Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

David2 wrote:

Mr Man wrote:

vidar wrote: If somebody feel aversion towards Chanting the best thing to do is maintain equanimity

Do you mean just observe the aversion and work with that (focusing on the mind space and thought proliferation)? Or should one return to the object of meditation, be that anapana sati or focusing on physical sensations in the body?

You should continue your meditation if aversion arises.

You are observing the aversion when you are observing the sensations in the body.

Do you mean the thoughts of aversion? Creating a large field of mindfullness which encompses mind and body? How about focusing directly on the sound of the chanting as it resonates?

Mr Man wrote: How about focusing directly on the sound of the chanting as it resonates?

Focusing on the chanting is certainly not wrong either..
I would say try out what works best for you.

Mr Man wrote:Do you mean the thoughts of aversion? Creating a large field of mindfullness which encompses mind and body? How about focusing directly on the sound of the chanting as it resonates?

That wouldn't be vipassana, vipassana techniques ask you to observe sense contact through the 6 sense doors, so instead of focusing on sound you observe the process of hearing, you observe what's happening within your own mind body process.

This is an important distinction.

Goofaholix wrote:vipassana techniques ask you to observe sense contact through the 6 sense doors, so instead of focusing on sound you observe the process of hearing, you observe what's happening within your own mind body process.

This is an important distinction.

Is that different than "just the heard in the heard" ?

kirk5a wrote: Is that different than "just the heard in the heard" ?

No, that's what I'm talking about, otherwise it would be "just the sound in the sound".

Goofaholix wrote: No, that's what I'm talking about, otherwise it would be "just the sound in the sound".

So you see a difference in practice between "just the heard in the heard" and "just the sound in the sound" ? What is that difference?

kirk5a wrote:

Goofaholix wrote: No, that's what I'm talking about, otherwise it would be "just the sound in the sound".

So you see a difference in practice between "just the heard in the heard" and "just the sound in the sound" ? What is that difference?

It seems to me that "heard" involves the coming together of sound, ear, and vinnana. Strictly speaking, "just the sound in the sound" isn't a possible percept.

kirk5a wrote:

Goofaholix wrote: No, that's what I'm talking about, otherwise it would be "just the sound in the sound".

So you see a difference in practice between "just the heard in the heard" and "just the sound in the sound" ? What is that difference?

Sound happens out there, hearing happens within ones mind and body.

If you focus on sound you'll get caught up in imagining where it is happening, what kind of bird is making it etc.

If you observe hearing you'll observe the process of contact, perception, feeling, and fabrication etc all happening within the mind body process.

Goofaholix wrote: If you observe hearing you'll observe the process of contact, perception, feeling, and fabrication etc all happening within the mind body process.

So what?

kirk5a wrote:

Goofaholix wrote: If you observe hearing you'll observe the process of contact, perception, feeling, and fabrication etc all happening within the mind body process.

So what?

That's the practise.

Suffering arises within the mind body process not within sound, you can observe the beauty of the melody of birdsong and imagine how lovely that bird is but unless you notice the process that is going on in the mind and body as a result of that you won't have learned anything about the mind.

Goofaholix what do you focus on to "observe hearing"?

Mr Man wrote:

vidar wrote: If somebody feel aversion towards Chanting the best thing to do is maintain equanimity

Do you mean just observe the aversion and work with that (focusing on the mind space and thought proliferation)? Or should one return to the object of meditation, be that anapana sati or focusing on physical sensations in the body?

I mean just observe the sensations in the body and maintain the equanimity if aversion arises, and if you are incapable to do that then you go back to anapana-sati and just observe the breath, or at least that's how I have understood.

vidar wrote: I mean just observe the sensations in the body and maintain the equanimity if aversion arises, and if you are incapable to do that then you go back to anapana-sati and just observe the breath, or at least that's how I have understood.

Thanks for the reply, that's how I would imagine one would implement the U Ba Khin method as well.

Mr Man wrote:Goofaholix what do you focus on to "observe hearing"?

Focus and observe are two different things, focus is attempting to hone in on something to the exclusion of everything else whereas observe is more inclusive and more open to whatever arises.

We don't focus in insight meditation, we observe. So we observe hearing the same as we observe sensations in the body, and the feeling tone, and the arising and passing away.

So when sound is noticed you observe what happens in the body and mind, notice hearing has happened, notice the feelings that arise pleasant unpleasant or neutral, the sensations in the body that may arise as a result, the thinking that may arise as a result.

It makes not difference what the sound is, it's what happens within the mind and body as a result of the sound that is of interest.

Goofaholix, When we practice the U Ba Khin method, the same mental faculty that is developed in Anapana Sati is brought to "Vipasana". The focus is sometimes narrow (like focusing on the soles of the feet) and sometimes it is widened to take in the whole body etc.. Sometimes it is fairly active and sometimes more passive but it is still the same mental faculty.

When I said "How about focusing directly on the sound of the chanting as it resonates?" what do you think I meant?