text:
Is technology making us less mindful?
In terms of availability of technology, the modern world is very different from the world in which Buddhism arose, and the Buddhist suttas were written As a result, these days, people do things differently from the past, for example:

performing multiple tasks at once
using medication to try to improve attention
working with headphones on, listening to music or radio
constantly using smartphones and tablets

Are there any consequences of all of this for Buddhist practice? For example, does technology impact meditation and insight? Are we becoming more distracted and therefore adding more suffering to our lives?

still seems off-topic? I would vote if my vote wasn't final.

Hello Andrei, more of less, we had this discussion before, let's keep it for a while and see if the answers are useful :)

I think this is, at core, a useful question but I agree it is off topic as it stands (even with @yuttadhammo's edits). I'm going to take the risk of blootering konrad01's meaning and make some changes. konrad01, just revert if I break it!

When it comes to developing concentration modern technology is definitely a distraction as devices tend to seek your attention. This leads to being scatter brained. This is the reason many meditation centres don't allow you to have them.
Also modern life style has a lot of responsibilities, and leaves little time for spiritual practice.
The society as a whole is becoming materialistic and sensualised. This means that you are always in in the process of getting attached to different products and services as well as the more morally loose life style. This hinders development of insight as it is kāma-taṇhā, or "sense-craving".
Mode education and scientific thought has made people to be more inquisitive and skeptical towards traditional or unfamiliar teaching. This is a double edged sword as this can lead to Vichikicha also.
In a modern world our quality of life has increased due to these technologies. Hence the onus is on the user to use them for ones benefit. E.g. if there is a kitchen knife and you use it to cook you are getting utility. You can use it for a very negative cause like killing or committing suicide. It is the user who is to blame and not the knife.

In "The Distraction Addiction", Alex Soojung-Kim Pang reports something on this that surprised me. My initial reaction to the question of modern technology distracting us and making mindfulness hard was to say "absolutely". I agreed (still do to some extent) with Nick Carr in "The Shallows", that the Internet is making us stupid.
But Alex Soojung-Kim Pang talked to several Buddhists who were active on the Internet, including, I believe, our very own @yuttadhammo, and got a reaction of surprise from them on this question. Their overall answer seemed to be, no, of course modern technology is not any more or less distracting than anything else, because distraction is an internal state -- i.e. it is our reaction to the external stimuli that matters, not the external stimuli themselves.
To square that with my own experience of Clear and Present Distraction from e-things, I note that the people he talked to were experienced meditators. So my current theory is that if you have achieved a certain level of advancement in meditation, you may well be able to operate without technology being a problem; but until you have reached that level, distracting modern technology may act as an obstacle to you even reaching that level of advancement.
In summary: newbies should explicitly guard the sense doors -- a.k.a. turn your phone off sometimes!; but advanced meditators may not need to be as cautious (because they implicitly do it anyway).

agree. The "issue" here is with the new generation, the original question was related to generation Y and Z but was changed because some considered it to be offensive somehow.

The problem is never the external, ever!! It's always the individual and their mind. To blame anything or anyone for our distraction or for our pain and suffering, that is complete ignorance, that is lack of wisdom, that is wrong-view!!

This makes me think of two quotes I once read.

I think that technologies are morally neutral until we apply them. It's only when we use them for good or for evil that they become good or evil.
-William Gibson

It is as you say, we do things differently than we did in the past. We grow up with technology, it is commonplace. When something is common, it is not uncommon for us to take for granted the advantages and disadvantages.
This quote will capture the essence of what I'm trying to say far better:

We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. In that race which daily hastens us towards death, the body maintains its irreparable lead.
-Albert Camus

In his book The World Until Yesterday Jared Diamond compares traditional societies (i.e. tribal societies in places such as the highlands of Papua New Guinea) with our Western capitalist society. One of the things he noticed about traditional societies was how much they talked to each other. They apparently have a running dialog with each other about achingly trivial things - what they've eaten. how they've slept, what's this, what's that, what's she doing etc... It is a lot more than Western society - we are very quiet by comparison. They didn't spend their time being very very mindful.
So to believe that without modern technology we would all be a lot less distracted is wrong (IMO). We would just distract ourselves with other things. Without smart phones, we would watch TV. Without TV we would listen to the radio. Without the radio we would crowd round to piano for a sing and read books. Without any of this we would just talk and talk and talk and distract each other.
It's not technology that's the problem it is us. I really think there is something deep inside us that doesn't want to be connected with the present moment and it will grasp at anything to avoid it - smart phones, internet, TV, wittling a piece of wood, anything.

I like the neutral tone of the ideas by "the hermit". We are in this world and we can use technology as we are doing now to awaken ourselves to our real nature or we can use it to increase our sense of personal self.
What seems apparent is that we cannot make someone practice that feels in their bones the calling to live out their personal sense of life. Nor can we, or would we want to, tear a bikhu from the practice of awakening to the Buddha nature.
Technology is a tool. We can use it to enhance our understanding and practice, or we can use it to crystallize our self-conceptions and self-deceptions.
What we cannot change is the inner drive a person feels to reach their destiny in whatever form that is, be it worldly or spiritual. If they feel the spiritual fire nothing will stand in their way.
Let us not demonize technology or idealize Buddhism. Is this not what having compassion for all is about, acceptance without judgement?

That is a very difficult distraction, and I think it is best pre-faced by saying, we have a lot of leisure time and a lot of incoming data.
I don't know, if I were a subsistence farmer in 11th century England, if I would be mindful, or just struggling a bit more viscerally.
I am getting rid of all my stuff, though.
Especially the distracting technology stuff.  Like the "TV". :)


text:
Interacting with monks in Thailand
I'm planning to visit Thailand, so I would like to know some simple local "rules" to interact with monks respecting Theravada tradition, I want to avoid behaving like a tourist that (not intentionaly) breaks the protocols, also I want to maximize the experience there, so I will list some specific topics:

How to approach to do dana? Can I offer to buy food for them or should I just give the food?
How to interact in temples or centres, can a lay person start a conversation or would it be distracting therefore not a good idea?
Should one bend or prostate to the monks? Or make the gesture with the hands (similar to praying)? In what occasions?
Any specific advise for women when interacting with Bikkhus? Not touching them? I assume they should avoid some revealing clothes as well.
Any other specific advise?

Many thanks!

You will see the monks in the early morning going on a procession called Pindapata, or Bindabat in Thai (at least I think that's how it's spelled). That is the time  you will want to offer Dana. Approach with the food and they will uncover the alms bowl and let you put the food in.
When approaching a monk you should always put your hands together at about heart level facing forwards and bowing your head so your forehead is parallel with your hands. Here is a link that talks about how to do it with a nice picture with three examples. With monks, do the version shown on the far right: http://www.phuket.com/magazine1/dos.htm
Women aren't allowed to have physical contact with monks and when receiving offerings other than food in their alms bowl in Thailand they will lay out a white cloth for you to set the offering on.
I'll edit more in if I think of anything.

You should be mindful of some of the Vinaya rules like not eating after noon.
If you are a lady don't meet the monks alone.
When sitting in the presence of a monk choose a lower chair.
Remove foot wear inside the monastery.
Wear clothes which are modest and cover your self well. No shorts, mini skirts, see through dresses, etc.

Thanks and how about giving food and bending? These are my main doubts

+1 for this also. Place the food in the bowl if you see a monk doing his alms round and bend with your hands together.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is there any benefit in learning Pali or Sanskrit?
Much of the Theravadan scriptures are written in Pali, so are a lot manuscripts written in Sanskrit, but is there any benefit in learning these languages while the Canon is already translated in other languages i.e. English?
Also:

Should one learn Pali or Sanskrit first?
Should one put effort in learning to speak Pali/Sanskrit (if that is possible)?

There absolutely is value in learning either Pali or Sanskrit (and I'd stick to the one for the lineage you are practicing - Theravada = Pali, Mahayana in general = Sanskrit).  You don't have to become fluent, but it is extremely helpful knowing a good deal of the vocabulary.  There are certain words that just don't translate well into English or just don't have any English equivalent.  I think this is especially true for the meditation terminology - especially mental factors and phenomenology.  To give you an example from Pali, the word pīti is a condition that arises during mediation.  It is often translated as "rapture", but I don't think this really gets at it (bright joy?  I don't know.  Something like that.)  The point is, if you read that word just as "rapture", you miss out on the full meaning of the concept.  Translated texts put you at one remove from those subtle nuances.  And really, it's the concepts we're worried about in our practice; poorly translated words lead you away from that core essence.
Don't learn to speak it though - that's a total waste of time!

More in agreement with your view.

I am also in agreement with the answer for those serious about delving into the teachings for their deeper understandings. Especially agree with: "Theravada = Pali, Mahayana in general = Sanskrit".

Learning Pali is indeed beneficial if you have a inclination to be a scholar or to teach. If it is your salvation you are after you are better off spending time practicing. But to teach others the bar is much higher than practicing on your own. This is also a worthy cause.

