The paper, which was conceptual in scope and rooted in the early Buddhist discourses of the Pali Canon, aims to do two things. First, it identifies the most fertile areas of convergence between Buddhist psychology and modern psychotherapy. Second, it proposes a framework through which the two traditions can cohere rather than compete. The linchpin of that framework is the Noble Eightfold Path of early Buddhist teaching, and specifically two of its eight factors: right view and right effort. Right view, in this reading, is the capacity to see mental constructions as constructions—recognizing that the self, the future, memories and relationship patterns are moment-by-moment fabrications rather than fixed realities. Right effort is the sustained, balanced application of the mind toward abandoning unwholesome patterns and cultivating wholesome ones. Together, the authors argue, these factors can frame psychotherapy itself as part of a whole-life path of moral, mental and wisdom development.

Three foundational understandings from early Buddhist psychology anchor the proposal. The first is that the self is fluxing and constructed. The Buddha’s analyses of the five aggregates and of dependent origination describe how each moment of cognition is conditioned by accumulated mental registrations, producing urges that grasp at pleasant contact and push away painful contact, and how this grasping fabricates an apparently solid “I” at the center of experience. The authors connect these ancient maps to contemporary constructs such as core beliefs in cognitive behavior therapy, maladaptive emotion schemas in emotion-focused therapy, and relational schemas in integrative approaches. What modern psychology calls self-image, in this frame, is a species of saṅkhāra—a volitional formation built fresh in each moment from prior constructing processes.

The second understanding is that release is possible. In the logic of dependent origination, if any link in the causal chain of self-construction ceases, the surrounding links lose their conditions and cease as well. Freedom, in the early texts, is a radical cessation of the blindness and hungers associated with the illusion of a permanent, separate self—described in the discourses as profoundly peaceful and rooted in an ethical life. The authors emphasize that neither therapist nor client needs to be fully convinced of such possibilities; what matters is openness to investigating them, which keeps therapy from being limited to ordinary symptom relief and allows a more refined happiness, based on the quieting of ignorance and craving, to come into view.

The third understanding is that the whole of life is the path. The Buddha proposed a comprehensive program of morality, mental culture and wisdom cultivated through both formal practice and in-life reflection. From this standpoint, ethics are not an add-on to therapy but a foundation: harmful behaviors rooted in selfishness generate remorse, worry and separation from clear seeing, all of which undermine mindfulness. The authors caution therapists against imposing moral values, but insist that the value of a moral life should not be excluded from the therapeutic conversation, citing the teaching that “taking care of others, one takes care of oneself; taking care of oneself, one takes care of others.”

Crucially, the paper does not rest on philosophy alone. It marshals a growing body of empirical work suggesting that the mechanisms it highlights are scientifically tractable. The Pattern Theory of Selflessness, published in Mindfulness in 2024 by Berkovich-Ohana, Giommi and colleagues, models the self as a dynamic, reorganizable pattern spanning embodied, affective, cognitive, narrative and social dimensions—and shows how meditation can loosen a rigid self-pattern. Related research links self-rigidity to psychopathology across diagnostic categories, positioning flexibility and perspective-taking as transdiagnostic targets. The S-ART framework of Vago and Silbersweig situates mindfulness effects in self-awareness, self-regulation and self-transcendence, offering neurocognitive entry points for contemplative claims.

On the craving front, habit-loop neuroscience and neuroimaging work led by Judson Brewer demonstrate that mindfulness interrupts cue-urge-action cycles and reduces activity in the posterior cingulate cortex, a hub of self-referential processing. Randomized trials of mindfulness-based relapse prevention and mindfulness-oriented recovery enhancement show reduced relapse risk and recalibrated reward processing in addiction, echoing the Buddhist analysis of how right effort can unhook craving. Decentering—observing thoughts and feelings as passing mental events rather than truths about reality—has emerged as a validated mechanism in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, with meta-analyses confirming reduced depressive relapse and process studies showing that gains in decentering and self-compassion mediate outcomes. Scales measuring nonattachment and nonattachment to self show consistent associations with lower distress and higher well-being, providing measurable proxies for the Buddhist concept of non-clinging.

