text:
Are Habits a Kind of Attachment?
Some questions have already touched the nature of habits, namely in the sense of good habits or their benefits. This answer explains how attachment occur from a repeated desire to engage in the phenomenon. But, psychology sees this same pattern for habits, and more so, in psychological literature habits occur independently of pleasure and of effort. A habit, when formed, continues usually even when no more satisfaction is derived from it, even if it produces no reward.
Thus, wouldn't bad habits be a form of attachment and potentially even worse given the lack of reward? By definition, unless they are positive, habits will continue occuring again and again despite nothing rewarding is produced.
Does Buddhism consider neutral habits, just habit itself, as unvirtuous? Is doing something repeatedly without reward, compulsively, a kind of potential attachment? Or does the Buddhist concept more so mean a pleasurable form of attachment?
Thank you

Please don't be offended, and I apologize if I'm overstepping the boundaries, but I have to ask this. You ask a lot of questions many of them getting pretty good answers, but you keep finding new topics to ask about. When I was like this, my teacher pointed out it was a sign of overly active discursive mind, that keeps spinning endlessly generating infinite variety of ideas. Tell me, what goes on in your head in the years you've been on this site? Are getting anything from the answers at all? Because it really seems like you don't. Sorry I'm confronting you like this but I really want to know.

I guess you're right that there's a lot of discursive stuff going on. I do feel I'm getting some things from these answers, but I guess I'm perhaps not entirely aware of what the basic problem which affects me is. I feel that in many ways, I'm either backwards or not fully satisfied with my experience, and I feel Buddhism has a lot of answers; but, as you say, across the years I'm still a bit clueless.
I will say, though, that recently I'm less motivated and derive less pleasure from my activities and experience. In any case, perhaps I could answer better on the chatboard. I'm not offended

Sounds like you're experiencing reality as unsatisfying and that is one of the 3 characteristics a meditator who is practicing correctly sees. Do things seem to come and go? Does your understanding come and go? Does the meditation make YOU feel like your not in control? You could be practicing better than you thought.

Kilesa has a residual impression which is called vāsanā which even arhats (other than the Buddha) have. Only a Buddha eliminates that. This is what drives habits. Many habits are reflexive and there no much thoughts of the intention behind it. If it is purely reflexive it does not have karmic consequences.
Initially, when you start doing something this is driven by craving. More you do it it becomes habitual. When it becomes habitual this might surface without craving.
If you think you are developing bad habits you should break them early. Deeply ingrained habits are difficult to break.

Buddha is an arahant

Does Buddhism consider neutral habits, just habit itself, as unvirtuous?

Nothing is a habit in itself. They consists/occurs out of something else, and can be viewed as sankhara.

Is doing something repeatedly without reward, compulsively, a kind of potential attachment?

Yes, there is silabbatupadana - clinging to rituals - for instance. However, one may benefit from specifying what is meant by habit. Sometimes we persevere because we're hard wired that way, and it could arguably be a case of rupa, our constitution.


text:
Is this just a logic or experience about mind(reality)?
While doing self enquiry kind of meditation(also doing vipassana) there is feel of understanding/experience/logic that make myself convinced(but not strongly) that "me" is not the thoughts or the body or sensual experience. I don't continuously feel this, but I find concentration, calmness etc getting better.
What is this am I experiencing?
How to go beyond this?
And some teachings says that if you can disassociate ourself from mind and body then we can experience oneness(or conciousness), but I don't experience oneness or anything that I haven't experience before except the feeling of dissociation, why?

Hi Saravanan! Why would you like to experience "oneness"? What purpose will that fulfill? What is that "ourselves" that should be dissociated? Kind regards!

@BrianDíazFlores I just wanted to understand and relate my experience whether in line or not with the teachings, by "ourselves" I mean something we used to refer as "me" in daily life, is is being less related to "my" body and mind. I actually don't have concrete  idea of what is meant "me"(ourselves). Thanks

Sounds like the hinderances have been temporarily tamed to some degree.
Oneness as I experience it using metta, self investigation and mindfulness just means there doesn't nessasarily have to be a distinction made by us human beings between me and other, us and them, tree and it's background, hand and fingers, sky and ground, good and bad, out and in, foot and ground, right and left, eyelid and eye,  you and me, up and down and so on. If no distinctions are  taken for granted one can transcend only perceiving distinctions and percieve everything as one yet distinct.
Dissociation with the concept of oneness or dissociation with needing to bring on oneness might be desirable as oneness can so easily be clung to.
How do you get beyond? Simply don't try to get beyond, that detached kind of  attitude is in harmony with getting beyond.  Keep at it, it sounds to me like your doing alright.

So, as an observer there is nothing special about this body and this mind, in that sense there is no difference between me and others or other lives or things. Is this what you mean? Thanks

Reality doesn't admit of anything special.  There is and there isn't a difference between me and others but all we usually see is the difference, the distinctions. Maybe newborn babies sees more without much distinction, like they see a tree and it's background as "not mommy". Us Adults are already on the security & conceptual momentum path where distinctions are clung to tightly.  If only infants could practice Satipatthana<lol

You are starting to observe things with more clarity, noting that there is nama and rupa (mind and body) and also noting an awareness of both. In other words, you are experiencing awareness (knowing, consciousness) as its own object, distinct from the sensations it accompanies. This is good.
Continue sharpening your mindfulness. Maintain your continuous mindfulness longer, and observe more detail about whatever arises. Observe them the very moment they arise, and watch them change, and disappear.
Maintain your calmness and concentration - these are 2 factors that are helping you along the path. (There are 7 factors of enlightenment - mindfulness, investigation, energy, joy, tranquility, concentration, and Equanimity)
If things progress, observe the 5 aggregates. This may open further depths of knowledge and experience.
The oneness you refer to is a concept, one which you're now desiring. During practice, there may be times when you experience oneness as a feeling, and sense that you are everything and everything is you. Don't strive to seek it out, or build up strong expectations or desire for it. It will occur naturally as long as your mindfulness, concentration, equanimity, etc. continue to develop.
Oneness is simply another experience to observe with mindfulness and Equanimity. It occurs with increasing strength as you let go more and more of your concept of self, and know that everything you sense is in your mind. That sound you hear isn't out there, it's within your own mind. When you experience the whole the world within, then you feel a oneness.

Thinking is of two kinds:
1. About the seen; smelled; tasted; felt with the body; or heard.
2. About 'thinking' itself
In this sense thinking is one of the six and can model a representative expression of that which can be thought about, figuring out how things work, imagining and understanding how reality, which would be what the senses present, works rather than what it is.
That word which is 'self' is an abstract concept in that it is unquatifiable, unmeasurable, undefined and is therefore a product of imagination and fantasy, delusion if you want to be precise. It is entirely in the realm of fiction  this idea of self.
The idea of self is contained to the 1 of the 6, the ideation & ideas. We can't see a self; can only see forms & colors. Can't taste...smell...sense... or hear a 'self'.
It is only possible to think 'a self' much like it is only possibly to think of fictional stuff like spiderman or santa claus.
It is basically a made-up attribute loosely based on misapprehension of obserevable reality.
Ideas can be true or false and so can models. Therefore it is natural that ignorance would corrupt understanding and worldview would have 'holes & contradictions' and various faulty ideas would be like a way of working around that.

I cannot answer what you are experiencing. Only you would know that. And you would know that in a language. Therefore, if there is confusion in what you are experiencing, it is possibly due to not knowing the language in which the 'talk' of meditative experience is taking place. That you can easily read and make yourself understand.
The meditative experience, Vipassana, the technique of Buddha, is many times talked about as a path. Since you are practicing Vipassana, you are walking the path. How does, then, one go 'beyond' the path? By walking the path to its end! In a manner of speaking, going beyond in Buddhist talk means not thinking in terms of concepts but realzing through exprience- going beyond this very conceptual construction in which you seem to find yourself.
The goal in Vipassana is not to have this or that experience, but to be aware and be equanimous about whatever experiences you have. (Experience in Vipassana would mean experience of the sensations) If you get caught up and start looking for some type of experience, you wont be observing the sensations equanimously (and therefore coming out of the samsaric becoming). Rather, because of the expectation of this or that, you would land up creating more samsaric fuel.
I suggest that you continue with your practice. Let questions come- if you have answers then perfect. If you dont, the dont get lost in looking for them- that is, dont stop your walk on the path because you cannot find some answers. Continue meditating, contiue walking the path. Either you would get the answers (and thus have gone beyond those questions) or the questions would dissolve (or seem incorrect or useless or will be answered).

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Are impressions or vasanas found in the Pali Canon?
According to this answer:

Kilesa has a residual impression which is called vāsanā which even
  arhats have. Only a Buddha eliminates that. This is what drives
  habits. Many habits are reflexive and there no much thoughts of the
  intention behind it. If it is purely reflexive it does not have karmic
  consequences.

Are vasana or residual impressions found in the Pali Canon? Preferably in the Sutta Pitaka.
What about the statement that arhats or arahants still have vasanas, but Buddha does not? Is this also in the Pali Canon?
Would arahants still have impressions although they had eliminated latent tendencies (anusaya)?

What habit is reflexive? Like sneezing? Like when the doctor hits your knee with the hammer? Like when food comes and you like or don't like it? Does the Buddha or arahant like food and is mindful of that liking at all times or does liking just no longer arise?

Vasana (Tendency Continues Life After Life)
Predisposition plays a role in a person's life, past or present. Tendency to proliferate bad habits in promoted by kelisa (mental defilement). Vasana based on morality
or good deeds is classified as samma chanda (wholesome wish). This vasana is inherent in the mind-continuum of all beings. Thus in your past kamma actions if you
have cultivated greed along with them, your vasana will now be greedy in nature. If
you do not reform this bad tendency in this existence, raga carita vasana will continue to dominate you in your future births as well. Dosa, moha, and vitakka characters
also, will continue to dominate likewise. If you are endowed with paññā carita now
and if you cultivate wisdom continually, this tendency will produce its own result here
and hereafter. You will be reborn a person with paññā in forthcoming existences.

