Insight in Perspective: S.N. Goenka and the emergence of Global Insight Meditation and Mindfulness - by Daniel M. Stuart
- Numata Center for Buddhist Studies - Hamburg 2024
(written with the support of the University of North Carolina, College of Arts and Sciences)

Introduction

Hello all,

So... I have been quite fascinated by this new book by Stuart and wanted to start a dedicated thread to share my notes about it, hoping it will be of interest to some.
I will post my notes on each chapter, quoting Stuart quite heavily when I couldn't see the point of paraphrasing him. This notes reflect my interests and might not cover all the aspects of the book. I might comment afterwards as, for now, the book is still resonating within. 
All quotes are between brackets ("") with the page number afterwards between parenthesis (p.69). If you find a page number without brackets before, it's just the page I'm talking about.
I strongly recommend to those interested to read the whole book!
https://www.projektverlag.de/schriftenreihen/hamburg-buddhist-studies/Insight-in-Perspective

The aim of the book is to recontextualize the contours of current-day Burmese lay insight meditation practices, and to correct the conflating of the development of the mass lay meditation movement with the lineage tradition of the Mahasi Sayadaw, reassessing the role of the U Ba Khin/Goenka tradition in the development of global insight meditation.

It goes into great details about many stories and assumptions at the root of the mythology of this tradition, in a way that is fascinating to me...

Let's start, then...

with metta
smiling stone

The Ledi Sayadaw

Stuart states that both the Ledi Sayadaw and U Ba Khin have not been seriously studied by scholars and that their role has been misrepresented and downplayed, particularly by Eric Braun in his popular Birth of Insight (2013). The first chapter is built around a refutation of Erik Braun's exposition of Ledi Sayadaw, and I realized that I had internalized quite a lot of his views, namely that he taught the abhidhamma to lay people, which gave birth to a meditation method which downplayed calming techniques (shamata): dry insight. So I had constructed my image of Ledi Sayadaw very much according to his portrait, which confirmed the abhidhammic intellectual bend of the Sayadaw's writings I had had access to (the Manual of Insight -Vipassana dipani-).

On the contrary, Stuart finds that Ledi Sayadaw based his meditation practice on the suttas, and that a modicum of concentration remained an important factor to reach insight. He also did not think the Abhidhamma was necessary for the laity. The Sayadaw himself was a master in supranormal powers, as was Saya Thetgyi who spent at least seven years exclusively on calm meditation.

The book is a critique of the modernist view as exemplified by Braun and Sharf.
"It is necessary to stress that Ledi fully occupied such a world [populated by spirits], claimed to actually see such forces, and strongly opposed modern skeptics who doubted the reality of such a world" (p.41)

Stuart on Ledi in the Manual of Insight : " [Here he points out] that the detailed theoretical discussions entailed in Abhidhamma learning are not necessary for the enactment of insight meditation practice" (p.38).
("These innumerable momentary deaths occur innumerable times even during the wink of an eye. These momentary events are only relevant in Abhidhamma discussions. In insight meditation, all that is needed is consideration of the [awareness] of the transformation and the transfiguration of the continua, things which are visibly evident, and personally experienced by every man alive" (adapted from LD 1915 -p.64-65).

As a monk the Ledi Sayadaw could not write about his experiences or even plainly about meditation practice, which made the small manual by U Ba Khin such a revolutionary milestone! It was the first time that a practical guide was committed to writing, and it had to be by a lay person [did I read that right? Or first time that a guide was written by a lay person?]. 
"It is not suitable for venerable monks, who must abide by disciplinary rules, to speak openly of [such] things [related to meditation]."(U Ba Khin 1962 [1952] p.1-2).
I totally suscribe to Stuart's remark: "I find it difficult to see more than a very traditional scholar, one who is greatly constrained by the format of his work." (p.81)
That's why Stuart gave more importance to treaties not directly related to the path, such as the Rogantara dipani (manual for warding off pestilence), where he could find more details about the Ledi Sayadaw's worldviews.
This rather short chapter on the Ledi Sayadaw draws extensively on the Rogantara dipani.

Stuart wants to unearth the magical (weizza) and esoterical aspects of the line of teachers at the root of the Goenka network to counter the modernist view of most scholars on the matter.

Braun states that the Ledi Sayadaw has simplified meditation by introducing Abhidhamma categories obviating calm abiding practices. For Stuart, the Sayadaw's simplification of meditation comes from his knowledge of the sutta tradition, which obviates the need for Abhidhamma learning at an introductory level of meditation practice.

There was an apotropaic quality found in the recitation of the Abhidhamma in the times of the Ledi Sayadaw and in Burma, and that's what he had in mind when he created recitation groups ("apotropaic" is a fancy word for "magical"). "The Abhidhamma is important as much for his ritual power as for its logic" (p.44, see also p.46 on the cosmic battle between good and evil). He was himself a powerful healer, as was Sayagyi U Ba Khin
Yes, Weizza, It's like the traditional magical path in Myanmar, that of wizards and healers... It seems that both the Ledi Sayadaw and U Ba Khin were considered such, per their mastery of supernormal powers.

The Mingun Jetavana Sayadaw (1868-1955) was the first who taught groups of lay meditators and established the very first center (in 1911) where they could congregate and practice together. (note 77, p.52).
His disciple, the Mahasi Sayadaw, developed his teacher's method, setting up a large network of lay meditation centers, and being tasked by the government to teach foreign visitors from 1950 onwards. (p.53).
​​​​​​​The Heart of Buddhist Meditation, published in 1954 by the german monk Nyanaponika Thera -who learned from Mahasi-, was one of the first western language books on practical Burmese insight meditation. (note 78 p.53)
The monk Waya-Zawta claimed that he had attained key stages of Buddhist liberation and promised such stages to those who followed his teachings... in the middle of the eighteen century.
The monk Medavi (1728-1816) authored the first meditation-oriented treatise. (p.53)

Ledi played no part in such events. His importance lies elsewhere, perhaps in the fact that he was the first "to charge one key lay disciple with the duty of teaching insight meditation to other lay people, and even certified that this disciple was qualified to teach monks" (p.56), thus starting a lay lineage.

(.../....)

Smiling Stone - I hope you don't mind that I fixed the link in your first comment. It was broken.

Thanks Chris!

I'm enjoying this, thanks Smiling Stone

Fascinating!

Sayagyi Maung Po Thet, known as Saya Thetgyi

Here, Stuart draws extensively on A treatise on the shortcut to knowledge and vision of insight meditation in this very life (ditthadhammavipassanananadassana - unknown author, one of Saya Thetgyi's close disciples), [which I referenced in the thread "some views...". So I knew some of this material.]

The main novelty was that Saya Thetgyi proposed a shortcut approach to insight through short seven days retreats, where the meditator would first develop strong concentration.
He believed the power of the teacher could help the meditator reach high states of concentration very quickly, which was a condition for deep insight.
"It is precisely the great supernormal powers of these lay teachers and their natural karmic capacities that in the end renders unnecessary the need for their students to engage in extended practices of calm meditation before engagement with insight practice." (p.65)

He was also famous as a powerful healer. The fact that Ledi asked him to teach at least one thousand people (or six, depending on the source) shows how he valued the powers when it came to teaching skills, hence concentration practices that unlock them.

His initial difficulty to gather students despite the support of the Sayadaw shows the prominence given to monastics in teaching these matters by the Burmese population. Stuart states that only the Goenka network would eventually prove successful in Myanmar as a lay meditation method, the rest staying in the hand of monastics. (p.67)

As he was not a scholar, his example would set the trend for an anti-intellectualism bend that would become a key aspect of Goenka's teachings. This is despite the fact that both U Ba Khin and Goenka would claim some authority on Theravada Buddhist learning. (p.69)

(.../....)

Thanks Martin and Shargrol!
​​​​​​​There's more to come...

Sayagyi U Ba Khin

It is important to note that, even if U Ba Khin downplayed the necessity of deep concentration in specific contexts (where the help of a powerful teacher would render it unnecessary to reach insight), he would still "[teach] his advanced students to develop their concentration skills to a high level, and to tap into fields of supernormal powers themselves". (p.72)

"U Ba Khin's character came to represent the paradigmatic modern insight meditator" (p.73)

He started meditation at 38 but made extraordinary quick progress due to his exceptional cosmic/karmic background... (p.74)
He was encouraged to teach by Webu Sayadaw only 4 years later, in 1941!

