text:
Can you explain the "Maha Meru"?
I have come to learn the fact that the idea if maha meru is not only included in the buddhist canon but in many other beliefs and cultures which are not Buddhist.
This is what Wikipedia says - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Meru
I belong to the theravada tradition so i am very interested in knowing sources in the canon for further learning if you can mention some. Also if you can ease me into the topic with a small explanation it is also very much appreciated.

I know that this has nothing to do with nirvana but i am curious of this and i also read this
https://muslimanswersfiles.wordpress.com/2013/05/01/buddhism-modern-science/

I guess i want an answer to the question "While all other things are logical and also even scientific, why this (Maha meru) makes no sense?"
Namo Buddhaya!

As per my understanding in listening to Dhamma the maha meru is the mount Himalya. The anawatapta lake is located in the maha meru as per the scripts & now it is found hat this lake exists in the Himalya range.
Hope you will be able to find the stories about Maha meru more logical of you read articles on Himalya region, earth's structure, universal physics etc.

I think Himalaya was called Sineru

Sorry but I wasn't sure & I'be never heard of the word Sineru. Thanks

Mt. Kailash as we refer to it in the present day is the Mount Meru of yesteryear. It is in the region around Mt. Kailash that Pacceka Buddhas will reside at a time just before a Supreme Buddha is born to this world.  That is when the eminent coming of a Supreme Buddha is talked about amongst the general population of that time.
So Mt. Kailash is a very storied mountain, the equally storied lake and the storied flower in it. Mt. Kailash is the mythical Mt. Meru. Read about it in the "Saptha Suryodgamana Sutta" The Sermon of the Seven Suns (Anguttara Nikaya VII. 62). In it the Buddha explains in detail about the events that would unfold, and in it, this monarch of mountains will get consumed and burnt, that neither ashes not soot will remain.
The Lake Anavatapta is said to be so sheltered and covered that the direct rays from the sun would not fall and the lake would not dry up until the day this world would come to an end, as per the Saptha Suryodgamana Sutta. In this "Sermon of the Seven Suns" the Supreme Buddha, tells us about the end of the earth due to the expansion of the dying sun.
In the Manual of Buddhism by Spence Hardy he has this to say about Mt. Kailash & the Lake Anavatapta - in page 42:

"The great forest  is in the northern  part of Jambudwipa, which, from the southern  extremity, gradually  increases  in height, until it attains an elevation  of 500 yojanas, in the mountains  of Gandhamadana, Kailasa, Chitrakuta, and  others, there being in all 84,000..  These mountains are inhabited by an infinite number of dewas and yakas, and are beautified  by 500 rivers, filled with the most delicious  water, and by the seven  great lakes, among  which  is the Anotatta-wila.  This lake is 800 miles long, and as many broad and deep; and there are  four  places  in it in  which  the  Budhas, Pase-Budhas, rahats, and rishis  are accustomed  to bathe;  and six  other places where the dewas from the six inferior  heavens  bathe.
..... On the four sides of Anotatta are four mouths or doors, whence proceed as many rivers;  they are, the lion-mouth, the elephant, the horse, and the bull.  The banks of these rivers abound with the animals from which they take their name.  The rivers that pass to the north-east  and west flow three times round the lake without touching each other, and after passing through  countries  not inhabited  by man, fall into the sea. The river  that runs to the south  also  passes  three  times round  the lake, then  rushes  from the midst  of a rock, and flows in a straight line 60 yojanas.. It then strikes against another rock, and rises into the sky, like a mount of gems 12 miles  in size, flows  through  the sky for  the space  of 60 jojanas, and strikes against the rock Tiyaggala. This rock it has broken by its immense force;  and after this it violently rushes on a further space of 60 yojanas, after which it flows on  an  inclined  plane, strikes  and  breaks  the  ponderous Pansu-parwata  or  Five  Mountains, and  again  passes  on 60
yojanas.  It then flows 60 yojanas  further, through  a cave, strikes the four-sided rock Wijja, and is lastly divided into five  streams, like  five  fingers, that  are the five  great livers  (Ganga, Yumuna, Acirawati, Sarabhu, and Mahi), which, after watering Jambudwipa, fall into the sea."

The five great rivers of India: the Ganga, the Yamuna, the Aciravati, the Sarabhu, and the Mahi, is said to have its beginning in Lake Anavatapta & around Mt. Meru.

I should study this more, thank you very much for the answer. Downloading the book now! :-)

I had read that Himalaya is defined as Buddha.
Buddha called Himalaya Pabbatarāja, ‘the lord of mountains’. (S.II,137). The exact meaning of the name Himalaya is uncertain. It may have been formed from the words hima and mala meaning ‘garland of snow’ or from hima and alaya meaning ‘abode of snow’.
But when speaking about cosmology and "Maha Meru"
You can see all Viharas, Chorten or Buddhist temples are built in five layers that are defining "Maha Meru" or "Cosmology".
The Buddha said this about the body of living being (quoting the 7th point at the bottom of page 131 in The Buddha and His Dhamma by Dr B. R. Ambedkar):

The body of a living being consists of the combination of four great elements, viz., earth, water,
  fire and air, and when this combination is resolved into the four component elements,
  dissolution ensues.

Abhidharma describes Mount Meru/Kailash as a cosmological system; similar descriptions found in Kalachakra Tantra.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Meru_(Buddhism)#Characteristics
https://web.ccsu.edu/astronomy/tibetan_cosmological_models.htm
The tradition of Bon calls the mountain Yungdrung Gutsek; the surrounding realm is termed Tazig Olmo Lung Ring.  Olmo Lung Ring is not a location on the Earth; rather, a kind of meditational realm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagzig_Olmo_Lung_Ring

I heard somewhere that Mount Meru is invisible to the normal eyes. You need powers to see it. And we are all living in Jambudvipa which is the southern island. Buddha doesn't say false speech.


text:
Buddhism and homosexuality
Is Buddhism accepting homosexuality? It is a famous question now.I want to know "Is lord Buddha accede homosexuality?

See also How is sexual misconduct explained in regards to the five precepts?

This thread also discusses homosexuality: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/1886/what-is-the-attitude-toward-homosexuality-in-buddhism?noredirect=1&lq=1">

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Memory about the past life
As per the scriptures, lower being such as pretha & higher beings such as deva & Brahma remembers their early life. But in case of humans, only rare incidents are reported in remembering the past life. What is the cause of this?

In cultures where reincarnation is widely accepted, children report their memories and it is not an uncommon thing.

This is a limitation of we who inhabit a three-dimensional world IMHO. We are not aware of other dimensions, and do not have the ability to see past existences because of the limitations of our physical senses. We experience only a very small part of reality, the three-dimensional world of physical forms.  But also we could quite rightly say that we humans live in a four dimensional world; in other words, humans are aware of four dimensions -three dimensions of space plus time.
This is why we see only two realms (human and animal) out of the other realms of existence like that of Pretha, Deva and Brahma. Of the newest scientific theories, the M-theory says that ours is a 11-dimensional universe, even though we can see only four dimensions (including time). So Prethas live amongst us, but they live in a differnet dimensional world.
Our consciousness (vinnana) is not like that of an Arahant. Ours is contaminated by defilements. This our awareness is not pure; it is like looking though a foggy window. But it is not so for some Arahant who got to open the divine eye in them. Twenty five hundred years ago, the Buddha achieved the ultimate state of the mind and became “all knowing” (or “perfectly conscious”). He came to know about the boundless universe, the endless cycle of rebirths, and about the complex process of cause and effect (paticca samuppada) which sustains everything in the universe.

I understood it pretty well. May the noble triple gem bless you.

