text:
Where does the Buddha compare the Dharma to leaves on a tree?
There is a story in the Pali Canon where the Buddha compares the Dharma to leaves on a tree. If I can give a very approximate quote to what I remember

The dharma that I have taught is just a handful of leaves. The Dharma
  is actually all the leaves in all the trees

So the point been that there is a lot more to the Dharma then what the Buddha is teaching at that point. Can anyone give the exact reference for that story - I'm fairly certain it is from the Pali Canon.

From the Pali canon perhaps it's the Simsapa Sutta (see here and here).
The main message I get from that story is a bit the opposite of what you suggested: i.e. not that "The Dharma is actually all the leaves in all the trees", rather that the central doctrine is only the four noble truths (stress; origin of stress; cessation of stress; path of practice leading to the cessation of stress).
I think there are other suttas in which he said, "I have taught one thing and one thing only, i.e. dukkha and the cessation of dukkha.

Brilliant that's exactly it. I'm going to reread to check my understanding which is probably wrong.

I think that sutta is also understood as evidence of the Buddha's omniscience and ability to see everything.(iddhi and abhiññā); and whether 'everything he knows' should also be called "dharmas" I don't know (maybe yes they can because dharma is a slightly multi-meaninged word); and there's also a long footnote; ...

... what he's asking people to know is, "Therefore, monks, your task is to learn: 'This is Suffering, this is the Arising of Suffering, this is the Cessation of Suffering, this is the Path that leads to the Cessation of Suffering.' That is your task."


text:
Is there a specific practice that leads to a "rainbow body"
First of all is the "rainbow body" almost similar in the different lineages of Tibetan Buddhism? Then the above question.
Thanks

Here is a quote about the practice from the Wiki:

"Rainbow body (Tib. འཇའ་ལུས་, ja lü; Wyl. 'ja' lus) — fully accomplished Dzogchen practitioners can dissolve their body at the time of death."
"Through the practice of trekchö, the practitioner can attain the so-called ‘rainbow body’, in which the body becomes smaller and smaller as it dissolves, emanating rainbow light, and finally only the hair and nails are left behind."

Here is a quote on The Rainbow Body from the Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia:

"The rainbow body phenomenon is a third person perspective of someone else attaining complete knowledge (rigpa). Knowledge is the absence of delusion regarding the display of the basis.
Rigpa has three wisdoms, two of which are kadag and lhun grub. Kadag (primordial purity) is the Dzogchen view of emptiness. Lhun grub (natural formation) is the Dzogchen view of Dependent origination. Throughout Mahayana, emptiness and Dependent origination are two sides of the same coin. Kadag deals with tregchöd. The lhun grub aspect has to do with esoteric practices, such as (but not limited to) Thödgal, that self-liberate the dependently originated human body into the Sambhogakāya (rainbow body phenomenon). The symbol of Dzogchen is a Tibetan A wrapped in a thigle (see picture to the right). The A represents kadag while the thigle represents lhun grub. The third Wisdom, thugs rje (compassion), is the inseparability of the previous two wisdoms.
The ultimate fruition of the thodgal practices is a body of pure light, called a rainbow body (Wylie 'ja' lus, pronounced Jalü.) If the four visions of thogal are not completed before death, then at death, from the point of view of an external observer, the following happens: the corpse does not start to decompose, but starts to shrink until it disappears. Usually fingernails, toenails and hair are left behind (see e.g. Togden Urgyen Tendzin, Ayu Khandro, Changchub Dorje.) The attainment of the rainbow body is typically accompanied by the appearance of lights and rainbows.
Some exceptional practitioners such as Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra are held to have realized a higher type of rainbow body without dying. Having completed the four visions before death, the individual focuses on the lights that surround the fingers. His or her physical body self-liberates into a nonmaterial body of light (a Sambhogakāya) with the ability to exist and abide wherever and whenever as pointed by one's compassion."

Lanka

Thanks Lanka that was extremely helpful especially the second link.

Welcome. Glad it was of benefit.

I was wondering whether at the funeral (around 28th of August 2004) of Ajaan Paññavaddho we are witnessing the emanations of a rainbow body (food for thought).

Ajaan Panya’s remains were cremated at Wat Pa Baan Taad 10 days later. His funeral ceremony was the largest event ever held there—an estimated 50,000 people attended to pay their final respects, including over 4,000 monks. Something extraordinary occurred on the day of his cremation. On 3 separate occasions, a circular rainbow appeared in the blue sky, each time encircling the sun like a large, luminous halo. The rainbow first appeared as his casket was being placed on the funeral pyre; it appeared again later when his life story was being read aloud; and yet a third time when Ajaan Mãha Boowa lit the funeral pyre. It was as though the power of his spiritual attainment had created an external, visual image to reflect the depth and subtly of his virtue for all to see. It marked a supremely graceful conclusion to the life and practice of a monk whose loving kindness and humility radiated softly from his presence to encompass the whole world of samsãra.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Theravada perspective on transgender people
What would be the Theravada approach to people who have a transgender experience? As far as I understand it, the mind does not have a gender. So should a Buddhist, out of compassion alone, indulge a transgender person in their request to be regarded as a gender opposite that which they are born; or is this not compassion at all, to indulge one in things which you understand to not be based in reality? Where is the line drawn where one crosses over from being compassionate to being dishonest to oneself and what you have experienced to be true? I know this may be a sensitive subject to some, and I'm not trying to marginalize anyone else's experience of reality; only trying to gain some perspective on how to relate to the world. Thank you

I edited to write 'Theravada' instead of 'Buddhist'. You chose the [tag:theravada] tag for this the topic, and so I guess you are asking what a specifically-Theravada approach or perspective is. You also used the [tag:modern-world] tag though, so I'm not entirely sure: maybe you asking for the perspective of contemporary (i.e. modern) Theravadins.

theravada is fine thats the perspective i was looking for. i just chose modern because it seems to be something more of a modern "phenomenon". i could just be biased, though, being alive now, myself :p

I suppose binary gender roles seemed well-defined when I was an infant and only knew 'mum' and 'dad'; but I'm guessing that there's always been some overlaps in 'gender' and gender-aspiration in society and in history. Even women's wanting to ordain for example might once have been seen as 'transgender'. A midieval times a Shivaite saint wrote, "If they see breasts and long hair coming, they call it woman, | If beard and whiskers, they call it man, | But, look, the Self that hovers in between, is neither man nor woman"

no doubt there have always been people not associating with a binary position, it's probably just our modern culture that's making it more comfortable for such people to be so open about it.

See also http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/1441/what-does-buddhism-literature-and-tradition-say-about-transgender-folks for a discussion about transgender issues which you may find interesting

Stay with loving kindness (Metta) and act out of goodwill.
Have compassion (karuna) knowing that all people suffer and offer help when you have strength.
Avoid perceptions of gender and personalities as that would lead to conditioned responses or worst still stereotyped reactions. So with mindfulness intact act with goodwill.

Your saying, "Avoid perceptions of gender" contrasts nicely with the OP saying, "their request to be regarded as a gender opposite".

I think Samadhi may be saying to avoid conceptions/formations of "gender" in ones own mind, to avoid getting caught up on it, as gender is a constructed artifice.

I think i misread what you meant chris; but you're right it does

In order to serve as a reference for any trans/queer/non-binary and gender non-conforming folks on the Bodhisattva path here, looking to see how Buddhism interacts with their gender identity, it would be beneficial and more precise to add that Buddhism 100% allows all beings to be what they already are. When I entered the stream I had already had one transsexualism operation and was waiting for my second. The middle path does indeed allow for many of us who aren't monastics to be part of the sangha.
This article ...
Gender transformed and meta-gendered enlightenment: Reading Buddhist narratives as paradigms of inclusiveness
... quotes the buddha’s official position on trans-men and trans-women according to the Vinaya.