Abhidhamma in Daily Life by Ashin Janakabhivamsa

The dictionaries say the word Vāsanā is from the words 'vasati' and 'vāsa', which are commonly found in the Pali sutas in 'pubbenivasa'. Other related words are "abhinivesa" ("adherences") in SN 12.15; SN 22.3, etc and "vasa" ("abodes") in AN 10.20.  Vasana is found in Snp 4.15, to mean clothing (or otherwise lodging).
If "vasana" means "recollection from the past" then obviously the Buddha had recollection from the past. But if "vasana" means "tendencies" or "adherences from the past" then both Buddha and Arahants do not have them.

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


text:
What is the basis?
I was reading this comment which included ...

I guess I'm perhaps not entirely aware of what the basic problem which affects me is. I feel that in many ways, I'm either backwards or not fully satisfied with my experience, and I feel Buddhism has a lot of answers; but, as you say, across the years I'm still a bit clueless. I will say, though, that recently I'm less motivated and derive less pleasure from my activities and experience.

... and I thought ...

Isn't that the observation of Buddhism -- like 'rule number one' (the four noble truths -- i.e., that "experiences" aren't "fully satisfying", and that "motivations" may be temporary (conditioned)?

From which there's then the eightfold path, starting with right view, seeing the true worth of everything ('seeing things as they really are'), isn't that right?

My question here though is based on the Kimattha Sutta (AN 11.1)

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

So ...

Is it fair to see the "absence of remorse" as relatively unconditioned, and therefore permanent (compared with other maybe-more-mundane sensual contacts which are more transient)?
Metaphysically, is an absence (e.g. of remorse), possibly emptiness, reliably (seemingly paradoxically) present or existent -- conversely any presence (sense-contact) is not "reliably" present or existent?
Am I right in thinking that the following bits of dhamma support this theory:

Sīlānussati being one of the anussatis AN 6.10
The Dana sutta (AN 7.49 or is it AN 7.52), translated as saying that it's a "support" for the mind? That's sometimes also translated "ornament" or "requisite" -- or cittālaṅkāracittaparikkhāra: "adornment or improvement (making fit?) and equipping of thinking?"

How does that (i.e. its being a reliable support) fit with Buddhist doctrine about "groundless" -- or 'trackless' or 'footless' -- or is that something else entirely?
What about "skilful virtue" or "skilful ethics" then, kusalāni sīlāni, concentrating on those words: is the meaning of that non-obvious, is it quite specific and closely defined, or does it mean just what you might expect it to mean?
I notice that AN 6.10 says,

Furthermore, a noble disciple recollects their own ethical conduct, which is unbroken, impeccable, spotless, and unmarred, liberating, praised by sensible people, not mistaken, and leading to immersion (samādhisaṃvattanikāni: "conducive to concentration").

That reminds me a bit of problems people sometimes say they have, of being "unable to concentrate". So might you explain this quote a bit: how is "ethical conduct" and "remembering ethical conduct" is related to concentration? Is that actually informative or prescriptive, or are they (e.g. "remembering" and "concentration") merely synonyms?

One who dwells on perfect virtue is one having acted on right view. Done, one is capable to remember, has the means for right conncentration, right release. Defiled virtues, how ever appreciated with in certain community, doesn't lead out of it, stays this or that kind of householder, holding a stand.

In regard of what is the basis, nissaya, for release: Admirable friend (savaka sangha) should be answered.

"absence of remorse" is only for an Arahat no more conditioned. All other is conditioned, yet even not present at all, when talking about neither sekha nor asekha, in regard of "samma".

Thank you. So SN 55.40 says that a Sotapanna may be content with virtue (which may lead to immersion), but they might then not make further "effort" (vāyamati) -- whereas immersion is also conditioned by a lack of "negligence" (pamatta) -- that rapture and tranquillity are also required for immersion.

It's depending "co-disappearing". No effort (will) required once virtue/saddha is perfect. Cetana-sutta. Right effort = straighten right view, right virtue.

The first thing here is to understand that the Buddha did not say, as it is almost universally translated: "All conditioned things are impermanent." He said all 'sankharas' are impermanent and sankhara does not mean 'condition'. It means san = own or self; and khara - make, and it means that which is constructed by the individual mind with the idea of creating personal experience. Nibbana is conditioned (paccaya) by following the Magga.
I have laid out the argument for the above in greater detail at:
http://buddhadust.net/dhammatalk/dhammatalk_forum/dhamma_talk/dt_009.conditioned.vs.own-made.htm
So the absence of remorse is conditioned, but not being an existing thing, not having been constructed (sankharaed)-- it was the result of not-doing, is not itself subject to ending and is a small taste of Nibbana. Remorse being relative to its cause and the cause being removed the remorse is removed forever. Remorse may return but it will be based on another ill-conceived act.

Free from remorse is one of the initial factors from which one reaches Nibbida.

(Ekādasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta Introduction by Piya Tan

(Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta Introduction by Piya Tan
There are many starting points like virtue, faith, understanding of suffering.

And what, bhikshus, is the necessary condition for faith?
It should be said: suffering (dukkha).
  Suffering, bhikshus, has a necessary condition, too, I say.
  It is not without a necessary condition.

Upanisa Sutta
Also,

listening to the Dharma
teaching the Dharma
reciting the Dharma
reflecting on the Dharma
meditation

Followed by the rest of the steps :

joy arises in him;
because of joy, zest arises;
because of zest, the body becomes tranquil;
when the body is tranquil, he feels happiness;
a happy mind becomes concentrated.
...

Vimutt’āyatana Sutta
Also, 4 Noble Truths lead to the same process.

Then, the Buddha, when further questioned by Potthapāda on what he actually teaches, declares that
  he teaches the 4 noble truths, and his reasons are:
Because
it [their declaration] is connected to the goal;
it is connected to the Dharma;
it belongs to the fundamentals of the holy life;
it leads to revulsion, nibbidāya
to dispassion [letting go], virāgāya
to cessation (of suffering), nirodhāya
to inner peace, upasamāya
to direct knowledge, abhiññāya
to awakening, sambodhāya
to nirvana. nibbānāya savattati

Potthapāda Sutta

OP: Is it fair to see the "absence of remorse" as relatively unconditioned

Free from remorse is conditioned by moral virtue. If one becomes less virtuous then guilt-free state disappears. Every element in the above lists are conditions except for Nirvana.

Cittâlakra citta,parikkhr’attha. In other words, the giving is part of one’s cultivation of moral virtue
  as a support for mental cultivation. With abundant moral virtue, it is easier for one to cultivate the mind. Conversely,
  if one finds difficulty in meditating then one should examine one’s moral conduct and rectify any unwholesome
  habits or resolve negative thoughts.

Dana Maha-p,phala Sutta
In the 1st list above free from remorse give rise to joy. Items 3-7 are related to concentration. So giving supports virtue which supports lack of remorse and from there onwards, the rest follow.

♡ Is it fair to see the "absence of remorse" as relatively unconditioned, and therefore permanent (compared with other maybe-more-mundane sensual contacts which are more transient)?

● i think one can explain them in that way, in that they don't require maintetance and are to that extent without a particular requisite for substinanca and to that extent preferable.
I think it is ok if it occurs to you.
♤ It isn't a paradox tho because it even tho it is not conditioned by a cause for regret, the preferable is still conditioned by life-force, heat and etc.
■ i think preferable translation is; 'how would one guide him who has no path, whose field is endless'
I think the meaning is that one has perfected all perfections, laid down the burden and there is nothing more wise people would urge him to do or develop. So it is like what new can you teach to one who is perfected in all trainings
• silanupassana is for gladdening the mind if it is dull or when otherwise appropriate by developing perception of that theme.
° sila as in ethical conduct is also for gladdening the mind for one who does good in the morning, daytime and the evening has a good day to that extent. One who has a good day is glad.
One who is gladdened can stop giving attention to the theme which prompted it and just be mindful and at ease or develop otherwise.
Just my thoughts on the question.


text:
How to evaluate hindrances?
As a meditator, are there categories of hindrances which may occur during meditation practice? If yes, can you please elaborate it.

Perhaps, you're looking for the five hindrances, namely, sensual desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt. These definitely hinder meditation, but they also appear habitually in the mind even at other times, for those who are not yet advanced on the path.
This essay by Ajahn Brahm provides useful info:

Sensory desire refers to that particular type of wanting that seeks for happiness through the five senses of sight, sound, smell, taste
  and physical feeling. It specifically excludes any aspiration for
  happiness through the sixth sense of mind alone.

In its extreme form, sensory desire is an obsession to find pleasure
  in such things as sexual intimacy, good food or fine music. But it
  also includes the desire to replace irritating or even painful
  five-sense experiences with pleasant ones, i.e. the desire for sensory
  comfort.
The Lord Buddha compared sensory desire to taking out a loan. Any
  pleasure one experiences through these five senses must be repaid
  through the unpleasantness of separation, loss or hungry emptiness
  which follow relentlessly when the pleasure is used up. As with any
  loan, there is also the matter of interest and thus, as the Lord
  Buddha said, the pleasure is small compared to the suffering repaid.
In meditation, one transcends sensory desire for the period by letting
  go of concern for this body and its five sense activity. Some imagine
  that the five senses are there to serve and protect the body, but the
  truth is that the body is there to serve the five senses as they play
  in the world ever seeking delight. Indeed, the Lord Buddha once said,
  "The five senses ARE the world" and to leave the world, to enjoy the
  other worldly bliss of Jhana, one must give up for a time ALL concern
  for the body and its five senses.
When sensory desire is transcended, the mind of the meditator has no
  interest in the promise of pleasure or even comfort with this body.
  The body disappears and the five senses all switch off. The mind
  becomes calm and free to look within. The difference between the five
  sense activity and its transcendence is like the difference between
  looking out of a window and looking in a mirror. The mind that is free
  from five sense activity can truly look within and see its real
  nature. Only from that can wisdom arise as to what we are, from where
  and why?!

