text:
A Good Career for a Buddhist?
I am a business woman and my job is stressful. It is entirely motivated by greed. I want to leave my career but I have a dream to help poor people in my country and also to make my parents proud of me.
Could anyone please tell me what kind of career is compatible with Buddhism?

That does not depend on job much, more on your motivation. See what you can do with pure heart. If you can't see it, practice insight meditation, and you will. I am researcher myself, and see no problem in compatibility.

Most business is stressful and it's not entirely motivated by greed. You want to make your parents proud and you want to help poor people, that is not as bad as you think. All occupations have upsides and downsides.
The less harmful your job the better. But, if you are not doing business in weapon, human being, meat i.e. slaughter animal in order to sell its meat, intoxicants and poison, your job is compatible with Buddhism. If your job is not breaking any of the five precepts, your job is compatible with Buddhism. Try your best.

In my opinion and experience, a job of a manager or executive/director is pretty compatible with Buddhism. If you apply all teachings of Buddha to managing people, you can be both very successful and help people under you grow.

Potentially, any job that doesn't violate the precepts is Right Livelihood.
The actuality of it though is that if you want to practice vipassana, the heart of the Buddhist practices, it is better to do a job that does not have consideration of profit/loss and does not have too much thinking/abstraction involved (slow manual labor is fine for developing vipassana and samatha through daily life).
Your question though I believe is aimed more towards not vipassana cultivation, nor the "potential" of any job but ... what job is most stress-free?
And for that, the answer is "it depends."
It depends on the person and their character, inclinations, and tendencies.
I would look at what you like to do in your free time and consider what jobs pay you to do that?
For some people, due to their natural inclinations and habits, they may enjoy a jack-of-all-trades job, and would be able to squeeze in some meditaiton practice along with it.
For others, that are not so chronically intellectual, they may look for a job within a wide range of choices including: grocery bagging, greeting, sign-waving, farming, etc.
It really depends on the person and there is no high or low.
All that matters is that you enjoy life without harm and gain some lasting benefit from it, especially in the form of mindfulness practice.

You can pick anything other than what is forbidden under Samma Ajiva of the Noble Eightfold Path.
Here are few options:

Teacher/Principal
Doctor/Nurse
Farmer
Engineer(Civil/Mechanical/Software etc.)
Architect
Librarian
Accountant
Seemstress
Baker
Babysitter

Within the Noble Eightfold Path is a thorough description of what qualifies as an acceptable career for a Buddhist. Also in this teaching are some examples of such a career. See right livelihood for a basic idea; you can use this as a framework for judging potential career choices in the future!

Sherly,
giving up ones carrier (that what is carry one on in the wheel of love and suffering) is already a beginn for a good "Buddhist" carrier and to start this Dhamma-carrier with Generosity and giving ones wealth is the normal right fist step, but be careful to do not use Bussiness with Generosity as a means for exact the same way as before just by changing the company to this modern one which has stolen the original trademarks of the Buddha.
At least, why would you like to help the poor if not out of love again?
If willing to wander on in the world pleasant, chose a rightious lifelihood and don't be a trader in generosity and Dhamma

One should not make an effort everywhere,
should not be another's hireling,
should not live dependent on another,
should not go about
as a trader in the Dhamma.
Seclusion

maintain a right livelihood, do as much as possible Dana, observe Silas, best 8 and do Bhavana.
--> "Purification through Wandering-on"
As for the real and final carrier, that excels all others, here introduced in a talk between a King, the Buddha about a carrier of even a tidays slave:

"Suppose there were a man of yours: your slave, your workman, rising in the morning before you, going to bed in the evening only after you, doing whatever you order, always acting to please you, speaking politely to you, always watching for the look on your face. The thought would occur to him: 'Isn't it amazing? Isn't it astounding? — the destination, the results, of meritorious deeds. For this King Ajatasattu is a human being, and I, too, am a human being, yet King Ajatasattu enjoys himself supplied and replete with the five strings of sensuality — like a deva, as it were — while I am his slave, his workman... always watching for the look on his face. I, too, should do meritorious deeds. What if I were to shave off my hair and beard, put on the ochre robes, and go forth from the household life into homelessness?'
"So after some time he shaves off his hair and beard, puts on the ochre robes, and goes forth from the household life into homelessness. Having thus gone forth he lives restrained in body, speech, and mind, content with the simplest food and shelter, delighting in solitude. Then suppose one of your men were to inform you: 'You should know, your majesty, that that man of yours — your slave, your workman... always watching for the look on your face... has gone forth from the household life into homelessness... content with the simplest food and shelter, delighting in solitude.' Would you, thus informed, say, 'Bring that man back to me. Make him again be my slave, my workman... always watching for the look on my face!'?"
"Not at all, lord. Rather, I am the one who should bow down to him, rise up out of respect for him, invite him to a seat, invite him to accept gifts of robes, almsfood, lodgings, and medicinal requisites for the sick. And I would provide him with righteous safety, defense, and protection."
"So what do you think, great king. With that being the case, is there a visible fruit of the contemplative life, or is there not?"
"Yes, lord. With that being the case, there certainly is a visible fruit of the contemplative life."
"This, great king, is the first fruit of the contemplative life, visible in the here and now, that I point out to you."
Samaññaphala Sutta: The Fruits of the Contemplative Life

Anumodana!
(Note: This answer is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains)


text:
Explaining non-attachment to the very attached
I've been told by someone close to me that my meditation and desire to let go are very threatening to her. She sees sense desires, ego and attachments as very natural and wholesome, and my way of life as a threat or a questionable choice at the very least. She's aware of Buddhism and renunciate ideals, but thinks the Buddha was an idiot for leaving his family and palace to chase nirvana.
This was the essence of an hour long conversation, so there's lots I am leaving out. Seeing that I was very cheerful after an hour long harangue only infuriated her some more.
Some of the more colorful comments here:

You're like the cartoonist who draws cartoons of Mohammed and incites
  terrorists. By meditating all the time you are trying to be perfect,
  you're actually making fun of us who don't meditate and like our egos.
  I get angry when I see you meditate.
How can you smile? Stop treating me like a child, you don't know
  better than me. I know what I am saying, the world thinks like me, not
  like you.

I'd like to put it out there for general comment, but my specific question is, what to do when Dharma is (un)intentionally violent like this?
How can I help or at least not hurt these people in my life?
(I was reminded to ask this when I came across: Right speech in social situations)
p.s. Being a vegetarian I'm used to such comments from people who think I am trying to be better than them. It became less of a problem over time, but it's of a much larger magnitude w.r.t Dharma.

I would refer you to a post made on here yesterday http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/10427/right-speech-in-social-situations/10431#10431   ;)

@Ryan Haha, I know, I know, this is what I was thinking of when I wrote it, and why I didn't offer the usual practical ways out, because I knew others could offer that - but still it's a discussion worth having. :-)

well Buddho, aside from employing skillful means, all else I can advise is: ordain :D

I was taken aback by "the world thinks like me, not like you" ... TRUE! Most people in my life & milieu are so, comfortable with life, not wanting anything different. They aren't necessarily "bad" people ... simply ignorant. That characteristic requires careful handling. As is said in the South ... "Bless their heart".

@PaPa As J Krishnamurti says, it's not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

When people are violent like that how can one reason with them? From my experience: One cannot. Logical fallacies, ad hominem, straw man, and circular in comment you excerpted. Retract yourself and ask them if they are willing to reason carefully rather than make incendiary comparisons.. You will see that there are too many issues that must be resolved (usually anger issues) before they can even still their mind enough to do some reasoning and overcome self-ignorance..

I suggest removing the Vegetarianism Tag (and maybe the p.s.) as not relevant, and adding the Relationship Tag as being the point of the Question. You might drop Samara Tag also, as it seems not about that per se. But add a Tag about Compassion or something, as that is likely to be the Answer. I added a definition to the Attachment Tag (which is already in this Question), so check that after it has been approved... If people react to You, part of it is very likely to be about You. Examine how you are coming across.

@Ryan: "He bravely turned his tail and fled." (from Monty Python and the Holy Grail)

Sounds like your realization of Emptiness is not complete. Evidently, there are still some leftover attachments in you, specifically attachment to Dharma. Have you read Choguyam Trungpa's work? "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism" comes to mind.
Have you worked with live Zen teachers or with higher levels of Tantra? Integrating Samsara and Nirvana is not a joke, and it is exactly simple but insightful women like this that were almost designed to call our bullshit.

How true you are, I was thinking the same. I have for the last few months been feeling that it's time Moses came down from the mountain. This Moses likes it too much atop the mountain with the flaming bush.

Something insightful that she said was "you don't need to become perfect, you are already perfect" :-) It was like watching a Zen master speak.

Sometimes Primordial Buddha takes unexpected forms ;)

I found this talk by Adyashanti in my playlist: Beyond Where All Paths End - item 534 - I often have the right teaching leap out at me from the universe, this was one of those times. I had a suspicion I was done searching and had to choose to integrate with samsara, but was a bit obsessed with quelling vasanas and attaining perfection. This argument, this thread, this talk all were one nice teaching.

