Adventures at the Vipassana Enlightenment Factory
karanvas.com
karanvas.com
The article felt a little negative and while Goenka may or may not be enlightened a lot of teachings and discourse are but classical buddhism. The author I felt fell in the same trap Goenka does of criticising Gunaratne.
Don't know who Goenka is but have several family members who have done Vipasanna and have been privy to their experiences.
Author here. Goenka didn't criticise Gunaratane, or even mention him or any other Buddhist teacher by name. The most specific he got was when he was explaining that "other traditions" might teach (what is generally called) 'choiceless awareness' but he doesn't teach that, because the meditator would miss out on the development of awareness in body parts that don't appear in awareness spontaneously. But then he did recommend the equivalent of choiceless awareness practice to be done in bed just before falling asleep, and again just after waking.
My sense is that the Goenka org is the budget version. Which worked for me as a first retreat.
So yes, it's a factory, a conveyer belt of putting participants through a certain practice. It's practical, no frills, and not much flexibility. Also the food kinda sicks :)
But, for the price (donation) it totally delivers.
I found that the quality of the answers given depended on the quality of the specific teacher. While I was impressed by one teacher's answers, I got a similar "just keep meditating" answer from another.
That being said, Goenka's centers are free, and have a structured routine with no distractions, so I continue to recommend it to others as a first course.
Ah, but what about the severely reduced food intake? ;)
And Buddha's thoughts on rebirth make a lot more sense when you realize that not being reborn was rebellious to the status quo where rebirth was seen as natural. It was one part of his learnings that I was confused about and now I realize he was being pragmatic again.
Did we have any one like the Buddha again? Do we have anyone at the present, is it even possible for someone to be enlightened presently? And if Buddha genuinely was the only one who reached this level, did he actually glean "divine" truths?
The Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita from the Hindu traditions primarily discuss liberation from rebirth and various paths to it. [1] At least some of the Upanishads probably predate Buddhism. [2]
Liberation from rebirth has always been an integral part of the whole rebirth lore. So the Buddha's teachings were in that sense not rebellious to the status quo. It is even possible that the status quo actually coloured his opinion of his subjective experience of meditation so much as to lead him to believe he had found another path (if not the best path) to liberation.
It’s if you think taking an antihistamine is going to screw up your meditation, you’re probably on the wrong path.
I find acetic practices like putting vinegar in my salad helpful to meditation at times.
With that limitation, you're generally forbidden from being admitted if doctors think that the absence of your medication can result in a problem later down in the retreat.
Surely there are retreats where things are analyzed case-by-case in a much more thorough basis, but they're not entry-level, cheap-or-free retreats that Goenka is.
The critique in the article is valid but it comes with the territory. I also feel that a lot of things the author find difficult or annoying are things you just need to learn to roll with with in the same way that being an adult means being patient and learning to just deal with some difficult stuff.
Buddhism has concept called the Two truths doctrine. Ultimate truth and provisional truth. There are also parables in the sutras where Buddha describes his teaching as not being the ultimate truth itself.
In the parable of dad saving his children from burning house , dad uses fancy toys to draw the attention of kids so that they walk out of the burning building. Essentially bullshitting them.
There is also comparison of his teaching to a raft to cross the river. Teaching has utility value to get people across, it's not useful to carry it after the river is crossed.
Another thing in Buddhist thinking is consideration to how different people understand things and what they need psychologically. There are people who just want to hear from authority figure what to do and they believe it and just do it (maybe majority of people). You must teach them in a that way.
As a modern interpretation of this, my teacher told me that the point of his public talks is to tell people something that makes them to attempt meditation seriously until it 'clicks'. The practice itself sorts out those who can do it and can't. Most people will never be into it anyway. The motivation and reasoning that makes people to start does not really matter at all.
The name Buddha gave to his religion was not Buddhism. It was Dhamma-vinaya, 'doctrine and discipline'. In my experience after being involved with mediation circles for 20 years, gym-rats used to hard training and daily discipline have much better start with meditation than people like me who are overthinking and analyzing, and who try to make sense of everything said. Instructions are there to help with training, you don't go to mediation retreat to learn philosophy.
Perhaps true, but "overthinking and analyzing" is not the only failure mode or even the most common one. Many people view Buddhism as little more than a fashionable, 'exotic' practice, with many elements of a social club. These folks are even less likely to undertake vipassana (insight) meditation successfully! At least if you're an analyzing type, reading something like Ingram's 'Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha' will tell you plenty of useful things about how vipassana is supposed to work, and what progress you have made along the way at any given time. The vast majority of people who approach Buddhism or even "meditation" of some sorts aren't even aware in the least that these are issues one could care about!