I agree with those who praise learning Canonical languages. Studying Pāli texts in Pāli is very rewarding. I have found my understanding of the Buddha's teaching blossomed through reading Pāli texts. I enjoying reading texts in Pāḷi and I teach beginners Pāḷi around my local Buddhist Centre.
Pāḷi is not a difficult language to learn. I would start there. It is always advantageous to learn Sanskrit because word morphology and derivations are much clearer and regular in Sanskrit. One can do without it to some extent, but especially once you start reading poetry Sanskrit comes in very useful.
What else you learn will depend on your interests. If your interest is primarily early Buddhism then the language to learn is Chinese. Not Mandarin but Middle or Classical Chinese. Studying the parallels between Pāḷi, Gāndhārī and Chinese is a hot topic at present. Often a Chinese text cannot be understood without a Pāli or Sanskrit text to compare it to. The Chinese script is difficult, but the grammar is very simply and easy compared to Sanskrit!
Sanskrit requires a much greater commitment and perseverance to learn. It is mostly written in Devanāgarī and has many more declensions and conjugations as well as a dual in addition to singular and plural. However, if you are interested in Mahāyāna texts a combination of Sanskrit and Chinese unlocks the Canon, so you cannot do without it. Sanskrit is also useful for historical interests - it is more closely related to ancient Iranian for example. Sanskrit also helps with the Brahmanical texts which were being written and discussed at various times by Buddhists. Being at least a little bit familiar with the early Upaniṣads helps to clarify some of the Buddha's teachings.
I've not tried Tibetan or Japanese. The former can be very useful for Mahāyāna texts and of course for Tibetan Buddhism. The latter has a huge body of scholarship that does not get translated into European languages. Many of the early Japanese Buddhists, like Kūkai, wrote in Classical Chinese.
If you want to know how people think, learn their language.

Great answer, thank you and +1 for the statement "If you want to know how people think, learn their language". Can i ask how did you learn pali language?

No, I would say this is a trap, a side-trail that does not lead to the goal.
It looks attractive to the ego, because it stimulates certain hope in us, a hope to get closer to the Truth -- but this is a false hope. There is a Pali term, papañca, which can be translated as "conceptual bullshit". This is the danger here, getting caught up in quasi-intellectual masturbation.
The Truth is known by realized teachers, this is whom we must seek. Teachers show us how theoretical dharma maps to real life. The only reason to prefer the books over teachers' interpretations, is if you don't trust the teachers. If this is the case, then you should take a good look inside yourself and ask: "why do I assume that no one really understands Dharma? Could it be a projection of my distrust/aversion to this world with its people and values?" Surrendering yourself to a teacher helps.
That said, it is tremendously useful to know the main terminology. So I keep my Sanskrit and Pali dictionary links on my Google Chrome toolbar, and use them all the time. You can learn a lot from understanding the raw meaning, and the story behind, some words.
There are people who were able to turn the trap into a blessing. Take Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi for example  (the famous translator of Nikayas into English) - he got caught up in a fly trap, but because he was so determined, he was able to tear through all words, understand the meaning, and get to the nectar -- while benefiting all of us. But unless you are a super-geek like him (I respectfully bow at his feet!) -- your time is much better spent putting dharma to practice.

Interesting aside regarding Bhikkhu Bodhi that sort of reinforces your point - he's physically unable to meditate.  It gives him severe migraines.  I'm curious as to whether we'd have his translations if not for that.

I must say I have never heard of 'quasi-intellectual masturbation', great use of words. The only reason to prefer the books over teachers' interpretation, is if you don't trust the teachers - @enenalan presented another valid reason too in my opinion, which is that the English terminology is not completely compatible with the Pali terminology. I understand that the point you try to make is to seek value in practice rather than learning the Dhamma. But is there really no value in trying to understand the core teachings directly and more profoundly (not to the extreme level)?

"English terminology is not completely compatible with the Pali terminology" -- all words are like that, they are not "completely compatible" with life! We have to know what is spoken about, only then can we see the message behind the words. "I understand that the point you try to make is to seek value in practice rather than learning the Dhamma" -- not at all. Learn Dharma, master it in practice, instead of pretending to be busy while entertaining one's brain. "Is there really no value in trying to understand the core teachings directly" - only experience is "direct", not reading.

I can't agree, I see some value in it as @enenalan says, but you seem to take it to the extremes. I however agree with your view on that, but it wasn't exactly the question. You say one must put the Dharma to practice, so what if one practices based on interpretation which is most likely always the case in the absence of a teacher (which could be the case and there might be several reasons for it).

I say "it is tremendously useful to know the main terminology" -- but be careful and don't fall into the trap of papan'ca. This is a balanced position. You seem to think that terminology is not enough and one should learn the entire language. This is a bit extreme, no?

If the question is for academic research purpose, I will add one advantage in learning Sanskrit - it will greatly aid in researching ancient Buddhist documents in Nepal, where Sanskrit continues to be the liturgical language of Newar Buddhists.

I agree with other answers which state that knowing some terminology and vocabulary is useful, but learning the grammar is unnecessary, unless you're a scholar. The reason is that some words are technical terms with specific meanings, that can't be easily translated to plain English words.
While there's no need to know the grammar, it may be useful to be able to separate words from their inflection (e.g. noun declension and verb conjugation), so that you can refer to them in a dictionary or glossary.
Here's an example:
From AN 10.58 (translated by Bhikkhu Sujato):

Reverends, all things are rooted in desire.
chandamūlakā, āvuso, sabbe dhammā

Initially, when reading only the English translation, you might wonder what "things" are, and what "desire" is. Probably, this is related to the second noble truth, which states that the cause of suffering is craving.
But if you look at the Pali words here, we find that "thing" refers to "dhamma" and "desire" refers to "chanda".
The word "dhamma" has many meanings as can be seen in this answer.
The word "chanda" for desire, is different from the word "tanha" for craving (of the second noble truth). Please also see "Difference between desire (chanda) and craving (tanha)?". These are technical terms.
So, this phrase doesn't refer to craving.
But it was not clear to me what "things" refer to, so I created this question.
By the way, the "ā" in "dhammā" for "dhamma" (thing), is the declension to indicate that it's plural i.e. "things", but we can leave that detail to the translator, though it's useful to extract the basic word so that we can refer to it in a dictionary or glossary.

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

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


text:
What tenets must a person accept to be a Buddhist?
I'm curious what minimal tenets a person must accept in order to be considered a Buddhist.
As an example of the type of answer I'm looking for, I'll give you the minimal tenets of Christianity as I know them. A person must...

Accept that there is only one God and that Jesus, his son, walked the Earth for some time in order to be a model for his followers.
Accept Jesus/God as their lord and savior.
Recognize that they are born in a state of sin, and that acceptance of Jesus/God is the one and only way to attain a happy eternal life.

Is there a similar set of statements that can be made about Buddhism?

Sure - the Four Noble Truths:

Life is characterized by anguish,
the thirst for impermanent things is the cause of that anguish,
that this anguish can be extinguished, and
there is an eightfold path leading to that extinguishing consisting of right views, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration.

added line breaks, hope you don't mind my skull on your answer :)

No worries!  :-)

FWIW I think that the third noble truth is worded as being the cessation of suffering, not the cessation of thirst, though the two are connected by the second truth.

Yeah I too had some issues with this rendition...

Point taken; post updated.

Though in protest - "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of dukkha: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving." SN 56

Your protest accepted, it does say cessation of "dukkha" i.e. of suffering. Although, the title, "Nirodha sacca", just means "the noble 'truth of cessation'" without being too specific about what ceases. And yes, I think it's meant to be both; or more than both/two (suffering, and craving, also ignorance, etc.).

"thirst for impermanent things" is also incorrect. Suffering is unsatisfied thirst (a mismatch of "is" and "should"). Origination of suffering is clinging (to either "is" or to "should").

Tried to by pithy and get all of the meaning.  Hah.  Didn't happen.  But - "And this, monks is the noble truth of the origination of dukkha: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming."  SN 56  "Becoming" (bhava tanha) is a thirst for self-making - a self that is ultimately fabricated (anatta) and impermanent (anicca).

You just need to take refuge in the Triple Gem sincerely.

Buddham saranam gacchami - I go to the Buddha for refuge.
Dhammam saranam gacchami - I go to the Dhamma for refuge.
Sangham saranam gacchami.- I go to the Sangha for refuge.

Refuge here means spiritual refuge. It doesn't mean you reject medicine for physical ailments like in some Christian sects.
Taking refuge will be broken for ordinary people when they die, but this breaking is blameless and does not bring bad results. On the other hand, breaking the taking of the Triple Refuge during one's life is very serious. This is broken whenever a person goes for refuge to a teacher outside the Buddha's Dispensation or when a person is disrespectful to the Triple Gem. Those who are Noble Ones will never break with their refuge. But ordinary people, through ignorance, doubt, and wrong knowledge about the special qualities of the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, are susceptible to breaking their refuge.
Read more at How to Take the Triple Refuge.

I thought taking refuge in the triple gem is the basic entry for every Buddhist. By looking at other answers I get the feeling that there are different opinions on this as well :)

At what physical age, after how much education, does a lay person or child typically 'take refuge'?

@ChrisW, there's no minimum age given, AFAIK. As soon as a child can speak the language and have a basic understanding of what it means, he can take refuge.

Main tenets? Here how I see them:

There is good (health, peace, nirvana) and bad (sickness, trouble, suffering, samsara) -- versus "nothing matters" i.e. nihilism.
By acting a certain way we can change our life, and the lives of people, away from the bad and towards the good. -- versus "everything is predetermined" i.e. fatalism or "it's all because of society, I cannot do anything" -- i.e. victim consciousness.
Enlightenment is real and achievable in one life -- versus "Enlightenment is a fiction" or "It takes 10000 lives to attain".

