text:
Anatman: How does the illusion of 'I'/ self seize?
It seems that 'I' am between worlds. Sometimes the illusion is not there. Sometimes it seems that thoughts string together this sense of self. How can anatman be fully realised without this 'I' being recreated?
The dictionary describes this as the self: a person's essential being that distinguishes them from others, especially considered as the object of introspection or reflexive action.
How might this be true/untrue?
How does the state of anatman begin to permanently remain without the magnetism of this self?

I wonder if you might mean 'anatta' in the place of a 'anatman?' - one being of Buddhist origin and the other Hinduism respectively.

Please reuse same account, avoid creating many accounts with the same name.

I like your use of the words 'it seems', which suggests you've gained a particular degree of understanding. It does indeed 'seem' this way, but it is a very convincing mirage; an illusive trick created by the self-reflective nature of the six-sense consciousnesses.
Initially, (prior to stream-entry) one observes there to exist an enduring sense of self - personal space, time and consciousness.  The realisation of stream-entry shatters this illusion. What then remains are habitual and episodic instances that Theravada calls 'I am' conceits. These 'I am' conceits are a notoriously stubborn mental fetter.
In Theravada, it is understood that one finds a way to observe the rising and disbanding of these 'I am' conceits using the five aggregate model, but it must be a method of observing whereby one is absent of any preoccupation with the themes and details of those conceits.
By doing the non-doing of this, one comes to understand anicca (impermanence) quite naturally and effortlessly simply because the transient nature of conditionality is a permeating truth. This eventually puts an end to the 'I am' conceit who's job it is to work against the tide of impermanence thus causing a strenuous relationship that we know as this and that. Anatta might then be understood as this and that being no longer defined as neither of those, nor nothing in-between them.

First, let us notice the worry itself about the I. Once the worry is accepted as a legit concern, without even noticing, we have created drama, that will sustain the search and more things to do/achieve. The short answer is: there is no I, so the concern of making it "not be" also does not exist.
However, the short answer does not help in the marketplace where illusion is king. So we dive deeper... The I either is interested in finding out what is true (even if it means its own demise) or it is interested in deepening the illusion, (Morpheus asking Neo in "Matrix", which pill will he take) where it remains your personal God. This decision is not yours on the conscious level. The ego is always a step ahead, even in forming your preception, so there are clever strategies to disrupt the subconscious, creating a gap, for the conscious mind to get a wedge in there and from then systematically widening that gap. To see an excellent example how this gap appears, watch the movie "Revolver" from Guy Ritchie, or at least the "elevator scene" on youtube, where the main character realizes the separation from his Ego. The Eightfold Path is a good starter for strategizing.


text:
Does the dependent origination leads to becoming? If so, will then the reversal of the same i.e Dependent cessation brings the cessation of becoming?
Buddha talks of becoming have a cause, is dependent on something other. Like Lamp's flame and light, shadow and real object, The sun and it's aura, object and mirage.
The dependent origination generates the false  'I' which is nothing but the becoming.
Then can one conclude the cessation of becoming is also carried out by reversal of dependent origination I.e Dependent Cessation? I think that's the way!
Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the wisdom dawns upon.
This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can we say that?
Some quotes of Saints have this testimony in common,
√ Cure for Pain is in Pain!_ Rumi
√ Samudayadhamma(origination) = nirodhadhamma(cessation)_ Buddha
I believe the becoming and cessation are two opposite sides of the same coin!
What do others have to say about this? Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures. Do we have here the seekers which can see with eyes of wisdom?
I am asking them! Others please don't bother!

"Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures" is not allowed here unfortunately, because we must ensure that all questions and answers stay on-topic. So, users are in fact strongly encouraged to support their answers with citations if possible. So, you can tell users that they don't have to cite scriptures, but you cannot tell them that they cannot cite scriptures.

When you figure out how to reverse old age, lemme know!  We can go into business together.  But seriously, look at the 12 steps of dependent arising and ask yourself how any of them could be reversed.

Old age can't be reversed. The 'one who sees' for him death, old age, birth are true delusions. That which doesn't come into being, how could birth and death apply to it? Only it's due to ignorance he caught in this diad.

There is in fact, a forward version and a reverse version of dependent origination. Rather than calling it the two sides of the same coin, they are more like heads and tails - two different sides of the same coin (of samsara).
This is the forward version which starts with ignorance (avijja) and ends with suffering (dukkha):

“Thus, bhikkhus, with ignorance as proximate cause, volitional
formations come to be; with volitional formations as proximate cause,
consciousness; with consciousness as proximate cause, name-and-form;
with name-and-form as proximate cause, the six sense bases; with the
six sense bases as proximate cause, contact; with contact as proximate
cause, feeling; with feeling as proximate cause, craving; with craving
as proximate cause, clinging; with clinging as proximate cause,
existence; with existence as proximate cause, birth; with birth as
proximate cause, suffering;
SN 12.23

And it continues with the reverse version which starts with suffering (dukkha) and ends with the knowledge of destruction (of ignorance):

with suffering as proximate cause, faith; with faith as proximate
cause, gladness; with gladness as proximate cause, rapture; with
rapture as proximate cause, tranquillity; with tranquillity as
proximate cause, happiness; with happiness as proximate cause,
concentration; with concentration as proximate cause, the knowledge
and vision of things as they really are; with the knowledge and vision
of things as they really are as proximate cause, revulsion; with
revulsion as proximate cause, dispassion; with dispassion as proximate
cause, liberation; with liberation as proximate cause, the knowledge
of destruction.
SN 12.23

OP wrote:

Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not
the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing
thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the
wisdom dawns upon. This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the
non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can
we say that?

This sounds like the language of Advaita Vedanta of Hinduism, and not Buddhism.
There is no true "I" that's discovered when the false "I" is removed, in Buddhism.
Buddhism teaches "sabbe dhamma anatta" (Dhp 279) - all phenomena is not self. Also please see Vina Sutta and Sunna Sutta. This means absolutely ALL phenomena, including Nibbana, is not self.

Yes sir, i am not saying the false 'i' when ceased you land on to real 'i'. What am I saying when the individuality is just a mirage and when wisdom dawn on him, he knows 'I am that! 'That' is not real 'individual self' but the 'soul of the universe'!. It is never ever comes into becoming, then one realises equal attitude and compassion towards every living beings.

Saint Kabir says, 'If I call it one it's a lie and if I say Two it's a slander. The union is like husband and wife!'.   Eightfold path is living  life of union with the Master. 'samma' doesn't mean 'right' as they translated it in english. Samma means 'in union'.

We should be careful with this line of reasoning (as with all lines of reasoning). One doesn't eliminate a shadow by moving the light; moving the light casts a shadow in a different direction. 'Dependent cessation' sounds like dependent origination in a destructive mode. Just as the presence of a thing can be 'caused', the absence of it can be 'caused' as well. "I am not that" is merely that opposite side of the coin from "I am that"; both can be identifications.
To eliminate the shadow of identification, one must become transparent. Something to meditate on...

Sir, your statements conclude total annihilation, not this nor that. Nirvana they say is blowing out, now when the fuel is over, flames goes out. But, when the same fuel is over, who is the one who knows that the flame is not there anymore? Every Saints have testimony in common in the end, like Jesus(Lo! I am He), Buddha(tathgata), upanishad(thou art that)).

The  supreme  Soul  is  such  that  He  is  spoken  about  without actually  speaking,  about  whom  knowing  nothing  is  actually  same  as knowing  Him,  who  occurs  without  any  happening.  There,  the  even  the aspect  of  "I  am  that"  vanishes,  the  speaker  becomes  the  spoken  and  view disappears  along  with  the  viewer.   Can  anybody  say  that  something  has  survived  behind?

@sandeeptelang: Transparent does not mean absent (or annihilated); a glass hammer can still drive a nail. All that’s lost is the mirror that reflects how we see ourselves back at the world. But this talk of a ‘supreme soul’ is far more in line with Vedanta than Buddhism proper. That doesn’t make it wrong; it merely makes the discussion much more convoluted. I like Vedanta.; I like Buddhism; I like convoluted discussions. But that’s as far as I’m willing to go.

Majority of them doesn't recognise what the bodhi tree and the root means. Buddha attained enlightenment under the tree is not the fool think as Fig tree, but the tree of Samsara(worldly existence). If one found the root of tree, he will be awaken and the tree of samsara vanishes as mere dream. That's the real message. He himself is the root, leaves, branches and twigs. Universe shines at his reflection. Thou art that.

In case if you know the real Bodhi tree the link is down below.  http://www.dj6qo.de/dnye/dnye15.htm

@sandeeptelang: I prefer not to objectify metaphors. And I sense that you're trying to teach something more than you're trying to learn something, which is fine as such, but not the normal use or purpose of asking a question. Perhaps you should be answering others' questions?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Regarding Zodiac signs in authentic and classic Buddhist scriptures
There is still considerable amount of controversy regarding Lord Buddha's dating and the dating of incorporation of Zodiac signs of Mesha, Vrishaba etc into Indian and Asian culture. Their mentioning in ancient Buddhist scriptures may help in dating both the events.
Are there any mentions of Aries, Taurus resembling Mesha and Vrishabha in ancient and classical Buddhist scriptures?

What exactly is the controversy about the dating of the Buddha's lifetime? And what is the relationship between the Buddha and the zodiac signs? Can you cite sources for the claim of the relationship between Buddhism and zodiac signs? It's unclear to me how this question is related to Buddhism.

