text:
Does the Doctrine of No Soul mean there is nothing permanent to continue?
Does the doctrine of no soul is means that there is nothing permanent to continue? So is the teaching of reincarnation, rebirth misleading as there is a notion there is a continuity after death? Also death and birth is visible at the physical level, [but the rebirth process is not. What is the implication on this in the doctrine?]

thanks for great explanation. i am struggling to understand this thing for long period of time.

also there is huge misunderstanding in society there is reincarnation and rebirth pretend and mislead as continuous conciseness. Eg;  misconception about "jathaka katha" true or false or belongs to Buddhist literature.i  am so grateful to you saying rebirth refer to self view. that is a greate concept.at last i found individual who agree with me.

again the individual who answer my question has completed one of biggest dhamma dana in this poya day.i would request your true identity.my email:danuka5870213@gmail.com.many thanks.

To Mr.Lanka; my specific question is about rebirth and continuous conciseness.

i am so appreciated for adjust my question by Mr.Suminda

Some of these might be of some value: posts with 'extreme view' and posts with 'Sampasadanīya Sutta'

I agree with you.
The Pali suttas do not refer to a continuous consciousness at the termination of life.
Instead, the suttas explain 'birth' ('jati') & 'death' ('marana') refer to the birth & death of 'self-views'.
Therefore, 're-birth' refers to the re-arisings of 'self-view'.
For example, you make $100,000. Re-birth is the happy view: "I made $100,000; I am rich". You lose $100. Death is the unhappiness of 'I lost $100; I am poor".

I got a little "aha! Moment" from this answer :)

I think you're asking, partly, about rebirth -- I asked a question similar to that here, you might find the answers to that question helpful.
You might also also like to browse other topics on this site, which are tagged rebirth and anatman.
Also, various people posted elsewhere that the suttas don't tend to talk about "rebirth"; they just talk about "birth" -- for example, in this answer:

The Buddha never, afaik, used a term that could be translated as "rebirth". In fact, the idea of anything being reborn goes against orthodox early Buddhist teachings. Throughout the Buddha's teachings, it is made clear that at the breakup of the body there is birth, not rebirth - as in birth of new things, not the return of anything old.

But your current question is mostly asking about "the doctrine of no soul", rather than asking about rebirth. If you're asking "what is the doctrine of no soul?" I think that the most famous sutta on that subject is The Anatta-lakkhana Sutta. I find that sutta difficult to understand though (possibly because it's refuting a "doctrine of soul" or Atman that I wasn't really familiar with in the first place).
Instead I found the clearest explanation of the doctrine was in the Alagaddupama Sutta, which I talked about a bit in this answer.
In brief I think that the "doctrine of no soul" might be summarized as, "there is no satisfactory doctrine of soul".

You ask, as well, "what is the implication of this doctrine?"
One of the (mistaken) implications might be that if there's no rebirth then there's no heaven and no hell, and no reason to be ethical. Buddhism warns that this would be "Wrong view":

And what is wrong view?

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

This is wrong view.

So the doctrine may appear to contradict, or be related somehow, to e.g. doctrine about karma.
Another implication of the doctrine is the concept of "self" (e.g. here the title of the The Anatta-lakkhana Sutta is translated as On the No-self Characteristic).
There are various other doctrines related to "self": for example, identity view, and conceit ... and the brahmavihāras ... not to mention dana ... and so on into other, Mahayana doctrines.

Also, some (later) schools of Buddhism try to explain what you might have been asking about (i.e. explaining the workings of karma), for example Wikipedia on store-house consciousness says,

The store-house consciousness accumulates all potential energy for the mental (mana) and physical (rupa) manifestation of one's existence (namarupa). It is the storehouse-consciousness which induces transmigration or rebirth, causing the origination of a new existence.

(See also What is storehouse consciousness?).

Another sutta that you may find be relevant to this topic is the Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta.
Incidentally the translator's (Thanissaro Bhikkhu's) introduction to that sutta says,

Although the Buddha never used any word corresponding to "rebirth" in his teachings, he did describe birth as a process following on death again and again as long as the appropriate conditions are present.

... which more-or-less agrees with Ven. Yuttadhammo's answer which I quoted above.
And it says,

However, a being — in the Buddha's sense of the term — not only takes birth after the death of the body, it can also take birth, die, and be reborn many times in the course of a day — as attachment develops for one desire, ends, and then develops for another desire. This is why the processes leading to rebirth after death can be observed and redirected in the present moment during life.

... which more-or-less agrees with Dhammadhatu's answer answer to the question.
Anyway, the Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta starts with one of the monks saying,

As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on [from birth to birth], not another.

The other monks see that as a pernicious view, and bring him to the Buddha, who corrects him, saying,

Haven't I, in many ways, said of dependently co-arisen consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is no coming-into-play of consciousness'?

I think that maybe the theory of "dependent origination" or "dependent co-arising" may be related to anatta too: there's no such thing as an independent self (nor an eternal self), instead things like consciousness arise and end together with feelings, contact, sense-objects, etc.; and there are different types of consciousness associated with different senses.
Dharmafarer's introduction to this suttas starts with,

The average ordinary person is very likely to view things as wholes and entities, even as being
fixed and eternal. For example, he may think that there is a permanent “self,” “soul,” “person” or “being”
when what he is really experiencing is only a series of mental events comprising a super-rapid series of
discrete thought-moments.

Later in the introduction it says,

The bhavanga (lit “existence-factor”) or “life-continuum” is a concept that evolved primarily in
the Abhidhamma commentarial tradition to explain the continuity of consciousness and personal identity
in the absence of a permanent self (which is denied by the anatta doctrine). The life-continuum flows on
like a stream (sota) from one existence to the next. It is sometimes called bhavanga,citta (existence-factor
consciousness) or “consciousness continuum” and is the foundation of all experience, both conscious and
unconscious.

A simple answer might be found in the Sabbasava Sutta, which warns that there are questions:

Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? etc. etc.

... and views:

he view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self etc. etc.

... and warns that these kinds of thinking do not lead to freedom:

This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

... which maybe leads back to my original summary of anatta: that "there is no satisfactory doctrine of soul".

There is rebirth in Buddhism, for sure, but rebirth of what?
When we say "rebirth", we mean that something that we can peg onto as YOU, is born again after physical death. But what is YOU? The soul or self or the SAME consciousness that wanders on throughout this lifetime?
The Buddha taught that all phenomena is not self. The Buddha also taught that all conditioned and/or compounded things (including consciousness) is impermanent. It is not the SAME consciousness that wanders from childhood to old age. It changes. (See MN 38)
So, in Buddhism, there is no rebirth of the self or consciousness.
In fact, if a person injures his brain or experiences dementia or amnesia or coma, then his personality, his memories and even his consciousness could be impaired or non-existent for the remainder of his physical life. In this case, even in his lifetime, we cannot guarantee that he is totally present at every moment. Then, what more for the next lifetime?
So, if a soul or self or consciousness is not reborn, then what is reborn?
There is definitely rebirth in Buddhism, but what is reborn?

Suffering. The continuity of suffering, regardless of physical death, is rebirth.
The continuity of conditioned processes when the condition for them to exist continues, is also rebirth. For e.g. karmic cause and effect, and its relationship to an individual's perceived continued existence in this lifetime. Also, the physical and mental processes of the five aggregates, for e.g. the "stream" of consciousness (MN 38) and the thought "I am the thinker" (Snp 4.14).

The Theravada perspective is that at every moment there is death and rebirth. In between, we have the continuity of conditioned processes, that bridges every moment. With the continuity of conditioned processes, we have the continuity of suffering, so long as ignorance is present.
When ignorance is permanently ended, craving is permanently ended and suffering is permanently ended. This permanent ending of ignorance is referred to as liberation in Buddhism.
Usually when people talk about rebirth, they imply that the SAME consciousness wanders on in this lifetime and onto the next lifetime. In the following quote from this answer, we read an excellent explanation by Damith, of why this is not true.

Stream of consciousness OR Continuity of consciousness means
individual consciousness which arises (uppada), exists (titi), ceases
(bhanga) rapidly as an effect of many causes. It's just a stream, not
a long lasting single one.
Think of a stream of water. When you look at a single point in the
stream, you see many water droplets appear, exist, and disappear. Take
a single droplet out of it which passed by(*) that point. If you
consider the past, present, and future of that droplet, you'll see a
stream. In reality, it's not the same droplet nor another droplet you
see in the past, present, and future. Stream of consciousness is
analogous to this example. Please try to understand it in that way.
(*) Note: "passed by" - This phrasal verb can be only used when we
talk in conventional truth. The reader may think that rūpa
(form/matter) can move in space which is not a true in ultimate
reality. Neither any nāma (name) nor rūpa can move. What happens is
the arose rūpa existed and ceased then and there. After that new rūpa
arise nearby. This is called "Deshāntarotpatti".

I'm not saying that there is no YOU (self) at all. There is a YOU, but it's not a permanent YOU. It's changing from moment to moment, depending on conditions, and compounded by different mental and physical processes.


text:
Dana, Dhamma Talk or Retreat
Was just curious, can doing dana helps in accumulating good karma?
What about attending dhamma talk or those retreat?
Thanks and sadhu x 3!

Tq all for the sharing! Sadhu x 3

Merits, through ‘Daana’, ‘Sila’ & ‘Bhavana’ bring you joy. But Bhavana (Meditation) is not so important at the start. So leave the retreats for a later date.   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.”