I'm not even perfectly sure about your Christian tenets; for example,

So far as I know, it's only opinion (it's not canonical) that those are the minimal tenets
There's even perhaps a dispute about one of your tenets: a dispute between mainstream Christian churches (Catholic and Protestant) about whether "accepting Jesus" is the way to life (the Catholic church teaches that faith is not sufficient)

There are several (many) Schools of Buddhism.
Here is one article, titled Two Main Schools of Buddhism, which claims that,

The areas of agreement between the two schools are as follows:

Both accept Sakyamuni Buddha as the Teacher.
The Four Noble Truths are exactly the same in both schools.
The Eightfold Path is exactly the same in both schools.
The Pattica-Samuppada or teaching on Dependent Origination is the same in both schools.
Both reject the idea of a supreme being who created and governed this world.
Both accept Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta and Sila, Samadhi, Panna without any difference.

All of these are words which you can easily look up; for example, Four Noble Truths, Anicca, etc.
IMHO the central, first, or 'minimal' part of the Christian Bible is the Gospels, which describe the life and words of Jesus.
Similarly, IMHO the central part of the Buddhist scriptures are the parts which describe the life and words of the Buddha.
The most central part of the Buddha's doctrine is perhaps what/everything he taught in his first sermon after he became enlightened, which is called "The Setting in Motion of the Wheel of Dharma", a.k.a. "The Sermon at Benares".
You might have noticed that Buddhists like numbered lists: four noble truths, eightfold path, etc. Another is the "triple jewel", i.e. "the Buddha (himself), the Dharma (his teaching), and the Sangha (his 'church')".
The "four noble truths" are, approximately:

Suffering exists (gives various example including poverty, disease, old age, death)
Suffering is caused by desire/attachment/craving (to have what you don't have, or to keep what you can't keep)
There's a way which leads to the end of suffering
That way is the eightfold path, which is: Right views; right aspirations; right speech; right behavior; right livelihood; right effort; right thoughts; and right contemplation.

Note that what I listed above is tenets of doctrine (i.e. words or beliefs); but (at least one school of) Buddhism is or requires more than only doctrine or faith: it requires or consists of "right effort", "right behaviour", etc. (as listed above and as described/defined/analysed in considerable detail).

"I'm not even perfectly sure about your Christian tenets" -- I like that this answer points out the inherent difficulty with determining fundamental tenets to begin with.

If I were to try to quote the Christian church's own statement of what the fundamental tenets are, it would probably be the creed, perhaps its use in baptism and mass; or if I were to try to quote Jesus himself instead of the church, it might be his Great Commandment.

In the Zen tradition in which I've practiced, I was taught "Refrain from evil, do good and purify this mind."  Everything else was guidance about practices (particularly seated meditation) that could help accomplish those goals.  There was not any particular emphasis on 'being' a Buddhist.  It doesn't really matter what I think, imagine or believe; things are what they are.  So, while I would say that there are plenty of useful lists of tenets, ultimately you don't need to believe anything to be a Buddhist or, more to the point, to be a Buddha.  It's about the practice.

I agree with you, but I think the issue has two sides: 1. initially I must have some kind of "faith" that something will help me - the car will start if I put the key in. 2. The more I know, the more effective I can be: I started a car with a pencil once (it was flooded) and with a broomstick another time (starter cable grounded on manifold). So, knowing how to drive a car is the basic level, and knowing some things about how it works can be useful. People will get in the car and learn to drive if they see us going places safely and happily! (initial acceptance / faith)

What tenets must a person accept to be a Buddhist?
Here's what the Buddha had to say about it:

In what way, Bhante, is one a lay follower?”
“When, Mahānāma, one has gone for refuge to the Buddha, the Dhamma,
  and the Saṅgha, in that way one is a lay follower.”
“In what way, Bhante, is a lay follower virtuous?”
“When, Mahānāma, a lay follower abstains from the destruction of life,
  from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct, from false
  speech, and from liquor, wine, and intoxicants, the basis for
  heedlessness, in that way a lay follower is virtuous.”
-AN 8.25 & SN 55.37 (They are both worth reading in their entirety)

And what does it mean to take refuge? It means trusting that the Buddha [as the name implies] awakened, that what he taught is realizable & verifiable for oneself and that his community of followers are worthy of generosity & respect:

'We will be endowed with verified
  confidence in the Buddha: "Indeed, the Blessed One [the Buddha] is
  worthy & rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge & conduct,
  well-gone, an expert with regard to the cosmos, unexcelled as a
  trainer for those people fit to be tamed, the Teacher of divine &
  human beings, awakened, blessed."
'We will be endowed with verified
  confidence in the Dhamma: "The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed
  One, to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification,
  pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves."
'We will be possessed of verified confidence in the Sangha: "The
  Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced well... who
  have practiced straight-forwardly... who have practiced
  methodically... who have practiced masterfully — in other words, the
  four types [of noble disciples] when taken as pairs, the eight when
  taken as individual types — they are the Sangha of the Blessed One's
  disciples: worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of
  offerings, worthy of respect, the incomparable field of merit for the
  world."
-SN 41.10, Seeing the Sick

I like this answer, because it quotes the Buddha. But it's a bit of a circular definition, isn't it? Because it pre-supposes that the person asking the question knows that "the Dhamma" is.

@ChrisW Usually, the 'refugee' takes refuge after hearing a Dhamma talk. So, in the end of the talk the person is already filled with enough confidence to take refuge. In cases where the person doesn't hear a Dhamma talk and only knows about the Buddha & his message by hear-say, she will ask the meaning of the words if she is curious enough. So in the end, it doesn't really matter whether it's one way or the other because a wise person will always try to investigate the meaning.

In Buddhism your should follow the 3 fold training:

Live a life of morality
Develop control over your mind
Develop wisdom towards the working and natural of your mind with a view to eradicate all sources of stress

In addition you should seek inspiration from the Triple Gem and develop confidance / refuge in the Triple Gem with a view towards developing the qualities in the Triple Gem to complete your 3 fold training and come out of stress. Lack of confidence / refuge in the technique and practice would entail you to not practice properly hence not getting out of stress.
To come out of you should identify stress, the reason behind the stress, that you should overcome stress and the way out of stress which is the 3 fold training.

No argument with any of the answers.
Here is what might be called "barebones Buddhism"
1) follow the breath with awareness
2) have compassion and understanding for all beings including oneself
3) dedicate one's efforts and life for the benefit of all.
There are ways to express that in Buddhist terms, but if you wanted to explain it to a child and hit the major points, that is enough.

I have no formal education in Buddhism, and have never been part of a Buddhist community, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but given I didn't feel a deep sense that any of the existing answers were saying what I'd want to share on this topic, here I am, for whatever it's worth....   (Andrei Volkov came close though!)
What follows is a perspective on the core of the Four Noble Truths....  I see Buddhism as a path - motivated by and cherishing empathy and compassion - to improving quality of life. This is completely achievable given the insight that quality of life is a direct function of:

lacking attachment/lust/longing/avarice/neediness
lacking aversion/hatred/fear/disgust/contempt
being fully involved in the moment - to:

appreciate whatever enjoyment, empathetic engagement, experience and/or learning is on offer,
perceive and accept reality, and
plan and act to guide the future towards increased likelihood of a better quality of life for others and ourselves

this despite understanding and accepting (per 1.) that those plans/efforts may not actually pan out; we just need sincerity of intent combined with best effort to make educated decisions, though there's often very subtle and complex ways in which we affect future quality of life

Everything else - recommended codes of conduct, exercises of breathing and mind - they're tools to help use the moment to better realise and act consequent to an understanding of the three factors above.


text:
How can I build up to being able to get into the full lotus position?
When I meditate, I usually sit in what is referred to in the United States as Indian style.  The problem with this position is twofold: 1) It isn't very stable and 2) after ~15 minutes I find myself straining to keep upright.  I have been told that the full lotus position is more stable since the legs are symmetric and both knees are on the ground.  I've tried to get myself into the position, but I am not even flexible enough to get into the half lotus position (one foot on the other knee).
My question is: If I am willing to work at it daily; what is the best way to get my legs flexible enough to sit in the full lotus position?

*Picture from "Tanumânasî en Meditacion Loto Padmasana" by Jesús Bonilla (Tanumânasî) - Retiros de yoga. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons.

