text:
aswaha and katawaha in Buddhism
Anyone beleves in aswaha and katawaha? Is aswaha and katawaha defines in Buddhism? Can anyone explain is there any explanations

These are Sri Lankan words, aren't they? I'm not sure why you tagged this topic [tag:tibetan-buddhism]. I think they mean something like (they're used e.g. in the context of) "bringing a jinx on something if you speak well of it" (e.g. saying "what a lovely child" might bring ill health to the child).

Some thing wrong with my tagging. sorry for that. Yes thay are Sinhala words. I need whether those are define in buddism or not. I know the meaning of those words :)

If this interpretation of those words of those words is correct, then FYI I think that is a common folk belief in non-Buddhist cultures too; for example:

don't jinx it

Anyone can explain this expresion to me? and in what context can I use it?

A jinx is a little like a magical spell, specifically to make something go wrong. It's often used to refer to something good that is hoped will happen, but that might not happen if you talk about it in advance. "Don't jinx it by talking about it."

Or this:

"How beautiful are the noble children! How large are their eyes! And so young too! Indeed, indeed, I might have remembered that the children of kings are men from the beginning."

Now, Tabaqui knew as well as anyone else that there is nothing so unlucky as to compliment children to their faces. It pleased him to see (the parents) look uncomfortable.

Or I can think of many other examples.

One possible (non-supernatural) explanation might be that things are likely to get "better" or "worse" by themselves, no matter what anyone says -- and anyone expecting a "good" state to continue might be mistaken.
For example, I once read another (non-Buddhism) aphorism, "good health is a temporary state which foretells nothing good" -- and I read something similar last night, though I forget where: the young Buddha telling an old man that only a fool would see their body as healthy.
A corollary might be that it's better might be that it's better not to say such things (i.e. if it's customary not to say such things then maybe this is one of the reasons for the custom). For example there's this story (which is maybe Zen or more possibly Taoist), about how it's wrong to predict the future (and predictions are often wrong).
Anther practical reason might be found in the (again, non-Buddhist) phrase: "Hope for the best but plan for the worst." If you're not aware of the possibility that things might (or will) go 'bad' then you have no plan to handle it or you're slow to recognize the need for that plan and put it into action.
Saying such a thing (e.g. "he is winning") might show an attachment to that thing (attachment to "his state-of-winning").

“aswaha” and “katawah” in Sinhala, if translated  could be said as “Evil eye, evil mouth and evil tongue”.  This belief is found in almost all cultures. The effect of the evil eye is being misfortunate. The same is true in Buddhism. This is something that comes to pass when one tries to put into practice the Dhamma that one has learnt. This person could be one who has cultivated the five ‘Sēkha Bala Dhamma’ – Saddhā (faith), Sīla (virtue), Sutha (Dhamma knowledge), Thyāga (generosity), and Paññā (wisdom of the Dhamma).  Also this could be a person that has religiously gone through the stages of listening, remembering, constant reciting, mental observation and ideologically understanding the Dhamma (Sutha, dhata, vacasa paricita, manasanupekkhita, ditthiya suppatividdha). Still when trying to put into practice in daily life, what one has learnt, one faces many obstacles, difficulties, emotional pain, and conflicts that throw one away from this Dhamma path.  This is due to the “Evil eye, evil mouth and evil tongue” of ones own making.
We’ve got to remember that Mara has a stranglehold of our six senses. (Mara is more precisely understood as "cravings and delusions")  In the Samyutta Nikāya 4 -Connected Discourses with Mara: 19 – The Farmer this point is made clear to us.

“Mine alone is the eye (in creatures). Mine are forms, mine is the sphere of consciousness & contact at the eye. Where can you go to escape me? Mine alone is the ear…the nose…the tongue…the body…. Mine alone is the intellect. Mine are ideas, mine is the sphere of consciousness & contact at the intellect. Where can you go to escape me?” – Mara
“Yours alone is the eye, Evil One. Yours are forms, yours is the sphere of consciousness of contact at the eye. Where no eye exists, no forms exist, no sphere of consciousness & contact at the eye exists: there, Evil One, you cannot go. Yours alone is the ear…the nose…the tongue…the body…. Yours alone is the intellect, Evil One. Yours are ideas, yours is the sphere of consciousness & contact at the intellect. Where no intellect exists, no ideas exist, no sphere of consciousness of contact at the intellect exists: there, Evil One, you cannot go.” – Buddha

Remember well the Supreme Buddha’s words…

“Dear Bhikkhus, ones who would not realize this Dhamma is like this earth (in amount). Ones who realize the Nibbāna is like this small amount of soil on my finger nail.”

The “Lokavidu” Buddha, the ‘knower of the worlds’ showed us the path, and told us how to escape from all the worlds. This Dhamma is for the wise. Each one has to come to Dhamma by one’s own effort.  As it is to be personally known by the wise, one cannot force it on ones loved one. The Dhamma can be perfectly realized only by the noble disciples (Ariyas) who have matured and enlightened enough in supreme wisdom.  So as long as we keep our personal practice very close to our hearts, with utmost humility, one can go far in this path.
There is possibility of being one amongst the minute few who remain in the finger tip, if we could relegate self, and put Dhamma to the forefront. This is an extremely difficult thing to do. That is why only a minute few succeed in this Path. If you are of the “I think therefore I am” type, telling the whole wide world what you do, why and how you go about it, you will not gain anything in this path even if you meditate at length, and you are the most benevolent, righteous person as per world view.


text:
How to understand Buddhism original dogma?
Buddhism has been evolving dramatically since Buddha created it. Somehow it spawned into many different 'sects' across the world. There are numerous sutra and books on Buddhism. As a beginner, it's really hard to know what to start, but I had a feeling that I need to understand the original dogma/meaning of Buddhism when it was invented. However I heard that most sutra were written by Buddha's disciples, or disciples' disciples, or even laymen; Some of the recordings are contradict each other when interpreting Buddha's true meaning; Some original meaning was lost or probably altered since then.
Anyone has suggestion how I should start and what to read?

I hope you'll find the answers in these topics might answer your question: 1) English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon; and 2) Chronological or other sequence for beginners.

Power of Judgment may be of use.

I like The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching by Thich Nhat Hanh as a beginning book on the core of the Buddhist teaching. It is well written and modern in style, and covers essentials such as the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path as well as slightly deeper topics. It will give you a grounding and a place from which to appreciate the sutra's.
There are various web based repositories of sutra's which you can explore, I found http://www.accesstoinsight.org to be pleasant and good. The book includes many references to sutra's which you can look up online.
One thing to be aware of in Buddhism is that the different schools hold differing opinions on the words of the Buddha. There is a doctrine called the Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma, which sets out the Mahayana view on the Buddha's teaching, while the Theravadan view is that the Pali Cannon which constitutes much of the Mahayana tradition's First Turning is authoritative by itself.
The Tibetan tradition has composed a series of texts called lamrims, of which there have been many following on from Atiśa's 11th-century original text A Lamp for the Path to Enlightenment. These aspire to order the sutra's in a logical order of progression for actual practice.

The Pali scriptures are mostly consistent; without contradiction. The primary themes are non-harming (morality), non-sensual happiness (concentration) & non-attachment (wisdom).
However, there are certainly some notable contradictions in them (for example, the Maha-Nidana Sutta), which I speculate were later attempts to introduce ideas about 'reincarnation' into the scriptures so a 'social religion' attracting a broader audience could be developed.
I would speculate this ultimately lead to the demise of Buddhism in India, making Buddhism indifferentiatible from Hinduism.
The foundation for a proper understanding of the Pali teachings is to embrace the principle that is chanted everyday in Theravada Buddhist countries about the Dhamma or Teachings, namely:

Svākkhāto Bhagavatā dhammo, sandiṭṭhiko, akāliko, ehipassiko, opaneyyiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī ’ti.
Well taught is the Dhamma of the Blessed One, visible here and now, not involving time, inviting investigation, leading onwards, to be
  experienced by the wise.

