text:
Is practicing Buddhism to be happy a wrong view?
One of my teachers has said that practicing Buddhism isn't about having a good time. That's always struck me as a bit harsh. If I practice Buddhism to feel a bit better about myself and to be happy is that a wrong view. If it is, then why would anyone start to practice at all unless they had been brought up in that tradition and it was a cultural thing.

I think you're getting mixed up with words. What do 'having a good time', 'feeling better about yourself' and 'being happy' mean? In terms of your actual experience of life? In precise language?

Mr Bucket: The site won't allow me to post a proper answer to your question but hopefully you will see this comment. The answer, stripped of any scripture or doctrine, is that you are both correct. We can be fairly certain that there is no God or god who actively intervenes in this world in order to be known to all mankind at this time; there are even some religions like Scientology, Anglicanism, and Mormonism that are ipso facto wrong in their claims to represent exclusive metaphysical truth. Nonetheless, a religion that makes you warmer, more moral, more loving, closer to your friends

and family is a perfectly fine and helpful tool for your psyche to cling to. If that happens to be Buddhism for you, more power to you. That said, a fundamental claim of Buddhism itself is that attachment (especially to temporary feelings but even to beliefs and doctrines) will ultimately lead you to needless and unproductive suffering. Buddhism won't make you always feel better about yourself and that's not Buddhism's "fault" or "failure". Similarly, th'side effects if you espouse Buddhism to feel superior to others in your culture. You should follow your dharma, but your teacher isn't wrong.

In answer to the question as to why someone would believe Buddhism except to be happy or because they were born to it... well, the answer would be because it is true or at least speaks to deep psychological truths (particularly mindfulness) which are completely independent of any doctrine, school, or culture.

In the Suttas, the Buddha taught two distinct levels of teachings:  For monks (and nuns) and householders.  The goal of the monk's life is to attain nibbana, permanent freedom from suffering.  The goal of the householder practicing the Buddha's teaching is to reduce the suffering and increase the happiness in this life and the next.
It is hard to know what your teacher was thinking - but it may have been that there are people who neglect sila (the moral rules of the Buddha), thinking that the ultimate goal of life is simply "Eat, drink and be merry."

“Ethan santhan ethan paneethan, sabba sankhara samatho, Sabbhupathi patinissaggo, tanhkkhayo, virago, nirodho, Nibbanan ti“

“It is the only peace, the only happiness: prevent sankhara from arising by eliminating tanha and excess greed, and thus stopping the arising of defilements, which is Nibbana“.
This above mentioned contemplation is the most effective  kammatthana when cultivating Ariya Jhana. But we can never achieve such jhanic states that is helpful in furthering the Noble Eightfold Path if there isn’t a sense of happiness within us. The sati sampajanna that one dwells in should be one of inner happiness and peace of mind. Sati is mindfulness. The Pali word for alertness is sampajañña. It doesn’t mean being choicelessly aware of the present, or comprehending the present. Sampajañña means being aware of what you’re doing in the movements of the body, the movements in the mind. This is why mindfulness and alertness should always be paired.
Our happiness, our lack of happiness, depends on our actions. So that’s where we focus our attention. When you create a frame of reference here in the present moment, there are lots of things you can tune in to. You can choose the body in and of itself. You can choose feelings, mental states, mental qualities in and of themselves.
Of all the sensory input that comes in at any one particular moment, you make a choice of what you’re going to pay attention to, what memories, what frame of reference you’re going to bring to that particular moment. And it’s an important mental skill to be able to shift your frame of reference as necessary.
Being mindful means being very deliberate and clear about what you bring to whatever you’re doing: what you’re going to remember, what you’re not going to remember, what you’re going to recollect, what you’re going to let go, which things are useful to recollect right now.
If you wanted to, you could sit and spend the whole hour thinking about facts that would make you totally miserable, but what does that accomplish? In walking the Path we are to think about things that are useful for the mind, so remember the things that are useful for the mind, that will help it develop. As for the other voices coming in and out of the mind, listen to the ones that are helpful and ignore the ones that are not. You can be selective.
This way, mindfulness becomes a quality we can apply to everything we do. And instead of making us unable to function, it heightens our ability to function, because we understand the process that the mind goes through, and we are in a state of happiness within.
Just because your teacher and almost all the books in the present day say as to how could one be happy when everything is suffering, you should not accept such a statement as true. For one to advice another on Dhamma, one has have at least come to the ‘Stream Entrant’ stage of the Path. This is like someone trying to teach another to ride a cycle, when he himself doesn’t know how to ride one. Sadly that is the state of affairs in the present day and age.
You can sing, dance, and have an enjoyable time while being grounded in reality, in knowing the underlying nature of anything in this world. It is fully engaging in life with an understanding that we will not be able to maintain anything to our satisfaction over long times. Thus we can see suffering - there not being anything of true inherent value in mundane life activities – but still participate in the activities in a rather detached way. If one truly understands this fact, that itself leads to the Stream Entrant stage of Nibbana.

Thks. Andrei Volkov… Today a great many take Buddha Dhamma for what it is not. Visakha was seven years old when she & 500 maidservants in the first stage of sainthood, Sotapanna. They led normal lives. Visakha had 32 kids. A rich man's daughter who had attained Sotapatti Fruition as a young girl ran away with hunter & had 7 kids. Once a group of monks took Buddha’s advice incorrectly & were found (by Visakha) dancing in the rain, naked. If we wrongly interpret Dhamma, it results in restlessness and remorse (uddhacca-kukkucca) preventing us from becoming Sotapanna, the first stage of sainthood.

Is practicing Buddhism to be happy a wrong view?

It depends on what kind of intention is motivating the search for happiness.
If the intention originates from the 3 unwholesome roots, then yes it is considered wrong view as actions based in these roots cause further suffering to arise by enforcing craving and thereby the bondage to Samsara.
If the intention originates from the path factor of Right Intention in the Noble Eightfold Path, i.e. the intention of Renunciation, good-will and harmlessness, then it is considered right view.
To attain deliverance requires the complete eradication of craving - not by force but by understanding. True renunciation is about changing our perspective on conditioned phenomena through the practice of (insight) meditation. This leads to understanding the nature of craving and with keen attention and investigation the mind is able to let go of craving. This leads to true happiness, i.e. a happiness that is pure, unconditioned and permanent.
If one is practicing Buddhism, motivated by right intention, in order to attain that kind of happiness, then it is not wrong view.

One of my teachers has said that practicing Buddhism isn't about having a good time.

I agree with that teacher. At least regarding the practice of insight meditation. It is not undertaken in order for the practitioner to feel good. It is done in order to learn about, investigate and to understand reality. It is meant to bring about a deep, profound and permanent internal change of the practitioner.

My meditation teacher said, "Motive and intent create karma."

So, in other words, the point of Buddhism isn't to make yourself happy, but becoming happy by practicing it is OK?

If I practice Buddhism to feel a bit better about myself and to be happy is that a wrong view.
I think that the goal of Buddhism, as I understood it from the Pali suttas, is usually phrased as an absence of a negative/affliction: for example, as "cessation of suffering" rather than as "happiness".
There is also a sutta (AN 11.1) which begins with,

"What is the purpose of skillful virtues? What is their reward?"
"Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, Ananda, and freedom from remorse as their reward."

That sutta then goes on, to talk about "joy", and so on. But when you mentioned "feel better about myself" I interpreted  that phrase as meaning "freedom from remorse" (because conversely any practice that you may feel worse about is, I presume, somehow associated with remorse).
But the tripitaka mentions happiness too (see the Pali word sukha).
If it is, then why would anyone start to practice at all unless they had been brought up in that tradition and it was a cultural thing.
Well for me I suppose the reason "why" I started to practice at all was because I found the first noble truth was evident: including for example friends and family dying, with Buddhism being the more plausible-seeming method to try to cope/live with that.
I think it's to its credit that Buddhism can find anything at all to be happy about in these circumstances, yet I think it does: for example AN 7.49 mentions gratification and joy as maybe the second-best reason (not quite the best) reason for doing something.
Different people (or different forms of Buddhism) have different reasons though, see e.g. the answers to How to explain what Buddhism is?.

I find the  best way to go about it is to ignore dogma and instead follow your heart. Find what is true and works for you. Forget what the dogma says is right and wrong.
However, using meditation to try and feel  happier is probs not a great idea because you might start to try and use it as a fix or a spiritual bypass. This can be a trap. Then when you don't feel happy you may start to think "this isn't working" etc
Meditation is more like a process of disillusionment. You begin to look at yourself, the way your mind works, your thought processes and difficult emotions etc. We begin to realise how these phenomena block our innate joy from arising.  Instead of trying to be happy we just allow the joy to bubble up naturally.
It can be a very painful process breaking through and facing this stuff. The first time I went on silent retreat I was overwhelmed with grief. So many layers of sadnes and grief kept arising. I cried for days and thought I'd never stop. Eventually I did and I felt the most exquisite joy and stillness. It was a very enlightening experience.  So don't try too hard. Just look and allow things to happen and unfold.

"One of my teachers has said that practicing Buddhism isn't about having a good time."
If he hasn't explained why, and he is teaching for the laity, I suppose he could be referring to (at least) the difficulty of abandonment prescribed by the five precepts and the virtue group of the noble eightfold path. For example:

Abandonment of false speech, angry speech, slander, sexual misconduct, consuming intoxicants, theft, killing etc (right speech, right action / precepts).

These can be difficult and painful to practice.
As one becomes more dedicated, the practice also becomes more difficult. One is taught to restraint faculties hard to restraint, to endure things hard to endure, to avoid things hard to avoid and to develop things hard to develop (MN 2).
Just the following, from MN 2, can be quite painful to practice:

he endures ill-spoken, unwelcome words and arisen bodily feelings that are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, distressing, and menacing to life.

