Re: Goenka technique
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:02 am
Great report, FijiNut!
metta
Ben
metta
Ben
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of TheravÄda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
Hi rowyourboat, I have also came to conclusion that "bhanga" in Goenka's tradition is most probably is a (near-)jhana state.rowyourboat wrote:'Bhangha' is another term- possibly with new usage with the tradition. It is said to denote a point where all body sensations disappear. Previously in the commentaries bhanga nana (knowledge of dissolution) is when everything seems to be dissolving. These two are different. I suspect that bhanga may occur in two instances- one is when samadhi is developed to a great degree and the mind cannot direct itself towards body sensations (this naturally happens in samatha) and focuses internally on the mind away from body sensations. Or it happens when there is stream entry.
No, that is not correct. The description of Bhanga within the tradition is completely consistent with the commentarial explanation. Goenkaji goes into considerable detail and explains that sensations do not disappear. As for 'new usage', Goenkaji has been describing bhanga-nana since I have been involved in 1985. And before that, I have a transcript and audio file of U Ba Khin saying much the same thing in 1969. And before that, we can look at the writings of Ledi Sayadaw, so its been around for awhile.rowyourboat wrote:'Bhangha' is another term- possibly with new usage with the tradition. It is said to denote a point where all body sensations disappear.
That is not correct either. One apprehends bhangha from practicing vipassana. Within this tradition, vipassana is not practiced only after the attainment of jhana. It would be the exception rather than the rule that practitioners within this tradition experience bhanga from the basis of jhana. Bhanga and jhana are two very different states.Oleksandr wrote: Hi rowyourboat, I have also came to conclusion that "bhanga" in Goenka's tradition is most probably is a (near-)jhana state.
You say "bhanga" has been around for quite a while (at least 100 years). Was it around at the Buddha's time and did the Buddha elaborate on it?Ben wrote:No, that is not correct. The description of Bhanga within the tradition is completely consistent with the commentarial explanation. Goenkaji goes into considerable detail and explains that sensations do not disappear. As for 'new usage', Goenkaji has been describing bhanga-nana since I have been involved in 1985. And before that, I have a transcript and audio file of U Ba Khin saying much the same thing in 1969. And before that, we can look at the writings of Ledi Sayadaw, so its been around for awhile.rowyourboat wrote:'Bhangha' is another term- possibly with new usage with the tradition. It is said to denote a point where all body sensations disappear.That is not correct either. One apprehends bhangha from practicing vipassana. Within this tradition, vipassana is not practiced only after the attainment of jhana. It would be the exception rather than the rule that practitioners within this tradition experience bhanga from the basis of jhana. Bhanga and jhana are two very different states.Oleksandr wrote: Hi rowyourboat, I have also came to conclusion that "bhanga" in Goenka's tradition is most probably is a (near-)jhana state.
kind regards
Ben
Cultivating the conditions that give rise to insight is possible.Brizzy wrote:
Is "practicing" vipassana possible?
What is your opinion of this Brizzy? And how did you come you your conclusions?Brizzy wrote: Is "practicing" vipassana possible?
Refer to tiltbillings post. A meditation technique/ritual/bodyscan that one decides to label "vipassana" is a misnomer.cooran wrote:What is your opinion of this Brizzy? And how did you come you your conclusions?Brizzy wrote: Is "practicing" vipassana possible?
with metta
Chris
It is just one of those things like "taking" refuge or "enlightenment."Brizzy wrote:]
Refer to tiltbillings post. A meditation technique/ritual/bodyscan that one decides to label "vipassana" is a misnomer.
I do not understand.tiltbillings wrote:It is just one of those things like "taking" refuge or "enlightenment."Brizzy wrote:]
Refer to tiltbillings post. A meditation technique/ritual/bodyscan that one decides to label "vipassana" is a misnomer.
One does not "take" refuge; the Pali is gacchami, I go for refuge. Bodhi is awakening, not enlightenment. Calling the practice "vipassana" because it cultivates those things that leads to vipassana is just one of those things. It is no big deal.Brizzy wrote:I do not understand.tiltbillings wrote:It is just one of those things like "taking" refuge or "enlightenment."Brizzy wrote:]
Refer to tiltbillings post. A meditation technique/ritual/bodyscan that one decides to label "vipassana" is a misnomer.