text:
What does 'corrupted' (world or society) mean?
Several people (several questions and answers) in this topic use the word "corrupted", especially applied to "the world" and "society".

What does the word "corrupted" mean?
Does it have a standard meaning in Buddhism, or is it idiosyncratic?
Is it an objective (observable, shareable) property (of the world), or a subjective (personal) feeling?
Do all schools (or yanas) define it the same way?
Is it mentioned in any suttas?
Is it related to the idea that the Buddha's Dharma may (or will be, has been) lost, misinterpreted, over time? Or is it a different perception, applied to "society" rather than "dharma"?
Why would someone say that the world or society is becoming more corrupt? Compared to when and where, or what? Do schools (and/or teachers) differ in their view of whether the world is "progressing", i.e. whether it's improving or regressing?

Perhaps it is simply an assumed term, like 'suffering', needing no further explication? Does it matter if it has a cause, grows worse or less so? We cannot change it, basically, like dukkha.

Dukkha is (or was) explained further; starting with the first noble truth. The definition (of "corruption") might matter when people are offering life advice resulting from an observation that the world is corrupt ... as if it is corrupt, and as if that's a shared observation (i.e. people giving advice understand what "corruption" is being complained of. and vice versa). Also I wondered how the term relates to standard doctrine[s].

I have been reading about Feyerabend's concept of 'incommensurability'. It reminds me of Cheryl Abram saying that everyone has their own world. Take the concept of 'Diunital' and wrap that up with Nonduality. Presto! I guess we still need to attempt to clarify terms.

I think a word like "dusty" for example makes sense (as a metaphor) in a Buddhist context because it's used several times in the context of well-known scriptures (suttas). To the extent that suttas are trustworthy, it's not only a clear metaphor but a (morally) good one. But is society's being "corrupt" such a "good" description? I don't recognise it as an obviously-true description, as a well-known description, nor even as a (morally) good description, virtuous, skilled: perhaps it's hate-filled, proud or hurt, I don't know. Anyway if it's dharmic and helpful I wanted to understand it better.

I recall Zen using the image of dust on a mirror. Rumi uses the phrase "polishing the mirror" also. It is possible that the word 'dusty' arose from a single usage in some distant past scripture and has spread. For me, the essence of the word 'corruption' is the decay after death, meaning that some principle that was preserving the 'life' of people (their morality or whatever) has died, and now things are decaying. Anything less dire does not need a word like corrupt, and so dusty misses the mark. I regret that I have no suttas to steer you toward.

"Dusty" is in the suttas too: as, the Buddha's agreeing to teach "for the sake of those who have little dust in their eyes" (i.e. who can benefit from the dharma); and. "the householder's life is a dusty path" (compared to "going forth" as a monk). So the dust of the world, apparently, or the world as dust: blinding, fruitless, also unable to satisfy "craving" (literally "thirst"). The English word "corruption", to me, has the meaning you describe: putrefaction after death, also "sundered". And it's Christian, it describes the Fall of Man (and more generally the fall of the world), implying...

... that a system which used to be good has acquired some evil intent. Is that Buddhist? I think the "original sin" according to Buddhism is confusion or ignorance (not knowing what's "good"), in Judeo-Christianity maybe it's disobedience (and "knowledge of good and evil, apparently!), also sexuality and shame. So if that's like Christian, is "corrupt" used in Buddhism, and if so where and what does it mean there? And is it true that, why might you say that, "the world" or "society" is becoming more corrupt? Is that a socially conservative (society used to be better, now getting worse) view?

Is a view of whether or not it is getting worse a feature of various schools? Do Mahayana sects, for example, see it as getting any better?

Socrates said that "these young people" are less worthy than their elders, so the decline has been going on since then, apparently. It squares with the idea of decline, if every generation sees things as getting worse. I think a lot of things have improved in the last few hundred years. Ancient suttas probably won't have much to say about recent developments.

I'd say it's idiosyncratic.  Each school has a somewhat different take on it.  In Zen, we often refer to corruption as "red dust".  Han Shan, for instance, refers to it often:

I was born just thirty years ago,
  but I’ve wandered a million miles already.
  Along the River through the green grass on the
  banks, out to the borderlands, where the red dust roils.

I think the footnote in my copy of his poetry does an excellent job of explaining this idea:

"The word we usually translate as “dust,” or “the red dust,” is a
  conventional epithet for the klesas, or “defilements,” of life in the
  everyday world, everything from simple dirt, to the deep moral
  defilements we accept in the compromises and little hypocrisies of
  everyday lay living."

From Cold Mountain Poems translated by J.P Seaton

that poem is: 1出生三十年，2當遊千萬里。3行江青草合，4入塞紅塵起。wouldn't a translation as this better than that? 1Though for thirty years I was born, 2yet millions miles I've roamed. 3Tracking along the river green grasses spread but furl; 4entering the border the red dusts swirl. classical Chinese poem always goes with rhythm, also with graphical beauty like colors and patterns in words, and embedded meanings. i guess 境界 (image reflecting state of mind?), 意象 (image as metaphorical story-telling?) maybe is not as an element in English literature, however it's the very spirit in Chinese. i'm no expert though :)

Ya got me.  I don't speak Chinese in any form!

I like @Mishu米殊 translation, but for English-only reader, the other is a bit more clear.

@Mishu米殊 I often like (or prefer) a literal word-for-word translation, without the translation's choosing or adding extra English words to make it rhyme or rhythm or grammar -- so something like, "born thirty years | when travel 1000 miles | ... | ...". What are the last two lines, translated in that style?

Ya got me too @nocomprende :) "for English-only reader, the other is a bit more clear" that's the puzzle I try to solve, for I got the meaning in Chinese therefore it's a bit difficult to fall back to unclear understanding - when examining my own work; plus other issues

@ChrisW Using google translate :)? // 3 is walking at the side of the big river [河 is narrower; this one: 江 is wider, therefore we got Yellow River (黃河), Yangtze River (長江)], the poet's legs divided the tall grasses then they furled back after passed. 4 is entering the country border (塞) (Ancient China the border divided by the Great Wall, outside was non-Middle-Kingdom culture) [here it's a metaphor of entering Samsara]; Red Dust is the world, for Chang'an was like modern New York, the busy carriages stirred up dusts in the setting sun looked red, also dust is translation...

...of Paramanu (微塵 micro-dust), the Buddhist idea of smallest indivisible unit, combined a new etymology Red Dust with very very rich literature and cultural meanings. Therefore the last one is a metaphor the ups and downs of the world the drama began when one entered Samsara. These four are just part of a long poem. // I was trying the word-for-word, it's more honest than trying to digest then rewrite a piece of translation. I only choosing among the words corresponding to the meaning with better rhythm, or re-arrange the words in one sentence to get the rhythm --

[3]   行 walked /  江 river /  青 green /  草 grass /  合 close   [4]  入 entered /  塞 border /  紅 red /  塵 dust /  起 rises

@Mishu米殊 Here is an example of  poem translated word-for-word: "ancient pond | frog jumps in | sound of water". I've seen more "poetic" translations with English grammar added, like "Breaking the silence of an antique pond, a frog jumped into water" ... I like the first, simple version.

@ChrisW think i've seen this poem somewhere long ago... will take time to read and find the old Japanese (which is in fact Chinese :), thanks. i can see why, because Chinese doesn't have "grammar", no tense, no need to use the, a, to, for... subject etc. only key words, very condense meaning in short verse because any word that's just filling the space is out :)). that's why it's a pain to read long scholastic thesis... imagine the Tao Te Jing has 4999 words only, Art of War only about 6000. Macro Polo said learning 500 words by heart would be able to read Classical Chi works, try :)

@Mishu米殊 Re. Basho's poem, a commentary I read said it was about hearing-consciousness. Re. Chinese, I read that Chinese also doesn't distinguish noun from verb: so a pair of ideograms like "mountain + running" might mean "I run a mountain" or "a mountain run". So: simpler, maybe better than English. Also fewer different words (or more compounded words) -- I heard someone complain that English is difficult to learn because it has completely different words like "car, bus, bicycle, truck, taxi, etc.", saying that in Chinese those words are instead "vehicle, public vehicle, self vehicle, etc.".

ya got it 2 @ChrisW ! another piece for you to contemplate: 恰恰用心時，恰恰無心用；無心恰恰用，常用恰恰無。this is part of the stanza of Lazy/Dào Róng Ch'an master when he enlightened. almost same characters, arranging in different order, in perfect meaning :) [my advice is to get google translating each word and put them together as verse. you might get enlightened by this, yo!]

The translation of "corruption" & "corrupt" is found in many places in the Pali suttas, such as:

As to this, bhikkhus, there is a threefold corruption and failure of bodily kamma, arisen from unwholesome volition, having a painful outcome and result; a fourfold corruption and failure of verbal kamma, arisen from unwholesome volition, having a painful outcome and result; and a threefold corruption and failure of mental kamma, arisen from unwholesome volition, having a painful outcome and result.
It is, bhikkhus, because of the threefold corruption and failure of bodily kamma, arisen from unwholesome volition … or it is because of the fourfold corruption and failure of verbal kamma, arisen from unwholesome volition … or it is because of the threefold corruption and failure of mental kamma, arisen from unwholesome volition, that with the breakup of the body, after death, beings are reborn in the plane of misery, in a bad destination, in the lower world, in hell.
AN 10.218

While the world can never be perfect, a morally uncorrupted world is described in many places in the Pali suttas, including simply as the Six-Directions & the respective duties/relationship obligations expounded within. A departure from the kammic lawfulness of the Six Directions is a corruption (rather than something "progressive").

And how, young householder, does a noble disciple cover the six quarters?
The following should be looked upon as the six quarters. The parents should be looked upon as the East, teachers as the South, wife and children as the West, friends and associates as the North, servants and employees as the Nadir, ascetics and brahmans as the Zenith
DN 31 Sigalovada Sutta The Layperson's Code of Discipline

Or the Conditions of a Nation's Welfare:

So long, brahman, as these endure among the Vajjis, and the Vajjis are
known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
DN 16

The cause & condition for the creation & maintenance of the human world is wholesome sexual & family conduct. While the world has periodically engaged in wars & other unwholesome actions, a departure from wholesome sexual & family conduct is the primary cause of the corruption of the human world & regression into an animal, hell &/or hungry ghost world.