I went through this and I will probably go through it again ^^ at one time I found Osho's "Nirvana, the final nightmare" book and strong alcohol to be of particular assistance ^^

I've been told by someone close to me that my meditation and desire to let go are very threatening to her. She sees sense desires, ego and attachments as very natural and wholesome, and my way of life as a threat or a questionable choice at the very least.

If you mind your own business, and you don't preach/push other people into your way of thinking, it's entirely her decision to feel threatened. it is important that feeling and being are different things.
If, on the contrary, you are trying to sway her towards your beliefs, then she might be right.

[...] thinks the Buddha was an idiot for leaving his family and palace to chase nirvana [...]

It is entirely up to her to think about whatever she wants in whatever way she wants. If you don't like that, then you are attached to the idea/facts she's against.

Seeing that I was very cheerful after an hour long harangue only infuriated her some more.

It is completely normal. Most people are infuriated when their aggressive response goes nowhere and they do not get the reaction they expected.
They way you behave is also important. If you are simply peaceful and non-imposing, it is good. If you even seem to be patronizing, you should work on that. Having different beliefs does not make you superior (and neither it makes her so).

By meditating all the time you are trying to be perfect, you're actually making fun of us who don't meditate and like our egos. I get angry when I see you meditate.

This is twofold. You should take time to explain her that what you are doing is your choice. You are not doing it be better than others - but because you feel that it is better for you. To give a vivid comparison: if I say that try to learn to drink ten pints of beer at one sitting because I like it drunk, it is one thing; if I say I do that to be better than others at drinking and will consider them inferior, it will be outright rude.
Second part is that she is angry when she sees you meditate. It is, again, entirely her decision to become angry.

How can you smile? Stop treating me like a child.

This strongly hints that your communication leads her to think that you are patronizing. It takes two to cuddle, so you have to take steps to prevent that and communicate better.

what to do when Dharma is (un)intentionally violent like this?

It is not violent by itself. If you communicate with people well, they will usually leave you to your own devices, whatever they may be. Threat comes from the expansion on the views when you are trying to spread them. Be gentle: if a person doesn't want to know the details, don't push them.

How can I help or at least not hurt these people in my life?

Frankly, people do not need your help. If you think that way, then it is partially a source of the trouble. You are doing things differently to them. If you explain that plainly, without arguing that you are doing things better, it will be the first step towards normal coexistence.

The best option would be to keep following the noble eightfold path and observe the different path factors and the 5 precepts. This way you have your side of the coin clean and you are not pushing or preaching to her in any way.
If she get's angry when seeing you meditate then that is her own doing. The untrained mind does not see reality for what it is. Instead it extrapolates and identifies with objects. In her experience she thinks you are doing something to her where in reality she is creating her own suffering. But how to explain that?
It can be very difficult to explain or talk about the Dhamma to non-buddhists and especially non-meditators. The reason for this is the practical nature of buddhism and the emphasis on experiental knowledge instead of intellectual knowledge.
I often tried this and have begun using the "fruit-analogy". Imagine one has brought you a fruit from a country far away. You have never tasted the fruit and are curious about it's flavour. The bringer of the fruit tries to explain the flavour of the fruit to you. He uses all kinds of adjectives and descriptions but you can never fully understand the flavour of the fruit before taking a bite and tasting it for yourself.
So it is with some buddhist doctrines. They are so profound that they cannot be fully grasped by the intellect.
This analogy usually puts people to sleep, i.e. ends the discussion.
When that is said then some people will just never understand the choices and ways of life that other people practice. In these cases one must ask oneself - how much time and energy should I spend on explaining it then?

How can I help or at least not hurt these people in my life?

By keep practicing the noble eightfold path. Keep observing the precepts. Keep meditating and thereby puryfing yourself from the defilements. When doing that only pure intentions will come from you. When you are following the noble eightfold path your intentions will be; intentions of renunciation, good will and harmlessness.
When not having any unwholesome intentions then you are not hurting anyone. If anyone is getting hurt they are hurting themselves. In that case you can offer your advice and help. A good explanation could be to explain how human beings superimpose qualities onto objects, e.g. one experiences grey and rainy weather and says it's "sad". The weather is not sad. The weather is neutral and objective. It is human beings themselves who put the quality of sadness onto the weather thereby making themselves sad.
The fruit- and weather-analogies are good ones to use because they are simple. They are non-preaching and they are understandable also for non-meditators.

Well said!  ... if I may add wrt "good will and harmlessness" - Doing "no harm" can include being gentle with another's psychological comfort zone ... while not compromising one's practice.

While I agree with most of the answer, lines like "The untrained mind does not see reality for what it is" will be the source of frustration. Thinking or saying like that suggests that your view is superior to the others', and may make them angry. It would be much better, IMO, to say something along the lines of "Minds trained differently perceive things differently".

"How can you smile?" -- I'm smiling simply because I'm happy!
Perhaps this is a case where it's best to simply say, "This works for me, and is important to me, and I mean no harm to you by my practice," and walk away. I don't know if "walk away" is an option in this relationship, but if this person is having this hostile a reaction to your practice, then I don't know how you could resolve it in a way that will help the person. I think the best you may be able to do it maintain your practice, remain an example of the peace and happiness that it can bring (smile!), and let the person tread their path.

I like this saying of yours: "This works for me, and is important to me, and I mean no harm to you by my practice".

Thanks for your answer. Walking away is the nuclear option I'd prefer not to use unless absolutely necessary, I think this person needs a lot of compassionate people in her life.

"How can I help or at least not hurt these people in my life?"

"Don't ask me that"

... said the Buddha to people asking him questions that would torn them. Following his example, we should not be careless towards others -- "right speech bullet lists" is just not enough.
For example, it's not wise to alienate someone who regard us as dear by selectively implying that the feeling might not be reciprocate (say, when talking about "non-attachment"). It's not fair to expect them to not be hurt, specially when we are the ones who study so intensely the causes of suffering (e.g. "being apart from what is desirable"). And specially when we actively participated in creating that very "attachment" in the other.
Another example would be when one uses "non-attachment" as an excuse for "non-commitment", like a green card to be forever unreliable. The list of misuses and misunderstandings goes on. But the point, I think, of the quote above is we should ponder carefully about the benefit (or injuries)  our actions and words bring to others. And our responsibility in these acts.

"If one regards himself superior or equal or inferior by reason of the body that is impermanent, painful and subject to change, what else is it than not seeing reality? Or if one regards himself superior or equal or inferior by reason of feelings, perceptions, volitions or consciousness, what else is it than not seeing reality? If one does not regard himself superior or equal or inferior by reason of the body, the feelings, perceptions, volitions or consciousness what else is it than seeing reality?"
— SN 22.49

From the above, we should not regard, imply or entertain such comparisons. Some of us might regard the dhamma as perfect, and a path to perfection. But what is the use of such expressions when it brings people to dwell in these very same comparisons? Fundamentally, the Buddha dhamma is about "relieving suffering". Isn't it enough when approaching what we are doing when following the dhamma? Is there any chance for one to be at blame for standing by this?

I think - [...] uses "non-attachment" as an excuse for "non-commitment" is very true +1

"but my specific question is, what to do when Dharma is (un)intentionally violent like this?"
Practice the Five Faculties during and outside of meditation.
The Five Faculties are Mindfulness, Concentration, Faith, Energy, and Understanding.
These are in no particular order and are like the wheels on a cart: if any of them are weak, idiotic extremes occur: mass genocide, stagnancy, zealotry, etc.
To be honest your question shows you need to actually study Dharma, at least read a few Buddhist works, preferably one old text and another more modern like "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" which is free online.
I would suggest having faith that Buddhism works for many of us and studying it further. It is not easy to get everything in life figured out but Buddhism makes it possible. Also the Buddha was not an "idiot" for his decision. At the very least, Gautama Buddha was a brave man and an opportunist with a good eye for what will eventually happen (death for all) and what excellent thing he can search for (Awakening, liberation from death) for the most benefit of all for all time.
He is the great hawk, your girl friend is the blind bat.
Life is never perfect and sometimes extremely difficult sacrifices must be made  for the highest good.

-1 Sorry but I think it's safe to assume that the OP has studied some Dhamma. This answer seems to say little more than "read more, have faith, and understand", which isn't a specific answer to the question.

First two paragraphd

Have you had any experience like the one described in the OP? If so can you describe lessons learned from that?

Yes I have. The five faculties can be applied in analyzing ones own ideologies and making sure the cart is going the right way. When one can do this for oneself, one can easily do this for other people, listening to them and seeing what they are lacking and suggesting they develop the relevant faculty specifically "wisdom" faculty which is akin to studying in whatever particular religion, including esoteric texts. In islams extremist case this would mean studying the Sufi texts which explain and expound the Koran..

For some years one of my spiritual practices is to get close to extremely difficult people in my life that normally common sense & psychiatry would say should be avoided. I don't seek them out, but I don't avoid them if they enter my life. This is one such person who has in the past threatened self harm and suicide to get her way. I see it as arising from a deep fear and insecurity, because the genuine heart behind these actions is very apparent to me. Yet, I've had to take harsh actions to protect myself from too much damage in the past. I'm always looking for better ways to handle myself.

