text:
Killing a bigger animal causes more bad karma than killing a smaller animal?
I know that killing virtuous beings is a grave bad karma. But when it comes animals, virtue is irrelevant. I have heard from monks that bigger the animal greater the sin it is to kill it. How is that so? Why does physicality matter at all? Isn't it just a matter of your intention when it comes to karma?

My knowledge in Buddhism is quite poor. IMO it is a greater sin to kill a larger animal than to kill a smaller animal but this cannot be the case always! Let me ask you a question. Which is easier, to kill an ant or to kill an elephant? Generally the effort and planning you have to go through to kill an elephant is much greater than to kill an ant. The greater the effort you are willing to put is because of the greater intensity of cruelness of your mind which makes it a greater sin. True physicality isn't what determines this. Hope this answers the question

since kamma is intention, i think there's no difference provided in both killings there's intention to kill. in the same way killing an elephant by accident entails bad kamma no greater than unintentional killing of an ant.

We are not talking about unintentional killing. Your thinking is not exactly accurate. there are instances where in which both karma can be the same. But intense intentions are needed to kill larger animals unlike for smaller animals making it worse than the case of an insect

Did someone just down vote this??

The intensity of Karma in killing of a being including an animal can be influenced by these 2 factors:

intensity of volition - more planning or effort the worse (elephant vs ant), more stronger your desire to kill the worst
conciseness of the being - if the being has a higher level of conciseness (elephant vs ant) and virtue (bear vs cow) the worst. Hence virtue of the animal also plays a role. E.g. sakes are to have more wroth than more tame animals.

In the novel The Dalai Lama's Cat, the Dalai Lama is quoted as teachiing,

I understand what you're saying, but there are some who would say that eating a cow is better, because a single cow can provide more than one thousand meals. A fish, only one meal. Sometimes it takes many prawns, many sentient beings, for only one meal.

And,

It's a very big subject. You will find that some people tell you there is only one way, this way, which happens to be the way they think, and that everyone else should change their views to be like them. But it is really a matter of personal choice. The important thing is to make sure our decisions are guided with compassion and wisdom.

This is a subject on which different people (and, maybe, different schools of Buddhism) differ.
You wrote, "But when it comes animals, virtue is irrelevant" -- I don't know whether there's any Buddhist school/tradition which that's an accurate description of.
The kind of opinion I quoted above is not based on "virtue is irrelevant", instead it's based on "life is dear to all".

Buddhaghosa, an influential 5th-century Theravada commentator, states:

With regard to animals it is worse to kill large ones than small. Because a more extensive effort is involved. Even where the effort is the same, the difference in substance must be considered. In the case of humans the killing is the more blameworthy the more virtuous they are. Apart from that, the extent of the offence is proportionate to the intensity of the wish to kill.

So it seems to be the additional effort that makes it morally worse to kill bigger animals. Effort is a direct expression of cetana (volition). As Peter Harvey states:

cetana is the motive for which an action is done, its immediate intention (directed at a specific objective, as part of fulfilling a motive), and the immediate mental impulse which sets it going and sustains it.

References:

E. Conze, Buddhist Scriptures, Page 70, Penguin, 1976.
P. Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics: Foundations, Values and Issues,
Page 17, Cambridge University Press, 2012.

According to the Bhikkhu Patimokkha (quoted below), which are rules for monks, killing a human is grounds for immediate and irreversible dismissal from the monastic order (parajika).
However, deliberately killing an animal is an offense that requires only confession (pacittiya) within the monastic order, usually with the intention not to do it again. It's not as severe as killing a human.

Intentionally bringing about the death of a human being, even if it is
still a fetus — whether by killing the person, arranging for an
assassin to kill the person, inciting the person to die, or describing
the advantages of death — is a pārājika offense. (Pr 3)
Pouring water that one knows to contain living beings — or having it
poured — on grass or clay is a pācittiya offense. Pouring anything
that would kill the beings into such water — or having it poured — is
also a pācittiya offense. (Pc 20)
Deliberately killing an animal — or having it killed — is a pācittiya
offense. (Pc 61)
Using water, or getting others to use it, knowing that it contains
living beings that will die from that use, is a pācittiya offense. (Pc
62)

According to AN 6.87, there is actually a list of people a person could kill or injure, and such a person will never be able to have the right mental state or moral capacity to learn the Dhamma:

"Endowed with these six qualities, a person is incapable of alighting
on the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even
when listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?
"He has killed his mother; he has killed his father; he has killed an
arahant; he has, with corrupt intent, caused the blood of a Tathagata
to flow; he has caused a split in the Sangha; or he is a person of
dull discernment, slow & dull-witted.
"Endowed with these six qualities, a person is capable of alighting on
the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even while
listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?
"He has not killed his mother; he has not killed his father; he has
not killed an arahant; he has not, with corrupt intent, caused the
blood of a Tathagata to flow; he has not caused a split in the Sangha;
and he is a discerning person, not slow or dull-witted.

According to MN 86, Angulimala killed many human beings, but he could still change and become an arahant. So, probably, he did not commit the transgressions above (killing father, killing mother, killing arahant, injuring Buddha)
So this shows the value of humans above animals, and the value of the Buddha, the arahant and one's parents above all other humans.
So, the answer is yes, there is a difference in the consequence and effects of killing.
With this, we can extrapolate, that it's worse to kill a dog or cow, than a mosquito or cockroach. It's not the physical size, but it's the mental and emotional capacity of the animal.
That said, it would still be impossible for an arahant to kill any animal, however small, as the arahant is free of all mental defilements. In other words, to do any killing at all, you must have mental defilements.

Do you think that killing a baby causes less bad karma than killing an adult?
I'm talking about humans here and from my point of view, killing a baby, just for fun, this is pure evil. Maybe even more than killing an adult. Why? Because the baby is not yet able to defend himself.
This is the same thing for the animals. When you kill an animal, you must have a good reason for that. For example, you can kill to survive, to eat and you can kill also to defend yourself when you are being attacked.
If you kill animals just for fun or if you contribute to the extinction of some species, this is evil.
Example, killing hundreds of rhinoceros only to take the horns for sell it to some japanese people who are stupid enough to think it will help them to get better "erections": Evil.
All this to say that you shouldn't feel ashamed if you only have killed a couple of annoying flies in your life. There is way more evil compared to this. Everything is relative...

I doubt the amount of bad karma is decided on the ability of the victim to defend themselves

And there is never a good reason to kill. Maybe a least evil reason

Ants are not animals. Killing should be avoided. The only time to kill an animal, would be in a life threatening situation, or to eat it. The act of killing is the same for a small animal as it is a bigger animal. Both are living creatures. There is no difference. To kill an animal, just to watch it die, is pure evil. Bad Karma would be, is the type of animal that you killed, one day surrounds you in large numbers, and looking for blood.

Ants are not animals? animals = Animalia → Arthropoda → Insecta → Hymenoptera → Apocrita → Vespoidea → Formicidae = ants.

It's not about the physical size for a living creature in this universe, it's all about the intention to do so.
For example: A human kill daily billions of living creatures, totally unaware about it. We call them bacteria. But they are living creatures too. The point in this case is: THIS bacteria are only there to do one task and then die cause of thousands reproductions in nearly the same time. So ... it's not your fault ... it's natural intension.
The other site is: To killing an animal / human just for fun is extremely bad and pointed out as a rough negative karma.
But there is a point people are talking very aggressive about, is killing animals for eating. There are many points about this but if it's not 100% necessary to do so (for example as an Eskimo or living in the tundra in Mongolia) there is no way to say "This is normal and the karma doesn't count here".

"To follow the way of a vegetarian is nearly the half way to nirvana."
  - Siddhartha Gautama

.

"In his final teachings before he physically left this earth, the
  Buddha foresaw that a situation would arise in the future where those
  speaking in his name would pervert his Doctrine and encourage meat
  consumption. So here, in this great Nirvana Sutra, he lays down his
  last will and testament on the matter: in no circumstances should one
  eat meat or fish " nor animal corpses, found in the jungle, for
  instance " nor even accept from a donor a meal which contains an
  abundance of flesh-foods. The very contact of other food with meat is
  deemed defiling and requires purification of the food by water. It is
  quite evident from all this that the Buddha in no way condoned the
  eating of meat and was keen for his monastic and lay followers to
  abjure the uncompassionate practice of meat eating and follow the pure
  path of vegetarian Mahayana. In this, we would be wise and benevolent
  to follow him."

Google suggests that these quotes are from Dr. Tony Page paraphrasing the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra.

IMO it's better to avoid hurting and killing all beings. Despite of how big or small karma will we get. They both aren't do good for us.

authors: Баян Купи-ка


text:
Is there a Sanskrit (not Pali) version of the Five Precepts?
Can anyone provide me a Sanskrit (not Pali) translation of the Five Precepts?

If you don't get an answer here, perhaps an alternative place to ask this question might be the suttacentral.net forum?

I believe that the link that follows would be your one of your best options for tracking down a Sanskrit version of the Five Precepts. It indicated that this is to be found in the liturgy. Get in touch with them and see if they can provide more information.
http://nalandatranslation.org/offerings/notes-on-the-daily-chants/commentaries/ritual-for-taking-the-five-precepts/

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
what the buddha said about his own karma?
I have a strong believe in buddha but i am not much in karma logic. Had the buddha said anything of karma? If yes then what and if not then how? I am seeing some people getting back in a very amazing way whatever they had done in their respective past. Sometimes it is related to extreme past events, even. Like having a generation gap, too.

what the buddha said about his own karma?

