This article develops an ontological approach to study meditation in practice. Recognizing that social studies of meditation are dominated by critical and humanist standpoints, it suggests that the politics of meditation should not be indexed to hegemonic social forces – capitalism, neoliberalism, medicalization – but to what it can do to bodies, selves and environments through particular performances and engagements with non-humans. In order to develop this argument, the article delves into two popular practices of meditation – Vipassana, in the tradition of S. N. Goenka, and Mindfulness, according to the teachings of Thich Nhat Hanh. The empirical data stem from fieldwork carried out between 2010 and 2013 in France, Portugal and the United Kingdom. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with meditators, as well as participant observation at meditation retreats and local practice groups. The article explores how these two articulations of Vipassana and Mindfulness allow practitioners to reconfigure how they perform their bodies and selves, leaning towards versions of subjectivity that contrast with paradigmatic versions of the modern self. It suggests that the ontological politics of meditation are multiple, involving a wide range of performances, effects and arrangements, requiring social scientists to take into account how meditation unfolds in practice in order to avoid totalizing generalizations.

本文开发了一种本体论方法来研究实践中的冥想。认识到冥想的社会研究以批判性和人文主义的立场为主，它表明冥想的政治不应该与霸权社会力量——资本主义、新自由主义、医学化——相关联，而应该与它可以通过特定的方式对身体、自我和环境做些什么与非人类的表演和互动。为了发展这一论点，本文深入探讨了两种流行的冥想练习——根据 SN Goenka 传统的内观和根据一行禅师的教义的正念。实证数据来源于 2010 年至 2013 年在法国、葡萄牙和英国进行的实地调查。与冥想者进行了 24 次半结构化访谈，以及参加冥想静修和当地实践团体的观察。这篇文章探讨了内观和正念的这两种表达如何让从业者重新配置他们如何表现自己的身体和自我，倾向于与现代自我的范式版本形成对比的主观版本。它表明冥想的本体政治是多重的，涉及广泛的表演、效果和安排，需要社会科学家考虑冥想如何在实践中展开，以避免总体概括。倾向于与现代自我的范式版本形成对比的主观版本。它表明冥想的本体政治是多重的，涉及广泛的表演、效果和安排，需要社会科学家考虑冥想如何在实践中展开，以避免总体概括。倾向于与现代自我的范式版本形成对比的主观版本。它表明冥想的本体政治是多重的，涉及广泛的表演、效果和安排，需要社会科学家考虑冥想如何在实践中展开，以避免总体概括。