Retreat Reflection Pt 1: The 3 Marks

It has been just over a week since I flew back into Denver, after having finished a 6-week vipassana intensive at the Insight Meditation Society in Barre, MA. This article is an attempt at putting words to what I’ve experienced during the course of those six weeks, and will in many ways be quite pointless. The reason I say that is because when one reflects on one’s experience and tries to share some essence of that with another there are at least two assumptions that one makes, which in the Therevadin tradition of Buddhism are not assumed, and are in fact challenged. One is that experience is happening to someone, a self, a person, a being, and the other is that these experiences somehow matter in some grand way.

The whole aim of the retreat was to actually investigate the nature of experience itself, or what are called the characteristics of existence. In the Buddhist view these are called the 3 marks of existence, namely impermanence (annica), suffering (dukkha), and no-self (anatta). Because I was looking at the nature of experience, rather than the content of the experiences, what I actually experienced doesn’t really matter that much and most of which I don’t remember in any case. But what I learned about the nature of conditioned reality, and more importantly what I saw about a more unconditioned recognition of reality are really what I’d like to share. I may draw on relative experiences to bring light to these understandings, but not because I see them as important, meaningful, or in any way indicative of there having been a self named Vince who actually “had” those experiences.

So, coming back to the 3 characteristics I mentioned above. I put the recognition of the changing, unsatisfactory, and selfless (or empty) nature of phenomena as my top priority while on retreat. From dusk till dawn I brought attention over and over again to the true nature of this experience. Physical sensations coming and going. Thoughts coming and going. Emotions arising and passing. Intentions arising and passing. This whole complex pattern of phenomena I call “Vince” was dissected into its constituent parts, which were not just parts but patterns as well. Patterns that intermingled, interpenetrated, and broke apart upon further investigation.

No more engaging in the world of concepts and the world of solidity, but seeing directly the ephemeral and transient nature of all things. This was the practice, and this practice literally broke me open. Again and again I was faced with the anguish of trying to control that which can’t be controlled, that which by its very essence is infused with change. The mantra I developed during this retreat went like this:

Nothing can be held onto
Nothing is worth holding onto
And there’s no one to do the holding…

Three dimensions of emptiness, three doorways to the absolute, three refuges which have served me well. But even these must be released for they are characteristics of that which is changing, not that which is Unborn.

10 Responses to “Retreat Reflection Pt 1: The 3 Marks”

  1. martin #

    looking forward to seeing more of these reports…

    November 20, 2005 at 11:50 am
  2. coolmel #

    great reflection. i guess my stupid question is, so how will this affect others?

    “tell me, did you sail across the stars,
    did you make it to the milky way,
    and see the lights all faded,
    and that heaven is overrated?”

    glad to be have you back here in samsara dawg!

    November 23, 2005 at 2:57 pm

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. field/figure » transience - November 16, 2005

    [...] A fellow I met during my touch-and-go work with the Integral Institute recently spent several weeks on a vipassana retreat. He has a blog, and he has started to write about those weeks. This article is an attempt at putting words to what I’ve experienced during the course of those six weeks, and will in many ways be quite pointless. The reason I say that is because when one reflects on one’s experience and tries to share some essence of that with another there are at least two assumptions that one makes, which in the Therevadin tradition of Buddhism are not assumed, and are in fact challenged. One is that experience is happening to someone, a self, a person, a being, and the other is that these experiences somehow matter in some grand way. [...]
  2. Deep Surface » Perspectives - November 21, 2005

    [...] Tomorrow I head to Seattle for another Integral experience. As an apt preparation, today I read some excellent writing by Vince Horn. I met him briefly while passing through Colorado last summer, and again in the fall during my ITP course. He has some thoughts related to a six week Vipassana course he attended recently. Six weeks! I can rarely muster the willpower to meditate once a week, let alone 12 to 14 hours a day for six weeks. If his words are any indication of spiritual progress through meditation, Vince is an inspiration for those of us with less than regular practices. [...]
  3. VincentHorn.com » Retreat Reflection Pt 2: Who Am I? - November 24, 2005

    [...] My last reflection was on the practice of vipassana and the three marks of existence. This was the primary practice I engaged in while on retreat, in terms of time-spent. The other practice (which is a bit of a non-practice) was that of self-enquiry, a practice taken from the Advaita Vedanta tradition [Advaita Vedanta literally means “radical non-duality”]. The enquiry “Who am I?” is the principal means to the removal of all misery and the attainment of the supreme bliss. When in this manner the mind becomes quiescent in its own state, Self-experience arises of its own accord, without any hindrance. #150; Ramana Maharshi, Self Enquiry [...]
  4. Generation Sit » Blog Archive » My Retreat Reflections… - November 25, 2005

    [...] Retreat Reflection Pt 1: The 3 Marks Retreat Reflection Pt 2: Who am I? [...]
  5. Generation Sit » Blog Archive » Retreat Reflections - November 25, 2005

    [...] Retreat Reflection Pt 1: The 3 Marks Retreat Reflection Pt 2: Who am I? [...]
  6. VincentHorn.com » Retreat Reflection Pt 4: So What? - December 7, 2005

    [...] I dear friend of mine, after reading my first retreat reflection asked me quite frankly, “so how will this affect others?” My first response to the question was one of slight annoyance. I think subtly I get frustrated at this question, because on the one hand, spiritual practice isn’t done in order to change anything. It’s done because there’s something fundamental and deeply vital, which needs to be resolved and one really has no choice but to resolve this nagging “problem.” One might describe the problem as, “suffering,” or “duality,” or perhaps even “sin.” It’s a problem that has to do with why things aren’t quite right, when it seems they should be. I’ve experienced some form of this nagging as far back as I can remember, and spiritual practice, to me, is about coming to understand this problem and its resolution completely. And it’s done, paradoxically, by coming to accept that everything is as it is. I know as an idea this is completely counter-intuitive. As I said, it is a paradox. But as a practioner, it makes total sense, and I’ve begun to see that nothing else will resolve this core problem. [...]
  7. Numinous Nonsense » Independent Study 2005 - February 4, 2006

    [...] Part 1. The Three Marks [...]
  8. Numinous Nonsense » How has the Practice Changed? - March 5, 2006

    [...] The practice has changed since the long retreat. How? The three characteristics are directly understood, not ideas which I believe in, but are related to my understanding concerning the nature of phenomenal reality. Nothing can satisfy ultimately, because it’s always changing, and because there’s no one driving this bus. [...]