Scanning and Noting Compared and Contrasted

I think of scanning and noting as two tools that can be used together or separately, or perhaps as analogous to the scanning and cataloging that a field biologist would do. In order to get an overview of the habitat and see all of the animals that are present, you scan. But if you want to be clear about which animals they are, you catalog or name them. You can also catalog by taking a more tightly focused perspective; if you look at a one square meter patch of habitat, you will find gazillions of animals if you just keep zooming in to higher levels of resolution (smaller and smaller animals), in which case you can still catalog. You can also scan without cataloging, just getting an intuitive sense or overview that animals are present without necessarily knowing which ones.

The important concept to have about developmental practice is that it is a process of accessing, objectifying, deconstructing, and thereby dis-identifying from a succession of ever more subtle strata of mind. If I can take something as object, it isn't "I". "I" must be the one who is looking at it. My sense of self has moved on up the line to the next stratum of mind on the tree. Working systematically, I then take the new stratum of mind as object, etc. When all the strata of mind have been accessed, objectified, and deconstructed, there is no place for the sense of self to hide. I have no choice but to be awake. There is awareness, but it isn't coming from anybody or from anywhere. This is freedom.

(cont below)

(cont from above)

Jackson Wilshire and I were talking recently about the potential weakness of the Goenka method if not supplemented by other techniques. One can imagine becoming a master of feeling body sensations without actually making the connection between body sensations and emotions. This is where naming or noting is important. For example, it's essential to the development of my emotional maturity that I be able to identify anger when it arises. I have to name it. If not, I am likely to act out my anger. There is a cognitive component; naming is a function of relatively high-level thought. Body scanning without noting/naming does not address this. I've read Mr. Goenka's book, in which he explains that for every thought and emotion there is a corresponding body sensation, so that to be aware of the body is to be aware of all four of the Foundations of Mindfulness. This is correct as far as it goes, but doesn't negate the need to address each of the four Foundations on its own terms, at its own level. It's only by clearly objectifying all of the changing phenomena of mind and body from every possible angle that we create a situation in which ignorance has no place to hide. Think of it as radical transparency of the mind/body compound. Suffering needs piles of ignorance to hide behind. No ignorance, no place to hide, no suffering. Make your mind transparent to Awareness. Taking it to the next step, when even the sense of self is objectified, there is nothing but Awareness, which includes, pervades, and is not other than the entire manifest world. There is no sticking point from which to look, no perch on which to build a home, "no fixed position," as they say in Zen. Far from being unpleasant or scary, this is the most attractive of all views, illuminating as it does the fact that there isn't anyone here to suffer.

May all beings awaken in this lifetime,

Kenneth

I have to add as someone who was immersed in the goenka method for 9 years that coupling it with noting practice pushed me into territory that I had never been before. Now when I say coupling it I mean using both at the same time. I would note as I did a few scanning rounds when I felt my attention slipping or when the subtler tricky sensations of "I" were blipping in and out of the bare sensate experience of scanning.
It is one of the key things that got me over the line!

"(cont from above)

Jackson Wilshire and I were talking recently about the potential weakness of the Goenka method if not supplemented by other techniques. One can imagine becoming a master of feeling body sensations without actually making the connection between body sensations and emotions. "

Hi Kenneth,

I can see where one could miss seeing the connection between body sensations and emotions. However this was not at all the case for me while pracising in Goenka teqnique.

Then again, I was a Dhamma bad boy becasue when I found out that Goenka's teacher Sayagyi U Ba Khin taught his students to focus most of their attention on the chest area, that is what I started doing. Especially when I heard many people dipped under his guidance. When I started doing that, I realised how many of our emotions were connected to the sensations that arose there, and not just there, but at the throat and stomach and solar plexus(the chakras). When I felt anger I was able to pinpoint exactly were the sensations that were being reacted to were. Same with passion, worry, depression etc. When that habit became strong, being equanimous with those sensations became easier and certain emotions that once caused so much misery became less and less. The connection between body sensations and emotions was ever so clear. But maybe this is because I chose not to just do body scanning non stop. Dhamma bad boy!

And on further thought, when these emotions arose, I would note them anyway...aaa anger has arisen...then the mind would go quickly to it's corresponding sensations and with equanimity, watch it do it's thing and then dissipate. Liek this, it felt like I wore down the habit of reacting to the sensations on the body.

Hey Nikolai,

Thanks for sharing your experience.

