text:
Integration of Body and Mind
Upon asking about over-watching Youtube, I wondered if this activity was detrimental because it was merely sensory without much cognition. Buddhism usually promotes seemingly either attention (mindfulness), action (compassion), or even contemplation (analytical meditation).
Therefore, I am wondering whether Buddhism considers that activities relying solely on the senses and the body cause detriment? Do only activities with a cognitive or mindful component bring benefit?
Also, I feel vipassana is divided between bodily observations as the body itself and feeling, and mental observations as mind and dhammas. Is this seemingly complementary approach linked explicitly with integration of body-mind?
Thank you

I don't think mere "cognition" is necessarily helpful.
And Buddhism might regard "cognition" as merely another sense, the 6th sense -- i.e. with the "cognition of thoughts" being objects of the mind, comparable with the "seeing of sights" being objects of the eye.
Examples of mere cognition might, I suppose, include watching videos, reading books, arguing online, doing cross-word puzzles...
What might be more helpful is "directed" thought, purposeful, intentional -- and preferably with a motive which aligns with Buddhist values and morality (e.g. beneficial, harmless, liberating).
I think that's related to "energy" -- i.e. that's a type of cognition which is associated with, from which derives, a self-sustaining energy.
I don't know of a canonical reference to justify this answer, though.
This article -- The Seven Factors of Enlightenment -- implies there may be some connection between "energy" and "purposefulness":

The third enlightenment factor is viriya, energy. It is a mental property (cetasika) and the sixth limb of the Noble Eightfold Path, there called samma-vayama, right effort.
The life of the Buddha clearly reveals that he was never subjected to moral or spiritual fatigue. From the hour of his enlightenment to the end of his life, he strove tirelessly to elevate mankind, regardless of the bodily fatigue involved, and oblivious to the many obstacles and handicaps that hampered his way. He never relaxed in his exertion for the common weal. Though physically he was not always fit, mentally he was ever vigilant and energetic. Of him it is said:

Ah, wonderful is the Conqueror,
    Who e'er untiring strives
    For the blessing of all beings, for
    the comfort of all lives.

Buddhism is for the sincerely zealous, strong and firm in purpose, and not for the indolent (araddhviriyassayam dhammo nayam dhammo kusitassa). The Buddha {etc.}

And "mindfulness" ought to be helpful -- that is assuming that "mindfulness" means not just "attention" but "remembering the Dhamma".

Just to be clear, are you saying that activity aligned with Buddhist values promotes self-sustaining energy?

Yes, purposeful activity -- however I don't really know what the scriptures say about that.

In the Pali Canon the Buddha talks about metaphorical "foods". In addition to the physical food, there is emotional "food", conceptual "food", and the "food" of purposeful action.
All these "foods" are fuel or sustenance (upādāna) in the sense that they serve as support for "future becoming and renewed existence".
Obviously, different quality of "food" creates different "future becoming and renewed existence". "Food" can be spoiled or rotten or even poisonous.
It sounds like your problem has nothing to do with mindfulness - instead, it has to do with the type of "food" you eat, as well as the quantity.

Therefore, I am wondering whether Buddhism considers that activities
  relying solely on the senses and the body cause detriment? Do only
  activities with a cognitive or mindful component bring benefit?

I'm sceptic to whether we can have activities completely free from any form of cognition (if that's what you're referring to) unless maybe we're asleep or in a coma. Our organisms will always be active in all six sense modalities, so the question becomes whether we're attentive to them or not. If i'm not mistaken it's all a matter of the scope of our perception (mindfulness).

Also, I feel vipassana is divided between bodily observations as the body itself and feeling, and mental observations as mind and dhammas. Is this seemingly complementary approach linked explicitly with integration of body-mind?

I could be wrong, but looking at it as integration is perhaps the opposite purpose of vipassana, since at least one aspect of investigative meditation aims to become more aware of the individual skandhas. It then becomes a process of dissolution of the concept of self, rather than integration.


text:
Disclosing Spiritual Experiences
I've read that the Dalai Lama tends not to disclose his own spiritual experiences.
Is it bad to disclose meditative or spiritual experiences as visions and such? Is there a difference between monks and lay practitioners in this respect? Again for monks and lay holders: what occurs if someone is lying or inauthentic about a spiritual experience?
Also, how does one know if a spiritual experience is a genuine one?
Thank you

This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?

From AN8.67, this is ignoble:

Saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, but you haven’t. And saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have

From AN8.68, this is noble:

Saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you haven’t. And saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have.

Together, these two considerations create a powerful disincentive to make claims, simply because one might be speaking out of delusion and would therefore be speaking ignoble expressions. Essentially, not saying anything about personal attainments is wisest.
Yet even with this in mind, one might assert a personal experience--how can a listener know the truth of such?

You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.

One comes to know the truth of oneself and others in deeds rather than speech. For more detail, study AN5.100, which discusses the claims of different kinds of teachers including the Buddha himself:

A person will be recognized by their own deeds.

According to the Patimokkha rules:

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 over-estimation, he also is defeated and no
  longer in affiliation.
Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed.

The first rule means that monks who deliberately lie about their spiritual achievements to anyone, are defeated (immediate and irreversible expulsion from the monastic order).
The second rule means that monks are not allowed to reveal their spiritual achievements to lay people, even if it is factual.
In addition, for monks and lay people alike, the precept of not telling untruth applies.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Level of Focus in Anapanasati
I've been practising meditation with the breath as an object. While meditating, I am mindful of whatever arises. I feel that such awareness gives insight into the mind.
However, I am wondering whether one should investigate the mind this way, or try and increase focus by narrowing onto the breath. Would narrowing onto the breath provide more benefit?
Hence, I wonder how close to the breath one should be in meditation? Should all thinking be ideally diminished?

Yes, once you have reached sufficient level of concentration you may continue on the breath (samatha) or investigate the mind (vipassana). In my own practice I have a preference for reaching the calmest level possible, so I simply stay with breath, but more quietly, gently, less control, just allowing it to be, no more. At the same time, I don't ignore or suppress things as they arise, i just let them arise, fall, arise, fall. In one door, out the other. It's "kind of" a combination of both Calm and Insight.

For perspective, here is a sutta excerpt that describes 3 of the most popular meditation topics taught by the Buddha, and note anapana is especially designated for its effectiveness in ceasing vitakka (thinking):

(4 indispensable practices from AN 9.1 excerpt) a-subhā bhāvetabbā
  Non-beautiful [foulness perceptions] (he) should-develop, rāgassa
  pahānāya, (for) [lustful] passion's removal, mettā bhāvetabbā
  Good-will (he) should-develop, byāpādassa pahānāya, (for) ill-will's
  removal, ānā-pānas-sati bhāvetabbā inhale-exhale-mindfulness (he)
  should-develop, vitakk-upacchedāya, (for) [distractive]
  thinking's-cutting-off,

And here for more explanation on why breath meditation is so effective at that:
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2019/04/16aps-great-for-driving-out-thoughts.html
And part of your other question:

Should all thinking be ideally diminished?

See MN 19 and MN 20 for great examples on the role of vitakka (thinking) in first jhāna. For example, first jhana includes resolves (sankappa) and thoughts (vitakka) based on metta, karuna, etc. There's nothing wrong with vitakka/thinking inherently. The problem is that people without sufficiently developed samadhi, run away with thinking and papanca/proliferation based on confused and deluded perceptions of reality (MN 18).

I will give to you a bit of advice that a bhikkuni gave about the practice of Anapanasati. She is one who has developed and practiced continuously this form of meditation, and have achieved the greatest of all rewards and is now helping others too in this Path. She was an educated person born to a Catholic family who was raised in a Christian environment who held senior positions at work and later embraced the Buddha's Teachings. Apparently, she had the ability to see past lives of others and this led to a desire to study the Buddhist Teachings making her give up her lay life and ordain.
A couple of weeks ago I had the good fortune of meeting her in person. Thus we had the good fortune of listening to her, telling all those who have a special calling, of this higher truth. The following bit of info about the practice of Anapanasati will help you. But first remember to take the meaning of “So satōva assāsati, satōva passāsati” to mean “He maintains his mind on dhamma (what is beneficial) that should be taken in (kusala or moral) and those that should be gotten rid of (akusala or immoral)”. That is to say that ALL thinking should NOT be diminished. ALWAYS take IN the GOOD and DISCARD the BAD. Now…
•   Concentrate on your breath, in breath that flows. Gently flowing through your entire body, bringing life to every cell, every single vain that needs life to function.
•   Concentrate on your breath, as it flows out of your body gently taking away what ever is unwanted. See how impurities leave your body with a single breath. Slowly all impurities leave, all that should leave from the body is taken away.
•   The frustations that you have mentioned are just thoughts that arise. Just try to reflect on them thru Dhamma – on those thoughts of unfulfilled desires.
•   In reflection… connections that has been made in mind towards desire… some thoughts gets you agitated and blinds you with anger followed by hate… and some thoughts blinds you with delusion that follows asa shadow.
•   The attachments of feelings… which are connected. Attachments of different perceptions…
•   There is an impermanent factor underlining all desires as it does not stay in the same way that you so wish it to be. The desire is such that you don’t recognize that fact that, slowly but very surely it travels along the lines of suffering and pain.
•   In reflecting this way, you come to certain understandings…. Certain realizations, which helps in letting go of desires and attachments.
•   Excepting the change… positive decisions brings new realizations. Letting go seems the only true answer there is to happiness.
•   And when you do let go of desire, hate and delusion, it finally brings you tranquility and calmness… unexplained.

