text:
How to practice Mindfulness Meditation?
I have been researching this lately and thought it was amazing. I just don't know where to begin or know any techniques. Can someone list some?

Recently I m reading a dharma book (The Chinese Version), which 25 great beings demonstrated how they practiced mindfulness meditation.
The winner is: Guan Shi Yin Bodhisattva practices on hearing:
http://www.cttbusa.org/shurangama5/shurangama5_12.asp
You might be interested to have a read of above link as well as 24 other practices.
May you be happy and at ease

The word 'mindfulness' means 'to remember' or 'keep in mind'. In the context of Buddhism, it means 'to remember' to practise the factors of the eightfold path.
For example, if you are speaking/talking, you remember to speak in a manner that is honest, pleasant/gentle, cordial & beneficial. This is practising mindfulness meditation when meditating upon speech.
If practising formal sitting meditation, mindfulness is to remember to keep the mind in state that does not have desire for or get distressed about anything in the world.
Therefore, in formal sitting meditation, how to practise mindfulness meditation is to sit without desire or worry & just sit with natural quiet. When this is done properly, awareness of breathing will arise naturally as a sign of right mindfulness & later pleasant feelings will arise as a sign of right mindfulness.

You won't learn this one from books, only by trying out and practicing it. The practice is to go beyond concepts like Now I'm meditating, this is good, bad, me, mine... and focus on the raw experience which is present. If you sit down to start meditating with the intention to be mindfull you might have the feeling Now I'm meditating, but in reality all you do is change postures.
You should have some basic instructions, but don't get into theory too much. It won't help you, it will only reinforce your opinions and ideas. I'd suggest to get to know the framework of Right Mindfulness, which are body, feelings, mindstates, mindobjects (dhamma).
The original teaching from the Buddha himself: Satipatthana Sutta: The Foundations of Mindfulness
A more practical guide from Ven. Yuttadhammo (the noting technique): How to Meditate

Try starting with accesstoinsight.org, Jon Kabat Zinn, Joseph Goldstein, Google Search Inside Yourself.

How about The Bhante Yuttadhammo channel on YouTube? He has a lot of useful videos but check out "How to Meditate" for beginners. His online  videos are beginner to intermediate on much more than only mindfulness and he gives meditation courses from beginner to advanced.
The teachers below teach about the same way as Bhante Yuttadhammo and are very beginner friendly:
Joseph Goldstein, Bhante Bodhidhamma,  Gil Fronsdal
Just Google one of the above names in quotes and add "Dhamma talks"
There's a Youtuber called "Stephen Proctor" who gives outstanding beginning teachings on mindfulness meditation in my opinion. Has anyone else heard of him? Is it just me or can this guy really teach or what?
These teachers practice  the same way I try to practice but there are a lot of good teachers who might have a different approach.

Just checked him out. Thanks for the tip (not Robinhood). Plus seems like he sticks to the program - no woken stuff.I've looked for decades for someone with pure practice without any philosophy. It's kind of interesting that you say "beginning." I usually find that appellation a bit demeaning. I know of many "advanced" practitioners who  yet watch the breath, recite Namo Amitaba, you get my point. For me personally in stuff like math, genetics, etc. when I hear that, I'm already looking for "advanced."

The detail of the practice is outlined in Satipatthana Sutta and Anapanasati Sutta, but these instruction maybe difficult to follow for a beginner. Best is to take a course in it. 2 organisations with a reasonably wide outreach are:

http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/ and
http://www.dhamma.org

or alternatively look for a teacher in World Buddhist Directory.


text:
Basic dharma theory tells me that it is definitely not possible to perceive both fingers simultaneously
In MCTB (Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha), Daniel Ingram describes the following exercise.

I sit quietly in a quiet place, close my eyes, put one hand on each
  knee, and concentrate just on my two index fingers. Basic dharma
  theory tells me that it is definitely not possible to perceive both
  fingers simultaneously, so with this knowledge I try to see in each
  instant which one of the two finger’s physical sensations are being
  perceived. Once the mind has sped up a bit and yet become more stable,
  I try to perceive the arising and passing of each of these sensations.
  I may do this for half an hour or an hour, just staying with the
  sensations in my two fingers and perceiving when each sensation is and
  isn’t there.

What I found most curious about this, was the assumption that "it is definitely not possible to perceive both fingers simultaneously" and that this assumption is supported by "basic dharma theory".
I understand that sensations arise and pass, but I feel like I have experienced multiple sensations simultaneously and/or the sensations of multiple body parts have formed a single sensation. I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this.
In the form of specific questions:
I can feel tingling in all of my fingers simultaneously. Does this refute his assertion that "it is definitely not possible to perceive both fingers simultaneously"? Or am I not understanding something? I suspect the latter and am hoping to be enlightened. I'm also curious what "dharma theory" he is most likely referencing?
Thanks in advance for any response.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

That's kind of an advanced book.
There are no body parts within each of our own bodily experiece, only sensation.
Unless you are a natural you can't see how fast the mind works or see if awareness arises simultaneously in the beginning. It's all a blur until we have practiced long enough.
I guess your being taught to see things as they are in your own experience. While one does this kind of practice one sets concepts aside. Ideally even Dhamma theory could be put aside when one gets the hang of the practice.

Basic Buddhist theory says that you can only know one thing at a time. If you have two hands held in front of your face then you might think "This is my right hand" so at that moment you know your right hand. Then you think "This is my left hand", then you have knowledge of your left hand but you forgot your right hand momentarily.
Usually this process of knowing and forgetting goes by very quickly. You might think that you can feel the wind,see a dog and hear a car at the same time but actually you're rapidly shifting from one object to the next.
I want to clarify one point of confusion on this. Going back to the two hands example, if you have the two hands in front of your face you might think "These are hands" so at that moment you have knowledge of "hands" but you no longer have the knowledge of "left hand" or "right hand". The two hands become a single object in the mind.

Thanks Hugh, can you point me to where this is stated or suggested?

I honestly have never come across it in a sutta. I've heard it several times in dhamma talks where the speaker asks a trick question like "how many suttas do you know right now?", or when the speaker is answering "Did the Buddha know everything?" and they say that he could know any one-thing but not everything at once.

The latter is said here: "It is not possible that a brahman or contemplative could know everything and see everything all at once." Dharmafarer's commentary though relates that to something else, i.e. that the Buddha could know/see the past but not (except in general terms) the future.

It may feel like you have experienced multiple sensations simultaneously and/or the sensations of multiple body parts have formed a single sensation. However, this is unrelated to Daniel's exercise because Daniel is referring to the specific exercise of two discrete sensations (rather than a blur of sensations).
For example, now it is a relatively cold morning where I am (6:00 am) but I am not wearing a shirt (having just left the warmth of being wrapped in a blanket). If I turn my mind to meditation, I can feel breathing sensations but can also feel the cold chill on my skin, particularly my lower arms, at the same time.
Where as Daniel has placed two index fingers on his knees, which are difficult to cognise exactly simultaneously because they are very specific & small sized sensations. Interesting exercise.

It doesn't seem like a sutta to me. I'm guessing it's Abhidhamma.
You noticed, did you, that Daniel Ingram is describing some switching or vibrating (alternating) very rabidly (e.g. 30 times per second)? Something that rapid might seem continuous.
For example in A Manual of Abhidhamma (Abhidhammattha Sangaha)

The time-limit of such a consciousness is termed
  one thought-moment. The rapidity of the succession of
  such thought-moments is hardly conceivable by the ken of
  human knowledge.

... and,

When, for instance, a person looks at the radiant
  moon on a cloudless night, he gets a faint glimpse of the
  surrounding stars as well. He focuses his attention on the
  moon, but he cannot avoid the sight of stars around. The
  moon is regarded as a great object, while the stars are
  regarded as minor objects. Both moon and stars are perceived
  by the mind at different moments. According to
  Abhidhamma it is not correct to say that the stars are perceived
  by the sub-consciousness and the moon by the consciousness.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How do i Focusing on the breath and letting thought go
Now this may sound silly but I'm new to mediating and I hear that when you have a thought you just let it go. But if I'm focusing on the breath do I go off it, accept that I'm thinking then go back to the breath or just stay on the breath and if I get distracted go right back to it and not even focus on my thoughts?

samatha or vipassana?

You should stay with the breath as much as you can. Therefore, if a thought arises & it will just float away, then let the thought float away; like it is a passing visitor.
You only have to 'let go' of something after you have 'picked it up'. Therefore, if you have not picked up (attached to) the thought, you do not need to let it go. Instead, just stay with the breathing & let the thought float by & away.
This method develops both samatha (calmness) & vipassana (insight).

Mindfulness of breathing consists of paying attention to the sensation of breathing at the nose. When you are distracted (which is natural) you return to the breathing. The objective is to maintain a state of objectivity. The key is not to avoid distraction but to not get involved with it. By maintaining a state of objectivity, you automatically engage your Bodhicitta. Later on, the Bodhicitta will become more conscious and become something like "focusing" as defined by Eugene Gendlin.

what is "state of objectivity"?

The most important attribute of objectivity is to not get caught up by emotion. Objectivity is an investigative tool needed to uncover the historical causes of unwholesome sankhara. It is also a state of mind from which one can explore the truly vast mental universe.

