text:
How should satipatthana be understood in regard to external/internal minds?

"In this way he remains focused internally on the mind in & of itself, or externally on the mind in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the mind in & of itself. (Thanissaro)

How should the fragment above be understood and practiced in detail, in particular, considering the last two alternatives: externally and internally/externally?

See: Satipathanna Sutta and contemplating mind externally?

Here is a short quote from an article on BuddhaNet called "The Vipassana Retreat - The Six Sense-spheres". In here it's talked about how internally and externally should be understood.

The Vipassana Retreat

The Six Sense-spheres

The teaching of the sense-spheres is to be found in the Contemplation of Mind (dhammanupassana) in the text we are following: the Satipatthana Sutta, which by now is familiar to you as the Four Establishments of Mindfulness.
After each section in the text in the Satipathana Sutta, you will find this passage: "In this way he abides contemplating the body as a body (or feelings, mind states and mental phenomena) internally, externally, and both internally and externally". What does this mean? It means that the focus of one's attention changes from the subjective (internal) to the objective (external) and by "both" is meant the understanding of the interrelationship or interdependence.
The focus of the practice so far has been mainly introspective; now the watchfulness or attentiveness can be expanded to include the external as well. That is, the attention is switched from the subjective to the objective. This is done by orientating to the sense-spheres, which are about the relationship between oneself and the outer world. Practising both internal and external satipatthanas can prevent self-absorption, and achieve a skilled balanced between introversion and extroversion.
The importance of contemplation of the sense-spheres is that it directs awareness to the six “internal” and “external” sense-spheres and the fetters (samyojana) arising in dependence on them. Although a fetter arises dependent on sense and object, the attaching nature of such a fetter should not be attributed to the senses or objects themselves, but to the influence of the hankering pull of desire (tanha)...

The article says further on how to make an orientation to a sense-door:

Orientation to a Sense-door
To make an orientation to a sense-door, you start by literally coming to your senses - seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and smelling. These are the five sense-doors or sense bases; the 'sixth sense' is 'consciousness of something', which is the mind-base with its eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, etc. You also need to be aware of the senses internally as well as externally. That is, the organs and their sense objects: nose/smell, tongue/taste, body/tactile objects, ear/sound, mind/mind-objects or consciousness.
Attentiveness or 'presence of mind' at one of the sense-doors during a sense impression is the way to practice. For example, most people are predominantly visual, so being attentive at the eye-door allows you to notice the effects of the contact between the eye and the visible objects and how you are relating to them.
The process is this: there is the eye (the internal base), and a visible object (the external base). With contact or a sense impression between the sense-door and external object, consciousness arises followed by feeling. The moment of consciousness ordinarily is too rapid to catch while the feeling tone can be more easily known and apprehended.
This orientation to a sense-door brings awareness of what is happening during the moment of contact or the sense impression, and with it the ability to monitor the associated feelings and consciousness that arises. When this feeling tone is apprehended, the link to liking and disliking is broken and therefore one is free at that moment from conditioned suffering.

Here is a quote from the Wiki on the 6 sense bases:

Ṣaḍāyatana (Sanskrit) or saḷāyatana (Pāli) means the six sense bases (Pāli, Skt.: āyatana), that is, the sense organs and their objects. These are:
Eye and Vision
Ear and Hearing
Nose and Olfaction
Tongue and Taste
Skin and Touch
Mind and Thought
That is, in Buddhism, the sixth "internal" and "external" sense bases are: mind (Skt., manas; Pali, mano); and, thought (along with memory and emotion) (Skt., dharma; Pali, dhamma).
Ṣaḍāyatana is the fifth link in the Twelve Nidānas of Pratitya-Samutpada (Dependent Origination) and thus likewise in the fifth position on the Bhavacakra (Wheel of Becoming). Ṣaḍāyatana (Sense Gates) is dependent on Nāmarūpa (Name and Form) as condition before it can exist.

In what way does one subjectively or objectively focus on a sense? it says it is done by orientating to the sense spheres? But that doesn't seem to convey any direction at all as to what should actually be happening?

I updated the answer to include the orientation to a sense-door.

Thanks, that's a very clear answer calling out the internal/external as the  subjective/objective or the way I understand it, interpreted/observed viewpoints.

Thank you! I hadn't gotten around to checking out the article yet myself :)

@Ryan. Don't worry about it. May you be well and happy.

@SriLanka you as well friend

There's a long discussion here on DhammaWheel: Satipatthana: Internal and external contemplation
It starts by saying that, according the commentarial literature (emphasis mine),

The first way of interpreting follows the Abhidhammic and commentarial literature, which interprets 'internally/externally' to encompass phenomenon arising in oneself and others. So, when one contemplates body/feelings/mind/dhammas, one contemplates them in oneself and in others. We of course cannot read the minds of others. But reading the Abhidhammic and commentarial literature, Ven. Analayo suggests that we can direct mindfulness towards the outer manifestations of others (facial expressions, posture, movements, etc) so as to practice satipatthana 'externally'.
The second way of interpretating is suggested by some contemporary teachers who interpret 'internally/externally' to refer to what is inside of the body and what is on the outside of the body--i.e. the surface of the skin. I won't reproduce Ven. Analayo's arguments in detail here. But he more or less argues that while such interpretations are not entirely unfounded and have their practical benefits, they have their limits (e.g. it becomes hard to maintain such a distinction when one begins to contemplate the dhammas).

Ven. Sujato's translation is,

And so they meditate observing an aspect of the mind internally, externally, and both internally and externally.
Iti ajjhattaṃ vā citte cittānupassī viharati, bahiddhā vā citte cittānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā citte cittānupassī viharati;

The word used there for "internally" is ajjhattaṃ ...

concerning oneself in oneself; inwardly, personally; in regard to oneself (opp. bahiddhā).

... (and for externally, bahiddhā), so IMO it's plausible that the opposite of "in oneself" might be "in someone else".

In Uddesa Vibhaṅga Sutta one of the main Suttas where the term internally and externally is analysed in detail. Analysis of what internally and externally appears multiple places. Couple quote on this is as follows, but it is best to read the whole Sutta to get a more thought out idea.
Summary

Bhikshus, a monk should examine things in such a way that while he is doing so, his consciousness
  is neither distracted nor scattered externally, nor slack internally; and by not clinging,
  would be unagitated.
  Bhikshus, if his consciousness is neither distracted nor scattered externally, nor slack internally;38
  and by not clinging, is unagitated, then there is in him no further arising or producing of suffering,
  that is, of birth, decay and death.”

Internally:

Having cognized a mind-object with the mind, if his consciousness follows after the sign of mindobject,
  bound to gratification in the mind-object sign,
  enthralled by gratification in the mind-object sign,
  yoked to the fetter of gratification in the mind-object sign—
  then, the consciousness is said to be distracted and scattered externally.
  Thus, avuso, is the consciousness said to be distracted and scattered externally

Externally:

Having cognized a mind-object with the mind, if his consciousness does not follow after the sign
  of mind-object,
  not bound to gratification in the mind-object sign,
  not enthralled by gratification in the mind-object sign,
  not yoked to the fetter of gratification in the mind-object sign—
  then, the consciousness said to be distracted and scattered externally.
  Thus, avuso, is the consciousness said to be undistracted and unscattered externally.

Insight

He does not regard consciousness as the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness
  as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.
  That consciousness of his changes, becoming other.
  When that consciousness of his changes, becoming other, his consciousness70 is not caught up with
  the consciousness‟s changing.
  No agitated mental states born of the preoccupation with that consciousness‟s changes arise together
  and continue to overwhelm his mind.
  Because his mind is not overwhelmed, he is fearful, vexed, and full of longing, and due to non-clinging,
  he is unagitated.
  Thus, avuso, is there neither agitation nor clinging.

Sorce: Uddesa Vibhaṅga Sutta.

It seems like the internal and external headings are flipped.

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


text:
How to "attend to the perception of light"?
In  AN 7.58, the Buddha instructed Maha Moggallana on what do to about his nodding:

"But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then attend to the perception of light, resolve on the perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night. By means of an awareness thus open & unhampered, develop a brightened mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

Elsewhere (AN 4.41), this same practice is described as one that leads to knowledge & vision1.
How is this to be understood and practiced in detail? What is meant by "perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night"?
Is it as simple as imagining light? Are there ancient or modern detailed comments on this practice?

1In Bodhi translation, he says the Manorathapūranī understand this as divine eye, but in other places it can be insight knowledge or full enlightement.

