text:
Is there a pali term for "natural concentration"?
In the book, "Handbook for mankind" Buddhadhasa Bikkhu describes two types of concentration:

One "as a result of organized practice", which he refers to as vipassana-dhura, and is mentioned in post-tipitaka commentaries.
One that "come about naturally".

In the text, there are no pali words given for the latter, and the only reference given is that it is described in the Tipitaka.
My questions are,

Is there a name in pali for the latter type?
Are there specific descriptions of the second type of concentration somewhere in the tipitaka or elsewhere?

(Please note that i'm not asking for the correctness, efficacy, or other evaluations of the statements above. This is primarily a reference request).

I used to study Ajahn Buddhadasa very comprehensively. However, Handbook For Mankind was a book I was never partial towards. While it contains many basic teachings, I always found the verbal style of delivery difficult or abrasive to read. However, merely browsing and offering an answer:

The book is from 1956 lectures the Venerable Buddhadasa Bhikkhu gave to a group of prospective judges. Therefore, the two chapters on meditation are addressed to laypeople.
The chapter on "Nature Method" concludes: "Summing up, natural concentration and insight, which enable a person to attain the Path and the Fruit, consist in verifying all day and every day the truth of the statement that nothing is worth getting or being."
The statement: "nothing is worth getting or being" essentially comes from MN 37. It is a statement of Right Understanding: Samma Ditthi.
In his book Heartwood From The Bo Tree, Bhikkhu Buddhadasa said about concentration: "As for samadhi, an empty mind is the supreme samadhi, the supremely focused firmness of mind. The straining and striving sort of samadhi isn't the real thing and the samadhi which aims at anything other than non-clinging to the five khandas is micchasamadhi (wrong or perverted samadhi). You should be aware that there is both micchasamadhi and sammasamadhi (right or correct samadhi). Only the mind that is empty of grasping at and clinging to 'I' and 'mine' can have the true and perfect stability of sammasamadhi. One who has an empty mind has correct samadhi."
To conclude, the teachings above by Bhikkhu Buddhadasa accord with the following sutta teachings about samadhi:

sattahaṅgehi cittassa ekaggatā parikkhatā sammādiṭṭhi pubbaṅgamā: mind with single intent equipped with seven factors in use where right view is the leader (MN 117)
samādhindriyaṃ vossaggārammaṇaṃ: faculty of concentration reliant upon letting go (SN 48.10)
samādhisambojjhaṅgaṃ vivekanissitaṃ virāganissitaṃ nirodhanissitaṃ vossaggapariṇāmiṃ: concentration factor of enlightenment that relies on solitude, dispassion & cessation maturing as letting go (MN 118).

In summary, "natural concentration" means "concentration without craving".

Concentration (ekaggatā), the mental focus on one object to the exclusion of all other objects is a universal mental state applicable to all mental states. I have concentration even when I type this answer.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel322.html

For the benefit of all I would like to share my experience. Organized Concentration can be attained through practice. We can focus on the five aggregates or Truths and thus achieve concentration.
But natural concentration is also interesting. You find it everywhere. As child I craved for entertainment. I was highly concentrated while watching cartoon on TV. So much so that any disturbance was highly opposed.  If you have lost ability to naturally concentrate then the good news is that you can regain that strength. You need to discover your passion.Know what you really want and give your heart to it.
I find myself concentrated when things do not work and I become obsessed with trying to fix it. I do not like broken things. That is my passion now a days. I become naturally concentrated...I am effortless in trying to concentrate. That is what I think is the meaning of natural concentration.

Thanks for your answer. Unfortunately, i don't see how this answers either of my questions.

You asked for reference. Sorry I don't have. You can vote to close the answer if it doesn't help in anyway.

Users can't vote-to-close answers (only questions) -- but users can "flag" an answer for a moderator (who can delete answers). And users with a reputation of 4000 or higher can vote to delete downvoted answers.


text:
Does anyone recognise this haiku?
I was staying at samye ling Tibetan monastery in Scotland and writing a lot of poetry. I wrote this haiku in one go without any consideration or counting syllables, and did not feel as if I wrote it. It is much better than my usual standard:
Palms open fingers spread,
Serenity offered,
The mind now awake.
Does anyone recognise it? I am certain that I have no conscious memory of reading these words or any similar lines and am equally sure that they are not my invention! I would appreciate any insight into how they came to be. I have not subsequently experienced anything like this.

Your big mind wanted to say hello.  Keep practicing and he’ll tell you even more.

Thank you for your response, my big mind and the illusory collection of achetypal traits which currently represent myself are in constant communication! The experience felt like it had more of an  independent nature. Possible hypotheses I am considering are either I had read this before ( unlikely ) or that I had been an unwitting medium.

If that’s your working theory, you’re probably barking up the wrong tree posting on a Buddhist Q&A site.  Don’t attach too much importance to the source.  It could wind up becoming an obstacle.

@Joedean7 - I see no reason think you were a medium, if there is such a thing, but I do remember recording a Schubert Impromptu once and feeling that the composer was standing next to me the whole way through, and the experience was so real it's always made me wonder.  ,

I've never come across it. I like it. To me it doesn't have the impact we expect from Basho and his like but this is an unfair comparison.
If the last line was simply 'awake' it would work better imho, more sudden, even if the form would be compromised. To say, 'The mind now awake' is to open a can of worms, since some would say such a thing is impossible,

Thanks, it had to be 17 syllables which normally I would have been counting but in this instance I wasn't. I had only started writing haiku at the time as a response to zen koans and that one just kind of wrote itself. I was possibly reacting to a buddhist atmosphere with my subconscious perhaps more focused than usual?

And I think mind awakens now maybe?

Wrong way round! Now mind awoken?

@Joedean7 - The mind cannot awake. One could say that it is realising this that is awakening.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How can we correlate Buddhist cosmology with astronomical cosmology?
How can we correlate Buddhist cosmology with astronomical cosmology? Basically I have following questions.

Moon is considered 51 yojan in height and 50 is the sun. Sun is self illuminated and heat is the outward. Inner is made of diamond. But with modern physics sun is extremely large star fueled by nuclear reactions. Moreover are stars and planets are small elements or are stars like sun as in astronomy?
Is Earth flat or sphere?
Where can you find the great Mahameru mountain? In science there's an opinion of center of the Galaxy. But it's an opinion and not a theoretical teaching.
Can a loka dathu have one moon and sun each or more? Sun and moon is rotating around great Mahameru Mountain. Then how can we correlate that with moon orbiting around earth and Earth orbiting around sun.
Is Jambudweepa mentioned is the entire earth or is a part of Earth? Where can we find the other 4 continents.

Since there are lots of opinion based answers on internet, I would like if there is a more theoretical answer. Thank you all. May you all attain Nirvana. Theruvan Saranai.

Much of Buddhist Cosmology is found in commentarial literature and has some parallels with the cosmology of the time with many elements shared in Asian religions.

OP: Where can you find the great Mahameru mountain?

This is in some opinions centre of the universe.
The following quote is from the Hindu interpretation:

In the middle, the power point (bindu) represents the cosmic center.

Source: Shri Yantra
A 3D image of it is as follows:

or

OP: Can a loka dathu have one moon and sun each or more?

This is akin to more a solar system with planets in current terminology.

OP: Where can we find the other 4 continents.

Space is divided into 4 quadrants and these are the continents in some opinions. So the whole world is part of one continent.
More like what is found here:

Source: Supercluster
For more information see:

Buddhist Cosmology by Ajahn Sona
THE BUDDHIST COSMOS: A Comprehensive Survey of the Early Buddhist Worldview; according to Theravāda and Sarvsātivāda sources By Punnadhammo Mahāthero
Parallel universes by Piya Tan

Thank you for your answer

Is this flat or 3d model?

It's a 3D model.

Dharma does not answer these questions for you. Buddhism is all about verifying and not just accepting dogma as facts based on faith alone.
Consider what His Holiness says here carefully:

His Holiness remarked that it is because the Buddha’s teachings can
  be presented in terms of logic and reasoning that aspects of them
  dealing with the mind and so forth are of interest to scientists.
  Logic and reason also have a role in relation to the three objects of
  knowledge—phenomena that are manifest and obvious; others that are
  slightly hidden and yet others that are very hidden. To understand
  extremely hidden phenomena it’s necessary to rely on textual authority
  or an experienced person.
His Holiness clarified that teachings about topics like emptiness can
  be verified by experience and declared that he has chosen to reject
  the existence of Mount Meru explicitly because neither he nor anyone
  else has any experience of it. He suggested that if it existed we
  should be able to see it as we travel around the world—and we do not.
  He added that the reason the Buddha appeared in the world was to teach the Four Noble Truths, not the measurements of the world or
  other aspects of cosmology.

What matter are these aspects of cosmology to your heartfelt practice of Buddha Dharma??!!

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


text:
Is wanting to do something = desire?
Is wanting to do something = desire ? Doesn't enlightened people want to do anything ? They just react to whatever comes ? ( "react" may not be a suitable word).
A related question that I hope to ask in Buddhism SE: How a enlightened monk differs from a enlightened lay person ?
As I know:

Monks have intention to teach dhamma to others.
Monks can live more than 7 days.

The first one have some relation to this question.

An enlightened mind has eradicated the fetters that bound that mind with wandering around with suffering born from ignorance and craving.
What kind of craving?
In the Discourse of the Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma (SN 56.11), the Buddha said this about the kind of desires than bind to suffering and dissatisfaction:

"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.

These three kinds of craving are called Tanha, or 'thirst'. As the objects desired from that thirst are impermanent, the emotional and mental thirst is never quenched by getting this or that object.
Other kinds of desire may still arise for the enlightened mind. The main difference is that such kinds do not lead to suffering, because ignorant expectations, assumptions and generalizations about the world have been uprooted. For such liberated mind, the task has been done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world.
Kind regards!

