Esoteric Theravada - Kate Croby

[Sam Vara]

It is profoundly ironic that in an attempt to prioritize culturally Eastern meditation traditions, someone would apply culturally Western scholarship.

Once again we have a tremendous effort on behalf of the WEST to belittle the gold standard described in the Pali Canon, the most ancient of any tradition found in the EAST. Perhaps it is the fact that the Buddhist tradition in India was interrupted that makes it so easy for people to pretend that it was never there.

PhD. Oxford. Bravo.

I'm not sure of the point you are making here. This publication doesn't seem to be belittling anything, but recovering one of the traditions that practitioners in the West don't know much about. That would seem to require some scholarship, as the tradition was dispersed and difficult to interpret. And if it were anything other than "culturally Western" scholarship, would you understand it? As Wittgenstein said, if a lion could speak to us, we would not understand him. That "gold standard described in the Pali Canon" is only intelligible due to Western scholarship.

[Assaji]

May be not contained in the Book. But, similar name is found in Burma.

The name may sound similar, but the Burmese "weikza-do" (Vidyādhara) movement is very different from the "Borān kammaṭṭhāna" which was preserved in Ayutthaya and never made its way to Burma.

[Assaji]

I've no knowledge or experience of these practices, but I'm a little surprised that almost all of the reactions to this book are along the lines of : "Whatever was being practised in SE Asia before the reforms of the 19th and 20th C was a load of rubbish...."

Having taken up Theravada specifically because I came across it as a living tradition, I have some interest in what may or may not have been lost in what has been communicated, though no particular stake in this particular area (since I have no personal experience with it).

I have been fortunate to apply some of the teachings brought by Weliwita Sri Saranankara Thero from Ayutthaya to Sri Lanka, and I must say they are amazing, when understood. It is a pity that these ancient texts are misunderstood nowadays.

[Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta]

May be not contained in the Book. But, similar name is found in Burma.

The name may sound similar, but the Burmese "weikza-do" (Vidyādhara) movement is very different from the "Borān kammaṭṭhāna" which was preserved in Ayutthaya and never made its way to Burma.

Thanks. I don't know about "Borān kammaṭṭhāna"; however, the Thai's "medicine", and "mercury" sounds very much related to those in Burmese.

btw, I'm not saying "medicine" and "mercury" are totally incompatible with a person of Theravada. I'm just saying these are not theravada practice. And, I'm sure these are not even related to Buddhism. "Borān kammaṭṭhāna" is a different matter, which may or may not be related to theravada. I haven't read about it in depth yet.

[SDC]

...

Do you think this is really the intention? Clearly "Theravada" is a development that took place over many centuries, millennia in fact. Furthermore, the invocation of "western belittlement" is a little strange, given that modernisation movements in Thailand, Burma and Sri Lanka during colonial appear to be, at least in part, a reaction to Colonial pressures and ideas.

Of course, one could reject all interpretations and developments beyond the early parts of the Pali and other Canons, but that wouldn't really be "Theravada". And that approach seems to be llargely western led... Ooops...


Mike

...

I'm not sure of the point you are making here. This publication doesn't seem to be belittling anything, but recovering one of the traditions that practitioners in the West don't know much about. That would seem to require some scholarship, as the tradition was dispersed and difficult to interpret. And if it were anything other than "culturally Western" scholarship, would you understand it? As Wittgenstein said, if a lion could speak to us, we would not understand him. That "gold standard described in the Pali Canon" is only intelligible due to Western scholarship.

When I see someone from the West make an effort to uncover what was "lost" and "forgotten" when that which it is based upon is both older and not forgotten, it's perplexing. Sure it is a great thing to reveal the history that was interrupted by Colonialism, but the work clearly intends to prioritize these methods over the contemporary Vippassana trend and the secular movement, as indicated in the review. That's all well and good (I'm perfectly okay with ridiculing either), but the author clearly does not see the baby going out with the bath water when she essentially claims she is recovering something, when the Pali Canon has not been lost, i.e. the Path has yet to be lost. Last I checked the Sangha still has the Dhamma; and if the goal of SE Buddhism is liberation, what exactly does the author reveal that is more significant than the Buddha's own words on the matter?

And to Mike's point, when did it become a western approach to uphold and value the world we find thoroughly described in the suttas just a bit more than anything else? If the Indian Buddhist tradition had never been broken, the west would have no problem giving it priority, but because SE Asia became the epicenter, it is perfectly acceptable to elevate it as the living tradition that it is. I get it, but the implication in what I've read so far in this work is reckless and arrogant, and it seems the intention of the author to act as a savior to that which does not need saving.

To be explicit, I think it is a wonderful thing to uncover this history, but the intent here overshadows the whole thing. It is the epitome of Western elitism to take responsibility for what everyone should be prioritizing, which is why even my call to uphold the triple gem is inseparable from it. But I'll take the risk.

For the record, you're both dear friends, and I'm sorry we're at odds here.

