text:
How bad is the karma of feeding meat to your children?
I have a girlfriend who has a daughter from another man. If I raise this kid not vegetarian, will that be bad karma? Her mother is an omnivore and the kid is being raised in an omnivore household. It would be very difficult to change her diet. Is it my reponsibility to make her vegetarian?

Kamma here depends on of what porpose one feeds a child and with which means, livelihood, and less on the food itself unless it's not poision and nurishes usually. Like pig raising, or a killer dog, or as thief and killer ones beloved child to become a liberated... How does one gain food and for what purpose is it used is importand here, good householder. Wrong doing stays wrong doing, for whom ever, for what ever purpose.

Please post an answer. Comments misused as answers will be deleted.

Please read "Why is contributing to the market demand for meat not wrong?".
According to most schools of Buddhism, it is against the first precept to kill an animal yourself, but it is ok to buy frozen meat from the supermarket for consumption.
Let's say you go to a restaurant as a customer. If the restaurant prepares your meal order using frozen meat, then that's  ok. But if you have to select the animal for slaughter (which happens in some Asian countries, for seafood dishes for e.g. you need to pick your lobster from an aquarium), then that breaks the first precept.
As long as you did not do the killing yourself or select the animal and ordered the butcher or chef to slaughter for you, it is not a violation of the first precept.
To summarize from that question:

Avoid killing animals and avoid becoming the direct cause of the killing of animals
Avoid having livelihood on the business of meat
Avoid consuming meat that is from an animal that is seen, heard or suspected to have been slaughtered specifically for you
You can purchase and consume frozen meat from the supermarket (that was already dead long before you arrived at the market)
You can order a meal from a restaurant, which is based on frozen meat

Why? This is because you did not have the intention to kill that animal. You are simply buying meat that was no longer alive when you first encountered it.

But if everybody does this, then no more meat to consume

@user614287 Yes! If every single citizen of a country observed the first precept and Right Livelihood, then no one would be a butcher, retailer, distributor, importer or exporter of meat.

You do not specify if you yourself are vegetarian or vegan. I bring this up because, first and foremost, the precepts are yours to keep, and not to make you feel that you must force them on others. However, if you are vegetarian or vegan, your example in the family, who are at least omnivores, as you say, can serve to educate the young child that there are concerns about eating animal flesh. These concerns are that it is a cause of suffering for the animals, is considered to be a health risk for humans, and is implicated in the production of the majority of global-warming chemicals that are contributing to the collapse of the life-supporting ability of the Earth.
As to the specific teachings found within Buddhism, I find the Buddha’s own words to be authoritative:
Why is this important?

In explaining to you the rules of the Vinaya, I have frequently emphasized three good lessons, namely, (1) the only way to keep the Precepts is first to be able to concentrate the mind; (2) by keeping the Precepts you will be able to attain Samadhi; (3) by means of Samadhi one develops intelligence and wisdom. Having learned these three good lessons, one has gained freedom from the intoxicants and hindrances.

Ananda, why is concentration of mind necessary before one can keep the Precepts? And why is it necessary to keep the Precepts before one can rightly practice dhyana and attain Samadhi? And why is the attainment of Samadhi necessary before one may attain true intelligence and wisdom? Let me explain this to you. All sentient beings in all the six realms of existence are susceptible to temptations and allurements. As they yield to these temptations and allurements, they fall into and become fast bound to the recurring cycles of deaths and rebirths.

Regarding Violence to Animals:

The next important hindrance and allurement is the tendency of all sentient beings of all the six realms of existence to gratify their pride of egoism. To gain this one is prone to be unkind, to be unjust and cruel, to other sentient beings. This tendency lures them into the bondage of deaths and rebirth, but if this tendency can be controlled they will no longer be lured into this bondage for right control of mind will enable them to keep the Precept of kindness to all animate life. The reason for practicing dhyana and seeking to attain Samadhi is to escape from the suffering of life, but in seeking to escape from suffering ourselves, why should we inflict it upon others? Unless you can so control your minds that even the thought of brutal unkindness and killing is abhorrent, you will never be able to escape from the bondage of the world's life. No matter how keen you may be mentally, no matter how much you may be able to practice dhyana, no matter to how high a degree of Samadhi you may attain, unless you have wholly annihilated all tendency to unkindness toward others, you will ultimately fall into the realms of existence where the evil ghosts dwell.

There are three ranks of these ghosts: the highest are the mighty ghosts, the next are the Yaksha ghosts who fly in the air, and the lowest are the Raksha ghosts that live under the earth. Each of these ghosts has his double that disguises itself as having attained enlightenment. After my Parinirvana in the last kalpa these different kinds of ghosts will be encountered everywhere deceiving people and teaching them that they can eat meat and still attain enlightenment. But how can any faithful follower of the Lord Tathagata kill sentient life and eat the flesh?

You of this great assembly ought to appreciate that those human beings who might become enlightened and attain Samadhi, because of eating meat, can only hope to attain the rank of a great Raksha and until the end of their enjoyment of it must sink into the never ceasing round of deaths and rebirths. They are not true disciples of Buddha. If they kill sentient beings and eat the flesh, they will not be able to escape from this triple world. Therefore, Ananda, next to teaching the people of the last kalpa to put away all sexual lust, you must teach them to put an end to all killing and brutal cruelty.

If one is trying to practice dhyana and is still eating meat, he would be like a man closing his ears and shouting loudly and then asserting that he heard nothing. The more one conceals things, the more apparent they become. Pure and earnest bhikshus and Bodhisattva-Mahasattvas, when walking a narrow path, will never so much as tread on the growing grass beside the path. How can a bhikshu, who hopes to become a deliverer of others, himself be living on the flesh of other sentient beings?

Pure and earnest bhikshus, if they are true and sincere, will never wear clothing made of silk, nor wear boots made of leather because it involves the taking of life. Neither will they indulge in eating milk or cheese because thereby they are depriving the young animals of that which rightly belongs to them. It is only such true and sincere bhikshus who have repaid their karmic debts of previous lives, who will attain true emancipation, and who will no more be bound to wander to this triple world. To wear anything, or partake of anything for self-comfort, deceiving one's self as to the suffering it causes others or other sentient life, is to set up an affinity with that lower life which will draw them toward it. So all bhikshus must be very careful to live in all sincerity, refraining from even the appearance of unkindness to other life. It is such true hearted bhikshus who will attain a true emancipation. Even in one's speech and especially in one's teaching, one must practice kindness for no teaching that is unkind can be the true teaching of Buddha. Unkindness is the murderer of the life of Wisdom. This is the second admonition of the Lord Buddha as to the keeping of the Precepts.

(Taken from Surangama Sutra, Chapter Two, Importance of Keeping the Precepts, found at: https://medium.com/p/e84c1abb029b )
And just a final, personal note: I find the argument that it is ok to eat animal flesh so long as you have no involvement in the killing of the animal to be a feint-hearted attempt to escape one’s culpability in providing a market for such murdered flesh. Without a willing buyer, there would be no killing.

If I raise this kid not vegetarian, will that be bad karma? Her mother is an omnivore and the kid is being raised in an omnivore household. It would be very difficult to change her diet. Is it my reponsibility to make her vegetarian?

The Buddha's advice about this matter in MN 55:

Then Jīvaka went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to the Buddha:

“Sir, I have heard this: ‘They slaughter living creatures specially for the ascetic Gotama. The ascetic Gotama knowingly eats meat prepared on purpose for him: this is a deed he caused.’ I trust that those who say this repeat what the Buddha has said, and do not misrepresent him with an untruth? Is their explanation in line with the teaching? Are there any legitimate grounds for rebuke and criticism?”

“Jīvaka, those who say this do not repeat what I have said. They misrepresent me with what is false and untrue.

In three cases I say that meat may not be eaten: it’s seen, heard, or suspected. These are three cases in which meat may not be eaten.

In three cases I say that meat may be eaten: it’s not seen, heard, or suspected. These are three cases in which meat may be eaten.

If you can introduce her to vegetarianism and at least not encourage meat consumption, it would be of benefit to you both.


text:
Is better sati cause to better memory?
Did Lord Buddha tell something about this ? (Relationship between sati and memory)
There was a monk in Buddha's time who is enlightened but didn't have a strong memory. To be enlightened, some has to have a strong sati.

What is better sati?

I mean Well developed sati / awareness.

Do you have more specific references on your story about this monk?

That monk is Arahat. Chulla Panthaka thero.

Normal memory is bound up in craving (e.g., "I remember that pretty face"). Or normal memory is bound up in aversion (e.g., "You ALWAYS pick on me!"). Or normal memory is bound up in delusion (e.g., "I want to be like that famous person").
The memory of sati requires awareness without craving, aversion or delusion. That's surprisingly difficult and requires steady and constant practice.