Here, in the Suttavibha≡ga – the first section of the vinaya – we find
  significant discussion on offences meriting expulsion from the order
  (pārājika). All kinds of breaches of celibacy are discussed; the
  discussion is prompted – as stated explicitly - by real cases,
  [etc.]
Interestingly enough, we read here also about a change of sex,
  although the connection with breaches of celibacy is not immediately
  obvious:

‘Now at one time, the sign of a woman [ittthilinga] appeared to a
    monk. They [the other monks] told this matter to the lord. He said:
    “Monks, I allow a teacher [upajjha, preceptor, spiritual teacher] to
    meet with nuns during the rains, as for the upasampadā ordination
    [higher ordination], so as in the presence of the nuns away from those
    offences which they have in common with monks; but in those offences
    of monks which are offences not in common with nuns, there is no
    offence (for the nuns).’
‘Now at one time, the sign of a man
    [purisalinga] appeared to a nun. They [the other monks] told this
    matter to the lord. He said: “Monks, I allow a teacher to meet with
    the monks during the rains, as for the upasampadā ordination, so as in
    the presence of monks to turn the monks away from those offences which
    they have in common with nuns; but in those offences of nuns which are
    offences not in common with monks, there is no offence (for the
    monks).’ (Vin. iii 35 PTS)[3]

The gist of this narrative might not be
  too clear in the earlier translation of Ms. Horner, Pali Text Society
  (1938), which I just quoted. Let us try a more accurate reading of the
  crucial point in this obscure Pāli passage:
The Buddha answers in the case of the male to female (MtF)
  transformation: Monks, I allow [her] a preceptor, I allow her the
  ordination, I allow her the ordination years [or: the monsoon periods,
  pointing either towards prestige or the general permission to stay
  with other nuns during this period] and the presence of nuns…
The Buddha’s laconic and pragmatic reaction towards
  sex/gender-crossing within the sa≡gha (the Buddhist community) is
  striking. The bottom line is, the Buddha changed the status of the
  transsexual from Monk to Nun, with all implications for the keeping of
  the specific precepts of the other sex but with no consequences for
  the continuity of spiritual guidance (preceptor) and prestige (years
  of ordination). The female to male (FtM) is treated analogously.
The context of the passage in the discussion of offences clarifies the
  focus on the ethical implication of a sex-change for the community, in
  which sex specific precepts had to be kept and in which cross-sex
  contact was extremely limited and sanctioned.
By defining the transformed as a full member of the sex changed into,
  the Buddha clarifies the monastic-disciplinary implications.
  Interestingly enough, the text doesn’t give any account how the ‘mark
  of the opposite sex’ appeared in the person in question. That it
  happens is accepted as common fact. This is also demonstrated by the
  enumeration of MtF and FtM transformations in the para-canonical
  Milindapañhā (267) within the regular phenomena appearing in the
  world.[4]

‘mark of the opposite sex’ <- What do you think this means? Did the transsexuals undergo a physical sex change like a clownfish or did the Buddha refer to what today we would call "gender dysphoria"?

The mind can be seen as having a gender. Usually being very emotional, afraid and capricious are seen as a qualities of a female mind. Of course both men & women can be like that. That's when you say a man with female qualities or a woman with male qualities.
All Brahmas who have none of the above weaknesses are considered male, even though they don't have a physical gender.
As far as dealing with transgender, you can simply treat them as trasgender. In practical situations, if they look like women in appearance, address them as women. If they look like men, address them as men, regardless of what they want to be called. Or simply avoid using gender references at all.

that was the way my mind inclined to act as well; but then the thought arose that doing so may arouse anger in such people, to their detriment. And with that in mind would it still be proper to address them as such?

You can't really take responsibility for people getting angry because of their delusions. People who are around can also get angry even though you might make that person happy.

You can also avoid using gender references

thats a good point, avoiding the contention is probably the best way. the middle way!

In Western countries, some people are teased and bullied in school: including people who are gay and transgender. Apparently, for transgender gender, people expecting you to behave/dress/socialize/identify as the 'wrong' gender feels like coercion and bullying. I saw documentary video of young children (boy and girl) who wanted to be the other gender. One of their dads was talking on documentary, and said, "When I first heard of their desire (to be transgender) I was surprised. But I did some research and I found that suicide rates are higher among transgender people who aren't allowed ..."

My opinion is that, being a transgender is not an unnatural phenomenon, since being a hermaphrodite by birth is a natural occurence, because it is an inherited mutation. So there is no question about that. But the question is, do we classify men who have decided by themselves that they are women, or whether we classify women who consider themselves men - purely on the basis if a cosmetical gender changing surgery.
In reality, the brain does have a gender. This is because the brain is a physical object, and humans are quite skilled at comparing physical objects. It is quite like comparing an orange and and apple and calling each by their own man-given name. A woman's brain has distinct differences from a male brain, since sensory centres relating to empathy, kindness, attachment are more well defined than in a man. A man's motor centres are more well defined in a woman. So we can see size differences in certain regions in the man's brain and woman's brain when comparing them physically (externally). But what if I ask you, what would you see when comparing a female bodybuilder's brain with that of a non-bodybuilder female's brain? Yes. The bodybuilder's motor centres are indeed more well defined than her non-bodybuilder counterpart. So, physical comparisons are quite lacking in truth. So we need to consider avout the mind's nature as well. A person's gender as well as their characters and personality depend on many factors.
It is stated that prince Siddhartha made five great considerations (Pas Maha Belum) before being born on earth. Those are time, continent, country, clan and mother. In addition, a person's aforementioned features depends on their Niyama Dharmas as well.

According to Buddhism, there are five orders or processes (niyama) which operate in the physical and mental realms.They are:

Utu Niyama - physical inorganic order, e.g. seasonal phenomena of winds and rains. The unerring order of seasons, characteristic seasonal changes and events, causes of winds and rains, nature of heat, etc., all belong to this group.
  2.Bija Niyama - order of germs and seeds (physical organic order), e.g. rice produced from rice-seed, sugary taste from sugar-cane or honey, peculiar characteristics of certain fruits, etc. The scientific theory of cells and genes and the physical similarity of twins may be ascribed to this order.
  3.Karma Niyama - order of act and result, e.g., desirable and undesirable acts produce corresponding good and bad results. As surely as water seeks its own level so does Karma, given opportunity, produce its inevitable result, not in the form of a reward or punishment but as an innate sequence. This sequence of deed and effect is as natural and necessary as the way of the sun and the moon.
  4.Dhamma Niyama- order of the norm, e.g., the natural phenomena occurring at the advent of a Bodhisattva in his last birth. Gravitation and other similar laws of nature. The natural reason for being good and so forth, may be included in this group.
  5.Citta Niyama - order or mind or psychic law, e.g., processes of consciousness, arising and perishing of consciousness, constituents of consciousness, power of mind, etc., including telepathy, telaesthesia, retro-cognition, premonition, clairvoyance, clairaudience, thought-reading and such other psychic phenomena which are inexplicable to modern science.
  Every mental or physical phenomenon could be explained by these all-embracing five orders or processes which are laws in themselves. Karma as such is only one of these five orders. Like all other natural laws they demand no lawgiver. Quotes from here.

Hence, a person's gender has all these predeterminant factors as well. The issue is, gender - like race, religeon and caste, are just human classifications, just like an orange is different from an apple. What is more important is not the physical differences between individual objects/beings, but rather what lies within- their conscience and the karma they commit right here right now, which decides where they progress in this cosmic existence. So my opinion is that being a judge of what should be and what is ought to be, is not what Lord Buddha taught us to do. He taught us on repeated occasions to be compassionate, kind, gentle, wise and understanding. See beyond the barriers and see the being within the external covers.

"Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relation to everything else."
"Purity or impurity depends on oneself,
  No one can purify another."
"True love is born from understanding."
-Gautama Buddha
"By working together, we come to realize that no barriers to religion, race or gender exist."
  -Venerable Wuling, Path to Peace Buddhist view of transgenderism

EXTRA READING:
Buddhist view of transgenderism

Thank you for your response. The more I've thought about it, the more I realize my initial reaction was knee-jerk, not at all born out of clear awareness of what is.

Buddhism is not identitarian.
If transgender people follow the five precepts (which includes committed sexual relationship), Buddhism says this is wholesome & minimizes harm.
If transgender people do not follow the five precepts (which includes uncommitted heedless sexual activity), Buddhism says this is unwholesome & generates harm.
Buddhism is a Path of 'Dhamma', which means a path about how to 'maintain/uphold/support' one's well-being and also the well-being of others.
All people suffer due to wrong action, regardless of their sexual identity/disposition.

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:
What is Zen Qigong in Zen Buddhism?
Question is in the title.
I was wondering about what this Qigong practice is and how it relates to Zen Buddhism. I've heard that it's a way of developing internal energy but I'm not sure what it's used for.
Thanks for your time.
Click on photos for full size

Qigong in Zen Buddhism comprise the Shaolin Eighteen Lohan Hands

They were taught by the great Bodhidharma in 527 CE to monks at the Shaolin Monastery in China when this First Patriarch of the Shaolin arts found the monks weak and often sleepy during meditaion...

Lifting the Sky
Shooting Arrows
Plucking Stars
Turning Head
Thrust Punch
Merry-go-Round
Carrying the Moon
Nourishing Kidneys
Three Levels to Ground
Dancing Crane
Carrying Mountains
Drawing Knife
Presenting Claws
Pushing Mountains
Separating Water
Big Windmill
Deep Knee Bending
Rotating Knees

Introduction to Shaolin Temple Luohan Qigong

Luohan Qigong is the "Art of Breath of the Enlightened Ones."  Luohan Qigong, or Lohan Chi Kung, is an system of exercises and breath control for improving your fitness, vitality, energy levels, concentration, poise, and well being.  Combined with seated or standing meditation, Luohan Qigong can also contribute to steady spiritual progress.  Numerous legends attribute the development of the Luohan Qigong methods, and the Muscle Tendon Changing Qigong methods, to the Buddhist leader Bodhidharma (Da Mo, Ta-Mo, Daruma), circa 525 CE, a early advocate of Chan (Zen) Buddhism.  There is little nor no written documentation of Luohan Qigong methods prior to 1880 CE.
The native religion of China, Daoism, and the native social philosophy of China, Confucianism, antedate the arrival of Buddhism by over 300 years.  These three viewpoints have often conflicted with one another, with Buddhism often characterized as a "foreign" influence, and at other times the three schools have blended together as in Complete Reality Daoism.  The Daoist scholar, Livia Kohn, has researched the history of Taoist and Chinese medical practices using exercise methods as a cornerstone.  There is documentation back to 200 BCE regarding these practices, although specific movement descriptions are often lacking.  Clearly these Daoist Daoyin practices and secular medical exercise methods for health and longevity influenced and were influenced by the qigong and martial arts practices of Buddhists at places like the Shaolin Temple.  Numerous other authors, listed above, have explained the intertwining and cross fertilization of the related qigong practices of the Buddhists, Daoists, and traditional Chinese medicine doctors: Liang Shou-Yu, Yang Jwing-Ming, Andy James, and Kenneth Cohen.


text:
When should one ask a question of someone other than themselves?
Is it just that we share our knowledge with others and then they interpret it as per their own individuality and spot benefit?
Do Buddhas ask questions of other humans as well?