This article, “Generosity First” by Thanissaro Bhikkhu will help you IMO. If you take to heart what he says and follow it to the letter, then,

...this confidence is what allows you to overcome a lot of the initial difficulties: the distractions, the pain. At the same time, the spaciousness that comes from generosity gives you the right mindset for the concentration practice, gives you the right mindset for insight practice—because when you sit down and focus on the breath, what kind of mind do you have? The mind you’ve been creating through your generous and virtuous actions.

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


text:
altruism or being used?
One of my friends got himself into some serious debts. I've loaned him money, helped him get his admin organised, I've helped him move into a new apartment....and I single-handedly moved his stuff back out, after he had fled the country in an attempt to run away from his debts. Now, he's back and I've managed to get him into a program to pay off those debts over the course of the next three years. Until recently, we were quite close and he shared many of his fears and thoughts with me and I was glad to be there for him, any way I could. His life seems to be improving now and I'm happy for him. Two weeks ago he started ignoring me and blocking me, because his current girlfriend doesn't believe our friendship is merely platonic. (it really is, though)
I do not regret helping him; I did it for him, not for myself.
I'm happy he's trying to rebuild his life.
I don't think he's in a nurturing relationship right now, but I think that's for him to figure out by himself.
My other friends keep telling me he's using me and he's not treating me with the respect I deserve.
I agree partly: I do not feel respected anymore. I feel ambivalent. What should I do next? End our friendship? Keep a low profile? How does that teach him not to forsake his friends for romance? We've all been blinded by love before, so I understand why he's doing this right now, however, when I reach a point where it's hurting my feelings, should I end the friendship? I've tried to talk to him about it, but he remains incommunicado. Still I am doing his admin for him and making sure he stays in the afore mentioned "debt program"; it's not helping him to move forward, though, because currently he's not an active part of sorting out his admin. Please advise me....

How is this about Buddhism? Did I miss it?

In Buddhism, there are two kinds of friendship: (i) ordinary friendship; & (ii) spiritual friendship.
In ordinary friendship, Buddhist principles ensure what is called 'false friends' or 'false friendship' does not harm us, including economically. The principles of 'true friendship' & 'false friendship' are listed in this link in the 2nd section, which begins with: "These four, young householder, should be understood as foes in the guise of friends...". You may read this thoroughly & thoughtfully to help provide perspective &/or guidance.
In what you described in your post, the impression of 'false friendship' does not appear to exist because: (i) you have volunteered to help him; (ii) you are not threatened economically; and (iii) you are not being taken advantage of sexually or illegally.
Therefore, your situation appears to be an issue of spiritual friendship. In Buddhism, spiritual friendship (metta-karuna) or 'altruism' is unconditional; it is not given to receive anything in return; it is selfless.
From a Buddhist perspective, since it appears you are not being threatened or harmed, your issues are those related to hurt from 'pride' or 'conceit'. This kind of 'egoism' the Buddhist path seeks to end or overcome because it causes suffering. A mind training verse is as follows:

When someone whom I have helped, Or in whom I have placed great hopes, Mistreats me in extremely hurtful ways, May I regard him still
  as my precious teacher.
Eight Verses for Training the Mind

Buddhism would recommend to continue helping your friend in a selfless manner & identify the problem as your 'pride' or 'ego' rather than your relationship being something inherently dangerous you must urgently end.
While his new girlfriend may not be ideal, ordinary people do often get possessive in relationship so you can give them some space rather than officially break your platonic friendship.
Ultimately, it is ideal the new girlfriend trust you and express gratitude towards you given you have helped her new boyfriend in an extraordinary & praiseworthy way. Give it time. His new love affair may not work out, anyway (since she sounds very possessive & controlling), thus he made need your help & support again when it falls to pieces.
In summary, true spiritual friendship & altruism cannot hurt or harm us. As long as the five Buddhist precepts are not transgressed (namely, physical violence, economic theft, sexual exploitation, deliberate lying & drug addiction/enabling) then we cannot be harmed or hurt; unless we ourselves are controlling & possessive, in which only our own pride & attachment hurts us.
My answer: keep a low profile! (but be prepared for when he needs you again).
In Buddhism, this is called 'upeka' ('equanimity'), which literally means: 'to watch over/observe a person in a detached manner until we have the opportunity to help'. An intrinsic element of 'upeka' is giving others the space to take responsibility for & learn from their own karma (actions).
Since you have genuinely helped him, you should be satisfied in your own virtue & goodness. One meditation in Buddhism is reflecting upon your own good altruistic deeds (cāgānussati).

Thank you very much for your words of wisdom.....you've really helped me make up my mind about this issue. Today I conveyed my thoughts to him, telling him I only wanted his happiness and would be there for him if he needed my help, but that I figured the best thing I could do right now was to keep a low profile and allow him to find out for himself where his path may lead him. He was completely relieved, for he'd feared he'd be faced with a decision, in which he'd have to choose between romance and friendship. He thanked me for being such a true friend to him and for understanding his needs.

You're welcome. You are certainly a true friend to him and he is not a false friend but, at this time, has not perfected true friendship. I am glad it all worked out.

You were very compassionate in how you reached out to that person. Mine too was a very similar story. I have no ill will in any way what so ever against that person, but I now keep my distance with him. What I would like to tell you here is that you have to learn compassion for the people around you, and also compassion for yourself. And most importantly you need a good sense of humor.
It is the ability to laugh at the foibles of human nature that leads both you and the person that you reached out to, to doing what is unskillful. We have to learn to laugh at that kind of behavior, but it’s a good-natured laugh. It’s not nasty or mean. It’s the recognition that we all have had those impulses, and we can see the foolishness in giving in to them. The virtue of humor is that it allows you to step back and separate yourself from what you’re laughing at. If you can develop a sense of distance between self and the act, then you can laugh at human behavior. So when you can laugh at yourself, you’re putting yourself apart, separate from your foibles and above them. Then you will learn from any unskillful actions or thoughts from your part, and learn to keep on giving, and reaching out to others without any form of expectations in return.


text:
Is it possible for a human being to live without the mind?
If a human being consists of two parts as mind and body, is it then possible to live without mind?
Appreciate your ideas.

I edited grammar and spelling. Please roll-back if not agreeable.

To answer this question accurately is very difficult if you are not a scientist but often people have accidents that results in them being in a coma for an extended period, where their physical body is alive but their mind is not conscious. If the mind is not conscious at all here then that physical body is living without mind (however from a Buddhist perspective, this is probably not a "human" living since, in Buddhism, the word translated as "human" means to have a reflective & wise mind).
Also, there is a meditation state where the mind becomes unconscious, called 'the cessation of perception & feeling'. This meditative state is compared to a dead body, where even breathing cannot be felt yet the 'life force' or 'vitality' of the body & heat remain.
For example, in the Buddhist scriptures, there are stories about monks that enter into the meditation state of 'the cessation of perception & feeling' & people watch them meditating (not moving) under a tree for many days, believe they are dead & try to bury or cremate them.
Therefore, it appears it is possible to that a 'human' can live without mind.

What is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time; and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception &
feeling?
In the case of the one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily fabricator (breathing)...his verbal fabricator (thinking)
... his mental fabricator (perception & feeling) have ceased & subsided, his vitality is
exhausted, his heat subsided & his (five sense) faculties (eye, ears, nose, tongue & body nervous system) are scattered.
But in
the case of a monk who has attained the cessation of perception &
feeling, his bodily fabricator... his verbal
fabricator ... his mental fabricators have ceased & subsided, his
vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not subsided & his (five sense) faculties
are exceptionally clear (pure).
This is the difference between one who is
dead, who has completed his time, and a monk who has attained the
cessation of perception & feeling.
Mahavedalla Sutta

Without the mind the human body dies, there are many case of people in comas, but in cases where there is absolutely no brain activity these people are kept 'alive' using life support.
So I would argue that you can't live without the mind.

mind is not brain, or not even part of the brain. Brain is part of the body, but mind is not part of the body.

@techshare your question asked if the body can live without a mind. I was illustrating that a mind is a required component of the body, whether you believe the mind drives the body through the brain or whether the brain is the mind is an arbitrary point and another question. At the moment we measure whether a mind is present in a body with brain scans, seeing electrical activity, if there is no electrical activity we consider the mind to be absent, and in these cases the body is kept alive using life support, otherwise it dies. Thusly the body can't live without a mind.

I'm not sure that this is about the mind: I'd say that it's about the brain, i.e. Body can't live without brain. Brain is a required component of the body. We measure whether a brain is active in the body using brain scans. If there is no electrical activity we consider the body to be "brain-dead"; in these cases other organs of the body can be kept alive using life-support.

@ChrisW Um sorry but no. The mind is not the same as the brain. Let me explain in a metaphor; the brain is like a computer, it requires a program(mind) in order to work(live). A computer without a program is just an object as it is unable to do anything.

