text:
What are the benefits of caring parents?
The Dhamma says that not helping parents is evil and preaches to take care of the elderly parents. What can be some positive outcomes the children will get by helping the parents?

The Buddha says that there are two people that you can never repay, no matter what you do. They are your mother and your father. Again the Buddha said that there is one way that you can repay for all what they have done.  That is to establish them in this Dhamma Path. It is not an easy task, as we are all full of defilements that muddy the waters and prevent us from seeing this path. So if they’re stingy for example, then you can try to find some way to influence them to be more generous.  If they are not the type to observe the five precepts, then you could try to get them to be more virtuous, to have more principles in their lives. You can gain merits that will help pave the way to your own Dhamma path, if you could help introduce your parents to the practice of Dhamma. Try to do it in as diplomatic a way as possible. Most parents resent their children who try to tell them what is right or wrong.  That is why you will have to find some means of doing this in an indirect way. If they are not into Dhamma, try not to say that this is a Buddhist thing. That is how SN Goenka thought Vipassana Meditation to the Westerners. Only later that they get to know that this is the Noble Eightfold Path that their Master is leading them to.

Helping parents engages the mind in the moral 'right view' of knowing what has been received as benefaction (gift; sacrifice) from one's parents & one's resultant reciprocal obligations (good actions to be performed). This is called 'katannukatavedi' ('gratitude'), namely, 'what others do for me; what I must do in return'. The Pali scriptures state:

And what is the right view...siding with goodness...‘There is gift, offerings, sacrifice [from] ...mother & father.
  There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is
  this world & the other worlds.  There are spontaneously born beings
  (sattā opapātikā)...’
MN 117

Having this 'right view' of 'katannukatavedi' also helps develop skillful means in the other relationships in life & can also help develop the higher Noble Eightfold Path because 'giving up' (vossagga) selfishness is a primary factor for developing meditation & the Noble Eightfold Path.
When having such right view, the mind spontaneously arises in the 'human' (wise) or 'humane' (compassionate) state.
If parents are not helped, when required, the mind is spontaneously born in the 'animal kingdom' (of ignorance & immorality) & probably eventually in 'hell' (suffering) due to wrong view. All people age, start dying & experience loss and those with wrong view generally are not able to cope with their own inevitable aloneness, old age & imminent death.
The above said, sometimes parents can be very stubborn, even to the point of death, therefore we should not always expect we can help our parents, as we would like.

if we are not able to help our parents as we like, how should we proceed? substitute spiritual help with material offerings?

looking for benefits is like doing business.
When ever you care or help your parents or others who cannot help in return,
As per bhagavad gita, krishna said you will get more energy and inner peace.
To the society you become role model.
Don't expect anything in return from your loved one's.


text:
What does dogen's genjo-koan mean?
What does the genjo-koan means? Especially:

To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to
  forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad
  things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well
  as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization
  remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.

and

A fish swims in the ocean, and no matter how far it swims there is no
  end to the water. A bird flies in the sky, and no matter how far it
  flies there is no end to the air. However, the fish and the bird have
  never left their elements. When their activity is large their field is
  large. When their need is small their field is small. Thus, each of
  them totally covers its full range, and each of them totally
  experiences its realm. If the bird leaves the air it will die at once.
  If the fish leaves the water it will die at once.
Know that water is life and air is life. The bird is life and the fish
  is life. Life must be the bird and life must be the fish.
It is possible to illustrate this with more analogies. Practice, enlightenment, and people are like thi

What does it mean to say that these are life and that there's no realisation?

Hakuun Yasutani's Flowers Fall is a worthy commentary.

Dogen is pointing to emptiness. When the self drops, you realise you are one with the ten thousand things, and there is no more I and them. Enlightenment, path, etc are no more than concepts.
The Heart Sutra:

"Shariputra, form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not
  differ from form. That which is form is emptiness, that which is
  emptiness form. The same is true of feelings, perceptions, impulses,
  consciousness. "

And:

"Therefore, in emptiness no form, no feelings, perceptions, impulses,
  consciousness. No eyes, no ears, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind;
  no color, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no object of mind;
  no realm of eyes and so forth until no realm of mind consciousness. No
  ignorance and also no extinction of it, and so forth until no old age
  and death and also no extinction of them. No suffering, no
  origination, no stopping, no path, no cognition, also no attainment
  with nothing to attain. "

http://www.kwanumzen.org/wp-content/uploads/Heart-Sutra-in-English-text1.pdf

The 1st koan is of the phrase in the Pali scriptures: "deep, deep...connected with emptiness".
In the Pali scriptures, there is the statement about enlightenment & Nirvana: 'Birth is ended...there is no more renewal of being'. 'Birth' ('jati') & 'being' ('bhava') are the generation of the idea that there is 'self' & 'other people', i.e., that there are 'various beings & group of beings'.
Therefore, in the actualization described by Dogen, all 'birth' ends. There is no longer the generation of the idea or view that there are 'beings' or 'people', both internally or externally.
All that is experienced is the continuous flow of myriad sense objects or 'things'; of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches & experiences of mind, including the peace called Nirvana.
Even the sense of concrete/solid minds & bodies drops away as experience is only the flow of myriad sense objects of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches & mental experiences; merely elements (dhatu).
When this experience becomes completely normal & ordinary ('suchness'; 'thusness'; 'tathata'), the idea of ('special') 'enlightenment' or 'realisation' also drops away.
Thus, in the 2nd koan, all there is is nature or elements (dhatu) & this is all life is; there is no 'self' that is separate from the elements of nature.

Reaching the Source
There is no more self-consciousness reactions to distort the world.
9th Oxherding Picture

In the Rohitassa Sutta: To Rohitassa you will find a parallel to this GenjoKoan that you pointed out. For the fish it is the water, and for the bird it is the air. Likewise for the gods / celestial beings, it is the cosmos. This Deva told the Buddha about a desire that he had in a previous life when he was a seer named Rohitassa and its result. He said:

” ‘I will go traveling to the end of the cosmos.’ I—with a one-hundred year life, a one-hundred year span—spent one hundred years traveling—apart from the time spent on eating, drinking, chewing & tasting, urinating & defecating, and sleeping to fight off weariness—but without reaching the end of the cosmos I died along the way. So … ‘I tell you, friend, that it isn’t possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one doesn’t take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear.’”

In the above Sutta, the Buddha says that the end of the world cannot be reached by going the distance. Buddha said that only by finding your own self, or in other words, it is the understanding of oneself as one really is, that one would see the light. As the Rohitassa Sutta states, these truths are concerned with the "one-fathom long body of man." The key-note of Buddhism is this right understanding.
To get to know what life is, one has to first come to Samma Ditthi.  Samma Ditthi is in short, Right understanding.  Right understanding is explained as the knowledge of the four noble truths. In other words, it is the understanding of oneself as one really is. One pre-requisite of one coming to ‘Right View’ (Samma Ditti) is learning to welcome advice of the Supreme Buddha with delight. We must not treat even a single verse of Dhamma as being plain and simple. We must learn to treat the Noble Dhamma as supreme. We must consider this Dhamma to be the most profound.
It is said in the scriptures… “ Pemato jayati soko, pemato jayati bhayam”.  [From affection springs grief, from affection springs fear].  Conventional minds will recoil to the idea. But it is seeing this other side to life will one get to know what life is. The truth and meaning of Dhamma becomes a private experience by the wise only when there is insight or vipassana. But vipassana depends on samadhi or concentration. And samadhi depends on Samma-ditthi. Thus, everything in Dhamma is connected. Why is that? The Buddha is speaking, albeit in diverse ways, only of one thing and one thing alone – dukkha and the cessation of dukkha.
This Noble Dhamma is Svākkhāto (it is well proclaimed). Nothing needs to be corrected in this Dhamma (found it the Sutta & Vinaya – the first two baskets) and nothing can be discarded on the basis that it is too plain and simple (if one understands this quality, then this person comes to Samma Ditti— right view). This is why we must hold dear the advice we receive and use that noble advice to discipline ourselves than vice-a-versa.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
contentment, complacency, sloth/torpor
Are these conditions mutually exclusive? Is complacency a form of sloth/torpor?
Sloth/torpor is a hindrance, but to say that one must not be satisfied seems contrary to the spirit of contentment and non-doing.
My guess is that sloth is inertia rooted in avoiding challenge, but not sure.
Please define sloth/torpor, comparing it to contentment.

