text:
Aversion and Mahayana
I think Andrei might have commented once that the suttas are mostly about (liberation from) lobha (including craving and attachment) as a problem, and Mahayana is about dosa.
That's probably an approximation but, even so, what is to be learned about that from Mahayana?
I can think of two possible examples ...

Teacher tells you to do things you don't want to do
Breaking "taboos" in some real though perhaps harmless way, e.g. dipping the top of your finger in alcohol and licking it

... but anything else, in general or in particular?
Some related question might include:

I'm especially interested in the type of aversion that would cause you to avoid what might be good for you-and-others, rather than a type of aversion that manifests as anger or hatred.
If nibbida is meant as an antidote to lobha then is there a corresponding antidote to dosa? Or should nibbida be an antidote to both?

I'm aware of this topic -- Could Lobha(craving) and Dosa(aversion) be working in tandem? However that seems to be quite "descriptive" (of what's happening) -- rather than "practical", "actionable", or "prescriptive". Can an answer to this question address more of the latter? Ven. Yuttadhammo wrote ...

If you want an abhidhamma answer, you have to speak in abhidhamma terms. "Wishing for pain to go away" is a sutta statement. It involves a wisher, and describes a sutta action.

... so perhaps in asking this question I was hoping for more of a sutta answer.

Yes, it is sometimes said in Mahayana that "hinayana" is the basic foundation, and that its primary focus is to learn to be satisfied with little, to control one's desire for entertainment, lust for sensual pleasures, and impulse to grasp after objects of the world. The end goal of this phase is an image of someone like a warrior or an ascetic: cool, detached, dispassionate, controlled.
And then, on the next level (confusingly called "mahayana" - same as the broad name referring to all non-conservative schools), the practice shifts from overcoming desires to overcoming aversion towards the people and the world.
It is recognized that someone at the hinayana level may develop a tendency to avoid dealing with people and the world because many of these interactions often lead to disturbance and drama, and away from what would otherwise be self-contained peace. Someone like that may have a rather strong aversion to real-life issues, anything "spiritually dirty", and especially to "lowly humans" with their constant self-generated trouble.
In order to overcome that, the mahayana practice is to go out to the world and learn to deal with its issues, while still keeping one's balance and avoiding any sense of egotistic pride that would come from one's "spiritual superiority". This is called "the bodhisattva practice", to basically leave all Dharma-Theory home and dive into the world, while learning to be authentic and helpful. The end result of this is an image of someone very warm, strong, and open, who has enough inner power and confidence that he or she can be very down-to-earth, very real, without formalities and artificial boundaries that come from fear. This is very different from the aloof ascetic image cultivated on the previous stage. It is someone very warm and very real.
So that's what I meant when I said that in Mahayana the focus shifts from desires to aversion.
Now, regarding that idea of breaking taboos - that comes at the vajrayana level. That is where the practice transcends dharma that can be explained / formalized as rules, and gets into dharma that is felt and intuitively improvised like a dance. In order to get there, one must study the edge cases where the superficial and the authentic understanding of dharma come in conflict. This is when controversial practices like burning buddhist texts, getting intoxicated, stealing something, hurting someone, or engaging into adultery may be prescribed. Yes, it is correct to say that these practices are performed with the goal of overcoming one's deep-lying attachments. It is never the case that all rules are simply lifted and the student can do anything, not at all. Instead, the student, working under the guidance of his long-time mentor, practices on overcoming his or her strongest phobia, strongest attachment, in the most effective way possible, while minimizing damage to the other (worldly) side, and hopefully even providing them with some long-term benefit as well. That's quintessentially vajrayana-level practice, not mahayana-level.
Anyway, coming back to Mahayana,

OP: If nibbida is meant as an antidote to lobha then is there a corresponding antidote to dosa? Or should nibbida be an antidote to both?

Since now we know we are talking specifically about dosa-towards-the-world-and-people, it becomes clear that a key antidote to that is compassion, as well as the four brahmaviharas in general. The practices of metta meditation, of tonglen meditation, and of dedicating the virtue to all sentient beings before and after each formal practice session are all examples to antidotes to aversion. The Mahayana paramita of Patience is essentially about overcoming aversion, too. The Bodhisattva's vow to defer entering Nirvana until all sentient beings are liberated is an antidote to aversion towards Samsara at large.

Oh, so you meant literally aversion towards people, hostility, superiority. I guess I think of "aversion" as being (like desire) some kind of mood which you can more-or-less feel by yourself, e.g. as described in this article: Why You Procrastinate? (which says e.g. that procrastination is to avoid anxiety and other negative or threatening emotions). Maybe that's what you called Hinayana though, i.e. "desire for entertainment".

It's not accurate that the suttas do not address aversion (dosa) and the antidote for it.
For example, in the Nakulapita Sutta, the Buddha advises householder Nakulapita with regards to his aversion to old age and disease:

Then the householder Nakulapita went to the Blessed One and on
  arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting
  there he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, I am a feeble old man, aged,
  advanced in years, having come to the last stage of life. I am
  afflicted in body & ailing with every moment. And it is only rarely
  that I get to see the Blessed One & the monks who nourish the heart.
  May the Blessed One teach me, may the Blessed One instruct me, for my
  long-term benefit & happiness."
"So it is, householder. So it is. The body is afflicted, weak, &
  encumbered. For who, looking after this body, would claim even a
  moment of true health, except through sheer foolishness? So you should
  train yourself: 'Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will
  be unafflicted.' That is how you should train yourself."

Later, Ven. Sariputta explained this in more detail to Nakulapita, which incidentally provides the antidote for aversion (dosa) through the contemplation of not-self (anatta):

"And how is one afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind? There is
  the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has
  regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma;
  who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in
  their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as
  possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is
  not seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is
  not seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, but he does
  not fall into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its
  change & alteration.
"He does not assume feeling to be the self...
"He does not assume perception to be the self...
"He does not assume fabrications to be the self...
"He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as
  possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self
  as in consciousness. He is not seized with the idea that 'I am
  consciousness' or 'Consciousness is mine.' As he is not seized with
  these ideas, his consciousness changes & alters, but he does not fall
  into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its change &
  alteration.
"This, householder, is how one is afflicted in body but unafflicted in
  mind."

When the Buddha visited the sick ward of monks in Gelañña Sutta, he advised the contemplation of impermanence (anicca), which also works as an antidote for aversion (dosa):

"Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he discerns that it is inconstant, not
  grasped at, not relished. Sensing a feeling of pain... Sensing a
  feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he discerns that it is
  inconstant, not grasped at, not relished. Sensing a feeling of
  pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain...
  Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it disjoined
  from it. When sensing a feeling limited to the body, he discerns that
  'I am sensing a feeling limited to the body.' When sensing a feeling
  limited to life, he discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling limited to
  life.' He discerns that 'With the break-up of the body, after the
  termination of life, all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow
  cold right here.'
"Just as an oil lamp burns in dependence on oil & wick; and from the
  termination of the oil & wick — and from not being provided any other
  sustenance — it goes out unnourished; in the same way, when sensing a
  feeling limited to the body, he discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling
  limited to the body.' When sensing a feeling limited to life, he
  discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling limited to life.' He discerns
  that 'With the break-up of the body, after the termination of life,
  all that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here.'"

OP: [comment] I was hoping that this topic would be more about choosing or failing to do what one is or feels averse to -- to some
  extent Nakulapita's growing old wasn't a choice (extent to the extent
  of choosing to identify with form, feeling, etc.).

In Vajjiputta Sutta (quoted below), the monk alone in the forest, heard music and festivities in a neighbouring village, and felt aversion towards his seclusion (which is considered good for monks by the Dhamma). This is an aversion by choice (unlike disease and old age), which was overcome by changing his perspective or changing his view of the situation.

On one occasion a certain monk, a Vajjian princeling, was dwelling
  near Vesali in a forest thicket. And on that occasion an all-night
  festival was being held in Vesali. The monk — lamenting as he heard
  the resounding din of wind music, string music, & gongs coming from
  Vesali, on that occasion recited this verse:

I live in the wilderness all alone
    like a log cast away in the forest.
    On a night like this,
    who could there be
    more miserable than me?

Then the devata inhabiting the forest thicket, feeling sympathy for
  the monk, desiring his benefit, desiring to bring him to his senses,
  approached him and addressed him with this verse:

As you live in the wilderness all alone
    like a log cast away in the forest,
    many are those who envy you,
    as hell-beings do,
    those headed for heaven.

The monk, chastened by the devata, came to his senses.

I agree with Andrei: In this answer, by understanding the underlying reasons for others' sufferings, we can generate compassion towards them. This was proposed as an antidote towards contempt. This is one example of overcoming aversion by changing one's perspective or view of a situation.
In fact, disgust (nibbida) to cure passion (lobha), compassion to cure contempt, not-self or impermanence to cure aversion towards old age or suffering, and changing one's perspective to cure aversion towards skillful things like seclusion, are all examples of changing one's perspective or view of a situation, to turn unwholesome into wholesome.

