Vipassanā Technique Revisited

On the cultivation of insight/wisdom
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Vipassanā Technique Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

In yesterday's Zoom conversation between myself, Robertk, Sam Vara, and MikeNZ66, we were discussing different meanings and approaches to vipassana and clear seeing. In relation to this conversation, Robertk has noted that... "Retro lucidly explained how the very act of trying to be aware of one of the khandhas gives rise to possible distortion. I would like to hear all that again."

So in lieu of saying it all again, I'm actually going to dig into the archives and share with you all part of an unpublished manuscript that I wrote about 5 or 6 years ago on the subject of mindfulness and vipassana. I suspect that my thinking on this subject may have evolved a little since I originally wrote it, incorporating certain themes from the writings of Bhikkhu Akincano, further readings of Ven. Nanananda et.al., but for the most part it should at least fit the brief of explaining in detail what was explained on Zoom, in brief.

Over the following posts I will share extracts from the manuscript. Feel free to comment, challenge, ask questions etc. as you see fit.

:reading: :meditate: :reading:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Building Knowledge through Mindfulness Techniques

For decades, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) techniques have promoted mindfulness of behaviour and helped people to cultivate the skill of emotional regulation and non-reactivity in the face of challenging situations. By consciously challenging maladaptive thinking before it triggers undesirable speech and actions (much like the popular injunction to count to ten before acting), it allows an individual who is trained in such techniques to improve their mindfulness of thought and behaviour. By doing so, they come to rely less on habitual responses to such situations, and more on conscious deliberate choice. Seeing the gap that exists between a triggered response and a conscious response, individuals come to progressively learn and gain confidence that their responses can indeed be a conscious choice, and that a conscious choice is invariably better in terms of outcomes than an emotionally triggered response. Previous thought patterns can be modified, if there is the awareness and will to do so. Through lived experience, this positive cycle of confidence and reinforcement helps individuals progressively break free from emotionally and self-destructive habits that people may have accumulated in the past.

A similar lesson can learned by the Vipassana practitioner cultivating bare awareness. Nyanaponika explains that, “by bare attention we understand the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens to us and in us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called "bare" because it attends to the bare facts of a perception without reacting to them by deed, speech or mental comment. Ordinarily, that purely receptive state of mind is, as we said, just a very brief phase of the thought process of which one is often scarcely aware. But in the methodical development of mindfulness aimed at the unfolding of its latent powers, bare attention is sustained for as long a time as one's strength of concentration permits.”

However, Vipassana can teach us far more than simply learning to be non-reactive in the face of unpleasantness. A key benefit of Vipassana practice is the ability to generate direct insight into the three common characteristics that are true of all conditioned phenomena. The primary characteristic that is observed most directly through such techniques is that of impermanence. Impermanence is discerned experientially through the rising and falling of aspects of the present moment experience. Life is never like a DVD stuck on pause, nor can it be, even if we would like it to be so. Rather, life is always flowing, ever-changing and evanescent, possessing no stable basis upon which any experience can be said to be constant. As such, all phenomena are unsatisfactory because they cannot be relied upon as a solid basis for lasting happiness. Literally, as we have surely heard by now, all good things do indeed come to an end, and Vipassana practice goes to demonstrate that this first-hand. Such realisations help the practitioner to see for themselves that if there is no solid basis underpinning anything that is experienced, then there is also nothing worth clinging to and that anything experienced by the practitioner cannot truly be said in any way to be a “self” or a “soul”. Regarding all aspects of experience henceforth as not-self, not-I, and not mine, disinterest and detachment with all conditioned phenomena arises naturally, and the practitioner learns to release themselves from all forms of identification and suffering.

Or at least, that is the standard pitch. In theory, and on paper, it is fully aligned with the Buddha’s doctrine and there are more than likely Vipassana practitioners over the last two centuries who have realised this goal for themselves and fully abandoned suffering. Yet, there are a great many dedicated Vipassana practitioners, monks and lay practitioners alike, who still haven’t found what they are looking for. Some, like Vimalaramsi will abandon Vipassana techniques entirely and revert to direct guidance from the discourses, but it cannot be expected that everyone will elect to follow in his footsteps. Most practitioners however, do speak very highly of the benefits of Vipassana so the techniques they employ must deliver certain benefits. But how much of these benefits are due to improved non-reactivity, how much is from simply taking some time out from their busy lives to focus internally, and how much is attributable to genuine insight into the three characteristics of experience? These questions are very difficult to answer, but perhaps if we take the time to examine the techniques employed in more detail, some clues might be found.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

The Mechanics of Vipassana Techniques

Doubtlessly, the best way to learn about the mechanics of Vipassana techniques is to dive in and experience the instructions for oneself in a retreat setting. I do not propose to be an expert or teacher in either method, and to that end, if the reader truly wishes to understand precisely how these techniques operate, I strongly recommend the reader go directly to the sources in question and conduct their own investigation.