Complacency is a form of sloth/torpor. Complacency can be said as lethargy in the body (sloth) and drowsiness in the mind (torpor). It is when the mind is not sleeping, but not awake either. So be aware of this twilight zone, where nothing of use is achieved. Buddha advises us to be aware of this enemy in life that would stop you from succeeding in life. So we have to make a habit of getting up early every day, being energetic. Energy arises when one has a clear-cut direction. One knows exactly where one is going and keeps at it. This is one to keep Mara’s armies at bay.
The host of Mara, the Evil One, is described as comprising ten kinds of passions (kilesa). They are: 1. material pleasures (kama). 2. aversion for the Holy Life (arati), 3. hunger and thirst (khuppipasa), 4. craving (tanha), 5. sloth and torpor (thina middha), 6. fear (bhaya), 7. doubt (vicikiccha), 8. detraction and obstinacy (makkhathambha), 9. gain (labha), praise (siloka) honour (sakkara) and ill-gotten fame (yasa), 10. Extolling of oneself and contempt for others (attukkamsana-para-vambhana).
On The Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest and specially on sloth and torpor (thina middha) following is a good example:

Once when the Venerable Maha Moggallana, one of the Buddha's two chief disciples, was meditating in the forest, thina middha arose. His mind shrank and withered, as unworkable as a piece of butter that hardens in the cold. At this point Supreme Buddha looked into the Venerable Maha Moggallana's mind. Seeing his plight, he approached and said, "My son Maha Moggallana, are you drowsy, are you sleepy, are you nodding?"
The elder replied, "Yes, Lord, I am nodding." He was frank and candid in his reply. the Buddha said, "Listen, my son, I will now teach you eight techniques of overcoming sloth and torpor."
Some of the eight Ways to Stay Awake are…  first is to change one's attitude. When torpor attacks, one may be tempted to surrender to thoughts like, "I'm so sleepy. It's not doing me any good just to sit here in a daze. May be I'll lie down for a minute and gather my energy." As long as you entertain such thoughts, the mental state of sloth and torpor will be encouraged to remain. If, on the other hand, one states decisively, "I'll sit through this sloth and torpor, and if it recurs I still won't give in to it," this is what the Buddha meant by changing one's attitude.

If you are content in life is easier to overcome these subtle barriers, these “hindrances,” or “obstacles” as they’re self-created.
Contentment counters sensual desire that the Buddha compared to debt. He compared Ill will to a sickness or an illness. Sloth and torpor he compared to a prison. Restlessness and anxiety he compared to slavery. Uncertainty he compared to traveling across a barren, dangerous landscape.
Contentment is to be content about everything else - all other aspects of your life, but NOT of your spiritual development. Your liking for the Dhamma Path should far exceed the liking that you have for all other things. Then only Contentment can be taken as being detached. The term detachment gives a much deeper meaning than just non attachment.  It is used in Dhamma to denote a certain state of mind, which characterizes calmness, serenity, and equanimity. One become thus by being detached from both  aversion or revulsion, and attachment. The absence of the five hindrances - namely; sensuous desire (kamacchanda), ill-will (Vyapada), sloth and Torpor (thinamiddha), restlessness and scruples (uddhacchakukkuccha) and Skeptical doubt (vicikiccha) helps one to arrive at such a state of mind.  A content mind which is neither attached to anything nor repulsed by anything, helps one to dwell in calmness, coolness, and serenity of mind. A state of calm,detachment is a very positive state, unlike complacency.

To tell you I watched the whole Avatar Series from Aang to Korra, and loved it – would have watched them many times over with my son. Getting back to your OP, I will add a bit more on Contentment, as it can be taken as being detached in life. If you can distance yourself from other distractions, then you are more rested and better able to walk this Path, and live the life of an Avatar Spirit Wan.

This has been a difficult hindrance for me, and returning to your answer, my understanding is somewhat clearer now. Contentment is a state having spiritual energy (virya), accepting things as they are with joy. Complacency can be confused in having a similar outward appearance in acceptance by not displaying any effort to change things, but the reason why is in direct opposition. It is the absence of virya  i.e. sloth and torpor and the absence of joy.

'Complacency' would be a lack of urgency, thus a deficiency in wisdom.
'Sloth & torpor' is a lack of energy (tiredness) or mental dullness ('sinking mind'), which can occur in concentration development & thus a deficiency in optimum concentration technique.
As for 'contentment' & 'complacency', yes, they could occur together when a practitioner is content with a liberating yet lower level of attainment, such as stream-entry or jhana.

If one can be content and complacent, then can one be content yet also have the hindrance of sloth & torpor?

Certainly. But one can also be practising meditation with urgency (non-complacency) but have sloth & torpor due to unbalanced concentration or poor concentration technique.

I disagree on one point - I do not see how one can be content with any one of the hindrances present. Your answer has helped me see this.

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


text:
Does it make any sense to read the four noble truths parallel to the Buddhaghosa's 4 interpretations of the nidanas

The Twelve Nidānas are explained in detail in the Visuddhimagga of
  Buddhaghosa, the central text of the Mahāvihāra commentarial
  tradition. Buddhaghosa recounts four methods to interpret the Twelve
  Nidanas:
Working from "bottom to top",
Working from the "middle to the top",
Working from "top to bottom",
Working from the "middle to the source".

Seems a bit like you might claim these four are in turn the four noble truths in turn

idam dukkham, "this is pain"
ayam dukkha-samudayo, "this is the origin of pain"
ayam dukkha-nirodha, "this is the cessation of pain"
ayam dukkha-nirodha-gamini patipada, "this is the path leading to the cessation of pain"

Has anyone ever claimed this?

Ven. Buddhaghosa himself has said in his book THE PATH OF PURIFICATION (VISUDDHIMAGGA) that 'one's own opinion is the weakest authority of all and should only be accepted if it accords with the Suttas' (DA. 567-68). So far I have not come across such an explanation in the Suttas. So until I come across such an explanation in the Scriptures (Sutta-Vinaya), I’ll have to take it that Ven. Buddhaghosa’s own opinion is the weakest authority of all and should only be accepted if it accords with the Suttas'.
To understand the Four Noble Truths the 4 'foundations of mindfulness’ is there.  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.
The first step toward the Noble Eightfold Path is for one to become faith-devoted – that all the answers are there in the Suttas. One who accepts this path of Dhamma admits that there is 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.
In one who comes to these notions, an internal spiritual faculty will be formed. It is a faculty that operates within the mind. This person will come to the Noble Eightfold Path, as this person has accepted the Supreme Buddha, His Dhamma, and His disciple monks wholeheartedly. It is this person who will begin to study the scriptures in earnest. Only then he/she will begin to realize the Paticca Samuppāda gradually.

