text:
Sathipathanna mindfulness and Jhana how to do them correctly
1) It is said that doing the technique that Mahasi  Sayadaw talks about we can attain awakening. If you know anything about this technique how is it to be done and can it take us to Nibbana.
2) Question number 2:  could you describe the sathipathanas and Jhanas and how I should train them. Especially when I hear about Jhanas on youtube it seems something mystical that we normal people cannot attain. Thank you Dhamma brothers.

The way to develop Satipattana and Jhana is described below:

When, bhikshu, this samadhi has been cultivated, well cultivated by you, then you should train yourself thus:
“I will dwell exertive, clearly aware, mindful,
observing [contemplating] < body | feeling | mind | dhamma > the in the < body | feeling | mind | dhamma >,
removing covetousness and displeasure [discontent] in regard to the world.”
Thus, bhikshu, you should train yourself.
When, bhikshu, this samadhi has been cultivated, well cultivated by you, then, you, bhikshu,
THE 1ST DHYANA:
should cultivate this samadhi with initial application, with sustained application;
should cultivate this samadhi without initial application, with only sustained application;
THE 2ND DHYANA:
should cultivate this samadhi without initial application, without sustained application;
should cultivate this samadhi with zest;
THE 3RD DHYANA:
should cultivate this samadhi zest-free;
should cultivate this samadhi attended by comfort;
THE 4TH DHYANA:
should cultivate this samadhi attended by equanimity.

Saṅkhitta (Desita) Dhamma Sutta
Jhana is not that difficult if you have the proper guidance.
For Mahaisi method see this answer.

if you really want to know about Mahasi, or more generally about Mahasi Sayadaw, Pa Auk Sayadaw and SN Goenka, then skip all the middlemen who copy him, especially all the people who love to claim to be part of the  pragmatic dhamma, like the westerners, and read directly his book
https://wisdomexperience.org/academy/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/07/Manual-of-Insight-for-Course.pdf
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/index.html
and of course, since Mahasi copies the abidhamma of the theravadan and the Visuddhimagga, while claiming it is the dhamma taught by the buddha, you can go directly to reading those
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf
and for the abidhamma, bikku bodhi talks about it each year
https://www.youtube.com/user/DharmaRealmLive/search?query=Bodhi
In fact the 16 knowledges that those puthujjanas have created are expended from from the 9 knowledges of the  commentary, officially it is in the Sutta Pitaka,  called Paṭisambhidāmagga
The major problem of the people who invented insight mediation is that they claim that knowing anicca, anatta and all that brings what they invented and called ''bhaya-nana'', whereas the buddha claims that knowing anicca and all that brings viraga, ie nibanna.
Their mistake is that they fail to understand dukkha and so fail to understand anatta. According to those people,

things vibrate
when something vibrates, it means it is anicca
when something vibrates,it is not pleasant, ie it is dukkha
when something vibrates, it cannot be the self, so it is anatta

Those puthujjanas derive anatta and dukkha from anicca, but they never connect anatta with dukkha.
Whereas, according to the buddha, what is anicca is dukkha, what is dukkha is anatta.

See this answer for the latest edited version.

Answer to the following question Jhana Explaination. I have answered it here as this is marked as a duplicate of the above question:
Question:

Can someone please SIMPLY explain the EIGHT Jhanas, specifically:

1) What are Jhanas meant to do & why would one want to achieve them?
2) How does one specifically achieve them (instructions please)?
3) What happens in each individual Jhana, from the first to the eighth?
4) How can I explain the Jhanas to a newcomer of the Dhamma?

Answer:

OP: 1) What are Jhanas meant to do & why would one want to achieve them?

Jhana factors contract each of the 5 Hindrances:

Coarse examination (vitakka) counteracts sloth-torpor (lethargy and drowsiness)
Precise investigation (vicāra) counteracts doubt (uncertainty)
Well-being (pīti) counteracts ill-will (malice)
Bliss (sukha) counteracts restlessness-worry (excitation and anxiety)
Single-pointed attention (ekaggatā) counteracts sensory desire

Five hindrances
Jhana suppresses mental fermentation (Āsava)

With the ending of mental fermentations — he remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having directly known & realized them for himself right in the here-&-now.

AN 4.35

Also, Jhana gives mastery over the mind so that one does not think about thoughts one does not want, essentially what are unskilful.

He thinks any thought he wants to think, and doesn't think any thought he doesn't want to think. He wills any resolve he wants to will, and doesn't will any resolve he doesn't want to will. He has attained mastery of the mind with regard to the pathways of thought.

AN 4.35

Jhana is also meant as a pleasant abiding.

He attains — whenever he wants, without strain, without difficulty — the four jhanas that are heightened mental states, pleasant abidings in the here-&-now.

AN 4.35

One would want to achieve them to suppress Hindrances, Mental Fermentation, achieve mastery over the mind and create a pleasant state of mind and body free from pain. Another side benefit might be special power like iddhi and abhiññā. But this rarely manifests.

OP: 2) How does one specifically achieve them (instructions please)?

See this answer.

OP: 3) What happens in each individual Jhana, from the first to the eighth?

What happen beyond the 1st few Jhana is fuzzy as fewer people has reached them and there are less descriptions of them.
1st Jhana
5 Hindrances are suppressed.

Coarse examination (vitakka) counteracts sloth-torpor (lethargy and drowsiness)
Precise investigation (vicāra) counteracts doubt (uncertainty)
Well-being (pīti) counteracts ill-will (malice)
Bliss (sukha) counteracts restlessness-worry (excitation and anxiety)
Single-pointed attention (ekaggatā) counteracts sensory desire

Well-being (pīti) and Bliss (sukha) creates a pleasant abiding
2nd Jhana
Dropping initial application and sustained application (Vitarka-vicara) reduces the effort to stay in the Jhana. Well-being (pīti) and Bliss (sukha) becomes prominent.
3rd Jhana
As Well-being (pīti) is dropped strong vibration and swaying of the body stops. Bliss (sukha) becomes prominent which is a much more subtle vibration.
4rd Jhana
Hardly any vibrations as Bliss (sukha) has been dropped. Pleasure and pain does not arise. What remains is the focused on the object.
From the 5th Jhana onwards
5th Jhana
One transcends the perceptions of form and bodily sensations, with the disappearance the perceptions of sense-reaction, with non-attention to perceptions of diversity, aware that “Space is infinite,”
6th Jhana
One transcends the sphere of infinite space, aware that “Consciousness is infinite,”
7th Jhana
One enters and dwells in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception
8th Jhana
One transcends the sphere of nothingness, one enters and dwells in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception

OP: 4) How can I explain the Jhanas to a newcomer of the Dhamma?

This is found in this answer.

See this answer


text:
How can people meet again after rebirth?
Prince Siddhartha & Princess Yashodhara met in a lot of lives as partners. How are people intended to meet their present life relations in the next life? Is the desire needed to be wished upon?

Samajivina Sutta: Living in Tune ..."Lord, ever since Nakula's mother as a young girl was brought to me [to be my wife] when I was just a young boy, I am not conscious of being unfaithful to her even in mind, much less in body. We want to see one another not only in the present life but also in the life to come."...

I edited my answer to include the sutta citation.

If you both have:

(1) compatible faith (sama,saddhā),
(2) compatible virtue (sama,silā),
(3) compatible charity (sama,cāgā),
(4) compatible wisdom (sama,pannā).

Sama,jivi Sutta 1
With the balance of probability, you will be born in the same plane, which increases the chance of meeting again. There is no guarantee through. This will make your current life together effective.
What is desirable is not achieved through wishing or praying, but through action resulting is conducive karma, i.e, convergent, action-based karma from both parties should spontaneously effect reunion:

they are not to be obtained through prayer (ayacana,hetu) or through wishing (patthana,hetu)

Pañcaka Iṭṭha Sutta

all of them are rooted in diligence, converge on diligence,

(Hatthi) Pada Sutta

Thank you very much. May the noble triple gem bless you!

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Neither standing nor swimming, I crossed the flood
From the Crossing the Flood Sutta below, we read that the Buddha said that he crossed the flood (i.e. of suffering, of clinging to the world), neither by standing still, nor by struggling (or swimming). And that when he stood still, he sank, and when he tried to swim, he was swept away.
What does this mean?
What does standing still mean?
What does struggling or swimming mean?
If he neither stood still, nor swam, then how did he cross the flood of clinging and suffering?
From SN 1.1 (Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation):

“How, dear sir, did you cross the flood?”
“By not halting, friend, and by not straining I crossed the flood.”
“But how is it, dear sir, that by not halting and by not straining you
crossed the flood?”
“When I came to a standstill, friend, then I sank; but when I
struggled, then I got swept away. It is in this way, friend, that by
not halting and by not straining I crossed the flood.”

From SN 1.1 (Bhikkhu Sujato's translation):

“Good sir, how did you cross the flood?”
“Neither standing nor swimming, sir, I crossed the flood.”
“But in what way did you cross the flood neither standing nor
swimming?”
“When I stood still, I went under. And when I swam, I was swept away.
That’s how I crossed the flood neither standing nor swimming.”

Following introduction to the Sutta by Piya Tan explains this. There are 7 interpretations from the commentaries. Essentially standing still and swimming here are extremes, and the middle ground is neither of them.

Ogha,taraṇa Sutta
The floods in this context are:

Ogha,taraṇa Sutta

+1This seems to say it all. One additional issue may be that straining to make progress requires that we know where are going, so may require the formation of speculative and incorrect views and destinations towards which we strain. Thus straining of a certain kind is likely to lead us astray.