If a doctrine is believed or adhered to that cannot be experienced in the here & now by an ordinary mind, this is not the original doctrine.
Therefore, any translations of the Pali Canon that do not make sense to the ordinary reader are not the original doctrine (since the Dhamma is 'well taught', plain & straightforward, as stated in the scriptures).
The greatest problem is that of language & translations. There are many crucial translated words, such as 'birth', 'death', 'cessation', 'body', etc, which are interpreted in ways that result in not being able to experience the interpretation in the here & now.
Fortunately, all of these crucial words are well-defined in the scriptures therefore those searching for a meaning that can be 'experienced in the here-&-now' can find it.
If you want to read something for beginners that accords with my explanation above, these links:
Two Kinds of Language
Buddha-Dhamma For Students

That's great input. I found the links are much useful. Last question: should I learn Pali or Sanskrit for Buddhism study? I asked several of my India friends, who told that even in nowadays India, not too many people can actually read and write in Sanskrit. Pali is kind a ancient language and now is only taught in advanced academy.

What Original Buddhist Sources say is very true.

”The Dhamma possesses multiple forms and levels. It is incumbent upon the interpreter to seek the internal coherence and consistency within a text in order to understand it. If the method of interpretation must be based on the inherent structure and intention of the Dhamma, interpretation must mirror the Dhamma itself. This means, for instance, that any interpretation that contradicts the three marks of existence (that is, all life is suffering, everything is impermanent, and non-self) is incorrect. The nature of the Dhamma necessarily requires interpreting the Dhamma in terms of itself. This suggests that the Buddha becomes the interpreter of his own teachings. More specifically, the meaning of the Dhamma points to the purpose or goal of Nibbana, and demonstrates the way that the teaching is interrelated with other parts.”

If you have an interest in learning the Dhamma, start with the Majjhima Nikaya.  Reading Faithfully
Building a relationship with the suttas tells you why.
If you are interested in building a Sutta Library go to this link. It gives a list of Cannonical Collections, Sutta Anthologies, and Sources.  Use this list to build a basic collection of the discourses of Gotama Buddha that is readable, accurate, and nearly complete. Use this list to build a basic collection of the discourses of Buddha.

First, your use of the term dogma indicates a profound ignorance of Buddhism. As Alan Watts (an adherent of the Zen Buddhist school(NOT sect http://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/sect-and-sects-etymology-and-meaning ) said, Buddhism is the religion of no religion. Buddhism shares a lot in common with clinical psychology. You learn best by direct face to face contact with a competent teacher. Rather than waste a lot of time trying to understand on your own with your head(left brain , language, analytic) I suggest you would benefit most from direct contact with a Buddhist teacher. Finding the right one for you is a lot like finding a potential mate or a clinical psychologist. I hope I haven't discouraged you by my blunt reference to your ignorance. A really good teacher is like a good psychotherapist who will be able to reach you where you are at now and help you on your self learning process. Buddhism is not dogma but a tool box for self exploration. The different schools vary on whether enlightenment is slow or sudden or another difference is how to understand consciousness(Madhyamika vs Yogacara). There is almost universal agreement on the non-concept of emptiness(Pure Land Buddhism is a school that abdicates responsibility of learning or teaching emptiness and instead advocates a life of chanting Amitabha Buddha in order to be reborn into a Pure Land similar to Christians' concept of heaven). A koan of sorts, for me, was the question "What is the difference between death and transformation?". A serious practice of Buddhism leads to a shedding of the false ego that might be perceived by the ego as no different than death but in actual fact it is through ego death that you can really begin to live life fully. Not only that, it is a lot more fun, kinda like what Tom Robbins says that it is never too late to have a happy childhood. Have fun!!! Oh, BTW, all I have said is a gross oversimplification and therefore false(partially). It is up to you to take responsibility for your search for truth. In this respect it might be worth your while to read the very short Kalama Sutta ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalama_Sutta ). As usual, Wikipedia is where you begin to search, not the end of your exploration. If you do a search on "find a good Buddhist teacher" (with or without the quotes) you should be able to find some good tips on locating a teacher.

Thanks Charlie for pointing out the wrong words :) If dogma is not a proper word, can I use doctrine? (guess no... as you said it's religion of no religion); Should I say Buddhism is a kind of way of living, like Hinduism?

Hi Dave,   As I already mentioned,Buddhism is about finding a way to live, not a logical dissertation to justify one's choices. That said, it is true that there are incredibly complex arguments to defeat any attempts to do otherwise(than finding the Middle Way). Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika ( http://aaari.info/notes/03-06-06Tam2.pdf ) is like reading a graduate level text in logic. The aforementioned pdf is supplemented by Jay Garfield's excellent book "The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā" ISBN : 978-0195093360. Much more to say but only 1 chars left.

May I suggest a better book, as Garfield massively complicates the issues. It is 'The Sun of Wisdom' by Kenpo Tsultrim Gyamptso. In passing I would also reiterate Kerome's note about the 'Three Turnings'. It would be necessary to understand this, and the reason for it, in order to disentangle the teachings.   .

I was not aware of "The Sun of Wisdom" publication. It does look like it would be better than Jay Garfield's book which is a tough slog. BTW I have been recently advocating Iain McGilchrist and Alan Schore on the importance of right brain functionality. Alan Schore came out with two books this year on right brain psychotherapy http://www.allanschore.com/ and an ultra quick intro to the subject is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI  RSA ANIMATE: The Divided Brain. I see their work as a major bridge between Asian philosophy(eg Buddhism) and Western Science.

Buddhism has evolved indeed ever since it was created by Buddha Sakyamuni. Traditional Buddhism is the teachings of the Buddha who taught us the truth of life and the universe, and taught us how to acquire the ultimate and perfect wisdom that all of us sentient beings innately possess. This is the goal of Buddhism--to enable sentient beings to attain this same self-nature Buddhahood level of wisdom. In essence, Buddhism is an education of wisdom.
To better understand the Buddhist original dogma, one may start with reading the following 5 key guidelines that serve as the crucial foundation for practice:

The Three Conditions
The Six Principles of Harmony
The Three Learnings
The Six Paramitas
The Ten Great Vows

More importantly, Buddhist practitioners strive to sever all afflictions and try to develop a pure and quiet heart. This is the first step in learning Buddhism. Once developed a pure and quiet mind and have attained wisdom, we learn to remain unmoved by surroundings which will enhance our deep concentration. Developing a clear and understanding mind will enhance wisdom.
In regards to the various sects of Buddhism around the world, they are all spawned from the teachings of Buddha Sakyamuni that arose from the self-nature. All methods are thus equal. Practitioners should choose a method that works well or suits himself or herself to focus in their daily lives. There is this one school, Pure Land Buddhism, that was particularly mentioned numerous times by the Buddha in various sutras throughout his teachings. The Buddha encouraged all in the Dharma-Ending Age (our present days) to understand and learn the Pure Land practice of Buddha-name Chanting (Chanting of "Namo Amitabha Buddha"). This would seem the most suitable for the majority of us for several reasons.
First, Buddha-name Chanting is relatively easy to practice in almost any environment: alone, with other practitioners, or even amid the hustle and bustle of everyday life. Second, there are no difficult prerequisites of one's capabilities. Even if one's abilities and knowledge are modest, one can achieve with belief, vows, and practice, and one will be reborn in the Pure Land at the end of one's lifetime. Therefore, the practice of Buddha-name Chanting is highly recommended for all of us to give it a try.
For more info on the Pure Land School, the Pure Land principles page explained well about the meaning of Amitabha, what the Western Pure Land is and why Amitabha Buddha created it.