Bhikkhus, these two bright principles protect the world. What are the
two? Shame and fear of wrongdoing. If, bhikkhus, these two bright
principles did not protect the world, there would not be discerned
respect for mother or maternal aunt or maternal uncle's wife or a
teacher's wife or the wives of other honored persons, and the world
would have fallen into promiscuity, as with goats, sheep, chickens,
pigs, dogs, and jackals. But as these two bright principles protect
the world, there is discerned respect for mother... and the wives of
other honored persons.
AN 2.9

The last instruction Milarepa gave his followers is reported to be: "Act so that you have no cause to be ashamed of yourselves."


text:
Greed over meat
Is greed over meat is more unwholesome compare to greed over non-meat dishes? Meat is non-living thing, greed is greed, they're the same. Many studies have shown that meat consumption involve in far greater number of killing compare to non-meat diet. More meat means more supply therefore more killing. So is it true greed over meat is more unwholesome?

What does B1100 expect to gain with this question? What escape might defilements try to seek?

See also the 7 other topics about meat and Theravada -- including Why is contributing to the market demand for meat not wrong?

It's a highly subjective question. Someone might desire the taste of a vegetable curry more than a meat curry. Someone might desire the taste of chocolate or ice-cream more than the taste of meat. Someone might desire liquor consumption more than meat. It has nothing to do with the number of animals killed.
On the other hand, eating meat does not require desire. Even enlightened beings consume meat. Unwholesomeness comes when you desire or dislike the taste or start worrying about whether you are responsible for the dead animal.

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

Non-Theravada answer -
Greed is unwholesome. Meat dish is more unwholesome than non-meat, simply, meat dish involved killing. Where can the meat be coming from without killing? "Meat is non-living thing...", a well-developed mind might be able to tell you this is not really true... at least meat is coming from once living being, right? [Hey, do you ever wonder why meat spelled as me + eat?? In Chinese it's written as 肉, a combination of two characters, 人(human/man) + 內(inside)?!].
You are right, meat consumption means more killing. A person who cultivates compassion will feel saddened when passing by the market at the butcher's stall, those meats hanging on hooks in blood red, the sharp knife cutting across the tissues... for this very realization the meat no long taste the same.
How do you feel when a Bhante after chewing the chicken breast tearing the flesh from the legs, with this very same hands and mouth, gives talk to the lay-people, flipping the Sutta, quoting,

One is not called noble who harms living beings. By not harming living
  beings one is called noble. -- Dhammapada, verse 270
All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place
  of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill. --
  Dhammapada, verse 129

In non-Theravada tradition, non-meat dish is praised; all the Chinese Mahayana monasteries served only vegetarian dishes. Detailed explanation in this post. If lay-people taking a Bhiksu out for meal, automatically we will go to vegetarian restaurant, to show him respect.
There are sayings of the Buddha eating meat, or his last meal was pork therefore due to food poisoning he died. One should understand its only the Theravadin interpretation. In Mahayana Sutra, the Chinese translation of Sukara-maddava is 樹耳 (tree mushroom/ truffle) since antiquity, the food in the last meal of the Buddha.

from the great link below about "The Buddha's final meal"  it seems without connection to sect there was no meat in that dish  :
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Diet_of_Buddha

@breath Good you know the fact, good dhammawiki posted the correct account. However, there's enough damage done by spreading the Buddha eating pork and died of food poison... you can google to read. Not to mention this Bhante writing "Even the Buddha ate meat". I don't know if there is inaccurate oral tradition transmitted the distorted stories in the Pali Vinaya, or incorrect translation of the text into Eng, or what. I read completely the Mahisasakas Pratimoksa in Chinese Canon, scanned two more Vinayas of the Early 18 Schools...

... checked the Mahasamghika Pratimoksa - the oldest of all Vinayas, the original Vinaya since the Buddha before the story about the 1st schism over the Vinaya - in the entire Buddhist canons across different sects; there are five versions of the Vinaya in the Chinese Canon each belonged to the different Early Buddhist Schools, none has record like the Pali Vinaya stories telling in the Pali Canon way as quoted by the Bhante.

from the link i gave :
"There appears to be one place, and apparently only this one place, where he is described as eating meat. At AN III. 49 it mentions that the Buddha was once served sukaramamsa (Pali) with jujube fruit. The term mamsa = meat or flesh.
The sutta mentions that the Buddha ate "out of pity" apparently suggesting that he wanted to please the layman by accepting his food. "

before buddha became a monk he probably ate meat  -  after he became a monk its a different story   -  monks karma of eating meat is different than someone going to buy meat or bought for him

I respect your tradition - Pali Canon and Theravada. However I cannot trust your oral tradition (even modern man trusts black and white written contracts, right?) Nor if that tradition has the totality and authentic the Buddha's words, likewise. I can list loooong list to show you, too painful in this small box. Nor I can judge if the Pali word translated correctly to English. As far as my research goes, Pali even was an invented language, it's not even spoken by any ancients, evident is that, there is none other historical text recorded in Pali, except the Pali Canon...

I would say that usually meat involves a bigger desire = less wholesome than eating non-meat food
I will not even address the moral aspect of killing as being much worse than other stuff cause i dont want to say something im not sure of
its more clear this day and age that consuming meat involves killing - that you dont need to eat it for health - that it causes bad effects to the environment
now in a decision to eat something you have a lot of elements into it wholesome and un-wholsome ... like maybe not to offend the host etc  -  in the past people might have thought they need it for their health which we know is not the case today  etc
but really if you are in the supermarket and you can buy a chocolate to snack on - its pretty clear its not wholesome and its out of greed instead of choosing something to eat purely for nutrition ...  if you buy an expensive chocalte that harms your health a litte and your money which you could have used for better purposes
to buy a more expensive food is less wholesome cause it will involve usually more greed - unless for example its a healthier food
To give up on tastier foods for other more wholesome purposes (saving money- being healthier - prevent the death of animals - not harm the environment etc) ....  is good kamma
How bad kamma wise it is to fund the killing of animals (and more accurately making someone get the bad kamma of killing animals) in comparison to buying something overly expensive for taste is im not sure -  but i do think you can say this day and age most people buying meat will be something with a good percentage of akosala intentions

It all comes down to the  intentions of the individual who is eating the meat. Many cittas happen in any one moment so there can be more than one intention while eating meat  and they can be wholesome, neutral or unwholesome.

-There could be greed for craving the meat, any food or anything.
-There could be greed for supporting someone else's unwholesome actions.

-Whether or not there is greed could depend on what the individual believes deep in the subconscious.
-Whether or not there is greed could depend on the instincts about how the  individual relates to others.

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
What is the role of karma in the wheel of becoming?
I can't seem to find resources that tell me the role of karma within the wheel itself rather than the nature of karma. Any suggestions?

On traditional bhava-chakra images, the center of the wheel shows pig, snake, and peacock - these are the three intoxicants of Want, Hate, and Confusion (really, Reification). In the next outer layer from the center are shown human figures: half of them going up and half falling down. This is karma, good and bad. Then the next outer layer shows the six realms. And the outermost layer shows 12 Nidanas.
The relationship between layers is, the inner layers serve as causes or engines for the outer layers. So the three intoxicants, mixed like paints in various proportions, give rise to various karma classified generally in the two types, and then the fruits of karma arise as experience of one of the realms. That's from the perspective of a sentient being looking from the inside out.
From the perspective of Buddha, looking at the wheel from the outside in, the whole thing is manifestation of the spontaneous individuation (bhava) aka pratitya-samutpada, represented by 12 Nidanas.
So the role of karma within the wheel itself is to create experience of one of the six realms. Meaning, the world that you experience at any given moment is a projection of your mental/emotional state, which in its turn comes from your karma and the intoxicants. So if you make effort to not act under influence of the three intoxicants, then over time your reality will change.

"Sankhara Paccaya Vinnana" - Paticca-samuppāda
Karma causes the first thought moment of the next life. In other words, it determines where you are born next. Apart from that, good Karma causes pleasant experiences and bad Karma causes unpleasant experiences throughout the life.

Nice hat, Sankha. I'm jealous :))

I see you got one too :D

Tipitaka translation version and reading study system are the main cause of your question. You can't see the answer by yourself because you never recite and memorize suttanta-pāli like the ancient buddhist people did, such as commentary teachers did.
Cause-saṅkhāra and effect-saṅkhāra
There are 2 main type of saṅkhāra words are using in tipitaka: cause-saṅkhāra, that cause effect-saṅkhāra arising, and effect-saṅkhāra, that depending on cause-saṅkhāra to arise.
Cause-saṅkhāra example from S.N. Nidānavagga Paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅga sutta:

Saṅkhārā paccayā viññāṇaṃ.
Direct translation: Fabrications cause mind.
Alternative translation: Fabrications fabricate mind.

You can see above saṅkhārā is in the cause position of sentence.
Effect-saṅkhāra example from D.N. mahāparinibbānasutta:

handadāni  bhikkhave  āmantayāmi  vo vayadhammā saṅkhārā  appamādena   sampādetha.
Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things[saṅkhārā] are subject to cease. Strive with earnestness.

You can see above saṅkhārā is in the effect position of sentence because
 buddha taught in S.N. Nidānavagga Paccayasutta:

viññāṇaṃ  bhikkhave aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā    virāgadhammā   nirodhadhammā.   ime   vuccanti   bhikkhave paṭiccasamuppannā dhammā.
saṅkhārā bhikkhave  aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā    virāgadhammā   nirodhadhammā.   ime   vuccanti   bhikkhave paṭiccasamuppannā dhammā.
avijjā  bhikkhave aniccā saṅkhatā paṭiccasamuppannā khayadhammā vayadhammā    virāgadhammā   nirodhadhammā.   ime   vuccanti   bhikkhave paṭiccasamuppannā dhammā.
Monks, mind are impermanent, produced by a combination of causes, arise on account of a cause, a wasting thing, a decreasing thing, a fading thing and a ceasing thing.
Monks, fabrications are impermanent, produced by a combination of causes, arise on account of a cause, a wasting thing, a decreasing thing, a fading thing and a ceasing thing.
Monks, ignorance is impermanent, produced by a combination of causes. Arise on account of a cause, a wasting thing, a decreasing thing, a fading thing and a ceasing thing. (Āsavā cause ignorance.)
Monks, this is called effects.