In the book "The Way Of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera it's described how to overcome to the hindrance of Sloth and Torpor. Here he writes about the perception of light. I have made highlights in the quote:

3. Sloth and Torpor
Through wrong reflection on a state of boredom and the like, sloth and torpor come to be. Boredom is just dissatisfaction. Lassitude is bodily laziness. Languidity of body is the bending of the body torpidly in getting up and in similar actions. Lethargy after a meal is a dizziness or slight faint which is due to eating a principal meal. It is also called the discomfort which follows such a meal. The mind's sluggishness is the dullness of the mind. An abundance of wrong reflection on boredom and similar states of mind produces sloth and torpor. Therefore the Blessed One said that much wrong reflection on boredom, lassitude, languidity of body, lethargy after a meal, and the mind's sluggishness, is a condition for the production of fresh sloth and torpor and the increase and expansion of sloth and torpor already come into being.
Through right reflection in inceptive energy and similar states of mind is brought about the overthrow of sloth and torpor. Inceptive energy is the effort first set afoot. Exertion is more powerful than the inceptive energy because it leaves indolence behind. And because of its assailing further and further of the destructive condition, progressive endeavor is more powerful than exertion. By the exercise of right reflection intensely on this threefold strenuousness sloth and torpor are cast out. Therefore the Blessed One said that the condition for keeping out new sloth and torpor, and for casting out sloth and torpor that is old, is abundant right reflection on the element of inceptive energy, of exertion and of progressive endeavor.
There are six things which lead to the casting out of sloth and torpor: The seeing of the reason of sloth and torpor in the fact of eating too much or gluttony; the changing of the postures completely; reflection on the perception of light; staying in the open; sympathetic and helpful companionship of the good; and stimulating talk that assists in dispelling sloth an torpor.
There is the following explanation of these six things: The bhikkhu who has eaten gluttonously is assailed by sloth and torpor while doing his recluse duty of meditation in his day or night quarters as by a mighty elephant pressing down on him, but that one who practices moderation in food is not troubled thus with these hindrances. In one who thus sees the characteristic of sloth and torpor in gluttony there is the casting out of sloth and torpor.
Sloth and torpor disappear in him who changes over from the posture which induces sloth and torpor to another; in him who reflects on the brightness or the light of the moon, a lamp or a torch by night, and on the light or brightness of the sun by day; in him who lives in the open; in him who associates with sympathetic and helpful companions, like the Elder Maha Kassapa, who have dispelled sloth and torpor; and by stimulating talk connected with a strict recluse-regimen.
Therefore it is said: Six things lead to the casting out of sloth and torpor. The yogi understands thus: sloth and torpor cast out by these six things are stopped from arising forever in the future by the attainment of the path of arahantship.
The bhikkhu who has eaten gluttonously after the manner of the well-known types of Brahmanical gormandizers mentioned in ancient Indian books. There are five kinds of these greedy eaters: (1) He who eats until he has to be raised up by the hand from his seat. (2) He who lies rolling just where he has eaten and eats as long as he likes. (3) He who eats until he slips off his waist cloth. (4) He who fills himself with food in such a way that it seems as if a crow could peck at the food in him. (5) He who having filled his belly full and vomitted eats more food again, or he who eats until he vomits.
On the light or brightness of the sun by day: The meaning should be understood thus: Sloth and torpor vanish in him, too, who at night is reflecting on the image of the perception of the brightness of the sun he got by day.
Here it may be helpful to state the eight ways of dealing with torpor taught by the Master to the Elder Maha Moggallana: (1) One should neglect to mind the thought which says that drowsiness is descending on one, or (2) one should reflect on the Dhamma, or (3) repeat or recite the Dhamma, or (4) pull both earlobes and rub or massage the limbs with the hands, or (5) getting up from the sitting position, apply water on and rub the eyes, and look into the distance, at the constellations in the starry sky, or (6) reflect on the thought of light, or (7) fix the thought on the ambulatory, aware of the ends of it with the controlling faculties of sense turned inwards and the mind kept in, or (8) sleep conscious of the time of waking and on awaking get up quickly thinking that one will not give oneself to the comforts of lying down, reclining and languor, when all other seven ways fail.

I think it is as simple as you mentioned, i.e. to just imagine a bright light or imagine the items described in the quote.

Very valuable quote, especially the "right reflection on the element of inceptive energy, of exertion and of progressive endeavor" - thank you very much.

You're welcome:) glad it was of help.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Are some forms of employment less just to workers, according to Buddhism?
I live in a pleasant apartment complex and work as an Instructor. My job is cushy, which is good because I have health issues (and teach adults with health issues). But I watch workers mow the lawn at the apartment complex, re-shingle the roofs, etc. Other examples are food service workers and auto repair people with oil and sweat on them. I have worked on an assembly line for a while and the biggest problem for me was the intolerable loneliness. (It didn't do much for my feet, hands and back either.) I have cooked, cleaned, repaired cars and appliances and so on, but all in some moderation. I wonder about jobs where people do the same drudge work day after day?
I know about the idea of Karma, but it has gone flat for me, because the idea of Reincarnation has also. Leaving those aside (except for people getting good or bad consequences of their recent choices) what does Buddhism say about whether various work situations are more or less Just / Fair to the workers? This is not about Right Livelihood, because I am addressing the circumstances that workers are put in - the external world - rather than them choosing their work - the personal realm. [Consider only legally allowed work: I am not trying to deal with crime here. Also, don't try to solve the problem, only explain the perspective on it, please.]

In the book "The Buddha's Teachings on Prosperity" there was an interesting section on the Buddha's advice to employers on how to treat their employees. I will fill in with direct quotes a bit later. But the message to employers was to treat their employees well and to give them benefits including something akin to modern day medical benefits.
I found this very interesting but not surprising. The Buddha was a social champion in compassion and treating people fairly. Many employers today could learn a lot from his teachings.
Edit
From page 16 of "The Buddha's Teachings on Prosperity":

The Buddha's recommendations for the welfare of employees further clarify an honorable path to prosperity. Specifically he mentioned five ways in which employers should treat workers:
Assign work and duties in accordance with their skills and abilities.
Pay salaries befitting their work and service.
Provide medical assistance.
Make wholesome food availble.
Allow for leave and vacations at appropriate times.
These amazingly modern concepts confirm the Buddha's teaching that people are not entitled to wealth if they fail to follow ethical business practices.

The books original source for this information was listed as DN 31: Sigalovada Sutta, The Long Discourses of the Buddha: 461-469.
And indeed from Sigalovada Sutta:

"In five ways should a master minister to his servants and employees as the Nadir:
(i) by assigning them work according to their ability,
(ii) by supplying them with food and with wages,
(iii) by tending them in sickness,
(iv) by sharing with them any delicacies,
(v) by granting them leave at times.

As far as people doing routine work, that doesn't have to be a negative thing at all. Not being overly stimulated in your work can give you plenty of time for being meditative in daily life, being content with a simple life, and getting out of work on time as compared to executives who are married to their careers and stay occupied with them 24/7.

I especially like the last section of your answer about simple work. It's very true. It becomes much easier to be mindful throughout the working day.

This addresses what I am asking well. As for being meditative, I found the assembly line and also repetitive work on the computer to be acceptable (especially with music) for a while, but the loneliness was crushing. Same reason I stopped wanting to be a computer programmer - too much time staring at my "square girlfriend" : )

If I spend too much time idly browsing the web I dampen my meditative concentration, I consider it akin to idle chatter. FWIW, boredom and loneliness are among the first defilements one loses after attaining the ariya states, so there's that to look forward to.

@Buddho: true, but some people express their nature through interacting with others. (Mmm... I sense another question coming on.) So, despite not being bothered by feeling bored or lonely, they can be signals that I am not fully living my path.

I experientially agree simple work is more enjoyable and conducive to being able to practice a peaceful mind and even vipassana! But it certainly wont be as intensive and self-developmental as a full on mini-retreat.. which one can afford if the financial reward with said "more stressful" jobs.

The law of kamma is always in effect. Wholesome actions lead to wholesome results. Unwholesome actions lead to unwholesome results. "Justness or fairness" are both human conventional constructs.
They are acts of extrapolation or superimposing qualities onto reality.
When one is asking whether or not a specific situation is just or fair, one is no longer seeing reality for what it is. One is no longer being objective and non-interfering. When being objective it would only be "seeing" or "hearing" or any of the other senses at work.
When being unmindful of phenomena the mind will follow after an object and begin to evaluate it and form opinions about it. These are mental constructs that have no real point of reference.
This can be verified by doing insight meditation.

I somewhat agree... Another question about ending one's life by not eating said that there are circumstances where non-action is not blameworthy (watching a person being swept away in a flood and not attempting to save them - is not an action). So, there is no compulsion to meddle in peoples' lives, yet if help can be rendered, it reduces suffering. To be involved without getting involved emotionally or in terms of outcome... This follows directly from my question Are there other people.

Yesterday I found myself thinking: "noting, noting..." It was very funny. But I was driving the car at the same time.

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


text:
Can the Buddhism.SE site function as "the Sangha" for me?
I don't have access to a Sangha just now, and I do frequent this very well conceived and helpful site. Recently I was writing a comment about no longer being a programmer because it was too isolating for my nature ("square girlfriend" = computer screen, ha ha) and I thought: gee, I am staring at a screen now... and for many hours today...
But it is vastly different to be reading and writing with other people (ahem) than to just do an induhvidual activity like programming. Right? I am actually interacting, but somewhat ansynchronously. So I still use and develop some of my Hetaira Archetype skills (more effortful and challenging with only text to interpret and reply by).
Does asking and answering Questions here count as taking refuge in (and providing) The Sangha?

Sangha means different things to different people.
Some people who "take refuge in the sangha" are referring to all the enlightened beings who have ever lived and their refuge is in being inspired by the example of such beings.
Some are referring to the community of ordained monks and nuns and they look to the monastic community for teachings of the dhamma and guidance in their practice.
Some are referring to all followers of the Buddha's teachings not only the enlightened and ordained ones. It's more of a "fellow travelers along the path" concept.
From Wikipedia, "Some scholars have noted that sangha is frequently (and according to them, mistakenly) used in the West to refer to any sort of Buddhist community." The point being there is not one particular thing that is understood to be the sangha that one takes refuge in.
To really answer your question, we'd have to know what you mean by a sangha. But from the context of your question, I'm guessing you mean a community revolving around Buddhism where you can learn and interact with others.
Here is what I'd like to think we're practicing here on Buddhism.SE. It's from the Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha:

"Then, Ananda, I answered Mara, the Evil One, saying: 'I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until my bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples — wise, well disciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the Dhamma, abiding by appropriate conduct and, having learned the Master's word, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it in detail, and make it clear; until, when adverse opinions arise, they shall be able to refute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating Dhamma.

