text:
Is it possible to be reborn for all eternity?
According to Buddhist teachings, is it possible to continue to reborn and suffer for all eternity?
Suppose if a being never attained any merit, never was able to work through its old karma. Would it be possible for that being to never escape suffering?
I have heard some people say:

No, nobody can be reborn and suffer forever. For an extremely long time, maybe, but not forever.

I mean, forever is really an astounding concept. Even if you take billions of trillions of gazillions of births it's still nothing compared to forever.
If it's not possible to be reborn forever, then it implies that all beings are eventually destined for Enlightenment. Some may have an insanely long way to go, but if they're not gonna be reborn forever, then they have to eventually attain Enlightenment?
Do some beings continue to be reborn and suffer forever, or are all beings destined to attain Enlightenment eventually?
I prefer answers that give sources and all that. But some nice reasoning is also welcome.

The Buddha didn't gave an answer to "how many beings will be escape", all, or... so how could someone here give an answer of use for what can be done? It's total irrelevant for ones practice but catches one in papanca and such questions had been layed aside by the Sublime Buddha and told to do likewise, good householder.

First, if I may, I will correct one misunderstanding:
Enlightenment = free from rebirth =/= not no MORE rebirth...
Enlightenment means one will not be bounded on the wheel of destiny--rather one will be able to help others freely. Thus, do not equate Enlightenment with totally never being born. It's beyond born and unborn.
To answer your question: The latter is correct: all beings are destined to attain Enlightenment eventually. The Mahayana sutras state how people will all be saved at some time or another, specifically Maitreya Buddha who, when he returns, will deliver "billions" of beings at a time through the universe. (Surangama Sutra)
Here is more info on this Buddha:

Maitreya Bodhisattva is the future buddha of this world who currently
  resides in the Tushita Heaven. A Dictionary of Buddhist Terms and
  Concepts relates the following information about him:
"A bodhisattva predicted to succeed Shakyamuni as a future Buddha.
  Also called Ajita, meaning 'invincible.' Some accounts view him as a
  historical personage who preceded the Buddha in death. He is said to
  have been reborn in the Tushita Heaven where he is now expounding the
  Law to the heavenly beings there. It is said that he will reappear in
  this world 5.670 million years after Shakyamuni's death, attain
  Buddhahood, and save the people in Shakyamuni's stead. For this reason
  he is also sometimes called Miroku Buddha. Belief in Miroku prevailed
  in India around the beginning of the first century A.D., and spread to
  China and Japan. In the fourth century, a monk named Maitreya (c.
  270-350) became famous as a scholar of the Consciousness-Only school,
  and was later identified with this bodhisattva." (pp. 266-7)
Maitreya Bodhisattva is the only bodhisattva who is revered by both
  Theravadin and Mahayana Buddhists (aside from Siddhartha Gautama and
  his past lives as a bodhisattva). His coming is predicted in the Pali
  Canon as well as in the Mahayana Sutras.

Although no one falls on the end of the "forever" spectrum--nonetheless, there are certainly people are closer on the spectrum towards "forever" than others, having lived a very impetuous existence with little consideration for spiritual cultivation or making merit (e.g. chanting a Buddha's name).

Many people are interested in living forever (eg Christians) because such people do not think living is suffering. Instead, they wish to spend forever with their loved ones. That is why they are not queuing up to practise Buddhism.
My impression is Buddhists are similar, in that they wish to believe in reincarnation so they can live more lives. That is why most Buddhists are not practising the path, hardcore, but preaching that Buddhists must believe in reincarnation, rebirth, whatever.
Also, Buddhism does not state making merit ends suffering (SN 12.51) so what is its relevance?
Also, Buddhism does not state all beings are destined for enlightenment (AN 10.95).
Imo, the questions are an extreme & pointless misrepresentation of Buddhism. If the questioner truly believe they were suffering, they would be a monk urgently putting out the suffering, like as if their hair was on fire.

A person with achieved enlightenment will end the birthing cycle and go to nirwana. It is the greatest achievement of a Buddhist. Lord Buddha has told until there is no beginning or an end to the birthing cycle of all beings. So it is wise to go to nirwana and end the tormented cycle of sansara.

From the viewpoint of most (if not all) Buddhist schools, you have been being reborn since beginningless time- all the way through repeated universes as they come and go in their own cycles.
You will continue to do so.
The point is, you may be fed up of the suffering that you continue to experience.  Enlightenment (or Nirvana) is a permanent (as in forever) and irreversible step out of the suffering.
In some Mahayana schools, this does not mean an end to the continuum of consciousness though.  It's not really 'rebirth' as you think of it, as being free from the idea of 'self' frees you from having to plod around as a single being. Once enlightened a Buddha is able to be reborn (or merely manifest) simultaneously in multiple (no limits) places across the universe.

SN 22.99  -  Gaddula Sutta: The Leash
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.099.than.html
Supreme Buddha’s answer to your question in found in the Gaddula Sutta. So it is more or less eternity as He says, “Unimaginable, Bhikkhus, is a beginning to the round of births [and deaths]. For beings obstructed by ignorance and fettered by craving, migrating and going the round of births, a starting point is not evident.” Only if you could realize the Dhamma of a Supreme Buddha, you will escape this eternity. But you know what, it is so rare is it to find a Supreme Buddha! Do you have any idea what an aeon (world cycle / kappa) is? It is equivalent to eternity. Only by a simile you will get an idea of it. The Buddha offers a vivid simile to suggest the eon's duration.
Anamatagga-samyutta — The unimaginable beginnings of samsara. In Samyutta ii, Chapter XV, the Buddha used the parables of the hill and mustard-seed for comparison:
• Suppose there was a solid mass, of rock or hill, one yojana (eight miles) wide, one yojana across and one yojana high and every hundred years, a man was to stroke it once with a piece of silk. That mass of rock would be worn away and ended sooner than would an aeon.
• Suppose there was a city of iron walls, one yojana in length, one yojana in width, one yojana high and filled with mustard-seeds to the brim. There-from a man was to take out every hundred years a mustard-seed. That great pile of mustard-seed would be emptied and ended sooner than would an aeon.
In the last 91 Kalpa (Aeons) only 7 Buddha’s have come. At the time of the next Buddha, the average lifespan of a human is going to be eighty thousand years. (In the present day it is around 60 -80 years). What are our chances of being born during that time, when we could never meet any of the past Buddhas and are still in this samsara?

We can meet the Buddha in the suttas. In the Gaddula Sutta, samsara was described as: ""He keeps running around and circling around that very form... that very feeling... that very perception... those very fabrications... that very consciousness".

If you would read my post again, you will see that I pointed out the urgency. Now you know the danger of this Samsara. You and I would have committed suicide a countless number of times in our previous births. This shows the urgency and importance of becoming a Sotha-Aapanna – to get into the stream – the Noble Eight-fold Path.

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


text:
Is there any meaning, which I am supposed to untangle, to things I saw during meditation?
I had a friend who introduced me to Buddhism. He was very insistent I go to Buddhist groups, though I ended up going to a different one to the one he suggested (the leader was Theravāda not Mahāyāna). I haven't spoken to him in a long time, but he is the person I associate most strongly with Buddhism. He was very insistent that I chant the same mantras as him, and go to the groups he suggested.
In any case, during the meditation (which took place immediately after the one where I resolved to check if the universe is eternal) I saw these things:

I remembered a dream I had two days ago in which my Buddhist friend had changed from how I knew him. He was usually friendly and cheery, if a little unusual in manner sometimes. However, in the dream he looked very different and was angry, seemingly not just with me, but with everyone, but with me also. He grabbed me by my collar and screamed at me and I was afraid.
I saw there was a world within my laptop, which became large and over-filled with information, then shrunk to become the size of my left foot, and hovered just below my knee.
I saw a bright light, which was powerful and pure white, but tinged at the edges with gold. The light appeared to come from a figure, whom I saw as bound but then released from his bondage, stepping down from the place where he was bound to walk on the earth and talk to the people there.

Is it possible there is any meaning to these, which I am supposed to untangle? They seem to all be connected to my previous question, about the limits of the universe and the cycle of birth and death.

Was the group a legitimate, official Buddhist group? Did they demand donations or made an untrustworthy impression?

@OidaOudenEidos Yes. They wanted donations from my friend, and said that he needed to buy different items for his practice often.

Closing this question due to the the acceptance of satisfactory answer by the questioner, since it was flagged as an opinion based question.

@BuddhaTheis Sounds like this was some kind of sect, but not a Buddhist group, where you donate only if you want to (dana). If you want to get into real Buddhism, you could start by listening to this talk by Ajahn Sumedho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNb5fe_ixvg

@OidaOudenEidos Ok. I am helping some people in the English Language group edit their posts at the moment and they are showing me what I am doing wrong but I will look afterwards, I promise.

