text:
What are the similarities between quantum physics and buddism?
What are the similarities between modern physics/quantum physics and Buddism?
Although i know little about this, like Budha said that conciousness creates everything, emptyness and dependent origination kind of things. What are other things that matches with what modern science is saying?

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CAPIOQ-2.PDF&ved=0ahUKEwj51PCXiY_TAhWWF8AKHW6nBcMQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNHCwMPZagzcHJxaJMnTe3u9czKmtQ&sig2=DvgBTQikkTmSZ6SDBVX5Jw is an interesting short philosophy paper to read.

This a quite a nice and free lecture on the subject https://www.freebuddhistaudio.com/audio/details?num=OM729

Maybe related: Is it true that Physics confirms some of the Buddha's teachings?

This is the transcript of the lecture recommended by Crab Bucket, above. In summary: 1) things aren't what they seem; 2) the Copenhagen interpretation may be correct or might be proven wrong; 3) everything is inter-connected -- but, quantum physics says nothing about ethics; nor about values (e.g. "why a human being is more valuable than a bacterium"); and views (from quantum physics) risk being reductionist, materialist, nihilist.

quantum woo.

As far as I know quantum physics does not teach four noble truths, dependent origination and consciousness. So there are no similarities.However quantum physics can be used as examples to explain Buddha's teaching.

https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9609002 , the relational interpretation is effectively in line with dependent origination and anatta.. sadly, like all QM interpretations, they are just that! Although it deals with the EPR paradox without any issues like Copenhagen or others, so people should come around to it, due to it being the most parsimonious one out there. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_quantum_mechanics)

what do you mean by "does not teach ... consciousness?"

The Buddha, in aiming to comprehend suffering, from a psychological point of view, sought to understand experience as it actually is. The scientific method, aims to limit itself to the understanding of experience as it actually is, whilst not focusing solely on the psychological. Whilst the Buddha approached experience (mostly) from a generally more internal frame of reference, the scientific method approaches experience through examining the external frame of reference.
If the concept of 'Truth is one, the wise know it by different names' is accepted (one truth, rather than duality etc), then, subject to the validity of the Buddha's insight, the scientific method (an examination of experience, as it actually is), should agree.
Here the issue becomes the question of - which of the two methods has the more accurate insight? The Buddha taught anicca and anatta. The scientific method, has shown itself susceptible to anatta (anicca follows naturally from anatta) through the relativisation of physical concepts, as theories that embrace relativism tend to explain perceived experience better (statistically, mathematically), than ones with essential, absolutely and externally fixed constants.
Interpretations of quantum mechanics, gives many options for how to interpret experience as it is.
Relational quantum mechanics agrees with the Buddha's insight into anatta.
Relational EPR is a scholarly discussion on how RQM deals with the EPR paradox (is quite insightful and not much maths in it at all for the most part!)

Quantum physics deals with things that are a subset of

Rupa
Vedanä
Saññä
Sankhara
Viññana

And it tries to understand what happens to these in a subatomic level.
Buddhism deals with the understanding of Four Noble Truths of which the First Noble Truth is,

Rupa
Vedanä
Saññä
Sankhara
Viññana

And it tries to warn you that the assumption these things as "me", "mine" or "my soul" leads to suffering rebirth (hence Aging, Sickness, Death)
While both seem to look at the same things, Quantum mechanics has a different objective from that of Buddhism. Thus, Quantum mechanics does not address the three questions clearly where as Buddhism does

What is the pleasure of Pancha Upädänakkhanda ?
What is the danger of Pancha Upädänakkhanda?
What is the refuge from Pancha Upädänakkhanda?

"Pancha Upädänakkhanda" means "the five clinging-aggregates". See also How does the first noble truth associate dukkha with each of the five skandhas?

In quantum physics states every atom is impermanent. Same is taught by Buddha.
Apart from that there is quantum entanglement which means if two atom or particles are entangled than it doesn't matter how far they are if you make any changes to one another changes automatically, Buddhism teaches this in Mettā Meditation.
Buddha was able to see every atom of his body was continuously coming to existence and dying at the same time, giving you the illusion that we are alive.
He told (10 to the power 21) times an atom is coming to existence every second, which is very similar to quantum physics.
The actual question should be about the difference, Which we need to understand is Panya (Pragya in Hindi, Maybe experiential knowledge in English) When one find's the Quantum truth by Physics one would still remain as same person, but if one reaches to same truth by Mind, one become Buddha.(Buddha is a person who has his Bodhi(Realization), Which means you will become self realized).

May I know any reference to what you have stated as "Buddha was able to see every atom of his body was continuously coming to existence and dying at the same time, giving you the illusion that we are alive.
He told (10 to the power 21) times an atom is coming to existence every second, which is very similar to quantum physics", please?

@AkilaHettiarachchi Yes Sir I attended 10 Days vipassana course in which we were told by Mr Goenka that Buddha was able to see how the mind is entangled with each atom(4 basic elements), the space with each atom is the 5th basic element and 5th element he said is mind which is entangled throughout the physical body.

@Rishi start reading the Tipitaka.

@RavindranathAkila Sir, I would request you to explain what is "Tipitaka" and Why one should read it?, What is its essence?, What kind of knowledge it has?, is it very interesting? or can I get its smaller version, Which just tells the truth in simple words.

@Rishi The Tipitaka is the Pali canon; but the most important of these "three baskets" (for a lay person) are the suttas. For further details see this answer and the several answers to this question.

@Rishi Tipitaka is essentially the whole of Buddhism, and was written down in Sinhalese (Pali sutta etc written in Sinhalese) and later on given to all other countries. The original Buddhism (one that has no extra opinion mixed into it) can be read in easily understood inside the Tipitaka, in most cases. You will find clarity there, and can discard any false statements made by modern variants of Buddhism by reading it.


text:
What is Nirvana (mahayana)?
...as per the title.
In the Theravada literature, the Buddha is seen as someone who found an end to suffering and taught that for all his life, urging his disciples to apply themselves to it, to not waste the opportunity and regret later.
While there are many interpretations of what exactly is Nirvana in this tradition (and what is/is-not a tathagata after death etc), it's perhaps universally accepted by it's adherents that embarking on this doctrine culminates in the permanent cessation of suffering. Some may speculate or say more about Nirvana, but others might be silent and not add anything that the texts don't say.
But what about Mahayana's Nirvana?

Is it the same same? Or is it more elaborated, like a realm where beings (Buddhas?) actually live?
Does it have the same requirements as the Theravada nirvana (e.g. elimination of the ten fetters, realization of four noble truths & dependent origination)?

Warning: To not make it too long, I avoided quotes. In addition, this is merely a summary. Just like with Theravada, there are interpretations. Since I present things in a traditional way, please do not take it personal when I seem to despise so-called Hinayana tenets or practices.

We say that a Hinayana arhat still has limitations, obstacles that prevent him from achieving the welfare of others as well as his own. On the other hand, a [fully enlightened] buddha abandoned all obstacles and thus is able to achieve the welfare of others, and achieved his own. This is because there are two obscurations that a buddha has abandoned:

Afflictive obscurations
Knowledge obscurations

Since a Hinayana arhat has uprooted ignorance - the root of samsara - he has abandoned afflictive obscurations. This is because ignorance, anger, desire, etc. are afflictive obscurations, and once the root has been abandoned, all the other afflictions  as well. However, a Hinayana arhat has not abandoned knowledge obscurations. Only a buddha has abandoned both obscurations.
There are four divisions of nirvana but I will speak of two. A Hinayana arhat achieved abiding nirvana. We also call it 'individual liberation' or 'solitary peace.' We say that this abiding nirvana is the extreme of peace. According to Asanga's Bodhisattvabhumi and other texts, after some time, the buddhas wake them up from their blissful individual liberation and tell them that more is to be done.
A buddha abides neither in the extreme of peace (abiding nirvana), nor the extreme of samsara. He achieved a non-abiding nirvana. He has abandoned the two obscurations and is, in this sense, beyond limitations. Therefore, he is able to benefit all sentient beings.
The way to abandon afflictive obscurations is by generating the wisdom of emptiness. Different Mahayna tenets posit emptiness differently, but they all posit the two selflessness: emptiness of person and emptiness of phenomena. As the Heart Sutra puts it:

Phenomena also are empty.

The way to abandon knowledge obscuration is by having the wisdom of emptiness conjoined with Bodhicitta. By generating spontaneous bodhicitta, one enters the Mahayana path of accumulation. On the Mahayana path of seeing, the wisdom of emptiness is conjoined with bodhicitta. When wisdom is imbued with bodhicitta, the mind becomes powerful and vast enough to abandon knowledge obscuration. We often refer to the following analogy:
The wisdom of emptiness is like an axe cutting through the two obscurations, while bodhicitta is a strong arm. Without bodhicitta, one's arm is not strong enough and can not abandon the two obscurations, thus achieving buddhahood. A Hinayana arhat has abandoned afflictive obscurations, but since he did not generate bodhicitta, he has not abandoned knowledge obscuration.
There are two divisions of knowledge obscurations:

The imprints of ignorance, and
The appearance of true existence that is caused by the imprints of ignorance.

Only a buddha is free from the appearance of true existence. Therefore, when a conventionality appears to a buddha, it does not appear together with the appearance of true existence and he realizes both truths simultaneously and with the very same mind: the omniscient mind of a buddha. On the other hand, whenever a conventionality appears to a sentient being (i.e. a non-buddha), it appears together with the appearance of true existence. Consequently, a sentient being cannot realize the two truths directly and simultaneously.
The omniscient mind of a buddha (the wisdom truth body dharmakaya):

Directly realizes the two truths, simultaneously
Is free from conceptualization, and unmistaken
Knows all existent, past, present and future

In addition, according to Mahayana, a buddha obtained the four bodies (kayas). There are ways of dividing the kayas into two, three, four, or five but we generally speak of four. A buddha has a mental body that is seen only by Mahayana aryas and that teaches them only the Mahayana Dharma. It is called Enjoyment body (Sambhogakāya). A buddha has body that is seen even by ordinary beings and this is the Emanation body (Nirmanakaya). We say that Shakyamuni Buddha was a supreme emanation body because he taught he possessed the 32 marks and the 80 signs. A buddha has an omniscient mind that we call "wisdom truth body". It gives birth to the teachings that emanate from it, like the rays of the sun emanate from the sun. It is by emanating in this way that he benefits all sentient beings (even though not all sentient beings interact with his teachings, but that is another subject of debate.)