It is important to know that no degree of generosity can cover up the lack of virtue in personal life. This karmic law cannot be deceived. This is why it has been laid down that "give dana with confidence and always be virtuous" (daanam dadantu saddhaaya - seelam rakkhantu sabbadaa). The two aspects should be complementary to each other.
So cultivate the five ‘Sēkha Bala Dhamma’ – Saddhā (faith), Sīla (virtue), Sutha (Dhamma knowledge), Thyāga (generosity), and Paññā (wisdom of the Dhamma). Also religiously go through the stages of listening, remembering, constant reciting, mental observation and ideologically understanding the Dhamma (Sutha, dhata, vacasa paricita, manasanupekkhita, ditthiya suppatividdha). An interesting fact that very few know of is, nowhere in the Doctrine (Sutta) it is mentioned that one becomes a stream entrant (Sotapanna) through meditation. So to your next question, listening to dhamma is more important than practicing meditation. Meditation comes only when one strives to go beyond the stage of Sotapanna.

Dana, generosity, is considered the first of the 10 perfections (paramitas). A very comprehensive text about dana can be found here.
A sutta underlining the potential of dana: MN 142

There are these fourteen offerings to an individual. What fourteen? [...]

Here, Ānanda, having given a gift to an animal a hundred-fold offering is to be expected (in return),

having given a gift to an unvirtuous ordinary person a thousand-fold offering is to be expected (in return),

having given a gift to a virtuous ordinary person a hundred-thousand-fold offering is to be expected (in return),

having given a gift to an outsider who is without passion for sensual desires a hundred-thousand times a hundred-thousand-fold offering is to be expected (in return),

having given a gift to one who has entered upon the way to experiencing the fruit of Stream-Entry an immeasurable, unlimited offering is to be expected (in return).

What to say about a Stream-Enterer?

What to say about one who has entered upon the way to experiencing the fruit of Once-Returning?

What to say about a Once-Returner?

What to say about one who has entered upon the way to experiencing the fruit of Non-Returning?

What to say about a Non-Returner?

What to say about one who has entered upon the way to experiencing the fruit of Worthiness?

What to say about a Worthy One?

What to say about an Independent Sambuddha?

What to say about a Realised One, a Worthy One, a Perfect Sambuddha?

While dana mostly seems to fall under the training of morality, practicing the dhamma and listening to dhamma would be more on the side of concentration and wisdom. These three aspects, the cultivation of morality, concentration and wisdom sum up the Noble Eightfold Path. So practicing as much as you can according to this path in any way is the best choice.

Dana has more power than many people think.  From Giving Sutta

Then there is the case of a person who gives a gift not seeking his
  own profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to
  store up for himself, nor [with the thought], ‘I’ll enjoy this after
  death....—but with the thought, ‘This is an ornament for the mind,(cittālaṅkāracittaparikkhāraṃ)
  a support for the mind’—on the break-up of the body, after death, he
  reappears in the company of Brahma’s Retinue. Then, having exhausted
  that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a
  non-returner.

I tried to find where else Buddha used "ornament of mind" to clearify the meaning but I couldn't find anything. So I searched what type of people who would be reborn in Brahma's world and after that, a non-returner.  I found out that  The noble disciple who are expert in entering any Jhanas or arupa sanna, like (take pleasure in, satisfy) in that state, and maintain such ability by time of death (not exactly as dying in that state) they would enter Brahma's world according to his meditation level reach final nirvana after that.
this is strictly my conclusion: one of the characteristics of Jhana is abandoning five hindrances, and maintaining perception in giving, (Danna sanna) can also do the same as medition.
So IMO, giving as ornament of mind = perception of charity or giving in such a way that it abandons 5 hindrances of mind.
noble disciples are stream enterers or higher.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
mind is like illusionist
as per "mano puggmama dahma mano setta mano maya" Buddha explain mind as illusionist create millions of imaginary questions and travel time to find answers to those imaginary questions like reincarnation,rebirth and existence.Buddha never answered those metaphysically created imaginary questions.Buddhism is about come and see through wisdom not come and believe.so my dear friends are you agree with me???

hope my basic idea is remain same.example: "each and every word in any language in creation of mind so how can I explain my mind using words."some time Buddha remains quiet for some specific metaphysically created answers because of above reason. i think so.

See my comment on your other answer.

I disagree with you about 'mano puggmama dahma mano setta mano maya' in the Dhammapada, which is about the mind creating intentional actions (rather than about the mind creating illusion).

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

It is the Phena Sutta which refers to the mind as an "illusionist".

"mano puggmama dahma mano setta mano maya"  is a truism. Everything is mind created and is immoral until tamed. It is full of lobha (attachment or greed), dosa (anger) ,and moha  (bewilderment) that are obstacles to this Path. So the wise amongst us understands them as hindrances and strives to detach themselves from them.
The greed that is created in our minds prevents us from performing meritorious deeds, such as giving, because the main characteristic of greed is attachment (upadana). It compels us to grasp more and more. When we grasp more and more, unaware of it ourselves, we are attached to the world. It is because of ignorance of the fact of impermanence. We go after mirages and deceptions, and get caught up in illusions of attachment with perverted Views (vipallasa).
One of the biggest mistakes we can make is taking the mind for granted. The mind has the capacity to create good and also evil for us, and only when we are able to remain even-minded no matter what conditions arise, can we say that we have gained a little control. Until then we are out of control and our thoughts are our master.
Taming this monkey is not an easy thing. So you have to take baby steps in the beginning. Even if your attempt at meditation takes only a few seconds, or a couple of minutes, be happy about it. Left alone the mind behaves like a monkey in a forest. Meditation is a great way to calm the monkey mind.  But prior to that we have to learn how to go beyond - being resolved on sensual passion, being resolved on ill will, being resolved on harmfulness—because all these things stir up the mind and interfere with its settling down.
The illusion of Sakkayaditthi, as understood by one who listens to Dhamma up until the stage of a Stream Entrant finds out that this is nothing but a collection of constantly changing physical and mental components [of clinging] ([upadana-]skandhas). When contemplating on the Dhamma thus, the Stream Entrant comes to realize the absence of a permanent and unchanging self (identity), and beyond the upadana-skandhas, there is no actual self. He she comes to the understanding that what is normally thought of as "self" is a collection of constantly changing physical and mental components [of clinging] ([upadana-]skandhas).
The illusion of ATTA, is the most subtle state of manifest of Upadanas, that ONLY at the final stage of Arahanthood would one truly come to know of and transcend this clinging to personality belief (attavadupadana). Atta means self, ego or personality in Buddhism. But it is a mere conventional expression.
If I am to touch on your earlier question that was put on hold.... it is not only Ehi-Passika... The Dhamma is preached very well (Swākkhātō Bhagavatā Dhammō) can be seen in this very life (Sanditthika). The Dhamma can be realized in any era/time (Akālika) and can be shown to others inviting them to come, see, and realize it (Ēhi passika). The Dhamma needs to be realized through oneself (Ōpanaika) and can be realized by wise people (Paccattan vēditabbō viññūhi). Some peoples’ decision on postponing realization of Dhamma into an unseen world and unseen time is unthinkably ignorant.

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


text:
Mind as a creator
All words are creations of mind. How do we explain the mind with the words?
 So that proves there is something beyond words. That is thoughts. Connected to mind. Are mind and thoughts two different things? Or the same thing?

The answer to this question may be a bit beyond you @danuka. I have never come across a proper explanation to it in English. It involves both mentality & materiality (Nama Rupa). A proper Sri Lankan monk would explain it to you in Sinhala far better. I will write a bit further on this as an answer but I may not be able to give any examples at length as I am too pressed for time.

the real mind should be experienced in meditation, where words and thoughts ceased. to describe the mind with words or thoughts is a tedious labour, like cultivating a fruitless tree waiting for it's harvest.

Are 'X' and 'Y' two different things, or the same thing? Seems like a Koan. What is the sound of one thing? A non-vexing question, I say. Excellent.

I have turned your question over and over trying to grasp what it is asking. I am not sure but I feel that it deserves an answer, perhaps different from but alongside the two good answers already here. I hope this is useful.
On one level the answer is simple: the mind is a container and creator of thought, like a pot for making food. So it is different - but linked, as Saptha Vissuddhi said.
But there are different kinds of thoughts (and other mental phenomena), including verbal thought. Words are different from other thinking because they are not just the outflow of a thought process, they are also the input, and symbols with their own rules, and tools for creating, storing and shaping thought. With so much power and complexity, it is right to ask about how they relate to the mind. The full answer is probably beyond human knowledge at this time.
My way of thinking about this lately is to distinguish between conscious - verbal - logical thought as produced by the neocortex, and emotional - impression thought as in the limbic system. There is an essential difference and a gap of understanding. Neither can explain the other.
Basically, words cannot explain thoughts, and thoughts cannot explain the mind. But they are one thing. (Well, if you are nondual.)

Is mind and thoughts are two different things? or same thing?
Buddhism talks about "six senses" rather than five.
For example, in the Sabba Sutta

What is the All? Simply the

eye & forms,
ear & sounds,
nose & aromas,
tongue & flavors,
body & tactile sensations,
intellect & ideas.

This, monks, is called the All.

