text:
role of imagination
The ability to believe in something is a function of the imagination.  The power of belief is the power of the imagination.  How does one differentiate between conceptualizing and using one's imagination ?

I don't find this question clear (don't understand the question). Might it help to add some examples? E.g. an example of "believing in something", an example of "imagination", and an example of "conceptualizing" ... and/or explain what real-life problem you're trying to solve by asking this question.

On perception, verballization arises, on verb. one acts. So most importand.

Imagination happens in one's mind (sixth sense in Buddha's teaching).
First, you have a "subject" to think.
Second, you memorize the "subject".
Third, you determine the "subject".
Forth, you decide the subject is good or bad.
Fifth, you like or dislike the "subject".
(For the above sentences, I am referring to Diga Nikaya. Silakkhanda Vagga, 9:416 but the reference text didn't directly answer your question)
Imagination composes of one or more subjects (many impacts of subject and mind) above. Subjects could be related or non-related each other.
Conceptualization composes of many subjects (also many impacts of subject and mind) which are related and interact each other in a way to achieve the "Concept".
Belief is  - making strong decision that imagination or concept is wright or wrong (or you take the concept in your heart that you like or dislike) but belief is more like on process/concept which is more concrete in sense than imagination (which is more abstract in sense). Imagination is cornerstone of belief (but in some cases there are many imaginations come and go in the mind without being mature to be a concept and to be a belief eventually).
There are many references in Tripitaka as far as I read in before, but for me it difficult to pinpoint the exact paragraph. So if anyone who frequent in these can comment or add more precise reference answer here

The ability to believe in something is a function of the imagination.

View are mental constructions as they break down under scrutiny at a lower level of abstraction.1 Since an average person cannot discern the realities at lower levels of abstraction develop confidence in these views as permanent, pleasant, self and beautiful.
See: Vipallasa Sutta

The power of belief is the power of the imagination.

Certain beliefs arise thought logical or imaginative thinking or attractiveness of a teaching or what has been imagined. Many wrong beliefs stem from imagination as discussed in the Brahmajala Sutta. But finally what you should believe is what you can verify at the experiential level.

How does one differentiate between conceptualizing and using one's imagination?

Conceptualisations are the result of imagination (or thinking) and discerning them is difficult as they are subjected perversion of thought (citta vipallāsa). When you start seeing the ultimate realities then you can see that certain concepts break down at a lower level of abstraction, then these are the conceptualisation of one's own imagination.
Also see: The Notion of Diṭṭhi by Piya Tan, The Dhamma Theory: Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa for more on these areas.

1

But what is a chariot? Nagasena asked. Is it the wheels, or the axles, or the reigns, or the frame, or the seat, or the draught pole? Is it a combination of those elements? Or is it found outside those elements?
The King answered no to each question. Then there is no chariot! Nagasena said.
Now the King acknowledged the designation "chariot" depended on these constituent parts, but that "chariot" itself is a concept, or a mere name.
Just so, Nagasena said, "Nagasena" is a designation for something conceptual. It is a mere name. When the constituent parts are present we call it a chariot; When the Five Skandhas are present, we call it a being.
...
Another way to understand the chariot simile is to imagine the chariot being taken apart. At what point in the dis-assembly does the chariot cease to be a chariot? We can update the simile to make it an automobile. As we disassemble the car, at what point is it not a car? When we take off the wheels? When we remove the seats? When we pry off the cylinder head?
Any judgment we make is subjective. Perhaps you may argue that a pile of car parts is still a car, just not an assembled one. The point is, though, that "car" and "chariot" are concepts we project onto the constituent parts. But there is no "car" or "chariot" essence that somehow dwells within the parts.

O'Brien, Barbara. "King Milinda's Questions and the Chariot Simile." Learn Religions, Jun. 25, 2019, https://www.learnreligions.com/king-milindas-questions-450052.

Hmmm... I would say, the ability to believe in something is a function of dhyana. The power of belief is the power of mindfulness matured to the power of visualization/concentration (samadhi).
Conceptualization (in context of Buddhism) is confusing abstractions/projections for reality.
When you think your abstraction/projection is reality you are a victim of your mind, you are not master of your mind. When you actively use your mindfulness/concentration to control your belief you are the master of your mind. That's the difference.

Superficially, imagination and conceptualization clearly have shared attributes and different connotations. Using philosophical analysis, a person (after a good deal of reflection) could come up with the rules that govern their application. The unconscious mental processes that contribute to experiencing them are beyond the grasp of modern psychology. Indeed, we can marvel at the unconscious sophistication and intelligence that goes into causing common experience. But these explorations are not relevant to the practice of Buddhist mindfulness meditation.

+1 "we can marvel at the unconscious sophistication and intelligence that goes into causing common experience"

Every thought, feeling, and motive you experience is influenced by a multitude of relevant experiences acquired in previous lifetimes. This is the influence of the karma of past lifetimes. It is infinitely complex.

The ability to believe is a function of karma ( in your words - imagination). Conceptualising is the follow on activity based on one's karma.
Buddha thought the 12 dependant arisings. Good to understand 12 dependent arisings.


text:
Being mindful sitting/working on a computer
I find being mindful while sitting on a computer very hard.
Most movements with mouse/keyboard are happening so fast and intuitive that it's very hard to be conscious of what the actual intention (by clicking on/typing this or that) is; often this also leads me into restlessness or loosing track of time;
I'm sure this is a common phenomenon. Are there certain tricks/tips by which one can be more aware while sitting/working on a computer?

I find being mindful while sitting on a computer very hard.

Being mindful of what you are going is good but not always the right mindfulness.
What you can pratice in such a situation:

Mindfulness of posture by looking at the touch of the body with the chair and clothes
Sensations that arise in the body and mind

Most movements with mouse/keyboard are happening so fast and intuitive that it's very hard to be conscious of what the actual intention (by clicking on/typing this or that) is; often this also leads me into restlessness or loosing track of time;

Intention does not matter if it is hard to keep track of initially. Just concentrate on the sensations that arise. Sometimes when you cannot fix a piece of code or perhaps under pressure then these situations also give sensations. Be mindful of them.

I'm sure this is a common phenomenon. Are there certain tricks/tips by which one can be more aware while sitting/working on a computer?

Takes the whole body or the body as part by part and direct your attention to these parts. Initially when you feel a sensation on some part more on. When you can feel sensations throughout the body then they to divide and dicest the sensations to see them at more lower level of granularity.
Since you are seated mostly be mindful of your posture and sensations it brings. Once you have been in one posture for some time you might get a urge to more. Look at these sensation. Also the texture of your cloths touching you. The touch of the atmosphere on the exposed parts of your body. Heat of cold or the environment you work in and perhaps perspiration running down your body if you perspire. And also the touch of the chair. Touch of the keys when your fingers hit the keyboard.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Unnecessarily Complicated Analysis of Anapanasati
Alright, I'm having a lot of unnecessary trouble, and would like some advice regarding anapanasati. I've attempted to understand the technique as with the Anapanasati Sutta, with The Attention Revolution of Alan Wallace, with Turning the Mind into an Ally by Sakyong Mipham, and have taken many classes of meditation in different contexts. Still, I am having extreme trouble lol. Therefore, I'm going to attempt asking extremely detailed questions to clarify the meaning for myself, and hopefully others.
To my understand, from The Attention Revolution explicitly and in the Anapanasati Sutta in the form of the directive to "calm bodily fabrications", relaxation is necessary.
Question 1: Do they mean calming the body's physical tension, i.e. muscle tension or the mental sensation of tension in the body?
Now, in The Attention Revolution and Turning the Mind into an Ally, stability comes next. This occurs with the decrease of conceptualization. Yet in the Abhidhamma I recall seeing that until the first jhana thought is still present. What does this mean?
Question 2: What do we mean by calming thoughts? Calming all thoughts? Gross thoughts? Trying to calm thoughts even though they will not ultimately subside?
Then, from my understanding clarity is developed. Personally, in all these texts, I fail to grasp what is meant by clarity.
Question 3: Is clarity a kind of brightness of the object, or a greater focus? Is clarity a more detailed object? Is it a part of the object or the mind? How can it be recognized?
Final question: I seem to have tried to figure out all these things and meditate in a proper way. Yet, if I sit and try to meditate every day, and attempt to focus on the breathing, and I meditating in a proper way? I don't quite get what distinguishes proper and improper meditation, and whether I should meditate or not when possible. How long should it take to see either results or a shift in my meditation.
Thank you for any advice you could give me.

I think you are intellectualizing meditation too much. You'll know it when your mind is clear & calm, so don't worry about it when it's not. There are 5 hindrances which prevent clarity (the 5. one is doubt). Try to drop your concepts during meditation. Meditation is not about doing more or gaining something, it's about doing less!

calm bodily fabrications

Calm the bodily fabrications is to calm the breath. This is not by controlling it but having the intention but not the action to calm the breath. In many cases you don't need even this. It will calm down on it's own.
More on this see: page 35, Knowing and Seeing 4th Ed by Pa-Auk Sayadaw and Lecture 3 in Anapanasati: Mindfulness with Breathing - Unveiling the Secrets of Life by Ven Buddhadasa Bhikkhu
Preceding to trying to calm your your fabrication you should feel the whole body and breath otherwise this step will be premature. This is you should be able the feel the whole breath as well as you body. When breathing there are sensations that arise tied to breathing elsewhere in your body like expansion and contraction. You should be able to feel all this as well as any feeling even in remote areas of your body like your earlobes, toes, etc.

