text:
Fundamental building blocks of reality according to Buddhism?
Is there any mention of the fundamental building blocks of reality in Buddhism? Science tells us that we are made of atoms, which in turn are made of protons, neutrons and electrons, which in turn are made of quarks and so on. Does Buddhism reveal to us the absolute fundamental building blocks of reality and the Universe? If so, then what is the nature of those building blocks? I am 100% certain that the Buddha would have known the deepest nature of physical reality and answers to all the mysteries, humans have spent pondering since millenium.
I know this question falls under the imponderable and thus doesn't aid me in relieving suffering in samsara, but still curious to know :) Peace.

Understanding the origin and mysteries of the physical world is considered an unconjecturable or imponderable, and it doesn't help with ending suffering, as you already know.

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

Was the Buddha omniscient and knew everything? No. He definitely knew and understood everything related to the Dhamma (the teachings), but he did not know everything simultaneously.
The Buddha stated that it is not possible to be all-knowing all at once.
That means it is possible for the Buddha to know and understand all things if he tried to learn it, but not simultaneously. This means he has the capacity (the intelligence) to know all things, but it doesn't mean that he indeed knew all things.
Also please see Buddha's omniscience.

“Sir, I have heard this: ‘The ascetic Gotama claims to be all-knowing
and all-seeing, to know and see everything without exception, thus:
“Knowledge and vision are constantly and continually present to me,
while walking, standing, sleeping, and waking.”’ I trust that those
who say this repeat what the Buddha has said, and do not misrepresent
him with an untruth? Is their explanation in line with the teaching?
Are there any legitimate grounds for rebuke and criticism?”
“Vaccha, those who say this do not repeat what I have said. They
misrepresent me with what is false and untrue.”
“So how should we answer so as to repeat what the Buddha has said, and
not misrepresent him with an untruth? How should we explain in line
with his teaching, with no legitimate grounds for rebuke and
criticism?”
“‘The ascetic Gotama has the three knowledges.’ Answering like this
you would repeat what I have said, and not misrepresent me with an
untruth. You would explain in line with my teaching, and there would
be no legitimate grounds for rebuke and criticism.
MN 71

Then the king said to the Buddha, “I have heard, sir, that the ascetic
Gotama says this: ‘There is no ascetic or brahmin who will claim to be
all-knowing and all-seeing, to know and see everything without
exception: that is not possible.’ Do those who say this repeat what
the Buddha has said, and not misrepresent him with an untruth? Is
their explanation in line with the teaching? Are there any legitimate
grounds for rebuke and criticism?”
“Great king, those who say this do not repeat what I have said. They
misrepresent me with what is false and untrue.” .....
Then the king said to the Buddha, “Sir, might the Buddha have spoken
in reference to one thing, but that person believed it was something
else? How then do you recall making this statement?”
“Great king, I recall making this statement: ‘There is no ascetic or
brahmin who knows all and sees all simultaneously: that is not
possible.’”
“What the Buddha says appears reasonable.
MN 90

Sandaka, take a certain teacher who claims to be all-knowing and
all-seeing, to know and see everything without exception, thus:
‘Knowledge and vision are constantly and continually present to me,
while walking, standing, sleeping, and waking.’ He enters an empty
house; he gets no almsfood; a dog bites him; he encounters a wild
elephant, a wild horse, and a wild cow; he asks the name and clan of a
woman or man; he asks the name and path to a village or town. When
asked, ‘Why is this?’ he answers: ‘I had to enter an empty house,
that’s why I entered it. I had to get no almsfood, that’s why I got
none. I had to get bitten by a dog, that’s why I was bitten. I had to
encounter a wild elephant, a wild horse, and a wild cow, that’s why I
encountered them. I had to ask the name and clan of a woman or man,
that’s why I asked. I had to ask the name and path to a village or
town, that’s why I asked.’
A sensible person reflects on this matter in this way: ‘This teacher
makes such a claim, but he answers in such a way. This spiritual life
is unreliable.’ Realizing this, they leave disappointed.
MN 76

Just read your response above, and have a question. "The Buddha stated that it is possible to be all-knowing, but not all at once.", Isn't this contradictory? "All-knowing" and "not all at once" sounds contrasting to me. Do you mean to say, All information about a particular topic including its history, if he deems? I am not doubting that the Buddha is Omniscient, nor your response above, but trying get my understanding straight.

@Iowa I fixed my statement to "The Buddha stated that it is not possible to be all-knowing all at once."

@Iowa The Buddha said he's not omniscient. He said he's intelligent enough to learn any subject.

I recall reading from a sutta (not able to recollect the name of the sutta) stating that the Buddha is indeed Omniscient, which goes on to further state, that he could access entire history of a given topic, but as you rightly said not all information of everything, at once.

@Iowa Please see this answer for details. Milindapanha, a text (within Khuddaka Nikaya) written 400 to 700 years after the Buddha's passing, makes exaggerated claims of his omniscience, that the Buddha himself refuted in the Majjhima Nikaya suttas. That answer provides the references. Milindapanha can be considered a sutta as Khuddaka Nikaya is part of the Sutta Pitaka.

So what are the fundamental building blocks of scientist?
As for the Buddha Dhamma, they are Craving and Not-knowing, the builder of everything. By removing those blocks, the unconditioned is gained.

I undoubtedly agree, but just curious about the Buddha's understanding, interpretation and explanation of subatomic particles and there wave-particle nature, if he has said so, as mentioned in the texts.

Already told, good householder: avijja&tanha are the fundamental blocks creating ones world of experiances. All six elements (water, earth, fire, wind, mind, space) are insecure, conditioned, no heartwood can be found, nothing one could really relay on. Science is blind and holds on improper attention as to ever get suffering and release from it understood.

I have a feeling that what you call "fundamental building blocks of reality" -- i.e. atoms -- are a matter of cultural (and technological) bias.
And that for ancient Babylonians the "fundamental building blocks of reality" might have been the details of trade routes or commercial contracts; or for ancient Polynesians the "fundamental building blocks of reality" might have been details of winds and ocean currents and seasons.
"Atoms" are an explanation of (or model derived from) various technological experiments -- starting in the 17th and 18th centuries with chemistry, and gradually going on to high-energy physics at the turn of the 20th century.
I'd argue it's not a "fundamental building blocks of reality" any more than public health is (epidemiology), and all the other branches of knowledge -- unless that's how you define the words "reality" and "fundamental" (which it seems you do).
Anyway, "atoms" are an explanation for various experimental experiences -- for example the Geiger–Marsden experiments -- and I presume that without such experiences the theory of atoms, atomic theory, doesn't arise.
Anyway, according to Buddhism the fundamental building blocks might be called dhammas; or possibly dhatus. Or others, Buddhism has many ways to analyse reality, sub-divide it into components, to find out what causes what and so on.
Subatomic particles' having a "wave-particle" nature (as you mentioned in a comment) is (I would say) not a "nature" but a view -- a model, a theory -- not wrong but not especially fundamental except for people who are trying to describe some of the observation made in Physics labs.

There are actually "atoms" that are older than the 17th and 18th century experiments that you reference. There is ancient Greek atomism, and also ancient Indian atomism. They are very different notions of "an atom" than anything you'd find in a modern physics text (let alone a text from the 1800s!), and are basically quasi-magical postulated entities, but they were postulated far before "the modern atom" started to be divined during the 1800s and before, leading up to that.


text:
Is it true that its always thoughts that creates emotions?
Firstly, this question is related to this stack because during the mindfulness meditation we are told to be aware of our passing thoughts and emotions.
I was going through a video that said that 'thoughts create emotions' but I disagree to this, Many times I am engulfed by emotions first, like fear, anxiety, worry, and insecurity and I scan through my mind and I have not had any particular thought, the emotion is right there without any reason.
Then I do some mindfulness meditation to deal with that pure emotion. So, am I right that there can be pure emotions to deal with in meditation without thoughts?
Broadening the question I would really like to ask, what's the relation between thoughts and emotions? How, where, and when do they get related to each other and influence each other?

I guess in this question you're equating "thoughts" with "reasons" -- maybe "reasoning", and maybe (which may be what @7years's answer is implying) "words". Is that what you're asking? Also might it help to quote, to reference, the text that you're asking about (instead of paraphrasing it)?

I wanted to get across that it's not taught like that 'thought creates emotion' but it's not a bad question. It's related to what Chris says, reasoning/thinking, feeling/emotion, these words are difficult to pin down and are open to interpretation lest otherwise specified.

Thus have i read

"Now, when there is the eye, when there are forms, when there is
eye-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a
delineation of contact.[1] When there is a delineation of contact, it
is possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When
there is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will
delineate a delineation of perception. When there is a delineation of
perception, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of
thinking. When there is a delineation of thinking, it is possible that
one will delineate a delineation of being assailed by the perceptions
& categories of objectification.
"When there is the ear...
"When there is the nose...
"When there is the tongue...
"When there is the body...
"When there is the intellect, when there are ideas, when there is
intellect-consciousness, it is possible that one will Madhupindikasuttam mn18

Sujato's translation with pali

Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. The meeting of the three is contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. What you feel, you perceive. What you perceive, you think about. What you think about, you proliferate. What you proliferate about is the source from which a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions. This occurs with respect to sights known by the eye in the past, future, and present.
Cakkhuñcāvuso, paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇam, tiṇṇam samgati phasso, phassapaccayā vedanā, yam vedeti tam sañjānāti, yam sañjānāti tam vitakketi, yam vitakketi tam papañceti, yam papañceti tatonidānam purisam papañcasaññāsamkhā samudācaranti atītānāgatapaccuppannesu cakkhuviññeyyesu rūpesu.