I have read that there are few reasons, when the child is in the mother's womb, it forgets the precious birth. One I recall clearly is shock.
(Such as from a big jolt of loud noise)

Well, I do know that Deva and Brahma could look into their past life but it doesn't mean that they remember everything just right they were born. Just like Deva and Brahma, we could look into our past life.
As for Peta, I'm not sure whether if Peta could look into their past life.

There are stories about Pretha telling about their past lives in 'Pretha vasthu'

Okay, i'm going to check on petavatthu.

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


text:
Focus on the object or nimitta?
Once I reach a nimitta during jhana meditation, do I then move focus to it or keep in the object? Do I ignore the nimitta, or is it one of those things that is very hard to ignore?

I presume that your object is the breath, crossing the anapana spot (under the nostrils, on the upper lip).
You must be careful since wanting the Nimitta to appear will actually prevent it from appearing. As long as you desire such things, to experience Nimitta or Jhana, it will simply never happen.
Let go of such expectations, completely. Also, by wanting Nimitta to appear, there is a very high chance of it being the product of your imagination.
You must let it be, do not give it any attention. Nimitta will strengthen, stabilize, and merge with the object on its own. Always remain with the object.

Nimitta cannot be ignored in jhana because the nimitta itself is one-pointedness (ekaggatā), where the mind (citta) itself becomes the nimitta & the mind is glued unmoving to the nimitta.
An analogy is a wheel that is fixed to an axle and spins around the axle. Being fixed to the axle is the nimitta/ekaggatā. The mind being expansively conscious, luminous & blissful is the wheel.
In the Pali suttas, the Buddha did not mention the nimitta because he only mentioned ekaggatā.

It is said that a nimitta appears together with uppādo (origin of existence), pavattaṃ (continuity of it)'.
Nimittas arise, and if your intent is not the continuity of this nimitta, another nimitta will arise in its place. In meditation we try to keep to one nimitta. “Uppādo” means arising. When anusaya (temptations) arise due to āsava (cravings), we need to stop that temptation and be at “pavattam” (continuity of it or go with it).
If we go along with the unbroken and consistent maintaining (“pavattaṃ”), then it becomes a nimitta (literally a “sign”). A nimitta is a characteristic that is associated with a particular act. For example, for an alcoholic a picture of an alcohol bottle or a bar (or where one normally drinks), or even seeing a friend with whom one drinks often, can be a nimitta; when any of such a “symbol” comes to the mind, it reminds of the drinking act and gets one in the “mood”. Now you will see that it is not so difficult to ignore a nimitta.

Go back to your object of meditation. Don't pay attention to nimitta, just let go of it. if you hold nimitta, you'll become crazy in no time. Trust me.


text:
According to Buddhism, how can a woman get a male soul?
How can women get male anima? Women bear many sorrowful feelings all of their lives. So how can they escape those lives and be men?

@Glorfindel Don't think "anima" is the correct replacement for OP's "soul". The OP clearly stressed "be men".

@Bhumishu米殊 that's what was in the original text. Feel free to improve it.

@Glorfindel I thought that's ur edit ;)-

I invite you to read more on Bhava Rupa of Abhidhamma.

Upasaka (lay follower) Lal shared a nice approach on his website: Sexual Orientation – Effects of Kamma and Gathi (Sankhara), Olivia Glad.
Whether one seeks direct liberation or best possible conditions also afterwards, there is only making merits which is conductive.
A short quote from the article:

One is born male or female due to whether one cultivates “purisa sankhara” or “iththi sankhara” by thinking, speaking, and doing things accordingly. One does not do either punna abhisankhara or apunna abhisankhara here.

A nice approach that might have some personal hints that are maybe not so tasty for moderns, but over all a very releasing work on this most hard opinioned topic.
And a Verse of the Blessed One given in regard of Growth  of female lay disciples (SN 37.4):

She grows in conviction & virtue,
  discernment, generosity, & learning:
  A virtuous female lay disciple
      such as this
  takes hold of the essence
  right here within herself.

Important for oneself, one thinking "I am a woman", "I am a man", "Neither woman nor man I am", conceit and suffering is not abandoned.
So here a list of some inspirations, "Women and Buddhism", and may Olivia and other be careful not to fall into strong conceit and greed, hatred and delusion in regard of gender and situations which had causes.
Note: This answer is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or to use the content for other wordily gains.

Good highlight on falling prey to sakkayaditti.

So why these many sociteis bush away the women.If-India

Women bear many sorrowful feelings all of their lives. So how can they escape those lives and be men?
In my experience, men bear sorrowful feelings too.
Maybe they don't show their sorrow often. I think their sorrowful feelings are often related to their relationships with women and other men.
So men too may want to escape those lives.
When I read the suttas, I see little difference between men and women: merely some difference in their roles in lay society (within marriage). I think the same message (of Buddhism) might be of use to men and women. Liberation may come from studying, understanding, practicing the Dharma.

Part of Buddhist doctrine is that having and accepting views-of-self, any views-of-self, results in sorrow. I think that "views-of-self" includes views like "I exist", "I am a woman", "I am a man", "I am of such-and-such an age, or family".
It also teaches that sorrows arise from cravings (I think that 'craving to be a man' might be a kind of craving).
I think that the Buddhist path is open to all (though I realize that recently the existence or lineage of Theravada nuns has been controversial in some countries).

You mention "the woman soul" frequently, but I'm not sure there is such a thing. The sabba sutta for example describes the six senses; I doubt that a sense (the 'eye' for example) is male or female.

How does a woman stay as a woman? A woman does not escape her femininity as long as she clings to her feminine nature.

“A woman attends inwardly to her feminine
  faculties, her feminine gestures, her feminine manners, feminine
  poise, feminine desires, feminine voice, feminine charms. She is
  excited by that, delighted by that. Being excited & delighted by that,
  she attends outwardly to masculine faculties, masculine gestures,
  masculine manners, masculine poise, masculine desires, masculine
  voices, masculine charms. She is excited by that, delighted by that.
  Being excited & delighted by that, she wants to be bonded to what is
  outside her, wants whatever pleasure & happiness that arise based on
  that bond. Delighting, caught up in her femininity, a woman goes into
  bondage with reference to men. This is how a woman does not transcend
  her femininity.
AN 7.51

How does a woman escape her femininity?

A woman does not attend inwardly to
  her feminine faculties… feminine charms. She is not excited by that,
  not delighted by that… does not attend outwardly to masculine
  faculties… masculine charms. She is not excited by that, not delighted
  by that… does not want to be bonded to what is outside her, does not
  want whatever pleasure & happiness that arise based on that bond. Not
  delighting, not caught up in her femininity, a woman does not go into
  bondage with reference to men. This is how a woman transcends her
  femininity.
AN 7.51

Hey!Don't you heard "Ithi Jathaka before?

@OliviaGlad Sorry I don't know what you mean. Are you referring to a particular Jataka story?

Maybe that helps: Itthi vagga

Note @OliviaGlad , most Jatakas are teachings on Vinaya and meant to encourage monks of being careful not to tend on the most dangerous object of mind: the other gender. One can understand it also viciversa for the other gender. And woman normaly know good how to use their gender. So just stay always on the good side and DMSPs post are good to get more disattached to "I am a woman, and because of this, this and that..." papanca and suffering follows such thoughts.

