Mindfulness or Sati?: An Anthropological Comparison of an Increasingly Global Concept

This article offers a comparison of some of the meanings of mindfulness in secular US settings and Theravāda Buddhist communities of South and Southeast Asia. Based on ethnographic data gathered from over 700 psychiatrists, Buddhist monks, lay practitioners, and others in Thailand, Myanmar, Sri Lank...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Cassaniti, Julia (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: [publisher not identified] 2021
Dans: Journal of global buddhism
Année: 2021, Volume: 22, Numéro: 1, Pages: 105-120
Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés:B USA / Buddhisme / Arrangement / Thailand / Myanmar / Sri Lanka / Vigilance / Internationalisation
RelBib Classification:AE Psychologie de la religion
BL Bouddhisme
KBM Asie
KBQ Amérique du Nord
Sujets non-standardisés:B Myanmar
B Méditation
B potency
B Sati
B Sri Lanka
B Self
B Thailand
B Mindfulness
B Affect
B South Asia
B Ethics
B Southeast Asia
B Morality
B Theravāda
B Supernatural
B Temporality
B Power
Accès en ligne: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Informations sur les droits:CC BY-NC 4.0
Description
Résumé:This article offers a comparison of some of the meanings of mindfulness in secular US settings and Theravāda Buddhist communities of South and Southeast Asia. Based on ethnographic data gathered from over 700 psychiatrists, Buddhist monks, lay practitioners, and others in Thailand, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and the United States, the article suggests some key mental associations in mindfulness and sati that converge and diverge across different cultural contexts. I call these the “TAPES” of the mind: relationships that mindfulness and sati have to particular conceptions of Temporality, Affect, Power, Ethics, and Selfhood. The article examines each of these “TAPES” and their expressions in the field in turn, from the temporal significance of “remembering the present” to the effects of supernatural and political potencies, to the morality of practice and the ontological status of the self. I argue that when the two terms are used interchangeably some meanings of these associations become privileged, while others are effectively erased. I conclude with a discussion of the problems of hegemonizing discourses about mindfulness, and the implications of the findings for global health and Buddhist studies.
ISSN:1527-6457
Contient:Enthalten in: Journal of global buddhism
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4727577