Bhikkhu Thanissaro and other scholars on Mahasi

[Christopherxx]

Hi there,

I have heard that some scholars do not recognize the Mahasi method as being in accordance with the sutta.

I am wondering if anyone knows Bhikkhu Thanissaro position on this (I respect his work) and other scholars.

This thread is in no way meant to be an attack on Mahasi. Simply an examination of scholar opinions on his method and how it likens to the sutta in which it is derived.

Thank you in advance for taking your time to post.

Metta wishes!

[marc108]

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ml#part2-b

These points may be illustrated with some meditation techniques that are currently popular in the West: In a "mental noting" practice, mindfulness is a matter of remembering to keep up the noting, alertness means seeing whatever phenomena arise to be noted, and ardency is a matter of sticking with the noting relentlessly and being ever more quick and precise in one's alertness. In terms of the factors constituting jhāna practice, the mindfulness and alertness here would be related to directed thought, ardency to singleness of preoccupation, while alertness aimed at evaluating the results of the noting — and ardency in keeping the "pressure" of the noting just right — would be related to evaluation. If this practice is then conducted in line with the texts, it should reach a stage where the mind settles down into the singleness of the first jhāna.

[mikenz66]

Ven T's approach, as explained in his talks, is not so different from Mahasi, or other approaches. I.e. have a "primary object" (breath, motion of feet, etc) and also pay attention to what comes up.
See my comments here: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p174339

Like the meditation instructions from any teacher, Ven Mahasi, Ven Thanissaro, the ancient teachers whose experience is preserved in the commentaries, ..., teach "tricks", like noting (or counting breaths in some cases) that are not in the suttas. However, since no-one claims those techniques have any dhammic significance, whether or not they in the suttas is hardly an issue. Noting is simply a way of keeping ones attention focussed clearly on the phenomena that are arising, and cutting down on mental "commentary" that otherwise tends to inflict the beginning meditator.


Mike

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Christopher,

Your question and Mike's comment about "tricks" brings to mind the following that I read last week, and whilst it doesn't reference sutta, it gives some potential criteria etc.

From "Awareness Alone Is Not Enough: Questions & Answers with Ashin Tejaniya"
http://sayadawutejaniya.org/wp-content/ ... Enough.pdf
--------------------------------

LABELLING

Yogi: I have been trying to watch the mind, but labelling
automatically comes in because I used labelling for over two
months before coming here.

SUT: But the mind is labelling!

Yogi: Yes, but I keep using words in my mind like ‘thinking’.....

SUT: How does it feel when you see such labels come up in
the mind?

Yogi: It’s a little bit distracting. I try to push the labelling
aside...

SUT: NO, NO, don’t try to push it aside!! Just recognize
that the mind is labelling. You cannot stop a habit abruptly.
If you try to stop it forcefully, there will be a conflict.

Yogi: What’s the difference between labelling and just
observing or noticing? In either case you recognize what is
happening. What’s wrong with using words?

SUT: Labelling gives the mind a lot of work to do and
therefore it has less time to investigate. Phenomena are
happening at an incredibly fast rate, and labelling them will
therefore also be late, i.e. you are naming the experience
long after it happened.

Yogi: So just feel the emotion as opposed to labelling it?

SUT: Yes, by being aware of what is going on continuously.
When we observe something, the mind naturally comments
on what is going on. There is nothing wrong with that.
Mechanically labelling ‘fear, fear, fear’ is very different. That
is not only tiring and but it also prevents you from seeing the
details of your experience. It is unnecessary. But you cannot
stop the natural comments the mind makes when it recognizes
something.
Mechanical labelling weakens both awareness and
understanding of the mental processes. We don’t really need
labelling to explain anything to ourselves; we only need labels
to explain things to other people. When we use labelling, the
mind will get involved with all the meanings and associations
connected to that label. By using labelling we also target a
particular aspect of our experience and therefore cannot
see the whole picture.

--------------------------------

Metta,
Retro.

[tiltbillings]

Mechanical labelling weakens both awareness and
understanding of the mental processes. We don’t really need
labelling to explain anything to ourselves; we only need labels
to explain things to other people. When we use labelling, the
mind will get involved with all the meanings and associations
connected to that label. By using labelling we also target a
particular aspect of our experience and therefore cannot
see the whole picture.

Of course, that is not an accurate characterization of the Mahasi method.

[mikenz66]

Of course, that is not an accurate characterization of the Mahasi method.

And as I was trying to get across above, it is unfortunate that it is seen as the defining characteristic of Mahasi's approach. Labelling is just a bit of technique, that has to be dropped at some point.

U Tejaniya does some really interesting ways of approaching things. As with Ajahn Chah, he seems to be trying to really make his students confront what they are doing. Steve Armstrong (who teaches mostly Mahasi method) discusses him in some of his talks. U Tejaniya instructed him to watch and notice if he was using any "meditation technique", and stop doing it. Which would be a really interesting and challenging instruction for an experienced meditator, but presumably not what he would get a beginner to do...


Mike

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

U Tejaniya instructed him to watch and notice if he was using any "meditation technique", and stop doing it.

That doesn't surprise me at all actually, given that as I was reading the aforementioned transcript I was thinking, "Hmmm... here's a meditation teacher that I think Robert would like".



Anyway, I suppose we'd best get...



Metta,
Retro.

[mikenz66]

Well, I guess the topic was Ven Mahasi. I think that fixating on the labelling aspect would be analogous to saying that Thanissaro Bhikkhu's entire approach is based on breath manipulation or Ajahn Chahs' on [insert random Ajahn Chah one-liner here].


Mike

[Christopherxx]

Thanks guys,

I think you've pretty much hit it right ont he head (tips and tricks) rather than it being a dogmatic issue or not.

[Kamran]

I think its in his "Not Self" series of talks someone asks him about the Mahasi method and Thanissaro simply replied that he was not trained in that method, so he can't answer questions about it.

[Billymac29]

Has Thanissaro ever commented on Mahasi Sayadaw? He has a few of his writings on his website http://www.accesstoinsight.org. I would find it odd that he would have his publications on his site if he didn't hold the Ven Mahasi in some kind of honorable regard, and respect his teachings in some matter. I could be wrong. Has anybody found anything showing Thanissaro's view on or of Ven Mahasi? I couldn't find any.

[mikenz66]

Hi Billy,

"Access to Insight" isn't Ven Thanissaro's website, it is John Bullitt's website:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/faq.html#whatis
Of course, it does have a lot of Ven Thanissaro's material, but also a lot of BPS and other material.


Mike

[Billymac29]

"Access to Insight" isn't Ven Thanissaro's website, it is John Bullitt's website:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/faq.html#whatis
Of course, it does have a lot of Ven Thanissaro's material, but also a lot of BPS and other material.


Mike

Oh ok, woops.... I never noticed that before. Stupid me..lol
thanks Mike

with metta