text:
Can this cause a rebirth as a homosexual?
I've been thinking about this for quite some time, and decided to ask the forum, perhaps someone have more knowledge about this. (sorry for grammar mistakes (if there's any), English is not my first language)
Recently, I watched a film about a gay couple. I like their relationship, so I decided to support them because I saw in several Buddhist sources (including answers on Buddhism Stack Exchange) that homosexual relationship is no different than heterosexual relationship.
But then I remember that upādāna (attachment) conditions bhava (existence, becoming). So, will liking, supporting, and continuing to watch that film causes rebirth as a gay person?
If someone can clear this out for me, it'll be much appreciated

I think this can only evoke opinion. Adding to that, I'm struggling to see where the matter is. We've occupied many different forms previously, and many will follow. There is a sutta where such thinking is discouraged. I don't know the name of the sutta, but the pertinent lines are something like, what will I be in the future? How will I be in the future?... Perhaps another member can locate that for you. ;-)

@NeuroMax Thank you, I've read that sutta somewhere before. This became my concern because apparently being born as a homosexual is a result of bad karma and a transgression of the path(?) but after reading your answer, I think it's not really a problem if a person is born homosexual. So do you think there's no problem for me to continue liking & supporting that couple?

I can't answer that question for you. We support people for many reasons. The fact that you're asking that question, suggests that you see a problem with it, so you've likely got the answer yourself. By and large, it matters not what others think. ;-)

I asked because I thought supporting them can lead to a rebirth as I mentioned above (because I thought homosexuality isn't 'ideal' according to Buddhism (is it?)). But after reading your answers, I'm pretty sure I'm convinced otherwise.. thank you for your answers!

As a lay follower, homosexuality is negligible in terms of here-and-now lay practice. By the way, welcome to the site. Please read the help section for some useful information on how to use the site. ;-)

Sorry, can you elaborate more on 'negligible in terms of here-and-now lay practice'? I don't quite understand.. thank you, by the way!

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Since there is no normative difference between gay and straight from either a biological or a Buddhist perspective, why does it matter?
Sexual orientation is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. It's not a conscious choice. So, in the same line of reasoning, if you watch a movie where you feel sympathy for a character suffering under genetic, hormonal or environmental factors, like:

Sophie's Choice, you will be worried to be reincarnated as a persecuted woman?

a documentary on Stephen Hawking, you will be worried to be reincarnated as a man with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis?

a documentary on bone cancer in newborns, you will be worried to be reincarnated as a baby with bone cancer?

a documentary on HIV/aids ravaging populations, you will be worried to be reincarnated having HIV?

a documentary on tsunami victims, you will be worried to be reincarnated to die in a tsunami?

If your answer on any of these is "no", I would suggest some introspection as to why you treat that condition differently.
For clarity: I'm not comparing sexual orientation to a disease. I'm giving examples of conditions caused by genetic, hormonal or environmental factors.

I was worried because apparently what one consistently thinks and ponders about, becomes the inclination of their awareness (copied from ruben2020's answer). But your answer gives me a new way to think about this matter, thank you!

A detective from a homicide police dept. has to constantly think and ponder about brutal crime. Except for a few statistical aberrations, none of these detectives becomes a murderer just because they ponder crime all day for their profession.

Actors perform, intoxicated with the three poisons i.e. passion (also lust, greed), aversion (also hatred) and delusion, and they do so, spreading it to their audience.
Then the audience too become intoxicated with passion (also lust, greed), aversion (also hatred) and delusion, and this will affect their future, naturally, because what one consistently thinks and ponders about, becomes the inclination of their awareness.
This applies to any movie or performance, with unwholesome themes. The unwholesome theme in this case is passion or lust (lobha).

"Apparently, headman, I haven't been able to get past you by saying,
'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.' So I will simply
answer you. Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with,
who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on
things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst
of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin
with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more
aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage
in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion
to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even
more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on
stage in the midst of a festival.
Thus the actor — himself intoxicated & heedless, having
made others intoxicated & heedless — with the breakup of
the body, after death,
is reborn in what is called the hell of laughter. But if he holds such
a view as this: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a
festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation
of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is
reborn in the company of the laughing devas,' that is his wrong view.
Now, there are two destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell
you: either hell or the animal womb."
SN 42.2

"Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that
becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing
thinking imbued with sensuality, abandoning thinking imbued with
renunciation, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with
sensuality. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with ill will,
abandoning thinking imbued with non-ill will, his mind is bent by that
thinking imbued with ill will. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking
imbued with harmfulness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmlessness,
his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with harmfulness.
MN 19

Also, please see MN 57 for the story of ascetics who pretended to be animals, and SN 42.3 for the story of the warrior in battle.

So based on your answer, I think there's no differences between heterosexual or homosexual relationship then? Because both are rooted from passion/sensuality (lobha)?

Based on the story of ascetics who pretended to be animals, we will become what we try to be (...He develops dog behavior fully and unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs). My question, so if one keeps thinking about a person s/he likes, then in the next life, that person will be born as... what? That person doesn't try to be the person he's thinking about, so in this example, the case is different from the ascetic who pretended to be animals?

@iyin Let's put it this way. In Buddhism, you need to look at it from the perspective of mental defilements and how it causes suffering. As we can see, both are based on passion. The Acintita Sutta states: "The precise working out of the results of kamma is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it." We cannot guess how exactly karma will play out. It's best to understand wholesome vs. unwholesome and their effects.

You're right, both are based on passion, so I guess there's no need to worry about heterosexual or homosexual or anything like that since they're all the same?

@iyin Well, there are some monastic rules concerning the ordination of LGBT and intersex individuals. Please see pandaka.

Thank you! From what I read, I suppose there's no rules concerning LGBT for lay people?

@iyin That's right. I don't see any rules or precepts concerning LGBT for lay people.

I see, thank you very much for your answers and explanations!

Possible, on causes and effects, see answer in related question: What makes someone become a gay? , good householder.
So now good householder goes on to watch more Mr. Bean, or else? Uposatha Silas are of much benefits, countless more, for long time happiness.


text:
How do we perceive pitch-dark?
According to Abhidhamma, following four conditions must be satisfied for the arising of eye-consciousness.

Eye-door should be good
Visible object must be present
Light must be present
Attention must be present

So my question is, how do we perceive pitch-dark? Do we perceive pitch-dark with mind-consciousness?

Since you have tagged Abhidhamma, this might well be suited to @Bonn, and if he decides to answer, it might be quite intriguing.

In my understanding, light refers to form only with regards to eye consciousness. When there is pitch dark, there are no visible forms. But the other senses still remain in play perceiving the other aspects of form, for instance: the body feels the tactile sensations of form - a small breeze or the pressure of the body pushing against the ground. Likewise for the remaining sense organs and their respective sense objects. Therefore, this perpetuates the intellect-consciousness and with the absence of light but with the presence of the other sense organs and their sense objects, mind reconciles with itself by creating the perception of pitch dark.

Good answer. The suttas refer to visible form as a requirement for eye-consciousness, and this is absent in a pitch-dark cave. So the mind fabricates a perception of darkness, informed by input from the other senses.

Visible light is the visible spectrum of electromagnetic radiation which upon contact with the sensitive medium can be cognized by the nervous system.
When there is no color vision, that doesn't mean that the eye has no object, there is still vision but it is without color.
When you decide to look and see 'darkness', that experience depends on the nervous system interpreting, conceiving & perceiving the conditions that can be known with the eye element.
If you had no eye then looking wouldn't occur and no information would come into being based on the eye-instrument.
The absense of color vision is seen as a darkness with the eye element, that which sees is the eye, the uncolored spectrum visible is the seen and consciousness cognizes it as 'dark', perception perceives it as 'darkness', can be felt as pleasant or otherwise depending on the circumstance.
This directing of attention to seeing gives you knowledge you wouldn't have otherwise.
A person with no eye can't see darkness in a dark room, can't perceive shades or even direct attention to that knowledge & vision of darkness.
It is kind of evident in that you can see dark spaces in an otherwise illuminated room and there darkness is something you see & know with the eye due to seeing.
You can also think about it as seeing shades of black color as more or less uniform in terms of a distinguishable shape.

Thats a good answer and i think right. Spells out what i was trying to say in mine. You might be interested in the visual cortex aspect i added but other than that you covered it more/better

Interesting question. The Suttas say almost the same about eye-consciousness. Ive been thinking about this question. My opinion is that the suttas and abhidhamma are technically wrong . This marks the first time Ive ever held such an opinion, but I think eye-consciousness is present in pitch black when attention goes to the visual cortex; because samjna is happening. The visual cortex is still processing and creating summaries of the visual field to pass on to the rest of the brain, and attention is on that summary. In my opinion, that is what eye-consciousness is: the eye  giving raw sight data to the visual cortex which is summarizing it and applying edge detection etc and passing that summary on to the cortex default mode network . And all that is still happening.
Congratulations you’re the first person to ever convince me of a technical error by the Buddha. I say technical because I don’t think the omission from the normal teaching is detrimental in any way to any aspect of practice, but this is very interesting and could even be a useful, relatively short-term, contemplative lesson. If this is directly addressed elsewhere in the suttas or by a master saying the opposite, I’ll probably change my opinion. Thanks for an insightful question

I have never expected such answer. I'm sorry if I make you suspicious about the path and Buddha. To follow this path you must have faith in Buddha and you must trust Buddha. As I have mentioned in one of my old answers, "If we find contradiction somewhere in Dhamma, it's not because contradiction lies within Dhamma but may be because we don't really understand what's actually described or may be the lack of words in translating original pali canon to other languages which eventually leads to misconception."

Well it’s a very minor point. It wouldnt affect practice or faith in the path for someone.

