SuttaCentral
Year: 2002
Place: Grand BlueWave Hotel, Shah Alam, Malaysia
Event: Global Conference on Buddhism
Ven. Aggacitta: Ajahn Chah didn’t teach the (absorption) jhānas. So, where did you learn it form?
Ajahn Brahm: Samatha Trust, when I was a layperson.
As told by Ven. Aggacitta to Ven. Kumāra.
In a 2022 Tricycle article on Boonman Poonyathiro’s astonishing life, Ven. Brahm freely shared about meeting his Jhana teacher in England way back in 1971, long before ordaining.
… Boonman started teaching meditation with the English Sangha Trust and moved into the Hampstead Buddhist Vihara…
Several years later, a Cambridge student of theoretical physics named Peter Betts also found his way to Boonman’s class and attended a life-changing nine-day retreat with him in 1971. Three years later, he moved to Thailand to become a monk. Now, 48 years later, Betts is known as Ajahn Brahmavamso Mahathera—Ajahn Brahm for short.
“He impressed me because his method was simple and it worked for me,” Ajahn Brahm told Tricycle. Today, Ajahn Brahm teaches all around the world and is the abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery and the spiritual director of the Buddhist Society of Western Australia.
Imagine learning Jhana in England and then going to Thailand and living in hard core Wat with Ajahn Chah not known for emphasizing extended Jhana practice. That says a lot for Ajhan Brahm
As an aside Ajahn Chah closed the loop visiting the Hampstead Vihara in 1978 – From left to right: A visiting roshi, Ajahn Sumedho, George Sharp, Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Khemadhammo
This is from the article:
“Ajahn Chah did teach jhanas, but not publicly,” Ajahn Brahm said in an email. “He would call it appana samadhi , which is the Abhidhamma term. Ajahn Jayasaro, who translated Ajahn Chah’s biography, told me that many old recordings exist of Ajahn Chah teaching appana samadhi.”
This is from the book A Taste of Freedom:
That which can be most harmful to the meditator is absorption samādhi (jhāna), the samādhi with deep, sustained calm. This samādhi brings great peace. Where there is peace, there is happiness. When there is happiness, attachment and clinging to that happiness arise. The meditator doesn’t want to contemplate anything else, he just wants to indulge in that pleasant feeling. When we have been practising for a long time we may become adept at entering this samādhi very quickly. As soon as we start to note our meditation object, the mind enters calm, and we don’t want to come out to investigate anything. We just get stuck on that happiness. This is a danger to one who is practising meditation.
I read that part of the book. In context, I think he is saying that it’s important to practice Right Samadhi so that we can avoid the danger of getting stuck on that happiness.
Being diligent, they achieve accomplishment in ethics. They’re happy with that, and they’ve got all they wished for. And they glorify themselves and put others down on account of that: ‘I’m the one who is ethical, of good character. These other mendicants are unethical, of bad character.’ And so they become indulgent and fall into negligence regarding their accomplishment in ethics. And being negligent they live in suffering.
Suppose there was a person in need of heartwood. And while wandering in search of heartwood he’d come across a large tree standing with heartwood. But, passing over the heartwood, softwood, and bark, he’d cut off the shoots and depart imagining they were heartwood. If a person with clear eyes saw him they’d say, ‘This gentleman doesn’t know what heartwood, softwood, bark, shoots, or branches and leaves are. That’s why he passed them over, cut off the shoots, and departed imagining they were heartwood. Whatever he needs to make from heartwood, he won’t succeed.’ …
This is called a mendicant who has grabbed the shoots of the spiritual life and stopped short with that.
MN 29
People can get attached to virtue (sīla) and get stuck there. They can also create a sense of self and identity around it. Should we discourage people from practicing sīla?
Hi,
This statement sounds categorical when, in fact, it’s conjectural and dependent on the particular practitioner.
Arahants experience states of deep peace and happiness and are not attached to these experiences.
Even those not fully awakened can know them as conditional and beneficial while not clinging to them.
In the end, it’s never the experience in itself that matters so much as how that experience may lead to the reduction and eventual cessation of the defilements while stabilizing and deepening our equanimity, peacefulness, and wisdom.
If silent, deep, experiences of peacefulness and happiness are conducive to this, as they certainly can be, then isn’t that on the Path?