It's a great and wonderful thing that we have a format to try our hand at explaining the dhamma to someone else. It's a great opportunity and a deep responsibility to try our best to get it right. This is a good place. :)
But that said, I don't think it's wise to fully feel that one is taking refuge here as a sangha and depending heavily on it for learning. There are a lot of potential drawbacks. It's very democratic and that can sometimes result in unsound answers getting voted up. We welcome all traditions but that can result in such a mixture of views being expressed it can be confusing to newcomers to Buddhism. This answer to a question about the benefits of sticking to one tradition is a good explanation for what I'm getting at.
As great as the site is, it's not a solid substitute for learning from a teacher or at a center or in some manner of a structured program. It's not the same as walking into a physical location and feeling the quiet, calm, and peace of a space that is dedicated to meditation; even if you have to travel some distance for that experience occasionally. It's a great complimentary practice, but structured learning and meditation (whether local or online) in a particular tradition may offer the depth of the teachings and support for your particular practice that can't be offered in a short answer, democratic, Q & A format community.

Lovely Answer. Your paragraph beginning "It's a great and wonderful thing that ..." is a beautiful statement. I appreciate the list of the drawbacks in your last two paragraphs. Perhaps my question was naive. I used to live in a Retreat Centre, but now I am far away doing things completely different.

@nocomprende, thank you. I'm glad it was useful. :)

For years my sangha was audio recordings and books. I came and went from a couple of IRL (In real life) sanghas. I always found the experience of meeting and talking with like minded people to be beneficial. Even if only like minded in interests and/or curiosity.
There were both Buddhists and non-buddhists in one sangha, but they shared things in common. Meditation practices, belief in some type of morality, or sometimes even interests in psychology.
Some people take the sangha and their practice extremely seriously, and some are more laid back about it. There exist people sprinkled between both extremes.
I would say this could be a type of sangha, but I'd recommend having an IRL sangha in addition to it.
Also if you do not have a Lama or Guru I would say that is more essential than a sangha. Especially if you have questions you wish to get clarification on, that you might not feel comfortable posting on the internet.
I have encountered one commentary after an introduction in a copy of The Tibetan Book of the Dead where the following claim was made. That ultimately the guru serves no function. It was one of the strangest statements I have encountered. I do not have that copy on hand, it is much older then the copy I currently have. I've placed an order for the copy that I read it in, so once it arrives I'll present the statement in its original wording.
Pretty much every other conversation on the subject has said the opposite, that the Guru and a Sangha are necessary.
Edit: So it was more of a statement then an argument.
The ISBN is 9780394730646 and the commentary is by Rinpoche Chögyam Trungpa, for those that want to read it. The statement dealt more specifically with the topic at hand, and I don't want to quote it as it can easily be taken out of context. I find it useful read with the context of the commentary as a whole and with the book itself. (Which I got for 15 cents plus shipping, what a steal!)
So instead I will quote The Bardo Prayer which Protects from Fear which is at the back of the book with other prayers and verses related to the Bardo. I'll keep it as close to the original formatting as possible.
༔ (gter tsheg)

A terma break, a treasure break (Unicode 0F14: ༔)
a punctuation mark or textual delimiter used in a fashion somewhat
comparable to a comma. This mark is known as གཏེར་ཚེག and may ligate
or combine with certain other signs.

When the journey of my life has reached its end,
  and since no relatives go with me from this world
  I wander in the bardo state alone,
  may the peaceful and wrathful buddhas send out the power of
  their compassion
  and clear away the dense darkness of ignorance. ༔
When parted from beloved friends, wandering alone,
  my own projections' empty forms appear,
  may the buddhas send out the power of their compassion
  so that the bardo's terrors do not come. ༔
When the luminous lights of wisdom shine,
  fearlessly may I recognize myself;
  when the forms of the peaceful and wrathful ones appear,
  fearless and confident may I recognize the bardo. ༔
When I suffer through the power of evil karma,
  may the peaceful and wrathful buddhas clear away suffering;
  when the sound of dharmatā roars like a thousand thunders,
  may it be transformed into the sound of mahāyāna teaching. ༔
When I follow my karma, without a refuge,
  may the peaceful and wrathful buddhas be my refuge;
  when I suffer the karma of unconscious tendancies,
  may the samādhi of bliss and luminosity arise. ༔
At the moment of spontaneous birth in the bardo of becoming,
  may the false teachings of the tempters not arise;
  when I arrive wherever I wish by supernatural power,
  may the illusory terrors of evil karma not arrise. ༔
When savage beasts of prey are roaring,
  may it become the sound of dharma, the six syllables;
  when I am chased by snow, rain, wind and darkness,
  may I receive the clear divine eye of wisdom. ༔
May all sentient beings of the same realm in the bardo,
  free from jealousy, be born in a higher state;
  when great thirst and hunger are caused by passions,
  may the pain of thirst and hunger, heat and cold, not arise. ༔
When I see my future parents in union,
  may I see the peaceful and wrathful buddhas with their consorts;
  with power to choose my birthplace, for the good of others,
  may I receive a perfect body adorned with auspicious signs. ༔
Obtaining for myself a perfect human body,
  may all who see and hear me at once be liberated;
  may I not follow all my evil karma,
  but follow and increase what merit I may have. ༔
Wherever I am born, at that very place,
  may I meet the yidam of this life face to face;
  knowing how to walk and talk as soon as I am born,
  may I attain the power of non-forgetfulness and remembrance of past lives.༔
In all stages of learning, high, middle, and low,
  may I understand just by hearing, thinking and seeing;
  wherever I am born, may that land be blessed,
  so that all sentient beings may be happy. ༔
O peaceful and wrathful buddhas, may I and others
  become like you yourselves, just as you are,
  with your forms and your auspicious marks,
  your retinues, your long life and your realms. ༔
Samantabhadra, the peaceful and wrathful ones, infinite compassion,
  the power of truth of the pure dharmatā,
  and followers of tantra in one-pointed meditation:
  may their blessings fulfill this inspiration-prayer. ༔

Thank you. I have a Guru, but I have not been in contact with her for a few years (except inwardly : ) I look forward to reading the explanation of how the guru serves no function - interesting statement. Perhaps it is because ultimately, we are all "One Without a Second" (Vivekacudemani #515)

@nocomprende well the book shipped yesterday, so I'll have it soon.

Arigato Zaisho. Your quote is from Volume 6, and I have vol 3, which includes Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism and The Myth of Freedom, which I read years ago. They are not published online. I wish you could refer to what was said about not needing a Guru, but if you feel it would be unwise, I understand. I liked in the excerpt above how many times sounds were referred to. I used to sit outside and listen to the freeway noises in the distance, for years finding them irritating, then not, then they became bells and organ notes and people toning. Former wife thought I was mad. Not So.

@ChrisW thanks for the edit. I typed it late at night, and I couldn't figure out the linebreak, so I just gave up on it.

@nocomprende the context was specific to the bardo, but while comparing the bardo to the psychological states of life. It said roughly that a guru or spiritual friend can act as a catalyst, but ultimately all progress is up to the individual. Especially true in the bardo, as you are alone, and must recognize emptiness, and the phenomena of the event as projections of the mind.

You're welcome. Editing each line gave me some opportunity to read it (as you had when you typed it).

Householder, interested
Can the Buddhism.SE site function as “the Sangha” for me?
First Saṅgha here, means the Buddhas straight following disciples, and is used to address the Bhikkhu community.
The proper term for your use, a mixed or monk void gathering around the Buddha is called Buddha-Parisā.
It might be that there is occasionally a gathering of the Buddhas disciples, monks, nuns, lay-people, male or female.
There are many actually very respect-less ways the notion Buddha-Sangha is used in modern and western world, not conductive for proper refuge at all and sometimes even to be regarded as fraud or stealing.
Does asking and answering Questions here count as taking refuge in (and providing) The Sangha?
Asking answering does not mean going for refuge necessary. Seeking answers, refuge, outwardly the Buddhas heritage and disciples, is no refuge. Since it is a commercial place at least, not really dedicated to the Sangha of the Buddhas monks, not easy for one to trace the Gems here, if people and words appear and not underlying the rules and principles, it would not easy function as Sangha, even in perfect meaning.
This counts, out of that reason, also for gifts and contributions here. They can not easy be understood as high merits and at large are dedicated to the web-sites owners for there commercial use, but also for what ever common societies members.
While it could happen that there are gifts, reseiving, or on one side or even two sides purified giving, it would be hardly matching the qualities of the Noble Sangha, if one seeks after doing such merits.
So generally merely dangerous to regard the interact as interact with the Sangha of the Buddha, in both, conventional and perfect sense.
How ever, things might change, people come and go, finding the conditions they are inclinated to and at least there might be always accesspoints, doors, traced, left behind, so that those with less dust in the eyes could follow them, find the Tripple Gems, the Sangha, and seek escape by going for refuge.
Some general points on failures in perceiving, fault object..., in regard of refuge, can be found here: How does one become a lay Buddhist?
See also: Association with People of Integrity and many on good association for prosperity here.
To live near the Sangha, to dwell in a borderland to access the Noble Domain, it is required the dwell in a Vatt(a), a place of practice the Noble Tradition, outwardly and inwardly, and to leave home, at least temporary.
If lay people see the benefit of having access to the Noble Domain, they are wise in looking for the conditions that at least such as a "Kuti" and water in a remote area, where single Sages could dwell is available and look that ways to access the village are pleasant to walk.

