Buddhism Before the Theravada

There is a detailed series of talks that turned some dharmma teachings on end for me in what proved to be key to progress. Most interesting is a six part series of talks, 8 1/2 hrs total. I included a few notes I took from his first lecture below, wish I had more notes to share but I only reviewed the first lecture for you to get a sense of his take on the history. Here is the link:

www.audiodharma.org/teacher/207/

Two series of lectures in the link, in the second series (two parts) John details why Metta was originally taught to be a path of insight practice. Also worth a listen! Bring metta practice alive.

(John Peacock lecture)

Buddha did not speak Pali, probably a mixture of Northern India dialects.
Initial translators were judges and lawyers and they translated Dharma as "Law". From British East India Company. Being interested in law they translated many words incorrectly.

Buddha was far more radical than he came down to us as.

He engages in very intense and deep levels of social and ethical critique, teaches deeply across all class boundaries. Attacked vedic literature by taking it literally, playing with the words, uses humor and puns a lot. He engaged intensely with society and language. Must see all Buddhist teachings in light of relationship with the language he spoke, the culture and his unfolding background and changing world view.

At the time of the buddha Pali was only spoken, not until 1st century bce did the written form arrive. As time went on many things were added to the canon.

The Buddha was always striving to actualize metaphysics in his teachings.

4 Four Noble Truths were actually a joke, not meant to be a literal teaching

This looks pretty interesting. Thank you!

This is really good. I'm up to Part 4 --- which has the best description of Dependant Origination that I've come across.

I admit that "best" in this context means "understandable to me and able to be related to my experience" so take it for what it is worth.

Man, I just started listening to this (only about an hour in) SO AWESOME. I am learning a whole lot about early eastern history that I just knew nothing about. This is very cool. I love how he talks about early eastern philosophies as non-religions and that they are called religions almost because of bad translations from westerners that didn't really have anything else to compare it to. He speaks that religion = beliefs, but these early eastern cultures were about rituals, not about beliefs. Just getting into it, but its fascinating.

Until I heard these talks I was never interested in learning Pali, but now I'm in the market for a Pali/English dictionary. Does such a thing exist? If so does anyone have any recommendations? Learning that the literal translation of metta is to grow fat with friendliness made me smile. Wonderful stuff. Thanks for sharing this!

More meorable stuff:

"No-self vs. Not-self"
"I am feeling sad" Who or what is I? compared to
"It is raining" What is it?

This is incredible.

Thanks so much. Honestly, I was a bit leary at first but am quite impressed.

Highly recommended!

"Until I heard these talks I was never interested in learning Pali, but now I'm in the market for a Pali/English dictionary. Does such a thing exist? If so does anyone have any recommendations? Learning that the literal translation of metta is to grow fat with friendliness made me smile. Wonderful stuff. Thanks for sharing this!"

If you're interested in learning pali, check out 'The Pali Text Society'. I had a book years ago : 'A.K. Warder's Introduction to Pali' . It was a great book, but I don't really have gift for languages and gave up.

To tell the truth, for me, trying to learn pali was just another way of 'procrastinating about the bush' instead of actually meditating! If only I had an infinite amount of spare time...alas!


Try this:-

www.amazon.co.uk/Introduction-Pali-A-K-Warder/dp/071020356X

www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Textual-S...der-Introduction.pdf

www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/kelly/warder-key/index.html

86 more talks by John Peacock!

dharmaseed.org/teacher/91/

"86 more talks by John Peacock!"

I might just listen to all of them; what an amazing lecture series "Buddhism Before the Theravada" is. Very impressive.

"86 more talks by John Peacock!"

As a lecturer John reduces down to essentials presenting concise information within a story line. A very gifted teacher. Thanks for this new link!

Hey Dodge E. Thanks for the tips. I'll definetly check those out.

Peacock's take on metta as an insight practice and not samatha has been very helpful to me. I've been very frustrated by the fact that there was so little metta in my metta practice, but when I started doing metta as a vipassana discipline it yeilded much more clarity and wisdom for me.

Side note: it's clear Peacock is not a fan of the Visuddhimagga and he sees little merit in the cultivation of jhana. Hmm... interesting.

I love how he refers to the self as a verb instead of a noun. I have tried throughout the day to see when "Selfing" is going on and it really does help realize not-self more and more.

"Side note: it's clear Peacock is not a fan of the Visuddhimagga and he sees little merit in the cultivation of jhana. Hmm... interesting. "

I caught that, too. What is interesting to me is that he's saying something very similar to Kenneth: that super hard jhanas are not necessary. He sees it as a way the monastics redefined the process to cement their authority/place in society.

Who says super hard jhanas are necessary? And for what?

Just curious....

Maybe they're not necessary, but they sure do sound enticing--everyone who's done them says they're better than sex

I've been listening to these talks as well, and plan to continue. Thanks for the tip.

"
Who says super hard jhanas are necessary? And for what?

Just curious....

"

Good questions, maybe this view is a mythological beast that everyone is sure exist, but does not, but it seems like Pa Auk Sayadaw and Ajahn Brahm are often mention as "hard jhana" teachers/advocates, saying it is necessary for full awakening. (???)