The standard Goenka introductory course is taught in the context of a ten day silent retreat and there are retreat centres across the globe, all indexed at the primary Goenka website - https://www.dhamma.org. On such a retreat, secluded from external distractions and any obligation to communicate with retreat participants or loved ones at home, the student is able to become increasingly immersed in the practice, as it is gradually exposed, piece-by-piece, step-by-step, by Goenka himself (through pre-recorded materials) and guidance from the assistant teacher in residence. Because it is felt that this is the best environment in which to learn the method, it is difficult for the casually interested reader to source definitive materials pertaining to the technique itself. For those unwilling or unable to commit ten full days to such an endeavour, perhaps the best and most easily sourced introduction to this method would be “The Art of Living: Vipassana Meditation as Taught by S.N. Goenka” by William Hart, supported by the introductory materials available on the Goenka website.

Mahasi-based retreats vary more in terms of their duration, format and setting, and despite being organisationally more dispersed, they still consistently involve adherence to the key principles of the Mahasi mode of instruction. For more information direct from the tradition itself, it is difficult to go past Nyanaponika's aforementioned classic “The Heart of Buddhist Meditation”, but readers might also find interest in U Pandita’s “In This Very Life” and Mahasi’s own “Practical Insight Meditation: Basic and Progressive Stages”.

The Path of Purification, the treatise from which both methods find their genesis, is a slow and difficult read comprising over 900 pages of dense and technicality-complex information, extrapolation and interpretation. For those unwilling to make such an investment of time and headspace in order to trawl through this epic text, U Dhammaratana’s 100 page “Guide Through the Visuddhimagga” may be a worthwhile substitute, but not having read the guide, I cannot vouch for it personally.

Interestingly, because of the recent history of the Theravada tradition, it is actually quite difficult for the earnest “Early Buddhism” practitioner to find meditation retreats they can attend that are based on the discourses themselves, rather than the established Burmese Vipassana methods rooted in The Path of Purification. Until a few centuries ago, the earnest cultivation of meditation was something of a lost art in Theravada circles, and if it took some time for the Path Of Purification-inspired techniques to proliferate, then it will reasonably take some time for meditation and mindfulness courses based on the original discourses to become more prominent too.

With all necessary caveats disclosed and in place, we can now take a deeper look at some of the components of the techniques themselves. In the following sections, we will examine a few key elements of the Burmese Vipassana techniques, under a few key classifications that align with the Pali terminology of the original discourses. I apologise in advance for any unintentional misrepresentations of the techniques that may follow. If the reader has doubt about anything that is said, I suggest reaching out to teachers and practitioners of the methods in question in order to address any concerns.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Attention in Vipassana

Known in the Pali language as manasikara, attention is the conscious intentional act of placing one’s attention in a particular direction, towards a particular object. Its etymological roots show that ‘manasi’ means ‘in the mind’, and ‘kāra’ means ‘doing’.

On Goenka retreats, attention is initially placed at a single point near the nostrils, where the breath is observed as it passes by, but it is neither followed as it enters the body, nor as it leaves. This single-pointedness of attention serves to calm and still the mind, subduing its habitual tendency to wander from thought to thought. The Buddha likened such a tendency to that of a monkey swinging from branch to branch – hence the well-known Buddhist expression “monkey mind”. With the mind now calmed from three days of preparatory work, the technique proper commences with retreat participants asked to slowly, progressively and systematically sweep through their physical body, mindful of any feelings which are present. Attention repeatedly follows a pre-defined course throughout the body, until the technique is relaxed towards the end of the retreat in order to allow participants to gradually acclimatise to life in the outside world.

In contrast, the Mahasi technique places attention on what is known as the “primary object”. The chosen object for attention here is the breath, but rather than focusing on the nostrils, the Mahasi technique sees retreat participants focus on the abdomen and place attention on the rising and falling of the abdomen that occurs naturally with each passing breath. In recognition of the tendency for the mind to become distracted and place attention on other phenomena, potential distractions are integrated into the method as “secondary objects”. As with the “primary object”, the intention here is to mindfully observe the rising and falling of the chosen object. Once the “secondary object” is no longer presenting itself as a distraction, the meditator returns attention once more to the primary object. Bhikkhu Pesala prefers to Mahasi technique over Goenka’s one, in part for its ability to accommodate these additional objects of distraction themselves. “Goenka's method is fine in a protected retreat environment, but hard to maintain and develop in daily life. It seems that many meditators struggle with this conflict, unable to practice effectively outside the confines of the meditation centre.”

The common feature of both techniques noted here is that they each involve constant, deliberate and mindful attention of a volitionally chosen object.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Contact and Feeling in Vipassana

In Pali, contact and feeling are represented by the terms phassa and vedana respectively.

In the Goenka method, physical sensations are the fulcrum upon which the relationship between mind and body comes to be understood. As Goenka stated, “any thoughts or emotions, any mental impurities that arise manifest themselves in the breath and the sensations of that moment. Thus, by observing the respiration or the sensations, we are in fact observing mental impurities. Instead of running away from the problem, we are facing reality as it is. As a result, we discover that these impurities lose their strength; they no longer overpower us as they did in the past.” The feelings which arise therefore, are understood to be a combination of the mental state of the individual, the location upon which one’s attention is sweeping, and past conditioning. Deviating somewhat from the Buddha’s discourses in favour of the Jainist principle of wearing out past karma (nijjarā), Goenka suggested that a non-reactive response to these arising sensations is an act of purification in and of itself. “The observation of the physical sensations without reaction during Vipassana meditation produces a remarkable effect. It causes the old stored-up past conditionings such as anger, hatred, ill-will, passion, etc. to come to the surface of the mind and manifest as sensations. Observation of these sensations without any reaction causes them to pass away, layer after layer. Your mind is then free of many of these old conditionings and can deal with experiences in the life without the colour of past experiences.”

