A rather difficult question, Marie. I take it that you would like to know whether the organizations are "upholding" the underlying philosophy of meditative practice when they take up the practice themselves, such as when they ask their employees to engage in meditation as a means toward increasing wellness or productivity.

The underlying philosophy you are talking about is quite broad. It could be something religious, such as Buddhist, but it does not have to be. One can engage in a meditative practice without thereby becoming a Buddhist, or a follower of any religion for that matter. We can look at meditation from a purely naturalistic standpoint. That is, we look at it as a natural kind of practice, such as jogging or listening to music, without tying it up with any religious practice.

If that is so, then the "underlying philosophy" behind the meditation does not have to be anything mysterious. You can also have an underlying philosophy of jogging or swimming, which is that it enhances bodily movement thus is beneficial for the body. We can certainly look at meditation in the same way.

If we look at meditation as a purely physical and mental exercise (nothing overly spiritual), then the concern about "purity" of the practice that you talk about becomes something concerning whether the meditation is "correct" in terms of whether it is done in such a way that actually produces the result - the same way as when you teach someone to do swimming where there are "correct" and "most effective" ways of doing it (i.e., making you swim faster, etc.).

A rather difficult question, Marie. I take it that you would like to know whether the organizations are "upholding" the underlying philosophy of meditative practice when they take up the practice themselves, such as when they ask their employees to engage in meditation as a means toward increasing wellness or productivity.

The underlying philosophy you are talking about is quite broad. It could be something religious, such as Buddhist, but it does not have to be. One can engage in a meditative practice without thereby becoming a Buddhist, or a follower of any religion for that matter. We can look at meditation from a purely naturalistic standpoint. That is, we look at it as a natural kind of practice, such as jogging or listening to music, without tying it up with any religious practice.

If that is so, then the "underlying philosophy" behind the meditation does not have to be anything mysterious. You can also have an underlying philosophy of jogging or swimming, which is that it enhances bodily movement thus is beneficial for the body. We can certainly look at meditation in the same way.

If we look at meditation as a purely physical and mental exercise (nothing overly spiritual), then the concern about "purity" of the practice that you talk about becomes something concerning whether the meditation is "correct" in terms of whether it is done in such a way that actually produces the result - the same way as when you teach someone to do swimming where there are "correct" and "most effective" ways of doing it (i.e., making you swim faster, etc.).

Love the question. The objectives of meditation might be to achieve something that abandons the material; the ultimate objective might be, curiously, to become one with the material, to empty the self of the self, to dissociate, achieve a trans. It does sound "counter-productive" in the world of commerce or production.

In terms of philosophy, as Hongladarom suggests, it doesn't necessarily have to be associated with a worldview or doctrine. However, it is not necessarily philosophical either. If one supposes philosophy to be the identification of problems and the application of methods by which to solve them (ethical, ontological, metaphysical, epistemological), then philosophy is not a meditative activity so much as an active cognitive activity. One might find oneself far away mentally in a similar state to meditation, but it might not be meditation.

One might argue that Buddhism, for instance, as a philosophy, recommends meditation as a means of emptying oneself of the usual concerns and values that create one's usual identity. However, to arrive at that recommendation, as a philosophy, Buddhism asked a question about what it is that creates suffering in the world. The answer was the usual concerns and values one has.

A challenging question really.  For mediation not necessarily religious support like Buddhism is essential. It can be achieved without it.

I'm having trouble articulating an answer here for various reasons.  First, the question asked about "contemplative techniques" but I wish to point out that contemplation is about moving past technique.  And THIS is the real issue for me in the use of contemplation in corporate or workplace settings.  A corporate or workplace setting has at its base -- a productive, utilitarian, pragmatic agenda.  We do things with a goal.  It is that intention and that way of framing our experience that contemplation subverts.

Contemplation turned into technique or goal is no longer contemplation.  It may be stress reduction.  It may be non-religious.  It may be a lot of things.  But contemplation is a type of knowing and consciousness with no goal.  It is useless.  It is otium in Latin -- leisure.  As soon as it has any goal attached to it it ceases to be contemplative.  Just seeing.

All traditions that utilize contemplation are aware of this paradox.  As soon as you meditate to become enlightened  you no longer are able to get there.  If you contemplate to see God you will not see God.  This idea of Paradox of Intention guides the entire process of this form of consciousness and was noticed by all those in the various traditions who watched their minds and noticed the shifts in consciousness.  It is not magical or supernatural.  It is quite ordinary.  We experience this quite often.  The word on the tip of the tongue phenomena demonstrates this.  If we try to remember something we can't.  But if we stop trying to remember and even turn away from the remembering itself and do something else, the possibility opens for the information to "come to us".  The information we sought often pops in our head later while doing something else.  We didn't achieve it.  It came to us after.  Demonstrating that some process of thinking and retrieving was going on outside of our control and what we are unaware of in normal consciousness.  But that process only happens if one surrenders control and allows for something out side of our awareness to lead.