I know that's not your question, but you don't have to sit in the lotus... :) First, there is half-lotus. Then, there is vajrasana. Finally, you can just sit on a stool. Surely it's not as cool, but the effect is pretty much the same. One way or another, the sooner you'll face your boredom, the sooner real meditation begins. Learning to sit in lotus is too much entertainment IMO. In this sense, the stool could be your best bet ;)

Agree with you Andrei, the lotus position is overrated by beginners mainly due to Buddhas statues, you don't really need it to have a good meditation :)

Burmese style !

here I can answer as a sporter ;)
Your problem is twofold:

Your range of motion is limited,  and
your core is not strong enough

To address 1. you can do stretching, common gymnastics stretching: Guide to basic stretching. Yoga is also a good option but I consider common stretching more to the point (and you will need that for yoga too, anyway).
For 2. there is no easy answer: You need to strengthen  your core. Please note that for many Japanese, Koreans and Indians the lotus position is easy because they use to sit on the ground, this has a huge impact on  the core muscles: Our western chairs hold our backs and void us from using too much force for sitting, making that our cores are less strong, specially a large amount of small muscles...
There are two basic exercises that you can do for that: the plank and the bridge: 10 core workouts
For both, the core exercises and the stretches you can start holding them for 20 seconds, build up to 30 seconds and then up to 1 min and 1:30, there is a maximum of 90 seconds (1:30) above which there is no effect. I fact the proper stretching reflex of the muscles is triggered after 20-30 seconds after which they elongate.
Other things that you may do are:

Stand as much as you can: If you drive by train don't sit. If you are in public spaces try avoid sitting and stand instead.
Use the stairs not the escalators/mechanic stairs.
Give sitting on the ground a try, even when not for meditation

So, here's my grain of salt. I'm not a Buddhist, mind you, I practised Zen a lot of years ago, but I recall zazen being very painful to hold while now I can sit comfortably in the lotus position or seiza (the real one, as in Kendo).

Yoga is very helpful, especially aspects that deal with opening the hips and stretching the legs. It is best not to force it or you could hurt the body.
A cushion or zafu under the tail bone and buttocks can elevate the body sufficiently so crosslegged is more comfortable.
Some people sit Japanese style with legs folded under sitting on your heels and or supported by a zafu.
Sitting in a chair with a straight back and feet on the ground is a valid method of meditating. The position will open up and be comfortable over years as the practice opens up the locked up sections of the body.
Here is a youtube video that especially works on opening for beginners. Adrienne has many yoga videos. She seems like a meditator as she encourages mindfulness expecially in 2nd video. She is conservatively dressed and friendly in her approach. I find her a helpful teacher that does not provide unneeded distractions.
20 minutes complete beginners - very doable sequence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7AYKMP6rOE
40 minute longer more meditative from the preview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ6NfFIr2jw&list=PLqkIhuaKSFbuaG3i9cBpO7E0dAKnd-MAu
Accepting where you are is important. You are right where you need to be. You are opening in a very natural way. Namaste.


text:
Is it possible for a Buddhist to develop spiritual bypassing? What are the main traps?
How to avoid falling into spiritual bypassing while practicing Buddhism?

Spiritual bypassing, a term first coined by psychologist John Welwood in 1984,
  is the use of spiritual practices and beliefs to avoid dealing
  with our painful feelings, unresolved wounds, and developmental needs. It is
  much more common than we might think.
http://realitysandwich.com/74388/spiritual_bypassing/

Practice with experienced people who can help recognize problems and give appropriate direction.  Easier said than done, but cherish whoever or whatever in your life calls you on your BS.

Wideshanks, if you have already read my answer, you may want to reread it. This morning found passages in Mountain Record of Zen Talks that spoke to me as if directly answering this question.

The guy in the article appears to have this favorite style of psychology and solutions for everyday problems drawn from the world of psychology.
I'm guessing that "spiritual bypassing" is sort of like using religion to solve problems instead of using this guys favorite methodology.
I think the most legitimate trap is to not distinguish between problems that Buddhism is good as solving and which problems are better solved with pharmacology, or one of the many talking cures from the world of psychology.
Buddhism does a really good job of addressing the problems of existential angst-- the who am I and why am I here questions. It isn't especially suited on its own to deal with marital problems (Dr Gottman is a better expert), or literal delusions (like seeing little green men in the drain of the bath tub), substance abuse, bacterial infections, cancer, stroke, clincial depression and so on.
But if some wants to try to deal with their problems using Buddhism instead of Freudian psychoanalysis or any of the other talk cure systems that have since followed and bypass this the article's author's methodology, I wouldn't hold it again them. The various talk cure systems are probably as difficult to prove right or wrong as it is to prove one religion to be better or worse.

While reading this morning 9-12-14 MOUNTAIN RECORD OF ZEN TALKS by John Daido Loori pg 187, I was struck how this spoke to the question about bypassing:

In Zen training, when we get the surface mind quiet, a lot of the
  deeper stuff that we do not want to think about begins popping
  up...Little by little, as concentration builds, and joriki, the power
  of concentration, develops...If the joriki becomes strong enough,
  samadhi happens...but it can also be a trap. It can also be a way of
  avoiding dealing with things or tuning them out. In Zen, it is
  considered "dead-end samadhi" to stop in samadhi. To stop anywhere is a
  dead end.

This is the big trap. Or stopping anywhere and thinking you have arrived is a trap.
The author goes on page 188

Developing concentration and samadhi, sitting in meditation year after
  year, is like scaling a mountain. You struggle up the slopes...Finally
  you reach the top, which is like the ground of being...But if you stay
  there, it becomes just as much a delusion as everything else...You
  need to keep going down the other side of the mountain, back into
  everyday life, into the marketplace...in the way we raise a child, grow
  a garden, drive a car, live our life...Zen has to do with everyday
  life.

I leave the rest of the answer, but you probably do not need to read it. The above really answers the question for me.
One pathway that steers around bypassing is to meditate to experience your inner suffering without running from it or reacting to it.
Meditation can be a highly elevated experience that is a tempting way to get out of suffering temporarily, but the human condition is suffering. By running from suffering, the shadow it casts is larger than life and it is constantly chasing us.
If one could bypass this suffering would that really be a Buddhist practice or would it just be a clever self-deception that would fall at the first test?
Here is a zen story that illustrates how a true practice and a contrived practice hold up under real life situations.
"Tanzan and Ekido were once traveling together down a muddy road. A heavy rain was still falling.
Coming around a bend, they met a lovely girl in a silk kimono and sash, unable to cross the intersection.
"Come on, girl," said Tanzan at once. Lifting her in his arms, he carried her over the mud.
Ekido did not speak again until that night when they reached a lodging temple. Then he no longer could restrain himself. "We monks don't go near females," he told Tanzan, "especially not young and lovely ones. It is dangerous. Why did you do that?"
"I left the girl there," said Tanzan. "Are you still carrying her?""
There are many sources of this story. this one was found at
http://www.mdjunction.com/forums/agoraphobia-discussions/general-support/2027111-muddy-road-a-zen-story
The point I see is that any self-deception will not stand against the realities of life.
The intention of the practice may be a key factor. If the goal is self-enlightenment all the trickery of the self can hamper real awakening. If the goal is to dedicate all the results of your life and practice to helping all, then where can the tricky appearance of self get a foot hold?

Loved the story at the end

Yes stories are more expressive than a whole book.

One main aspect of Buddhism is to deal with reality as it is. Also sensations (Vedananupassana) is a main aspect your meditation. So you are taking the bull by the horns when dealing with pain. So when practicing Buddhism you do not by passing it.


text:
How to judge progress in vipassana
In samatha one can judge their progress through the progression of jhana, is there a concrete/measurable way to judge progress in vipassana?

I hope my answer helps though I have being a bit tangential in the answer.

There are multiple stages of insight before you reach stream entry. Then there are the 4 stages of sainthood which follows which you can judge of the fetters and defilements that remain.
Taking Dependent Origination into account the main issue leading to the conditioned existence is when we sense any sensations due to, we react with with like or dislike which you try to possess or get rid of. This keeps you rolling in stress and conditioned existence. Once you feel the sensation and you maintain your equanimity then you stop conditioning. Therefore by all means the best measure of your progress is much equanimity and awareness you have towards feeling and sensations that arise in different situations. At a more advanced stage when your equanimity is not wavering, the main measure can become how much of the 3 characteristics of existence you can see. At some point your will start seeing the arising and passing away of phenomena in  any place of your body confirming everything is in a flux of change. You will realise any feeling you get has a finite length. It arrives as cluster of vibrating quantum particles and stays for a finite duration. You have no absolute control over creating, maintaining or the sensation of a particular sensation.
The next way you can monitor your progress is through your wellbeing and that of others people around you. You will be less agitated and stressful. This intern makes people around you less agitated and stressful. You become moral. Each time you try to generate negativity you see the process of stress and agitation building in you. This re enforces your morality and cordial interaction with others. You will have a balanced mind thus make the right proactive decisions than emotional reactive decision. This will be profitable for you in this life and the afterlife for you and everyone around you. Also you will experience peace and happiness with in you. As always your 1st measure of progress should be equanimity and mindfulness after which is firmly established you can look at the secondary measures. You will actively investigate the phenomena arising and passing away within the framework of your body. Once well You will feel pleasant and relaxed. Your mind will get focused. You will have a lot of energy in you.
Another way to measure your progress is through the level of understanding of the Noble Truths at the experiential level (Paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhi). If you were to use another way to investigate your progress you can keep looking at sensation within you. In further investigation you will see that any stress or agitation arises arriving in you. On further investigating you will see what causes this is your attachment and aversion. You will start seeing if something happens to something you identify as me or mine (things, ideas, thoughts, views, body, friends and foes) you get either agitated or pleased. The lack of mindfulness and equanimity you grasp to the feeling that arrised when you sense something. (E.g. your foe losing his job.) You always long for similar incidents as when you get to know and recognise this is in deed your foe then you experience the some feeling. As you practice, you see when your get any volition in your mind, you experience sensations. You see the sensations as not permanent, grasping to them cause resentment and not absolutely controllable. When you are equanimous and mindful in all times you see that this reduces the stress and agitation in you. You will see every time you even think about breaking your morality you get stressed and agitated, more control you exercise over your mind and prevent it going into negative states more positive you feel and when it does go agitation and stress arises, you will see each time you like or dislike towards something (starting with a certain type of feeling) you loose your balance of your mind and craving to create any such sensation or feeling is not under your absolute control, does not last long and since it does not last it is not satisfactory. You see the way out of this is not to react to the sensations you experience but be aware looking at their true characteristics.
Also you can always be mindful of the defilements to see what frequently arices and how intense they are.
Monitoring progress is has its drawbacks. Proximate cause of looking at progress is striving too hard. You have to leave the results for itself to manifest in due time than be trying to be over mindful of the progress. If you are looking for progress too often then this is a sign of being too attached to the outcome thus losing the balance of your mind and falling behind in your practice.
You do occasionally (not too often or not too far paced) have to see how you are doing though. This is to see if you are doing the right practice and on track. If you are not making progress then the this might mean that you have missed some aspects of the practice or doing something wrong. When you do look at progress is that if is like a knife. You cannot see the daily wear and tear but suddenly notice that it has worn out though this was happening little by little over time.