Ajahn Chah… explained that his way of teaching is very simple: “It is as though I see people walking down the road I know well. To them the way may be unclear. I look up and see someone about to fall into a ditch on the right-hand side of the road, so I call out, ‘Go left, go left!’ Similarly, if I see another person about to fall into a ditch on the left, I call out, ‘Go right, go right!’ That is the extent of my teaching. Whatever extreme you get caught in, whatever you get attached to, I say, ‘Let go of that too.’ Let go on the left, let go on the right. Come back to the center, and you will arrive at the true way.”
From Stories of the Spirit, Stories of the Heart
So, there can be right samadhi and wrong samadhi.
Wrong samadhi is where the mind enters calm and there’s no
awareness at all. One could sit for two hours or even all day but
the mind doesn’t know where it’s been or what’s happened. It
doesn’t know anything. There is calm, but that’s all. It’s like a well-
sharpened knife which we don’t bother to put to any use. This is a
deluded type of calm, because there is not much self-awareness.
The meditator may think he has reached the ultimate already, so he
doesn’t bother to look for anything else. Samadhi can be an enemy
at this level. Wisdom cannot arise because there is no awareness of
right and wrong.
With right samadhi, no matter what level of calm is reached,
there is awareness. There is full mindfulness and clear
comprehension. This is the samadhi which can give rise to
wisdom, one cannot get lost in it. Practitioners should understand
this well. You can’t do without this awareness, it must be present
from beginning to end.
In his talks Ajahn Brahm over and over brings attention to the following from the Pasadika Sutta to emphasize that attachment to jhana is entirely beneficial and wholesome and leads to one of four results - stream entry, once return, non-return and arahant.
- The Benefits of Indulgence in Pleasure
- Sukhallikānuyogānisaṁsa
It’s possible that wanderers of other religions might say,
Ṭhānaṁ kho panetaṁ, cunda, vijjati, yaṁ aññatitthiyā paribbājakā evaṁ vadeyyuṁ:
‘How many fruits and benefits may be expected by those who live indulging in pleasure in these four ways?’
‘ime panāvuso, cattāro sukhallikānuyoge anuyuttānaṁ viharataṁ kati phalāni katānisaṁsā pāṭikaṅkhā’ti?
You should say to them,
Evaṁvādino, cunda, aññatitthiyā paribbājakā evamassu vacanīyā:
‘Four benefits may be expected by those who live indulging in pleasure in these four ways.
‘ime kho, āvuso, cattāro sukhallikānuyoge anuyuttānaṁ viharataṁ cattāri phalāni cattāro ānisaṁsā pāṭikaṅkhā.
What four?
Katame cattāro?Firstly, with the ending of three fetters a mendicant becomes a stream-enterer, not liable to be reborn in the underworld, bound for awakening.
Idhāvuso, bhikkhu tiṇṇaṁ saṁyojanānaṁ parikkhayā sotāpanno hoti avinipātadhammo niyato sambodhiparāyaṇo.
This is the first fruit and benefit.
Idaṁ paṭhamaṁ phalaṁ, paṭhamo ānisaṁso.Furthermore, a mendicant—with the ending of three fetters, and the weakening of greed, hate, and delusion—becomes a once-returner. They come back to this world once only, then make an end of suffering.
Puna caparaṁ, āvuso, bhikkhu tiṇṇaṁ saṁyojanānaṁ parikkhayā rāgadosamohānaṁ tanuttā sakadāgāmī hoti, sakideva imaṁ lokaṁ āgantvā dukkhassantaṁ karoti.
This is the second fruit and benefit.
Idaṁ dutiyaṁ phalaṁ, dutiyo ānisaṁso.Furthermore, with the ending of the five lower fetters, a mendicant is reborn spontaneously and will become extinguished there, not liable to return from that world.
Puna caparaṁ, āvuso, bhikkhu pañcannaṁ orambhāgiyānaṁ saṁyojanānaṁ parikkhayā opapātiko hoti, tattha parinibbāyī anāvattidhammo tasmā lokā.
This is the third fruit and benefit.
Idaṁ tatiyaṁ phalaṁ, tatiyo ānisaṁso.Furthermore, a mendicant realizes the undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life, and lives having realized it with their own insight due to the ending of defilements.