Dependent origination is simply a more detailed explanation of the 2nd noble truth, as explained in AN 3.61. Therefore, both the Noble Truths and D.O. can be read in parallel with eachother.
If Buddhaghosa's interpretation is followed, there will be a departure from the here-&-now into ideas about 're-birth'.


text:
How are Prasangika and Svātantrika different?
I was refreshing myself with some stuff on Madhyamaka.
I don't understand how the difference between Prasangika and Svātantrika can be svabhava. How can svabhava exist without changing anything else about conventional entities or ultimate reality?
So what other claims does this entail about conventional entities by Svātantrika?
Or does Prasangika show their ultimate reality cannot be empty?

First, the Gelug and the Nyingma presentations of the Prasangika system vary (in particular with respect to other-emptiness / self-emptiness). My answer is from the Gelug standpoint.
Second, I am confident that the following references would answer your questions:

Editor's introduction to The Adornment of the Middle Way: Shantarakshita's Madhyamakalankara with Commentary by Jamgon Mipham,
Editor's introduction to Introduction to the Middle Way: Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara with Commentary by Ju Mipham, and
The Svatantrika-Prasangika Distinction: What Difference Does a Difference Make?

Prasangika give a short definition of conventional truth:

An object found by a mind distinguishing conventionalities.

While the short definition of ultimate truth is:

An object found by a mind distinguishing the ultimate.

Although the Svatantrika definitions differ, these two help understand the issue at hand. The definition mentions what consciousness has one or the other truth as its object: in one case, "a mind distinguishing conventionalities", in the other "a mind distinguishing the ultimate." It is important to understand what a conventional valid cognizer and an ultimate valid cognizer are, because they apprehend different objects. A conventional valid cognizer apprehends conventional truths while the mind analyzing the ultimate apprehends ultimate truth, the lack of inherent existence. Nihilist think that, since a mind analyzing the ultimate does not find conventionalities (i.e. all it finds is the absence of inherent existence, emptiness) then conventionalities are utterly non-existent. This is the reason why Khedrup Je reminds us: not seeing sounds does not refute the existence of sounds... in the same way, not finding conventional truths with a mind of ultimate analysis does not refute the existence conventional truths. It is not because an Arya in meditative equipoise on emptiness does so in a non-dualistic manner, not apprehending any conventionality, that conventionalities are refuted. Conventional truths and ultimate truths are just the objects of two distinct cognizers, just like smells and sounds are the objects of two distinct consciousnesses.
Both Svatantrika and Prasangika assert that ultimate truth - the absence of inherent existence - is not found by any conventional valid cognizer: it is found only by the pristine wisdom realizing emptiness. This wisdom is a mind that we also call "mind distinguishing the ultimate", "mind of ultimate analysis", "mind analyzing the ultimate." Svatantrika posit that phenomena are empty of inherent existence ultimately because the mind of ultimate analysis apprehends the lack of inherent existence, but they are not empty of inherent existence conventionally because such emptiness is not found by any conventional valid cognizer. Khedrup Je says:

Therefore, when [Svatantrika] explain that entities are natureless, it should be taken in the context of referring to an ultimate [nature, and should not be taken as denying that things exist from their own side]

Prasangika disagree with this assertion. They posit that inherent existence is utterly non-existent. Therefore, phenomena do not exist inherently, be it conventionally or ultimately. Emptiness of inherent existence is not found by any conventional valid cognizer but this does not entail that phenomena are empty only ultimately and not conventionally. According to Prasangika, phenomena are empty of inherent existence even conventionally, since inherent existence is a mode of existence that is refuted by ultimate analysis. Since emptiness of inherent existence is apprehended by an ultimate valid cognizer, its opposite –  inherent existence – must be utterly non-existent. Another way of saying is that inherent existence is not an object of knowledge of even conventional valid cognition. Therefore, no phenomena exist inherently in any way.
Both Jetsün Mipham and Geshe Dreyfus suggest that this distinction was overly emphasized by Prasangika while needed not be. It is the point of Geshe Dreyfus's book: What Difference Does a Difference Make? In the introduction to Mipham's commentary to Shantarakshita, it also says:

Those who, through practice associated with the view of the concordant ultimate, thus attain the experience of the ultimate truth in itself may be called either Prasangika or Svatantrikas depending on the way they make or do not make assertions in subsequent attainment. But one should know that in terms of their realization there is no difference between them. They are both in possession of the wisdom the Aryas.

Prasangika claim, however, that the object of negation asserted by Prasangika is not the same as that of the Svatantrika. Asserting that anything exist inherently in any way (as the Svatantrika do) is untenable. Therefore, according to Prasangika, only a proponent of Prasangika tenets is “in possession of the wisdom of the Aryas”. Indeed, we often believe that all Superiors (Aryas) must be Prasangika by tenets.
The thing is that Svatantrika posit a conventional analysis while Prasangika do not. Since they posit the entity of conventional valid cognizer differently, what these cognizers apprehend must differ as well. Prasangika argue that no conventionality is an object of analysis, but an object apprehended by a conventional valid cognizer that does not investigate the mode of existence of anything. The introduction to Mipham's commentary to Shantarakshita reads:

[Some] think that to affirm a tenet that investigates conventional
  phenomena is incompatible with the Prasangika stance, which is to
  accept phenomena as they are, without analysis, according to the
  general consensus.

This is because conventionalities – conventional truths – are just that: conventions. They are not to be refuted or investigated. Once, in a class I was attending, a student asked our teacher “Since I only see John's body, and the person is not intrinsically one with her body, then it means I have never seen John, doesn't it?” It is due to this type of misunderstanding that Prasangika refute any conventional analysis. It shows just how important it is to understand how conventional truths are objects of conventional cognizer, not of minds analyzing the ultimate. As soon as one engages in analysis, he leans towards the direction of realizing emptiness, and the mind realizing emptiness does so in a non-dualistic manner, it does not apprehend conventional truths.
On the other hand, Svatantrika posit that one can analyze the mode of existence of phenomena by way of a mind of conventional analysis, and thus refute that phenomena exist in certain ways conventionally. For instance, Svatantrika-Yogacara posit that external establishment can be refuted with a conventional analysis. Thus, they claim that phenomena lack external establishment conventionally, do not lack inherent existence conventionally, lack inherent existence inherently. They lack external establishment conventionally because a conventional valid cognizer can refute external establishment; they do not lack inherent existence conventionally because the emptiness of inherent existence can not be found by way of conventional analysis; they do lack inherent existence ultimately because the emptiness of inherent existence is found / realized by way of a mind analyzing the ultimate.
The introduction to Mipham's commentary to Shantarakshita reads:

It must be said, however, that in the context of pramana, or valid
  cognition, applied on the conventional level, [according to
  Svatantrika] it is quiet acceptable to say that phenomena exist
  according to their characteristics or that they are established by
  valid cognition and so forth.

Prasangika say, on the other hand: (1) there is no such thing as conventional analysis (2) inherent existence is utterly non-existent even if its absence is found only by a mind of ultimate analysis, because inherent existence and its emptiness are opposites. It is important to understand what conventional valid cognition and ultimate valid cognitions are to understand what their respective objects are. In the introduction to Mipham's commentary to Shantarakshita, it says:

The Prasangika texts refute 'true existence' (bden grub) and
  'existence according to characteristics' (rang mtshan nyid kyis grub
  pa) indiscriminately. But when one makes a distinction between these
  expressions – as the Svatantrikas do (refuting true existence on the
  ultimate level and asserting existence according to characteristics on
  the conventional level) – one must distinguish, if one is not to
  confuse the issue, the two kinds of reasoning and their respective
  spheres.

Additionally, according to Prasangika, if a phenomena was inherently existent, then it would have to appear the way it exists (i.e. it would have a truly existent phenomena).
According to Svatantrikas, however, conventional truths are empty of true existence (i.e. they do not exist the way they appear) but are not empty of inherent existence conventionally. When Prasangika say that a phenomena does not exist inherently, they mean that if you look for it with a mind analyzing the ultimate, you do not find it. Svatantrika mean something else, since they posit both that (1) they exist inherently and (2) they do not withstand ultimate analysis. In the introduction to Mipham's commentary to Shantarakshita, it says:

[According to Madhyamika-Svatantrika-Yogacara] if conventional
  phenomena were assessed from the standpoint of ultimate valid
  cognition, they would not be even slightly established thereby.

This helps understand the Svatantrika position that conventional truths do not exist inherently ultimately but do exist inherently conventionally.
How do conventional phenomena appear, according to Svatantrikas? They appear as:

existing by way of their own characteristics
not being imputed by mind

While they are, both:

existing by way of their own characteristics, and
imputed by mind.


text:
In this present time, can we go to Nirvana?
I heard that when we settle our mind and focus in one thing, if we meditate we can go to Nirvana. In Buddha's time and many centuries after, people went to nirvana. So my question is, is it possible in this present time if we do all of these things: is it possible go to Nirvana?

I heard that when we settle our mind and focus in one thing, if we
  meditate we can go to Nirvana.

Its much more deeper than this. To put some context to this you can settle your mind in many ways by calming your mind doing breathing exercises, listening to music or many other forms of meditation. This is not what budha's way of calming your mind to go to nirwana. Only way of meditation mentioned in budhism is Anna Pana Sathi (Assa Passa Bawana) Meditation
What it means is  focusing on your current thoughts. If good thoughts come to your mind keep them and refrain from bringing in bad thoughts inside. Also create good thoughts in your mind and remove existing bad habits from inside. This is Anna Pana (Anna pana is not a breathing exercise nor focusing on breathing)

In Buddha's time and many centuries after, people went to nirvana. So
  my question is, is it possible in this present time if we do all of
  these things: is it possible go to Nirvana?

When you do Anna pana sathi you have to do it in the present moment. For example if a bad thought (Moha, Raga, Dewesha) come to your mind few mins earlier you can't clean that using Anna Pana meditation. You can only clean current thoughts not past ones. So that's why budha said Nirwana is at the current moment.
Person who do Anna Pana meditation are capable of Removing Raga Attachments, Moha Attachments, Dwesha Attachments at current moment. You can remove all three with practice of Anna Pana meditation. Any of these could come at any order in a given moment.
Raga - getting attached to something because you like it
Dwesha - getting angry or hate something because you don't like it
Moha - Because you don't know of the truth you measure things between good or bad
Ex: You go to a restaurant and eat a peace of cake which is the best cake you had ever tried. at that (Current) moment you get Raga thoughts and mind get attached to this thinking this is the best. This thought gets stored in your mind how awesome is this cake.
after few months later your mind provide the picture of the cake and all those thoughts stored in your mind suddenly comes to you. again you get attached to that thought in current moment thinking about how awesome was that cake. You picture it taste it from mind.
Next day you go to the same restaurant and order the same cake. But you realize its not the same taste. You get bit of anger at that moment (this is Dwesha) thinking why is it bad today
Then on the very next moment with moha mind you compare the old cake with new cake thinking how awesome was that and how bad is this. It is the same cake same cook same restraunt  but different taste but you got attached Raga Dwesha Moha mind.
For a person who had become enlighten minds at those moments are different
He eats the cake at the current moment notice it is a tasty cake and that's it. He doesn't get attached to it (he doesn't fantasize about the cake with Raga) therefore for him story ended at that moment and moments to come.

The mind can reach Nirvana. It is unrelated to time & place. It is related to dispassion towards the world. Craving, which is an inborn instinct of all life forms, is the major obstacle to Nirvana.

Yes
One of the qualities of the teaching is "Akalika" which means "Timeless". Lord Buddha directly said that the teaching is fruitful regardless of the time it is practiced in. So there is nothing stopping you or anyone from realizing the teaching.
Nirvana is not a place like "Heaven" mentioned in other religions. It is a state of mind. As long as true words of lord Buddha exists,the path is open.
As a beginner to the path do not worry about the end you are trying to reach. Keep practicing so that one day you would reach the destination.
Here are few links for you to expand your knowledge...
http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/index_en.html
www.mahamevnawa.lk/inenglish
www.Dhammasiith.blogspot.com

This Dhamma is not sterile. The Dhamma is alive. The Dhamma has the quality of “Akalika” (not belonging to time). So for those who walk this Noble Eightfold Path in an orderly manner, it is still possible to attain Nirvana.
Having said that I have to now say that it is much harder for a person to realise Nirvana (Nibbana) in the present day. It is because the protective fence that was there in the first 1000 years is not there anymore. Today the world is influenced to a greater degree by Asura Forces.
In Samyutta Nikáya Sutta 16.13, the Supreme Buddha warned that the true Dhamma would remain unadulterated for 500 years after his passing into Nibbána. It is not so today. Today, the Supreme Buddha’s teachings are referred to as Tipitaka (The Three Baskets of Treasuries), although they were called "Dhamma-Vinaya" by the Supreme Buddha in the discourses. In Anguttara Nikáya Sutta 4.180, the Buddha  refers to Dhamma as the Suttas (discourses). Vinaya is the disciplinary code of monks and nuns. In the Nikáyas, it is also implied that the Suttas are "Saddhamma" which means "true Dhamma".  (to be continued....)
I mentioned that the Suttas are "Saddhamma" which means "true Dhamma" - not my words but that of the Supreme Buddha. I left it at that for a couple of days expecting a reprisal. Today one has to be ‘politically correct’ in what one say and do in public. The present-day attitudes are very much a product of the rapid development of science and technology. What the Buddha has said is patisotagami or against the current of conventional thinking. Buddha knew this well. That is why He said,

“Dear Bhikkhus, ones who would not realize this Dhamma is like this earth (in amount). Ones who realize this is like this small amount of soil on my finger nail.”

Only if we develop two important attitudes that strengthen skillful desires: a sense of dismay (samvega) over the universality of suffering that we tend to see as otherwise, and an attitude of heedfulness (appamada) to avoid being duped by types of desires that come our way, that we will have a sense of urgency towards the practice of Dhamma, then ‘Nirvana’ is not that far.
Many a times Buddha had said things to induce samvega:

“Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries—enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released.” — SN 15:14-19

According to the Buddha’s preaching, amount of people who would NOT attain enlightenment is like the amount of soil in this earth. Amount of people who would attain the enlightenment will be like the small amount of soil one can put on a finger nail.


text:
What is the meditation position in which Ananda thero became an arahant?
We all know that Ananda Thero was Buddha's personal attendant -- Wikipedia says,

In the long list of the disciples given in the Anguttara Nikaya (i. xiv.), where each of them is declared to be Prime in some quality, Ānanda is mentioned five times (more often than any other). He was named Prime in conduct, in service to others, and in power of memory. The Buddha sometimes asked Ānanda to substitute for him as teacher and then later stated that he himself would not have presented the teachings in any other way.

