text:
Are 'elements' defined as non-suffering?
I'd like to question something from this answer without disputing it, i.e.  there was a phrase it in which I found novel:

You do this by seeing that your suffering is impermanent and empty (entirely made up of non-suffering elements i.e. made of the joy of your relationship).

Is it generally true that the "elements" of something are non-suffering?
Is this a well-known, implicit part of (or a reason for) the doctrine of emptiness?
Is this part of the meaning of "sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā", i.e. it's that combinations of elements, or compounded things, are dukkhā ... but that elements are not?
Is it difficult to identify what's meant by an "element"? The quoted phrase (the "non-suffering elements of a relationship") seems to me to have colloquial meaning, which might be neither an Abhidhamma-like single-moment-in-time or thought-element, nor the "earth, fire, wind, etc." type of classification of element. Can you summarize how to recognize what's an "element"? Do you aim to perceive elements rather than saṅkhārās, and how do you know when/whether you're succeeding?

I added the mahayana tag because I think the quote is from a Mahayana tradition, but other perspectives would be welcome too.

MN 115 is a comprehensive discourse on elements (dhatu).
In reality, none of the many elements described in MN 115 are intrinsically 'suffering' because they, as mere elements, are not yet mixed with attachment (upadana).
Thus, MN 115 states:

When, Ānanda, a bhikkhu is skilled in the elements... in that way he can be called a wise man and an inquirer.

The 1st noble truth summarises all suffering as 'attachment' (upadana) and the 2nd noble truth explains the various cravings (tanha) do not give rise (samudhaya) to suffering (dukkha) unless craving creates new becoming (bhava), which is simply more solidified attachment (upadana).
To quote the 2nd noble truth from SN 56.11:

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for
  sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.

The teaching of the 'elements' ('dhatu') is the same as 'sunnata' ('emptiness') therefore any clear discernment of 'elements' quenches suffering because 'elements' are discerned rather than 'self'.
Again, to quote, this time from MN 62:

Rahula... there are these five elements, Rahula. Which five? The earth element, the water element, the fire element, the wind element
  & the space element... Now both the internal elements & the external
  elements are simply elements. And that should be seen as it actually
  is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me,
  this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is present
  with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the elements
  and makes craving for the elements fade from the mind.

The phrase: "sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā" is unrelated to this answer posted in the question because the word 'dukkhā' in this phrase does not mean 'suffering'. Instead, it means 'unsatisfactoriness', i.e., the incapacity of saṅkhārā (impermanent conditioned things) to bring lasting true happiness.
This is clearly explained, also in MN 115, as follows:

Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat any formation
  as permanent ― there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It
  is possible that an ordinary person might treat some formation as
  permanent ― there is such a possibility.’ He understands: ‘It is
  impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could
  treat any formation as pleasurable ― there is no such possibility.’
  And he understands: ‘It is possible that an ordinary person might
  treat some formation as pleasurable ― there is such a possibility.’ He
  understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person
  possessing right view could treat anything as self ― there is no such
  possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that an ordinary
  person might treat something as self ― there is such a possibility.’

Therefore for example, inanimate objects, such as rocks, trees or stars in the sky, are 'unsatisfactory'; they cannot bring or be relied on for true pleasure; but they are not 'suffering'.
To avoid doubt, Dhammapada 278 explains the experience of "sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā" results in liberation rather than suffering:

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

The reason I thought the phrase: "sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā" might be related to that answer was because I understood saṅkhārā as meaning "compound things" ... which I presume are compounded of "elements" ... and I thought the answer said that "elements (of the relationship) are not dukkha" ... which (if true) I guessed might mean that they become dukkha only when they're compounded somehow with something.

Absolute realities fall into citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana out of which the Rupa is elements or materiality. [See: The Abhidhamma in Practice by N.K.G. Mendis] Nibbana is also sometimes considered an element.
Everything which is conditioned is constructed by materiality or elements which are:

earth or solidity
fire or heat
water or cohesion
air or movement
other secondary elements

What ever made of elements is unsatisfactory and suffering as it is not in one's control or not permanent (hence you will have to part with pleasant forms causing unsatisfactoriness).
The element or part that causes suffering in this is the mental reaction to your experience. When you do not react to it with craving, aversion of ignorance then there is no suffering. You will be at peace or Nirvana if you do not react with craving. As Nirvana is sometimes also referred as an element (Nibbānadhātu) it could be this which can be considered as an non suffering element.
Citta, cetasika are also conditioned by they come into being as part of the Nama-Rupa process, hence they cannot exist without materiality except for  in the immaterial realms.

Nibbānadhātu

Nibbānadhātu:—“the state of Nibbāna”. S.V, 8; A.II, 120; IV, 202; J.I, 55; It.38 (dve: see under Nibbāna); Miln.312. Also in the foll. connections: amata° It.62; bhū° the verbal root bhū DA.I, 229; ṭhapitāya dhātuyā “while the bodily element, i.e. vitality lasts” Miln.125; vaṇṇa° form, beauty S.I, 131; Pv.I, 31. In these cases it is so far weakened in meaning, that it simply corresponds to E. abstr. suffix —hood or —ity (cp. °hood=origin. “form”: see ketu), so perhaps in Nibbāna°=Nibbāna-dom. Cp. dhātuka.
Source: Sutta: The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary
  nibbānadhātu : (f.) the sphere of nibbāna.
Source: BuddhaSasana: Concise Pali-English Dictionary

The Ultimate Realities
The Abhidhamma deals with realities existing in an ultimate sense, called in Pali paramattha dhammaa. There are four such realities:
Citta, mind or consciousness, defined as that which knows or experiences an object. Citta occurs as distinct momentary states of consciousness.
Cetasikas, the mental factors that arise and occur along with the cittas.
Ruupa, physical phenomena, or material form.
Nibbaana.
Citta, the cetasikas, and ruupa are conditioned realities. They arise because of conditions and disappear when their conditions cease to sustain them. Therefore they are impermanent. Nibbaana is an unconditioned reality. It does not arise and therefore does not fall away. These four realities can be experienced regardless of what name we give them. Any other thing — be it within ourselves or without, past, present, or future, coarse or subtle, low or lofty, far or near — is a concept and not an ultimate reality.
Citta, cetasikas, and nibbaana are also called naama. The two conditioned naamas, citta and cetasikas, together with ruupa make up naama-ruupa, the psycho-physical organism. Each of us, in the ultimate sense, is a naama-ruupa, a compound of mental and material phenomena, and nothing more. Apart from these three realities that go to form the naama-ruupa compound there is no ego, self, or soul. The naama part of the compound is what experiences an object. The ruupa part does not experience anything. When the body is injured it is not the body, which is ruupa, that feels the pain, but naama, the mental side. When we are hungry it is not the stomach that feels the hunger but again the naama. However, naama cannot eat the food to ease the hunger. The naama, the mind and its factors, makes the ruupa, the body, ingest the food. Thus neither the naama nor the ruupa has any efficient power of its own. One is dependent on the other; one supports the other. Both naama and ruupa arise because of conditions and perish immediately, and this is happening every moment of our lives. By studying and experiencing these realities we will get insight into: (1) what we truly are; (2) what we find around us; (3) how and why we react to what is within and around us; and (4) what we should aspire to reach as a spiritual goal.
...
Ruupa
The third reality or paramattha dhamma is ruupa, matter or material form. In its analysis of matter the Abhidhamma recognizes twenty-eight kinds of material phenomena. Four of these are called primary, twenty-four secondary. The secondary kinds are dependant on the primary.
The four primary elements (cattaari mahaa bhuutaani)
These are metaphorically referred to under their ancient names but signify distinct properties of matter:
The Earth element (pa.thavi dhaatu) = solidity
The Water element (aapo dhaatu) = adhesion
The Fire element (tejo dhaatu) = heat
The Wind element (vaayo dhaatu) = motion
There is no unit of matter that does not contain these four elements in varying proportions. The preponderance of one element over the other three gives the material object its main characteristic.

The Abhidhamma in Practice by N.K.G. Mendis

What is the "reacting element"? Is a "reacting element" mentioned in the Pali suttas?

It is Saṅkhāra. the material aggregate (rūpa) and the four mental aggregates of cognising (viññāṇa) recognising (saññā) feeling (vedanā) and reacting (saṅkhāra) - Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta - S. N. Goenka

Viññāṇa cognises that something has happened. Then saññā evaluates it as good or bad, and the sensation that results is pleasant or unpleasant. Saṅkhāra reacts, and bondage, misery starts. ... Mind is divided into another four aggregates: viññāṇa cognises; saññā recognises and evaluates; vedanā feels; and saṅkhāra reacts and creates. ...

... Saññā evaluates: female, male; beautiful, ugly; pleasant, unpleasant. With this evaluation the sensations become pleasant or unpleasant, and immediately saṅkhāra, the reacting part of the mind, starts generating craving or aversion. Thus this whole process of bondage starts and multiplies. ...

I don't think I've heard saṅkhāra translated as "reaction" before. I thought it was "construction" or "combining", especially the combining of new perceptions with old experiences ... for example, hearing a voice (a perception) and remembering or associating the sounds of that voice with that of an old friend or an old enemy (a past experience). Or is this (associating or recognizing) a description of "perception" or of "cognizing" (i.e. of saññā or viññāṇa), rather than of saṅkhāra?

All source from: Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta - S. N. Goenka. Sanna evaluates. Evaluation maybe based on past memories and also classification. Sankha react as well as creates or constructs if you want to call it that. I don't think combining is a good translation. You can search for the terms within the document.

