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.
Vipassana
shanyin
Novice YoginSault Ontario Veteran
I would like to practice vipassana at some point.
How do you practice vipassana?
It's not concentrating on the breath is it?
How do you practice vipassana?
It's not concentrating on the breath is it?
0
Comments
http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe.html
It's a very good read and it's all about vipassana. I'm making my way through it right now. To give you a brief answer, the way I was taught is that we start off by bringing our attention to the breath, but then as other thoughts, perceptions, judgements, etc come, we bring our awareness to those things. As those formations subside, we note that they've subsided and come back to the breath until other things arise. Nowhere do we force our attention anywhere, we just be aware of what we are being aware of, gently coming back to the breath as things arise and fall away.
Only concentration can be practised
When we look with dedicated single focus at an object, that is concentration
When the mind sees the inherent characteristics of the object, that is vipassana
For example, we look at a tree. that is concentration
Then we see the impermanence of the leaves falling from the tree, that is vipassana
We cannot 'practise' seeing leaves fall from the tree because it is the leaves doing the falling, not us
The five aggregates are the same. they are by their very nature impermanent & selfless. all we can do is look in the right way to see the impermanence & selflessness
It is the looking in the 'right way' which is the difficult part
If we try too hard, that very effort obscures/hinders the mind's clarity to see clearly
Regards
"Vipassana" = "seeing clearly" or "insight"
There is no such thing as vipassana method or technique
The Burmese (such as Mahasi & Goenka) who hijacked the term use it incorrectly
Vipassana cannot be taught
here you go:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html
I'll post the table of contents because the text is very long:
it is just mostly long winded Satipatthana theory
sati (mindfulness) is not exactly vipassana
:wtf:
I just provided you with the way that the Suttas describe how an individual practitioner can cultivate the inner conditions for developing insight and all you say is "it is just mostly about Satipatthana theory" along with a wtf emoticon.
Perhaps you should spend a bit more time evaluating your own arguments and less time dismissing the valid points of others.
just face it. your strong objections against how others speak here is because others keep pointing out what you are posting does not conform with reality
others disagree with the view of Dhamma you are presenting but then you start to blame them for harsh speech and attacking you personally
there is no benefit in posting rhetoric by the scholar monks such as Bhante Gunarattane and Bodhi Bhikkhu when it does not really conform with reality
these scholars and career monks are just using the word "vipassana" or "insight" as a trendy marketing tool
the word "vipassana' is relatively quite rare in the suttas. the Buddha did not use the word in a sloppy manner
http://www.buddhanet.net/develop.htm There's more on the link, but it explains what I'm getting at. If you don't agree, I'll leave that to you. Just consider the possibility that the error is not mine.
i asked you to offer a reference from the suttas to substantiate your view
you last quote is just more Mahavihara Sinhalese dribble
:wtf:
And I have offered my own reasoning, but you asked for a reference when you questioned my assertion that the Suttas say there is a means for cultivating the conditions for insight? Do you think that contemplating the Four Frames of Reference don't lead to insight? Really? That's a tall statement. It's worked for me and many others. Why does everyone get discounted when you aren't?
You talk a lot about questioning the attainments of others, but what attainment do you speak from that negates thousands of practitioners who are further along the path than yourself. Or do you think you ARE further along the path than Bhikkhu Bodhi and others?
What reasoning do you have to offer that negates the fact that the Suttas describe practices that lead to insight? You have yet to offer any. Just a bunch of rigid semantics that frames the argument in your favor.
i offered a quote from the Buddha. you did not
it was you who claimed your viewpoint was from the suttas
but you can only quote scholar monks
what i posted was from the Buddha's lips
it was not in "error"
for a 3rd time
sati = "mindfulness" or "recollection"
sati has its root in memory rather than in consciousness (sense awareness)
:eek2:
I will offer one last point on this matter. I consider your absolute confidence in these matters in a similar regard to the way you consider Vincenzi's self-assessment that he is a non-returner. I may be right or wrong, but I hope you can understand why I would have my doubts.
vipassana is not "learning to recognise" (or brainwashing our mind). it is actually recognising. it is clear seeing
most of all, vipassana is seeing the three characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self
vipassana is not having an angry mind then somehow trying to not get involved in the anger
vipassana means: "passa" = to see; and "vi" = clearly
the angry mind cannot see clearly
:rant:
it short, on a theoretical basis, the viewpoints presented by you have been invalidated
the excerpt below is not vipassana. it is dealing with discursive thoughts
the mind that is "aware" does not need to "come back"
the mind may become "aware" when it becomes aware of its own unawareness
when it remembers its meditative intent (rather than wandering off in la la land)
further, you have declared you are at least a stream-enterer
i am understanding what you are posting and your declarations of enlightenment are tenuous
So, in what way is anicca the basis of dukkha?