Your question is not very clear. The grammar needs cleanup too.

Tried to clear it up... still not 100%

Asking questions is interesting in Buddhism; the Buddha had his own version of the Socratic method, and many of the discourses are comprised of back and the Buddha asking questions in order to lead his audience to their own wisdom.
See, for example, the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, the Buddha's second discourse:

"Bhikkhus, how do you conceive it: is form permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable Sir." — "Now is what is impermanent painful or pleasant?" — "Painful, venerable Sir." — "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir."
(Nyanamoli, trans)

Other discourses are more traditional, wherein the Buddha is asked a question and responds in one of various ways. The Buddha himself said he responded to questions in one of four ways:

“Bhikkhus, there are these four ways of answering questions. What four? (1) There is a question to be answered categorically; (2) there is a question to be answered after making a distinction; (3) there is a question to be answered with a counter-question; and (4) there is a question to be set aside. These are the four ways of answering questions.”
-- AN 4.42 (Bodhi, trans)

Yet other teachings show the Buddha using questions out of compassion, to bring up a topic that his students are disinclined to bring to his attention out of consideration for his welfare. As the commentary explains:

jānantāpi tathāgatā pucchanti, jānantāpi na pucchanti; kālaṃ viditvā pucchanti, kālaṃ viditvā na pucchanti; atthasaṃhitaṃ tathāgatā pucchanti, no anatthasaṃhitaṃ. anatthasaṃhite setughāto tathāgatānaṃ. dvīhi ākārehi buddhā bhagavanto bhikkhū paṭipucchanti — dhammaṃ vā desessāma, sāvakānaṃ vā sikkhāpadaṃ paññapessāmāti
Sometimes, knowing, the Tathāgata asks, and sometimes, knowing, he doesn't ask. Knowing the time, he asks; knowing the time, he doesn't ask. He asks what is connected with benefit, not what is not connected with benefit; for the Tathāgata has destroyed the bridge in regards to what is not connected with benefit. With two intentions the Buddha, the Bhagava,  asks questions back to Bhikkhus: "We will discourse on the dhamma, or we will establish training rules for our disciples."
-- Pārājika, verañjakaṇḍa

To this end, we can see that the Buddha himself gave some significance to asking and answering questions.
As to the purpose of questions, it is most obviously related to the way in which we acquire information, and how information informs our behaviour. Since asking questions can lead to hearing useful things, to broadening one's perspective, to reminding one of what one has forgotten, to helping one discard wrong views, and to many other good things as well, it seems obvious that questions should be asked and answered.
I can't think of a specific reference for the above paragraph, though, except to say that a read through of the Buddha's forty-five years of teaching should give a good idea of how questions are effective in helping us progress on the path. The only specific teaching on benefits of questions I can think of off the top of my head is:

“Here, student, some man or woman does not visit a recluse or a brahmin and ask: ‘Venerable sir, what is wholesome? What is unwholesome? What is blameable? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What kind of action will lead to my harm and suffering for a long time? What kind of action will lead to my welfare and happiness for a long time?’ Because of performing and undertaking such action…he reappears in a state of deprivation…But if instead he comes back to the human state, then wherever he is reborn he is stupid. This is the way, student, that leads to stupidity, namely, one does not visit a recluse or brahmin and ask such questions.
“But here, student, some man or woman visits a recluse or a brahmin and asks: ‘Venerable sir, what is wholesome?…What kind of action will lead to my welfare and happiness for a long time?’ Because of performing and undertaking such action…he reappears in a happy destination…But if instead he comes back to the human state, then wherever he is reborn he is wise. This is the way, student, that leads to wisdom, namely, one visits a recluse or brahmin and asks such questions.
-- MN 135 (Bodhi, trans)

So, there you have it. Asking questions leads to wisdom.
As with all sorts of learning, it is important not to mistake asking questions with actual meditation and empirical realization of the truth. On the other hand, asking questions certainly has greater benefit that simply producing theoretical knowledge; it can challenge and encourage and be quite beneficial as a means of producing wholesome mind states.

You edited my question and answered it. I accept your answer. That is thoughtful. Thanks. Love.

We ask a question when we do not know.
To some questions the answer is definite and there is no other interpretation and it accords with the Buddha's dhamma.
To other questions of morality/ethic (sila) then it is relative to the person.
Buddhist monks keep the 227 rule; 8 preceptors, the 8 precepts; and ordinary people, 5 precepts.
Even within the first precept of "abstaining from killing" we practice according to our ability...do we kill  mosquitoes that spread malaria, etc..
The Buddha knows so he only asks questions so he may show the  error of other peoples answer inorder to teach. That is one of his many teaching methods.


text:
Buddhist attitude towards prostitution and non-procreative sexual activity
I would like to ask a question from a Theravada Buddhism perspective.
In the Sutta it's said having sex with particular people is considered as sexual misconduct:
He has no intercourse with girls who are still under the protection of father or mother, brother, sister, or relative; nor with married women, nor female convicts; nor lastly with betrothed girls.
My question is, why prostitute does not include in the prohibited person? Does it mean having sex with prostitute does not considered sexual misconduct?
Second question is, from my understanding for married people having sex with their partner is not an offense but how about having oral sex or sodomy with your own wife or husband?
Is it true that oral sex and sodomy will make you take rebirth as an animal?

Hello Gr3 and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some information to help you get started here.

See also http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/5979/the-third-precept-and-prostitution for a discussion about prostitution and Buddhism which you may find interesting

Thanks guys.
@CrabBucket, I've checked that discussion previously but decided to started more specific topic, thanks.

Does it mean having sex with prostitute does not considered sexual
  misconduct?

It does not break the 3rd precept, if both parties are proper(not belonging to the 20 kinds of improper partners). However, not breaking the 3rd precept does not mean you are not committing unwholesome Kamma. All sexual activities are unwholesome regardless of if you are not breaking the 3rd precept. Because the root causes are always lust and delusion.
The five precepts are given as the minimal moral standard that is required for spiritual development. A person who keeps to the 5 precepts can still commit many unwholesome Kammas. But doing it with your spouse can potentially be less unwholesome compared to doing it with a prostitute. Because the relationship with your spouse can involve wholesome feelings as well. With your spouse you are not trying to have pleasure regardless of if she/he is enjoying it. You are usually more gentle and if she/he isn't ready or finds a certain method uncomfortable, you get to practice self restraint. That comes from Metta & Karuna. So it's not all lust. But with a prostitute, you are mostly trying to get your money's worth. Usually you don't care much for the other person. The focus is on extracting the maximum enjoyment you can, in whichever way you so desire during the time you get. The lust involved here can be much more stronger. So it can cause greater unwholesome Kamma. Also, there are other disadvantages to consider like your reputation being sullied and the higher possibility of catching STDs.

Is it true that oral sex and sodomy will make you take rebirth as an
  animal?

Any kind of sexual activity has the potential to give you a unfavorable birth, if it comes forward at the time of your death. Read more about how the mind works at the of death. However, engaging in unorthodox sexual activities usually requires a greater degree of lust and delusion. So the said methods can potentially cause stronger unwholesome Kamma.

Thanks a lot for your reply.
I agree that the practice of five precepts doesn’t mean that one is free from unwholesome actions, in this example sexual activities with prostitute. However, it’s said that practising five precepts will deliver someone to a lower level of heaven or rebirth as a human being.  How is that possible?
As for the delusion of unorthodox sexual activities, do you think the delusion is depend on the individual rather than the sexual activity per se?

Practicing five precepts gives you a higher chance to be born in one of the the happy destinations of the sensual sphere. But there's no 100% guarantee. It is possible because usually the strongest Kamma(good or bad) comes forward to determine the next birth. The sexual activity is an indication of the strength of the lust and delusion at the moment. ex: It takes stronger lust to have intercourse than just to kiss.

One thing I didn't understand about this answer was your statement that "unorthodox sexual activities usually requires a greater degree of lust and delusion": are you sure that's true? And indeed is oral sex "unorthodox" sexual activity? In some societies it's not uncommon or taboo e.g. these CDC statistics (table 5 and 6 on page 21 and 22) seem to claim that 99% of middle-aged men and women in the (non-Buddhist) United States of America have experienced intercourse, and about 90% of them have at some point in their lives engaged in oral sex.