The Buddha mentioned that there were 8 past Karma which were effective even after becoming Buddha. See: Why the Buddha Suffered - Apadāna 39.10

but i am not much in karma logic.

Karma is one of the things that only a Buddha completely understands. We can only have a rough idea of its operation.

I am seeing some people getting back in a very amazing way whatever they had done in their respective past.

Even outside Buddhism there is a saying your past catches up with you. In the Buddhist perspective this is termed Karma.

Sometimes it is related to extreme past events, even.

There are 5 Niyamas or causal factors which define your experiences and also being in the wrong place the wrong time and the right place in the right time, i.e., random events. So past Karma or action does not dictate all results.

Like having a generation gap

I do not think the generation gap has anything to do with Karma. This is more to do with social, technological and attitude changes.

I believe in karma. I said my curiousity, someone try answer.

I updated my answer.

Karma is one of the main teaching in Buddhism. Basically what buddhism teach us is this. We are in a wrong understanding of me. Even thought we thinks there is something called me, the truth is there is no anything called me. (At least there is not a define constant thing)
Because of this wrong understanging, we are doing 'things' which were not existed before and we become the owner of this 'things'. These 'things' have re-acts.
e.x. Say we kill a moquito. This incident of 'killing that mosquito' was never before. We did it. Hence we are the owner of that incident. This killing incident has a negative power which will make us suffer. So we will suffer for that incident in future. The power of incident came from the strength of our own thoughts and from the act. (First we are thinking we want to kill this mosquito, then we think to kill it, then we do the act) This is simply what Karma is.
For each and every thing we are doing, this law applies. Lord Buddha describes, this same law plus the miss understanding I mentioned above cause us to born over and over again. Each time as of the Karma we did for the rebirth.
Main aim of buddhism is get the right understanding and stop these re-births.

Pardon me my direct knowledge is not that clear on the issue so let me forward you to the very teachings themselves.....

These are the Sutras / Suttas By Lord Buddha on Karma.
Maha Kammavibhanga Sutta: The Great Exposition of Kamma
Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta: The Shorter Exposition of Kamma

Go to this link and look for "Vimanavatthu" (Contains good returns of Karma)
Khuddaka Nikaya: The Collection of Little Texts

This Contains bad returns of bad karma
Khuddaka Nikaya - Petavatthu - The Real Truth of Life

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


text:
Forced conversion
How are we supposed to respond to forced conversion, is the choice completely personal or did Buddha ever talk about this i.e. conversion or death?
If someone chooses death over conversion to other religion, would that be the same as killing oneself or not maintaining loving kindness toward oneself and others?

Conversion to Buddhism or to a different religion?

Buddhism states a self-responsible path ("You can do whatever you want, but if you want to reach nibbana you should try it this way")

Yes a Buddhist will not give up on faith even in the face of death. How do i know? Well it happened in my country (Sri Lanka).
When the English invaded and captured my country they forced christianity. Not at just gunpoint they were much artistic.
They took the Babies from their mothers and ordered my people to be converted but they did not. So then they impaled Babies and move on to children & then to men and later women. Whole villages were slaughtered this way by the so called "Religion of love & peace". Some people by the way accepted Christianity and received government jobs and other favors as presents. They & their children are to this day Christian.

No, It does not generate bad karma to accept death instead of conversion, actually every Buddhist should look forward to that. Our "Martyrs" do not take live they just lay their innocent lives with Mettha (Kindness) towards the killers themselves.
If you are wondering why it does not become a bad Karma. Because it does not include Hate. We die with kindness towards these foolish ones who force faith on to others.

i am very sorry this happened in your country and i am inspired by the example your people laid forth.  to die with a mind of kindness, no matter what or how gruesome the outer circumstance, is in accord with Lord Buddha's teaching.  Namaste.  _/_

How are we supposed to respond to forced conversion, is the choice completely personal or did Buddha ever talk about this i.e. conversion or death?

I Buddhism there is not conversion. Yet the Buddhist pratice has convertion from bondage to liberation and misery to happiness as it aims at eradicating the metal conditions which create unsatisfactoriness. This is akin to visiting a psychologist to free yourself from agony.

If someone chooses death over conversion to other religion, would that be the same as killing oneself or not maintaining loving kindness toward oneself and others?

No. If someone is trying to kill you for not converting though death is inevitable there is no self hate.

Hi Suminda, after reading Theravada's answer, has your perspective been changed at all?


text:
Sutta Reference, perception, judgment
I'm looking for two suttas:
(1) a sutta in which the Buddha says, I believe, that one is able to perceive the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, along with other pairs that one can perceive in the way opposite to what is natural.
(2) A sutta in which the Buddha says that you shouldn't judge others since only he or one like him knows the full extent of people's kamma. I believe it is from the long discourses.

I found it thanks to Dhammadhatu's answer:
“Therefore, Ānanda, do not be judgmental regarding people. Do not pass judgment on people. Those who pass judgment on people harm themselves. I alone, or one like me, may pass judgment on people."
Bhikkhu Bodhi. The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha (Kindle Locations 19187-19188). Wisdom Publications. AN 6:44.

(1) a sutta in which the Buddha says, I believe, that one is able to perceive the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, along with other pairs that one can perceive in the way opposite to what is natural.

I am not sure if there is Sutta which mentions this but the following does have something like what you mentioned above which is called the 5 perception (pañca saññā) which appear in Metta,sahagata Sutta (quotation below), Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta, Tikandaki Sutta, etc.

(1) If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,’ he dwells perceiving
    the repulsive therein.
    (2) If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive,’ he dwells perceiving
    the unrepulsive therein.
    (3) If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and in the repulsive,’
    he dwells perceiving the repulsive therein.
    (4) If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and in the unrepulsive,’
    he dwells perceiving the unrepulsive therein.
    (5) If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell rejecting both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, and dwell in
    equanimity, mindful and fully aware,’ he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and fully aware.

(2) A sutta in which the Buddha says that you shouldn't judge others since only he or one like him knows the full extent of people's kamma. I believe it is from the long discourses.

Acinteyya Sutta mentions karmma is unfathomable thence thinking and trying to read too much into it is futile for a person who is not a Buddha. I think what is said is that you should not judge the working of Karma.

The result of karma, bhikshus,
    is unthinkable [beyond thought], should not be thought about,
    thinking about which would bring one a share of madness or vexation.

Following are some Suttas which mentions judging other:

Cūḷa Puṇṇama Sutta - Judge a true or false person
Thāna Sutta - How to truly know a person’s character

Thanks, Suminda. The first one is just what I was looking for but the second is different; the sutta I refer to is not about trying to figure out karma, it's about passing moral judgment on others.

We find the below and similar pairs in the Tikandika Sutta (A 5.144)
“It is good, bhikshus, that one were to dwell from time to time perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive"
In the Maha kamma vibhanga sutta we find the Buddha describing the complexities of kamma and to an extent admonishes from making categorical claims about the effects of kamma.

A sutta in which the Buddha says that you shouldn't judge others since only he or one like him knows the full extent of people's kamma. I believe it is from the long discourses.

Intention matters. The Dhammapada gives 2 seemingly contradicting messages but they actually aren't as long as we keep intention in mind:

Dhp 76-77: Regard him as one who points out treasure, the wise one who seeing your faults rebukes you. Stay with this sort of sage. For the one who stays with a sage of this sort, things get better, not worse. Let him admonish, instruct, deflect you away from poor manners. To the good, he's endearing; to the bad, he's not.
Dhp 252-253: Easily seen is the fault of others, but one's own fault is difficult to see. Like chaff one winnows another's faults, but hides one's own, even as a crafty fowler hides behind sham branches. He who seeks another's faults, who is ever censorious — his cankers grow. He is far from destruction of the cankers.

AN 4.246 How to Judge a Person’s Character
AN 6:44 Don’t Judge Others!

Thank you, Dhammadhatu, AN 6:44 is what I was looking for. The link is broken, though, so I'll post the text below.

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


text:
Why doesn't a person cease to exist as soon as becoming an arahant?
From what I know body and mind are two separate entities. Body cannot survive without a mind but is not the same case for a mind from what I know. When a person completely rids himself/herself of all the delusion and desire he/she becomes an arahant. An arahant ceases to exist when he/she passes away and nothing goes on or lingers and there are no more births. I am curious to know why this cannot happen as soon as becoming an arahant. Why does an arahant only cease to exist after death? How come the mind or sansara is extended to the point of which the body dies? Why doesn't the mind cease to exist as soon as attaining nirvana?

The mind cannot exist without a body except in the Arupa Brahma realms.
Arahanths have no desire to die. So becoming enlightened does not imply that they have to immediately die. It's like when you are driving a car, if it runs out of fuel, it's not going to stop immediately. The momentum will take it some distance before stopping.

You and your analogies. Bravo!

Mind never "ceases to exist" and to speculate as to what happens to a realized beings body/mind after a certain point is just as helpful as speculating what the view from the top of a mountain looks like.
However, in response to the more pragmatic elements of your question, if you consider that karmic effluents must invariably run their course, then even a realized being must "suffer the consequences" ... or in their case "enjoy the apparent consequences" of aeons of accumulation as they slowly wither.
Mind is stainless, and all the karmic imprints we have, whether they be bad or good, are temporary stains.  However, without practicing Dharma, they will simply continue to accumulate and we will dive deeper into the chasms of samsara.  With practice of virtue it becomes easier to meditate as our experience of reality becomes more pleasant and pure, and at this point it is more accessible to an ordinary being to get a glimpse of the true nature of the mind, which we all share and will always share.
Instead of speculating about the personal experience of someone who is realized, it would be better asked "who is this person experiencing these effects?"  because the Buddha taught selflessness of the individual.
Self-grasping is the primary cause of our suffering.  When we relinquish self-grasping by cultivating a mind that wishes to benefit other sentient lifeforms we are uncovering our basic nature.  Basic in the sense that it is always there.  It is also a priceless diamond, because realization of this nature halts rebirths in the lower realms (hells, animal) and guarantees eventual complete realization within so many lives.
From what I understand, it is possible for an arhant to have made many vows, and typically abide until the fulfillment of all their most heartfelt vows.  This is good news for ordinary people like me, because without their help it would take a long time to realize the true nature of mind.
The question you pose, and not to nit-pick, but it is somewhat ill-formed because it assumes that there is a person who experiences the results of actions.  This is always true until realization -- we shall inherit the effects and fruitions of all our actions when the right circumstances align.  We will continue to experience all these until we have insight that pierces the veil of obscured knowing and effectively polishes our always-stainless gem.
We are all interconnected and we share a mind.  With the cultivation of love and compassion we are helpfully benefiting those around us in myriad ways, and also breaking down the walls of delusion.
In short, ask not what happens, but how you can get there yourself.

At the point of becoming an arahat you enter Phala Samapathi. What ceases when you become an Arahat is Perception and Feelings (Vedana Sanna Nirodha). The mind is dependent on Perception and Feelings, hence the mind also stop functioning.
The mental function ceases when (while) you are in Phala Samapatti and Nirvana as the object.
When you come out of  Phala Samapatti, an Arahat's mind starts to function again; but the difference is that a Arahat does not have roots, and Citta which have roots do not occur in an Arahat, hence does not create any new Karma.
As mentioned by others, an Arahat continue to exist due to momentum from past Karma until the end of life.
Also following would be an interesting read: Kāma,bhū Sutta 2 tr. by Piya Tan

Great, to know all that, since the Buddha simply sad, that question is valid: Does a Tathagata exist, not exist, exist and not exist, neither exist nor not. Just if Upasaka likes to take care about that in his answer. The momentum from past kamma, seems to be also more speculative. How could kamma effect an Arahat or was it about the body?

All the Vipaka Citta (these are rootless) can arise in an Arahat

Upasaka seems to miss the point. But go one with this commentary nonsense missing the point... rootless arising and criticizing Mohayanais. Atma would wonder in which Sutta Upasaka had found such answers about beings and Arahants existing or not.

Nibbana is sopadisesa and anupadisesa depending before or after death. In sopadisesa nibbana the body remains until the life comes to an end due to end of life expectancy or other reasons. I don't understand what you are trying to get at.

No problem with that (aside of sopadisesa and anupadisesa, that seems to be a later expalining). Maybe Upasaka likes to look at the question again and then to your answer. And it can not be that fruits have no root, but it is possible that they do not touch any surface any more. Remember the sutta where the Buddha gave the simile of the sun shine falling on the west wall. With your answer you give 1. the notion of unconditioned fruits when a Arahant is alive and 2. that he does no more exist after decay of the body.

The answer lies in this sutta (the Kamabhu Sutta, SN 41.6):

Citta asked him a further question: "What is the
  difference between a monk who has died & passed away and a monk who
  has attained the cessation of perception & feeling?"
"In the case of a monk who has died & passed away, his bodily
  fabrication has ceased & subsided, verbal fabrication has ceased &
  subsided, mental fabrication has ceased & subsided, his life force is
  totally ended, his heat is dissipated, and his faculties are shut
  down.
But in the case of a monk who has attained the cessation of
  perception & feeling, his bodily fabrication has ceased & subsided,
  verbal fabrication has ceased & subsided, mental fabrication has
  ceased & subsided, his life force is not ended, his heat is not
  dissipated, and his faculties are bright & clear.
This is the difference between a monk who has died & passed away and a monk
  who has attained the cessation of perception & feeling."

So the reason according to Ven. Kamabhu is because you can achieve arahantship and still have your life force not ended, heat not dissipated, and faculties running.

Life force is not ended after cessation of perception and feeling?

Yes, you can achieve the "cessation of perception and feeling" while your vital forces are still running.
The "cessation of perception and feeling" is described by The Buddha as the most extreme form of pleasure (SN 36.19, Pañcakanga Sutta), it is not what is imagined by most (eliminating perception by force), it is just existing as is without the feelings and perceptions that cause misery.

it's because i think their past kamma (accumulated up until the moment of attainment) hasn't run its course as a result of the attainment
and even though at the moment of an arahant's physical death there may have been left inexhausted kamma from their previous births, this kamma cannot initiate a new birth due to lack of bhavatanha in the arahant

There are few things that should be taken into consideration before going any further.

What exactly is the reason for staying after reaching "Nirvana"?
When Lord Buddha (The first Arahat of all) reached the completion of realizing (Reached Nircana) a strange thing happened. The most powerful Deva of all "Mara" came to see Lord Buddha. This is the same Mara that challenged Lord Buddha before reaching Nirvana.
He said, Now you have reached your goal, So now please choose "Parinibbhana" (The name for the death of an Arahat).
Lord Buddha replied saying, Yes i have reached my goal but until my "Shasana" (Monks+Followers+teaching) is strong i will not choose "Parinibbhana".

Later in Lord Buddha's life this happened

Lord Buddha said this to his very faithful apprentice Ven.Anandha thero..
A lord Buddha can last the utmost amount of time a Human can in that particular era in kindness towards beings(Aayu Kalpa).
But Ven.Anandha thero's mind was Shadowed by the Same Villainous deva "Mara". So thero couldn't answer. But Lord Buddha repeated the same sentence. Still the mind Of Ven. Anandha thero was shadowed.
If an invitation is not given Lord Buddha's do not extend life Expectancy. So in this era "Mara" deva succeeded in that.

So it is clear that Venerable Arahats stay alive with Kindness Towards us.

Does Mind dissolve after Nirvana leaving a half alive mind?
NO
Mind is a constantly generating and ceasing element. Ven. Arahats can control their minds at their will and therefore reaching Nirvana does not effect daily life.
For example the chief Arahat himself,Lord Buddha took time to admire Nature's Beauty all the while teaching Impermanance.
There are many statements by arahats describing the beauty of the surrounding Forests and songs of the rivers.

Although you must know a rarely occurring incident which goes a bit different.
If a person reach Nirvana while being a Lay person and choose not to be a monk that person will choose "Parinibbhana" within 7 days. This has been stated as "Nature" of such an event.


text:
How Does Buddhism Handle Internal Conflict
Few years ago, family put matrimonial ad in newspaper in India. We thought we selected nice person, but turns out he was abusive, unfaithful, and only wanted green card. Worse, he made me have miscarriage.
Now, I wish to move on with my life. One minute my heart says I want family to put matrimonial ad in newspaper in India again, next moment my heart says I want to keep busy in USA, maybe I will find person I am meant to marry here.
I asked God to give me sign, a "Yes" or "No" as to whether we should put another matrimonial ad (of course we learned from last time, will be million times more careful), but literally, one hour I think "Yes", next hour I think "No".
What does Buddhism teachings say in this case. For past few months I have been torturing myself mentally just thinking of this.

If you want to choose a marriage partner, see "Any authentic sutta from any tradition that gives guidance on what kind of partner to choose?" for advice on how to do that.

@ChrisW That was a very good answer you gave.

Thank you. It's from a book written by a Sri Lankan monk who now teaches in Texas. It has different chapters for the various difficult subjects for lay people (e.g. wealth, relationships, family, conflict, succeeding socially, making decisions, etc.): it selects various suttas which give the Buddha's advice or Buddhist advice for each of those subjects. It's a useful anthology of Buddhist teachings for laypeople.

To seek the mistake FIRST by one self. Noting is for free, so the lesser your desires, the lesser the problems. Matrimonial ad is not a way to find a partner and its clear that you have to pay what you promised when you put your self to be for sold. Did you keep that promise? Focus on your duties and you find them here: The Discourse to Sigala (at the end of the Sutta, toward you husband)

It's important to understand that any amount of external situations happen which may not go your way. When it goes your way, you're happy and God doesn't come into the picture. And when it doesn't, sometimes God doesn't help. ;)
So the idea is to accept the external situation as it is, because it was never in your control. And keep living with the moments in life. If you let an external situation faze you out too much, you're lost.
Understand this fact. What we are in control of is ourselves, our internal reactions and responses to anything.
So whatever situation life brings you, just take it in the right stride and keep smiling and going. Simply accept it. There is no need to fear anything. Fear is ego's response to a threat on its existence.
Don't struggle with yourself. If you put an ad in the matrimonial page, don't expect things to go right. But don't expect things to go wrong either. Just let it be. Because the future is only imaginary if we think about it. So let the future be whatever it is. Have faith in yourself that you can deal with anything.
The way to deal with it is to introspect if you are ready, put the ad. And hope it goes right by analyzing the person clearly. Go with the flow. Because life is to be lived whatever the situation may be, sportively.
(PS: And please, don't expect a certain God, to help out whenever you are in trouble. That is simply wishful thinking.)

I like the advice you gave and I understand Buddhism doesn't believe in concept of a God.

I really love this advice you gave and am reading it over and over. Right now, I'm working on improving myself, by developing skills in hobbies I enjoy, working on continuing adult education, and who knows, I may get accepted into University later this year. I wish I can laminate what you wrote :-)

@Rhonda glad if it helps. Don't get too attached to my answer ;)

Okay, ok, you are right, attachment is the root of dukkha (sadness)

Well, I wouldn't say dukkha is sadness as a literal translation. Dukkha is more like an "unsatisfactoriness". Things in life satisfy you for a certain period of time. And then they lose their charm. That is Dukkha.

Ahhh, now I understand

"Go with the flow. Because life is to be lived whatever the situation may be, sportively." Again this nonsense, that is not what the Buddha taught. Such a hint is good for Samsarism but not for Buddhism.

"Fear is ego's response to a threat on its existence." - Did you write this?!

@Surgęn No. I don't think so. This is merely a translation of whatever many great beings have said. Look inward. It will keep you enthralled. In all kinds of good, bad and confusing ways.

Buddhism has principles called “Sama-jivi Dhamma” for couple to ensure their compatibility and provide a firm foundation for a long married life. Sama-jivi dhamma concerns four qualities:

Sama-saddha:  having compatible faith; they uphold the same  religion, revere the same objects of worship, concepts, beliefs or principles, and share the same lines of interest- they are equally firm in all these or can reach agreement on them.
Sama-sila: having compatible morality; they have conduct, morality, ethics, manners and upbringing which are harmonious or compatibility.
Sama-caga: having compatible generosity; they are in accord, not conflict, with each other in their generosity, hospitality, munificence, sacrifice, and readiness to help others.
Sama-panna: having compatible intelligence; they are sensible and can understand each other; they can at least reason with each other.

You don't have to limit yourself to one method of finding a partner. You can try all the accepted ways.
But, whether it is a love marriage or an arranged marriage, it is best to date for about an year and find out if you are compatible, before tying the knot.
As far as dealing with the capricious nature of your own mind, Vipassana meditation is the way to go.

I totally agree! Traditionally marriage is done early after few days meeting. Better to spend a year really knowing the person.

Love is foundation of a relationship. Instead of marriage focus on love. If you have positive vibration you will attract persons of positive vibrations to you. Also you will be able to feel the person instead of judging the person. Looks like your understanding of very natural phenomenon (man/woman) is shallow and taking recourse to religion to understand simple basic concepts is not advisable at this stage.
Love is energy and if you are full of love i.e. energy it will attract others to you. Try to be healthy and cheerful and forget about marriage. Marriage is second step when love changes its dimension. When two people want to dissolve themselves into each other and decide to live together its called marriage. I know of a couple where if one is hurt the other feels it (one in a million). Marriage which you know of is a lawful arrangement by the society and therefore utterly flawed.

Please explain this: `Looks like your understanding of very natural phenomenon (man/woman) '. But I agree, I'm focusing on being happy right now, and let the flow of nature, Way of the Tao take it's course.

two forces of Nature - man/woman, yin/yang, masculine/feminine, There is no completeness within and without. Your longings for opposite sex is built in. How can you ignore that aspect? Yearnings for the other exist in both physical and metaphysical sense. If you can feel a person positive vibes go on and have a relationship. But for that to happen you need to be healthy (physically, mentally, emotionally) otherwise you will endup with one more disaster. One simple way is to accept everything that comes your way (Tao). But one should not be bothered about religion at this juncture.

"Love is foundation of a relationship." Desire as the foundation for marriage is a new age invention, and did not even exist in Christianity some 150 years ago. Its actually the believe that such satisfaction of greed is the foundation that makes things worse. Marriage is a simple enterprise with objectives and duties. So if there is the possibility to choose, one should look if the objectives are the same and if he/she can fulfill the contract, is willing to give and share the benefits with the partner.

desire and love go together...platonic love is a myth. A man or a woman has a dual existence - body and soul i.e. physical and metaphysical. Therefore any relationship which satisfoes both physical and spiritual needs is fulfulling.

@ShashankKhare I like your thought process

@SamanaJohann 150 years ago marriage came into existence (in Christianity)? Wow!

No Mrs/Ms Rhonda, but the broader believe it is thought for satisfy greed (love). Many Mrs/Ms tries to read more carefully. Western romanticism. Buddhist Romanticism is sure good to understand the common modern beliefs and what Dhamma is about.

@SamanaJohann oh ok, now I read it more carefully :-) Desire was a pre-requisite for marriage starting 150 years ago  --- before it was a calculated and loveless arrangement

Is, is and get's even stronger and with it the "problems" and incapability of people keeping a relation more as for simply sex and satisfaction. The more such is important, the lesser the success. Since addicted people seek sooner or later for harder drugs.

sexual expression leads to habit formation and West is obsessed with sex. Trouble is sex gives you an experience far greater than any material thing on earth. Until and unless u experience something far greater than sex, sex will not drop. That experience is what religion gives you. Samana please do not find fault with sex. Find the thing which takes you beyond it. If marriage takes you there marry someone. If loving somebody takes you there then love like hell. But get that experience for god sake. Talking about marriage and problem associated with sex will not help you.

In Tibet buddhist and tantric traditions combined to create buddhist tantra. Its a unique blend of hinduism and buddhism. FYI sex is used in certain tantric traditions to attain enlightenment. Now what do u think of sex Samana? Nothing is good or bad in this world...its just the way you use it. I hope this puts an end to this topic.


text:
How to avoid Tattling
Hurting someone physically, Mentally, Verbally is a sin according to Buddhism. As I believe no matter we love or hate each other, anyhow we don't have any ownership of any others lives.

So how about Gossiping or the tattling about others lives ?
How does Buddhism explain specifically about TATTLING ??
How one should practice not to Gossip about others lives ?
In the other way how one should practice to face others Gossiping about
himself/herself ?

Please note: I'm here referring gossiping about personal life, Not in business environment.

Abstain from people who are not in the sphere of kalyanamitta which requires to become one by one self. heaven and hell even approve and disapprove.

but unfortunately we have to deal with the non-kalyanamitta too in our day to day life. Dealing with them is very hard though have understanding of them. :(

Why is it hard not to response if people like to talk this or that?

yes that's hard. And now I think that's because of our attention on them. If we can improve our attention on some meaningful thing by practicing samatha meditation, then I think we can avoid lots of such situations.

So how about Gossiping or the tattling about others lives ?

You are wasting your time and others time. Talk that is productive towards betterment of oneself, which lacks proper reasoning (mud slinging), if you are monk not connected with the goal, the pratice, the Dhamma or Vinaya.

How does Buddhism explain specifically about TATTLING ??

If it is to divide people then it is not right speech. Also it should not be with malice, but say you are a witness of a wrong doing then perhaps might have a social or legal or moral obligation to report it but even this case some aversion arises as you are averse to the fact that something does not fall to your moral, social or legal idea but in society, work and as a householder you have to do these things sometimes.

How one should practice not to Gossip about others lives ?

If it can be an example to others then maybe it is OK. Otherwise change the topic to something productive or something you can learn from.

In the other way how one should practice to face others Gossiping about himself/herself ?

If you can learn something from it then try to. Sometimes in Business and Work situations you have to promote or market yourself and also engage in chatting to a maintain cordial relationships. This is not unproductive endeavour or killing time by chatting.
Even in a personal situation you what you have to see if the chatting is directed at achieving something productive to yourself and listeners. Does it help you understand something better. Is there something listener can lean by a situation some one else has been in. If it is wasting time try changing the topic or move on it it is not inappropriate or rude. For a householder trying to build relationships, networking and friendships is productive and endeavor, even at a personal level, hence may not be idle chatter.

Thank You Sir for your ideas :)
regarding last question:- I'm expecting an answer regarding personal life, Not in professional (Business) environment please.

I edited my answer see if the additions address your question


text:
Buddhism and economics
In the present context of the world, the chain of economics and happiness as I see it is, money is necessary to fulfill one's basic necessities (even if not luxuries), to earn money we need jobs, to make jobs we need to manufacture things, to sell things that have been manufactured, they have to be marketed and people have to be eventually 'desire' to buy these items and feel that they are happy to keep the chain alive.
But because of this chain, for example the automobile industry, we have more cars on road, more pollution, more environmental and health issues and so on.
So I was thinking if there is a better economic model which we can learn and devise from the teachings of the Buddha. Is there some other method we can adopt to reinvent this chain and relation between economics, happiness and consumerism? I do understand that real 'happiness' as taught by the Buddha and the happiness that one obtains by practising meditation is the way ahead to limit our desires and achieve a balance in the world. On these lines, I read something on 'Sufficiency Economics' briefly and felt it was a good topic.
I wish to ask if anyone can provide references to any other topics or books that relate economics, consumerism and Buddhism that offer a practical solution to a really happy world.

A related topic: Is modern capitalism inherently opposed to Buddhism?

Are you interested in topics which relate to nations (e.g. "What national economic policies could Bhutan implement?") Or advice for smaller groups of people, e.g. companies and cooperatives? Or advice for individuals (what's a right attitude towards working for a living)?