Is wanting to do something = desire ?
Not really. Wanting to do something is a thought process.
In Buddhism, desire (Taṇhā) refers to greed or craving pleasure, material goods, and immortality, all of which are wants that can never be satisfied as the world is impermanent in nature and it is always subjected to change. This causes suffering. People generally desire a better life, family, children, money, cars, boats, planes, vacations etc. All these things which are impermanent.
Enlightened people do not possess material craving. Followers of Buddhism tries to mitigate these desires and understand that everything is impermanent. Yes, they do feel hunger, they do feel pain and pleasure but they understand that both pleasures and sufferings are impermanent. For example, a normal person might crave luxurious food while an enlightened person might only eat food just to survive and stay alive.
"Monks have intention to teach dhamma to others"
The monks intention to teach Dhamma is not done for the pleasure or for greed of spreading the religion. If I am not mistaken,  I think there are some guidelines for monks when leading an ascetic life and some of them do require a monk to teach so more people open their eyes.
How a enlightened monk differs from an enlightened lay person ?
A monk would abide by the guides related to being a monk such as preaching Dhamma and any other responsibilities set around a monkhood. Lay person is not given these rules hence might live a quiet life. Either way both have understood the impermanence taught in Buddhism and will have no material craving. If by enlightment you mean attained nirvana, they will no longer have another life. ( Remember there are stages of enlightenment. More explained here.

Is wanting to do something = desire ?

Abhidhamma...

Thinking to do can be wholesome, unwholesome, or neither wholesome nor unwholesome.
Thinking to attach  can be unwholesome only.

When one thinks to eat, he can eat by  wholesome, unwholesome, or neither wholesome nor unwholesome. His mind is unwholesome by desiring in eating, wanting to eat more and more without proper reason.

Doesn't enlightened people want to do anything ? They just react to whatever comes ? ( "react" may not be a suitable word).

The Arahant want to do the best for people without attachment. The enlightened people are not a robot. They react by developed wisdom. The developed wisdom is automatic, but it is adaptable for peoples' 6 advantages. The robots can't act like that because they still are programmed.

A related question that I hope to ask in Buddhism SE: How an enlightened monk differs from an enlightened lay person?

They are the same, but Vinaya Rules are forcing all monks, either enlightened or not, to teach in the way leading Dhamma to 5,000 years. In Vinaya's commentary commented "The Arahants' job is reciting, memorizing, and understanding whole Tipitaka." Every enlighten people should teach and memorize Tipitaka. Vinaya and commentary allowed even the ordinary in reciting and teaching the Dhamma, but the Vinaya and it's commentary focus on Arahanta and all Buddhist Teachers, either enlightened or not, in memorizing Tipitaka because they has no left meditation for enlightenment to do. That's why the Buddha denied the monks to keep foods for eating, the Buddha forced the Arahant to meet people and teach them.


text:
How do you understand the Cakkavatti Sutta?
https://suttacentral.net/dn26/en/sujato
How could humans have lived 80 000 years in the past? And how could we live 10 years in the future, with people reaching sexual maturity at five, when life expectancy is constantly increasing?

I have never read the sutta. Bhikkhu Sujato wrote:

The Dīgha contains truly mythic texts in DN 26 Cakkavattisīhanāda and DN 27 Aggañña. These set forth a myth of origins, replacing conventional creation mythology with an evolutionary account of how the world came to be the way it is. In these stories, human choices play a critical role in how the environment evolves, and in how it will all fall apart. The Aggañña depicts climate change quite explicitly, showing how human activity affects the plants, the weather, and the natural ecosystem of which we are a part (see also AN 3.56).
The mythology is essentially cyclic. There is no absolute beginning; just another turning of the wheel. Thus even when the world falls apart and civilization collapses, there will be a new renaissance, far in the future, and ultimately another Buddha will arise. He is named as Metteyya (Sanskrit: Maitreya) who in the early texts appears only in DN 26 Cakkavattisīhanāda. He went on to become one of the most important figures in Mahāyāna Buddhism, and many Buddhists even today still await his coming with hope. Yet DN 26 is not taught in order to encourage devotees to dedicate themselves to Metteyya, but to illustrate the impermanence and uncertainty of our lives. The Buddha always taught that we should practice as best we can to understand the Dhamma in this life.
The Long Discourses: Dhamma as literature and compilation

Life expectancy in the human realm (collectively all humanoid planets in the universe) vary based on the ethics of the era. Ethics generally progress or deteriorate. This determines life expectancy. The humans who lived 80,000 did not necessarily live on planet earth.
See my answer to: How can we correlate Buddhist cosmology with astronomical cosmology? for more colour on this.

In general, one way to try to understand a difficult sutta is to read what Piya Tan says about it -- http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/
His translations include footnotes, references to commentary and other authors.

One of the comments from the introduction to this sutta, DN 16:

Steven Collins’ critical remark on the Sutta is helpful here:

[The Cakka,vatti Sīha,nāda Sutta] depicts life in time, however good or bad, as slightly absurd;
    and therefore its opposite, timeless nirvana, as the only serious thing in the long run. I suggest that
    the intention (at least in part) of the long-drawn-out sequence of decline and revival, in all its detailed specificity, numerical and otherwise, and also of the humor and irony of the parable, is to
    induce in its audiences—or at least to make possible as a reaction from some among them—a
    sense of detachment from, or at least a (briefly) non-involved perspective on the passage of time.

... which isn't a very satisfying explanation, but what do you expect? :-)

My personal understanding of it is presumably unorthodox, but for what it's worth that includes:

The sutta's subject being a "wheel-turning monarch" suggests that's maybe a later sutta e.g. developed for king Ashoka -- I can't imagine why that would have been an interesting topic for "early Buddhists" (like it was argued in this answer that the idea of a "next Buddha" probably didn't arise while the original Buddha was still teaching).
The thesis is that this age (aeon) is worse than before but not as bad as it is going to be. That kind of reminds me of the doctrine that being born human is a good time to practice Buddhism -- maybe better than when you're born in one of the higher or the lower realms.


text:
Can the energy generated through meditation neutralize the covid 19 corona virus?
Many yogis have extraordinary experiences in terms of generating physical and mental energy through meditation. These experiences could be on a broad spectrum, ranging at one end, from a few hours or a few days of being turbo charged with energy and on the other end, as mentioned in our scriptures, to incredible feats of energy performed by saints and enlightened beings. For instance, the Gospel of Thomas verse 106 refers to energy that can move a mountain. The moment of the Buddha's Enlightenment is said to have rocked the universe. At a time when the entire planet is being 'rocked' by a virus, with no vaccine in the foreseeable future, would it be worth our while to collectively shift our focus to build a degree of resistance to the virus through extended hours of meditation whilst in lockdown at home and also to encourage others to do so?

This is too close to a medical question for my comfort and as such is off topic.

Well it can make you happily accept the virus :)

There needs to be a stricter formal policy against magical-thinking types of questions; they tend to get voted down into oblivion, on a know-one-when-I-see-one basis, but that doesn't really explain to people why their questions were banned.
All the health-wealth-sex-love-fame-and-success questions seem to be designed to attract only crank answers; and would have only crank answers, if they weren't promptly closed. Questions about where-can-I-find-a-truly-enlightened-guru-who-can-fix-everything seem to fall into the same category (and seem to attract unfortunate answers from messianic claimants) as well as the questions about how-can-I-physically-levitate-and-read-minds.
Questions of this sort (and the answers they receive) seem to harm the credibility of a site designed for serious academic study of historical Buddhist thought.  And more significantly have the potential to mislead vulnerable people.  People who are inclined to earnestly ask questions like that on a site like this are obviously vulnerable.  Ideally there'd be a bot that would automatically reply to mystical truth-seekers that the Buddhist Sangha doesn't and didn't exist for these purposes, citing scriptural justification from authentic suttas.
While somebody might believe that meditation "should" prevent COVID-19 infection, might feel that one karmically "deserves" to be uninfected, and might attempt to construe certain suttas to support that view... it remains that there is not one known case of meditation preventing COVID-19 infection.  It would be irresponsible in the extreme to suggest that meditation can prevent COVID-19 infection.

Right, well that's a fair opinion. I find it difficult to generalise though -- i.e. to formulate as a general rule and then follow/implement that rule --  e.g. the site has allowed topics about suicide and all sorts; the site's Moderation policies for Questions is (by its community's request) unusually permissive. So-called "bad" (or confused) questions are ideally an opportunity for good answers. Still, it's quite unusual for there to be two votes-to-close a question (as there are currently), perhaps I should take the hint and close it.

I hope that this site has been, for whatever reason, mostly free of the kind of question you identify in the second paragraph. But I do think that the site tries to serve two purposes -- "serious academic study of historical Buddhist thought", but also "practical" questions i.e. related to personal practice/understanding/life. Also maybe we should be stricter about answers than about questions -- tolerate "crank" question but less so crank answers. What do you think of the existing answer to this question -- do you see a way to improve that, or a need to delete it?

Please see this new meta-topic: Should there be an explicit policy against “Magical thinking” questions?

"The Path of Purification" - Visuddhimagga XXII.46     ( English translation by Bhikkhu Nanamoli - Osbert Moore), refers to the Coupling of Tranquility Power and Insight Power at the Noble Path Moment. This is a Power that leads from a Mundane to a Supramundane Consciousness.  Yogis who practice this meditation generate vast amounts of energy. At a time the planet is in pain due to the corona virus, it is opportune to share our knowledge/experience for the benefit of others. Uni of California (UCLA) has in 2015  reported the mitigating effect of mindfulness meditation on the HIV Aids virus.

...to build a degree of resistance to the virus through extended hours of meditation whilst in lockdown at home and also to encourage others to do so?

Actually scientific research on meditation does prove that it reduces stress level and the Cortisol stress hormone, hence giving a boost to one's own immune system. But with that said, during lockdown, one shouldn't just solely do sitting meditation. Don't forget to do some real physical exercises also. That'd make a win-win combo. Stay safe everyone!