With a deep dedication, one learns that sensual pleasures are a major hindrance in the path to Nirvana. So here, delight in sensual pleasures are likely the best fit for "having a good time". As it so happens, sensual pleasures have some gratification, but hide greater danger (MN 13). Also, ultimately they are impermanent and unsatisfactory. But still, hard to understand and abandon:

The person who’s to their body-cave
Clouded by many moods, and in delusion sunk,
Hard it is for that one, far from detachment,
To abandon sensual pleasures in the world.
-- Snp 4.2
“And what, bhikkhus, is the severance of the bond of sensuality? Here, someone understands as they really are the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger, and the escape in regard to sensual pleasures. When one understands these things as they really are, then sensual lust, sensual delight, sensual affection, sensual infatuation, sensual thirst, sensual passion, sensual attachment, and sensual craving do not lie within one in regard to sensual pleasures. This is called the severance of the bond of sensuality."
-- AN 4.10

However, apparently, abandoning sensual pleasures is something the Buddha rarely taught laity (he certainly did not preach celibacy to laity, for example), so this is usually considered a part of the practice that is targeted at a specific, dedicated audience (the monks).

One may ask oneself why something that is advertised as a path to happiness can be painful.
First, this is not entirely the case. Much of the practice has it's own short term rewards. To reiterate @ChrisW's example:

“Bhante, what is the purpose and benefit of wholesome virtuous behavior?”
“Ānanda, the purpose and benefit of wholesome virtuous behavior is non-regret.”
-- AN 10.1

All branches of the Noble Eightfold Path, however difficult, have fruits and rewards as the result of practice. These rewards, naturally, are always congruent with happiness (wholesome), or are themselves increasingly superior kinds of happiness (which culminates in the ultimate happiness, Nirvana).
Also, similar questions can be brought up about practicing healthy exercises, healthy diet, certain medical prescriptions for diseases, or even study: these can be very painful to follow, but they have bigger rewards in the long term.
"If I practice Buddhism to feel a bit better about myself and to be happy is that a wrong view."
I suppose everyone who is sincerely practicing Buddhism is looking for a way to handle suffering and live happy, as well as help others in the same way. The Buddhist path is itself, in all it's aspects, the cultivation of happiness and the study of the origins of suffering. So how could this be wrong view?
To conclude, from the pali canon, Nirvana is said to be the greatest happiness. While gratification of sensual pleasures are recognized, their danger is frequently emphasized along with the possibility of greater happiness apart from sensual pleasures:

“Ānanda, there are these five cords of sensual pleasure. What five? Forms cognizable by the eye that are desirable, lovely, agreeable, pleasing, sensually enticing, tantalizing. Sounds cognizable by the ear … Odours cognizable by the nose … Tastes cognizable by the tongue … Tactile objects cognizable by the body that are desirable, lovely, agreeable, pleasing, sensually enticing, tantalizing. These are the five cords of sensual pleasure. The pleasure and joy that arise in dependence on these five cords of sensual pleasure: this is called sensual pleasure.
“Though some may say, ‘This is the supreme pleasure and joy that beings experience,’ I would not concede this to them. Why is that? Because there is another kind of happiness more excellent and sublime than that happiness. [...]
-- SN 36.19
I see other beings who are not free from lust for sensual pleasures being devoured by craving for sensual pleasures, burning with fever for sensual pleasures, indulging in sensual pleasures, and I do not envy them, nor do I delight therein. Why is that? Because there is, Māgandiya, a delight apart from sensual pleasures, apart from unwholesome states,  which surpasses even divine bliss. Since I take delight in that, I do not envy what is inferior, nor do I delight therein.
-- MN 75

It depends why you are going in any direction at all.
Generally speaking, as worldly people (not monks), we go to anything to derive self-benefit out of it. We want to feel satisfied/better. For example, I have this lingering feeling that if I answer this question in this way, I might be appreciated/taken notice of and that makes me feel better or lets say you want to watch a football game, you obviously want to feel happy and entertained by it.
Let's try to see what Buddhism is. In essence, we don't want to capture Buddhism as a concept. In the most primary form, it is a set of guidelines/attitudes (mostly) for monks who wish to be enlightened and have given up the worldly.
Now the lay people can practice meditation too. There is nothing wrong with that. But what happens is, it really just clears our cache/mind (sort of, I don't know if you got it). Once we clear our mind, we feel better. You observe that if you are feeling restless/uncomfortable, it mostly has to do with the mind. (Sometimes it could be body too.) You see there is a difference in the goals of the monks and the goals of the worldly.
We only go back the next day to work/to some entertainment to fill it up some more and then we do meditation and it clears up a bit again. Now with constant practice, of meditation in everyday life, we learn to deal with things. But for monks it is more a technique for stream entry and more and more going towards enlightenment. So you see why it means something else for monks and something else for other people.
So I would say, detach a bit from the concept of Buddhism or being a Buddhist. Allow other people to have their idea of it. But to you, it must not mean anything quite literally or as an identity.

The Buddha taught about unsatisfactoriness and the way out of it.
The biss of Nirvana surpases all.
So you practice Buddhism to come out of misery. Initially you will find sensation based bliss like Piti and Sukha and finally Nirvana which does not depend on sensations. So in a way this is right.

Following the dhamma begins when their is a ''will'' to stop being ''unhappy'', miserable, disappointed, no matter what the pleasures (and their costs) is experienced so far.
The ''harmless fun'', physical or not, that people crave is nice and if you get it without much work, then lucky you; but once the dhamma is seen, the person is not driven, towards the dhamma or anything, by the boredom, the pleasures nor pains, in daily life, nor even the ones of the jhanas, but the person is driven only towards the end of the path, and driven only by knowing that the path is the only thing relevant to do (for as long as the guy is living).
Of course any puttujana is driven, towards anything, by the current tastes,  (which change sooner or later), by what is liked and what is disliked, by pleasures and avoiding pains and hardships (directly, or by constructing some story that being in pain, disappointments, hardships, predicaments are worth it or have some merit or are deserved).
This holds for the puttujanas who follow the dhamma  and for non-bodily drives, there can be faith-doubt(choose the word you see as negative), boredom in their life,  tradition, curiosity, realizing their fantasy of becoming righteous, their fantasy of the knowledge of the ''true nature of reality''.
It turns out that, for puttujanas, having a non-physical pleasures makes the mind plastic, concentrated, still, nonagitated. Even if there remain some faiths in some god, in some boasting about the success of the jhanas, some faith in something else than the dhamma, This mind is the ideal mind to meditate on the ''four noble truths''.
The students will have the healthy mind, since they are told to stop worrying (and are made so by being secluded and far away from all this hustle and bustle) about, being still towards ''social'' matters (typically some contests, hierarchies, like a career), which is the basis for contemplating, the continuation of being still with respect to bodily pains/pleasures and boredom, before meditating on their misery ---- which really means ''there is the knowledge that there is still misery, no matter what has been done before'', then all there is the radical stop of being sad, whatever the consequences this would bring to this existence and there is their acceptation , there is only caring about no longer being unhappy; then there is the insight that ''there is misery, because there are not the objects desired (such as cars, heaters, foods, travels, being judged innocent in some trial, paying less taxes, joy or pride of giving some pleasures to a few women, feeling relevant to some humans, expressing some opinions about something, believing to be righteous, believing to behave in agreement to some rules), but this misery happens only because there is a taking up of consciousness, feelings and all that stuff always impermanent, uncontrollable, not I-me-mine, what people call ''ego'' casually, which did not give what was wanted before (for very long) no matter how much effort is put to keep the good states; there is no longer a misery, once and for all, once there is no taking up of, taking as basis those stuff always impermanent and uncontrollable, not I-me-mine''; then the dispassion towards all those stuff happens which brings the knowledge of ''right view''; then the natural and only relevant step to do is to contemplate-meditate to settle this right view once and for all and be done with the path.
Before this meditation, The only ''sadness'' that there is is the knowledge that there is no contemplation carried out,  yet needed to finish the path.

Buddha taught many kinds of happiness.
Nibbana is the highest.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.059.than.html


text:
prayer ettiquette in a wheelchair
Is it (in a strict view) possible to go to inside a temple/pagoda sanctum with a wheelchair or should it be placed outside? and/or orthotics? Ihave spina bifida and sit mostly in a wheelchair. I can walk a few steps with help but need orthotics to support my ankles (without them its werry difficult to walk because i will stand on my toes.)
I ask cause my friend is buddhist (i write from his account)

Is it (in a strict view) possible to go to inside a temple/pagoda sanctum with a wheelchair or should it be placed outside?

Where do you live or where is the temple you want to go to?
A good idea is to either visit, write or call (if possible) the Temple and ask about their options. Some remote temples might not be accessible via wheelchair due to infrastructure or lack there of.
A list with a couple of places to visit temples:

There is a temple in Canada that is wheelchair-accessible from the backside.
There is also a temple in Thailand.
Wheelchair-accessible Tanah Lot Temple in Bali.
Wheelchair-accessible Sensoji Buddhist Temple in Asakusa, Tokyo.
Recommended Temples to visit in Tokyo with wheelchair-access.
Here is a link to New Kadampa Festival for wheelchair-users.
A great post about a wheelchair-user who visited temples in both Cambodia and Thailand. She mentions that she was able to visit even temples in the remote countryside.

and/or orthotics?

Regarding the use of orthotics inside Temples is difficult to answer. Many temples require one to remove shoes when entering as a sign of respect. Other temples might give out cloth to wrap over e.g. a shoe or orthotic. There are many ways to show respect. It would be a good idea to also ask about this topic when contacting a temple. Some temples are very strict while others are more relaxed.