In regards to the Abhidhamma, the op translation of 'light' is misleading, i am pretty sure the pali doesn't literally translate as light.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Could anyone explain: (1) What are the advantages of practicing Guru Yoga? (2) Why (or What are the reasons) practicing Guru Yoga has such advantages?
The question is just the title. Moreover, AFAIK, currently there are 2 editions of the 14th Dalai Lama Guru Yoga.
(1)  "The Source of All Attainments: The Yoga of the Inseparability of the Guru and Avalokiteshvara".
(2)  "A Stairway to Potala: Guru Yoga of Avalokiteshvara".

This is a question seriously asked. Why is this get downvoted?

Hi, I downvoted this question after awhile because there did not appear to me a satisfactory answer and guru yoga or vajrayana is a very fraught subject. There are very good practitioners on this site who I have confidence could give a good answer, but the fact that they have refrained from doing so tells me something.

I don’t practice vajrayana and am of the opinion that it should only be practiced by those with tremendous wisdom and oceans of merit. That’s not me and the silence of those who have such merit and wisdom speaks loudly that this question - while earnest and seriously asked - should be downvoted at this time and in this context. Hope that helps to explain.

@YesheTenley These 2 editions of the 14th Dalai Lama Guru Yoga were/are firstly publicly taught by Gelug Dharma teachers (i.e., Geshes, Rinpoches,... ) in Dharma centers in Taiwan to students to practice, even to students who have never practiced Vajrayana, when the week of the 14th Dalai Lama's birth day was coming. The Chinese edition of the 14th Dalai Lama Guru Yoga instructions, are freely available from (the publications of) the representative office of the 14th Dalai Lama and Tibet in Taiwan, and also freely available from Gelug Dharma teachers in Taiwan.

If practiced properly from a proper teacher, it is:
The fastest way to attain enlightenment.
Some of the reasons are:

The guru is the Buddha
if the guru is the Buddha we have direct access to Buddha teaching

this because: a method was developed by the Buddha, it was transmitted Orally for the first 500 years, after that, books where introduced with the Buddhas teachings to supplement the oral teachings. This teachings are still being teach verbally and in other ways as well. Qualified teachers (Gurus) have complete understanding from where the teachings came (lineage) and there is still unbroken lineages around.
IF we choose to practice Guru yoga. It is recommended that we do our homework and find a proper teacher(s) that we can trust and we feel connected. Also absolutely proper to ask question about lineage and from who they learn. Guru Yoga and Vajrayana wont work if is from a not proper teacher and is said to be dangerous if practice wrongly.
I hope this answer the question! also sorry if there is any typo.

I upvoted this. IMO, this pretty much answers the OP. From a Vajrayāna perspective, the guru is a Perfectly Enlightened Buddha. The Saṃgha is his body, the Buddha is his mind, and the Dharma is his speech. Learning directly from a Buddha is better than learning from a non-Buddha. From a non-Vajrayāna perspective, none of this necessarily applies. The refuge is not in the guru in non-Tantric Mahāyāna, and the guru is not the three jewels in non-Tantric Mahāyāna.

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


text:
What are the signs indicating onset of wisdom because of meditation practice?
One of the benefits of the meditation practice that is widely talked about is becoming more wise. I am not sure if there is a universal definition of wisdom so I am trying to see what wisdom other practitioners here have "realized" during the course of their practice. How did you realize you were becoming more wise and what exactly is this wisdom if you are able to convey it in writing?

One would think that stopping looking for these signs would be a sure sign.

@BolucPapuccuoglu Exactly. The reason being that one is not able to judge one's own wisdom. Of course it needs wisdom to recognize that. At which state one would also humbly and politely reject other people's judgement -- at least the flattering ones -- because others are in an even worse position to judge one's wisdom...

Traditionally it is described as "discernment". In simple words, you don't lump everything in black and white categories anymore, you see nuances. Your answers become much more "it depends" than before.
That's one sign. Another one is how you act. Previously, you acted out your frustration or disagreement as-is. Now you see: what's the point of getting angry if it won't improve things. You get more rational and less swayed by emotions, because you can see further down the road.
Another improvement is the expanded scope of your awareness. Previously you were aware of one topic you were thinking or talking about. Now you are effortlessly aware of a hundred other things and factors. You have a rich context and perspective on things. You effortlessly see "whereas", "therefore", and "on the other hand" of things.
The expanded scope of awareness allows you to no longer get stuck in a single interpretation. You don't get stuck in a negative picture of the world (or any other limited perspective). In Buddhist terms, you don't get stuck in a single world.

When reading the title I was thinking of a flippant answer along the way "when you have it you'll know" (which seems to be kind of a cop-out you see in this or similar form often). But your points are not only very well put, but actually match my experience. "Wisdom" does not mean that one becomes an all-knowing quantum scientist through meditation, but the effects you describe is what could be seen as the very definition of what the "symptoms" of being a wise person look like. Very well answered.

With wisdom there will be less suffering:

AN5.136:3.7: They’re wise. They have the wisdom of arising and passing away which is noble, penetrative, and leads to the complete ending of suffering.

Please note the "arising and passing" phrase. Suffering arises when there is clinging to what must pass. Although universal, suffering (and therefore wisdom) will arise individually according to the nature of that individual suffering.
For example, the urge to steal may arise, and one may mistakenly identify with that urge to ill effect. But that urge will also pass on its own. So it can be endured and relinquished. The wise avoid stealing. But the unwise do not.
In general, suffering is entangled with the limits of greed, hate and delusion. Right wisdom relinquishes those limits in a certain way:

SN35.72:5.1: “Good, mendicant! And regarding the eye, you will truly see clearly with right wisdom that: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’

So wisdom grows in the individual according to how that individual relinquishes craving. Empty of craving, wisdom then becomes universal.

You may find it helpful to refer to Visuddhiñana-katha/The Progress of Insight by Mahasi Sayadaw, which explains the signs that a meditator recevies from a Theravadin perspective. It's fairly comprehensive.
Personally, if I were to summarize it, you will reach a stage where you have a very deep understanding that nothing your mind craves in the outside world can ever be satisfactory because of annica/impermanence. This leads to a natural loss of desire for chasing things in the material world because they cannot bring lasting joy & a withdrawal of the senses inward. You'll also likely find yourself sticking to the precepts much more easily because you understand how breaking them creates the conditions for continued suffering. Like a child who sticks his hand in the fire for the first time and learns that fire burns; you won't want to engage in certain vices anymore. And then a bunch of other signs also, which is explained in far greater detail in the text I mentioned.

I think wisdom refers to insight into/ experience of

suffering, it's causes and how to be free of it
interdependence
impermanence
emptiness
non-conceptuality
no inherently existing separate self

and how to live a meaningful life according to it that benefits and liberates you and other beings.
Some features I experience(d) in meditation (shamatha awareness of awareness) and life that point into this direction (although it's hard to put into words and I might be wrong about thinking that it points towards wisdom, I'm not a professional):

thoughts, emotions and so on just arise and pass in my mind, often I can just watch them without getting entangled with them, without seeing them as meaningful, permanent or „mine“ and without an immediate urge to act on them.
pain (especially mental/emotional one) arises and passes, but it's not neccessary and inevitable to suffer from it. Awareness seems indestructible and there's always joy and equanimity that can be accessed in deep meditation.
I'm not as attached to entities of the world anymore. I don't need them to find happiness or peace, since these are in awareness itself. Events in the world arise, pass and repeat themselves anyway, I'm kind of not that interested in them anymore (except if it causes suffering to others).
'Love' (or rather loving kindness) and happiness due to it come from inside me unconditionally, not from others being nice to me or attached to me.
Happiness is happiness and suffering is suffering, no matter in which being they arise. I just don't want anyone to suffer, but to be happy instead, no matter their relationship to „me“.
I don't really feel like having a real, permanent and separate self: Mental events rise and pass without being mine or controlled by „me“, I don't feel that much like having permanent character traits, I don't feel very connected to my past or possible future, „my“ body feels like an arbitrary vessel of conciousness, in deep meditation I feel like an abstract, spacious awareness (which is peaceful, vivid and benevolent). (although I have to admit that this feeling/attitude is also kind of strange and especially when talking about it, it feels/sounds a bit like a personality disorder)
Often it's not neccessary and not helpful to put labels onto entities or beings, to put them into categories and judge them accordingly.

Becoming wise means having much understanding of essentials and thus exceptional foresight to avoid trouble.
One's behavior changes more or less gradually but changes are discernable immediately due to the kind of thoughts associated with knowledge.

For me, when I meditate regularly I'm not as easily hijacked by my emotions; I inhabit a calm place. While wisdom is a subjective term, operating from a calm center feels like a wise thing to do because I can observe what's happening around me without getting caught up in it.


text:
Why Become Buddhist?
I am interested in Theravada Buddhism.
What are some concrete reasons as to why one should become a Buddhist?

The great hair styles...

To become what you already are.

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/44065/so-what-is-a-buddhist-and-what-makes-a-person-a-buddhist check out those answers, there's really not much consensus on what makes a Buddhist.

You don't "become" a Buddhist. It's not an identity, it's a way of exploring what identity means.

@WillyWonka - it would be good if you could expand that wise comment into an answer! ;-)

Why Become Buddhist?

A fully enlightened Buddha's teaching is the only thing that bring about complete cessation of suffering.
Nothing else can do that. Doesn't really matter if the word "Buddhist" is used. What's important is that the teaching contains "The Four Noble Truths" since only such a teaching can issue liberation from the rounds of suffering for good.

There is no word in Pali, Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese, Korean, Japanese,... that corresponds to the Wester "-ist" qualifier.
For example, in Chinese & Japanese, the term used is 佛教徒 (Ch: Fójiào tú, J: Bukkyōto), lit. "Buddhist teachings people".
Also, in many Oriental countries there is no exclusive attribute: I've seen Thai people worship both a Buddha and a Ganesh statue; I know Japanese people that would identify simultaneously as Shinto and Buddhist.
I just wanted to get that stated first, because it's important to answer your question. Buddhism is not an "-ism" like other "-isms" in Western context. It is not a religion in the sense that requires anything supernatural to operate. It is more a method, a philosophy than a religion in the Western, Abrahamic sense.