There are different schools of Buddhism but virtually all subscribe to some notion of emptiness which Zen practitioners often refer to as "no mind" or "beginner's mind" and is echoed in Christianity in words ascribed to Christ as "unless you become as little children you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven" )http://biblehub.com/matthew/18-3.htm). Incidentally the capper follow up to that is "The kingdom of heaven is within you" ( http://biblehub.com/luke/17-21.htm ). Almost all religions mention the notion of transformation within but Buddhism is the only philosophy(I prefer to refer to Buddhism as a philosophy because it insists that you diligently verify all its claims yourself much in the spirit of philosophy.) that centers focus on self transformation in a practical how-to fashion.
Buddhism is unlike almost all religions which insist you take most of their credo "on faith" until you die and then all will be revealed. Some of their credo is downright silly like virgin birth and walking on water. Buddhism does have some very hard to verify beliefs like rebirth. There has been a lot of work recently on near death experience(Pim van Lommel http://www.pimvanlommel.nl/home_eng ) and the earlier work of Ian Stevenson ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stevenson ) on memories of prior lives(mostly among pre-school children). Stephen Batchelor says it is possible to be a "good Buddhist" while disavowing rebirth. The jury is out for me personally. I will need a bit more data in terms of tightly controlled studies. A note, the American Asociation for the Advancement of Science(AAAS) has the Parapsychological Association ( http://www.parapsych.org/home.aspx )as an associate organization. Conventional science is beginning to abandon the view that ultimate reality is mechanistic materialism. My personal focus is to work at a joining of East and West and I see the scientific study of consciousness as the first big step in that direction. Finally, as respects Hinduism, I was a student of Hinduism for a number of years(primarily Sri Aurobindo, whom I still venerate). Sri Aurobindo wrote "A Synthesis of Yoga" where he advocated that all kinds of Yoga(Hatha, Karma, Bhakti, Raja and Jnana) be united in a single practice with the proviso that Jnana should be avoided by all except those with an exceptional intellect (Nagarjuna would be an example of Buddhist Jnana Yoga). Sri Aurobindo taught Advaita Vedanta Hinduism which is nearly identical with Buddhism. So, finally, at the risk sounding like a broken record, Buddhism is about self transformation by non-attachment to all mental and material phenomena (to become as a little child or to have a beginner's mind). Buddhism can help you put your left brain analytical self in its proper role as a help in understanding conventional thought(each age has its own flavor..humans were once convinced that the Earth was flat and the center of the universe where all else revolves around the Earth). Giordano Bruno ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno ) advocated a remarkably modern view  that resulted in the Catholic Church burning him at the stake. Buddhism always advocates that any and all mental constructs are provisional and NEVER final. In other words, the Buddhist claim is that there will never be a final theory of everything. The analytical mind is very useful in navigating through the conventional reality du jour but it is of paramount importance to keep in mind "this too shall pass", That is the Buddhist "doctrine" of impermanence (Buddhists also say that emptiness is empty). The study and practice of Buddhism has the potential to afford you the grandest adventure of any life you might hope for. A last note, my guess is that you might like to try Sokkai Gakkai International ( http://www.sgi.org/ ) it starts as a very simple practice of chanting and allows you to progress at your own pace. Many people consider it to be a cult but I have investigated it thoroughly and it is most definitely NOT a cult. It is true that there are a lot of ex-Catholics and ex-Mormons (I believe it is true that both the Catholic Church and the Church of LDS are most definitely cults(an organization whose leadership have direct contact with God and  therefore are infallible)) members who fan the flames of the cult of personality surrounding Daisaku Ikeda. Regrettably there is a widespread cult of personality within the SGI surrounding Daisaku Ikeda but he disavows any association with such attitudes. The nice thing about SGI is that it is the fastest growing Buddhist group in the history of Buddhism and is spread widely on demographics factors( income, education, race, ethnicity, gender, LGBTQ, etc). Obviously, I respect your right to decide for yourself, but a word of warning, there are many practitioners of Buddhism who get all wrapped up in the intellectual side of Buddhism and fail to understand it is all about having a genuinely happy and joyful life. It was that tendency that led to a Daoist critique of Buddhism ( http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/daoism/ ). So follow your genuine concerns and maybe you will find a home in Buddhism. I have many homes, myself. There are versions of many of the great faiths (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Jainism, and Hinduism) that I call home but Buddhism and Daoism are the most homely for me.

Can start with teachings generally presented by Tathagata to his students and pondering the implications.
The general presentated part of the Dhamma is something like this; 'All things are impermanent. What is impermanent is subject to change, what is subject to change is unreliable; is to be parted with and is to that extent stressful and unfit to regard as me, mine or myself.'
When you have an idea of what has been said you examine those teachings to see if it is agreeable and keep developing your understanding in detail.
In general one should be extremely skeptical to any teacher and not take their word for things until you know how their understanding was formed; is it based on commentaries; is it a personal interpretation based on views;   what are the subjects of controversy regarding those teachings etc. In general you will want to become skilled at discerning wrong views and not become fixated in wrong view.
In general a well learned person who has done his work in regards to this is incredibly hard to find.

Though may sects agree, the core teaching attributed the Buddha are the same. E.g. the Theravada Suttas and Mahayana Agamas are nearly the same.
In the Theravada tradition also there are many Tripitakas which are near identical.
So the original teachings at large are still well preserved.

Anyone has suggestion how I should start and what to read?

To learn about the philosophy you can start with In The Buddha's Words by Bhikkhu Bodhi. To learn the praticle aspects you can try a course:

http://www.dhamma.org/en/index
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html
http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/

For a classic introduction to the Buddha's teachings, I recommend the book "What the Buddha Taught" by Walpola Rahula. You can find the PDF version here. There is also a very short collection of the suttas at the back of the book.
The ebook "Without and Within" by Ajahn Jayasaro, available in PDF and epub formats, is 127-pages long and is meant to be a collection of questions and answers on Buddhism for beginners.
I think these sources should suffice as a closest introduction to the original teachings and "dogma" of the Buddha.

Start with original Theravada suttas. You can find them on accesstinsight. Use a good dictionary in your studies and go through all the terms, until you're perfectly clear about the meaning of the suttas. This part of the studies is called duplication. Before you can even start to understand the suttas, you must have in your mind a perfect duplication of the original material. To do that, you must duplicate the original meaning of the suttas. This is only possible with the use of good dictionary.
Once you complete duplication, you can start to understand them. In this process of understanding you make connections between all the concepts of Theravada suttas. Now things are getting exciting because you're getting the understanding of the original disciples of Buddha!
The end of the process of understanding is marked by having a complete working mental model of the original suttas. Now the contemplation follows. In contemplation, you admire the beauty of riginal teachings of Buddha. After prolonged contemplation follows the realization of the original teachings of Buddha. This means you become Buddha.

Dwight Goddard's a Buddhist bible is a free download on the app store. 3 pillars of Zen is really good. Sutra and "dogmatic" structure will get you a feel for it. A book about knights of the round table isn't the same as dying of smallpox. Sometimes a Roshi makes it work. Sometimes visiting temples. Zanzen meditation was a must for me and took years. It's also what worked for Buddha. That's the point. The schools are trying to teach what Buddha found but it's not recorded in words. It's definitely there because how could there be so much life devoted to obtaining. Once you have it what will you do with it?

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it sinful to masturbate in Bhutanese variety of Vajrayana?
Is masturbation a sin in Vajrayana variety practiced in Bhutan as official state religion? When performed by non-monk, for example, adolescent boy, divorced man, as part of wider sexual practices used by partners, etc.

Masturbation is not a Dharma practice, even in Secret Mantra.

It is not a sin for laymen. Even for monks, it will become a "sin", if it's goal or end result is ejaculation, but not otherwise.

I get the impression that the word 'sin' is wrong when applied by a westerner toward Buddhism. The concept of sin is in and of itself a western concept and as such does not directly apply.  The 'sin' is relative and depends on context and is therefore diffused by virtue of relativity and context: and we see that the sin is in the eye of the beholder and not defined a priori as SIN.  The concept of God does not exist in Buddhism.  Sin is not really sin at all but mearly an opportunity to experience a path which may provide an excuse to change for the 'better'?.

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


text:
Sequence in the noble eightfold path
It's clear right view is the foremost factor as without the right view one would not go for practicing the noble eightfold path at all. But when the rest is considered, is there a real sequence? My physical actions are generally good and my speech is fine but needs to be improved as I'm vulnerable to idle chatter. But controlling speech the action is difficult to me. But when I realize that idle chatter(rather idle communication, not just idle chatter alone) leads to more dukkha I am abstaining from it. It's kind of right concentration. Am I following the noble eight foldpath correctly in that scenario?