What research are you referring to?

Lots of them: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=meditation+reduces+stress+research+says&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

No, and this is very dangerous thinking. It MAY increase the robustness of your immune system but you will not be invincible because you sat and focused on your breath for 10 minutes.

@MB, I never said that meditation absolutely helps one's immune system. But it can't hurt to try and even scientists suggested that: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/women-autism-spectrum-disorder/202003/3-reasons-meditate-in-the-battle-against-coronavirus
. Also, that's why I emphasized the need for real physical exercises in my post.

Metta meditation in times like this might help if I am to speculate, as it generates much positive karma. But there is not definitive that the positive collective karma generated might specifically help with Coronavirus situation as karmic consequences are only truly understood by a Buddha. Nevertheless, if many people can do Metta meditation there will be some positive outcome.
Thought meditation is definitely a worth and good use of one's time spent in lockdown possibly also having a positive impact it is also absolutely necessary to take all needed medical precautions and not doing so would seriously out weight the positive benefits reaped from meditation.

Besides Metta, Mindfulness Meditation has been scientifically established as a means of mitigating the effect of the HIV Aids virus by the University of California (UCLA). The Chief Abbot of the New York Centre of the Ramakrishna Mission quotes the Buddha, whilst unfolding a fourfold path to mitigate the effects of the virus, in this inspiring discourse, a few days ago, from the current epicenter of the pandemic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzFtOOVQPmA&t=31s

It's funny that everyone is so upset by this virus. Did you know that atmospheric pollution kills 9 millions people each year, and harms the quality of life or billions of beings?
Yet nobody lifted a finger. Not to mention that our beautiful planet, and all its ressources, was going down the drain at fast pace.
So to come back to the question, i will give a very personnal opinion. I don't think meditation only can prevent a virus infection. However, from a very long and personnal interest in the relationship between health, mind, emotions, energy, i would say that paying close attention to maintaining a positive mindset, healthy habits, avoiding sources of stress and bad karmas as much as possible will be hugely beneficial toward health and virus resistance.


text:
Can bodhisatta reborn as mara
Sometime i read that the current mara is a bodhisatta. It seems hard to believe a bodhisatta can be reborn as mara, who oftens damage buddhism.
There are two types of bodhisatta, the comfirmed one by a Buddha which will surely become a Buddha, and the not comfirmed yet, maybe mara is the later who can still return to normal being.
So, can a bodhisatta, comfirmed or not, reborn as mara?

Please provide a link to where you've read this.

Bodhisatta was under the influence of Mara. However, he defeated Mara when realising  Nibbana. (ie. Defeating ten Mara)

In this version of the story of Ksitigarbha -- Kisah Niat Suci Utama Ksitigarbha Bodhisatva -- it says that,

At that time that demon king is now Bodhisattva Ts'ai Shou.

I think that Yama is seen as a Dharma protector -- Eight Dharmapalas: The Protectors of Buddhism.
I think that some people or schools see Mara as beneficial, intending to test (and thus refine) people's attainments or progress on the path. Here is one example of that -- Yama and Mara:

Mara, the tempter who is also called the Evil One, has the job of testing living beings to make sure they are progressing on the path. He and his demon followers are emanations of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who test those engaged in self-cultivation. He appears in the texts both as a real being (i.e. as a deity who is the King of Demons of the Paranirmita Heaven, the sixth and highest heaven in the desire realm) and as a symbol of everything that hinders the arising of wholesome roots and progress on the path of enlightenment. This includes the internal difficulties encountered by the practitioner. There are four kinds known as the Four Maras: 1) skandha-mara or incorrect view of self; 2) klesha-mara or being overpowered by negative emotions; 3) matyu-mara or death that interrupts the spiritual practice; and 4) devaputra-mara or becoming stuck in the bliss that comes from meditation.
Seeing these fearsome beings as bodhisattvas who are really responsible for helping us on our evolutionary path puts the so called “devil” in a very different light.

This doesn't directly answer your question, but perhaps the question was based on a misunderstanding ("a bodhisatta can be reborn as mara, who oftens damage buddhism").

"Lord Yama’s job is to make sure beings receive the appropriate karmic retribution in the appropriate hell realm." --> from that link. I think this is entirely wrong and dangerous and do not accept this in any way as Buddha Dharma. I'd be shocked if my Tibetan Buddhist teachers in any way endorsed this.


text:
Does the Buddha deny genetic differences?
In MN.98, the Buddha seems to deny the ethnic/racial/genetic differences between humans. He seems to indicate that differences in physical traits between individuals are not determined by birth as in the rest of the animal world. This seems totally contrary to genetics:
I. Humans are genetically part of the animal world and follow the same laws of heritability.
II. Whether we speak of race or ethnicity, there are many identifiable genetic clusters within humanity.
III. Even without going that far it is obvious that between two individuals there will be physical differences according to their genetics (height, eye colors, features, hair, etc). The Buddha seems to deny this completely.
He says for example that the differences in eyes/nose/shoulders, etc., between two individuals are not defined by birth but by convention... this is totally false: children inherit the traits of their parents and two parents with the Asian phenotype do not give birth to an African child by pure chance or convention. I thought it was because he wanted to say that all these genetic differences were conventional and I would have agreed, but it can't be that since he's only saying that for humans and recognizes the validity of these differences for animals and plants... I don't understand this sutta?

While the differences between these species are defined by their birth, the differences between humans are not defined by their birth. Not by hair nor by head, not by ear nor by eye, not by mouth nor by nose, not by lips nor by eyebrow, not by shoulder nor by neck, not by belly nor by back, not by buttocks nor by breast, not by genitals nor by groin, not by hands nor by feet, not by fingers nor by nails, not by knees nor by thighs, not by color nor by voice: none of these are defined by birth
  as it is for other species. In individual human bodies you can’t find such distinctions. The distinctions among humans are spoken of by convention.

The Buddha

MN 98 is about "jati" or "social identity". The Buddha says physical birth or "ancestry" is unrelated to jati; that the jatis are verbal designations assigned due to kamma (actions).
For example, Michael Jordan's great great grandparents were probably slaves. Where as Michael Jordan was a sporting superstar & billionaire. Jordan was born at Cumberland Hospital in Fort Greene, Brooklyn, to Deloris, who worked in banking, and James R. Jordan Sr., an equipment supervisor. These distinctions of "slave", "banker", "supervisor" vs "basketball billionaire" are not related to physical birth or ancestry. They are related to social kamma (activity).
Albert Einstein was a German-born theoretical physicist. His parents were Hermann Einstein, a salesman and engineer, and Pauline Koch. The Einsteins were non-observant Ashkenazi Jews, and Albert attended a Catholic elementary school.

You’re a brahmin by your deeds, Kammunā brāhmaṇo hoti,
and by deeds a non-brahmin. kammunā hoti abrāhmaṇo.
You’re a farmer by your deeds, Kassako kammunā hoti,
by deeds you’re a professional; sippiko hoti kammunā;
you’re a trader by your deeds, Vāṇijo kammunā hoti,
by deeds are you an employee; pessako hoti kammunā.
you’re a bandit by your deeds, Coropi kammunā hoti,
by deeds you’re a soldier; yodhājīvopi kammunā;
you’re a sacrificer by your deeds, Yājako kammunā hoti,
by deeds you’re a ruler. rājāpi hoti kammunā.
In this way in accord with truth, Evametaṃ yathābhūtaṃ,
the astute regard deeds. kammaṃ passanti paṇḍitā;
Seeing dependent origination, Paṭiccasamuppādadassā,
they’re expert in deeds and their results. kammavipākakovidā.
Deeds make the world go on, Kammunā vattati loko,
deeds make people go on; kammunā vattati pajā;
sentient beings are bound by deeds, Kammanibandhanā sattā,
like a moving chariot’s linchpin. rathassāṇīva yāyato.
MN 98

That translation you quote is not very clear.
What it actually says is, animals are classified by their inborn characteristics, what modern science calls "phenotype". While humans are not classified like this - their iherited qualities such as hair color, eye color etc. are not useful for separating humans into classes. Instead, humans are classified by their role in society, which is acquired as a result of their deeds.
Then Buddha goes on to say that such classification as "Brahmin" cannot be made on the basis of inborn characteristic aka biological heritage - but only on the basis of the person's lifestyle. Then he gives numerous examples of what makes someone worthy of being called a Brahmin.
So basically, this Sutta is not about genetics, it is about the proper basis of designation of classes in humans vs animals.

The sutta should not be read literally.
Buddha describes what he believes makes actual significant difference between people, by starting off exemplifying things that are not significant differences. Among these nonsignificant properties are the physical properties we today understand thanks to genetics.
In the sutta he also goes into detail what he defines as being noble. He uses the example of a brahmin, a title with high social status in his time, as a mean to give his own definition of a brahmin - or rather - his own definition of what is noble.
Again, his use of the brahmin is not to be understood literally. There is likely little to no social status to be gained from buddhism. Instead, the latter part gives many examples of what makes significant difference among people, and what is noble according to the buddhist dhamma.

"There is likely little to no social status to be gained from buddhism." IIRC there have historically been places where Buddhist monks have had significant political power. For instance, their armies played a significant role in the politics of Japan during the Warring States Period.

