"A spiritual practice is liberating when it deconstructs the external and internalized power structures that shape how we speak, act, feel, and move, and when it supports expressing our own way of being human."
From a reader:
“I agree and applaud the brave attempt to take full responsability. On the other hand, I am waiting on a blog post that adresses the feminine trauma of already doing this, and taking all responsability for a difficult interaction, without self love and respect to one self, induced by a society that tells women they just have to be more understanding and empathic. I really think there is a lot of need for a buddhist blog on self-hate and depreciation, covered in altruistic and spiritual ambition.”
Disclaimer: I address other facets of this multi-layered question/comment in these blogs:
In his provocative book Beyond McMindfulness, Ronald Purser argues that the mindfulness hype is neither based on solid scientific evidence nor does it fulfill its claimed revolutionary potential. Instead, it has become the new capitalist spirituality: reduced to a self-help technique, it perfectly aligns with Western consumerist and materialistic values. In fact, it is counter-revolutionary. By making people responsible for their own mental well-being through mindfulness, even in unhealthy and oppressive environments, it undermines the motivation to bring about the much-needed social and political change. Has mindfulness become the “the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.” - Karl Marx
This criticism can be extended to many contemporary (commercial) spiritual practices. When focused on felt experience (often seeking calmness, happiness, emotional release, or vitality) without addressing or deconstructing the (internalized) power structures that necessitate these experiences, there is a risk of disempowerment. Spiritual practice risks becoming a tool of oppression by providing emotional comfort or encouraging self-ownership, thereby diverting attention and energy away from the root of the problem.
For example:
A person in a stressful, exploitative job doesn’t need mindfulness to prevent burnout. They need humane working conditions.
A woman feeling disrespected and oppressed by her partner or society doesn’t need emotional appeasement with sound healing or a shakti mat. She needs to express her anger, so it can fuel the social and political changes necessary for fair and equal treatment of all genders.
A woman neglecting herself to care for others doesn’t need applause for her selflessness. She needs support to develop self-love and respect.
A participant in a tantric workshop feeling tense or nervous during intimate practices with a stranger may not need a kundalini release, but rather psychoeducation on setting and respecting boundaries, and caring for their own needs.
A spiritual practice is liberating when it deconstructs the external and internalized power structures that shape how we speak, act, feel, and move, and when it supports expressing our own way of being human. Internalized power structures often take the form of conditioned fears, but they can also manifest in identities we hold as our own. For example, a woman overextending herself to care for others may identify with a paternalistic stereotype of women as caring, empathetic, receptive, and understanding. In doing so, she consolidates an internalized power structure. This contrasts with a woman who chooses care as an expression of her way of being human, with the entitlement to set boundaries, express anger when those boundaries are crossed, and devote sufficient attention to her own pleasure.
It’s not about what you say or do, but the intention and presence you bring to it.
Spirituality without political awareness is stultifying and numbing. Political awareness and activism without self-awareness can perpetuate the very violence it seeks to address. Fighting patriarchy requires questioning all oppressive systems that treat individuals as tools or means rather than ends. If I make others responsible for my anger—even if they triggered it—I risk committing the same act of violence I aim to challenge. This is indeed what sometimes happens: victimhood and weakness can become tools of power and domination (used by both men and women, e.g., “white or male fragility”), rather than fostering the awareness and presence necessary for equality, fairness, and partnership.
At House of the Beloved, we propose a radically engaged existential development. How can we act with full passion to deconstruct systems of oppression as a practice of personal liberation, rather than being swept up in the rapture of emotion or attachment to a particular outcome?
Here, a delicate nuance is essential. I’m not advocating for activism without intense emotions or fierce criticism. Instead, I argue for full, passionate, and radical engagement without identifying with the emotions that fuel it or the outcomes of your actions. It’s not about owning your anger so it disappears, but using it with clarity and lucidity as a fuel for change. It’s about riding desire without seeking fulfillment, going all-in without attachment to the result. It’s an expression of full aliveness without a project.
These paradoxes can only be embodied when we stop identifying with our thoughts, emotions, and sense of self. Only through direct availability and sensitivity to our experience (before we have a thought about it) can we transcend the reenactment of the power structures that form the very fabric of our sense of self.
______________
If you resonate with these ideas, check out our existential research center.
Interested in cutting through your internalised conditionings? Join a shadow work weekend.
Comments