Right view is the leader ('forerunner') of the path.
When you realize idle chatter leads to more dukkha, this is right view leading your speech.
When the mind maintains right speech in communication, this is right mindfulness.
In actually practising the path, right view & right mindfulness work together, as described below:

Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong speech as wrong speech and right speech
as right speech.
One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong speech & for entering right speech: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon
wrong speech & to enter & remain in right speech: This is one's right
mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort &
right mindfulness — run & circle around right speech.
Maha-Cattarisaka Sutta: The Great Forty

Some sequence at the beginning of the practice would be helpful. Please see Ven. Bodhi's excellent "The Noble Eightfold Path", especially the sequence of practice described in Chapter2.

Just as the paths of Stream entry, Once returner, Non-returner , and Arahantship must be passed through and attained in sequence to reach full Purification and emancipation. There is a sequence to the complete  understanding of the Noble Eightfold Path.  But it does NOT mean that it is to advance step by step in the sequence of the enumeration (one after the other) until “Samma Samadhi’.  The process starts in sequence and (the full completion of each step) ends in sequence though.
1 .Right Understanding (sammâ ditthi)
Right understanding is seeing things as they really are – seeing things as impermanent, as dependently originated, as not-self, as impersonal, as seeing the Four Noble Truths. When we understand in all these various ways, all these descriptions are opposed to ignorance, to bondage, to entanglement in the cycle of birth and death.
2. Right Thoughts (sammâ samkappa)
Clear vision or right understanding leads to clear thinking or Right Thoughts. Thought has an immense influence on one’s behavior. The cause of suffering is described in terms of desire, ill-will and ignorance. Right Understanding removes ignorance. Right Thought removes desire and ill-will. To remove desire and greed we need to cultivate renunciation or detachment. To remove ill-will, we need to cultivate loving-kindness and compassion. Nekkhamma, Avydpdda, Avihimsa are the three-fold Right thoughts.
3. Right Speech (sammâ vâcâ)
Right thoughts lead to right speech, the third factor. It speech involves respect for truth and respect for the welfare of others. Right speech means to avoid lying, to avoid back biting or slander, to avoid harsh words, and to avoid idle talk. Always be truthful and trustworthy and seek the good. Idle talk refers to malicious gossips, diverting oneself, entertaining oneself, recounting the faults and failings of others.
4. Right Action (sammâ kammanta)
This leads to Right Action. Right action entails respect for life, respect for property, and respect for personal relationships. Respect for personal relationship means to avoid adultery, to avoid sexual misconduct. These three evil deeds are caused by craving and anger, coupled with ignorance.
5. Right Livelihood (sammâ âjîva)
Right livelihood is an extension of the rules of Right Action. It is very important to remember that dealing in intoxicants violates the principle of respect for the welfare of others. This contributes to the insecurity, to the suffering and discord in society. The practice of good conduct creates within the individual an inner sense of peace, of stability, of security and of strength. Once he has created that inner peace, he can then fruitfully and successfully practice the other steps of the path. He can cultivate and develop meditation. He can achieve wisdom only when he has created both inwardly and outwardly in his relationships with others and in himself the necessary foundation of good conduct.
6. Right effort (sammâ vâyama)
Right effort is the first of the three steps in the mental development group. Together these three steps encourage and enable one to be self reliant, attentive and calm. Right effort (enthusiasm) means cultivating a positive attitude towards our undertakings. It means undertaking our tasks with energy, and a will to carry them through. J ust like the strings of the lute, effort should never become too tense, too extreme, and similarly, it should never become too slack. Right effort is a controlled, sustained, enthusiastic, cheerful determination.
7. Right Mindfulness (Sammâ Sati)
Mindfulness is awareness or attention, avoiding a distracted and clouded state of mind. Mindfulness acts as a rein upon our mind. At almost every moment of our life, our minds are running after objects of the senses, may they be sounds, or sights. The mind is never concentrated or still. This guard against unwholesome thoughts is mindfulness. It simply entails being aware and attentive, watching your mind, seeing where it is going, seeing what it is doing with regards to body, with regards to feelings, with regards to moments of consciousness, and with regards to objects.
8. Right Concentration (sammâ samâdhi)
Right concentration is the practice of focusing the mind single pointedly on a object, be it physical or mental. When total single-pointed ness of the mind is achieved through concentration, the mind is totally absorbed in the object to the exclusion of all thoughts, distractions, wavering, agitation, or drowsiness. When one’s ability in this kind of meditation is developed, it has two principal benefits. Firstly, it leads to mental and physical well-being, comfort, joy, calm, tranquility. Secondly, it turns the mind into an instrument capable of seeing things as they really are. It prepares the mind to attain wisdom.
In order to turn our understanding of the Four Noble Truths from book knowledge into direct experience we have to achieve one-pointed ness of the mind. It is at this point that mental development is ready to turn its attention to wisdom. It is at this point that we see the role of concentration in Buddhism. This is similar to sharpening the pencil to write with, or sharpening of the axe which we use to cut off the roots of greed, hatred and delusion. When we achieve single-pointed ness of the mind, we are then ready to conjoin tranquility with penetrative understanding, meditation and wisdom. Wisdom is described as the understanding of the Four Noble Truths, or the understanding of the dependent origination and so forth.

I am only going to address the first part of your question. The Noble Eightfold Path is paradoxical because it begins with Right View, which follows immediately after the pre-path "grade" of dharma follower (which in turn follows after faith follower). The nun Dhammadina came up with a threefold classification that the Buddha accepted, consisting of Virtue, Meditation, and Wisdom, in that order. This then raises the question of sequence, since the sequence of the NEP - without which the Buddha said there is no authentic dharma practice - is clearly Wisdom, Virtue, Meditation. Although some religious Buddhists discount the order of the NEP, suggesting that the stages can be achieved simultaneously or in any order (and it is certainly true that the Buddha taught all sorts of meditations to different people at different stages of development), noted Pali scholar Peter Masefield has suggested that the order of the NEP is important, and my own comparative researches in the Pali Canon confirm this. The apparent discrepancy is resolved by regarding the threefold classification as being in order of importance, which has also been suggested by Buddhist scholar Hirakawa Akira. However, the paradox remains. How can the first step of the path be identical with the attainment of wisdom, which the Pali Canon makes clear is the salvific principle itself? The attainment of wisdom makes one a stream enterer, beyond which salvation is certain - it's just a matter of time. Some religious Buddhists have suggested that Right Wisdom is simply a kind of formal religious or intellectual assent, much as some Christians associate "repentance" (metanoia) with a kind of formal catechism, but the word samma means 'perfect.' Thus, each step of the path must perfected. Others might regard Right View as formal entry to the sangha in the sense of monastic community, but the inclusion of Right Livelihood in the NEP militates against this interpretation too, since monastics are not permitted to earn a livelihood. It is also true that many Buddhist monastics were and are puthujjana monastics and not enlightened at all. From this it follows that the path is also open to householders, as is clearly shown in the Pali Canon itself (difficult, but not impossible). It follows therefore that entry to the NEP in itself represents an advanced spiritual attainment, and is not merely a matter of intellectual assent or even conversion, which clearly pertains to the two pre-path stages aforementioned.

Thus, each step of the path must perfected. Is it possible that the process is iterative? E.g. that it does start with a more-or-less right view, then includes or attempts the subsequent steps, and then repeats, starting with a slightly more correct right view, and so on?

It may very well be pursued that way in practice. Obviously one can pursue right livelihood before one has right view, but one cannot really be said to be perfect in the subsequent steps before one is perfect in the previous steps. I will find the passage in the Pali Canon that says this, and post it in the comments when I do.

He declares the Seven Requisites of Concentration, viz.,

Right View;
Right Thought;
Right Speech;
Right Action;
Right Livelihood;
Right Effort; and
Right Mindfulness.

The similarity to the Noble Eightfold Path is obvious.  I would note the strong emphasis on the sequence of the Seven Requisites for Concentration, which clearly correspond to the stages of the Noble Eightfold Path.  Each requisite establishes the necessary basis for the next, so the requisites clearly must be attained in order. (DN 18)

MN117 clearly explain the sequence.and the sequence is not linear.
The sutta start by buddhas intention to teach ariya sammāsamādhi.

