4 ms·

That's true, it can depend on the volunteers and the locations of the centres themselves, so it's a bit of a gamble. I've talked to a few of people who've been

That's true, it can depend on the volunteers and the locations of the centres themselves, so it's a bit of a gamble. I've talked to a few of people who've been travelling in Asia and attended Goenka retreats after huge benders, having never meditated before, because "why not, I've got 10 days left on my visa and need to detox". Then the teachers don't speak any English in some cases. Although one person I met who had done exactly that said it was the best experience of his life, getting through it. So there's that. I'm not condemning the retreats entirely, I just think that having a complete or even relative beginner sit a 10 day intensive vipassana retreat after basically just checking if they do drugs or take medication or not is quite a risk, and people should know that risk. My friend who had a good experience said he had no clue what he was getting into and thought it would just be a nice relaxing experience that feels good. Having presumably sat one, you'll know that's usually not the case, at least for the first 6 or 7 days, which is a long time, and can be very intense when all the advice you get is "keep going and listening to the tapes". > It's right their in the discourses. Also true, to be clear I think that Goenka courses are great resources for people who have sat shorter retreats before or have a long-term, stable practice. It's the "jumping in at the deep end" type stuff that happens, partially because they're free and so easy to access, partly because of the "boot camp" style image, that's risky. Many people aren't inclined to dive into early Buddhist texts and make sense of its philosophy and practice before attending a retreat for the first time.

h0l0cube 6y ago
> basically just checking if they do drugs or take medication or not is quite a risk The questions were a bit more probing than that. One question was something like, 'How are your relations with your family?', and I think there were questions about mental history etc. > Also true, to be clear I think that Goenka courses are great resources for people who have sat shorter retreats before or have a long-term, stable practice. It's the "jumping in at the deep end" type stuff that happens, partially because they're free and so easy to access, partly because of the "boot camp" style image, that's risky. Many people aren't inclined to dive into early Buddhist texts and make sense of its philosophy and practice before attending a retreat for the first time. Much of the seriousness of the retreat is described on the dhamma.org website. I had read and understood this before I signed up. I think I may have even had to confirm that I had read this before I was able to apply. However, it's likely a lot of people just skip this like the T&Cs on their Facebook account. So I do agree with you, it would probably be to the benefit of the students to at least be aware of the seriousness of the course, and for this to be better communicated. I had maybe sat 10 or so 1-hour meditation workshops just casually at festivals before I took my course. I had very little about Buddhist philosophy or practice, so I was very much diving in at the deep end, but I entered the course knowing it was a serious psychological intervention from the introduction on the website. During the course, I found the discourse tapes enough to give a satisfactory explanation of what I ought to be aiming for, and sometimes they even pre-empted questions or conflicts I had in my mind.
- lewispollard 6y ago
  It's great that it worked for you, I'm glad :)
  - h0l0cube 6y ago
    I didn't say, but yes, the technique did end up work for me with some very tangible positive outcomes :) And I still practice.

h0l0cube 6y ago

> basically just checking if they do drugs or take medication or not is quite a risk The questions were a bit more probing than that. One question was something like, 'How are your relations with your family?', and I think there were questions about mental history etc. > Also true, to be clear I think that Goenka courses are great resources for people who have sat shorter retreats before or have a long-term, stable practice. It's the "jumping in at the deep end" type stuff that happens, partially because they're free and so easy to access, partly because of the "boot camp" style image, that's risky. Many people aren't inclined to dive into early Buddhist texts and make sense of its philosophy and practice before attending a retreat for the first time. Much of the seriousness of the retreat is described on the dhamma.org website. I had read and understood this before I signed up. I think I may have even had to confirm that I had read this before I was able to apply. However, it's likely a lot of people just skip this like the T&Cs on their Facebook account. So I do agree with you, it would probably be to the benefit of the students to at least be aware of the seriousness of the course, and for this to be better communicated. I had maybe sat 10 or so 1-hour meditation workshops just casually at festivals before I took my course. I had very little about Buddhist philosophy or practice, so I was very much diving in at the deep end, but I entered the course knowing it was a serious psychological intervention from the introduction on the website. During the course, I found the discourse tapes enough to give a satisfactory explanation of what I ought to be aiming for, and sometimes they even pre-empted questions or conflicts I had in my mind.

lewispollard 6y ago
It's great that it worked for you, I'm glad :)
- h0l0cube 6y ago
  I didn't say, but yes, the technique did end up work for me with some very tangible positive outcomes :) And I still practice.