Thank you for sharing this detailed answer and tradition.

What is the origin of Heart Sutra, and where are the original copies? Who drafted them and who is the author of Heart Sutra?

From a "religious" viewpoint, as His Holiness the Dalaï-Lama says, "The Mahayana teachings are rooted in the sermons that the Buddha taught
primarily at Vulture Peak." The Heart Sutra is one of them. It has 3 parts: (1) words that were permited by the buddha (2) words that were inspired by the buddha (3) the words of the Buddha's own mouth. There is much to say, even from a historical perspective. I suggest you create a question is you are interested.

Fom this answer I understand that nirvana/arahatship has the same requirements in both traditions. But parinirvana is not soteriological, or final, in Mahayana? In other words, for theravada it's not said much about parinirvana, usually no more than final freedom of suffering. But for Mahayana, after parinirvana, the Buddhas will wake that arahat and, once awaken, he will find that there's more to be done. So that blissful peace of his parinirvana is temporary? So final (really final) peace in Mahayana is when all beings attain nirvana? Is it correct to say that this Mahayana soteriology then?

Abiding nirvana is arhatship, but non-abiding nirvna is full enlightenment. Indeed, most Mahayana traditions posit that there is one final vehicle and that this final vehicle is the Mahayana vehicle. This "doctrine" of the one final vehicle is referred to as Ekayana. We believe that [Hinayana] arhatship is temporary, and that all arhats will have to enter the Mahayana path eventually to achieve buddhahood. Does it answer your question?

Certainly you did not say that you "despise" another branch of Buddhist practice other than your own? Isn't "despise" a word that describes hate? Regarding these "knowledge obscurations" that a Theravadin arahant has not relinquished . . . if such a person knows and directly sees that consciousness is not self (which is inherently a part of being an arahant) then how could such a person still cling to some type of knowledge?

You know, mya ngan las ‘das pa zhi ba’o means basically something like “Enlightenment is peace”. Sometimes it is considered like that. Peace. This of course misleads lots of people, thinking peaceful in the sense of – you know the standard peaceful like Koi Pond, Zen Garden, mountain, nobody bothering you. Weekend situation for instance. Or a holiday excursion to Hawaii, where you will not be bothered. Or also not only that, just even the religious sort of peace, like smiling, walking gently, brushing your teeth gently and with a mindfulness. All of that. That kind of peace, we talk about that kind of peace a lot.
Mya ngan las ‘das pa zhi ba’o, nirvana is peace. That peace has to go beyond that. In this case what is peace. Nonduality. Because the duality is the violence. The moment you create the duality it is a violence. It is a violence and it creates a lot of violence.
Let’s go back to our mirror situation. The moment you differentiate, the moment you divorce between the appearance of your face and the emptiness of your face in the mirror there is a violence. Why? Because when you divorce these two you are bound to fall into on of the extremes, either nihilism or eternalism. If you fall into that, then you will construct thesis. You will construct approach. And this is how it becomes violent. Nirvana on the other hand has deconstructed all the dualism, therefore actually the real peace, real ahimsa, I am say it is maybe under the second category. The peace, the nirvana peace is actually when you reach the nonduality, experience of the nonduality is the real peace.

Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche

This topic is covered more than adequately in Wikipedia, see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)
Of Early Buddhism it is said: "Most modern scholars such as Rupert Gethin, Richard Gombrich, Donald Lopez and Paul Williams hold that nirvāṇa (nibbana in Pali, also called nibbanadhatu, the property of nibbana), means the 'blowing out' or 'extinguishing' of greed, aversion, and delusion, and that this signifies the permanent cessation of samsara and rebirth.[34][35][36][37][38][quote 6]
According to Steven Collins, a synonym widely used for nirvana in early texts is "deathless" or "deathfree" (Pali: amata, sanskrit: amrta) and refers to a condition "where there is no death, because there is also no birth, no coming into existence, nothing made by conditioning, and therefore no time."[46] He also adds that "the most common thing said about nirvana in Buddhist texts is that it is the ending of suffering (dukkha)."[47] Gethin notes, "this is not a 'thing' but an event or experience" that frees one from rebirth in samsara. According to Collins, the term is also widely used as a verb, one therefore "nirvanizes."[46] Gombrich argues that the metaphor used in the texts of flames going out, refers to fires which were kept by priests of Brahmanism, and symbolize life in the world.[48] Nirvana is also called "unconditioned" (asankhata), meaning it is unlike all other conditioned phenomena.
The cycle of rebirth and suffering continues until a being attains nirvana. One requirement for ending this cycle is to extinguish the fires of attachment (raga), aversion (dvesha) and ignorance (moha or avidya). As Bhikkhu Bodhi states "For as long as one is entangled by craving, one remains bound in saṃsāra, the cycle of birth and death; but when all craving has been extirpated, one attains Nibbāna, deliverance from the cycle of birth and death."[49]"
As to the Mahayana conception of Nirvana it is stated:
"Nirvana is also described in Buddhist texts as identical to anatta (anatman, non-self, lack of any self).[95][96][97] Anatta means there is no abiding self or soul in any being or a permanent essence in any thing.[98][99] This interpretation asserts that all reality is of dependent origination and a worldly construction of each human mind, therefore ultimately a delusion or ignorance.[98][100] In Buddhist thought, this must be overcome, states Martin Southwold, through "the realization of anatta, which is nirvana".[100]
Nirvana in some Buddhist traditions is described as the realization of sunyata (emptiness or nothingness).[101] Madhyamika Buddhist texts call this as the middle point of all dualities (Middle Way), where all subject-object discrimination and polarities disappear, there is no conventional reality, and the only ultimate reality of emptiness is all that remains.[102]"
In otherwords, Theraveda emphasizes the extinguishing of afflictive obscurations, but the main thing to understand about the Mahayana view is the awakening to the realization of anatta, No Self, or Sunyata, Emptiness.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

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

sort: votes


text:
Feeling concern for others but like my efforts in anything are wasted
I feel concern for others, but like my efforts in anything are wasted. Is there any practice I could engage in, to remedy the latter?
I've been taught meditation in a handful of contexts. What about sort of focusing on or keeping that feeling of nothing mattering, during zazen?
Caveat: I won't believe in other lives, only karma.

I feel concern for others, but like my efforts in anything are wasted. Is there any practice I could engage in, to remedy the latter?

Act of the betterment of other, but do not be attached to the outcome, as you have to practice equanimity, also as part of the Brahmavihara. Otherwise the practice will become a burden and a stress, than away to unburden yourself. I.e., be concerned but not stressed, when the outcome is not what is intended.

Caveat: I won't believe in other lives, only karma.

Attachment to beliefs is also attachment which can give arise to stress. Generally it is best to avoid believes in the line "this exits or does not exists, that exists does not exits". But having said this you need a set of Right Beliefs but even to these do not get attached.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
What is Indra's Net, according to Mahayana Buddhism?
I have heard a lot about "Indra's Net". A wiki says that it describes how emptiness and dependent origination are creating the universe. Can anyone provide me a link and book which I should read, to understand this more?

There are two sets of Mahayana sutras:

The seventeen Perfection of Wisdom sutras (Prajnaparamita Sutras), and
The other sutras, of the Wheel of Perfect Differentiation.

The first set does not present Indra’s net while the second does. Tibetan traditions posit the first set as being “of definite meaning” and therefore study it and overlook the second. They do not study the sutras of the Wheel of Differentiation except through commentaries refuting their presentations.
On the other hand, most Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese traditions such as the Huayan school, Chan, Tientai, etc. posit the second set of sutras as being “of definite meaning” and therefore study it and overlook the Perfection of Wisdom sutras.
Therefore, if you want to know more about Indra’s net, you have to look on the side of Zen, etc. because they are more likely to comment sutras that speak of Indra’s net. Among the various sutras of the Wheel of Perfect Differentiation, the most well known are:

The Lankavatara Sutra (remember that Chan masters were first called "Lankavatara masters" before the "Chan" designation came into being),
The Avatamsaka Sutra (Garland of Flowers), that became popular after the Lankavatara was found too complicated for lay people
The Lotus sutra,
The Tathagatagarbha Sutra, and
The Vimalakirti Sutra.

Most of them mention Indra (just as the Prajnaparamita Sutras do) but do not mention Indra’s net. For instance, the Vimalakirti Sutra merely mentions Indra. Even the translator's footnotes do not say more than:

Kausika, Sakra, and Indra all refer to the same god, who, in Buddhist cosmogony is regarded as the king of gods in the desire-realm.

This helps you understand that it is not that common a notion.

Of these scriptures, only the Avatamsaka Sutra (a 1’500 pages sutra) does. It says:

Far away, in the heavenly abode of the great god Indra, there is a wonderful net which has been hung by some cunning artificer in such a manner that it stretches out indefinitely in all directions. In accordance with the extravagant tastes of deities, the artificer has hung a single glittering jewel at the net’s every node, and since the net itself is infinite in dimension, the jewels are infinite in number. There hang the jewels, glittering like stars of the first magnitude. A wonderful sight to behold. If we now arbitrarily select one the these jewels for inspection and look closely at it, we will discover that in its polished surface there are reflected all the other jewels in the net, infinite in number. Not only that, but each of the jewels reflected in this one jewels is also reflecting all the other jewels, so that the process of reflection is infinite.

Thích Nhất Hạnh is a Vietnamese Zen master in the lineage of Huineng. The Caodong Chan school in China and the Soto Zen school in Japan also proceed from Huineng. In Understanding Our Mind (Chapter 13, Indra’s Net), Thích Nhất Hạnh refers to the Avatamsaka Sutra:

Indra's net is a vast, cosmic lattice that contains precious jewels wherever the threads cross. There are millions of ewels strung together to make the net, and each jewel has many facets. When you look at any facet of any jewels, you can see all the other jewels reflected in it. In the world of the Avatamsaka, in Indra's net, the one is present in the all, and the all in the one. This wonderful image was used in Buddhism to illustrate the principle of interdepedence and interpenetration.