You are mistaking Saṅkhārā for concepts. Concepts are perceived as stable and satisfying.
Saṅkhārā means conditioned phenomena. That refers to physical elements and the rest of the five aggregates.
All saṅkhārās come under the first noble truth for being deficient, impermanent, unpredictable & conditioned. But there will be no mental suffering if you do not cling to them. Think of it as a fire. You don't get burnt as long as you stay away from it. But that doesn't mean the fire isn't hot.
There's no non-suffering element except for Nibbana.

Your post is a contradiction so I marked it down. It states: " But there will be no mental suffering if you do not cling to them.... There's no non-suffering element except for Nibbana". Regards

@Dhammadhatu Isn't "non-clinging" more-or-less a synonym of "Nibbana", though? There's a metaphor about a fire which is no longer clinging to its fuel.

Yes. Non-clinging is more-or-less a synonym of "Nibbana" however once there is non-clinging the elements & aggregates become benign or harmless. Clinging is the problem. Regards

@Dhammadhatu The First Noble Truth does not become false even if you become enlightened. Sankharas come under the noble truth of suffering whether you get rid of craving or not. You are only thinking about one meaning of the word Dukkha. But Dukkha also refers to that which is useless and not able to satisfy. Here's a related answer: https://youtu.be/g9MVzgUd34M?t=868

Sankharas do not come under the noble truth of suffering. What you are writing has no basis in experience or reality. Regards.

They do in Theravada Buddhism. Not sure what you follow.

You seem attached to words that have no meaning; like believing in god. Please read SN 22.1.

You seem to believe in your own customized religion :)

Let us continue this discussion in chat.


text:
Sati-Sampajañña (Mindfulness)
Hello folks I have some questions on mindfulness.

How do I maintain mindfulness in stressed or high stimulus environments? It's easy at home and when I do my things alone but once I'm at work (delivering food on a bike), at school or being with someone it's very hard to stay mindful. Any suggestions?
I couldn't really see any good explanation of buddhist mindfulness. If someone has an easy explanation please send me a link, however it combines alertness or concentration with a clear knowing what is going on (a label), isn't it so? But after an experience has been labeled it's not done yet. The practitioner needs then to do something to change from a unwholesome state/behaviour to a wholesome state/behaviour, right?
This question is related to the first one. If I am at work my mind is jumping from thought to thought and I feel in my body that I want to do things really fast. So in essence, my mind and body feels hasty and like a turmoil. Is there any practical advice how I can settle down the mind and body in in a fast way (especially when it's getting difficult or rather where distraction is available, e.g. at work, school, etc).

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We also have a Guide and a Resource section for new users, that you might like. Enjoy your time here.

This is through maintaining Sati, Samadhi and Sampajanna it self.
1st one should keep your mindfulness in the 4 Frames of Reference. You should have Sampajanna in the following way:

purpose (sātthaka): refraining from activities irrelevant to the path.
suitability (sappāya): pursuing activities in a dignified and careful manner.
domain (gocara): maintaining sensory restraint consistent with mindfulness.
non-delusion (asammoha): seeing the true nature of reality (see three characteristics).

Source: Sampajañña also see The Four Sampajanna by VRI, Sampajanna by VRI, Sampajanna-the Constant Thorough Understanding of Impermanence by VRI,
 Sampajañña: The Fullness of Understanding - by S. N. Goenka, The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna by VRI
Though arise due to sensory input. Perhaps you can try to restrict distraction by non reaction to the sensory input, which is to maintain the domain, and also be non deluded by at least seeing arising and passing nature of the experience. Also if the thought that district you are not related to the path you can abandon them. More on this see Vitakka Saṇṭhāna Sutta. Also be careful there is no lapse of mindfulness which might lead to unwholesome
 or unsuitable thought to arise.
To quiet your active mind perhaps you can try out developing the Jhana factors. Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta. If initial and sustained application is developed within the 4 Frames of Reference this also you are keeping to the domain, purpose, doing what is suitable and non deluded, while also getting and handle on the distracting thoughts through concentration.
To apply this to daily activities always see it your mind is with the 4 Frames of Reference periodically, with initial and sustained application, contemplating the at least impermanence of the of the three characteristics, as you go through your daily activities.

Good posting suminda. -)

sampajañña: 'clarity of consciousness', clear comprehension. This term is frequently met with in combination with mindfulness (sati). In D. 22, M. 10 it is said: "Clearly conscious is he in going and coming, clearly conscious in looking forward and backward, clearly conscious in bending and stretching his body; clearly conscious in eating, drinking, chewing and tasting, clearly conscious in discharging excrement and urine; clearly conscious in walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep and awakening; clearly conscious in speaking and keeping silent." - For a definition of the term sati-sampajañña, s. Pug. 86.
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_s.htm

So when the buddha said "clearly conscious" he meant for one the alertness and the mental labeling of which one is doing, am I right? So for example: : "chewing, chewing", "holding, holding" , "typing, typing".

No, it is a bit more than that. What you mention was just the first step. I think Suminda's answer is more comprehensive.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Mindfulness, Eightfold path,
I read your message but didnt't really understand much. What do you recommend for a beginner at buddhism? I read a bit about right effort and view. Where to start? I've been meditating for about 3 years or so. What is really meant by sensual restraint? Dont get me wrong but I don't want to give up my desires and passions and preferences that I like... .
Have a nice one ;)

Wise attention is the forerunner of the Noble 8 Fold Path so cultivate it.

Dawn, bhikshus, is the forerunner, the harbinger of sun-rise.
Even so, bhikshus, for a monk this is the forerunner, the harbinger of the arising of the noble eightfold
  path, that is, accomplishment in wise attention.
Bhikshus, when a monk is accomplished in this wise attention, it is to be expected that he will
  cultivate the noble eightfold path, develop the noble eightfold path.

Yoniso Manasikāra Sampadā Sutta
You can develop wise attention by being equanimous to every sensation which is felt and noting its impermanence. For what unwise attention is see this answer.
Regarding sense restraint on each sense door results in sensations which are either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral

i. On seeing a form with the eye,

one investigates the form that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the form that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the form that is the basis of equanimity.

ii. On hearing a sound with the ear,

one investigates the sound that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the sound that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the sound that the basis of equanimity.

iii. On smelling a smell with the nose,

one investigates the smell that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the smell that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the smell that is the basis of equanimity.

iv. On tasting a taste with the tongue,

one investigates the taste that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the taste that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the taste that is the basis of equanimity.

v. On feeling a touch with the body,

one investigates the touch that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the touch that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the touch that is the basis of equanimity.

vi. On cognizing a mind-object with the mind,

one investigates the mind-object that the basis of mental joy,
one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of equanimity.

Each of these sensation should be treated as follows:

If he feels a pleasant feeling,

he understands that it is impermanent;
he understands that it is not to be clung to;
he understands that there is no delight in it.

If he feels a painful feeling,

he understands that it is impermanent;
he understands that it is not to be clung to;
he understands that there is no delight in it.

If he feels a neutral feeling,

he understands that it is impermanent;
he understands that it is not to be clung to;
he understands that there is no delight in it.

If he feels a pleasant feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.
If he feels a painful feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.
If he feels a neutral feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta
You should be careful that you do not react to the sensation with unwholesome thoughts which are craving, aversion or ignorance.

(1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;
(2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings;
(3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings.

Pahāna Sutta

The Eightfold path is practice in many different levels. The eightfold path practice by five preceptors is not the same as an Arahant.
To answer your question as a lay person you are expected only to follow the Eightfold path in line with the five precepts. So there is no need to give up all your passions and desires. As a layperson, you can practice eight precepts on Uposatta days. This is optional.

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


text:
Impermanence (Anicca) and Mindfulness in general

Did the Buddha meant to be attentive all the time or is that just an ideal to strive for?
If we are attentive and feel sensations do we always see the impermanence in them? So first to recognize what is going on in- or outside and then seeing the impermanence and potentially the unsatisfactoriness in them, right? But wouldn't that decrease pleasures in certain activities/objects?

That is two questions. I'll answer the second.
Things are not unsatisfactory in themselves because they don't have selves. Anicca is the flip side of Anatta (non-self). Because things are made entirely of other things and aren't independent self-entities if any one 'thing' in the universe changes then everything changes because it all interpenetrates. This is the middle way between existence and non-existence - a big debate in Buddha's time and ever since!
Dukkha (third of the three marks of existence) is what arises when we deny Anicca-Anatta. If we truly see/embrace/understand/know Anicca-Anatta then we are in Nirvana - which is nice not nasty.
So in practice we look deeply and see Anicca-Anatta which feels good. Nothing changes. Ice-cream still tastes yummy but we can see that it, along with our tongue, is impermanent and is also a product of the whole universe. Without impermanence the ice-cream would never have frozen and wouldn't melt. Without non-self the ice-cream couldn't become part of us. i.e. Wholesome pleasures increase in breadth and depth as we see them deeply.

You said one should label the impermanence. What I am doing is I usually label the experience, e.g. "thinking, thinking", "touching, touching" and then I mentally contemplate for like 10 seconds or so on dukkha and anicca. Is that the correct way or should I stop doing one of these? Let me know

Yes. One should be in constant awareness seeing impermanence as you mentioned.

Yato ca bhikkhu atapi, sampajannam na rincatiatapi, sampajannam na rincati;
  tato so vedana sabba, parijanati pandito.
When a meditator, striving ardently, does not lose sampajanna, the thorough understanding of impermanence, even for a moment, such a wise person fully comprehends and experiences all sensations by exploring the entire field.
By constantly observing the sensations in the body, one experiences the arising and passing away. This constant observation of the body sensations based on the realisation of impermanence is sampajanna.