From above sutta, saṅkhatā (meaning: "effect is fabricated by causes") and vayadhammā is predicate of avijjā, saṅkhārā, and viññānaṃ. Because they are arisen by their causes. So the context of above sutta showing the condition of causes and effects to let the listener see avijjā, saṅkhārā, and viññānaṃ as effect-saṅkhāra like saṅkhārā word in mahāparinibbānasutta, above.
If you understand pāli's relation of saṅkhāra, like I have explained it above to you. You can see the role of karma.
Role of karma
Role of karma already defined in pāli, S.N. Nidānavagga paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅgasutta, as cause-saṅkhāra:

Saṅkhārā paccayā viññāṇaṃ.
Direct translation: Fabrications cause mind.
Alternative translation: Fabrications fabricate mind.

You can search more more detail of karma's role by it's nature:

‘‘katame ca, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā? tayome, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā – kāyasaṅkhāro, vacīsaṅkhāro, cittasaṅkhāroฯ ime vuccanti, bhikkhave, saṅkhārāฯ
"And what are fabrications? These three are fabrications: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, mental fabrications. These are called fabrications.

You can notice all above saṅkhāras' explanations are causes, paṭiccasamuppādā, of their effects, paṭiccasamuppannā, by bhūmijasutta in the same cannon, S.N. Nidānavagga. This sutta show that "kamma is intention, cetanā, and intention is saṅkhāra", so in many sutta taught about kāya-saṅkhāra (kāya-kamma, kāya-sañcetanā, kāya-ducarita, kāya-sucarita, puññābhisaṅkhāra, apuññābhisaṅkhāra), vacī-saṅkhāra (vacī-kamma, vacī-sañcetanā, vacī-ducarita, vacī-sucarita, puññābhisaṅkhāra, apuññābhisaṅkhāra), citta-saṅkhāra (mano-kamma, mano-sañcetanā, mano-ducarita, mano-sucarita, puññābhisaṅkhāra, apuññābhisaṅkhāra, āneñjābhisaṅkhāra) by the same context as kamma [cause] of vipāka [resultants]. You can use my example pāli words ad search by yourself.
Also, according to that bhūmijasutta, viññāṇa, nama-rupa, saḷāyatana, phassa, and vedanā in the Dependent Origination, are vipāka of saṅkhāra, too. Because no one can say "while viññāṇa arising, there is no nama-rupa arising, no āyatana arising, no phassa arising, and no vedanā arising". So, in M.N. uparipaṇṇāsa, anupada sutta taught the simultaneous arising of them:

[155]  Idha  bhikkhave  sārīputto vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi   savitakkaṃ   savicāraṃ   vivekajaṃ   pītisukhaṃ
  paṭhamaṃ  jhānaṃ  upasampajja viharati   .   ye   ca  paṭhame  jhāne
  dhammā  vitakko  ca  vicāro  ca pīti   ca   sukhañca   cittekaggatā
  ca  phasso  vedanā  saññā  cetanā viññāṇaṃ  1-  chando  adhimokkho
  viriyaṃ  sati  upekkhā  manasikāro tyassa dhammā   anupadavavatthitā
  honti   tyassa   dhammā   viditā   uppajjanti viditā   upaṭṭhahanti
  viditā  abbhatthaṃ  gacchanti  .  so  evaṃ  pajānāti
  Evaṃ  kirame  dhammā  ahutvā  sambhonti  hutvā
  pativentīti  1- . So tesu     dhammesu    anupāyo    anapāyo
  anissito    appaṭibaddho vippamutto   visaṃyutto   vimariyādikatena
  cetasā  viharati  .  so  atthi uttariṃ nissaraṇanti pajānāti
  tabbahulīkārā atthi tvevassa hoti.
“Again, bhikkhus, Sāriputta, overcoming thoughts and thought processes, the mind internally appeased in one point, with joy and pleasāntness born of concentration abides in the second jhānaThese things of the second jhāna such as internal appeasement, joy, pleasantness, one pointedness of mind, contact, feelings, perceptions, intentions, interest, resolution, effort, mindfulness, equanimity and attention, follow one after the other, to him. They rise, persist and fade with his knowledge. He knows, these things come to be and cause feelings to rise. When these things follow one after the other, he abides with a mind that does not settle, is not bound, is released and unyokedand is unrestricted. knows there is an escape beyond this. With much practise they come to him.

This sutta  taught about jhāna, and jhāna is puññābhisaṅkhāra and apuññābhiaṅkhāra in A.N. ekādasakanipāta, aṭṭhakanāgarasutta. So simultaneous arising in anupadasutta referring to cause-saṅkhāra. However, pāli-student should use simultaneous arising with effect of the cause-saṅkhāra in the Dependent Origination, too, because when someone birth they must have viññāṇa, nama-rupa, saḷāyatana, phassa, and vedanā. Except asaññasatta-brahmma, arūpa-brahmma, and saññāvedayittanirodhasamāpatti-person, no one live without them, right?
There is no pāli error
But saṅkhāra in  M.N. 44 cūlavedallasutta is not cause-saṅkhāra, so the pāli-student can not compare  saṅkhāra in  M.N. 44 cūlavedallasutta with saṅkhāra in bhūmijasutta and paṭiccasamuppādavibhaṅgasutta. So the fact is, it is not pāli's error".
Explanation of saṅkhāra in M.N. 44 cūlavedallasutta
M.N. 44 cūlavedallasutta taught about effect-saṅkhāra, because visākhā-upāsaka was anāgāmi-ariya, and dhammadinnā-therī was arahanta-ariya, and both ariya already ceased five kāmaguṇa attachment, so visākhā-upāsaka asked dhammadinnā-therī about jhāna which causes the cessation of five kāmaguṇa attachment. And jhāna causes the cessation of in-&-out breaths, directed thought & evaluation,  and perceptions & feelings, too. Therefore dhammadinnā-therī answered:

Assāsapassāsā   kho   āvuso   visākha   kāyasaṅkhāro   vitakkavicārā
   vacīsaṅkhāro   saññā   ca   vedanā   ca   cittasaṅkhāroti.
"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

Because 4th jhāna causes the cessation of in-&-out breaths, 2nd jhāna causes the cessation of directed thought & evaluation,  and saññāvedayitanirodhasamāpatti  causes the cessation of  perceptions & feelings [saññāvedayitanirodhasamāpatti translation: "the achievement  to cease the  perceptions & feelings"]. So in  D.N. Dasuttarasutta, ten Ariyan methods of living, taught about bodily fabrications (kāya-saṅkhāra) are ceased by 4th jhāna. Also, bodily fabrications (kāya-saṅkhāra) use in ānāpanassati-jhāna method in mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta, too. Both sutta enough to show that bodily fabrications in M.N. 44 cūlavedallasutta referring to effect-saṅkhāra.
Then, you will not do an reader error:

AN 6.63 states: "kamma is intention". In the Dependent Origination, intention (cetana) is first mentioned at nama-rupa (4th condition).
It is one of the greatest errors & corruptions to regard "sankhara" (2nd condition) as "kamma" because sankhara (in SN 12.2) is defined (per MN 44) as the in & out breathing (kaya sankhara); initial & discursive thought (vaci sankhara); and perception & feeling (citta sankhara). Bhikkhu Thanissaro explains this very well in the meditative examples in his book The Shape of Suffering.
Suttas, such as SN 14.12, show clearly that intention & kamma do not occur at sankhara (2nd condition), where sankhara is distracting thoughts & perceptions produced by ignorance (where ignorance, the 1st condition, includes the sensuality element or asava), as follows

So, I often say "Tipitaka translation version and reading study system are the main cause of your question. You can't see the answer by yourself because you never recite and memorize suttanta like the ancient buddhist people did, such as commentary teachers did."

@chrisW Help me please to check. I know I do too much asking for your help. But I have no one who I trust he can understand my answer. Thank you very much, I very appreciate for your help.

Please avoid directly disputing other answers like you did here ("error like @dhammadhatu done"). This has a danger of leading to a flamewar. Instead, imagine that you are writing an encyclopedia article - you would not debate with other books if you were writing an encyclopedia, right? Just stay neutral and objective in your tone&style, and this will lead to better reception by other users and will avoid debates. I just took liberty and removed all references to dhammadhatu in your answer, I hope this did not damage your answer too much.

Why no one still not notice, what I letting you see? Why he can do, but I can not? Why no one advise him? Why you all look like "debating with the tipitaka-distorter is worst, but tipitaka's fact-distorting is no ploblem, like encycropedia analysis? " We use the same word "error", right? And he did it first before I did, right? We can see it, here, right? And the pāli that I quote to you is not the same as he wrote, right? It is his error, not tipitaka's error, right? >>> he wrote 'It is one of the greatest errors & corruptions to regard "sankhara" (2nd condition) as "kamma" ', right?

Yes, but he did not say it was Bonn's error. He just said it was an error, and that is Okay (not perfect, but Okay)

Since it is all about the topic, one may find this useful as a guide:

Kamma: A Study Guide, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (2000; 48pp./145KB)
  An overview of the Buddha's teachings on kamma (karma; intentional action).
The Karma of Questions
  As the author writes in the Introduction: "There's no such thing as a totally idle question. Every question, even the most casual, carries an intention." Since one's intentions shape the course of one's entire spiritual journey, learning to ask the right kinds of questions plays an essential role in any spiritual practice. This collection of essays explores the nature of questions in the Buddhist path. Essays include: Life Isn't Just Suffering, Opening the Door to the Dhamma, Questions of Skill, Freedom from Fear, Samsara, Samsara Divided by Zero, The Agendas of Mindfulness, De-perception, The Weight of Mountains, File Piles of Bricks, and "When you know for yourselves...".
  Available in various formats at dharmatalks.org. To request a free printed copy of this book, please write to: Metta Forest Monastery, PO Box 1409, Valley Center, CA 92082 USA.
The Road to Nirvana Is Paved with Skillful Intentions
  According to the basic principle of karma, our underlying intentions play a crucial role in determining the ultimate fruits of our actions. As the author explains in this essay, if we're genuinely interested in pursuing the goal of the Buddha's teachings, it's not enough that we act merely with good intentions; rather, we must learn, through honest self-reflection and association with virtuous and wise friends, to cultivate skillfulness in our intentions.
   A printed copy is included in the book Noble Strategy.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]