And he explains the meaning:

In our ordinary world, we see a teapot as a single, independent object. But if we look deeply enough into the teapot, we will see that it contains many phenomena – earth, water, fire, air, space, and time – and we will realize that in fact the entire universe come together to make this teapot.

From this Vietnamese Zen perspective, this is analyzing dependent-origination.

The earlier answer is excellent and exceeds my knowledge of the question in the sutras.
However, this issue is also addressed (perhaps with a twist) in the tantras, albeit, less accessibly (depending on what it is being compared to). Generally, to fully understand the meaning of Buddhist tantras, it requires oral transmission because the information in any one tantra is incomplete, sometimes encoded, sometimes arranged out of order, and needs cross-reference with other tantras.
For example, in the book published in English as "Luminous Essence," which is Mipham Rinpoche's commentary on (Longchenpa's great commentary on) the Guhyagarbha Tantra, arguably the "root" tantra for the Nyingma system, Mipham says the following:

The Great Tantra of the Glorious Magical Net, the Secret Essence, Reality Ascertained reveals mind and wisdom to be self-display. ... This universal tantra of the great Magical Net is a secret among secrets.

and

Reality is nothing whatsoever, yet from it, anything can arise. Due to this key point, its self-display manifests impartially and without limitation as the display of the magical net.

While none of this references "Indra's" net specifically by name, I'm pretty sure it's the same idea explicated with a different kind of terminological domain.
Lastly, with regard to the wording of your original query, to say emptiness and dependent origination are "creating" the universe, this maybe has some conceptual issues (which may also just be semantic). Depending on the system of tantra or the view you're looking from, "the universe" can be said to be somewhat of a mistake, as least as unenlightened beings are experiencing it, and emptiness and dependent origination are concepts we're using to try to bring some degree of understanding into the matter, but to think there is something operating with intent would be, to my limited understanding, a mistaken idea.
Hope this helps (get you started :-)

Just so you know, the question is 4 years old and it looks like the OP no longer has an account. Nice answer nevertheless. ;-)

Yeah, I didn't check the timeframe. It sorted to the top of a list and I assumed that meant it was new. I, on the other hand, AM new here. I'll pay more attention to details :-)

Welcome and enjoy the site!

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


text:
Its been said that deep meditationl leads a meditator to another world, what is this another world actually?
I have heard that when a meditator does a long meditation, he is able to enter into different world, see and hear that world. What are those? Are they just illusion, imagination or different universe?

In Pali Buddhism, the word 'world' ('loka') refers to different mental states.
For example, MN 79 calls the meditative jhanas of pure bliss 'the world of only pleasant feelings' ('ekantasukhassa lokassa'). To quote:

Venerable sir, what is that course of actions to realise the world of only pleasant feelings?
Here, Udāyi, the bhikkhu secluded from sensual desires and thoughts of demerit abides in the first jhana: Overcoming thoughts and thought processs and the mind in one point internally appeased, without thoughts and thought processes abides in the second jhana. Again with equanimuity to joy and detachment, feeling pleasant with the body too, abides in the third jhana. To this the noble ones say abiding in pleasantness with equanimity. Udāyi, this is the course of actions, for realising the world of only pleasant feelings. `
MN 79

'Nibbana' is not a 'world'. The attainment of Nibbana is the 'cessation of the world', which is experienced within the living body & mind. To quote:

There is, bhikkhus, that [sense] base where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space,
  no base consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base
  consisting of nothingness, no base consisting of
  neither-perception-nor-non-perception; neither this world nor
  another world nor both; neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say
  there is no coming, no going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising.
  Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of
  suffering. Ud 8.1

Within this fathom-long body, with its perception & mind, that I declare that there is the world, the origination of the world, the
  cessation of the world and the path of practice leading to the
  cessation of the world. AN 4.45

Therefore, when a meditator does a long meditation & is able to enter into different world, those worlds are not just illusion, not imagination or not a different universe. Those worlds are mental states.
As for Nibbana, this is also not illusion, not imagination & not a different universe. However, it is also not another world and not a mental state, even though Nibbana is experienced by the mind.

What is called world in Buddhism is the six senses. When you meditate you experience finer senses which you can't experience via ear, nose etc. When you meditate you experience finer wholesome mental states.
The logic here is for example you can see only colours from your eye. Even if you become a Deva or Brahama with your eye you only see colours.

Is there a particular reference to this? Because I don't recall reading it anywhere. It seems to me like a kind of experience that would be perceived differently by each person, so not very worth talking about.

I am not aware of where the Buddha called the 'world' the 'six senses' or when the Buddha said the Devaloka & Brahmaloka are colours. Please post links that show the Buddha said what you claim the Buddha said. Thank you

What is all? Sabba Sutta:http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html

A meditator doing long meditation is able to enter into a different world. We call this the entering into a Manomaya Kaya or that of an Out-of-Body Experience. The Buddha compared the situation of a manomaya kaya separating from the physical body to a sword pulled out of its sheath, or a snake shedding its skin. Once the manomaya kaya comes out, the body is lifeless like a log. The life force or the vitality goes out the moment the manomaya kaya leaves the body.
When the manomaya kaya and the physical body separate, “seeing” takes place without the need of light. The person acquires the ability look at things far away. Ones “hearing” then does not need air as a medium for the sound to propagate (one could hear things far away). “kirana” or “rays” similar to electromagnetic radiation helps in this ‘hearing’. One also gets to  “travel” very fast; it is not physical travel. The Buddha or Arahants with iddhi powers travelled to the worlds of the devas (deva-loka) within a time taken to “stretch a bent arm”. The internal eye and internal ear associated with the manomaya kaya helps in the actual “seeing” and “hearing”.

Please provide links to the suttas that state what has been posted, Thanks

@Dhammadhatu, you want references to Suttas but you are not prepared to accept all inconsistencies and untruths. Your comment on my Vibhava-Abhava answer was false. It is quite clear that vibhava tanha is associated with ucceda ditthi, the view that one lives just this life and that is the end of it. So, one tries to "enjoy life to the fullest" until death. You think that you know a lot, but you are the loser for thinking that way. - Well.. no more comments & no hard feelings - with metta...

You seem to not comprehend that "ucceda ditthi" is the view a "self" will end at death. The view "life ends at death" is not ucceda ditthi. Returning to the answer to this question, please provide links to the suttas that state what has been posted, Thanks

Hello Dhammadhatu. Saptha Visuddhi is writing from his indepth knowledg and from his Sutta Study. If you can trust me he is writing from Sutta, for example, re "sheath":http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html

Thks @SarathW. True Dhamma is only in Sinhala. To tell you - What you ask about ‘Atta’ was valid _ you got -3 for that & it was put on hold. Such words come under Adhi-vacana – meaning - the same word has different meanings depending on the sutta. Also, some explanations cannot be given taking only one sutta, as the info is there in bits and pieces in many suttas. I listen to only the Tipitaka in Sinhala. I did not reply to that question b’cos you treat all answers the same. I do not mind getting -3 for an answer if you see it as correct & if you can highlight that as the correct answer.

Saptha Visuddhi is not posting the meaning of Manomaya Kaya.

Details of Manomaya Kaya (Astral Body) I first read in Lobsang Rampa Books. In many suttas and commentaries too this is mentioned. I will add to answer this when time permits. May not be today.

Lobsang Rampa, born as Cyril Hoskin (1910–1981) is not Sinhala. You are contradicting yourself. Buddhism was degenerate & virtually extinct in Ceylon when the British arrived. The Burmese were required to reinstate the Singalese Sangha. True Dhamma is not only in Sinhala.

I knew that you will say this. It is over 40 years ago as a kid I read Rampa Stories. Now it is different. I mostly listen and do not read, and what I listen is in Sinhala. The Buddha has said that the Astral Body is no more one's true self than the body is in Potthapada Sutta. Also in the Sāmaññaphala Sutta and commentaries this is mentioned. In Tibetan Buddhism and Mahayana Sutras too it is mentioned Refer to Lankavatara Sutra. I do not have the time to look into the commentaries where I get the info.

@SapthaVisuddhi I suggest you read SN 51.22, which states the Lord Buddha goes to brahma worlds with a mind-made-body. It other words, SN 51.22 does not state once the manomaya kaya comes out, the body is lifeless like a log; that the life force or the vitality goes out the moment the manomaya kaya leaves the body.

@SapthaVisuddhi DN 11 states: "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body". DN 11 does not state: "once the manomaya kaya comes out, the body is lifeless like a log;".

Okay. It has been scientifically proven that the brain cannot distinguish between you imagining a situation and you actually being in a situation.
So when you meditate with the aim of being detached from your experiences you'd also detach yourself (your soul) from the ego perspective of being in the situation imagined or real.
So the world you'd be a part of then is the soul world.
Now the term out of body experience would say that you actually leave your body, which is not really the case. You just focus on other input that you can receive, mostly via the third eye and other sensations that directly touch your soul.
Since the soul is eternal, yet the body isn't you'd be able to experience everything that your soul has, is or will be experiencing.
If you follow that and say that the soul was there before the body that means the soul is on the inside and the body is on the "outside". So you'd actually be venturing inside by not being attached to your bodies experiences anymore.
However. As long as you(your body) is alive you will never completely detach, so there are always some signals coming through. You just focus on the other ones more.

This answer is not Buddhist. Please provide links that state what has been posted, Thanks


text:
Why don't teachers just tell us the answers?
'Those who speak don't know, those who know don't speak.' (Zen aphorism)
Lots of posts on SE Buddhism seem to hover around the question 'what is your original face', or 'what is Buddha' etc. It shouldn't be so difficult to answer these questions straightforwardly with a sentence or two, so why is it that teachers (who supposedly know) tend not to?