The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna in Vipassana Meditation by VRI
The pleasure or gratification one gets from sense objects are temporary and end in unsatisfactoriness when it changes. By not seeking pleasure in temporary things you are trading lesser pleasure for a more lasting and higher pleasure of Nirvana. Until you get there at least you are not in emotional rollercoaster if you see impermanence.
Not seeking pleasure is that you do not react to sensations mentally noting their impermanence. For house holders the the restain one should practice is the 5 precepts. You can seek pleasurable things within this confine. But while doing that if you practice insight a time will come where you will start giving up on things you might consider thrill seeking. But this should be a gradual process. This should not be an ideological or philosophical belief that you should give up on such activities, in which case it is attachment to a concept or ideal, which on itself in not ideal as it will result in misery.

The OP posted comments to you as an answer, which I deleted. You can read that deleted answer and, if you want to, address those extra questions by adding to your answer.


text:
Difference between Sampajanna and Vipassana
If Sampajanna is clear comprehension and Vipassana is clearly seeing how or are they distinguishable?

Sampajanna is a prerequisite for right concentration. Vipassana is a result of right concentration.
Mindfulness > sampajanna > concentration > vipassana > liberation > nibbana
Sampajanna is a product of active volition & mindfulness; what is called 'wise or careful attention' (yonisomanasikāro); as described in AN 10.61:

Mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said: careful attention (yonisomanasikāro). AN 10.61

Vipassana is the automatic seeing of ultimate truth that occurs when the mind is clear & concentrated, as described in AN 11.2.

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

Sampajanna (applied wisdom) is the preliminary wisdom that mindfulness (remembering; recollection) brings to mind to establish meditation. Again, to quote AN 10.61:

The four establishments of mindfulness, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the four establishments of mindfulness? It should be said: ... mindfulness and clear comprehension. AN 10.61

For example, when meditation is established, sampajanna applies the types of wisdoms listed below, when required:

observing breathing brings peace therefore it is beneficial to observe the breathing

craving & attachment cause suffering & disturbances therefore I should meditate without craving & attachment

this hindrance harms myself & harms another therefore it should be abandoned

Bhikkhu Buddhadasa has explained 'sampajanna' & 'vipassana' below:

sampajanna, wisdom-in-action, ready comprehension, clear comprehension: the specific application of  panna as required in a
given situation.
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.
SAMPAJAÑÑA
Sampajanna is wisdom as it meets up with and immediately confronts a problem, as it deals with and wipes
out that problem -- this is wisdom-in-action. It is only that wisdom
specifically related and applied to a particular situation or event.
The word "wisdom" (paññä) encompasses many
meanings and understandings, we can't even begin to estimate its
content. However, the word "sampajanna" is far more limited in its
meaning. It is exactly that wisdom directly needed for the problem
that confronts us. Active wisdom isn't general, it is a matter of
particulars.
We can compare wisdom (paññä) with the medicine chest in our house. In it we store a wide variety of drugs, pills, capsules, ointments, powders,
and syrups for possible use. When we're actually sick, we must choose
from among the many the one drug which will be effective in treating
our ailment. We can't take them all; we take just what is needed to
cure our illness here and now. The same is true for wisdom. Understand
that there's an incredible amount of what we call paññä,
but that we only apply a little bit at a time. We apply just that
portion which can take care of the immediate situation. Know how to
use the Dhamma, the paññä, which is exactly relevant to our situation
and problem. The Dhamma or wisdom which controls that situation and
problem is what we call "sampajanna."
The Scientific Cure of Spiritual Disease

In short Sati with Sampajanna is Samma Sati which is Vipassana.

From this it becomes evident that according to the Buddha, whenever there is sammasati or satipatthana, it is always with sampajanna. That means it is with panna (wisdom). Otherwise it is mere sati, which is mere remembrance or awareness.

Source: Sampajanna-the Constant Thorough Understanding of Impermanence by VRI

Sati is not vipassana, seriously. sammasati, in maggasacca, is adhicittasikkha, in tisikkha.

Sati + Sampajanna = Vipassana

So, sati+sampajanna are sila and samadhi, too.

This is Right Mindfulness which comes under Samadhi

Seriously. Sati and sampajañña always appear in the third jhāna context, too. Sati-Sampajañña of Right Mindfulness in 3th jhāna is samatha.  It is not just vipassanā. Sati-Sampajañña is sīla and samatha, too. The example "pītiyā ca virāgā upekkhako ca vihāsiṃ sato ca sampajāno, sukhañca kāyena paṭisaṃvedesiṃ". You must memorize tipitaka, to learn it. You can not just read it to understand tipitaka.

In sampajaññaṃ 4 --asammohasampajañña is vipassana.
sampajaññaṃ 4 = clear comprehension; clarity of consciousness; awareness

sātthakasampajaññaṃ - clear comprehension of purpose.
sappāyasampajaññaṃ - clear comprehension of suitability.
gocarasampajaññaṃ - clear comprehension of the domain in physical
and mind.
asammohasampajañña - clear comprehension of non-delusion, or of reality.

see: http://84000.org/tipitaka/dic/d_item.php?i=189

asammohasampajañña  is not vipassana. asammohasampajañña is viewing the mind during meditation and knowing clearly the mind is not meditating with self-view & other delusions. kind regards

@Dhammadhatu Vipassanā in bhaṅgañaṇa-uddesa (k.n.paṭisam.) refer to balava-vipassanā. So the lower ñāṇa also vipassanā, too. Because dhammaṭṭhitiñāṇa, in paṭisambhidāmagga, contemplate about paṭiccasamuppāda, too.

Sampajañña, in the third of 4 samādhibhāvanā in saṅgītisutta also is
taught "See vatthu of vedanā to make it apparent for sampajañña". This method also is appear in visuddhimagga diṭṭhivisuddhiniddesa (method to do when the nāma are not appear to ñāṇa). See the sutta context and it's commentary for more detail.


text:
Replacing the hindrances with it's opposite?

Similarly, wise consideration of the mental liberation of loving kindness (mettā-
  cetovimutti) counteracts ill will; wise consideration of the elements of effort
  (ārambhadhātu), exertion (nikkamadhātu), and striving (parakkamadhātu) counteracts
  sloth and torpor; wise consideration of tranquility (cetaso vūpasama) counteracts
  restlessness and worry; and wise consideration of wholesome and unwholesome states
  (kusalākusaladhammā) counteracts doubt.6

So lets say i am having ill will thoughts. Do i just replace those thoughts with loving kindness instead?
Or if I am experiencing sloth and torpor, do i just replace and abandon those thoughts with exertion and striving?
Is that how you apply this passage in the real world, by abandoning those thoughts and having one pointed focus on their antidotes?

"So let's say I am having ill will thoughts do i just replace those thoughts with loving kindness instead?" I would say yes. But it is not easy to just do this.  How I practice this is by seen impermanence, suffering and not-self in other beings.

I've tried to give a title to this which summarises the question so it can be search for. Please edit or revert if I have misunderstood

I understand crab hmm what would a good title be?

So lets say i am having ill will thoughts do i just replace those thoughts with loving kindness instead? Or if im experiencing sloth and torpor, do i just replace and abandon those thoughts with exertion and striving?

Yes, that would be one way of dealing with the hindrances. This is the first method. If that does not work, one moves on to the second method and so forth. Methods are described below.

One can deal with each of the 5 hindrances in 5 ways, i.e. the following 5 methods works for all of the hindrances.
Methods are found in The Noble Eightfold Path, p. 63-66, by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi.

Replacing the hindrance with its opposite, e.g. replacing hatred/ill-will with thoughts of loving-kindness.
Contemplating the arisen hindrance as vile and ignoble, since it has entered the mind without permission or any control.
Shifting attention away from the hindrance.
Shifting attention onto the hindrance and thoroughly contemplating it by investigating its causes and conditions for arising together with its characteristics.
Removing the hindrance with force, just as a strong man would pin a weaker man to the ground.

No. 5 should only be used if method 1-4 does not work.
If you have any questions to what I wrote feel free to ask.

This can be read in MN 20: https://suttacentral.net/en/mn20

No that was perfect thank you. I find number 3 works best for me. But i didn't even know there was other methods

I don't really know if the list above is meant to be done chronologically. By my experience (I think this can be generalized), if one feels strong negative emotions one needs to cool off first, because one's mind is distorted and filters out information ->If one is happy for example, negativity is filtered out. So I think distracting oneself and/or watching it curiously is a good way. Also reflecting on the drawbacks can be helpful, but only prior or after the emotional disturbance. Whenever you are emotionaly disturbed, don't use reason. Be compassionate+accept experience+"cool yourself off".


text:
Belief in Ghost and spirits
If Buddhists don't believe that we have a soul then why do some believe in ghosts or spirits? this seems contradictory.

Soul in the context of Buddhism is that was contemporary considers atman, which is permanent, pleasant and controllable. What is established in Buddhism is that there is nothing as such and everything constituting a being is subjected to the 3 Universal Characteristics.
Also there is not entity as a being. What is there is a causality arising process, which also is presented as the 4 Noble Truths, Dependent Origination, Conditional Relations. The continuity of the causality process can be taken as a trip in a vehicle. Each point of the journey is different from the other but still point of the same journey, hence there is a continuity but not also the entirely the same. Death is like changing vehicles.
In Buddhism Ghosts and Spirits are not tormented souls of past being. They themselves are life forms which inhabit the 31 planes of existence. When one dies and is reborn as a Ghost or Spirit this is like any other rebirth. This is a new existence. It is not the same being in the previous birth or nor a different being, but the continuation of the causality process.

In buddhism, nothing is permanent. One can be reborn as an animal, reborn as a ghost, reborn in hell, reborn as a god thus cycling through all 6 realms of birth. Therefore, there can't be one soul, otherwise there'll be  animal soul when animal dies,  human dies there will be human soul, a ghost dies there will be ghost soul, a god dies there will be god soul and thus 6 different souls - and not one soul. Thus there is no soul, just cycle through the 6 realms.

So then what gets reborn?