This is a big misunderstanding and this is probably one of the examples where a Pali-English translation give us a completely different understanding as you cannot take it word for word or literal meaning.
Genetics define your look, personality etc. However, a person being born as a child with certain genetic combination is a result of the person's karma. For example, a person with a lot of good karma might be reborn in a womb of a woman who has a potential to create a good-looking healthy human being. A person with a lot of bad karma might be born in a womb of a woman which could grow a child with defects.
A child's genetics are considered "random" and subjected to "probabilities" in science. However, I think these random occurrences are not random and it is as a result of the karma of the being about to be born.
Somewhat similar example is natural distastes such as earth quakes. These natural disasters happen because of nature. However, beings having a bad/good outcome of that is because of the being's karma.


text:
Can we ignore sense doors through meditation?
In the process of reading a book, we need only the mind and the eyes. There is no need of ears and tongue.
In the process of hearing Dhamma,there may no need of eyes.
Are there any meditation practice to ignore senses completely for a period of time ?
(I'm looking for a specific meditation practice designed to achieve this, I know that we can achieve a similar result by doing Ānāpāna/breathing exercises,but may take much time )

Short answer to your question is no, but if you could clarify the reason why you're asking, perhaps there might be another answer. Also, please bear in mind that a lot of the insights provided in buddhism primarily builds on direct experiences from sustained practice, not by intellectual sports like asking/discussing.

@Erik looking for a way to get rid of distractions, a way to stop breaking progression. Thanks :)

@Dum I updated the answer with links to more details I have covered else where.

One cannot avoid contact (described below) hence one cannot ignore the sense doors totally:

Cha Chakka Sutta

(Samuday’atthaṅgama) Loka Sutta
What one can do it to ensure any contact (described above) does not result in craving and break the above progression of events at feeling. This can be achieved through meditation.
See

Food and other cravings, and guarding the senses
Rejecting clinging to both pleasure and displeasure
How should I watch sensations in Vipassana meditation?
Sankhara meditation
Meditation technique to reduce/control pain/sorrow/loss

answers for more details.

Thank you very much sir :)


text:
Does Vajrayana accept the idea that Buddha placed Lord Yama (a supposed Bodhisattva) in charge of the hell realms to ensure karmic retribution?
In reading this answer to another question I came across this link which is seemingly a Tibetan Buddhist site proclaiming the following:

In Buddhism the two beings that are often confused with the Christian
  concept of the devil, Yama and Mara, are also Bodhisattvas. Lord
  Yama’s job is to make sure beings receive the appropriate karmic
  retribution in the appropriate hell realm.

Which strikes me as completely antithetical to Buddhism, the Dharma, the Bodhisattva way of life, and well in just about every sense wrong and even dangerous idea about how karma works. This is certainly never been taught to me in the Gelug tradition of Tibetan Buddhism and I would be quite shocked if any of my teachers (in the lineage of His Holiness the Dalai Lama) accepted any of this.
As a student of Tibetan Buddhism, but not specifically the Vajrayana I would like to know if there is any defense of this from the viewpoint of Vajrayana? Does anyone follow this way of thinking?
Personally, I would file this under don't believe everything you read purporting to be Buddha Dharma on the internet. There are ignorant people out there making all kinds of bellicose claims and surrounding themselves in the iconography and material trappings of Tibetan Buddhist culture all the while being shockingly ignorant of Buddha Dharma. This seems to me to be one of them.

There's more from the same organisation at http://holyvajrasana.org/lineage/h-h-dorje-chang-buddha-iii and so on.

You are going wrong direction and wrong question. This question not change your life. Asking questions according your experience. For example Conflict Habit
Practice

Let me refer you to The Lamp of Wisdom That Illuminates the Darkness of Ignorance, also known as The Voyage to the Hell of the Exalted Lady Choijid, also known as Tale of Choijid Dakini - a story that was popular in 16th century Tibet, "about virtue, sin and the afterlife, told through a 37-year-old woman’s encounter with Lord Yama in hell."

Čoyijid dagini had left life before the time allotted to her. After her soul had gone to hell and there witnessed the judgment of Erlig qaγans, the prince of hell, she returned to earth and into her mortal cover to report and write down what she had seen and experienced in hell. The judgment of Erlig qaγan serves to illustrate the Buddhist teaching that those who have lived a virtuous life are happily reborn, while sinful people have to suffer and suffer inferior existence later in life. Neither the author nor the exact time of origin of this story are known, but it is known that it was published in block print in 1534 in Tibetan. There are several Mongolian translations of this block print, some of which contain changes and additions. What is striking is the change in the name "sinful Gelung" (monk) to sinful Gesgüi "(supervisor at prayer events). So by addressing a higher Lamarang, the narrative got something of a socially critical tendency. Episodes were also inserted in which Erlig qaγan punished high lamas and princes hard for their sins.

Unfortunately, I can't find this story in English, but I have it in Russian and believe me, "Lord Yama’s job" is described in all possible details.

Not to discredit her outrightly; but this very much reminds me of the boy who met with ninja turtles in a near-death experience, or the hyper-realistic dream I had about having a meaningful relationship with a friend from outer space. Perhaps they are all very real -- as real as samsara itself? ;-)

This is probably borrowed from Hinduism.

The question was not at all “is Yama the ruler of hell?”

Yama is a known God of the lower realm in all forms of Buddhism, I am not knowledgeable about particularly Vajrayana, but I guess they do accept him, there is no reason why not, when he mentioned in all of the sutras
Yama is the God that humans meets when they die, because he rules Karma
I am not sure whats your issue with that
Hope this help

In meditation who do you obey if not a yama a mara etc.? When I got sit at a temple Mara, Yama, etc. frequently try to appear as the nose consciousness.
The most difficult consciousness of the six consciousnesses to conquer that allows one not to ever fall back into birth as an animal.
How many know that those meals only lead to eating corpses, blood, and the feces of all of those that have failed to attain?
Even in Satori those beings live; replacing empty taste with any taste, replacing empty sight with any sight etc free the eye, the ear, the nose, the mouth and tactile sensation and where oh where could they possibly find a foothold other than right back to their own source of dependent origination striking them like a thunder bolt.
However, deluded? They think that such attack came from oneself and not from the kamma of them self and the company they keep. Such is the nature of Mara's, Yama's and their armies.
Conquer one's own entire wheel of life; many are under the mistaken impression that they are supposed to escape it. After it is conquered; make no mistake... another wheel not one's own; is on the way... and they expect you to conquer it for them just the same as you did yours.
HA! Sadhu! Sadhu!

Yama is the; Demon or lord of death of the Bhavacakra. Basically; He's the monkey stuck in the tar trap sutta. Grasp the wheel yourself and make Yama happy he can then go be Kurukulla and protect the dhamma like he's supposed to do.


text:
Categorizing common thoughts patterns and believes
Are there any list of thought patterns / believes of a person who have extream aversion, conceite .... etc ?
There is an android app that gives a similar result. (I'm not sure that I can linked to a that kind of source from here) But that app is on topics like Perfectionism, low self esteem .. etc. That app let us know what are the common thought patterns, believes if we have one of that problems. Also they provide some pracices to overcome them.
It is very useful to know that common belives, thought patterns as we can understand our mind / situation easily and quickly. Also, that may let us know some belives we have that we might think we don't have.
Can anyone post list of common belives on topics from buddhism ? Especially on five hindrances ? (Wiki answers may suitable)
Example format for an answer :
Common believes of a person who have aversion
Common thought patterns of a person who have aversion
Very sorry for bad english
Kind regards

There are different classifications for unwholesome thoughts:
Vipallasa
(can be compared to "cognitive distortions" from contemporary cognitive psychology. I assume you have those mentioned in your app).
Vipallasa are misconceptions regarding:

The impermanent (anicca) being permanent
Pain (dukkha) being pleasant or happiness-yielding
That which lacks a self (anatta) being a self
That which is repulsive (asubha) being pure or beautiful

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.049.olen.html
Akusala cetasikas
These are mental factors grouped in four categories. They are not cognitions in the strict sense, but still has relevance for your question (The five hindrances are included in the akusala cetasikas):
Universal unwholesome mental factors (akusalasadharana):

Moha - delusion
Ahirika - lack of shame
Anottappa - disregard for consequence
Uddhacca - restlessness

Greed group (lobha):

Lobha - greed
Diṭṭhi - wrong view
Māna - conceit

Hatred group (dosa):

Dosa - hatred
Issā - envy
Macchariya - miserliness
Kukkucca - regret

Other unwholesome mental factors:

Thīna - sloth
Middha - torpor
Vicikicchā - doubt

(A good abhidhamma source for the akusala cetasikas turned out to be really hard to find online)
These are concepts on the top of my head, and could need more elaboration. Also, ChrisW pointed out that you might have asked for everyday examples, and not classifications from dhamma if i understand you.
However, one may have to connect the theoretical dharma concepts with thoughts actually appearing in everyday life by observing vinnana with the aid of meditation. Vipassana is inevitable for understanding dharma:

There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.041.than.html

I think the question is asking e.g., "Given that greed is a hindrance, what are some examples of the common beliefs and of common thought patterns associated with greed?"

@ChrisW I'll see if i can edit this to fit the question better. Perhaps not the answer expected, though.


text:
Responding skillfully to an insincere apology
from AN 2.21:

"Monks, these two are fools. Which two? The one who doesn't see his transgression as a transgression, and the one who doesn't rightfully pardon another who has confessed his transgression. These two are fools.

How about when the person presenting the apology is not doing it sincerely? How to respond skillfully?

There is no specific repose to that situation ,however the most moral response is a sincere response .

