text:
Why can't we accord the theory of evolution?
What's the Buddhist view of evolution of mankind? Why can't we accede to the theory of evolution? Can we get same path of an evolution theory and aggajha sutta?

Why we can't accord theory of evolution??

The Buddha's Teaching is a not a theoretical teaching but a practical teaching. The Buddha invites one to come and see1 for oneself.
In SN 1:20 - Samiddhi Sutta, its taught that; "This Dhamma is here-present, out of time, inviting inspection, leading onward, to be realized by the wise each for himself".
Human beings, mankind and evolution are all concepts that do not have any real reference point, ie. a reference to Ultimate reality.
The question becomes meaningless when observed from a practical/meditational point of view. The question belongs to the Four Imponderables, namely the origin-element.
The Buddha teaches only about suffering and how to become free from it.

What's the Buddhist view of evolution of the mankind?

Insight meditation will show that "the evolution of mankind" is merely a concept belonging to the 4th aggregate of mental formations.

1"Ehipassiko" is a Pali
 word used to describe the investigative nature of Buddhism. Discouraging blind faith alone, the Buddha encouraged his disciples to "come and see" his teachings for themselves, to witness the fruits of this practice through direct experience.

Aggañña Sutta covers the Buddhist perspective on evolution.
Darwinian theory covers the evolution from the perspective of the evolution of physical creatures with corporeal bodies. Aggañña Sutta takes this further and discusses this how the world system forms and how being with finer material bodies from higher places come to take corporeal form. More on this see the discussion of Piya Tan's commentary on Aggañña Sutta.
Related Suttas include:

Satta Suriya Sutta
Kosala Sutta 1
Cakka,vatti Siha,nāda Sutta

Agganna Sutta and Darwinian theory reveal different way of origin of human beings.We have thought only about Darwinian theory in school. So what We accept among both of them?

I would believe in the Buddhist rendering. Any way they are perhaps compatible. Dawin only touchers origin of life on earth with coarse bodies, i.e., bodies leaving fossils. Buddhist perspective include more subtle being in other planes of existence and how progressively lower realms came to being. Also there would be simplification and analogies so the contemporary people could understand also so some rendering may not be literal.

The Aggañña Sutta is superstition, not spoken by the Buddha or, otherwise, merely a parable.
Since suttas such as AN 4.77 & MN 122 criticise talk about 'creation', why would the Buddha contradict these teachings and speak the Aggañña Sutta?

Conjecture about [the origin of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring
  madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it. AN 4.77

If, while he is dwelling by means of this dwelling, his mind inclines to speaking, he resolves that 'I will not engage in talk that is base,
  vulgar, common, ignoble, unbeneficial, that does not lead to
  disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calm, direct knowledge,
  self-awakening or Nibbana — i.e., talk about kings, robbers, &
  ministers of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing,
  furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns,
  cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street &
  the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the
  world & of the sea; talk of whether things exist or not.' In this way
  he is alert there. MN 122

Most of The Aggañña Sutta can be able in science theory without parable. Buddha also is not  anti-superstition, too.
Just the western who try to distort theravada tipitaka decided that Buddha  is  anti-superstition.

Ordinary people with ignorance will not know the nature Dhamma and will make a dispute over matter wasting valuable time in vain. Buddha teaching is simple and timeless. By practicing(not by just reading, thinking or discussing) insight meditation, one will surely come to know what is rupa/nama, how it come and go incessantly and how it will end suffering. Science will need more time to prove this but not yet. With spear piercing in the chest, one cannot get chance to trace back the source. All the being passing through the beginningless/endless samsara not only as human but also as other being in different abodes(including animal life) in countless number will have an answer. Some being nearer to human will have more closer to human in general. If one like the habit of an animal(eg. a cow/monkey/dog) surely with ignorance will lead to that life in after-birth and vice versa. Kamma is simple if one know the absolute truth, if not it is probably thought as miraculous.

Over the years, the Dalai Lama has attended many International Symposiums for Contemplative Research sponsored by the Mind and Life Institute. During these symposiums, the Dalai Lama has listened to many world class scientists talk about science. In response to these symposiums, he has written several books. In one of these books, he clearly recommended that, when science and Buddhism disagreed, consider science to be correct. If someone could recall in which book he said this I would appreciate it.


text:
Upostha Sila in normal daily life
I'm thinking of taking the upostha sila for 7 days targeting for a Pooja. And I am employed in a software engineering company so I'll be working for 5 days out of 7.
Can you give me any advices on how to take the 8 preceps and how to protect them avoiding obstacles that could harm them during these working days? Some Sutta references are appreciated as well (if any)
-Metta

You might not be able to do this the traditional way.
But Sila is a promise to abstain. The promise can be to the Triple Gem of another person. Best is to make the promise to the Triple Gem.
Throughout the day recall the promise and see if you have broken it. If so take it again. If not make a determination to keep the posimie recollecting which precepts you have taken.
The skillful karma from the Sila is in the initial taking, recollection and retaking as well as the determination. So do the recollection retaking often with strong determination.
Also Sila has many level. Initially this can be like a rite or ritual. At an intermediate level it is based on Brahmavihara as breaking the precepts will harm or make other or oneself unhappy can cause negative karma for oneself, and at a higher level it is at level of sensation. The sensation is what gives arise to the unwholesome roots. So abstain from action which are unwholesome triggered by the respective sensation. More on this see: Kīta,giri Sutta.

The other answer is perfect. So in short I better recommend taking the precepts keep it firm and not to break, mindfulness in every day activity and loving-kindness will surely help you. Sadhu,Sadhu,Sadhu.

Sadhu, Upasaka Akila Hettiarachchi! On this full-mond Uposatha today.
Everybody is able to walk the path upwards and this is the way. Those are the precepts of lay people, possible to be undertaken in "normal" life and hoods and guiding one on the eightfold path torward liberation.
Suttas: The 8 Precepts

These training rules are observed by laypeople during periods of intensive meditation practice and during uposatha (lunar observance) days. The Eight Precepts are based on the Five Precepts, with the third precept extended to prohibit all sexual activity and an additional three precepts that are especially supportive to meditation practice.

Should one come accross people discouraging one, remember:

"It's no gain for you, Sakyans. It's ill-gotten, that in this life so endangered by grief, in this life so endangered by death, you sometimes observe the eight-factored uposatha and sometimes don't.
Sakka Sutta: To the Sakyans (on the Uposatha)

Should you (one) have any questions, feel free to ask further here, in regard of refuge, and Silas.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gains)

So is doing the this for 7 days a good thing? Or something else? I'm thinking of doing 7 dad per month.

Start without doubt and full of joy and best following the Buddhas advice. Mudita, @AkilaHettiarachchi 1 day, not to speak of one week, one month...

One question. About the 8th precept, how is it violated? Does sitting on a sofa or other types of chairs break it? Does sleeping on a normal bed break the rule? How is it violated?

There are certain factors taken from the roles of monks. The practical way is to maintain a modest mind setting. So when you get aware of "oh let's enjoy this soft, high, nice place and forget anything else" that's to point you seek now for a low and maybe harder place. What ever invites to laziness, to feel above, to pride and high self esteem, avoid it. Try to sit all day straight, not leaning and just for bed time lay down. In such a way you are actually already in the highes training, vipassana, by you noble addept. Try to figue out what drives you to use this and that and then make choice

-es. You will know in this way by your self, don't worry, Nyom @AkilaHettiarachchi . The links above have technical explainings but my person does not recomment them for people really liking to practicing. Mudita.

Try to keep your sense under control, try to appear like moddle, feel like being on the stage and tousands are watching your noble undertaking. Actually there will be countless Devas attend and rejoicing in observing you. So keeping that in mind, no need to worry about technical things. The Devas will help you and tell you, if with pure heart and joy undertaken @AkilaHettiarachchi Mudita.

As long as they live, the arahants — abandoning high & imposing seats & beds — abstain from high & imposing seats & beds. They make low beds, on a pallet or a spread of straw. Today I too, for this day & night — abandoning high & imposing seats & beds — abstain from high & imposing seats & beds. I make a low bed, on a pallet or a spread of straw.'

This was taken from the link your provided sir. The Buddha specifies types of seats. But this was eligible for those days. What about for the 21st century?

That is very motivating @SamanaJohann. I will keep that point in mind

This Dhamma is alkaliko (timeless). Sleeping on the floor and use simple & low seats, best without something to lean on is not only great for body and its health but also to train the mind so that learns to do not depend on outwardly support to be well & fine. Just keep in mind that you train to appear like a Noble One and such does not depend on time, location, job or sociaty. Humble and mindful, aware and controlled the sense, one shines like the moon & rejoices of being blameless, Nyom @AkilaHettiarachchi . Detail talk is disliked here. Upasaka & all others are always welcome at sangham.net

Purpose of 8 precepts is to stay away from 5 sensual pleasures.
if eating one meal a day is too much for you on work days (tho if you are a software engineer and are not required physical work), mango juice might help elevate some hunger pain at night, and also Buddha allowed phala (fruit) drinks for monks in the evening.  I believe milk isn't. I believe milk is considered food.  From personal experience, sensual pleasure through tasting is one of the toughest enemies.
Also, dancing and musics etc..  use your judgement of what is considered entertainments.  Example, video games, Buddha did not mention it but you get the idea.  To me, following some code of conducts without intellectual understanding of their meanings is a 3rd fetters.  Not much good will come out of doing it.  (I'm certain not trying to be rude here) but my golden retriever has near perfect 5 precepts but i doubt he would get anything out of it. He would not steal my food even if i leave my plate on the floor because he was trained not to take food not given.

