Noting simplicity and subtle sensations

I've just started reading In this Very Life by Sayadaw U Pandita and realized that I've probably been getting too cute with my noting vocabulary. He writes:

"For sensations in the body we may choose a slightly more descriptive term like warmth, pressure, hardness, or motion. Mental objects appear to present a bewildering diversity, but actually they fall into just a few clear categories such as thinking, imagining, remembering, planning and visualizing. But remember that in using the labeling technique, your goal is not to gain verbal skills..."

So, I've been interjecting content-related descriptive terms into the labels I've been using. "Dharma thought" might be used for any thinking that has to do with the dharma. "Reporting thought" might be used for any of those thoughts related to questions about how I would report this or that sensation. I've also been interjecting descriptive terms about the object itself, so sometimes it might go something like this "hearing, hearing (airplane)" or some such. Based on the instructions above, this seems like an overly complex approach.

First, would others agree that the simplest approach is best?
Second, what kind of vocabulary do people enlist for subtle sensations? I've been using stuff like "third-eye pressure" or "'crown pressure," etc., and often seem to be at a loss as far as how to note/report this stuff. Should I just use "pressure" for all such sensations, or maybe "vibrations" in some cases?

In noting aloud with Kenneth, I would just use "pressure" whether the sensation was my leg on the chair or tension at the third eye/crown. However, how is Kenneth to know whether the sensation in question is subtle or gross, if one uses such a blanket, catch-all term? Or is that not important?
Thanks for any help!

Most of my noting vocabulary can be broken down into three categories.

physical: pain, pressure, tension, release, rising, falling, moving, pleasure
mental: thinking, fantasy, future thoughts, past thoughts
emotional: pleasant, unpleasant, neutral, sadness, bliss

This is just what I find myself using. Sometimes other words come up, but like my old TKD instructor told me, "You will find that you have just a few moves that you are really good at. Those are the ones you use in a real fight. Don't get fancy"

I find that if I spend too much time figuring out what to say, the sensation has already disappeared and then I'm not noting what's in front of me. I think if you can get two things down, you are on your way:

1. You are using all of the power of you mind so you don't wander from your actual experience.
2. By seeing clearly what's going on in the moment, you can break down the illusion that an experience is continuous, satisfactory, or is you.

Metta,
-o

Thanks, Owen. That makes a lot of sense. I've definitely found myself trying to pick out the right label seconds after the sensation itself. So "subtle" sensations are simply physical sensations to be labeled with terms like "pressure" and "release." No need to privilege them with some other subset of labels.

Yep, that's the ticket. There are no important sensations.
There are no important sensations.
There are no important sensations.
Also, there are no important sensations.

"Yep, that's the ticket. There are no important sensations.
There are no important sensations.
There are no important sensations.
Also, there are no important sensations.

"

Ha! Never underestimate the power of what Kenneth calls "relentless clarification"! LOL
Thanks again.

But what about this question of reporting, as traditionally understood, versus noting aloud? They cannot be the same thing, right? If the practitioner sticks to a very simple and direct set of actual labels, how is the teacher to know what is going on, short of a more detailed report in which the student drills down into more detail about the types of sensations being experienced, what is happening to those sensations, where they are occurring and so forth? EDIT: In other words, the actual report would have to be an off-the-cushion description of what was going on, rather than a real-time noting-aloud session?

Traditionally, I believe the report would be an off-the-cushion account of experience. Similar to what would be going on in a personal interview at a retreat. If you'd like the traditional traditional format check out the Guidance for Yogis at Interviews which describes how it's done in the Mahasi tradition: tmc.tathagatameditationcenter.org/articl...0at%20Interviews.pdf (it seems a bit intense to a beginner like me but interesting nonetheless).

When I've worked with Kenneth, I've done both. We did a skype session where we moved up the jhanic arc to equanimity going back and forth with each of us describing sensations. It was what got me my 2nd path fruition.
Just to clarify one thing though, what I posted back there should not be thought of as a complete list, just the labels that I use 90% of the time. Also, when moving through the arupa jhanas, I tend to note, consciousness, space, nothingness... etc. Once you move into equanimity, things like "fluttering" might become predominant.