Mind is Vinnana and is one of the very basic six elements (Dhatu) that constitute you and me. What would it be if we take out this ‘Mind’ element?
Viññāna as dhatu or elements, are divided into 7 classes:
cakkhu-vinnana-dhatu = cakkhu-vinnanadvi. They depend on cakkhu-vatthu for their arising. (eyes)
sota-vinnana-dhatu = sota-vinnanadvi. They depend on sota-vatthu for their arising. (ears)
ghana-vinnana-dhatu = ghana-vinnanadvi. They depend on ghana-vatthu for their arising. (nose)
jivha-vinnana-dhatu = jivha-vinnanadvi. They depend on jivha-vatthu for their arising. (tongue)
kaya-vinnana-dhatu = kaya-vinnanadvi. They depend on kaya-vatthu for their arising. (body)
mano-dhatu = panca-dvaravajjana and sampaticchanadvi. They depend on hadaya-vatthu for their arising. (mind)
Mind is Vinnana and is one of the four type of food that is required for our survival. What would it be if we take out this ‘survival’ factor – the Nutriment of Consciousness (Vinnana Ahara)?
There are six classes of consciousness.  When eye and forms are both present, eye consciousness arises dependent on them.  Similarly when ear and sounds are present, ear consciousness arises dependent on them; nose and smells are present, nose consciousness arises dependent on them; tongue and tastes are present, tongue consciousness arises dependent on them; body and tactile objects are present, body consciousness arises dependent on them; mind and mental objects are present, mind consciousness arises dependent on them.  This is a cause which results in the our existence.

When I was about 17 years old, my grandmother told me she would sometimes  suddenly come out of her body.
I was thinking that in all the time I had lived with my grandmother as a child, I never seen her fall unconscious or anything. She told me that was because her body would never loose consciousness when she went out of it.
She would feel "herself" or her "mind" hovering above her body but the body was still walking and talking.
Apparently, a lot of the time when my grandmother was lucid and holding intellegent conversations with me and everyone else, she wasn't even in her body!
I don't claim to know if this means there actually was no mind in her body but I thought it might be worth mentioning nonetheless.


text:
Interdependent origination
Is the doctrine of interdependent origination found in Vedas . What is real origin of this?  I have heard of indra net .just curious

Do you mean Dependent Origination? If so, see related question; Learning materials for Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda) in Theravada Buddhism.

Joanna Jurewic would have tried to interpret Dependent Origination from the perspective of “Vedic thought", but what is important to you and I is to clearly understand what Dependent Origination (paticcasamupada) is. The Blessed One said that if you would be freed of dependant arising, if there is no dependant origination, there is no you in terms of that.  When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there.  When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two.  Then you would be liberated”.
The doctrine of Paticcasamuppāda (Pāli); Dependant Arising is THE MOST IMPORTANT part of Buddhist metaphysics. It states that phenomena arise together in a mutually interdependent web of cause and effect. This is the understanding that any phenomenon ‘exists’ only because of the ‘existence’ of other phenomena in an incredibly complex web of cause and effect covering time past, time present and time future. Because all things are thus conditioned and transient (anicca), they have no real independent identity (anatta) so do not truly ‘exist’, though to ordinary deluded minds this appears to be the case. Simply stated this can be said as:

With this as condition, That arises.
  With this NOT as condition, That does NOT arise.

This "Coming to be, and Ceasing to be" is happening all the time. All phenomena are subject to this unending interaction. And since all phenomena are dependent on other phenomena, they are all transient and impermanent. Avidyā the first condition. And then because in this life one has been ignorant, and acted in such a way as to produce karma, the cycle continues. The realization one gets out of understanding of Paticca Samuppāda (the universal law of cause and effect) is the ability of seeing things in life according to cause and effect. Once a person acquires that skill, he will be able to free from the idea of ‘me’ by seeing it as a deceit (the true nature). Then, he understands that the concept of ‘me’ is just a (false) view.

The doctrine of (Inter) Dependent Origination is solely the doctrine of the Buddha & unrelated to the Vedas. If it was related to the Vedas there would be no Buddha and no Buddhism since the term 'Buddha' solely rests on the premise that the Buddha 'discovered' or 'was enlightened' to the previously unknown truths that lead to Nirvana (here-&-now perfect peace & freedom of suffering).
There are some secular scholars such as Joanna Jurewicz, Linda Blanchard & possibly Richard Gombrich that claim Dependent Origination is related to the Vedas in that: "the 12-nidana chain mirror the creation myth involving the deity Prajapati & the Buddha repurposed the Brahmanic creation myth ". This view is wrong & primarily arises from a misunderstanding of the term 'nama-rupa' (the 4th link in Dependent Origination). 'Nama-rupa' is a term that originates from the Vedas however the Buddha redefined the term to mean 'mentality-materiality' ('mind-body') instead of the Vedic 'name-form'.
Unfortunately, the majority of official Buddhist translators today, such as Bhikkhu Bodhi & Thanissaro Bhikkhu, while not sharing the Vedic views of Linda Blanchard, etc, also mistranslate 'nama-rupa' in Dependent Origination as 'name-form'. This mistranslation occurs because there are contexts in the Buddhist scriptures where the Buddha is answering questions to Brahmans who have no understanding of Buddhism thus in these contexts (but not in the context of Dependent Origination) the translation of 'name-form' is appropriate since it has the same meaning as found in the Vedas.
The real origin of Dependent Origination is described in the Maha Sakyamuni Gotamo Sutta, where, before his enlightenment, the Buddha-To-Be was searching for how suffering occurs.
The Buddha-To-Be asked himself: "Why do people suffer?" He replied: "People suffer due to change & loss; due to aging & death"...he continued...Why does aging-&-death occur? Because of 'birth' ('identity'). People self-identify themselves to be 'of this clan', 'of this family', 'this self' or 'this person'. Why does 'birth' occur? Due to becoming. People 'become' what they believe themselves to be. Why becoming? Attachment. The mind attaches to sense objects & pleasurable feelings. Why attachment? Craving. The mind craves for sense objects & pleasurable feelings. Why feelings? Sense contact. Why sense contact? Sense organs. Why sense organs? Having a body & mind. Why does a body & mind exist? Due to consciousness. Why does consciousness exist? Due to having a body & mind. Why is the body, mind & consciousness not at peace & primed to create its own suffering? Due to 'sankhara' ('inner formations'). Why sankhara? Ignorance.
In summary, those that claim Dependent Origination has its origin in the Vedas cannot be Buddhists (since they deny the Buddha's enlightenment) and simply do not understand how suffering comes to be & how suffering is extinguished (which is the sole purpose of Buddhism).
The Buddha declared: "What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering". Thus, the Buddha did not teach from the Vedas.

It's interesting what you say about namarupa and it sounds like there might be actual corroboration out there for it but it sounds like your own personal view when you say "those that claim Dependent Origination has its origin in the Vedas cannot be Buddhists". Why couldn't it be that they just have wrong view? Why can't they be Buddhists with wrongview?

Thanks. As I explained at the start, the word 'Buddha' means 'self-enlightened' or 'completely original'. If one believes the Buddha borrowed from Brahmanism to devise his central teaching of Dependent Origination then one cannot believe in the self-enlightened Buddha. Regards.

It is only in recent years Bhikkhu Bodhi turned to using the translation of 'name-form'. Previously, with his mentors, he used 'materiality-mentality'. Further, in DN 15 (which is a departure from the many other suttas on Dependent Origination), the nama-rupa described there is 'name-form'. There are certainly contexts in the suttas where the translation 'name-form' applies. But as Bhikkhu Bodhi explains in his recent book, he decided to change the translation to 'name-form' in all contexts, Imo, this is incorrect because there two different contexts.

“Don’t blindly believe what I say. Don’t believe me because others convince you of my words. Don’t believe anything you see, read, or hear from others, whether of authority, religious teachers or texts.”

The Buddha says not to believe a word we say. Not everyone is so logical when they believe things. People can believe some crazy stuff :)

Indra's Net metaphor was not used in Buddhism until Mahayana's Avatamsaka Sutra written in the 3rd century CE.
Buddha lived 8 centuries before Indra's Net was repurposed for Buddhism.
Dependent Origination has nothing to do with Indra's Net. Indra's Net is a metaphor used to illustrate that all phenomena in the Universe are interrelated or interconnected. That's not what Dependent Origination is about.
According to Mahayana, Dependent Origination (which could also be translated as "Gradual Automatic Emergence" or even simply "Evolution") describes how subjective experience of the self and the world arises from the cyclical self-supporting tendency of representation, recognition and discrimination.
In the beginning there is complete randomness, with nothing more probable than anything else. This undifferentiated mass of being is nevertheless full of potential possibilities. Initially, the undifferentiated mass of being randomly gives rise to disbalances or abnormalities or fluctuations that appear and disappear without leaving a trace. However, at some point one such disbalance creates a local condition making further such disbalances more probable. This starts the process of evolution of self-supporting disbalances. Ones that create better conditions for further such disbalances to arise, "survive" and "pass on" their function. This way the primordial randomness gradually evolves into structured regularity - the physical, chemical and informational processes that tend to follow their certain courses of action.
As these processes co-exist, they interact. Interacting, they leave imprints on each other. As these processes are self-reproducing, they repeat with some variations. Repeating, the interactions of processes lead to accumulation of imprints. These accumulated imprints are de-facto representations holding information about the past interactions. Because they represent past interactions, they evolve to react differently when a new interaction is reminiscent of a pattern exhibited by past interactions. This leads to arising of recognition of patterns, the basic semiosis (the process of recognizing and interpreting signs), with its corollary of discrimination or discernment. Recognition of a pattern differentiates it from its background and from other patterns. This ability to represent, recognize, and discriminate is the foundation of consciousness.
This covers the first three steps of Dependent Origination.
From further growth of recognition and discrimination, there occurs gradual development of the representation of distinct entities. As recognition develops and gets more sophisticated, representation develops and gets more sophisticated - and vice versa. Recognition and representation help each other to grow into awareness of distinct entities. Eventually from the perception of entitiess, contact with entities, and pursuit of entities - arises the boundary between "inner" and "outer".