Anapana Sati and Satipathana are closely related.
The way I understand your focus (Sati) is to make sure that your attention does not go beyond four frames of reference. It is important to differentiate Samatha and Vipassana practice. Your thoughts (Vitakka and Vicara only. not all thoughts) stop in second Jhana. (Samatha)
Anapanasati Sutta:
 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html

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


text:
PIN POTHA (puñña potha) or Merit Book, costom still alive? How to keep it up?
My person just came across an answer by Upasak Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena, mentioning:

Also there is a concept of Pin Potha, which is a journal of all good deeds done.

And

It is an age old custom of the Sri Lankan Buddhists to maintain a record of One's meritorious activities. This record is named PIN POTHA or Merit Book.

Since such is not only a perfect daily reflection means, fitting in the praised Anussatis: Recollection of one's own virtues (silanussati),
Recollection of one's own generosity (caganussati),
Recollection of the own qualities equal the devas (devatanussati), but also as telling, reminding very sick and dying people on their good deeds as support, my person wonders whether this custom is still alive.
Is such, keeping records of ones merits done,  still practiced in Sri Lanka?
And, since it can be used perfect also for the practice of sharing merits and the practice of rejoicing in merits, my person wonders if there are ideas how to make the basic practices more virtual, vital, knowing that modern people are hardly to motivate toward the basic practices. They might possible needs such as a "reputation system", possible implemented in other daily used software or online services.
[Some "experiments" had been done to encourage the nearly death basic section, such as Anumodana or mail-list, next to a section in use, to get some ideas.]
(Note that this is not given for use for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but for encouragement toward release and benefical undertakings toward such)

As a Sri Lankan, I've heard these in our grand parent times (within last 20-30 years back). With the current lifestyle, everyone has started looking for happiness in outer world, most of the people have forgotten these kind of customs / traditions. This doesn't imply that Pin Potha is no longer active in Sri Lanka, but I should say its very hard to find now a days.
As I've heard the main purpose of this book is, when the owner of the book is about to die and while laying on the bed (Here it's talking about natural death with aging, because that's how the most of the people died in back old days, no sudden heart attacks) someone else starts reading the book to the owner. The concept behind this is, to make his next life a better one ( next birth in human world or heaven not the hell)
How that happens is the bhava in Pratītyasamutpāda is caused by the previous Nidanas. So if he can have good Saṅkhāra (mental fabrication) based on what he hears (from Pin Potha) at the last fractions of seconds, it will results to create a good Bhava. This is the concept behind this action as I've understood.

Thank you for the insight. That sounds similar to, stories in which bhikkhus comfort a dying bhikkhu by asking him to reflect on what he has attained through the practice, which was apparently a common way of encouraging a dying bhikkhu to focus his thoughts on the best object possible quoted from page 82 of this.

It's to lift the mind to access-concentration by Caga-nussati, Sila-Nussati, Deva-anussati. And that one does not get fearful and gain so a higher rebirth.

So modern Sri Lankan will not have much support for good rebirth.

@SamanaJohann, thing is this is more like a custom or tradition. But according to Dhamma this doesn’t guarantee that the will get a good rebirth. The only guarantee for the good rebirth (not the hell) is being at least a stream entrant. That’s what dhamma says.

Don't say so, don't say so. The state of mind at death is most relvant for ones rebirth! As Upasaka Lal, since more likely to follow householders advices. As you might no the opposit as well, having hold right view, kept silas, if at the moment of death wrong view, one is destinated to hell. It's pure practice and one should train for the time to come the whole life! Ask those learned scriptual Abhidhamma of what determines the rebirth consciousness. Don't spend time with westerns modern, you loose all your good traditions, Dhamma practice.

Don't spend time with westerns modern, you loose all your good traditions, Dhamma practice.

Here, as a sample wheb the Buddha "read" out of "Mahanamas" Merit book: http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/sn/sn55/sn55.021.than_en.html of course to write into one needs to perform fist.

Nakula's fathers "death story" and the "re-reading from the book" by his wife http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.016.than_en.html

Agreed on your points. What I tried to say is, we should not rely on PinPotha, we should follow the path. With Metta

Sure, Upasaka, better to remind the good and to desire to repeat if more refined and possible even reach the path.People are advices to relay on their Pin, have kamma, kusala as well as their heritage, relay on it, for better becoming and beyond. See also advices to Rahula, as what to make with good deeds after long term reflection:

"...But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... it was a skillful mental action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then you should stay mentally refreshed & joyful, training day & night in skillful mental qualities." Start as soon as possible to store a "Pin potha".

Agreed, no argument on that. But when we think widely, why we are loosing these kind of practices? Instead of worrying on the after life, people have started attracting to modern stuff, thinking they can get pleasure out of those, but just because those not make them satisfy they just keep running on these, and forgetting the old customs. Why? That's the nature of the world. It won't behave as we want. So only thing we should do in the present moment is follow the noble path. Coz even if we get a good immediate next birth we can't guarantee the second one, can we?


text:
Would a wise person avoide situations where other could perform lot of demerits?
Would a wise person avoide situations where other could perform lot of demerits?
Or different asked: Would a wise person go out only if meritorious reactions are suspected?
What do you think, or know about the Buddhas view on such?
(Note that this has been not asked for trade, stacks, exchange or entertainment that binds here in this world, but as means of release)

What you mean by if meritorious reactions are suspected

On touch one might probably act kusala. If a wise approaches un-faithful devoted worldlings, akusala, such as upvoting this question, just for example, might be performed by fools, so causing them much demerits. If no touch, they might not conduct such, at least not being touched by good. That is the meaning, Upasaka @follower.

The general Buddhist advise is to associate wise people. There are many Buddhist stories that Buddha encountering unwise people. It appears that Buddha did not have much time for those people. You find stories such as Angulimala. But they appeared to be intelligent people.

Does Upasaka think that such answeres the question? (It was not about association, btw., althout that is of course right) Do wise leave their good association, to get (in) touch with unwise, even fools, risking that they make again some demerits?

Yes. Wise person would avoid situations which can give negative vibrations.
When you are in contact with negative things, they weaken you.
So as much as possible, you should be with positive thinkers.
Because, after all, our life is result of our sankalps, therefore, be with the things which give you hope and confidence.

With wise he was meant someone who would be no more shaken by the worldily dhammas, householder Manak.

Would a wise person go out only if meritorious reactions are suspected?
The Gilana Sutta (AN 3.22) might imply that a wise person would go out if a meritorious reaction is even possible -- even if an unmeritorious reaction were also possible -- i.e. "on the chance that they may actually turn out to need and benefit from such".
Another way to say it is, perhaps you shouldn't only judge an act by its effect -- "was it effective, successful?" -- but by intent.

Sadhu and: never on assumed effect, sticking to precepts fist till own intention has been learned to trace rightly. And it is because there is this sort of person that the other sorts of persons are to be taught the Dhamma as well [on the chance that they may actually turn out to need and benefit from the teaching].


text:
Difference between "mythology" and historical "facts"?
In this video, a monk tried to draw a distinction between "mythology" and "history facts" ...
Ajahn Sujato - Buddhist Mythology - The Sacred and the Profane - Part 3
... saying that "Mythology" just has a community (identification) purpose.
Yet my person's thought was, "and how is that different to 'factual' history (aside that it faster changes)?"
How can "mythology" (Anussava), and "history" (perhaps thought as Itivea?), be seriously distinguished, if possible? And how should the past be seen, grasped, in accordance with the path, practice?
What kind of mythology, history, and anussati (bringing into present) is conductive for one's way, toward long-time happiness and beyond?
(Note that this is not asked for trade, stacks, exchange or entertainment, but for good undertakings toward release from this wheel)

All we can know to be "facts" is the following:

Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko
  paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī
The teaching (of Suffering Ending Truth) well explained by the Buddha — visible in the here-&-now, immediately effective, inviting inspection, leading onwards (to Nibbana), that
  sensible people can know for themselves.

This is the Dhamma Refuge taught by the Honest Awakened One (The Buddha); adhered to by Honest Noble People. This is all we can know as "fact" and this is all the Buddha expects or asks of us to know.

Yet my person's thought was "and how is that different to 'factual' history" (aside that it faster changes).
Yes perhaps you're right, if you're saying that "history" isn't much better than mythology.
Even so-called "history" is often (or, invariably?) partisan -- see e.g. Is history always written by the victors?
I am not an experienced (e.g. professional) historian, though -- so I don't want to say they are the same, either -- perhaps a historian might try to explain a distinction. I think that a very simple definition of "history" is that it's related to "writing" -- if nothing written survives, from a given period, then that period is by definition "prehistoric" -- though there may be something recorded from "oral history", or inferred from "archaeology" (and/or perhaps from "myth").
How can "mythology" and "history" be possible serious distinguished
I guess that's two questions:

How do professional historians distinguish?
How should a practising Buddhist distinguish?

Leaving aside the first as off-topic, I think there are suttas -- e.g. one of the suttas to Rahula, and the Kalama sutta -- where the Buddhas says people should consider what they themselves know to be true.
In my experience even what I "know" of my own personal history is not much better than any other history -- e.g. perhaps conceited, partisan, incomplete, and empty -- but even so perhaps people learn from experience (possibly learning wisdom or the opposite of ignorance), as Rahula was told to:

Having done a [...] action, you should reflect on it: 'This mental action I have done — did it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Was it an unskillful mental action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful mental action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should feel distressed, ashamed, & disgusted with it. Feeling distressed, ashamed, & disgusted with it, you should exercise restraint in the future. But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... it was a skillful mental action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then you should stay mentally refreshed & joyful, training day & night in skillful mental qualities.

