text:
How to balance an attitude of "effortless non-striving" with proper posture?
In Karma-Chagme's book, "A Spacious Path to Freedom", he emphasizes the importance of correct posture in directing the vital energies to the central channel.  In particular, he mentions (1) the tongue pressed against the pallet, (2) the teeth lightly touching, & (3) gaze directed 4 finger lengths beyond the tip of the nose.
I find that when I try to incorporate these three elements of posture into my practice I quickly store up tension in my jaw and throughout my face in general.  Additionally, keeping the gaze correctly placed is a full-time task that tends to excite the vital energies rather than relax the body.
How can I balance keeping a correct posture while maintaining a relaxed attitude of effortless non-striving?

All this is this/that causality.  Relinquish your need to have things just so.  You must rid yourself of all conditionality especially that which you have imposed on yourself.  Your posture is as such therefore it effects your meditative endeavor.  This is not so.  Your mind is telling you that you need a conditioned state of being in order to be just so.  This in itself is a question in need of a meditative response.  Go.  Go sit on your head.  Go.  Go kneel down in a closet.  Go. Go stand in a corner.  Meditate in all these places and in all these positions.  Delusion is delusion. Traverse your mind always.  Awareness  and meditation are the same.  Do not look for categories for they are like shelves.  You put things on them and they collect dust and are forgotten.  What have you done. Nothing but built more shelves in the mind upon which to collect useless contrivances .  No posture is correct or incorrect only a convenient contrivance.

It would be possible for me to give a reply in the Theravada perspective hoping it might add value.

(1) the tongue pressed against the pallet,
(2) the teeth lightly touching,

with clenched teeth and the tongue pressing on the palate

Vitakka Saṇṭhāna Sutta & Maha Saccaka Sutta
Maha Saccaka Sutta further mentions:

I thought thus, Aggi,vessana,
‘Suppose, with my teeth clenched and my tongue pressed against my palate, I beat down the mind with mind.’
So, Aggi,vessana, I with my teeth clenched and my tongue pressed against my palate, I beat down the
    mind with mind.
While I, Aggi,vessana, was subduing, restraining and beating down my mind, with teeth clenched and my tongue pressed against my palate, sweat poured from my armpits.
Just like as a strong man, Aggi,vessana holding a weaker man by the head or by the shoulders, were to restrain, subdue, attack him, even so, when I, Aggi,vessana, with my teeth clenched, and my tongue pressed against my palate, sweat poured from my armpits.
But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving.
But such painful feeling that arose in me did not invade my mind and remain.
I thought thus, Aggi,vessana,
‘Suppose I practise the breathingless meditation.’
    So I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths
    through my mouth and nose.
While I did so, there was a loud sound of winds coming out from my ear-holes, just like a loud sound
    of winds from a smith’s bellows.
Even so, Aggi,vessana, when I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths, there was a loud sound of
    winds coming out from my ear-holes.
But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my
    body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving.
But such painful feeling that arose in me did not invade my mind and remain.
I thought thus, Aggi,vessana,
‘Suppose I practise further the breathingless meditation.’
    So I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths through my mouth, nose and ears.
While I did so, violent winds cut through my head, just as if a strong man were splitting my head open
    with a sharp sword.
Even so, Aggi,vessana, when I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths, there was a loud sound of
    winds coming out from my ear-holes.
But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my
    body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving.
But such painful feeling that arose in me did not invade my mind and remain.
I thought thus, Aggi,vessana,
‘Suppose I practise further the breathingless meditation.’
    So I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths through my mouth, nose and ears.
    While I did so, there were violent pains in my head, just as if a strong man were tightening a
    tough leather strap around my head as a headband.
Even so, Aggi,vessana, when I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths, there were violent pains in my
    head.
But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my
    body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving.
But such painful feeling that arose in me did not invade my mind and remain.
I thought thus, Aggi,vessana,
‘Suppose I practise further the breathingless meditation.’ So I stopped
    my in-breaths and out-breaths through my mouth, nose and ears.
While I did so, violent winds carved up my belly,
    just as if a skilled butcher or his apprentice were to
    carve up an ox’s belly with a sharp butcher’s knife.
Even so, Aggi,vessana, when I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths, violent winds carved up my
    belly.
But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my
    body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving.
But such painful feeling that arose in me did not invade my mind and remain.
I thought thus, Aggi,vessana,
‘Suppose I practise further the breathingless meditation.’
So I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths through my mouth, nose and ears.
While I did so, there was a violent burning in my body, just as if two men were to seize a weaker man
    by both arms, might set him on fire and roast him over a pit of burning coal.
Even so, Aggi,vessana, when I stopped my in-breaths and out-breaths through my mouth, nose and
    ears, there was a violent burning in my body.
But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my
    body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving.
But such painful feeling that arose in me did not invade my mind and remain.