In the present day, many countries in the world, specially the governments of the western countries are committed to giving equal access to all people for all public buildings. It is specially so for Assembly buildings such as churches and temples. They have developed accessibility standards under Accessibility for People with Disabilities Acts, and no changes can be made to existing places of worship, or when building new ones, without providing universal accessibility.
New amendments have updated requirements for accessible seating spaces provided in public assembly buildings like churches and temples, enabling people with disabilities to equitably and independently access such and have equal rights to all worship opportunities.  In addition, new requirements address adaptable seating spaces suitable for a side transfer from a wheelchair, as well as storage spaces for wheelchairs and other mobility assistive devices.  Accessible and adaptable seating spaces are also required to be distributed throughout viewing areas.
Even if such facilities are not provided older temples, there is no way that a Buddhist Temple would knowingly mistreat a handicapped person. It is because of our understanding that one is born handicapped due to a strong kammā seed that was generated in a previous birth, and that they are not to be looked down upon, as we too have been this way in this samsara.
No one can avoid such vipāka, and when one is born handicapped, one will have to live the whole life that way. It is the kamma vipāka, why some people are born handicapped; some have healthy bodies, beautiful bodies, ugly bodies, and a healthy person may die suddenly too; the varieties are endless. These include those having low IQ, those who are blind or deaf at birth.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Did the Buddha ever weep in his days of Enlightenment?
Did Buddha ever weep while in his days of Enlightenment? What does Buddha say about weeping? Did he ever weep, for instance, a death of a relative?

Semi-related question: Did the Buddha ever 'thunder' during a Fire Sermon?

A Buddha would never ever weep while in his days of Enlightenment. It is because of the quality Akampita. It means unshaken; calm; resolute; that which does not tremble; not to be shaken.
The opposite of it is Kampita meaning shaken; agitated; quivering; caused to tremble. All these the Buddha was not. A Buddha is always impartial, treating all rivals or disputants equally; fair and just. Other words that describe this quality are unbiased, unprejudiced, neutral, nonpartisan, nondiscriminatory, disinterested, detached, dispassionate, objective, open-minded, equitable. For example the Buddha radiates metta equally towards his adversary Devadatta, Yasodhara his wife, and Patacara the demented woman, his royal father King Suddhodana and Sopaka the humble low-caste youth.
All feelings that arise are due to tanha, or some form of attachment. All such are due to mano sankhara. The feelings, (or the perceptions that give rise to feelings,reside inside oneself. It does not come from outside. We use external things to cause happiness or suffering by our own volition. There is no inherent suffering or happiness in anything external. A Buddha, or for that matter any Arahant, who has removed all asavas, will be free of such emotional responses.

“This assembly, O bhikkhus, appears indeed empty to me, now that Sariputta and Maha Moggallana have passed away” - Ukkacela Sutta.  Read this as you may but this sounds like grief.

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


text:
Did the Buddha really have snails on his head?
For a long time I was told that when the Buddha touched the ground and became enlightened that his hair went up and formed a ball on his head and that that is what we see on the statues. But recently I heard a different story, that they are snails!
That is something that really made my day, but is it true? Are there only snails or did his hair also stand up?

Welcome to the site. I think this topic has already been addressed...

@ChrisW: Ok, sure, I just didn't find it because I didn't find anything about snails in the potential duplicates... I guess I should have look further. But even after looking at the duplicate post I am still a little unclear on whether they were really snails or not? It seems to be still unknown. Unless I just didn't look closely enough?

This answer references a blog entry by a Theravada monk to say "no snails". Yinxu's answer is likely to be from a Mahayana perspective, and comments on the symbolism of "108".

@ChrisW: Ok, thanks! But when I get enlightened, I want snails!


text:
Is our surroundings affecting our ability to concentrate the mind?
I heard about some ascetics who were incapable of concentrating their minds. After changing their environment, the Jhanas were realized easier.

Are you asking if our surroundings affect our ability to concentrate the mind?
Or, if our surroundings are affected when concentrating the mind?

If our surroundings affect our ability to concentrate the mind.I heard about some ascetics who incapable d concentrate their minds,after changed their environment how realized Jana easier.

Natural surroundings such as forests or jungles or the like might be more conducieve to meditation practice due to their natural tranquility. In Asia a lot of temples are purposely build in such places due to e.g. the calming effect they have on the mind.
Natural surroundings also limit external reality and sense-inputs which is conducieve to introspection.
It might be more difficult (depending on the skill-level of the meditator) to cultivate Jhanas in a busy and hectic city environment or in a place that is torn apart by war and conflict.

Our surroundings do affect our ability to concentrate the mind. It is a fact that we are influenced by the environment. To get to the right mindset you can keep a Buddha statue in the meditation room. Or you could burn incense to give a pleasant odour conducive to meditation. These aromatic biotic materials which releases fragrant smoke when burned should be different to the ones that you use when going to a party. Perfumes that you use on an outing are a distraction, as they will arouse sense pleasures.
Bright colors, eye catching pictures, sensual fragrances, loud music, etc. create an environment for partying. A setting that is calm and peaceful, and conducive for contemplation is what you should try and create. Something in-between these two ends would be a large enough fireplace nook, with a built-in seat.  Some dwellings have special niches, bay windows, breakfast nooks, seats built into the walls, walk-in-shelves, closets, sunken parts of the floor, or raised parts that can be turned into a special place for meditation purpose only. I’d do this than going out looking for an ideal place.
There’s an incident in Buddha’s time, where a monk was greatly attracted to a very serene and charming place in the forest and wanted very badly to meditate only there.  Influenced by the environment he did not heed Buddha’s advice not to do so.  When he went there and tried his utmost to focus his mind, he could not do so for any period of time. When he asked Buddha as to why it was so, Buddha said that in a previous birth he had many a sense pleasures at that very place. That was why unknowingly he was so attracted to this very place in this life.
To answer your question about adverse influences… it is good to be aware that this world is more complex that we think, and that we perceive only a tiny part of it. There is an unseen world that can influence us if ever we cross paths. “Seth Speaks” by Jane Roberts (1994) is a series of books based on “Seth”, a being who could “possess” her body with her permission.  “Ramtha -The White Book” by J. Z. Knight (2005) is another book about a very benevolent being helping people to live a better life.
It is a good thing if the spirit world could help us on our Path, but if there are beings that are malevolent, how could we protect ourselves from such? Believe it or not… the best protection that you could have from such unseen forces is developing loving kindness to self and others. Spreading loving kindness to one and all whenever possible has many benefits. But what is most important is that it is like a double-sided sword that protects you from harm.
Only among beings in the lower five realms that you would find those who could be malevolent towards you. Those include one in this human world too. That is why it is good to keep your plans and intentions in this Dhamma Path very close to your heart, and share with only those that you look up to. Beings in the lowest four realms undergo unimaginable suffering, both physical and mental. If they could ever be able to influence you, they would rather hinder your progress than be of help to you.
When you spread metta, karuna, mudita, upekkha to such beings, what matters is not the particular set of words used, but what is felt in one’s heart. To do that one needs to truly comprehend that there is real suffering in this world, specially in the lower realms. While at it, be aware of what is “taken in” and what is “discarded”. Where there are thoughts of love, there cannot be any room for thoughts of fear.  The most potent kusala citta that one could have is the “thought that arises with joy and wisdom automatically”. This thought gets stronger with increasing wisdom.

My home is very calm place.But while during the meditation,a little afraid appeared in my mind.May be in danger of the muteness of my place.Additionally I heard about some inhuman's activities are affecting our meditation.

Please well prepare before any sitting meditation like donate/dedicate your rupa &nama to triple gem and your meditation master, direct metta loving-kindness towards all beings near and far.

You are right on both accounts, Olivia Glad. On both points I agree with you. Yes there is a danger in meditation. More than the place, it is because of your unpreparedness. If you read my answer to THIS it may help you to be better prepared. Also outside forces can influence you in meditation. Do not ask me what, why, who these forces are, but I will tell you how you can protect yourself from these adverse influences. – Will add to my answer later.

I do hope that I've answered your question to your satisfaction. With metta...

Because of the long samsara one had passed through, some places if one had frequently got through(for many rebirths) with unsurpassable worldly feeling/Tanha, it might be difficult for concentration. But only the Buddha know exactly all the being samsara and their attached Tahna. But it is not for every body. So generally it is not applicable for everybody (only in exceptional case). The same applied to past work habit, food fondness etc. The most important thing is to relentlessly work hard toward nibbana following the Buddha teaching.

To get into Jhana you have to pass through vitakka and vicara which is sustained and applied though on an object. Even if you have higher Jhana many (except for very accomplished meditators) have to pass through each applied and sustained thoughts.
When there is disturbances in the environment it is very hard to have sustained thought, hence in ability to get into Jhana. More the time you have to spend getting in the Jhana more environment will have a bearing as then you are developing applied and sustained thought you might get disturbed.
When the environment is more tranquil, then applied and sustained thought becomes possible and easier (no distractions) where by you can enter the Jhana.

AN 10.99 Upali Sutta might be related to your question.  Buddha told Ven Upila when he was not yet an Arahat that secluded forest is not a place for those who have not had a concentrated mind.

Upali, life in forest dwellings and jungle paths is difficult to bear. It is difficult to be attached to seclusion. The mind of the bhikkhu who is not concentrated is carried away by solitude. Upali, if someone says: I will abide in jungle forests to gain concentration. He could expect a sinking down or an elation..

Ven Upali was one of the top Buddha's principle disciples master of vinaya


text:
Has Sādhna ( Meditation practice) with closed eyes more benefits than with open?
Nowadays, I've been practicing Vipassana (Sometimes anaapan) with open eyes since I instantly start feeling sensations almost everywhere in my body including flesh & organs when I draw my attention there. Actually, I haven't fixed proper time for Sādhna in my routine rather I try to practice it 24hrs by being aware constantly like during eating, walking, listening, sitting (During activity I try to witness activity with detachment) with equanimity.

But whenever I give time to meditation with closed eyes, I feel my surrounding very dynamic, beautiful & loving once I open my eyes after meditation.  So far, I have been taking this as my hallucinations along with ego is the reason I haven't cared to give dedicated time for meditation practice with closed eyes.
But now, I want to ask whether I'm missing something?

