text:
Unforgiveable/Unforgetable Past Abortion and Miscarriage
I knew a few very senior Buddhism Scholars, one of them also start teaching Dharma having an issue as per title above.
The guiltiness is persist more than a decade and the actions below i personally felt inappropriate especially being too superstitious and claim that all those bad luck due to the title above. Kindly Correct me from wrong if any statement here found inappropriate.

Body overweight and start having obesity sickness like knee pain. They will claim that the aborted child coming back and bite the knee. I thought it is as simple as due to diet issue (too much sugar and fats) and lack of exercise?

Getting a Spirit tablet for the aborted/miscarriages child and often doing offering like praying, food, toy, etc  - Personally thought the child will remain in the human dimension and refuse to get incarnation yet it will keep playing mind tricks to the person.

They will start teaching Dharma and hope the child can listen as well?

Q1) Please someone review the action above is appropriate especially #2 and #3 ?
Q2) Apart the similar question and answer and this post, should we focus more in 8 fold path as core resolution and performing often chanting/praying without spirit tablet? Any Sutta/Mantra suitable for this type issue?
I hope can have different angle and views from Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, etc. Well, those scholars i mentioned above are from Mahayana by the way.

From the sutta quote below, you can see that a person's actions while they were alive determines their outcome, and not rituals performed after death.
Also, please watch this video talk and this video talk on superstition by Ven. Ajahn Brahm. In SN 7, you can find many cases where the Buddha criticized superstitions.
In DN 2, we find that astrology, palmistry, divination, tea leaf reading, magic, geomancy, dream interpretation, making predictions etc. are considered "animal arts" and wrong livelihood for monks.
From SN 42.6:

Then Asibandhaka’s son the chief went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat
down to one side, and said to him:
“Sir, there are western brahmins draped with moss who carry pitchers,
immerse themselves in water, and serve the sacred flame. When someone
has passed away, they truly lift them up, raise them up, and guide
them along to heaven. But what about the Blessed One, the perfected
one, the fully awakened Buddha: is he able to ensure that the whole
world will be reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm when their body
breaks up, after death?”
"Well then, chief, I’ll ask you about this in return,
and you can answer as you like.
What do you think, chief? Take a person who doesn’t kill living
creatures, steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech
that’s false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re contented,
kind-hearted, and have right view. And a large crowd comes together to
offer up prayers and praise, circumambulating them with joined palms
and saying: ‘When this person’s body breaks up, after death, may they
be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell!’ What
do you think, chief? Would that person be reborn in hell because of
their prayers?”
“No, sir.”
“Chief, suppose a person were to sink a pot of ghee or oil into a deep
lake and break it open. Its shards and chips would sink down, while
the ghee or oil in it would rise up. And a large crowd was to come
together to offer up prayers and praise, circumambulating it with
joined palms and saying: ‘Sink, good ghee or oil! Descend, good ghee
or oil! Go down, good ghee or oil!” What do you think, chief? Would
that ghee or oil sink and descend because of their prayers?”
“No, sir.”
“In the same way, take a person who doesn’t kill living creatures,
steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech that’s
false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re contented,
kind-hearted, and have right view. Even though a large crowd comes
together to offer up prayers and praise … when their body breaks up,
after death, they’re reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.”
When he said this, Asibandhaka’s son the chief said to the Buddha,
“Excellent, sir! … From this day forth, may the Buddha remember me as
a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.”

should we focus more in 8 fold path as core resolution and performing
often chanting/praying without spirit tablet

8 fold path is the path of viewing in terms of not-self & dependent origination . Dependent origination is the view that the impersonal element of ignorance is the primary cause of unwholesome actions.
often chanting/praying is not the 8 fold path
obviously the example provided in the question is of a person/mind unable to practise the 8 fold path and abandon identity, personality & self-views
in MN 66, it is clearly taught a new born child has no self-identity, which therefore also applies to an embryo or fetus
yet the individual in the example in the question keeps concocting a personality view of the embryo/fetus and also of the aborter
the individual does not understand the doer of the abortion was the element of ignorance and that the embryo/fetus was mere elements (dhatu)
AN 3.61 says:

In dependence on the six elements the descent of a embryo occurs

often chanting/praying is not the 8 fold path   --> Mahayana version somehow i personally i received a message from them to do more but at the same time they need to understand the meaning of the Mantra/Sutta and practice it. Practice is higher priority than pray/chant


text:
Do we have to believe that good people exists?
Is thinking that there are no good people / followers of five precepts in this world a wrong view? I read this in some where but I forgotten it.
It is hard to see that kind of people other than Buddhist monks. This is a reason for some people to not to follow buddhism. Some times I feel the same way. Is this a wrong view? Do you meet real Buddhists in real life other than monks?
I always try to remember that the metaphor of lotus pond.
Kind regards.

Believing that good people exist is like believing that young children will mature in wisdom and intelligence. Sometimes it's hard to watch a two year old in the middle of a tantrum and think "someday this little screaming monster will be a doctor, or a saint, or someone's loving spouse", but every small child has that potential in them.
Everyone wants to be good (or at least want to think of themselves as being good). Most people only have a vague idea of how to be good; many people are confused on the very idea of what being good means. That's what the dharma is for: to turn people's heads so they are looking in the right direction when they look for good. but clearing up that confusion is a difficult task in the best of circumstances, and most people don't have access to the best of circumstances. Give them he same forbearance one might give to a  child.
There is no value in assuming people are not-good. All that will do is ruin our own practice: making us cynical and jaded; leading us towards unhealthy egotistical states where we aggrandize ourselves or our masters over and above the unenlightened riffraff. We cannot lead people with a stick, or draw them forward with bile and vinegar, so we have to develop that sweetness within ourselves that sets asides such sour thoughts.

If we may agree that good requires the skillful, then:

AN3.69:9.1: There are these three skillful roots.
What three?
Contentment, love, and understanding.

Contentment, love, and understanding are worth cultivating for their own sake without needing to assess others. Indeed, the Buddha says quite clearly that:

MN8:12.12: ‘Others will have wrong view, but here we will have right view.’

Good people acting out of contentment, love and understanding are to be found in all faiths. Good people inspire us all.

I think this world is full of good people. THE first I can think of is my parents and there are many friends. The idea of "Good" is subjective. What I call good may not be the same as what you call good. The observing five precepts is a gradual training. It can have many levels. Not killing a human is not the same as not killing a virus.

It appears the world has relatively few good people who (per SN 55.7) both consciously follow the five precepts & speak in praise of the five precepts.
For example, there are relatively more people who more or less instinctually follow the five precepts but they don't teach their children the five precepts and they allow their children to transgress the five precepts.

From Dhammapada:

Few among men are those who cross to the farther shore. The rest, the bulk of men, only run up and down the hither bank.

But those who act according to the perfectly taught Dhamma will cross the realm of Death, so difficult to cross

Extremely few go all the way to Nibbana.
But it's not right to say that there are no good people. There may be many good people, but they may not be trying to escape suffering.
By "good people", I mean people who try to practise the four brahmaviharas - loving kindness (metta), compassion (karuna), empathetic joy (mudita) and equanimity (upekkha). One could practise these without trying to attain Nibbana.
For example, anyone who tries to help another person is obviously showing compassion.
What about the five precepts?
A monk (a full time, professional practitioner of the Dhamma) needs to practise the five precepts as perfectly as possible, as explained in the section entitled "The Moral Foundation for Jhana" by Ven. Gunaratana and also as explained in this answer.
However, a lay follower of the Dhamma may commit themselves to the practice of the five precepts but they may not strive to practise it perfectly.
Here's one example:
The lay follower who does not practice the five precepts perfectly, will not kill humans and most animals, but may occasionally kill a mosquito.
I'm sure we can find similar examples for the other four precepts.

Do we have to believe that good people exists?

You don't have to believe anything. It's entirely up to you. Buddhism is more of a practical religion based on experience rather than on belief.
As long as one is not fully Enlightened there will remain defilements (latent tendencies) in the mind.
A great focus in Buddhism is the cultivation of goodness, helpfulness, peacefulness and patience and many other positive qualities of mind. Many Buddhist (and non-Buddhists) possess those qualities so in that sense they are good people.
From a Buddhist (meditational and experiental) point of view this is a bit different. You see, a being does not really exist. What exists are moments of experience so when you see or hear a person talk these are just moments of experience such as hearing and seeing arising and passing away constantly.
The mind is like that. It arises and passes away incessantly. This is also known as momentary death. So when talking about good people we really have to talk about wholesome moments of mind arising and passing away. Being mindful is a moment of great goodness and wholesomeness so naturally a mindful person or one who trains in Buddhist mindfulness meditation can be said to be a good person.
Hope this helps.