So, "mind" and "thoughts" are two different things, in the same way that "ear" and "sounds" are two different things.
But we are conscious of these things making "contact" (e.g. we're conscious of sounds contacting the ear, and conscious of ideas contacting the intellect). Or the theory of the Five Aggregates suggests that mental factors arise as a result of contact between consciousness and form.
The Pali words here translated as "intellect & ideas" are mano and dhamma.
mano and dhamma appear in the first line of the first verse of the Dhammapada. The commentary suggests that dhamma includes feelings, perceptions, and mental formations (indeed dhamma is a word with many meaning, see for example this short definition and long definition).
The commentary also suggests that mind is a necessary precondition for mental factors.

The question was about "mind and thoughts"; I thought that "mano and dhamma" were the closest analogue.

Mind is;
Citta - the six senses, when combined with objects, gives rise to such:

chakkhu (eye) viññāṇa (consciousness)
sotha (ear) viññāṇa
ghana (nose) viññāṇa
jiwha (tongue) viññāṇa
kaya (body) viññāṇa
mana (brain) viññāṇa.

Vingnana (or viññāṇa) is the ability to recognize things separately.
Cetasika (mental factors) include:

vedana (feeling, physical and mental categorized as good bad and neutral)
sangna (recognition/signals)
sankhara (thinking, speaking and action)

Going further,
Buddha compares viññāṇa to an illusionist (because what you recognize as things separately don't show their true nature).
Buddha compares sankhara to mirage (when you explore it, the original what you saw isn't there anymore).
Mind is used in a broader sense because English and psychology don't do deep enough to reach the level Lord Buddha has broken things down.
What people call "world" is the combination of these six receptors, eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, brain. When an object, that is picture, sound, smell, taste, touch and thoughts connect with these receptors giving rice to the above six viññāṇa, we call it passa (contact / touch in a general sense).
So who's this creator? Viññāṇa, the illusionist.
On a side note, please note that one of the Cetasika, which is Sankhara is also called Cetana (Chetana) and that means kamma (karma).

I've updated the answer. Hope it helps.

The answer to your question lies in the ‘nama-kaya’ ‘rupa-kaya’ – The mind-body relationship in the scriptures.  It is too complex for me to write in English, so I will write a bit on it in my native Sinhala Language towards the end. Otherwise refer to DN 15: The Great Discourse on Causation (Mahānidāna Sutta) - Dīgha Nikāya
In the scriptures, the term samphassa is used in compounds. Then in D.15, a twofold division occurs: patigha samphassa contact by sensorial reaction, and adhivacana-samphassa verbal or conceptual, i.e. mental contact. Our simulations have two aspects to it. First is impact-stimulation (patigha samphassa) that depends on Rupa(Materiality). The other is designative-stimulation (adhivacana-samphassa) which depends on Nama( the faculty through which the external world is understood). This makes discernment or our ability grasp and understand and naming of sense objects possible. This conditions both the naming forms and named forms. Now I will try to explain this in simpler terms.
Nama is Mentality (mind & thoughts). Rupa are the material forms. ‘Nama’ and ‘rupa’ are linked together like flowers and their scent. They are born together. Our cognitive perception (Sanna) ( awareness of colour, shape, sound, smell, taste & touch) helps us to describe something or someone as short, tall, small, dark, fair, thin, stout etc. etc. Such descriptions are called ‘Nama-kaye adhivacana-samphassa.’ Such descriptions are possible because of the varied nature of Rupa. For example in our group there varied Rupa, named ‘Saptha Visuddhi’, ‘Dhammadhatu, ChrisW, Sominda, Lanka… etc. etc.  In other words this is Rupa-Kaye patigha samphassa.
සංඥාව කියන්නේ හදුනාගන්නවා හදුනාගන්නවා කියන අර්ථයෙනි.හදුනගන්නේ මොනවද? වර්ණයි හදුනා ගන්නේ[මහා වේදල්ල සුත්‍රය] එතකොට සංඥාවෙන් හදුනාගත්තදේ තමයි දැනගන්නේ.දැනගන්නේ නම් වශයෙන් හෝ උස මිටි,දිග කොට,කළු  සුදු හෝ විවිද වර්ණ, කෙට්ටු මහත........  ආදී විවිධ නාම ඔස්සේය. ඒක නිසා තමයි අපි  දැනගත්ත දෙයක් කියද්දී නම හෝ එහි මොනයම් හෝ ලක්ෂණයක්  භාවිතා කරන්නේ.විවිධ නම් හෙවත් නාම කායේ අධිවචන පවතින්නේ රූපයේ විවිධ ස්වරූප හෙවත් රූපකායේ පටිග සම්පසය නිසයි.ඒ කියන්නේ "ගස මල නිමල් කමල් "ආදී නම් තියෙන්නේ රූපයේ විවිධත්වය නිසයි.හිතන්න,ඉතා සමාන නිමුන්නෝ දෙන්නෙක් ඉන්නව. මෙයාලට නම් දෙකක් තිබුන කියල දැක්කහම එයාලව නමින් දැනගන්න බැහැ…… තෙරුවන් සරණයි!

This answer is excellent. I wish I could read the part that is in your native language.

Maybe someone else will translate it if that's possible.

It is basically the same thing that is in English that in Sinhala I’ve written, but in a much simpler, clear, accurate way that is to the point. Only the Sinhala text will make sense to @Danuka. What is in English is a bit too much for me too to make sense of to be honest .  Dhammadhatu once criticized DN15 as not authentic, as to how the 12 parts paticcasamuppada be 9. The problem is his as all 12 is included in the 9 in DN 15. It is explained well in Sinhala, but too complex / time consuming for me to translate to English. Perhaps someone could help translate that into English.

There is many a untruth in English Text. On Meditation specially. Nowhere in the Doctrine (Sutta) it is mentioned that one becomes a stream entrant (Sotapanna) thru meditation. It is by listening to dhamma that 1st 3 samyojana gets removed. Meditation comes only when one is ready to go beyond the stage of Sotapanna to help get rid of / cut through the other 7 samyojana. Otherwise going 'nuts' is a possibility and not enlightenment.  It is important to read only the first 57 books (sutta) - no contradictions contrary to Dhammadhatu.  Keep away from the later day translations.Many a distortions.

You said "otherwise going 'nuts' is a possibility..." ha ha yes. My Guru talks about using the right 'recipe'. The programming textbook I use does, too. Enlightenment is about programming the mind, then deprogramming it, until "no thing" is left. (but we started with no thing) (Shh! you'll ruin the story!)


text:
Life With Death
How can we earn money while we don't want to live for anything?
P.S.: I'm very wise and smart guy. I have high degrees in academical stuff. And I can say that I had satisfaction most of the emotions related with success. Now I don't have any feeling rather than having my money to survive in life. I don't choose death because of it's darkness. Also I hated humans. Because firstly to live you need to be selfish as an individual. And in fact every human being is selfish. But for having social satisfactions we act differently.

If you hate humans, it's possible you are from different realm to come here at this time - the degrading of humans at this particular time. Usually those come down to here are more intelligent, artistic and elegant, easy to have academic achievement because in that world, human nature are not as based like this time here; intellectual, genuine and morality are basics, v.s. greed, cunning and ill-intent...

The debased human nature here makes those coming down suffocating, their are low, their taste coarse and vulgar, they are not able to see the fineness thus communication with them has to be twisted and distorted to fit their disposition. The possibilities for those coming down are: a) they have unfinished issues to complete - usually termed Karma. b) they in their going the path of enlightenment has to learn everything, incl. those unbearable things. c) similar to above, this is the time to learn loving kindness - to accept the unacceptable, but not being dragged down by the unacceptable.

@Bhumishu米殊 is there any references to your claims in  any Buddhist text? I'd love to read more about this. Thanks.

@NuWin at the moment I've not yet come across a Sutra directly presented this analogy. in Surangama Sutra, it has a small paragraph described how from each different realm those beings reborn as humans their dispositions; further, Great Bhikkhu Xuyun (虛雲和尚) by the time he was around 90-100 yrs old he said he would rather die soon for there would come a time it would be really horrible he rather not to endure it (he meant the Cultural Revolution later happened in China). Xuyun was believed by many the Bodhisattva from Western Pureland related to Mahāsthāmaprāpta (大勢至菩薩)...

@NuWin next, in the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa-sūtra (維摩詰經) the Buddha of Pureland of Frangrance (香積佛國) instructed the Bodhisattvas when visiting Sahā-lokadhātu (娑婆世界) - earth, had to hide their fragrances emitting naturally from their bodies and not to look down upon the beings (earthlings) for their rather small size and the (less grandeur) appearance of their abode, incl. Buddha Shkayamuni for teaching here he adopted the similar appearance.

@NuWin beings here are from many different dimensions/ realms, by their present dispositions one can trace back where they were from. it's hard for the Western mind to adopt there are beings once were animals, or from hell, or the asuras, or from the hungry ghost for the brain-washing resulted from thousands years of Christian/ Catholic faith - humans are superior god-made.

@NuWin the Buddhist teaching has a fluid understand of all the worlds and huge scope of phenomenas. our only world is just a very small tip of the whole universe, so to speak. the varieties of all livelihoods are not just the result of ethnic, education, parental influences, etc.

