insight meditation society and joy of living

[erine]

i wonder what the main differences are between the way Insight Meditation Society teaches and lives meditation, and what Rinpoche teaches through Joy of Living

Topic

[edwin]

Jorge – Mingyur Rinpoche says that awareness is the essence of meditation. Awareness is part of our basic goodness, our true nature. Awareness is with us at all times, anywhere. All we have to do is recognize it. The act of recognition in any given moment is meditation. So all forms of meditation are just skillful means for the recognition of awareness and other qualities of our basic goodness. Once we have established a strong sustained recognition of awareness, wisdom naturally arrises. As does lovingkindness and compassion. Awareness is the key to access our basic goodness.

[jr10375]

Edwin,

Thank you very much for your response. What you said make a lot of intuitive sense. If I could ask another question. The realization of this awareness, does it come to us through the constant practice of mediation alone? Is one form of meditation better than another, or are they simply suited to different types of people? Once this awareness has been realized, what do we do then?

[edwin]

Jorge – Yes you are correct. Hence one of Mingyur Rinpoche’s favorite expressions, borrowed from his father, ‘As it is’. Awareness is naturally present in any moment. Meditation is the act of recognition of that awareness. Awareness is non discriminatory. It just shows up for what is. In the Joy of Living level 1 DVDs that we use of Rinpoche’s teachings there is one point where he talks about awareness as similar to space. He talks about how space does not have a favorite star or galaxy, it does not like, or dislike what appears in it. Awareness is the same, it just knows what is, as it is.

[jr10375]

I had a question. How can we be sure that we are not substituting one “delusion” of the mind for another? In my own practice, I am noticing that I am often trying to avoid or escape one particular state of mind for another; I am trying to move from an “anxious” state to a “calm and relaxed” state of mind, but when I practice meditation on thought and emotion, I find that these calm and relaxed states are actually just the fixation on pleasant thoughts and emotions, and not necessarily the dis-attachment from thought and emotion.

I’ve read some other literature from other Buddhist traditions and it seems that this is something that comes up in meditation practice in general.

Am I right in understanding that meditation is not the attempt to escape or change ourselves or the world, but the acceptance of ourselves as we are and the world as it is?

[cortland]

well said, Edwin!

[edwin]

Erin
This is a good question and not so easy to answer as there are many teachers who teach at IMS and their different styles of teaching vary considerably. However, given that I lived and practice there for many years and spent time in Burma practicing in the Mahasi method of Theravada vipassana, I would make the following comments.
From my experience most schools of Theravada vipassana place great emphasis on the object of awareness and specifically examining one’s experience to see the three characteristics, or marks, of all experience, impermanence (anicca), unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and non-self (anatta), or what I prefer to call not-self. This is true for most methods that come from Burma or Sri Lanka. There is a very different approach in the Thai forest tradition.
Seeing clearly these characteristics is key to developing insight and attaining stages of enlightenment. Much more could be said about that, but I don’t see the need to here.
Mingyur Rinpoche on the other hand starts with ‘open awareness’, or shamatha without abject. He shows us how awareness is the basis of meditation. It is ever present, innate and part of our basic goodness. He then goes onto skillfully teach us how to use any experience as support for our awareness. The emphasis is always on awareness, not the object or its characteristics.
This is important because recognizing awareness in any or all situations, even short times, many times as he is fond of saying, is an important preparation for the recognition of nature of mind, our true nature, the ultimate goal, recognizing our buddha nature.
That is the main difference as I see it. In this way the Theravada method can be considered a causal vehicle and the Mahamudra method a resultant vehicle. Of course a lot more could be said, but I feel that is enough for now.
Edwin

[Author]

Replies