Yes, if wishing toward Path, good householder, as it begins with Right view, wherein this view is included:

"And how is one made pure in three ways by mental action? There is the case where a certain person is not covetous. He does not covet the belongings of others, thinking, 'O, that what belongs to others would be mine!' He bears no ill will and is not corrupt in the resolves of his heart. [He thinks,] 'May these beings be free from animosity, free from oppression, free from trouble, and may they look after themselves with ease!' He has right view and is not warped in the way he sees things: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how one is made pure in three ways by mental action."
— AN 10.176

And as the Buddha declared in the Shorter Lion Roar Sutta, the four kind of real good people are only to be found within his Sangha.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is observing the five precepts a gradual training?
Which Pali suttas refer the subject of "gradual training"?
Do the Pali suttas say observing the five precepts is a "gradual training"?

While the five precepts are not a form of gradual training (since it is the minimum prescribed practice), the Noble Eightfold Path is certainly a gradual training as evidenced by the following quotes:
From Ud 5.5:

Just as the ocean has a gradual shelf, a gradual slope, a gradual
inclination, with a sudden drop-off only after a long stretch; in the
same way this Dhamma & Vinaya has a gradual training, a gradual
performance, a gradual practice, with a penetration to gnosis only
after a long stretch. The fact that this Dhamma & Vinaya has a gradual
training, a gradual performance, a gradual practice, with a
penetration to gnosis only after a long stretch: This is the first
amazing & astounding quality of this Dhamma & Vinaya because of which,
as they see it again & again, the monks take great joy in this Dhamma
& Vinaya.

From MN 70:

"Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once.
Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual
action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis
after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the
case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having
visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having
lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers
it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings.
Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering
the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the
teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When
one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an
exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the
ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it.

Blockquote"It is possible, brahman, to lay down a gradual training, a gradual doing, a gradual practice in respect of this dhamma and discipline, Brahman, even a skilled trainer of horses, having taken on a beautiful thoroughbred first of all gets it used to the training in respect of wearing the bit. Then he gets it used to further training — even so brahman, the Tathagata, having taken on a man to be tamed, first of all disciplines him thus:

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.107.horn.html
You can start observing with one precept first. For instance, you can stop consuming alcohol forever even though you still may be breaking the other four precepts or you can stop killing humans but you may still kill animals. You know breaking five precepts is unwholesome but you still may break them. Knowingly breaking five precepts is better than doing it unknowingly. This is not ideal but you have to start it somewhere.

MN 107 says about morality: ""'Come you, monk, be of moral habit, live controlled by the control of the Obligations, endowed with [right] behavior and posture, seeing peril in the slightest fault and, undertaking them, train yourself in the rules of training.' As soon, brahman, as the monk is of moral habit, controlled by the control of the Obligations, endowed with [right] behavior and posture; seeing peril in the slightest fault and, undertaking them, trains himself in the rules of training, the Tathagata disciplines him further saying:"

MN 107 includes morality as one step of gradual training. It does not refer to a gradual training within the morality step.

@Dhammadhatu and Sarath: Wouldn't a being not yet freed from Samsara continue to break precepts until a certain amount of ignorance has been dispelled? Until then, wouldn't the training in morality be "gradual"?

I have poted this in Dhamma Wheel for the discussion.https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=38813&p=596461#p596461

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


text:
What is the meaning of “knowledge and vision” in the context of the heartwood sutta?
I am aware of a similar question here:
What is knowledge and vision?
However, I would like a deeper understanding of what precisely is meant by “knowledge and vision” in the heartwood sutta and why is its attainment positioned as it is with respect to the other attainments.
I feel that I have a good understanding of the meaning of the attainments which precede, and presumably are prerequisites for “knowledge and vision”.
Namely
1: gain, honor and renown
2: moral discipline
3: concentration
and for the attainment which follows and presumably depends upon it.
Namely
5: perpetual liberation
but the attainment of “knowledge and vision” itself is frustratingly fuzzy in my mind.
I’d like a better understanding of
1: What precisely is meant by “knowledge and vision” in this context?
2: Why is concentration a prerequisite for “knowledge and vision”?
3: Why is “knowledge and vision” a prerequisite for perpetual liberation?
My best guess is that
1: Knowledge and vision” represents a level of development wherein one can get to nibbana when needed, but it does not persist perpetually.
2: Concentration is a prerequisite for “knowledge and vision” because seeing the arrow (hard to see) as it enters the heart requires a concentrated mind. Perhaps this is the vision part?
Seeing the arrow as it enters the heart enables us to identify precisely where we became self-absorbed in the narrative and thus where the work of severing attachments must be done.
3: “Knowledge and vision” is a prerequisite for “perpetual liberation” because having knowledge of each individual desired sensory experience which the mind is attached to, is required before the work of severing said attachment can begin. Perhaps this is the knowledge part?
When all such attachments are severed and no new ones are added, then sustaining nibbana perpetually becomes possible
This is a complete guess on my part. Am I close?
I am referring to the translation provided by Bhikkhu Bodhi.
https://www.suttareadings.net/audio/index.html

Heartwood Sutta is one of the many suttas that paint the overall Path in broad strokes. We use these suttas to understand the elements of the Path from their relations to each other.
In this case the point of the sutta is to drive home the last step of the Path, cetto-vimukti, i.e. "liberation of mind" (or heart) as the only reliable differentiator between the Knowledge-and-Vision and all kinds of lesser knowledges, as superior to even this Knowledge-and-Vision, and as the only true Nirvana. The knowledge-and-vision (also described as "wisdom" in oher suttas) plays the role of the instrument or the gateway to Liberation.
Before I answer your question about the nature of Knowledge-and-vision I'd like you to first understand what Liberation actually refers to. This topic is not studied deeply in Theravada but is very well covered in Mahayana, especially in the live teacher-to-student traditions of Zen and Vajrayana. Liberation is a big topic and I don't have room here to describe it in detail, but to boil it down to its essence it is when, having realized how things work, you are no longer bothered by anything. You have no fear, no hope, no hindrance in the mind. You don't ascribe intrinsic value to anything. And now that you see that nothing is more valuable than anything else, nothing bothers you. Subjectively it feels as if you are finally free to just be spontaneous and true to yourself. (But remember: at this point you're quite clear on how things work, so you are free but not stupid.) You no longer define yourself, you have no shape, and you are not anchored in any single mental framework. You are undefined and spontaneous. You are free to do anything you decide, or not do anything at all.
1: What precisely is meant by “knowledge and vision” in this context?
Now, knowledge-and-vision (jnana-dassana) is exactly that understanding of how things work that, both, gives you assurance that nothing is intrinsically more important than anything else, and at the same time gives you clear insight into how certain actions lead to certain results. Once again, this knowledge-and-vision is quite deep and has multiple facets that all come together as one thing only when you truly get it. Until then you have to necessarily approach it from multiple sides as if it were multiple things. One of such aspects is Emptiness. Emptiness is an umbrella term that stands for the huge body of realizations and implications that come from the basic insight that "everything is defined relatively to something else". Another aspect of knowledge-and-vision is the Three Marks of Existence, or the nature of dharma-flow. When you truly understand TMoE you understand Emptiness and vice-versa. Another aspect of knowledge-and-vision is insight into how samsara comes about, that is how the developing mind assembles its superficial impressions into a full-blown subjective reality. This is usually explained as Dependent Origination but there's more to it than the standard formula. Another aspect of knowledge-and-vision is direct insight into the mechanism of semiosis that powers your own mindstream. This insight is obtained from the practice of Four Formless Jhanas and is also connected with Emptiness. Finally, the practice of Four (Rupa) Jhanas gives the insight into Four Noble Truths: Dukkha, Craving, Cessation of Craving, and Suchness. I can't emphasize enough that all of these only seem to be distinct ideas, but when you really get them they are aspects of the whole that I like to label "how things work".
Now, to answer your other questions:
2: Why is concentration a prerequisite for “knowledge and vision”?
It's not as much "dumb" concentration (in and of itself) as it is being able to focus on these topics and spend some quality time with them, to fully understand their implications. Well, I have to correct myself: when it comes to jhana practice, concentration is quite literally concentration on your own mind. Again, it's not just mechanical "dumb" concentration, it is concentration governed by a very specific goal: reaching the ultimate "sign" (the end of semiosis) in case of formless jhana, and reaching the ultimate "suchness" (the end of dukkha) in case of rupa-jhanas.
Both types of concentration are needed so you can exhaustively understand and truly get to the bottom of things.
3: Why is “knowledge and vision” a prerequisite for perpetual liberation?
As I explained above, cetto-vimukti is liberation of heart (or mind) through wisdom. Until you clearly see that nothing is more important than anything else, and until you know for sure why that is the case, it's really quite impossible to be free. Hence wisdom being the prerequisite for liberation.
My best guess is that ... This is a complete guess on my part. Am I close?
No, not at all. Yours is a typical misunderstanding of the final stages of the Path. The liberation is not attained through watertight control of the mind. It's not a sterile state. It's a state of having transcended the boundaries of all those frameworks that kept you captive.