AN5.14:4.1: And what is the power of mindfulness?  It’s when a noble disciple is mindful. They have utmost mindfulness and alertness, and can remember and recall what was said and done long ago.

Good householder,
The question is a little hard to understand since sati means remembering, keeping in mind, but maybe this helps a little to clearing certain common missunderstandings: Mindfulness Defined and The Agendas of Mindfulness. Bad memory of course means weak sati and viciversa. So don't use google and search-machines (sati killer, training lazyness and make dependend) :-) but sort and remember where what to find.
As for the Path, actually less of just knowledge needs to be remembered, so the proper attention on what to keep in mind, as a skill, is much more importand for paths and fruits.
"What is skilful, what unskilful, what to hold on end develope, what to abound." Not much, or?
(Note 5hat this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks but to escape from this wheel of dependency)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
I love life and I don't want to die. How to let go?
The last few days I've been struggling with the fear of death. I really love life and I fear the unknown. I know it's inevitable but for some reason I can't accept it. I find it beautiful how in buddhism people actually want to achieve nirvana. I mean I know there's no suffering but also there is no happiness etc. I would love to hear some tips on how to accept the inevitable and enjoy the here and now more. Mindfulness helps a lot but sometimes the thought still jumps into my mind.

"I mean I know there's no suffering but also there is no happiness etc." Nibbana is pleasant; 'but what is the pleasure where nothing is felt?'; just that is the pleasure where nothing is felt. Buddha talks about cessation of perception&feeling but describes it as most extreme pleasure because he talks about pleasure in whatever terms it is attained, not only in the terms of the pleasant sensory perception.

I somehow find it sad that good memories will be gone and the opportunity to experience happiness. I don't know but to me that doesn't seem pleasent. @116PYC

Well, if Nibbana wasn't more pleasant than existence then the mind would not be inclined to the former after the initial experience. There is no way one would give up a happiness for nothing or a lower value, only in case of a higher pleasure/happiness would one give up a lower one. One can find anecdotes where people restrain themselves from what they like but it's a bit different from growing out of one's likes and becoming disenchanted.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.034.than.html https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.059.nypo.html these are the texts i referenced in the initial comment

@116PУC Thanks I'll look into them and thank you for your patience and time

To fear death and/or uncertainty is part of the human condition. You're not alone with these feelings, especially not with a pandemic going on in the world right now.
Mindfulness is a good start. Also, there are "the five recollections" that may seem a bit cynical at first, but serves the purpose of reminding us to get used to the fact that everythings ends. They are:

Aging
Disease
Death
Losing loved ones
Karma

The last of these five reminders tells us that the only thing we really can own is the consequences of our actions. This can sometimes help in reconciling fear of death, as it may shift our attention to how to live a healthy life (The buddhist idea of a healthy life is perhaps different to a laymans idea of a healthy life).
https://suttacentral.net/an5.57/en/sujato

Yes I definitely get that and I'm keeping it in mind every day but for some reason I'm attached to the love to life. I will check that link out though thank you

That's kind of a personal question, isn't it. :-)
In my experience, when someone who you love dies, then you understand death to be ever-present. When you think of death then you think, "I (we) have already died" and "I know/experience what death is" and so on.
Even that is probably something which Buddhism defines as a "conceit", i.e. a kind of fleeting or residual sense of "self" -- How are 'conceit' and 'identity-view' not the same?
The whole doctrine of "self-view" is difficult to explain, or easy to explain but difficult to understand. Briefly, I think it's that having a sense of self (e.g. "I exist") is a cause of suffering (e.g. "woe is me, I will die") -- so a part of Buddhist doctrine, the beginning of enlightenment, is the abandoning of "self-view".
Another angle is to understand that what you sense and perceive is always changing, is impermanent, appears and vanishes. So to the extent that you identify with that (e.g. "I am what I see" or "I am the owner of these sights"), that is always changing or flickering, appearing and disappearing, all the time. So you might see "thought moments" as arising and ceasing continually, even several times per second. And I think that that kind of discontinuity is related to the Buddhist understanding of death -- see e.g. this answer, "True death only occurs either at every moment or at the experience of nibbana."
Then there's also e.g. this recent topic -- Can I plan for future while doing meditation on death? -- which seems to is based on this sutta.
I'm not sure if this will help but that sutta reminds me of this Zen story (i.e. from another tradition of Buddhism):

Three Days More
Suiwo, the disciple of Hakuin, was a good teacher. During one summer seclusion period, a pupil came to him from a southern island of Japan.
Suiwo gave him the problem: "Hear the sound of one hand."
The pupil remained three years but could not pass this test. One night he came in tears to Suiwo. "I must return south in shame and embarrassment," he said, "for I cannot solve my problem."
"Wait one week more and meditate constantly," advised Suiwo. Still no enlightenment came to the pupil. "Try for another week," said Suiwo. The pupil obeyed, but in vain.
"Still another week." Yet this was of no avail. In despair the student begged to be released, but Suiwo requested another meditation of five days. They were without result. Then he said: "Meditate for three days longer, then if you fail to attain enlightenment, you had better kill yourself."
On the second day the pupil was enlightened.

Several of these "101 Zen Stories" are about death -- I like the one about "The True Path" for example.
Another part of the doctrine is, what are you going to do instead of being attached and fearful? And a Buddhist answer to that might be that you try to do the best you can in the circumstances, which should lead to a lack of regret (an absence of remorse), and so on.
Another part of the doctrine is caring for others and trying to avoid seeing yourself as special. I don't know but I think that Tibetan Buddhism might identify self-cherishing attitude as a fundamental problem or source of misery. Although conventionally I'd identify the Three poisons as being the "unwholesome roots".

Wow thanks. Yes it's a somewhat personal question but then again it's also somewhat universal. I hope someone might find this as helpful ad it might be for me. I'm meditating every day quite a bit. I would love to attain the enlightenment and to free myself of the self. I keep the impermanence in mind every day and I practice it with everything. Since everything and all changes inevitably. I didn't click through the links as of now but I will definetly do it later on and maybe give some feedback again. Thank you very much

It's natural that one who loves the life will dread dying.
There is nothing you can do to have one without the other.
What we cherish that we don't want to lose.
Therefore these anxieties are embedded in the notion that existence is categorically good.
To change it one has to reevaluate both ends.
Here are main lines of  categorical reasoning that could be considered;

are phenomena stable, permanent or impermanent and unstable?
phenomena are afaik impermanent and to that extent unstable.
is that which is impermanent & unstable reliable or unreliable?
That which is impermanent & unstable is to that extent unreliable.
That which impermanent & unreliable, is it controllable?
No, that which is impermanent & unreliable is to that extent uncontrollable.
Is that which is unreliable, uncontrollable, unstable & impermanent, is it subject to change?
Yes, that which is unreliable, uncontrollable, unstable &  impermanent is subject to change.
Does the change depend on conditions, is change conditioned?
Yes, change occurs when conditions change, to that extent change is conditioned.
Is that which changes conditioned or unconditioned?
That which changes is conditioned [changes when conditions so dictate].
Being conditioned, unreliable, uncontrollable, impermanent and  a subject to change. Are these characteristics a basis for happiness or stress?
To the extent that phenomena are conditioned, unreliable, uncontrollable, are impermanent and are subject to change, these phenomena even if pleasant are subject to change and are to that extent stressful.
Now is it appropriate to regard that which is conditioned,uncontrollable, unreliable, changing and stressful as a self or belonging to a self?
It is inappropriate to regard that which is conditioned, uncontrollable, unreliable, changing and to that extent stressful as one's self or belonging to a self. There is here no basis for regarding these to be a self or belonging to a self.

This goes then for behavior, thoughts, feelings, perceptions and so on.

How do you do that? Do you have any tips?

Added to the answer.

Eventually the thoughts: 'i am,  i am good, i am bad, may i be thus, may i not be thus, may i be otherwise', all these verbalizations shouldn't occur

Thank you very much

Since one who has entered the stream has nothing to fear with death, losses such fears, it's surely the best to give much effort to gain it as soon as possible, good householder. Maybe of good support: Into the Stream: A Study Guide on the First Stage of Awakening. A streamenter is directed toward highest liberation and his max seven birthes to come are in good families or in the Deva realms. Don't forget: death is just a point on a wheel and usually no end, but each new starts quality depends on many things & could be in many spheres, insec.