...As a king intent on battle
  would hire a youth
  in whom there are
      archery skills,
      persistence,
      & strength,
  and not, on the basis of birth,
              a coward;
  so, too, you should honor
  a person of noble conduct, wise,
  in whom are established
          composure
          & patience,
  even though
  his birth may be lowly.
Let donors build
  pleasant hermitages
  and there invite the learned to stay.
  Let them make reservoirs
      in dry forests
  and walking paths
      where it's rough
  Let them, with a clear, calm awareness,
  give food, drink, snacks,
  clothing, & lodgings
  to those who've become
      straightforward.... (SN 3.24)

If ordinary people, no landlords or kings, desire to have the Sangha near, they would need the permission of the landlord, the king, so that a Vatt(a) could be given to the Sangha without worldly, legal strings, they could not accept.
It's good and wise to look after providing such places in the internet-realm, kingdoms, and if wishing to do such great merits, good to let a wise monk assist you in doing so.
What is a boarderland, how to recognice?

Fields are spoiled by weeds;
  people, by passion.
  So what's given to those
  free of passion
      bears great fruit.
Fields are spoiled by weeds;
  people, by aversion.
  So what's given to those
  free of aversion
      bears great fruit.
Fields are spoiled by weeds;
  people, by delusion.
  So what's given to those
  free of delusion
      bears great fruit.
Fields are spoiled by weeds;
  people, by longing.
  So what's given to those
  free of longing
      bears great fruit. (dhp)

(Note that this gift of Dhamma is not dedicated for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to make merits toward release from this wheel)


text:
Does each person have a particular True Nature, according to Buddhism?
I know that there is what is described as universal True Nature - aspects common to everyone. I know about Karma, which can be seen as how beings have tendencies even from birth (which otherwise has no explanation that I can see). This question is whether each person (regardless how you think they exist or not) has a particular set of characteristics that are theirs to express in living their full potential?
Buddhism is sometimes accused of being nihilistic in the way that it seems to leave no reason for people to function when they overcome ignorance and realize the truths. This is your chance to explain, using references, that no, every person is a valid and necessary part of the complex web of Experience, not just a wrinkle that escaped temporarily from The Void.

Self Tag was so compelling... Oh! Soul Tag! But I do not accept the concept of a Soul, as I understand it, so don't go there. Don't go in to Reincarnation either - it is not to the point. "Take the instant way..."

Could you clarify the term "true nature"? Thank you.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.007.wlsh.html

@Ryan: thank you for the link. I am not worried, neither am I grasping. It is merely that we can observe that people vary, in obvious ways like height, and also in less-obvious ways, like temperament. I am asking if Dasein has any characteristics that sprang in to being with it, and are like unto only itself? A purpose or strengths, etc? Every living thing can have different DNA, so why can not people have Different Natural Abilities? Does Buddhism assert that everyone is the same? To what purpose?

True Nature - Voltaire said that a book is finished, not when nothing more can be added, but when nothing more can be taken away. If we can't take away everything, then what is essential? Was it there to begin with? Can different people be different (else why have them?) Need a few more ?...? ? ? .........?

To the best of my knowledge Essentialism is not a part of any school of Buddhism. Essentialism deals with metaphysical essentialism, and is essentially on the opposite end of the spectrum from emptiness/sunyata, which might be refereed to by some as Metaphysical anti-realism. However I have not met many Buddhists that want to jump into that classification. Taoists love it though. The Buddhists will assert that there is an Ultimate truth, and so can never truely be metaphysical anti-realists. At least not in the most extreme case of the view. They do show some grey areas from time to time.
A quick dirty and brief summery of metaphysical anti-realism is that there is no "Truth"
but some views are more true than others. It is found in various places within eastern philosophy.
Also Buddhism is not nihilistic, never do they throw up their hands and say, nothing matters do whatever you want. The only term with nihilism in it that might come close to paralleling with the Buddhist worldview that I can think of is Mereological nihilism.

Mmkay... Essentialism is not quite what I was thinking. If I understand properly, it means that an object of type X has certain essential characteristics (Platonic Idealism), which is actually what I see Buddhism saying: people have senses, objects of the senses, consciousness of the sense objects, and on and on through the 52 things. To me this is somewhat silly and I never thought of it as factual, just a nice description. I was asking: when my friend Mark came in to being, did some "unique particulars" come with him? Otherwise, how in the world can we distinguish him from anyone else?

@nocomprende so your asking if the "you" that travels with "you" from life to life has particulars that separate it from other "souls" going from life to life? The answer is no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9A%C5%ABnyat%C4%81

At least from the Buddhist perspective...
If I am still misunderstanding, please edit your original question.
Also Buddhism != Platonic Idealism either...

How about just within this life?

@nocomprende In most cases no "unique particulars"... But I can think of some fringe cases, like being the first to get particular tattoo, or holding a particular belief.
Any particular you have that is unique to you, sure. But they do not come with you, when you die. People gain and lose particulars all the time.

Very good question though, great way to narrow the scope.

I still find this question compelling. So let's imagine a building. It is unique in all the world, presumably. It didn't have a past life, and will not reincarnate. Yet it has characteristics now, for good or ill, that no other building has. This is the opposite of the familiar "where does the fire go when it goes out?" idea: I am asking, where did the fire come from? Where did the unique building come from? If you say, someone's head, then the question becomes: where did their head come from? It is all very well to say that things dissolve in to nothing, but what brings them about initially?

So you are asking for first cause? In Buddhism there is no first cause.

Not so much first as: If things have causes and people's experience is a series of events, what events brought my experience in to being? Was I prepared with something different from everyone else? Otherwise, how could identical causes produce very different people? Another Vexing Question, I suppose...

Was I prepared with something different from everyone else? Just the causes of your previous lives. Karma cause becomes effect, becomes cause, becomes effect.

And so on and so forth, as for identical causes, I have no idea what you are talking about....

Appealing to previous lives as a cause is just kicking the can down the road. What about the causes in those lives? Question-begging. If people manifest differently, causes must have been different somewhere along the line. I suppose it is not important, nothing can be made of it. I just think that it is good for people to recognize their strengths and build on them. Cause is not important for that. I withdraw my question.

The road does not begin or end, the "can" just keeps tumbling down it. Cyclic existence is not linear, but it is linear. I think you could compile all this into a new question maybe, as really there have been several questions throughout this thread.

(two years later) I guess it comes down to "the Butterfly Effect". Which is part of the reason my symbol is a butterfly. How Interesting! What I used to call Teleology becomes Connected Causes. Future becomes past, becomes now becomes nothing. I don't know. Heart Sutra!


text:
What is "vital formations"?
In this answer by @yuttadhammo, he quotes a section of the Visuddhimagga:

After reciting the Pātimokkha, it seems,
  on the Uposatha day of the full moon, one of the two elders who were brothers
  went to his own dwelling place surrounded by the Community of Bhikkhus. As
  he stood on the walk looking at the moonlight he calculated his own vital
  formations, and he said to the Community of Bhikkhus, “In what way have you
  seen bhikkhus attaining Nibbāna up till now?” Some answered, “Till now we
  have seen them attain Nibbāna sitting in their seats.” Others answered, “We
  have seen them sitting cross-legged in the air.” The elder said, “I shall now
  show you one attaining Nibbāna while walking.” He then drew a line on the
  walk, saying, “I shall go from this end of the walk to the other end and return;
  when I reach this line I shall attain Nibbāna.” So saying, he stepped on to the
  walk and went to the far end. On his return he attained Nibbāna in the same
  moment in which he stepped on the line.
-- Vism. VIII.244 (Nyanamoli, trans)

I'm echoing @Parag's inquiry, from the comments, here: what is meant by "vital formations" above?

Cool question and passage! Monks sitting in the air, being able to calculate their life-span... This topic makes me happy about the connection to Taoist jing and chi and flying immortals. My teacher always said though that Buddhism is way higher (no pun intended).

Here is a quote from "The Majjhima Nikaya 43 - Mahavedalla Sutta: The Greater Series of Questions and Answers" that explains the term "Vital Formations":

VITAL FORMATIONS

"Friend, are vital formations states of feeling or are vital formations one thing and states of feeling another?"

"Vital formations, friend, are not states of feeling. If vital formations were states of feeling, then when a bhikkhu has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, he would not be seen to emerge from it. Because vital formations are one thing and states of feeling another, when a bhikkhu has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, he can be seen to emerge from it."

"Friend, when this body is bereft of how many states is it then discarded and forsaken, left lying senseless like a log?"
  "Friend, when this body is bereft of three states - vitality, heat, and consciousness - it is then discarded and forsaken, left lying senseless like a log."
"Friend, what is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time, and a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling?"

"Friend, in the case of one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily formations have ceased and subsided, his verbal formations have ceased and subsided, his mental formations have ceased arid subsided, his vitality is exhausted, his heat has keen dissipated, and his faculties are fully broken up. In the case of a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, his bodily formations have ceased and subsided, his verbal formations have ceased and subsided, his mental formations have ceased and subsided, but his vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not been dissipated, and his faculties become exceptionally clear. This is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time, and a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling."
-- The Middle Length Discourses in the Majjhima Nikaya, Ch. 5: The Shorter Division of Pairs, (Culayamakavagga), p. 392-393, by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi

Here is another quote from the same book. This is from the chapter "Notes to sutta MN 43":

"Vital formations" (ayusankhara), according to MA, denotes vitality itself. They cannot be states of feeling because they are required to keep the body of a bhikkhu alive when he has attained to the cessation of perception and feeling. This special meditative attainment, in which all mental activity ceases, is accessible only to non- returners and arahants who also have mastery over the eight attainments on the side of serenity. For a brief discussion see the Introduction, p. 28, and for the full scholastic account, Vsm XXIII, 16-52. The cessation of perception and feeling will be taken up again in MN 44.
-- Ibid, p. 1237

Lastly, here is a quote from the "Visuddhimagga" explaining the term "Vital Formations":

“‘Vital formations’ are the same as life span; though some say that they are the life span, heat and consciousness. These are the object only of his normal consciousness. There is no death during cessation because dying takes place by means of the final life-continuum [consciousness]. He should attain only after adverting thus, ‘Let sudden death not occur.’ For in the case of sudden death he would not be able to declare final knowledge, advise the bhikkhus, and testify to the Dispensation’s power. And there would be no reaching the highest path in the case of a non-returner” (Vism-mhþ 904).