Shakyamuni was the fourth Buddha (or twenty-eight, depending on your sources) to arise from this world.  Saying that what he realized was unrealized previously is incorrect.
It is also a stretch to assume that only announced/known Buddhas obtained the state of non-returner.
The Avatamsaka Sutra, whether spoken/transmitted directly by Shakyamuni, or another Buddha, is an authentic transmission.  Why?  Because the words in it are composed of fractal visions which is why the assocation to Indras net.  Only a unified mind can comprehend the visions in the sutra.
I'll go even further to observe that apart from the intricacies of (inter)dependent origination (12 links, etc), Buddhism's one shortcoming as a system of teaching is to not address the first cause, the reason why we are all here.  It is possible that this subject is beyond comprehension.  But this topic is generally avoided beyond generalities and vagaries and does appear to be a hole in the overall Buddhist cosmology. For a system/view that is wrapped around cause and effect, it has no original cause.
The Hindu religious system is the en-cultured coding of the knowledge of a highly realized understanding of quantum physics and vibrations.  Hinduism at its core is not a religion per se.  It was wrapped in a religion in order to preserve the teachings down through time.

The OP is asking about the possible link of the origin of Dependent Origination to the Vedas, based on Indra's net. Indra's net first appeared in the Atharva Veda.
The Buddhist use of Indra's net is found in the Avatamsaka Sutra, a Mahayana text, whose composition started at least 500 years after the passing of the Buddha. This is not an Early Buddhist Text, and in my opinion, does not contain the original teachings of the historical Buddha.
The idea of "interdependent origination" in the Avatamsaka Sutra is described as follows from the "Indra's net" wikipedia article:

They [Buddhas] know all phenomena come from interdependent
origination. They know all world systems exhaustively. They know all
the different phenomena in all worlds, interrelated in Indra's net.

The above has nothing to do with the 12-nidana dependent origination of the Pali Canon.
On the other hand, the paper "Playing with Fire: The pratītyasamutpāda from the perspective of Vedic thought" by Joanna Jurewicz indeed tries to connect the dependent origination of the Pali Canon to Vedic thought, stating that the Buddha "formulated pratītyasamutpāda as a polemic against Vedic thought".
Already at the beginning of the paper, Jurewicz wrote:

Since I am not a Buddhologist, I do not attempt to analyze here all
the meanings which have been ascribed to these links in Buddhism; I
restrict myself to their principal and most general meanings.

Reading this paper, I find that indeed Jurewicz is neither a Buddhologist, nor is she discussing Buddhism as taught by the Buddha.
Instead, in my opinion, she finds ways to link the Buddha's dependent origination to Vedic thought, in the same way one may look at clouds and find the shape of sheep. It's a work of coincidental pattern matching (aka apophenia) and absurd speculation of the Buddha's original intentions behind the formulation of dependent origination.
It is quite obvious that there is nothing like the dependent origination of the Pali Canon, in Vedic thought.

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


text:
What is the difference between Enlightenment and Nibbana?
Is there a difference between Enlightenment and Nibbana?

See the previous question Enlightenment vs nibbana/nirvana

Enlightenment is the insight knowledge that cuts through & extinguishes the mind's defilements (cravings) of greed, hatred or delusion.
Nibbana is final peace or coolness that is experienced after the 'fires' of greed, hatred & delusion have been extinguished.
Enlightenment is the cause which allows (the pre-existing but hidden) Nibbana to be experienced.
This process is described in the Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta

Seeing (impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self) thus , the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with
  perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with
  consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through
  dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.'

The 'seeing thus' is enlightenment. 'Becoming dispassionate' (end of craving) is Nibbana. 'Fully released' is liberation (which is also Nibbana). The knowedge 'fully released' is enlightenment, in clearly knowing the end of craving is Nibbana.

The real problem is that both concepts are poorly defined in the Pali Canon. If you are a Westerner, then you want a more psychologically sophisticated answer. After 50 years of mindfulness practice, I only offer the following answer: Enlightenment or nibbana can be viewed as that fullest possible attunement with the Bodhicitta, which is an innate and ancient intelligence that has developed within you and is the product of a long evolution of intelligent consciousness that is deeply loving. Complicated? Absolutely. But an intellectual definition won't help much anyway. However, the mindfulness of breathing allows your Bodhicitta to function (if only unconsciously at first). More advanced forms of mindfulness meditation are somewhat like "focusing" as defined Eugene Gendlin.

Enlightenment is a translation of the Pali word Nibbana. They are supposed to mean the same thing.

From my understanding, they are different. eg The history Buddha comes to Englighted on 8 Dec, while goes to Nibbana on 15 Feb, which are different dates :)

The Pali word for enlightenment is 'bodhi' and not 'nibbana'. 'Nibbana' means 'cool' or 'flame blown out'. The 8 Dec is Mahayana. In Theravada, the Buddha attained enlightenment & nibbana on the same day (Vesak).

Ok but can't enlightenment also mean Nibbana?

Nibbana & enlightenment certainly go together because when there is enlightenment there will be Nirvana. Your sentiment is certainly correct but the meaning of the words is just an issue of semantics or language.


text:
Watching the flow or flow?
I had this moment , when I was engaged in conversation of topic with my friend, which we both reveled. I enjoyed the talk and we discussed without inhibition as it was natural. My question is whether I should flow with the events in my natural state of mind/body or just watch the flow of events without engaging fully (because doing and watching are two separate activities,and I can't be doing both at the same time without loss of concentration). When I watch, this creates duality, am I the doer or watching the doer, who is also me. Who is real me?

I think the "creation of duality" is only a temporary mess in the beginning. Think of learning piano - at the beginning you watch your playing, learn to get in ever-better resonance with motion, emotion and overview... - and when mastery occurs you can be in the flow, or even be the flow. Have you seen the pianist Lang Lang recently? Wow...

will check metta

My opinion, that feeling of "I, me, mine, or even you etc" is part of high fetters (Sanyojana).  specifically, Māna which English translation is related to conceit.   This fetter is for people with high paying grade (none-returner) to deal with.  As for myself, low fetters, especially the 5 sensual pleasures are handful to resolve already.  But many have the ability and strength to deal with all 10 fetters simultaneously, and they have been successful too.  My observation, Buddha gave many target specific suttas regarding lower fetters and what to deal with them (perhaps in 100+ suttas), but he gave very general instruction on higher fetters. Basically to see them as 3 marks for existence (subject to destruction, changing, and none-self).

@8CK8, what you have experienced is an “alive (in-the-flow-of-things),” & “timeless” moment when you were engaged in conversation with your friend. Architect Christopher Alexander spent many years trying to pin down exactly what makes a building or a community seem “alive” “comfortable” or “timeless.”  Alexander identified this quality to be there in moments of timeless present. If one lives the life of here and now, not in an imaginary tomorrow, or a bygone past, then one is truly alive.

“We cannot be aware of these most precious moments when they are actually happening - such as when trying to finish something late at night over a table with a group of friends, cigarette stuck to lower lip, eyes tired, earnest concentration.  It is the time we are most right, most just, most sad, and most hilarious.  Places that have this quality, invite this quality to come to life in us.  It is a self-supporting, self-maintaining, generating quality.  It is the quality of life.  And we must seek it, for our own sakes, in our surroundings, simply in order that we ourselves become alive.” (Alexander. Christopher,   Timeless Way of Building)

Alexander identified certain examples of architecture that fosters this quality. These places help one to dwell in the eternal timeless present and live the truth that one understands, immediately. Truth is never in the past.  Truth is a living thing, and not within the field of time. Sacredness is not found in the past, in memory. The question for you and is, how could we bring this quality to our practice of Dhamma.
Now in seeing through Dhamma eye, ‘in-the-flow-of-things’ can have a positive or a negative connection, depending on the intention. With intensions of generosity you create a positive connection, a connection where good things can flow back and forth. Being ‘in-the-flow-of-things’ and immersing yourself in the breath in the present moment creates positive results as discribed in Limitless Thoughts:

The more immersed you are, the more difficult it is to pull away and start wondering about someplace else. So allow yourself to be immersed totally in the body right here right now: breath coming in, breath going out, whole body breathing in, whole body breathing out. Aware of the whole body, the whole nervous system opening up, all your blood vessels, all the little tiny, tiny muscles in your blood vessels: allowed them relax so that the breath energy has a free rein to flow anywhere in the body at all. This is a very immediate way of showing goodwill to yourself, because it’s both a good place to stay and it’s a process of developing the mindfulness and alertness you’re going to need to learn even more as the meditation progresses.

Now I have to look into this other aspect of distancing oneself from the flow, and how to observe the flow in detachment.

Pl. provide reference to The more immersed..

@8CK8, Pl. give me a day or two for this. I will edit my post to show this. When I copy parts of what I read online, I do not copy the reference - not a good habit. I do hope that I will be able to find same.