Mental continuum gets reborn. What one did in the past gets propagated in the future. This propagation is perceived by the mental continuum as rebirth. As long as one creates karma, there is rebirth.


text:
Helping Others Who Still Need to Suffer due to karma
I was wondering if helping others who are suffering prevents them from receiving their karmic dues.
For example, if Person X caused great suffering to others, then according Buddhism, his Karma will come back to haunt him in the same life or a next life. Now suppose, he does suffer in another future life but a Good Samaritan rescues him before all his karmic debts are paid. The Good Samaritan improves his karma account with the good deed but he has still rescued someone who still has a debt to pay to society.
How can one justify helping others in this case? I'm not trying to find fault with Buddhism.

Karma is not meant as a punishment or retribution or debt to be paid which you are not to interfere with. It is complicated with many interactions. The environment has to fall into place for its results to be seen.
If the environment can influence the effects of Karma, it can be eradicated or changed in some cases. Since Karma is complex you you cannot say for sure.
By helping others your can help lighten the burden of their Karma and in some cases counteract the bad Karma altogether.
Also this is the good Karma for the person doing it.

Thank you! I did hear from a monk that suffering has multiple causes some of which is not tied to karma like acts of nature. That makes sense what you wrote.

Yes. This is Niyama Dhamma. There are 5 Niyama of only 1 is Karma. Also see some my previous answer on Niyama

In the present moment we may have the opportunity to understand, support or help another fellow human in the spirit of compassion. To behave compassionately towards another in the present moment can only improve life for ourselves and those around us. If all our actions cause a reaction we should endeavour to live our lives more skillfully and with compassion.
I was very touched recently by a reading on Gratitude.
"Any goodness that we encounter in the world is a gift from people now and in the past - a handful of people we know by name, and millions of others who's names we will never know. For their countless acts of generosity, we owe them our deepest gratitude. Our job is to take the lantern from their hands and carry it a little farther down the road."

The ideas in your question are your own. They are not related to what the Buddha taught.
The Buddha taught if suffering was caused by actions performed in the past, we would be helpless.

Those who fall back on past deeds as the essential truth have no desire to do what should be done and to avoid doing what should not be done, nor do they make an effort in this respect. Since they do not apprehend as true and valid anything that should be done or should not be done, they are muddle-minded, they do not guard themselves, and even the personal designation ‘ascetic’ could not be legitimately applied to them. This was my first legitimate refutation of those ascetics and brahmins who hold such a doctrine and view. AN 3.61


text:
Is it recommended in Buddhism to know people from other nations and learn their languages
In Islamic quran, we Muslims are asked to know people from other nations and following other religions, we are recommended to learn their languages. Allah said: "O Mankind, We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into peoples and tribes that you may know one another." Is there any recommendations in the Buddhism that tells the same? especially for languages learning?

...
You should not cling to a regional language; you should not reject common usage.
This is a summary of the analysis of non-conflict.

Arana Vibhanga Sutta
A lot more discussions in Language and Discourse by Piya Tan

Are those your words, or they are mentioned as in in any holy book please?

This is Arana Vibhanga Sutta which is part of the Majjhima Nikāya which is part of the Sutta Pitaka which in part of the Tripitaka


text:
Is allowing or seeking detachment a bad karmic influence vis a vis rebirth?
If I let relationships and other things go as a way of embracing detachment then will there be karmic "retribution"  or will it leave some hole that will force me into rebirth?

If you let go mentally then there will be more positive karmic efforts in the future.
If you let go by being attached to an ideal or view or practice or embracing this as a view, ideal or practice then this might cause negative karma for the future depending on how much you get attached to the ideal, view or practice. E.g. if you see many charities which seem to do good but many of the volunteers seem overly attached to the cause. This will have an element of unwholesomeness in it.
So you have to get detached by training your mind than through other means. Also without going overboard with being detached if you practice this to some extent then this also might help towards letting go through your mind but keeping in mind this is a double edge sword. If this is leading to some form of craving or attachment then this is not the right way it should be done, and also will have some negative karmic effect.
For rebirth not to happen you should not get attached at the dying moment. If there is any effective (not dormant or not ahosi) kamma rebirth will happen. Attachment to view, ideals and practices, even to that of detachment, also may have potent for a next birth. If you have mentally let go then there will be not potent karma and there will be no rebirth.
More technically according to dependent arising, rebirth is generated in two sequences:

(1) ignorance (avijjā) + karma -> the stream of consciousness beginning at rebirth (vinnāna).
(2) craving (tanhā) + clinging/fuel (upādāna) -> existence (bhava) + rebirth into that existence (jāti).

Source: Dependent Arising by Piya Tan

The Buddha did not teach 'kammic-retribution' & 'non-attachment' together.
'Kammic-retribution' is a moral yet defiled & mundane teaching; based in the ordinary view of 'self'.
'Non-attachment' is a supramundane/transcendent (lokuttara) teaching; based in not-self (anatta).
Please refer to MN 117, which distinguishes these matters.
This being said, any important & essential relationship in life must be looked after, for example, the relationship an enlightened monk must have with laypeople.
The Buddha taught 'non-attachment' rather than 'detachment'. The advanced Buddhist practitioner learns to have metta without attachment. Having metta will look after/safeguard any relationship.

If I let relationships and other things go as a way of embracing detachment then will there be karmic "retribution" or will it leave some hole that will force me into rebirth?

As long as Ignorance (avijja) is present, there will be rebirth, with reference to the doctrine of Dependent Origination.
The only way to "let things go" is by way of understanding.
In Buddhism one overcomes Samsaric phenomena by understanding them through the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path, namely the insight portion of the Buddha's path to liberation. Only insight meditation can shed away the veil of delusion permanently.

The exact answer for your question was in the Dhamma deshana I listened to yesterday. It is true that Lord Buddha has asked you to detatch from materialised substances, but in case of living as a lay person practicing this 100% is not practical. To practice in this detaching, you should go & live a life as a monk.
The example taken to explain this was:

There is a person who lived a normal family life & after coming into contact with dhamma this person started to practice extreme detachment while living in his house with his family (He was not in a position to leave the family). Now having to live with the family members was also a distraction in his detachment practicing. This led him to be angry with his family. As well as Lord Buddha has asked us to detach from materialised components, we are told that anger is bad. So, now this person has come into contact with anger as well as he is not able to detach 100%. This is worsening of the situation.
And also if a person tries to refrain from performing the duties towards the society by practicing detachment & by seeing them as a collection of elements, that will lead to some unpleasant situations as that person throwing a stone at another person & thinking of it as a set of elements stucking another set of elements. These kinds of situations arise by not understanding what the dhamma is truly about. If a person tries to practice the extremes of these while not having a clear vision & a stable mind, that will lead to unpleasant situations which is not what Buddhism is about.

I'm not trying to tell that you can't practice detachment while living as a lay person, we need to have the correct vision about dhamma as well as we have to have the right conditions from the surrounding to do so.


text:
Can you do labeling and tai chi?
Im doing mahasi style meditaiton with labeling  - is it possible to do thai-chi and this type of noting ?    should it be just  "moving moving moving"  non stop ?
also to save me some time  - when people usually do thai chi what are they thinking about exactly (if they are good practitioners of thai chi)  ?  cause i tried to find out online and couldnt
why i practice thai chi ?   manly as a positive way to pass the time and  but also i really want to get some cool out of the norm experiences to help strength my believe in not "normal" scientific stuff
i wanted to gain cool out of the ordinary experiences in meditation to increase my faith and by that my will to meditate more  -   but i hope maybe thai chi  can  do it more easily - cause  my vipassana practice is just boring no cool nimmitias  just good old worries doubts and expectations etc

Are you familiar with the expression "a watched pot never boils"?  If you keep looking for an otherworldly experience, it's never going to come.

Im doing mahasi style meditaiton with labeling - is it possible to do thai-chi and this type of noting ? should it be just "moving moving moving" non stop ?

Of course. Noting can (and should) be applied to all mental and bodily activity.
But do not use "moving, moving" for all movements. As in walking meditation we use both lifting, moving, placing, touching. You can use similar noting in Tai Chi, e.g. moving, turning, lifting, pushing, pulling etc.
Keep it simple.
Btw - Tai Chi is great. I teach it to my coworkers 2 times a week followed by sitting meditation. I too note movements when doing it.

and it wont distract from how one should do tai-chi ?  what people usually focus on - the breath ?  or maybe tingling feeling (i remembered now it made me think of practicing tai chi cause i got tingling felling once)  ?

also sent you an email

Well, yes normally people focus on the breath. In-breath is on moving up and out-breath on moving down. I teach that to my coworkers - its only me who notes, since I'm practicing the burmese method. Tai chi is great for noting, due to the slow nature of the movements. Its a good way (together with walking meditation) to transition mindfulness from cushion practice into daily life.

i understand the tingling feeling is chi btw  ----     dont you wonder maybe your missing some cool experiences by not focusing on the breath ?
cause im really looking for cool experiences out of the ordinary (dont want to switch to samatah for them and vipassana is the thing im intersted in just trying to find the fastest and easiest way to get cool expirences without using drugs of course)

I don't look for anything, I just observe and note.

what about the breathing ?  i mean in vipassana you dont control it here you control when you inhale and when you exhale

is it possible to do tai-chi and this type of noting?
I would not have thought so, but maybe that's because I'm not good enough at labeling and/or at tai chi.
Labeling is not what I was taught to do, when I was taught tai chi.
I find that tai chi is so complicated, or so immersive, that it seems to shut off the verbal part of my mind. When I'm 'doing nothing' (when I'm not practicing tai chi) I tend to visualize and verbalize. Ditto when I'm doing something simple, e.g. bicycling: less visualization when bicycling (I have real-world things to look at), but still verbalizing.
But doing Tai Chi there are many things to think about:

Breathing, in or out
How breathing affects the current movement
Posture (spine) and balance (on the weighted foot and knee)
Movement (push or pull, and twist/rotate) of four limbs
The sequence within the form

I try to experience (to get feedback from) the form and the feeling.
See also this list of 'fundamental principles' which you're supposed to obey no matter which form or movement of the form you're doing ... on top of which, there are forms to learn and practice (I'm linking to Chen-style but I suppose other styles are similar).
when people usually do thai chi what are they thinking about exactly
Maybe it depends on how adept you are.
When you're learning to speak (a non-tonal language), one of the things you concentrate on the sound of syllables. What does "oo" sound like? What does "b" sounds like? What about "boo"? Similarly a tai chi beginner learns many syllables (fragments of movement), like, what's it like to "push your hand forward while rotating the wrist but keeping your shoulder down and back": what does it feel like and how do you do it?
Also you might practice just one move from a form, as a drill, for example, "wave hands like clouds"; or a drill, like, "peng lu ji an".
Then you learn a 'form' which is a sequence of moves (e.g. this sequence). You have to learn and practice each move in sequence: how to do it (what the components of the move are), how it starts, what's in the middle, how it ends, what the next move will be, what it's called, and what the 'practical' purpose of the move is.
You may (optionally) be naming each move (e.g. "Buddha's Warrior Attendant Pounds Mortar") as you do it; and/or the teacher may be naming each move (to try to remind students which is the current move).
Unless you're a learner or a teacher though, I don't think to try to label in this way, though of course you're more-or-less aware of what you're doing.
When I first learned the form I was told to just "breathe naturally". After I had learned the (external) form (sequence of moves) well enough to be able to practice it, I started to learn how/when to breathe when practicing it, i.e. exhaling during a push and breathing in when contracting, i.e. to integrate breathing. So now when I practice the form, I think of it as a sequence of balanced breaths:

Breathing in (and contracting)
Breathing out (and stepping or expanding)
Breathing in again, etc.
While keeping my balance
While moving through the steps of the form

We're also told to think about your dantian i.e. to keep your energy there, close to the ground or rooted (according to the teacher, usually people's energy is up in their head, which is why they're so unbalanced or easy to unbalance).
Two more things to think abut when doing a solo form:

Skeleton (you're supported on your skeleton, so the skeleton should be upright and balanced, while the flesh is relaxed ... or "bone rises, flesh sinks" as the teacher put it)
Apparently, there's "spiralling energy" associated with your bone marrow (this is an example of the type of thing, which the teacher described and which I'm not sure I ever cottoned on to)

Finally, a teacher might need to be able to label it, i.e. to explain what they're doing (everything they're doing, or anything their students are doing) in any amount of detail.
i really want to get some cool out of the norm experiences to help strength my believe in not "normal" scientific stuff
I haven't experienced any too-miraculous chi phenomena, so maybe I only experienced "normal scientific stuff".
On the other hand I do remember being pleased, after an early lesson: that I'd been to school for so many years but that nobody had ever really taught me how to walk before! So it's quite practical: good for posture and balance and flexibility and coordination and so on; and hopefully you'll enjoy the company of the people you do it with.
just good old worries doubts and expectations etc
As I said, for me it shuts down verbalizing and so on; so part of what's pleasant about it is that it's a break from "old worries" and so on. Instead my "worry" is whether I'm keeping my balance while I'm moving three limbs while standing on one foot! And breathing! And I've practiced enough now to be successful at that, so no worries!

Incidentally I read once that there are different ways of learning:

By seeing
By hearing
By doing

Different people may have different preferences about how they're taught:

Don't just tell me, show me!
Don't just show it, explain it!
Let me try it for myself!

Although I answered "no" to your question, I see Lanka answered "yes, of course". Other people might be more verbal, skilled at verbalizing or labelling, than I am. And if he's currently teaching it, maybe that helps to require him to label it (for his students' benefit).

One of the things I'm concentrating on when practicing a form is a physical awareness than something is mis-aligned and needs to be moved.
Given that there's constant motion over the whole body there's always something (multiple things) that need to be moved. So I might have a thought like,
"My kua (pelvis) feels like it's pointing towards the right and needs to be more centered."
Having formed the thought (that the kua is out of alignment) I correct that. The practice is to get better integrated.
I can read text faster than people talk. Similarly it seems to me that when practicing Tai Chi I'm aware of sensations faster than I can label them. It also seems to me that labelling sensations isn't the point of the exercise, that the point is to correct sensations associated with doing it wrong (also to keep the body comfortable, nourished with breath and lubricated by exercising the joints, and to keep the mind as clear as possible).

A gross way to think of spiraling is to first understand it as torque.  Think of coming up into a bow stance into a ward off position.  The entire body uncoils.  Eventually, you start to break down that coarse spiral into it's aggregate parts - e.g. the spiraling of each leg, the spiraling through the torso, the turning of the dantien, into the arms, etc. And then you repeat the inverse spiral as the body retracts.  According to classical tai chi, that supposedly all happens in the marrow - which I think just complicates the issue for a modern practitioner.

what about the breathing ?  i mean in vipassana you dont control it here you control when you inhale and when you exhale


text:
What is the true nature of karma?
The more I study and meditate upon karma the more I am convinced that it is a physical thing and not a moral one.
The universe is a massive interweaving assemblage of gears and wheels and shafts and cogs. By doing this simple action (we'll call it "X") you create a rippling of reactions as a direct result. These are the primary reactions then secondary then tertiary and so on.
Thus the momentum imparted from the original action resulted in countless other effects. And the momentum or propensity of the actions to continue in that general direction is in my opinion the true nature of karma.
Not some altruistic ideology that frowns upon immoral actions and exacts a eventual penalty just for that reason. Now, granted, the ill effects on others from those type of negative actions may create its own karmic momentum. But so many see karma as some sort of cosmic police force and that just isnt the case. At least not as I see it.
Would someone agree or set me straight?

O! Bhikkhus, it is volition - cetana that I call Kamma, -cetanaham
  bhikkhave kammam vadami

Karma is always mental. But the consequences(Vipaaka) are both mental and physical.

It is true that its not a good bad thing .....  BUT  it actually almost sits on definitions of good and bad one on one
What you said is said in almost all places that talk about karma in buddhism and its always in this funny way
they start very bold in stating on how karma is not about good and bad but just the law of karma the way things are  .... but than if you continue to read you see that good is almost one by one the same as wholesome and same with bad and unwholesome
***  no one is punishing you (also said almost everywhere that they talk on karma)  but you will be "punished" not on purpose when you will receive the effects of your action
it has differences like for instance meditation is considered wholesome karma  - and can be considered even better karma than donating money for example
giving money for example is good cause its letting go of attachment - also it developes metta  --- which are things which will benefit you
edit :   but karma can be unfair (like real life police actually)   some stuff you do can be very little and have  great effect and huge stuff you do have a tiny effect
what is said for sure is that  an unwholesome (akosala)  action has bad results and good action good results    .... when the time is right (i belive you heard about comparing karma to seeds
the unfair part of karama  can be different than good and bad  which is  if you give  40  you might get 20  or get 4000000  its not tit for tat

I really appreciate this answer because showing me this is a consistent disagreement tells me I am on the right path.

just to be clear what you said is right  .... but also to view it as some king of police seems right to me   .... so i agree with you and those people who say its like a police lol

ohh another thing i forgot and will add as edit now

You are right in using physical things to explain karma. But reasoning can only get us this far. Reasoning does little to eliminate sufferings. The main wish of the buddha is to have everyone be free from sufferings and be enlightened. Since buddha has seen karma being responsible for sufferings he teaches us not to create karma. And since there many types of karma, there are many different teachings - 84,000 of them. Thus besides besides explaining karma, we must know that we should not create them.

Karma can be simply explained using the Newton's 3rd law : "Every action has a reaction which is equal in magnitude & opposite in direction." These actions include, thoughts, words & physical actions. Through the way we do these actions, we alter the momentum of the force that we emit in doing them. The return is always even equal to the depth of our intention in doing it. That's why Lord Buddha has asked us to remind the good thing we do in our life over & over again. It will increase the depth of our intention in doing it & increase the momentum of the return we get.

I'm not sure that's accurate, it might apply to physics, but kamma seems a bit more complex. I don't think every karmic action has an equal reaction, and I believe karmic actions plants the seeds for future results, that may or may not ripen.

@m2015 Yeah that ripening or not ripening is based on the depth of the intention. Even though some karma wave off when attaining arihath, there are still some karma which gives the result. As for an example "Seevali Thero" never lacked dhana. Buddhism is purely science, I just took a simple approach to explain the fact.

physical thing and not a moral one

Karma is created as part of the Dependent Origination Process due to craving and clinging. In the  Since it is part of this process it is neither physical nor moral. In this context becoming is the karmic component. in the context of the 5 Aggregates the Karmic component is included in Formations which is not physical but mental. But morality is positive karma (gives results which is felt as being pleasant when experienced) an immorality is negative karma.

universe is a massive interweaving assemblage

The interactions are complex which only a Buddha shall know for sure. Having said this the universe is a complex interaction of many factors.

immoral actions and exacts a eventual penalty just for that reason

Immoral action does have penalties but there is no law giver. The next moment is conditioned from this moment with the input of fabrications created through volitional actions. Each moment has so much state built in, it is like a granary with abundance of seeds which can germinate at any moment to give results. Much of the this state is transferred from moment to moment. By staving each moment of input you can stop the accumulation of karmic seed.

Please do not take offense. I am still trying to digest this one. Your answers come from a pure canon perspective and that is highly appreciated ... but as a layman it takes me a bit to decipher them. It's cool, I really appreciate the different angle as it helps me broaden my perspective. Thank you! I will keep working on it!

No offence taken. Hope it provides food for thought and pointer for further learning.