@ruben2020 It's relavant to Buddhism because it is asking for Zodiac signs in Buddhist scriptures

@ruben2020 https://youtu.be/PaFnsOSTBnc

@ruben2020 https://youtu.be/9UFfQJWOsNo

@ruben2020 https://www.pgurus.com/dr-manish-pandit-dates-when-gautam-buddha-attained-nirvana-and-it-is-a-shocker-p1/

There is no mention of specific zodiac signs in the Pali Canon, as far as I know. Stars, galaxies or constellations are only mentioned generically.
Mainstream historians say the Buddha lived around 563 BCE to 483 BCE, as you can see on Wikipedia.
The traditional chronology of Theravada Buddhism can be found on this page. It says in the footnote:

Year 1 of the Buddhist Era calendar is the year of the Buddha's
Parinibbana (death and final release), which occurred in the Buddha's
eightieth year (480 BCE according to the "historical" timeline; 544
BCE by tradition).
The actual date of the Buddha's birth is unknown. According to
Buddhist tradition, the Buddha's birth took place in 624 BCE, although
some recent estimates place the Buddha's birth much later — perhaps as
late as 448 BCE. 560 BCE is one commonly accepted date for the
Buddha's birth, and the "historical" date for that event that I adopt
here.

According to National Geographic's article "Oldest Buddhist Shrine Uncovered In Nepal May Push Back the Buddha's Birth Date" (Nov 27, 2013) by Dan Vergano:

Time to push back the Buddha's birth date a century or so?
Archaeologists may have uncovered evidence of the oldest Buddhist
shrine yet discovered, dating to around 550 B.C. ....
The exact date of the Buddha's birth is disputed, with Nepalese
authorities favoring 623 B.C., and other traditions favoring more
recent dates, around 400 B.C. ....
Digging beneath a central shrine, the researchers uncovered postholes
pointing to a wooden railing surrounding a tree shrine and dating to
around 550 B.C., says Coningham. They also found an older brick
structure.

The videos the OP linked proposes dates which are not supported by mainstream historians. 1800 BCE is completely nonsensical for the Buddha's lifetime.
It's obvious that the Buddha lived before Adi Shankara, based on the writings of the latter. The date of 1800 BCE for the Buddha's life was fabricated so that Adi Shankara's birth date can be placed at 509 BCE based on tradition. However, mainstream historians agree that Adi Shankara was born around 700 CE or 788 CE, as you can see on Wikipedia.
I noticed a trend that certain religious scholars like to push dates far back in time, than it really is, because to them, the older something is, seems to lend credibility to it.
However, in the case of Buddhism, the dates do not matter at all. Buddhists seem to be more than happy to accept dates given by mainstream historians and archaeologists, because it doesn't change the credibility of the Buddha's teachings in their view.
In fact, accurate historical and geographical information is helpful, in understanding the context behind some of the teachings and stories told in the Pali Canon and other texts.

Thanks for the answer. This question was mainly asked for dating of Mahabharata and Ramayana.

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


text:
Does reality fight back when you want to meditate?
Whenever I want to meditate (down to Nirvana), it seems that the whole world wants to confront me to stop me.
Does reality fight back when you want to meditate?
Have other people encountered this?
i assume you know how anxiety affects our focus, The world always seems to find a way to disrupt my focus.

Right immersion is peaceful:

AN5.27:1.2: When you develop limitless immersion, alert and mindful, five knowledges arise for you personally.
AN5.27:1.3: What five?
AN5.27:1.4: ‘This immersion is blissful now, and results in bliss in the future.’ …
AN5.27:1.5: ‘This immersion is noble and spiritual.’ …
AN5.27:1.6: ‘This immersion is not cultivated by sinners.’ …
AN5.27:1.7: ‘This immersion is peaceful and sublime and tranquil and unified, not held in place by forceful suppression.’ …
AN5.27:1.8: ‘I mindfully enter into and emerge from this immersion.’ …
AN5.27:2.1: Develop limitless immersion, alert and mindful.

This sounds easy, but actually is not, so the Buddha provides instruction:

AN5.28:2.1: “And how do you develop noble right immersion with five factors?
AN5.28:2.2: Firstly, a mendicant, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption. It has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected.
AN5.28:2.3: They drench, steep, fill, and spread their body with rapture and bliss born of seclusion. There’s no part of the body that’s not spread with rapture and bliss born of seclusion.
AN5.28:2.4: It’s like when a deft bathroom attendant or their apprentice pours bath powder into a bronze dish, sprinkling it little by little with water. They knead it until the ball of bath powder is soaked and saturated with moisture, spread through inside and out; yet no moisture oozes out.
AN5.28:2.5: In the same way, a mendicant drenches, steeps, fills, and spreads their body with rapture and bliss born of seclusion.

Let's look at these instructions carefully:

secluded from sensual pleasures. If we're absorbed in a video game, it will be hard to find time to meditate. So we turn off the video game.
secluded from unskillful qualities. If we're obsessed with gain such as promotions, more salary, finer clothes, better lodging, etc., then that's not really skillful. So we let the world be without grasping at it. Ethics help here as a natural form of restraint. And seclusion provides a time and space for immersion.

So seclusion is quite important. Notice that the Buddha repeats "seclusion" for emphasis. Seclusion is a key principle.
How shall we go about achieving this elusive seclusion? Well the Buddha recommends this:

MN62:3.2: “Rāhula, you should truly see any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’”

By not grabbing at the world, we can move gently and peacefully through the world, doing what needs to be done when it needs to be done. By not grabbing at the world, we can work and pay our bills and feed our families. And by not grabbing at the world, with patiently awaited good fortune, we may have the time to peacefully meditate with right immersion.
The path is gentle and at the start of the path is Right View. Right Immersion is the eighth step in the path, so let's start with the first step before jumping all the way to the last.
If the world is chasing us, let's turn towards it and meet it directly with the heart. If we are chasing the world, let's turn away from it and find peace for the heart.
NOTE: for more details on Right View, please see MN117:

MN117:6.1: And what is right view?

The anxiety occurs due to an ever-increasing understanding of impermanence, but the mind diversifies such simplistic teachings. Having further understood impermanence and having become upset by that understanding, the mind projects its upset back out towards the world. This comes as a result of holding views about what is perceived in that world. Whatever views one holds about the world, the 'I am' conceit is always the predominant funder.

"But, lord, might there be agitation over what is internally not
present?" [Impermanant]
"There might, monk," the Blessed One said. "There is the case where
someone has this view: 'This cosmos is the self. After death this I
will be constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change. I will
stay just like that for an eternity.' He hears a Tathagata or a
Tathagata's disciple teaching the Dhamma for the elimination of all
view-positions, determinations, biases, inclinations, & obsessions;
for the stilling of all fabrications; for the relinquishing of all
acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.
The thought occurs to him, 'So it might be that I will be annihilated!
So it might be that I will perish! So it might be that I will not
exist!' He grieves & is tormented, weeps, beats his breast, & grows
delirious. It's thus that there is agitation over what is internally
not present."

The fighting back that you describe is not the world 'out there', it is your inner views resisting the transient nature of conditionality, but the mind plays tomfoolery with you.

To amplify Max's last line: The Buddha taught that the path to our enlightenment lies solely within us. Likewise, the impediments are solely within us as well. From my personal experience, what you perceive as the world 'fighting' you really arises from  your own inability to calm yourself and block out the interference from that inner distraction. Best to you on this effort; it is not easy, Jim


text:
Most efficient practices you will quickly do to recover/re-generate Bodhicitta and/or right view of Śūnyatā if realizing losing mindfulness of?
In daily (secular) life, if you realize that you are being or have been losing (or forgetting) mindfulness of Bodhicitta and/or right view of Śūnyatā, what (most efficient practices) you will quickly do to recover/re-generate Bodhicitta and/or right view of Śūnyatā in you?
Thanks in advance for any possible answer and/or instruction for the question in this post you can and will give.
P.S. I am unsure having figure out a good title for this post so everyone is welcome to help.

The distraction probably needs more emphasis than sunyata. What is the distraction?

@Max Hi thanks for begin discussion! So using "distracted" causes unclear meaning? Then, maybe that "distracted from" should be replaced by "losing/forgetting mindfulness of". I try edit it now.

If I understand your question correctly, you don't need a new or special practice for this; just take a moment and do a light version of regular practice. For instance, you might stop and focus your attention on your breathing for a minute, just watching it come and go without changing it. You don't need to sit on a cushion, find a 'clear' space, or do any of the other things you would do for a normal meditation session; you don't even need to put down anything you might be holding. Just pause, pay attention to six or seven breaths, and go back to whatever you were doing.
You'll sometimes hear people talk about 'centering' or 'grounding'. That is essentially what I'm suggesting, and you might find some other practical techniques if you google around. Full meditation sessions establish and deepen the practice, but in between such sessions we still want to bring ourselves back to center, just a touch of practice on the fly to remind ourselves.


text:
What is life like after having achieved nirvana?
So , if someone defeats death and ends birth...actually achieves nirvana.
What is that like pragmatically?
Of course you have that old saying about carrying water and chopping wood but what is the actual experience of reality like for someone who has done this?

Closely related: What Does It Feel Like to Be in Nirvana?.  Maybe even duplicate of this?

The not very helpful but probably accurate response is Nirvana is ineffable
The more helpful answer would be to direct you a few books.
Daniel Ingram's book Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, An Unusually Hardcore Dharma Book is a very detailed account of what the higher stages of realisation are like (to him) up to and including Nirvana from an arhant perspective. I think he has since modified this claim but it's all pretty high level stuff. It is freely available for download at the above link.
Also, there is Rob Burbea book Seeing that Frees. While Rob Burbea doesn't make any specific claims for his own level of realisation - it's clear that he is a very experienced insight meditator and he gives a clear account of what that is like plus instruction on how to get there. You'll have to pay for that book.
Probably the most helpful thing to say is just engage with Buddhist practice as much as you are able under a teacher that you trust. And do your best. I personally wouldn't read the above two books if I wasn't practicing, as there is just a whole heap of misunderstanding and grasping that can come from it - especially the Daniel Ingram one.
They are great books though, so everyone makes their own decision about how much they want to know about the stages of the path and at what point, and how to balance this with their own practice.