Should I allot dedicated time for meditation with closed eyes? Are there some benefits?
Is feeling surrounding dynamic & beautiful after meditation a hallucination?

To your question, ”Should I allot dedicated time for meditation with closed eyes? Are there some benefits?” I would advice you to do otherwise. Each person is different. In your case it is when you keep your eyes wide open that you are most effective. So put more emphasis on the things that work for you, and that you consider favorable. Now I will give you some pointers to help develop this type of ‘meditation’ to another level.
In interacting with the world, we see visuals (rupa) with eyes, hear sounds with ears, smell odors with nose, taste with the tongue, touch (pottabba) with body, and think about concepts (dhamma) with the mind. Be mindful when you experience these while you are in any of the four main postures of sitting, standing, walking, or lying down. Then you will observe that kamachanda and vyapada are the main culprits for making a mind stressful, and for causing “inside fires”. Try to forcibly remove any thoughts of extreme greed and hate as they come to the mind. Make a habit of it. Then with time you will begin of “cooling down” or experiencing niramisa sukha.
Also in time you will abstain from committing an immoral act at any time. In any posture – be it sitting, standing, walking, and laying flat, you will be vigilant on what you are about to do or speak. This is being “morally mindful” at all times. get into the habit of contemplating their consequences. When thoughts come to mind to say something or to do something while sitting, standing, walking, or lying down, you will to get into the habit of contemplating their consequences. Then with time you will see a change in yourself, a sense of tranquility, a “peace of mind”. When you are at this stage, it will be easier to get into samadhi, even if you are just doing the “breath meditation”.

When meditating some past impressions can surface either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. Their are like they are like dreams and should be treated so. You should not identify it with ego which always lead to suffering now (any egoistic throught has some sensation associated with it, and whatever the sensation it has suffering as an element of it) and craving which creates future existence hence suffering in the future.
Also keeping eyes closed will be helpful to reduce distractions.

Please refer to the instruction given to Potthila by seven year old Arahant,"six openings in a mound where an iguana make it home, to catch this iguana, close up the five exits, wait for to come out from last exit." So you will see the benefit of meditation with closed eyes. At the same time, during every day activities, you can do mindfulness practice in every moment.
Our mind is constantly disturbed by lobha, dosa and moha, once coming out of sitting meditation practice, your mind is so calm and undisturbed with Samadhi that clear the delusion previously covered. It is not hallucination.


text:
Why must we not wear a hat or cap when listen or teach Dhamma?
I read that we must not listen or teach Dhamma if we've wear hat or cap.
So why we must not wear hat or cap while listen or teach Dhamma even at anniversaries?

This rule has very archaic origins. When listening to a monk explaining the dhamma we normally put the monk in a more respected position (e.g. sitting in a chair while we sit on the floor); when we do this we tend to treat the monk's words as more important so being humble is helping us to learn the dhamma.
At the time of the Buddha sunshades and umbrellas were a sign of luxury. At that time if someone used a sunshade while the monk didn't have one then it is as if they see themselves as more important than the monk and they are less inclined to care about the monk's words.
Thanissaro Bhikkhu's book The Buddhist Monastic Code I has some explaination about this rule

SN 6.2 records that the Buddha himself had the highest respect for the Dhamma
  he had discovered; that, as others might live under the guidance of a teacher,
  honoring and revering him, the Buddha lived under, honored, and revered the
  Dhamma. He enjoined his followers to show the same respect for the Dhamma
  not only when listening to it but also when teaching it, by refusing to teach it to a
  person who shows disrespect.
  The following set of rules deals with situations in which a listener, in terms of
  the etiquette at that time, would be regarded as showing disrespect for a teacher
  or his teaching. As the Vinaya-mukha notes, a few of these cases—such as those
  concerning footwear—are not considered disrespectful under certain
  circumstances at present, although here the exceptions given for listeners who
  are ill might be stretched to cover any situation where the listener would feel
  inconvenienced or awkward if asked to comply with the etiquette of the
  Buddha’s time. On the other hand, there are many ways of showing disrespect at
  present that are not covered by these rules, and an argument could be made,
  reasoning from the Great Standards, that a bhikkhu should not teach Dhamma
  to a person who showed disrespect in any way.
  Dhamma here is defined as any statement spoken by the Buddha, his disciples,
  seers, or devat›s, connected with the teaching or with its goal. See Pc 7 for a
  more detailed discussion of this point.


text:
Non appearance of dhammas to note during meditation
Early in my practice (Mahasi noting), I had plenty of thoughts come up to note, as taught, but lately there is only the meditation object. Is this normal or just another impermanent thing that will change with changing experience? I have meditated 5-6 months, and the last two I've had this (disappearance of outside thought) so to speak. Thanks.

This isn't a trivial or common issue so I suggest you ask a long-term practitioner at your local meditation centre

Thank you, I'm sure it's impermanent, like everything else. My teacher has told me to continue noting. I intend to do so. Everything is constantly arising and ceasing. with Metta ...T

The goal of the trainee level of Buddhist meditation is for the mind to be free from thought.
The Mahasi noting method is like training wheels on a child's bicycle (to be eventually discarded).

You are so condescending towards other practitioners

@Dhammadhatu. I echo what Hugh is mentioning. Buddhism SE has a Be nice-policy that must be respected. I suggest you do that too.

Respectfully, I think the comments here are completely unwarranted. To reiterate, the goal of the trainee level (sekkha) of Buddhist meditation is for the mind to be free from thought. Please refer to MN 19 & MN 20. The Mahasi noting method is like training wheels on a child's bicycle (to be eventually discarded). There was nothing unkind about my post. The analogy I used was an appropriate explanatory principle. With metta.

I don't intend to discard notation, but I respect your opinion... with Metta...T

This answer is insightful the value of it should be grasped by the emphasis between the lines, not on the surface of words. Though this comment doesn't endorse my agreeing/disagreeing with Mahasi's since I never followed such practice nor studied the method - to comment/criticize something one has no knowledge of is the self-proclaimed wiseman camouflaged by a fool - but discerning from the general principle of medtation.

But worth to note is, to be free from thought is almost as the level of realization of Emptiness, thus "free from thought" is not "trainee level"...

This sounds like the jhanas (beyond the first).  Also, when asked about emptiness, the Buddha defined it as the mind being empty of thought other than the meditation object.  However, all things short of nibbana  are impermanent, even the jhanas.
Sadhu, sadhu.

I wonder who downvoted my post.  Do you think it was a Buddhist?  There was nothing inaccurate about what I said.  It looks like he downvoted at least three of the posts.

I agree @Tharpa that your answer is sincere so I can within my mean put a +1. ...yet this your "...emptiness, the Buddha defined it as the mind being empty of thought other than the meditation object..." is in question. From what I know (Mahayana based on Chinese Sutras) that saying is not Emptiness.

@Bhumishu米殊 My answer is from the Suttas.  The suttas (the Pali sutras) are historically-based.  The Chinese Agamas were translated from a Sanskrit translation of the Pali Suttas.  The Mahayana Sutras, however, are not historically-based.  Whereas the Pali suttas were meticulously transmitted orally syllable for syllable until they were written down, the Mahayana Sutras were not.  They were authored about a thousand years later.  For example, the Heart Sutra (and the other Prajnaparamita Sutras) were created by Nagarjuna.  He claimed to have received them from the spirits of water snakes.

@Tharpa Sorry to hear that. Not sure who input those your understandings of Mahayana Sutras into your mind. You may just keep to that conviction :). But that's wrong, fabricated by evil schematic plot. Pali Suttas (the 5 Nikayas) are just equal to Agama Sutras which is small portion of the total, Heart Sutra is older than Agamas... not created by Nagarjuna... etc. Of import, Mahayana Sutras are NOT translated from Pali, Pali Suttas are just part of the teachings some monks took to Ceylon, the earliest can only be dated to Ashoka... But you can believe whatever! I'll give this a pass ;)

@Mishu I got my accurate understanding of Mahayana Sutras through 40+ years of study and practice.  It is not wrong, it is correct.  I would urge to continue your studies and your questioning..  You blindly assert that the Pali Suttas are equal to the Agamas without even addressing my point that the Agamas are translated from the Sanskrit which was translated from Pali, the Buddha's language.  Pali Tipitika was written down about 500 AB, the Chinese Tripitika not until ~1400 AB.

@Mishu To say that a single Mahayana Sutra (the Heart Sutra) was written down before the rest of the Chinese Tripitaka is not saying much.  The Mahayana Sutras were translated from Sanskrit, not Pali, the Buddha's language!  Pali texts were non-fiction.  I am fully aware of Mahayana dogmas, however they are incorrect.  Suttas (not sutras) are 1/3 of the Tipitika taken to Ceylon (Sri Lanka).    I am glad you give the truth a pass! e.g.  http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/Prajnaparamita_-The_Great_Mother

@Mishu I have a homework assignment for you.  Find out if Mahayana doctrine even claims that the Mahayana Sutras were orally transmitted from the time of the Buddha.  You will find out that even the Mahayanists do not claim that they were orally transmitted from the time of the Buddha.  They believe that they were "recovered" from non-material realms.
I would encourage you to read both Pali and Mahayana Sutras systematically, not just a few that some teacher has selected for you.  I truly wanted to believe as you do, because the Mahayana has some good points.  But then I read both.

From what you have said, it seems that you have developed meditation to a degree that you can come to Ekaggata with ease. You seem to have the ability to keep the mind on one object. By going beyond the first jhana you will get to experience piti (joy), sukha (body lightness), and ekaggata (one-pointedness). In the second jhana, both vitakka and vicara are absent.
But you should exercise caution if you’re trying to go beyond the fourth jhana. I do hope that you are fully grounded in Dhamma if you are to on this route. If you are not established on a good firm foundation in Dhamma, you are asking for trouble, as you will then come to the “Asanna realm”.
Sanna is, at the very fundamental level, the recognition of an external stimulus. Without sanna we cannot identify things around us, and also cannot communicate with each other meaningfully. But beings have no sanna or perception in the “Asanna realm”. Those beings are without any awareness. Nothing registers in the mind. If someone gets to the “Nevasanna Na’sanna“ realm without being fully established in the path, then that person will have difficulty in coming out of this Asanna realm.