To read more about Paradox of Intention I suggest the classic work on this topic.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Paradox-Intention-Reaching-Religion/dp/1555401104

In any event, contemplative practices used as techniques are no longer contemplative.

I think Michael Uebel has the best answer.  If one just teaches the practice AS the practice, then it is possible that some of the side effects could be fruitful for workplaces.

BUT I wonder seriously if that is possible.  Any attempt at controlling the situation breaks the contemplation and that form of awareness and attention.  This is the reason why many of the ritual and ascetic practices and such are in place to create an environment of "purifying intention" to allow for the possibility of contemplation to even occur.  But we do not dictate this.  It is a gift.  Graced.  Revealed.  Use your religious word of choice here.

Hmm.  My first response is "can you use words of one or two syllables or has academic phraseology obscured the simple question I think you were asking, which is "how can meditation be used on the job and not mess with the integrity of their origins."  Like, integrity?  I have a Harvard MBA, I have overseen workers and colleagues in dozens of roles in company I started. I also founded a Buddhist institute and learned some very simple yet powerful meditation techniques directly from te Dalai Lama.  I can't figure out how taking fifteen minutes to do a little vipassana to clear one's head could in any way violate the integrity of the practice no matter where it is done.   One lama friend pointed out it was hard to find a place to meditate in the old days, one room, animals, squalling babies - but now - so easy to meditate.  That was why, when we started the Professional Learning Corporation way back in 1984 to do stresss management consulting and seminars, it was basic to our message that it's better to let them do something - like meditiate - than train a new worker if someone gets too stressed out.  So is there a question?  Professional manangement practice has supported meditative practices in the workplace for decades ... and in our case we had a couple of lamas for teachers.  Let me show you how ... that company went on to other lives ,...but I'm 70 and a pretty good example that it works,.

Kevin talks about the paradox of intention. I think that may be a bit too far to talk about in this forum and in the context of the question. No one in the workplace who practices meditation would want to achieve Nirvana in that moment. They just want a way to relax themselves and to refresh their minds and bodies. It may be true that in order to achieve Nirvana you cannot think of it in the course of the practice, but I don't think these people in t he workplace want to achieve Nirvana.

Having said that I also admit that when you do meditation, no matter how small scale it is, you are advised not to get fixated on a desired result. If you do meditation thinking "I should achieve this or that, I should get relaxed; after this I will feel fine, and so on", it only means that your mind is getting side tracked into thinking these trivial thoughts and away from the point of the meditation. So when you do meditation try focusing on whatever you are focusing, such as your breath, your surroundings, and so on. And when the mind wanders (as it always will) just bring it gently back to the point of  the meditation. The mind can think about the whole purpose and the desired result, or it may think about what to have for lunch, or it may think about future plans or past mistakes. It does not matter, just bring it back to the immediacy of the meditation at this moment.

Work, work, work. Work faster. Don't contemplate it; assemble it. Work. Would "contemplative techniques"  apply to people making clothes in Bangladesh or assembling I-phones in China?

Dear All,

1. Reasoning to justify implementing contemplative techniques in workplaces to bring benefits:- 

Work can be of many kinds. It equally produces different kinds of results. According to the nature of work(Karma or Action in Sanskrit), the type of results accrue. The wise observe the different kinds of actions undertaken, contemplate on their 'nature' and the nature of the doer, observe the type of results achieved, and then choose the best mode of action out of all. Contemplative techniques like mindfulness are a very aware and conscious way of undertaking action with a view on the 'big picture' and the impact of the action on all sentient beings. When one intends to work meaningfully with the aim of universal welfare, contemplative techniques are most ideal. Selfish and individual motives seldom need mindful ways of working.

2. yet maintaining integrity of their origins:

Mindful contemplative techniques are universal principles. They operate on many levels. One cannot expect to maintain integrity when one is a novice. The attempt and the motive are more important than the integrity of their origins. A sincere attempt, full of mistakes and not maintaining the integrity of its 'origins' is a welcome step than not attempting at all OR casting aspersions on the 'integrity of their origins'. This is a part of evolution of Consciousness, a beginning has to be made somewhere, even if faulty. Baby steps later lead to perfection. The will and purity of motives is paramount than worrying over 'integrity' and 'purity', a malaise which often affects puritan ways of thinking.

Regards

Scott:

Mindfulness contemplation techniques are universal. They can be applied everywhere, anywhere. In fact, working mindfully lays the foundation for Immortality/Liberation/Freedom/Moksha/Nirvana mentioned in the various world scriptures and wisdom writings. Wise people in the course of history, facing daunting odds and harsh environments, have steadfastly applied midnfulness to their work, and achieved greatness, earning a place in history and scripture to be emulated by others.

