Vipassanā meditation, a very popular form of Buddhist meditation in this present day, is surprising similar to phenomenological mediation, especially that of Edmund Husserl's Epoché. Though separated by millennia, one can see that the Buddha and Edmund Husserl were manipulating consciousness in much the same way when practicing introspection. A comparison can be made between the two, but first one must understand the history of Vipassanā mediation and how it has become so popular.
The Buddha did not actually ever speak of Vipassanā meditation in his teachings though he did use the word Vipassanā sparingly. The context of this word was to explain a sense of seeing reality or deep insight, but he did not use it in the context of meditation. The Buddha would speak of Jhana and concentration in regards to the actual act of meditation, but never Vipasanā. The very few times the Buddha described the exact moment of enlightenment within meditation, such as the Bhaya-bherava Sutta and the Maha-Saccaka Sutta both in the Majjima Nikaya, the Buddha talked about being in Jhana, but he describes a moment where his mind turns inward and he begins to investigate the mind rather than just being absorbed upon an object. The Buddha also discussed Sati, mindfulness (though awareness is a better definition, that is a conversation for later) and meditation with Sati in the famous teachings of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. This is a teaching of four stages where the practitioner first concentrates on a physical object, the body, and then gradually becomes aware of the consciousness as it is perceiving the body, this is the Sati or awareness. The practitioner first becomes aware of feeling as a separate part of interpretation, then consciousness as a whole. Lastly, the observer becomes aware of the function of interpretation in the fourth and final step.These two teachings, that of his exact moment of enlightenment and that of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, are where the Theravada tradition of Vipasanā was born.
The use of Vipassanā as a form of meditation was not formulated until 800 years after the Buddha when the great Buddhist Scholar Bhandantācariya Buddhaghoṣa wrote the Visuddhimagga, The Path of Purification. In the Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghoṣa talks of two types of meditation, Samadhi, or tranquil meditation, and Vipassanā, or insight meditation. Here Buddhaghoṣa explains that deep concentration that leads to Jhana, with one of the 40 Kammaṭṭhāna objects, is absorption into an object, this is Samadhi. He goes on to explain that examining an object, and the reality that the object exists within, with Sati, is Vipassanā, or insight meditation. Within Vipassanā meditation, the practitioner sees the three characteristics of existence- impermanence, suffering, and non-self. As the meditator progresses down a 16 step path of insight, these are known as the "nanas", one begins to understand these characteristics more and more. That first stage is the separation of mind and object, or the separation of the interpretation of an object and the object itself. This separation requires Sati, it is a process of the mind seeing the mind seeing an object and takes reflexiveness, commonly known as mindfulness, in order to achieve. This was Vipassanā, a meditation of investigation as opposed to the calm and tranquil absorption of Samadhi meditation.
Jump another 1600 years into the future and we have Ledi Sayādaw who wrote the Vipassanā Dīpanī around 1900. This treatise of Buddhist metaphysics again conveys the importance of separating mind and object, or the interpretation of the object and the object itself. Jump another 50 years into the future and we arrive at Mahāsi Sayādaw, one of the greatest modern monks and my personal hero, his influence on me has been considerable to say the least. Mahāsi Sayādaw developed a particular practice of meditation that emphasizes this separation of the mind and its object. In fixating on the movement of the abdomen when one is breathing, one begins to understand that that movement is outside of the mind as it is making contact with the mind- as the mind perceives an object we interpret an object, but our interpretation and the object are different. He said- the practitioner will see a difference in the movement and the noticing of the movement. Mahāsi Sayādaw developed this teaching through years of meditation, he also had extensive academic training in Buddhist theory.
This method of rising and falling is the quintessential practice of Vipassanā meditation today, but that does not mean you must focus on the abdomen in order to do Vipassanā, that is a common misunderstanding. Vipassanā is simply becoming aware of the perception of an object, and experiencing one's self experiencing the object, otherwise know as mindfulness.
If one were to study the great phenomenologist Edmund Husserl and his epic guide to consciousness Logical Investigations, one would become familiar with the term Epoché, Husserl's mode of meditation. Part of my life's work in academia will be comparing phenomenological philosophy and the Buddha's teachings and in studying both I have found a significant amount of similarities between Buddhism's Vipassanā and Husserl's Epoché. Husserl discusses intentionality, and the consciousness intending one object at one time. This object of consciousness is then labeled as an interpretation that we can understand through a process of noema/noesis. The object and the interpretation are different, and the way to separate the two in order to discern the difference is to "bracket" the object- this is taking away all other factors of experience, eg wandering thoughts, other objects that may be visible, sounds, etc. and concentrating upon that object. The mind using Epoché, or"bracketing", then focuses on the one object wherein which the mind becomes reflexive and consciousness can then observe consciousness, It is in this way that Husserl is able to describe the process of interpretation. This reflexiveness is awareness of the experience, or mindfulness, and is strikingly similar to the teachings of Vipassanā meditation. Husserl believed we all lived in a "life world" and that this "life world" was literally nothing but interpretations of the outside world that we understand through conceptions made by our consciousness. This is what the Buddha was talking about when he said mundane reality and absolute reality. Husserl also said that in order for us to understand reality we must understand our interpretations, and in order to do that we must meditate upon that process of interpretation. This is what Mahāsi Sayādaw was teaching when giving lessons on Vipassanā meditation- We can only understand reality when we understand how we view reality. Husserl and Mahāsi Sayādaw, a Jewish mathematician, and a Burmese Theravada monk, not so very different after all.
No comments:
Post a Comment