The word karma literally means action, and action is motion, so it is of physical nature, it is the play of energy. Things (forms) exist as long as they act (inner-motion), and the process is either conscious, or unconscious. Therefore, human birth is of extreme importance.


text:
Karma and the creation of the earth
I believe I've heard that the earth, after periodical destruction, comes into being because because beings with unexpiated karma exist - some of them will need to be born as humans, some as animals. The earth therefore is necessary, and appears.
Does anyone recognize this description? References will be greatly appreciated.
Please note that my question is not about any absolute beginning of being or the universe (that issue firmly remaining unanswered I believe?)

i know of one sources on this which is the Agganna Sutta   from the digha nikaya 27

‘At that period, Vāseṭṭha, there was just one mass of water, and all was darkness, blinding darkness. Neither moon nor sun appeared, no constellations or stars appeared, night and day were not distinguished, nor months and fortnights, no years or seasons, and no male and female, beings being reckoned just as beings.827 And sooner or later, after a very long period of time, savoury earth828 spread itself over the waters where those beings were. It looked just like the skin that forms itself over hot milk as it cools. It was endowed with colour, smell and taste. It was the colour of fine ghee or butter, and it was very sweet, like pure wild honey.
‘Then some being of a greedy nature said: “I say, what can this be?” and tasted the savoury earth on its finger. In so doing, it became taken with the flavour, and craving arose in it.829 Then other beings, taking their cue from that one, also tasted the stuff with their fingers. They too were taken with the flavour, and craving arose in them. So they set to with their hands, breaking off pieces of the stuff in order to eat it. And [86] the result of this was that their self-luminance disappeared. And as a result of the disappearance of their self-luminance, the moon and the sun appeared, night and day were distinguished, months and fortnights appeared, and the year and its seasons. To that extent the world re-evolved.

http://www.palicanon.org/en/sutta-pitaka/transcribed-suttas/majjhima-nikaya/142-mn-88-bhitika-sutta-the-cloak.html


text:
If someone have experienced supernatural abilities through meditation, than why don't he shows it to world?
If somebody goes beyond fourth jhanas and has received super knowledge and also powers, than why don't he shows it to world and shares his knowledge and experience to world or say scientist and science community so that the general humans will believe in dharma and religion?

If the story of Jesus is believed to be true, Jesus did what is suggested in the question and look how Christianity turned out; thousands of years of killing over a (narcissistic) personal saviour.
Acts of magic or witchcraft will not change the majority of people for the better. This is why DN 11 teaches with proper wisdom the 'miracle of instruction' is superior to the 'miracle of psychic power'.

The objective of Dhamma is the work yourself out of stress and misery which is to follow the Noble 8 Fold Path. These kinds of practices diverts from this focus. If someone start practicing being attached by such display then most likely their goal will not be tied with the Buddhist goal.
Perhaps for this reason monks are not supposed to display such abilities. Even for lay, through there is not rule, it is not advisable as you are diverting the attention and focus from the true purpose of the practice. Also then meditation practitioners will be no different from magicians and illusionist, like David Copperfield. People will go to them to learn magic tricks and not to learn the dhamma with a view to Nirvana. People go to see David Copperfield for entertainment and not spiritual guidance! Also when displaying these abilities one might develop pride which would lead to one's downfall.
Displaying these abilities may attract a following and belief, but for the wrong reason.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html
Kevatta (Kevaddha) Sutta: To Kevatta
This Sutta talks about the drawbacks of displaying magical powers.
tl;dr it mostly just does not prove anything other that you do have the powers, people will still try to argue that it is not what you say it is.

Of Leonardo da Vinci it is known that he invented the principle of submarine boats - but also it is transmitted that he explains "why I do not give this to the open: because they would use it for even more warfare on the sea" (paraphrased from memory). Similar caveats have been sometimes explicated in science (for instance with atombomb by Einstein and others - documented in a biography I've read).
Anyway... the best answer on this has surely been given by @Suminda and the idea with it should be a frequent topic in self-observation and meditation.


text:
Can a person with harmful thoughts still meditate?
If a person has enemies and wants to take revenge, then can he meditate? Will those thoughts stop the person from meditating even if he doesn't think those things while meditating?

If a person has enemy's and wants to take vengance, than can he do meditation?

Of course he can. Insight meditation is the only way to permanently uproot the causes for those thoughts, i.e. the root defilement of hatred and namely Ignorance (avijja).

Will such thoughts never let the person do meditation even if he don't thinks such things while meditating?

All formations are impermanent so its not possible for something to "never let" anyone do something. That's an extreme view.
It might be more challenging to do meditation while the hindrances are present. But it is necessary. One can only purify the mind by dealing with the hindrances. It just means that there is work to be done.
Loving-kindness meditation is a great way of over coming thoughts of hatred, vengeance and the like. See my answer here for a detailed description on how to practice Metta meditation.

Think about the reverse.  Having enemies or thoughts of revenge at some point in a persons life is not really a rare thing.  How many people who meditate do you think have completely avoided this in their lives?  Grist for the mill.

If you have harmful thoughts Metta meditation is the antidote for such thoughts. It might be difficult to do but this will help in alleviating such thoughts.
If negative thoughts arise they also can be displaced using the following method:
(1) Thought displacement - turn his attention to a different sign connected with the wholesome.
(2) Aversion therapy - should examine the disadvantage [the danger] of those thoughts
(3) Non-attention - he should not mind them, he should disregard them
(4) Thought reduction - should attend to the stilling of the thought-formation
(5) The last resort: Sustained effort - with clenched teeth and the tongue pressing on the palate, he should subdue, restrain, attack the (bad) mind with the (good) mind
Adopted from: Vitakka Saṇṭhāna Sutta
One objective of Metta is breaking down the mental classification you have towards individual beings or classes of them into groups which you deem favorable, unfavorable or neutral and reacting to them with pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feeling associated with each classification. One such classification systems would be me, beings I like, neutral or unknown beings and being you do not like. When you break down the classification you will like everyone like yourself. Another classification could be same country, neutral country and enemy country. When you break down the mental classification system you will love everyone as your fellow country men. Another classification could be higher life forms, lower life forms and same level life forms. When you break down this classification you will love all living beings equally.
When you classify if a being is from a favorable category you react with pleasant sensation, unfavorable category with unpleasant sensation and neutral category with unpleasant sensations. These sensation lead to the unwholesome roots of craving for the favorable and pleasant, aversion towards the unfavorable and unpleasant and ignorance towards the neutral, as discussed in the Pahāna Sutta. When such reaction stops you stop creating negative mental states and come out of misery.
In order to develop Metta you should wish every one in every category you can imagine to be well and happy. Also know how the classifications are woulding in the back of your mind and know mental reaction and sensation. Say you remember and foe look at the mental reaction and sensations that follow. If you remember a loved one see the mental reaction and the sensations that follows. Try to be equanimous knowing the changes and and arising and passing nature of the sensations.
Once the favorable and unfavorable categorisations are broken you do not despair if you meet with non loved one and with equanimity you do not get attached to others. Beings cannot cause you stress. You are free from negative thoughts about other and also this itself can take you to the final goal of Nirvana.

well what if a person don't want to forgive his enemy's but still want to do meditation just to get more power inside?

Not forgiving means there is aversion which is and unwholesome root as well as a hindrance. So you cannot go deep with your meditation. As you meditate more you will find that you can forgive more. Meditation aso help to forgive. Sometimes it seems hard to forgive. In which case you have to work on it so you eventually is done. This is no easy that it needs effort. This might mean mediating more and when in meditation ill will or aversion comes up trying to displace the thoughts with more positive thoughts.

"If a person has enemies and wants to take revenge, then can he meditate? "
---------
Yes you can.
It is called Mitya Samadhi. (wrong concentration)


text:
What does "Namaste" mean in Buddhism context and why is it even associated with Buddhism?
A commenter on the NewBuddhist blog claimed that one should not say Namaste in a Tibetan Buddhist event (in this context).

I remember one time saying "Namaste" while at a Tibetan Buddhist event, and someone quickly pulled me aside and said, "Oh, no-- do not say 'Namaste!' Say, 'Tashi Delek!'"
I'm not entirely sure why I brought that up... perhaps because I'm still confused as to why it was wrong to say Namaste.
-- SillyPutty

I'd like to make a disclaimer that I am not from a Buddhist country so I'm confused. I never even read from anywhere that The Buddha even says this, or is the phrase really Buddhist -- you can imagine my confusion.
Is this a modern phrase? What is its connection to Buddhism?

Namaste is a greeting in the Hindu custom and does not have a context in Buddhism.

Namaste (/ˈnɑːməsteɪ/, Hindi: [nəməsteː] (About this sound listen))), sometimes spoken as Namaskar, Namaskaram is a respectful form of greeting in Hindu custom, found on the Indian subcontinent mainly in India and Nepal and among the Indian diaspora. It is used both for salutation and valediction. Namaste is usually spoken with a slight bow and hands pressed together, palms touching and fingers pointing upwards, thumbs close to the chest. This gesture is called Añjali Mudrā or Pranamasana.
In Hinduism it means "I bow to the divine in you".The greeting may also be spoken without the gesture or the gesture performed wordlessly, carrying the same meaning

Then why do Buddhists say this purposely if its not connected to Buddhism in the first place?

Buddhist do not say it as far as I know. It is the Hindus who say it.

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/search?q=namaste try this link. People in this sub even use it as a greeting

These are from Indian users of the site. Culturally they say Namaste as a westerner would say good morning. This is cultural thing in dominant Hindu countries.

I see. So it's more of a cultural thing than Buddhist thing. Thank you!

@Bwrites: you misunderstand. It is a language thing. Being asked to say 'Merci' in France instead of 'Thank you' is not a cultural thing, it is because people in France speak French, not English. Likewise, people in Tibet don't speak Hindi.

