Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Samadhi - Teaching by Ajahn Chah
Floating_Abu
Veteran
Comments
If you like that you should really read Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond by Ajahn Chah's pupil Ajahn Brahm. He may put a little too much emphasis on the jhanas, but teaches the same (unsurprisingly
With metta,
Sabre
That was a nice read, very insightful. Thanks.
Has Ajahn Brahm ever said: "Samadhi is capable of bringing much harm to the meditator"? Has Ajahn Brahm ever said: "So, there can be right samadhi and wrong samadhi"? I recall Ajahn Brahm has spoken to the contrary.
Has Ajahn Brahm ever said: "In any posture, we are fully aware of the birth of happiness and unhappiness"?
In all of Ajahn Chah's books in the internet, he regards the "birth" in Dependent Origination as being the birth an emotional mental state and the birth of an ego state.
But Ajahn Brahm regards the birth in Dependent Origination as the rebirth of a new live. Ajahn Brahm has gone to great lengths to repudiate the way Dependent Origination was taught by Ajahn Chah.
Ajahn Brahm has rejected many of Ajahn Chah's teachings. Ajahn Brahm does not teach the same as Ajahn Chah.
I would love to see his response.
This is in the meditation forum and not a question about rebirth. Those discussions we've had before and it is just a waste of time bringing them up again and again - it's already clear enough you have a different understanding of Buddhism than how it is usually interpreted. The teaching about rebirth is just a small part of the book by Brahm, so no need to say the entire teachings are different just because there is this one aspect you think Ajahn Chah didn't teach.
Anyway back to the subject, I think it can be quite clear Ajahn Chah wouldn't have asked & allowed his pupil to found a monastery if he didn't trust his ability to teach meditation as he was taught. So that's one of the reasons I suggest everybody who likes this teaching by Chah to read the teachings of Ajahn Brahm also. Everybody can decide for themselves if it suits them, but if you look deep you'll see it is the same teachings, for example about what attachment to samadhi means and how to overcome it, this is in the book. Also how emotions become and disappear and how to observe them without attachments is in there.
It's just a great book which helped me a lot in my meditation practice and I hope it can help others as well.
With metta,
Sabre
While we are on the subject of arguing about who taught what and who is right and who is wrong...Ajahn Brahm just gave a talk about views, opinions, arguments and disagreements...watch this space (should be available in the next couple of days): http://dhammaloka.org.au/downloads.html
Metta,
Guy
You can find it on the page here, dated 8th August 2010 :
http://www.amaravati.org/abmnew/index.php/teachings/audio
That's actually quite the opposite haha.
But I guess that was just an opinion of where the initial post in this thread was pointing to
With metta,
Sabre
.
I referred directly to meditation.
Ajahn Brahm has said there can be no danger in jhana.
This is contrary to both Ajahn Chah and the suttas.
We have already had a thread on this.
As for Dependent Origination, this is an essential part of meditation.
Meditation is not something separate from Dependent Origination. My impression is Ajahn Chah did not ask Ajahn Brahm to found Bodhinyana. The original abbot of Bodhinyana was Ajahn Jagaro (who disrobed and eloped with a rich beautiful Thai woman). In my opinion, this will only lead to confusion.
Contrary to Ajahn Brahm, the link states this: Contrary to your opinion, the link states this about Dependent Origination: Sabre
Did you actually read the link? I did you just rush in enthusiastically evangelising Ajahn Brahm?
I've also read that people may also get to the point where they see problems, have a solution, but there is no execution. It is where compassion is lost, and attachment to our own happiness arises. This seems like the worst thing that we can let happen to ourselves.
I'm not evangelising, that wouldn't help anyone. I'm simply referring to a book that has been useful in my meditation practice so it can maybe help others who like the meditation teachings of this tradition. If you don't think they teach the same just because you see a different meaning of dependent origination, that's totally fine with me
I think it would be rather strange for someone to be taught by a master like Ven. Chah for many years to come up with a totally different practice. Many things said to monks by Ven. Chah were never written down, only some of his teachings directed to the lay society. I guess if you've lived with him as a monk for years you have a far better understanding of what he taught than we do. So I guess Brahm knows what he's saying. Of course I don't just come to this conclusion by some kind of blind faith, so from the limited information we have let me explain why I think this is so.