AN 6.63 states: "kamma is intention". In the Dependent Origination, intention (cetana) is first mentioned at nama-rupa (4th condition).
It is one of the greatest errors & corruptions to regard "sankhara" (2nd condition) as "kamma" because sankhara (in SN 12.2) is defined (per MN 44) as the in & out breathing (kaya sankhara); initial & discursive thought (vaci sankhara); and perception & feeling (citta sankhara). Bhikkhu Thanissaro explains this very well in the meditative examples in his book The Shape of Suffering.
Suttas, such as SN 14.12, show clearly that intention & kamma do not occur at sankhara (2nd condition), where sankhara is distracting thoughts & perceptions produced by ignorance (where ignorance, the 1st condition, includes the sensuality element or asava), as follows:

Bhikshus, dependent on the sensuality element [ignorance], perception of sensuality arises [sankhara];  dependent on perception of sensuality, sensual
  intention [nama-rupa] arises; dependent on sensual intention, sensual desire
  arises [craving]; dependent on sensual desire, sensual passion arises; dependent
  on sensual passion , sensual quest [attachment] arises; engaged in the quest of
  sensuality, the uninstructed worldling conducts himself [becoming] wrongly in
  these three ways—with the body, with speech and with the mind. SN
  14.12

Note: the 'asava' ('outflows') are included within ignorance in MN 9.
Therefore, mental kamma or mental intention 1st comes into play at 'nama-rupa' (mind-body; 4th condition), namely, when ignorance takes control of the mind-body & the mind-body inclines (namati) towards pursing the ignorant urges & formations produced by ignorance & sankhara. About 'nama-rupa', SN 12.2 states:

Feeling, perception, volition (intention), contact and attention — these are called mentality. The four great elements and the material form
  derived from the four great elements — these are called materiality.
  SN 12.2; MN 9

For example, you are quietly meditating then a sensual urge suddenly spontaneously erupts. The sensual urge/energy is from ignorance (1st condition) & the distracting sensual thoughts & perceptions are sankhara (2nd condition). At this cross-roads, the mind & body (nama-rupa), if mindful, can choose/intend to ignore or calm the sensual urge & thoughts or, otherwise, if unmindful, can intend (4th condition) to follow the sensual urge & thoughts. This is the first occurrence of intention in the dependent origination, namely, at the 4th condition.
Then kamma (mental, verbal & bodily) becomes mature at "becoming" (bhava), as explained in AN 3.76. Note how there must be craving for kamma to fully occur.

Lord, this word, 'becoming, becoming' — to what extent is there becoming?
Ananda, if there were no kamma ripening in the sensuality-property, would sensuality-becoming be discerned?
No, lord.
Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance &
  fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a lower property. Thus
  there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.

In conclusion, meditation is required to comprehend dependent origination for oneself (rather than believe in unverified ideas of scholars). It is important to discern in meditation that the distracting thoughts & urges that spontaneously arise are not volitional or not intentional. Given these spontaneous urges (avicca; asava) & spontaneous thoughts & perceptions (sankhara) are not volitional, they cannot be "kamma" because kamma is intentional action (per AN 6.63).

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


text:
Pathway to Nirvana
As a complete beginner to Buddhism, what steps should I follow to get closer to enlightenment?
Should I study Buddhism and meditate or should I move to a monastery?
I know that to attain nirvana, one must discard the desire of nirvana.
But one must work towards it in one way or another.
So, what are the actions required for one to get closer to nirvana?

Stong desire for Nibbana is needed and look of what the Buddha told, Nyom Divyansh Gupta: Into the Stream

Start keeping to the five precepts and do Satipattana meditation on a daily basis. Keep to 8 precepts on full moon days. Apart from that, study the Dhamma when you get free time.

Systematically work to identify and let go of attachments to opinions and generalizations, especially ones that stir emotions.
Meditate. Just take a moment to sit down and sit, no need for instructions.
Read some Buddhist books and think about them. Try to see how they map to your day-to-day life.

To attain Nirvana, yes, discard the desire for Nirvana & everything else, as the meditation master says from 4:32 in this video called 'Ajahn Chah - Mindful Way'.
Ideally, to practice to know or attain Nirvana, a person should live in a meditation monastery for a dedicated period of at least one year so they are free from worldly burdens.
To get closer to Nirvana, harmlessness is the most important action, particularly in relation to sex. If there is not Right View about sex, the five hindrances to Nirvana will be difficult to overcome.

Does the desire for Awakening get in the way of Awakening?

The Buddha's doctrine of kamma takes the fact of skillful action, which can be observed on the ordinary sensory level, and gives it an importance that, for a person pursuing the Buddhist goal, must be accepted on faith. According to this doctrine, skillful action is not simply one factor out of many contributing to happiness: it is the primary factor. It does not lead simply to happiness within the dimensions of time and the present: if developed to the ultimate level of refinement, it can lead to an Awakening totally released from those dimensions. These assertions cannot be proven prior to an experience of that Awakening, but they must be accepted as working hypotheses in the effort to develop the skillfulness needed for Awakening. This paradox — which lies at the heart of the act of taking refuge in the Triple Gem — explains why the serious pursuit of the Buddhist path is a sustained act of faith that can become truly firm and verified only with the first glimpse of Awakening, called stream-entry. It also explains why a strong desire to gain release from the stress and suffering inherent in conditioned existence is needed for such a pursuit, for without that desire it is very difficult to break through this paradox with the necessary leap of faith.
Wings to Awakening

Not to assist with fools but associate with the wise, this is the first and highest blessing and protection torward liberation and freedom of suffering, for this world, the next and beyound.
Kalyāṇamittādivaggo: Good companionship and others

"With regard to external factors, I don't envision any other single factor like friendship with admirable people as doing so much for a monk in training, who has not attained the heart's goal but remains intent on the unsurpassed safety from bondage. A monk who is a friend with admirable people abandons what is unskillful and develops what is skillful."

Association with People of Integrity
Listening to the True Dhamma
Appropriate Attention
Practice in Accordance with the Dhamma

Avoid fools and association with them, those no shame in doing evil and spread unskillfulness like poision!

The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits, the truth goes against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some things which we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we take to be right may be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are in darkness, we don't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the truth. (Ajahn Chah, A Taste of Freedom

And his teacher about fools:

The Lord Buddha taught that his Dhamma, when placed in the heart of an ordinary run-of-the-mill person, is bound to be thoroughly corrupted, but if placed in the heart of a Noble One, it is bound to be genuinely pure & authentic, something that at the same time can be neither effaced nor obscured.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]


text:
Can a Bhikkhu yell at or beat a lay person under the vinaya?
In the vinaya of the Theravāda, it is an offense for a monk to insult or be abusive to another monk (pacittiya 2). But I don’t see any reference to a prohibition from yelling at a lay person (and I know of some instances when some bhikkhus have behaved disgracefully in this regard).
For that matter, there seems to be no prohibition in the vinaya on beating the hell out of a lay person either without the use of a weapon (short of killing them).
Is that right or am I just missing the rule where this is prohibited?
Notes:

Please don’t reply with references to what is implied and what is common sense etc. I know that. The question is specific to whether there is a prohibition in the letter of the monastic code.
While the 5 lay precepts do guide against harsh speech, no prohibition on a lay person silently beating someone either.  This is also not lost on me, so it’s not really useful to point out that “what about the lay precepts?”  .  The question is regarding the Vinaya in its role as community rules, not as guidelines for wholesome personal behaviour.

Even torward a cat, insects or non-human, neither insulting nor even beating would be proper and allowable, in cases against humans it might be even seens as heavier then toward a fellow or novice.
It falls like many other things (really and by far, not all has been caught in special wording or rules) under that what is called derived offenses, some are mentioned in commentary or sub-c. or "just" to figure out at times, using the great standard:

"Bhikkhus, whatever I have not objected to, saying, 'This is not allowable,' if it conforms with what is not allowable, if it goes against [literally, "preempts"] what is allowable, that is not allowable for you.
"Whatever I have not objected to, saying, 'This is not allowable,' if it conforms with what is allowable, if it goes against what is not allowable, that is allowable for you.
"And whatever I have not permitted, saying, 'This is allowable,' if it conforms with what is not allowable, if it goes against what is allowable, that is not allowable for you.
"And whatever I have not permitted, saying, 'This is allowable,' if it conforms with what is allowable, if it goes against what is not allowable, that is allowable for you." — Mv.VI.40.1

Something actually very hard for those not tending to higher virtue.
The BMC1 tells about Pc2:

To insult a bhikkhu incurs a pācittiya; to insult an unordained person — according to the Commentary, this runs the gamut from bhikkhunīs to all other living beings — a dukkaṭa.

For example. My person would not agree, since generally "foreign-policy agenda" are generally given more sensibility. If we take the cases in BMC2 in relation with lay people it allows the Sangha to take on disciplinary measures.
See Reconciliation BMC2 and the story of Cv.I.18.1-5

The Community, if it wants to, may impose a reconciliation transaction on a bhikkhu endowed with any of the following qualities:
a) he strives for the material loss of householders, for the detriment of householders, for the non-residence of householders (so they can't live in a certain place); he insults and reviles householders; he gets householders to break with householders;
b) he speaks in dispraise of the Buddha to householders, speaks in dispraise of the Dhamma to householders, speaks in dispraise of the Saṅgha to householders, ridicules and scoffs at householders about something low or vile, does not fulfill a righteous promise made to householders [C: this includes accepting an invitation for the Rains retreat or any other similar promise].