You’ve identified self correctly @bubblebobble, as you seem to live within a bubble IMHO. I guess it is time for you to come out of it and start living life with an attitude of gratitude to one and all. Now is the opportune time for making it a habit to express thankfulness and appreciation in all parts of your life, on a regular basis, for both the big and small things alike. Just look around you at the built environment, towards everything and anything that you make use of for your existence. They are all there for your convenience and existence because of someone else’s contribution to society.  Then you will understand the positive side of selfishness. This is what one of my beloved authors had to say on it:

The Objectivist ethics proudly advocates and upholds rational selfishness—which means: the values required for man’s survival qua man—which means: the values required for human survival—not the values produced by the desires, the emotions, the “aspirations,” the feelings, the whims or the needs of irrational brutes, who have never outgrown the primordial practice of human sacrifices, have never discovered an industrial society and can conceive of no self-interest but that of grabbing the loot of the moment.
The Objectivist ethics holds that human good does not require human sacrifices and cannot be achieved by the sacrifice of anyone to anyone. It holds that the rational interests of men do not clash—that there is no  conflict of interests among men who do not desire the unearned, who do not make sacrifices nor accept them, who deal with one another as traders, giving value for value.

If you have the time please read her three novels… Atlas Shrugged,  We the Living, and The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand. Now I will try to stay within the limits of Dhamma of the Buddha in answering your question “How can we earn money while we don't want to live for anything?” with the hope that it will help you to go further in this Noble Path.  Firstly let us rephrase the question: ”How to live with the least money possible?
Not knowing your temperament, I’m a bit hesitant in writing this. Anyway, here goes…. When Buddha instructed his own son Rahula on the practice of anapanasati meditation, the Blessed One recognized Venerable Rahula’s temperament and what would be most suitable for him.  As temperaments differ, so do the objects of meditation, and Rahula was advised to practice other forms of meditation before Anapanasati. So I am not sure whether you are ready for what I tell you or not.
I see that at present you are not a person without any means of support. You are not a destitute person. But there will come a time to live meagrely, if you are serious about this Dhamma path. It will not be an issue if you become an ordained monk, as then you will be free. The question is if you wish to remain a lay disciple, as then you may not be free from all expenses. All what you can do is to just make it significantly lower.
Before starting on the Dhamma path these are the thing that you may have to do. As you do not want to live for anything, start doing the following: a] stop eating out; b] cut out technology (Netflix, games etc.); c] cut down on processed foods, eat healthy, cook at home; d] Wear the clothes that you have for decades until they fail; e] Stop going out for movies and other shows, a walk in the park will do for an outing; f] do not indulge in any luxuries, get used to frugal living; g] save the little extra money that you have for a rainy day; h] go back 50+ years and compare how people lived then (and mind you they were happier then); j] make Gautama Buddha’s Dhamma your hobby & pastime. The liking to this PATH should far outweigh / exceed liking for all other things.
Such a change in you is not possible if you do not limit yourself to reading only the first 57 books on Dhamma ever written, and while at it put into practice what you learn. This first 57 books on Dhamma is your Teacher. So never question the authenticity of these first 57. Then what is called as gift of principle (patipatti dana) will begin to occur from within own self. It is the gift that functions in the cessation from the attachment to the six sense faculties. This gift is nobler than material gifts of food and drinks.
Then you will inevitably to make a commitment to genuine morality. One who practices the True Dhamma will form his mind into prudentially with moral rationality. The one who is being fixed in morality does untie all the tangles, being restrained from within own self. Such a person can walk into a jungle and live there for months without any harm coming to them from animals. Few westerners who come to SriLanka to practice Dhamma do this. The jungle will provide what is necessary for their survival.
I can go on and on and on with many other pointers, but this is a very good start. Once you are well on the way on this new way of life, ask me what to do next. You will not fail, as I’ve tried it, and it had worked for me. Today I’m financially independent. I keep earning money while I don't want to live for anything. (I started with nothing. 30 years ago, at age 24, when I came to Canada with just $200 in hand). You too will live this truth, if you honestly strive for it. Good luck to you.

Sometimes people ask that answers on this site should be explicitly Buddhist,

Once I formulate an answer to the question proper, I will delete this portion of it. Do give me a couple of days. These two days are going to be hectic for me. I'm trapped in the 'rat race' with family matters and other distractions.

Thank you all good people try to answer!

In Buddhism, 'wisdom' refers to understanding suffering. To quote:

And what is the faculty of discernment (wisdom)? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed
  with discernment of arising & passing away — noble, penetrating,
  leading to the right ending of stress. He discerns, as it has come to
  be: 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is
  the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the
  cessation of stress.' This is called the faculty of discernment.
Analysis of the Mental Faculties

Often, high degrees in academical stuff create suffering things, such as weapons of war.
If fact, some high degrees in academical stuff have mental illness.
Not one living being has survived in this world without the unselfishness of its parents.
This shows firstly, to live, you need to receive & reciprocate unselfishness as an individual.
Thus Buddhism explains about wrong or deluded view:

And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad
  actions. There is no this world, no other world, no mother, no father,
  no spontaneously arisen beings; no contemplatives or brahmans who,
  faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the other after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is
  wrong view.
MN 117

Thank you all good people try to answer!


text:
Can the seeds of desires bowed in the past lives can now be eradicated from the mind completely?
Desires are the seeds which have effects later or sooner. Can we destroy such seeds without experiencing their effect or Karmas?

First of all, a seed of desire, or a seed of anger, etc. are not karmic seeds (or karmic imprints). They do not ripen in the same way at all. A seed of desire will give rise to a mind of desire. Second, desires are not seeds. The seeds are non-associated compositional factors while an instance of desire is a mind.
Yes, the seeds of the afflictions can be abandoned so that they never give rise to an afflicted mind, such as a mind of anger, lust, etc.
There are two types of abandonment:

Partial abandonment, and
Complete abandonment.

Partial abandonment is also called 'non-analytical cessation' since such an abandonment happens when you engage in Samata and the Jhanas. When you reach a concentration of the form realm (such as a mind of calm abiding, etc.) afflictions of the desire realm are abandoned, but the seeds are still there. This is a partial abandonment, since the seeds are not yet abandoned.
The way to abandon the afflictions together with their seeds is by generating wisdom directly realizing emptiness. When the wisdom directly realizing emptiness acts as an antidote, it abandons afflictions together with their seeds, this is called analytical cessation and it is complete abandonment. According to Prasangika, the first moment of a wisdom directly realizing emptiness does not abandon all afflictions altogether (and their seeds), but merely the intellectually acquired afflictions and their seeds. It is only later, when the wisdom is conjoined with an accumulation of merit (or with the six perfections) that this wisdom is strong enough to abandon innate afflictions and their seeds.
Usually, according to so-called Hinayana tenets, the seeds are abandoned by way of generating wisdom directly realizing the sixteen aspects of the four noble truths.
In any case, such a wisdom is a mind of special insight and is thus a union of calm abiding and special insight. Calm abiding must be attained first.

A seed is consciousness, not desires.

Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance &
fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a middling property.
Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.
Bhava Sutta

Karma can only works with sense gates, no sense gates then Karma has no power.

Another straight up answer:

ariyo (noble) aṭṭhaṅgiko maggo (eight fold path)
kārma-nirodha (extinction of karma) -gāminī (goal) paṭipadā (mode of progress)

Practicing noble eight fold path is a mode of progress to end karma.
This comes from the Nibbedhika Sutta (AN 6.63):

Katamo ca, bhikkhave, kammānaṃ nidāna-sambhavo? Phasso, bhikkhave, kammānaṃ nidāna-sambhavo.
And what is the cause by which kamma comes into play? Contact is the cause by which kamma comes into play.

And:

Katamo ca, bhikkhave, kamma-nirodho? Phassa-nirodho, bhikkhave, kamma-nirodho. Ayameva ariyo aṭṭhaṅgiko maggo kamma-nirodha-gāminī paṭipadā, seyyathidaṃ: sammā-diṭṭhi, sammā-saṅkappo, sammā-vācā, sammā-kammanto, sammā-ājīvo, sammā-vāyāmo, sammā-sati, sammā-samādhi.
And what is the cessation of kamma? From the cessation of contact is the cessation of kamma; and just this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration — is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma.

So karma has Phassa ("detection" or "contact") as its Nidhana Sambhava (which I translate as "stage where karma plays out", or which buddha-vacana.org translates as "cause by which kamma comes into play"). Without stage to play, karma is powerless. Reference "dependent origination" to find out how Phassa or detections end.

karma has Phassa (detection) as Nidhana Sambhava (my translation-stage where karma plays out . without stage to play, karma is powerless.  Ref dependent origination to find out how Phassa or detections end.

I think the second quote might be taken from SN 56.11, except that there it's given as dukkha·nirodha instead of "kārma-nirodha".

yes.  I recognize a pattern that Buddha often used "dukkha" (in this case, pain" interchangeable with vedana and/or karma.  You see the same thing as I do?    Second quote can be found in Nibbedhika Sutta AN 6.63 where Buddha talked about 6 things one should know about karma.  Some sources may spell Kamma instead of Karma .

wow!!!  thanks Chris, those who understand Buddha's teachings and able to articulate them for others are not easy find.  thanks.  Also in some sutta, Buddha compared tanha to sap (vitality) of the seed, Nandi as water (most dictionary translate Nandi as 'joy' but I feel this word means more like 'dwelling, immersed in, get caught in'.  You may have read Buddha explanation of an arahat's mind ' raga appears, remains, and ends.  He knows it well but not dwell in such.. or no Nandi.  Letting go of Nandi is another way to not let a seed sprout.


text:
How to suppress the 5 hindrance to achieve the first jhana?
I am reading books on the subject. But don't fully understand the language as im new to meditation and Buddhism. I want to learn the jhanas one at a time to work my way up. But im lost when it comes to getting rid of the 5 hindrances. I dont quiet get how to do t. Any tips.. I wish i could find a teahcer but i have no money to travel and theres no one here in my location.

