Page 3 of 12

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:12 pm
by tiltbillings
beeblebrox wrote:
If a person feels like that he needs an intensive training, then I think that's OK. If the person feels like that he doesn't need it, then I think that's OK also... I don't think that there's any need to turn it into something that one has to be defensive about, or an argument.

:anjali:
I agree. Intensive practice is not something that will meet the needs of everyone. I find, however, the willingness to so quickly and without meaningful basis to criticize intensive practice unfortunate as is the willingness to dismiss it because it supposedly is not in line with what the Buddha taught.

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:14 pm
by tiltbillings
beeblebrox wrote:I don't think that there should be any concern about doing an intensive training... it's all about cultivating the insight of anicca, dukkha and anatta... and then try to figure out how to apply that insight, in a way which is wholesome.
If one has actual insight, and not something conceptually derived, there is no need to try to figure out how to apply the actual insight.

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:15 pm
by beeblebrox
tiltbillings wrote:I agree. Intensive practice is not something that will meet the needs of everyone. I find, however, the willingness to so quickly and without meaningful basis to criticize intensive practice unfortunate as is the willingness to dismiss it because it supposedly is not in line with what the Buddha taught.
Yes, I see the point now.

:anjali:

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:18 pm
by beeblebrox
tiltbillings wrote:
beeblebrox wrote:I don't think that there should be any concern about doing an intensive training... it's all about cultivating the insight of anicca, dukkha and anatta... and then try to figure out how to apply that insight, in a way which is wholesome.
If one has actual insight, and not something conceptually derived, there is no need to try to figure out how to apply the actual insight.
Maybe that could be... but seems like that it still could be a part of the practice, though.

:anjali:

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:26 pm
by tiltbillings
beeblebrox wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
beeblebrox wrote:I don't think that there should be any concern about doing an intensive training... it's all about cultivating the insight of anicca, dukkha and anatta... and then try to figure out how to apply that insight, in a way which is wholesome.
If one has actual insight, and not something conceptually derived, there is no need to try to figure out how to apply the actual insight.
Maybe that could be... but seems like that it still could be a part of the practice, though.

:anjali:
Insight into anicca, dukkha, anatta points to a shift in perception that at its basis is not conceptual, though concepts certainly are at play when insight is talked about.

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:19 pm
by Chi
Many monks sit a 90-day retreat each year. Some monks sit two 90-day retreats a year (Zen). Some monks remain in mostly solitude and silence for years and decades.

So yes, although 10 days seems like a long time to somebody who is not used to silence and solitude (most of us in the West), it's a relatively short time to be alone and quiet. It just points out how insane our societal conditioning has made us.

If you want intense, you go to certain monasteries in Burma and Thailand where monks and laypeople are striving for liberation e.g. Panditarama Forest Monastery. Most Mahasi retreats are quite austere, and you can make it more challenging by not taking rest during the day, not lying down until time for bed, not spending much time in your residential quarters, etc.

But whatever the circumstances, if your health permits, don't quit! Meditation is meant to be time for one to face his demons, long suppressed, repressed, pushed away, hated, etc. I know over the last year or so, I have broken down maybe 100+ times into tears. It's all the stuff that's been stuck in our cells that have the chance to be released when our bodies become still, when we are not adding any experience purposefully through our sense doors. It's wonderful to cry and let go of some of the rigidity with which this culture imbues us.

:clap: Be Happy!

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:21 pm
by DAWN
Agree with you, beeblebrox :bow:
tiltbillings wrote:Insight into anicca, dukkha, anatta points to a shift in perception that at its basis is not conceptual, though concepts certainly are at play when insight is talked about.
I'am sorry, titlbilling, i will make one little modification. :juggling:
Anicca, dukkha and anatta are alredy here, and directly seen by the wise.

You said : 'Insight into anicca, dukkha, anatta points to a shift in perception'.
Actualy is not insight that make change perception, but shift of perception make knowledge arise.
Why?

When insight (knowledge) change perception - it's a conceptual understanding, because knowledge change perception, and you have to undertake this knowledge to keep this perception.
But when is perception that change knowledge - it's a non-conceptual understanding, because perception change knowledge, and insight arise from this new perception.

