A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby 5Khandas » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:01 am

People have asked about my practice. How do I prepare my mind for meditation? There is nothing special. I just keep it where it always is. They ask, “Then are you an arahant?” Do I know? I am like a tree in a forest, full of leaves, blossoms and fruit. Birds come to eat and nest, and animals seek rest in its shade. Yet the tree does not know itself. It follows its own nature. It is as it is.
(Ajahn Chah, A Tree in a Forest)


So after that, Ven. Sona determined the right pitch for his persistence, attuned the pitch of the [five] faculties [to that], and there picked up his theme. Dwelling alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute, he in no long time reached & remained in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now. He knew: "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world." And thus Ven. Sona became another one of the arahants.
(AN 6.55)

"Is there, monks, any criterion whereby a monk, apart from faith, apart from persuasion, apart from inclination, apart from rational speculation, apart from delight in views and theories, could affirm the attainment of enlightenment: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been accomplished, what was to be done is done, there is no further living in this world'?"
"For us, Lord, all things have the Blessed One as their root, their guide, their refuge. It would be well, Lord, if the meaning of these words were to be made clear by the Blessed One. Hearing it from the Blessed One, the monks will remember it."
"There is such a criterion, monks, whereby a monk... could affirm the attainment of enlightenment... What is that method?
(SN 35.152)

"Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"
(MN 109)

(According to the last quotation every Arahant know that he is an Arahant.)

Ajahn Chah said, that he doesn’t know whether he is an Arahant or not, but many suttas say that it’s impossible. So I think with this statement Ajahn Chah admitted that he is not an enlightened person.
Or, the other possibility: I don’t understand something crucial. (I must admit I feel so a bit.) Could you explain me why Ajahn Chah answered this way to that question?

Metta,
5Khandas
5Khandas
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:07 pm

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby jcsuperstar » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:30 am

i dont know if he is or not, but if he was why should he say so? so we can fight over it? just look at the whole ajahn boowa spectacal...
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
User avatar
jcsuperstar
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby BlackBird » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:48 am

So and so's an Arahant
No they're not, look here - Here's the evidence
Oh that's rubbish evidence I don't even believe it.
You're not looking at the facts
Yes I am
No you're not



Context is very important when it comes to Ajahn Chah.
Last edited by BlackBird on Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"And so, because this Teaching is so different from what Westerners are accustomed to, they will try to adapt the Teaching to their own framework. What they need to learn to do is not to adapt the Teaching to their own point of view but to adapt their own point of view to the Teaching. This is called saddhá, or faith, and it means giving oneself to the Teaching even if the Teaching is contrary to one’s own preconceived notions of the way things are."- Ven Bodhesako

Nanavira Thera's teachings - An existential approach to the Dhamma | Ven. Bodhesako's essay on anicca
User avatar
BlackBird
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby Dan74 » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:09 am

For what it's worth:
Diamond Sutra wrote: if a Bodhisattva clings to the notion of an ego, a personality, a being and a life, he is not a (true) Bodhisattva.


In other words, he (Ajaan Chah) has abandoned false notions of self (realized anatta). Saying "I am an arahat" would be a lie in a sense, because there is no such thing as arahat. Expediently we say "arahat" but he must've believed that it was not expedient in that instance.

So take it as a teaching, I think..

_/|\_
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2607
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby PeterB » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:32 am

5Khandas wrote:People have asked about my practice. How do I prepare my mind for meditation? There is nothing special. I just keep it where it always is. They ask, “Then are you an arahant?” Do I know? I am like a tree in a forest, full of leaves, blossoms and fruit. Birds come to eat and nest, and animals seek rest in its shade. Yet the tree does not know itself. It follows its own nature. It is as it is.
(Ajahn Chah, A Tree in a Forest)


So after that, Ven. Sona determined the right pitch for his persistence, attuned the pitch of the [five] faculties [to that], and there picked up his theme. Dwelling alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute, he in no long time reached & remained in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now. He knew: "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world." And thus Ven. Sona became another one of the arahants.
(AN 6.55)

"Is there, monks, any criterion whereby a monk, apart from faith, apart from persuasion, apart from inclination, apart from rational speculation, apart from delight in views and theories, could affirm the attainment of enlightenment: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been accomplished, what was to be done is done, there is no further living in this world'?"
"For us, Lord, all things have the Blessed One as their root, their guide, their refuge. It would be well, Lord, if the meaning of these words were to be made clear by the Blessed One. Hearing it from the Blessed One, the monks will remember it."
"There is such a criterion, monks, whereby a monk... could affirm the attainment of enlightenment... What is that method?
(SN 35.152)

"Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"
(MN 109)

(According to the last quotation every Arahant know that he is an Arahant.)

Ajahn Chah said, that he doesn’t know whether he is an Arahant or not, but many suttas say that it’s impossible. So I think with this statement Ajahn Chah admitted that he is not an enlightened person.
Or, the other possibility: I don’t understand something crucial. (I must admit I feel so a bit.) Could you explain me why Ajahn Chah answered this way to that question?

Metta,
5Khandas

Lets just have a quick look at what he didnt say. He didnt say " I am not an Arahant ". Neither did he say Arahants dont exist. Neither did he say that if Arahants exist it is no big deal.
Remember that Luang Por Chah did not write books. What you read are translations of transliterations of extemporised answers to specific questions from specific individuals at a particular time. In view of those facts it may not be possible to know exactly what he intended.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3904
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby catmoon » Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:52 am

I suspect the situation is, if you are an arahant, you look at the concept "arahant" and see it does not apply, partially for lack of a self to apply the label to. So there is a strong tendency to dodge the question, just as you might dodge the question "Do you still beat your wife?"


Or on a another tack, the correct answer to "Are you an arahant?" is "What is a 'you'?'

Or again suppose the man is not an arahant. He might think, "This person who asks if I am an arahant thinks that is very important. If I say no, he will leave and go searching until he finds some shyster who claims to an arahant."
User avatar
catmoon
 
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:59 am

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby PeterB » Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:07 am

Throughout the ages and from the time of the Buddha there have been many Arahants who have described themselves as Arahants...Part of being an Arahant we can presume is the ability to use conventional language where appropriate to indicate a reality which is less unreal.

I think this particular exchange is actually about the questioner.
PeterB
 
Posts: 3904
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: A Question about Ajahn Chah’s reply

Postby mikenz66 » Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:24 pm

The Vinaya forbids monks from discussing their attainments with lay people. Also, Ajahn Chah had enough people coming to visit him because they thought he was an Arahant. He did his best to discourage "guru worship" and encouraged "looking for yourself". I just did a weekend with Ajahn Tiradhammo, where he noted that if Ajahn Chah though a monk was competent, but getting attached to him he sent him off to some distant branch monastery. On the other hand, if a monk needed help, he gave it... As Ajahn T tells it, Ajahn Chah didn't have a "view" or a "method", he just responded with wisdom.

Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10093
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand


Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: robertk and 7 guests