"And which are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is
internal? There being 'I am,' there comes to be 'I am here,' there
comes to be 'I am like this' ... 'I am otherwise' ... 'I am bad' ...
'I am good' ... 'I might be' ... 'I might be here' ... 'I might be
like this' ... 'I might be otherwise' ... 'May I be' ... 'May I be
here' ... 'May I be like this' ... 'May I be otherwise' ... 'I will
be' ... 'I will be here' ... 'I will be like this' ... 'I will be
otherwise.' These are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what
is internal.
"And which are the 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is
external? There being 'I am because of this (or: by means of this),'
there comes to be 'I am here because of this,' there comes to be 'I am
like this because of this' ... 'I am otherwise because of this' ... 'I
am bad because of this' ... 'I am good because of this' ... 'I might
be because of this' ... 'I might be here because of this' ... 'I might
be like this because of this' ... 'I might be otherwise because of
this' ... 'May I be because of this' ... 'May I be here because of
this' ... 'May I be like this because of this' ... 'May I be otherwise
because of this' ... 'I will be because of this' ... 'I will be here
because of this' ... 'I will be like this because of this' ... 'I will
be otherwise because of this.' These are the 18 craving-verbalizations
dependent on what is external.
"Thus there are 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is
internal and 18 craving-verbalizations dependent on what is external.
These are called the 36 craving-verbalizations. Thus, with 36
craving-verbalizations of this sort in the past, 36 in the future, and
36 in the present, there are 108 craving-verbalizations. Tanhasuttam Craving An4.199

As to your question;

Is it true that its always thoughts that creates emotions?

It makes me think of a baby that does not yet speak a language but feels pleasant & unpleasant sensations and is emotive.

For even the thought ‘self-identification’ doesn’t occur to a stupid baby boy lying on its back, so from where would self-identification view arise in it, even though a latent tendency to self-identification view lies latent within it? Even the thought ‘dhammas’ doesn’t occur to a stupid baby boy lying on its back, so from where would uncertainty about dhammas arise in it, even though a latent tendency to uncertainty lies latent within it? Even the thought ‘habits’ doesn’t occur to a stupid baby boy lying on its back, so from where would grasping at habits & practices arise in it, even though a latent tendency to grasping at habits & practices lies latent within it? Even the thought ‘sensuality’ doesn’t occur to a stupid baby boy lying on its back, so from where would sensual desire for sensuality arise in it, even though a latent tendency to sensual passion lies latent within it? Even the thought ‘beings’ doesn’t occur to a stupid baby boy lying on its back, so from where would ill will for beings arise in it, even though a latent tendency to ill will lies latent within it? Mn64

As i understand it, as an example if child is abused they don't have the language to name the experience as to think about it in those terms but they will know that it wasn't pleasant and will recognize & classify [remember as unpleasant] it for future reference if mind is developed sufficiently.
Language is then an evolution of this ability to recognize & classify in mind as to manipulate [communicate with] the environment as to avoid pain & gain pleasure.
Added;

"But what, dear sir, is the cause of envy & stinginess, what is their
origination, what gives them birth, what is their source? When what
exists do they come into being? When what doesn't exist do they not?"
"Envy & stinginess have dear-&-not-dear as their cause, have
dear-&-not-dear as their origination, have dear-&-not-dear as what
gives them birth, have dear-&-not-dear as their source. When
dear-&-not-dear exist, they come into being. When dear-&-not-dear are
not, they don't."
"But what, dear sir, is the cause of dear-&-not-dear, what is their
origination, what gives them birth, what is their source? When what
exists do they come into being? When what doesn't exist do they not?"
"Dear-&-not-dear have desire as their cause, have desire as their
origination, have desire as what gives them birth, have desire as
their source. When desire exists, they come into being. When desire is
not, they don't."
"But what, dear sir, is the cause of desire, what is its origination,
what gives it birth, what is its source? When what exists does it come
into being? When what doesn't exist does it not?"
"Desire has thinking as its cause, has thinking as its origination,
has thinking as what gives it birth, has thinking as its source. When
thinking exists, desire comes into being. When thinking is not, it
doesn't."
"But what, dear sir, is the cause of thinking, what is its
origination, what gives it birth, what is its source? When what exists
does it come into being? When what doesn't exist does it not?"
"Thinking has the perceptions & categories of objectification[1] as
its cause, has the perceptions & categories of objectification as its
origination, has the perceptions & categories of objectification as
what gives it birth, has the perceptions & categories of
objectification as its source. When the perceptions & categories of
objectification exist, thinking comes into being. When the perceptions
& categories of objectification are not, it doesn't." Dn21
Now, craving is dependent on feeling, seeking is dependent on craving,
acquisition is dependent on seeking, ascertainment is dependent on
acquisition, desire and passion is dependent on ascertainment,
attachment is dependent on desire and passion, possessiveness is
dependent on attachment, stinginess is dependent on possessiveness,
defensiveness is dependent on stinginess, and because of
defensiveness, dependent on defensiveness, various evil, unskillful
phenomena come into play: the taking up of sticks and knives;
conflicts, quarrels, and disputes; accusations, and lies dn15

I was going through a video that said that 'thoughts create emotions' but I disagree to this, Many times I am engulfed by emotions first, like fear, anxiety, worry, and insecurity and I scan through my mind and I have not had any particular thought, the emotion is right there without any reason.

Notice the conventional terms we use in our daily life don't always mean the same thing with the Buddhist terms. For example, the conventional sense of "feeling" involves a lot more than the feeling/Vedana in the Five Aggregates. The expression "you hurt my feeling" imply feeling as carrying an emotional tone, while the Vedana in the Five Aggregates is just the bare sensational registration of 3 basic tones: painful, pleasant, and neutral. So it's important to distinguish what's meant conventionally versus what's meant in terms of the Buddhist Khandhas. Conventional "thought" involves a mixed bag of everything including Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara, and Vinnana, while the Dhamma's lingo separates it out into bare sensation/Vedana, perception/labeling/identification/Sanna, volitional/mental-formation/Sankhara, and awareness/cognition/Vinnana. So, to prevent any confusion,  always go back to the terms as defined in the Five Aggregates and filter out any "noise" that might be present in conventional language.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Stages of equanimity and the end
Beyond householder-equanimity is recluse-equanimity. Yet - equanimity being the highest factor of the factors for awakening - does this factor then result in a further kind of equanimity, or does equanimity fade into something else, once highest, aim, is reached?
What's higher than equanimity?
And where and how could the stages of equanimity be mapped on the ten-fold path?

Yet - equanimity doing the highest factor of the factors for awakening - does this factor then results in a further kind of equanimity or does equanimity fade into something else, once highest, aim, is reached?

Per MN 54, there're different grades of equanimity depending on where one is on the Path:

“So too, householder, a noble disciple considers thus: ‘Sensual pleasures have been compared to a skeleton by the Blessed One; they provide much suffering and much despair, while the danger in them is great.’ Having seen this thus as it actually is with proper wisdom, he avoids the equanimity that is diversified, based on diversity, and develops the equanimity that is unified, based on unity, where clinging to the material things of the world utterly ceases without remainder. ~~ MN 54 ~~

Does equanimity evolve into something else? What's higher than equanimity?
Questions of King Milinda say:

As the rafters of a house connect up to the ridge-pole, and the ridge-pole is the highest point of the roof, so do good qualities lead up to concentration.

What is meant here by concentration? Certainly not staring-at-the-candle-until-eyes-pop-out kind. Instead, it is a kind of mindfulness or collectedness maintained throughout all activities. This type of collectedness enables continuous suchness by preventing any and all mental disconnect between "what is" and "what is on one's mind". In other words it's a kind of active dynamic concentration that continuously maintains the mind in sync with things-as-they-really-are.
If you ever meet an enlightened person, you'll see how they move with a kind of royal grace and precision. It's like they are always comfortable, never losing their center. This royal grace and precision are outer expressions of the right concentration.

Thanissaro Bhikkhu states that the Buddha said Nibbana is the highest happiness.

It's from Dhammapada verses 203 to 204.

From the suttas, we have:

SN46.54:15.10: The apex of the heart’s release by equanimity is the dimension of nothingness, I say, for a mendicant who has not penetrated to a higher freedom.”

Equanimity corresponds with the sixth liberation. There are two more:

DN34:2.1.202: Going totally beyond the dimension of infinite consciousness, aware that ‘there is nothing at all’, they enter and remain in the dimension of nothingness.
DN34:2.1.203: This is the sixth liberation
DN34:2.1.204: Going totally beyond the dimension of nothingness, they enter and remain in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.
DN34:2.1.205: This is the seventh liberation.
DN34:2.1.206: Going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, they enter and remain in the cessation of perception and feeling.
DN34:2.1.207: This is the eighth liberation.

It may also be interesting to read MN43:

MN43:29.5: “The limitless release of the heart, and the release of the heart through nothingness, and the release of the heart through emptiness, and the signless release of the heart: do these things differ in both meaning and phrasing? Or do they mean the same thing, and differ only in the phrasing?”

As i understand, "The dimension of nothingness" is an apex of equamity in as far as perception attainments go and "The dimension of neither perception nor non-perception" is an equanimity highest in as far as sustenance goes.

"There is the case, Ananda, where a monk, having practiced in this way — (thinking) 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' — obtains equanimity. He relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it. As he relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it, his consciousness is dependent on it, is sustained by it (clings to it). With clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is not totally unbound."
"Being sustained, where is that monk sustained?"
"The dimension of neither perception nor non-perception."
"Then, indeed, being sustained, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance." Mn106

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


text:
What does Buddhism teach regarding Cyber-Bullying?
Refer to this chart about the Cyber Bully, it causes a huge spike of cyber bully over a recent decade due to social media. It's seem getting more and more serious.
source about cyberbully
What does Buddhism teach regarding Cyber Bullying?