If you meditate without learning and growing and analyzing the causality of different kinds of suffering (that is, psychological stress) eventually overcoming them, you'll never become enlightened. If anything, the analyzing type is the ideal type for enlightenment. Maybe not for meditation, but definitely for figuring things out. A trick is to not get in the way of what you're observing. If it feels bad there is a natural tendency to try to change it, but if you're changing it, then you can't observe it in a clear and scientific way hampering learning and growth. If you want to try to figure out solutions to suffering, it can be done after meditating, but meditation itself is not getting involved, beyond setting breakpoints (called noting) to accelerate awareness if the same problem arises.
If you find yourself getting involved in stressful ruminations, it is helpful to remember that stress/suffering is impermanent and will disappear on its own without any involvement, so you can relax even while stressed. This has the side effect of increasing awareness because involvement decreases awareness. However, being avoidant outside of meditation often makes the problem worse, so it is important to not have aversion. There needs to be a middle ground here, as with everything else.
Some do gain stages of enlightenment while meditating, but I suspect the majority gain those stages at the end of their meditation session, when they switch from meditating to analysis putting together what they just saw.
Also, Arhat is usually achieved while reading suttas, and Once Returner often is achieved when socializing. Stream Entry is the only common enlightenment obtained while meditating.
this right here is a good summation of why buddhism is just a cult of advanced physiology, those 'too much in their own head' and the truly mentally ill never do well in it. Buddhists like Alan Wallace insist this is a condition of fortunate conditions of karmic rebirth, in which those who have both social access to the Buddha's teaching and the neural complexity and health to integrate it successfully are in a 'Higher' rebirth caste than others.
The most common reason why people can't do it is exactly the same reason why people start physical exercise, or start eating healthier or any self improvement and then fail: problem in self regulation and the ability to maintain routine.
Big part of monastic type training and retreats is just fixing this very thing. The group and the routine comes from outside, you can do it.
I don’t see much difference between religion and sex. Their natures are diametrically opposite when it’s practiced privately vs publicly.
All forms of evangelism is advertising. Which brings up the question, why?
I have a theory that the reason religions/spirituality are actively encouraged to be spread because mob control and crowd control is necessary in a complex world. Being ‘good’ and ‘righteous’ is about creating homogenous societies who all play by the same rules and the reason these mind virii distinguish from each other with practices and icons and beliefs and structures is to be able to recognize and know ‘the other’.
Someone in the past said, religion is the opiate of the masses. It isn’t so anymore..it is more like pharmaceutical drugs prescribed by your doctor after a very heavy deductible. I can keep going on with this analogy but it is too predictable. So..please fill in the blanks yourself.
The notion is that we should be ‘good’ and easily recognized as ‘one of the tribe’, as it were...and speak the same language. It keeps the peace. Ironically, with the advent of monotheism, not so much anymore. Which begs the question, is the hack..that we know as religion/spirituality...outdated? Is it corrupted to the point that the system is attacking itself?
Certain themes are universal and don’t need institutionalized religion. I will give an example of forgiveness.
Last August, there was a hit and run case and a man died while riding his bike to work. The driver of the car that hit him took off. Last week, he turned himself in..
An overwhelming majority of the (religiously diverse) community was glad that he did and almost all of them thought that he did the right thing, he must face his punishment and that he will be at peace now that he doesn’t have to live with the guilt anymore. And then all said he should be forgiven. They never said that he should be let go and avoid imprisonment or trial. But then said that they forgave him.
I found that fascinating. Forgiveness is important. And promoting forgiveness is more important.
Most of them have children. They were using the same technique parents use with kids. Punishment without forgiveness will make sure that the future mistakes will never be confessed.
No punishment can be delivered without chances of redemption. No rules will be followed without the threat of punishment. I understood religion better at that moment. In a sense religion is for the order and well being of society. It is not for personal spiritual ascension. Not the version of religion with rules and strict observances. And publicly displayed.
Like the tail of a peacock. I don’t mean to make religion vain or vain glorious. To the contrary, I think we need such performances.
My point is that current state of religion is a mixed bag. Some are obviously failing. You can see this in the world arena where there is communal/sectarian violence and religious unrest. The hack has failed.
I suspect it is mostly due to its commoditization and emphasis on the reward system. There are no more sacrifices for the larger community. It is transactional.
My 2c. It was an informative read. Congregations are important to any faith. Religion or politics or family or celebration..all of them require assemblage of like minded people. They assemble because they agree to the rules. For some it is a trial run. Others subscribe to it. Others are initiated and adopt it from their families of origin. But at the end of the day, it’s meant to be a hack for public peace.
Secondly, think of the state as the aliens in Philip K Dick's story Faith of our Fathers. Religion in the form of poet-saints and the Bhakti tradition in the Indian subcontinent is an antidote to that and a reminder that virtue has nothing to do with education or literacy (see Akbar who was illiterate as an example)