Something hinted at by Stuart is the degree of self-persuasion of his own worth sanctioned by his elders (Saya Thetgyi and the Webu Sayadaw who invited him to teach). He did exactly the same thing with quite a few of his western visitors, providing them quickly with experiences that he interpreted as attainments [my interpretation], giving them the mission to bring his teachings abroad. He did not do that with his faithful long-term Burmese disciples, hinting at the fact that they were to follow him from life to life on his Boddhissatva path... (p.108-110)

This made me think of how he embodied (or actuated) the values of Buddhism, which is something which is so important in the whole tradition and a big difference with modern dharma where the most important is to feel the truth of our being in the depths of our lived experience. In U Ba Khin, we have somebody who was successful in burying his human frailties so as to appear as more or less a saint. Same with Goenka, and that's what he asks of his deputies (old students) when he demands a stainless sila. It's because we're a conquering tradition, we are ambassadors of the Dhamma, it's not some sort of new-age-ish self-development, we're here to convince people of the efficiency of the "true" Dhamma.
There's something about sacrificing truth for order, stability and power which Yuval Noah Harari analyzes well in Nexus (but doesn't seem to apply to his own tradition???) and which has been on my mind since Trump's election...

His only meditation manual was: The right answers to practice with a basis of textual theory.

Stuart brings to the fore something which has always puzzled (intrigued?) me: Goenka's explanation of lokutarra jhana vs loki jhana samadhi (supramundane vs mundane absorption) and the former relationship to nibbana. It appears that U Ba Khin view on this topic was modified between the two editions of his book to better concur with the Abhidhamma:

"The particular idea that emerges here is that the attainment of the supramundane path state can itself bring about the capacity for worldly absorption [loki jhana samapatti]. [...] in the 1962 edition of his treatise, for reasons that are not clear, he slightly modified his position. He characterized the kind of absorption accomplished as a result of the attainment of the path state as supramundane [lokuttara jhana samapatti] -as opposed to mundane- which brings his position closer to the classical tradition of the Abhidhammatthasangaha." (p.84-85)

Also, "Those of my students who are believed to have attained absorption meditation as a result of the path state (maggasiddhijhana) progress from the first absorption of the fine material sphere to the fourth absorption of the fine immaterial sphere in a matter of hours" (U Ba Khin 2003 [1952] p.34-35)
From this, I understand that access to the jhanas is a direct result of path attainment, not the other way around.

I have to quote this last one from U Ba Khin at length as it is as precise as it can get:
"At the time of entering the attainment of the fruition state, one does not take as object a conceptual counterpart sign, as one does not attend to one. There is simply attainment upon attending to nibbana as the object by way of the three characteristics. The mental impulsion of the fruition state arises after one experiences the sparkling-like mind element (manodhatu), which has the characteristic of purity, as it is free from the subsidiary defilements (upakkilesa). At the time of emerging from the fruition state, the characteristic nature (sabhavalakkhana) of what one experiences is vastly superior to the peace of absorption meditation. With great force, the peace and bliss (santisukha) of the stillness of nibbana is experienced for oneself." (U Ba Khin 2003 [1952] p.39-40)
The first I heard talk about "taking nibbana as object" was Analayo , and it sounded somewhat mysterious to this worldling back then...

We have talked elsewhere about how important the protection from spirits was, and how it was one of the duties of the teacher to maintain the purity of the atmosphere at the meditation center... Also how Sayamagyi was a powerful helper as a suspected anagami... Together, they gather the conditions for the meditator to reach the high stages of concentration necessary to start Vipassana successfully.

I enjoyed re-reading John Hislop's account which is quoted by U Chit Tin. I will reproduce some of it here:

"When the time was ripe,[he told me to concentrate harder on the center, then harder still]. Then he would say the moment was there, to concentrate harder still, with an appreciation of Anicca in the consciousness, then to exert a strong mental pressure on the spot for several seconds with the strong desire to escape from the suffering of existence and from the endless succession of births and deaths (Samsara), then to suddenly relax the mental pressure and hold the mind empty -just let the mind go blank. To anticipate and expect nothing. [Then Sayagyi and Sayamagyi would gather the forces of the devas and brahmas present to create a shield against the forces that rush to prevent escape from samsara]. Then they would need a second type of effort."
"This second effort would be in this fashion: the arising of mind and matter units is continuous [becoming and extinctions following so close together that it seems] an unbroken stream or "process" or "thread". With their power, Guruji and helper would intercept between two of these instants and make a small gap in the mind-matter process for a "fraction of a second" for the "breakthrough" attempt [...] if I was able to cooperate with them in making the gap in the stream of my Samsara and then suddenly relaxing the mind to stillness so that "something new", the unconditioned, could "fill" or "replace" the mind which I had suddenly given up." (Chit Tin 1985 p.26-27)