"Do not be idolatrous about or bound to any doctrine, theory, or
ideology, even Buddhist ones. Buddhist systems of thought are guiding
means; they are not absolute truth." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Therefore, to become a Buddh-ist (the Budh* root means "to awaken"), implies a volition to understand reality as the historical Buddha did. This should be the foremost concrete reason for someone to take up practice. The recommended way to attain this goal is meditation. There are additional recommendations to facilitate this goal, but none of them take the form of "divine edicts" or leading to "sins" if not followed for lay people. You do not have to accept any doctrine at face value - in fact, the Buddha stressed you should examine everything for yourself in the Kālāma Sutra:

Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing (anussava),
nor upon tradition (paramparā),
nor upon rumor (itikirā),
nor upon what is in a scripture (piṭaka-sampadāna)
nor upon surmise (takka-hetu),
nor upon an axiom (naya-hetu),
nor upon specious reasoning (ākāra-parivitakka),
nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over (diṭṭhi-
nijjhān-akkh-antiyā),
nor upon another's seeming ability (bhabba-rūpatāya),
nor upon the consideration, The monk is our teacher (samaṇo no garū)
Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

Secondary reasons include:

transcendence into Nirvana, breaking the cycle of rebirth (although some Buddhist schools will take the vow not to enter into Nirvana until all sentient beings are saved)
reduce suffering in a meaningful, genuine way through compassion
a framework to make informed choices that benefit not just yourself
a renewed view on the world once you have experienced śūnyatā (terribly translated as "emptiness" in English)
a renewed view on yourself and the illusions that surround your self-image

but everything should start with a genuine desire to understand the true nature of reality, self, and the mind. And even then, one can practice and not call themselves Buddhist.

Good answer! Just out of interest, how did śūnyatā come to be translated as emptiness?

Several branches of Buddhism attribute very different meanings to śūnyatā . In Theravada, it often refers to the non-self, while in Mahayana it refers more to "all things are void of intrinsic existence and nature (svabhava)". Linguistically, it derives from the root śvi, meaning "hollow".  I guess "hollowness" didn't click with early translators?

I actually know muslims who do not consider Buddhism to be a religion opposed to Islam.

Why become a Buddhist?
It would be to heed the advice and guidance given by that benevolent man with good eyesight standing on the bank, who wishes you permanent freedom from suffering.

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have
heard: "Suppose a man was being carried along by the flow of a river,
lovely & alluring. And then another man with good eyesight, standing
on the bank, on seeing him would say: 'My good man, even though you
are being carried along by the flow of a river, lovely & alluring,
further down from here is a pool with waves & whirlpools, with
monsters & demons. On reaching that pool you will suffer death or
death-like pain.' Then the first man, on hearing the words of the
second man, would make an effort with his hands & feet to go against
the flow.
"I have given you this simile to illustrate a meaning. The meaning is
this: the flow of the river stands for craving. Lovely & alluring
stands for the six internal sense-media. The pool further down stands
for the five lower fetters. The waves stand for anger & distress. The
whirlpools stand for the five strings of sensuality. The monsters &
demons stand for the opposite sex. Against the flow stands for
renunciation. Making an effort with hands & feet stands for the
arousing of persistence. The man with good eyesight standing on the
bank stands for the Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened."
Iti 109

I am interested in Theravada Buddhism.
What are some concrete reasons as to why one should become a Buddhist?
Reason:

What are you looking for (searching) in your life?
If your answer is “wealth or love or a successful business” or anything like that, I would again ask what are you looking within those? If you keep digging like this you will come to the answer “Satisfaction”. Everyone is looking for Satisfaction in their lives. That person can be a terrorist or a president or a parent or an Olympic athlete or who ever, what they are looking for is “the Satisfaction”. Now based on this if you think deeper, have you found anyone who is satisfied with their whole life by achieving something. As an example is Bill Gates satisfied with his whole life? He might be satisfied as a businessman but that doesn’t make Bill is satisfied with everything he has or he is. Why is that? Because people are looking for Satisfaction throughout their lives but they are not looking it in the correct place. Due to that they won’t be satisfied with everything. We always think A will satisfy me so we run after A, after we achieve A we keep running after B because the Satisfaction we got from A is not enough (basically A has not make us satisfied, if it did why we even want to run after B). Likewise we keep running after C, D,…. until we die, assuming next thing will quench our thirst of Satisfaction. Unfortunately it will never happen. Because real Satisfaction is not in this outer world. It’s in our inner world. It’s called Nivana (Enlightenment) and what Nivana is and what’s the path to Nivana is clearly mentioned in real Buddhism (which is labeled as Theravada). If you think this view gives your some concrete reason, I might explain this further.


text:
How can the details of the mappō age be discussed skillfully?
Mappō (a.k.a mòfǎ, mạt pháp) is a term used by the majority of Mahayana Buddhism branches in East and Southeast Asia. It was mentioned in the Mahayana Mahaparinirvaṇa Sutra, signalling the declination of Buddhism and corruption of society as a whole. The sutra painted a grim picture of Buddhism's future, where monks violate the precepts and preach a perverted version of the Buddha's teaching.
Most of the times where this concept is mentioned, it is to achieve political purposes, e.g to gain legitimacy by demonising other people or sects. This has happened since more than a thousand years ago, in ancient China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and is still going on.
Personally, I found the concept and its details unhelpful since it gives practitioners (especially beginners) the feeling that the world is falling apart. I'd like know why such description is necessary for Buddhists to know, and what is the optimal way to address it?

First - though it my be a bit of an aside — I don't see mappõ as a 'singular' age. Mappõ is part of the cycles of the karmic world: the metaphorical winter before the spring of the path's perennial rediscovery. Until that long-off day when all beings reach enlightenment, the teachings will degenerate, and from that degeneration they will be discovered again, over and again.
That being said, I think it's wise for anyone on the path to recognize that the teachings are offered within the world, framed by the ignorance and attachments that people in the world bring with them. This is as true of teachers as of students; as I see it, the conflicts born of such inevitable cravings and misunderstandings within different sects and schools bring this degeneration about, as they confront each other over the 'truth' of the teachings. The least awake among us might use the concept of mappõ as a charge to be leveled against other sects or the world at large, with the best intentions, or without. But if we take it instead as an observation into the nature of the world we live in — the collective karma that we are all born into — it can make us more diligent and circumspect in our practice.

I'll mark this as the best answer. It addressed mappō, sectarianism and the attitude we should have towards them. Other answers were helpful, but vague or did not touch the political issues in Buddhism.

"it gives practitioners (especially beginners) the feeling that the world is falling apart", that's totally straight to point: urgency, since it soon breaks for one appart. If a fool nevertheless does not go after right effort, what else could the great Teacher have left behind for him... so what is good householder waiting for not to seek for going forth, now if aware of the danger around?
Fear of the world (of senses), seeing it's hoples bound to corruption, saṃvega, is the very prequisite for Refuge into the Gems, Awakening, and so most skillful if one is able to ser, confirm the 1. Noble Truth in all aspects: Affirming the Truths of the Heart: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada
See also 'future' dangers, and more detail, urgency reasons.

The purpose of the teaching of the degenerate age of Buddhism, is to remind monks and students of the Dhamma that they should be cautious not to be enchanted by the elegant words of contemporary unenlightened self-proclaimed gurus, teachers and prophets, while neglecting the true Dhamma, the teachings of the Buddha.
Instead they should reflect: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.'

"Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum
called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted
another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden
body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained.
"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who
won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep,
deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are
being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing
them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But
they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works
of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of
outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and
set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as
worth grasping & mastering.
"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the
Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with
emptiness — will come about.
"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses
that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning,
transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will
lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these
teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train
yourselves."
SN 20.7

Would this make beginners more doubtful? Maybe I'm underestimating them, but I've always assumed that it requires advanced knowledge in Buddhism to distinguish good teachers from bad ones, given that quite a lot of bad (or unskilled) teachers hold privileged status.

@viptrongproz98 Well, I expect beginners to be reading about the four noble truths or the biography of the Buddha, rather than digging deep into the suttas.

Dhamma Talks in Vietnam are mostly for beginners and laymen. A teacher will eventually cite suttas somewhere in a talk. Even the four noble truths or the biography of the Buddha is most likely discussed here. I do appreciate the academic approach to Buddhism in the West, but this is not the norm here.

With regard to your first paragraph, I find it to be a great sadness that one feels they must adhere to a stringent set of principles in these ways. One becomes concretized and encased in iron and reconcile with themselves by calling it a version of Buddhism. I guess this way of doing things might work, I don't know. The reality is much more fluid, malleable and creative, and brings forth a way to demonstrate dhamma in other ways through the unique nature of that person. This is the truest love.

@Max There are a lot of New Age enthusiasts who are interested in Buddhism, but when they go deep into it, they find that the Buddha didn't really teach the opening up of chakras or fine tuning of auras or quantum healing or meditation with scented candles plus music of ocean waves.

@ruben2020: Without disputing what you're saying, I think it would be wise to caution people about the paradox of fundamentalism. There is a certain class of 'gurus, teachers and prophets' who use dogmatic literalism to create new (and often quite odd) interpretations of the teachings. One can recite the words of the Tathagata without understanding them; originalism is often a jaded and cynical ploy to defend and obscure revisionism.

Tough times are inevitable:

DN26:19.1: There will come a time, mendicants, when these people will have children who live for ten years.
DN26:21.2: During that time they will see each other as beasts.
DN26:21.3: Sharp swords will appear in their hands,
DN26:21.4: with which they’ll take each other’s life, crying, ‘It’s a beast! It’s a beast!’

