Jump to content
Dharmaling Forums
Sign in to follow this  
urki

Vipassana

Recommended Posts

Tashi Delek dear all,

 

the glossary definition:

(skt.: vipashyana; tib: lag thong) Special Insight. The principal meditation taught in the Theravada tradition. It is sometimes called mindfulness meditation. In the Mahayana, vipashyana has a different meaning...

 

I do not not really understand in what way vipassana has a different meaning in the Therevada/Mahayana...there is difference between vipassana and lag thong, other than the motivation of the practitioner? Would anyone be so kind to explain this difference?

 

Thank you - all best!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not not really understand in what way vipassana has a different meaning in the Therevada/Mahayana...there is difference between vipassana and lag thong, other than the motivation of the practitioner?
Hi, as far as I understand:

 

Popularly, Hinayana's Vipassana usually refers to the engagement in certain mindfulness techniques, like watching the breath, observing sensations arise in the mind, or letting go of thoughts - therefore it is sometimes called mindfulness meditation.

 

But more traditionally, Hinayana Vipassana has wider meaning - it is based on the Buddha's teachings on the four foundations of mindfulness, which are 1. contemplation of the body (which itself consists of mindfulness of breath, mindfulness of death etc.) 2. contemplation of feelings 3. contemplation of the mind 4. contemplation of mental objects (which itself consists of contemplation on five aggreagates, four noble truths, etc.). It can be said that Hinayana Vipassana meditation is mindfulness plus insight into the three marks of existence that underlie all phenomena: suffering (dukkha); not-self (anatta) and impermanence (anicca).

 

Mahayana Vipassana is more specifically meditation with emptiness as the object, because emptiness is the only object of meditation which can bring one to the Path of Preparation. Meditation on other objects, which are meditated on in Hinayana Vipassana, such as four noble truths or coarse selflessness of a person can not bring one to Path of Preparation.

 

It is true though that technically speaking (if we take Jamyang Shewa's definition, which is "Special insight is defined as wisdom of thorough discrimination of phenomena conjoined with special pliancy induced by the power of analysis.") one could say that Mahayana Vipassana could have other objects as its object, because the word emptiness is not specifically included in definition, but it seems that in most explanations the object of Mahayana Vipassana is emptiness. But even in this case, the difference would remain - the difference of subtlety of Hinayana and Mahayana object of meditation in Vipassana.

 

So, in my opinion the difference between Hinayana and Mahayana Vipassana is not only in motivation, but also (1) object of Mahayana Vipassana is emptiness, and (2) the object of Mahayana's Vipassana is more subtle (=subtle emptiness of phenomena).

 

Of course, If anyone knows more on this topic, please correct me :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Petra S

Hi,

 

a new age friend told me that she went to India to attend a vipassana course. It had nothing to do with buddhism. And nothing to do with analysis. In fact, what I read about shamatha & vipashyana in buddhism, is quite different to what she told. Is buddhist vipashyana based on analysis and non-buddhist vipassana not? :dontknow:

 

Some more info: they were observing their mind and breathing. Listening to her, it sounded like a colourful kaleidoscope, quite exciting and also very peaceful, she said it was like the whole universe was one with her mind. She explained that this practice is much older than buddhism.

 

Bye,

Petra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a new age friend told me that she went to India to attend a vipassana course. It had nothing to do with buddhism. And nothing to do with analysis. In fact, what I read about shamatha & vipashyana in buddhism, is quite different to what she told. Is buddhist vipashyana based on analysis and non-buddhist vipassana not? :dontknow:

 

Some more info: they were observing their mind and breathing.

...

Maybe the following links could be of some help;

http://www.fpmt.org/Teachers/resident/satta.asp

http://www.venantonio.com/venantonio/2006/..._vbm_vipas.html

 

I've had just a little taste of the type of Vipassana as thaught by Antonio.la on a short retreat...