-- Visuddhimagga - The Path of Purification, p. 740, by Ven. Buddhaghosa


text:
Buddhist philosophy and "events"
By "event" I mean something that happens over some interval of time.
Am I right that for Buddhists, intervals don't exist (everything lasts only for an instant): so neither do events?
If so may I ask about the experience of "now" or the present: i.e. the experience of impermanence?
Is the experience of impermanence an event (i.e. with duration) or is it too only an instant?

Wherever did you get the idea that Buddhists think that "everything lasts only for an instant"? Do you have any quotes or sources for the nature of your question? (I have not heard such ideas before, that is why I ask.)

not a mathematical instant, but the smallest quantity of time there is, a ksana - 1/75th of a second. i think all buddhist teachings deny that the same thing can exist twice at two moments; though early buddhists may have made this claim only for two lives, i believe the theravada and all extant traditions make the wider claim, of "momentariness", based on the abhidarma

If you are saying that no set of circumstances ever repeats, and narrowing the scope of time to be small, then I think almost anyone would say yes. What am I missing that changes this from Philosophy to something particular to Buddhism? Does it have a larger applicability for some purpose? Where are you going with this?

i'm not sure what the question is, i'm just seeking clarity

Andrei's answer is very beautiful and should give you a lot to consider. Not sure if he came up with the relation of Entity and Event, but it is spot on. Good Luck!

i mean i'm not sure what your question is. yeah the answers here are always good

Buddhist philosophy of anatta challenges the notion of "entities" - objects with identity, independent of the rest of the world and observer.
Instead, here is an alternative: try and see the world as a connected network of causation, with a system of nominal entities overlaid on top. In other words, consider that entity is a construct of the mind. (This simplifies things a bit, as the network of causation is a concept as well, and even the mind itself is dependently co-determined by its objects - for those Madhyamaka nitpickers - but stay with me). What's important is to understand that the real world is not discrete. Discreteness is mind-made.
If we extend this from spatial to temporal relationships, we can see that event is a temporal counterpart of an entity. Indeed, event is something that has a definite identity, beginning, life span, and end. Exactly like an object. In our mind event is separated from its context, from the rest of the stuff going on before, in parallel with, and after.
But in actuality, that's never the case. Objects and events don't exist by themselves. At first approximation we can say they arise from causes and conditions - so when those conditions and causes come together, thereby is an object or event. And when some of those conditions and causes fall apart (the necessary ones) - the object or event is no longer.
If we look more carefully though, we will notice that causes and conditions don't live in isolation either - they are infinitely forking and joining, infinitely interacting. So it is the mind that picks a subset of causes and conditions to focus on and label; the mind assembles an object that would satisfy mind's predispositions. Similarly, the mind assembles an event, assigns it with identity, and cognizes its beginning, span, and ending.
So it's not that events don't exist because everything lasts only an instant. Events don't exist because they are discrete constructs, overlaid on the (analogue?) fabric of reality.
The experience of any (assembled!) entity or event is necessarily subject to beginning and ending, subject to impermanence. Because an assembled object cannot exist once its constituents fall apart. What you call "now" is itself an assembled entity. It depends on a number of conditions coming together in a certain way. When those conditions following their natural courses fall apart, that particular "now" is no longer, and a new "now" is assembled.
Because we ourselves delineate the entities/events, we can choose the level of granularity to apply. We can designate big objects (systems of components) and big events (massive events) - or we can observe at the small scale. (Check out "Hierarchy Theory" by Valerie Ahl for a modern treatment of this thought.) So is with observation of present, it is up to us to decide when the given present has begun and when it has ended. Ground reality is analogue, not discrete. (Technically speaking, both analogue and discrete are two sides of the same coin, two truths are really one and the same truth.) "Now" is not instantaneous nor an interval. It's a nominal designation.
All experienced phenomena are mere products of conceptualization, merely nominal entities without any ultimate existence. Therefore sentient existence necessarily involves suffering that comes from mismatch between the concept and reality.
The mistake we make by default is to assume that experienced reality is made of stable entities. Then we build expectations around this assumption, and then we suffer. So once we know the trick, we can see through it. But because the nature of mind is to fabricate experience, it keeps doing it whether we want it or not. Not just fabricate, but use these fabrications as foundations for its interpretation and decision-making activity. There is simply no other way to operate. So all our experience and behavior is necessarily based on layers upon layers of fabricated quasi-stable virtual structures. Which means suffering will inevitably sneak in here and there. But at least now we can include the above in our working model of reality, and account for the non-substantiality in our interpretation and decision-making activity. So even when we have to walk on illusions, we know what we are doing, and are ready to deal with it once they collapse. It may still be painful when it happens, but we will have expected it, and will minimize the damage as much as we can. This is the extent to which there is an escape from suffering.

Perhaps Signal Processing offers some good metaphors. What is a Signal? Does it exist? etc... Time and frequency domain can be interchanged... Fourier Transform, components, harmonics, Solitons... But I digress.

Am I right that for Buddhists, intervals don't exist (everything lasts only for an instant): so neither do events?

Ultimate reality exists only as momentary experiences of the six senses, experienced one after another. In this way, there is no "interval", either for Buddhists or non-Buddhists.
Conventionally speaking, Buddhists could employ the concept of intervals to explain phenomenon, I suppose. For instance: Experience A arises, experience A ceases, knowledge of impermanence arises, knowledge of impermanence ceases.
Within this interval of time, the conditions for the knowledge of impermanence to arise arose and ceased, moment by moment, and the knowledge of impermanence arose and ceased. As you alluded to, these are all individual momentary phenomenon.

By "event" I mean something that happens over some interval of time.

This is an argument based on semantics, but I suppose sure, you could say "events", as you have defined it, conceptually exist within Buddhism, inasmuch as some "thing" happens over a given interval of time: knowledge of impermanence (the thing) happening over given period of time, as defined above.


text:
Is there a Buddhist term for a lack of self identity?
Is there a Buddhist term for a lack of self identity?
I don't (of course) mean a radical acceptance of the anatta doctrine, but whether the Buddha or any Buddhist scholar or writer, talks explicitly about being unable to take one's own personal identity seriously enough: even to the extent of becoming quite thirsty for one.
Thank you for your compassion :-)

I think the question is unclear. Could you elaborate on how this is different from Anatta? And the meaning of this sentence: "...being unable to take one's own personal identity seriously enough: even to the extent of becoming quite thirsty for one...". Thank you.

by self identity i mean who you think you are based on who you've been, not from moment to moment but day to day or year to year. by thirsty i just mean psychologically attached to the experience

Asking about "who you think you are based on who you've been, not from moment to moment but day to day or year to year" seems unclear and highly philosophical.

Is your term "self identity" maybe the same thing as the Buddhist term "identity view"? There's a not-very-good question but several answers, which describe what identity view is, at What are examples of identity-view?

@SriLanka it's a standard psychological concept

@ChrisW i don't think it's identity view, but when i've edited the question you're free to say otherwise :)

You posted a link to "Self-concept" as an explanation of self-identity. Would it also makes sense to edit the text of the question and the title, to ask about "self concept" instead of "self identity": is the "standard psychological concept" of "self concept" what you want to ask about? Also you're asking about a lack. So might you have a hyperlink to a description of "lack of self concept"? Is "lack of self concept" also a standard psychological concept, is it said to have symptoms, etc.?

My model of development is: Pre-Ego (child, animal), Ego, Neo (self with ego not operating), Nondual (no self), and whatever comes beyond that. So, in my view, getting beyond Self is natural, inevitable (if the person develops) and should be common. But people get stuck in their Ego stage. I have only met one other person who really understood what it means to be a Neo (something like recurring, ongoing Satori), but I see it around me all the time. Perhaps this is what you are talking about? Also: Nonduality is now being studied in the research on Persistent Nonsymbolic Awareness (PNSE).

Rats! PNSE should say Persistent Nonsymbolic Experience. (Can't edit my comment now).

To study the Way is to study the self.  To study the self is to forget the self.  To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things.~Dogen

I think the question is asking about a self-identity in the Right Livelihood sense: making a living in the world doing something that aligns with your personality and idiosyncratic proclivities.
Am I right OP?

If I understand this question, this might be a diffuse perception of the skhandas, as these are the groupings that might better translate as the identity constructs (in the modern sense).
In that case, i'm not sure there is a word or discussion of identity disorders (if that is what you're referring to) -- i've never seeing this being discussed in any text.
I have seen (modern) people talk about supposed risks of mindfulness meditation for people with specific mental disorders who already have difficulties with making sense and perceiving or associating (or too inclined to disassociate) certain things. But whether these are real risks of what specific practice and to whom exactly i'm not sure (e.g. some researchers do advocate mindfulness meditation to people with specific identity disorders). This is the closest link to buddhism and this lack of self identity i've heard of.


text:
Does any sect claim that only Shakyamuni will ever achieve great nirvana
ARe there any schools which say that Shakyamuni the historical Buddha, alone, will ever be a Buddha?
I understand that some might identify him fully with the dharmakaya, but isn't it completely canonical that there is a Buddha vehicle for others, at some point in time?

