vipassana craziness

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Mike,

Well, yes, but of course that's what everyone teaches, isn't it?

Well I don't know - I don't recall anyone else saying it, but then, I've not explored what everyone teaches... hence the question.

Thanks.

Metta,
Retro.

[mikenz66]

Well, yes, but of course that's what everyone teaches, isn't it?

Well I don't know - I don't recall anyone else saying it, but then, I've not explored what everyone teaches... hence the question.

I've no idea which teachers you have talked to, read, or listened to who don't spend time discussing the development of right view, so I'm rather puzzled what you might be referring to.


Mike

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Mike,

I've no idea which teachers you have talked to, read, or listened to who don't spend time discussing the development of right view, so I'm rather puzzled what you might be referring to.

I'm not talking so much about whether they promote right view or not... I was asking whether they teach this particular dynamic (or technique if you prefer)...

"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view." (MN 117)

Metta,
Retro.

[tiltbillings]

"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view." (MN 117)

That is characteristic of all the vipassana teachers I have worked with.

[mikenz66]

"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view." (MN 117)

That is characteristic of all the vipassana teachers I have worked with.

To me it seems obvious that anyone worth listening teaches that. So I can't understand why the question would arise in the first place. Of course, I can't guarantee that every teacher would say those exact words, but in my experience it's a common theme.


Mike

[Mr Man]

Hi Mike
Well I was puzzled because I couldn't find any criticisms of Goenka in the thread. I certainly have questions - It seems that discussion is taboo though. That doesn't seem to be the case with other teachers/schools or not to the same degree anyway.

Sorry, I thought this was a "criticism":
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 91#p220129

the Goenka practice is certainly inline with what the Buddha taught.

It is presented within the context of what the Buddha taught but the "technique" and format? The Goenka practice is not main stream Theravada.

I think it's quite valid to ask such questions, but you'd have to explain what is different between what Goenka is teaching and what you would advise otherwise for me to take them seriously.

As I said to Retro, there are a range of ways to structure practice (some not particularly structured), all of which, as far as I can understand, are equally compatible with the Suttas. If you think that certain teachers are teaching approaches incompatible with the suttas you'd have to be specific about the details.


Mike

Hi Mike, I don't think it is my position to advocate a specific technique or path of practice and to some extent I don't think a specific technique is needed. We can adjust our practice to suit the situation and to what we are trying to achieve (I don't mean pick and choose or do what we like). I think the power of our practice should not be in a specific technique but more in a mindset or foundation, which we build.

With the Goenka practice we can't take just the "sweeping technique" and say this is Vipassana meditation as handed down from the Buddha we have to take the whole package to understand what is happening. I don't think there is somthing fundamentally wrong with the technique, it might be a good and useful we just need to keep it in perspective and see it for what it is, which is an exercise in concentration/awareness. We also need to look at the package that it is presented in - you must comit to this paractice only.

Ajahn Sumedho talks about the sound of silence. He recommends it as a tool to allow our minds to calm down as a resting point. Some people say that this is the primordial sound, some say is the sound of the blood moving within the body or tinnitus but it really doesn't matter. Ajahn Sumedho is not adding to much to the "technique", accept for the poetic name, He is not saying or implying that the technique is acting as an agent. He is just using it in a skillful way.

[tiltbillings]

He is not saying or implying that the technique is acting as an agent. He is just using it in a skillful way.

Sounds like Goenka.

[Mr Man]

He is not saying or implying that the technique is acting as an agent. He is just using it in a skillful way.

Sounds like Goenka.

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

[tiltbillings]

He is not saying or implying that the technique is acting as an agent. He is just using it in a skillful way.

Sounds like Goenka.

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

And what does that mean?

[Mr Man]

Tilt another difference with the way that Goenka teaches is to implement it you need to comfit to the whole Goenka package.

[tiltbillings]

Tilt another difference with the way that Goenka teaches is to implement it you need to comfit to the whole Goenka package.

comfit - candy containing a fruit or nut

That is interesting. I never that before.

[Mr Man]

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

And what does that mean?

I'm off out now so I will come back to you but what does it mean to you?

[tiltbillings]

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

And what does that mean?

I'm off out now so I will come back to you but what does it mean to you?

I'll wait till you get back.

[Mr Man]

comfit = commit

[tiltbillings]

Tilt another difference with the way that Goenka teaches is to implement it you need to comfit to the whole Goenka package.

While you are on retreat, that certainly makes sense, but I have known committed students of Goenka who have worked with other teachers and methods. What is your complaint here? You seem to want to find something wrong with the Goenka practice.

[Mr Man]

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

And what does that mean?

I think it is fairly self-explanatory.

Tilt another difference with the way that Goenka teaches is to implement it you need to comfit to the whole Goenka package.

While you are on retreat, that certainly makes sense, but I have known committed students of Goenka who have worked with other teachers and methods. What is your complaint here?

It goes beyond the retreat.

You seem to want to find something wrong with the Goenka practice.

No I don't want to find something wrong with the Goenka practice. There are aspects that are worthy of discussion though.

[daverupa]

I would suggest that you don't have to do the above in any methodological manner. In my case, I know what the frames of reference are, care of the Satipatthana Sutta, and I apply and use them as I see fit at any given moment.

That which you see fit is the method, the technique.

I think you're objecting to claims of "the right technique" or "the only technique" or "one technique fits all", as opposed to techniques themselves. Do I misunderstand?

[tiltbillings]

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

And what does that mean?

I think it is fairly self-explanatory.

Explain it, please.

Tilt another difference with the way that Goenka teaches is to implement it you need to comfit to the whole Goenka package.

While you are on retreat, that certainly makes sense, but I have known committed students of Goenka who have worked with other teachers and methods. What is your complaint here?

It goes beyond the retreat.

And I have yet to see anyone who has done some other practice on their own time being barred from doing a Goenka retreat.

You seem to want to find something wrong with the Goenka practice.

No I don't want to find something wrong with the Goenka practice. There are aspects that are worthy of discussion though.

Still looks like you are fault finding.

[tiltbillings]

From the OP "proof that Anapanna was doing its work and bringing the gross level impurities to the surface".

And what does that mean?

I think it is fairly self-explanatory.

Interestingly enough, meditation is an agent of change. We don't do the practice (whatever technique we opt to use) to stay the same. We do it because we want change -- we are not satisified with how we are -- and because meditation is the catalyst, a change agent, it is what promotes changes, hopefully the changes we want. One of the interesting things to be observed here on DW is the focus on jhana. It is an obvious and dramatic experiential process indicative of change that people really, really want for any number of reasons. In a retreat, particularly one that is challenging, as one becomes quiet, stuff is naturally going to come up, which is, depending upon the type of retreat, not necessarily a bad thing at all. So, what is the problem you are having here?

[Mr Man]

Tilt, Anapanna is not bringing the gross level impurities to the surface. I think that that is a misrepresentation of what is happening.