This is extremely helpful. It will take me awhile to unpack it all

One question re: “Nothing is more important than anything else.” In my estimation, if a critical mass of human beings do not learn how to get to nibbana soon, there is a high probability that we will destroy ourselves. So how can this be true? My understanding is that indifference is the near enemy of equanimity.

In the grand scheme of things existence or nonexistence of galaxies is not that important, let alone of this civilization. In the relative sense of course I care if someone suffers and try to help but it doesn't bother me if things don't go the way I think is "right".

Thank you. Do I understand correctly that if you believed that your advanced knowledge of this subject placed you in the unique position that your action/inaction could increase/decrease the probability of our civilization destroying itself, you would be inclined to act but would be somewhat indifferent to the result?

I don't think in terms of myself either acting or remaining inactive. My presence is continuous (whether you categorize it as action or inaction is up to you), but I am a small part of the unfolding social context. If humanity gets interested in these topics and they nurture this conversation through paying attention and participating - then it will develop into something good. If the circumstances are not right - it won't. I keep doing whatever I can and watching this situation unfold, ready to accept whichever way it unfolds, acting accordingly.


text:
Huayan Buddhism Flower Garland
Is Huayan Buddhism the one that teaches about infinite universes being held on a jeweled flower garland, or is it another branch/sect of Buddhism?

華嚴 (Hua-yan) literally means "flower garland". The name is the Chinese translation of "Avatamsaka". The name Flower Garland is meant to suggest the crowning glory of a Buddha's profound understanding of ultimate reality. The Avatamsaka sutra contains the following verse:

In each dust-mote of these worlds
Are countless worlds and Buddhas...
From the tip of each hair of Buddha's body
Are revealed the indescribable Pure Lands...
The indescribable infinite Lands
All ensemble in a hair's tip [of Buddha]

So just Huayan and Pure Land Buddhism teach about infinite universes? I think Chan Buddhism also does?

Chan/Zen interprets this verse as follows:. All levels of reality are related and interpenetrated. This is depicted in the image of Indra's net. This unity in totality allows every individual entity of the phenomenal world its uniqueness without attributing an inherent nature to anything. It focuses more on the interdependence of all universes than on the individual "pure lands".

Oh, so is Indra's Net the thing holding universes together like the Flower Garland?

Not so much "holding together" as being a term for emptiness, and by consequence interdepency. Just like a spider's web doesn't hold the tree branches together between its wires. Imagine a spider web in the morning filled with dew drops. Every dew drop reflects every other dew drop within a dewdropt...to infinity.


text:
What is the source of this popular quote about giving?
What is the source of the following quote (rightly or wrongly) attributed to the historical Buddha (easily found online):

Generosity brings happiness at every stage of its expression. We
experience joy in forming the intention to be generous. We experience
joy in the actual act of giving something. And we experience joy in
remembering the fact that we have given.

At least parts of the quote appears to originate from the article "Family Dharma: The Joy of Generosity", written by Beth Roth and published in January 2007. This article appears in "Tricycle: The Buddhist Review", a Buddhist magazine.
I guess from there, it became wrongly attributed to the Buddha and the text has also changed along the way.
If you read the article, Beth Roth derived her inspiration from the Buddha, as shown below.

The Buddha said, “If you knew, as I do, the power of giving, you would
not let a single meal pass without sharing some of it.”

This comes from Iti 26:

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have
heard: "If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing,
they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of
selfishness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite,
their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared, if
there were someone to receive their gift. But because beings do not
know, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they eat without
having given. The stain of selfishness overcomes their minds."

Also, related quote from AN 3.57:

"I tell you, Vaccha, even if a person throws the rinsings of a bowl or
a cup into a village pool or pond, thinking, 'May whatever animals
live here feed on this,' that would be a source of merit, to say
nothing of what is given to human beings. But I do say that what is
given to a virtuous person is of great fruit, and not so much what is
given to an unvirtuous person.

Thanks! Also found this on generosity via https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel367.html#perfect  The Perfection of Giving
by Acariya Dhammapala
From the Cariyapitaka Atthakatha, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi in The Discourse on the All-Embracing Net of Views: The Brahmajala Sutta and Its Commentaries (BPS, 1978), pp. 289-96, pp. 322-23.


text:
The Buddha is said to have rediscovered the ancient path. Why was it lost to begin with?
My understanding is that the Buddha is said to have "rediscovered an ancient path" which, presumably, formed the core of his teachings.
Source: Gil Fronsdal’s Introduction to the Dhammapada.
My question is: Why was it lost to begin with?
And why is it that the teachings of the Buddha are so voluminous and contain so much redundancy?
UPDATE: I am absolutely convinced that the Buddha's 8-fold path leading to the end of suffering does so by training the mind to respond to the pain of unskillful moves caused by unskillful predictions by (1) restraining the hindrances and (2) investigating with the intent of processing the feedback for insights to improve the predictive model of the sensory-motor brain so that more skillful predictions leading to more skillful moves will be made.
Why does this lead to the end of suffering? Because although pain is inevitable, suffering is a choice. Specifically, suffering is the choice to cling to wrong views because doing so leads to the descent into the hell of uncertainty. As the world descends into chaos, those who cling to views will descend into chaos along with it because they are refusing to "see things as they actually are."
In other words, clinging to "wrong views", views which do not correspond to the evidence of sensory experience, is unskillful.
Accordingly, please offer only answers that do not violate the scientific method of inquiry. For example, claiming that a human being lived for 80,000 years without offering evidence to support this extraordinary claim is not desired.

OP: My question is: Why was it lost to begin with?

The reason for this is elaborated in SN 20.7.
SN 20.7 shows HOW the teachings will be forgotten - when monks (and I guess also lay Buddhists) do not want to listen to the teachings of the Buddha or pay attention or apply their minds to it. Instead, they will listen to the teachings of unenlightened teachers or poets which are phrased in fancy ways.
Even today, we can find a number of new age gurus in the last 50 years, who have a lot of followers, writing bestselling books or giving speeches using fancy jargon or technobabble such as "quantum healing" or "inner engineering", and appearing on TV shows or YouTube.
Also, it's not unusual that people start forgetting or misunderstanding the original teachings after a long time. For e.g. in this answer, you can see that the Buddha originally said that he is not 100% omniscient in MN 90 and MN 71, and only said that he had the three knowledges, as well as he had the capacity to know and understand all things, but did not actually know and understand all things. Then Milindapanha, written many centuries later, exaggerated the Buddha's omniscience and made the same kind of excuses that the Buddha himself criticized in MN 76.

OP: And why is it that the teachings of the Buddha are so voluminous and contain so much redundancy?

The Buddha taught for something like 45 years from his enlightenment to passing away. That's why it's so voluminous.
Why does it have so much redundancy?
Firstly, he taught for around 45 years, so it's no wonder that teachings get repeated.
Secondly, I believe that the monks edited and reorganized the Pali suttas over centuries to make them have mnemonic formulae and they also modified similar stanzas to become exactly identical - which is why you can find some standard formulae repeated in multiple suttas. This made it easier to memorize, recite and transmit. You have to remember that it was an oral tradition before it was written down. More details can be found in this answer.
P.S. This answer of mine has paragraphs copied from other answers of mine, and combined together with new sentences, and adds quotes of your question. So, even my own not-so-voluminous answers have redundancy / repetition. So, it's no wonder that the suttas can have redundancy.

