A Snapshot of Vipassana: The good, the bad and the ugly!!!

 

This is my personal observation of people who have undergone the Vipassana course. If someone feels otherwise, they are free to put in their remarks in The comments section below. 

For many years, I have read about Vipassana and also known people who have undergone this course. Many of them claim that it has helped them. The retreat-goers claim that it is a science but are unable to give an explanation of how it is so. And there are repetitive statements that everyone’s experience with Vipassana is individual and different and one cannot generalize what it does for everyone. But when one looks at all of these Vipassana returnees, one finds so many things in common in their behaviour post-Vipassana. They become more silent with a sad expression on their face. They smile less post-course. They do not seem to enjoy life anymore like before and demonstrate inconsistent and erratic behaviours. They suddenly get up in between a talk when they realize that they have to detach themselves from it because that is what Vipassana teaches ‘do not attach to anything in this life’. They are 'struggling and fighting inside with themselves' to see to it that they do not react and attach to things. But how can they avoid it when they are in the midst of this mad and crazy world??? Before the Vipassana, they were fighting with their ‘troubles’ and after that, they are fighting with 'themselves' trying to go against the normal good human feelings and tendencies. It is just a shift of fights that continues unabated. Peace is elusive. Let us see the good, the bad, and the ugly of this ancient technique and teaching.

Vipassana

In this course, students are away from the digital world and in a state of solitude for 10 days. They also do not talk to each other and only minimally with the volunteers or staff there at the center. They have 10 hours of meditation per day and partial fasting (only breakfast, lunch with no dinner). So basically, there is penance and hardship with self-reflection through meditation.

Also, listen here 

The good points of Vipassana but...

Vipassana center [Source: Medium]

The people are away from the noise and digital technology for a few days. This is good. Such breaks are required but can be done anywhere in the world (if there is a will) and not necessarily in a Vipassana retreat. It would be better that people consciously minimize the use of digital technology as much as possible in the real world rather than just being off them for 10 days in a year/lifetime. Besides, you are trying to keep yourself for 10 days from technology, but have done nothing to change these things in the world. You are trying to keep yourself off them and making yourself cope with this issue of life but have left the major issue of misuse of technology in the world totally untouched.

Vipassana teaches to ‘live in the present'.  This is good and right. But this we have been learning since childhood days that one should 'not brood over the past' and 'not worry about the future'. And that living in the present is the best option. The course refreshes that point is good. The course people claim that nothing is permanent. Everything changes. But are we not all aware of this basic nature of things and people around us?

At the retreat center, one meditates for 10 hours  a day. This needs tolerance and stamina and enhances your confidence and gives mind stability. This is a good thing but provided it is continued into the regular life of the person who takes the course. Just 10 days in a year or a lifetime are not enough to maintain that strength gained by continuous meditation at the center.

You have some time for yourself to reflect and rethink about your life problems. There is enough time to take a bird’s eye view of your whole life and try to make efforts and determination to improve it. But this can be done in any place where you are alone and by yourself for a few days.

The centers are good and spacious with good food and facilities. So the surrounding itself can bring out happiness in a person [1]. They talk about kindness and compassion. This is good but a 'blanket' or 'blind' kindness and compassion is ‘not the order of the day’.

The bad...

The schedules are hard and rigorous and timetables are strict to be adhered to. This could be difficult for many who are not used to it and it would not be a freedom from this clockwork for those who already are practicing it in their daily life.

They preach that if you do good things, you get back good and if you behave and do bad, you get bad things back to you. But in this modern world, how many people will agree with it? I can quote innumerable examples where people did good and yet faced sufferings in their lives. And a person did bad and remains unaffected throughout his or her life. In fact, in some countries, you will find that the ‘good suffer and the bad are happy’! So how do you explain and prove the above philosophy here! Of course, I do not advocate that people should not do ‘good deeds’ in life. But I am against the preaching that you should do good deeds because good returns to you. You should do good deeds for societal reasons and not because you want good to come back to you. That would be ‘selfishness’ and also not right since doing good does not ensure a return of goodness to oneself. Experience and everyday observations have proven this beyond doubt.