The right attitude towards working for a living for individuals has already been questioned and answered in this forum elsewhere I guess. My question pertains to ideas for practical implementation of the Buddha's teachings for larger groups, be it organisations or nations. Basically, a sustainable and implementable economic policy in the conventional sense of the world, based on the Buddhas teachings.

It's possible that an expert economist is more likely to answer this than an expert Buddhist. You're asking for references to books about economics. Therefore you might get answers if you ask on the Economics.SE site. Also a Google search returns several results (including a Wikipedia article).

This is not directly related to economics but Buddha's Ten Royal Qualities (Dasa Raja Dharma) is an excellent guidance to handle a country and thereby the economy as well.
Check this link to get an idea: THE CURRENT RELEVANCE OF
DASA RAJA DHARMA
Here's a very brief extract/summary from that article:

The promise of dasa raja dharma (ten principles
  of Buddhist governance) has been a
  trademark emotional appeal that our rulers
  have used to win elections.

Dana -- Liberality, generosity, charity.
Sila -- a moral character.
Pariccaga -- sacrificing everything for the good of the people.
Ajjava -- honesty and integrity.
Maddava -- kindness and gentleness.
Tapa -- austerity of habits.
Akkodha -- freedom from envy, ill-will, enmity.
Khanti -- patience, forbearance, tolerance, understanding.
Avihimsa -- non-violence, which means not only that he should harm nobody, but that he should try to promote peace by avoiding and preventing war, and everything which involves violence and destruction of life.
Avirodha (non-opposition; nonconfrontation) as they are related though not the same.

I believe this market based economist who are highly influenced by the capitalist nature basically they come from a University where these things are taught to them and their brains are programmed in that way and these people are taken as advisors to the government and they provide the solution of higher consumption in the economy higher consumption is the main evil, though for a short period of time higher consumption could lead to higher economic growth but in long run it destroys the basic human nature, consumers become monsters and they want higher consumption at any cost and if consumers are unable to afford it they are provided with credit cards, so borrow more and more to consume and ultimately people loose their peace of mind with such high level of debt and what is the cause of this suffering? Its higher consumption!!

How is this answer related to Buddhism?

"In the Buddhist view, when consumption enhances true well-being, it is said to be successful. On the other hand, if consumption results merely in feelings of satisfaction, then it fails. At its worst, consumption through tanha destroys its true objective, which is to enhance well-being. Heedlessly indulging in desires with no regard to the repercussions often leads to harmful effects and a loss of true well-being. Moreover, the compulsive consumption rampant in consumer societies breeds inherent dissatisfaction. It is a strange thing that economics, the science of human well-being and satisfaction, accepts, and indeed lauds, the kind of consumption that in effect frustrates the realization of its own objectives.

By contrast, right consumption always contributes to well-being and forms a basis for the further development of human potentialities. This is an important point often overlooked by economists. Consumption guided by chanda does much more than just satisfy one's desire; it contributes to well-being and spiritual development. This is also true on a global scale. If all economic activities were guided by chanda, the result would be much more than just a healthy economy and material progress -- such activities would contribute to the whole of human development and enable humanity to lead a nobler life and enjoy a more mature kind of happiness."

~ Bhikkhu P.A. Payutto "Buddhist Economics: A Middle Way for the Market Place" https://www.urbandharma.org/udharma2/becono3.html

Buddhas aren't in the business of teaching how to be happy. Sorry.
The real deal is concerned with freedom from circumstances, including the ones you're particularly worried about. As it just so happens, this freedom typically brings a kind of happiness but it's only the perfume of the main game.
Work on yourself. This will help others immeasurably.

This was posted as an answer, but it does not attempt to answer the question -- please see Answers vs Advice on Meta.

It answered a more relevant question and brought the focus back towards Buddhism. Answering people's questions all the time is just feeding their craving for power over intellectual knowledge. It does not help them.

Did you read the meta-topic I linked to? If someone wants to ask a question about Buddhist art (or culture, or economics, or about a school or practice of Buddhism that you don't agree with) then site policy is to answer that question (or refrain from answering it if you don't want to answer it), but if you can try to avoid posting a non-answer.

How exactly are you meant to help someone if you aren't allowed to tell them they're asking the wrong questions? Or is this place more about feeding the ego's desire for intellectual knowledge rather than helping humanity? Hmm?

Well Mr.Cameron, Lord Buddha gave the teaching for one purpose and that is to be free from suffering  and reach true happiness. Lord was also kind enough to give us tips to make it in the world while we are at it. If anything Buddhism is about being happy and how to be happy in a temporary manner until a person reach permanent happiness. @Cameron


text:
Betraying People
Today people are betraying each other in different levels without considering relationships and bonds.
For example scenarios:

Children betrays parents and ignore them
Boy/Girl cheats on Girl/Boy due to bad friends and bad intensions
Betrays who were in need when got succeeded and forget them

I can't understand how people do these kind of very simple to understand misdeeds. Even a dog wags it's tail when we gave it some food just ONE time.
Then why does these humans do this inappropriate acts without giving any values to relationships, bonds ???
Lord Buddha did 'animisa lochana puuja' to the Bo Tree as it helps Buddha to get Enlightenment. Can anyone explain in practical scenarios that how can we teach our loved ones not to betray anyone in life with the guidance of Buddhism ?
How can we teach our friends Betraying is bad ?
AND most importantly How can we make our mind when someone Betrayed ON us ??

What are you loyal to, really loyal? And how many times a day you betray the Buddha Dhamma Sangha? So that about how we can we understand what we see outwardly but not when it hits us again and again.

But that does not mean to be now comfortable. It give just the right place to work against it rather to save the world.

"How can we teach our friends Betraying is bad?". Start by understanding their motivation and intent. You don't have any right to judge someone without seeing through the circumstances.

yeah, that's true since everything has a reason(s) behind. But still there are some moments that it's crystal clear that the betraying was not the only option..

Your observations are quite correct in a capitalist mould. Survival of the fittest and stepping on your neighbor due to ambition or desire to achieve something is quite common.
We cannot, quite simply, get out of that mould in a day or even in a week. This is due to the mental model we have created for ourselves and the world around us. We are quite literally aping the animals because their environment is a survivalist mould and can only do so much for their species. Having said that, there are a few animals who are sensitive and capable of compassion and love. Dog is one such being you mentioned.
There is a human core or collective consciousness in us, that is empathetic and capable of kindness and compassion. This is by realizing the fact that we are all capable of feeling and emotions and need not hurt or lie to each other for perceived success. Of course, doing what you must, as a duty in daily life to achieve some goals is important, but definitely not at the cost of others.
I would go further and state that this consciousness need not be human alone. This includes all sentient beings, including animals and insects.
In metta meditation, we visualize the well being and happiness of every sentient being starting from our inward "happy" core and spread the vibrations of goodness to every living being on the planet including trees and plants.
In all this, it is important to recognize the ego (mental model of a "fixed, permanent being") in our reactions to any happening. For example, you creating a dent on my car in some way may hurt me mentally, even though it is only the car that has been damaged in some way. We don't recognize the fact that our mind, our body, our possessions, our relatives, are all ever-changing and impermanent. The solid core, that is the created ego, is capable of changing a man into a monster. He is perfectly capable of calmness in every situation. But he changes into a monster because his ego perceives something did not go as per his desire.
Betrayal is not the only scenario. It is part of the whole sphere of emotions that we are beset with in contemporary society. We are quite simply slaves to it.

How can we teach our friends Betraying is bad ?

If the mind of a person is more open or broad, it would take in the aspect of human consciousness among us all and work toward well being of oneself as well as honor good relationship with other beings. Simply recognizing the fact that we are all human and together on this earth, feeling the same things, positive and negative, should open up the person's "intrinsic goodness". Even better if it is toward animals and plants also.

AND most importantly How can we make our mind when someone Betrayed ON us ??

Any "perceived" attack on me is my ego telling me, "Hey! He/She hurt me! Look what he/she has done! Do something about it! Hurt them back!". The ego always acts in self-preservation. It is something that is a creation with no truth in it. And this is why we practice mindfulness and awareness, so that we can capture moments like this "perceived injustice" in our mind, recognize the ego, think clearly and work more constructively toward a solution rather than blindly reacting and worsening any situation.

This is really helpful!!! Thank You so much :)

Is this purely from your mind or have you gathered this from sources? If so, may I see them? Thank you!

It is from a mixture of reading and experience. I haven't read much. I have read parts of a good book called "Cutting through spiritual materialism" by Chogyam Trungpa. The practice of meditation helps observe the mind and ego at work. I also listen to talks by Buddhist monks available on YouTube like Ajahn Brahmavamso for instance.

Then why does these humans do this inappropriate acts without giving any values to relationships, bonds ?

This is the nature of Samsara. People do this. Since things like this happen it is one motivation to leave Samsara. If things were more rosy there is no reason to leave Samsara.

how can we teach our loved ones not to betray anyone in life with the guidance of Buddhism ?

This is the most difficult to do. Buddha would have made everyone understand the 4 Noble Truths if you can easily teach others. Most what you can do is try.

How can we teach our friends Betraying is bad ?

In certainty you cannot. But you can approach this in 2 angles by pointing out people are less likely to accept and deal with someone who do not have any scrules and also mention about the Karmic retribution

AND most importantly How can we make our mind when someone Betrayed ON us?

