Sorry… maybe out topic but… What about Ledi Sayadaw ? Is Ledi Sayadaw considered following orthodox Theravada?
To be frank, I’m quite ignorant on Myanmar Theravada Buddhism development…
Mostly I follow Thai Theravada tradition.
Update: Yes, Venerable Ledi Sayadaw is of Theravada tradition monk.
He said its impossible for someone (perhaps apart from the Buddha) to see the rapid mind-moments claimed by the Abhidhamma, and you would go mad trying. If that makes him orthodox or not I leave up to you.
That is interesting… I’m glad I made this a forked topic. I’ve read some of his stuff, but not all. Maybe I will ask ven Maggavihari what he thinks.
this topic discussed that point.
During insight it is the nimitta of the realities that are known, thus not every single moment.
I guess you didn’t mean the “Semi-eternalist” Thai tradition. 
It doesn’t make him unorthodox because the Visuddhimagga presents many ways of contemplating Paramatthas in brief and group-wise. See Ditthivisuddhiniddesa.
A Pannatti of a group of Paramatthas (eg: 5khandas, 18dhatus etc.) is considered close to a Pannatti of a Paramattha (eg: Pathavi), afaik according to the texts. (I also remember ven. Maggavihari taught it).
Also the Pannattis of a dominating Paramattha of a multi-Paramattha group (eg: kesa as pathavi) allowed in Suttas.
Same for me. The parts that I have read from Ledi sayadw seem Classical, but further study is needed to conclude accurately.
The venerable regards highly about Ledi Sayadaw and he will consider him as Orthodox for sure.
Ven. Upasama (Patthana teacher) readily praise him as Orthodox and very wise, in his Sinhala talks. (sometimes mentions about the beliefs of sayadaw’s attainments even)
Regarding Ledi Sayadaw:
After he published his New Tika (Paramatthadipani) to Abhidhammatthasangaha which criticized the Old Tika (Vibhavini) in more than 200 places, many Burmese had started to protest against it.
Some had continued the protest but later some of them had given it up saying New Tika also a valuable work.
Some had said New Tika is also Orthodox even though it disagreed with many points of the Old Tika. Some justify both Tikas.
Some of the information from a Westerner’s point of view can be seen in the work below.
I highly doubt that ven pa-auk sayadawgyi believes that every mind moment can be known in present moment.
However, with taking past mind actions, the instructions are to look at the mind moments taking a particular memory action kamma etc, and vīthi of that happening, along with the causes.
I’m not sure where it says in the texts that every mind moment can be known by practitioners. Therefore I doubt such statements are not “controversial”. Just because billions of mind moments occur and cannot be all known as a present subject, does not mean we reject the occurrence. It is like being able to see the speed of light. We can do so with high speed cameras after it occurs in a review stage.
Hi, Ekocare. Not all Thai monasteries or monks are following the semi eternalist ideas.
Just as not all monks in Sri Lanka now are of Warahaka sect.
I know it. 
Once Ven. Dhammanando wrote that the semi-eternalist view is Ubiquitous in Thai Forest Tradition.
So I guess the majority of Orthodox monks are not affiliated to Thai Forest Tradition.
Wat Khao Sanamchai is one such great tradition in Thailand. On the other hand… that group helped establish the Pa-Auk Thailand center in Aungton.
I asked ven Maggavihari about Ven Ledi Sayadaw. He said that Ledi Sayadaw might be the most Theravada monk ever. (He was implying … “definitely so…” instead “most” which would open a can of worms for debate.
I want to say that the idea of rejecting the ability for non-Buddhas to not see mind moments is still very Theravada. It is said like this in relation to seeing “every mind moment.”… it is not saying that mind moments don’t happen. They do indeed happen.
In terms of practice of seeing vīthis, these are reviewed in past moments. Whether you agree or not, it is for sure that mahasi method too is missing mind moments and ultra present moments of awareness. It is a futile debate saying one is more theravada than the other… on the other hand… you don’t hear much about vīthis in Mahasi practice,
I don’t think this is much of a debate. I just split the post reply as a topic because I thought it was more of a unique topic.
I read Ledi Sayadaw works and it is definitely good Dhamma teachings.
I respect Venerable Ledi Sayadaw 
Let this thread be closed.
Definitely agreed that this thread or topic is not for debate.
Having read some his Venerable works, I have respect to Venerable Ledi Sayadaw’s knowledge in this wonderful teachings of Dhamma.
Let this thread be closed.
This is not really something we laymen can fathom. Until we are able to verify it by ourselves with direct experience, I sustained my judgement.
So far to what I read till now, Venerable Ledi Sayadaw is definitely of Theravada tradition.