Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by mikenz66 » Sun Nov 26, 2017 6:13 pm

2600htz wrote:
Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:05 pm
Any practice that causes: hallucinations, shaking and tremble, nausea, diarrhea, headaches, etc. doesn´t agree with the suttas and probably wasn´t taught by the Buddha.
Well, of course, those are listed under "imperfections" or "corruptions of insight" in the texts...

The development of mindfulness and concentration can have all kinds of side-effects. Uplifting ones (bright light, feeling of floating) and more disconcerting ones (shaking, and so on). Many of these are not really specific to Buddhist practice...

Some of these are hinted at in the suttas. Mostly positive ones, for example, here: viewtopic.php?t=15578
There are also suttas that talk about arising of fear, and so on, and what to do about it.

Any practice that aims to make significant changes to one's mind, and one's life, is likely to have side-effects. Some good, some not so good. I think it would be naive to go into these practices thinking that progress will always be easy and pleasant.

:heart:
Mike

2600htz
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by 2600htz » Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:31 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Sun Nov 26, 2017 6:13 pm
2600htz wrote:
Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:05 pm
Any practice that causes: hallucinations, shaking and tremble, nausea, diarrhea, headaches, etc. doesn´t agree with the suttas and probably wasn´t taught by the Buddha.
Well, of course, those are listed under "imperfections" or "corruptions of insight" in the texts...

The development of mindfulness and concentration can have all kinds of side-effects. Uplifting ones (bright light, feeling of floating) and more disconcerting ones (shaking, and so on). Many of these are not really specific to Buddhist practice...

Some of these are hinted at in the suttas. Mostly positive ones, for example, here: viewtopic.php?t=15578
There are also suttas that talk about arising of fear, and so on, and what to do about it.

Any practice that aims to make significant changes to one's mind, and one's life, is likely to have side-effects. Some good, some not so good. I think it would be naive to go into these practices thinking that progress will always be easy and pleasant.

:heart:
Mike
Hello:

To my understanding the upakkilesas/imperfections/defilements that are mentioned in the suttas are talking about hindrances, or mental imperfections. I don´t know any sutta where they are described as physical problems, with the exception of when the Buddha was a Bodhisattva and practice austerities (wrong effort).

Regards.

User avatar
_anicca_
Posts: 325
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:44 pm

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by _anicca_ » Mon Nov 27, 2017 1:44 am

One of my teachers said, "It's better to not even know about them."

Sankhara-upekkha nana is samadhi (in other terms) and the basis for insight, whether or not you follow the nanas model.
"A virtuous monk, Kotthita my friend, should attend in an appropriate way to the five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self."

:buddha1:

http://vipassanameditation.asia

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by mikenz66 » Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:20 am

2600htz wrote:
Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:31 am
To my understanding the upakkilesas/imperfections/defilements that are mentioned in the suttas are talking about hindrances, or mental imperfections. I don´t know any sutta where they are described as physical problems, with the exception of when the Buddha was a Bodhisattva and practice austerities (wrong effort).
Perhaps this is a false dichotomy (physical/mind)? As I understand it piti (rapture) can manifest with various physical factors. Furthermore, we don't need to read suttas to know that anger can manifest physically, fear can lead to physical trembling, and so on. In fact, trembling is mentioned quite often in suttas with reference to fear.

:heart:
Mike

Hiheyhello
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:10 am

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by Hiheyhello » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:16 am

Admin, please deactivate my account. TIA
Last edited by Hiheyhello on Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by dylanj » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:05 am

yes, the whole Vipassana Movement aside from maybe Webu Sayadaw & others predating Goenka is silly :)
susukhaṁ vata nibbānaṁ,
sammā­sambud­dha­desitaṁ;
asokaṁ virajaṁ khemaṁ,
yattha dukkhaṁ nirujjhatī


Oh! extinction is so very blissful,
As taught by the One Rightly Self-Awakened:
Sorrowless, stainless, secure;
Where suffering all ceases


etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭi nissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṁ

This is peaceful, this is excellent, that is: the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:19 pm

dylanj wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:05 am
yes, the whole Vipassana Movement aside from maybe Webu Sayadaw & others predating Goenka is silly :)
Well, the nanas predate those people by at least 1500 years, probably longer, so it seems premature to be dismissing them as invalid...

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by dylanj » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:21 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:19 pm
dylanj wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:05 am
yes, the whole Vipassana Movement aside from maybe Webu Sayadaw & others predating Goenka is silly :)
Well, the nanas predate those people by at least 1500 years, probably longer, so it seems premature to be dismissing them as invalid...

:heart:
Mike
oh lmao
susukhaṁ vata nibbānaṁ,
sammā­sambud­dha­desitaṁ;
asokaṁ virajaṁ khemaṁ,
yattha dukkhaṁ nirujjhatī


Oh! extinction is so very blissful,
As taught by the One Rightly Self-Awakened:
Sorrowless, stainless, secure;
Where suffering all ceases


etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭi nissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṁ

This is peaceful, this is excellent, that is: the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction.