Yes I think you get there by equating aversion with suffering (i.e. "one is averse to suffering" and "suffering is what is averse to"), and surely the suttas have a lot to say about suffering. I was hoping that this topic would be more about choosing or failing to do what one is or feels averse to -- to some extent Nakulapita's growing old wasn't a choice (except to the extent of choosing to identify with form, feeling, etc.).

Also the suttas seem to be rational e.g. "consider what would be beneficial and thence decide to do that, and also consider that while you're doing it, and consider whether it was beneficial after it's done, too". I was wondering whether  Mahayana adds to that somehow, whether there might be other doctrine that might be good to hear or understand. I think that "that's just dukkha, don't bother with that" might be clever but might be a bit pathological, hence this question.

I added the Vajjiputta Sutta to my answer, for the case of aversion by choice towards something that is considered good by the Dhamma, and the overcoming of it by changing one's perspective or view.


text:
Psychology of 'flow'
I guess (perhaps I'm wrong) that humans and life in general tend toward homeostatis -- i.e. wanting to stay the same as before -- and not just physically but socially and mentally too, e.g. to keep what you have and avoid what's new.
An "avoiding extremes" doctrine might encourage that.
The theory of 'flow' in psychology suggests that people want to engage in activities which are not too boring but also not too challenging.
I think that school-teachers are aware of that phenomenon, and school-children become trained (habituated) to it.
But however useful or pleasant that may be, perhaps that (i.e. the pursuit or maintenance of that 'flow' state) is just samsara.
Does Buddhist doctrine challenge this? Or endorse it, use it?
Wikipedia says,

In positive psychology, a flow state, also known colloquially as being in the zone, is the mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity.[1] In essence, flow is characterized by complete absorption in what one does, and a resulting loss in one's sense of space and time.
Named by Mihály Csíkszentmihályi in 1975, the concept has been widely referred to across a variety of fields (and is particularly well recognized in occupational therapy), though the concept has existed for thousands of years under other names, notably in some Eastern religions, for example Buddhism.
The flow state shares many characteristics with hyperfocus. However, hyperfocus is not always described in a positive light. Some examples include spending "too much" time playing video games or getting side-tracked and pleasurably absorbed by one aspect of an assignment or task to the detriment of the overall assignment. In some cases, hyperfocus can "capture" a person, perhaps causing them to appear unfocused or to start several projects, but complete few.

Can you comment on either of the highlighted statements from a Buddhist perspective?
Also perhaps this is related to my previous question, Aversion and Mahayana -- I guess that 'flow' might help you to do things, even useful things, even things you might not do otherwise, like your maths homework at school -- I'm not sure it's a useful tool (or habit) for handling aversion however, i.e. any activity which takes you "out of the zone" is something you might avoid.

Does the wikipedia quotie sources comparing flow to buddhist concepts?

The footnoted reference for the quoted sentence was -- Mihaly Csikszentmihályi (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper & Row. ISBN 978-0-06-016253-5.

Later in the article there are other sentences which perhaps need no reference: "The teachings of Buddhism and of Taoism speak of a state of mind known as the "action of inaction" or "doing without doing" (wu wei in Taoism) that greatly resembles the idea of flow.", and, "For millennia, practitioners of Eastern religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and later in Ismaic Sufism have honed the discipline of overcoming the duality of self and object as a central feature of spiritual development. ", also ...

... "Practitioners of the varied schools of Zen Buddhism apply concepts similar to flow to aid their mastery of art forms, including, in the case of Japanese Zen Buddhism, Aikido, Cheng Hsin, Judo, Honkyoku, Kendo and Ikebana.", and, "Theravada Buddhism refers to "access concentration", which is a state of flow achieved through meditation and used to further strengthen concentration into jhana, and/or to develop insight."

I guess I'm interested in flow's being addictive somehow; in the pursuit or maintenance of flow being samsaric; and situations in which flow is difficult or even counterproductive, and coping with (not being averse to) situations where you're not "in the zone"  -- though the bits I just quoted above ought to be interesting too, I guess, but I'm not sure whether those are relevant to the kind of problem I was trying to solve or get insight into when I asked this question.

@ChrisW - I share your view. To me the sort of harmful 'hyperfocus' you speak of is actually a lack of mindfulness, which is a little ironic. There's something here about the difference between concentration as a narrowing of awareness and attention as a broadening of it. 'Hyperfocus' would be closing-off of awareness. Just pondering out loud. . . .

This sounds like the application of the practice of mindfulness in daily life.
For example, from "Chapter Six: Daily Life" of Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu's book "How To Meditate":

When cooking, cleaning, exercising, showering, changing clothes, even
  on the toilet, one can be mindful of the movements of the body
  involved, creating clear awareness of reality at all times. This is
  the first method by which one can and should incorporate the
  meditation practice directly into ordinary life.

From the teachings of Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh, we find the use of mindfulness in daily life for example:
In the kitchen:

The kitchen is also a meditative practice space. Let us be mindful
  when we are cooking or cleaning in this space. Let us do our task in a
  relaxed and serene way, following our breathing and keeping our
  concentration on the work. A few words only may be needed about the
  work at hand. We might like to start our work by offering incense to
  the kitchen altar, to express our gratitude and to remind ourselves to
  work mindfully.
Let us support the kitchen teams by not disturbing this meditative
  space unnecessarily. We do what we have to in silence and leave the
  kitchen so the teams can do their work.
While cooking, we allow enough time so we will not feel rushed. Let us
  be aware that our brothers and sisters depend on this food for their
  practice. This awareness will guide us to cook healthy food infused
  with our love and mindfulness.
When we are cleaning the kitchen or washing our dishes, we do it as if
  we are cleaning the altar or washing the baby Buddha. Washing in this
  way, we feel joy and peace radiate within and around us.

Drinking tea (tea meditation):

Tea meditation is a time to be with the Sangha in a joyful and serene
  atmosphere. Just to enjoy our tea together is enough. It is like a
  “good news” occasion, when we share our joy and happiness in being
  together.
At times, when we are drinking tea with a friend, we are not aware of
  the tea or even of our friend sitting there. Practicing tea meditation
  is to be truly present with our tea and our friends. We recognize that
  we can dwell happily in the present moment despite all of our sorrows
  and worries. We sit there relaxed without having to say anything. If
  we like, we may also share a song, a story or a dance.

Eating together:

We should take our time as we eat, chewing each mouthful at least 30
  times, until the food becomes liquefied. This aids the digestive
  process. Let us enjoy every morsel of our food and the presence of the
  dharma brothers and sisters around us. Let us establish ourselves in
  the present moment, eating in such a way that solidity, joy and peace
  be possible during the time of eating.
Eating in silence, the food becomes real with our mindfulness and we
  are fully aware of its nourishment. In order to deepen our practice of
  mindful eating and support the peaceful atmosphere, we remain seated
  during this silent period. After twenty minutes of silent eating, two
  sounds of the bell will be invited. We may then start a mindful
  conversation with our friend or begin to get up from the table.
Upon finishing our meal, we take a few moments to notice that we have
  finished, our bowl is now empty and our hunger is satisfied. Gratitude
  fills us as we realize how fortunate we are to have had this
  nourishing food to eat, supporting us on the path of love and
  understanding.

Service meditation:

To participate in service meditation can be a great happiness. It is
  an opportunity to engage in the maintenance and care of our practice
  center while enjoying our practice of mindfulness. When we wash the
  cars, or turn the compost piles or chop wood we stay mindful of our
  breathing and the activity that we are doing. We speak only when
  necessary and about the work at hand. We can maintain a light and easy
  feeling as we work. An environment that is quiet can make the work
  more pleasant and enjoyable. When we work in the garden we get in
  touch with the plants and nourish our connection to the earth we are
  living on. Sweeping and mopping the meditation halls we see that we
  are already practicing to calm our mind and body. Please, do not be in
  too great of a hurry to get the job done. Our most important
  contribution to the Sangha is to maintain our practice of mindfulness.
Service Meditation links us to our everyday life, both here and when
  we return home. As we are working at our computer or preparing dinner
  for our family or teaching a class, we can practice stopping, calming
  and refreshing ourselves with our conscious breathing. We can relax
  and smile at our co-workers and pace ourselves to maintain a light and
  serene state of being.

Most of the human actions/habits are to suppress their suffering or cover it up. The ordinary human mind's direction is avoiding certain thoughts, feelings and emotions and to do that developing certain habits, addictions. Playing games, studying the lessons, watching television, listening to music, sensuality, following the politics, watching football, talking with others etc.. Some of the human actions leads a person to a kind of "trance state" but I think that is generally not high awareness but it leads people to kind of a unconscious state that can bring him/her temporary calm. I am not sure the "hyperfocus" that is mentioned in the article is always meditative hyperfocus. In some activites like playing games, using the technology, reading a book, studying the lessons etc. it can be the opposite(because the person is not having clear awareness) unless there is some real mindfulness involves in the "focusing".
In Buddhism, meditation and mindfulness this is useful and beneficial. Absorbing in what you do in the present moment mindfully is creating a "flow" that carry you to peace, happiness and freedom from suffering. The other answers are very good so there is not so much for me to add to this subject.
Great question. Thank you.