Mahasi’s approach to physical sensations involved consciously noting what is observed. He explained that “because of sitting for a long time, there will arise in the body unpleasant feeling of being stiff, being hot and so forth. These sensations should be noted as they occur. The mind should be fixed on that spot and a note made as "stiff, stiff" on feeling stiff, as "hot, hot" on feeling hot, as "painful, painful" on feeling painful, as "prickly, prickly" on feeling prickly sensations, and as "tired, tired" on feeling tired.” The emphasis here is on avoiding “the wrong view of holding them as one's own personality or self, that is to say, "I am feeling stiff," "I am feeling painful," "I was feeling well formerly but I now feel uncomfortable," in the manner of a single self. In reality, unpleasant feelings arise owing to disagreeable impressions in the body. Like the light of an electric bulb which can continue to burn on a continuous supply of energy, so it is in the case of feelings, which arise anew on every occasion of coming in contact with disagreeable impressions.”

Nyanaponika explains that, “Further progress, however, will require persistence in the mindful observations of the arising and passing away of every instant of feeling whenever it occurs. This will lead to a deepening experience of impermanence, being one of the main gates to final liberation. When, in Vipassana Meditation, the vanishing moment of feelings becomes more strongly marked, the impermanent nature of the feelings will impress itself very deeply on the meditator's mind.”

Contact in both traditions is understood quite simply in line with the commentarial take on phassa, summarised by Nagasena when responding to the questions of King Milinda... "Just as if, your majesty, two cymbals are striking together, one of these cymbals is to be understood as the eye, and the other as a visual object, and the coming together of the two of them is contact." Likewise with the other sense bases and their respective objects.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Perception in Vipassana

Continuing with Nagasena for the time being, in relation to perception (saññā) he said, "the distinguishing characteristic of perception, your majesty, is perceiving. What does one perceive? One perceives blue, yellow, red, white, and crimson. Thus, your majesty, the distinguishing characteristic of perception is perceiving."

In the Mahasi tradition, perceptions become manifest through the intentional noting or labelling of what is presently perceived. U Pandita explains the act and function of noting as follows, “In making the verbal label, there is no need for complex language. One simple word is best. For the eye, ear, and tongue doors we simply say, “Seeing, seeing... Hearing, hearing... Tasting, tasting.” For sensations in the body we may choose a slightly more descriptive term like warmth, pressure, hardness, or motion. Mental objects appear to present a bewildering diversity, but actually they fall into just a few clear categories such as thinking, imagining, remembering, planning, and visualizing. But remember that in using the labelling technique, your goal is not to gain verbal skills. Labelling technique helps us to perceive clearly the actual qualities of our experience, without getting immersed in the content.”

In both methods, what is to be perceived is not the “content” per se, but the qualities of the perception themselves. Namely, that they are impermanent, and by virtue of being impermanent, they are neither an aspect of fixed self, nor are they to be perceived as satisfactory. As Mahasi said, “As he observes this ceaseless process of arising and vanishing, the yogi realizes the law of impermanence.”
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Volition in Vipassana

The Pali word for volition is cetana, and may be understood in English as an act of will or intention.

Regardless of method, each Vipassana technique under review (and perhaps the very notion of a technique itself) is characterised by the requirement that attention must be deliberately and volitionally placed on a certain object, as part of a sequential, pre-determined and systematic process being employed.

As noted, whilst the Goenka method strives to subdue volition to some extent by promoting non-reactivity, it is important to be aware that it is a consciously volitional act to propel the systematic body sweeping, and the repeated movement of attention as it is directed throughout all parts of the body. The speed, the direction and the movement of attention are all deliberate choices, which the meditator must manage for themselves as they simultaneously endeavour to observe the impermanent characteristics of the observed sensations.

Likewise, the Mahasi method requires simultaneity of volition and attention in order to be sustainable. The very acts of noting and labelling, as well as the regular choices of whether to place attention on either the primary and secondary object are examples of the active and volitional role that the meditator plays in creating and shaping their experiential reality in each and every moment.

Over the past decade I have asked practitioners of both techniques whether such acts of volition fall within the scope of their technique’s observation of the present moment. Does the technique observe the operation of the technique itself? Are the mechanics of the technique excluded from the field of observation? If they are excluded, what is the reason for that exclusion, given that the attention, volition and perceptions themselves are occurring in the present moment? Alas, despite repeated efforts I’ve never received what I considered to be a meaningful and satisfactory answer to these questions. Nor have I seen such a question answered in the written works of the teachers of either tradition. Should the reader wish to learn the answers to such questions, I apologise that I cannot help – and it seems that they will need to conduct their own enquiry into that matter. I wish them luck.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Observing the Observer

The aforementioned characteristics of the mechanics of each Vipassana technique itself – feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention - are collectively grouped together in the Buddha’s discourses together under the classification of nama, or name.

The discourses advise that “name” is a quality to be fully known and understood. This is not because name is something that is to be intentionally and systematically cultivated, but rather, because of the role that naming plays in creating an individual’s experiences. Of name, the Buddha says that, "name has conquered everything, there is nothing greater than name. All have gone under the sway of this one thing called name."

