Vipassana movement

[helloworld]

Hello everyone, ive spent alot of time researching into buddhism to gain knowledge on meditation. I figured this was the correct place opposed to forums like reddit.
Ive been trying to find information on the whole thing of meditation and its correlation with concentration and bare-insight. As ive understood it, meditation has originally been a practice done with one pointed concentration and that the vipassana movement is a more modern approach which has understood it wrong, as a practice not requiring one pointed concentration but just awareness of the senses.
Am I wrong, am I right? Please enlighten me

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

The approach of working directly for insight, without developing the absorptions is not a new method. The Buddha taught different individuals in different ways according to their abilities.

Those like Mālukyaputta who ordained while already advanced in years, and Bāhiya Dāruciriya who was the quickest among all of the Buddha's disciples to gain Arahantship, practised the method of bare attention, leading to insight.

Venerable Nyānaponoka, in his book "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation," remarked that these days most people do not have months or years to dedicate to cultivating the absorptions, therefore they should strive to develop insight in what little time they have for meditation.

The modern vipassanā movement, is an intensive course of meditation designed for lay-people, who have little free time, and are unable to renounce worldly affairs completely. Ledi Sayādaw, Mahāsi Sayādaw, Chanmyay Sayādaw, and others taught insight meditation in a way that lay people could practise to gain insight in the shortest possible time.

[DNS]

It's not a one-size-fits-all; one meditation technique for everyone, as Bhante noted above. There are different ways for various temperaments and personalities.

The Four Foundations of Mindfulness includes meditation on the breath, mind, sensations, mind-objects (Dhamma). So if some prefer the mindfulness of sensations as their core practice; that is fine.

[SarathW]

Meditation is practiced on many levels from gross to subtle.
It is important to note that there is right and wrong meditation as well.

[mjaviem]

At Savatthī. “Bhikkhus, I will teach you noble right concentration with its supports and its accessories. Listen to that….

“And what, bhikkhus, is noble right concentration with its supports and its accessories? There are: right view … right mindfulness. The one-pointedness of mind equipped with these seven factors is called noble right concentration ‘with its supports,’ and also ‘with its accessories.’”

[TRobinson465]

Im not sure if they think meditation is vipassana only, I thought it was more they believe in a bare minimum of samatha and then put emphasis on vipassana. I have also heard (anecdotal) that some vipassana groups think vipassana meditation is the way the Buddha enlightened (partially right) adn that samatha is just non-Buddhist meditation like was done by the Buddha's masters cannot lead to enlightenment. This later part is definitely wrong as both samatha and vipassana are Buddhist meditation and both are needed to enlighten.

Even if it is the far more benign former case where they just advocate dry insight, i personally think the vipassana movement is wrong to emphasis this as opposed to both samatha and vipassana as is traditionally done. According to Ajahn Lee (pg 94-95) doing vipassana with minimal samatha can lead to enlightenment through dry insight, but people enlightened this way will lack many useful psychic abilities people who enlighten with a balance of samatha and vipassana have. Granted this makes no difference to the person upon reaching nibbana, i just think its kinda a waste. Like somebody becoming an arahant and then dying the next day. Doesnt make a difference for them but kinda a waste for everyone else who could have benefited from his/her longer existence.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/lee/craft.pdf