I'm not sure how advanced I am. I don't really think about it. I just meditate, keep my precepts, and try to be mindful as much as possible. Thanks for the input...T


text:
How did Mahayan, Hinayan,Vajrayana come into Buddhism?
How many types of sects like Mahayans, Hinayans,Vajrayana are there in Buddhism? How did they come into Buddhism? To my knowledge Buddha never talked about any sort of 'yans'.
Who created these 'Yans'? What was the necessity of creating these 'Yans'?

The Buddha lived 2500 or more years ago. That is relevant: humanity has had 2500 years to think about his teachings and disagree about them. Or more kindly put: in trying to live by his teachings, people have thought about them and come at different interpretations.
The main schools are - as you note:
Theravada - the only living 'hinayana' school. It preserved the Pali canon and as the only living representation of early Buddhism, many people consider it the most 'pure' school. However - it is still only one out of about two dozen schools that existed around the time of Christ.

Mahayana is usually translated as'great vehicle', in opposition to Hinayana 'small vehicle'. This translation is obviously derogatory and offensive to the only early Buddhist school still in existence: Theravada Buddhism. Mahayana can actually also be translated as 'great path', that is: a path for every being. Hinayana would then mean: small path, or path only for monks actively striving to become arhats. source

Mahayana - everything else, including Vajrayana. Mahayana started in India around the time of Christ - not in China as one answer here suggests. It is true though that Chinese and Japanese Buddhism are dominated by the Mahayana approach.
It could be said that the Mahayana approach came about through the need for a more explicit compassion in Buddhist teaching and practice. The Bodhisattva ideal filled that hole.
The Bodhisattva ideal:

May I attain Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings.

Mahayana Buddhism includes Zen as well as Tibetan Buddhism.
Vajrayana is a form of Mahayana Buddhism, but it takes individual Buddhas as their main object of meditation. One theory about why it became popular is that it is a practice that helps a lot in times of uncertainty. It became the main form of Indian Buddhism in the centuries before Islam came to India - it was a time when Hinduism became prominent again and Buddhists were on the defensive.
Do note that it is difficult to be sure about the history of Vajrayana, because its practitioners are traditionally vowed to secrecy about their practice.
Vajrayana is prominent in Tibetan Buddhism, but it also survives in Japanese Buddhist ritual.

Beware that, according to more than one discussion on this site, there are Theravadins who don't like being described as "Hinayana". As such it may be a useless or counter-productive epiphet to apply.

That is why I put 'Hinayana' between quotes - but the OP wanted history. The label 'Hinayana' can't be avoided in those circumstances. I have clarified with a quote.

Mahayana started in India around the time of Christ, as I posted. 4th Buddhist council in Kashmir was during the lifetime of Christ, if he survived the crucifixion using supernormal power.

The word 'hina' is used in the Buddha's 1st sermon to mean 'inferior' or 'low'. The word is derogatory. It does not mean 'small'. That said, I am a practitioner, do not take offense to it & take it to be an intrinsic tenant of the Mahayana doctrine that differentiates Mahayana from Pali Buddha-Dhamma. With metta

I can't answer you by its history, for a large part is lost, and I fear that many of the scholastic articles are false information.
I tend to take a "conspiracy theory" perspective. I think there is some underlying motive to move the world to one direction, and religion/spirituality is one of their targets - to create a world religion that fits their goal. The rise of popularity or sudden trending of certain religious sect is a sign of caution. The Theosophical Society had and still has influence in Southeast Asia, particularly countries which once fell under colonial rule. A respectable Thai scholar turned monk advocating Thai Buddhist reform was under Theosophic influence; so was the Japanese Buddhist scholar D. T. Suzuki (his wife was a Theosophist). Sri Lanka was a lucrative English colony: a famous monk is also a politician, elite locals who were able to receive higher education or even migrated to Western countries, and thus had good English, were often the lineages the left-behind byproducts groomed by the colonial rulers to establish their rules. In China the popular monk Jing-kong, who teaches Namo-Amitabha as the one and only fix-all method to be reborn in Sukhavati: some evidence indicated he was once a spy, and was used by NSA to promote the 2012-GIG. Many are learning the interpretation of Sutta/Sutra from them, instead of learning directly from the Sutta/Sutra: this is worrying. Anyone with independent mind reads history, searches for the truth buried under history (or Hi[s]-Story) knew what Theosophical Society is, and how it participated in the World Wars. Those popular monks should be read with caution, are they searching for enlightenment, or, carrying a hidden agenda? (Note 1 and more notes if needed)

Now laying clear of above, what are these schools? You are right, Buddha didn't create schools. Since no one is as completely enlightened as the Buddha those students had different understandings of his teachings, all are incomplete, especially one schooled by the schools. To summarize these schools, I would instead differentiate on what their paths lead to:
A) Hinayana: for self-liberation, the highest goal is Nirvana/Nibbana, Arahat.
B) Mahayana: for Buddha-hood. To realize Buddha-hood a practitioner adopts the Bodhisattva Path to cultivate wisdom and merits, to reach perfection of Prajna and untainted conducts. This could take for many Kalpas. After realizing self-liberation a Bodhisattva arose from Nirvana reborn in the Samsara to further wisdom quest and helping others to realize The Path. The apex is attaining Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi.
C) Vajrayana: nowadays represented by Tibetan Buddhism, for immediately realizing Buddha-hood by mastering the subtleties of the human body or, energy (an not exact term). These [must at the final stage] involve Tantric practice (the learnt should know what is Tantra Yoga), and the mouth-to-ear transmission of secret teachings from Guru to disciple. I have to declare my understanding maybe partial. There may be some other teachings but what I stated is valid too.

Theravada vs Hinayana, The Pali Suttas
Although the modern Theravadist footnote 1 tries to decline the relation to Hinayana it seems their final goals are the same: i.e. Self-liberation & Nibbana. Because the Theravadist has only the Pali Canon, in which the Suttas are the four Nikayas, and the rest are Abidhammas (treatises written by Bhikkhus not directly Buddha's teachings) their canon don't include teachings about how to reach Buddha-hood, nor what is Buddha-hood. Instead of asking whether there may be missing teachings in their Suttas, some conventional Theravadists disparage the Sutras of other schools, saying that they not from the Buddha but composed by some later monks. I think it's worth investigating how the Pali Canon originated: obviously Buddha didn't visit the island of Sri Lanka. I read in this forum Soumen quoted a claim that it was bought there by some monks sent by Mahendra: these monks took what they only could have at that time. However, even the Mahinda/Mahendra legend is suspected a pure Sri Lankan invention due to the obvious fact of lacking any historical artifacts left behind of such supposed important event. footnote 2
The latest discovered fragments of a Mahayana Sutra dated 75CE are almost identical with the Chinese version. In contrast, the Chinese Classical Sutras have as background that Bhikkhus went to India (i.e. "The West") to obtain them, or that Bhikkhus of India went to China (The Middle Kingdom or Middle Earth, 中土) taking with Sutras with them. The Chinese Sutras kept complete teachings related to almost all the schools; the Vinayas are a collection of different schools kept separately in their original formats, not combined to produce any defined monastery rules. Many of the modern Sanskrit Sutras are back-translated from Chinese, since these Sutras were lost in India. However conventional Theravadists, allied with some modern Western scholars (Edward Conze was an old Theosophist), and some Western Theras (monks), claim (unjustly, in my opinion) that the Pali Canon is the "only" Buddhavacana, the oldest and purest, and discredit the rest of the Buddha's teachings recorded in other Sutras. Some Theravadists adopt Western scholars' interpretations of the Suttas, instead of understanding in original Pali by tradition: a lot of the English translations of Pali Canon are of doubtful accuracy.
In this sense the conventional Theravadist is indeed not the same as Hinayana. "Hinayana" means someone taking an immediate mean to liberate himself, reaching Arahat-hood. Hinayana doesn't label Sutras other than Agamas fake, but just that they don't see the Bodhisattva Path is feasible. Agama Sutras, which are equivalent to and cover the entirety of the Pali's Nikayas (Suttas), are among the many to be studied. Agama Sutras recorded only fragments of the teachings and very repetitive, instead those most centred in meditation techniques and how to transform the Vijnanas to free from the grip of the Four Greats - the body are studied footnote 3. The Sutras for the path of Hinayana are also collected in the Chinese Tripitaka; whilst the traditional (old) Theravadist may have to rely heavily on the Abidhammas such as the Visuddhimagga written by Buddhaghosa footnote 4 to practice meditation for self-liberation.
I expect that some may disagree with my answer, but I thank you for letting me voice it here.

footnote 1
      ^The reason to give emphasis on modern is, according to historical records and scholastic studies some sub-divisions of original Theravada practiced Mahayana Doctrines.
footnote 2
      ^In the accounts of Ashoka, Mahendra his son a Bhikkhu never mentioned, it was missing in all the Ashoka edicts.
footnote 3
      ^For Hinayana practitioners: 《正法念處經》(highly recommended for those have the taste of the Nikaya/Agama style),《成实论》,《俱舍论》... etc.
footnote 4
      ^Buddhaghosa originally was a Brahmin scholar, his commentries shown he was influenced by Mahayana and Yogacara. He might have visited China at his time when China was the capital of Buddhism, but due to his old age he didn't set foot Canton instead returned on the same boat.

+1 because I think it's good to introduce the paths' goals. Thank you for taking the time to answer.

Mahayana views and doctrines are welcome. It's only the disparaging of other schools (e.g. Theravada), and/or other users, that would be unwelcome ... but I suppose that disparaging other schools and arguing with other users is never really necessary, and so I hope that isn't much of a restriction. I suppose I recommend you write (I would welcome you to write) more about the Mahayana that you know, and add that in contrast you shouldn't generally feel much need to write about Theravada.

@ChrisW thx the editing earlier, I do try as much to incorporate ur suggestions when I re-editing and adding links. I agree with and appreciate the open-mindness the rightful aiming at learning what really benefit us.

@ChrisW when I first registered late last year I held no bias of any teachings, I was curious to know about the Pali Canon and the new name Theravada, in fact I was keen to read the links to the Suttas provided by other users since it was new knowledge... until I was completely irritated by some. then I start to research the Pali Canon and found out the facts.

I'm sorry that you have been "completely irritated". Please post on Meta, whenever there are specific answers or comments which irritate you (maybe we could discuss how to improve that content); or "flag" the content for moderator attention; or edit the content to improve it; and/or suggest new policy (on Meta) if you think existing policies are inadequate.

There's a Wikipedia article, Yana (Buddhism), which introduces the term Yana and various historical origins/usages of this word.
I think of "Mahayana" as identifying schools of Buddhism which passed through China (so, Japan as well). Or if "China" isn't a fair way to summarize it in one word (it's more related to the Geography and/or the History of Buddhism than the practice or the teaching of Buddhism), maybe think of it as Bodhisattvayāna.
"Vajrayana" is I think Tibetan: historically Tibetan were able to adopt (or be influenced by) Buddhism from India or China, see for example Moheyan.
Some people (rightly or wrongly) consider "Hinayana" to be rude or belittling, and use the term "Theravada" instead (other people, who use the term "Hinayana", say that it isn't used to refer to Theravada at all). But anyway, Theravada rather than Hinayana is the name of one of the two (or three) biggest classifications/sects.
There are many ways to classify schools, see e.g. Schools of Buddhism.
I don't know "what was the necessity of creating these 'Yanas'". Actually someone on this site wrote that the term "Buddhism" is questionable, that -ism is a Western or English-language construct; I suppose they mean it's better to use words like Dhamma or Dharma and so on.

Mahayana Buddhism originates in India - there is plenty of evidence for it. For instance, Santideva - an Indian teacher who went to Tibet - wrote the Bodhicharyavatara – The Way of the Bodhisattva.

When I wrote "passed through China" I meant that it comes to us (in this century) via China: not that it "started" there ... see e.g. this map.

Neither of the two main mahayana teachers of this century - The Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh - are Chinese or Japanese. So even if you are talking only about modern Buddhism - which wasn't the question - it is misleading to say that Mahayana Buddhism came through China.

I think that, historically speaking, Vietnamese Zen too arrived there via China.

Vietnamese Buddhism is a mix of various types of Buddhism, including Theravada and Chan via China. [Chan Buddhism became Zen Buddhism in Japan]. This is visible in Thich Nhat Hanh's teachings too, both in day-to-day practice and in his books. It is definitely Mahayana Buddhism. It is NOT the same as the Zen that got exported from Japan to the West.

Yes. Even so, his form of Buddhism is described (even self-described) as "Zen".

That doesn't suddenly make his form of Buddhism Japanese or Chinese. That is just a (conveniently fashionable) label - though it may be true in terms of lineage.

I think you're saying that his lineage is Zen, but that saying so may be misleading because his teaching is Mahayana (and international and modern)?

Yes, Thich Nhat Hanh claims Zen-lineage. However, since Zen is mahayana, there is no contradiction there. Lineage is merely the ritual succession within tradition - often independent of the content of the teachings & sometimes even of central practices.

Maybe it's making too much of a throw-away comment (i.e. of my saying in my answer that I think of Mahayana as having passed through China ... I suppose the reason I still think that way is because that's literally the first thing I was taught, about Mahayana); but I suppose that thoughts of lineage are kind of on-topic here, in that the OP's question "How did they come in?" got me thinking in historical terms ... and such a high-level overview that I wasn't thinking of specific people (e.g. His Holiness or Thầy), which itself was maybe a mistake.

My 3rd attempt to answer this question.
I once attended talks by a Tibetan lama about Medicine Buddha and Yellow Jambala.
The Tibetan lama himself said these Vajrayana deities were adaptations of existing Hindu deities and were adapted to a Buddhism as a Mahayana doctrine because it was suitable to certain audiences of people & because Buddhism was declining in society due to increasing unpopularity.

In Hindu mythology, Jambhala is known as Kubera. Jambhala is also believed to be an emanation of Avalokitesvara or Chenrezig, the
  Bodhisattva of Compassion. There are five different wealth Jambhala,
  each has their own practice and mantra to help eliminate poverty and
  create financial stability.

Vajrayana itself (as taught to me by a Tibetan geshe) is a 'relationship or (Hindu) tantric practise' where the devotee establishes a personal relationship with a deity or a guru that manifests the qualities of a deity (such as metta).
Other adapted Hindu deities include Tara & Avalokiteśvara (who lectures Sariputra in the Mahayana Heart Sutra).

Whether the Tārā figure originated as a Buddhist or Hindu goddess is unclear and remains a source of inquiry among scholars. Mallar Ghosh
  believes her to have originated as a form of the goddess Durga in the
  Hindu Puranas. Today, she is worshipped both in Buddhism and in
  Shaktism as one of the ten Mahavidyas. It may be true that goddesses
  entered Buddhism from Shaktism (i.e. the worship of local or folk
  goddesses prior to the more institutionalized Hinduism which had
  developed by the early medieval period (i.e. Middle kingdoms of
  India). Possibly the oldest text to mention a Buddhist goddess is the
  Prajnaparamita Sutra (translated into Chinese from the original
  Sanskrit c. 2nd century CE), around the time that Mahayana was
  becoming the dominant school of thought in Indian and Chinese
  Buddhism. Thus, it would seem that the feminine
  principle makes its first appearance in Buddhism as the goddess who
  personified prajnaparamita.

The name Avalokiteśvara combines the verbal prefix ava "down", lokita, a past participle of the verb lok "to notice, behold,
  observe", here used in an active sense; and finally īśvara, "lord",
  "ruler", "sovereign" or "master".
According to the Kāraṇḍavyūha Sūtra, the sun and moon are said to be born from Avalokiteśvara's eyes, Shiva from his brow, Brahma from his
  shoulders, Narayana from his heart, Sarasvati from his teeth, the
  winds from his mouth, the earth from his feet and the sky from his
  stomach.

For example, the term 'īśvara' is found in the Pali AN 3.61, where it is stated:

yaṃ kiñcāyaṃ purisapuggalo paṭisaṃvedeti sukhaṃ vā dukkhaṃ vā adukkhamasukhaṃ vā sabbaṃ taṃ issaranimmānahetū
There are other ascetics and brahmins who hold such a doctrine and
  view as this: ‘Whatever this person experiences—whether pleasure,
  pain, or neither-pain-nor-pleasure—all that is caused by God’s
  creative activity.’

If we examine Vajrayana writings, such as Tantra in Tibet (by Dalai Lama), we will find many Hindu concepts used such a 'tantra', 'yoga' & 'mantra' which are not characteristic of older Buddhism.
For example, in his 1st sermon, the Buddha used the word 'yoga' in a negative sense, where he said to not be 'devoted to' or 'bound to' sensuality or self-mortification.
In short, Mahayana arose to create a broader variety of teachings to appeal to a broader audience & often adapted Hindu methods & ideas.
That is why Mahayana is the 'Great Vehicle'. 'Maha' does not mean 'better' but means 'broader'.

I have never heard any Buddhist teacher admit that Buddhist deities (aka Buddhas) were adapted from Hinduism. It is true that it is one of the theories about the topic in the scientific community.

Good question!
The Buddha never talked about "yanas," but was the Buddha even a Buddhist!? Was Jesus a Christian!??!  Was Marx a Marxist, Freud a Freudian ...
So who declares "Buddhism" when there's no central authority, no Vatican, to Buddhism. Answer: It's for each to see for her or himself.
Similarly, on a larger level of scale and organization, it varies according to cultures of geographic regions. Original Buddhism (aka Theravada and Vipassana) is found in SouthAsia and SouthEastAsia. (Hinayana by the way is not really an apt word, because it can be perjorative, but that's another story).
As the big boat of Buddhism travelled East and was received and adopted and adapted in China, Korea, Japan, there emerged schools under a semantic umbrella called Mahayana: Zen, Pureland, Lotus Sutra, etc.  As it travelled north, (Ladakh, Mongolia, Tibet, etc), the Vajarayana traditions evolved.
So, for instance, when China first heard about the teachings of the Buddha, they said, "Hey, this sounds like our guy, Lao-tse! He went East and was never heard from again. Sounds like he attained Enlightenment." So the first translations were done in terms of Taoism.
In Tibet, the teachings mixed with native Bon traditions. This included transforming wrathful deities into protectors of the Dharma.
Now, in 21st globalized societies, the segregation of Buddhism into national schools and traditions is becoming more permeable to cross-fertilization.
"One Dharma."
For a longer answer, I've published Various Paths, One Dharma. And even longer is my humble guide book, whose first part goes into greater detail about four major schools, so you can glimpse the big forest by looking deeply at diverse trees.
That said — the ultimate answer to this question might be ... Rajiv-yana!
Namasté.  (())

I'm not sure that "Rajiv-yana" is compatible with anatta.


text:
What was the reason behind the fall of Buddhism in India?
Buddhism was originated from India.It spread all accross the world, many countries are called as Buddhist countries.
Lord Buddha was the most scientific, serene, logical and kind person of the world, anyone becoming his enemy seems to be impossible. There was a time when almost whole of the India was Buddhist. Then, what caused the decline of Buddhism in India?

I wrote (with references) about a subject related to that, in my answer to this topic on Skeptics.SE -- Were Buddhists murdered en masse during the first Muslim conquest of India?

This is nearly an exact duplicate of the topic Why is Buddhism followed mainly outside of India when it originated there? (so I think this topic ought to be closed as a duplicate).

I think the other topic talks about following Buddhism outsite India. I am not sure whether it clearly highlights the reason of its fall In India.

May this will help you. Decline of Buddhism in India.

Here is a book exactly answer your question  DECLINE AND FALL OF BUDDHISM
(A tragedy in Ancient India)
By
Dr. K. Jamanadas

After the Pari-nibbhana of The Buddha, there was a decline of Theravada Buddhism ( those who follow the teaching preserved in the Pāli), and a rise of the Mahayana Buddhism. The third council got underway to make the monastic order of those who follow the teaching preserved in the Pāli.  With time Mahayana Buddhism rose up again. It was a death blow to those who wanted to keep the teaching preserved in the Pāli.  Mahayanists translated the Dhamma into Sanskrit and rejected attaining of the Marga- phala of the Theravada School.
At the time only the Brahmins’ Veda was written in Veda and Sanskrit languages. Brahmins never felt that other religions will be a threat to their own since Veda as it was the only religious script written in Sanskrit. However, after the translation of the Mahayana scriptures into Sanskrit by the Mahayanists, the Brahmins started reading these translated texts and to argue pointing out its content.
In trying to defeat these Brahmins, the Mahayanists built large universities like Nalanda with the aim of learning the Veda. The language used in these universities was Sanskrit. They tried to outdo the Brahmins. They tried to argue with the Brahmins. Thus what came to pass was exactly as mentioned in the Alagaddūpama Sutta, which states that “if anyone tries to learn my teachings to argue with others, then he will be destroyed like the man who tried to catch a snake by its tail.”
When the monks won an argument the monks got the king to make the Brahmins their servants in the Nalanda University. The monks were beheaded when Brahmins won their arguments. The Brahmins went for the kill, because of the change that these monks have made to the Brahmin society. A Sothern Indian Brahmin called Sankarāchārya rose up to destroy the power of these monks. The Musālman invaded India at this time. The Brahmins got them to first destroy Buddhism, or at least what was left of it. This was how the Buddhism got wiped out from India.
It was the moguls that did most of the killing of Buddhist Monks, and the process of decline continued until Buddhism got fully wiped out in India by the end of the 12th century, when Somapura Mahavihara (in the present day Bangladesh) was set ablaze. In 1199 CE Odantapuri Mahavihara close to Nalanda was burnt down after killing all the monks. Buddha’s place of Enlightenment, Bodhgaya too was attacked.

Actually, there's a lot of factors regarding this.
The Monks started to liberate the buddha's teaching.
The Buddhism started to decline after the 4th buddhist council of India. Unlike King Asoka, King Kanishka of Kushan Empire, not keeping the precepts and still going on wars with other empires. He chose the most Sangha in the community back then the Sarvastivadin-Mahayana.
The last was because of the invasion of Turkic-muslim-Mamluk Dynasty which ended the Most Enormous Buddhist University, Nalanda.
As what Buddha said in DN16 Mahaparinibbana Sutta, there are 7 things x 7, which prevent decline in the community.

Now at that time venerable Ānanda was stood behind the Gracious One
  fanning the Gracious One. Then the Gracious One addressed venerable
  Ānanda, saying:
1) “Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians assemble regularly and
  assemble frequently?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians
  assemble regularly and assemble frequently.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as
  the Vajjians will assemble regularly and assemble frequently surely
  growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
2) Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians assemble unanimously, rise
  unanimously, and carry out their Vajjian duties unanimously?’” “I have
  heard this, reverend Sir, that the Vajjians assemble unanimously, rise
  unanimously, and carry out their Vajjian duties unanimously.” “For as
  long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will assemble unanimously, rise
  unanimously, and carry out their Vajjian duties unanimously, surely
  growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
3) Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians do not establish new laws
  that were not established, or cut off old laws that were established,
  and carry on with such laws as were accepted in the Ancient Vajjian
  Constitution?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians do not
  establish new laws that were not established, or cut off old laws that
  were established, and they carry on with such laws as were accepted in
  the Ancient Vajjian Constitution.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as the
  Vajjians do not establish new laws that were not established, or cut
  off old laws that were established, and they carry on with such laws
  as were accepted in the Ancient Vajjian Constitution surely growth,
  Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
4) Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians honour the elders of the
  Vajjians, respect, revere, worship and think them worth listening
  to?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians honour the
  elders of the Vajjians, respect, revere, worship and think them worth
  listening to.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will honour the
  elders of the Vajjians, respect, revere, worship and think them worth
  listening to, surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the
  Vajjians not decline.
5) Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians do not coerce and force their
  women and girls to dwell with them against their will?’” “I have heard
  this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians do not coerce and force their women
  and girls to dwell with them against their will.’” “For as long,
  Ānanda, as the Vajjians will not coerce and force their women and
  girls to dwell with them against their will, surely growth, Ānanda, is
  to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
6) Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians honour the Vajjian shrines
  amongst the Vajjians, both within and without the city, respect,
  revere, and worship them, and do not allow the righteous sacrifices
  that were formerly given, formerly made, to be neglected?’” “I have
  heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians honour the Vajjian shrines
  amongst the Vajjians, both within and without the city, respect,
  revere, and worship them, and do not allow the righteous sacrifices
  that were formerly given, formerly made, to be neglected.” “For as
  long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will honour the Vajjian shrines amongst
  the Vajjians, both within and without the city, respect, revere, and
  worship them, and do not allow the righteous sacrifices that were
  formerly given, formerly made, to be neglected surely growth, Ānanda,
  is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
7) Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians have made good arrangements
  in regard to the lawful protection, safety, and guarding of the Worthy
  Ones, so that Worthy Ones in the future can enter the realm, and
  having entered the Worthy Ones can live comfortably in the realm?” “I
  have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians have made good
  arrangements in regard to the lawful protection, safety, and guarding
  of the Worthy Ones, and that the Worthy Ones in the future can enter
  the realm, and having entered the Worthy Ones can live comfortably in
  the realm.” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will make good
  arrangements in regard to the lawful protection, safety, and guarding
  of the Worthy Ones, and that the Worthy Ones in the future can enter
  the realm, and having entered, the Worthy Ones can live comfortably in
  the realm, surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians
  not decline.”
Then the Gracious One addressed the Magadhan chief minister the
  brahmin Vassakāra, saying: “At one time, brahmin, I was living near
  Vesālī near to the Sārandada Shrine and there I taught the Vajjians
  these seven things which prevent decline. For as long, brahmin, as the
  Vajjians maintain these seven things which prevent decline, and the
  Vajjians agree with these seven things which prevent decline, surely
  growth, brahmin, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.”
After this was said, the Magadhan chief minister the brahmin Vassakāra
  addressed the Gracious One, saying: “If the Vajjians, dear Gotama,
  were endowed with even one or the other of these seven things which
  prevent decline, surely growth is to be expected not decline, what to
  say about having seven things which prevent decline? The Vajjians
  cannot be overcome, dear Gotama, by the Magadhan King Ajātasattu, the
  son of Lady Wisdom, by war, but only through diplomacy, or through the
  breaking of an alliance. And now, dear Gotama, we shall go, as we have
  many duties, and there is much which ought to be done.”
“Now is the time, brahmin, for whatever you are thinking.” Then the
  Magadhan chief minister the brahmin Vassakāra, after greatly rejoicing
  and gladly receiving this word of the Gracious One, rose from his seat
  and departed.
3: Seven Things which Prevent Decline in the Community (1–7)
Then the Gracious One, not long after the Magadhan chief minister, the
  brahmin Vassakāra, had gone, addressed venerable Ānanda, saying: “Go,
  Ānanda, and whatever monks there are living in dependence on Rājagaha,
  assemble them in the Attendance Hall.”
“Very well, reverend Sir,” said venerable Ānanda, and after replying
  to the Gracious One, and assembling whatever monks there were living
  in dependence on Rājagaha in the Attendance Hall, he approached the
  Gracious One, and after approaching and worshipping the Gracious One,
  he stood on one side.
While standing on one side venerable Ānanda said this to the Gracious
  One: “The Community of monks have assembled, reverend Sir, now is the
  time, Gracious One, for whatever you are thinking.”
Then the Gracious One after rising from his seat approached the
  Attendance Hall, and after approaching he sat down on the prepared
  seat. While sitting the Gracious One addressed the monks, saying:
“I will teach you seven things which prevent decline, listen to it,
  apply your minds well, and I will speak.” “Very well, reverend Sir,”
  those monks replied to the Gracious One, and the Gracious One said
  this:
1) “For as long, monks, as the monks will assemble regularly and
  assemble frequently, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the
  monks, not decline.
2) For as long, monks, as the monks will assemble unanimously, rise
  unanimously, and carry out their Community duties unanimously, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
3) For as long, monks, as the monks do not establish new laws that
  were not established, or cut off old laws that were established, and
  they carry on with such training-rules as have been accepted, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
4) For as long, monks, as the monks will honour the elder monks, those
  of long-standing, a long time gone-forth, the Fathers of the
  Community, the Leaders of the Community, respect, revere, worship and
  think them worth listening to, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
5) For as long, monks, as the monks will not come under the influence
  of craving which has arisen for continued existence, surely growth,
  monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
6) For as long, monks, as the monks will have desire for forest
  dwellings, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
7) For as long, monks, as the monks individually will attend to the
  ways of mindfulness, so that their fellow celibates, who are
  well-behaved, in the future can come, and having come to their fellow
  celibates, who are well-behaved, can live comfortably, surely growth,
  monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
For as long, monks, as the monks will maintain these seven things
  which prevent decline, and the monks will agree with these seven
  things which prevent decline, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
4: Seven Further Things which Prevent Decline in the Community (8–14)
I will teach you a further seven things which prevent decline, listen
  to it, apply your minds well, and I will speak.”
“Very well, reverend Sir,” those monks replied to the Gracious One,
  and the Gracious One said this:
1) “For as long, monks, as the monks are not devoted to the pleasure
  in work, the delight in work, and are not attached to work, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
2) For as long, monks, as the monks are not devoted to the pleasure in
  speech, the delight in speech, and are not attached to speech, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
3) For as long, monks, as the monks are not devoted to the pleasure in
  sleep, the delight in sleep, and are not attached to sleep, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
4) For as long, monks, as the monks are not devoted to the pleasure of
  company, the delight in company, and are not attached to company,
  surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
5) For as long, monks, as the monks do not have evil wishes, do not go
  under the influence of evil wishes, surely growth, monks, is to be
  expected for the monks, not decline.
6) For as long, monks, as the monks do not have wicked friends, do not
  have wicked companions, do not have wicked comrades, surely growth,
  monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
7) For as long, monks, as the monks do not achieve only mundane or
  incomplete attainment, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the
  monks, not decline.
For as long, monks, as the monks will maintain these seven things
  which prevent decline, and the monks will agree with these seven
  things which prevent decline, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
5: Seven Further Things which Prevent Decline in the Community (15–21)
I will teach you a further seven things which prevent decline, listen
  to it, apply your minds well, and I will speak.”
“Very well, reverend Sir,” those monks replied to the Gracious One,
  and the Gracious One said this:
1) “For as long, monks, as the monks will have faith, surely growth,
  monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
2) For as long, monks, as the monks will have a conscientious mind,
  surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
3) For as long, monks, as the monks will have a sense of shame, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
4) For as long, monks, as the monks will be learned, surely growth,
  monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
5) For as long, monks, as the monks will be strenuous, surely growth,
  monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
6) For as long, monks, as the monks will attend to mindfulness, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
7) For as long, monks, as the monks will possess wisdom, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
For as long, monks, as the monks will maintain these seven things
  which prevent decline, and the monks will agree with these seven
  things which prevent decline, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
6: Seven Further Things which Prevent Decline in the Community (22–28)
I will teach you a further seven things which prevent decline, listen
  to it, apply your minds well, and I will speak.”
“Very well, reverend Sir,” those monks replied to the Gracious One,
  and the Gracious One said this:
1) “For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of
  Perfect Awakening that is Mindfulness, surely growth, monks, is to be
  expected for the monks, not decline.
2) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of Perfect
  Awakening that is Investigation of the nature of things, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
3) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of Perfect
  Awakening that is Energy, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for
  the monks, not decline.
4) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of Perfect
  Awakening that is Rapture, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for
  the monks, not decline.
5) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of Perfect
  Awakening that is Calm, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for
  the monks, not decline.
6) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of Perfect
  Awakening that is Concentration, surely growth, monks, is to be
  expected for the monks, not decline.
7) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the factor of Perfect
  Awakening that is Equanimity, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
For as long, monks, as the monks will maintain these seven things
  which prevent decline, and the monks will agree with these seven
  things which prevent decline, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
7: Seven Further Things which Prevent Decline in the Community (29–35)
I will teach you a further seven things which prevent decline, listen
  to it, apply your minds well, and I will speak.”
“Very well, reverend Sir,” those monks replied to the Gracious One,
  and the Gracious One said this:
1) “For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of
  impermanence, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks,
  not decline.
2) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of
  non-self, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
3) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of the
  unattractive, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks,
  not decline.
4) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of
  danger, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
5) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of
  giving up, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
6) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of
  dispassion, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
7) For as long, monks, as the monks will develop the perception of
  cessation, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
For as long, monks, as the monks will maintain these seven things
  which prevent decline, and the monks will agree with these seven
  things which prevent decline, surely growth, monks, is to be expected
  for the monks, not decline.
8: Six Things which Prevent Decline in the Community (36–41)
I will teach you a further six things which prevent decline, listen to
  it, apply your minds well, and I will speak.”
“Very well, reverend Sir,” those monks replied to the Gracious One,
  and the Gracious One said this:
1) “For as long, monks, as the monks with friendly actions by way of
  the body will serve their fellow celibates, both in public and in
  private, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
2) For as long, monks, as the monks with friendly actions by way of
  speech will serve their fellow celibates, both in public and in
  private, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
3) For as long, monks, as the monks with friendly actions by way of
  the mind will serve their fellow celibates, both in public and in
  private, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not
  decline.
4) For as long, monks, as the monks in regard to those righteous
  gains, received in accordance with the Teaching—whatever amount has
  been received in the bowl—will divide and share such gains with those
  who are virtuous, fellow celibates, and share them in common, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
5) For as long, monks, as the monks are endowed with those virtues
  which are unbroken, faultless, unspotted, unblemished, productive of
  freedom, praised by the wise, not clung to, leading to concentration,
  and will live endowed with virtue amongst their fellow celibates who
  themselves possess such virtue, both in public and in private, surely
  growth, monks, is to be expected for the monks, not decline.
6) For as long, monks, as the monks are endowed with that which is
  Ariyan View, which leads out, which leads to the complete destruction
  of suffering for one who acts thus, and will live endowed with Right
  View amongst those who themselves possess such Right View, both in
  public and in private, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the
  monks, not decline.
For as long, monks, as the monks will maintain these six things which
  prevent decline, and the monks will agree with these six things which
  prevent decline, surely growth, monks, is to be expected for the
  monks, not decline.”
There also the Gracious One, while living near Rājagaha on the
  Vultures’ Peak Mountain, spoke frequently to the monks about the
  Teaching, saying:
“Such is virtue, such is concentration, such is wisdom, when virtue is
  well-developed it yields great fruit and brings great advantages in
  regard to concentration, when concentration is well-developed it
  yields great fruit and brings great advantages in regard to wisdom,
  when wisdom is well-developed the mind is completely liberated from
  the pollutants, that is to say: the pollutant of sensuality, the
  pollutant of craving for continued existence, the pollutant of
  ignorance.”