Ill will refers to the desire to punish, hurt or destroy. It includes sheer hatred of a person, or even a situation, and it can
  generate so much energy that it is both seductive and addictive. At
  the time, it always appears justified for such is its power that it
  easily corrupts our ability to judge fairly. It also includes ill will
  towards oneself, otherwise known as guilt, which denies oneself any
  possibility of happiness. In meditation, ill will can appear as
  dislike towards the meditation object itself, rejecting it so that
  one's attention is forced to wander elsewhere.

The Lord Buddha likened ill will to being sick. Just as sickness
  denies one the freedom and happiness of health, so ill will denies one
  the freedom and happiness of peace.
Ill will is overcome by applying Metta, loving kindness. When it is
  ill will towards a person, Metta teaches one to see more in that
  person than all that which hurts you, to understand why that person
  hurt you (often because they were hurting intensely themselves), and
  encourages one to put aside one's own pain to look with compassion on
  the other. But if this is more than one can do, Metta to oneself leads
  one to refuse to dwell in ill will to that person, so as to stop them
  from hurting you further with the memory of those deeds. Similarly, if
  it is ill will towards oneself, Metta sees more than one's own faults,
  can understand one's own faults, and finds the courage to forgive
  them, learn from their lesson and let them go. Then, if it is ill will
  towards the mediation object (often the reason why a meditator cannot
  find peace) Metta embraces the meditation object with care and
  delight. For example, just as a mother has a natural Metta towards her
  child, so a meditator can look on their breath, say, with the very
  same quality of caring attention. Then it will be just as unlikely to
  lose the breath through forgetfulness as it is unlikely for a mother
  to forget her baby in the shopping mall, and it would be just as
  improbable to drop the breath for some distracting thought as it is
  for a distracted mother to drop her baby! When ill will is overcome,
  it allows lasting relationships with other people, with oneself and,
  in meditation, a lasting, enjoyable relationship with the meditation
  object, one that can mature into the full embrace of absorption.

Sloth and torpor refers to that heaviness of body and dullness of mind which drag one down into disabling inertia and thick depression.
  The Lord Buddha compared it to being imprisoned in a cramped, dark
  cell, unable to move freely in the bright sunshine outside. In
  meditation, it causes weak and intermittent mindfulness which can even
  lead to falling asleep in meditation without even realising it!

Sloth and torpor is overcome by rousing energy. Energy is always
  available but few know how to turn on the switch, as it were. Setting
  a goal, a reasonable goal, is a wise and effective way to generate
  energy, as is deliberately developing interest in the task at hand. A
  young child has a natural interest, and consequent energy, because its
  world is so new. Thus, if one can learn to look at one's life, or
  one's meditation, with a 'beginner's mind' one can see ever new angles
  and fresh possibilities which keep one distant from sloth and torpor,
  alive and energetic. Similarly, one can develop delight in whatever
  one is doing by training one's perception to see the beautiful in the
  ordinary, thereby generating the interest which avoids the half-death
  that is sloth and torpor.
The mind has two main functions, 'doing' and 'knowing'. The way of
  meditation is to calm the 'doing' to complete tranquillity while
  maintaining the 'knowing'. Sloth and torpor occur when one carelessly
  calms both the 'doing' and the 'knowing', unable to distinguish
  between them.
Sloth and torpor is a common problem which can creep up and smother
  one slowly. A skilful meditator keeps a sharp look-out for the first
  signs of sloth and torpor and is thus able to spot its approach and
  take evasive action before it's too late. Like coming to a fork in a
  road, one can take that mental path leading away from sloth and
  torpor. Sloth and torpor is an unpleasant state of body and mind, too
  stiff to leap into the bliss of Jhana and too blinded to spot any
  insights. In short, it is a complete waste of precious time.

Restlessness refers to a mind which is like a monkey, always swinging on to the next branch, never able to stay long with anything.
  It is caused by the fault-finding state of mind which cannot be
  satisfied with things as they are, and so has to move on to the
  promise of something better, forever just beyond.

The Lord Buddha compared restlessness to being a slave, continually
  having to jump to the orders of a tyrannical boss who always demands
  perfection and so never lets one stop.
Restlessness is overcome by developing contentment, which is the
  opposite of fault-finding. One learns the simple joy of being
  satisfied with little, rather than always wanting more. One is
  grateful for this moment, rather than picking out its deficiencies.
  For instance, in meditation restlessness is often the impatience to
  move quickly on to the next stage. The fastest progress, though is
  achieved by those who are content with the stage they are on now. It
  is the deepening of that contentment that ripens into the next stage.
  So be careful of 'wanting to get on with it' and instead learn how to
  rest in appreciative contentment. That way, the 'doing' disappears and
  the meditation blossoms.
Remorse refers to a specific type of restlessness which is the kammic
  effect of one's misdeeds. The only way to overcome remorse, the
  restlessness of a bad conscience, is to purify one's virtue and become
  kind, wise and gentle. It is virtually impossible for the immoral or
  the self indulgent to make deep progress in meditation.

Doubt refers to the disturbing inner questions at a time when one should be silently moving deeper. Doubt can question one's own ability
  "Can I do This?", or question the method "Is this the right way?", or
  even question the meaning "What is this?". It should be remembered
  that such questions are obstacles to meditation because they are asked
  at the wrong time and thus become an intrusion, obscuring one's
  clarity.

The Lord Buddha likened doubt to being lost in a desert, not
  recognising any landmarks.
Such doubt is overcome by gathering clear instructions, having a good
  map, so that one can recognise the subtle landmarks in the unfamiliar
  territory of deep meditation and so know which way to go. Doubt in
  one's ability is overcome by nurturing self confidence with a good
  teacher. A meditation teacher is like a coach who convinces the sports
  team that they can succeed. The Lord Buddha stated that one can, one
  will, reach Jhana and Enlightenment if one carefully and patiently
  follows the instructions. The only uncertainty is 'when'! Experience
  also overcomes doubt about one's ability and also doubt whether this
  is the right path. As one realised for oneself the beautiful stages of
  the path, one discovers that one is indeed capable of the very
  highest, and that this is the path that leads one there.
The doubt that takes the form of constant assessing "Is this Jhana?"
  "How am I going?", is overcome by realising that such questions are
  best left to the end, to the final couple of minutes of the
  meditation. A jury only makes its judgement at the end of the trial,
  when all the evidence has been presented. Similarly, a skilful
  meditator pursues a silent gathering of evidence, reviewing it only at
  the end to uncover its meaning.
The end of doubt, in meditation, is described by a mind which has full
  trust in the silence, and so doesn't interfere with any inner speech.
  Like having a good chauffeur, one sits silently on the journey out of
  trust in the driver.


text:
Does a Buddha see the heart objectively?
Does a Buddha or arahant like food and is mindful of that liking at all times or does liking just no longer arise? Does the Buddha like or dislike at the heart level and yet sees the heart objectively?
Related to this question:
What is the basis?

Cool. Lots of neurotransmission beyond one individual brain here

:) ,I never met any Arhant / Buddha. Still ,as far as I have studied & heard too , an enlightened one can never like or dislike anything. There is no choice or requirement  left for enlightened one. Body & process(Mind) within body MIGHT become like a stone to earth .

Feelings (vedana) are of one of these types: pleasant, painful or neutral.
Arahants will experience all these types of feelings.
However, the three poisons of lust or greed (lobha), aversion (dosa) and delusion (moha) will not arise in arahants. Craving (tanha) and clinging (upadana) will also not arise in arahants.
Liking a feeling is basically lust or greed (lobha). So, this does not arise in arahants. They would only endure the pleasant, painful or neutral feeling mindfully.

This falls under the heading of Guarding the Senses; one of several practices in the creation of self-discipline:  Jagarianuyoga
A previous act of identification with the activities that started the process [intent to create personal experience coupled to deeds of body, speech and mind] puts a sort of 'mark of ownership' on the consequences and it is identifying (claiming, recognizing) these markers that results in the experience known as "My sight", or "I am seeing."
The experience of sensation — that is, the subjective reaction to or evaluation of the unpleasant or pleasant (physical, verbal or mental) — changes in accodance with whether or not the individual is oriented to gain in the experience of worldly pleasures or to attaining an end to kamma. For example the experience of pleasant sensation arising from kamma to be experienced as worldly pleasure can be changed to the perception of the unpleasant implications of that situation for one seeking to end kamma. Thus the pleasant can be experienced as pleasant or unpleasant, the unpleasant can be experienced as unpleasant or pleasant, or both can be experienced indifferently.
Arising from this experience comes liking or disliking depending on the sensation and whether or not one's original intent was to create worldly experience or to escape the world.
Both liking and disliking, are, in the Pali, forms of wanting and lead to action that repeats the cycle and results in an outcome determined by kamma.
For this reason, the beggar trains himself to be wary of sights, sounds, scents, flavors, touches, and thoughts.
Being aware of the danger,
he guards "The Doors of the Senses"
and when an object of sense
comes into the range
of an organ of sense,
he neither dwells on its general appearance
nor it's details.
— He is aware of it, but does not 'think about' it
or dwell on the sensation associated with it
or take delight in it
or react to it's influence
or say to himself 'sensing, sensing, sensing'.