-Samana Johann

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


text:
I feel like I'm in the wrong place
I feel like I was born in the wrong place and I'm surrounded by wrong people, ideals etc.
I'm very much into buddhism, but with all the things I learned until now, that I'm 23 in Germany, I feel like this life I have right now is not right for me.
Since I grew up in Germany in a normal house etc, I can't imagine myself as a monk. But I can't also imagine myself living like I do at the moment. I'm torn between two worlds so to say. Also, I wouldn't know where to go or how to get there. If I should continue working as a developer which doesn't fulfill me since I'm not helping people. I feel lost in this world, and since this pandemic is going on all the Buddhist monasteries around me are closed.
Well, maybe you have a few tips.
EDIT: Thank you for all your replies. I did always know that I was much better off than others. I also know there are a lot of people that would love to trade places with me and give up everything they have. That day when I wrote this I was in a despair and felt quite lost. I didn't want to offend anybody or make anyone mad. If I did I am truly sorry about it. Currently I am in a existencial/spiritual crisis since I had a completely different world view just a few months ago. Where all I cared about was money, girls, sex, cars, clothes etc. and I realized that all this stuff will not make me happy in any way. So my whole world view crumbled. Then I started feeling like an alien and also started thinking about my mortality etc.
Well to get to the point: I am sorry if I offended anybody and I truly know that I am lucky now. I am working on myself a lot these past months. Thank you all I appreciate it greatly.

You can very much help people as a developer. Lots of applications out there that save lives (ie. medical, positional), or help people grow and improve in different ways.

Yes definetly. But most companies only help other people make more money. I'm currently working in such a company. But I'll be on the lookout for other opportunities where I can help more people. Thanks

Please don't feel guilty about asking questions, you're not being offensive. I think that one of the tenets of Buddhism might be that financial well-being is actually not a guarantee that people will feel happy and secure.

No no I don't feel guilty about it. It helped me a lot. But I wanted to clarify that I didn't mean any harm with it. It just felt right to me.

OP: I feel like I was born in the wrong place and I'm surrounded by wrong
  people, ideals etc.
I'm very much into buddhism, but with all the things I learned until
  now, that I'm 23 in Germany, I feel like this life I have right now is
  not right for me.

I'm not German, but I've stayed in Germany before, and worked for German employers for many years.
Not all, but many Germans tend to like to follow rules, ignore superstitions, appreciate work-life balance and tend to believe in something only after doing research on it.
These are very Buddhist qualities.
The precepts (five, eight, ten) are like rules. You find the Buddha rejecting superstitions in suttas (see this answer). Work-life balance can be seen in practices like the Uposatha vs. normal life. And believing in something after researching it can be found in the Kalama Sutta.

OP: Since I grew up in Germany in a normal house etc, I can't imagine myself as a monk.

That's not because you're German. That's because you do not have enough renunciation (nekhamma). There are quite a few famous German monks in history like Bhikkhus Nyanaponika, Nyanatiloka and Analayo.
Then again, it is not required for you to become a monk. You can simply be a lay Buddhist observing the five precepts, and study and practise Buddhism at your own pace.
Have you read the question "Can a Buddhist own and run a billion dollar business?"? There's nothing wrong in being a lay Buddhist. There's also nothing wrong with being wealthy or being a businessman, if you are.
Also from the Ittha Sutta:

Long life, beauty, status, honor,
  heaven, high birth:
  To those who delight
  in aspiring for these things
  in great measure, continuously,
  The wise praise heedfulness
  in making merit.
The wise person, heedful,
  acquires a two-fold welfare:
  welfare in this life &
  welfare in the next.
  By breaking through to his welfare
  he's called prudent, wise.

The above sutta has advice for lay people and shows them what they can aspire towards.

OP: But I can't also imagine myself living like I do at the moment. I'm
  torn between two worlds so to say. Also, I wouldn't know where to go
  or how to get there. If I should continue working as a developer which
  doesn't fulfill me since I'm not helping people.

I'm not a monk, but I can help people in other ways. For e.g. I'm trying to help you here, by writing this answer.
You can also find ways to use your skills as a developer to help Buddhism. For e.g. have you noticed that SuttaCentral's source code can be found on GitHub? See here.

OP: I feel lost in this world, and since this pandemic is going on all the
  Buddhist monasteries around me are closed.

What??? There are Buddhist monasteries which are open on YouTube.
You can attend Ajahn Brahm's dhamma talks and guided meditation sessions on the BSWA YouTube Channel. Here's a video of Ajahn Brahm conducting a five precepts taking ceremony. People send questions during his live YouTube talks. Now, with the pandemic, all of BSWA's sessions are exclusively online. BSWA is the Buddhist Society of Western Australia.
Here's Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu's YouTube channel. You can find his profile here. He has created a Digital Pali Reader and a similar Android Tipitaka app which are used by Pali scholars around the world. Here's another example of using your skills as a developer.
Here's an interesting talk for you by Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu: "Social Distancing and Buddhism".

I read your whole answer and I appreciate it greatly. Thank you for all the links and your time  I sometimes feel like being a lay person isn't the "perfect" Buddhist ideal. Maybe I'm really too harsh on myself. I will also definitely check all the developer suggestions out you mentioned. I also applied to volunteer as a developer for the fridays for future movement here in Germany. I love helping people and making the world a better place.

being a lay person isn't the "perfect" Buddhist ideal I found this book helpful, to explain another side of the story. Maybe there's a slightly different mahayana ideal too, I don't know.

I also added Ittha Sutta to the answer to show what lay people could aspire to.

Thank you two for your patience and for sharing your knowledge

I feel like I was born in the wrong place and I'm surrounded by wrong people, ideals etc.
I'm very much into buddhism, but with all the things I learned until now, that I'm 23 in Germany, I feel like this life I have right now is not right for me.

Look a bit deeper and you'll see it's quite the opposite. The fact that you were born in Germany, not Syria, Iraq, or other war-torn regions in the MiddleEast or Africa is evidence. Imagine how much more difficult it'd be to try to cultivate the Dhamma there amid all the killings, rapings, famines and diseases, talking about being in the wrong place! And since you're a developer (assuming software developer), you're among the blessed few who are able to gain access to 99.99% of all the Buddha's teaching online, something even the most learned scholars in the old days couldn't even dream about. So, recognizing the good merit you're having now, try to take advantage of it to cultivate moral virtues, practice meditation, and develop insight/wisdom while it lasts, for as you probably already knew about the Buddhist teaching of Anicca, nothing lasts forever. At the same time, try to help others thru volunteer work. Your software skill can help in countless ways to do countless positive useful things, use it!

I started crying happy tears after reading this. You're so right. I've been practicing for a little over a month now seriously and known buddhism for a few years. In these last few weeks of practicing I always felt like all these distractions that are here in the world and all the people with their wrong views around me are just a bad place to be at. Whereas let's say a monestary might help you with your teachings as you have a guide that you can ask questions etc and like-minded people around you. But now that you said it I think I have a bias to think negatively. I'm so blessed.

And I can do so much especially with my knowledge about software development to help humanity. I just don't know yet how. I hope I will one day find out. I meditate and practice and I always keep the impermanence in mind. Thank you

@buddhismcuriousity, seriously, you have no idea how lucky you're. Being born in a country like Germany definitely has a lot of benefits. I'm a third world citizen and I'm dying to live a life like yours. I am a self-taught developer, but in my country, I'm treated like s**t. There are too many people here.

@buddhismcuriousity Even though I earn quite good, there is a high probability that I may not be able to live a life yours. English is not my mother tongue, so I can't express the desperation and anger I feel as I am writing this. I curse myself every single day for being a 3rd world citizen. I don't follow Buddhism (or any other religion for that matter). I created this account just to reply to you. Believe me, you're very privileged.

@buddhismcuriousity People in my country are leaving behind the morals and values of their culture and running blindly towards western culture. And here I see people like you to taking pride in being a Buddhist monk.

@just-today thank you for your reply. I'm sorry to hear that you're not happy about your circumstances. I do realize how lucky I am now. I was in a bit of despair that day and I also do realize that there are people who would love to lead a life like me. Thank you for replying seriously. I appreciate it a lot. I'm also not a buddhist monk and I don't take pride in anything. Maybe it would actually help you to look into buddhism. It's not really a religion like the other ones. I myself am very "careful" about other religions. I wish you well, happiness, peace and freedom.

@just-today I'm also a self taught developer btw. If I can help you with anything development related or also give you some tips on how to maybe move somewhere else or help you with spirituality feel free to contact me via mail. It's my username with the domain protonmail.com

You can look at your work as being for the purpose of getting you the nutriment, which in turn is for sustaining your development, which is for the benefit of all beings.
It's difficult to detach from the company one keeps and the general happy go lucky attitude. For me it usually takes an extraordinary event, a crossing of a line of sorts.
One can live a more or less secluded life without being a monk.
Ordaining nowadays isn't all sunshine & rainbows, there are many factors to consider like finding people with similar understanding as yourself, this doesn't come into play much in the beginning but as you learn much, the range of what is agreeable gets narrowed down accordingly.
If you want to get away from some external influences, do as you see fit. Perhaps some place with next to no people and next to no noise would work just as good or even better than the average monastery. There you can study and try getting some special attainments.

Yes I've been thinking about moving somewhere closer to nature and further away from the city which is really distracting and the different outlook on work really makes sense and I will incorporate that. I think regular retreats would also be nice.