What Kenneth and I were getting at has to do with the maturity it takes to identify emotions as "emotions" - rather than identifying emotions just as "sensations." I heard Jack Kornfield tell a story about a man who was a very skillful meditator and went to work with a psychologist on some personal issues. The psychologist would ask, "What are you feeling?" He would say, "I feel heat, tingling, pressure in the throat, tightness in the chest, numbness here or there," etc. Eventually, the therapist had to ask again, "No. What are you FEELing?" In this case, the yogi burst into tears and fully embraced and experienced his emotions at their own level. Hurt, sorrow, sadness, anger, even joy, love, excitement, envy, whatever... It's important to open up to these processes in terms of sensations, but it's equally important to take them at the level of emotions themselves. Only when we open up to both are we taking steps toward greater freedom.

At least that's my opinion. I can see the danger in teaching others to focus on sensations and vibrations of experience to the exclusion of other modes of experience. It can foster a sense of aversion to certain flavors of experience, and aversion is a major enemy to meditative and spiritual progress.

Thoughts?

~Jackson

Hmmm, i see what you are saying. The Goenka method seems to a degree to dfocus less on "emotions" and focus purely on the sensations that correspond to them. And I have certainly seen examples of people immersed in the Goenka tradition that have had aversion to the expression of emotions. Yes, there is the danger of aversion towards this but it was never like that in my case. But I admit, I have seen meditators take it way too seriously and deny certain things in the name of "not reacting". But I don't think they are practicing what Goenka is teaching. I think they just take things way too seriously. But there is certainly the idea that " no reaction to sensations is what the technique is all about.

I have gotten great benefit from it , the non reacting mind. And thinking back, I never really denied "emotions" that i felt. I just tried to see what they really were when they arose. And for me they were sensations arising on the body and the reacting part of the mind reacting to them with either aversion or craving. It helped me tremendously to come out of depression, anger etc when I was able to break the emotions down into what they were made up of. I guess i can't really see what the problem with doing that is. Although I do admit that it can be misunderstood and taken to the extreme. If i ever came across that behaviour say at a centre when working at one, I would usually give the advice that it is the middle path and there was no need to deny certain things in the name of "not reacting to sensations".

I have a heap of pressure in my forehead where the cycle seems to be at the moment which is affecting my concentration and thinking. Sorry if I haven't gotten to the point.

I have to weigh in with Jackson and Kenneth on this and have realized in my own practice how critical it is to experience emotions as emotions. These things, these FFELings, have a tremendous power over us and must be objectified. That said, these things, these FEELings, are a necessary and important part of being human, and to ignore them or to trivialize them or to try to try to manage them purely as raw sensations strikes me as a mistake.

JMHO

This isn't meant as a disagreement with any of the other posts, just another thought or opinion:

My impression of the Goenka method is that "not reacting" means to not try to interfere or stop the sensation, so that it comes to it's full flower. So, if one is experiencing sensations from an emotion positive or negative and is practicing properly, I think they would be fully experienced and known both as raw sensation and as emotion.

Hi Mike,

I think both you and Nikolai are making an excellent point in regards to the plus sides of coming to know the bodily sensations which correspond with (dare I say "compose") our basic and complex emotions. It's true that staying with bare sensations can be a way for us to give our experience enough attention, and thus allow ourselves to open to the experience of whatever emotion is playing itself out.

The shadow side to this, which I believe is quite serious and potentially prevalent among vipassana meditators, is the use of the Goenka style technique to deny or otherwise avoid the significance of human emotion by reducing it to mere physicality, and thus become cut off from a very important - even crucial - aspect of our being.

The same can be said about dwelling as the Witness. I think some people become absorbed in the Witness and use it to blow off other important aspects of their lives. It's almost like spiritual Novocain, and it ain't pretty. Nothing stunts emotional and spiritual growth like avoidance and aversion, and so exposing these shadow sides is a must.

I don't think Goenka's method is "bad" or "wrong". I just like to warn people of potential snags in their development. Certain practices have a tendency to cultivate the "near enemies" rather than the Buddha qualities if we're not careful.

Thoughts?
~Jackson

EDIT: spelling and grammar.

Yes, Jackson. You are right in warning others about the shadow side of the Goenka method. There are many who are trapped in the extreme take on it. I have seen them, seen their behaviour. I have even gone through it myself on reflection. But very briefly. I mean, it is the middle path after all. And so many people forget that.