I suppose Buddhists study the buddha-vacana too -- and maybe hagiographies (of which the Theragatha are an example).
What kind of mythology, history, anussati (bringing into present) is conductive for ones way toward long time happiness and beyond?
I'm not sure that story of the life of the Buddha, for example, is "history" -- including his birth and meeting the four "divine messengers".
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote,

Meeting the Divine Messengers
The traditional legend of the Buddha's quest for enlightenment tells us that throughout his youth and early manhood Prince Siddhattha, the Bodhisatta, lived in complete ignorance of the most elementary facts of human life. His father, anxious to protect his sensitive son from exposure to suffering, kept him an unwitting captive of nescience. Incarcerated in the splendor of his palace, amply supplied with sensual pleasures and surrounded by merry friends, the prince did not entertain even the faintest suspicion that life could offer anything other than an endless succession of amusements and festivities. It was only on that fateful day in his twenty-ninth year, when curiosity led him out beyond the palace walls, that he encountered the four "divine messengers" that were to change his destiny. The first three were the old man, the sick man, and the corpse, which taught him the shocking truths of old age, illness, and death; the fourth was a wandering ascetic, who revealed to him the existence of a path whereby all suffering can be fully transcended.
This charming story, which has nurtured the faith of Buddhists through the centuries, enshrines at its heart a profound psychological truth. In the language of myth it speaks to us ...

When I visited Singapore once, for example, there were three books in the hotel room: a Christian Bible, an Islamic Koran, and a Buddhist "Life of the Buddha" of some kind.
I think that sort of "narrative" of the Buddha's life is well-known.
Perhaps -- I don't know -- it is everyone's first introduction to Buddhism: a story you learn as a child.

Thoughtful and careful share of thought, Nyom Chris.

How can "mythology" (Anussava), and "history" (perhaps thought as Itivea?), be seriously distinguished, if possible?
In my humble opinion, it cannot. History begins its transformation iinto mythology on its first retelling by a human. So, in a way, there is really no true history.
Even if we are present at an event, what we remember is modified by our life experiences and viewpoints. Many psychological studies on "eyewitness" recall have proved that. So what we recount to ourselves (and others) is always, in actuality, myth. The amount of myth-iness - or diversion from 'history' - in the retelling might vary but it will never be 0%. And the more retellings, the more divergence, as each individual in the chain modifies the story through their personal filters.
Even a film of an event seldom portrays straight 'history' - although I admit it can come close. The placement of the camera and the editing usually modify the perception of what was 'true' in the recording's retelling.
And how should the past be seen, grasped, in accordance with the path, practice?
Personally, I view that the past wisdom of the Buddha we have been provided, while myth by my definition, is definitely not without value. The actual words he used and perhaps some of the minor meanings may have been lost, but the essential core of his teachings have been shaped and interpreted by well meaning and intelligent fellow human beings through the centuries. What we may have lost in accurate 'history', we have gained in interpretations formed by the wisdom of 'the group'. His teachings have been, thus, amplified and refined for understanding through the humanity of each teacher in the chain.
What kind of mythology, history, and anussati (bringing into present) is conductive for one's way, toward long-time happiness and beyond?
In my opinion, all of the available texts and teachers are potentially valuable resources for us to find our way on the path to enlightenment. Since each interpretation has come to us through different chains, there will be some variability in the form of the knowledge. But by studying several and trying to be open to the teachings in each, we can build a composite understanding that will resonate with us and we will be able to incorporate into our being. Because it will, then, be totally accepted by us, we can be one with the methods and understand necessary work we individually need to use to attain our ultimate goal.
I believe this is consistent with the (mythical?) teaching we have received from the Buddha in the Kalama Sutta that we should not automatically accept any one single teaching / teacher as the absolute font of truth. By studying many, we will have a basis for determining which is our true path.


text:
What might be the impact when western monk start to think they must teach the elders?
Coming accoss such:

Would such, on even normal sociaty level, be contuctive for western people who desire odination? Is such in line with good conducts, monks would have to keep?

What does "they must teach the elders" mean? The talk appears to be for people who ask to attend.

Sri Lanka and it's Sangha, in this case, is to be seen as Elder for Western, in regard of Dhamma-Vinaya.

Also on Meta recently you advised to "carefully look at questions and answers"  and to "not act like a foolish racist". I'm not sure what "western" is doing there in the title -- isn't it proper to view him as "just 'a monk'" instead of "western"?

No, in this case not, since he (and other western) have that tendency, and the impact will be a strong billateral, and not just an idealistic, Nyom Chris. Elder is clear here, that is a conventunal distinction.

And Nyom might also miss the context this advices had been given, or does he sink it speeks about two religions here (of what is good possible the impact of such respectless action).

@Sujato could also state direct of what a monk's "beef" would be on such, if one with respect.

You seem to be very emotionally driven, @SamanaJohann. I think, you need to work on your detachment / dispassion.

"There is a question that should be answered definitively. There is a question that should be answered analytically. There is a question that should be answered with a counter-question. There is a question that should be set aside.--DN33"
Perhaps this is a question that should be set aside.

I think this question is primarily opinion-based.

@ruben2020 I think this question has "an incline". Though it's true anyone might have an opinion, perhaps a few users might have an answer from personal experience (i.e. "based on something that happened to you personally", though I could see their choosing not to. I guess this is a genuine question too, to the extent that it's one aspect of a cluster of topics which seems to be a source of repeated trouble for the OP.

Speaking here as a Westerner. OyaMist suggests that this is a question that should be put aside. That person's (thatza haha) question should be put aside would require that the motive be known, for as a neutral question, it is a reasonable one and should be given a qualified answer.
The situation is this: The Dhamma is, in its initial steps (generosity, ethical conduct, self-discipline, mental development) very much in agreement with most people's idea of what is good. This leads the beginner to immediately assume he understands the system as a whole. That stuff about rebirth and not-self and kamma, that is all just a matter of details. So we have every sort of exploitation of the Dhamma going on by self-declared arahants, pompous academics, activist/destructivist politically-minded opportunist bhikkhus and blind fools and when they presume, because of the success they meet with in presenting their own version of Dhamma to an ignorant public, they learn to believe they are the only one who understands. That is, in their mind, a mandate to teach even elders and without careful consideration, leading many people astray. Our savior ... or The Defender of the Dhamma.
But how is one to stop this? It comes out in all sorts of disguises such as, for example, the case of an intelligent person with a little familiarity with the Dhamma who is nevertheless illiterate in English but who attempts again and again, here, there and everywhere, to teach English-speakers one and all (including elders) by way of asking loaded, sloppily worded questions with a subtle scent of 'I know better than you'. A case of astounding lack of self-awareness and hasty/careless disregard for his readers that would in most cases, where there was fear of blame and sense of shame, result in keeping quiet and getting on with one's studies. We need to understand motive. A case of high anxiety to teach reflecting a basic misunderstanding of the idea of letting go? A case of fear at one's destiny being over-compensated for by a desperate effort to create some good kamma? Pointing out what is actually happening to such a one and the effect he is having on others has little chance of breaking through.
But do we put the question aside because of that? Experience will tell one that when the Dhamma is taught correctly, it sticks. It penetrates through to the heart and remains. It may not show up in behavior change immediately, but sooner or later it will trigger search-the-truth and trial-and-error and evaluation and trust and calm and impassivity and serenity and detachment and liberation and knowledge and vision of liberation. The Buddha does not get upset when his students do not immediately understand. So compassion would dictate some attempt to deal with the question. Modern psychology would say a person of such a sort was 'crying out for help.' Do you make no effort?
As to the question, it is easily answered, not so easily put into practice. One who knows and sees Dhamma should, if there is a teaching opportunity, teach those who do not know and see Dhamma if there is any possibility that the person or persons can be brought from the dark to the light. Even if it means going to a lot of trouble and unpleasantness.
Some links to further study of this issue:

Something for Teachers

MN 137: Salayatanavibhanga Suttaɱ

The Satisfaction of Teaching
In the case of the first case, the teacher teaches Dhamma and the students neither pay attention nor learn. In this case the teacher is neither delighted nor disappointed but is satisfied simply to teach Dhamma.

MN 103

The right time to teach
The Fourth Case:

If there will be grief and aggravation for myself;
And there will be grief and aggravation for the other;
Because the other is by nature angry, temperamental, touchy and resentful of instruction;
And is slow witted and hard to convince;
But I have the skill to raise him from a low path to a high one;
It is proper to speak, because my aggravation and his aggravation is a small thing compared to the importance of him being brought from a low path to a high one.

Sadhu. Thats at large a very thought full and self-critical answer, seemingly of someone who has won certain battles in himself already.

...and maybe one thing missing: a disciple would even have the duty to guides ones teacher, out of gratitude, back on the trace. For those how like to think that ill-will stands behind blame, may they think so. Nobody could do it possible if not near related, once one has fallen from the good path.

The enlarged font was because of underlines (i.e. "-----") in the text -- that's interpreted as a header. If you wanted a "horizontal rule" (as a separator) instead of an underlined "header", then insert an empty line to separate the line with hyphens from the line of text above it (but instead I reformatted as a list, also made hyperlinks i.e like this [for example](http://example.com), and used > to indicate a block quote).

Something, householder Mike Olds, as it came to mind again: from experiances, language does never realm be a matter in regard of essence. In regard of simply accumulating knowledge, and interest after such, it does, of cause. Even nationality plays a big matter if on conventional level and that is the most risky matter in this case, next to conventions in regard of seniority on this level. My person assumes that soon it will be nearly impossible for foreigners to ordain and learn intensively in the traditional countries.


text:
In what realm did archaic humans live? Is it manussa (human) realm or tiracchāna (animal) realm?
I think the interesting part is to first classify archaic humans, as a manussa or a tiracchāna?
Is there any explanation about this? Since as far as I know, Buddhism supports the theory of evolution.