My advise would be, to have a complete understanding why you are doing
  it and what good it will benefit you.
  Anumodana

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What does the term 'Sammasambuddha' mean?
Buddhists, from children to monks, chant the following homage to the Buddha:

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

What does the term 'sammasambuddhasa' mean?

Refer to Sammāsambuddha Sutta
https://suttacentral.net/sn22.58/en/bodhi

“The Tathagata, bhikkhus, the Arahant, the Perfectly Enlightened One,
  is the originator of the path unarisen before, the producer of the
  path unproduced before, the declarer of the path undeclared before. He
  is the knower of the path, the discoverer of the path, the one skilled
  in the path. And his disciples now dwell following that path and
  become possessed of it afterwards.

the title of the sutta gives a nice hint that it's about to answer the question :) Saptha's answer is really good, but always better to provide a sutta reference.

We pay homage to the Buddha by saying ”Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa” three times. The widely practiced translations of it take the following forms:
“Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy (Exalted) One, the supremely (fully) Enlightened One!”
“Homage to the fully Enlightened One who found the truth about the existence and became free of all defilements!”
“Veneration to Him, the Most Exalted, the Purified, the Supremely Enlightened Buddha (the Rightly Self-awakened One.)”
Here the term Sammâ-sambuddho means  that Buddha understood the Four Noble Truths without anyone’s help. Buddha is really the one and only Teacher who first taught the Four Noble Truths. These Truths explain the realities of life. Buddha understood the realities of life, without anyone’s help. By knowing this, we can establish an unshakeable confidence based on this quality.
There can be only one Samma Sambuddha, in the entire universe, at any given period. During most aeons (Kalpa), there are no Samma Sambuddhas. Hence they are very rare. A Samma Sambuddha is called ‘Asama Sama’, i.e. incomparable with any other being but can be compared only to other Samma Sambuddhas who had lived in the distant past. Hence it is not feasible for all to aspire to be a Buddha.
The Buddha himself said that the best way to pay homage to him is to learn Dhamma and to follow the Path. This is the more deeper meaning of the Namaskaraya, “Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa”.
Once Buddha said, “Attä hi attano nätho, kö hi näthö paro siyä”, meaning, ”One indeed is one’s own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one?”. Each one has one’s own mind. And that is what is needed to be purified in order to attain a peaceful life now, a better life in the next, or even Nibbana. But it all starts with going for refuge in the Buddha Dhamma & the Sangha. When we say the Namaskaraya with understanding and resolve, we develop citta pasada or calmness and joy of mind.

There are two types of Buddhas, depending upon their abilities, one is Samma Sambuddha and other is named as Prakket Buddha, according to Buddhism.. To become a Buddha by doing his own sadhana without help of any Guru or spiritual master is very rare phenomenon and that is achieved by both Buddhas, But what distinguish them is that after enlightment only Samma Sambuddha has  ability to teach the dhamma to world. This ability is not found in some Buddhas are called  Prakket Buddha. Both are reverential, honorable. Prakket Buddha doesn't mix with world much, always live in forests, hills. But Samma Sambuddha goes village to village, city to city to teach Dhamma to the people of all walks of life . He is Guru of Devtas world and human word. He leads the Devas and humans towards Nirvana.

What I have been understood is that Buddha is sammasm Buddha when he decided to distributes the knowledge of Dhamma to the general public and it's Gautam Buddha alone who is sammasm Buddha. No other Buddha became sammasm Buddha as they kept knowledge of Dhamma upto themselves. Hi

Just because no one knows who the current sammasambudhha is doesnt me he does not exist on this earth right now?

all_licenses: 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/


text:
Is there any proof of Karma theory & rebirth?
Non Abrahmic religions like Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism & Sikhism believe in Karma theory & rebirth.

I'm interested in knowing the proofs of Karma theory & rebirth presented by Buddhism.

Why downvote??? There were no evil intentions behind asking.

I see this is a nice question seeking knowledge asked from student aspiring for deliverance of living in a conditioned world. +1. My advice to the questioner is, this is a public forum knowledge/opinion should be taken with discern, these answers represented some of the schools' teachings. These schools are, such as Mahayana (teachings recorded in the Chinese Classical Sutras and very rarely trending in English Buddhist communities), Vajrayana (Tibetan), or, modern Theravada (based on the Pali Canon).

There is no evidence the questioner is not aspiring for deliverance of living in a conditioned world. If the questioner was aspiring for deliverance from the conditioned world; they would have asked another type of question.

@Dhammadhatu we can deliver to the world if we can give proofs of Karma theory.

In my opinion, Abrahamic religions also teach reincarnation, in that they teach that a permanent essence migrates to a different vessel/body (i.e. "heavenly body") upon the death of one body.

Buddhism differs from others in that rebirth is not a transmigration of a Soul, nor of any specific entity. It is more of a statement that perceived experience being subject to conditions - finding itself empty of any and all self referential properties - cannot logically be seen to either have a concrete beginning nor a concrete ending, whilst the conditions for the arising of said experience are present.
When the notion of an Essential, Independent and Unchanging Atman/Soul is taken at its word, then at birth and death, that Soul must either appear from somewhere, or disappear somewhere, respectively, as Essentialist religions infer.
The Buddha's aim was to show that what is directly perceived - impermanence and non-self - does not allow for termination of the conditioned (as that would be a process with a permanent conclusion), nor does it allow for some unconditioned and unexperiancable entity flirting off to invade somewhere else, as that is not directly perceivable by entities that depend on conditions for their perception..
The point is that there is no duality of 'cessation of the conditional'+'non-cessation of the non-conditional'. There is simply the continuation of conditionality. Ending the process of rebirth is the act of removing whatever conditions make up the necessary support for some conditionally-defined object: there is no 'rebirth' for my desire to drink, because I have removed the necessary conditions for this conditioned entity called 'me' to lunge for booze - the condition removed is craving for beer. This craving is removed volitionaly - volition being the arbiter of Kamma and its fruit: empty of volition? Empty of Kamma and hence empty of rebirth.
(I will be the first to say that this logic works a lot easier for 'beer' than for the entity labeled 'me'. But there is no concrete dividing line between the two concepts - as for any two concepts - given that true Independence is not possible within conditionality, so the beer example should be a decent starting point!)

Can you suggest me Sutta to understand this concept better?

Personally I would say that in order to start thinking about rebirth, as within the Pali Canon, one must have a very good grasp of anicca and anatta, as the theory of rebirth deals with a conditioned process. MN109, especially the last quandry: "So — form is non-self, feeling is non-self, perception is non-self, fabrications are non-self, consciousness is non-self. Then what self will be touched by the actions done by what is non-self?", as thought by a monk - is often how people attempt to tackle rebirth imo.. "If no permanent self is directly perceivable, then what gets reborn?"

But I don't think the Buddha would have framed rebirth solely on non-self (and certainly not 'self', as the above questions do to a degree), but on non-self and impermanence together. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel248.html#great I would read to get to some of the more intricate points the Buddha made on Kamma. Insight into rebirth is left within the canon for very advanced meditators (which to outsiders can sound like needing a theta level 12 or whatnot in scientology), but if you first focus on understanding anicca, anatta and kamma, rebirth should be less awkward!

I'm not one of those super meditators btw, my post is really more my current understanding of rebirth.. I mainly put rebirth aside when I found the suttas - at least until the core insights mentioned above were relatively well understood. (it's either one of the more advanced insights of the Buddha, or a later corruption of the texts - deciding either way, for yourself, requires a good base understanding of the whole message!)

Okay thanks. I've searched online. It is being a matter of debate whether not self is egolessness ( no identification ) or devoid of self. Both versions have their own explanations, even Gautam Buddha didn't say clearly - he said both extremes are hurdles...

