Unexpected Freedom

A Question of Identitythough I’d like to. I think the closest I have ever come to it isconversations I’ve had with Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Tate.Whether they were arahants or not I don’t know. Actually, Idon’t find talking about whether or not somebody is anarahant very appropriate. To me the state of purity ofsomebody’s heart is an intensely personal matter. What I dohave confidence in is that both were great monks who werevery well-acquainted with reality and practice. However, thequestion remains. When Ajahn Chah was questioned alongthese lines he persistently told people that it was none oftheir business and to get on with their own practice. Yet onone occasion, apparently when he was asked whether he wasan arahant, he said, “My experience is like being a tree, I’vegot branches and leaves and berries and fruits and so on.And the birds come along and they sit in the branches andthey eat the fruit, some say it’s sweet, some say it’s sour. Andthey go on about whether they like it or dislike it and so onand so forth. That’s just the chattering of the birds, that’s justwhat they do. So I just am what I am. You call me an arahantor not, you can say what you like about it.”It’s similar to the question as to whether or not anarahant has a personality. We could discuss the dynamics ofan arahant’s behaviour from the perspective of being anobserver, and we could say ‘Well, their personality is like thisor their personality is like that.’ I’m speculating here, but Iwould imagine that from the perspective of the arahant theydon’t have a personality.I would suggest that perhaps it is more useful to see howwe have things. Ajahn Chah often spoke about having andnot having as being the same thing. He said, “Hai mee mai mee– make having not-having. Have but don’t have. Having andnot-having need to be seen as the same thing.” And he wouldsay, “Like this cup here; actually you can have this cup, but153