A Buddha has to guard?


text:
Can the body be stuck in a state during practice?
So I've been doing vipassana meditation more regularly after my second 10 day regularly. I try to do 1hr to 1.5 hr per sitting and meditate as much as possible during my commute.
I've been feeling many more sensations lately as well as having a deeper feeling for where they reach in my body. I've also had strong emotions regularly coming up and I've had some things that have been happening as well.
I try my absolute best to be equanimous but at times during my meditation my body will automatically tense up And twitch. My main concern is my neck / throat area. Lately when I swallow, I don't feel a bump per say but I feel a spot of tightness which even feels like a ridge that I have to get over when I swallow sometimes. It only happens sometimes.
I've been feeling a ton of tightness in my neck and I've never felt this before since the neck sensations are fairly new. Could it be that something is arising which is causing a shift in the state of my body like increased neck tightness and constriction? Generally after meditation this feeling gets much better so I'm not sure if it's a sort of transitioning state.
I'm not sure. Saw a doctor and they couldn't find anything after feeling my  neck. I don't smoke. I am active and a healthy weight.

Could be due to, pressure between upper & lower teeths/jaws; sitting on hard surface leading to pain
resulting in feeling of tightness in neck & backbone area; already pain exist somewhere in body & one tries to switch directly from pain spot to head; Meditator going through some tensed atmosphere in daily-life, if going through tension, better try anapaan by lying down & remember to get-up & meditate in dreams as you tend to sleep ,in this way ,may u start meditation in dreams too.Have Metta session with fellow meditators & stop increasing mind-pressure through audios/videos(spiritual too)

It could possibly be stored mental tension arising.
It could possibly be the body adjusting; so breathing & mental energy can flow via a more optimal route.
It could be due to poor sitting posture, such as sitting cross-legged with a hunched back or forcing oneself to unnaturally sit cross-legged (but this would obviously not happen when commuting).
You should soften your awareness around the neck/throat area.
I assume you are practicing the Goenka method. While I personally do not know how the Goenka method is actually practised; you probably should stop any active body sweeping/scanning when the tension arises and simply just sit with an aim of simply relaxing the mind, face, eyes, jaw & the body.
If the neck tension remains of physical concern, consult an acupuncturist who appears competent & knowledgeable about meditation & breath ('prana; chi'). Note: there are often vast variations of knowledge & skill between acupuncturists and other complementary medicine practitioners, such as osteopaths.
Things like faulty or excessive yoga practise can also cause subtle physical abnormalities and distortions. Subtle displacemnts/distortions of hip flexor muscles, for example, from yoga or forced cross-legged sitting can affect the diaphragm & neck and block the naturally flow of subtle breathing in the throat/neck.
To summarize:

Focus on relaxation of face, jaw, eyes, mind & body and stop any active method
Consult an acupuncturist or otherwise gentle osteopath.
Be cautious towards forced crossed-legged sitting and strong yoga asana (such as 'Iyengar' &  'Pattabhi Jois Mysore Ashtanga' methods).

Past sankhara and sanna create bizarre experiances when meditation. Don't get alarmed, just look at the sensations and keep meditating.
To rule out any sensations due to medical issue, it is also best to see a doctor when pain or tightness arise. If there is no medical issue then don't fret about it too much and do meditation as usual.

Even I have undergone tightness around my neck and I have been equanimously observing it and it gradually dissolves


text:
Is regret worth?
Today I regret for a sparrow was wandering around running ceiling fan.
Even I had noticed and think to turn it off but I forget.
I don't care if it was my bad karma which is not important than saving a sparrow    but does really a matter for saving it then it wasn't a bad karma.
I'm not afraid if I've break precept or my bad krama, what else I need to pay for it.
I can't revert a time neither get a sparrow alive.
I don't have anything left than regret.
Does it worth?
Anything defined in sutta about regret or what Lord Buddha said about regret?

See the Buddhas teachings to his Son Rahula. Once seeing that something caused harm (by speech, body), talk to a admirable friend, resolve no more doing it. In case of thought, just ashamed, and resolve no more doing it. Fans are killer, 100 hour for hour, for some sense pleasures, and also not healthy. No need to make use of such at all. Used to without such, healthier bodily and mental.

@Samana Johann Thank you Bhante. I should be altert and must be acitve for such situations so I could help to lives around me.  Thank you so much

One with perfect Sila, seeing the backwards of sensuality, has no more need in rescue and many kinds of Dana, isn't anymore that busy to run arround that nothing breaks. Mudita, Nyom Swapnil.

To the question "is regret worthy", yes, one of the three governing principles, leading all the way to liberation.

Thinking about what you could have done and should have not done is part of Nīvaraṇa more particularly Uddhacca,kukkucca. Since you cannot turn back time or remedy the situation it is best you do not worry about this. Worrying will aggravate the situation.
If you knew the sparrow was in danger but chose it to ignore it this is negligence. This does not amount to killing but this may have karmic consequences.
If you did not occur that the sparrow was in danger and if hit the fan and died there is no karmic consequences.

So I thing Nivarana means Prevention . In my case I didn't ignored, it just happened because I was busy and as if fan blades hit it's body I realized that it's gone. and I regret. As I said I'm not afraid if it is my bad karma or will may have karmic consequences but it does really matter for good deeds. My aim was just save a life.

"What is the purpose of skillful virtues? What is their reward?"
"Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, Ananda, and freedom from remorse as their reward."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.001.than.html


text:
Are there Theravada practitioners that aspire to be Buddhas?
As far as I know, most Theravada followers practice according to the Pali Canon even though they accept the Bodhisattva vehicle as well. So, the main focus is to attain Arahantship for most people. My question is: How common is it for Theravada practitioners to aspire to be Buddhas?

Very common. It usally ends only by stream enter.

There are many who aspire to be Buddhas even in the Theravada community. But it is not something that is usually encouraged. It is left up to the individual choice.
Those who make such aspirations out of ego and lack of understanding of the enormity of the task are discouraged and adviced to give it up. Those who  have mastered the Tipitaka at the highest level and proven their worthiness to the community are given blessings. Even then it's not sure until they actually get the blessings of another Sammasambuddha. And it's not certain if they ever get the chance to meet another Buddha, let alone getting the blessing. Those who never get that blessing end up being Pacceka-Buddhas after a long time, if they don't give up the pursuit.

A person that has memorized and understood the Tipitaka to an advanced level is considered "well-versed" but this is not adequate. One should practice and apply the Dhamma so that nibbana can be attained. In this way, an individual serves as a great gift to the world as he or she is able to teach the right Dhamma out of compassion. However, an arahant's ability to teach is of course unlike that of the Buddha's.

@AdrianRusli you cannot attain Nibbana if you have an aspiration to become a Buddha. I used the word 'mastering' and you chose to replace it with the word 'memorizing' and started an argument. :)

The Theravadin Buddhists do not place much attention to the path leading to Buddhahood because there is little to no evidence that Buddha has ever taught it before. The reason why the Bodhisattva Vehicle is never taught is unclear. Perhaps it is simply because nobody had such aspiration in Buddha Gautama's era. However, as there were numerous Buddhas in the past, I believe there was at least once when the past Buddha taught the Bodhisattva Vehicle. It is unfortunate that it has been forgotten.

@AdrianRusli you cannot follow someone else's teaching and become a Buddha. That goes against the definition of the word 'Sammassambuddha'. It's as simple as that.

There are a thousand world systems beside our own. So, it is possible that even a Sammasambuddha exists in another world system in the present moment. If a Bodhisatta were to be reborn in heaven or as a monk that had successfully developed supernatural powers, he or she would be able to visit that Buddha. (Note that I am not starting an argument. So, do not misunderstand)

@AdrianRusli no such thing is mentioned in the Dhamma. So it's an assumption at best. Merely meeting a Sammasambuddha is not enough to get the blessings. One needs to complete 8 conditions.

I see, what are the eight conditions? Can you provide a reference for that?

You can ask that in a new question. Not really appropriate to post all that in a comment

In Theravada, the word 'Bodhisatta' refers to an unenlightened person seeking Buddhahood.
In other words, a Bodhisattva is not a Buddha in Theravada.

Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still only an
  unenlightened Bodhisatta...
MN 19

This is why most Theravada reject the Mahayana doctrine of Bodhisattva Vehicle and this is why there are two separate doctrines (Theravada & Mahayana) which despise each other. Theravada views the Mahayana doctrine as superstition and Mahayana views the Theravada doctrine as "hina", which means "inferior, low; poor, miserable; vile, base, abject, contemptible, despicable".

Also, in Theravada, a Buddha is an Arahant but an Arahant is generally not regarded to be a Buddha. Therefore, Theravadans generally aim for Arahant and keep the name 'Buddha' reserved for Gotama Buddha.

Yes, I understand the difference between a Bodhisatta and a Buddha. It appears that my question seemed to be unclear, so I editted it. I am actually asking whether it is common for Theravadin Buddhists to seek Buddhahood.

In the modern days, Theravadin Buddhists have began to accept the Bodhisattva vehicle as well. However, unlike Mahayana Buddhists, Theravadin Buddhists do not believe that celestial Bodhisattas exist.

What evidence are you basing that most theravadans accept the Bodhsattva path?

How about Dhammadhatu spoken of Theravadin-Bodhisatta-Buddha-Aharahants? There obiviously are such or?

This was said by Bhikkhu Bodhi in Access to Insight: "Once it became widespread in mainstream Indian Buddhism, the idea of the three vehicles was not only taken up by the Mahāyāna but was eventually also absorbed into conservative Theravāda Buddhism. " Arahants, Bodhisattvas, and Buddhas
by
Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi

Bhante Samana Johann, I am curious of your view regarding Buddhahood. What do you think of it?

I believe that for a Buddha to arise in the world, there had to be some form of preparation before that particular lifetime.

Seldom is the arising of a Buddha and even more to get in touch with his Dhamma, good householder. Else and further has a better place here.