The declination of buddhism was because of breaking these.
Hopefully this helps. If you want to know more about this, you can try to read this book called "The concise history of buddhism".


text:
Where to get the genuine e-book on "Jataka Tales" in English?
I have been looking for an e-book on "Jataka Tales", I got one in Marathi by Ven.Dharmanand Kosambi which I feel is good and the another one I got is in English by Todd Anderson which is totally different from the Marathi version. The stories here are different from the Marathi one.
Can somebody please tell me somethig about the Jataka tales and the place / site where I can get the genuine e-book on the same in English?
Thanks in advance!

See: The Jataka by Robert Chalmers ed. E.B. Cowell in www.sacred-texts.com. The index is found here.


text:
Does any/every form of lying violate the precept of "not-lying"?
What if one thought it wiser to tell a lie, because the truth could potentially endanger one's own life?
For instance, someone might lie that they believe in a supreme being, in reply to a question being asked by their parents who have strong faith. This is a very sensitive topic in some cultures or countries, to the point that parents might kick their son or daughter out of the house.
This is an example where the intention is to maintain personal security.
Does this violate the precept of not-lying? Or, instead of being a lie, might this be considered like the "noble silence" that Buddha once exhibited when the listener was incapable of understanding the Dhamma?

According to the quote in this answer, yes, it would be breaking the precept.

I tried to edit. I hope that it is still the question which you wanted to ask.

Thank you for editing! Yes, it looks better now.

The motivation DOES make a difference to the karma of an action. The classic discussion about karma stresses motivation.

Karma as action denotes an act of mental volition (cetanā), and the bodily and verbal actions that stem from it.
(Classical Indian Buddhist Philosophy, by John Powers)

This is almost literally from  Vasubandhu's Abhidharma-kośa (4th century CE).
So the mental volition (that is - motivation) is the whole point. That makes sense: everything in Buddhism is about consciousness first.
So if you lie to protect jews from the Nazis, to use a modern example - that is not necessarily negative karma. If you had taken lay vows, as a Tibetan Buddhist you would probably do some purification ritual to be sure, but since the motivation is to help someone & you are also preventing people from harming (the nazis) - on balance it is better to lie in such circumstances.
Your example is a bit less clear. I do think it is better to stay silent than to actively lie about your faith. If you have taken lay vows, you have at the very least taken on the attempt not to lie. Staying silent does not break your vow.
The vow to not-lie is also sometimes explained as follows:

Do not distort fact
  ... Sometimes the use of words can make something seem acceptable, when it could have been said very differently and be totally unacceptable. This is not a lie, but a distortion of fact.
(Essays on Karma, by Katinka Hesselink)

Is that true and according to the Dhamma? Or certain doing a favor colored, an excuse?

yes, the concept of motivation, Cetana, is dhamma.

Householder might confuse object, aim with intention. Aims do never justify means. Because a worldling is not able to trace mind qualities, the tool of Sila protects while concepts do not as based on defilements. Cetana that conducts a lie is always akusala. Not possible to lie if not relay on wrong view, moha, out of greed or aversion. Householder may like to read more about how the rabbit became judge.

Actually knowing the clear answer, it's defilments reason, fear, that causes one to speak of what is not true, even if already in refined form, but still lack of saddha, or knowing, hindering the reach of Jhana, path and fruit.

The simple answer is "Yes"
However, there are different weight in each Kamma.
A person who tells a lie to protect his life has the least weight.
It also depends on the person.
Monks are expected to follow the precepts more vigorously than a lay person.
See the current discussion on a similar subject.
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/on-the-five-precepts/5486

Could you add, as a quote, one or two bits that you think are the most relevant quote from the discussion you referenced? Perhaps a quote which answers the OP's question (e.g. about lying), or a quote which supports your answer.

Any statement meeting the following conditions is ling.

FIVE PRECEPTS (PACASILA)
So there will be dilemmas like if you tell the truth someone may lose their life or similar situation. One must weigh one's commitment to the precepts and the consequences.

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