Yet it is the double bypass that gives the paper its edge. Spiritual bypass, the authors note, fears the pain of the world: it treats naming trauma, problematic attachments or social anxiety as an endless descent into personality illusions, and uses meditation to placate anger, loneliness and fear rather than to see clearly. Psychological bypass fears the pain of losing the world: it dismisses awakening as delusional wishful thinking and holds that a workable arrangement of personality is the best a human can hope for. Both, they argue, are motivated by fear and ignorance, and both sustain suffering—one shrinking from the first two Noble Truths, the other from the third. Contemporary models sharpen the diagnosis: Ontological Addiction Theory frames rigid identification with “me, mine and I” as a literal addiction, while developmental accounts such as Engler’s dictum that one must “be somebody before one can be nobody” warn that premature transcendence risks dissociation and narcissistic avoidance.

The practical implications are concrete. The authors recommend that Buddhist-informed psychotherapists ground their clinical work in personal contemplative practice, use competency frameworks such as the MBI:TAC for mindfulness teachers, engage in mindfulness-based supervision, and systematically monitor countertransference with structured steps of naming, normalizing, regulating and choosing a response. Instruments such as the Spiritual Bypass Scale, Nonattachment Scale, Experiences Questionnaire and Self-Compassion Scale can track both progress and risk. Acknowledging that meditation can occasionally produce adverse effects, the paper calls for careful screening, pacing, referral pathways and safety infrastructure. Finally, it lays out a research agenda: testing whether Buddhist-informed psychotherapy differentially shifts nonattachment, decentering and compassion; whether those shifts mediate outcomes and reduce both forms of bypass; and how therapist practice and training shape results, all within rigorous frameworks for complex interventions. The authors close with a challenge that transcends the clinic: because every moment of body and mind conditions the next, navigating the double bypass is not an academic exercise but a whole-life undertaking.

Subject of Research: A conceptual framework integrating early Buddhist psychology with contemporary psychotherapy to address spiritual and psychological bypass

Article Title: The Double Bypass: Cohering Psychotherapy and the Buddhist Path

Article References: Kramer, G., & Giommi, F. (2026). The Double Bypass: Cohering Psychotherapy and the Buddhist Path. Mindfulness. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-026-02967-8

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s12671-026-02967-8

Keywords: Buddhist psychology, psychotherapy, spiritual bypass, psychological bypass, mindfulness, right view, right effort, decentering, nonattachment, compassion, contemplative neuroscience, Noble Eightfold Path

The study was conducted by Seyed Mohammad Reza Amirian, Fatemeh Akbari, and Zahra Bayat of the Department of English Language and Literature at Hakim Sabzevari University in Sabzevar, Iran. Drawing on data from 201 Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers working across a variety of teaching contexts, the researchers set out to model how two affective variables—psychological wellbeing (PWB) and foreign language teaching enjoyment (FLTE)—contribute to the enactment of loving pedagogy in the classroom.

Loving pedagogy is a concept rooted in positive psychology, an approach that has reshaped how researchers think about emotion in education over the past two decades. Rather than focusing exclusively on negative states such as anxiety, burnout, and stress, positive psychology examines the constructive emotional resources that allow individuals to flourish. Within this framework, loving pedagogy emphasizes empathetic connection, emotional relationality, and genuine care in teaching. In practical terms, a teacher practicing loving pedagogy is attentive to students’ emotional needs, builds warm and trusting relationships, and treats the classroom as a space of mutual care rather than mere knowledge transmission. The authors note that these traits have become increasingly valued in foreign language teaching, a field where emotional dynamics between teachers and learners are known to shape motivation, engagement, and achievement.

Despite its conceptual appeal, loving pedagogy has remained empirically underexplored, particularly in relation to the psychological states that might underpin it. The research team identified a specific gap: while scholars have theorized that a teacher’s own wellbeing and enjoyment might feed into their capacity for loving, caring instruction, few studies had tested this relationship using rigorous statistical modeling. The present study was designed to bridge that lacuna.

To do so, the researchers adopted a quantitative, cross-sectional correlational design. Data were collected from 201 EFL teachers through validated instruments measuring the three constructs of interest: psychological wellbeing, foreign language teaching enjoyment, and loving pedagogy. Psychological wellbeing refers to a teacher’s overall sense of emotional contentment, purpose, and functioning in life, while foreign language teaching enjoyment captures the positive, energizing emotions teachers experience specifically in the act of teaching a language. Loving pedagogy, the outcome variable, reflects the degree to which teachers enact empathy, care, and emotional connection in their professional practice.

The analytical centerpiece of the study was structural equation modeling, or SEM, a multivariate statistical technique that allows researchers to test hypothesized networks of relationships among latent psychological constructs simultaneously. Unlike simple correlation analysis, SEM accounts for measurement error and evaluates how well an entire theoretical model fits the observed data. In this case, the researchers specified a model in which PWB and FLTE serve as antecedents—predictor variables—of loving pedagogy, and then estimated both the strength and the statistical significance of each pathway.