Brahm also writes Jhana is suffering (page 238) and is not a goal by itself but has to be used to contemplate (Chapter 8), just like Ven. Chah said in the quoted talk.
So it leads to insight, if used well. Although some teachers (I don't know exactly who) apparently claim deep samadhi can prevent insights, we can conclude Ajahn Chah was not one of them. Yes, we can see Ven. Chah remembers us to see happiness born from meditation as impermanent, but he doesn't say anywhere avoid it or fear it. I think he was quite a happy guy himself
Anyway, we could post about it our whole lives but I think one can not know the importance of absorption (or judge attachment to it) if one has not experienced it himself. But even without any (neighboring) jhana experiences the book can be incredibly useful and I hope it can help anyone.
With metta,
Sabre
Each Ajahn Chah disciple is encouraged to develop a set of their own teachings that they can give to people.
I have been around the Thai forest tradition for 20 years and you lecture me on the Forest Tradition. Oh dear.
:-/ It is not strange at all, as advised above. You are now manufacturing fictious assumptions about Ajahn Chah. Ajahn Brahm is not even connected to Ajahn Chah. Ajahn Brahm was expelled from the tradition, primarily for ordaining women and, secondarily, for being "Mahayana", which in the Forest Tradition means being obsessed with teaching morality (rebirth) to laypeople. To me, your views are blind faith & mere conjecture, as detailed above. Pretty standard Buddhist understanding. Nothing to do with Ajahn Chah. Even I would advice the same. Ajahn Chah did not say this in the article. He said the exact opposite.
In jhana, insight into selflessness can occur but, apart from that, it is only the fourth jhana that is ideal for insight.
The lower jhanas are quite unsuitable for general insight due to their overt one-pointedness.
The purpose of insight is to clearly see the impermanence of the five aggregates, so dispassion & disenchantment occurs. For this to happen in the lower jhanas is not really possible. This video is irrelevent. Ajahn Jayasaro has given his correct opinion here that Ajahn Chah simply experienced spontaneous non volitional states of 'no thought' and 'shifts in consciousness'. Ajahn Chah's experiences were not related directly to practice. The skilled practitioner enters and emerges from jhana at will.
Ajahn Chah simply experienced the breakdown of perception and flowing movt of consciousness that can happen to people during drug experiences. A certain degree of samadhi is important in that it provides bliss & thus freedom from needing sensuality for happiness. But to regard it as important in the manner you and Ajahn Brahm are drunk on is to be attached to it.
However, I am not asserting here you yourself have experienced jhana. Your posts are too discursive for such an appraisal to arise.
Sariputta's experience of jhana is reported below. He did not regard it as important.
All the best
:coffee:
How does the opinion of Ajahn Chah above reconcile with your opinion below?:
If you think it is so, then let it be so. I'm do not feel offended because contrary to what you think, I don't try to convince or lecture you. I'm just putting out information I'd like to share in the hope of helping people. If you don't think Ajahn Brahms teachings are relevant for your practice, then simply don't use them. It's as simple as that. To me there is no need to take it personal about this or judge someone's meditation. Also it is totally meaningless to use hollow arguments like how many years we have been studying just to discuss a book.
So, yes maybe I've got some historical facts mixed up, you're right about that. But let me say [for information], what you say about jhana is not correct. You can neither enter or emerge from absorption at will, for the will is simply disappeared once your concentration reaches that kind of states. This same view of no willpower inside strong concentration is described in the book by Brahm and in the video of Ajahn Chahs experience I posted. And so that makes the video totally relevant for this thread about Ajahn Chah and his experience of samadhi... because... it is about his experience of samadhi!
But let us let go of our views, meditate, and find out for ourselves :om: Let the teachings of Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Brahm or whatever great monks we like help us on the path towards liberation. Maybe we can even learn from Mahayana monks! :crazy:
With metta,
Sabre
The video about Ajahn Chah did not describe jhana. It simply describes a certain kind of spontaneous samadhi state, as Ajahn Jayasaro said.