By unorthodox I was merely referring to oral and sodomy. Yes, oral isn't uncommon even in Asia.  But usually it takes a greater degree of lust and ignorance to use your mouth on someone's urinal area. Same can be said about sodomy

Five precepts are not to prevent people to take rebirth in lower realms like I used to think. But then I wonder what's the purpose of precepts then? Probably only for the society to function well? But I could be wrong.
Another thing can be understood is, it's the degree of lust involved that determine the weight of the unwholesome kamma rather than the type of sexual activity.
I asked a monk regarding oral sex and animal rebirth and he answered oral sex already like animal. But then again he also said the cause of animal rebirth is not just sex. But I'm not quite sure how to understand that

Keeping to the 5 precepts greatly improves your chances of not being born in lower realms. But you have to attain the state of Sothapanna to never to be born again in lower realms. Sila is an essential part of the practice. Sila helps the mind to be tamed. It is very difficult to develop concentration and wisdom if you don't have morality. Also, keeping to the Sila prevents you from doing a lot a bad deeds. So it is greatly beneficial. You can get a hell rebirth by breaking the all 5 precepts. Not just the 3rd. That's what the monk meant.

@SankhaKulathantille Just came across this thread. So, for example, if someone has intercourse with different "unprohibited woman" everyday. It's very likely he will get unfavourable rebirth although he is not breaking the precept, is that right, can you please confirm? This is a little bit confusing because in abrahamic religion, if you don't break God's commandments, the reward surely is heaven.

That depends on what karma comes forward at the time of death. Yes, doing it every day with a different woman is indicative of extreme degree of lust. So it's highly possible to have an unfavorable birth next time.

@SankhaKulathantille But his extreme degree of lust is not breaking the precept.
Practicing five precepts will greatly improve the chance to be born in one of sensual spheres.
Since he has both the quality of five precepts and extreme degree of lust. Can we say it's very likely he'll be reborn in one of the sensual spheres instead, who enjoys (superior) sensual pleasures such as devas in heavenly realm?

It all depends on birth Karma. There is a precedence. First comes weighty karma, second comes near death karma, third comes habitual karma.

In this case, his habitual kamma is having intercourse with different woman every day. That is not breaking the precept, is that wholesome or unwholesome?

It is unwholsome

@SankhaKulathantille isn't third precept only for men?

@ETHER No, it is not.

Oral sex and sodomy will make you take rebirth as an animal?

These kind of ideas can be seen in other religions.In Buddhism we do not label sexual activities as good or bad,sex is sex it is not extremely bad as long as you remain to your partner.But Buddhism consider sex as a distraction from the path of nirvana.
Please note that people who reached higher levels of mind (Sovaan/Sothapanna) like "vishaka" had many children.so it is more of a distraction not a deadly sin.
Question - why prostitute does not include in the prohibited person? Does it mean having sex with prostitute does not considered sexual misconduct?
Imagine a person Single,Adult,Independent.
Now you have a natural need to have sex,but you do not want to marry just yet.Now you might think Buddhism instruct its followers to either marry or not to have sex at all.That is not true because we are only mindful not extremists as Buddhists.
Say this person find a lady who is single,in the right age and currently willing to provide sexual services to him.So they are both eligible!
Now your question must be if this person hire her will it be bad karma?
There is only one mention in Theravada about prostitution and bad karma and it goes like this (i am simplifying the details)
"If a prostitute take money from a person to provide services and serve someone else before serving that person it would be a violation of the third (sexual misconduct)"
Please understand,we are a religion of cause and effect our good & bad is only defined i a completely logical manner (Not like many other religions in which the rules are already set).
So the conclusion is.
As you already know how the third (sexual misconduct) happens,a purchase of sexual services from a prostitute (within the borders mentioned above) it would not be a "sin".
I would recommend you to learn about the life story of "Ambapali" who was a sexual service provider later on became a follower of Lord Buddha and reached nirvana.

I can only offer a small partial answer here. My understanding from general reading is that historical Buddhism tolerated prostitution because of the difficult financial situation of widows in post-Vedic India. How early this toleration manifested itself I do not know, but it seems likely that it was early for the same reason that the whole Pali Canon accurately manifests the tenor of the time of the Buddha. Thus, it may have influenced the writing of the Pali Canon (3rd-1st cent. BCE).

GR3 1st learn about Basic Guidelines of Buddhism as a Start..

Do not take life
Do not take what is not given
Do not distort facts
Refrain from misuse of the senses
Refrain from self-intoxication through alcohol or drugs

in Buddhas time also their was Prostitutes. having sex others (including Prostitute) beside your wife as per Buddhism its WRONG
find below the meaning of the Guide line 4

Refrain from misuse of the senses

The senses in Buddhism include not only the five generally thought of: touch, hearing, seeing, smelling and tasting, but also the mind: thinking. This means overindulgence in touching (for instance sex), hearing ( overindulging in listening to music for instance), seeing (too much focuss on beauty or ugliness around us), smelling and tasting (overindulgence in food preparation for instance). Lay people aren't expected to refrain from sex, yet they are expected to refrain from overdoing it. Moderation in this respect has become highly unpopular, with kids having sex at earlier ages every year and sexual crime becoming almost usual. To be a virgin equals being ashamed, these days. Buddhist morality is old-fashioned in this respect.
The the last sense which can be overindulged is thinking or thought, or use of the mind. One often meets people who think so much, they forget to practice. Or they out-think any morality one can come up with. The mind is a highly deceptive tool and overuse makes it overly powerful over us. When thoughts start seeming real, and control ones life, beyond what is reasonable, it is perhaps time to consider whether perhaps one has overindulged in thinking.

My question is, why prostitute does not include in the prohibited
person? Does it mean having sex with prostitute does not considered
sexual misconduct?
Based on its definition, the 3rd precept is obviously a teaching about social (rather than personal) morality. Its essence is to not have sex in a way that harms existing relationships or reputations.
Therefore, to not have sex with those living under the protection of their family is to avoid harming the family relationship or to not have sex with those living in institutions is to avoid harming the social reputation of the institution.
That is why, even today, to have sex in the workplace is generally prohibited by employers & corporations.
That said, having sex with prostitutes falls under the Six Roads That Can Ruin A Man, found in the Sigalovada Sutta

Second question is, from my understanding for married people having
sex with their partner is not an offense but how about having oral sex
or sodomy with your own wife or husband? Is it true that oral sex and
sodomy will make you take rebirth as an animal?
For most worldly people, sex is a necessity. For me, 'rebirth' is a metaphor & rebirth as an 'animal' means to develop the mental state of lacking reason (reflective intelligence) & emotional self-control, just as animals cannot reflect with objective intelligence or control their emotions.
In my opinion, sodomy is 'rebirth' as an animal (i.e., stupidity) since sodomy can be a dangerous activity (since the anus & intestines are not physically designed for sexual activity).
Also, often, women do not actually enjoy anal sex but do it to please the voyeuristic wants of their male partners. At least in past generations, before the era of universal birth control, many women in certain cultures abhorred being forced to have anal sex to satisfy their husbands & avoid pregnancy.
When a man forces or coerces his wife to do an act she really does not want to do, this is 'animal' behaviour & thus 'rebirth' as an animal.
In Buddhism, 'death' is not a requirement for taking 'birth' as an animal, as shown below:

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."
Lokapala Sutta: The Bright Protectors

In the history of Buddhism, some 'authorised Buddhist teachers' (for example, Chögyam Trungpa & his authorised heir Ösel Tendzin) often took 'birth' in this world as 'animals', as demonstrated by their sexual & other social behaviours. For example, Ösel Tendzin had unprotected sex with students while knowing he had AIDS.
Any Buddhist teacher that has sexual relations with a student transgresses the 3rd precept & is immediately ('opapatika') reborn as an 'animal'.
In summary, to preach immorality & to engage in immorality is also 'spontaneous birth' ('opapatika') as an 'animal', even for so-called 'authorised Buddhist teachers'.

The Malavagga said: Unchastity is the taint of a woman.
I dated a woman who a masseuse who practices certain functions one might consider prostitution. I've been with her for 2 years.  She has tried to stop, but I can't afford to support her family in the necessary way.  I know she loved me deeply and I her, but what she did tortures me and hurts me.  She is not a drug addict.  She doesn't drink.  She supports a mother, a son, and others, and sometimes it's quite extravagant with gifts to me and for herself.  What she did hurts her and it hurts me. If her son knows it would devastate him.  Even though she is a consenting adult doing her work for a good cause, the effects on herself and others are problematic.  It involves lying, often selfishness, and hurting herself and others.  It is not a victimless act.  I understand the potential poverty but it doesn't invalidate the inconsistencies and harm.

I'm an authorised Buddhist teacher and I don't know of anywhere in the texts where it is said or implied that sex or wanting sex is bad, that fornication is wrong, that homosexuality or being transexual are wrong, or that prostitution is wrong - in fact the quote mentioned above suggests that it is seen as being like any other business- or that anal or oral sex are wrong.  The Dalai Lama himself has said he is not able to discover any such thing in the texts.  The above answers are cultural myths only, and if you ask Theravada teachers to point out the relevant passages in the texts, they cannot.
Neither will normal desire, which is natural to humans, lead to a bad rebirth.  Only very serious acts like killing your father or mother automatically lead to a bad rebirth.  The word 'tanha', which is translated as craving, actually means a very unhealthy, obsessive desire, a real stalker mentality.  The Victorian translators understood 'craving' as the nearest equivalent to a quite horrible word.
During the Buddha's life, many laypeople both married and unmarried became Enlightened, some of whom it seems implied in the texts, led an active sexual life.

Hi Tom and welcome to Buddhism SE. I have some questions for your answer. Questions are not a critique of you but instead a search for clarification and elaboration together with relevant references to back up statements.

What is an authorised Buddhist teacher? 2. You write: "...if you ask Theravada teachers to point out the relevant passages in the texts, they cannot...." - that seems like a broad comparison. 3. What is normal desire? 4. Do you have a source for your translation of Tanha?. 5. Which texts imply that enlightened people had an active sexual life?.

@Dhammadhatu I think it's my duty to ask, please be moderate when you comment on other people's answer. This site is intended to be open to all schools of Buddhism and policy is to avoid sectarian arguments. I suppose Tom is Mahayana and, for all I know, may be giving an answer that is orthodox to his school. Though you might want to warn people that an answer doesn't match your preconceptions, a gentler way to phrase that might be to say e.g. "According to this reference, Tanha means so-and-so. When you say that it means such-and-such instead, could you give me a reference for that please?"

Prostitution is often not a particularly healthy occupation, which is why many prostitutes have drug habits & addiction to suppress unwholesome emotions. Imo, these tormenting emotions themselves are 'rebirth' in hell (since I only believe in 'internal' hells). In Pali Buddhism, there are many acts that lead to 'rebirth' in hell. For example, Dhammapada 306 states: "the liar goes to hell'. In Pali Buddhism, 'tanha' represents all forms of worldly craving, be they gross or subtle, as defined in the 2nd Noble Truth.


text:
From a Buddhist point of view, what are the benefits of supernormal powers?
I've heard that intensive meditation of certain kinds can lead to the development of supernormal powers such as penetration into others minds (reading minds) and hearing sounds from far away (Divine ear). From a Buddhist point of view, what is the benefit to being able to discern the thoughts and far away voices of others given that most people are not yet enlightened and their thoughts and words are likely colored with the defilement of desire, aversion, and delusion? It would seem possible that such an ability might lead to suffering for the one discerning the unguarded (and unenlightened) thoughts and words of others. Edit As an example, if one reflects on thoughts that have arisen in one's own mind, there are likely thoughts that you wouldn't share with anyone because they are base, mean, hurtful. Why would an advanced meditator want to subject themselves to being able to receive such thoughts?
Is there a traditional Buddhist view on how such abilities are advantageous or even wholesome?

I guess that, in the same way that being able to see a cup of wine wouldn't cause the Buddha to suffer, neither would his being able to hear the thoughts of a drunkard.

@ChrisW, Yes, for the Buddha that would be true. But my question is not regarding the Buddha having this ability but advanced meditators having this ability.

I assume you are asking about the disadvantages of unenlightened beings gaining magical powers. Devadatta is a good example for that. He used his magical powers to impress king Ajatasatta and intern caused much harm. They are like tools that can be used for both good and evil. But they don't last longer if you use them for evil.
Attaining supernatural powers is done through Samatha meditation and it does not require you to be enlightened. So it is possible that your mind can also get defiled by watching the thoughts of others and things at a distance. In that case, you will lose the powers as you will lose the Jhana. There was a story about a king who developed the ability to fly through the air. One day when he was traveling in the sky, he saw a pretty woman in a village. Lust arose in his mind immediately and he lost the Jhana and fell to his death.

Why would an advanced meditator want to subject themselves to being
  able to receive such thoughts

One can look into others' minds and notice the rising and falling of their thoughts too. That way you see them as instances of Panchaskanda rather than people. You can also see how they suffer and what causes that suffering. So the super powers can be used in ways to help one attain enlightenment. Divine eye can be used to see the impermanence at a microscopic level. That's much more powerful since it's instantaneous. Divine eye and ears can also be used to see and hear hell beings and how they suffer. That will motivate you in your meditation. Ability recall your past lives can be used to understand the danger of Samsara. ex: venerable Yashodara did this before she attained enlightenment.

Does these powers arise when one has attained all the Jhanas or how should it be understood that Samatha meditation leads to them?

You have to attain upto the 4th Jhana and have mastery over it. Then to develop the divine ear, you arise from it and start using that focus to listen to sounds coming from a distance. You increase the distance gradually. Ability to read other's minds is connected to divine eye. After attaining the divine eye, you focus it on someone's heart and get to know his thoughts. Visuddhimagga has a comprehensive description on how to attain these powers.

Thanks for the info and reference Sankha. Is it true that these powers will not lead to enlightenment?

One can use them to understand Anicca, Dukka, Anatta and attain enlightenment. Ex: Venerable Yashodara attained enlightenment by recalling  her many past lives.

This answer is answering the converse of the question, not the question itself. However, the content is still valuable in its own right.

@Anthony, ah I saw the edit. Updated the answer.

Just from inferring from the texts, you can see how the Buddhas ability to read people's minds allowed him to teach them exactly what they needed to hear. So such an ability would allow someone greater ability to teach people. I also seem to remember in the dhammapada, accounts of the Buddha using his omniscience, seeing understanding arising in monks minds, to telepathically communicate with the monks who were practicing far away in a forest to give them assurance on their path. So as far as I can tell, these powers are to be used to help others on their paths.

An Indian yogi came to Japan and demonstrated his ability to levitate and other supernatural powers. The people who witnessed these miracles went to the Zen master living nearby (Bankei) and asked "See what this yogi can do? What miracles can you perform?"
The Zen master responded "When I'm hungry I eat, when I'm tired I sleep."

Hello todji and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some tips to help you get started here.  :)

@todji - What does that mean though?

@Motivated I've opened a meta thread to discuss these type of answers http://meta.buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/1561/157 which might be of interest

@motivated  I always understood it as meaning that supernatural powers are irrelevant to Buddhism. The miracle of Zen is to be fully present in everything we do, to exist fully in human form.

@Crab Bucket While I can see your criticism to my other comment, I'd argue that my response here is of a different caliber. Not only is my post more on target, but I'm directly citing/paraphrasing the literature- in this case a well known Zen parable.

@todji Absolutely. I see nothing wrong with this answer as it stands- it's good. I was just an example 'zen type answer' which was the topic of the meta post discussed here - http://meta.buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/1561/157. I'm not a zen expert at all so maybe the two answers don't belong together, In any case your contributions are valued and I was rightly called out about being too harsh (or not understanding) answers of this nature.

This is a Buddhanet-quote from a section called "The Buddha's Attitude to Miracles":

"The only miracles that should be performed are these: when you see a man full of passion, craving and greed and you teach him to free himself from passion, craving and greed; when you see that a man is a slave to hatred and anger and you use your powers to help him control his hatred and anger; when you come across a man who is ignorant and who cannot see the true nature of the world (everything in this world is impermanent, sorrowful and egoless) and you use your powers to help him overcome his ignorance. These are worthy "miracles" you can perform.
This advice to Kevaddha was also extended to the Vinaya rules that forbid monks from performing miracles to impress people and gain converts, without helping them to be enlightened. This was clear in the case of Pindola.
Arahant Pindola Bharadwaja was famous for miraculous psychic powers. A rich man, wanting this monk to prove his psychic powers, placed a beautiful bowl at the top of a high place and challenged any holy man to get the bowl down. If he could do it, he could keep the bowl.
Pindola Bharadwaja flew up and took the bowl down easily. This was also done to prove to the rich man that there are saints in the world, a fact that the rich man did not believe. When the Buddha came to know about this incident, he called Pindola Bharadwaja to bring his bowl. He broke the bowl into pieces in front of a large gathering of monks, saying, "I am displeased about the demonstration of your psychic powers. You must never show off your powers just to impress simple ignorant people."

The first paragraph illustrates how these powers should be used, i.e. to help other beings become free from the defilements so that they can develop their faculties. So i think that must be the some of the benefits. Being able to help other beings thereby doing wholesome actions creating wholesome effects to ripen in this life or future lives.
What we also see from this text is that the Buddha placed great emphaziz on people, especially monks not abusing these powers and thereby giving the Sangha and more broadly speaking Buddhism a negative reputation.
When that is said i think its of great importance that such powers should be in the hands of clear-seeing, highly developed beings and not beings who still have a gross level of the root defilements in them. If that is the case the powers might be abused.