(contd.) I respect this person a lot, she's taught me a lot of things, and I can see how if I were more skilled I'd handle this relationship with less conflict. Sometimes it feels like I'm learning to ride a bicycle in communicating with her, I have frequent falls, but it's teaching us both a lot - though if she's in a bad mood she'd disagree that I've taught her much :-) I've read MTCTB, what ancient text did you have in mind?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can anything in Buddhist theory explain phenomena like Buck Fever?
A surprising number of people whom I know, who are generally kind and compassionate, are also avid hunters or at least enthusiastically support hunting by others. They feel hunting is a healthy activity and a good way to provide food. They site biblical references to man having dominion over animals. They feel hunting is part of a tradition that should be upheld. There are also a couple who feel it's a necessary skill to learn for the inevitable doomsday; but that's a whole other thing. ;-)
So these are people who feel good about hunting. At least in theory. But there is a phenomena called Buck Fever which is described as intense nervousness by inexperienced (and sometimes very experienced) hunters. There is a video circulating around the internet now showing a little girl experiencing this "buck fever" and while it's being shared by hunting enthusiasts who think it's great, I couldn't help but feeling disturbed watching it. To me it looks like horror in the guise of exhilaration.
In Buddhism, we understand that any intentional killing will have consequences sooner or later and this is not something to be taken lightly. I wonder if this intense mind and body reaction to killing (or the intention to kill) can be explained by anything in the Abhidhamma or Buddhist theory in general. It's really intellectual curiosity about whether the mind can cause the body to malfunction when the mind perceives something on a deeper level than a person's logical reasoning. Or perhaps it's something else entirely. But I'm interested if Buddhism has anything to teach us about this. Thank you.

Thanks for the video. Though I've had an interest in guns since I was a kid, I only shot air rifles. When I finally got to fire real weapons at a shooting range I expected to be thrilled but instead was horrified by the brutality of guns. I shot a solid 600 pound steel block with a military rifle and watched it get thrown back. I instantly imagined a human body there, I could see the damage possible, and my hands started to shake a bit, and I've never fired a gun since.

I grew up in just such an environment. I completely relate (no need to view the video). The cultural practices youngsters can be encouraged to adopt can be disturbing. One would hope that there can be a subconscious (store consciousness?) reaction to this experience ... "whether the mind can cause the body to malfunction when the mind perceives something on a deeper level" ... some innate human inclination toward revulsion with violence against "creatures". I would eagerly listen to a Dhamma talk on this consideration. _/|_  Thx for this post

@Buddho - And I totally agree.  If more people handled a weapon, they're would be a lot less gun violence in the world.

I have never heard of this (not my background; was a bit disturbed with the video). This seems surprisingly detached from conscious thinking. Looking around, it seems it is not clear if these symptoms emerge from some subconscious/primitive (a) revulsion towards harming; (b) excitement/thrill; (c) fear of death during hunt; (d) other?

@nemo, this question isn't about food politics. I'm sorry if it came across that way. My question is about an apparently observable mind/body reaction to an experience of killing. Because in Buddhism we study the mind, I am curious as to whether this phenomena is explained in the teachings.

@Robin111 - it's just that your first paragraph came off a little "anti-hunting" and seemed to suggest that it's somehow a contradiction that someone could be otherwise compassionate yet still support hunting.  The bit about Biblical verses also doesn't really have anything to do with your question.  If I could make I suggestion - I think I would strike everything up to "There is a phenomena called 'Buck Fever'".  I think that would keep this question from introducing too much controversy.

To all, Very Goods Question and Points. Growing up in western culture, middle class, etc., one's lifestyle and politics and materialism are complicated and convoluted ... perhaps the perceived simplicity of the ordained life ca be a major appeal.

This is a great question, the video really makes you wonder. It appears as though there is definitely some kind of very abnormal reaction going on

Angulimala (finger garland) Bandit was probably the most ruthless serial killer during Buddha's time.  I read somewhere but didnt do much research on it that in his previous life he offered food to previous buddha or arahat who was tired and weak from hunger, after that in every life, Angulimala had extraordinary strength than everyone around him.  in one of his lives he was a wild buffalo attacking the domesticated buffaloes.  The villagers got upset and set up a lynching mob to hunt him down.  He was eventually captured, tortured, and killed.  He wanted to take revenge on those who killed him.  Among the villagers, there was a girl who watched the lynching with teary eyes.   She became his mother in his last life (which woulda been his last victim if Buddha didnt intervene) and the villagers became his victims.  However, i dont think he took pleasure in killing but rather was misguided.     Kalayanamitra is certainly a blessing.

Not sure of any specific theory, but just to throw in a bit of general philosophy/intellectual thought: Maybe because this girl is so young, her conscious mind is not yet developed enough to fully realize the consequences (kammic or otherwise) of the act of killing the deer. Or perhaps, since this is a case of "buck fever" it could apply to any who have not yet killed a sentient being of considerably higher level than say, a bug. For such people, the subconscious mind may be so strongly repulsed by the tremendous negative kamma of such an act, something almost foreign to it and yet extremely large and offensive, it is revolting. In the case of the girl, because she is so young, it may be the case that her body and mind are pure/sensitive/untainted as compared to older individuals who have spent more time in the world or who have become desensitized to killing. As a result, the incredible negative kammic force in her subconscious may be causing a physical reaction.

I may be wrong but looking at the video, the little girl's face seems to me smiley (happy) while her hands (limbs) are shaking. She seemed to me happy that she's having a novel experience. That doesn't look like horror to me: it looks like, I don't know, an adrenaline rush or something like that. Her voice sounds whispery, I suspect that's because her heart is pounding (high breathing and heart rate).
I thought she seemed to be enjoying or at least intrigued by the experience: it's as if her dad had given her amphetamines.

Amphetamines are synthetic chemicals based upon a structure closely resembling that of adrenaline and norepiniphrine. These chemicals, therefore, can induce similar biological responses, such as acting as a stimulant, and creating a greater alertness and a feeling of prowess

I think that some of the comments under the "field and stream" article that you posted might support this diagnosis:

And an elevated heart rate is not the kiss of un-death ... for shots taken at acceptable ranges.

to be honest buck fever is why i go if i didnt get it i wouldnt hunt i get it even when im not gonna shoot it took me 21 years to be able to calm down enough to kill a deer with a bow. If you dont get excited why would you hunt?

I did read and interesting article (possibly here) that heart rates of hunters can more than double in just a couple of seconds. There are very few things that can cause a jump like that, maybe jumping out of an airplane because the engine just exploded, doing the running of the bulls blindfolded, and certain lapdances.

If you don't get a little adrenaline spike, why do it?

Not a very Buddhist answer.
Anyway I suppose that's the cause: it may be comparable in its (physiological and possibly/consequently attachment-inducing or habit-forming) effect to recreational drug use.
Skill (in hunting) may require a person to avoid or overcome (or deny or control or dissipate) that effect (because it can be debilitating): I'd guess the physiological reaction/effect is more evolutionarily helpful for gross motor activities (running and fighting) than for fine motor activities (aiming and shooting).
Wisdom is something else, presumably, i.e. seeing it for what it is.

This makes some sense and I surely may have misread what is happening with this phenomena. It may be more of a rapture or burst of euphoria or something. Thanks for pointing this out Chris.

Well, not quite euphoria, i.e. "feeling good or well": it's clearly a sickness in some sense, a fever. Even so she might (and others are) willing to repeat the experience, perhaps in a "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" kind of hope.

Or an addiction to the adrenaline rush maybe. But you're right, people do seem to like this feeling whatever it is.

i think ""vāsanā"  might fit the situation best.
from wiki "vāsanā (Skt.). Habitual tendencies or dispositions, a term, often used synonymously with bīja (‘seed’). It is found in Pāli and early Sanskrit sources but comes to prominence with the Yogācāra, for whom it denotes the latent energy resulting from actions which are thought to become ‘imprinted’ in the subject's storehouse-consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna). The accumulation of these habitual tendencies is believed to predispose one to particular patterns of behaviour in the future.
Someone saw ven Sariputra jumped over the edge of a rice field and compliant to Buddha that the behavior was not worthy of a Bhikkhu.  Buddha explained that it was Ven Sariputra's Vasana from previos lives.  He was born as amonkey many life times, the vasana imprinted on him.  Only Bhudda could have his vasana wiped cleaned.  Maybe it was that little girl's vasana?

Hi dean! Do you remember where did you read that story involving sariputra?

Sure.  I'll look.  It might have been from a hard copy.  Give me some time.

thiago, i searched sutta and didnt find anything.  i suspect that my memories were from books i read composed much much later , possibly in south east asia .  I will delete my answer in a few .

No worries, i'm just very curious about bibliographical bits. thank you for looking up!