Very low quality question, hence the downvotes i assume. Likewise questions like rhis, eg 'What does Buddhism teach about cervical radiculopathy or about the new tesla engine? Followed by a body of info about CR and the engine complete with pictures.. it's difficult for me to believe this is posted in good faith.

@7years and yet it isn't obviously spam

As i see it, It should 've been removed immediately and user suspended already because note he persistently posts low quality questions, in a similar format and doesn't interact with other users when asked questions. I mean if you are waiting for sock puppet accounts to identify themselves explicitly and for trolling to be more obvious, it's probably not going to happen.

I think moderators should use their judgement and err on side of protecting the community because it's what u have power for. It's wrong if you are going to err on the side of suspect posters

It can be closed as a duplicate of bullying questions.

Also edited the question's body to remove most of the parts which are off-topic. FWIW I don't think the OP has the intention to spam or any other malicious intent.

Basically the teaching is don't bully others and let others have their peace and ease.

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near
Sāvatthī at Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. And on that
occasion, a large number of boys on the road between Sāvatthī & Jeta's
Grove were hitting a snake with a stick. Then early in the morning the
Blessed One adjusted his under robe and — carrying his bowl & robes —
went into Sāvatthī for alms. He saw the large number of boys on the
road between Sāvatthī & Jeta's Grove hitting the snake with a stick.
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that
occasion exclaimed:
Whoever hits with a stick
beings desiring ease,
when he himself is looking for ease,
will meet with no ease after death.
Whoever doesn't hit with a stick
beings desiring ease,
when he himself is looking for ease,
will meet with ease after death.
Ud 2.3

The same thing in Dhammapada 131 - 132.

Cyber bullying is a nasty issue. Social media mixes us all together even with others who would hurt us, making it hard for us to find a refuge. The technology is trying to change and adapt as it can, but it will take some time. And during that time, we can simply remember what the Buddha said.

MN8:12.7: ‘Others will speak divisively, but here we will not speak divisively.’

Cyber bullying is a fictional concept created by people who didn't understand the meme and in turn are attempting to destroy decades old culture (internet culture)
Really there wouldn't be a Buddhist view on such a trivial thing as it neither falls into harmful actions or incorrect speech, even audio speech is up for debate whether it relays to incorrect speech. It is impossible to harm someone via text on a screen, if this was a case any written symbol could be seen as a negative action from drawing a straight line to a geometric shape and many books would also be "bullying" others just those people are not reading those books at the present moment to notice they are being bullied. Anyone who thinks they are being "bullied" just wasn't taught how to use a computer properly and need to learn how to press ALT+TAB or ALT+F4.
Also your inconsequential chart isn't really representing the fact that after 07-10 there was a mass influx of normies onto the internet (because of social media) who use terrible "search engines" like google and have no idea of the cyberbullying meme other than just as a word that other people who have no idea about the internet seemed to take as a real phenomena.
Either way this post has nothing to do with Buddhism and seems to be some sort of political/social issue that does not belong here at all.


text:
What Pali term most closely represents the concept of "inner conflict"?
A little context to describe what I am looking for and why I am looking for it:
It is my strong intuition that "suffering" is a label that we give to a phenomenon
that, upon deeper inspection, we discover to be an "inner conflict" between
(1) a part of us that craves a particular sensory experience (kāma)
and
(2) a part of us which desires to see things as they actually are (yathabhutañanadassana)
and that the resolution of these inner conflicts
by relinquishing sense-desires
in favor of clear seeing
is the means by which suffering is ended
and that the āsava are the biases
which keep us clinging to sense-desires
until we are strong enough to relinquish them
and that each resolution of an inner conflict of this nature
results in a destruction of the āsava (asavakkhaye ñana)
and that each such destruction brings us closer and closer to full awakening
wherein all āsava have been removed
inner conflicts no longer go unresolved
because avijjā (the choice to ignore uncomfortable truths) has been destroyed
i.e. we no longer respond to dukkha (the arrow in the heart who purpose is to alert us to that the map of the world we have constructed has made a misprediction that should be corrected)
by ignoring evidence that our views are compelling us to make bad decisions
in favor of clinging to sense-desires.
and that this works because
the sensory motor wherein all āsava have been removed
inner conflicts no longer go unresolved
because avijjā (the choice to ignore uncomfortable truths) has been destroyed
i.e. we no longer respond to dukkha (this discomfort of misprediction)
by ignoring evidence that our views are compelling us to make bad decisions.    brain evolved because it enabled beings to respond to sensory experience with moves in the world that improved the probability of gene survival
i.e. the trait of making accurate predictions (saṅkhāra) originally served the master of the zero-sum game of gene-survival (aka "Māra)
but the zero-sum game intensified competition
which created selection pressure for ever more accurate predictions
leading to the point where clinging to the original gene-survival compulsions
actually become an impediment to clear seeing
and that the choice to relinquish this impediment
in favor the welfare of all living beings
was the choice the Buddha made
when he renounced Māra
and attained nibbana.
Although everything is a hypothesis,
and all hypotheses should be considered impermanent (sabbe saṅkhāra annicā),
and all hypothesis are subject to the discomfort of misprediction (sabbe saṅkhāra dukkha),
I have a very high degree of certainty that this hypothesis is correct.
Nevertheless, the "fly in the ointment" is the uncomfortable truth that I am not familiar with a Pali term to represent the concept of an "inner conflict" between these 2 parts.
My best guess is that
(1) I am attributing an incorrect meaning to a term that I already know which represents this concept
or
(2) The term was removed from the canon by the same forces who removed the 4 resolves (adhiṭṭhāna: sacca, pañǹa, cāga, upasama; which described how to actually resolve the unresolved conflict).
I'm hoping that (1) is true and that someone here can point me in the right direction.

In pali, Lola means agitate.
Example, I agitated between doing good to a robber or doing bad to a robber.
From PTS Pali-English dictionary entry on lola:

Lola (Loḷa) Lola (Loḷa) (adj.) [fr. luḷ: see luḷati; cp. Epic &
Classic Sk. lola] wavering, unsteady, agitated; longing, eager, greedy
S iv.111; Sn 22, 922; J i.49 (Buddha -- mātā lolā na hoti), 111, 210,
339 (dhana -- loḷa); ii.319 (˚manussa); iii.7; Pug 65; Nd1 366; Dāvs
iv.44; Miln 300. —alola not greedy, not distracted (by desire),
self-controlled S v.148; Sn 65.
-bhava greediness, covetousness ThA 16.

Thank you. The usage of this term with the meaning of "wavering" seems to be very close. Snp 4.14 appears to do this starting here: "Jhāyī na pādalolassa": https://suttacentral.net/snp4.14/en/sujato

From PTS Pali-English dictionary search on "agitation":

Āvilatta Āvilatta (nt.) [abstr. fr. āvila] confusion, disturbance, agitation Sn 967; Nd1 488.

Āluḷa Āluḷa (adj. [fr. ā + lul] being in motion, confusion or
agitation, disturbed, agitated J vi.431.

Āloḷa Āloḷa [fr. ā + luḷ, cp. āluḷati & āloḷeti] confusion, uproar,
agitation DhA i.38.

Ubbijjanā Ubbijjanā (f.) [abstr. fr. ubbijjati] agitation, uneasiness DA i.111. Cp. ubbega.

Uddhacca Uddhacca (nt.) [substantivised ger. of ud-dharati, ud + dhṛ, cp. uddhaṭa & uddhata. The BSk. auddhatya shows a strange distortion. BSk. uddhava seems to be also a substitute for uddhacca] over-balancing, agitation, excitement, distraction, flurry

Pakopa Pakopa [pa+kopa] agitation, effervescence, anger, fury Dhs 1060; Vism 235, 236.

Vipphandita Vipphandita (nt.) [pp. of vipphandati] "writhing," twitching, struggle M i.446; S ii.62; — (fig.) in diṭṭhi˚ combd with visūkāyita) "scuffling of opinion" (Mrs. Rh. D.), sceptical agitation, worry & writhing (cp. Dial. i.53) M i.8, 486; S i.123 (here without diṭṭhi˚; the C. expln is "hatthirājavaṇṇa sappavaṇṇ' ādidassa nāni" K.S. i.320); Dhs 381; Pug 22.

Saŋvega Saŋvega [fr. saŋ+vij] agitation, fear, anxiety; thrill, religious emotion (caused by contemplation of the miseries of this world) D iii.214; A i.43; ii.33, 114; S i.197; iii.85; v.130, 133; It 30; Sn 935; J i.138; Nd1 406; Vism 135=KhA 235 (eight objects inducing emotion: birth, old age, illness, death, misery in the apāyas, and the misery caused by saŋsāra in past, present & future stages); Mhvs 1, 4; 23, 62; PvA 1, 22, 32, 39, 76.

From PTS Pali-English dictionary search on "madness":

Ummāda Ummāda [ud + māda] madness, distraction, mental aberration S i.126 (˚ŋ pāpuṇeyya citta -- vikkhepaŋ vā); A ii.80;
iii.119; v.169; Pug 69; PvA 6 (˚patta frantic, out of mind), 94
(˚vāta), 162 (˚patta).