This is such a wonderful topic for a lengthy discussion that SE does not support with its restrictive Q&A format. So now one has to perform the herculean attempt to frame an answer that might capture at least some of that broad discussion.
Your note on homestasis resonates deeply with the following from MN121

There is only this that is not emptiness, namely that associated with the six sense fields dependent on this body and conditioned by life.

In fact all of MN121 explores, if you would, the homestatic evolution of emptiness that culminates with this invitation to Ananda:

So, Ānanda, you should train like this: ‘We will enter and remain in the pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness.’

Note that this invitation was extended late in life.

"Ānanda, these days I usually practice the meditation on emptiness."
I trust I properly heard, learned, attended, and remembered that from the Buddha?

Before that came the entire Noble Eight-fold Path with all of the practice detailed in other suttas. But that's a topic for a different day.

"Go with the flow" is the practice of animals and lazy slaves... and all they are willing to scarifies: nothing, but wishing to eat.
Many years ago Bhante Thanissaro wrote an approach to the "go with the flow" and the value of the Dhamma on the other side.
The Karma of Happiness: A Buddhist Monk Looks at Positive Psychology

“This is the way leading to wisdom: when visiting an awakened person, to ask … ‘What, when I do it, will be for my long-term welfare and happiness?’”...
... if psychologists could remain open to the possibility that there’s an unadulterated happiness that doesn’t fit into their framework of a full or meaningful life, it would serve as a sign that they had become genuinely wise.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What could go wrong if one misconstrue Buddhism with nihilism?
I see that Buddhism is absolutely not nihilism, but I wonder what could go wrong if one misconstrue one with another. This is especially true with people with psychological issues, because they have to experience an amount of suffering more than normal when they are young. For example, for persons with borderline personality disorder, they constantly has these feelings:

Extremely fear of being abandoned
Unstable self-image

In this example case, since Buddhism teaches that acknowledging everything is impermanent you won't be afraid of being abandoned. The unstable self-image also matches with the idea of anatman, therefore the idea of impermanence will have a strong impact to them. But in fact, this is just clinging on the idea of impermanence.
Many people with psychological disorders knows that they are the trouble, so they want to limit relationships at all cost to protect the person involving them. To justify this behavior, they may use nihilism. But when it become a habit, it's really hard for professional therapists to help them, because they now have a reason to continue the behavior.
I know you may not have much understanding on such cases, but I'm not asking about it either. I just want to know that if someone is misconstruing Buddhism with nihilism, then what suttas/teachings they contradict with.
Note that my understanding on philosophy is not very concrete. It's possible that I should replace "nihilism" with "impermanencism".

Related:
• Is Buddhism Nihilistic?
• How to not slip into Nihilism from Vipassana?
• Why is Buddhism not Nihilism?

• Is there a kind of consulting service in Buddhism?
• When would a Buddhist want to attach?
• Does Buddhism give methods to ask questions when you are proliferating?

Even though this interests me, i have a hard time understanding what you're asking for... Is it possible to elaborate/clarify?

I think it's asking for a list of one or more wrong views, i.e. ways in which Buddhist doctrine might be misunderstood as nihilist or teaching nihilism -- and/or a list of unfortunate consequences e.g. ways in which someone might misbehave or suffer as a result of misunderstanding.

@Erik ChrisW says it right. Is that better?

If one misconstrues Buddhism with Nihilism everything goes wrong. The entire doctrine descends into incoherence. A lot would depend on what you mean by 'Nihilism'. .

I've no formal experience with borderline personality disorder, this answer isn't intended to be relevant to that.
I've seen posts on this site where people say, "If you don't believe in rebirth then you believe that death ends everything (and ends suffering). But if you really believed that death ends then why wouldn't you just kill yourself? Therefore you must believe in rebirth." I think that (i.e. the belief that death ends suffering) is one of what Buddhism identifies as "a wrong view" and might be translated as nihilism (or "annihilationism"). There's even a sutta in which some monks do kill themselves and the Buddha clarifies that that wasn't right.
Conversely I think that the (non-Buddhist) Bhagavad Gita too seems like a wrong view to me (at least as far as I understand it). I think there's a scene where someone is faced with 'enemies' before a battle, and he doesn't want to kill them because they're his kin, and the God says to him something like, "But they're going to die anyway, everyone does, they're mortal[s]. Now you should go and fight (and kill) them because that's your social duty, the job you were born to do (by being born into the warrior or ruling class, I guess), and therefore your holy duty." The Buddhist doctrines of emptiness and anatta notwithstanding, I think that "There is no father, no mother, no teachers" and so on is explicitly declared to be another wrong view.
There's a hint of that in the Zen story which is titled, Nothing Exists.
That's about it, I'm not sure what else would count as nihilism. Possibly despair, a feeling of helpless -- or a feeling of heedlessness -- a view like, "It's all impermanent, nothing makes any difference, no point in even trying anything."

I read the link you posted, e.g. ...

Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment by friends and family

... but, sorry, I'm not sure how to advise about that or even what it has to do with nihilism exactly. I think I see it's related to psychological "attachment theory". The Buddhist doctrine I've learned doesn't seem to me to be very much about such relationships, except things like this and doctrine about the brahmaviharas. And the "refuges", the three jewels, suggest maybe people shouldn't put their faith in friends and family and so on.
On the other hand something like DN 31 says there is such a thing as proper behaviour for a layperson, and there is a difference between a good friend and a bad friend, that there are duties between between family members (and so perhaps to that extent, "good" and "bad" family members), maybe that's worth knowing too.

...  so they want to limit relationships at all cost to protect the person involving them.
I suppose it's because a therapist isn't too attached, and because they're motivated to "first, behave ethically (and/or 'professionally')", and is "disinterested" i.e. needs no help from the patient, but not "uninterested" so there is two-way communication, I think those are reasons why a  a patient needn't fear that they may hurt and therefore must protect their therapist (though shying away might be a habit that's hard to break, and sharing personal information might be a skill like any other which if it hasn't been learned already might be difficult to practice).
Instead of being entangled (in a relationship), protecting a partner or protecting oneself from a partner, perhaps with a therapist it's clearer (to the patient) that it's the patient who will "inherit their own kamma":

I am the owner of my actions (kamma), heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir...

I think that that doctrine -- that reflection or observation -- is used, to say that it matters what you do and what you intend: because that actually makes a difference (to you, to your future self, and/or to whoever may exist in the future).
I think that Buddhism also uses this doctrine to teach some equanimity towards others (e.g. that "they are heir to their own kamma") -- the brahmaviharas -- i.e. you're supposed to feel kindness and compassion (maybe being harmless and helpful, not hurtful), and admiration (for someone's virtues, instead of being jealous or pitying), but also equanimity (disentangling).

The bit about heedlessness is what I'm talking about. Can you elaborate?
I think that the "there's nothing I can do that makes a difference" view is a wrong view, perhaps canonically associated with a view that "what happens is predetermined or predestined" -- possibly a clockwork universe theory -- i.e. that past kamma determines everything about "now", and will also continue to determine everything about the future, and so there's no sense in trying and no personal responsibility for anything.
I think the Buddhist view is that, in contrast, a) kamma is intentional action; b) past kamma does affect the present but isn't the only thing that affects the present (e.g. a hurricane isn't a result of kamma, though how you react to a hurricane might well be); c) what you do now (and what you intend now, i.e. new kamma) does make a difference -- whether you intend good, intend evil, or even intend to "end" kamma.
Also if the "clockwork universe" theory is about physics, Buddhism is about the mind, for example:

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

Being "heedful" in't easy. Canonically it was the Buddhas final advice, the last words of the Buddha:

vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādethā

The opposite of "heedfulness" might be likened to a "drunkenness".
I say "not easy", maybe it's like that famous bit of advice to Christians, "be perfect".
Anyway I think that being "heedful" may be related to being "mindful", some ability to concentrate, or if not  "concentrated" then to not get carried away -- to remain in the present.
Incidentally the classifications in the DSM are quite approximate:

It says e.g. "this not that" where really people are a bit of both
Also "this" might be a characteristic of relatively healthy people too, what makes it unhealthy is a matter of degree (doing it "excessively"), where the definition of "excessive" is difficult to assess if you're, like, not professionally trained, and to some extent it's a matter of personal choice.

Anyway, apart from "BPD" there's another diagnosis, "PTSD", which for all I know (i.e. little) might be similar in one way -- i.e. it's where someone has (had) a traumatic experience and keeps "re-living" it. One of the psycho-therapeutic therapies for that is what they call "mindfulness" (that's probably not exactly what the Buddhist canon defines as "mindfulness", but still), especially trying to be mindful of or to remember the present (instead of re-living the past).
It's "maladaptive" behaviour e.g. it's fearing a threat where there isn't (or shouldn't be) one in the present.
Perhaps that's some form of "attachment" but an attachment to a past undesirable event.