Puna caparaṁ, āvuso, bhikkhu āsavānaṁ khayā anāsavaṁ cetovimuttiṁ paññāvimuttiṁ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharati.
This is the fourth fruit and benefit.
Idaṁ catutthaṁ phalaṁ catuttho ānisaṁso.These four benefits may be expected by those who live indulging in pleasure in these four ways.’
Note from Sujato -[Some meditation teachers warn of the supposed dangers of becoming attached to the pleasure of meditation. The Buddha’s view was that the pleasure of meditation arises from letting go and leads to Nibbana.]
Ime kho, āvuso, cattāro sukhallikānuyoge anuyuttānaṁ viharataṁ imāni cattāri phalāni, cattāro ānisaṁsā pāṭikaṅkhā’ti.
From people living there at the time, I heard that not only Ajahn Chah but most Thai forest monks were reticent to teach the jhanas, at least in public. If so, I don’t know why that would be the case, but they must have had their reasons. (Maybe someone has an idea?) A notable exception was Ajahn Thate, a disciple of Ajahn Mun.
His teachings, as far as I’ve seen, also use some uncommon terminology and ideas, but does include nimittas as an important part, mentions the inability to contemplate in jhana, as well as various other traditional Theravadin ideas on samadhi which would align with Ajahn Brahm’s teachings. He’s written some things on samadhi, translations of which can be found online.
Ajahn Brahm mentions Ajahn Thate often as an inspiration in his talks, although he met him much later in his monastic life, and I don’t think he was taught directly by him.
(My info about Ajahn Thate teaching samadhi a lot compared to other teachers comes from a long-term disciple of him, not Ajahn Brahm.)
Thanks for the great post 
Although Ajahn Thate taught Jhana, its noteworthy that he simulatneously cautioned about its dangers. Ajahn Thate as translated by Thanissaro Bhikku in Steps Along the Path pointed out some of the risks in Jhana practice, that might have dissuaded other Ajahns from publicly encouraging Jhana:
- The visions and signs that arise from the practice of meditation are a strange
and uncanny affair. They may delude a gullible person of weak judgment into being so convinced of their truth as to lose touch with reality. For this reason, those who practice meditation should be cautious, examining and reflecting on them carefully…
Visions, signs, and the knowledge resulting from jhāna are obstacles to the one-
eyed—those who are simply developing jhāna—but can provoke insight for those
with two eyes, i.e. those who are developing discernment along with concentration.
Other Thai Ajahns might have been reticent to teach Jhana due to this or similar unhelpful personal experience eg
The problem is that samãdhi is so peaceful and satisfying
that the meditator inadvertently becomes addicted to it. This
happened to me: for five years I was addicted to the tranquil-
ity of samãdhi; so much so that I came to believe that this very
tranquility was the essence of Nibbãna. Only when my teacher,
Ãcariya Mun, forced me to confront this misconception, was I
able to move on to the practice of wisdom.Unless it supports the development of wisdom, samãdhi can
sidetrack a meditator from the path to the end of all suffering. All
meditators who intensify their efforts to develop samãdhi should
be aware of this pitfall. Samãdhi’s main function on the path of
Arahattamagga practice is to support and sustain the development of wisdom.
https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books2/Maha_Boowa_The_Path_to_Arahantship.pdf
I remember reading one of Ajahn Thanissaro’s notes, about how his teacher just once gave him a paper detailing the jhanas, and they then never discussed them again, though I can’t find the exact quote now.
I think it has something to do with TFT having a more hands-on approach with their practice, rather than strict scriptural adherence.
Not sure if it was Ajahn Thanissaro or Brahm, but also I remember something about self-conditioning with meditation, and very strict guidelines making people try to create those circumstances and description, rather than allowing the practitioner to experience what comes up naturally. Control / Letting go kind of dichotomy.
Sadly I don’t have any sources now for these observations. 
But, perhaps someone living with Ajahn Brahm can inquire? 
From what I have gathered, most of the forest monks would give most of the details and explanations to people who asked questions directly about their practice. So it isn’t that they wouldn’t talk about things, but that they wouldn’t just give a random public talk about higher levels of Dhamma.