You are correct, the concept of conflict (or clash or mismatch) is subsumed under the concept of dukkha or dukkhata.
If you think about it, there's no suffering distinct from (apart from) conflict. Presence of conflict is the very suffering, and vice versa, suffering is mismatch between "is" and "should". That's why there's no need for a separate term.
Absence of conflict is happiness/dukkha and ultimately suchness/tathata.
Practice of the Eightfold Path, culminating in the practice of Jhanas, is all about methodically removing (arresting, preventing) causes of conflict, from coarser to finer, all the way until tathata.
Conflicts range from external social conflicts, to conflict of expectations, to subtle conflict coming from overgeneralizations, reifications, inaccurate models, to implicit conflicts inherent to all conceptual boundaries.
Buddha is called Tathagata - one living in suchness.

Thanks. This is helpful. On suttacentral, I see that the term atathaṁ is used in DN15 & MN105. However, it seems to have the more general meaning of not-truth.

I still feel unresolved conflict, however, because the absence of a term to represent this concept is inconsistent with sensory experience: i.e. (1) As a general rule, when we zero in on the cause of a problem we are seeking to solve (or a destination we are seeking to reach), the density of named concepts tends to increase as we get closer to the target in order to ensure that the target can be hit. (2) the volume of text in the suttas is considerable.

Let me know what you find, I'll be interested to know.

Although perhaps too low-level, anurodha,virodha, or a joining of the two, anurodhavirodhaṁ, may be suitable:
FROM MN38:

Being so full of favoring and opposing, when they experience any
kind of feeling—pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral—they approve,
welcome, and keep clinging to it.
So evaṁ anurodhavirodhaṁ samāpanno yaṁ kiñci vedanaṁ vedeti sukhaṁ
vā dukkhaṁ vā adukkhamasukhaṁ vā, so taṁ vedanaṁ abhinandati
abhivadati ajjhosāya tiṭṭhati. This gives rise to relishing.

used slightly differently in a few instances: AN8.5, AN8.6, SN36.6

In Sanskrit there is a word called “Antar-Virodh”. It means “self contradictory”. It makes you unable to make a decision because of the conflicting situation or feeling or facts.
In Pali same words “Antar” and “virodh” can be combined to create “antarvirodh”.

(1) a part of us that craves a particular sensory experience (kāma)
and (2) a part of us which desires to see things as they actually are
(yathabhutañanadassana)

The above simply sounds like the hindrance (nivarana) & fetter (saṁyojana) of 'doubt' or a lack of faith.

and that each resolution of an inner conflict of this nature results
in a destruction of the āsava (asavakkhaye ñana)... and that each such
destruction brings us closer and closer to full awakening

I am not sure the word khaya here means a gradual lessening. Generally, my impression is the destruction of the āsava is the product of full awakening. More research is required here.
You seem to be referring to the gradual destruction of the 'fetters' ('saṁyojana').

and that the āsava are the biases which keep us clinging to
sense-desires

The word 'asava' means 'outflow' of in-born & conditioned tendencies (anusaya). It does not mean 'bias' ('agati').

wherein all āsava have been removed inner conflicts no longer go
unresolved

When the fetter of doubt is destroyed by a stream-enterer, this appears the ending of inner conflict.

because avijjā (the choice to ignore uncomfortable truths)

Ignorance is not a 'choice' ('cetana'). Ignorance is an anusaya (underlying tendency) & asava (outflow).

and all hypotheses should be considered impermanent (sabbe saṅkhāra
annicā), and all hypothesis are subject to the discomfort of
misprediction (sabbe saṅkhāra dukkha),

The Laws of Dhamma/Nature are fixed (AN 3.136). Their realisation brings comfort.

(1) I am attributing an incorrect meaning to a term that I already
know which represents this concept

Inner-conflict is a lack of faith or otherwise blind faith. If the mind still lusts for sensual pleasures yet believes it must attain Nibbana, this sounds like blind faith in religion.

(2) The term was removed from the canon by the same forces who removed
the 4 resolves (adhiṭṭhāna: sacca, pañǹa, cāga, upasama; which
described how to actually resolve the unresolved conflict).

The four resolves in are in the canon, such as in MN 140:

Paññādhiṭṭhāno, saccādhiṭṭhāno, cāgādhiṭṭhāno, upasamādhiṭṭhāno.
The foundations of wisdom, truth, generosity, and peace.
MN 140

If we wish to advance in the Dhamma, it is said we must abide in the moral precepts (MN 6). No watching porn, no believing casual sex is OK, no drugs & alcohol.

The hindrance/fetter of vicikicchā does not mean "doubt". This is a mistranslation by people who have not sufficiently restrained their compulsion for immediate gratification in favor of seeing things as they actually are. A more precise translation would be the "split thinking" which precedes the perception of doubt. vicikicchā and papaǹca are 2 different perspectives of the same phenomenon. 1st person and 3rd person. It is the "flight of the hero" in response to the first arrow.

The Pali term which seems to most closely represent the concept of “the inner conflict which gives rise to suffering and whose resolution leads to the end of suffering” is the term “dhammas”.
Ajahn Sucitto explains …
2023-09-03: video: BuddhaDhamma Foundation: Luang Por Sucitto: Vassa ‘23 Dhamma Streams (at 26 mins 15 seconds)
Direct Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqf9kHJXYmc&t=26m15s
However, let's be more precise.
Dhamma means "sensory motor map that guides our movements through sensory experience".
Dhamma is our "sensory motor predictive model of sensory experience".
Our maps contain errors.
This is explained by the Buddha in the opening lines of chapter 1 of the Dhammapada (Yamakavagga):
Mind precedes the map
Mind is first
Mind constructs [the map]
Speak or act with a corrupted mind,
And suffering follows
As the wagon wheel follows the hoof of the ox.
Mind precedes dhamma
Mind is first
Mind constructs [dhamma]
Speak or act with a peaceful mind,
And happiness follows Like a never-departing shadow.
The first arrow in the heart is a "notification of misprediction in the sensory motor predictive model".
i.e. the sensory experience "observed" is different than the sensory experience "predicted".
This is the difference between "external" and "internal" that the Buddha guided us to focus on in MN 10.
Sati is the skillful response to the first arrow.
Sati is the tool we use to find and correct the error.
When the error is corrected, all suffering is ended.
Why is this?
Because avijjā, AKA denial, the refusal to see things as they actually are is the root cause of the dependent orgination of suffering.
The dhammas that Ajahn Sucitto is referring to are the dhammas which still contain the uncorrected error. The mind ruminates upon these so that we will make the correction.
This is explained more fully here.


text:
what is difference between Mansikāro and Vitakā
I have asked this question earlier
but still not clear...so asking this again...
This time be specific on mansikaro and vitaka..
people says vitaka is directed attention and mansikaro is always termed as attention..
can we say vitaka is  directed mansikaro.?
Santa100 given good pointer to abhidhmma in his answer.
following questions are related to his answer.
After searching for vitaka in abhidhamma.. I found two major difference.
mansikaro is universal.. where vitaka is not.. can someone explain whats that means.
vitaka is also sankappa. Can someone explain how.?

what is difference between Mansikāro and Vitakā

A few lines of explanation won't be able to fully describe these 2 important concepts. Please refer to CMOA's Chapter II: Compendium of Mental Factors, where it analyses those factors in great details. But just in brief, below is the key passage:

"Manasikara should be distinguished from Vitakka: while the former turns its concomitants towards the object, the latter applies them onto the object. Manasikara is an indispensable cognitive factor present in all states of consciousness while vitakka is a specialized factor which is not indispensable to cognition."

that link does not work.. However above paragraph is on wiki.. and I am reading it since one year..I still dont understand.

Doubt is  are they  same or different.

can we say vitaka is directed mansikaro.?   .. like man is mammal... vitaka is mansikaro..???

abhidhamma says mansikaro is universal and vitaka is not... what does that mean?

it also says vitaka is sankappa... How?

@enRaiser, i've updated the CMOA link. After clicking the link, simply scroll down until you see the Download Free PDF button and click it to download. I've recommended you read the chapter first, it should clear up your many questions.

This is a question for the Jhana-attainer who beginning on the insight meditation. Jhana makes wholesome strong enough to see the truth.
I have ask similar question to the Tipitaka-memorizer, ven. Pa-auk. He answer me "meditate the concentration meditation".
However, according to Pali...
Vitakka is carrying mind and mind factors to do their duty on the object.
Vicara is  keeping carrying, again and again, mind and mind factors to do their duty on the object.
Manasikara is choosing the environment to do mind and mind factor's duty on the object.
Adhimokha is deciding the environment to do mind and mind factor's duty on the object.
Viriya is keeping the same environment to do mind and mind factor's duty on the object.
Sati is not forget not ignore the wholesome mind's object. It is keeping only wholesome mind and wholesome mind factors to do their duty on the object.
Etc, see the path of purification in pali version.


text:
In which sutta does the Buddha discuss his attitudes toward his audience either understanding or not understanding his teaching?
I am writing an essay on Buddhist nonattachment, in which I argue that nonattachment is compatible with a wide range of affective states and intimate relationships (contra some popular philosophical conceptions, which are greatly influenced by Stoicism). The account of Buddhist nonattachment I offer stresses an attitude of open-minded acceptance of whatever mental state arises, without attraction or aversion -- without indulging or suppressing it.
In more than one place I have heard mention of a sutta in which the Buddha describes his mental states and attitudes when he teaches the Dhamma, and his audience either understands or fails to understand. From what I've heard, he says something along the lines that he is pleased when people understand the Dhamma and displeased when they do not; however, his is not overcome by those mental states. This is not a direct quote, only the impression left in my memory. Does this sound familiar? Can anyone help me find this sutta?