'Suppressing' the five hindrances is not the method of the Pali suttas.
In the Pali suttas, the five hindrances are 'abandoned', 'purified' or 'cleansed' using wisdom, as explained in MN 19, MN 20, DN 13, SN 46.55, etc.

Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells with an awareness devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of
  covetousness. Abandoning ill will & anger, he dwells with an awareness
  devoid of ill will, sympathetic with the welfare of all living beings.
  He cleanses his mind of ill will & anger. Abandoning sloth &
  drowsiness, he dwells with an awareness devoid of sloth & drowsiness,
  mindful, alert, percipient of light. He cleanses his mind of sloth &
  drowsiness. Abandoning restlessness & anxiety, he dwells undisturbed,
  his mind inwardly stilled. He cleanses his mind of restlessness &
  anxiety. Abandoning uncertainty, he dwells having crossed over
  uncertainty, with no perplexity with regard to skillful mental
  qualities. He cleanses his mind of uncertainty.
Having abandoned these five hindrances — imperfections of awareness that weaken wisdom — then, quite secluded from sensuality,
  secluded from unskillful qualities, he enters and remains in the first
  jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed
  thought & evaluation.
MN 38

Okay now the books are making a Bit more sense. So i need to change my life to abandon the unwholesome hindrances?

Basically, I would say yes. Even after changing life, it takes a far bit of time to develop the (real) jhanas. Regards

Jhana and abandoning the 5 hindrances are interrelated, but abandoning the 5 hindrances alone will not get Jhana. The main things to get to the 1st Jhana is vitakka & vicāra. You have to establish your mind on an object and then apply sustainable effort to retain your mind on the object. It is though this effort that the 1st Jhana arises. For a slightly more detailed discussion see this answer.


text:
Meditation Without References
I have previously asked questions on this forum, and now I have gained some familiarity with meditation. I am primarily doing breath meditation. When I practice, my thoughts are barely distractions at all. I can easily stay focused, but I cannot narrow my attention to the sensations at the tip of the nose. What occurs in meditation feels like a clear, yet imprecise awareness.
I know from reading on the subject that the sharpness I am looking for comes with gladdening the mind, or applying effort. Yet, neither seem fruitful in my practice. I remain very weakly focused on an imprecise object, more or less the face and nose area.
Similarly, it often happens that while meditating my thoughts dissipate completely, or to a near absence. I keep hearing different types of advice, some people experienced in meditation advising me to not use the breath, some people advising sticking to it.
Given that I am very avoidant towards experience, I am doubtful towards centring my awareness on a single object. I would like to be more alert and aware, as well as awake, in general. Yet, I cannot visualize anything at all, am mostly emotionally barren, and feel unmotivated in general. I remember applying meditations on emptiness quite intensely in earlier years, and now I feel without much suffering, but also without much enthusiasm.
Any thoughts?

I can easily stay focused, but I cannot narrow my attention to the sensations at the tip of the nose.

If you are craving when you manage to get the attention, or being averse when you cannot, you are not doing the meditation right.
Early on, the results are not due to the fact that you were (or weren't) able to keep your attention: they are due to whether you had sustained effort, to keep your attention, by bringing your mind back to the middle of the upper lip of the nose area. This is what Vitarka and Vicara are.

Yet, neither seem fruitful in my practice. I remain very weakly focused on an imprecise object, more or less the face and nose area.

You seem to be craving to be able to do this.
Initially say you mind stick to the chosen object, nevertheless you should continuously try to bring it back. At the start of the breath, see if the breath is on the chosen spot: if not, bring it back, if it is on the breath still redirect it back to the chosen spot as when you would bring it back when the attention had gone away.
When your mind goes away to another object, or just thinking and pondering, there are three sensations which come by: i.e. sensations are pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. Try to see the thing's sensation before bringing your mind back. For example if you get a leg pain, see the pain and some aspect of its impermanence. Then bring back your mind.

Two phrases that weren't clear to me. One was "Initially say you mind stick". The other was "if it is redirect it" which seems to contrast the previous "if not" but I'm not sure that the contrast makes sense: perhaps it should say, if not, bring it back, if it is and redirect it back".

When you you check you mind it is either on the object or not. Regardless of whether it is with the object or not just redirect you mind to the object (Vicara). This is same mental action as if then the mind is away even when it is on the object. Simple formulae: initially apply the mind to the object (Vitakka) - re apply apply the mind to the object (Vicara).

For a change, why not you practice a different kind of meditation?  The maithri bhavana (loving kindness meditation) is the most important. It is not easy for everyone to properly do Anapanasati because many other obstacles different to what you have experienced come up - if not now, then in the time to come. So why not make a change in practicing Asubha Bhavana (Meditation on Loathsomeness) and Dhathu/indriya Bhavana (Analysis of Four Elements).
Please keep in mind that you should not mix one meditation with another. You should get out of one type of meditation to get into another. Always before starting to meditate, spend a minute in being aware of your surrounding. Then always without fail start doing these two steps. First – before start of a meditation, say to self (Vitakka) that you are about to leave ‘normal’ self, and entering into a meditative state.  Next – after each type of meditation - say to self (Vitakka) that you are about to leave ‘the meditative state’ to that of the day to day. As you start going into Jhana/Dyana states this practice will safeguard you.
Anytime when there is wandering thought, the concentration is not there. The appearing of a nimitta is a sign of concentration. When you develop an anapanasati nimitta, and practice it further, then you need a good knowledge of teachings (suttas) for you to overcome obstacles that you face. That is why in an earlier post – last week – I said that there is many a untruth in English Text on Dhamma - On Meditation specially. Nowhere in the Doctrine (Sutta) it is mentioned that one becomes a stream entrant (Sotapanna) thru meditation. It is by listening to dhamma that a disciple of the Buddha gets rid of the first three samyojana. Only then will one come to the proper frame of mind to do Meditation the right way. If not, you fall into all the trappings that come in the way. These trappings are both of this world and that of the other. There are forces of the netherworld that are going to cross your path that only one who is firmly established in the Noble Eightfold Path can overcome. That is why I said that meditation comes only when one is ready to go beyond the stage of Sotapanna to help get rid of / cut through the other 7 samyojana. Also that is the very reason that I said that otherwise going 'nuts' is a possibility and not enlightenment.
As mentioned earlier, the appearing of a nimitta is a sign of concentration. the ‘nimitta’ is your main object of focus. If hatred forms in a mind as a result of a cause, then that is Patigha nimitta (an objective to hate) which is your focus. When this focus is powerful, there is no room for a second different object of focus to get in the way.  One of the other many obstacles that you have not yet faced is that of distractions in the form of colours – bright or subdued- of white, red, yellow, orange, blue, etc. and get trapped in them.  One quality that’s always appropriate in establishing mindfulness is being watchful or alert, while maintaining a detached presence with what is experienced. Without a proper knowledge of dhamma this in not possible. The Pali word for alertness is sampajañña. It doesn’t mean being choicelessly aware of the present, or comprehending the present. Sampajañña means being aware of what you’re doing in the movements of the body, the movements in the mind. This is why mindfulness and alertness should always be paired.

First don't assume too quickly that you thoughts aren't a distraction, the mind is very tricky and the more you will practice the more you will be aware of your lack of awareness, which is a good thing because you will start being conscious of being distracted by deep thoughts processing underneath your immediate attention and driving you off the focus of your breath.
If you have no sensation around the nostrils don't be upset it is normal, just keep your attention there, remain equanimous and most of all don't crave or avoid any sensation you encounter in this area. The sensation can be anything don't look for a specific one and accept it as it comes. If you have unpleasant sensation on the nostrils, then focus on it without avoiding it, if you have pleasant sensation focus on it without being attached to it or craving for having it back when it goes away.
Being conscious of the impermanence and remaining equanimous, meaning that you don't start craving our avoiding the phenomena you experience is absolutely fundamental in your practice. Once you develop this tendency your focus will increase naturally. This is called the Right Concentration : Samma Samadhi.
Keep applying yourself like that and your attention will become sharper and sharper.

It seems different forms of subtle craving are present in your question, which is the hindrance of restlessness & remorse.
The ultimate purpose of Buddhist meditation is to abandon craving.
Abandoning craving can create more equipoise & also clarity.

Could you explain what the hindrances of restlessness & remorse are?

Your mind is jumping around, judging this & judging that. That is restlessness, which is the opposite of equipoise & restfulness. You have described having some calmness but are dissatisfied because there is some dullness & a lack of buoyancy/brightness. Thus your mind is caught up in judging & a lack of contentedness. This is restlessness. If the mind stops judging & wishing, the restlessness will end and the slight mental imbalances may iron themselves out if you let go of craving for things to be different. Regards


text:
The question of why do we have craving
In Buddhism everything boils down to we as humans and animals crave. Craving is the root cause for suffering and rebirth.
So the question becomes why are we hard coded to crave. Is there any reference in Buddhist documents where the Buddha have answered this question?
Personally i think every living being is hard wired to crave because of survival. I think at a primal level for every living being the main objective is to survive and to reproduce and i think that is why we have craving and all those akusala karma such as jealously anger etc...
please tell me you opinions or any reference in Buddhist scriptures

In case it helps to clarify the question, are you asking "What is the 'root cause' of craving?", and why are you asking that?

Has your question been answered?