Question 1: Do they mean calming the body's physical tension, i.e. muscle tension or the mental sensation of tension in the body?

Calm the bodily fabrications is not the same as claiming physical tension thought this also seeds to be done.
You have to let go of physical and mental tension. These tensions manifest as an unpleasant sensation. You should look closely at these sensations as mere sensations without any aversion towards it. For a beginners you should try to divide and dicest the pain to see its constituent parts. If you can see it's arising and passing nature then perhaps you can concentrate on this. Initially even when you look at it the pain linger for a while. Not to worry just let go of this bring it to your meditation object. At later stages once you have look at its arising and passing nature the pain will just disappear. Do not wish or crave for this in which case this might not happen.
In summary the way to release tension is to try to see the tension or pain clearly and closely and once you see it its arising and passing nature.
Maha Saccaka Sutta your body should not be stained. So if your are fatigues maybe try lying posture. Also if you muscles are tensed loosen them. Sometimes you facial muscles may become tense. Best way to loosen them is to smile. Also smiling reduces tension and brings about pleasant or neutral sensations.

This occurs with the decrease of conceptualization.

Conceptualisation happens in verbal fabrication. Verbal fabrications is not explicitly mentioned in the Anapana Sutta but should be calmed before calming the mental fabrication. This can be achived by keeping your attention focused on a object you are bringing down creation of new verbal fabrications. In the Abhidhamma there is 5 fold Jhana classification. In the Sutta there a 4 fold classification. In the Suttas the 1st and 2nd Jhana in the Abhidhamma system is amalgamated into one. The 1st Jhana has initial application and the 2nd Jhana is sustained application in the Abhidhamma system and in the Sutta system both initial and sustained application is considered in the 1st Jhana. Initial and sustained application is what enables thinking and conceptualisation. Once these fall away (Abhidhamma 3rd Jhana and Sutta 2nd Jhana) there is no conceptualisation or the mind does not have the ability to think or conceptualise. The definition of verbal fabrication is found in Cūla Vedalla Sutta and Aṭṭhaka,nāgara Sutta mention how verbal fabrication is stilled after the 1st Jhana.

Question 2: What do we mean by calming thoughts? Calming all thoughts? Gross thoughts? Trying to calm thoughts even though they will not ultimately subside?

This is to reduce verbal fabrication as discussed above. The main thing here is trying to reduce them. You have to have sustained effort to calm the fabrication by 1st anchoring the mind on an object then then continuously reviewing if it is with the object and re directing it to the object when it wanders away and perhaps even when it still is focused on the object followed by trying to see the object more clearly and closely. What you have to do is try and not develop aversion if you cannot sustain your attention and also not crave or get too attached to the object of being able to keep the mind with the object.
Breath meditation does have calming mental fabrication. This not claiming thoughts calming the perceptions and feelings, i.e., you do not perceive pleasant as agreeable and unpleasant as agreeable. In the Jhanic route this is in the 4th Jhana.
Also keep an eye on potential answers to this question: How does one calm one's bodily fabrications?

Question 3: Is clarity a kind of brightness of the object, or a greater focus? Is clarity a more detailed object? Is it a part of the object or the mind? How can it be recognized?

Once you keep trying to stay with the object followed by looking closely and clearly in more detail as per its construction and nature, as time progresses you will start seeing the object more clearly and in detail.
If the object or meditation is mind made then the clarity would of this object. If it is related to arising and passing then the clarity would be of this nature.
Looking closely is synonymous with Jhana in some definitions. See: What exactly is Jhana?

Final question: I seem to have tried to figure out all these things and meditate in a proper way. Yet, if I sit and try to meditate every day, and attempt to focus on the breathing, and I meditating in a proper way? I don't quite get what distinguishes proper and improper meditation, and whether I should meditate or not when possible. How long should it take to see either results or a shift in my meditation.

The worry you are having here might become a hindrance as you are not sure of your pratice. In Breath meditation in most cases you should just try look at things as they are and not control it. A few places you have to be active is to relax body and mind and also calm the fabrication.
What is proper meditation is if the meditation helps reduce your mental defilements. If your pratice feeds into it you are doing it wrong. See Pahāna Sutta which is a short description of letting go of the roots and Avijja Pahana Sutta 2 which concentrated on ignorance.
Also measuring the time to see results or longing for results lead further away from eradicating the mental defilements as this is a form of craving. The results will manifest itself when you have properly let gone (including searching for a result and measuring progress) and not creating any more conditioning / fabrication and past stock of conditioning / fabrication have been depleted.
Also see: Ānâpāna,sati Sutta

Thank you very much for the answer! I do have a question though, when you say "you should be able to feel the whole body / whole breath" does this mean one should practice meditating on body sensations before engaging in the breath, ideally? I do not feel much bodily sensations.

This can help but you can also focus on a pinhead point on the centre of the upper lip and you mindfulness stick expand this to your whole body.

It appears obvious vitakka & vicara are the "verbal fabricator" rather than the "verbal fabrication". As stated in MN 44: "Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabricators". Vitakka & vicara are 'cause' and verbal speech is 'effect'. Refer to the Buddhadasa book you posted.

One would have thought that the breath would have been the simplest of objects to meditate upon :)
Well it is.
The first 4 steps of being mindful of the in-breath and out-breath according to the Ananapanasati Sutta are

Aware that the in-breath is long one breathes in / aware that the
out-breath is long one breathes out
Aware that the in-breath is short one breathes in / aware that the
out-breath is short one breathes out

This requirement to evaluate the breath (not control it), helps the mind be mindful of the breath.
As the mind is mindful of the breath, one will be able to experience one's whole body (sabba kaaya), albeit subtly, as the inhaling and exhaling motions generate sensations throughout the body.
As one continues to be mindful of these subtle whole-body sensations, one will begin to be aware that the breath (kaaya sankhara, i.e. the bodily formation) is now calming or calmer than before.
This calmness is peaceful, tranquil, free from the disturbance of lust and conflict, non drowsy, free from anxiety.

Question 1: Do they mean calming the body's physical tension, i.e. muscle tension or the mental sensation of tension in the body?

There's debate over what these passages mean. See this question: How is the Pali Phase “Sabbakayapatisamvedi Assasissami… passasissamiti sikkhati…” Interpreted as per Different Linage?
In short, it is not crystal clear if kaya should be taken as the physical body or as the breath, and people have different takes on this.

Now, in The Attention Revolution and Turning the Mind into an Ally, stability comes next. This occurs with the decrease of conceptualization. Yet in the Abhidhamma I recall seeing that until the first jhana thought is still present. What does this mean?

In the first jhana, vitakka ("applied thought") and vicāra ("sustained thought") are present. The Visuddhimagga explains them as:
Herein, applied thinking (vitakkana) is applied thought (vitakka); hitting upon, is what is meant. It has the characteristic of directing the mind on to an object (mounting the mind on its object). Its function is to strike at and thresh—for the meditator is said, in virtue of it, to have the object struck at by applied thought, threshed by applied thought. It is manifested as the leading of the mind onto an object. Sustained thinking (vicaraóa) is sustained thought (vicára); continued sustainment (anusañcaraóa), is what is meant. It has the characteristic of continued pressure on (occupation with) the object. Its function is to keep conascent [mental] states [occupied] with that. It is manifested as keeping consciousness anchored [on that object]

Question 2: What do we mean by calming thoughts? Calming all thoughts? Gross thoughts? Trying to calm thoughts even though they will not ultimately subside?

I take you refer to the passage containing "calming mental fabrication". Yes, calm the thoughts.

Question 3: Is clarity a kind of brightness of the object, or a greater focus? Is clarity a more detailed object? Is it a part of the object or the mind? How can it be recognized?

It is both improved ability of insight and the (consequential) capacity to deeply discriminate that which the mind directs to.

Final question: I seem to have tried to figure out all these things and meditate in a proper way. Yet, if I sit and try to meditate every day, and attempt to focus on the breathing, and I meditating in a proper way? I don't quite get what distinguishes proper and improper meditation, and whether I should meditate or not when possible. How long should it take to see either results or a shift in my meditation.

I'm not sure how to answer that. Maybe finding a teacher and/or doing longer retreats may help you on how to evaluate your practice?

The almost universal tenuous translation "bodily fabrications" is of the Pali word "kaya sankhara". The "kaya sankhara" is defined in the Culavedalla Sutta as the in & out breathing. Therefore, calming the kaya sankhara means calming the breath. There is nothing to debate here.
This demonstrates the proper translation of kaya sankhara should be "body fabricator" or "body conditioner", as explained in 'Anapanasati: Mindfulness with Breathing - Unveiling the Secrets of Life' by Ven Buddhadasa Bhikkhu.
As for vitakka & vicara in the 1st jhana, there is no need for the beginner meditator to be concerned about this since the 1st jhana is too advanced for the beginner.

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


text:
Is anxiety connected to the three unwholesome roots?
I have read that anxiety/worry is unwholesome. Is this because it is a form of aversion, one of the three unwholesome roots, or something else?

Anxiety/worry taken together are one of the five "nīvarana" in the Buddha Dhamma. "Nīvarana" are states of mind that conceals, hinders, covers, prevents the understanding of the true nature things.
Restlessness (uddhacca) and worry (kukkucca)

Restlessness (uddhacca) has the characteristic of disquietude,
  like water whipped by the wind. Its function is to make the mind
  unsteady, as the wind makes a banner ripple. It is manifested as
  turmoil. Its proximate cause is unwise attention to mental disquiet.
Kukkucca is worry or remorse after having done wrong. Its
  characteristic is subsequent regret. Its function is to sorrow over
  what has and what has not been done. It is manifested as remorse. Its
  proximate cause is what has and what has not been done (i.e. wrongs of
  commission and omission).