So "in this lineage of practice, the harnessing of such teaching powers is what made it possible to render unnecessary long periods of calming meditation" (p.96)

By teaching to non Buddhists, English speaking U Ba Khin emphasized that the teachings would "not interfere with their religious faith", but he elsewhere stated that they would "become Buddhist" upon taking up the practice (when speaking in Burmese). He also thought that his students had great paramis (and so were often Buddhist in past lives). (p.104)

The concept of paramis, developed through innumerable existences, is central to his worldviews, as it is to Goenkaji's!

Stuart hints at the fact that Sayagyi might not have attained stream entry, but was still able to successfully bring many people to those stages (p.111). That's because he considered himself a boddhisatta (bodhisatva) of the highest kind -the next Buddha Maitreya, according to his disciples!-, a rationale (being a boddhisatta) which was also endorsed by Goenka. He quotes the same passage in the documentary From Myanmar to the world that I referenced in the Goenka thread (I was moved to see that), to show that his closest disciples (Bill Hart in this instance) firmly held that belief.

Also, he said that "the Webu Sayadaw [picked and collected some] hair that had been shaved off his head" (p.113) Seeing this, he collected the rest and brought it back to Yangon, where it became relics for his disciples (even when he was alive), who then enshrined small bits of it in their centers. This is a clear sign of a cult toward U Ba Khin, which was never made public.

(.../....)

[12/20/24 : edited for clarity]

Satya Narayan Goenka. The beginnings

"[We have to] understand that U Ba Khin conceptualized his students as true deputies, as proxies able to serve as channels of his physico-mental [sic] power and allow him to extend it beyond the borders of Burma. A primary element of this teaching model involved his ability to radiate his thought waves to his students at great distances, a practice that he claimed to have verified by experiment. [...] [With the support of Sayamagyi]... he could transmit the force of wisdom (vijjadhat' - nibbanadhat') that would help them purify their minds, and he could provide a protective "cover" from evil forces that are always on the look out to intervene in the process of human liberation." (p.121)

That's how, in 1968, he could send unprepared westerners to teach in their respective countries (only Hover, Coleman, and Ruth Denison -to teach women only- had taken up to it by 1975, but he had also appointed Leon Wright -as early as 1958, an interesting story in its own right-, Forella Landie -Canada, to teach women only-, Jan Van Amersfoort (the Netherlands). Goenka was deputized one year before them, in 1967, to teach a course in Mandalay "under the direct personal guidance of his teacher", translating his teachings to a "non-sectarian Hindi" for fellow members of the Hindu Burmese community. (p.116)

A savvy anecdote "... U Ba Khin was known to recite [chant] one particular mantra that went something like: "May I not come in contact with the ignorant. May I encounter only wise, saintly people until I attain nibbana." This verse emerged from a vow he had taken that "may only ripened people with very good paramis from the past come to me to take Dhamma, and may these people later take the torch of Dhamma, and spread it around the world". Being a devout student and wanting to emulate him, S.N. Goenka learned the mantra and would go around reciting it. One day U Ba Khin heard him... and rebuked him: "These words are not for you!" he said. "You are to give seeds of Dhamma to a very large number of people." (p.115)

Stuart goes on to report the firm belief of Goenka that he was receiving the mangal maitri [the dhamma vibrations, the nibbanadhatus] from his teacher, and that it is the key factor that allowed the tradition to expand as it did, Goenka pushing the "deputy" aspect of his appointed "assistant" teachers even further...
So the tradition is based on a cultic, magical paradigm which is certainly not emphasized!

There is an ongoing "eternal conflict of cosmic forces", exacerbated when one tries to spread the dhamma, which translates as contrary outside events. This belief was also passed from U Ba Khin to Goenka. See also the importance of the purity of the location where one teaches... (p.127)
To this day, the ATs (assistant teachers) play U Ba Khin's chanting ( Stuart says it's a part of the Tikapatthana (which pertains to the Abhidhamma) on the afternoon of day 0, before the beginning of the course (p.128). I've witnessed it a couple of times, not sure if it's always the case. (note 221: The Tikapatthana is used as a protective incantation in Myanmar)