So no extremes will do any good. We have to find ourself a middle path. How is middle path found?

It is Noble Eightfold Path

As my teacher explained, in Buddhism we don't solve problems brute-force, we solve them using a different kind of "force":
Because reality is our interpretation, we transcend the boundaries of our interpretation in order to transcend the limits of reality.
Hence,

Neither standing nor swimming, I crossed the flood.

Fighting with reality within its framework will not get you anywhere. Surrendering to reality will not get you anywhere either. It is understanding the limits of so-called reality, understanding the arising of limits, understanding cessation of limits, and step by step way of acting that leads to cessation of limits - is what gets you across.

It means what I often post about Anapanasati but nobody understands.
He made no striving effort; apart from the effort to be resolute. Therefore, he was not swimming.
He did not cling to or intentionally deliberately fixate upon a pre-planned meditation object, such as breathing, therefore he did not stand still.
Yet the mind entered the stream and it was the stream that moved the mind towards to breathing, to feelings, to citta, to complete insight and to Nibbana.
He let go and let the stream take the mind to Nibbana.
That is how he crossed the flood.
To use theistic language, he surrendered to God and let God take him to heaven.

Non-action hm? There are many who understand you, but thats not the point here. surrender :-)

surrender to nirodha dhamma. surrender means no thoughts, no ego, no craving

next refrigerator... Aharahatamagga...

Perhaps this quote from Thanissaro Bhikku regarding stream entry can shed some light on your question.

Basically, stream entry happens when you've got the mind as quiet as possible that you can through your concentration practice, and you start asking the question, "Is there still some stress here?"
And you look for it.
And this is one of the reasons why you look for inconstancy because you want to see the rise and fall of the level of stress experienced by the mind. You're not talking about the body now.
And you begin to notice that there are certain things you do that are going to raise the stress level (just minor things at this point in your concentration). And you say, "I'm going to stop doing that." And then you stop doing that. And that will take you to another level of concentration. So you go through the levels of concentration this way.
Finally, you get as far as you can go in concentration. And you begin to realize [...], the question comes up, "There's stress if I stay here, but there's going to be stress if I move, and this is where it gets paradoxical, you neither stay nor move. There's no intention either way because you realize whichever way you intend, there's going to be stress." And it's in that moment of non-intention that things open up.

Perhaps it is best to take what the Buddha said about crossing the flood and keep it in mind without dwelling too hard on what he meant exactly. When thinking about spiritual attainments of this magnitude we truly can’t understand what it means until we have experienced it for ourselves. Seeking to understand it before getting to that point may be helpful insofar of knowing what to do when we reach that point in our meditation, but it can also misguide us and lead us to look for the wrong thing.

Access to Insight has a couple of translator's notes:

This discourse opens the Samyutta Nikaya with a paradox. The Commentary informs us that the Buddha teaches the devata in terms of the paradox in order to subdue her pride. To give this paradox some context, you might want to read other passages from the Canon that discuss right effort.

... and ...

Or: "unestablished." See Ud 8.1. Related references are in SN 12.38 and SN 12.64.

The operative word in SN 1.1 is appatiṭṭha, contrast that with patiṭṭha in SN 12.64.
So maybe "stop our spiritual efforts on account of defilements" (quoted from Piya Tan) isn't the only explanation/translation -- perhaps the word "unestablished" implies something like "unattached" and "not accumulating kamma" and/or how you understand SN 12.64.

This is analogical to the two extremes of self-mortification and indulgence in sensual pleasures.
One should make oneself comfortable but not too comfortable, not losing the sight of the essential one avoids becoming obsessed with worldly baits whilst also being compassionate to himself in allowing the necessary comforts if these can be obtained without going out of one's way after having gone forth.
In practical terms, a monk's dwelling should where possible be without annoying things like gadflies, foolish people, unsuitable locality or harsh climate and also without beautiful sights & objects which obsess the mind, because all these things impair judgement & make it difficult to calm down.
EG where the texts generally advise not seeing or talking to women as being the general instruction on dealing with womenfolk, they also say that women can be Arahants, that one ought to follow a person of great learning, one's equal or better, ought not be stingy with the Dhamma and if the proximity is conducive to the development of one's faculties then one shouldn't leave even if chased away with a stick.

Having been in real floods, one might simply read AN2.1:
Crossing the flood of the senses (i.e., sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and thoughts) is just like crossing a real flood. It requires careful attention and more.
If we stand still, we never get anywhere and may just perish there, overwhelmed in despair. If we are lucky the flood soon subsides. But the flood of the senses roars at us constantly, leaving us no reprieve.
If we jump into the flood and swim about, we likely drown in the merciless turbulence of the water. Chasing the senses leads us far astray and into whirlpools that catch us and hold us gasping for air under water.
Yet if we look about us carefully for safe paths and help, we might find higher ground and helping hands. And we might even find a raft kindly provided to help us and others on our way.

MN22:13.26: In the same way, I have taught how the teaching is similar to a raft: it’s for crossing over, not for holding on.

So to cross the flood, we have to start with right view. We need to acknowledge that we need help. And we also need to pay proper attention to others:

AN2.126:1.3: The words of another and proper attention.
AN2.126:1.4: These are the two conditions for the arising of right view.”

Real floods end. The senses are not so merciful.

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


text:
Is discussing bad practices of monks a sin?
I've heard in several dhamma deshana that discussing the bad practices practiced by monks is a sin. But I feel that if we don't discuss such with our family & just continue giving, we won't have much shradda in our heart & also we won't be able to inform it to the chief monks to be corrected. Is there any suthra that describes about this?

Very broad, actually. Investigating with the will to understand right and be clear is nothing wrong, especially if driven by metta, karuna.. Talking what is not right, a lie. AN 4.83: Avannaraha Sutta - Dispraise. As a very dangerous area, elders always tell to care about ones own actions and relations. It's also often unskilful of what people speak about neighbors. Asking direct is always better, if really after good. The topic as well can be a transgression here, destroying refuge.

See also Ninda and Pasamsa and Issa

Association with careless and respectless people with no shame, is always the main support to wrong doings. That is why elders stay away from people who have a loosy mouth. When coming from good tradition, virtues are fast lost in modern worlds of common people.

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/20955/how-should-a-lay-person-respond-if-they-see-a-monk-teaching-something-contrary-t?rq=1 This answers most of my question.

Ordinary people, how ever, are incapable to recognice of what is a person of integrity and not, young householder, and will always give preferences toward their defilements. The Power of Judgment.

"This dosen't look like the best platform to ask these questions." is by the way good observed when tracking that in commercial, trading enviroment, between doubters and rebels.

(Hatthi,gāmaka) Ugga Sutta
In the above Sutta householder, Ugga declares he does not discriminate how he treats the monks based on their attainments or qualities. This is his 6th quality.
But if some monk is doing something wrong it might be worthwhile to report him to a head monk if there is a chance that proper action might be taken.
Ultimately what matters is the motivation. If you talk ill of a monk with intention breaking his good standing with other this is bad karma. If you do it for the betterment of the monk and the sasana then it is positive. In doing so you have to be tactful though so that it does not lead to unintended consequences.

Remember that any yet-to-be-enlightened monk/nun is still a responsible citizen of the country they're living in, hence they're bound by the law of the land, not above it. Furthermore, they also need to observe another set of law written in the Vinaya specific to their "profession". So if they break a common law, then they're not a good citizen; if they break a Vinaya law, then they're not a good monk. And provided that the errors are well documented and backed up by evidences, it's not only fair game but also a duty for good people, both lay and monastic to bring it up, so that the error could be corrected and prevented from happening again in the future.

"yet-to-be-enlightened monk/nun is still a responsible citizen", in that case he might not have left home and relations.

You are missing my point. A monk in training is still a human who can still break not only Vinaya law but also the common law of the land. I don't care if s/he left home and cut off relationships, the moment they break the law, they will be tried in front of the court just like every other citizens exactly because they are still citizens of the land who are bound by the law of the land, not above it.

It's obivious and displayed without much shame that Nyom does not care, not respect, those having left home. No need to worry about them and also no need to worry that they would take on whom ever's point. It's all Nyom's.

@SamanaJohann "I don't care if" is an idiom which means "my statement was true independent of" -- it's saying, "monks are still subject to the country's national law, regardless of (independent of) whether the monks have left home and cut off relationships", and, "it's the duty of all citizens (or good people) to be concerned when anyone breaks the laws (even if the law-breaker were a monk)".

Where such as the status of "homeless" isn't recognized, missing already such as leader who could give such. My person does not say that such is something inherited and often points out how seldom such is. Of course "homeless" do not hold any rights as well and have "just" the Gems as refuge. Such is surely not easy to understand, more difficult ever to meet. Take care! Blame an "householder" wrongly isn't that heavy and not easy to know.

It's is much wiser to follow the safe track as the elders did. There is much danger in pseudoliberal environments and ways of thinking in equality.

Nyom Santa knows already, that even if rightly blamed one can have a lot of disadvantage in worldly regards. Therefore one is not encouraged to such. "Kamma will do it's effects" anyway. If improper is really traced, and personal proved, best just say away and look after ones own business. Less may have the liberty to act without they could be harmed. Yet not to speak on cases which are wrongly discerned, defiled discerned., or right, yet still with akusala mind in reaction.