There is a difference between the ideas of apology and revelation or confession. When we in the west read in the suttas about some person recognizing his mistake, we should not be thinking he is apologizing. The idea is that by confessing ones understanding that one has made a mistake and that one understands the nature of that mistake one has made the details conscious. Conscious of the error and the corrective measures needed to prevent its repetition, one is then in a position to take those corrective measures. It is the making conscious that is the important thing.
Apology is asking for forgiveness, not necessarily stating that there will be any effort to reform.
In both cases there is the idea that once an error is sincerely confessed, or a wish for forgiveness expressed in an apology and the other person does not acknowledge the confession or forgive the transgressor, the bad kamma of the deed passes over from the one who is confessing or apologizing to the one confessed to or apologized to. It is beyond my scope to comment on the reality of this belief.
In the case of the apology, going by the Christian practice, there is no requirement that the transgressor understand his error, and one is supposed to forgive, '“seventy times seven times” (490) (Matthew 18:22), a number that symbolizes boundlessness. ... '
In the case of the confession the transgressor must express an understanding of the error and corrective measure before it is necessary to acknowledge it. In this case (and we do not have an example in the suttas so this is just me making up what seems to be a logical response), the polite thing to do would be to explain exactly what was needed before the error could be acknowledged. A diplomatic construction of the statement: "You have not understood your error and consequently I am unable to acknowledge it for you." With perhaps an explanation such as made above to point to what is needed to be done by the transgressor in order to turn this exercise into something helpful to the goal, i.e., change of behavior.
Since the distinction between confession and apology is not likely to be known by most persons in the west, a further act of kindness when faced with an apology that looks to be a sincere effort at change for the better would be to explain this distinction and by that give the person an opportunity to change the apology into a confession.

This is good. I would note that there is a difference between 'regret' and 'guilt' and that true confession brings the former not the latter.

exactly the answer I was looking for, confirms my experience and understanding. I will leave it unaccepted for a while to get potential additional points of view.

My personal opinion is that a "sincere" apology has two essential components:

"I see that what I did was wrong (regrettable)", or possibly, "My offence was unintentional"
"I will not do it again"

Conventionally you'd accept a sincere apology, meaning, "they have said they will not do it again, and I believe that assurance is true, therefore there is nothing to worry about now and in future, so I can forget it happened and/or behave as if it didn't happen or is forgotten".
This kind of transaction is IMO typical of a parent/child relationship (young children's misbehaviour is forgiven by their parents); and having learned that as a child, you might apply it in adult life too.
I assume your saying, "they are not sincere", is the same as saying, "I not believe their apology is truthful/factual". In that case I imagine that Buddhism might have three bits of advice for you:

Beware (i.e. avoid) having a mind of ill-will -- see for example the "parable of the saw", and the first six verses of the Dhammapada.

Consider what several (physical and social) conditions caused the "offence", and whether you or they can do something differently, to change the circumstances, to prevent that reoccurring

Maybe a "skilful" thing to do is to discuss this kind of topic, possibly using the apology as a good occasion to do so.
But again, in my opinion though, it's possible that a mind of ill-will ("you hurt me, you owe me") might be counter-productive, and would only occasion the other person to deny their offence or to assert their right or to defend their ego etc.

In the suttas, transgressions are addressed thus:

AN7.84:1.1: “Mendicants, there are these seven principles for the settlement of any disciplinary issues that might arise.  What seven? Removal in the presence of those concerned is applicable. Removal by accurate recollection is applicable. Removal due to recovery from madness is applicable. The acknowledgement of the offense is applicable. The decision of a majority is applicable. A verdict of aggravated misconduct is applicable. Covering over with grass is applicable.

The applicable principle for apology/confession is The acknowledgement of the offense is applicable. What is notable about this phrasing is that only acknowledgement is required. Conviction, sincerity, deference, resentment, anger, etc. are simply not mentioned. When we acknowledge breaking the speed limit, we may or may not believe in the validity of the rule. If we do not believe the validity of the rule, then we are the fools. If we do not accept the acknowledgement of others when they break the rules, then we are the fools.

AN2.21:1.3: One who doesn’t recognize when they’ve made a mistake. And one who doesn’t properly accept the confession of someone who’s made a mistake.

It's therefore critical to be quite clear about what needs to be acknowledged and accepted as a confession. There's a vast difference between "my car was going faster than the speed limit" and "I believe I should obey that speed limit".  The former only requires a simple statement, the second leads to foolish arguments. Sincerity can only be known after a long time and mostly reliably only in the context of one's own practice.

AN3.101:2.1: In the same way, a mendicant who is committed to the higher mind has coarse corruptions: bad bodily, verbal, and mental conduct. A sincere, capable mendicant gives these up, gets rid of, eliminates, and obliterates them.  When they’ve been given up and eliminated, there are middling corruptions: sensual, malicious, or cruel thoughts. A sincere, capable mendicant gives these up, gets rid of, eliminates, and obliterates them. When they’ve been given up and eliminated, there are fine corruptions: thoughts of family, country, and being looked up to. A sincere, capable mendicant gives these up, gets rid of, eliminates, and obliterates them.

If someone apologizes insincerely, it's because they are attached to a self-image and are afraid that self-image will be harmed if they apologize sincerely. If we allow ourselves to become offended because we sense that the apology is insincere, then we are attached to a self-image, and fear that our self-image will be harmed if we do not receive a sincere apology.
There is nothing we can do about someone else's attachments except to have compassion for them. We can have compassion for our own attachments too, but we also have to option to try and end them.
The best approach, I think, is to take the apology at face value. If we accept the apology as sincere, we remove an ego threat and make it easier for that other person to give a sincere apology in the future.

The first time they apologise, accept they see the error, and that they intend to not repeat it. Conceptualising another's reasons for a first apology is lack of faith.
The second time they apologise for the same thing, they must also apologise for making a false apology the first time, as they made an error if they intentionally repeated the first error. (so long as they accept an apology implying that the error would not be repeated again)
At some point though, the appology becomes meaningless, even insincere, so if you can maintain the relationship with their error, ask them to not create an extra burden for themselves by falsely apologising, and let them figure it out for themselves. If you do not positively affect their intention, no need to beat them up about it, they should be fully aware of their failure themselves.
If the error is too big for the relationship though, or they are heedless, judge by what is beneficial to you and them. The final stop is AN4.111 - the cutting off of relations entirely (one who does not correct their errors is not a good friend), but that should only be done when it is for the benefit of you and the other, or if the decision would hold no impact on them, but be beneficial for you.


text:
Ignoring thoughts vs. understanding them
Every day I struggle with an onslaught of negative thoughts (perfectionists with a huge ego). I came upon two different schools of thought in Buddhism teaching.
One would be to try to ignore the thoughts, not give them energy, not identify with them, be present and in time they would go into the background. Basically they are just thoughts; they are not you.
Another approach would be to sit down, meditate and try to go deep inside to find the root of those thoughts (I suspect I have myself deep down :P). Try to see clearly the constant river of thoughts that is happening inside (things I notice is just a small surface of things).
I was never sure which one was correct.

Just a caveat... I don't think anyone touting the first method would agree with your description of it as "ignoring" thoughts. Rather, it is about keeping a watchful eye on them much like a grandfather would do while watching his kids play in a sandbox. He would not involve himself in their silly play, but rather watch mindfully while allowing them to play to ensure they don't hurt each other or themselves... and that they stay in the sandbox.

Actually those "schools of thought" are just 2 out of 5 skillful means, or helpful strategies to counter unwholesome thoughts. Try them all out and use whatever helps you in the most effective way. Check out this great sutta if you haven't read it: https://suttacentral.net/mn20/en/bodhi

These are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the latter method contains the 1st method you mentioned as the last resort. So do both in tandem as needed:

OP: One would be to try to ignore the thoughts, not give them energy, not identify with them, be present and in time they would go into the background. Basically they are just thoughts, they are not you.

You can try "ignoring" thoughts by focusing on a particular object hence developing some level of Jhana to reduce mental chatter through the Jhana factors like initial and sustained application:

When, bhikshu, this samadhi has been cultivated, well cultivated by you, then you should train yourself thus:
“I will dwell exertive, clearly aware, mindful,
observing [contemplating] [body | feeling | mind | dhamma] the in the [body | feeling | mind | dhamma],
removing covetousness and displeasure [discontent] in regard to the world.”
Thus, bhikshu, you should train yourself.
When, bhikshu, this samadhi has been cultivated, well cultivated by you, then, you, bhikshu,

THE 1 ST DHYANA:

should cultivate this samadhi with initial application, with sustained application;
should cultivate this samadhi without initial application, with only sustained application;

THE 2 ND DHYANA:

should cultivate this samadhi without initial application, without sustained application;
should cultivate this samadhi with zest;

THE 3RD DHYANA:

should cultivate this samadhi zest-free;
should cultivate this samadhi attended by comfort;

THE 4 TH DHYANA:

should cultivate this samadhi attended by equanimity.

Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta
in the 2nd Jhana and beyond there is no mental chatter.

OP: Other approach would be to sit down, meditate and try to go deep inside to find the root of those thoughts (I suspect I have myself deep down :P). Try to see clearly the constant river of thoughts that is happening inside (things I notice is just a small surface of things).

Thought proliferation is due to the following process:

“Bhikshu, as regards the source from which proliferation of conception and perception assails a person: if one were to find nothing there to delight in, nothing there to welcome, nothing to cling to—this is the end of

the latent tendency of lust,
the latent tendency of aversion,
the latent tendency of views,
the latent tendency of doubt,
the latent tendency of conceit,
the latent tendency of desire for existence, and
the latent tendency of ignorance.

This is the ending of the taking up of the rod and the sword, quarrels, disputes, mayhem [strife], slandering and lying —here these evil unwholesome states cease without remainder.”
…
Avuso, dependent on the [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind] and [form | sound | smell | taste | touch | mind-object], [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind]-consciousness arises.

The meeting of the three is contact.

With contact as condition, there is feeling.

What one feels, one perceives.

What one perceives, one thinks about.

What one thinks about, one mentally proliferates.

From that as source, proliferation of conception and perception assails a person regarding past, future and present [forms | sounds | smells | tastes | touch | mind-objects] cognizable through the [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind].

Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta
There 3 crucial points in this process:

feeling/sensation
one perceives then thinks and finally build views
mental chatter resulting in thought proliferation (papañca)

There are 3 things to be done at each juncture:
Feeling/sensation
Feeling/sensation result in perception (Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta above), craving (see Dependent Arising), 3 unwholesome roots (Pahāna Sutta). So one has to break the progression beyond feeling/sensation by:

i. On seeing a form with the eye,

one investigates the form that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the form that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the form that is the basis of equanimity.

ii. On hearing a sound with the ear,

one investigates the sound that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the sound that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the sound that the basis of equanimity.

iii. On smelling a smell with the nose,

one investigates the smell that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the smell that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the smell that is the basis of equanimity.

iv. On tasting a taste with the tongue,

one investigates the taste that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the taste that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the taste that is the basis of equanimity.

v. On feeling a touch with the body,

one investigates the touch that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the touch that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the touch that is the basis of equanimity.

vi. On cognizing a mind-object with the mind,

one investigates the mind-object that the basis of mental joy,
one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of equanimity.

...
If he feels a pleasant feeling,

he understands that it is impermanent;
he understands that it is not to be clung to;
he understands that there is no delight in it.

If he feels a painful feeling,

he understands that it is impermanent;
he understands that it is not to be clung to;
he understands that there is no delight in it.

If he feels a neutral feeling,

he understands that it is impermanent;
he understands that it is not to be clung to;
he understands that there is no delight in it.

If he feels a pleasant feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.
If he feels a painful feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.
If he feels a neutral feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta
To prevent your mental reaction to sensation becoming unwholesome you can try:

“Nothing is worth clinging to”
When this was said, the venerable Mahā Moggallāna said this to the Blessed One:
“In what way, bhante, in brief, is a monk freed through the destruction of craving, that is, one who has reached total perfection, the total security from bondage, the total holy life, the total consummation, the highest amongst gods and humans?”
“Here, Moggallāna, the monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to. And, Moggallāna, a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things [he directly knows the nature of the all]. Having directly known the nature of all things, he fully understands all things.
Having fully understood all things, he knows whatever feelings there are, whether

pleasant,

painful or

neither painful nor pleasant.

As regards to those feelings, [Section on Disillusionment and Revulsion (Nibbida) follows]

he dwells contemplating impermanence in them;

he dwells contemplating dispassion [fading away of lust] in them;

he dwells contemplating ending (of suffering) in them;

he dwells contemplating letting go (of defilements).

When he dwells

contemplating impermanence in them,

contemplating dispassion in them,

contemplating ending in them,

contemplating letting go,

he does not cling to anything in the world.
Not clinging, he is not agitated; being not agitated, he himself surely attains nirvana.

Pacalā Sutta
One Perceives then Thinks and Finally Build Views
At this point, cravings and unwholesome would have arisen which also gives rise to perversions. For a worldly person perceptions, thoughts, views that arise are subjected to the 4 perversions (vipallasa), which are:

what is impermanent is taken to be permanent;
what is painful is taken to be pleasurable;
what is not self is taken to be a (or the) self; and
what is impure [unattractive or repulsive] is taken to be pure [attractive or beautiful]

One should try to break this train also when feelings arise. The method to deal with preception is also as in the previous part, hence I will not repeat it here.
If

perceptions,
thoughts, or
views

do arise one should straighten them by contemplating:

Impermanent as impermanent
Painful as painful
Not-self as not-self
Impure [unattractive or repulsive] as impure

See Vipallasa Sutta
Mental Chatter Resulting in Thought Proliferation
If one could not stop the progression of events at feeling/sensation, perception and thinking then this results in mental chatter which is through proliferation. This results in latent tendencies (Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta) and is the last point one can stop this train of events progressing further but by this time craving, unwholesome roots and perversion (vipallasa) of perception, thoughts and view would have already arisen.
Metal proliferation can be cut out thought Jhana as from the 2nd Jhana onwards there is no thinking and pondering (vitakka-vicāra).
According to Dantabhūmi Sutta one should abandon thoughts with regard to the Sathipattanas namely thoughts regarding or originating from the body, feeling, mind and dhammas:

(1) dwell observing the body in the body,
and do not think (any) thought regarding the body;
(2) dwell observing feelings in feelings,
and do not think (any) thought regarding feelings;
(3) dwell observing the mind in the mind,
and do not think (any) thought regarding the mind [thoughts];
(4) dwell observing dharmas in the dharmas,
and do not think (any) thought regarding dharmas [realities].
With the stilling of initial application and sustained application,
by gaining inner tranquillity and oneness of mind,
he enters and dwells in the second dhyana, free from initial application and sustained application, accompanied by zest and joy, born of concentration.
And with the fading away of zest,
he dwells equanimous. Mindful and clearly comprehending, he experiences joy with the body.
He enters and dwells in the third dhyana,
of which the noble ones declare, ‘Happily he dwells in equanimity and mindfulness.’
With the abandoning of joy and abandoning of pain,
and with the earlier disappearance of pleasure and displeasure,
he attains and dwells in the fourth dhyana that is neither painful nor pleasant,
and with mindfulness fully purified by equanimity.

This way latent tendencies (anusaya) and further vipallasa and sankhā through the papañca-saññā-sankhā process will not arise. The method of practice is given above and also found in the Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta quoted above.
Also one can use another object of mentation like Ānâpāna,sati Sutta.
Essentially this is bringing one's focus to a given object and repeatedly refocusing on the object again to sustain one's focus on the particular object so one is not distracted by unwholesome trains of thoughts. Also, to get into Jhana in the moment of need requires greater length and effort in pratice through.

Majjhima Nikaya 2 goes through a list of methods to abandon craving, including the two you mention.

Two key questions for this are: what is the main deep underlying purpose behind your question? What do you expect to achieve after whatever "method" you start following?
If what you want is "simply" relax your head for awhile, I think any approach that takes such negative thoughts away in that very moment may be useful. But I suspect that won't solve the problem for good, because the root of those thought of ego and pain will come back eventually.
If what you want is to eliminate the root cause of those thoughts in order to cease any future arising of them, you may need to eliminate the condition that make them arise, and not just calm those thoughts for awhile.
Have you noticed that there are periods where those thoughts are not there, and instead there are other kinds of thoughts? Maybe ones without any special relevance of negetive effect on your feelings and emotions. Another good questions to ask yourself is: under what circumstances do such negative thought arise? What is the condition that, when present, makes them express? Is such condition/s always there, or it comes and goes randomly or every once in a while?
All of this comes reflected on the ideas expressed by the Buddha of Dependent Co-arising (the conditions that give rise to dissatisfaction, stress and mental suffering) and in his Path based on the development of wisdom (that changes one's way of processesing the world, by changing one's deepest underlying tendencies and assumptions about "oneself" and the world) and the cultivation of non-attachment (and release of those conditions and attachments that perpetuate the cycle of suffering).
Kind regards!


text:
The Oldest Traditional Buddhist Lineage?
In Hinduism the traditional master-disciple relationship in the transmission is very important, which means that a student can go and learn from a teacher whose initiatory lineage goes back directly to Adi Shankara for example.
I would have liked to know if there was such a thing in Buddhism, and if so, what were the oldest lineages still in place? With the master-disciple initiation chain unbroken.
Is there one that can be traced back to the Buddha himself? I hear a lot about the Forest Tradition, but it only dates back to the 20th century.

Every "official" Chan/Zen master (that is, a master recognized and authorized by an older master) keeps a list of his ancestral teachers going back all the way to the Buddha Shakyamuni. I have such list for my Zen Master for example.
Every Tibetan lineage keeps a list of teachers that goes to a Buddha (not necessarily Shakyamuni). Many Tibetan texts begin by listing the lineage of the author.
The question is moot, because every school will say its teaching is best and the most traditional.

Downvoted because unverifiable claims

@116PУC I read the claim as being that Zen masters and Tibetan lineages keep a list, I don't think that's unverifiable -- and that the question is moot ("subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty"), I don't suppose that's unverifiable either. How, in what way, would you want to see this answer improved?

Id like to see it say that they all keep a list which is claimed to be true and held as true by that school

The Six qualities of the Dhamma:

Svakkhato: The Dhamma is not a speculative philosophy, but is the Universal Law found through enlightenment and is preached precisely. Therefore it is Excellent in the beginning (Sila — Moral principles), Excellent in the middle (Samadhi — Concentration) and Excellent in the end (Panna — Wisdom),

Samditthiko: The Dhamma is testable by practice and known by direct experience,

Akaliko: The Dhamma is able to bestow timeless and immediate results here and now, for which there is no need to wait until the future or next existence.

Ehipassiko: The Dhamma welcomes all beings to put it to the test and to experience it for themselves.

Opaneyiko: The Dhamma is capable of being entered upon and therefore it is worthy to be followed as a part of one's life.

Paccattam veditabbo vinnunhi: The Dhamma may be perfectly realized only by the noble disciples who have matured and enlightened enough in supreme wisdom.

(from Anguttara Nikaya 11.12)

Source: 6 qualities of the Dhamma
Also, the progression of the Dhamma is lean the theory - Pariyatti (theory), put it into practice - Patipatti (practice), and finally realise the results - Pativedha (realisation).
The qualities of Dhamma are to be experienced and realised 1st hand culminating in the direct confirmation of the theory. Hence the quality of the results and experience in verifying the teachings can imply what tradition is closest to that of the Buddha and handed down in the purest form. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

I will tell what i know of Theravada.
Afaik Theravadin Abhidhamma order was established on the Ceylon, Sri Lanka south of India 300 BC, this was still in the period Buddha proclaimed to be of True Dhamma and the culture was thriving for about 1500 years. No other of the early lineages from the true Dhamma period and no Vibhajavada school in particular  remained thriving for as long as the Theravada on SL.
This is in part due to the unique geo location.
It started first to decline after an invasion in the 12th century by Kalinga Magha, the Theravadin order was eventually more or less extinct in the 17th century.
The Sri Lankan order was revived with ordination by Burmese Theravadin monks.
These were of the exact same Theravada lineage which was becoming extinct in SL as the SL missionaries spread it to Burma region to begin with.
Afaik the early missionaries maybe could've reached that Burmese region early some 200 BC but idk.
There are artifacts from ~ the 1st century and we know abhidhamma was studied in that region around 5-7th century.
Theravadin tradition  became widespread around the 10th century and they had contact with Sri Lankans but the Sangha was by then quite fragmented and with non canonical 7th century commentaries. The Sangha was eventually forcibly hard reformed in the late 14th century and eventually the Sangha again became more Abhidhamma focused and they help revived the Sri Lankan order.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bischoff/wheel399.html#ch1 on history in Burmese region

I found this interesting passage from this Wikipedia page:

There are several rules in the Theravada monastic code by which a
  bhikkhu is "defeated" - he is no longer a bhikkhu even if he continues
  to wear robes and is treated as one. Every ordination ceremony in
  Theravada Buddhism is performed by ten bhikkhus to guard against the
  possibility of the ordination being rendered invalid by having a
  "defeated bhikkhu" as preceptor.