Generally in regard of the basic precepts, not to speak about kammic effects, there is no exclusion for Bhikkhus at all and the Vinaya contains aside of "foreign political" and community rules specifical special mentionings of cases where Bhikkhus obiviously had to less objectivity, such as water filter, digging earth... It's importand to understand, that Vinaya rules are for the most cases for very undeveloped minds and wordlings. Whom would one need to tell about issues of being in water, earth or possible endangered by uncontrolled fire... if not someone who is far away from higher virtue and controll of the sense faculties and mind.
How to handle things is always a case to case matter, requiring people with lot of knowledge and understanding of Vinaya so that the right kind of offense class is selected.
So aside of the Patimokkhas 227 rules, 1000 in Mv and Cv and other books, "countless" other cases need to be deriven form the given set and especially today many have of course real problem.
One, like also mentioned in the Suttas, who trains firm in higher virtue, concentration, wisdom, would aside of community and costume rules have no problems at all, sticking firm to the basics and fundamentas precepts.
There are those who argue just in literary ways, even thinking (following the words) that Bhikkhus might have more ease than Samaneras for example, or householder and there are also many cases where householder rules are explained by the Vinaya standards, but that is mostly wrong. Vinaya should be seen as addition to the basics to have common min. standards and not as replacements at all. Again, not to speak of kammic effects, where there is no difference in what ever cloth one might wear.
Hope that this short explaining could ease in the regards of shock displayed in the question.
In cases where a lay person might be really ill willed harmed by a monk it's good and proper, if no backwards need to be feared, to speak out such cases to other trusted monks since it is not good, for anybody, to keep problem, possible also misunderstandings, a burden for good relation. "Sadly" such as "opening the Vihara" is not really broad known and practiced but a good and performed way to clean things up, used here in Cambodia, for example, in the Dhammayut Nikaya. When lay people see grave problems they are given to call for "opening the Vihara" where they then are given to bring up their cases in front of an assembling of monks and possible the involved people. Not that such is a desired and pleasant event, but it is a very good tool for healing and clarify possible misunderstandings as well since it is somehow public.
At least one should not forget that a Bhikkhu is not immune and excluded in regard of criminal law for cases where the Sangha is not really capable to handle cases. Beating and serious ill-willed insult are no trivial offence in most counties. Of course it's better to solve it in amicable arrangement but in certain countries one would be even obligated to legally report it.
If a monk deprives lay people from their possessions and states, advocate such, promote such and tell others to do, if a layperson loses (such as a legal case, right or wrong), he insures a Pārājika, the same also in regard of killing. There are actually many "monks" who, by Vinaya, are no more. Think on certain movements, euthanasia, abortion... hate speech toward not beloved, support of legal actions... So stay away from those and be sure that merits toward those are just for harm in the world and will seldom bear even small fruits. Even association with them or using things from them will have much disadvantages for one, cuts one off from good monks and the Savaka Sangha.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]


text:
Greed and karma
What is the difference between greed and karma?
For instance, a person eats meat greedily, greed for meat but no direct killing. Another person kills a cat (not for food) but he is not greedy. Which one is more unwholesome or causing more suffering, killing or greed?

I have a question , why people kill animals ?
if we eat meet have to kill animals. think its a death animal meet. what about if jungle has 10 rabbits and 10 people need to eat rabbits, what happen after eating all. people need rabbits but no any rabbit. so farmer came and starts a new rabbit farm , so what happen according to need and supply chain ... ? If you eat more someone needs to kill animals for fulfill your requirements.

Greed is one of the 3 defilements that causes bad Karma. The other 2 are aversion and ignorance. A greedy thought is bad Karma.
Killing is caused by aversion. It is more unwholesome and causes more suffering compared to craving for the taste of meat. Because killing breaks the first precept.

Is there any difference in terms of unwholesomeness or consequences between greed over meat that comes from farmed factory animals (more suffering) and greed over meat that comes from animals that live in the wild, which one is worse? There is no intention to kill but do we have to concern the difference, if any?

It all depends on the strength of the greed in the individual at that time. General comparison is not possible.

But does different sources of meat i.e. farmed factory animals vs wild life animals make one outcome is more unwholesome than the other besides the greed alone?

As I've mentioned before unwholesome is not something outside the mind. We are going around in circles. :) All your examples become irrelevant as long as they are outside of the mind.

So the unimaginable suffering an animal has gone through makes no impact at all to the greddy human who eats it? He is only responsible for his own greediness, is that what you are saying? I'm having hard time to understand this, it goes against logic.

That's how Karma works. What logic it goes against?

Is that a "Yes"?

It is! It's not so difficult to fathom if you start meditating.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Why seaching after better evil? Why not striving for abstain of evil and follow what one him/herself wouldn't harm?
How can there be killing, harming life, without greed, desire, thirst (tanha), caving after sensual pleasure, becoming, not-becoming/being?
Killing and taking of what is not given, abuse and lying, speaking untrue and for a favour, always involves desire for one or another food (joy from physical nurishment, touch/contact, intellectual intention, consciousness). Just look attentive. That's corruption (duṭṭha), nothing else. Don't feed corruption in ways of thinking, in ways of association, nurishment and entertainment.
Why seek for better foolishness and don't go after the wise? What does one expect on such looping tracks of views and stands. Dhamma is simple: abstaining from harming life is skillful and beyound that, in this regard, there is no good. Entertaining ones intellect? Such causes a lot of pain, for one self and many.
There is no such as aversion and in it's extrem killing when there is no such as big greed and love (tanha for sensuality, becoming, not becoming/being) on first place. And there is no such as greed if there is not strong delusion at first place, wrong view, not-knowing.
Hatred, aversion, is "just" the other side of love, the twin brother, honey (his poision) for the fool:

thinking, 'O, that what belongs to others would be mine!' He bears ill will, corrupt in the resolves of his heart: 'May these beings be killed or cut apart or crushed or destroyed, or may they not exist at all!' He has wrong view, is warped in the way he sees things: 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how one is made impure in three ways by mental action.

So at least it's all a matter of how strong delution is, how obviously basic right view.
On it wrong resolve/intent/will is based, which is base of actions by body, signs, thoughts.

Right Resolve
"And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve.

It's not possible to kill (by one self, bodily), order to kill (speech, signs), or approve killing of what ever being (thoughts of agree, acceptance, joy for benefit of what one regards as own, or good, e.g. killing the "bad" is also forced by selfidentification, desire), for what ever purpose, without strong unskillful mind (connected with greed, aversion, delusion), without strong effects and causes.

Ways of acting
"Bhikkhus, followed by those three things, one is headed and designated for hell.[13] Which three? One self takes life,[14] instigates others to take life, and approves taking of life. These, Bhikkhus, are the three things, of which one is headed and designated for hell."
"One self speaks what is not true,[18] instigates others to speak what is not true, and approves speaking of what is not true..."
"One self abstains from speaking of what is not true, instigates others to abstain from speaking of what is not true, and approves abstaining from speaking of what is not true..."
"One self has wrong view,[24] instigates others to wrong view, and approves wrong view..."
"One self has right view, instigates others to right view, and approves right view. These, Bhikkhus, are the three things, of which one is headed and designated for heaven."
Good companionship and others

"Bhikkhus, I do not know anything else that arouses non arisen merit [1] and fades arisen demerit[2] as good companionship. Good companions arouse non arisen merit and fades arisen demerit. This is the first.
"Bhikkhus, I do not know anything else that arouses non arisen demerit and fades arisen merit as evil companionship. Evil companions arouse non-arisen demerit and fades arisen merit. This is the second.

The Second Section on Heedlessness

"Bhikkhus, those who point out wrong Dhamma as Dhamma, Bhikkhus, those archive harm for many people, suffering for many people, for the sorrow and suffering of heavenly and human beings. Much demerits, Bhikkhus, those produce, for the disappearing of the true Dhamma.

Truly unfortunate are many if looking with whom and where they associate, what they pay rebut to... May they work on their ways out!
Because beings, not arrived at Dhamma yet, are unable to distinguish between defiled and right judgment of what is intention, of what quality the mind actually is, one does good to stick simple by "not taking life/destroy life/take existence of beings" (of what ever kind they came into being, by oneself, in order, or agree). Later it will be not different but just naturally. Such ideas of doing bad might be good are ideas of fools who are good to be avoided striktly.

Not consorting with fools,
  consorting with the wise,
  paying homage to those worthy of homage:
      This is the highest protection.
highest protections/blessings

And what should be killed?
Kill possible all notions to associated, assist, approve, nurish, accept and entertain (upadana) toward actions and signs of them inwardly and before outwardly to success. This is the kind of aversion and disgust the wise approve, like to be extrem "greedy" after liberation, after right view and not getting lost in a thicket of wrong views and improper attention.

"What do you think Dhanañjani? There is the case where a certain person, for the sake of his mother & father, does what is unrighteous, does what is discordant. ...for the sake of his wife & children ... his slaves & workers ... his friends & companions ... his kinsmen & relatives ... his guests ... his departed ancestors ... the devatas ... the king, does what is unrighteous, does what is discordant...for the sake of refreshing & nourishing his body, does what is unrighteous, does what is discordant. Then, because of his unrighteous, discordant behavior, hell-wardens drag him off to hell. Would he gain anything by saying, 'I did what is unrighteous, what is discordant, for the sake of refreshing & nourishing my body. Don't [throw] me into hell, hell-wardens!' Or would others gain anything for him by saying, 'He did what is unrighteous, what is discordant, for the sake of refreshing & nourishing his body. Don't [throw] him into hell, hell-wardens!'?"
"No, master Sariputta. Even right while he was wailing, they'd cast him into hell."...
"Dhanañjani, there are other activities — reasonable, righteous — by which one can refresh & nourish one's body, and at the same time both not do evil and practice the practice of merit."

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]

I used to fantasize about killing my neighbor's cats (because the cats killed the native birds in my garden & killed some small native trees I planted). I used also fantasize about killing my neighbor's dogs because they bark at night & bark at people, unnecessarily. However, fortunately, at least one of the neighbor's dogs killed one of the neighbor's cat so now there is only one cat.
Buddhism teaches kamma is intention and the results of kamma (action) depend on the quality of the intention. Killing motivated by greed or hatred generates a negative result. But killing from a good intention (such as to save native birds & trees) does not generate a negative result.

As a monk told me there is no killing from a good intention  maximum it can be mixed but always there will be bad kamma involved  --  hope you dont kill a cat and risk your advancement because of it - or even falling back

@breath Advanced practitioners can act to engage in killing, such as have pet cats to kill rats. The purpose of the teachings is liberation & not bondage. I live in an isolated natural place, with native wildlife, that is World Heritage listed. We have petitioned the govt to ban cats, but the old people will get lonely. That people live here with cats & dogs is ignorance. The cats & dogs kill the endangered native wildlife. In many places, pigs are killed by professionals in the forests to protect wildlife & the forest. The monk you spoke to sounds superstitious & not a stream-enterer.

i actually wont be surprised if his an arhant judging by actions and behavior

what value have buddhism has to native wildlife spices ?  what value it has of not killing living beings ?      anyway everything aside im not a great convincer in the internet (i do think i am face to face)  and my english isnt great and clarity isnt great i just really hope you dont go killing an animal anyways  - judging by your comments in genral you do seem to be in a good place and it would be a shame to ruin it

don't worry. i don't kill animals. but if we can make cats illegal, i would prefer this.


text:
Why do we still don't know exact birth & date year of the Buddha?
I just want to know:
1)Why do we still don't know exact birth & date year of the Buddha?
2)What are the factors that is limiting in knowing Buddha's birth & death year?
3)Why many people/countries/traditions contradict? Many countries following different traditions, follow different Buddhist calendar year i.e. years since Buddha left.
4)Even the recent Nat Geo Excavations reveal he might be born in 6th Century B.C. A 2013 news which still doesn't official claim nor does it leave a convincing conclusion till date, on whether their findings are indeed perfect or not. Nor their findings seems to be accepted if its true.
5)Does the pali text gives any reference to the same?