The Puttamansa Sutta lists four nutriments for the sustenance of beings (sattānaṃ) who have come to be (bhūtānaṃ) and for the support of beings seeking to be (sambhavesīnaṃ), namely:

Edible food, coarse and fine;
Sense-impression;
Volitional thought; and
Consciousness.

For unenlightened beings, craving is included within the nutriment of volitional thought, as stated:

If the nutriment volitional thought is comprehended, the three kinds of craving are thereby comprehended.
Puttamansa Sutta

Thus, at a primal level, for every unenlightened living being, craving serves the main objective (of nature) to survive and to reproduce.
As for the enlightened, they survive more skilfully relying on wisdom rather than craving.

The word 'dharma' means 'that which supports' thus craving also supports life but it is an 'akusala dhamma', namely, an unskilful means of support. For example, the suttas state:

Thus, Ānanda, in dependence upon feeling there is craving; in dependence upon craving there is pursuit; in dependence upon pursuit
  there is gain; in dependence upon gain there is decision-making; in
  dependence upon decision-making there is desire and lust; in
  dependence upon desire and lust there is attachment; in dependence
  upon attachment there is possessiveness; in dependence upon
  possessiveness there is stinginess; in dependence upon stinginess
  there is safeguarding; and because of safeguarding, various evil
  unwholesome phenomena originate—the taking up of clubs and weapons,
  conflicts, quarrels, and disputes, insulting speech, slander and
  falsehoods. Therefore, Ānanda, this craving is the cause, source, origin, and condition for those various evil unwholesome phenomena.

To add, "we" do not crave. To the contrary, it is craving that creates the idea of "we". To quote:

"Who, O Lord, craves?"
"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he craves.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who craves?' would
  be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask
  the question will be 'What is the condition of craving?' And to that
  the correct reply is: 'Feeling is the condition of craving and craving
  is the condition of clinging.'"
SN 12.12

An uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person assumes form, feeling, perception, fabrication &/or conscious to be a self. That assumption
  is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what
  is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication?
  To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is
  felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication [of self]
  is born of that.
SN 22.81

In Buddhism everything boils down to we as humans and animals crave.

Yes.
Even in worldly affairs: Craving -> searching -> gain -> decision-making -> desire and lust -> attachment -> possessiveness -> stinginess -> safe-guarding -> various evils, unwholesome phenomena - Mahā,nidāna Sutta
Also the 12 link generic version of Dependent Arising: ... -> feeling -> Craving -> Clinging -> ...

So the question becomes why are we hard coded to crave.

Particularly craving arises when you get attached to the pleasant feeling. Pahāna Sutta
In context of Dependent Arising both craving and aversion are 2 sides of the same coin. The case of unpleasant and neutral feeling leading to aversion and ignorance is coved in the above Sutta. In this context craving [, aversion, ignorance] arises due to due to feelings which are pleasant, unpleasant, neutral.
Carving, aversion and ignorance are latent tendencies. They are reinforced due to our habitual reaction to sensation. That is why in meditation (as taught by some teachers at least), you are asked to be equanimous seeing the arising and passing of sensation.

Personally i think every living being is hard wired to crave because of survival. I think at a primal level for every living being the main objective is to survive and to reproduce and i think that is why we have craving and all those akusala karma such as jealously anger etc...

This is also true as the the cycle: Craving -> searching -> gain -> decision-making -> desire and lust -> attachment -> possessiveness -> stinginess -> safe-guarding -> various evils, unwholesome phenomena - Mahā,nidāna Sutta

Google for the "12 dependent arisings". All dependent arisings lead to sufferings and craving is one of the dependent arisings.
Buddha's teaching is able to cut one of the dependent arisings thus preventing subsequent arisings from taking place, leading to enlightenment..

Which of the 12 dependent arisings does it cut?

@Chirs I think it cuts ignorance

Beginning practices include cutting "craving" OR cutting "clinging".

There are various suttas which say there are three roots: delusion, craving, and aversion.
Also, ignorance is identified as the first of the 12 nidanas, and the root cause of dukkha.
I think that "right view" (or wisdom) might be an antonym of "ignorance": so seeing things properly, for example understanding the disadvantages of craving, is what eventually leads to dispassion, renunciation, the end of craving; and conversely, the opposite (i.e. ignorance, lack of right view, insufficient wisdom) could be called the root cause of craving.
Another theory is that craving is conditioned by feelings which are conditioned by sensations: so maybe these could be seen as the cause of craving (for which, I think the antidote is "guarding the sense-doors").

AN 3:76 Bhava Sutta: Becoming, gives us an analogy to describe how becoming is produced:  “Kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the moisture.” Kamma gives us a range of possibilities in which the seed of consciousness can be planted and on which it can feed. Craving is the moisture that keeps the seed alive and allows it to grow into a state of becoming.
It is Kamma, rooted in ignorance and craving (Tanhā, thirst), that conditions rebirth. This life-stream flows ad infinitum, as long as it is fed by the muddy waters of ignorance and craving. When these two are completely cut off, then only, if one so wishes, does the stream cease to flow, rebirth ends as in the case of the Buddhas and Arahats. The most valuable evidence Buddhists cite in favor of rebirth is the Buddha, for He developed a knowledge which enabled Him to read past and future lives.
Thus the cause for the arising of suffering is craving. Craving results from delusion, which prevents man from seeing things as they really are. Therefore, cessation of suffering is achieved when craving is eradicated and extinguished. The path leading to the cessation of craving is the Noble Eightfold Path, expounded by the Enlightened One.

so the question then becomes why are living beings born with ignorance and delusion? again is this hard coded in us for the survival of our species so to speak?

Yes, you are right @user119020. I will add to my answer on this, sometime later, when time permits. with metta...

Just an Opinion
Craving: is like, "A Motion needs space"
A stone or dead person can get rid of this.
e.g Your craving saying let's ask about craving :)
that means you are alive, you need this internally like body needs parts externally.

does that mean even Arahaths have craving. And even the Buddha. Because they wanted to spread the dharma and that was also a wanting

Buddha was king and they left the throne because they had know actually it's nothing, they kick that types of craving, which can make distance between GOD In other side they goes door to door for spread Dharma. Does that make sense a men can go door to door, village to village without Craving? But here craving was converted into deeds.

@user119020 Doctrine distinguishes pathological craving from wholesome desire -- see e.g. Tanha versus Chanda


text:
why is all of Buddhas past lifes referes to times of kings
The title says it all.
Why does all the recollections of past lifes of Buddha revolves around times of kings which were similar to the time the Buddha was living.
Why aren't there any mention of times that are similar to the times of what we are living right now ?
does this mean this is the 1st time in the sansara that we are living in a world like this ?
if it is the 1st time, that we are living in a world like this with so many technological advances, that would mean we are living in sansara which is not repeating, which in turns mean that new things can happen in the sansara. then how can we be even sure about enlightenment. if sansara can change what is to say that some day all beings that achieved nibbana will not again be reborn?

Why Buddha's past lives refers to times of kings

1) Because when Buddha was teaching, the audiences were living at the time of the kings. It's pointless to talk to the audiences ruled by the kings that there were governments governed by universal suffrage president elected by public votes - how could they understand it? Moreover, it's painful to add unnecessary burdens to the audiences introducing a new concept whilst the Dharma such as Anatta and Emptiness was already beyond general mind. The Buddha had nothing to do with his own self - Anatta, all his doings were because of teaching others, so was when talking about his past lives.
2) When Buddha was asked by the Bhikkus to tell them how the "heaven and earth" was formed and what was like in the beginning of time - cosmology, Buddha explaint in the way these Bhikkus could understand: aliens who's faces shaped as square, round, trapezoid (Jambudvīpa, earthlings) and half-moon from 4 corners of the "heaven  and earth" - the universe; galaxies in spiral or odd shapes - worlds like gyroscope, like plate or tilted. And when telling them there were numerous bacteria in the water, he could only name it "worms". We shouldn't use the concept of modern day to wrap around the past. Sutras were recording what Buddha taught 3000 years ago, thus used the terminology understandable to people living at those times.
3) Now Buddha has already enlightened, so he will not return to Samsara at this time for he is already freed from it. If Buddha returned his is doing it for teaching, not for himself, therefore these shouldn't be called his past lives.
4) Although in many circumstances many Sutras mentioned Buddha talked about his past lives, these not the complete record of his past lives. For there is no beginning and no ending of past lives we, Buddha before attaining Buddha-hood, lived, not mentioned doesn't mean not existed. The mentioned past lives were particularly related to certain teachings.
And last

Samsara now has new things, not repeating itself... technology advances?

Nope. Even the Bible has a glimpse of the truth:
"So there is nothing new under the sun" ~Book of Ecclesiastes 1:9

Buddhist stories stick to conventions. These days we use the words president and prime minister. A million years from now they might call the rulers lords. We had Pharaoh's if you study Egyptian history.
Buddha uses conventions and avoids using words that will distract people from dhamma, as people might want to explore further.

then how can we be even sure about enlightenment
I think there are schools of Buddhism which say that enlightenment becomes less possible, as the centuries go by and the Buddha's doctrine becomes distorted.
There are also schools which say that enlightenment is already attained (by the Buddha), therefore enlightenment is certain.
Or that all saṅkhāras (conditioned things) are impermanent, but that some dhammas (especially nirvana) are unconditioned (and not-self), and "timeless" (or immediate).
People also often say that it (the path to enlightenment) is something you should experience for yourself, i.e. have direct experience of.
if sansara can change
I think that sansara is expected to change: that it's considered "impermanent" in Buddhism.
What seems more-or-less constant about it is a cycle of death and life (perhaps you you'll agree that death and life still exist), and suffering (oceans of tears), and causes of suffering, etc., as described in Dharma.
what is to say that some day all beings that achieved nibbana will not again be reborn?
I think that some schools of Buddhism assert that some relatively-enlightened beings are reborn (see for example "Bodhisatvas" and "tulkus").
But perhaps the statement "beings that achieved nirvana may be reborn" is a nonsense phrase, for example because it assumes that "the same being" may be "reborn" ... whereas, sansara and impermanence posit that anything "reborn" is necessarily a different being.
Also, enlightenment and "being" might be mutually contradictory. It reminds me of this Vajira Sutta:

Why now do you assume 'a being'?
  Mara, have you grasped a view?
  This is a heap of sheer constructions:
  Here no being is found.