“ariyaṃ vo, bhikkhave, sammāsamādhiṃ desessāmi saupanisaṃ saparikkhāraṃ.

“monks, I will teach you noble right undistractible-lucidity with its vital conditions and its prerequisites.

Looking at the arrangement of these 8 words buddha says

Tatra, bhikkhave, sammādiṭṭhi pubbaṅgamā hoti.

In this context, right view comes first.

And then buddha  defines right view . and at the end puts this refrain.

So micchādiṭṭhiyā pahānāya vāyamati, sammādiṭṭhiyā, upasampadāya, svāssa hoti sammāvāyāmo.

They make an effort to give up wrong view and take up right view: that’s their right effort.

So sato micchādiṭṭhiṃ pajahati, sato sammādiṭṭhiṃ upasampajja viharati, sāssa hoti sammāsati.

rememberfully they give up wrong view and take up right view: that’s their right remembering.

Itiyime tayo dhammā sammādiṭṭhiṃ anuparidhāvanti anuparivattanti, seyyathidaṃ—sammādiṭṭhi, sammāvāyāmo, sammāsati.

So these three Dharmas keep running and circling around right view, namely: right view, right effort, and right remembering.

Here buddha clearly says right view comes first. But there are two other pillars.They are right effort and right mindfulness. Buddha clearly says that these 3 works in communion around right view.
We can say that these 3 together is active right view. or right view in action.
Then after buddha visits remaining 4 limbs of Eightfold paths and puts the same refrain after them.
Remaining 4 are constantly churned by these 3 wings of right view  and purified.These four are resolve, livelihood, speech and action. In fact Even wrong view gets churned out by active right view.
The last is samadhi. it arrives on its own.. However when it comes on the foundation of right view as above. then its is right samadhi.

Let's use some helpful analogies.
When you first learn to drive a car, do you learn how to start the car on one day, how to accelerate on the second day, how to brake on the third day, how to turn the steering wheel to the left on the fourth day and how to turn the steering wheel to the right on the fifth day? No. It doesn't make sense. You have to learn and develop these steps altogether in tandem, and practise them together.
Another example is this. When you learn to cook, would you learn to cut vegetables on one day, then learn how to wash ingredients on another day, then learn to boil on another day, then learn to simmer on another day and so on? No. Instead, you learn and practise them altogether at once by trying to cook a certain recipe. By practising them together, you slowly deepen your cooking skills. You would then expand to add frying, broiling, baking, steaming, poaching, sauteeing etc. to your techniques, but you would practise them together in one recipe.
Similarly, in the case of the Noble Eightfold Path, you would have to first cultivate Right View (the forerunner of the path) by learning the Buddha's teachings (the Dhamma). Then you would start developing Right Resolve, and decide to take refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, and practise the five precepts (which form the core part of the virtues - Right Action, Right Speech and Right Livelihood).
As you deepen your progress into Right View by studying more of the Dhamma, you then increase your knowledge of the virtues (Right Action, Right Speech and Right Livelihood) and try to practise them with more fervour. That's more of Right Resolve and Right Effort being applied.
As you deepen your contemplation of the teachings, you start cultivating Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration, and then go into the meditation practices. These meditation practices would then lead you to better understanding of the Dhamma through first hand experience, which is improving the Right View once again. If you stumble into the five hindrances during meditation, you may need to deepen your practice of the virtues once again. This of course again is applying Right Resolve and Right Effort towards making progress in meditation and cultivation of wisdom.
So, every step helps the other. You can't practise only one of them at a time. But of course, learning the Dhamma and practising virtues tend to come before meditation, in general. This is just as in the case where you need to start a car and accelerate, before braking, but you would anyway do them in one session of driving, with repetition of all the steps as needed, to take you to your destination.
Even if you have not tried to meditate, if you continually reflect and ponder upon the teachings (that you have studied) and see how they match your experiences in life, you would still begin to understand the teachings from first hand experience. Then meditation could still progressively come later.


text:
What is Zen, what are Zen beliefs, and why is it called Buddhism?
Please note that i have no idea about what Zen is, and I mean no disrespect to anybody with this question.
I have heard these words "Zen Buddhism", many times, and I'm curious: why it is called or attached to Buddhism, and how did it come to be?
Can someone explain?

'Zen' is the Japanese name of the school of Buddhism that originated in China around the 5th century AC, called (in Chinese) Chan Buddhism, and whose founder is thought to be Master Bodhidharma, an Indian monk. Later, in the XIIIth century, Master Dogen introduced this species of Buddhism into Japan, where it is mostly practiced today, alongide with the USA and Europe.
It is a form of Buddhism because, among other things, it acknowledges the Way of the Buddha as a way to Awakening; because there is a traceable heritage that links today's Zen Masters with the historical Buddha; and because it emphasizes the practice of sitting meditation ('Zazen') as a way to achieve 'Satori', the Awakening.
There are various schools among the Zen tradition, but the more important today are the Soto and the Rinzai schools. Each of these schools emphasizes different aspects of the Buddhist heritage, and though their ceremonies and mindsettings somewhat diverge, they converge in the emphasis they make on Zazen as a practice that provides, when constantly and earnestly taken upon, an insight into the nature of the Self and the ultimate unsubstantiality of reality.

I think the history is that at some point, people in China began to hear of "Buddhism".
From China it eventually moved/migrated to Japan (where it's called "Zen"). There were/are several schools or sects in Japan. My (not well-informed) impression is that an emphasis on meditation (or "sitting") might be partly in reaction/opposition to sectarian arguing over doctrine and intellectualisation.
As well as Japan, Zen also exists in Korea and Vietnam.
Some of the first Buddhists to arrive in the USA were Zen school, and "Zen" might be better known (I don't mean "well known", but known in the sense that "a lot of people will have at least heard of it") in Western popular culture than, for example, Theravada.
For example among the popular books on Zen that I read quite a while ago, The Three Pillars of Zen and Zen Flesh Zen Bones (both of which helped to popularize Japanese Zen).
One of the popular foundations in the West at the moment is Plum Village whose founder is, I read, from Vietnamese Zen.

And to try to begin to answer "Why is it called Buddhism?" there's Lineage and Dharma transmission .
I think that in theory or traditionally that's understood as an unbroken chain of transmission of Dharma from teacher to student, a chain going back to the earliest teachers and the Buddha himself. The historical reality might be more complicated than that. Even so I think there's an emphasis on studying with (learning from) a living and relatively enlightened teacher, perhaps instead of an emphasis (or an exclusive emphasis) on studying the earliest texts (e.g. the Pali suttas or the Chinese Agamas).
As well as suttas there's also the Vinaya which (I read) is apparently followed within some schools of Zen and not others.

'Zen' is a Japanese word from the Chinese 'chaan', which is from the Sanskrit 'dhyana' & the Pali 'jhana'. Thus, 'Zen' means 'meditative absorption' & refers to a school of Buddhism with a primary focus on meditation.
Zen is how Buddhism came to be after a long & centuries long journey across Asia to Japan.
Zen is generally included within 'Mahayana Buddhism' however, in my opinion, it is more 'Hinayana' ('individual focused') than Theravada (which has many teachings for laypeople).

the very thorough explanation of what Zen is:

This answer is presumably a reference to that-which-is-wordless being an aspect of Zen, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_Sermon

well, there is another one but, there is no way to use Keisaku via network =)

Admin comments like that just further degrade the already horrible representation of Buddhism on this site. It is clear that the admins are only interested in the regurgitation of meaningless words rather than the fostering of real spiritual growth. Perhaps before making silly comments they should try to understand the topic themselves? Hmm?

@Cameron Two questions: 1) Is this a topic you want to start on Meta? There are already some topics e.g. this, also this. 2) Suppose an admin (or other user) were in some remote place (i.e. not near a Zen teacher), and not already acquainted with Zen. Can you suggest what they should do to "try to understand the topic themselves"?


text:
third eye experience of mindful breathing
I am practising mindful breathing and after a while it takes my concentration directly to my forehead. I tried to be in thoughtless state and just keep watching my forehead. After this practice for 2 or 3 days i feel a kind of pressure in my forehead for a day now. is this normal ? i am hesitated to continue my practice because of this. why i experience this sensation ?