@BonnieTopits If a question is answered/answerable then it needn't be closed. The OP's "accepting" an answer is a signal that he or she is satisfied and doesn't need further answers (but the question isn't closed so people can add further answers if they want to anyway). This site (Buddhism.SE) is a bit more lenient than other SE sites about not closing answers ... see Moderation policies for Questions which is specific to this site

... see also  What does it mean if a question is "closed" or "on hold"? and Help Center > Asking which are the general (not site-specific) help topics, which describe how the web site software works.

I am still learning, and will follow your advise. I remember reading that one should leave a comment on why one was voting to close, but I did not consult the help section at that time. It popped upon review asking for a vote on closed status.

In order to possibly determine the meaning of your thoughts, you would need to consult a psychoanalyst. What is important within the reference of a forum answering questions on Buddhism, is that these conceptual thoughts during meditation are to be pushed aside so that you return to your focal point, usually the breathe. The goal of meditation is not to allow your thoughts to jump from one to another while you sit on a cushion. The goal is the absence of thought, thereby generating a clear calm mind. This takes practice. As you are someone new to to Buddhism, I recommend that you not rely on your friend alone, but read and study, and attend as many teachings offered by genuine lamas in order to extend your knowledge. You have made a good start. The Buddha said to listen to what he had to say but explore the truth of it on one's own.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Why have a legal/ justice system? Let karma take care of things?
We all know people who are living immoral lives committing crimes but getting away by bending the law towards their side due to wealth and influence. When ever I see or hear something like this I keep telling my self that karma will get them even though the legal system cannot. But then again I keep question as to why we need a legal system at all when we know that there is a natural system or justice called karma?

Even the Buddha himself had a (tiny - but existent)  "legal system" for his order in terms of the vinaya. It is really a nice thing to read a bit into the (nowadays written) text of the vinaya, where the rules were often introduced with a story, when and why a conflict in the order existed and in which way the vinaya rule should give a line of how-to-go and keep the sangha as much undisrupted as possible. No recurrence on "karma" needed (and see the nice answer on this of sajeewa) (the vinaya is part of the pali-canon and can be read there)

I think your idea is not practical. A justice system is a convention developed based on social norms and logic. But karma is a metaphysical phenomenon which goes beyond logic. Therefore, we will have to let karma take its course and respect the conventional legal system.

There are two theories about criminal law:

absolute theory: You should punish someone because his action is intrinsically bad and therefore he deserves to be punished. (refers to the past)
relative theory: The purpose of a law is to prevent a crime from happening. Therefore a penalty on certain actions is reasonable because it prevents 'criminals' from doing it again and scares people off. (refers to the future)

So to come to your question:

A legal system (if it follows the relative theory) is useful at least to that extend that it will try to prevent crimes (kamma of body and speech, if you want so) and create an environment in which you're conditioned to restrain from certain actions. So the great benefit is that your being conditioned not to do bad deeds (at least body and speech).
If somebody committed a crime and has been punished for it, this sounds to me like a clear coherence between cause and effect. Being punished by a government institution obviously is a result of your past actions, since you wouldn't have been punished if you didn't commit a crime. Kamma doesn't have to be something mystical, it's just cause and effect.

Think of the legal system formed as a natural part of the cause-and-effect.
If your family and friends were tortured you would quickly become a part of this web of cause-and-effect and fight for justice, too, whether by being a cop, criminologist, etc... The energy created from the criminals act compelled certain people to fight, becoming part of the karmic play called justice system.
Anyway, this whole fatalistic idealism is also one-sided and Buddha did not advocate it as complete. Buddha said to never attach to extremes in thinking.
To forcibly NOT have a justice system because of fatalism is attaching to an ideal and incorrect thinking (and not just because the Buddha said not to... ANY extreme thought is metaphysically bound to incorrectness).
The person holding back the energy to fight for justice even though they are motivated to is still participating in karma.
Let what happens happen, justice system just happens to happen naturally, just like maybe one day when biological achievements become more affordable a system of eugenics will or electric cars will take over when they become affordable, etc.

Many Christians believe God or Jesus will correct the evils of the world but there has never actually been a time in history (for which we have real evidence) when this has actually occurred. Often views about karma are similar.
In Buddhism, there is the word 'kaya', which is often translated as (although it can mean) 'the physical body'. In reality, the word 'kaya' means 'collection' or 'group' & generally refers to the five aggregates (physical body, feeling, perception, mental formations & sense consciousness). Every single action (act of kamma) is made up of a collection (kaya) of mental & physical components, which also manifests as 'self-identity-birth or 'jati'.
Thus, Buddhism teaches the results of kamma will only be reaped when the 'kaya' comes to an end & there is 'self-identity-death' (marana). For example, when a murderer is caught & imprisoned, their kamma & kaya of killing come to an end & their self-identity as a 'murderer' experiences 'death'. Thus, in prison, the ex-murderer is 'born anew' or 'reborn' with a new self-identity as a 'prisoner' & a new 'kaya' dominated by regret, remorse & even painful punishment, thus reaping the kamma they have sown.
What I am saying is 'kamma' will not take care of things, just as 'God' or 'Jesus' will not take care of things, because the kamma of the politically powerful must stop before they will reap the bad consequences.
Generally, people of normal human conscience (which Buddhism calls 'humans') quickly reap what they sow thus they grow in goodness & wisdom by learning from their mistakes (or bad kamma).
But psychopaths & sociopaths that Buddhism calls 'gods' ('asura') do not have a normal moral conscience thus do not reap their bad kamma unless they are stopped by a legal system or revolution.
I have heard conspiracy theorists allege individuals such as David Rockefeller, George H. W. Bush, George Soros, etc, are engaged in evil deeds. But these individuals are alive & kicking, well into old age, with  David Rockefeller now 100 years old due to multiple heart transplants.
If one wants to believe like a Christian or Muslim there will be a Day of Judgment where God or kamma sorts it all out, that's fine. It will help the mind be free from suffering over the evils & horrors of this world. For example, in Asia, many Buddhists believe a child is abused or raped because of evil deeds the child committed in a past life. Thus, those Buddhists free their mind from the suffering of righteous anger of injustice. They abide in non-attachment towards abused & raped children. But such beliefs about kamma won't help the world or those children.

The legal system is one of the many ways that karma can work. If you rob someone and end up in jail, that jail sentence is one of the ways in which you may experience the fruits of your actions. If you rob someone and don't get caught, you can experience the consequences in some other way. Karma has many ways to operate, most of which are beyond our understanding.

I have been interested in a very closely related but more general question. What would an institution of social justice look like in a Buddhist dominant culture? There is a large amount of thought on this that has been published in the last 15 to 20 years. One way to rephrase the question is there a social philosophy that is compatible with Buddhism. Rather than name a long list, I will only mention David Loy as a good starting point. As I understand Buddhism, Buddhism is about personal liberation and that it is up to each individual to take up the challenge. If everyone were a Buddha, then very likely there would be no need for any fixed social justice institution. If the majority are still in ignorance, then what? I am still searching for a good answer to that question. If anyone answering the above initial question has a really excellent reference  to this more general question, please include it in your response to the initial question. It seems to me that organized force with the threat of violent or near violent retribution is antithetical to Buddhism. But surely, there must be something in an interim period where enlightened people are a minority.

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


text:
Vipassana Bhavana
So now I fully understand Samatha Bhavana meditation and the goal of all meditative practice - thanks to some of you guys' helpful answers.
However I fail to grasp how to practice the second type of meditation : Vipassana Bhavana.
I've looked at most of the answers attempting to answer similar questions
to mine here on this website, but didn't find them that helpful.
I know of course what the position you're supposed to adopt is - most traditionally you'll do it sitting, the back straight preferably against
a surface such as a wall, etc.
But what is your mind focusing on during Vipassana ?
Thank you

Some of the answers to these might be helpful: Important readings in vipassana; and Can someone provide online resources to learn Vipassana and Metta?