[coconut]

In their Saturday morning zoom sessions the UK-based Samatha Trust has recently hosted a series of talks on yogāvacara meditation / borān kammaṭṭhāna by Dr. Paul Dennison, a student and practitioner of this approach since the 1960s. The talks have now been uploaded to youtube.

Contents

Talk 1: Invocation
Talk 2: The 1st & 2nd Rupa Jhanas
Talk 3: The 3rd & 4th Rūpa Jhānas
Talk 4: 1st and 2nd Arūpa Jhānas
Talk 5: The 4th & 5th Arūpa Jhanas
Talk 6: The Path

thank you

I've seen some of Dr. Dennison's videos before, but not this one.

[Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta]

The Ancient Theravāda Meditation System, Borān Kammaṭṭhāna: Ānāpānasati or ‘Mindfulness of The Breath’ in Kammatthan Majjima Baeb Lamdub
(by Andrew Skilton And Phibul ChoomPolPaisal)

• borān kammaṭṭhāna & dhammakaya

  • 51. Reflecting the issue of diversity within borān kammaṭṭhāna mentioned at the start of this article, it can be noted that the dhammakaya method uses only three locations — the tip of the nose, the throat and the navel. The nimitta is stationary and developed at the navel centre. The inbreath is followed through the body to reach the nimitta at that point (Chayamangkalo 1999, 150).

    note: 51

• Nine points of anapanasati:

  • 

    the nimittas associated with them are experienced neither inside the body nor on the skin surface, but in the deep or bottom layer of the inner skin.

    Interesting.

• It is also widely known, if not practised, across Buddhist traditions, and described and explained in Mahāyāna as well as Śrāvaka treatises. It can hardly be a matter of surprise therefore to find that it has undergone ‘development’; that with the passage of centuries meditation practitioners, phra yogāvacara, have found reason to make adaptations. ... That said, the designation of specific locations in the body for the development of nimittas is a distinctive feature of borān kammaṭṭhāna practice. It is perhaps also worth noting in this respect the emphasis in KMBL on the integration of mind and body, not just through the use of bodily locations, but also through its emphasis on the role of the elements (dhātu) and the implicit health benefits of this. Regardless of the date of development of KMBL practice, we have seen that its practices are consistent with the account of ānāpānasati in the Visuddhimagga, and we are probably justified in seeing them as in this respect ‘orthodox’.

  Undergone "development" + make adaptations + a distinctive feature .... so ... and, very "logically" ... concluded as: "it is orthodox" OMG!

[gavesako]

Nirvana & the new technologies: the suppression & renewal of meditation in Buddhist Southeast Asia



An Inaugural Lecture by Professor Kate Crosby

This talk looks at the impact of the 19th century religion-science divide on Buddhist meditation in Southeast Asia during and after the European colonial period. Meditation is a technology of transformation ultimately aimed at Nirvana, Buddhist salvation. The traditional techniques that Buddhists employed to bring about desired changes on the path resonated with other pre-modern technologies of change such as medicine, chemistry/alchemy, group theory mathematics and generative grammar.

Some of these technologies were more advanced in Asia than in 19th century Europe, but the military success of Europe in Asia misled Europeans to assume that they were more advanced in all physical sciences. The notion of ‘progress’ was used to justify warfare, colonialism and missionising. Asian knowledge systems in the area of the physical world were ignored, dismissed or actively undermined, and European systems imposed. As a result, traditional meditation with its own somatic practices went underground.

In the same colonial context, in Burma, a new form of meditation arose: Vipassanā. Focusing on mind-culture, Vipassanā was located ‘safely’ above the physical realms over which colonial powers claimed dominance, and safely on the religion side of the religion- science divide. The resultant rise of the sciences of the mind and an emerging, global awareness of Buddhism’s expertise in such science, allowed Vipassanā to flourish and spread, to make its own impact on Western culture and modern medicine as ‘Mindfulness’. This lecture traces this story.

This lecture follows on from the conference Variety in Theravada Meditation.

[Sam Vara]

When I see someone from the West make an effort to uncover what was "lost" and "forgotten" when that which it is based upon is both older and not forgotten, it's perplexing. Sure it is a great thing to reveal the history that was interrupted by Colonialism, but the work clearly intends to prioritize these methods over the contemporary Vippassana trend and the secular movement, as indicated in the review. That's all well and good (I'm perfectly okay with ridiculing either), but the author clearly does not see the baby going out with the bath water when she essentially claims she is recovering something, when the Pali Canon has not been lost, i.e. the Path has yet to be lost. Last I checked the Sangha still has the Dhamma; and if the goal of SE Buddhism is liberation, what exactly does the author reveal that is more significant than the Buddha's own words on the matter?

And to Mike's point, when did it become a western approach to uphold and value the world we find thoroughly described in the suttas just a bit more than anything else? If the Indian Buddhist tradition had never been broken, the west would have no problem giving it priority, but because SE Asia became the epicenter, it is perfectly acceptable to elevate it as the living tradition that it is. I get it, but the implication in what I've read so far in this work is reckless and arrogant, and it seems the intention of the author to act as a savior to that which does not need saving.