@Adrian Rusli In modern days, monks seem to accept more & more just to satisfy the leftist "laissez faire" attitude, but in the Theravada scriptures there is nothing found of the mahayana boddhisattva ideal. Gotama the Buddha never claimed that all beings can be saved. In fact quite the contrary, he said that only a few have little dust in their eyes that they can comprehend dhamma.

Indeed, I am actually thinking that in order for a Buddha to arise in the world, there had to be an unenlightened being aspiring to do so.

The difference between Arhantship and Buddha is that the Buddha rediscovers the meditative technique through his/her own effort (rediscovers the technique since the technique is lost as it has been a long time since the last Buddha) that leads to liberation while the arhat learns the technique through Buddha or a line of teachers that have preserved the technique in its purity since the last Buddha. They both are enlightened beings.
I cannot say if it is common or uncommon to aspire to be a Buddha. To aspire for liberation is certainly a commmon goal.

That is well-said!

"Bodhisatta" in your question is a word mean "a man who enlightened by himself, then help uncountable others to enlighten follow him too".
According above meaning, there is very less person, uncommon, who going to be a Buddha because almost everyone hates suffering, loves happiness. Helping others are suffering. And if one chooses to help uncountable people, it comes with uncountable suffering, too, because each one comes with individual complex problems.
Most of people will not be Bodhisatta because they will give up to that uncountable suffering.
Every Bodhisatta borns with uncountable jobs, he has to plan for every step from current life to the next and next and uncountable next to the last life. Bodhisatta must work hard to practice people for making sure that people will birth with him and practice to enlighten follow him in his last life. He has only one chance to help people because it is his last life, so he has to work very hard to collect the actual practicable people before his last life.
The fail Bodhisatta is called "PaccekaBodhisatta" because he can't let the others enlighten follow him in his last life.
And that's why the Buddha praises PaccekaBuddha more than other Arahanta. Sāriputta and Moggallāna practiced to be the chief male disciples of Gautama Buddha  only for 1 asaṇkheyya and 100 thousand mahākappa after making a decision in front of the Buddha, but PaccekaBuddha practiced for 2 asaṇkheyya and 100 thousand mahākappa to enlighten in the last life. All of them can enlighten at the time of making decision, but they didn't because they want to help people.
How does PaccekaBuddha help people? And why his helping is better than Sāriputta and Moggallāna?
PaccekaBuddha help people by helping many other Bodhisattas. All kinds of Bodhisatta help each other to collect people. You can see the co-working teamwork in Jataka-Atthakathā and some other Atthakatha. Who practice longer is who can  help greater.
That's why PaccekaBuddha is better than Sāriputta and Moggallāna.
PaccekaBuddha can't help people to enlighten in his last life, but he can help many other Bodhisattas to let uncountable people enlighten follow more than Sāriputta and Moggallāna because PaccekaBuddha practiced in the longer period.
The only fail of PaccekaBuddha is "they can let people enlighten in their last life".


text:
How to disconnect family life & become monk?
I have a very strong pull towards becoming a full-time monk but being a family person (a son/husband/father) it seems really tough to take-up robe. How do I go about convincing or communicating this thought to my family?
What are the drawbacks if I just leave everything and walk away?

Not trying to be flippant, but have you asked those it concerns?

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

MN82 discusses the drawbacks faced by Raṭṭhapāla when expressing a desire to  go forth:

Please give me permission to go forth.”
  When he said this, Raṭṭhapāla’s parents said to him,
  “But, dear Raṭṭhapāla, you’re our only child. You’re dear to us and we love you. You’re dainty and raised in comfort.
  You know nothing of suffering.
  When you die we will lose you against our wishes.

Similarly, consider the needs of your spouse and children. Later in MN82 we see the impact on the wives:

Then Raṭṭhapāla’s former wives each clasped his feet and said,
  “What are they like, lord, the nymphs for whom you lead the spiritual life?”
  “Sisters, I don’t lead the spiritual life for the sake of nymphs.”
  Saying, “Our lord Raṭṭhapāla refers to us as sisters!” they fainted right away.

Going forth affects many. Discuss this with them. Also think about your own motivations. Raṭṭhapāla felt he had no choice in life but to go forth:

‘I’ll either die right here or go forth.’

No permission of wife or children required actually.

Don't do this my dear friend
  You don't understand becoming  craving
Becoming process  want be something
For example
You are family person and you want become monk.
Monk want be something
That process is problem..
Knowing becoming process
Everyone want to become something
Becoming condition  firction  you and your craving
Firction condition suffering  ..
Example
Skinny person want to become body builder
Firction  skinny  person and his opposite craving
Firction condition suffering
You know these process
Can we live without friction?
Because friction contidion suffering
We avoid friction
We avoid suffering

Family life has all the challenges one has to overcome in order to become monk.
Advisable to look at so called "pull" to monkhood ..and see what exactly  you are trying to achieve.
If it is to escape the burden of family life . Then monkhood will not be fruitful
One need to  learn to live unaffected while attending to all the needs of family life .
How...that is what therawadi doctrene teaches you to achieve.
Once you get to that, whether you stay with family or become a priest is a very small decision.
One need a certain thereawadi knowledge to become a person unaffected by ups and downs of family life.
Unfortunately very few places in this world has the correct knowledge to guide you...
So seek out " knowledge" which make you cool..or do not get aruosed by happenings of this world .
You could get go a stage where a happening  .....need not  be ignored nor responded".. .for its impact on you. .  Your "knowledge" steers you away from both  of theses positive or negative  responses which are....Automatic reflexes.
So you are free and could continue with what you want to be doing now... free ...  Truly unaffected ...light headed  with no remorse whatsoevef irrespective of the current issue in hand ...Thereawadi life..
Do you still work yez. Work better ..more effectively... With lot more ease

Q >>>What are the drawbacks if I just leave everything and walk away?

Q >>>What are the drawbacks if I just leave everything and walk away? ANSWER>>> None, if you can walk away and enter into priesthood that shows you have very little attractions towards family. There exist  families without father, without mother, family without both parents, they just continue to live.don't die don't vanish.. If your purpose here us solely to become an enlightened one so that you could serve the word then no issue  If your  purpose is just to run away from burdrn and have a easy life then that is where the problem lies. not in the first I mentioned. Most run away from tackling problems because they don't know enough to understand they could live happily with a tormenting family without remorse.. Why should Therawadi doctrene exist if it cannot provide remedy for everyday sufferings. There is a cure...we need to learn...to live happily.. A devotee listens to semons, solely to build the required knowledge. Blessings


text:
What is karma vipaka and its contents?
What are the results of various sins done. I heard that it has various kinds of results we get for sins done.

For a puthujjana (ordinary unenlightened person), the results of sinful kamma is rebirth in hell.

These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions
under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body,
after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad
destination, the lower realms, in hell.
MN 4

For a Noble One, the results of past sinful kamma is merely feelings (vedana) felt (vedaniyaṃ).

Bhikkhus, this group [of aggregates] is not yours, nor does it belong
to others. It is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by
volition, as something to be felt (vedaniyaṃ).
SN 12.37

AN 3.99 says:

Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual takes him to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped in [contemplating] the body, undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind, undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling with suffering. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual takes him to hell.
Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is developed in [contemplating] the body, developed in virtue, developed in mind, developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted, dwelling with the immeasurable. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.
Monks, for anyone who says, 'In whatever way a person makes kamma, that is how it is experienced,' there is no living of the holy life,
there is no opportunity for the right ending of stress.
But for anyone who says, 'When a person makes kamma to be felt (vedanīyaṃ) in such & such a way, that is how its result is experienced,' there is
the living of the holy life, there is the opportunity for the right
ending of stress.

Comment has been moved to chat.

Thank you for the answer!

See the 2 main MN suttas on Kamma at MN 135 and MN 136. For more detailed infos on Kamma, see accesstoinsight's index

Thank you for the answer

You  surely know already. It's simple. Bad actions leads to bad results. Good actions lead to good results.
Like when someone gives from the bottom of their heart, that someone's vipaka is the  development of the bottom of their heart.
Like when someone get's angry,  the vipaka is often anger right back at that someone or that someone looking like a fool.
I'm still finding out the good actions. So I constantly ask myself "What are the good actions?".
Subtle bad actions that we can't even see, the substance of avijja, leads to subtle or substantial bad results.
Death is the vipaka of being compelled to exist or being compelled to not exist on  through
 samsara.

Thank you for the edit and answer.


text:
Can you identify these figurines?
I'm looking to find info about these particular statues.
Any info would be great. Had these for years and really wondering who they are, where they're from and any history if known.

The heavy metal looking sign is supposed to be the Karana mudra that's apparently for banishing and expelling negativity. It is supposed to express a very powerful energy that is able to expel negative energy & ward off evil. The superstitious who have this Buddha making the Karana mudra, are encouraged to try and be very mindful about its placement.  I wonder if Karuna and Karana are related.

Thanks for the info! I did think it was to ward off negative energy actually. It's been placed by the front entry way at my mother's place.

They are all the Buddha as far as I can see.  The top one looks Balinese.  The metal casting look possible Indian,  I would guess 1950s or earlier.

They all look Buddha to me as well. I have not read about mudras in any sutta.

These are Buddhas. I couldn’t find any mention of mudras in suttas. I asked about mudras in this forum but nobody found any mention of mudras in suttas.


text:
What is the difference between love and infatuation?
What is the difference between the two or are they the same?

Usually 3 years after gained the object.

