text:
What does Buddhism teach about energy?
I am interested in what Buddhism has to say about the flow of energy in our lives.
(For clarification, by "energy" i am referring to the concrete aspects of stamina/fatigue, feeling tired or having the strength to go about your day. I realize the topic of energy is broad, and dealt with in different yogic, para-psychological or pseudo-scientific contexts, but those aspects are out of the scope of my question).
To the best of my knowledge, the extent of Buddhist commentaries regarding energy use concepts like indriyas/balanis and not least viriya. For instance, in AN 6.55 we can read that:

...when energy is too forceful it leads to restlessness. When energy is too slack it leads to laziness. So, Soṇa, you should apply yourself to energy and serenity, find a balance of the faculties, and learn the pattern of this situation.

https://suttacentral.net/an6.55/en/sujato
In SN 48.43 Buddha elaborates on the faculty of energy:

The faculty of energy is the power of energy, and the power of energy is the faculty of energy.

https://suttacentral.net/sn48.43/en/sujato
Possibly related, we can also read about piti, a feeling of energizing rapture (if you will) as a dhyana factor:

Here, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhāna, which consists of rapture and pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by thought and examination.

https://suttacentral.net/an5.28/en/bodhi
Seeing as tranquility in Buddhism is - arguably - given precedence over energizing i am assuming that the latter is somewhat subordinate, and dealt with to lesser degree than other Buddhist topics. Or am i wrong?
What else can Buddhism teach us about energies? (This is a reference request.)

"There are these eight grounds for the arousal of energy. Which eight?
"There is the case where a monk has some work to do. The thought occurs to him: 'I will have to do this work. But when I am doing this work, it will not be easy to attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't I make an effort beforehand for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the first grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has done some work. The thought occurs to him: 'I have done some work. While I was doing work, I couldn't attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't I make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the second grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has to go on a journey. The thought occurs to him: 'I will have to go on this journey. But when I am going on the journey, it will not be easy to attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't I make an effort beforehand for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the third grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has gone on a journey. The thought occurs to him: 'I have gone on a journey. While I was going on the journey, I couldn't attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't I make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the fourth grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk, having gone for alms in a village or town, does not get as much coarse or refined food as he needs to fill himself up. The thought occurs to him: 'I, having gone for alms in a village or town, have not gotten as much coarse or refined food as I need to fill myself up. This body of mine is light & suitable for work. Why don't I make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the fifth grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk, having gone for alms in a village or town, does get as much coarse or refined food as he needs to fill himself up. The thought occurs to him: 'I, having gone for alms in a village or town, have gotten as much coarse or refined food as I need to fill myself up. This body of mine is light & suitable for work. Why don't I make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?'[1] So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the sixth grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk comes down with a slight illness. The thought occurs to him: 'I have come down with a slight illness. Now, there's the possibility that it could get worse. Why don't I make an effort beforehand for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the seventh grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has recovered from his illness, not long after his recovery. The thought occurs to him: 'I have recovered from my illness. It's not long after my recovery. Now, there's the possibility that the illness could come back. Why don't I make an effort beforehand for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the eighth grounds for the arousal of energy.
"These are the eight grounds for the arousal of energy." - an8.95 https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN8_95.html

"May nothing remain but skin and sinews and bones; may flesh and blood dry up in the body! Not before having achieved what can be achieved by manly strength, manly energy, manly exertion shall my energy subside!"— MN 70

More on overcoming laziness and drowsiness;

"But, monks, when the mind is sluggish, that is the right time to cultivate the enlightenment-factor of investigation-of-states, the enlightenment-factor of energy, the enlightenment-factor of rapture.[2] What is the reason? A sluggish mind is easy to arouse by these factors. - aggi sutta

Some translations

Viriya - Energy (1,2), Effort (3), Persistence (4), Energy (5)

Nyanasatta Thera as (1), Piyadissa Thera (2), Burmese Pitaka (3), Thanissaro (4) Bhikkhu Bodhi (5)

Abhidhamma expression;

The energy of his searching, investigating and reasoning out thoroughly that same thing with wisdom, is strenuous, unshrinking. This is called energy-awakening-factor. (3)Therein what is energy-awakening-factor? That which is the arousing of mental energy. right effort, energy-awakening-factor, path constituent, included in the path. This is called energy-awakening-factor.
The mental inception of energy which there is on that occasion, the striving and the onward effort, the exertion and endeavour, the zeal and ardour, the vigour and fortitude, the state of unfaltering effort, the state of sustained desire, the state of unflinching endurance, the solid grip of the burden, energy, energy as faculty and as power, right endeavour—this is the energy that there then is.

Arousing energy from other texts;
Things are conducive to the abandonment of sloth and torpor:

Knowing that overeating is a cause of it;
Changing the bodily posture;
Resolving the perception of light;
Staying in the open air;
Noble friendship;
Suitable conversation. -Vsm

These things, too, are helpful in conquering sloth and torpor:

The recollection of Death; Today the effort should be made, Who knows if tomorrow Death will come?— MN 131

Perceiving the suffering in impermanence

In a monk who is accustomed to see the suffering in impermanence and who is frequently engaged in this contemplation, there will be established in him such a keen sense of the danger of laziness, idleness, lassitude, indolence and thoughtlessness, as if he were threatened by a murderer with drawn sword.— AN 7:46

Sympathetic joy

Cultivate the meditation on sympathetic joy! For by cultivating it, listlessness will disappear.— MN 62

Contemplation of the spiritual journey

"I have to tread that path which the Buddhas, the Paccekabuddhas and the Great Disciples have gone; but by an indolent person that path cannot be trodden."— Vism. IV,55

Contemplation of the Master's greatness

"Full application of energy was praised by my Master, and he is unsurpassed in his injunctions and a great help to us. He is honored by practicing his Dhamma, not otherwise."— Ibid.

Contemplation on the greatness of the Heritage

"I have to take possession of the Great Heritage, called the Good Dhamma. But one who is indolent cannot take possession of it."— Ibid.

How does one stimulate the mind at a time when it needs stimulation?

If due to slowness in the application of wisdom or due to non-attainment of the happiness of tranquillity, one's mind is dull, then one should rouse it through reflecting on the eight stirring objects. These eight are: birth, decay, disease and death; the suffering in the worlds of misery; the suffering of the past rooted in the round of existence; the suffering of the future rooted in the round of existence; the suffering of the present rooted in the search for food. — Vism. IV,63

The five threatening dangers

If, monks, a monk perceives these five threatening dangers, it is enough for him to live heedful, zealous, with a heart resolute to achieve the unachieved, to attain the unattained, to realize the unrealized. Which are these five dangers?