An older KFD thread:

kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/38...hana+vs+Static+Jhana

It maybe worth mentioning that using noting I worked up to a blockage and it wasn't until I turn to concentration practices, and in fact devloped them quie deepy, that I got a new path (worked this way for 3rd and 4th, not the first two). Admittedly everyones practic is quite unique Also on this board, at a time of struggle, I was told the Buddha got enlightened solely using concentration practices and that advice, wether true or not, was useful to my practice.

"Good questions, maybe this view is a mythological beast that everyone is sure exist, but does not, but it seems like Pa Auk Sayadaw and Ajahn Brahm are often mention as "hard jhana" teachers/advocates, saying it is necessary for full awakening. (???)"

A friend of mine recently went to a talk where the Tibetan lama said guru yoga is absolutely necessary for full awakening. Meanwhile I went to a talk the same day where the lama said compassion is the essential ingredient without which there can be no awakening.

So I suspect people tend to swear by the technique they know that has been most helpful to them or people they know. Which implies that quite possibly a wide variety of methods can all be helpful.

Can someone here define "hard jhana?" It's hard to talk about something we haven;t sufficiently defined. In my experience concentration is necessary to awakening but not some superhuman version of it. I liked what Kenneth said in the link you posted betawave, and it dovetails nicely with my own experience. For example, I couild conjure up some very, very very blissful states (pure land jhanas) but I would be hard pressed to call them "hard jhanas."

"Which implies that quite possibly a wide variety of methods can all be helpful."

Well said! I suspect there is a set of "necessary" components to awakening but those can be developed over time by any number of practices. I believe the golden key is really seeing dependent origination when experienced very deeply and to a level that just wakes us up, but that might happen using any one of hundreds of mediation techniques, yoga, tai chi, and what have you.

this maybe getting off the original topic but i do think it is pertinent to what we are all accomplishing here (support our awakening!!):

I used the term "deeply" which may be the same as "hard" jhana?? don't know, but what i do know is if i go to a jhana, anyone will do, and sit with that for long enough (twenty minutes or more) i experience a transition in my mind state. if i stay in that same jhana i find i can experience one more transition of state. each transition is quite noticable when it occurs and definitely is not a transition into or out of that particular jhana (as the jhanic characteristics remain). With each of these transitions the mind "sinks" deeper in the experience, or becomes more grounded in the actual features of that jhana and further away from the material world and thinking. i may have described some of these events in more detail in my journal while ther were occuring. I am going from memory here but i have little doubt, from my personal experience, if i hold in a jhana for extended periods i experience mental transitions that are much like transitions between nanas or other jhanas. if i choose, after the two transitions, i can continue up to the next jhana. in doing so i find that next jhana is much, much more grounded than if i had entered it without awaiting the two transitions. i tried but never experienced more than two transitions while in a particular jhana.

That's all true for me, too.

But then I have to get up off the cushion and walk the dog, do dishes, go to work, raise children, manage employees. So... what is the absolute/relative world(s) implication and practical use of the jhana experiences you're describing, rocketbuddha?

bear in mind that i currently have a different perspective (no pets, minimal chores, no job, no kids/employees or wife, my only stress is deciding wether to ride the motorcycle or take the car to painting class, hahaha, funny but true).

the practical use part is straightforward: caught in months of endless vipassana cycles until it occurred i should be doing concentration practices (as opposed to the usual noting). i followed that intuition (i guess you can call it that but i was reading other practice journals of course) and really dug into jhanas. that is where i discovered the transitions i mentioned above. the first time i did this i got third path a few days later. while navigating third path via noting techniques i got into endless cycles again, for weeks, and switched up to concentration and discovered i had all 13 jhanas. continuing with concentration practice i got 4th path within days.

the following is based on speculation and attempts to go beyond the practical use of jhanas to get path:

now that i'm over the honeymon phase of 4th it occurs to me to dig into jhanas again. doing so i find that i am much more grounded and aware off cushion for longer periods of time throughout the day. this compared to the 3 weeks post path i was not sitting at all. it also occurs to me that it is quite healthy, and in fact maybe rewiring neural pathways, to dwell in these jhanas (i sense daily progression). each jhana, especially beyond 4th, involves very specific neuropaths, why does nature seem to gravitate to those pathways? don't know, but this road has taught me to trust in nature! post path the jhanas are different in that the center point, and sensations associated with that "state", are gone. left in their place new layers of very subtle sensations that i'm excited to explore. so in that it opens up wonder into daily practice. there maybe other benefits but this got too long

Interesting how the Buddha was replying to emanationist theories about creation all the way back then. I associate that kind of stuff (unpacking the logic of creation) with neoplatonism, which forms the basis of mystical Christianity and Judaism. Turns out its origin is much further back than that. Buddha's turn back to a basis in the here and now links up what he does with non-mystical versions of religion, actually. Reminds one of what the historical Jesus was probably doing, and even St. Paul to a certain extent.

Anyway, very interesting talk. Thanks for posting.