An actually that might be another side to "impermanence" i.e. sometimes it's difficult to get that some past threat, a threatening situation, is over and finished, that the present situation is different, is changing.
I imagine there are lot of ways in which Buddhist doctrinal views could be applied to psychotherapy, or vice versa, maybe I see some parallels (but I haven't experienced that, not been trained).

Thanks. The bit about heedlessness is what I'm talking about. Can you elaborate? The frantic effort to avoid abandonment is just an example, not really about nihilism at all. Many people with disorder knows that they are the trouble, so they want to limit relationships at all cost to protect the person involving them. To justify this behavior, they may use "impermanencism". But when it become a habit, it's really hard for professional therapists to help them, because they now have a reason to continue the behavior. This is why I asked the question about consulting service in Buddhism.

I updated the answer to try to elaborate a bit.

The Brahmā Net act-ually gives all kind of Nihilist approaches and there reasons by the Buddha himself, Nyom. While the outcomes in behavior are endless different, yet of course akusala.

“There are, monks, some contemplatives & brahmans who are annihilationists,[23] who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being [sant satta][24] on seven grounds. And with reference to what, coming from what, are these honorable contemplatives & brahmans annihilationists who proclaim the annihilation, destruction, & non-becoming of an existing being on seven grounds?

Why some (better many) do so in under the lable of Buddha-Dhamma, even in robes and as preacher? Because in need to steal reputations so that those without orientation may grasp after it. The Uposatha of the Jains is probably the most celebrated kind of Uposatha undertaken in the modern times, householder Buddhism and secular approaches, in the many medi-centers.
(Not given for trade exchange and to nourish entertainment binding to the world but for liberation)

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


text:
Particular Benefit from Writing
I have noticed that when I write spontaneously, a lot of insight occurs. By this, I mean ideas flow in a manner generating many positive emotions as awe, joy, and movement.
In Buddhism, is such creative insight considered what is typically called 'insight' (e.g. insight meditation) or is the Buddhist version of insight something entirely different?

This Quora answer is an interesting story of a lady who was terrified of strange ghostly noises at night sounding like a woman wailing in pain. Later on, she figured out that this was the sound of cats mating. She gained insight into the nature of the noises, and this allayed her fear.
According to Merriam Webster dictionary entry of "insight":

Definition of insight

the power or act of seeing into a situation
the act or result of apprehending the inner nature of things or of seeing intuitively

From the ATI Glossary (below), we find that Buddhist insight (vipassanā in Pali or vipaśyanā in Sanskrit) refers to insight that leads to liberation from suffering. It's not creative insight, but it's insight into the nature of how things work.

vipassanā:
  Clear intuitive insight into physical and mental
  phenomena as they arise and disappear, seeing them for what they
  actually are — in and of themselves — in terms of the three
  characteristics (see ti-lakkhaṇa) and in terms of stress, its origin,
  its disbanding, and the way leading to its disbanding (see ariya-sacca).

From Theragatha 6.6 (quoted below), we find in poetical proses, the story of the monk Sappadasa who, 25 years after going forth and undertaking the training of the holy life, failed to achieve anything. He then was about to take his own life, when in a moment of deep concentration, suddenly had awakening insight into the nature of suffering, and became liberated.

Twenty five years since my going forth,
  and no peace of awareness
  — not a finger-snap's worth — attained.
  Having gained no oneness of mind,
  I was wracked with lust.
  Wailing, with my arms upheld,
  I ran amok from my dwelling —
  "Or... or shall I take the knife?
  What's the use of life to me?
  If I were to renounce the training,
  what sort of death would I have?"
So, taking a razor,
  I sat down on a bed.
  And there was the razor,
  placed ready to cut my own vein,
  when apt attention arose in me,
  the drawbacks appeared,
  disenchantment stood
  at an even keel:
With that, my heart was released.
  See the Dhamma's true rightness!
  The three knowledges have been attained;
  the Awakened One's bidding, done.

In the Bahiya Sutta (quoted below), we find advanced ascetic Bahiya impatiently seeking the Buddha's guidance to help him understand the truth. A short explanation from the Buddha helped him gain insight into the nature of suffering.

A third time, Bāhiya said to the Blessed One, "But it is hard to know
  for sure what dangers there may be for the Blessed One's life, or what
  dangers there may be for mine. Teach me the Dhamma, O Blessed One!
  Teach me the Dhamma, O One-Well-Gone, that will be for my long-term
  welfare & bliss."
"Then, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the
  seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the
  heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to
  the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train
  yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the
  seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in
  reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the
  cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When
  there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When
  there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the
  two. This, just this, is the end of stress."
Through hearing this brief explanation of the Dhamma from the Blessed
  One, the mind of Bāhiya of the Bark-cloth right then and there was
  released from effluents through lack of clinging/sustenance. Having
  exhorted Bāhiya of the Bark-cloth with this brief explanation of the
  Dhamma, the Blessed One left.


text:
What's the relation between feelings of neither-pleasure-nor-pain and ignorance?
I often see in some suttas that there are some habitual tendencies that, after the arising of pleasent feeling or painful feelings, lead to suffering due to passion for the pleasure and aversion for the pain.
But beside those two modes of feelings, there is a neutral kind of feeling, which neither-pleasent-nor-painful. In the suttas, such as MN 44 and MN 148, it is stated that neutral feeling accompanied with ignorance leads to suffering, because one does not see the gratification, the danger and the escape from suffering.
I do understand the reasoning behind the two former modes of feelings and their relation with passion and aversion, but I can't grasp the idea behind neutral feelings and ignorance.
Can someone explain the influence of ignorance over neutral feelings and its connection with suffering?
Maybe some examples from the suttas or from everyday life might be helpful.
Thanks for your time and patience!

The definition of the 3 feelings come in MN 44 and their relationships to the 3 underlying tendencies towards greed, repulsion and ignorance:

“Pleasant feeling is pleasant when it remains and painful when it
  perishes.
“Sukhā kho, āvuso visākha, vedanā ṭhitisukhā vipariṇāmadukkhā;
Painful feeling is painful when it remains and pleasant when it
  perishes.
dukkhā vedanā ṭhitidukkhā vipariṇāmasukhā;
Neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge, and painful when
  there is ignorance.”
adukkhamasukhā vedanā ñāṇasukhā aññāṇadukkhā”ti.
“The underlying tendency for greed underlies pleasant feeling. The
  underlying tendency for repulsion underlies painful feeling. The
  underlying tendency for ignorance underlies neutral feeling.”
“Sukhāya kho, āvuso visākha, vedanāya rāgānusayo anuseti, dukkhāya
  vedanāya paṭighānusayo anuseti, adukkhamasukhāya vedanāya avijjānusayo
  anusetī”ti.

In Contemplation of Feeling, Nyanaponika Thera explained this:

Pleasant feeling is habitually linked with enjoyment and desire;
  unpleasant feeling with aversion; neutral feeling with boredom and
  confusion, but also serving as background for wrong views.

Also in SN 36.5:

“Mendicants, there are these three feelings. What three? Pleasant,
  painful, and neutral feeling. Pleasant feeling should be seen as
  suffering. Painful feeling should be seen as a dart. Neutral feeling
  should be seen as impermanent. When a mendicant has seen these three
  feelings in this way, they’re called a mendicant who has cut off
  craving, untied the fetters, and by rightly comprehending conceit has
  made an end of suffering.

The neither-pleasant-nor-painful feelings also known as neutral feelings, normally make us bored or dissatisfied. Cravings would lead one to seek pleasures (kama tanha) or to become something or achieve something (bhava tanha) rather than sit around all day experiencing neutral feelings that don't bring satisfaction.
No feelings at all, would also be a cause for boredom and dissatisfaction. From the same article by Nyanaponika Thera, we read the commentary of the suttas and his comment:

Comy.: "From the fourth Jhana onwards, it is the
  neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling (that is present in these
  meditative states). But this neutral feeling, too, is called
  'pleasure' (sukha), on account of its being peaceful and sublime. What
  arises by way of the five cords of sensual desire and by way of the
  eight meditative attainments is called 'pleasure as being felt'
  (vedayita-sukha). The state of Cessation of Perception and Feeling is
  a 'pleasure, not being felt' (avedayita-sukha). Hence, whether it be
  pleasure felt or not felt, both are assuredly 'pleasure,' in the sense
  of their being painfree states (niddukkhabhava-sankhatena sukhena)."
In AN 9.34, the venerable Sariputta exclaims: "Nibbana is happiness,
  friend; Nibbana is happiness, indeed!" The monk Udayi then asked: "How
  can there be happiness when there is no feeling?" The venerable
  Sariputta replied: "Just this is happiness, friend, that therein there
  is no feeling."

To the arahant, neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana are all pleasant.

Thanks for that insightful answer! I have a doubt, though: if a neutral feelings is felt as unpleasent (as when feeling boring), doesn't that make it unpleasent instead? Kind regards!

As said in MN 44: "neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge, and painful when there is ignorance” - so it's unpleasant depending on the context of whether there is knowledge (of the four noble truths and three marks of existence) or there is ignorance (of the four noble truths and three marks of existence).