Yet for some, just as inexorably, prudence and conscience will provide an escape from tough times:

DN26:21.5: But then some of those beings will think,
DN26:21.6: ‘Let us neither be perpetrators nor victims! Why don’t we hide in thick grass, thick jungle, thick trees, inaccessible riverlands, or rugged mountains
and survive on forest roots and fruits?’

From that narrow escape will spring hope, faith and skill:

DN26:21.10.0: 6. The Period of Growth
DN26:21.11: Then those beings will think,
DN26:21.12: ‘It’s because we undertook unskillful things that we suffered such an extensive loss of our relatives.
DN26:21.13: We’d better do what’s skillful.

Today we see signs that remind us of that very perilous decline. Seeing those signs, should we give up and roll down the cliff?
Or should we attend to what we can skillfully do?

DN26:22.1: Then those beings will think,
DN26:22.2: ‘Because of undertaking this skillful thing, our lifespan and beauty are growing.
DN26:22.3: Why don’t we do even more skillful things?

Should we read the full sutta or just stop at the horror?

The destruction of society represents the turmoil of the samsaric cycle. I think it can be helpful, not unhelpful, for practitioners to see the unwholesomeness in the world or, to use your words, the grim picture. We come to understand maturity and immaturity and this sets a marker from which one can study the behaviour of humankind and how that behaviour influences our thoughts, speech and actions. After some time, we discover that we no longer want to look at the world in such ways, we discover that we don't like what we see in the world, and we may feel bad towards them - but this is helpful. It is a kind of strange grief that, if embraced, leads to a great opening imbued with great wisdom alongside the unmanifested.
Now, here's the thing: With all the world's stories put on pause, what is actually happening within the various dualities of the world is an affectionate gyration of love in all its many guises, and that those seeming individual manifestations (the ten thousand things) are the innocence of that love.
The optimal way to address, and to discuss it skilfully, is to recognize this love in the way the Buddha phrases in the Lotus sutra...

According to how all the living beings
In previous lives put down good roots,
They have knowledge of the mature
And of those who are immature,
They take it all into account,
Articulate it in their understanding,
And following the way of the one vehicle
They appropriately expound the three.’

We are in the Latter Day of the law. There are three periods of time that the Buddha said would take place after his death. The first period is named the Former Day of the Law. During this time, many people attained the way and were able to adhere to the precepts. During the middle Day of the Law, Buddhism began to deteriorate and not many people attained Buddhahood as the amount of people who did in the Former Day of the Law. During the Latter Day of the Law, almost everyone is tainted by greed anger and Foolishness. That is not a joke. This is a scary time we are in. Almost, zero people will gain enlightenment. Just look at the world today. The Buddha saw all of this coming. If the Buddha told his disciples about the Latter Day of the Law, then ordinary teachers of the present time should do the same. Here is a Sutra to support what I have said.
The Nirvana Sutra says: “There are icchantikas, or persons of incorrigible disbelief. They pretend to be arhats, living in deserted places and speaking slanderously of the correct and equal sutras of the great vehicle. When ordinary people see them, they all suppose that they are true arhats and speak of them as great bodhisattvas.” It also says: “After the Former Day of the Law has ended and the Middle Day of the Law has begun, there will be monks who will give the appearance of abiding by the rules of monastic discipline. But they will scarcely ever read or recite the sutras, and instead will crave all kinds of food and drink to nourish their bodies. . . . Though they wear the clothes of a monk, they will go about searching for alms like so many huntsmen who, narrowing their eyes, stalk softly. They will be like a cat on the prowl for mice.” The Parinirvāna Sutra states, “There are also icchantikas who resemble arhats but who commit evil deeds.”


text:
Different types of vipassana meditation?
I am interested in vipassana meditation.
What are the different types of vipassana meditation?

Why is he changing the question entirely after getting answers?

@Letsbuddhism The previous question was closed as being opinion-based. He modified it then it was reopened.

There is nothing called Vipassana Jhanas in the suttas. But in the commentaries there is something called Lakkhaṇūpanijjhāna.
Tattha lakkhaṇūpanijjhānaṃ nāma vipassanāmaggaphalāni.
Therein, lakkhaṇūpanijjhāna is the name of insight, path, and fruit.

Vipassanā hi tīṇi lakkhaṇāni upanijjhāyatīti lakkhaṇūpanijjhānaṃ.
Insight meditates upon the three characteristics, therefore it is
meditation on characteristics.
Maggo vipassanāya āgatakiccaṃ sādhetīti lakkhaṇūpanijjhānaṃ.
The path completes the task begun by insight, therefore it is
meditation on characteristics.
Phalaṃ tathalakkhaṇaṃ nirodhasaccaṃ upanijjhāyatīti
lakkhaṇūpanijjhānaṃ.
Fruition meditates on the characteristic of reality that is the truth
of cessation, therefore it is meditation on characteristics.


text:
What is the (commentary) source for Buddha's daily schedule?
What is the (commentary) source for Buddha's five-part daily schedule, as mentioned at The Buddha's Daily Routine (Buddhanet) and A Day in the Life of the Buddha (YouTube video, Bhikkhu Bodhi).

We can find mentions of morning, midday or noon and afternoon in AN 3.19.

In the same way, a mendicant who has three factors is unable to
acquire more skillful qualities or to increase the skillful qualities
they’ve already acquired. What three? It’s when a mendicant doesn’t
carefully apply themselves to a meditation subject as a foundation of
immersion in the morning, at midday, and in the afternoon.
AN 3.19

For the three watches of the night, we can find it in MN 53. The parts in square brackets are comments from the translator.

"And how is the disciple of the noble ones devoted to wakefulness?
There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, sitting & pacing
back & forth, cleanses his mind of any qualities that would hold the
mind in check. During the first watch of the night [dusk to 10
p.m.], sitting & pacing back & forth, he cleanses his mind of any
qualities that would hold the mind in check. During the second watch
of the night [10 p.m. to 2 a.m.], reclining on his right side, he
takes up the lion's posture, one foot placed on top of the other,
mindful, alert, with his mind set on getting up [either as soon as he
awakens or at a particular time]. During the last watch of the
night [2 a.m. to dawn], sitting & pacing back & forth, he cleanses
his mind of any qualities that would hold the mind in check. This is
how the monk is devoted to wakefulness.
MN 53

It's from Tipitaka like ruben2020 answered.
The commentary teachers are the Tipitaka Memorizer, so they concluded the Buddha's normal daily schedule like below...
sīlakkhandhavagga,aṭṭhakathā 45 paṇṇe