I remember my first weird supernatural event (AP) on the first course I served in 2001. I was washing the pots in the kitchen. It was day 9 of the course and I remember thinking to myself suddenly. Why the hell am I washing the pots again? Why the frack am I always getting the crappy job? This was the FEELing that suddenly rose. A real agitation.
Now at this stage I became aware of a very heavy and sour sensation at my chest. It was maybe 2 centre metres wide. It felt like a flow of vibrations with a very negative quality. My thoughts got stronger and stronger. "Bloody bastards for making me wash the pots!" But as the negative thoughts started to invade my mind I remembered Goenka's words...be equanimous with the sensations. I pulled the mind back from the negative mental state and fiercely put my attention on the negative flow of sensations at the chest.

All the time washing the pots still. It was so interesting seeing how this sensation was so connected to the emotional reaction going on in my head. It got stronger and began to feel like a pounding thumping sensation in the same area of the chest. It got stronger and stronger.......and i had to drop the scourer and the pot i was holding. Everyone looked up at me in the kitchen. i was on the verge of balling my eyes out. Tears were welling up in my eyes..I managed to stammer out ...."I....gotta......gulp!......go !

I rushed out of the kitchen and into the empty dining hall all the while with my mind observing the pounding sensation at my chest. Tears started flowing freely without any control of them.....I sat down and BOOM...the sensation got stronger and felt like someone was thumping in the chest with their fist. And I cried like a baby, I balled like I've never before.....so much sadness and depression was felt.....not as a FEELing in the mind...there was no mental reaction of sorts...there was complete equanimity with what was going on....but the body just released it and cried and cried. It felt as if someone else was sobbing the heart out.

It was an amazing experience and really got me onto the path. I was hooked since then and have had many similar experiences ever since. I don't think I ever denied the emotions. I accepted them for what they really are and let them arise and pass as they did, without attachment to them, without identifying with them. That is the Goenka/ U Ba Khin tecnique. those who take it to the extreme and deny certain things are not walking on the middle path in my humble opinion.

They become too attached to the idea of "Not reacting". But telecaster is right..."not reacting" is more about not identifying with "I", "My emotion" My experience" and breaking it all down into what it really is. Not denying it to be there. It is there, it does arise and it does pass away, regardless. In my case , there was no denying the FEELing or the emotion. There was complete equanimity with all the sensations arising and passing and when it dissipated and finally stopped...I felt so much relief and happiness.

This was a big lesson for me in not reacting and just witnessing and accepting the emotions and sensations arising and passing as they were. There was no identifying with it all as "I" . In fact it all felt like someone else going through it, at the time.

From an email exchange with a student:

Q: So, what do you think? Bear down and increase concentration on primary object? Or keep letting it play out?

A: Well, you never want to bear down, as that implies "over-efforting." You want just enough energy/effort (viriya) to make contact with the object in this moment. No more, no less. It's very dynamic and the amount of effort required from one moment to the next is constantly changing. This ability to dynamically change the amount of effort in response to the changing objects of attention is key to mastering vipassana. See how flexible you can be, how lightly you can touch the object without overshooting it. Imagine a peanut floating in a bucket of water. Put your finger on it just enough to feel it, but not hard enough to roll off. Now introduce some waves into the water. Maintain contact with the peanut as it moves up and down, back and forth. Reestablish contact when you lose it.

How do you know if you have contact with the object? Easy. If you can name it, you know you are contacting it. This is the true value of noting; it keeps you honest. If you are noting, you are doing vipassana. You cannot note without doing vipassana. That does not mean hypnotize yourself into noting "rising, falling," and pretend that you are awake, mind you. You have to know something about the object. Go ahead and note "rising, falling," but know that you are experiencing coldness, warmth, softness, hardness, stinging, burning, aching, pulsing, throbbing, or whatever it is. Noting (knowing clearly what you are experiencing and naming it) is biofeedback.

Kenneth

(Response to Nick's posts # 10 and 11)

Thanks for the terrific story, Nick! If you don't mind my taking a crack at dharma diagnosis, I would say that sounds like the 1st ñana, Knowledge of Mind and Body.

"I rushed out of the kitchen and into the empty dining hall all the while with my mind observing the pounding sensation at my chest. Tears started flowing freely without any control of them.....I sat down and BOOM...the sensation got stronger and felt like someone was thumping in the chest with their fist. And I cried like a baby, I balled like I've never before.....so much sadness and depression was felt.....not as a FEELing in the mind...there was no mental reaction of sorts...there was complete equanimity with what was going on....but the body just released it and cried and cried. It felt as if someone else was sobbing the heart out."-Nikolai

Notice how it became clear that the mind and body were two distinct phenomena. The body was sobbing out its "sadness and depression" while the mind stood by and watched with "complete equanimity." This is characteristic of the 1st ñana. It is completely revolutionary for a yogi the first time s/he is able to clearly make this distinction. A&P events, by contrast, are characterized by euphoria, visions, lights, and unitive experiences. No doubt you've had one or more such experiences, but the experience you relate so clearly here is probably not an arising and passing experience.

Yeh, as I wrote it I kind of doubted if it was. In my first course I ever sat, on one of the last day I was sitting and scanning and getting a free flow of subtle vibrations throughout the body when suddenly POP!!! at the crown there was like pressure and the release and all of a sudden a flood of love and bliss drenched my body and the meditation just flowed. I think I was scanning the body going up with the in breath and going down with the out breath. Also when this thing popped on the crown, there was an amazing pinkish purple red that descended over my eyelids. I really think that may have been an AP event. I realize now that the pinkish purply red colour is related to the crown chakra and i get it happening after a fruition sometimes. From then on, whenever I sat, for the majority of my experience, I was in the bhanga state. If I didnt meditate for awhile I obviously had to work my way up from nyana 1 again.

" In my first course I ever sat, on one of the last day I was sitting and scanning and getting a free flow of subtle vibrations throughout the body when suddenly POP!!! at the crown there was like pressure and the release and all of a sudden a flood of love and bliss drenched my body and the meditation just flowed."-Nick

Right, that sounds more like a description of 4th ñana, the Arising and Passing Away of Phenomena.

Kenneth

Hi everybody,

I'm new to this community and have been lurking in the background for a couple of weeks while observing how things work around here. I'm really impressed by the warmth and openness of this community and excited to have discovered such an incredibly rich resource for practitioners.

I'm coming in a little late here, which is ironic because I believe this thread was initiated in response to a query that I emailed to Kenneth. I live in Nairobi, Kenya and nearly the only dhamma resource that we have had here over the last 7-8 years has been Goenka "gypsy camps": 10-day courses held in a rented location every 3-4 months. So I'm coming from a scanning background but since reading MCTB have become intrigued by the prospects for breaking new ground through trying out Mahasi-style noting. It's encouraging to see that there are people like Nick who have tread this path before.

A quick question on technique: on the DhO Wiki, the description of noting gives the impression that it is done on only one part of the body, e.g. the abdomen. Scanning, of course, travels the length of the body. Is it possible to combine the two? When I try, I feel overwhelmed by the number of sensations. And if sensations arise in an area different from where the scanning is, should I divert the attention to where the sensations have arisen? This would definitely be a no-no in the Goenka school of thought...

Dave

Hi Dave,

When I began practising coupling the noting with awareness of sensation, I generally gave less importance to the sweeping up and down the body. The sweeping certainly helped me navigate certain insight stages like the dukkha nanas, but when I hit the equanimity of formations stage, I shifted the focus on to the sensations that made up ¨I¨ (self). Then the noting really pushed me into new territory. For example, the subtler sensations that corresponded to say..anticipation, frsutration, boredom, investiagtion, etc were noted first and directly after it the mind fell onto the sensation that corresponded to that. I was noting the totality of what made up the self...images and sensations...eveything. That got me across the line.

"For example, the subtler sensations that corresponded to say..anticipation, frsutration, boredom, investiagtion, etc were noted first and directly after it the mind fell onto the sensation that corresponded to that. I was noting the totality of what made up the self...images and sensations...eveything. That got me across the line.
"

Thanks, Nick, this is helpful. In my sitting just before I read your advice, I was actually noting some of those emotional qualities which you mention. Now I need to take it to the next level and link them to their corresponding sensations. The difference between scanning and noting is now becoming much clearer to me. A subsidiary benefit is that this is also making my sitting more interesting and engaging, as the scanning at times became routine and the mind would start to coast...

" A subsidiary benefit is that this is also making my sitting more interesting and engaging, as the scanning at times became routine and the mind would start to coast..."

Yeh, that was my experience. I was coasting too much previous to including the noting. I would get bored, lose interest and as you said, coast without any real investigation going on. But with the noting, it got real interesting and insightful. In fact I found it really made my daily sits something to look forward to as there was so much more to explore now that I was noting everything. It got even more interesting when the sensations that made up the feeling of "I", of Self, were seen blipping in and out rapidly over any bare awareness of other sensations. Try turning your attention and noting to the feelings of duality. Where is the "I" located? Are there images that accompany it? This is where it gets really interesting and takes you places.