80 • PART II: MINDFULNESS IN EDUCATING FOR SELF-REGULATION AND ENGAGEMENT
Not-Self
Not-self is sometimes considered to be one of the most difficult mindful teachings for
Westerners to understand (Shapiro & Carlson, 2009). Specific to self-regulation, both sense
impressions and mental events do not contain anything that could be called a self (Grabovac
et al., 2011). This concept is very hard for children and many adolescents to grasp. It requires
a level of formal operative thought (i.e., the ability to think in abstractions and conceptual-
izations) that does not typically arise until the middle school years and, for some students,
not until high school.
There are lots of ways students identify with what is happening as self. For example,
I often meet adolescents in private practice who have identified wholeheartedly with a par-
ticular disorder (Cook-Cottone, 2015). For example, They might say, “I am anorexic,” or
“I can’t control myself.” I watch their language for these statements to reveal a sense of
a nonchanging, permanent self that is serving their disorder or struggle (Cook-Cottone,
2015). When I hear a statement like this, I tell them what I noticed and ask them to reword
the sentence in an empowering, malleable manner. For example, an adolescent can change
“I am anorexic” to “I have struggled with food restriction when I feel overwhelmed.”
Another example is changing “I can’t control myself” to “In the past, I didn’t notice that
I was triggered by clothing advertisements to shop.”
Younger students often say things like, “I am mad,” “I can’t do that,” or “I am bad.”
Here, mindfulness gives us the place to reframe these notions of self. This is important
because, if a student views himself or herself as mad, there is little room for modification of
the state. If a student views himself or herself as incapable, there is little room for progress.
Last, if a student sees himself or herself as bad, cultivating positive experiences is dissonant
from who they think they are. For students who identify as a feeling (i.e., “I am mad”), the
teacher can help them reword, “Samuel, you are feeling angry right now.” For students
who are making brief statements regarding their capabilities (e.g., “I can’t do that”), the
teacher can help them reframe their statement: “Samuel, being kind to people who have
hurt you can be very challenging. Let’s practice and see how you do.” Last, for students
who conceptualize themselves as bad or unworthy of effort, a phenomenon that can be a
risk factor for depression, the teacher can validate their experience and help them reframe:
“Samuel, when you have engaged in behaviors that are against the rules, it feels bad. Still,
what you do—and who you are—are two different things.” In these ways, we don’t need to
explicitly teach the concept of not-self. Rather, we teach them how to create space between
what they are feeling and challenged by and who they are. Chapter 3, principle 6, inquiry,
speaks directly to this process. Ask students to ask questions about the space between what
is happening and who they are.
ALLOWING WHAT IS
Allowing is a term that I find easier to negotiate than acceptance (Cook-Cottone, 2015). It
is a subtle semantic difference. Yet, I believe it is an important one. Acceptance is intended
to mean an acknowledgment of or a cessation of resistance to something (Cook-Cottone,
2015). However, in Western culture, acceptance has a connotation of agreement. Whereas,
allowing suggests a clearer boundary between what you or I might consider acceptable
and what is happening (Cook-Cottone, 2015). Allowing suggests that, although you or