Very good answer, +1 - although I would not say that "neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana are all pleasant" - in this context sukha means peace, quiet happiness, rightness, suchness, comfort - just not "pleasure". The English word "pleasant" has very definite sensory connotations and so is logically not appropriate here.

Maybe it's better to divide it into "householder"-neither-well-nor-unwell and "renunciation"--neither-well-nor-unwell, since that is not so much subject to the defilements overestimating arguments and developing housholder-equanimity leads astray from ever understanding Dhamma for a long, long time...
Having no right view, seeking ignorance-pleasure in Jhana, that is the "end" for for liberation for one got caught there, following householder-teacher, since "knowing" with desire after sukha, does not let go of it, but increases attachment for even greater ignorance.
Again, one incapable to leave house, is not prepared for the Buddhas higher teachings. That is something one should check honest first before training such as equanimity, if wishing for release.
Therefore the Buddha told that for not instructed it is better to assume the body as refuge, as Self, since here he could understand it's decay. One who goes on mind at this stage matters has not to get foremost attached to ignorance while still clinging on house, stand, kaya.
(note: this is not given to bind one to trade, exchange, stacks and other gains but for liberation only)

Neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling can lead to confusion or, otherwise, delusion or wrong view.
For example, you see a man in a tree painting one of the branches with blue paint. If this sense impression gives rise to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling; it does not give rise to greed or aversion; but your being unsure or confused about what the man is doing.
Or, otherwise, neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling  can be that of equanimity, such as from very strong concentration. Due to the feeling of equanimity, you may not actually know how to respond to a situation; as occurs to meditation zombies. Or your mind may cling to that feeling of equanimity with craving or self-view.


text:
Sutta jhana vs. Visuddhimagga jhana
In the paper "Multiple Buddhist Modernisms: Jhāna in Convert Theravāda", Natalie Quli compares what the following teachers have taught about jhana: Ayya Khema, Bhante Henepola Gunaratana, Pa-Auk Sayadaw, Ajahn Brahmavamso, Bhante Vimalaramsi, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Leigh Brasington and Shaila Catherine.
There seems to be roughly two camps of teachers. The first that depend on Visuddhimagga, Abhidhamma, commentaries and suttas for the teaching on jhanas. The second depends either primarily or solely on the suttas, and not the other sources.
Another way to divide them is those who consider ekaggatā or very deep one-pointed concentration important, or those who don't.
Questions:

What's the actual difference between sutta jhana and visuddhimagga jhana?
Is ekaggatā or very deep one-pointed concentration required for jhana?
Would a jhana attainer be able to use his jhana state to reflect on the four foundations of mindfulness as found in the Satipatthana Sutta? Or is jhana simply used to overcome the five hindrances, which aids the four foundations of mindfulness meditation?

The paper discussed Ajahn Brahm's view:

Brahmavaṃso  argues  for  a  very  deep  level  of
concentration—ekaggatā—that  other  teachers  often  criticize.  He
states  that  in  jhāna the  body  disappears,  so  that  one  can  no
longer  see  or  hear.  He  also  states  bluntly  that  jhāna  is
not  possible  during  walking  meditation,  perhaps a statement made
in reference to Vimalaramsi’s light, sutta-based jhānas, discussed
below. Finally, he argues that “some teachers today present a level
of meditation and call it jhāna when it is clearly less  than  the
real  thing.” Among the sources Brahmavaṃso reveres and cites
throughout his work are the Vinaya, the Visuddhimagga, and even the
jātakas — which are very rarely mentioned by Western Insight Meditation
teachers.

The paper discussed Bhante Vimalaramsi's view:

Part  of  this  effort  to  return  to  the  origin  of  Buddhism  has
led  Vimalaramsi to revere the suttas and Vinaya but reject the later
commentaries and the Abhidhamma. He is particularly critical of the
Visuddhimagga. For example, he notes:

So  you  have  the  Visuddhimagga  teaching  one  kind  of
meditation,  that doesn’t lead to nibbāna, and you have the sutta,
that teaches an-other kind of meditation, and it leads directly to
nibbāna. And now, because we’re so far away from the time of the
Buddha, there’s a lot of monks that take the Visuddhimagga as the same
as the teaching of the Buddha, and then there’s other monks that don’t
take that as the teaching of the Buddha, they take the suttas as the
true teaching.

Though Vimalaramsi initially studied in the vipassanā centers in
Burma, he became convinced that this style of meditation was not
authentic because it was based on commentaries rather than the
suttas. In fact, this sutta-based interpretation of meditation has
led him to teaching what he calls “tranquil-wisdom meditation,” a
joint samatha/vipassanā  meditation.  He  teaches  mainly  from  the
Anapanasati-sutta and the Satipaṭṭhāna-sutta, and maintains that jhāna
should not be considered ecstatic or one-pointed (ekaggatā). Rather,
it is a light, relaxed state  in  which  various  Buddhist  insights
are  examined.  He  maintains  that (1) those who follow the
commentaries’ descriptions of jhāna are practicing  a  non-Buddhist
meditation  that  does  not  lead  to  nirvana  and  (2)  those  who
follow  the  commentaries  in  practicing  a  separate  vipassanā
practice are mistaken in following a non-canonical authority.

The paper discussed Thanissaro Bhikkhu's view:

Thanissaro Bhikkhu teaches jhāna exclusively from the suttas and not
from  the  commentaries.  After  noting  that  the  jhānas  as  taught
in  the  Visuddhimagga  include  elements  not  mentioned  in  the
suttas,  Thanissaro Bhikkhu notes, “Some Theravadins insist that
questioning the commentaries is a sign of disrespect for the
tradition, but it seems to be a sign of greater disrespect for the
Buddha—or the compilers of the Canon—to assume that he or they would
have left out something absolutely  essential  to  the  practice.”  He
concludes  that  jhāna  in  the  commentaries is “something quite
different” than jhāna in the canon.
Unlike  others  who  advocate  the  “deeper”  states  described  in
the  Visuddhimagga, Thanissaro Bhikkhu argues that extremely deep
states of  meditation  are  “wrong  concentration.”  One  must  be
fully  aware  of the body; powerful ekaggatā, as discussed in the
Visuddhimagga, can lead to one losing a sense of sounds, thoughts, or
perceptions, which is not ideal for insight in his opinion. People who
advocate such deep meditation are, according to Thanissaro Bhikkhu,
blocking out certain areas of awareness and are “psychologically adept
at dissociation and denial.”

Leigh Brasington, student of Ayya Khema, described sutta jhana vs. visuddhimagga jhana:

Leigh Brasington is an American student of Ayya Khema who now teaches
regularly on the jhānas across the United States, mainly to students
at Insight Meditation centers. Like his teacher, Brasington suggests
that  the  jhānas are not difficult to learn or practice.  He  notes
that “The jhānas as discussed in the suttas are accessible to many
people” but maintains that the jhānas presented in the Visuddhimagga
are actually qualitatively different from those described in the
suttas; he speculates that the Visuddhimagga jhānas were developed
during a later period and are more difficult to achieve. In fact,
Brasington has suggested that we distinguish between “sutta jhānas”
and “Visuddhimagga jhānas,” which he considers quite different from
one another. Brasington favors the lighter sutta jhānas.

A further comment by the paper's author:

Likewise, Thai-trained Thanissaro Bhikkhu completely rejects the
authority of the commentaries in terms of jhāna practice. Both of
these teachers agree that the jhānas are a light state of meditation
because ekaggatā, deep one-pointedness, is mentioned only in the
commentaries. Thanissaro argues that the deep state of meditation
advocated by some Buddhist teachers is “wrong concentration,” while
Vimalaramsi suggests  that  the  jhāna  practices  endorsed  by
Visuddhimagga  followers  is  “hypnosis,”  not  jhāna.

These somewhat misrepresent Thanissaro's view. He does criticize the "deep" concentration of the Visudhimagga, but he also states his teacher told him, I quote, "Strong concentration is absolutely necessary for liberating insight. “Without a firm basis in concentration,“ he often said, ”insight is just concepts.” To see clearly the connections between stress and its causes, the mind has to be very steady and still. And to stay still, it requires the strong sense of well being that only strong concentration can provide." https://www.dhammatalks.org/books/PurityOfHeart/Section0013.html

Another way to divide them is those who consider ekaggatā or very deep one-pointed concentration important or those who don't.

"Ekaggatā" does not mean "very deep concentration". "Ekaggatā" is stability. Even though the 1st jhana includes ekaggata, the 1st jhana is an expansive luminous exalted heaven.

What's the actual difference between sutta jhana and visuddhimagga jhana?

The sutta jhana is taught by the Buddha, who taught jhana is reached by making "letting go" ("vossagga") the meditation object (SN 48.10; MN 118). "Visuddhimagga jhana" is Hindu yoga taught by the Brahmin Buddhaghosa; who taught "seclusion by suppression" (page 134). "Letting go" ("vossagga") is not "suppression". This is probably the primary difference between Buddha-jhana and Vissudhimagga-jhana. Buddha-jhana is consistent with the Noble Truths, namely, abandoning craving. Vissudhimagga-jhana is Hindu yogic craving.