I've personally never heard of this, but apparently ordination of new monks are done by multiple monks, to ensure that at least one of the monks performing the ordination is not "defeated". This is to ensure that every ordination can be traced back all the way to the Buddha. That said, I doubt that a detailed record of the lineage is kept.
I would say that for Theravada Buddhism, the lineage of monastic ordination is important (without keeping meticulous records of lineage), but not the lineage of teaching.
As the Buddha has stated in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta (quoted below), he is not leaving behind any successor. Instead, his followers must depend on themselves, with the Dhamma (the Buddha's teachings) as their basis. There is no mandatory need for a teacher as an intermediary (although the Buddha did specify criteria for a Dhamma teacher in the Udayi Sutta). The Buddha also did not hide any esoteric teachings.
Due to this, a lineage of teaching is not important.

Thus spoke the Venerable Ananda, but the Blessed One answered him,
  saying: "What more does the community of bhikkhus expect from me,
  Ananda? I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of
  esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard
  to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed
  fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. Whosoever may think that
  it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the
  community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give
  last instructions respecting them. But, Ananda, the Tathagata has no
  such idea as that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus,
  or that the community depends upon him. So what instructions should he
  have to give respecting the community of bhikkhus?
"Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my
  eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is
  held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is
  kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata,
  disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings,
  attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, that his
  body is more comfortable.
"Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto
  yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your
  island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.
"And how, Ananda, is a bhikkhu an island unto himself, a refuge unto
  himself, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as his island,
  the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge?
"When he dwells contemplating the body in the body, earnestly, clearly
  comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow
  in regard to the world; when he dwells contemplating feelings in
  feelings, the mind in the mind, and mental objects in mental objects,
  earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome
  desire and sorrow in regard to the world, then, truly, he is an island
  unto himself, a refuge unto himself, seeking no external refuge;
  having the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no
  other refuge.
"Those bhikkhus of mine, Ananda, who now or after I am gone, abide as
  an island unto themselves, as a refuge unto themselves, seeking no
  other refuge; having the Dhamma as their island and refuge, seeking no
  other refuge: it is they who will become the highest,  if they have
  the desire to learn."

Very good points

Surely ordination is not the basis for a lineage. It seems to set the bar rather low.

@PeterJ The point is that a lineage of teachers is unimportant, because according to the Buddha in DN 16, the Dhamma is all you will ever need. In other words, if we stick closely to the teachings of the Buddha in his words (Buddhavacana) as he originally taught it, we wouldn't have to rely on a lineage, that's prone to corruption and disappearance. I'm sure we can easily find suttas talking about the dangers of straying away from the original teachings.

@ruben2020 - Okay. I tend to think of lineages as consisting of people who have sufficient realisation and knowledge not to make such mistakes, and see this as the whole point of lineages. I would agree that lineages of ordination are not important. but those for which its members know that the Buddha's Dhamma is all that anybody needs seem quite important as a sort of public kite-mark or quality-measure. .

And, of course, to maintain the integrity of the teachings.

Like you said gurus exist only in hinduism and jainism. Gurus are complete non-sense in buddhism because the bikkhus  move around a lot, so they cannot have followers (bikkhus or lay people). For instance, a lay person (buddhist or not) who gives food to a bikkhu may never see this bhikku ever again after a few days of offering. However a bikkhu may have special link with the bikkhu who ordained him. It is expected that ''The preceptor will foster the attitude he would have toward a son (‘son-mind’) with regard to the student. The student will foster the attitude he would have toward a father (‘father-mind’) with regard to the preceptor. Thus they—living with mutual respect, deference, and courtesy—will arrive at growth, increase, and maturity in this Dhamma-Vinaya.''
https://www.dhammatalks.org/vinaya/bmc/Section0054.html
Bikkhu really are nomads., but a bikkhu may live in the forest or go from monasteries to monasteries, there is no rule binding a bikkhu to one monastery.
The other idea from the hindus is the one of devotion of the follower towards the guru, but being devoted is non-sensical again in buddhism, not at all part of the path (the path is just watching the mind to keep having only good intentions and good actions) and that the guru provides custom teaching fitting perfectly the follower, but again that's not what happens in buddhism.
For instance the monk Channa https://suttacentral.net/sn22.90/en/sujato had trouble to reach full awakening, so he went from ''senior mendicants '' to ''senior mendicants '' and they said the generic teaching that the buddha keep saying, he still did not get it though. So he went to Ananda who told him again a generic teaching and he said that he ''has  comprehended the teaching.''
So the monk Channa did not stick to the first ''senior mendicants '' he met and made them his guru for many years and being devoted to them like they do in hinduism. Since he did not understand anything from them, he just went to other ''senior mendicants '' until he understood whatever he wanted. This is how it is supposed to work in buddhism when there are arahants around: going to live with a few arahants until you get it, mostly because the arahants from which you understand buddhism click with you.
Currently there is only  claims about having a direct lineage to  the buddha. The best you can have is the theravadans who say their ancestors started writing the suttas in 100BC, mostly in the south of india (moslty lanka), and before that the teaching was only oral and indeed directly from the buddha.
Since there is no gurus in theravada, the theravadas do not care about lineage and gurus.
As long as the bikkhus base their study on the suttas and optionnaly on the theravadan abiddhama, they are happy..
So the answer is that you wont find a way to determine if somebody is indeed in a sect directly coming from the time of the buddha. Perhaps even the theravada have modified too much the teachings. Perhaps the buddha did not even exist, because today historians say  the buddha really existed because ''we cannot explain how so many suttas popped up all over india with lots of almost exact copies, so the buddha must have really lived''.

On this site we don't allow denigrating "not my" traditions. By definition some other tradition is something you don't really understand in depth. If we allowed rants like yours, this site would quickly turn into an argumentative mess. I have no choice but to edit the piece about Mahayana out of your answer.

Yes, we insist: please avoid the kind of answer which says "mahayana is fake" -- see also the "Minimizing controversy" section of the site's FAQ index.

You had me until maybe buddha didn't exist. I'll vote up the answer. It's not true that not one's own tradition isn't understood in depth. People switch and study various traditions and if other traditions aren't known by definition then how could one make an informed choice.

One doesn't have to know everything to know enough, there is a diminishing return on knowledge, not all of it is essential.

-1 A profoundly unsympathetic take on devotion and gurus, if not also Buddhism. .

Lineage exists both in zen Buddhism and vajrayana practices, [I've read these called perfection and tantric teachings]. In the latter, key names include vajrabodhi, amoghavajra, and subhakarasimha; esoteric Japanese Buddhists were able to visit China and succeed earlier patriarchs in much the same way as Zen Buddhists.
e.g., Saicho, who brought Tendai to Japan and was a friend and rival of kukai, who brought shingon to Japan, received "transmission" in the northern school from gyohyo, the ox head "transmission" from hsiu-jan, and esoteric

transmission from Weixiang of Guochingsi on Mount Tiantai

And scholastic Buddhists like hua-yen [beginning with Dushun] and tientai [beginning with Nagarjuna] Buddhists also have lineages and patriarchs, though there is not always the necessity to meet and be initiated as there is in zen and esoteric Buddhism.

Huiwen (Chinese: 慧文) is traditionally considered to be the second
  patriarch of the Tiantai school. Huiwen studied the works of
  Nāgārjuna, and is said to have awakened to the profound meaning of
  Nāgārjuna's words: "All conditioned phenomena I speak of as empty, and
  are but false names which also indicate the mean."

So, it depends on what you mean by "guru". There are important Buddhist teachers, both historically and today, and sometimes one needs to meet them to be initiated into their tradition.


text:
Should we care about what others think?
Should we care about what others think? If so, to what level? (Most of the time, those thoughts creates suffering).

Maybe if it's people that cares about you and your spiritual progress. Good friendship with good advices/criticism is a treasure to be protected.
In the Dhammapada, we see that:

Should one a man of wisdom meet
  who points out faults and gives reproof,
  who lays a hidden treasure bare,
  with such a sage should one consort.
  Consorting so is one enriched
  and never in decline.
Let him exhort, let him instruct,
  and check one from abasement.
  Dear indeed is he to the true,
  not dear is he to the false.

Kind regards!

Tryin to project one's self-image into the minds of others is a source of suffering1. So one should look inwardly and constraint oneself with the precepts and also develop the Brahavihara and be benevolent. This protects others also oneself. Beyond this worrying about what others think will create misery as this is not in one's control and one's ego is expanding from the spere of "me" to "dear ones" and "others" (also see link below). The misery will be more closer you are to the person in question.

1 This is highlighted in this example: Vipassana | S.N. Goenka | The Ego - "The teacher and his 5 students"

Are you sure about the first sentence? I thought that trying to understand what other people are thinking is good and normal -- that theory of mind is a skill which children develop from an early age. And that it's related to empathy or compassion, e.g. the Dhammapada, "All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill."

