7 ms·

I did a Vipassana retreat a few years ago. Definitely an incredible experience, and I could see directly measurable positive effects on my thinking, on how I ma

by wdrw 11y ago

I did a Vipassana retreat a few years ago. Definitely an incredible experience, and I could see directly measurable positive effects on my thinking, on how I made decisions, etc. afterwards (although the effect does wear off after a while if you don't keep meditating regularly). However, I feel I must mention some negatives as well. First, the course emphasizes many times that it is purely secular, but towards the end it slides into the more religious aspects of Buddhism (reincarnation and even some explicitly anti-scientific ideas). I feel that this can turn off a lot of the more analytically-minded/secular/atheist people, which is a real shame because Vipassana still makes a lot of sense without these religious aspects. Secondly, towards the end of the course there's real pressure in the lectures to accept Vipassana as the "one true way" to meditate, and I got a little bit of a cult-ish vibe from some of the returning students and especially from the volunteers. Not to the degree that it's going to be a problem for most people, but I can see how a small minority of "brainwash-susceptible" individuals, especially in a vulnerable stage in life, may throw themselves 100% into Vipassana after a retreat, instead of critically thinking about this powerful experience afterwards. So my advice: definitely do it if you can, take it seriously and give it your 100%, but don't turn off your critical thinking skills during the lectures or after the retreat. If you can do it, there's lots to gain.