Is ekaggatā or very deep one-pointed concentration required for jhana?

"Ekaggatā" does not mean "very deep one-pointed". Of course "ekaggatā" is required for jhana; as written in the suttas & taught by the Buddha. How can each jhana not include ekaggata when all of the sutta say the 1st jhana includes ekaggata?

Would a jhana attainer be able to use his jhana state to reflect on the four foundations of mindfulness as found in the Satipatthana Sutta?

Jhana includes vedanupassana & cittanupassana, i.e., observing feelings & the mind with the mindfulness of non-clinging. Satipatthana is for developing jhana. Jhana is not for developing satipatthana. The suttas say jhana is used for vipassana.

Or is jhana simply used to overcome the five hindrances, which aids the four foundations of mindfulness meditation?

Overcoming hindrances is a requirement for jhana. Jhana is not a requirement for overcoming hindrances.
Ayya Khema, Bhante Henepola Gunaratana, Pa-Auk Sayadaw, Bhante Vimalaramsi, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Leigh Brasington and Shaila Catherine = imaginary jhana for children building ego sand castles. Ajahn Brahmavamso = real jhana for adults.

There is definitely a lot of confusion about Jhanas. In general, Buddhism has always been infamous for its lack of trust to teachers, texts, and interpretations - hence traditional obsession with "that one guy in the mountains who actually got it". The last two centuries' increased interest to Pali Canon apparently comes from the same doubts that give rise to an obsessive quest to seek ever more "authoritative sources" - i.e. the suttas, secret "root texts" in Tibetan Buddhism etc.
Despite all that, Dharma is and remains a rather straightforward and logical system, with its practice and teachings naturally following from a very small number of rather simple key principles. To any one who clearly understands these principles, interpretation of teaching and practice is no longer a mystery - the meaning of texts and the point of practice becomes clear as daylight.
Luckily for all of us the essence of Buddhism has not been lost, there are in fact many schools and teachers who get the gist and pass it on to next generation. At the same time, over the centuries of transmission, the Dharma as taught by Buddha has been unnecessarily burdened by a heavy load of superstitions and misunderstandings that get mindlessly passed from generation to generation. These "monkey practices" and "parrot teachings" do not help a new student, but only make their quest harder and their path longer and twisted.
When it comes to Jhanas, it is very clear to me that both their original context (how they fit with the Teaching at large), and their essence (how exactly they look in practice) has been largely lost in all traditions. Yes, most schools retained some of the right elements and teach them as their meditation - but the idea of progression, what this progression means and how it is achieved has largely been lost.
I agree with that article, that most modern interpretations can be divided into two groups: the ones that see Jhanas as trance-like states, and the ones that try to challenge that notion. I won't say that the trance-like Jhana camp is limited to Theravada only; there are plenty of Tibetan Buddhism teachers who teach a similar theory of meditation (not sure whether they actually practice it).
As for my own opinion, I am definitely in the "sutta-jhana" camp, and probably even more so than the others. In my mind, the connection of Jhanas to Four Noble Truths is crystal-clear, and the way Jhanas lead to Liberation is as obvious to me as 2+2.
Jhanas are milestones (not actual fixed states!) on the progressive path of removing the coarse-medium-fine instances of non-suchness towards the gradually more refined suchness, culminating in non-conditional suchness of the Unbinding. The practice of Jhanas is based on the key principle that the conflict between "is" and "should" (=non-suchness) is dukkha, and agreement between "is" and "should" (=suchness) is peace. This principle is then utilized to remove coarse sources of conflict, and to find, generate, and contrive coarse sources of the agreement - and the practice is repeated recursively with progressively more refined conflict and suchness.
Jhanas are clearly not states that one "enters" as a  byproduct of concentration. Nothing could be furthest from truth. Jhanas are milestones of one's mastery of emotional intelligence, one's ability to let go of unwholesome mindstates, and to generate and/or maintain wholesome mindstates.
First Jhana is when the student learns to let go of pretty much all regular sources of non-suchness (such as craving for entertainment, worldly success, lust for sensory pleasure, craving of informational stimulation, concerns about real-life problems, aversion to people and society and so on and so forth) and draws coarse suchness from congratulating oneself on one's luck of encountering True Dharma, one's flawless ethics, one's lack of involvement with the worldly drama, one's clear understanding of Dharmic principles, and one's progress on the Path. Feeling thus happy is the basic skill that one has to master, without which nothing else can follow. This skill is cultivated until one can recall good thoughts and make oneself feel happy at will, whenever one wishes.
Second Jhana is when the student has mastered and enjoyed First Jhana for long enough time that he or she has had enough of it. He then stops generating coarse suchness (happiness) through self-suggestion, and learns to draw a subtler kind of happiness from the sense of confidence, rightness, lack of inner conflict, and a sense of inner integration. This is more of a psychosomatic practice than a mental one. This state is cultivated until one gets stable in it and can stay in it pretty much all the time.
Third Jhana is when the student has had enough of the second Jhana to the point when being emotionally uplifted starts getting a slightly bit weary. This is when the student allows oneself to relax their sense of control over one's thoughts and emotions, and enter a state which can be explained as being emotionally sober. This state is then cultivated until one gets completely comfortable in it - without falling back to emotionally negative states, but without having to put any effort in staying emotionally uplifted either. Emotionally sober is a very good name for this Jhana.
Finally, Fourth Jhana signifies a phase when one's detachment, dispassion, non-identification, wisdom, seeing the emptiness (all these are different names that point to the same quality of mind) reaches the level when one can basically drop all control over one's thoughts and emotions, because one's suchness is no longer conditional on circumstances. Indeed, the very worry about "suchness" vs "conflict" is now seen as a source of non-suchness and is outgrown.
This is my interpretation of Jhanas based on what I learned from my teachers, books, and personal practices. As everything in Buddhism after Buddha's parinirvana, it remains subject to doubt and scepticism. What makes me confident that my interpretation is right, is the fact that it fits both with the sutta descriptions of jhanas, as well as with Noble Truths and with numerous other teachings in different traditions of Buddhism, from Theravada to Zen to Dzogchen. Most importantly, this teaching actually "works" for me in the most direct and personal way.
This doctrine of "suchness" is the kind of Buddhism I practice myself and am trying to share with others as much as I can. If someone wants to verify it for themselves, it is only too easy. All you need to do is separate all your thoughts and activities into two classes: ones that are sources of suchness vs. ones that are sources of conflict between "is" and "should". Then, cultivate the first and let go of the second. Start with the coarsest and gradually go to subtler, and see for yourself how it works.

So, jhana according to you is not a state of mind while absorbed in sitting meditation, but rather milestones of mental and emotional mastery that applies even when one is walking and talking and eating, right? Your description of the jhanas is possibly similar to what Bhante Gunaratana is said to teach in the paper: "In addition, he (Bhante Gunaratana) argues that each one of the four levels of awakening (stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner, and arhat) “always arise as states of jhanic consciousness.” In other words, jhāna is absolutely necessary for nirvana."

Yes, correct, I think you understood me.

Also, from Ven. Dhammavuddho's talk in this question, he states that once one has mastered the first jhana, the five hindrances are (mostly) overcome, not just during meditation but at all times. At least I remember him saying this in the video.

However, this may conflict with the description of the Buddha entering different jhana states in sitting meditation in the Yasoja Sutta and just before he passed away in Mahaparinibbana Sutta.

Why? Yasoja Sutta has nothing to do with Jhanas. It says, Buddha sat in imperturbable meditation, that's all. As for Mahaparinibbana Sutta - first, it is a rather mythical account from the perspective of students, not Buddha's words - second, yes Buddha went through Jhanas, so first he generated suchness/happiness with the help of self-suggestions, then without self-suggestion etc. - this sounds perfectly normal to me. I don't see any conflict here.

AN 10.72 may conflict with your stand - it says "Sound is a thorn to the first absorption. Placing the mind and keeping it connected are a thorn to the second absorption. Rapture is a thorn to the third absorption. Breathing is a thorn to the fourth absorption. Perception and feeling are a thorn to the attainment of the cessation of perception and feeling." This sounds more in line with the four jhanas as meditation states rather than milestones of mental and emotional mastery.

An incorrect attempt to redefine jhana. The Buddha taught jhana as a meditation “practice” to be conducted in isolated places like under trees or in cemeteries (SN 35.145). To achieve enlightenment, he sat beneath a tree and advanced in one night through the jhanas, which he repeatedly said were states of concentration (MN 36). The Visuddhimagga defines jhana at length as absorption, with vitakka and vicara as applied and sustained thought on one object (133-137). Just a few examples showing that jhana – right samadhi – is of course meditation, as the sangha has practiced for 2500 years.

I don't think I argue with any of what you said @K_M except the fact that jhanas are not distinct mindstates entered "with a click". Do you know what vitakka and vicara actually refer to in real life? Have you personally experienced the difference between the first and second jhanas? If you think I make this stuff up, let me clarify: I have studied nikayas, visuddhimagga, and a lot of other texts for 25 years, and practiced meditation under a traditional lineage master - how about you?