I repeat, what you are posting about no will in jhana is merely blind faith in Ajahn Brahm.
I already quoted MN 111 above, which repudiates the view of Ajahn Brahm.
MN 111 states Sariputta discerned intention in jhana.
I will also post more late.
Guy C is well aware by now how the many things Ajahn Brahm teaches, including one cannot be attached to jhana, are not in accord with the scriptures.
The Buddha taught the way to progress on the path is to remove the causes of dukkha.
The Buddha did not evangelise about gliterring states of happiness that appeal to craving.
As I said, I will sort out Ajahn Brahm's false views about jhana, later.
What I say about jhana is correct. What Ajahn Brahm says is another matter.
Further, you appear to not have direct experience of jhana to argue otherwise.
So it is the suttas and other teachers versus Ajahn Brahmavaso.
the ultimate liberation.
I dont think Brahm is asking you to stay in jhana n stop.
Brahm talks in a way that is humourous & entertaining.
I dont fault him for that. He reaches many more people that way.
He is the 1st person I heard say jhana is better than sex.
He is controversial but he is also kind, wise, a great teacher.
:-/
:sawed:
:hair:
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books3/Buddhadasa_Anapanasati.pdf
:hair:
Personally I've found Ajahn Brahms teachings a great aid for that and so are the other teachings you post here. Again, I have no need to defend anyone or any of my own views. I'm just suggesting others what I think is a great book. Even without all the jhana stuff it can teach you a lot to get into silence of the mind. I may be wrong, but it seems like you feel offended by something and think you know what Chah taught better than one of his own deciples.. Well, to be honest, that's fine with me.
You like your interpretation, fine. You think you know about my meditation, also fine. Really. I do not feel offended. But please, spare yourself some time next time by not trying to show me about that with selective quotations. You are not going to convince me of anything that way and I think it is not helping anyone but yourself.
Next time I might respond to your specific posts if they contain an actual solid argument instead of mere quotations and also, without getting personal to me or other members of this board.
May we all be well and learn about ourselves.
With metta,
Sabre
I see contradictions in the teachings by those teachers. As we know, things can be put into words accurately. One would expect a "master" speaks accurately. The basic condition for refuge in the Dhamma is the Buddha spoke it accurately (svakhato bhagavata dhammo).
When one reads without a biased view, the teachings above contradict each other. But when one reads with a biased view, one imagines "similarities" in the teachings that do not actually exist.
When we have not actually confirmed those teacings with our own experience by mastering meditation for ourselves, there is no use in behaving as though we ourselves are a "master" and projecting metaphors upon the whole world, such as "talking about tea doesn't actually give us the experience of its flavor."
It is best we honestly admit to ourselves we ourselves have not tasted the flavour of the soup. We should refrain from asserting our inexperience upon others and, worse, assuming the role of a teacher.
Personally I think what I have read of Ajahn Brahm's book, the preliminary section, is good. Even without all the jhana stuff, it can teach you a lot to get into silence of the mind.
But you are wrong, especially when projecting upon others condescending traits such as they feel "offended". This again, is bad karma and just ego.
The truth is Chah taught different & more accurately than Ajahn Brahm in respect to the core supramundane true dhamma.
However, for my tastes, the preliminary parts of Ajahn Brahm's book is the best I have read as an introduction to meditation, that is, for its type of book. Of course, it is not better than the instruction of the Buddha.
I think it has been established you are just talking out of blind faith.
I will spend my time as I wish.
Next time, I would not recommend you respond to my specific posts. This is because it seems you are so stuck on this Jesus figure of Ajahn Brahm. It seems you believe all must dwell in his infallible light & wisdom.
My posts are an actual solid argument. But your mind may have some bias.
Ajahn Brahm teaches many things no according to the Buddha-Dhamma. I personally do not regard him as a "master" of Dhamma.
May you be well and learn about yourself.
With metta,
DD