There is this

For a generation delighting in attachment, excited by attachment, enjoying attachment, this/that conditionality and dependent co-arising are hard to see. This state, too, is hard to see: the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding. And if I were to teach the Dhamma and if others would not understand me, that would be tiresome for me, troublesome for me." SN 6.1:
Ayacana Sutta: The Request

Also this

“Monks, if others were to speak in dispraise of me, in dispraise of
the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Sangha, neither hatred nor
antagonism nor displeasure of mind would be proper. If others were to
speak in dispraise of me, in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise
of the Sangha, and at that you would be upset and angered, that would
be an obstruction for you yourselves. If others were to speak in
dispraise of me, in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the
Sangha, and at that you would be upset and angered, would you know
what of those others was well-said or poorly said?”
“No, lord.”
“If others were to speak in dispraise of me, in dispraise of the
Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Saṅgha, you should unravel and
explicate what is unfactual as unfactual: ‘This is unfactual, this is
inaccurate, there is nothing of that in us, and that is not to be
found in us.’
“If others were to speak in praise of me, in praise of the Dhamma, or
in praise of the Sangha, neither joy nor gladness nor exhilaration of
mind would be proper. If others were to speak in praise of me, in
praise of the Dhamma, or in praise of the Sangha, and at that you
would be joyful, glad, & exhilarated, that would be an obstruction for
you yourselves. If others were to speak in praise of me, in praise of
the Dhamma, or in praise of the Saṅgha, and at that you would be
joyful, glad, & exhilarated, would you know what of those others was
well-said or poorly said?”
“No, lord.”
“If others were to speak in praise of me, in praise of the Dhamma, or
in praise of the Sangha, you should unravel and explicate what is
factual as factual: ‘This is factual, this is accurate, there is that
in us, and that is to be found in us.’ DN1: Brahmajala Sutta: The Great Net

MN 137
https://lucid24.org/mn/mn137/index.html#7
7 - (The teacher -buddha- uses 3 types of sati, to illustrate upekkha reaction)
7.1 – (bad disciples)
7.2 – (some good some bad disciples)
7.3 – (all good disciples)

How about this?
If the teacher understands the meaning and the teaching, then that's a good enough reason to teach.
If the audience understands the meaning and the teaching, then that's a good enough reason to teach. Here, whether the teacher fully understands the teaching, appears to be optional.
If both teacher and audience understand the meaning and the teaching, then that's a good enough reason to teach.

“Mendicants, taking three reasons into consideration provides quite
enough motivation to teach Dhamma to another. What three? When the
teacher understands the meaning and the teaching. When the audience
understands the meaning and the teaching. When both the teacher and
the audience understand the meaning and the teaching.
Taking these three reasons into consideration provides quite enough
motivation to teach Dhamma to another.”
AN 3.43

Hi ruben2020, thank you for your response and editing my tags. Unfortunately, the passage you cite is not the one I'm looking for. Notice that the passage you cite is not discussing the Buddha's response to his audience either understanding or not understanding his teaching and him being pleased or displeased (respectively) yet remaining equanimous, as I am looking for; instead, your cited passage describes reasons/motivations for teaching the Dhamma. Is the difference clear? Thank you again!

To reiterate and clarify, the passage that I am looking for consists of the Buddha describing to one of his disciples (I believe it might be one of his attendants, possibly Sariputta or Ananda) that when he teaches the Dhamma, and the audience does not understand, he is displeased. Conversely, when he teaches the Dhamma, and his audience does understand, he is pleased. However, in either case, the Buddha says that he is not ‘overcome’ or ‘overwhelmed’ by these mental states, rather he remains equanimous in the face of either. Do this help at all? This is not verbatim, merely the gist.


text:
Can an art career distract from the Buddhist path?
I have aspired to be an artist since adolescence. I saw a Studio Ghibli movie and wanted to create that same magical feeling in others. However more recently, I think I have may have aspired only to create nothing more than escapism, rather than content that truly helps anyone. I don't feel that I am doing more to contribute to the world than farmers, doctors, and the like. Additionally, much of the work I aspire to is largely inspired by nerdy things that I obsess over, or things that make me feel a certain way that I want to replicate. But that is self-serving, and not a display of my compassion.
Many people want to be artists, however we are drowning in a complete excess of artistic media. Artists today compete heavily for the economy of people's attention spans. We exonerate film auteurs like Hitchcock, Miyazaki, Spielberg etc., but those people had to compete with many others
I still feel the desire to create work that is personal, expressive and cathartic. I want to create art that connects me to like minds. However, I feel that my artistic pursuits could be more passionate. And that can be hard when you feel a need to mold your work to the demands of social media.

You could create arts work related to the Buddha Dhamma. That could help inspiring many people toward higher more noble paths. But you might have to do a side job to help paying the bills cuz majority of people nowadays are only interested in arts that stimulate sensual desire, hence your noble art work alone might not be able to support your living.

I think any career which allows one to practice the five precepts, Right Livelihood, Right Speech and Right Action (which includes the five precepts) without any obstruction, is a career that is aligned WITH Buddhism. I think we should not make lay Buddhism more complicated than it should be.
So, a career in art is fine, but preferably you should avoid using art to inflame others' passion, greed, anger and hatred (please see Talaputa Sutta for details).
Here are the five precepts:

I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

Here's a reminder of Right Livelihood from AN 5.177:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which
five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat,
business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

Here's a summary of Right Speech from SN 45.8:

"And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive
speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right
speech."

Such an interesting question.  Since I do not believe you went into detail about your practice experience answering this is tricky.  I am gathering you  have not taken robes. If that is the case, then being a lay practitioner will require some sort of work to support yourself, unless you are independently wealthy.  I personally see nothing wrong with creative pursuits, what is more important is intention.  One can do what seems like a wholesome livelihood, but if the intention is for wealth and power, then even a charitable action can be tainted.
If one gives ample time to practice, meditation, study and puts efforts towards keeping the precepts, the right path will present itself.  That at least has been my experience.

In this day and age, any professional or performer will have to compete in their profession. The competition is not of your making. That is how the industries work today. That is simply how the world is.
Part of being a Buddhist is to realize that one cannot change the world.

"Don't try to bend the spoon Neo, that is impossible. Instead realize
what the spoon is. Then you will see that its not the spoon, but you are
the one who's bending" - Something I recalled from Matrix the movie.

The only thing that we can change is ourselves. And that is where the Buddhism comes in. Your profession should not stop you from your listening, studying, practicing Dhamma. Its just a choice you make.
As an artist, you might be competing and creating art that does not promote spirituality to your liking. That is tough. But you need to make a living. If your passion is to connect with people's spirituality through your art, you can always do so in your spare time. There are enough channels to share your content with the world - i.e. - YouTube, Flickr, etc.
I know, its not the ideal solution. You still have to work in an industry where you don't work wholeheartedly. But unless you try to express your altruistic intentions through your work on some platform, no one knows and understands you (what's on your mind is not known to others). As an artist, you have the rare gift of sharing your mind with others in a scale other professionals cannot reach. Make the most of it. As per my personal experience, when you start doing so, even as a hobby or a part time gig, you increase your chances of moving into the community of like minded people. You get the attention of like minded communities and increase your chances of landing a full time job that aligns with your true intentions.
You have to take the initiative, and good things will follow you. When your mind is expressed though your art, like minded people will flock around you. You can do a lot of good to the world by being a Kalyana Friend (someone who helps realize Dhamma).

I see two aspects to your question. The first is related to the specific issues of being an artist and the types of work you might create in relation to the Buddha’s teachings. I believe @ruben2020 created a pretty complete answer with regard to this.
The second is related to one’s efforts in pursuit of ‘success’ in this career (or of any other, actually). I bring this up as you seemed to be – rightly – concerned about the passions and efforts you will have to expend to be ‘successful’ in this career; especially if you define success as not just expressing yourself artistically but also having 1000’s of followers on media and $$ in sales.
As a photographic artist, I know that there will be many fellow artists in your media trying to compete for such ‘success’ and to compete with them you will have to expend incredible passion and effort to achieve it. Such could easily lead you astray by creating an unhealthy attachment to this pursuit & its goals. We all know where this will lead.
In summary, if you pursue a career as an artist who creates unharmful works, there seems to be no indications in the Buddha’s teachings that this should distract you from following the correct path. However, the manner by which you could define and pursue success as an artist in this world could easily lead you away from that path if you are not mindful of how you define your goals and carry out your actions. Best.


text:
Difference between optimism and expectation
In vipassana we are asked to be optimist. But buddha said expectation is the cause of all suffering. .
Is there any difference between expectation and optimism?

Where is it said that one is asked to be optimistic when practicing Vipassana meditation?

To 'expect' is to imagine a particular state of the world and assume or assert that it will come to be. It is a counterfactual that can lead to discontentment and attachment (dukkha and tanhā) if it doesn't come to pass exactly as imagined.
To be 'optimistic' is to have trust in the workings of the world: faith that whatever outcome arises (expected or unexpected) will ultimately work out well. Optimism is an attitude more than a belief, and it's an attitude that tends to dissolve discontentment and attachment.

You asked about "expectation", but let's start with the word "expect". The word "expect" is used in translations of the suttas in terms of future certainty.

DN16:1.4.5: “As long as the Vajjis meet frequently and have many meetings, they can expect growth, not decline.

However, the word "optimist" is not used in the same translations, so we have to rely on Google:

involving an overestimate.
"previous estimates may be wildly optimistic"

Although we can expect a future certain outcome, we should not fall into the optimistic trap of expecting it tomorrow. So some expectations are well founded and those are discussed throughout the suttas. However, there are also optimistic expectations which are delusional. In other words, the Vajjis may have to endure much hardship before growth happens. As we deepen our practice, we can expect skillful outcomes but should not be optimistic about instant success. It takes time for our practice to be fruitful, not forever, but not never:

AN3.87:2.6: With the ending of three fetters they have at most seven rebirths.
AN3.87:2.7: They will transmigrate at most seven times among gods and humans and then make an end of suffering.