Pfff...exquisite boredom as Antonio.la would say :D

I do not dare to go into any discussion on emptiness, but from what I've heard emptiness has to do with understanding the true nature of phenomena...sitting on a cushion for never ending 40 minutes with unbearable leg pain for at least 30 min of every sitting session and then getting up (I drove 1500 km for it - :D ), as stupid as you might find it, it was the most valuable taste of the transient nature of phenomena...session after session...this was my à¢-Ëœvipassana retreat' with a à¢-ËœMahayana teacher' who I think combined à¢-ËœTheravada techniques'...something like this... :bow:

 

I observed my mind before, when I was not a Buddhist, it allowed me to use the situations I faced in life better - for my own benefit, to suffer less, etc....nowadays I try to observe it more, on the cushion, off the cushion, according to my capacities and limitations, preferably while breathing ;) ; if you label this Buddhist or not, Tibetan, Chinese, Mahayana, Theravada, vipassana, emptiness, ...(or any other label which I'll have to look up in the dictionary :blush: ), it really does not make anything more clear to me; I want to become a 'Mahayana practitioner'! :angel: ; I take on the path whatever brings me closer to that goal; having almost no wisdom of my own, when in doubt, I ask my Teacher, a Mahayana Teacher, and then try to put things into practice, into every day life - eating lunch is the (Mahayana) practice if you give it the right motivation, no?...being mindful, trying to be more aware 24/7 helps me be à¢-Ëœan aspiring Mahayana practitioner'...yet, as a beginner, I naturally constantly lack this mindfulness, so I have plenty to analyse once I sit down on the cushion :(:D...it is all mixed up for me in theory, I hope I am not too confusing, but so simple somehow...

 

May your day be like a colourful kaleidoscope (I like this expression:-))...quite exciting and very peaceful...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Petra S

Thank you Dani for the answer. :bow:

 

I know more or less nothing about buddhism. Rather less than more. :D But I'm curious and I search and ask. So I was wondering if the vipassana that my new age friend attends is the same as buddhist vipassana. I wanted to know what to follow and what to avoid, what leads to results and what not.

 

After surfing a little bit on the internet, my conclusion was that it is not the same, because the buddhists in vipashyana analyse their mind to find its emptiness while the new age friend was just observing it. But as I understood you, both vipassanas are the same because labeling doesn't matter and everything can be a buddhist practice. Well, my mistake then. :blush:

 

You didn't tell anything about the method. Did you analyze your mind or you were just watching it? What was the aim? I guess not the sore knees? :laugh:

 

I wish you many nice things to see, wherever you look, inside or outside. :))

 

Bye, Petra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me Vipassana was a lot about getting to know my mind better, getting to know confusion better, learning a better and more kind way of dealing with disturbances. It opened a new door, new life, a bit less disturbed, so more place for observation, analysis. Sore knees, love, anger, impatience...everything being transient, everything will pass. To everything you give just observance/awareness, yet no more than that. Mind has all the capacity to deal with all mental creations.

 

The important things I also learned:

WHEN PAIN - practice patience

WHEN PLEASURE - practice content

 

So mind slowly becomes more peaceful...hah...of course my mind did not find it so easy ;)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Petra S

I see. What you and Dani are talking sounds just like my new age friend. The only thing that she added was the unity with everything there is, a unity with God. The rest sounds the same.

 

So Vipassana has nothing to do with analysis and emptiness and similar? Do I understand right? (I prefer to check because what you wrote sounds different to what Goodie wrote. Or maybe I'm just dumb, not excluded. :0022: )

 

I wish you a soft warm nicely scented night, ;)

Petra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

new age...very cool, with just the God missing :laugh:

Do I understand right? (I prefer to check because what you wrote sounds different to what Goodie wrote. Or maybe I'm just dumb, not excluded. :0022: )
Mr Goodie and me gave quite different sets of information; He has a plenitude of information about different schools, different techniques, scriptures, foreign words, he knows so many things, he must have read many books and has a very vast knowledge, probably accumulated over a period of time. :bow:

I've never read anything about Vipassana, I did a 10-day retreat labelled vipassana retreat together with another 50 or 60 people; it is obvious there is no intrinsic quality of a vipassana retreat for the participants to experience; all I can share is my experience, and painful legs, of course, were not the goal of the practice, yet as for myself a very important means I used to get some results - of course results are according to my level of practice - I've practically never done a retreat in my life before...

So, I see nothing controversial about our posts; it is just our starting points that are different.

 

As for the method, the question should be put to a Vipassana teacher.

But just out of curiosity - how do you analyse your mind without observing it or having observed it?

...as I understood you, both vipassanas are the same because labeling doesn't matter and everything can be a Buddhist practice. Well, my mistake then. ...
What I do believe is possible is to make my life 24/7 a Buddhist practice, all of it...some day, I have no doubt about it...(different opinions are of course more than welcome)

However, the fact that it can be, does not mean that it is...