This sensation is being experience probably because you are deliberately focusing your intention on your forehead. Your post states:

I tried to...just keep watching my forehead.

Practising mindful breathing probably takes your concentration directly to your forehead because you are probably concentrating with your forehead.
There is no need to 'concentrate' to practise mindfulness with breathing. If you simply let go & make the mind quiet, awareness of breathing will still occur.
This is because when the mind is quiet & not craving, breathing becomes the most gross or dominant sense object for the mind.
That is why the 8 fold path does not start with concentration but ends with concentration.
'Mindfulness' means to let go of craving. When the mind is quiet, it starts to 'collect' or 'gather' itself, which is the meaning of 'concentration' ('samadhi' - 'collectedness').

There is no meditation master for me. I tried meditating on what was said by to watch mindful breathing in a book. I have the pressure on forehead and also night sleep was too disturbed. I stopped my practice due to this. Will these symptoms subside on its own ?

yes. the symptoms will subside. possibly, you were concentrating too hard; with too much effort & force. just return to normal activities & do some physical exercise. if you meditate again, try to be more gentle & natural in your approach. kind regards & best wishes

really thanks a lot. I was practising this for a couple of days an hour each day but felt this problems so stopped immediately. I was really concerned about my night sleep and pressure in the forehead. If i concentrate something i get the pressure on my forehead again. Day by day the severity is subsiding  but I want to know whether this would return to normal completely.

my forehead pressure is getting better on and off. but my night sleep is affected. how long does it take to return back to normal ?

I can't say. But meditating over-vigorously generates unbalanced energy, which why it disturbs sleep. It happened to me in my very 1st week of practising meditation. On that occassion, I stopped meditating, went to a beach & surfed all day for a week. It you returned to normal activities, it should settle. The pressure was created by an impermanent cause and if the cause is stopped the pressure will subside & cease. You have said it is getting better so that is how is should be. Regards

What do u mean by impermanent cause ? What is it in my case ?

The suttas didn't place any restriction on what area of the body one can focus on for mindfulness of breathing meditation. But there're 2 areas commonly taught by most masters and widely practiced: the nostril gates or the diaphragm. The nostril gates are taught in the Visuddhimagga commentary (starting from page 259). If you find some discomfort during meditation, please consult your meditation master if you have one. I you don't have one, make sure to closely follow the textual instruction and try switching the focus to the nostril gates to see if it helps.

May be that your problem lies in taking literally what your meditation master said.  If you find that focusing on the breath gets you distracted, the normal advice that you get is to just focus right between your eyes, or the middle of the forehead when breathing.  The problem comes when you stare right there literally.  While sitting upright, you should ‘touch’ that  spot with your mind’s eye,  and not strain to focus your eyes to that spot.

In my humble opinion, you should not be hesitant to continue - you should be happy.  This started happening to me yesterday, and continued today when I meditated.  I have a sensation in the middle of my forehead, a humming/glowing feeling.  As I meditated, I simply went with the flow to see what this was about.  I believe that it's what's called the "Third Eye" or the "Mind's Eye".  If you think about the way mindfulness mediation activates your brain's prefrontal cortex (please look at this article: http://www.mindful.org/how-the-brain-changes-when-you-meditate/ ) it completely makes sense that we feel a tingling sensation at the center of our forehead.  I realized that while meditating I was sort of seeing myself from some interior position, like my 2 eyes but further in.  Then when I felt this third eye opening, I decided to let that be my vantage point for looking within, for viewing the chatter and the images that my mind throws about, and when I did that I felt that I made a real breakthrough in strengthening the powers of my prefrontal cortex.
Thinking now about the result of this, well, I can say that I have had some real progress thinking through some career issues today, and it may very well be that I have gotten more in touch with my gut instincts and deeper self-knowledge.
I'm no expert, this is just me.  I hope this is food for thought.  Good luck
Michael


text:
To introduce Dharma, what categories of people are there?
Buddha tailored his teachings to meet the particular needs of his audience.
What are the different audiences then?
Here is a slightly related question: Should a beginner try to educate others about the benefits of Vipassana?

Tama (dark) to Tama (dark)
Tama (dark) to Joti (light)
Joti (light) to tama (dark)
Joti (light) to Joti (light)
There are those going from darkness to darkness, darkness to light, light to darkness, and light to light--four different categories -- from the Puggala Sutta (SN 3.21/S.I. 93ff).

It is difficult to group the audience s into categories as the differences are many. Each person differs in each ones' level of understanding. The skillful and unskillful qualities of a persons mind differs from person to person. Then every questioners need is different from one to another. Some questions call for analytical answers, and others require categorical answers.
The Buddha had ten special powers. One of them was the ability to know positive and negative attribute of every being. So Buddha tailored the response depending on the person’s beliefs, or need, or level of knowledge.
The examples are many. One that came to mind was that of Cula Panthaka. The Buddha helped him to remove his ‘kleshas’ & ‘upakkleshas’  and finally release his mind from all defilements. The story goes like this:

At the time of the Supreme Buddha, there were two brothers. They ordained in the Dispensation of the Buddha. The elder brother was very talented in remembering the Dhamma really well, but the second brother was unable to remember even one stanza. So, the elder brother asked his young brother to give up the monkhood and leave, “You can’t remember the Dhamma. You must go back home and start cultivating some plants.” But the younger brother didn’t want to leave the monkhood.
At the end, the younger-brother monk went to the temple’s gate and sat there crying. The Supreme Buddha came to him.
“Chūla Panthaka, why are you crying?”
“Oh dear Sir, my brother asked me to leave the temple.”
“Why was that?”
“I can’t remember any stanza I read. Therefore, he asked me to leave the monkhood and cultivate a field at home.”
“No, that’s not what you should do. Your brother doesn’t own this dispensation.”
The Supreme Buddha gently touched the monk’s head and took his hand, “Come with me.” The Supreme Buddha gave this young monk a small piece of cloth. “Dear monk, rub this cloth saying ‘cleaning, cleaning (rajō haranhan)’.” The young monk did as the Buddha told him. He saw that even though his intention was to clean the cloth, it was actually getting dirty gradually, “I rubbed this saying it to clean, but it is actually getting dirty.” His mind was well concentrated on to what happened to the cloth. The Supreme Buddha preached the Dhamma, so that the monk’s mind will be cultivated. In a moment, the young monk became an Arahant. See how his talent of realizing the Dhamma was concealed within him. If it was not the Buddha himself, who else would be able to do such a miracle? How many chances we may have missed and how many talents of us realizing life may have been concealed within us? Who would know how to unveil that talent in us?
It was this Chūla Panthaka Thero who became the first among the Bhikkhus who were able to create mental (Manōmaya) bodies. His brother monk didn’t know about it. He thought Chūla Panthaka Thero has gone home by that time. On that same day, all Bhikkhus went to alms-offering invitation. The Supreme Buddha told them that one monk is missing. Nobody knew about Chūla Panthaka Thero. The Supreme Buddha asked someone to go fetch the missing monk from the temple.
When he went to the temple, he saw one thousand monks. They were all alike. They were walking, cleaning the ground, and meditating. That person who came to fetch the monk ran back to the house and told the Supreme Buddha, “Dear Sir, there are thousand monks in the temple now.” The Supreme Buddha told him, “Please go back and ask what his name is. Touch the robe of the monk whoever answers first.” So, that person went back to the temple and said, “Who among you is called Chūla Panthaka Thero?” Then all thousand monks came forward saying, “I am… I am… I am…” As soon that person touched the monk who first answered, all other nine hundred ninety nine monks (bodies) disappeared.
He said, “Dear Sir, please come to lunch.” Chūla Panthaka Thero answered, “Dear devotee, you go please. I will come later.” The Supreme Buddha had the devotees at home to make a chair for Chūla Panthaka Thero. Then a Bhikkhu appeared from beneath the ground and sat on that chair; it was the Chūla Panthaka Thero.