There's a joke, where a computer is built to answer the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. After millions of years, the computer finally finds the answer: 42. Unfortunately, no one knows what the 'ultimate question' actually is, so the answer is useless.

Actually, the question is finally revealed in the 4th book of the book trilogy that contains that joke. "What is 9x6?" IIRC.

That's a koan-puter for you.

@Jeff 7x6!?!?!?!

@kame - exactly so, grasshopper. Exactly so. :-)

Because the question is supposed to "point directly at your mind" like the finger pointing at the moon. The answer could not do better. In fact, you learn more from trying to solve an apparent contradiction. If anything, you learn at least that you are frustrated over not getting it. What matters most is not the object (a koan, a hua tou) but how you hold it in mind, what it does to your mind, how you try to make sense of it, etc.
The funny thing is that we are so habituated to run after external objects and dive into them that it is difficult to look inward. A proof is that we are more concerned with the object (the koan) than we are with our mind. We forget to pay attention to what our experience tells us, not of the object we experience, but our mind that experiences. Because of this, we know little of the mind, including our own. It is easy to recognize a tree when we see one; it is way more difficult to recognize attachment, anger, belligerence, spite, etc. when they arise in our continuum because we seldom look inward, we are not familiarized with it.
As far I understand, the point with Hua tou and Koan is rather to stay with it and learn from how you relate to it. For instance, why is it that contradictions make you unsettled? How do you relate to frustration? Does frustration even arise when you try to solve a case? What makes you think it has to be solved? How do you try to make sense of things?
In Vipassana, some do what they call "meditation with an anchor" (the anchor often being the breath). Here, it is quiet similar. You learn a great deal by trying to stay with an object such as a Hua Tou. You learn why it is difficult to stay with it, why you lose it over and over again, etc. So it is not the answer that matter much.
Kazuaki Tanahashi 's introduction to Dogen's Shobogenzo is quiet informative and very enjoyable. But then, I am not that qualified when it comes to anything different from Tibetan Buddhism.

This is similar to other explanations I've heard, although the texts have a somewhat different account of the way koans operate (I wouldn't really know, as my tradition is Soto Zen, and we don't use koans in the strict way that Rinzai does).

Answers are written in plain language in plain sight in books you can buy anywhere and may already own. Sometimes we miss the underlying sense of a sentence because the subtlety is hard to grasp. But no one is hiding anything from you.
What began to make me personally understand a lot more was thinking about the five skandhas after reading D.T. Suzuki's Manual of Zen Buddhism.
And funnily enough, the first time I experienced an 'aha!' moment was looking at a tree outside while listening to the Gospel of John. Notice how both Jesus and Buddha talk about seeds?

I don't recall what Jesus said about seeds, although I like the gospels very much.

"By their fruits ye shall know them."

Now a good report of Master Gotama has been spread to this effect:
  'That Blessed One is such since he is arahant and fully self enlightened,
  perfect in true knowledge and conduct, sublime, knower of worlds,
  incomparable teacher of men to be tamed, teacher of gods and humans,
  enlightened, blessed. He describes this world with its gods, its
  Maras, and its (Brahma) Divinities, this generation with its monks and
  brahmans, with its kings and its people, which he has himself realized
  through direct knowledge. He teaches a Dhamma that is good in the
  beginning, good in the middle and good in the end with (the right)
  meaning and phrasing, he affirms a holy life that is utterly perfect
  and pure.

Is the stock description of 'the' Buddha. It has terms that likely need to be further defined - fully self enlightened, Dhamma - that will likely have even more terms that need to be defined, but overall the above should do the trick. 'What is Buddha' asks a question looking for something closer to Essence imo, and that's not really within the Dhamma.
"What is your original face" I am not sure about! Reading about it a little, if it hints towards dependent origination, then it's an insight into the fact that 'I hit you with a stick' is mirrored by 'You are hit with a stick, by me'. Subject depends on object and object depends on subject - there is no event that can be described within the world that is not subject to this. If it is to do with some notion of an eternal self when the mind is fully stilled, it is again not part of the Dhamma, as it is wrong view, Brahmajala Sutta for 'eternal', Mulapariyaya Sutta for 'Self'. The experience of Nibbana - the end of mental fabrications - is unconditioned, so 'original', 'eternal' or even 'self' would not be accurate.

It's from Zen, so it's pointing at the actual fact (yourself, what is), rather than asking a question about doctrine. We say you should 'kill the Buddha' (if you meet him on the road) to stop yourself mistaking words for truth :)

Thanks.. I prefer to say language is limited if discussing the limited nature of language - then a rational debate can start with those who don't accept such a statement. Wrong livelihood in MN117 includes the act of hinting, which esoteric concepts like koan tend to employ - they may work for those who know, but for those who don't, they are mere words. Surely, if you wish to make a point, to the broadest audience possible, in the most convincing way possible - you speak with clear meaning.

Pointing to the ineffable, using conceptual constructs like language can also be done clearly: "Whatever is dependently arisen is unceasing, unborn, unannihilated, not permanent, not coming, not going, without distinction, without identity, and free from conceptual construction." is a good one.

I take your point, but I prefer imagery.

Someone said that the only qualities of God that can be spoken are negative qualities (what God is not), and your list is a good illustration of this kind of explanation. Sometimes the 'not' list is a lot shorter, like saying that a prime number has no divisors.

Because the mind is like the stream, the width of it dictated the water capacity. Normal mind runs on intellect, a PhD, or common genius mind like certain mathematician scoring IQ 200 is just that the current of the stream is swifer, not the capacity enhanced. With Koan the Huatou the mind is stuck for the questions are crazy, nonsensical. Working on it rigoriously but trapped, forced the mind evetually breaks through the intellect confinement thus really "upgraded", realized the beyond the frontier veiled by the five senses and intellect-Mind. Like the water breaks up the bank and flooding. Hence when the great master of ancient enlightened, none of them wrote down a correct answer to any Huatou, instead, most wrote poems (and a true teacher was able to see if the student really arrived by reading the poem) which are none to do with the question. So don't be fooled by the questions ;) thinking they must be so sophisticated, no. But yes, also, they have the power to trap/engulf a brilliant mind.
These have a lot to do with the "magic" the Chinese this unique language. I really doubt the same favour could be preserved when working with other language. Japanese is kind of exceptional because in ancient time until Song Dynasty of China, Japan, Korea was adopting Chinese. Thus their tradition of Ch'an Koan was a Chinese language version. Language, an accomplished teacher who knew where the student reached, is the key. I doubt nowadays where these could be found.

Because it is so difficult to answer these questions in a straightforward manner with only a sentence or two.

Or even 100,000 sentences, in some cases.

The best way to answer the specific question would be to not answer it at all, but since this site is about instant information, I will go on.
If you get the information from someone or something outside of yourself, you only get the data, if you ponder it in your own mind, you gain insight and the answer is truly yours.
Koans are specific instruments to help you learn, not just receive information.

Ha ha, maybe we should just post Questions on this site and not Answers? (that's a question) (let's see if he answers it or not) (Zen teacher would slap him if he did) (or didn't)

Actually the teacher has already told us the answer, but due delusions and obscurations, we cannot see the answer. Just like if there are clouds, one can never see the sky.

Because, human can only gain WISDOM by tackling problems, having experience and getting answers afterwards.
Getting answers is useless for many questions without having experience.
Tell me a single teacher who is teaching without being a student.


text:
If everyting comes from emptyness than what is energy
Buddha tells that everything originates from nothingness, emptyness, sunyata. but how can that be possible. how can something come from nothing. what is logical meaning of this? he says that space, time and matter/energy is just and illusion because everything originates from sunyata by our conciousness, what is that?

When you write, "Buddha tells that everything originates from nothingness etc." and "he says that space, time and matter/energy is just an illusion", what are you referring you, what are you quoting?

Ok, from now i'll put the reference also.

Please do. What kind of text are you quoting or paraphrasing, from where did you get that understanding or statement? That seems to be the subject of the question, so I think it would be better if you'd identify it.

@Krishna, what was really said was... when the mind becomes empty of greed (raga), hate (dosa), and ignorance (moha) it becomes empty of those defilements. That is emptiness, sunyata with respect to defilements. Check Cula-suññata Sutta: The Lesser Discourse on Emptiness. I would love to reply to your OP, but I do not have the time.

I never ever heard about 'energy' in a traditional context. I suspect your source i new age.

@Krishna. This post needs a clear reference to where the Buddha has said that "... everything originates from nothingness ...".

this video is one of the source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj_i7YqDwJA

Emptiness is the best but not the accurate translation of Sunyata, Chinese translated it to 空. It appears you are from Indian origin, why don't you understand it as the Sanskrit term instead of confusing with emptiness is nothingness?

Emptiness doesn't mean 'vacuum' or 'nothingness' (this view is refered to as nihilism sometimes in Buddhism). It means empty of self, or 'self-existence'.
In other words things are what they appear to be, and nothing else. The names you give to things, the thoughts, opinions you have about them, woven by your desires, fears, speculations etc. are transitory fabrications of your mind.
These fabrications are useful for remembering where you left your car keys, but become troublesome if you begin to believe in them as reality. So the Buddha reminds us that everything is in fact empty.

The Buddha did not say that 'everything' comes from 'nothing'. Specifically, the Buddha stated that Essential concepts - like 'Everything' and 'Nothing' are mere conceptual constructions, that the notion of independent entities, embodied by the term Self within his argument, are not evident within experience. It's not that everything comes from nothing, it's that neither everything nor nothing are evident as constructs.

This world, Kaccana, for the most part depends upon a duality—upon the
notion of existence and the notion of nonexistence. But for one who
sees the origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom,
there is no notion of nonexistence in regard to the world. And for one
who sees the cessation of the world as it really is with correct
wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to the world. SN 12.15

The above seems like a decent parallel to your question.
Madhyamaka tackles this issue in a more philosophical way though, look into Nagarjuna:

Neither from itself,
Nor from another,
Nor from both, nor without a cause,
Does anything, anywhere, whatsoever, arise.
Mulamadhyamakakarika

In addition, for energy specifically, Noether's theorem shows that energy is conserved, or more famously that:

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change forms.