Bhikkhu Bodhi

Is this because it is a form of aversion, one of the three unwholesome
  roots, or something else?

Yes, and could also be caused by the other 2 unwholesome roots as well. Anxiety can be due to a state of conflict. The mind in a fight or flight situation. Or caused by a state of desire, an expectation, or a state of ignorance.
Restlessness and worry are painful states of existence.
You can find more about the 5 Hindrances here and recommendations on how to overcome them.
May you be happy.

Can you please give me a link of the source of the definition by Bhikkhu Bodhi?

@OidaOudenEidos : https://books.google.com.au/books?id=ACrogsyJmoAC&q=vitakka&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=kukkucca&f=false


text:
I get rapid eye movement as soon as meditation starts
I saw a question about rapid eye movement when meditating, which from what I know is similar to REM sleep and the experience I had is a little bit different. As the title says I get the eye movement with in a few seconds and the only difference is the top of both my eyes hurt a little and can be distracting sometimes. Is it good that I can get this so fast?  Does it mean some kind of raise in consciousness or even more concentration may come soon?
I have only recently noticed this this week and I meditate about 20 minutes.

Possible duplicate of eye movement during meditation

In short this can be due to:

past fabrications surfacing rapidly and creating uncommon experiences
perhaps less likely but a possibility is Piti which sometimes create vibrating and / or pulsating experiences

Also see: eye movement during meditation
These experiences are neither good nor bad. Also do not get attached or averse to them. In additions concentrate on the task at hand than giving importance and distracting your self when there experiences do arise in your meditation session.

I guess I will just have to experience it for my self and find out that way. Thank you.

Is it good that I can get this so fast?

Why do you assume getting REM during meditation is a good thing?
Buddhist meditation is about stilling/calming the mind and body, about contemplating the truths to break free from the ten fetters. Getting REM and the eyes hurting is more distraction and suffering.
When humans get REM in sleep, they are unaware of such REMs. Instead they usually are external signs that the person asleep is dreaming. For a person to be consciously be aware of his/her REMs during Buddhist meditation session is not a desired goal or experience. Therefore I would have to say no, its not a good thing.

Does it mean some kind of raise in consciousness or even more concentration may come soon?

No in my experience.
Strongly suggest that you speak with a respected and experienced meditation instructor.
What happens when you just close your eyes? Do you get REM then? If so, I would also recommend seeing a GP.
May you be happy.

I asking "is it good" as in is it good or bad. I have martial arts instructors who have plenty of experience. And no the REM only happens during meditation

@Morihei1883:I've added to my answer above. You say that you get REM within seconds of starting meditation. Usually, the physiology of the 1st few seconds of most meditators, is no different from a person simply closing one's eyes & taking a few breaths. The main difference is intention. So if you just close your eyes & take a few breaths without the intention to meditate and do NOT get REM, but if you do the same with the intention of meditating for long and do get REM, then that's something you will have to discuss with an experienced meditation instructor. I do not think its a good thing.

I forgot to add my breathing is always deep even out of my meditation. My intention is rarely negative. I will be careful from now on but from what I know REM sleep is where you dream, so could it be a vision is emerging. I have had some struggles with abusing marijuana not so long ago, and I've heard drugs cloud the mind's eye. Still this makes me too worried to meditate now. Should I stop? thank you for the feedback

@Morihei1883: Yes, REM is an outward sign that someone asleep is dreaming. However, the person asleep is not aware of the REM. What sort of meditation do you practice? Do you have a guide/teacher? I cannot comment further, but it seems that you may have some very strong expectations of your meditation practice. In Buddhism meditation is used for letting go and letting the mind calm. Do not stop, keep searching. I wish you well.


text:
What is "thukdam"?
I was reading an article in National Geographic about death, in which there was a brief reference to "thukdam". This was described as a form of meditation that takes place in India, during which monks meditate for a week or more with no biological processes occurring in their bodies (essentially, their bodies are dead), and then come out of the meditation with no apparent consequences. What is this meditation and could someone provide references for further info?
Thanks

See also Meditating dead monks.

An article on the topic: http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=22935

Tukdam is a state of meditation that is practiced by highly realized masters of Buddhism. They do go into a near death state that is called Ground Luminosity, generally for 3-4 days. They neither eat nor drink during this time, and are not moved or touched until they arise on there own. Then at the time a master senses his own death is eminent, he will enage in this meditation until death, at which point the body is left undisturbed for three days, so that the consciousness can fully exit the body.

Good explanation.  A relevant study may also be the Jhanas, and the neither-perception-nor-non-perception absorption, which is not liberative, but can suspend.

I think it happens to the one who is fully dedicated to the holly book n concentrate on Buddha which I can give example of our lama who died last week n he is still in thukdam now


text:
if rebirth/reincarnation is true then what is your first birth/incarnation?
I think the question is clear so no further explanation is needed.

Question closed due to being primarily opinion-based and too subjective in nature. Please see "What types of questions should I avoid asking?" in the Help Center.

this question falls under "Acinteyya" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acinteyya ,

@Lanka I think this question should be reopened. The Tibetan Buddhist answer to this is specific, and I believe the other schools of Buddhism are in agreement that there is no first cause, no first birth.

actually I think it is a duplicate of http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/9973/first-life-in-samsara/14660#14660

@Hellyale. I will reopen the question as I see it has gained upvotes and that 3 users have submitted reopen-votes. I still think the question is lacking content and is too subjective in nature. Lets see what happens from here.

Do you think someone might have asked that question before?
According to Access to Insight, many of the suttas include the following quote,

At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said:

"From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on.

In other words the "first" is not evident (or, I'd read that as, it's not evident that there is a first).


text:
Observing sensations during normal time.
I observe very strong sensations even post meditation. They are strong at some time and some time subtle. I am alternating between apanana and vipasana. I would like to understand why they are so strong at times.

The experiences are based on the sum total of your past fabrications and what has surfaced in a given time.
In the different times the fabrications that has surfaced are different hence the diversity of the experience.
Dwelling on matters like this will inevitably make you crave or be averse to some types of sensation hence regress in your pratice. You should just be aware regardless of if it is strong or not.
Having said this some times the strong sensations can be due to rapture.

Vipassana meditation, if practiced correctly and consistently, will reveal the true nature of reality for the meditator.
What you are describing and have seen through your practice, is the impermanence of conditioned phenomena. The characteristic of impermanence is one of the Three Marks of Existence.
Bhikkhu Bodhi gives the example of a waterfall that from a distance looks solid but when taking a closer look one can see the flow constantly changing.
Vipassana meditation is when one is taking a closer look at reality, which reveals e.g. that sensations do not have a fixed intensity, but instead they change constantly - sometimes they are strong, sometimes subtle.
That is the nature of condition phenomena. They are not constant. They are subject to alteration, change and decay. They are dynamic processes and not stable entities.


text:
watching myself everywhere?
During meditation sessions, morning 4 to 5, I have started watching myself everywhere. I didn't experienced it before. The garden where I am used to take a morning walk after meditation, there I saw my duplicates, same me in different-2 attire, casual-formal-pyjamas-with friends-cycling.
There was a moment in real world when I thought that if I could see everyone as me then I can percieve real peace. I think that thought merged into meditation and showed me the same but it was very different. I was so attached to myself when no one other was present as a special appearance. I want to know 'was that of my thought was wrong or right ?

My english is still weak. Don't hassitate make a correction. I'd be thankful. Regards & Love.

When meditating you might get imaginative experiences which might seem very real. Just do not give any importance to them. Just be aware that you are experiencing something. These experiences has sensations associated and if you get attached to them unsatisfactory experiences will follow. Whenever you get some experience just see if you like or dislike or neutral towards the experience and the sensations that follows.

I myself manytimes, give suggestions to other just per my own Experience. I am here at buddism section to get references of his, the buddha's real teachings. Please try get me into that on this matter if it is there in buddhism. Regards & Love.

Best is that you take a course http://dhamma.org

Thank you. My phone isn't compatible. Once I will complete that, i'd be back. Regards & Love Sir.


text:
What is the water filter of Koṇāgamana?
No matter how many different ways I search, I seem to get this exact/ALMOST exact phrase:"These relics include the staff of Kakusandha, the water filter of Koṇāgamana, a piece of the robe of Kassapa, and eight strands of hair from the ..." But I cannot find an explanation for it. This supposedly belonged to the "grandfather" Buddha to Gautama, aka Koṇāgamana (all according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_named_Buddhas), and Siddhartha  supposedly lived in the 6th century BCE. If there are 1,000 Buddhas per kalpa and 4.32 billion years in a kalpa, that means they average 4.32 million years between appearances. So, what could this "water filter" possibly consist of? Thank you for your input.
To be specific, I am interested in the history and historicity of this artifact. For example, when was it first mentioned? From where did it originate? How did it come to Shewdagon Pagoda? Etc...

It is believed there are relicts from the previous Buddhas' in the Shwedagon Pagoda. This is possible that such artifacts survived since it is within the world cycle Maha Kalpa.
All monks should carry a water filter to filter out insets from the water. I would believe this will not be any different. It will be a basic piece of cloth.

Would it be allowable for monks to use a modern filtering devices, than just a piece of cloth?

