It refers to a particular style of meditation, as taught by a particular teacher and his acolytes - a form of no-self insight mediation, based on a systematic examination of all the things that might constitute a self. It also refers generally to "insight" meditation, where "insight" might depend on whether you are training in a mahayana or hinayana tradition (in hinayana, it's insight into no-self, in mahayana, it's insight into emptiness). It might refer to silent but discursive reflection, based on instructions; or it might be a concept-free state of "resting the mind", arising spontaneously from various kinds of shamatha/samatha (broadly, mental calming) exercises. No doubt the the term also has divergent meanings in other Indian practice traditions.
So why a 10-day vipassana course, rather than (say) a nine-day course? Is it a particular brand of "vipassana" that you are suggesting? In what respect is it a "course" - do you get a certificate at the end? Is there a test?
The particular style of meditation referred to in the article is one I've never heard of before; BWV, or "Brain Wave Vibration". Oh dear, that sounds suspiciously like woo, so I'll google it.
Hmmm. Apart from this NIH paper, I can't find anything about BWV that doesn't reek of hype or woo. Why did the researchers choose this particular obscure style of meditation? Judging by their names, it seems that many of the researchers are Korean. Perhaps BWV was invented by some Korean sect derived from buddhism. As far as I can tell, BWV is really a form of guided shamatha, incorporating physical movement. That's not unusual; both shamatha and vipassana are often performed while walking (saves leg stiffness from long periods of sitting). Calling it "yoga" doesn't help much; that's an even looser term than "vipassana". In both buddhist and shaivite traditions, all types of meditation are forms of yoga ("yoga" in Sanskrit just means "union" - or "yoke", like the wooden apparatus that unites two cattle for ploughing work).
I'm aware that various styles of meditation have been productised and commercialised over the last couple of decades, and are now marketed for profit to knowledge-workers, executives and the like (i.e. suckers with not much time, but with money to burn). I'm deeply suspicious of these trends. If meditation costs anything, it costs time.
Personal declaration: for about 30 years I used to do a lot of meditation in a buddhist tradition, but I think I've fully recovered from all that now.
Oh - I didn't mention "mindfulness". This is a term that's nowadays widely used in therapy and treatment situatiuons; it's also heavily commercialised and branded.
When I was taught mindfulness, it was initially mindfulness of breathing; a way of calming the mind. A while later I realised it was a basic part of the buddhist approach to morality; how can your action be correct if you have no idea what you are doing? - So I was taught to become mindful in everything - cooking, programming, walking, listening etc.
Mindfulness in programming seems to be very difficult!
The "mindfulness" that therapists use seems to be a form of shamatha (calming the mind), specifically mindfulness of breathing, usually with spoken guidance from the facilitator (after all, they have to do something to earn their fee).
Good question (I'm assuming realisation of the no-snark doctrine).
No-self is a form of emptiness; "emptiness of self", as you might say. The belief in a self is considered to be the root of suffering, so extinguishing that belief extinguishes suffering. This is the culmination of the path of the "hearers" - those who heard Sakyamuni speak.
The mahayana teaching on emptiness goes further. Not just the self, but all phenomena, arise dependent on chains of causation with no beginning; nothing has independent existence. Nothing can be relied on, everything is like models made of tissue-paper. Various kinds of logical reasoning have been developed to get this kind of perspective.
Insight into this kind of emptiness includes insight into no-self, because the self is a phenomenon too, and one that is empty of independent existence like all other phenomena.
Realisation of the emptiness of all phenomena is said to engender compassion. One's personal suffering might not diminish at all.
Incidentally, I used the term "hinayana", which can be translated as "narrow path", and is considered to be a put-down by some people. I do not mean it as a put-down, I am just using it as a term for those kinds of Buddhist teaching that don't embrace the doctrine of emptiness. I think that all such forms of Buddhism are now historical; in particular, I have been told that the Theravada teachings that are current especially in South-East Asia are not the same as hinayana - that Theravada includes significant mahayana influences.
It refers to a particular style of meditation, as taught by a particular teacher and his acolytes - a form of no-self insight mediation, based on a systematic examination of all the things that might constitute a self. It also refers generally to "insight" meditation, where "insight" might depend on whether you are training in a mahayana or hinayana tradition (in hinayana, it's insight into no-self, in mahayana, it's insight into emptiness). It might refer to silent but discursive reflection, based on instructions; or it might be a concept-free state of "resting the mind", arising spontaneously from various kinds of shamatha/samatha (broadly, mental calming) exercises. No doubt the the term also has divergent meanings in other Indian practice traditions.
So why a 10-day vipassana course, rather than (say) a nine-day course? Is it a particular brand of "vipassana" that you are suggesting? In what respect is it a "course" - do you get a certificate at the end? Is there a test?
The particular style of meditation referred to in the article is one I've never heard of before; BWV, or "Brain Wave Vibration". Oh dear, that sounds suspiciously like woo, so I'll google it.
Hmmm. Apart from this NIH paper, I can't find anything about BWV that doesn't reek of hype or woo. Why did the researchers choose this particular obscure style of meditation? Judging by their names, it seems that many of the researchers are Korean. Perhaps BWV was invented by some Korean sect derived from buddhism. As far as I can tell, BWV is really a form of guided shamatha, incorporating physical movement. That's not unusual; both shamatha and vipassana are often performed while walking (saves leg stiffness from long periods of sitting). Calling it "yoga" doesn't help much; that's an even looser term than "vipassana". In both buddhist and shaivite traditions, all types of meditation are forms of yoga ("yoga" in Sanskrit just means "union" - or "yoke", like the wooden apparatus that unites two cattle for ploughing work).
I'm aware that various styles of meditation have been productised and commercialised over the last couple of decades, and are now marketed for profit to knowledge-workers, executives and the like (i.e. suckers with not much time, but with money to burn). I'm deeply suspicious of these trends. If meditation costs anything, it costs time.
Personal declaration: for about 30 years I used to do a lot of meditation in a buddhist tradition, but I think I've fully recovered from all that now.