I would not say “at a click,” but the suttas and traditions do indeed describe the jhanas as meditative states of mind that one enters and exits. I have been practicing and studying Buddhism for over 10 years, and yes to your first two questions, but our practice histories are not an argument for being correct. This is about the definition of jhana, as defined by the Buddha and understood through history. If you have scripture citations to support your view that jhana is a permanent milestone in life and NOT a state of samadhi, that would be pertinent.

Most suttas describe jhanas as something a bhikkhu "enters and stays" at, not enters and exists. Very few mention exiting and those may be later additions for all i know. For an example, the Cow Sutta (AN 9.35) allegory def. makes it look like a milestone of mastery.

I see what you’re saying, however I think that sutta is about mastery through proper progress: one who practices jhana correctly and masters it can use jhana to gain high knowledge. Perhaps where we differ is I think the suttas are saying that jhana meditation, coupled with insight, allows one to progress toward enlightenment, but jhana itself is not the new cultivated, permanent state, it is simply the practice method that got one there (it’s the boat, not the shore). “Coming out” of jhana is implied, though sometimes it’s explicit, e.g. with the two highest formless dimensions in MN 111.

The formless jhanas are indeed absorptions, even from my own experience - but as far as I know they are very different and were practiced even before Buddha. The four rupa jhanas are uniquely Buddha's and in his characteristic manner he repurposed the term "jhana" even though his practice was about mastering emotional intelligence rather than pursuing dry absorption of his teachers.

Yes, good points there, and good talk overall. Sorry if I came off brusque in my first comment, these short comment sections don't leave much space for finesse.

Thank you, you are very sweet.

I marked this answer up not because I am sure it is correct from non-Andrei POV, but because I think it most certainly is correct from Andrei's POV! IOW, here is someone who has done the work and tested the interpretations and scripture in his own practice and found something that works for him in a very authentic way. That's beautiful!

does craving fall under 'should'?  i think craving is dukkha, but craving thinks otherwise

Craving is "should". "Is" may be tainted by ignorance or it can be pure.

From the first translation - AN 4.123 PTS: A ii 126
Jhana Sutta: Mental Absorption (1)
translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
© 2006 - we can read the differences between Jhana 1,2,3, & 4 which are critical to this arguement.
NOTES: In chemistry pH is measured with each whole number being more acid or more alkaline by a multiple of 10. The differences between these first 4 (rupa) jhanas is greater than the difference in pH. I will attach these translations here - but please note the DIFFERENCES between J 1-4!
"There is the case where an individual, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the devas of Brahma's retinue. The devas of Brahma's retinue, monks, have a life-span of an eon. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.
"Again, there is the case where an individual, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Abhassara[1] devas.[2] The Abhassara devas, monks, have a life-span of two eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.
"Again, there is the case where an individual, with the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Subhakinha[3] devas. The Subhakinha devas, monks, have a life-span of four eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.
"Again, there is the case where an individual, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Vehapphala[4] devas. The Vehapphala devas, monks, have a life-span of 500 eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.
NOTES:
AGAIN!
first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation
second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance
Again, there is the case where an individual, with the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana
Again, there is the case where an individual, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain
From J1 to J4 we go from 'bliss and ecstasy' all the way to 'equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain'
QUESTION #1 - What's the actual difference between sutta jhana and visuddhimagga jhana?
As you can see below, there is NOT a substantial difference between this Jhana Sutta AN 4.123 from the commentaries or the Visuddhimagga, in regards to the identification of the definitions of jhana according to the five factors they possess - vitakka, vicara, sukha, piti, ekkagata - see definitions at : http://www.buddhanet.net/mettab3.htm)
Here is the language used in the Visuddhimagga: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf
- pages 133-161:
[FIRST JHANA]
“Quite secluded from sense desires, secluded from
unprofitable things he enters upon and dwells in the first jhána, which is
accompanied by applied and sustained thought with happiness and bliss born
of seclusion” (Vibh 245), and so he has attained the first jhána"
[THE SECOND JHÁNA]
And at this point, “With the stilling of applied and sustained thought he
enters upon and dwells in the second jhána, which has internal confidence and
singleness of mind without applied thought, without sustained thought, with
happiness and bliss born of concentration” (Vibh 245), and so he has attained
the second jhána
[THE THIRD JHÁNA]
And at this point, “With the fading away of happiness as well he dwells
in equanimity, and mindful and fully aware, he feels bliss with his body; he
enters upon and dwells in the third jhána, on account of which the Noble Ones
announce: ‘He dwells in bliss who has equanimity and is mindful’ (Vibh 245),
and so he has attained the third jhána"
[THE FOURTH JHÁNA]
And at this point, “With the abandoning of pleasure and pain and with
the previous disappearance of joy and grief he enters upon and dwells in the
fourth jhána, which has neither-pain-nor-pleasure and has purity of mindfulness
due to equanimity” (Vibh 245), and so he has attained the fourth jhána"
NOTE: As you can see, the primary frame work of the Jhanas is for the most part identical in both Sutta and The Path of Purification, the Visuddhimagga
From J1 to J4 we go from 'bliss and ecstasy' all the way to 'equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain'
It confirms a consistency of Deep-End vs. Shallow End of the Pool. The beginning of the deep end is J4 and beyond, because the discrimination mind of pleasure/pain, like/dislike, ceases to operate in a judgmental fashion, it is even beyond the fashionable "bliss-consciousness' of the spiritual marketplace.
QUESTION # 2 - Is ekaggatā or very deep one-pointed concentration required for jhana?
BOTH THE Sutta and the Visuddhimagga state that Ekaggata (Equinimity) is necessary for J3 and J4 the distinction being bliss is not yet fully transcended in J3. "very deep one-pointed" is not very adequate language to express J4, but the answer is still Yes.
QUESTION #3 - Would a jhana attainer be able to use his jhana state to reflect on the four foundations of mindfulness as found in the Satipatthana Sutta? Or is jhana simply used to overcome the five hindrances, which aids the four foundations of mindfulness meditation?
Entering into J1-2 is recommended for this, yes. *citation needed
Thought and Feeling, Perception and Consciousness are already fully stilled & utilized by the J3-J4 - it's the culmination of the 4 Bases. Direct experience surpasses "reflection"
Conclusion: Concerning the Jhanas and jhana factors, the ancient texts display remarkable consistency. The disputations that arise are not well-founded textually.

I have only browsed the Visuddhimagga but my strong impression it is like an encyclopedia of existing & different Buddhist views of that era. In other words, it is not an consistent body of work. It often quotes the suttas but the explanations may be contrary to the suttas. Thus just because the Visuddhimagga quotes sutta on jhana does not mean its other teaching about jhana are sutta based.

I'm merely suggesting that the 'jhanas" in the Suttas and the "jhanas" in the Visuddhimagga aren't different jhanas, as many claim. Where the Visuddhimagga comes from I have no idea. It could be like you suggest. The whole discussion field is full of so many straw men that I become suspicious immediately.

Personally, i am emphasising the method. Sutta is letting go. VM is yogic. As for the end result, i doubt they can be the same, even though both sutta & VM use the same terminology for each jhana.

I get different results from "noting" than I do with counting breath. Noting makes me feel hyper, whereas breath cultivates calm. Noting practice is derived from the VM, or so it is said.

In short and as i see it;
For a Theravadin there should be little confusion about what constitutes a jhana if one goes by the Theravadin Abhidhamma.
If one attempts to reconcile other interpretations with the Theravadin interpretation it may or may not work, same goes for the commentarial works and contemporary "modern Buddhism" interpretations and personal theories.
For example afaik some of the people on the OP list reject Abhidhamma, others reject commentary and a third follows commentary strictly. This is obviously going to be very problematic.
I think it is important to study the Abhidhamma books to understand the Theravadin Interpretation before opting out in favor of a different expression or interpretation which is more agreeable psychologically or intellectually more easy.
As for what constitutes the Jhana in early Theravadin interpretation of what is jhana, as i understand it in brief;
A variety of states are with jhana factors ranging from wholesome thoughts accompanied by joy to meditative absorbtions. A detailed breakdown of the categories and classifications would be too long of a post but there are several Sutta which suggest that what constitutes a jhana is a relatively wide range of experiences.
Examples of this would be Sutta which deal with Pleasant Abidings wherein Jhana are explained to be Pleasant Abidings brought about by a specific development of concentration. There are the jhana factors but also specific examples of Pleasant Abidings as those easily attained by Stream-Enterer;

"And which four pleasant mental abidings in the here & now does he
  obtain at will, without difficulty, without hardship?
"There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones is endowed
  with verified confidence in the Awakened One: 'Indeed, the Blessed One
  is worthy & rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge & conduct,
  well-gone, an expert with regard to the world, unexcelled as a trainer
  for those people fit to be tamed, the Teacher of divine & human
  beings, awakened, blessed.' This is the first pleasant mental abiding
  in the here & now that he has attained, for the purification of the
  mind that is impure, for the cleansing of the mind that is unclean.
"Furthermore, he is endowed with verified confidence in the Dhamma:
  'The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here &
  now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the
  wise for themselves.' This is the second pleasant mental abiding in
  the here & now that he has attained, for the purification of the mind
  that is impure, for the cleansing of the mind that is unclean.
"Furthermore, he is endowed with verified confidence in the Sangha:
  'The Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced well...
  who have practiced straight-forwardly... who have practiced
  methodically... who have practiced masterfully — in other words, the
  four pairs, the eight individuals [1] — they are the Sangha of the
  Blessed One's disciples: worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality,
  worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, the incomparable field of
  merit for the world.' This is the third pleasant mental abiding in the
  here & now that he has attained, for the purification of the mind that
  is impure, for the cleansing of the mind that is unclean.
"Furthermore, he is endowed with virtues that are appealing to the
  noble ones: untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered, liberating,
  praised by the wise, untarnished, leading to concentration. This is
  the fourth pleasant mental abiding in the here & now that he has
  attained, for the purification of the mind that is impure, for the
  cleansing of the mind that is unclean.