There are many, especially in the western world, who’d rather have Buddhism without rebirth because they do not believe in rebirth. They are turned off by the concept of rebirth because most major religions are based on three levels of existence: This life, and one of two eternal stages of life thereafter.  It is either heaven or hell for eternity based on what one does in this life. Also they just cannot fathom the possibility of being reborn as an animal
The concept of rebirth is a paradigm-changing concept, and one needs to put aside all preconceived notions to understand this core message.  The reason rebirth is a core message is that this life is only but an insignificant time in the cycle of rebirths that we have been on from eternity.
The sense of urgency to follow diligently in this Dhamma Path comes when one realizes suffering in many of the lower realms of existence is much worse than that in the human or even the animal realm. When one gets more and more into Dhamma, one realizes that rebirth is an inseparable part of being a Buddhist in the truest sense.
The Pali word for Buddhist means “a person trying the stop the rebirth process” (“Bhava+uddha” = Bhauddha). One meaning of Buddha Dhamma is “path or method of removing bhava and thus stopping the rebirth process”. Buddha means, “one who has removed bhava (and attained Nibbana)”.
For evidence of Rebirth one can refer to the research done by the late Professor Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia. He has done over 20 years of research on the authenticity of rebirth accounts. Also refer to Professor Jim Tucker’s books about rebirth. A good book is “Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation” by Ian Stevenson.
There are hundreds of youtube videos on rebirth stories and also many on child prodigies and hypnosis-based curing of certain ailments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMfsjXiZGis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGHDpgBc9Dk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQHp9bGVDB8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk7biSOzr1k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w2MCpzE8u0
We can see various levels of human happiness/suffering around us. We see some people live with relatively higher levels of health, wealth, and happiness, while others live in poverty, ill-health, and misery. This in itself is proof of Kamma.
A child may die prematurely, or someone may get brutally murdered. What could be the underlying causes for such misfortune. Nothing happens in this world without a reason or without a cause.
Does it just happens that X is born healthy and wealthy, Y is born healthy but poor, and Z is born handicapped and poor? There must be REASONS why X, Y, and Z are born that way. Many times a person born rich can become poor, and vice versa. Or a person in good health can die suddenly in an accident or by a heart attack. The laws of kammā can explain all the above.

+1. "... they just cannot fathom the possibility of being reborn as an animal..." insightful and true. whilst Stevenson or Tucker's understanding is not the Buddha's so the Buddhist in exact, just a progress or hint. "The laws of kammā can explain all the above" is a bit abrupt, many factors are playing, its easy to be misinterpreted as a declaration of fatalism.

Non Abrahmic religions like Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism & Sikhism believe in Karma theory & rebirth.

See my answer here. It explains how Buddhism is a practical religion and not based on blind belief.

I'm interested in knowing the proofs of Karma theory & rebirth presented by Buddhism.

The only proof obtainable is by practicing insight meditation thereby seeing with your own eyes how phenomena arise and cease and how they can cause new phenomena to arise.

"how Buddhism is a practical religion and not based on blind belief." - I didn't ask that. You got aversion when you saw names of other religions. Kashmiri Shaivism which I follow too have practical techniques & so other Indian schools like Sankhya, Advait Vedanta Etc. Rituals are not blind beliefs, just that can't be proved... "The only proof obtainable is by practicing insight meditation thereby seeing with your own eyes how phenomena arise and cease and how they can cause new phenomena to arise."- it doesn't prove rebirth & complexity of Karma theory, although gives hint to cause - effect.

@Aghori. The workings of Kamma is one of the Four Imponderables. The Buddha taught that one should not think about these things as they will only agitate the mind. Only a fully enlightened Buddha can understand Kamma.

Non Abrahmic religions like Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism & Sikhism believe in Karma theory & rebirth.

Rebirth is not the same as reincarnation. Reincarnation refers to the belief that a soul at the termination of life enters a new physical body. Jainism, Hinduism & Sikhism may believe in reincarnation where as original Buddhism (before the later day variations) believes in rebirth.

I'm interested in knowing the proofs of Karma theory & rebirth presented by Buddhism.

In Buddhism, kamma & rebirth is a doctrine of moral efficiency. The teachings state:

And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions?
There are fruits & results of good & bad actions (kamma). There is this world & the other worlds. There are spontaneously reborn beings [due to actions/kamma]...
MN 117

For example, a free man robs a bank, is caught & is reborn as a prisoner is a prison. This is the proof of kamma & rebirth, where the free man later takes spontaneous (immediate) rebirth as a prisoner & treated like an animal in a zoo.
Or a normal person takes drugs & becomes a drug addict & then a thief or prostitute. Here, the humane being is reborn in a ghost & animal birth. They are reborn as a ghost because they always must search for drugs, never content, & they are reborn as an animal because they must always perform bestial depraved acts to obtain money for drugs. This is the proof of kamma & rebirth.
Buddhism teaches at least five destinations of rebirth due to kamma (motive & action), namely, humane (sane), godly (exalted), ghost (addiction), animal (lack of self-control) and hell (suffering), as follows:

Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech & mind.
Sense contact is the cause by which kamma comes into play.
And what is the diversity in kamma? There is kamma to be experienced in hell, kamma to be experienced in the realm of common animals, kamma
to be experienced in the realm of the hungry shades, kamma to be
experienced in the humane world, kamma to be experienced in the world
of the gods. This is called the diversity in kamma.
AN 6.63

In Budddhism, the word 'birth' ('jati') refers to 'production' ('abhinibbatti') of the idea or view of a 'person' ('puriso'), 'self' ('atta') or 'being' ('satta'). 'Re-birth' is the continued production of these ideas or views of 'self', 'persons' or 'beings', which generally occurs due to 'kamma' ('motive & action').
For example, kamma is made to successfully make money. Here, the mind is 'reborn' as a 'god', thinking: "I am rich; I am successful; I am special; I am upper class".
Then later, there is a collapse in the stock market & loss of wealth. The same person in reborn in hell (suffering), thinking: "I am poor; I am a failure; why didn't I do this; why didn't I do that!".
Each thought of "I am" is a "birth' ("jati"), created by the craving & motive that drives kamma (intentional actions).
This is kamma & rebirth. People are reborn into different mental states of self-identification due to their kamma (motives & actions). They are reborn as rich, poor, husband, wife, divorcee, widow, etc, due to their kamma that leads to self-identifying. The teachings say:

The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual
pleasure, craving to be, craving not-to-be: This, friend Visakha, is
the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One.
MN 44

Each act of 'self-identification' is a 'birth' or 'rebirth' & each 'birth' will bring suffering. In his first words, the Buddha said:

153. Through many a birth in samsara have I wandered in vain, seeking the builder of this house. Repeated birth is indeed
suffering!
154. O house-builder, you are seen! You will not build this house again. For your rafters are broken and your ridgepole shattered. My
mind has reached the Unconditioned; I have attained the destruction of
craving
Dhammapada

You're saying there is no physical body after death? Only 1 life.

I am not sure that your question about biology is relevant. The Alagaddupama Sutta states: "Bhikkhus, both formerly and now what I teach is suffering and the cessation of suffering." In original Buddhism, the word "death" ("marana") means the idea or view that a "self-identity" has died, which is suffering. The termination of life without any self-identification is not suffering. To quote the Dhammapada: "21. Heedfulness is the path to the Deathless. Heedlessness is the path to death. The heedful die not. The heedless are as if dead already."

To quote again from Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta: "Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and does not yearn." https://suttacentral.net/en/mn140

@Aghori What body? What "after"? What death?  Death is all the time. Where does one's body begin and end? Wouldn't any answer be an assumption based on past experience? What past experience?

Your questions here have no relevance to real Buddhism. Real Buddhism is about ending suffering. The kamma & rebirth teachings are peripheral (additional) to real Buddhism. Buddha taught such things to the ignorant people in the villages  so they would not harm themselves & others. These teachings are no different to Christianity or Islam teaching about heaven & hell. As I explained, "death" is an idea created by the mind. When the mind is empty, it will understand "death" is only a thought; nothing more.

@Dhammadhatu But I've been reading Buddhism believes in rebirth. Buddha too had many previous births, we find in Jātaka tales. I can't believe Gautam Buddha didn't believe rebirth. He clearly talked about other lokas & stages of enlightened where one go after death according to his maturity in Dhamma.

@Dhammadhatu. Maybe you could provide clarification to this question?

Rebirth is real not metaphorical

Yes, rebirth is not metaphorical. But to believe "rebirth" is physical (aka reincarnation) is metaphorical. Many suttas say love is born, hate is born, rapture is born, etc, None of these suttas are metaphorical. They are literal. My answer to the question is literal. But your comment is superstition because there is no evidence for it. What blocks the mind from verifying the truth of my post is this very birth of egoism. Ego opposes non-ego.

While this answer might be controversial on this site I myself have struggled with this question for a long time. This is my perspective, nothing more.
The answer is no, currently, there is not a proof of karma or reincarnation that I have found to be convincing.
However, the inverse is also true... there is not a proof that eliminates the possibility of karma or reincarnation that I have found to be convincing.
The conclusion I came to was that the timetables involved of lifetimes of rebirth made it impossible to set up an experiment that proved the issue one way or another. Believe me, I tried, for ~3 years I made myself the experiment. It was an existential adventure I do not regret.
Now it is said that some people after a certain point in the path remember all their past lives, and to them, that would be a personal proof. But to me it is anecdotal, and I could not accept it as proof unless I myself experienced it. Even if I experienced it myself, I would not consider it a proof for other people for the same reasons.

