In an article by Miguel Farias, Associate Professor in Experimental Psychology, Coventry University, he states; “A 2022 study, using a sample of 953 people in the US who meditated regularly, showed that over 10 percent of participants experienced adverse effects which had a significant negative impact on their everyday life and lasted for at least one month.” However, individuals with pre-existing mental illnesses naturally were more likely to report unpleasant meditation-related experiences. The figure Mr. Farias cited in his article was misleading. A systematic review reported an overall MRAE prevalence of 8.3% (not 10%), but this varied significantly depending on study design for meditation-related adverse effects (MRAEs). While this rounding up of percentages may seem harmless to you, it does in fact show an urge to warp and up sell negative aspects. As with such things it is how such studies are created, executed and presented that reveals possible attempts at influencing and manipulating perceived optics. Market research, for example, is in truth a form of marketing itself, not essentially to find out what people in phone interviews think about something but to actually drop in ideas occasionally during the “study” as to what they should think simply by asking the question in the first place and dropping in the brand name at intervals in order to sell the brand name. In many of Mr. Farias seemingly anti-Buddhist articles he makes repeated cases against meditation and mindfulness, often relying on numerous studies to back up his belief that there is a “dark side” to practising these ancient traditions of acquiring inner peace. I say his “anti-Buddhist articles” because this is how I personally perceive his negatively accented articles to be. While anti-Buddhist sentiments and persecution are nothing new, I do not view Mr. Farias position as hardline as the Haibutsu kishaku (“abolish Buddhism and destroy Shākyamuni”) movement in Japan, which started in The Meiji period (1868–1912), seeing a strong response against Buddhism, with persecution and a forced separation between Buddhism and Shinto (Shinbutsu bunri). However, Mr. Farias constant obsession with meditation and mindfulness having a “dark side” may suggest otherwise.
“Taming the mind does not mean eliminating outer objects or suppressing inner thoughts. It means revealing and maintaining the natural state of the mind. Taming the mind has nothing to do with cultivating certain thoughts; it is simply keeping the mind in its fundamental state, where its clarity and wisdom are revealed. The true nature of the mind is calm and clear and full of compassion, love, and wisdom.” – The Buddhist Path A Practical Guide from the Nyingma Tradition of Tibetan Buddhism by Khenchen Palden Sherab and Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal.
The term mindfulness derives from the Pali word sati (“memory”,”retention”, or “to remember to observe”). In an article dated 5th June 2015, Mr. Farias stated yet again; “And here we come to an important point. Buddhist meditation was designed not to make us happier, but to radically change our sense of self and perception of the world. Given this, it is perhaps not surprising that some will experience negative effects such as dissociation, anxiety and depression.” No, Mr. Farias, it was not designed solely to “radically change our sense of self and perception of the world”. There’s considerably a lot more to it than just that. In fact, your description of what your perception of what you think meditation actually is, is somewhat misleading, generalising and homogenising. There are many traditions, lineages, and types of Buddhism that all have their specific flavour and pith instructions (a term linked with Tibetan Buddhism). In it’s ultra basic super simplified interpretation it is a practice that involves focusing the mind in order to achieve a state of calm and clarity, often through techniques like contemplation, concentration on breathing or repeating a mantra (which is my personal technique for achieving absorption). It is used to enhance mindfulness, reduce stress, and improve overall well-being. Enlightenment, which I have recently blogged about, is another goal of meditation. The word “meditation” is often used imprecisely to designate many numerous different practices found across many cultures. Mr. Farias’s article exists in my mind to discredit Buddhist wisdom, which so far, forgive me if I’m wrong, has actually worked to help calm the human mind. Indeed, in an another poorly educated and extremely misleading article entitled “Meditation can be harmful – and can even make mental health problems worse” Mr. Farias states; “Mindfulness is a type of Buddhist-based meditation in which you focus on being aware of what you’re sensing, thinking and feeling in the present moment. The first recorded evidence for this, found in India, is over 1,500 years old.”
Incorrect Mr. Farias. The Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta is an important and central Buddhist text more than 2,000 years old. Bhante Sujato suggests that the sutta, as it exists today, may have been compiled from other suttas as late as 20 BCE (which, for those of you into exact timings as of today is equal to 2044 years, 5 months and 19 days ago). It is considered one of the oldest and most widely celebrated Buddhist texts, originating in India. It is also known as the Foundations of Mindfulness Discourse. Samatha (“calm,” “serenity,” “tranquillity of awareness,”) and vipassanā (“special, super, seeing) are two qualities of the mind developed in tandem in Buddhist practice. Samatha-vipassanā is one of India’s most ancient techniques of meditation and was in effect rediscovered by Buddha more than 2500 years ago. The oral transmission of the Buddha’s teachings continued for approximately 454 years after his death before being committed to writing. They were eventually written down in the form of the Pāḷi Canon, which is believed to have been compiled during the Fourth Buddhist Council in Sri Lanka around 29 BCE. It refers to a two-part meditation practice, and is often practised together in Buddhist traditions, that aims to calm the mind and develop insight. However, ancient Buddhist meditation techniques were influenced by early Brahmanic yoga which revolve around the cultivation of mindfulness, insight, and spiritual liberation namely Anapanasati, Vipassana and Metta Meditation.
You don’t need to pay a therapist lots of money (not when it can be found for free) or swallow any one of the newly hyped experimental drugs. Just sit, be silent and meditate (though one should always make efforts to find a qualified and accredited meditation teacher and not rely on someone unproven). However, having said this simplistic statement, being diagnosed as clinically depressed should be taken extremely seriously and all patients with such a diagnosis need to follow their practitioners guidance. And yet, I seriously question why my poor now dead sister was allowed to be on destructive anti-psychotic drugs for over 30 years, her brain slowly melting into a dementia riddled mass of deranged mulch because the drugs she was being fed and the monitoring required in the critical checks and balances essential were basically ignored and her mental health destroyed. Drugs are a short term solution for a long term problem. Mr. Farias obviously has a problem with seeing money leaving the therapy and drug industry, going into those pesky NHS mindfulness programmes, mindfulness coaches, videos, apps and lots and lots of wonderfully helpful books on meditation. When Mr. Farias quoted Giles Coren (he of poisonous pen and word) in one of his articles, he instantly lost any form of credibility for me. Coren is not a good role model to quote when discussing mental health. Judging by the articles (now being posted into the French language) that Mr. Farias posts online he obviously has ulterior motives and an agenda that is somewhat, to borrow his term, something on the “dark side”. Is this just someone attempting to boost their profile (or book sales) or an underlying agenda that dwells on the “dark side”? It does seem that Mr. Farias is attempting to replay his greatest hits in article form, from his book, The Buddha Pill: Can Meditation Change You?, which The Literary Review said; “…the conclusions are tentative at best and the reader is not left with any clear sense of whether or not it would be good for them to meditate, or in what context.” The only person you need to refer to in regard to whether or not you meditate is you dear reader, while having some basic common sense, and referring to the ancient Greek philosophical maxim of “know thyself“. This comes from the “light side”, a side unlike the “dark side” that rarely gets mentioned, practised or that matter given much column space.
Sheer Zed ~ Author • Buddhist Shaman • Musician 