A tree cannot choose where it is planted. If its seed falls on bare land it doesn't have the luxury of travel. But instead it raises its branches, drops its leaves on the soil, breates air into the world. In time that tree and all the other trees around it will be a forest and the land will be beautiful.
You are not in the wrong place. What you see lacking is what you can give the world, what you are missing, others will give to you. There is not only beauty to be found, but to be made and lived.
Now, this 37 year old software developer needs to get back to his dull job and planning his new business venture! ;)

Yes I still have a lot to learn and want to give a lot to the world and contribute to the beauty. Thank you for your answer and time

Being a developer is a huge blessing because it will one day allow you to practice for enlightenment. You need to eat too, so those skills are valuable for your meditation practice as they support you.
Think long term, make a life-plan. Don't try to rush things during the pandemic. Be patient.
Think what the life you want is, then make a list of the steps necessary to achieve them. Then think what person you need to become, and make a list of all the new habits / abilities you need to cultivate in yourself!
If you believe you will make it and help the world, and be happy, then eventually you will. Believe in yourself.

Yes true, thank you  a friend of mine also told me if you really believe something you can do it no matter what

The are less developers capable to keep simple precepts, so it's merely a matter of being blessed to arive at right livelihood, as far as observed, right?

What do you mean?

Try to be serious with abstaining from what is not given (or proper traded), good householder, and then quick to find out for oneself. The whole it-area is far "left" and unvirtuose, even if in comparing it with common law outside of this realm. Not speaking about the contracts, of which the most are actually unserious and against the laws, compared with the "real" world. The crimerate is sure 2 times are more higher already there as in "physical" world, not to speak about virtue. Investigate it yourself selfhonest and in compairing with right conduct the Noble ones prais. Wrong view is common

I don't quite understand what you mean. Could you clarify what exactly is far left and what crimes are going on?

Why do you worry about things over which you have no control? You should be thankful for what you have. I once saw a beggar with no limbs!! At least you are better off.
Under the circumstances no one is living an ideal life. In fact there is no ideal life. You have to make compromises unless you are a true monk. You should rejoice. Rejoice for having found Buddha.
Do not feel lost. Buddha has shown the way. If you do not wish to leave your mundane life then at least devote your life for the well being of others. Develop compassion. Have compassion for all beings in existence.


text:
Is it Vipassana?
I have the following question regarding Vipassana:
From time to time I get unpleasant emotions.  And instead of diving into them, I find a place to sit and concentrate on the sensation that this feeling causes.  After some time, there is no trace of a negative feeling :)
The question is:
Is it ok at such moments not to shift attention all over the body, but simply to focus on a certain sensation? Does it violate the technique?

"After some time, there is no trace of a negative feeling...", to see the three perceptions, that's Vipassana, yes. And all four frames of references, in what ever perspective are highly valid for such a gain.

As per sutta i think this would be classed 'a concentration development leading to mindfulness & alertness' as well as 'mindfulness of feelings'.
Both are related to what is nowadays called Vipassana. The Vipassana movement has several factions which practice differently, most notably Mahasi method variations and the Goenka method.
Even if it violates a technique, it doesn't make it a bad practice.
Whether it violates a particular technique or not is a moot point, as mindfulness of feelings would be included.
If however one isn't verbalizing the 'noting' that would make some teachers say you aren't practicing 'our method' which has noting as a distinctive characteristic.
Same with body scanning, some might hold that it is a distinctive attribute of the technique and if you aren't doing it then you are doing something else.
If you want to practice a particular technique then you should stick to the technique. Otherwise you can deviate and train as you see fit.

I agree with this that what OP is saying is satiphattana, which in turn is and leads to vipassana. Mindfulness of feelings in this case.

Every sensation leads to latent tendency. Missing a sensation means this give the chance of certain latent tendency to arise as awareness of a sensation gives us the chance to stop the sensation progressing to latent tendencies (quoted below) and unwholesome Roots (Pahāna Sutta below) among other negativities like craving (Dependent Origination), concept proliferation (Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta), etc.

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

Pahāna Sutta

And what is the latent tendency of beings?
There are the seven latent tendencies:
(1) the latent tendency of sensual lust;
(2) the latent tendency of aversion;
(3) the latent tendency of conceit;
(4) the latent tendency of wrong view;
(5) the latent tendency of doubt;
(6) the latent tendency of lust for existence;
(7) the latent tendency of ignorance.
That which in the world is pleasant and likable, there the tendency to sensual lust of beings
  lies latent.
That which in the world is unpleasant and unlikable, there the tendency to aversion of beings
  lies latent.
Thus in these two states, ignorance continuously occurs, and so too conceit, wrong view and doubt.
This is the latent tendency to beings.

Introduction to Pahāna Sutta. Found in Sangīti Sutta, Cha,chakka Sutta, Anusaya Sutta, Patisambhida,magga, Vibhanga.


text:
How should Buddhists deal with Loneliness
I don't know how many Buddhists actually reckon with loneliness and the (very real) suffering associated with it.
It seems to me that a lot of Buddhist teachings emphasize on the value of solitude and deem intimate/personal relationships to be unwholesome karma, which ought to be readily forsaken.
So what should an aspiring Buddhist do if he/she feels perpetually alone, constantly challenged with the near-impossible task of building deep, trusting and long-lasting relationships that are emotionally nourishing and fulfilling?
Should he/she simply forget about such worldly pursuits and learn to live the life of a recluse in a good forest monastery? Or try to do something about this somewhat-unbearable State of Being? If the latter, what can the Dharma teach us about forging human connections that are increasingly loving, kind and deeply meaningful?

Some Afterthought:
From the Samana Johnann's comment and some of the answers below, it does show that Buddhism tend not to view Loneliness as a problem per se.
We do need friends (and Teachers!) to provide consistent spiritual support in each of our paths towards Enlightenment, though. (And people who are lonely often find it hard to express and/or address their need in this respect.)
Also, it is natural for humans, as social beings, to yearn for social bonding and some level of intimacy.
I know many seasoned Yogi(ni)s can attest to the fact that one can be perfectly equanimous being alone in a meditative state.
But are we missing out on something?

They should love it, good householder. How ever, as long as Samadhi (Non-returner) is not fully and firm developed, one  ("monk") should stay near,by, his Sangha. Staying with good friends or a teacher.

Overall, the Buddha says:

MN128:6.30: If you find an alert companion,  a wise and virtuous friend, then, overcoming all challenges, wander with them, joyful and mindful. If you find no alert companion, no wise and virtuous friend, then, like a king who flees his conquered realm, wander alone like a tusker in the wilds.

Rarely do we have to "wander alone like a tusker in the wilds." Spiritual friends often enter our lives when we take the time to recognize them as such.
But the above advice works best for those committed to and firmly on the path. For others struggling with day to day issues it's more challenging given the need to maintain relationships to simply survive. Surrounded by materialistic pursuits and people, alienation and loneliness can overwhelm. If sangha and/or teacher are not available to you locally or even online, then you may very well be a "tusker in the wild."
To build deep, trusting and long-lasting relationships requires ethics. On the path we practice ethics, immersion and wisdom. Ethics define our relationships with others. When we behave ethically, others trust us and relationships grow.
Ethics is surprisingly complicated. In MN8, the Buddha declares forty-four (44!) things to attend to. The list starts with:

MN8:12.2: ‘Others will be cruel, but here we will not be cruel.’

Indeed, for this online age, the following seem quite appropriate:

MN8:12.8: ‘Others will speak harshly, but here we will not speak harshly.’
MN8:12.9: ‘Others will talk nonsense, but here we will not talk nonsense.’
MN8:12.10: ‘Others will be covetous, but here we will not be covetous.’

There are a lot more in that sutta. I read it regularly to refresh my perspective. Perhaps that may help you as well.

That was very helpful, thank you!

Loneliness is not being alone. You have yourself, and that is the best company in existence.
You just have to become familiar with yourself, your mind without following anything, without grasping at anything, in a state of pure non-action. Leave everything as it is, and allow your true self to arise with splendor.

Here on the notion of solitude in Pali texts;

All the directions are obscure,
  The teachings are not clear to me;
  With our benevolent friend gone,
  It seems as if all is darkness.