"Know HOW to do.

Know WHAT to do.

Know how NOT to do.

Know what NOT to do.

Really complicated is the path of doing."-BG 4.17

The Bhagavad Gita is a manual on work and action, the pitfalls and the background of action, the different types of doers, the different modes of actions and the different results obtained. Anyone interested in the 'Big Picture', facing a dilemma of 'To Act or not to Act, and what for to Act" is advised to refer to it.

Regards

Mindfulness techniques, no matter how we wish to dress them up with metphysical trapping or language, are heuristic methodologies employing a number of focusing techniques to clear and calm the mind.  Nobody who is familiar with them thinks that we do it to "get to Nirvana" any more that we feed our body to get to Nirvana or worry about being an amateur at exercise;  we can do walking meditation, we can do vipassana, visualizations, we can do hatha yoga, kriya yoga, yoga tantra and anntura yoga tantra. We can focus on the host, the flame, the crystal or the toenail,  we can do mantra, jap, or focus on our breath. It makes no difference at all.  As long as we have a decent teacher ,... and just DO it  .. all will be well and as long as we don't bother anuyone at work, who cares?. This discussion seems to beg the question ... any of us actually doing it?   Let's hear from a couple of meditation masters doing it in the workplace; as far as I'm concerned my integrity is intact, does any workplace meditator here feel otherwise? 

I think the Gita is great .. it's chock full of wisdom ... but wisdom itself is nothing more than eloquently expressed common sense.  It can be found nearly anywhere if we know how to look, right?.  

The ultimate goal of human life is Nirvana/Liberation/Freedom/Immortality, even to those who deny it. It takes many lives to reach the goal, hence people are rather ambivalent about it, and pursue sense-gratifying goals. But to those who have gone ahead and can see the light clearly, all life is pervaded by the One Consciousness, and reaching that Absolute Consciousness is the goal. The goal of life on earth is evolution, to better more conscious states. It ultimately leads to Nirvana. The uninterested passenger might not be interested in the goal, but the conscious passenger is well aware of the goal, 'aligns' himself properly and reaches his goal earlier.

A mindfully conscious person thus eats, works, interacts with others seeing the same Light in All and Everywhere. "All is Yoga. The Goal and the means to the goal is Yoga". All his Thoughts, Words & Deeds are aligned in such a way to follow the path of Liberation from Matter towards light/higher consciousness. To a novice, this might not appear clear, but upon deeper introspection, a clearer understanding of the words and deeds of the mindful person emerge, aligned towards Spirit and away from Matter.

Laurence: Wisdom is not eloquently expressed common sense. It is the distilled essence of higher truths which is not possible for all to see, especially from lower states of consciousness. If it is common as you say, the wise would be everywhere, right? Knowing how to look is a gift bestowed by a master, and masters are  not so common.

Regards

Just to clarify, as Soraj above points out -- no one doing meditation in work place wants to achieve Nirvana.  They wish to clear their mind or be refreshed.  Exactly my point.  Contemplation assumes a different way of approaching reality.  It is a shift away from one way of being in the world toward something else.  Each tradition that discusses contemplation or its equivalent -- has a different focus.  The original question spoke about "integrity" of the origins and not undermining the underlying philosophy of contemplation and so that was the point of my response.

Meditating for relaxation or clearing a mind is fine.  I have no problems with it.  But strictly speaking that is not "contemplation".  It is a technique.  Most likely a fruitful one.  (And meditation can set the stage for contemplation but by itself it is not contemplation.)

But I was pointing out the precision in the use of the terms.  So many are attempting to use contemplation to achieve and other pragmatic things.  This confuses the point of contemplation and closes off what contemplation has to offer.

It IS a universal aspect of the human mind.  It is not something supernatural.  It is quite ordinary.  But teaching contemplation is something different from teaching mindfulness or meditation.

Technically -- contemplation cannot be taught.  It can only be prepared for.  But I was wondering aloud HOW contemplation could be brought into corporate settings when the goal of corporate enterprises has a distinct productivity goal and contemplation has a distinct non-productivity goal.

I think of Taoism as an example here where Lao Tzu speaks of non-doing, uselessness and even "inhumanity"  of the Tao and how this is contrasted with the pragmatic "doing", and goal focus of Confucian practitioners.

It is not that doing and non-doing are opposed.  They are just different moments in an entire process we call knowing.  But when we talk about contemplation as if it is a technique, an experience, goal oriented, we have slipped from contemplation into the other moment.

So it wasn't so much that I was focusing on Nirvana but instead I was more interested in giving an analogy about how one approaches contemplation without approaching it.