It seems that there is a very big risk here for the meditator that whilst under the sway of paying attention to all that can possibly be named, they have not taken the time to adequately reflect on the active process of naming itself. By looking at the impermanence of the named, we may have neglected to look at the impermanence of the naming, which is arguably more important if we wish to develop the penetrative wisdom that could one day enable the meditator to see through the false permanence of the namer. If the distinction between namer, naming and named is not acknowledged by the student, the potential for obtaining direct insight is greatly obstructed. This risk is highlighted by author Steven Harrison, who maintains that, "All the forms of meditation can give us glimpses of aspects of our world, but no technique will help us see the entirety. This is because the mind, the experiencer, is blind to itself. The experiencer, the core sense of self, divides the whole into aspects and is certain that the aspect is the whole."

Any act which inadvertently sustains a false bifurcation of experience between the observer and the observed, the watcher and the watched, is going to create a false duality which shields the observer half of the equation from proper scrutiny of its own impermanence. Steven Harrison continues highlighting that some, “practitioners buffer themselves from their lives by creating a watcher. This is the one who is aware of the mess that is going on all around. The watcher is not the body, but it is aware of the body. The watcher is not the mind. It is aware of the mind. It is not the thoughts, feelings, sensations. It is aware of all of these things. The watcher is a big trap in awareness meditation. The meditator has been trained to watch everything, except the watcher. The watcher cannot be watched. This is a paradox and a big, big problem if you are trying to get enlightened.”

To test these propositions, I invite readers to reflect inwardly for a few minutes on the question, “What am I?” I suggest that the search for an answer to this question is unlikely to lead the reader towards the breath, to the abdomen, or to one’s physical sensations. It is far more likely that such a deep and probing question is going to lead the inquirer into deeper waters, to the realms of volition, attention, thoughts, consciousness, and to the role that these qualities play in forming perceptions and feelings.

As Thanissaro Bhikkhu warns, “A meditation method that assumes a moment of pure receptivity and focuses attention primarily on distortions that the mind creates after that moment, pushes into the dark all the most important factors prior to contact that lead to stress.” Ninoslav Nanamoli provides the caveat that, “it is impossible to engage in a technique without the implicit belief that a set of motions, that the chosen technique consists of, performed in a particular mechanical order, will somehow, by itself, reveal the nature of things. By holding this belief and faith in a technique, one will not be trying to understand things, and by not making attempts toward the understanding, one will definitely remain devoid of it.”

It is here perhaps that we have come to chart the furthest limits of technique. On reflection, all along it has been the technique itself that has been creating those objects of which it was so invested in observing. The doing created the done, as the doer hid in the background watching on unchallenged, as its creations repeatedly spun into life, altered, and gradually passed away. It seems the technique has created busywork for itself, keeping itself self-employed. Possibly the mind can be employed in a more constructive manner in order to learn a little more about itself and break down this false division between self and other, subject and object, watcher and watched, observer and observed?

One clue on how to erode this division comes from the first line of the very first verse of the Buddha’s classic compendium The Dhammapada. It says that the “mind precedes all things. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought.” This is where everything starts - the mind creates all things. All these named things, each and every single thing or concept that we have ever conceived, perceived or experienced – our stories, our narratives, our lives, our history, our dramas - came to be by sheer virtue of the mind attending to, and shaping forms into things, into phenomena, into experience, into the present.

We see now how the mechanics of mindfulness techniques themselves, for all their widely acknowledged benefits, appear to have created for us a self-fulfilling mindfulness trap, of which there is no possible escape other than to dismantle and see beyond the mechanics of mindfulness techniques themselves. In doing so, we may come to learn how things are created by the mind, and through doing so, learn how to stop the process of creating “things” in the first place. When the mind better understands its role in creating things, wisdom can be applied to create positive and productive things, or to learn how not to create things at all. In fact, the need to halt the incessant flow of mind-made objects was regularly taught to us by the Buddha in one of his deepest and most frequently misunderstood teachings called “dependent origination” (paticcasamuppada), in which he said that fabricated things are spawned from ignorance, and will only cease once and for all when ignorance itself comes to an end.

Therefore, in the coming sections we will look at how the integral qualities of mindfulness can be preserved and enhanced in a whole new way, totally devoid of pre-defined techniques, with the goal of reducing ignorance and giving rise to wisdom. In doing so, we will try to find a pathway within the Buddha’s discourses that transcends the requirement for us to clog up present moment experience with the machinery of name – ultimately transcending the machinery of mindfulness techniques themselves.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

The Inner Workings of Attention

By teaching that “with the arising of attention is the arising of objects, and with the ceasing of attention is the going down of objects" , the Buddha espoused a mode of phenomenology that radically challenges the conventional worldly way of understanding and relating to objects.

The word phenomenology is derived from the Greek words phainómenon ("that which appears") and lógos ("study"). As such, it is the study of what appears subjectively to the consciousness of an individual, within the internal world of their experience. The phenomenological approach of the Buddha can be juxtaposed most clearly against the philosophy of naïve realism, which holds that objects are objectively real, independently of whether or not they are being observed.