mmohebbi 11y ago
Yes- nice to see I'm not the only one who felt this way! It's an amazing experience but some of the cultish aspects bothered me as well. I understand that they want you to focus on the Vipassana way of meditating during the retreat but pushing it as the "one true way" felt contradictory.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
shockzzz 11y ago
I can't stand people who say Buddhism is not a religion. In many, many, MANY ways Christianity is as much a philosophy as Buddhism is. People also don't realize that Buddhism in the West is specifically catered to Westerners who are sick of the dogma of the Abrahamic religions. Ironically, Buddhism is filled with the same dogma, but it's hidden in the West until you buy into it. I can't imagine it's entirely different from how Christian missionaries approach developing countries. Not saying that Buddhism is "bad" - not at all. But it is in no way as secular, or as peaceful, as Westerners think it is. It has a long and torrid history of violence, as well as dogma. I just wish people recognized Buddhism for what it is - a religion.
- paolomaffei 11y ago
  (Buddhist here) Could I see quotations about the history of violence? Buddhism has by far the lowest score of violence of all five big religions of the world. Not to mention that when that violence did happen (zen priests blessing kamikazes during WW2, myanmar riots these days...) it has been condemned as explicitly not-buddhist by the wider Buddhist world (for violence has no place in the Buddha's thought). As for it being a religion, well yes it is, however it is not a theistical religion that explicitly asks you to believe in a vengeful, retributing god. The Buddha describes how reality works (karma - from a certain action an appropriate consequence will follow, and there's nothing fixed or permanent, just conditions giving rise to other conditions) with the important corollary that if you want to be happy, then do actions that are ethical because "good" consequences will follow from those. This is what we call a "philosophy" in western thought. It only becomes a "religion" when one believes that one too, could be like the Buddha, becoming something that's much higher than what one is right now. One doesn't have to believe this bit however, one could very well follow the Buddha's teachings (and meditation, which is an integral part of) just to become a happier human being.
  - nabla9 11y ago
    I think the key point shockzzz makes is: "it is in no way as secular, or as peaceful, as Westerners think it is" (Just look at what is happening in Burma right now or Sri Lanka) Satan and Jesus are walking down the street. They see man in front of them picking up small piece of truth. Jesus says "Satan! That man has realized the Truth! There is nothing you can to do to stop him now!" Satan smiles cunningly at Jesus "Yes, he has realized the Truth. And now I am going to help him organize the Truth!" As a secular Buddhist the key issue for me is that whenever Buddhism becomes popular main religion, it will will more or less dilute into something very different. In Zen Buddhist tradition there are many autobiographies and stories from over thousand years of Zen Buddhism. They tell the story of constant struggle between community/authority and actual praxis. Either authorities want to embrace Buddhism and dilute and disfigure it into common religious formula, or they prosecute it. Buddhism as a religion seems to be in the state constant decay and needs periodic reforms to get back into basics. The history of Thai Forest Tradition is good example of how there was need for reform in Buddhist monastic tradition in a country where Buddhism is everywhere in well organized and accepted form.
trhway 11y ago
sounds somewhat similar to a "slow induction/sucking into swamp" way the Scientology consumed (in all senses) one my colleague some years ago. If it looks cult-ish, if it sounds cult-ish ...
mvanvoorden 11y ago
Exactly how I feel about it. I am pretty critical and have a knack for spotting hypocrisy, which there was enough to find of, at least in the center where I was (Bavaria, Germany, they are so attached to rules there, no amount of Vipassana can take that away). One anecdote: Mr. Goenka ends every day with 'May all beings be happy.' Imagine my surprise when the server said we could not pet the stray cats that were walking around, to prevent them from coming back all the time, because they didn't want to take care of them. Some of these contradictions started to annoy me, and almost made me leave, until I realized on day 5 that this is all part of the meditation, more or less. I wasn't there for them, I was there for my own development, and so I had to accept the reality as it is, stop comparing and focus on the experience. All externalities are not relevant, and the ability to not let your mood be influenced by things outside your control is exactly what is developed there. So every contradiction or irritation became a challenge, to strengthen my discipline. I had an interesting conversation on the last day with a Buddhist. He also didn't like the 'one true way' part of it. He became a Buddhist mainly because his teacher told him honestly that his way was just one of many that one can follow. And although Mr Goenka says it's the one true way, he also continuously says that you should not take his (or anyone else's) words for granted, but that you should experience and decide for yourself, and that whatever you do, decide on a path to follow and stay with it, because if you start a new path all the time, you will never reach the end of the road.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  >Imagine my surprise when the server said we could not pet the stray cats that were walking around, to prevent them from coming back all the time, because they didn't want to take care of them. That seems like an ethical approach to me. Once you start feeding and messing with wildlife, you interrupt their natural habits and processes. Many animals have starved to death because some "do gooder" decided to feed them, thus raising their populations to an unsustainable level, then he gets bored of it, and now their babies cant get enough calories and starve. Not to mention the potential of passing on or catching some virus or bacteria from touching feral or wild animals or the slim, but real, potential to get a rabies bite.
  - 11y ago
danieldk 11y ago
Luckily, when I did vipassana, I was in a group that did not insert much religion in weekly practice or retreats. Sometimes, there were separate reading groups for people who were interested. But practice was only sitting, walking, sitting, and then the opportunity to tell about your experience if you wanted to. I think another problematic aspect (besides religious dogma) is the hierarchy that exists in some communities. While I definitely think that it's important to be guided by an experienced meditator, some leaders are (unjustly) put on a pedestal (even more when they are from the east). This leads to people accepting practice (or even sexual abuse in some cases) without critical thinking.
treenyc 11y ago