As you say this is the most important thing and what is relatively in your control. Best is to do Vipassana to make your mind. In doing this one thing to keep in mind is betrayal is a perception arise in your mind and why do not like it there is unpleasantness associated when you perceive something negatively. This is the Dukkha in this.

Thank You so much Sir, The last part is really valuable!! I haven't done Vipassana yet. Will try it for sure :)

A logical analysis suggests that being betrayed is history and now unchangeable; painful only if you let it bother you; and difficult only if you need to remain friends.  it may not be worth your mental effort to remain friends.  after being betrayed, this becomes a lot harder.  of course, the magnitude of betrayal matters, as does the degree of friendship.  focusing yourself elsewhere is the easy self-interested solution, and often quite appropriate.
however, from a social perspective, there is the more difficult question of justice and incentives to prevent this person to repeat betrayals on others.  it is a form of compassion to care, not towards the betrayer but towards these others.  is it sufficiently important (to you) to bother with this?  how much harm will (s)he do elsewhere?

yes that's true we should move on without sticking in past. But since I have done nothing wrong these questions comes into mind AUTOMATICALLY suddenly with past memories.
1.) why am I got betrayed ?
2.) why that person doesn't get any punishment by karma ?
3.) how can that person even not understand how wrong he/she is ? etc


text:
Are there meditations for forgiveness?
I'm having a lot of trouble forgiving someone for something they did quite a little while ago. The repercussions of which I am still dealing with today. I feel a lot of anger and frustration when I think about what this person did, and it's very hard to ignore.
I have already spoken to this person, and told them how I feel about the situation - ultimately forgiving them, but it still troubles me internally.
What can I do to "purge" the thoughts from my mind and the negative connotations that come with them?
EDIT: I do not wish to forget what happened, only learn to better manage the emotions that are felt when recalling the incident.

This isn't exactly the same question as yours but the answers may be similar -- What is the Antidote for a Hateful Temperament?

Thanks for your help Chris, and while that answer is very helpful, I am looking for something specifically geared towards relinquishing grudges and forgiving those who one may hold responsible.

Just accept it. Accept the situation, accept the thoughts, the negativity. Everything. When you fight something it fights back. Accept it, and it loses intensity and fades.

@Cameron I was given similar advice by someone else. To give resistance is to give strength.

A short nice talk on that matter: Comfortable with the truth and the talk to Rahulas. Just accept it means just ignore it and that is not what the Buddha taught. There are means for such. Its a huge topic, forgiveness and confessing and the step even able to practice the Dhamma.

Well this form of meditation is not well established or part of the more common meditation object but Bhanthe Vimalasiri does teach forgiveness meditation. The instructions are here: http://www.dhammasukha.org/forgiveness-meditation.html

i recommend this method. I've tried this and been helping a lot of people with this. it works

Hmm. I think "selfless action" will let you be peaceful, hard as it sounds. There is no need to sit and meditate in some way.
Try this. Whatever you do, try to let go of an idea of yourself. Just be totally aware and conscious and involve yourself in the activity.  This is really meditation. And you'll see yourself loosening up automatically. And you'll be more content.
To really forgive, you need to understand that everyone is looking for "something" and that's why we do things. Some inexplicable happiness. To express ourselves. Even criminals do so. In trying to look for happiness outside, we get misguided and do unnecessary things. This includes things like alcohol or drugs. It is a satisfying-the-ego nature. This happiness is not true happiness. We try to fit in with the crowd or friends to be "accepted" to be happier.
Edit:
This can also go the other way. Disillusionment with life could indicate more focus, or blowing up the suffering/disappointing/frustrating aspects.
With a cool rationality and temperament by mindfulness/awareness, we can gain more equanimity.
To really see bliss and happiness, look inward and make yourself that way. By being more open to pleasantness and reducing the ego qualities, you won't ever have to look outside.

I am always immersing myself in my activities, in work and in leisure. However, the subject I am referring to is something that can not be avoided.  This is something that interferes with my every day life, purely because the thought will not go away. Even whilst I am doing something I love and feel selfless in. To be upfront, it involves someone who I hold dear taking their own life.

Oh, I am really sorry. That would be harrowing. I wish you peace and nothing less. I think you would do well in talking more openly with other people. I believe slowly and surely you will make peace with the person and incident.

Thanks a lot, I too am confident that I will do so. I'm thankful I am able to pursue a solution. To confirm, it was an attempt, not a success.

I suggest maitri meditation because not only you'll be able to forget but will develop a loving kindness attitude towards the person of interest and all other beings

You might try compassion for the person who hurt you: understand that they were trapped themselves, by their own circumstances (and, maybe, ignorance). I guess that's part of the message in The Moon Cannot Be Stolen (where I think that the moon is a symbol representing enlightenment).
Another possibility might be reconsider your theory that they hurt you. Verses 3 through 6 of the Dhammapada say that "those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred" ... so, taking that to be true, maybe you need to let go of those thoughts. For example if the person hurt you by not doing what you wanted, or not doing what you expected, it might help to see "what you want" and "what you expect" as impermanent, non-self, and non-satisfactory, and maybe to disassociate "me" from them, or abandon them -- maybe in favour of another less harmful theory, a theory that doesn't involve "me".
See also the answers to questions about "identity view" (for example answers to this question) ... this (suffering as the result of not having forgiven a hurt) might be one of the myriad ways in which identity view leads to suffering: so "purging" that view might be a way to "purge the thoughts from my mind and the negative connotations that come with them" -- not just purging a symptom but a root cause.

Take the blame. I understand they hurt you, nevertheless, you can take responsibility for it. In many cases, that punctures the ball of negative energy and helps it dissipate. Try it, take it on and live with it for a day, see how it feels.

There are only two ways to forgive - forget about it or achieve no mind state. Forgetting takes a hell of a lot of time and most of the time it does not happen. Scientists are working on selective erasing of memory. But the research is years away from mass deployment.
Meditation will help you but prior to that you have to physically, mentally and emotionally cleanse yourself.
Another very simple way is to live a creative, conscious and fulfilled life. Such a life has meditation built into it.
Do not try to forgive anyone. Hatred will reinforce itself. More you try to forgive more strength you give to mind to start the hate process. Have you seen a child who is denied candy? If you deny mind the hatred through thought of forgiveness it will hate even more. Meditation helps you reach no mind state in which mind only functions when you want it too. Forgiveness is built into meditation. There is no meditation for anything. There are different meditation techniques for different people to reach no-mind state.

[Basing this answer in part on a comment by the OP on one of the answers]
This is not just about forgiveness: this is about dealing with suicide. Which is huge.
I think you are being too hard on yourself. You want to move to forgiveness before going through all the mourning necessary given the gravity of what happened.
You may be able to forgive this person in time, but (in Buddhist terms) you have to accept the suffering of the situation first. It is part of life - and it does not go away with a simple meditation.
That said: you could try meditation on the inevitability of dukha (sorrow, stress, suffering, pain). Your own and theirs.
Once you have really realized that, forgiveness will likely come easier too.
That you have repetitive thoughts tells me that there are underlying emotions that you are not allowing yourself to feel. These are likely anger, sorrow, disappointment etc.
Allow yourself to feel whatever it is you are pushing away. Take the time to cry, to be angry. It will pass.
In the meantime: look up the stages of grief. While they are often not followed in the order listed, they may give you an idea of what to expect.

Hey if you want to know why they do meditation So read these full.
Okay, now i will tell you why they meditate

For making themselves internally strong
Also too control there emotions like anger,happiness,etc

It already existed in the Hindu tradition, and the Buddha himself used meditation as a means to enlightenment.
Over the centuries Buddhism has evolved many different techniques: for example, mindfulness; loving-kindness and visualisation. But what Buddhists get from meditation is more than just calm.


text:
Losing interest in Samsara and transformation one undergoes when following Buddhism
I have been reading books on Buddhism and contemplating on the Suttas. Lately the things which I was interested about like reading novels, watching movies, playing games and girls is losing its sheen. I am more inclined to just observe things happening around me. What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism?

I deleted a couple of comments: if you want to answer this question, please post that as an answer, instead of posting a comment.

It isn't easy to answer the literal/personal question "am I depressed" without meeting/knowing/interviewing you. So it might be better to rephrase that as a more general question, e.g. "How could one tell whether that's a symptom of depression, or...?" But diagnosing depression might be off-topic for this site. Can you try to tweak the question to make it a bit more explicitly about Buddhist theory or Buddhist practice?

Affirming the Truths of the Heart

Being depressed and delusional are also normal. Being enlightened is what is not normal in the world. Becoming disappointed of sensual pleasures and wanting to figure out what is really going on around you is a good thing. It's a mild version of what prince Siddhartha felt before he left the lay life. It's called Nekkhamma Sankappa(a part of the right intention). But it will soon disappear and you will be defeated by sensual desires again, if you don't practice Samma Vayama(right effort) of the noble eight fold path.

If you observe what is around you the right way you can make progress. Whatever you observe will be perceived as:

desirable
undesirable
neither

which results in:

pleasure
pain
neutral.

This is discussed in Sal-āyatana Vibhanga Sutta, Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta.
When you experience any of these sensations you should remain equanimous and aware of the arising and passing nature to eliminate the roots. See: Pahāna Sutta

"I am more inclined to just observe things happening around me"
Is reading novels, watching movies, playing games, etc, not observable as something happening around you?
It is true that some things lose their edge, but mostly because they never had an edge to begin with. The practice of observation is actually more than a practice because it's really the naturally way of being. As such you can just go about your normal life and still be practicing and being, which effectively are the same thing. There is no more that needs to be done.
This is the process of transformation.

[...] is losing its sheen [...] What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism?

One way of thinking is that dispassion is the process a buddhist undergoes: dispassion for things that are, ultimately, unsatisfactory. Not too different from the dispassion one starts to feel towards children toys when growing old: they are no longer a source of craving or clinging. That does not mean that growing old one becomes depressed, however.
While depression has many kinds and many symptoms, it is invariably associated with not feeling well -- feelings of sorrow, sadness, guilt, hopelessness, anxiety/irritability, lack of energy for anything / fatigue, feeling empty, lack of concentration, difficulty remembering things and making decisions, etc.
Buddhism, however, is associated with hapiness. We can even pair some of the depression symptoms with the 7  factors of enlightenment (which a buddhist is supposed to master):

While a depressed person develops difficulty remembering and concentrating, a buddhist develops mindfulness and investigation.
While a depressed person develops lack of energy and fatigue, a buddhist develops energy.
While a depressed person develops sadness and sorrow, a buddhist develops joy.
While a depressed person develops anxiety and irritability, a buddhist develops tranquility, concentration and equanimity.

What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is following Buddhism?

In Theravada Buddhism there are identified Four stages of enlightenment.
The Viññana Sutta seems to mentions earlier stages too: "faith follower" and "Dhamma-follower".

It may be (I know very little about it) that Mahayana Buddhism describes a different set of attainments (or describes or defines stages of enlightenment in a different way): see e.g. Ten Bodhisattva Bhūmis.

I suppose the "process" varies from person to person and from school from school. One description of the process is presumably the description of the "noble eight-fold path". I can't tell you what the methods of all the various schools are.
I'm not even sure what chiefly motivates all Buddhists. For example some people talk about Saṃvega, conversely I think that some people have as their motive something like Mettā.
Also there is equanimity ... but as 'compassion' and 'pity' are 'near enemies' so are 'equanimity' and 'indifference' (so e.g. you should aim for equanimity but not indifference).
At some point this might be a question to ask an actual teacher.

What is the process of transformation one undergoes when one is
  following Buddhism?

The eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mind are impermanent, subject to destruction, vanishing, subject to origination, subject to cessation. Forms, sounds, odors, flavors, tactile sensations, mind objects … Eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness… Eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact … Whatever feeling arises with eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact as condition, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant … that too is impermanent, subject to destruction, vanishing, subject to origination, subject to cessation.
Seeing thus you experience revulsion towards the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mind; towards forms, sounds, odors, flavors, tactile sensations, mind objects; towards eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness; towards eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact; towards whatever feeling arises with eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mind-contact as condition—whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant. Experiencing revulsion you become dispassionate.
What is impermanent is suffering. What is suffering is nonself. What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ When one sees this thus as it really is with correct wisdom, the mind becomes dispassionate and is liberated from the taints by nonclinging. By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitated. Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbāna.
Based on SN 35.39-43, 22.45 in Ven Bodhi's translation

Through repeated examination and contemplation of the truth over time,
  your views change and what you once mistakenly perceived as attractive
  gradually loses its appeal as the truth of its unattractive nature
  becomes apparent.

Ajahn Chah "Clarity of Insight"


text:
Why is human population increasing? Better kamma?
Human population is increasing whether we like it or not and might even hit 10bn in the next few decades. But why is this happening according to a Buddhist's perspective? Some that I know that don't believe in kamma use this as a counter example saying that if people are becoming more sinful they ask how come the population is increasing. While I have my own understanding (devas being born back among humans, kamma alone doesn't determine the next birth "cuti sitha" does) I would like your expert opinion this.

Human population is increasing whether we like it or not and might even hit 10bn in the next few decades. But why is this happening according to a Buddhist's perspective?

Since life expectancy on average is falling (famine, wars, etc.), the needed Karma need to gain human birth is falling.

Some that I know that don't believe in kamma use this as a counter example saying that if people are becoming more sinful they ask how come the population is increasing.

When humans become sinful the criteria to become human falls and life expectancy falls and life in the human realm becomes hellish with more conflicts.

While I have my own understanding (devas being born back among humans, kamma alone doesn't determine the next birth "cuti sitha" does) I would like your expert opinion this.

Cuti sitha is determined by Karma.

Apologies for the lack of knowledge in cuti sitha. But the population increase that has occurred I think, is due the developments in healthcare that has managed to increase the life expectancy. True when compared to the days of Buddha life expectancy has probably gone down by about 40 years but it has gone up since the early 1900s though it maybe a temporary phenomenon.

If you look at the world how many of the population has access to these medical innovations? There many who do not have food let alone any medicine. If you consider mortalities in countries like Somalia I do not think life expectancy increased though this may be the case in some developed countries.

And also in areas life expectancy has increased birth rates have decreases where population increase is stalling or decreasing.

Yes I suppose. The reason why in Africa, though the life expectancy is low, the birth rates are still high due to lack of access to contraceptive methods. I suppose developed societies are more into family planning and maybe that's why birth rates have decreased

One would not believe how many small or big living being modern healthcare costs and one would not believe how difficult it is to gain simply according one development a proper live as an normal animal. So gain causes loses on the other side, or disadvantage. Normal life time nowadays without modern treatment, human would no reach 50 easily. Its just because there is additional akusala that provides the directions way. It will be a temporary phenomena.

Here is not an expert opinion: which is that I don't know why you expect that the total number of sentient beings is finite, countable, and constant.
The perspective in the OP seems to be that the total number is constant, and is asking, "If the number of humans is increasing, then where (which realms) are they (pre-existing beings) coming from and why?"
It has a view of, "this used to be (countably) one old sentient being, and that (same) being is now being reborn as (countably) one new sentient being" ... it has a view that, the type of being and/or realm might change (hell, animal, human, deva), but the total number of beings must be constant.
I don't see why you'd expect that view to be true, though: it seems to me an atman (self/soul) view, not an anatman view.
So far as I know a more anatman view might be look "there's no person now" (there are are just skandhas, an assemblage of parts, c.f. the parable of the Milinda's chariot), "the number of sentient beings isn't countable" (except perhaps to the Buddha), and fabricated things are inconstant.

here's an interesting perspective on this from the Pali Canon, which implies that it's rather when human morals are high that the population is growing, not the other way round
superstitious quite a bit

Depopulation
Then a certain affluent brahmin approached the Blessed One … and said
  to him:
“Master Gotama, I have heard older brahmins who are aged, burdened
  with years, teachers of teachers, saying: ‘In the past this world was
  so thickly populated one would think there was no space between
  people. The villages, towns, and capital cities were so close that
  cocks could fly between them.’ Why is it, Master Gotama, that at
  present the number of people has declined, depopulation is seen, and
  villages, towns, cities, and districts have vanished?”
(1) “At present, brahmin, people are excited by illicit lust, overcome
  by unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. As a result, they
  take up weapons and slay one another. Hence many people die. This is a
  reason why at present the number of people has declined, depopulation
  is seen, and villages, towns, cities, and districts have vanished.
(2) “Again, at present people are excited by illicit lust, overcome by
  unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. When this happens,
  sufficient rain does not fall. As a result, there is a famine, a
  scarcity of grain; the crops become blighted and turn to straw. Hence
  many people die. This is another reason why at present the number of
  people has declined, depopulation is seen, and villages, towns,
  cities, and districts have vanished.
(3) “Again, at present people are excited by illicit lust, overcome by
  unrighteous greed, afflicted by wrong Dhamma. When this happens, the
  yakkhas release wild spirits. Hence many people die. This is yet
  another reason why at present the number of people has declined,
  depopulation is seen, and villages, towns, cities, and districts have
  vanished.”
“Excellent, Master Gotama! … Let Master Gotama consider me a lay
  follower who from today has gone for refuge for life.”

Paloka sutta (AN 3.56)


text:
To what extent can Ānāpānasati be related to Vipassanā?
I've read that the two can somehow be used in Unison, with benefit. Can anyone expand on this?

Anapanasati is divided into 4 tetrads which correspond to the 4 Satipatthana hence the pratice of Anapanasati is actually a forms of Satipatthana / Vipassana. A thorough introduction to Anapanasati and how to develop this into Vipassana is difficult in this format hence it might be worthwhile to read a more elaborate book on it: Anapanasati: Mindfulness of Breathing by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. You can complement this book with: Right Mindfulness: Memory & Ardency on the Buddhist Path by Thanissaro Bhikkhu

Best answer possible. I'll learn a lot from this. Thank you.