FWIW

Kevin:

Your post brings forth an ancient philosophical issue to be discussed again. The crux of the Bhagavad Gita is "Action/Karma". Karma has many shades and meanings, physical action as used in the english language being just one of them. (Dr.Huston Smith:"For every english term describing human psychology, ancient Greek has four and Sanskrit has over forty." )Thus the difficulty to express Karma/Action/Work in English.

Broadly, there are three states in the evolution of man.

1. Not doing: An ignorant state blaming everything else but not acting.(Welfare recipients?)

2. Acting for one's own benefit: The capitalist model where productivity and profit are the main goals, as you have pointed out in your post.

3. Action for universal welfare: A rare altruistic state where action is only for universal welfare.

Evolution of Consciousness happens from 'Animal to 1 to 2 to 3 to....

1. Not doing: Threatens the very survival and is counter productive. A state of sensory indulgence and addiction to matter and sense gratification. Consciousness is described here as being "Sleeping" "Dark" "Heavy". Inertia, laziness, mistaking the unreal for the real are its characteristics. Happiness is attempted to be obtained from material consumption and indulgence. Welfare recipients, the so-called "lower classes" with their sensory indulgence and addiction to matter, meat and alcohol, as a carryover from past animal lives. "Why should I work?" is a common characteristic question from an individual in this state, questioning authority, systems and balance. After suffering for many lives in this state, one passes on from this "Animal" stage to stage two, the "Human" state.

2.Acting for one's own benefit: Is a "Human" state, with all human foibles and mistakes. The animal man from stage one now uses his intelligence to create industries for self-profit, is highly productive in terms of material gains but creates consequences and endangers sustainability in the long run. It is this highly commercial and capitalist approach which has unobtrusively taken over human endeavor in many industrialized societies, creating stress in the workplace. Again happiness is sought from material consumption and production, with little avail. As an antidote to this, exhausting all other avenues, 'mindfulness' is prescribed in the workplace. But no one 'walks the talk' truly, as this mindfulness is practiced half-halfheartedly, without understanding its goal of Nirvana, and again going back to commercial and capitalist productivity goals.This type of attempt at mindfulness is non-productive, like going to church and afterwards consuming alcohol at a pub.

3. Action for others is sacrifice and the consequences do not bind one in Karma. This is a very aware practice of working/acting and evolves an individual to higher,"divine" states of Consciousness. This meaning of "Karma" was taken by pilgrims and missionaries and translated into chinese Confuciusianism and japanese Zen, both offshoots of Indian Yoga, as 'Non-doing' and the highest form of action. To make matters clear, "Non-doing' is taking action, but without any personal/selfish motives and without identifying the "Ego" as the doer. Thus 'non-doing' is stress free, because the actor acts without any personal motives, without fear of success or failure, profit of loss, happiness or unhappiness. "Non-doing' thus bestows Nirvana/Liberation/Freedom/Immortality. You are acting/working, but at the same time, not acting/working because you understand that the work is being done "through" you and that you are only a tool in the hands of nature. You thus act/work without any motive and any expectation of reward. This type of mindful work does not create stress and is sustainable. Workplaces should now evolve and incorporate the philosophy  of the third type of Karma/work for mindfulness to give results.

To illustrate how these complex sanskrit philosophical terms are misunderstood and misused, in a rather ironical setting, the concentration camp in Auschwitz had the message "Arbeit Macht Frei" emblazened over the entrance(pic attached). In Deutsch, it means "Work sets you Free", borrowed by Hitler's assistant Himmler ,who always carried a copy of the Bhagavad Gita with him, from Indian philosophy. This gentleman also misunderstood/ misused the sanskrit "arya", or "noble" to mean "aryan", with consequences we all know of.

"Know HOW to do.

Know WHAT to do.

Know how NOT to do.

Know what NOT to do.

Really complicated is the path of doing."-BG 4.17

Regards

Raveendra -- yes!  We are right back to the question of action and contemplation.  And I was pointing out that in discussing contemplation we should not mix up the words and talk about contemplation as if it is equivalent to thinking, action, logic, pragmatic approaches to reality.

McMindfulness is an appropriation of a religious practice. It's like telling a Christian, "Oh God will take care of this," dismissing the experience and valuing a temporary placidity.

Organizations are comprised of subcultures located throughout its various divisions, geographic regions, and occupational groups. Some subcultures enhance the dominant culture by espousing parallel assumptions, values, and beliefs; others are called countercultures because they directly oppose the organization’s core values.

http://www.uni-graz.at/iimwww/iimwww/orgculture.pdf

Hi

The application of contemplative techniques in the workplace allows the mind to be free in the process of thinking about the events faced by the individual, therefore, the process of creativity is not restricted by strict instructions that inhibit the process of thinking according to the approach of learning from events and behave in proportion to them.

Benefits should be customized to the needs and can with illustration include flexible time, job sharing, jobs designed to inclusiveness and link to provide required support.