The preconditions to first jhana clearly stipulate the V&V of first jhana are kusala/wholesome/skillful, not just any kind of random V&V (thinking and pondering). I’ve done a digital search and looked at every single reference to first jhana in the pali suttas. I’d estimate over 95% of them either have abandoning the 5 hindrances, or the supression of the 5 cords of sensual pleasure (which is the first of the 5 hindrances), as the sentence right before the standard first jhana formula.
And in the standard first jhana formula itself, “vivicceva kamehi” and “vivicca akusalehi” would also dictate V&V needs to be free of 5 hindrances.
I don’t get the impression from your response that you actually have a sincere intention to try out EBT jhana meditation, compare it to the sutta passage, and objectively investigate whether Ajahn Brahm’s redefinition of jhana in the EBT is justified.
If I am mistaken, I’ll be happy to point you to specific essays and clarify any points you have doubt on. I will be very busy the next 10 days though, so response may be delayed.
I understand. However, I am quite convinced that this translation will not effect dhamma negatively. It depends on the reader and sometimes highly knowledgeable people (I am assuming you are one) would benefit from direct translations where as people with less knowledge might understand and practice better with another. Actually as an inexperienced meditator when I first started meditating I found A. Brahm’s techniques full of freedom, easy to comprehend and not dangerous. But nothing helped me more than investigating my thoughts with open eyes and in the moment. But without the right mindfulness I wouldn’t have been able to achieve it.
Sorry about my ignorance regarding this. Conciously letting go of 5 hindrances was a hard one for me. Because of this I trusted my teacher to guide me and it really helped.
Most in this forum seem like they can totally understand suttas on their own and are highly intelligent. It’s now apparent why the meaning of suttas matter so much to such people.
You could be half right my friend as I think I am slowly understanding this dhamma business. Not much just a little.
But I would like to read about your perspective more and truly understand whether having different interpretations have a big impact. So thanks for the posts. I will let you know if I need more information. Also thank you for this discussion.
Already posted this link several times in this thread already, but once more here for good measure.
As I said earlier in this thread, there’s nothing wrong with Ajahn Brahm’s meditation in itself. The problem is he redefines important fundamental terms like “kāya”, V&V, that confuses and creates havoc with the rest of the world, meditators who follow the EBT jhana system where kāya, V&V, have simple straightforward meanings.
And with Ajahn Brahm’s massive international popularity, it definitely becomes a big problem. For example (real example), and I’m sure this happens frequently for teachers who teach a straightforward EBT jhana, one time B. Thanissaro was giving a talk and Q&A, many people in the audience were trying to clarify why B. Thanisssaro was contradicting what Ajahn Brahm said on what and how jhana works. Finally B. Thanissaro said something to the effect of, “there will be no more questions about Ajahn Brahm’s jhana.”
Ajahn Brahm redefining important jhana terms is like redefining “up” as “down”, “body” as “mind”, “forward” as “backward.” It causes massive confusion, not just for beginners and intermediate meditators, but those trying to read and understand the suttas.
Here’s an analogy. Suppose every country in the world has traffic laws where automobiles drive on the right side of the road, except for England where they drive on the left side. And for traffic lights, red light always means stop and green always means “go”. Then Ajahn Brahm comes along and says, “in the Buddha’s time they always drove on the left side of the road, even though the text look like it says drive on the right side.” And he also adds, “all the time except during jhana, red light means go” and “green light means stop.”
That wouldn’t just cause inconvenience for the rest of the world, it causes fatalities and death on a massive scale. If Dhamma becomes corrupted on important fundamental aspects of the path, it’s far worse than death of a single life. Samsara is a long journey.
There are plenty of ways Ajahn Brahm could teach his meditation method to be in accordance with EBT, in a way that doesn’t have to redefine basic terms, and doesn’t seriously screw up the rest of the world.
If you were to get 1000 non buddhist objective, intelligent translators with integrity, and their job was to translate the EBT texts without bias, I’d bet the farm not a single one would translate the EBT texts on jhana related material anything close to how Ajahn Brahm did. Ajahn Brahm got away with it (so far) because Vism. did the same thing, but they had to invoke the authority of late Abhidhamma texts having primacy over EBT. Ajahn Brahm and B. Sujato do not follow late Abhdhamma, they follow EBT, so they need to translate accordingly.
Well if I were you I would have a discussion with Ajahn Brahm and let him know about the confusion. Maybe you have already , if so I am sorry that you didn’t get an expected response.
Since my experience is quite positive and I haven’t met people who got confused over EBT and Ajahn’s definitions I guess I don’t have the same sense of urgency as you to clarify this.