The only answers you'll get to this are answers-by-analogy, because realization is experiential. I mean, if I asked you questions like:

What's it like to throw a baseball?
What's it like to eat lasagna?
What's it like to sing?

I doubt you could give me any effective answers. I will say that the best analogy I know of comes from daoism, which suggests that mastery is like a pond after the mud settles. Everything is the same - the same pond, the same water, the same mud - but everything is different. After the mud settles, the water is clean, clear, and sweet.

Great answer and actually the only answer that can be given.

What do you think about the idea that if you can't explain something to a kid to understand it, then you don't really understand it?

@Ooker: I'd say it's a cute aphorism, one that has an element of 'truthiness' with respect to abstract knowledge, but that doesn't really apply at all to experiential understandings. I mean, I understand the Calculus thoroughly. Could I explain it to a class of third graders? Only in the most superficial and limited ways; they just don't have the acumen to really grasp it. I also have a deep knowledge of coffee, but could I explain to them what 'drinking coffee' is like? sharing knowledge demands a knowing teacher and a 'ready' student; sharing experience is probably best left to poets.

I understand that, but at the same time I don't thing the person who first made that quote meant that the kid needed to fully understand calculus. They may only understand a small portion of it, which in your view is superficial to what calculus really is. But that's not a big problem to them. When your teacher taught you calculus, they was also aware that what they said and what you would understand weren't the whole beauty of it, but that wasn't a problem to them, or else they couldn't explain anything

@Ooker: Which is why i say the aphorism has a certain 'truthiness' with respect to abstract knowledge. I'm not certain what point you're reaching for, here; is this just a curious but idle thought stream, or does it reflect some discontentment with my answer?

A discontent to the answer I would say. I don't think we are having any disagreement – I accept that explaining an experience is hard and sometimes requiring the student to be ready as well, and you accept that the aphorism has a certain truthiness. However your answer seems to only discuss about the former, and lack the latter

@Ooker: I see your point, but I'm disinclined to go there on the 'Santa Claus' principle. Yes, one can make a compelling case (in the Christian tradition) that Santa Claus is an understanding of God accessible to small children: old guy with a white beard who sees everything and rewards or punishes accordingly (even has God's favorite smiting tool, thunder and lightning, aka Donner und Blitzen). But that child-friendly version predisposes Christians towards anthropomorphic understandings of God, which becomes a notable hindrance down the line. One must keep a wary eye on karma...

Please see this answer for details.
The fully liberated ones (arahants) tend to live as monks or nuns, because they can no longer live the lay materialistic life. They are completely free from all mental suffering and mental defilements.
They may experience physical pain, but they can mentally endure it. Physical pain does not lead to mental suffering for them.
They no longer experience greed/ lust, aversion (including hate) and delusion. They no longer crave for sensual pleasures or crave to become something. They don't experience boredom.
They may plan to do something, but they never plan to become something or somebody. They don't brood about the past or, dream or worry about the future.
Where the unenlightened feel boredom due to inactivity or feel loneliness due to lack of company, the arahants feel completely at ease and peaceful, and even prefer this. Their mental state is peaceful, free of "noise" and mental agitation of any kind.
They eat or take care of their health only out of necessity for maintenance and not with desires for sensual pleasures or to become something or somebody.
Their mental state will be that of peace and bliss all the time.
From the Dhammapada:

The fever of passion exists not for him who has completed the journey, who is sorrowless and wholly set free, and has broken all
ties.

The mindful ones exert themselves. They are not attached to any home; like swans that abandon the lake, they leave home after home
behind.

Those who do not accumulate and are wise regarding food, whose object is the Void, the Unconditioned Freedom — their track cannot be
traced, like that of birds in the air.

He whose cankers are destroyed and who is not attached to food, whose object is the Void, the Unconditioned Freedom — his path cannot
be traced, like that of birds in the air.

Even the gods hold dear the wise one, whose senses are subdued like horses well trained by a charioteer, whose pride is destroyed and
who is free from the cankers.

There is no more worldly existence for the wise one who, like the earth, resents nothing, who is firm as a high pillar and as pure as a
deep pool free from mud.

Calm is his thought, calm his speech, and calm his deed, who, truly knowing, is wholly freed, perfectly tranquil and wise.

The man who is without blind faith, who knows the Uncreated, who has severed all links, destroyed all causes (for karma, good and
evil), and thrown out all desires — he, truly, is the most excellent
of men.

Inspiring, indeed, is that place where Arahants dwell, be it a village, a forest, a vale, or a hill.

Inspiring are the forests in which worldlings find no pleasure. There the passionless will rejoice, for they seek no sensual
pleasures.

Arahantavagga of Dhammapada

The six-senses cease creating consciousness. The consciousness that usually arises out of these six-senses is very noisy, even when one seems settled and relaxed. In Buddhism, it is known as the samsaric consciousness, which is best illustrated visually in the Tibetan Wheel of Life and best described by the Buddha in Dependent Arising as a mass of suffering. This type of consciousness largely comprises an unsettling energy coupled with a tremendous desire to ease the discomfort it creates. What we understand to be comfort is actually the release from the activities that we assume to be a remedy: the acquisition of objects, people and situations only gives temporary relief, but it is only the relief from striving itself. This antagonizes the restlessness, and so humans go round and round in a crazy loop because the fundamental issue still remains.
Enlightenment is the understanding that one does not need to suffer in that way. The six-senses no longer fall under the illusion that captivates 99 percent of people on earth - that type of consciousness has ended, but if you were to touch the body, there still remains heat, one still speaks and moves around. But you might still knowingly fall into the innocence along with everyone else. After all, we are 2-year-olds farting about in a huge sandpit. Some of us do it nicely, some of us perhaps not so. That's OK, because it's all the same childlike innocence.
It doesn't mean you become perfect. You might still roll a ball of snot between your thumb and index finger and perhaps flick it into an obscure corner of the room (that reminds me, I must vacuum the floors this week). And who knows, you might even tell someone off.

Ānanda once asked the Buddha a similar question:

MN115:3.2: “Sir, how is a mendicant qualified to be called ‘astute, an inquirer’?”

The Buddha responds at length and touches most succinctly on the unconditioned:

MN115:9.3: There are these two elements:
MN115:9.4: the conditioned element and the unconditioned element.
MN115:9.5: When a mendicant knows and sees these two elements,
MN115:9.6: they’re qualified to be called ‘skilled in the elements’.”

So the short answer is to understand the unconditioned:

SN43.12:1.3: And what is the unconditioned?
SN43.12:1.4: The ending of greed, hate, and delusion.
SN43.12:1.5: This is called the unconditioned.

Furthermore...

AN3.47:2.1: “Unconditioned phenomena have these three characteristics.
AN3.47:2.2: What three?
AN3.47:2.3: No arising is evident, no vanishing is evident, and no change while persisting is evident.

Pragmatically, one might simply observe that the unconditioned life (i.e., a life lived in resonance with limitless love, compassion, rejoicing and equanimity) is a life lived free of the boundaries imposed by suffering.

SN41.7:6.2: Greed, hate, and delusion are makers of limits.
SN41.7:6.3: A mendicant who has ended the defilements has given these up, cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, and obliterated them, so they are unable to arise in the future.


text:
Longest meditation period of historical Buddha
Is there any record of the longest period the historical Buddha stayed in meditation?  I have heard rumors ranging from many days to many weeks.  Also when?  Prior to his first sermon or after?

In the following suttas, it was recorded that the Buddha sat in unbroken meditation for seven days, before emerging. This occurred right after he became fully enlightened.

I have heard that on one occasion, the Blessed One was staying at
Uruvelā on the bank of the Nerañjarā River at the root of the Bodhi
tree — the tree of awakening — newly awakened. And on that occasion he
sat at the root of the Bodhi tree for seven days in one session,
sensitive to the bliss of release. At the end of seven days, he
emerged from that concentration.
Ud 1.4

Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying at Uruvela, beside
the river Nerañjara at the foot of the Bodhi Tree, having just
realized full enlightenment. At that time the Lord sat cross-legged
for seven days experiencing the bliss of liberation. Then, at the end
of those seven days, the Lord emerged from that concentration and gave
well-reasoned attention during the first watch of the night to
dependent arising in forward order.
Ud 1.1

I have heard that on one occasion, the Blessed One was staying at
Uruvelā on the bank of the Nerañjarā River at the root of the Bodhi
tree — the tree of awakening — newly awakened. And on that occasion he
sat at the root of the Bodhi tree for seven days in one session,
sensitive to the bliss of release. Then, with the passing of seven
days, after emerging from that concentration, he surveyed the world
with the eye of an Awakened One. As he did so, he saw living beings
burning with the many fevers and aflame with the many fires born of
passion, aversion, & delusion.
Ud 3.10

Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying at Uruvela beside
the river Nerañjara at the foot of the Mucalinda Tree, having just
realized full enlightenment.
At that time the Lord sat cross-legged for seven days experiencing the
bliss of liberation. Now it happened that there occurred, out of
season, a great rainstorm and for seven days there were rain clouds,
cold winds, and unsettled weather. Then Mucalinda the naga-king left
his dwelling place and having encircled the Lord's body seven times
with his coils, he stood with his great hood spread over the Lord's
head (thinking) to protect the Lord from cold and heat, from gadflies,
mosquitoes, wind, sun, and the touch of creeping things.
At the end of those seven days the Lord emerged from that
concentration. Then Mucalinda the naga-king, seeing that the sky had
cleared and the rain clouds had gone, removed his coils from the
Lord's body. Changing his own appearance and assuming the appearance
of a youth, he stood in front of the Lord with his hands folded
together venerating him.
Ud 2.1


text:
AN 8.30 Great thoughts, thoughts of great man, thing-able, (de-)touch-able for everyone? (thinking in first jhāna)
Coming from here, analysis of AN 8.30.

Good, Anuruddha, very good.
It’s good that you think
these thoughts of a great person:

Does good householder think that certain (all) people are capable to think such thoughts?
So how then could certain delight in such thoughts? What then would one, seeing this, start to think for himself instead to try to make a dead dog walk? In what would he delight and sacrifices into himself? What does good householder here desire to think?
Are thought of a great man only think-able for great or by everyone? What happens if a ordinary starts to give them public thoughts?
And in the case thinking not possible for everybody here and now, what would be the prerequisite to get the point?
What's the matter with proper attention and good association here? Could that be a way out?

some of your questions unclear, such as  >>What then would one, seeing this, start to think for himself instead to try to make a dead dog walk? In what would he delight and sacrifices into himself? What does good householder here desire to think?

If we read the later part of AN 8.30, we will find that this is targeted at monks (bhikkhus) and not lay followers.
For example:

“When it was said: ‘This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one
who is discontent,’ with reference to what was this said? Here, a
bhikkhu is content with any kind of robes, almsfood, lodgings, and
medicines and provisions for the sick. When it was said: ‘This Dhamma
is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent,’ it is with
reference to this that this was said.
“When it was said: ‘This Dhamma is for one who resorts to solitude,
not for one who delights in company,’ with reference to what was this
said? Here, when a bhikkhu resorts to solitude, bhikkhus, bhikkhunīs,
male lay followers, female lay followers, kings, royal ministers,
heads of other sects, and disciples belonging to other sects approach
him. In each case, with a mind that slants, slopes, and inclines to
seclusion, withdrawn, delighting in renunciation, he gives them a talk
invariably concerned with dismissing them. When it was said: ‘This
Dhamma is for one who resorts to solitude, not for one who delights in
company,’ it is with reference to this that this was said.
AN 8.30

There is further indication below that this is targeted at monks (bhikkhus) and not lay followers.

“When you reflect upon these eight thoughts of a great person and gain
at will … these four jhānas … then, while you dwell contentedly, your
scraps of almsfood will seem to you as a dish of rice cleaned of black
grains and served with many gravies and curries seems to a householder
or a householder’s son; and they will serve for your delight, relief,
and ease, and for entering upon nibbāna.
“When you reflect upon these eight thoughts of a great person and gain
at will … these four jhānas … then, while you dwell contentedly, your
dwelling place at the foot of a tree will seem to you as a house with
a peaked roof, plastered inside and out, draft-free, with bolts
fastened and shutters closed, seems to a householder or a
householder’s son; and it will serve for your delight, relief, and
ease, and for entering upon nibbāna.
“When you reflect upon those eight thoughts of a great person and gain
at will … these four jhānas … then, while you dwell contentedly, your
bed and seat made of straw will seem to you as a couch spread with
rugs, blankets, and covers, with an excellent covering of antelope
hide, with a canopy above and red bolsters at both ends, seems to a
householder or a householder’s son; and it will serve for your
delight, relief, and ease, and for entering upon nibbāna.
“When you reflect upon these eight thoughts of a great person and gain
at will … these four jhānas … then, while you dwell contentedly, your
medicine of fermented cow’s urine will seem to you as various
medicaments of ghee, butter, oil, honey, and molasses seem to a
householder or a householder’s son; and it will serve for your
delight, relief, and ease, and for entering upon nibbāna.
AN 8.30

So, does this mean that the Dhamma is only for monks and not for lay followers? Does this mean anybody who is interested in Buddhism MUST eventually become monks?
No. Definitely not.
There is the duality of the path according to MN 117.
There is Right View with effluents for lay persons and the Noble Right View for monks. Similarly, for Right Speech, Right Livelihood etc. there's the version with effluents and the version which is noble.
What is Right Livelihood for lay persons for e.g. carrying out the business of a merchant selling clothes, or the profession of a doctor, for example, is not Right Livelihood for monks. The former is with effluents. The latter is the noble version.

"And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts:
There is right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in
acquisitions [of becoming]; there is right view that is noble, without
effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path.
"And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit,
resulting in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered,
what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions.
There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There
are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans
who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the
next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This
is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in
acquisitions.
"And what is the right view that is noble, without effluents,
transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of
discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a
factor for awakening, the path factor of right view1 in one
developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without
effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right
view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the
path.
MN 117

So, does this mean that the study of the Dhamma and the practise of meditation is only for monks?
No. That's not true. The Buddha told Anathapindika and 500 other lay followers to practise the meditation leading to jhana, when they can find free time. He did not tell them to become monks.
He said their charity towards monks is commendable but they shouldn't think that this is the only thing they should do as householders. They should also practise meditation and reflect on the teachings.

Then Anathapindika the householder, surrounded by about 500 lay
followers, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed
down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there the Blessed One
said to him, "Householder, you have provided the community of
monks with robes, alms food, lodgings, & medicinal requisites for the
sick, but you shouldn't rest content with the thought, 'We have
provided the community of monks with robes, alms food, lodgings, &
medicinal requisites for the sick.' So you should train yourself,
'Let's periodically enter & remain in seclusion & rapture.' That's
how you should train yourself."
Piti Sutta (AN 5.176)

Renowned sutta scholar Piya Tan wrote in his commentary on Piti Sutta that:

Until recently (even up to the late 20th century), there is a common
wrong view that spiritual training, especially mental cultivation or
meditation, is only the domain of the monastic. The laity merely makes
merit by serving and supporting the monastics. However, it is clear
from the Pīti Sutta here that spiritual development by way of mental
cultivation is just as important for the laity.

Sometimes, monks like Devadatta (Iti 89) or Sati (MN 38) are wrong teachers and a lay householder like Citta (SN 41.5) is the right teacher.
One of the monks that Citta taught, by the name of Ven. Kamabhu, said:

“You’re fortunate, householder, so very fortunate, to traverse the
Buddha’s deep teachings with the eye of wisdom.”
SN 41.5

Many lay followers attained stream entry in the stories of the suttas.
So, while the path of the monk is superior to the path of the lay follower, and is in fact, the noble path, but the path of the lay follower is definitely existing and is legitimate.
And the lay follower is not just meant to provide alms to monks, but is also meant to study the Dhamma and practise it to the extent that is possible to him. Of course, he can also choose to become a monk later if he wants to, but this is not mandatory.
It's as though the monk is like the full time professional practitioner, like a full time professional football player. And the lay person is the casual practitioner, like someone who plays football casually in his free time.
We cannot tell the casual football player that he cannot play football at all, just because he is not a full time professional football player.
What is important is that we shouldn't waste our precious time, and do the best that we can, as the Dhammapada says:

Those who in youth have not led the holy life, or have failed to
acquire wealth, languish like old cranes in the pond without fish.
Those who in youth have not lead the holy life, or have failed to
acquire wealth, lie sighing over the past, like worn out arrows (shot
from) a bow.
Dhammapada 155 - 156

So laypeople aren't able to atain Jhanas or what should the excluding of lay people being "great people" here suggest, aside that thinking that answer might have lacked of proper attention possible, good householder? It doesn't seem that good householder got the point of question at all and prefers papancing on it, right? Auf Deutsch: 'Don mag da gerade mal wieder eine Windmühle attackieren".

Maybe, even if certain in traumata, he likes to reread the Question and answer instead on it as there isn't any matter of kind of way of livelihood inside at all. (Elsewhere, maybe apply the 'this was taught to homeless' to correct 100 of answers)

Good householder Frank, maybe:
First, a not yet completely great person would think:
(1) ‘This Dhamma is for one of few-desires,
not for one of many-desires.
(2) This Dhamma is for one who is content,
not for one who is dis-content.
(3) This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive,
not for one who who delights-in-social-gathering.
(4) This Dhamma is for one of aroused-vigor,
not for one who is lazy.
(5) This Dhamma is for one who has established-mindfulness,
not for one of muddled-mindfulness.
(6) This Dhamma is for one who is concentrated,
not for one who is un-concentrated.
(7) This Dhamma is for one endowed with discernment,
not for one of dubious-discernment.’
and as possible being made aware or get aware himself, that having fallen into the Papanca-trap (composed out of the three papanca-dhammas: view, graving, conceit) in all cases for himself, cutting him off from Noble attainments, remembers the 8. and takes the first without slippering away by papanca by heart, gotten back on right attention, track, ye way of practice of a Noble One:
(8) ‘This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-proliferation-[of-objectification],-1- who delights in non-proliferation,
not-for-one who enjoys & delights in proliferation-[of-objectification].’
(it's importand not to let go of thoughts till the highest release, thoughtless acts will otherwise remain)
de-powered by:

sorry, I still don't know what you're asking of me. My article you linked in the OP was specific on the topic that the 8 great thoughts (vitakka), has to be the same vitakka of first jhana, contrary to LBT (late buddhist texts) position that vitakka in first jhana means "not thinking, just placing the mind".  It sounds like you're asking me something outside the scope of my article on that narrow topic. II'd be happy to comment if I knew what you were after.

So far as I know, most other users of this site don't see advertisements like the one in your screen-shot -- and you do see them, because you use throw-away unregistered user accounts. I'm not sure about this but the Stack Exchange network implements a "Reduced ads" privilege -- that privilege is undocumented on this site, but I don't see ads so I guess it exists. I mean, users like frankk (whose reputation is over 1000) won't see the ads you see. You wouldn't see them either, except that you insist on using unprivileged user accounts.