Returning to "expectation", we have:

SN22.3:12.1: And how does one have expectations?
SN22.3:12.2: It’s when someone thinks:
SN22.3:12.3: ‘In the future, may I be of such form, such feeling, such perception, such choices, and such consciousness!’

Form, feeling, perception, choices and consciousness are the five grasping aggregates. As they grasp, we crave. And as we crave, we suffer.

AN4.9:3.1: Knowing this drawback—
AN4.9:3.2: that craving is the cause of suffering—
AN4.9:3.3: rid of craving, free of grasping,
AN4.9:3.4: a mendicant would wander mindful.”

I feel physically ill reading sankharā translated as choices.

@user23786, I notice that my understanding of the English language has changed after reading the suttas. The suttas have been more helpful than the English language, so that seemed to be a good solution to feeling ill. English is just a view.

In vipassana we are asked to be optimist.

One can't force themselves or pretend to be optimistic. Instead, optimism, or a positive attitude about life can only come as a result of diligent cultivation of the Path, after a certain degree of Samatha/tranquility and Vipassana/insight have been developed. See Ven. Brahm's excellent essay Joy At Last To Know There Is No Happiness In The World for more details.

"It’s so ironic that Buddhism is called pessimistic. Actually, it’s probably the most optimistic teaching there could be. Human beings have the ability to totally transcend suffering, that’s what the Buddha says. He not only says it, he also gives us a path to follow. He gives us the techniques and he also tells us, “You’ve got to develop these qualities of mind: an enjoyment in the path, persistence in the path, showing interest and sensitivity in what you’re doing, and using your own ingenuity. Make use of them.”"

~ Thanissaro Bhikkhu "The Power to Transcend Suffering" https://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/CrossIndexed/Published/Meditations9/0203n1b1PowertoTranscendSuffering,The.pdf

There is no standardized "Vipassana" and very few people agree on what is vipassana & how to achieve it.

Buddha said "expectation is root"

Did he really?

"Monks, there are these three roots of what is unskillful. Which three? Greed is a root of what is unskillful, aversion is a root of what is unskillful, delusion is a root of what is unskillful.

"Now, there are these three roots of what is skillful. Which three? Lack of greed is a root of what is skillful, lack of aversion is a root of what is skillful, lack of delusion is a root of what is skillful.

There is another way of explaining what is root of all things when asked by people from other schools/sects. If they ask what is the root of all things one should answer

all things are rooted in desire

One can say that expectation creates suffering, but this doesn't have much to do with Buddhism in particular. Expectations are a cause for disappointment, if there are no expectations then there is no disappointment, in that sense it's suffering, this is obvious.
Expectations can be realistic or not-realistic. In the world it is held that unrealistic expectations in particular are a cause for suffering and the realistic one's a cause for equanimity.
In Buddha's teachings expectation itself comes under 'suffering' because it is impermanent.
Optimism is likewise good & necessary if it's tied to wisdom. As example, a person should believe that good behavior will have good expected value and that the doer of good will meet with good fortune when the results of the good deeds mature.
If he didn't believe that then it would be difficult to find motivation to keep up the good behavior especially if met with bad fortune whilst the good has yet to mature.


text:
Normal Deep Breathing vs Buddhism Basic Meditation
What is the difference between normal deep breathing that recommended by all western Doctors vs Buddhism Basic Meditation ?

Difference is one doesn't "force" his breathing in meditation to be long or short, deep or shallow. One's just "aware" of their in and out breaths. If it's a long one, s/he's aware that it's a long one; if it's short, s/he's aware that it's short. (ref: MN 118 )

I guess the different is Buddhism fully focus in mind but medical deep breathing more focus using the organ using the belly ? Correct me from wrong

@ruben2020 can comment also. Sadhu.

Breathing should just be breathing.  That's what makes it hard to follow.

Santa's answer is 100% correct, but I'd add something.  Buddhist breathing doesn't necessarily come out of your nose or mouth.  Watch your breath.  You may discover something interesting.


text:
Visual representation of mind and kamma
Is there a visual representation of how mind looks like with kamma, feelings, emotions, perceptions, attachments etc. Like for example, I tend to visualize lust as a tether that binds us to this human place and locks our mind from our understanding and penetrating the true nature of things as it prevents development of concentration, and thus wisdom. Likewise I am looking for somewhat intuitive understanding of mind and kamma.
Any one?

The famous monkey mind simile of SN 12.61 is one.

"It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to
hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the
mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four
great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four,
five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But
what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by
night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey,
swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of
it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one.
Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's
called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night
arises as one thing and ceases as another.
SN 12.61

The simile of the six animals from SN 35.237 may be fitting your request well. Please see below.
The suttas also contain many such similes, for e.g. the similes of SN 12.63.
Please take a look at AccessToInsight's Index of Similes.

“Bhikkhus, suppose a man with limbs wounded and festering would enter
a wood of thorny reeds, and the Kusa thorns would prick his feet and
the reed blades would slash his limbs. Thus that man would thereby
experience even more pain and displeasure. So too, bhikkhus, some
bhikkhu here, gone to the village or the forest, meets someone who
reproaches him thus: ‘This venerable one, acting in such a way,
behaving in such a way, is a foul village thorn.’ Having understood
him thus as a ‘thorn,’ one should understand restraint and
nonrestraint.
“And how, bhikkhus is there nonrestraint? Here, having seen a form
with the eye, a bhikkhu is intent upon a pleasing form and repelled by
a displeasing form. He dwells without having set up mindfulness of the
body, with a limited mind, and he does not understand as it really is
that liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, wherein those evil
unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having heard a sound with
the ear … Having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind, he is
intent upon a pleasing mental phenomenon and repelled by a displeasing
mental phenomenon. He dwells without having set up mindfulness of the
body, with a limited mind, and he does not understand as it really is
that liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, wherein those evil
unwholesome states cease without remainder.
“Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would catch six animals—with different
domains and different feeding grounds—and tie them by a strong rope.
He would catch a snake, a crocodile, a bird, a dog, a jackal, and a
monkey, and tie each by a strong rope. Having done so, he would tie
the ropes together with a knot in the middle and release them. Then
those six animals with different domains and different feeding grounds
would each pull in the direction of its own feeding ground and domain.
The snake would pull one way, thinking, ‘Let me enter an anthill.’ The
crocodile would pull another way, thinking, ‘Let me enter the water.’
The bird would pull another way, thinking, ‘Let me fly up into the
sky.’ The dog would pull another way, thinking, ‘Let me enter a
village.’ The jackal would pull another way, thinking, ‘Let me enter a
charnel ground.’ The monkey would pull another way, thinking, ‘Let me
enter a forest.’
“Now when these six animals become worn out and fatigued, they would
be dominated by the one among them that was strongest; they would
submit to it and come under its control. So too, bhikkhus, when a
bhikkhu has not developed and cultivated mindfulness directed to the
body, the eye pulls in the direction of agreeable forms and
disagreeable forms are repulsive; the ear pulls in the direction of
agreeable sounds and disagreeable sounds are repulsive; the nose pulls
in the direction of agreeable odours and disagreeable odours are
repulsive; the tongue pulls in the direction of agreeable tastes and
disagreeable tastes are repulsive; the body pulls in the direction of
agreeable tactile objects and disagreeable tactile objects are
repulsive; the mind pulls in the direction of agreeable mental
phenomena and disagreeable mental phenomena are repulsive.
“It is in such a way that there is nonrestraint.
“And how, bhikkhus, is there restraint? Here, having seen a form with
the eye, a bhikkhu is not intent upon a pleasing form and not repelled
by a displeasing form. He dwells having set up mindfulness of the
body, with a measureless mind, and he understands as it really is that
liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, wherein those evil
unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having heard a sound with
the ear … Having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind, he is not
intent upon a pleasing mental phenomenon and not repelled by a
displeasing mental phenomenon. He dwells having set up mindfulness of
the body, with a measureless mind, and he understands as it really is
that liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, wherein those evil
unwholesome states cease without remainder. It is in such a way that
there is restraint.
“Suppose, bhikkhus, a man would catch six animals—with different
domains and different feeding grounds—and tie them by a strong rope.
He would catch a snake, a crocodile, a bird, a dog, a jackal, and a
monkey, and tie each by a strong rope. Having done so, he would bind
them to a strong post or pillar. Then those six animals with different
domains and different feeding grounds would each pull in the direction
of its own feeding ground and domain. The snake would pull one way,
thinking, ‘Let me enter an anthill’ … as above … The monkey would pull
another way, thinking, ‘Let me enter a forest.’
“Now when these six animals become worn out and fatigued, they would
stand close to that post or pillar, they would sit down there, they
would lie down there. So too, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu has developed
and cultivated mindfulness directed to the body, the eye does not pull
in the direction of agreeable forms nor are disagreeable forms
repulsive; the ear does not pull in the direction of agreeable sounds
nor are disagreeable sounds repulsive; the nose does not pull in the
direction of agreeable odours nor are disagreeable odours repulsive;
the tongue does not pull in the direction of agreeable tastes nor are
disagreeable tastes repulsive; the body does not pull in the direction
of agreeable tactile objects nor are disagreeable tactile objects
repulsive; the mind does not pull in the direction of agreeable mental
phenomena nor are disagreeable mental phenomena repulsive.
“It is in such a way that there is restraint.
“‘A strong post or pillar’: this, bhikkhus, is a designation for
mindfulness directed to the body. Therefore, bhikkhus, you should
train yourselves thus: ‘We will develop and cultivate mindfulness
directed to the body, make it our vehicle, make it our basis,
stabilize it, exercise ourselves in it, and fully perfect it.’ Thus
should you train yourselves.”
SN 35.237 - The Simile of the Six Animals


text:
what is difference between sukha and somanassam?
internet is talking more abouut difference between piti and sukha because its important for Jhana   I liked this discussion here Is pīti physical and sukha emotional?
However in VedanA SaSyutta, sukha and somanassa also refered together..
Can you give me  the subtle difference between them.
and similarly what is difference between dukhas and domanassa..