This seems to be a question about the difficulty of getting exact dates from the archaeological record when there's no historical record (or an imperfect historical record). You might get a better answer if you ask this on the History.SE site.

@ChrisW:Ok i will try that.....

Knowing the precise date of the Buddha's birth is not very useful knowledge within the Buddha's teaching, as it is presented in the Pali Suttas. How will knowing this precise birthday help any student transcend their own suffering? Only the most worldly and materialistic forces within any tradition would care about such superficial things.
The Pali Suttas(and arguably the Sanskrit Sutras) are the closest to what the Buddha actually taught. All traditions derive their truth from the Suttas/Sutras and other truths that might or might not be so compatible with the Buddha's actual original teaching. These additions were made for reasons of culture, politics and practicality IMHO.
If one wants to know what was likely the truth that the Buddha taught then one might stick to the core teachings that the Buddha repeated over and over again in the Suttas/Sutras.
It seems to me that these core teachings fit within themselves with great precision. Their potential is so awe inspiring to me that I wonder what, in 2500 years, has been stopping so much of humanity from embracing the Buddha's teaching or any teaching like the Buddha's teaching.-Metta :)

"...seems to me that these core teachings fit within themselves with great precision..." because it's the truth, truth is not learnt, it's naturally presented everywhere. Wisdom is not learnt, though learning is a process to arrive at not-learning. The highest is Nothing-to-learnt (無學), usually refer to Arhat.

@lowbrow: you are right when it comes to HIS teachings, I was just curious how on earth we still don't have any idea about it & reason behind it. Was it improper documentation or something like that.

@Mishu right but all audiences aren't ready for that...or maybe they are depending on the way the teacher teaches.

Yes, the personal history of the Buddha is very poorly documented I think. I'm not even sure he was a prince. It could be that he was just a well off individual. It is possible that many suttas that have not been repeated over and over again by the Buddha were not as true as we might want to believe. At least that's how it has been taught to me from various  teachers. This doesn't mean we can't be humble to the Buddha whatever  the truth is. If you see the Dhamma, you see the Buddha.

The story of the Buddha's life according to the Pali Canon can be found here. According to it, the Buddha lived for 80 years.
A chronology of the Buddha's life and Theravada Buddhism can be found here.
According to this Wikipedia page, Year 1 of the Buddhist Calendar started on 13 May 544 BCE according to the Burmese religious tradition and the 11 March 545 BCE according to the Thai religious tradition. Historical or archaeological dates for the Buddha's passing are around ±100 years from the traditional dates.
From here:

BE = Buddhist Era. Year 1 of the Buddhist Era calendar is the year of the Buddha's Parinibbana (death and final release), which occurred
  in the Buddha's eightieth year (480 BCE according to the "historical"
  timeline; 544 BCE by tradition).
The actual date of the Buddha's birth is unknown. According to Buddhist tradition, the Buddha's birth took place in 624 BCE, although
  some recent estimates place the Buddha's birth much later — perhaps as
  late as 448 BCE {1}. 560 BCE is one commonly accepted date for the
  Buddha's birth, and the "historical" date for that event that I adopt
  here.
Events in the timeline prior to -250 CE are shown with two CE dates: the date based on the "traditional" nativity of 624 BCE,
  followed by the date based on the "historical" date of 560 BCE. After
  -250 CE the "historical" date is dropped, since these dates are more appropriate only in discussions of earlier events.
To calculate the CE date corresponding to an event in the Buddhist traditional calendar, subtract 544 years from the BE date. The BE
  dates of well-documented historical events (particularly those in the
  twentieth century) may be off by one year, since the CE and BE
  calendars start their years on different months (January and May,
  respectively).
{1} The Buddhist Religion: A Historical Introduction (fourth edition)
   by R.H. Robinson & W.L. Johnson (Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1996)


text:
How come Devdutta is also Buddha's brother-in-law?
In this wiki article it says Devdutta is his Brother in law but how?

Devadatta (Buddha's cousin ?): MN 29, MN 58, AN 8.7, Iti 89

If Yasodhara and Devadatta were the children of Suppbuddha, they are brother and sister. Then, how could devadhatta fall in love with Yasodhara? There is some confusion here. Please explain.

Marrying within the family was common in many parts of the ancient world, especially among royalty. The Buddha’s family was no exception.
Yasodharā (who married Siddhārtha who went on to become the Buddha) and Devadatta were children of Suppabuddha. Suppabuddha was Siddhārtha’s uncle, being the brother of the sisters Māya (Siddhartha’s birth mother) and Pajāpatī ( his stepmother who actually raised him after Māya died at childbirth ).
So Devadatta was the Buddha’s cousin, brother-in-law, playmate/rival while growing up, follower and ordained student after Siddhartha was enlightened, an important leader in the Sangha*, a causer of a schism in the Sangha, a would-be plotter of his death.  A complex figure  who has been caricatured and narrowed down in the eagerness to paint everybody as either hero or villain.  A book that discusses this is Buddhist Saints of India by Reginald Ray 1994.
As an aside, it was said that Devadatta’s father, Suppabuddha also was pretty antagonistic towards the Buddha, first because of anger that he had abandoned his beloved daughter to go forth as a samaṇa and later also on account of tensions that his son had with the Buddha.

"praised by the Buddha as one of his “top ten” at one point"  - When was this? Got any reference?

@SankhaKulathantille Sorry, 11, not 10. Please see edits in the answer. Thanissaro Bhikkhu in his Udana translation notes that in the PTS list Ven. devadatta is at number 10 in this list and Ven. Ananda is at number 11. The Thai, Burmese and Sri Lankan rescensions have only 10 people approaching the Buddha, but they differ on who the 10th one is (Sri Lankan says Ananda, but the other two say Nanda). In any case, the point is not which one is the “true” version, but that that that character is less monochromatic in some readings than one might hear from the uniformly negative portrayal.

Not sure where you got the list of 11 but Devadatta isn't even among the 80 great disciples:  http://threegems.org/articles/sangha/historical/eighty-great/1/

@SankhaKulathantille Well, I don’t know what it means where I got the list. I cited my source in the answer already. Here, I’m moving it to the comments section as it’s not central to the main answer.

Footnote*-Devadatta is even counted among 11 disciples whom the Buddha terms “Brahmans” (translated in this context as saints) at one point according to the PTS version of Udāna 1.5. Please note that this differs between versions. The other versions drop Devadatta from the list.

I was expecting a link that lists the said "11 great Brahmans".

@SankhaKulathantille It does. Last paragraph on the first page of the linked document.

okay, thank you!

Prince Sidhdhaartha married princess Yasodhara . Devdaththa was the brother of Yasodhara. so prince Sidhdhaartha 's brother in law was him.
Basically before marriage Devadaththa was Sidhdhaartha's cousin. His mother was a blood relative for Sidhdhaartha's father


text:
Vajrayana VS theravada - after death theories - do they contradict each other?
As far as i understand the having opposing views  about what happens between after you die until you are reborn again right ?  or do they "sit together" some how ?

Can you give a citation or some reference, or maybe an example of what you heard?

i dont know much about this subject and im probably wrong about what i heared  - but for example that in Theravada you reincarnate straight away (a few moments)   and in Vajrayana there is the a journey before  --- also im not sure what sects this belongs to but that a spirit of someone is next to the body for some days after also thats why you dont want to move the body much ?  (and i am sure its a buddhist who said that not another religon)

ruben2020  just gave an answer which is what i heard more or less

From Wikipedia on the Tibetan bardos:

Kyenay bardo (skye gnas bar do): is the first bardo of birth and life. This bardo commences from conception until the last breath, when
  the mindstream withdraws from the body.
Milam bardo (rmi lam bar do): is the second bardo of the dream state. The Milam Bardo is a subset of the first Bardo. Dream Yoga
  develops practices to integrate the dream state into Buddhist sadhana.
Samten bardo (bsam gtan bar do) is the third bardo of meditation. This bardo is generally only experienced by meditators, though
  individuals may have spontaneous experience of it. Samten Bardo is a
  subset of the Shinay Bardo.
Chikhai bardo ('chi kha'i bar do): is the fourth bardo of the moment of death. According to tradition, this bardo is held to
  commence when the outer and inner signs presage that the onset of
  death is nigh, and continues through the dissolution or transmutation
  of the Mahabhuta until the external and internal breath has completed.
Chönyi bardo (chos nyid bar do): is the fifth bardo of the luminosity of the true nature which commences after the final 'inner
  breath' (Sanskrit: prana, vayu; Tibetan: rlung). It is within this
  Bardo that visions and auditory phenomena occur. In the Dzogchen
  teachings, these are known as the spontaneously manifesting Thödgal
  (Tibetan: thod-rgyal) visions. Concomitant to these visions, there is
  a welling of profound peace and pristine awareness. Sentient beings
  who have not practiced during their lived experience and/or who do not
  recognize the clear light (Tibetan: od gsal) at the moment of death
  are usually deluded throughout the fifth bardo of luminosity.
Sidpa bardo (srid pa bar do): is the sixth bardo of becoming or transmigration. This bardo endures until the inner-breath commences in
  the new transmigrating form determined by the "karmic seeds" within
  the storehouse consciousness.