@SamanaJohann wrote: "Therefore one is not encouraged to such. "Kamma will do it's effects" anyway". So, question for you, if you see a monk having sex with underage teenagers, you'll just look the other way and let "Kamma does its effects"? Is that what you're advocating?

May Nyom focus on what will lead him to go beyond the baits of the world, what makes him incapable to perform kamma which led him into bad realms. May Nyom seek for security. May Nyom find ways to let go of hunts and uproot the relations to Mara in his heart for ease.


text:
Is Near death experience in enlightenment true?
I have been meditating intensively according to the Advaita tradition where self inquiry is practiced till realizing that I and effort are just feelings and that the watcher of even identity is the true self which isn't a phenomena that manifests.
2 days ago I had what I felt as a near death experience ,or maybe a great death of the ego ,at night I suddenly had an awakening in trance where there was a clear seeing of the "I" that I thought was  me,then I woke up with a vibration feeling in my head and after lying on my back I suddenly felt as if a light was going to replace me as the identity of the body and me that I thought was my identity all my life was just an idea that was going to be replaced by that light ,I couldn't accept that happening and chose to stay as myself, and I actually cried cause I felt that I was going to die, not realizing that this "I" was more intimate that expected .
Is this a paranormal experience or is it actually how enlightenment should occur ?

This seems an important event. I would suggest that next time you go right ahead and die. Look at it as if you are Indiana Jones standing on the ledge peering into the chasm. This element of the Grail mythology is there for a reason.

it may not be explicitly buddhist enough, but you could look at krishnamruti's (dunno which one) experience of kensho

not to sound messianic, but I can relate to it. it was not satori, and not integrated with my everyday life, but nonetheless it made me question everything I have ever done, as if I were facing judgment, and it was, while being initially a small thing, completely life "destructive" (ultimately in a good way). I never got a certificate for it, I think, but it was on retreat.

This seems to be a question about Advaita (Hinduism) meditation rather than Buddhism, and so it is off-topic.

I believe such peculiar experiences may be significant, or may not; but in Buddhism one shouldn't cling to them. Enlightenment would involve an understanding of the three marks of existence: impermanence, no-self, and suffering. I mean, if you delve into that experience and gain enlightenment, good! But if you do so and then everything remains exactly the same, you might be discouraged. Just do not cling to the whole phenomenon.

Due to past karmic formation, people sometimes get "out of the world" experiences. Best is not to read into these experiences and continue your meditation.
Enlightenment is beyond any sensory experience, therefore if you experience involves any pleasant sensation, vibration, thoughts then this is not enlightenment.

Is this a paranormal experience or is it actually how enlightenment should occur ?

That still sound rather abstract and hence difficult to evaluate where one is on the Path. Actually, enlightenment is subjected to pretty concrete tests and metrics as evidenced in various suttas like here, here and here

There are four ways of developing immersion further. Your experience calls to mind the second way:

And what is the way of developing immersion further that leads to gaining knowledge and vision?
A mendicant focuses on the perception of light, concentrating on the perception of day regardless of whether it is night or day.

For more information on the four ways of developing immersion further, please see AN4.41, from which the above was quoted.
You may also be interested Ajahn Brahm's writings on nimitta:

Nimitta, in the context used here, refers to the beautiful "lights" that appear in the mind...

Please do consider finding a Teacher and a Sangha as well for personal guidance and reliable progress.

If I can answer from the point of view of doctrine, rather than of meditative experience, I think that Buddhist doctrine says that any and every "doctrine of self" shouldn't be grasped (attached to) -- because they all give rise to dukkha and so on:
MN 22

It would make sense to grasp at a doctrine of self that didn’t give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.
  But do you see any such doctrine of self?”
“No, sir.”
“Good, mendicants!
  I also can’t see any such doctrine of self.

So I guess that the ("Buddhist") doctrine of suttas might contradict whatever "Advaita" is teaching -- i.e. you mentioned "is the true self" which I think is foreign to Buddhist doctrine.
Similarly I guess that "a light was going to replace me as the identity of the body" might also be a 'self-view' -- i.e. "there is a currently a 'me' which is the identity of the body" and "the light will become a new identity", even bits like "my life" and "I am going to die" -- I think these could all be classified as examples of self view.
As for "how enlightenment should occur" I suppose that the doctrine from the same Tipiṭaka describes what might be called Four stages of enlightenment. I think that "self views" are regarded as one of the "fetters", and that abandoning that fetter is part of the first stage of enlightenment.

From experience and not repeating the words of others, Samadhi is a controlled physical death. The breathing stops in Dhyana. Then, the heart in Samadhi. It is not good to describe the experience but rather the methods to get there, as knowing that to look for can prevent obtaining it. Extreme concentration causes it in conjunction with cutting the knots or cakkras which hold one locked in the body. A correct method is needed to ensure it, lahiri mahasaya's methods are good, as are the tantrik methods (more forcible and can cause health problems), which force the blood pressure low but bounces back. Cells oxygen starved long enough go anaerobic and can turn into cancer. Meditational methods put all the cells to stop and need no oxygen. Take a very scientific approach to getting samadhi as endless falsities and imaginations will try to pose as being it when they are just more mayic delusions. After samadhi you see through the endless lies of others, and the dream world we live in. People wrapt up in psychological universes and delusions. Before samadhi, we understand nothing. After, all answers are had with perfect self-evidence preventing any possibility of having had another fraud in the endless ocean of it within mayic delusion. Certainty. Pure, crystaline, unending, unassailable.
Enlightenment and satori are often confused. Samadhi towers above both. Satori is a breakthrough to higher levels. Enlightenment is the spiritual disaster, where the mind is done and one no longer lives in a belief system or reality tunnel based on one's limited perceptions and unproven beliefs. A buddha may speak truth, but it is only theory for anyone who hears it. Thus in enlightenment, nothing is true.
You have to die to get though the door. The little self opresses and prevents the real Self. But it isn't how you think, because if you knew who, or what, you really are, you would be enlightened already, and laughing at the sillyness of it all.
Best of luck and many blessings.

interesting response. slowed heart beat and breathing is not unique to samadhi and not necessary for it. HTH

That depends on one's definition of samadhi. The guru warned me specifically not to associate with any person who claimed samadhi but could not demonstrate breathnlessness on command for at least an hour with their head in a bucket of water, as being a servant of mara, a deceiver, who are everywhere. Many buddhist tantrics, are sworn in the higher initiations, upon becoming boddhisattva, to turn all away from the truth even at the cost of their lives.

hmm. isn't guru a hindu word?

put it this way, I've done a lot of crazy breathing exercises, and they are not all zen, and it is completely unnecessary IMVHO

I'm 40 and drink gallons of caffeine every day. no way can I do what I did in my early 20s. but I am a lot more subtle

Yes. A figure of speech. He is from Tibet and has had all 15 kalachakra initiations, as have I. He is also in non-denominational Hindu order. I work at the temple he owns. People of many faiths come often.

don't be so afraid of zen ..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linji_Yixuan


text:
Nature of Craving in Charm and Impressing Others
I noticed recently that I tend to try and impress others and gather attention, especially with women (I'm a man). I see this as problematic because unlike other sources of craving and attachment, its hard to avoid others.
Thus, I'd like to understand the nature of the craving/grasping/etc. process in relation to trying to impress. What type(s) of attachment(s) are involved? How can one best relinquish a need to appear a certain way to others?
Also, I wonder: Is there any equivalent to 'overcompensating' in Buddhism? Overcompensating here means specifically attempting to augment the self because the self is in reality lacking, insecure. How does no-self affect this?
Thank you

What type(s) of attachment(s) are involved?

This is carving arising due to self-view.
There are 18 internal and external views across past, present and future making a total of 108 views of self rooted in carving.
18 Internal Preoccupations with Craving

(1) “I am”
(2) “I am this [I am like this]”
(3) “Thus am I [I am like that]”
(4) “I am otherwise”
(5) “I do not exist”
(6) “I exist”
(7) “May I be”
(8) “May I be this [be like this]”
(9) “May I be so [be like that]”
(10) “May I otherwise”
(11) “I might be”
(12) “I might be this [be like this]”
(13) “I might be that [be like that]”
(14) “I might be otherwise”
(15) “I shall be”
(16) “I shall be this [be like this]”
(17) “I shall be so [be like that]”
(18) “I shall be otherwise”

Tanhā Jālinī Sutta / (Vicarita) Tanha Sutta
18 External Preoccupations with Craving

(1) by this (form, etc), “I am”
(2) by this, “I am this [I am like this]”
(3) by this, “Thus am I [I am like that]”
(4) by this, “I am otherwise”
(5) by this, “I do not exist”
(6) by this, “I exist”
(7) by this, “May I be”
(8) by this, “May I be this [be like this]”
(9) by this, “May I be so [be like that]”
(10) by this, “May I otherwise”
(11) by this, “I might be”
(12) by this, “I might be this [be like this]”
(13) by this, “I might be that”
(14) by this, “I might be otherwise”
(15) by this, “I shall be”
(16) by this, “I shall be this”
(17) by this, “I shall be so”
(18) by this, “I shall be otherwise”

Tanhā Jālinī Sutta / (Vicarita) Tanha Sutta
With regard to external preoccupation with every interaction, one reinforces the self-view with further escalate to sensation resulting in the craving.