(1) Here, monks, a monk reflects thus: "I am now free from sickness, free from disease, my digestive power functions smoothly, my constitution is not too cool and not too hot, it is balanced and fit for making effort. But a time will come when this body will be in the grip of sickness. And one who is sick cannot easily contemplate upon the Teachings of the Buddha; it is not easy for him, to live in the wilderness or a forest or jungle, or in secluded dwellings. Before this undesirable condition, so unpleasant and disagreeable, approaches me, prior to that, let me muster my energy for achieving the unachieved, for attaining the unattained, for realizing the unrealized, so that, in the possession of that state, I shall live happily even in sickness."
(2) Reflect thus: "I am now young, a youth, young in age, black-haired, in the prime of youth, in the first phase of life. But a time will come when this body will be in the grip of old age. But one who is overpowered by old age cannot easily contemplate on the Teachings of the Buddha; it is not easy for him to live in the wilderness or a forest or jungle, or in secluded dwellings. Before this undesirable condition, so unpleasant and disagreeable, approaches me, prior to that, let me muster my energy for achieving the unachieved, for attaining the unattained, for realizing the unrealized, so that, in the possession of that state, I shall live happily even in old age."
(3) And further, monks, a monk reflects thus: "Now there is an abundance of food, good harvests, easily obtainable is a meal of alms, it is easy to live on collected food and offerings. But a time will come when there will be a famine, a bad harvest, difficult to obtain will be a meal of alms, it will be difficult to live on collected food and offerings. And in a famine people migrate to places where food is ample, and there habitations will be thronged and crowded. But in habitations thronged and crowded one cannot easily contemplate upon the Teachings of the Buddha. Before this undesirable condition, so unpleasant and disagreeable, approaches me, prior to that, let me muster my energy for achieving the unachieved, for attaining the unattained, for realizing the unrealized, so that, in the possession of that state, I shall live happily even in a famine."
(4) And further, monks, a monk reflects thus: "Now people live in concord and amity, in friendly fellowship as mingled milk and water and look at each other with friendly eyes. But there will come a time of danger, of unrest among the jungle tribes when the country people mount their carts and drive away and fear-stricken people move to a place of safety, and there habitations will be thronged and crowded. But in habitations thronged and crowded one cannot easily contemplate upon the Teachings of the Buddha. Before this undesirable condition, so unpleasant and disagreeable, approaches me, prior to that, let me muster my energy for achieving the unachieved, for attaining the unattained, for realizing the unrealized, so that, in the possession of that state, I shall live happily even in time of danger."
(5) And further, monks, a monk reflects thus: "Now the Congregation of Monks lives in concord and amity, without quarrel, lives happily under one teaching. But a time will come when there will be a split in the Congregation. And when the Congregation is split, one cannot easily contemplate upon the Teachings of the Buddha; it is not easy to live in the wilderness or a forest or jungle, or in secluded dwellings. Before this undesirable condition, so unpleasant and disagreeable, approaches me, prior to that, let me muster my energy for achieving the unachieved, for attaining the unattained, for realizing the unrealized, so that, in the possession of that state, I shall live happily even when the Congregation is split. — AN 5:78

At last a couple more Sutta excerpt;

“So, mendicants, when the senior mendicants left, why did you sleep until the sun came up, snoring?
What do you think, mendicants? Have you ever seen or heard of an anointed king who rules his whole life, dear and beloved to the country, while indulging in the pleasures of sleeping, lying, and drowsing as much as he likes?”
“No, sir.”
“Good, mendicants! I too have never seen or heard of such a thing.
What do you think, mendicants? Have you ever seen or heard of an appointed official … a hereditary official … a general … a village chief … or a guild head who runs the guild his whole life, dear and beloved to the guild, while indulging in the pleasures of sleeping, lying, and drowsing as much as he likes?”
“No, sir.”
“Good, mendicants! I too have never seen or heard of such a thing.
What do you think, mendicants? Have you ever seen or heard of an ascetic or brahmin who indulges in the pleasures of sleeping, lying, and drowsing as much as they like? Their sense doors are unguarded, they eat too much, they’re not dedicated to wakefulness, they’re unable to discern skillful qualities, and they don’t pursue the development of the qualities that lead to awakening in the evening and toward dawn. Yet they realize the undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life. And they live having realized it with their own insight due to the ending of defilements.”
“No, sir.”
“Good, mendicants! I too have never seen or heard of such a thing.
So you should train like this: ‘We will guard our sense doors, eat in moderation, be dedicated to wakefulness, discern skillful qualities, and pursue the development of the qualities that lead to awakening in the evening and toward dawn.’ That’s how you should train.” - AN6.17

Drowsiness, lethargy, lazy stretching,
Discontent, torpor after meals:
Because of this, here among beings,
The noble path does not appear.”
“Drowsiness, lethargy, lazy stretching,
Discontent, torpor after meals:
When one dispels this with energy,
The noble path is cleared.” -sn1.16

The first one is a copy of AN 8.80 isn't it?

Looks identical yes thanks for the link. A very good practice this arousal of energy is.

Can you look into the downvote on this answer? Lately I am seeing some strange downvotes without comments on pretty solid answers.

The software isn't showing any "suspicious voting patterns". And you received only two downvotes today, the previous one was a week ago, and the one before that 19 days ago -- not at all many in total, whether strange or otherwise.

As i understand it a downvote marks an answer as wrong or not useful and this here answer is neither. Therefore you should look into the voting patterns of whoever cast the downvote on this.

I see -- and I guess you're right, I don't see why someone might downvote this one. But I (i.e. a moderator) can't see who cast each specific vote, though I've some tools for detecting "serial downvoting" and "voting rings (i.e. fraud)". I really don't know if an SE employee has that ability, but I don't think it's worth trying to involve them when it's a matter of a single downvote.

@Ruslan I voted this answer down, because it is wrong and useless. It's a collection of empty words that have nothing to do with the Buddhist teaching on energy, copy/pasted by someone who can't even manage his own energy . (I'm absolutely not interested in arguing with you, so don't bother to respond)

What a comment to wake up to xD get help mate

@AndreiVolkov Would you care to share your view on the topic?

@Erik Perhaps you might like to read these answers (though they're not specifically to do with "concrete stamina").

@AndreiVolkov I upvoted this answer just for its mentioning "food", which no other answer had. I once asked a Sifu "How are you so strong?!", he had very little English but answered me, "Rice" (which I thought was a great answer).

a collection of all sutta references to sleeping
http://lucid24.org/sted/sleep/index.html
The two most important passages occur in these two suttas:
AN 3.16 shows the daily moment by moment typical routine, with sleep schedule. (about 4 hours a day sleeping is the typical amount for a monk)
AN 7.61 teaches 7 methods to ward off drowsiness, with sleeping in lion posture the last resort, and not to indulge in pleasures (sukha) of sleeping.
A closely related subject, http://lucid24.org/sted/maranassati/index.html
marana sati, shows the attitude of the Buddha towards sleep and making maximum usage of one's viriya/energy to accomplish nirvana before death strikes, and this is in a context of rebirth, where most beings would be reborn forgetting the lessons of the immediate previous life.

Bojjanga is a good starting point to understand this
You can start here: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN46_8.html
There is a whole body of knowledge and practice behind bojjanga which is usually well explained by a priest who practiced it well; If you are interested in achieving bojjanga rather than mere curiousity you likely will achieve it to an extent where you don't need others to verify it. To this effect Maha Satipattana Sutta practice 7 years to 7 days applies.
Regarding references from a priest in relation to thripitaka for bojjanga: Ambanpola Gnanawijaya Thero (pardon me for any wrong reference here) is an excellent place to start. Though it is in Sinhalese. (I can consider translation if someone is really keen on practice).
Kaya Sutya MN 5 2 . Unable to find English version
http://www.thripitakaya.org/tipitakaya/Index/138?s=2152

A question about "stamina/fatigue" might be partially answered with doctrine about "torpor".
Here are several references about the causes of torpor -- Denourishing of Sloth and Torpor
One of these is ...

Six things are conducive to the abandonment of sloth and torpor:

Knowing that overeating is a cause of it;
Changing the bodily posture;
Thinking of the perception of light;
Staying in the open air;
Noble friendship;
Suitable conversation.

... though I don't know what that's referencing (perhaps it's a paraphrase or summary, not a quote).
Several suttas mention "not creating new feelings (from overeating)"; and that (i.e. "the middle way") -- was sort of the first Buddhist doctrine even before the Buddha mentioned the noble truths:

In SN 56.11):

Mendicants, these two extremes should not be cultivated by one who has gone forth.

And perhaps more especially in the introduction to the Jataka (not that physical stamina, which is what you're asking about, is the explicit aim).

On the subject of "food" you might see also the Puttamaṃsa Sutta (SN 12.63) which mentions not only physical food, but also sensual contact (feeling), volition (craving), and consciousness (name and form) -- I get the impression that these might be exhausting or fatiguing, in the sense that these might take or involve whatever energy you have.