On a different note can you or someone please post links to suttas where Buddha taught jhanas to lay people? This is for my reference and not to start another discussion.
Translation uninformed by actual practice would have its own problems. It would be like 1000 non-bicycle riders writing a manual on how to ride a bicycle. That said, I agree that the labor of translating the EBTs without idiosyncracies is quite important and will likely involve very many translations over a long time. SuttaCentral itself supports such translation endeavors.
However, compared with 2500 years of Pali, modern translations are still very very young and changing with each translator in multiple languages. It will be a while before we eliminate translation idiosyncracies. Indeed, I suspect that a core value of any contemporary translation will be to guide people right back to the Pali EBTs. And that is why I recite “Nandī dukkhassa mūlan’ti” in my head instead of Bhante Sujato or Bhikkhu Bodhi or Thanissaro Bhikkhu, who all disagree with each other somewhat on MN1. They all brought me to the Pali and for that I am immensely grateful. Without them I would still be splashing and drowning in the sea of Nandī. Contemporary translations take us to the raft.
I’m not following A.Brahm but was early on conditioned by Nyanatiloka, Nyanaponika, and in a way by their successor B.Bhodhi. And yes, it took some years to get that confusion away. For those who don’t know the first two, they were influential editors, early propagators and translators to Europe and the West and were both strongly influenced by Abhidhamma interpretations of the Dhamma.
But if the source material is accurate, it’s very possible the resulting translation by those 1000 non bicycle riders into the target language is just as effective of teaching how to ride the as one done by 1000 bicycle riders.
edit: addition
in fact, I definitely could teach people how to do first jhana EBT using the translations of translators who can’t do jhana but translated V&V correctly. I would have difficulty teaching someone how to do first jhana using B. Sujato’s translation. We could actually do an experiment to prove that, but it would be inhumane.
What you’re saying is true, but for the specific instance of V&V, an unbiased translator would translate the EBT V&V the same inside jhana as outside jhana. There is nothing in the EBT that redefines V&V when it switches into jhana.
The issue is translating EBT with integrity. Vism. redefines V&V and jhana. But Vism. is not EBT. Bhante Sujato and Ajahn Brahm follow the EBT, not the Vism., so they have no justification whatsoever to translate V&V differently in first jhana than elsewhere.
You can also look at it in a more compassionate way. Ajahn Brahm’s followers come from all walks of life. Just imagine all of them followed EBT direct translation of VV and falsely thought they had jhanas while perceiving senses, how would that reflect on EBT?
Anyway I read the reasons behind this translations by Ajahn Brahmali and Ajahn Sujato and they makes sense. But I am not a scholar so I can’t dig deep into pali and look for errors in their judgement and also I don’t see a point.
Judging from your early posts, this translation has been an issue for you for a couple of years. I am sorry if it had hindered your practise. I think it’s about time to let it rest if the expected changes are not happening. This dhamma text may need protection by preserving in its “original” condition but saddhamma needs no protection. It will go on as it is supposed to. People with little dust in their eyes will see it even if it’s etched on a complicated rubik’s cube .
I don’t think the Dhamma needs protection either. It’s people that need protection. But what is the ‘abstract’ Dhamma without words? How do you know what Dhamma is if you don’t dig into the Pali? Certainly not by cosmic transmission. It’s through words.
For most people the only Dhamma they know is the Dhamma of translators. They completely depend on the interpretations of translators and only based on that can form their own understanding.
Different words = different practice. Many meditation methods ‘work’, including Abhidhammic, Tibetan, Zen, Christin etc. But if we’re dedicated to EBT then we’re dedicated to excavate what the texts say about the oldest available Buddhist practices. While Buddhist practice is a lot about ‘letting go’ - this thing (accuracy of understanding) we surely should not let go
Do you suggest we should have little dust in our eyes? Good idea, just how do I do that again? Either ‘I look inside myself’ and ‘connect with my inner wisdom’, or I find a Guru, or I pick up a Dhamma book.
Most of us are not wise enough to just look inside. And only few people are blessed with a personal liberated Guru.
If you’re liberated already you don’t need to work - ‘have little dust in your eyes’ is hardly practical advice. Also ‘let everything go, Dhamma, practice, teaching, inspiration’ might work for a non-returner but not for normal folks.
Interesting question Veraji! AN 5.176 may be helpful. This sutta as it relates to jhana could probably be a new thread. Seems to me that it refers to first jhana because the aim of the instruction is rapture born of seclusion. Also, it is to householders. However, the specific term jhana is not used.