"by this experience or interaction, I look good and I appear positively"
"by this experience or interaction, I look good but I appear negatively"
"by this experience or interaction, I look good but I appear neutral"
"by this experience or interaction, I look bad and I appear positively",
"by this experience or interaction, I look bad but I appear negatively"
"by this experience or interaction, I look bad but I appear neutral"
"by this experience or interaction, I look neutral and I appear positively"
"by this experience or interaction, I look neutral but I appear negatively"
"by this experience or interaction, I look neutral but I appear neutral"

More the one appears positive with respect to the self-evaluation and the perception one appear, one experiences deeper shades of pleasantness. Similarly with it is negative one experiences unpleasantness. When there is no disparity, i.e., one's evaluation of oneself matches one's expectation of how one is perceived by others, there is a neutral sensation.
This is further appplified based on the people one tries to project the evaluation, the level one want to make an impression, the number of people involved as well as the source of the experience. The grouping of people could be:

oneself
special people (friends, foes, coworkers and family)
acquainted people
strangers

If the source is a close person then the feeling is more. If a loved one does something unexpected one feels more strongly than a stranger. E.g. if someone you admire is negative about you the pain is more.
If something about you is known by many vs few it will increase the feeling. E.g. if someone does something improper and is caught one may try to stop the knowledge of it spreading as one sees this as damaging.
If one it trying hard to impreses then this also will intensify the sensations. E.g. If one does badly at school it might be harder to let your parents know the results than a stranger who does not care as much.
The combinations give different shares of feelings:

something done by a special person, which affects how I want to project my self, which is projected to other special people
something done by a special person, which does not affects how I want to project my self, which is projected to other special people
something done by a special person, which affects how I want to project my self, which is projected to other people who I care about
something done by a special person, which affects how I want to project my self, which is projected to other people who are strangers

...

How can one best relinquish a need to appear a certain way to others?

This is by eliminating the classes of craving leading to self-view.

You beat me to it, haha... Thanks for a thorough answer.

What type(s) of attachment(s) are involved?
Is there any equivalent to 'overcompensating' in Buddhism?

The attachment/overcompensation you describe can be seen as self-doctrine clinging (attavadupadana).
It is associated with self-view (sakkaya-ditthi), meaning that the five skandhas are mistaken for a self. Self-view runs the risk to cause a struggle for controlling/own/achieve things that are ultimately impermanent, and out of our grasp. Suffering will follow.

How can one best relinquish a need to appear a certain way to others?

Vipassana meditation probably wouldn’t hurt. It can give us a new perspective on the things that are difficult.


text:
Possible to intentionally kill without "intention"?
The 5 criteria of killing
1) There is life present
2) The person knows "there is life present"
3) Intention to take away the life
4) Action or speech that causes "life is taken away"
5) Life is taken away
Is it possible for a person to fulfil criteria 1, 2, 4 and 5 but not 3?
For example, a person orders me to kill and I did it unwillingly. Many times, I've heard people insisting that it's not counted as killing because the intention to kill is absent. But I kind of disagree thus posting this question for advice.
Perhaps, to explain my understanding. You know an action will cause life to be taken away but chooses to act upon it. That choice itself is the intention.

"That choice itself is the intention.", yes, good observed. To agree, approve, that death might happen counts as well as intention to kill. Is kamma of killing even if not acting on it. Yet Sila is meassured the other way around.

The title "intentionally kill without intention" doesn't make sense -- perhaps the word "intentionally" should be removed.

Perhaps you mean without 'selfish intention' thus without negative karmic results. This is what the Baghavad Gita is about, and may be the reason for the preservation of (teaching?) stories about the Buddha's previous lives in which he killed with intention.

Quoting from The Pāṭimokkha Rules
Translated & Explained
by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu

The non-offense clauses state that there is no offense for a bhikkhu who acts unintentionally, not knowing, or without aiming at death. In the Vinita-vatthu, unintentionally is used to describe cases in which a bhikkhu acts accidentally, such as dropping a poorly held stone, brick, or adze; removing a pestle from a shelf and accidentally knocking off another one. Not knowing is used in cases in which the bhikkhu deliberately does an action but without knowing that his action could cause death. An example would be giving food to a friend not knowing that it is poisoned. Not aiming at death is used in cases where the bhikkhu deliberately does an action but does not intend that action to result in death. Relevant examples include trying to help a bhikkhu who is choking on food by slapping him on the back and inadvertently causing his death; telling a bhikkhu to stand on a piece of scaffolding while helping with construction work, only to see the scaffolding collapse; describing the joys of heaven to an audience, only to have a member of the audience decide to commit suicide in hopes of going there.
Thus, to fulfill the factor of intention here, a bhikkhu must be acting intentionally, knowingly, and aiming at death.
The word-analysis covers all the same points—although it shuffles the terms around—when it defines intentionally as “having willed, having made the decision knowingly and consciously.” Without teasing out the differences in terminology, we may simply note the important point added in its analysis, which is that an act of manslaughter counts as intentional here only when the bhikkhu has made a clear decision to kill. Thus if he were to strike a person unthinkingly in a sudden fit of rage, without being clear about what his intention was, it would not qualify as “intentional” here. The Commentary seconds this point when it defines having made the decision as “having summoned up a reckless mind state, ‘crushing’ through the power of an attack.” The Sub-commentary does not explain crushing or attack here, but apparently they mean aggressively overcoming, through a brute act of will, any contrary or hesitant thoughts in the mind.

Quoting from Getting the Message (also by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu),

Killing is never skillful. Stealing, lying, and everything else in the first list are never skillful. When asked if there was anything whose killing he approved of, the Buddha answered that there was only one thing: anger. In no recorded instance did he approve of killing any living being at all. When one of his monks went to an executioner and told the man to kill his victims compassionately, with one blow, rather than torturing them, the Buddha expelled the monk from the Sangha, on the grounds that even the recommendation to kill compassionately is still a recommendation to kill — something he would never condone. If a monk was physically attacked, the Buddha allowed him to strike back in self-defense, but never with the intention to kill. As he told the monks,

"Even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves."
-- MN 21

If there is the knowlage or expectation there is life then to take a life there should be intention to do so. If there is no knowledge nor expectation there is life, then only there is no intention.
If you are ordered to kill you know it is a living being, hence following through cannot be done without intention.
Absence of intention is generally in accidents where you know there is life but without intention you might take a life.
Also, since when doing our daily activities we do not have full awareness of what beings are there one may unknowingly and intentionally kill. E.g. you may step on a leaf with an ant underneath.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

According to Abhidhamma killing is invariably done with ill will or  aversion. Prompted by whatever motive, one, as a rule, kills with a thought of ill-will. Where there is ill will (pañigha) there is
displeasure (domanassa). Where there is displeasure there is ill will in a subtle or gross way. - Narada
The Abhidhamma discusses 82 forms of consciousness. An adult who kills for sport does experience the 9th or 10th type of consciousness. There is ill-feeling at the moment of killing. This ill-feeling results in Kamma.

If a person orders you to kill (for example, you are a soldier), the killing remains intentional because you could have exercised your intention/choice to refuse the order. That is why Hitler, himself, did not kill 6 million Jews, 50 million Soviets, etc.


text:
Do Different Meditations Support One Another?
I have tried meditating on compassion, just as I've tried meditating on the breath. Currently, these days, I find it hard to meditate on compassion.
My question is: Would practising meditation of any kind improve a meditation of another kind, e.g. practising breath meditation would increase compassion meditation's effectiveness?
Simply put, does every meditation type share at least some aspects with others, some basic features such as--I suppose--gathering attention, learning patience, and so on? Thus, improving those aspects through breath meditation might extend to compassion meditation?
Thank you

Only right view supports meditation for long lasting happiness, liberation, if such is objected. Up on right view one is free to choose the preferred kammatthana according to ones inclinations. To increase right view: practicing dana, sila, bhavana. Once Sila is firm, based on right view, right concentration comes by it's cause given by itself.

Yes they do support eachother imho. Whenever one directs the mind to a wholesome theme, to rouse gladness or energy, when keeping the mind on the theme one is not oblivious to the theme and this concentration is a good skill to develop. Furthermore the foremost quality for the attainment and awakening to the truth is effort and it requires contemplation and coming to agreement.
Therefore it is evident that when mind is somehow impaired one should direct the mind to a skillful theme for a purpose of gladdening or composing otherwise. When mind is unconstricted and pliant one can then retreat from that wholesome theme and stop thinking about it and just be mindful and at ease.
Traditionally speaking the guardian meditations are largely accepted to be necessary among insight and samatha meditators alike afaik. I advocate contemplation in general; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kZxstsAvjhj9Svc47RUKRIyKQMuHMD4adIvr_7pp2uI/edit?usp=drivesdk

“There is the case of a monk who remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on the body in & of itself, a fever based on the body arises within his body, or there is sluggishness in his awareness, or his mind becomes scattered externally. He should then direct his mind to any inspiring theme. As his mind is directed to any inspiring theme, delight arises within him. In one who feels delight, rapture arises.
In one whose mind is enraptured, the body grows calm. His body calm, he feels pleasure. As he feels pleasure, his mind grows concentrated.
He reflects, ‘I have attained the aim to which my mind was directed. Let me withdraw [my mind from the inspiring theme].’ He withdraws & engages neither in directed thought nor in evaluation. He
  discerns, ‘I am not thinking or evaluating. I am inwardly mindful & at ease.’
“This, Ananda, is development based on directing.
And what is development based on not directing? A monk, when not directing his mind to external things, discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external
  things. It is unconstricted [asankhitta] front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on the body in & of itself. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’
“When not directing his mind to external things, he discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external things. It is unconstricted front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on feelings… mind… mental qualities in & of themselves. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’
“This, Ananda, is development based on not directing.

Metta meditation helps achieve concentration hence will help Anapana

(8) One’s mind easily concentrates.

(Ekā,dasa) Mettânisaṁsā Sutta
Manranasati meditation helps develop a sense of urgency hence you might not be lethargic or procrastinate in meditation.


text:
Does anyone know where it is possible to identify a lama incarnation?
Hi I'm just seeking advice if it is possible to identify a Lama incarnation, whom to speak to etc.

Can you be more specific. Do you have a child that you want to identify?

Thank you for your reply, something i have to do for myself, to move forward in my own journey.

Maybe you can try writing to the office of the Dalai Lama?
To be honest, I don’t have any idea how that works.

In Tibetan Buddhism, the procedure is AFAIK only documented for Tulku (high-ranking Lamas):

When an old tulku dies, a committee of senior lamas convenes to find
the young reincarnation. The group may employ a number of methods in
their search. First, they will probably look for a letter left behind
by the departed tulku indicating where he intends to be born again.
They will ask the close friends of the departed to recall everything
he said during his last days, in case he may have given hints. Often,
an oracle is consulted. Sometimes a prominent lama has a dream that
reveals details of the child's house, parents, or of geographical
features near his home. Sometimes heaven presents a sign, perhaps a
rainbow, leading the search party to the child.

See The Tibetan Tradition of Recognizing Reincarnate Lamas

If you are asking in regards to yourself, no, you're not a reincarnated lama.  Trust me.  You are much more than that.  You are buddha nature.  That little bit of stirring inside of you isn't the bygone memories of some Tibetan master who used to live in the Himalayas and spent his mornings drying his laundry on his body.  That stirring, that feeling, that you might be something more is your inherent enlightenment turning over in it's sleep.  Everyone wants to be the hero of their story.  They search out their own auspiciousness and self importance aligning themselves with all sorts of disasters - some become Democrats, some become skinheads, some become surgeons - and in that becoming, they forget who they really are.
If you were a lama, that would be unimaginably terrible.  How awful to be trapped, identifying with some limited being!  Our small selves are prisons enough.  How much worse would it be to trap that already limited consciousness within the confines of another!
Master Rinzai said that there is a person of no rank that moves in and out of the doors of your face.  Instead of locating the lama who you think you are, find that person of no rank who is absolutely and utterly you.

Excellent answer! A perfect opportunity to drop master Rinzai's pertinent and defining quote, which goes thus: Whether you're facing inward or facing outward, whatever you meet up with, just kill it! If you meet a buddha, kill the buddha…“


text:
What is today’s equivalent of a world system?
Buddhism mentions “world systems.” What’s the equivalent terminology for a world system in the parlance of contemporary astrophysics?

The problem is that astrophysics investigates only the observable psycho-physical universe so it has no term for the richly layered and structured 'world-system' of Buddhism, which would include the world of physics but not be limited to just the gross surface layer.  . . . .

I don't think it refers to parallel universes as an alternate dimension of the sensous realm because the world systems shake when the Bodhisatta gains final attainment which would be strange if an eventuality caused effect over multiple worlds which are supposedly closed systems with laws of conservation, essentially closed systems of information. To me an eventuality causing a tremble over a multitude of such systems is philosophically like magical thinking as far as i can tell.
Also when the Buddha delivers a discourse such as the Brahmajala Sutta the ten thousandfold world system shakes.
Furthermore given that afaik i've never seen a declaration of a thousandfold multitude of formless realms i think it is the thousandfold world system that undergoes expansion and contraction and the vastness of the universe of form explains the variety of sub worlds which could be planetary systems or galaxies.
Another point is that there is only one Buddha in a world system simultaneously (mn115).  Which is significant because if Buddhas can supposedly teleport and if one followed an intepretation of one Buddha per solar system (as some people do) then a Buddha could meet another and this would be contradictory.
I think there are the 31 planes and it is a single expanding & contracting field of form that is inhabited by a multitude of galaxies with suns and habitable planets. I also think there is only one Maha Brahma per expanding system and one Buddha at a time.
Another point worth mentioning is that during a world system contraction, beings are said to be for the most part inhabiting formless realms.

World system in the context of the likes of Saṅkhār’upapatti Sutta, I believe, are humanoid planets.
From what you can infer from Kosala Sutta 1 this looks like a galaxy:

Bhikshus, as far as the sun and the moon revolve, illuminating the
  quarters with their light, there extends the thousandfold
  world-system. In that thousandfold world-system there are
  a thousand moons,
  a thousand suns,
  a thousand Sinerus,
  the kings of mountains,
  a thousand Jambu,dīpas [Jambul Continents],
  a thousand Western Goyāna continents [Apara,go,yāna],
  a thousand Northern Kuru continents [Uttara,kuru],
  a thousand Eastern Videha continents [Pubba,videha],
  four thousand oceans,
  four thousand maharajahs [emperors],
  a thousand heavens of the Cātum,mahārājika [the
  4 great guardian kings],
  a thousand heavens of Yāma [the Yāma devas],
  a thousand heavens of Tusita [contented devas],
  a thousand heavens of Nimmāṇa,ratī [the devas who delight in creating],
  a thousand heavens of Para,nimmita,vasavatti [the
  devas who lord over the creation of others],
  and a thousand Brahma worlds.
  And in that thousand-fold world-system, MahāBrahmā is
  regarded as the foremost.
  Yet even in MahāBrahmā
  there still is uncertainty, there is change.
  Seeing this, the instructed noble disciple is revulsed
  with that.
  Being revulsed with that, he becomes
  dispassionate toward what is the foremost, not to
  speak of the inferior.

Also see:

Parallel universes by Piya Tan
Buddhist Cosmology by Ajahn Sona
THE BUDDHIST COSMOS: A Comprehensive Survey of the Early Buddhist Worldview; according to Theravāda and Sarvsātivāda sources By Punnadhammo Mahāthero

Based on Piya Tan's Parallel universes, I'm not sure whether there is a modern equivalent term -- because if a type of object is real (e.g. "tiger", "dog", "grass") then I'd expect to find a word for it in several languages -- but if it's mythological then not (because different cultures don't have the same myths).
I doubt it has anything to do with contemporary astrophysics.
I'd avoid calling it a "system" (which a contemporary audience might confuse with e.g. "a solar system").
I imagine it's something like a "horizon" -- but in the second sense of that word:

1 The line at which the earth's surface and the sky appear to meet.
‘the sun rose above the horizon’
2 (often horizons) The limit of a person's knowledge, experience,
  or interest.
‘she wanted to leave home and broaden her horizons’

I might also term it as a "field of view" -- like someone might say for example that, "microscopic and macroscopic are different fields of view".

Aka Umwelt in the technical (semiotic) sense. Or perhaps a superset of all homomorphic umwelts.

Interesting question.
Remember modern day language, the scientific method, Newtonian physics, and higher mathematics only came into existence relatively recently in history around the 17th-18th Century whereas the Pali canons were orally transmitted more than 2,000 years before that.
So understanding exactly what's meant in more modern day terms is tricky but the suttas give us some hints:

“Ānanda, a galaxy extends a thousand times as far as the moon and sun
  revolve and the shining ones light up the quarters.
In that galaxy there are a thousand moons, a thousand suns, a thousand
  Sinerus king of mountains, a thousand Indias, a thousand Western
  Continents, a thousand Northern Continents, a thousand Eastern
  Continents, four thousand oceans, four thousand Great Kings, a
  thousand realms of the Gods of the Four Great Kings, a thousand realms
  of the Gods of the Thirty-Three, of the Gods of Yama, of the Joyful
  Gods, of the Gods who Love to Create, of the Gods who Control the
  Creations of Others, and a thousand Brahmā realms.
This is called a thousandfold lesser world system, a ‘galaxy’.
A world system that extends for a thousand galaxies is called a
  millionfold middling world system, a ‘galactic cluster’.
A world system that extends for a thousand galactic clusters is called
  a billionfold great world system, a ‘galactic supercluster’.
If he wished, Ānanda, a Realized One could make his voice heard
  throughout a galactic supercluster, or as far as he wants.” (AN 3.80)

The words "sahassadhā loko" or thousandfold-world is translated as "galaxy" here.
Looks like to me "world-system" or lokadhātu more refers to something like a solar system rather than the entire universe since thousandfold up to billionfold world-systems are mentioned.
It's mentioned that there are thousands of moons and suns in the thousandfold world system more similar to a galaxy.
But remember this was written long long before the concept of a galaxy was ever mainstream so it's still unknown exactly what's meant.
In my opinion certain terms should remain untranslated as it's still unknown exactly what's meant in modern terms.
When debating Menander Nagasena says:

"This world system, O king, is a one-Buddha-supporting world; that is,
  it can bear the virtue of only a single Tathāgata. If a second
  Tathāgata were to arise the world could not bear him, it would shake
  and tremble, it would bend, this way and that, it would disperse,
  scatter into pieces, dissolve, be utterly destroyed." (Mil 6.1.1)

Indicating that the Earth would explode if two sammasambuddhas appeared at once which indicates that the "world-system" word is more related to the Earth and this solar system rather than the entire universe.
Also indicates that on other world-systems different Buddhas can appear more similar to Mahayana Buddhist concepts.


text:
Is it necessary to be completely still during body scan?
I've been practising vipassana for some time. Now, I'd like to try body scan, but one issue isn't clear for me. Books or articles about sitting meditation, I've read, say that it's good to sit completely still during practise. Does the same implay to body scan? Should I lie entirely still during body scan or can I move my hand, for example, when I feel such a need?
Thanks for your answers.

