If the Suttas are silent and you would interpret that it can/should be done by any posture, it is also fine to me.
A person may use Anapanasati to enter into Jhanas. But entering into Jhanas can be done by many ways, not only by Anapanasati. For example, Arahans can also use Nirvara as an object for medition to enter Jhanas (which ordinary men cannot do this). If we read Tripitaka and see anyone entering into Jhanas, should we assume that he has to start from Anapanasati? (The Suttas on the Buddha's death also did not mention Anapanasati.)
Moreover, the Buddha is the uncomparable skillful master on mediation. But we are just like students, if he can do something, it does not mean that students can/should do the same easily at the beginning stage. The students should follow what he taught.
I noted this report. First, this report does not say anything about Anapanasati, so please do not add it. Second, can any of us continue standing for only 10 hours for Anapanasati meditation? If many of us can do it, I will accept that a "beginner" can do Anapanasati by standing as it is practical for us to do so. In my view, please do not take the Buddha's practice level to teach the beginners. The Buddha already considered which is suitable for followers/beginners when he said any Sutta to teach people. I read many books of many Ajaans and have not seen anyone teaching anything contrary to the Suttas.
On the part of testing Anapanasati, please (a) take much longer time to test it (not just counting one to ten or hundred, as it is too short to understand difference/result), and (b) compare with sitting posture to see the difference and find out why the Sutta teachs to sit. Otherwise, if any person can do mindfulness and count one to ten during his swimming or running marathon, he may conclude the same.
In summary, if any of us practices meditation in any posture and it helps to improve meditation skill and develop mindfulness, please continue doing it regardless whether or not it may be callled Anapanasati. In fact, "name" does not matter for our real practice. However, if we are going to challenge the Sutta or teach beginners or public on anything contraty to the Suttas, please be careful and ensure that we have true knowledge (i.e. by being enlightened). I have never seen any Ajaans teaching anything contrary to the Suttas. On the contray, their discourses followed the Suttas.
I think that I spent sufficient time on explanation and already covered all issues I would like to raise. Many thanks for all who shared views and knowledge. My apologies if my comments create any unsatisfactoy to anyone including readers.
Kind regards




