| Ajahn Pasanno |
Q: When did you first meet Luang Por Chah? What was your first experience with him? A: My first experience with Luang Por Chah was in 1974, shortly after I had ordained as a monk. What made him a great teacher was his willingness to train people. It’s one thing to train people and another thing to teach people; to have those two qualities together is quite rare. Some people might be a good trainer but not a great teacher, and vice versa. Luang Por had the ability to both teach and train. The very first meeting I went in and paid respect, and the first thing he said was: “If you want to stay with me, you have to stay at least five years.” He immediately pushed a button - his willingness to push buttons is rare. When I first went to Wat Pah Pong I really liked meditation. Now, I am a morning person, I like mornings. But at Wat Pah Pong they had long morning chanting, which I really didn’t like. I didn’t go to morning chanting. I’d wake up and start meditating in my kuti, thinking, “I am meditating, I don’t need to go to morning chanting, it’s a waste of time. I don’t know what they’re chanting anyway.” Luang Por would only occasionally go to pujas in those days, as the senior monks had invited him not to have to feel obliged to look after things, such as attending morning and evening pujas. But he would go from time to time. I hadn’t been there all that long and hadn’t been to morning puja, when he showed up one morning, and asked, “Where’s that new monk, Pasanno? Where is he?” “He hasn’t come.” “Was he here yesterday? No! He doesn’t come? He’s lazy!” Of course, word got back to me very quickly! He publicly announced my laziness and I had to live with that. I was at morning puja very regularly after that! I gave up my ditthi (view).
When I think of Luang Por, he was someone who really embodied Dhamma-Vinaya. Any decisions on what to do or not to do, what would be appropriate or not, had nothing to do with his own bias or preference. One always felt that whatever he was saying or doing, the consideration was always Dhamma-Vinaya, rather than anything personal.
| |