The results were striking in their clarity. Both psychological wellbeing and foreign language teaching enjoyment significantly predicted loving pedagogy, but they did so with notably different magnitudes. Teaching enjoyment emerged as the strongest antecedent, with a standardized regression coefficient of β = 0.55 and an explained variance of R² = 0.186. In plain terms, the more teachers enjoyed the act of teaching itself, the more likely they were to practice loving, caring pedagogy—and this single variable accounted for a meaningful share of the variation in loving pedagogy scores across the sample. Psychological wellbeing, meanwhile, showed a smaller but still statistically significant effect, with β = 0.28 and R² = 0.009. Beyond its direct contribution, wellbeing may also interlock with enjoyment, since the study found that the three constructs were strongly intercorrelated with one another, painting a picture of a tightly woven emotional system in which a teacher’s general contentment, their pleasure in teaching, and their capacity for caring instruction reinforce one another.

The overall model demonstrated acceptable fit to the data, lending statistical credibility to the theoretical proposition that loving pedagogy does not arise in an emotional vacuum. Rather, it appears to be fueled from two directions: the broad, stable reservoir of a teacher’s psychological wellbeing, and the more immediate, context-bound experience of joy in the classroom. The finding that enjoyment is the stronger predictor is particularly noteworthy. It suggests that the everyday emotional texture of teaching—the moments of humor, connection, and satisfaction that occur in real time—may matter even more for compassionate instruction than a teacher’s baseline life satisfaction.

The implications of the study reach well beyond the Iranian context. Around the world, language teachers face mounting pressures: large classes, standardized curricula, high-stakes testing, and, increasingly, the emotional labor of supporting students through turbulent times. If loving pedagogy depends on teachers’ emotional resources, then policies that ignore teacher wellbeing risk eroding the very relational qualities that education systems claim to prize. The authors argue that their findings highlight “the necessity of instilling teacher’s emotional contentment and teaching joy to engender loving and compassionate teaching spaces that respect the emotional wellbeing of learners and teachers alike.”

The study also carries practical consequences for teacher education. Pre-service and in-service training programs, the researchers suggest, should incorporate explicit attention to wellbeing and enjoyment—not as optional wellness add-ons, but as foundational components of professional development. Institutional support plays a role as well: school administrators and policymakers can influence teachers’ emotional lives through workload management, collegial support structures, recognition of teachers’ efforts, and working conditions that allow joy to flourish rather than be squeezed out by administrative burden. The authors frame their work as providing “a new framework for conceptualizing the effect of affective experience on pedagogic orientation,” positioning loving pedagogy as an outcome that education systems can deliberately nurture.

Methodologically, the study contributes to a growing movement in applied linguistics and educational psychology that treats teachers’ emotions as central rather peripheral to instructional quality. Positive psychology has already transformed research on language learners, spawning entire literatures on learner wellbeing, engagement, and enjoyment. This study extends that lens to the teacher’s side of the desk, connecting three constructs—wellbeing, enjoyment, and loving pedagogy—that had previously been studied largely in isolation.

The research also raises questions for future inquiry. Because the design was cross-sectional and correlational, it captures associations at a single point in time rather than proving causation. It remains possible, for instance, that teachers who practice loving pedagogy come to enjoy their work more, rather than the reverse—or that the relationships are bidirectional and mutually reinforcing. Longitudinal studies, experimental interventions aimed at boosting teacher enjoyment, and replications in other cultural and educational contexts would help clarify the causal architecture suggested by the model. The sample, while reasonably sized at 201 participants, was drawn from a single national context, and loving pedagogy may take culturally specific forms that deserve comparative study.

Still, the core message of the research is likely to resonate with teachers everywhere: caring teaching is emotionally expensive, and the emotional accounts that fund it—wellbeing and enjoyment—require deliberate replenishment. A teacher who is depleted cannot easily offer empathy; a teacher who has lost the pleasure of teaching will struggle to build warm relationships with learners. By quantifying these links, the Hakim Sabzevari University team has transformed a largely philosophical ideal into an empirical target, one that teacher educators, school leaders, and policymakers can now measure, monitor, and support. In an era when teacher burnout makes headlines as often as student achievement does, the finding that joy in teaching may be the single strongest predictor of loving pedagogy offers both a warning and an invitation: protect teachers’ joy, and their capacity to care for students is likely to follow.