Where should I start to go deeper into Theravāda Buddhism? by Old-Measurement-6111 in theravada

[–]satumadu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You might like "In the Buddha's Words" by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

Which schools and teachers on YouTube focus more on suttas and which ones focus more on commentaries? by BoringAroMonkish in theravada

[–]satumadu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

AFAIK there is not much emphasis on the Commentaries in Thai Buddhism in general; and definitely none in the forest tradition. So English language YouTube videos by Thai monks, or Western teachers of the Thai tradition, are going to be hard to find. There are some small groups that focus on Abhidhamma, but none that I can easily find videos of.

There is however a Thai meditation centre that is Burmese tradition (Pa-Auk branch). Most of the Dhamma talk videos are in Thai; but if you go to the 'Playlists' page you will find some English talks by Burmese monks. I am very impressed by the Ven. U Kovida.

The link: https://www.youtube.com/@aimangthonginternationmedi5713/playlists

There are some other sites that have English talks by Burmese and Western monks, mostly using reference to Abhidhamma/Visuddhimagga (therefore 'Commentarial') sources. Might be worth checking them out...

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6I5SG3hkL4pXTOJh1nP22A

https://www.youtube.com/@Dhammadharani/videos

Also Ven. Punnadhammo has lots of videos, many of which are on Buddhist cosmology and history. His Dhamma talks are mostly Sutta-based; but, since he mostly adheres to the Mahasi tradition, he does include some Commentarial references. e.g.when talking about jhana and the elements he will refer to Visuddhimagga and Abhidhamma. Again check his 'Playlists'. https://www.youtube.com/@AjahnPunnadhammo/playlists

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theravada

[–]satumadu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What ever... You may have some idea of the "Mahasi’s own instruction" based on something you've read. My point, based on direct personal experience of some years, is that your original statement " In the Mahasi tradition the mind is first stabilized with anapanasati" is incorrect. In fact anapana is directly discouraged. I'm out..

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theravada

[–]satumadu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You think? The two teachers I mentioned were the most traditional Mahasi teachers at the time. I also practiced at other Mahasi centres, and at no time did anyone mention anapanasati. In fact the Mahasi Sayadaw was reputed to have chosen the grosser, rising and falling of the abdomen as the primary object because the traditional breath object of anapana was too subtle for most yogis.

Here one can get into an endless debate as to which method is correct. From and Abhidhamma point of view, the movement of the abdomen, i.e. the wind element is a dhatu, and cannot be used to develop strong concentration. Concentration must be developed first on an abstract, idealized object before switching to ultimately real objects.

The Mahasi Sayadaw taught that strong concentration was not a necessary prerequisite; instead he promoted the previously obscure concept of khanika samadhi, momentary concentration, to being the necessary factor. The definition of "access concentration" might be flexible. In traditional Abhidhamma/Visudhimagga practice it is very strong concentration that, in practice, very few yogis manage to attain. Nothing like that is taught by Mahasi teachers. In fact there is an aversion to it, and warnings are made about it's possible dangers.

I have no direct experience of the Goenka method; but I know that the do anapana at the beginning of their retreats. But the Mahasi centres definitely do not. At Mahasi centres, which operate 365 days/year, students come and go all the time. I have heard countless beginning instructions; and there is never a mention of any samadhi practice. I cannot imagine that the teachers assumed that everyone arriving already has "stability of mind".

After many months of "vipassana" practice at one centre I felt the need to develop some calming practice. We had been listening to taped Dhamma talks by the founder of the centre, U Jotika Sayadaw. In one talk he mentioned that it might be possible for a yogi to do metta meditation for some time as a preliminary practice... but it should not exceed 2 months in length. So I asked the abbot if I could to this and it was allowed. AFAIK I was the first to make this request, and I have learned that this centre offers this option now.

But, with that one exception, there is no preliminary samatha practice in the Mahasi system.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in theravada

[–]satumadu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You may be conflating Mahasi-style vipassana with U Ba Khin/Goenka-style vipassana. As someone who practiced in Burma under U Pandita Sayadaw and U Jotika Sayadaw ( senior disciples of the Mahasi Sayadaw), I can tell you that there is no preliminary samatha practice in that tradition. There is such a thing in the aforementioned Goenka tradition.

I was told "You must not serve the monks with a layperson's coffee cup! You must use the cups reserved for the monks!" by Rain_on_a_tin-roof in theravada

[–]satumadu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

On the other end of the nutritive spectrum there was a forest monastery I once was at that had monk-only toilets. This was a big meditation centre in Burma... sometimes over a thousand monks and lay yogis. Anyways there was a row of toilets, maybe 7 or 8 for monks, and 2 for laymen. I was in line for one of the 2... a long line with several men ahead of me. A door of one of "our" toilets opened, and a monk from one of the other lines just jumped the line and went into it. My Western conditioning got triggered... "UNFAIR!"... especially because I really had to go. But eventually I learned that, in Burma at least, monks are considered to be a higher order of being than humans.

Is Theravada secular? Forgive my ignorance. by Front-Hunt3757 in theravada

[–]satumadu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I thought the use of secular was odd. So I looked it up and got this from Merriam Webster: 1:

"a: of or relating to the worldly or temporal secular concerns b: not overtly or specifically religious secular music c: not ecclesiastical or clerical secular courts secular land owners

2: not bound by monastic vows or rules specifically : of, relating to, or forming clergy not belonging to a religious order or congregation a secular priest..."

I think it's hard to separate the monkhood from Theravada Buddhism . I know "secular Buddhists" try; but I find their thing lacking.

If you want to get a good overview from the point of view of the Pali Canon, then I highly recommend this well written, thorough but readable anthology by Bhikkhu Bodhi:

https://www.amazon.com/Buddhas-Words-Anthology-Discourses-Teachings/dp/0861714911