To illustrate the distinction, imagine that you are standing in a location where you can see either a building or a tree. Wherever you cast your attention will determine what arises for you. If you attend to the tree, a tree will arise. If you were to then move attention to the building, from the perspective of your present moment experience, the tree will cease and the building will arise. Hence, “with the arising of attention is the arising of objects, and with the ceasing of attention is the going down of objects". What is being shown here is a mode of viewing and relating to the world, which enhances our understanding of the role we each play in constructing our own present moment experience.

It is important to understand that this mode of viewing does not involve making any ontological determinations about whether trees or buildings objectively exist (i.e. realism) or do not exist (i.e. idealism). The Buddha was quite insistent that implicit or explicit views pertaining to existence and non-existence should be deliberately set aside and released, lest they interfere with this correct mode of present-moment attention. The importance of this correct mode of viewing is detailed in the following discourse…

“Venerable Kaccayana Gotta approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?"

"By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (i.e. takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.

"By and large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.

"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle.”

What the Buddha has done here, completely re-orientes how we typically view “the world”. Rather than taking it to be the Earth and its material contents, “the world” depicted here in the discourses is an internal world of subjective experience, comprising the realms of the five senses and the mind. For all the speculation that could be had debating the merits of external existence or non-existence all that can actually be known is that which is sensed by the individual…

"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye and forms, ear and sounds, nose and aromas, tongue and flavours, body and tactile sensations, intellect and ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."

Nanananda clarifies the role of attention in manufacturing experience by explaining that “we see because we look. We hear because we listen. It is not the other way around”, and this advice certainly holds true in relation to our example of the tree and the building. In his discourses, the Buddha taught that “all things are rooted in interest, they originate with attention” , thereby showing us that the things we experience come to be through a conscious choice, rooted in interest, to shift attention to particular forms.

As Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains, “This is why what may appear to be a simple act of attention is anything but simple, and anything but bare. It’s shaped, consciously or not, by views and the intentional actions informed by those views. If those views are ignorant, the act of attention is conditioned to be inappropriate: applied to the wrong things, in the wrong framework, and for the wrong reasons, aggravating the problem of stress and suffering rather than alleviating it.”

A fuller understanding of mindfulness therefore includes awareness of the role that attention is playing in the creation of present moment experience. Through mindful observation of attention, and the way it is dragged around by interest and craving, we see how the present experience is concocted. The following lines of inquiry may be followed, if you wish to develop your own experiential understanding of what has been explained above.

Mindfulness of attention – developing insight and wisdom through direct observation

• What determines where attention is placed?
• What happens when we choose to fix attention on a specific object?
• Can attention be placed in multiple directions simultaneously?
• How does the mind feel when the factors that drive attention are calmed?
• Can we sustain the phenomenological mode of viewing that is independent of the polarity of existence and non-existence?
• Does viewing experience in this way change the way we relate to objects?
• What role do we play in the arising of things?
• What role do we play in the ceasing of things?
• Can we skilfully manage attention in order to prevent the fabrication of things?
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

The Inner Workings of Perception

Through seeing experiences via the phenomenological lens of understanding, it will gradually become more natural for us to see that what we are seeing is not in fact a thing “out there”, but rather, it is whatever we have perceived as a result of the activity of the mind – driven initially by attention and interest. Venturing even deeper into the arising of “a tree”, we can logically determine that there must be some point in the cognitive process through which the image comes to be labelled as “a tree”, in order for it to be known as such by the individual.

By way of illustration, consider here the example of a baby who is placed underneath the tree. When the baby is looking at the tree, they will not see “a tree” and think of it as “a tree”. Rather, they will see different colours, shades, patterns and textures. It is not until the baby is taught by people around them that these combinations constitute “a tree” that they will come to perceive such sights as “a tree”. As the conceptual world of the youngster evolves, new concepts like bushes, shrubs, weeds and flowers, each with their own biologically differentiable varieties, will flower into an ever-expanding garden of conceptual and linguistically-based terms for classifying and relating to that which has appeared in the realm of experience.

In fact, the tree only gets to be known as “a tree” once we actively perceive it as such with the mind. Acknowledging the active nature of perception, we see the vital role that concepts, language and perception play in the naming and experiencing of all things. In one of the discourses, the Buddha encouraged people with this higher knowledge of what constitutes an object, to refrain from conceptualizing such objects, in order to give rise to enhanced knowledge and wisdom. Many examples of potential objects are given in the discourse, but let us take the example of “earth” in order to demonstrate the principle at hand.

“He understands through higher knowledge earth as earth. Having known through higher knowledge earth as earth, let him not imagine ‘earth’ as such, let him not imagine ‘on the earth’, let him not imagine ‘from the earth’, let him not imagine ‘earth is mine’, let him not delight in earth. Why is that? I say it is because it should be well comprehended by him.”

Speaking in relation to himself, the Buddha shares his experience of mindful perception as follows…

Thus, monks, a Tathāgata does not conceive of a visible thing as apart from sight; he does not conceive of an unseen; he does not conceive of a 'thing-worth-seeing'; he does not conceive about a seer.

He does not conceive of an audible thing as apart from hearing; he does not conceive of an unheard; he does not conceive of a 'thing-worth-hearing'; he does not conceive about a hearer.

He does not conceive of a thing to be sensed as apart from sensation; he does not conceive of an unsensed; he does not conceive of a 'thing-worth-sensing'; he does not conceive about one who senses.