Apart from my question, the quote below sounded like a declaration to me because a stream-enterer realises anatta. I apologise if I misinterpreted :bawl:
This is once again a derail to OP about the practice of vipassana bhavana, but that's my answer. If you don't feel it's adequate and don't share my correlation between anicca and dukkha, then I suggest you start a separate thread to expound further. If you want to expose my 'kindergarten' understanding of the dhamma further, this is not the place to do it.
Anyway, if one practices vippassana bhavana in the correct manner, regarding the body, feeling, consciousness, and mental objects in the manner prescribed in the suttas, that help bring about the conditions which lead into direct insight into the Four Frames of Reference. If one practices vipassana bhavana in the manner prescribed, they will see the impermanent nature of body, feelings, consciousness and mental objects and therefore not incorrectly ascribe lasting satisfaction to any of them, nor ascribe a lasting, self-existing essence to any of them. That has been my experience and it has led to many insights of that nature, regardless of how advanced those insights may or may not be.
The question I asked you is directly about vipassana
You continue to give the impression of regarding vipassana as something distinct from insight
Vipassana is insight
Seeing anicca-dukkha-anatta is vipassana
I have never read the term 'vipassana bhavana' is the suttas
I have only read 'citta bhavana' and 'samadhi bhavana'
BTW. You type fast
In Vipassana everything that happens in the mind is simply noted. It would even be given a name.
One would notice pain; then mentally say: “pain..pain..” Or one could notice bliss and simply note “bliss.. bliss”.
The practice of mentally wording everything I found distracting personally…
But what I liked about it –and learned from it – is observing the mind’s stuff in a neutral non-judgmental way.
Just seeing anger (for instance) and not running away from it or suppressing it; and also not being identified with it; is calming. We can see anger (for instance) coming, not do anything about it, and then it goes away; just like everything else.
Vipassana calms the mind in a natural way.
Imho !
An arahant has extinguished all craving.
Rather than seeing no 'lasting' satisfaction, do you think an arahant sees any satisfaction at all in the impermanent five aggregates?
In other words, do you think an arahant abiding with Nibbana mind still experiences the dukkha (unsatisfactoriness) of the five aggregates?
In other words, when the Buddha used the word 'dukkha' (suffering) in the 1st Noble Truth, to mean the experience of mental torment or mental tribulation, do you think this meaning of 'dukkha' in the 1st Noble Truth differs from the meaning of 'dukkha' in the 2nd Characteristic?
but does any arahant still experience the 2nd characteristic?
or does the 2nd characteristic end in the experience of the arahant?
the 1st characteristic is anicca (impermanence)
does an arahant continue to see the anicca in conditioned things?
if so, does an arahant continue to see the unsatisfactoriness (dukkha) of conditioned things, even though their mind does not suffer (dukkha) about those conditioned things?
if so, does the term 'dukkha' (unsatisfactoriness) in the 2nd characteristic have a different meaning to the term 'dukkha' (suffering) in the 1st Noble Truth. i.e., the suffering of craving & attachment?
thanks
on this thread http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=41&start=2480, 13th post down, there is a Buddhist scholar than keeps insisting the contrary
given you have such good manners and the administrators of this forum consider morality & rebirth belief to be the path to Nirvana, maybe you could share your opinion there
nice to discuss dhamma with you, to see your interest & devotion to dhamma
may all beings find freedom from suffering
now is not the best time to go over it but thank you all!
I'll have read it all tommorow thank you
I just came back on to share that this video inspired me to take interest and learn into Vipassana meditation:
I think you're a Sam Harris fan DD.
Anways, as he said, it is common to have constant thoughts/white noise get to the point of 'chasing us out of bed'. I experience the chatter all day and the chasing me out of bed.
He describes vipassana as starting out with focusing on the breath. I have heard this before, starting out with watching the breath. But they don't really go on from there.
I've been having trouble concentrating. Alot of trouble trying to concentrate on the breath. Perhaps a teacher would be very helpful.
Metta meditation is wonderful for me but I have racing thoughts alot and it's very distracing.
It's kind of funny that I have had what I think is alot of success with meditation on breathing yet I can't really do it anymore.
Anyway... I will go back to your actual replay tommorow DD, It's 5 am and I was drinking some wine with my friend so tomomrow is better!!
Be well!!
I'll go back to your reply later