Yes, and it stays around after that. Again vipassana is not the same thing as vitakka-vicara. Just as the piti-sukha in second has removed the support struts of vitakka-vicara for its sustenance and is dependent on samadhi, so too with vipassana.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sat May 08, 2021 12:29 pm That requires paṭisañcikkhati:
Idhānanda, bhikkhu araññagato vā rukkhamūlagato vā suññāgāragato vā iti paṭisañcikkhati: ‘etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhippaṭinissaggo taṇhākkhayo nirodho nibbānan’ti.
It’s when a mendicant has gone to a wilderness, or to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut, and reflects like this: ‘This is peaceful; this is sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all attachments, the ending of craving, cessation, extinguishment.’
Again, the suttas define vipassana as something else entirely from what the vsm does.
What is often called vipassana is in fact the process of giving rise to vipassana rather than the vipassana itself. Does that make sense?