Good householer Frank is always welcome for thoughts and issues with no requirements to speak on traders sites. And sure most useful to let go of trying getting death dogs walk and waste ones time nurishing on it.. Good householder Chris, since years does he ignore for what he works and sacrifices... yet it was just an ironic on the topic, but with lack of proper attention sure hard to trace. Nothing to worry as for oneself.

The question asked is:

And in the case thinking not possible for everybody here and now, what  would be the prerequisite to get the point? What's the matter with
proper attention and good association here? Could that be a way out?

Per AN 10.61, the prerequisite to get the point is proper attention and good association. For example, due to lacking good association, the thoughts of FrankK are:

An example, of good association are the thoughts of Ajahn Buddhadasa (given five Honorary Doctorates by Thai universities), which were/are:

When the inferior & mundane with wrong view are lost in imaginings/misconstruings (maññati) about a profound & lofty Dhamma subject (such as 'jhana'), if they wish to be wise, they will rely on the superior, such as the Ariya Sangha.
For example, AN 8.30 says:

Therefore, Anuruddha, also reflect on (vitakkehi; 2nd person singular imperative) this eighth thought of a great person: (8) ‘This Dhamma is for one who delights in non-proliferation, who takes delight in nonproliferation, not for one who delights in proliferation, who takes delight in proliferation.’
“When, Anuruddha, you reflect on (vitakkessasi; 2nd person singular future active) these eight thoughts of a great
person, then, as much as you wish (ākaṅkhissasi; 2nd person singular future active), secluded from sensual pleasures,
secluded from unwholesome states, you will enter (upasampajja; gerund, active, absolutive) and dwell (viharissasi; 2nd person singular future active) in the
first jhāna, which consists of rapture and pleasure born of seclusion,
accompanied by thought and examination.
“When you reflect on these eight thoughts of a great person, then, as
much as you wish, with the subsiding of thought and examination, you
will enter and dwell in the second jhāna, which has internal placidity
and unification of mind and consists of rapture and pleasure born of
concentration, without thought and examination.
“When you reflect on these eight thoughts of a great person, then, as
much as you wish, with the fading away as well of rapture, you will
dwell equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, experience
pleasure with the body; you will enter and dwell in the third jhāna of
which the noble ones declare: ‘He is equanimous, mindful, one who
dwells happily.’
“When you reflect on these eight thoughts of a great person, then, as
much as you wish, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with
the previous passing away of joy and sadness, you will enter and dwell
in the fourth jhāna, neither painful nor pleasant, which has
purification of mindfulness by equanimity.

Here, AN 8.30, using active future verbs, says every jhana can be attained by reflecting on the eight thoughts of a great person. For example, about the 1st jhana, AN 8.30 says when there is thought about the eight thoughts, the 1st jhana will be attained, which includes the vitakka of jhana. This shows the reflecting of the eight thoughts is not the vitakka & vicara of the 1st jhana (because one type of vitakka is used to enter/attain & abide in another type of vitakka). Therefore, obviously, per the good association with Ajahn Buddhadasa, the reflecting/use of ordinary 'verbal thought' occurs prior to jhana, which contains another type of 'non-verbal vitakka', namely, 'directing the mind'.
To reiterate & emphasise the last of eight thoughts, which is about practising non-proliferation, MN 19 says:

If I think and ponder upon this thought even for a night, even for a
day, even for a night and day, I see nothing to fear from it. But with
excessive thinking and pondering I might tire my body, and when the
body is tired, the mind becomes strained, and when the mind is
strained, it is far from concentration.’ So I steadied my mind
internally, quieted it, brought it to singleness, and concentrated it.
Why is that? So that my mind should not be strained.... Tireless
energy was aroused in me and unremitting mindfulness was established,
my body was tranquil and untroubled, my mind concentrated and unified.
Quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome
states, I entered upon and abided in the first jhāna...

Therefore, when a puthujjana places faith in Ariya Sangha, such as Ajahn Buddhadasa or Ajahn Brahm, it appears impossible the puthujjana & non-jhana attainer would regard the reflecting referred to in AN 8.30 as occurring in the 1st jhana. Ajahn Budhadadasa & Ajahn Brahm have advised us ordinary vitakka is not the same as the vitakka of jhana. Naturally, if we had merely a small amount of common sense, we would logically concludes ordinary vitakka cannot occur together with ekaggata citta. Regardless, when the Ajahns of high repute tell jhana vitakka is not the same as ordinary vitakka, we should consider what they say.
Of course, if Ajahn Brahm preaches reincarnation to us, we do not have to believe this, because the Suttas already tell us reincarnation is not related to the Noble Path. But when Ajahn Brahm tells us vitakka is a subtle movement of the mind towards the rapture of jhana, it is wise to have faith in him, rather than continue the kamma of making endless arguments & baseless insults on the internet.
The above example shows the benefit (namely, non-delusion) of association with good persons.


text:
Confusion about Stream Entry
How is the fetter "Identity View" destroyed by confidence in the triple-gem and ethics ([DN 16, see "Dhamma-Mirror"])?  The concept of identity view also seems to be a bit fuzzy. In [SN 55.21] the stream entrant Mahanamo wonders about his future abodes. I assume that Mahanamo was familiar with the term Sotapanna and its implications. The buddha assures him that by his ripened confidence in the triple gem and his steadfast ethics, he is saved.
I make the following conclusions:

"I am worried about my future births" does not imply identity view.
If I doubt my attainment of SE, I do not disprove my attainment.

Point 2 is mentioned, because often I see the argument "you worry about sotapanna, then you are not sotapanna due to identity view". By the above reasoning, I know that identity view must be something else, as it seems to tolerate some thoughts about myself.
I also conclude that there are two sufficient conditions for stream entry:

No self view, no skeptical doubt and no clinging to rites and rituals implies Sotapanna [MN 25].
Confidence in the triple gem and good ethics implies Sotapanna, [DN 16, see "Dhamma-Mirror"].

If point 4 describes the "conviction follower", then Thanissaro Bikkhu disagrees about 4, saying

[...] conviction-followers are apparently those who are following the path
to stream-entry but have yet to reach the fruit of stream-entry.

This leaves only point 3 as possibility to stream entry and contradicts the Dhamma Mirror, given by the Buddha.

'Identity-view' means immersion in an identity such that one takes the identity to be the 'real' self. An identity-view can be an identification with practically anything, positive or negative: a career or the failure to achieve one; a relationship, relationships, or the absence of such; physical beauty or ugliness; intelligence or stupidity... Anything towards which one can say: "I am 'that'" such that 'that' is inseparable from who one is.

I am a lawyer with a beautiful wife and an Italian muscle-car
I am a homeless person cast out from society
I am a wife, mother, and homemaker, willingly or not
I am a rock star, a decadent idol suffused in sex, drugs, and music

Breaking this fetter means realizing that such an identification is empty and superficial. It's a bit like a mid-life crisis, where everything we thought was significant and important about our lives suddenly seems trivial and ridiculous. But rather than buying a little red sports-car and trying (vainly) to recapture our glory years, we seek refuge in buddha, sangha, and dharma, where such trivialities have no importance.
We don't stop being a lawyer, homeless person, homemaker, or rockstar; we still have identity. But the hold identity has over us has cracked. The dharma shows us a better path; the sangha embraces us as we are, without regard to identity; our own buddha-nature calls to us as it always has called to us, but now we start to listen.
The first three fetters, in a nutshell, are about distinguishing between the insubstantial and substantial. Our career, our social status, our relationships, our sensual pleasures, our protestations of virtue and declarations of faith... all of these are insubstantial. One day they are here, in the flesh; the next day they are gone, like a dream we try to recall in daylight. As Eckhart Tolle once quipped, someday the powers that be will cancel your American Express card, and when they do: who are you? You alone, without that reliable card to establish your life's value?
To be a stream-enterer means to take the first few hesitant steps into the stream that we must eventually cross; to see that everything we thought was solid and secure will eventually be washed away, and all that's left is the far shore. One must reject the impermanent safety, comfort, and ease of the near shore, must believe that the far shore brings a proper state of peace and understanding, must trust that those walking the path with us will carry us when and if we need to be carried.

The Vera Sutta (AN 10.92) lists out the criteria for stream entry:

Five forms of fear and animosity are stilled through the observance of the five precepts
Four factors of stream entry
Rightly seen and rightly ferreted out the noble method (dependent origination)

The four factors of stream entry are verified confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, as well as, being endowed with the virtues appealing to the noble ones.
So, when you have all of the above, you can reach stream entry. Those are the criterias to reach stream entry.
And then we have the three effects or results of stream entry, which is overcoming the first three lower fetters (of the ten fetters):

Eradication of identity view or self view (sakkaya ditthi)
Becoming free of attachment to rites, rituals and rules (silabbata paramasa)
Becoming free of skeptical doubt in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the (ideal) Sangha

There's another list in SN 55.5:

Associating with good people (good company) i.e. talking about the ideal Sangha
Listening to the true teaching
Proper attention (yoniso manasikara)
Practising in line with the teaching

Buddha: “Sāriputta, they speak of a ‘factor of stream-entry’.
What is a factor
of stream-entry?”
“Sir, the factors of stream-entry are associating with good people,
listening to the true teaching, proper attention, and practicing in
line with the teaching.”
“Good, good, Sāriputta! For the factors of stream-entry are
associating with good people, listening to the true teaching, proper
attention, and practicing in line with the teaching.
Sāriputta, they speak of ‘the stream’. What is the stream?”
“Sir, the stream is simply this noble eightfold path, that is: right
view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood,
right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion.”
“Good, good, Sāriputta! For the stream is simply this noble eightfold
path, that is: right view, right thought, right speech, right action,
right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right
immersion.
SN 55.5

Conviction-follower doesn't mean free of skeptical doubt. It simply means that they decided to follow this path, after doing some investigation.
Conviction-follower - it's like I'm not a lawyer yet, but as a high school graduate, I compared various career paths and think becoming a lawyer is the right path for me.
Attaining stream entry is like graduating from law school, perhaps but not yet practising law - here, it means now I understand the law completely but not yet practising ("stainless, immaculate vision of the teaching" - AN 3.94).
Attaining arahantship is like becoming a full-fledged successful professional lawyer. Attaining Buddhahood is like becoming the Attorney General (of which, there can only be one at a time).
Of course, arahantship is completely different from the other categories, because all ten fetters have been completely overcome, without a trace of ignorance remaining.
What about self-view or identity-view?
In the following sutta, Ven. Khemaka explains the difference between self-view or identity view and conceit.
So, a stream enterer can become free from identity view, but may still have traces of conceit remaining.
Here's an analogy. Stream entry is like that point in time where you have completely understood how diet, exercise, obesity, metabolism, homeostasis, ageing and non-communicable diseases work. You've thoroughly seen how it works ("stainless, immaculate vision of the teaching" - AN 3.94).
There's no more denial, delusion and doubt. There's no more ritualistic practice of diet and exercise without understanding. You're still obese and unhealthy, but now you have understanding.
The remaining journey to attainment of Arahatship, is like the rigorous journey of improving one's diet and exercise further till perfect health and fitness is achieved.