Interesting question; ultimately, as energy is a corporeal realm sort of concept(cf existential sorts of concepts), energy is impermanent and illusory. Of course there 'are' various types of energy, but the actual Teachings of The Buddha & most Branches of Buddhism only don't discuss much about electricity & other forms of energy directly, except indirectly in reference to corporeal concepts, examples of which are nicely cited in several Answers to this Question; and many behaviours, such as eating habits & occupation certainly affect energy. But Buddhist Teaching is more at existential concepts rather than a corporeal sciences guide. Appropriate life conduct & interaction etc is carefully & specifically addressed re following The Noble Eightfold Path & discerning The Four Noble Truths, which are central to Buddhism, and for which literature for which is of course helpfully pervasive & extensive; Textual references translated as energy tend to be more re illusoriness considerations
Suggested Reference Source(of several):
A History of the Philosphy of India, 5 Volumes, S. Dasgupta, 1922-1955, includes meticulously researched & detailed specific doctrinal features of several hundred different Branches of Buddhism(s), and much additional material


text:
Do any Buddhists say that everyone's Buddha nature repeats an infinite number of times?
Do any Buddhists say that everyone's Buddha nature repeats an infinite number of times? To be specific, I mean that everyone's -- including Sakyamuni's -- life, or perhaps just karma, is repeated over and over again, timelessly and forever. I'm asking, because I think that's what I believe [that's all].
The Fan Wang Ching says that Sakyamuni manifests billions of times, but does anything claim he appears an infinite number of times, or eternally [I don't mean permanent].

Previously on this site the first version of this topic -- How could we have so many past lives without reaching some degree of wisdom or enlightenment? -- generated a lot of answers which eventually moderators deleted as off-topic, because they were trying to explain modern-Mathematical understanding of what "infinite" means. Let's not repeat that...

Could you give an example of how you mean life repeats itself?

Infinity is surprisingly complicated, so let's look at what the Buddha said:

SN15.14:1.2: “Mendicants, transmigration has no known beginning. …  It’s not easy to find a sentient being who in all this long time has not previously been your mother.  Why is that? Transmigration has no known beginning. … This is quite enough for you to become disillusioned, dispassionate, and freed regarding all conditions.”

Given this understanding of transmigration leading back to "infinity" (or more precisely, "with no known beginning"), it is natural to ask about all the various Buddhas. So let's see what the Buddha says about the Buddha:

DN1:3.73.1: The Realized One’s body remains, but his attachment to rebirth has been cut off. As long as his body remains he will be seen by gods and humans.  But when his body breaks up, after life has ended, gods and humans will see him no more.

In this way, Buddhas appear and disappear, never to be seen again.
Regarding "Buddha-nature", one might perhaps refer to this:

MN121:13.1: Whatever ascetics and brahmins enter and remain in the pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness—whether in the past, future, or present—all of them enter and remain in this same pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness.

If you have a system with infinite distance and infinite elements, you will have infinite variance.
What does not change is the principle or the mechanics of the system. Ie a coinflip retains an average 50/50 probability as a principle across the immeasurable distance of various flips.
Therefore a system follows the same principles with infinite variance in the expression. In other words a coinflip is a coinflip no matter how many times a coin is flipped but no flipping of the coin is the same.
One can draw an analogy to language, as one can express the same meaning in an infinite variety of expression.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
What are the Buddhist guidelines for choosing the true Dhamma?
With many traditions and teachers to choose from, how should one go about figuring out what is the true Dhamma?
I prefer answers based on Buddhist scriptute and references to Sutta, ideally to the Buddha himself.
I welcome answers from all traditions just not opinion based.

[tag:reference-request] means you're not asking for opinion or explanation but only asking for references (e.g. to scripture). And I imagine you already know various references in/to the Pali suttas on that topic ... perhaps you'd like to change the question to ask more specifically for Mahayana references?

I want well referenced answers is what is meant. I know a lot but i am apparently not allowed to share. I might not know them all tho, so i would like to improve my knowledge and therefore i am curious about the answers.

Should i remove the tag?

Maybe not -- if you're asking "what is the Buddha's advice" it sounds like you're asking for a quote. The oddest thing about the use of tags is that normally [tag:theravada] means "please no mahayana answers to this question" and vice versa.

And there the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Now, bhikkhus, I shall make known to you the four great references. Listen and pay heed to my words." And those bhikkhus answered, saying:
"So be it, Lord."
Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.'
"In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve."
Footnote: In the earlier edition of this work, mahapadesa was rendered as "great authorities." It is now known that the proper meaning of apadesa is not "authority," but "reference" or "source." Besides, from the passage it is clear that there are only two real "authorities" — the Discourses (Suttas) and the Discipline (Vinaya).

Four Great References (DN 16)

There's a canonical description of the characteristics of the Dhamma:

The Dhamma is well declared by the Bhagavā:
visible here and now, immediate,
inviting to come and see, effective,
to be individually ascertained by the wise.
Dhammānussati

I've seen some people apparently try to use that too to discriminate, using arguments like, "if it isn't sandiṭṭhika then it's not true Dhamma".

I marked this answer due to the last sentence. What is the point of Dhammānussati if it is then ignored.

I try ti report what the text says. At least in theory it's possible to jump to a wrong conclusion when you start to use logic, especially when combined with negatives. For example the text might say, "The Dhamma is effective immediately."  -- then a person might use logic to add, "... therefore what's effective over the long term isn't Dhamma" -- but doing that wouldn't be a safe (justified) way to use logic. So I hesitate to say that or to report it as orthodox. Whether the reader chooses to do that might be "to be individually ascertained by the wise" instead of for me to argue using logic.

With many traditions and teachers to choose from, how should one figure out what is the true Dhamma?

From AN 8.53

"Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'

"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"

How do you know that you have arrived at the true Dhamma?
From MN 9:

Ven. Sariputta said, "When a disciple of the noble ones discerns what
is unskillful, discerns the root of what is unskillful, discerns what
is skillful, and discerns the root of what is skillful, it is to that
extent that he is a person of right view, one whose view is made
straight, who is endowed with verified confidence in the Dhamma, and
who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns nutriment,
the origination of nutriment, the cessation of nutriment, and the way
of practice leading to the cessation of nutriment, then he is a person
of right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns stress, the
origination of stress, the cessation of stress, and the way of
practice leading to the cessation of stress, then he is a person of
right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. (stress =
suffering) ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns aging &
death, the origination of aging & death, the cessation of aging &
death, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of aging &
death, then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at this
true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns birth, the
origination of birth, the cessation of birth, and the way of practice
leading to the cessation of birth, then he is a person of right
view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns becoming, the
origination of becoming, the cessation of becoming, and the way of
practice leading to the cessation of becoming, then he is a person of
right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns clinging, the
origination of clinging, the cessation of clinging, and the way of
practice leading to the cessation of clinging, then he is a person of
right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns craving, the
origination of craving, the cessation of craving, and the way of
practice leading to the cessation of craving, then he is a person of
right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns feeling, the
origination of feeling, the cessation of feeling, and the way of
practice leading to the cessation of feeling, then he is a person of
right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns contact, the
origination of contact, the cessation of contact, and the way of
practice leading to the cessation of contact, then he is a person of
right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns the six sense
media, the origination of the six sense media, the cessation of the
six sense media, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of
the six sense media, then he is a person of right view... who has
arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns name-&-form,
the origination of name-&-form, the cessation of name-&-form, and the
way of practice leading to the cessation of name-&-form, then he is a
person of right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns
consciousness, the origination of consciousness, the cessation of
consciousness, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of
consciousness, then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at
this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns fabrication,
the origination of fabrication, the cessation of fabrication, and the
way of practice leading to the cessation of fabrication, then he is a
person of right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns ignorance,
the origination of ignorance, the cessation of ignorance, and the way
of practice leading to the cessation of ignorance, then he is a person
of right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma. ...
"There would. When a disciple of the noble ones discerns (mental)
fermentation, the origination of fermentation, the cessation of
fermentation, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of
fermentation, then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at
this true Dhamma. ...

"Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' — then you should abandon them.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html

So he said to the Blessed One, "Master Gotama, with regard to the ancient hymns of the brahmans — passed down through oral transmission & included in their canon — the brahmans have come to the definite conclusion that "Only this is true; anything else is worthless." What does Master Gotama have to say to this?"

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.095x.than.html

Below is Venerable Guan Cheng's response below on similar question
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Buddhist_Temple
https://youtu.be/LUjqAajuvZk
We have to be careful in choosing the teachers we are listening to. Not all teachers are right in their explanation of Buddhism. The general criteria for judging whether a certain teacher is right or not is using The Four Seals of the Dharmas( 四法印) :
• Impermanence (Skt: Anitya): All phenomena are impermanent 諸行無常
• Non-self: (Skt: Anatman): All existence is devoid of inherent nature 諸法無我
• Suffering (Skt: Dhukkha): The world is imperfect and non-satisfactory. We are constantly experiencing changes, attaching to craving (such as lust and greed), which in turn leads to suffering.  諸漏皆苦
• Nirvana (Skt: Nirvana) A transcendent state in which there is neither suffering, desire nor delusion of self.  The subject is liberated from the effects of karma and the cycle of death and rebirth.  It is the perfect state of bliss, peace and equanimity. 寂靜涅槃.
In other words, if the teacher’s teaching has not departed from the four Dharmas as indicated above, then his teaching should be regarded as within the parameters of Buddhism.
Do not be afraid of listening to more than one teacher, as long as you are careful and maintain some queries (or doubts) in your mind about the authenticity of his teaching.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
What's the advice for dealing with an abusive partner?
How would one deal with a verbally or otherwise abusive partner who gets upset over nothing and let's anger loose?
Assuming the abuser realizes they have a problem but are unable to solve the behavioral issue.
How could one best advise everyone involved in such a relationship based on the Buddhist texts & practices?
Would be great if answers are referenced but it's not a requirement.
Thanks

I think the texts are ambiguous -- they generally have advice which ranges from, "there's no fellowship with a fool", to, "it can be great if the partners are equal and/or well-behaved and living in tune", to, "your morality (including e.g. good-will) should be unconditional".
If the "abuser" can't solve the issue then in my experience that requires external intervention (e.g. a doctor or psychiatrist), and/or a change in the situation or relationship or the way in which the couple communicates (e.g. relationship counsellor or therapist of some sort), and/or possibly divorce lawyers.
If it isn't psychiatric then consider it may be a psychological problem, like post-traumatic stress.
If the problem persists perhaps the partners suffer from learned helplessness ...

Over the past few decades, neuroscience has provided insight into learned helplessness and shown that the original theory actually had it backwards: the brain's default state is to assume that control is not present, and the presence of "helpfulness" is what is actually learned.

... or perhaps "ignorance" about how to solve it -- so do, try to find help if you can't solve it.
I also suggest you might think it's the other person's problem ("they're the abuser who misbehaves, I am the victim") but when you're in a relationship it's not that simple -- if you went to Al-Anon/Alateen meetings for example you might hear how the behaviour of the family permits or cooperates with the continued misbehaviour.
A counsellor might provide some neutral ground and ensure that both parties are listened to.
A separation (a least a temporary or trial one) might be an option, to explore or consider -- or even just a holiday -- or some other agreement, perhaps a renegotiation of fundamental premises (like "who is expected to do what, and when?"), which a counsellor might suggest.
Beware that people have limits -- if one person is so stressed that they behave irrationally, the other partner too might be vulnerable (to stress and irrationality and abusive behaviour) even if to a different extent/manifestation.
Being too generous or permissive of bad behaviour might be harmful, a teacher (or a paid counsellor) might help to assess if you're going too far.
Unconditional love might in the end be the greatest thing -- or perhaps it's foolish -- who knows, perhaps it's up to you.

Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.
Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow.
"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.
There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die. But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.

This might be relevant to your question too -- Reconciliation, Right & Wrong -- and might match some of the things I suggested, e.g. ...

A monk seeking reconciliation with a lay person follows a similar pattern, with another monk, on friendly terms with the lay person, acting as mediator.

... suggests that having a third-person neutral/friendly counsellor might help to repair a relationship.

In the Sujāta-sutta the Buddha speaks of seven types of wives, The first three kinds are heading for unhappiness in this life and the next the last 4 are heading for happiness in this life or the next. The same can be said for the male spouse.
When someone is doing something to you it is almost always because of something you have done previously in this life or earlier. Therefore if you don't patiently tolerate all the abuse hurled towards you the bad kamma won't be extinguished as you are creating more kamma. This just leads to an infinite cycle where you will always be with someone who is abusive in a lot of births.
Best course of action would either be to tolerate everything that keeps happening or you somehow find a way to break off from the relationship without hurting your partner.


text:
Can a monk live with a male lay person?
I've found a similar question;
Are theravada monks allowed to stay in lay people's house?
However it was asked by a woman and nobody answered otherwise.
What i wonder is if there are any restrictions on living in the same house as a male lay disciple and relying on the lay person for alms and requisites?
Thank you.

A Bhikkhu is restricted to max. three nights sleeping under the same roof with lay-people, better Non-Bhikkhus (which incl. novices and some Nikayas incl. animal as well).
"Under one roof" is also seen often differently, sometimes technical in regard of roof seen, sometimes as matter of touch each other ("privacy"), as the origin story suggest that it's a matter of danger of lose of respect toward monk(s) if seeing ordinary things while he sleeps...etc.
As for the practice (for those in training) it's actually not good for Bhikkhus (but also for others after Paths/fruits) to spend even short time in near association with "non-likewise" or "lower".
It's how ever great goodness if a mature Bhikkhu let a non-Bhikkhu dwell near for a while.
General is near association, living near, with householder and real novices not good and often encouraged to avoid by the Sublime Buddha, not to speak of improper association or dependency.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades but for escape from this wheel.]

A monk may not spend more than 3 nights with a layman (Theravada vinaya). However...over time, some traditions have managed to find loopholes in this to deal with some practical difficulties (for example, a temporarily crowded monastery where some laymen need to be housed in bhikkhu quarters or vice versa).
The loophole I have seen used is this: It's not considered "spending a night" if one of you leaves the dwelling before sunrise. In this way, the 3 day limit has been extended indefinitely. Some orders are fine with this, some don't like it.


text:
Are absences empty / conceptual constructions, according to all Buddhists?
Are absences empty / conceptual constructions, according to all Buddhists? Or is it -- perhaps -- a fact independent of language that there is no elephant in this room? Does anyone know?

A key underlying principle of the vināśitvānumāna is that negative
facts, such as absences, are not part of the ultimate furniture of the
world, but are just fictional conceptual constructions, as they are
devoid of causal powers.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dharmakiirti/

Is this question different from https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/31223/is-this-an-ok-understanding-of-dharmakirtis-vin%C4%81%C5%9Bitv%C4%81num%C4%81na ?

yes, cos i'm asking about all buddhism, not just Dharmakirti thanks for reminding me tho @Erik

Are absences empty / conceptual constructions
I thought this answer implied that an absence is unconstructed:

So the absence of remorse is conditioned, but not being an existing thing, not having been constructed (sankharaed)-- it was the result of not-doing, is not itself subject to ending and is a small taste of Nibbana.

is it -- perhaps -- a fact independent of language that there is no elephant in this room?
I don't know -- sense-contact with the room gives rise to various perceptions, but none which I would label "elephant".
they are devoid of causal powers
You're saying that as if that's a bad thing. :-)

too meta for me, sorry

Just the the last sentence, or all of it?

i just mean your referring to an answer in your answer ha

Almost all my answers have a reference. This reference was to an answer written by Mike Olds, who's the author/editor of http://obo.genaud.net/ -- I think that answers your questions about whether "according to all Buddhists" absences are constructions -- i.e. there's a straightforward sense in which an absence is unconstructed.

it's a nice site, but who is he? it sounds enormously heterodox

It is nice, isn't it. That's all I know of him, except what he posts on this site occasionally. If his nickname is "ol'begga ols", perhaps he is or was a monk.

Ākiṃcanyāyatana आकिंचन्यायतना or Ākiñcaññāyatana आकिञ्चञ्ञायतन (Tib:
ci yang med; Chinese: 无所有处/無所有處; Jpn: 無所有処 mu sho u sho; Burmese:
အာကိဉ္စညာယတန; Thai: อากิญฺจญฺญายตน or อากิํจนฺยายตน; Devanagari: /)
"Sphere of Nothingness" (literally "lacking anything"). In this sphere
formless beings dwell contemplating upon the thought that "there is no
thing". This is considered a form of perception, though a very subtle
one. This was the sphere reached by Ārāḍa Kālāma (Pāli: Āḷāra Kālāma),
the first of the Buddha's original teachers; he considered it to be
equivalent to enlightenment. Total life span on this realm in human
years – 60,000 Maha Kalpa.

Taken literally, it implies nothingness and absences are empty.


text:
Can you explain how cessation of existence is known to be possible?
People from other sects may argue against Buddhism on the following grounds.
I invite the community of BSE to explain by reasoning or analogy how cessation of existence, which is known as the Nibbana-principle, as it is explained in Buddhism, isn't a philosophical fallacy of "something turning into nothing" in order to refute those arguments.
I call the idea of "something turning into nothing" a fallacy because it can be explained to contradict the law of conservation of energy or simply put; supposedly no existant thing known to a man is known to simply disappear without a trace and thus destroyed without being somehow transformed into some other state, in particular neither matter, nor energy or information can be deleted without a trace, afaik this has been experimentally established as a truth.
If cessation of existence, an abandoning of all being with no fuel for a future is possible, then how is it logically acceptable?
You are welcome to try showing how "something turning into nothing" is not a fallacy if you want to try that.
Extra points if you substantiate your answer with EBTs.
Put shortly the problem here is such that a person says; 'Buddha Gotama teaches annihilaton and it's impossible, it cannot happen that existant things can be annihilated.'
It's a strawman argument.

What's the source for your "something turning into nothing" quote? And how did you make the conclusion that "cessation of existence" means "an abandoning of all being with no fuel for a future"?

"When delight and existence are utterly exhausted,
when perception & consciousness are both destroyed,
when feelings cease and are appeased - thus, O friend,
do I know, for them that live
deliverance, freedom, detachment."
Saṃyutta Nikāya 1.2
Nimokkha Sutta

“One perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ Just as, when a fire of twigs is burning, one flame arises and another flame ceases, so one perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ On that occasion, friend, I was percipient: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna.’”
Aṅguttara Nikāya 10.7
Sāriputta Sutta

The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease.
Having understood the unconditioned state,
Released in mind with the cord of being destroyed,
They have attained to the Dhamma-essence.
Delighting in the destruction (of craving),
Those stable ones have abandoned all being. Itivuttaka 44

Now, from the remainderless cessation & fading away of that very craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering. This is the ending of the world." Loka Sutta Sn12.44

Those are the passages that may be argued to be the basis for that question As to the  source for "something turning into nothing" quote, it's the position i presented, not a quote.

I understand. I won't be able to answer this without going off-topic. Perhaps someone else can.

You can go off-topic if you want mate. I welcome answers in whatever terms possible.

@Erik If you were willing to answer in chat, no topic is off-topic there.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

i find this question confusing, and feel you may be asking too many things at once

@sorta_buddhist i am so sorry :) anything in particular you want clarified?

not really, i mean i understand the phrases

It is a confusing question for sure. One needs not to argue against a strawman argument in general because it is a misrepresentation of the doctrine that is criticized. Here however i was looking for a good expression to address the confusion which promts the question. Another way to pose the question, would be; 'How is Buddhism not annihilationism?'. I wsn

Answering that would establish the argument "buddhism is flawed because something turns to nothing" as a misrepresentation. I wanted to narrow it down a bit to get some good ideas for the expression to address the confusion and explain the doctrine.

This question, although seemingly coherent, is a Category Error at its foundation. The “cessation of existence” in Buddhism refers to manifestations of mind, not the ‘dematerialization’ of things inhabiting the objective reality of Science to which the law of conservation of energy can be applied. Whether, or not, there is any relation between the two is an entirely different question.
The added quotations that you gave, all refer to perceptions, not the ‘things’ perceived, and specifically, perceptions that manifest in mind, or disappear thereby.
The difficulty for one inhabiting a scientific (reduced) frame, is that “mind” in that frame has no correlation to the semantic target of that word’s usage in Buddhism. This is an irreconcilable divide between the two domains.
For example, in Quantum Physics, quanta have various qualities, two of which are “color” and “charm,” neither of which has anything to do with being charming or colorful, and yet, their incongruous uses do not cause any difficulty because they are still being used as “qualities.” With “mind” it is a completely different situation.

I'll use the analogy of the Lute Sutta.
You hear beautiful music coming out of a lute, a stringed musical instrument. If you break it down into its constituent parts, you cannot find music anywhere.
Similarly, reification (papanca) creates the idea of the self, and also the idea of all the non-self things and their relationship to the self. When the existence of the self i.e. the mental idea of the self ("I am the thinker" - from Snp 4.14) ceases, then suffering ceases.
The music in the analogy is the self. The lute in the analogy is the being or satta (Vajira Sutta), an assemblage of the five aggregates.
The different parts of the lute are like the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, mental formation and consciousness. Similar to how different parts of the lute work together to make music, the five aggregates work together according to dependent origination to build up and keep functioning the existence of the self, which is just a mental idea.
By cultivating wisdom, one eventually attains Nirvana, uprooting ignorance. Dependent origination is like a row of cards, the first of which is ignorance. When ignorance falls, the five clinging aggregates (SN 22.48) cease, hence the tainted version of mental formation, consciousness, name-and-form, six sense bases, contact and feeling, all fall. However, the (non-clinging) aggregates remain, which is what is meant by the Nibbana element with fuel remaining in Iti 44. With this, craving, clinging, becoming / existence, birth (the idea of a self) and suffering (aging, death and this entire mass of suffering) all fall and cease.
So, in this case, the lute remains, but no music comes out of it anymore. It may make sounds (i.e. the operation of the five aggregates), but it does not make sweet music (the self) any more. The arahat can feel the physical sensations of pain and pleasure, but does not suffer from them. The arahat can also have intentions and plans, without being tainted with defilements and the three poisons.
When the arahat's physical body dies, it's referred to as Nibbana element without fuel remaining in Iti 44. Here, the lute is broken into pieces and no sound comes out of it anymore. The five aggregates are no longer experienced. Also, the appearance of a being (satta), the assemblage of the five aggregates ceases. This is an emergent phenomena.
Back to the original analogy of the lute - when you break down the lute into its constituent parts, you cannot find music. There is no single thing or object such as music. It is simply an emergent phenomena that appears when different parts of the lute work together.
Upon Nirvana, what disappears is the emergent phenomena of a self - a mental idea, and also the rest of the reification of non-self mental ideas that relate ideas of the world to the self. Nothing concrete gets destroyed. No single object or thing that can be isolated gets destroyed.
Upon the physical death of the arahat, what disappears is the emergent phenomena of a being (satta), the assemblage of the five aggregates.
What is an emergent phenomena? If you arrange pebbles on a beach to look like a human face, then from the sky you can see the emergent phenomena, which is the form of a human face. But if you look closely, it's just an arrangement of pebbles.
To say that there is a concrete object called music or in this case the self - is eternalism. To say that there is no music at all or in this case, no self at all - is annihilationism. Instead, we explain the emergent phenomena of music by way of how it emerges from the inter-working of the different parts of the lute. Similarly, we explain the emergent phenomena of the self by the inter-working of the five aggregates, by means of dependent origination. This is discussed in the Acela Sutta.
Just like music, the lute is also an emergent phenomena - it is composed of various parts. Similarly, the self and the being are also emergent phenomena.
The self understood as an emergent phenomena, is the concept of anatta (not-self). The self and being understood as emergent phenomena that is objectified and classified by the mind into concrete things, is the concept of papanca (reification).
"Turning something into nothing" combines eternalism (something) and annihilationism (nothing). Instead, the explanation above takes the middle way of dependent origination and emergent phenomena.