'Vipassana' ('clear seeing') is the mind focused on (i.e. continuous experiencing) impermanence (arising & passing) & also conditionality/cause & effect (eg. how craving & attachment cause suffering or how the absence of craving & attachment result in peace & freedom).
Focusing on impermanence & conditionality will also result in the concurrent clear seeing of 'not-self' (anatta) or 'emptiness' (sunnata).
As quoted previously, vipassana is described below:

And what is the development of [mind using] concentration that, when
  developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is
  the case where a monk remains focused on (ānupassī) arising & falling away with
  reference to the five aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origination,
  such its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its
  passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such its
  passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such
  their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such
  its disappearance.' This is the development of concentration that,
  when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents.
AN 4.41

~~~

There are these five aggregates (subjects of clinging) where a monk should stay, keeping track of arising & passing away (thus): 'Such
  is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is
  feeling... Such is perception... Such are fabrications... Such is
  consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' As he
  stays keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to these
  five aggregates, he abandons any conceit that 'I am' with regard
  to these five aggregates. This being the case, he discerns, 'I have
  abandoned any conceit that "I am" with regard to these five
  aggregates.' In this way he is alert there.**
MN 122

~~~

[13] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on
  inconstancy.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on
  inconstancy.'  [14] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing
  on dispassion [literally, fading].' He trains himself, 'I will
  breathe out focusing on dispassion.'  [15] He trains himself, 'I will
  breathe in focusing on cessation [of suffering].' He trains
  himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on cessation.'  [16] He trains
  himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on relinquishment [of 'self'].' He trains
  himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on relinquishment.'
MN 118

This commentary may be useful:

Now, observe that in the realization of impermanence there is the
  realization of many other things simultaneously. When impermanence is
  truly seen, this characteristic of impermanence is also the
  characteristic of dukkham, namely, it is ugly and unbearable. We will
  see the characteristic of not-self in it, also. Because these things
  are always changing, impermanent, unsatisfactory, and beyond our
  control, we realize anatta, also. Then we will see that they are void
  of selfhood, which is sunnata. We will see that they are just thus
  like that. Impermanence is just thus, just like that, thusness. And
  so, tathata is seen as well.
Please understand that the realizations of these truths are
  interrelated. From seeing impermanence, we see unsatisfactoriness, see
  anatta, see sunnata; see tathata, and see idappaccayata
  (conditionality, the law of cause and effect), also. Each continues
  into the next. A complete realization of impermanence must include
  unsatisfactoriness, not-self, voidness, thusness, and the law of
  conditionality. When all of these are seen, then impermanence is seen
  completely in the most profound way. This is how we realize fully the
  impermanence of the sankhara.
vipassana, insight: literally, "clear seeing," to see clearly, distinctly, directly into the true nature of  things, into aniccam-dukkham-anatta. Vipassana is popularly used for mental development practiced for the sake of true insight. In such cases, the physical posture, theory, and method of such practices must not be confused with true realization of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self. Vipassana cannot be taught.
http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Bhikkhu_Buddhadasa_Anapanasati_Mindfulness_with_Breathing.htm

What is meant above by "vipassana cannot be taught" is that it arises naturally from concentration, as explained below:

For a person whose mind is concentrated, there is no need for an act
  of will, 'May I know & see things as they actually are.' It is in the
  nature of things that a person whose mind is concentrated knows & sees
  things as they actually are.
AN 11.2

@Arthur Jacomelli, what I write here is what Vipassana is like in mindfulness of in and out breathing (anapanasati), as in the earlier post @Dhammadhatu has touched on what the scriptures say on this.  What I write is what I have learnt from my teacher. Before getting into the subject proper, firstly it is very important to remember that the truth and meaning of Dhamma becomes a private experience by the wise only when there is insight or Vipassana. But Vipassana depends on ones level of concentration (Samadhi). And samadhi depends on Samma-ditthi (acceptance of the Four Noble Truths). Thus, everything in Dhamma is connected. The Buddha spoke in diverse ways, only of one thing and one thing alone – dukkha and the cessation of dukkha.
The Blessed One regularly repeated the phrase, “Atapi – sampajano satima vineyya loke abijjha domanassam.” Satipatthana means the setting up of mindfulness. There are certain requirements that need to be fulfilled in establishing mindfulness.
Atapi is ardent and continuous exertion and perseverance for the development of concentration and deliverance from defilements.
Sampajana means clear comprehension for deliverance from defilements, wrong views and perceptions.
Satima is mindfulness to focus the mind on the anapanasati, to the exclusion of all other thoughts and to fix the mind there.
Vineyya loke abijjha domanassam - Eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind are the world. The world as experienced from these faculties, is continually correlating with the world of form, sound, smell, taste, tangibles, and mental objects. Interaction with the external world normally creates defilements like greed and distress. Therefore, we must tame and restrain this greed and distress,
Vipassana is a method to investigate with insight, by analyzing aggregates, material elements, sense spheres, etc. In Supreme Buddha’s Dhamma (Ananda Sutta, Girimananda Sutta), it is clearly explained how mindfulness of in and out breathing is developed and pursued so as to bring the four foundations of mindfulness to their culmination. When first developing mindfulness of in and out breathing, the meditator discerns the differences of his breathing, and remains focused on the breath. This is kayanupassana. Anapanasati (mindfulness of in and out breathing) is a form of kayanupassana (contemplation of the body).
Thereafter, he discerns the differences of the mind as he trains himself to breathe in and out sensitive to rapture and pleasure. Thus, he is experiencing feeling and perception. Further, perceiving the differences (of feeling and perception in his mind), he trains himself to breathe in and out calming mental formations. At that point, he remains focused on feelings (vedananupassana) – ardent, alert, and mindful, with continuous exertion for deliverance from mental defilements (atapi) and from clear comprehension (sampajano). Some people become elated when they get the feeling of happiness and bliss to the body and mind. A mind that is obsessed by elation cannot concentrate. Concentration, rapturous joy, calm, and peace of mind and body, are causally dependent; they are conditioned results.
This is how mindfulness of in and out breathing brings the contemplation of body and contemplation of feeling to their culmination. Once he trained himself to breathe in sensitive to pleasure, and to breathe out sensitive to pleasure, he will now develop equanimity – the result of a calm concentrated mind. Without clinging to the gladdening of the mind by calming; without being scattered; and without being obsessed by sense desire, ill will or sloth and torpor, he trains himself. . By concentrating on anapanasati to a higher degree, he brings the cittanupassana to its culmination. He will now develop dhammanupassana (contemplation of mind objects).
Dhammanupassana (contemplation of mind objects) needs time and regular practice. We cannot properly analyze ourselves without first practising a meditation. Other meditations that will help in this regard is the meditation on repulsiveness (asubha), the meditation on loving kindness (metta), the concentration of reflection on material elements (dhatumanasikara), meditation on the extraordinary qualities of the Supreme Buddha (Buddhanussati).
Now, he trains himself to breathe in contemplating impermanence, and he trains himself to breathe out contemplating impermanence. His effort, mindfulness and concentration are now being directed towards focusing on impermanence. He is contemplating on impermanence within anapanasati. He can see the impermanent nature of his own breath in its rise and fall; the impermanence of his body; and the impermanent nature of the pleasant feeling and perception that he experienced. The recognition of perception is called sañña (perception) which is also subject to change as it is conditioned by contact. Perception changes due to impermanence of contact.
Perception is followed by sankhara (mental formations). If the mental factor was directed to a certain matter, on that occasion there is volitional activity, and this is called sankhara. Here, he observes the impermanence of the mental formation with the change of contact. All these are based on the activities of the mind. Now he understands every aspect in this life process which was considered as self (form, feeling, perception and formation); or anything pertaining to a self. He has real wisdom to see things as they really are.
Finally, he sees the impermanent nature of all that has been cognized (the rise and fall of breath, rapture, joy, feelings, and perceptions). It is through this insight that the true nature of the five aggregates of clinging is understood and seen in the light of impermanence:
material form (rupa) derived from the four great elements,
feeling (vedana) that is conditioned by contact,
perception (sañña) that is conditioned by contact,
mental formations (sankhara) that is conditioned by contact, and
consciousness (viññana) that is conditioned by mentality-materiality (nama-rupa)
Now, based on the impermanent breath, he understands the impermanent nature of the five aggregates of clinging. He realizes that whatever is impermanent and subject to change, is suffering (dukkha). And, whatever is impermanent is without self (anatta). It is through this insight that the true nature of the aggregates is clearly seen; in the light of three signs (ti-lakkhana): impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and without self (anatta). With this realization, he understands clearly that what is impermanent is not worth clinging to. If his mind was obsessed by the five hindrances, he would not be able to concentrate successfully on an object of a wholesome nature, and he would not be able to avoid clinging.
Now, he focuses on cessation. It is the cessation of what? It is not the cessation of material form, feeling, perception, mental formations or consciousness. It is the cessation of the wrong view of personality-belief, which he held with regards to the five aggregates of clinging, as this is ‘mine’, this ‘I am’, and this is ‘my self’. He understands the non-substantial (non-self) nature of the five aggregates of clinging.
Now, the seven factors of enlightenment (satta bojjhanga) should be cultivated in the mind. The Pali term ‘bojjhanga’ is composed of bodhi and anga. ’Bodhi’ is the realization of the Four Noble Truths and ’anga’ means ‘conducing factors’.

In summary: vipassana means 'clear seeing' and is a meditation technique. The meditator knows the arising and ceasing of any/every object that comes to his/her mind without reacting with greed or aversion. The aim is to see the 3 characteristics of reality with one's own mind: impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and non-self (anatta). non-self means that there is only mind and an object arising to mind, but nothing else (no permanent self) beside.

what is your mind focusing on during Vipassana ?