He does not conceive of a cognizable thing as apart from cognition; he does not conceive of an uncognized; he does not conceive of a 'thing-worth-cognizing'; he does not conceive about one who cognizes."

Just as attention could be calmed by reducing the frequency with which attention is moved, similarly, perceptions can be calmed by reducing the movement of perception. Or to put this another way, perceptions can be calmed by reducing the amount of conceptualisation and mental proliferation involved in the observation of our experiences. In a very profound discourse given by the Buddha to an ascetic named Bāhiya, the Buddha explained how this mode of observation works in practice.

"In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. "

If the above practices is followed, some interesting and invaluable observations about the nature of human cognition can be cultivated.

By viewing our present moment experience as instructed in the above discourses, we come to see that objects become objects only when we mentally perceive and segregate a part that becomes distinct from the whole. This artificially constructed part is then granted “object” status, and comes to be divorced and differentiated from “the seen”. If however we held true to the Buddha’s instructions to Bāhiya by seeing only the seen, then there would have been no differentiable thing or object discerned apart from the broader field of vision.

The mode of observation taught to Bāhiya has significant implications for how we understand and enhance our understanding of impermanence. This understanding of impermanence should be of crucial importance to anyone whose meditation practice focuses on observing impermanence.

A fuller understanding of mindfulness therefore includes awareness of the role that perception is playing in the creation of present moment experience. Through mindful observation of perception, and the way it is inextricably linked to concepts and language, we see how the present experience is concocted. The following lines of inquiry may be followed, if you wish to develop your own experiential understanding of what has been explained above.

Mindfulness of perception – developing insight and wisdom through direct observation

• Practice perceiving in accordance with the Buddha’s instructions noted in this section.
• What impulses and habits cause the naming of forms, in spite of these instructions?
• Look at a tree – perceive it broadly as a tree. Now perceive more narrowly it as a trunk, branches and foliage. Now perceive it even more narrowly, as leaves, bark and twigs? Throughout this activity, observe the role that the mind plays in framing the object.
• Go for a walk. As you walk, be mindful of whenever a form is named, and be aware that by naming the object, it has been mentally segregated from the broader field of vision. Similarly with sounds, smells and other objects of the senses.
• In the absence of mind-made objects, what if anything, can be said to arise?
• In the absence of mind-made objects, what if anything, can be said to cease?
• In the absence of mind-made objects, what if anything, can be said to be impermanent?
• Is it possible to get distressed about “only the seen”, “only the heard” etc.?
• Is it possible to get distressed about non-arisen, non-things?
• Can anyone else possibly have the same perceptions as you? What would that involve?
• Whilst observing your experience, consider this question put by the Buddha to one of his disciples… "If, Ānanda, consciousness were not to find a footing, or get established in name-and-form, would there be an arising or origin of birth, decay, death and suffering in the future?"
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

The Inner Workings of Contact and Feeling

In contrast to Nagasena’s simplistic simile of the clanging cymbals, the Buddha gave a slightly more nuanced and subtle take on what contact means, and how it relates to feeling. In the discourses, he explains that,

"Dependent on the eye and forms arises eye consciousness; the coming together of the three is contact; with contact as condition, arises feeling”

Eye and forms are easy enough to understand, but why is it that eye-consciousness is regarded as something present over and above eye and forms themselves? Nanananda explains here that, “eye-consciousness is the very discrimination between eye and form. At whatever moment the eye is distinguished as the internal sphere and form is distinguished as the external sphere, it is then that eye-consciousness arises.” The matter of contact then appears to relate closely to the issue of bifurcation between subject and object that we discussed earlier when warning about the falsity of “the observer” or “the watcher”. Contact rises not simply from there being eyes and forms, but from the mental differentiation of the two, and the establishment of a subject-object relationship.

Nanavira follows that so long as there is ignorance, all things are fundamentally regarded as being “in subjection, they are appropriated, they are mine. This is the foundation of the notion that I am and that things are in contact with me. This contact between me and things is contact.”

In order to make this subtle distinction apparent to Bāhiya, and to make clear how the sense of self comes to be constructed as part of this mental process, the Buddha continued his earlier instructions by saying that…

“When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no “you” in connection with that. When there is no “you” in connection with that, there is no “you” there. When there is no “you” there, “you” are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

As for feeling, the Buddha’s take of the subject was also more sophisticated than mere sensory impingement. He explained that…

“Three feelings have been spoken of by me: pleasant feeling, painful feeling, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.” . They are, “impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, subject to vanishing, subject to fading away, subject to cessation.”

We can see now in relation to the above teachings why feeling arises with contact as its condition. Without the separation of the subject from the object, there would be no object to feel, nor would there be a subject to discriminate and cast judgement upon how it feels about the arisen object in question. We see then that through the cessation of contact, we can achieve what the Buddha calls “the cessation of feeling”…

"Now when a disciple of the noble ones discerns feeling in this way, the cause by which feeling comes into play in this way, the diversity of feeling in this way, the result of feeling in this way, the cessation of feeling in this way, & the path of practice leading to the cessation of feeling in this way, then he discerns this penetrative holy life as the cessation of feeling.”