Wow that is interesting! I have many respected secular friends who have done it and highly recommended. I've being waited listed, but have not done it yet. Sorry to hear that was your experience in the end. Seems like the people who are preaching may be diverting from the essence of the practice. From what I understand Vipassana predates buddhism. Has not thing to do with religion rather a practice to observe our own internal thoughts without outside influence.
abledon 11y ago
It's also quite dangerous if you haven't taken physical preparations beforehand. To sit on the floor 6-8 hours a day with a weak westernised body, used to sitting in a chair, is dangerous. If your not super fit and have great core strength, the muscles around your spine simply can't hold you for that long and you collapse into the skeleton, which can lead to injury. Traditionally, Vipassana would have rigorous physical training before the meditation, now in the westernised setting, we just go from sitting at desk 8 hrs a day for decades, to sitting on the cushion. Furthermore, the endocrine system can get really messed up when you sit for that long over a number of period of days. When the body doesn't move, things stagnate and cause problems (just look at all the research coming out about the dangers of prolonged sitting) However if one is physically fit & ready to begin, then great things can happen!
- mvanvoorden 11y ago
  It's not like you have to sit 10 hours a day without ever moving. The longest streak is about 1 hour, and only from day 5 there's two times a day a sitting with determination. Nobody's asked to force it, if it really hurts, then just move. Every hour there's a 5-10 minute break to walk around and stretch the legs. As I knew there would be sitting with determination later in the week, I trained my body and mind in the first days by sitting still as long as I could.
  - abledon 11y ago
    Yeah, I guess I'm more addressing those Type-A personalities who might be reading this thinking "I'm gonna go do this and kick ass, taking the practice to the maximum limit my mind will let me"... then going in and ignoring their pain through sheer willpower then coming out in a lot of trouble.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
>but towards the end it slides into the more religious aspects of Buddhism Well, its a religious practice. This is like joining a Catholic choir and being surprised all the songs are about Jesus, and all the talk of melodies and harmony take a backseat to devotion. As a meditator, I think this push to strip it down and reduce it to just a "stress remover" is counter-productive and will end in situations like yours where you feel the "anti-scientific" (whatever that means) aspects attacked you. The reality here is that meditators, especially teachers, can't divorce the emotional, spiritual, ethical, and even supernatural parts of their practice for Western consumers who just want a "fix me" weekend to go back to their busy, complex, and stressful lives. The larger point is to fix/change yourself so you don't constantly need "recharge" retreats. I think there's been this failed experiment in the last 100 years to strip people of spirituality either by force (Communism) or by shame (Western Determinism/Materialism). As an lower-case atheist and non-religious person, I find it all incredible bleak and have been, over the years, working my way closer to the "softer" parts of Buddhism. I'm pretty much an agnostic with maybe some weak spiritual views now and its a good place to be. I don't think you can really expect Buddhists to strip Buddhism from meditation. They find too much value in it the same way I do. Secular/scientific "stress busting" techniques don't work compared to holistic life changes that yes include weird spiritual stuff and counter-modern ideas like living for the moment/experience and not giving into attachment, materialism, emotions, etc. We tried just deep breathing, we tried every psychological fad, we tried drugs, etc. They just don't seem to work very well compared to a serious change in lifestyle as described by Buddhism or some school of mediation/Eastern thought. I see people stuck on endless skinner boxes on ipads and consoles. I see people fighting and killing themselves at shitty, stressful jobs (yours truly included), etc. I see conflict all the time and the inevitable race to a Nash equilibria that makes everyone unhappy. Samasara looks real to me, even if you interpret it as a metaphor. I don't think its cultish to point out alternatives to the Western idea of "being productive," or to add some "woo." Frankly, I'm not convinced some "woo" isn't real. No, I'm not sending money to Sylvia Brown, but I won't be a dismissive asshole when people talk about reincarnation, or how they think Vipassana or Kundalini brought them close to some important spiritual experience, etc. Funny how we dismiss these experiences, but ask any geek about LSD and he'll ramble one for hours how its pretty much spiritualism in a can and everyone nods in lockstep. Perhaps we're a little too dismissive of the soft parts of Buddhism in the West.
poelzi 11y ago
I did like 14 courses over the years. I understand what you mean with religious talks and I can understand your point of view. Tho, first, Goenka explicitly sates that whatever part of the theory, you don't like, take it out, as long as the practice is in tact. From a scientific point of view, the practice is tested to work very well. Only on my personal level, it works very well in alignment with the mental body-mind model I developed over the years, but it not a published scientific model, at least yet. Unfortunately, that your physical model does not have a model for rebirth like information exchange does not mean there exists none. Hey, if you think in the standard model, your model has be proven to never predict absorption lines correctly apart from all the other problems it has. Not all 4 general believed facts on a black hole can all be true at the same time. Lots of unexplained phenomena even counterfactual. The model I adopted explains general and special relativity, all known quantum mechanical effects, rules and energies and predicts some more, the periodic table, stable and unstable isotops, all chemical bonds, absorption lines, has a correct arrow of time, irreversible processes and is ultimately reversible, explains much more cosmological phenomena then your model, quasars, pulsars, binary pulsars, cepheids of type II, globular clusters, and and and Uses much stricter energy conservation, stricter logic while having fewer assumptions. And yes, it also has predicted phenomena not existing in your model at all, called ring photons. One or many photons entangled with: start<->end, building a very stable ring with 2 bits of information. Those can build up loop in loop structures encoding very dense informations in a very quite stable structure. And know what, those rings are predicted to be emmited in 3 amino acids we humans use, so - I see things a bit different now, scientifically :) But I don't see those fields as some indestructible object, and more like fragments that flow around. But without understanding the model it will not make much sense for you.