Emptiness with impermanence!

Buddha tells that everything originates from nothingness, emptiness,
  sunyata.

First, emptiness is not nothingness. Depending on the school of Tenets, emptiness refers to the absence of true existence, or to the absence of inherent existence, or to the absence of self-sufficient substantial existence, or to the absence of external establishment.
Second, emptiness cannot be a cause because a cause must preceed its effect, while emptiness and its basis (i.e. the object that is empty) arise, abide, cease simultaneously.
Third, emptiness cannot be a cause because emptiness is permanent and permanent phenomena do not perform a function.
The only context I know of where we find the expression, "phenomena arise from emptiness" is Tantra. In such a context, emptiness does not refer to emptiness itself, but to the mind realizing emptiness. This mind arises in this or that aspect.

How can something come from nothing.

It does not. Whatever is a product is produced by another [existent] phenomena.

Space, time and matter/energy is just and illusion.

Usually, we say that phenomena are "like an illusion", not that they are illusions. If you happen to read a traditional text that says that "phenomena are illusions", it means that they are "like an illusion." What we mean by this is that they do not exist the way they appear.
'Energy' is a word I never came across in any traditional text. However, we speak of 'matter' or 'form'. All objects that are apprehended by sense consciousnesses are 'matter'. This include smell, sound, taste, etc.

For a lucid, readable commentary on emptiness, take a look at Guy Newland's Introduction to Emptiness.  Therein you will find a clarification of the difference between nothingness and dependent origination, which is another way of referring to emptiness. Jay Garfield's The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way is an exceptional work and most germane when the question of sunyata arises. Another comprehensive tome on the subject is Jeffrey Hopkins' Meditation on Emptiness.  Any one of these presentations will address your question as to the origin of illusion like everyday phenomena. On the topic of energy, it is humbling to recall Richard Feynman's remark, that "it is important in physics today to realize that we have no knowledge of what energy is". - https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Energy

I have heard the logic system of Jains holds a logical category called "unfathomable".

adjective

not able to be fathomed, or completely understood; incomprehensible: heroism in the face of unfathomable conflict.
not able to be measured with a sounding line, or fathomed: unfathomable depths of the ocean.

Source: Dictionary.com

That means that transcendental phenomena are beyong the mind, uncomprehensable by the mind, unfathomable.


text:
Verses and lines of dedication of merits: Does one like to share traditional and personal verbal ways?
Ven. members of the Sangha (coming across here),
Valued Upasaka, Upasika,
Valued Team here and for awakening seeking readers,
whether young or old, lay person or ordained, since child one would be trained in generosity after having made merits, may it be just a recitation, veneration, after a giving, after taking precepts, after a meditation session, after having listened to Dhamma.
In traditional countries there are many deep and beautiful verses used an known. Here some may know a traditional recitation as sample: Dedication of Merit

Do you know or even practice a certain Verse and feel inspired sharing it?
Do you know good and nice sources (not commercial but dedicated as Dana) of valuable Verses in various languages?

Feel inspired to share you ways and possessions.
If inspired to even share an audio of your recitation, feel invited to do such here: Rejoice with others & sharing merits pattanumodāna & pattidāna. You can link it into here and no need to take uninvited space or contracts anywhere.
[Note: This question is a gift of Dhamma, and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains.]

There are probably as many answers to this question as there are Buddhists, but as you ask the question to all, I thought maybe I can offer something about the rule, rather than the form.
There are several textual sources regarding what is appropriate for dedication - in general one may dedicate ones' actions any way one may wish, but then the behaviour does not lead to liberation, and is therefore not Dharma activity, unless the dedication is in line with Dharma activity.
These are the four ways of dedication that are in accordance with Dharma activity, as I have been taught from within the Himalayan tradition:

Dedication towards one's own liberation and enlightenment.
Dedication towards the liberation and enlightenment of all beings.
Dedication towards the longevity of Buddha's words.
Dedication towards the longevity of the Sangha and one's Dharma teachers.

Of these four, the best is the first because it involves taking personal responsibility for the Buddha Dharma through the greatest means possible.

"We" want them all here. Good dedications, good answer, Sadhu, Konchog. Maybe you like to write a little bit different in reagard of sharing, since it gives only the possibility for others to take part, and its of course not possible to give somebody a direct share of ones deeds.

In Tibetan monasteries, we recite part of Shantideva's Bodhisattvacharyavatara (Bodhisattva Deeds) Chapter 10. It has 58 verses. The whole chapter relates to dedication and the practice of the perfection of generosity. It is really inspiring. To quote 8 verses:

May no living creature suffer,
  Commit evil or ever fall ill.
  May no one be afraid or belittled,
  With a mind weighed down by depression.
May the blind see forms
  And the deaf hear sounds.
  May those whose bodies are worn with toil
  Be restored on finding repose.
May the naked find clothing,
  The hungry find food.
  May the thirsty find water
  And delicious drinks.
May the poor find wealth,
  Those weak with sorrow find joy.
  May the forlorn find hope,
  Constant happiness and prosperity.
May there be timely rains
  And bountiful harvests.
  May all medicines be effective
  And wholesome prayers bear fruit.
May all who are sick and ill
  Quickly be freed from their ailments.
  Whatever diseases there are in the world,
  May they never occur again.
May the frightened cease to be afraid
  And those bound be freed.
  May the powerless find power
  And may people think of benefiting each other.
For as long as space remains,
  For as long as sentient beings remain,
  Until then, may I too remain,
  To dispel the misery of the world.

The main difference between dedication and aspirational prayers is that, when we dedicate, we offer a substance such as our merits. In the practice of "exchanging oneself with others", we offer our happiness and its causes to sentient beings. When we dedicate, we intend for our merits to ripen in ways beneficial for others. It is slightly different. We usually say that dedicating one's merits (accumulated through cultivating compassion, love, etc) is like saving one's money. Merits saved will not go to waste. It is better that the merits ripen as pleasant feeling in dependence on studying the teachings of the Buddha than in dependence on eating ice creams.
Another verse of Shantideva goes:

May all beings everywhere
  Plagued with sufferings of body and mind
  Obtain an ocean of happiness and joy
  By virtue of my merits.

Nice Tenzin Dorje, an inspiring expression on compassion and goodwill. How about saring the merits, which is of course mostly connected with the developing of metta. Maybe a "may all beings have a share of my skilfull deed developing karuna and metta" at the end?

@SamanaJohann I added something to my answer to respond to your comment.

Good add and a good final dedication and Dana, of what sharing merits fall into, @Tenzin Dorje

For sharing merits with the departed relatives we use,

Pali verse: ldam me ñatinam hotu sukhita hontu natayo [3 times]
Meaning:
  Let this merit be received by my relatives, and may they be happy [3 times]

For sharing merits with the devas and nagas we use,

Pali verse:
Akasattha ca bhummattha
  Deva naga mahiddhika puññam tam  anumoditva
  Ciram rakkhantu sambuddha-sasanam, ciram rakkhantu sambuddha desanam, ciram rakkhantu mam param
Meaning: May all the devas and the powerful nagas inhabiting space and earth, enjoy these accumulated merits and protect long the religion, the teaching and myself

For sharing merits with all beings we use,

Pali verse:
Ettavata ca amhehi sambhatam puññasampadam sabbe deva anumodantu, sabbe bhuta anumodantu, sabbe satta anumodantu
  sabba sampatti siddhiya
Meaning: May all the devas, the spirits and all beings share the merits we have accumulated and thus accomplish their happiness.

Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Like to share an Audio, maybe also in you language? Feel invited to do such here: Rejoice with others & sharing merits pattanumodāna & pattidāna


text:
Does anybody knows origin and reference Buddha teaches a bossy & angry the seven kinds of wifes
... in letting her chose which kind she would like to be?
Valued Upasaka, Upasika,
Dear seekers for the way to Awakening and Readers,
Atma (polite addressing of the own person toward householders, where Atma dwells) has started the transcribtion and translation of a very seldom teaching in modern and western world in regard of the Maha Manala Sutta by Ven. K. Gunaratana Thera, still not finished. Most stories are taken from the Jataka, some references already found. In redard of "To Look After Feed And Take Care Of The Wife And Children Is Most Blissful/highest protection" it contains a story that goes this:

Sujata, the sister of Visakha Maha Upasika, married the son of Anata Pindika. She was not only wealthy but was also charming. In the home of Anata Pindika she became disagreeable to almost every member of the family and to the servants as well. She was very quarrelsome and had her own say mostly because of her conceit.
One day Anata Pindika offered food to the Lord Buddha and his Bhikkhus and during the meal, she made a commotion in the household. The Lord Buddha,knowing the nature of the woman enquired about her dispute, which disrupted the peace of the home. The Lord Buddha then asked her, “There are seven classes of wives; have you any knowledge to which class you belong?” She replied that she did not know. The Lord Buddha said, “A wife not in any way agreeable but finding every chance to quarrel with her husband or members of his family, is a quarrelsome wife. A wife whose outlook in life is bent on squandering away the fortune of her husband in gambling or drinking, is a thievish wife, a wife who takes good advantage of the kindness of her husband, adopts a superior outlook in a manner so as to gain control over him in any matter concerning his family or his outside activities, is a
domineering wife; but when a wife looks after her husband’s interest with tender care and devotion like a mother over her child, this kind of wife is a motherly one; again a wife who by nature is obedient and shy like a sister to a brothers belongs to a sisterly type; and a wife who shares in like manner the happiness of misfortune of her husband is at once a friendly one; finally a wife who lives in tolerance of the whims and dislikes of her husband and serves him faithfully throughout, is a servantly type.
In the light of the truth Sujata gained the realization of the fruits of the First Path (Sotapatti).
Continuing the sermon, the Lord Buddha remarked that among the first three classes of wives, their existence after death would be in a hellish state, suffering untold pain in the unconsuming fire or
tortment. The remaining four classes of wives would enjoy even in their present lives, the store of
happiness and after death, their existence would be in a continued state of bliss in the realm of heaven.