To see how this works in practice, consider the hypothetical situation where we are both sitting in a car. As we drive along, the latest chart topping hit plays through the car stereo…

• What happens if we give the attention to the sound coming out of the speakers?
• What happens if we perceive the sound as music, or a certain style of music?
• What happens if we make contact, by differentiating the ear from the music?
• What happens if we feel and explore the contacted object, giving rise to qualitative judgement on its pleasantness or unpleasantness?
• Alternatively, what happens if we do not do any or all of the above things?
o What happens if we do not pay attention, perceive, make contact, or discriminate feeling?
o We are both sitting in the car, but will both of us share the same experience?
o Considering this, what role do we play in constructing our experience?

Whether we discriminate feeling as being pleasant, unpleasant or neither, will involve a variety of factors. In the scenario discussed, this may include our current state of mind, our musical preferences, whether it is being played at what we consider to be a suitable volume and fidelity, traffic conditions, whether we are on time or running late, and so on.

First-hand personal investigation of this kind helps us to develop wisdom into the discernment, cause, diversity and result of feeling. However, because this way of understanding contact and feeling is based on the Buddha’s discourses rather than the Path Of Purification or the Theravada commentaries, it is reasonable to expect that any instructions on how to perceive and discern these qualities in our experience will differ too. As such, for those who have prior exposure to Burmese Vipassana Techniques, I recommend comparing how contact and feeling are represented from each perspective, because how we understand key concepts will have an impact on what we observe, how we frame and construct our experience, and what we will learn by doing so.

Mindfulness of contact and feeling – developing insight and wisdom through direct observation

• Practice observing experience in accordance with the Buddha’s instructions noted in this section.
• If we decline to differentiate between a sense-base and an object, where is the “you”?
• Where there is no “you”, is there any suffering associated with the experience?
• Is pain different to suffering?
• What causes us to regard a feeling as pleasant, unpleasant or neutral?
• How does feeling differ from raw sensory impingement?
• Does feeling happen to you, or do you create feeling?
• Can you have meta-feelings – or, feelings about how you feel?
• Listen to some music and use it as a basis for exploring the functioning of attention, perception, contact and feeling.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

The Inner Workings of Volition

Volition or intention, plays an integral role in the Buddha’s teachings - so much so that the Buddha’s principle of karma is modelled around it.

"Intention, I tell you, is karma. Intending, one does karma by way of body, speech, & intellect."

Entire books have been written on the subject of karma, and since karma is not the central theme of this text, I will draw attention here only to the aspects of it that are significant to our pursuit of a wise and well-directed mindfulness.

In the Buddha’s doctrine of karma, activities of body, speech and mind are assessed based on the quality or tone of mind which led to their being, as opposed to the external outcome of the action itself.

To explain this principle by way of example, it is karmically bad to deliberately step on a snail, because such action is undertaken from the basis of the negative roots of ignorance, greed or aversion. To deliberately dodge a snail and spare its life as we walk is to act from the basis of the wholesome roots of wisdom, generosity and universal love. Both acts are intentional, and thus have karmic potency. If someone were to step on a snail completely by accident, then there would be not karma involved in the death. However, if someone were to deliberately try to step on a snail, but slip and miss, then this would have karmic consequences.

The modern conception of karma however, extends well beyond the Buddha’s discourses and into the realms of metaphysics, speculation and retribution. What the Buddha was interested in however, was encouraging people to act in a wholesome way, and to experience the positive benefits that come from positive actions. The fruit of such actions are not arrived at mystically via the equilibrium of cosmic set of weigh-scales but directly and internally within the mind itself as a result of the moral quality or tenor from which the action was undertaken. If we do a good deed, with a heart of kindness, we feel good outcomes as a result. If we spend our time ruminating on our hatred towards someone, with a closed heart then we will experience bad outcomes as a result. Mindfulness of the basic causality behind karma provides insights which encourage us to cultivate wise, generous and open-hearted behaviours. Conversely, if we are mindful of the sufferings associated with a closed heart, or a mind conflicted due to internal struggles, then we will be increasingly motivated to weed out such negative traits from our personality.

We see here that the mental quality underpinning the volitional activity determines the mental results from undertaking such activity. As such, it is important to be aware of the operation of volition, and the deliberate action which it spawns.

If we take the time to reflect internally, we can see that shifts in attention are generally driven by volition. Very closely related to volition is the traditional Buddhist concept of craving. It is said in the doctrines that craving is the cause of suffering, and it is craving that impels us to undertake volitional activities, particularly those that are associated with the grasping (i.e. craving for) or rejection (i.e. craving against) of what has been perceived.

This impulse to pull in and push away is the result of ignorantly conceiving of an ego-centre that is separate from the object which is being craved or rejected. We see here how the ignorance associated with contact and the false bifurcation between self and other, is logically necessary in order to sustain the activity of craving.

Were one to see the nature of experience as it is without concocting a false observer, there would no pivot point upon which craving could operate. The Buddha explained that…

“When a man dwells with his heart possessed and overwhelmed by sense-desires, and does not know, as it really is, the way of escape from sense-desires that have arisen, then he cannot know or see, as it really is, what is to his own profit, nor can he know and see what is to the profit of others, or of both himself and others. Then even sacred words he has long studied are not clear to him, not to mention those he has not studied.”

Speaking in reference to the world of experience, the Buddha said that…

"Any mental formations whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every mental formation is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

"Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with mental formations. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released.”