Your language betrays you. Articulation does not bring you to Enlightenment, because, through articulation you must engage a frame of reference or a representation of human nature. Enlightenment is a state of awareness unhindered by such constructs. Talk about "without inhibition," "natural," "flow," "concentration," "duality," "doer," and "real me," are all theory laden concepts. I have practiced mindfulness meditation for 50 years. On the basis of my experience, I recommend this practice. Enlightenment comes from the Bodhicitta. The intellect cannot help you. The "real me" is, at best, a fool and, at worst, a form of conceit. Be careful.

true, for pointing out what one has to look out for, metta

doesn't one need flags on the path as a directional guide which concepts define

+1 "a frame of reference or a representation of human nature"... "Enlightenment is a state of awareness unhindered by such constructs"

In a deep state of vipassana, a person perceives events and processes that cause consciousness and constitutes basic evidence for believe, theory, explanation, and Buddhadharma.


text:
Should I meditate on one thing or just any sensation that arise?
As I research I am hearing people say pick a single point and focus on that. Then I hear other say you should just focus on the sensation that arise in your body. Personal one point focusing is much easier and I often get distract on if I should focusing only on the breath or move it to the inch on my leg or the numbness from sitting. Most people from the east that I hear say single point focusing more western meditator that hear say focusing on different sensation. Which is it?

The main objective of meditation is to maintain a mind of equanimity (calmness).
When the mind is calm, it can also develop insight.
Meditating upon one thing helps establish equanimity (calmness).
The main practise in the teachings of the Buddha is to establish the mind on knowing when the body breathes in & when the body breathes out.
In does not matter where this knowing of breathing in & breathing out is established.
The knowing can be in a small area, such as the nostrils, nose-tip & upper lip.
Or the knowing can be in a larger area, such as the abdomen; or even a larger area, from the nostrils, throat, chest to abdomen (stomach).

You should find a teacher and follow their method.
There are two meditation branches, namely Samatha and Vipassana, in general the former developes great concentration whilst the second developes insight into the nature of things.

I think what you described is foundation of mindfulness (2 out of 4 in your question).
My reccomendation is to study satipatthana sutta first.  Buddha said we may focus on one of :

mindfulness of the body; (breath is form of body)
mindfulness of feelings or sensations (vedanā);
mindfulness of mind or consciousness (citta); and.
mindfulness of dhammās

Buddhist meditation practices can be broadly divided into Samatha and Vipassana. For more information on them see this question and this explanation. Vipassana meditation is mainly based on the Satipatthana Sutta which describes four foundations of mindfulness, namely:

Mindfulness of Body
Mindfulness of Feelings
Mindfulness of Consciousness
Mindfulness of Mental Objects

Generally agreed view is that Samatha helps to develop concentration required to develop insight - which is knowing the three marks of existence impermanence, suffering and non-self based on mindfulness.
Although mindfulness of breath is fairly simple and one could practice it by watching online videos or reading online, technique of Vipassana is quite complex and requires special guidance from teacher. One of the many available options would be 10 day retreat at one of the meditation centers established in the tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin and as taught by Ven S. N. Goenka. You could register for a course near you at Dhamma.org

As I understand it, there are different techniques within meditation. The one-pointed focussing technique is one, the letting things arise is another. They are useful for different things. One pointed focus will help develop equanimity and concentration, while letting things arise is good for insight.
So when you ask, which is it, there is no hard and fast answer, it depends on what you are trying to do. Often a meditation teacher will try and guide you through different processes over time, and when you have a teacher it is best to follow their sequence.
If you don't have a teacher, mindfulness of the breath is a good place to start. This is a technique which can be begun very simply by just sitting and focussing on the breath, but can be extended by taking account of correct sitting and becoming more aware of the breath's subtleties. YouTube carries a number of good guides.


text:
What does "joy" mean in the phrase "dharma gate of great ease and joy"
Dogen's zazengi says

Zazen is the dharma gate of great ease and joy

What does the term "joy" mean here?
And if I can feel something like that without zazen, should I cultivate it? As well as learning meditation, I mean.

When there is joy, when a person is full of happiness and joy, there is little chance for ‘Uddhacca’ & ‘Kukkucca’ to arise. These are two of the hinderances mentioned in the scriptures. Restlessness (uddhacca) is agitation or excitement, which drives the mind from thought to thought.  Worry (kukkucca) is remorse over past mistakes and anxiety about their possible undesired consequences. When one's mind is possessed and overpowered by restlessness and remorse, one cannot properly see things in a clear way. It is compared to when water is stirred by the wind, agitated, swaying and producing waves, a man is unable to see the image of his own face. Buddhists are taught to diffuse the Four Divine States of Mind: loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity towards all sentient beings, as this brings about a Joyous State of mind.
Merits, through ‘Daana’, ‘Sila’ & ‘Bhavana’ bring you joy. ….  As the Buddha preached:

“Don’t ignore even a small merit thinking that it will not come to you! It is in fact with each drop of water that a pot is filled. Therefore, a wise person will collect all merits even if it is by bit by bit. In this way, his life will full with merits at the end.”

A joyous state of mind is important when learning to meditate. As the Buddha once explained:

“If the thought should occur to you that, when defiling mental qualities are abandoned and bright mental qualities have grown, and one enters & remains in the culmination & abundance of discernment, having known & realized it for oneself in the here & now, one’s abiding is stressful/painful, you should not see it in that way. When defiling mental qualities are abandoned and bright mental qualities have grown, and one enters & remains in the culmination & abundance of discernment, having known & realized it for oneself in the here & now, there is joy, rapture, serenity, mindfulness, alertness, and a pleasant/happy abiding.” — DN 9

The Pali scriptures describe two kinds of joy: (i) worldly/sensual joy; and (ii) dhammic or Zen joy.
Sensual joy is like joy from sex or drugs. The more this joy is indulged in, the more it harms a person via addiction & diminishing pleasure. These sources of 'joy' can cease to bring joy & instead bring pain (such as the torturous craving & withdrawal symptoms of drug addiction).
Where as Zen joy is completely harmless & always satisfying. The more Zen joy is cultivated, the greater the happiness (from generosity to harmlessness to jhana/Zen until perfect Nirvana).
Therefore, if you can feel joy without zazen, it does not necessarily mean you should cultivate it because some sources of joy (such as drugs or wrong sex) are very harmful (poisonous).


text:
Principles of moral conduct
For denourishing restlessness and remorse, code of discipline and principles of moral conduct are useful. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel026.html#rest
But what are exactly these principles of moral conduct and code of discipline for laymen?
There are so many codes of discipline(five precepts, eight precepts) and principles of moral conduct. I am somewhat clear about the codes of discipline, but what are these principles of moral conduct? (some principles in my mind are ten skillful actions.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.176.than.html)

You have correctly identified principles (IMO) of moral conduct in your OP,  @Dewmini  Gunasekera. For the benefit of others may I list them? While the five precepts are usually stated in negative terms they have their positive counterparts. They are the principles of non-injury and loving-kindness, the principles of honesty, the principles of sexual propriety, the principles of truthfulness and the principles of sobriety that a Lay Follower is to follow.
Some Buddhists observe the Eight Precepts once a month. These three additional precepts are:  Abstaining from eating after mid-day; Abstaining from dancing, singing, music and other forms of entertainment; and  Abstaining from garlands, scents, cosmetics and other kinds of adornment.
For those who are desire a greater degree of withdrawal from lay life, and are prepared to make a full-time commitment, there are two more precepts. They are Abstaining from luxurious beds, and Abstaining from accepting money. For lay Buddhists the keeping of the five basic moral precepts of is adequate but is in itself quite demanding.
One of the fundamental Buddhist principles of moral thought and action is kamma. Kamma is the Law of Moral Causation. Kamma, literally, means action; but, in its ultimate sense, it means the meritorious and demeritorious volition (Kusala Akusala Cetana). It is the principle of Kamma that prompts a person to refrain from evil, do good and be good without being frightened of any punishment or tempted by any reward. For Buddhism the relevant kind of action is volitional action, deeds expressive of morally determinate volition, since it is volition that gives the action ethical significance. Thus the Buddha expressly identifies action with volition. In a discourse on the analysis of kamma he says: "Monks, it is volition that I call action (kamma). Having willed, one performs an action through body, speech, or mind."
The Majjima Nikaya Sutta Number 24, Rathavinãta Sutta, shows us the importance of the Purification of Morality (Virtuous conduct). Moral discipline is the foundation for concentration, concentration the foundation for wisdom.  The Pali word for "moral discipline," is Sila. The observance of sila leads to harmony at several levels — social, psychological, kammic, and contemplative. At the social level the principles of sila help to establish harmonious interpersonal relations.
The ultimate moral code taught by the Buddha is beyond the changing conditions of the world. For example a disciple is a person who has submitted to the Blessed One and His Dhamma. To yield or surrender (oneself) to the will or authority of Buddha and Dhamma requires real discrimination—the capacity to recognize the necessity of completely opening oneself and letting go. The more one surrenders, the more accountable one will become for ones own choices, ones own practice, and for the terms of one’s engagement in this path. If you find a person who understands submission to authority and you’ll see a person who is humble, full of love, unselfish, accountable, and personally responsible. Find a person who does not understand submission to authority and you’ll see a person who is prideful, full of criticism, selfish, self ruled, and spiritually irresponsible. Such mindful surrender is an opening to a deeper dimension of truth.