User avatar
LG2V
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:40 pm

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by LG2V » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:02 pm

archaic wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:23 pm
SarathW wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:13 pm
Oddly enough, some of the potential side-effects of meditation are even diarrhea and vomiting... :shock:
I can relate to the vomiting. We do many disgusting things without realising it.
Eating certain food, sex etc. could be disgusting and feel like vomiting when you really contemplate on them.
While I do understand what you are saying, during any of the meditation retreats I have been on, I cannot imagine someone just starting to vomit or defecate themselves. This sounds preposterous.
I think that those are the most extreme cases. To be fair, people have vomited and defecated themselves over less. Say, a quick scare, for example.
Here are some excellent sites for giving free Dana (Click-Based Donation):
http://freerice.comhttp://greatergood.com/www.ripple.orgwww.thenonprofits.com

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:39 pm

dylanj wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:21 pm
mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:19 pm
dylanj wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:05 am
yes, the whole Vipassana Movement aside from maybe Webu Sayadaw & others predating Goenka is silly :)
Well, the nanas predate those people by at least 1500 years, probably longer, so it seems premature to be dismissing them as invalid...

:heart:
Mike
oh lmao
Suit yourself. There are many approaches to the Dhamma in general, and meditation in particular, that have been useful to many people for many centuries. As I said, the insight knowledges were documented well over 1500 years ago, and were presumably assembled from the experiences of awakened individuals.

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
archaic
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:42 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by archaic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:22 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:39 pm
dylanj wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:21 pm
mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:19 pm

Well, the nanas predate those people by at least 1500 years, probably longer, so it seems premature to be dismissing them as invalid...

:heart:
Mike
oh lmao
Suit yourself. There are many approaches to the Dhamma in general, and meditation in particular, that have been useful to many people for many centuries. As I said, the insight knowledges were documented well over 1500 years ago, and were presumably assembled from the experiences of awakened individuals.

:heart:
Mike
A totally non-judgemental question (not meant to provoke or be disrespectful):

If the Buddha went to great length to describe the jhanas in many discourses and suttas, why did these nanas not get described, assuming they were so important?

They seem very contrived to me, like the mindset was "well we should break this into stages" like boyscouts have badges or like martial artists have belts... They are not describing *natural* breaks or delineations, they are simply breaking things down for the purposes of breaking things down, and thus are completely artificial.

You may not agree, and I respect your opinion, but do you at least see what I mean?
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

Hiheyhello
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:10 am

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by Hiheyhello » Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:15 pm

Admin, please deactivate my account. TIA
Last edited by Hiheyhello on Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hiheyhello
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:10 am

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by Hiheyhello » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:41 pm

Admin, please deactivate my account. TIA
Last edited by Hiheyhello on Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
archaic
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:42 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by archaic » Sat Jan 20, 2018 1:04 am

Hiheyhello wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:41 pm
Also, clarifying a series of strongly worded derisive posts with "no offense meant" doesn't make them any less derisive or offensive. As long as you feel that whatever you are practicing is helping you stamp out craving, greed, anger, and delusion, keep at it. Ride that horse. No need to publicly denounce core components of other practices which may be helping their respective followers achieve the same goals.
Apologies if you or others were offended by my language. I guess I am relentlessly sceptical of prescribed dogma. It comes from the hope that others don't get bogged down with unnecessary contrivances. Why? Some things which are traditional seem to get the silk glove treatment, as if their traditional status means they don't get questioned, and thusly they get unjustly perpetuated ad infinitum...

Honestly, I was just trying to forward specifically why I don't understand their logic. Clearly I should have been less descriptive, or more precise in my language that the nanas ***seem*** like this to me from my own perception. I mean to impart scepticism not judgementalism.

And to be clear, if someone has a compelling reason as to why they are a concrete, pragmatic, or carefully constructed theory, I would definitely show my respect for those perspectives.

Regardless, thanks for letting me know, I'll be more careful when posting discriminative thoughts about the beliefs of others.

My intent was not to agitate or wound.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16275
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Are Vipassana Nanas silly?

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Jan 20, 2018 2:26 am

archaic wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:22 pm
A totally non-judgemental question (not meant to provoke or be disrespectful):

If the Buddha went to great length to describe the jhanas in many discourses and suttas, why did these nanas not get described, assuming they were so important?

They seem very contrived to me, like the mindset was "well we should break this into stages" like boyscouts have badges or like martial artists have belts... They are not describing *natural* breaks or delineations, they are simply breaking things down for the purposes of breaking things down, and thus are completely artificial.

You may not agree, and I respect your opinion, but do you at least see what I mean?
If you take time to read the practical instructions in the Vissudhimagga, you'll see that there are often alternatives: "one person experiences this, another that..." Of course if you read a short summary, it will seem artificial. I don't think any such lists should be taken too linearly.

There is, obviously, plenty in the instructions of modern teachers such as Ajahns Thanissaro, Maha Bua, Chah etc that is not explicitly in the Suttas, but it would be strange to dismiss the advice of experienced teachers. Likewise, one should use one's judgement about which elaborations are helpful, and which are not, whether the advice is from ancient or modern texts.

The basic outline of the progress of insight are readily apparent in suttas that talk about the progressions including nibbida (disenchantment/disgust), equanimity, and so on.

:heart:
Mike

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests