text:
What is the perception of the body?
I'm following the four foundations of mindfulness. This has given me round-the-clock body awareness. It can often be painful; but it can often be pleasant. The pleasantness is marred by its opposite.
I notice from time to time the density of my body disappears along with all ideas of pleasant and unpleasant and their respective sensations.
Questions
Is the body a perception like all other perceptions?
How does the subtle perceptions described in MN 121 translate into the body? - I'm asking this as there appears to be greater mental/emotional turmoil like an archaic or ancient frustration/restlessness.

The body is obviously a perception (sense object) but it also exists independent of perception. For example, the automatic functions of the body (such as breathing, heart function, liver function, digestion function, growth, cell division, etc) exist and operate independent of perception.
Therefore, scriptures, such as MN 43, say the living body continues to exist when (living) perception ceases.
The question about MN 121 appears irrelevant. MN 121 ultimately says in the supreme realization/experience of Emptiness, the body continues to exist. It says:

‘This mode of perception is empty of the effluent of sensuality, empty of the effluent of [ego] becoming, empty of the effluent of ignorance. And there is just this non-emptiness: that
connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body
with life as its condition.’

In your attempt to practise Satipatthana, there is greater mental/emotional turmoil like an archaic or ancient frustration/restlessness because of your past kamma (actions). Restlessness is one of the Five Hindrances to meditation and the scriptures (AN 10.61) say the food (nutriment) of the Five Hindrances is the Three Unskillful Actions.
Instead of focusing on higher teachings, such as perception & Emptiness, you should focus on teachings for rank beginners, such as the Five and Eight Precepts, which include not watching pornography, not engaging in casual sex and, on a higher level, not masturbating.
Satipatthana is the 7th factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, which includes abstinence from all sexual activity in its 5th Factor. If a person actually is practising Satipatthana "around the clock" (as you claim) then they will be free from all sexual activity because Satipatthana means giving up all lust and distress towards the world.
Your experience of restlessness is like a detoxification. When a person enters into detox via abstinence, they will experience withdrawal symptoms for a time, until they fully detox. A person cannot detoxify if they keep taking toxins.

This is very helpful. Thank you. Referring back to basic precepts seems a sensible approach with regards to the hindrances.


text:
Concentration with no object?
The Buddha often makes this requests on his monks, "incline your mind towards Nibbana"
Does this mean concentration with no object?
As far as I can ascertain, concentration with no object does not seem to be possible.
I have a particular interest in the Mahayana perspective but answers from other traditions are welcome.
Thanks

It means to incline your mind towards dispassion, dispassion towards the sense objects, dispassion towards craving for existence and dispassion towards craving for non-existence.
Inclining your mind toward dispassion means to incline your mind towards disenchantment, no longer being enchanted with sense objects, craving for existence and craving for non-existence.
To incline your mind towards disenchantment, you must see reality as it is by observing any/all of the three marks of existence:

changing nature of reality
selfless nature of reality
unsatisfactory nature of reality

By observing these qualities of existence, the mind gradually loses its interest in grasping to such unreliable things for a source of lasting happiness, thus inclining towards disenchantment, thus inclining towards dispassion, thus inclining towards Nibbana.

Does this mean concentration with no object?

No - It means concentration of any object while noticing its changing nature, selfless nature and/or unsatisfactory nature.

You might also find this relatable - Cetana Sutta: An Act of Will https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.002.than.html

Thanks for sutta. Disenchantment and dispassion can be absent of some qualities mentioned in this sutta thus making the field of play a little more uncomfortable. It either doesn't apply to me or I must observe my virtue with a little more scrutiny.

@NeuroMax , I'm not sure what you mean by ... can be absent of some qualities mentioned in this sutta thus making the field of play a little more uncomfortable

If it helps you to understand the Sutta better, it is describing a path, a set of conditions, one giving rise to the next, leading all the way up to realization of Nibbana. For example, the Sutta mentioning freedom from remorse, joy, rapture, serenity... etc, Disenchantment and Dispassion are not yet applicable because the mind at these stages is still enchanted, fascinated, interested, craving, hating sense objects & existence/non-existence. When the proper pre-requisites are met, the mind begins to see that none of these objects are worthwhile objects to satisfy it's desires.

Each of the stages it describes has its own spectrum of completeness; One stage does not need to be "completed" before the next begins. More-so on a sliding scale, as one develops the affinities mentioned in each stage (beginning to end), the ability to develop the subsequent stages is deepened.

An example of this being - you do not need to be totally free from remorse to have joy arise... As you become more and more free from remorse, more and more joy arises... apply this to all the stages it describes like this.

Right, I see. This was never my understanding of disenchantment and dispassion, but I think I can stretch it to fit within those parameters. It seems helpful. Disenchantment and dispassion bear the qualities of lack, grief and disappointment. From your perspective, these still remain enchantments to the mind. Thank you for outlining the path mentioned in the sutta leading to this version of disenchantment and dispassion.

Yes, but know that "disenchantment" and "dispassion" does not mean the opposite of enchantment and the opposite of passion. If you are disenchanted/dispassionate with something, it simply means you are not enchanted/passionate with that something. There is no new quality or emotion that gets created in its place necessarily. If you take away enchantment and take away passion, what is left is disenchantment and dispassion. If you find disenchantment/dispassion leads you to feelings of "lack, grief and disappointment", then disenchantment/dispassion should be applied to those feelings as well :)

Excellent! Thanks. ;-)

From Mahayana perspective true Nirvana is the non-abiding Nirvana, which is a state of not being bounded by any single interpretative framework whatsoever.

Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"
"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. - MN 72

So it's not as much a concentration without an object as it is without a reference point such as one delineating "better" (state) from "worse" (state).
Freedom from all frameworks is the inexpressible suchness or positive ambiguity where even the dichotomy of samsara/nirvana has been transcended.
As the sutta answers pointed out, attaining this freedom requires concentration to identify and stop the opposing factors, the factors of attachment/craving/aversion/non-suchness, through letting go and dispassion of wisdom.

And that concentration can occur outside of meditation, as is the case with myself. It's not that I must sit there crossed-legged and concentrate - that's helpful in some respects - but I can concentrate in the wider field of experience; in life so to speak. Could you expand on this sentence please: "So it's not as much a concentration without an object as it is without a reference point such as one delineating "better" (state) from "worse" (state)

It means the object is Nibbana and the mental attitudes leading to Nibbana, as literally said as follows:

And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a
monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go,
attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.
SN
48.10
To whatever extent there are phenomena conditioned or unconditioned,
dispassion is declared the foremost among them, that is, the crushing
of pride, the removal of thirst, the uprooting of attachment, the
termination of the round, the destruction of craving, dispassion,
cessation, nibbāna. Those who have confidence in the Dhamma have
confidence in the foremost, and for those who have confidence in the
foremost, the result is foremost.
AN 4.34
Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops the mindfulness enlightenment
factor, which is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation,
and ripens in relinquishment. He develops the investigation-of-states
enlightenment factor…the energy enlightenment factor…the rapture
enlightenment factor…the tranquillity enlightenment factor…the
concentration enlightenment factor…the equanimity enlightenment
factor, which is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation,
and ripens in relinquishment.
MN 118

AN 4.34 states: “To whatever extent there are phenomena conditioned or unconditioned, dispassion is declared the foremost among them". Dispassion for the unconditioned? Is this attachment to notions of emptiness?

I imagine dispassion is a conditioned phenomena despite it being the final gateway to experiencing the unconditioned Nibbana. Dispassion means loss of desire due to being disenchanted with the impermanence & unsatisfactoriness of conditioned phenomena. Dispassion is to get sick of things. Example u love your wife but discover your wife is cheating on u all the time many many times. Instead of loving your wife u now look down upon her & completely lose interest in her. This is dispassion. Dispassion is conditioned (dependent upon insight) but it allows the Unconditioned to flow into the mind.

Let's say you go to the doctor and get your blood pressure measured and it turns out to be high, probably because you were anxious at that moment. The doctor tells you to calm down, and then he will take another reading.
In order to do so, what would you concentrate on? Surely not on the blood pressure measurement device or the doctor. And surely not on nothing.
Your anxiety is due to clinging to some mental ideas related to the results of the measurement. In order to become calm, you need to let go of that clinging.
Similarly, to incline your mind towards Nibbana, to extinguish suffering, you need to let go of your craving and clinging, which is only possible by the cultivation of wisdom and uprooting of ignorance, as explained by the analogy of the South Indian monkey trap.

I searched Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations of the Samyutta Nikaya, Angutarra Nikaya, and Majjima Nikaya, as well as Maurice Walsche's translation of the Dhiga Nikaya. The closest I could come to "incline your mind toward Nibbana" was advice from Sariputta to Anurudda, wherein the latter - who had achieved the jnanas was complaining to the former about encountering obstacles. Sariputta, in Bhikkhu Bodh's translation advises him to "direct your mind to the deathless element."
In a different translation of the same text (by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hec ker) Sariputta advises Anuruddha to "direct your mind to the deathless element, Nibbana." AN3:128 / AN3:130.
Since that's as close as I could come to your original quote, I'm afraid I can't be very helpful. However, withing the context of the exchange between Anuruddha and Sariputra, and your question concerning meditation without objects - especially in an Indo-Tibetan Mahayana context I can perhaps be of a little service.
Following Kamalasila, shamatha meditation can be undertaken with an external object, such as a pebble or statue; an internal object, such as the breath or a visualization; or it can be done without an object, in which case it is known as meditation on the essence of things (or shamatha without support). This last type of shamatha is a resting meditation and shouldn't be confused with vipasyana.
Mingyur Rinpoche gives very clear, nice instructions in this technique, as does Thrangu Rinpoche and Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche.
On the other hand, it seems that Anuruddha had gained the jnanas of the form or formless realm. In classical Indian texts, one is advised to begin vipasyana prac tice after one has attained the meditative stability of the four formless realms. Various Tibetan teachers have suggested that one can begin sooner - some say as soon as one has achieved the fourth or fifth level of shamatha where the mind no longer strays from the object - no matter how long the meditation session. In any case, one needs strong meditative stability in order for vipasyana practice to be effective.
Traditionally, vipasyana is divided into two parts; analyzing and resting. In the resting stage, one rests in one's realization or certainty, without engaging in further analysis or looking. One may subtly cling to a conceptualization of one's realization, but ideally, this is a sort of formless meditation. Similarly, in tantra mahamudra, one generates the image of a deity, and in the completion stage one dissolves the visualization and - ideally - rests in nonconceptual awareness.
Both sutra mahamudra and Essence mahamudra also entail objectless meditation.
All of which is to say that meditation without an object is indeed a part of the Mahayana path.

I could find "He turns his mind away from those states and directs it towards the deathless element" in MN 64

You said, "meditation on the essence of things". This intrigues me because my perceptive field has been very wide for about 10 months. Could you link to some more information on this please?

ruben2020 - yes, there are various permutations.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Fear of Samsara in Others
I have been recently experiencing tremendous fear, but as I look through my eyes at the world and the objects it contains, the fear does not accord with what I see. The world itself is beautiful but people's minds seem tarnished by a neurosis. They seem to define themselves by this very neurosis.
I notice all the little behavioural patterns they play and how they are trapped by them. I find this very fearful, and it affects my ability to integrate with people. Furthermore, I often find myself 'playing along' but knowing that I'm playing along. This seems disingenuous and somewhat incongruent. I have avoided television for 4 years because of this falsity, but it is becoming very prominent just now. Only the other day I caught a few seconds of a TV program where they were discussing Covid-19 death rates like it was some kind of sporting event. I find humans very peculiar.
At the level of mind I am able to see the danger present in the world and act accordingly but this comes from a natural inclination instead of from a fear-based story. This doesn't stop me feeling fear for that mode of being we call samsara.
It is possible - or highly likely - that this fear could be my own samsaric turmoil looking to find a footing in the world as someone who is fearful of others and that its real plight lies in keeping the wheel turning.
My question is, from a Mahayana perspective, how can I come to love the samsara that I see in others?
I'm happy to welcome answers from other traditions.
Be well.

This is pretty normal, I'm guessing most practitioners go through this phase.
You have a certain - valid but incomplete - understanding of Dharma, and so you interpret your observations from this perspective, creating subjective reality that looks somewhat negative.
What you see is not wrong, these negative observations are not wrong, but they are a small part of the Totality that can be seen once your mind completely opens. You are listening to one radio station that plays sad music.
Luckily, once your perception purifies your attitude to samsara will change. Imagine getting the superpowers that allow you to hear all radio stations simultaneously. Once you are like that, the sad radio station won't bother you like before, although I won't lie: you will keep hearing it for the rest of your life.
The transformed purified attitude to samsara is called "compassion" or "unity of wisdom and compassion". You still see all those childish behaviors, neuroses etc. but you see them as growing pains, as part of an evolution. You see that in the grand scheme of things everything is perfect and is going as it's supposed to. At that point you can try and help as much as you can but you also have patience to let things develop naturally. You don't try to fix the world, if it's raining you let it rain, you also let children be children. Within the reason.
Back to the radio station allegory. Reality is an interpretation we make. Once your awareness liberates from all interpretative frameworks, your experience won't be bounded by one radio channel. The six realms of samsara and even the divine abode of Great Perfection are only small bands in the overall radio spectrum.

You are beginning to notice the natural behaviors that we all carry out. This is a great thing as most people don't even take a moment to understand their behavior or how/why it functions that way.
As you are noticing like this, all kinds of weird side effects may start arising, as you are really shaking the foundation of the way you perceive the world. Fear for others may arise, sadness for others may arise, meaninglessness of the world may arise, great purpose for the world may arise, all kinds of things may arise because of this new noticing on behavior of others & workings of the world.
What you are experiencing is a normal phase of investigating the spectrum of behaviors. Keep investigating and don't give too much importance to the fear or other feelings that arise from it (otherwise you may feed & strengthen those feelings).
As you keep investigating, you will begin to understand why people play out these behaviors and you will begin to understand why this fear arises in you as a response. As your understanding of these things deepens, it will help you through this phase and eventually it will pass. What you'll be left with is better understanding of peoples behaviors, which parts of them are conducive to their long term happiness, which ones aren't, which ones you should support in them or not and which ones you should "play along with".
If you understand why we all "play out" these behaviors, then it no longer appears as "playing out" because you understand why you are doing it and it's purpose. For example:
"If I don't greet this person I just met kindly and go through the normal interactions they might expect, they may get upset and that would unnecessarily increase their pain/suffering, so better that I help them avoid that pain."
With this kind of understanding in your interactions, the feelings of disingenuousness should fade away.
Keep up this process and you naturally will come to love the world and everything in it. Understanding is love.
Additionally, I recommend meditating on the four Divine Abodes and trying to encompass those attitudes when interacting with others, this may be of great help.

Do you have any audio resources for the Devine Abodes that you could share with me?

I've not come across any audio resources that talk about all four, but Ajahn Brahm is a great listen for loving kindness! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj98u8peZOU&ab_channel=BuddhistSocietyofWesternAustralia

Thank you. I've always found Ajahn Brahm a bit disorganised in his talks but some of his books are good.

This answer is from the Theravada perspective.
When you feel like you fear or dislike people because of their mental traps and neurotic dramas, you can use this opportunity to cultivate the brahmavihara of compassion (karuna).
The primary purpose of cultivating compassion is to cure this strong aversion that you have of other people. Aversion or hatred (dosa or dvesha) is one of the three poisons that will prevent your progress. Fear is a type of aversion. The secondary purpose is for you to regain a healthy social connection with the people around you.
Why are they the way they are? For e.g. if your grandmother who has senile dementia lashes out at you in anger or doesn't behave like normal people do, would you be fearful or judgemental or contemptuous against her? No. You would be compassionate towards her, because you understand that she has senile dementia.
Similarly, you can generate compassion by trying to understand that other people are suffering and there may be genuine underlying reasons for their suffering and condition. It could be their life situation (e.g. poverty or undergoing divorce) or even mental states (e.g. ignorance, or clouded by anger or other negative emotions) as you have correctly identified.
Instead of playing the role of a victim or potential victim or a contemptuous person or a hateful person, you can become compassionate towards others by recognizing that people who demonstrate neurotic behavior are actually suffering.
By tending to your own renunciation, you may be feeling more calm, but by cultivating compassion, you can create the balance needed in dealing with others. Renunciation and equanimity is how you deal with your own suffering. Meanwhile, compassion is how you deal with others' suffering.
Ven. Bodhi wrote in "The Balanced Way":

Like a bird in flight borne by its two wings, the practice of Dhamma
is sustained by two contrasting qualities whose balanced development
is essential to straight and steady progress. These two qualities are
renunciation and compassion. As a doctrine of renunciation the Dhamma
points out that the path to liberation is a personal course of
training that centers on the gradual control and mastery of desire,
the root cause of suffering. As a teaching of compassion the Dhamma
bids us to avoid harming others, to act for their welfare, and to help
realize the Buddha's own great resolve to offer the world the way to
the Deathless.
Considered in isolation, renunciation and compassion have inverse
logics that at times seem to point us in opposite directions. The one
steers us to greater solitude aimed at personal purification, the
other to increased involvement with others issuing in beneficent
action. Yet, despite their differences, renunciation and compassion
nurture each other in dynamic interplay throughout the practice of the
path, from its elementary steps of moral discipline to its culmination
in liberating wisdom. The synthesis of the two, their balanced fusion,
is expressed most perfectly in the figure of the Fully Enlightened
One, who is at once the embodiment of complete renunciation and of
all-embracing compassion.
Both renunciation and compassion share a common root in the encounter
with suffering. The one represents our response to suffering
confronted in our own individual experience, the other our response to
suffering witnessed in the lives of others. Our spontaneous reactions,
however, are only the seeds of these higher qualities, not their
substance. To acquire the capacity to sustain our practice of Dhamma,
renunciation and compassion must be methodically cultivated, and this
requires an ongoing process of reflection which transmutes our initial
stirrings into full-fledged spiritual virtues.

Thank you. Very helpful. It's difficult to give language in these regions without appearing contemptuous. I guess that's due to the binary function of language alongside perceptual attachments contained inside of that language - feeling and consciousness: components that cannot easily be discerned from one another.

I have been recently experiencing tremendous fear, but as I look
through my eyes at the world and the objects it contains, the fear
does not accord with what I see.

The scriptures say there can be valid fear and invalid fear. The scriptures say:

317. Those who see something to fear where there is nothing to fear, and see nothing to fear where there is something to fear — upholding
false views, they go to states of woe.
Dhammapada

The world itself is beautiful

The Buddha did not share the above idea.

but people's minds seem tarnished by a neurosis. They seem to define themselves by this very neurosis.

Indeed. The scriptures say:

171. Come! Behold this world, which is like a decorated royal chariot. Here fools flounder, but the wise have no attachment to it.
174. Blind is the world; here only a few possess insight. Only a few, like birds escaping from the net, go to realms of bliss.
Dhammapada

I notice all the little behavioural patterns they play and how they are trapped by them. I find this very fearful, and it affects my ability to integrate with people.

The Buddha did not seek to "integrate" with the people of the world. The scriptures say:

There is this (mental) dwelling discovered by the Tathagata where, not attending to any themes, he enters & remains in internal
emptiness. If, while he is dwelling there by means of this dwelling,
he is visited by monks, nuns, lay men, lay women, kings, royal
ministers, sectarians & their disciples, then — with his mind bent on
seclusion, tending toward seclusion, inclined toward seclusion, aiming
at seclusion, relishing renunciation, having destroyed those qualities
that are the basis for mental fermentation — he converses with them
only as much as is necessary for them to take their leave
MN 122

Only the other day I caught a few seconds of a TV program where they were discussing Covid-19 death rates like it was some kind of sporting event. I find humans very peculiar.

Covid-19 is a serious event because its exaggerated danger can cause great harm to the world, including for freedom of religion and spiritual pursuit. You should take an interest in the Covid-19 death rate to learn: (i) suspected 100 million Americans have Covid-19; (ii) 17 million Americans tested positive; (iii) merely 300,000 dead Americans attributed to Covid-19 associated with an average of 2.7 comorbidities; with average age of death around 75 years old; (iv) Pfizer vaccine 5% ineffective even though the death rate is only 0.1%; (v) therefore healthy people may be forced to take a vaccine that is unlikely to work on unhealthy people; (iv) the above appears crazy yet you claim the world is "beautiful" and Covid-19 death rate is trivial.

At the level of mind I am able to see the danger present in the world and act accordingly but this comes from a natural inclination instead of from a fear-based story.

Possibly you are mistaking "fear" with "caution" or what Buddhism called "heedfulness" ("appamāda"). In Buddhism, there is a healthy spiritual fear called "ottappa". "Ottappa" is one of five requirements for the Path.

This doesn't stop me feeling fear for that mode of being we call samsara.

"Samsara" is merely the mind cycling in egoism, as clearly explained in SN 22.99, as follows:

Just as a dog, tied by a leash to a post or stake, keeps running around and circling around that very post or stake; in the same way,
an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble
ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no
regard for people of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in
their Dhamma — assumes form to be the self, or the self as possessing
form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.
"He assumes feeling to be the self...
"He assumes perception to be the self...
"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...
"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in
consciousness.
"He keeps running around and circling around that very form... that very feeling... that very perception... those very fabrications...
that very consciousness. He is not set loose from form, not set loose
from feeling... from perception... from fabrications... not set loose
from consciousness. He is not set loose from birth, aging, & death;
from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is not
set loose, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

It is possible - or highly likely - that this fear could be my own samsaric turmoil looking to find a footing in the world as someone who is fearful of others and that its real plight lies in keeping the wheel turning.

Yes, looking for a "footing in the world" is contrary to Buddhism. The goal of Buddhism is to transcend or be above/beyond the world (called "lokuttara") rather than gain a footing in it.

My question is, from a Mahayana perspective, how can I come to love the samsara that I see in others?

Yes, very Mahayana ideas. Mahayana, similar to Christianity, appears to believe it can save the whole world (even though the Tibetans could not even save themselves), even though it is reported the Buddha himself denied such a possibly (in AN 10.95).

I'm happy to welcome answers from other traditions.

I already provided the Theravada viewpoint.

I like some of your replies, but I sense an element of extremism in the subtext. I never harbour any form of Buddhism with such a concretized mind and I never will.

Additionally, it looks like I may not have represented myself very clearly on the covid-19 reference and that this resulted in what appears to be a very passionate response from you. I apologise for my not being clearer about that.

Fear is internal. The Buddha discusses fear at length in MN4. The first step is to consider personal ethics and purify ones conduct by mind, speech and body:

MN4:4.1: Then I thought, ‘There are ascetics and brahmins with unpurified conduct of body, speech, and mind who frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. Those ascetics and brahmins summon unskillful fear and dread because of these defects in their conduct. But I don’t frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest with unpurified conduct of body, speech, and mind. My conduct is purified. I am one of those noble ones who frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest with purified conduct of body, speech, and mind.’ Seeing this purity of conduct in myself I felt even more unruffled about staying in the forest.

With ethics mastered, one can then directly face fear:

MN4:20.1: Then I thought, ‘There are certain nights that are recognized as specially portentous: the fourteenth, fifteenth, and eighth of the fortnight. On such nights, why don’t I stay in awe-inspiring and hair-raising shrines in parks, forests, and trees? In such lodgings, hopefully I might see that fear and dread.’ Some time later, that’s what I did.   As I was staying there a deer came by, or a peacock snapped a twig, or the wind rustled the leaves. Then I thought, ‘Is this that fear and dread coming?’ Then I thought, ‘Why do I always meditate expecting that fear and terror to come? Why don’t I get rid of that fear and dread just as it comes, while remaining just as I am?’ Then that fear and dread came upon me as I was walking. I didn’t stand still or sit down or lie down until I had got rid of that fear and dread while walking. Then that fear and dread came upon me as I was standing. I didn’t walk or sit down or lie down until I had got rid of that fear and dread while standing. Then that fear and dread came upon me as I was sitting. I didn’t lie down or stand still or walk until I had got rid of that fear and dread while sitting. Then that fear and dread came upon me as I was lying down. I didn’t sit up or stand still or walk until I had got rid of that fear and dread while lying down.

Facing fears, one might come to understand that much of what is seen is misleading. One might understand that makeup is a lie yet still feel an unwholesome attraction. In letting go of the attraction, in seeing the skull behind the makeup, a fear vanishes. Looking further, one might see a peacock, beautiful in its shiny natural animal splendour. Yet looking again, here too, one will see that the plumage of a peacock is nothing other than makeup that has come to exist for the rebirth of peacocks. So gradually understanding arises that humans will always decorate themselves as peacocks do, for the sake of rebirth. And with that understanding fear might vanish with one's own desire for rebirth.

MN4:31.1: When my mind had become immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—I extended it toward knowledge of the ending of defilements. I truly understood: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’. I truly understood: ‘These are defilements’ … ‘This is the origin of defilements’ … ‘This is the cessation of defilements’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of defilements’.

Live without fear, content without wishes.

Thank you for the answer.

A nice skilful fusion of sutta excerpts. Beautiful and progressive finishing with a mellow textual gong. I loved it.

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


text:
Types of Concentration?
My field of perception is very wide. It often becomes so wide that it loops back onto itself in some odd kaleidoscopic fashion.
This has rendered my previous methods of concentration unhelpful. Previously concentration was very deliberate and contrived and my surroundings would phase off into obscurity in favour of a pin-point focus on my chosen object. It opened up some interesting doors.
The application of attention on a particular event such as breathing is very different. It is different because it is inclusive of all other phenomena, like the universe is doing the concentration from which no personal claims can be made. I find this to be a distraction but there is a part of me that wants to embrace this inclusiveness. This leaves me with some dissonance between the previous method - in particular my attachment to the results incurred from that method. Moreover, when I try to apply myself in the previous way, I suffer - I guess I've just answered my own question in some ways.
Is this change in concentration to be expected?
Can you share any resources from either Theravada, Mahayana or Zen that would help me further my understanding of this matter?
Best wishes

Have you considered your Mahabhuta alignment in correlation to the affinity of the techniques you practice? Some practices are more suitable for some while less suitable for others. While our Dharma are equal, we are unique and so therefore is our Dharma.

@Beau - if I understand you correctly, that Mahabhuta refers to the elements, then the elements are a fundamental part of my satipatthana practice. Kind regards ;-)

yes, the elements ;D you know how some people say they're water people and some tend to always hold expressions like a wildfire? Some meditations were designed for the water-like individuals, and so on, because of this affinity - martial arts as well. Anyone can practice any technique, that would be Compassion's influence on cultivation, but constitution and countenance can be a major influence on how an individual performs each meditation.

I guess some people are drawn to a particular element in the way you describe. I tend not to form that kind of association with any of the elements, choosing instead to see that no personal claims can be made from their external/internal transitory nature. Kind regards.

It might be difficult for readers to understand exactly what you're experiencing in your meditation. You learn techniques of meditation to get you started on a path, but eventually that path must be understood by you, personally. You become like a scientist experimenting with what works and what doesn't work. For that you have to know what "working" even means... as you develop your path, this is an essential aspect to understand. What am I trying to achieve here when I sit down to meditate?
The path the Buddha described made Tranquility and Insight the markers of progress. If what you are experimenting with, within your own mind and body framework, moment to moment, is (over time) leading you to more and more calmness of mind, calmness of body, then you might be able to consider whatever methods you were employing successful.
Similarly, if whatever you are experimenting with, within your own mind and body framework, moment to moment, is (over time) leading you to deeper and deeper understanding of the nature of reality (three marks of existence), causing you to see more finely these qualities, subtler and subtler in your experience, then you might be able to consider whatever methods you were employing successful.
Both these two developments, Tranquility and Insight, should lead to letting go, fading away, cessation of your experience, in a gradual way.
AN 4:170
Mindfulness of the breath is a common practice that can develop both of these to their fruition.
SN 54:13
As you practice in this way, the Four Establishments of Mindfulness should simultaneously be developed.
MN 10

I hesitate to outline the particulars of what I experience because it is not restricted to meditation sessions. The openness and its 'other qualities' are with me throughout the day and every day. For that reason it was important that I kept the question concise. Thank you for responding. I enjoyed the sutta readings.

Very good! It is good to strive to make your whole waking hours your meditation, your practice.

This exact topic is the central topic of the book I can't recommend enough:
"The relaxed mind. A seven-step method for deepening meditation practice." - by Dza Kilung Rinpoche
I started pulling out quotes for you but had to stop when I realized I'd have to quote half of the book.

When we focus or concentrate, we want to be careful not to do so in a narrow, forced way. In school we were sometimes urged by our teachers to focus and concentrate when studying and taking tests. Usually that meant that we were to furrow our brow, squint our eyes, and close off all distractions from the task at hand. This is very judgmental. In a critical and somewhat aggressive way, we are accepting and rejecting our thoughts. But here we want to do the opposite - we are looking for an opened focus.

Open means open to the whole environment - physical form, energy, everything. Be confident in openness. Then, when you feel yourself starting to relax, it's time to focus. Focus doesn't mean tensed up; it means attention that is loose and calm.

When thoughts appear, you don't really need to disconnect from them or escape from that situation. Rather, you allow the mind to be wide open, and using this wide-angle lens, you experience a more clear and spacious view of reality of the mind and its nature. [...] Another aspect of openness, touched on earlier, is to be without any judgement when our meditation environment includes things such as the sound of birds, a telephone ringing, a baby crying, and so forth. We may experience phenomena coming from our six senses. Be wide open to all of them and just let them be - no judging of "good" or "bad". Their empty nature will be naturally revealed.

-- and then starting from page 82 I would have to copy most of the rest of the book, because most of it is exactly about cultivating this openness.

Good quotes!  I'd up vote if I had an account!

This seems like an interesting read, and it relates to satipatthana - "'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out,'. I will try to locate the book. Thank you.

@Andrei Volkov - Thanks, I got hold of an audiobook version. The dynamism of this book is very appealing to me.

What you are experiencing isn't concentration.  Concentration is marked by ekagata or one pointedness.  If the universe, dinosaurs, and the Maltese falcon are all dancing on the head of your breath, what you are experiencing isn't the breath, it's the breath and all that other stuff together.  Concentration will ultimately lead you to a place of openess, but that field of openess has no content save for increasingy subtle feelings of joy and excitement.  If there anything in addition to that, you're missing your target.
Stay on the breath.  Don't move a muscle.  Sit for at least an hour but preferably an hour and a half.  If you're consistent in your practuce, eventually your breath will wash all that other stuff away.

From what tradition do you base this on? So this openess is a distraction leading me away from concentration? Can you offer any resources that varify this?

Openess appears out of one pointedness.  The more you engage with the object of concentration, the more you and all mental content (eg "the universe is doing the concentration", etc.) falls away.  If you are being pulled from stability, you are being pulled from being pulled from samadhi.  At this stage in the game, I'd strongly encourage you to steer clear of any concerns over the result of your practice.  Focus on learning good technique.  Keep your practice so close that no air can escape.

Most importantly, meditation isn't about having profound experiences on the cushion.  It is a tool for helping you to develop insight.  Worrying about the universe or what have you is going to undermine your ability to really see the mundane subtleties that are the real meat and potatoes of practice.

Right now, it seems to me that you're all over the place.  Meditation is simple.  The technique is simple.  In fact, it's that simplicity that makes it so hard.  People keep trying to introduce things that just end up driving them into confusion.  Pick a spot, rest (don't press) your mind there.  Keep your body upright and relaxed.  Don't move.  That's all there is to it.  What arises in the mind is ancillary.  The method is the result.

"Like the universe is doing the concentration from which no personal claims can be made"
That would be a distraction if you were going for highly concentrated Samatha states. If you are practicing insight vipassana type meditation then Anatta (or transcending the personal) is what is supposed to be happening as  momentary concentration is used  to widen perception.
The way I practice is to anchor my attention to my breath and then move my attention to distractions from the breath when they arise and when they fall go back to the breath.

I used the word 'like' in its conjunctive meaning and not as its preposition. It was a way of giving language to describe something that is ordinarily difficult to describe. I'm actually beginning to question these highly concentrated states. I'm not sure they lead to anything that I would call 'significant' unless you can call the same old insights 'significant'. Furthermore, I think it is healthy to venture elsewhere.

I get so bored with insight meditation where the concentration is on multiple experiential phenomena(momentary concentration) that I never get into a highly concentrated state anymore.I want the meditation to be significant and substantial too but I know intellectually at least, that that is clinging. Maybe I just got to kinda embrace what I don't like, kinda embrace the boredom to counter the aversion. This is very challenging and if I get anywhere , I can't even brag about it because then I'm cultivating more ego. LOL.

I see ego as scaffolding that may motivate me in the early stages but at some point I must transcend it. Idk.

Yes, it often 'feels' like there is something there that needs to be removed. In my current understanding, it is right in there; right in that thing we think needs to be removed or transcended. The story of 'removal' is another aversion tactic.


text:
The Intention to Strive
Yesterday, I was eating some vegetable sausages and I noticed that there was just a set of teeth rhythmically opening and closing like a lonely metronome with no meaningful sensory instrumentals. It reminded me of one those animations in a Pink Floyd video where unidentified mechanical machinery rocks back and forth which then took me on various excursions through the woeful realms.
Afterwards, the thought occurred to me although with some slight linguistic embellishments here: "isn't it marvelous, isn't it astounding, isn't it stupendous that, amongst the processed and compressed remnants of soy beans shaped into a sausage, one can be brought to the very edges of the cosmos and back again but not actually traverse one single cubic meter of space."
Even going down to the shops in the car to purchase various types of cruciferous vegetables, movement is sometimes stillness.
In the Diamond Sutra, which I very carefully studied for four years, (I don't mean 'study' in the conventional or academic sense) the Buddha eludes to this by saying, "Subhuti, if any person were to say that the Buddha is now coming or going, or sitting up or lying down, they would not have understood the principle I have been teaching. Why? Because while the expression ‘Buddha’ means ‘he who has thus come, thus gone,’ the true Buddha is never coming from anywhere or going anywhere. The name ‘Buddha’ is merely an expression, a figure of speech.”
At this juncture and with the notion and fallacy of time and space falling away, intention and striving seem somewhat superfluous. Striving perhaps takes a new manifestation; one that shimmers ever so slightly rather than presenting as various forms of vigour. In fact, in the Buddhist sense, striving seems counter-intuitive to its original dictionary definition and certainly debunks the overly enhanced ideas derived from the noise that motivates a materialistic-ridden society.
The strange thing about the latter is that there is something ever so right about mundane human striving even in the face of its ensuing sufferings; that this rightness is the product of its own realising tendancies but through various infantile spasms - not infantile in the pejorative sense, but an infancy that is embodied by innocence and love. This is too subtle for me to embrace just now but I see it teetering on the very edges of my awareness prancing alongside some odd luminosity and unmitigated terror.
In the above context what is the meaning of striving to awaken?
Does the initial intention behind striving suggest a network of flimsy ideas indoctrinated by ones chosen context as a form of pacifying the mind from worldly distractions and that these spirituality fabricated artefacts must be later seen to be a hindrance?
Currently, my intention seems to be informed by the way my mind has been previously exposed to the practice which is to say: raw personal experience, but I question the flickering baubles we call spirituality, Buddhism, Theravada, Zen, Mahayana. Is this suitable?
NOTE: I understand it might sound like I'm all over the place but please be assured that this is not the case. I would rather not have a flurry of misdirected aims in this manner. The theme here is striving and intention and how they might be perceived - in the fullest range of perception - by different people and their traditions.
Thanks.

In my experience, it's a kind of phase. First, you don't really strive, but you're intrigued by Dharma enough to keep learning hodgepodge and practicing once in a while.
Then your perception of samsara becomes negative enough that finding the way out becomes an urgent matter. This is the phase when you strive. Some people are more extreme than others and so get pretty unhinged while others are lukewarm, and everything in between.
Then you break through enough barriers or otherwise get enough insight into what's possible and what's fiction that your attitude to striving transforms. You realize that what you thought was striving was actually a neurosis fueled by samsaric confusion and what you thought was non-striving is actually the right striving. You begin to get the true meaning of the word "cessation" and in general the first three Noble Truths become your everyday reality rather than something abstract.
And then slowly but steadily you get more honest with yourself, until you get so honest that you can admit that you are not perfect. Far from it, you admit that occasionally you still get carried away by emotions and make mistakes. And if you think about it very carefully, you realize that being perfect is kind of impossible exactly because of anatta. And so, since you are not and can never be perfect, some amount of striving - not necessarily striving for something extraordinary but simply striving to not be a jerk - will stay relevant for as long as you live and probably even longer.

My lukwarming is epic :) .

Very helpful. Thank you.

My understanding of the reference to "arahants," or liberated beings, within the sutras is that these are "perfect" ones. In other words, there is no legitimate basis on which to criticize or blame anyone of these beings for anything. In that way, they should be seen as "perfect." Even Jesus exhorted his followers to "be perfect in the way that your Father up in Heaven is perfect." I have full faith that the Budha's Eightfold path will turn anyone into a "perfect" being if they "strive" with vigor, wisdom, patience and diligence. In falling short of the goal, we will not give up.

Dear @KilayaCiriello, I understand that's what you read in suttas, but the reality seen with insight is different. When you understand the nature of the mind and the meaning of anatta you see that being mathematically absolutely perfect requires absolute control and absolute knowledge which are impossible. That said, of course we can and should strive to walk the Path to its end, but I must tell you that its end is called "Liberation of Mind By Wisdom" and not airtight perfection.

@KilayaCiriello, These beings may be considered perfect in the sense that they are without craving, not in the sense that the output of their being and actions would not cause anyone else to criticize them or see them as doing wrong. There are too many people in the world with too many perspectives on what right/wrong is for that to happen. I think it as close to "perfect" as "perfect" can get.

In this sense I always think about absolutes like clean and dirty and the play on words they create. How can anything ever be clean. If you take all grease from a machine moving parts won't work anymore. Machines get cleaned but will never be clean. Therefore I suppose enlightened beings to be perfected. In this world perfect does not exist but one can be perfected through going the eightfold path and using the middle path.

That's a good way to put it. Perfectly beyond :)

Well, striving (to awaken) to me is the opposite of laziness. If one is hit by negativeness (depression, exhaustion, confusion), one may sit down and do nothing for decades. In this case it is a lot better (reduces suffering) to actively say, I'll not let this affect longer that it needs to (similar to not craving on positive emotions, and living in ignorance in neither positive nor negative emotions) as in MN 148:

When one is touched by a pleasant feeling, if one does not delight in
it, welcome it, and remain holding to it, then the underlying tendency
to lust does not lie within one. When one is touched by a painful
feeling, if one does not sorrow, grieve and lament, does not weep
beating one’s breast and become distraught, then the underlying
tendency to aversion does not lie within one. When one is touched by a
neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, if one understands as it
actually is the origination, the disappearance, the gratification, the
danger, and the escape in regard to that feeling, then the underlying
tendency to ignorance does not lie within one. Bhikkhus, that one
shall here and now make an end of suffering by abandoning the
underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feeling, by abolishing the
underlying tendency to aversion towards painful feeling, by
extirpating the underlying tendency to ignorance in regard to
neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, by abandoning ignorance and
arousing true knowledge—this is possible.

NOTE: I understand it might sound like I'm all over the place but please be assured that this is not the case. I would rather not have a flurry of misdirected aims in this manner. The theme here is striving and intention and how they might be perceived - in the fullest range of perception - by different people and their traditions.

Over the place or not, there is a cause behind the colorful and fantastical language you are using, it would be good to observe why. Remember, all things change and therefore normalize in the mind. Whatever you are experiencing recently or now, will seem as normal as the blue sky in some time.

In the above context what is the meaning of striving to awaken?
...
Currently, my intention seems to be informed by the way my mind has been previously exposed to the practice which is to say: raw personal experience, but I question the flickering baubles we call spirituality, Buddhism, Theravada, Zen, Mahayana. Is this suitable?

As your path develops, the previous spiritual interests and school based or technique based interest will fall away, what becomes of interest is your own personal path you have discovered, which shares the same aims as the Buddha and (most) practitioners.
You are discovering your own reasons to strive instead of just following the post signs your previous knowledge led you to. You are striving towards the results that your practice has given rise to.
Striving (toward results, Nibbana) is an important aspect of practice. Without striving, how could you arrive anywhere?
SN 51.15

"In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as you see
fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll
go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that
particular desire allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have persistence, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,'
and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular persistence
allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have the intent, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,'
and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular intent
allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have [an act of] discrimination, thinking, 'I'll go
to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that
particular act of discrimination allayed?"
"Yes, sir."

When what you are striving for (Nibbana) is realized, the striving for that will be the last to drop away.

The thing about “mechanical machinery” that rocks back and forth is that there is something else moving it. But in your noticing the “set of teeth rhythmically opening and closing like a lonely metronome” what is it that is moving the teeth?
The salient aspect of what you notice seems to me to be that there isn’t ‘anyone’ chewing. If there isn’t anyone chewing, why do you take it to be like a mechanism, a “lonely metronome”? (love the poetic metaphor, btw ☺) Doesn’t that erase what it is that you were noticing? Isn’t that processed experience? Not raw experience? Aren’t you squeezing your immediate impressions through a sausage maker (the discerning mind) trying to make sense out of a moment of clarity that just doesn’t fit our current sausage making ideas?

The Lord Buddha was much pleased with this reply and said: Subhuti, although terrestrial human beings have always grasped after the arbitrary conception of matter and great universes, the conception has no true basis—it is an illusion of mortal mind. Even when it is referred to as ‘cosmic unity’ it is something inscrutable.

The Lord Buddha continued: If any disciple were to say that the Tathagata, in his teachings, has constantly referred to himself, other selves, living beings, an Universal Self, what think you Subhuti? Would that disciple have understood the meaning of what I have been teaching?

Subhuti replied: No, Blessed Lord. That disciple would not have understood the meaning of the Lord’s teachings. For when the Lord has referred to them, he has never referred to their actual existence; he has only used the words as figures and symbols. It is only in that sense that they can be used, for conceptions, and ideas, and limited truths, and Dharmas have no more reality than have matter and phenomena.

The the Lord made this more emphatic by saying: Subhuti, when disciples begin their practice of seeking to attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, they ought thus to see, to perceive, to know, to understand, and to realize that all things and all Dharmas are no-things, and therefore, they ought not to conceive within their minds any arbitrary conceptions whatever.

That randomly opened page in the Diamond Sutra that I just quoted, was opened with the heartfelt intent to point you to a certain insight about what you are doing with your mind when, discriminating a lack of a motivator in your experience of chewing, you conceive a clockwork mechanism. That’s not a raw experience. Or it is, but you’ve quickly buried it under flavorful sauces to make it more palatable. That I opened to the page in the Diamond Sutra section quoted above, could mean there are many applicable words to guide you in the Diamond Sutra, or it could be a kind of responsiveness to my striving to help you. It’s true that God doesn’t roll dice—no “God,” no dice, no rolling—but hey, look what turned up!
Strive to resist the temptation to precook your raw experiences. That might bring you somewhere very interesting.

Excellent! Yes, words can give solidity to an experience. I can't really say much about where or what it all points to other than it seems all-knowing, all-present, all-encompassing but dimensionless, shapeless and edgeless. It's absolutely mind-shattering but plain & ordinary at the very same time. Thank you for your lovely reply.

In the above context what is the meaning of striving to awaken?
The question -- of striving (desire, energy), and cessation -- reminds me of the Brahamana sutta, SN 51.15.
I'm not sure about striving "to awaken". The definition of right intention seems to me to be intentions towards harmlessness, non-grasping, kindness, and "skilful ways of thought" (which I guess might be a.k.a. wisdom).
As for "perfection" I think that, in the suttas, the word "perfect" (or what's translated as "perfect") literally implies finished or accomplished, done, having been done -- i.e. it's what's implied by the perfect tense grammatically. It appears in SN 56.11 as for example,

suffering ... should be understood ... and has been completely understood
origin of suffering ... should be given up ... and has been given up
cessation ... should be realised ... and has been realised
this is the practice ... which should be developed ... and has been developed

See also Sn 22.110 and the definition of vusita.

More about "striving to awaken":

Perhaps "awake" or "awakening" is a characteristic of the doctrine of other (later?) schools like Zen.

Perhaps "awake" is a natural/undefiled (original?) state, not the future goal (for which you strive).

It might be more informative to read about the Way (e.g. as it's spelled out in the suttas, above), rather than about a Goal.
I find that people talk about the latter (the Goal) as a superlative, metaphysical, often with self-contradictory language (like Huineng's poem) -- including "not self", "not this", and "this but not this" kind of idioms -- or just adjectives without a noun.

See also this answer for an example/description of the "previously accomplished" sense of perfect/perfected.

The word 'awaken' can be quite a loaded term for many. It can be seen to be a final attainment above all else - a goal as you put it. I was referring to this term from my own direct experience in which has occurred a series of 'higher understandings' that cannot be reversed or undone. It seems plausible that these higher understandings are the culmination of how the mind has been previously developed through practice, and that they continue to bear fruit within the context of that practice.

In the grand scheme of things it seems progressive, but in the confines of my current awareness it's acceptable to refer to potential  'higher understandings' as an awakening of sorts. You sort of get the feel for it, that something profound is on the horizon. Great answer. Thank you.

I had some time to fully digest your reply. I found it very informative.

This is my answer for the newly modified post
It all depends. Does the context you are brining into question aid you in your current striving in your practice? If it is aiding, then no it would not be a hindrance; And if it's not aiding, then yes it would be a hindrance.
Your practice constantly develops and something that was previously an aid could become a hindrance, and vice versa.
It is up to you to examine whatever contexts arise and determine if it is an aid or a hindrance to your practice. If you have a more specific question about any of these contexts, you could ask, and peoples insights might guide you, but again, you should make your own sense of it and not blindly follow their answers, otherwise that would possibly be a hindrance for your practice.

Ryan, I'm trying to have this question removed at the moment. Apologies and thank you for giving your time and energy.

Not a problem NeuroMax, hopefully this process was still helpful in some way

Yes, it was very helpful. In fact your first reply helped me. Thanks for your understanding.

Ryan, my apologies again. It seems the moderator, Chris, did not want to uphold my request to remove the question. In that case, I will consider what I can learn from these answers.


text:
Impermanence causing depression and anxiety
I’ve learned that all things are impermanence. This is causing depression and anxiety in my life. I’m sad and scared that my relationships will one day come to an end. The fact that all things are impermanence just make me sad. How do I feel better?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/kpjqik/impermanence_causing_depression_and_anxiety/

The answers generally focus on "do this", "let go", etc. What is wrong with sadness and anxiety? Who says that needs to change? Who says that it can be changed (by force of will)? That last question does not have as simple of an answer as one might think.

That which impermanence appears to ,or that which speaks about impermanence. Is that changing ?

Any kind of material form whatever, whether past, future, or present,
internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or
near, all material form should be seen as it actually is with proper
wisdom thus: “This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self."
Gautama Buddha (MN 22)

Just meditate on these phenomenon and seeing them for what they are you aren't identified.

Not all impermanent relationships cause you sadness, doesn't it? You have clearly noticed joy taking place once a "bad" relationship end (like escaping from the fetters of drugs or alcohol). Can you remember of any of those? This could be a motivator for you to take your relationships fully, i.e., as they start, age, and die. On the positive side, this attention to birth-age-rebirth of very many things you observe will yield wisdom and reduction of suffering.

This is exactly the topic discussed in the River Sutta.
You created this mental concept of relationships with people around you, and you cling to it, assuming these relationships belong to you, i.e. belongs to the self.
But these relationships are impermanent. If you cling to it, it will bring you suffering when these relationships change or end.
The solution is accepting the impermanence and letting go.
Please watch Ajahn Brahm's YouTube talk "Four Ways of Letting Go". Also please read this answer on the South Indian monkey trap.
From River Sutta:

“Bhikkhus, suppose there was a mountain river sweeping downwards,
flowing into the distance with a swift current. If on either bank of
the river kasa grass or kusa grass were to grow, it would overhang it;
if rushes, reeds, or trees were to grow, they would overhang it. If a
man being carried along by the current should grasp the kasa grass, it
would break off and he would thereby meet with calamity and disaster;
if he should grasp the kusa grass, it would break off and he would
thereby meet with calamity and disaster; if he should grasp the
rushes, reeds, or trees, they would break off and he would thereby
meet with calamity and disaster.
“So too, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling … regards form as self,
or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form.
That form of his disintegrates and he thereby meets with calamity and
disaster. He regards feeling as self … perception as self … volitional
formations as self … consciousness as self, or self as possessing
consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in
consciousness. That consciousness of his disintegrates and he thereby
meets with calamity and disaster.
“What do you think, bhikkhus, is form permanent or
impermanent?”—“Impermanent, venerable sir.”…—“Therefore … Seeing thus
… He understands: ‘… there is no more for this state of being.’”

The fact that all things are impermanence just make me sad. How do I feel better?

There's nothing to do. That's just how Samsara is. Everything that arises must end at some point. You can't change that. Trying to change anything will just cause more suffering.
What we can/must do is to come to terms with change through meditation practice. Change is one of the suffering parts of conditioned existence.
The correct thing to do from a Dhamma and Meditational perspective is to take that worry and fear as the primary meditation object and cultivate insights from it. If aversion towards the fear arises, then take the aversion as the primary object until it subsides. Being flexible is a key component in the practice.
The mind needs to see the Three Marks of Existence over and over again until it slowly begins to turn away from them. That is when understanding arises which leads to inner peace, happiness and freedom from suffering.
In other words: when fear arises, meditate on that fear. Try to see it clearly and you will become free from it gradually. The same goes for worry, happiness etc.

The Buddha did not teach the perception of impermanence to all people.
Higher Buddhism is not suitable for all people.
Many Buddhists covert to Islam or Christianity.

Seeing the truth of impermanence, one finds it sadly unsatisfying. Letting go of the unsatisfying, embrace the limitless.
Meditate spreading a limitless heart full of love, compassion, rejoicing and equanimity.

MN50:14.4: Come, all of you mendicants, meditate spreading a heart full of love to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, spread a heart full of love to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.
Meditate spreading a heart full of compassion …
Meditate spreading a heart full of rejoicing …
Meditate spreading a heart full of equanimity to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, spread a heart full of equanimity to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will.’

And even with just spreading a limitless heart of love, there is beauty:

SN46.54:12.9: The apex of the heart’s release by love is the beautiful, I say, for a mendicant who has not penetrated to a higher freedom.

Meditating on the heart's release by compassion, rejoicing and equanimity leads on further.
May your sadness be dispelled by limitless love and your efforts lead to freedom.


text:
Circular logic and Practice
After many years of Buddhist considerations, I finally admit to myself that I fight a constant battle for certainty and self-gratification. I guess those encompass the three aspects of dukka well enough.
So with somewhat of a renewed determination to practice, I have searched this generous website (and elsewhere online) for "my" book and "my" practice, and possibly my path/teacher.
The circularity I mention in the title of this question refers to the acknowledgement that these self-placating enterprises stand in marked contrast to the work that need to be done.
Sometimes i the past, in going to a website I have wondered if the drop-down for "Reading List" might say none. And more farfetched, if the "Meditation Instructions" say: figure it out yourself; no one is coming to save you.
I'm open and appreciative to any comments, admonitions, and advice.
EDIT (In response to @Rain) How to practice? Or better yet, how to find a teacher or some context (book, maybe)? Hence the circularity, so as to be my own teacher and this does not lapse into lip-service.
With kind regards.

What exactly is the question?

@ruben2020 Nice touch, thanks.

If could include how Teacher/ teacher is being considered/ defined, & what is expected of the Teacher/ teacher in your context, and also how certainty is being considered/ defined, could also be helpful. Thank you

Sometimes i the past, in going to a website I have wondered if the
drop-down for "Reading List" might say none. And more farfetched, if
the "Meditation Instructions" say: figure it out yourself; no one is
coming to save you.

You're on to something here. No one is indeed coming to save you. When you truly get that, all hope falls by the wayside, and you are forced into the body where we see feelings and their causes: the mind. These are three of the four foundations of mindfulness: body, mind and feelings. The last one is truth or dhammas which comes about through unflagging persistence with the previous three. Crucially, we take a backwards step and learn to be in the body with all of its contractions, squirms and other whatnots. Our minds can throb and thrash like a fish out of water but various 'higher insights' are revealed along the way giving us encouragement.

“You should therefore cease from practice based on intellectual
understanding, pursuing words and following after speech, and learn
the backward step that turns your light inwardly to illuminate your
self. Body and mind of themselves will drop away, and your original
face will be manifest. If you want to attain suchness you should
practice suchness without delay.”
Zen Master Dogen - Fukanzazengi

Maybe you remember I asked you about Absolute Zen. Perhaps you might be able to suggest a teacher. Thanks,

I've never done teachers at a personal level. I prefer to go with my eclectic ways, choosing to study many forms of Buddhism. If Zen appeals to you, read The Blue Cliff Record. Also, there is a book called Zen Flesh, Zen Bones that might be a little easier on the cognition. These two books will give you a deep taste of Zen. In terms of deceased teachers, Bodhidharma is a good place to start.

I very much like what @NeuroMax wrote, and only wish to add that there are sources of helpful pointers available for someone willing to do the work involved in actually implementing them. I suggest you ask more questions here and use the combined experience of those that will answer your questions to help you find a path that works for you. I mean, that’s what this site is all about ☺


text:
Buddhist meditation for intrusive thoughts and anxiety
I struggle with anxiety and intrusive thoughts and I've found that meditation helps a lot to calm my restless mind. I am familiar with key concepts of Buddhism. I read a tiny bit about it directly and from Schopenhauer.
I've been thinking about it for a while and I want to incorporate it into my daily lifestyle. Do you have any tips with starting to implement this on daily basis and maybe something more towards anxiety problems?
Thanks in advance

Your question is not an easy one. Anxiety is not a secondary or auxiliary problem, it's a problem that goes to the very heart of Buddhism and indeed to the very heart of what it means to be alive.
To resolve this problem completely and exhaustively requires complete and perfect penetration into the core principle of Buddhism.
To be perfectly without anxiety is to be perfectly at peace. It's not an easy feat, unless we are taking about sedated "peace" or "peace" of a stupid person unaware of issues. To be perfectly at peace while being fully aware of all the existential trials and tribulations is what we Mahayana Buddhists call to be in Nirvana. This unconditional peace regardless of circumstances requires (is enabled by, depends on, comes from) the special level of insight into the basic principles of sentient existence. We call this level of insight Enlightenment.
I just want to set expectations, so you know what you are asking for, a solution to The Fundamental Problem. It's not something you can achieve "by the way", between other things. It takes extraordinary focus and determination.
The principles themselves are simple, I will explain them to you right now. It is fully grasping the implications and integrating them in one's life is what most people find difficult.
Sentient existence is a phenomenon that is 100% subjective. Everything we ever encounter in life is subsumed in our subjective experience. This subjective experience is a flow of shapes our mind takes. In other words, our entire existence is a sequence of mindstates. I'm not saying nothing else exists, I'm saying mindstates is what really matters because nothing in our actual subjective lives can be experienced outside of mindstates.
Mind is an interpreter. Everything we experience has a meaning to us, pointing to some other meanings, each of them pointing to yet other meanings. We follow these chains of meanings leading us to some conclusions and determinations. We follow associations, memories, stereotypes, generalizations, and signs. Our mindstates, the shapes our subjective existence takes, and our very universe (as we see it) are largely defined by these chains of interpretations.
Our categories of "good" and "bad" are right there among these meanings and signs. Our feeling joyful or fearful or satisfied etc. - is nothing but a step in a series of mindstates induced by the interpretation sequences. When we take some of these meanings and categories very seriously, when we identify with them, when we are attached to them - they lead us down certain interpretation chains that end up feeling bad.
I won't tell you that all our interpretations and all our categories are arbitrary and therefore should be abandoned, no. Although that is not far from the truth, it's technically not accurate. Instead I will say this: our categories and understandings are simplistic and superficial. Being simplistic and superficial they are one-sided and unnecessarily polarized. Being onesided and polarized they lead to conflict (whether tangible or abstract). Anticipation of conflict is anxiety.
Are you with me so far? Anxiety, just like most other  discordant mindstates, comes from a clash of interpretations, which comes from attachment to simplistic superficial categories, meanings and signs we have internalized as "the reality". The good news is, it's not the actual reality. The Actual reality is open, multidimensional, and ambiguous in the good sense of the word.
The way to living without anxiety is to let go of the illusory safety and illusory stability of our categories and meanings and values - and to embrace the seeming groundlessness of the truly open mind. This requires undoing one's habitual stereotypes and prejudices not only about life, society, the world - but also about ourselves. When all of these are perfectly open, the process of interpretation has no ground to stand on, leading to indescribable mind no longer terrorized by its content.
To master this Liberation and to get fully confident operating from the perspective of groundlessness, being confidently nobody, undefined - is the only mathematically possible way to absolute and total cessation of anxiety.
In practice the end state looks surprisingly warm and humane. After all, we are born undefined and we die undefined, it's only in the middle that we pretend to be someone we are not. Coming back to being honestly and 100% authentically what you really are feels like putting down an unbearable unnecessary load. Who knew you can simply be your imperfect self and that in itself is the greatest thing in the world and the true Nirvana? It's the simplest thing in the universe but the hardest to grok and master.

Thank you for this much detailed and thoughtful response. I get your point (although not in full detail probably). Yes what you said certainly bothered me, and still does to some extent, however I think the worst is the images that I see in my mind, the "3rd eye" that disturbe me, not the thought himself or the action of having it, but the image. Im trying to do meditation and mindfulness. Thank you again

Those images come from some kind of interpretation process, too. Just saying :)

I find these videos by Ven. Yuttadhammo on anxiety very useful:

Monk Radio: Calming Down, Panic Attack
Monk Radio: Meditation for Anxious People
Q&A: Anxiety and Depression
Monk Radio: Relaxing in Life

If you like to learn more about this type of meditation (Vipassana) practice you can find his introduction video series to the method here.
May you be well and happy.

thank you so much for your time and recommendations. I wish you the same

Someone once approached Venerable Sariputta in agony.

MN143:4.1: “I’m not keeping well, Master Sāriputta, I’m not alright. The pain is terrible and growing, not fading, its growing, not its fading, is evident. The winds piercing my head are so severe, it feels like a strong man drilling into my head with a sharp point.  The pain in my head is so severe, it feels like a strong man tightening a tough leather strap around my head.  The winds piercing my belly are so severe, it feels like a deft butcher or their apprentice is slicing my belly open with a meat cleaver.  The burning in my body is so severe, it feels like two strong men grabbing a weaker man by the arms to burn and scorch him on a pit of glowing coals. That’s how severe the burning is in my body. I’m not keeping well, Master Sāriputta, I’m not alright. The pain is terrible and growing, not fading, its growing, not its fading, is evident.”

Sariputta responded at length. Part of his reply was:

MN143:6.1: You should train like this: ‘I shall not grasp sight, and there shall be no consciousness of mine dependent on sight.’ …   ‘I shall not grasp sound … smell … taste … touch … thought, and there shall be no consciousness of mine dependent on thought.’ That’s how you should train.

From this we can understand that it is critical to acknowledge the pain without attachment. Indeed, this is an important point emphasized in many suttas:

AN3.133:2.3: They truly see any kind of feeling at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all feeling—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’

Understanding that "This is not mine..." can also help in daily life. Please also see a doctor. There may be an underlying medical condition for constant anxiety.

Thank you for your thoughtful and kind response. I am already having medical care but the results arent really what I hoped for so Im complementing it with Buddhist meditation and its getting better.

There are methods to help with anxiety, although not necessarily buddhist.
Here is a meditation which may help. It's called Infinite Bloom; something I have been practicing since I was little.
The three main steps broken which have been broken down the sake of simplicity. To make the most out of this technique, once you have completed reading the components of each main step, have a go before continuing.
Getting someone to read it out this first time can help even more.
Growing the bloom:

Get comfortable and close your eyes.
Think of all the qualities that make you you, an individual.
Hold those characteristics together and think what kind of flower matches those characteristics. You could think of that flower as a symbol of yourself.
Imagine just the bud of 'that' flower, one that glows from within.
Gather energy for the bud to bloom, but make it grow as many petals as you can possibly imagine.

Assessing the bloom:

Is it a happy flower?
Are there individual petals that are not doing so well?
Is a petal smaller than they should be?
Is there any festering petals?
If there is a festering petal, is the fester coming from inside or outside?
When you are focusing on a particular petal remind you of a connection; something or someone?
The petals don't just reach out, they connect with petals from other blooms and if a petal has been compromised then the connected bloom is in some way responsible or at least a participant in the result.

Cultivating the bloom:

If a petal is festering and causing the flower to become ill, there is nothing wrong with letting that petal drop away from the flower. If that doesn't settle your mind, when the petal drops away, it returns to the mud and becomes nutrients for another petal to grow.
By dropping the petal, it is dropping the last connection with the individual that comes to mind. This is is an important process because if we don't let a subject drop we will subconsciously continually brew.
If there is a wound left by the festered flowers, applying something along the lines of pure liquid silver to the wound will create a bandaid of sorts.

This technique is designed for assessing and managing emotional connections - something people just don't do. When we go about our day we may have  to focus on what we are doing but how much energy is spent thinking about our kids (if we have them), our worries, all that stuff cluttering our brains?
Unfortunately when there is too much going on in the background it all distracts us; from our performance, what we want to think about and prevents us from seeing the opportunities we are looking for - which in turn gives us more worries to clutter our brain.
The beauty of the Infinite Bloom is it's catered for the individual by being 'your' flower and can be done in a matter of a few seconds when you get good at it.
Cultivate in harmony

thank you for your answer and time, I will definetly try and research this more. I think your recommendations are really what I needed, I relate to all you said. My intrusive thoughts really disrupt my daily activities, specially demading "intelectual" like learning or reading, even the way I enjoy life. I was wondering about buddhism philosophy because of that too, new perspetive of looking at thing. Now just out of genuine curiosity, and excuse me because I'm new to this, isn't associating "myself" with an object against the "letting go" of the "self" in buddhism?

Thank You for the response and feedback brother. Gathering conscious energy to focus on a task is one of the main goals of meditation. Understanding where it all goes is the best (personal bias) way to getting the control we require. As this technique is 'management', you could think of it as setting the foundation for reprogramming the mind so when you practice a gathering technique there is less of a rebound effect.

Very good question, this would come down to individual perception. No need to apologise!
My perception in a nutshell? If one had to truly define the self, there would have to be a level of mastery over oneself - before even attempting the concept of "letting go".
Symbols are a language just like any other, except the meaning are individualistic to ourselves as a general rule (through the process of association and perception).
The flower is simpler way to envision something that would otherwise be difficult to describe - like a circuit diagram as opposed to a complicated system.

thank you for all this information, I will try my best and research it. Thank you very much


text:
Personality and Conditioning?
The bulk of my personality is made up of other people's beliefs about what is lacking. These core beliefs rise up like bubbles and when the attention is placed on them, they burst into a rather coarse type of emptiness. For decades and unbeknownst to me, I have laboured over this negative self-talk which takes on various permutations of not being enough. As I investigate further, it's clear where they came from: implicit messages from society, that no matter what you can do or what you have in material possessions, it is never enough. It's like a sinister melody playing in the background of human consciousness. It is a collective and implicit agreement stationed just beyond the boundaries of normal, every day awareness and generates a perpetual attitude of always becoming yet the suffering it causes goes unquestioned - no link is formed between the thoughts and the actions.
There is so much to write about concerning these observations, but it would hurt my head if I continued mainly because I see a barrel of worms inside those karmic propensities. If I look at one person, I see only the manifold accumulation of past actions which determines their current behaviour, but they see an exclusive and individualized entity making unique and specialized decisions. They seem rather clown-like in that respect - their personality lost to the conditions of their circumstances. Then I turn towards myself, and see the same things ticking away, and so I smile and kick up one of my clown shoes. What else is left for me to do. The negative self-talk has little footing these days, but it's what I built my identity with.
As humankind's defunct tutorial meanders off it takes with it those biological conditionings: eating food has the same neutrality as shoving a letter into a postbox and women's tits look like what they are: droopy skin with a pointy circle denoting some vague hint of conceptual sensuality.
This leaves me thinking curiously about what actually drives me, what is my personality? The Buddha had a personality, for sure.
In a sense I know the answer to this question, but I'd have to start writing a curious state of affairs because language seems to do it a disservice. Then, the karmic waves come rolling in, and I've lost all direction. They seem quite annoyed over in this region even throwing obscure items like the kitchen sink.

Good Morning,
It sounds you are reaching through a bottleneck of defining your Dharma:)
While moving onto the next level of enlightenment we reassess how we defined ourselves previously to judge if we deem ourselves worthy of breaking through to the next level. Going over history like that flash before our eyes that humanity seems to associate with death/rebirth and weighing ourselves in action.
Defining ourselves would require 'dropping all the petals' of attachment back to the core of the individual structure, laying the skeleton bare. We are what we are, no One can define us better than ourselves.
When we come closer to what defines us, any historical attachment can influence a shift or impose limitations so, while we are breaking through the thoughts and motives of others are unnecessary. When we drop those attachments, the respite moves from gnawing emptiness to contentment of the self. Like the 'immovable' amongst the karmic waves.
The knowing comes when that 'position' stabilises.
Cultivate in harmony

Good morning and thank you for your reply. I always enjoy reading your replies.

Thanks @NeuroMax, the feeling is mutual. Both your questions and answers hold insight not often found :D

The Buddha had a personality, for sure. His personality is who he was, moment to moment, but not the result of him desiring to become that personality.
But you are not a Buddha, and much of your life experiences has built upon the habit of creating a self-reinforcing personality. Those habits are part of who you are, moment to moment, the result of deep desires to become that personality.
You are now seeing your own personality and experiences with a different perspective, a partially complete dharmic perspective, and that too is naturally going to become part of your personality. The deep desires to have a personality will latch onto this new found perspective with excitement, but those deep desires for a personality aren't intelligent enough to realize that this perspective is set upon unravelling these very habits and what that even means.
If you are really curious and really want to know what your personality is, then you are free to ask yourself those questions. Your personality is something completely fluid that is modifiable by your own or others input. So ask yourself, what do you really want? And feel free to strive for that.

"partially complete dharmic perspective" - this term has been a bit tricky with me mainly because the mind likes to reach some sort of finality, which amounts to more becomings. The consensus seems to imply that there is a place where one can 'feel complete' and my overall experience is guiding me towards some sort of completeness, but I haven't realized that, so it's hard for me to entertain. I guess there's much to be said about faith here.

@NeuroMax, "completed dharmic perspective" is not intended to mean "that there is a place where one can 'feel complete' ", it is intended to mean a thorough understanding of the workings of dhamma, natural laws of the universe, such that one can use that understanding to more deeply pierce through and/or shed the layers of defilements built up over time.

I see. So when they say in the suttas "the job has been done. There is nothing more for this world", and various similar permutations thereof, they mean one has fully comprehended the dhamma?

It depends... dhamma has many meanings and is an can be used in many different ways to convey very different meanings. For what I said, focus on the word "perspective"; Mostly I mean the perspective you have towards your experiences in such a way that it incorporates the qualities of dhamma (three characteristics) towards whatever it is you are brining to mind. So partially complete means some part of a correct perspective is there, enough to incorporate the qualities of dhamma in a beneficial way.

In the way you presented it there, that more-so means, the full realization of dhamma, having fully investigated the entire field of dhamma and ultimately realizing arahantship.

Much appreciated. :-)

The ancient Greeks imagined the Fates as weavers, spinning out the yarn that makes the fabric of our lives. And it's a useful analogy: our experiential lives are like strands of yarn dragging behind us as we move forward. We have no control over that. We pick up experiences, and they are part of the fabric of our lives as it stretches behind us.
What we do have some control over is whether those strands are a tangled mess of knots and snags that pull on us from this direction or that, or whether they are smooth and ordered, gliding gracefully along with us. It's a painstaking process; the more we fight the snags and tangles, the tighter they become.

"Personality" ("attabhava"; individual character) is made up of nature (dhamma) & nurture (bhavana), namely:

Genetic structure: the Realized One truly understands the world with its many and diverse elements (anekadhātunānādhātulokaṃ)... dispositions (ānādhimuttikataṃ).. and faculties (indriyaparopariyattaṃ)... MN 12

Conditioning, mental development & training: Mendicants, I do not see a single thing that, when it is developed and cultivated (bhāvitaṃ bahulīkataṃ), is so very beneficial as the mind... I do not see a single thing that, when it’s not developed and cultivated, brings such suffering as the mind. (AN 1.28)

The suttas (AN 4.171; MN 114; avoid Sujato translations) say there are four ways to acquire personality, which includes due to the actions or influence of others, such as family, associates & society:

There is acquisition of personality/individual character where one’s own intention is effective, not that of others. Atthi, bhikkhave, attabhāvapaṭilābho, yasmiṃ attabhāvapaṭilābhe attasañcetanā kamati, no parasañcetanā.

There is acquisition of personality/individual character where the intention of others is effective, not one’s own. Atthi, bhikkhave, attabhāvapaṭilābho, yasmiṃ attabhāvapaṭilābhe parasañcetanā kamati, no attasañcetanā.

There is acquisition of personality/individual character where both one’s own and others’ intentions are effective. Atthi, bhikkhave, attabhāvapaṭilābho, yasmiṃ attabhāvapaṭilābhe attasañcetanā ca kamati parasañcetanā ca.

There is acquisition of personality/individual character where neither one’s own nor others’ intentions are effective. Atthi, bhikkhave, attabhāvapaṭilābho, yasmiṃ attabhāvapaṭilābhe nevattasañcetanā kamati, no parasañcetanā

There exists no person or personality.
All Buddha's are the same.

Welcome to Buddhism Stack Exchange. The system flagged this as a low quality answer. This answer is too short and doesn't contain enough details. Also, if possible, it is preferred to cite sources to support the answer. Did you intend it to be a comment under the question? If not, please see this guide on how to write a good answer.


text:
In what sutta does the Buddha talk about Paccekabuddhas?
Question is in the title.
Thank you for your time.

In MN116,

Once upon a time, five hundred Buddhas awakened for themselves dwelt
for a long time on this Isigili. They were seen entering the mountain,
but after entering were seen no more. When people noticed this they
said: ‘That mountain swallows these hermits!’ That’s how it came to be
known as Isigili.
desessāmi, bhikkhave, paccekabuddhānaṁ nāmāni.
I shall teach the names of the Buddhas awakened for themselves.
Taṁ suṇātha, sādhukaṁ manasi karotha, bhāsissāmī”ti.
Listen and pay close attention, I will speak.
“Yes, sir,” they replied. The Buddha said this:
“The Buddhas awakened for themselves who dwelt for a long time on this
Isigili were named Ariṭṭha, Upariṭṭha, Tagarasikhin, Yasassin,
Sudassana, Piyadassin, Gandhāra, Piṇḍola, Upāsabha, Nītha, Tatha,
Sutavā, and Bhāvitatta. ......
These and other mighty ones awakened for themselves, enders of the
attachment to rebirth— honor these great hermits who are fully
extinguished, having got past all ties, limitless.”

Other translation: From Piyadassi Thera

I'll just update your answer to provide a bit more of the surrounding text to add more context.

From AN 10.16:

“Bhikkhus, these ten persons are worthy of gifts, worthy of
hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, an
unsurpassed field of merit for the world. What ten? The Tathāgata, the
Arahant, the Perfectly Enlightened One; a paccekabuddha; the one
liberated in both respects; the one liberated by wisdom; the body
witness; the one attained to view; the one liberated by faith; the
Dhamma follower; the faith follower; and the clan member. These ten
persons are worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of
offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, an unsurpassed field of
merit for the world.”

From AN 9.20:

It would be more fruitful to feed one person accomplished in view than
that great offering of Velāma.
It would be more fruitful to feed one once-returner than a hundred
persons accomplished in view.
It would be more fruitful to feed one non-returner than a hundred
once-returners.
It would be more fruitful to feed one perfected one than a hundred
non-returners.
It would be more fruitful to feed one Buddha awakened for themselves
than a hundred perfected ones.
yo ca sataṃ arahantānaṃ bhojeyya, yo cekaṃ paccekabuddhaṃ bhojeyya … pe …
It would be more fruitful to feed one Realized One, a perfected one, a
fully awakened Buddha than a hundred Buddhas awakened for themselves.

From Ud 5.3:

“Formerly, monks, the leper Suppabuddha was a son of a wealthy
merchant in this very Rājagaha. While going to his pleasure park he
saw the Pacceka Buddha Tagarasikkhī entering the city for alms, and
having seen him, this occurred to him: “Who is this leper roaming
around with his leper’s robe?” And having spat, and circumambulated
him disrespectfully on the left side, he went away.