Your concerns are understandable.
However it might be worthwhile noting that I have no criticisms against any other internationally known method of vipassana. My objection is with those teachers who are likely to confuse those who know less about this complex subject of insight knowledges. I have no problems with those who teach 'buddhist meditations' because that does not cause 'psuedo-gold' issues.
You dont have to take my word for this. You are welcome to disregard it.
You might also want to consider this:
"And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.'
This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions.
I cannot say that this applies to me, nor can I say that it doesn't. Because I cant prove either stance to your satisfaction. So let that be.
However you might want to consider what this means for your practice if it is by some chance true. Goenka is keen to have his students commit to his method and you are going to be stuck in it for a long long time without much opportunity for learning about new methods which might be helpful for you to progress into stream entry. I'm not saying that the Goenka method wont be able to bring this about, but that it is extremely inefficient in my experience at doing that. Considering its world wide reach, that leaves me concerned. Those people who have enough causes for them to become stream entrants in this lifetime may well loose that opportunity.
I don't prescribe to that 'all methods lead to the same goal' type of thinking because that is just a lack of understanding of a particularly complex subject of how a person is propelled through the insight knowledges and of how certain ways of holding mindfulness sends the practitioner down a samatha path and another, down the vipassana path.
In any case it is best to read the likes of Mahasi Sayadaw and Ven Matara Nanarama and the numerous suttas and commentaries they draw upon in their research into the matter. They dont differ even a hundredth on their views on a matter. They may not comment on their views of the Goenka method, clearly.
I feel Goenka is doing some kind of service introducing meditation to the masses but it is limited. I have just read the manual of vipassana by Ledi sayadaw here : http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/The_ ... di_Sayadaw
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There is no mention of the body scan, nor is there any evidence of having progressed through the vipassana knowledges except of nama-rupa paricceda nana as far as I can see. I am saying this as someone who has been teaching this. It is possible to determine what level of insight a person has by how/what they come and report back about their practice. All I see in this work is scholarship and a bit of practice to a basic level, I'm sorry to say. Comapare that with Mahasi Sayadaw of the same country:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... gress.html
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and I see a clear world of difference. The latter is just devoted entire to the practice and the practical unfolding of the vipassana nanas in graphic detail, combining that with just he right amount of indepth scholarship. If I were to hedge my bets I would feel safer not committing to anything in terms of long term practice. Goenka in my opinion is introductory practice. The next step is via the Visuddhi camp, whoever they might be. Mahasi sayadaw and Pa uk are probably safe bets in my opinion.