In addition to what @Ryan wrote about the Buddha helping people with powers, it can also guide the aspirant.
One may use powers to read other people's minds for example, to understand the nature of anicca. Since one's own thoughts may appear too personal and arising with just cause, seeing the thoughts of others change from time to time, may drive home the point that it is affected by causes and conditions, and is compounded.
Even though every mature teacher recommends not getting side tracked by powers, the lure of powers is like candy to children for some. Experiencing the powers can convince such people that they are not worth lusting after. Of course, they can also lose their head, and behave like Devadatta.
The Buddha himself when he attained enlightenment analysed his past lives with great interest, and learned without a shred of doubt the futility of eons of lives spent lost in pleasures, not searching for the truth.

The greatest danger by far is always going to be emotional attachment to the attained skill, or to attainment itself.  Attachment is death, the only real death.  Our connection to any version of who we think we are limits our potential for movement and growth and any desire limits us similarly.  Power feeds the mind's yearning to solve problems, and that yearning manifests even larger problems, so despite our good intentions, we are working with the discipline of infants when provided with new tools of potentials previously seen as magical.

Hello infinite horizons and welcome to Buddhism.SE! We've put together some information to help you get started here.

Seems like you are referring to iddhi powers which are extremely important in achieving arahantship.
Developing the four bases of iddhi seems to refer to developing concentration founded on desire, persistence, intent, and discrimination (SN 51.20).
It says in SN 51.7:

“Monks, all the monks in the past … future … present who realize the
  undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life,
  and who live having realized it with their own insight due to the
  ending of defilements, do so by developing and cultivating the four
  bases of iddhi power." (SN 51.7)

This means it's impossible to achieve arahantship or the ending of mental fermentations without developing a certain degree of iddhi.
It's not the superhuman powers themselves that are important but the well-developed concentration ability required to achieve those powers which is important which is required for achieving arahantship.
Now I understand why my own personal progress in achieving arahantship is halted I'm only a little skilled in iddhi development though I've achieved higher states and have experienced some effects of iddhi development here and now.
Originally desire and enthusiasm was viewed as important and beneficial in Buddhism for achieving arahantship even though now the popular media portrays
the opposite (I think this is in part because of the disappearance of arahants).
Right Effort is part of the Noble Eightfold Path:

"And what, bhikkhus, is right effort? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu
  generates desire for the nonarising of unarisen evil unwholesome
  states; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and
  strives. " (SN 45.8)

Sariputta took a week longer than Moggallana to achieve arahantship perhaps because Moggallana was much more skilled in iddhi development than Sariputta.
With developed iddhi powers one can do nearly anything.
Moggallana boasts:

"Sāriputta, the monk who has crossed over,  may be supreme  in respect
  of his wisdom,  ethics, and peace.
But in a moment I can create the likenesses  of ten million times
  100,000 people!  I’m skilled in transformations;  I’m a master of
  psychic powers." (Thag 20.1)

Based on the suttas looks like it's necessary to develop a certain level of concentration to achieve arahantship.
In general things can be beneficial if it leads towards arahantship, but maleficial if it leads away from arahantship.
Iddhi development is necessary for achieving arahantship, easing doubts, perceiving the truth, and especially useful if one decides to become a teacher.
What type of teacher would The Buddha have been if he hadn't developed supernormal powers to a very high degree? It would've been extremely difficult to teach and know certain things.

"It is because he has developed and cultivated these four bases of
  iddhi power that the Realized One is called ‘the perfected one, the
  fully awakened Buddha’" (SN 51.8)

Remember The Buddha used his power to avoid the serial killer Angulimala, who He converted into a monk who eventually achieved arahantship and also used it constantly for teaching (like looking into someone's past existences to see what teachings would trigger unconscious memories that lead towards arahantship).
Iddhi development was encouraged for monks but displaying iddhi powers became viewed as a negative thing after the arahant Pindola Bharadwaja started flying in public to take down a bowl. Now in modern times it seems because of frauds, imposters, non-arahants, the faithless, and other incapable people iddhi powers are viewed as even more negatively even though a very positive thing for achieving arahantship.
Iddhi development may be viewed as more negatively now probably because of the disappearance of real arahants existing in the world but it is still extremely important for those desiring to achieve arahantship.

"Monks, whoever has missed out on the four bases of iddhi power has
  missed out on the noble path to the complete ending of suffering." (SN
  51.2)

One siddhi worth mentioning is the one called "anima," the ability to see atoms. Almost a century ago, two clairvoyants, Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater, used this ability to examine all the elements of the periodic table known at the time. More recently, a physicists named Stephen Phillips found a mathematical relationship between their observations and our modern knowledge of the elements. Someday, I suspect, people will be developing this siddhi in order to provide new information about atoms for modern physicists. I suspect that the same siddhi can also be used to observe the physical form of citta. But that is another story.


text:
Doubts about Karma and/or Rebirth
I have been a staunch follower of the Buddha's words for the past 1.5 years. I do believe in the Buddha in so far as the Denial of God, Creationism, Destiny is concerned but considering the events in my life and what I see around, I am now absolutely sure that there is no Karma nor Rebirth.
In my own life experience, I was married about an year back, arranged by my family according to the traditions. Obviously I did not know the Girl before marriage nor had any sexual relations with her. It so followed that after marriage following a few days of sex with me she went ahead and had sex with her boyfriend (her friend close to her before marriage).
What followed was - She obviously found him to be more suitable for her sexual desires and immediately after that she started mentally irritating me and abuse followed. She did other stuff (like creating fissures in family) and ultimately left me after a few months. Now she is extremely happy and posting happy messages and photos in social networking and abusing me happily. The marriage laws in my country are pro female and I cannot do absolutely anything.
But the fact of the matter is that she is extremely happy (both sexually and otherwise) while I feel cheated and wronged.
Further I do see in my country in India due to a hierarchical Caste system, extremely poor people made to clean others toilets etc and pick trash due to their birth. I just spoke to an old man (about 65 years old) who told me (while crying) that he has been doing this job (cleaning toilets and picking trash) for 45 years and he is not allowed to do any other work except this and there is nobody to help him because the traditions in the country are like that.
I would like to ask you for those who believe in Karma: Where is Karma acting?

Hello Saurav and welcome to Buddhism.SE! We've put together some information to help you get started here.

Hi Saurav and welcome to Buddhism SE.

The basic concepts of buddhism like the eight percepts and many other things can be considered as buddhas words. You have to remember that buddhism was revived by king asoka after the death of buddha , So as in ever religion there may be additions of thoughts along with the passage of time. Buddha new this and thats why he said- you have test everything for reason before going ahead. So you don't have to be blind follower ,you choose what you beleive is proper for you.

@saurav If you are still on stackexchange, please see this link, it may guide you. http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/14202/how-does-buddhism-handle-internal-conflict

Karma is your action, Some actions lead to good vipaka(result) , others lead to bad vipaka and others lead to neutral vipaka & don't worry about rebirth  because rebirth happens right now. You never noticed these cyclic patterns within what is going down? That's Rebirth.

Karma is your action. Some actions lead to good vipaka(result) , others lead to bad vipaka and others lead to neutral vipaka (neutral?) Rebirth just means the next wave but rebirth happens right now. So the rebirth always happens right now. You never noticed these cyclic patterns within what is going down? That's Rebirth.

The failure of your marriage could be due to a past bad Kamma you have done. But it is also a result of you giving the chance for that past bad kamma to come into fruition. There are 4 factors affecting the results of past Kamma. Payoga Sampatti is one of them. It means skillfulness, diligence and intelligence. You can use this to avoid the results of certain past bad Kamma.
You probably could have avoided such a heartbreak had you at least got to know her as a friend for about an year and studied her character. Even in proposals, you can do that, after both families agree. You didn't have to marry her immediately.
You should stop focusing on the girl who left and use your Payoga Sampatti to do a better job in the future when selecting partners. Focusing on her will likely create hatred in your mind and make your situation worse. If she has done wrong, she will suffer for it in the future. But your situation will not improve whether she suffers or not. She could be enjoying life now because of her past good Kamma, her own Payoga Sampatti and Upadi(good looks) Sampatti.
In case of the old man, one is born into a low caste because of the following reasons:

There is the case where a woman or man is obstinate & arrogant. He/she
  does not pay homage to those who deserve homage, rise up for those for
  whom one should rise up, give a seat to those to whom one should give
  a seat, make way for those for whom one should make way, worship those
  who should be worshipped, respect those who should be respected,
  revere those who should be revered, or honor those who should be
  honored. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the
  break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in the plane of
  deprivation... If instead he/she comes to the human state, then he/she
  is low-born wherever reborn. This is the way leading to a low birth:
  to be obstinate & arrogant, not to pay homage to those who deserve
  homage, nor rise up for... nor give a seat to... nor make way for...
  nor worship... nor respect... nor revere... nor honor those who should
  be honored. -Cula Kammavibhanga Sutta

Nope ! Nope ! Low birth and low caste are entirely different thing ,a low birth is somebody doing despicable things ,low caste is a class division .I suggest you edit the post . If  person born into a lower caste  if he is working as a doctor ,he is not a low person ,your deeds decide your caste . If a high caste person does some despicable deeds he is low birth.  http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhism/lifebuddha/2_24lbud.htm

@jathin, you got it mixed up! It takes good Kamma to be born in a certain social grouping that is considered as high born. In ancient India, Brahmanas and Kshatriyas were considered high born whereas Shrudras were considered as the lowest. Buddha was only talking about the unjustful criteria used to define these castes. But it is what it is. If you are born in low caste, you will go through hardship no matter how unfair it is.

There is no mention of the word caste here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.135.than.html  The Buddha said:
By birth one is not an outcaste,
By birth one is not a Brahmin;
By deeds alone one is an outcaste,
By deeds alone one is a Brahmin

Brahmin by birth means the Brahmin caste

@jathin 's quote "not by birth is one a brahman" seems to come from the Vasala Sutta. In that sutta the Buddha is addressing someone who is (conventionally) a brahman ... I'm not certain what the Buddha means when he says "not a Brahman", but perhaps he's implying that a real Brahman must at least speak and act accordingly, and/or that a real Brahman (for example Sopaka/Motanga) is someone who (because of deeds and not because of birth) is then reborn in the Brahma realm.

Karma means action. We act through body, speech and mind. What you are experiencing now is the results of past actions in this life and possibly previous lives. If you have aversion towards the feelings and mental formations you experience now then that is a new unwholesome karma that is being created by reacting to the results of the past karma. I have tried to draw a picture of it. See illustration. You might have to zoom in.
What im trying to show in the picture is that the way you react to the situation now will condition future results. So if you react in an unwholesome way now it will lead to future suffering. An unwholesome way of reacting would be to identify with- and take ownership of the mental formations or feelings of anger, sadness, irritation. It would be unwholesome to dwell in them and thereby providing them further fuel to burn.
If you react in a wholesome way, e.g. to accept it, learn from it and move on you will create wholesome results for yourself.
Best way to  deal with this would be to do insight meditation and observe the feelings and mental formations that arise in the mind due to the situation you are finding yourself in. Insight meditation will give you insights into how these phenomena occur and exist.

Maybe you could do up this drawing in Word or Paint or something? Gimp is free and easy to use...

@Bhante. I did it in a program called ithoughts.

I feel like maybe it is just an issue of phrasing (in terms of temporality), but this answer and others on here may be neglecting a subtlety of the Buddha's teachings on kamma; namely, that actions in the present contribute to one's experience in the present. Again, maybe this is what you intended but I feel like clarity about this could improve this and other answers in this thread; e.g., maybe one is treating one's wife harshly and that is why she leaves. Cf. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.021.than.html & http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html

@Adamokkha Lanka's answer mostly agrees with what you said: it says that present (i.e. post-marriage) karma is important. Can you point to anything in his answer that you would change, suggest any specific changes? Perhaps the pink box in the lower left of the diagram, instead of saying only, "Marriage ending is the results of past karma", say, "Marriage ending is the results of karma from before and during the marriage". And maybe the top left box, "Past and present karma conditions [etc.]". And maybe quote e.g. from the references you gave, about the importance of the present.

@Adamokkha. Thanks for the suggestion. Im happy to make an edit to my answer if it can be a bit more specific what needs to be edited and if its in line with the content. Remember you can also yourself post and answer to OP's question if you feel this answer and others are neclecting to mention something regarding kamma.

You assume your marriage ending and the man cleaning the toilets is bad karma, why?
Is it not possible that your marriage could have lasted for many years ending with your ex-wife killing you for some reason, so karma could have intervened...my point is, you don't know for certainty whether or not the karma was good or bad. But you do know how you are preceiving the situation because you are experiencing pain and suffering...but that doesn't mean your interpretation of the situation is correct or accurate.
As for the old man cleaning the toilets, firstly, do you know karmically if the old man was to go a different path in life, that in fact each other path than the one he is currently on, each other path would lead to instant death? So, it is possible that his karma could be keeping him alive!! It's possible. But again, we have another person who is preceiving the situation as negative and in doing so, is causing himself the pain and suffering.
Secondly, you don't believe in karma, and yet, you are going through a really tough time in your life, and then, all of a sudden karma connects you with a man who has a life of cleaning toilets. From my point of view, it's possible that karma is showing you something very important, that is... life may seem bad for you now, but... you could always have been born into a life of cleaning toilets!!
It's your negative interpretation of the objects, people and events around you which are causing your own pain, it's you holding those thoughts in your head, which is leading to your pain and suffering, you, no one else!!Even though, it is definitely possible that karma could be trying to save you and the old man, and if you and the old man viewed it that way, i guarantee your pain and suffering would instantly disappear!!
I hope i have helped!
Metta.

Rebirth is the evolving of the consciousness from one life form to another through kamma(skilful and unskilful action).
Someone who wakes up in the middle of the night for just an hour and sees  that there is only darkness, comes to the conclusion that there is no such thing as light, is making a simple statement based on a very limited time period. Not knowing what happened before and could happen after.
The Buddha has seen his own previous lives and the lives of many beings appearing and disappearing in one world after another.
What we experience now is the results of previous kamma, yourself and the old man. Is it not possible that you have been cruel in a previous life and the old man wicked, that such events are happening?
The gist is skilful actions now and forbearance of the results of previous kamma.

I don't know about (and cannot talk about) kamma from any previous life.
I believe though that people's intentions and actions have consequences during this life, at least.
For example if one is greedy or angry then that causes suffering;
and if one can renounce greed and anger then that's conducive towards the ending of suffering.
I suspect that Hinduism (not to mention Buddhism) sees a link between Karma and caste. For example, this article Karma in Hinduism claims that:

Chandogya Upanishad 5.10.7 distinguishes between good birth such as birth in a spiritual family, i.e., (brahmin caste) ... Thus, the doctrine of karma comes to explain ... even differences between members of the same species, such as humans.
It has also been argued that Karma has a role in Hindu society as a whole. When one abides by their caste duty good Karma is earned and vice versa; and the Karma one collects is reflected in the next life as movement within the Caste system. The promise of upward mobility appealed to people, and was made plausible through Karma. This effectively "tamed" the lower castes into passive acceptance of the status quo. Thus, the Karma doctrine discouraged actual social mobility.

I don't think I have a supernatural ability to see past lives or to know how they affect this life.
Instead I see the four noble truths as being true for everyone, applicable to everyone, in this life.
Actually I recommend this short article: The Taste of Freedom. It suggests as an experiment, imagine a prisoner: is he free? Take him out of prison, give him a middle-class lifestyle: now is he free? Make him a great king: now is he free?
I think that the point of Buddhism is to acquire freedom (e.g. freedom from suffering i.e. cessation of dukkha, and also freedom meaning autonomy) somewhat regardless of our circumstances.
In this article, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote, talking about the Dhamma's being "universal",

the Buddha placed no restrictions on the people to whom he taught the Dhamma. He held that what made a person noble was his personal character and conduct, not his family and caste status. Thus he opened the doors of liberation to people of all social classes. Brahmans, kings and princes, merchants, farmers, workers, even outcasts — all were welcome to hear the Dhamma without discrimination, and many from the lower classes attained the highest stage of enlightenment.
Within the wider Indian society the Buddha did not attempt to abolish the caste system, which, it seems, had not yet developed into the complex, oppressive system it became several centuries later. However, he flatly rejected the orthodox brahman view that a person's class status was an indication of his intrinsic worth. Within the Sangha, the monastic order, he completely disregarded all distinctions of social class, declaring,

Just as the waters of the four great rivers flow into the ocean and become known simply as the water of the ocean, so when people of all four social classes go forth as monks in my teaching, they give up their social status and become known simply as disciples of the Buddha.

I'm sorry that your marriage hasn't worked out in the way you hoped it would. Romantic relations are often like that, even notoriously like that.

I'm sorry too for the man you talked about, who was crying. I was told a story yesterday evening, of an Englishman:

An old labourer 85 years old remembers his hard life in Suffolk. "There was nothing in my childhood, only work and no games. One day a year I went to Felixstowe with the people from my church ... that was my pleasure. But I'd forgotten one thing: the singing, there was always singing then ... in the churches, in the fields, in the trenches during the war. So wasn't telling you the truth: I did have pleasure, I had singing."

Maybe you shouldn't be thinking about marriage or remarriage now; but if you do, this topic was about Buddhist suggestions for choosing a suitable marriage partner.