 

Eating lunch can be a Buddhist practice; but it is not because you see a person eating lunch, that you go to him with a little label and say, à¢-ËœOh, fantastic, you must be a Buddhist!' Also when you see an overweight Buddhist, you do not automatically assume this person must had done a lot of à¢-Ëœlunch type of meditation' , but it can be; I can make an offering before eating the meal, I can observe how my mind jumps and stomac turns around at the sight of a cauliflower, and then to break the cup routine, and swallow it easier, take the smelly cauliflower as the object of my analytical emptiness meditation, and then observe mind jump even higher seeing ice-cream on horizon, recognising it as attachment, mindfully avoiding the issue of its non-self inherent nature not to loose the pleasure of the moment, I can leave a little piece of it aside to later offer to hungry ghosts...and many more things...just over a simple box of ice-cream...I mean lunch.

 

You say your new age friend went to India and just observed her mind and breathed and it had nothing to do with Buddhism...

All I am trying to say is that, just like eating that lunch, breathing and observing the mind or analysis can be nothing and all...if you know what your goal is, I would guess you make use of any of it according to the path you chose and then label it accordingly, if necessary.

 

Just an opinion...maybe a dumb new age one :-) ...thank you Petra for your inexhaustible flow of interesting questions; I appologize for my new age communication style- thank you for being patient with me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Petra S

It's good to listen to you. ;) I'm glad that you are not :[ on me because of my annonying neverending questions. :bow: I wouldn't say that you are a new age dummy, but that I am a western dodo, you know, built of rusty concepts like that iron man from the Oz, making a lot of verbal noise at every step. :read_this:

 

Bye, Petra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm glad that you are not :[ on me because of my annonying neverending questions.
Observing the mind helps, as I can detect irritation early enought to prevent it from developping into :[ Joking! :laugh:, of course...I mean, it works perfectly as a method (for me), but has nothing to do with you - the debates you launch are a pleasure to follow :bow:

 

as for the rusty concepts...we could compare notes some day :laugh: I have plenty on stock

a beautiful day to all, another little bit exciting and a very peaceful one ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see. What you and Dani are talking sounds just like my new age friend. The only thing that she added was the unity with everything there is, a unity with God. The rest sounds the same.

 

I think when we talk about practice sounding similar does not really matter. I was at Vipassana and I thought: I have this and this experience...so I thought, this one has similar as me, and this one has also. After the end of The retreat I was curious, so I asked. Actually none of those had similar experience. KARMA is so complex that to wrap one practice into a vague concept is really not necessary.

 

I agree with Dani very much. All is about motivation, eating can be done with Mahayana motivation, maybe selfish motivation too or a new age motivation. We can make rice in so many different ways, so we also have so many different results - rice dishes. Vipassana too, we can have different motivations, so different results, different experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Petra S

Hi again,

 

it is reeeally interesting to talk to you two. It would never come to my mind that somebody can think this way.

 

Let me check again. What you are saying, sounds like it doesn't matter what one practices, even if one doesn't practices, because motivation turns everything into practice. This sounds like a good idea, it can make every moment of life meaningful. :applause:

 

But... Why are then so many types of meditations, visualisations, mantras, prayers and whole practices? Why were initiations and levels of practice introduced, if differentiation is just a label? 8/

 

Looking forward to an answer :))

Petra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if one doesn't practices, because motivation turns everything into practice.

I am really not an expert, so I hope I wont say something that is not ok. I think practice is when there is a certain motivation behind. Lets say to offer food to hungry ghosts is a practice, to mindfully eat is a practice. Whatever brings us closer to our mind, our true nature of our mind is a practice. Yet with proper guidance. Without a spiritual advice of a qualified master all this can become an ego trick.

 

This sounds like a good idea, it can make every moment of life meaningful. :applause:
Exactly :). Lama Yeshe wrote a book: Making life meaningful http://www.lamayeshe.com/lamazopa/mlm/mlm_3.shtml

 

But... Why are then so many types of meditations, visualisations, mantras, prayers and whole practices? Why were initiations and levels of practice introduced, if differentiation is just a label? 8/
Each practitioner has different needs, so different practices exist. Yet within one practice also each individual has its own experience, since karma is so different. I think certain practices work more with certain delusions, so this is also why so many exist.

