Because it seems to me that some of the discussion here heads in quite a different direction to the point of the noting method (or any "vipassana" method, such as what Goenka teaches), which is to get one focussed continuously on whatever is arising in the present.ancientbuddhism wrote: The main point that I have taken from this system is to train awareness to be present with what is arising – changing – falling. The satipaṭṭhāna refers to direct knowledge (pajānāti) of these conditions, so consider the Mahasi method as a tool box method to develop this.
What one sees arising is things like "pain", "lifting", "hard". The actual experiences. Those experiences do, of course, have characteristics such as anicca, and can be analysed in terms of various satipatthanas, but if one is sitting there thinking "oh I'm seeing the anicca in my breath", that's just mental proliferation, not actual paying attention to experience.
U Vivekananda http://dharmaseed.org/teacher/186/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; http://www.panditarama-lumbini.info/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; a student of U Pandita, often emphasises that when students come to him to report experiences he does not want such proliferation, or any Pali terminology. He wants to know what the experienced. What did they feel when they lifted their foot?
The noting is not a story, it's a focussing technique. And the continuous focus is the goal, not the particular trick used to get focussed.
Mike