by wdrw 11y ago

mmohebbi 11y ago

Yes- nice to see I'm not the only one who felt this way! It's an amazing experience but some of the cultish aspects bothered me as well. I understand that they want you to focus on the Vipassana way of meditating during the retreat but pushing it as the "one true way" felt contradictory.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

shockzzz 11y ago

I can't stand people who say Buddhism is not a religion. In many, many, MANY ways Christianity is as much a philosophy as Buddhism is. People also don't realize that Buddhism in the West is specifically catered to Westerners who are sick of the dogma of the Abrahamic religions. Ironically, Buddhism is filled with the same dogma, but it's hidden in the West until you buy into it. I can't imagine it's entirely different from how Christian missionaries approach developing countries. Not saying that Buddhism is "bad" - not at all. But it is in no way as secular, or as peaceful, as Westerners think it is. It has a long and torrid history of violence, as well as dogma. I just wish people recognized Buddhism for what it is - a religion.

paolomaffei 11y ago
(Buddhist here) Could I see quotations about the history of violence? Buddhism has by far the lowest score of violence of all five big religions of the world. Not to mention that when that violence did happen (zen priests blessing kamikazes during WW2, myanmar riots these days...) it has been condemned as explicitly not-buddhist by the wider Buddhist world (for violence has no place in the Buddha's thought). As for it being a religion, well yes it is, however it is not a theistical religion that explicitly asks you to believe in a vengeful, retributing god. The Buddha describes how reality works (karma - from a certain action an appropriate consequence will follow, and there's nothing fixed or permanent, just conditions giving rise to other conditions) with the important corollary that if you want to be happy, then do actions that are ethical because "good" consequences will follow from those. This is what we call a "philosophy" in western thought. It only becomes a "religion" when one believes that one too, could be like the Buddha, becoming something that's much higher than what one is right now. One doesn't have to believe this bit however, one could very well follow the Buddha's teachings (and meditation, which is an integral part of) just to become a happier human being.
- nabla9 11y ago
  I think the key point shockzzz makes is: "it is in no way as secular, or as peaceful, as Westerners think it is" (Just look at what is happening in Burma right now or Sri Lanka) Satan and Jesus are walking down the street. They see man in front of them picking up small piece of truth. Jesus says "Satan! That man has realized the Truth! There is nothing you can to do to stop him now!" Satan smiles cunningly at Jesus "Yes, he has realized the Truth. And now I am going to help him organize the Truth!" As a secular Buddhist the key issue for me is that whenever Buddhism becomes popular main religion, it will will more or less dilute into something very different. In Zen Buddhist tradition there are many autobiographies and stories from over thousand years of Zen Buddhism. They tell the story of constant struggle between community/authority and actual praxis. Either authorities want to embrace Buddhism and dilute and disfigure it into common religious formula, or they prosecute it. Buddhism as a religion seems to be in the state constant decay and needs periodic reforms to get back into basics. The history of Thai Forest Tradition is good example of how there was need for reform in Buddhist monastic tradition in a country where Buddhism is everywhere in well organized and accepted form.

trhway 11y ago

sounds somewhat similar to a "slow induction/sucking into swamp" way the Scientology consumed (in all senses) one my colleague some years ago. If it looks cult-ish, if it sounds cult-ish ...