Perception is impermanent and conditioned. By what is conditioned? It's conditioned by Wisdom.
So, it's not insight (direct knowledge) a condition to new perception (direct perception), but Wisdom is condition to new insight (direct knowledge).

Friendly :namaste:

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:27 pm
by DAWN
Actually, IMO , in long meditation sitting, it's not a mental activity, but a bodily pain what is realy difficult. :rolleye:

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:38 pm
by Mr Man
tiltbillings wrote:
Mr Man wrote: With respect Tilt I think you really need to go back and read over what I actually said. Have I said something that is not correct?
If you are saying that Goenka or Mahasi Sayadaw are out of line with the Theravada and the teachings of the Buddha, then yes, you have said something quite incorrect.
Well I never even mentioned Mahasi Sayadaw.

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:54 pm
by beeblebrox
Chi wrote:Many monks sit a 90-day retreat each year. Some monks sit two 90-day retreats a year (Zen). Some monks remain in mostly solitude and silence for years and decades.
Ven. Nhat Hanh (granted a Mahayanist... but still ordained in the Dharmaguptaka lineage, with its own version of Vinaya and all) who has been a monk for 70+ years, actually discourages doing "intensive" training (same words that he used)... mainly because he said he sees no point in creating more suffering for oneself (but I will agree that this is probably not the motivation of some sincere practitioners who want to train in this way), when there is already plenty of suffering for us to work with, already.

I've seen him sit for 1 1/2, or sometimes 2 hours, giving a Dharma talk, though... he didn't seem to show any sign of discomfort. He even seems to enjoy it throughout. One time, when I was sitting like 15 feet away from him, he seemed to be a bit under the weather, and then when he gave a Dharma talk... he just seemed to continue to brighten, more and more, as the time went on... till he seemed to be full of joy, at the end. I was fascinated, even though I couldn't hear him. (I'm deaf.)

Although that was impressive... and the fact that the Ven. Nhat Hanh is easily the most humble person I've ever met, by far... much of what he says in his talks probably will clash with what many people understand to be Dhammic.

Of course, everyone's circumstance is different. I think in the end, they're really the ones who know the best about what they should do with their own practices.

:anjali:

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:29 pm
by tiltbillings
Mr Man wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Mr Man wrote: With respect Tilt I think you really need to go back and read over what I actually said. Have I said something that is not correct?
If you are saying that Goenka or Mahasi Sayadaw are out of line with the Theravada and the teachings of the Buddha, then yes, you have said something quite incorrect.
Well I never even mentioned Mahasi Sayadaw.
Fine, but you are still quite wrong about Goenka.

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:44 pm
by marc108
Mr Man wrote:The format and technique do not come from the suttas.

even hardline Sutta-based teachers like Taan Geoff say that Goenkas sweeping techniques are in line with the Buddhas approach to meditation... ardency, mindfulness and alertness. although i dont know much about the format and theories, or anything beyond the technique it self.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... part2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"In a "scanning" or "body sweep" practice, mindfulness means remembering to stick with the process of scanning the body, while alertness would mean seeing the subtle sensations of the body being scanned. Ardency would mean sticking with the scanning process and trying to be ever more sensitive to the subtlest sensations. As in the previous case, these activities are related to factors of jhāna, and the process, if conducted in line with the texts, should culminate in a state of full-bodied singleness, at which time the motion of the scanning can be brought to stillness, and the mind can enter deeper concentration."

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:18 pm
by Mr Man
tiltbillings wrote:Fine, but you are still quite wrong about Goenka.
Wrong about what?

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:20 pm
by tiltbillings
MM wrote:
tilt wrote:
Mr Man wrote: Well I never even mentioned Mahasi Sayadaw.
Fine, but you are still quite wrong about Goenka.
Wrong about what?
That Goenka is not in line with Theravada and not in line with the Buddha's teachings.

Re: vipassana craziness

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:34 pm
by Mr Man
tiltbillings wrote:That Goenka is not in line with Theravada and not in line with the Buddha's teachings.
Okay. I don't think that the Buddha taught the "technique" and format that is used by Goenka, which is not a problem in and of itself. I don't think Goenka's organization can be considered to be mainstream Theravada. It is it's own little subgroup to my mind. And more distinct than many of the other subgroups