I want to get this discussion page started because I'd like to see some expansion of this page. Mindfulness is an important concept in Buddhism and there are sutras devoted to it's practice. The non-Buddhist, non-religious uses of mindfulness are of interest as well, and could be expanded. As the page stands it's quite basic, and I think it could become far richer in information. Nightngle 13:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
______________________________________ New topic; and I hope this will be a useful place to describe two edits I just now made. ____________________________
I noticed in the 'Related terms and practices' section, the table had two items whose Roman transliterations did not match what purport to be the same terms, as written in Devanagari. Both are in the Sanskrit column. I corrected those two items in the column.
Specifically, I changed the 'samprajaña,संप्रज्ञान' pair to 'samprajñāna, संप्रज्ञान ; And I changed the former 'apramāda,ज्ञानकोश' pair to 'apramāda,अप्रमाद'.
The reasons are, first, that संप्रज्ञान is spelled as 'samprajñāna' when transliterated into Roman script. The original error appears to me to be nothing more than a typo.
And second, I could not find the word 'ज्ञानकोश' , which transliterates to 'jñānakośa' , as a relevant term in this context. I find myself baffled as to how that word got introduced here. The word 'apramāda' is however relevant in this context. So I chose the transliterated word 'apramāda' as the one to retain -- the point being, the word written in Devanagari did not match the word, which should presumably have been the same word, as written in Roman script; so one had to choose between them. Savitr108 ( talk) 20:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Later note: I also noticed an oddity concerning this pair: manaskāraḥ मनस्कारः which, until I changed it just now, also did not quite match since it was written as manaskāraḥ मनस्कार .
For some reason this term is shown with a grammatical ending -- namely, it is shown in the nominative singular. Or the transliterated version was so shown; see above. Just now I corrected the Devanagari version so it also has the same -aḥ ending; it did not.
I first tried correcting the transliterated version, but it then came out highlighted in red font-colo, to show that there is no Wikipedia entry for that term. Evidently the Wiki entry has the term with the grammatical ending. Who knows why.
If anyone cares for such minute detail, and wants to further correct this pair manaskāraḥ मनस्कारः here, I am sure there is a way to do it so that one writes manaskāra मनस्कार . That way it will be 'out of grammar' so to say, as all the other terms in this table are. If and when I have time I will research how to do that myself. It will be some simple formatting command which at present I do not know, perhaps a re-direct command. Savitr108 ( talk) 06:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I have a big concern about the external links on this page. Except for the link to "Mindfulness in Plain English", they are all sites promoting services. To me, this violates the spam policy. I would like to see only sites that have material that supports understanding mindfulness, not links that promote signing up for a course. Nightngle 13:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I am glad that you have raised this Nightngle it seems to me that there is a danger that mindfulness will be adopted by the "sham" artists who offer the secrets to happiness, success etc. The NLP reiki etc etc "experts". Alnpete ( talk) 16:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
BTW: I am one who also thinks that the Timeline of psychotherapy should contain Siddhartha Shakyamuni as one of the first psychotherapists and I am working the courage up to edit it this way as I know that someone will soon revert and a long and heated discussion will then ensue. On the other hand being such a neglected little wiki entry I might well get away with it. Mattjs 17:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Karley - thanks for your comments. I'm glad to hear you're working on the Mindfulness therapies, there is a lot of really good stuff out there. I'm going to work on the Buddhist Mindfulness practices, and I think this page will be a good jumping off point to help people figure out which direction they would like to read about. Nightngle 15:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Alright, what happened to the original that was here two weeks ago. The Buddha wikiproject has complete overhauled the article and made it much less useful. In fact, it is not as well written. The secular version needs to be recreated and the Buddha wikiproject made as another article. It should have a short article and the See Full Article on Buddhism Mindfulness. Please recover the original document, I require it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.110.224 ( talk) 22:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
The only meaning of mindfulness that really counts is what an ordinary WP expects to see. If there are multiple possibilities, then the users see a disambiguation page. If one meaning is strongly dominant, then they get the dominant page with a top-of-the-page link to the less dominant meanings (if there aren't too many) or to a disambiguation page (if there are many). This is Wikipedia practice. WP:DAB Because psychology doesn't seem to want the term, you might well be able to effectively claim that the main entry is yours and effectively change the meaning of the word in Wikipedia, a good prosyletizing strategy. DCDuring 02:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm in total agreement with No Architect on this, except that I find it offensive rather than just 'odd', and have therefore moved the section to the end of the article, where I have incorporated it under a new heading Mindfulness in the West. I have also attempted to bring together the various strands on western medical and psychiatric uses of mindfulness. Bearing in mind the definition of paralogous given on Wikipedia, I have also lightly edited the parts of the text using that and related words. BlueThird ( talk) 03:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
The Mindfulness entry seems oddly biased towards Christianity. Mindfulness in Christianity, or any other religion for that matter, is an interesting side note, but since the origins of the practice are Buddhist, one would expect Christianity to appear late in the article, rather than dominating the first paragraph, which should be devoted to basic definition, origin, and history.
No Architect 22:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
From what I know of mindfulness it is also known as Vipassana. Shouldn't we merge the two articles into a more complete one?
Within early Buddhist contemplative culture, sati has a specific context with reference to Ānāpānasati/Satipaṭṭhāna work. Vipassanā, as a specific contemplative praxis was a later invention in Burma, and not represented in the teachings of the Buddha, except in tandem with samatha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phrafarang ( talk • contribs) 22:07, 20 December 2011
I added the following paragraph:
The attempt to be continuously mindful can easily lead to the entrance into the dark night, a singular state of consciousness in which the individual experiences a sudden and deep suffering[1] . While this is a normal stage of the process of learning to be mindful, sometimes it might be difficult to realize that this state is caused by mindfulness itself. This realization, together with a lot of acceptance and a renewed attempt to be mindful will lead to the exit of the dark night and to the entrance into the equanimity states. The dark night is a very delicate moment in which the guidance of a qualified master is specially useful. Stopping meditation at this point can lead the meditator to be stuck in the dark night for a quite long period.
The cited reference was Perez-De-Albeniz, A., Holmes, J., Meditation: concepts, effects and uses in therapy, International Journal of Psychotherapy, Mar. 2000, Vol. 5 Issue 1, 49-58
This paragraph has been deleted by 76.211.116.200 because: 1) content is poorly written, 2) content isn't substantiated or explained, and is wacky on the face of it.
Since I think the content of the paragraph is true and important to know for possible meditators, I would like to ask for help to improve its redaction and to consider to be included again in the main article. --Juliusllb 00:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I have also read about this state of 'fear, misery and disgust' in the following work (on-line) - "A Modern Treatise on Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation" by The Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw - so I would agree about its re-instatement in the article. 39tiro ( talk) 10:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Following the above discussion about splitting Mindfulness into Buddhist and therapeutic articles, Mindfulness (psychology) was created. Shouldn't the current section 2 "Mindfulness in the West" and its references be moved there? Keahapana ( talk) 23:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Great feedback. However, since this entry is part of the Wikipedia alternative medicine project, doesn't it seem as though the psychological concept of using mindfulness to treat depression and anxiety should probably remain here?
This article is to be an important chapter of the abovementioned Wikibook. This article is currently very loose and uncited. This is a polite call to action to cite information included otherwise it will be deleted within 108 days as conjecture and hearsay.
Svaha
B9 hummingbird hovering (
talk •
contribs) 06:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Response
Hello, I'm not sure I understand to whom the call of action is addressed. If you don't like the article you're welcome to edit it. This is, after all, Wikipedia. Have a great day! Jlchan29 ( talk) 20:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
How should we proceed with moving the psychological material from Mindfulness to Mindfulness (psychology)? In cleaning up Mindfulness (disambiguation), I noticed that both Mindfulness (Buddhism) and Mindfulness meditation redirect to Mindfulness. Could we somehow make the current Mindfulness the disambiguation page, and split the current contents between Mindfulness (Buddhism) and Mindfulness (psychology)? Keahapana ( talk) 00:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaing up the entry so much!
This is a great question. I took out the Mindfulness in the West section and put the information in that section in the therapeutic section below it to tighten up the entry. Because mindfulness is used so much in popular culture and modern psychology, keeping a reference to the general non religous use of mindfulness in the main category while putting the Buddhist aspect of mindfulness elsewhere makes sense. However, the concept of mindfulness is originally derived from Buddhism so it seems strange to leave the Buddhist aspect out all together.
I amended the history of Buddhism and mindfulness in passing to de-emphasize Buddhism and mindfulness in this entry. Let's keeping looking at it.
Thanks again for cleaning up the entry. Jlchan29 ( talk) 21:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd like a little more info about the source for this purported variant of nian:
I suspect that it is wrong. Every other source I've seen for sthāpana translates it as "demonstration," as it is used in the context of Indian logic, and the Tibetan gnas pa seems to mean "abiding" and translates the Sanskrit avasthita. Maybe nian is actually equivalent to these two terms, but in the context of this article it just seems to be confusing. Sylvain1972 ( talk) 16:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
PDF-Datei, auch hier http://www.intersein-zeitschrift.de/intersein24.pdf
Die dritte Übung der Achtsamkeit "Verantwortlicher Umgang mit Sexualität-Fragen und Antworten" Intersein Nr. 24/Mai 2004
Is there some english text about mindfullness and sexuality?
I don't object to Zen Criticism of the mindfulness movement in this article. Unfortunately, the two comments now quoted under the heading of "Zen Criticism" are impossible to understand. I'm familiar with mindfulness and Zen, and I can't really figure out what these two guys are talking about. Maybe the comments were shortened too much, or maybe someone else said it better. 69.225.3.53 ( talk) 21:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
This article should contain a short section about the "body scan" technique. It's often taught by mindfulness instructors in MBSR, Vipassana and other traditions. 69.225.3.53 ( talk) 21:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I felt it necessary to undo the last change. The previous text gave a much clearer idea of what mindfulness is - certainly in Therevadan terms. I could not understand what the list of ten mindfulnesses add in terms of reader's understanding. Hope this is OK. 94.197.253.80 ( talk) 09:34, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Why is so much room given to the etymology of various translations of smrti? This is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. An encyclopedia should give an overview of a subject. Dumping all the definitions of a Sanskrit term from Monier-Williams is not at all relevant or helpful for people who are wondering what mindfulness is. Tengu800 ( talk) 23:11, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
I am very surprised at some terms used in the first two paragraphs of this article. Specifically use of word "hatred" and "enraged" 1. – "Mindfulness is a spiritual faculty (indriya) that is considered to be of great importance in the path to hatred according to the teaching of the Buddha. 2. – Enlightenment (bodhi) is a state of being enraged in which has been overcome, abandoned and is absent from the mind. From my reading of The Dhammapada, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying and Jon Kabat-Zinn's course on mindfulness, these seem bizarre and misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.191.106 ( talk) 22:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Rectified. Not sure how those terms appeared in the first place, as they were corrected almost straight away but other user. May have been a glitch. Orlaghob ( talk) 22:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Can someone please put a description of what mindfulness is. This page used to say quite clearly what it is, but now it only talks about how mindfulness is used. Without such a description, this page does not deserve to be B rated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.18.92 ( talk) 07:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I am new to commenting/editing, so please forgive me if I don't know the edicate. In the first paragraph there is a statement: "Mindfulness meditation can also be traced back to the earlier Upanishads, part of Hindu scripture." The footnote is not to a primary reference, i.e. the Upanishads itself. The reference is to a journal article that makes the statement "However, the roots of mindfulness practice can be found in Yogic practices in the Upanishads dating back thousands of years before the advent of Buddhism." The journal article does not substantiate this claim and I don't know of any that exist. I invite discussion on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aflum ( talk • contribs) 08:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
The five hindrances identified by the Nivarana Sutta of the Pali Canon which must be overcome in order to awaken are:
Sensual desire (kamacchanda)
Ill will (vyapada)
Sloth, torpor, or drowsiness (thina-middha)
Restlessness and worry (uddhacca-kukkucca)
Uncertainty or skepticism (vicikiccha)
There appears to be an overlap with other traditions, for instances, the Seven Deadly Sins in Christianity.
In keeping with merger guidelines on Wikipedia, I propose that Mindfulness be merged into Satipatthana, because although it is a great article with non-redundant information, the concept of mindfulness and Satipatthana are considered in Bhuddism to be essentially the same. Please feel free to post here or on my talk page if any feedback. Parsh ( talk) 03:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
There is a line in this article which says The English term mindfulness, in use for centuries, long predates its use in the Buddhist contex. What is this supposed to mean? Pali and Budhism easily predate english by centuries. I am under the impression that Latin might have been the language of the European world during rise of Budhism. So what is correct? - Wikishagnik ( talk) 15:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
http://ajh.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/09/13/ajh.hpt134.abstract
I think this research study should be mentioned in the article. At the moment it mentions under the research section that Mindfulness lowers blood pressure. That might be true according to some sources but this research suggests it does not. In the interest of maintain NPO this information should be added to the article.
-- Uncreated ( talk) 09:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I added a section referring to two papers by two contemporary scholars who do not agree in all ways with modern interpretations of mindfulness. Please feel free to improve this section. I just wanted to make a start. 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 23:28, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
In the section on "Scientific Research, it is stated: "Research has been ongoing over the last twenty or thirty years.." Is it 20 or 30 years? Which is it? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:104:E001:9010:A1A0:6D31:1799:95D7 ( talk) 22:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
At this point, I think it's moot (debatable) whether we have one or a singular definition of 'mindfulness' or several (plural) definitions of mindfulness, memory and retention, or focus (moving forward, focus, etc.), full mind encompassing the more mature development of the older-view/overview, etc. MaynardClark ( talk) 18:44, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I've removed 81~14'additions a secons time. The quote he added is about "satipaṭṭhāna", and does not support the previous two sentences. WP:OR, as so often with this editor. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:19, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Good, since you don't understand what WP:OR means, here's the explanation:
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 10:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Several meanings are given to the word mindfulness in psychotherapy. One not so far mentioned in this article is the Gestalt Therapy interpretation. This was inspired by Buddhist writing. It is in some ways simpler than some of the other descriptions given. It consists of focussed awareness on all the phenomena of consciousness, sensation, thoughts fantasies, memories, feelings. The assumption is that the whole person is in a constant process of bringing to the fore whatever is at that moment of significance. From attention to this changing spontaneous flow, appropriate action will follow. Perhaps this trusting attitude is truly Buddhist. The practice is not connected to meditation, but encouraged as a way of living and connecting to the world and others. 87.114.129.244 ( talk) 16:47, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! In the article it is said that:
He found that Unitarianism came closest to true Christianity, and had a strong sympathy for the Unitarians.
In another article, Transcendentalism, though it's been said that:
Transcendentalism is a religious and philosophical movement that was developed during the late 1820s and 1830s in the Eastern region of the United States as a protest against the general state of spirituality and, in particular, the state of intellectualism at Harvard University and the doctrine of the Unitarian church taught at Harvard Divinity School.
So, what is the truth? :O Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 21:10, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
A new editor added the following content to the Schools section:
The David Lynch Foundation has implemented the meditation-based Quiet Time program in several San Francisco middle schools since the 2006-2007 school year. Positive results among students and teachers include reduced teacher absences and turnover, decreases in educator depression, anxiety, anger, and fatigue, and increases in student GPA, school attendance, and positive behaviors. Former San Francisco Superintendent of Schools Carlos Garcia, along with other current key school district leaders, are hoping to expand the Quiet Time program to reach another 15 schools throughout the Bay Area.
The source doesn't mention mindfulness. Also, the source is self-published [2] and shouldn't be used to claim health benefits. It seems like this content should be removed. TimidGuy ( talk) 15:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Propose to merge both Mindfulness (psychology) and Mindfulness meditation into Mindfulness:
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 18:18, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I've reorganised Mindfulness and Mindfulness (psychology). "Mindfulness" gives an overview of Buddhist mindfulness, psychological/clinical/theraputic mindfulness, and popular/lifestyle mindfulness; in "Mindfulness (psychology)" the emphasis is on therapeutic mindfulness. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
I think the two articles should be merged, especially considering that there is a lot of overlap. I just entered some new references to the “Mindfulness” article (under "Clinical applications"), but then wondered if the edits are more suitable in the “Mindfulness_(psychology)” article (however, the “Mindfulness_(psychology)” article does not even have a separate "Clinical applications" section!). In any case, I did not want to repeat the same edits in both articles.
This is also an important matter when taking into consideration the re-directing of article links to “Mindfulness” from other Wikipedia articles.
Nandinik ( talk) 17:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! Now as the mindfulness-related articles have been merged, I think there is need to start changing many of the bullet points we have into coherent paragraphs and fluid text (e.g. Mindfulness#Attention and Mindfulness, sub-section Evidence for improvements in three areas of attention). Thoughts? Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 16:00, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I am a Buddhist meditation instructor, authorized in a well-known ancient tradition.
So, I am dismayed that this so-called "Buddhism" article is now a Psychotherapy article. In other words, it is now the same as newspaper articles "Mediation is good for your blood pressure!".
That is NOT the purpose of meditation.
The Buddha did not leave his wealthy family to find a way to lower blood pressure, and to allow high-powered professionals to more effectively make lots of money.
The point of meditation is to observe the true nature of reality, not to aid you in pursuing some existing false or distorted view of reality.
Please re-write this page as a Buddhist Meditation article and put all of the psychotherapy into a separate linked article.
162.205.217.211 ( talk) 16:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! I just noticed that after a recent edit [4] by Nandinik, we currently have five distinct sources for the sentence "Clinical studies have documented the physical and mental health benefits of mindfulness in general, and MBSR in particular." in the lede. That seems like a model example of WP:OVERCITE ("Garphism is the study[1][2][3][4][5] of ...").
I haven't taken a closer look at the sources, but do we really need all of them? How about the ones you added, Nandinik? I think we should trim a few though... Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 10:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm moving this sourced content here from the lead, since it is not currently mentioned elsewhere on the page:
The Five-Aggregate Model of the Mind has been recently proposed as a theoretical resource that could guide mindfulness interventions.This model is an ancient model of the mind that comprehensively describes moment-to-moment changes that happen in subjective conscious experience.
Imo, the content needs first to be appropriately integrated into other sections. I also think some caution is needed regarding strong claims (eg "...comprehensively describes...) made in the RS. 5.80.198.100 ( talk) 13:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Nandinik ( talk) 15:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I've tried to add a link to Satipatthana, but I don't know how it would fit into the article.-- 89.12.190.214 ( talk) 11:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Nandinik ( talk) 17:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
First you merge mindfulness meditation into mindfulness. Now you start deleting things because they are only about meditation, not 'pure' mindfulness. I get that some people think they just invented mindfulness and that it has nothing to do with any ancient stuff; that now you have to pay big money to learn it and that it's now terribly complicated, scientific and medical... But really? --- Nigelj ( talk) 19:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I have re-worded the ‘POV-section’ (five-aggregate model) that had been identified as needing ‘neutrality.’ If anything is not clear, please let me know.
Nandinik ( talk) 23:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
@ ZuluPapa5: I've removed the following stuff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Removed:
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Removed:
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)
What's the relevance of this passage to this article? Are we going to sum up every Buddhist teacher from the past 2,500 years? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the sentence stating "The popular mindfulness movement was initiated by Jon Kabat-Zinn". This is a statement that is appearing in numerous popular articles derived from this page but that is contentious. Mindfulness was *popular* throughout Asia for several thousand years. The word itself was used as a translation of smṛti/sati before J. K-Z was involved.
Thich Nhat Hanh published a popular book "A Miracle of Mindfulness" before J. K-Z was on the scene. The current addition has a quote for Jon
"The first book to awaken a mainstream readership to the subject of mindfulness – a testimony to the power of Thich Nhat Hanh’s elegant and profound teaching." (Jon Kabat-Zinn, author of Full Catastrophe Living)
I think that is an acknowledgement that he (Jon) didn't initiate/awaken the mainstream!
J. K-Z definitely initiated the movement around the MBSR programmes but these are only one manifestation of mindfulness.
RogerHyam ( talk) 12:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC) RogerHyam
I'm skeptical of the inclusion of the section on the Alexander Technique. I added a "citation needed" to it, as there are none. A more experienced editor might consider deleting it as off-topic?
This article on mindfulness does not mention serious reservations about the efficacy of the practice inasmuch as a reader might think that there were no risks involved. But the psychologist Susan Blackmore in her textbook on Consciousness, Consciousness: An Introduction, 1st ed, Hodder & Stoughton, 2003, on p. 395 says, "More worrying is that meditation can occasionally have harmful effects". She goes on to state in this paragraph that TM can overwhelm those beginning the technique and moreover can exacerbate existing psychological conditions and increase tension. It is clear that mindfulness is to be considered here, as in the index, mindfulness is referenced to these pages (385-400) dealing with meditation, and she refers directly to it on p.389. 92.29.242.234 ( talk) 18:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Please note the following changes I made: (i) I added/updated some references. (ii) Brought back the “five-aggregate model.” This model is very relevant for this page, since it is a useful theoretical resource that can guide mindfulness interventions. Also felt this part is better suited in the “psychology” subsection – so I moved it there. I also added a few edits to it to make it clearer. (iii) I improved the “Business” section and removed the template message (that said this section is "written like an advertisement"). I included many of the points and kept the references, and also added two new references to it.
If anything is not clear, please let me know.
Nandinik ( talk) 17:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
This [7] should be NPOV reconsidered as it's intended to provide balanced mindfulness. Zulu Papa 5 * ( talk) 07:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Research on meditation was proposed to be split from its huge "Mindfulness" section, which then would be moved into this article here. Beforehand it would need to receive some improvements in terms of proper sourcing. I could do that, would anybody here mind or have any comments? Meerpirat ( talk) 11:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mindfulness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello CFCF: I would like to know why my edits were removed. I learned to edit Wikipedia from an experienced user – so, I know the entries I made are correct. Please let me know why ALL the edits I did on the 24th as well as the edits I did about two weeks ago have been removed (I spent quite a lot of time on them). Thank you. Sandyshore ( talk) 23:37, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Since I have not received a reply from CFCF explaining why ALL the edits I did were deleted (message above), I have brought some of those edits back. Below, I have provided brief explanations of the edits I carried out:
- The Creswell publication is a 2017 reference, not a 2016 reference (anyone can check this out for themselves by taking a look at its publication listing directly from the journal site: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-psych-042716-051139 )
- The reference "Awakening Through Mindfulness" is merely someone’s blog – it is not an authentic, published reference. Therefore, I replaced that reference with published reference.
- The wording of some sentences were changed to better reflect the reference/s cited, to get rid of repetitions, etc. For example, I changed the wording “the internal experiences occurring in the present moment” to “experiences occurring in the present moment” – if you check the reference cited here (Baer, 1994: Mindfulness Training as a Clinical Intervention: A Conceptual and Empirical Review), you will see this wording is more appropriate. Alternatively, one can edit this sentence to say “internal and external experiences occurring in the present moment.”
- I wrote the paragraph starting with “Interest in mindfulness has grown during the past several decades…” to list various OTHER applications of mindfulness (i.e., besides direct applications in clinical psychology and psychiatry that are listed in the previous paragraph – these other applications include applications for healthy aging, in athletics, for weight management, in dermatology, for the perinatal period, for children with special needs, etc. All these articles that were added are new research studies (2016 and 2017 articles) published in academic peer-reviewed journals. In case someone thinks this paragraph is better suited in a different place of the article, it can be moved. Another alternative would be to create a separate section (subheading such as “Other applications”) to list these.
- I added Karunamuni & Weerasekera, 2017 article, which is a recent academic peer-reviewed article published in the journal ‘Current Psychology.’ I think it is important to add this information on cultivating of self-knowledge and wisdom (through mindfulness practice). I added a subsection titled ‘Cultivating self-knowledge and wisdom’ containing four sentences.
- To the section on “Meditation,” I added the reference Last et al., 2017 (title: The Effects of Meditation on Grey Matter), since this appears to be a good review published in the ‘journal of Alzheimer’s disease.’
- I left the ‘maintenance template’ as it is, so that someone could address any concerns by discussing rather than simply deleting all new edits (without providing any explanations).
If anyone has issues with any of the edits above, please let me know and I am happy to discuss or change the edits as needed. (By the way, I did not have time to redo all the edits that CFCF deleted – I might do the additional edits some other time.)
Sandyshore ( talk) 22:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
As I mentioned earlier (please see my previous comment), I felt that the paragraph starting with “Interest in mindfulness has grown…” is better suited to be listed under the “Other usages” subsection. Also, the part “Recent interest has emerged for studying the effects…” is better suited to be listed under the “Other usages” section (rather than under the “Meditation” subsection). Therefore, I have moved these two paragraphs - as a result of the move, I needed to slightly edit a few sentences (considering its new location). I have also updated a reference in a couple of places. If anyone has comments/concerns regarding any of these edits, please let me know.
Sandyshore ( talk) 20:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Regarding any source used to provide an individual's opinion such as Joiner's [8]: To avoid WP:NOT and WP:NPOV problems, reliable and independent sources are generally required. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:29, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I am planning on adding more empirical research to the education portion of this article. I've done multiple searches for published studies, and plan to include some of these citations in my contribution to the section. Please review and provide feedback. Thank you.
1) Mindful interventions: Youth, poverty, and the developing brain.
Choudhury, S., & Moses, J. M. (2016). Mindful interventions: Youth, poverty, and the developing brain. Theory & Psychology,26(5), 591-606. doi:10.1177/0959354316669025
2) A Randomized Trial of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Children: Promoting Mindful Attention to Enhance Social-Emotional Resiliency in Children.
Semple, R. J., Lee, J., Rosa, D., & Miller, L. F. (2009). A Randomized Trial of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Children: Promoting Mindful Attention to Enhance Social-Emotional Resiliency in Children. Journal of Child and Family Studies,19(2), 218-229. doi:10.1007/s10826-009-9301-y
3) Effectiveness of a school-based mindfulness program for transdiagnostic prevention in young adolescents.
Johnson, C., Burke, C., Brinkman, S., & Wade, T. (2016). Effectiveness of a school-based mindfulness program for transdiagnostic prevention in young adolescents. Behaviour Research and Therapy,81, 1-11. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2016.03.002
4) Mindfulness-based interventions in schools-systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zenner, C., Herrnleben-Kurz, S., & Walach, H. (2014). Mindfulness-based interventions in schools-systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology,5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00603
5) Effectiveness of the Mindfulness in Schools Programme: non-randomised controlled feasibility study.
Kuyken, W., Weare, K., Ukoumunne, O. C., Vicary, R., Motton, N., Burnett, R., . . . Huppert, F. (2013). Effectiveness of the Mindfulness in Schools Programme: non-randomised controlled feasibility study. The British Journal of Psychiatry,203(2), 126-131. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.113.126649
6) Gauging Mindfulness In Children And Youth: School-Based Applications.
Eklund, K., Omalley, M., & Meyer, L. (2016). Gauging Mindfulness In Children And Youth: School-Based Applications. Psychology in the Schools,54(1), 101-114. doi:10.1002/pits.21983
7) Introduction To The Special Issue: Mindfulness In The Schools-Historical Roots, Current Status, And Future Directions.
Renshaw, T. L., & Cook, C. R. (2016). Introduction To The Special Issue: Mindfulness In The Schools-Historical Roots, Current Status, And Future Directions. Psychology in the Schools,54(1), 5-12. doi:10.1002/pits.21978
8) Effects of Mindful Awareness Practices on Executive Functions in Elementary School Children.
Flook, L., Smalley, S. L., Kitil, M. J., Galla, B. M., Kaiser-Greenland, S., Locke, J., . . . Kasari, C. (2010). Effects of Mindful Awareness Practices on Executive Functions in Elementary School Children. Journal of Applied School Psychology,26(1), 70-95. doi:10.1080/15377900903379125 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2600:8801:9301:830:5916:AF06:6:1EF7 (
talk) 20:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello all:
I went through the article in order to find/address issues related to the POV template [i.e., (i) undue weight (ii) neutrality (iii) reliability of listed sources], and have carried out edits to several sections of the article – please see the detailed descriptions below:
Introductory section: The article “McLaughlin KA, Nolen-Hoeksema S (Dec 2010)” that is used to support the sentence “….contribute to mental illnesses such as depression and anxiety,” is not a review article –I have replaced it with a review article (Creswell, 2017).
I removed the page number from the ‘Ruth A. Baer’ reference, because it is used in other places in the article (where this particular page number is no longer valid).
To address the POV comment ‘undue weight,’ I added the following to this section:
“The necessity for more high-quality research in this field has also been identified – such as the need for more randomized controlled studies, for providing more methodological details in reported studies and for the use of larger sample sizes."
I removed the sentence “This is applicable to society at large as well as specific settings such as workplaces and schools,” (because the references cited are web links, and schools are mentioned later on in this section as well). I also removed “It has gained worldwide popularity as a distinctive method to handle emotions.” Also, in the last paragraph of the introduction section, I briefly mentioned other applications of mindfulness (since schools, etc., are mentioned here).
I think the language used in this introductory section is neutral.
The section on “Meditation”: Some of the references cited here are websites and I found that the information provided is not very clear and complete. Therefore, I have done some edits to this section (reworded sentences to match the references cited, added new reliable references, etc.).
The sections: “Translations and Definitions” “Historical development” and “Buddhism”: In these sections, the reliability of listed sources appear to be ok, especially considering that these sources are either published peer-reviewed academic journal articles or published books that are relevant (however, I carried out a few edits to improve the references – described below). I also think the language used in these sections are neutral. (Note that the issue of “undue weight” also does not apply to these sections, due to the descriptive nature of the subject matter.)
I incorporated new references to the following sentences in order to better reflect what is stated in them (and to address the issue of “reliability of listed sources”):
“It leads to insight into the true nature of reality, namely the three marks of existence, the impermanence of and the unsatisfactoriness of every conditioned thing that exists, and non-self.”
“Vipassana is practiced in tandem with samatha, and also plays a central role in other Buddhist traditions.”
“The practice of mindfulness supports analysis resulting in the arising of wisdom (Pali: paññā, Sanskrit: prajñā).”
“Vipassanā is insight into the true nature of reality,….”
I also thought that the above sections can be summarized and edited to avoid repetition, and that some of the publications currently listed can be updated – for example, the following new article can be incorporated to these sections: Anālayo, B. (2016). Early Buddhist mindfulness and memory, the body, and pain. Mindfulness, 7(6), 1271-1280. (I will try to do these edits some other time.)
The section on “Therapy programs”: In this section too, most of the sources are either published peer-reviewed academic journal articles or published books that are relevant – i.e., the reliability of listed sources appear to be ok. Neutrality of descriptions also appears to be fine, and I do not think there are issues of “undue weight.” However, I carried out a few edits to improve this section as described below: In the “Mindfulness-based stress reduction” subsection, I corrected a typo: I changed “mindfulness-based cognitive therapy” to “mindfulness-based programs.”
I incorporated a more relevant reference to back the statement “which uses a combination of mindfulness meditation, body awareness, and yoga to help people become more mindful.”
Deleted the sentence starting with “This suggests it may have beneficial effects,….” since this sentence refers to a non-functioning link.
Also deleted the sentence “In recent years, meditation has been the subject of controlled clinical research” – since this matter is extensively described in other parts of this article.
Since the reference cited to back the statement “While MBSR has its roots in spiritual teachings, the program itself is secular” is not a review article, I added a different reference.
I added a reference to back the sentence: “Hakomi therapy, under development by Ron Kurtz and others, is a somatic psychology based upon Asian philosophical precepts of mindfulness and nonviolence.”
In the subsection “Adaptation Practice,” both references are inappropriate (one is a non-functioning weblink and the other is a media article). I have deleted these references and have marked as [citation needed].
The reference cited for “Mindfulness relaxation” is a non-functioning link. I have marked this.
The sentence starting with “The Self is curious about…” needs a reference, and it is marked as “needing a reference.”
The section on “Scientific research” This section has a lot of overlap with the subsection “Other uses” – therefore I brought some of the paragraphs from that section and merged here. In this section, almost all the references are peer-reviewed academic journal articles – so, the reliability of listed sources are ok. The section is presented using neutral language as well. However, addressed the potential ‘undue weight’ by incorporating the following sentence: Many of the above cited review studies however also indicate the necessity for more high-quality research in this field, such as conducting intervention studies using larger sample sizes, the use of more randomized controlled studies and the need for providing more methodological details in reported studies (I have provided references). There are also a few review studies that have found no differences between mindfulness interventions and control groups (provided references). These studies also list the need for more robust research investigations. Several issues pertaining to the assessment of mindfulness have also been identified including the current use of self-report questionnaires (Grossman, 2008 – use 2011 one; Creswell; Keng 2011,). I also did some minor edits to this section (e.g. replacing the first reference cited with a more reliable reference, deleting a couple of unnecessary words, etc.). Also, I think this section is better suited to be listed just before the section on ‘therapy programs.’ If there are no objections to this, I will do this edit in a few days.
Section on “Movement” I think this section can benefit from some summarizing and adding newer references - I will try to attend to this some other time. I felt that the subsection on “Schools” and “Education” could also be merged, since there appears to be an overlap. I do not think this section has any issues relating to neutrality, reliability and ‘undue weight.’ However, in the schools section, the reference ‘De Bruin, E.; Meppelink,’ is not a review article – therefore I deleted this part.
Section on “Risks” I would suggest getting rid of this section because the reference provided to state that ‘there are risks’ is a web link (i.e., it is a media article that talks about opinions/experiences of selected people, and it only uses a few selected studies – the article is an individual’s ‘point of view’). If no one has issues about removing this section I will remove it in a few days. If you do not agree about removing, please talk on this ‘talk’ page. For the time being, I did some edits to make this issue clearer (edited sentences and incorporated articles).
Section on “Related concepts” This section is written using neutral language, and also cites books and articles that appear to be relevant/reliable. However, the sentence ending in “…..and differs from both pre-existing and later-developed notions.” and the sentence ending with “……and honest self-expression (defined as expressing oneself authentically in a way that is likely to inspire compassion in others)” need reference support – these are marked. The issue of ‘undue weight’ does not apply to this section.
I have now removed the POV- template. If you have questions or issues regarding any of the above edits, please let me know (please be specific).
Nandinik ( talk) 19:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Out today, [9], [10], [11], [12] and soon to be in the article. Zulu Papa 5 * ( talk) 18:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
There appears to be a POV fork of this article happening at Definitions of mindfulness. Please discuss at Talk:Definitions of mindfulness#POV fork. Thanks, Biogeographist ( talk) 12:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mindfulness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.3:1:2991.paliWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello. I'm translating the article " Mindfulness" into Japanese language version( ja:マインドフルネス). However, in the section of Mindfulness#Translations_and_definitions, I don't understand exactly the meaning of following phrases. Though I read the references of that(Robert Sharf's " MINDFULNESS AND MINDLESSNESS IN EARLY CHAN", pp.942-943), still I don't understand it. So I want someone to tell me the meaning of these phrases on this talk page.
I would be grateful if you answered these questions. Thank you in advance.-- Leonidjp ( talk) 07:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Not willing to contradict sir Dreyfus, but is'nt awareness : "the ability to directly know and perceive, to feel, or to be cognizant of events" (sic Wikipedia), so is'nt he himself talking of the direct knowledge of bare attention, without the memory side, often presented by the mahayana scholars (indeed not in a mandatory way) ? Papalain ( talk) 16:23, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm thinking of adding a paragraph to the Education subheading on the Mindfulness page. The paragraph will summarize the findings on 5 studies conducted on school-based MBI's on youths with intellectual or developmental disabilities. The citations I will be using are:
Felver, J. C., Felver, S. L., Margolis, K. L., Ravitch, N. K., Romer, N., & Horner, R. H. (2017). Effectiveness and social validity of the Soles of the Feet mindfulness-based intervention with special education students. Contemporary School Psychology, 21(4), 358-368. doi:10.1007/s40688-017-0133-2
Harper, S. K., Webb, T. L., & Rayner, K. (2013). The effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions for supporting people with intellectual disabilities: A narrative review. Behavior Modification, 37(3), 431-453. Retrieved from http://libproxy.sdsu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.sdsu.edu/docview/1509083285?accountid=13758
Kim, J., & Kwon, M. (2018). Effects of mindfulness‐based intervention to improve task performance for children with intellectual disabilities. Journal Of Applied Research In Intellectual Disabilities, 31(1), 87-97. doi:10.1111/jar.12333
Lam, K. (2016). School-based cognitive mindfulness intervention for internalizing problems: Pilot study with Hong Kong elementary students. Journal Of Child And Family Studies, 25(11), 3293-3308. doi:10.1007/s10826-016-0483-9
Malboeuf-Hurtubise, C., Lacourse, E., Taylor, G., Joussemet, M., & Ben Amor, L. (2017). A mindfulness-based intervention pilot feasibility study for elementary school students with severe learning difficulties: Effects on internalized and externalized symptoms from an emotional regulation perspective. Journal Of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine, 22(3), 473-481. doi:10.1177/2156587216683886
I will also include limitations of these studies such as small sample sizes and lack of generalizability. Kellypodesta ( talk) 20:59, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Kellypodesta ( talk) 05:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- In the ‘introduction,’ I added more appropriate references in some places and also updated with new references. I also fixed a couple of sentences using more appropriate wording.
- In the “scientific research” section, a great deal of information was provided for an inappropriate reference that has limitations. I have fixed this issue, and also added more information related to a more appropriate reference that is cited. Additionally, I replaced some older articles (studies over 10 years old) that are used as references to validate a point. I also removed an article that is irrelevant to this particular point discussed.
- I replaced references in a couple of other places as well. If any of these explanations are not clear, or if anyone has questions or concerns regarding any of the edits, please discuss in this talk page.
Thank you!
Sandyshore ( talk) 22:35, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
At the end of the first paragraph, it is indicated that reference 9 does not support the claim. I suggest deleting it.
Concerning a quotation to verify reference 10 pointing to "Harrington, Anne; Dunne, John D (2015). "When mindfulness is therapy: Ethical qualms, historical perspectives". American Psychologist. 70 (7): 621–31. doi:10.1037/a0039460. PMID 26436312." The article is in the October, 2015, issue of this journal, which is entirely devoted to the topic "mindfulness" as a possible psychological therapy. There are four articles, the last of which is the one cited, which is entirely devoted to the development of mindfulness as therapy, and traces the efforts of Kabat-Zinn from the creation of the first medically oriented, stress-reduction clinic until the date of the cited publication in 2015. Kabat-Zinn was a PhD in molecular biology from MIT who was himself a practictioner and teacher of Zen Buddhism. However, he tried to establish the clinical, scientific basis of "mindfulness-based stress reduction" (MBSR), and his clinical resources were devoid of reference to Buddhism, at least initially. The popularity of MBSR is attributed to the publication of his 1991 book intended for laymen, "Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness." (More can be found in Jon_Kabat-Zinn.)
To return to the present issue, I suggest that the text and reference could be left as is. It might be preferable to replace the phrase "generally considered to have been initiated" with a more generic statement concerning his creation in 1979 of the Stress Reduction Clinic at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, soon after renamed the MBSR clinic, which developed a 7-8 week course and supporting resources, including an internet-based web site as early as 1988.
The article has many more serious issues with citations. For example, references 200 and 201 appear to be an attempt to point to another "named" reference. They should be replaced with the appropriate reference.
MidwestGeek ( talk) 20:48, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
I have listed the main four individuals that appear to have significantly contributed to the the popularity of mindfulness in the modern context. More information is provided in the cited references and in the links provided. I also edited a couple of sentences.
(By the way, I saw the comment by MidwestGeek (above) only just now - hopefully I addressed that comment as well.)
Nandinik ( talk) 20:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for this; it is a great improvement. I am in no position to judge critically, but I question how much influence D. T. Suzuki may have had on mindfulness as therapy. Kabat-Zinn credits Thích Nhất Hạnh for influencing the development of his thinking on the subject. The wikipedia article about Hanh mentions his impact on western thought. He lives in France, has taught at universities in the U.S., and has published many books in English.
MidwestGeek ( talk) 21:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi MidwestGeek, Please feel free to edit what I have entered - if others are ok with that. I suppose people like D. T. Suzuki would have had an indirect influence on the therapies used today. I simply entered information that I had collected after doing some quick searches.
Nandinik ( talk) 21:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Reading Matt Nisbet, The Mindfulness Movement, the following passage struck me:
Kabat-Zinn’s key innovation, noted Wilson (2014) was to take the traditional week-long meditation retreat, inaccessible to those with busy lives, and to offer participants classes that took place once a week for two months. Participants, who usually numbered between thirty-five and forty per course, were assigned guided meditation recordings to use at home for forty-five minutes each day for the duration of the course. They were also instructed on how to be mindful of their breath during their daily activities, expanding the “thread of meditative awareness” into every aspect of their lives (Kabat- Zinn 2013).
Just as important, the course was able to be offered across clinical and institutional settings. Instructors, many with advanced degrees in the mental health professions, were required to complete an intensive certification process and to keep their training up to date.
What was new about weekly meditation-classes in the 1980s? The guided meditations seem more key to me; and it's remarkable that this method is not mentioned in the article. The "intensive certification process" seems also relevant in this regard; meditation courses are offered by thousands of teachers nowadays, but none (or few) of them, as far as I know, use guided meditations, except those who brand their product "mindfulness." I think we have to write more about the role of guided meditations in mindfulness. Do participants also learn to be mindfull without such guided instructions? When do the guided instructions cease? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Kabat-Zinn himself: Full Catastrophe Living (Revised Edition), p.lxiv (long introduction for a short message...), advising to use CD's with guided mindfulness practices:
Almost everybody finds it easier, when embarking for the first time on a daily meditation practice, to listen to an instructor-guided audio program and let it "carry them along" in the early stages, until they get the hang of it from the inside, rather than attempting to follow instructions from a book, however clear and detailed they may be.
Compare Rupert Gethin (2004), On the practice of Buddhist meditation, p.202-203, noting that the Buddhist sutras hardly explain how to meditate, and then stating that "the effective practice of meditation requires the personal instruction of a teacher." Gethin seems to echo Vetter (1988), The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism, who notes that the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta describes the Buddha as instructing his first followers in turn: instructing two or three of them, while the others go out begging for food, signifying the need of personal instruction to learn ho to practice dhyana - or mindfulness? (only the first stage of dhyana centers on samadhi; the second stage is smadhi-ji, "born from concentration; in the third and fourth stage "eqaunimity and mindfulness" are central).
Also a nice observation from Nisbet (bold mine):
During the 2000s, with books, talks, and documentaries about mindfulness instantly available via Amazon, Netflix, and YouTube and guided meditations downloadable to smart phones, public interest in mindfulness was set to explode.
Maybe add the walkman, intriduced in 1979, the same year MBSR was introduced? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
The term "mindfulness” is derived from the Pali term sati, "memory," [1] "retention," [2] "mindfulness, alertness, self-possession," [1] which is a significant element of Buddhist traditions, [3] [4] while the concept is related to Zen, Vipassanā, and Tibetan meditation techniques. [5] [6] While "mindfulness" has been translated and interpreted as "bare cognition," in a Buddhist context it has a wider meaning and purpose, related to vipassana, namely discerning what is beneficial and what is not, and calming the mind by this discernment. [7] [8] [9]
into
Mindfulness is derived from sati, a significant element of Buddhist traditions, [3] [4] and the concept is related to Zen, Vipassanā, and Tibetan meditation techniques. [5] [6]
with the edit-summary
Not particularly helpful on this page (more relevant or covered at Sati (Buddhism))
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Nisbet
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Wilson
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Mindfulness is not exactly derived from Buddhist sati; the term is derived from a specific (mis)interpretation of sati. It has a broader meaning, as explained in the body of the article, which is summarized in the lead. To understand what mindfulness really is about, this information is necessary. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:56, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
This article makes heavy use of non- WP:MEDRS sources for biomedical claims, leading to a POV problem. It is in need of a clear-out. Alexbrn ( talk) 11:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This edit was reverted because the content is WP:FRINGE, WP:RECENT, and supported only by a list of primary research and one example of a small primary study. The information is not encyclopedic, and is reverted again. The IP user has reached WP:3RR, and admin will be notified if further warring occurs. -- Zefr ( talk) 21:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
References
In the beginning of the article, I read, "Mindfulness is very similar to what was earlier known as Gestalt therapy." Not only do I not believe this, there is no supporting reference here. In a different place in this article (under the heading Morita therapy, which may not be the right place) there is a reference, but the referenced text does not even contain the word mindfulness, nor a definition of awareness that looks like mindfulness. -- Han691 ( talk) 20:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Should expand on the usage of Mediation in the major Abrahamic regions as well. For example Islam praying 5 times a day and so forth.
Should also add a section on Franz Friedrich Anton Mesmer and the importance of Hypnosis and its relation to mindfulness — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamwow786 ( talk • contribs) 01:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Re "evidence supports the use of mindfulness programs to alleviate symptoms of a variety of mental and physical disorders (Gotink et al (2015), "Standardised mindfulness-based interventions in healthcare: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. PLoS ONE 10(4): e0124344. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124344),
Note that this paper has been retracted [13] because of methodology and COI issues. The results are not necessarily wrong, but the process didn't meet standards. The paragraph should be rewritten without this cite. 173.228.123.207 ( talk) 01:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
I made an edit removing the reference, and another one restoring it with the retraction mentioned. I don't know what's best. It is a heavily cited paper but the errors sound significant. 173.228.123.207 ( talk) 02:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
From the lead:
Mindfulness is the psychological process of bringing one's attention to experiences occurring in the present moment
- is it possible to bring one's attention to experiences which are not happening in the present moment? What's missing is the non-judgmental part. Baer, citing Kabat-Zinn:
Paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:37, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
This article needs a more tempered tone about the benefits of mindfulness intervention. To include Richard Davidson in the lead and not his concerns about mindfulness intervention being oversold for something for which it was not designed is a failure of NPOV. DolyaIskrina ( talk) 02:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Regarding the paragraph on ‘physical illness’ (that quotes Richard J. Davidson) – it cites a low quality reference – a podcast! I listened to this podcast (audio file) and it does not mention any of what is written in this paragraph! Therefore I have replaced this paragraph with a new paragraph that incorporates academic peer reviewed research publications that relate to physical health and mindfulness. I also felt that it is more suitable to place this paragraph just before the ‘commercialization’ paragraph. If anyone has questions or concerns regarding this edit or any of my other edits, please discuss here in this talk page.
Sandyshore ( talk) 16:20, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello all:
I carried out the following edits. If you have questions/concerns please let me know. Below is a summary of the edits I did:
- Added and updated several references and got rid of repetition.
- Removed the Gotink, et al reference, along with its associated sentences (considering this article has been retracted).
- Listed the subsections ‘Two-component model,’ ‘The five-aggregate model’ and ‘Cultivating self-knowledge and wisdom’ as a separate section (because they do not belong under the ‘Definition’ section). This new subsection is called “Models and Frameworks for Mindfulness Practice.”
- Additional edits to increase clarity. Also removed some references published in the 1980’s (along with Transcendental Meditation references) that are irrelevant to be listed under the “Scientific Research” section.
Nandinik ( talk) 15:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
So chapter title is " Samprajaña, apramāda and atappa" ... - then the text devellops mindfulness, samprajaña, and apramāda : where is atappa ? ( ātāpī: (adj.) ardent, diligent, serious in effort, zealous. The term appears most prominently in the Satipatthāna formulas) Papalain ( talk) 07:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Is this addition added by an anon notable enough? I'm leaning towards no, but I'd like some input.-- Megaman en m ( talk) 18:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm confused why Zen, "Vipassana", and "Tibetan" traditions are listed here. There are so many schools of Buddhism not listed here - and I'm nearly certain that mindfulness plays a role in every Buddhist school.
Could it say instead:
Mindfulness is derived from sati, a significant element of [all] Buddhist traditions,[6][7] ?
[I wonder if that first sentence is referring to the growth of Mindfulness as a concept in the west. That this particular strain, coming from teachers like chogyam trungpa, thich nhat hanh, and other big names comes specifically from zen and tibetan. It's my understanding that meditation as a tool to be used by the vast masses is a relatively recent conception as Buddhism was more in the 'priestly caste' before persecution of buddhists. I can't remember my source though. So to summarize, though meditation/ sati/ dhayana is a part of all traditions but mindfulness has grown from a few key transmissions to the west. NateRen ( talk) 19:16, 18 April 2021 (UTC)NateRen
I think it would be very useful to do some reseach on the schools of Buddhism and see how mindfulness had an impact on those. 01:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre2208 ( talk • contribs)
Bennv123 removed some citations because I added them as one of the authors of the study. The study was a systematic review reviewing 60+ studies on mindfulness for athletic performance. The review concluded there were some positive effects but the quality of the studies were very poor, so strong conclusions should be avoided. Both of these claims are consistent across the wikipedia page, but without the review, the wiki article becomes more biased—relying instead on a single study that supports mindfulness. The citations to the review support the wikipedia ethos of fair, balanced, and accurate descriptions of the area. Still, instead of reversing the change myself, I have a self-cite COI, which have declared on the page, and on my profile, but hope that another contributor can reverse the edit, reinforcing the benefits of using data from the top of the Hierarchy of evidence. Noetel ( talk) 11:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
User @ Jtjdt: made a good-faith edit to change "judgment" to "evaluation" in the opening of the lead. I think this change should be discussed here, as I'm not sure I agree with "evaluation" as a synonym for "judgment". I propose the edit be reverted, so discussion of this can take place. Pyrrho the Skeptic ( talk) 17:39, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Morganbmark95. Peer reviewers: Cvonne12.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 04:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I want to get this discussion page started because I'd like to see some expansion of this page. Mindfulness is an important concept in Buddhism and there are sutras devoted to it's practice. The non-Buddhist, non-religious uses of mindfulness are of interest as well, and could be expanded. As the page stands it's quite basic, and I think it could become far richer in information. Nightngle 13:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
______________________________________ New topic; and I hope this will be a useful place to describe two edits I just now made. ____________________________
I noticed in the 'Related terms and practices' section, the table had two items whose Roman transliterations did not match what purport to be the same terms, as written in Devanagari. Both are in the Sanskrit column. I corrected those two items in the column.
Specifically, I changed the 'samprajaña,संप्रज्ञान' pair to 'samprajñāna, संप्रज्ञान ; And I changed the former 'apramāda,ज्ञानकोश' pair to 'apramāda,अप्रमाद'.
The reasons are, first, that संप्रज्ञान is spelled as 'samprajñāna' when transliterated into Roman script. The original error appears to me to be nothing more than a typo.
And second, I could not find the word 'ज्ञानकोश' , which transliterates to 'jñānakośa' , as a relevant term in this context. I find myself baffled as to how that word got introduced here. The word 'apramāda' is however relevant in this context. So I chose the transliterated word 'apramāda' as the one to retain -- the point being, the word written in Devanagari did not match the word, which should presumably have been the same word, as written in Roman script; so one had to choose between them. Savitr108 ( talk) 20:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Later note: I also noticed an oddity concerning this pair: manaskāraḥ मनस्कारः which, until I changed it just now, also did not quite match since it was written as manaskāraḥ मनस्कार .
For some reason this term is shown with a grammatical ending -- namely, it is shown in the nominative singular. Or the transliterated version was so shown; see above. Just now I corrected the Devanagari version so it also has the same -aḥ ending; it did not.
I first tried correcting the transliterated version, but it then came out highlighted in red font-colo, to show that there is no Wikipedia entry for that term. Evidently the Wiki entry has the term with the grammatical ending. Who knows why.
If anyone cares for such minute detail, and wants to further correct this pair manaskāraḥ मनस्कारः here, I am sure there is a way to do it so that one writes manaskāra मनस्कार . That way it will be 'out of grammar' so to say, as all the other terms in this table are. If and when I have time I will research how to do that myself. It will be some simple formatting command which at present I do not know, perhaps a re-direct command. Savitr108 ( talk) 06:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I have a big concern about the external links on this page. Except for the link to "Mindfulness in Plain English", they are all sites promoting services. To me, this violates the spam policy. I would like to see only sites that have material that supports understanding mindfulness, not links that promote signing up for a course. Nightngle 13:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I am glad that you have raised this Nightngle it seems to me that there is a danger that mindfulness will be adopted by the "sham" artists who offer the secrets to happiness, success etc. The NLP reiki etc etc "experts". Alnpete ( talk) 16:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
BTW: I am one who also thinks that the Timeline of psychotherapy should contain Siddhartha Shakyamuni as one of the first psychotherapists and I am working the courage up to edit it this way as I know that someone will soon revert and a long and heated discussion will then ensue. On the other hand being such a neglected little wiki entry I might well get away with it. Mattjs 17:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Karley - thanks for your comments. I'm glad to hear you're working on the Mindfulness therapies, there is a lot of really good stuff out there. I'm going to work on the Buddhist Mindfulness practices, and I think this page will be a good jumping off point to help people figure out which direction they would like to read about. Nightngle 15:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Alright, what happened to the original that was here two weeks ago. The Buddha wikiproject has complete overhauled the article and made it much less useful. In fact, it is not as well written. The secular version needs to be recreated and the Buddha wikiproject made as another article. It should have a short article and the See Full Article on Buddhism Mindfulness. Please recover the original document, I require it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.110.224 ( talk) 22:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
The only meaning of mindfulness that really counts is what an ordinary WP expects to see. If there are multiple possibilities, then the users see a disambiguation page. If one meaning is strongly dominant, then they get the dominant page with a top-of-the-page link to the less dominant meanings (if there aren't too many) or to a disambiguation page (if there are many). This is Wikipedia practice. WP:DAB Because psychology doesn't seem to want the term, you might well be able to effectively claim that the main entry is yours and effectively change the meaning of the word in Wikipedia, a good prosyletizing strategy. DCDuring 02:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm in total agreement with No Architect on this, except that I find it offensive rather than just 'odd', and have therefore moved the section to the end of the article, where I have incorporated it under a new heading Mindfulness in the West. I have also attempted to bring together the various strands on western medical and psychiatric uses of mindfulness. Bearing in mind the definition of paralogous given on Wikipedia, I have also lightly edited the parts of the text using that and related words. BlueThird ( talk) 03:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
The Mindfulness entry seems oddly biased towards Christianity. Mindfulness in Christianity, or any other religion for that matter, is an interesting side note, but since the origins of the practice are Buddhist, one would expect Christianity to appear late in the article, rather than dominating the first paragraph, which should be devoted to basic definition, origin, and history.
No Architect 22:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
From what I know of mindfulness it is also known as Vipassana. Shouldn't we merge the two articles into a more complete one?
Within early Buddhist contemplative culture, sati has a specific context with reference to Ānāpānasati/Satipaṭṭhāna work. Vipassanā, as a specific contemplative praxis was a later invention in Burma, and not represented in the teachings of the Buddha, except in tandem with samatha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phrafarang ( talk • contribs) 22:07, 20 December 2011
I added the following paragraph:
The attempt to be continuously mindful can easily lead to the entrance into the dark night, a singular state of consciousness in which the individual experiences a sudden and deep suffering[1] . While this is a normal stage of the process of learning to be mindful, sometimes it might be difficult to realize that this state is caused by mindfulness itself. This realization, together with a lot of acceptance and a renewed attempt to be mindful will lead to the exit of the dark night and to the entrance into the equanimity states. The dark night is a very delicate moment in which the guidance of a qualified master is specially useful. Stopping meditation at this point can lead the meditator to be stuck in the dark night for a quite long period.
The cited reference was Perez-De-Albeniz, A., Holmes, J., Meditation: concepts, effects and uses in therapy, International Journal of Psychotherapy, Mar. 2000, Vol. 5 Issue 1, 49-58
This paragraph has been deleted by 76.211.116.200 because: 1) content is poorly written, 2) content isn't substantiated or explained, and is wacky on the face of it.
Since I think the content of the paragraph is true and important to know for possible meditators, I would like to ask for help to improve its redaction and to consider to be included again in the main article. --Juliusllb 00:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I have also read about this state of 'fear, misery and disgust' in the following work (on-line) - "A Modern Treatise on Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation" by The Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw - so I would agree about its re-instatement in the article. 39tiro ( talk) 10:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Following the above discussion about splitting Mindfulness into Buddhist and therapeutic articles, Mindfulness (psychology) was created. Shouldn't the current section 2 "Mindfulness in the West" and its references be moved there? Keahapana ( talk) 23:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Great feedback. However, since this entry is part of the Wikipedia alternative medicine project, doesn't it seem as though the psychological concept of using mindfulness to treat depression and anxiety should probably remain here?
This article is to be an important chapter of the abovementioned Wikibook. This article is currently very loose and uncited. This is a polite call to action to cite information included otherwise it will be deleted within 108 days as conjecture and hearsay.
Svaha
B9 hummingbird hovering (
talk •
contribs) 06:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Response
Hello, I'm not sure I understand to whom the call of action is addressed. If you don't like the article you're welcome to edit it. This is, after all, Wikipedia. Have a great day! Jlchan29 ( talk) 20:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
How should we proceed with moving the psychological material from Mindfulness to Mindfulness (psychology)? In cleaning up Mindfulness (disambiguation), I noticed that both Mindfulness (Buddhism) and Mindfulness meditation redirect to Mindfulness. Could we somehow make the current Mindfulness the disambiguation page, and split the current contents between Mindfulness (Buddhism) and Mindfulness (psychology)? Keahapana ( talk) 00:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaing up the entry so much!
This is a great question. I took out the Mindfulness in the West section and put the information in that section in the therapeutic section below it to tighten up the entry. Because mindfulness is used so much in popular culture and modern psychology, keeping a reference to the general non religous use of mindfulness in the main category while putting the Buddhist aspect of mindfulness elsewhere makes sense. However, the concept of mindfulness is originally derived from Buddhism so it seems strange to leave the Buddhist aspect out all together.
I amended the history of Buddhism and mindfulness in passing to de-emphasize Buddhism and mindfulness in this entry. Let's keeping looking at it.
Thanks again for cleaning up the entry. Jlchan29 ( talk) 21:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd like a little more info about the source for this purported variant of nian:
I suspect that it is wrong. Every other source I've seen for sthāpana translates it as "demonstration," as it is used in the context of Indian logic, and the Tibetan gnas pa seems to mean "abiding" and translates the Sanskrit avasthita. Maybe nian is actually equivalent to these two terms, but in the context of this article it just seems to be confusing. Sylvain1972 ( talk) 16:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
PDF-Datei, auch hier http://www.intersein-zeitschrift.de/intersein24.pdf
Die dritte Übung der Achtsamkeit "Verantwortlicher Umgang mit Sexualität-Fragen und Antworten" Intersein Nr. 24/Mai 2004
Is there some english text about mindfullness and sexuality?
I don't object to Zen Criticism of the mindfulness movement in this article. Unfortunately, the two comments now quoted under the heading of "Zen Criticism" are impossible to understand. I'm familiar with mindfulness and Zen, and I can't really figure out what these two guys are talking about. Maybe the comments were shortened too much, or maybe someone else said it better. 69.225.3.53 ( talk) 21:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
This article should contain a short section about the "body scan" technique. It's often taught by mindfulness instructors in MBSR, Vipassana and other traditions. 69.225.3.53 ( talk) 21:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I felt it necessary to undo the last change. The previous text gave a much clearer idea of what mindfulness is - certainly in Therevadan terms. I could not understand what the list of ten mindfulnesses add in terms of reader's understanding. Hope this is OK. 94.197.253.80 ( talk) 09:34, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Why is so much room given to the etymology of various translations of smrti? This is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. An encyclopedia should give an overview of a subject. Dumping all the definitions of a Sanskrit term from Monier-Williams is not at all relevant or helpful for people who are wondering what mindfulness is. Tengu800 ( talk) 23:11, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
I am very surprised at some terms used in the first two paragraphs of this article. Specifically use of word "hatred" and "enraged" 1. – "Mindfulness is a spiritual faculty (indriya) that is considered to be of great importance in the path to hatred according to the teaching of the Buddha. 2. – Enlightenment (bodhi) is a state of being enraged in which has been overcome, abandoned and is absent from the mind. From my reading of The Dhammapada, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying and Jon Kabat-Zinn's course on mindfulness, these seem bizarre and misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.191.106 ( talk) 22:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Rectified. Not sure how those terms appeared in the first place, as they were corrected almost straight away but other user. May have been a glitch. Orlaghob ( talk) 22:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Can someone please put a description of what mindfulness is. This page used to say quite clearly what it is, but now it only talks about how mindfulness is used. Without such a description, this page does not deserve to be B rated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.18.92 ( talk) 07:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I am new to commenting/editing, so please forgive me if I don't know the edicate. In the first paragraph there is a statement: "Mindfulness meditation can also be traced back to the earlier Upanishads, part of Hindu scripture." The footnote is not to a primary reference, i.e. the Upanishads itself. The reference is to a journal article that makes the statement "However, the roots of mindfulness practice can be found in Yogic practices in the Upanishads dating back thousands of years before the advent of Buddhism." The journal article does not substantiate this claim and I don't know of any that exist. I invite discussion on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aflum ( talk • contribs) 08:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
The five hindrances identified by the Nivarana Sutta of the Pali Canon which must be overcome in order to awaken are:
Sensual desire (kamacchanda)
Ill will (vyapada)
Sloth, torpor, or drowsiness (thina-middha)
Restlessness and worry (uddhacca-kukkucca)
Uncertainty or skepticism (vicikiccha)
There appears to be an overlap with other traditions, for instances, the Seven Deadly Sins in Christianity.
In keeping with merger guidelines on Wikipedia, I propose that Mindfulness be merged into Satipatthana, because although it is a great article with non-redundant information, the concept of mindfulness and Satipatthana are considered in Bhuddism to be essentially the same. Please feel free to post here or on my talk page if any feedback. Parsh ( talk) 03:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
There is a line in this article which says The English term mindfulness, in use for centuries, long predates its use in the Buddhist contex. What is this supposed to mean? Pali and Budhism easily predate english by centuries. I am under the impression that Latin might have been the language of the European world during rise of Budhism. So what is correct? - Wikishagnik ( talk) 15:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
http://ajh.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/09/13/ajh.hpt134.abstract
I think this research study should be mentioned in the article. At the moment it mentions under the research section that Mindfulness lowers blood pressure. That might be true according to some sources but this research suggests it does not. In the interest of maintain NPO this information should be added to the article.