For one whose friend has passed away,
  One whose teacher is gone for good,
  There is no friend that can compare
  With mindfulness of the body.
The old ones have all passed away;
  I do not fit in with the new.
  And so today I muse alone
  Like a bird who has gone to roost. (Ven Ananda's gatha)

Ananda, a monk does not shine if he delights in company, enjoys company, is committed to delighting in company; if he delights in a group, enjoys a group, rejoices in a group. Indeed, Ananda, it is impossible that a monk who delights in company, enjoys company, is committed to delighting in company; who delights in a group, enjoys a group, rejoices in a group, will obtain at will — without difficulty, without trouble — the pleasure of renunciation, the pleasure of seclusion, the pleasure of peace, the pleasure of self-awakening. But it is possible that a monk who lives alone, withdrawn from the group, can expect to obtain at will — without difficulty, without trouble — the pleasure of renunciation, the pleasure of seclusion, the pleasure of peace, the pleasure of self-awakening. (https://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/mn/mn.122.than_en.html)
...the Blessed One said to him, "Is it true, Elder, that you live alone and extol the virtues of living alone?"
"Yes, lord."
"But how do you live alone and extol the virtues of living alone?"
"Lord, alone I enter the village for alms, alone I return, alone I sit withdrawn [in meditation], alone I do walking meditation. That is how I live alone and extol the virtues of living alone."
"There is that way of living alone, Elder. I don't say that there isn't. Still, listen well to how your living alone is perfected in its details, and pay close attention. I will speak."
"As you say, lord," Ven. Elder responded.
The Blessed One said: "And how is living alone perfected in its details? There is the case where whatever is past is abandoned, whatever is future is relinquished, and any passion & desire with regard to states of being attained in the present is well subdued.[2] That is how living alone is perfected in its details." https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn21/sn21.010.than.html#fn-1

These are relevant to the question and afaik have not been recited in the other answers. So i post to complement the other good answers which are based on texts known as true.

This seems like a two-folded question to me.
People who experience difficulties in relationship to other people can learn to break out of it, how difficult it may seem. It is a type of training where buddhism can help to a certain degree. However, there are a lot of situations in our modern lives, that calls for - shall we say - modern skill building, in addition to buddhist practice.
Dealing with the pain associated with the above is - on the other hand - very much a topic to be dealt with the scope of buddhism. It is likely open to interpretation, but loneliness could arguably be described in different ways, dependent on the situation:
Loneliness could be seen as painful in and of itself (dukkha dukkha). It is not a misconception that loneliness hurts, just as there is no misconception that a knife wound hurts, and therefore it is not necessarily caused by avijja. In this case, we may only be able to deal with the pain by stilling it temporarily through samatha in our worst moments.
It is also a situation that calls for other interventions to break out of loneliness, just like a knife wound requires going to an ER. Generally speaking, it could mean the developing of new habits for activation, establishing contact with others, or developing social skills for those who need it. These are examples of skillbuilding outside the scope of buddhism, and i don't believe it would be helpful to simply dismiss the above as tanha/upadana. Buddhism has never been about subjecting ourselves to unnecessary suffering, provided that we can prevent it.
However, loneliness could also make us feel unsatisfied because we cling to involuntary false assumptions regarding ourselves and relationships (attavadupadana). For instance, a person who lacks the relationship he/she believes he/she deserves or needs. This is a trickier situation, since it is conditioned by avijja, tanha or upadana to a greater degree than the previous example.
Using another strictly hypothetical example, if we feel unsatisfied by our loneliness because we have a strong belief that every person on the planet must like us, or that we are fundamentally impossible to be appreciated by others, it becomes another examples created by attavadupadana.
Another hypothetical example: if we believe that a happy life can only be lived with no loneliness at all, we are bound to be unhappy as soon as we aren't surrounding ourselves with people at every price (vibhavatanha).
These are some examples where one could benefit from buddhist insights regarding unhealthy expectations, desire or clinging, and consequently practicing nekkhamma for renunciating unbeneficial assumptions.
These are complicated issues, and dealing with them requires more than the Q&A format here. Also, these things doesn't rule each other out, and a way to less suffering could possibly consist of a combination of several things.
Please bear in mind that there are a lot of people struggling with this, and not everyone is willing to openly admit it. To me, the latter is a rather big step in a new direction, hopefully to a less painful life.

Any practical advice with the insight from the Dharma?

@Sati I added some stuff, for what they're worth...

Thank you for your hypothetical examples. They do illuminate the very rational approach Buddhism offers to tackle these issues - don't stray away from the Path and you would pull through. I think it takes a very strong-willed and single-minded person to be able to use the advice.

I didn't think of that, actually. What i was trying to say was that loneliness is best tackled with different approaches, and buddhism is one of many way to deal with it. If it seems difficult there are other ways out of it.

Is companionship valued in Buddhism?
Yes, but only noble companionship. It's not just half of the holy life, but it is the entire holy life i.e. the journey to enlightenment.
From SN 45.2:

Then the Venerable Ānanda approached the Blessed One. Having
  approached, he paid homage to the Blessed One, sat down to one side,
  and said to him:
“Venerable sir, this is half of the holy life, that is, good
  friendship, good companionship, good comradeship.”
“Not so, Ānanda! Not so, Ānanda! This is the entire holy life, Ānanda,
  that is, good friendship, good companionship, good comradeship. When a
  bhikkhu has a good friend, a good companion, a good comrade, it is to
  be expected that he will develop and cultivate the Noble Eightfold
  Path.
“And how, Ānanda, does a bhikkhu who has a good friend, a good
  companion, a good comrade, develop and cultivate the Noble Eightfold
  Path? Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu develops right view, which is based upon
  seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. He develops
  right intention … right speech … right action … right livelihood …
  right effort … right mindfulness … right concentration, which is based
  upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. It is
  in this way, Ānanda, that a bhikkhu who has a good friend, a good
  companion, a good comrade, develops and cultivates the Noble Eightfold
  Path.

Furthermore, you should choose your friends carefully according to AN 7.36:

A friend gives what is hard to give,
  and does what’s hard to do.
  They put up with your harsh words,
  and with things hard to endure.
They tell you their secrets,
  and keep your secrets for you.
  They don’t abandon you in times of trouble,
  or look down on you in times of loss.
The person in whom
  these things are found is your friend.
  If you want to have a friend,
  you should keep company with such a person.”

And AN 7.37:

They’re lovable, respected, and admired,
  an admonisher who accepts admonishment,
  speaks on deep matters,
  and doesn’t urge you to do bad.
The person in whom
  these things are found is your friend.
  If you want to have a friend,
  benevolent and compassionate,
  you should keep company with such a person,
  even if they send you away.”

On seclusion and pursuing the holy life alone, the famous sutta is the Rhinoceros Sutta (Sutta Nipata 1.3) which I quote below.
All of the following apply only to those who choose the monastic life. It's not necessary for lay Buddhists.
It tells to go forth alone (as a monk) fleeing ignoble companions:

In the midst of companions
  — when staying at home,
  when going out wandering —
  you are prey to requests.
  Valuing the freedom
  wander alone like a rhinoceros.
There is sporting (flirting) & love
  in the midst of companions,
  & abundant fondness for offspring.
  (While) feeling disgust
  at the prospect of parting
  from those who'd be dear,
  wander alone like a rhinoceros.
People follow & associate for a motive.
  Friends without a motive these days are rare.
  They're shrewd for their own ends, & impure.
  Wander alone like a rhinoceros.

However, it praises the company of noble companions and if there are none, better go alone:

If you gain a mature companion,
  a fellow traveler, right-living & wise,
  overcoming all dangers
  go with him, gratified, mindful.
If you don't gain a mature companion,
  a fellow traveler, right-living & wise,
  wander alone
  like a king renouncing his kingdom,
  like the elephant in the Matanga wilds,
  his herd.
We praise companionship — yes!
  Those on a par, or better,
  should be chosen as friends.
  If they're not to be found,
  living faultlessly,
  wander alone like a rhinoceros.

Sometimes the monks wandering alone in the forest become lonely, and they need to be reminded, as we see in SN 9.9 below.

On one occasion a certain monk, a Vajjian princeling, was dwelling
  near Vesali in a forest thicket. And on that occasion an all-night
  festival was being held in Vesali. The monk — lamenting as he heard
  the resounding din of wind music, string music, & gongs coming from
  Vesali, on that occasion recited this verse:

I live in the wilderness
    all alone
    like a log cast away in the forest.
    On a night like this,
    who could there be
    more miserable than me?

Then the devata inhabiting the forest thicket, feeling sympathy for
  the monk, desiring his benefit, desiring to bring him to his senses,
  approached him and addressed him with this verse:

As you live in the wilderness all alone
    like a log cast away in the forest,
    many are those who envy you,
    as hell-beings do,
    those headed for heaven.

The monk, chastened by the devata, came to his senses.


text:
I have forgotten how to live
The previous years of my life feels like a dream. I was happily living, consumed with studies, learning things, watching youtube and stuff, enjoying a lot, mind was busy in various entertaining stuffs. But, I don't know how it started, but all those passions are waning. Its almost as if I've forgotten how to live. Live as in the previous ways of my living. I am now trying to find a way to live as I've lived in the past but can't seem to go back to the old ways. I mean I want to find something fun for my mind as I had in the past but I just cant bring up enough passion.
What is happening to me ?

Perhaps this question may help you: What does Buddhism say about boredom?