One last thing, there are also no unimportant sensations.

"When I've worked with Kenneth, I've done both. We did a skype session where we moved up the jhanic arc to equanimity going back and forth with each of us describing sensations. It was what got me my 2nd path fruition.
Just to clarify one thing though, what I posted back there should not be thought of as a complete list, just the labels that I use 90% of the time. Also, when moving through the arupa jhanas, I tend to note, consciousness, space, nothingness... etc. Once you move into equanimity, things like "fluttering" might become predominant.

One last thing, there are also no unimportant sensations.
"

This is helpful. Here's the genesis of the question: In a recent session with Kenneth, I noted aloud for an hour. Kenneth had intended to teach me The Wheel, a technique that I gather is about working with subtle and gross sensations. He was unable to teach me this, however, because my practice has not evolved beyond a certain plateau of relative grossness.
This made me ask questions such as, "Am I reporting sensations incorrectly? Should I be giving some indication of whether a set of sensations involves the third eye or the crown or a sense of spaciousness, etc.? And what does the noting practice of someone who has gone beyond such a plateau actually look like, if in fact there is nothing wrong with the way I'm reporting?"
Last question: We do go into considerable detail about mind states, do we not? In other words, we don't just say, "feeling, feeling" or "emoting, emoting." We label it anticipation or dread or boredom or what have you. So I gather, in talking about space, etc., we do go beyond these basic categories.
OK, sorry if I'm being dense.

I can't speak for Kenneth, but I can tell you my own experience with it. The more I look with the vipassana technique at what appears to be a solid sensation, the more it breaks up into individual component sensations that are not solid.

For instance, I'm sitting and my hip hurts (chronic problem for me), I notice what at first appears to be a solid mass of pain. When I note further, it begins to break up into smaller packets of sensation. I will look like pain - pain - pain - pain - pressure - pressure - pain - tingling - desire for the pain to end - pain - tingling - pleasant - pleasant - neutral - pressure - relaxation - opening - pain - pressure.. etc.

At the point where the primary objects of a strata of mind has been "vipassanaed" into more subtle sensations, I'll notice then that I've moved into another nana where the feel and focus of experience changes. Basically, as you break up sensations into the component parts, you can't help but move into more subtle layers of mind, i.e. up the jhanic arc.

As you do this, the change in focus and feeling tone will enable you and others to tell where you are. There are also signposts. For instance, when I'm in disgust, I almost always notice it by the fact that I'm noting "nausea - nausea - aversion - unpleasant" and the fact that the mind is unstable in that space, meaning instead of getting a clear rhythm of sensations to note, they seem to be all over the place. That's how I can always spot when I'm in the dukkha nanas.

However, if I've just come from equanimity and now I'm noting space - space - thinking - space, I can tell I'm in the 5th jhana. Make sense? You can tell where you are more by what you don't see. If I'm in the 13th jhana, pretty much all that's left is knowing. When I'm in fear, it looks much more gross. Anyway, that's what it looks like subjectively.

Also, check this out:
www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html

That was helpful to me. Notice the focus is more about what drops away as Sariputta moves up the arc.

Anyhow, long and meandering screed there. But that's about how I note and report and my mental model for it all. Hope it is helpful. Also hope someone more experienced will come and tell me if I'm full of crap.

Wow. Owen that is wonderful. So much of what we are doing here matches what they were doing then. Thanks so much for this link.

"Also, check this out:
www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html

That was helpful to me. Notice the focus is more about what drops away as Sariputta moves up the arc.

Anyhow, long and meandering screed there. But that's about how I note and report and my mental model for it all. Hope it is helpful. Also hope someone more experienced will come and tell me if I'm full of crap.

"

Extremely helpful. If that's a screed, keep 'em coming! Thanks, Owen!