mikenz66 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 3:58 am
nmjojola wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 5:34 pm
Just to clarify I'm looking for someone in Dhammayut who is already familiar, I dont care to introduce anyone to it, but either way yes I understand the likelihood of finding such isn't great.
Are you looking for someone to ordain with, visit, study with, or something else? It might help someone to point out something useful if they knew your motivation.
My impression, is that the main readers of these works are Western converts. Obviously, there have been some Asian monks (particularly in Sri Lanka) who have read them, such as Ven. Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda. He was clearly not Dhammayut, and by his own definition not a Nanavirist, but he does comment on Nanavira's writings in places. Ven Thanissaro, of course, is Dhammayut and I would guess is aware of the writings, but not overly sympathetic to them. But maybe some of his students are...
I am taking higher ordination in the United States in the Dhammayut lineage, after that I should do a stint Thailand, although it seems I may not necessarily "have to", I should nonetheless. However it seems the places and teachers my abbott are familiar with are dead or dying out, either figuratively or literally, so it seems there may be room for my input on where I would go since he's not liking what he's hearing about his primary choice from my predecessor reporting back on monthly updates who was sent last year (the place is now rich, deforested, lax vinaya, founding monk/teacher practically retired and not teaching anymore, i.e. "not what it used to be when he was a young monk himself" kinda thing, etc..).
So for the first time I'm researching Dhammayut temples in Thailand myself, and obviously from this post one can tell I share in the ken of what seems to be called the "Phenomenological/Existential" approach.
--Side Note: I actually came across Nanavira after
I already personally felt established on the Path, and it was a heck of a thing too because when I read the Notes I was swept away by the constantly repeating vindication of my own experience word after word, sentence after sentence, paragraph after paragraph, I was in awe with how talented he was in being able to articulate so precisely
these things with such nuance
that I had personally grasped only generally, for me it was perfectly natural to just keep nodding my head page after page "this guy is nailing it right on the head", it was like finding out about a long-lost older brother that I never knew I had.
I don't get that much out of Fundamental Structure and I never cared much for existential philosophy so I tended to look over those parts in the footnotes where he quotes those philosophers because it wasn't necessary for me as their attitude was already
my attitude to life in general (and thus dhamma as well) from the very beginning, I was fortunate enough to already have the right relationship with the suttas in other words, I didn't need the parts of his writing intended (not to preach those doctrines but) to orientate the attitude of the reader. It simply vindicated my own experience as I already had it and it served to clarify and shine some light on some things further since my knowledge of Pali is quite less than someone like him who was a bhikkhu for over 15 years, and even to this day the work simply serves as a supplementary workbook, by no means a necessity, and actually my favorite monk isn't even Nanavira, it's Nanavimala who walked all over Sri Lanka.
However due to the contention and controversy surrounding him I have to keep it all to myself pretty much even at the monastery where I now live, in fact it was one of the head monks who first handed me The Notes but under the explicit pretext "Hey check out this guy, he was insane, here's an example of how a good monk doesn't turn out, don't end up going crazy like this", so, yeah lol I actually feel bad for people who overlook it so easily but nonetheless I am still thankful for being here and don't take the difference of position personally.
So of course I would be most comfortable at a place where the same general view of the dhamma is shared, but its not a necessity, and from what I just said above I think one could tell I'm already quite used to inwardly being "the oddball out" when it comes to atittude towards teaching and tradition.
However thanks to a post in this thread by user The2nd I realize I am probably taking the wrong approach here in that I should just try to find a place with a good reputation in holding to the Vinaya, which may not be that much easier (the "Forest Tradition" seems to be succumbing to the modern times in recent decades) but I'm sure it's got to be at least somewhat