One, they wanted it to be catered to the specific person or audience present. This is also why many refused or disliked their teachings being recorded and transcribed; what they said was mostly for the people there in front of them, and could easily be taken out of context. A classic example would be Ajahn Chah’s simile that someone veering off the left side of a road might be told “go right! go right!” whereas someone veering off the right side might be told “go left! go left!”
Second, they wanted to encourage people to actually practice and use their own sense of initiative and ingenuity in the practice. They didn’t want people getting ahead of themselves with all kinds of theory and ideas about the practice, which easily becomes an obstruction. The mind can get expectant and impatient, or start labelling and imagining, or comparing and judging at the wrong time. So if someone actually ran into a real problem or point in their practice, they would help or encourage them as they saw fit.
Another reason might be that many of those teachers would draw from their own experience for teachings, and they probably mostly wanted that to stay between the (monastic) disciples they were speaking to.
Just some thoughts. I think this is relevant and interesting for all practitioners, not just as historical trivia, so it seemed worth sharing some thoughts.
Are you sure about that, my good and learned friend? Its just Ive never heard Ajahn Geoff say that. Not once .Can you find your reference? 
If my memory serves me, Thanissaro Bhikku said Ajahn Fuang taught him thoroughly in a classic teacher-apprentice model over a decade or so. Ajahn Fuang was known for not doing micromanagement teaching but rather fosteried self-reliance. Thats very different to your memory of “they then never discussed them again”. Im sure I can dig out references from the web if you want - they arent hidden.
I do recall Ajahn Thanissaro saying when he was a young layman and had only recently met Ajahn Fuang, he was given Ajahn Lee’s classic little book Keeping the Breath in Mind . That absolute gem looks like its going to be about breath mindfulness but goes straight into sublime samatha breath practice for Jhana. That book then served as a launch for Ajahn Fuang teaching. Not an end.
Maybe you were thinking about the Ajahn Lee lineage not talking up, or “empowering” student attainments? The Ajahns wouldnt confirm “big experiences” like Jhana attainments. No medals. However they certainly would help students to figure out what was going wrong and how to work out how to go right.
I dont think that’s Thanissaro Bhikku’s “voice”. Not at all. Ive never heard him say “just let go” during training! Thanissaro’s lineage is more about encouraging students to “experiment” in meditation with an active process, to see what the results are and then make changes as needed. That’s almost the opposite of a passive “letting go”.
Could that vibe be via Ajahn Brahm:
A common problem at this stage is the tendency to control the breathing, and this makes the breathing uncomfortable. To overcome this problem, imagine that you are just a passenger in a car looking through the window at your breath. You are not the driver, nor a `back seat driver’, so stop giving orders, let go and enjoy the ride. Let the breath do the breathing while you simply watch without interfering.
Its curious you mentioned “Ajahn Thanissaro or Brahm” together. Their teachings on samatha are in some ways opposites. If their teachings on samatha are put side by side its actually hard to imagine they both come from the same little Buddhist school of Thai Forest monks.
Correct. In other words, don’t practice Wrong Samadhi, which is absorption samadhi.
On the flip side, Venerable, is it possible to truly 100% believe in impermanence without experiencing absorption?
What other way is there to directly experience the impermanence of the five senses (and the parts of the mind that depend on the five senses)?
Someone who doesn’t practice absorption could infer impermanence from observation (people die, things break, etc.), but how can they go beyond inference?
Bhante, I do not think that this is what Ajahn Chah is suggesting in the text that you linked to. From my point of view, what he is suggesting is the same as what Ajahn Brahm suggests.
First of all Ajahn Chah says:
Ajahn Chah:
That which can possibly be harmful to the meditator is absorption samādhi (jhāna), the samādhi with deep, sustained calm.
So he is here defining jhāna as: samādhi with deep sustained calm. And note that it is only possibly harmful, not always harmful.
He then suggests the possibility that:
Ajahn Chah:
The meditator doesn’t want to contemplate anything else, he just wants to indulge in that pleasant feeling.
He further notes the possibility that:
Ajahn Chah:
… the mind enters calm, and we don’t want to come out to investigate anything. We just get stuck on that happiness.
So yes, if you do not use the calm mind that is the result of jhana, then there will be a missed an opportunity.
