ajahn chah

On the cultivation of insight/wisdom
befriend
Posts: 2284
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am

ajahn chah

Post by befriend »

what is ajahn chahs method of vipassana?
Take care of mindfulness and mindfulness will take care of you.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: ajahn chah

Post by Cittasanto »

befriend wrote:what is ajahn chahs method of vipassana?
Ajahn Chah does not seperate samatha and vipassana, and he doesn't teach a techneque which was called vipassana as in the modern usage from the Burmese Tradition.

That said, his main teachings revolved around impermanence, or as he prefered, "mai neir" (sorry if the spelling is not correct) "not-sure", the mind being a liar, his biography has an account of this practice, every time some thought came up he would say "liar".

but in essence calming the mind down, seeing the three characteristics, and seeing reality, were the main teachings on meditation. I would recoment getting the collected teaching of Ajahn Chah, there are some great talks included but not all talks, only those which have been translated at time of bringing them together.

EDIT - Just to add, his main interest was whether something had benefit.
Last edited by Cittasanto on Sat May 19, 2012 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: ajahn chah

Post by tiltbillings »

Cittasanto wrote:
befriend wrote:what is ajahn chahs method of vipassana?
Ajahn Chah does not seperate samatha and vipassana, and he doesn't teach a techneque which was called vipassana as in the modern usage from the Burmese Tradition.

That said, his main teachings revolved around impermanence, or as he prefered, "mai neir" (sorry if the spelling is not correct) "not-sure", the mind being a liar, his biography has an account of this practice, every time some thought came up he would say "liar".
Which is a form of noting.
but in essence calming the mind down, seeing the three characteristics, and seeing reality, were the main teachings on meditation. I would recoment getting the collected teaching of Ajahn Chah, there are some great talks included but not all talks, only those which have been translated at time of bringing them together.
Despite not using a highly structured methodology, his teachings are in line with modern vipassana teachings.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: ajahn chah

Post by Mr Man »

I would say that the the framework for Ajahn Chah's teaching was monasticism and monastic lifestyle. Living within that structure, fully committing oneself to the structure and working with whatever arises.
:anjali: :anjali:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: ajahn chah

Post by tiltbillings »

Mr Man wrote:I would say that the the framework for Ajahn Chah's teaching was monasticism and monastic lifestyle. Living within that structure, fully committing oneself to the structure and working with whatever arises.
:anjali: :anjali:
Ajahn Sumedho explained to me at Wat Ba Pong in the mid 70's one of the major practices taught by Ajahn Chah was keeping the Vinaya.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
bodom
Posts: 7216
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: ajahn chah

Post by bodom »

Everything you need to know about Ajahn Chah's teachings can be found here:

The Teachings of Ajahn Chah: All available Dhamma talks by Ajahn Chah
http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/index.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.

- BB
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: ajahn chah

Post by Cittasanto »

tiltbillings wrote:Which is a form of noting.
Despite not using a highly structured methodology, his teachings are in line with modern vipassana teachings.
being in line with a "highly structured methodology" doesn't mean he taught what is known as and called Vipassana, which has different origins than Tahn Ajahn Chah and his teachings. His teachings on practice have more in common with MN117 the great forty than DN22/MN10 The Satipatthana Sutta which is where Vipassana comes from.
Tahn Ajahn also tailored his talks to the audience, his emphasis was on vinaya for the monastics, but not for the lay followers, he taught sila for both, and encouraged everyone to practice with what was present.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: ajahn chah

Post by tiltbillings »

Cittasanto wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Which is a form of noting.
Despite not using a highly structured methodology, his teachings are in line with modern vipassana teachings.
being in line with a "highly structured methodology" doesn't mean he taught what is known as and called Vipassana, which has different origins than Tahn Ajahn Chah and his teachings.
I did not say that he did, Also, keep in mind that the methodology is naught more than expedient means. What I was pointing to was the statement: "in essence calming the mind down, seeing the three characteristics, and seeing reality, were the main teachings on meditation." Ajahn Chah did not do that? That would be serious news to me.
His teachings on practice have more in common with MN117 the great forty than DN22/MN10 The Satipatthana Sutta which is where Vipassana comes from.
You are splitting hairs.
Tahn Ajahn also tailored his talks to the audience, his emphasis was on vinaya for the monastics, but not for the lay followers,
Of course the Vinaya is for monastics.
he taught sila for both, and encouraged everyone to practice with what was present.
Yep.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: ajahn chah

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Cittasanto,
Cittasanto wrote:
Despite not using a highly structured methodology, his teachings are in line with modern vipassana teachings.
being in line with a "highly structured methodology" doesn't mean he taught what is known as and called Vipassana, which has different origins than Tahn Ajahn Chah and his teachings.
I think you may be confusing structure with content. The "vipassana" approaches tend to be structured when they are dealing with large groups of people, for purely practical, not essential, reasons. If you're working with a teacher in a small group it tends to be much less structured.
Cittasanto wrote: His teachings on practice have more in common with MN117 the great forty than DN22/MN10 The Satipatthana Sutta which is where Vipassana comes from.
Tahn Ajahn also tailored his talks to the audience,
Indeed, so it is not easy to discern an actual "approach", but he does seem to encourage building up some concentration and then applying it to insight (just as the "vipassana" approaches I am familiar with).