“After the rainy season the sky is clear and cloudless. And when the
sun rises, it dispels all the darkness from the sky as it shines and
glows and radiates.
In the same way, when the stainless, immaculate vision of the teaching
arises in a noble disciple, three fetters are given up: identity view,
doubt, and misapprehension of precepts and observances.
Afterwards they get rid of two things: desire and aversion. Quite
secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities,
they enter and remain in the first absorption, which has the rapture
and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it
connected. If that noble disciple passed away at that time, they’re
bound by no fetter that might return them to this world.”
AN 3.94

"I am not getting better, my friend. I am not comfortable. My extreme
pains are increasing, not lessening. There are signs of their
increasing, and not of their lessening."
Then Ven. Dasaka went to the elder monks and, on arrival, said to
them, "The monk Khemaka has said to me, 'I am not getting better, my
friend. I am not comfortable. My extreme pains are increasing, not
lessening. There are signs of their increasing, and not of their
lessening.'"
"Come, friend Dasaka. Go to the monk Khemaka and on arrival say to
him, 'The elders, friend Khemaka, say to you, "Concerning these five
clinging-aggregates described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a
clinging-aggregate, feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a
clinging-aggregate, fabrications as a clinging-aggregate,
consciousness as a clinging-aggregate: Do you assume anything with
regard to these five clinging-aggregates to be self or belonging to
self?"'"
Replying, "As you say, friends," to the elder monks, Ven. Dasaka went
to Ven. Khemaka and on arrival said to him, "The elders, friend
Khemaka, say to you, 'Concerning these five clinging-aggregates
described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a clinging-aggregate,
feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a clinging-aggregate,
fabrications as a clinging-aggregate, consciousness as a
clinging-aggregate: Do you assume anything with regard to these five
clinging-aggregates to be self or belonging to self?'"
"Friend, concerning these five clinging-aggregates described by the
Blessed One — i.e., form as a clinging-aggregate... feeling...
perception... fabrications... consciousness as a clinging-aggregate:
With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, there is nothing I
assume to be self or belonging to self."
Then Ven. Dasaka went to the elder monks and, on arrival, said to
them, "The monk Khemaka has said to me, 'Friend, concerning these five
clinging-aggregates described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a
clinging-aggregate... feeling... perception... fabrications...
consciousness as a clinging-aggregate: With regard to these five
clinging-aggregates, there is nothing I assume to be self or belonging
to self.'"
"Come, friend Dasaka. Go to the monk Khemaka and on arrival say to
him, 'The elders, friend Khemaka, say to you, "Concerning these five
clinging-aggregates described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a
clinging-aggregate... feeling... perception... fabrications...
consciousness as a clinging-aggregate: If, with regard to these five
clinging-aggregates, Ven. Khemaka assumes nothing to be self or
belonging to self, then Ven. Khemaka is an arahant, devoid of
fermentations."'"
Replying, "As you say, friends," to the elder monks, Ven. Dasaka went
to Ven. Khemaka and on arrival said to him, "The elders, friend
Khemaka, say to you, 'Concerning these five clinging-aggregates
described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a clinging-aggregate...
feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness as a
clinging-aggregate: If, with regard to these five clinging-aggregates,
Ven. Khemaka assumes nothing to be self or belonging to self, then
Ven. Khemaka is an arahant, devoid of fermentations.'"
"Friend, concerning these five clinging-aggregates described by the
Blessed One — i.e., form as a clinging-aggregate... feeling...
perception... fabrications... consciousness as a clinging-aggregate:
With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, there is nothing I
assume to be self or belonging to self, and yet I am not an arahant.
With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, 'I am' has not been
overcome, although I don't assume that 'I am this.'"
Then Ven. Dasaka went to the elder monks and, on arrival, said to
them, "The monk Khemaka has said to me, 'Friend, concerning these five
clinging-aggregates described by the Blessed One — i.e., form as a
clinging-aggregate... feeling... perception... fabrications...
consciousness as a clinging-aggregate: With regard to these five
clinging-aggregates, there is nothing I assume to be self or belonging
to self, and yet I am not an arahant. With regard to these five
clinging-aggregates, "I am" has not been overcome, although I don't
assume that "I am this."'"
"Come, friend Dasaka. Go to the monk Khemaka and on arrival say to
him, 'The elders, friend Khemaka, say to you, "Friend Khemaka, this 'I
am' of which you speak: what do you say 'I am'? Do you say, 'I am
form,' or do you say, 'I am something other than form'? Do you say, 'I
am feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness,' or do you
say, 'I am something other than consciousness'? This 'I am' of which
you speak: what do you say 'I am'?"'"
Replying, "As you say, friends," to the elder monks, Ven. Dasaka went
to Ven. Khemaka and on arrival said to him, "The elders, friend
Khemaka, say to you, 'Friend Khemaka, this "I am" of which you speak:
what do you say "I am"? Do you say, "I am form," or do you say, "I am
something other than form"? Do you say, "I am feeling... perception...
fabrications... consciousness," or do you say, "I am something other
than consciousness"'? This "I am" of which you speak: what do you say
"I am"?'"
"Enough, friend Dasaka. What is accomplished by this running back &
forth? Fetch me my staff. I will go to the elder monks myself."
Then Ven. Khemaka, leaning on his staff, went to the elder monks and,
on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with them. After an exchange
of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was
sitting there, the elder monks said to him, "Friend Khemaka, this 'I
am' of which you speak: what do you say 'I am'? Do you say, 'I am
form,' or do you say, 'I am something other than form'? Do you say, 'I
am feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness,' or do you
say, 'I am something other than consciousness''? This 'I am' of which
you speak: what do you say 'I am'?"
"Friends, it's not that I say 'I am form,' nor do I say 'I am
something other than form.' It's not that I say, 'I am feeling...
perception... fabrications... consciousness,' nor do I say, 'I am
something other than consciousness.' With regard to these five
clinging-aggregates, 'I am' has not been overcome, although I don't
assume that 'I am this.'
"It's just like the scent of a blue, red, or white lotus: If someone
were to call it the scent of a petal or the scent of the color or the
scent of a filament, would he be speaking correctly?"
"No, friend."
"Then how would he describe it if he were describing it correctly?"
"As the scent of the flower: That's how he would describe it if he
were describing it correctly."
"In the same way, friends, it's not that I say 'I am form,' nor do I
say 'I am other than form.' It's not that I say, 'I am feeling...
perception... fabrications... consciousness,' nor do I say, 'I am
something other than consciousness.' With regard to these five
clinging-aggregates, 'I am' has not been overcome, although I don't
assume that 'I am this.'
"Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower
fetters, he still has with regard to the five clinging-aggregates a
lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am' desire, an 'I am'
obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of
arising & passing away with regard to the five clinging-aggregates:
'Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance. Such is
feeling... Such is perception... Such are fabrications... Such is
consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.' As he keeps
focusing on the arising & passing away of these five
clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am'
desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated.
"Just like a cloth, dirty & stained: Its owners give it over to a
washerman, who scrubs it with salt earth or lye or cow-dung and then
rinses it in clear water. Now even though the cloth is clean &
spotless, it still has a lingering residual scent of salt earth or lye
or cow-dung. The washerman gives it to the owners, the owners put it
away in a scent-infused wicker hamper, and its lingering residual
scent of salt earth, lye, or cow-dung is fully obliterated.
"In the same way, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned
the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five
clinging-aggregates a lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am'
desire, an 'I am' obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on
the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five
clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origin, such its
disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are
fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its
disappearance.' As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of
these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit,
'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated."
When this was said, the elder monks said to Ven. Khemaka, "We didn't
cross-examine Ven. Khemaka with the purpose of troubling him, just
that [we thought] Ven. Khemaka is capable of declaring the Blessed
One's message, teaching it, describing it, setting it forth, revealing
it, explaining it, making it plain — just as he has in fact declared
it, taught it, described it, set it forth, revealed it, explained it,
made it plain."
That is what Ven. Khemaka said. Gratified, the elder monks delighted
in his words. And while this explanation was being given, the minds of
sixty-some monks, through no clinging, were fully released from
fermentations — as was Ven. Khemaka's.
Khemaka Sutta (SN 22.89)

Here's a more detailed commentary by Piya Tan on the Khemaka Sutta here on Dharmafarer:

In other words, one may not regard the five aggregates as self (attā)
or as belonging to self, but this does not mean that one is an arhat.
This is because even after the destruction of the five lower fetters,
there still remains a residue of the conceit “I am,” of the desire,“I
am,” and of the latent tendency, “I am.” Only when one has totally
uprooted the notion that “I am” the aggregates, that one becomes an
arhat.