The course people talk about having 'no attachment with things' because change is the order of life. This is okay for a saint or a sage. But it sounds funny when you say this in the context of a family and friend circle. Do they mean that one should have no attachment for them too? Attachment is a normal human feature and saying that a person should not attach to an object or another person would be against the essence of living and humanity. Yes, ‘excess attachment’ is bad but attachment is essential for human society and good living. Even the animal kingdom has ‘attachment’ between them. One can also get attached to animals and things around and this, in fact, makes many people happy rather than trouble them. You want to have ‘people’ around you and not ‘zombies or robots’ with ‘no feelings and sentiments’. One can say that ‘fake attachments’ or ‘attachments with wrong things’ are bad. This is agreeable. But saying that one should not attach to anything in life is absolutely wrong.

There is also training that one should not react to happenings around us. Again this is okay for a sage or a saint but for a family man or a person in society, this is weird. How can a person not react to the various happenings around him or her? If he or she does not react, he or she will not be able to ‘act’. It actually should be one should ‘not overreact’. The latter is damaging to the body and health but a normal reaction is 'good and essential' for a civilized society. But the expected reaction should be 'positive' and in favour of other people and 'not negative'. I have seen people coming back from the course and still reacting in a negative way to many things in life. They continue to be jealous of people, belittle others, make fun and tease others, and get angry. The only difference after the course is that they do not express it out or avoid the person for whom they harbour the negative sentiments. They do it in silence. Isn’t it futile? I would say that respond but ‘do not overreact’ or ‘negatively react’. Avoidance of things that make you react is the work of cowards and do Vipassana preachers want the students to become cowards??? Do they want them to run away from the realities of life and be reclusive always? It is impossible.

Vipassana center [Source: 7 Continents 1 Passport]

Click to read here more on Vipassana in a nutshell

The course people claim that the preaching is pure and directly from Lord Buddha. They say that the technique is flawless. If it does not work it is because the people are practicing it wrongly. They talk nothing about the fault of the ‘teaching’!!! If a student fares badly, it is also a failure of the teacher and the system itself!!! [1]

They also state that one has to have an insight into his mind and that would help him or her overcome the problems. But this could deter people from seeking proper and timely ‘medical help and consultation’ for their problems. Their problems may worsen leading to more mental deterioration.

There are claims that things done out of love or concern are okay. But women oppression in society is an example where people who love her in fact oppress her and do not allow her to be independent. Are the course people for it and thus against women empowerment??? They seem to rationalize the actions of the abuser [1].

The course people claim that the course is non-sectarian but they continue to talk about Buddha and his path to salvation during the sessions!!! [1] They talk about love and happiness but how does one experience these with ‘no attachment and reaction’? They seem to be pushing people into a state where neither happiness nor sorrow matters. I find many of the people that come out of the retreat confused on many aspects of life rather than having a clear vision and insight of it!!!

Trained staff is not present during the course and volunteers are present to help out with things. If any person develops serious mental issues or a meltdown during the course, no medical help is present on-site for them [1].

The ugly...

The course people claim that one should be humble and have no egos. But I have seen that people coming out from the retreat continue to have egos and humbleness is absent in them. They intermittently make a show of it but have been unable to imbibe these ‘virtues’ well into themselves and their lives. Besides, some people returning from the course have also stated that the preacher has a lot of egos and it is a surprise since they are not supposed to have it when they are preaching against it [1]. So ‘they preach but do not practice them’. They belittle others who are of a different religion or are irreligious. The preacher labels those who leave the course as being weak-minded [1]. Is it right to do so? In fact, questioning the course and not allowing oneself to be brain-washed is a sign of a strong mind.

They talk about freedom to ask questions but are unable to answer any questions on it. They talk about individual experiences but then at the end of the retreat, all of the people have almost similar experiences.

The audio and video sessions keep repeating that one should return to the sessions and also persuade others to come there!!! [1]

If I talk in a nutshell about the course and in medical terms, the course might act as a VERY WEAK IMMUNE BOOSTER for the course-doer but is not an ANTIDOTE OR ANTIBIOTICS against the bad or ‘germs of society’! These ‘germs’ are allowed to do their harm to society! Thus societal improvement per se is absent with this course and it leaves the person undergoing the course confused and become a stoic!!!

Further reading:

1.      The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: A Critique of the Goenka 10 – Day Vipassana Retreat-By Anderswanders!