No, there are no schools that claim this. All the schools accept that there were previous Buddhas before Buddha Shakyamuni and that there will be Buddhas after him as well.

do you have any source for this

You can't really give a specific citation to show that all schools don't believe in something. All you can do is point to them all and indicate that none of them do, and all the major scriptural collections (i.e. the Pali Canon accepted by the Theravada school, the Chinese Canon accepted in East Asia, and the Tibetan Kangyur) of all the major schools have references to previous and future Buddhas.

I realize that. I just find it odd that there WOULDN'T be some small, one-off branch of Buddhism that believes just this. Which is why I'm asking for a source that has led you to believe that such a branch doesn't exist, to make such a claim that NO schools claim this. How do you know that NO schools claim this?

It is something so basic and fundamental to the teaching of both Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism that if such a group existed, it would definitely be mentioned in general sources. By definition, Mahayana Buddhism is about teaching people how to become fully enlightened Buddhas, and within the Theravada school, the very early Suttas mention the previous Buddha Kassapa. Without proof that such a group DOES exist, we have to default to assuming they don't.

So you don't know this to be true, then. You're assuming. Thank you for the clarification.


text:
Does an arahant ever reveal that he is an arahant?
An arahant is one who has eradicated all defilements and broken all 10 fetters, namely sensual desire and conceit.
Why would an arahant mention that he is one and does the texts say anything about the purpose of mentioning that one is an arahant?

FYI, please don't post a comment instead of a small answer. Comments are ideally for commenting on the question: e.g. suggesting an improvement to the question or requesting a clarification. If you can help answer the question then it's generally better to post that as answer.

I think the Buddha said he was an Arahant. The Ariyapariyesana Sutta says,

"Then, wandering by stages, I arrived at Varanasi, at the Deer Park in Isipatana, to where the group of five monks were staying. From afar they saw me coming and, on seeing me, made a pact with one another, (saying,) 'Friends, here comes Gotama the contemplative: living luxuriously, straying from his exertion, backsliding into abundance. He doesn't deserve to be bowed down to, to be greeted by standing up, or to have his robe & bowl received. Still, a seat should be set out; if he wants to, he can sit down.' But as I approached, they were unable to keep to their pact. 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. Lend ear, friends: the Deathless has been attained. I will instruct you. I will teach you the Dhamma. Practicing as instructed, you will in no long time reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for yourselves in the here & now.'

The book In the Buddha's Words by Bhikkhu Bodhi translates "is a worthy one" in this sentence as "is an Arahant",

"Thereupon I told them: 'Monks, do not address the Tathagata by name and as "friend." The Tathagata is an Arahant, a Perfectly Enlightened One. Listen, monks, the Deathless has been attained. I shall instruct you, I shall teach you the Dhamma. Practicing as you are instructed, by realizing it for yourselves here and now through direct knowledge you will soon enter and dwell in that supreme goal of the holy life for the sake of which clansmen rightly go forth from the home life into homelessness.'

I suppose the reason was to persuade the five to listen to his teaching, to benefit them.

FYI page 136 of The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained,

This would have led some people to
remain secretly convinced of Ven. Dabba Mallaputta’s guilt and—because he was
an arahant—would have been for their long-term detriment and harm.

... which might imply that someone who is (secretly or not-so-secretly) against an arahant would be so to their detriment. So might that perhaps be another reason for an aharant's "revelation"?

Page 86 through 98 explains the following rule,

Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, claim a superior human state, a truly
noble knowledge and vision, as present in himself, saying, “Thus do I know; thus do I
see,” such that regardless of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion,
he—being remorseful and desirous of purification—might say, “Friends, not knowing, I
said I know; not seeing, I said I see—vainly, falsely, idly,” unless it was from overestimation,
he also is defeated and no longer in affiliation.

So I suppose the rule is to forbid knowingly lying about it.
There might be another rule for not saying such a thing to a lay person (page 92),

Claiming a superior human state that one mistakenly thinks one
has achieved is no offense under this rule, although if addressed to a lay person
the claim would come under Pc 8.

Note that "superior human state" is not just "being an aharant" but also attainments of jhana, samadhi, fruits of the path, abandoning defilements, being free from hindrances, etc.

Thank you for this answer. It makes sense that if a person is harming himself by having aversion towards an arahant then that arahant could choose to announce it to relieve that persons suffering.


text:
Differences in attainments among Arahants
In the Anguttara Nikaya it is said that by possessing seven qualities one can attain direct knowledge of the Four Analytical Knowledges:

Mastery.

"Bhikkhus, possessing seven qualities, Sāriputta exercises mastery over his mind and is not a servant of his mind. What seven? Here, (1) Sāriputta is skilled in concentration, (2) skilled in the attainment of concentration, (3) skilled in the duration of concentration, (4) skilled in emergence from concentration, (5) skilled in fitness for concentration, (6) skilled in the area of concentration, and (7) skilled in resolution regarding concentra- tion. Possessing these seven qualities, Sāriputta exercises mas- tery over his mind and is not a servant of his mind".
"Bhikkhus, when he possessed seven qualities, Sāriputta realized for himself with direct knowledge the four analytical knowledges".
-- The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha - A Translation of the Anguttara Nikaya by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi: The Book of the Sevens, Sutta 39, p. 1023

What are the Four Analytical Knowledges?

In the Pali Canon Study "Nibbana as Living Experience / The Buddha and The Arahant" by Lily de Silva a well described section on the Four Analytical Knowledges can be found. Here is a quote from the study:

Among arahants too there are differences in attainment. In one place the Buddha states that in a group of 500 monks sixty are arahants with the six higher knowledges (cha.labhi~n~naa), sixty are arahants with the three clear knowledges (tevijjaa), another sixty are arahants liberated from both parts (ubhatobhaagavimutta), while the rest are arahants liberated by wisdom (pa~n~naavimutta).
The highest qualifications among arahants are the six higher knowledges (cha.labhi~n~naa) and the four analytical knowledges (catupa.tisambhidaa) . The former comprise psychic powers, the divine ear, thought reading, retrocognition (the ability to recall one's former births), clairvoyance (the ability to see beings dying and being reborn according to their kamma), and the knowledge of the destruction of defilements. The four analytical knowledges comprise insight into the meaning of words (attha), truth (dhamma), use of language (nirutti), and originality of ideas (pa.tibhaana) . They seem to pivot round the ability to teach the Dhamma through the medium of verbal communication with appealing and meaningful ways of presentation.
Some arahants are endowed with the special accomplishment of the fourfold analytical knowledge (pa.tisambhidaa-~naa.na), which qualifies them even more thoroughly for creative work. These are spelt out as analytical knowledge of the meaning or goal, profound truth, language or the medium of communication, and originality of expression (attha, dhamma, nirutti, pa.tibhaana). These four special qualifications make arahants experts in communicating to their audience the exact meanings and goals of the profound truths they have discovered, through the medium of refined language, using their own original modes of expression such as eloquent similes, metaphors, etc. Several arahants, both male and female, are recorded as eloquent speakers and erudite exponents of the Dhamma. Special mention must be made of the Theragaathaa and Theriigaathaa, which comprise poems of exquisite beauty. They are utterances of monks and nuns embodying their varied experiences. Literary critics rank them among the best lyrics in Indian literature. They remain unrivalled in the literary history of the world as creative writing issuing forth from the undefiled purity of the human heart and the nobility of human wisdom. They are ever-fresh fountains of inspiration to the truth-seeker and lasting monuments to the creative genius of the liberated beings.

For more information on this topic there is a comprehensive and detailed exposition called "The Fourfold Analytical Knowledge in Pali Literature" by Ven. Bhikkhu Kusalaguṇa. Here is a quote from the abstract:

The fourfold analytical knowledge (catu-paṭisambhidā) is an integrated set of knowledge gained by the noble persons (ariya) who had developed necessary conditions eligible for this distinctive attainment. The fourfold analytical knowledge consists of:
(1) The analytical knowledge of result (attha-paṭisambhidā),
(2) The analytical knowledge of cause (dhamma-paṭisambhidā),
(3) The analytical knowledge of language (nirutti-paṭisambhidā), and
(4) The analytical knowledge of knowledge (paṭibhāna-paṭisambhidā).
The noble persons who possess these kinds of knowledge are able to penetratingly understand the four types of ultimate realities (paramattha-dhammā), namely, consciousness (citta), mental concomitants (cetasika), matters (rūpa) and Nibbāna, the unconditioned element, and are capable of elucidating them with lucid language and exposition. The Buddha, Venerable Sāriputta and other great noble disciples were real legends in this field of comprehension and explanatory dexterity, as evidently described in the Pāḷi literature.
Each of the fourfold analytical knowledge possesses different analyticities. The analytical knowledge of result has the power to understand fully the so-called resultant phenomena including all cause-produced things, meanings of the Buddha’s Word classified into nine categories such as sutta (discourses in prose), geyya (discourses in prose and verse) and so on, and the unconditioned element, Nibbāna. Similarly, the analytical knowledge of cause has the ability to know various causative phenomena that comprise all result-generating causes, the Buddha’s Word, and the Noble Path leading to the realization of Nibbāna. The analytical knowledge of language, on the other hand, is endowed with the capability of recognizing the grammatically correct usage and the grammatically incorrect usage of Pāḷi language, and is able to understand a wide range of Pāḷi terminologies connected with the ultimate realities. The analytical knowledge of knowledge is, however, capable of taking the foregoing knowledge as objects, and of comprehending their functional activities.
The attainment of the fourfold analytical knowledge is nothing but the accomplishment of collectively conditioning factors accumulated in both the past and present lives. The eight conditions must be fulfilled in order to give rise to the fourfold analytical knowledge, they are: attainment of the highest mundane insight knowledge (knowledge of equanimity towards formations) in the past lives, great erudition, proficiency of dialects, knowledge of Scriptures, inquiry, attainment of the Noble Path, association with teachers, and acquisition of good friends.


text:
Arahants and suicide
I'm aware of a story in the Pali Canon where a monk commited suicide by slitting his throat and achieved arahantship at the moment of death.
Where in the texts can i find this story?
Thank you for your time.