I feel as if there are some huge misconceptions regarding "karma" as described in the west. So many consider it like a kind of moral retribution and never recognize its true essence. Karma is momentum.
All things are interrelated ... like a massive wall of gears and pinions. Some turning one way, others another way, some shafts protruding at 45 degree angles, and some vanishing into space or even time. Once one turns one direction then it is affected and affects others (all others to some extent). Some things it will affect in a negative manner, some sideways, some additive, and some barely at all. Positive actions tend to do positive things on down the line and help in many areas while negative things tend to wreak more havoc or be more isolated. That is karma. Not some moralistic determiner.
As for rebirth. ugh. OK. The dualism we find specified between mind and body is also a bit of a misnomer. It's consciousness and body. Only the body is that identity that "rebirths". The consciousness, or chariot driver from the aisha upanishad, is itself limitless despite being housed by the vessel of the body. Limitless in space and time. When unconstrained it may merely reoccupy the same body it came from, or another, or something completely different. The why behind that ascension is debatable. We DO come back like we are now and we DON'T come back like we are now and we ARE back like we are now and this will continue until the damage is fixed to the universe and it goes back to unity.

I dont mind negging at all. Just please tell me where you disagree. I have no ego investment in this discussion. I am still a student of life as well and can use any pointers people might provide!! I come to learn.

Please dont place me in the middle of some tussle between different schools of Buddhism. My views are my own. My path is the one I have discovered on my own with no assistance other than my own curiosity. So I am not trying to one-up anyone else's views. This is just how I see it.


text:
What are the texts of Vajrāyana Buddhism? And where can I get?

What are the scriptures of Vajrāyana Buddhism? Or texts related?
Where can I get scriptures or texts on Vajrāyana Buddhism?

See also related question; "What are the core Mahayana and Vajrayana Sutras?".

This person – Andrea Pema will be able to help you on this. If asked just say that Saptha Visuddhi referred you to him.
Andrea Pema has translated many of  Vajrāyana Buddhism text to English. The follow are few of his notes:
The Progressive Stages of Meditation. From Shamata to the Beginning of the Mahasandhi
An Excerpt from my Book “Buddha Dharma”: Introduction to the Vajrayana (for Advanced Yogis and Yoginis as well as for Beginners)
On the three Buddha Bodies - the Buddhist Sutra and Tantra on the Qualities of Enlightenment
The Guru Yoga Practice of Padmasambhava, for Beginners and Advanced Practitioners
A short advice on how to do Deity Yoga in Buddhist Tantra
What is “Bodhicitta” in the Tantra ?
A Gem of Compassion from the Mahayana; The Practice of Tonglen, a “must” for those that follow the Bodhisattva Path
The Dharani of Lapis Light that generates the Power of the Tathagatas Meditative Absorption
On Shunyata ( Emptiness)
On meditation and sacred outlook
The Path of Bliss in Buddhist Tantra


text:
How to memorize suttas?
I was watching a video about the oral tradition in relation to how the suttas was first communicated and conveyed to monastics and lay people.
I was wondering what techniques buddhist monastics and lay people used/are using to memorize suttas. I know of chanting as an effective method.
Are there other methods used within Buddhism?
Thank you for your time.

Upasaka Lanka,
usually the teacher would give a stanza of a sutta be reciting it. The student would then try to rebeat it and the teacher would correct him. When it has been grasped, the disciple would seek for a proper place for him, but not to far from his teacher, or elders, so that they would correct him in cases of wrong, and rebeat the stanza. Once gotten, he would go out for the next and after a while he would be able to cite the whole sutta.
Today books and writting down as support or mostly even replacement, would be normal.
My self not really eager and interested in memorizing words and also because the usual way of transfere is very seldom (a proper given) and also not very gifted in that, coul master a "Blessing-Sutta" in two days. (Its quite disturbing when used to meditation, since it appears disturbing like if still carring music lyrics if not abound already)
How ever, the training it self is a really good concentration training and young monks would not do and train it on silent remute places, but in the middle of the "noice" of even hundred other chanting monks. An enviroment which would cause western or modern really problems but their concentration and mindfulness is very good trained to be able to turn off evertthing else.
It's also not seldom that jhanic states are reached and some also become somehow addicted, whould chante the whole night loadly, if their teacher would not restrikt it for a good.
Generally the learn method is total different to modern ways in still traditional countries. Children would learn also in school in a citing way first. Mastered words and remembering, then would be the time rippe to learn the language and other that the meaning while train in precepts.
The benefit is that concentration is trained by an certain object and the mind does not become so full of ideas and speculations, tousands of thoughts.
Modern learning does not really put much into basic mind training good for an easy life but more in making people effective in thinking how to still there desires and be productive outwardly.
Of course in just reciting memorizing texts, mostly without understanding even the language, does not bear much in regard of the path at first glimbs but given that most will not gain fruits or paths, one might leave this world with more ease and not so disturbed and confused like others having developed much ideas. Saññā (Rememberance) is gone anyway with the break up of the body but habits, such as being skilled in remembering, mindfulness and concentration will follow in some ways.
So if one searches for a good practice and finds some tendency to it, it's recommented if lighter objects of concentrations are not so graspable for now.
The more the five hindrences are dominant and people are used to contact and following them, the more difficult will bethis training. Especially when coming in contact with modern live and emense sensuallity.
Used to speak load, one trains also speech, in form of sound, metrics and words, which is also very benefical. Reading loud is also very recommended in regard of reading learning Dhamma and just in modern, wewtern wirld unusual. That is also the reason why most people (since many had ordained as kids) are very skilled in speech that is charming and pleasant.
So it's out of urgency in any case good (if avaliable) to get and understand the meaning, which Upasaka Saptha Visuddhi explained well in his answer.
We should not forget that in folk-buddhism, eg generally, monks are training chanting to have a means for their livelihood and "income", so its at lage, even traditional, a "acter"-traing without which most would not survive, like today modern learning much Dhamma, study it, and then teach people and "entertain" the layity with a other service for livelyhood. Both, how ever, is actually not really good and wrong livelyhood for monks but counts also for lay people, chanter or scholars: this Dhamma is not given to make a livelihood out of it and good right from the beginning, never to speculate to gain material thing, honore... or a punch of reputations on Bu-SE in citing the same, again and again.
Here a gift blessing "Mangala Sutta" (pali with khmer translation after each stanza) of some young former fellow monks as a amr-file attached. (Note that the Khmer Mahanikaya, or long time folk pronanciation is different to all other countries and in Cambodia it was till short a "pure" oral tradition, maybe even the longest "unbroken" lineage till Khmer-rouge time) The Ven. left, , "youngest and smallest, leading the chant, for example, is one, even young, one does good to pay respect like to rare Elders.

"Vast learning, skill in handicrafts*, well grounded in discipline, and pleasant speech — this is the highest blessing.

Maha-mangala Sutta: Blessings

of layman and or monks

(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains.)

The best way to "memorize" suttas is to get the key idea or sanna of the given sutta. It is the “learning” of true dhamma and not “memorization” that will help in the retention of key phrases. For that one needs to get the key idea or sanna of a given concept. When one gets the sanna of a concept, one will never lose it.
So, the best way to memorize is to grasp the concepts of dhamma. Then it becomes easier to analyze a given concept as one progresses. The more one grasps about a concept and the meanings and how to use them in other situations, things start to come flowing through. This is unlike memorizing the wording, but another will think that you’ve memorized a given thing.
The basic difference between “real learning” and memorization is that in the first case you have acquired the ability to grasp concepts, whereas the latter makes you just blindly follow rules/instructions.
This is a concept that is hard to grasp for many these days, because we are so much used to “book learning”. There are many people who can repeat certain tasks mechanically without even bothering to think through. And then when the situation changes somewhat they do not know how to handle the “new situation”.

My person thinks that he remembers right that Nyom is actually skilled in chanting & has also certain "love" in practicing it. So in this1 frame my person "ask" better "likes to encourage" not only to expand his answer also on a very technical level here (as profi, so to speak), but also likes to invite Upasaka to try to teach and give encouragement to practice it in the online vihara to be sangham.net since many westerns have no easy access and possibility to receive it from a teacher and Nyom might know that it is not proper for monks to teach chanting to lay-people. It would be good to try.

I would try the memorization technique that is recommended for bodypart memorization in Vsm. Mental and verbal recitation.