I reckon if you marry someone because you want to keep them, that's like infatuation.
And if they're dying, and you neither want them to remain in suffering, nor want to push them away, that's more like love.
More generally any form of unwise or selfish misbehaviour might be diagnosed as caused by an "infatuation", whereas ethical and generous might be described in more positive terms like "love". Buddhism might distinguish different types/kinds (manifestations) of the better kind of love -- see the "brahmaviharas" which are translated e.g. "compassion" and "loving-kindness" and so on.
There's another consideration, I think "ethical" might imply that nobody regrets it, it's not action (or intention) from which any suffering or dissatisfaction arises -- so it "benefits both, self, and others", and see e.g. "and is a small taste of Nibbana".
If you want specific advice about binding yourself to (or simply choosing) a lay partner, see e.g. Any authentic sutta from any tradition that gives guidance on what kind of partner to choose? -- see also e.g. DN 31 for very generic advice about friendships in lay life.


text:
What did Dogen think a miracle was?
Dogen, Shobogenzo #26

Guishan is the thirty-seventh ancestor, a direct descendant of
  Shakyamuni Buddha. He was a dharma heir of Bhaizhang, Zen Master
  Dazhi, Today buddha ancestors in the ten directions, even those who do
  not call themselves descendants of Guishan, are all in fact his remote
  descendant.
One day, while Guishan was lying down, Yangshan Huiji came to see him.
  Guishan turned to face the wall.
Yangshan said, “I am your student. Please don’t be formal.”
Guishan started to get up.
Yangshan rose to leave.
Guishan said, “Huiji.”
Yangshan returned.
Guishan said, “Let me tell you about my dream.”
Yangshan leaned forward to listen.
Guishan said simply, “Would you interpret my dream for me? I want to
  see how you do it.”
In response Yangshan brought a basin of water and a towel. Guishan
  washed his face and sat up.
Then Xiangyan came in.
Guishan said, “Huiji and I have been sharing miracles. This is no
  small matter.”
Xiangyan said, “I was next door I heard you.”
Guishan said to him, “Why don’t you try now?”
Xiangyan made a bowl of tea and brought it to him.
Guishan praised them, saying, “You two students surpass even
  Shariputra and Maudgalyayana with your marvelous activity!”

I don't think Dogen believed in miracles. Am I right?

As Chogyam Trungpa explained in Shambhala: The Sacred Path of the Warrior (or was it in The Myth of Freedom and the Way of Meditation ?), the perfectly enlightened Bodhisattva always does exactly what's right at the moment. The perfectly enlightened Bodhisattva is always on time.
Because their mind is not running ahead nor falling behind, it is always exactly so. Being exactly so, it is without conflict, and is perfectly in sync with the needs of the moment. It is also 100% authentic without pretense, as simple or as complex as presently required.
This is what Dogen said Guishan praised as "miracles" and "no small matter".

Hi Andrei! How do you reconcile what you've said with the events told in the discourse found in SN 54.9, where a group of monks take their lives after practicing the contemplation on the "non-beauty" of the body? How can we interpret what happened there? Thanks in advance. Kind regards!

Reconcile?There's no conflict here to reconcile. Buddha was a young teacher then and assumed the method that worked for him would work for everyone.  Doing what's exactly right at the moment, doesn't mean you don't make mistakes from the future standpoint. You did exactly what you knew was right at the moment, and after that you learned something new, but what you did was right at the moment you did it.

Thanks! How you define "right", then? What makes such quality special, in contrast to the attitude a regular person might have? Let's say, if I feel completely sure about a decision, without any amount of hesitation, is that person doing what's right at the moment? Kind regards!

"Exactly right" is what you do when you are not under influence of asava, i.e. you're not swayed by one or more of the "three poisons". You do what's best for the long term benefit to oneself and others, to the best of your knowledge, as opposed to acting out your neuroses or acting out your ego. When the mind is pure like that, seeing things is clearly "yathabhutam", and the action is "exactly right".

Thank you! Now I understand. Have a nice day!


text:
Attaining a calm mind
During the last 5 months I made observation regarding my inner mind process. The inner chatter which most people know during their day disappeared completely in my mind.
I practiced mindfullnes during my day and meditated as well. Is their a specific term in Buddhism which refers to achieving a quite or calm mind?

One could call it jhāna or dhyāna which is the meditation with a calm mind. You are on a great path. Perhaps you want to meditate on the heart sutra where it says:
"No suffering, no origination,
no stopping, no path, no cognition,
also no attainment with nothing to attain. "
The moment where you recognize a calm mind (the absence of something) as achievement, the ego crawls back up and claims having attained something. The true you is just about to get this ego to quite down. As you begin to research terms and more about having attained this great achievement you might create artificial distance again. Always remember that you are neither the mind nor the body.

A quitened or a calmed mind is an important and a dangerous milestone. It is important because it is a mark of your concentration that the mind's chatter has quitened down. It is dangerous because it is not the final stage- things change and the chatter may come up again and you may start despairing when that happens  and so generate more misery.
The term for it may be one of the four jhanas or the stage of rapture/bliss. They are all intermediary stages. But it would be better if you further read on these stages, since only you would know the precise details of your meditative progress.


text:
What is the textual source of the 4 infinitudes and the 6 coolnesses?
If I remember this right I heard about the 4 infinitudes and the 6 coolnesses on podcasts. Not sure if I'm getting the names right and/or representing these properly. The question is, I'm looking for the textual source of these two lists in the scriptures.
4 infinitudes:

mind of a buddha
the mind in Jahna
space
world systems

6 coolnesses:

When the mind needs to be restrained you restrain it
When your mind needs to be exerted you exert it
When it needs to be encouraged to encourage it
When you should develop equanimity you develop the quality of equanimity
When there’s resolve on the mark of freedom you reserve on that mark
Delighting in freedom

"There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?
"The Buddha-range of the Buddhas[1] is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
"The jhana-range of a person in jhana...[2]
"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma...
"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
"These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.077.than.html

i want to say what i asked about differs from these "unconjecturables" or "imponderables" right?

Actually the unconjecturables are likely the same as what I was naming the “infinitudes.”
As for the 6 coolnesses:
aṅguttara nikāya
6. book of the sixes
85. Cooled
https://suttacentral.net/an6.85/en/thanissaro
“A monk endowed with six qualities is incapable of realizing the unexcelled cooled state. Which six? There is the case where a monk doesn’t rein in his mind when it should be reined in. He doesn’t exert his mind when it should be exerted. He doesn’t gladden his mind when it should be gladdened. He doesn’t watch over his mind when it should be watched over. He is intent on what is lowly. And he delights in self-identity. A monk endowed with these six qualities is incapable of realizing the unexcelled cooled state.
“A monk endowed with six qualities is capable of realizing the unexcelled cooled state. Which six? There is the case where a monk reins in his mind when it should be reined in. He exerts his mind when it should be exerted. He gladdens his mind when it should be gladdened. He watches over his mind when it should be watched over. He is intent on what is exquisite. And he delights in Unbinding. A monk endowed with these six qualities is capable of realizing the unexcelled cooled state.”


text:
Other people may misinterpret my "calming my mind"
I'm not an "official" Buddhist but I have accepted the idea that "calming my mind" is good -- by not getting emotional about little setbacks (to the degree I can).  To some degree, I have accomplished this.
As a result, I can keep my head while others are losing theirs.  So far, so good.
But God help me if I get convicted of a serious crime.  Whether I'm remorseful or not (or whether I did it or not), the judge is likely to give me extra punishment if I don't show remorse.
And I once met a friend of a friend with whom I similarly held my reactions in check.  She later described me as being "an emotionless monster" as if I walk around the streets at night eating children and small animals.
What can I do to keep people from thinking something's wrong with me just because I don't get wildly emotional at every little thing?
This question is not off-topic.  Please don't edit it.  Answers that don't directly answer the question as asked will be ignored (no XY-ing, please).

Are you sure this question wouldn't be more on-topic on the Parenting.SE or "Interpersonal Skills" or the "Workplace" SE sites? I'm not sure how the question is related to "Buddhist doctrine or practice"? I'm not saying you shouldn't ask here, but why are you (so that we can better guess at how to answer)?

Yes, I am certain.  "Calming your mind" is a key concept in Buddhism, and I'm looking to Buddhists to answer it.  And why Parenting?  This has nothing to do with either parents OR children, except for the children I do NOT go around at night eating.

There is a difference between getting wildly emotional at every little thing and having empathy for others. I don't know your friend, or how you interact with her, but I can imagine she may have told you something that was emotional for her and your reaction was deadpan.
This is not kind. It communicates to another person that their life and suffering is unimportant to you and breaks any social bonds you might have with that person.
It sounds like you are so attached to unattachment that you don't consider how your actions may affect others around you. You can stop people from thinking "something is wrong with you" by forming deep connection with people and showing genuine caring kindness for them.

I have to say, my reaction WAS deadpan.  Maybe I DO need to be more reactively emotional -- even though that seems to be the opposite of what I've learned.  In my defense, this was someone I met for the first time that day -- not a friend in the sense I think you mean it.

What can I do to keep people from thinking something's wrong with me just because I don't get wildly emotional at every little thing?

Practice expressing brahmaviharas explicitly. It will help others to see that your calm demeanor isn’t based on indifference.
Just make sure that you only say what you mean. If needed, metta bhavana can aid in deepening your compassion for others, and will not interfere with your ambition to develop stillness.

Just two days ago I was at a ladies' club meeting and one of the members there had a small emergency.  I was clueless to what was going on, but later walked up to her and said I don't know what happened, but I hope everything is all right now.  She explained the situation, and I avoided looking like someone who just doesn't give a ****.

Thanks for sharing. I hope it worked out for both of you.