So my question is: after Buddha's Nirvana, Ananda Thero became arahant before the The First Council; so what is the position of meditation that Ananda Thero became arahant?

Ven. Ananda’s realization of emancipation happened when he was neither walking, standing, sitting or lying down.  Ven. Ananda was doing the walking meditation at that time.  It is interesting to note that meditation could be practiced employing any of the four bodily postures, and he never got out of his 'walking meditation..  For emancipation one has to eradicate influxes (asava) and this is how Ven. Ananda got emancipated. At that very moment when he was about to lie down, when he was between standing and lying down to sleep, just before his head hit the pillow, he became an arahant.
Nyanaponika Thera discribed it thus, in his book "Great Disciples of the Buddha - Their Lives, Their Works, Their Legacy":

“He practised the four foundations of mindfulness throughout the night - sitting and walking, sitting and walking, sitting and walking. In the early hours of the morning, as he was preparing to lie down after a full night of striving, just when he has raised his legs off the ground but had not yet laid his head on the pillow, his mind was released from all cankers....”
"...When Ananda was 120 years old......Ananda chose a way to die in keeping with his gentle nature: he raised himself into the air through his supernormal powers and let his body be consumed by the fire element. The relics were devided and stupas erected."

you are 100% correct & i want to add some thing to your answer..in society of Buddhist Monks Ananda thero is the one & Only one who become arahant in this way


text:
Who was the buddhist figure who forbade writing what he said, and whose disciples instead wore paper robes?
There's an enlightened buddhist figure I remember reading about a year or two ago, but I am failing completely to search him up. I would like to find his name and story again, could you help me identify him? These are the details I remember:

He was enlightened (I think), and the head of a monastery.
He was known to say quite profound things (of course!), but forbade anyone from writing down what he said.
A couple of his disciples thus resorted to wearing paper robes and carrying ink with them, so that when they were within earshot of him and heard him say something impressive, they could write it down immediately.
He was quite angry at people who wrote down what he said in his presence. I remember reading he once chased a disciple out of his meeting room in fury, shouting "You'd sell me if you could!".
I think books/scrolls were sold of his teachings by those disciples; which is what frustrated him (it seems he was concerned some people were only there to make money by doing this) and is what compelled him to forbid people to write down what he said and chase that person out.
I think he may have been from Japan.

This man contrasts very well with one popular image of enlightenment (outwardly serene, all the time, and completely unable to be messed with in any way) and I would like to show this to a friend who might be struggling with unrealistic self-expectations in their path to enlightenment.

Yúnmén Wényǎn (862 or 864 – 949 CE), (雲門文偃; Japanese: うんもんぶんえん, Ummon Bun'en; also known in English as "Unmon", "Ummon Daishi", "Ummon Zenji"), was a major[a] Chinese Zen master in Tang-era China. He was a dharma-heir of Xuefeng Yicun

This is exactly the figure I was looking for. The paper robes story is featured in the Koans section of his Wikipedia article; I think it was the story of his farewell that first made me aware of him. Thank you very much.

unfortunately i can't answer your question
but

He was quite angry at people who quoted him. I remember reading he
  once chased a disciple out of his meeting room in fury, shouting
  "You'd sell me if you could!"

not an 'enlightened' behavior if you ask me

This man contrasts very well with one popular image of enlightenment
  (outwardly serene, all the time, and completely unable to be messed
  with in any way) and I would like to show this to a friend who might
  be struggling with unrealistic self-expectations in their path to
  enlightenment.

if we talk Buddhadhamma there should be no unrealistic expectations, since qualities of an awakened state are pretty much known in advance being described in the Buddhist scriptures
besides, one cannot know for certain that the said teacher was indeed 'enlightened', especially considering his obvious attachmment to the way his teaching is treated and propensity to anger, and so adducing him for the argument in favor of an alternative form of 'enlightened' demeanor could be misleading and not necessarily convincing

not an 'enlightened' behavior if you ask me -- The OP is asking for the opposite, i.e. for an example/story which "contrasts very well with one popular image of enlightenment (outwardly serene..."

my response is to THIS There's an enlightened buddhist figure... He was enlightened (I think), and the OP asks for help in finding the story of this very teacher who he thinks WAS enlightened, but whos behavior stands in contrast with the 'enlightened' one, which for me is a sufficient prove for him NOT being enlightened, so read my response in this vein, i just wasn't being blunt... he does not ask for the opposite

the OP assumes or believes the teacher was enlightened, then asserts contrast in behavior, but there's really no contrast if the premise is that he was NOT enlightened, because acting this way he was most certainly not

That's a conventional viewpoint/assumption, e.g. at the end of this answer, "It is much easier to tell whether someone is unenlightened, because if they get angry, greedy or deluded, you can be sure they are not enlightened."

for me not only it is conventional, it is also correct

authors: Баян Купи-ка


text:
A question about mental states in meditation
I had meditated Vipassana for about 8 years up to about an hour and a half a day, had an experience, and for no reason related to the experience,  I stopped meditating for about the last 10 years.   Within the last year (after about 10 years) I started meditating again.  My practice has gone from about a half an hour to about 2+ hours a day for the last several months.   Not long after ramping up to about 2 hours a day I had several experiences, one didn’t really fit the mold of anything I have read about with Jhanas, etc.  So I was hoping someone experienced might offer a few words on what it might be.   I understand I am not supposed to grasp or try recreate this, and though I know I had this tendency for a week or two following it, I’m long over it – if I never have another experience again I’m just fine with that.  I’m content just sitting and going nowhere as that’s a great place to be in itself.   But I still would like some context to understand what it was.  I think not having had a real knowledge of jhanas or other altered states until AFTER the second experience happened (I’ve read a few books since then) gives the “uneducated” brain some latitude as my experience hadn’t read those books either.
I had read Ajahn Chah say not to worry about what the books say as it never happens that way anyway, from what he said he didn’t know much about jhanas or altered states either until it happened to him and what he described. Though Ajahn Chah’s experience sounded like a far more powerful and deeper experience than mine, there were some similarities.  He never described (named) his experience into any traditional Buddhist context in his narrative,  and I have none for mine as the closest thing I am aware of is the 5th Jhana – but from what  I’ve read you can’t “jump” Jhana’s more than one or two levels.
I had been doing samatha meditation, unlike the more normal long slow quieting of my mind,  I got into a deep concentration quickly.   I found that unlike normal, I was tight; I had to continuously make a conscious effort to relax my arms, hands, and legs.   I began rocking and turned my concentration from breath to my mind and the peace that was there. I made a mental effort to remember that all of the small very quiet thoughts and images left (vapors of thoughts) were just mental constructs and were not real until the thoughts were vapors of vapors. I knew intuitively that absolute peace was almost uncovered and made a very slight mental exertion to push into it.. The state was very near total quiet and peace.  It was at the most peaceful place a consciousness could be within the realm of my experience. I sensed a piece material comprising a wall, and they started vibrating very hard and as it vibrated it cracked and intuitively I pressed on that and it shattered. .   I know the material, pressing, and shattering I experienced was also a mental construct and not real..  I think it was my thinking mind trying to create something to make sense out of something that doesn’t work in a thinking world, a portal to something beyond thinking.  Things completely flat lined, absolute peace, incredibly vast space, just a consciousness in space without limit.   I had a meditation timer on and it made a chime so I know that I was in this state for about 20 minutes which I did hear from what seemed a great distance away.  I had no sensations of my body, no pain, physical sensations, no breathing, and almost no sound. Then my mind just took itself back, I made no effort to stay or go.
This experience was almost identical to the one that happened to me about 10 years before. The difference was with the ten years old experience I remember coming out if it with a powerful epiphany “It’s all true” about the dharma as I had experienced some doubt that “all this Buddhist meditation stuff” could be some clever parlor mind game and that I had wasted years practicing.. I had no doubt of the truth.   This time I didn’t have that epiphany, but a whole lot of the permanent deep seated stress (PTSD) of many events events of the last 10 years were gone (2 long term unemployment experiences, complete loss of wealth, near homelessness, the drug addiction of one of my kids, and divorce). The persistent stress that was a part of my identity had vanished and has now been gone for months.   Knowing where you are on the path and to put things into some type of context, are good to know.  If you have some wisdom to share about this I would appreciate it.