Welcome. I have not linked some of the words to what I mean by them in some places. I hope this is not a problem.

Hello Sir, I am thinking about what happens if something comes back. For example, say I was mediating to let go of the habit of labeling everything as good or bad. At one point, I feel that I no longer have that habit but then I notice myself doing it again.

Eradication of sanskaras of craving and aversion, I'd say, is a good way to measure one's progress in Vipassana. Earlier I used to get upset with something and remained disturbed for one week, but after practising Vipassana for 4 hours daily for a month, now I get over with a similar turn of events in three minutes.
So, I could see very tangible progress in this path - hence I've kept up my efforts, though I am not always able to keep up that high levels of practice ...
but I am highly motivated to keep working hard ....
Metta

yes.
well theres a couple of ways...
1- you could study more about the stages of insight and enlightenment, and
2- you could practice with a monk regularly and ask for help.
Im sure there are other ways (and feel free to explore them) but these are traditionally how progress is made and verified in buddhism to he best of my knowledge and really, if you want to know how you're progressing on a buddhist path... theres only one type of person likely to be qualified to evaluate you (though not all monks are valid choices).
Here is a video my teacher made on the stages of insight through vipassana though for a short run down so you can make a general assessment.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G3u4JEEdK1Y

Suminda concludes in another answer.

When you do look at progress is that if is like a knife. You cannot
  see the daily wear and tear but suddenly notice that it has worn out
  though this was happening little by little over time.

I would take this thought further. It describes the appearance of awakening. We don't add something, but we wear out something we never had.
The insights are a tool, a horse that trains us to be a good rider. When we get to the ocean we have no need of the horse. We sail on the waters of tranquillity.
Then what? Go down the other side of the mountain and live what we have discovered as our original mind.
These are not concrete in the sense of physical appearance, but when you start "wearing the knife down" there are noticeable changes in clarity of perception. At first they are fleeting, but with continued persistent and compassionate practice, the clarity of perception becomes something we no longer need or want to strive for. But seeking clarity for its own sake or for the sake of personal delight is an impediment. Putting clarity to work as a tool to help all by first clearing our perception and then living as an example of simplicity and awakened joy will speed this part of the journey.

The yardstick to measure progress is by sensing your volition to serve other people. If it is increasing you are on the right track.
Also if you are caught in the same situation as you did previously but acted In a calm and balanced manner, for your own benefit and benefit of others, you are on the right track.
If you got angry before and it lasted for several hours, has this period reduced? It eventually reduces as you tend to come out of your miseries quicker. Same for lust, hatred, jealousy etc.
-S.N Goenka (ten day discourses)


text:
That "Electric Feel" body sensation during meditation
Meditation skill level: greater than beginner, less than adept.
Before I can get to the Electric Feel, we need to come to a mutual understanding on how I get there.
I have a specific technique to my meditation that I have sown together from random scraps of multiple religions(taoism, buddhism, christianity(yes they meditate), Islam and new age stuff). Imagine my technique to be a pyramid that has many levels(plateaus). I must achieve reaching the first level before going to the next. If I am on the third level and stop doing something that was required to reach the first level, then I have to gone down to the first level again and must work my way up from there.
The first level is Breath... of course. 4 seconds in, and 4 seconds out. The attention is on breath. Continues until this process requires no counting of time and is automatic.
Second level is muscle relexation over then entire body. The attention is on the entire body in a state of rest. During the first and second levels one must shrug off all thoughts that are worldly worries or thoughts that are hindering your progress.
Third level is Electric Feel. I can feel what I would call an energy running circuits through my body. This sensation can be directed through intention: If I want to feel energy coming in through my head and go down my spine, it can happen.
Levels after 3 are theoretical. But I feel like I can feel my 'Asteral Body'.(when answering you may disregard anything about the Asteral Body if it has no correlation with Buddhism)
So is this sensation a normal one for meditation? How can I move past this sensation to deepen meditation? Are my 'levels' accurate to what Buddhism teaches? What level comes after the electric feel? Does Buddhism support the notion of an Asteral Body?

This electric feel is also impermanent in nature. Arising and passing away at a tremendously high rate. Knowing this at an experiential nature will help you. Trying to maintain this sensation or supercede this will only cause more misery in the long run. It's hard to let go of pleasant sensations than overcome unpleasant ones but it is possible if you keep trying with patience and persistence.

I have been doing meditation fot some 25 years now, but lately i have been astro projecting seeing pyramids covered in Gold and then at times I can feel my entire body is riddled with electrical current that makes my hair stand.

Could be the "Arising & Passing Away" stage of insight? See here for more details on diagnosing and what to do next: http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/1509672

This feeling is Piti. It is also in sphere of the sensual world hence has the 3 marks of existence. It arises and passes away. You should try to look at it more and more closely until you see it. At some point this will also disappear and turn into either pain or a neutral feeling. When you get the neutral feeling you should be very careful as not to loose the balance of your mind as equanimity is easy in pain and pleasure but hard in this instance. If you examine closely this is also impermanent as you will see things arising and passing. If you see arising and passing of phenomena in each and every part of your body then you are experiencing bhanga-nana. You should see it in remote places in your body also like your earlobes.
This can result either due to Jhana or that through Vipassana where you have either suspended or eradicated (in case of Vipassana) some of you bad Karma which might give you birth in a lower realm for that stretch of time. (In Jhana there is a temporary suspension of the such rebirth linking karma. If you dies with your Jhana you are born in a higher existence.) This does not mean that you can keep them suspended always in Jhana or other periods where some old residual Karma giving you bad rebirth linking result will not surface in the future in the case of Vipassana. Through Vipassana you can eradicate all rebirth linking Karma starting from the lower realms and progressing to higher realm. When you have eliminated all rebirth linking Karma and mind comes to a state it does not acquire any new rebirth linking Karma then you will enter Nirvana. Even when you enter Nirvana you can still have non rebirth linking Karma. Also the present feeling are associated with Karma which you have done with attachment. (Interpretation as per my understanding according of Ledi Sayadaw linage.)
All being said don't get attached to it in any way nor wish for it to pass away.

is jhana and samadhi(completely focused on breathe) are same things?

Right Samadhi = Jhana

While this may sound similar to the second jhana, I don't think it is. In second jhana the rapture (piti) is enveloping all body, it may be somewhat more bright around chest, or head, or armpits, but not to the point of being specifically localized. You can move the ball of excitement up and down the spine at will, right? I did this. It is a kind of winds-and-channels yoga they do in Tibetan schools.
Since you have gotten this far, here is a task for you: can you achieve a permanent state that won't require an effort to maintain, and will stay with you forever post-meditation? Solving this is what made Buddha, Buddha. Anything else is child's play ;)

Never knew this had a name.
I can do it at will and during my childhood it happened to me a lot when being close to certain persons, in this case it was localised on the front of my head.
It feels like goosebumps but without any hairs rising.
I have however a more mundane explanation for that: I think that this is a  semi-voluntary (or voluntary) contraction of small muscles or at least it is a nervous signal that we transmit to the muscles.
I am pretty sure that it is that because the feeling is very similar to the one you get when you lift weight and use "intensity, this is a (sort of) technique that makes you use much more muscles and power for a given weight (it doesn't get lighter, the aim is to get a better result), this is very usual among body-builders.
I have always been curious about that and when I was doing zazen I often did it, but in the end the effect is just that you concentrate on this particular purpose, nice to feel but defeating the purpose of meditation.

For a few months now I've been experiencing this lovely enveloping feeling within seconds of closing my eyes, deepening as my focus deepens. I was intrigued when Andrei Volkov wrote 'can you achieve a permanent state that won't require an effort to maintain?' This was exactly what I was wondering, will this become more permanent if I let it be? During day-to-day activities I regularly feel as if this lovely feeling is there somewhere nearby and when I least expect it, it fleetingly appears. I only intended to meditate in order to become more tranquil and just counted these tickly feelings as a bonus.