Another analogy similar to the lute analogy is that of the scent of a flower in Khemaka Sutta.
A similar discussion occurs in the Yamaka Sutta on whether the Buddha ceases to exist after death. There it is proven that Buddha as a person is also an emergent phenomena that is not something concrete or something that can be isolated as a single object or thing.

Addendum based on discussions in the comments:
As answered by Andrei, "existence" in "cessation of existence" refers to bhava. Sometimes also translated as "becoming".
This is on the chain of dependent origination after clinging and before birth (the mental idea of the self). Cessation of existence is really cessation of the mental idea of the self, which is a reification, along with the reification that objectifies and classifies things into non-self objects according to their relationship to the self.
It's the cessation of the mental ideas that lead to suffering, which is next on the chain of dependent origination after birth. "Cessation of existence" is not cessation of the non-clinging aggregates. Of course, when ignorance ceased, the clinging aggregates ceased.
For e.g. a piece of cooked meat. To a non-vegetarian, it's delicious food. To a vegan, it's a disgusting thing.  If the vegan becomes a arahat, he drops thinking "I am a vegan", "this is my car"  and he sees cooked meat as what it really is, rather than associating with his self-identity.
These mental ideas are reification of emergent phenomena, that leads to suffering. The cause of it leads back down the chain of dependent origination all the way to ignorance.

Can you explain this part "Here, the lute is destroyed completely." The argument in the OP is that this is impossible, otherwise you aren't answering the question lest i am missing something or am mistaking.

@Ruslan I've changed it into "Here, the lute is broken into pieces and no sound comes out of it anymore. The five aggregates are no longer experienced."

@Ruslan Updated further. Not just the self. The being is also an emergent phenomena.

@Ruslan I have added a conclusion: "Turning something into nothing" combines eternalism (something) and annihilationism (nothing). Instead, the explanation above takes the middle way of dependent origination and emergent phenomena.

I like parts of your answer but i think it's not clear how you tied things together to answer the question. In particular i like the part explaning how there is a perception of things that are not there, as an abstraction of what is but i just fail to see where you were going with it.

I think the point you were making is that existence of objects can't be pinned down and therefore there is nothing to annihilate. The argument is that existence of form, feeling and consciousness can very much be pinned down tho, it may not be a self or a being but their existence and coming into play is undeniable.

@Ruslan As answered by Andrei, "existence" in "cessation of existence" refers to bhava. Sometimes also translated as "becoming". This is on the chain of dependent origination after clinging and before birth (the mental idea of the self). Cessation of existence is really cessation of the mental idea of the self, which is a reification, along with the reification that objectifies and classifies things into non-self objects according to their relationship to the self. It's the cessation of the mental ideas that lead to suffering, which is next on the chain of dependent origination after birth.

@Ruslan "Cessation of existence" is not cessation of anything else like form, feeling, perception, mental formation and consciousness. I'll add these to the answer as an addendum.

@Ruslan In any case, form, feeling, perception, consciousness and mental formation are all sankhara - conditioned and compounded things. They exist, but they don't exist standalone - they either depend on other things or are composed of other things. In a sense, these are also emergent phenomena that can be objectified and classified by the mind into concrete objects. Just because they are emergent phenomena, does not mean they are unreal.

'I have attained this path to Awakening, .. from the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of consciousness, from the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. ... " https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.065.than.html sounds like cessation of consciousness is very much a thing...

Anyway no need to discuss further, this is not a good format for discussion.  thank you for answering.

@Ruslan Yes! That's the cessation of the tainted version of the nidanas - which are part of the five clinging aggregates, which also ceased. The non-clinging aggregates did not cease, however. Please also see Burden Sutta.

Let's assume for the sake of entertaining of the idea that the claim is correct, still. What about not tainted version, is an arahant without consciousness? Obviously not. Is the arahant's consciousness permanent? Obviously not. How is it then not subject to cessation? Obviously it is subject to cessation.

@Ruslan This is where Iti 44 comes into the picture. The arahat's non-clinging consciousness ceases completely at physical death. But even when he is alive, it conditionally rises and ceases from moment to moment.

The question i was all along asking is how this cessation of existence to be explained. Now i am even more confused as to why you said; ""Cessation of existence" is not cessation of anything else like form, feeling, perception, mental formation and consciousness. I'll add these to the answer as an addendum."

@Ruslan I understand the confusion. Ignorance ceased at Nirvana. Thus the next on the chain of dependent origination also ceased - mental formation, consciousness, name-and-form, six sense bases, contact and feeling - all ceased, but only the tainted version of them, because they are part of the clinging aggregates.  The non-clinging aggregates did not cease. When clinging feeling nidana ceased, then the next on the chain - craving, clinging, existence, birth (mental idea of self) and suffering ceased.

@Ruslan Updated: "Cessation of existence" is not cessation of the non-clinging aggregates. Of course, when ignorance ceased, the clinging aggregates ceased.

I understood your point. What about parinibbana then, quoting from iti44; "The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease." Clearly this is a cessation of existence of "non-clinging aggregates", or do you disagree?

@Ruslan "Existence" is a technical term that applies to the nidana after clinging and before birth. It doesn't refer to existence of everything. It refers to "I want to exist", "I want to become"

Do you mean bhava? The iti44 quote i referenced; Anupādisesā pana samparāyikā,
Yamhi nirujjhanti bhavāni sabbaso. So it would be fair to say that cessation of "all modes of being" implies cessation of non-clinging aggregates.

@Ruslan The word "bhava" means "exist". Yes. But in the context of Nirvana, "cessation of existence" refers to the nidana of bhava, not to other types of existence. Other words have additional contexts too. Like "clinging" can also be a monkey clinging to a tree branch.

But that is just false because the Iti44 quote talks about the breakup of the arahants body and uses that very term, according to yourself an arahant has already abandoned all being tied to the clinging (hence is called an arahant), so what other being is there left to abandon? You yourself admit that the consciousness of an arahant is impermanent, so why do you have a problem saying that it ceases to exist?

@Ruslan Yes. In that context, the non-clinging aggregates cease to exist. But the reason for that is physical death, not Nirvana. Even for unenlightened people, their form will cease to exist at death, isnt it?

But ordinary people do not abandon all being, there is a picking up of another body, causes for a future are not extinct, so there is dependent origination of consciousness etc, furthermore normally consciousness arises as one thing and ceases as another. For an Arahant this doesn't occur, all modes of being utterly cease and there is no future existence. Aggregates utterly cease.