Ithi Jathaka is not a teaching of the Buddha. It is a story written hundreds of years later by clergy, possibly under King Asoka, who wanted to convert India to Buddhism. This falsifying of Buddhism ultimately lead to Buddhism becoming extinct in India & nearly extinct in Ceylon. Jataka made Buddhism indistinguishable from Hinduism, which lead to Hinduism absorbing Buddhism into it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Buddhism_in_India#Religious_convergence

First of all, "get male soul" I assumed you mean to be reborn as man, Buddhism doesn't teach the notion of existing a soul. Reading the question it seemed the OP does have the conviction and Dharma insight of the disadvantage of being female, congratulations on such awakening. While the Buddha accepted the Bhikkhunis and praised the women the Mothers of lives, to attend Buddha-hood all Buddhas' last lives born as men. There is one rare case of the Dragon Daughter (龍女), aged 8-y-o, attended Buddha-hood once she offerred her Pearl of Three-Thousand-Worlds, the description was she "then appeared at the South, changed to a male-body (男身) and became the Buddha". It was recorded in the Lotus Sutra. Feminism or sex-equal advocators, I am not interested in the debate. Please don't then label the Buddha in guilt of any so and so discrimination, its tiring to attend all the noises that catered only craving and self-love.
How to be reborn as man? Starts to work to get lighter/ light-hearted in the notion called love, love of relationship, attachment to a partner, sex... etc. It is the exceed of these attachments get one born as woman. Next, the practices related to Avalokitesvara and Medicine Buddha have the notion about being reborn as man if one invoke them correctly, following the practices.
Having said above, Buddha is transcended on gender, so its not about male, female which is better or both should be equal. Surangama Sutra has thorough description on the creation of the world, and different genders came to be. Else in some notes type instead of sermon type of Sutras like the Agama Sutra or its equivalent, it said male and female came to being because of desire, then sex, therefore male and female resulted to satisfy this activity; then death, therefore life created through sex. The beings came from the Realm of Brilliance (光音天) were genderless, later they due to indulging in the Taste of Earth (地味/地肥) some were caught up and forever left on earth, that's the origin of human beings. It will leave for the archaeologist to uncover the ruins, those monolithic structures who and how did they build.

Additional:
How did male and female come to be according to Agama Sutras (or Nikayas in Pali):
**Dīrgha Āgama 《長阿含經》 || Dīgha Nikāya**

...「其後眾生便共取粳米食之，其身麤醜，有男女形，
  互相瞻視，遂生欲想，共在屏處為不淨行。
  餘眾生見言：『咄此為非！
  云何眾生共生有如此事？』彼行不淨男子者，見他呵責，
  即自悔過言：『我所為非。』即身投地。
  其彼女人見其男子以身投地，悔過不起，女人即便送食。
  餘眾生見，問女人言：『汝持此食，欲以與誰？』
  答曰：『彼悔過眾生墮不善行者，我送食與之。』
  因此言故，世間便有不善夫主之名；
  以送飯與夫，因名之為妻。... 《長阿含經_卷22世記經》

In Dīrgha Āgama it recorded that after some beings from the Realm of Brilliance conducted sexual activities and were discovered by the other beings, one fallen down onto the ground lamented, "I did wrong!"; the other then took the food to serve the one laid on the ground refused to raise up in self-punishment. The one lamented is called "wrong-doing husband" (不善夫主), the one serving food called wife (妻).
In this short portrait I discerned that the two beings were equal, yet when one took the other as her object of care, she is the wife/female; whilst the other in reference to the whole of the other beings, realized his action was wrong, he is the husband/male. It's true in social structure, women are generally caring about her own family's welfare. The more limited one is able to care about - selfishness, the more one suffered. Just like depressed people are usually so concerned about their own selves. If one attached to any object as his/her affection and care, that object will be the very weapon to harm him/her. As women tend to look up to men (husbands) as their object of care, thus women are less free.
Therefore from serving food to her object of care/desire as portrayed in the Sutra, she then would wish to keep the man, then to have a place belonged to them, then assets, and then children... Therefore the bearing of children are the tasks of the women, and all the physical inconveniences. In the higher realm such as the Devas, those beings giving birth they don't come from the birth-channels. The new being (baby) could spring from the leg, shoulder, or from the head etc., from either male or female Deva. (It's recorded in Sutra but I yet have to find it).
If one could dive deeper into how female come to be, an incomplete summary: 1) attached to the female features - to attract man (thinking that's beautiful, because these are attractive to man); 2) attached to/ depended on man/husband (because her focus is on husband, thus family, thus bearing children. without these, woman felt insecure); 3) emotional attachment 情執重生為女人. woman tended to live according to feelings, and enjoyed feelings (love of romance), and loved relationships. These are hindrances for one to develop a complete/independent character. Attachment is source of suffering.

What are you saying?According to your answer male and female genders are equal.So why females bear many sorrowful feelings than male?We can't say the two genders are equal.The males are always in a front of female.

@OliviaGlad I'm relieved that you got "...genders are equal", you got it right. If you are more into the deeper teaching, Form (male/female) is resulted from our own differentiation (Diamond Sutra - Mahayana). Now if you read more the paragraph about this Realm of Brilliance how they were then "fallen" to become our human ancestors, you will know more about how female came to be. I put the rather long answer in my Additional.

So are there no way to escape the woman soul?

There is no gender in Nirvana.
That is how a man can escape being a man, or a woman being a woman.
I for one, I plan to keep being a woman, and the difficulties are not difficulties, but a fundamental training in selflessness and loving kindness. That way, if I am reborn where Dharma is not taught, then at least I can keep practicing until I meet the teachings again.

Remember the Heart Suttra. In emptiness, there is ...no eye, no nose, no ear, no mouth, ...
Thus in emptiness there is no soul. The concept of man and woman are created by human beings.

I like your point that 'concept of man and woman are created by human beings'

The Pali suttas (SN 37.3), which were relevant to the Buddha's society, describe certain difficulties peculiar to women, namely:

A young woman must leave her family & live with her husband's family.
Menstruation.
Pregnancy.
The physical pain & danger of child birth.
Serving a man.

However, apart from this, I do not recall reading anything in the Pali suttas that mention any causes or reasons for why a woman is physically born as a woman.
Everything I recall reading in the Pali scriptures treats men & women equally in respect to both the results of kamma/actions (refer to the Mātugāma Saṃyutta) and the potential for enlightenment (refer to the Therigatha).
In the Pali suttas, the different results of different kammas lead to the humane (compassionate), animal (immoral), ghost (addictive), heaven (blissful) & hell (suffering) states of mind rather than lead to birth as a man or woman.
As mentioned, accounts of women attaining freedom from suffering can be read in the Therigatha.

So are there no way to escape the woman soul?

Throughout this samsara we have been born as both male and female. Gender difference happens in sensual planes. Not in brahma planes. If you think that you are a woman or a man forever you under the the extreme view of Eternalism. Your kamma and the things you cultivate in your mind determines your next rebirth. It's hard to know cause the the laws of kamma and beings are infinite. Only the Buddha knows it fully.

Why desiring to be a man? Just don't underestimate your womanhood like that. Just empower yourself and give a value to yourself. Society will say so many things.but who will give a damn? Just don't care what others say about women. Being a woman i thought in the same way now you are thinking.but it's some time ago and now I know the value and the importance of being a woman. Don't attribute such a value and an importance to men. No matter what your gender is if you are doing it right it will be the best. Those good notions of being a man have created  by this patriarchal society.And we women should subotage those stupid values that make the women unimportant and miserable creatures.

Oya monavada me kiyanne?Oyage ammala thaththala oyata bala kaloth kasada bandinna kiyala, oyata ekata kamathi venna venava neda?Eth pirimi kenekta eke ganak nehe.Thava deyak,dan vadipurama mahana dam puranna lesi pirimi kenekta misak ganu kenekta nemei neda?Dan aduma tharame bhikshuni shasanayavath me loke nehe.