-- Uncreated ( talk) 09:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I added a section referring to two papers by two contemporary scholars who do not agree in all ways with modern interpretations of mindfulness. Please feel free to improve this section. I just wanted to make a start. 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 23:28, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
In the section on "Scientific Research, it is stated: "Research has been ongoing over the last twenty or thirty years.." Is it 20 or 30 years? Which is it? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:104:E001:9010:A1A0:6D31:1799:95D7 ( talk) 22:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
At this point, I think it's moot (debatable) whether we have one or a singular definition of 'mindfulness' or several (plural) definitions of mindfulness, memory and retention, or focus (moving forward, focus, etc.), full mind encompassing the more mature development of the older-view/overview, etc. MaynardClark ( talk) 18:44, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I've removed 81~14'additions a secons time. The quote he added is about "satipaṭṭhāna", and does not support the previous two sentences. WP:OR, as so often with this editor. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:19, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Good, since you don't understand what WP:OR means, here's the explanation:
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 10:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Several meanings are given to the word mindfulness in psychotherapy. One not so far mentioned in this article is the Gestalt Therapy interpretation. This was inspired by Buddhist writing. It is in some ways simpler than some of the other descriptions given. It consists of focussed awareness on all the phenomena of consciousness, sensation, thoughts fantasies, memories, feelings. The assumption is that the whole person is in a constant process of bringing to the fore whatever is at that moment of significance. From attention to this changing spontaneous flow, appropriate action will follow. Perhaps this trusting attitude is truly Buddhist. The practice is not connected to meditation, but encouraged as a way of living and connecting to the world and others. 87.114.129.244 ( talk) 16:47, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! In the article it is said that:
He found that Unitarianism came closest to true Christianity, and had a strong sympathy for the Unitarians.
In another article, Transcendentalism, though it's been said that:
Transcendentalism is a religious and philosophical movement that was developed during the late 1820s and 1830s in the Eastern region of the United States as a protest against the general state of spirituality and, in particular, the state of intellectualism at Harvard University and the doctrine of the Unitarian church taught at Harvard Divinity School.
So, what is the truth? :O Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 21:10, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
A new editor added the following content to the Schools section:
The David Lynch Foundation has implemented the meditation-based Quiet Time program in several San Francisco middle schools since the 2006-2007 school year. Positive results among students and teachers include reduced teacher absences and turnover, decreases in educator depression, anxiety, anger, and fatigue, and increases in student GPA, school attendance, and positive behaviors. Former San Francisco Superintendent of Schools Carlos Garcia, along with other current key school district leaders, are hoping to expand the Quiet Time program to reach another 15 schools throughout the Bay Area.
The source doesn't mention mindfulness. Also, the source is self-published [2] and shouldn't be used to claim health benefits. It seems like this content should be removed. TimidGuy ( talk) 15:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Propose to merge both Mindfulness (psychology) and Mindfulness meditation into Mindfulness:
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:09, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 18:18, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
I've reorganised Mindfulness and Mindfulness (psychology). "Mindfulness" gives an overview of Buddhist mindfulness, psychological/clinical/theraputic mindfulness, and popular/lifestyle mindfulness; in "Mindfulness (psychology)" the emphasis is on therapeutic mindfulness. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
I think the two articles should be merged, especially considering that there is a lot of overlap. I just entered some new references to the “Mindfulness” article (under "Clinical applications"), but then wondered if the edits are more suitable in the “Mindfulness_(psychology)” article (however, the “Mindfulness_(psychology)” article does not even have a separate "Clinical applications" section!). In any case, I did not want to repeat the same edits in both articles.
This is also an important matter when taking into consideration the re-directing of article links to “Mindfulness” from other Wikipedia articles.
Nandinik ( talk) 17:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! Now as the mindfulness-related articles have been merged, I think there is need to start changing many of the bullet points we have into coherent paragraphs and fluid text (e.g. Mindfulness#Attention and Mindfulness, sub-section Evidence for improvements in three areas of attention). Thoughts? Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 16:00, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I am a Buddhist meditation instructor, authorized in a well-known ancient tradition.
So, I am dismayed that this so-called "Buddhism" article is now a Psychotherapy article. In other words, it is now the same as newspaper articles "Mediation is good for your blood pressure!".
That is NOT the purpose of meditation.
The Buddha did not leave his wealthy family to find a way to lower blood pressure, and to allow high-powered professionals to more effectively make lots of money.
The point of meditation is to observe the true nature of reality, not to aid you in pursuing some existing false or distorted view of reality.
Please re-write this page as a Buddhist Meditation article and put all of the psychotherapy into a separate linked article.
162.205.217.211 ( talk) 16:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Greetings! I just noticed that after a recent edit [4] by Nandinik, we currently have five distinct sources for the sentence "Clinical studies have documented the physical and mental health benefits of mindfulness in general, and MBSR in particular." in the lede. That seems like a model example of WP:OVERCITE ("Garphism is the study[1][2][3][4][5] of ...").
I haven't taken a closer look at the sources, but do we really need all of them? How about the ones you added, Nandinik? I think we should trim a few though... Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 10:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm moving this sourced content here from the lead, since it is not currently mentioned elsewhere on the page:
The Five-Aggregate Model of the Mind has been recently proposed as a theoretical resource that could guide mindfulness interventions.This model is an ancient model of the mind that comprehensively describes moment-to-moment changes that happen in subjective conscious experience.
Imo, the content needs first to be appropriately integrated into other sections. I also think some caution is needed regarding strong claims (eg "...comprehensively describes...) made in the RS. 5.80.198.100 ( talk) 13:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Nandinik ( talk) 15:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I've tried to add a link to Satipatthana, but I don't know how it would fit into the article.-- 89.12.190.214 ( talk) 11:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Nandinik ( talk) 17:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
First you merge mindfulness meditation into mindfulness. Now you start deleting things because they are only about meditation, not 'pure' mindfulness. I get that some people think they just invented mindfulness and that it has nothing to do with any ancient stuff; that now you have to pay big money to learn it and that it's now terribly complicated, scientific and medical... But really? --- Nigelj ( talk) 19:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I have re-worded the ‘POV-section’ (five-aggregate model) that had been identified as needing ‘neutrality.’ If anything is not clear, please let me know.
Nandinik ( talk) 23:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
@ ZuluPapa5: I've removed the following stuff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Removed:
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Removed:
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)
What's the relevance of this passage to this article? Are we going to sum up every Buddhist teacher from the past 2,500 years? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the sentence stating "The popular mindfulness movement was initiated by Jon Kabat-Zinn". This is a statement that is appearing in numerous popular articles derived from this page but that is contentious. Mindfulness was *popular* throughout Asia for several thousand years. The word itself was used as a translation of smṛti/sati before J. K-Z was involved.
Thich Nhat Hanh published a popular book "A Miracle of Mindfulness" before J. K-Z was on the scene. The current addition has a quote for Jon
"The first book to awaken a mainstream readership to the subject of mindfulness – a testimony to the power of Thich Nhat Hanh’s elegant and profound teaching." (Jon Kabat-Zinn, author of Full Catastrophe Living)
I think that is an acknowledgement that he (Jon) didn't initiate/awaken the mainstream!
J. K-Z definitely initiated the movement around the MBSR programmes but these are only one manifestation of mindfulness.
RogerHyam ( talk) 12:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC) RogerHyam
I'm skeptical of the inclusion of the section on the Alexander Technique. I added a "citation needed" to it, as there are none. A more experienced editor might consider deleting it as off-topic?
This article on mindfulness does not mention serious reservations about the efficacy of the practice inasmuch as a reader might think that there were no risks involved. But the psychologist Susan Blackmore in her textbook on Consciousness, Consciousness: An Introduction, 1st ed, Hodder & Stoughton, 2003, on p. 395 says, "More worrying is that meditation can occasionally have harmful effects". She goes on to state in this paragraph that TM can overwhelm those beginning the technique and moreover can exacerbate existing psychological conditions and increase tension. It is clear that mindfulness is to be considered here, as in the index, mindfulness is referenced to these pages (385-400) dealing with meditation, and she refers directly to it on p.389. 92.29.242.234 ( talk) 18:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Please note the following changes I made: (i) I added/updated some references. (ii) Brought back the “five-aggregate model.” This model is very relevant for this page, since it is a useful theoretical resource that can guide mindfulness interventions. Also felt this part is better suited in the “psychology” subsection – so I moved it there. I also added a few edits to it to make it clearer. (iii) I improved the “Business” section and removed the template message (that said this section is "written like an advertisement"). I included many of the points and kept the references, and also added two new references to it.
If anything is not clear, please let me know.
Nandinik ( talk) 17:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
This [7] should be NPOV reconsidered as it's intended to provide balanced mindfulness. Zulu Papa 5 * ( talk) 07:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Research on meditation was proposed to be split from its huge "Mindfulness" section, which then would be moved into this article here. Beforehand it would need to receive some improvements in terms of proper sourcing. I could do that, would anybody here mind or have any comments? Meerpirat ( talk) 11:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mindfulness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello CFCF: I would like to know why my edits were removed. I learned to edit Wikipedia from an experienced user – so, I know the entries I made are correct. Please let me know why ALL the edits I did on the 24th as well as the edits I did about two weeks ago have been removed (I spent quite a lot of time on them). Thank you. Sandyshore ( talk) 23:37, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Since I have not received a reply from CFCF explaining why ALL the edits I did were deleted (message above), I have brought some of those edits back. Below, I have provided brief explanations of the edits I carried out:
- The Creswell publication is a 2017 reference, not a 2016 reference (anyone can check this out for themselves by taking a look at its publication listing directly from the journal site: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-psych-042716-051139 )
- The reference "Awakening Through Mindfulness" is merely someone’s blog – it is not an authentic, published reference. Therefore, I replaced that reference with published reference.
- The wording of some sentences were changed to better reflect the reference/s cited, to get rid of repetitions, etc. For example, I changed the wording “the internal experiences occurring in the present moment” to “experiences occurring in the present moment” – if you check the reference cited here (Baer, 1994: Mindfulness Training as a Clinical Intervention: A Conceptual and Empirical Review), you will see this wording is more appropriate. Alternatively, one can edit this sentence to say “internal and external experiences occurring in the present moment.”
- I wrote the paragraph starting with “Interest in mindfulness has grown during the past several decades…” to list various OTHER applications of mindfulness (i.e., besides direct applications in clinical psychology and psychiatry that are listed in the previous paragraph – these other applications include applications for healthy aging, in athletics, for weight management, in dermatology, for the perinatal period, for children with special needs, etc. All these articles that were added are new research studies (2016 and 2017 articles) published in academic peer-reviewed journals. In case someone thinks this paragraph is better suited in a different place of the article, it can be moved. Another alternative would be to create a separate section (subheading such as “Other applications”) to list these.
- I added Karunamuni & Weerasekera, 2017 article, which is a recent academic peer-reviewed article published in the journal ‘Current Psychology.’ I think it is important to add this information on cultivating of self-knowledge and wisdom (through mindfulness practice). I added a subsection titled ‘Cultivating self-knowledge and wisdom’ containing four sentences.
- To the section on “Meditation,” I added the reference Last et al., 2017 (title: The Effects of Meditation on Grey Matter), since this appears to be a good review published in the ‘journal of Alzheimer’s disease.’
- I left the ‘maintenance template’ as it is, so that someone could address any concerns by discussing rather than simply deleting all new edits (without providing any explanations).
If anyone has issues with any of the edits above, please let me know and I am happy to discuss or change the edits as needed. (By the way, I did not have time to redo all the edits that CFCF deleted – I might do the additional edits some other time.)
Sandyshore ( talk) 22:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
As I mentioned earlier (please see my previous comment), I felt that the paragraph starting with “Interest in mindfulness has grown…” is better suited to be listed under the “Other usages” subsection. Also, the part “Recent interest has emerged for studying the effects…” is better suited to be listed under the “Other usages” section (rather than under the “Meditation” subsection). Therefore, I have moved these two paragraphs - as a result of the move, I needed to slightly edit a few sentences (considering its new location). I have also updated a reference in a couple of places. If anyone has comments/concerns regarding any of these edits, please let me know.