From the SN 48.38:

“Monks, there are these five faculties. Which five? The
pleasure-faculty, the pain-faculty, the happiness-faculty, the
distress-faculty, the equanimity-faculty.
“And what is the pleasure-faculty? Any physical pleasure, physical
comfort born of body-contact to be experienced as pleasure & comfort.
That is called the pleasure-faculty.
“And what is the pain-faculty? Any physical pain, physical discomfort
born of body-contact to be experienced as pain & discomfort. That is
called the pain-faculty.
“And what is the happiness-faculty? Any mental pleasure, mental
comfort born of intellect-contact to be experienced as pleasure &
comfort. That is called the happiness -faculty.
“And what is the distress-faculty? Any mental pain, mental discomfort
born of intellect-contact to be experienced as pain & discomfort. That
is called the distress-faculty.
“And what is the equanimity-faculty? Anything, physical or mental, to
be experienced as neither comfort nor discomfort. That is called the
equanimity-faculty.
“With regard to this, the pleasure-faculty & happiness-faculty are to
be seen as a feeling of pleasure. The pain-faculty & distress-faculty
are to be seen as a feeling of pain. The equanimity-faculty is to be
seen as a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. Thus, by this
exposition, the five are three; and the three, five.”

The Pali can be viewed here

Sukha is defined in the context of feeling: pleasant, painful and neutral.

MN44:24.2: “Sukhā kho, āvuso visākha, vedanā ṭhitisukhā vipariṇāmadukkhā;
MN44:24.2: “Pleasant feeling is pleasant when it remains and painful when it perishes.

MN44:24.4: adukkhamasukhā vedanā ñāṇasukhā aññāṇadukkhā”ti.
MN44:24.4: Neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge, and painful when there is ignorance.”

Somanassa is defined in terms of outcome:

DN21:2.3.11: ‘imaṁ kho me somanassaṁ sevato akusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhanti, kusalā dhammā parihāyantī’ti, evarūpaṁ somanassaṁ na sevitabbaṁ.
DN21:2.3.11: ‘When I cultivate this kind of happiness, unskillful qualities grow, and skillful qualities decline.’ You should not cultivate that kind of happiness.

DN21:2.3.13: ‘imaṁ kho me somanassaṁ sevato akusalā dhammā parihāyanti, kusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhantī’ti, evarūpaṁ somanassaṁ sevitabbaṁ.
DN21:2.3.13: ‘When I cultivate this kind of happiness, unskillful qualities decline, and skillful qualities grow.’ You should cultivate that kind of happiness.

We can also understand these two terms with regard to mindfulness meditation:
Sukha is part of the second kind of mindfulness meditation:

MN10:3.3: They meditate observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.

And somanassa is part of the fourth kind of mindfulness meditation:

MN10:3.5: They meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.

Sukha is experiential and of the moment. Somanassa is subtler in that it requires an understanding and mindfulness of principle.   <-----   Not correct. See my detailed answer on this thread, as SN 48.37 shows. Sukha and Somanassa can both be coarse or subtle, both are experiential, both can be experienced in the present moment.

Good point. Deleted.

See my answer to your question on the difference between sukha and sukha-indriya here: what is difference between sukha and sukhendriyam?
The same sutta referenced for that question, SN 48.37,  also answers your question on the difference between sukha indriya and somanassa indriya (my version of the sutta is annotated showing clearly which factors are physical and mental).
Also, if you study SN 36 suttas carefully, you'll find that sukha (unqualified) and sukha vedana usually referring to physical pleasant sensations. Example of the dart sutta. First you feel the physical sensation of dart, then mental baggage of mental pain is added on unnecessarily. But even a Buddha still feels physical pain of the dart, or physical pleasure of eating a mango for example.


text:
Looking for a book specifically about the 37 factors of enlightenment
Not sure if this is the correct place to ask this question so sorry if it is not.
I am just looking for a book that is specifically about the 37 factors that explains each one in depth.

The Wings to Awakening: An Anthology from the Pāli Canon, by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu. The 37 Wings to Awakening (bodhi-pakkhiya-dhamma) were the Buddha’s own summary of his teachings. This book contains sutta translations organized by topic with relevant discussion by the author. Internal cross-references are hyper-linked in the ebook versions, and in the online version external ones, i.e. to the Suttas, are as well. https://www.dhammatalks.org/books/Wings/Section0001.html

It is inside the path of purification from chapter 14 - chapter 23.
You need to meditate 4th Jhana at mastery level to be a genius one who have professional photographic memory, and you need Abhidhamma knowledge to understand it.
You can also begin with ven. Pa-Auk.
Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga) by Ven. Ñāṇamoli


text:
what is difference between sukha and sukhendriyam?
Moreover inline with this question there is somanassindriya, dukkhindriya, domanassindriya and upekkhindriya?.
And Uppaṭipāṭikasutta says that.
arisen pain faculty (dukkhindriya) ceases without remainder in the first jhAna; the arisen dejection faculty (domanassindriya) ceases without remainder in the second jhAna; the arisen pleasure faculty (sukhindriya) ceases without remainder in the third jhAna; the arisen joy faculty (somanassindriya) ceases without remainder in the fourth jhAna; the arisen equanimity faculty (upekkhindriya) ceases without remainder in the saññAvedayitanirodha.9

“Monks, there are these five faculties. Which five? The
pleasure-faculty, the pain-faculty, the happiness-faculty, the
distress-faculty, the equanimity-faculty.
“And what is the pleasure-faculty? Any physical pleasure, physical
comfort born of body-contact to be experienced as pleasure & comfort.
That is called the pleasure-faculty.
“And what is the pain-faculty? Any physical pain, physical discomfort
born of body-contact to be experienced as pain & discomfort. That is
called the pain-faculty.
“And what is the happiness-faculty? Any mental pleasure, mental
comfort born of intellect-contact to be experienced as pleasure &
comfort. That is called the happiness -faculty.
“And what is the distress-faculty? Any mental pain, mental discomfort
born of intellect-contact to be experienced as pain & discomfort. That
is called the distress-faculty.
“And what is the equanimity-faculty? Anything, physical or mental, to
be experienced as neither comfort nor discomfort. That is called the
equanimity-faculty.
“With regard to this, the pleasure-faculty & happiness-faculty are to
be seen as a feeling of pleasure. The pain-faculty & distress-faculty
are to be seen as a feeling of pain. The equanimity-faculty is to be
seen as a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. Thus, by this
exposition, the five are three; and the three, five.”
SN 48.38

SN 48.37 gives the most detailed answer on this, as far as the difference between sukha and sukha-indriya.
https://lucid24.org/sn/sn48/sn48-037/index.html
In short, sukha vedana = sukha indriya + so-manssa indriya.
Meaning, 'sukha' unqualified could be referring to either or both of those.
SN 48.40 (Uppāṭika sutta) is a corrupt Theravada sutta, I do a detailed analysis here
https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2021/05/sn-4840-de-corrupting-and-reconstructing.html
which also contains a link to Tse Fu Kuan's excellent research PDF file, comparing SN 48.40 to a few different versions preserved in other Early Buddhist schools showing the differences.
Late Theravada had an agenda in redefining jhāna.
Even if you just stay within Theravada school, you can see SN 48.40 contradicts
AN 5.176
https://lucid24.org/an/an05/an05-0176/index.html
Where the Jhāna factors would not cease in the order as the corrupt SN 48.40 shows.

thanks. But now new comfision. I to thought phassa or sense impression is only phisical part.Now if you say sukh is phisical then how it is different from phassa

Or probably sukh is phisical plesantness of phassa... Not sure

Moreover here phisical means hormonal/emotional? Because if it is somaatic phisical then there is another word piti.

See these suttas in SN 36 https://lucid24.org/sn/sn36/index.html to get a better sense of what the physical cause of sukha is: suttas using 3 fold vedana scheme where anatomical body is the cause of vedana
suttas SN 36.4, SN 36.6, SN 36.7, SN 36.12, SN 36.13

Phassa, contact means the meeting of internal sense base, external object, and consciousness (awareness of the raw sensory data). So using the dart sutta example again, if you had an anaesthetic applied to your arm so it was numb, then shot by a dart there, there wouldnh't be phassa for the arm from dukkha physical pain, because the anaesthesia would have prevent the contact/meeting of the the 3 things, blocking the dukkha vedana from appearing. But the internal and external sense objects are still physical, still there. It's lack of contact that's preventig vedana from arising.

so-manassa, and do-manasaa, or good mental states, bad mental states. In 7 awakening factors pīti is desscribed as "pīti manassa", an enraptured minde, whereas sukha is described as immediately following the pacified relaxed body "passaddha kāyassa sukhino"


text:
whether tripitak talk about marananusati or maranassati?
I find many monks  discussing about marananusati... however I never find this word in tripitak.  Instead I find maranassati.
Do buddha ever talked about marananusati.