sātthakaṃyeva pana bhagavato kiccaṃ hoti. taṃ pañcavidhaṃ –
purebhattakiccaṃ, pacchābhattakiccaṃ, purimayāmakiccaṃ,
majjhimayāmakiccaṃ, pacchimayāmakiccanti.
tatridaṃ purebhattakiccaṃ –
bhagavā hi pātova uṭṭhāya upaṭṭhākānuggahatthaṃ sarīraphāsukatthañca
mukhadhovanādisarīraparikammaṃ katvā yāva bhikkhācāravelā tāva
vivittāsane vītināmetvā, bhikkhācāravelāyaṃ nivāsetvā kāyabandhanaṃ
bandhitvā cīvaraṃ pārupitvā pattamādāya kadāci ekako, kadāci
bhikkhusaṅghaparivuto, gāmaṃ vā nigamaṃ vā piṇḍāya pavisati; kadāci
pakatiyā, kadāci anekehi pāṭihāriyehi vattamānehi. seyyathidaṃ,
piṇḍāya pavisato lokanāthassa purato purato gantvā mudugatavātā
pathaviṃ sodhenti, valāhakā udakaphusitāni muñcantā magge reṇuṃ
vūpasametvā upari vitānaṃ hutvā tiṭṭhanti, apare vātā pupphāni
upasaṃharitvā magge okiranti, unnatā bhūmippadesā onamanti, onatā
unnamanti, pādanikkhepasamaye samāva bhūmi hoti, sukhasamphassāni
padumapupphāni vā pāde sampaṭicchanti. indakhīlassa anto ṭhapitamatte
dakkhiṇapāde sarīrato chabbaṇṇarasmiyo nikkhamitvā
suvaṇṇarasapiñjarāni viya citrapaṭaparikkhittāni viya ca
pāsādakūṭāgārādīni alaṅkarontiyo ito cito ca dhāvanti,
hatthiassavihaṅgādayo sakasakaṭṭhānesu ṭhitāyeva madhurenākārena
saddaṃ karonti, tathā bherivīṇādīni tūriyāni manussānañca kāyūpagāni
ābharaṇāni. tena saññāṇena manussā jānanti – ‘‘ajja bhagavā idha
piṇḍāya paviṭṭho’’ti. te sunivatthā supārutā gandhapupphādīni ādāya
gharā nikkhamitvā antaravīthiṃ paṭipajjitvā bhagavantaṃ
gandhapupphādīhi sakkaccaṃ pūjetvā vanditvā – ‘‘amhākaṃ, bhante, dasa
bhikkhū, amhākaṃ vīsati, paññāsaṃ…pe.… sataṃ dethā’’ti yācitvā
bhagavatopi pattaṃ gahetvā āsanaṃ paññapetvā sakkaccaṃ piṇḍapātena
paṭimānenti. bhagavā katabhattakicco tesaṃ sattānaṃ cittasantānāni
oloketvā tathā dhammaṃ deseti, yathā keci saraṇagamanesu
patiṭṭhahanti, keci pañcasu sīlesu, keci
sotāpattisakadāgāmianāgāmiphalānaṃ aññatarasmiṃ; keci pabbajitvā
aggaphale arahatteti. evaṃ mahājanaṃ anuggahetvā uṭṭhāyāsanā vihāraṃ
gacchati.
tattha gantvā maṇḍalamāḷe paññattavarabuddhāsane nisīdati, bhikkhūnaṃ
bhattakiccapariyosānaṃ āgamayamāno. tato bhikkhūnaṃ
bhattakiccapariyosāne upaṭṭhāko bhagavato nivedeti. atha bhagavā
gandhakuṭiṃ pavisati. idaṃ tāva purebhattakiccaṃ.
atha bhagavā evaṃ katapurebhattakicco gandhakuṭiyā upaṭṭhāne nisīditvā
pāde pakkhāletvā pādapīṭhe ṭhatvā bhikkhusaṅghaṃ ovadati –
‘‘bhikkhave, appamādena sampādetha, dullabho buddhuppādo lokasmiṃ,
dullabho manussattapaṭilābho, dullabhā sampatti, dullabhā pabbajjā,
dullabhaṃ saddhammassavana’’nti. tattha keci bhagavantaṃ kammaṭṭhānaṃ
pucchanti. bhagavāpi tesaṃ cariyānurūpaṃ kammaṭṭhānaṃ deti. tato
sabbepi bhagavantaṃ vanditvā attano attano rattiṭṭhānadivāṭṭhānāni
gacchanti. keci araññaṃ, keci rukkhamūlaṃ, keci pabbatādīnaṃ
aññataraṃ, keci cātumahārājikabhavanaṃ…pe.… keci vasavattibhavananti.
tato bhagavā gandhakuṭiṃ pavisitvā sace ākaṅkhati, dakkhiṇena passena
sato sampajāno muhuttaṃ sīhaseyyaṃ kappeti. atha samassāsitakāyo
vuṭṭhahitvā dutiyabhāge lokaṃ voloketi. tatiyabhāge yaṃ gāmaṃ vā
nigamaṃ vā upanissāya viharati tattha mahājano purebhattaṃ dānaṃ datvā
pacchābhattaṃ sunivattho supāruto gandhapupphādīni ādāya vihāre
sannipatati. tato bhagavā sampattaparisāya anurūpena pāṭihāriyena
gantvā dhammasabhāyaṃ paññattavarabuddhāsane nisajja dhammaṃ deseti
kālayuttaṃ samayayuttaṃ, atha kālaṃ viditvā parisaṃ uyyojeti, manussā
bhagavantaṃ vanditvā pakkamanti. idaṃ pacchābhattakiccaṃ.
so evaṃ niṭṭhitapacchābhattakicco sace gattāni osiñcitukāmo hoti,
buddhāsanā vuṭṭhāya nhānakoṭṭhakaṃ pavisitvā upaṭṭhākena
paṭiyāditaudakena gattāni utuṃ gaṇhāpeti. upaṭṭhākopi buddhāsanaṃ
ānetvā gandhakuṭipariveṇe paññapeti. bhagavā surattadupaṭṭaṃ nivāsetvā
kāyabandhanaṃ bandhitvā uttarāsaṅgaṃ ekaṃsaṃ karitvā tattha gantvā
nisīdati ekakova muhuttaṃ paṭisallīno, atha bhikkhū tato tato āgamma
bhagavato upaṭṭhānaṃ āgacchanti.
tattha ekacce pañhaṃ pucchanti, ekacce kammaṭṭhānaṃ, ekacce
dhammassavanaṃ yācanti. bhagavā tesaṃ adhippāyaṃ sampādento
purimayāmaṃ vītināmeti. idaṃ purimayāmakiccaṃ.
purimayāmakiccapariyosāne pana bhikkhūsu bhagavantaṃ vanditvā
pakkantesu sakaladasasahassilokadhātudevatāyo okāsaṃ labhamānā
bhagavantaṃ upasaṅkamitvā pañhaṃ pucchanti, yathābhisaṅkhataṃ antamaso
caturakkharampi. bhagavā tāsaṃ devatānaṃ pañhaṃ vissajjento
majjhimayāmaṃ vītināmeti. idaṃ majjhimayāmakiccaṃ.
pacchimayāmaṃ pana tayo koṭṭhāse katvā purebhattato paṭṭhāya nisajjāya
pīḷitassa sarīrassa kilāsubhāvamocanatthaṃ ekaṃ koṭṭhāsaṃ caṅkamena
vītināmeti. dutiyakoṭṭhāse gandhakuṭiṃ pavisitvā dakkhiṇena passena
sato sampajāno sīhaseyyaṃ kappeti. tatiyakoṭṭhāse paccuṭṭhāya
nisīditvā purimabuddhānaṃ santike dānasīlādivasena
katādhikārapuggaladassanatthaṃ buddhacakkhunā lokaṃ voloketi. idaṃ
pacchimayāmakiccaṃ.

There aren't many people that could translate this. Maybe you could include an English translation?

Yes, this recovering dumbed down American would like a translation too please, although this is not an official request, as we're all so busy. Also, what are ways to site this? Something like: Sutta Piṭaka Dīghanikāyo sīlakkhandhavagga, aṭṭhakathā 45 paṇṇe?


text:
Is the human realm the only one where conscious moral choice is possible?
In this page's explanation of the six realms of existence the human realm is presented as below, it reads a bit off.
Is it not possible, for example in the heavenly realm, to make a good choice and aim for liberation? aren't their Suttas that indicate the existence of liberated beings or of beings that are greatly cultivated and working their way for final realize in the heavenly realm?

Human Realm
The human realm is the only one in which one’s choices (good or bad)
affect one’s future—in all the others, one is either being rewarded or
punished for one’s actions as a human being.  One’s present human
condition (e.g., wealth, social status, and physical and psychological
qualities) is based on one’s past karma, but one’s present choices
also determine one’s future (in this life, or a future life).  As
conscious moral agents, human beings have agency that the beings in
other realms do not; this clearly underscores the importance of moral
action and spiritual development.
...

Other beings have the ability to know dhamma, but humans have a distinct ability for moral inclination, this is true. Humans have access to the entire range of mind realms. This affords them a unique opportunity to develop situational wisdom.

What is the "volition" tag?

They’ve followed those teachings by ear, reinforced them by recitation, examined them by the mind, and well comprehended them theoretically.
But they die unmindful and are reborn in one of the orders of gods.
Being happy there, passages of the teaching come back to them.
Memory comes up slowly, but then that being quickly reaches distinction. https://suttacentral.net/an4.191/en/sujato

Not only humans.
It is also evident in that devas from the pure abodes become extinguished there.


text:
Who was Anuruddha's father?
In the Pali commentaries, there is a contradiction regarding the name of Thera Anuruddha's father. Somewhere he is said to be the son of Sukkodana, and somewhere of Amitodana. Both Sukkodana and Amitodana were Suddhodana's brother. So, in any case, Anuruddha was surely a cousin of the future Buddha. But his relation with Thera Ananda becomes controversial. Everywhere Ananda is said to be the son of Amitodana. So he might be either a cousin or a brother of Anuruddha. Most modern Western scholars seem to prefer the latter alternative albeit insisting that they were probably step-brothers from different mothers "as the texts do not refer to the two as brothers and imply that they grew up in different households." If that is the case, why not accept Anuruddha as the son of Sukkodana? Are there more weightage in the claim of Amitodana? Can someone answer with commentarial references?

According to the Apadana Atthakatha, Anuruddha was the youngest brother of Mahanama, and their father was the paternal uncle of the Buddha. It doesn't mention the father's name.
It is undisputed that Anuruddha was Mahanama's own brother, from various sources, including the Vinaya in Pli Tv Bu Vb Pc 6.
According to this page:

Mahānāma. A Sākiyan rājā, son of Amitodana; he was elder brother of
Anuruddha and cousin of the Buddha. When the Sākiyan families of
Kapilavatthu sent their representatives to join the Order of their
distinguished kinsman, Mahānāma allowed Anuruddha to leave the
household, he knowing nothing of household affairs. Vin.ii.180f.;
DhA.i.133; iv.124, etc.; but according to Northern sources (Rockhill,
p. 13) he was son of Dronodana; according to ThagA. (ii.123) Ananda
was a brother (or, at least, a step brother) of Mahānāma, for there
Ananda's father is given as Amitodana. But see MA.i.289, where
Mahānāma's father is called Sukkodana and Ananda's Amitodana.

From the abbreviation list of this journal edition, ThagA is the Theragatha Atthakatha and MA is the Majjhima Nikaya Atthakatha.
According to this page which quotes a book called "Relatives and Disciples of the Buddha" by Radhika Abeysekera:

Anuruddha was one of Prince Siddhattha’s cousins. His father, who was
named Amitodana, was a younger brother of King Suddhodana. Amitodana
had two consorts. Anuruddha, his brother, Mahanama and his sister,
Rohini, were born from one consort. Ananda, who later became the
Buddha’s personal attendant, was the son of the other consort. As such
Ananda was Anuruddha’s step-brother.


text:
Is Anagarika procedure a necessity in Thai Forest Tradition?
I wonder if the Anagarika period is always a pre-requisite to samanera & bhikkhu ordinations in this TFT tradition?

I edited the question seeing how op prompted answers which are not answering the question. I just want a categorical answer to a simple question.

Firstly, I feel one should avoid having a romanticized view of either the lay married life or the celibate monastic life.
Being a married person, you may find that your spouse, children and in-laws may often not be in line with your wishes and expectations, and may be a source of grief.
If you read the book "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika, you will find that many monastic communities today are not living up to the standards of the Buddha's Sangha, to put it mildly. Also, please see this answer. A zealous person joining the monastic order today may get disillusioned by this.
Hence, it makes a lot of sense, to become an anagarika first, and then a novice monk (samanera) next, to try out the monastic life for a short time, as a trial, by staying in a monastery under the guidance of a teacher. In the end, you may find that this does not suit you, or the other way round. It's a practical way to guide one's decision-making.

That whole point of ordaining isn't just to leave home, it's to leave your very self behind.  Monastic ordination in any tradition - Buddhism of any stripe and otherwise - has a component of complete obedience to both the precepts, the rule, and the community.  If that the way it's done, that's the way you do it.  Your anxieties, reservations, or oppositions simply aren't important.
Master Dogen writes that to study the way is to study the self.  To study the self is to forget the self.  To forget the self is to become one with the 10,000 things.  So many modern people are pretty keen on studying the self and becoming one with the 10,000 things.  Forgetting the self, though, that's hard.  But it's the lynch pin that everything else depends on.