To be explicit, I think it is a wonderful thing to uncover this history, but the intent here overshadows the whole thing. It is the epitome of Western elitism to take responsibility for what everyone should be prioritizing, which is why even my call to uphold the triple gem is inseparable from it. But I'll take the risk.

For the record, you're both dear friends, and I'm sorry we're at odds here.

Last things first: rest assured, SDC, that there's no need to be sorry about an honest disagreement, especially as I value friendship with you far higher than any mere academic book.

Just a few points I would like to make. I think you are right when you say that Crosby is trying to recover something that was lost, and I think you might be right when you say that this lost tradition is thought to be preferable to the modern "Vipassana" and secular approaches. I haven't actually read more than the first (free!) chapter yet, so until I've actually bought the book after Christmas, I'm not too confident about the second claim. Where I think we disagree is over your point that the recovery of a lost Eastern tradition somehow reflects on Crosby's views on the Dhamma or the path in general. You are right; that is still there. But she doesn't seem to be attacking it at all. Rather, she is piecing together one cultural expression of how the Dhamma was practised at one time before globalisation. Note that she emphasises the role of Abhidhamma in borān kammatthāna, as well as other systems - so she's hardly overturning foundations here.

More importantly for me, this is - or is at least reputed to be - an old system of meditation. A method. And that's precisely the area where the Pali Canon is vague as to how the meditation is actually to be done. Today on another thread I've made the point that there are very few instructions as to what we should be doing when we meditate. I've made the same point often on DW. There are frequent questions along the lines of how one should watch the breath, should one deliberately intervene with physical processes, with mental processes, the differences between samatha and "vipassana meditation" (whatever that is!), counting, noting, mantras, and so on. This book, it seems, is an attempt to outline an old method which apparently answered these questions to the satisfaction of some people over a distinct period of time. Just as modern Western methods apparently do for some people, at the present time. Now, I don't know if Crosby intends to "prioritise" what she has uncovered over other methods. Let's see. Even if she does, she's just one more voice among the Visuddhimagga devotees, the Goenkaites, and the plethora of approaches taught by monasteries and meditation centres around the world. And she can safely be ignored, if that's what one wants.

The salient point here, though, is that Crosby cannot be prioritising a set of meditation methods over the Dhamma, or its expression in ancient texts. These different approaches have sprung up precisely because of the lack of such meditation methods in those texts. They fill a vacuum. To the extent that they are at odds with the Canon, they might be rejected. Otherwise, the proof of the pudding is pretty much in the sitting, so to speak...

So the path has not been lost, but many descriptions of how to walk it have been lost. This, from a charitable reading of the first chapter and the reviews, seems to be nothing more than an attempt to recover one of them. I don't see bad intent here.

[Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta]

... the implication in what I've read so far in this work is reckless and arrogant, and it seems the intention of the author to act as a savior to that which does not need saving. ...
...

I like that. Yet, regarding "not need saving", I assume she does need feeding her passion as well as saving her academic career in the midst of "publish, or perish" culture.

...
These different approaches have sprung up precisely because of the lack of such meditation methods in those texts. They fill a vacuum. To the extent that they are at odds with the Canon, they might be rejected.
...

I like that, too.

[mikenz66]

To be explicit, I think it is a wonderful thing to uncover this history, but the intent here overshadows the whole thing. It is the epitome of Western elitism to take responsibility for what everyone should be prioritizing, which is why even my call to uphold the triple gem is inseparable from it. But I'll take the risk.

For the record, you're both dear friends, and I'm sorry we're at odds here.

Likewise. I'm just puzzled by your conclusions. The teachings most of us follow appear to have been historically highly influenced by Western ideas, and we largely rely on Western translations and interpretations (especially the Westerners who ordained in Sri Lanka over the past 100 years or so). Any insights into how the teachings have been applied in pre-colonial times could be a useful clue to what may have been lost.


Mike

[JohnK]

The best part of this thread is seeing graceful disagreement (modeled by mikenz66, Sam Vara and SDC).

[mikenz66]

The best part of this thread is seeing graceful disagreement (modeled by mikenz66, Sam Vara and SDC).

Not difficulty, since SDC has such excellent taste in coffee shops...


Mike

[Mr Man]

The best part of this thread is seeing graceful disagreement (modeled by mikenz66, Sam Vara and SDC).

Not difficulty, since SDC has such excellent taste in coffee shops...


Mike

He has an advantage being in New York.

[coffeendonuts]

To the OP, I get the sense that pre-moderns relied more on the somatic, felt sense. They anchored change to the body and let it speak. Gurus as living teachers and their inspiration were far more relevant than a collection of discrete writings pinned ages ago. Moderns are cerebral. We no longer speak from our bodies. We deem the old language of change as mere mythology, dismissing its power with a wave of the hand. We look at religion as historians. We put on our thinking caps, we speak of rescuing the purity of the Pali canon or whichever canon, and we hold tightly on to the conviction that we are following an accurate record of a person who once lived called the Buddha...because getting facts right is so crucial to this whole game.