In stark contrast with the legend immortalized in Goenka's discourses, "U Ba Khin tells about Goenka in a discourse on the fifth day of one of his ten-day meditation retreats": (note 334 p.192-193). There, he reveals that, when Goenka took refuge in July of 1954, two months before his first course, he got rid of his headaches immediately:

​​​​​​​"He offered his body to me. He accepted himself as Sayagyi's disciple. As soon as he did so, his headache was gone. [...]. On the first Friday of September, [...] he did not appear. He did not enrol in the list either. Here, we were going to start on Friday. He suffered a headache, as seriously as before, the Wednesday prior. How? He broke his promise, right? Therefore, I guess that the guards who gave protection in favor of me did not protect him anymore. [...] Later, he meditated here and was completely free from headaches. So, he pays much respect to me..."

Another testimony of the prominence of dhatu here, subtle vibrations, in the worldviews of both...

(.../....)

Goenka and Munindra

It's not the place to expand on Munindra's biography, suffice to say here that he was a student of the Mahasi Sayadaw (which was the reason why U Ba Khin, which he knew well, did not want to have him sit a retreat at the IMC (p.138)), and also explored a range of different traditions during his nine years in Burma (p.133).

Munindra started to teach in Bodhgaya in 1966, three years before Goenka, which does not fit in the narrative of Goenka as the unique agent of the prophecy about the return of the teachings to India after 2500 years (p.131).

But it seems that Munindra had great respect and friendship for Goenka from their years in Burma. He participated in the first course in Bodhgaya in 1970, which had a powerful effect on him (whether it was a first encounter or something he had already experienced before remains unclear: it is good for the Goenka narrative to suggest that it was a discovery (note 237 p.139)).

I see Munindra as willingly endorsing the narrative, out of frienship/respect for Goenka (just from what transpires from the excerpts reproduced here (a letter he sent to U Ba Khin after the course, where he is very enthusiastic about the retreat and about Goenka as a teacher. (p.138)). Stuart stresses that he might also have adhered to the prophetic cult around U Ba Khin (p.138)). Sitting the course under Goenka gave him a subordinate position in the tradition's mythology... . It is also noteworthy how he taught "vipassana meditation" to his students: on an open day to day basis, giving talks but not really organising retreats...

Munindra would gladly send his few students to sit Goenka courses, and have access to different teachings. It is a peculiarity of this tradition to reject other traditions as inferior and to downplay intellectual understanding (note 240 p.141 where U Ba Khin tells Goenka that the extracts of the Abhidhamma he gave him are enough to satisfy any scholar, that "it is desirable to avoid telling them anything which they cannot understand now by experience."

Interesting that Goenka knew the Mahasi Sayadaw quite well (p.135). Stuart talks about the need of endorsement of these lay teachers by some monastics, thus the importance of the Webu Sayadaw for U Ba Khin... and at the same time maintaining this sense of superiority of their practice (which is clear in the extract from Goenka about the Mahasi Sayadaw).

To have an idea of the U Ba Khin network at the time, Hover taught a few courses alongside Goenka in India. He created the Vipassana newsletter in the US, on the model of Goenka's hindi model.

(.../....)

The birth of the IMS

Joseph Goldstein conducted a 30 days Sati-patanna [sic] course in September 1974 in California, the first of its kind, drawing on Munindra's teachings but also nourished by his intense practice with Goenka. (p.146)

"At the time Goldstein taught this course, he had been practising under Goenka intensively for four years, and some in the communities of meditation students thought he was being groomed by both Munindra and Goenka to become a teacher." (p.143)

The Satipatthana sutta was an important framework in the teaching of the Mahasi Sayadaw and Munindra, not so in the Ledi Sayadaw, U Ba Khin lineage. Prior to that course, Goenka had wanted Goldstein to stop attending Munindraji's teachings. (p.143)

Goenka reacted strongly against what he stated was a "big confusion in the mind of western students with these words of Satipathanna and Vipassana" (p.147)

Goenka would go on teaching his own Mahasati Patthana Sutta course on december 1981, after completing a comprehensive analysis of the text, reconciling it with the practice he teaches, and positioning himself as a true pandita for his indian public. (p.195)

Stuart rightly states that the practice inherited from U Ba Khin is more aligned with the Anapanasati Sutta (MN118) or the Dhatuvibhanga Sutta (MN140), but that Goenka wanted to position himself along "the Mahasi Sayadaw who taught using the Satipatthana Sutta"... He even asked a student to bring all the Sayadaw's treaties about this topic back from Myanmar to study them, in 1980 (just a year before the first STP course)... He also wanted to respond to his western students who had by then started teaching in the States! (p.197-198).