Disenchantment to what actually does not really lead to long joy and/orr requires a lot of suffering for oneself or others, or did so in the past (getting had giving as condition)? In that case, mudita,  and maybe Samaññaphala Sutta: The Fruits of the Contemplative Life gives a more then worthy alternativ. Joy and luck isn't something lasting, as all kinds of phenomena in the world, good householder.

I cannot of course say what is happening with you. But here is a thought, since you have used the tag of impermanence for this question (and quite correctly, I think).
Our minds are addicted to sensations- craving of pleasurable sensations and aversion to painful sensations. The addiction is to react, depending on which type of sensation one is experienceing, which changes from time to time (hence the impermanence in the subtlest form). An addicted mind, like an addict, grows accustomed to a high- once staisfied with one drug (here 'fun'), it wants another. Addict wants a high and once that is satisfied, it will want another high. This wanting of high (craving) is a conditioned pattern of mind, at the deepest level- conditioned because of our ignorance to the impermanent nature of phenomenon.
What you thought of as fun, is now boring. But the mind is addicted to 'fun'. So now it is in a bad mood since it can't find something new, a new fun thing to do. Don't get me wrong, having fun is important. The obsession is harmful- we loose the balance of mind.

First of all, you haven't forgotten how to live. Do not be discouraged. The fact that you have that seen how hollow everything is sounds to me like a moment of insight.
It might be that you feel you have forgotten what really matters. But maybe you are also beginning to understand that you never actually understood what really matters.
What we know intellectually, is one thing - but we also must ask ourselves, whenever we learn something - how does it change my world?
If I really know that everything is transient like the form taken in a wisp of incense smoke, then it's hard for me to develop an attachment to their permanence, right?
So laziness.
In some schools of Buddhism, there are three types of laziness - they are opposite to the three types of effort.

The first is apathy lethargy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLexgOxsZu0
The second is a lack of transvaluation: finding no pleasure in doing what is good, or finding pleasure in doing what is bad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT_nvWreIhg
The last a lack of confidence or belief in your ability to do good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDqmJEWOJRI

It is this last one which is the most harmful to our path-treading, as if we believe we cannot do it, or that it's impossible, we end up living in a shit world with no escape.
The direct opponent to laziness is effort, with the corresponding antidotes to the 3 above.
But the underlying cause of laziness is wrong view. If we are able to see the world as it is, then the natural path of least resistance is to follow the path, so developing your insight into the nature of reality is fundamental to changing the way in which you behave within it.


text:
Which Buddhist sect do I belong to?
I've been a Buddhist since I was 13 years old, ever since my confirmation and studying the bible following that, realizing that I didn't believe in the scriptures which I was raised on then I started searching for some sort of a philosophical structure and knowing that without religion I'd have a void within me.
To make long story short, I studied the tenets of Buddhism and the eight fold path and I started living like that at the best of time however strafing away from it at the worst of times.
However I would like to add some depth to my understanding of Buddhism and it's teachings, however the local temples are either Thai Buddhists with the golden statues which I find revolting or the Zen which I'm not quite sure of.

I wouldn't want to answer without knowing a bit more about your interests, abilities and priorities. I will just say for now that a deep study of Buddhism will allow you to make sense of the Bible, so don't give it up on it too hastily.

Typical modern/western 2.0 , seeking for own identification rather to just seek for the Buddhas kown", and the other Juwels, track? There is just one Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha and of course much missusing source-forkings, "illegal" unsupported.

PS - I'd recommend Zen. It's minimalism allows it to sit well with Biblical teachings. But only given a certain reading. For texts that line-up Christianity with Zen and non-dualism I'd recommend 'A Course in Miracles' or Meister Eckhart's sermons. . .

As far as i can tell the delineation of school/sect doesn't really come into play until one plans to join a community for the long term or is in a doctrinal discussion.
The various schools have collections of texts, some doctrines therein are non-negotiable whereas a lot of texts will be in a "maybe true maybe not true" category (ie commentary) and the various positions in regards to those will be tolerated within that school as a whole, although some sects within a school might hold strongly a position regarding a particular non-canonical text and be thus closed off to those of other persuation.
Buddha himself said that he taught the doctrine of analysis (Vibbhajavada) and one would historically have ie  Vibbhajavadins of Theravada, people who would reject some positions held within a school, based on analysis and cross referencing with texts known as true.
Nowadays there are different sects within Theravada, some reject the Abhidhamma, some reject commentary, some rejecting some commentary, some not rejecting anything at all even if the texts contradict themselves.
It is my impression that relatively few people actually study the texts before joining a school.
More often than not people find a community and get taught as the teacher was taught. More often than not the expression and methods are more or less based on the very recent popularizations or passed down tradition.
There is really no reason for having to choose a school before having familiarized oneself with the various doctrines.
Birds of feather flock together, so it is with holymen and views. If one wants to join a community one will for the most part have to learn their particular doctrine because it's just a lot less conflict if all members believe same things. The actual study of texts will often be neglected as well, because that's looked at as a bit dangerous as it might cause disruption and challenge the guru's authority.
Also most monks and lay people alike don't really study beyond the things their teachers tell them. This in part has to do with the sheer volume of essential and non-essential material to study.
If mastering a teachers expression & it's meaning takes 1000 hours, that alone might keep one occupied for years and it might not even result in any understanding of the essentials of what the Buddha taught but instead be based on stories, anecdotes, popularizations and new age systems of doing and explaining things.
Therefore you probably don't belong to any particular school. Ideally one should know why one belongs to a particular school and the various points of controversy.
You can frequent the various communities as you like and as i said people usually don't care about what you believe lest they see you as a threat or consider you for long term cohabitation.

There are a number of Buddhist schools, mostly falling under the umbrella of Theravada, Mahayana or Vajrayana. Well, Vajrayana is technically under Mahayana too. Zen, Pure Land and so on fall under Mahayana. Tibetan Buddhist schools mostly fall under Vajrayana. You can read about them in Wikipedia and also answers on this site for e.g. from this question.
You don't need to choose a sect or school now. Just start observing the five precepts (as best as you can - no pressure) and then become familiar with the original teachings of the Buddha, i.e. as close as possible to the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs).
The texts which are as close as possible to the EBTs is the Pali Canon, also known as the Tipitaka or Tripitaka, which are composed of three collections. The collection known as Sutta Pitaka, contains the teachings of the Buddha, known as suttas or discourses.
The suttas are very huge. I suggest reading an anthology of selected suttas like "In the Buddha's Words" by Bhikkhu Bodhi.  You can also find them in this answer. You can also use AccessToInsight's "Path to Freedom: A Self-Guided Tour of the Buddha's Teachings".
The sect corresponding to the Pali Canon is Theravada.
However, after reading the sutta anthology, you can then explore Mahayana teachings and texts, of course.
In any case, you don't have to commit yourself to any school or sect.
Through study of the teachings, you will improve your Right View. From there, you can decide where to go next.
One important thing is not to judge or decide what Buddhism is, based on what temples look like or what some Buddhists practise or what some teachers teach. Rather use the Buddha's words directly.
For e.g. you won't find any use of statues or idols, or the practice of chanting, or the use of amulets or mandalas or prayer beads or incense in the Buddha's original teachings. These things come from later cultural influences.
Another interesting thing is, in DN 2, the Buddha prohibited monks from practising astrology, palmistry, divination etc.

You don't have to join a sangha to be a buddhist, but it helps.
If there are sanghas nearby in your community, i'd suggest giving them the benefit of doubt by meeting the followers and learn about their teachings. When you're acquainted enough you will have an informed opinion to decide whether to stay or move on.

I think monks are ordained by other/existing monks. This history is called a "lineage". The world is big, over time the lineages in distant countries might have evolved into so-called sects.
I suspect that a layperson may belong to a "culture" (e.g. you might be born Thai or Vietnamese), and/or you can aspire to study any aspect of Buddhism from any tradition that's available and seems useful to you. I believe that even monks, ordained into one sect, might learn from others (yet still remain a monk). I'm pretty sure that some of laypeople on this site have studied more than one tradition (more than one teacher).
See also What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share?
I think there's a sutta which warns against being too sectarian: Ud 6.4 includes the parable of the blind men and the elephant.


text:
I'm scared of the universe
So here is a quick "disclaimer":
I know that the Buddha didn't answer metaphysical questions since it made no sense to him. He wanted to afaik limit/remove suffering as much as possible.
Also I know that science isn't always right and is itself making up theories which more then often enough turn out to be false.
Also I meditate a lot every day as in sitting meditation and all together mindfulness.
Well now to my question:
I somehow get scared of thinking how there was (according to science) a big bang and then I wonder what was before the big bang or where the space comes from that the universe takes up etc. I don't know why but especially these last days I'm drawn to think about it even though I know it doesn't help me in any way and even if I happen to know everything it won't change anything.
Also another thing I think of is heat death. Which again I know is a story made up by science and then I ask myself is it really worth to do anything, live, help etc. anybody if in the ultimate end everything will be gone and does that maybe imply that all beings will reach paranirvana?
And just like these questions seem metaphysical and paranormal I feel like the idea of rebirth and paranirvana is also somewhat scary to think about and is as well somewhat metaphysical.
I wish I could give up all these unnecessary thoughts which cause suffering to me. Also I wish science wouldn't go as far as trying to explain everything.
Do you have any thoughts on this?