Whether or not you are an "offical" Buddhist, you are a human being. Any human being who reacts wildly with emotion or does not react at all is a human being with problems. And almost all of us fall within these two categories most of the times.
Being a Buddhist (offical or not) or having a calm mind does not mean that one does not have or express any emotion at all. In fact you can find many stories where Buddha, Boddhisattvas, Arihants express great joy and are blissful and show great empathy. Having a calm mind means that one acts in accordance to the sitaution; one acts- doesn't react. That is, having a calm mind means that if it is a jouful/happy ocassion, one is happy without loosing the balance of the mind (becoming madly ecstatic). Or if it is a remorseful situation, one is empathetic, without becoming overwhelmed with sadness oneself.
The balance of mind, avoiding the extremes of emotion (too much or not at all) is important.
You cannot do anything about what people think of you. You can do everything about your balance of mind, your calmness of mind. For that you dont need to be an offical buddhist.
Being over-emotional or a lack of emotion are both dangerous. There are good emotions to cultivate like loving-kindness, warm heartedness, joy etc. Cultivate your wisdom and balance of mind- then you would be, in every situation, calm and happy. You wouldn't feel the worry of what other people think of you. That is a benefit of such positive emotions.

One acts -- [one] doesn't react -- I like that.

I see now that it's not just about having inappropriate reactions to negative events -- it's also about having the right reaction to good events.  I'll work on that.

In Buddhism, calming the mind, if done sufficiently, eventually leads to joy. Joy is an excellent basis for developing another practice called 'metta' ('good-will'). Also, the calm mind is sensitive to the suffering of others, therefore the calm mind is an excellent basis for developing 'compassion' ('the hope others are free from suffering' called 'karuna'). Buddhist practitioners train in both calming the mind and metta-karuna.

What can I do to keep people from thinking something's wrong with me just because I don't get wildly emotional at every little thing?
Buddhism recommends what's "praised by the wise" and being inoffensive.
Perhaps try to be like a good parent or teacher -- or a mature adult, a reasonable human being, perhaps somebody with high "emotional intelligence" or a great deal of courtesy?
I say that because, for example, if you manage young children then things will happen -- they get upset, they hurt themselves, they might hurt each other if you're not careful, they don't self-regulate as much as adults do (self-regulation is a learned skilled).
And their parent or teacher is (I think) meant to be sympathetic and loving (at least they in conventional society that I know) -- and practical, and probably highly moral especially if you're a teacher (and not, "convicted of a serious crime") -- without getting too upset themselves when a child is crying about something.
Specifically-Buddhist doctrine on how to relate with other people seems to be to pratice the brahmaviharas when you're in company. There are several articles about that here. I think it's evident in standard Buddhist interpersonal messages like "may you be well".
If you don't mind my posting it here I admire this lecture (it's not Buddhist) which illustrates various forms of speech and how/when they're proper in different situations.
Possibly you shouldn't "hold your reactions in check", I don't know? But instead express loving-kind reactions. Perhaps a characteristic of well-enlightened people is that they trust themselves to act appropriately, and so they allow themselves to act.
Then again I sometimes read of stories like Is That So?, the guy doesn't seem wildly emotional to say the least, but he seems trusted or respected by his neighbours, and acts appropriately even though he says not much.
I think people appreciate it when there's some two-way communication (I once heard someone define "communicative" as, something like, "receptive" plus "responsive").

I really like this answer, however, I suggested the story of "Is That So?" in a comment and it seems to have been removed. Do you know anything about that?

@Muuski Yes I see it was a comment under a previous answer of Dhammadhatu's, which he deleted (and later posted a different answer), so the comment was deleted with the answer. That's one of the reasons to post in an answer instead of in a comment -- comments are often "temporary".


text:
does all of buddhism depend on dependant co arising?
If co-dependant arising is shown to be false or contradictorary, would all of Buddhism fall ?
anatta, shunyata, nirvana as extinction-cessation, momentariness and and so forth seem to be based on this law-paticasamutpada/pratityasamutpada ?
is this Buddhism's crutch?

It's not like "buddhism" "depends" on a "law" - it's just that D.O. is the most fundamental observation about how things work.
It is an observation about how the world of representation develops, from complete nondifferentiation to having appearance of distinct sentient beings who are born, die, suffer, argue and fight with each other.
And it's basically like, "hmmm, this appearance of distinct sentient beings with all their troubles only exists in the world of representation, and outside of representation none of this is applicable!" and "therefore, if we learn to deconstruct our own representation, we can transcend its limits and griefs" and "so, it makes sense to study how representation develops, this might give us clues into how to deconstruct it".
But if you want to prove it false, you'd need to prove false the very idea of representation (aka subjective experience aka consciousness). As well as the idea that subjective experience is something that does not just pop out of nowhere but grows over time.
Both of these are obvious facts known first-hand. We all have subjective experience. And we all remember how it developed when we were children. Do you want to try and prove this false?

I marked this answer up; even though it appears too esoteric for most people to follow. Its not user-friendly. I suppose the sentence "this appearance (pātubhāvo) of distinct sentient beings (sattānaṃ) with all their troubles only exists in the world of representation ( jāti abhinibbatti) " is a very good description of what I have been teaching you for a few years now. Regards

For your question, let us see Buddhism as an assemblage of three aspects of meditation, philosophy, ethics.
Dependent origination (paticcayasamuppada [Pali]) is a term used to make sense of things, the understanding gained out of meditation. The technique is not dependent on the concept or the word. The meditative technique remains as effective it is, irrespective of the fact that  logical argument about a concept (which only connventionally makes sense) stands or not. So 'meditative' aspect of buddhism does not fall.
Sunyata and other concepts that you mention depend on this concept, as much as this concept depends on sunyata and other concepts you mention. {Refer to Mulamadhyamakakarika of Arya Nagarjuna} These concepts are part of a language-game being played, only so that the technique of meditation can be communicated to other people, so that they can understand and practice.
If you show dependent origination to be false, you thereby show sunyata to be false.
If you show sunyata to be false, it means you are saying things have an inherent existence (are not empty) or that you are saying there is nothing. Both these cases have been refuted extensively by Buddhist scholars (such as Arya Nagarjuna, Arya Candrakirti, etc.).
If you say any of the above two cases as valid, you are not talking about Buddhism.
But you are questioning about Buddhism.
Therefore, you can't say things are have inherent existence or that things don't exist.  Since you cant say either of these two, all you can say is that things are dependently originating.
Since you would say that, you wont be able to say dependent origination is false or contradictory.
'Philsophical' aspect of Buddhism therefore doesn't fall.
Whether or not dependent origination stands or not, buddhists practice generosity, compassion, morality, etc. The 'ethical' aspect does not fall.
Thus, neither part of our aseemblage of Buddhism falls, therefore Buddhism doesn't fall.

In the original Pali teachings, paṭiccasamuppāda refers to those conditions that dependently co-originate into suffering, as follows:

And what, bhikkhus, is dependent origination? With ignorance as
condition, formations come to be; with
formations as condition, consciousness; with consciousness as
condition, mind-and-body; with mind-and-body as condition, the six
sense bases; with the six sense bases as condition, contact; with
contact as condition, feeling; with feeling as condition, craving;
with craving as condition, attachment; with attachment as condition,
becoming; with becoming as condition, birth; with birth as
condition, aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure,
and despair come to be. Such is the origin of this whole mass of
suffering. This, bhikkhus, is called dependent origination.
SN 12.1

It follows, paṭiccasamuppāda is called "the wrong path", as follows:

And what, bhikkhus, is the wrong way? With ignorance as condition,
formations come to be; with formations as
condition, consciousness…. Such is the origin of this whole mass of
suffering. This, bhikkhus, is called the wrong way.
And what, bhikkhus, is the right way? With the remainderless fading
away and cessation of ignorance comes cessation of
formations; with the cessation of formations, cessation of
consciousness…. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.
This, bhikkhus, is called the right way.
SN 12.3

Anatta, sunnata and Nibbana lead to & are cessation; are the right path; are not paṭiccasamuppāda.

Pratītyasamutpāda considered to be Śūnyatā is only false, contradictory, the crutch, failure & hellish fall in Mahayana and particularly in the illogical utterances (rantings) of Nāgārjuna.

Those are just words.
These are just words.
How will anything be shown? With the crutch of useful words we make up ourselves or by the show of non-conseptual direct experience that just is?
The two seemingly contradicting realities(conseptual & non-conseptual) make it hard to explain the ineffable with words. There are multitudes of crutches in books that are useful but can't get one to the root of truth by themselves.


text:
How to continue practice with pain?
I practiced meditation for 6 months continuously. I used to meditate 45 mins in the morning as well as evening. In weekends, I used to meditate many rounds with breaks in between. I developed fear of loneliness due to which I have suffered from insomnia which has lasted till now though it has gotten a bit better now. I don't know if its dark night of the soul or depression. I have also been suffering from gastritis since 1 year. The stomach pain causes me anxiety and I have not been able to continue my meditation. I am waiting for both my sleep and stomach to get better so that I can continue. I sometimes feel that the problem will last till my death. I don't know how to progress from this phase. My meditation practice had definitely brought many positive changes. I have set milestones for myself regarding the practice that I think I may not reach during this lifetime. Any suggestions for me ?

What is your social life like?

I go to job and come back. Most of the time I am alone. Though, sometimes I meet my friends.

You should not believe meditation is for everyone or should not believe you are a "failure" if meditation does not work out for you. In reality, serious meditation is only for a small minority of people. Some of the meditation in the Western world is just 'fondling' with a service that is advertised so some smooth talkers can make money. Few Westerners are doing actual real meditation.
Fear of loneliness ("dark night of the soul") is certainly a common and inevitable result of extensive and intensive meditation. This existential fear must be passed through to achieve any advanced level of meditation.
Therefore, if meditation has not worked out for you, please do not judge yourself negatively. Many monks meditate for many years but make little progress and disrobe.
You should see a doctor or healer for your gastritis and find some solutions for poor sleep, such as Chinese herbal medicine, exercise, swimming, metta meditation, spiritual friendship, etc.
If you believe in future lives, the Buddha taught lay people to practise generosity & keep the five precepts is enough for 'rebirth' in heaven.  The Buddha generally did not teach meditation to lay people.
The sense of "self" is a natural survival instinct. Meditation can diminish the sense of "self" and this is actually not healthy for most people. Its only a small minority of people who are able to abide without a sense of "self".

