Page 2 of 3

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:04 am
by Brizzy
meindzai wrote:
Mukunda wrote:
Brizzy wrote:Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility.
I was never taught to induce sensations, but rather to observe their arising. Perhaps therein lies the problem.
Exactly. Buddha's problem with the Jains was that by practicing self mortification, they were just creating more kamma in the process.

i.e. if I hit you in the face with a shovel, that's an unwholesome action, which will ripen at some point for me. (For you it's your bad kamma ripening, so...you're welcome?)

But hitting my*self* in the face, whether that is the ripening of unwholesome kamma or not, is kind of pointless, because all I've done is create more unwholesome kamma by doing the action.

I believe it's that simple. Sitting in mindfulness and observing sensations, feelings, etc. isn't anything like this shovel-face-hitting-asceticism (or any kind of asceticism - same thing). The Goekna method, as far as I know, is adopted from Satipatthana - nothing ascetic in there.

-M
The whole practice is designed to produce unpleasant sensations. It is your "Attention" that is proliferating these sensations. If you turned your attention away from these unpleasant sensations, towards something wholesome, then the sensations would subside.

That is not to say that unpleasant sensations do not appear in Right Meditation, it is just that one does not go looking for them in order to impose an "equanimous" mind upon them & thereby eradicating past kamma. Goenka will often explain that these "Gross" sensations are "DEEP, DEEP" sankharas from our past, rising to the surface to be eradicated.

This idea of "one pointed" concentration is strange. We learn from the Buddha that everything is change and we are then told to "FIX" our minds on one "POINT". So in an ever changing world we are told that we can come to understand this world, by grimly trying to fix our minds statically. Now this would produce an enormous internal struggle (pain :cry: ) but if we are bloody minded enough we can come through it, and the brief abscence of the pain is great :smile: and then we "Start Again" :jawdrop:

The idea of a collected mind, as found in the suttas is a mind that is together & powerful - in tune with the body and is malleable enough for vipassana (a happy mind :twothumbsup: ). The one pointed mind sounds more like a "Hindu Oneness" approach rather than Buddha Dhamma.

People are told to develop equanimity to painful sensations - all that is being developed is willpower/strength of mind. If people developed a happy mind, this would lead into equanimity. Goenka puts it the other way round "Be equanimous - it will lead to happiness!" The Buddha teaches, to develop a joyful/happy mind and this leads to equanimity. Its a really important point, it is very easy to fool ourselves and take willpower to be equanimity. Equanimity is the profound jhana within which the Buddha encourages his monks to make a breakthrough (any jhana will do), it is not a mind state that can be "set up" it has to be developed and developed through jhana.

Goenka will often tell the tale of a weapons engineer who developed guidance systems for missiles. His sankharas/kamma were so bad he was jumping about his cell through the heat & pain of his evil past. Does this not sound a little like Nigantha asceticism. Does any of this sound like the Buddhas explanation of how kamma works?

People on the thread seem to object strongly to my views on Goenka Vippasana and I can understand why. However, if people are so sure of the truth of this practice and it is truly the Buddhas Dhamma, why is there no trace of it in the suttas?

Words & meanings can be changed & stretched, and people may point to the satipatthana sutta, but the satippathana sutta does not promote this technique. Goenkas technique produces a very strong & hard mind, that can overcome pain through vigorous exertion - mindfulness is produced, but look at the Buddhas explanation for this "type" of practice :-

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


This sutta describes a "Goenka Approach" to mindfulness, which the Buddha ultimately rejected in favour of the beautiful memory from his childhood under a rose-apple tree.

:smile:

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:14 am
by Ben
Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:51 am
by Brizzy
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:21 pm
by meindzai
Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:
I have never known Ben to axe grind when it comes to Dhamma.

Your posts are full of unsupported opinion, misrepresentation of the Dhamma and Goenka, along with your own personal traumas. I am sorry you have had such "grim" and "painful" experiences with meditation, but not everybody has experienced it that way.

Defaming Goenka on a public forum as being adhamma is probably not the best approach at dealing with whatever happened to you.

-M

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:11 pm
by tiltbillings
Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder

Who is your axe being ground for?
I see a lot of accusation flying about here from you, but I have yet to see you tie then directly to Goenka's actual teachings, using his words with references.

