Yes, thanks, trjones; however, I have been a contemplative all along, and I met people from time to time who got a lot more out of their daily practice of meditation than most; who never got their meditation experiences validated by meditation teachers either. We helped each other to understand what was happening, or recommended the odd book, such as Teresa of Avila, and John of the Cross.
I finished listening to the entire recorded talk. While I found her description of the 4 material absorptions (rupa-jhanas) reasonably accurate, and suggestive of jhana as an experience, not just a mental projection, or technique. Whereas, I found her description of the 4 immaterial absorptions (arupa-jhanas) not very accurate, and strongly suggestive of mental projection.
I appreciated that she frequently used the term 'absorption' for jhana, which suggests the experiential; however, she did frequently use the term 'concentration' for jhana as well, which I belief is a gross mistranslation. I especially appreciated her interpretation of Vitaka and Viccara, and her comment about how it is commonly mistranslated.
Vitaka is initial application on the meditation subject...
Viccara is continued application on the meditation subject...
They are unfortunately wrongly translated.
Toward the end there is a question from the audience regarding someone's interpretation of something related to jhana, something vertical. I found Ayya Khema's response interesting, but since I could not hear the question I was not completely sure what her response of negating the vertical meant. However, I believe that she was referring to Ub Ba Kin, who was Goenka's teacher, and who seemed to be very negative on jhana.
