Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
What is vipassana?
jll
Veteran
http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Bhikkhu_Thanissaro_Vipassana_One_Tool_Among_Many.htm
Almost any book on early Buddhist meditation will tell you that the Buddha taught two types of meditation: samatha and vipassana. Samatha, which means tranquility, is said to be a method fostering strong states of mental absorption, called jhana. Vipassana -- literally "clear-seeing," but more often translated as insight meditation -- is said to be a method using a modicum of tranquility to foster moment-to-moment mindfulness of the inconstancy of events as they are directly experienced in the present.
Almost any book on early Buddhist meditation will tell you that the Buddha taught two types of meditation: samatha and vipassana. Samatha, which means tranquility, is said to be a method fostering strong states of mental absorption, called jhana. Vipassana -- literally "clear-seeing," but more often translated as insight meditation -- is said to be a method using a modicum of tranquility to foster moment-to-moment mindfulness of the inconstancy of events as they are directly experienced in the present.
0
Comments
and....?
Was there something you wished to ask or discuss.....?
in this sphere, the buddha taught only one kind of meditation, i.e., samadhi bhavana. samatha (tranquility) and vipassana (insight) are two fruits or results from the one method/development (bhavana) of concentration (samadhi). the OP has distinguished two "methods", which is not the case. there is only one noble eightfold path
also, the OP has not used the term "mindfulness" correctly. mindfulness is a factor of concentration but is directly unrelated to insight. insight happens when mindfulness establishes the mind in concentration. there is no such thing as 'mindfulness of the inconstancy'.
Then he explains "In the few instances where they do mention vipassana, they almost always pair it with samatha -- not as two alternative methods, but as two qualities of mind that a person may "gain" or "be endowed with," "
etc....
Also, the article is called: The Place of Vipassana in Buddhist Practice, not What is vipassana? Different connotation, IMO.
I don't see how it is logical.
concretely, if you think of vipassana as a stand alone method, either Goenka or Mahasi, you are automatically doing samatha. Either directly or indirectly as a result of vipassana.
Samatha is simply stabilizing the mind on a object.
If you are doing Vipassana, even if you are not doing Samatha directly (which both Goenka and Mahasi does for at least a third of the time), your object of concentration is whatever you are looking at inside instead of the breath.
So you will develop Samatha no matter what.
Even if you do something called "dry" insight which is to go right into vipassana without first gaining access concentration or first-second jhana through pure samatha meditation, you have no choice but to do Samatha while doing vipassana.
For Mahasi, most of the time is spent doing Samatha, looking at the breath, even when doing Vipassana.
as an example from my practice, going to Goenka retreats,
we first work exclusively on Samatha for the first 4 days.
Then move on to vipassana.
After 4 days of training, the mind is far more powerful/stable/concentrated.
So even if, on the first meditation of the morning in the fifth day, i go straight to vipassana, it takes only a few minutes to get the mind to be very stable and stabilize. Due to residual benefits from the training of the first 4 days.
Since vipassana also develop Samatha, my concentration still keep on getting better every single day after even if i don't do any pure Samatha meditation for the rest of the retreat.
I firmly believe anyone who talk of Vipassana as something that can be separated from samatha to not really understand what is Viapassana, as taught by Goenka or Mahasi.
So they might imagine it is something completely different and are talking about whatever it is that they imagine, which would make alot more sense.
I always 'preffered' zen-buddhism over...other uhm....streams
Because it's main focus is on practise, not so much on theoretics.
they all lead to Rome, so it doesn't matter...really...
breathing , letting come and pass,
etc. etc. etc.
the above is my theoretical understanding, don't know if i will ever be able to directly experience it
I'm not sure I agree. It seems to me that "mindfulness of inconstancy" is actually a very good description of vipassana. Mindfulness of a single object leads to concentration. Mindfulness of the mind leads to insight.