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:54 pm
by DNS
Brizzy wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:Goenka's answer and teaching seems very much inline with this from the Buddha:
"And how is striving fruitful, how is exertion fruitful? There is the case where a monk, when not loaded down, does not load himself down with pain, nor does he reject pleasure that accords with the Dhamma, although he is not fixated on that pleasure. He discerns that 'When I exert a [physical, verbal, or mental] fabrication against this cause of stress, then from the fabrication of exertion there is dispassion. When I look on with equanimity at that cause of stress, then from the development of equanimity there is dispassion.' So he exerts a fabrication against the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion, and develops equanimity with regard to the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity. Thus the stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion is exhausted & the stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity is exhausted."
MN 101
Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility. These sensations are to be viewed as past kammas (sankharas) to be looked upon with equanimity.(thereby eradicating kammas & not producing further kammas). This does not seem to me, quite what the Buddha is saying - it is the desire & lust that are to abandoned, past kammas are not eradicated. There is a sutta where the buddha talks of metta, being an escape from bad kamma, but even here, old kamma is not eradicated - it is simply overwhelmed by metta. I will endeavour to find the particular sutta.
"Thus the stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion is exhausted"
from the above quote MN 101

Goenka's teachings have nothing in common with Jain philosophy and are completely in line with Buddha-Dhamma.

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:06 pm
by PeterB
Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:
This is a calumny against Goenka and a calumny against Ben.

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:18 pm
by tiltbillings
PeterB wrote:
Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:
This is a calumny against Goenka and a calumny against Ben.
The problem with the Brizzy's assertions, he has really offered no real argument or carelly cited support for what he is claiming, which makes it kind of hard not to see this a bit a blowhard-ishness. The OP started poorly and it has not really gotten any better.

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:29 pm
by cooran
Am I the only one who wonders if Dhamma Wheel is experiencing the games of a troll or game player - in this and the Vipassana thread?

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:07 pm
by Brizzy
cooran wrote:Am I the only one who wonders if Dhamma Wheel is experiencing the games of a troll or game player - in this and the Vipassana thread?

Excuse my ignorance, as I take it that this is aimed at me :cry: - but what do you mean by a "troll" or "game player"? I am blissfully unaware of most "computer speak".

Is it someone who is prepared to put the suttas as the centre-piece and consider everything else almost irrelevant? (unless it is inline with the suttas/vinaya).

:smile:

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:08 pm
by Mukunda
Please don't feed the trolls. :cookoo:

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 9:37 pm
by meindzai
For the record, no, I don't think it's fair to classify Brizzy as a troll.

But Brizzy, your posts do seem to have a bit of an agenda. I think saying that you have an "axe to grind" is probably accurate. If you don't like Goenka's approach - don't practice it. Comparing it to the Niganthas does two things. First, it puts down Goenka and everybody who practices his technique by saying they're doing the kind of practice the Buddha advised against. Secondly, the imlpication is that you have a better understanding of the Suttas and of the Dhamma than Goenka does. That's above and beyond simply disagreeing with what somebody teaches.

Also, you didn't show any favor to the Suttas at all. Here for example, you use an idea from the Suttas (ekaggata - one pointedness) to accuse the Buddha of contradicting his own teachings.
The idea of a collected mind, as found in the suttas is a mind that is together & powerful - in tune with the body and is malleable enough for vipassana (a happy mind ). The one pointed mind sounds more like a "Hindu Oneness" approach rather than Buddha Dhamma.
-M

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:07 pm
by BlackBird
Why do you practice Buddhism Brizzy?

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:50 pm
by Cittasanto
there seam to be a few members who seam to come here with an agenda.

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 11:16 pm
by meindzai
Manapa wrote:there seam to be a few members who seam to come here with an agenda.
May we all become free of our agendas.

-M

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:46 am
by Ben
meindzai wrote:
Manapa wrote:there seam to be a few members who seam to come here with an agenda.
May we all become free of our agendas.

-M
Sadhu Meindzai, Sadhu!

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:22 am
by Cittasanto
meindzai wrote:
Manapa wrote:there seam to be a few members who seam to come here with an agenda.
May we all become free of our agendas.

-M
Image

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:54 am
by Brizzy
meindzai wrote:For the record, no, I don't think it's fair to classify Brizzy as a troll.

But Brizzy, your posts do seem to have a bit of an agenda. I think saying that you have an "axe to grind" is probably accurate. If you don't like Goenka's approach - don't practice it. Comparing it to the Niganthas does two things. First, it puts down Goenka and everybody who practices his technique by saying they're doing the kind of practice the Buddha advised against. Secondly, the imlpication is that you have a better understanding of the Suttas and of the Dhamma than Goenka does. That's above and beyond simply disagreeing with what somebody teaches.

Also, you didn't show any favor to the Suttas at all. Here for example, you use an idea from the Suttas (ekaggata - one pointedness) to accuse the Buddha of contradicting his own teachings.
The idea of a collected mind, as found in the suttas is a mind that is together & powerful - in tune with the body and is malleable enough for vipassana (a happy mind ). The one pointed mind sounds more like a "Hindu Oneness" approach rather than Buddha Dhamma.
-M
Hi Mendzai

Ekaggata - unification, rather than one pointed. There is a real difference in practice.

Comparing it to the Niganthas is my opinion. If people can show that the Buddha supported Goenka's views on kamma, I would be interested.

"Questions And Answers

Question: It seems to me that it would take forever to eliminate the sankharas one by one.

S.N. Goenka: That would be so if one moment of equanimity meant exactly one less sankhara of the past. But in fact, awareness of sensation takes you to the deepest level of the mind and allows you to cut the roots of past conditioning. In this way, in a relatively short time, you can eliminate entire complexes of sankharas, if your awareness and equanimity are strong.

Question: Then how long should the process take?

S.N. Goenka: That depends on how great a stock of sankharas you have to eliminate, and how strong your meditation is. You cannot measure the past stock but you can be sure that the more seriously you meditate, the more quickly you are approaching liberation. Keep working steadfastly towards that goal. The time is bound to come—sooner rather than later—when you will reach it. "

http://www.udaya.dhamma.org/ebook/Medi ... urn false;

Now if somebody can give a sutta reference for stockpiles of kamma being released for one moment of equanimity I would be interested.....

"'If it were the case that when there was fierce striving, fierce exertion, you felt fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment; and when there was no fierce striving, no fierce exertion, you still felt fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment, then — that being the case — it would be proper for you to assert that, "Whatever a person experiences — pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain — all is caused by what was done in the past. Thus, with the destruction of old actions through asceticism, and with the non-doing of new actions, there will be no flow into the future. With no flow into the future, there is the ending of action. With the ending of action, the ending of stress. With the ending of stress, the ending of feeling. With the ending of feeling, all suffering & stress will be exhausted." But because when there is fierce striving, fierce exertion, you feel fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment; and when there was no fierce striving, no fierce exertion, you feel no fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment, then — that being the case — it is not proper for you to assert that, "Whatever a person experiences — pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain — all is caused by what was done in the past. Thus, with the destruction of old actions through asceticism, and with the non-doing of new actions, there will be no flow into the future. With no flow into the future, there is the ending of action. With the ending of action, the ending of stress. With the ending of stress, the ending of feeling. With the ending of feeling, all suffering & stress will be exhausted."' But when I said this, I did not see that the Niganthas had any legitimate defense of their teaching.

"So I asked them further, 'Friend Niganthas, what do you think: Can an action to be experienced in the here-&-now be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced in the future life?'

"'No, friend.'

"'Can an action to be experienced in the future life be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced in the here-&-now?'

"'No, friend.'

"What do you think: Can an action to be experienced as pleasure be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced as pain?'

"'No, friend.'

"'Can an action to be experienced as pain be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced as pleasure?'

"'No, friend.'

"What do you think: Can an action ripe to be experienced be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action not ripe to be experienced?'

"'No, friend.'

"'Can an action not ripe to be experienced be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action ripe to be experienced?'

"'No, friend.'

"What do you think: Can an action greatly to be experienced be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action barely to be experienced?'

"'No, friend.'

"'Can an action barely to be experienced be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action greatly to be experienced?'

"'No, friend.'

"What do you think: Can an action to be experienced be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action not to be experienced?'

"'No, friend.'

"'Can an action not to be experienced be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced?'

"'No, friend.'

"'So, friends, it seems that an action to be experienced in the here-&-now cannot be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced in the future life. An action to be experienced in the future life cannot be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced in the here-&-now... An action to be experienced cannot be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action not to be experienced. An action not to be experienced cannot be turned, through striving & exertion, into an action to be experienced. That being the case, the striving of the Niganthas is fruitless, their exertion is fruitless.'

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... urn false;

Now one of the main themes of goenkas courses is striving & exertion (adittana sit) & hour after hour of sitting.

The painful sensations that arise are put down to concentration ( whenever I become concentrated (unified mind) my pains fall away). The painful sensations arise because of intense exertion & attention.

[EDIT: Off-topic meta-discussion removed - Retro.]

:smile:

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:10 pm
by Brizzy
Manapa wrote:
meindzai wrote:
Manapa wrote:there seam to be a few members who seam to come here with an agenda.
May we all become free of our agendas.

-M
Image

Image

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:12 pm
by Brizzy
BlackBird wrote:Why do you practice Buddhism Brizzy?
Why do you ask Blackbird?

:smile: