text:
Where can I find an English translation of a Bön text called the Ma Gyud / Ma Gyudr (Mother Tantra)?
There is a Bön text I found out about recently that I’ve spent a lot of time looking for but haven’t been able to find anywhere as an English translation.
The text is:
Ma Gyud / Ma Gyudr / Ma Rgyud (Mother Tantra). I think the full translation of the name of the book is: Mother Tantra: The Tantric Cycle of the Sun of Compassion (Ma rgyud thugs rje nyi ma'i rgyud skor). Or it might also be: Secret Mother Tantra Cycle (Ma rgyud gsang skor), which was first promulgated among humanity by the Royal Shen Milu Samleg / Samlek [Mi lus bsams legs]
I found references to the Mother Tantra in Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche’s book “The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep”. I’ve also come across some more info about it and its structure here: http://www.surajamrita.com/bon/MotherTantra.html There might also be some other names for it here: http://drenpa-namkha.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/A-Title-of-mother-tantra.pdf
I’d really love to read and practice from the source material. I suspect, however, that there may not be an English translation of it available, as I haven’t found any traces of it online.
Would anyone be able to point me to a page or pdf online of this original text where it’s been translated, or send me a copy if you have one? Or alternatively, know of an English translation I could buy as a kindle or physical book?
Thanks in advance for any help!


text:
Suttas of 6 qualities of dhamma
The 6 qualities of the Dhamma are

Svakkhato, 2. Samditthiko, 3. Akaliko, 4. Ehipassiko, 5. Opaneyiko, 6. Paccattam veditabbo vinnunhi

according to here.
This website claims that the source is

Anguttara Nikaya 11.12

But I couldn't find such words in this sutta.
Does anyone knows the source of these words?

Sometimes the numbering of the suttas especially in Anguttara Nikaya could be off by one or two in either direction, due to the original source of the edition e.g. Pali Text Society, Mahasangiti Tipitaka, Buddha Jayanti Tipitaka, Vipassana Research Institute,  etc. Please also see Tripitaka Section Numbering.
I found the stated text in AN 11.11 (below) in SuttaCentral, translated by Ven. Sujato, which is based on the Mahasangiti Tipitaka edition.

‘The teaching is well explained by the Buddha—visible in this very
life, immediately effective, inviting inspection, relevant, so that
sensible people can know it for themselves.’
‘svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattaṁ veditabbo viññūhī’ti.

However, on AccessToInsight.org, it's AN 11.12 (below), translated by Ven. Thanissaro, and it seems to be based on the Pali Text Society edition.

'The
Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here & now,
timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise
for themselves.'
'svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opanayiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī'ti

The Pali word opaneyyiko above is a bit different from opanayiko below, if you notice.

Thank you so much. In the end, it was AN 11.11., But not AN 11.12. Great.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Suggestion for movie in English (or subtitled in English) that shows a person modeling good/bad Buddhist behavior
I apologize in advance if this question is not in the scope of this SE.
Rather than read about the principles of Buddhism, I'd rather experience the practice of Buddhism through watching a movie.  Is there a movie that shows a character learning about Buddhism demonstrating good and bad behaviors as the character learns?  For example, something makes the character angry and the movie shows how the person reacts "in a Buddhist way" or reacts in a way that shows the outcome as it relates to Buddhist principles?
Preferable to be in the English language and entertaining for adults.

From the top of my head Samsara by nalin pan and spring summer autumn winter spring...

Related: What are some entertaining/fictional movies, books, etc. about Buddhadharma or Buddha himself?

I think most of movies are relate to karma, to keep peoples' eyes on the movie. It's depending on the watcher karma analysis skill, PubbenivasAnussatiNana+CutUpapataNana, whether "which resultants are possible or not". Karma is complicated depending on uncountable mind-moment (trillion times per second) through uncountable reborn, so it's not easy to present on the show even for the Nana mastery.

Documentaries: dharma-documentaries.net has hundreds of documentaries, some in English, covering all schools of Buddhism and several related topics (like Shugendo). And fictional/semi-fictional films, not in English, but personally my favorite Buddhist movies are Spring Summer Fall Winter Spring, Why Has Bodhidharma Left For The East, The Burmese Harp, and Zen (2009 — you don't have to like modern Soto to appreciate this one).

Not a movie, but original greek stoicism comes quite close to buddhism in terms of action.

In terms of movie, I think the closes would be Jedi masters, yoda for example. They have overlapping ideology to buddhists.

There might be movies on "the life of the Buddha" out there, which can be assumed as the best sample behavior => buddhist behavior. But to simply follow his heir, the monks, would be of more use than to stay at home and watch movies, waste time by dreaming...

There is little Buddha with keano reeves playing Buddha (lol I know) which is more about Tibetan Buddhism and reincarnation of a Lhama with the Buddhas life story as a back drop.
Samsara, Tibetan movie so subtitles which is about a monk who cannot reconcile his desire for sex so goes into a family life but is always torn between both lifestyles.
Then there is seven years in Tibet which is a biographic movie about a german mountain climber who goes to Tibet during WW2. Bets movie of the 3 but only really has Buddhist influence rather than showing what Buddhist life is.
None of these are really what you are asking for except maybe the parts of Buddhas life in little Buddha but i honestly do not know of any actual movies that are Buddhist in nature that really explains the concepts of Buddhism. Kind of ironic that movies are idle entertainment so not really something a devout Buddhist practitioner would waste time on making and the actual Buddhas teachings do not translate into a movie like that, they are wisdom about reality not a fickle concept or story.

I like this video of a Thai nun: Perspective : ตามติดชีวิต ภิกษุณีธัมมทีปา | Wonder women [4 มิ.ย. 60] Full HD

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


text:
Looking for a quote, sutta or teaching about suffering not decreasing with succedent stages of enlightenment
I have heard about this before from a video teaching I watched before but I honestly cannot remember from who or where.
The idea of the concept is that as one progresses upon the stages towards arhant Dukkha does not actually decrease and in fact can be seen or seems to increase.
for eg a puttajanna is not concerned about death or freedom from the cycle of existence on a day to day bases where a Sotapanna is consistently concerned about these things that in fact a Sotapanna suffers more because of their more ultimate concerns, where I guess a putajanna is in a sort of blissful ignorance.
Any direct from the Buddha or third party teachings on this concept would be welcome.

The whole point of being a Sotapanna and higher stages is to know the dharma, and that there is an end to suffering and know that things will go well for them. It's impossible to have suffering increasing, especially by simple perceptions.
It is actually the non-enlightened people who freak out when they hear the dharma
https://suttacentral.net/an4.33/en/bodhi
The only framework where terror arises is the made up 16 knowledges which are not found in the sutras. like ruben explained https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/47543/14789
The fears sotapanna and so on have is to make moral mistake, ie breaking the precepts and so on.

Then Anathapindika the householder went to the Blessed One and, on
arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he
was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, "When, for a disciple
of the noble ones, five forms of fear & animosity are stilled; when he
is endowed with the four factors of stream entry; and when, through
discernment, he has rightly seen & rightly ferreted out the noble
method, then if he wants he may state about himself: 'Hell is ended;
animal wombs are ended; the state of the hungry ghosts is ended;
states of deprivation, destitution, the bad bourns are ended! I am a
stream-winner, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe,
headed for self-awakening!'
"Now, which five forms of danger & animosity are stilled?
"When a person takes life, then with the taking of life as a requisite
condition, he produces fear & animosity in the here & now, produces
fear & animosity in future lives, experiences mental concomitants of
pain & despair; but when he refrains from taking life, he neither
produces fear & animosity in the here & now nor does he produce fear &
animosity in future lives, nor does he experience mental concomitants
of pain & despair: for one who refrains from taking life, that fear &
animosity is thus stilled.
"When a person steals... engages in illicit sex... tells lies...
"When a person drinks distilled & fermented drinks that cause
heedlessness, then with the drinking of distilled & fermented drinks
that cause heedlessness as a requisite condition, he produces fear &
animosity in the here & now, produces fear & animosity in future
lives, experiences mental concomitants of pain & despair; but when he
refrains from drinking distilled & fermented drinks that cause
heedlessness, he neither produces fear & animosity in the here & now
nor does he produce fear & animosity in future lives, nor does he
experience mental concomitants of pain & despair: for one who refrains
from drinking distilled & fermented drinks that cause heedlessness,
that fear & animosity is thus stilled.
"These are the five forms of fear & animosity that are stilled."
— AN 10.92

For those on the Noble Eightfold Path, disagreeable things in general decrease over time:

MN46:4.3: So they cultivate and foster practices they should, and don’t cultivate and foster practices they shouldn’t.
MN46:4.4: When they do so, unlikable, undesirable, and disagreeable things decrease, and likable, desirable, and agreeable things increase.

But there are four ways to practice. In particular, let's look at the painful ones. First the practice to avoid current and future pain decreases pain by avoidance, so it doesn't lead to an increase in suffering:

MN46:5.3: There is a way of taking up practices that is painful now and results in future pain.

Second, if we avoid pleasant things to avoid future pain, then a hedonist might consider that a "momentary increase of suffering". An example might be avoiding exciting and loud music concerts to prevent future deafness:

MN46:5.4: There is a way of taking up practices that is pleasant now but results in future pain.

Third, we do or endure something painful now for future pleasure:

MN46:16.2: It’s when someone in pain and sadness doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech that’s false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re contented, kind-hearted, with right view. Because of these things they experience pain and sadness.
MN46:16.12: But when their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.
MN46:16.13: This is called the way of taking up practices that is painful now but results in future pleasure.

This third practice it tough. It has us face and deal with painful things instead of running away from them or giving in to anger. Some may choose to see this as an "increase in suffering", but even that increase is momentary, since in the long run suffering lessens overall.
As practice deepens, our awareness increases about what results in future pain. And with an increased awareness of future pain, we act now to avoid that future pain. Paradoxically, that ever-sharpening awareness of future pain leads to contentment with fewer and fewer wishes.

I don't know about a quote or a video, but to me this is straightforward from the three marks of existence. When you say 'stages of enlightenment' I assume you mean all those times before enlightenment which of course are bound up with samsara and hence have the three marks of existence.
The first mark of existence is anitya or impermanence. The relevant point here is that this mark of impermanence characterizes each and every moment. There is no moment of existence not characterized by this mark of change. This is true of all of those existing moments along those stages of enlightenment.
The second mark of existence is dukkha or suffering. Now, "suffering" is technically not a great translation, but this is what I believe you are referring to in your question: dukkha. There are three kinds of dukkha:

The suffering of pain - which happens to everyone including Bodhisattvas
The suffering of change - which is pleasure to pain or pain to pleasure or the change associated with the first mark
All pervasive suffering - existential pain or just the pervasive feeling of nothing being quite right

Just from a cursory look at these definitions it is clear that all three correspond to sentient beings. The last two are with us constantly while the first one comes and goes. Moreover, it is hard to understand how these - being literal marks of existence - not pertain to any sentient existing being regardless where they are on the path. If you are on the path and haven't reached the goal you are subject to these marks of existence.
And indeed I think it could very well be the case that further progress on the path can lead to more not less of say #1 at least. Bodhisattvas are regularly depicted as voluntarily going into the depths of hell to save sentient beings and thus subjecting themselves to the worst kinds of pain. The latter two are with us more or less constantly although when our minds are focused on virtue they do seem to abate or at least do not overpower us so much. At least that is my experience.

"The four stages of awakening in Early Buddhism and Theravada are four progressive stages ..." That suffering doesn't decrease with successive stages might be counter-intuitive, instead you might imagine that things would get easier as the various fetters are abandoned.

Chris this is what I am looking for that in fact suffering increases after each successful stage towards enlightenment. I have head this statement before, or more accurately that suffering intensifies after each stage and I am looking for the direct source of the statement.

The Visuddhimagga or the Path of Purification by Ven. Buddhaghosa talks about this. Please see "Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga)", translated from Pali by Ven. Ñāṇamoli. It's a classic manual of Buddhist doctrine and meditation written in approximately the 5th century CE, and is considered the most important Theravada text outside the Pali Canon and its traditional commentaries.
It talks about the eight knowledges of insight:

Now,  insight  reaches  its  culmination  with  the  eight
knowledges,  and knowledge in conformity with truth is ninth; these
are what is called purification by  knowledge  and  vision  of  the
way.The  eight  should  be  understood  as  follows:  (1)  knowledge
of  contemplation of rise and fall, which is insight free from
imperfections and steady on its course,(2) knowledge of contemplation
of dissolution, (3) knowledge of appearance as terror, (4) knowledge
of contemplation of danger, (5) knowledge of contemplation of
dispassion,  (6)  knowledge  of  desire  for  deliverance,  (7)
knowledge  of contemplation of reflection, and (8) knowledge of
equanimity about formations.
“Knowledge  in  conformity  with  truth
as  ninth”  is  a  term  for  conformity.So one who wants to perfect
this should make these kinds of knowledge his task, starting with
knowledge of rise and fall free from imperfections.

The description of (3) knowledge of appearance as terror:

As  he  repeats,  develops  and  cultivates  in  this  way  the
contemplation  of dissolution,  the  object  of  which  is  cessation
consisting  in  the  destruction,  fall and breakup of all formations,
then formations classed according to all kinds of becoming,
generation, destiny, station, or abode of beings, appear to him in the
form of a great terror, as lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas,
spirits, ogres, fierce bulls,  savage  dogs,  rut-maddened  wild
elephants,  hideous  venomous  serpents,thunderbolts,  charnel
grounds,  battlefields,  flaming  coal  pits,  etc.,  appear  to  a
timid man who wants to live in peace. When he sees how past formations
have ceased,  present  ones  are  ceasing,  and  those  to  be
generated  in  the  future  will cease  in  just  the  same  way,
then  what  is  called  knowledge  of  appearance  as terror  arises
in  him  at  that  stage. ...
But  does  the  knowledge  of  appearance  as  terror  [itself]  fear
or  does  it  not fear? It does not fear. For it is simply the mere
judgment that past formations have ceased, present ones are ceasing,
and future ones will cease. Just as a man with eyes  looking  at
three  charcoal  pits  at  a  city  gate  is  not  himself  afraid,
since  he only  forms  the  mere  judgment  that  all  who  fall  into
them  will  suffer  no  little pain;—or  just  as  when  a  man  with
eyes  looks  at  three  spikes  set  in  a  row,  an acacia  spike,
an  iron  spike,  and  a  gold  spike,  he  is  not  himself  afraid,
since  he only  forms  the  mere  judgment  that  all  who  fall  on
these  spikes  will  suffer  no little pain;—so too the knowledge of
appearance as terror does not itself fear; it only forms the mere
judgment that in the three kinds of becoming, which resemble the three
charcoal pits and the three spikes, past formations have ceased,
present ones  are  ceasing,  and  future  ones  will  cease.

The description of (4) knowledge of contemplation of danger:

As  he  repeats,  develops  and  cultivates  the  knowledge  of
appearance  as terror he finds no asylum, no shelter, no place to go
to, no refuge in any kind of becoming,  generation,  destiny,
station,  or  abode.  In  all  the  kinds  of  becoming,generation,
destiny, station, and abode there is not a single formation that he
can place his hopes in or hold on to. The three kinds of becoming
appear like charcoal pits  full  of  glowing  coals,  the  four
primary  elements  like  hideous  venomous snakes (S IV 174), the five
aggregates like murderers with raised weapons (S IV174),  the  six
internal  bases  like  an  empty  village,  the  six  external  bases
like village-raiding  robbers  (S  IV  174–75),  the  seven  stations
of  consciousness  and the  nine  abodes  of  beings  as  though
burning,  blazing  and  glowing  with  the eleven  fires  (see  S  IV
19),  and  all  formations  appear  as  a  huge  mass  of  dangers
destitute of satisfaction or substance, like a tumour, a disease, a
dart, a calamity,an affliction (see M I 436). How?
They  appear  as  a  forest  thicket  of  seemingly  pleasant  aspect
but  infested with wild beasts, a cave full of tigers, water haunted
by monsters and ogres, an enemy  with  raised  sword,  poisoned  food,
a  road  beset  by  robbers,  a  burning coal, a battlefield between
contending armies appear to a timid man who wants to  live  in  peace.
And  just  as  that  man  is  frightened  and  horrified  and  his
hair stands  up  when  he  comes  upon  a  thicket  infested  by  wild
beasts,  etc.,  and  he sees  it  as  nothing  but  danger,  so  too
when  all  formations  have  appeared  as  a terror by contemplation
of dissolution, this meditator sees them as utterly destitute of  any
core  or  any  satisfaction  and  as  nothing  but  danger.

Apparently, this will transition into a knowledge of peace:

“He  contemplates as suffering
Arising, occurrence, and the sign,
Accumulation, rebirth-linking —
And this his knowledge is of danger.
“He contemplates as bliss no arising,
And no occurrence, and no sign,
No accumulation, no rebirth-linking —
And this his knowledge is of peace.
“This knowledge about danger has
Five sources for its origin;
Knowledge of peace has also five —
Ten knowledges he understands.

Knowledge of the state of peace is this: “Non-arising is safety,”
etc.: this, however, should  be understood as said for the purpose of
showing the opposite kind of knowledge to knowledge of danger. Or when
it is stated in this way, that there is safety without terror and
free from danger, it is for the purpose of comforting those  who are
upset in their hearts by seeing danger through appearance as terror.
Or  else,  when  arising,  etc., have clearly appeared to a man as
terror, his mind  inclines towards their opposites, and  so this is
said  for the purpose of showing  the advantages in the knowledge of
danger established by the appearance as terror.

So, the mind first sees the terror of the inevitability of the cessation of phenomena, and then experiences danger when it realizes that there is no place to cling to for safety from the inevitability of the cessation of phenomena. Finally, it accepts this situation, and sees non-arising etc. as safety.
Hence, to me, the knowledge of appearance as terror and knowledge of contemplation of danger sound like the increasing of suffering as one progresses on the path to liberation.


text:
Stories and teachings that glorify adult children and speak against toxic parenting
I have seen that in Buddhist as well as Hindu traditions, parents are considered as benevolent beings who should be venerated and put in a pedestal. Stories, verses, and myths about praises for parents are plenty.
However, toxic parenting must have been present in the past and surely there could be something about evil parents in some Buddhist teaching? Consider parents who are narcissist, control-freaks, irresponsible, or just plain unqualified to raise kids in a healthy manner. Parents who treat their children as their possessions and not independent beings should not receive the same praises, should they? There are enough parents who constantly put down and actively try to harm their own children. How could one say that such parents are saintly beings? How does the act of being a parent by simply giving birth and doing the bare minimum that everyone does makes someone a noble person? Almost everybody in the world would be noble by that definition.
Don't children who had bad parenting deserve more compassion and respect? Could someone point me to Buddhist stories and teachings, and mantras/verses talking about the evils of megalomaniac and narcissist individuals who are terrible parents?

Related posts:

Relationship with bad parents (kamma and issues)
How should a Buddhist approach honoring parents who abused them?
Must I continue a relationship with my abusive parents?
I want to leave my mother
What does Buddhism teach about abusive parents?
Not listening to parents is bad karma?
I need an answer as to why i received a mother who makes me feel like an outcaste?
What did Buddha say about dysfunctional families for novice practitioners?

Yes. There is a teaching from the Buddha that is very practical about this.
He exhorts you to be the son or daughter who is superior to their unvirtuous parents.

“Now what, bhikkhus, is the superior kind of son? In this instance a
son has a mother and father who have not gone for refuge to the
Buddha, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha; who do not abstain from
taking life, from taking what has not been given, from wrong conduct
in sensual desires, from false speech, and from intoxicating drink
leading to negligence;who are unvirtuous and of bad conduct. But the
son is one who has gone for refuge to the Buddha, to the Dhamma, and
to the Sangha; who abstains from taking life, from taking what has not
been given, from wrong conduct in sensual desires, from false speech,
and from intoxicating drink leading to negligence; who is virtuous and
of good conduct. This, bhikkhus, is the superior kind of son.
Iti 74

However, you can still help your unvirtuous parents by introducing them to the Dhamma, the Buddha's teachings, which is the greatest gift in the world (Iti 100).

"I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay.
Which two? Your mother & father. Even if you were to carry your mother
on one shoulder & your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and
were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, & rubbing
their limbs, and they were to defecate & urinate right there [on your
shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. If
you were to establish your mother & father in absolute sovereignty
over this great earth, abounding in the seven treasures, you would not
in that way pay or repay your parents. Why is that? Mother & father do
much for their children. They care for them, they nourish them, they
introduce them to this world. But anyone who rouses his unbelieving
mother & father, settles & establishes them in conviction; rouses his
unvirtuous mother & father, settles & establishes them in virtue;
rouses his stingy mother & father, settles & establishes them in
generosity; rouses his foolish mother & father, settles & establishes
them in discernment: To this extent one pays & repays one's mother &
father."
AN 2.32

However, if they are not interested in listening to the Dhamma, don't waste your time.

Now at that time Venerable Kassapagotta, having withdrawn for his
day’s meditation, tried to advise a tribal hunter. Then the deity
haunting that forest approached Kassapagotta wanting to stir him up,
and recited these verses:

“A tribal hunter wandering the rugged hills
is unintelligent, unthinking.
It’s a waste of time to advise him;
this mendicant seems to me like an idiot.
The tribal hunter listens without understanding,
he looks without seeing.
Though the teaching is spoken,
the fool doesn’t get it.
Even if you lit ten lamps
and brought them to him, Kassapa,
he wouldn’t see anything,
for he has no eyes to see.”

Impelled by that deity, Venerable Kassapagotta was struck with a sense
of urgency.
SN 9.3

Thanks for the answer! There are people (including parents) who are so toxic and self-centered that they would not be open to accepting anyone's teaching, even Buddha's! No matter what one tries, there are toxic parents who would continue on the wrong path. Is there also something about such people/parents? Thanks again!

@rivfelder If they are not interested in listening to the Dhamma, don't waste your time. I have added a sutta quote stating this.

Thanks for iti74. I have added "how does a child" to Voice examples.

Thanks! @OyaMist where have you added it?

@rivfelder https://voice.suttacentral.net has key search phrases used to find particular suttas.  These key phrases can provide a mnemonic basis for study and recollection of the suttas. Ven. Sujato's translations are remarkably consistent and extensive, making them particularly useful for search by key phrase.

Thanks @OyaMist! I know about Suttacentral and Ven. Sujato's work. I was not sure whether you added a new answer or a comment. Appreciate your adding the search phrase to Suttacentral! Are any of you aware of some stories (e.g., from Jataka tales) about such parents or their children?

@rivfelder you might ask the SuttaCentral community directly on the SC Discourse&Discover forum, which is more interactive than BSE. I useBSE for exploring suttas or concepts I haven't yet studied and D&D more for discussion.

A bad example is still one to learn from. We can learn from others' mistakes. And in this way, we can understand that what the Buddha said is still true:

iti106:3.2: ‘First teachers’ is a term for your parents.

Over our lifetimes, we encounter many teachers. Some may have taught us with awareness. Others may have taught us by their mistakes. And however it is that we learn, it makes sense to acknowledge that time of learning, that gift of wisdom that passed on to us.
The Buddha had many teachers. He listened and practiced carefully, deciding for himself what was skillful and leading to peace. And when he learned all he could from his teachers, he would take his leave to seek deeper knowledge.

MN26:15.34: Then it occurred to me,
MN26:15.35: ‘This teaching doesn’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. It only leads as far as rebirth in the dimension of nothingness.’
MN26:15.36: Realizing that this teaching was inadequate, I left disappointed.
MN26:16.1: I set out to discover what is skillful, seeking the supreme state of sublime peace. I approached Uddaka, son of Rāma, and said to him,
MN26:16.2: ‘Reverend, I wish to lead the spiritual life in this teaching and training.’

If a teaching is inadequate, we leave disappointed. Yet in that leaving, we will still need to remember and acknowledge the lessons learned. If a teacher is toxic, then we have learned the dangers of toxicity. And if we forget those lessons, then we run the danger of being toxic ourselves. There is no glorification here, however. There is a simple acknowledgement of what was learned.
So let us seek and share the skillful that brings us peace, acknowledging the skillful lessons learned from all our teachers, starting with our parents, the first teachers.

yes the point of learning from bad examples is well taken, but are there some stories, examples, or other contexts about adult children of toxic parenting?


text:
Questions about Chogyam Trungpa's unique presentation of the five skandhas?
I've recently begun reading the new book Cynicism and Magic - Intelligence & Intuition on the Buddhist Path by Chogyam Trungpa. This is my first book by this renowned teacher.
In Chapter 3 of this book I read an explanation of the five skandhas I've never seen before. The explanation mesmerized as it stirred memories of a profound experience long ago in my past. After reading this chapter I was struck by the seeming similarity to an answer I vaguely remembered reading on this site about dependent origination. With a little bit of search of the site and remembering it came from our Andriy - I've found it. This answer on D.O. (dependent origination) resonated deeply with me at the time although I was not really sure why.
Here is a small excerpt from Chapter 3, page 25-28 of the book:

The starting point for the skandhas is bewilderment. We are completely
bewildered. Not in the sense of stupidity or ignorance, but we are
bewildered in the sense of not having anything to lay our hands on.
Everybody possesses this bewilderment. Whether you call it emptiness,
openness, or groundlessness, it is always there.
THE FIRST SKANDHA: FORM
At some point, we try to make a home out of this situation. We would
like to build a secure home out of our bewilderment. We grope all over
the place, not having such a thing as ourselves. Though there is a
sense of flow, we make that flow itself an entity, a false entity.
That constant groping creates "you" and "other." A sense of duality, a
sense of separateness develops, which is a false notion. But that
falsity seems to be much more secure than the truth, which has no
substance and which we find somewhat overpowering. We don't want to
face reality -- it's too brilliant, too dazzling, too hot, too cold.
We would like to compromise and make ourselves comfortable.
You have no idea whether you have the right to do this or not, because
nobody's judging, and that groping process, trying to find a base of
some kind, creates a further sense of being lost. You begin to realize
that you have to provide your own ground, your own seat, your own rug,
your own chair, your own table, your own ceiling, and your own walls.
All kinds of things have to be created, otherwise there isn't anything
at all. That kind of basic panic, or perhaps you could call it basic
creativity, is the origin of the first skandha, what's known as the
skandha of form. You made everything out of nothing. There is a
dichotomy there: you haven't made it, but you have made it, somehow.
You made false out of true.
According to Buddha's teaching, this first experience of bewilderment
is called "basic bewilderment." It is basic to everything; it's a
constant experience in everyday life. It takes place in every
conversation, between activities, and during activities. Our life is
governed by this false notion of something that we are holding on to.
Traditionally this basic bewilderment is known as avidya. Vidya in
Sanskrit means "inner cognitive mind functioning," and the a at the
beginning means "non," so avidya means "ignorance." Avidya is not
cognition in the ordinary sense of the consciousness that functions in
daily life; it is the subconscious mind that has a sense of
double-ness, two-ness and duality. It has a sense of wholesomeness, a
sense of being. "I exist because the other exists. Therefore, I
could create my realm and have a sense of being." That experience also
becomes, ironically, very powerfully joyful to a lot of people. We say,
"Phew, we made it. We found it." We found what? We found it. There
is something, at least there is something. What is it? "I don't
know, but nevertheless there is something happening. Isn't that great?
Something is taking place." It is extremely hopeful. It's worth
celebrating. But at this point we are celebrating avidya. We are
celebrating that we are completely stupid.
And then stupidity replaces bewilderment. Of course, it is really
comfortable to be stupid. You could play dumb, as if nothing is
happening around you, as if everything's okay. You never look around
and you never ask questions. Questions such as "How?" "Why?" "When?"
"Where?" and "What?" are regarded as very dangerous to utter. We
simply say, "is," "am," and "I am." "I," if you just say it by itself,
feels somewhat shaky, unless you say "am," which qualifies the I-ness.
Then we need a further reference point and reassurance, so it becomes
"I am happy," or "I am sad," which qualifies the whole, stupid
statement. "I am happy," or "I am sad," or "I am such and such," is
the utterance of stupidity.
That's the basic form that we have created, which isn't to say -- and
I would like to emphasize this -- that this situation was created
"once upon a time," that there was a "fall of man" and then everybody
was bad and confused. This experience, this situation, takes place
constantly in our everyday lives. The basis of our operation, and
activity, is bewilderment and stupidity.
THE SECOND SKANDHA: FEELING
From there, we develop the second stage of ego's development, which is
the skandha of feeling. You feel piggish, dumb and you are growing --
now that you have created a solidified self. You have developed a big
head, a thick neck, and a swollen face. Your eyes are tiny, your mouth
can hardly move, and your ears are sinking in. You are almost a
cast-iron statue of "me" sitting there. You can't even turn your head
because your neck is stiff and swollen. You begin to feel that the
silence of the stupidity that you have created is somewhat suspicious.
There may be something wrong. You turn to look around, back and forth,
trying to develop some kind of feeling. From there, we grope around to
experience distinct feedback -- pleasurable, painful or neutral
feelings. It's like the traditional analogy of the pig exploring
piggery, trying to find food, trying to develop some kind of
discrimination. So if you come across a pebble, you reject it; if you
come across a piece of meat or fruit, you try to eat it up. It's a
very simple level of feeling, an animal or ape instinct.
Maybe you have developed an eloquent or beautiful style, as if nothing
is wrong. You try to hide your clumsiness and try to avoid letting
anybody else see it. We usually try to be very smooth and genteel.
However, that sense of animal-ness or ape-ness is still there, and is
particularly evident when we begin to deal with the sharp edges of our
experience, which we usually ignore. The sharp edges of situations
challenge our stupidity, and present the potential of nonexistence,
nonego. You try to be graceful, but never quite succeed. You feel as
if someone is watching over your shoulder all the time. You are being
extremely clumsy, but at the same time, you are inquisitive. You want
to explore the world outside. You want to give and take at a very
simple level. This is feeling.

I want to note a few points that I find unique about this presentation. Please let me know if you read this in the same way?

The emphasis on the fact what is described is a constant occurrence in every moment of life. Trungpa specifically emphasizes that he is not talking about a singular event, but rather "this situation, takes place constantly in our everyday lives."
In explaining form, Trungpa seems to be starting with the first link in D.O. of Avidya which he describes as basic bewilderment that comes about when primordial mind experiences a non-existent or groundless base. Groundless experience is described as overpowering and uncomfortable. This  uncomfortable-ness gives rise to bewilderment.
The description of the second skandha really comes across to me vividly as a description of how a baby might see the world. The other impression I get is of someone very confused or high trying to disguise the fact and play off like they are fine. Like someone freaking out or paranoid on weed, but acting as if - or not wanting to admit it to themselves - that everything is fine.

And now some questions... Is this presentation unique to Trungpa or can it be found in other dharma? Where can I find Trungpa laying out his presentation of D.O. explicitly? If you read the rest of the chapter he goes on to talk about the other skandhas and it all seems to me like a description of D.O. inline with Andriy's answer but he never mentions D.O. explicitly. Anyone else read this book yet? Any other impressions?

It seems like a fairly straightforward presentation of the skandhas.. I read his Shambala Warrior book, & the parts about using magic to get what we want made me uneasy, so I read up about him, & he does not seem a reliable person to follow:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C3%B6gyam_Trungpa#Controversies

Hi, I am aware of the controversy around this teacher thanks.

I don’t find this presentation unique to CTR, though of course his style is unique.  He lays out the progression perhaps more clearly in The Development of Ego.  It’s the bit that starts with a grain of sand popping its head up.

Could you provide any quotes?

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-WB1Fzh_m8LjpIk16/Cutting%20Through%20Spiritual%20Materialism_djvu.txt
The chapter starts on page 121.

Also, you can hear him present this directly on talk 3 state of mind starting around minute 18 at https://www.chronicleproject.com/meditation-the-path-of-the-buddha/


text:
How can I stop feeling guilty that I’ve taken the lives of so many insects in my life unintentionally
Recently I’ve been come to realize that over the course of my life, I’ve probably taken the lives of so many insects unintentionally or even intentionally. It’s come to the point that I feel guilty going for a walk, going for a run or even for a drive, because it’s inevitable that a tiny creature will die because of me. It’s causing me some distress and I don’t know how to rationalise these thoughts.
Is there any way I can stop feeling guilty?
Has anyone else felt the same?

Your guilt doesn’t do you any good and is just another ego trip. Your guilt isn’t helping any of those insects either. By just breathing you are killing countless sentient beings. That is the nature of samsara.
Instead of feeling guilty - which is a negative emotion involved with ego - you could instead feel regret for any intentional killing you’ve done in the past and resolve to no longer kill with intent or malice. That would be healthy and not involve a big ego trip.
Let go of your useless guilt and tell your ego to give it a rest and simply do your best to not intentionally harm sentient beings. Develop compassion for yourself and then stop the ego trip which is just causing you to suffer while not helping anyone or anything.
I’d say try and develop a sense of wisdom that will laugh at your silly ego and the oh-so-heavy shenanigans it is playing with useless guilt.
BTW, I was once on that exact same ego trip and when I told my teacher he gave me a big hearty belly laugh full of compassion and basically told me what I told you above :)

Yeshe Tenley. Humbly: You state the "just breathing you are killing countless sentient beings". However most definitions I have seen define sentient beings as something like: "Sentient beings is a term used to designate the totality of living, conscious beings that constitute the object and audience of Buddhist teaching. [Getz (2004: p. 760)]. Could you clarify your statement or is my definition flawed? Regards, Jim

Firstly, if you unintentionally killed anything, there is no consequence of kamma.

"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body,
speech, & intellect.
Nibbedhika Sutta

The story of blind elder monk Cakkhupala from Dhammapada 1 shows the importance of intention:

On one occasion, Thera Cakkhupala came to pay homage to the Buddha at
the Jetavana monastery. One night, while pacing up and down in
meditation, the thera accidentally stepped on some insects. In the
morning, some bhikkhus visiting the thera found the dead insects. They
thought ill of the thera and reported the matter to the Buddha. The
Buddha asked them whether they had seen the thera killing the insects.
When they answered in the negative, the Buddha said, "Just as you had
not seen him killing, so also he had not seen those living insects.
Besides, as the thera had already attained arahatship he could have
no intention of killing and so was quite innocent."
Verse 1: All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they
have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts
with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the
hoofprint of the ox that draws the cart.

In the Abhidhamma, regret and remorse over the past is considered an unwholesome mental factor.

Worry (kukkucca) is remorse, brooding, and repenting over evil acts
done in the past or good acts left undone.

The following theme for reflection from AN 5.57 (quoted below) can prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states. It encourages shame of evil (hiri) and fear of evil (otappa), which are mentioned as beautiful mental factors in the Abhidhamma.
So, remorse and regret over the past is unwholesome. But shame of evil and fear of evil, or basically moral shame (hiri) and fear of wrongdoing (otappa), for the future, is wholesome.

“And for the sake of what benefit should a woman or a man, a
householder or one gone forth, often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of
my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my
relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma,
good or bad, that I do’? People engage in misconduct by body, speech,
and mind. But when one often reflects upon this theme, such misconduct
is either completely abandoned or diminished. It is for the sake of
this benefit that a woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth,
should often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my
kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my
resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do.’
AN 5.57

Hiri and otappa are explained below in Ven. Bodhi's "The Guardians of the World" :

The Buddha points to two mental qualities as the underlying safeguards
of morality, thus as the protectors of both the individual and society
as a whole. These two qualities are called in Pali hiri and ottappa.
Hiri is an innate sense of shame over moral transgression; ottappa is
moral dread, fear of the results of wrongdoing. The Buddha calls these
two states the bright guardians of the world (sukka lokapala). He
gives them this designation because as long as these two states
prevail in people's hearts the moral standards of the world remain
intact, while when their influence wanes the human world falls into
unabashed promiscuity and violence, becoming almost indistinguishable
from the animal realm (Itiv. 42).
While moral shame and fear of wrongdoing are united in the common task
of protecting the mind from moral defilement, they differ in their
individual characteristics and modes of operation. Hiri, the sense of
shame, has an internal reference; it is rooted in self-respect and
induces us to shrink from wrongdoing out of a feeling of personal
honor. Ottappa, fear of wrongdoing, has an external orientation. It is
the voice of conscience that warns us of the dire consequences of
moral transgression: blame and punishment by others, the painful
kammic results of evil deeds, the impediment to our desire for
liberation from suffering. Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the
difference between the two with the simile of an iron rod smeared with
excrement at one end and heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is
like one's disgust at grabbing the rod in the place where it is
smeared with excrement, ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in
the place where it is red hot.

And from Iti 42:

"Bhikkhus, these two bright principles protect the world. What are the
two? Shame and fear of wrongdoing. If, bhikkhus, these two bright
principles did not protect the world, there would not be discerned
respect for mother or maternal aunt or maternal uncle's wife or a
teacher's wife or the wives of other honored persons, and the world
would have fallen into promiscuity, as with goats, sheep, chickens,
pigs, dogs, and jackals. But as these two bright principles protect
the world, there is discerned respect for mother... and the wives of
other honored persons."
Those in whom shame and fear of wrong
Are not consistently found
Have deviated from the bright root
And are led back to birth and death.
But those in whom shame and fear of wrong
Are consistently ever present,
Peaceful, mature in the holy life,
They put an end to renewal of being.
Iti 42

Also, see Four Right Exertions.


text:
How many types of meditation did the Buddha teach in the Pali Canon?
I read that he taught many different kinds and that there are contradictions in the Nikayas on these meditation types. What are these, how many and why different types?

Related: What are the broad categories of the different types of meditation?, Sutta jhana vs. Visuddhimagga jhana, Are Samatha and Vipassana mentioned in the Pali Canon as different styles/techniques of meditation?, Did Lord Buddha teach any other meditation technique than the Anapana?

Vipassana and samatha is all i know that the actual Buddha taught, well in the general aspect of "actual" meditation but there are many other contemplations, like the 4 stages of death or the kasinas. Even the 4 immeasurables could be classed as meditations.
I think the real question or issue is what can be called a mediation, what is contemplation, what is a statement or factual phrase or what is intended to be experienced via meditations.
for eg, Dukkha as the first noble truth is a statement "suffering exists" and then the explanation and contemplation to understand in which forms suffering exists are separate from the statement, but as to what degree do we need to meditate on Dukkha, or do we need to realize or experience it ourselves in all forms..this is the conundrum.
With that trail of thought we could classify all dharmas as meditations which would leave your question as too many to count unless one has an eidetic memory and/or is a scholar who mathematically dichotomised every statement the Buddha ever said into a classification of an individual meditation.


text:
How to begin to practice vipassana meditation?
I've been practicing meditation and studying buddhism for years, and I've always been curious about vipassana, but I never knew how should I practice it, on what should I focus, etc.
So my questions is: what do you recommend for someone who is starting vipassana meditation? How do I begin and how should I do it?

For basic insight meditation (vipassana) based on the mindfulness of breathing, you can consider starting with Ven. Yuttadhammo's "How To Meditate" series for beginners, which is available as a YouTube video playlist and as an online book.
This meditation is based on the four foundations of mindfulness (satipatthana). It comes in the varieties of sitting and walking meditation.
After you have mastered this, you can proceed to "How to Meditate II" by the same teacher.

You may find this source useful:
https://www.dhamma.org/en-US/index
Whichever you go for, make sure they are reliable meditation coming from genuine sources and not merely anyone claiming to be teaching or talking about vipassana.


text:
"The result of kamma is of three sorts, I tell you" - Are the "sorts" explicated anywhere in the canon?
From the Penetrative Sutta, Nibbedhika Sutta, AN 6:63, translated by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu:
“And what is the result of kamma? The result of kamma is of three sorts, I tell you: that which arises right here & now, that which arises later (in this lifetime), and that which arises following that. This is called the result of kamma."
The translator seems to be trying to help the reader here when he adds (in this lifetime), but these are not the Buddha's words. I'm wondering if the three sorts are mentioned elsewhere in the teachings, possibly less ambiguously than here.

Hi. The word in question is upapajjati (as you can see here, Ven. Sujato translates that line as, "in this very life, on rebirth in the next life, or at some later time"). If I search this site for that word I find 20+ posts.

Deane, perhaps you can explain here what you really intended to ask or maybe change the question so that it isn't a duplicate?

@ChrisW Perhaps the question is about the three types of karma and not the translation of upapajjati.

It looks like OP did not understand the relationship between his question and the term upapajjati. ChrisW thinks it sufficiently explains the passage but OP is still not clear and so insists on the original question staying open.

Ok so the question isn't, "How to translate this passage, which contains (i.e. depends on the meaning of) the word upapajjati?" -- and instead the question is, "Are there other places in the teachings where the Buddha uses other (less 'ambiguous') words to describe 'the three sorts'?"

I just re-read the Penetrative Nibbedhika Sutta, and I find it odd that of all the sections only the section on kamma uses a non-English word, i.e., kamma

I find it interesting that nobody has commented on the obvious: These two translations point to different understandings of the passage I quoted. One offers "in this lifetime" (in parenthesis), the other states "in the next life" (although the word "rebirth" is included, which can be applied with differing scope).

In any case, I wasn't looking so much for an explanation of the meaning of this passage from a forum user, more for references to other parts of the canon that might be helpful to my understanding.

@DeaneCameron Perhaps the idea that there is such a thing as rebirth is controversial, especially among westerners (even western monks). I don't know what Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu's view is but perhaps he's one. For more details or another view  this answer for example and this answer.

@ChrisW Rebirth is controversial, as you stated. So I thought that it could be wrong speech (divisive), if I was to knowingly step into that minefield. I remember hearing Ajahn Jayasāro say, "It's important to make distinctions between what we know and what we believe." He went on to say that he couldn't prove rebirth, but that the concept appeals to him, and is useful. I was impressed with his integrity.

The first question I asked on this site was about rebirth (not trying to be divisive, but hoping for an explanation of the topic). There are now nearly 300 topics tagged [tag:rebirth]. And, "the concept is useful" reminds me of the "Existence & non-existence" section of the Apannaka Sutta: A Safe Bet (MN 60).

@ChrisW Apannaka, now there's a "useful" word!  "The Pali title of this sutta is an adjective that has no exact equivalent in English. It is used in two different contexts. In the context of gambling, it describes a die that has not been loaded to favor one side or the other. In the context of an argument, it describes a position that is true regardless of which side of the argument is right. In other words, if there is an argument as to whether A or not-A is true, if C is true regardless of whether A is true or not, C is an apaṇṇaka position."

there is similar structure regarding the results in MN 136.

"Now there is the person who has killed living beings here... has had
wrong view. And on the dissolution of the body, after death, he
reappears in a happy destination, in the heavenly world. But (perhaps)
the good kamma producing his happiness was done by him earlier, or the
good kamma producing his happiness was done by him later, or right
view was undertaken and completed by him at the time of his death. And
that was why, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he
reappeared in a happy destination, in the heavenly world. But since he
has killed living beings here... has had wrong view, he will feel the
result of that here and now, or in his next rebirth, or in some
subsequent existence.
"Now there is the person who has abstained from killing living beings
here... has had right view. And on the dissolution of the body, after
death, he reappears in a happy destination, in the heavenly world. But
(perhaps) the good kamma producing his happiness was done by him
earlier, or the good kamma producing his happiness was done by him
later, or right view was undertaken and completed by him at the time
of his death. And that was why, on the dissolution of the body, after
death, he reappeared in a happy destination, in the heavenly world.
But since he has abstained from killing living beings here... has had
right view, he will feel the result of that here and now, or in his
next rebirth, or in some subsequent existence.
MN 136

For more information about the mechanics of karma, I would investigate storehouse consciousness.
After reading an answer to another question - which references AN 4.77 - on this forum, I would perhaps advise with caution when investigating the precise workings of karma.

"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is an
unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring
madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it."
AN 4.77

Thanks for your answer, and thoughtful warning.

I edited the answer to add the relevant quotes.

This standard formula on divine eye appears frequently. Both karma, and rebirth are intertwined (both showing effects of right or wrong view and action), and the same phrase OP is questioning, reappearing in the next life (upapajjati), is used in this formula and indubitably means rebirth.

Dibbena cakkhunā visuddhena atikkantamānusakena satte passati cavamāne
upapajjamāne hīne paṇīte suvaṇṇe dubbaṇṇe, sugate duggate
yathākammūpage satte pajānāti: ‘ime vata bhonto sattā kāyaduccaritena
samannāgatā vacīduccaritena samannāgatā manoduccaritena samannāgatā
ariyānaṃ upavādakā micchādiṭṭhikā micchādiṭṭhikammasamādānā, te
kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā apāyaṃ duggatiṃ vinipātaṃ nirayaṃ upapannā.
Ime vā pana bhonto sattā kāyasucaritena samannāgatā vacīsucaritena
samannāgatā manosucaritena samannāgatā ariyānaṃ anupavādakā
sammādiṭṭhikā sammādiṭṭhikammasamādānā, te kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā
sugatiṃ saggaṃ lokaṃ upapannā’ti. Iti dibbena cakkhunā visuddhena
atikkantamānusakena satte passati cavamāne upapajjamāne hīne paṇīte
suvaṇṇe dubbaṇṇe, sugate duggate yathākammūpage satte pajānāti.
With clairvoyance that is purified and superhuman, they see sentient
beings passing away and being reborn—inferior and superior, beautiful
and ugly, in a good place or a bad place. They understand how sentient
beings are reborn according to their deeds: ‘These dear beings did bad
things by way of body, speech, and mind. They spoke ill of the noble
ones; they had wrong view; and they acted out of that wrong view. When
their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a place of loss,
a bad place, the underworld, hell. These dear beings, however, did
good things by way of body, speech, and mind. They never spoke ill of
the noble ones; they had right view; and they acted out of that right
view. When their body breaks up, after death, they’re reborn in a good
place, a heavenly realm.’ And so, with clairvoyance that is purified
and superhuman, they see sentient beings passing away and being
reborn—inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, in a good place or a
bad place. They understand how sentient beings are reborn according to
their deeds.
AN 3.58


text:
Do Buddhists file lawsuits when grievances are done against them?
I have always been against lawsuits, but I live in America - and I have observed lawsuits being filed for many things.
Suppose one's civil rights were in question, and it is a matter of being personally harassed and bullied upon by a larger organization that has clearly done wrong, would an American buddhist simply let it go?

It depends on your current focus of Buddhist practice.
If you are at the level where you are trying to master controlling your emotions, and the big company's actions trigger powerful emotional response in you, then you would focus on letting go (un-sustaining) of that emotion. If you succeed, then your main problem is solved. At that point you may decide to take legal action or abandon it based solely on rational reasons, which often (but not always!) ends up in the topic getting abandoned, since we the humans are rather emotional type of sentiment beings.
Similarly, on the next level where the  main focus of Buddhist practice is your ego, which always has a tendency to exaggerate its importance, posture as the deeply offended party, absolutize its perspective as the only valid one, and so on, - then in context of the practice of uprooting the egocentric habits a Buddhist may meditate on the subject of the conflict between themselves and the Big Organization and try to expand one's perspective as to see the situation from outside of the ego's context. If that ends in an authentic success then more often than not the Buddhist will actually see that his own personal grievance is not really important in the great scheme of things, resulting in the issue getting abandoned.
If the Buddhist has passed both of these levels: learned to control one's emotions, mastered the noble skill of letting go, and achieved perfection in seeing things (and acting!) from outside of one's ego - then comes the time for cultivating the power of intent. On this level, the Buddhist won't have emotions nor personal biases associated with the situation, but may choose to litigate solely for the exercise of courage and will power. This is nice especially if the Buddhist previously had a history of laziness or has a tendency for giving up. Again, it's not done for any objective reasons, but primarily in context of one's main Buddhist practice at the time. It goes without saying that the reason for litigation must be wholesome to begin with. In other words, it has to be objectively examined and established as conducive to peace (both at the personal and the global level).
Finally, if a Buddhist is through with all this training, they would make a decision to act or not to act based solely on this last criterion. Once the personal training is out of the picture, the global peace ends up being the primary decision making factor.

This may depend on whether you're a lay follower or a monk.
While violence and destruction is strongly discouraged in Buddhism, it is ok for a bonafide ruler or government ("wheel-turning monarch") to establish courts of justice, police and armed forces to:

protect and guard the people
ensure peace
ensure that justice prevails

As such, I don't see why we shouldn't have civil litigation mechanisms for justice and I don't see why lay followers shouldn't use them.

"What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis duly protect and guard the
arahats, so that those who have not come to the realm yet might do so,
and those who have already come might live there in peace?"
"I have heard, Lord, that they do."
"So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
be expected, not their decline."
DN 16

‘But sire, what are the noble duties of a wheel-turning monarch?’
‘Well then, my dear, relying only on principle—honoring, respecting,
and venerating principle, having principle as your flag, banner, and
authority — provide just protection and security for your court, troops,
aristocrats, vassals, brahmins and householders, people of town and
country, ascetics and brahmins, beasts and birds. Do not let injustice
prevail in the realm. Pay money to the penniless in the realm.
DN 26

However, monks are expected to be completely pacifist according to SN 35.88, MN 20, MN 86, MN 21.

"Well then, Punna. Now that I have instructed you with a brief
instruction, in which country are you going to live?"
"Lord, there is a country called Sunaparanta. I am going to live
there."
"Punna, the Sunaparanta people are fierce. They are rough. If they
insult and ridicule you, what will you think?"
"If they insult and ridicule me, I will think, 'These Sunaparanta
people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't hit me with
their hands.' That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I
will think, O One Well-gone."
"But if they hit you with their hands, what will you think?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't hit me with a clod.'..."
"But if they hit you with a clod...?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't hit me with a stick.'..."
"But if they hit you with a stick...?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't hit me with a knife.'..."
"But if they hit you with a knife...?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't take my life with a sharp knife.'..."
"But if they take your life with a sharp knife...?"
"If they take my life with a sharp knife, I will think, 'There are
disciples of the Blessed One who — horrified, humiliated, and
disgusted by the body and by life — have sought for an assassin, but
here I have met my assassin without searching for him.'  That is what
I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One
Well-gone."
"Good, Punna, very good. Possessing such calm and self-control you are
fit to dwell among the Sunaparantans. Now it is time to do as you see
fit."
SN 35.88

smart answer, thanks.


text:
Is Krishna a demon?
I've read in several articles that the Lalitavistara identifies Krishna as leader of the "black demons" and is an enemy of the Buddha. I've only been able to check the 84000 translation from Tibetan, and haven't been able to locate the source of this claim. Am I overlooking something?

TL;DR
I couldn't find the connection to Lalitavistara so far either.
But Hindu-leaning pages like this seem to popularize the idea that Buddhist literature denigrate the Hindu deity Krishna, when it actually does not.
Kanha in Pali is Krishna in Sanskrit.
And the term Kanha in Pali literature is mainly used to refer to Mara, the Evil One or Dark One who is the temptor, probably the same person as the Hindu Kamadeva (cupid).
It also refers to Vasudeva, probably the same person as the Hindu deity Krishna. Vasudeva is identified as the past birth of Sariputta, the Buddha's chief disciple.
For what it's worth, Vasudeva (aka Krishna, Kanha, Kesava) is different from Mara, the Evil One.
And if you read further, you will find that the Vasudeva stories from Pali literature may not match exactly with the Krishna stories from Hindu literature.
Details:
From the footnotes of Padhana Sutta:

The "Dark One" or Kanha (Sanskrit: Krishna), is another name for Mara.
He is the Indian Cupid (Kamadeva) and personifies sensual passions. He
carries a lute (vina), mentioned at the close, with which he
captivates beings by his playing. His other equipment includes a bow,
arrows, a noose and a hook.

And from Palikanon's dictionary of proper names on Mara:

Generally regarded as the personification of Death, the Evil One, the
Tempter (the Buddhist counterpart of the Devil or Principle of
Destruction). The legends concerning Māra are, in the books, very
involved and defy any attempts at unravelling them. ....
The later books, especially the Nidānakathā of the Jātaka Commentary
(J.i.71ff.; cp. MA.i.384) and the Buddhavamsa Commentary (p. 239f),
contain a very lively and detailed description of the temptation of
the Buddha by Māra, as the Buddha sat under the Bodhi tree immediately
before his Enlightenment. These accounts describe how Māra, the
devaputta, seeing the Bodhisatta seated, with the firm resolve, of
becoming a Buddha, summoned all his forces and advanced against him.
.....
There is no doubt that the Māra legend had its origin in the Padhāna
Sutta. There Māra is represented as visiting Gotama on the banks of
the Nerañjarā, where he is practicing austerities and tempting him to
abandon his striving and devote himself to good works. Gotama refers
to Māra's army as being tenfold. The divisions are as follows:

the first consists of the Lusts;
the second is Aversion;
the third Hunger and Thirst;
the fourth Craving;
the fifth Sloth and Indolence;
the sixth Cowardice;
the seventh Doubt;
the eighth Hypocrisy and Stupidity;
Gains, Fame, Honour and Glory falsely obtained form the ninth; and
the tenth is the Lauding of oneself and the Contemning of others.

Māra bears many names in Pāli Literature, chief of them being Kanha,
Adhipati, Antaka, Namuci and Pamattabandhu. (MNid.ii.489; for their
explanation see MNidA.328; another name of Māra was Pajāpati,
MA.i.28). His usual standing epithet is pāpimā, but other words are
also used, such as anatthakāma, ahitakāma, and ayogakkhemakāma (E.g.,
M.i.118).

The name Kanha can also refer to the Hindu deity Krishna I suppose, as Vasudeva.

Kanha.-A name for Māra. E.g., Sn.v.355; M.i.377; D.ii.262; Thag.v.1189.

Kanha.-The name of the Bodhisatta; he was born in a brahmin family and
later became a sage. He is also called Kanha-tāpasa, and is
mentioned among those the memory of whose lives caused the Buddha to
smile. See Kanha Jātaka (2). DhsA.294, 426.

Kanha.-Another name of Vāsudeva (J.iv.84, 86; vi.421; PvA.94ff ); the scholiast explains that he belonged to the Kanhāyanagotta.

Kanha.-Son of Disā, a slave girl of Okkāka. He was called Kanha because he was black and, like a devil (kanha), spoke as soon as he
was born. He was the ancestor of the Kanhāyanagotta (D.i.93). Later he
went into the Dekkhan and, having learnt mystic verses, became a
mighty seer. Coming back to Okkāka, Kanha demanded the hand of the
king's daughter Maddarūpī. At first the request was indignantly
refused, but when Kanha displayed his supernatural powers he gained
the princess. D.i.96f.; DA.i.266.

Kanha.-A Pacceka Buddha, mentioned in the Isigili Sutta. M.iii.71.

Kanha.-A dog. See Mahā-Kanha.

Kanha.-See Kanhadīpāyana.

The entry on Vāsudeva states:

The eldest of the Andhakavenhudāsaputtā.
The Ghata Jātaka (No. 454) relates how, when Vāsudeva's son died and
Vāsudeva gave himself up to despair, his brother Ghatapandita brought
him to his senses by feigning madness.
Vāsudeva's minister was Rohineyya. Vāsudeva is addressed (J.iv.84; he
is called Kanha at J.vi.421) as Kanha and again as Kesava. The
scholiast explains (J.iv.84) that he is called Kanha because he
belonged to the Kanhāyanagotta, and Kesava because he had beautiful
hair (kesasobhanatāya). These names, however, give support to the
theory (see Andhakavenhudāsaputtā, No.1) that the story of Vāsudeva
was associated with the legend of Krsna.
In the Mahāummagga Jātaka (J.vi.421) it is stated that Jambāvatī,
mother of King Sivi, was the consort of Vāsudeva Kanha. The scholiast
identifies this Vāsudeva with the eldest of the Andhakavenhudāsaputtā,
and says that Jambāvatī was a candalī. Vāsudeva fell in love with her
because of her great beauty and married her in spite of her caste.
Their son was Sivi, who later succeeded to his father's throne at
Dvāravatī.
Vāsudeva is identified with Sāriputta. J.iv.89.

And finally the entry for Andhakavenhu-(dāsa)-puttā gives us the Hindu Krishna story, more or less:

Ten brothers, sons of Devagabbhā and Upasāgara.
As it had been foretold at Devagabbhā's birth that one of her sons
would destroy the lineage of Kamsa, each time a son was born to her,
fearing lest he be put to death, she sent him secretly to her
serving-woman, Nandagopā; the latter had married Andhakavenhu and, by
good fortune, daughters were born to her at the same time as sons to
Devagabbhā; these daughters she sent to Devagabbhā in exchange for the
latter's sons.
The ten sons were named Vāsudeva, Baladeva, Candadeva, Suriyadeva,
Aggideva, Varunadeva, Ajjuna, Pajjuna, Ghatapandita and Ankura. Cowell
sees in this story the kernel of a nature-myth (Jātaka, trans. iv. 51
n. ); cf. with this the Krsna legend in the Harivamsa; see also
Wilson's Visnu Purāna (Hall's Ed.), v. 147f.; and the article on Krsna
in Hopkins' Epic Mythology, pp.214f.


text:
Where does the story of Assaji being eaten alive come from?
In Osamu Tezuka's manga Buddha, Assaji was eaten alive by wolves or wild dogs. I always thought the manga artist came up with a lot of his own original stories. Because this story and others are not on wikipedia.
But then I recently watched an old Hong Kong TV show Journey to the West II (1998) and it depicted the same story of Assaji being eaten alive. And that of King Bimbisara being killed by his own son, as predicted by Assaji. As influential as the manga was, it seems unlikely that a Hong Kong TV show would have picked a story from a manga.
Is it possible, in Japanese or Chinese Buddhism, they have their own set of canonical stories? And they are unfortunately hard to find on the English internet?


text:
Looking for a historical text or a contemporary study of such text on how it is that this world is or isn't a "pure land"
Looking for a primary source (an actual historical text) or a secondary source (a formal study of a historical text or texts), on how it is that this world is or isn't a "pure land".
Presumably the Buddha Sakyamuni has or had a pure land? I've read a lot of Buddhist scholarship, so please don't be shy in recommending anything at all, in English or translatable somehow.

The bolded statements below show immediate birth into the Pure Land in this life itself.
The way I see this explanation is that the Pure Land is a "place of mind".
From Japanese Pure Land Philosophy on Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Thinkers like Shinran and Shōkū, however, both understood the
utterance of nembutsu to be fulfilled practice because it arises from
the oneness of being and Buddha expressed as shinjin or taking refuge.
Further, because of this oneness, a person’s attainment of birth in
the Pure Land is completely settled in the immediate present.
The effects of the oneness are manifested not only in the occurrence
of birth in the Pure Land at death, but also in various ways in
present life. Shōkū speaks of a variety of benefits received in the
present by the person of the nembutsu, including the elimination of
the effects of past evil acts, extension of life, avoidance of various
calamities, protection of buddhas, seeing of Amida, and so on. One
should not pursue such benefits for their own sake, but they naturally
come about for the person of the nembutsu whose birth in the Pure Land
is settled. Thus, to express the condition of the nembutsu
practitioner, Shōkū even distinguishes two types of Pure Land “birth,”
“immediate birth” (sokuben ōjō) while remaining burdened with
afflicting passions in present life and birth into the Pure Land at
the time of death (tōtoku ōjō).

Yeah, that makes sense, and I already knew it. Maybe I'll just try some general pure land scholarship.

The question "how it is that this world is or isn't a "pure land". Presumably the Buddha Sakyamuni has or had a pure land?"
Thanks to your question and the fine answers I understood what "pure land" means. It is what some may call the  mind of peace, or the mind that does not vacillate.
Reading  SA 557 helps. Do not rely on its Pali counterpart AN 9.37, which has been modified to suit the Pali tradition.
The world according to Buddha is a person's individual experience. How is it brought about? It is done via data that enters through the six entry points, if any of those are touched, that leads to Impure lands. "Touch" has a specific meaning.
If the data enters via  these six places without being influenced by the signals the objects emit, then one has found the "Pure land"
An excerpt from SN 35.95
"Not impassioned with forms
— seeing a form with mindfulness firm —
dispassioned in mind,
one knows
and doesn't remain fastened there.
While one is seeing a form
— and even experiencing feeling —
it falls away and doesn't accumulate.
Thus one fares mindfully.
Thus not amassing stress,
one is said to be
in the presence of Unbinding"
Right mindfulness most succinctly stated in SN 47. 42 Sutta on Origination or Samudaya, offers us clues as to how to dwell in the pure land.
Based on this discussion "unbinding" in the above verse sounds to me like "Pure Land".
"Pure land" in other words would be a land without defilements, or a consciousness that is un-fastened.
When we begin naming the forms that arise in our minds, that leads to "Impure Lands"?.


text:
Is goodwill necessary in order to make progress on the Path?
It seems impossible to have goodwill in certain situations. Is it enough to be tolerant and forgiving of other's faults?

right intention is part the 8-fold path. compassion is well known to be the motivator in bodhisattva progress. HTH :-)

if you mean consummation, rather than progress: arhats lack certain "emotions", I believe (that is one way for us to think about the defilements), whereas bodhisattvas would, I suppose, be aware they are transient and empty. all the best!

I found this essay on goodwill helpful, particularly the excerpt below:

"... you wish not only that beings be happy, but also that they avoid
the actions that would lead to bad karma, to their own unhappiness.
You realize that happiness has to depend on action: For people to find
true happiness, they have to understand the causes for happiness and
act on them. They also have to understand that true happiness is
harmless. If it depends on something that harms others, it’s not going
to last. Those who are harmed are sure to do what they can to destroy
that happiness. And then there’s the plain quality of sympathy: If you
see someone suffering, it’s painful. If you have any sensitivity at
all, it’s hard to feel happy when you know that your happiness is
causing suffering for others.
So again, when you express goodwill, you’re not saying that you’re
going to be there for them all the time. You’re hoping that all beings
will wise up about how to find happiness and be there for themselves."

Surely it's nearly impossible for one not familar to the Dhamma of the Sublime Buddha, good householder. Maybe good to start to investigate it via metta here and especially the essays. For intensive and benefical, good to leave home and commercial places first.


text:
Did the Buddha teach how to discern deception?
With deception as rampant as ever, what did the Buddha teach about it -- other than "let none deceive another" in the metta sutta -- especially how to discern and respond to deception?

Our first duty is to give up deception ourselves:

SNp2.9:5.1: Giving up mirth, prayer, weeping, ill will,
SNp2.9:5.2: deception, fraud, greed, conceit,
SNp2.9:5.3: aggression, crudeness, stains, and indulgence,
SNp2.9:5.4: they’d wander free of vanity, steadfast.

To give up deception ourselves, we must understand wrong view and right view. Believing in worng view is deception.

MN117:5.1: And what is wrong view?
MN117:5.2: ‘There’s no meaning in giving, sacrifice, or offerings. There’s no fruit or result of good and bad deeds. There’s no afterlife. There are no duties to mother and father. No beings are reborn spontaneously. And there’s no ascetic or brahmin who is well attained and practiced, and who describes the afterlife after realizing it with their own insight.’

Giving up wrong view, we focus on right view:

MN117:6.1: And what is right view?
MN117:6.2: Right view is twofold, I say.
MN117:6.3: There is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment.
MN117:6.4: And there is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.
MN117:7.1: And what is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment?
MN117:7.2: ‘There is meaning in giving, sacrifice, and offerings. There are fruits and results of good and bad deeds. There is an afterlife. There are duties to mother and father. There are beings reborn spontaneously. And there are ascetics and brahmins who are well attained and practiced, and who describe the afterlife after realizing it with their own insight.’
MN117:7.3: This is right view that is accompanied by defilements, has the attributes of good deeds, and ripens in attachment.
MN117:8.1: And what is right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path?
MN117:8.2: It’s the wisdom—the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, the awakening factor of investigation of principles, and right view as a factor of the path—in one of noble mind and undefiled mind, who possesses the noble path and develops the noble path.
MN117:8.3: This is called right view that is noble, undefiled, transcendent, a factor of the path.
MN117:9.1: They make an effort to give up wrong view and embrace right view: that’s their right effort.
MN117:9.2: Mindfully they give up wrong view and take up right view: that’s their right mindfulness.

So we have a long way to go before dealing with deception in others. Our own deceptions trip us up and we need to give up those deceptions before we can reliably detect and respond to deception in others. It takes a while to understand ourselves and others. It takes a while to become a good friend among good friends.

SN3.18:4.3: Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life.

Nice answer Oya<3

Right view will definitely help with discerning deception! Thanks


text:
Do Buddhas and Bodhisattvas care and have compassion for all sentient beings equally
Do Buddhas and Bodhisattvas care and have compassion for all sentient beings equally. On the one hand, my question is a little facetious (if only because, at least within the laity, not doing so is impractical in the extreme: why would spiritual help be any different?). On the other, it may raise some interesting riddles.
What does "the one taste of the dharmadhatu" mean except that? And, wouldn't that mean that a Buddha could in principle approve of hells, at least if the suffering in them is, like I believe it kinda is in Christianity, to assure the good and beneficent that virtue is loved, via granting us "free will" (don't quote me on that).

The riddles were too simple: Buddhas do not create hells and do not populate them (bodhisattvas aside), do not create the laws of karma; and the "one taste" of the dharmadhatu is about being free, not a lack of differentiation among moral agents. Right?

I guess you put "free will" in quotes because they claim that God is omnipotent which results in that paradox. Conversely, hell doesn't imply that the Buddha has no compassion.

well, I don't know if people are sad to be free to reject God's love and if that is equivalent to punishment, but it's one answer. But then I believe God can save anyone, so I dunno. Anyway, I"m not much of a theist @ChrisW

Do Buddhas and Bodhisattvas care and have compassion for all sentient beings equally.
Perhaps in practice the type of relationship varies -- see for example AN 4.111.
What does "the one taste of the dharmadhatu" mean except that?
I don't know about Mahayana, I think that from the Pali suttas "one taste" might be a reference to this (description of the dhamma-vinaya):

The ocean has just one taste, the taste of salt.
In the same way, this teaching and training has one taste, the taste of freedom.
Ud 5.5

And, wouldn't that mean that a Buddha could in principle approve of hells
Imagine if someone who you love is in hell, I'd suppose it's difficult to approve of that.
Approving of someone's suffering sounds to me to be the very opposite of mudita (which is one of the four brahmaviharas).
like I believe it is in Christianity, to assure the good and beneficent that their virtue is loved (don't quote me on that)
There are different Christian sects with different doctrines, I heard one of them teach that hell is a self-imposed consequence of choosing to distance or to separate oneself from the love of God.
I imagine Buddhist doctrine is somewhat similar, i.e. that hell is a natural consequence of unskilful or unvirtuous actions and desires. Perhaps the definition of "skilful" is "eradicates suffering".
But the idea of Buddhas approving of suffering just sounds like anathema to me -- instead they would only approve of the skilful/noble ways that lead to non-suffering.
The closest I know of to the idea of suffering being good is this:

Is there anything like "positive suffering" for Buddhists?

And "wrathful" deities (from the Tibetan tradition):

What is a wrathful Buddha?

Thanks for the quote on "freedom", but the question was not quite insightful (which I do not mean except as an answer) enough to accept. e.g. the sutra you cited saying that the buddha "kills" people he cannot help: does that mean he violates the precepts or just that his teaching and compassion is lost to them (an absence of compassion is not necessarily malign)? Could use more discussion, yours or someone else's. For some reason, I always find your answers difficult in those terms.

The sutta explains what he means -- i.e. he stops talking with them. A bit like the American/English idiom, "to cut someone dead" which means to not converse with them socially. See also this answer, in which Channa fails to receive instruction. There's another longer answer here. But I just meant that the Buddha agreed to teach for the sake of those "who have ears to hear" and "little dust in their eyes" ...

Yes, I agree that's what the sutta says

Good householder, like a farmer would first work on best land, the Buddha and his good monks teach first to monks, second to devoted lay people, and out of compassion sometimes also wanderer of other sects. Why? Because even a single sentence, if they understand, would merit much for them. - SN 42.7
And, yes, monks aren't given to teach those showing disregard and stinginess.
Yet thoughts of compassion will in all ways remain toward all, incl. "hopeless" cases. There the most compassionate action is to leave them far.

“In these three instances, monks, one can be recognized as a person of conviction & confidence. Which three? One wants to see virtuous people. One wants to hear the True Dhamma. One’s awareness cleansed of the stain of stinginess, one lives at home, freely generous, openhanded, delighting in being magnanimous, responsive to requests, delighting in the distribution of alms. In these three instances, monks, one can be recognized as a person of conviction & confidence.”
One who wants to see virtuous ones,
& wants to hear the True Dhamma
—having subdued the stain of stinginess—
is said to have conviction.

And those with proper attitudes will be taught of course fist and possible all.


text:
Is buddhism trivialist?
"Trivialism is the theory that every proposition is true. A consequence of trivialism is that all statements, including all contradictions of the form "p and not p" (that something both 'is' and 'isn't' at the same time), are true."

does this mean all language constructs are true?  for instance, 'the chair is a person'.   what is not true about that statement?  it's just a string of words.  Henry Miller said 'words are dead'

The answer is trivial: no. But perhaps you can explain why you think this would even merit a question? What leads you to believe it is even possible Buddhist philosophy would say “everything is true”?

No, I don't think so. Graham Priest talks aligns buddhism with paraconsistent logic, which voids the principle of explosion, meaning the claim anything can be inferred from anything (which sounds a bit like trivialism). It can feel that way, perhaps because you're often meant to drop inferences, I think, despite them being valid!

Just to add to this I’d say that I think the principal of the excluded middle is probably the one bit of western logic that Buddhism might take issue with. Without PEM; but all other normal western logical rules of inference; Buddhism would be constructive logic. You can read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuitionistic_logic but note this is far different than saying everything is true.

Does  Graham Priest really align it with paraconsistent? That wouldn't seem to make sense as Catuṣkoṭi is, S is and is not P (quantum principle of explosion)

yes @Paragon it's been one of the most / fruitful buddhist overlaps in western philosophy https://www.sjsu.edu/people/anand.vaidya/courses/comparativephilosophy/s1/The-Logic-of-the-Catuskoti-by-G.-Priest.pdf there have been others, e.g. dharmakirti and nominalism, and parfit on personal identity https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14639940008573723 but mostly it's limited to ethics, explication and comparative religion

Nagarjuna explicitly refutes the propositions of the type "p and not p" as true.[ref. Mulamadhyamakakarika] This four-fold rejection is a feature of the Madhyamika dialectical reasoning.

Based on this, and your provided definition of trivialism, Buddhism is not trivialist.

If there were no contradictions, then it wouldnt be the case that there would be no difference between choosing a right path or a wrong path- because they would both be true.

But the Buddha clearly and explicitly identifies right from wrong or correct from incorrect.
Therefore, it isnt the case that contradictions are true in Buddhism.
Therefore, it isnt trivialist.

Can you recommend any secondary books/papers on this topic?

@Paragon David Seyfort Ruegg had published an essay titled "The Uses of the Four positions of catuskoti and the problem of the description of reality in Mahayana Buddhism" in 1977. That is a very good read to understand the tetralemma. Catuskoti is implicitly presented in Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika. As an example of its presentation, in chapter 1 "Examination of Conditions" we see how the four logically possible positions, pertaining to the arising and cessation of conditions, are refuted.


text:
Is self-mummification considered same as Nirvana?
Sokushinbutsu
Sokushinbutsu (即身仏) are a kind of Buddhist mummy.
In Japan, the term refers to the practice of Buddhist monks observing asceticism to the point of death and entering mummification while alive.
Mummified monks are seen in a number of Buddhist countries. Only in Japan are they believed to have induced their own death by starvation.
There is a common suggestion that Shingon school founder Kukai brought this practice from Tang China as part of secret tantric practices he learned.
During the 20th century, Japanese scholars found very little evidence of self-starvation of Sokushinbutsu.
Emperor Meiji banned this practice in 1879, and assisted suicide—including religious suicide—is now illegal.
It says self-starvation and death by starvation.
So does it considered "Nirvana"?
What would Buddha's aspect of self-mummification be?

Related: Is suicide similar to Nibbana?, Apocarteresis in Buddhism

The Buddha specifically rejected that kind of self mortification. In fact the first Buddhist monks were ascetics he had previously practiced that extreme asceticism with. After leaving them and achieving enlightenment he sought them out and taught them a "middle way" instead. Their first reaction at seeing him looking healthy and relatively well fed was disappointment at him giving up their idea of the proper spiritual life.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.than.html

Answer: No, there is no way to reach Nirvana without following Buddha's main teachings. That means understanding the reality of the world/universe/ourselves.
Buddha teaches the path to Nirvana and the causes of rebirth and suffering. In Buddha's time, there were many beliefs on how to break this cycle of rebirth and achieve permanence. However, none of these methods worked; some of them were born as BRAHMA, and some were born in hell, but all of them tried to break this cycle. Yet, no one was able to find the right path.
According to Buddha, only  "The Pase Buddha" (not as powerful as Buddha and their number is unknown) and "The Buddha" (there have been 28 Buddhas until now) can find this path. Therefore, there is no other way to break this cycle of birth and death without following the path to Nirvana."

I think so. Mummies are a pre-Buddha so it would make sense.
The parinirvana sutra does explain Buddha’s desire for mummification

"The body of a universal monarch, Ananda, is first wrapped round with new linen, and then with teased cotton wool, and so it is done up
to five hundred layers of linen and five hundred of cotton wool. When
that is done, the body of the universal monarch is placed in an
iron[48] oil vessel, which is enclosed in another iron vessel, a
funeral pyre is built of all kinds of perfumed woods, and so the body
of the universal monarch is burned; and at a crossroads a stupa is
raised for the universal monarch. So it is done, Ananda, with the body
of a universal monarch. And even, Ananda, as with the body of a
universal monarch, so should it be done with the body of the Tathagata

My Buddha is also wrapped so I guess another coincidence ☠


text:
Vimalakirti Sutra -- A License for Drinking and Visiting Brothels?
I have heard from the Vimalakirti Sutra that Vimalakirti was a householder who drank and visited prostitutes; but he was foremost in wisdom and Buddhist practice?!
I heard the Buddha sent monks to him to observe and study under his guidance?! Is this true?! Why would the Buddha do this?!

Based on the translation below, it sounds like Vimalakirti intentionally tried to bring Buddhist teachings to the brothels and cabarets, rather than him being enlightened in spite of frequenting brothels and cabarets.
From the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra, translated by Prof. Robert Thurman:

He made his appearance at the fields of sports and in the casinos, but
his aim was always to mature those people who were attached to games
and gambling. He visited the fashionable heterodox teachers, yet
always kept unswerving loyalty to the Buddha. He understood the
mundane and transcendental sciences and esoteric practices, yet always
took pleasure in the delights of the Dharma. He mixed in all crowds,
yet was respected as foremost of all.
In order to be in harmony with people, he associated with elders, with
those of middle age, and with the young, yet always spoke in harmony
with the Dharma. He engaged in all sorts of businesses, yet had no
interest in profit or possessions. To train living beings, he would
appear at crossroads and on street corners, and to protect them he
participated in government. To turn people away from the Hinayana and
to engage them in the Mahayana, he appeared among listeners and
teachers of the Dharma. To develop children, he visited all the
schools. To demonstrate the evils of desire, he even entered the
brothels. To establish drunkards in correct mindfulness, he entered
all the cabarets.
... Thus lived the Licchavi Vimalakirti in the great city of Vaisali,
endowed with an infinite knowledge of skill in liberative techniques.


text:
Important literature on Zen Buddhism before the year 1900
I was reading through a history of Buddhism recently, which led me to a famous title called the Shōbōgenzō by Eihei Dōgen, written in the 13th century. I highly recommend this book.
I know there is a great deal of writing on Zen from the 20th century and beyond, but for my purposes I'm interested in literature that was written prior to the year 1900. Either explicitly about Zen Buddhism, or a closely related precursor to Zen.
Were there any other important works on this subject dating back to it's inception? What were they?

bodhidharma anthology is a fun and generic response. I love Dogen's recorded saying anthology, it is <3

Any of the koan collections immediately spring to mind - the Mumonkan, the Blue Rock Record, Entangling Vines, etc.  Other than those, a number of famous Zen teachers wrote substantial bodies of work.  Hakuin, Huineng, Seng t'san, and even Bodhidharma all have works attributed to them (prior to the 18th century, whether they themselves actually wrote those texts is a matter of debate).  Just look up any of the key Zen personalities in a university library catalog and see if they wrote anything.
And geez, Shobogenzo?  I'd rather have my gums scraped!  Dogen can be monumentally obtuse!