The last section on cultish teachings seems like a deal breaker for me. I've read this a couple times and I just want to go to this place, and meditate in a safe place.
I don't really want to be preached to.
I don't really want to be preached to.
I've done the same program at the same location, and it's really not cultish at all. Essentially you're not allowed to do anything that would distract you (or others) from meditating, and that's it. (E.g. you're not allowed to talk with others or eat junk food, as with most similar programs.) The teachings obviously come from a certain sect of buddhism, but that's why you're there. Yes, Goenka does make some counterintuitive claims about the underlying nature of the universe, but the basis for those claims are phenomenological experiences that people have had while meditating; they come from the same set of experiences that you yourself will have if you stick with it.
There are certainly a few aspects that are less than ideal, e.g. there isn't really any way to get medical advice if you need it apart from just quitting the program. But other than that it's hard to complain. It's free, the food is amazing, the quality of instruction is very high, the people are great, etc.
I ask this very non-rhetorically - do you believe that this is a totally natural convergence of thought, or is it possible that this is the progression of thought that this particular set of guidance will lead you toward?
Happy to answer, but I'm not sure I understand the question -- could you rephrase?
> Yes, Goenka does make some counterintuitive claims about the underlying nature of the universe, but the basis for those claims are phenomenological experiences that people have had while meditating; they come from the same set of experiences that you yourself will have if you stick with it.
To rephrase the question - do you think that these experiences are convergent, in that anyone with enough discipline to meditate for long enough will have them, or do you think that these experiences are the result of Goenka's guidance?
To further the question, are you saying that the "counterintuitive claims" are something at which (again given enough practice/discipline) we all would arrive, or just that we would all share something similar to the experiences that they were born from?
I think they are specific to the technique, but not the teacher. E.g. someone doing concentration meditation (as opposed to insight meditation) is going to have very different experiences.
I don't think the fact that different spiritual techniques yield different experiences says much about their validity though. After all, you could easily consider normal everyday life to be a spiritual technique that yields a certain set of experiences.
"To further the question, are you saying that the 'counterintuitive claims' are something at which (again given enough practice/discipline) we all would arrive, or just that we would all share something similar to the experiences that they were born from?"
I think that for every technique there is a set (in the mathematical sense) of experiences that can be experienced via that technique. And every time you practice the technique, you're basically picking out an experience from that set at random (though certain experiences need certain requisite skill levels). So if you were skilled enough and had enough practice then your odds of having a given experience would increase, but they'd probably never be 100%.
You can see that though, for example, with the Johns Hopkins psilocybin trials, the odds of having some mystical experience over the course of two high-dose sessions are about 80%. Some people might be floating through the universe, others might experience the sum total of everything that ever can and will and has happened from every perspective, others might life a life review, others might relive their birth, etc. But the more times you do it, the more of these experiences you will eventually have.
I'm an Atheist myself. And on the 7/8th day I had what I would call a strange dream. I was practicing Vipassana on the bed as I could not get to sleep. Suddenly I've fallen asleep and dreamt of being someone else on a distant past. After some time I woke up not knowing where I was and what was happening.
For anyone 'spiritual' enough that would be a 'past life experience'. But the thing is. I don't know why, but while there, every dream seems a lot more "real".
I think it has something to do with all the silence involved. You can't speak, and the center itself is very quiet (far from any urban center).
On the 11th day (when you are allowed to talk with other students) I've found out that it was very common indeed.
So I think, yes, with enough practice every one will have similar experiences. But these experiences will mean different things for different people.
> the people are great
?
On balance, it's pretty chill. Even the people who totally buy in and devote huge portions of their life to this organization are mostly just really into meditation (as opposed to, say, devotion to the organization or the man behind it). Though some of tactics are kind of strong-arm-y, the emphasis is always on getting you to practice a very simple, effective form of meditation
I feel like a huge benefit to meditation is that it allows people to arrive at their own conclusions. But what I worry about is that the "guidance" you'd receive in situations like this is more guidance to a set of predetermined ideals or conclusions, rather than guidance into how best to find your own. It's incredibly hard to do anything so deeply introspective without bumping up against existential issues. I feel like having someone guide you through this process requires a ridiculous amount of trust in how they value your individualism.