Just from my own experience I experience a lot of electric type sensations when meditating. Sometimes they can be fairly mild but at other times they can be so intense as to physically jolt me.
Just reflecting on this I think there are two things going on at different times. When I haven't meditated as much as I usually do or I am going through a particularly intense time outside of mediation then I will get the jolting type of sensations. When meditating I can spot a kind of stuckness that if I meditate on it can come out surges of energy that can be intense. This will then be a feature of meditation for a while then it will subside and meditation will be calmer.
At other times when mediation is progressing and I have more time for it I can get electric sensations at the end of a meditation session when I am particularly calm or focused. This could be piti (not sure). It is less intense but can also be associated with a few more meditation bells and whistles such as feeling out of body or maybe feeling that sensations are a lot more fluid (like a waterfall).
As other people have said I do my best not to get attached to these. Also I try not to anticipate them or certainly not to actively chase them - however it's sometimes useful for me to be open to the possibly of them. To be honest I'm not particularly putting this forward as any kind of definitive (or even helpful) answer. It's just an experience that I'm actually finding quite useful to write down. If anyone has any comments I'd actually be very grateful.

So is this sensation a normal one for meditation?

I have many weird sensations while meditating but not this one. However, lots of my classmates do so I'd say yes.

How can I move past this sensation to deepen meditation?

Move past it by ignoring it. If you're paying attention to the sensation or thinking about it, you aren't meditating.

Are my 'levels' accurate to what Buddhism teaches? What level comes after the electric feel?

As far as I know, there are no ubiquitous or strictly defined "levels" to meditation. If it helps your meditation, then it's a useful classification. If it doesn't, then ditch it.

Does Buddhism support the notion of an Asteral Body?

From my experience, there is strong support of a subtle body, astral body, spirit, soul, or whatever you want to call it.

Buddhism supports astral projection as answered in more details in Buddhist view on out of body experience (OBE) as well as energy centers called chakras.
Remember, when meditating, try to not visualise, imagine anything or analyse with your physical thoughts (stay relative), just plain awareness, so you can benefit from it further more (trust your senses).
When you higher your vibrations during meditation (by breathing and intend), you start to feel your light (astral, etheric) body (electric sensation). The deep relaxing (friction) breathing helps to move your energy between chakras making the intensive connection and your whole body start to vibrate (you can learn how to consciously move this energy) and how to let it flow. Whilst circulating, the life force (Lung/Vijñāna/Qi) follows certain lines of energy (meridians in Chinese, nāḍī in Sanskrit) and as your light body gains in strength through these practices, it gains a great resistance to negative energy (it's expelled consciously). When you feel the vibration - you feel the etheric (mixture of etheric frequencies of light or astral vibration). When you learn how to control this sensation, from there, you can train and develop many interesting abilities (ESP, OBE, RV and many more).
So to answer your question, yes, this sensation is perfectly normal during meditation.


text:
Signlessness seems to be contradictory to Buddhism
Signlessness is a concept that I was taught about Buddhism in a college course on Buddhism. It was defined as "not taking omens to have meaning, whether the omen was good or bad does not matter."
But in the same course I learned the mystical means by which the new Dali Lama was found. They see letters in sky telling them to go to Ando Province.
Maybe this is right-mindfulness(?): we see things as they truly are in reality and do impose logic onto things were there should not be. Like if I see my lucky number right as I have that really good feeling when I know I am making the right decision. Must I regard seeing my lucky number as just a coincidence and not a sign?

As I understand it, in Mahayana, signlessness (animitta) has nothing to do with omens. To quote Wikipedia,

Signlessness refers to the fact that phenomena seem to possess their
  apparent qualities by way of their own nature, but when one examines
  this appearance one realizes that all qualities are merely mentally
  imputed and not a part of the nature of the objects they appear to
  characterize.

Basically, signlessness means not getting caught into traps of abstractions. This is based on clear understanding that real world is infinitely more nuanced and multifaceted than any concept, however precise, can ever dream to capture. There is an infinite number of alternative ways of describing the world -- each valid in its own context.
The notion of signlessness is related to aniketa-cārī (usually translated as "wandering without a home" but having a broader meaning in Mahayana) -- the practice of "non-abiding", or not settling on any single conceptual, metaphysical, or philosophical base.

The Kalama Sutta deals with some of the logical aspects mentioned in your question. Much of your experience is governed by cause and effect. Omens may have some significance but such significance is highly speculative unless you know the laws of cause and effect to its entirety, thus it is best to concentrate on more pragmatic things like understanding the laws of cause and effect, which intern might give you real insight into the nature of omens.
To understand the the laws of cause and effect you have to practice to Nobel 8 Fold Path organised according to the 3 fold training. One aspect of this is Right Mindfulness which also appears in many places in the factors of enlightenment.
As a 1st step you can do a course in meditation throug https://www.dhamma.org/ or any other Vippasana Meditation Centure.

http://archives.dailynews.lk/2011/01/27/fea25.asp
I found some information of this matter as well.
"For bhikkhus, reading marks on the limbs (palmistry); reading omens and signs, interpreting celestial events, interpreting dreams, reading marks on the body (e.g. phenology), offering fire oblations (yaga), offering blood-sacrifices, practising astrology etc are wrong livelihood. Path to Nibbana and the path to gains are different."


text:
Is lying at a job interview breaking a precept?
Since lying is not really directed at a person, can it still be harmful? I have had multiple jobs before when the companies I worked for had no issues lying to me(on a organizational level)
I can see how lying(when done successfully) can make myself believe I am something I am not and hence inflate my ego but what if this is not the case and the lying is only done with a sense of wanting to get a position and work hard and achieve something?

Causes of False Speech
The root causes of false speech are greed, hatred and delusion.

Greed is the root cause when false speech is used to obtain
material gain or status for oneself or someone dear to oneself.
Hatred is the root cause when false speech is used to cause loss
and bring harm and suffering to others.
Delusion is the root cause when it is used neither for one's gain
nor to cause loss and harm to others, but for the sake of
enjoyment such as lying for the sake of a joke, exaggeration to
spice up a story, or flattery to please others, etc.

Lying to get a job falls under the 1st category. So yes, it  does break the fourth precept.

Is greed or should greed always be viewed as negative (unwholesome), or can there be a positive for greed?

No! Greed is always unwholesome by definition.

Does false speech for delusion break the said precept? For example, you decide to lie to your parents by not disclosing some bad stuff happened to your friend because you don't want your parents to get too worried about you.

@ΕГИІИО Not telling something is not the same as lying and it never breaks the precept

Let me rephrase. What if my parents ask me how my roommate is doing, and I decide not to tell them about his drug addiction or his recent accident with a bus and tells them that he's doing fine although he's actually going through hell. By that non-disclosure, all I want is that my parents' do not start worrying too much about me living on my own away from them. How does something like that play out in terms of compliance with the precepts? Can one get away with uttering a lie all in good faith, if that lie is not going to do any harm for anybody who are involved in the context?

Again, non-disclosure has nothing to do with the precept. So, instead of saying "he is doing fine",  think of something positive to say about him that is actually true or just avoid the topic altogether.

If you have intention to deceive, you know what you are going to say is false and then say it then it is lying.
In a job interview you might be asked questions you are not very sure about. Making an intelligent guess in those instances in fine. Not attempting may look negative or as a lack of confidence. Also interviewer will not expect you to know everything but an attempt will be appreciated. Much like in an exam.
Lying about your experience may not be fine. Also spin doctering / white lies with a intention to deceive is not fine. Otherwise putting a positive spin is fine. Facing an interview is an art in itself which you can master without breaking your ethics and morality.

Are there any links or books you can guide me to? Please that would help. I am pretty certain I am lying with an intention to deceive and just breaking the precept in itself is making me miserable. Can we chat?

Not right now but send me your email address. Will touch base when I have time.

Well said Suminda. Intention is really the key-word here. I think its the same case like with the blind monk Chakkupala that stepped on some insects and accidently killing them while doing walking meditation. He didnt knew it and the Buddha said that he didnt do anything wrong because he didnt had the intention to kill those beings.

Good that some of my answers are useful to you. BTW, would like to know you really are if you don't mind.

In addition to the excellent answers already given, it's important to also keep in mind the effect of one's actions on oneself. So even if the lie you told had no ill effect on the interviewer or company for which you were applying for a job; (say for example, they didn't hire you anyway), you still know you stated something untrue and that stays with you. We work to keep our sila good (by following the 5 precepts) because of the good it does for our own minds.

Thank you for this important answer about the effect having to targets.

Lying occurs when four elements are present.
a.  The speaker must not be mistaken about what he or she wants to say.
b.  The speaker must have the intention to deceive.
c.  The lie must be consciously pronounced.
d.  The hearer must be deceived.

Associated with lying are all attempts to twist the truth by deceptive means and the concealment of the facts in order to cheat people.
source: Treasury of Precious Qualities, commentary by Kangyur Rinpoche

Traditions/rules may differ on the last point: e.g. I think that according to the Theravada monastic rules, for example, although killing doesn't occur unless someone dies, it's not necessary for anyone to have been deceived for a lie to have occurred (or been attempted).