1/ Thank you for the time and effort expended to offer this very thoughtful answer. It is much appreciated.
Re: “It’s not unusual that people start forgetting or misunderstanding the original teachings after a long time.” Something just doesn’t feel right about this.

2/ For other domains of knowledge, the sciences, for example, this never happens. On the contrary, with the passage of time, in these other domains, knowledge is consolidated, simplified and expanded upon with great rapidity. New students are able to acquire the skills ever more rapidly due to constant innovation in teaching methods.

3/ And yet, in this domain of knowledge, a domain which I believe to essential to ensuring that the advancement of the sciences do not lead to our destruction,
things are very different. There seems to be a force present within this domain which is not present within others which is preventing this advancement.

4/ After 2500 years of innovation, one might expect new students to be able to get to nibbana far faster and for there to be far more of such people since this is such a highly desirable skill. One exception. Thanissano Bhikkhu seems have done an very good job here: http://bit.ly/3aqltOA

Your first two paragraphs suggest that Buddhism must be for everyone, and that is not the case... unless, for you, Buddhism is all-consuming, then I could understand your bias. By the way, the Khuddaka-nikaya of the Sutta-pitaka contains some of the oldest pali poetry that we know of.

For the same reason Buddha's teaching was destined to disappear, because of people losing its deep meaning and replacing it with the superficial "pegs":
SN 20.7

Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained.

Here the drum still looks the same, it's the deep voice that is lost.
Deep insights like the Dharma are notoriously difficult to convey, therefore difficult to understand, difficult to retain, difficult to pass on. The simplistic and the superficial is what remains, not the subtle and deep.

Thank you for the SN20.7 reference. That's quite the powerful direction to not proliferate on the suttas.

Explaining the meaning in one's own words is fine. It's superficial parroting without real understanding that is the issue.

Yes. And in this era of proliferation, the warning given in SN20.7 is quite important.

Your second question is the easiest to answer:

why the teachings of the Buddha are so voluminous and contain so much redundancy?

Because for centuries they were transmitted orally. Anthropologists have observed that repetition in oral transmission is ubiquitous. Repetition is a helpful tool against oral dilution often compared to the "Telephone Game"
Your first question is harder to answer, since it is somewhat open to interpretation:

the Buddha is said to have "rediscovered an ancient path". Why was it lost to begin with?

The question assumes this "ancient path" was actually lost to the human experience. This is not necessarily the case. Many schools of Buddhism actually teach that the mental state that precedes attainment is something we have all experienced at some point in our day-to-day lives. We just didn't notice or weren't able to place it. Those that have practiced meditation for a long time will often describe the first time they consciously attain this mental state as this being "familiar", i.e. something they have experienced before.
In this light, Buddhism is an upaya, a skillful means or tool to learn to experience this mental state, often symbolized as "a boat to get you to the other side of the river". It is not meant to be carried on the back inland once you reach the other side. This is what they mean in Zen when a teacher says a student's answer "stinks of Zen". The student is trying to "translate" the experience into Zen vocabulary. Since language is by nature dualistic, it is not possible to render any human experience fully into language without aspects getting "lost in translation". The "ancient path" therefore can be thought of as the actual experience of this mental state, which is universal and described in many cultural traditions, but gets "lost" in translating it into the local vernacular.

Why was it lost to begin with?

Because even the Teaching is a part of conditioned phenomena. The only un-conditioned is Nibbana. For everything else, they're all subjected to Anicca

And why the teachings of the Buddha are so voluminous and contain so much redundancy?

The Buddha was a great teacher who had a long lifespan. As a result, he was able to propagate the Dhamma for more than 40 years, hence the voluminous colections of Buddhist text. About the repetition/redundancy, it was for ease of memorization, an absolutely vital component in the preservation and propagation of His words during a time when information could only be transmitted verbally.

A vote or downvote is a form of speech. Before you offer yours, please evaluate if your speech is in accordance with the preconditions of the Buddha:
1: Is it true?
2: Is it kind?
3: Is it useful?
4: Does it promote concord?
5: Is it timely?
If you choose to downvote this answer, please do so only after reading the full explanation and provide a rational argument as to WHY you believe the explanation to be incorrect in the comments.
My answer: (condensed form)
The Buddha offered his teachings in a voluminous fashion with insurmountable redundancy. He could have offered his teachings in a far more condensed fashion. The Buddha was not stupid. So why did he choose to do this?
Throughout all of history religious teachings which challenged the authority of the ruling class have been co-opted by the ruling class. The Buddha knew this because he himself had been forced to re-discover the original teachings after they had been corrupted. He knew that it would happen again. He chose to revivify the teachings by adding volume and redundancy as a defense mechanism to ensure that they could be rediscovered again by a sufficiently motivated disciple.

I will answer your one question.

Why does this lead to the end of suffering?

When you refrain from sexual activity and train your mind to follow the 8 noble paths, after some period of time your mind will gain the power to immerse itself in the meditation. When your mind goes deep in the meditation, even the state of wakefulness feels like a dream, and at this point pure pleasure and rapture form in your body. This pleasure is so great that nothing in this world would compare, you become very ecstatic, and by giving a continuos effort in this practise, you will permanently be free from suffering and worldly things.

Ah, well...
There is a trace of perennial philosophy here that escapes most people. Perennial philosophy is the idea — common to most mysticisms — that there is one ultimately true (real, transcendent...) understanding of the (human) world that all faiths, religions, and philosophies bend towards. Gautama Buddha taught a path that led there, but he didn't create the goal or the path. He found what was already there, and set out to show us how to see it for ourselves.
I mean, to be 'Buddha' means to be awakened to this ultimate truth, right?

Was Gautama Buddha the first to awaken to it? Hmph...
Was Gautama Buddha the last? Hmph...
Do the answers to those questions make his teachings any more or any less profound? Hmph...

The perennial philosophy is perennial because as soon as it's found it begins to be lost. One cannot transfer an understanding; one can only point the way and help people navigate the path on their own. The thread of the teaching begins to unravel as it is taught, and as it unravels people begin to cling to it: adding commentaries, repeating points they want to emphasize, creating new practices and discourses. It's a bit like a waterfall, where what starts as a pure, clear stream bounces around, tumbling and churning until it dissolves into an inchoate mass of white water and spray; and then someone finds the stream again. Such is life.


text:
When feels empty during vipassana meditation?
When command the mind to does something it was done what had commanded. If thought about more happy today next moment  less happy. After sitting meditation feel empty. Is it mindfulness?where is the meditation,according to visuddhimagga?

Voted to close for obvious reasons.

@8527 Could you please clarify as to why this post will be closed?

Because it is nonsensical and OP didn't care to make it comprehensible. Where is meditation, according to Vsm? That is unanswerable.

@8527 I see. Perhaps English is not their native language. It was a bit confusing to attempt to answer I must admit.

I just perused previous lengthy answer and if you still looking for an answer, pls let me know then will show you different application to your question. Best regards

the buddhas discovery is that the mind is not-self and therefore cannot be commanded as one by you.

When command the mind to does something it was done what had commanded.

"So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or
presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or
external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with
right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine,
this is not I, this is not myself.'
"Any kind of feeling whatever...
"Any kind of perception whatever...
"Any kind of determination whatever...
"Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future or presently
arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external,
whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right
understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is
not I, this is not my self.'
SN 22.59

As the Buddha taught, identification with the mind (along with the other aggregates) is a wrong view. The mind is impermanent (along with all else in Samsara), in flux. It is not a stable, controllable thing. The more you try to control it, the more identification you will cultivate with it. Try meditating and observing thoughts arising and falling in the mind. You will come to see that they are out of the control of any self and you will come to objectively accept them as just arising and ceasing thoughts.
If thought about more happy today next moment less happy.

"Monks, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the
world spins after these eight worldly conditions. Which eight? Gain,
loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain. These are
the eight worldly conditions that spin after the world, and the world
spins after these eight worldly conditions.
AN 8.6

Experiences are impermanent as the Buddha teaches. This is something the Buddha teaches to accept. And how does one accept it? This is through meditation (specifically vipassana), observing one's experiential reality to see it objectively as it is and ultimately let go to be wavered by it.
After sitting meditation feel empty.