A fuller understanding of volitional intention therefore includes awareness of the role that intention and karma play in the creation of present moment experience. Through mindful observation of intentions, and the qualitative results of our volitional actions, we see how the present experience is concocted. Seeing the role we play in creating our reality, we can empower ourselves to act in a way that is conducive to increased happiness both now and in the future. The following lines of inquiry may be followed, if you wish to develop your own experiential understanding of what has been explained above.

Mindfulness of volition – developing insight and wisdom through direct observation

• Practice observing in accordance with the Buddha’s instructions noted in this section, remembering that “This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.”
• Be mindful of the quality of your present state of mind. Is it open and loving, or is it closed off and full of fear or craving? How does it feel to have a mind in this state?
• Be mindful of the quality of your thoughts. How are they linked to your state of mind?
• When attention moves, observe the impulse that moves it. What is being sought and why?
• Intentionally cultivate a wholesome mind-state, replete with openness, love, kindness and generosity. How does this feel?
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Vipassana Revisited

We have now investigated the mental components that drive mindfulness techniques and the creation of our personal experience. This study been done by synergistically harnessing the wisdom found in the Buddha’s discourses and undertaking mindful observation of our personal experiences, through the lens of this wisdom.

By undertaking this investigation for ourselves and by learning how objects come to be, it may now be clearer to us why it is not enough simply to watch objects as they rise and pass away. Rather, we need to watch what causes them to rise and pass away. In contemporary discourse on meditation, we invariably hear about the necessity of taking a “meditation object”, which we are to remain mindful of throughout our session. In direct opposition to this, our explorations have identified that this approach to meditating falsely takes the object as a given, and glosses over how the object came to be discerned as an object in the first place.

Ninoslav Ninamoli writes that, “Experience as a whole, where the sign of your mind is, is already there, given, regardless of whether you perform certain things or not. Believing that going through the set of motions or things ‘to do’ is the way of seeing the experience as a whole, means not seeing that experience as a whole, and not knowing where to look for it either… Not-knowing that the things are already there, you do a technique, trying to reach those things that are already there. Since the experience as a whole is already there, doing a technique to reach it, means that it is not just redundant, it also implies not-knowing where the experience as a whole is to be found. In this way the (belief in the) technique obscures seeing the nature of the experience as a whole and, as long as you are doing that technique (i.e. maintaining your belief), you put the nature of things out of your reach—you are responsible for your ignorance.”

If we wait until something is already deemed an object by virtue of perceiving an object, and making contact with it, we have already unknowingly created the subject-object duality, which holds the object as being both separable and separate from the subject.

To see that objects are impermanent does not really get us any closer to seeing that the subject or watcher is a false construction of our own doing. It may be more accurate then to say we do not take a “meditation object” per se, but rather, remember to apply a wise mode of observation and response.

Therefore, since Vipassana meditation is about seeing things as they really are, any mindful observation of the present moment must also include awareness and understanding of the active roles of attention, perception, contact, feeling and volition. To the extent that execution of a pre-defined technique inhibits such observation, it is imperative to go beyond technique alone if we are to understand things as they really are.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

OK... they're the relevant sections. Feel free to critique and comment at will.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Volo
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: Vipassanā Techniques Revisited

Post by Volo »

retrofuturist wrote: Fri May 15, 2020 4:54 am In the Goenka method, physical sensations are the fulcrum upon which the relationship between mind and body comes to be understood. As Goenka stated, “any thoughts or emotions, any mental impurities that arise manifest themselves in the breath and the sensations of that moment. Thus, by observing the respiration or the sensations, we are in fact observing mental impurities. Instead of running away from the problem, we are facing reality as it is. As a result, we discover that these impurities lose their strength; they no longer overpower us as they did in the past.” The feelings which arise therefore, are understood to be a combination of the mental state of the individual, the location upon which one’s attention is sweeping, and past conditioning.
I'm not very familiar with Goenka's technique, therefore I can rely only on what you have quoted. And I don't see in the above quote the word "feeling". He is taking about "sensations" (i.e. bodily experiences), feelings (at least in Abhidhamma and very often in the suttas) is mental aggregate.
Deviating somewhat from the Buddha’s discourses in favour of the Jainist principle of wearing out past karma (nijjarā), Goenka suggested that a non-reactive response to these arising sensations is an act of purification in and of itself. “The observation of the physical sensations without reaction during Vipassana meditation produces a remarkable effect. It causes the old stored-up past conditionings such as anger, hatred, ill-will, passion, etc. to come to the surface of the mind and manifest as sensations. Observation of these sensations without any reaction causes them to pass away, layer after layer. Your mind is then free of many of these old conditionings and can deal with experiences in the life without the colour of past experiences.”
What does it have to do with Jains? Jains (at least from buddhist suttas) did self-mortification, i.e. they created on purpose an unpleasant bodily sensations thinking that this sensation has something to do with their past kamma. I don't see where Goenka suggests to do anything like that.

What he says is that (I'm rephrasing the way I understand him) every consciousness produces some materiality (this is also according to Abhidhamma, or to be more precise "every consciousness, which depends on the heart base), which we experience as bodily sensations or as changes in the breath pattern. If we react to it with greed, hatred or delusion, we create new unwholesome kamma. Whereas if we simply stay with it (i.e. not trying to create this unpleasant sensation), we exhaust bad mind tendency, which caused it to arise (note that in your quote Goenka doesn't use word "kamma").
Post Reply