Good! A very prerequisite to seek and possible use a path beyond: In Bekräftigung der Wahrheiten des Herzens: Eine Darlegung von Samvega und Pasāda. Seldom that one finds that far, more seldom to even meet pasaga after Samvega.

Thank you for your resources I will check them out

Bhikkhu, im übrigen, wird auch gerne als "jemand der die Welt/Universum fürchtet" erklärt, seit der Buddha dieses tat.

Und Sadhu: "Bhikkhus, diese zwei Personen findet man schwer in der Welt. Welche Zwei? Jene, die einen Gefallen [1] im Voraus tut und jene, die sich für einen Gefallen rückverpflichtet fühlt. Diese zwei Personen findet man schwer in der Welt."

OP: I know that the Buddha didn't answer metaphysical questions since it made no sense to him. He wanted to afaik limit/remove
  suffering as much as possible.

No. The Buddha did not answer metaphysical questions because it confuses and bewilders the questioner.
You are confused now, and it makes you scared and gives you suffering.
The Buddha already predicted that in AN 4.77:

"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an
  unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring
  madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

This is what you're experiencing now. Confusion caused by thoughts about the metaphysical nature of the world.

OP: I don't know why but especially these last days I'm drawn to think
  about it even though I know it doesn't help me in any way and even if
  I happen to know everything it won't change anything.

The Buddha did not discuss metaphysics also because it is not useful. That is exactly what you have written here. It won't help you in any way and it won't change anything. It is completely useless.
The Buddha taught in MN 63:

"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with
  poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide
  him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow
  removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble
  warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't
  have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the
  man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or
  short... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a
  common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander
  arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown
  to him.

It is more useful to remove the poisoned arrow i.e. end suffering, rather than think about where the arrow came from, who shot it, what kind of arrow it is etc.
Also, why does metaphysical speculation lead to madness?
It's because it's outside our range of senses (including thought and mind). So, you can never completely understand it.
This too, the Buddha taught in SN 35.23:

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear &
  sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations,
  intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who
  would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if
  questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement,
  would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief.
  Why? Because it lies beyond range."

Physics - this is possible to theorize and prove. For e.g. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity can be proven by the perihelion precession of Mercury, deflection of light by stars, gravitational waves, gravitational lensing etc. It is also useful - for e.g. Theory of General Relativity has been used in the application of Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites, to compensate for time dilation.
But metaphysics? It's impossible.
Then you may ask, why do some other religions or philosophers discuss and debate about metaphysics extensively? The answer for this comes in Udana 6.4 (parable of the blind men and the elephant).

OP: I somehow get scared of thinking how there
  was (according to science) a big bang and then I wonder what was
  before the big bang or where the space comes from that the universe
  takes up etc.

If you fear something where there is nothing to fear, it means you are holding a false view about something. You need to let it go. As the Buddha has taught in Dhammapada 22:

Those who see something to fear where there is nothing to fear, and see nothing to fear where there is something to fear — upholding
  false views, they go to states of woe.

There's nothing to fear about the universe.

OP: Also another thing I think of is heat death. ...
  if in the ultimate end everything
  will be gone and does that maybe imply that all beings will reach
  paranirvana?

Parinirvana is not the same as non-existence. It is also not the same as existence.
This is discussed in many suttas like SN 44.6, SN 44.8, SN 44.11, SN 22.86, AN 10.95 etc.
The Buddha has never declared whether the Tathagata (Buddha) exists or does not exist after death.

OP: And just like these questions seem metaphysical and paranormal I feel
  like the idea of rebirth and paranirvana is also somewhat scary to
  think about and is as well somewhat metaphysical.

All the confusion about rebirth and parinirvana and what happens to beings can be answered by SN 22.86:

"What do you think, Anuradha: Do you regard form as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard perception as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard fabrications as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard consciousness as the Tathagata?"
"No, lord."
"What do you think, Anuradha: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in
  form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere than
  feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In
  fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?...
  Elsewhere than consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as
  form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without
  feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without
  consciousness?"
"No, lord."
"And so, Anuradha — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth
  or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare,
  'Friends, the Tathagata — the supreme man, the superlative man,
  attainer of the superlative attainment — being described, is described
  otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after
  death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after
  death, neither exists nor does not exist after death'?"
"No, lord."
"Very good, Anuradha. Very good. Both formerly & now, it is only
  suffering that I describe, and the cessation of suffering."

Also SN 44.6 is useful.

OP: I wish I could give up all these unnecessary thoughts which cause
  suffering to me.

Yes! You need to give up unnecessary thoughts, for the reasons already explained above.

Thank you for your extremely detailed answer which, I'm sure, took quite some time to write. I appreciate it deeply  I will stop pondering these questions which will not alleviate my suffering or the suffering of anyone else. I will keep on practicing and check out all the resources you provided. Thank you again.

Sometimes our need for control reaches a tipping point, and becomes counterproductive in that it gives us more pain than relief.
Maybe at some point in your life, control and predictability was necessary (it usually is to some degree). Now it seems that the tipping point has been reached and clinging for control demands more than it gives.
What is worse, anicca or control? What is required for nekkhamma, and how does it compare to the requirements for remaining in control?

Control is worse and for attaining nekkhama I have to let go of control. I have to let go of the craving for wanting to have an answer to everything. I guess this will take some time for me. Thank you for your answer

There comes a time when, Vāseṭṭha, after a very long period has passed, this cosmos contracts. As the cosmos contracts, sentient beings are mostly headed for the realm of streaming radiance. There they are mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious, and they remain like that for a very long time.
There comes a time when, after a very long period has passed, this cosmos expands. As the cosmos expands, sentient beings mostly pass away from that host of radiant deities and come back to this realm. Here they are mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the sky, steadily glorious, and they remain like that for a very long time. - DN 27

This is what the pali texts say on the expansion-contraction.
I don't have much else to say but you do seem a bit confused by technical terminology such as 'nibbana', 'space', 'big bang' and etc; most people are confused about these things and of those who claim not to be confused many have contradictory views.
Perhaps if you look into the usage of the words 'all', 'world', 'origination of the world' and 'cessation of the world' in the discourses, perhaps it would make things a bit more clear or at least send you down the right rabbit hole.

Yeah now that you say it. Yes I confuse myself and I overwhelm myself  thank you I will look into it.

You can find a lot of sutta excerpts explaining the meaning of the different words here;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NHDYCBjXLKwCxEUqbqvk7ui9fPfUx6oKxibjXcEH2CM/edit?usp=drivesdk

Thank you a lot  I appreciate it very much :)

It has no references but these are all pali Sutta excerpts with a section on 'form' being partly from the theravadin abhidhamma. You can usually find the Sutta if you google "a particular passage" + sutta

I read through the more important ones right now but I will definitely reread it again and make some notes about it. I definetly see that I'm still craving a lot. Thanks again

Do you have any thoughts on this?
Thoughts are impermanent and unsatisfactory.
Your worries are actually internal, so turn your attention inside first before dealing with the external. Deal with external perceptions later. The heat death of the universe is not an immediate concern. What is immediately available to all of us is the breath. Simply counting breaths shifts focus away from desire and aversion for the world. Counting breaths is both easy and difficult. After decades, it is still a critical part of my practice.
So count the breaths, hold onto the count and let the heat death of the universe arise and fall away on its own.

MN10:2.1: “Mendicants, the four kinds of mindfulness meditation are the path to convergence. They are in order to purify sentient beings, to get past sorrow and crying, to make an end of pain and sadness, to end the cycle of suffering, and to realize extinguishment.
MN10:3.1: What four?
MN10:3.2: It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
MN10:3.3: They meditate observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
MN10:3.4: They meditate observing an aspect of the mind—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
MN10:3.5: They meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.

