Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Sacha G wrote:Hi
I just wanted to expose the unorthodox way I practice vipassana (not always but for a good part of my practice).
When I'm concentrated enough, I focus my awareness on the pure consciousness which appears "around" and "between" the thoughts (I hope it's clear enough). I would call this, "recognizing" of the pure consciousness.
Then I try to stay on it as much as I can, without paying attention to the thoughts. Like somebody looking at a mirror, and wanting to see the mirror itself, not the reflections.
When I leave the cushion, I try to be aware of my environment as just "phenomena" appearing on the surface of this consciousness, and I try to keep this detached awareness.
What do you think? Can you call this vipassana? Or does it sound more like zen/dzogchen/advaita?
Thanx
Sacha

piotr wrote:Hi PeterB,

Thanks for advice, I'll stay away from your sacred cow.

PeterB wrote: Because it is not a gaffe. Ajahn Amaro was appointed at a young age as abbott of one of the Forest Traditions leading western monasteries because of his palpable attainment.
You will find him and a number of other spiritual descendents of Luang Por Chah using Pali in a creative and living way.
This is of course is upsetting to some...and the Forest Tradition we may conclude, is not their way.
But it is not bad scholarship....it is a conscious eschewel of scholarship.
What this illustrates vividly is the fact that the Forest Tradition is rooted in the experiential...not in the Sutta tradition.
As such they feel able to tale liberties with the Pali. They bend it to reflect experience rather than use language to create a model of anticipated experience.
Luang Por Chah said repeatedly " The only book worth reading is the book of the heart ".
This was not a flippant throw away remark, he meant it.
The Forest Tradition have a working knowledge of Pali, as much as it tales to encourage the real work on the cushion.
The results of this non scholastic approach can be see anytime one has contact with the Forest Sangha...
Their wisdom , humour and vitality are inspiring.

PeterB wrote:You wouldn't be the first to say so....in fact of course they distance themselves even more from the Mahayana written corpus. Their approach is like or not, radically experiential. As such they are true heirs to Ajahns Mun and Chah.

PeterB wrote:For whom Tilt ?
You had better tell THEM that. They would gently and politely beg to differ.
I must have attended several hundred hours of teachings by various Forest Ajahns including Ajahn Sumedho and I dont recall them referring to the Suttas at all.
Perhaps they are not Theravada . Seriously. And if they were not considered so I dont think they would lose sleep.

PeterB wrote:For whom Tilt ?
You had better tell THEM that. They would gently and politely beg to differ.
I must have attended several hundred hours of teachings by various Forest Ajahns including Ajahn Sumedho and I dont recall them referring to the Suttas at all.

PeterB wrote:What this illustrates vividly is the fact that the Forest Tradition is rooted in the experiential...not in the Sutta tradition.
As such they feel able to tale liberties with the Pali. They bend it to reflect experience rather than use language to create a model of anticipated experience.

PeterB wrote:Their approach is like or not, radically experiential. As such they are true heirs to Ajahns Mun and Chah.