Your desire for this woman and for sex and pleasure, and your feeling cheated that these things were not fulfilled, this is where Karma is acting. Your disappointment in the way things are, feeling they ought to be someway else, leading to your sadness that they aren't the way you feel they ought to be, this is where Karma is acting. Any time you come to be at odd's with the way that reality is, creating these states of mind thinking or feeling that you'd like something else to be, or even that the way things are is good and you enjoy it, this leads to your suffering and this is where, as you say, Karma is acting.
And if you want to understand this for yourself, meditate. I would suggest if you can, undertake a meditation retreat.
*vipassana, insight meditation, that is

Your actions have results don't they? Karma is your actions and your actions always have results even if you aren't aware of the results. We are reborn because we want to exist. If we stop wanting to exist and let go of everything then we attain Nibbana. If one practices "seeing things as they are" (Vipassana or Mindfulness) as well as concentration and virtue, then one will slowly start to notice one's experiences repeating over and over again. It can really seem to get ridiculous all the things that happen again and again during meditation. We begin to see that experiential phenomena are dying and becoming reborn over and over again very quickly. We must meditate to truly understand rebirth. We can't read our way to this understanding. We must have a little faith that the more we are mindful, the more we understand rebirth as the Buddha taught. Metta: )

As a practitioner and a longtime meditator, I think the idea of karma can and has most certainly been used to justify abuses and injustice. In my limited understanding, truths communicated by the concept can coexist with misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and abuses of the idea to justify or explain away the oppression of women, minorities, etc. and to justify socially-constructed phenomena or societal mores as a kind of absolute, which they are not.
For myself, I currently view the concept as a kind of "skillful means"--a conceptual aid to meditators and practitioners that is open to interpretation--and not an "absolute truth." My saying this has its roots in my own study, state of understanding, and practice of Buddhism. And "skillful means" means that the idea is ever-changing. I'm aware that in Buddhism it is said that karma is not absolute truth. I think that is a good thing to keep in mind.
Stephen Batchelor, to my knowledge, has written about karma in an intelligent, open-minded, and critical way. You might want to check out some of his books. In addition, you might want to read Buddhist teachers like Chogyam Trungpa and Dzongsar Khyentse, among many others. In my experience, Buddhist teachers never make any simplistic statements about karma or judgments like "because so-and-so was bad in a past life, he was born as a poor man."
Karma is a way of understanding the world, and I think in some of its manifestations can and has been culturally conditioned. Seeing events in terms of karma could be compared to seeing events in terms of God's judgment in theistic traditions; both can be speculative approaches to understanding why things happen the way they do, which ordinary people can never completely understand except that, as Buddha said, "This is because that is." In other words, a skein of causes and conditions is behind everything that exists, and that skein of causes and conditions can be looked into and, to a greater or lesser extent, understood. What matters most is that the understanding, I think, be personal.
As for bad events happening to one, it is often said that practitioners will experience obstacles, sometimes even moreso than non-practitioners. In my experience, I often feel that fixating on trying to understand events in terms of karma can and often is a form of being absorbed in myself. (I say this in a non-critical way--everyone wants to know why bad things happen to people.) I would say please extend kindness to yourself and then to others. Thinking critically is important, but it's not necessary always to speculate on karma. I think trying to practice kindness, openness, and so on in negative situations can be far more important, depending on the situation.
Finally, please know that my answers are simply efforts at understanding and in no way reflect a claim to absolute truth or authority. I apologize for any mistakes, and please know that I think it's always important to think for oneself, and Buddhist teachers as well as the Buddha himself emphasized this. I have responded here simply because I think of the same issues as you do. Perhaps it would be best to concentrate on being the best person you can be in every situation, for everyone's sake. That's what I try to do, anyway. I wish you all the best. May we all be held in compassion.

I would like to bring forth the views of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, regarding Kamma.
For those of you who do not know him, here is a wiki article about him..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar
Here is the link regarding Rebirth and Kamma from his book 'Buddha and His Dhamma'
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_buddha/04_02.html
The full book can be accessed here
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_buddha/sectionmap.html

Can I ask you to summarize a little, and/or to direct-quote (e.g. copy-and-paste) the most relevant paragraph or two (perhaps from the introduction or conclusion) -- even if only, at least enough to show that the contents of those links include an answer to the question, encourage people to read the links, and to direct them to whatever specific place within the linked content best answers the question (in case they will not read the whole of what you linked to)?

If you don't believe in karma, there is no point explaining what happened to you in karma theories in Buddhism. So below are some Logical reasons to believe karma and rebirth .
Karma : If there is no karma , all the people will be same in every way. But when you look at the society you see a huge difference between people. Some are born extremely poor while some are born extremely rich . Some die inside the womb while some live over 100 years old. So there are billions of differences like this . There is no other thing to explain this other than karma.
Rebirth:  When hypnotizing some people tell about places they have never seen or never heard of and they actually exist. Also some kids talk in foreign languages even though they don't even have heard a word in that language. Also some people are born to do things , when the same amount of training given to few people, some people do exceptionally well . Again also when you hypnotize someone to tell about where they were before born in this life , most people can see where they lived in their past lives .
So above reasons are the logical reasons to believe in karma and rebirth. What we do comes along with us . If you plant rice seeds , you ll harvest rice . What you harvest is what you have planted. So in the same way what you/others do will affect you/them in the future in a good or bad way .
Ps: It is not necessarily happen in this life . May be 100 births after this the consequences can happen.

Karma is action or intent based on desire. And also accumulated Karmas lead to rebirth. In India people get married for fulfillment of sexual desires which society does not allow if you are a bachelor. You are a guy who cannot love and in return cannot get love and therefore jealous. If she has moved on so can you. Where is Karma coming into picture? Have a heart first and become generous. Meditation can help you reach there. After that contemplate on Karma. If you go deep in Meditation you can see your past lives and Karmas. Just do not rely on theory of Karma, see it, experience it. Religion is about practice it is not an intellectual affair. Unfortunately majority of people read/write about Karma but few gets to a point of experiencing it. Please do not be one of them. Live your life well and meditate and you will get your answers.


text:
Is Tantrayana the same as Vajrayana?
I'm reading a little bit from the Tibetan Buddhist lama Dhardo Rimpoche at the moment. He keeps referring to Tantrayana not Vajrayana when discussing Buddhist philosophy and practice. It's pretty obvious from context that this is the diamond vehicle i.e. Vajrayana. However I'm not clear whether the two terms are the same and interchangeable. Would Tantrayana refer to non Tibetan Vajrayana schools such as Shingon? Is Tantrayana  a subset of Vajrayana or is it a term only used by certain schools? Do they have a different nuances of meaning or are they genuinely exactly the same?

Vajrayāna (Sanskrit: वज्रयान, Bengali:
বজ্রযান)

is also known as Tantric Buddhism, Tantrayāna, Mantrayāna, Secret Mantra, Esoteric Buddhism and the Diamond Way or Thunderbolt Way. The Lama and the Guru yoga are central in this system.[1] Vajrayāna is a complex and multifaceted system of Buddhist thought and practice which evolved over several centuries.

Although known with different names they are slightly different according to their practices.
There are many ways in which Vajrayana can be divided or classified and one way is to differentiate according to schools

..there is historical evidence for Vajrayana Buddhism in Southeast Asia and elsewhere (see History of Vajrayana above), today the Vajrayana exists primarily in the form of the two major sub-schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Esoteric Buddhism in Japan known as Shingon, with a handful of minor subschools utilising lesser amounts of esoteric or tantric materials.

The Tibetan schools are:

Tibetan Buddhism
Nelpalese Newar Buddhism
Ari Buddhism
Azhali region

Japanese schools are:

Shingon Buddhism
Tendai Buddhism
Shugendo

etc...
History of Vajrayāna:

Vajrayāna probably came into existence in the 6th or 7th century, while the term Vajrayāna itself first appeared in the 8th century. The Vajrayāna was preceded by the Mantrayāna, and then followed by the Sahajayāna (*8th century - long haired Sahaja(founder of Mahamudra)-siddhis) and Kalacakrayāna (*10th century - which includes messianism and astrology).

Fourfold division in Tibetan Buddhism

The best-known classification, by the Gelug, Sakya, and Kagyu schools, the so-called Sarma or New Translation schools of Tibetan Buddhism, is to divide the Tantras into four hierarchical categories:

-Kriyayoga, action tantra, which emphasizes ritual;
-Charyayoga, performance tantra, which emphasizes meditation;
-Yogatantra, yoga tantra;
-Anuttarayogatantra, highest yoga tantra, which is further divided into "mother", "father" and "non-dual" tantras.

Shingon and Tibetan Buddhism

The primary difference between Shingon and Tibetan Buddhism is that there is no Inner Tantra or Anuttarayoga Tantra in Shingon. Shingon has what corresponds to the Kriyā, Caryā, and Yoga classes of tantras in Tibetan Buddhism. The Tibetan system of classifying tantras into four classes is not used in Shingon.
Anuttarayoga Tantras such as the Yamantaka Tantra, Hevajra Tantra, Mahamaya Tantra, Cakrasaṃvara Tantra, and the Kalachakra Tantra were developed at a later period of Esoteric Buddhism and are not used in Shingon.

So Tantrayana as far as I know is another name for Vajrayana which is different from Shingon and other Chinese Esoteric Buddhism. Tantrayana or Vajrayana is the latest 10th century tradition which includes the highest yoga tantra (Anuttarayogatantra).

Tantrayana is another word to describe the tantric vehicle of Buddhism. From the Vajrayana view, the three vehicles include: Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana. The nine vehicle system described by the Nyingmapa sect can be researched on the Rigpa wiki
It is important to note that some of the other Buddhist traditions do not accommodate the assertions that Himalayan and Indian Buddhist traditions about the division of Dharma practice into 3 vehicles.