Can you please check the answer on the eight precepts? abstaining from luxurious beds is contained in eight precepts. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/atthasila.html   http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/dasasila.html   I read on a book of rerukane chandawimala thero that such high beds and chairs are not available now. Luxurious probably meant to be ones with carves of animals(though there may be other conditions also).

Another concern, when I have a random free day, is it okay if I observe the eight precepts?

I am with a special group of lay people here in Toronto. For everyone the 5 precepts are the minimum. They also refrain from slander, harsh & empty talk. Few try to observe 8 precepts on every weekend. Few of them  observe 8 precepts on week days when free. Few try to not eat in the afternoons. When observing Sil, in Pali we say precept 9 as 7 - so you are right. Then we combine 7 & 8 as one. A group of 25 even recite 'Pirith' once every month for 5-6 hours (Gihi-pirith) in houses. (Natca Geeta  Waadita Visuka Dassana Mala Ganda Vilepana Dharana Mandana Vibhusanattana Veramani Sikkha Padam..)

When I was ordained as a novice monk some 30 years ago, I was given the Dharma name Sila Ananda. In that context, the term "sila" meant "merit," referring to a quality acquired over previous lifetimes. A fundamental cause of confusion occurs when a person assumes that the Buddhist rules of conduct have a purpose similar to the Christian rules of conduct. To understand the difference, it helps to take note that the Christian rules involve the concept of a God who is a constant presence in the life of a monk or nun, whereas the Buddhist rules lack such a reference. My meditation teacher, the late Namgyal Rinpoche, referred to rules as forms of aspiration. The concept of sin is not present in Buddhism. My teacher used to give a "Lama Couple Ordination" to couples who were in a sexual relationship and wanted to teach Dharma together. In order to understand sila, one must look for the psychological reasons for following a rule. Essentially, each rule was formulated (while the Buddha was still alive) when a monk or nun became seriously confused because of something they did. For example, when a monk became sexually involved with a woman, he will have become deeply connected with her, thereby interfering with inner transmissions from the Buddha. Do not forget that the Tibetan Buddhists have works of art that display male and female deities in sexual union. And, if the woman were to bear a child, the monk would be responsible for caring for both mother and child. Also, there is no "sin" in finding the opposite sex attractive. In an interview on Youtube, the Dalai Lama talked about finding women attractive. The formation of a rule by the Buddha back then was an act of compassion for the monk or nun and for anyone else affected by the action in question. This underlying principle hold true for both the ordained and the layperson.

+1 "Namgyal Rinpoche"

Namgyal Rinpoche was a Canadian born Theravadin monk who achieved Enlightenment after eight years in a Burmese monastery. He was recognized by the Karmapa to be an incarnation of the famous Namgyal Rinpoche of Sikkim. I received traditional mindfulness meditation instructions from him over 50 years ago.


text:
'Dukkha': What is the difference between 'suffering' & 'unsatisfactoriness'?
In Buddhism, the English words 'suffering' & 'unsatisfactoriness' are often used as translations of the Pali word 'dukkha'. What is the difference between 'suffering' & 'unsatisfactoriness'?

May I share my research, by posting questions on this site and self-answering them? and Can we ask questions which could be meant to teach one a lesson?

Thanks Chris. I think this thread is objective & genuine. I leave it to your judgment. Regards

Very similar question: Why is dukkha bad?

From my personal perspective, this thread answers your question. The word 'dukkha' has three uses in Pali: 1. dukkha as painful feeling/vedana; 2. dukkha as characteristic of unsatisfactoriness; 3. dukkha as suffering. Each meaning is distinct and not related to the other. Your question about the teachings was simply due to mistranslations of words. I hope this thread is clear to you because it is intended to be straightforward; about real things that can be truly experienced. Regards

The Five causes of suffering: 1. The trauma of birth 2. The fear of death 3. Sickness and old age 4. To be bound to what one abhors 5. To be separated from what one loves. Unsatisfactoriness would be a milder form of suffering, more of a thought than an actual experience; wishing it were otherwise. Byron Katie says, "When you argue with what is, you lose, but only 100% of the time."

all dukkha is summarised (in the 1st noble truth; MN 37; SN 22.1; etc) as attachment (upadana) to the five aggregates. please read the teachings clearly. (however, this does not include unsatisfactoriness, which is not a mental state but the characteristic of conditioned things that are unable to bring lasting happiness). try to comprehend. the teachings state that which is impermanent is unsatisfactory. therefore, the sun, which is impermanent, is unsatisfactory. "unsatisfactoriness" does not mean "dissatisfaction" or boredom. it means the inability of things to bring lasting happiness

'Unsatisfactoriness' is one of the Three Characteristics. 'Unsatisfactoriness' refers to an inherent quality of all (conditioned) material & mental things.
The cause of unsatisfactoriness is impermanence. Due to impermanence, all (conditioned) mental & material cannot be relied upon for lasting true happiness. Therefore, all impermanent things have a quality of unsatisfactoriness, be it major or minor.
A Buddha or fully enlightened person cannot eradicate unsatisfactoriness because every conditioned phenomena in the universe, including stars & planets & the body & mind of a Buddha, contains the characteristic of unsatisfactoriness. A Buddha experiences unsatisfactorines in everything they see, hear, smell, taste, touch & cognize (except Nirvana. Nirvana is satisfactory because it is the unconditioned peace experienced from letting go of craving).

Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents: what is he on the
  break-up of the body, after death? Thus asked, I would answer, ‘Form
  is impermanent… Feeling… Perception… Fabrications… Consciousness is
  impermanent. That which is impermanent is unsatisfactory. That which
  is unsatisfactory has ceased and gone to its end. Very good, my friend
  Yamaka. Very good. SN 22.85

~~~

Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is
  held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is
  kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata,
  disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings,
  attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, that his
  body is more comfortable. DN 16

Experiencing unsatisfactoriness is the cause of eradicating craving & suffering. When conditioned things are seen with wisdom as unsatisfactory, those conditioned things cease to be desirable. Thus, when desire (craving) ends, suffering ends.

Seeing (impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self) thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with
  form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception,
  disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness.
  Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is
  fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully
  released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled,
  the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' SN 22.59

Therefore, unsatisfactoriness & suffering are not the same thing because experiencing unsatisfactoriness results in not experiencing suffering.

"All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
  purification. Dhammapada 278

Below are pictures of unsatisfactoriness; i.e, undesirable things that cannot bring true lasting permanent happiness.

(wow, he answered his own question) (Shh, you'll ruin the story.) (wicked fast typing, 1 minute!)

Dukkha is a vast subject. After 50 years of practicing Buddhist mindfulness meditation based upon the Satipatthana Sutta as taught by the late Venerable Namgyal Rinpoche, I am able to talk about the kind of Dukkha that mindfulness meditation deals with, along with a little common-sense. For example, mindfulness helps a person stay objective. Hence, physical pain remains simply that--physical pain without an emotional response such as self-pity or anger. Yet, it remains painful to observe a loved one suffer, for that is the nature of compassion. Advanced states of mindfulness meditation have three other general benefits: (1) It allows a person to explore the siddhis (psychic powers that depend upon previous karma), such as perceiving the nature of karma and the nature of the Bodhicitta. (2) It frees the mind to function more in accord with the awareness, wisdom, and love of the Bodhicitta. (3) It brings a person to Enlightenment and helps them to understand Enlightenment, just as the Buddha promised. Beyond that, I am inclined to agree with the Tibetan Buddhists that the true purpose of Enlightenment is to help others suffer less rather than to achieve lasting true happiness. If you want more than that, then the karma-vipaka of that wish will turn around and bite you with disappointment.

Compassion, which causes us to feel suffering when other suffer, is nonetheless good, because that inspires in us a desire to help. Desire is usually bad, but in this case is good... OK. I'll buy that. I don't know what it means to "understand enlightenment". What is there to understand?

'Suffering' is the subject of the Four Noble Truths. 'Suffering' refers to psychological or emotional trauma, including sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief & despair.
For example, when a woman is to give birth to a child, this event is often one of great anxiety, worry & physical pain, which is why the Four Noble Truths explain there is suffering associated with 'birth' (jatipidukkha).

Then for nine or ten months the mother shelters the embryo in her womb with great anxiety, as a heavy burden. Then, at the end of nine
  or ten months, she gives birth with great anxiety, as a heavy burden.
  MN 38

Similarly, aging, illness, death, separation from the loved, etc, are experiences of human suffering when human beings are tied up in these experiences with self-view (attachment).

Now at that time a certain householder's dear & beloved little son, his only child, had died. Because of his death, the father had no
  desire to work or to eat. He kept going to the cemetery and crying
  out, "Where have you gone, my only little child? Where have you gone,
  my only little child?" The Blessed One said: "That's the way it is,
  householder. That's the way it is — for sorrow, lamentation, pain,
  distress, & despair are born from one who is dear, come springing from
  one who is dear. MN 87

~~

Nakulapita went to the Blessed One and said "Lord, I am a feeble old man, aged, advanced in years, having come to the last stage of life. I
  am afflicted in body & ailing with every moment." The Blesssed One
  said: "'Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be
  unafflicted.' That is how you should train yourself." Now, how is one afflicted in body & afflicted in mind? He assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration. SN 22.1

The causes of suffering, as explained in the 2nd Noble Truth & Dependent Origination, are ignorance, craving, becoming, attachment & self-identifying (self-view).
A Buddha or fully enlightened person has eradicated all suffering. A Buddha experiences no suffering in life whatsoever.
Below are pictures of suffering.

(Look! he did it again) (I told you it would get more interesting) (The answer almost precedes the question in time - Teleological)

There is no difference as they are both inexact translations of "Dukkha" in English.
I think the best definition of dukkha is "believing "what is" should be some other way".
So, if one smashes their finger with a hammer the result would be a sensation that is not good or bad in the ultimate sense.
When one reacts by crying and trying to distract oneself from the pain sensation then that is dukkha, that is believing very deep down that reality is no good as it is.


text:
In what ways you advance on the path ?
In what ways you advance on the path?

is it by lowering the hindrances ? or your ability to notice them ?  you get a greater ability to not attach and let go ?

im trying to understand in what ways we advance -  i mean before becoming a sotapanna what do you improve throw meditation
and if you answer for example : " you have less ill will your less angry"  do you mean we lower the anger levels - if so how -  did i remove existing anger "seeds" or did i improve my ability to notice and let go of anger - and if so is this an ability which builds up from meditaiton to meditation ?
i would appreciate everything you can expand on the subject of advancing in the path

The path is lead by right view, which is wisdom.
Each hindrance is the drive/motivation to do harm or enslave. Therefore, to advance on the path, it is ideal that wisdom investigate each hindrance & examine why its motive is harmful &/or enslaving.
If the mind is not a slave to hindrances, to enter sotapanna the mind must have the selflessness to 'let go'. Sotapanna will not be entered with force or will power. It will be entered by dropping ego & self. For some people who are very ethical or harmless, dropping the self can be difficult because it can be like 'dying' existentially.
Therefore, a good way to advance on the path is to focus on being a harmless & unselfish person and to also abide regularly in solitude so existential fear can be overcome.
For example, if you live in society, you can find somewhere, like some bushland or empty beach, to meditate alone a few nights a week.

After reading your post, especially these words "...to meditate alone a few nights a week..." I was reminded of the Bhaddekaratta Sutta (MN 131).

The “Thayodhamma Sutta” in the Anguttara Nikaya tells you how to go about it, @breath. It explain in full why and how to practice the spiritual life. Specifically this sutta describes what you should avoid or irradiate in order to achieve Nibbana.  Thayo means Three – so it is abandoning three things at a time towards Path Fruition.
To abandon  1. Birth  2. Old age  3. Death
You have to abandon:  1. Greed (passion);  2. Hatred;  3. Delusion
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Personality view;  2. Doubt;  3. Rituals and observances.
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Drowsiness of the mind;  2. Following the wrong path;  3. Unwise attention.
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Unmindfulness (wrong mindfulness);  2. Unawareness;  3. Mental distraction.
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Dislike to see the noble ones;  2. Dislike to hear the noble teachings;  3. Fault-finding mind.
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Conceit;  2. Unrestraint;  3. Immorality.
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Lack of confidence;  2. Dislike to listen to others;  3. Laziness.
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Unfriendliness;  2. Disobedience;  3. Bad Friends (Asathpurisa Sevanaya).
To abandon the above three you have to abandon:  1. Shamelessness;  2. Fearlessness;  3. Non-diligence.

how do you abandon  "non-diligence"   ?
is there a pali word for "non-diligence"  ?
i mean thats the biggest problem there is  - if i solve that all will full into place for me- but its the greatest problem i have and i believe most of the other mediators : how to motivate yourself ect
im practicing and walking the path and always falling from it for years now - and read a lot and never saw a clear good answer about how to be motivated and to overcome ""non-diligence"

The one meaning that I found for this- The one most important Pali word is “Appamada”. In English it is described as “untiringly,” “earnestly,” “with diligence”— convey the notion of sustained, determined effort. Other meanings are unrelaxed mindfulness, heedfulness, vigilance, wariness, care.  It is to not be complacent. Watch out for danger. To not get caught with your guard down. All skillful qualities of mind are rooted in appamada, converge in appamada, and have appamada as the foremost among them. Vigilance and heedfulness provide the perspective needed to keep effort on the right track.

@breath, in reading what you said above... (how to motivate yourself in practicing and walking the path..& ... always falling from it for years..). To answer this, I may have to write at length. This needs a cultivation of a very different set of habits and a mindset that goes with it - a new "you" basically. I will do another post in a day or two, when time permits. With Metta.....

thanks  - to check this talk in a few days ?

A good first step to advancing on the path is by increasing one's mindfulness. Motivation and meditation are sufficient to do that, and this will start to show you specific instances where you are encountering hindrances or could do better.
For example, if you are walking impatiently and end up continually advancing in front of a friend rather than walking side by side with him, mindfulness may show you that you are doing this because of impatience to reach a goal, a desire for that goal, and clinging as well as a tendency to live in the future, rather than the present.
Mindfulness is a powerful tool at many stages along the path, it will show you many sides of yourself, details of your own reactions, the hidden parts of your nature that we usually don't get to see. It is a key factor for early advancement on the path.
In terms of the seeds, my understanding is that it depends on which ones we "water". The nutrients we take in, be they newspapers, movies or actual food, can feed our store of seeds. So you can choose to feed a seed of anger or a seed of calmness, which may help you to stay detached when anger comes to visit.


text:
Are there any body who achieved Nibbana currently (in the current world)
Are there any body who achieved Nibbana currently (in the current world).
If so give one or two names, please.

You looking for List of Buddha claimants?

There are many. I won't publicise namehere

There's nobody in the current world. The current world is one of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking. Nibbana is devoid of any of those.

Can you elaborate more please?

do you know anybody got at least Sovahan state, in the current world?

'anybody' is a construct. When you see, the current world 'seeing'. When you hear, the current world is 'hearing' ...

The Pali scriptures describe 4 levels of enlightenment, which equate to 4 levels of Nibbana.
The Nakhasikha Sutta states in the 1st level of enlightenment the vast majority of the previous suffering has been ended & extinguished.
Many Buddhist practitioners have tasted Nibbana (freedom from suffering). However, I suspect those that have reached the highest Nibbana are not many.
In Thailand, monks would say Ajahn Maha Bua & Ajahn Chah (both now deceased) reached the highest Nibbana. You can watch these videos:

Ajahn Chah - Bio 43 - Talking about enlightenment
Ajahn Chah - Bio 44 - How attained was Ajahn Chah?

I think Ajahn Brahm is close to the highest Nibbana.
The Buddha said if people practise the 8 fold path in the right way, people will know Nibbana.
This article, 'Nibbana for Everyone', may be helpful.

I think this question has a great potential for misunderstanding the concept of Nibbana. Why is it important to know? There is no way to know if Nibbana is just another silly concept like God except you have experienced what this word is pointing to. If there is the claim that somebody else is 'enlightened' it doesn't really change the fact that you simply don't know if this is true.