Most monastic lineages have a probationary period to weed out those who aren't right for monastic life.  Part of that is identifying people who are impatient and would react poorly to having their sense of self assailed by something as innocuous as waiting for permanent, full vows.  This, not to mention the fact that real practice involves very long periods of time where progress is slow and nothing appears to be happening..  I think a better question to ask is if it's so important to you, why aren't you willing to wait?

@user21064 You can add this as an answer by itself.

It's just a restatement of the answer above which I agree with.

"Most monastic lineages have a probationary period to weed out those who aren't right for monastic life" - How is that working out? Disrobing rates are like 95+%? Tell me more about the weeding out... Maybe you are weeding out the wrong kind of people, ever thought of that or why the Buddha never advised this?

Pretty well, I should say.  I highly doubt that those 95%+ are leaving because the the monastery isn't immediately giving them full vows.  A much simpler and probable explanation is that the diversions of the householder life exert too strong a pull.

A much simpler and probable explanation is that the diversions of the householder life exert too strong a pull. - and there is also the declination of monastic Buddhism, in part due to mainstream methods of delivering the same information. But the worrisome Buddhist would shout things like, "It's the prophesized decline of Buddhism. The Dhamma is disappearing. The end is nigh!". The method of delivery has changed to meet the demands of modern day living. Monasticism is fading into obscurity like the seniority of antiquated, old-fashioned ideas.

Good householder,
As for the Noble tradition, the Sublime Buddhas Sangha, such as Anagarika (a householder without house...) is unknown and seemingly a merely new, Sri Lank originated custom. Yet there are communities with agree on what is called "Sangha-agreement", of which is only allwoed if not against the Dhamna-Vinaya. Generally the Sublime Buddha wished to let people fastly ordain, since faith, good mind states, are all but not sure and doubt the greatest hindrance. So he also rebuked communities agreeing on similar things. There are clear rules set out by the Teacher and also clear restrictions, yet, if ordaining or not, is of course not up to any right but compassion. So nothing that should be claimed at first place. Not giving, or demand certain things, may have reasons, sometimes right, sometimes wrong judged.
The only, of which comes near such prove time, is the decleared prove time for wanderers of other sects (as for higher ordination, not explicit for going forth), whether they are really fit and earnest toward the Tripple Gems or not. Sure, most modern, westerns, would fall under this category, yet different in each individual case, of course.
There is, how ever, no real indication that such a test phase should be spend as householder. And formal, if one asks for leaving house under the Gems, taking on 10 precepts, one becomes a recluse, pabbajito, and not sure if giving such without giving robes, check if the requester has sufficent, wouldn't be actually an ordainers fault.
In all cases good if always seeking out communities with less doubt that this Dhamma-Vinaya has been layed out good. This includes of course to tend oneself to it as well, starting by being aware of being a receiver of compassion, either for the sake and bond toward the Unbound or toward the world and it's common communities.
Don't wait anyway, what ever hard ship might be feared, times is running out and skillful mind and good intentions, possibilities, even faster, good householder.


text:
Non-Self vs. depersonalization disorder
After quite some time of daily meditation, I feel less like having a real separate, permanent self (specific details see below, but it's a general question), which, in my opinion, could be regarded as a step on the path to enlightenment. However, it also matches the criteria of a depersonalization disorder as defined by psychiatry more or less.
I wonder whether that's an issue and how to approach it.
As a distinguishing feature, one could think that it feels good and liberating in the case of enlightenment, but negatively speaking a source of suffering in the case of a disorder. As a non-enlightened being I don't always feel good, so it's not that clear, and I think there can be more serious doubt in moments or phases when one feels bad (e.g. due to unpleasant nyams in meditation). The feature of social functioning also doesn't seem clear to me, since one could argue, for example, that seeking solitude/retreat for meditation is a socially impaired behaviour, especially when I talk to people who are not familiar with Buddhism. I suppose talking about feelings of no-self sounds rather crazy – which isn't a problem in itself, but it might impair my ability to have a positive influence on their lives or in charitable organizations.
So I wonder:

How would you distinguish between the (partial) feeling of non-self as a step towards enlightenment and a depersonalization disorder (or a similar mental disorder)?
(How, in which cases) would you speak openly about non-self-experiences with others?

Some details about my personal experience if relevant: Instead of a permanent self, it feels more as if mental events rise and pass without being mine or controlled by "me“. I feel less like having permanent character traits. I don't feel very connected to my past or possible future - "my“ body feels like an arbitrary vessel of consciousness. In deep meditation I feel like an abstract, spacious awareness (which is peaceful, vivid and benevolent).
While I'm not completely free of mental afflictions, I think attachment, desire, aversion, fear, and so on, are significantly weaker than before I started meditation and then in many other people (up to a point that others don't understand some of my behaviour).
Meditation method: shamatha awareness of awareness according to Alan Wallace.

There's a similar question here which has answers that might appeal to you.

the cessation of stress is not facilitated by any view of self- Mini B

In depersonalization and derealization disorders one recognizes a self that one is not, and that one believes one should be. This creates stress and anxiety, along with distortions of one's perception of reality.
With anatta (no-self) one realizes that the egoic self is superficial, impermanent, and illusory, and loses one's attachment to it. This creates peace and openness, and a clear view of reality.
I imagine that as people struggle with the idea of anatta during their practice they might have moments of (non-clinical) depersonalization and derealization — moments where they reject the world or reject the self without releasing their attachments to these things — but anatta is ultimately the resolution of this problem.
We should be wary of what Kew Wilber called the Pre/Trans fallacy. People who are still in a 'conventional' mindset (the ego-identification mindset) often confuse pre-conventional and trans-conventional states: enlightenment can appear the same as infantilization; the experience of samadhi can be conflated with a drug-induced stupor; higher understanding cannot easily be distinguished from mental confusion... It's easy to get our heads turned around.

Love this answer and think your first sentence is profound.

Thanks a lot for your answer!
So if I don't think I should have a self and mainly feel peaceful in general it's probably not a disorder, but a step towards enlightenment? Even if there are also phases with less peace and well-being sometimes? "One recognizes a self that one is not" doesn't mean/ include remembering having had more of a self (which I do), right?

@anyone Welcome to Buddhism SE. If you decide to accept this answer, please click on the tick symbol beside it.

Very interesting question! From the link you provide:

Presence of persistent/recurrent episodes of depersonalization/derealization

From reading the definitions of depersonalization and derealization it does sound a lot like what you might expect from an experience of not self.

Ability to distinguish between reality and dissociation during an episode (i.e. patient is aware of a perceptual disturbance)

Hmm, this sounds suspect. It isn't at all clear what this should refer to? I suppose it means that someone can remember back to the past and appreciate the difference between that and this new experience of not self?

Symptoms are severe enough to interfere with social, occupational, or other areas of functioning

The crux of it. Other than seeking solitude for meditation and/or retreat have you experienced any other potential "impairments?" You mention that it seems hard to relate this experience with others. Do you feel a great need to do so? Is there some craving to share the experience with others? If so, what is the motivation for such a craving?

OP: How would you distinguish between the (partial) feeling of non-self as
a step towards enlightenment and a depersonalization disorder (or a
similar mental disorder)?

Personally, I would compare my own experiences and their effect on my life and attitude with the joyous behavior exhibited by my spiritual heroes. Have a look at this video clip and see the smile on Rinpoche's face. If you watch the whole movie (which I highly recommend) I'll bet you'll get an amazing sense of warmth and carefree childlike playfullness emanating from him. The simple prescription to figure out whether what you are experiencing is authentic is to compare with such people. HHDL is another great example of someone you could look at and compare with. Rinpoche and HHDL are two of my spiritual heroes. Of course, you should decide for yourself who your own spiritual heroes are and compare with them!
If you find that your experience is not conducive to generating in you the same traits you see in your own personal spiritual heroes, the best thing to do is to conclude that you've misunderstood or are having an artificial simulacrum of a true authentic experience. Laugh about it and move on and keep trying to make it authentic. You'll know you're making progress when you compare with your spiritual heroes and see some tiny inkling of a smidgeon of a resemblance :)

OP: (How, in which cases) would you speak openly about
non-self-experiences with others?

If you are having the desire or craving to relate the experience, then I'd examine the motivation for wanting to do so. Where is it coming from? What would be the purpose of relating it? What good will come of it? Is it simply a desire to know whether you are on the right track? Is it the craving for praise or a pat on the back? The motivation matters of course and once you are clear on the motivation it might be the case that the answer comes to you :)
Who are your spiritual heroes? Can you identify a mind that you are trying to emulate? Can you see the behavior they exhibit and the traits they seem to possess? Finding someone who you really believe exhibits the traits you wish for is a good step towards answering some of these questions because then you can look and see if you're making progress by comparing. Are your experiences and understanding gained through Dharma practice leading you further towards the traits you are looking to possess or farther away?