Archaic humans are still humans. Richard Dawkin said that the biggest misconception about evolution is the belief that humans evolved from apes. But the truth was that both apes and humans are 2 separate species that branched off from a common ancestor. So the first archaic human was still the first "human"

The word tiracchāna means "going crosswise or obliquely or horizontally". It probably means to mentally not go beyond the instinctual existence of enslavement to instinctual desires. It appears to not have the biological meaning of having four legs. Since the theory of evolution is biological, it is unrelated to Buddhism, which is psychological.
People who are "territorial", engage in unthoughtful breeding or reproduction, who are ruled by their emotions & instinctual drives, who cannot discern the future consequences of their actions, etc, are tiracchāna. Their life goes "crosswise or obliquely or horizontally" because they do not "transcend/go beyond the common level" ("vītivatto puthujjanabhūmiṃ"). They don't go "upward". They go "horizontally".
For example, the lives of four-legged animals have no significant purpose. The lives of four-legged animals is the same, generation after generation after generation. All they do is reproduce, look for food and fight to protect their territory and protect their life from predators. People who live like this are "tiracchāna" or "going horizontally".
"Tiracchāna" are the "groundlings" that "crawl" rather than "climb" ("āruyha").

28. Just as one upon the summit of a mountain beholds the groundlings (bhummaṭṭha), even so when the wise man casts away heedlessness by
  heedfulness and ascends/climbs (āruyha) the high tower of wisdom, this sorrowless sage
  beholds the sorrowing and foolish multitude.
Dhammapada

There are times when humans hold long lifespan, good conducts, beautiful and large bodies, and there are times when their lifespans are short, bad, animal-like conducts, ugly small bodies. Currently it goes foward the decaying line again. Lifespan, bodies, without much taken support, is already very short and degenerated. So the age of going into relationship.
(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:
Will I break the eight precepts if I listen to nature sounds considered as music?
During uposatha days, I'm getting a little confused with the interpretation of the seventh precept of eight precepts.
Is it possible for me to listen to nature sounds without any musical instruments' sounds? Even if they’re considered as 'music'?
Also, is there any text (from aṭṭhakathā or ṭīkā) explaining this precept? It would be great and very helpful.
Thank you in advance.

What is prohibited is the sounds (music) disturb your meditation and increase your attachment aversion and ignorance. You are allowed to substitute unwholesome sounds with wholesome sounds.
For instance, you can listen to Pirith chanting or watch Dhamma video.

Householder Alfa Renaldo Aluska, interested,
one is precept, one is kamma. Better always consider kamma while keeping precept anyway. Of course if one would delight on birds tweets... animals in the forest... such is not different to listen to music as it would be not different to delight in watching animals acts from attending shows. What ever entertains the mind in akusala way should be avoided to rejoice on it.
Some advices are found here, on how to grow into observing: How to come to be able to observe precepts?
(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:
Alternative to Willpower in Fighting Cravings
I noticed that I almost unconsciously revert to trying to fight cravings via willpower, i.e. resisting them. Let's take the example of food cravings. I usually make an internal commitment to avoid junk food, but the cravings nevertheless arise, and when my mood is low I fail to resist.
Are there alternatives to willpower in fighting cravings? I had been wondering whether other solutions  -- like mindfulness or even seeking healthier sources of pleasure -- might be more effective.
More so, I believe I crave more because recently I experience less pleasure from activities or emotional sources. Does Buddhism have any technique specifically linked to pleasure?

Willpower is one of the five strategies to remove distracted thought in MN 20. Try to follow the sequence of operation as suggested by the sutta before resorting to applying willpower. (ref: https://suttacentral.net/mn20/en/bodhi )

Firstly, don't buy and store any junk food. If they are within easy reach, you would be tempted to consume them.
Secondly, think about why you should not eat junk food. Do you have diabetes or are at risk of diabetes? See this talk about diabetes. If you understand why too much carbohydrates are bad, you will avoid them, just as how you avoid snakes. Same applies to other types of health risks e.g. high blood pressure, bad cholesterol etc.
Thirdly, replace junk food with healthier snacks that are within easy reach. For e.g. mixed nuts, fruits, seaweed snacks, kale chips, unsweetened natural yogurt etc.
Natural Buddhist way to induce pleasure? Yes, there's mindfulness of breathing according to SN 54.9.

Some stuff for you to try:

Pace yourself, by letting cravings go in manageable steps (If everyone else deserves compassion, so do you in your practice of letting go)
Don't quit cold turkey, instead replace your habits with alternative
activitites (essentially anything related to the eightfold path, not
least meditation)
Do Asubha bhavana (foulness meditation)
Study dhamma (disperses ignorance on this topic, and is also conducive to comprehension/panna and hope/saddha, as alternatives to viriya/willpower)
Ask your sangha (You already did)

I usually make an internal commitment to avoid junk food

Buddhism teaches to use wisdom. Constantly think about the dangers of junk food.

Craving food is tied to a bodily sensation. When a thorn pricks you get pain to avoid it, similarly sensations when your body signals you need fast food or a particular type.
When looking at bodily sensations try to isolate the particular sensation and develop equanimity and difference towards it. Sensations tied to different types of food also slightly varied. When you body the low in sugar the sensation is different from when craving to something savory.
Also when hungry you get another sensation. Do the same for the sensations tied to how your body signals that you are hungry or need to eat.
Our mind and body is programed to react to these sensations or signals your body generate. To take back control you have to have mastery over the bodily signals. So instead of developing willpower not to eat, use the will power to master the bodies signalling mechanism, to achieve the same through sensations / bodily signals as proxy.
This is easy said than done. Go get the real hang of it you will have to do a meditation course which train you to observe bodily sensation. You can try one of:

http://www.dhamma.org/en/index
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html

Also you can try "The perception of loathsomeness in food" meditation. You should not over do this of you might get anorexia.

yes sati is always the way to guard the senses and guarding the senses is always the way to nibanna

"And what is lack of restraint? There is the case where a monk, seeing
  a form with the eye, is obsessed with pleasing forms, is repelled by
  unpleasing forms, and remains with body-mindfulness unestablished,
  with limited awareness. He does not discern, as it actually is
  present, the awareness-release, the discernment-release where any
  evil, unskillful mental qualities that have arisen utterly cease
  without remainder.
"Hearing a sound with the ear...
"Smelling an aroma with the nose...
"Tasting a flavor with the tongue...
"Touching a tactile sensation with the body...
"Cognizing an idea with the intellect, he is obsessed with pleasing
  ideas, is repelled by unpleasing ideas, and remains with
  body-mindfulness unestablished, with limited awareness. He does not
  discern, as it actually is present, the awareness-release, the
  discernment-release where any evil, unskillful mental qualities that
  have arisen utterly cease without remainder.
"Just as if a person, catching six animals of different ranges, of
  different habitats, were to bind them with a strong rope. Catching a
  snake, he would bind it with a strong rope. Catching a crocodile... a
  bird... a dog... a hyena... a monkey, he would bind it with a strong
  rope. Binding them all with a strong rope, and tying a knot in the
  middle, he would set chase to them.
"Then those six animals, of different ranges, of different habitats,
  would each pull toward its own range & habitat. The snake would pull,
  thinking, 'I'll go into the anthill.' The crocodile would pull,
  thinking, 'I'll go into the water.' The bird would pull, thinking,
  'I'll fly up into the air.' The dog would pull, thinking, 'I'll go
  into the village.' The hyena would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the
  charnel ground.' The monkey would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the
  forest.' And when these six animals became internally exhausted, they
  would submit, they would surrender, they would come under the sway of
  whichever among them was the strongest. In the same way, when a monk
  whose mindfulness immersed in the body is undeveloped & unpursued, the
  eye pulls toward pleasing forms, while unpleasing forms are repellent.
  The ear pulls toward pleasing sounds... The nose pulls toward pleasing
  aromas... The tongue pulls toward pleasing flavors... The body pulls
  toward pleasing tactile sensations... The intellect pulls toward
  pleasing ideas, while unpleasing ideas are repellent. This, monks, is
  lack of restraint.
"And what is restraint? There is the case where a monk, seeing a form
  with the eye, is not obsessed with pleasing forms, is not repelled by
  unpleasing forms, and remains with body-mindfulness established, with
  immeasurable awareness. He discerns, as it actually is present, the
  awareness-release, the discernment-release where all evil, unskillful
  mental qualities that have arisen utterly cease without remainder.
"Hearing a sound with the ear...
"Smelling an aroma with the nose...
"Tasting a flavor with the tongue...
"Touching a tactile sensation with the body...
"Cognizing an idea with the intellect, he is not obsessed with
  pleasing ideas, is not repelled by unpleasing ideas, and remains with
  body-mindfulness established, with immeasurable awareness. He
  discerns, as it actually is present, the awareness-release, the
  discernment-release where all evil, unskillful mental qualities that
  have arisen utterly cease without remainder.
"Just as if a person, catching six animals of different ranges, of
  different habitats, were to bind them with a strong rope. Catching a
  snake, he would bind it with a strong rope. Catching a crocodile... a
  bird... a dog... a hyena... a monkey, he would bind it with a strong
  rope. Binding them all with a strong rope, he would tether them to a
  strong post or stake.[1]
"Then those six animals, of different ranges, of different habitats,
  would each pull toward its own range & habitat. The snake would pull,
  thinking, 'I'll go into the anthill.' The crocodile would pull,
  thinking, 'I'll go into the water.' The bird would pull, thinking,
  'I'll fly up into the air.' The dog would pull, thinking, 'I'll go
  into the village.' The hyena would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the
  charnel ground.' The monkey would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the
  forest.' And when these six animals became internally exhausted, they
  would stand, sit, or lie down right there next to the post or stake.
  In the same way, when a monk whose mindfulness immersed in the body is
  developed & pursued, the eye does not pull toward pleasing forms, and
  unpleasing forms are not repellent. The ear does not pull toward
  pleasing sounds... The nose does not pull toward pleasing aromas...
  The tongue does not pull toward pleasing flavors... The body does not
  pull toward pleasing tactile sensations... The intellect does not pull
  toward pleasing ideas, and unpleasing ideas are not repellent. This,
  monks, is restraint.
"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness
  immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it
  as a basis, give it a grounding. We will steady it, consolidate it,
  and set about it properly.' That's how you should train yourselves."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.206.than.html

Practice samatha meditation.  The feeling of calm and well being that it engenders reduces and even altogether replaces the pull of addictive, impulsive behaviors.  This has effect has been extremely well documented in regards to TM (which is basically just a riff on samatha).

This is on Eliminating bias, but it works just as well for other unskillful traits.
We are told that bias/prejudice is bad and that we should get rid of it. But being biased and thinking "I am biased"; one will never be able to get rid of bias.
How come?
Because there is no thing there that is this "I" in which there is this bias.
There is no way to find this bias to see it, analyze it, understand it, get rid of it because it is not where you are looking.
But thinking "There is bias in me" (the 'me' there being conventional speech) and focusing on getting rid of every instance of the expression of that bias, eventually gets rid of that bias. It dies out from lack of deployment. This is another way of describing kamma that ends kamma. The impulse to act (to react) is not responded to and that ends that kammic force right there.
This way of dealing with faults completely eliminates the reluctance one has to admit faults because seeing things this way, faults are never a reflection on the core values one wishes to see in one's self, they are always 'out there'; it is curiously impersonal and liberating.

Householder, Interested,
- Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -
In relation to all various kinds of touches which could be encountered with kama-raga/tanha, sensual desire/craving, the Sublime Buddha gave a set of different contra-actions to them for his monks, which may be possible to addopt to certain extent also for lay practitioner, but of course not easy:
Sabbasava Sutta: All the Fermentations

There are fermentations

to be abandoned by seeing,
those to be abandoned by restraining,
those to be abandoned by using,
those to be abandoned by tolerating,
those to be abandoned by avoiding,
those to be abandoned by destroying,
and those to be abandoned by developing....

(Note that this works also in regard of bhava-tanha and vibhava-tanha in same way if not clear of what might be the danger)
What might be conductive in regard of the hindrance of sensual-desire is generously given in "The Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest" under 1. Sensual Desire
Will-power, how ever, till reaching the certain path, is in all cases always and for all of those actions required.
Only after perfection of the path, no more will-power is needed: Cetana Sutta: Act of will

"For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue.
"For a person free from remorse, there is no need for an act of will, 'May joy arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that joy arises in a person free from remorse...
..."For a dispassionate person, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I realize the knowledge & vision of release.' It is in the nature of things that a dispassionate person realizes the knowledge & vision of release.

As for the "food-aspect" Silas are the means at first place. 1. not violation the 5 serious, incl. not indulging in inproper sense pleasures, also livelihood, trade, and secound to take the precept of not eating at the wrong time, making the aspects of the five more strict.
It would be hard to ever overcome raw sensual-desires and developing Samadhi and Panna, if not looking after observing the 8. precepts.
In regard of alternative pleasures instead of sensual-pleasures, Jhanas, dwelling in refined areas, are mentioned as replacement for finding needed joy to walk on and of which, at least when doing, would not harm anybody and protect good silas. Of course if after the possibility to dwell in Jhanas, one would not lead proper livelihood, such seek after refined pleasures could be also for no long lasting happiness (a usual case is modern use of meditation for manager, more productivity... without Silas).
(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:
How to avoid the dangers of gain and honor (lābhasakkara)?
It's said that desire for gains as intention for one undertakings, beyond simply that for liberation from suffering, is a huge hindrance, obstacle.
No, the Buddha also warned even Arahats, at least in regard of the accumulation of sakkara (honor, amassing honor, Labāsakkara), as being a cause that leads to unease.
Now, what could, should one do, should avoid, that all kinds of such accumulations do not take place and do not endanger ones intention, aspiration, to bend from highest path and fruits, awakening?
Which role does maccharia (stinginess of five kinds and one primare cause) plays here, and if related, what kind of practice would work against such?
(Note that this task is not given for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainments but just to bind toward liberation)

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

Sooo... If i give a thorough answer that will reward the bounty, i will boost reputation, gain and honor?

My person did not say it's easy, especially when bond on certain not so proper circumsatances, householder @Erik  So here you are where other unseen often struggle.

Consider that you would need to hold on it, and it would be good when reputations are seen as nothing static, making good better flow, or. your answer, householder @Erik

Related topic and answer may be Should Buddhist teachers get rich?

Is that the same discussion from this forum?

I marked this question down because it appears very irrelevant to the members here, including Johann, who is unlikely to acquire fame & honor. Regards

So Doodoot, Element, Dhammadhatu has pure desire to help other in destroying their gains for their good... also a way, if smart, who knows.

@SamanaJohann: You started your question in neutral tone without referring to  any  scripture - "It's said that desire for gains as intention for one undertakings, beyond simply that for liberation from suffering, is a huge hindrance, obstacle.".  And, the 2 questions, you had put forward, are also general in nature.  Are you expecting answers general in nature, based on SPIRITUAL concepts only, without referring to any scripture? or can be answered from other ways of thinking, say Hinduism?

What ever householder @srimannarayanakv thinks that it would clarify and is truthfully, leads to release when put into practice.

As much as I like Hinduism, it is offtopic on this site. Please stay on topic (Buddhist questions and answers).

Just to mention in regard of the bounty. My person abounded that and would not (even not proper in certain situations) transfere personal to someone, independed of owing credits in Dhamma. So it's up to your system here who might take on it, not sure how it would work. It's to be regarded as simply abound and to heavy, to much, as to care on it. May the gainer, how ever, use it for his long time benefit and as a good means.

Now, what could, should one do, should avoid, that all kinds of such accumulations do not take place and do not endanger ones intention, aspiration, to bend from highest path and fruits, awakening?
That sutta implies that even accumulating dung can be a problem for some.
So I'm not sure it's feasible to solve that by avoiding literally everything (especially for a house-holder, but presumably mendicants too -- the sutta seems to be addressed to bhikkhus, not to arhats) -- even including, for example, "food" and "honours".
Instead the problem seems to be in the mental attitude toward accumulation, for example:

"With a mind overcome and overwhelmed by possessions, honor, and popularity"
"they look down on other good-hearted mendicants"

There are other suttas nearby on the same or similar theme -- for example, SN 17.3 offers,

Whoever enjoys and likes arisen possessions, honor, and popularity is called a mendicant who has been pierced with a harpoon

I suppose the problem originates from the delighting in such things.
Perhaps the sutta itself suggests one of the remedies -- if you see (view) it as being like dung, not nourishing, then you might not be inclined to accumulate (eat) it.
And, as you pointed out in a comment, SN 17.30 says,

We will give up arisen possessions, honor, and popularity, and we won’t let them occupy our minds.

Will someone carry candies with him, even if not delighted, attracts flies and be not burdened, Nyom Chris? "We will give up arisen possessions"

From SN 17.5 sutta itself and other SN 17 suttas, you can read:

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will put aside any gains,
  offerings, & fame that have arisen; and we will not let any gains,
  offerings, & fame that have arisen keep our minds consumed.' That's
  how you should train yourselves."

It is not the gains, offering and fame that is to be avoided, but rather the mental obsession with them, that is to be avoided (for future) and put aside (for past), as karma is all about intention.
I don't understand the second question.
This type of mental obsession is due to clinging (upādāna) to gains, offering and fame. It's greed (lobha / rāga).
If one monk is envious due to another's gains and fames, then he too suffers from clinging, and this time it's aversion (dosa / dveṣa).
In SN 35.153, the Buddha taught:

“Further, bhikkhus, having heard a sound with the ear … … Having
  cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind, if there is lust, hatred,
  or delusion internally, a bhikkhu understands: ‘There is lust, hatred,
  or delusion internally’; or, if there is no lust, hatred, or delusion
  internally, he understands: ‘There is no lust, hatred, or delusion
  internally.’ Since this is so, are these things to be understood by
  faith, or by personal preference, or by oral tradition, or by reasoned
  reflection, or by acceptance of a view after pondering it?”
“No, venerable sir.”
“Aren’t these things to be understood by seeing them with wisdom?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“This, bhikkhus, is the method of exposition by means of which a
  bhikkhu—apart from faith, apart from personal preference, apart from
  oral tradition, apart from reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance
  of a view after pondering it—can declare final knowledge thus:
  ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done
  has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’”

Since it is also called a danger for Arahats, housholder ruben, it might be not said only in relation to mindstates. The point to maccharia denotes on more raw levels of training, as it is possible to oversee the tree standing in the forest, while thinking to make the final works on a chair, smoothing the actually bark. So good if staying where one actually is.

Where does it say that it is a danger for Arahats?

Rude and undisciplined does householder Ruben approach, does he appear. Nevertheless...: he may find it in the same, accumulating-Honor Vagga as the 30. one.

SN 17.30 implies that gains, offering and fame does not disturb or reverse an arahat's liberation, but it may disturb the arahat's blissful meditations. In this sense, they may need to give it up.

Yes...!? Possible to get to similar level in use for householders? Imagining something that is far off seen would not help them to stop cutting the bark, would such for householder Ruben work conductive?

As the Buddha said (AN 5.159 PTS: A iii 184 Udayi Sutta: About Udayin),  "It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. Of the five qualities, the fourth was, “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak not for the purpose of material reward.'"
Much more than the seeking of any kind of material reward, the biggest of all diseases of the mind is that of our ego-desire(s), our ego-conceit and the underlying tendency to manifest that notion of an ego-entity inside us.  The strongest defilement of the mind, the biggest inner fire (thapa) is this ego-desire and ego-conceit. The only cure for this, as well as all other desires of the mind, is the Saddhamma. The Dhamma is like medicine, the only cure for the basic disease of the mind.
According to the Buddha, it’s the tendency of the mind to compare itself with others. Even if you say, “I’m worse than that other person,” or, ”I’m equal to that other person,” that’s conceit. There’s an “I” there: the “I‐making, mine‐making, and tendency to conceit.” To overcome this, the Buddha recommend that we develop a sense of disenchantment—nibbida—and that we do it skillfully. He
teaches us to get attached to more and more refined states of wellbeing in the mind, and to become disenchanted with everything else.
Getting rid of attachments is not easy, and more refined states of wellbeing are a good place to be attached: states of concentration, states of wellbeing in the mind that don’t have to depend on circumstances outside. That’s a lot better than being attached to the sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, and ideas we’re normally attached to.  A good time to look at your attachments is when you meditate. When the mind has a sense of ease and wellbeing, you can, you can look at all of the other mistakes you’ve been making, with a much greater sense of fairness, a much greater sense of objectivity, with less sense of being desperate.
One who is well trained in the traditions of the noble ones, or the customs of the noble ones, accumulate Inner wealth — conviction, virtue, a sense of conscience, scrupulousness, breadth of learning, generosity, and discernment— the inner qualities we build within ourselves. Outer wealth—money and material goods—doesn’t have any hard and fast owners. Today it may be ours, tomorrow someone else may take it away.  Outer wealth such as having lots of food, lots of clothing, a lot of worldly possessions have their drawbacks. When you learn to see the world through Dhamma, you will learn to say, “No.” to tendencies of the mind. You’re not sucked into those things, and as a result the mind is more independent, has a lot more peace. It can keep its values straight.
The more you live the life of a noble one, the more you will immerse in the culture of the noble ones. Amidst all dangers of gain and honor (laabhasakkara), that voice of restraint inside is going to be your protection. You will begin to learn how to listen to it, to strengthen it, so that restraint in day‐to‐day life will begin to augment the restraint of your meditation.
When you really get a taste of what it’s like to get the mind to settle down, you find how liberating it is. When you see the rewards, you’re more and more willing to let go of the things that you’re normally attached to in favor of the freedom of not being attached.  As the Buddha said, “The mind well trained brings happiness.” It needs to be well trained because it’s always doing things, so make sure that what it’s doing is in line with where you want to go.

Good so, Upasaka @Saptha Visuddhi. But there seems to be two problems, one is that "ego-desire", desire for beauty, perfection, is one of the governing principles, a required force toward skillful and liberation, the other that reputatiins will pull unease behind one, the dart is in the back.. Could the solution, at first place, be found in neiter sekha nor asekha, sekha and asekha? In regard of different approaches. As known conceit is to be used to overcome conceit. Maybe a skilled taking, let go, taking next, let go...?

And where, is having taken for a while, to best put it back, whom or what to give reputations, merits made, before?

The Buddha describes the sense of “I am” as the underlying cause for the mind’s tendency to proliferate ideas, its tendency to make differentiations, to complicate things, and all the categories and conflicts that come from those complications. You become selective: Where can you make a difference? Where can you not make a difference? Where is your craving helping you in the path? Where is it getting in the way? You must learn how to be selective, how to be skillful in where you direct your wants, where you direct your aspirations.

Both punnabhi sankhara (merits) and apunnabhi sankhara (demerits) that a person has accumulated throughout past samsaaric journey is a hinderance to achiving Nibbana in this very life. But it requires a lengthy explanation to tell why it is so, and how this can be overcome.

First, my person does think that it is a hindrence aside that one with merits could fall into selft-complacency like the foolish son of a rich, second, Upasaka Saptha Visuddhi doesn't like to hold on his merits he could share, or does he :-). The path is plastered with skillful deeds, not by inaction, resignation or stinginess.

Selective: greedy toward what, aversive toward what? Whats right effort?

We do need to accumulate punnābhi sankhāra to avoid rebirth in the lowest four realms. One should not shy away from doing meritorious deeds, “BUT” one needs to stay away from wishing for “things in return” for such meritorious deeds as much as possible, because such thoughts are based on greed. If one does a good deed AND wishes for something in return, that wishing is done with greed. Any good deed “WILL” produce good results whether one wishes or not.

Better to say “PERFECT EFFORT”, than “Right Effort”. This is where a person could or could not continue in the Path. If a person let go of the Path and falls back in to the worldly manner of doing things again & again, the suffering gets more with time. So focus & have the right efforts to go through the Path, in order to be free & have an end towards all forms of suffering.

Here, given place where merits would not fall back into the world, as here not so welcome, both, Upasaka @Saphta Visuddhi (forgot the Canadians user name)

No... thats the end of discussion. No more comments or replies on my part. with metta....

They will say Saptha Visuddhi only approaches when a lot of reputations can be expected.

I am offering my answer based on the OP's reply to my query:

My query; You started your question in neutral tone without referring to any scripture - "It's said that desire for gains as intention for one undertakings, beyond simply that for liberation from suffering, is a huge hindrance, obstacle.". And, the 2 questions, you had put forward, are also general in nature. Are you expecting answers general in nature, based on SPIRITUAL concepts only, without referring to any scripture? or can be answered from other ways of thinking, say Hinduism?
answer; What ever householder @srimannarayanakv thinks that it would clarify and is truthfully, leads to release when put into practice.

So the OP is interested to know the answer from the householder's perspective.  The questions are:

1) Now, what could, should one do, should avoid, that all kinds of such accumulations do not take place and do not endanger ones intention, aspiration, to bend from highest path and fruits, awakening?
2) Which role does maccharia (stinginess of five kinds and one primare cause) plays here, and if related, what kind of practice would work against such?

Rebirth in Buddhism refers to

its teaching that the actions of a person lead to a new existence after death, in endless cycles called saṃsāra. This cycle is considered to be dukkha, unsatisfactory and painful. The cycle stops only if liberation is achieved by insight and the extinguishing of desire. Rebirth is one of the foundational doctrines of Buddhism, along with Karma, nirvana and moksha.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebirth_(Buddhism)

The key issues are: The cycle stops only
(i) if liberation is achieved by insight, and
(ii) the extinguishing of desire.

I am quoting 2 slokas from Bhagavad Gita here, as the OP permitted me to do so.

ध्यायतो विषयान्पुंसः सङ्गस्तेषूपजायते।
सङ्गात् संजायते कामः कामात्क्रोधोऽभिजायते।।2.62।।
In a person, meditating on sense-objects, attachment or them is born in succession; from attachment springs passion; from passion arises wrath.
क्रोधाद्भवति संमोहः संमोहात्स्मृतिविभ्रमः।
स्मृतिभ्रंशाद् बुद्धिनाशो बुद्धिनाशात्प्रणश्यति।।2.63।।
From wrath delusion comes to be; from delusion is the loss of memory; from the loss of memory is the loss of capacity to decide; due to the loss of capacity to decide, he perishes outright.
https://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/srimad?etgb=1&etssa=1&choose=1&&language=dv&field_chapter_value=2&field_nsutra_value=63

Desire >> possessiveness >> anger (jealousy) >> delusion >> loss of memory >> loss of capacity to decide >> perishment
So every downfall starts with a desire and ends with perishment.  This is the core area, which is common both to Hinduism and Buddhism.

Let us get back to rebirth as per Buddhism;;
The cycle stops only
(i) if liberation is achieved by insight, and
(ii) the extinguishing of desire.
Both actions are to be carried out parallelly either by a monk or by a householder, for getting liberation.

It should not be misunderstood that insight can be achieved (i) by attending to the discourses of scholars or (ii) by reading the preachings of the great Buddha or (iii) by doing meditation, duly following the techniques prescribed by masters of meditation.
No, it is not possible, as the desires, mentioned in the 2nd prerequisite will not allow one to get insight, unless they were brought under control.

Again, desires can never be satiated or cooled down by the enjoyment of objects. But as fire blazes forth the more when fed with butter and wood, so it grows the more when it feeds on objects of enjoyment.
If all the foods of the earth, all the precious metals, all animals, and all beautiful women were to pass into the possession of a man deluded by desire, they would fail to give him satisfaction.

The Indriyas or senses bring the man in contact with external objects and the desires are thereby created. But the senses are not all-in-all. If the mind co-operates with the Indriyas, then only is mischief wrought. Mind is more powerful than the Indriyas. Mind is the commander.
Reason is more powerful than the mind. Even if the mind brings a message into the mental factory by its association with the Indriyas, the pure reason can reject it altogether. Reason is more powerful than the mind. Behind reason is the Self, who is the director and witness of reason and who is superior to reason.

So practice to attain insight through meditation and checking the desires with reasoning should go parallelly, which slowly, but surely, brings the cycle of birth to end.

Good so, good householder. Yet it was not very specific and practical in regard of the question, althought of course, can be adopted.

@SamanaJohann: I am delighted to know that atleast my answer satisfied you to some extent:-).  Spiritual practices, which are practical, should be learnt from an accomplished master only. Getting rid of desires should be practiced by one on his own, which cannot be taught or made easy by any master.


text:
What's the (mental) quality different between aversive leaving (vi-bhava) and renouncing (nekkhamma)?
Whats the different between leaving, abounding, letting go, push away, say out of aversion, anger, and renouncing?
Both seems to be combined with tanha (thirst), yet one is called ku-sala (bad-cutting away) and one a-ku-sala (not bad-cutting away). And/Or is renouncing combined with a-moha, not-not-knowing or moha, not-knowing/delusion root of aversive notion of desire for leaving, letting go?

If, by forsaking
  a limited ease,
  he would see
  an abundance of ease,
  the enlightened man
  would forsake
  the limited ease
  for the sake
  of the abundant.
— Dhp 290

Sound gready, that what gives rise to "aversion", like strong desire for refined pleasure, yet even 'enlightened' situation.
How is renouncing conductive toward and on the path, leaving and let go part of the path of liberation?

A realated topic with given space for discussion and possible answer can be found here.
(note that this question is not given for trade, stacks, exchange or entertainment, but for ones work trough the wheel here and liberation)

Vibhava tanha arises as a result of attachement, aversion and ignorance combined with the wrong view of Nicca, Suka , Atta and Subha.
Nekkhamma is a result of non-attachement, non-aversion and wisdom combind with the right view of Anicca, Dukkha ,Anatta and Asubha.

beside of right view and wrong view, there are no real differences to be traced, here, Upasaka Sarath. How could nekkhamma not be a rejection? So it seems to be more a matter of what to reject, in what way.

@SamanaJohann, the defining difference would be our intentions: If we expect to eliminate the pain completely (vibhava tanha), we are fabricating unwholesome sankhara. If we expect to accept the pain, and strive (chanda) for reminding us (samma sati) that it's impermanent (anicca) and not ours (anatta) we are renuncianting pain in a wholesome way.

well you said the difference, aversion is not samma sankappa, because aversion is devoid of dispassion from the knowledge of the worthlessness of whatever  is avoided.

And what, Brethren, is what is free from the asavas?
The destruction of lust, Brethren, the destruction of hatred, the
  destruction of illusion, - that is called what is free from the
  asavas.
And what, Brethren, is the path that goes to what is free from the
  asavas?
Herein, Brethren, a brother practises right aim, which is founded on
  singleness of heart, founded on dispassion, founded on cessation,
  whicb leads to giving up.
He strives, puts forth energy, exerts bis mind and strives.
That, Brethren, is called 'the path that goes to what is free from the
  asavas.'

singleness of heart translates weirdly viveka-nissitam
here is what happens with the the akulasa sankappa
http://obo.genaud.net/a/dhamma-vinaya/pts/sn/04_salv/sn04.35.096.wood.pts.htm

What are the quality differences of ku-sala-resolve and a-ku-sala-resolve, good householder? Singleness of heart can be akusala as well. Strives for what, "rejects" what, to get right singleness of heart?

Both seems to be combined with tanha (thirst)
I don't think they are "both combined with tanha (thirst)".
I think of tanha as always meaning "an unskilful craving" -- especially a craving "to have what you cannot have", or. "to keep (permanently) what you cannot keep".
Whereas a skilful version of that is more likely to be called chanda.
Anyway, the way I understand it is --

If you're an addict, addicted to something, then perhaps you "crave" it
Perhaps, after a while of experiencing being an addict, you begin to see the disadvantages (including "unpleasantness" and "suffering") of being an addict -- at that point you might "crave not to be" an addict
With additional right view and practice and skill, and other supporting factors (including perhaps some "good friends"), you might be able to renounce what you're addicted to -- that, then, might be called a "skilful desire", and not just an "unskilful craving"
Maybe after you have done that successfully, finished training, then there's no more craving and even no more desire -- see the Brahmana Sutta (SN 51.15) for example

I think I can say from personal experience that there are some things that I used to be accustomed to and attracted to, but which I no longer use, no longer crave (never think about), and no longer even feel averse to if I encounter/contact them -- that if I smell them, for example, it doesn't elicit craving or aversion -- it's just a smell, a recognisable smell -- perhaps that means perception (sañña) without much feeling (vedanā).
Even though I'm not averse to it I still renounce it -- perhaps because I still remember and feel aversion towards being an addict (and don't want to resume using the thing and becoming accustomed and addicted again). I don't think that type of aversion counts as "craving not to be", though -- because, given that I am already not, it's not a craving for something to be other than it is.
Still there are some "states" that I'm averse to -- e.g. social conflict -- and I might avoid situations which might give rise to that -- and, I don't know, perhaps my avoiding such situations isn't always "skilful". I think there's some Buddhist training about not being averse to e.g. social situation (perhaps it's more Mahayana or Vajrayana training though) -- see e.g. Aversion and Mahayana -- but I don't know a lot about that.

What the definition of kusala, akusala, Nyom Chris. What greed, what aversion, is kusala?


text:
Vanna-maccharia, stinginess in regard to one's reputations: What to practice in order to get rid of it?
Vaṇṇā-maccharia, stinginess in regard to one's honor, reputation, not't letting make others use it, envy to lose it, is one of the five kinds of maccharia, based on ingratitude, wrong view, and a quality not only absent in all Noble Once, but also a hindrance to attain whatever Jhana, path or fruit.
What are practices to train to learn not being stingy in regard of ones honour, beauty, sublimity?
What and where to give into?
What traditional practice is done by faithful followers in that regard?

A/the realated topic with given space for discussion and possible answer can be found here.
(note that this question is not given for trade, stacks, exchange or entertainment, but for ones work trough maccharia to escape the wheel here and liberation)

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

Perception of impermanence

Bhikkhus, to the bhikkhu practicing the perception of impermanence and abiding much in it, gain, honour and fame keeps away, it shrinks and rolls away. The mind stretches out and gets established in equanimity or loathing

“And what, Ānanda, is the perception of impermanence? Here, having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty hut, a bhikkhu reflects thus: ‘Form is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, volitional activities are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent.’ Thus he dwells contemplating impermanence in these five aggregates subject to clinging. This is called the perception of impermanence.

Perception of impermanence in all conditioned things;

“And what, Ānanda, is the perception of impermanence in all conditioned phenomena? Here, a bhikkhu is repelled, humiliated, and disgusted by all conditioned phenomena. This is called the perception of impermanence in all conditioned phenomena.

These too will be helpful;
Perception of all formations as undesirable;

Bhikkhus, to the bhikkhu practicing the perception of unpleasantness in impermanence and abiding much in it, a keen perception of fear, for laziness, distraction, negligence and non-reflection gets established, like to a slayer with raised sword.

Perception of non-delight in the all worlds;

Bhikkhus, to the bhikkhu practicing the perception of non-attachment to all the world and abiding much in it, the manifold beauty of the world, keeps away, it shrinks and rolls away. The mind stretches out and gets established in equanimity or loathing.

“And what, Ānanda, is the perception of non-delight in the entire world? Here, a bhikkhu refrains from any engagement and clinging, mental standpoints, adherences, and underlying tendencies in regard to the world, abandoning them without clinging to them. This is called the perception of non-delight in the entire world.

Perception of non-self;

Bhikkhus, to the bhikkhu practicing the perception of lacking a self in unpleasantness and abiding much in it, whatever distinctions arise as superior, inferior or equal in the sixfold conscious body and all external signs, are appeased and well released.

“And what, Ānanda, is the perception of non-self? Here, having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty hut, a bhikkhu reflects thus: ‘The eye is non-self, forms are non-self; the ear is non-self, sounds are non-self; the nose is non-self, odors are non-self; the tongue is non-self, tastes are non-self; the body is non-self, tactile objects are non-self; the mind is non-self, mental phenomena are non-self.’ Thus he dwells contemplating non-self in these six internal and external sense bases. This is called the perception of non-self.

At the surface, you can look at how we do unskilled bodily, verbal and metal volitional formations due to stinginess for reputation (vanna maccariya). For example, one utters false speech to maintain a status. One kills, steals, etc. (all 10 can be looked at this way).
But to understand this in the Noble sense, you need to first understand the arising phenomena of stinginess. As explained in the Vattupama Sutta (Simile of the Cloth) it can be understood that it is because of Disparaging (palaso); and underneath that is difference in volitional formations (sankhara). For example, the person who lies to maintain a reputation have given different values to such statuses and disparage one status over another and holding on to that idea now doing even immoral acts (dussilam) to maintain it. This way we roam in samsara.
In order to go further deep, you need to understand how the stream of consciousness flow. You may not understand that without the pre-requisite dhamma therefore I won't try to explain it here.
Stinginess for reputation is connected with misapprehending feeling as pleasure but it has to be understood with above flow of consciousness and how the five-fold stinginess attributing to each other to maintain the flow.
Person who has destroyed all cankers (i.e. an arahat) does not have stinginess.
If you are interested in learning more, take a look at discussions in English stream on this website: https://visuddhimagga.info/

Good to try to overcome stinginess here and risk some lose of vanna. two quick things, householder: 1. starting from streamenter, Noble ones are free of stinginess, so all not only the Arahat. 2. Householder did not provide much of practice toward it, eg. generositie, sila and it's special kinds in regard of vanna-maccharia. Most deals with break of precepts to gain vanna. Holding on vanna, maccharia, itself does not necessary requires break of precepts.

(1) At a gross level one might think the a stream enterer has removed maccariya but that is not the case. It gets more subtle but as long as you have the idea of a self, to that extent all 5 maccariya can arise. (2) The practice leading to the complete removal of maccariya is the Noble Eight Fold Path. In the Noble dhamma, when you realize the origin & cessation of something, that's when you realize it can be removed. Therefore contemplate on how one misapprehends feeling as pleasure and as a result mental volition happen.

And as a result we say "it is pleasure" when it is really suffering (dukka). Now one utters false speech, etc. (remember: vitakka-vicara is verbal volitional formations - doesn't necessarily speak out loud).
This might help to understand this: https://visuddhimagga.info/download.php?file=https://anaalaya.blob.core.windows.net/dhamma2018/M_E_HaliddakaniSutta_30_03_2018.mp4

So  ahtisarw is wiser then the elders and the Buddha? -> see own answer at 2. Is householder ahtisarw wake and able to listen or is there running a loop sequence. A Noble Person might still grasp after things, but since knowing by himself that sense and objects are no refuge, would not grasphold on them => void of maccharia. See Vissuddhimagga for details as householder seems to like it. So again, what are the specific practices toward this kind of maccharia.

As example: as for training to let go of material things (lābha maccharia) people do engage into Dana. What about listening in lowered position when possible knowledgeable tell something? Isn't vanna macchariya most hindering?

In a gamified system like SE/SO reputation and score is a source of motivation.
In a Buddhist context, this can be both:

stinginess as to one's gains (Lābha-macchariya) - in this case, gain in reputation
stinginess as to one's status (Vaṇṇa-macchariya) - in this case, total reputations accumulated

But for this system to work gamified element is essential as this is tied to the privileges on getting on the site. Also, votes and acceptance can guide people who are not very knowledgeable in Dhamma to finding better answers. So one should vote on and accept answers which one sees as being in line with the Dhamma and downvote on ones which seam not being in line with the Dhamma. (Use this sparingly as it might agitate users.)
In the real world giving something has merit as it is useful to others. In this system, one can give to questions and answers as bounty. If one is attached to reputation then this may help reduce macchariya. But a better way is not to be bothered with the reputation gains. If you are mentally not attached then this will not hinder the achievement of Jhana. Having said it is better to put bounties more sparingly to questions which might attract great answers which are useful to the spread of dhamma. Also awarding a bounty may be en endorsement that one agrees with the answer and it is in line with the Dhamma. This should not be left to the system alone. People without much knowledge can use this to distinguish what is in line with the Dhamma and what is not using this as a cue.
To summarise, votes, accepting and bounties serve a purpose, even in spreading the Dhamma. One should explore how this works for oneself and use it wisely so that it aids the spread of the dhamma signalling to other users about the correctness and acceptability of what is being said. Also, look at the system like a hammer. If you are using it there is a particular way to use it. If you do not hit with the head it does not work. So try to put the system to work in a way which benefits the dhamma the most. This being backed by good volition would also mean positive karma.

Sadhu for effort. Here a relativation with causes: "in the real world giving"... huch!? Upasaka, what is kamma? What is real on the path? It's not a game but 100% kamma and by mind even much more of effects! "Real world" are the ideas of the Jains, may Upasaka take care here. MN56. Maybe Upasaka likes to investigate it inwardly and outwardly by reading first.

Let my person give an answer to it in practical ways, related to ones situation, for inspiring of better rhetorical answers by those skilled in such that many could grasp the essence easier and related to ones Nissaya and used bearable food, ways of speech:
Reputations are used to overcome all personal reputations, similar to conceit, so a requirement on the path, given by the three Governing principles, like the four prerequisites, good livelihood and use of food, nourishment. Without such, upholding such, one is not able to walk, has no joy and dies of another time yet not secured. So the Buddha advised on many places, in many ways, to act after merits and gain and to look after ones "beauty with care. Yet by sharing, giving one gain, yet by sharing , giving upwardly one gains ways upwardly. By sharing and giving to equal and lower, one stays where one is or falls of. Not giving, sharing, fire, foods, Kings, thieves and death will take them away and so decay.
The ignorant does not see the value of reputation and how to use them for a better. How much ever he gains by merits, he will waste them off by himself or give them, share them upwardly. He may look for some like a perfect one on not attentive observation of his way of actions related to reputations, received from either wise or fools.
A good householders way to use ones reputations, honor and estimate for better becoming is to invest them upwardly. One could use them equal to material gains:

25% for ones join and life from it
25% for security and bad times
25% for investments to gain more reputations
25% to make merits (best toward giving to the virtuous individuals, the Tripple Gems)

The last is usually done by Veneration, by giving reputations toward the Sangha.
An ordinary monks training is avoid accumulation of personal honor and to receive no personal reputations and if given forward them all to the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha. To give way reputations upwardly and outwardly intentional would be a violation of his rules.
A Noble Ones ways in regard of reputations is not to hold on them, being free from stinginess. Not free from greed yet, he might up and on take some personal but would not hold on them as soon as it can be given away. Of course such would never intentional give reputations upwardly.
A Perfect One, being free of taking anything personal, does neither accept reputations personal nor would he still hold on some. He shines by being ride of touch by reputations.
In regard of teaching the Dhamma, as the highest field for reputation:

Candūpama Sutta: Comparable to the Moon
..."There is the case, Bhikkhus, that a Bhikkhu teaches the Dhamma, thinking: 'Oh, may they listen to the Dhamma from me. Having learned my Dhamma, may they be settled in believe in it. Having been settled in believe in it, may they show their settlement in believe," this is a kind of Bhikkhu, Bhikkhus, who is giving teaching on Dhamma impurely.
There is the case, Bhikkhus, that a Bhikkhu teaches the Dhamma, thinking: 'The Dhamma of the Blessed One is well taught, direct visible, timeless, inviting to come and see, appropriate, to be self-experianced by the wise. Oh, may they listen to the Dhamma from me. Having learned the Dhamma, may they understand. Having understood the Dhamma, may they practice accordingly.' So he teaches the Dhamma because of the excellence nature of the Dhamma; he teaches the Dhamma out of compassion and kindness, out of concern. This is a kind of Bhikkhu, Bhikkhus, who is giving teaching on Dhamma purely.
Kassapa, Bhikkhus, teaches the Dhamma, thinking: 'The Dhamma of the Blessed One is well taught, direct visible, timeless, inviting to come and see, appropriate, to be self-experianced by the wise. Oh, may they listen to the Dhamma from me. Having learned the Dhamma, may they understand. Having understood the Dhamma, may they practice accordingly.' He teaches the Dhamma because of the excellence nature of the Dhamma; he teaches the Dhamma out of compassion and kindness, out of concern.

What are ways of sharing reputations:
After having proved and investigated, praising of what is worthy to praise, blame of what is worthy to blame, taking worldly loses, even that of friends, to bear. Practicing sharing merits, inviting, expressing joy in merits of others. Bowing, greeting, veneration, hospitality toward those worthy of such of all what has become natural by those having reached the Noble Domain. Putting higher always on higher place, knowing the foremost as foremost, the elder, the more advanced and always give to known such by words, signs and speech and in proper ways, never out for harming others with ones gift, never act deceitful with ones shares for favors.
Note that if using the reputations actually owned by the Tripple Gems, given by the Buddha, by using his heritage, his label, for others then liberation and toward to it, one does not only harm oneself but many by this thieving, fraud.
May it be of good inspiration and motivation to reflect further and possible start to practice it much for many.
(note that this gift of Dhamma is not given for trade, stacks, exchange or entertainment, but for ones work trough maccharia to escape the wheel here and liberation)


text:
What's the different between kusala (good) and akusala (bad)?
What's the different between ku-sala (good) and a-ku-sala (bad), in regard of what the Buddha taught?
(ku - bad, sala - cutting away, a - not)
What are good and bad actions by deeds, speech and mind, and what qualities defines them as such?
Here   he grieves
    he grieves  hereafter.
In both worlds
the wrong-doer grieves.
He grieves, he's afflicted,
seeing the corruption
    of his deeds.
Here   he rejoices
    he rejoices hereafter.
In both worlds
the merit-maker rejoices.
He rejoices, is jubilant,
seeing the purity
    of his deeds.
Yamakavagga
So good to now really good of how to distinguish and alltime worthy to ask, remember and tell for many's benefit, and the own.
(Note that this is not asked/given for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to escape this wheel here)

This may be a duplicate of (or related to) What determines whether actions are good or bad?

It isn't and to delete things going against your grain does not change that but simply increases the akusala actions of your further.

The individual question> "What determines whether actions are good or bad?", really doesn't fit the question here. It would be good is that would be answered separate here

The explanation for Kusala can be found in MN-3 -> Maha Chattarika Sutta ( I can't find this in english translation site, but this is in Sinhala / Pali Thripitaka ), So if I explain it how I understood by reading it,
It's about noble eightfold path, and in each it's describe two things one is lokottara (= focusing on Nivana) path the other one is laukika (= focusing on good things in this world: eg -> samma kammanta = to do a decent job, not kill animals and sell).
And the opposite of this is Akusala which doing opposite things not knowing what the right view, resolve, speech, etc..
About lokottara path that person should have a correct view what is the problem with the world, why we are attached to things, and why we should not attached, what's the danger in that so on.
Hope my description led some lights and I should accept that I'm not a good translator.
Update:
Found more information on this. It's in Vibhangaprakaranaya-1, paticcasamuppada vibhangaya There you can notice what is kusala dharmayo, the explanation is given the paticcasamuppada cycle but it starts with sankara not with avijja that means when a thought is processed without avijja it causes to Nivana as it is a kusala

English copies of MN 117 are here and here.