There is also a story about a Bodhisattva who breaks his vows of not killing, in order to stop a captain of a ship from killing another. He saw that the captain with his current karma would be reborn a human, and if he killed his shipmate would fall to the hells. So he killed the captain knowing he would take the negative karma onto himself. Rather than to let the captain, oblivious of karma, fall into the hells. However these kind of skillful actions require abilities and insight. The bodhisattva could see the future lives of others based on their current karma for example.

Ran out of characters.... also there was not an alternative means to stopping the Captain from his murder, it was a split second judgement call. Suicide is not a common means of enlightenment. It is rarely recommended.

There might be something along those lines in SN 4.23 Godhika Sutta.
Page 85 of The Patimokkha Rules
Translated & Explained says,

Case (b) is apparently derived from SN 4.23, where Ven.
  Godhika takes his life and gains arahantship just moments before death

I am sorry i do not remember the names in this.But here is the complete story.
There was an ambitious monk while Buddha was alive.He wanted to reach nirvana but he had a little problem.He was able to reach "Samadhi" but couldn't hold on to it.he kept loosing and regaining it.He was terrified by the idea of facing his death without a "Samadhi" at least.He kept trying but it was obvious that nothing is going to change.One day he had enough of this game that his fate was having with him and decided to end his life while remaining in "Samadhi".This is not something Lord Buddha would agree with so no one knew this.he took a knife and cut his throat but years of practice was able to be useful at this moment.His mind started to reach higher levels of concentration and he went with that using his samadhi. By the time he was dead he was no longer a normal  monk he was an "Arahant".Lord Buddha heard the news and came to see his body and said this is not a normal one he is an "Arahant",Give the body the respect it deserves.That's how the rest of the people got to know about the real story.

I think that you are referring to Arahant Sappadāsa. You can find the verse of that great Arahant in http://mahamevnawa.ca/images/BookThumb/VoiceofEnlightenedMonksTheragathaSample.pdf

Those Who Walked the Path to Nibbana - Verses of Great Arahants
This stanza was told by Arahant Sappadāsa
It has been 25 years since I received ordination. Yet, I have not achieved a mind fully concentrated, not even for a single moment.
I greatly suffered from sensual desires that arose in my mind. My mind was never tranquil. At the end, I was so discouraged and overcome with sorrow. With a sense of un-accomplishment, I went from one monastery to another.
I was determined to take my own life, even if I had to use a weapon on myself. What purpose is there in this life? How can a person like me, who received ordination because of my unshakable confidence in the Noble Triple Gem, disrobe? How can I leave this noble life and die as a householder?
And so, I took the knife on to my hand, and sat on my bed. So determined to cut off my veins, I placed the knife on my neck
Through that itself, ‘wise consideration’ arose in my mind. The suffering that arises from all defilements became apparent to me. I felt a sense of detachment through the understanding of that reality.
Through that understanding, my mind became free from all impurities. Look at the miracle of this noble Dhamma. I too attained the noble Triple knowledge. I fully accomplished the highest level of achievement one can achieve in the Supreme Buddha’s dispensation.


text:
What are the 3 recollection chants?
What are the 3 recollection (protection) chants of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha?
It's told that they can be used to dispel fear.
Thank you for your time.

Text and Chanting by Bhante Khemakumara

Here's the chant with translation:

Itipiso Bhagava (He is indeed the Exalted One)
  Araham (far from
  defilements)
  Samma Sambuddho (perfectly enlightened by Himself)
  Vijjacaranasampanno (fully possessed of wisdom and excellent conduct)
  Sugato Lokavidu (knower of the worlds)
  Anutaro Purisadhammasarathi
  Sattha (unexcelled Trainer of tamable men)
  Devamanussanam (teacher of
  deities and men)
  Buddho (the Awakened One)
  Bhagavati (the Lord skilled
  in teaching Dhamma)
Svakkato Bhagavata Dhammo (well expounded is the Exalted One’s Dhamma)
  Sanditthiko (to be seen here and now)
  Akaliko (not delayed in time)
  Ehipassiko ( (inviting one to) come and see)
  Opanayiko (leading
  inwards)
  Paccatam Veditabbo Vinnuhiti (to be seen by each wise man for
  himself)
Supatipanno Bhagavato Savakasangho (that which is the Sangha of the
  Exalted One’s disciple who have practiced well)
  Ujupatipanno Bhagavato
  Savakasangho (that which is the Sangha of the Exalted One’s disciple
  who have practiced straightly)
  Nayapatipanno Bhagavato Savakasangho
  (that which is the Sangha of the Exalted One’s disciple who have
  practiced rightly)
  Samicipatipanno Bhagavato Savakasangho (that which
  is the Sangha of the Exalted One’s disciple who have practiced
  properly)
  Yadittam (that is to say)  Cattari Purisayugani (the four
  pairs of men- those who are in the four pairs of Noble Path and
  Fruition)
  Attha Purisapuggala (the eight types of individual persons-
  those who are with the mind of a Stream Winner up to Fruition of
  Arahantship)
  Esa Bhagavato Savakasangho (that is the Sangha of the
  Exalted One’s disciples)
  Ahuneyyo (worthy of gifts)
  Pahuneyyo (worthy
  of hospitality)
  Dakkkhineyyo (worthy of offerings)
  Anjalikaraniyo (who
  should be respected)
  Anuttaram Punakkhetam Lokassati (incomparable
  field of merit to the world)

(source http://methika.com/pali-chanting/itipiso-chant/)

Actually now that I look at the formatting of it, I think it is much easier to read at the source page btw.

Before the Itipiso chant, there are some shorter chants. Should i chant them first before going to the quoted ones?

This translation is full of extra little interpolations that exaggerate the words of the text. E.g. samma-sambuddho 'perfectly enlightened by Himself' where by himself is added. Bhagavati (the Lord skilled in teaching Dhamma) typo here bhagavā ti ("ti" is a separate word), it is usually translated "Blessed One". In the next line the same word is translated "Exalted One" which is a mistake.
And so on. I also looks rather naked without the proper diacritics. There's a much better version here: http://www.oxfordbuddhavihara.org.uk/books/OBV%20Morning%20Chanting.pdf

Sādhu for pointing that out. I just picked the first convenient page off of google. I will update to a better translation asap.

@JayaravaAttwood. Thanks for sharing your knowledge about that.

itipi so bhagavā
arahaṃ sammāsambuddho vijjācaraṇa-sampanno sugato lokavidū
anuttaro purisadamma-sārathi satthā deva-manussānaṃ buddho bhagavā ti
svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo,
sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opanayiko,
paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī ti.
supaṭipanno bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho
uju-paṭipanno bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho
ñāya-paṭipanno bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho
sāmīci-paṭipanno bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho
yadidaṃ cattāri purisayugāni aṭṭha purisapuggalā
esa bhagavato sāvakasaṅgho
āhuṇeyyo pāhuṇeyyo dakkhiṇeyyo añjali-karaṇīyo
anuttaraṃ puññakkhettaṃ lokassā ti.

Never mind the interpolations.
This "works":

Itipiso Bhagava (He is indeed the Exalted One)
  Araham (far from defilements)
  Samma Sambuddho (perfectly enlightened by Himself)

But accuracy and orthodoxy after 2750 years are important, my revered friends.
Buddha "vachana" brings serenity peace and above all progress.


text:
What are the Buddhist teachings on how best to live a married life?
Does Buddhism describe how best to live a married life? Please provide some short excerpts. Thank you.

Are you asking about the marriage ceremony itself? Or how to choose a marriage partner before marrying them? Or what to do after you marry i.e. during married life?

@ChrisW: I am asking about how best to live a married life, as described by Buddhism. Ceremonies don't mean much to me, and choosing a partner, no matter how discerning you are, is basically a gamble. But what I actually DO I have some control over.

I would recommend reading the book "The Buddha's teachings on Prosperity" by Ven. Bhikkhu Basnagoda Rahula. There is a large chapter on "Establishing a marital partnership". I would have quoted from it but i have it only in physical edition and it's not possible to quote pieces of it since it will not do the content right. Here he goes into details about how to manage a marriage and what kind of obligations both the man and the woman has to each other. It's a great book and highly recommended for laypeople. The original price on Amazon.Uk is £13, i bought it used for £0,69 + £3 in postage.

The Access to Insight website has a number of related translations and essays;
Suttas

How to ensure that you'll be with your spouse in future lives: AN 4.55
Spouses' duties to each other: DN 31

Essays

"A Single Mind" (Fuang)
A Happy Married Life: A Buddhist Perspective (Dhammananda)
Nothing Higher to Live For (Nyanasobhano)
Buddhism and Sex (Walshe)

It all seems to boil down to "be ethical". Although on the other hand ideally one would not get married, but would take up celibacy and reject family life. For example in the Cūḷahatthipadopama Sutta the Buddha says:

so tena saddhāpaṭilābhena samannāgato iti paṭisañcikkhati — ‘sambādho gharāvāso rajopatho, abbhokāso pabbajjā. nayidaṃ sukaraṃ agāraṃ ajjhāvasatā ekantaparipuṇṇaṃ ekantaparisuddhaṃ saṅkhalikhitaṃ brahmacariyaṃ carituṃ. [MN 27; i.179
And having become possessed of faith [from hearing the dhamma] he thinks: household life is crowed and dirty; having gone forth one is wide open. It is not easy to live the religious life, so perfect and pure like a polished shell, while living in a home.