Thanks a lot for your answer!
I think my motivation is mainly altruistic (meaningful potentially beneficial conversations in specific situations) and there's probably a bit of attachment to people I'm close to.
In general, I'd like to know if I'm mentally sane so I can trust my judgement and actions not to be wrong or harmful.
You're right, comparing with spiritual heroes is a good idea. I think my experience points towards what they express, but since I'm far away from being like them and it's not a linear path of progress, but also has some rough moments /phases, it's not easy to know.


text:
What do the (Pali) suttas say about "sacrifice" in general (and why it's not necessary)?
Requesting sutta references mentioning "sacrifice" along with pali words commonly (and uncommonly) translated as "sacrifice" along with thoughts and commentary please

Found this: There are some ascetics and brahmins who have this doctrine and view:
‘Purity comes from sacrifice.’
But it’s not easy to find a sacrifice that I haven’t previously offered in all this long time, when I was an anointed aristocratic king or a well-to-do brahmin. via https://suttacentral.net/mn12/en/sujato?layout=plain&reference=none&notes=sidenotes&highlight=false&script=latin

“Master Gotama, we brahmins sacrifice and enjoin others to offer sacrifices. Now both one who himself sacrifices and one who enjoins others to offer sacrifices engage in a meritorious practice that extends to many people, that is, one based on sacrifice. But one who leaves his family and goes forth from the household life into homelessness tames only himself, calms only himself, and leads to nibbāna only himself. In such a case, he engages in a meritorious practice that extends to only one person, that is, one based on going forth.” Then the answer via: https://suttacentral.net/an3.60/en/bodhi

The Buddha discouraged animal sacrifice, human sacrifice, and other extra extravagant ritualistic sacrifices (soma juice drinking etc.), of which I quoted only part of the sutta of AN 4.39 below.
The Buddha however praised non-violent sacrifices, which I think refers to giving gifts (or contributing necessities) to family members.
Based on the dictionary entry given below for "yañña" (sacrifice), it seems like this term is used both for animal sacrifices and charity.
A similar teaching is given in SN 3.9.

“Does Master Gotama praise sacrifice (yañña)?”
“Brahmin, I don’t praise all sacrifices. Nor do I criticize all
sacrifices. Take the kind of sacrifice where cattle, goats and sheep,
chickens and pigs, and various kinds of creatures are slaughtered. I
criticize that kind of violent sacrifice. Why is that? Because neither
perfected ones nor those who are on the path to perfection will attend
such a violent sacrifice.
But take the kind of sacrifice where cattle, goats and sheep, chickens
and pigs, and various kinds of creatures are not slaughtered. I praise
that kind of non-violent sacrifice; for example, a regular gift as an
ongoing family sacrifice. Why is that? Because perfected ones and
those who are on the path to perfection will attend such a non-violent
sacrifice.
AN 4.39

From the PTS Pali-English dictionary entry on "yañña":

Yañña Yañña [Vedic yajña, fr. yaj: see yajati. The metric reading in the Veda is sometimes yajana, which we are inclined to look upon as
not being the source of the P. yajana] 1. a brahmanic sacrifice. — 2.
almsgiving, charity, a gift to the Sangha or a bhikkhu. The brahmanic
ritual of Vedic times has been given a changed and deeper meaning.
Buddhism has discarded the outward and cruel form and has widened its
sphere by changing its participant, its object as well as the means
and ways of "offering," so that the yañña now consists entirely in a
worthy application of a worthy gift to a worthy applicant.

The Buddha also taught to not sacrifice one's own welfare for others in Dhp 166. The commentary for this verse can be found here. Please also read this answer.

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

The link to the Dhp-verses on The Self is really good, thanks.

The phrase "for example, a regular gift as an ongoing family sacrifice" is intriguing. What does it refer to?

Yes, what actually happened at a non-violent "ongoing family sacrifice" involving animals? Were they given to someone?

Also, are there other examples of non-violent sacrifices other than SN 3.9 and AN 4.39?


text:
What were the Original Methods of Meditation and their Instructions as Expounded by the Buddha?
In Theravada, I know there is union in understanding that the Buddha taught two types of meditation: vipassana (insight) meditation and samatha (tranquility) meditation. However, I have come across various types of these meditation methods over the years, either with an emphasis on samatha meditation, vipassana meditation, or both, all filled with various interpretations. My question is the following:
Putting aside the modern methods of meditation taught by members of the later Sangha and their interpretations as well as going back to the Buddha and his early Sangha, what was it that the Buddha originally taught in regard to meditation (samatha and vipassana meditations) and what instructions did the Buddha give as to how one practices them?
PLEASE REFERENCE THE TIPITAKA OR SOURCES STRICTLY USING THE TIPITAKA.
-Apannaka

Related: Are Samatha and Vipassana mentioned in the Pali Canon as different styles/techniques of meditation?

As AN 2.41 makes clear, samatha and vipassana are qualities, and not methods. Methods are described in the Anapanasati and Satipatthana suttas, for example.

If I explain anything, it is what you called "later interpretations".
If I quote a short Sutta, it is what you called "modern methods"--rearrange Suttas' sequence by my own opinion.
If I quote other Suttas' which is not Ananda's Sutta, people would say "this
Sutta is new, not original."
So, this is the long Sutta by Ananda, the first Tipitaka Memorizer, who we all accept that he is the main answerer at the first Buddhist Council of Theravada.
I can't quote because it is very long. These all are enough for me to meditate follow the Buddha and enough for me to understand and trust the entire Tipitaka Pali, commentary pali, sub-commentary pali, forest-monk tradition, etc.

What was that noble one's spectrum of ethics that the Buddha praised?

See https://suttacentral.net/dn10/en/sujato?h=The%20Entire%20Spectrum%20of%20Ethics#dn10:1.6.5.0

What was that noble one's spectrum of immersion that the Buddha praised?

See https://suttacentral.net/dn10/en/sujato?h=The%20Spectrum%20of%20Immersion#dn10:2.1.0

What was that noble one's spectrum of wisdom that the Buddha praised?

See https://suttacentral.net/dn10/en/sujato?h=The%20Spectrum%20of%20Wisdom#dn10:2.20.0
There are many long Sutta which content something like above Sutta in DN, MN, but by the Buddha directly such as DN2.
However, if one still can't meditate follow above very long Sutta, it's time to trust in Tipitaka Memorizers like, Pa-Auk tawya, Abhidhamma, commentary, etc.

Links to the most important suttas on meditation here:
https://lucid24.org/misc/raft/index.html (disclosure: my website, most of the sutta translations derived from B. sujato).
You'll want to start with SN 46.3, it shows the causal sequence of how 7 awakening factors leads to samadhi.
SN 54.3 is the basic version explaining 16 steps of breath meditation.
SN 45.8 gives the definitions for noble eightfold path.
Prior to attainment of jhanas, most of the time in meditation will be spent in right effort, explained in detail in AN 4.14
Remember that Buddhism was an oral tradition, so the instructions are terse, and you won't be able to get the full picture on reading through those suttas  once or a few times. You'll need to recite and reflect on it frequently, and consult with knowledgable friends to connect the dots and see the whole picture.
Samatha and vipassana segregation is a late Theravada corruption. In the original suttas on meditation, those qualities are not developed independently of each other, but synergistically, holistically, organically.
edit, answering a comment:
It's easy to misinterpret Yuganaddha Sutta that way (as segregating samatha and vipassana). But if you study carefully all the meditation suttas, you'll find that interpretation is not tenable, not to mention there are very few suttas that like that one period. In light of the collection of meditation suttas and connecting the dots, what  Yuganaddha Sutta is actually saying is that some meditators tend to be stronger in samatha or vipassana, and on their path to arahantship they don't really strengthen the other factor until later stages. The 4th case of the sutta makes it especially clear. Both samatha and vipassana are weak to begin with, and later both are developed in tandem.  So out of the 4 possible cases 50% of them involve developing both samatha and vipassana in tandem. The first two cases, where one is developed first while the other is lacking, is from inherent weakness in the meditator, not because the buddha ever recommended one factor to be developed first.

Well, samatha and vipassana looks segregated to me in the Yuganaddha Sutta.

It's easy to misinterpret Yuganaddha Sutta... (see edited msg)

The word meditation doesn't have an analog in pali discourses.
The way samatha & vipassana are spoken of, likewise, doesn't align with contemporary practices.
Unfortunately one has to read a lot of discourses to get a good idea of how people were training on & off the cushion and how they talked about it.
If you want a bunch of excerpts from pali sutta & theravadin abhidhamma + minimal commentary, i have a doc here, only the first half of it will be interesting to you as a cross reference of the main meditation instruction in the discourses.
It's a 24/7 kind of training. Here are the brief expositions;

"Kesi, I train a tamable person [sometimes] with gentleness, [sometimes] with harshness, [sometimes] with both gentleness & harshness.
"In using gentleness, [I teach:] 'Such is good bodily conduct. Such is the result of good bodily conduct. Such is good verbal conduct. Such is the result of good verbal conduct. Such is good mental conduct. Such is the result of good mental conduct. Such are the devas. Such are human beings.'
"In using harshness, [I teach:] 'Such is bodily misconduct. Such is the result of bodily misconduct. Such is verbal misconduct. Such is the result of verbal misconduct. Such is mental misconduct. Such is the result of mental misconduct. Such is hell. Such is the animal womb. Such the realm of the hungry shades.'
"In using gentleness & harshness, [I teach:] 'Such is good bodily conduct. Such is the result of good bodily conduct. Such is bodily misconduct. Such is the result of bodily misconduct. Such is good verbal conduct. Such is the result of good verbal conduct. Such is verbal misconduct. Such is the result of verbal misconduct. Such is good mental conduct. Such is the result of good mental conduct. Such is mental misconduct. Such is the result of mental misconduct. Such are the devas. Such are human beings. Such is hell. Such is the animal womb. Such the realm of the hungry shades.'"
AN 4.111

“Master Assaji how does Gotama the Contemplative generally instruct his disciples?”
“Aggivessana, Gotama the Rightly Self-awakened one instructs his disciples, in a general way, as follows: ‘Form is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, mental fabrications are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Being impermanent, form is not-self, feelings are not-self, perceptions are not-self, mental fabrications are not-self, and consciousness is not-self. All impermanent phenomena is not-self. In short, the Five Clinging-Aggregates are impermanent and so not-self.’ Aggivessana, this is the general way that Gotama the Rightly Self-awakened one instructs his disciples.”
Cula Saccaka Sutta