The IMS center opened in Barre Massachussetts in the summer of 1975. The first course was conducted by... Robert Hover! Its establishment was explicitly associated with the three non-Asian constituents of U Ba Khin's global team: Hover, Denison and Coleman. (p.149).

In their opening statements, they said the center would also welcome other vipassana traditions [than that of U Ba Khin, courses by its three teachers being the firsts to be announced]. (p.150) This would prove unacceptable to Sayama and Goenka. In 1977, both Hover and Denison were ousted from the tradition. Coleman stayed, as it seems he had a good relationship with Sayama (Stuart goes into minute details on why they were ousted. You should read the book! Hover used a female student to channel U Ba Khin, among other things -unproved allegations of sexual misconduct-. Denison was too new-age-ish, mixing meditation and dance etc.)

Hover was also informally "ghosted" by the IMS afterwards, his contribution erased from the history of the center ... and from western meditation. It should be noted that (according to Stuart, p.157) Ayya Khema was a student of Robert Hover, one that was especially strong in her concentration skills... but apparently not the one that was used as a channel!

Stuart states that the IMS founders were in dire need of a south Asian lineage endorsement to feel authorized to teach, as they lost the connection to U Ba Khin lineage. That's where Munindra (and his disciple Dipa Ma) comes to the fore, having encouraged Goldstein to teach early on. He led numerous retreats there from 1977 to 1984. This would lead to the long-term connection with the Mahasi Sayadaw lineage, who first came in 1979. (p.160-163).
The Burmese scholar-monk U Rewata Dhamma saw the need of a formal endorsement of the young teachers by the Sayadaw (in the form of a famous picture shown in the book p.162),

Interesting that "these young teachers pulled much of their initial cultural capital from the endorsement of the 'crazy wisdom' Tibetan Buddhist teacher Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche and his budding Naropa Institute" (note 281 p.161 ; Fronsdal Virtues without rules: Ethics in the Insight Meditation Movement p.287-88). Goldstein was connected to Trungpa early on.

While they turned to U Pandita after the demise of Munindra (because of an alleged story of sexual misconduct that was 'swept under the rug' because he was "too deeply embedded in the narratives of the IMS founding to be completely removed[...]" p.165), the fact that they never "fully embraced an institutional vision that puts monastics at the center of its activities" (p.166) had to do with the fact that (among other things) they had been groomed by a lay meditation lineage.
​​​​​​​
Stuart goes on to explore Kornfield's strategy at "setting himself up as a self-standing authority", having had "a broad exposure to a variety of teachers and practice models" from years in Asia [see his book Living Masters], and claiming scientific endorsement through a Phd and alluding to a "superiority of the west" thanks to modern psychological insights. In the process, he misrepresented U Ba Khin teachings in his book...

To conclude, I would say it looks like a more thorough and accurate report that what Braun gathered, and quite different from the image I had of the IMS (It looks like they also had to bend history their way, at some point)...

​​​​​​​(.../...)

Fascinating. I wish I had spotted this thread earlier, I would not have to wait for a week for the book to arrive now

The magick aspect of insight is definitely worth exploration. The teachers in Thailand I had contact with were not doing dry science meditation for sure. Resolutions for attaining insight stages (used much more often than Mahasi did) have their magick aspects, and the interviews sometimes felt as tacit metta/healing sessions covered up with talking about meditation. One of the names of Ajahn Jodok (Thai-Lao, disciple of Mahasi Sayadaw in the 50s, "the father of Mahasi method in Thailand", main vipassana teacher for Thailand in Wat Mahathat in 70s and 80s, one of the teachers of Ajahn Tong) was "Yanasit": Thai (=lazy) rendering of "Ñana-siddhi".

Just related to what you write about "taking nibbana as object" for fruition, this same Ajahn Jodok uses that phrase in his Path to Nibbana here (I would assume it to be an established expression from abhidhamma?). In the same text, he also distinguishes between jhana-samapati (spelled chana-samapati; which I assumed to be deep absorption with loss of external senses, but not cessation) and phala-samapati (for extended fruition/cessation). It is a hint of his olympic-level concentration mastery when he says there that one can do "24 hours or more" "if you have good concentration".

