Satipatana vs Anapanasati
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:40 am
Are these basically the same practice? Is vipassana as it is commonly taught today considered satipatanna or anapanasati or both (or does this depend on the precise style, i.e. Mahasi noting vs Goenka etc?)
I have heard some people say that anapanasati is basically a samatha only practice and only satipatanna is vipassana (with the implications that anapanasati might be good for calming thing and developing concentration, but that satipatanna is the "real deal"). On the other hand Buddhadhasa Bhikku's Mindfulness with Breathing: A Manual for Serious Beginners is based off the Anapanasati Sutta, and it seems to go beyond samatha practice.
In looking at the Satipatanna Sutta and the Anapanasati Sutta, the Satipatanna Sutta is clearly more detailed in its instructions, but the practice of Anapanasati also is founded on the 'Four Frames of Reference'.
Is there an established answer to this question within the Theravada, or is this going to be looked at differently by different schools?
I have heard some people say that anapanasati is basically a samatha only practice and only satipatanna is vipassana (with the implications that anapanasati might be good for calming thing and developing concentration, but that satipatanna is the "real deal"). On the other hand Buddhadhasa Bhikku's Mindfulness with Breathing: A Manual for Serious Beginners is based off the Anapanasati Sutta, and it seems to go beyond samatha practice.
In looking at the Satipatanna Sutta and the Anapanasati Sutta, the Satipatanna Sutta is clearly more detailed in its instructions, but the practice of Anapanasati also is founded on the 'Four Frames of Reference'.
Is there an established answer to this question within the Theravada, or is this going to be looked at differently by different schools?