I hate to do this to you, but "in the jhānesu" is a word choice from the Department of Redundancy Department. "Jhānesu" already has a sense of "in." If you want to use both the native declension and also the particles of analytic grammar (as opposed to inflected grammar), you would arguably have to say "[...] no 5 sense experience jhānesu."
Basically, they are arguing with Venerable Vasubadhu, who could be wrong. Ven Saṃghabhadra had serious disagreements with his principle Abhidharma treatise, but I have no clue the breadth of his disagreements. Similarly, I have read conflicting information that Ven Saṃghabhadra was either 1) vexed by errors in Abhidharmakośakārikā, or 2) vexed by Sautrāntika heresies in the Bhāṣya. I have heard the matter explained both ways, and am basically waiting for a translation of Ven Saṃghabhadra's refutation text, Abhidharmapradīpika, to see what the actual meat of the matter was. Ven Vasubadhu argues this, Abhidharmakośakārikā vol 4 p. 1240, and this is supposed to be the Vaibhāṣika view: Ven Vasubandhu has manas-exclusivity starting in the second dhyāna according to the Vaibhāṣikas. If Ven Vasubandhu is wrong, we can imagine Ven Saṃghabhadra will have something to say concerning the matter, if his voluminous treatises defending Vaibhāṣika orthodoxy are ever translated.