I know that the Buddha didn't answer metaphysical questions since it made no sense to him.
No, no, no. This is a catastrophic misperception. Nagarjuna explains why the Buddha steered clear of metaphysical questions. It was because they made complete sense to him. But the answers wouldn't make sense to his audience and they cannot be stated in ordinary language. This is a technical matter to do with the rejection of extreme views for a non-dual metaphysical scheme. If you understand Nagarjuna then you understand why the Buddha avoided metaphysical questions. It was because he understood the answers.
Well now to my question: I somehow get scared of thinking how there was (according to science) a big bang and then I wonder what was before the big bang or where the space comes from that the universe takes up etc. I don't know why but especially these last days I'm drawn to think about it even though I know it doesn't help me in any way and even if I happen to know everything it won't change anything.
Thinking about these things is important. As a Buddhist you're attempting to transcend space-time, so thinking about what comes 'before' is useful. If you discover answers it will help you in almost every way and change everything for you for the better.
Also another thing I think of is heat death. Which again I know is a story made up by science and then I ask myself is it really worth to do anything, live, help etc. anybody if in the ultimate end everything will be gone and does that maybe imply that all beings will reach paranirvana?
The Ultimate can never go anywhere and as this is what you are neither can you. The heat-death of the universe is a regular event and of no consequence. As for whether all beings reach paranirvana, I suspect there may be two ways of looking at this.
And just like these questions seem metaphysical and paranormal I feel like the idea of rebirth and paranirvana is also somewhat scary to think about and is as well somewhat metaphysical.
It can be scary at first, but in fact there's no downside. Inevitably these ideas are metaphysical. Any fundamental theory is metaphysical. But don't imagine Buddhist metaphysics is as hopeless and pointless as the academic discipline.
I wish I could give up all these unnecessary thoughts which cause suffering to me. Also I wish science wouldn't go as far as trying to explain everything.
The practice is the medicine and cure for your problem, and it is a science. It may be called the science of Yoga and it meets Popper's criteria for a science.
I think you only need to keep studying and practicing and all these issues will disappear or be resolved.

Thanks a lot for your time and clarification. I think I still do misinterpret quite a lot of things. The part where you said that Buddha doesn't talk about it, because he knows it doesn't make sense to us really makes sense to me now. I will definitely keep on practicing and learning and I guess that will make a lot of things clearer day by day.

Can you please, if you have the time, elaborate on the part where you say "The heat death[...] Is a regular event and of no consequence". How? Again thank you very much

"Science" of yoga is Hinduism - and so it is off-topic.

@ruben2020 - Oh okay. For me Buddhism is Yoga. Let's call it the science of consciousness.

@buddhismcuriousity - I assume space-time universes all end the same way and that there are infinitely many. So heat-death would be a regular event. If so then there'll be more heat-deaths than grains of sand in the Ganges.

Fear is something of nature and arises in nature, nature conceives the entirety of the universe and in that types of fear based on not knowing how it's done.
This fear is here obviously based on the ignorance element and has ignorance as a requisite condition, whatever the perfected knowledge is, it would not be not a ground for such a fear as it is antithetical to ignorance.
So... logically there is no need to fear anything of that sort because nature has no reason to fear itself and it encompasses all things, in other words we may be caught up in a war but nature always wins as it's merely here fighting itself.
What i mean is that it's not like nature is going to turn out to be a big disappointment or something like that not to say that there is no disappointment in nature but that too is delusion based as disappointment requires expectations and expectations require an unknown.


text:
To what extent do Zen students study Dhamma?
This answer was thought to be Zen-inspired:

Yes it's wrong. Throw away your statues and burn your dharma books.

Zen has a reputation for being a bit iconoclastic.
But perhaps it is somehow based on dharma or suttas (see e.g. Publishing the sutras, and Korea has a Tripitaka)?
On the other hand I think I remember one user of this site writing that they had a Zen teacher initially, but didn't understand it so well until later, after they studied the Pali suttas a bit on their own -- as if the Zen were maybe not clear about explaining theory?
Some of the famous recorded dialogs (e.g. "Nothing Exists", or the poem contest which Huineng won) seem to be dhamma discussion -- as if they have learned some dhamma to discuss!
But the few popular modern English introductions to Zen that I might have read don't seem to mention dhamma much -- they talk about Zen customs or methods, like sitting and giving students a koan -- not the four noble truths, not the gradual or the threefold training, not the hindrances nor fetters nor the factors of enlightenment, perhaps not even the traditional story of the Buddha (i.e. the four messengers and his living home).
I think that Thich Nhat Hanh probably talked about the three or four characteristics of existence, at least -- I expect that, impermanence, is maybe a famous item of doctrine in the culture (of traditional Zen countries) at large.
What is Zen doctrine, what might be taught to a novice? Does it depend entirely on what the student might have learned already, no fixed curriculum, based on an interview between the student and the teacher?
Is the elementary dhamma -- e.g. as outlined in What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share? -- instead a body of knowledge which most laypeople would have learned at home or perhaps in elementary school, in countries where Zen is traditional, therefore something which doesn't need to be taught to adult students?

I found my way into Buddhism via Zen since the teacher 'who appeared when needed' was a Zen and Taoist practitioner. This was fantastically lucky since Zen cuts straight to the chase and I'm impatient with details. As a lazy person 'just sitting' was right up my street.
I started by reading 'Cultivating the Empty Field', a collection of poetry by Master Hongzhi. The preface and introduction are brilliant and from a philosophical perspective explained all I wanted to know. At the time these were by far the two best and most useful philosophical pieces of writing I had ever read.
The dharma in all its details is not especially important since Zen goes straight the heart of practice. But the situation is deceptive. The teachings and practices of Zen are grounded in the metaphysics of Nagarjuna. Thus Zen is iconoclastic as is Mahayana. Nothing really exists or ever really happens and all our mundane idea have to be knocked-down.
There is very little need for organised teaching. I was advised to sit down and give up everything. That's it really, the core of the method, supported by pondering on koans, the occasional touch of austerities and so on.
I would recommend the aforementioned book as a way into this topic. I have no patience with the 8 levels of this, the 43 levels of that, the 9 stages of the other and so on for to me they are merely didactic devices, albeit valuable where they are helpful. It won't suit everyone, but some prefer to burn their books and leap-frog all that.
I feel Zen is the best approach for anyone coming from scholastic philosophy since it is free of clutter and has an explicit, complete and well-formed metaphysical scheme. Whether it is best for you only you can know. It combines well with other simple-minded approaches like philosophical Taoism (not the later religious Taoism) and Sri Ramana's method of self-enquiry.
You ask what is Zen doctrine. It is the Mahayana doctrine stripped-down to its most-minimal practical essentials. One sits and waits for the dust to settle, and as it does ones realisation grows and life improves. No need to fight tendencies and attachments like a battling saint for they gradually fall away in the silence and peace. Also, koans are an effective method of unsettling ones usual way of thinking and getting to grips intellectually and 'intuitively' with non-duality.
Hope this helps. For more of an answer the question would have to be more specific.

Case 6 The Buddha Holds Out a Flower
When Shakyamuni Buddha was at Mount Grdhrakuta, he held out a flower
  to his listeners.
Everyone was silent. Only Mahakashyapa broke into a broad smile.
The Buddha said, "I have the True Dharma Eye, the Marvelous Mind of
  Nirvana, the True Form of the Formless, and the Subtle Dharma Gate,
  independent of words and transmitted beyond doctrine. This I have
  entrusted to Mahakashyapa."
Mumon's Comment
Golden-faced Gautama really disregarded his listeners. He made the
  good look bad and sold dog's meat labeled as mutton. He himself
  thought it was wonderful. If, however, everyone in the audience had
  laughed, how could he have transmitted his True Eye?
And again, if Mahakashyapa had not smiled, how could the Buddha have
  transmitted it?
If you say the True Dharma Eye can be transmitted, then the
  golden-faced old man would be a city slicker who cheats the country
  bumpkin.
If you say it cannot be transmitted, then why did the Buddha approve
  of Mahakashyapa?
Mumon's Verse
Holding out a flower, The Buddha betrayed his curly tail.
  Heaven and earth were bewildered, At Mahakashyapa's smile.

If I had a registered account, I'd upvote PeterJ's answer as it is absolutely correct.  The only thing I would add is that Zen is entirely interested in personal
discovery.  The pedagogy that we use is to follow the blind path taken by the Buddha.  The Buddha didn't have the dharma to go on.  He didn't have the Four Noble Truths or the suttas or the commentaries.  Everything he discovered he had to find for himself.  That's harder, no doubt about it.  But finding those things himself meant that he absolutely saw them - plain as the nose on his face.  There were no concepts mediating his experience.
When we come at the way with conceptual baggage - ideas like the factors of enlightenment, the jhanas, the eightfold path, etc. - we invariably and often unwittingly either file our experience away in those little boxes or worse, impose those concepts on our experience.  The dharma we are after is our own dharma.  Some of it will look like what the Buddha found and taught and some of it will be uniquely our own but all of it will point at the same thing.
Ultimately, there is no teaching.  There is only knowing.  How we know is uniquely our own.  We can hold up a flower or we can order at the Wendy's drive thru.  Cheeseburgers can be the unsurpassed true dharma eye and the marvelous mind, and subtle dharma gate.  In Zen, we'd say that cheeseburgers are better for waking up than the entire Tripitaka.