mvanvoorden 11y ago

Exactly how I feel about it. I am pretty critical and have a knack for spotting hypocrisy, which there was enough to find of, at least in the center where I was (Bavaria, Germany, they are so attached to rules there, no amount of Vipassana can take that away). One anecdote: Mr. Goenka ends every day with 'May all beings be happy.' Imagine my surprise when the server said we could not pet the stray cats that were walking around, to prevent them from coming back all the time, because they didn't want to take care of them. Some of these contradictions started to annoy me, and almost made me leave, until I realized on day 5 that this is all part of the meditation, more or less. I wasn't there for them, I was there for my own development, and so I had to accept the reality as it is, stop comparing and focus on the experience. All externalities are not relevant, and the ability to not let your mood be influenced by things outside your control is exactly what is developed there. So every contradiction or irritation became a challenge, to strengthen my discipline. I had an interesting conversation on the last day with a Buddhist. He also didn't like the 'one true way' part of it. He became a Buddhist mainly because his teacher told him honestly that his way was just one of many that one can follow. And although Mr Goenka says it's the one true way, he also continuously says that you should not take his (or anyone else's) words for granted, but that you should experience and decide for yourself, and that whatever you do, decide on a path to follow and stay with it, because if you start a new path all the time, you will never reach the end of the road.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago
>Imagine my surprise when the server said we could not pet the stray cats that were walking around, to prevent them from coming back all the time, because they didn't want to take care of them. That seems like an ethical approach to me. Once you start feeding and messing with wildlife, you interrupt their natural habits and processes. Many animals have starved to death because some "do gooder" decided to feed them, thus raising their populations to an unsustainable level, then he gets bored of it, and now their babies cant get enough calories and starve. Not to mention the potential of passing on or catching some virus or bacteria from touching feral or wild animals or the slim, but real, potential to get a rabies bite.
- 11y ago

danieldk 11y ago

Luckily, when I did vipassana, I was in a group that did not insert much religion in weekly practice or retreats. Sometimes, there were separate reading groups for people who were interested. But practice was only sitting, walking, sitting, and then the opportunity to tell about your experience if you wanted to. I think another problematic aspect (besides religious dogma) is the hierarchy that exists in some communities. While I definitely think that it's important to be guided by an experienced meditator, some leaders are (unjustly) put on a pedestal (even more when they are from the east). This leads to people accepting practice (or even sexual abuse in some cases) without critical thinking.

treenyc 11y ago

Wow that is interesting! I have many respected secular friends who have done it and highly recommended. I've being waited listed, but have not done it yet. Sorry to hear that was your experience in the end. Seems like the people who are preaching may be diverting from the essence of the practice. From what I understand Vipassana predates buddhism. Has not thing to do with religion rather a practice to observe our own internal thoughts without outside influence.

abledon 11y ago

It's also quite dangerous if you haven't taken physical preparations beforehand. To sit on the floor 6-8 hours a day with a weak westernised body, used to sitting in a chair, is dangerous. If your not super fit and have great core strength, the muscles around your spine simply can't hold you for that long and you collapse into the skeleton, which can lead to injury. Traditionally, Vipassana would have rigorous physical training before the meditation, now in the westernised setting, we just go from sitting at desk 8 hrs a day for decades, to sitting on the cushion. Furthermore, the endocrine system can get really messed up when you sit for that long over a number of period of days. When the body doesn't move, things stagnate and cause problems (just look at all the research coming out about the dangers of prolonged sitting) However if one is physically fit & ready to begin, then great things can happen!

mvanvoorden 11y ago
It's not like you have to sit 10 hours a day without ever moving. The longest streak is about 1 hour, and only from day 5 there's two times a day a sitting with determination. Nobody's asked to force it, if it really hurts, then just move. Every hour there's a 5-10 minute break to walk around and stretch the legs. As I knew there would be sitting with determination later in the week, I trained my body and mind in the first days by sitting still as long as I could.
- abledon 11y ago
  Yeah, I guess I'm more addressing those Type-A personalities who might be reading this thinking "I'm gonna go do this and kick ass, taking the practice to the maximum limit my mind will let me"... then going in and ignoring their pain through sheer willpower then coming out in a lot of trouble.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