Piya Tan quotes Ven. Bodhi:

The other elders apparently had not yet attained any stage of
awakening and thus did not understand this difference, but the
Venerable Khemaka must have been at least a stream-enterer (some
commentators say he was a non-returner) and thus knew that the
elimination of identity view does not completely remove the sense of
personal identity. Even for the non-returner,an “odor of subjectivity”
based on the five aggregates still lingers over the experience.

Also please see "A view of the self".

Even the Buddha used similar convetion in speech like "this is my last birth" so the whole papanca here is not only baseless but very apart of point and path, good householder.
Just noted so that one with possibilities wouldn't waste time by increase hindrances on useless objectivications.


text:
had an episode of psychosis - can I ever become a monk?
Background:
As the title suggests, I had an episode of psychosis this year. With medication and meditation I quickly recovered, and am basically back to normal. The doctors expect that I can eventually go off the medication if things continue as they have (very well so far). Apparently this can happen to some people, and a good percentage never have a return of any symptoms, it's just something that can happen to a person, from which they recover.
Now for my question:
I am particularly wishing to some day take ordination, and I am attracted to the thai forest tradition. Their website specifically says that if you have had psychosis in the past you cannot ordain or even go as a novice, since it would be a burden if your psychosis reappeared. I understand this, but where am I to go, then? Is there any school which sticks closely to the buddha's teachings, with a focus on meditation and the path of purification, where I can some day ordain? Or will I just have to live the rest of my life as a householder?

Answering this for personal experience. A few years back I was doing my Ph.D. in the UK and I got an episode of Psychosis, that turned into Schizophrenia, and I also got diagnosed with depression. My whole life turned upside-down and I had to return to my home country. I had no job and did literally nothing other than sleeping, for five years straight.  Although I was on medication, studying Buddhism and Meditation helped me a lot, in fact, more than the medications.
Now your question. I can understand your condition like you want to do something that's defining, that will give you some sense of belonging and a task for the mind to achieve (forgive me if that's not the case).
I am assuming that you are either from the US or some European country. So before thinking to take ordination I will suggest you attend a few (2-3) ten days Vipassana retreats with S.N Goenka. Also, check for Zen meditation centers or retreats in and around you. Once you get acquainted with what it means to literally revolve your life around meditation and nirvana, you will be in a better position to have the courage to go-forth.
During the same time, spend a good amount of time studying Theravada scriptures to which the Thai forest tradition belongs.
If you are in Australia, you can go to the monastery of Ajahn Brahm who has studied in the Thai monasteries. Also, there are Theravada monasteries in the US. So, the good news is, you don't have to go to Thailand, maybe a good monastery is in your country.

I understand this, but where am I to go, then? Is there any school
which sticks closely to the buddha's teachings, with a focus on
meditation and the path of purification, where I can some day ordain?

I am still on medications and whenever I ask my psychiatrist to low down the medicine doses, he tells me that the psychosis episodes can repeat. So I cannot say with guarantee in your case, but there's always some sort of chance for it to relapse.

Or will I just have to live the rest of my life as a householder?

Being a householder is not that bad. Start small, reach the point from where there's nothing left other than going forth.

Thank you for your advice. May you be happy minded, and sustain total cessation of symptoms. The only thing which I would add in reply is that i have already gone very far, have studied the dhamma for years, and for 2 months now consistently meditate every day, reaching jhanas. I've been convinced that i should go forth for years and this recent progress in my spiritual development has added a sense of certainty. I have no doubt that i will one day go forth. Your advice is very helpful and i feel less lost.

Good householder,
"Their website specifically says that if you have had psychosis in the past you cannot ordain or even go as a novice, since it would be a burden if your psychosis reappeared"
In short: that's the community's  rule there, yet not something found as "Dhamma-agreement" in accordiance with the Dhamna-Vinaya and it's further not unusually that 'burdensome' get, out of compassion (one should be clear that there is not such as a right to ordain, but it's something which is given or not), ordained and maybe more a hint that not everything that carries fame in the world is really always worthy it.
Good, of course, to start associating, so that monks would know good householder good anyway and one should not think that people living at monasteries are generally viewed 'normal'. Yet not to speak of modern/western distinctions and SEAsians or even Dhammic. It's generally not so wise to prefer to seek a home in westernisationed/modernisationed communities but leave home first on a home level, into another nearby culture, nearby the heritage rather that modern.
In any case, good to not waste time and to use possibility to go forth, if one feels inspired and ways can be found.
Not only that outer conditions aren't for sure, intention and good aspirations are even more hindrances, as kusala isn't for sure and one is adviced by the Sublime Buddha to be there quick.
May good householder always remember that the Devas (not to speak of good and carefull monks) would open the doors for one after leaving home for the Noble Quest with a clear and honest heart.
And to pay approve of householder White clouds experiances in relation of heal. If the is a 'doctor' hwo leads to heal, then the Sublime Buddhha and his good disciples by use of the sublime Dhamma and practicing it. Medications of common ways may sometimes 'heal' for some time, sometimes not even that. Aging, sickness, death are sure, anyway, for one who took another birth. As for ending the wheel of stress, nothing else as the Noble path would really help.
(...and stop gaming of any kind! quick! nothing of permanent akusala cittas where one 'must' get 'stupid')

Thank you so much for your reply. My mind set at ease knowing that (as i suspected) the limitation on past psychosis is not vinaya, but only a rule of that community. I agree going forth into a traditional monastery rather than a westernized one is preferred. Maybe a middle way is a thai forest monastery in the "west". I agree about gaming, in fact i was just reading in DN 1 about "gods corrupted by play", so much so for gods, then clearly a mortal human can be corrupted! Thank you so much for your reply. I feel less lost.

Also, you are right there is no medicine like the dhamma. My symptoms have been completely controlled by meditation, and right view has helped keep me steady even when strange thoughts arise.

Mudita. Now: Good feelings are not for sure and there is work to be done, things are also not under any real controll, so hurry up.


text:
If the chain of dependent origination (Pratītyasamutpāda) ends, then isn't the last part independent?
Dependent Origin or Pratītyasamutpāda is defined as

It states that all dharmas (phenomena) arise in dependence upon other
dharmas

And then there are these 12 causes one after another, each depending on the next one starting from Aging or decay, and death (Jarāmaraṇa) which depends on Birth, Rebirth (Jāti) and so on, which finally ends in Ignorance, nescience (Avidyā).
But notice Avidya seems to be not depending on anything. But as a rule all dharmas should be dependent on another dharma. How is this contradiction reconciled?
Source

This is a very good question. What does ignorance depend on? What is the condition for ignorance?

There is a cyclic dependency between ignorance and defilements (also called taints or fermentation).

Ignorance originates from defilement. Ignorance ceases when defilement
ceases.
Āsavasamudayā avijjāsamudayo, āsavanirodhā avijjānirodho
Defilement originates from ignorance. Defilement ceases when ignorance
ceases.
Avijjāsamudayā āsavasamudayo, avijjānirodhā āsavanirodho
MN 9

Why is there such a cyclic dependency? This is amply discussed in "Does MN9 imply a cyclic causation? How does it work?"
I quote from the best answer there:

It is like being born in a poor uneducated family: because you are
poor, you can't get education, and because you can't get education you
are poor.

Excellent, just some small clarifications. Why is Defilement not present in the 12 dharmas listed in the chain. Is it the same as Sankhara or Samskara. What is the Sanskrit equivalent of Asava.

@MrGreenGold In Sanskrit, it's Āsrava.

thanks, but is Āsava same as Sankhara or equivalent to it, as Āsava is not present in the traditional chain of 12 causes.


text:
Did Buddha endorse caste system in kannakathala sutta
Some Brahmins say Buddha endorsed caste system in kannakathala sutta

In MN90, King Pasenadi asks about the caste conventions of his own society:

MN90:12.2: Sir, there are these four classes:
MN90:12.3: aristocrats, brahmins, merchants, and workers.

King Pasenadi is insightful, and his question probes deeply into freedom beyond caste:

MN90:12.4: If they had these five factors that support meditation, and if they practiced rightly,
MN90:12.5: would there be any difference between them?”

The Buddha answers that conventions of caste do not apply to the freedom from suffering:

MN90:12.6: “In that case, I say that there is no difference between the freedom of one and the freedom of the other.

In general, the Buddha has this to say about limits:

MN43:35.2: Greed, hate, and delusion are makers of limits.

So, when presented with any caste system, the question arises: "are these limits made by greed, hate and delusion?".

In the sutta, the Buddha clearly said there is no difference among people of the different castes with respect to their practice of the Noble Eightfold Path and its results.
The fact that castes are mentioned in the sutta, is not a sign that the Buddha supported the caste system. It's simply an acknowledgement that it existed.

"Lord, if these four castes were endowed with these five factors for
exertion, would there be any distinction or difference among them in
that respect?"
"I tell you, great king: the difference among them would lie in the
diversity of their exertion. .....
But with regard to these four castes: if they were endowed with these
five factors for exertion, and they had right exertion, would there be
any distinction or difference among them in that respect?"
"I tell you, great king, that there would be no difference among them
with regard to the release of one and the release of another.
Kannakatthala Sutta(MN 90) (translated by Ven. Thanissaro)

The Buddha did not endorse the caste system. Instead, he taught that any person, regardless of their birth, is destined for good outcomes, if they are consummate in virtue and indulge in good practices.

