I'm not sure where you get the Dukkha part from - he doesn't talk about it much, and though the pain you get from sitting is prevalent (when is it not?), you aren't as encouraged to focus on it as much as you are on Anicca. He outrightly says that the sensations are a representation of impermanence, and you know, the technique is about feeling the sensations. Sure he also talks about Anatta, but again, he barely speaks of it compared to Anicca. I have his 1 hour recordings, and he's constantly repeating "Anicca, Anicca, Anicca."Modus.Ponens wrote:Hmmm. I think I can't agree with that as far as 10 day introductory retreats go. It's true that Goenkaji mentions impermanence again and again. And he also mentions not self quite a few times. But the technique itself is "designed" almost only for the contemplation of suffering and how to deal with suffering skillfuly. But dealing skillfuly with suffering is not the same as droping it.MisterRunon wrote: It focuses more on Anicca than anything else. Goenka is always talking about it in the discourses, and he always mentions that the sensations are representations of the changing nature in life.
Out of the four foundations, though, I think it focuses only on Vedana (Joseph Goldstein and a few others have claimed this, I believe). There are a few other things that people complain about. If OP wants to find out more, he can easily search up "Goenka" on this site.
I would say that there's one big difference between Mahasi style and Goenka style: Goenkas' feels a little bit forced and goal-oriented, whereas the Mahasi style is more about experiencing whatever rises. Some may work well with the goal-oriented/forced style, though.
As you say, the technique feels a bit forced. In my opinion it's not because of goal orientation. It is more about this rigidity, or intense focus on just one of the three characteristics. And the fact that the contemplation is done just at the level of sensations is probably limiting as well.
To anyone who thinks that I am dismissing the Goenka style of vipassana, I am not. The 10 days retreat I made in 2004 still has positive consequences today. It was that good! And in 10 days it's probably dificult to do more than that. But the point is that, to practice at home after the retreat, it's best to broaden the objects of contemplation to the body, sensations, mind and mental objects; and boraden the characteristics contemplated in those objects to impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not self.
Goal orientation is a big issue with his retreats, and he often has to remind students not to focus on "the game of sensations." In his discourse, he even mentions students who have come to his 10 day retreats 10+ times, and they still don't understand that it's about equanimity, and not the sensations. Based on my conversations with other students, I think it holds true (and in my experience as well. my first 2 sits were very goal-oriented until I had to learn that I was craving results).