So, you are asking about "recollection or remembrance of death" vs. "mindfulness of death"?

yes. but I am not asking meaning . I am asking about reference for marananusati.? where it has stated in tripitaka?

Your question context are slightly crude.

In the Tipitaka/Sutta "Sati" is defined as "Saritaa or Anussaritaa" which is "Sati or Anussati". Atthakata/Visuddhimagga says Anussati is "Repeated Sati". No text says Sati is present moment.

Yes Marananussathi is discussed in Tipitaka. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but Maranassathi and Marananussathi are same isn't it?
Please refer

KN 1 (Mahāniddesa - Aṭṭhakavagga  -> 1. Kāmasuttaniddesa).

Buddhānussatiṁ bhāventopi vikkhambhanato kāme parivajjeti,
dhammānussatiṁ bhāventopi …pe… saṅghānussatiṁ bhāventopi …
sīlānussatiṁ bhāventopi … cāgānussatiṁ bhāventopi … devatānussatiṁ
bhāventopi … ānāpānassatiṁ bhāventopi … Variant: ānāpānassatiṁ →
ānāpānasatiṁ (bj); ānāpāṇassatiṁ (pts-vp-pli1)maraṇassatiṁ bhāventopi
… kāyagatāsatiṁ bhāventopi … upasamānussatiṁ bhāventopi vikkhambhanato
kāme parivajjeti.

Buddhānussatiṁ bhāventopi vikkhambhanato kāme parivajjeti,
dhammānussatiṁ bhāventopi …pe… saṅghānussatiṁ bhāventopi …
sīlānussatiṁ bhāventopi … cāgānussatiṁ bhāventopi … devatānussatiṁ
bhāventopi … ānāpānassatiṁ bhāventopi … Variant: ānāpānassatiṁ →
ānāpānasatiṁ (bj); ānāpāṇassatiṁ (pts-vp-pli1)maraṇassatiṁ bhāventopi
… kāyagatāsatiṁ bhāventopi … upasamānussatiṁ bhāventopi vikkhambhanato
kāme parivajjeti.

Also see,

AN8.73 Paṭhamamaraṇassatisutta

AN6.20 Dutiyamaraṇassatisutta

There is difference betwewen anusati and sati. anusati is remembering. whereas sati is in present moment.

@enRaiser Can you find that difference in Tipitaka? Where you found Sati is present moment?

for that there will not be single line.. what you need to do is, search all the occurrence of SAti and anusati and make sense from the context they are used. for example satima means be mindful. but you will not find any word like anusatima.  THeer is another word patisati whi means mare mindfulness.

I don't care whatever people think "is this wholesome is in Tipitaka or not?" because  it's always truth whether "maraṇassatiṃ bhāveti" is an important meditation no matter whatever people said.
ekakanipāta,pāḷi 43 paṇṇe

maraṇasaññaṃ bhāveti… āhāre paṭikūlasaññaṃ bhāveti… sabbaloke anabhiratisaññaṃ [anabhiratasaññaṃ (sī. syā. kaṃ. pī.)] bhāveti…
aniccasaññaṃ bhāveti… anicce dukkhasaññaṃ bhāveti… dukkhe anattasaññaṃ
bhāveti… pahānasaññaṃ bhāveti… virāgasaññaṃ bhāveti… nirodhasaññaṃ
bhāveti….
[463-472] aniccasaññaṃ bhāveti… anattasaññaṃ bhāveti… maraṇasaññaṃ
bhāveti… āhāre paṭikūlasaññaṃ bhāveti… sabbaloke anabhiratisaññaṃ
bhāveti… aṭṭhikasaññaṃ bhāveti… puḷavakasaññaṃ [puḷuvakasaññaṃ (ka.)]
bhāveti… vinīlakasaññaṃ bhāveti… vicchiddakasaññaṃ bhāveti…
uddhumātakasaññaṃ bhāveti….
[473-482] buddhānussatiṃ bhāveti… dhammānussatiṃ bhāveti…
saṅghānussatiṃ bhāveti… sīlānussatiṃ bhāveti… cāgānussatiṃ bhāveti…
devatānussatiṃ bhāveti… ānāpānassatiṃ bhāveti… maraṇassatiṃ
bhāveti… kāyagatāsatiṃ bhāveti… upasamānussatiṃ bhāveti….

Upajjhatthana Sutta: Subjects for Contemplation
(Actually it's not often do, it is always doing continuously.)

"There are these five facts that one should reflect on often, whether
one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained. Which five?
"'I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' This is the
first fact that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or
a man, lay or ordained.
"'I am subject to illness, have not gone beyond illness.' ...
"'I am subject to death, have not gone beyond death.' ...
"'I will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing
to me.' ...
"'I am the owner of my actions,2 heir to my actions, born of my
actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my
arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall
heir.' ...
"These are the five facts that one should reflect on often, whether
one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained.
...

And much more Suttas.

Meditation basically into to stages
01.Samatha
02.Vidarshana[Vipassana]
To Investigate about this real world we need to acquire a Samadhi. For this purposes lord buddha taught us those meditation methods.
Lord buddha showed us 40 ways to conduct meditation and those 40 ways called "Sama Sathalis Karmasthana". Those who wanted to start meditaion, first need to identify him or herself. Their characters. Then accordingly they need to choose their Karmasthana.
Karmasthana basically works against their characteristics and bring them neutral or clam.  Example: If you are an angered person you need to practise Metta Bhavana. if you are a lusty person you need to practise asubha bhavana.  If you cannot figure out where you place yourself exactly start with Anapanasathi.
That is why we are advised to take Monks or Guru's guidance and advices before starting the meditation.  To select suitable "Kamatana". Not only that while meditating you may be arising questions or points that need to sortout then and there and clear the mind about those questions. I am talking about the meditation that leads to Nibbana.
Those 40 methods are:
These 40 classic and orthodox meditation subjects are:
I. The 10 Kasina  exercises: Kasina = 'Entirety'. All 4 jhānas possible.
1: Earth kasina,
2: Water kasina,
3: Fire kasina,
4: Wind kasina,
5: Blue kasina,
6: Yellow kasina,
7: Red kasina,
8: White kasina,
9: Light or consciousness kasina,
10: Space kasina.
II. The 10 perceptions of disgust: asubha-sañña: 1st jhāna possible:

A swollen and bloated corpse,
a bluish livid corpse,
a rotting corpse,
a cut-up and split corpse,
a gnawed corpse,
a hacked corpse,
a spread scattered corpse,
a bloody corpse,
a corpse of maggots,
a skeleton.

III. The 10 contemplations: remembrances or recollections anussati:

On the Buddha,
The Dhamma,
The Noble Sangha community,
Morality,
Generosity,
Heavenly divine beings,
Death-Marananussathi,
7.1.  To Learn More Click this Link,
7.2.  More about Marana sathi,
7.3.  How to Start Meditating on Death (A Guide for Beginners),
Body,
In-and-out-breathing: All 4 jhānas  possible!,
Peace.

IV. The 4 divine abodes or infinite states: brahma-vihāra:

All-embracing friendliness = mettā,
Pity = karunā,
Mutual joy = muditā,
Equanimity = upekkhā,
All 4 jhānas successively possible.

V. The 4 formless spheres arūpāyatana: based on the 4th jhāna:

The infinitude of space,
The infinitude of consciousness,
Empty nothingness,
Neither-perception-nor-non-perception.

VI. Perception of the loathsomeness of food āhāre patikkūla-saññā:
VII. Defining Analysis of the four great elements dhātu-vavatthāna:.
Now you know Where exactly Marananussathi Bhawana includes in Buddhism.  Also, above articles I saw many sutta's mentioned about Marananussathi. Follow the links that you have provided so that you can learn more about meditaion.
May Triple Gem Bless You!!!

The question is very simple and sort. Is it maranassati or marnanusati. Or both.and uf both what's difference?

There is no difference both are same.  Just the two words using same thing.  marana sathi in Sinhala marananussathi in Pali that also using in Sinhala.  The issue sometimes Google Translation getting differently  because of the typing language.


text:
Meaning in pancasila benefit
I am a Buddhist from Thailand. I have a question about pali meaning.
In ceremony, we swore to follow the five rules of pancasila. Monk told us what pancasila consist of. Then monk said in pali;
Imani panca sikha patani.
Silana sukating yanti
Silana poka sumpata
Silana nipputing yanti
Tusama silang wiso ta ye
I'm not quit sure whether I translate the above to English word correctly. Do you have this chants in your country? What are these chants called? Any reference to this chant? How to spell it in English and what is the meaning of it.
I already searched in Thai language but I want to expand to English as well. It's quit hard to write Pali in English.
Here is the meaning I found in Thai.
As you follow these five rules, you will have good place to go(next life). You will become wealthy. And you may go to nirvana.
I want to compare its meaning from many source especially "ni-pu-ting" in last sentence that referred to nirvana. I don't quit agree that it is the same thing.

"Do you have this chants in your country?": I'm from Sri Lanka and these chants are not used.

@Sampath, Thank, maybe not all theravada  has this chant

I want to compare its meaning from many source especially "ni-pu-ting" in last sentence that referred to nirvana.
Another translation here

Sīlena nibbutiṁ yanti.
Through virtue they go to Liberation.
因持戒故，使你达证涅盘

I think it's these words -- nibbuta and nibbuti

This chant is a different but has some overlap
"Sīlena sugatiṃ yanti,
Sīlena bhoga‧sampadā,
Sīlena nibbutiṃ yanti,
Tasmā sīlaṃ visodhaye."
and the English
" Sīla is the way to a good life,
Sīla is the source of true wealth,
Sīla leads to true peace,
Therefore, let Sīla be pure!"