I think there are things to learn by not moving but i doubt it is essential since it is nowhere mentioned in the Sutta afaik.

I don't know that its necessary, but its for the purpose of noticing the body sensations as they occur naturally. Moving would create a sensation and possibly the desire to create or cease a particular sensation.  If you find difficulty in staying still maybe try mindfulness walking, and/or observances of daily activities

I've read, say that it's good to sit completely still during practise. Does the same implay to body scan?

Yes. Ideally.
If it is difficult you can take the liberty to move. But staying still:

increases your Adhiṭṭhāna - This is why in courses at least for 3 of the 1-hour sessions you are asked to stay still in courses taught by Goenka
increases your Samadhi


text:
Sense of Accomplishment in Meditation
Regardless of a meditation's perceived quality, I feel that finishing a meditation provides some sense of accomplishment.
Nowadays, I am experiencing great lack of motivation, and when I set the goal of meditation as '30 minutes', I stop half-way and feel that I failed.
Knowing how finishing things provides accomplishment, would it make more sense setting shorter times which I can finish? Is there such a thing as the momentum of accomplishment in meditation or even in virtuous activity in general? Or, is such a feeling of success a kind of attachment, and problematic?
Thank you

Here are some excellent advice given by Ajaan Fuang in "Awareness Itself":

§ "When the meditation goes well, don't get excited. When it doesn't
  go well, don't get depressed. Simply be observant to see why it's
  good, why it's bad. If you can be observant like this, it won't be
  long before your meditation becomes a skill."
§ A young nurse practiced meditation with Ajaan Fuang several days
  running, and finally asked him one day, "Why wasn't today's session as
  good as yesterday's?"
He answered: "Meditating is like wearing clothes. Today you wear
  white, tomorrow red, yellow, blue, whatever. You have to keep
  changing. You can't wear the same set of clothes all the time. So
  whatever color you're wearing, just be aware of it. Don't get
  depressed or excited about it."
§ A few months later the same nurse was sitting in meditation when a
  sense of peace and clarity in her mind became so intense that she felt
  she would never have a bad mood infiltrate her mind again. But sure
  enough, bad moods eventually came back as before. When she mentioned
  this to Ajaan Fuang, he said, "Looking after the mind is like raising
  a child. There will have to be bad days along with the good. If you
  want only the good, you're in for trouble. So you have to play
  neutral: Don't fall in with the good or the bad."
§ A student came to complain to Ajaan Fuang that she had been
  meditating for years, and still hadn't gotten anything out of it. His
  immediate response: "You don't meditate to 'get' anything. You
  meditate to let go."
§ "Don't make a journal of your meditation experiences. If you do,
  you'll start meditating in order to have this or that thing happen, so
  that you can write it down in your journal. And as a result, you'll
  end up with nothing but the things you've fabricated."
§ "You can't plan the way your practice is going to go. The mind has
  its own steps and stages, and you have to let the practice follow in
  line with them. That's the only way you'll get genuine results.
  Otherwise you'll turn into a half-baked arahant."
§ "When the mind's not quiet — that's when its poor and burdened with
  difficulties. It takes molehills and turns them into mountains. But
  when the mind is quiet, there's no suffering, because there's nothing
  at all. No mountains at all. When there's a lot to the mind, it's
  simply a lot of defilement, making it suffer."

Maybe you can give yourself the flexibility of meditating between 15 to 30 minutes. At the end of it, don't cling to any result/ state, and be observant about why today's session was the way it was. If today's session was not good, it's not because you had failed. It was probably due to some defilement entering the mind. Then that would lead you to identify how the defilement came into the mind. That's more skillful than blaming yourself.

So then I should keep the 30 min, but not cling to any result/state?

Maybe you can give yourself the flexibility of meditating between 15 to 30 minutes. At the end of it, don't cling to any result/ state, and be observant about why today's session was the way it was. If today's session was not good, it's not because you had failed. It was probably due to some defilement entering the mind. Then that would lead you to identify how the defilement came into the mind. That's more skillful than blaming yourself.

when I sit meditation, I sit till I get up. Sometimes that's 15m. Sometimes that's 90m. When I walk meditation, I walk the same path till I get home. The time varies. There's no magic in 30.

Yes, you can develop a momentum in meditation. After consistent and prolonged practice with discipline, meditation get's it's momentum. I know this from mantra meditation. You fill your mind with spiritual impressions. In beginning it won't be easy because your miind is not used to meditation. But over time, as you get used to the practice of meditation, it will be easier and easier to start meditating.

Knowing how finishing things provides accomplishment, would it make more sense setting shorter times which I can finish?

That seems like a situation where you would oblige your craving.

Is there such a thing as the momentum of accomplishment in meditation or even in virtuous activity in general?

Yes. But momentum in a buddhist sense is likely to occur by letting go of attachment or achieving. It’s the art of no art to paraphrase Bruce Lee.

Or, is such a feeling of success a kind of attachment, and problematic?

Yes and yes.

If you struggle with motivation you can consider formally contemplating, can even start with 3-5 minutes.
Mn95;

"Exertion is most helpful for the final attainment of the truth, Bharadvaja. If one didn't make an exertion, one wouldn't finally attain the truth. Because one makes an exertion, one finally attains the truth. Therefore, exertion is most helpful for the final attainment of the truth."
"But what quality is most helpful for exertion? We ask Master Gotama about the quality most helpful for exertion."
"Contemplating is most helpful for exertion, Bharadvaja. If one didn't contemplate, one wouldn't make an exertion. Because one contemplates, one makes an exertion. Therefore, contemplating is most helpful for exertion."
"But what quality is most helpful for contemplating?..."
"Being willing... If one weren't willing, one wouldn't contemplate..."
"But what quality is most helpful for being willing?..."
"Desire... If desire didn't arise, one wouldn't be willing..."
"But what quality is most helpful for desire?..."
"Coming to an agreement through pondering dhammas... If one didn't come to an agreement through pondering dhammas, desire wouldn't arise..."

I would also beware of this line of thinking; 'I am good/bad because of "X". It affirms and is of the notion of 'I am' which is a verbalization of craving and will make it minds inclination if pondered frequently.

Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking -
"Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness.

See the tanha sutta as well for craving ref.

OP: would it make more sense setting shorter times which I can finish?

When one does not have Sampajañña, i.e., know there is a sensation and know it is impermanent one is accumulating Sankhara / Karma. 1
In daily activities, a novice generally does not have Sampajañña, therefore accumulates Sankhara.
When one is in proper meditation (not merely sitting on a cushion distracted) one does not accumulate sankhara and also dilutes the effects of past sankhara.
Also during a meditation session, there are times one remains distracted and it might take a while to settle into a serious meditation.
Therefore a meditation session should be sufficiently long to compensate for distraction during meditation and the lack of Sampajañña during daily activities. Short sessions may not give desired results. E.g.

polishing brass takes some time to remove the oxidisation. If you do this for a short time then this will not restore the shine.
to create fire one needs to rub 2 sticks until they catch fire. If you stop rubbing prematurely it does not light up.

OP: Is there such a thing as the momentum of accomplishment in meditation or even in virtuous activity in general? Or, is such a feeling of success a kind of attachment, and problematic?

If one tries to perceive the quality of a meditation session this leads to disappointment or satisfaction. This counters what meditation tries to achieve that is not to be averse or attached.

1

Know the feeling

i. On seeing a form with the eye,

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

ii. On hearing a sound with the ear,

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

iii. On smelling a smell with the nose,

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

iv. On tasting a taste with the tongue,

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

v. On feeling a touch with the body,

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

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

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

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta

Know that the feels are impermanent so do not cling onto them

If he feels a pleasant feeling,

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

If he feels a painful feeling,

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

If he feels a neutral feeling,

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

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

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta


text:
Inauthentic Compassion and Friendship
When I meditate on compassion, afterwards there is a post-meditative effect of making me kinder, but usually in a way that doesn't benefit me. It makes me want to rekindle friendships that were not desirable in fear that the others would suffer, or give others time and attention in ways that somewhat disadvantage me.
How can this be dealt with?
Is compassion even linked with being friends, or is it distinct; i.e. how can one be compassionate yet retain distance with others?

One should associate with true friends and disassociate with false friends.
One should associate with those are:

(1) He is pleasant [loving]. piyo ca hoti
(2) He is agreeable. manāpo ca
(3) He is respectful. garu ca
(4) He is worthy of respect. bhāvanīyo ca
(5) He admonishes, patient when admonished. vattā ca vacana-k,khamo ca
(6) He is profound in conversation. gambhīrañ ca kathaṁ kattā hoti,
(7) He does not engage us in the impossible. no ca aṭṭhāne niyojeti.

