OK. Thank you for clarifying that, Jorg.
In that case, you may want to change the title “A deeper analysis of “sankharas” and Buddha Dhamma” and the text there (p. 82) to make clear what your intention is (what you discuss mainly is REGARDING “sankharas” in Goenka’s Vipassana.)
- You should EITHER discuss the correct “sankharas” (different types, why they are important, etc.) OR you can discuss the problem issues with Goenka’s Vipassana. That section confuses me because I am not sure which of those you are discussing there.
- Anyway, I agree that there is no point in discussing this further. But I am glad that I got a better understanding of “Geonka’s Vipassana,” thanks to you and Lang.
Of course, if you or anyone else has questions about “sankhara,” we can discuss those. If anyone else wants to defend “Goenka’s Vipassana,” we can discuss that too.
- I must say that Goenka seems to have faith in the Buddha. But unfortunately, that faith is not based on Buddha’s true teachings.
- I see many such people in discussion forums too. They present incorrect information, but they believe they know the true teachings. The problem is that even when shown evidence from the Tipitaka, they don’t seem to be able to understand the true teachings or to get rid of their wrong views. Self-consistency is the best way to verify any concept. Once you have the correct fundamentals, no one can point to any contradictions.
- But some people are so blind with miccha ditthi that they don’t see, for example, why translating “vinnana” as “consciousness” everywhere is WRONG! Even a child should be able to see that contradiction.