No one would carry placards announcing that they are on the Path.  If there are any who have fulfilled the practice of the Path, then certainly even today there could be Arahants in the world.  But if any one loudly publicizes his/her attainment of Arahantship, then there arises some doubt about it.  This is because such public announcement is not in keeping with Arahants, for they are totally self-effacing. The ones who are in the Path knows, when a level of Path and Fruition is achieved, but he/she would never share it with a lesser person.  If a lay- person makes such an announcement it could be due to some sort of misunderstanding of the doctrine.
In the Pali Canon, an Arahant is one who has attained the final goal of Buddhist practice -- the Nibbāna, The term arhant is one of the epithets of a Buddha, and is used to refer to an enlightened disciple of Gautama Buddha. An Arahant is one who has completely destroyed greed, hatred and delusion. Usually the term ‘enlightenment’ is used to denote one who has attained arahantship. Such a person is called an enlightened person. The Path Fruition has four levels. They  are Sotapatti (Stream-Winner), Sakadagami (Once-Returner), Anagami (Never-Returner), and Arahatta (The Worthy Ones).
A sotapanna is usually referred to as a ‘stream entrant’. Sotapatti is the first stage in the Path of spiritual progress to Nibbana.  The ‘Sota’ is used in Pali in diverse senses.  It denotes also craving, the ear, the Noble Eightfold Path etc.  In this context the term ‘sota’ is used to denote the Noble Path.  It is also designated as the Dhamma-sota – the stream of doctrine.  A person who reaches this dhamma-sota is called a sotapanna. When one attains sotapatti stage, Sakkaya ditthi or soul-view view gets eradicated as a sotapanna understands the true nature of the five aggregates.
A sotapanna obtains the Right view, the first feature in the Noble Eightfold Path and this is the understanding of the Four Noble Truths.  Consequently a sotapanna gets rid of both doubt and clinging to rites and rituals. A Sotapanna has to establish himself in Right View and further develop the four establishments of mindfulness.  A Sotapanna person still has craving.  If we call a sotapanna an enlightened one, how are we going to describe an Arahant? In order to understand the nature of a Sotapanna one could read the Sammaditthi sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya.
When one becomes an once-returner (sakadagami), the two fetters - sensual desire (kamaraga) and enmity (patigha) get eradicated. To attain anagamihood one has to cultivate Right Concentration and develop jhanic attainments. The Buddha very well knew that all cannot attain Arahantship.  The Buddha viewed this world as a lotus pond where there are fully blossomed lotuses as well as buds of different stages of maturity. According to their knowledge the Sotapannas and the Anagamins are divided into further categories.
The Mahaparinibbana sutta says that as long as the bhikkhus in this dispensation follow the Noble Eightfold Path, the world will not be empty of Arahants. So there are Arahants who walk this earth though we may never know.

The effusive fruition of the great and wonderful dhamma has become known by countless persons alive today. It is your privilege and duty to find them and test them and be affected by them in order to answer your question for yourself.
Anyone can deny and question the profundity of realization or Nibbana being present in another person, reality is up to you. Nibbana is up to you. How many may have walked casually by the Buddha without a second glance? How many submitted themselves to his presence and instruction? How many benefited?
If you must find the answer to your question it will be a solo journey, the opinions of others can only take you so far.
Warmly, NightSkySanghaGuy

"Are there any body who achieved Nibbana currently (in the current world). If so give one or two names, please".
The easiest answer to the above question is to say 'Not known'. However, please consider the following. The name Lord Buddha (Bhagava Buddho) gave to his teaching is Dhamma-Vinaya. Dhamma cannot be understood because it is based on: Dukkha Ariyasacca. Dukkha (dukkham) cannot be translated into English. See the following quote from the entry, Dukkha in the PED.
B. (nt.; but pl. also dukkhā, e. g. S i.23; Sn 728; Dh 202, 203, 221. Spelling dukha (after sukha) at Dh 83, 203). There is no word in English covering the same ground as Dukkha does in Pali. Our modern words are too specialised, too limited, and usually too strong. Sukha & dukkha are ease and dis-ease (but we use disease in another sense); or wealth and ilth from well & ill (but we have now lost ilth); or wellbeing and ill-ness (but illness means something else in English). We are forced, therefore, in translation to use half synonyms, no one of which is exact. Dukkha is equally mental & physical. Pain is too predominantly physical, sorrow too exclusively mental, but in some connections they have to be used in default of any more exact rendering. Discomfort, suffering, ill, and trouble can occasionally be used in certain connections. Misery, distress, agony, affliction and woe are never right. They are all much too strong & are only mental (see Mrs. Rh. D. Bud. Psy. 83 -- 86, quoting Ledi Sadaw).
Ariyasacca is usually given the English Equivalent 'Noble Truth'. The term 'noble truth' is not in Oxford Dictionaries. That means it is not an English word.
No one understands the Dukkha Ariyasacca, therefore they cannot understand Nibbana. Therefore the question is meaningless.

In Udana 7.2, Ven. Sariputta (the Arahant) tried to teach Ven. Bhaddiya without realizing that he too was an Arahant.
The Buddha saw this and exclaimed the verse, describing Ven. Bhaddiya:

He has cut the cycle, has gone away to freedom from longing. The
dried-up stream no longer flows. The cycle, cut, no longer turns.
This, just this, is the end of stress.

This shows that the Buddha could recognize who is an Arahant, but not another Arahant (who does not possess psychic powers).
In addition, in the Bhikkhu Patimokkha, there is a rule forbidding monks from confessing their factual attainments to lay people:

Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an
unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed. -
Pācittiya 8

Hence, it is impossible to identify arahants (those who attained highest Nibbana) or draw up statistics.


text:
Breath mediation during daily acvities
Is it possible to do breath meditation during daily activities ?

Mindfulness and Awareness is not a concept only to be practiced during Meditation. Practicing Mindfulness and Awareness during the day, with Parents, Teachers, Customers ... and all other Beeings is a powerfull and healthy practice. It is a tremendous challenge,
The Buddha spoke of the power of mindfulness in a very emphatic way:

Mindfulness, I declare, is all-helpful.
  SAMYUTTA, 46:59

and

All things can be mastered by mindfulness.
  ANGUTTARA, 8:83

and

Further, there is that solemn and weighty utterance opening and
  concluding the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, the Discourse on the Foundations
  of Mindfulness:
  This is the only way, monks, for the purification of
  beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the
  destruction of pain and grief, for reaching the right path, for the
  attainment of Nibbana, namely the four foundations of mindfulness.

See THE POWER OF MINDFULNESS
and A Guide to Awareness
There is no sense in not beeing mindfull and aware during your carmic activities, you know Buddhism ... it is not all about your breath, it is all about your awareness and mindfullness during the day, the week.
If you feel you need more help, teaching or instructions, look for a good teacher with a solid reputation and established traditions along a respectable linage.
Addendum:
Perhaps the publication Essentials of Insight Meditation Practice is of some aid and section OTHER DAILY ACTIVITIES a good introduction.

It is possible but as there are a lot of types of breath meditation it may not be possible to do your type.
If you do breath meditation for samatha remember that the point is to develop calm, the point isn't to see how long your can focus on your breath. So if you have to focus on your task a bit that's not a bad thing as long as you do it calmly.
If what you are doing is a simple task you can largely be aware of your breath while you do the action in the background. If you are doing a complicated task then you'll have to put a lot of attention on the task but keep an awareness of the breath in the background which you can frequently go back to momentarily to remind you of equanimity, in that way the breath is like a refuge.
Compared to sitting in a quiet room, during daily activities there is a lot going on and your attention is probably jumping from a sight to a sound to a smell and then to another sight. Some people use this to observe impermanence; as you inhale notice the sense arising in your awareness, as you exhale notice how what you are aware of has changed.

Thank you. I'm practicing the meditation http://www.dhammatalks.org/mp3_guidedMed_index.html. "If what you are doing is a simple task you can largely be aware of your breath while you do the action in the background. If you are doing a complicated task then you'll have to put a lot of attention on the task but keep an awareness of the breath in the background which you can frequently go back to momentarily to remind you of equanimity, in that way the breath is like a refuge." this is what I exactly need. Where I can find instructions ?

Gathas can be helpful for increasing awareness of daily activities and breathing. They are short practice verses/poems read silently while we synchronize the reading with our breathing. For example:

(Breathing in)
  Washing the dishes is like bathing the baby Buddha;
(Breathing out)
  The the everyday is the sacred, the mundane is the profound

You can find more practice poems here and in the book "Present Moment, Wonderful Moment - Mindfulness Verses for Daily Living" by Thich Nhat Hanh


text:
What are the cylinders in front of the Buddha statue at Nanzō-in Temple, Japan?
I recently visited Nanzō-in Temple, Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan, home of a very large bronze reclining Buddha. In front of the statue are many vertical metal cylinders. My initial thought was that they are prayer wheels - and you may tell me that this is the case - but I did not see any obvious means for them to rotate. What are these cylinders?

(image from Wikimedia Commons, licensed CC BY-SA 2.0. Original at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanzoin_temple#/media/File:Reclining_Buddha_statues_of_Nanzoin.jpg)

The urns are numbered.
The Many Faces of Fukuoka’s Nanzoin Temple says,

There are 365 urns in front of the Buddha.  Visitors travel long distances to place messages to their dearly departed loved ones in the urn marked with the day they died.


text:
Can an ordained person keep a late sleep schedule?
If a person has health reasons that make sleeping late (say, 3am-11am) a necessity, can such a person appropriately hold monastic vows in the Geluk tradition of Tibetan Buddhism?  Are there certain sleeping restrictions mentioned in the vows?

What kind of health reason would result in such a bad sleep schedule?

This seems like the type of thing which could vary from one monastery to the next. Illness is an excuse for ignoring a lot of the rules in the vinaya but a monastery may decide not to allow you to ordain if your sleeping schedule is a burden. I suggest you ask the specific monastery if you have one in mind. Note that you can eat from 4am to 12am as a monk so you have one hour of the day to eat and you'll miss the alms run.

Yes, such a person can appropriately hold monastic vows in the Geluk tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. There are sleeping restrictions in the Vinaya, but not regarding the time or length of sleep. Although Vinaya states that sleep is an impediment to the three trainings, in any case over-sleeping (are 8 hours of sleep over-sleeping? this is open to interpretation) would not constitute a downfall since it is not the breaking of a vow.
However, sleeping at such hours and for so long would be seen as inappropriate by many. In addition, a monk could hardly stay in a monastery or in a center (even in the West) with such a schedule, because there are (1) monastery-schedules, and (2) rules that are not Vinaya but institutional. It is not rare to have pujas in the morning, etc. Of course, Western institutions are not as strict as  the Tibetan ones (for Tibetan have to wake up at 5:30 am, and if they do not, they are fined by the disciplinarian) but still.
Most of the western sangha are relatively wealthy elderly women who live in their houses, enjoying various floors, living with their cat, great gardens and the like, on their own, and not all taken that seriously by monks.
I suggest you read Lama Yeshe's Advice for monks and nuns.

When you are true to the practice of Dhamma, with time you tend to sleep less and less due to the ‘tranquility’ or 'calm abiding' that you experience in your day to day life. So your late sleep schedule is not a given. It is going to change to the better. In practice you learn to push yourself to alter negative habits. When it comes to sleep, at times you may back off from this kind of pushing a little bit until you find what is the number of hours of sleep is right for you. For each of us, this is going to be different as to how much sleep we need. This will inform you as to how much you can push yourself in the practice. The important principle is you learn to be responsible for yourself—because this is how discernment is developed.  Too much sleep is a hindrances to the pursuit of this path. The Dhamma word for this is “thina middha”.

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