I listened to a talk by Ajahn Punnadhammo some days ago.
In here he talks about why the Buddha had put a great emphasiz on right speech.
Ajahn Punnadhammo says that by using the speech faculty we can directly input dhammas into other beings mind-stream.
So by misusing the speech faculty (by lying for example) we can directly input delusion into other beings mind-stream. That is a heavy kammic thing to do since delusion is what binds us in Samsara.
When he said that i really understood the depth of the 4th precept.

is there ever a time to not look and think carefully about an actual
situation?
suppose one were the sole provider for a large family and lost their job. one looks and looks and finally an opportunity arises. and the person can actually do the job. and do it well.
but!
a degree is mandatory. the person lacks that. what to do? see if they can be hired by demonstrating ability might be on choice.
if jobs are.scarce and the family has begun to starve tho? me, I would accept that some negative karma would be incurred. I would accept some delay on reaching enlightenment. I would lie.
if hired, I would get the degree quietly, over time.
there is no absolute thing to do. it depends on the situation.
to save the lives of others, especially others who are children or otherwise dependant on you, I don't see how I could make any choice that ignored that (but again, a situation could arise in which I acted differently).
to me it seems the essence of Buddhism is awareness. generalizing or adhering to preconcieved ideas of what to do and not do seems a bit robotic and not a way to further the habit of actually percieving. it also gives no room to listen to ones inner voice, intuition or whatever you want to call it, which I've always understood to be also perception just not always at the level.of conscious intent.


text:
How does Buddhism explain the creation of everything (universe)
How does Buddhism explain the creation of everything (universe). Did Buddhism faithfuls believe that universe had always been here and forever, and everything runs by cause-and-effect?
Did Buddha have any power of any kind to influence the universe, or it's just teaching? and if so, who rules the universe before Buddha's birth?

The Buddha is omniscient. Not almighty. There's no ruler to the universe.

@SankhaKulathantille how can you say Buddha is omniscient? does he knew everything everywhere, it make no sense for human mind, since Buddha is humain

The omniscience talked about with regards to the Buddha is different from what you think. Omniscience here doesn't mean that he sees, feels, hears everything that happens in the universe at all times. Omniscience here means that nothing is covered to him. ex: if he wants to see what is happening in another galaxy, he can see without any obstruction and he completely comprehends what he sees. This ability is described by 2 of the 6 special powers only a Buddha can attain. They are called the "Saya Asadarana Nana". The Buddha is not just a human: http://www.tbsa.org/articles/BuddhaQualities.html

Buddhism says that the world has no discernible beginning.
That it runs by cause-and-effect.
That people are able to influence their own state, and have an effect on others.
And that you shouldn't spend too much attention on theoretical questions, such as "when did the universe begin?", because there are more important questions such as "how can we help to end suffering?"

Buddhism does have an aspect of cosmology, creation and evolution of life on earth.
But again as @ChrisW mentioned investigating this is not:

profitable for oneself
profitable for others

(Unless of course you do this for a living.)
When there are worst problems to worry about like emotional imbalances and stress we go through in daily life.

Buddha himself questions the existence and non-existence of everthing in space. That everything is unborned. Thus to him there is no creation in the first place.

I think it boils down to definition and our observation time based leads to subject and object in that sequence or simultaneously but is a measure from discussion subject to timely constrained  observation our minds have. Causality in our observation has sequence answer me this if there was no time how could causality lead to creation because action and it's reaction depend upon time the only way creation could be from action is an immutable nature to time that allows the effect of causality.


text:
Are these magical powers real?
My interest was caught by an article talking about the mundane and supermundane powers which are mentioned in the Samaññaphala Sutta (The Fruits of the Contemplative Life,  DN 2):
The first five mundane powers: (can be attained through perfection of samādhi)

Supranormal powers

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from
  defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and
  inclines it to the modes of supranormal powers. He wields manifold supranormal
  powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes
  one.  He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, and
  mountains as if through space.

Clairaudience

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from
  defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and
  inclines it to the divine ear-element. He hears -- by means of the divine ear-element, purified and surpassing the human -- both kinds of sounds: divine and human, whetever near or far.

Mind Reading

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from
  defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and
  inclines it to knowledge of the awareness of other beings. He knows the
  awareness of other beings, other individuals, having encompassed it with his
  own awareness.

Recollection of Past Lives

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from
  defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and
  inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives. He
  recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand,
  many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many
  aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a
  name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance.

The Passing Away & Re-appearance of Beings

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from
  defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and
  inclines it to knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings.

One supermundane power (Can be attained through Vipassana):

The Ending of Mental Fermentations

With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from
  defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, the monk
  directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations.

However, the Buddha emphasized to attain only the last through the realization of Arahatship. It might be unfair to ask for scientific proof, but is there any backup for the first five supposedly attainable powers, any personal experiences maybe?

Some of these have been actively researched in Parapsychology. The Wikipedia link directs you to research efforts around this subject.
If you are skeptical of what others have to say you can verify your self by developing the Jhanas. Also keep in mind more you long for these powers more further it becomes so your practice should be very diligent with strong sense of equanimity through out the practice. Once you see for yourself (Ehipassiko) your doubts and skepticism will disappear.


text:
Sloth-torpor-Restlessness-worry
I meditate first think in the morning and every morning i have to face sloth and torpor.When i face sloth and torpor i make a mental note and i can see how is impermanent and  uncontrollable and after a while  it seams that i overcame it,so then when i go back to the raising and falling i can see it very clear from the beginning until the end and back again without interruptions.Then little by little thoughts and restlessness begin to disturb this clarity of mind,at this point the mind is very energetic and again i make a mental note and it passes away.Is like that there is not balance when the mind is concentrate i have to face Sloth-torpor and in the other hand and when is energetic restlessness come up.
Before i was forcing to stay with the raising and falling and i began to see how aversion was coming up and i was just dealing with it,little by little i learn to don't force to much.there is not aversion anymore but seams that there is not balance.Is this just normal or i am doing something wrong?
Sorry again for my english and i hope that what i write is understandable.

What you are describing is an experience of impermanence (that your energy doesn't last), suffering (that your experience isn't as you wish it to be) and non-self (that you can't make the lethargy go away for real). This is to be expected and suggests proper practice of insight meditation. Congratulations :)
Over time, this will lead to disenchantment, weariness - getting tired of being tired, for example :) Eventually, if you practice intensively, your mind will let go, and you will become enlightened, no longer upset by things like lethargy, etc.

"O monks, the well-instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets wearied of form, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception, gets wearied of mental formations, gets wearied of consciousness. Being wearied he becomes passion-free. In his freedom from passion, he is emancipated. Being emancipated, there is the knowledge that he is emancipated. He knows: 'birth is exhausted, lived is the holy life, what had to be done is done, there is nothing more of this becoming.'"
SN 22.59 (Mendis, trans)

Thank you Venerable Yuttadhammo!Your answer is very inspiring!I am practicing Theravada Buddhism and I have to thank you for your videos that are very helpful.I have no teacher and sometimes I  have questions that I don't know how to answer to.Thank you again for what you do you are very inspiring.

You should use the 5 faculties and 5 powers to balance you mind to dispel some the niwarana.

When restless this is because your have become too energetic but lacking in concentration. Best is to do Anapana to increase concentration
When sleepy this is because you have high concentration but lack energy best is to practice Satipatthana, or instruction in the Capala Sutta
You have too much faith backed with little wisdom, you accept theory due to faith than at the experiential level, then you should develop your wisdom to see what you have faith in, at the experiential level.
When you have lack of faith or doubt the teachings (you have learned too much with little experiential knowledge) you might either get lazy, so develop some confidence to practice by contemplating qualities of the Triple Gem enough to get you to practice and experience in reality the truth of what your have learned
When you have ill will try metta or realise you have will will
When you have desire realise it or contemplate on impermanence or realise have desire

To realise that the hindrances are arising you have to develop strong mindfulness.
Also as a final note with any hindrance or any other mental state there is and associated sensation. This arises and passes away. At 1st you will see it at a gross level as e.g. just sleepy but then you will sense they are made of smaller quantum of smaller sensations arising and passing away. Having said this the feelings and their arising and passing away due to metal factors or content is very difficult to sense. The Vipassana method based on the Pacalā Sutta:

“Nothing is worth clinging to”
When this was said, the venerable Mahā Moggallāna said this to the Blessed One:
    “In what way, bhante, in brief, is a monk freed through the destruction of craving, that is, one who has reached total perfection, the total security from bondage, the total holy life, the total consummation, the highest amongst gods and humans?”
“Here, Moggallāna, the monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to.
    And, Moggallāna, a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things [he directly knows the nature of the all].
    Having directly known the nature of all things, he fully understands all
    things.
Having fully understood all things, he knows whatever feelings there are, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant.
As regards to those feelings, [Section on Disillusionment and Revulsion (Nibbida) follows]
he dwells contemplating impermanence in them;
he dwells contemplating dispassion [fading away of lust] in them;
he dwells contemplating ending (of suffering) in them;
he dwells contemplating letting go (of defilements).
When he dwells contemplating impermanence in them, contemplating dispassion in them, contemplating ending in them, contemplating letting go, he does not cling to anything in the world.
    Not clinging, he is not agitated; being not agitated, he himself surely attains nirvana.