At the END focus on 'Nibbana'(Nirvana)(Sunnya).
At the beginning focus on worldly things like 'Breathing'.
During practice focus on impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and without self (anatta) of that "Object'.
This is a natural process like 'a hen warming an egg': after sufficient maturity the chick 'beeps'.

You asked, "But what is your mind focusing on during Vipassana?".
I think you're right, that when you do Samatha meditation then you "focus" your mind on something.
For example (to reference a concise summary), Wikipedia says,

Objects of meditation
Some meditation practices such as contemplation of a kasina object favor the development of samatha, others such as contemplation of the aggregates are conducive to the development of vipassana, while others such as mindfulness of breathing are classically used for developing both mental qualities.
In the Theravada tradition there are forty objects of meditation. Mindfulness (sati) of breathing (ānāpāna: ānāpānasati; S. ānāpānasmṛti) is the most common samatha practice. Samatha can include other samādhi practices as well.

So you focus on something like: the breath; or mettā; or etc.
In contrast, in Vipassanna I think the mental activity is described as "noting" rather than "focussing": you note that you're thinking something, you note that you're feeling something, that you're seeing, touching, or hearing something, etc. The object of meditation is "the aggregates". When you do that you'll notice that the things (e.g. sensations) you're noting come and go, they are thus impermanent.
I think that's what Dhammadhatu's answer meant when writing, "the mind is focusing on impermanence (arising & passing)": i.e. the mind notes anything/everything (a.k.a. "the aggregates") and understands that what it notes, what it's noting, is impermanent.
You can also notice other things from/of/about what you're noting, e.g. that it (each/any noted thing) is ultimately unsatisfactory; and that it's conditioned (e.g. that one thing causes another); etc.
Finally, you benefit from this meditation by "seeing" or noting things, whatever they are, clearly -- the "goal" is e.g. learning to not "grasp" things, not to be greedy for and attached to things.

The word 'vipassana' means 'clear seeing'. It does not involve 'noting' (mental labeling). "Noting' is not required to discern change (impermanence) or to feel/touch suffering . The word "focussing" is an inaccurate translation of 'ānupassī', which means to 'continually see', 'experience' or 'observe'. Also, samatha does not require "focusing". Because of improper samadhi, meditators "focus". When this does not bring results, they turn to "noting" distractions. One method is too suppressed & the other method is too lax; not yet in "the middle".

Thanks for your explanation. I think that 'noting is often used in the context of Vipassana. 'Seeing' might be a difficult verb to understand if you have to talk about 'seeing pain' for example, or any other object that's not visual. I think another way to describe it might be 'clear awareness' (but I don't think there's a modern English verb associated with awareness).

Or maybe 'noting' is one technique used in meditation ... so you shouldn't say "meditation is noting" but you could say that "noting is (part of) meditation". Or maybe noting is associated with specific schools of meditation (I think there are different lineages).

To summarize, I think that "focus" might give the impression of "to focus exclusively" on something, i.e. to try to focus on something and to exclude other things (apart from that object) from awareness; whereas Vipasanna is maybe the opposite, i.e. it's being aware of (not trying to exclude from awareness) anything/whatever one may be aware or become aware of.

How about 'knowing'?

I commented because you misrepresented what I said in your post. Wiki explains modern Burmese methods that use 'noting'. @Suptha Vissudi mentioned the Girimananda Sutta that contains preliminary practises called "perceptions", which are 'noting'.These are not vipassana but a form of "wise reflection" (yoniso manasikara) to aid concentration. "Vipassana" does not involve thinking. The literal meaning is "clear seeing" or we can use "clear knowing". Vipassana is a fruit of concentration rather than something than can be volitionally practised; just as hearing a sound does not require volition.

@Dhammadhatu I commented because you misrepresented what I said in your post. Thank you for commenting. When I read your answer I wanted to see "focus on impermanence" explained a little more concretely or in more detail (and then I decided to try to explain that myself instead of pestering you to change your answer). I was afraid that "focus on impermanence" by itself might be difficult to understand, like "walk on water" or something would be difficult.

ChrisW. You continue to make comments about contemporary beliefs, such as "exclude other things (apart from that object) from awareness". This, again, is not vipassana per the suttas. Vipassana is not the practise of allowing any defiled mood or thought (kilesa) into awareness, as done in the psychotherapy method called "free association". Vipassana is "to focus exclusively" on impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, not-self, conditionality, etc. It is a product or fruit of concentration & the path. MN 117 mentions a 10 factored path, that includes right knowing or vipassana as the 9th factor.

@Dhammadhatu Is it identical to (i.e. no more or less than) mindfulness of (i.e. remembrance of) right view?

I used the term "focus" because that is the term the questioner used in their question. I was simply replying to what the questioner asked. By sheer coincidence, Thanissaro uses the term "focus" in his translation. Regardless, vipassana does have an exclusive object, which is 'Ultimate Truth' or 'Dhamma'. Impermanence (& its associated characteristics) is the exclusive object of vipassana.

I would say vipassana is not mindfulness of (i.e. remembrance of) right view. There are many facets & stages to wisdom. Right view is a preliminary factor (being the 1st factor of the path). Right view guides the entire development of the path, including concentration. When right view is applied to negotiate obstacles, it takes the form of 'wise reflection' or even 'sampajjana' (clear comprehension; ready/applied wisdom). As previously stated, I think the ten factored path in MN 117 explains my distinctions, with Right View as the 1st factor & Right Knowledge (Vipassana) the 9th factor.

You focus should be in

arising and passed away of
sensations, (pleasant, unpleasant and neither pleasant nor unpleasant)
while maintaining utmost equanimity to the sensations,
and conditioning that follows, if you react to the sensations.

For more details see my answer here.


text:
Over expectations and overconfidence
I have caught myself many times saying to others that I will do this and that. I also tend to confirm that I can and will do things, when I'm asked about it, even when I am not sure. Often people end up criticizing me when I fail to achieve what I promised to.
I also have a lot of over-expectations about myself. I intend to learn so many things or read so many things or meditate a lot etc., and also I always get carried away buying things just for the sake of fulfillment. I want to over achieve.
My meditations have helped me realize that this was due to my obsession with wanting to be 'great'. I want to always be appreciated and want to always feel high. How can I resolve this problem of mine?

Do you practice meditation?

Yes, I do. I try to meditate 15 to 20 minutes daily. Breath meditation, and few other types like equanimity to thoughts, compassion, gratitude.

Then maybe you shouldn't look at this as a problem. This could be a result of your meditation. When you get more aware you see more of your habits and attachments, this is normal.

Hi OidaOudenEidos. Basically what I've been following is identifying traits of my behaviour through meditation and resolving the impediments. For instance, your advice on conceit was really helpful. Now whenever I catch myself feeling proud or having conceit, I tell myself - dont feel proud but instead be kind to yourself. Now I recognized another trait in me. When I feel I am not performing up to mark like not reading or learning or not working up to my expectations, I get this feeling of falling behind. I somehow feel bad about it and this results in not moving ahead.   Your advice on this?

Noticing frustration and expectations, means you're doing something right.Try to stay objective. Let frustration be "frustration" and don't go to the next step of judging. Expectation and frustration always come together like light and shadow. Having expectations is a habit, it's not "me" or "mine". It may take a while until it goes away. You can counteract by developing the habit of sati, always remind yourself that expectations are only "expectations". They're neither good nor bad. If you become objective, you'll see them as a cause of suffering.

You are not alone on this… @Ashwin Kumar. You have good company. When you stop and think about it, that’s what a lot of people do in this world. They do something because they think it makes them better than other people. That whole mindset—the idea of wanting to be better than others or that they are worse than others or equal to others—is a real trap because it tends to swing you back and forth between extremes: either exaggerated self-esteem or exaggerated self-hatred, back and forth, back and forth. And either extreme can make you miserable because the idea of self, of who you are, becomes the big issue in life. You have to do everything you can to shore it up. Then when you find yourself doing things that are not up to that high standard, you feel like a failure. It’s good to remind yourself that all those issues are useless. They don’t accomplish anything at all. We are practicing this Dhamma to overcome conceit, but conceit has its uses.
So as long as there’s going to be conceit in your mind—i.e., the idea that you define yourself in a certain way and you define yourself against other people in a certain way—try to use standards that are wise. Look in terms generosity, virtue, conviction, discernment. At the very least be your own best friend in terms of your values and try to keep those values clear and articulate so that you notice when you’re deviating from them. So that even though we’re living here in a land of wrong views, you try to create an island of right views around yourself.
When you can let go of that conceit of over expectations and over-confidence—even though you can’t totally conquer it, at least put it out of your mind for the time being—it allows you to look at situations less in terms of what you are, and more in terms of what you can do with the range of skills at hand.

You could try to practice Vipassana meditation and take the wanting as an object, noting it as "wanting, wanting", while sending the mind out to the object. Note it a couple of times and return thereafter to the feeling of the rising and falling of the abdomen.
Regarding mental formations such as thoughts, do not engage them, meaning do not focus on the content, instead focus on the process. Content is not important. The process is.
You might benefit from studying the doctrine of Dependent Origination (Paticcasammupada) to learn how craving and attachment arises.
I would also suggest for you "How To Meditate:
A Beginner's Guide to Peace" by Ven. Yuttadhammo.
Let me know if you have any questions to what I wrote and I will try to answer them. May you have a fruitful practice.


text:
How long do blessings last?
I recently attended a Tibetan Drinking Kagyu Buddhist retreat. During that time the visiting Rinpoche blessed several items, and I was told by His Eminence that one can renew the blessing of statues by placing them in a small bowl containing a little bit of saffron water, and then dribbling some of the water over the top of the statue. I neglected to ask how often this should be done. Does anyone know?

I went to a famous temple in Rosemead and some ancient sacred items (sariras supposedly) were brought out and I blessed my amulet on them. I left the temple literally half an hour after that and on my drive back home had an accient and my car burned down, totalled. :-(
To answer your question, karma and merit is a complicated topic to understand and I don't think anyone will be able to give you a precise answer. One would have to go into the origins of said karma that created this object and those are either infinite as some sutras suggest, incomprehensible (as Buddha avoided the questions about origins of karma), or nil (see Zen master's response to king).
You will have to feel the object yourself. Try feeling with your non-dominant hand which is usually better at perceiving these energies.
This whole enchanting thing and sariras is something that comes from Vajrayana and the newer traditions which the original branches of Buddhism did not advocate, espouse, or uphold.
As much as I believe in crystal energetics and various holistic technologies, I am now wary of "sariras" and know that the highest way to make merit is through appreciation of the Buddha, his teachings, and practice whether it is in the form of another object, ourselves, or others. Try practicing different mantras--THAT is definitely IMO way more powerful than any sarira.


text:
Why do I have to suffer due to a thing that a person in a past life has done that I have no control over?
The question that I was asked recently and couldn’t come up with a proper answer to was,

"Please explain to me why I have to suffer due to a thing that a person in a past life has done that I have no control over?"

Supreme Buddha says that we suffer because of our mis-perceptions of things, seeing constancy in what’s inconstant, pleasure in what’s painful, self in what’s not-self, and attractiveness in what’s really unattractive. So the question that I am asking is in relation to this question, that an ordinary person who is suffering, and has little understanding about this ‘otherness’ that is found in the dhamma, once asked.

Are you asking about something like how karma works?

Your friend believes they are suffering due to past life kamma. I have never read such a belief in the Pali suttas. Further, if this belief is true, there is no way for your friend to stop suffering since the causes of the suffering are inaccessible to them since the causes occurred in a past life.
AN 3.61 refutes the (sectarian non-Buddhist) view that suffering arises from past kamma. It states:

When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential,
  monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be
  done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or
  reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered &
  unprotected.

In Cula-Kammavibhanga Sutta, it is not said suffering (dukkha) arises due to past kamma. It is only said that past kamma determines certain worldly conditions, such as being short-lived, long-lived, sick, healthy, ugly, beautiful, insignificant, influential, poor, rich, low-born (social status), high-born (social status), stupidity & wisdom.
In the teaching of Dependent Origination, which explains how suffering arises, the word 'kamma' does not even exist in the Pali (despite some erroneously translations including the term 'kamma-formations'). Therefore, past kamma is unrelated to Dependent Origination, which explains the ultimate cause of suffering is ignorance.
In the teaching of the Four Noble Truths, it is explained suffering arises due to craving & new becoming occurring in the here-&-now:

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the
  craving that makes for new becoming — accompanied by passion &
  delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for
  sensual pleasure, craving to be, craving not to be.

Your friend has the non-Buddhist sectarian view described in AN 3.61. Due to this wrong view, your friend has no solution to suffering & lives unprotected, as is warned in AN 3.61.

Doesn't past likfe Karma influence our present birth? If I did bad deeds, I would be born into realm of hell beings or asuras. In my understanding this would mean I would be being born into poor families or in countries torn by war where life would be horrible.

Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Tibet, Cambodia, Vietnam, Japan, Korea & colonialist China all have had many wars. Are you saying all of these Buddhist countries had populations that did bad kamma in previous lives? The brutal Mongols that took over the Islamic Empire were originally Buddhists but, after their conquest, became Muslims, then invaded India, killing many Buddhists in India. Are you saying becoming a Muslim ruler was good karma & being a Buddhist monk (that was killed at Nalanda by Mongols) was bad kamma? The Americans that dropped atomic bombs on Buddhist Japan had good kamma?

That is what I heard from a Bikshu here in the U.S. - that the 10 realms where people take birth are methophorical and in reality could be their place/condition of birth. Maybe because he was addressing western audience he said so to make them understand that the heaven and hell in Buddhism is not like the Christian heaven and hell.

So, in a nutshell, the sutras are saying that kamma of previous lives can create bad situation, but cannot create suffering, because that's something very different? Interesting point. Unfortunately this will have the majority of people just going "Huh???", since it is a very popular myth that bad conditions equal suffering. 8-)

I personally have never suffered about any bad situation from a past life. Every experience of suffering I have had is about an event or feeling in this life.

Dhammadhatu, i mean no quarrel, it is true that  Dependent Origination doesn't not address karma directly but if you match Bhava with other sutta, then you can see how Bhava is related to karma.   I'm not mentioning reference numbers here (unless requested) because from what i read your answers, you are quite Bahusacca or learned in sutta.     one obvious example is when Buddha gave examples of how consciousness is seed, and this is important, sometime Buddha used karma or Bhava as example of field, sap (vitality of seeds) as desires, nandi  as water , sprouting of seed as birth.

if i read the question correctly, Saptha was trying to figure out how karma related to suffering in Buddhist teaching.  The fundamental difference between Jain and Buddhist teaching is that, for Jain, burnt out bad Karma is the way where Buddhist teaching, vimutti yanatasana is the key.

Thank you Dean. I am aware of AN 3.76, which equates kamma with becoming (kamma is the field, consciousness is the seed, craving is the moisture). This sutta does not attribute suffering to past kamma. It attributes suffering to present-moment kamma. The kamma ripens (comes into play) at becoming (10th link) rather than at the 2nd link. AN 6.63 states kamma is intention. SN 12.63, DN 22, etc, emphasis intention arising with/at craving. Kamma begins at craving & ripens at becoming, which occurs in the present-moment rather than in a distant past.

AN 3.76 states consciousness is established in a lower (defiled) property. The metaphor of the "seed" here is about consciousness being "planted". The metaphor does not state the suffering sprouts from or is contained within the "seed". The "tree" of suffering does not grow because of the material contained in the seed. Imo, to believe so is a misinterpretion of the metaphor. SN 22.53 is useful to clarify how consciousness does not contain any seeds of suffering but, instead, is just tainted/infected by ignorance & craving. Regards

We can approach it like this:
There are no past lives. There are only the experiences of the individual  person's moment, moment by moment.
My past life is my past  moment. Your past life is your past moment.
Moments go to the next moment because of change or transcendence.
Birth is a change. Death is a change. Everything is in flux. Birth and death. Rise and fall.
Death of the physical body is simply another moment that seems like a lot of change.

Imagine you were a 10-year-old kid born in a war torn country. The warlord army approached, raped your sisters, killed your brothers and parents, and forced you to become a child soldier who had to shoot and kill people for a living. Needless to say, the level of suffering and pain would be indescribable. Now half a world away, another 10-year-old boy borned into a royal family of a wealthy country who saw this terrible news on TV and gave either one of these 2 responses:

Respone1: shrugged his shoulders and said: "Oh well, sh...happens. There's no kamma, things are completely random. By sheer chance the poor kid just happened  to be born on the wrong side of the lucky coin of life while I happened to be born on the right side"
Response2: things happens for a reason. Although you are not the same person as the guy in a previous life (different body and mind), you are not a completely different one from him either (the kammic stream continues on from one life to the next). Now whether you agree with this truth or not, the fact is you're currently in this terrible situation right now. You've been dealt a terribly lousy hand. But past kamma belongs to the past, what you do right now (your current kamma) is all that matters for it'll have a direct impact on your own life here and now and the many subsequent lives into the future:

"I am the owner of my actions (kamma), heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir". ~~ AN 5.57 ~~

The term 'kammayoni' (born of my actions) does not mean being born from a woman's womb. This is explained in paragraph 32 of MN 12, which states: "Sariputta, there are these four kinds of generation (yoniyo). What are the four? Egg-born generation (aṇḍajā yoni), womb-born generation (jalābujā yoni), moisture-born generation (saṃsedajā yoni) and spontaneous generation (opapātikā yoni).".

