“Appropriation is derived from the Latin word appropriare, or to make one’s own, which is from the Latin root proprius, to own property, and cultural appropriation highlights the borrowing of ideas, practices, and sacred philosophies from other culture by another group that has more resources (Surmities et al., 2017).”
What is “correct” Mindfulness?
Amidst the rising promotion of the “hustle culture” in the West, mindfulness has taken a front seat. While mindfulness was adopted from East Asia, with given standard principles and ethical regulations of its practice, people seem to have their own ways and predefined outcomes when engaging with mindfulness. From corporations to schools to mental health settings, everyone advocates for mindfulness to “think positive”, “gain control”, and “improve mood.” These blurred, individualistic Western definitions of mindfulness often deviate from the original Buddhist principle of enlightenment and acceptance, making it difficult for practitioners to acknowledge the cultural roots of the practice. With the rising popularity of mindfulness in American culture, the canonical Buddhist terminologies were muted and replaced with more secular-sounding scientific and commercial linguistic frames (Woodhead, 2015), which helped to attune the practice to the population’s needs. This adaptation led people to consider mindfulness a secular, goal-oriented technique that provides therapeutic benefits. On the contrary, mindfulness has historically been cultivated within a sangha to gain insight into the true nature of reality to attain enlightenment and reduce suffering for oneself and others.
Origin of Mindfulness
‘Mindfulness’, as described in the 21st century, is “paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and non-judgmentally” (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). The history of mindfulness can be traced back to the Buddhist sacred texts, especially the “Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta” or “The Discourse on the Establishing of Mindfulness.” About 2500 years ago, Buddhism was born in Northern India when a man named Siddhartha Gautam started sharing his teachings with the public. He eventually became known as the “Buddha” or the “awakened one”. Buddha was known to have achieved liberation from suffering, and his teachings were just a way for people to achieve liberation. Out of all his theories, the most prominent ones are called the Four Noble Truths.
1) The Existence of Suffering (Dukkha), the first Noble Truth, acknowledges the existence of suffering by all human beings.
2) The Cause of Suffering (Samudaya), the second Noble Truth, identifies the cause of suffering as craving and attachment.
3) The cessation of Suffering (Nirodha), which is the third Noble Truth, provides hope by stating that it is possible to end suffering by refraining from the origins of suffering.
4) The path to the cessation of Suffering (Magga), the fourth Noble Truth, provides a path that leads to the cessation of suffering. The Buddha highlights the Noble Eightfold Path, a set of eight interconnected principles that lead to a life free from suffering. The Noble Eightfold Paths are – Right Concentration, Right Mindfulness, Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort.
One of the prominent factors in Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path is “Right Mindfulness” (Samma sati). This seventh factor proposes that mindfulness is not an ethically neutral practice and instead requires a deliberate ethical prejudgement of what is considered skilful (kusala) and unskilful (akusala) (Kang & Whittingham, 2010). The term ‘right’ signifies that the practice has some fundamental principles, which, when followed, lead to reduced suffering for self or others. This essentially signifies that to practice mindfulness in alignment with Buddhism, it’s crucial to have an ethical judgment and understanding of the practice.
“Unfortunately, today’s Western mindfulness practice often gets translated into an individualistic technique that is highly outcome-oriented.”
How culture impacts mindfulness practice
The distinction in how one perceives the practice and goals of mindfulness can also be attributed to cultural factors, which often shape people’s beliefs, behaviors and practices. Decades of research on cultural psychology delineates how the idea of “self” is situated within a larger social context. For instance, while the West may focus more on ‘individuality’ and ‘independence’, the East focuses more on ‘interdependence’ and ‘social connectedness.’ Interestingly, this underlying idea of ‘I’ vs ‘We’ also perpetuates mindfulness in the Western community. Primarily, it’s crucial to acknowledge that the Buddhist principles of mindfulness promote sharing the practice with a sangha or a community setting. It is not an isolated or solitary technique meant to explore periods of silence; instead, it is an ethical, spiritual practice aimed towards spiritual transformation with an ultimate goal towards liberation. The Buddhist goals are not for the “self” entirely but instead for the betterment of civilization through mindfulness (Ishikawa, 2018). Unfortunately, today’s Western mindfulness practice often gets translated into an individualistic technique that is highly outcome-oriented.
Practicing ‘Right Mindfulness’
Marketing mindfulness, as a ‘problem-solving’ technique, promotes it as an all-purpose practice to reduce stress, increase work productivity, and tackle sleep issues, among a host of outcomes – all of which deviate from the main purpose of seeking liberation. This goal-driven approach often strips away the meaning and non-judgmental acceptance of the present moment, ultimately making ‘feeling better’ the primary goal. While it’s encouraging to witness people actively engage in mindfulness for their self-growth, engaging in the practice “ethically” is equally crucial while being mindful of the practice holistically and not just contextually. Learning the core of the Buddhist principles of mindfulness opens the possibility of connecting people with culturally appropriate practice.
Surmitis, K. A., Fox, J., & Gutierrez, D. (2018). Meditation and appropriation: Best practices for counselors who utilize meditation. Counseling and Values, 63(1), 4-16.
Woodhead, L. (2014). Tactical and strategic religion. In N. M. Dessing, N. Jeldtoft, J. S. Nielsen, & L. Woodhead (Eds.), Everyday lived Islam in Europe (pp. 9–22). Farnham, U.K.: Ashgate.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144–156. doi:10.1093/clipsy/bpg016.
Kang, C., & Whittingham, K. (2010). Mindfulness: A dialogue between Buddhism and clinical psychology. Mindfulness, 1, 161-173.
Ishikawa, M. (2018). Mindfulness in western contexts perpetuates oppressive realities for minority cultures: The consequences of cultural appropriation. SFU Educational Review, 11(1).