@Ruslan At Nirvana, suffering ceases. While Nirvana is not attained, suffering continues. But it's just suffering that continues. Not my suffering or your suffering or his suffering or her suffering.  Remember the story of monk Sati in MN 38 - there's no permanent consciousness that wanders through life and becomes reborn onto another life. Consciousness is always dependently originated. It's not my consciousness or your consciousness. This is about "anatta".

My question was how can this existence utterly cease. For an ordinary person at death contact is one end, origination of contact is another end, cessation of contact is the middle and craving is the seamstress; for an arahant contact ceases and thats the end of all suffering because all impermanent phenomena are sankha-dukkhata and all impermanent phenomena cease at parinibbana. My question was in regards to philosophy of this exact cessation, not about the doctrine of a self. I don't mind your answer i just think it's unclear to me, maybe i am stupid or your answer isn't very good:)

@Ruslan Understand. You're thinking about the rebirth linking consciousness of the Abhidhamma, but this is not found in the Pali suttas. The closest I can find to it is in SN 44.9 - "when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time." But what is a being? In this context, it probably comes from SN 23.2. But there's no soul in Buddhism, so what is that?

@Ruslan From SN 23.2 - "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'" This can only be a mental idea of a being (similar to what is in Snp 4.14 - "I am the thinker").

I think it's off-topic but there is also reference to beings looking for birth in the metta sutta; 'Those born and to-be-born — May all beings be at ease!'. There is also the Gandhabba involved with conception. I've never thought much about it, seems kind of clear that consciousness doesn't normally cease altogether to arise a new in the next moment but arising as one thing it ceases as another, past is one end, future is another end,  present is the middle and craving as seamstress. Nothing else is like that, so it's not fair to say that consciousness arises and ceases every moment.

If one says that consciousness arises and ceases every moment, that can be misunderstood as if it arises as one thing and ceases as the same thing, then arises and ceases as another thing. The difference is very crucial, afaik there has historicall been a lot of controversy and harsh criticism on this basis.

@Ruslan The theory based on Ajahn Buddhadasa's writings may be unorthodox but it is of interest - from this sutta "When a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained". The word for "body" here is "kaya" which can be interpreted as "collection" or "heap" instead of "body", referring to the five clinging aggregates. This is consistent with the Burden Sutta.

@Ruslan This means that the being (a mental idea) defined in SN 23.2, puts down its five clinging aggregates in one moment, and is craving sustained, till it picks it up again in the next moment.

@Ruslan Thank you for introducing me to the seamstress - AN 6.61. "“Name, reverends, is one end. Form is the second end. Consciousness is the middle. And craving is the seamstress" - that's the first sutta I have seen connecting name (mind) and form (body) with consciousness

@Ruslan "Moment" above refers to birth - so the birth of the idea of the self.

That (buddhadasa assertion )makes no sense to me because it would imply that something which can be grasped with wrong view as personal for this or that being is apart and elsewhere than aggregates and is otherwise sustained when inbetwen their cessation and arising. These kind of assertions even tho denied as; 'the person here cannot be said to be identical to the aggregates or different to them'. This looks very similar to pudgalovada views which were criticized by Vibhajavadins. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pudgalavada

@Ruslan Yes. Pudgalavadins say there is a being who is literally born, dies, born, dies and attains nirvana. But based on Buddhadasa's ideas, this being is just a mental idea, that dies and is reborn from "moment" to "moment" i.e. dropping and picking up the five clinging aggregates from "moment" to "moment". And in between, it is sustained by craving.

@Ruslan that means dependent origination occurs from "moment" to "moment", causing the birth and death of the mental idea of the self, and in between is sustained by craving.

Well ideas do not exist apart from aggregates, that which is vinnana is also called mano [mind] and citta [intellect] and ideation is dependent on contact on the mind base. Therefore there can be no ideation without mind-base contact, when there is contact there is feeling etc

@Ruslan Well, it's not that the being (mental idea) literally drops and picks up the five clinging aggregates. It's more like the five clinging aggregates rebuilds the mental idea of the being (and self) from moment to moment. Recall Dhammapada 154 - "O house-builder, you are seen! You will not build this house again. For your rafters are broken and your ridgepole shattered. My mind has reached the Unconditioned; I have attained the destruction of craving."

Whether it literally drops it or is rebuilt by them, what matter is if it is one thing and aggregates are another, if it is produced by aggregates or one among them and does it exist in the context of the aggregates, is it included or is it repudiating the aggregates,  and on what basis it's existence is postulated. I prefer setting this question aside because it's way too difficult to pin this doctrine down here in the comment section.

@Ruslan - ok, we will stop here. The moderators will probably move this to chat.

If cessation of existence, an abandoning of all being with no fuel for a future is possible, then how is it logically acceptable?

You are welcome to try showing how "something turning into nothing" is not a fallacy if you want to try that.

There's no proof needed because the premise was already wrong to begin with. There was never really "something" to begin with! It's ignorance and delusion that cook up a concept or a label of "something" from a bunch of nothings, ie. due to ignorance, there's notion of a "Ruslan" entity, a "something" other than just the Five Aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness. So, no, Buddhism never proposes "something turning into nothing" for the simple reason that that "something" was never really truly exist. Once ignorance, delusion, and craving have been removed, the law of conservation of energy won't be violated, for the Five Aggregates would simply be returned to their natural entropy state. They just won't come together to form subsequent bundles of Aggregates called Ruslan, or Peter, or Jane, or whatever in the future simply because the glue and the bonds (ignorance, craving, hatred, etc.) were completely broken.

This is what the Blessed One said. Having said this, the Fortunate One, the Teacher, further said this:

“Form is like a lump of foam,
Feeling like a water bubble;
Perception is like a mirage,
Volitions like a plantain trunk,
And consciousness like an illusion,
So explained the Kinsman of the Sun." ~~ SN 22.95 ~~

In the original Pali, the word usually translated as "existence" is "bhava".
Bhava means individual existence, that is, existence as something or someone, existence in a particular way. Bhava means identification with certain form of existence: "this is how I exist, this is my way of being, this is my form, this is my bound".
Cessation of bhava is exactly cessation of this small-minded thinking. It is cessation of attachment to a certain mode, cessation of identification with it, cessation of self-limitation, cessation of bounds.
When you no longer define yourself, you no longer demand the world to be a certain way. When you don't expect the world to be a certain way - there is no basis for suffering to arise.
What remains is the bliss of suchness.
The experience is somewhat similar to the bliss of reciprocated love: just like when you abandon your fears of being who you are in front of your beloved, and for the first time can be deeply authentic and spontaneous with the person you love, whose judgement is important to you - similarly, when you abandon any and all definition of self and (its mirror reflection) the wishing for the world to be a certain way, in other words when you drop the deeply rooted fear of something going a wrong way, then, for the first time in a long time (and maybe the first time ever!) you can be completely and perfectly free from second-guessing yourself, free from the fear of judgement, free from all comparison and categorization, free to spontaneously express the sheer vast open precious immovable unmistakable unshakable joyful truth of being what you truly are.

Toss a pebble into (or, "a frog jumps into") a pond. That creates waves on the surface of the pond. Those waves may eventually disappear again.
I'm not sure what the physical explanation is, for that physical phenomenon of (relative) stillness returning -- is it Turbulence, becoming Heat? Surface Tension? Entropy? Dilution? -- but that (i.e. waves disturbing the surface of a pond) seems to me an analogy of something's "appearing and disappearing".
Even then the analogy may be too ideal or invented, made-up. Is a real pond ever really still? Or is that an invention, an idealisation, the sort of simplified assumption which physicists are accustomed to working with?
I once read a joke about a post-scientific society understanding Newton's inverse square law of gravity -- the "attraction between two objects is proportional to the inverse square of the distance between them" -- as being a statement about young love (i.e. "lovers close together are attracted to each other"). That's a joke because it's really meant to be a law of physics, and completely unrelated to psychology.
I'm not sure that Physical principles (e.g. "Conservation of Energy") or analogies translate well to the realm of Buddhism. For example if you have a fleeting desire, where did it go? Does a desire have any energy, i.e. as measured in Joules -- can a desire move mountains, anything like that -- or cause a rock to float, perhaps?
Part of what disappears in Buddhism is "ignorance", isn't it? Where does that "go" or cease to exist? It's not a physical thing.
The other thing is, that what "ceases" are sankharas. It's not that they "cease to exist" entirely, exactly, but they come apart, they're unmade. What happens when you burn a wooden cart -- where is the cart then, and where is the wood?