I upvoted & I agree with your line of thinking, @santa100. You and I are fortunate to be having a good birth in this life. Our misfortune as I see it is that we tend to compare Dhamma to others. But a sense of ‘hiri-ottapp’a accompanied by mindfulness is to reflect on oneself only, and never let your mind to compare it to others. Every time you do so, you get thrown away from this path. It is, because of us trusting this ‘untamed’ mind that we never even now see the danger of Samsara, and we are forever in it.

Royal families generally are descendants of warlords, just as King Ashoka was a brutal merciless warlord. Being of royal family is not actually good karma, which is why the Buddha renounced his royalty. Eventually, the whole of the Buddha's family were killed by another royal family. The child becomes a soldier due to the karma of the warlord & due to the kamma of the royal family in the wealthy country, which makes money from supplying the warlord with weapons. Dhammapada 137 states there are "innocent" "unarmed" people, such as the child & his family, who are harassed by evil people.

I have to learn more about Kamma. So I'm not in a position to answer you @Dhammadhatu. As per Anguttara Nikaya IV.77 (Acintita Sutta).. "There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?
The Buddha-range of the Buddhas … The jhana-range of a person in jhana…. The (precise working out of the) results of kamma…. Conjecture about (the origin, etc., of) the world…"

The doctrine of Anatta is so subtle that it simply cannot be understood by mere reasoning or intellectual knowledge.
Only insight meditation practice can lead one to ultimate understanding, i.e. that there exists no being, a man, a woman etc. These are concepts and have no real reference.
Instead there exists a mental and a physical stream which can be understood through the practice of insight meditation.
As Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw says: "In brief, we should understand that life is only a ceaseless causal relationship of mind and matter with consciousness" (Dependent Origination).

This a good advice for those who try to (intellectually) over analyze things. The thrust is: ‘accept only when you know in yourself this is true’. The truth of what the Supreme Buddha says is beyond doubt; It is beyond reasoning and logic [atakkavachara]. It is one step from inferential thinking. It is patisotagami or against the current of conventional thinking.

Touch, is the cause of suffering, if not-knowing is not touched, if one is not touched, how could suffering arise. Pleasure and pain are caused by touch, Nyom Saptha Visuddhi, and by no other, this, or that man.
And who could solve the problem of still being touched if not one self by listening and putting into practic the path, for the sake of destroying not-knowingness?
[Attention!: This touch of Dhamma is a gift and not meant to get touched with not-knowingness but its destruction, not for using it for commercial purposes or other wordily gains and to keep alive the flames of death and suffering. It has the only purpose to let one come in touch with Dhamma, and it is harmful if using not for the sake of liberation but for the world.]

I am going to be assuming that the "other person" referred was "you" in a previous life. I quoted the "you" as Buddhism asserts there is no self. I somewhat agree with the answer there are no past lives. This is a very hotly contested view in the larger Buddhist community. I personally, have no problem with that view. Stephen Batchelor has spilled a lot of ink in favoring the no past lives view. But let's say you want to keep past lives (probably an ego attachment) then the view of the alaya consciousness asserted by Vasubandhu, an early adherent ti the Yogacara school of Buddhism says (in my understanding) that a deep level consciousness called alaya consciousness is a continuous stream where the alaya consciousness acts as a karmic storehouse. The alaya consciousness may manifest as tendencies in this life. Who knows, maybe genetic correlates of personality. The genetic correlates of personality is hotly debated within the genetics community and it is beginning to look like the interweaving of genetics and the environment may be so complex that trying to tease out a causal model may be too deep(at this point in history). So.... how you choose to look at the nature/nurture question and the alaya consciousness may provide some insight on how you might answer your question. I think the Stephen Batchelor approach is probably more well suited for people deeply enmeshed in Western thinking(linear causality and principle based philosophy, see excellent book "The Uncertain Phoenix" by David Hall ISBN-13: 978-0823210534)


text:
Why is fasting allowed in Buddhism?
One of the answers to this question 'Is there a tradition or practice involving fasting in Buddhism or Buddhist countries?' says that fasting is followed by Tibetan Buddhists.
Why is fasting allowed since it is as extreme as gluttony and not a middle way? If I am right, following the path of the śramaṇic and yogic systems which existed at the time of Gautama Buddha, he subjected his body to extremes such as fasting and then realized that such extremes do not help in his enlightenment.
Has the Buddha prohibited fasting in any of his teachings?

The extreme in the fasting of the Buddha was its extreme fasting not that fasting at its own. Of course it is a training for the emancipation of the will from the dominance of bodily greeds. The orientation of the Bhikkhu-sangha on begging for alms instead of gardening and producing own food even implies, that even occasional "in-volutorily" fastening should be beared with patience and metta. The great disciple Mahakassapa was famous for his frequent separate living in solitude. I think it is connected with fastening, but likely not worth a big story because being a simple samanic practice

There are a lot of scientifically proven benefits of fasting for short periods of time.
Within the earliest form of Buddhism, fasting after noon is recommended way of life.
This means they would get done with the "taking care of the body" part of their life out of the way early and can devote the most time to what is truly important: spiritual cultivation.
This is a fast of 16 hours. On the other hand, very long fasts that are weeks long is not the Middle Way and Buddha recommended against that.
Eating 3 meals a day is actually falling further on the opposite spectrum: eating too much, so be wary.

Lay Buddhists observe the Full-moon day as a day of fasting when meals are not taken after mid day.  On that day they abstain from sensual pleasures and the use of high and luxurious seats and beds.  Time is spent on the practice of the Dhamma.  This has to be developed as an inner strength.
Fasting alone does not lead to purification. The bhikkhus too fast daily between midday and the following dawn.  But this is not called fasting. For some people when meditating fasting may work well, but for others it works just the opposite — the more they fast, the stronger their defilements get. It's not the case that when you starve the body you starve the defilements, because defilements don't come from the body. They come from the mind
There is the Dhammapada verse (with regards to ascetic Jambuka) in the scriptures that says that realization is far superior to mere fasting. It’s English translation is :
“Month after month a fool may eat only as much food as can be picked up on the tip of a kusa grass blade, but he is not worth a sixteenth part of those who have comprehended the Truth.”
But other ascetics at Buddha’s time did so. But it is said the prolonged, so-called meritorius fasting of other ascetics who have not destroyed the passions, is not worth the sixteenth part of a solitary day's fasting of an Ariya who has realized the four Noble Truths. There’s another Dhammapada verse (with regards to ascetic Bahu Bhandika)  that says, that external penances such as fasting cannot purify a person.

I read fasting is done when dying, since eating food can cause pain to the body & disturb the mind.

I'd like to relate to you an account I once came across of the way
  that people in the time of the Buddha prepared for death. For those
  who kept the Precepts of Virtuous Conduct fasting was not at all
  difficult because they were used to abstaining from an evening meal on
  Uposatha days. When their illness reached the point that they felt
  that they had no more than ten days left to live they would stop
  eating.... Their efforts to avoid food
  were for the purpose of having a mind completely undisturbed. When the
  body starts to run down it loses its ability to digest food and so
  anything consumed turns to poison, making the mind restless and
  confused.
So they prepared themselves for death by abstaining from food and
  taking only water or medicine. As death got closer, they would stop
  taking even water or medicine in order to focus their mindfulness and
  self-awareness, so as to die in the way of remainderless extinction.
http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Bhikkhu_Buddhadasa_Heart_Wood_from_the_Bo_Tree.htm

This sounds like (or "is also, more or less") a Jain practice, Sallekhana. And that (turning away from or abstaining from food) is done by other people (e.g. Westerners) who are dying.

In this day and age when instead of the Suttas themselves, many prefer to study other books or listen to others' teachings, which may be inconsistent with the Sutta-Vinaya, we have to be careful when accepting a claim as true. I think that this monk Buddhadasa has erroneously stated fasting was a part and parcel of the life at the time of a death. So this is my first down vote. Has he substantiated by siting the scriptures? If not the resulting damage is two-fold: The Suttas will disappear, and  People will gain wrong understanding of the Dhamma.

In the time of the Gautama Supreme Buddha, there were other teachers like Ajita Kēsakambīla, Nighanta Nāthaputta, Sanjaya bellatti Putta, Makkali Gōsala, Pakuda Kaccāyana, and so on, with various types of views/concepts. If what @ChrisW says is true, Is it wise to bring up the views of these other teachers and the customs of their followers into our discussion?


text:
Scared of growing old – living in the moment
For those who are scared of growing old and death, what would be a well thought out response be? My first thoughts on it would be, if you learn to meditate, you are going to enjoy your old age, and you will never fear death. But that is not an answer that will go down well with many people. So this is a question that cries out for a mature, seasoned response?

@Saptha I guess this may be a follow-on to this previous question of yours i.e. you want an answer that's phrased/intended/explained for someone who isn't familiar with Buddhism.