My impression from travelling in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand & Nepal is 'namaste' is Indian & Nepalese & not related to Buddhism.

Namaste, sometimes spoken as Namaskar, Namaskaram is a respectful form of
  greeting in Hindu custom, found on the Indian subcontinent mainly in
  India and Nepal and among the Indian diaspora. It is used both for
  salutation and valediction. Namaste is usually spoken with a
  slight bow and hands pressed together, palms touching and fingers
  pointing upwards, thumbs close to the chest. This gesture is called
  Añjali Mudrā or Pranamasana. In Hinduism it means "I bow to the divine
  in you". The greeting may also be spoken without the gesture or the
  gesture performed wordlessly, carrying the same meaning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namaste

So it's more of a cultural(on a country level) thing, and not a Buddhist thing?

I think so. I have only observed internet Buddhists use the phrase.

I have seen it between Osho-disciples/-sannyasins and inheritants, and learned it in courses in the 90 ies here in my hometown (Neo-tantra & relatives). I liked the sentiment with it much and accustomed myself to it. Surprising - but good to know now, that it is not common within buddhism and I can avoid possible discomfort... .

Namaste means that the good in me recognizes the good in you. It is generally an Indian greeting and I agree with the sentiment. In fact, I agree with many things expressed by various hindu doctrine. Probably because I spend a lot of time with the Upanishads.
The fact that some may find the term's use distasteful in some other context merely reiterates its' beauty. The GOOD in me ... the part of me that exists beyond all the political smatterings and social claptrap ... recognizes and appreciates the GOOD in you ... whether I disagree with your opinions or life et al.
It is truly a remarkable sentiment and impervious to such trivial attacks. You have found some common ground or commonality between the two of you despite all other things. You have connected.


text:
What is the essence of spiritual enlightenment
I once read, I don't recall where, that Buddha stated that spiritual enlightenment is not suffering. That he put it in a negation on purpose. Ok, I get that, not suffering.
With NLP I learned there are 2 types of motivation. 1). Moving away from. 2). Moving towards to. The second is more valuable in my experience, because it brings me want I want, instead of something that differs from what I do not want, but isn't necessarily something I would want instead.
So to be able to move towards experiencing spiritual enlightenment I need to know what is.
I would like to known, in simple words, what spiritual enlightenment is. So the question is, what is the essence of spiritual enlightenment?

Hello - welcome to Buddhusm Q&A. The purpose of this question seems to be to serve as a lead to post the link to your video. While we appreciate the spirit of contribution we would like to preserve the authentic Q&A format of this site and not let it become a generic forum or board. Thank you for your cooperation and welcome!

@AndreiVolkov I understand your point. Thank you for point it out and for the welcome. How about putting the definitions given in the video in the answer below and come to the final description. Would that add to the authenticity of this site. In any case YouTube is down, the information is still availble. I will add the unraveling to this post. The main motivation is sharing that which adds to the quality of life.

May I share my research, by posting questions on this site and self-answering them?

I once read, I don't recall where, that Buddha stated that spiritual
  enlightenment is not suffering.

This is wrong. Enlightenment is wisdom. The result of wisdom is no suffering. Therefore, wisdom itself & no suffering are not exactly the same thing (although the former leads to the later).

That he put it in a negation on purpose. Ok, I get that, not
  suffering.

This is also wrong. The Buddha said the sole purpose of his spiritual path was complete freedom of mind. (MN 29)

With NLP

Wikipedia states:

NLP has since been overwhelmingly discredited scientifically but continues to be marketed by some hypnotherapists and by some companies
  that organize seminars and workshops on management training for
  businesses. There is no scientific evidence supporting the claims
  made by NLP advocates and it has been discredited as a pseudoscience
  by experts.

I learned there are 2 types of motivation. 1). Moving away from. 2).
  Moving towards to. The second is more valuable in my experience,
  because it brings me want I want, instead of something that differs
  from what I do not want, but isn't necessarily something I would want
  instead.

The Buddhist path uses 'moving away' ('abandoning'; 'giving up') to achieve the goal. It is the opposite of what you have written.
Enlightened Buddhist have said: "To be happy, the mind must give up the desire to be happy".

So to be able to move towards experiencing spiritual enlightenment I
  need to know what is.

The result of enlightenment is an absence of greed, hatred & delusion. To move towards experiencing enlightenment requires abandoning these very three mental impurities. By moving away from selfish desiring, the mind moves towards what is desired. As Jesus said: "To save one's life, one must lose one's life".

I would like to known, in simple words, what spiritual enlightenment
  is.

In Buddhism, most simply, enlightenment is seeing how attachment & self-view is suffering; in such a way that attachment & self-view are given up or dropped by the mind.

So the question is, what is the essence of spiritual enlightenment?

MN 37 most briefly summarises the entire teachings as: "Nothing ought to be attached to (as I, me or mine)". This is the essence of Buddhist enlightenment.

'NLP has since been discredited' I don't care. What works, works, no matter what acronym refers to it. The word 'free' can't be found in the MN29 URL you posted. The word mind is found in context of a unified mind, not being free of it. To me that is fundamentally different. My mind doesn't cause me to suffer, how I use it potentially does. "To be happy, the mind must give up the desire to be happy" To be happy I follow my feelings to point towards what makes me happy. "greed, hatred & delusion" don't find their origin in solely focussing on what sensual information provide FAFAIK.

"Nothing ought to be attached to (as I, me or mine)" doesn't say anything about what spirit nor enlightenment is in the simplest way.

You can't tell someone to give up and not attach. You can however tell someone to analyse what their senses provide with information and follow what yields positive results. That also results in being free from ego and suffering. But by telling how to, not by telling what should be absent first. Much easier to focus on what feels positive than to tell yourself, I should not be greedy. Simply feeling greedy as negative and therefore dropping it doesn't even need the intellect to define it as greedy. Just feel it doesn't bring foward hapiness and let go. That is spiritual enlightenment,no thinkn

So the question is, what is the essence of spiritual enlightenment?

The essence of Enlightenment, in short, is to be stress free.
This is by understanding the 4 Noble Truths and attaining Nirvana, which is realised through the Noble 8 Fold Path organised into the 3 Fold Training, which essentially is the path out of stress and misery, or the path to Nirvana.

Thank you for answer. I've studied Buddhism. I value it. But from my perspective all that information is not the essence of spiritual enlightenment. Rather a lot of implications and 'how to's' including a lot of does and don'ts. That I find valuable after I understood what spiritual enlightenment is, otherwise I feel like I 'can't see the forest for the trees'.

To me that feels like answering the question: "What is programming"? With going into depth of how a CPU works on the level where electrons fly through all the semiconductors to process instructions and how NAND and AND ports work where there is something like memory which can be addressed, etc,etc. A lot of details, by which the essence becomes obscured. I can't share my sister the 4 noble truths, 8 fold path and 3 fold training when she is not into Buddhism in 5 minutes. I did however, share with here the video I made, which she understood right away. Because it stays close to the essence.

This is a good answer. The essence is indeed to be stress free and the Noble Truths explain that essential meaning.

The essence of enlightenment is awakening to the truth and getting rid of delusion.

I think I've found the most simple and truthful description out there. Which is
"Knowing and understanding, without reasoning, how information, obtained directly through the senses, relates to the true nature of the force that gives the time for something to exist and function"
I've come to this sentence by simply looking up words in a dictionary and combining their definitions. To me this is so true.
To short cut to how this reduces suffering: Emotion is a sense (almost no one uses it consciously like that where I live). It is a sense that lets you know how you feel. You can sense when you are creating suffering. Then when you sense that you are suffering you can concentrate on that feeling. When you combine that with knowing that you only experience a subjective reality by which meaning is created by you when you observe it, and meaning doesn't exist on its own in an objective reality. You have the tools to find out what meaning you are attaching to something that makes you suffer. When you dive into that you will find that what you are observing, and attaching meaning to, is an illusion. It always comes down to mistake subjective for objective that makes you a victim and makes you suffer. Seeing that you are making the mistake is the antidote for suffering and therefore you can let go of the illusion. So getting closer to reality starts with sensing. So the essence of spirituality is sensing how to stay close to that which works/ is life/ is truth.
Nothing that you observe includes how you need to feel about it. Feeling is only known to you by sensing.
The unraveling of the words "spiritual enlightenment" to the description stated in bold above is shown here in this ~5 min. video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNQiWyX1IIU

I like video, it has a great sentiment, but from a Buddhist perspective it does not seem to address the central  issue of suffering.

@m2015 I am planning on creating more short to the point videos. In those videos I have in mind we will get to the subject of suffering and the cause of it. But first I want to address, examples of experiencing spiritual enlightenment, reality and the dichotomy of objective and subjective reality, the origin of meaning and content, emotion as a sense and then the bridge to sensing suffering and seeing that you are the cause of your own suffering, that it is a state of mind. But to put that all in one lengthy video is a lot of work :) I like to 'ship' intermediate sequential worthy videos.

@m2015 I wish I had more time to make all these videos as soon as possible. But I have to earn money with a day job and do this in the evening hours :) But I will certainly create them. Great to see that other people see value in it.

Looking forward to seeing more.

The answer in your 5min video can be summarized as "interdependent origination" in Buddhism. That being said, your explanation is disconnected from the main values of Buddhism and the words of those who have achieved the Goal. Sorry but using a dictionary is not going to be enough to be define Buddhist spiritual enlightenment.

@Ahmed May I correct your comment? You 'think' that it is disconnected from the main values. If you 'think' that is reality, you have an illusion if you ask me. As in objective reality there is no such thing as being disconnected from a main value. I think that it is perfectly aligned, only described differently and very to the point without going into the implications, perfectly suited for a western culture oriented mind I would say. The 5 min video is not intended to describe all implications.