"And how does a monk remain focused on feelings in & of themselves?
There is the case where a monk, when feeling a painful feeling,
discerns, 'I am feeling a painful feeling.' When feeling a pleasant
feeling, he discerns, 'I am feeling a pleasant feeling.' When feeling
a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he discerns, 'I am feeling a
neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.'
"When feeling a painful feeling of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am
feeling a painful feeling of the flesh.' When feeling a painful
feeling not of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am feeling a painful feeling
not of the flesh.' When feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh, he
discerns, 'I am feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh.' When feeling
a pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am feeling a
pleasant feeling not of the flesh.' When feeling a
neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am
feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh.' When
feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he
discerns, 'I am feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of
the flesh.'
"In this way he remains focused internally on feelings in & of
themselves, or externally on feelings in & of themselves, or both
internally & externally on feelings in & of themselves. Or he remains
focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to feelings, on
the phenomenon of passing away with regard to feelings, or on the
phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to feelings. Or
his mindfulness that 'There are feelings' is maintained to the extent
of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by
(not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains
focused on feelings in & of themselves.
MN 10

When you feel empty, meditate on that feeling, observing it as just a feeling. That's all it is anyways.
Is it mindfulness?where is the meditation,according to visuddhimagga?
Unfortunately, I am ill suited to quote a passage from the Visuddhimagga that can clarify this (as it is a vast technical text). What I can tell you from what I have learned is that mindfulness is when one is in the here and now, presently focusing on their current experience (which, again, is done in vipassana meditation).

I would recommend checking Yuttadhammo's booklet on how to meditate. Your questions should be answered once you start meditating after a while. I hope this all helps!

When command the mind to does something it was done what had commanded.

According to visuddhimagga, above sentence is Concentration Meditation (Samatha). Samatha is an important base for Vipassana.

If thought about more happy today next moment less happy. After sitting meditation feel empty. Is it mindfulness? where is the meditation,according to visuddhimagga?

There are 2 mindfulness meditations, Samatha and Vipassana. Both are important.
What you are talking about is a kind of Samatha Meditation. It is a tool for for case by case management. If we don't think about more happy today next moment less happy, we have uncountable moments or objects to think of instead immediately. Vipassana is the next step to stop all of those clinging thinking forever.
For Vipassana according to Visuddhimagga and mostly suttas in first ten suttas of Diganikaya, when the practitioner can manage the present unwholesome mind arising professionally by the hard meditation on Samatha, the practitioner will have the strong enough wisdom to analysis Nama and Rupa (mentality and physicality in the dependent origination) as elemental smallest moment which depending on various origin (over trillion times per second; See Patthana of the detail).
The practitioner will see again and again the past karma (Sankhara) which the only one important origin of the previous life when the practitioner analysis life as Nama and Rupa, especially analysis each moment as elemental smallest moment which depending on various origin after the concentration meditation in the past and future life by Pubbenivāsānussatiñāṇa — Knowledge of the recollection of former living places and Cutūpapātañāṇa. — Knowledge of the rebirth of diceased beings. (Someone can do this without Abhinnaha depending on the past wholesomeness collection).
This past karma seeing let the practitioner the real 8 ignorant, 3 craving, 3 clinging (craving again and again), 3 karma, and the real moment of the realities (Nama and Rupa).
Each life has only one important past karma which keeping life going on, the other karmas are only the supporting role. No doubt left whether "Do good, get good, do bad, get bad." And the practitioner can analysis everything as  Nama and Rupa. From now on, the practitioner getting the state called Cula-Sotapanna (Pre-Stream-enterer).
All above steps are the powerful encouragement and inspiration for meditating Vipassana in next step from now on.
The three characteristics will appear from this state on according to KN.Patisambhidamagga and Visuddhimagga the end of Kankhavitaranavisuddhiniddesa. The practitioner will use this three characteristics to meditate Vipassana (SammasanaNana, UdayabbayaNana, and the other uppers) on each real moments, not conceptual moment.

This is sound weird or so very hard depending on the reader's skill. To understand above, please memorize  Sutta. Tī.  Subhasutta, BhramaJalasutta, MahaSatipatthanaSutta (all in Pali and skillful memorizing only). Thank you Pa-Auk Tawya Sayadaw who let me understand the pali as it is, even I has no any chance to learn with him face to face. Amazing teacher!


text:
Eating meat mantra
I heard from some brotherhood from Mahayana said Theravada also will do some chanting for eating meat. Is it true ?
I have only able to find the Mahayana Mantra but not Theravada info as below
https://drukpachoegon.org/meat-blessing-mantra

I can't find the reference but iirc it is canonical for Theravada that the Buddha said something like: 'should a bhikkhu eat meat without reflecting on what it is, is an offense of wrong-doing'.

There is no "mantra" in the Theravada tradition for this as far as I am aware.
But the practitioner can mindfully reflect on what was taught in the suttas about food, before eating.

"'This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by
relying on food that food is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And
in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a
monk, considering it thoughtfully, takes food — not playfully, nor for
intoxication, nor for putting on bulk, nor for beautification — but
simply for the survival & continuance of this body, for ending its
afflictions, for the support of the holy life, [thinking,] 'Thus will
I destroy old feelings [of hunger] and not create new feelings [from
overeating]. I will maintain myself, be blameless, & live in comfort.'
Then he eventually abandons food, having relied on food. 'This body,
sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying on
food that food is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference
to this was it said.
AN 4.159

"And how is physical food to be regarded? Suppose a couple, husband &
wife, taking meager provisions, were to travel through a desert. With
them would be their only baby son, dear & appealing. Then the meager
provisions of the couple going through the desert would be used up &
depleted while there was still a stretch of the desert yet to be
crossed. The thought would occur to them, 'Our meager provisions are
used up & depleted while there is still a stretch of this desert yet
to be crossed. What if we were to kill this only baby son of ours,
dear & appealing, and make dried meat & jerky. That way — chewing on
the flesh of our son — at least the two of us would make it through
this desert. Otherwise, all three of us would perish.' So they would
kill their only baby son, loved & endearing, and make dried meat &
jerky. Chewing on the flesh of their son, they would make it through
the desert. While eating the flesh of their only son, they would beat
their breasts, [crying,] 'Where have you gone, our only baby son?
Where have you gone, our only baby son?' Now what do you think, monks:
Would that couple eat that food playfully or for intoxication, or for
putting on bulk, or for beautification?"
"No, lord."
"Wouldn't they eat that food simply for the sake of making it through
that desert?"
"Yes, lord."
"In the same way, I tell you, is the nutriment of physical food to be
regarded. When physical food is comprehended, passion for the five
strings of sensuality is comprehended. When passion for the five
strings of sensuality is comprehended, there is no fetter bound by
which a disciple of the noble ones would come back again to this
world.
SN 12.63

I heard from some brotherhood from Mahayana said Theravada also will do some chanting for eating meat. Is it true ?
As far as I understand, Theravada monastics will sometimes chant prior to eating for reflective purposes (i.e. to reinforce how they are suppose to appropriately observe and use their alms). Aside from that, Theravada Buddhism does not have any chants I have ever encountered that specifically involve meat eating.

I hope this answer helps. May you be well.


text:
Animal sacrifices mentioned in the suttas or vinaya?
Hindus believe that the Buddha opposed Vedic rites of animal sacrifice in his time, for example, on this page and on this page.
This apparently influenced later Hindus to abandon the practice of animal sacrifice.
In the suttas, we find the Buddha forbidding taking of a life, and this is the first precept.
But are there any sutta or vinaya references showing the Buddha explicitly opposing animal sacrifices as a religious practice?

AN 4.39, AN 4.40, DN 5 and also see MN 55

Then Ujjaya the brahmin went up to the Buddha, and exchanged greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to the Buddha:
“Does Master Gotama praise sacrifice?”
“Brahmin, I don’t praise all sacrifices. Nor do I criticize all sacrifices. Take the kind of sacrifice where cattle, goats and sheep, chickens and pigs, and various kinds of creatures are slaughtered. I criticize that kind of violent sacrifice. Why is that? Because neither perfected ones nor those who have entered the path to perfection will attend such a violent sacrifice.
But take the kind of sacrifice where cattle, goats and sheep, chickens and pigs, and various kinds of creatures are not slaughtered. I praise that kind of non-violent sacrifice; for example, a regular gift as an ongoing family sacrifice. Why is that? Because perfected ones and those who have entered the path to perfection will attend such a non-violent sacrifice. [AN4.39]

Also see: [DN 5]


text:
Putting "Bhikkhu" before or after name, is there a difference?
For example there's Bhikkhu Bodhi and Thanissaro Bhikkhu. What's the distinction?

