Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche: “Mindfulness as a concept has been hijacked”

The guru-shishya relationship is quite important in Buddhism in terms of transmitting spiritual practices. When mindfulness comes into the market, how does that affect the guru-shishya relationship and also the transmission of these practices?

Oh gosh, what a question! I think that the guru-shishya parampara is almost unmarketable now. Forget others, you Indians have lost it and become slaves to the colonial British education system. I am not speaking of the guru-shishya parampara only with respect to dharma practice. Even in terms of music and art, it has been such a wonderful tradition.

In the spiritual context, this tradition encompasses the highest form of mindfulness. Having a guru means that you are assigned someone to pull rugs from under your feet all the time. What better mindfulness can there be? You have someone to help you get rid of delusions.

Are we losing out on this tradition because we are reluctant to surrender?

Yes, very much so because we cherish individualism to an extreme. You might have heard of a documentary film by Adam Curtis, which is called The Century of the Self. We are so caught up in ourselves, and with ourselves. There is hardly any space for surrender.

What are some of the misconceptions surrounding mindfulness?

Mindfulness as a concept has been hijacked, corrupted and diluted. Mindfulness is being sold like fortune cookies in Chinese restaurants. These days, we don’t even know what people are talking about because there is no mutual agreement about the meaning. I am not sure if the English word ‘mindfulness’ does justice to the Sanskrit word smriti. Mindfulness is not the ultimate goal; awakening is. Mindfulness is just a means to an end. But on a lighter note, sometimes even the misunderstandings are kind of nice and I would close an eye.

Could you please give an example of such misunderstandings?

I’ll be straightforward. Let’s take Sadhguru (Jaggi Vasudev), for example. He is a very good ambassador for Indian values but he takes a limited point of view. He is always building small and shallow swimming pools, especially for those who are brainwashed by the British colonial education system. I always wonder, “How about building a deeper swimming pool?” Because if people learn only to swim in shallow pools, what will they do if they fall into an ocean? They will be in trouble, so I think that Sadhguru should upgrade himself.

Traditionally, dharma teachings were offered free of cost and there was an opportunity for people receiving the teachings to practise dana (voluntary donation). When mindfulness is taught in hotel rooms with restricted access, does the context in which teachings are offered change the manner and spirit in which they are received?

In the ancient Indian wisdom traditions, practices like smriti or Vipassana are concerned with the seeking of truth. Today, a lot of people associate mindfulness only with relaxation. They are not interested in pursuing truth. Mindfulness is seen as an antidepressant; just a tool for reducing people’s stress or helping them become more productive.

Now coming to your point about dharma teachings — in a way, they are offered freely. But if you think about it carefully, you end up giving everything to receive these teachings. (laughs loudly) They only appear to be free of charge. Actually, they are the most expensive.

Many people who go to mindfulness retreats simply want a break from their busy lives, or an opportunity to be silent. How do you feel about that? Do you think that mindfulness practice must necessarily be connected to the quest for enlightenment?

That is not a bad thing at all if people are experiencing benefits but it is a limited understanding. As a Buddhist, I feel concerned because this kind of mindfulness has no connection with renunciation. Mindfulness becomes shallow when it becomes commercialized, when it is a product that can be sold. You must have seen Tibetan singing bowls that are sold to tourists. Such things do not exist in the entire Tibetan culture.

With reducing attention spans, especially because human beings spend a lot of time glued to electronic devices, practices like sitting and walking meditation can seem challenging to many people. How can the making of art be a meditative practice?

Actually, you are right. Limiting mindfulness practice to sitting and walking meditation is such a shame! If you go to Japan, they have something called a tea ceremony. Now there is nothing special about the tea. It is just regular green tea. Actually, it does not even taste so good, if you ask me. But it is the whole procedure that you are supposed to focus on. Let us take haiku poetry. Writing it takes a bit of mindfulness. Even in the Tibetan tradition, what people call “lama dance” is a form of Vipassana. What you call “bhajan” in Indian culture is also a form of mindfulness. It is not just singing. The pujas that Bhutanese people do all the time include mindfulness. The relationship between culture and dharma is very interesting. Sometimes, they help each other; at other times, they contradict each other.

What, according to you, is the relationship between humour and awakening?

That’s a very interesting question. Humour is dying now; don’t you think so? Especially in America, my goodness! You can’t joke there. People don’t know how to take jokes. Humour is such a valuable thing. Of course, you can have staged humour. And in that case, there is no awakening. But humour that arises spontaneously can lead to awakening.

A lot of conflict in the world today is around identity, whether it is religion, caste, race, gender, sexual orientation, language or nationality. How can mindfulness help people reduce the intensity with which they cling to their various identities?

Identity crisis is the biggest crisis of our times. Let us imagine that there are three people travelling in a car: wisdom, compassion and morality. From the standpoint of Buddhism, wisdom should be the driver and compassion should sit right beside. Morality should be in the backseat or even in the trunk. Everything has become upside down these days. Morality is doing the driving. Wisdom has not even got a lift. I don’t know what to say about compassion. Human beings are so anxious about artificial intelligence. I am secretly happy about it. Finally, people might understand the Buddha’s teaching in the Heart Sutra – the fact that identity is an illusion. As the Chinese say, one could reap profit from a crisis.

Many practitioners and scholars attempt to present Buddhism as a science rather than as a religion. Are these efforts aimed at gaining acceptance from the West?

Partly, yes! I have been doing some research which shows that science and secularism, which always pretend to be rational and objective, are the most blind and biased. They present religious people as fanatical. But look at liberal democracies. Look at America. Look at people who read only The New York Times, and nothing else from other parts of the world. They are dangerous because they have weapons. They can sanction others. They can award others. We, poor religious people, what can we do? We just sit and do pujas. (laughs)

Chintan Girish Modi is a writer, journalist and educator, who can be reached @chintanwriting on Instagram and X.