When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on delusion, he places conviction in him. With the arising of conviction, he visits him & grows close to him. Growing close to him, he lends ear. Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas. There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates (lit: "weighs," "compares"). Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.
"To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is an awakening to the truth. To this extent one awakens to the truth. I describe this as an awakening to the truth. But it is not yet the final attainment of the truth.
"Yes, Master Gotama, to this extent there is an awakening to the truth. To this extent one awakens to the truth. We regard this as an awakening to the truth. But to what extent is there the final attainment of the truth? To what extent does one finally attain the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the final attainment of the truth."
"The cultivation, development, & pursuit of those very same qualities: to this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the final attainment of the truth. To this extent one finally attains the truth. I describe this as the final attainment of the truth."
MN 95

"May the Blessed One teach me the Dhamma in brief! May the One Well-gone teach me the Dhamma in brief! It may well be that I will understand the Blessed One's words. It may well be that I will become an heir to the Blessed One's words."
"Then, monk, you should train yourself thus: 'My mind will be established inwardly, well-composed. No evil, unskillful qualities, once they have arisen, will remain consuming the mind.' That's how you should train yourself.
"Then you should train yourself thus: 'Good-will, as my awareness-release, will be developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, & well-undertaken.' That's how you should train yourself. When you have developed this concentration in this way, you should develop this concentration with directed thought & evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & a modicum of evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & no evaluation, you should develop it accompanied by rapture... not accompanied by rapture... endowed with a sense of enjoyment; you should develop it endowed with equanimity.
"When this concentration is thus developed, thus well-developed by you, you should then train yourself thus: 'Compassion, as my awareness-release... Appreciation, as my awareness-release... Equanimity, as my awareness-release, will be developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, & well-undertaken.' That's how you should train yourself. When you have developed this concentration in this way, you should develop this concentration with directed thought & evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & a modicum of evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & no evaluation, you should develop it accompanied by rapture... not accompanied by rapture... endowed with a sense of enjoyment; you should develop it endowed with equanimity.
"When this concentration is thus developed, thus well-developed by you, you should then train yourself thus: 'I will remain focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.' That's how you should train yourself. When you have developed this concentration in this way, you should develop this concentration with directed thought & evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & a modicum of evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & no evaluation, you should develop it accompanied by rapture... not accompanied by rapture... endowed with a sense of enjoyment; you should develop it endowed with equanimity.
"When this concentration is thus developed, thus well-developed by you, you should train yourself: 'I will remain focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.' That's how you should train yourself. When you have developed this concentration in this way, you should develop this concentration with directed thought & evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & a modicum of evaluation, you should develop it with no directed thought & no evaluation, you should develop it accompanied by rapture... not accompanied by rapture... endowed with a sense of enjoyment; you should develop it endowed with equanimity.
"When this concentration is thus developed, thus well-developed by you, then wherever you go, you will go in comfort. Wherever you stand, you will stand in comfort. Wherever you sit, you will sit in comfort. Wherever you lie down, you will lie down in comfort."
AN 8.63

Then, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."
Through hearing this brief explanation of the Dhamma from the Blessed One, the mind of Bāhiya of the Bark-cloth right then and there was released from effluents through lack of clinging/sustenance.
Ud 1.10

These are short expositions.
In detail one begins by reflecting on results one's thoughts & behavior in general. One separates thoughts into two categories as to conducive and not conducive to the goal which one envisions for oneself. Furthermore, one starts cultivating the good ones by giving attention and stilling the formation of distracting thoughts;

When, indeed, bhikkhus, evil unskillful thoughts due to reflection on an adventitious object are eliminated, when they disappear, and the mind stands firm, settles down, becomes unified and concentrated just within (his subject of meditation), through his reflection on an object connected with skill, through his pondering on the disadvantages of unskillful thoughts, his endeavoring to be without attentiveness and reflection as regards those thoughts or through his restraining, subduing, and beating down of the evil mind by the good mind with clenched teeth and tongue pressing on the palate, that bhikkhu is called a master of the paths along which thoughts travel. The thought he wants to think, that, he thinks; the thought he does not want to think, that, he does not think. He has cut down craving, removed the fetter, rightly mastered pride, and made an end of suffering."
MN 20

Assuming one has come to agreement with the Dhamma, one should reflect on one's actions before, during & after doing deeds, analyzing the results.
One should reflect on the fearfulness of the states of woe and give much attention to the danger in things. Cultivate self-preservation, kindness to oneself and this will make you a kind person to all beings because others are like yourself just different body & amount of delusion.
One should be one's own servant, protector, judge & advocate and let one's best knowledge dictate behavior.
One reflects much on one's circumstances, think thoughts of sympathy towards oneself, wanting oneself to succeed, think of ways to show compassion to yourself, a little kindness, restraining some bad behavior maybe or get rid of bad influence.
Think thoughts of appreciation much, count your blessings, don't ruminate on what you lack, think of how far you've come & etc. There are many other themes to develop, I have a list of course (see here).
Furthermore, one should remain always mindful of the body, the dhamma, the Buddha and the Sangha. What these mean exactly I won't get into here.
However, dwelling thus mindfully in dependence on strengths of a student, ardent & resolute, serious with perception of death acutely established, perception of unattractiveness well established, senses guarded, moderate with food, devoted to wakefulness, filled with learning, having a few duties, resting in solitude and with energy aroused, one will perceive great distinctions and quickly attain the final goal.
Here a few random excerpts on vipassana & samatha;

These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana).
“When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned.
“When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned.
“Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release.”
AN 2.30

There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness (cetosamathassa), but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment ( adhipaññādhammavipassanāya)
“The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and ask him: ‘How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?’ ...
“As for the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness, he should approach an individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness... and ask him, ‘How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated?’
AN 4.94

Basically, samatha is calming for impulse control and insight is associated with strategy, knowledge & understanding. If there is a lack of impulse control then one can't execute one's strategy and is distracted.


text:
Nirvana with residue/non-abiding nirvana
What is the difference between Nirvana with residue and non-abiding Nirvana? Both these states apply to a Buddha while still alive and come to an end when the physical life of a Buddha comes to an end.

Related: Difference between abiding nirvana and non-abiding nirvana?

In reality there's no difference. There's only one Nirvana, not two, not three. The difference between the concepts is didactic:
the Nirvana with residue (or with fuel) is a Pali Canon concept defined as the extinction of attachment, aversion, and delusion. Even though the Buddha explicitly said that an arahant dwelling in this Nirvana still experiences agreeable and disagreeable as well as pleasure and pain, some students assume Nirvana must be a fixed sterile state, sort of like a perfect diamond with no flaws.
To counteract this delusion the Mahayana teachers coined a new concept of non-abiding (or non-localized) Nirvana. This Nirvana is explicitly defined as a non-fixed state of fully realized Shunyata or Emptiness, leaving no room for doubt or misunderstanding.
In both cases, we are talking about the same exact unconditioned Nirvana that Buddha taught. The non-abiding Nirvana is presented as a distinct (and superior) attainment to help the student let go of the idea of a fixed state and cultivate the atammayata.

Is one a delusion and the other not a delusion? Why would there be a need to separate the two in the way it was written in the relevant sutta?

I'm saying, both refer to the same thing but the first is easier to misunderstand. The two do not occur in the same sutta, one is a Pali Canon and the other is Mahayana concept. You must be confusing with the Nirvana-without-reminder, which is traditionally interpreted as a description of how an arahant experiences own death.

Right. Yes, I was confused with something else. By the way, ruban2020 had linked to a similar question, in which your answer spoke to me with more depth.

In the pali sutta, nirvana in general refers to destruction of taints, in particular the removal of greed, anger & delusion. It translates as 'extinguishment'.
There are qualified and there is a definitive designation for this term.

"Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left and the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
"These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."
These two Nibbana-elements were made known
By the Seeing One, stable and unattached:
One is the element seen here and now
With residue, but with the cord of being destroyed;
The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease.
Having understood the unconditioned state,
Released in mind with the cord of being destroyed,
They have attained to the Dhamma-essence.
Delighting in the destruction (of craving),
Those stable ones have abandoned all being.
Iti 44

“Venerable sir, it is said, ‘the removal of lust, the removal of hatred, the removal of delusion.’ Of what now, venerable sir, is this the designation?”
“This, bhikkhu, is a designation for the element of Nibbāna: the removal of lust, the removal of hatred, the removal of delusion. The destruction of the taints is spoken of in that way.”
When this was said, that bhikkhu said to the Blessed One: “Venerable sir, it is said, ‘the Deathless, the Deathless.’ What now, venerable sir, is the Deathless? What is the path leading to the Deathless?”
“The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion: this is called the Deathless. This Noble Eightfold Path is the path leading to the Deathless; that is, right view … right concentration.”
SN 45.7

Reverend, they speak of ‘extinguishment in the present life’. In what way did the Buddha speak of extinguishment in the present life?”
“First, take a mendicant who, quite secluded from sensual pleasures … enters and remains in the first absorption. To this extent the Buddha spoke of extinguishment in the present life in a qualified sense. …
Furthermore, take a mendicant who, going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters and remains in the cessation of perception and feeling. And, having seen with wisdom, their defilements come to an end. To this extent the Buddha spoke of extinguishment in the present life in a definitive sense.”
AN 9.51

There are certain 'meditative' attainments that are associated with this seeing with wisdom, seeing with wisdom is seeing with dhamma-eye, it sees the four noble truths in course of entering into & something from attainments associated with a cessation of perception & feeling, this seeing is what inadvertently destroys taints.

There are, monks, three unskilled ways of thought: thoughts of lust, thoughts of ill-will, thoughts of hurting. And these three unskilled states disappear utterly in him whose heart is well established in the four foundations of mindfulness, or who practices concentration on the signless.
"Indeed, monks, this concentration on the signless is greatly to be commended; the concentration on the signless, if developed and frequently practiced, is of great fruit, of great profit.
SN 22.80

The signless, undirected, emptiness releases are based on the same principle which is the truth of cessation and are called different due to how they are first apprehended & approached. This is the theravadin interpretation.