From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Someone injected commercial links! Needs to be fixed.

WikiProject Religion (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Buddhism (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Satipatthana, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


In keeping with merger guidelines on Wikipedia, I propose that Mindfulness be merged into Satipatthana, because although it contains great contributive non-redundant information, the concept of mindfulness and Satipatthana are considered in Bhuddism to be the same. Please feel free to post here or on my talk page if any comments. Parsh ([[User talk:Chantoke|talk]]) 03:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Isn't it spelled "Buddhism?"
  • Conditional support I would accept this on the condition that the automatic article page when a user looks for the article "Mindfulness" be changed into the current disambiguation page. The disambiguation page can link to Satipatthana, Mindfulness (psychology), and elsewhere. --Pine 22:22, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
That is a good idea. I will wait for other input to give more users a chance to chime in, but I certainly agree with your suggestion. Parsh (talk) 10:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I have given it a few weeks, and it seems we are the only two to have commented on the issue. If anyone else has anything else to say, please comment here. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page, although it would be best to keep the central dialogue here. Thanks. Ramwithaxe (talk) 14:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Opposed The initial supposition for this change -- that "mindfulness" and "satipatthana" are the same -- is simply incorrect. It is true that "mindfulness" is a traditional translation of the Pali word "sati"; but, once you add the suffix "patthana" or "upatthana" to "sati," we are no longer talking just about mindfulness/awareness, but about a specific framework for establishing mindfulness described in the Pali Canon, practiced by Theravadin and vipassana adherents, and different from other mindfulness-generating or -requiring meditation techniques (such as anussati, which is explicitly mentioned in the current "Mindfulness" article). Admittedly, this current article's lede could have been read in a way that equates "mindfulness" with "sati-pathana"; I've tried to change this with recent updates to the article. So, given that "satipatthana" is a specific, traditional, widespread technique for gaining "sati" ("mindfulness"); I think it might be beneficial to add a summary paragraph about "satipatthana" to the "Mindfulness" article (e.g., above the current "Ten forms" section); but, they should no more be merged than an article on "Tree" with one on "Oak" or "Pine." - Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 17:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Opposed I agree. Mindfulness has been abstracted into the vernacular vocabulary. People discuss it without the trappings of Buddhism. Surely a vernacular definition will soon arise that does not quite conform to the Buddhist definition and does not refer to Buddhism, at least not respectfully. BTW, many Buddhists object to it being called a "religion." It has no gods, the Buddha himself was quite mortal and is now quite dead, and although it does not discourage belief in supernatural phenomena, neither does it encourage it. -- User:Gene Fellner 16 January 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 13:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Opposed I just noticed the merger template at the top of this page. I strongly agree with the arguments presented above in opposition to the merger, and I think the merger template should be removed, since almost six months have passed with no action. The terms sati and satipaṭṭhāna are distinct enough, and important enough, to deserve separate articles. Gene Fellner's argument above is good, but he ignores the fact that the Mindfulness article specifically refers to the Buddhist concept sati, and the Mindfulness (psychology) article refers to the vernacular and psychological uses of the term (such as Ellen Langer's use of the term, which I love, but which is quite distinct from the Buddhist use). To Larry Rosenfeld's excellent explanation above, I would add that the teaching of satipaṭṭhāna (in the Sanskrit form smṛtyupasthāna) is important to many Mahāyāna practitioners as well. See, for example, the page on the four applications of mindfulness at Rigpa Wiki. The arguments against merger are very strong and the arguments in favor are weak. Should I go ahead and remove the merger template? Porelbiencomun (talk) 19:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Opposed. Mindfulness and the foundations practices are not the same thing, and deserve separate treatment. There should be no merger, but if there were, this article should be merged into the mindfulness article. The Mindfulness article is much better than this one, and "mindfulness" is an term familiar to most educated readers of English. Pali and Sanskrit terms known to almost no English speakers are poor choices for article names. I strongly agree that the merger template should be removed.