@OliviaGlad tell first whether you are woman or a man?

Mama nam mata bala kalata kisima deyak karanne nehe. I am an empowered woman. I am trying to empower those who are disempowered by this patriarchal society.

There is no male/female "soul" in the way that you speak of...
My teacher did say though that the attachment to sensation skandha is more for women and attachment to conception skandha is more for men. (Men destroy themselves by overthinking, women by feeling.)
In Buddhism, feelings (sensation, vedana) are just one component of the human collection.
There is also form, conception, volition, and consciousness... all of which compose the 5 skandhas.
Men (can) experience more suffering than women. It depends on the person's cultivation/craving level.
We have to keep practicing meditation and learn to distance ourselves from our own thoughts and emotions, which are not our True Self.

In Buddhism there is no concept of Soul. So, we can leave out the discussion of the gender of the soul.
If your question refer to the fact that you wanting to be re-incarnated as a man to attain Nibbana, here are some facts:
How can you be born as a woman? If you have the intention of experiencing the world in sensitive detail, you have to be born as a woman. Only a woman is capable of doing that, as women have much more heightened senses (modern biology agrees with this notion) which allow them to perceive the world in intimate detail.
One can argue that this level of perseverance of detail is a hurdle to Nibbana. In fact, thinking that female senses would hinder their spirituality is one of the reasons most other ancient religions in India to consider women as lesser human beings. Buddhism rejects this concept. Simply because, with the proper mindset, the extra sensitivity/details perceived could be used as a positive catalyst in the process of realizing the true form of the world. (E.g.: All the females who attained Arhath state so far).
The bottom line is you are a woman because you chose to experience the world in detail. Don't be ashamed of it. Its not a crime. You see, feel, hear, taste, smell more than a man would ever be able to. Just don't chase those feelings. Don't let them enslave your mind. Rather, see them as they are with the help of Dhamma. If you think less of who you are it is the biggest hurdle to realizing Nibbana.


text:
Does love mean crime?
I really know what does love means even my prior question was also "What does love means?" but as I'm going through. When I tried to let person know I'm loving then it gets angry at me so how love conquer anger/hate when I found person hates me. Neither has affection nor kindness towards me, no respect for my feelings towards that person. So is this love crime that I found someone who I Iove hates me after knowing I'm loving that person. I don't know what's their psychology or perspective of love. So I've question that is love crime?

Sometimes when you're attracted to someone, those feelings of yours will be reciprocated, sometimes they won't. If they're not, people can react in all sorts of ways, from hostility to shock to mild amusement etc. You should accept the other person's reaction gracefully, and if there's no hope of romance let go of your love.

Swapnil,
Love does never conquere anger and hatred but is actually the reason of it.
Look how angry you are, aren't you? And why?
Love is simply greed and it's not proper to blame another trader of not taking your deal, or?
Of course it's not a crime perse, but actally the reason for all crimes in this world.
To deal unfair, in cases where others do not like to trade with this dangerous item, lead also often to direct "love-crimes"
That is why the Buddha and wise people taught and teach, "Suffering comes from what is dear" and to make best nothing neither dear nor put anger into it.
And since no being loves any thing more as him/herself, on should not harm others and derive them from their beloved.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains.)

Yeah, I know 'Piyavagga' but I'm in search of my life partner so I just expressed my mind my feelings , affection, love, kindness for that person. I wouldn't agree with if it's reason for all crime. I mean who is wisdom wouldn't be criminal because of love. I would let you know person not knowing Piyavagga or Buddhism really so I really really don't understand their perspective of love. I know that every thing end with sorrow but this is it.

As told, if the is no love there is no killing. Its not always called crime in normal sociaty, but looking a little bit deeper also Swapnil will see how much he had killed for it, and not only good and cool mood. "But this is it", if such would be a proper approach to suffering that the compassion of the Buddha for his alternative was useless and you also could stop to do conductive harm in regard of defilements and just live like an animal. There are alternatives much more refine then sensual pleasures which always cause harm and also a way even beyound this refinded pleasure.

And having a partner or not, one will be aways alone, just experiance sign, sound, smell, tast, touch, thoughts, e.g. the world for one self and just for one self, created for one self. Thinking that far, are you even really relayed to the world you experiance? Or is it not so that all this is also not lasting, makes no sense and can not be regarded as refuge? So why not seeking after hardwood, now where there is the seldom chance, rather to invest in meaningless and turn on in that wheel?

Ok I'm agreed 'This is it' I mean I've decided to live as layman and not as monk. So that circumstances give me nice choice itself now I'm thinking to find one who practicing Buddhism and  that wouldn't hurt me ever that person would be wiser and wisdom as practicing Buddhism so I've to stop what I was looking for like silly. Thank you.

Samajivina Sutta: Living in Tune and mudita.

Love is a hard word to interpret. For simplicity let's use the two generally used words

Selfish love
Unconditional love

Selfish love is generally unhealthy and in a Buddhist context means "loba" (craving) and may lead to "dwesha" (anger). This is harmful for you and the other person.
Unconditional love is generally healthy and in a Buddhist context means "alobha" (non craving) and usually is also "adhosha" (non angry). This is not harmful for you and the other person.
In normal life, love is something which mixes these two from time to time; hence a mix of good and bad.

I'm agreed but I wonder their psychology and perspective of love. Even they not kind person to whom who love them. I really wonder this phenomena of mind or tendency.

@Swapnil it might be useful to think why you love this person. Then think it those reasons are kusal (merits) or akusal (demerits).

@Rvindranath Akila  Reason is I found wiser (wisdom) person and want to marry that person. So I accepted answer and got what I must've.

You can see how anger causes more anger? Aversion causes more aversion? The ideal in Buddhism would be if you could cultivate wisdom or metta. Then you could better keep loving other people as friends regardless of hate or love. Acceptance of the anger, equanimity, impartiality and loving everyone even when you are loving just one. No one can hurt your feelings, we all hurt our own feelings by reacting to them. -metta

So perhaps the 'particularity' of the OPs love is the 'crime' that he is feeling? Attachment changes the love from a freely given gift to one with some expectation?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For sharing merits with the departed relatives we use,

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

For sharing merits with the devas and nagas we use,

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

For sharing merits with all beings we use,

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

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


text:
What reference to other powers are there in Buddhism?
Does Buddhism, other than Amidism, describe or explain entities like Amida, or any other "other power," or intra-psychic, in yer mind, other.
I did not mean to consider whether Buddhism is theistic or not.

Do you know of any theistic Buddhist tradition? Because I don't.

Perhaps I should say then, non-other-power Buddhism.

See also this answer for a description of a form of Amidism.

Pigeonholing Buddhism into theistic or atheistic category betrays ignorance of the relationship between reality and its description.
Theistic concepts such as gods, souls, afterlife, other realms etc. are all descriptions referring to certain phenomena observable in the real life.
Most of these phenomena are of such nature that speaking about them in other terms is hard or impossible. So over the centuries humanity developed a kind of partially metaphorical / partially exaggerated / partially simplified vocabulary that we now know as "the supernatural" and "the metaphysical".
Then, on top of that useful if a little inaccurate vocabulary, a hundred generations of people overlaid their fairy tales and anecdotes. Then on top of this folklore came systematizers who wrote down the canons and catechisms. The mixture of these three layers is what we know as a religion.
When we talk about Buddhism, the conversation would get a lot more clear if we were to drop the two later layers and focus on the original set of ideas used to describe phenomena that don't have adequate representation in materialistic let alone scientific vocabularies.
I claim that ideas such as gods, spirits, other worlds, and other seemingly fictional elements are simplified descriptions or real things going on in the real world you and I live in. There's no room in this answer for going in details but at least I have made the claim.
If we suspend our judgment and assume (hypothetically) that my claim is grounded in reality, then we will have to say that the difference between theistic and non theistic Buddhism is moot. In fact we would have to say that what we know as traditional Buddhism is probably more complete while secular Buddhism artificially restricts itself to a subset of reality that is included in the modern materialistic description while leaving the other important phenomena out just because we are not aware of them and don't understand them enough to describe in our own words.