Hey DD, is it possible to contact you via E-Mail?

dhammadhatu@bigpond.com.   regards

Please consult a doctor first to find the cause of your stomach pain. By the way, you can keep the pain as your meditation object. (Vedanaupassana)

Consulting a doctor would be suggested as a priority. If the body is not in a good physical condition, then one cannot meditate properly. A healthy body is a pre-requisite. Once, you are fit, as per the advice of your doctor, you can begin your meditation again. Do not worry about things. Certainly take care of yourself, but don't worry.
Your journey, as hard as it is, is for you to make. We all share in the metta of Buddha, boddhisattvas and other enlightened beings. Persistence, patience and determination are qualitites that will help you in this part of your journey, and this part of journey also gives you an oppurtunity to further cultivte these qualities. Things change (anicca).
May you experience anicca nature of sensations in your meditation (and come to realize the changing nature of all phenomenon) and come out of your worriness.

It is not clear what type of meditation you're following at present and the reason for doing so. If you're interested in simply reducing the stress levels at your work place, you may benefit from Mindfulness Meditation. Following 10 years of research at Oxford University targeting stress related problems in schools, the British Government has introduced Mindfulness Meditation, as official education policy in the UK and 5000 teachers have been trained to teach this type of meditation in the schools. It seems a very professional approach to address this problem of stress in schools. If you fall into a similar category, you may benefit from such a program of training. Also recommend the French Lama Matthieu Ricard, who teaches Altruistic Love, Compassion, Loving Kindness, meditation
to the corporate sector such as the Google staff. These are types of meditation designed to de-stress most of us who find our school/work routine stressful. Much of this information is available on youtube.

I am doing self taught mindfulness meditation reading 'Anapanasati Sutta'

Living in a country exposed to a three decade long civil war, it was a roller coaster drive all the way in my meditation. I think it is necessary to fix your mind on to the ultimate purpose of your meditation first, similar to an Olympic athlete targeting a gold medal. This becomes your driving force. Technically it is called Visualization of the Objective. This could be something quite mundane as '' a peaceful atmosphere at your work place'' or something more spiritual.  I found the Mahasi Sayadaw system which gives the mechanics of breathing meditation in great detail, very beneficial.


text:
State of mind corrected by anti anxiety or anti depressants
How does karma apply itself to an incarnation with a predisposition to aniexty who acts and reacts differently on no anti depressants , to the same incarnation who is not on mind control drugs.

Hi Sue! I think something similar could be asked about the application of kamma during periods of -natural- extreme hormonal fluctuation. Maybe thinking about that could give you some hint to answer your question. Kind regards!

Some are able the use the Buddhas drugs, some are not, react on in usual ways. Freedom From Fear and AN 3.22: Gilana Sutta — Sick People may help as to get ride of the cause of fear:  The Healing Power of the Precepts.

What does "how does kamma apply" mean, given that's what the question is asking?

Chris. I did not choose my words well enough. When I said ‘how does Karma APPLY itself’ ... I should have said ‘ what are the karmic implications for a person who, because they’re on anti anxiety medications, behaves in a more conscious state than that same person who is not on this prescribed medication. Surely it’s an unfair advantage when the mind is stilled ?

Here are some thoughts on the topic, and i want to be clear that i'm not looking to argue for either of the alternatives of medication/no medication. Also, any question regarding the effects of medicine and the proper ordination has to be consulted with the doctor prescribing the medicine first hand.
If by karma you mean sila/moral consequences of medication, i don't believe a buddhist perspective differs from a layperson perspective on moral. Generally speaking, drugs that affect our actions in a way that risk being harmful to ourselves or others are illegal, and are not prescribed by doctors (I realize this is debatable).
On the other hand, if you're wondering about any form of consequence from a buddhist perspective one could argue that the use of medication is a form of tanha - desire for pleasant feelings, alternatively a desire for eliminating negative feelings - and as such can be a hindrance to develop a buddhist understanding of dependent origination, anatta or anicca, for instance.
However, one may argue that medication really doesn't do any difference to the fact that vedanas/skandhas are continually transforming independent of the choice of medication or no medication. One may very well be able to develop mindfulness and concentration in the buddhist sense either way, provided that the medication (and eventual side effects) doesn't affect your concentration or perception.
The aspects mentioned above regards medication, and could also be weighted against the option to live with unmedicated anxiety or depression, and deal with these things according to the buddhist noble eightfold path. I would argue that this is a matter of severity of symptoms, or the intensity of emotions, and that a buddhist approach to life is easier done in cases of lighter forms of negative emotions or mental illness. Also, the karmic effects of actions based on more severe emotional states of anxiety, depression or illness may very well be more concerning compared to how one goes about ones life with a prescribed and carefully planned medication.

If my answer is too inappropriate for this forum, i don't mind having it deleted.

Eric thank you so much. You have clarified this for me. At times in my life I have been prescribed a mild anti anxiety drug, the effect of which, allows me to make better choices in my life ... I choose meditation over agitation, acceptance over confrontation and gardening rather than the internet. It has always bothered me that on this medication I had an advantage over someone with the same problem of anxiety as me, but with no access to medication . And I have wondered about the ‘fairness’ of karma when I clearly have the advantage. I am grateful for the time you’ve taken.

what are the karmic implications for a person who, because they’re on anti anxiety medications, behaves in a more conscious state than that same person who is not on this prescribed medication. Surely it’s an unfair advantage when the mind is stilled ?
So I'm not sure about "unfair" advantage.
I usually think of "fair" in the context of inter-personal competition -- like "unfair to use performance-enhancing drugs in a bike race" -- which this isn't.
If we have an opportunity to practice the Dhamma that's a result of good fortune, skill, other people's kindness, etc. I think we're all supposed to feel fortunate that the conditions are right to enable us -- starting with having been born human, and encountering the dhamma.
Medications have a couple of other problems, possibly, in my opinion:

one is that they may be temporary -- if you feel good because you're drugged then perhaps you won't when the drug wears off -- so it's not as good as developing some skill that's independent of a drug -- possibly though a drug is necessary, if without it you can't practice at all, perhaps not even survive
another is that it may be harmful -- have unwanted side-effect, possibly physical (harmful to health) -- again that might be worth it, though, which is something a doctor and patient should decide together

Hi Chris. Thank you for your time. This is what I take from your answer. Please correct me if I’m misunderstanding.
It is my good fortune that at times of prolonged stress in my life, I have been fortunate to have been prescribed a medication which has relieved me of the anxieties which, without, may have seen me behaving in an unconscious manner?

Your question is about the difference in the application of karma to two incarnations, one that is on mind control drugs, and the second, which is not on mind control drugs.
Karma (Sans.) (kamma {Pali}) is fruit of a cause, it's the effect of cause, it's the result of a cause. But not just this. Depending on the type of cause, the effect is. (Depending on the type of seed, the fruit is). Note the 'karma' connotes the relation of cause and effect, which its translation into english as 'action' may not be capture. Karma may also be taken to mean the coming to frution of action. The effect playing out because of a cause.
What do I mean by types? Karma (action) is also an act performed on any of the following three levels: body, speech and mind (This will suffice for this question). And these three types of action can be either out of craving, out of averssion, out of ignorance or out of wisdom. The first three are what can be referred as bad (cause, the seed is bad). The fourth can be called good (cause, the seed is good). The three are bad because action performed out of craving, aversion or ignorance is what fuels the samsaric flow- it is what fuels the becoming of mind-body phenomenon; it is thus respnsible for suffering/misery.
Say that the 'stock' of bad karma increases every time bad karma is performed. Similarly, say every time one acts not out of craving, aversion or hatred, but out of wisdom, one increases the 'stock' of good karma (virtue).
Every time a certain type of action (karma) is performed (by body [physical], speech [verbal] or mind [mental]), a seed has been planted. Based on the right conditions, this planted seed will bear fruits. That is, every time an action (karma) is performed, it will bear certain consequences (a conventional necessity) that will arise when conditions are met.
It is for this reason that even if a person stops creating more karma, one doesn't suddenly pass away into parinirvana. For the acccumulated stock of bad karma still remains; until its consequences arise and cease, the stock remains. Here, bad is what leads to attachment to sensations (craving for pleasant, craving for removal of unpleasant). Here, good is equanimous-awareness of mind-body phenomenon,  that is through wisdom, one does not cling to sensations, and therefore does not create more fuel for samsaric flow (does not plant more bad seeds).
Incarnation, is just a particular conventional 'name' given to the moment when the physical aggregate, aggregate of form (naam-rupa), chanages from one body to another.   For according to Buddha, we are 'birthing'(arising) and 'dying'(ceasing) every moment. At the last moment, just before death ('our death' {which happens at the 'end' of life}), strong karmic action comes to fruition and, as a consequence, effects the next moment in a major way. The next moment happens to be another 'birthing', but in this case, a incarnation (since the aggregate of form has changed drasctically).
Thus, karma applies itself to the two cases, as it applies in every other case. However the seed is  (good or bad), so the fruit will be (good or bad). Depending on conditions, some particular karma will bear fruit at the moment of death, whose next moment (that is the birth- and this 'birthing' moment in this case is incarnation) will depend on the quality of its cause.
The person on mind control drugs or not on mind control drugs have already planted the seeds - and the consequences will play out in both cases. Karma applies the same way in both cases; only that the consequences will be different, depending on the respective 'stock' of karma, and the moment of death (whose quality is itself dependent on the 'stock' of karma).
NOTE

I am using 'fuel' as a metaphorical concept to talk about sankharas [pali]. It can be translated as 'complex-mental formations' or 'mental dispositions'. Both tranlsations work in this context.
Be attentive about karma as causality and karma as action. Both transliterations are not entirely incorrect and neither are completely correct.

I will print this off and study what you said. You have given me clear explanation. Thank you