As an anecdote, my wife just competed her 200 hour yoga teacher certification which included a two day retreat to an ashram. Like you said about being told that the chanting is not rite or ritual, they constantly said that yoga isn't spiritual or religious. But in surveying the whole of yoga there are definitely parts of it that are at least "mystical" if not religious. For some of it you can just say "they're not being literal, this is metaphorical" but other parts, such as the chakras, are hard to see through that lens [Edit: as another lesser-known example, see mudras, hand [1] or otherwise]. And then even where there isn't any mysticism there is plenty of "holistic" discipline or rigor being taught.
When I went to her graduation ceremony one of the fellow students told me that the biggest thing that she got out of the training was the knowledge that when we die, our energy lives on. While this is literally true, she clearly meant it in a very spiritual sense.
As a complete outsider it's hard not to see this in a religious light. To the issue of trust in those who are guiding your introspective thoughts, I see this situation as a huge barrier.
1: http://www.eyogaforbeginners.com/hand-mudra-meanings-explana...
You don't need help to do this. You don't need a magic tree, or to be in India to do this. Just sit quietly and meditate. Quit putting obstacles in your way and just do it. Forget teachers, instructors, gurus, priests, yogis, etc and just do it.
While meditation is incredibly simple, it is far, far more difficult than just sitting quietly. Meditation is observing and (hopefully gently) directing your mental focus.
Try it sometime for 10-20 minutes. Sit down someplace quiet, close your eyes, and choose some very simple thought to focus on. Try to keep your mind from flailing about. It's incredibly difficult. There's absolutely no way I could make it through a 10 day exercise like this without guidance.
Some people do this for specific purposes such as working out a problem that they're having, or just promoting attentiveness, and sometimes it's just a matter of exercising general discipline so that other discipline will follow outside of meditation.
In support of my original comment, this is the easiest place I've found to apply the lens of metaphor. People will talk about meditation in terms of energy, vibrations, and flow. If you just think of these terms in the context of focus - the intensity, oscillation, and well, flow of focus, it gets a lot easier to accept.
Edit:
To answer your "what types of guidance" question directly, there are all kinds of non leading guidance to be given. Simple examples include "sit someplace comfortable," and "don't feel guilty should your mind start to wander."
It is helpful to get help -- someone holding space for you can be very helpful -- but ultimately, this is between you and you.
In the last two days I have begun to wonder if I should find a good teacher. I find it _insanely_ hard to hold my focus for that ten minute period. However much I try, I often catch myself thinking about something else - without realising how I got onto that train of thought. I then try to steer my mind back.
The other thing I noticed is that I don't know if I made any progress at all over the last week. I don't know if I am trying the right things or whether just sticking to this will some day bring about an improvement.
This makes me feel that though no one can be _made_ to learn anything, a good teacher can definitely make one learn faster (and in some cases learn what one may otherwise be unable to figure out by oneself).
http://www.audiodharma.org/series/1/talk/1762/
(Gil Fronsdal, Introduction to Meditation)
They're a good secular introduction to mindfulness meditation. (Gil Fronsdal is a buddhist, but in this series he takes great care to avoid mixing the religious aspects with the meditation teaching, to the extent of jokingly referring to the "b-word")
I've also mentioned "Mindfulness in Plain English" elsewhere: http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe.html
Both of them address the problems you mention. And actually they're not so much problems as your perception of them are - you get better by practising observing and guiding your attention back to your breath (or whatever other object of focus you choose), and you get that practice by constantly losing focus.
Some people will experience it getting much worse after a while, even. After a few weeks I went through a period where I'd get really intense "monkey mind". That is, I'd sit down to meditate, and my mind would go completely crazy. All kinds of things would pop into my head, including totally ridiculous and pointless concerns, and concentration was impossible.
Then I had a period where I'd get an intense feeling that I hadn't set my alarm (I was meditating before I had to leave for work, and this feeling indicated that I was running late, and needed to look at the watch immediately). If I looked at my watch, the feeling would still reassert itself a few minutes later. I had to look at my watch several times, and confirm and reconfirm that the alarm was set and the countdown running before I started meditating to weaken the feeling, and then still spent weeks overcoming the desire to look at my watch before it finally subsided.
But it all passed, and while I don't meditate as often as I like to, it's gotten a lot easier with time. That is not to say it is easy, and as with pretty much everything else, you can always push further into more advanced practices. But you get to a stage where you feel that you are actually meditating rather than fighting off total chaos in your mind, and that makes it a lot easier to want to sit regularly.