Does anybody know the reference in the Suttapitaka (thinking Atma came accross one time there)?
Does anybody know which Ven. K. Gunaratana Thera wrote this book and some infos, biography and picture of him? Maybe even contact possibility, if still alive?
If inspired and knowing also the references of other stories in the book, willing to research them, feel invited to take on this possibility.

(If somebody feels inspired to help prove reading and/or translating further, one should feel welcome to take this possibility. Topic as well as sources can be found here: Mangala Sutta Uannana - Ven. K. Gunaratana Thera(draft)
(Note, this question and content is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commerzial use or other purpose of wordily gains.)

Atta feels inspired to help translating further this sutta Atma is searching for. Below are seven translations of the seven wives sutta:
1.සුජාතඝර සුණ්හා සූත්‍රය
2.妻子經
3.Жёны
4.Các Người Vợ
5.ภริยาสูตร
6.Az erőd
7.Istri-Istri
With metta
Householder # 3,454,845,812

There is a German version as well (among others): https://suttacentral.net/de/an7.63
And in English: http://awake.kiev.ua/dhamma/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara4/7-sattakanipata/006-abyakatavaggo-e.html (10. Bhariyāsuttaṃ - Wives)

You could make this answer shorter and clearer, by saying something like, "The 'seven wives' sutta is Bhariyāsutta (AN 7.63). There's a copy of it on SuttaCentral, with various translations of it into 11 languages including English and German. With metta."

Risky sometimes...

The Buddha taught to be grateful for the small favour or gift. The sutta requested was provided. The Buddha said rare is the world is a thankful & grateful person. This appears very true.


text:
Vesak 2561/2017 TODAY Where in western world can traditional & benefical celebrations be aspected?
Valued Upasaka, Upasika,
Dear seeker for way to awakening and readers,
Vesak-Pūjā (Birth, Awakening and Paranibbana-Remembering day of the Buddha, (Vesak= Name of the secound month of the luna calender/pi: Visaka; Pūjā = sacrify, veneration.)
It's the near end of an auspicious period in which most Nikayas cellerbrated Uposatha in timely union. A season in which seldom, even last oppotunities and possibilities that place.
Only some view more days the bigges celebration, now undertaken nearly all over the world (!) - some say it's the fist time and actually so that it is cellebrated in the whole world - and the main and biggest Veneration of our times Buddha, takes place.

Where in the western world are such as a real Sangha established and traditional and benefical Vesak-Pūjās undertaken by the Ven. Monks where people, young and old, rich or poor, could part-take also in their own county on 10. of May, today?
Where in traditional countries are - usually much by serious "western" people from abroad frequented - traditional and benefical Vesak-Pūjā taking place.

(Please, if knowing, do not share often usual kermis and trade fairs)
May you rejoice by sharing merits and invitations to such, as well those many able to take part on you futune. Anumodana!
So where to got today evening to make sacrifies to the Buddha? May all take up this possibility today and gain liberating joy with it!
(Note: This question is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpoes or other wordily gains.)

For this Vesak, I will be going to the Mahamevanawa Buddhist Monastery & Buddha Meditation Centre of Greater Toronto. On this day I, together with 300+ others will be observing 24+ Uposatha Sil. Buddha recommended that the disciples follow additional precepts to the first 5 precepts whenever time permits. These are known as the Uposatha Precepts, or simply the Eight Precepts. They are traditionally observed on the full-moon days (uposatha). This give us the opportunity to practice some of the renunciation that those who follow the Buddha’s teaching to the highest goal of enlightenment give up completely. So when we spend time following these training rules, we can remember that we are imitating these great spiritual beings. It is said that:

Whatever wealth exists within this sphere— pearls, gems, and beryl, an excellent stone, singi gold or natural mountain gold, and the gold called hataka— those are not worth a sixteenth part of an uposatha complete in the eight factors, just as all the hosts of stars do not match the moon's radiance.  - Visakha Uposatha Sutta (Numerical Discourses, AN 8:43)

On this day I will participate in a special “Pirith Sajgayana” (recitation) that will last till dawn. We normally get together at least once every month to chant Pirith (from 7.00 pm to past midnight usually & covering all of the important suttas) to help turn away all sorrows, (sabba dukkha), ailments, (sabba roga), and all fears ( sabba bhaya).
The Supreme Buddha said, “One who abides in the Dhamma, delights in the Dhamma, meditates on the Dhamma and bears the Dhamma well in mind, does never fall away from the Sublime Dhamma". By reciting Pirith we do all of the above and help invoke the blessings of the Triple Gem for protection.
On this Vesak Day we celebrate three great events. These three great events in the life of the Buddha are - the birth of Prince Sidhartha, the Bodhisatva at the Royal Park of Lumbini, His attainment of the Perfect Enlightenment in his 35th year under the shade of Sri Maha Bodhi at Buddha Gaya, His demise after a noble ministry that lasted 45 years at Kusinara in the Sala Grove, Upavartana that belonged to Royalty of Malla. These 3 events occured on the Vesak Full Moon Poya Day. It is renowned as the most sacred Poya Day in the Buddhist world over.
There is an additional Vesak Poya called "Adhi Vesak Full Moon Poya Day" that occurs once in 3 years, due to the change of planetary movements. Whether it is Wesak or Adhi Wesak, or any other day, the need of the hour is to follow the Message of the Buddha Dhamma. The knowledge of Buddhism is the key to the higher Path.
Mahamevnawa was established by much venerated monk, Ven. Kiribathgoda Gnanananda (VKG). He was not born Buddhist. Baptized as Jude Cabraal, born on 1st July 1961, he was the third child & the first son of the Roman Catholic family. When in University (age 17?) he became a monk. But his higher ordination, his disillusion of a namesake ordination made him opt out to become a Samanera again, since the Vinaya is not given a due prominence. He de-robed, misguided that his search for truth can be achieved as a lay “Upasaka”. Later he became a monk again, portraying his unwavering resolve to achieve his final goal. Today the Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery, that he formed has several branches in the Western World. Given below is a list of most of them:
Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery Toronto, Canada.  - 11175 Kennedy Road , Markham , Ontario , L6C 1P2 Canada   Tel: (905) 927 7117  E-mail: info@mahamevnawa.ca
Mahamevnawa Buddhist Nuns' Center and Meditation Center of Halton Hills. 9148 MAIN STREET SOUTH, ACTON, HALTON HILLS, ONTARIO, L7J 1X9. Canada.
Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery Edmonton, Canada. 13036 SHERBROOKE AVE NW, EDMONTON, AB T5L 4E8.
Buddha Meditation Centre Saskatoon, Saskatoon, Canada. 602 Stonebridge Common, Saskatoon SK S7T 0M9. Telephone: (306) 374-2840, Email: info@mahamevnawasaskatoon.com
Buddha Meditation Centre, Winnipeg, Canada. 2610 St Mary’s Road, Winnipeg, MB R2N 4A2
Mahamevnawa Meditation Monastery, Offenbach, Germany
Mahamevnawa Monastery, Sydney, Australia 105, Wisemans Ferry Road,
Cattai NSW 2756 Australia. +61 245 728 872
Mahamevnawa Monastery, Melbourne, Australia 71 Monbulk Road,
Mount Evelyn, VIC 3796  +61 03 9736 3937
Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery, Adelaide, Australia 1105, Grand Junction Road,
Hope Valley, SA 5090. +61 08 8364 4879
Mahamevnawa Monastery,  UK Dhamma land, Hardings Elms Road
Crays Hill, BILLERICAY, Essex CM11 2UH.  01268 533870.. Web    mahamevnawaimc.org;
mahamevnawaimc.co.uk;  mahamevnawa.uk;  buddhameditation.uk;  Email  admin@mahamevnawaimc.org
Mahamevnawa Monastery, New Jersey, United States
Mahamevnawa Monastery, California, USA 9917, Mission Blvd, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509
Phone: 714 884 3894
Mahamevnawa Monastery, Florida, USA. 2714 DOERUN CT, TAMPA, FL 33618
(813) 961-5296
Mahamevnawa Monastery, Washington D.C., USA 5004 Stone Rd, Rockville, MD 20853, USA
Mahamevnawa Monastery, Ireland
Mahamevnawa Monastery, France 6 bis Rue Maurice Laisney, 92600 Asnières-sur-Seine.  +33 9 70 99 46 65

Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu. Especially for the extanded teachings and share of own merits. Anumodana! Does Upasaka/-ika also likes to share a contact, link and adress of the monastery, so that those near and far, inspired to paticipate in practice of veneration, undertaking the precsepts and seeing and meeting the monks, could possible ease part-take? Maybe he/she likes to add it in the answer.

Maybe it's also possible to add "Canada/Toronto" bold at the beginning, so that others could easy find near to their location.

I gave just one link for now, but will try to give more late in the day. With metta.

Sadhu. No need to hurry. Those in hurry are depend on taking google, those honoring gifts will take their time to receive. Ohh... facebook is maybe not so good, since not all especially those keeping the eight silas and more constant would maybe no being citizens there and would have a hard to access.

Access possible without citizens-ship. Just another question, seeing the page (link of monastery: http://www.Mahamevnawa.ca/ ), is it in relation with the Dhammakaya-branch of Thailand?


text:
What are the personal consequences opposing, mobbing or even revile Noble Ones or right view?
Ven. members of the Sangha coming across here,
Valued Upāsaka, Upāsikā,
Valued team here and for awakening searching readers,
Since it is modern and somehow not only presentable but even seen as a sign of "independence" or "cool" to be fearless about opposing and undermining of what still stands firm: it may be good for those who do not know but like to know, to answer properly about certain consequences for oneself.

What can be expected for oneself, if one is opposing, fighting or even reviling the Noble Ones, Right View or those following this line, here or/and here after?

If somebody does not know, would that result in harder consequences, or equal, or even lessen such a fault?

What are the personal consequences for others and for many, who approve, accept and even follow such?