Sandyshore ( talk) 20:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Regarding any source used to provide an individual's opinion such as Joiner's [8]: To avoid WP:NOT and WP:NPOV problems, reliable and independent sources are generally required. -- Ronz ( talk) 21:29, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I am planning on adding more empirical research to the education portion of this article. I've done multiple searches for published studies, and plan to include some of these citations in my contribution to the section. Please review and provide feedback. Thank you.
1) Mindful interventions: Youth, poverty, and the developing brain.
Choudhury, S., & Moses, J. M. (2016). Mindful interventions: Youth, poverty, and the developing brain. Theory & Psychology,26(5), 591-606. doi:10.1177/0959354316669025
2) A Randomized Trial of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Children: Promoting Mindful Attention to Enhance Social-Emotional Resiliency in Children.
Semple, R. J., Lee, J., Rosa, D., & Miller, L. F. (2009). A Randomized Trial of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Children: Promoting Mindful Attention to Enhance Social-Emotional Resiliency in Children. Journal of Child and Family Studies,19(2), 218-229. doi:10.1007/s10826-009-9301-y
3) Effectiveness of a school-based mindfulness program for transdiagnostic prevention in young adolescents.
Johnson, C., Burke, C., Brinkman, S., & Wade, T. (2016). Effectiveness of a school-based mindfulness program for transdiagnostic prevention in young adolescents. Behaviour Research and Therapy,81, 1-11. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2016.03.002
4) Mindfulness-based interventions in schools-systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zenner, C., Herrnleben-Kurz, S., & Walach, H. (2014). Mindfulness-based interventions in schools-systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology,5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00603
5) Effectiveness of the Mindfulness in Schools Programme: non-randomised controlled feasibility study.
Kuyken, W., Weare, K., Ukoumunne, O. C., Vicary, R., Motton, N., Burnett, R., . . . Huppert, F. (2013). Effectiveness of the Mindfulness in Schools Programme: non-randomised controlled feasibility study. The British Journal of Psychiatry,203(2), 126-131. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.113.126649
6) Gauging Mindfulness In Children And Youth: School-Based Applications.
Eklund, K., Omalley, M., & Meyer, L. (2016). Gauging Mindfulness In Children And Youth: School-Based Applications. Psychology in the Schools,54(1), 101-114. doi:10.1002/pits.21983
7) Introduction To The Special Issue: Mindfulness In The Schools-Historical Roots, Current Status, And Future Directions.
Renshaw, T. L., & Cook, C. R. (2016). Introduction To The Special Issue: Mindfulness In The Schools-Historical Roots, Current Status, And Future Directions. Psychology in the Schools,54(1), 5-12. doi:10.1002/pits.21978
8) Effects of Mindful Awareness Practices on Executive Functions in Elementary School Children.
Flook, L., Smalley, S. L., Kitil, M. J., Galla, B. M., Kaiser-Greenland, S., Locke, J., . . . Kasari, C. (2010). Effects of Mindful Awareness Practices on Executive Functions in Elementary School Children. Journal of Applied School Psychology,26(1), 70-95. doi:10.1080/15377900903379125 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
2600:8801:9301:830:5916:AF06:6:1EF7 (
talk) 20:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello all:
I went through the article in order to find/address issues related to the POV template [i.e., (i) undue weight (ii) neutrality (iii) reliability of listed sources], and have carried out edits to several sections of the article – please see the detailed descriptions below:
Introductory section: The article “McLaughlin KA, Nolen-Hoeksema S (Dec 2010)” that is used to support the sentence “….contribute to mental illnesses such as depression and anxiety,” is not a review article –I have replaced it with a review article (Creswell, 2017).
I removed the page number from the ‘Ruth A. Baer’ reference, because it is used in other places in the article (where this particular page number is no longer valid).
To address the POV comment ‘undue weight,’ I added the following to this section:
“The necessity for more high-quality research in this field has also been identified – such as the need for more randomized controlled studies, for providing more methodological details in reported studies and for the use of larger sample sizes."
I removed the sentence “This is applicable to society at large as well as specific settings such as workplaces and schools,” (because the references cited are web links, and schools are mentioned later on in this section as well). I also removed “It has gained worldwide popularity as a distinctive method to handle emotions.” Also, in the last paragraph of the introduction section, I briefly mentioned other applications of mindfulness (since schools, etc., are mentioned here).
I think the language used in this introductory section is neutral.
The section on “Meditation”: Some of the references cited here are websites and I found that the information provided is not very clear and complete. Therefore, I have done some edits to this section (reworded sentences to match the references cited, added new reliable references, etc.).
The sections: “Translations and Definitions” “Historical development” and “Buddhism”: In these sections, the reliability of listed sources appear to be ok, especially considering that these sources are either published peer-reviewed academic journal articles or published books that are relevant (however, I carried out a few edits to improve the references – described below). I also think the language used in these sections are neutral. (Note that the issue of “undue weight” also does not apply to these sections, due to the descriptive nature of the subject matter.)
I incorporated new references to the following sentences in order to better reflect what is stated in them (and to address the issue of “reliability of listed sources”):
“It leads to insight into the true nature of reality, namely the three marks of existence, the impermanence of and the unsatisfactoriness of every conditioned thing that exists, and non-self.”
“Vipassana is practiced in tandem with samatha, and also plays a central role in other Buddhist traditions.”
“The practice of mindfulness supports analysis resulting in the arising of wisdom (Pali: paññā, Sanskrit: prajñā).”
“Vipassanā is insight into the true nature of reality,….”
I also thought that the above sections can be summarized and edited to avoid repetition, and that some of the publications currently listed can be updated – for example, the following new article can be incorporated to these sections: Anālayo, B. (2016). Early Buddhist mindfulness and memory, the body, and pain. Mindfulness, 7(6), 1271-1280. (I will try to do these edits some other time.)
The section on “Therapy programs”: In this section too, most of the sources are either published peer-reviewed academic journal articles or published books that are relevant – i.e., the reliability of listed sources appear to be ok. Neutrality of descriptions also appears to be fine, and I do not think there are issues of “undue weight.” However, I carried out a few edits to improve this section as described below: In the “Mindfulness-based stress reduction” subsection, I corrected a typo: I changed “mindfulness-based cognitive therapy” to “mindfulness-based programs.”
I incorporated a more relevant reference to back the statement “which uses a combination of mindfulness meditation, body awareness, and yoga to help people become more mindful.”
Deleted the sentence starting with “This suggests it may have beneficial effects,….” since this sentence refers to a non-functioning link.
Also deleted the sentence “In recent years, meditation has been the subject of controlled clinical research” – since this matter is extensively described in other parts of this article.
Since the reference cited to back the statement “While MBSR has its roots in spiritual teachings, the program itself is secular” is not a review article, I added a different reference.
I added a reference to back the sentence: “Hakomi therapy, under development by Ron Kurtz and others, is a somatic psychology based upon Asian philosophical precepts of mindfulness and nonviolence.”
In the subsection “Adaptation Practice,” both references are inappropriate (one is a non-functioning weblink and the other is a media article). I have deleted these references and have marked as [citation needed].
The reference cited for “Mindfulness relaxation” is a non-functioning link. I have marked this.
The sentence starting with “The Self is curious about…” needs a reference, and it is marked as “needing a reference.”
The section on “Scientific research” This section has a lot of overlap with the subsection “Other uses” – therefore I brought some of the paragraphs from that section and merged here. In this section, almost all the references are peer-reviewed academic journal articles – so, the reliability of listed sources are ok. The section is presented using neutral language as well. However, addressed the potential ‘undue weight’ by incorporating the following sentence: Many of the above cited review studies however also indicate the necessity for more high-quality research in this field, such as conducting intervention studies using larger sample sizes, the use of more randomized controlled studies and the need for providing more methodological details in reported studies (I have provided references). There are also a few review studies that have found no differences between mindfulness interventions and control groups (provided references). These studies also list the need for more robust research investigations. Several issues pertaining to the assessment of mindfulness have also been identified including the current use of self-report questionnaires (Grossman, 2008 – use 2011 one; Creswell; Keng 2011,). I also did some minor edits to this section (e.g. replacing the first reference cited with a more reliable reference, deleting a couple of unnecessary words, etc.). Also, I think this section is better suited to be listed just before the section on ‘therapy programs.’ If there are no objections to this, I will do this edit in a few days.
Section on “Movement” I think this section can benefit from some summarizing and adding newer references - I will try to attend to this some other time. I felt that the subsection on “Schools” and “Education” could also be merged, since there appears to be an overlap. I do not think this section has any issues relating to neutrality, reliability and ‘undue weight.’ However, in the schools section, the reference ‘De Bruin, E.; Meppelink,’ is not a review article – therefore I deleted this part.
Section on “Risks” I would suggest getting rid of this section because the reference provided to state that ‘there are risks’ is a web link (i.e., it is a media article that talks about opinions/experiences of selected people, and it only uses a few selected studies – the article is an individual’s ‘point of view’). If no one has issues about removing this section I will remove it in a few days. If you do not agree about removing, please talk on this ‘talk’ page. For the time being, I did some edits to make this issue clearer (edited sentences and incorporated articles).
Section on “Related concepts” This section is written using neutral language, and also cites books and articles that appear to be relevant/reliable. However, the sentence ending in “…..and differs from both pre-existing and later-developed notions.” and the sentence ending with “……and honest self-expression (defined as expressing oneself authentically in a way that is likely to inspire compassion in others)” need reference support – these are marked. The issue of ‘undue weight’ does not apply to this section.
I have now removed the POV- template. If you have questions or issues regarding any of the above edits, please let me know (please be specific).
Nandinik ( talk) 19:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Out today, [9], [10], [11], [12] and soon to be in the article. Zulu Papa 5 * ( talk) 18:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
There appears to be a POV fork of this article happening at Definitions of mindfulness. Please discuss at Talk:Definitions of mindfulness#POV fork. Thanks, Biogeographist ( talk) 12:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mindfulness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.3:1:2991.paliWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello. I'm translating the article " Mindfulness" into Japanese language version( ja:マインドフルネス). However, in the section of Mindfulness#Translations_and_definitions, I don't understand exactly the meaning of following phrases. Though I read the references of that(Robert Sharf's " MINDFULNESS AND MINDLESSNESS IN EARLY CHAN", pp.942-943), still I don't understand it. So I want someone to tell me the meaning of these phrases on this talk page.
I would be grateful if you answered these questions. Thank you in advance.-- Leonidjp ( talk) 07:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Not willing to contradict sir Dreyfus, but is'nt awareness : "the ability to directly know and perceive, to feel, or to be cognizant of events" (sic Wikipedia), so is'nt he himself talking of the direct knowledge of bare attention, without the memory side, often presented by the mahayana scholars (indeed not in a mandatory way) ? Papalain ( talk) 16:23, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm thinking of adding a paragraph to the Education subheading on the Mindfulness page. The paragraph will summarize the findings on 5 studies conducted on school-based MBI's on youths with intellectual or developmental disabilities. The citations I will be using are:
Felver, J. C., Felver, S. L., Margolis, K. L., Ravitch, N. K., Romer, N., & Horner, R. H. (2017). Effectiveness and social validity of the Soles of the Feet mindfulness-based intervention with special education students. Contemporary School Psychology, 21(4), 358-368. doi:10.1007/s40688-017-0133-2
Harper, S. K., Webb, T. L., & Rayner, K. (2013). The effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions for supporting people with intellectual disabilities: A narrative review. Behavior Modification, 37(3), 431-453. Retrieved from http://libproxy.sdsu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.sdsu.edu/docview/1509083285?accountid=13758
Kim, J., & Kwon, M. (2018). Effects of mindfulness‐based intervention to improve task performance for children with intellectual disabilities. Journal Of Applied Research In Intellectual Disabilities, 31(1), 87-97. doi:10.1111/jar.12333
Lam, K. (2016). School-based cognitive mindfulness intervention for internalizing problems: Pilot study with Hong Kong elementary students. Journal Of Child And Family Studies, 25(11), 3293-3308. doi:10.1007/s10826-016-0483-9
Malboeuf-Hurtubise, C., Lacourse, E., Taylor, G., Joussemet, M., & Ben Amor, L. (2017). A mindfulness-based intervention pilot feasibility study for elementary school students with severe learning difficulties: Effects on internalized and externalized symptoms from an emotional regulation perspective. Journal Of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine, 22(3), 473-481. doi:10.1177/2156587216683886
I will also include limitations of these studies such as small sample sizes and lack of generalizability. Kellypodesta ( talk) 20:59, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Kellypodesta ( talk) 05:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- In the ‘introduction,’ I added more appropriate references in some places and also updated with new references. I also fixed a couple of sentences using more appropriate wording.