Above, you can see that the fifth and sixth bardos are located between death and rebirth.
However, the Theravada view according to Ven. Narada Mahathera from his book The Buddha and His Teachings, chapter 28:

In the foregoing case, the thought experienced before death being a
  moral one, the resultant rebirth-consciousness takes for its material
  an appropriate sperm and ovum cell of human parents. The
  rebirth-consciousness (patisandhi vi?āna) then lapses into the
  Bhavanga state.
The continuity of the flux, at death, is unbroken in point of time,
  and there is no breach in the stream of consciousness.
Rebirth takes place immediately, irrespective of the place of birth,
  just as an electromagnetic wave, projected into space, is immediately
  reproduced in a receiving radio set. Rebirth of the mental flux is
  also instantaneous and leaves no room whatever for any intermediate
  state (antarabhava). Pure Buddhism does not support the belief
  that a spirit of the deceased person takes lodgement in some temporary
  state until it finds a suitable place for its "reincarnation."

From the above two excerpts, it appears that the Tibetan and Theravadan views are contradictory.

The orthodox Theravada view is that the mind cannot exist without form except in the formless realms. Even in the cases of people floating around like ghosts after death, there's no proof that the mind exist independently of form. If they can see, hear, feel things it's very likely that they have some form of subtle body.

Life in between, existence in between, would be existence as well, or? So to give it a special notion, this rebirth as well, does not make much sense aside of possible willing to serve the everywhere common cultural aspect of untrained people in the teachings of the Noble Ones, that there is a lasting, independent spirit, searching for new body.
As Upasaka Sankha Kulathantille told in his answere, there is no mind without matter, no being without object. That counts as well for the "non"-material states, which just have mind objects instead of classical matter as object.
After each death, decay, a rebirth follows, moment for moment, as well for lager appearences of aggregating, which are common taken as living being.
Many existences are very short or "fail" after boming into being in a womb, so that they are regarded as having come into being at large. There might be the mystery of this distinction be found.
In folk perceptions there is no difference, exept of time and traditions in detail, within different countries and cultures and can be traced in western world as well, even in modern stories and movies, my person guesses.
The "living being in search for becoming" accurs also in the Pali canon, thinking on the Karaṇīya Metta-Sutta and may serve here especially to catch all possible perception a person may have in regard of existence and living.

Bhūtā vā sambhavesī vā,
Those born as well as those seeking rebirth

Events for the "in between being individual" are celebrated in Theravada folk-near Buddhism and daily life as well, but mostly not really made to a doctrine derived from the Buddha, by serious teachers and monks. But similar, and also popular at large, can be found as well, as it gives favors in many aspects for those willing to buy and trade for the sake of becoming.
The main different between the tradition might be, that Vajrayana seems to be more devoted to the world and serve its desires and ideas, while Theravada seems to focus more on liberation it self. How ever, Buddhas Dhamma, the good teachings, serve both in it's best possible way, so actually not that much requirement to stick to much to later developed notions and to much to cultural aspects, althought they might also serve certain purposes in given circumstances.
May you soon no more come into being, may your rebirth end! :-) do you like it?
The Bardo-questions here, by the way, could still not be valid answered by the followers of certain sects.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]

No they do not.
31 Planes of Existence is cosmological theory valid across all Buddhist religions, Theravada, Mahayana, Tibetan (Vajrayana), and even new branches such as Nichiren Buddhism.
This wheel of rebirth is a basic fact of life accepted across all eastern religions actually and was common accepted knowledge in the time of the Buddha.
However, Tibetan Buddhism goes into the most detail of this post-mortem transmigration process with tips and tricks to help the noncorporeal spirit get closer to enlightenment (because it is easier to enlightenment at certain points in time when one is without this body).

and does theravada think that the reincarnation process is a few moments while tibetians think it can be days ?

Nope. Buddha talks about the gradual dissolution of the elements from the body which a smart person can correlate to the much more detailed after-life description of Tibetan's. They do not contradict but explain in more detail. This is the nature of of the Buddhist teachings--the COMPLEMENT each other and not COMPETE.

In the Pali suttas, 'death' is the unenlightened ending of a state of attachment or acquisition, which is a form of sorrow & suffering. Therefore, what happens after death in the Pali suttas is sorrow & suffering. The Pali suttas say

As he explores he understands thus: ‘The many diverse kinds of suffering that arise in the world headed by aging-and-death: this suffering has acquisition as its source, acquisition as its origin; it is born and produced from acquisition. When there is acquisition, aging-and-death comes to be; when there is no acquisition, aging-and-death does not come to be.’
As he explores he understands thus: ‘Acquisition has craving as its source, craving as its origin; it is born and produced from craving. When there is craving, acquisition comes to be; when there is no craving, acquisition does not come to be.’
SN 12.66


text:
Is jhana taught in Pure Land Buddhism?
Most of the books I have read really don't cover the Pure Land segment. There is a local Pure Land group and I was wondering if they (Pure Land Buddhists in general) teach and practice jhana as part of the path to awakening?

Pure Land practice survived only in the Chinese lineage, for only the Chinese Canon has the totality of the Twelve Sections of the Sutras. The other lesser lineage has only one section of the Sutra (Sutta) with large portion missing, could be due to their lack of writing media relied only on oral memorizing. Example, Madhyama Āgama [Wikipedia has most of the articles on Buddhist topics written by Theravadin sympathizers with distorted accounts or misleading narrations] has 222 Sutras but the counterpart Pāli Majjhima Nikāya kept barely 152 Suttas. The Twelve Sections of Sutras such arrangement of all the Buddha's teachings were recorded in the Vinaya(s) recounting the historical event of the 500 Arhats collecting the Sutras:

Mahisasakas Pratimoksa

迦葉即問阿難言。佛在何處說增一經。在何處說增十經大因緣經僧祇陀經沙門果經梵動經 (Do these Sutras exist in the Pali Canon?? Anyone without bias knows the correct answer)。何等經因比丘說。何等經因比丘尼優婆塞優婆夷諸天子天女說。阿難皆隨佛說而答... 名雜阿含。此是從一法增至十一法。今集為一部名增一阿含。自餘雜說今集為一部。名為雜藏。合名為修多羅藏 (Sutra Treasure)。我等已集法竟。
(A Vinaya existed in Ceylon belonged to Mahīśāsaka School, collected by
Faxian (337-422CE). However, it's so unfortunate we found none this Vinaya existed in the Theravada Pali Canon, who self-claimed the oldest tradition or of the "Early School" - how does it relate to the old Sthavira apart from holding a name that meant "elder"?)

Sarvāstivāda Vinaya

三轉十二分法輪行 (Three turning of the Twelve Dharma Wheels)... 得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。(The Twelve Dharma Wheels are the Twelve Sections of the Sutras, with Prajna Paramita as the 2nd Wheel, which reconfirmed if one read the Prajna Paramita Sutra in it said as the 2nd Wheel)

Dharmaguptaka Pratimoksa

大迦葉即問阿難言。梵動經在何處說。增一在何處說。增十在何處說... 如是生經本經善因緣經。方等經 (方等: Vaipulya, meant deep deep very profound teachings = Mahayana teachings, survived only in the Chinese Canon, one of the Twelve Sections) 未曾有經譬喻經。優婆提舍經句義經。法句經... 集為阿毘曇藏 (Collected as Abidharmas Treasure)... 時即集為三藏 (at that time there collected Three Treasures (Tripitaka))。

Tibetan Buddhism has practice based on Amitabha, and very high level of visualization meditation related to Amitabha (very few got such knowledge) - correct me if I missed something.
All cultivation the fruition must come through some form of Dhyana (Pali: Jhana), even dealing Koan the mind must be in a state of Dhyana so that the clarity of mind be obtained to see beyond the conceptual contriving.
Therefore the real Pure Land practice is a Dhyana practice, in short. However, I cannot know what you saw of that local group, since most of the real Buddhist practices are done in the wrong way the meanings are lost these days.
Pure Land the practice method is generally called 念佛 (Niànfó, Japanese: Nembutsu). The real meaning of this character 念, is remembering, or recollecting, even with a sense of missing (missing like missing someone dear to you, here the dear one is Buddha Amitabha, in simplicity). This remembering most common expression is by chanting the name. Chanting can be a loud chanting, or chanting for your own self to hear, or chanting in your heart silently. By this very method, the practitioner's thoughts (fetters) are abandoned, focusing only on ONE thought, that is Amitabha. He should chant and hear his own chant, he should "lose" himself, the chanter and chanting becomes one... This the most effective for modern man to achieve Dhyana, since human faculty in general is in declining cycle from the Buddha's time. Of course there are exceptions.
More sophisticated practice is related to visualization meditation, taught in  Amitāyurdhyāna-sūtra, of 16 scenes. Each of these scenes has profound effect, and meaning.
A related post is here. There are more important Sutras related to Pure Land, also the higher meanings, however it seems here to keep this simple is just right. Often time, Ch'an (Japanese: Zen) may incorporate Pure Land, or vice versa.

Who is Amitabha? For modern man who incapable of relating to immaterialistic existence this can be explaint neatly with modernized materialistic etymology, same as Avalokiteshvara, or Manjushri...

Well, I am not an expert in entire Tibetan Canon, but since it exists, just like many Pure Land practices in many Tibetan lineages do, and since Tibet is culturally different from the mainland China, I suppose the Chinese Canon is not the only source for this Practice.

@Manjusri neither am I familiar with Tib. Canon, but historically part of Chinese Canon bought to Tib. during Tang Dynasty, vested in. Post. My insight is, Tib. Canon contained many "sophisticated" practices, or calling in "demons" (they called wrath deities, protectors, etc.) due to their cultural background; also they prefer texts from later development of Buddhism, mixed in their tribal belief. It could be an asset if one an adept, also poison for some. Amitabha practice in Tib. is related to extending life, too... a mystic practice.

Not everything that comes from Tibet is Buddhism. There many lineages, just like there are many Pure Lands, and the lineages are, roughly, Bon ( 'BlackHats'),Old School Buddhism ('Red Hats') and newer lineages of Yellow Hats. The wrathful deities are often thought of as manifestations of peaceful ones, and many Vajrayana wrathful deities come from the Hindu tradition (in fact, I suppose that only Red Hats accept Bon spirits as parts of their practicies, of which not all are classified as wrathful ones).

In short, I think Tibetan Buddhism has a lot of practicies to learn to distinguish between reality and illusion, or a superficial  impression made by an object from its true nature.

Encompassing and objective, good @Manjusri :) (Manjusri the wisdom embodiment, one of my favourites. Have you read the 《佛說魔逆經》? About Mj made Mara spoke how to defeat Mara himself. Likely no eng. transl. Maybe I should do this one :)). My understanding of TB is general but more than general. Not details about the schools but I read the real Buddhist school is Jonang wiped out by 5th D. Lama - they reappearing but not sure if the same. Only this school taught real understanding of Tathagathagarbha.