Certainly many of his students teach an approach that is very similar to what I'm familiar with in a "vipassana" context. Ajahn Tiradhammo, for example, who was in New Zealand for several years until recently.
Cittasanto wrote: his emphasis was on vinaya for the monastics, but not for the lay followers, he taught sila for both, and encouraged everyone to practice with what was present.
Indeed!

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: ajahn chah

Post by mikenz66 »

These Ajah Chah instructions to lay people sounds familiar from interactions with Ajahn Tiradhammo, and have the same essence as other approaches I've seen:

http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Fragments_Teaching1.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
When the mind is peaceful and concentrated, release it from the breath as the object of concentration. Now begin to examine the body and mind comprised of the five khandhas: material form, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness. Examine these five khandhas as they come and go. You will see clearly that they are impermanent, that this impermanence makes them unsatisfactory and undesirable, and that they come and go of their own - there is no ''self'' running things.
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: ajahn chah

Post by Cittasanto »

tiltbillings wrote:I did not say that he did, Also, keep in mind that the methodology is naught more than expedient means. What I was pointing to was the statement: "in essence calming the mind down, seeing the three characteristics, and seeing reality, were the main teachings on meditation." Ajahn Chah did not do that? That would be serious news to me.
so Ajahn Chah did not teach samadhi, investigating using the three characteristics or seeing things as they are?
Clarity of Insight wrote:A further aspect of mental development that leads to clearer and deeper insight is meditating on an object to calm the mind down. The calm mind is the mind that is firm and stable in samādhi (concentration). This can be khanika samādhi (momentary concentration), upacāra samādhi (neighbourhood concentration) or appanā samādhi (absorption). The level of concentration is determined by the refinement of consciousness from moment to moment as you train the mind to maintain awareness on a meditation object.
The further you go investigating the mind itself, the clearer and more profound the insight that emerges. This is something I emphasize when teaching, because understanding this point is crucial to the practice. Normally, when you experience sense contact and receive impingement from different objects, the mind is just waiting to react with attraction or aversion.
he did not teach people to call the mind a liar?
Also from Clarity of Insight
"vipassana meditation is similar because you use the reflection 'don't believe it' as you make contact with the sense objects"
I have also heard this from direct students of his!

from knowing the world
"This is a question for us practitioners. There are many factions of teachers promoting their different methods of meditation. it can get confusing. But the real point of it all is to be able to recognise the truth, see things as they really are and being free of doubt."
You are splitting hairs.
am I?
Tahn Ajahn didn't teach the Vipassana method which stems from Burma, which was my point. we could call every meditation which includes vipassana "Vipassana Meditation" but this takes away and add onto what is already going by that name and the other teachers methods.
Of course the Vinaya is for monastics.
yes, and he taught in line with who was there, you were using a quote from a monastic as evidence of a emphasis which was contextual.
Tahn Ajahn commended monastic training, but knew fully well that it was not for everyone.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: ajahn chah

Post by tiltbillings »

Cittasanto wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:I did not say that he did, Also, keep in mind that the methodology is naught more than expedient means. What I was pointing to was the statement: "in essence calming the mind down, seeing the three characteristics, and seeing reality, were the main teachings on meditation." Ajahn Chah did not do that? That would be serious news to me.
so Ajahn Chah did not teach samadhi, investigating using the three characteristics or seeing things as they are?
You are grossly misreading what I wrote.
You are splitting hairs.
am I?
Yes.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: ajahn chah

Post by Cittasanto »

Hi Mike,
No not confusing, just clarifying, what is not being talked about - initially - and the second time (your quote), simply using words used by Tilt to make the same point, which is the vipassana tradition as in Goenka, Mahasi and other Burmese teachers is not what Ajahn Chah taught specifically, not trying to say that there would be no similarities, formal/informal.... The vipassana tradition is diverse enough without throwing every meditation teacher in it!

like I say in the edit Tahn Ajahn was more concerned whether something had benefit, there are plenty of examples of this, and pointing out whatever is useful is a skilful means.

but last time I point out what tradition someone doesn't teach for clarity with what I say!
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: ajahn chah

Post by Cittasanto »

Hi Tilt,
What exactly are you saying then?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: ajahn chah

Post by tiltbillings »

Cittasanto wrote:Hi Tilt,
What exactly are you saying then?
When you stated: "so Ajahn Chah did not teach samadhi, investigating using the three characteristics or seeing things as they are?" What did you think I said?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply