As someone who has completed the 10-day Vipassana course and who practices its meditation technique, I was both intrigued and disappointed with the arguments and observations put forth by Dilip Mandal, in his article in ThePrint Why I fled Vipassana in just 4 days. It is one thing to have attended all 10 days of this globally known meditation course and offer informed insights and critique, and quite another to make problematic generalisations based on false assumptions after quitting in just four days. Here I highlight some fallacies that must not go unchallenged. A disclaimer upfront: I do not work for the Vipassana teacher, late SN Goenka’s dhamma.org and am not a trained Vipassana teacher. I am responding in my individual capacity as a student and practitioner of the Vipassana meditation technique; my response also resonates with other Vipassana sadhaks I know.
Misleading assumptions
In as much as this is his personal experience and narrative I appreciate Mandal’s views, but it is no more than a man’s description of an elephant who has only seen it partially. Mandal was late to the course and he left early. Apparently, he didn’t read or fully comprehend Introduction to the Technique and Code of Discipline for Meditation Courses, nor did he carefully listen to the videos at the centre—leading to some inaccurate claims.
He decided to experience Vipassana firsthand, only that he didn’t by leaving exactly at the time Vipassana is taught and practised. Mandal begins the column by saying he is a believer of not accepting anything without testing it, but it is not clear to me what he planned to “accept” at the end of the course. Besides, he contradicts himself as he fled the course, without actually “testing” something that he eventually rejected.
He mentions his unpreparedness for the course as a novice, and that he had never read any “scholarly or popular texts on Vipassana”. It is important to note that dhamma.org, which contains all resources related to the meditation method as taught by Goenka, does not specify such prerequisites for the successful completion of the 10-day course, and hence he was not at a disadvantage.
The name of the meditation technique means ‘to observe’, and see things as they really are. When one applies for the programme, as Mandal did, they make it very clear that Vipassana “is neither an intellectual nor a philosophical entertainment, not a rest cure, a holiday, or an opportunity for socializing”. There are other schools and techniques where one may gain knowledge by questioning, debating, studying, and contemplating. He was clearly at the wrong place; akin to expecting Chinese food at a South Indian restaurant.
He also found the initial watching and observing of the breath (ana-pana) very “regimented” and “problematic”. The ability to focus your mind whenever you want and for as long as you want is the preparatory training for this meditation. Developing an ability to have such control over your mind that you can use it as a tool requires some serious work. If hard work is “problematic”, then yes, it is problematic, and so are many other ventures which require perseverance, dedication, discipline, and hard work.
Also Read: Buddhist monks are like psychotherapists. We look at problems from the mental health angle
Misreading the Code of Discipline
Mandal problematises “noble silence”, and wanted to have an intellectual debate on that and the technique itself. In one of the early videos, which Mandal probably missed, Goenka clearly explains the reason for “noble silence”: the silence of body, speech, and mind. The idea is to create an environment where one should feel alone in isolation, mind turned inward without any distractions. However, the organisers know that there could be doubts and discomfort. They note in their Code of Discipline, “It may be that a student cannot understand the practical reasons for one or several of the above rules. Rather than allow negativity and doubt to develop, immediate clarification should be sought from the teacher.” Mandal didn’t let the readers know if he indeed tried that pathway.
Mandal considers “silence” and restrictive mobility as “violative of the fundamental right.” He also didn’t like that they wanted to make him stay for 10 days. This course is designed so that a meditator would achieve the desired outcomes in a certain minimum number of days. Several medical treatments, healing practices, and other demanding activities require “regimented” and rigorous schedules and restrictions. The rules and demands are explicitly made clear right at the time of application and prior to enrolment.
He calls the food served during the course “Jain food in a Buddhist meditation camp”, although the organisers do not make such claims. In fact, they are very explicit about not subscribing to any particular food philosophy in their Introduction to the Code of Discipline, which he signed off on when registering for the course. No course can satisfy the dietary needs of every single person.
They offer simple vegetarian meals based on local produce and availability and make a sincere effort to create a balanced menu suitable for meditation. However, if a doctor has prescribed a special diet, which was the case for Mandal, then the organisers ask to let them know in advance so that they may try to meet their specific needs. Those with very restrictive diets, or diets that interfere with meditation, are asked to wait until they gain flexibility in their eating behaviour. Mandal should have either notified the organisers or waited until he had clearance from his doctor.
Another complaint he has is that gym activities and jogging were not allowed. They clearly mention that secluded facilities are not available at the course site and the only exercise permitted during breaks is walking in the designated areas. He was warned, that too well in advance.
Another fallacy claimed by him is that “these meditation techniques claimed to cure many ailments.” This statement can’t be further from the truth. The website clearly states, “it is not a substitute for medical or psychiatric treatment” and “the purpose of Vipassana is not to cure diseases”. This meditation technique is not for those who believe in instant cures, cults or who wish to experience divine miracles, or see God.
Also Read: Diamond heiress to plastic baron — the daily lives of Jain monks & nuns who gave it all up
Misunderstanding the spirit of Vipassana
Mandal is not qualified to speak about Vipassana as the specific Vipassana meditation technique is taught after the fourth day, and by that time he was already gone. What he practised was ana-pana, the preparatory breathing technique for Vipassana.
Vipassana trains the mind to develop an understanding of raga (cravings) and dwesha (aversions) and to eventually eliminate them through meditative practices. Mandal feels that human society has progressed from one epoch to another because of “raga and dwesha”, which he considers similar to having “fire in the belly”. However, he does not offer his reasoning for this correlation. Freedom from raga and dwesha prevents one from being reactive and allows one to respond to different situations with equanimity, essential for human progress.
Vipassana does not contradict any school of philosophy one follows, including the Navayana Buddhism of BR Ambedkar, which Mandal claims to be influenced by. The goal is to develop panna (wisdom, insight that purifies the mind), by observing “the changing nature of body and mind and experiencing the universal truths of impermanence, suffering, and egolessness. This truth realisation by direct experience is the process of purification.” Vipassana does come from Buddhist traditions but to locate it within ‘Buddhism’ or call it a philosophy is a complete misunderstanding of the spirit of Vipassana.
Mandal says that his reason for quitting the course after four days was to attend to the unfinished business he had for the upcoming Independence Day. When one applies to the program one plans and commits for the full 10 days to see its benefits. They do not charge for the training and the facility, and the enrollment is based on first come first serve. The courses are fully booked months in advance and, people are waitlisted before being able to find a place. By leaving before completion he wasted one precious seat.
If Mandal had followed his own resolve and acquired the wisdom of ‘testing before accepting’, he would have completed the course and then shared his observations and experiences. What he ended up doing is ‘rejecting without testing’. Vipassana challenges a person’s emotional and physical capabilities, and meditative gains are possible only with sincere efforts, persistence and practice. There is no miracle involved, no shortcuts are possible.
On this occasion, raga and dwesha got the better of him, but perhaps there will be another opportunity for Mandal to actually learn about Vipassana and what it offers to the world.
Manish Paliwal is a professor and former chair of mechanical engineering at The College of New Jersey, US. He tweets @paliwalTCNJ. Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)