The state was very near total quiet and peace. It was at the most peaceful place a consciousness could be within the realm of my
  experience. I sensed a piece material comprising a wall, and they
  started vibrating very hard and as it vibrated it cracked and
  intuitively I pressed on that and it shattered....Things completely
  flat lined, absolute peace, incredibly vast space, just a
  consciousness in space without limit....I had no sensations of my
  body, no pain, physical sensations, no breathing, and almost no sound.
  Then my mind just took itself back, I made no effort to stay or go...a
  whole lot of the permanent deep seated stress (PTSD) of many events
  events of the last 10 years were gone (2 long term unemployment
  experiences, complete loss of wealth, near homelessness, the drug
  addiction of one of my kids, and divorce). The persistent stress that
  was a part of my identity had vanished and has now been gone for
  months.

Thank you for your lovely & inspiring post.
My explanation is this was a vivid experience of the inherent purity of mind/consciousness, including experiencing the capacity/ability of the mind to purify/cleanse itself of conditioned impure emotions (refer to Pabhassara Sutta).
The peace is the Nirvana Element and the vibrations are the Suffering (Dukkha) Elements and when the Nirvana Element 'touched' the Suffering Elements, the Suffering Elements were dissolved/shattered by the Nirvana Element (just like pure water can dissolve/clean dirt).
Thus, your accumulated PTSD from the mind attaching & clinging to the vicissitudes of life was also shattered or cleansed.
I would say your experience was not 'jhana' but it was a profound cleansing catharsis (from which consciousness can get very exalted), which is a most excellent, beneficial & healthy experience to have.
The mind (rather than "you" or "ego"), after many years, itself decided to clean up the mess in its house. Its like the digestive system deciding to go to the toilet.
This video about Ajahn Chah may be relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1oK4Vt_ntY

Dhammadhatu,   thank you so much for your answer and the links. I had never seen the Ajahn Chah videos narrated by Ajahn Jayasaro. I really appreciate the time you must have taken to put  into a thoughtful answer.  Honestly, it brought tears to my eyes.. my desire to know about this has been quenched.   Thanks you!


text:
The pali word for this concept
I'm wondering if pali has a specifically designated word for the view that the outer world is a reflection of one's own life state, not the other way around.
Additionally, I am wondering if there are any good recources that people know of online that acts as a pali dictionary for buddhist philosophical concepts.

The "view that the outer world is a reflection of one's own life state, not the other way around" -- can you reference this view (do you know of one or more Pali scriptures which describe and/or name this view)?

@ChrisW Hmm, I'm not exactly sure. It's something I've just heard talked about quite a bit. I think it comes from the Vimalakirti Sutra (which I know is a Mahayana Sutra). In there it says that there are no two worlds pure or impure; that the difference lies in our minds alone. I thought that it still would have a Pali word for it even if it wasn't directly a part of Tharavada philosophy. Is that statment correct?

A Pali word for the view that the outer world is a reflection of one's own life state is 'namati', which means 'inclination' or 'bent'.
The Dependent Origination explains when ignorant sankhara arise & control the mental faculties (nama), the mind (nama) develops an inclination (nati) bent (namati) by those ignorant sankhara.
As a result, the mind will pursue & engage in sense contact (passa), in which it views the external world in an ignorant way, such as viewing evil as 'good', the ugly as 'beautiful', the undesirable as 'desirable', the impermanent as 'permanent', the unsatisfactory as 'satisfactory' & not-self things as 'self', etc.

Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination (nati) of his mind. If a monk keeps pursuing
  thinking imbued with sensuality, abandoning thinking imbued with
  renunciation, his mind is bent (namati) by that thinking imbued with
  sensuality. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with ill will,
  abandoning thinking imbued with non-ill will, his mind is bent (namati) by
  that thinking imbued with ill will. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking
  imbued with harmfulness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmlessness,
  his mind is bent (namati) by that thinking imbued with harmfulness.
Dvedhavitakka Sutta

~~~

Nati (f.) [Sk. nati of nam] bending, bent, inclination S ii.67; iv.59; M i.115.
Namati [Ved. namati, Idg. nem to bend; also to share out]

Dhammapada: The Buddha’s Path of Wisdom
Yamakavaggo.

Manopubbaṅgamā dhammā manoseṭṭhā manomayā 1 Manasā ce paduṭṭhena bhāsati vā karoti vā Tato naṃ dukkhamanveti cakkaṃ'va vahato padaṃ.
Manopubbaṅgamā dhammā manoseṭṭhā manomayā 2 Manasā ce pasannena bhāsati vā karoti vā Tato naṃ sukhamanveti chāyā'va anapāyinī.

1-2   Phenomena are preceded by the heart, ruled by the heart, made of
  the heart. If you speak or act with a corrupted heart, then suffering
  follows you — as the wheel of the cart, the track of the ox that pulls
  it.
Phenomena are preceded by the heart, ruled by the heart, made of the
  heart. If you speak or act with a calm, bright heart, then happiness
  follows you, like a shadow that never leaves.

In this context the pali term ‘Dhamma’ is translated as penomina.
And ‘Mano’(=mind) as heart.
From these translation Dhamma is translated as mental states.

Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all
  mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering
  follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.
Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all
  mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness
  follows him like his never-departing shadow.

In Buddhist philosophy the  term Dhamma is used for everything belongs to outer and inner world.

'Dhamma' is the word used as the sense objects in the sense sphere of mano (mind as sense organ), dhamme (mind objects) and mano-vinnana (mind consciousness). Therefore, 'dhamma' in the context of Dhammapada 1 appears to be internally generated 'mind objects' that result intentional kamma (rather than 'phenomena'). The mind does not create the external world. The mind only experiences or gives rise to awareness of the external world. Buddharakkhita's translation of 'mental states' is probably correct and Thanissaro's translation of 'phenomena' is probably incorrect.

If Dhamma is an mind objects only, then how they create samsara(external world) or kamma vipaka?

Dp1 appears to be about kamma (intention) & vipaka (result) rather than the conscious knowing of the external world because each verse states: "If with a....mind a person speaks or acts..."

Some interpretations of Buddhism assert that external reality is an illusion, and sometimes this position is misunderstood as metaphysical solipsism. Buddhist philosophy, though, generally holds that the mind and external phenomena are both equally transient, and that they arise from each other. The mind cannot exist without external phenomena, nor can external phenomena exist without the mind. This relation is known as "dependent arising" (pratityasamutpada).

maybe. but, imo, Dp1 is not referring to dependent arising. it is referring to how the mind creates pure & impure kamma & results. regards.

IMO, dependent arising describes kamma & results (=samsara). regards.

Yes it does. But Dp1 does not describe external phenomena cannot exist without the mind. Dp1 is about karma & results. It states "If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow" & "If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox." Also, Buddhism does not teach external phenomena cannot exist without the mind. You are taking the dhamma too far here. For example, AN 3.134 on internet (really AN 3.136) states the law of dhamma exists regardless of mind & its discovery by Buddha.

is this what AN 3.136 says? 136. Bhikkhus, endowed with three characteristics friends should be associated. What three? Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu gives something difficult to give, does something difficult to do, pardons when difficult to pardon.

Its AN 3.134 on the internet: Dhamma-niyama Sutta - "whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant...All processes are unsatisfactory...All phenomena are not-self." Similar, SN 12.20 - "Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this regularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma, this this/that conditionality. " These two suttas state the Dhamma exists, even when it is unknown to man.

You asked about,

the view that the outer world is a reflection of one's own life state, not the other way around

I'm not sure that that is a conventional/orthodox view from the Pali canon.
I mean, maybe there are views that are like that ... but maybe not exactly like that, or nothing phrased exactly like that?
If someone weren't familiar with Buddhism then their first/naive interpretation of that phrase might be, "if 'the outer world is a reflection of one's own life state', does that mean so one's own life state is true and real contrasted with the outer world being less true or unreal (i.e. merely a reflection or illusion)?"
But I think that (saying that the outer world is unreal) might be (or might be, if it's misunderstood or taken to a naughty extreme) a wrong view:

And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no contemplatives or brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view.

According to western philosophy/language there's a view called Solipsism.

Moving on from there, some people who know very little about Buddhism might think that "Buddhism teaches that the outside world is an illusion".
I wondered where that belief might come from and found Maya (illusion).
If "Maya" is more Indian or Vedic than Buddhist, the more-Buddhist counterparts to that might be Saṃsāra (which is Sankrit and Pali), or perhaps Vipallasa (distortions of the mind).
I think that (Vipallasa) is a more standard view in the Pali canon: it's a view/philosophy that we mis-see, that we mis-understand the (whole, outside and inside) world.

I'm not sure about phenomenology in Pali, which I think is a subject of the Abhidhamma. So far as I know, the Pali canon doesn't say that the "outer world" is more or less than some counterpart "inner world". If you read about Ayatana it says that there are "external" and "internal" sense objects, maybe without saying that one is a reflection of the other.
On the other hand, "Rupa" (which I understand as meaning "forms" or "external objects") shows up among the 5 aggregates and the 12 nidanas ... in context maybe we should understand as saying that Rupa has some existence (though not "self-existence") but it's important because of its effect on our consciousness.
While I'm mentioning "rupa" let me also mention "dhamma", since other answers here talk about it ... it's a word with many meanings, I think one of those meanings is that it means "idea" ... I think the Sabba Sutta implies that dhammas are perceived by the mind, in a way that's similar to (no more and no less important than) the way in which forms are perceived by the eye, etc.

In a comment you mentioned the Vimalakirti Sutra: which I haven't read.Wikipedia says,

The sutra teaches, among other subjects, the meaning of nondualism.

I think that "non-duality" as a teaching will be found more in scriptures that are later than the Pali canon, so maybe there isn't exactly a Pali word for that philosophy.
If there is such a word though then it might be advaya ... Dvaya means "two-fold" or "dual"; so advaya means "not two-fold", "non-dual", or "single".
Maybe the Vimalakirti Sutra de-emphasizes the "outside world" by talking about "emptiness" ... the Pali word for that is suññatā.

The Law of Attraction says “Like attracts like” and “Birds of feather flock together”. This is based upon the idea that people and their thoughts are both made from pure energy, and the belief that like energy attracts like energy. The scriptures too attest to this truth. In the Samyuktha Nikaya, Kamma Sutta 3 (S.ii.155)  that was preached at Gijjhakūta, the Buddha tells the gathered bhikkhus:
“Do you see Ven.  Sāriputta, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus have great wisdom.”
“Do you see Ven.  Moggallāna, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus have great spiritual powers.”
“Do you sees Mahā Kassapa ,walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus are proponents of the Ascetic practices.”
“Do you see Ven.  Anuruddha, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus possess the devine eye.”
“Do you see Ven.  Punna Mantānīputta, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus are speakers on the Dhamma.”
“Do you see Ven. Upāli, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus are upholders of the discipline.”
“Do you see Ven. Ananda, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus are highly learned.”
“Do you see Devadatta, walking with several other bhikkhus? All those bhikkhus have evil wishes.”
Buddha ends this discourse by saying that beings of similar disposition come together.

One of my favourite sutta teachings

Translations of that Caṅkamana Sutta can be found here (linked from suttacentral) and here (with commentary). The latter translates the Pali word dhātu as meaning "personal disposition".

The answered mentioned "The Law of Attraction" -- there's a topic about that (that phrase) at What is the Buddhist point of view of the Law of Attraction?. Wikipedia on that subject says that particular "Law" is from a 19th century western philosophy -- so not really Buddhist probably. Do you know a Pali word for such a concept (or for any similar concept)?

Many thanks for the valuable feedback, and the links that you've provided @ChrisW. I do not know of the Pali word (as of now). I will try & look into it...

You're welcome. I read a similar story but I forget where -- I think it was advice to the monk whose duty is to decide where other monks will be housed: and the advice was that monks who like to meditate in silence should be housed with other monks who like to meditate in silence; that monks who like to discuss should be housed with other monks who like to discuss; and there was at least one other category.

