On the ServiceSpace "ideas" list, we had an insightful exchange around a recent article in The New Yorker -- Long Marriage of Money and Mindfulness.  It centered around the expropriation of Eastern concepts of mindfulness and meditation for use in supporting Western notions of "success" -- particularly in a business context.  The essence of the article is pretty much captured in the closing paragraph:
 

With business meditation, we have a practice that is extrapolated from Buddhism and secularized so that all of the theological underpinnings are swept away,” Catherine Albanese, the author of “A Republic of Mind and Spirit: A Cultural History of American Metaphysical Religion,” says. “So we have Buddhism stood on its head. Mindfulness meditation has been brought into the service of a totally different perspective and world view.” By now, that’s part of a venerable American tradition.

This led to a lengthy round of response from the community, and we thought it would be nice to capture the discussion in one place. However, it was a rich, multifaceted comment-and-response - and so is difficult to summarize -- but here's an attempt at the salient points:
 

Jyoti questions whether converting Eastern mindfulness teaching into a “prosperity gospel” doesn’t change it into a fundamentally different teaching. (The original article alludes to the same thing.) Jyoti also wonders if Western adoptions of “mindfulness” are not simply being used as an ennobling veneer -- like the “greenwashing” of environmentally destructive business practices.

Prasad wonders if initially attending to mindfulness even for the wrong reasons will not eventually lead to a more enlightened outcome.

Somik suggests that all business activity might at least in some sense be viewed through the lens of “service” -- and that as such, businesses who fail to provide such service will ultimately fail.

Birju points out that some teachers would refuse to take on students whom they felt were improperly motivated (interestingly, the new documentary “Steve Jobs: Man in the Machine” contains just such a story. More on this below.)

Somik questions the effort to keep teachings “pure” - or is there value in allowing aspects to be incorporated into current trends of culture?

Rahul broaches the idea of intentionality and echoes the question as to whether the practice can amplify malicious intent, or will the practitioner eventually be reformed by the practice? (Again, see my comment at the end.)

Alan suggests that, indeed, intention and will are crucial on the spiritual path -- that mindfulness practices can be co-opted by ego for purposes such as profit-making, war-making, and power-seeking.

As a synchronistic capstone to this discussion, last night I saw the premiere of a new documentary about Apple co-founder Steve Jobs (my housemate was the dude who accompanied Jobs to India, and provides significant commentary in the film). I didn’t realize that at one point Jobs seriously considered becoming a monk but was compassionately turned away - pretty much for the reasons discussed on this thread.

Jobs seems to embody the essence of the above discussion: someone with spiritual sensibilities, who appeared to be a genuine seeker, yet someone who perhaps used some aspects of practice for purposes of control, manipulation, and segregation. I’m puzzled how this could be. That’s probably material for another book or film. In any case, I highly recommend the film, whenever it’s ready for general release.

Thank you, all, for a great discussion thread! In case I misrepresented anyone's thoughts, do add a comment to elaborate further. :)