Dhamma Principles › The Debate on Mindfulness: Are All Things Foundations of Mindfulness?
The Debate on Mindfulness: Are All Things Foundations of Mindfulness?
Going deeper

The Debate on Mindfulness: Are All Things Foundations of Mindfulness?

Satipaṭṭhānakathā

One side holds that all things are foundations of mindfulness, since mindfulness can be established on anything. The Theravāda shows that what mindfulness knows does not thereby become mindfulness: anger that is noticed is still anger, not mindfulness.

7 points

In the Satipaṭṭhānakathā of the Kathāvatthu, Tipiṭaka volume 37, at the end of chapter 1, the opponent agrees that all things are foundations of mindfulness (satipaṭṭhāna). The Theravādin immediately asks: then are all things mindfulness, the faculty of mindfulness, the power of mindfulness, right mindfulness, the awakening factor of mindfulness, the direct path, leading to awakening and nibbāna? The opponent says this should not be said.

The Theravādin goes through item by item, from the eye base and the visible-form base to lust, hatred, delusion, conceit, views, doubt, dullness, restlessness, shamelessness and lack of moral dread, asking whether each is a foundation of mindfulness, and if so, whether it is also mindfulness. The opponent's reason is that mindfulness can be established taking all things as its object. The Theravādin then asks: contact too can take all things as its object; are all things therefore foundations of contact?

At the end the Theravādin quotes the discourse that those who do not partake of mindfulness of the body do not partake of the deathless, the discourse on the direct path of the four foundations of mindfulness, and the discourse on the seven jewels of the awakening factors, and asks whether all beings are developing mindfulness of the body, or whether all things are the direct path. The opponent cannot agree. The commentary names the schools that held this view, but the text itself speaks only of sakavādī and paravādī.

  1. 1

    If all things are foundations of mindfulness, they must be mindfulness too Sabbe dhammā satipaṭṭhānā

    The opponent agrees that all things are foundations of mindfulness. The Theravādin asks: then are all things mindfulness, the faculty of mindfulness, the power of mindfulness, right mindfulness, the awakening factor of mindfulness, recollection of the Buddha and of the Dhamma, up to mindfulness of breathing and mindfulness of the body? The opponent says this should not be said. This point is for overall understanding.

    Applying it in daily life

    When you hear the broad claim that everything is meditation, ask whether it means everything can be a basis for meditation, or that everything is already meditation. The two are very different.

  2. 2

    Are lust and lack of moral dread foundations of mindfulness too? Anottappaṃ satipaṭṭhānaṃ

    The Theravādin asks item by item, from the eye base, the ear base, sights, sounds, smells, tastes and touches to lust, hatred, delusion, conceit, views, doubt, dullness, restlessness, shamelessness and lack of moral dread, whether each is a foundation of mindfulness, and if so, whether it is mindfulness or right mindfulness. The opponent cannot agree.

    Applying it in daily life

    When you notice you are angry, don't assume the anger has become good. Anger is still anger; what is good is the noticing, which helps you not act on it.

  3. 3

    What is known and mindfulness itself are not the same Cakkhāyatanaṃ satipaṭṭhānaṃ tañca na sati

    The opponent agrees that mindfulness is a foundation of mindfulness and is mindfulness, but not that the eye base is mindfulness. When the opponent agrees that the eye base is a foundation of mindfulness but not mindfulness, the Theravādin asks: is mindfulness then a foundation of mindfulness but not mindfulness? The opponent cannot agree. This pair of questions shows that if both what is known and mindfulness itself are called foundations of mindfulness, the word is being used in two senses at once.

    Applying it in daily life

    When practising, distinguish in your mind what is being observed from the observing. The breath is what is observed; the awareness that you are breathing is mindfulness.

  4. 4

    Mindfulness can be established on all things Sabbe dhamme ārabbha sati santiṭṭhati

    The opponent's reason is that mindfulness can be established taking all things as its object. The Theravādin agrees this is true but not that all things are therefore foundations of mindfulness. What both sides share is that there is nothing mindfulness cannot know.

    Applying it in daily life

    No need to wait for a quiet place or free time. Showering, walking to the bus, or boredom while waiting in a queue can all be a basis for mindfulness.

  5. 5

    Then all things would be foundations of contact too Sabbe dhammā phassapaṭṭhānā

    The Theravādin asks: if all things are called foundations of mindfulness because mindfulness can take all things as its object, contact too can take all things as its object; are all things then foundations of contact? The same goes for feeling, perception, intention and mind. The opponent cannot agree. That something can be an object does not make it named after what knows it.

    Applying it in daily life

    When you reason that because A is like this, B must be like that, try replacing A with something else that has the same property. If the conclusion no longer holds, the reasoning has a gap.

  6. 6

    Not all beings are already mindful Sabbe sattā upaṭṭhitasatino

    The Theravādin asks: if all things are foundations of mindfulness, are all beings firmly mindful, endowed with mindfulness, with mindfulness established? He quotes the discourse that those who do not partake of mindfulness of the body do not partake of the deathless, and those who do, partake of the deathless, and asks whether all beings develop, cultivate and make much of mindfulness of the body. The opponent cannot agree.

    Applying it in daily life

    Mindfulness is a skill to be trained, not something already complete. Set short moments each day to come back to your body, such as before every meal.

  7. 7

    The direct path is the four foundations of mindfulness Ekāyano ayaṃ bhikkhave maggo

    The Theravādin quotes the discourse: this is the direct path for the purification of beings, for surmounting sorrow and lamentation, for the ending of pain and grief, for attaining the true method, for realising nibbāna, namely the four foundations of mindfulness; and the discourse on the seven jewels of the awakening factors that appear with the arising of a Tathāgata. He asks whether all things are the direct path, or the jewel of the awakening factor of mindfulness. The opponent cannot agree.

    Applying it in daily life

    The path to freedom from suffering has a clear direction. Simply drifting through life is not walking it; it becomes a path only when you deliberately train.

Try it in daily life

This debate separates two things people practising mindfulness often mix up: what is known and the knowing itself. Everything in life can be a basis for mindfulness, from the breath and washing dishes to irritation in a traffic jam. But irritation does not become something good just because we notice it. The practice is the noticing.

Another lesson is that mindfulness is not automatically present in everyone. If all things were foundations of mindfulness, all beings would already be firmly mindful, which is not true. Mindfulness has to be developed, cultivated and trained again and again.

So in practice there is no need to pick beautiful objects. Anything in front of you will do, as long as you are clear that you are training the knowing, not praising what is known.

Sign in to keep track of what you have read

Sources in the Tipiṭaka

Tap to read the actual passage on the page cited.

Other principles worth reading

Log in to earn 40 merit points for reading this page