Below you can see some titles and names.
The title is (Sammasam)Buddha and the name is Kassapa, the title is bhikkhu and the name is Sahaka, the title is Mara and the name is Dusi, the title is disciple (savaka) and the name is Vidhura, the title is brahmin and the name is Kakusandha.
In all the cases, the title precedes the name in the English translation, just like how we say Doctor Fauci or President Obama in English.
But in all the cases, the title comes after the name in Pali.
So both are the same. One in English and one in Pali.
From SN 48.57:

Once upon a time, sir, I lived the spiritual life under the fully
awakened Buddha Kassapa.
Bhūtapubbāhaṃ, bhante, kassape sammāsambuddhe brahmacariyaṃ acariṃ.
There they knew me as
Tatrapi maṃ evaṃ jānanti:
the mendicant Sahaka.
‘sahako bhikkhu, sahako bhikkhū’ti.

From MN 50:

Then it occurred to Māra Dūsī,
Atha kho, pāpima, dūsissa mārassa etadahosi

after attacking the disciple Vidhura
Vidhuraṃ sāvakamāsajja,
along with the brahmin Kakusandha?
kakusandhañca brāhmaṇaṃ.

very good answer


text:
Is inventing "defensive" biological weapons right livelihood?
I read the following on the internet:

Working for DoD contractors could give a very fat paycheck. However,
there're ethical issues involved. If you decide to work for them, make
sure to make it clear you'll work for defensive capabilities, not
offensive ones. There're a lot of other areas DoD needs people to
build up their defensive programs, and these should be legit from an
ethical standpoint.

Is inventing "defensive" biological weapons right livelihood?

What's wrong with you? You never ask such questions and you know the answer already.

It's clear from the sutta below that trade or livelihood related to weapons is forbidden, or at least, very strongly discouraged, for lay followers.
From AN 5.177:

“Mendicants, a lay follower should not engage in these five trades.
What five?
Trade in weapons, living creatures, meat, intoxicants, and poisons.
Satthavaṇijjā, sattavaṇijjā, maṃsavaṇijjā, majjavaṇijjā, visavaṇijjā
A lay follower should not engage in these five trades.”

The question is formulated in such a way that it doesn't provide factual information about what this development entails, and erroneously categorizes this as "weapons research".
The DoD is prohibited from developing, or outsourcing the development of, biological weapons. The US (and most of the world) signed the Biological Weapons Convention. As stated in Article 1 of the BWC:

"Each State Party to this Convention undertakes never in any
circumstances to develop, produce, stockpile or otherwise acquire or
retain:
(1) Microbial or other biological agents, or toxins whatever their
origin or method of production, of types and in quantities that have
no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful
purposes;
(2) Weapons, equipment or means of delivery designed to use
such agents or toxins for hostile purposes or in armed conflict."

The United States Congress passed the Bioweapons Anti-Terrorism Act in 1989 to implement the Convention. The law applies the Convention's convent to countries and private citizens, and criminalizes violations of the Convention.
The clause "no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes" refers to a concept called Biodefense: a system of planned actions to counter and reduce the risk of biological threats and to prepare, respond to, and recover from them if they happen.
Products currently being produced or under development through military research include:

Vaccines to prevent tularemia, Q fever, Rift Valley fever, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, Eastern and Western equine encephalitis, chikungunya fever, Argentine hemorrhagic fever, the botulinum toxicoses, and anthrax;
Antitoxins for diseases such as botulism;
Human immune globulin preparations (passive antibody protection) against various bacteria and viruses; and
Antiviral drugs against multiple viral agents.
Some vaccines also have applicability for diseases of domestic animals (e.g., Rift Valley fever and Venezuelan equine encephalitis). In addition, vaccines are provided to persons who may be occupationally exposed to such agents (e.g., laboratory workers, entomologists, and veterinary personnel) throughout government, industry, and academe.

USAMRIID also provides diagnostic and epidemiological support to federal, state, and local agencies and foreign governments. Examples of assistance rendered to civilian health efforts by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC) include:

The massive immunization program instituted during the Venezuelan equine encephalitis outbreak in the Americas in 1971;
The laboratory support provided to the U.S. Public Health Service during the outbreak of Legionnaire's disease in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1976;
The management of patients suspected of having African viral hemorrhagic fever in Sweden during the 1980s;
International support during the outbreak of Rift Valley fever in Mauritania in 1989;
Assistance with the outbreak of Ebola infections among monkeys imported to Reston (Virginia) in 1990 (→ Reston virus); and
Epidemiological and diagnostic support to the World Health Organization–Centers for Disease Control and Prevention field team that studied the Ebola outbreak in Zaire in 1995 (→ Zaire ebolavirus).

These developments are clearly not weapons. They are medications and antidotes.


text:
How is 'consciousness' (vinyaana) defined in Buddhist texts?
How is 'consciousness' (vinyaana) defined in Buddhist texts? How similar or different is it from the way the word is used these days -- particularly in scientific studies of consciousness ?

'It cognizes, it cognizes': Thus, friend, it is said to be
'consciousness.' And what does it cognize? It cognizes 'pleasant.' It
cognizes 'painful.' It cognizes 'neither painful nor pleasant.' 'It
cognizes, it cognizes': Thus it is said to be 'consciousness.' - MN 43

And what, bhikkhus, is consciousness? There are these six classes of
consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness,
nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness,
mind-consciousness. This is called consciousness. - SN 12.2

The six classes of consciousness should be understood. ’ So it was
said. And with reference to what was this said? Dependent on the eye
and forms, eye-consciousness arises; dependent on the ear and sounds,
ear-consciousness arises; dependent on the nose and odours,
nose-consciousness arises; dependent on the tongue and flavours,
tongue-consciousness arises; dependent on the body and tangibles,
body-consciousness arises; dependent on the mind and mind-objects,
mind-consciousness arises. - MN 148


text:
Am I falling asleep or am I deepening my concentration?
I use the Tara mantra as my focus during Samatha meditation prior to beginning Vipassana but lately I am beginning to wonder...am I falling asleep? I can't tell, really. I don't get drowsy but my mantra becomes so quiet that it begins to merge with the thought-stream that it is resting on, and then I lose awareness of both until my consciousness returns to the fact that I am still chanting, but without any awareness of what, if anything, I was actually thinking about-the thoughts being too quiet to catch or to get caught in. But just as there is no going, there is no returning either (no waking up) with this experience, just very subtle ebb and flow. When I began a regular meditation practice about five months ago discursive thought would become loud enough to break my concentration. It still does, of course, more often than not, and I thoroughly enjoy the challenge of "getting caught up in the flow" only to return to the mantra. But lately it is like meditation has lost its urgency. It has become so much a part of my life. It has become like that ebb and flow and I just want to rest in the stillness of that. It is just so beautiful...but then I start to think that maybe it is an escape from being present and that my mind is playing with me. I would really like to know what is going on, and if there is somewhere I should be going with this, some way that I should be practice with it skillfully.

Ah, the bliss plateau. Good that you caught this now.  Some practicioners never get past it, the quietitude is too enticing for them to push past.  In Zen, we call this "dead sitting" and it can completely ruin the practice of even experienced monks.
What you're experiencing now is step two on your way to absorption.  Step one was the monkey mind that you put to rest.  Here, correct me if I'm wrong, but I bet you can sit longer than you could in stage one.  Your body is probably moving less, and, like you mentioned, your thoughts aren't as intrusive.
In order to go beyond, you need an anchor point.  Unless if you have one to apply your mind to, you are going to drift off into that see of oceanic bliss and never find your way to the other shore.
You're working with a mantra.  That's similar to how we work with a koan in Rinzai.  One thing I've found effective is to hold the vowel sounds.  Keep them going so the mantra takes up the entirely of a single breath.  Wait for that exhalation to stop.  Don't force the breath out.  The technique I have been using more often these days is to simply find a spot and anchor your attention there.  Don't force the concentration point.  Sit on it.  Just like you don't have to force your butt down to stay seated, just plop your attention down on that point and let it sit there.  Dont let your mind shift off that spot.
If you're doing this right, a feeling of energy is going to start to emerge.  It may feel like tension or discomfort in the body.  It can also start as a feeling of pressure in the head.  Theres going to be a temptation to move your body or slide off your seat of concentration.  Resist that.  Stay with that energy.  Eventually it will crack - but please don't try to crack it.
When that happens, you'll have this meditation thing pretty well sorted!


text:
Pure Perception
I've read here, that:

As Dza Patrul Rinpoche candidly says (AKC 15): Ritual sessions four
times a day without the generation and completion stages, pounding
drums and clashing cymbals without reminding ourselves of pure
perception, droning mantras without any concentration: all that gets
us no further on the path to liberation.