Yes, @ChrisW… and there are a few other questions in the same vein that I’ve come up with that even others could ask the group for answers. Few of those are… Inner peace in a chaotic world; How do I not let everything get to me?; Letting go of anger and pride; Dealing with aggressive & negative people; Getting over a broken heart; Is love & attachment negative in Buddhism; How to bring the practice to daily life; Loneliness & dependence; How to deal with regret?

Also if someone else could ask the following questions, I’d love to give my take on them:  How to find your spiritual path again; How does one let go of something that really hurt them in the past?; Living a normal modern life & practicing Buddhism; How should one deal with loneliness; avoiding rebirth in the hell realm; How should one deal with loneliness; Correcting bad kamma; letting go of ego; Any meditation tips for someone full of self hatred, rage or pain?;How do I not let everything get to me; The ‘other woman’ & adultery.

You can see there are innumerable question you could invent. Beware that in the past most users said that they don't want to see "seeded" questions: i.e. if you ask a question it should be because you want an answer, not because you think that other people ought to want an answer to that question. See Can we ask questions which could be meant to teach one a lesson? and the three other topics (e.g. Should Buddhism.SE be seeded with entry level questions?) which are linked from that answer.

Thank you @ChrisW for letting me know. Going forward I will abide rules.

Once two old people approached the Buddha, Upasaka Saptha Visuddhi, and told that they missed to made merits, now fearing death. The Buddha, honest forward, for the sake of benefit for many listening to it, Simply said, that they fear righteously and then utterd:

It's swept along:
life, its next-to-nothing span.
For one swept on by aging
no shelters exist.
Keeping sight of this danger in death,
do meritorious deeds
that bring bliss.
Whoever here is restrained
in body, speech, & awareness,
who makes merit while he's alive:
that will be for his bliss after death.
AN 3.51

Often it's good that the Ox sees the down so that he moves faster, if one still does not hurry, one is no match even for on ox, as Ajahn Chah once told.
If having done merits, having arrived to all blessing (Upasika Nina van Gorkom, now over 90 already if still alive, once gave Atma one of here teachings on it, to be shared as gift of Dhamma further), what has one to fear? And no need to hurry any more.
Look at all the youth, all those who are drunken in youth, health and live, yet they do not really fear, wasting this precious time that could be over even today.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gains]

A good response is one of good demonstrative right intention(or action).
Then they might inquire further  and if so, maybe tell them about some fundamental Dhamma.

Yes, @Uilium... it is only through deep and thorough experiential knowledge that a true transformation can be expected. So it is in the 'action' where the answer lies, but a great many of us try to gain this otherness intellectually. It never happens.

Similar to a modern counselor, the Gautama Supreme Buddha was 'client centered'.
Due to  psychic power, the Gautama Supreme Buddha taught people what was suitable for them.
However, because you don't have psychic power, a starting point is to ask (with equanimity) the other person what they think will happen at death.

You bring to the table a different level of thinking... @Dhammadhatu. I am glad to have you as a Noble Friend. Dhamma is ' Paccattam veditabbo viññuhiti'. ~  To be realized by the wise, each for himself.

Relief from the fear of death comes from the recognition of the true self. When one recognizes that the body is not the self, the mind is not the self, etc., and that one's true nature is timeless, the fear of physical death subsides. Death is a stripping away of all of those things that are not self anyway.

If only you and I can become Stream Entrants, then you and I are destined to be born in the Heavens in our next life. The question is whether we can become a “Sothapanna” before we pass on..... Then we are saved. The “Thayodhamma Sutta” in the Anguttara Nikaya tells us how to go about it.

One could take the opportunity to explain the Dhamma or give instructions on insight meditation practice.
The only way to really overcome this is to take the fear as the object of meditation and learn about it and understand it by discovering its characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not-self - The Three Gateways to Liberation.

Yes, @Sri Lanka... that is the Threefold Gateway. That is the road for a person attaining Sovan Phala, then he gets a glimpse of Nirvana and the defilements he has to eradicate are similar to the grains of sand on the fingertips. The number of defilements he has eradicated are similar to the grains of sand in the vast expense of the Earth. Then will there be any fear left?

In a comment (now deleted) Bharat suggested this answer:
"I would say Sattpatana Sutta gives us the means that realize the impermanent nature of all dhammas by meditating on various dhammas and observing their impermanent nature. Especially meditation on the 9 stages of corpse."

Scared of growing old is a nagging kind of a fear. It is not like the fear for one’s future, one’s financial situation, ones separation from a loved one, of having a terrible accident. These are false fears that actually never will happen. But death is inevitable and the fear of it is very real when people are really possessive of their bodies.
There’s this old gospel song, “When I'm growing old and feeble, When the storms of life are raging, Stand by me”. Also the key anthem of the Civil Rights Movement - the song "We Will Overcome" comes to mind. Unlike praying for this, or hoping for such, we can look to the scriptures for some advice as to what concrete steps that we can take to get rid of this nagging fear.  The Buddha says there are four reasons why death scares us, as us in fear. First is attachment to the body. Second is attachment to sensual pleasures. Third is the knowledge that we’ve done cruel and horrible things to other people, to other beings, and fear that after death we’re going to be punished for it. And the fourth reason is not having seen the true Dhamma, having doubts about the true Dhamma. If we are to learn to overcome these four causes of fear, death won’t bring suffering. If we are to learn to deal with our fear of death so that it won’t freak us out, we must see these four points in ourselves.
Take the first two of the four points. It’s easy for us to see that there are lots of drawbacks to sensual desire but part of the mind refuses go that way. It’s afraid, because if we don’t get immersed in sensual desires, we fear there is going to be no pleasure in life at all. Even if the first two points may sound rather difficult, could we not be true to the third point? Then at a later date we can take up the first two.
Regarding the third of the four points, Thanissaro Bhikku once wrote:
“These are the activities that we have to engage in order to prepare, in order to withstand the storm—not just before the storm hits, but all the way throughout the storm. Being generous, observing the precepts, and meditating keep us strong, keep us from getting blown away. If your survival is accomplished without generosity, without virtue, without meditation, it’s not worth much. It’s not the sort of survival that keeps you healthy and well-nourished. You look at survivors of war, who had to go and kill and steal and cheat and bomb, and then go into a lot of denial about it. Look at all the veterans of past wars, emotionally scarred for life. They did survive, but at a huge cost, the cost of the skilful roots in the mind. It’s by nourishing the skilful roots that the health of the mind survives. Even if we have to leave this particular body, at least the mind has the potential for sending out skilful roots wherever it finds itself the next time around. It’s nourished with its inner sense of well-being, truthfulness, self-honesty. You look at your behaviour and there’s nothing you have to hide from yourself.”
Regarding the fourth point, the purification by overcoming doubt (kankhāvitarana-visuddhi)
'purification by overcoming doubt', is the 4th of the 7 stages of purification (saptha visuddhi).
But this a another subject altogether.


text:
What happens when your tank is empty, and you’ve got nothing left to give?
Today I happen to read the article “Charitable giving by country: who is the most generous?”
Then this question came up. When it comes to generosity, sometimes people look at what they’ve got and they’d like to be able to give much more. They’d like to make a more impressive offering, but their means are limited. So they have to content themselves with giving limited gifts. So what do you think happens when your tank is empty, and you’ve got nothing left to give?

Upasaka Saptha Visuddhi,
interested and the Tripple Gems respecting readers,
first of all this not a good article and statistic, think that it's properly build up on registered trade in charity which is far away from what is real giving in accordiance to Dhamma. For example, everybody knows that Swiss people are the most stingy peolpe in Europe and Chinese-people are for the most the most greedy people, yet they also have ways to give, or better trade.
If you "tank" is empty, than you might propably have already reached the Eightfold Path and it's good to focus now more on simply "Sila, Samadhi, Panna". Being already there, don't forget that you might have beome a person which is already a worthy field of merits and it's good to be not greedy and let now others prepare their way to follow. Having given all outwardly one is on the stage of becoming a real homeless.
When ever taking what is not given, taking for sensual lust, again, one needs to give to keep one self-esteem on a level that allows further paths and fruits.
Its not praiseworthy to encourage taking for the sake of giving and enjoyment with it.
Yet, on the other side, if still after sensuallity, it's best to turn also generosity into virture by giving service, best for those who are worthy to receive it, since help, assistance and service, Veyyāvacca (not translated into english yet) falls already like veneration, under the Sila part of the eightfold path.
Atma can only encourage again and again, support, help and dedicate what ever possible and insired to the Savaka Sangha, don't waste your goodness into throwing gold into the mud or clear water into the salty ocean. No money and material needs required at all and when even keeping 8 precepts, all time worthy of living on gifts of the country dedicated to the worthy Ones and trainees.
But there is also another point, shown in a nice story of a giving greedy Deva, Upasaka might know and remember:

Ajaan Lee "Goodness": There's another story, about an old woman who went to a monastery one day and saw that the walking meditation paths were dirty. She swept the paths clear of the dirt and rubbish, so that the monks could walk conveniently on the paths. She did it only this once, but she did it with an attitude of love, an attitude of conviction, an attitude of respect, and a pure state of mind. The dirt and rubbish had made her feel dispirited, so she swept it all away and set out water for washing the feet; as a result, her mind felt clean and refreshed. Soon after she returned home she had a heart attack. After she died she was reborn as a deva with a large following, a palace, divine food, and all kinds of abundant wealth. Living in her palace, she began to remember her previous life and thought to herself, "If I had done lots of merit, I'd be even richer than I am now. It'd be good to go back and do good things for just a little bit longer, so that I could get even more abundant results than what I have now.... (story further, invited to follow link)

So it might be that real good monks will not give in to your desire to make more merits not really conductive for the path but simply for this or that being and becoming.
And this is the point, Upasaka thought already about this the last days intensively, why you hang around here and waste you precious Gems, yet even possible to dedicate it there where it might bear real benefical fruits. No more demanding from a certain sociaty there is no more dept to pay.
Atma has to thing on Upasaka Lals story about his teacher. Others then most western or todays "teacher", who use the Sangha and the tripple Gems right from the beginning to accumulate depts and demerits, having learned on generosity, lived on it, then even lay down the robe and make bussiness in teaching Dhamma as a "tradition destroying" Layperson enjoying sensuality and even take alms as well, he was a lay teacher and seemingly with time his Dhamma eye really opened and then there is no other way if possible, to live the holly live, ordained and also his family followed. This is a great story and shows the way it works and worthy to follow this foodsteps, since the others, having been giving goodness and step by step making a livelihood out of that, what do they do aside of distroying their old goodness and damaging the possibility of many in doing so.
Since Upasaka is actually well versed in Dhamma, but might only have lacked of straight forward advices, he might find enough food for thoughts and my person trusts that he do not only make the best choices for him and for the benefit of all his dears around him but also that he finds the way to real happiness with ease by him self.
Where else can someone arive having followed good deeds and the words by the wise, ones merits receive one here or their like old lost good friends where ever one goes. Theis neither fear nor lack of anything for such a person.
Let mt person now share the The Analogy of the Fire-Worshipper at the end, since Danā alone at least just increases the corpses, death and suffering in this world:

The acquisition of merit now aimed at prolonging existence in the future will lead to the same fate. The burdensome tasks that one undertakes to support one’s present existence are no different either. All these efforts merely serve as fuel for the fire of death. This is to impress upon you the futility of all human efforts, however meritorious, aimed at the continuation of existence. (Read more following the link and ariving in the wisdom division of the path)

Mudita.
An possible extended answer, as well as possibility to ask further and discuss, can be found here, invited, given and welcome:
[Q&A] What happens when your tank is empty, and you’ve got nothing left to give?
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gains]

It's not really about what you give, it 's about what you give up. What you let go.
We can always give love. We can always send lovingkindness and compassion.
We can give to ourselves if it is from the heart. Love yourself by loving all beings. Free yourself by loving all beings. When you love yourself in a virtuous way, you see yourself as you humbly see everyone.
Anyway, If your tank is empty for giving then remember there are 7 other parts of the eightfold path other than giving that can be practiced by monastics    and    laypeople.  -m e t t a

It's not about giving.. if you can live with good thoughts that's enough. You can give a little water to a thirsty animal, that's also a great thing. Keep your mind clean and good. Don't make your giving a competition with others. Read the following Dharma Padaya.

"Manopubbangama dhamma
  manosettha manomaya
  manasa ce pasannena
  bhasati va karoti va
  tato nam sukha manveti
  chayava anapayini."
All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind, happiness (sukha) follows him like a shadow that never leaves him.

Watch the following video for more of this answer: The poor man asking Buddha "Why am I so poor?"

When the tank attains emptiness (sunnata), the Dhamma is given because no amount of giving money can bring enlightenment. To quote what the Gautama Supreme Buddha allegedly taught:

This is the best of gifts: the gift of Dhamma...to arouse, instil and strengthen wisdom in the unwise...the bestowal of equity: if a stream-winner becomes equal to a stream-winner; a once-returner
  equal to a once-returner; a non-returner equal to a non-returner; and
  an arahant equal to an arahant. This, monks, is called the power of
  benevolence. AN 9.5

I came across this storey in the article titled "The Stairway Up":

Sometimes the little gifts bring the greatest reward.  Ajaan Fuang liked to tell
  the story of a man and his wife who had only one upper cloth between them. They each had a cloth to cover the lower parts of their bodies, but only one cloth between them to cover the upper parts of their bodies. That was back in the days in India when you didn’t go out of your house unless you had two pieces of cloth around you: one wrapped around your waist, the other over your shoulders.
  Because they only had one upper cloth between them, they’d have to leave the house at separate times. If one was going out, the other had to stay at home. They were that poor.
One night they heard that the Buddha was going to be giving a talk, so they agreed that the husband should be the one to go. The talk was basically on the rewards of generosity. The husband kept sitting there thinking, “This is why I’m so poor. I haven’t been generous. What have I got to give? Nothing. All I have is this one cloth, and if I give this I won’t be able to go anywhere. But if I don’t give this, what can I give? I won’t be able to give anything at all.” So he battled back and forth, back and forth, back and forth in his mind for hours, and the Buddha, noting what was going on, just kept on talking and talking on generosity. It was originally supposed to be a short Dhamma talk, but it went on and on and on until midnight. The king was in the audience, lots of people were in the audience, and they were wondering why the Dhamma talk was going on for so long.
Finally around midnight the man stood up shouting, “Victory! Victory!” He had overcome his stinginess. He was going to give the cloth to the Buddha, so he went down and gave the cloth. People in the audience wondered who this was, and why he was shouting “Victory.” When they learned of his poverty, they were very impressed. The king said, “Okay, I’ll give him another cloth and other things in addition”—a cloth and a horse and an elephant, all kinds of stuff. One of each.
And because the man was on a roll, a generosity roll, he gave all those things to the Buddha, too. So the king upped the ante—gave him two of each. The man gave all of that. The king kept doubling: four, eight, finally sixteen. At that point the man decided to keep eight of each of these things—eight pieces of gold, eight pieces of silver, eight pieces of cloth, eight horses, eight elephants. He gave the other eight to the Buddha and went home with his remaining eight. The lesson of the story is that a small gift by a person of little means translates into a lot more in terms of its rewards than a large gift from someone of large means, because the first gift requires more of a sacrifice.

As long as you are a normal human, you have many things to give, which money cannot buy such as simple act of kindness. For example:

Simple smile
Save a drowning ant
Spare a life of a small insect.
Live with a good heart
Follow the 5 precepts (it doesn't cost a single penny)

You do not have to be Bill Gates and start up a foundation and do mass offerings. This will bring in enormous amounts of good karma. But what we have to realize is, such good karma will take us to heaven and sometimes even blind us from the truth of life and put us back to hell.
Good karma can be run out one day and hence it is impermanent. Any deed done with the hope of good karma to take you to heaven will take you to heaven. But it will end and take you back to hell. Good Karma is like fire, you need it in life but it can also destroy you completely.
The danger is even though you have helped billions of lives during your lifetime but the last dying moment, if you happen to think of your family, or your house, or even a temple, or anything impermanent out of attachment or greed or whatever, you will be born again in a hell or as a divine being (deva). True, if you are in a heaven, it is great, but like I said it is impermanent and there is  chance you falling back to the hell.
What you need to do is to see that everything in the world is impermanent. Lord Buddha's body Itself was impermanent (He lived, and He passed away). That is the type of world we live in. Attachment to worldly things will bring you temporary happiness and will get you to suffering and it will keep going endlessly. You need to understand that and accept death is coming your way for sure. Be prepared for it. Do good, things I mentioned. Not multi million dollar offerings. Simple things.
If you understand this and follow it, and in your last dying moment you happen to think of these good things you did, and then you happen to think that even the good karma you got is impermanent like everything else in the world, then you are on your way to enlightenment.
This is what Buddhism is about, not just do good and end up in heaven and do vice-versa and end up in hell.

Giving offering to animal, human being, a person with sila, a person of four Arya (sotapanna etc), to Buddha, dedicated to whole Sangha, giving metta, having insight meditation all these are stepwise higher degree of dana, while noting matter(rupa) during insight meditation, 500 millions deeds just in a wink of time one got dana merit, while noting mind(nama) during insight meditation,  one billion deeds just in a wink of time one got dana merit, topmost dana, unsurpassable dana, dhamma dana, Buddha and arahant used to praise such dana. How can the tank ever be empty or nothing left to give?

With paranibbana, nyom, with paranibbana. And no more need to give anything , having given all what is not onesback, for an Arahat, work done nothing further for this world.