@Manjusri Trimondi is informative I'm reading, insider knowledge. But it got too obsessed with explaining everything in the framework of Male/Female struggle or Female Sacrifice. I'm not sure if TB got the correct interpretation of Emptiness (reality/illusion), still investigating...

There are eighteen different types/interpretation of emptiness concepts in Tibetan buddhism; the Gelug-pa lineage often describe the emptiness as interdependence.

@Manjusri I did not study those, but my insight tell me if there eighteen, then all are partial, not the ultimate interpretation. I read the Classical Chinese Prajna-paramita Sutra (not finished yet) there investigating the Emptiness - very profound, translated by Kumarajiva. I again the insight those translations (Edward Conze, etc.) are with faults; or corrupted when translated to Tibetan, or corrupted when back-translated from Chinese to Sanskrit... like Heart Sutra... too complex to explain here...

The male/female dihotomy is described in
Vairocanabhisambodhisutra as follows: 'What is the mind of a man? It means What is the mind of a man? It means to think about benefiting others.What is the mind of a woman? It means to conform to the dharma of desire.'  http://www.bdk.or.jp/document/dgtl-dl/dBET_T0848_Vairocana_2005.pdf

See also the Chinese version (in symplified characters, sorry): http://www.fodian.net/zjj/view.aspx?file=T/08-mijiao/T18-j/T18n0848.TXT

An ultimate interpretation would be the completely identical texts in  a source language and in a target anguage, wich would mean the identity of  the both forms, which is impossible, because forms are different. Hence, there is no corruption (in my opinion), because 'emptiness is the form' and a permanent ultimate trouth cannot be rendered by impernmanent words and/or languages.

Will read those links, thanks. Simplified characters are ok for me (if you learn Chinese better the classic for then it's easy to understand simplified but classic much complex to memorize). It seems we have misunderstanding on "ultimate interpretation". Anyway in many levels of emptiness it could be realized, the Ultimate is the real Emptiness which I doubt if it's understood in the TB, that's why there are faults in them... complex ...too complex... @Manjusri

I don't see any faults in my persons and/or Tibetan texts of sutras.

It seems to be clear that Pureland practice focuses nearly exclusively on Jhana and refined becoming while teaching in regard of wisdom, incl. the explaining of Jhana and becoming seems to be merely total absent. Isn't the main aim, or general objected aim there a becoming in a refined sphere of being in the Immaterial World and joy in concentration their main focus?
Of cause, my person is not really into those spheres of undertakings by the Westernland-seeker and those being, dwelling there.
Maybe an answer: "No, just, merely uninstructed and not noted/know, practiced" might be proper.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]


text:
What are Buddhist perspectives on psychedelic drugs?
I have head psychedelic drugs described as a gateway that can lead people to Buddhism, and to very powerful meditation practice. I have also heard the drugs were frowned upon by ancient Buddhist teachings. What do you know about the ancient and modern Buddhist attitudes toward these drugs?

you mean stuff like LSD, psilocybin mushrooms, mescaline cactus, and DMT? Were they even known in ancient East?

Related topics: Were psychedelics used in the past by Buddhists? -- Are there any specific stories or talks where Buddha discussed using mind altering substances other than alcohol? -- Can we reach enlightentment with recreational drugs?

John Hopkins is currently doing a boatload of research in this area (e.g.).  While I personally find all this very interesting and cannot possibly argue against the use of psychedelics in palliative care, I don't think they are appropriate in the context of Buddhist practice.  This is especially true for beginners; maybe not so much for advanced practitioners.  The experience of jhana or any mystical experience isn't nearly as important as the journey that gets you there.  As profound as the insights that issue from a bright, malleable mind can be, they are absolutely secondary to the transformation that is won through the sweat, effort, failure, patience, and resolve that characterizes long term meditation practice.  The bumps and bruises are what transform us.  They also better prepare us to receive and make use what wisdom is to be had in the jhana state.

The fifth prescept, to abstain from taking indoxication, which causes heedlessness makes clear, that such has no base in the Dhamma and it's practice like taught by the Buddha. Certainty it can be observed that drugs lead many to what is called Buddhism, and usually even monasteries are much populated by heedlessness producing products consuming people as well as Monks and Nuns deriving from this sections, like here, even play around on this matter...
One does good to follow the advices of the Buddha to keep away from drugs if inyeresed to free and liberate youself from addictions and desires and uproot the cause, food, for it. The indoxications with youth, health and live, are the first nedded to be seen as not conductive for long lasting happiness. Seeing oldage, sickness and death clealy and having the messenger suggesting psychedelic medicine insteed of helpful healing in for of renouncing and the great Samanas message, is merely the ordinary way to hopless try to escape from suffering, stress and pain.
Let hindrences better be then to test if the Buddha was right on avoiding it and to simply abstain out of convition, at first, from it, till path might be actually taken and suggestiins become clear and no more necessary in on save journey from that on till unbound.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]

The main first point of the dhamma is to stop, once and for all, worrying about sensuality of the usual 5 senses and of the 6th sense of, in daily life, the intellect with its ideas, opinions, fantasies and other casual »mental proliferation«, which is accomplished by dwelling temporarily in the jhanas, especially in the fourth jahna, to experience for the first time something different than sensuality through the 6 senses.
Once this is experienced, it is time to focus on the challenge, on the phase of the »contact« of the »dependent origination« to prevent this contact to happen, whether on the senses or what is left to live beyond sensuality, and which generates all this »dukkha«; because it turns out, that whatever is felt is rubbish, especially through the 6 senses, or at least not good enough when it comes from something non-sensual, and only normal people claim otherwise.
The psychedelic medicine could at best facilitate the first goal --- by remaining on the level of sensuality and could build an alternative to the vajrayana practice à la vajrayanists who love to claim that the craving of sensuality can be destroyed through sensuality itself --- but as with any practice relying on curiosity of the senses and their enjoyment, there would still lack the skills to dwell in the fourth jhana; and even worse, it is useless for the main goal of the doctrine and practice.

The following is my personal opinion.
I assume that a mind-altering drug might be appealing to people who are disatisfied with (their perception of) reality-as-it-is, and who crave (thirst for) for something else (some alternate reality).
I think Buddhism recommends that you better perceive reality, and avoid views (e.g. views of self), and craving.
I fear that psychedelic drugs will distort your perception of reality ... like, "I don't like the view of reality which I see in the mirror of my mind: and so, I'll use drugs to warp or break the mirror!" The after-effect of taking the drug (i.e. a warped or broken mirror) may last longer than the initial episode (so it may do a semi-permanent harm, not just a temporary harm). And if the effect is only temporary then what's point ... do you need to make a habit of it, become a regular drug user?
Using mind-distorting drugs is not what Buddhism recommends (Buddhism recommends a Middle Way, ethics, learning dharma, dispassion, and associating with admirable people as friends).
Also psychedelic drugs tend to be disabling, make you less capable than you were. I think the effects tend to be sensual (e.g. "colours seem bright" or "music sounds entrancing") and cognitive (e.g. "I can fly" or "I am powerful") ... and should probably be regarded as delusions. I'm not sure what the point is of new views (especially novel views-of-self) which happen at the same time as being unable to take care of yourself and others ... it may be a new disability, not a new ability.
I assume that what leads people to Buddhism is a desire to escape suffering and to make sense of the world (i.e. to hear a sensible description of the world, which is more or less what dhamma is). I assume it's that "seeking" which might lead a person to discover Buddhism, might alternatively lead a person to experiment with drugs ... I don't think it's the drugs, necessarily, that lead to Buddhism: instead maybe drug use is a side-track or blind alley on the way towards discovering Buddhism.

Nothing can distort whatever you experience though and that is what we are looking at. If a drug causes seeing consciousness of butterflies coming out of one's belly button then that is seeing, the concept of it is unimportant. If you think you can fly, well, that's just thinking. The content is not really so important here. All views are wrong view so it doesn't matter that you really can or can't fly because that is conceptual.

I trust there is much statistical evidence that psychedelic drugs are a gateway drug that can lead people to Buddhism; similar to how mental illness has lead many mentally ill people to Buddhism.
However, I doubt there is any statistical evidence that psychedelic drugs lead to very powerful meditation practice. For example, there are a well known talker about Buddhism & psychedelic drugs named "Sam Harris", who has not given up sensuality & talks about the possibility genociding all Muslims because he believes Islam did 9/11. I think anyone that has not abandoned sensuality & promotes the genocide of every Muslin nation has not had any powerful meditation.
In fact, powerful mediation (e.g. the 4th jhana) in Buddhism is described as a state of mental purity therefore any chemical residue to psychedelic drugs in the bloodstream or braincells will prevent mental purity.
My impression is people who experience a glimpse of selflessness using psychedelic drugs spend more time talking about it than meditating.

to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime—as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day—but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe...
Sam Harris

Where did Sam Harris  talk about the possibility genociding all Muslims?

How does chemical residue in the bloodstream prevent mental purity? There are all kinds of chemicals in our bloodstream, it doesn't make our mind impure necessarily. Also, what does the question have to do with Sam Harris and Islam anyway?

I would advice not to take drugs though cause i can think about many bad sides to it that are certain  while their benefits are debatable - and thats the main point ....    i can see how easily drugs can completely destroy ones practice

some points :

The 5 precepts are clear not to use drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness  and the  5 precepts are really the basics of  buddhsim  - the precept relevant for us :
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.
Surāmerayamajjapamādaṭṭhānā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi.
drugs are really connected strongly to greed to attachment which is very anti-Buddhist
buddhism is to not attach to aversions and greeds and by that to gain wisdom
I understand hard experience in general can also lead to Buddhism - but for instance if you fall and break both legs and back and have huge amount of pain which somehow got you closer to buddhism  maybe the pain will prevent you from advancing maybe the bad health will prevent you from advancing  or advancing fast
so it might be the same case with drugs that they have some benefits but in general the disadvantages are much higher .... especially for someone asking about this or anyone reading this which is already interested in buddhism ! so the plus in getting into buddhism is not there anyway -  plus there is a very big chance people have the kamma to get into buddhism and if one event (fall/drugs/breathing/eating/scratching) wouldnt have happened than another one would happen that would lead them to buddhism