In short the best way to do marriage, is not to do it all, but to dedicate yourself to practising the Dharma.
This question is similar to a previous one:
What does a traditional Buddhist wedding look like?

I recall an incident where Buddha is chiding Ven. Upali for ordaining someone who'd already been a monk in several past lives, and was now a Bodhisattva whose work was in samsara not in the monastery. I'd be grateful if someone can find the sutta that contains this episode. It might be the Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra, I'll need to verify.

The problem I have with such views as stated in the quote above is that we cannot tell how contextual they are. Society has changed a lot, and I'd argue there's a lot less difference between lifestyle of a married practitioner and a celibate one now than there would have been in the Buddha's day. As lifestyles, they each convey different advantages (and disadvantages) - we would do well to discuss and debate those so that people can best make up their own minds on such important life decisions.

The "similar question" has answers from some traditional Buddhists. But the question is phrased so vaguely that it's hard to answer except in the most general terms. And any answer to any "Buddhist" question is likely to be partial anyway. As I understand the purpose of Stack Exchange it is not for discussion and debate. One solicits answers and perhaps hopes to get range that are representative. If you have your own answer then please do offer it.

@JayaravaAttwood It's true. Comments aren't for extended discussion - any issues arising from the answer should be either formulated in it's own answer or moved to chat or meta if there is a general point. These are interesting points but it deviates from the Q and A format to much in my opinion. I'm going to delete some of these comments. Please post on meta if you think i'm doing the wrong thing. Thanks

In DN 31 the Buddha saw a young householder "with palms together held up in reverence, [...] paying respect towards the six directions: that is east, south, west, north, lower and upper."
The Buddha, after asking what he was doing, said:

"But, young man, that is not how the six directions should be worshipped according to the discipline of the noble ones."

...and then, proceeded to explain it. At some point, he said:

"And how, young man, does the noble disciple protect the six directions? These six directions should be known: mother and father as the east, teachers as the south, spouse and family as the west, friends and colleagues as the north, workers and servants as the lower direction, and ascetics and Brahmans as the upper direction.
[...]
"In five ways should a wife as the western direction be respected by a husband: by honoring, not disrespecting, being faithful, sharing authority, and by giving gifts.
"And, the wife so respected reciprocates with compassion in five ways: by being well-organized, being kindly disposed to the in-laws and household workers, being faithful, looking after the household goods, and being skillful and diligent in all duties.
In this way, the western direction is protected and made peaceful and secure.

If we did all those things and it didn't work, then what?

it "works" if by "work" it's understood that one is leading a virtuous life, that one is blameless in the aforementioned attitudes and enjoy their fruits   -- despite of fortunate or unfortunate things happening, which are the natural course of life: anicca. A marriage is not something that "should work [happily ever after]" in buddhism, nor have I seen romantic issues dealt in detail in the suttas (I think it would be a major digression otherwise). From  what I see, people get married and the Buddha just advised them to be good towards each other, but wasn't really focused on making it work

Here is a quote from the Anguttara Nikaya where the Buddha explains how to live together in a marriage.

53 (3) Living Together (1)
On one occasion the Blessed One was traveling along the high- way between Madhurā and Verañjā. A number of male and female householders were also traveling along the same high- way. Then the Blessed One left the highway and sat down at the foot of a tree. The male and female householders saw the Blessed One sitting there and approached him, paid homage to him, and sat down to one side. The Blessed One then said to them:
“Householders, there are these four ways of living together. What four? A wretch lives together with a wretch;739 a wretch lives together with a female deva; a deva lives together with a wretch; a deva lives together with a female deva.
(1) “And how, householders, does a wretch live together with a wretch? [58] Here, the husband is one who destroys life, takes what is not given, engages in sexual misconduct, speaks falsely, and indulges in liquor, wine, and intoxicants, the basis for heedlessness; he is immoral, of bad character; he dwells at home with a heart obsessed by the stain of miserli- ness; he insults and reviles ascetics and brahmins. And his wife is also one who destroys life . . . she insults and reviles ascetics and brahmins. It is in such a way that a wretch lives together with a wretch.
(2) “And how does a wretch live together with a female deva? Here, the husband is one who destroys life . . . he insults and reviles ascetics and brahmins. But his wife is one who abstains from the destruction of life, from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct, from false speech, and from liquor, wine, and intoxicants, the basis for heedlessness; she is virtuous, of good character; she dwells at home with a heart free from the stain of miserliness; she does not insult or revile ascetics and
  brahmins. It is in such a way that a wretch lives together with a female deva.
(3) “And how does a deva live together with a wretch? Here, the husband is one who abstains from the destruction of life . . . he does not insult or revile ascetics and brahmins. But his wife is one who destroys life . . . she insults and reviles ascetics and brahmins. It is in such a way that a deva lives together with a wretch.
(4) “And how does a deva live together with a female deva? Here, the husband is one who abstains from the destruction of life . . . he does not insult or revile ascetics and brahmins. And his wife is also one who abstains from the destruction of life . . . she does not insult or revile ascetics and brahmins. It is in such a way that a deva lives together with a female deva. [59]
  “These are the four ways of living together.”
When both are immoral, miserly and abusive, husband and wife
  live together as wretches.
The husband is immoral, miserly and abusive,
  but his wife is virtuous, charitable, generous.
  She is a female deva living with a wretched husband.
The husband is virtuous, charitable, generous,
  but his wife is immoral, miserly and abusive. She is a wretch living with a deva husband.
Both husband and wife are endowed with faith, charitable and self-controlled,
  living their lives righteously,
  addressing each other with pleasant words.
Then many benefits accrue to them and they dwell at ease.
  Their enemies are saddened
  when both are the same in virtue.
Having practiced the Dhamma here,
  the same in virtuous behavior and observances, delighting [after death] in a deva world,
  they rejoice, enjoying sensual pleasures.
-- AN: 53, p. 443-445, Bodhi translation

Our enemies were sad, but so were we. The last part didn't happen.

A few other selections from the Pāḷi texts, since they seem to be what people respond to (I'm not bothering to offer my own translations this evening, these are by Thanissaro and can be taken with a pinch of salt). From the Rhinoceros Horn Sutta:

For a sociable person
  there are allurements;
  on the heels of allurement, this pain.
  Seeing allurement's drawback,
  wander alone
  like a rhinoceros.
One whose mind
  is enmeshed in sympathy
  for friends & companions,
  neglects the true goal.
  Seeing this danger in intimacy,
  wander alone
  like a rhinoceros.

From the Piyajātika Sutta:

"That's the way it is, householder. That's the way it is — for sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are born from one who is dear, come springing from one who is dear."

From the Ariyapariyesana Sutta:

"And what may be said to be subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement? Spouses & children... men & women slaves... goats & sheep... fowl & pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, & mares... gold & silver are subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement. Subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement are these acquisitions, and one who is tied to them, infatuated with them, who has totally fallen for them, being subject to birth, seeks what is likewise subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement. This is ignoble search.

And I could go on and on, citing dozens of texts which emphasise that, although there are some concessions to lay people in some places, they are not really taken seriously as Buddhist practitioners, nor expected to make much progress in the spiritual life. Certainly they are not expected to be liberated - the conditions are simply not in place for lay people. The best they can hope for, according to this point of view, is to generate enough merit to obtain a better rebirth.
Mahāyāna sects were more accommodating of lay people, but the extent of this is often over-stated. For example the idea that Mahāyāna was primarily a lay movement is now thoroughly discredited. It was essentially an offshoot of mainstream monastic Buddhism. For an overview of recent research on Mahāyāna history see: David Drewes, Early Indian Mahayana Buddhism I: Recent scholarship.
Of course one is free to pursue what the Buddha calls the "ignoble search" (i.e. marriage, relationships, socialising, career, and all that lay oriented stuff). But it is ignoble and it does not lead to liberation. Of course because supporting monks is the principle source of merit for laypeople, the monks have made a few concessions over the years to keep the lay people onside. But the basic message of Buddhism has not changed in many centuries, "Seeing this danger in intimacy, wander alone like a rhinoceros."
The exception is the kalyāṇa mitta one who is able to guide and support one in the spiritual life. But it's pretty clear who this might be - the Buddha is the template, so it really refers to arahants and other members of the ariyasaṅgha.
The phenomenon of modern lay people redefining the Buddha's message to fit the preconceptions of a modern world, with undigested lumps of popular psychology, so that more or less any lifestyle is seen as conducive to religious practice, is at best unfortunate. It is a serious misrepresentation of the Buddha's message as far as it is represented in the Pāḷi texts. In Buddhism one cannot have one's cake and eat it.

So, if one IS a Spiritual Friend, is it then noble to care for others rather than withdrawing?


text:
When and where were the mother and father of Buddha born?
Undoubtedly Buddha was a very famous person. I am very eager to know who were his mother and father and when and where they were born?

Here is a quote from Wikipedia's Family of Gautama Buddha:

The Buddha was born into a family of the kshatriya varna in what is Nepal in 567BCE. He was called Siddhartha in his childhood. His father was King Suddhodana, leader of the Shakya clan in what was the growing state of Kosala, and his mother was Queen Maya. He was raised by his mother's younger sister Maha Pajapati after his mother's death seven days after childbirth.
He later married Yaśodharā, and together they had one child, a son, Rāhula. Both Yaśodharā and Rāhula later became disciples of Buddha.
His first cousin, by his father, Ananda, joined the Buddha as his attendant.

I would also recommend 2 books for you. The first one is called "What Buddhists Believe" by Ven. K. Sri Dhammanda and "The Buddha and His Teachings" by Ven. Narada Mahathera.
Both books have an introductory section on the life of the Buddha. In the second book there are also 2 chapters on the Buddha's relatives.