Note that I'm not saying you shouldn't find a teacher. By all means. But you can make a good start by yourself, and you can find a lot of good (and free) guidance online as a starting point.
I have done it for 10-20 minutes. I have done it for 30 minutes. And 40. And 45. And 1 hour and half.
It is difficult every time. No one said this is easy.
Over time, I have learned to be able to observe the ... discomfort and "difficulty" as an arising object, and allow that to pass by.
I started from having extreme difficulty sitting for 1 minute.
As for "easier to accept" -- that is not acceptance. Acceptance is acceptance. There is no easy or hard about it. Thinking that something is "easier to accept" is a subtle form of aversion.
Finally, what you talk about with "focus" and "flow of focus" -- that is concentration, that is samadhi. Vipassana is insight, and while it uses a minimum level of concentration, you're not trying to hold a particular focus. You're observing the fundamental nature of reality.
I've left these two URL's in a couple of other comments - take a look at my other comments in this thread for more explanation. But these are gentle, non-preachy and non-strong-arm-y introductions:
http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe.html (Mindfulness in Plain English; free e-book, or you can get the printed version of Amazon)
http://www.audiodharma.org/series/1/talk/1762/ (Introduction to Meditation; MP3 recordings of a course held by Gil Fronsdal)
I share your scepticism. I'm a lifelong atheists, and though long fascinated by meditation, what kept me away for the longest time was the religious / spiritual baggage that comes with a lot of the teaching resources.
Here is a synopsis of a story that is told on retreat:
A man goes to see the Buddha and says, "Oh, Buddha I have heard that you are an all knowing sage, I have traveled far to see you. In my village the holy men can't seem to come to an agreement. Some say that after we die we are reborn here or in another realm, they believe that the soul is eternal. Others believe that there is no soul, and that after we die there is nothing. Can you please put this issue to rest, we have agreed that whatever you tell us is the truth and we will stop our ceaseless argument."
The Buddha smiling responded gently,
"Endless are the arguments of the mystics. Do you see the leaves in the forest? They represent the sum total of my knowledge."
The Buddha paused and picked up a handful of leaves from the forest floor.
"These leaves... They represent the knowledge that is relevant to the cessation of suffering in this lifetime. This is the knowledge I teach."
The Buddha as described in Theravada Buddhism was not particularly interested in specific beliefs but rather in providing practices that help humans to suffer less.
The Buddha spent a lot of time criticizing the establishment, and was distrusting of practices that left people with unprovable conclusions (i.e. the knowledge that, "when we die, our energy lives on.")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmajala_Sutta_%28Theravada%2...
I'll say this for the chanting: by the time it starts up at about minute 55, it is the sweetest sound you can possibly imagine.
- The overzealous assistant has his own thing going on, and so do you. That's actually an AWESOME interaction to have. How do you feel about it? Where is coming from your body? Good fodder for vipassana.
- The Trappist monks has the same practiced with a different set of cultural bias. Something to investigate.
- You can look up Daniel Ingram's book, Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha. It's a little advanced, but the coolest thing about his book is that the framework he talks about is flexible enough that you can see the underlying practice regardless of cultural biases.
- When you reach a tipping point of realization, you find yourself not at all bothered by these cultural biases or little difference. The essential practice is still the same.
- The conservative morality and reincarnation falls out of the insights people have doing these practices. Ingram has a great teaching, that morality is putting the realization you received on the cushion in every day life. It might manifest as conservative, it might not. The important thing is that *you* are living the realizations you received through your practice. The labels, conservative or otherwise, eventually fall away.
- Likewise, it is quite all right for you not to believe in reincarnation. You do this long enough, you start finding things about incarnation cycles. Until you've had those experiences, that one is a tough one to swallow for most people. And why should they accept it when they have not directly realized it?I'm allergic to coercion too. I did discover to my delight ... and horror ... that no one in the world can force you to be mindful ;-)
Even though some rules like not pointing the feet, segregation etc. look very rigid. But they make perfect sense as you understand the concept behind it all.
The rules are made so that there is as little disturbance as possible to your meditation practice. In an ideal meditation retreat of this kind, a person stays alone and meditates alone. So some rigid rules are made to help create such a condition.
The best thing what I liked was I did not have to believe in anything to start with. You benefit a lot if you practice the meditation and forget about understanding every piece of information.
There's enough literature out there that you can give vipassana a try on your own. It may be harder to be honest about yourself, but you don't have to meditate in a group or at a retreat.