It is part of the 8 requisites. This filtering is not intended to really filter, in the same custom with the Jains when there was accusation that monks could halm life by not removing small creatures in the water. Modern filters are fine also perhaps this being done as a form of symbolism.

Thanks Suminda. Can monks boil the filtered (or rather strained) water before consumption, as there can be many microbial parasites? (Filtered sounds like a purification process, for all a piece of cloth can do is strain the water.)

Yes this is a straining small insects. This is more symbolism in most cases but since it is in the Vinaya I think it should be done as a custom. We still have Jains and people holding similar view. So this will keep the happy and not be contempt of Buddhist Monks as you might drink a small creature and kill it due to negligence.

There's no "Grandfather" Buddha. The Buddhas are not related. Prince Siddhartha's grandfathers were king Sinhahanu(father's side) and king Anjana(mother's side).
Corporeal relics of each Buddha disintegrate as the respective Buddha Sasanas end. But it is possible for other relics to survive longer. Like the staff of the Buddha Kakusandha and the water filter of the Buddha Koṇāgamana in the Shwedagon Pagoda.
4.32 billion years is a Hindu count. An exact number isn't given in Buddhism. Only analogies provided.
There are no 1000 Buddhas per Kalpa. The maximum you get is 5. It is called the Maha Badra Kalpa.
The water filter is a piece of cloth, just like mentioned in the other answers.

The reason "grandfather" was in quotes was because I was not talking about his blood grandfather, i.e. the father of his father. I was talking about the Buddha (Koṇāgamana= "grandfather" Buddha) who preceded the Buddha (Kassapa="father" Buddha) who preceded Gautama. I was not being literal. Also, according to here (http://www.buddhistdoor.com/OldWeb/bdoor/archive/nutshell/teach36.htm) "Each Kalpa has 1,000 Buddhas."

Either way, you really missed the point here. I don't think this should be answer, it should be a comment. You commented on every aspect of the question without answering the actual question.

In that case G.W. Bush can be called as Obama's grandfather just because he was the previous president. :) Not sure if that is appropriate, even if you don't mean it literally. The link you have given is quoting Hindu/Mahayana sources.

You probably get the exact phrase because the phrase originates from one source, i.e. information about the Shwedagon Pagoda. Also if I google the phrase, google tries to return sites which include the exact phrase.
The timing between the arising of Buddhas is not uniform, and I haven't come across suttas which mention exact numbers like 1000 Buddha's per kalpa.
I am not aware of the existence of physical archaeological evidence of the 3 Buddhas before Gautma. That would be an interesting discovery in many ways, including the theories of human evolution. However, that wouldn't affect my practice.
The hair strands of the Gautma Buddha seem plausible, and the wiki site about the Pagoda says that they were the hair given by Gautma Buddha to Thapassu and Bhalluka. As the artifacts of the other Buddha's, I am skeptical.
Water filter's during Gautma Buddha's time were simple pieces of cloth, to strain out insects out of compassion, and during a life time of a Buddha/Bhikkhu he could have used many.

The likelihood of former Buddhas existing, especially when you're talking about the time scales Buddhism uses, is pretty much zero; thus, the same is true for their relics. I just wanted to know about the historiocity of this artifact. I'm going to edit the question.


text:
Question about Nichiren Buddhism
More specifically, I am refering to the Soka Gakkai movement of Nichiren Buddhism. In one excerpt from the Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, it, in essence, states that every time one says "nam-myoho renge kyo" that is the equivalent to reading the Lotus Sutra one time.
That doesn't really make any sense to me, so, why is that? I have a photo below of the direct excerpt:

Prior to Nichiren's time, reading the Lotus Sutra in its entirety was said to result in benefit, or good effects, in this life and the next. As part of Nichiren's efforts toward his goal of "saving all people" as he put it, he said that reciting the title (prefaced by the Sanskrit word Nam) was enough to gain the same benefit. It is in this context that Nichiren wrote. Here is a quote from the same letter (gosho), The One Essential Phrase, where he provides a rationale. As can be seen, he refers to earlier writers in support of his teaching.

The spirit within one’s body of five or six feet may appear in just one’s face, which is only a foot long, and the spirit within one’s face may appear in just one’s eyes, which are only an inch across. Included within the two characters representing Japan is all that is within the country’s sixty-six provinces: the people and the animals, the rice paddies and the other fields, those of high and low status, the nobles and the commoners, the seven kinds of treasures and all the other precious gems. Similarly, included within the title, or daimoku, of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is the entire sutra consisting of all eight volumes, twenty-eight chapters, and 69,384 characters, without the omission of a single character. Concerning this, Po Chü-i[1] stated that the title is to the sutra as the eyes are to the Buddha. In the eighth volume of his Annotations on “The Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra,” Miao-lo states, “When for the sake of brevity one mentions only the daimoku, or title, the entire sutra is by implication included therein.” By this he means that, although for the sake of brevity only the title of the sutra is spoken, the entire sutra is contained in the title alone.
  Everything has its essential point, and the heart of the Lotus Sutra is its title, or the daimoku, of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Truly, if you chant this in the morning and evening, you are correctly reading the entire Lotus Sutra.

And another, similar, quote from a different letter, Expedient Means and “Life Span” Chapters -

First of all, when it comes to the Lotus Sutra, you should understand that, whether one recites all eight volumes, or only one volume, one chapter, one verse, one phrase, or simply the daimoku, or title, the blessings are the same. It is like the water of the great ocean, a single drop of which contains water from all the countless streams and rivers, or like the wish-granting jewel, which, though only a single jewel, can shower all kinds of treasures upon the wisher. And the same is true of a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, or a million such drops of water or such jewels. A single character of the Lotus Sutra is like such a drop of water or such a jewel, and the hundred million characters[6] are like a hundred million such drops or jewels.

(the quotes were added in response to a request in the comments.)

Welcome to the site. Can you add any detail or a reference for your last sentence, "he elsewhere clarifies this"?

It says that starting and ending your day with a dedication to the lotus suttra is the equivalent of reading it, it still takes a whole day...

All sects dilute Buddha's message that only your efforts and that too in right directions can help you. This recitation or chanting has sounds which can calm you. Or the very fact that chanting helps you concentrate which helps in bringing you closer to meditative state. But is this the goal of Buddha's teachings? Buddha talked about only one goal i.e. liberation. One needs to be careful about different sects. No doubt they benefit you psychologically. But then your priorities should be clear.

I don't think that it is just that the sound of chanting calmes someone, because otherwise people would just listen to music or do something like that; I don't think there wouldn't be an entire sect founded on that

well there is psychlogical healing too by listening to motivational talks, narrating your own experiences etc. These are known as group therapy in modern psychology. Psychatrists are far better in this. But they are expensive. Whole point is sects are supposed to help people attain Nirvana not provide psychological help. Modern psychology is quite well developed science. Many sects have heads who are not enlightened. It is a blind leading blinds situation.

Regardind sounds there is whole science of enlightenment using chanting called japa yoga in India. Infact in all major religion chanting is a well established method.

That's in teresting; I had never heard about the japa yoga before. Regarding how sects are supposed to help people attain Nirvana, how may a sect go about doing that? I know that often times Nichiren buddhism is a bit different regarding what it advocates, and so I'm guessing that the virsion of nirvana that I'm thinking of is different.

If you want to follow a sect no problem but make sure its head is an enlightened one. It is easy to figure out. If the head talks about anything like social work or inculcating virtues he or she is not enlightened. Enlightened people in general use few words and even fewer sentences to communicate the mystery. Most of heads of sects talk a lot and mostly shallow stuff. But please try not to get influenced by these sects. Focus on Buddha's preaching and take help in understanding Buddha from sect members.

One also needs to be careful of those who claim to know the truth and that everything else is a bastardisation.


text:
In the book Parallel Worlds, does Michio Kaku believe in Nirvana and Genesis?
I'm curious because someone translated it into Thai that the eleven-dimensional hyperspace is actually Nirvana in Buddhism. Does Michio Kaku literally mean that? What's his religion. Sorry if my question is too nonsense.

“What is gradually emerging from the data is a grand synthesis of
  these two opposing mythologies. Perhaps, scientists speculate, Genesis
  occurs repeatedly in a timeless ocean of Nirvana. In this new picture,
  our universe may be compared to a bubble floating in a much larger
  “ocean,” with new bubbles forming all the time. According to this
  theory, universes, like bubbles forming in boiling water, are in
  continual creation, floating in a much larger arena, the Nirvana of
  eleven-dimensional hyperspace. A growing number of physicists suggest
  that our universe did indeed spring forth from a fiery cataclysm, the
  big bang, but that it also coexists in an eternal ocean of other
  universes. If we are right, big bangs are taking place even as you
  read this sentence.”
Excerpt From: Michio, Kaku. “Parallel Worlds.” Anchor,
  2006-03-14T06:00:00+00:00. iBooks.  This material may be protected by
  copyright.

Reading more from the excerpt which you quoted,

When I was a child, I had a personal conflict over my beliefs. My parents were raised in the Buddhist tradition. But I attended Sunday school every week, where I loved hearing the biblical stories about whales, arks, pillars of salt, ribs, and apples.

Perhaps that answers your question, "What's his religion?"

I suppose that the following helps explain why he describes the "11th dimension" as "Nirvana":

These creatio ex nihilo myths stand in marked contrast to the cosmology according to Buddhism and certain forms of Hinduism. In these mythologies, the universe is timeless, with no beginning or end. There are many levels of existence, but the highest is Nirvana, which is eternal and can be attained only by the purest meditation. In the Hindu Mahapurana, it is written, "If God created the world, where was He before Creation? . . . Know that the world is uncreated, as time itself is, without beginning and end."