In the same way,
wherever one is born
among human beings —
noble warriors, brahmans,
merchants, workers,
outcastes, or scavengers —
if one is tame,
with good practices,
righteous,
consummate in virtue,
a speaker of truth,
with conscience at heart,
one who's abandoned birth & death,
completed the holy life
put down the burden,
done the task
fermentation-free,
gone beyond all dhammas,
through lack of clinging
unbound:
offerings to this spotless field
bear an abundance of fruit.
Gihi Sutta (AN 5.179)

In what caste was the Buddha born in?

Then Sundarika the brahmin went up to the Buddha, and said to him:
“Sir, in what caste were you born?”

“Don’t ask about birth, ask about conduct.
For any wood can surely generate fire.
A steadfast sage, even though from a low class family,
is a thoroughbred checked by conscience.

Sundarika Sutta (SN 7.9)

But it is said that the first to castes are respected. Why

@Vithashoka That's just the Buddha acknowledging the status quo in Indian society in his time. It's like the upper castes are highly respected in society and have privileges, but actually all of them stand an equal chance at liberation depending on their effort.

Thank you Ruben. Can you clarify further whether practice of dhamma enable social mobility. Since rebirth is endorsed. Like upali says his birth as a barber was because of his past karma

@Vithashoka perhaps you can ask that as a new question and quote which sutta you found that in.

@Vithashoka Perhaps you can take a look at Tamonata Sutta. It says that a person's current social status may be based on his past thoughts and conduct, but his future state is based on his thoughts and conduct of today. So, every person has the equal chance to either improve or worsen his situation. This is true with or without rebirth. Just because you were born into a poor family, doesn't mean you have to be poor all your life. You can change it.

@Vithashoka Also please read this answer.

Many of the sutras claim equality only among bhikkus to self effort. In one Sutta Buddha asks king passenadi whether he would recruit a kshatriya who is not valorous. Passenadi says no. Buddha: would you recruit a person who is not a kshatriya but valorous. Passenadi says yes.

@Vithashoka SN 3.24 is a good example. The king says that he would not hire a cowardly undisciplined kshatriya man into his army.  Instead, the king would rather hire a brahmin, vaishya, or sudra man, should he be brave and disciplined. Similarly, the Buddha says, regardless of his background, a person who shows the right qualities and discipline to undertake the holy life is the best choice. In other words, caste by birth and lineage means nothing, compared to a person's own characteristics, both for the king and for the Buddha.


text:
What is the Buddhist attitude towards cosmology?
In Majjhima Nikaya 63, the Buddha says

So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undeclared by me as undeclared, and what is declared by me as declared. And what is undeclared by me? 'The cosmos is eternal,' is undeclared by me. 'The cosmos is not eternal,' is undeclared by me. 'The cosmos is finite'... 'The cosmos is infinite' ... 'The soul & the body are the same'... 'The soul is one thing and the body another'... 'After death a Tathagata exists'... 'After death a Tathagata does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' is undeclared by me.

"And why are they undeclared by me? Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life. They do not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are undeclared by me.

What is the opinion of Buddhism on Cosmology, which tries to deal with these questions (highlighted in bold above) about the cosmos? Is pursuing cosmology discouraged in Buddhism? (Cosmology, in this question, refers to the branch of Science and not metaphysical speculations about the universe. It is understood that Buddhism discourages idle speculations about the universe. But what about the pursuit of the science of cosmology?).

A general rule for the modern era — observed by far too few, unfortunately — is that science and religion should not pick fights with each other. There's no value to it, and the tiffs tend to spoil both.
Studying cosmology is a perfectly fine thing to do, as a profession or avocation. Buddhism isn't against the acquisition of knowledge per se; knowledge is quite useful in many practical situations. But knowledge of this practical sort will not lead to liberation, and disputes over the 'truth' of practical knowledge can interfere with the quest for liberation to the extent such disputes de-evolve into anger, jealousy, and/or acrimony. If someone wants to study cosmology as a buddhist, the hope is they will bring the buddhist practice to their acquisition of knowledge: seeking understanding with dispassion, clarity, detachment, and compassion.
Buddhist monasticism doesn't seem to have developed as the Christian monastic tradition did, with monks engaged in intellectual, academic, scientific, and philosophical thought. I don't see any reason why they couldn't, but most established traditions take a conservative and narrow view on monk's activities. But for lay practitioners the question is moot; it isn't what they do to make a living that matters, but how they do what they do.

Cosmology as a scientific endeavour is perfectly fine, and is acceptable as Right Livelihood for lay persons.
From a religious or philosophical perspective, some other religions or religious thinkers, including during the Buddha's time, are concerned with questions like "did the universe always exist, or was it created?" And "will the universe be destroyed in future?".
This leads to metaphysical and philosophical speculations like "where was I before the universe was created?" and "where will I be when the universe is destroyed?"
It is such speculations that the Buddha considered futile and may lead to vexation.

+1, but did the people at the time of the Buddha differentiate between metaphysics and physics?

@user21367 I'm not sure about that. I think it was a time when physics and metaphysics may have been mixed, and also astrology and astronomy.

The Buddha didn't gave cosmology, e.g. Scientists, secularism (todays largest Religion) much value, actually non at all and also explained why:Lokayatika Sutta, as for example.

Is pursuing cosmology discouraged in Buddhism

Pursuing Cosmology has nothing to do with the Buddha's teaching which teaches how to become free from suffering, so yes it is discouraged. The time is way better spent on meditation practice, studying the Dhamma and doing good for oneself and others.


text:
A Peaceful Suicide of Old Age and with Critical Illnesses
Human is subject to very short life span, sickness and death according to Buddhism Cosmology.
Suicide is somehow wrong livelihood in Buddhism.
If one very old age and with the issues below.

Diagnose with late stage of cancer
2 more operations for kidney failure and heart disease
Have financial issues and need public donation for the above 2.

If under this situation, the patient decided to end the life peacefully by taking pain killer that approved doctor. Patient wants to minimize the suffering and minimize the spread of negativity to surrounding.
Does this consider wrong livelihood ?
What this patient should do?
I saw a Buddhism teaching video before, if one suicide will decent to deepest level of hell. So, does this scenario applicable?
I understand only certain monk can do similar kinda suicide.
Anagami monk ( 3rd level attained ) or Arhant monk ( 4th level attained )

There are several other, similar topics (with answers) on this site that are tagged [tag:suicide].

Ya @ChrisW but not same.

Killing oneself does not stop one to be born again to another form of life, according to Buddhism. It does not stop the fruit of karma. Suicide will only change the form of suffering you may have. If you don't want whatever illness you currently have and want to stop it, then you will still get the similar kind of suffering after the death you committed, but in another form of life.
What the patient should do? As a buddhist, he/she may try to renunciate, accept whatever happen to him/her as manifestation of the law of karma. Doing meditation may support him/her to deal with that situation.

Take note if keep struggling to this total useless body may spread negativity to others. Not sure is waste of public tax money and time. Better keep it for someone need it more. If karma needs to carry forward then gotta face the fact.

Better keep it for someone need it more  --> at least not selfish and do some good deed before dying right?

If you don't want to spread negativity to others, just go somewhere else like monastery may be. You will eventually die, right. And you cannot stop people from hate you or love you. Some people may hate you with all negativity, but some people may love you and don't want you to die that soon.

already ask the monastery. They normally not accept unless u have a lot money

Or you may just go home then. Together with the ones who love and care about you. They will take benefit of your presence, it is also a good deed. Don't be biased. Some people may not want you, but some others may need you badly. Just let everything go as they are. Take a lot meditation, so you don't disturb anybody. Do less complaint, be easily taken care of.

Asking this question, we can see that you are in doubt. One should never commit suicide when in doubt. But the fact is that almost all suicide cases were committed with doubt. Do you know what happen to death people in doubt? Without the physical body they will be as ghosts with doubtful mind. What happen to the ghosts with doubtful mind? They don't know where to go, they don't know what to do. The regret is what left. Yes, it is a "hell-like" situation. And many end with haunting other living ones. It is not something good, right?

the patient decided to end the life peacefully

I'm not one to talk but maybe the better decision would be, "the patient decided to live the life peacefully".
A "decision to end life" sounds like "killing" -- which is not recommended in the canon, and is not the same as "dying".
Even the phrase "a peaceful suicide" in the title sounds like "describing the advantages of dying" which is a kind of action that would be considered an "offence of defeat" if done by a monk.

What this patient should do?

The canon says something about what makes a patient easy to care for -- see AN 5.123.

minimize the spread of negativity to surrounding

My wife allowed people (including me) to care for her when she was dying of cancer:

Followed doctors' prescriptions, including pain killers but no more than prescribed
Advised us on (i.e. helped us plan) what we should do after she was gone
Thanked the doctors for "saving her life"
And, as I said, allowed us to care for her

I guess that could be called a peaceful death -- more importantly an "end of life", focussing on the "life" not on the "end", i.e. on her and other people's intentions and behaviours while she was alive and with us.
If you really want to minimize people's suffering, the way to do that may be to be "enlightened" (and with them).

i need more study before "enlightened" or attempt on it. It's seem like nothing at Nibbana and not too sure what you can do there? Do they have hobby ? Do they have "happy" feeling ? Do they feel bored ? Tushita seems better place? The next Buddha, Maitreya is there. They have 500 Million years life span, plenty time to study Buddhism.

glad that your Wife has a good "enlightened"  hubby. Not all hubby/wife willing to take these kinda patient.

Better to invite monks to continuously teach, good householder, as there are a lot of possibilities to gain path toward real peace once having gained a human existance, which isn't sure at all if letting such change go. Killing, call for, encourage, agree, approve, assist... that's all killing, taking live, with it's hard consequences... short life, pains misserable existances... The wheel of suffering doesn't end by cutting of life but by seeing and understanding cause Dukkha clear, and even one short teaching could be enough.
Much place to make huge good deeds here, so good to waste no time. Death is for sure, the Gems to meet not.