- In the “scientific research” section, a great deal of information was provided for an inappropriate reference that has limitations. I have fixed this issue, and also added more information related to a more appropriate reference that is cited. Additionally, I replaced some older articles (studies over 10 years old) that are used as references to validate a point. I also removed an article that is irrelevant to this particular point discussed.
- I replaced references in a couple of other places as well. If any of these explanations are not clear, or if anyone has questions or concerns regarding any of the edits, please discuss in this talk page.
Thank you!
Sandyshore ( talk) 22:35, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
At the end of the first paragraph, it is indicated that reference 9 does not support the claim. I suggest deleting it.
Concerning a quotation to verify reference 10 pointing to "Harrington, Anne; Dunne, John D (2015). "When mindfulness is therapy: Ethical qualms, historical perspectives". American Psychologist. 70 (7): 621–31. doi:10.1037/a0039460. PMID 26436312." The article is in the October, 2015, issue of this journal, which is entirely devoted to the topic "mindfulness" as a possible psychological therapy. There are four articles, the last of which is the one cited, which is entirely devoted to the development of mindfulness as therapy, and traces the efforts of Kabat-Zinn from the creation of the first medically oriented, stress-reduction clinic until the date of the cited publication in 2015. Kabat-Zinn was a PhD in molecular biology from MIT who was himself a practictioner and teacher of Zen Buddhism. However, he tried to establish the clinical, scientific basis of "mindfulness-based stress reduction" (MBSR), and his clinical resources were devoid of reference to Buddhism, at least initially. The popularity of MBSR is attributed to the publication of his 1991 book intended for laymen, "Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness." (More can be found in Jon_Kabat-Zinn.)
To return to the present issue, I suggest that the text and reference could be left as is. It might be preferable to replace the phrase "generally considered to have been initiated" with a more generic statement concerning his creation in 1979 of the Stress Reduction Clinic at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, soon after renamed the MBSR clinic, which developed a 7-8 week course and supporting resources, including an internet-based web site as early as 1988.
The article has many more serious issues with citations. For example, references 200 and 201 appear to be an attempt to point to another "named" reference. They should be replaced with the appropriate reference.
MidwestGeek ( talk) 20:48, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
I have listed the main four individuals that appear to have significantly contributed to the the popularity of mindfulness in the modern context. More information is provided in the cited references and in the links provided. I also edited a couple of sentences.
(By the way, I saw the comment by MidwestGeek (above) only just now - hopefully I addressed that comment as well.)
Nandinik ( talk) 20:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for this; it is a great improvement. I am in no position to judge critically, but I question how much influence D. T. Suzuki may have had on mindfulness as therapy. Kabat-Zinn credits Thích Nhất Hạnh for influencing the development of his thinking on the subject. The wikipedia article about Hanh mentions his impact on western thought. He lives in France, has taught at universities in the U.S., and has published many books in English.
MidwestGeek ( talk) 21:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi MidwestGeek, Please feel free to edit what I have entered - if others are ok with that. I suppose people like D. T. Suzuki would have had an indirect influence on the therapies used today. I simply entered information that I had collected after doing some quick searches.
Nandinik ( talk) 21:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Reading Matt Nisbet, The Mindfulness Movement, the following passage struck me:
Kabat-Zinn’s key innovation, noted Wilson (2014) was to take the traditional week-long meditation retreat, inaccessible to those with busy lives, and to offer participants classes that took place once a week for two months. Participants, who usually numbered between thirty-five and forty per course, were assigned guided meditation recordings to use at home for forty-five minutes each day for the duration of the course. They were also instructed on how to be mindful of their breath during their daily activities, expanding the “thread of meditative awareness” into every aspect of their lives (Kabat- Zinn 2013).
Just as important, the course was able to be offered across clinical and institutional settings. Instructors, many with advanced degrees in the mental health professions, were required to complete an intensive certification process and to keep their training up to date.
What was new about weekly meditation-classes in the 1980s? The guided meditations seem more key to me; and it's remarkable that this method is not mentioned in the article. The "intensive certification process" seems also relevant in this regard; meditation courses are offered by thousands of teachers nowadays, but none (or few) of them, as far as I know, use guided meditations, except those who brand their product "mindfulness." I think we have to write more about the role of guided meditations in mindfulness. Do participants also learn to be mindfull without such guided instructions? When do the guided instructions cease? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Kabat-Zinn himself: Full Catastrophe Living (Revised Edition), p.lxiv (long introduction for a short message...), advising to use CD's with guided mindfulness practices:
Almost everybody finds it easier, when embarking for the first time on a daily meditation practice, to listen to an instructor-guided audio program and let it "carry them along" in the early stages, until they get the hang of it from the inside, rather than attempting to follow instructions from a book, however clear and detailed they may be.
Compare Rupert Gethin (2004), On the practice of Buddhist meditation, p.202-203, noting that the Buddhist sutras hardly explain how to meditate, and then stating that "the effective practice of meditation requires the personal instruction of a teacher." Gethin seems to echo Vetter (1988), The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism, who notes that the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta describes the Buddha as instructing his first followers in turn: instructing two or three of them, while the others go out begging for food, signifying the need of personal instruction to learn ho to practice dhyana - or mindfulness? (only the first stage of dhyana centers on samadhi; the second stage is smadhi-ji, "born from concentration; in the third and fourth stage "eqaunimity and mindfulness" are central).
Also a nice observation from Nisbet (bold mine):
During the 2000s, with books, talks, and documentaries about mindfulness instantly available via Amazon, Netflix, and YouTube and guided meditations downloadable to smart phones, public interest in mindfulness was set to explode.
Maybe add the walkman, intriduced in 1979, the same year MBSR was introduced? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
The term "mindfulness” is derived from the Pali term sati, "memory," [1] "retention," [2] "mindfulness, alertness, self-possession," [1] which is a significant element of Buddhist traditions, [3] [4] while the concept is related to Zen, Vipassanā, and Tibetan meditation techniques. [5] [6] While "mindfulness" has been translated and interpreted as "bare cognition," in a Buddhist context it has a wider meaning and purpose, related to vipassana, namely discerning what is beneficial and what is not, and calming the mind by this discernment. [7] [8] [9]
into
Mindfulness is derived from sati, a significant element of Buddhist traditions, [3] [4] and the concept is related to Zen, Vipassanā, and Tibetan meditation techniques. [5] [6]
with the edit-summary
Not particularly helpful on this page (more relevant or covered at Sati (Buddhism))
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
Nisbet
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Wilson
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Mindfulness is not exactly derived from Buddhist sati; the term is derived from a specific (mis)interpretation of sati. It has a broader meaning, as explained in the body of the article, which is summarized in the lead. To understand what mindfulness really is about, this information is necessary. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:56, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
This article makes heavy use of non- WP:MEDRS sources for biomedical claims, leading to a POV problem. It is in need of a clear-out. Alexbrn ( talk) 11:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This edit was reverted because the content is WP:FRINGE, WP:RECENT, and supported only by a list of primary research and one example of a small primary study. The information is not encyclopedic, and is reverted again. The IP user has reached WP:3RR, and admin will be notified if further warring occurs. -- Zefr ( talk) 21:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
References
In the beginning of the article, I read, "Mindfulness is very similar to what was earlier known as Gestalt therapy." Not only do I not believe this, there is no supporting reference here. In a different place in this article (under the heading Morita therapy, which may not be the right place) there is a reference, but the referenced text does not even contain the word mindfulness, nor a definition of awareness that looks like mindfulness. -- Han691 ( talk) 20:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Should expand on the usage of Mediation in the major Abrahamic regions as well. For example Islam praying 5 times a day and so forth.
Should also add a section on Franz Friedrich Anton Mesmer and the importance of Hypnosis and its relation to mindfulness — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamwow786 ( talk • contribs) 01:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Re "evidence supports the use of mindfulness programs to alleviate symptoms of a variety of mental and physical disorders (Gotink et al (2015), "Standardised mindfulness-based interventions in healthcare: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. PLoS ONE 10(4): e0124344. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0124344),
Note that this paper has been retracted [13] because of methodology and COI issues. The results are not necessarily wrong, but the process didn't meet standards. The paragraph should be rewritten without this cite. 173.228.123.207 ( talk) 01:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
I made an edit removing the reference, and another one restoring it with the retraction mentioned. I don't know what's best. It is a heavily cited paper but the errors sound significant. 173.228.123.207 ( talk) 02:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
From the lead:
Mindfulness is the psychological process of bringing one's attention to experiences occurring in the present moment
- is it possible to bring one's attention to experiences which are not happening in the present moment? What's missing is the non-judgmental part. Baer, citing Kabat-Zinn:
Paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:37, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
This article needs a more tempered tone about the benefits of mindfulness intervention. To include Richard Davidson in the lead and not his concerns about mindfulness intervention being oversold for something for which it was not designed is a failure of NPOV. DolyaIskrina ( talk) 02:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Regarding the paragraph on ‘physical illness’ (that quotes Richard J. Davidson) – it cites a low quality reference – a podcast! I listened to this podcast (audio file) and it does not mention any of what is written in this paragraph! Therefore I have replaced this paragraph with a new paragraph that incorporates academic peer reviewed research publications that relate to physical health and mindfulness. I also felt that it is more suitable to place this paragraph just before the ‘commercialization’ paragraph. If anyone has questions or concerns regarding this edit or any of my other edits, please discuss here in this talk page.
Sandyshore ( talk) 16:20, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello all:
I carried out the following edits. If you have questions/concerns please let me know. Below is a summary of the edits I did:
- Added and updated several references and got rid of repetition.
- Removed the Gotink, et al reference, along with its associated sentences (considering this article has been retracted).
- Listed the subsections ‘Two-component model,’ ‘The five-aggregate model’ and ‘Cultivating self-knowledge and wisdom’ as a separate section (because they do not belong under the ‘Definition’ section). This new subsection is called “Models and Frameworks for Mindfulness Practice.”
- Additional edits to increase clarity. Also removed some references published in the 1980’s (along with Transcendental Meditation references) that are irrelevant to be listed under the “Scientific Research” section.
Nandinik ( talk) 15:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
So chapter title is " Samprajaña, apramāda and atappa" ... - then the text devellops mindfulness, samprajaña, and apramāda : where is atappa ? ( ātāpī: (adj.) ardent, diligent, serious in effort, zealous. The term appears most prominently in the Satipatthāna formulas) Papalain ( talk) 07:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Is this addition added by an anon notable enough? I'm leaning towards no, but I'd like some input.-- Megaman en m ( talk) 18:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm confused why Zen, "Vipassana", and "Tibetan" traditions are listed here. There are so many schools of Buddhism not listed here - and I'm nearly certain that mindfulness plays a role in every Buddhist school.
Could it say instead:
Mindfulness is derived from sati, a significant element of [all] Buddhist traditions,[6][7] ?
[I wonder if that first sentence is referring to the growth of Mindfulness as a concept in the west. That this particular strain, coming from teachers like chogyam trungpa, thich nhat hanh, and other big names comes specifically from zen and tibetan. It's my understanding that meditation as a tool to be used by the vast masses is a relatively recent conception as Buddhism was more in the 'priestly caste' before persecution of buddhists. I can't remember my source though. So to summarize, though meditation/ sati/ dhayana is a part of all traditions but mindfulness has grown from a few key transmissions to the west. NateRen ( talk) 19:16, 18 April 2021 (UTC)NateRen
I think it would be very useful to do some reseach on the schools of Buddhism and see how mindfulness had an impact on those. 01:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre2208 ( talk • contribs)
Bennv123 removed some citations because I added them as one of the authors of the study. The study was a systematic review reviewing 60+ studies on mindfulness for athletic performance. The review concluded there were some positive effects but the quality of the studies were very poor, so strong conclusions should be avoided. Both of these claims are consistent across the wikipedia page, but without the review, the wiki article becomes more biased—relying instead on a single study that supports mindfulness. The citations to the review support the wikipedia ethos of fair, balanced, and accurate descriptions of the area. Still, instead of reversing the change myself, I have a self-cite COI, which have declared on the page, and on my profile, but hope that another contributor can reverse the edit, reinforcing the benefits of using data from the top of the Hierarchy of evidence. Noetel ( talk) 11:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
User @ Jtjdt: made a good-faith edit to change "judgment" to "evaluation" in the opening of the lead. I think this change should be discussed here, as I'm not sure I agree with "evaluation" as a synonym for "judgment". I propose the edit be reverted, so discussion of this can take place. Pyrrho the Skeptic ( talk) 17:39, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 15 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Morganbmark95. Peer reviewers: Cvonne12.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 04:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)