@ChrisW Doesn't empathy lead to suffering as well, if one holds onto the pain of others instead of accepting it? Even "good" things can lead to suffering if they are approached in the "wrong" way.

@user29568 Conversely even "bad" things might be handled without suffering if they're approached in the right way -- e.g. https://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=124 although that's slightly out of context -- but you might want to ask this as a new/separate question instead of in a comment here.

@ChrisW I just found your question interesting, it reminded me of a question I had a while ago.

Yes, as long as this would boost the desire to abandon what is unwholesome and undertake what is wholesome.

these two bright qualities guard the world. Which two? Shame &
compunction. If these two bright qualities did not guard the world,
there would be no recognition of ‘mother’ here, no recognition of
‘mother’s sister,’ ‘uncle’s wife,’ ‘teacher’s wife,’ or ‘wives of
those who deserve respect.’ The world would be immersed in
promiscuity, like rams with goats, roosters with pigs, or dogs with
jackals.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN2_9.html

.

Now if I, having gone forth, were to think thoughts of sensuality,
thoughts of ill will, or thoughts of harmfulness: Great is the
community of this cosmos, and in the great community of this cosmos
there are contemplatives & brahmans endowed with psychic power,
clairvoyant, skilled (in reading) the minds of others. They can see
even from afar. Even up close, they are invisible. With their
awareness they know the minds of others. They would know this of me:
“Look, my friends, at this clansman who—though he has in good faith
gone forth from the home life into homelessness—remains overcome with
evil, unskillful mental qualities.” There are also devas endowed with
psychic power, clairvoyant, skilled (in reading) the minds of others.
They can see even from afar. Even up close, they are invisible. With
their awareness they know the minds of others. They would know this of
me: “Look, my friends, at this clansman who—though he has in good
faith gone forth from the home life into homelessness—remains overcome with  evil, unskillful mental qualities.”’ So he reflects on this: ‘My persistence will be aroused & not lax; my mindfulness established & not confused; my body calm & not aroused; my mind centered & unified.’
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN3_40.html


text:
Why we can not fulfill our desires?
What characteristics in universe have that doesn't let us to fulfill our desires ?
Why we get more and more desires through fulfilling desires ? (What characteristics of desires have that we have to know to understand better about desires)

Because sensual desire is a bottomless pit, it's like drinking salt water, the more one drinks, the more one gets thirsty. However, there's one exception, the desire for enlightenment. See this sutta for more details: https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn51/sn51.015.than.html

Excellent question.
The reason why we can't full-fill our desires is because of the impermanent nature in the world. Everything around us is subjected to impermanence. This includes the happiness that we get from worldly things.
For example:
You buy a car(because you desire), now your happy. Then you get bored overtime, and you want a better car.  Because your satisfaction is impermanent. You had the satisfaction when you bought it but then it died away. So you buy a better car (to full-fill your deep desires). Then two cars, then five cars. Someday, you can have all the cars in the world and still not end up satisfied. Because your satisfactions are impermanent. Its born and it dies. Like everything else in this universe.
So the simple answer to  your question "Why we get more and more desires through fulfilling desires ? (What characteristics of desires have that we have to know to understand better about desires)":

Impermanence in this universe or Impermanence in satisfaction of desires to be specific.

Everything, except for Nirvana, is subjected to the three marks of existence:

all compounded phenomena are impermanent (anitya);
all compounded phenomena are suffering (duḥkha);
all phenomena, including Nirvana, is without self (anātman);

Whatever which is impermanent is unsatisfactory since whatever experience is unsatisfactory as one has to part with what is pleasant and satisfactory and has to come with what is unsatisfactory.
Not being control also leads to unsatisfactoriness as one is not fully in control and not everything turns out satisfactorily. In a world with finite resources not all wants can be satisfied due to the lack of absolute control over what can be got.


text:
What does Buddhism teach on cultivating energy for those who are drowsy?
This is rather a personal question.
Sometimes, I am a very depressed individual, and besides other things, I'm struggling with a lack of energy.
It happens that I sleep for 10 or more hours. Usually, after waking up, I'm not actually awake, but just keep on dreaming, being half-asleep. It's very hard to get up: the urge for sleep and dreaming is so strong, while consciousness is not awakened yet... In sleep, often there are nightmares about the conflicts and rejection, although I usually forget everything.
Also, sometimes I feel drowsy during the day. It's very hard for me to maintain mindfulness, often I keep on doing a dull, pointless activity, probably again because I'm deprived of energy.
In AN 7.58 Buddha says:

But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then — reclining on your right side — take up the lion's posture, one foot placed on top of the other, mindful, alert, with your mind set on getting up. As soon as you wake up, get up quickly, with the thought, 'I won't stay indulging in the pleasure of lying down, the pleasure of reclining, the pleasure of drowsiness.' That is how you should train yourself.

I really try to train myself like that, but forget about everything in the morning and just "stay indulging in the pleasure of lying down."
So, what would you recommend me to be more alert and mindful during the day, to sleep less and to get up more quickly?

Present situation is the result of past causes, so it would be interesting to see what led you to that constant state of fatigue in the first place.

To develop energy we need initiative, persistence and exertion:

SN46.51:8.1: And what fuels the arising of the awakening factor of energy, or, when it has arisen, fully develops it? There are the elements of initiative, persistence, and exertion.

If you're exhausted from exertion, then lying down and waiting for energy can give your body and mind a chance to recharge and retake the initiative. But if you haven't exerted yourself, then lying down won't restore any energy. Fortunately, te Buddha follows with more advice. Indeed, the Buddha recommends various ways of fostering energy in the Nodding Off sutta that you quote.
For example, walking for a time does take initiative, persistence, and exertion. In particular, we have:

AN7.61:8.1: But what if that doesn’t work? Then walk mindfully, concentrating on the perception of continuity, your faculties directed inwards and your mind not scattered outside.

There are several ways to "concentrate on the perception of continuity". A simple one is to count your breaths. If that is too dull and makes you sleepy, listen to a sutta repeatedly (i.e., for continuity) as you walk and see if you can predict what will be spoken next.
I personally tend towards couch potato, so walking meditation has been very helpful and allowed me to develop energy. Perhaps it may work for you as well.

You should do walking meditation to counter your depression. Walk around focusing on your meditation object of choice.
I strongly recommend recollecting on your generosity (caganusati) and recollection of virtue (silanusati.)
When practicing caganusati reflect on previous generous deeds and think, "How nice it is that I practice generosity in a world tainted by greed."
When practicing silanusati reflect on your observance of the five precepts and think, "By keeping the five precepts perfectly, I have real worth as a human being."
Alternatively, you can recollect on the Buddha. You can do this by thinking "Buddho, buddho, buddho..." over and over again or you can think, "How wonderful the Lord Buddha was: a person that completely shared his teachings with no expectations. He is completely free of ulterior motives, free from defilements, and has ocean-like compassion."


text:
Relaxation vs Laziness
In karniyametta sutta, Lord Buddha advised us to be relaxed and not to cling to the work.
How can I recognise relaxation from laziness ?

Well, if you can't recognize the difference it is laziness.
Relaxation is samadhi: the collection of mind around an object of meditation.
When we speak of conventional relaxation, what we really mean is letting the defilements do whatever they want to the mind.

Kusītārambhavatthusutta best describes laziness in eight grounds, according to this sutta laziness is when you are held back from attaining the unattained, achieving the unachieved, and so on depending on your case for varying excuses. If your relaxation technique doesn't restrain you from accomplishing that (your goal) it is not laziness. Relaxation should aid your progress; laziness hinders your progress. This should be simple.

Relaxation is essential for everyone to recharge after work. It aids in maintaining and restoring our physical and mental well-being. Buddha did not advocate against relaxation. However, he discouraged laziness, which hinders progress and success in both everyday life and the path to enlightenment, as it impedes achievement in all endeavors, according to the sutta.

This point in Karniyametta Sutta is to be smart in ones undertaking as elaborated in:

(1) Young brahmin, there is work that is great in goal, great in task, great in busyness, great in
  undertakings, but when it fails, is small in fruit [consequence].
(2) Young brahmin, there is work that is small in goal, with little busyness, few in external affairs,
  few in undertakings, but when it succeeds, is great in fruit.
(3) Young brahmin, there is work that is small in goal, few in task, few in external affairs, small in
  undertakings, but when it fails, is small in fruit [consequence].
(4) Young brahmin, there is work that is great in goal, great in task, great busyness, great in undertaking, when it succeeds, is great in fruit.

(Brahma,vihāra) Subha Sutta
Further elaboration is given in trading and spiritual life in the Sutta.
If one is lazy one procrastinates and/or does not take any initiative than the most productive and effective course of action. The Sutta does not say one should not cling to work thought this is something one should do, but one should be or less work but being more productive and effective.
Footnote 151 in Karanīya Metta Sutta, tr. by Piya Tan:

having with little busyness, appa,kicco. A renunciant should not have a busy life: see nn at (Brahma,vihāra)
  Subha S (M 99.5/2:197), SD 38.6; also above, (3.1.2).


text:
Stages of Compassion in Mahayana
Dear friends, I am looking for references pertaining to the notion of the Four Stages of Compassion in the Mahayana traditions.
Thank you for your kind and generous help, may you all be well and safe.

If you ask what is ‘great compassion,’ it is unstinting loving kindness toward all sentient beings, when there are actually no sentient beings. That is called great compassion.
The Buddha (Perfection of Wisdom Sutra in Ten Thousand Lines)
Tweet by The Buddhist Society

In ~30 years of (western) Buddhism I haven't come across "four stages of compassion". However, there are:

the four Brahmaviharas and
five stages of cultivating compassion, introduced by Buddhaghosa in the Visuddhimagga and explained for example in Wildmind.

For "great compassion" maybe see Mahakaruna. The Indians tend to put a "maha" before a word to mark the term as informed by the experience of liberation.

"Maha" is used as a prefix which translates as "greater".