Thank you. Do you have any references to explanations of Gods in Buddhist scripture?

@AndreiVolkov Hi! It seems to me that you've been indicating what you said above in other answers of yours as well. Do you know of any source from which one could read to understand what lies under those metaphors and allegories? I'd really appreciate any help on that. Kind regards, and thanks for your answers!

Unfortunately as with much of Buddhism most of the really useful stuff is passed down the oral tradition, from master to student. I can't think of any text that would spell it out that "worlds" are the worlds of subjective experience and that the "spirits" are abstract entities inhabiting the realm of latent effects.

That understandable. Thanks for your answer, anyway. Have a nice day!

Buddha speaks that the power of mära (mära bala) is something we should strive to win against though practice of Buddhism.
Buddha has also said that he doesn't see anybody else who exercises power as the mära does.
However mära also dies. Even Arhat Moghalläna has been mära.
Mära is also explained by Buddha as things that perish.
Our eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind, when specifically considered as "me", "mine" or "my soul", is said by mära to be belonging to him when answering a question by Buddha.

Thank you very much. Do you think Mara is Amida?

Also should you have a reference or ideally a link I would be grateful. The mention of facial bits jives with Phillippe Rochat's theory of other-in-mind as first person view of self.

@timtak I'm not familiar with Amida. You're welcome. I'll provide references as I read Tipitaka when I find them.

How is your reading of Tipitaka coming along? The author does a lot of washing of the bodies of Buddhas, which suggests again the <body - other power> connection, and these days I have taken a new more literal reading of the Eucharist. "This is my body" may not have been referring just to the bread!

While I read the Tipitaka on and off I've not specifically looked into this matter as my main focus has been understanding The Four Noble Truths.

Thank you. Should you come accross things related to the body, mära, or others that might help I would be interested to hear them.
When I said "the author does a lot of washing of bodies of Buddhas" I was referring to another Buddhist (devotional) writing the name of which I have forgotten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mara_(demon)

The only time I can think of mention of an 'other power', is perhaps in Zen's Gateless Gate book of Koan's where there is mention in #42 of a girl next to the Buddha. I think that this "girl" may be Amida (who is neutre) but it is only a guess.
There is so the bull in Zen's ten pictures of the bull. It is a sort of pair to self and dissappears when enlightenment is achieved.

There is officially no such thing as "atheistic Buddhism".
Yes, the Kamala Sutta does provide rhetorical ammunition to allow disbelief in some or all gods.  Yes, the belief in Karma does provide a moral absolute that exists independently of the will of any Higher Power.  Yes, the Buddhism does provide a Marcion-ist view of dispassion towards the physical cosmos, so one is not commanded to venerate a creator deity who reigns over a flawed universe.
Yes, Buddhism, especially Mahayana Buddhism, does tend to emphasize the god within, a sort of Spinoza pantheism.  Yes, Buddhism gives ample leeway to interpret the gods, spirits, and heroic characters allegorically--including the Buddha himself.  (Mahayana texts are largely the product of a Buddha who appears in meditative trances rather than the oral legends passed down from the historical, flesh-and-blood Shakyamuni Buddha.)
That so, "atheistic" Buddhism would be one that strongly denies even the possibility of gods and spirits, and rigorously demands empirical observation supporting every truth claim.  "Atheistic" Buddhism did not exist from any historical accounts; it is a recent innovation.  Modern atheist thinkers are using the permissiveness of agnostic Buddhism, Kalama-sutta Buddhism, to create an atheistic form of Buddhism.
Nothing wrong with that; atheists are allowed to be Buddhists, just like anybody else.

Do you mean Kalama Sutta and not Kamala Sutta?

I don't know if Buddhism is theistic. I am looking for things like "The Bull" in Zen pictures, the girl in Koan 42 of the Gateless gate, the sound of "one hand" (隻手) which may refer to an other power sharing our er mind. In Western psychology there is "the invisible hand (again)" and the "impartial spectator" (Adam Smith), "the superego" or "over I" (Freud), "the Other" (Lacan), the helper (Vygotsky), the super-addressee (Bakhtin), "Thou" (Buber), the Environmental self (Rochat), and some or at least one Amidist speaks of Amida in a similar way. I am looking for other such references.

In DN 1 (below), we see something like a God, but here it refers to a being who delusionally thinks that he is the Supreme Creator, when in fact, he misinterpreted coincidental events as acts of his power.

"There comes a time, bhikkhus, when after the lapse of a long period this world contracts (disintegrates). While the world is
contracting, beings for the most part are reborn in the Ābhassara
Brahma-world. There they dwell, mind-made, feeding on rapture,
self-luminous, moving through the air, abiding in glory. And they
continue thus for a long, long period of time.
"But sooner or later, bhikkhus, after the lapse of a long period, there comes a time when this world begins to expand once again. While
the world is expanding, an empty palace of Brahmā appears. Then a
certain being, due to the exhaustion of his life-span or the
exhaustion of his merit, passes away from the Ābhassara plane and
re-arises in the empty palace of Brahmā. There he dwells, mind made,
feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the air, abiding in
glory. And he continues thus for a long, long period of time.
"Then, as a result of dwelling there all alone for so long a time, there arises in him dissatisfaction and agitation, (and he yearns):
'Oh, that other beings might come to this place!' Just at that moment,
due to the exhaustion of their life-span or the exhaustion of their
merit, certain other beings pass away from the Ābhassara plane and
re-arise in the palace of Brahmā, in companionship with him. There
they dwell, mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving
through the air, abiding in glory. And they continue thus for a long,
long period of time.
"Thereupon the being who re-arose there first thinks to himself: 'I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the
Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the Maker and Creator,
the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the Father of all that
are and are to be. And these beings have been created by me. What is
the reason? Because first I made the wish: "Oh, that other beings
might come to this place!" And after I made this resolution, now these
beings have come.'
"And the beings who re-arose there after him also think: 'This must be
Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the
Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the Maker and Creator,
the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the Father of all that
are and are to be. And we have been created by him. What is the
reason? Because we see that he was here first, and we appeared here
after him.'
"Herein, bhikkhus, the being who re-arose there first possesses longer life, greater beauty, and greater authority than the beings who
re-arose there after him.
"Now, bhikkhus, this comes to pass, that a certain being, after passing away from that plane, takes rebirth in this world. Having come
to this world, he goes forth from home to homelessness. When he has
gone forth, by means of ardor, endeavor, application, diligence, and
right reflection, he attains to such a degree of mental concentration
that with his mind thus concentrated he recollects his immediately
preceding life, but none previous to that. He speaks thus: 'We were
created by him, by Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the
Unvanquished, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the
Maker and Creator, the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the
Father of all that are and are to be. He is permanent, stable,
eternal, not subject to change, and he will remain the same just like
eternity itself. But we, who have been created by him and have come to
this world, are impermanent, unstable, short-lived, doomed to perish.'

I'm not sure what you mean by "other" but there's a lot of doctrine like Upaddha Sutta (SN 45.2) in the Pali canon.

Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life.