This is method is used to subdue, restrain, attack the (bad) mind with the (good) mind or beat down the mind with mind. In a Theravada perspective this should be used as a last resort to get rid of distracting or unwholesome thoughts.
In a personal perspective I have found when Piti, a blissful feeling which might lead to bodily vibration, gets excessive it might help to resort to the above for a short duration. The rolled tongue seam to make a short circuit which might seem to defuse the vibrations. Even so you should just be mindful or arising and passing even in this state to effortlessly move to Passaddhi. (Ekā,dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta and (Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta implies such transition of transcending Piti should be effortless or not forced.

(3) gaze directed 4 finger lengths beyond the tip of the nose

The rationale is to:

Prevent you from getting sleepy
Develop a basic level of concentration

Perhaps as you become a more accomplished meditator you can drop this.

Now, the eyes. Should we leave them open or should we close them? Many people believe that they must close their eyes that they cannot meditate with open eyes. If you are serious about what you are doing and have a sufficiently strong mind it is not difficult to practice with the eyes left open. Begin with the eyes open. Open them with the determination to gaze toward the tip of the nose. This is not at all impossible. It just takes a little effort to do so. Gaze at the tip of the nose so that the eyes will not get involved in other things. When we close our eyes we tend to be sleepy, so be careful about closing the eyes. Also, when the eyes are closed they become warm and dry. Mediating with the eyes open will help us to stay awake and will keep the eyes cool and comfortable. Further, this will help the mind to be concentrated; it will aid the development of samadhi. As samadhi (concentration) develops about half way, the eyes will close naturally by themselves. The eyelids will relax and drop shut on their own. There is nothing to worry about. The complete technique is to begin with the eyes open. Gaze at the nose tip until samadhi develops, then the eyes will close on their own. That takes care of the eyes. (46)
Practicing with the eyes open and gazing at the tip of the nose is automatically a noticeable level of concentration. If we establish all of the mind upon gazing at the tip of the nose, we will not see anything else. If we can do this, it will be a certain type of samadhi. We will profit from having this much concentration right from the start. Merely look at the nose without seeing anything else. If all of the mind, all of its interest, is set on looking at the nose, then nothing else will be seen. This samadhi is not insignificant. Therefore you ought to try to start with open eyes. (47)
Please observe that this is something anyone can do. We are intent upon gazing at the nose, at feeling the nose, and at the same time we feel the body breathing. Both can be done. It may seem that both are being done at exactly the same moment, but they are not. There is not anything unnatural or supernatural about it. Because of the mind’s great speed it is possible for the eyes to be gazing at the tip of the nose while being aware of breathing in and breathing out. You can see this for yourself. (48)

Source: Anapanasati: Mindfulness of Breathing: Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by Ven Buddhadasa Bhikkhu or similar passage is found in Anapanasati: Mindfulness of Breathing by the same author

I find that when I try to incorporate these three elements of posture into my practice I quickly store up tension in my jaw and throughout my face in general. Additionally, keeping the gaze correctly placed is a full-time task that tends to excite the vital energies rather than relax the body.

Above pratice perhaps can lead to stress and tension in the body, though vital energy will arise and mindfulness is established: "But although tireless energy was aroused in me, and undistracted mindfulness was established, my
body was overstrained and ill at ease because I was exhausted by the painful striving". You should be relaxed body and mind to get positive results in Buddhist meditation.

How can I balance keeping a correct posture while maintaining a relaxed attitude of effortless non-striving?