Actually as i believe those theros had better memory and very good concentration. That is the main thing to use the brain power in efficient manner. Calm mind which has practised meditation can do lot more things than typical human


text:
How should a lay person respond if they see a monk teaching something contrary to Dhamma?
Let's say if a lay person sees fault of a monk (something against the monastic code, or against the Dhamma). Should the lay person just stay silent (thinking it would create bad karma), or should they do something about it (showing the monk what he has done, or letting others know about it)?
Are there any Sutta references on what the Buddha said about this?
I have seen a lot of monks doing things against the monastic code and the Dhamma, and it breaks me up to see that people who know about it are silent; and that, day by day, the Dhamma is fading away because of this. What has the Buddha instructed to a lay person, on situations like this?
Since Buddha Sasana is not only monks and nuns, but also lay man and lay woman as well, what are the lay person's responsibilities towards the Sasana?
(Sutta references are appreciated if any)

Recently me and my Meditation teacher encountered a monk who stated in one of his statement saying that the Buddha has advised lay people not to comprehend the 4 truths but to get rid the 4 states of misery. For me and my teacher, it was shocking since all of Buddhism is based on the 4 truths. Therefore we created a video on the monk's statement and give a detailed explanation on how wrong the statement is and how it should be corrected and we uploaded it on youtube knowing that the messaged would spread to that monk. And within 3 days of time it did.
At first, they didn't accept it but at the end they did accept their statement as wrong. And we took the video down since our mission accomplished. Our intention was for us to show that monk's fault and for him to recognize it and correct it. But now someone people are saying that it's a sin to do that and that we should not intervene with monks' things. But we were to stay silent when Monk themselves are spreading wrong statements, will the sasana survive? Isn't it selfish to stay silent where as we cans how what is right or wrong despite one is a monk or a lay person?

Nyom Akila, since a good answer does not only requires extended time and effort but also serious interest to gain understanding and maintain proper attention to make things not even more worse (which is the case why "people knowing" are mostly silent) it's maybe good to answer it after your precept undertaking, since you would understand many things better. If then is still a desire for an answer, let it be known again and it will possible served well then.

The word sangha is used nowadays to refer to the bhikkhus. This may or may not be true. One does not have to be a bhikkhu to belong to the sangha. An Upāsaka (male) or Upāsikā (female) - lay followers – could also be part of Arya Sangha. Upāsaka and Upāsikā are part of Ariya Sangha, once in the Path. The Ariya Sangha is described as all those who have attained at least the stage of Stream Entrant.
A bhikkhu is someone who has renounced the life of a layman to dedicate himself exclusively to practice, realization, study and teaching of the dhamma. But in the present day and age, there are a great number of bhikkus who have not come to the stage of Stream Entrant. Thus they are not part of Arya Sangha.
There were times when Hattha Āḷavaka Ugga gahapati (householder) preached dhamma to the Bhikkus at the time of Buddha, when no one else came forward to speak on Dhamma..
The Buddha does not advocate superficial unity for its own sake between bhikkhus or amongst bhikkhus and lay followers at the expense of the Dhamma. Buddha instead encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma and that the distinction between the two be kept clear.
Buddha has described in no less than six suttas about what one should do at such an instant. In the Sangha Bedha Sutta (AN 10.1.4.7), Buddha’s instruction is to not advocate superficial unity for its own sake at the expense of the Dhamma, but instead encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma and that the distinction between the two be kept clear. According to the Vinaya, a speaker of non-Dhamma is to be recognized as such if he “explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ …
Thus the ability to take a stand requires that one be well-informed about the Buddha’s teachings. A difference of opinion can be rightfully ended only if both sides are able to investigate the grounds and get to the root, and then resolve which side was right, based on the Dhamma and Vinaya.

For more about the Sangha Bedha Sutta, see the Suttas on pages 1389 through 1391 which are titled Schism(1), Schism(2), and Ananda(1) in The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha: A Complete Translation of the Anguttara Nikaya – by Bhikkhu Bodhi; and Schism in the Sangha by Thanissaro Bhikkhu & Geshe Rabten
.

Recently me and my Meditation teacher encountered a monk who stated in one of his statement saying that the Buddha has advised lay people not to comprehend the 4 truths but to get rid the 4 states of misery. For me and my teacher, it was shocking since all of Buddhism is based on the 4 truths. Therefore we created a video on the monk's statement and give a detailed explanation on how wrong the statement is and how it should be corrected and we uploaded it on youtube knowing that the messaged would spread to that monk. And within 3 days of time it did.

At first, they didn't accept it but at the end they did accept their statement as wrong. And we took the video down since our mission accomplished. Our intention was for us to show that monk's fault and for him to recognize it and correct it.
But now someone people are saying that it's a sin to do that and that we should not intervene with monks' things. But we were to stay silent when Monk themselves are spreading wrong statements, will the sasana survive? Isn't it selfish to stay silent where as we cans how what is right or wrong despite one is a monk or a lay person?

I don't think that. I'm not sure that, the Sangha Bedha Sutta "encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma": what it does say is that "schism" is when people preach non-Dharma as Dharma, etc.

Sidecomment, Nyom Saptha Visuddhi, altough usual to exchange "not given" things via pm or email saddly also under "buddhists" it carries even more danger to encourage by sample, even unkowingly, to do so public as well, aside of the meta-issue who did wrong fist. So its good to be careful in regard of links and tendentiously russian or ex-commonist counties origin are often also involved in what is even problematic in wordily legal issues. Just because having seen and having the "feeling" that Nyom rejoices in regard of issues in virtue.

The qoute of BMC2 is btw not really in relation with Geshe Rabten. Having wondered about the & in this origin an followed. Nyom may make use of bmc2 invited and without wordily strings if liking as well as all others for their skillful undertakings.

The suttas state in places (I can't quote all of them off-hand) that laypeople should strongly critique the behaviour of monks before establishing faith in those monks. Example, MN 95:

Here, Bhāradvāja, a bhikkhu may be living in dependence on some village or town. Then a householder or a householder’s son goes to him
  and investigates him in regard to three kinds of states in regard to
  states based on greed, in regard to states based on hate, and in
  regard to states based on delusion. MN 95

Misbehaviour of monks can be reported to other monks.

Note that it was often lay people's criticism that brought the monk's wrong doings to the attention of the Buddha.
The Bhikkhus' Rules A Guide for Laypeople

The suttas rarely report the Buddha taught lay people the 4 truths but, instead, the Buddha mostly teaches laypeople to develop morality for a heavenly rebirth.
For example, in his 1st sermon (SN 56.11), the Buddha states the 4 truths are for those who have left the household life.

Bhikkhus, these two extremes should not be followed by one who has gone forth into homelessness. What two? The pursuit of sensual
  happiness in sensual pleasures, which is low, vulgar, the way of
  worldlings, ignoble, unbeneficial; and the pursuit of
  self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, unbeneficial. Without
  veering towards either of these extremes, the Tathagata has awakened
  to the middle way, which gives rise to vision, which gives rise to
  knowledge, which leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to
  enlightenment, to Nibbāna. SN 56.11

DN 31 states the duty of a monk is to teach the path to heaven (and not Nibbana).

The ascetics and brahmans thus ministered to as the Zenith by a householder show their compassion towards him in six ways:
(i) they restrain him from evil,
(ii) they persuade him to do good,
(iii) they love him with a kind heart,
(iv) they make him hear what he has not heard,
(v) they clarify what he has already heard,
(vi) they point out the path to a heavenly state.
DN 31

MN 143 describes how the teaching of non-attachment was rarely taught to Buddhist lay people but to only those gone forth.

This sort of talk on the Dhamma, householder, is not given to lay people clad in white. This sort of talk on the Dhamma is given to
  those gone forth. MN 143

"In that case, Ven. Sariputta, please let this sort of talk on the Dhamma be given to lay people clad in white. There are clansmen with little dust in their eyes who are wasting away through not hearing [this] Dhamma. There will be those who will understand it."

In MN143 Anathapindika requests Ven. Sariputta to teach these sort of dhamma to lay people. So doesn't that mean any lay people who wish to attain Sotapanna should (to get rid of the 4 states of misery) should learn this dhamma?

In MN 56, the Buddha taught the 4NTs to a Jain lay person, who attained stream-entry.  in MN 97, the Buddha admonished Sariputta for not teaching a Brahman the four noble truths. But generally this was not what was done. There are many lay stream-enterers in the sutta but I would image they requested the higher teachings or were taught the higher teachings because the Buddha knew they were capable of penetrating. As I posted, the general duty was to teach laypeopel morality, such as in MN 60, DN 31, AN 10.176 & SN 55.7. Regards

What is important is to think about the different individual lay people. Most lay people crave for rebirth rather than non-attachment. Each person must be taught on a person by person basis. Therefore, when giving a public address, generally morality was taught. But if teaching an individual, the 4 four truths can be taught if the individual appears suitable. Myself, I only teach supramundane dhamma & never rebirth. Regards.

In MN 97 at the end it states
"But why, Sariputta — when there was still more to be done, having established Dhanañjanin the brahman in the inferior Brahma world — did you get up from your seat and leave?"
"The thought occurred to me, lord, 'These brahmans are set on the Brahma worlds. What if I were to teach Dhanañjanin the brahman the path to union with the Brahmas?'"
"Sariputta, Dhanañjanin the brahman has died and reappeared in the Brahma world."
But I don't see anything in regard of the buddha admonishing Sariputta to not to teach the truths. What did u mean by that? -Metta

"More to do" means the noble truths or the supramundane path, as Bhikkhu Bodhi has written in his footnote (although I did not rely on BB's footnote). That's enough for the questions. You should be able to discern on this website how attached people are to the idea of rebirth  & are unwilling to give up attachment to life. Thanks

You must first look to things within your own control that could contribute to or even cause the behavior you observed. A minor change on OUR part can often lead to the results you desire and not bring embarrassment to a colleague.
A person is only in our world of awareness because we choose them to be so we must always examine the weakness we observed from our own perspective first. WE control our world.
damyata datta dayadhvam

Ignorant monk must avoid ignorant monk.
Ignorant monk must avoid ignorant layman.
Ignorant layman must avoid ignorant monk.
Ignorant layman must avoid ignorant layman.
Graduated monks/laymans must know who is possible to enlighten after listen their teaching. They also must know who will never understand their teaching to avoid them.
You must know ṭhana and aṭhana before decide to do something. See dhammaññūsutta.
What mahavihara theravada buddhist monks must memorized and learn?
see: Beginer Buddhist Course Syllabus By Ancient Pali Canon (Ganthadhura And Vipassanādhura)


text:
The Conditions of Lying in Fiction
I'm a writer, and I tend to write parts of factual information, such as insights or impressions, mixed with other fictional aspects. Therefore, I am worried about what constitutes a lie, and what isn't. My intention is never to deceive, but I feel others may gather things in my writings that I didn't mean, or that are untrue. They could easily conclude stuff which isn't factual through them.
What are your thoughts? Thanks.
Edit: I make many claims in my writings, grandiose or vast claims, which I cannot be truly certain of. Yet, I don't mean them to be taken literally. I'm unsure what is considering lying, or pride, or boasting: is fiction really a realm wherein these things are considered, or is fiction free of judgment? Thanks.

BTW, What are the books you have written? Just out of curiosity.

As long as you do not make claim of function being non fiction then you are OK.
For something to be a lie the following conditions must be fulfilled.

i) The statement must be untrue.
ii) There must be an intention to deceive.
iii) An effort must be made to deceive.
iv) The other person must know the meaning of what is expressed.

Souce: FIVE PRECEPTS (PACASILA) at https://www.urbandharma.org
In writing non fiction, you would not be having the second condition as you would know and also making know this is fiction.

It's good that Eggman feels that such might be not good for one self and for others and it's always good to follow ones conscious and rejoice in ones sacrify less would do.
Precepts are simple and straight and not telling the truth rather suggesting lies, how could one feel comfortable a long time. To speak very straight forward: especially when written in words and people might fall into the pitfall.
Think when years later one might come to the insight "it's not good, it could cause others harm, it was not good that I used such to just earn this or that", how difficult to cover them all so that nobody would fall into.
Sometimes, and that is the reason why not often talked about, certain truth in regard of livelihood can make one troubled but also released if having found certain doubts by oneself. In this regard this Sutta about an actor in doubt might be useful, since it is not so far away in kind and way of livelihood:
Talaputa Sutta: To Talaputa the Actor
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains)

The fourth precept on musavada (lying) in Buddha Dhamma includes all abuses done my speech, including harsh speech, slandering, and gossip which will harm oneself and others.
Thus the fourth precept encompasses all four akusala kamma done with speech.
The Buddha said, “cetana ham Bhikkave kamman vadami“. Thus, what determines the type of kamma is the cetana. Cetana is translated sometimes as “intention” and other times as “volition”. “Intention” is one of the dasa akusala in the case of an akusala kamma. Intentions vary. For example, one may lie about something because of greed (lobha); another person may tell the same lie because of hate (dosa); the consequences are worse for the latter.
The greatest negative consequences that one will reap when writing on Dhamma is when one “explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ … Buddha has described in Sangha Bedha Sutta (AN 10.1.4.7 – in the sixth book) that this is what is meant by Sangha Bedha – an Anantariya kamma that is one of the five heinous deeds which certainly bear results after death (as one is misleading another in this dhamma path).


text:
Sutta References on Future Monks
I have heard that the Buddha has told that in the future the monks will have a wife and kids, will wear no cloths except for a puuna nula and he would be engaging in hunting and etc.
Where can I find the Sutta of this?

In the future, Ananda, there will be clan-members [(religious) lineage members] who are “yellow-necks,” immoral, of bad nature. People will give them gifts for the sake of the sangha. Even then, Ānanda, I say, an offering made to the sangha is immeasurable. And, Ānanda, I say that in no way is an individual gift ever more fruitful than an offering made to the sangha.

Dakkhiṇa Vibhaṅga Sutta

I'm interested to read this Sutta, but the link is broken, could u help? @Suminda

Update the link.

https://web.archive.org/web/20210506195537/http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/1.9-Dakkhina-Vibhanga-S-m142.pdf


text:
Did Buddha told anything about if we can travel to the end of the cosmos?
Did the Buddha tell us anything about reaching the end of the cosmos or time-travel through the means of experiencing all the Jhanas in meditation?

Normally the Buddha dismissed these types of questions as unimportant, or distractions from the goal of liberation. Though the question as worded is quite broad and might need to be narrowed

The answers to this question might be relevant (it asks, "I want to know what is inside a black hole.").

We know of no sutra directly bearing on the subject of time travel, although space travel to the akasha deva loka ("space world of shining ones") is frequently met with in both directions, Sakka to Earth and the Buddha and monastics to many "celestial" worlds [like the Buddha, Maha Moggallana, and other disciples going into near Earth orbit and battling a reptilian or naga named Nandopananda). But there is one oddity we never stop pointing out:
During WW II the Germans developed a time travel "bell" (Die Glocke), which just happens to look exactly like the strange hollow stupas, reliquary mounds or "bells" housing Buddha figures at the largest Buddhist site in the world -- Borobudur, Central Java, Indonesia -- with its massive, pyramid-like platforms. The structure is the size of a mountain in what is now an Islamic.

So marvelous and inexplicable to the Muslims was this site that they tried to destroy it but could not. Nor could they build anything to rival it; they simply did not have the technology. Instead, they buried it in a massive pile of mud. More than a century later, when the British archeologists were surveying the site, one realized that there was no way there could be a "mountain" there. He had his workers dig, and he is credited with rediscovering a Buddhist temple complex larger than the massive pieces in Bamiyan, Afghanistan (although the unexcavated Mes Aynak site may rival Borobudur, but if Chinese mining interests have their way, it will be destroyed first) and Angkor Wat, Cambodia.
The Germans were given off-planet instructions on how to construct a transporter, which they dubbed "The Bell" (Die Glocke), and tested it. They sent it into the future and retrieved, weather beaten a short time later. What else they did is kept top secret by the OSI, CIA, NASA, and other American organizations which inherited and protected German scientists after the war, such as Robert Oppenheimer and Nazi Wernher von Braun.
[Edited]. In Buddhism philosophy there is also Kalachakra Mandala which also look like Borobudur Temple.
Meaning of Kalachakra Mandala : The word kalachakra means cycles of time, and the Kalachakra system presents three such cycles – external, internal and alternative. The external and internal cycles deal with time as we normally know it, while the alternative cycles are practices for gaining liberation from these two.
What is the Kalachakra?.
Many articles are there explained about Kalachakra Manadala.
There also explained about cosmos and about five strings of attachments.
[Edited].

Once the Blessed One [the Buddha, who was known as the Teacher of Devas and Humans] was staying near Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, at Anathapindika's monastery. Then the male deva Rohitassa, late at night, with his splendid radiance lighting up the entire grove, went to the Blessed One, bowed, respectfully stood to one side, and asked:

"Venerable sir, is it possible by traveling to know or see or reach the far end of the universe where one does not undergo rebirth, aging, dying, passing away, or reappearing?"
"I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach the far end of the universe where one does not undergo rebirth, aging, dying, passing away, or reappearing."
"It is amazing, venerable sir, it is awe-inspiring, how well this has been said by the Blessed One! ...Once I was a seer (Indian rishi, yogi) named Rohitassa, a disciple of [the Guru] Bhoja, a powerful sky-walker. My speed was as fast as that of a strong archer -- well-trained, a practiced hand, a practiced sharp-shooter -- shooting a light arrow across the shadow of a palm tree. [This is a common idiom to illustrate extreme speed in ancient India, the time it would take a shot arrow to pass the shadow of a tree.] My stride stretched as far as the East Sea is from the West [the width of India]. To me, endowed with such speed, such a stride, there arose the desire: 'I will go traveling to the end of the universe.'
"I with a 100 year life, a 100 year span spent 100 years traveling. And apart from the time spent eating, drinking, savoring, urinating, defecating, and sleeping to ward off weariness. But without reaching the end of the universe, I died along the way. So it is amazing, venerable sir, it is awesome, how well this has been said by the Blessed One!"

[The Buddha replied:]

"I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach the far end of the universe... But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of disappointment and suffering without reaching the end of the universe (world).
    It is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception and intellect, that I declare that:

There is the universe (world),
The origination of the universe,
The cessation of the universe, and
The path of practice leading to the cessation of the universe." [This is another wording of the ennobling Four Noble Truths.]