It is in dependence on me as an admirable friend that beings subject to birth have gained release from birth, that beings subject to aging have gained release from aging, that beings subject to death have gained release from death, that beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair have gained release from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.

For lay people too there is doctrine about social relations, with good friends or bad friends, parents, teachers, people you work with, and so on.
There's also Reference request for "the Buddha takes the Dhamma as his superior"
If the opposite of "other" is "self", then perhaps Buddhism in general is at least as much other-centred as self-centred.

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


text:
Anyone know about the use of the skull for magic in the Burmese traditions?
I am doing research on the Burmese Weikza traditions and wanted help as to the usage of the skull in their magical practices.

Peter
What ever magical practice that might be, it has nothing to do with the Buddha, Dhamma an the Sangha and is called "Animal Art" by the Buddha and a grave misconduct.
Wrong livelihood for contemplatives
So maybe the question is better placed outside of "Buddhism"
Skulls an bones are used as object of investigation and meditation, asuba-nimitta (object of unattractiveness), to gain high concentration if done right. Of coures such training in what is called Jhana, can lead to supranatural powers but such is not the aim just side effects of practicing.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other worldly gains.)

This doesn't answer the question, which I think asks "how are they used?" and not "should they be used?". According to the Wikipedia article this maybe is associated with "Buddhism in Burma", and is therefore on-topic on this site. I'm not asking you to recommend that people practice it, and of course you don't have to answer this question, but it is on-topic on this site. Also "it is misconduct" might be considered as advice, and not as an answer -- see Answers vs Advice for guidelines on that topic.

One might find that keeping an useful and healthy discussion in Buddhism, especially one that does not require strong and constant moderation, might require leaving some more outlying subjects out of the discussion.

Open a chat, it you like to discuss., @ChrisW . Or delete it, if it does not fit to your refuge. It's a gift.


text:
What is appropriate punishment for heinous crimes by Buddhist standards?
I've been looking into this lately and am curious how should we address crime and punishment? I know all about the story of Angulimala, but we can't expect all murders, rapist etc., to experience liberation in this fashion. If capital punishment  is out and so many seem opposed to excessively long  prison sentences what's the practical alternative? Yes programs and such to deal with the root cause of these issues are needed but in the here and now how can we best protect society and give these individuals an opportunity to reform.
Also people don't like the idea of prison as retaliation or revenge "justice", but shouldn't all social actions have social consequence other than just allowing for kamma? And maybe the social consequence of jail is your kamma.

All the current Buddhist-majority countries (including for example Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma, Bhutan, Vietnam, Korea) have prisons. Does that fact (i.e. that the governments of those countries consider it appropriate to have prisons) answer your question?

They do but government doesn't always act in accord with the layity, and many Buddhist, perhaps not in these countries, seem to be increasing against "punishment". But perhaps this is a western phenomenon.

Doing Time Doing Vipassana also might be of interest.

Though Buddhism does not make a stance on punishments, they should be there as a deterrent. But there should be also a opportunity to reform one self through the practice of Vipassana. Meditation will lead to reform, as it is latent tendencies of aversion, craving and ignorance which lead to crime, and meditation helps alleviate them.
I do not think capital punishment should be acceptable this does not give an opportunity to correct oneself is depriving of life.
Also see: Vipassana Meditation Courses For Correction Facilities, Doing Time Doing Vipassana

The Buddha did not involve much in issues of worlds normal sociaty and ways and never suggested any either laws nor ways of punishment or even ways of reconciliation for lay people.
The only touch points with the lay people are:
reconciliation (paṭisaraṇīya-kamma) and
"overturning the bowl" (patta-nikkujja-kamma) (BMCII - Relations with the laity)
He teaches "from that, this comes, with arising of that, this arises" and leaves the rest to the individual to concern and take his choice, generally.
How ever, in regard of his community of Monks (Nuns) he created the Vinaya (Discipline) as a measure for behaviour incl. also such things like punishments, ways of transactions of disciplinary issues and ways of rehabilitation. Althought there are people who like to call it early development of a legal system it differs from such:

Some writers have described these disciplinary measures as a Buddhist prototype for legal justice, either praising them for their insightful contribution to legal philosophy or criticizing them for their shortcomings as legal procedures. Both the praise and the criticism miss the point. Unlike most modern judicial procedures, these measures do not function as retributive justice. They are not retributive in that they are not ways of making the offender "pay" for his wrong doings (the principle of kamma will see to that); and, viewed in terms of retribution, they are unjust (or at least not necessarily fair) in that there is no concern that bhikkhus with equal offenses will undergo equal penalties. With the one exception of "further punishment" (see below), each allowance for imposing a disciplinary measure states that a Community if it wants to may impose the measure on a bhikkhu endowed with certain qualities. Only in the case of that exception do the texts say that it must do so. ― BMC2 - Disciplinary Transactions

For everybody who likes to know more about the system of function of Buddhas society, it's worthy to read more of the Buddhist Monastic Code II.
To understand Vinaya general, read the Introduction in Ven. Thanissaro's BMC I

"Discipline is for the sake of restraint, restraint for the sake of freedom from remorse, freedom from remorse for the sake of joy, joy for the sake of rapture, rapture for the sake of tranquility, tranquility for the sake of pleasure, pleasure for the sake of concentration, concentration for the sake of knowledge and vision of things as they have come to be, knowledge and vision of things as they have come to be for the sake of disenchantment, disenchantment for the sake of dispassion, dispassion for the sake of release, release for the sake of knowledge and vision of release, knowledge and vision of release for the sake of total unbinding through non-clinging." — Pv.XII.2

It's worthy to note that the part-taking on the community as well as to it's standards is voluntary and so most means, which are based on willingness to stick to them, see the welfare of the development of each individual as prior. The whole system would not really work for a strong corrupted heart and others as the usual of wordily systems it's very needed to approch the standards with the will to be without a mistake and joyful to fulfil the standards of the Noble One and bend one tendencies rather to study the standards to find possible ways to stick by ones desires without being touchable. For a strongly corrupted heart this tools would work for ones personal welfar.
The transactions are always "punished" by the need of confession, and if the misdeeds are stronger penalties can (! Note, don't must, exept in some cases) layed down by the community.
The heavierst punishments is the leave of the order without any possibility to join again and cover heavy offences in regard of taking life, taking what is not given, sexual intercourse and lying.
There are no kind of physical punishments aside of restrictions from certain use of community properties and benefits.
There is also nothing like a physical prision.
How ever, in regard of prision one should understand the holly life or to ordain as monk or nun like a volunatary imprisoning to bend ones ways and who ever sees such as a gift and way to actually win over oneself and get right of any defilement, become a upright person, a Noble One, uses the support of the Noble Sangha and his tools right and for the benefit of him/her self and all others.
It's a very lage topic and it's not right to say that a society would function without any system of regulation and precrepts.
If many would take on the voluntary imprisoning within a community of admirable friends and elders and always seek for them, nothing than best posdible peace can be aspected. A peaceful and righteous life and community around on depends on ones own past and present efforts to give such to his/her community and its members first.
In ways of demanding and call for rights problems will naturally increase for societies of people merely hold such views. Such communities break apart within a very short time and such appereances thought of positive, called revolutions, destroying all means hardly developed over long time.
Althought there are often undertakings from such as "buddhist" lawyer to develop systems of Vinaya also for normal sociaties, it's not really possible and always would lead to misunderstandings since the aims of the individualls are different, for the world is becoming and for the Sangha of Buddhas disciples going beyond becoming and possible keep such an alternative as long as possible alive in this world.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for any commercial purpose or other wordily gains)

Only a puttujana has the desire, has faith in the desire, faith in the action on this desire and act on this desire to punish people who do not behave like the he wishes people would behave.