In this post I will touch on one aspect of the Vipassana side to Anapanasati meditation - Contemplation of Mind Objects. Contemplating on Impermanence, He Trains (as part of Anapanasati Meditation) “Contemplating impermanence, he breathes in. Contemplating impermanence, he breathes out. Thus, he trains himself.”
Anicca means ‘impermanence’. Being able to see everything in terms of impermanence is not something that comes automatically after gaining concentration of mind. Now, he trains himself to breathe in contemplating impermanence, and he trains himself to breathe out contemplating impermanence.
Some meditation teachers declare that impermanence is something that just becomes visible to a mind, like appearing in a meter, and enables one to gain something called ‘vipassana nana’ (insight knowledge) by continuous determination. This theory or view is not in accordance with the Supreme Buddha’s Dhamma.
Impermanence of Breath
Anapanasati is something that should be developed and pursued mindfully and discerningly. Now, he trains himself to breathe in focusing on impermanence, and to breathe out focusing on impermanence. Purity of mind has been achieved through the elimination of the hindrances (nivarana). His effort, mindfulness and concentration are now being directed towards focusing on impermanence. He is contemplating on impermanence within anapanasati. He can see the impermanent nature of his own breath in its rise and fall; the impermanence of his body; and the impermanent nature of the pleasant feeling and perception that he experienced.
Impermanence of Body
What has he seen in the body? What does this body consist of? This physical body contains and comprises the four great elements, which are known as: solidity/earth (pathavi), fluidity/water (apo), heat or temperature (tejo) and air (vayo). We generally use the word rupa (material form) to denote the body. When he is breathing in and out, he is focusing on impermanence of material form which is derived from the four great elements.
Impermanence of Feeling
Thereafter, he is focusing on feelings. Dependent on contact, feeling arises. What is contact? Contact is the coming together of three things. For example, eye, form and eye-consciousness come together, and it is their convergence, that is called contact. Similarly, with ear and sounds, nose and smells, and so on, through to mind and mental-objects.
In this instance, when body, tangible object and consciousness come together, there arises contact. With the arising of contact, simultaneously, there arises feeling (vedana) – feeling born of body contact. Since feeling is conditioned by contact, feeling differs in accordance with the change of contact. This way, he contemplates on the impermanence of feeling.
Impermanence of Perception
Then, there is the recognition of perception. This is called sañña (perception) which is also subject to change as it is conditioned by contact. Perception changes due to impermanence of contact.
Impermanence of Formations
Perception is followed by sankhara (mental formations). If the mental factor was directed to a certain matter, on that occasion there is volitional activity, and this is called sankhara. Here, he observes the impermanence of the mental formation with the change of contact. All these are based on the activities of the mind.
Now he understands every aspect in this life process which was considered as self (form, feeling, perception and formation); or anything pertaining to a self. He has real wisdom to see things as they really are. One may contemplate on impermanence saying “anicca, anicca” continuously, but still be holding onto the notion of “I am” or “mine”. To avoid this, it is important to realize the impermanent, no-self nature in inhalation-exhalation and in any other external object.
Impermanence of Consciousness
Finally, he sees the impermanent nature of all that has been cognized (the rise and fall of breath, rapture, joy, feelings, and perceptions). It is through this insight that the true nature of the five aggregates of clinging is understood and seen in the light of impermanence:
material form (rupa) derived from the four great elements,
feeling (vedana) that is conditioned by contact,
perception (sañña) that is conditioned by contact,
mental formations (sankhara) that is conditioned by contact, and
consciousness (viññana) that is conditioned by mentality-materiality (nama-rupa)
Being fully concentrated on anapanasati, he now dwells ardent, with full awareness, and clear comprehension of impermanence. With the base of this awareness, established in anicca (impermanence), he develops an understanding of his own life, the impermanent nature of others who breathe and live, and the impermanent nature of material form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness (the five aggregates of clinging).
Thus, he observes the impermanent characteristic of phenomenal existence, internally and externally. He does not see a difference in him and the outer world. He sees the characteristic of phenomenal existence as subject to cause and effect. Now he is gaining knowledge, and his comprehension is increasing. He sees things as they really are, in whatever material form: whether past, present or future, far or near, external or internal. He sees the impermanence even of the rapture and pleasure that he is experiencing in breathing mindfully. Now, based on the impermanent breath, he understands the impermanent nature of the five aggregates of clinging.
He realizes that whatever is impermanent and subject to change, is suffering (dukkha). And, whatever is impermanent is without self (anatta). It is through this insight that the true nature of the aggregates is clearly seen; in the light of three signs (ti-lakkhana): impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and without self (anatta).
He sees the impermanent, suffering and no-self nature of all conditioned and component things. As a result, he knows there is no “I”, no self, or anything pertaining to a self. When he trains himself to breathe in and out focusing on impermanence, he understands that anything taken as ‘mine’ is impermanent; anything taken as ‘I am’ is impermanent; and anything that is taken as ‘my self’ is impermanent. He realizes that whatever is impermanent, is without self. That which is without self, is not ‘mine’, not ‘I am’, and is not ‘my self’. Thus he sees everything as it really is – with wisdom.


text:
Is there an eBook reader compatible Tripitaka?
I would like to know if there exist a PDF version of Tripitaka which is compatible with an eBook reader(Kindle, Kobo alike)?

Thankyou, At the moment I am looking for Bhikkhu Bodhi's Samannaphala Sutta Commentary

I found this PDF which is his translation but without the commentary. It is "Extracted from The Fruits of Recluseship: The Samaññaphala Sutta and its Commentaries" -- which (as far as I can tell from Google) is a paperback available from Amazon or maybe from here (but I don't see evidence that it's published as an eBook).

I hesitate to suggest this because some people don't agree with everything he writes, but if I want a commentary then the first place I think of looking is http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/sutta-titles-2 ... there, many suttas are translated with an introduction and footnotes and cross-references, each in its own PDF, for example here is the one for the Samannaphala Sutta.

I am presuming you are looking for translations. There is the Buddha Jayanthi edition which has both Sinhala and Pali.
English

http://dharmafarer.org/ - does not have all the Tripitaka but there is a growing number of Suttas in PDF form
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ - this has traslation by many and can be downladed in multiple formats in mulitple languages

Multi languages

https://suttacentral.net/ - no PDF but mobile friendly. But has translations in multiple languages

Pali

http://www.tipitaka.org/ - Pali text is many different scripts with PDF downloads

Sinhala (Since you name sounds like a Sinhalese name including including some in Singhala script)

http://www.aathaapi.org/Thripitaka.html - Buddha Jayanthi in PDF
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/, http://pitaka.lk/ -  A.P. de Soyza's translations (https://www.facebook.com/pitaka.lk has links to PDFs)
http://www.thripitakaya.org/ - Unicode mobile friendly format.

As well as the suttas which are listed in this answer:

There are translations from the Vinaya linked here on Access to Insight (many of the PDFs are commentaries rather than translations).
This page (from 2005) of Access to Insight implies (though I don't know if that's true) that many of the Abhidhamma books haven't even been translated at all, let alone made available in eBook format. Still, there is at least A Manual of Abhidhamma, a commentary in PDF format. There are also translations of the Visuddhimagga (not sure whether that counts as tipitaka).
Also:

There are many PDFs at http://static.sirimangalo.org/pdf/ including suttas, Pali grammars, texts from the vinaya, dhammapada, jataka, etc.
There's an eBook library at http://www.buddhistelibrary.org/en/index.php?lang=english (which may have some books not found elsewhere, in its Theravada Texts category).
These Pali Text Society Publications are suttas in PDF format (actually they're ZIP files with a PDF inside, I don't know whether you can unzip on the Kindle, or need to download and then unzip before copying to Kindle).

You can find here some selected sutta translations from the Pali Canon, as translated by Thanissaro Bhikku to English, in the azw3, mobi, epub and pdf formats. With Kindle, please use the mobi format for best results.
http://www.dhammatalks.org/ebook_index.html
Here's what you can find at this page:

Handful of Leaves: an Anthology from the Sutta Pitaka, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (revised Jan. 21, 2016)
Handful of Leaves, Volume I: an Anthology from the Digha Nikaya, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Jan. 17, 2016)
Handful of Leaves, Volume II: an Anthology from the Majjhima Nikaya, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Dec. 31, 2015)
Handful of Leaves, Volume III: an Anthology from the Samyutta Nikaya, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Dec. 31, 2015)
Handful of Leaves, Volume IV: an Anthology from the Anguttara Nikaya, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Jan. 19, 2016)
Itivuttaka: This was said by the Buddha, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Jan. 21, 2015)
Udana: Exclamations, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Jan. 21, 2015)
Dhammapada: A Translation, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Dec. 10, 2014; pdf revised Dec 16, 2015)
Poems of the Elders: An Anthology from the Theragatha & Therigatha, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Jan. 19, 2016)
The Buddhist Monastic Code, Volumes I & II, translated and explained by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. (revised Jan. 10, 2014)

The Full set of the scans of the PTS translations of the 4 Nikāyas and the Vinaya are available in zipped PDF files at:
http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/idx_downloads.htm#pts_pdfs
This is the same collection as mentioned above as located at obo.genaud.net. That site has become obsolete due to our inability to update the site and has been replaced by buddhadust.net. This site also has the full set of PTS translations in html format. The new site has been completely converted to Unicode which makes use of the source files much easier.
If these files are wanted strictly for personal reading, the PDFs will just make it: they are not of the best quality scans. They were originally put together to assist in proofreading the html files. If what is wanted is a clear rendering for further distribution it would probably be better to take the source files of the html version and convert them directly with a tool like Calibre.
The site also contains all the Bhk. Bodhi translations made available to the public gratis; the translations of Bhk. Thanissaro; the Sister Upalavanna translations, the translations of the Majjhima of Lord Chalmers, the manuscript of Bhk. Nanamoli's translation of the Majjhima, and the individual sutta translations of a variety of lesser-known translators and the Pali text. All in html format. Translations are linked to each other and to the Pali. See the Sutta Index Page:
http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/sutta_toc.htm
which lists every single sutta with a short description. The PTS suttas have also mostly been unabridged in the html version.