In Buddhism, "Nirvana" is I think described as a state which is:

Unconditioned (i.e. it doesn't depend on or come into being as a result of other things as its condition)
Timeless (perhaps also translated as "ever-present" or "eternal")

He's saying that the "11 dimensions" described in one of the theories of Physics has similar properties, i.e. it exists without a cause (perhaps unlike "this universe", which I take it is presumed to be embedded within those 11 dimensions, and which has a cause e.g. the "Big Bang").

There's also this sentence:

What is gradually emerging from the data is a grand synthesis of these two opposing mythologies. Perhaps, scientists speculate, Genesis occurs repeatedly in a timeless ocean of Nirvana.

I don't think that means he literally believes in the Biblical story of Genesis. Its in a section of the chapter titled, "Baby Pictures of the Universe". I think the phrase "Genesis occurs repeatedly in a timeless ocean of Nirvana" is meant as, and should be understand as, "something-created (I guess/presume he's talkig about 'four-dimensional space-time' there) occurs repeatedly (or maybe 'fluctuates') within a timeless higher-dimensional space", and he's using pseudo-religious phraseology.

My personal opinion is that it's a pointless (meaningless and unhelpful) analogy.
A similar tendency exists elsewhere, e.g. Quantum mysticism suggests a link between quantum theory and consciousness ... whereas this guy suggests we equate his cosmological/mathematical theory with Nirvana (or with certain characteristics/descriptions of Nirvana taken out of context).
It may or may not (depending on your preconceptions) be a helpful description/analogy of 11 dimensions ... I guess it's an idiosyncratic description of his ... and I'd guess it's not a good description (not a canonical description) of the Buddhist Nirvana.

Nirvana is the fuel burning out which keeps the recreation of the 5 aggregates, more particularly the elimination of the cause or roots (greed, hatred, delusion, non greed, non hatred, non delusion). So this description of Nirvana as a place is wrong.
Scientific theories are not eternal but in a flux of change unlike the Dhamma is a constant in any time period. So these theories of dimensionality cannot be related to Dhamma but can be perhaps treated as an approximation or an aid to understand at the conceptual level.

but that it also coexists in an eternal ocean of other universes

According to Abhidhamma there are infinite universes.

If we are right, big bangs are taking place even as you read this sentence

This again is a view found in Abhidhamma texts.

The forming and the destruction of the universe has nothing to do with Nibbana. Space is a secondary Rupa element and time is simply a concept based on the change of conditioned phenomena. "bubbles forming in boiling water" is an analogy for a physical behavior. Nibbanna is not physical and whether the beings attain it or not, the world systems keep getting destroyed and reformed.
It appears that the word 'Nirvana' is casually thrown in there to make some kind of connection with Buddhism or his notion of it is different than the Buddhist definition. This article says he is a Pantheist.
Pantheism can be a convenient diplomatic stance for scientists who wouldn't want to lose the majority theistic audience in the USA.


text:
What are habits in buddhism?
How are habits seen in buddhism - how are they explained ?
read now about habit making - and would love to hear users views on habits -  and what they see habits as
And what people think about habit making and its effectiveness and why

How are habits seen in buddhism - how are they explained ?

Habitual tendencies persist from life to life. Say you were a monkey than then born a human sometimes the tendency to jump last.
Only the Buddha can overcome habitual tendencies. Even an enlightened person will have habitual tendencies.

read now about habit making - and would love to hear users views on habits - and what they see habits as
And what people think about habit making and its effectiveness and why

A worldly person does many thing habitually. Though habitual action is at the pre conscious level they have karmic potent. So if you develop wholesome habits this definitely would be a bonus for this life and after. In absence of weighty and near death Karma, habitual karma decides the next life.
Also see:

Anusaya by Piya Tan
The Unconscious by Piya Tan
Unconscious Views by Piya Tan

not yet read the links but will -  in case it dosnt say it :  any advice on how to install a habit (especially a meditation habit) ?

Simply by repeatedly doing it.

We are our habits. We are what we repeatedly do. So we can You focus on the issue of how we are creating suffering for ourselves because of our habits, and how we can develop new habits that create the causes for happiness. If we find ourselves engaged in unskillful habits, we’ve got to learn how to overcome those habits and replace them with more skillful habits. We can’t do this for one another. It’s a personal, individual matter.
So the precepts are a crucial part of this. They help you develop good habits and foster insight. In particular, they help you see into your habits of self-indulgence. A lot of the pleasures we indulge in really do get in the way of deeper pleasure, deeper happiness. The hardest habit of all that we should strive to overcome is the ‘I am’, mine, myself belief in all of us. We can’t see things clearly because the “I am” gets in the way.
It’s interesting: The Pali word for “conceit”—mana—doesn’t mean only a sense that you’re better than other people. If you say, “I’m worse than other people,” or “I’m equal to other people,” that’s conceit as well, because you’re still building the “I am” around things. There are several ways to get around this.
One such is the Buddha’s advice to Rahula: Whatever comes up is inconstant. It doesn’t last, so it’s not enough to build an identity around. Another way around the “I am” is that, whatever comes up in the mind, you remind yourself that this happens to everybody. Remind yourself that you don’t have any innate nature. The mind is neutral. It just knows. The thinking is skillful or unskillful, but those are habits, which aren’t innate at all.

I'm also interested in habits and found this text in the Samana-Mundika Sutta

And what are skillful habits? Skillful bodily actions, skillful verbal
  actions, purity of livelihood. These are called skillful habits. What
  is the cause of skillful habits? Their cause, too, has been stated,
  and they are said to be mind-caused. Which mind? — for the mind has
  many modes & permutations. Any mind without passion, without aversion,
  without delusion: That is the cause of skillful habits.


text:
How to practice mindfulness during job hours
Is there any way to stay mindful when your mind is busy at work?

What type of work do you do? Do you operate heavy machinery? Do you interact with people (e.g. waitor)? Is it manual labour? Do you have to focus hard/problem solve?

As i am a sw developer so i have to keep my mind busy all the time.

It is not an easy task to stay mindful as a software developer. I am one myself, and I even wrote a book on that matter.
There are three things I consider important for myself.
First: I practice meditation when I am not working. This gives me the roots I need.
Second: I need to interrupt my daily workflow so I can remember my practice and what I learned from it.
Third: I need to focus on work when I am working and focus on the rest, when I am not working. Which means: no Facebook at work time. But when I become tired at work, I interrupt my workflow and practice.
For interruption, I use several tools which change from time to time. Influenced from Zen, I sometimes walk mindful: Kinhin. Or I cook the best cup of tea possible. Or I just meditate in my chair.
When you have interrupted work and you feel you are mindful, go back to work and hack. Give yourself "focus times". Don't waste your time with other things.
Working as a software developer means, your mind is occupied by a technology problem. Sometimes you cannot feel your body, because you are concentrated on the problem. I don't think this is bad. Just interrupt when your mind/body demands it, and go back to the analogue life. Sticking with the digital life is as bad as sticking with the analogue life alone (at least for us programmers).
You may also want to read another Zen programming related blog post of mine, in which I wrote about some of my thoughts on working.

why not just do a different occupation ?

Is there any way to stay mindful when your mind is busy at work?

Simply be mindful of sensation in your body. E.g.

posture

Once been seated for a while there is bodily discomfort prompting you to move
when you see someone attractive, neutral or unattractive when you feel some attraction or repulsion  or do not care. Watch these sensations.

feeling

touch your cloths
touch of the sea
feeling of the fingers when you type

Sensations due to mental states
Sensations due to mental content

Also see: Being mindful sitting/working on a computer

I cannot find his video now but Mingyur Rinpoche recommends that if you have a job that requires a lot of focus and thinking about the task then begin with your focus on the breath for 10 seconds then start your task while being aware of the breath. Continue with the task for a while even if you forget the breath. Occasionally, perhaps every 5-10 minutes, take a few seconds away from your task to strengthen your attention on the breath and then return to your task while being aware of the breath.
Mingyur's method avoids problems people have with losing the breath every 5 seconds and having to fix their meditation so often that it interferes with work.


text:
Attachment to body and bodily sensations
Right from the birth we are so attached to our body.Unwanted sensations easily disrupt the peace of our mind.Why is the mind so attached to the body and how to overcome such attachments ?

Almost every single one of us are in this very same boat, though we never say so openly. One can free from this Sakkāya-ditthi (personality-belief) by realizing suffering as a noble truth. The Satipatthāna is there for this purpose. The realization one gets out of it is the understanding of Paticca Samuppāda (dependent origination or the universal law of cause and effect). That is, the ability of seeing things in life according to cause and effect. Once a person acquires that skill, he will be able to free from the idea of ‘me’ by seeing it as a deceit (the true nature). Then, he understands that the concept of ‘me’ is just a (false) view. The first step toward the Noble Eightfold Path is for one to become Saddhānusārī (faith-devoted). It is a person who accepts this path of Dhamma who then becomes Saddhānusārī . He admits suffering of this Samsara. He accepts there exists a cause and effect. He accepts the fact that one needs to be free from suffering. He also accepts that the Supreme Buddha has freed Himself from suffering and the Dhamma can free us from that suffering. He accepts that the disciples (of the Buddha) will have to follow the Dhamma and that there are disciples who have attained the Arahantship by practicing the Dhamma. One who comes to these notions will become Saddhānusārī . One needs to come to these views if he wants to come to the Dhamma and be free from this personality belief - to be free from this Sakkāya-ditthi.

Meditation is the key. But there are two components of it. First is the way of living and second is the meditation technique(s). You will find these two components in every religion, sect, mysticism. Since you have asked in this forum it is Buddha's percepts and Vipassna. If you can alter your lifestyle according to Buddha's teachings and practise Vipassna on  a daily basis you will be observe detachment arising in you. Final detachment will happen when you are able to see your past lives. By that experience all worldly attachments will fall to sides because that will clearly establish that you are not a mind-body phenomenon but something much greater. Welcome to the world of meditation.

Right from the birth we are so attached to our body.Unwanted sensations easily disrupt the peace of our mind.

That's right.

Why is the mind so attached to the body ...

You are born due to attachment to the body. If it was not so you will not be re born.

... and how to overcome such attachments?

This is though the pratice of Vipassana.
You have to be mindful of arising and passing of sensation pertaining to:

Body - Posture, Elements, Beauty
Feeling
Mental state
Mental content

I would say it is not correct to say the mind is inherently attached to the body, particularly from child birth (since the Buddha taught a new born child does not have the view of 'self' - MN 64).
What is happening is the body is producing painful sensations, such as hunger, pain & discomfort. For example, the body of baby children often have trouble breathing so the mind is afflicted with discomfort & starts to cry. These painful sensations cause cravings (desires), which then make the mind attach to the painful sensations. If the body never had painful sensations, there would never be any attachment.
The Buddha taught as follows about what is happening:

"Who, O Lord, feels?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say
that 'he feels.' The correct way to ask the question will be 'What is
the condition of feeling?' And to that the correct reply is:
'sense-contact is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the
condition of craving.'"
"Who, O Lord, craves?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say
that 'he craves.' The correct way to ask the question will be 'What is
the condition of craving?' And to that the correct reply is:
'Feeling is the condition of craving, and craving is the
condition of clinging.'"
"Who, O Lord, clings?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One, "I do not say
that 'he clings.' The correct way to ask the question will be 'What is
the condition of clinging?'
And to that the correct reply is:
'Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the
condition of the process of becoming.' Such is the origin of this
entire mass of suffering.
Phagguna
Sutta


text:
Need advice on how to handle my emotions
Tell you the truth, I joined Buddhism in search of peace and harmony. Not because I have mental issues. It is about admitting what I see and feel. I am not that much aware of stuff, but sometimes I aspire to be Buddhist; at other times, I am very emotional. At times I cry because the world is not aware of the basic values of humanity. When I choose to go to the Buddha for refuge, my family thinks that I am a psycho.. When I see others losing human morals, I suffer! Today I feel a bit better than yesterday, but when I look at myself during meditation, I feel like a person who suffers. It is not at all that I am different or I am trying to be different. I want to know the reason for this according to Buddhism?

Tag is self. I am aware of that. Am I attached to myself so much?

but when I look at myself during meditation, I feel like a person who suffers

I recommend you to listen to this talk by Ajahn Brahm about suffering.
I'm gonna summarize it shortly in order not to get banned:

There is no happiness without suffering. You can't have one without the other. They are equally measured by each other.
In Buddhism you have to get rid of all dogmas, especially the individual dogmas ('life must be happy', etc.)
Suffering is part of life. So why is it that we say 'Something is going wrong, I'm suffering'?
We have to put aside what we want to believe in and try to see real nature
the cause of suffering is inside of us, nothing/nobody can cause it from outside
Call whatever it is your suffering from 'Ajahn' or 'growing pain'. Let it be your teacher.
If there is nothing to do, do nothing. If there is something you can do, give it everything you can.

Every unenlightened person has metal issues. The reasons are the defilements: craving, aversion and ignorance.
I would recommend doing Vipassana meditation in your daily life:
If you dislike something or someone's behavior, simply note it as 'disliking', 'disliking', 'disliking...' before it gets to crying. If you are too slow and already started crying, simply note it as 'crying','crying','crying...' instead of thinking while crying.
If you want the world to be in a certain way or want others behave to your liking or to think about you in a certain way, simply note it as 'wanting', 'wanting', 'wanting...'
Don't drop the ball no matter how tough or exciting it gets! Simply keep noting.
For more instructions: http://www.sirimangalo.org/text/how-to-meditate/

I am very emotional

Since you are emotional best is to pratice in the context of an organised course. Due to emotions perhaps you might not pratice as intended or in the right way without guidance. Following centres have a wide outreach and I personally have positive results thought the pratice: https://www.dhamma.org/en/index. I have not tried this out but the course most likely like the other hence would be benificial: http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html

Need advice on how to handle my emotions

If meditation is done right you would be able to be more emotionally stable.
Emotions have some sensation associated with it. If you get attached or averse to the sensation you are creating negativity.
You have to try your best to study the sensations behind your emotions to understand and handle your emotions.
Also sensations and craving lead to all dogmas. [Brahma,jala Sutta] Many conceiving of self happen through craving. (Vicarita) Tanha Sutta Many of these lead to suffering. Emotions can be a form of suffering as you conceive the self as subject or receiver of any event or perhaps building of non conducive views which case suffering.

feeling of those who know not, merely the agitation and vacillation of those overcome by craving - [Brahma,jala Sutta]

@jitin… try to stay within the five precepts, within the bounds of what’s skilful, be true to the five precepts. Afterall there is no ‘buddhist’ or ‘ christian’ in it. The knowledge that you’ve maintained your honor can give you a lot of strength even as you go through negative emotions. Then you try to take apart unskillful emotions: You take apart the physical side, then the verbal side, then the mental side. For the mental side, you have to learn how to think outside the box. The same with the verbal side—because “verbal,” here, refers to your inner chatter, what you say to yourself. Often what you say to yourself can be a lot more harmful than what people do or say outside. So a large part of your training lies in learning how to talk to yourself in skillful ways.
Supreme Buddha taught that the most important part of the practice is appropriate attention, where you learn to look at the situation and divide it up into four categories: where’s the stress; where’s the cause of stress; what would be the cessation of that stress, i.e., by abandoning the cause; and then how you do that: the path of practice that you develop to abandon the cause of stress. In other words, you see things in terms of the four noble truths. Each truth has a task, which has to be mastered as a skill and brought to completion: comprehend the stress, abandon the cause, develop the path, so that you can realize the cessation. That’s a very different approach from simply being nonreactive, or learning to accept whatever comes.
You can consciously breathe in and out at times when these emotions overwhelm you. So we focus on the breath as a way of getting outside of these overwhelming emotions, to realize they don’t have to take over totally. We can have at least one corner of our awareness where they’re not raging and strong. Not only does the breath give us a place to stand, it also gives us some ammunition to use against these things. When anger comes, when fear comes, part of their power comes from the way they change the processes of the body. You can work with your breath to counteract at least the physical side of the emotion first. Regardless of what’s happening in the mind, you can still breathe calmly. In fact, this is an important way of retraining yourself.
That way, if something does start creeping in, you’ll notice it immediately. And you find that these emotions are a lot easier to deal with when you catch them right at the very beginning, before they trigger the hormones, before they trigger the physical reactions, because otherwise, once those reactions are triggered, you simply have to ride them out, and that may take a while.


text:
Can bad kammas be eased by apologizing?
For example if I have lied to my parents and can the bad kamma be deleted when I apologize to them?
What is the difference between the bad kamma that are committed to parents and ordinary people?

Apologizing is good Karma that has a mitigating(not delete) effect on the bad Karma you had committed:
ex:

The story of Soreyya.
Devadatta taking refuge of the Buddha just before being swallowed by earth.
The story of Bhaddā Kapilānī Therī

Bad Karma committed against parents are highly potent compared to ordinary beings. Ex: Killing parents makes birth(next life) in hell inescapable and you will have to face the consequences in the subsequent lives until you end Samsara.

The case of Devadatta is not an instance where his bad Karma got neutralized. He went to Avīci despite taking refuge in triple gem.  But Ajatashatru, even though he committed patricide which is an Avīci bound karma, he ended up in a Paduma hell. It is said that this dilution was caused by his good karma in sponsoring the First Buddhist council.

Not neutralized, but mitigated! Because of that he will become a Pacceka Buddha once he escapes from Avici. That reduces much of the Pravutti Pivaka he would've faced otherwise

Yes he will become a Pcceka Buddha named Sattissara. But he torments for one eon in Avici.

The point is he would suffer much more if not for that last act of goodness.

For example if i have lied to my parents and can the bad kamma be deleted when i apologize to them?

You can neutralise Karma when the result is felt [Sañcetanika Sutta] or by diluting the result of karma through counteracting [karma Loṇa,phala Sutta].

What is the difference between the bad kamma that are committed to parents and ordinary people?

Karma committed to parents are give more worst results than ordinary people. If you do something to a compassionate person the results are more weighty than an ordinary person. Likewise if you do something to your parents the repercussions are much more.