I normally don't down vote, but I don't  believe this addresses the central issue of dealing with crime and punishment in our contemporary world. Could you elaborate?

A proper answer, could be that no-arahats still have such slight desires, not tought about it. Its of course good to explain the meaning of puttujana and why it so than will not be found in Buddhas teachings in worldly ways.

Buddhism does not establish norms for crime & punishment. There are numerous examples in the Pali suttas were the Buddha comments, in an accepting manner, on the punishment inflicted by the secular government for bad kamma, including execution.
Buddhism is not the same as Judaism & Islam. It is not political. It does not proscribe punishment for sins.

So as lay Buddhist should we be concerned about things like capital punishment, excessively long prison terms, inequality in sentencing?

A Buddhist lay person can give their opinion where they can & hold a more humane view.

The prison system doesn't reform anyone unfortunately. It just perpetuates the situation. Treating people like animals and placing them in a violent and dehumanising environment makes even worse criminals. Sadly our society seems to turn a blind eye to this situation but it is at our own peril as many of these people will be released back into the community at some point and most will commit more crimes. What needs reforming is the entire system.  I know that vipassana meditation is taught in some prisons and works very well.

I think many people would share your views about the system @Arturia . But many would argue that we need to offer more than just Vipassana. I'm not trying to be fecicious, but we can't just offer meditation to violent repeat offenders. Is there a humane way to protect society and at the the same time make sure these individuals get it.

Punishment is not appropriate in Buddhism. Probably, criminals would receive wise-education, patience and compassion  in place of punishment, in an ideal Buddhist society.
We are criminals, we are saints, we are average people, we are eccentric individuals, we are the disabled and we are the criminals. Societies are all the time wanting revenge and sometimes societies even want to kill somebody. That sounds something like someone  throwing their finger away because their fingernail got smashed in the car door. -metta

So for a serial child molester, you who prescribe  education, patience and compassion, while allowing him to continue walking the street?

Of course not. Now how compassionate would we be if we just let the sleepwalking walk? We must guide them back. Compassion often involves discipline too. Imagine a world were all are satisfied with just what they need. I never said it was practical at this time but things can change awfully fast.

m2015 We don't need revenge or deturance

@m2015 We only need just what we need and we don't need punishment that is meant to cause suffering...  Holding the sick in bed  is compassionate and not imprisonment. Chriminals are the sick.-


text:
Did the Buddha ever delve on the dangers of one's own spirtual achievements feeding the ego?
This question came up when I really thought back on both my and many others' spiritual journey. In the New Age community, especially, the sense of viewing things as illusions and making progress in one's spiritual path can easily steer you to be more condescending or arrogant (i.e viewing others as somehow lesser or more immature than you) and in the process, feed the Ego.
Often you see this in spiritual teachers as well, who seemed to have, in their journeys to eliminate the Ego, fueled their Ego.
Did the enlightened Buddha ever touch on this subject?

There is one good example of the Buddha delving on the dangers of one's own spirtual achievements feeding the ego.  It is that of the erudite monk called Potila. Buddha dismissed him with just one word “THUCCA POTILA”  (meaning empty Potila), because he only taught others, but did not practice. It was his EGO that prevented him from achieving even the level of a stream entrant. The story is best described in THIS BLOG.

During the time of the Buddha there was a bhikkhu named Pötila, who was well-versed with deep Dhamma concepts and was a well known teacher; he had developed abhinna powers as well, but had not attained even the Sotapanna stage. His desanas (discourses) were deep and only those at the Anagami stage (at least Sotapanna stage) could follow them and get to Arahanthood. One day he went to see the Buddha, paid respects, and told the Buddha that he had been a Dhamma teacher during the times of several earlier Buddhas too, and helped many to attain Nibbana (Arahantship).
The Buddha asked him whether he has attained any magga phala and Bhikkhu Potila admitted that he had not. The Buddha just commented: ”Thucca Potila” and turned his attention to other matters; thucca (pronounced “thuchcha”) in Pali means despicable or “lowly”.
So, bhikkhu Potila, who had expected praise from the Buddha for helping others, realized that he needs to work on his own salvation before helping others. He strived by himself and could not make any progress; he was trying very hard to “give up all attachments”, following the same instructions he was giving others. But no matter how hard he tried, he could not succeed.
When he sought help from other bhikkhus, they were reluctant to become his teacher because everyone knew he was very knowledgeable in Dhamma. Eventually, he went to this very young Arahant, who was well-known for his teaching abilities, and sought help. The young Arahant agreed to help, only if bhikkhu Potila agreed to carry out everything as instructed, and Potila agreed.
The young Arahant decided to use an unusual kammatthana (instructions). He took Potila to a large area covered by mud, and asked him to wade into the mud and keep going until told to stop. Potila started wading in mud and kept going until he was told to stop when the mud was all the way up to his chin; he was barely able to move at this point because mud was heavy.
The Arahant told him that, “if someone is stuck in mud like that any knowledge about cleaning oneself by taking a bath is not going to help. One needs to get out of the mud first”.
Then he asked Potila to come back. Potila had great difficulty in moving forward initially, since he was all the way up to the chin in thick and heavy mud. While dragging himself out of the mud with great difficulty, Potila realized what the young Arahant was talking about. It is not possible to get out of mud until one realizes that one is stuck there, and getting out of mud required sheer will power. Similarly, he had not realized that he was stuck at a much lower moral level; he needed to cleanse his mind first.
The “giving up” part comes with a mind that has removed the wrong visions (micca ditthi); and that comes via comprehending anicca, dukkha, anatta. If someone at a level below at least the Sotapanna stage, “giving up worldly things” is not possible; that could easily lead to patigha or “friction” or “anger with oneself for giving up things”. One’s mind has not advanced to that stage yet.
The simile can be made even better by looking at what happens to ants who get stuck in honey. Here unlike mud, the sense pleasures are appealing and there is no incentive to get out either. Those ants who get stuck in honey, would not even try to get out because they are too busy enjoying the honey. Even when they are barely stuck, and can move out of honey, they would not because they like the taste of honey. Just like that, any living being, whether a human or even the lowly worm, likes to indulge in the sense pleasures, and thus gets stuck.
And even when one realizes that one needs to get out of “the honey pot” it is hard, at least initially.
  For that one needs to see the perils of staying in this rebirth process, where birth in lower four realms will lead to unimaginable suffering. Even if one can strive to be born in higher realms, that will not last long. This is “anicca“: no matter how hard we try to find refuge in the 31 realms it is not possible to do so in the long run.
With much effort, Potila slowly made his way up to the waist level, and started feeling the lightness of being free of mud. He could now move faster too. He felt the relief when he was out the mud, and was asked to go and take a shower. Now, cleaning up with soap could be done; but while stuck in mud, there was no use of soap and water. Just like that the deep Dhamma that he had memorized was of no use to him while he was still stuck in mud.
Eventually, when one comes out the mud that is like the Sotapanna level. One is still covered with mud, i.e., one still likes to enjoy sense pleasure. But now one KNOWS that one needs to take a shower, use soap and shampoo, and remove all that mud.