 

But this is really just an opinion as I do not know this things to such precision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Tashi Delek,

 

interesting encounter of two approaches. To avoid misunderstanding, maybe one could call one mindfulness meditation and the other one, i believe more traditional interpretation of the term, the special insight. But both lead us closer to the nature of our mind, don't they? ;)

 

Practices are paving the Path to Enlightenment. They are shaping, shaking and opening our mind so that we can discover the Buddha Nature within. I believe that higher one goes, more precisely they are prescribed (all kinds of practices). We are told how to develop the basic skills and how to upgrade them. The practices that lead towards the highest goal can be chosen only by our Guru, who knows our predispositions more than us and who has trodden the Path Himself.

 

Mindfulness meditation is one of the fundamental meditations and as such it can be non-religious, like Shine. Very briefly I've come across both, the new age and the Buddhist version. I see similarities in the method, but also differences in the vocabulary, selectivity according to a teacher, and in different motivation and goal.

 

My knowledge is far from being elaborate, but it goes in the same direction as Goodies. To my understanding, the traditional Special Insight meditation aims at realizing the true nature of phenomena, such as our own mind (which includes realization of Emptiness). To do it, we have to let go false concepts, especially ego-clinging. As Tilopa said to Naropa, "Son, the basis of samsara is not appearances; it is fixating on those appearances." Still, just watching the appearances come and go, might not lead us to a realisation yet. The Nagarjuna school talks of Vipashyana as rigorous questioning, leading to the non-conceptual view of reality itself. Kamalashila writes in his Stages of Meditation that one realises Vipashyana by reliance upon three causes: qualified spiritual friends, becoming learned (in Dharma), and proper reflection of the instructions (meditation). In the Vajrayana path, the direct experience of the nature of mind is granted by the Guru, on the basis of one's well trained mind.

 

It is said that mind has to be exceptionally strong to cut through appearances and realize its own nature. Therefore we train in Shine/Shamatha. We have to know precisely how to swing the sword of Wisdom to avoid the traps of the four extreme views. Therefore we train in Lhakthong/Vipashyana. Then we unite the two views.

 

The tandem of Shine-Lhakthong has the power to eventually cut the root of samsara, the ignorance. But for us, the beginners, any meditation that helps us to loosen the grip of clinging to appearances and bring us closer to the nature of our mind is the most precious meditation. ;)

 

All the very best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Therefore we train in Shine/Shamatha. We have to know precisely how to swing the sword of Wisdom to avoid the traps of the four extreme views. Therefore we train in Lhakthong/Vipashyana.
Which 2 views did you mean? The Shine view and Vipashyana view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Tashi Delek, dear Billytiss. ;)

 

Yes, i meant the union of the calm and mindful nature of our mind, developed by Shamatha, and the perception of the nature of reality, developed in Vipashyana (or the unity of vastness and precision, as Chögyam Trungpa said). By one interpretation these are three steps (Shamatha-Vipashyana-unity), while another interpretation talks about two steps (Shamatha-Vipashyana), because realization of Shamatha is a condition for the realization of Vipashyana and thus the latter already contains the first. In any case, by attaining the joined pair, one enters the path of preparation, the second of the five paths.

 

 

 

All the very best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Petra S

It seems that I've stopped stumbling over seeming or real contradictions. Thank you all for your answers - each single one contributed to the whole picture. :))

 

Bye, Petra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

 

Here is an link on Vipassana according to Theravada tradition:

What is Vipassana?

 

Here is my favourite passage:

 

"As was repeatedly told to us by our instructor-in-charge, in the Rangoon vipassaná centre, the sole duty, the only responsibility of someone undertaking a (Vipassana) training, only lies in knowing. There is nothing else that can be done. By telling this, our instructor exactly repeated what Buddha himself told twenty five centuries back:

 

"When a sound does manifest, only know what is heard. When a sight does occur, only know what is seen. When there is a smell, only know what is smelt. When there is a taste, only know what is tasted. When there is a mental object, only know what is thought." This is one of the rare and perhaps only time when Buddha clearly expresses what does the act of knowing, leading to nibbána, lie in."

 

Bye!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Very nice and useful link, thank you, Frederic. :))

 

If anybody would like to know more about scholastic definitions of Shamatha and Vipashyana, here are two more links, Mahayana school:

http://www.berzinarchives.com/sutra/sutra_...vipashyana.html

http://www.berzinarchives.com/sutra/sutra_...editations.html

 

Although, i believe that what helps us more in the practice is the most useful.

 

All the very best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...