Hey Eudoxos,

Thanks for the link to Ajahn Jodok, which looks like worth exploring !
And for sharing some of your experience with Thai Vipassana lineage, interesting indeed...

I hope you'll come back here after having read the book for further comments.
I've been reconsidering my own relationship to magical thinking after reading the book. Not so rational like I believed myself to be, for sure...
I thought somebody would have commented on the birth of the IMS... this chapter answered a lot of questions about the links between the founders of the Ims and Goenka... 

Here, I don't go in all the biographical details to concentrate on what is news to me. For those interested, here are a few (more hagiocraphic) biographies by Patrick Given Wilson :
On Goenka (first of two parts)
On Saya Thetgyi 
On Sayagyi U Ba Khin 
On the Ledi Sayadaw

and an insightmyanmar interview on Munindra with Mirka Kastner, her biographer.

I'll be back shortly to continue the thread on the book!
​​​​​​​
with metta
smiling stone

Goenka and Mother Sayama

Next come the repudiation by Mother Sayama, in 1981. Stuart gathered quite a lot of information, even if he does not pretend to have all the elements in hand to explain the fall out.
He points to the fact that it was Sayama's decision to oust Hover and Denison, and that Goenka just followed the lead, before being the next one on the list. That's quite different from what I had understood from the first book, where I had assumed that Goenka needed to get rid of the very Buddhist identity of Sayamagyi, and thus somehow provoked, or at least welcomed, the clash.

Well, going through the book again to write this, it is indeed the "notice of change" issued by Goenka (western Vipassana newsletter autumn 1981, not the Indian version) which makes the split public, and insist on voluntary donation by old students as the sole wholesome way of funding the courses. This document comes after four courses given back to back (in England) by the four remaining teachers of the tradition, that is, Coleman, Sayama, U Chit Tin and Goenka. There must have been heated discussions in this occasion.

There are five points in "the notice of change":
1- the dana aspect
2- No personal gain from the teachers
3- The Eightfold Noble Path, concrete beneficial results that can be verified objectively
4- Students should take refuge in the Dhamma, not in any teacher, and develop their own insight...
5- Non sectarian Dhamma, not a religion but a way of life.

We can see how number 5 would rub "unabashed" Buddhists such as Sayama and all.

Coleman responded with a "notice of clarification" in the spring of 1982, reminding the public that Sayagyi's original organization did actually charge dues to its members, and that he was a staunch Buddhist (vs point n°5).

Stuart remarks that the "notice of change" was directly conceived to solve the problem of Mother Sayama", although it appears like a general statement for the future of the organization, a "coherent set of Buddhist modernist principles that might be the basis for a modern approach to Buddhist (or non-Buddhist) meditation." (p.186).
He also highlights that there was a discrepancy between this written statement and how Goenka and his students were engaged in practice, giving tremendous importance to the connection with Sayagyi beyond the grave and to the power of his nibbana dhatus.

Stuart interviews students that were there on both sides at the time, and further explanations are proposed:
- One was that Sayama was not happy with Goenka teaching such big courses ("It seems that Goenka has become carried away by being a guru" (Streat talking to U Chit Tin, p.188). She sensed very negative vibrations when she arrived at the IMC center in England, and could not sleep for ten days right after a course where, "on the sixth day [...] one man accused Goenka of mind control and then publicly exited the retreat. On the eight day, another meditator began hyperventilating. [Which morphed into a primal scream which had him carried away from the tent]. These challenges led Goenka to end the course one day early [...and he] seemed troubled by these events." (p.189). In this context "she asked Goenkaji to stop giving such big courses, and to surrender to her as a teacher. She also asked him to start charging for courses as we do now, in order to dissuade the wrong people from attending". (Streat K. 2005 Captain Buddha and his amazing Dukkha machine: a seven year journey p.158) (p.188)

- Also, Goenka's choice of giving bigger courses was going against "U Ba Khin's theory of dhat', which stipulated the need to have the right psychic and material forces in force [sic] in retreat contexts to create the conditions for breakthrough to the nibbanic state." (p.189)

- Finally, Goenka, who did not want to say anything against Sayamaji, whom he was devoted to, did put the blame on U Chit Tin, "who had a different agenda". (p.191)

Interestingly, everybody (on both sides) was told NOT to talk about it.