Good share, Sadhu! Even not sure where the rendered story comes from. Upasaka Lal has some good motivating stories, having grow in his culture. Maybe here also a like to the Dhammapada commentary, it's canonical rescource: The Story of Thera Potthila

Certainly. The Buddha included 'conceit' as the 8th of 10 fetters to be broken for full enlightenment.
Some quotes:

There are these ten fetters. Which ten? Five lower fetters & five higher fetters. And which are the five lower fetters? Self-identity
  views, uncertainty, grasping at precepts & practices, sensual desire
  & ill will. These are the five lower fetters. And which are the five
  higher fetters? Passion for form, passion for what is formless,
  conceit, restlessness & ignorance. These are the five higher fetters.
  And these are the ten fetters.
AN 10.13

(33) Others will be arrogant; we shall not be arrogant here — thus effacement can be done.
MN 8

72. To his own ruin the fool gains knowledge, for it cleaves his head and destroys his innate goodness.
73. The fool seeks undeserved reputation, precedence among monks, authority over monasteries, and honor among householders.
74. "Let both laymen and monks think that it was done by me. In every work, great and small, let them follow me" — such is the ambition of
  the fool; thus his desire and pride increase.
75. One is the quest for worldly gain and quite another is the path to Nibbana. Clearly understanding this, let not the monk, the disciple
  of the Buddha, be carried away by worldly acclaim, but develop
  detachment instead.
94. Even the gods hold dear the wise one, whose senses are subdued like horses well trained by a charioteer, whose pride is destroyed and who is free from the cankers.
Dhammapada

I believe this is the context of Sotapätti. A person who is a Sotäpatti stream winner doesn't have sakkäyaditti (illusion of a souls). Thus, having ego is like feeding your own meditation practice with harmful assumptions of a ego-full self. This will therefore be an impediment to becoming a stream winner.
To answer the question, "I believe" Buddha's teachings are geared toward getting rid of ego.

Surely one of the best similes of the Buddha goes those:

In have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rājagaha on Vulture Peak mountain, not long after Devadatta had left. Referring to Devadatta, the Blessed One addressed the monks:... Maha Saropama Sutta: The Longer Heartwood-simile

The linked text references 'heedlessness' which seems here to mean being caught up in one's own thoughts about a situation. Is this what you mean about ego as a hindrance? Thank you.

If like to use this words, yes. Being proud on one self, one becomes 'heedless' (pamada), or conscienceless, especially about his own person, not having found liberation yet, still subject to birth, old age and death. Appamada! Be heedfull covers the whole Practice in one word, MrMrs NoComprende. (Ego is not a hindrance perse, actually it one of the three forces one can relay on to work and be heedfull)

@nocomprende In this topic (i.e. to answer the OP's question) people are interpreting the word "ego" to mean something like the Pali word for "conceit" or "pride" (which people also explained in the answers to this question). And when Samana Johann mentioned that "being proud" is "one of the three forces one can rely on", I think that might have been a reference to "food, craving, and conceit" e.g. as described in this sutta.

Or some of the answers (i.e. this one and maybe this one) are referring to "identity-view" or "self-view" (for which, see also the answers to this topic).

@ChrisW I suppose 'ego' can be used in various ways. I mean: the part of one at "acts for self" in ways that we would describe as selfish. It cannot really understand or empathize with others. The next stage, self without ego, I call Neo. Then nonduality - no self.

Yes!what Lord Buddha taught is to give up your ego. Ego is the destroyer of ypur path to nirvana. Ego will ruin everything.but we cling to our ego and that vagues our path to understand what is life and nirvana.

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


text:
Sutta Reference - Sound and musical instruments metaphors in the Suttas
I am looking for a specific sutta wherein the conditionality and insubstantiality of the existential process of a sentient being, or consciousness, is made plain by use of the simile of a resonating musical instrument being struck by the player's hand, the sound of which, resonating for awhile, then slowly fades away.
Any references, anyone ?
Thanks :)

Ha, I got it at last. This is taken from a footnote in the book 'The Workings of Kamma' : ... The Buddha makes this kind of distinction when He explains that the tune of a lute is not waiting inside the lute, but arises owing to conditions:
the physical components of the lute and the musician's playing on it
(S.IV.I.xix.9 'Vm-Opama-Suttam' ('The Lute-Simile Sutta')). And
VsM.xx.723 'Magg-Amagga-Ndna-Dassana-Visuddhi-Niddeso' ('Ex-
position of the Path&Non-Path-Knowledge & Vision Purification')
PP.xx.96 explains also: '. . .

This is a partial index of the similes and metaphors that appear in the suttas available at Access to Insight (/ZzE). Only the imagery that illustrates points of Dhamma is included here; imagery that serves primarily a literary or narrative function is not included (e.g., Ambapali's description of her long-lost youthful beauty). The subject of each image is given in the braces {}. The tilde (~) stands for the head-word in a given entry... Index of Similes

Tuning a stringed instrument:
{right effort} AN 6.55
Meta-ontopic-Drum:

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves." - Ani Sutta: The Peg/Drum

In reagard of the meaning behind in proper context:
Painting of a woman or man:
{not-self} SN 22.100; {nutriment} SN 12.64
May it be of the origins use for you, Fabien

Why the downvotes to this answer? Can someone explain?

SN 35.246 is close but not quite.

“Suppose, bhikkhus, there was a king or a royal minister who had never before heard the sound of a lute. He might hear the sound of a
  lute and say: ‘Good man, what is making this sound—so tantalizing, so
  lovely, so intoxicating, so entrancing, so enthralling?’
  They would say to him: ‘Sire, it is a lute that is making this
  sound—so tantalizing, so lovely, so intoxicating, so entrancing, so
  enthralling.’ He would reply: ‘Go, man, bring me that lute.’
“They would bring him the lute and tell him: ‘Sire, this is that lute, the sound of which was so tantalizing, so lovely, so
  intoxicating, so entrancing, so enthralling.’ The king would say:
  ‘I’ve had enough with this lute, man. Bring me just that sound.’ The
  men would reply: ‘This lute, sire, consists of numerous components, of
  a great many components, and it gives off a sound when it is played
  upon with its numerous components; that is, in dependence on the
  parchment sounding board, the belly, the arm, the head, the strings,
  the plectrum, and the appropriate effort of the musician. So it is,
  sire, that this lute consisting of numerous components, of a great
  many components, gives off a sound when it is played upon with its
  numerous components.’
“The king would split the lute into ten or a hundred pieces, then he would reduce these to splinters. Having reduced them to splinters, he
  would burn them in a fire and reduce them to ashes, and he would
  winnow the ashes in a strong wind or let them be carried away by the
  swift current of a river. Then he would say: ‘A poor thing, indeed
  sir, is this so-called lute, as well as anything else called a lute.
  How the multitude are utterly heedless about it, utterly taken in by
  it!’
“So too, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu investigates form to the extent that there is a range for form, he investigates feeling to the extent that
  there is a range for feeling, he investigates perception to the extent
  that there is a range for perception, he investigates volitional
  formations to the extent that there is a range for volitional
  formations, he investigates consciousness to the extent that there is
  a range for consciousness. As he investigates form to the
  extent that there is a range for form … consciousness to the extent
  that there is a range for consciousness, whatever notions of ‘I’ or
  ‘mine’ or ‘I am’ had occurred to him before no longer occur to him.”

AN 8.46 not close but interesting.

Those deities sang, one danced, and one snapped her fingers. Just as, when a musical quintet is well trained and its rhythm well
  coordinated, and it is composed of skilled musicians, its music is
  exquisite, tantalizing, lovely, captivating, and intoxicating,
  just so those deities’ performance was exquisite,
  tantalizing, lovely, captivating and intoxicating. Thereupon the
  Venerable Anuruddha drew in his sense faculties. Then those deities,
  thinking: “Master Anuruddha is not enjoying this,” disappeared right
  on the spot.

Ha, thank you so much @Dhammadhatu :) I knew about SN 35.246 which is, as you say, not quite close :) But for the life of me, I can't remember where I saw that simile :)