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


text:
How not to kill the mouse in my house?
I live with my mother in her house. There have been a mouse for a few months, living in the ceiling of my bedroom, and since a few weeks, it has been a nuisance for it scratches something, day and night, to the point of preventing me to sleep, even when wearing ear plugs.
The mouse does not seem to understand that it is not alone in the house and that it causes distress. I remember that There were mice long before and the rat poison was successful, until another mouse set in. They always find their way in, and always end up breeding and making a noisy mess.
I cannot access the ''thermal material''  which is between the ceiling of my bedroom and the  attic, because the attic has been covered up by some thermal blanket to better protect the house  thermally.
I do not wish to kill the mouse with some  rat poison per se. but I  also fear that the mouse could chew some wires, electrical and telephonic, which pass above the ceiling and causing damage to the house. I also fear that the mouse breeds leading to even more mice, especially if I end up killing them.
There are cats in the neighbourhood, and it is not clear to whom they belong, but they clearly did not catch the mouse thus far. I cannot get a cat myself, since there is no place and no means to sustain having a cat. I do not know the path to the garden that the mouse takes to leave the house, because there are plants and small trees preventing me to watch the ground and weed.
Is there another solution than killing it in disposing some rat poison, in order to stop the noises and be assured that the house will not be damaged ?

I never tried this, but it looks plausible: http://members.aceweb.com/patrussell/mousetrap/Mousetrap.htm

Various nonlethal deterrents: https://www.care2.com/greenliving/5-humane-ways-to-get-rid-of-mice.html

a mouse trap with a plastic bottle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDgAuVK1Br0

"The mouse does not seem to understand that it is not alone in the house and that it causes distress." You could try to tell them about
Buddhism

Three or four drops of peppermint oil on a few scattered cotton balls are effective deterrents, IF you can place the balls where you want to keep mouse-free. Rodents avoid strong, spicy odors.

@GuillaumeCombot whispering mantras to animals is said to have karmic benefit.

@Alan did you free the mouse? Updates?

Hi Alan and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have put together a Guide and a Resource section for new users that you might find useful.

"Without wisdom, effort, restraint of the senses, without giving up everything, I see no well-being for beings."
-- The Buddha (SN 2.17)

You can't have your cake and eat it too, unfortunately. The truth is the truth whether it is convenient or not. In this case, there are some fairly important truths that you have to consider when trying to decide what to do.
First is the truth that being a nuisance is a far lesser evil than murder in cold-blood... the mouse has the moral higher ground over the mouse-trapper.
Second is the truth that you don't want to be murdered yourself; knowing this, how can you contemplate it for a fellow being?

All tremble at violence; life is dear to all.
  Putting oneself in the place of another,
  one should not kill nor cause another to kill.
-- The Buddha (Dhp. 130)

Third is the truth that killing makes you a killer; it changes the direction of your life in a significant way that will have potentially far-reaching consequences, far beyond feeling a little guilty for a little while. There are karmically significant mind-states involved in killing that may not be evident to you until you actually kill. Once you've begun to kill, you start to desensitize yourself to killing; it gets easier and easier, and your mind becomes further and further sullied.
Fourth is the truth that the reason you can't sleep has little to do with the mouse and much to do with your own state of mind. In fact, lack of sleep itself isn't really the problem either; if your mind is clear, you can stay awake all night and not suffer harmful consequences.
My advice is first, to come to terms with your mind's reaction to noise that keeps you from finding peace; reminding yourself "hearing, hearing" is a good way to keep yourself objective and alert.

“In that case, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus:
  In what is seen there will be only what is seen,
  in what is heard there will be only what is heard,
  in what is sensed there will be only what is sensed,
  in what is cognized there will be only what is cognized.
  In this way, Bāhiya, you should train yourself.
And since for you, Bāhiya, in what is seen there will be only what is seen,
  in what is heard there will be only what is heard,
  in what is sensed there will be only what is sensed,
  in what is cognized there will be only what is cognized,
  therefore, Bāhiya, you will not come to be because that;
  and since, Bāhiya, you will not come to be because that, therefore, Bāhiya, you will not be in regards to that;
  and since, Bāhiya, you will not be in regards to that, therefore, Bāhiya, you
  will not be here or hereafter or in between the two - just this is the end of suffering.”
-- The Buddha (Ud. 10)

Second, consider whether it is your duty as a householder to take care of the mouse, or whether you can just as well leave it be. Unless it is destroying insulation or wiring, I don't think there is a compelling reason to remove a mouse; a rat, maybe... Either way, there are many ways of relocating a mouse humanly.
In regards to cats, if you in any way encourage a cat to catch and kill a mouse, well, it's not categorically different from killing it yourself...

"... if your mind is clear, you can stay awake all night and not suffer harmful consequences." Perhaps at a karmic level, but methinks there are a lot of health professionals who would disagree with this, especially if someone does so repeatedly.

@GreenMatt For sure, but I assume you'd be hard pressed to find a health professional who has studied the effects of sleep abstinence on enlightened beings.

Good point, but few of us are enlightened; at least it seems that way to me.

@GreenMatt Yes, sorry, I know it was unclear, but I just meant it as an example to point out that it is not absolutely a problem. And it is not an either or situation, either. The more clear one's mind is, the less one will have to worry about sleep.

In the past, I had some success with a no kill mouse trap like this one. It allows you to catch the mouse and release it in an appropriate area outside.
Now we share our home with 2 dogs and a cat. Mice don't seem to want to be here.

Mice are intensely territorial, it's hard to get them to walk away from their turf. Luckily they are also short lived. We often have little mice come in for a bite, and I try to block their entrances though not always successfully.
Once I had a Bandicoot the size of a small cat  occupy the house. We live in a large old house with a garden that houses them, but they rarely come indoors. Since this guy had marked his territory in the stairwell and other places within the house with urine and faeces I knew there was no getting him out. He was too smart for traps, even if I could find a trap large enough for him. Besides if released within a few kilometres they have excellent sense of direction and will return.
Being longer lived than mice he wasn't going to die one day soon, and he was chewing wires, hissing & threatening when encountered and likely carrying disease.

Large, aggressive bandicoot rats erect their guard hairs on their backs and emit grunts when disturbed. If caged with other bandicoots, it is likely to fight to death within a few hours. Usually, they occupy the outskirts of human dwellings such as compounds and gardens and are commonly found near garbage bins. Their burrowing habits cause great damage to grounds and flooring, as they can also tunnel through brick and masonry. Their characteristic large burrows give away their presence. They are not fastidious eaters, feeding on household refuse, grain, and vegetables, and are very serious pests in poultry farms. They are also a carrier for many diseases

I agonised with the decision to kill him for a little while and decided, we could either abandon the house to this guy and his friends, or he should be removed before he brought in more friends from outside.
My father was going to poison it, but I beat him to it, wanting to take on the karma. I felt deep sorrow the next day handling the carcass, I came down with intense racking stomach pains the same night for no specific reason for several hours, and instinctively felt I was the bandicoot eating the poison. I observed this experience mindfully and with equanimity as my karma working itself out. I sent a lot of metta to the bandicoot.
There's no correct answer. My actions were the best I could manage with the wisdom and compassion I had at hand, I still don't see a more acceptable course of action, but perhaps tomorrow I will be wiser and know better. In any case, it was a killing done mindfully and deliberately, and I live with the consequence.

Good but sad story ... life in samsara is REAL. Years ago, before my exposure to Buddhist philosophy, i responded to rats in the attic by setting out poison. A rat, having grown too large to exit the attic, died in the attic. The stench permeated through the ceiling and into the rooms below! I had to find the dead rat and dispose of it. Lesson Learned: Don't cause rodents to die in the attic of one's home.

Catch and release!
You can make a simple trap with a paper towel roll, some leftover food, and a bucket.
There are lots of clever, simple, humane traps.  In general you should just catch it and release it far away.

Just make sure to walk it far enough from your home. A nice forest or field.

What if you're not MacGyver?

@coburne then get a mouse hotel http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KHFJ48C?psc=1

I have used metal two-door live catch traps like the Havahart. Works best to only open one door. Peanut butter works best as bait: smells and is sticky. We would get them in the ceiling of the meditation room where I used to live. I eventually found a hole and closed it. We had snakes in the ceiling too, going after the mice. You haven't really meditated until you sit with a snake sliding over the ceiling above you and suddenly catching a mouse : ) You haven't mourned until you realize that you didn't check the trap yesterday and now the mouse is dead, or dying. Check often.

Yes, humane traps are only humane if you check them without fail. Otherwise the mouse will die with more suffering than a regular trap. Otherwise, they work very well.

You might want to check out those Ultrasonic/Electromagnetic Pest Repellents available at Lowe's or Home Depot:
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Aspectek-Home-Sentinel-5-in-1-Indoor-Ultrasonic-and-Electromagnetic-Pest-Repellent-HR211/205038495

I don't  believe they work; do you?

Make sure you place the device close to the suspected area. Use an extension power cord if necessary. I try this trick and it works pretty good for me. Other people say it doesn't work for them so I guess you just give it a try along with other methods in the other posts. Experiment, experiment,...