The pleasant abidings are explained as jhana in several Sutta, in example;

Then Ven. Ananda addressed Mahanama the Sakyan[3]: "There is the case, Mahanama, where a disciple of the noble ones is consummate in virtue, guards the doors to his sense faculties, knows moderation in eating, is devoted to wakefulness, is endowed with seven qualities, and obtains at will — without trouble or difficulty — the four jhanas that constitute heightened awareness and a pleasant abiding in the here-&-now MN53

Furthermore Sutta express that the Pleasant Abidings are not Abiding in Effacement but Right Concentration which is explained in terms of Jhana and more precisely the jhana-Factors are explained as abiding in Effacement.
From this it can be inferred that Pleasant Abidings would always be classified as Jhana and some of states that are classified as Jhana are referred to as Pleasant Abidings but are not referred to as Abiding in Effacement.
Furthermore it can be inferred that there are states which would be classified as jhana and referred to as Abiding in Effacement and Right Concentration in addition to the former.

"It may be, Cunda, that some monk, detached from sense-objects, detached from unsalutary ideas, enters into the first absorption that is born of detachment, accompanied by thought-conception and discursive thinking, and filled with rapture and joy, and he then might think: 'I am abiding in effacement.' But in the Noble One's discipline it is not these [attainments] that are called 'effacement'; in the Noble One's discipline they are called 'abidings in ease here and now.
  ...
  "But herein, Cunda, effacement should be practiced by you:
  Others will have wrong concentration; we shall have right concentration here — thus effacement can be done.

Further analysis of the relationship between Right Concentration and Pleasant Abidings, as i see it, requires analysis of Right Concentration as a Path Factor and this gets into the differentiation between Concentration as a Faculty and Concentration as a Path Factor as well as the differentiation between the two and Noble Right Concentration.
It goes deep so i will leave it at that.

There are 3 types of Abhi-Sankara (extreme Sankara)

Punna-abhi-sankara. (Heavenly gathi/Kamma and Sugathi realms)
Apunna-abhi-sankara (Hellish gathi/The 4 hell realms)
Aneyiya-abhi-sankara (Neutral gathi/The Brahma realms)

These 3 types of mental constructs guarantee your forward birth. The "Gathi" is the kind of mental attributes you develop. The Gathi of Abhisankara determines the destination.
What the Veda/Upanishand teachings do is cultivate Aneyiya-abhi-sankara and take you to a Brahama realm. I have said "neutral" Gothi but probably not the best translation. Anyone who does non-Aria Jhana is doing Aneyiya-abhi-sankara. This is the highest achievement as per the Veda teachings. They receive a Jyana because it does Samatha half of the equation. Although this is an Anariya Jayana since Vippassana is not achieved.
The ones who excel at this can see existence in Brahma realms. The Brahama existence is very long involving multiple eons. They thought this was the highest achievement since the existence there is so long. Although as soon as the time is up you may well end up in a 4 lower realms. The Buddha tried this before enlightenment and even achieved the highest (8th) Jhana.
In order to end up in the Brahma realms they focus on the 4 basic elements i.e. air, water, heat etc and cuts off all sensory inputs. This is known as Kasina meditation. An example using air Kasina is shown here. -> https://youtu.be/55QB1tMTq5E
The correct Buddha Bhavana involves Vipassanā and its this one -> https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/31543/15007
The way Buddha teachings work is one who has attained the path and one who has developed a mental faculty to decipher and teach the Dhamma (Siwu pilisimbiya Gnana) does so directly out of Magadhi. The Ariya can interpret the Dhamma in 36 different ways. He/she then writes commentaries (Atuwa) in other languages.
In Sri Lanka king Dutu Gamunu re-united the country after an invasion. He then collected all the commentaries (Hela Atuwa) written by Ariyas and stored them at Lovamahapaya in his capital Anuradhapura.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovamahapaya
Buddhagoha was a Brahmin who excelled in Veda. He joins the fraternity but conspires to undermine the Buddha Dhamma. He was a Trojan horse. He conspires with other individuals and burns down the entire building with all the Hela-Atuwa. An ancient text Buddhaghosuppathi (බුද්ධඝෝසුප්පත්ති) explains the events. The text explains the volume of books burnt was equivalent to size of 7 elephants.
He burns down the original Hela-Atuwa but leaves 20 odd of his own commentaries that include Visuddhimagga written in Maghadhi. That is why the Visuddhimagga takes a Veda flavour with the Kasina Air or (Breathing meditation).
Kasina meditation ended up in Theravada because of Buddhaghosa and his Visuddhimagga. He also introduces his own Metta meditation when the Buddha's own is in the Karaniya Metta Sutta.
Furthermore, in the Visuddhimagga itself Buddhaghosa says he is baffled by Patticasamuppada and do not know how to explain it at all.
The one who sees Patticasamuppada - sees the Buddha's path. He admits he did not.
There are and will be ones who continue to dwell in the breathing meditation. They might as well follow Veda teachings -> https://youtu.be/55QB1tMTq5E since that is where breathing meditation is used.

Since all of the path is a matter of right view and with it firm virtue, i.e. gaining the path first, this wink again might release from all 3 questions, probably seeking to find a alternative way:

...“For a person experiencing pleasure, there is no need for an act of will, 'May my mind grow concentrated.' It is in the nature of things that the mind of a person experiencing pleasure grows concentrated.
“For a person whose mind is concentrated, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I know & see things as they actually are.' It is in the nature of things that a person whose mind is concentrated knows & sees things as they actually are. ...
Cetana Sutta

[Note: like always not given for stacks, exchange, stands, trade in the world but for beyond and unbound]

...“For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue.

RE: "not given for stacks, exchanges" etc. FYI: in 1996-2001 there was a paid commercial Q&A site called "Experts Exchange" (started by some other people). Then in 2008 Joel Spolsky and Jeff Atwood launched a free site called "Stack Overflow", where people could exchange their knowledge and experience for free. In 2014 they launched Stack Exchange, a free open platform: "Instead of opening sites in exchange for money, we’re about to launch a new, democratic system where anyone can propose a Q&A site, and, if it gets a critical mass of interested people, we'll create it."


text:
Fake Dhammapadas
I am only getting fake and/or altered versions of the Dhammapada. This is a serious problem. They get changed regularly, sometimes a verse is just completely false as it describes something that is not Right View, other times the translations are poor, some verses seem untouched. Is anyone else experiencing this?

I'm aware of three versions in English

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.intro.budd.html -- I think of this as "standard"
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.intro.than.html -- I think of this as "poetic" (and a looser translation)
https://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/ -- this says of itself ...

It only remains for me now to express my deep and sincere gratitude to the members of the Editorial Committee, Burma Pitaka Association, for having meticulously gone through the script; to Sayagyi Dhammacariya U Aung Moe and to U Thein Maung, editor, Burma Pitaka Association, for helping in the translation of the verses.

... so I guess it thoroughly reviewed (not just one author), and based on Burmese version. The translations for example here include the Pali and the "background story" for each verse -- so if you doubt a translation then you can see the Pali easily.

I guess word-for-word translations are rarely perfect or only approximate (e.g. the three translations translate averena as "non-hatred", "non-hostility", and/or "loving-kindness").
There's also https://suttacentral.net/dhp which has:

One of the English-language translations
"20 translations in other modern languages"
"1 edition of the root text" (which, I'm not sure, might be a copy of the Pali Text Society 2nd edition).

Experiences are matter of ones own kamma, heritage, or on a more refined level, a matter of touch.
So it's not clear of what does the question seek for. Truth in things that are not, assuming that when others experiences something similar, it must be real?
Those who regard
non-essence as essence
and see essence as non-,
don't get to the essence,
    ranging about in wrong resolves.
But those who know
essence as essence,
and non-essence as non-,
get to the essence,
    ranging about in right resolves.
Yamakavagga: Pairs
(not given for exchange, trade, stacks, gain... that binds to the world but for liberation)