>but towards the end it slides into the more religious aspects of Buddhism Well, its a religious practice. This is like joining a Catholic choir and being surprised all the songs are about Jesus, and all the talk of melodies and harmony take a backseat to devotion. As a meditator, I think this push to strip it down and reduce it to just a "stress remover" is counter-productive and will end in situations like yours where you feel the "anti-scientific" (whatever that means) aspects attacked you. The reality here is that meditators, especially teachers, can't divorce the emotional, spiritual, ethical, and even supernatural parts of their practice for Western consumers who just want a "fix me" weekend to go back to their busy, complex, and stressful lives. The larger point is to fix/change yourself so you don't constantly need "recharge" retreats. I think there's been this failed experiment in the last 100 years to strip people of spirituality either by force (Communism) or by shame (Western Determinism/Materialism). As an lower-case atheist and non-religious person, I find it all incredible bleak and have been, over the years, working my way closer to the "softer" parts of Buddhism. I'm pretty much an agnostic with maybe some weak spiritual views now and its a good place to be. I don't think you can really expect Buddhists to strip Buddhism from meditation. They find too much value in it the same way I do. Secular/scientific "stress busting" techniques don't work compared to holistic life changes that yes include weird spiritual stuff and counter-modern ideas like living for the moment/experience and not giving into attachment, materialism, emotions, etc. We tried just deep breathing, we tried every psychological fad, we tried drugs, etc. They just don't seem to work very well compared to a serious change in lifestyle as described by Buddhism or some school of mediation/Eastern thought. I see people stuck on endless skinner boxes on ipads and consoles. I see people fighting and killing themselves at shitty, stressful jobs (yours truly included), etc. I see conflict all the time and the inevitable race to a Nash equilibria that makes everyone unhappy. Samasara looks real to me, even if you interpret it as a metaphor. I don't think its cultish to point out alternatives to the Western idea of "being productive," or to add some "woo." Frankly, I'm not convinced some "woo" isn't real. No, I'm not sending money to Sylvia Brown, but I won't be a dismissive asshole when people talk about reincarnation, or how they think Vipassana or Kundalini brought them close to some important spiritual experience, etc. Funny how we dismiss these experiences, but ask any geek about LSD and he'll ramble one for hours how its pretty much spiritualism in a can and everyone nods in lockstep. Perhaps we're a little too dismissive of the soft parts of Buddhism in the West.

poelzi 11y ago

I did like 14 courses over the years. I understand what you mean with religious talks and I can understand your point of view. Tho, first, Goenka explicitly sates that whatever part of the theory, you don't like, take it out, as long as the practice is in tact. From a scientific point of view, the practice is tested to work very well. Only on my personal level, it works very well in alignment with the mental body-mind model I developed over the years, but it not a published scientific model, at least yet. Unfortunately, that your physical model does not have a model for rebirth like information exchange does not mean there exists none. Hey, if you think in the standard model, your model has be proven to never predict absorption lines correctly apart from all the other problems it has. Not all 4 general believed facts on a black hole can all be true at the same time. Lots of unexplained phenomena even counterfactual. The model I adopted explains general and special relativity, all known quantum mechanical effects, rules and energies and predicts some more, the periodic table, stable and unstable isotops, all chemical bonds, absorption lines, has a correct arrow of time, irreversible processes and is ultimately reversible, explains much more cosmological phenomena then your model, quasars, pulsars, binary pulsars, cepheids of type II, globular clusters, and and and Uses much stricter energy conservation, stricter logic while having fewer assumptions. And yes, it also has predicted phenomena not existing in your model at all, called ring photons. One or many photons entangled with: start<->end, building a very stable ring with 2 bits of information. Those can build up loop in loop structures encoding very dense informations in a very quite stable structure. And know what, those rings are predicted to be emmited in 3 amino acids we humans use, so - I see things a bit different now, scientifically :) But I don't see those fields as some indestructible object, and more like fragments that flow around. But without understanding the model it will not make much sense for you.