"It is not to be reached by traveling [in space]. AND it is not without reaching the end of the universe that there is release from disappointment and suffering.
"So truly the wise one, an expert with regard to the cosmos, a knower of the end of the cosmos, having fulfilled the holy life, calmed, knowing the cosmos' end, doesn't long for this cosmos or for any other."

(See also AN 9.38).

So even if they found that Die Glocke were look like Borobudur temple.
Buddha said all about it is cosmos.

"These five strings of sensuality are, in the discipline of the noble ones, called the cosmos.
Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... aromas cognizable via the nose... flavors cognizable via the tongue... tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. These are the five strings of sensuality that, in the discipline of the noble ones, are called the cosmos. AN 9.38

Good answer and proper quotes, aside of the things about Germans and "die Glocke" Tipitaka is good, certain stories elsewhere not really useful everywhere. Maybe you like to make the changes so that the answer looks as bright as it could be Nyom Swapnil. Sadhu!

...and, a source link is missing at the last quote.5 strings? ...  why is the 6th missing here? 5 is not right, if saying thats all.See "The all (cosmos)" http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than_en.html

Ohh and one more in relation the the question direct: its possible to come beyound the cosmos, tme and space, and that is what the Buddhas teaching is about. Maybe also good to add and share a link to a good sutta, telling that. Mudita

While we could endless turn from one new end to the next with jhanas, it requires vipassana, to see that the cosmos is just this 6 senses and their sphare, to gain limitless freedom and unbound to the cosmos limits through sging, sickness and death of even a desired and grasped end.

@SamanaJohann I'm going to attend vipassana soon so I'm excited and so I could understand cosmos if I could lead to jhana. But Buddha simply told what is cosmos and we can't reach by traveling. So thanks a lot for this question so we all could get all about it. And I was thinking about you while answering. Thanks a lot.

Do as you feel fit und mudita & Sadhu with your noble future undertaking, Nyom Swapnil.

And here that you understand what Atma said: There is the case where a monk — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. This is called a monk who, coming to the end of the cosmos, remains at the end of the cosmos. Others say of him, 'He is encompassed in the cosmos; he has not escaped from the cosmos.' And I too say of him, 'He is encompassed in the cosmos; he has not escaped from the cosmos.' AN9.38 Ever End in the cosmos is not lasring.

@SamanaJohann Thanks a lot. I'll try to escape from it. Thanks a lot for your invaluable  guidance.

@Lanka My pleasure @-}--

The first bit of this answer seems to be an unattributed quote copied from "Buddhism and Time Travel"

@ChrisW I've copied from there. But when I've searched I found I missed something important in answer.  Maybe I need to edit my answer. Thank you so much otherwise I had never find it.

@ChrisW I've edited my answer with the information I found. Thank you so much for your attention. Highlighted with [Edited] tag. Thank you so much.

Did the Buddha tell us anything about reaching the end of the cosmos or time-travel through the means of experiencing all the Jhanas in meditation?
These are the undeclared questions:

"'...does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is eternal: only this
  is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"
"...no..."
"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is not eternal:
  only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"
"...no..."
"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is finite: only
  this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"
"...no..."
"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is infinite: only
  this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"
"...no...'"
Source: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html

The Buddha never answered these questions because they veered way too far away from what was relevant, that being the spread of the Dhamma to the best of his ability and the practice of the Dhamma (for himself & others). Time travel can also be seen as far too irrelevant to the practice, even if one could do so by Jhanic ability.
In essence, the undeclared answers communicate to us that we should not go too far with skepticism to allow one to walk the path he taught without distraction.
So we wouldn't know if there was an end to the cosmos, & it wouldn't matter, what matters is the now, here, the practice, & the path to end suffering.
The Jhanic abilities unlocked in meditation can be used to help others on their path or to help yourself by just noticing them as a clear indication you are on the path to realization. Although Jhanas themselves will never help you end suffering, they can be used, with Jhanic ability, as a tool of insight, observation into phenomena.
Although the Buddha warned not to be distracted or abusively use these abilities, this is why you basically never hear or see of them. It's all a personal thing.
In conclusion, focus on the path to end suffering, not irrelevant metaphysical speculations.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One.
Let my person take the best from Dhammadhatus and Swapnils answer and try to form maybe good picture of the whole:
As pointed out, by means of concentrations, we can reach what ever "end" of the cosmos, ones own limits, "ends" which are actually not independent and lasting but always need such as begin, perceptions of space and time:
By abhiñña, powers gained by the training of samādhi

He wields manifold supranormal powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, & mountains as if through space. He dives in & out of the earth as if it were water. He walks on water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting crosslegged he flies through the air like a winged bird. With his hand he touches & strokes even the sun & moon, so mighty & powerful. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds.
MN 119

One of the ten benefits (in the case of this abhiñña, a sideeffect of the training in the higher knowledge), which are good to increase faith when performed.
In an dispute with a Brahman, whether the teaching of Lord Buddha is a selfish one or not, and by being asked if he thinks that certain powers are "real" the Brahman answered, given in the Sangarava Sutta: To Sangarava

"Now, brahman, of these three miracles, which one appeals to you as the highest & most sublime?"
"Master Gotama, of these three miracles, the miracle of psychic power where a certain person wields manifold psychic powers... (and) exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds: that is a miracle experienced only by him who does it; it belongs only to him who does it. It seems to me to be of the nature of an illusion.
"As for the miracle where a certain person gives instruction in this way: 'Direct your thought in this way, don't direct it in that. Attend to things in this way, don't attend to them in that. Let go of this, enter and remain in that': this is the miracle that, of the three, appeals to me as the highest & most sublime.

As one sees in the first quote, it does not directly says that the End of the Cosmos can be reached and given the last answer here by the Brahman, we are leaded to what is the more importand question, the main teachings of the Buddha with possible lasting End of Cosmos and suffering.
When we look now on the secound answer her, by Swapnil, there is a quote from the Rohitassa Sutta: To Rohitassa, which matches more the topic and does not lead to astray grasping for Unity with Brahma, taught to Rohitassa, the son of a deva:

As he was standing there he said to the Blessed One: "Is it possible, lord, by traveling, to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away or reappear?"
"I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear."

The the Deva amazed, told a story of own experiances. After that, the Buddha seeing the right time, he added:

"I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos."

In the Brahmana Sutta: To Two Brahmans, he elaborates on the deeper meaning of first, the Cosmos, what it actually is, and secound gives the "End of Cosmos" another and graspworthy meaning:

I tell you, it isn't through that sort of traveling that the end of the cosmos is known, seen, or reached. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos.
"These five strings of sensuality are, in the discipline of the noble ones, called the cosmos. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... aromas cognizable via the nose... flavors cognizable via the tongue... tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. These are the five strings of sensuality that, in the discipline of the noble ones, are called the cosmos.

And this part explains my intoducing here, that it is possible to reach this or that end:

"There is the case where a monk — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. This is called a monk who, coming to the end of the cosmos, remains at the end of the cosmos. Others say of him, 'He is encompassed in the cosmos; he has not escaped from the cosmos.' And I too say of him, 'He is encompassed in the cosmos; he has not escaped from the cosmos.'

Why? Because all this ends, this Cosmoses are fabricated. And so it goes on in the Sensual world and fine material world:

[Similarly with the second, third, & fourth jhānas, and with the attainment of the dimensions of the infinitude of space, the infinitude of consciousness, nothingness, and neither perception nor non-perception.]

At this stage one with discernment, could have transcendent form (rūpa), but to complete - the first needed - task finaly, it goes on:

"Furthermore, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, he enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. [eg. nāma, mind] And, having seen [that] with discernment, his fermentations are completely ended. This is called a monk who, coming to the end of the cosmos, remains at the end of the cosmos, having crossed over attachment in the cosmos."

So to do not only dwell at this or that end of ones world/cosmos, just to find out that this end is not lasting at "the end", one needs to understand "The All" incl. the sixth sense-door, mind, and this "All" has a limit of whichs beyound, Nibbana, can not be declared or explained, the end of all suffering.
Sabba Sutta: The All

"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."
"As you say, lord," the monks responded.
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."