You have to relax both body and mind. Tensions manifest as a tightness around the head or heart. Be mindful of the arising and passing of sensations in these areas. Your posture should be comfortable, relaxed and balanced, i.e., straight body. Also whatever posture you are in should be effortless, i.e., you should not be trying too hard to be in the posture. More on this see my other posts: How does one do mindfulness of breathing with relaxation?, Having trouble meditating long sessions (Physical pain), Losing awareness, what to do, when you can't meditate?, How does one calm one's bodily fabrications?
Also you the book you mentioned is the only guide practicing without a teacher may be dangerous in case you miss interpret and instruction or do not know how to handle complications. So you can try joining a formal course or finding a teacher. Some helpful site: http://dhamma.org, http://internationalmeditationcentre.org, World Buddist Directory


text:
Is non-emptiness empty?
The term "non-emptiness" appears in the literature. For example from Chi-tsang (madhyamaka):

When the sutras speak of "the emptiness of visible form" this refers to its emptiness and lack of a true substantive nature; therefore it is called empty. It does not mean that conventional visible reality is empty (nothingness?). Since the substantive nature is an empty nothingness, therefore it is called empty. This is the real truth. The non-emptiness of conventional reality is called the worldly truth.

I just mean the opposite of emptiness.
Is non-emptiness empty, and in what way?

The substance is in the experience of seeing. The substance is in the experience of hearing.

Since Mahayana Agama contains parallels in the Pali Cannon I am answering using the Suttas in the Pali Canon which I am more familiar with.
Abiding or contemplating the 3 characteristics [impermanence (anicca),
suffering (dukkha) and not-self (anatta)] is called abiding in emptiness. [Cula Sunnata Sutta, Maha Sunnata Sutta] The opposite of the 3 characteristics is perversions (vipallasa) [what is impermanent is taken to be permanent; what is painful is taken to be pleasurable; what is not self is taken to be a (or the) self; and what is impure is taken to be pure]. [Vipallasa Sutta] Hence non empty might mean something is deluded, i.e., conceptual constructions are empty since they breakdown under further scrutiny. Attachment to concepts, review and throughts or being subjected to the perversion is non empty.
Also:

Verse 11:
They take untruth for truth; they take truth for untruth; such persons can never arrive at the truth, for they hold wrong views.
Verse 12:
They take truth for truth; they take untruth for untruth; such persons arrive at the truth, for they hold right views. At the end of the discourse, many people came to be established in Sotapatti Fruition.

Source: Dhammapada Verses 11 and 12 Sariputtatthera Vatthu
Contrary to the usage on perversion described above someone taking untrue and truth, wrong view as right view, something of low value as valuable can be considered empty in this context and some one taking truth as the truth, ... can be considered non empty in this context.

If non-emptiness means what it sounds like then it is indeed empty. All is empty within the reality of our individual experience. Everything that can be experienced is empty of self, complexity, and substance.

From a Madhyamika viewpoint, while emptiness [of true existence] is an existent, non-emptiness [of true existence] is a non-existent.

There is no fault in predicating a negation to a non-existent subject. For instance, you can say "Taking the subject 'a unicorn', it follows it is not white." Or "the horns of a rabbit lack this or that."
There is a fault in predicating a positive phenomena to a non-existent subject. This is because a valid knower can not realize a non-existent reason. For instance, you can not say "unicorns are white; rabbit's horns are made of ivory; non-emptiness is realized by way of this or that".

All in all, you can assert that non-emptiness is empty, because it amounts to associate a non-existent (i.e. non-emptiness) with a negative predicate (the lack of something).

There is a meditation that you can try to do to see this for yourself. If you are able to hold something in your mind like mental image of a teapot, or if you are able to chant a word or hold its spelling as a mental image in your mind, in this exercise it should have a meaning that you know and understand very well, you may be able to find your answer.
Focusing on mental images, even rotating them and manipulating them as your generated image becomes well defined and clearly visible in the mind with eyes-closed. Is just a trick to require your attention.
Same with chanting, there is actually a lot that goes into doing human language over and over again. Not just making the sounds but knowing what the mean and knowing that you have committed to repeating them, perhaps while also giving attention to your breathing, or sensations of energy occupying your physical senses.
There is a possible outcome in these types of exercising that is desired and rather shocking: your attention may or may not go away and then it will return causing the shock.
I believe the task continues to be held by some part of my brain controlling attention, but even though this is the same critical thinking type of consciousness it may eventually get automated out of your field of attention, like your heart controlling blood pressure or breathing.
Where we go during this moment, which may be as short a second or as long as minutes, I don't know.
But it is a place without time or thought, and you don't sense that you're there until you are abrubtly brought back to find this teapot or sound so well defined yet devoid of meaning. If you chanted, you will return to yourself making a sound for a word devoid of meaning and will be shocked by this.
Instantly your normal mode of consciousness will assign all meaning to the image or the sound, or the word. And this moment too, may be a fraction of a second or a few seconds, but it is a moment of bliss as you return from nothing to everything.
The bliss quick fades as your mind scrambles to reintegrate letters, sounds, words, meanings back into well defined and understood to be a certain thing.
I apologize for not know the vocabulary of these states, but I find they are the easier for me to access, and were once very easily repeatable. Also, leaving me with a certain buzz of invigoration and with a number of pleasing adjectives that seemed to indicate that I should move on from this.
I want you to see this because I believe it is a demonstration of the text you quoted, showing:

your departure from your senses and the arrow of time
your return from nothingness to your brain generating attention, only to find that it lacks any truth about your pre-departure definitions, as it hold no meaning and then instantly holds all meaning in a moment as bliss that guides you back to the construct of knowing meanings for things that we create, while understanding both nothing and everything one in the same.

Note: returning to find your self in the middle of vocalizing for me was a bit disturbing. However, I relied on it for a while just as it seemed to be easier to depart and more quickly. I started with oum, and eventually would play around with various words. Always the same effect, no matter how distinctly understood to be a discrete thing in our social construct. Holding images is just shocking to have a clear, vibrant contruct having your full attention, doubly so when you don't know what it is, and then triply so when you know it means everything. Same experience for chanting, but I eventually stopped chanting completely, as I felt like I didn't know what kind of fire I was playing with.

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
How worried should one be about the lay precepts?
I took the lay precepts after a short retreat. It was suggested that we say them however loudly we mean them.
I'm kinda worried about this. I may have over-estimated how much I meant them, and also, I may have said them too loudly anyway due to getting caught up in the moment.
This concerns me: what does it mean to break the precepts?

Precept is a promise or pledge or vow to abstain from certain actions. When you break a precept you break the promise, i.e., you pledged you will abstain but you have done what you promised not to do. You should retake the precept, i.e., promise or pledge or vow to abide by the rule of abstaining.
Also saying them loudly maybe you are psychologically more serious about preserving or abiding by them. Also as with any pledge or promise or vow you should mean it and have intention to keep it.
The abstainment in the precepts are towards actions that are unwholesome. So if you break them this also means you are doing something unwholesome hence accumulating bad Kamma. Precepts is a rule base or ritualistic approach from abstaining from what is unwholesome.

It means your probably making bad kamma. There is no magic in taking the precept vows.
We dont need to be affraid of making bad kamma when we can make right effort and determination to keep the precepts.

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


text:
Metta towards yourself - useless?
There is a part of Yuttadhammo's answer at
How to practice Metta without a Benefactor?
that has very confused me:

cultivate metta towards yourself (useless, but a good example)

Why is metta useless?
Are there any specific sources for this statement, or is this based on a determine school?

I think this needs qualification.
Metta towards oneself helps reduce self hate. So this is not completely useless. Also this is the basis of developing Metta to others. If you do not love yourself you cannot love others. [page 83 Knowing and Seeing - 4th Edition by Ven Pa-Auk Sayadaw]
You cannot attain Jhana if the person is oneself, hence as a means to achieve Jhana this is useless. [page 82 Knowing and Seeing - 4th Edition by Ven Pa-Auk Sayadaw]
Other objectives is as an antidote to hateful temperament towards others. On this perspective this is useless if you contemplate about only oneself and not of others, but useful if you contemplate about oneself and others. As you cannot love others if you do not love yourself hence oneself should be included.
Also this is used to break barriers [page 85 Knowing and Seeing - 4th Edition by Ven Pa-Auk Sayadaw] as perceiving someone dear, neutral and foe. In this perspective it is useful to asses the level of love to oneself vs loved one vs neutral people vs foes, but not useful if you contemplate only about oneself and not others, and only others and not oneself, and useful when you contemplate on oneself and others.

Householder Louis, interested,
as one stated in an answer, such a statement comes often from those actually having Nihilist Views. This monk, by such a statement, not only disregard the elders, but also the Buddha and his teachings.
Next to the fact that all traditional followers start practicing metta with having such for themselfs, a matter of right view, even the Karaṇīya Metta-Sutta starts with metta, goodwill toward oneself.