I also had this problem. The way I catched the mouse was using Humane Mouse Traps, which only catch mice but do not kill them. Take a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwUm6hDFiy8 for instance.
PS.: This made me laugh.

"The mouse does not seem to understand that it is not alone in the house and that it causes distress."

Hi Kagerf and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have Guide and a Resource section for new users that you might find useful.

If you want to stop all these foolish mousy pranks.
Do what we did and get yourself a manx.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manx_cat
or just get a Havahart trap
http://www.amazon.com/Havahart-1020-Animal-Two-Door-Mouse/dp/B0000DINGG

I am constantly at the mercy of field mice. They invade my cave and eat my potatoes and bread. Normally I can catch them by the tail and take them out to the trash can where the city hauls them off to the public dump where they live in peace.
But, that said, I have one mouse I cant catch. One mouse who has eluded my grasp for 2 seasons. He evades all my little puzzles and traps designed to snag him. I have even had him in my hands twice and he got away. I have named him Prof. Moriarty.
We coexist. I leave him some crumbs and he doesnt disturb me as much. namaste.

There are various types of mouse traps that can capture a mouse alive without killing it. The Buddhist way is to capture and release it safely somewhere outside. It would be unreasonable to expect a mouse to respect your wishes.

You have to plan 2 plans:
Short term plan

Catch it by cage.
Do big cleaning to your home.
Clean your home, everyday.
Put a smelly bin faraway from your home.  << This is very important step.
Deodorize food smell as soon as you can every time, by put it in refrigerator, or clean it.  << This is very important step.
Use smelly substance to make them scare. In the case of ants, I use camphor bags. I put them in every close-doors furniture. Also, sometime when I go out of my home, I sprinkle the camphor around my home, too.
Etc.

Long term plan

Choose no smell home, far from bin.
In the termite case, your home should build without termite's foods, such as wood, paper, etc.
Etc.


text:
What is struggle?
I am in sales line profession. Try believe that sales, here in India is at its worst now. Being a medical representative i know how much medicines mean to those who are in need of them. But this corporate/hardcore businessman world do not know about anything. Anything, anyhow, they know is how they have to take-out money out of their own society. They pick 8 members of society against remaining 72 members and do everything to go beyond the filth. being in association with them, daily i feel humiliated and harrased. They compel me to thug others, to push sales unneccesarily.
I am all here not by myself but by default. education system here is crap. I am doing this because i do not have support from our government at basic levels or as we (family) do not have so called financial background.
My question is: How can i left my family supposed to be survived in my absence while i'd be out in search of enlightenment?
Please respond with everything possible you can express. Thanks and regards.

Edit: Corrected spelling and added paragraphs to increase readability. Please roll-back if not agreeable.

Welcome Jitin:)

Regarding right livelihood- taking care of the sick is one of the few areas of social responsibility that are regularly mentioned in the oldest Buddhist texts. By this, I mean, they hadn't started thinking about literacy, pollution, and other modern progressive issues. I agree the modern Pharmaceutical business has some nasty parts. Essentially you have to trust the that the doctors will give the right medicine when the time comes and leave the ineffective medicine on the shelf.
Regarding "absence while in search of enlightenment"-- There are many versions, sects of Buddhism that do not make up a rule that says you have to be monk to be come Enlightened, and they are many version, sects of Buddhist that doesn't prohibit having a family if one is a monk.  Nyingma pa, all Japanese sects, some Korean Sects, probably most American sects allow the ordained to be married.
The path of the serious Upāsaka (lay follower) is more than the 5 precepts. Depending on the tradition, lay followers take the 8 precepts, the Upāsaka precepts or the Bodhisattva Precepts, all of which are compatible with a lay life, i.e. holding a job and taking care of a family.
Finally, if you are serious about a career change, consider doing it in a way that allows you to continue to support your family. The historical Buddha after going forth eventually came back home after he had a successful sangha and a model for how to live without starving and his wife & child ordained.  This was in part lucky circumstances-- nowadays, to make a living in Buddhism, you write books, conduct retreats and so on.


text:
Consciousness in Nibbana
In the Abhidhamma, it makes mention to 89 and 121 states of consciousness. It says there are four ultimate realities namely

Consciousness
Mental Factors
Matter
Nibbana.
The first three are conditioned, nirvana is unconditioned.

According the Abhidhamma, It states that persons who've attained nirvana no longer have consciousness. What does this mean exactly?
In the Mundane, sense-sphere, rootless consciousness, it says that “body consciousness, accompanied by pain” is the result of unwholesome karma. Does this mean that enlightened beings such as a Buddha or an arahant don't feel pain when they touch something hot?

It's better if you provide a link to where it says "that persons who've attained nirvana no longer have consciousness"

I suggest changing the question to "Consciousness in Nibbana", "after nibbana" is ambiguous: "after entering" (but there is no experience, so it is only vague expression) or "after coming back from nibbana".

@SankhaKulathantille it was on a video by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi. I think he said that in "2013 Abhidhamma Retreat 3/15 or 4/15." http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6l6jihH1ZQQ

@SankhaKulathantille I'm watching those videos whilst I read A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

There are two types of nirvana: saupādisesa-nibbāna (nirvana with remainder) and anupādisesa-nibbāna (nirvana without remainder) (Iti. 44).
It is true that for one who has attained anupādisesa-nibbāna there will be no more consciousness. This is because someone who has attained anupādisesa-nibbāna is dead*. It is the equivalent to the more familiar parinibbāna - "complete" nirvāna. For one who has attained saupādisesa-nibbāna, there is still the physical and mental formations that have been created as a result of being born as a human that need to work themselves out, including consciousness.
* Conventionally speaking; technically, they have become free from death, since they have become free from birth (arising).

Ven. @yuttadhammo, in my humble opinion, I think it's better to use "There are two interpretations for nirvana" rather saying "There are two types of nirvana". If not, reader may come to a wrong conclusion that there are two nibbana dhātu.

When the mind takes Nibbana as the object, all experiencing cease. But when enlightened beings do day to day activities, Nibbana is not the object of the mind. They do feel pain since there is experiencing. But they do not suffer. Being conscious of the pain is different from suffering due to pain.

I will answer your second question regarding enlightened beings feeling pain.
An arahat / Buddha does not create any new kamma, but they are still subject to the maturing of past kamma. This means that they can suffer physical pain but unlike us, there is no associated mental pain. See Sallatha Sutta (SN 36.6).


text:
Where does utilitarianism sit with Buddhism and vice versa?
My understanding of utilitarianism is that value is the result of an action e.g. which actions provide the most happiness.
There appears to be an overlap between Buddhism and utilitarianism however am unsure how these come together or grow apart in the actions we perform as well as the value of the results.
EDIT
The answer posted to the question is a good candidate for the commonalities as well as differences.

There are definitions of utilitarianism on the web, for example this one: Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility is defined in various ways, including as pleasure, economic well-being and the lack of suffering. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which implies that the "end justifies the means". This view can be contrasted or combined with seeing intentions, virtues or the compliance with rules as ethically important.

I think Buddhism can contradict utilitarianism too. Non-action, non-desire and emptiness are anti-utilitarian. When they say it's not about the results but about the process, it is also not utilitarian.

(Theravada) Buddhism is absolutely utilitarian... that's a pun, see, it's both absolute and utilitarian. I guess the more accurate contrast is moral absolutism and consequentialism (of which utilitarianism is a type).
In Buddhism (again, Theravada, at least), it is certainly the consequences of the action that are important, though only for the actor - the consequences to others (or society, etc.) are, at least technically, discounted:

Ill done is that action of doing
  which one repents later,
  and the fruit of which
  one, weeping, reaps with tears.
Well done is that action of doing
  which one repents not later,
  and the fruit of which
  one reaps with delight and happiness.
-- Dhp. 67-8 (Buddharakkhita, trans)

and

Let one not neglect one's own welfare
  for the sake of another, however great.
  Clearly understanding one's own welfare,
  let one be intent upon the good.
-- Dhp. 166 (Buddharakkhita, trans)

Of course, it is also understood that actions that one performs knowing they will harm others are generally not in one's own best interest, as they tend to sully the mind. By helping others, one helps oneself, and vice versa.
At the same time, Buddhism is also clearly absolutist on the level of ultimate reality; whereas it acknowledges that physical and verbal acts are morally variable, the mind states that initiate them are not. Since the acts themselves are merely conventional terms describing a sequence of mental states and their physical consequences, it is the nature of the individual mental states themselves that determine the ethical value of the acts.

katame dhammā akusalā? yasmiṃ samaye akusalaṃ cittaṃ uppannaṃ hoti ... tasmiṃ samaye aññepi atthi paṭiccasamuppannā arūpino dhammā — ime dhammā akusalā.
What dhammas are unwholesome? At whatever time an unwholesome mind has arisen ... at that time, whatever other dependently arisen immaterial dhammas there are - these dhammas are unwholesome.

In brief, acts are only bad because of their consequences, but the consequences are dependent on the nature of the acts (on an ultimate level), so morality is both absolute and utilitarian.

@Ven.Yuttadhammo - Shall I understand "mind states" (and wholesome and unwholesome mind) as comprehending or including habitual and volitional intentions? BTW, Thx for all your responses to SE-BU questions

Including, yes. Comprehending? I don't understand that.

When a person has not yet attained Nirvana, actions of such a person come from a completely utilitarian point of view.
When a person strives on the path towards Nirvana, actions of such a person come from a less and less utilitarian point of view.
When a person attains Nirvana, actions of such a person come from an even less utilitarian point of view.
When a person attains Nirvana, that person acquires immense compassion for other beings. Thus, actions of such a person come from his will to help other beings ease their suffering and attain Nirvana.
Do actions of such a person arise because he gets something in return from these actions? Yes. In order to help others attain Nirvana, he must survive. Thus, he must get food, water and shelter. In order to help others attain Nirvana, he must develop the wisdom for teaching. Thus, he must learn how to teach and gain experience. There are many things such a person must do to help others. Thus, on this level, in this "reality", there is utilitarianism in Buddhism, but this utilitarianism is only visible to a mind which has not yet attained Nirvana.
To a liberated mind which has attained Nirvana, there is no utilitarianism in his actions, nor in the actions of other minds which attained Nirvana. Why there is no utilitarianism in his actions?
To answer this question, we must answer this question: Why does the will to help other beings in attainment of Nirvana arise in a person who attains Nirvana?
To answer the previous question, we must answer this question: Why does the will arise?
To answer the previous question, we must answer this question: What is the cause of that will arising?
To give an understandable answer to the last question (and to others in the chain of questions) is impossible. The answer must be experienced: "will comes from ignorance". Does this mean that a person who attains Nirvana and helps other beings in attaining Nirvana is ignorant because there is "will" present in his mind? No, he is not ignorant. Such a person clearly sees what he is doing. He sees his ignorance. He understands it. He knows it fully. By seeing, understanding and knowing, he sees, understands and knows his "will". He sees, understands and knows, that there is no utilitarianism in his "will". To see this and understand it fully, it must be experienced. There is no other way.


text:
How to talk to a friend about "lack of control" in what happens to her son?
I know a friend, who doesn't practice buddhism, and who is always worried about her young son. She is always concerned about everything that could go wrong, or things which could happen out of her control that she can do nothing about.
I've always been one who doesn't worry about the things that are out of my control, but I don't think that simple piece of advice is enough for her to act on it. I'm sure it's something that is "easier said than done".
What advice can be found in buddhism for this situation?

Surely the child could be out of her control. Probably as much as she is out of your control.

@ThiagoSilva Both of those are true - my question is how to best help her see that as well. I cannot control her, she may completely ignore me, but I would still like to attempt to ease her suffering if I can.

Teach her Vipassana.  Get her to meditate on the worry.

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have put together a Guide and a Resource section for new users that you might find useful.

I suppose it largely depends on how close you are to her, or how seriously she would take and act on any advice.
These types of neurotic/anxious behaviors aren't something that are going to disappear by themselves overnight, or by you citing some scriptural passage to her that makes her see the light (most likely, there are cases where people do become enlightened in the scriptures from hearing verse, but in practice this is the exception not the rule).
The most practical way would be for you to, depending on the type of friendship you have, introduce the idea of meditation to her. Spin it in such a way that she is able to see that it doesn't have to in any way be connected with a "religion" or sectarian ideology.
I don't know what your experience with meditation is, but if you have some then you have even more authority it explaining to her that meditating will allow her to see experientially that things are largely uncontrollable, and that all she is doing is creating her own misery in worrying about these uncontrollable things.
Perhaps even convince her to go to a retreat with you, if at all possible :)
Ultimately, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. If she isn't ready to hear this, all you'll be doing is blowing hot air into the room. The best way to show others the benefit of meditation is to live your life as an example of the benefits of it.

Good answer. Also to encourage someone to try meditation for the first time you can remind them of something they've probably already heard before; that meditation is good for "stress relief". It's probably stressful worrying about the son all the time, so this may be appealing. Then the person can discover the many, many higher benefits as they go along. :)

The thing is if she keeps on worrying that way, she may end up with not doing at least what is in her control. Tell her the duties of a parent as preached by Lord Buddha in Singalovada Sutta and convince her that she should do or get ready for all of her duties.
1. Not allowing to do evil actions and self destructive actions.
2. Guiding for proper or meritorious and good action.
3. Providing proper education
4. Finding or helping to find a good spouse when the right age comes.
5. Passing on the inheritances.
And she can be a good friend to her own son whenever he needs a good friend, someone who helps him when he is in danger or relieving his fears or sorrow etc. Further, you can tell her about impermanance, suffering and non self. Nothing is in full control of anyone, that lack of control brings dissatisfaction and there is no one who does not undergo the the first two phenomena. In fact, all mothers have that worry to an extent, every mother cannot take full control of even themselves, so she is not the only mother who faces the issue. When she slowly understands that every mother feels that in different levels, she will slowly get away from that sorrow and fear.

When a mind is permeated with clinging, subdued by clinging, with a strong will to cling, and that same mind is not experiencing suffering due to that same clinging, there is little you can do to help that mind stop clinging.
When a mind is permeated with clinging, subdued by clinging, with a strong will to cling, and that same mind is experiencing a little suffering due to that same clinging, there is something you can do to help that mind to stop clinging.
When a mind is permeated with clinging, subdued by clinging, with a strong will to cling, and that same mind is experiencing immense suffering due to that same clinging, there is a lot you can do to help that mind to stop clinging.
There comes a time when a mind permeated with clinging, subdued by clinging, with a strong will to cling, is happy in that same clinging: "I'm happy. I have complete control over my son.".
Then, there comes a time, when that same mind starts to experrience a little suffering due to that same clinging and realises: "I have no control over my son. I'm suffering. Who knows the solution to stop my suffering?".
Then, there comes a time, when that same mind starts to experience immense suffering due to that same clinging and realises what is suffering, what are the types of suffering, how are the types of suffering experienced, what is the greatest suffering?
Then, there comes a time, when that same mind, fully aware of its own suffering and fully aware of the suffering of others, comes to realise: "I have no control over my son, but he has a roof over his head. I have no control over my son, but he has food and water. I have no control over my son, but he has ears. I have no control over my son, but he has eyes. I have no control over my son, but he has legs and arms. I have no control over my son, but he is breathing. My suffering is nothing compared to the suffering of others.". By realising this same truth, clinging subsides and wisdom follows: "I have no control over my son. I will never have complete control over my son. Thus, I will control him less.".

good answer :) Unfortunately, I've seen many parents who don't get that far along in this progression, even throughout their entire lives.


text:
How to deal with body pain during meditation?
I am doing vipassana meditation as taught by Goenka. I get numbness and tingling in my feet from nerve pressure while sitting cross legged. I put up with it for quite a long time and then the sensation becomes so unpleasant I have to move.
Do I have to get to a point where I can put up with quite severe discomfort in order to progress in meditation or can I progress even though I have to move. At the moment my choice to move feels like a damage to my progress.

Don't beat yourself up over it, but you will have to move at first. Keep pushing yourself to be with the pain. Don't judge it, maintain equanimity and see it's characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfying, and uncontrollable. Look closely at it, and you will see that the pain itself is not a solid entity but is constantly in flux. To answer your question, though, yes: you will eventually have to become ok with being with your pain

Here is some useful food for thought: http://www.shinzen.org/Articles/artPain.pdf -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BldDclolLCg -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWT69EvM1cQ

Some pain may be avoidable. Pressure on the nerves I the leg(s) near the sitting bones can be a reason for numbness and/or pain. I use a zafu filled with buckwheat hulls (cushion purchased online). The cushion elevates the pelvis. Also, ones should sit on only the forward 1/3 of the cushion, which places the sitting bones on the cushion, but virtually none of the leg anatomy, thus avoiding critical pressure on certain nerves. You could probably search for proper instructions and reasons online. Using the zafu and using it correctly has made an extraordinary difference for me.

This SE-BU link might be useful wrt cushions:  http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/10416/all-about-seats

Some good answers here also: http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3361/any-advice-on-leg-numbing-during-sitting (This question may even be a duplication.)

Hi Angela and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have put together a Guide and a Resource section for new users that you might find useful.

Edit: Question-title edited to better reflect question-content. Feel free to roll-back if not agreeable.

In principle, many contemplations that are part of satipatthana don't require our bodies to be still. In fact, a good portion of it are "24/7" practices to be developed whatever we are doing wherever we are.
On the other hand, all of these practices are immensely helped by concentration1  -- thus, the satipatthana sutta opens with concentration practice (calming of the breath). And some, I think, are particularly hard to do (that is, severely limited) without some degree of concentration. And concentration is hard (or seemly impossible) to develop in the presence of significant body discomfort.
Therefore, ideally, it's quite important to have a practice without discomfort. And here it's important to remember that, ultimately, the body form has little to do with the actual work: what is important is not the form, but if the posture (whatever it is) enables the practice.
There is the possibility that the pain from sitting in a certain posture is temporary and will not be an obstacle after a while. But there is the possibility that every sitting will be unbearable after a few minutes or a an hour or two (I meditate for over 15 years, and still can't sit cross legged for more than 30 minutes without discomfort, let alone ~2 hours -- which I've done twice in the past, enduring excruciating pain).
For this last case, if your sitting is of 20 minutes, 1 hour or 4+ hours, I think the best long term solution for practicing is to find out a posture where your body can be still and rest comfortably for the desired period while your mind is alert. Finding out a solution may involve trying out cushions and leg positions, exercises, or entirely different alternatives (e.g meditating laid down or in a chair).

1 a.k.a: tranquility, samatha, samadhi, jhana practice.

There are quite a few things to consider here to become skillful at approaching pain and discomfort during practice.
Most people experience discomfort and pain in meditation from time to time - so don't let this get you down :) The body (or the mind ;) is not used to sitting still for too long and will complain in some form or another. This is balanced on the other hand by wisdom that in some situations the body complains for a reason and that perhaps you need to adjust how you sit.
In your instance I don't know if you're using a cushion ... if not, sitting cross legged style without support puts stress on the pelvis and creates pressure on the legs where they connect because of the weight of the legs. You have to (1) raise your buttocks with the aid of a cushion or zafu (2) provide support under your knees with smaller cushions if you are not flexible. Another option is a meditation bench.

"If ... we simply generate the three primary gestures of alignment (the pelvis higher than the knees; the very bottom, or even a place just in front of the very bottom, of the sitting bones contacting the cushion; the upper torso balancing itself as effortlessly as possible over the stable base of support created by the first two gestures) and then allow the body to make whatever adjustments in posture spontaneously occur, the feeling tone of alignment gradually and inevitably begins to emerge. Paying more attention to the feeling tone of alignment rather than its spatial coordinates allows us to align ourselves with gravity from the inside out." - Will Johnson, The Posture of Meditation

... after you have done the above preparations listen to Shinzen Young:

When you sit and meditate you may sometimes be subject to discomforts, aches and pains, sleepiness, body sensations of agitation and impatience, itches and awkwardness from the posture. These discomforts are real but quite manageable. In the meditative state you can experience them with more mindfulness and equanimity than you would in daily life. As a result the mind and body go through a natural change, a deep learning process that affects the unconscious levels of neural processing ....True asceticism is a delicate skillful process that uses pain to overcome pain. When properly understood and practiced, it deepens our humanity, elevates our satisfaction with life and break up blockages in the deep reaches of the mind. When improperly understood, asceticism ceases to be delicate and skillful and degenerates into something pathological. One pathology is extremism, which can end up harming the body and weakening mental focus. A second pathology is spiritual macho, seeing how tough you can get. A third pathology is spiritual masochism, exposing yourself to discomfort because you consider yourself to be a worthless worm who deserves to suffer. Spiritual machismo and spiritual masochism both subtly reinforce a fixated ego; on the other hand, authentic asceticism shows us how to become free from the
  suffering self.

A "bookmarkable" answer in my book  thx

Your body must get adapted to prolonged sitting. Your discomfort will cease with practice. Exercise if your body is not in a good shape. Eat adequately and drink enough fluids.
When pain arises during your meditation, observe it and learn from it. See its impermanence. See as much as you can. Then, let go of it by moving your mind's focus on a different meditation object and notice how pain ceased. If pain arises again, repeat the process - observe the pain, then let go by moving your mind's focus on a different meditation object.
With time and practice, either your pain will subside or you'll learn to non perceive it, and you'll be able to sit still in your meditations without distractions from pain.

Prevent body pain by being limber and strong through Hatha Yoga. That is why it was developed! If sitting hurts, you are doing it too much throughout the day, or you are not stretching and limbering... throughout the day. At my workplace I take walks outside on the morning and afternoon breaks and at lunch. On those walks I stop at benches to do an assortment of stretches that I have learnt over the years. You cannot do it just once a day and not move the rest of the time.
The body has needs, among which are to be used properly, exercised and stretched properly, and rested properly. These amount to laws of physics and cannot be ignored. There is no point whatsoever in denying your body to try to 'progress' faster spiritually. It is just as useless as not stopping driving your car to get more fuel, oil or whatever to "arrive sooner". No. You will arrive at the side of the road with a disabled car.
I used to do lots of walking and stretching, and yes, often I would tense up after an hour or so of sitting meditation, but with the right exercise and a very good seat (such as I used to build and sell) You can sit much longer on "good days". Take care of yourself.


text:
the value of a regular vipassana meditation practice
What is the value in a regular vipassana meditation practice (e.g. almost daily, some days twice, typically 1hr+ per session) if, over the long haul (months), annicca, dukkha and annatta are not realized? Is the absence of these three very Buddhist characteristics an indication that the practice is, essentially, a secular practice with little-to-no spiritual value?

What type of spiritual values?

We practice meditation to purify our minds of greed, hatred, and delusion. We can't do this by yearning for ourselves to reach a particular stage of realization nor by yearning for special experiences within meditation.
We purify our minds of greed, hatred, and delusion by seeings these tendencies within ourselves and by seeing the objects of our greed, hatred, and delusion for what they are and becoming bored with them. When we become bored with them; we stop clinging to them. When we stop clinging altogether; we'll reach Nibbana.
This doesn't take months; it takes lifetimes. Who knows how many lifetimes we've already had to reach this point of being interested in bhavana at all? To be a human interested in the development of one's mind is very precious. You don't have to look far to see humans who are only interested in strengthening and beautifying the body, or accumulating money or possessions, or reputation or power, etc. But to be a human interested in the development of your mind, is an extraordinary opportunity.
Yes, it's valuable to practice your meditation regularly even when you don't "see" the progress. Venerable Yuttadhammo recently gave an especially encouraging dhamma talk regarding when you feel like "nothing is happening", in your meditation; it's actually bringing tremendous benefit. I will look for the dhamma talk and add it to this answer if possible. Be well. :)
added
This 10 minute long dhamma talk by Venerable Yuttadhammo has some very encouraging words for this situation. He is reflecting on the July 20 passage from http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/words_of_buddha.pdf.

If a meditator is practicing diligently and with skillful effort the meditator will surely reap the fruits of insight meditational practice. What are these fruits? The 16 stages of Insight and eventually Nibbana.
As with other skills if one is practicing the technique correctly, diligently and persistently one will advance in the practice, method or technique.
In vipassana one trains to see reality for what it is, i.e. the true nature of reality free from concepts and superimpositions. One trains the mind to stay in the present, to stay with phenomena as they are without extrapolating on them, without liking or disliking them. One keeps the mind at a level of "bare attention", i.e. the objective and non-interfering approach to phenomena. One trains to be with phenomena as they are when they are.
When interfering with phenomena one will obscure and mask their true nature.
By not interfering with them and simply being objective towards them they will at some point begin to reveal their true nature for the meditator, i.e. impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and the ungovernable nature.
In the absence of any insights one must assess and adjust one's practice and find out what causes one to not progress. Usually that is The Five Hindrances which are obstacles to meditative progress.
Also there are The Ten Imperfections of Insight (vipassanupakilesas). The Visuddhimagga, Chapter XX, p. 660-665, goes into detail about what these imperfections are.
Ven. Yuttadhammo has also made a video about these imperfections called "Monk Radio: The Ten Imperfections of Insight (Vipassana Upakilesa)".
The imperfections are not in themselves hindrances but they can become obstacles if the meditator clings to them or regards them as being important instead of continuing to note mental and physical phenomena.
Hope this helps. If you have questions to anything i wrote let me know.


text:
Can I count my contribution to the open source as a dharma?
It is mean, that if I am professional developer and I can help other people for free, can I think, that software development, that is my hobby and profession, in the same time is my Dharma?

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. Could you elaborate on how you understand and use the word "Dharma"?

Hi! I know that "dharma" has a lot meanings, but here I wont to ask about "dharma" as a "devoir" or "mission".

When i read your question i understand it as if you are asking about obtain merits from helping people for free. Is this correct understood or is your question about something else.

Not exactly "merits", but rather a direction on the way. And basically I want to know it in general, not just for myself. Sorry for unclear question.

Just read it again i think i understand it now.

Open source is awesome philosophically speaking, and that's really what counts in the dharma, not the actual benefit that accrues to others. A core tenet of Buddhism is to not cling:

"And he clings to nothing in the world."
-- The Buddha (MN 10)

So, regardless of the nature of your work, the fact that you are able to give up your attachment to its ownership is positive. If, for example, you produce pornography or a drink-mixing app, well, that's bad. If you make it open source, that is good, since the alternative is to cling to it.
Some years ago, a Buddhist monk threatened me with legal action over a text translated from the Pali 60 years ago that his organization owned the copyright to and which I had posted on our website in HTML format. It was remarkable to note at the time that people in the FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) community sounded more Buddhist than the Buddhists. Mark Shuttleworth, for example:

That’s the magical thing about creation and ownership. It creates the possibility for generosity. You can’t really give something you don’t own, but if you do, you’ve made a genuine contribution. A gift is different from a loan. It imposes no strings, it empowers the recipient and it frees the giver of the responsibilities of ownership. We tend to think that solving our own problems to produce a patch which is interesting to us and useful for us is the generosity. It isn’t. The opportunity for generosity comes thereafter. And in our ecosystem, generosity is important. It’s at the heart of the Ubuntu ethic, and it’s important even between competitors, because the competitors outside our ecosystem are impossible to beat if we are not supportive of one another.
(source)

Or Richard Stallman (admittedly, not the best Buddhist role model):

I'm often asked to describe the “advantages” of free software. But the word “advantages” is too weak when it comes to freedom. Life without freedom is oppression, and that applies to computing as well as every other activity in our lives. We must refuse to give the developers of the programs or computing services control over the computing we do. This is the right thing to do, for selfish reasons; but not solely for selfish reasons.
Freedom includes the freedom to cooperate with others. Denying people that freedom means keeping them divided, which is the start of a scheme to oppress them. In the free software community, we are very much aware of the importance of the freedom to cooperate because our work consists of organized cooperation. If your friend comes to visit and sees you use a program, she might ask for a copy. A program which stops you from redistributing it, or says you're “not supposed to”, is antisocial.
(source)

So yeah, the FOSS movement is awesome; a lot of open source advocates are Buddhist, or at least Buddhaphiles. There's even a Bodhi Linux, for example. It runs on the Enlightenment desktop. Actually, I'm not sure if that's dharmic or just crass...
I think you have one too many commas in your question, but if you are asking whether software development is dhamma practice, then I guess the answer is that the part of it that is you letting go of your attachment to stuff is dharmic. Coding software itself is not the same as developing your mind towards enlightenment, though...

Intention matters.
What brings one to open source decides whether it is completely wholesome or has taints.
If I'm in in open source because I hate Microsoft, it is unwholesome. If I'm writing software so that I become famous one day like Linus Torvalds and drive a BMW, that's unwholesome.
If I'm there to help people, teach students, solve problems for others it can be wholesome.
Working for Google can be as wholesome and one's dharma as working in open source, it all depends on the state of mind.
Of course, if I'm at a profit making firm and I disagree with an unwholesome activity, I may be fired. So be it, that is still a wholesome outcome.
If I'm writing open source software that I know is useful and wholesome, and only a few people use it, and I don't make unwholesome changes to get more users, that is wholesome.
Dharma is what is wholesome,  adharma is what is unwholesome.

Dhamma Greetings user1835337,
Buddha 'Dhamma' is the 'teaching' of the Buddha and Dāna (giving) is one part of it.
Openhearted giving (Dāna) is on of the three basic and main exercises recommended by the Buddha for lay people. It is a preparatory and accompanying exercise at the same time. Giving for the well-being of others just because one has fun doing it helps very much in the personal development. It' the first taste of letting go of craving.
But one has to look at the intention: Do I have fun helping or am I grumpily  reacting on something and, in this case, trying to score of the propriety software producers.
Now you can say, there is higher and lesser. I am sorry that I can't remember the exact Sutta, but the conclusion is like this: helping animals is good, helping non-spiritual poeple is better, helping spiritual people/teachers is  better than this and helping Buddhist teachers is the best.
So, contributing to the open source community is a good thing, if you connect it with contributing to Dhamma related projects it would be even better.
Best Wishes :-)


text:
Detailed definition of Lokavidu
I've seen this translated as knower of worlds/cosmos and with relation to the senses as what arises, but I still don't have a solid understanding, can someone add clarity?

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have put together a Guide and a Resource section for new users that you might find useful.

Lokavidu is one of the nine qualities of the Buddha.
Here is a definition of the quality:

LOKAVIDU

Lokavidu is the person who knows about the world. What do we mean by
Loka? As There are six worlds; the seeing world, the hearing world, the smelling world, the tasting world, the touching world and the thinking world. There are no other worlds than these six. The Buddha understands how they arise and cease. He knows how clashes and harmony happen in this world. He knows why people can be trapped in them or be free from them. That is why He is called Lokavidu. You are in harmony with the world only when you know about it and live accordingly accepting as it is.

Another quote from the book "The Great Chronicles of Buddhas", p. 1164 :

(ii) Āsayānusayan-ñāna:
Knowledge that discuss the natural bent and latent proclivities of individuals. (Ref: original text at pp 597 on the Lokavidu attribute of the Buddha.) The term ÈsayÈnusaya, a compound may be rendered as ‚the seed-germ of an individual’s mental makeup.‛ By this special knowledge, the Buddha knows discriminately that such and such a being has such natural bent of mind, such latent potential for defilements that are dominant in his mental makeup.
It was due to the possession of the above two special knowledges that the Buddha could deliver the right message to the right-hearer. Even the Venerable SÈriputta, being not endowed with these special knowledges, could not know the state of readiness of his hearers to receive the message, i.e. about the ripeness or otherwise of the mental makeup of his hearers, with the result that his discourses, in a few occasions, fell flat on the hearers.

Another quote on the term:

Gautama Buddha's explanation on 'World' or 'Loka'
A very significant word that comes in Gautama Buddha's Sutta discourses is the "Loka" or "Loke" that is commonly regarded today as the "World". One needs to have a proper understanding of what Gautama Buddha considered as the "World" or "Loka " since Buddha is "Lokavidu" , one of the nine qualities Gautama Buddha had been ascribed to. The meaning of the word" Lokavidu" is "knowledge of entire worlds" or "loka".

Another quote on the term from "The Qualities and Virtues of the Buddha" By Mithra Wettimuny:

V) Lokavidu means the seer of the world. He sees everything as it really is, with regard to this world. He sees all the conditions that bring about a situation, that bring about a dhamma, the root causes, the proximate causes, and the results that can come, that can flow from that situation. All that is his knowledge or his ability to see the world as it really is.

First, we have to understand what is meant by loka. There are three types of loka, according to type (DN-A 2.189):

okāsaloka - the world of space
sattaloka - the world of beings
saṅkhāraloka - the world of formations

According to the commentaries (AN-A 3.40):

lokavidūti tayo loke vidite pākaṭe katvā ṭhito
lokavidū means one who stands having made known, having made clear, the three worlds.

The Visuddhimagga (VII.135) goes into detail about how the Buddha knows each of these three worlds, including quotes from the texts:

“Tis utterly impossible
  To reach by travel the world’s end;
  But there is no escape from pain
  Until the world’s end has been reached.
  It is a sage, a knower of the worlds,
  Who gets to the world’s end, and it is he
  Whose life divine is lived out to its term;
  He is at peace who the world’s end has known
  And hopes for neither this world nor the next” (S I 62).
-- from Path of Purification VII.36 (Nyanamoli, trans)


text:
Can you reach the substrate consciousness through visualization practices
You mentioned that one can enter the substrate consciousness through the shamatha practice of cultivating awareness or during sleep, death and such. Can you realize the substrate consciousness and the luminescence and the radiance of mind through visualization practices such as the one you lead to explore the hearts desire (in motivation to power the retreat talk), through reverence, feelings of gratitude, love, exaltation of breath.
I have been listening to your talk remotely now for years and I am so grateful to have this resource to go back to often enough.
Thank you.

Hi Bindu and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have put together a Guide and a Resource section for new users that you might find useful.

are you directing this question to someone in particular? is there a context to this?

Apparently this phrase "Substrate Consciousness" is used by B. Alan Wallace. Here is a quote from his paper: "The false vacuum state of consciousness is known in Buddhist literature as the bhavanga, from Pali and Sanskrit, which is a kind of substrate consciousness. The bhavanga is a relative ground state of consciousness, more vacuous than deep sleep and free of mental dullness, in which all mental activation is dormant.".

Here is what Alan Wallace says in 'Stilling the Mind' (p 62) - I think this speaks to your question:
"Visualizations are fine. The stage of generation is important. Yet you must still confront your mind; you have to go right through it. That is taking the mind as your path. You need to go to the very ground of the ordinary mind. This requires shamatha. You don't need vipashyana for that nor Dzogchen, nor bodhichitta. But you do need to go right to the ground of your ordinary mind and let the mind settle, unforced. When the mind is quiescent — no turbulent thoughts or emotions arising — it is relaxed, still, luminous, and free from effort. That is shamatha."
The "ground of the ordinary mind" is the substrate consciousness; and shamatha is the essential practice for realizing this ground. Of course we don't want to stop there. I understand the visualizations of the stage of generation practice as a way to keep our eyes on the real prize:  'piercing through' the substrate to realize rigpa (pristine awareness) for the sake of all mother sentient beings. This is important to cultivate from the outset, considering how attractive and seemingly ultimate the experience of shamatha will be. But we must keep going to realize our deepest aspirations. Dudjom Lingpa teaches that stopping in the substrate "does not bring you even a hair's breadth closer to the paths of liberation and omniscience."
[Sharing this without any special authority, but as a grateful fellow student of these teachings. I welcome any corrections to this answer.]