@Amhed Also, why do you think this video wants to compete with the view of Buddhism? It doesn't in my opinion. I have a notion you are judging the content. You could just pick out what is valuable to you and leave the 'sorry'. For whom or what do you feel sorry? For me? That is not necessary at all!

Spiritual enlightenment is such a general term. Meeting it with a general definition I'd say it's one of those "aha!" moments when you discover the line between our physical existence and our consciousness.
Before you try to rewrite your belief system via Noah Webster you might read the Isha, Katha, and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads. I'd recommend the translations by Easwaran Eknath.

The video is purely intellectual. It transmits little, if any, insight. It sounds worldly rather than spiritual. Its conclusion at the end, about "creation", is the opposite of Buddhism. Also, you told a lie in your answer, when you posted: "I think I found". This was pre-planned. In Buddhism, enlightenment is truth rather than lies. The Buddha taught his 7 year old son to never tell a deliberate lie.

@Dhammadhatu It is not purely intellectual if you apply it. Do you use your emotions as a sense to know when you are creating suffering, investigate what you are doing, and let go of what you clang to because you see that what you where focussing on is an illusion instead of truth that works? The video is aimed at western people that haven't awoken yet. Because that is majority. Not at full time temple monks in Tibet. Try to draw a sleeping western oriented minds attention to a dhamma. A 5 min video with simplicity  may contain more potential to trigger interest in waking to reality.

Perhaps you would find more in common with people who speak about 'Nonduality' instead of Buddhism? You could start with Byron Katie and her site about "The Work" which is a self-inquiry technique for unseating thoughts that cause one to suffer. Similar goal to Buddhism, very different descriptions and route. I appreciate your sincere intention to be of help, but "different strokes for different folks." Namaste

I feel this answer shows deep and very valuable approach. In traditional Buddhist terms, it's based on mindfulness of feelings, one of the Four Bases of Mindfulness. From the point of view of Mahayana, it's observation of emptiness of dharmas - the essence of the Heart Sutra. Many people know those but few know how to actually practice them efficiently. I wish there will be more such interesting and deep answers. The only problem, the definition is long and not very clear. Maybe that's why the answer got the downvotes. I advise to cut out the definition and focus on that practical mechanism.

@MikedeKlerk, PS: Better explain the topic not from the point of view of theories - but from the POV of the mechanism that you described. The experience. What you actually do and recommend. Because the theories you want to use to introduce people are too shallow from the point of view of learned Buddhists. For example, Buddhism has deeper views on "objective" and "subjective". So please explain the method from the point of view of experience, and leave out philosophy until you learn Buddhist philosophy much deeper. Otherwise shallow theories would block some people from your valuable message.

@changzhao I understand what you mean with shallow with respect to a learned Buddhist. My aim with the video is more to trigger those who haven't entered the stream yet rather than an arahant. Thank you for your valuable feedback. I will contemplate on your words and let them incubate.

@MikedeKlerk, If you avoid even basic philosophy, then you wouldn't contradict deeper Buddhist concepts. For example, instead of speaking of "subjective" and "objective", making statements about them, say something like: "We can feel the same things differently. You know that, right? Remember, you had a problem which seemed hard, and then something happened - maybe someone smiled at you, or you just noticed smell of flowers, walking down a boulevard... Or a fresh wind from the sea... And you realized: those hardships can be solved, no need to torture yourself!" ...Or use Buddhist parables. :)


text:
thoughts in heart
I have read from abhidhamma book saying that our thoughts generate inside heart and heart is invisible to naked eye and untouchable. this statement in abhidhamma can't be accepted with modern day science. my certain question is when heart transplant took place what happen to person's thoughts? will the thought of heart owner transfer to the patient? Can someone give proper explanation on this?

Heart (Sanskrit hridaya) also means mind. The same is true for Chinese Xin, Japanese Kokoro and the like. The etymology might be: hrid - center, ayam - this. In Tantric Buddhism it is said that heart, or more precisely "Heart center" is located in the center of the chest, on the central channel. It is considered to be the seat of mind, or "the seat of Pure Consciousness". Similar views can be found in Hindu yoga, Taoism and other ancient teachings.
It is said that the central point of mind can move up and down along the central channel, and when unwholesome emotions arise, such as greed or anger, it shifts to the left or to the right from the central channel.
More details can be found in Tibetan Buddhist literature.
So I guess that the text you mentioned speaks not about the physical heart. And I think that modern knowledge of anatomy or physiology does not invalidate these views, because they are the result of contemplation of energies by means of our feelings. Even if modern science "doesn't know those kinds of energies", it's clear that our feelings can be interpreted as movements of energy.
For example, we might say: "I felt all my energy drained", or "Seeing that smile I felt that new fresh energy fills me", and the like. If you think about it, these feelings are not less real perceptions than what we see with our eyes. So they don't need to be kinds of physical energy, it's enough that they are real as our perceptions, and their knowledge can be used in training our mind and improving our lives.
PS. Some interesting references:

http://www.buddhism-dict.net/cgi-bin/xpr-ddb.pl?q=心
http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/Heart
http://mahajana.net/texts/kopia_lokalna/soothill-hodous.html (search for "心")

Abhidhamma says heart base. This is physically in the areas where the heart is but not necessary the physical organ. This is where mind resides in a pint point area where the heart is, through the body functions are controlled by the brain.
See: Abhidharmartha Pradeepika By Amaradasa Rathnapala, vol 1, p23 - p25; A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, p144
If a heart transplant takes place it is the physical organ which is changed. It is not the mind which is changed which depends on the materiality of the heart's location. Therefore heart base does not change with heart transplant. Also the mind is not physical though it depends on materiality of the location. When the new heart is put in would operate based on the materiality of the new heart.

Can you explain little bit more about "heart base". Because i have a sinhala abhidhamma book here with me written by Prof.Renukane chadavimala thero saying about only heart.If you can read "Abhidhamma margaya" page 114 vastu sangrahaya. This is confusing!

It is said the mind is in a pinpoint location around there the heart is, this is the heart base.

Is this cope with modern medical science? As we know,heart is a pump which circulate blood all over the body carrying oxygen and nutrition to brain and all other organs. Can we accept that Buddha made statement like this?

What would happen to the Vinnana during the time of an open heart surgery where the heart is inactive for the function of pumping blood?

Does the Vinnana get changed from one heart tissue to another in case of the heart transplant?

Where does Vinnana reside during the period of tissue transition (several hours)?

case of using an artificial heart, we can assume that engineers do not make any provision for the tiny heart hole' as they are not aware of the requirement. But we know the person who carry the 'heart pump' live normally. In this case what happens to the Vinnana?

This is a view expressed in the commentaries and not canonical as per  A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi. When you are in surgery you are unconscious hence mind-consciousness does not arise. Vinnana is a process. It is not always active. When not active you are in Bhavanga. Based on a stimuli only consciousness arises.

Heart even in non-Buddhist thinking often refers to the innermost, for example 'the heart of the matter'.

Both, brain and heart, are not important in buddhism, because arūpabhramma has not both.
So in buddhism, brain and heart are not important.
Brain and heart are just mechanism, that are arised by consciousness.


text:
Does chanting have a practical and exclusive benefit?
Other chanting answers tend to explain tradition, but this question only concerns practicality.
Are the benefits of chanting exclusive, or can your practice easily be full and productive using other techniques?
For example, I don't sit lotus for any special reason. Simply to maximize stability and lessen distraction while meditating. Could someone develop a great practice sitting in a chair instead?  I would guess they could, without necessarily missing something important.
On the contrary, if someone wanted to understand and fully benefit from Buddhism by becoming a master scholar, yet without putting in serious time meditating, I can't see how they'd even really achieve understanding let alone full benefit.
So which is it in this case? Is chanting just one of many paths of practice that is good, but not the only way?  Or is it something fundamental such that omitting it is necessarily a detriment?
(if it matters, I most often study metta meditation personally, but often sit with diverse groups where chanting is done)

Hello Lee and welcome to Buddhism SE. We also have a Guide and a Resource tab for new users, that you might like. Enjoy your time here.

Chanting is not essential.  I can't think of a single instance where the Buddha advised it in the Pali canon.  That being said, it is a lovely practice for so many reasons. Chanting provides a nice break during long periods of sitting (as on a retreat).  It's a great way to wake yourself up in the morning; going right to the cushion is generally a one way ticket back to sleep!  Chanting also develops concentration.  Try chanting the Lotus Sutra in a phonetic transliteration of Japanese...it takes a ton of brain power!  Most importantly, however, chanting helps strengthen the bonds of community.  All voices find unity in Buddhist chants.  You keep pace with your neighbor.  Your breathing starts to synchronize.  The whole room permeates with a shared spirit.  It's a really beautiful practice.

It is an antidote for the Hindrance of Sloth and Torpor

(3) RECITATION. If, Moggallāna, that drowsiness still would not go away, then, Moggallāna, you
  should recite in detail a teaching that you have learned.
It is possible that when you do so, that drowsiness
  would go away.

Pacalā Sutta
It starting point to builds concentration also take you to the final goal of liberation.

he himself recites the Dharma in detail to others, just as he has heard it, just as he has mastered
  it in theory.
Bhikshus, just as the monk recites the Dharma to others, he knows the goal and he knows the
  Dharma,
  he knows the goal and he knows the Dharma.
Knowing the goal and knowing the Dharma,
gladness arises in him;
because of gladness, zest arises;
because of zest, the body becomes tranquil;
when the body is tranquil, he feels happy;
a happy mind becomes concentrated.
This, bhikshus, is the third ground for liberation where the unliberated mind of a monk, dwelling
  heedful and exertive, finds liberation;
  or where the mental influxes, not wholly destroyed, become wholly destroyed, where the unattained
  unsurpassed safety from the yoke is attained.

Vimutt’āyatana Sutta