I think that's connected with for example this discussion of 'trackless'.
Beware too that this is (or is nearly) a topic for which it's difficult to get sensible answers: the unanswered questions include questions about whether the Tathagata exists after death, and the four imponderables includes

The Buddha-range of the Buddhas [i.e., the range of powers a Buddha develops as a result of becoming a Buddha]

The warning is that speculation on these topics may be counter-productive -- not the right way.

The bulk of the Pali suttas do not include recollection of 'past lives'. Here, the Pali words are 'pubbe nivasa', which mean recollection of 'past abodes', 'past dwellings' or 'past adherences'.
In short, it means recollecting in the past when the mind ignorantly clung to one or more of the five aggregates as 'self'. This is explained in SN 22.79.
As stated in SN 22.79, since such recollection can include only one aggregate, it seems obvious it does not refer to past lives because a life cannot comprise of only one aggregate, unless it is claimed having a past life of a tree or plant.
More crucially, SN 22.79 states to cling to past recollection as "I" or "mine" is wrong view.
However, probably at a later time, a mere handful of questionable & contradictory suttas were created, such as AN 3.15, AN 9.20, MN 50, MN 81, MN 123 & MN 143.
As stated in the question, that these (later) suttas do not account for technological developments (such as the three-age system) supports the view these literal reincarnation suttas are dodgy.
These later suttas have the same style as the Apadānas, Buddhāpadāna & Jataka Tales, which were composed hundreds of years after the passing away of the Buddha.

There's the Buddhavamsa too, also said to be a late addition to the canon, which mentions "kings" a lot.

"If it is the 1st time, that we are living in a world like this with so many technological advances, that would mean we are living in sansara which is not repeating, which in turns mean that new things can happen in the sansara. then how can we be even sure about enlightenment. if sansara can change what is to say that some day all beings that achieved nibbana will not again be reborn?"
If we were sure about enlightenment we would be enlightened.
One can't be sure of enlightenment at least until one has found stream entry.
According to the Buddha's ultimate reality teaching, nothing is really repeating but empty formations. I would think that , just because technological formations have predictable functions doesn't make them anymore real. Technology is empty, sunyata, not-self or anatta.
and also...
Yes, why is it always times of kings, the same exact culture and I guess there was Buddha's around 300,000 years ago? That teaching, that there were several other Buddha's before Gotama Buddha, that's got to be the most glaringly wrong teaching that I can think of(that and women can't be Buddhas). Doesn't it conflict with the theory of evolution? How could 28 Buddhas  who lived like 10,000 years apart each have lived before Gotama?
  I don't know if the Jatikas were meant to be taken so literally. I mean, maybe they are just  teachings that help students  understand rebirth. -metta


text:
Different state of mind during dhamma talk
Has anyone experienced moments like being in a state of restlessness during a dhamma talk?
A sense of relief, moment of temporary escape but yet the mind is actively running wild, almost gone into a state where one feels like tearing.
I wonder if it could be due to the stress and sorrow the person going through, therefore the person entered into such state of mind.
I always thought during dhamma talk, one's mind is supposed to be calm and steady or somewhat shielded from any harmful agent from the outside world.
Anyone mind to share?
Thanks!

Has anyone experienced moments like being in a state of restlessness during a dhamma talk?

The 5 Hindrances can surface any time. It is not necessarily in meditation. It can happen during Dhamma Talks, while working, etc. So Restlessness-worry being one of it can arise any time.

A sense of relieved, moment of temporary escape but yet the mind is actively running wild, almost gone into a state where one feels like tearing.

This is the nature of the mind. Do not analyse and this is what I expect of my mind, this is what do not expect of the mind, this is I do not care where by generating pleasant, unpleasant and neutral sensations followed by craving, aversion and ignorance.

I wonder could it be due to the stress and sorrow the person going through, therefore the person entered into such state of mind.

Stress and sorrow generally co exists with unwholesome mind state. This can lead to hindrances arising.

I always thought during dhamma talk, one's mind supposed to be calm and steady or somewhat shielded from any harmful agent from the outside world. Anyone mind to share?

If you have wise attention (equanimous and seeing the 3 universal characteristics), then only then you get shielded from any harmful agent from the outside world.

Would you like to see for yourself @Sunset_Limited, as to which category you fall into by reading INVERTED  SUTTA – AN 3.30 . The following is an extract obtained from The Book of Threes – 30 -The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha – A Translation of the Anguttara Nikaya – Bhikkhu Bodhi .

There are three kinds of persons found existing in the world. The person with inverted wisdom, the person with lap-like wisdom, and the person with wide wisdom…. The first person often goes to listen to Dhamma from the bhikkhus. They reveal to him the perfectly complete and pure spiritual life – the Dhamma. But while sitting in his seat, this person would not pay attention to this advice. Just as, when a pot is turned upside down, the water that had been poured into it runs off and does not remain there, so too such people never take in the Dhamma. This is called the person with inverted wisdom.
And what of the person with lap-like wisdom? This person too often goes to listen to Dhamma from the bhikkhus. The bhikkhus reveal to him the perfectly complete and pure spiritual life – the Dhamma. While sitting in his seat, this person would attend to that talk, but after leaving the monastery he would not apple this teaching to his daily life - Just as, when a person has various food stuffs strewn over his lap, if he loses his mindfulness when rising from that seat, he would scatter them all over. This is called the person with lap-like wisdom.
Then there is the person with wide wisdom. This person, just like the first two, often goes to listen to Dhamma from the bhikkhus. The bhikkhus reveal to him the perfectly complete and pure spiritual life – the Dhamma. While sitting in his seat, this person would attend to that talk. After he has risen from his seat, again he attends to that talk. Just as, when a pot is kept upright, the water that had been poured into it stays there and does not run off, so too, some person would live in accordance with the Dhamma. This is called the person with wide wisdom.

Wisdom will not just unfold. You have to work towards it and then it will unfold by degrees. Firstly you have to be committed to this path, and the liking for Dhamma should far exceed your liking for all other things, if you want to develop a mind that is concentrated, cleared of disturbance and distraction. Concentration is achieved through the training in the higher consciousness, which brings the calm and collectedness needed to develop wisdom. Specially when it comes to Dhamma it is not easy to retain for long what you have heard, if you do not put this new found insights into practice right away. While at it, in order for the mind to be unified in concentration, a check must be placed on the unwholesome dispositions which ordinarily dominate its workings.
Unwholesome dispositions of body and speech disperse ones attention and scatter it among other unwanted concerns. They will rule by way of body and speech as bodily and verbal deeds, if they are not kept in check. So you will have to restrain your sense faculties, to prevent them from becoming tools of the defilements. For it you will have to train in moral discipline. Then the path evolves through its three stages, with moral discipline as the foundation for concentration, concentration the foundation for wisdom, and wisdom towards reaching liberation.


text:
Does practicing Brahmavihara to get insights leads to Nibbana?
I read the books of Bhante Vimalaramsi that is using the practice of Brahmavihara to reach a state that is called Tranquil Aware Jhana and then to generate insights from the fourth rupa Jhana.
Has anyone of you practiced using this method and reached the Jhanas?
Has anyone gotten any insight?
In his site, Bhante Vimalaramsi says that this method is much better and faster than one pointed concentration to reach Jhanas. The Jhanas are less powerful and better manageable and getting attached to the joy of them is much more difficult.
Thank you, metta

It seems to be possible. Following elaborates on this.

The “divine abodes” (brahma,vihāra) are so called because
  these are the qualities of the higher divine beings or brahmas. They are called “immeasurables”
  (appamāṇā, appamaññā) is another term for the divine abodes because the practice is only complete
  when we break down the barrier or duality of self and other.
These qualities are lovingkindness, compassion, appreciative joy and equanimity. When they are
  practised to dhyanic levels, they are known as “liberation of mind” (ceto,vimutti), or more fully, the
  liberation of mind by the immeasurable (or the immeasurable liberation of mind) (appamāṇā
  ceto,vimutti)
...
The first three divine abodes—that is, the liberation of mind by lovingkindness, by compassion and
  by appreciative joy—can attain only up to the level of the third dhyana. Only the liberation of mind by
  equanimity can reach the fourth dhyana.
From the Metta,sahagata Sutta (S 46.54), a few interesting details are worth nothing. The liberation
  of mind by lovingkindness (mettā ceto,vimutti) has “beauty” (subha) as it highest limit. “Beauty”
  here refers to any of the form dhyana (rūpa jhāna), while the term “beauty element, or beautiful element”
  (subha,dhātu), refers to both the dhyana and its object, namely, a dhyana arisen on the basis of lovingkindness
  (Pm 2:39).
The Attha,sālinī, the Commentary on the Dhamma,saṅgaṇī, however, takes “the beautiful” here as
  referring to dhyana attainment through a colour device (kasiṇa) that is fully purified (DhsA 191). As
  Analayo notes, this gloss goes against the teachings of the Paṭisambhidā,magga (2009: 146 f).
The liberation of mind by compassion (karuṇā ceto,vimutti) has the base of boundless space (ākāsâ-
  nañc’āyatana) is its highest limit. That is to say, dhyana attained by the liberation of mind through the cultivation of compassion can be used to attain to the first formless base or formless attainment (arūpa
  samāpatti).
The liberation of mind by appreciative joy (muditā ceto,vimutti) has the base of boundless
  consciousness (viññāṇ’añc’āyatana) as its highest point, that is, it can be the springboard to attain the
  second formless attainment
The liberation of mind by equanimity (upekkhā ceto,vimutti) has the base of nothingness (akiñcaññâ-
  yatana) as it highest base, that is, it can be a basis for focus leading up to the third formless attainment
With such an attainment at its best, the practitioner will be able to attain non-return, but not arhathood,
  because he has yet to abandon all his remaining defilements. An important aspect of this practice
  is to remind ourselves that all such states are mind-made, and as such are impermanent and liable to ceasing.