The Pali scriptures show two basic audiences: (i) ordinary people (puthujjana), who have or are not capable of abandoning self-view; and (ii) the noble disciple (ariyasāvaka), who has or is capable of abandoning self-view.
Thus there is a stock phrase in the Pali scriptures, namely:

...this is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between a noble disciple and an ordinary
  person...

Thus, MN 117 lists teachings that are taken on faith by the ordinary person & teachings that are for the noble disciple:

And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered,
  what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions.
  There is this world & the other worlds. There is mother & father. There
  are spontaneously born beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans
  who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the
  other worlds after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This
  is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in
  acquisitions.
And what is the right view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment (wisdom), the faculty of
  discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a
  factor for awakening, the path factor of right view in one
  developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is without
  effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right
  view that is noble, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the
  path.

For example, the teaching above states the ordinary person should believe there are 'beings' ('satta') spontaneously born due to their good & bad actions yet teachings for noble disciples, such as SN 5.10, state there are no 'beings' to be found.
This is the reason there a teachings that contradict each other, such as MN 60 which states the view of 'existence' is right view for a householder & SN 12.15 which states the view of 'existence' is wrong view for the noble disciple; or teachings such as in Sigalovada Sutta which states the duty of a monk is to point out the path to 'heaven' (rather than to Nibbana) to the lay devotee. That is why the teachings about kamma & 'rebirth' never include the teaching of 'not-self' in them.
Later scholars, such as Buddhaghosa, created ideas that impersonal not-self (empty) phenomena are reborn in cycles of rebirth but the Buddha did not teach like this.
The Pali scriptures also include some special teachings to Brahmans using their own religious ideas, such as ending 'nama-rupa' ('name-&-form') & radiating love as the path to union with Brahma (God). These teachings confuse many modern Buddhists, who take these teachings to be Buddhism rather than (improvements to) Brahmanism.
In relation to what is posted above, the scriptures never report the Buddha making the declaration that 'karma & rebirth' or 'the path to Brahma' were his personal teachings & revelations (since these basic ideas pre-existed before the Buddha or used ideas not relevant to the Buddha himself).
The scriptures (eg, AN 3.61, AN 3.134,  SN 56.11, SN 56.31, SN 12.20, SN 20.7, MN 56, etc) only state the Buddha declared the 'six elements', the 'eighteen applications of mindfulness at feeling', the 'four noble truths', the 'three characteristics', 'dependent origination' & 'emptiness' to be his special & unique teachings.

Then the Blessed One discoursed to him a graduated sermon, that is to say, he spoke on the subjects of generosity, virtue, the heavens, on
  the evil consequences, the vanity and the depravity of sensual
  pleasures and on the advantages of renunciation.
When the Blessed One perceived that the mind of Upāli, the householder, was prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated and
  lucid, then he revealed to him that special doctrine of the Buddhas,
  viz. Suffering, its Arising, its Ceasing and the Path.
MN 56

Kesi Sutta  is where Buddha explained to a horse trainer of methods he used in teaching.  It indirectly explains types of audiences.

gentle,  result of good conduct.
harshness, result of misconduct.
gentleness & harshness, both methods above.
put down,  Buddha regarded him as being worthless to teach.

Though I agree with other answers I'm not sure I agree with the question: i.e. I'm not sure it's sane to try to categorize the different audiences, or decide there's only one possible categorization-system (still there are many common categorization-systems, e.g. ordained or lay, enlightened or not, etc.).
What I mean is that, although it's true he spoke to groups of people (and a group might be seen as a category), sometimes he taught small groups or 'individuals': assuming each teaching was "tailored to meet the particular needs of his audience", that's a specific/individual audience (not a category).
For example, look at Ariyapariyesana Sutta (MN 26) which I think explains why he started the Dhammacakkappavattana by teaching the doctrine of the Middle Way: i.e. he did that because that specific audience (who had met him before enlightenment) thought he must be wrong (and therefore, perhaps, unenlightened and not worth listening to) because he had stopped performing austerities:

Friends, here comes Gotama the contemplative: living luxuriously, straying from his exertion, backsliding into abundance.

So they for example could be called a "category-of-people-who-think-you-need-to-perform-austerities-in-order-to-find-enlightenment", or the "category-of-people-who-thought-they-could-address-the-Tathagata-by-name-and-as-'friend'".
So, lots of categories.
And as I said perhaps it's not sane to try to categorize (so the preceding was an example of wrongly categorizing).
Maybe there are as many different categories are there are different ignorances/delusions. :-)

It's not clear which Buddhist school you're asking about but the question is tagged dharmas. Apparently, a translation of one of the versions of the Bodhisattva vows is,

Sentient beings are numberless; I vow to save them all.
  Desires are inexhaustible; I vow to end them all.
  The Dharma Gates are infinite; I vow to enter them all.
  The Buddha Way is unexcelled; I vow to attain it completely.

Another translation of that is, "the dharmas are infinite".
--
If your question was asking how to teach (asking how you could teach) Buddhism to different (categories of) people, there were some answers to that here: How to explain what Buddhism is?
The question, though, might be like asking, "My mum has given people little presents which meet their particular needs. What are the different categories of people?" Well, there's a category of people who'd appreciate being given a new, easy-to-use, pink umbrella for their own use; there's a category of people who'd feel touched, by a hand-sewn sachet with dried lavender and their name embroidered on it; etc. If it really is 'tailored' and enlightened it might defy categorization, automation, generalization.

In case it matters, when you asked the question my first thought/memory was that there was only one category: i.e. "beings with little dust in their eyes (SN 6.1)". Or depending on how you interpret that sutta, a different (single) category i.e. "those who would hear" (sometimes translated, "those with ears"). Or a more inclusive set of categorizations,

Surveying the world with the Buddha-eye, the Blessed One saw beings with little dust in their
  eyes and beings with much dust in their eyes, the keen and the dull, the good and the evil, those easy to
  teach and those hard to teach, and some who live seeing blame (for wrongdoing) and fear (of pain) and in the hereafter.
Just as in a lotus pond of the blue or white or red lotuses, some lotuses might be born in the
  water, grow up in the water, and thrive while submerged in the water, without rising out of the water;
  some lotuses might be born in the water, grow up in the water, and stand up at an even level with the
  water; some lotuses might be born in the water and grow up in the water, but would rise up from the water
  and stand up in the water without being soiled by the water––
So, too, surveying the world with the Buddha Eye, the Blessed One sees beings with little dust in
  their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities
  and with bad qualities, easy to teach and difficult to teach, and a few who dwelt seeing blame and fear in
  the next world.

Buddha's audience is not only human beings.
1 - Buddhas,
2 - Bodhisattvas
3 - "Sound-Hearing" Arhats
4 - "Enlightened by Conditions" Arhats
5 - Gods
6 - People
7 - Asuras
8 - Animals
9 - Ghosts
10 - Hells

In The Shurangama Sutra, plus one additional: 11 - Immortals
As for categories / grades of each of above, depending on how you group them.
eg There are roughly 10 big categories of people mentioned in The Shurangama Sutra, and more sub-categories.
As for Gods (excuse for my English), there are 4 in Formless realm, which is above 18 in Form realm, which again is above 6 in Desire realm:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology#Form_Realm_.28R.C5.ABpadh.C4.81tu.29
As for Bodhisattvas, there are:
10 Faiths
10 Dwellings
10 Conducts
10 Transferences
 4 Positions of Additional Practices
10 Positions of the Ten Grounds
The Position of Equal and Wonderful Enlightenment


text:
Hosting people who are making me feel angry
I have been hosting people in my home recently, and I felt uncomfortable because they were being a little lazy for the common chores and sometimes even greedy when we had to pay for goods (eg. food, gasoil, etc.) by not proposing any financial participation (I wasn't asking anything though, but they are far from being poor), even though I was accepting them in my own house for a whole week and taking them with my car here and there.
This was, considering my culture, a big disrespect not because I expected any money in return, but because the least they could've done is to show some gratitude. (Note : it is not the first time that this happens, we had them a few times and I felt the same way every time)
I spoke with my wife, who doesn't feel the same way, and told her I wouldn't invite them for such a long period anymore because I was afraid this might eventually take my patience to its limits and consequently provoke the end of this friendship. I'd rather spend nice evenings with them or even weekends from time to time, but nothing more than that.
I feel guilty for making my wife sad by not accepting those people that aren't being harmful objectively and that we really like, but doesn't the Noble Eight-fold Path specifies that one should avoid bad thoughts by cutting the source of them ?
Did I do the right thing or am I overreacting there ?

have you considered that this is a pebble in your shoe and the discomfort only arises because you have a foot ? (in practical terms) maybe you are bothered by their behavior because there are times you could be more generous, but choose not to be, and you wish you behaved differently? try being yourself more generous (even when not required), and see if your joy from generosity melts your suffering from their lack of regard for your contribution. You are (currently) being generous with those who do not need it, when instead you could use the resource to be generous with those who need you.