- There's a also a hint at racial prejudices from Mother Sayama : she "invoked ethno-nationalist divisions, referring to Goenka disdainfully as 'that black face' [kala, a burmese term that was used for both non-Burmese immigrants of South Asian origin as well as British colonialists]." (p.190). That comes as a secondary account, put together from the primary account of two close disciples of Goenka who were involved in trying to mediate the conflict. (I give this precision as this disclosure was quite disappointing).

- "[She remembered] she had been Mother Visakha in the time of the Buddha. And she'd find people who had meditated with her before. [...] And she was very much what you would expect a middle-class Burmese housewife from that period to be, in terms of her beliefs." (p.191)

Also, Goenka was instrumental into developing the cult around U Ba Khin at the IMC in Burma, and participated in this visionary world to a large extent. We have to keep that in mind when we read the notice of change. And to remember how he "[solved the conflict] by seeking a direct psychic connection to Sayagyi U Ba Khin", which beforehand was the prerogative of Sayamagyi. (p.192)(the famous story about the course in Japan p.186-187)

"And this visionary process, virtually impossible to 'verify objectively', becomes foundational for the internal community validation of its mission." (p.192)

Which is exactly what Stuart wants to come to...

​​​​​​​(.../...)

At the head of his organization - The missionary drive

A few months after that, in 1982, he launched the first Satipatthana course, as we saw in the post on the IMS, "setting himself up as a true pandita for his Indian public" (p.195)
Along with that, he started to form assistant teachers, although "this program was developed in a context in which Goenka did not feel that his assistants were yet competent to teach the Dharma themselves" (p.210).
Stuart doesn't give details on how the tape-recorded instructions appeared (I remember hearing that a western student came with the technology and Goenka was thrilled!) but "it allowed Goenka to be the only actual teacher, while at the same time harnessing the zeal of his close disciples and providing more and more courses as the demand increased" (p.210). Also, maybe he did not want any student to do to him what he had done to Mother Sayama... (p.213)

Stuart shows how there was a lot of communication to show how "efficient and well received" the assistant teacher's courses were, in order to build the trust in the new program.. Also, while the idea was at first for the ATs to conduct courses for old students only, this was quickly changed to welcome new students as well. This would allow much quicker expansion...
There is also a note about the fact that it took him some time to appoint independent female assistant teachers... the conservative gender normes, still somehow at play in the courses, being a consequence of Goenka's own views, in line with traditional Asian attitudes, unlike what the organization would later try to convey (note 357 p.208).

How come there was such a drive toward expansion?

We have seen before how Goenka's mission was to bring the "seed of Dhamma" to large numbers of people ("the ignorant masses" p.198). Stuart shows very well how the break with Sayama was the occasion to develop the soteriological* identity of Goenka as a Boddhisattva, where his mission and that of his followers would become to assist the Buddha Maitreya along many lives.
* Soteriology: the branch of theology dealing with the nature and means of salvation

Stuart goes back with a great deal of details on how the tradition developed this feeling of superiority, not unlike what we find in Mahayana. As one student puts it: "In the end, I knew that if I went with Sayama it would be for my own liberation. With Goenkaji, it was for [the liberation] of others" (p.200, secondary account).

As a matter of fact, "by emphasizing his identity as a future chief-disciple-boddhisattva (aggasavakabodhisatta) of the coming Buddha, Goenka and his followers were [...] able to set themselves up as special beings with a special mission, while at the same time ensuring that the likes of Sayama and U Ba Khin's other students could be relegated to an inferior position within the cosmic hierarchy [because of their attainments, they could not be considered as vow-takers, except some Burmese disciples like U chit Tin and U Tin Yee]." (p.199)

Early on, however [after the split], Goenka made it clear that any serious student of his would have to make a choice. It was either him or Mother Sayama: no student of his could continue his work with her." (p.200) This was a big change from the first ten years where he had happily sent promising students to Burma to deepen their practice.

"At the same time, this idea devalues U Ba Khin's own teachings in certain respects. His primary focus was to bring his students as quickly as possible -and with whatever force necessary- to attain the final goal of Buddhist Nirvana. This was done through a one-on-one teaching model, one that often involved Mother Sayama's assistance". (p.200)

It is at this moment in time, for Stuart, that the goal of [realizing nibbana] "gets pushed to the background -if not rubbed out entirely- while the work of large-scale missionary institution building gets foregrounded" [...and assistant teachers start to be deputized] (p.204).

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​[.../...]

so interesting, thanks again!