Source: Introduction to Mettā Bhāvanā Sutta by Piya Tan

The practice of Loving-Kindness Meditation can lead you directly to the experience of Nibbāna if you follow all of the Brahma Viharas: that is the practice of Loving- Kindness, Compassion, Sympathetic Joy and Equanimity. This is mentioned many times in the suttas (the original discourses of the Buddha). Many times other teachers will say that this practice alone doesn't directly lead the meditator to the experience of Nibbāna. And this is true. But, when Loving-Kindness Meditation is practiced as part of the Brahma Viharas then it will take the meditator to the fourth Jhāna or meditation level. This is where the Lord Buddha tried to have all of the students who practiced meditation get to. The fourth meditation level is where the meditator experiences deep states of equanimity.
According to the suttas, there are three different paths that can be taken once the meditator reaches this level. They can take one directly to the experience of Nibbāna. We will not go into more detail at this time, because it may cause some confusion. But if you are interested, in having more information please start reading suttas like sutta 62 The Maharchulovada Sutta in the Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. Or you can read sutta 27 The Culahatthipadopama Sutta in the same book. I sincerely hope that these meditation instructions are helpful to you and that by practicing in this way you will benefit greatly and lead a truly happy and healthy life.

Source: "A Practical Bare-Bones guide to Metta Meditation" by Bhante Vimalaramsi

I wonder where in the Metta Bhavana Sutta does it say that the practitioner will be able to attain non-return, but not arhanthood. This is only an incorrect interpretation by Piya Tan. Practicing Brahmavihara to may get insights into leading to Rupa/Arupa Jhana, not leading to Nibbana. But there are other 4's that if practiced will lead to Nibbhana. The OP has accepted, and see things otherwise. So I will not elaborate any further on this. With metta....

It is not in the Sutta. Above is quoted from the introduction which discusses the commentarial literature and scholarly literature around the Suttas. What has been discussed is:  Metta,sahagata Sutta, Attha,sālinī, Com. on Dhamma,saṅgaṇī

Maybe you can try answering this: References on Rupa and Arupa Jhana through Brahma Vihara

I am very tight for time, and the little time that I have this weekend, I already have marked 3 questions to answer. The rest of the time I will observe 24+ hour Uposatha Sill at a temple - so the weekend is full. If we stick to the 3 sections - 40 volumes - 57 books, that has around 18,000 discourses, they are all about Nibbhana.  But Bhante Vimalaramsi has distorted it by saying a half truth. Hindus practice Brahmavihara and attend rupa / arupa jhana - but theirs is only micca samadhi that will not bring Nibbhana. So for this answer I'd say C'est la vie - such is the way life goes. w/ metta.

Brahma viharana is something Buddha practiced even as a Bhodisatva and helped many reach higher realms. They are meritorious and definitely insufficient to reach Nirvana.
There is only one way to reach Nirvana, and that's the Arya Ashta Angika Magga (the Noble Eight fold Path).

It's certainly possible.  The brahmaviharas are one of the methods one can use to achieve jhana.  Past the first jhana, however, jhana practice is more or less indistinguishable no matter which method you use to establish that initial base of concentration.  E.g. the fourth jhana is still the fourth jhana regardless of whether I'm practicing breath perception, kasina meditation, or contemplating karuna.  Some people find some methods easier than others.  That's why the Buddha gave us three dozen of them!

It is very possible to attain Nibbana by practicing Brahmavihara.
In MN 97 Dhananjani Sutta, Brahmana Dhananjani was instructed to practice brahmavihara by Ven Sariputta and before he died he was reborn as a brahma in lower BrahmaLoka which is the realm of 1st Jhana. Meaning by doing this you can achieved Jhana.
Samatha-Vipassana is the best way to attain nibbana as what the buddha describe about PannaVimutti / wisdom according to buddha.
A person need to get into Jhana 1 2 3 4 and to the bases then you'll be able to see the links of dependent origination. When you attained nibbana, you'll realized that the way that leads to the end of suffering opened up for you.
I'm a Brahmavihara's Practitioner and one of Bhante's Student

Read majjhima nikaya 52.8 it is clearly mentioned that one will reach either arahat or anagami stage if anicca is practised with brahmaviharas. So it is clear that practice of brahmavihara along with appreciation of anicca definitely leads to awakening. Bhante Vimalaramsi says that many of his students have experienced awakening i e nibbana.

Link  to MN 52: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.052.than.html

This sutta was spoken by Ananda, who wasn't an Arahant. What do you mean by practising anicca? Loving-kindness obviously cannot lead to nibbana because it's not insight into anicca and anatta. It might work as a spring board and makes the mind calmer, which in turn facilitates to see things clearly (due to the stilling of mental fabrication), but  the brahmaviharas in & of themselves DO NOT lead to direct insight, and no insight means no possibility of enlightenment.

@Sarathw pl read karaniya metta stta and mn 52.8

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


text:
Is there a mudra associated with renouncement?
For meditation purpose, and for appeasing suffering, I think I need a symbol associated with renouncement.
Is there a mudra that would particularly fit with this idea ?
Or a symbol that would come to your mind ?

Perhaps there's one called the shramanamudrâ (see also Śramaṇa).


text:
References on Rupa and Arupa Jhana through Brahma Vihara
I am looking for freely available resource on achievement of Jhana through Brahmavihara. What are such references?
Also I would like to dig deeper into what Bhanthe Vimalasiri has written on the subject. So references on his teachings are greatly appreciated, but so would be works by other teachers.

Related: Is there a compassion only Buddhist path?

Upasaka Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena,
May Atma be able to proper trust that Upasaka is well, healthy any heedfull?
Especially Notes here give further crosslinks, aside of the Sutta it self:
SN 46.054 and a linked in another question AN 04.125
Also Sankhitta Sutta: In Brief
(Good Will, Mindfulness, & Concentration) might be of interest.
And here maybe useful Bhant Nyanadassanas teaching: From mettā Jhāna to nibbāna and a Sutta and commentat that supports that: DN.09 and at least The Limits of the Unlimited Attitudes -
The Brahmaviharas on the Path to Awakening by Bhante Thanissaro with many links and crossreferences.
All collected in "Metta-Boom just fills Heaven and Hell"
Here some of Ven.Mahāsi Sayadaw comments.
In regard of Bhanthe Vimalasiri, best to ask Upasaka Micro, he is surely be found on any forum of other tapapals, charts or equal Buddhist communities and as disciple (till not so long mentioned as such) of Bhante, he always loved to share in this regard.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma not meant for commercial purpose or use for other wordily gains.)

Is Upasaka @Mirco still reachable via Bu-SE?

Their profile says that their most recent visit to this site was October 2015, so no.

Who knows. And delighted Devas are always around to share merits and bring people together in Dhamma, Nyom Chris. Sadhu für Aufmerksamkeit und Zuvorkommenheit.

this for first part of your question.
metta 1 sutta


text:
Websites with the Chinese canon translated into English?
Are there any websites that have an English translation of the Chinese Buddhist canon, similar to what is available for the Pali canon at accesstoinsight.org and suttacentral.net?
Grateful for help and with kind regards,
Tord

I'm curious why you look for the Chinese cannon instead of the pali cannon.

@RavindranathAkila Thank you for asking, i'm interested because i would like to study a couple of Sutras that are important to me and see how they compare with the "versions" in the Pali canon

Hope you find your answer. And may you realize the four noble truths!

That is or was difficult.
Other people have tried what you are trying to do (i.e. compare sutras with the Pali versions). To find whatever work they have already done, you might search for papers about the specific named Sutras.
In his book A History of Mindfulness in 2005, Bikkhu Sujato (who compares Nikayas with Agamas) wrote,

The translations are from various
  sources. Research was carried out in many places—monasteries, libraries,
  Buddhist centres, internet—and I am not able to standardize or to check
  all the references.

However, see Chinese Agama texts are now on SuttaCentral posted in 2014.

The following might be of some value:

http://www.bdk.or.jp/english/english_tripitaka/publication_project.html and / or http://www.bdkamerica.org/blog/free-pdf-versions-many-volumes-bdk-english
http://84000.co/ - this is from Tibetan sources
http://lapislazulitexts.com/ (http://lapislazulitexts.com/tripitaka)