Karma theory is age-old in Hindu society where Buddha was born. Any action born out of desire is karma and a self-less, natural action is a-karma. In Buddhism it is good kamma and bad kamma. There is no difference between your parents and others as far as Dhamma is concerned. If you hurt anyone there is bound to be repercussion. But parents are given special status because they are hurt more than strangers. For example if you show disrespect to a stranger he might or might not get hurt. He might think that you are a nut-case. But your parents will get hurt badly and there will be huge repercussions.
Repentance and apologies have no effect on your accumulated bad kamma. Once accumulated they will run their cycle no matter what. It is not mathematics. By your logic you can hurt people again and again and do away with it by apologies. Isn't it absurd? Only thing that can be done is not to indulge in selfish actions full of desires. You can reach a point where abstaining from bad kamma free you from re-birth so there is an end to your miseries. Yes even after Nirvana, effects of bad kamma will still be there and will lead to decay of your body and bodily senses. Nirvana is simply unachievable by balancing out bad kamma with good kamma but only through negation of bad kamma. Negation of bad kamma is only through meditation. When you indulge in good kamma it is also meditation. Sitting silently is also meditation. There is only one key - meditation and nothing else.

Having said that I must add sufferings can be minimized. For example if you have anger management issues if you change your lifestyle, meditate regularly then anger inside you will be subside. Even when anger arises you will not be consumed by it. Your anger will simply not go away. Even after enlightenment anger will be around. But the anger will not result in an action. That is the reason some people doubt an enlightened person when he/she gets angry or show emotions. Enlightened people can show emotions but they will never hurt anybody.

"Karma theory is age-old in Hindu society where Buddha was born."
Karma theory was not age old when Buddha was born, it was his specific discovery, you can see in the records that during the time of the Buddha, people have various theories about working of the world including: God Brahma determining everything so it doesn't matter what you do as long as you have faith  and obey God (quite similar to Christianity), to requiring the performance the Vedic rituals exactly as prescribed including animal sacrifices, to nihilism - whatever you do doesn't matter you are gonna die anyway. Many of these thinking are still present today. It is Hinduism that changed dramatically by adopting many of the teachings of Buddhism so that many modern people believe that Buddha did not teach anything new because many of his teachings have already been incorporated into Hinduism.
Specifically during his enlightenment he confirms that actions matter, and specifically what is behind the action, the mind - the thoughts and emotions of that action is the leading cause of the effect of karma.
"Repentance and apologies have no effect on your accumulated bad kamma."
Wrong, while karma - your action cannot be erased the effect can always be lessen by changing yourself. Karma does not imply one to one result, but a cause is always impacted by other conditions (secondary causes) to bear the necessary results. The act of repentance is one such conditions to ease the effect of karma, even though the original cause is not erased.
In Chinese Buddhism, the act of repentance is one of the most important part of Buddhist practice. This is reflected too all the way from Indian teachings through the sutras. Even the Vinaya requires monks to confess their offenses to the community as part of this practice.
Further more, good karma does not erase nor balance bad karma, good karma interacts with bad karma, just like the existence of one plant does not eliminate another plant, but they both interacts so bad karma can reduce/change the positive impact of your good karma, and good karma can reduce/change the negative impact of your good karma. None the less both of these causes still exist.
To give a practical example: It will be much worse for the outcome of a conflict if you refuse to apologize your wrongs. While if you have done a lot of good things, having done something blatantly unethical will cause people to reduce their trust in you no matter your contributions formerly.

No, nothing can delete results of actions. They will rippe anyway. But to know that and to straighten you mind will makes it not so painful.
The idea that apologize would make things undone is merely advertised in Almighty-god-believes.

I look at apologizing like confession. Buddha clearly taught that confession eradicates karma. How much karma is another question. A simple apology probably does not eradicate much. Better to recite a confession. Better still through meditation.

Apologizing certainly deletes bad results (vipaka) of bad kamma (actions) because it establishes the mind on the right path.
In the Samaññaphala Sutta, it is said the confession of a man who killed his father was:

"...cause of growth in the Dhamma & Discipline of the noble ones when,
  seeing a transgression as such, one makes amends in accordance with
  the Dhamma and exercises restraint in the future."

There are multiple approaches to answer this question. Two very different answers might both be correct.
Apologizing is it's own karma that can be good or bad depending on the intentions behind the apology.
One couldn't ease past bad karma because conditions in the past no longer exist.
Apologizing with good intentions will ease the future results (vipaka) of the bad karma that is being apologised for.
NOTE: Basically, karma means "action" and vipaka means "result"

Everything it depends. Buddhist know exactly what is karma and its result. It is not like in the court in front of the jury, plea guilty or not or what will be the punishment, or trying to dodge with excuses. Everything done with good or bad intention carry its karma. And if one did it towards which types of person who is laymen or Arya. Also it is important in which way you apologize to this person one insulted through which person. But good karma goes far beyond bad one and it depends how good and how bad. Some examples as stone sink under water but kept on the boat big enough to keep it cannot sink. So not to do the bad karma is the very first thing. If one did it, apologize directly to that person, if that person is no more, apologize through an Arya(Triple gems) and to get the big boat, practice insight meditation earnestly.


text:
In Buddhism, is Escapism seen as a bad thing to take part in?
In general in Buddhism, is escapism seen as a bad "movement" to involve one's self in? I have seen many posts on SE about separating one's self from one's body, or getting rid of desire, so; would these actions been seen as escapism?

Escapism is not a principle found in Buddhism. Escapism suggests you are trying to run away from suffering, but in reality we are trying to be changed by suffering. This is a core teaching in Buddhism and circulates around in the term being mindful. By avoiding experiences that are unpleasant, the practitioner does not learn a lesson life is trying to teach them. By grabbing the bull by the horns and facing your problem head on, wisdom and experience begins to unfold.
To no longer have desires is commonly misinterpreted as all desires. There are such things as wholesome desires such as wishing the well-being of all human beings. To say there are no more desires means you no longer have strings pulling you around. You can still enjoy your favorite pizza, go inside if it's to cold outside, stay in bed while you're sick, but that's ok. You're human and you recognize it's going to happen. It means you have accepted whats happening in the here and now; but it doesn't mean you can't enjoy life nor take action to help those in need.

Escapism does not address the core issue. Say you have X experience which you do not like and you distract yourself with Y experience with you take pleasure in. The solution is temporary as Y ends you are left unsatisfied again.
The case of much of the suffering are the unwholesome roots in craving, aversion and ignorance. Buddhist practice aims to remove them.
Now let's take experiance you like. What happens is you think "Ah, I like this" hence the notion of I arises in your mind. Likewise with many forms of craving and aversions. So if you remove the craving or aversion by being equanimous (and also remove ignorance being aware of the arising and passing nature of phenomena) you stop perceiving a self. There is not separation of self from the body, it is just that you do not perceive a self as an entity. Also any perception of self is a concept or abstraction created by our mind which is never in tune with the true nature of what actually is there. Hence you have to get rid of any concepts about self (which in all cases will be wrong).

Escapism

How is Vipassana different from escapism?

Vipassana is to face the world. No escapism is permitted in Vipassana.

Source: http://www.vridhamma.org/Question-and-Answers#escapism

What is to define the true entity of phenomenon? If there were nothing to experience the world for eternity, then it may as well not be there. From that logic, wouldn't everyone's perspective be equally acceptable?

There is not entity just phenomena arising and passing according to the law of dependent origination. This cannot be deduced purely by logic. You need to meditate. Perhaps you can try out a course to get practical experience into this. This will not happen in one course but things will reveal itself little by little. See: https://www.dhamma.org/en/index, http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html

here we go..  this Sutta directly addresses escapism

As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is resistant. Any resistance-obsession with regard to that painful feeling obsesses him. Touched by that painful feeling, he delights in sensual pleasure. Why is that? Because the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person does not discern any escape from painful feeling aside from sensual pleasure. As he is delighting in sensual pleasure, any passion-obsession with regard to that feeling of pleasure obsesses him. He does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling. As he does not discern the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling, then any ignorance-obsession with regard to that feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain obsesses him.

full sutta here:  Sallatha Sutta

i am going to try to answer this.  please let me know if incorrectly rephrased your question, "Is getting rid of sensual desires is a form of Escapism?".
I think it could be.  It is a first step to let go of desires (or 5 hindrances for that matters), when one can let go of them, equanimity remains.  However, equanimity, is also a fetter or higher parts of 10 fetters that a non-returner (Anagami) has to learn to let go.  Equanimity is fetters 6 and 7.  Budddha did not give specific lectures on how to let go of 5 higher fetters.  Once you let go all fetters, then Nirvana is realized.  It may sounds like a cop out, but nirvana is not annihilation nor can be explained logically.

Escapism - the tendency to seek distraction and relief from unpleasant
  realities, especially by seeking entertainment or engaging in fantasy.

According to the above definition, 'escapism' is unskillful even by common sense standards.
ex: Listening to songs to deal with your stomachache.
It is not "separating 'self' from body". It is "not taking the body or mind as a 'self'" as neither is qualified to be considered as a self in reality. Thus no escapism involved.
Working to remove desire is the opposite of 'escapism' as desire is the origin of suffering - 2nd noble truth.

But if you were to remove your being from your body, your body still would be there. You still would have problems that would arise from your life, the only difference then is that you're not with your body, right?

Being = mind + body. There's no being apart from body except in the immaterial realms. Neither mind nor body can be considered as 'you' or 'yours'


text:
Which are the Buddhist vows?
Could you please explain the traditional vows in Buddhism?
I would like to know which are and their qualities according to Lord Buddha.

There are several sets of vows that one can take depending on which school of Buddhism and what level of commitment one has to the practice.
In order to answer this question it would be better to narrow it down, and say which set of vows you wish to know more about

I'm not sure.

In Theravada there are "precepts" (for laypeople) and "monastic rules" (for monks) but I'm not sure they're called "vows".
In this description of Theravada ordination (also here), the precepts are phrased as "I undertake to" which could be called a "vow", for example,

Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
(I undertake to abstain from harming or taking life).

So far as I have read, one requests ordination and the rules are recited. This might be described (in English) as "taking monastic vows", and a vow (to obey the rules) might be implicit in the ordination, but I don't see such a "vow" being spoken explicitly.

The term "vow" seems to be used more in Mahayana, for example:

Monastic vows (quoting from Ordination in the Tibetan Buddhist Tradition),

His Holiness the Dalai Lama feels that it is important to know that nuns and monks ordained in the Tibetan tradition follow the vows set forth in the Mulasarvastivadin school of monastic codes. The gelong/gelongma (bhikshu/bhikshuni--the fully ordained monk/nun) level are recorded in the Mulasarvastivadin school's Individual Liberation Sutras. Interspersed throughout their Tibetan translation is an easy to remember set of chantable verses summarising the gelong or gelongma vows. These versified mnemonics are known as the "Interleaved Summaries of the Vinaya Discours".

Vajrayana vows (quoting from Samaya),

The samaya (Tibetan: དམ་ཚིག, Wylie: dam tshig, Japanese and Chinese: 三昧耶戒, sanmaya-kai, Sānmóyéjiè), is a set of vows or precepts given to initiates of an esoteric Vajrayana Buddhist order as part of the abhiṣeka (empowerment or initiation) ceremony that creates a bond between the guru and disciple.

The Bodhisattva vow,

The Bodhisattva vow is the vow taken by Mahayana Buddhists to attain complete enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings. One who has taken the vow is nominally known as a Bodhisattva. Whereas the Prātimokṣa vows cease at death, the Bodhisattva vow extends into future lives.

Many Mahayana sutras have chapters where the main Bodhisattva makes a list vows, Medicine Buddha, Amida, Samantabhadra are good examples. Some of which can only be accomplished by a Bodhisattva, some are model goals for everyone.

You give an answer much like I was expecting. Can you tell me if the Theravada vows or precepts as you said, came from the Buddha himself or is it a posterior tradition?

There is nothing as Buddhist vows. But the conduct of Sila for a beginner can perhaps be similar to a vow.
Also see: Virtue: Sila


text:
Does loving kindness meditation help beings other than the practitioner?
For an example when the practitioner wants every being to become free from sorrow, does it actually create a difference? At least when the practitioner concentrates on someone close to himself/herself. All answers are welcome and it's better if references from Pali Canon can be made.

I don't think it'd make other beings become "free" from sorrow, but it could bring certain level of peace to both the practitioner and the people s/he's interacting with. AN 11.16 mentions 11 benefits of cultivating metta:

"Monks, for one whose awareness-release through good will is cultivated, developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken, eleven benefits can be expected. Which eleven?
"One sleeps easily, wakes easily, dreams no evil dreams. One is dear to human beings, dear to non-human beings. The devas protect one. Neither fire, poison, nor weapons can touch one. One's mind gains concentration quickly. One's complexion is bright. One dies unconfused and — if penetrating no higher — is headed for the Brahma worlds."

I don't know of a sutta that suggests that prayers or concentration directly affects the well being of beings being prayed to or concentrated on.
Quite the contrary, suttas like the one below suggests that such thing would be wishful thinking. That is, wishing someone to be free from sorrow as the method to make them free from sorrow is a fruitless method.

“Suppose, bhikkhus there was a hen with eight, ten, or twelve eggs that she had not covered, incubated, and nurtured properly. Even though such a wish as this might arise in her: ‘Oh, that my chicks might pierce their shells with the points of their claws and beaks and hatch safely!’ yet the chicks are incapable of piercing their shells with the points of their claws and beaks and hatching safely. For what reason? Because that hen with eight, ten, or twelve eggs had not covered, incubated, and nurtured them properly.
“So too, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu does not dwell devoted to development, even though such a wish as this might arise in him: ‘Oh, that my mind might be liberated from the taints by nonclinging! ’ yet his mind is not liberated from the taints by nonclinging. For what reason? It should be said: because of nondevelopment. Because of not developing what? Because of not developing … the Noble Eightfold Path.
-- SN 22.101

Actually my question was meant to sorrow, pain,illness in regular life. Not about sorrow arising from clinging. It's quite clear no one can make anyone else's mind get liberated.


text:
Buddhist Prayer Beads, Malas
How are Malas used in the spiritual Buddhist practice?
Are there instructions and introductions for use?
I am equally interested in responses from the Buddhist practice of monks and lay people (less New Age theories). I am particularly interested the application of Malas uses of all Buddhist lineages in everyday life.

String of beads can be used in Anussati meditation in sitting or when you are out of meditation to occupy the mind with wholesome thoughts.

A lot of prayer beads have a certain number of beads that correspond to the number of chants one should undertake, usually ending in the number 8 since it is considered a good number. It is to keep your place when you chant. I have a number of them that are 108 count mala beads for the purpose of counting off chants that are 108 repetitions.


text:
What is reincarnation?
It is well known scientific fact that over time, the animal population including human population increases. How does a colloquially scientific religion explain reincarnation if populations increases?
Don't give copout answers or rhetorical impulses that I have already heard about this question from many people who were sometimes practising buddhists and buddhist monks.
This is an important question that needs rational scientific answers and not wishful thinking.
EDIT: No thanks for the copouts. And for guy who said something like it will be the dominant theory if not for the monotheistic religions, no thanks for the royal copout.
You should learn how to not be hostile towards my questions Messer's Copouts. Don't be angry. Give rational answers and not the ones where I have read more on it to understand.
The answer that I have to read on it more is the biggest copout. Every religion uses that to keep its people in abject poverty. Picture of poor tibetan buddhists here.

Did you first search this site? And at ALL the questions about reincarnation?

I fail to see why this is a good question. There is absolutely no research involved. A simple search across the site or Google would give you reference to texts. --Don't give copout answers-- the OP is just threatening to cover up a lack of reading and understanding for themselves. Asking about the technicalities of reincarnation is different from blatantly asking for so-called scientific answers. Where is the scientific research in this question?

I don't think anybody can give a proper answer to this question apart from quoting texts, which the OP can read for themselves through simple googling. The probability of there being a person who knows this experientially is close to none.

to evaluate population increases/decreases, it has to be evaluated in a close system (where the boundaries are clearly defined and nothing moving in or out of these boundaries).  Buddhist cosmology says there are more than one universe.
Even with this universe we are in right now, we dont know where the boundaries are nor what exact numbers of the unknowns in it.  It is very perplexing like quantum physics.  Someone asked Buddha where the boundaries (edge of the universe) were.  His answer was edge of the universe could not be reached by traveling.

so universe has boundaries but there are at infinity?  Buddha said this kind of thinking does not bring profit toward liberation from sufferings.

It is well known scientific fact that over time, the animal population including human population increases.

Actually it's not a scientific fact. Species are known to go extinct and new species are known to evolve..
There is no count of the total beings on earth yet alone the universe. So it's impossible to say whether the sum total of living beings is increasing, decreasing or stagnant.
As for reincarnation the Buddha understood that not all people would accept it. However, he said that accepting it is a safer bet than not accepting it. See the Appannaka Sutta for more about the Buddha's safe bet. Link
A search on reincarnation will yield a plethora of results from the Buddhist to the non Buddhist (Edgar Cassey, Richard Weiss, etc). There are many youtube videos of young children recollecting past lives.
My opinion is that, if not for theist religions forcefully denouncing the theory of rebecoming, that would be the default theory in the modern world.

Here is an article/statement from Dalai Lama, since the OP seems to be  asking about Tibetan Buddhism.
PS: Basically, the point I am trying to make is read for yourself, especially on such topics like reincarnation where there is mostly only personal experience to help. Don't take somebody's interpretation of it. Its a very bleak idea. And eventually you will say, how can I believe this? The answer is that's how it is, and you cannot believe it until you practice meditation and experience it for yourself.
And like it or not, this is a copout answer. I can find everybody who will give you copouts because OBVIOUSLY, the probability that somebody knows it for sure, is very less.

It is well known scientific fact that over time, the animal population including human population increases. How does a colloquially scientific religion explain reincarnation if populations increases?

First, I wouldn't state there are well-known scientific facts representing animal populations increasing. One counter example could be found in a correlational balance between prey and predator. When prey increases in population, than predators increase in population. Eventually the population of prey will be lower than the predator population leaving the remaining predators vulnerable to starvation thus dying.
Next, the question is actually very simple to resolve. Let us suppose you have three pencils. Each pencil is labeled independently giving them their own distinct letter (a, b, c). Therefore, (a ≠ b) (a ≠ c) ( b ≠ c) but all three pencils share a common essence known as "d". "d" in this case represents nothingness/emptiness. The formula can be read as (a = d) (b = d) (c = d) ( a + b = d) (a + c = d) (b + c = d) (a + b + c = d). Similar to pencils, which are objects dependent on nothingness, people too are objects dependent on nothingness. You can increase the number of pencils to aleph-naught (infinity) and find there is enough emptiness for them to exist in; and that they will all share a common essence known as "d". Therefor, "d" is sufficient in sustaining an infinite number of objects including animals and people. An increase in the population only shows a new manifestation of the same essence which is who we are. Let us consider our independent existence. For example, those who become enlightened are considered to move into "Buddha Land" while we live in the realm of Samsara. If the population in all six realms are low, than it becomes reasonable to assume people will have to wait their turn. Of course, this is only one hypothesis out of many.