To get some ideas, here are some examples of wrong view, and of consequences:

And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. ― MN117
Then, having surveyed the silent community, he addressed them: "Could a person of no integrity know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity'?"
"No."
"Good. It's impossible, there's no way, that a person of no integrity would know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity.'
"Could a person of no integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"
"No."
"Good. It's impossible, there's no way, that a person of no integrity would know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity.' ― MN110

(Note: This question is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for any commercial purpose or other wordily gains.)

A timely question @Samana Johann. I was thinking along this same line, the other day. I look forward to the answers to your OP. With metta... BTW.. I am a Upasaka (not an Upasika asyou addressed me the last time)

Upasaka @SapthaVisuddhi , good to inform so that there are no misunderstandings.Actually it's an all time matter and very, very serious. How ever, even if informing out of compassion, there are only less who would bear it by heart. It's a matter of Upanissaya (strong foundation) with the Noble Ones and people of integrity, so hard to have, so hard to find in this world. " A person of no integrity has, as his friends & companions, those brahmans & contemplatives who are lacking in conviction, lacking in conscience, lacking in concern, unlearned, lazy, of muddled mindfulness, & poor discernment.

(male/female), Upasaka @SapthaVisuddhi . Somehow Atma brought Upasaka in connection with a name beginning with A, and did not know that it's somehow different to the use of the same sounding name beginning with E.

As much as I want to understand what you want to say here, it is difficult to make sense of what you said here @Samana Johann. Pl. tell me who is "Atma"? What is the full name of this person - with a name beginning with A? What is this same sounding name beginning with E? Also if you could make your OP more concise, it would help as I would like to post an answer sometime next week. with metta....

"Atma" is here in Cambodia a usual and polite way to adress ones own person when monks are speaking with householders. The other is not so importand. In regard of concise: there are 3 questions, the rest is to make possible many to understand the question and also a door to make a seek for one self in questions regard.

Upasaka @ChrisW Sadhu for editing.

The mark of a Noble One is sunatta (emptiness; voidness), as the Lord Buddha explained about the perfectly virtuous Sariputta in MN 151.

The Blessed One said to venerable Sāriputta. `Sāriputta, your mental faculties are bright, skin colour is pure, in which abiding, do you
  spend your time mostly?”
“Venerable sir, I spend my time mostly in voidance.”
“It's good Sāriputta, you abide mostly in the abiding of Great Beings. Sāriputta,

When a monk exhibits greed, ambition, anger, conceit, domineeringness & delusion; always harassing laypeople; it is good karma to expel that monk from a community.
For example, in AN 6.54, the lay Buddhists expelled the bad monk Dhammika from their district.
The personal consequences are wisdom & liberation when opposing, mobbing or even reviling an Ignoble One of wrong view.
The Lord Buddha explained in the Dhammapada:

64. Though all his life a fool associates with a wise man, he no more comprehends the Truth than a spoon tastes the flavor of the soup.
72. To his own ruin the fool gains knowledge, for it cleaves his head and destroys his innate goodness.
73. The fool seeks undeserved reputation, precedence among monks, authority over monasteries and honor among householders.
74. "Let both laymen and monks think that it was done by me. In every work, great and small, let them follow me" — such is the ambition of
  the fool; thus his desire and pride increase.
75. One is the quest for worldly gain and quite another is the path to Nibbana. Clearly understanding this, let not the monk, the disciple
  of the Buddha, be carried away by worldly acclaim but develop
  detachment (viveka) instead.

Given how important Right View is, I suppose that the consequence of ignoring or being averse to right view is remaining in samsara instead of becoming  liberated. The opening lines of the Dhammapada, for example, suggests that quarreling will only cause more quarreling, and that the only antidote to anger is non-anger (see also What is the Antidote for a Hateful Temperament?).
Note that the prescription in the Dhammapada isn't only about (isn't specific to) being polite to Noble Ones -- the back-story to verse 5 is about a quarrel with an ogress.
You presumably know more than I do but I don't remember much on this topic in the suttas. I think the suttas (and the vinaya) tell more about "how to behave in a respectable way" rather than "what happens if you oppose or don't show respect".
But the (translations of the) suttas do describe what might now seem to be elaborate shows of respect and polite discourse, and so I presume that's normal in that society and impoliteness is abnormal. See also for example Tradition and purpose of prostration practice.
The only example I can think of off-hand, where the Buddha reproves someone, is in MN 26:

One, standing up to greet me, received my robe & bowl. Another spread out a seat. Another set out water for washing my feet. However, they addressed me by name and as 'friend.'
"So I said to them, 'Don't address the Tathagata  by name and as "friend." The Tathagata, friends, is a worthy one, rightly self-awakened.

It doesn't explain why, or what the consequence are of not being respectful, so I'm not sure that answers your question. My guess is that the statement had two meanings: the first is that "friend" is untrue, i.e. the Tathagata is no longer the person they once knew; and the second is that the audience needed to put aside their preconceptions, of him as an unenlightened person, in order to hear properly.

A very open heart answer @ChrisW . Sadhu! How ever, it fits more to veneration and respect. The question here is more a very active opposing and further not just an occational, while a not showing signs of does not nessesary cause anything up or downwardly by having a "neutral" mind. So not sure if it really fits the question. It would be good to have this answer in a veneration question. What does Upasaka think?

Just remembered that Atma once made an answer in regard of Respect and Veneration, also listing the Backward of disrespect of what is worthy of respect.

You're right that this answer does not really fit the question. One more example of a consequence is in the Maha-parinibanna sutta (DN 16): -- "Ananda, when I am gone, let the higher penalty be imposed upon the bhikkhu Channa." -- "But what, Lord, is the higher penalty?" -- "The bhikkhu Channa, Ananda, may say what he will, but the bhikkhus should neither converse with him, nor exhort him, nor admonish him." (apparently Channa was "difficult to admonish", i.e. impossible to speak to: one who cannot stand being criticized or who does not mend his ways after his faults are pointed out to him).

A sample for community penalty, yes. But such is also not in regard of the question in regard of kammic effects. Thanks for the thought, if it was that, to add a "what to do if one is respectless" part. Not sure. The Buddha did not encouraged much to such actions, especially not between monasitcs and laypeople. Dangerous, people do such anyway.

An enlighting Vesakh Pūjā. Don't miss to visit the monks, a monastery, if having the possibility, Nyom Chris and also who ever reads that.

It wasn't only a "what to do" thought, it was a "what consequence to expect" thought -- i.e. the consequence which Channa faced was that he had to work alone, unaided. I agree my answer doesn't describe "kammic" effects and other aspects of your question: that's because I'm not confident in my own ability to predict kammic effects and, as I said, I don't know of suttas which describe it. Thank you for kind thoughts and good will, today as always.

What can be expected for oneself, if one is opposing, fighting or even reviling the Noble Ones, Right View or those following this line, here or/and here after?
Once when Ven. Sariputta told the Buddha of what Sunakkhatta, son of the Licchavis, said of Him – that Buddha preaches Dhamma (merely) hammering it out by reasoning, and not through superhuman states – He explained to Sariputta of the ten Tathagata powers. One such was:

"Again, with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, the Tathagata sees beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and he understands how beings pass on according to their actions thus: 'These worthy beings who were ill-conducted in body, speech and mind, revilers of noble ones, wrong in their views, giving effect to wrong view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, after death, have reappeared in a state of deprivation, in a bad destination, in perdition, even in hell;…”

An ānantarika-kamma is a heinous crime that through karmic process brings immediate disaster. They are called ‘anantarika’ because they are ‘an’ (without) ‘antara’ (interval), in other words the results immediately come to fruition in the next life. Of the five such crimes, the fifth crime is “Creating a schism within the Sangha, the community of Buddhist monks and nuns who try to attain enlightenment.”
As to what is this creating division among Bhikkhus, or “Sangha Bedha”, is described in Sangha Bedha Sutta (AN 10.1.4.7). Here Buddha’s instruction is to look into the matter and to side with the faction on the side of the Dhamma. The Buddha does not advocate superficial unity for its own sake at the expense of the Dhamma, but instead encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma and that the distinction between the two be kept clear. According to the Vinaya, a speaker of non-Dhamma is to be recognized as such if he “explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ …
Thus the ability to take sides requires that one be well-informed about the Buddha’s teachings. A schism can be rightfully ended only if both sides are able to investigate the grounds (i.e., the point of dispute around which the schism crystallized), get to the root, and then resolve which side was right, based on the Dhamma and Vinaya.
There are cases where Bhikkhus have started or joined a schism rooted in corrupted intent, knowing or suspecting that their views and actions deviate from the Dhamma-Vinaya. Then those who joined the schismatic faction through ignorance should be won over to the Dhamma side by explaining the true Dhamma-Vinaya to them.

Ven. Sāriputta: “How am I to behave with regard to these (schismatic) bhikkhus?”
  The Buddha: “In that case, Sāriputta, take your stance in line with the Dhamma.”
  Ven. Sāriputta: “And how should I know what is Dhamma and what is not-Dhamma?”
  The Buddha: “There are these eighteen grounds by which a speaker of not-Dhamma is to be known. He explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ …

If somebody does not know, would that result in harder consequences, or equal, or even lessen such a fault?
The Buddha formulated two saṅghādisesa rules (Sg 10 & 11) to help intercept attempts at schism, and gave special allowances for bhikkhus to try to avoid, prevent, or end schisms, even if it means breaking their Rains-residence. So the Sangha cannot be ignorant of such fundamental basic fact of the doctrine.
Again it is said that "Chetahan Bhikkawe Kamman Vadami” - Volition is the prime factor for good or bad kamma. In the Parajika Paliya of Vinaya Pitaka it elaborate over 75 incidents of man slaughter during Bud dha's time, endorsing how only the volition is the root for all Kammas. A very prominent and well respected Monk has once said that intentionally or unintentionally if you have committed the crime it is punishable. But he has shown no sources from Tripitaka for cross reference. Once I remember a Bhikku stating that if it is un-intentional, the crime is greater and not less. Such views are based on what is discussed in the Kathavattuprakaranaya that says it will be an anantariya kamma. However, they are not direct words from Lord Buddha. On the other hand there are stories where you may do a good kamma not knowing the strength of it, but yet you will earn the good kammapala in full strength. Thus it should be the same when doing a bad kamma.
What are the personal consequences for others and for many, who approve, accept and even follow such?
Buddha categorically states that once a person attains sotapanna or become a stream winner (person of integrity), s/he will not indulge in any such actions. S/he will recognize a speaker of non-Dhamma as such if he “explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ … what was not spoken, not mentioned by the Tathāgata as ‘spoken, mentioned by the Tathāgata’ … what was spoken, mentioned by the Tathāgata as ‘not spoken, not mentioned by the Tathāgata’ … what was not regularly practiced by the Tathāgata as ‘regularly practiced by the Tathāgata’ … what was regularly practiced by the Tathāgata as ‘not regularly practiced by the Tathāgata’ … what was not formulated by the Tathāgata as ‘formulated by the Tathāgata’ … what was formulated by the Tathāgata as ‘not formulated by the Tathāgata’ … a non-offense as ‘an offense’ … an offense as ‘a non-offense’ … a light offense as ‘a heavy offense’ … a heavy offense as ‘a light offense’ … an incurable offense as ‘a curable offense’ … a curable offense as ‘an incurable offense’ … a serious offense as ‘a not-serious offense’ … a not-serious offense as ‘a serious offense.’” A speaker of Dhamma is to be recognized as such if he explains not-Dhamma as “not-Dhamma,” Dhamma as “Dhamma,” and so forth.
Buddha explained in Sappurisa Sutta of Anguttara Nikaya a simple way to identify person of integrity, honorable person, person worthy to be associated with. We can use this Sutta to identify our flaws; to what extent do I have these qualities and am I a person of integrity? And if not we can learn how to become a person of integrity…how to become a person who noble ones considered to be honorable and worthy.
It is not easy. A great deal of self-discipline is needed to be such a person. Trying to live according to noble Dhamma is like swimming against the current, it is not easy, because our mind is disposed towards bad, towards unwholesomeness. That is why the Lord Buddha has stated that three things are essential in practicing Dhmma. What three? Wisdom to know good from bad, effort to defeat defilements and mindfulness. In Satara—satipatthana they are explained as “Atapi, Sampajana, Satima”. In Panca-indriya and Panca-bala they are explained as “Veeriya, Sati, Panna”. In Sapta-bojjanga it is, “Sati, Dhamma-vicaya, Veeriya”.  In the noble Eight-fold path they are explained as “Samma ditti, Samma vayama, Samma sati”.
Therefore, let us be humble disciples of the Buddha and strive to be a person of integrity. Otherwise the personal consequences for those who approve, accept and even follow such Adhamma – non-dhamma- is that they will be barred from heavenly realms, and from the dhamma path.

Sadhu! Maybe some useful additional practical food for thought: How to address wrong view?


text:
Does "Connected Causes" mean the same thing as Dependent Origination?
I prefer the phrase "Connected Causes" to Dependent Origination or the alternatives such as Dependent Arising, Dependent Co-arising and so on, I feel that it is more direct and understandable. But I am not sure if it means exactly the same thing? I do not see this phrase on this site.
Here is a quote from The Biography of Milarepa, I do not have that book anymore, but found this online:
"The clear perception of the Mind Unmodified, and the noble impulse to serve others, appear to be alike, but beware, and confuse them not.
"The spiritual boon which shineth on one as a resultant of Connected Causes, and merit temporal, which bringeth much of worldly goods, appear alike, but beware, and confuse them not."

A good question @no comprende. It is more plausible to say "Connected Causes" than Dependent Origination. To tell you why, I will have to quote the original scriptures. It will take time. So you will have to wait at least 2-3 months to get an answer from me. It will take that long to formulate a good answer as what I will write will go against other interpretations of this Pali word “Paticca samuppada”.

@SapthaVisuddhi I very much appreciate your effort and am willing to wait for the answer. Thank you!

In discussing things with people it helps to use the terminology they use. So even if 'connected causes' is a better way to explain 'dependent origination' - the latter has become a common phrase in English Buddhism. The former is rare.
Without the precise quote it is impossible to determine whether the two are precisely the same thing. However, if the source is a biography, I would think that the meaning is likely close enough within that context.

edited in response to elaborated question:

In this case I would understand the phrase 'Connected Causes' as very simply all the causes that  create good circumstances (aka 'worldly good'). The sentence merely states that while it is great to experience the result of good karma, that doesn't mean you should rest on your laurels.
In other words: 'Connected Causes' is simply karma here, I think. And while the spiritual boon may seem the same thing as those great circumstances, it's not. For one thing: good circumstances are rarely used to good spiritual effect.

I suppose they're similar but not the same.

One difference is, the difference between "cause" and "condition". For example, for a plant to grow, it needs a seed, rain, sun, soil, to be undisturbed, and so on. Is it true to say, for example, that "the soil caused the plant to grow"? I'd say maybe not: instead of the soil being the cause, maybe the seed was the cause ... or maybe the sun ...
To avoid that kind of [slight] misunderstanding, I think it might be more accurate to say that these are "conditions" rather than "causes": that the plant grows "on condition that" it's sunny, that it rains, that the soil is good, that there's a seed, and so on.
So I prefer "condition" instead of "cause".
I find that people also sometimes use "condition" as a verb, even though that's slightly inelegant or uncommon in normal (non-Buddhist) English: they say for example, "the rain conditions the growth of the plant" (instead of "the rain causes").
For I think a similar reason people say "depends on" rather than "caused by": i.e. a plant's growth (and thus the plan't origin or coming-into-being) depends on sunshine, even if it isn't caused by sunshine.

The second difference is, what is it that is being caused or conditioned? When people talk about "dependent origination" based on the Pali canon, I think they're often talking about the 12 Nidanas (the topics of which include Ignorance as a condition of Birth of Death), or maybe the 4 Noble Truths (including craving as a condition of, or origin of, suffering, ad the origin of cessation of suffering).
Conversely I suspect that in a biography of Milarepa, it might be that the term is used to describe the causes or cultivation of boddhicitta.
If that's so then perhaps the "cause" that's mentioned is closer in meaning to the Pali word Bhavana.

I think your last sentence is correct, I found a quote and will revise the question to include it. In that sense the phrase might just be a formal designation, but all causes / conditions are equivalent in that we do not have a special term for beneficial results versus harmful ones. Science just says 'cause'. The word 'Origination', to me, is far more powerful and definite than 'cause', so I don't think it is more of an everyday term for what conditions our experience. To me 'conditioning' is associated with physical exercise. Words: can't live with em, can't write on the internet without em!

Since the last sentence is correct, I edited the answer to mention "bhavana". I think "origination" refers to the "caused", not the "cause": i.e. things 'originate' (a.k.a. 'are originated' or 'come into being') when they're caused and/or when the conditions or prerequisites for their existence are present. I think that condition implies not "cause" but sine qua non. Western logic and/or law distinguishes different kinds of "cause": proximate, ulterior, final., material, etc.

The 'cultivation' etymology in your link is beautiful thank you. I guess we are dealing with words scriptures, references that are thousands of years old, so precise definitions are hopeless. We can only dig for insight.


text:
What does Robert M. Pirsig's "Quality" correspond to in Buddhism?
The concept of "Quality" relates to the direct experience of the moment, as described in the book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I was wondering if this has a parallel in Buddhism? To me, the idea of Quality seems to be like Sunyata turned inside-out.
Here is a quote from the book:

Quality ... you know what it is, yet you don't know what it is. But
  that's self-contradictory. But some things are better than others,
  that is, they have more quality. But when you try to say what the
  quality is, apart from the things that have it, it all goes poof!
  There's nothing to talk about. But if you can't say what Quality is,
  how do you know what it is, or how do you know that it even exists? If
  no one knows what it is, then for all practical purposes it doesn't
  exist at all. But for all practical purposes it really does exist.

What would we call this idea?

See also https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/2078/has-zen-and-the-art-of-motorcycle-maintenance-got-anything-to-do-with-zen

@CrabBucket thank you, I did take a look at that one, but I felt that this is a very specific question with hopefully a useful answer. Maybe it will bring some interested visitors to the site.

Actually, this question might have the answer: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/11656/what-is-the-buddhist-term-for-each-moment-being-subtlety-unique

I'm not sure but I guess it's an expression of "feeling" or Vedanā -- e.g. the feeling that, "This is pleasant" versus "This is not pleasant".
I say that because the book starts with discussing whether you should maintain your motorcycle, based on whether your doing so leads to your having a good time when you're riding (I think there's a passage with an analogy about riding on a sunny day on a well-tuned machine versus riding in the rain on a machine that's breaking down). The word "feeling" shows up frequently in the first chapter,
Another memorable passage, near the climax, is when he explains the Greek idea of arete -- I think that the example which he gives, i.e. "And
may they say, as he returns from war, ‘He is far better than his father.’" appears to be an example of pride or conceit.
I'm not sure whether all that is what Buddhists would call "the direct experience of the moment". I couldn't tell you about Zen but the practice of "guarding the sense door" might (I'm not sure) involve being aware of what you sense (e.g. aware of contact: contact between light plus eye plus consciousness-of-seeing, and so on for all six senses), without becoming over-involved in how you may feel about that, in the feelings which you develop as a consequence of that sensory contact.
On the other hand part of what I think is good about the book is when he decides that the question "What is good?" is a more important or fundamental question than "What is true?" (i.e. when he contrasts the Sophists with Aristotle). I think the question of "What is good?" (i.e. Quality) corresponds not only to "feelings" but also "virtue" (right behaviour, righteousness, morality) ... and not only "virtue" but also the question of whether things are "beneficial" or "skillful" instead of harmful. And I think that corresponds to Buddhist concepts -- one of which is sila, which isn't just elemental but fundamental to Buddhism-as-it's-taught -- and another is the Buddhist term "ariya", which is translated "noble" or right, and is used when naming, "the noble truths", "the noble eight-fold path", "the noble sangha".

Well said. Whatever the moment of experience might be, it unfolds in to everything we know of. There is a similar question about Volition: how does it 'happen'? I suppose these things are not explainable, except as how the scriptures have already done.