What is meant by "pure perception"? As I understood it, it means recognize Shunyata – but to recognize this, you need to be enlightened (?). As a lay practitioner at the beginning of the path what is meant by "pure perception"?

In simple words, pure perception is when you see everything as manifestation of Buddha-nature. Even things we usually consider bad or imperfect you see as a part of Great Perfection at a deeper level.
Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche explains:

...pure perception is the main view and practice on the Vajrayana path. There is no room whatsoever for even a glimmer of an impure perception.
But what is ‘pure perception’? Ultimately, according to the Vajrayana, ... the main point of pure perception is to go beyond dualistic perception altogether and realize the union of emptiness and appearance.
To put it simply, pure perception is the highest form of mind training—dag nang byang in Tibetan. Dag means ‘pure;’ nang means ‘perception,’ and byang means ‘train’ or ‘get used to.’
So, how does pure perception work? As a Vajrayana student, if you look at [your guru] and think he’s overweight, that is an impure perception. To try to correct your impure perception you might then try visualizing him with the body of Tom Cruise, but that is still not pure perception. One of the Vajrayana’s infinite number of skilful methods that are used to deconstruct and dismantle impure perception, is to visualize [your teacher] with a horse’s head, a thousand arms and four legs. But even this technique must ultimately be transcended in order to fully realize pure perception.
Basically, while the student’s perception remains impure, the guru they see will be a projection based on their own impure projection, and so it can only ever be imperfect. The only way we can change our impure perception and see the guru as an enlightened being is by training our minds, using the visualization practises provided by the Vajrayana path.
No Vajrayana teaching or qualified Vajrayana teacher would ever expect a student’s perceptions to be completely pure from the moment they step onto the Vajrayana path. This is why the techniques we apply are called ‘training’—and even the English word ‘training’ implies that mistakes are inevitable. But there’s a very simple way of checking your progress with this practice. In the Vajrayana, you are supposed to see not only the guru but yourself as a deity. So if, having just been taught that you are a deity, you skip lunch and feel hungry, it means your training is not complete. You will only be perfectly trained in pure perception once you have finally actualized the union of appearance and emptiness.
So if a student ... were to see [his guru] floundering in the middle of a lake and based on their impure perception, project onto him the idea that he seems to be drowning, it would probably not be a good idea for that student to think, “Rinpoche is an enlightened being and should be able to walk on water.” A much better thought would be, “This is my impure perception! Rinpoche is manifesting as a drowning man so that I can accumulate the merit of rescuing him.”
As your practise improves, your perception of the guru will no longer be bound or limited by the causes, conditions and effects that once made you think he was drowning. This is the point in your spiritual development when you will truly see the outer guru as the Buddha and will also be able to see your own inner guru.
Until then, when your guru chairs a board meeting and it becomes obvious that he has no clue about an issue, as a prudent member of that board you shouldn’t hesitate to supply him with the information he needs. At the same time, as a Vajrayana student, you must skilfully remind yourself the guru only looks clueless to you because of your own impure perception, and that by appearing to need your assistance the guru is actually giving you the chance to accumulate merit.
We all have habits, and it’s habit that makes impure perception inevitable. The moment we step onto the Vajrayana path, we start breaking ‘samayas’—which are our commitment to maintaining pure perception. This is why the assumption that all Vajrayana practitioners will make mistakes is built into the Vajrayana path. A practitioner’s path is then to immediately confess, expose and fix any impure perceptions the moment they arise, and to continually aspire to make fewer and fewer mistakes.
This is what is meant by keeping the samaya vows. In fact, Vajrayana practice cannot be separated from keeping samaya. There is no such thing as: “Let’s keep samaya and then practice.”
In Buddhadharma, not just the Vajrayana, the only way any of us can keep [pure perception], is by fully realizing a perfect understanding of shunyata.
In Buddhism, the general idea is that we train our minds to actualize non-duality. Tantra offers us the most profound way of achieving that non-duality through the practice of pure perception; and in the Vajrayana we essentialize that practice by maintaining a pure perception of the guru.
Ultimately, as Vajrayana practitioners, we must apply pure perception to everyone and everything without exception, which means we must also apply it to Donald Trump and even Hitler. But we will only manage to achieve a pure perception of everyone and everything if we can first maintain a pure perception of our guru. If you try to retain the option of questioning, criticizing and analyzing—in other words if you retain some kind of selective impure perception as an insurance policy that allows you to question your very path—then how will you achieve the cessation of the dualistic mind? How will ‘one taste’ be actualized? How will you realize the union of samsara and nirvana?

On the more advanced level, pure perception is when you know that any observable reality is our interpretation and you can see in real time how your mind overlays an interpretation and simultaneously see inside that interpretation and outside of it. This is what's called "realize a perfect understanding of shunyata" and "actualize the union of appearance and emptiness".

What are you hearing when you hear nothing but silence?
“Pure perception” is what is left when you subtract out all the phenomenal manifestations, that, because they arise and pass away, are not real, are impermanent, and without a ‘self’.  These apply to all that we cling to as our identity, and also all that which we call the external world.
Do you hear silence? When even your thoughts fade away, and nothing arises because you have achieved a tranquil mind, in that stillness of pure silence, you still hear. The only aspect left of hearing silence, will be “pure perception.” Pure means unstained, unblemished, empty of all content.
So as a beginner, as you meditate, attend to the silence you hear and examine that silence and all that is there, and not there, in that perception.
Just going through the motions of practice, as Dza Patrul Rinpoche said, gets you nowhere.


text:
Why is “nibbana” considered to be “unconditioned”?
I’m aware that a similar question has been asked before:
How is Nibbana unconditioned?
However, I’m looking for an answer (1) in the language of science that is (2) clear and comprehensible to readers who know nothing of buddhism. i.e. In the spirit of the great teacher, Richard Feynman, answers which depend only upon concepts which the general public are familiar with.
The term “nibbana”:
For example, I’m assuming that nibbana, when observed in a brain scan, looks something like the subjugation of the “task negative network” by the “task positive network.”
The term “conditioned”:
My understanding is that the term “conditioned” has its origins in “dependent origination”.
Bhikkhu Bodhi, for example, says the “hallmark of the dharma” is the verse “All phenomenon originate with causes and conditions and with the cessation of those conditions, the dependent phenomenon also cease.”
For example:
From the 4 noble truths:
The origin of suffering is craving and clinging.
The conditions which give rise to suffering are “craving and clinging”.
With the cessation of craving and clinging, the dependent phenomenon, suffering, also ceases.
From this example, my best guess is that “unconditioned” simply means the cessation of the arising of the conditions (craving and clinging) which give rise to suffering. i.e. un-conditioned means the cessation of conditions.
It does not mean that the mind state of nibbana can be achieved without creating the conditions of the cessation of craving and clinging.
Is this correct?

Good question. Nirvana/Nibbana is not a state of mind, rather it's a quality or an aspect that is always present regardless of any conditions, but even though it's always present it is not always seen. The state of being aware of the ever-present N is dependent on conditions while the N itself is not.
You know this quality of mind that watches everything silently and just witnesses things without judging, whether circumstances are good or bad and whether you're well or tired or scared? N is similar because it doesn't stop nor change regardless of circumstances, not even when you're asleep or dead. This is why it's called unconditional.
Traditionally they say there are three ways to approach seeing N. One is through methodical incremental cessation of progressively more and more subtle forms of conflict inherent to craving/aversion, even of conflict inherent to aversion towards samsara and craving for N. Once you completely stopped generating conflict, completely gave up all aversion and craving - what's left to be experienced is N, pure and simple.
Another method is a bit more technical, it involves tracing how in your mind things are always defined relative to one another by dividing some sort of Whole into e.g. left and right, this and that, object and background, better and worse etc. In this method we try to ascend this graph of relative definitions up to its root by climbing the ladder of progressively more and more subtle forms of division that generates such relative concepts. The root of the graph is N which is not defined relative to anything else.
The third and final method consists in methodically trying to find something unalienable that truly belongs to oneself and cannot be taken away by the unstoppable passage of time nor swayed by circumstances. In this method one analyzes and discards all things that are subject to change and cessation, starting from obvious ones such as the physical body and moving on to subtle things such as one's memories, sense of identity, and various states of mind. As one fully and exhaustively understands the workings of conditionality and conditionally dependent arising/cessation of phenomena, one arrives at the only remaining answer, which is N.
From these explanations it should be clear that N is not something limited that is defined in juxtaposition to anything else and this unbounded supraconceptual suchness is exactly what allows it to not be dependent on any conditions or circumstances.