I found my answer while I was randomly reading this TinyBuddha article :

If you are angry with the other person and actually can’t whittle it down to being able to ask for something you need from them, then perhaps it is an internal conflict that the other person triggered, and you actually don’t need to involve them.
Focusing on what you need removes “should” and “should not” from your internal dialogue –”they shouldn’t be so insensitive” or “they should be more respectful.” It isn’t true that they should or shouldn’t be a certain way; that’s just something you want.
After determining how their behavior is affecting you, you can then discover what you need or would like to change.
The intention of simply asking for what you need is not to elaborate, but if the other person seeks to understand the situation further, then they might ask questions that lead you to sharing your feelings.

And then :

If grieving that relationship is a less painful option than having that person remain in your life, then that is something for you to consider, especially if it affects your self-worth.

This is my personal favorite. I have had this happen so many times although the victim was my mother who had to do a lot of things and I contributed a bit in a constructive fashion. This seems to be a fairly common case experienced by many hospitable people.
So the deal here is that I would not worry what the noble eight fold path says or whatever. This is rather general i.e., in terms of how best to deal with things that happen. It is about the choices you make and consequence you receive. There are lots of options to consider and each one would have a consequence. But without hurting others, (although I wouldn't mind giving the guests a piece of my mind), choose the best and most congenial option available. Sometimes it may be best to go out or do something else wherein you are busy.
Funny thing is they know they are being unhelpful too. But they still stick around. You could employ the tactic of asking for help when and if you need it.
There is nothing wrong with being practical about such matters. But know that you always deserved everything that came to you. Feeling something about it, either positive or negative, makes no difference to the matter. This is a little hard to take.
I am not asking you not to feel guilty or angry but know that when it comes, it is pointless to act on a whim. There are other ways to deal with the matter.
One other important thing is that, trying to satisfy other people is not your problem. You can treat/guide them to an extent. And in the world I have observed that no matter what you do you will be criticized in some way. Even Jesus was criticized. Buddha has been criticized. It's important how they took it. Because they were in total control of how they reacted.
Again I am not perfect and nobody is, and sometimes I get irritated too. But being practical and working on distancing yourself from emotions is important. The rest is how you conduct yourself.

I understand your point and you're right, the way I react to my own emotions is the real problem here. But if I am not able, at the time, to distance myself from those emotions, shouldn't I distance myself from their very cause ?

What do you mean by distancing yourself from the cause? You mean you want to avoid the situation ?

Yes, precisely.

Sure you can, if that's what you want to do. But be aware that that has consequences too. Any action for that matter. But don't get tensed about it :P no point. And things change. Sometimes you might be forced into that situation, sometimes you'll get away with it. It's all in the game. Don't take it too seriously and just play it :D

It's alright that you asked this question. And you'll get textbook answers soon. But really you're taking yourself way too seriously. Things change and you're not permanent and your guests are not permanent either. So try working "with" them instead of "for" them. Get what I mean ?

@ZenJin, there’s something that you and I and all of us can get from Priestess Diotima’s advice to Socrates. She said to him:

”There are two kinds of families, one is the karmic family that you beget and marry; the other is the true family and Spiritual family. These are the people who share your knowledge and follow your aspirations and dreams. These are the people who share your bliss.”
“O Diotima why could not these be the same? Why cannot I have my Karmic family be the same as my Spiritual family?” cried Socrates.
”On a rare occasion this can happen. In your case your Karma is to have a nagging wife and unresponsive children. In your passed life you must have invoked this Karma by your own deeds.” Said Diotima.

Your predicament, @ZenJin,  is having to host these people. Since you cannot get away from it, as your wife too has a equal say on it, what lessons could you learn from it, to further your Dhamma path? You can either create suffering and stress around this event, or let it be a lesson in Dhamma by thinking in terms of the four noble truths.  Or think that it is of your own making, and let it pass without thinking too much about it (verbal fabrication),  and not trying to bring up past unpleasant memories of them (mental fabrication). Then this can provoke anger in you (bodily fabrication). Likewise you can think through Dhamma, as these thing you just can’t get rid of; it’s like a cart wheel tightly fastened by an iron pin.

” “Dear Monks, these beings live having Karma as what they own. They live inheriting the Karma, making it the birth place, and making it their relative. The Karma is their refuge. If a friendly or evil karma is performed, that Karma will be his inheritance.” - (Sansappanii Pariyāya Sutta – A.N. 10th Nipātha)

Instead of creating any unpleasantness , if mindfully you see such a situation in a positive light?

“Dear Monks, if a person with the Sammā Ditthi has a bodily action, an action with respect to words, an action with respect to mind, an intention, an existence, an aim, and Karma (Sanskāra) that cause effects according to his view, all these will result in fulfilled, as desired, and pleasurable things. What is the reason for that? Dear Monks, that view is pleasant. Dear Monks, it is like this: let’s think that a seed of sugar cane or hill rice or grape was planted in a wet ground. If these seeds grow well by drawing nutrition and water from the earth, all these will result in sweet and tasty products. What’s the reason for that? Dear Monks, it’s because it was a pleasant seed.” - (A. N. 3rd Nipatha)

Past kammas are non-eternal.  So come into the Path, and free yourself of it.

“Dear Monks, what does it mean by freeing oneself from the Karma? The touching of the freedom by freeing oneself from the Karma done by body, words, and mind is known as the freeing from Karma.
Dear Monks, what is the path to free from Karma? It is the Eight Noble Path: Sammā Ditthi, Sammā Sankappa, Sammā Vāchā, Sammā Kammantha, Sammā Aajeeva, Sammā Vāyāma, Sammā Sathi, and Sammā Samādhi. Dear Monks, this is called the path of freeing oneself from the Karma.” - (Kamma Sutta – S. N. 4)

I'm pretty sure Socrates never talked about "Karma". Do you have a source?

@OidaOudenEidos it is found in "Socrates' Angel - Page 51 - Google Books Results"  -  https://books.google.ca/books?id=BHj-EGgb-RUC&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=There+are+two+kinds+of+families,+one+is+the+karmic+family+that+you+beget+and+marry&source=bl&ots=cS_Y0lQP8D&sig=8WzYL2EIAzhkkb5T24T5bmswru0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigjfP-_KnOAhVK7IMKHfpTAvwQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&q=There%20are%20two%20kinds%20of%20families%2C%20one%20is%20the%20karmic%20family%20that%20you%20beget%20and%20marry&f=false

@SapthaVisuddhi I think this book is modern fiction, not historical. It talks about Karma, Akashic records, the Nazarene. It's anachronistic.

I felt that it is so, @ChrisW. That's why I did not provide the link. I am always hard pressed for time. I wanted to read through that ebook further, but kept it for another day and time. Please give me a couple of weeks or more. I will revise it to one from the scriptures and expand on the answer provided.

@SapthaVisuddhi Please forgive me, I thought you meant the historical Socrates.

@OidaOudenEidos that was only a story based on imagination rather than on fact. So I should not have used it as an example. At that time of writing I did not have any better example. It is my fault. Hopefully, I will try to correct it soon.

Look for techniques to cultivate Metta(loving-kindness) and karuna(compassion) then practice compassion for yourself and for your guests, it is a good replacement for anger.