Doesn't the existence of water in a mirage cease to exist when one approach near and investigate? In the same way ignorance disappear with the light of wisdom.
The Buddha teach annihilation of ignorance to end suffering.

i'm not saying it was sky flowers haha

The Buddha does speak about an end of the world;

"And what is the ending of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. Now, from the remainderless cessation & fading away of that very craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering. This is the ending of the world. Sn12.44

The world here is defined thus;

Whatever in the world through which you perceive the world and conceive the world is called the world in the training of the noble one. Sn35.116

If this is reconciled with the definition of All;

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."sn35

Then he is here shown talking about an end of All, given that the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & the intellect are explicitly called a world and the seen, heard, smelled, tasted, sensed & ideation are conceived & perceived by that which is explicitly called the world.
I think at this point it can be inferred that as far as the conception & perception based on the six senses goes that is as far as the law of conservation goes.
Therefore one only has to show that conception & perception based on the six senses is dependent on requisite causes & conditions and that it does not occur without causes & conditions to show that All can cease if the causes cease, one who argues that it is impossible & it cannot happen that the causes would cease would have to prove otherwise if the dependent origination is shown.
Therefore even if the All is conceived & perceived as indestructible due to causal requisites it can be explained that with the exhaustion of causal conditions the conception & perception of All would cease no matter how it is conceived.
Sutta gives this analogy for the dependent origination  & cessation;

"Very well then, Kotthita my friend, I will give you an analogy; for there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said. It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name & form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of suffering & stress.
"If one were to pull away one of those sheaves of reeds, the other would fall; if one were to pull away the other, the first one would fall. In the same way, from the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of consciousness, from the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."an4.174

The meaning of this imo is made quite obvious in the context of Einstein's thought experiment of the moving train and two lightnings which makes it quite obvious that as far as objectification by senses goes that is as far as conception & perception of the world goes.
In the thought experiment  we conceive & perceive two conceptions & perceptions of the world occuring in the world and the two are not the same & are occurring independently of one another.
It can be reasoned that if one did not occur then perception & conception of the worĺd would not occur for this or that person but the world would not be destroyed in as far as it is still perceived & conceived by another, thus laws of conservation would be obeyed and a cessation of a world in a definitive sense would've occurred.
It can also be inferred that postulating an ultimate frame of reference that is independent of an observer would objectify non-objectification.
When requisite conditions for that in the world which conceives & perceives the world are extinct, then the world is extinct and it does not matter if it is conceived as indestructible due to laws of conservation because these too only go as far as conception goes.
Therefore this shows that there can be a cessation of a world in a definitive sense in as far as the requisite conditions for a consciousness are extinguished, there being no consciousness established there is no interference-observation & no collapse of the wave function can occur.

SN22.55
"Were someone to say, 'I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from fabrications,' that would be impossible.
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of form ...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of feeling ...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of perception ...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of fabrications ...
"If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no base for consciousness. Consciousness, thus unestablished, not proliferating, not performing any function, is released. Owing to its release, it stands still. Owing to its stillness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally unbound right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.

Conditionality is a fundamental to the Dhamma because, among other things, it allow us to explain the kind of questions you're making.
In order for emergent phenomena, entity or property to arise, all its necessary and sufficient conditions have to be in interaction in a specific way. If those conditions are not interacting in this manner, the particular emergent phenomena, entity or property would not come to be.
What the Dhamma does, among other things, is the change in the type and content of the information that constitutes a person's worldview. With sufficient training in the Eightfold Path, that change in information will result in a change perception, and naturally, the taints of greed, aversion and delusion will cease to have its informational conditions that allowed them to be. With the cease of the taints, there comes the cease of dukkha.
As you can see, nothing of the above implies a miraculous vanishing of nothing, but a gradual change of kinds and content of information and of the effects that information has on a person's thoughts, speech and bodily deeds.


text:
How do Buddhists talk about forgiveness and turning the other cheek, for extreme wrong doing?
How do Buddhists talk about forgiveness and turning the other cheek, for extreme wrong doing? The sorts of things that are not about being offended, not insults, but the exact opposite: are atrociously evil or wrong, so one would feel appalled if it had happened to anyone. On the one hand, one may be happy to let karma do its job, but -- on the other -- bodhisattvas must be impelled to save every sentient being.
Is the answer to seek material / earthly justice, and work to enlighten them, within the limits of Buddhist ethics?

one may be happy to let karma do its job
Recalling the brahmaviharas, I think that that -- i.e. "remembering that beings are heir to their own karma" -- is recommended as a recipe for "equanimity".
That's possibly not "good will" though -- i.e. if you're "happy" about someone's misbehaviour, that sounds like the opposite of mudita -- and good-will is important, see e.g. the parable of the saw (as an example of Buddhist doctrine that's relevant to what you're asking).
There's also the Dhammapada verses 3 through 6 -- which recommend against "he hurt me!" and "not stilling your hatred"...
There are other topics on this site though, about social justice -- e.g. if a person lies then you might not want to believe them in future; if they steal you might tell the police...
Or one of the Zen stories is The Thief Who Became a Disciple

I gave him the money and he thanked me for it.

"Where is anger for one freed from anger,
Who is subdued and lives
perfectly equanimous,
Who truly knowing is wholly freed, Supremely
tranquil and equipoised?
He who repays an angry man in kind Is worse
than the angry man;
Who does not repay anger in kind, He alone wins
the battle hard to win.
He promotes the weal of both,
His own, as well
as of the other.
Knowing that the other man is angry,
He mindfully
maintains his peace And endures the anger of both,
His own, as well as
of the other,
Even if the people ignorant of true wisdom Consider him
a fool thereby."

Akkosa Sutta: Insult

we're not talking about insults though? anyway, i asked about buddhists not aryas

Sure the Arya will perfect what is quoted, and those weak spiritually imitate as much as possible.

maybe. but you're quoting "insults" -- so either accept it's a poor answer, or edit it

i say maybe because the spiritually naive will surely imitate the perfections, and only the last sentence mentions 'wisdom' -- rhetorically tho, i agree

So be it. But perhaps you should edit your question, where in your question did exclude insult as wrong doing?

anyone who is more than offended at an insult is just a fool. i'd like to think i am not

He who repays an angry man in kind Is worse than the angry man? Why is one worse than the other?


text:
Do some, all, or no Mahayanists claim that we are all "bodhisattvas"?
Do some, all, or no Mahayanists claim that we are all "bodhisattvas"? Obviously, those influenced by the Lotus sutra claim that we are all -- at least potentially -- Buddhas. But I'm unclear about the word "bodhisattva", whether anyone at all can rightfully claim they are a bodhisattva.
For example, I think I'm aware of some ch'an Buddhists, which was deeply influenced by the 'one vehicle', saying that we progress through stages, only being bodhisattvas after abandoning the three vehicles. But perhaps this is skilful means, and not at all the case?

As i understand it they think that those who do a ceremonial ritual of taking the Bodhisatta vows become Bodhisattas. I may be wrong tho.

that would make sense, at least. thanks

According to my knowledge, to become a bodhisattvas, the person should obtain due certainty of being a bodhisattvas from a Buddha with the effect of Karma. We could identify this fact by considering the story behind Maithree bodhisattvas.