A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
i dont know how that can be called vipassana, since everything that normally arises is wrong.which I'd describe as observing whatever arises.
Huh?5heaps wrote:i dont know how that can be called vipassana, since everything that normally arises is wrong.which I'd describe as observing whatever arises.
then the big debate is what exactly does it mean to not be wrong
there are two truths, conventional truth and ultimate truth. ordinary objects of ordinary cognition are illustrations of conventional truths. the point of vipassana is not to realize conventional truths. is there something more particular you are disagreeing with?tiltbillings wrote:Huh?5heaps wrote:i dont know how that can be called vipassana, since everything that normally arises is wrong.which I'd describe as observing whatever arises.
Could you please explain it?i dont know how that can be called vipassana, since everything that normally arises is wrong.
did you see the post above about the two truths?Ben wrote:Could you please explain it?
I thought it was to see things as they really are, eg the 3 characteristics?5heaps wrote:... the point of vipassana is not to realize conventional truths.
Thanks, that looks like a good summary. I think what I was trying to say is that sati "off the cushion" seems quite similar to insight meditation, ie both involve paying close attention to what is happening.pilgrim wrote:Vipassana is a quality of the mind - the ability to see things without the taint of delusion. There are many meditative practices that can develop vipassana. The most commonly employed are samatha and sati developed by means of the various practices described in the sati-patthana sutta.
Vipassana helps us to see that all conditioned phenomenom are impermanent and outside of our control.They arise and they cease.When our mind is focused on on the rising and falling of the abdomin,we see that there is a beginning to the rising and an ending to the arising.Then we have a beginning to the falling and an ending to the falling.It can not continue to rise nor can it continue to fall,it is impermanent and outside of our control,therefore nor self,for if it were self we could tell it to keep rising.Try doing that,it hurts.Yeah I was dumb enough to check it out. 
in what way is the observation of whatever arises an observation of the way things are? can you give an example?Spiny O'Norman wrote:I thought it was to see things as they really
indeed. but what type of self is it that is not in control? its possible to understand the lack of a controller self independent of the heaps without understanding the remaining factorsgoingforth wrote:it is impermanent and outside of our control,therefore nor self
Mindfulness is a factor of vipassana. While one becomes more and more mindful with Sampajañña one will see the true nature of things as they manifest themselves at the moment - which will boost one's vipassana.Spiny O'Norman wrote:I've been noticing that my vipassana practice and mindfulness practice seem to be basically the same activity, which I'd describe as observing whatever arises.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.
Spiny
"The observation of whatever arises" means the observation of the things as manifested or as experienced, that is the way things are at this moment.5heaps wrote:in what way is the observation of whatever arises an observation of the way things are? can you give an example?Spiny O'Norman wrote:I thought it was to see things as they really
Just intellectual understanding is not enough for deep insight. How does one know initially, by one's actual experience, that the hand is ultimately nothing but a heap of "wave-particles"? One must begin with the conventional truth that one experiences initially--that this is hand, and while one proceeds observing the hand with Sampajañña he/she will ultimately see its ultimate truth too. Of course, if one misses Sampajañña during observation he/she will stick with the conventional truth which will obstruct the apprehension of ultimate truth, as you said.for example, the hand which appears to a mind apprehending it obstructs the apprehension of its ultimate truth, namely the ultimate particles that make up the hand.
i see. is this unfolding supposed to happen with the mere continuation and cultivation of concentration, or does it also require insight (ie. cessation of ignorance due to performing analysis)?SamKR wrote:The "ultimate truth" should unfold itself while observation deepens.
thats precisely my point. one doesnt. simple observance of conventional truth doesnt count as even an intellectual understanding - its simply wrong with regard to reality (ie. the nature of things).Just intellectual understanding is not enough for deep insight. How does one know initially, by one's actual experience, that the hand is ultimately nothing but a heap of "wave-particles"?for example, the hand which appears to a mind apprehending it obstructs the apprehension of its ultimate truth, namely the ultimate particles that make up the hand.