Let my person now end here, and may this words and explaining be a foundation for many to find the entrence to the path of the circle of beginnings and ends, suffering.
May all beings rejoice with the merits here done by the support of many with their previous contributions, given possibilities and sacrifies and may the Devas tell those, who have not seen, have not heard, about.
Anumodana!
A maybe modified and extended version of the answer you may find here where you are also welcome to discuss and place comments:
[Q&A] The Cosmos, traveling the Cosmos, and its limits and reaching its End.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains)

He wields manifold supranormal powers. Having been one he becomes
  many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He
  goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, & mountains as if through
  space. He dives in & out of the earth as if it were water. He walks on
  water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting crosslegged he
  flies through the air like a winged bird. With his hand he touches &
  strokes even the sun & moon, so mighty & powerful. He exercises
  influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds.
MN 119

Maybe and that this has no value and is not lasting, see commend on swapnils answer and an9.38, since the questioner may think Buddha taught the same as to reach Brahma, her in this case. He, @krishna , might not see the limits of his desire and not seeing Buddhas alternative, Dhammadatu, since you also teach lokuttara dhamma.


text:
Nine different ways the word ‘Mind’ is used?
I was reading a comment on this answer and it mentioned the word mind being used in nine different ways.
Comment below :

If you learn to apply episteme, the way Foucault, Derrida, and Kant had
  used, in deconstructing the key Buddhist Pali words, you may find
  other deeper meaning to them that are of a supramundane nature. For
  example, you will find nine different ways the word ‘Mind’ is used

Specifically in what 9 ways is the word mind used? In only nine ways? Not more not less?

@hellyale. Good to see you back on the site.

According to my experience, there are two main meanings of the term "mind" in Buddhist context. It's important to understand those meanings, in order to avoid confusion and misconceptions.
First meaning is "mind in general", which means limitless space where all the reality manifests.
It's related to notions of Buddha-mind, Dharmakaya, Universal Mind, Consciousness.
There are many kinds of consciousnesses. In the philosophical Buddhist tradition of Chittamatra (or Cittamatra), which means "Consciousness Only", there are eight consciousnesses. (Some schools count few more or less).
These eight consciousnesses are:
The five primary - the consciousnesses of:

eye
ear
body
nose
tongue.

The sixth is the mental consciousness, which processes the data from the previous five. Our practice deals with this, the sixth consciousness. Sometimes it might be referred as "mind".
The seventh is manas. As I understand, it's like consciousness in post-freudian psychology: a part of the space centered on our personal perceptions.
The eight is alaya-vijnana, or Store Consciousness. I understand it as limitless ocean where our seventh consciousnesses floats like a crystal ball.
Alaya-vijnana stores our karmic seeds - imprints of past actions - kinetic energies of our intentions.
It is related to the notion of vijnana as the fifth group of phenomena (dharmas). (The fifth skandha).
Please don't feel overwhelmed with all these concepts. They are just pretty simple ways to describe our experiences. If you study them in practice, it all becomes not so complex.
Note that for the most part I spoke of consciousness rather than mind; I distinguish these terms.
So basically the first major meaning of "mind" is limitless space where dharmas appear.
Perhaps the most important and praised philosophical school of Buddhism, Madhyamaka ("Middle Way"), emphasizes emptiness of all phenomena, conditional nature of all notions and objects.
Even the mind - as that limitless space, or in any other meaning - is not really existent. (Though also not really non-existent).
In that sense, Buddhists speak of awakening as realization of No-Mind. As long as we cling to ideas of mind or self or whatever else, we rely on the level of ideas, production of the sixth consciousness, rather than the original reality.
Therefore, what is actual Buddha-mind? Nothing real. Not even that limitless space I mentioned before.
In awakening, we see all such things as mental generalizations, nothing more.
Now what is the second major meaning of "mind"?
When Zen teacher asks you, "What's your mind?" - what would you answer?
Maybe you would describe your experience you are living through, right now.
In that sense, "mind" is the experience now. It can be clouded, with vexations, or very clear and bright...
This meaning of "mind" relates somehow to the notion of consciousness from Twelve nidanas (links of dependent origination).
Consciousness from Twelve nidanas is depicted as monkey jumping among fruits on a tree. From one fruit to another. It's consciousness engaged in activities formed by samskaras (mental constructing).
Being limited by our mental creations, consciousness becomes entangled in samsara.
So liberation can be explained as dropping the limits of mental constructions, opening the mind to being unlimited, dropping even the notions of "mind" and "unlimited" and "awakening" and "liberation".
I'm not sure I answered the question completely - as you see, I have no idea what they meant by "nine meanings of the term mind".
Theories are endless. I hope I pointed at some key ideas which can help you in the practice.
Use the mind well, and through practice of exploration you will always find some useful understanding, eventually helping all beings in liberation.

To better understand the key words in the Sutta Pitaka – the first basket, one must look into the third basket - the Abhidhamma Pitaka of the Tipitaka, the Pali Canon. The sutta pitaka gives a synopsis - a summary of key terms. For each of the key concept, there is a Vibhanga – a detailed description, in the third basket.
The different levels what we generally refer to as the MIND is explained in the Vibhanga Prakaranaya. At one end is the radiant mind. Then the mind goes through the nine stages of contamination, and the other end is the defiled mind. These stages are:
Citta,   Mano,   Manasan (Manasa),   Hadayan,   Pandarung,   Manayathan,   Maneendriyan,   Vinnana,   Vinnanakkhanda.  This classification is given in the Patisambhida-magga-prakarana section of the  Vibhanga Prakaranaya.
The reason for the Pali Tripitaka has been wrongly translated to English and then to Sinhala, has very much to do with Buddhaghosa and Visuddhimagga.  The Visuddhimagga (Path of Purification) written by Buddhaghosa has been a curse, that had misled almost every single one of us in the wrong path.
Only now we are beginning to see the true meaning of the words of the Magadhi language. Maghadi is language of sound. It is meant only to be spoken. To write down the lengthy discourses that were in Maghadi that Buddha took hours to preach, PALI was invented. Pali is a form of Precis writing. With Pali, the Arahants of yesteryear managed to describe as accurately and briefly as possible the substance or main ideas contained in the discourses that Buddha gave. As a result an hours long discourse was condenced into a couple of paragraphs.
The distortion of the True Dhamma happened when it was translated to Sanskrit. The people who translated the Dhamma did a word to word translation which caused the path to Nibbana be closed to all of us. Now the incorrect meanings have got so entrenched in our collective psyche, that it is a question whether the true meanings would ever come to light. If I am to briefly explain a couple of the forms that this ‘Mind’ of ours would take:
CITTA is the Mind in its most radiant, pure & pristine form. Its most contaminated form is called VINNANA. Our consciousness (vinnana) is not like that of an Arahant. Ours is contaminated by defilements. This awareness of ours is like looking though a foggy window. It is like a glass of water clouded from impurities. A pristine clear glass of water is on the other had the Citta - the “radiant mind”.
Vinnana is “Vi + Gnana”. The prefix “Vi” gives the meaning of distorted, biased, prejudiced, coloured, form of sanna. Sanna (perception) identifies the object according to one’s gathi. Thus vinnana changes from moment to moment from feelings of  Sukha, Dukha, Somanassa, Domanassa, elation, fear, etc. etc.. Vinnana is forever adding things through the senses, further lengthening the samsara process. The Buddha has taught “uno loko atitto tanha daso” - The world is empty, insatiable a slave of craving” - That nothing can be maintained to ones liking. The more that one sees this the more that one comes toward the radiant mind.

This doesn't answer the question, i.e. "What are the nine different ways the word ‘Mind’ is used?"

I wanted to, @ChrisW, but an unkind comment made to me changed that. (It is been taken down since).  I then delayed answering the Q proper by a day or two, and replied to that comment made instead. Earlier I wanted to give a short answer, but now I will elaborate on 3 of the 9 ways that mind is used, when time permits.

@SapthaVisuddhi I the asker did not leave the comment, but saw it, and disagree with it, and glad that it was taken down. A short answer would be preferred, concise and correct is always preferred by myself in these matters. To raise to the comment's taunt and be verbose to show you are not verbose just doesn't make sense to me, and seems to put me at a disadvantage due to someone else's speech. I am going to downvote for now but will switch it to up once the original question is answered in full.

Interesting ideas, about language distorting the intended meaning. I have not heard this applied in the case of Buddhism before, do you have a reference I could read? Thank you.

Just found that having "preserved" but somehow ignorant to fomal abhidhamma not translated yet, also saw that 10 (believed it have been seven) was mentioned by the devoted Abhidhamma fellow, here. He mentioned "matthasangaha, atthakatha, Abhidhamma" as resource and Atma comes only Bhante Ānandajoti or Ayya  into mind who possible could help here in recources. Abhidhamma even commantary, will be difficult to impossible find in western even easter living language.

Continue (slow connection) http://www.abhidhamma.com or you could ask Upasaka Robert, with greatings, in his forum http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums or on DW. Much joy by exploring together and maybe some is useful for a good answer, lets look if Atma takes time to translate the khmer transl. from thai... also @nocomprende especially here.

Read the edited & deleted part of this answer @no comprende. I got a ‘-3’ for that. It shows that this forum is not ready to weigh and consider any new interpretation of the long held. This is not the first time that I got shot for trying to share these new findings. I do NOT wish to comment on this anymore. Hope you'll understand. Hopefully things will change to the better in the future. Till then…. With metta…

Tried to read the edit…. Whoosh! "When I find myself in times of trouble, Mother Kwan Yin comes to me, speaking words of wisdom: step away from the damn computer!" haw haw - Metta