(Piya) Mitta Sutta 2

(1) He gives what is difficult to give. duddadaṁ dadāti
(2) He does what is difficult to do. dukkaraṁ karoti
(3) He tolerates what is difficult to tolerate. dukkhamaṁ khamati
(4) His secrets he reveals. guyham assa āvi karoti
(5) Your secrets he keeps. guyham assa pariguhati
(6) In misfortune he forsakes you not. āpadāsu na jahati
(7) He does not look down (on you) when you
  have failed [are destitute]. khīṇena nâtimaññati

(Piya) Mitta Sutta 1

“Young houselord, there are these 4 who should be known as true-hearted friends:
(1) The helper (upakara)
should be known as a true-hearted friend.
(2) The one constant in joy and in sorrow (samana,sukha,dukkha)
should be known as a
  true-hearted friend.
(3) The good counsellor (atth’akkhayi)
should be known as a true-hearted friend.
(4) The caring (anukampaka)
should be known as a true-hearted friend.
(1) The helper, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons:
(a) He guards you when you are heedless.
  pamattaṁ rakkhati
(b) He guards your property when you are heedless. pamattassa sāpateyyaṁ rakkhati
(c) He is a refuge to you when you are in fear [in danger]. bhītassa saraṇaṁ hoti
(d) When you are faced with tasks, he provides you with double the supplies you need. uppannesu kicca,karaṇīyesu tad
  di,guṇaṁ bhogaṁ anuppadeti
The helper, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons.
(2) The one constant in joy and in sorrow [a friend through thick and thin] should be known as
  a true-hearted friend for these 4 reasons:
(a) He tells you his secrets. guyham assa ācikkhati
(b) He keeps your secrets. guyham assa parigūhati
(c) He does not abandon you in your troubles. āpadāsu na vijahati
(d) He would even give up his life for you. jīvitaṁ pi’ssa atthāya pariccattaṁ hoti
The one who is constant in joy and sorrow, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted
  friend for these four reasons.
(3) The good counsellor [the one who shows benefits or the goal] should be known as a truehearted friend for these four reasons:92
(a) He restrains you from bad. pāpā nivāreti
(b) He exhorts you to do good. kalyāṇe niveseti
(c) He lets you hear what you have not heard before. assutaṁ sāveti
(d) He shows you the way to heaven. saggassa maggaṁ ācikkhati
The good counsellor, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four
  reasons.
(4) The caring should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons:
(a) He does not delight in your misfortunes. abhaven’assa na nandati
(b) He delights in your good fortunes. bhavena’ssa nandati
(c) He prevents others from speaking ill of you. avaṇṇaṁ bhaṇamānaṁ nivāreti
(d) He commends others who speak well of you. vaṇṇaṁ bhaṇamānaṁ pasaṁsati
The one who is caring, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these 4
  reasons.”
The Blessed One said this.
Having said that, the Sugata [the well-farer], the Teacher, further said this:
The friend who is a helper, and the friend in weal and woe,
and the friend who gives good counsel, and the caring friend—
these four are (true) friends, thus the wise should know
and devotes himself with respect as a child would his parents

Sigal’ovada Sutta
At a spiritual level they should have these qualities:

(1) The accomplishment of faith (saddhā,sampadā),
(2) The accomplishment of moral virtue (sīla,sampadā),
(3) The accomplishment of charity (cāga,sampadā),
(4) The accomplishment of wisdom (paññā,sampadā)

Dīgha,janu Sutta
One should disassociate or distance oneself from those with the following qualities:

“Young householder, there are these four who should be known as enemies in the guise of
  friends:
(1) The downright taker,
young householder, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend.
(2) The mere talker,
young householder, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a
  friend.
(3) The sweet-talker,
  young householder, should be known as enemy in the guise of a
  friend.
(4) The destructive companion,
young householder, should be known as an enemy in the
  guise of a friend.
Young householder, these are the four who should be known as enemies in the guise of
  friends.
(1) The downright taker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend for these four reasons:
(a) He only takes (without ever giving). añña-d-atthu,haro hoti
(b) With little, he desires much. appena bahum icchati
(c) He does what needs doing only out of fear. bhayassa kiccaṁ karoti
(d) He serves with an ulterior motive. sevati attha,kāraṇā
The downright taker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for these
  four reasons.
(2) The mere talker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for
  these four reasons:
(a) He claims to having been hospitable in the past. atītena paṭisantharati
(b) He promises hospitality in the future. anāgatena paṭisantharati
(c) He worms his way with empty favours. niratthakena saṅgaṇhāti
(d) In present tasks, he feigns misfortune. paccuppannesu kiccesu vyasanaṁ dasseti
For these four reasons, young houselord, the mere talker should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend.
(3) The sweet talker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for
  these four reasons:
(a) He approves of your doing wrong. pāpakaṁ pi’ssa anujānāti
(b) He approves of your doing right [or disapproves of it,
  depending on what profits him]. kalyāṇaṁ pi’ssa anujānāti
(c) He sings your praises to your face. sammukhāssa vaṇṇaṁ bhāsati
(d) He runs you down behind your back. param,mukhāssa avaṇṇaṁ bhāsati
For these four reasons, young houselord, the sweet talker should be known as an enemy in the guise
  of a friend.
(4) The destructive companion, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend for these four reasons:
(a) He is your companion in taking strong drinks, distilled drinks, fermented drinks that which causes
  heedlessness.
(b) He is your companion in roaming (and loitering in) the streets at unseemly hours.
(c) He is your companion in frequenting fairs [shows].
(d) He is your companion in indulging in gambling, a basis for heedlessness.
For these four reasons, young houselord, the destructive companion should be known as an enemy in
  the guise of a friend.”
The Blessed One said this.
Having said that, the Sugata [the well-farer], the Teacher, further said this:
The friend who merely takes, and the friend who only talks,
and the one who sweet-talks, and the companion who brings destruction—
these four are not friends. Thus the wise should know:
they should be avoided from afar like a dangerous path.

Sigal’ovada Sutta
Associating with false friends will influence you to be more unskillful than what you are in a spiritual sense and fail in a worldly sense. Sometimes true friends may seem like a pain when they watch out for you but they are the ones who make you a better person by helping you prosper in a world sence and be more skilful in a spiritual sense.
Also, see:

Spiritual friendship by Piya Tan
Spiritual Friendship: Stories of Kindness by Piya Tan
Bad friendship by Piya Tan

Compassion isn't the problem, and often requires a bit of courage as it kind of puts you in a place of vulnerability. Not everyone has the guts for that.
The other way around, someone feeling inclined to exploit others compassion is the actual problem, not only for themselves, but also for their surroundings. Everybody loses.
For a friendship to work out, compassion needs to be mutual. And if mutuality isn't possible, refraining from being hurtful is probably all one is obliged to do.

About the last part, i know theres a sutta somewhere for this. Can anyone chime in? I can't find it.

Lest they are willing to be trained at least semi-formally it is probably not going to be beneficial enough compared to prioritizing training.

Usually it is not so because real meditation brings insights. Maybe you should meditate more. Real meditation brings a transformation in consciousness. After meditation you can never be the same.
In my experience, it took me quote some time and effort of meditating to finally see that I was fooling myself all the time. What I called meditation was actually thinking. Thinking can never bring the same results as meditation.
In meditation, mind starts to dissolve and you start falling in trance. Meditation is very intense. You must be emotionally strong and intelectually accomplished before you can expect some real meditation. Accomplished, expert thinkers naturally start meditating and are drawn to the life of a meditator. IMHO, all real meditators used to be expert intellectuals. For example, Blaise Pascal became a meditator in after his phase in physics.
Compassion and friendship for all living entities and detachment from mundane life are qualities of an accomplished meditator. He becomes a being of compassion, a friend in the true sense of the term.
Meditation on compassion or Metta is nicely defined in the suttas. There are proper guidelines and qualifications for performing metta. You should read Karaniya Metta Sutta and Metta (Mettanisamsa) Sutta for full understanding of the process. I wish you best luck in your practice.

It makes me want to rekindle friendships that were not desirable in
  fear that the others would suffer, or give others time and attention
  in ways that somewhat disadvantage me.

It could be you're suffering from mild case of Christ complex.

"The term can also refer to a state of mind in which an individual
  believes that he or she is responsible for saving or assisting
  others..." -- Wikipedia, Messiah complex

Even though others are suffering, you're not responsible for their happiness. Rather that trying to save your friends, instruct them to meditate. They have their own life.

Compassion provides benefits to the recipient of that compassion. You cannot exclude yourself from the practice of immeasurable compassion. See AN7.68:

Two people understand the meaning and the teaching and practice accordingly:
  one practices to benefit themselves but not others, and one practices to benefit both themselves and others.
The person who practices to benefit themselves but not others
  is reprehensible in that respect.
The person who practices to benefit both themselves and others
  is praiseworthy in that respect.

This perspective is somewhat surprising to those who have been taught to benefit  others over self


text:
What kind of life is required for practicing Metta?
Here's the quote from Karaniya Metta Sutta:

"This is to be done by one skilled in aims who wants to break
  through to the state of peace: Be capable, upright, &
  straightforward, easy to instruct, gentle, & not conceited,
content & easy to support,
with few duties, living lightly, with peaceful faculties, masterful, modest, & no greed for supporters."

So one should be content and easy to support, unburdened with duties and living lightly. According to this standard, what is the best lifestyle for practicing Metta? How can one practice Metta in this [predominantly] materialistic world? Is Metta best practiced as a monk?

"content & easy to support" is Santussako ca subharo ca.
There's a fairly long description of that, with sutta references, in this definition of asantuṭṭhitā.
I think that "easy to support" is one of the things that the Buddha said that monks ought to be.
It's a formula, a phrase that's used in several suttas (I imagine it's in the Vinaya too).
The commentary says that the Karaniya Metta Sutta was addressed to a group of all/only monks.

Perception of metta developed even for as long as it takes to pull a cow's udder is of great fruit.

Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, if someone were to give a gift of one hundred serving dishes [of food] in the morning, one hundred at mid-day, and one hundred in the evening; and another person were to develop a mind of good-will — even for the time it takes to pull on a cow's udder — in the morning, again at mid-day, and again in the evening, this [the second action] would be more fruitful than that [the first].
"Thus you should train yourselves: 'Our awareness-release through good-will will be cultivated, developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, & well-undertaken. That's how you should train yourselves." (Sn20.4)
If with uncorrupted mind
  you feel good will
      for even    one being,
  you become skilled from that.
  But a Noble One produces
      a mind of sympathy
      for         all beings,
      an abundance of merit.
  (Can't remember where this is from)

There is a range of conditions required for development such as a human or otherwise suitable birth, desire and effort.
There are various circumstances of beings and some are more conducive than others to development.
Monkhood doesn't guarantee fewness of wishes & projects, nor a conducive environment; it does not guarantee being surrounded by nor being taught right view.
If one wants to develop the mind, is bent on doing it, is willing to hand it reins, even if it means homelessness and poverty; it would be pretty much impossible to stop one from winning.
If one is looking or waiting for favorable conditions, for a good teacher, for the approval from these or those people; one is bent on procastinating and making excuses ala 'i am too busy, i am too stressed, i am too tired, i am too disheartened, i have too much of this or not enough of that etc etc.
Ideally one would have all the blessings and the best circumstances but these things are hard to obtain and are subject to change. Therefore i think one should make most of what is at hand and try to simplify one's livelihood if there is any opening.
Look no further than Theranama Sutta to see that training solo is completely fine.
As for livelihood (a job or smthn) it isn't necessarily a disqualifying factor and there is rìght livelihood.

Metta is to be friendly in mind and in action. Metta meditation help develop this mentally by:

breaking distinction who you would teat certain people and / groups of people
develop qualities of friendship in mind which can later manifest as actions

OP: What kind of life is required for practicing Metta?

You can be at any point when you start Metta. But as you develop one should develop the quality of friendship. This does not mean one should associate with everyone but maintaining proper distance one can develop the qualities in the following quotes:

(1) He is pleasant [loving]. piyo ca hoti
(2) He is agreeable. manāpo ca
(3) He is respectful. garu ca
(4) He is worthy of respect. bhāvanīyo ca
(5) He admonishes, patient when admonished. vattā ca vacana-k,khamo ca
(6) He is profound in conversation. gambhīrañ ca kathaṁ kattā hoti,
(7) He does not engage us in the impossible. no ca aṭṭhāne niyojeti.

(Piya) Mitta Sutta 2

(1) He gives what is difficult to give. duddadaṁ dadāti
(2) He does what is difficult to do. dukkaraṁ karoti
(3) He tolerates what is difficult to tolerate. dukkhamaṁ khamati
(4) His secrets he reveals. guyham assa āvi karoti
(5) Your secrets he keeps. guyham assa pariguhati
(6) In misfortune he forsakes you not. āpadāsu na jahati
(7) He does not look down (on you) when you
  have failed [are destitute]. khīṇena nâtimaññati

(Piya) Mitta Sutta 1

“Young houselord, there are these 4 who should be known as true-hearted friends:
(1) The helper (upakara)
should be known as a true-hearted friend.
(2) The one constant in joy and in sorrow (samana,sukha,dukkha)
should be known as a
  true-hearted friend.
(3) The good counsellor (atth’akkhayi)
should be known as a true-hearted friend.
(4) The caring (anukampaka)
should be known as a true-hearted friend.
(1) The helper, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons:
(a) He guards you when you are heedless.
  pamattaṁ rakkhati
(b) He guards your property when you are heedless. pamattassa sāpateyyaṁ rakkhati
(c) He is a refuge to you when you are in fear [in danger]. bhītassa saraṇaṁ hoti
(d) When you are faced with tasks, he provides you with double the supplies you need. uppannesu kicca,karaṇīyesu tad
  di,guṇaṁ bhogaṁ anuppadeti
The helper, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons.
(2) The one constant in joy and in sorrow [a friend through thick and thin] should be known as
  a true-hearted friend for these 4 reasons:
(a) He tells you his secrets. guyham assa ācikkhati
(b) He keeps your secrets. guyham assa parigūhati
(c) He does not abandon you in your troubles. āpadāsu na vijahati
(d) He would even give up his life for you. jīvitaṁ pi’ssa atthāya pariccattaṁ hoti
The one who is constant in joy and sorrow, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted
  friend for these four reasons.
(3) The good counsellor [the one who shows benefits or the goal] should be known as a truehearted friend for these four reasons:92
(a) He restrains you from bad. pāpā nivāreti
(b) He exhorts you to do good. kalyāṇe niveseti
(c) He lets you hear what you have not heard before. assutaṁ sāveti
(d) He shows you the way to heaven. saggassa maggaṁ ācikkhati
The good counsellor, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four
  reasons.
(4) The caring should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons:
(a) He does not delight in your misfortunes. abhaven’assa na nandati
(b) He delights in your good fortunes. bhavena’ssa nandati
(c) He prevents others from speaking ill of you. avaṇṇaṁ bhaṇamānaṁ nivāreti
(d) He commends others who speak well of you. vaṇṇaṁ bhaṇamānaṁ pasaṁsati
The one who is caring, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these 4
  reasons.”
The Blessed One said this.
Having said that, the Sugata [the well-farer], the Teacher, further said this:
The friend who is a helper, and the friend in weal and woe,
and the friend who gives good counsel, and the caring friend—
these four are (true) friends, thus the wise should know
and devotes himself with respect as a child would his parents

Sigal’ovada Sutta
At a spiritual level one should try to develop these qualities:

(1) The accomplishment of faith (saddhā,sampadā),
(2) The accomplishment of moral virtue (sīla,sampadā),
(3) The accomplishment of charity (cāga,sampadā),
(4) The accomplishment of wisdom (paññā,sampadā)

Dīgha,janu Sutta

OP: So one should be content and easy to support, unburdened with duties and living lightly.

This is not limited to those who want to practice Metta. This is a general list of qualities for those who want to be liberated.
Content:- One should be content in 12 way, i.e., concent in 3 ways (based on what is received, based on one's strengths and what is benefiting) with regard to the 4 requisites (robes, alms, logging and medicine). E.g. if one receives a robe which is too heavy one will exchange it to a lighter one with a fellow monastic.
Easy to support:- When one is content one is easy to support.
Few duties:- one should not burden oneself with undue responsibilities and activities. One must discharge due responsibilities and activities.
Living lightly:- one equanimous towards Eight Worldly Conditions and unburdened.

OP: Is Metta best practiced as a monk?

Metta can be practised by anyone. Above passage list qualities of would who want to develop spiritually. These qualities can be adopted to a householder's life too.

OP: How can one practice Metta in this [predominantly] materialistic world?

This is by being friendly in mind and in action, without hurting or compromising oneself. In the material world one must ensure there is some distance so one is not hurt by bad friends:

“Young householder, there are these four who should be known as enemies in the guise of
  friends:
(1) The downright taker,
young householder, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend.
(2) The mere talker,
young householder, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a
  friend.
(3) The sweet-talker,
  young householder, should be known as enemy in the guise of a
  friend.
(4) The destructive companion,
young householder, should be known as an enemy in the
  guise of a friend.
Young householder, these are the four who should be known as enemies in the guise of
  friends.
(1) The downright taker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend for these four reasons:
(a) He only takes (without ever giving). añña-d-atthu,haro hoti
(b) With little, he desires much. appena bahum icchati
(c) He does what needs doing only out of fear. bhayassa kiccaṁ karoti
(d) He serves with an ulterior motive. sevati attha,kāraṇā
The downright taker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for these
  four reasons.
(2) The mere talker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for
  these four reasons:
(a) He claims to having been hospitable in the past. atītena paṭisantharati
(b) He promises hospitality in the future. anāgatena paṭisantharati
(c) He worms his way with empty favours. niratthakena saṅgaṇhāti
(d) In present tasks, he feigns misfortune. paccuppannesu kiccesu vyasanaṁ dasseti
For these four reasons, young houselord, the mere talker should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend.
(3) The sweet talker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for
  these four reasons:
(a) He approves of your doing wrong. pāpakaṁ pi’ssa anujānāti
(b) He approves of your doing right [or disapproves of it,
  depending on what profits him]. kalyāṇaṁ pi’ssa anujānāti
(c) He sings your praises to your face. sammukhāssa vaṇṇaṁ bhāsati
(d) He runs you down behind your back. param,mukhāssa avaṇṇaṁ bhāsati
For these four reasons, young houselord, the sweet talker should be known as an enemy in the guise
  of a friend.
(4) The destructive companion, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend for these four reasons:
(a) He is your companion in taking strong drinks, distilled drinks, fermented drinks that which causes
  heedlessness.
(b) He is your companion in roaming (and loitering in) the streets at unseemly hours.
(c) He is your companion in frequenting fairs [shows].
(d) He is your companion in indulging in gambling, a basis for heedlessness.
For these four reasons, young houselord, the destructive companion should be known as an enemy in
  the guise of a friend.”
The Blessed One said this.
Having said that, the Sugata [the well-farer], the Teacher, further said this:
The friend who merely takes, and the friend who only talks,
and the one who sweet-talks, and the companion who brings destruction—
these four are not friends. Thus the wise should know:
they should be avoided from afar like a dangerous path.

Sigal’ovada Sutta