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


text:
Will earth become a planet without Humans?
lets imagine that in all the human in earth become Arhant, so after their death they will not born again (i mean all of the humans).  after this will new humans born or Not, will earth become a planet without Humans  ?

"i know this will never happen" - this invalidates the question

Not if, my dear friend, when.
Suffering will always exist.   It is after all the first noble truth.  But I think your question is a theoretical one, and a very good one.  Yes, theoreticaly, if all beings now on earth attained enlightenment, then there would be no sentient beings as we know them (born live die).  But back to the vastness of reality's expanse, surely another meteor would come around and add new life to the earth before it falls into the sun....   de ja vue )))

Definitly, As per science when there is a start, there must be end.
Even our galaxy will expire.
you can take example of anything in this world, nothing is permanent.

Do you think that everyone in this world will develop a sense of dismay (samvega) over the universality of suffering?  Of those who see life in this way, what is the percentage that will develop an attitude of heedfulness (appamada) to avoid being duped by types of desires that come our way?  How many will have a sense of urgency towards the practice of Dhamma?
What the Buddha has said is patisotagami or against the current of conventional thinking. Buddha knew this well. That is why He said, “Dear Bhikkhus, ones who would not realize this Dhamma is like this earth (in amount). Ones who realize this is like this small amount of soil on my finger nail.”
As per the Teachings of the Buddha, the world will be without humans, but it will take an extremely long time. This is been said by the Supreme Buddha as He can remember the past up to infinite time such as many Sanvatta Kalpa, Vivatta Kalpa, and Sanvatta Vivatta Kalpa. Sanvatta kalpa means the time that takes the world to be destroyed after countless years. Vivatta kalpa means, time of the beginning of the world.
Long before this day is going to pass and in that time of the people with an eighty-thousand-year life-span, there will arise in the world a Blessed One, an Arahant fully enlightened Buddha named Metteyya /Maithree. You may now wonder whether there would be enough food for all. Buddha once said, ““Dear devotee, I am looking at 92 Kalpas (a long time) to the past right now. In all that time, no one had to face any destruction of their families as a result of offering their food.”

If all of the humans become enlightened you still have other sentient creatures who would become humans. At that point those would be saved by buddhas and bodhisattvas. But even then there is not a finite number of sentient beings since there is no transmigration, just rebirth of sankharas which is not strictly limited to one entity. So, I don't see an end of sentient beings reborn on earth. Whether humans evolve into something else is unknown. And eventually the earth will be destroyed by the sun and disintegrate with the rest of the universe.

will all beings attain enlightenment or will all beings not attain englightement is a speculative view, much like is the view about is universe finite or is the universe infinite and the other 9 questions. This question should be set aside. It is irrelevant to the grow or maturity of the Dhamma.

There are infinite beings in a universe. Event if a large number of beings become enlightened then still there will be infinite beings. The number of beings in all planes who get enlightened is approximately 24 asankya. The number of past Buddhas is infinite, the number of Arahants are infinite as there were infinite Sasanas. But despite all who becomes arahants infinite being remain, of whom some maybe born in this world.

Is there a reference for your statement of 24 asankyas.

At the moment I do not have. There 24 special instances where the the disclosures liberate 1 asankyas. Other instances the number is negligible, therefore that is why it is said 24 asankyas. This number is supposingly true for all Buddhas and Buddha only attains Parinibbana this number is complete. Again these are things I picked up in talks. I do not know what the source is.


text:
Difference between satipatthana and vipassana
Is satipatthana a synonym for vipassana? If not, what is the difference between both?

Vipassana is a compound of two words: vi - and passana. Vi means various, i.e. the three characteristics (transiency, unsatisfactoriness, non self). Passana means right understanding or realization by means of mindfulness of mentality and physicality. Vipassana therefore means the direct realisation of the three characteristics of mentality and physicality.
Vipassana or the right understanding requires the right awareness(Satipattana).
In other words, 'Satipattana' is the meditation you do to gain Vipassana.
It is of 4 kinds:

Kayanupassana(awareness of the body): the movements and postures.
Vedananupassana(awareness of feelings): bodily and mental sensations of pain, happiness, calm, etc.
Cittanupassana(awareness of the mind): thoughts that arise in the mind – of the past or future, good or bad;
Dhammanupassana(awareness of phenomena): groups of mental and physical phenomena that are of specific interest to the meditator, including the mental states that cloud one’s awareness, the six senses by which one experiences reality, and many others

More at http://www.sirimangalo.org/text/how-to-meditate/chapter-one-what-is-meditation/

Satipatthana is firmly established mindfulness / heedfulness. The four satipatthana are Kayanupassana-satipatthana, Vedananupassana-satipatthana, Cittanupassana-satipatthana, Dhammanupassana-satipatthana.  It is extremely important for a disciple of the Buddha to know the connection / relationship of Satipatthana to Vipassana. The Supreme Buddha said in the Satipatthāna Sutta that a Bhikkhu would become an Arahant or an Anāgāmii within 7 days if he practices the path in the exact way the Buddha advised. (Anāgāmii: the 3rd fruition, which is one step lower to Nibbāna).
One who meditates should have a sharp mindfulness, if he/she wants to gain the Vipassanā Paññā (wisdom of contemplating the true nature of things). It is said that a person who practice samatha and vipassana (calm and insight) without first coming to kayagata-satipatthana (mindfulness as regards the body), resembles the owner who yokes the still untamed bullock (a young male cow) to the cart or plough without the nose-rope. Such an owner would find himself unable to drive the bullock (male cow/steer) at his desire, as the steer is wild. Having no nose-rope, the steer will either try to run off the road, or break loose by breaking the yoke.
A person who first trains his mind with kayagata-satipatthana (contemplation of the body) before turning his mind to the practice of samatha and vipassana (calm and insight), his attention will remain steady and his meditation will be a success.
In the Ananda Sutta the Blessed One said that, Anapanasati, which when developed and pursued brings the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (Cattaro Satipatthana) to completion. The Four Foundations of Mindfulness, when developed and pursued bring the Seven Factors of Enlightenment to completion. The Seven Factors of Enlightenment, when developed and pursued bring Clear Knowing and Release to completion.”
This tells us that the thirty-seven bodhipakkhiya Dhamma in included in the Vipassana. The bodhipakkhiya dhamma consist of seven kinds: the Four Satipatthana; the Four Sammappadhana Viriya; the Four iddhipada; the Five Indriya; the Five Bala; the Seven Bhojjhanga; and the Noble Eightfold Path. When contemplating on the Dhamma thus, the meditator comes to realize the absence of a permanent and unchanging self (identity) or soul in any or all of the constituents of empirical existence, and beyond skandhas, there is no actual self. He she comes to the understanding that what is normally thought of as "self" is a collection of constantly changing physical and mental components [of clinging] ([upadana-]skandhas). Then the meditator realizes the true nature and detached him/herself from what is mistakenly regarded as his or her self.

Satipatthana is not a synonym for vipassana. However, countless satipatthana retreats are advertised as "vipassana retreats".
Vipassana is often translated as 'special insight'. According to Mahayana, any analytical meditation belongs to the class of vipassana. Whether one engages in analytical meditation on death and impermanence, or the three types of suffering, etc. this belongs to the class of vipassana. Actual vipassana, however, is analytical meditation on emptiness.
In the Lam Rim Chen Mo, Tsongkhapa says:

Nevertheless, all the meditative stabilizations starting from a
  single-pointed mind placed on a virtuous object are included in the
  class of calm abiding, and all the virtuous wisdom minds individually
  analyzing the meaning of the mode or varieties are included in the
  class of special insight.

Satipatthana is often translated 'four placements of mindfulness'. Placement of mindfulness on the body, feelings, minds, dharmas. Some argue that placement of mindfulness on dharmas imply placement of mindfulness on the sixteen aspects of the four noble truths, including "empty" and "selfless". Such a placement might be vipassana, analytical meditation on emptiness.

Vipassana is seeing with wisdom, the three marks of existence - anicca, dukkha and a anatta of conditioned existence ( sankhata dhamma).
Satipattana is establishing mindfulness in
- body ( can be done in 14 ways)
-feeling
-mind
-mental objects ( can be done in 5 ways)
When mindfulness is thus established in accordance with the guidance given in maha Satipattana sutta( samma sati), it leads to defilement free state of mind or jhana ( samma samadhi).
only when that state of calmness or purity of mind reached, is the mind suitable for vipassana.
The vipassana yogi can now contemplate on the scary and repulsive nature of mind and body, as taught by The Buddha in various ways... Aniccato, dukkhato, anattato, rogato, gandato, sallato etc.. Upto 40 ways are given as expansions of the 3 marks of existence in chatthalisakara vipassana bhavana .  Such contemplations lead to nibbida ( revulsion of all forms of existences), viraga ( non attachment) and nirodha ( cessation) or nibbana .
This is the Therawada teaching