So instead Ajahn Chah suggests:
Ajahn Chah:
Here, we enter calm and then, when the mind is sufficiently calm, we come out and look at outer activity. Looking at the outside with a calm mind gives rise to wisdom.
So (for me) that says. Do jhāna (so that the mind is ‘sufficiently calm’), then use contemplation when you come out.
Ajahn Brahm gives similar advice in any number of his talks. I’ve just been reading this, for example…
Ajahn Brahm from In the Presence of Nibbana:
Just as one leaves these states of concentration, one can experience the beginnings of craving, the beginnings of the mind going out to seek satisfaction. As an arm reaches out for a cup of tea (or whatever it thinks to be joy), one sees how stupid that craving is. Craving has its measure of delight: the anticipation, the joy of activity, the doing, making, becoming, controlling. But this is delusive joy. One sees craving going out and also sees its results.
When one is developing insight based on these powerful states of concentration, something like craving, instead of appearing as an idea or concept, appears like an animal or creature emerging from the mind and going out. One sees this very clearly; also one can very clearly understand the dangers. The coarse mind can see only what is coarse and superficial. The subtle mind, however, can see the subtle.
…
So for me, Ajahn Brahm, like Ajahn Chah is suggesting that you contemplate when you come out of jhāna.
But I guess it all rests on how we interpret ‘sufficiently calm’ in the Ajahn Chah passage. In my interpretation, this means jhāna.
Dhp372 suggests this:
No absorption for one without wisdom,
no wisdom for one without absorption.
But one with absorption and wisdom—
they have truly drawn near to extinguishment.
Ajahn Chah:
… the mind enters calm, and we don’t want to come out to investigate anything. We just get stuck on that happiness.
If one can enter and dwell in the fourth jhana and communicate with the beings who reside there, surely one can also investigate during jhanas and not only after emerging?
The jhanas expand the mind immensely and it is in and during these superhuman states of a vastly expanded mind that one can and should contemplate and investigate past lives, the death-rebirth (kamma) of other beings, impermanence etc.
Especially while dwelling specifically in the fourth jhana with equanimity since recollection of past lives, the death-rebirth (kamma) of other beings and so on involves witnessing things where equanimity is truly needed…
So there is no need to ”come out and investigate” when during the jhanas one is very much clairvoyant and clairaudient and the mind is literally radiant, light in abundance.
Those who pursue to further develop the supernatural abilities (Iddhi) are not only clairvoyant and clairaudient during the jhanas but also have those abilities while being here in Kama Loka.
While others, like Sariputta, preferred not to develop those supernatural abilities to such a degree and could not even see a ”mud-goblin”! 
One should not really make too many distinctions between the jhanas, the brahmaviharas and the various planes of existence in Rupa Loka.
Since two of the five higher fetters are Rūparāgo Lust for form (Rupa Loka) & Arūparāgo Lust for the formless (Arupa Loka) there is no doubt that the jhanas and ayatanas are indeed very pleasant experiences.
Only a Buddha teaches how to transcend even such sublime states.
I once attended a retreat by a Thai forest monk. He taught Vipassana (very popular in Thailand as it was deemed higher, more beneficial, etc than Samatha), which in fact focused on present moment awareness.
During an interview, I asked him why he didn’t teach jhanas as it was obvious to me that he was a good monk with deep samadhi. What he said was shocking to me but (after a bit of contemplation) was so true. He said: jhana is difficult to achieve. If you teach it and laypeople fail too many times, they will feel discouraged and don’t want to practice meditation at all. Present moment awareness is not too difficult to do and it benefits them. I’ve chosen to do things that will help people.
His answer reminds me of Ajahn Gunha. I didn’t (still don’t) like that giving candy and blessings to laypeople is the main activity he does when people visit him. One time he turned to me and said: “If I choose to teach only high dhamma and only to people who are wise, who will take care of these people? At least, they come here to do good things, not going to a pub.”
What I’m saying is that what we see might not be the whole truth. So, don’t judge any monk’s practice just by listening or reading a book written by someone. If you want to know the truth, ask that monk. Don’t be afraid to find the truth even it may appear disrespectful. Really good monks will always understand why you ask.
If the monks you want to ask are no longer here, go to the source of the teachings: the Buddha.
What’s the name of the Venerable and do you know if he have dhamma teachings online?
I like his reply, it’s so real.