Before I meditate first thing in the morning, I do stretching of legs and back for 10 minutes so sitting is more comfortable.
When I sit use pillow so back is straight. Feel like string pulling on head upward and weight on tailbone gently pulling it straight down.
After establishing breathing you can continue counting breath or do a ceremony.
Here is one the Dalai Lama

Generating the Mind for Enlightenment
For those who admire the spiritual ideals of the Eight verses on
  Transforming the Mind it is helpful to recite the following verses for
  generating the mind for enlightenment. Practicing Buddhists should
  recite the verses and reflect upon the meaning of the words, while
  trying to enhance their altruism and compassion. Those of you who are
  practitioners of other religious traditions can draw from your own
  spiritual teachings, and try to commit yourselves to cultivating
  altruistic thoughts in pursuit of the altruistic ideal.
With a wish to free all beings I shall always go for refuge to the
  Buddha, Dharma and Sangha until I reach full enlightenment.
Enthused by wisdom and compassion, today in the Buddha’s presence I
  generate the Mind for Full Awakening for the benefit of all sentient
  beings.
As long as space endures, as long as sentient being remain, until
  then, may I too remain and dispel the miseries of the world. In
  conclusion, those who like myself, consider themselves to be followers
  of Buddha, should practice as much as we can. To followers of other
  religious traditions, I would like to say, “Please practice your own
  religion seriously and sincerely.” And to non-believers, I request you
  to try to be warm-hearted. I ask this of you because these mental
  attitudes actually bring us happiness. As I have mentioned before,
  taking care of others actually benefits you.

This may have to do with focusing the mind and energy and dedicating it to others, but this focused ceremony helps to energize meditation.
Meditation 30-60 minutes are usually adequate to begin my day. Then I do yoga and other exercises to generate energy and plan activities so I am active. Just sitting all day could easily produce torpor. Having a plan to act in the world is part of walking meditation where you keep meditation or breathing awareness going while you do your job or goal for the day with complete focus.

Thanks maybe some stretching could be good I will try it!

If I skip a day or two I can feel the tightening. Hope it helps.


text:
The role of doubt in Zen Buddhist practice?
The Zen monk Hakuin said that 3 things are essential to practice

great faith, great doubt, and great resolve

I can see how faith and resolve would be essential but I don't see why doubt would be? Also wouldn't faith and doubt contradict each other unless they occur separately at different times.

This doubt is a byproduct of really paying attention to details. As you pick up bits and pieces here and there, some of them don't fit together. So you put them aside and keep going. Then, later, some of them fit together, but others still don't. You have great faith in three jewels, and great resolve to walk the path. At the same time you have no choice but to suspend your judgement on some things that don't make sense. The further you go, the more this happens. But only if you really pay attention, and only if you don't get discouraged by logical inconsistencies, and only if you are determined to follow through. Somewhere along the way you get unwavering certainty on some points, even if they contradict other, equally authoritative points. Because you are certain about these things, you can give up some other things you would never have dreamt of giving up, even though your heart sinks as you do it. You keep doing it in the name of "no hope, no fear" until you lose all ground and fall through space. This is the great doubt, the flip side of your faith and determination. It's not the goal, it's a thing you have to go through. It's not something that can or should be induced artificially though. As Master Bankei said:

What’s worse, they [the false teachers] tell practitioners that unless they can raise a “great ball of doubt” and then break through it, there can’t be any progress in Zen.  Instead of teaching them to live by the unborn Buddha-mind, they start by forcing them to raise this ball of doubt any way they can.  People who don’t have a doubt are now saddled with one.  They’ve turned their Buddha-minds into “balls of doubt.”  It’s absolutely wrong.

So doubt must be natural to be real. That's why even though Master Hakuin is right in listing it as one of three essential things, I now say it is secondary to paying attention properly, taking note of facts and how they fit together or not.

Your answer doesn't say explicitly what Bankei thought about koans. I looked using https://www.google.com/search?q=bankei+koan and the first few references (for example ref and ref) suggest he wasn't a fan of koans. But sometimes some of what he said is itself presented as or called a 'koan'.

In reverse order:
"wouldn't faith and doubt contradict each other unless they occur separately at different times"
...or unless they are directed to different things: Great faith [on the approach], great doubt [about Truth]. Great resolve: the act of persevering on the approach to penetrate the Truth.
"I can see how faith and resolve would be essential but I don't see why doubt would be?"
Great doubt can be seen as the catalyzer that creates motivation to make one go through great lengths to reach something so hard to reach. It can also be seen as "The Doubt among the doubts", a fundamental, deep and honest question, greater than any other, that no superficial answer would satisfy it, settle it, or make it rest.

I wonder whether 'doubt' is similar to 'suffering' in this context.

@ChrisW I feel that flavor to it too. In that respect, I see the quote mirroring the Noble Truths.

Then there is also Descartes' kind of doubt, which is indispensible for philosophical enquiry. People who doubt too little tend to end up believing things for the sake of convenience or personal preference, Doubt makes us dig and keep digging.

This has been explained by Yashutani Roshi in his 10th lecture. The relevance of doubt (Dai-gidan among faith aka dai-shinkon & strong resolution aka dai-funshi) has been explained by him as follows -

The second indispensable quality is a feeling of strong doubt. Not a simple doubt, mind you, but a "doubt-mass" and this inevitably stems from strong faith. It is a doubt as to why we and the world should appear so imperfect, so full of anxiety, strife, and
  suffering, when in fact our deep faith tells us exactly the opposite is
  true. It is a doubt which leaves us no rest. It is as though we knew
  perfectly well we were millionaires and yet inexplicably found ourselves
  in dire need without a penny in our pockets. Strong doubt, therefore, exists in proportion to strong faith.
  I can illustrate this state of mind with a simple example. Take a man
  who has been sitting smoking and suddenly finds that the pipe which
  was in his hand a moment before has disappeared. He begins to search
  for it in the complete certainty of finding it. It was there a moment
  ago, no one has been near, it cannot have disappeared. The longer
  he fails to find it, the greater the energy and determination with
  which he hunts for it. - Page 81, The three pillars of Zen.

Case 28 of the Mumonkan Ryûtan Blows Out the Candle
Tokusan asked Ryûtan about Zen far into the night. At last Ryûtan
  said, "The night is late.  Why don't you retire?" Tokusan made his
  bows and lifted the blinds to withdraw, but he was met by darkness.
  Turning back to Ryûtan, he said, "It is dark outside." Ryûtan lit
  a paper candle and handed it to him.  Tokusan was about to take it
  when Ryûtan blew it out. At this, all of a sudden, Tokusan went
  through a deep experience and made bows. Ryûtan said, "What sort
  of realization do you have?" "From now on," said Tokusan, "I will
  not doubt the words of an old oshõ who is renowned everywhere under
  the sun." The next day Ryûtan ascended the rostrum and said, "I
  see a fellow among you. His fangs are like the sword tree. His mouth
  is like a blood bowl. Strike him with a stick, and he won't turn his
  head to look at you. Someday or other, he will climb the highest of
  the peaks and establish our Way there." Tokusan brought his notes
  on the Diamond Sutra to the front of the hall, pointed to them with a
  torch, and said, "Even though you have exhausted the abtruse
  doctrines, it is like placing a hair in a vast space. Even though you
  have learned all the secrets of the world, it is like a drop of water
  dripped on the great ocean." And he burned all his notes.
  Then, making bows, he took his leave of his teacher.

Faith and doubt are dependent on each other.  The one is useless without the other.  I don't know if you've ever had this experience before, but how fresh and significant is the landscape when you are utterly lost?  Everything appears as it is.  You don't see that cedar tree where that raccoon was last spring.  You don't see that hollow where your brother fell in the river.  Instead, every rill in the landscape, every tree, every rock, stands out in bold relief revealing something like its true nature.  It's fresh and undistorted by memory and preconception.  This is beginners mind, but there's also this visceral, existential doubt, right?  I mean, we're lost for godsakes.  We have to find our way out!  Our very lives are on the line!  How are we going to do that when we have no idea where we are and no idea where we're going?  This is the great doubt of Zen.  Within it, we are lost, exposed, and utterly without direction.

Case 5 of the Mumokan  Kyõgen's "Man up in a Tree"
Kyõgen Oshõ said, "It is like a man up in a tree hanging from a branch
  with his mouth; his hands grasp no bough, his feet rest on no limb.
Someone appears under the tree and asks him, 'What is the meaning of
  Bodhidharma's coming from the West?' If he does not answer, he fails
  to respond to the question. If he does answer, he will lose his life.
What would you do in such a situation?"
Mumon's Comment
Even if your eloquence flows like a river, it is of no avail.  Though
  you can expound the whole of Buddhist literature, it is of no use.  If
  you solve this problem, you will give life to the way that has been
  dead until this moment and destroy the way that has been alive up to
  now.
Otherwise you must wait for Maitreya Buddha and ask him.
Mumon's Verse
Kyõgen is truly thoughtless; His vice and poison are endless.
  He stops up the mouths of the monks, And devil's eyes sprout from
  their bodies.

Getting lost is not fun.  No one likes being in a state of uncertainty.  We like having something to lean on whether it's our map, the sutras, etc.  When we lose that safety blanket, we lose our desire to go on.  When we're lost, great faith is picking a direction no matter how wrong it may seem.  Great faith is trusting that we'll eventually figure things out.  Great faith is letting go, even if doing so may destroy us.  Great faith is the decision to trudge headlong into doubt.