Thank you for investing the time and effort to compose this excellent answer. If anyone has pointers to source materials where interested parties might investigate each of these 3 methods more deeply, I (and perhaps others who are interested in this topic) would be interested in deeper exploration. Thank you.

In Buddhism there are two elements: conditioned and unconditioned, per MN 115.

There are these two elements: Dve imā, ānanda, dhātuyo—
the conditioned element and the unconditioned element. saṅkhatādhātu,
asaṅkhatādhātu.
When a mendicant knows and sees these two elements, Imā kho, ānanda,
dve dhātuyo yato jānāti passati—
they’re qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’. ettāvatāpi
kho, ānanda, ‘dhātukusalo bhikkhū’ti alaṃvacanāyā ti.

Nibbana is the unconditioned element or sense object (ayatana) that the mind can sense, as follows:

There is that sphere (ayatana), monks, where there is no
earth, no water, no fire, no air, no sphere of infinite space, no
sphere of infinite consciousness, no sphere of nothingness, no sphere
of neither perception nor non-perception, no this world, no world
beyond, neither Moon nor Sun. There, monks, I say there is surely no
coming, no going, no persisting, no passing away, no rebirth It is
quite without support, unmoving, without an object,—just this is the
end of suffering.
Ud 8.1

If we don't know what "ayatana" means, MN 148 explains:

There are the sense fields of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches
and (other) phenomena (aka "only-mind-sensed-objects").
Rūpāyatanaṃ, saddāyatanaṃ, gandhāyatanaṃ, rasāyatanaṃ,
phoṭṭhabbāyatanaṃ, dhammāyatanaṃ
MN 148

For example, a tree or rock are physical objects (rupa-dhamma) and are not mental objects (nama-dhamma) yet the mind can sense these physical objects via the eye sense organ.
Similarly, Nibbana is an type of element that is not physical or mental yet the mind can sense it.
For newbies, it can be said Nibbana is a peaceful quiet stillness, such as when there is no noise and no wind. Such a peaceful quiet stillness is not something physical, nor is it mental. Yet this quiet peaceful stillness can be experienced when the mind is free from defilements. The following may help:

Suppose, bhikkhus, there was a house or a hall with a peaked roof,
with windows on the northern, southern, and eastern sides. When the
sun rises and a beam of light enters through a window, where would it
become established?”
“On the western wall, venerable sir.”
“If there were no western wall, where would it become established?”
“On the earth, venerable sir.”
“If there were no earth, where would it become established?”
“On the water, venerable sir.”
“If there were no water, where would it become established?”
“It would not become established anywhere, venerable sir.”
SN 12.64

Beautifully explained. I have no words to describe the beauty of the quote SN 12.64. In one fell swoop it brings down the edifice of conceptual assumptions about nibbana. Thanks sir.

As stated in the other answers, Nibbana is not a state of mind or thought of the mind or state of consciousness, but rather, it's something unconditioned that is experienced by the mind. You can find more details in this answer.
Also the sutta quote below is helpful.
From AN 9.34 (translated by Ven. Sujato):

Ven: Sariputta: “Reverends, extinguishment (Nibbana) is bliss!
“sukhamidaṃ, āvuso, nibbānaṃ.
Ven. Udayi: “But Reverend Sāriputta, what’s blissful about it, since nothing is felt?”
"kiṃ panettha, āvuso sāriputta, sukhaṃ yadettha natthi vedayitan”ti?
Ven. Sariputta: “The fact that nothing is felt is precisely what’s blissful about it.
“Etadeva khvettha, āvuso, sukhaṃ yadettha natthi vedayitaṃ.


text:
Why did the Buddha take 7 years to attain Nirvana?
Why did the Buddha take 7 years to attain Nirvana?
Since he was a pure-hearted person who had never sinned, why not a shorter time?

the nirvana Gotama sought was a permanent nirvana.
being without sin will not stop suffering from hunger, heat & cold, sickness, etc
the only permanent nirvana is the complete eradication of self-view
it is not easy to comprehend the hallucination of self-view, let alone discover self-view is suffering
for example, the self-instinct of gotama was searching for nirvana therefore it appeared illogical or counter-intuitive to find the self searching for nirvana was the actually obstacle to finding nirvana
therefore it took gotama seven years to find nirvana because 'self' is a strong instinct in people


text:
"For a person whose past,present and future are the same" from Dhammapada
With reference to the title of the question, I would like to know if the person blessed or under a curse if for him the past, present, and future are the same?
If by unlawful acts he is elevated to a higher position when these three positions are better. He wants such a condition to perpetuate and go on.
If he is downgraded for his lawful acts, his downfall is usually bitter for him.
How to analyze the situations?

Dhammapada verse 421 does not say: "for him the past, present and future are the same".
The Pali is:

Yassa (whatever) pure (past) ca (and) pacchā (future) ca (and), majjhe
(middle) ca  natthi (does not exist) kiñcanaṃ (in any way) akiñcanaṃ
(not in anyway) anādānaṃ (not grasping)
He who clings to nothing of the past, present and future, who has no attachment and holds on to nothing — him do I call a holy man. (Buddharakkhita)
He who has nothing
— in front, behind, in between —
the one with nothing
who clings to no thing:
he's what I call
a brahman. (Thanissaro)
For whom there is nothing in the past, the future or the present,
having nothing and unattached, that one I say is a brahmin. (Anandajoti)


text:
Do the Abhidharma texts exist online in original format?
I just learned of the Abhidharma. What was their original or early language they were written in, and do they exist online in copy/pastable (non-PDF or image) format anywhere for free? Is this of any use?
So far people have listed some Theravada Abhidhamma links. What about the other schools of Abhidharma? Sarvastivada is supposed to be the only other school that has preserved a complete set of Abhidhamma, also with 7 books like Theravada. What languages are the original Sarvasitvada Ab. available in? And are there English translations?

Do you want the Pali / Sanskrit version or the English translation?

I am Abhidhammic entire life. I must say self reading Abhidhamma, either pali or translation, is leading the student to be confused and very misunderstood in Abhidhamma. I see many self reading people refer Abhidhamma content with many serious mistake pali grammas, references, relationships, reasons. They can make Sutta conflict with Abhidhama even the pali Abhidhammic scholars say "you are using wrong pali grammar, wrong words reference, missing some important translation, etc." So, I am very recommend to study with the Abhidhammic Tipitaka Memorizer directly, such as PaAuk Tawya.

You can find Theravada Abhidhamma, all Pali, only some translations, at Sutta Central:
https://suttacentral.net/ds
https://suttacentral.net/vb
https://suttacentral.net/dt
https://suttacentral.net/pp
https://suttacentral.net/kv
https://suttacentral.net/ya
https://suttacentral.net/patthana

This site is pretty good.
Check out:
http://www.abhidhamma.com/Introduction%20to%20Dhammasangani.pdf
See also Anapanasati
(Mindfulness of Breathing)
Buddhadasa Bhikkhu Translated by Bhikkhu Nagasena
https://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/anapanasati.pdf

This is using PDFs, I want copy/pastable text :)

By the way, there are a few different versions e.g. the Theravada Abhidhamma, Sarvastivada Abhidharma, Dharmaguptaka Abhidharma etc.
Here I focus only on the most popular version, which is the Theravada Abhidhamma.
If you read the ATI page on Abhidhamma Pitaka, it says:

The Abhidhamma Pitaka has a well-deserved reputation for being dense
and difficult reading. The best way to begin studying Abhidhamma is
not to dive right into its two key books (Dhammasangani and Patthana),
but to explore some of the more modern — and readable — commentarial
texts.

The page continues to provide a list of commentarial texts, some including links.