Karaṇīyam'atthakusalena, yaŋ taŋ santaŋ padaŋ abhisamecca:
He who is skillful in his welfare,
  and wishes to attain that state of Peace should act thus:...

So the drive is actually metta toward oneself. One doesn't have goodwill toward himself is never able to practice toward and on the path.
It's good not to stick much to "western/modern" ideas, since for the most they come from a Nihilist background, (previously) follower of other sects.
Note that many are disciples of this modern sect leaders here and reflect similar Nihilist and Jain-Uposatha approaches.
For mor an the topic see previous answer on: How to view people with metta and karuna?
Also Buddhadasa is one of this modern Sect leader, with same approaches like the young Canadian monk:
Does this statement by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu conflict with traditional mettā meditation?

Sakko ujū ca sūjū ca (being honest, very honest: a very prerequisite, not only for metta practice with conductive effects)
The Buddhas words on one occation: "Do you really love yourself? Are you going to content yourself simply with the food, clothing, shelter, and medicine of lay life even though this means staying in the cycle of birth, aging, illness, and death? Or would you really like to put an end to suffering?" (See: "Selves & Not-self", by Ven. Thanissaro on more about general instances on the roots here)

Metta toward what is dear and near, starting by really having goodwill toward one self, is right effort, is the foundation, when added samvega, for the path and the only way not developing something harmful for oneself and others, even when the four noble truth are not developed. Other kinds of metta will be hypocritical, void of virtue, void of path toward Brahma-Vihara, access and path. Even King and Queen realiced that by themselves:

...“That's the way it is, great king! That's the way it is! Those who engage in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct are not dear to themselves. Even though they may say, 'We are dear to ourselves,' still they aren't dear to themselves. Why is that? Of their own accord, they act toward themselves as an enemy would act toward an enemy; thus they aren't dear to themselves. But those who engage in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct are dear to themselves. Even though they may say, 'We aren't dear to ourselves,' still they are dear to themselves. Why is that? Of their own accord, they act toward themselves as a dear one would act toward a dear one; thus they are dear to themselves.”
That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-Gone, the Teacher, said further:
If you hold yourself dear
  then don't fetter yourself
          with evil,
  for happiness isn't easily gained
      by one who commits
      a wrong-doing.
When seized by the End-maker
      as you abandon the human state,
  what's truly your own?
  What do you take along when you go?
  What follows behind you
      like a shadow
      that never leaves?
Both the merit & evil
      that you as a mortal
      perform here:
  that's      what's truly your own,
          what you take along when you go;
  that's      what follows behind you
      like a shadow
      that never leaves.
So do what is admirable,
  as an accumulation
      for the future life.
  Deeds of merit are the support for beings
      when they arise
      in the other world.
Piya Sutta

One rejecting that he is worthy to have goodwill with himselves, would not fear to harm himself and break his virtue. Those who act like fools often say "I accept hell for the well-fare of (some) other" or act "Jesus-like" and in foolish hero-ways.

Searching all directions
  with your awareness,
  you find no one dearer
      than yourself.
  In the same way, others
  are thickly dear to themselves.
  So you shouldn't hurt others
      if you love yourself.
Rājan Sutta

The Buddha himself started his journey being dear to himself and all real warriors would follow in this way. A nice ballad has been written by one of them, reflecting the way "ex-bodhisattas" start to walk the path:

The Ballad of Liberation from the Khandhas
...Once there was a man who loved himself
  and feared distress. He wanted happiness
  beyond the reach of danger, so he wandered
  endlessly. Wherever people said
  that happiness was found, he longed to go,
  but wandering took a long, long time.
  He was the sort of man who loved himself
  and really dreaded death. He truly wanted
  release from aging & mortality.
  Then one day he came to know the truth,
  abandoning the cause of suffering &
  compounded things. He found a cave of wonders,
  of endless happiness, i.e., the body.

An at least, every developing of metta, Brahma-Viharas, in the good old tradition of the noble ones starts with oneself:

Ahaṃ sukhito homi
  May I be happy.
Niddukkho homi
  May I be free from stress & pain.
Avero homi
  May I be free from animosity.
Abyāpajjho homi
  May I be free from oppression.
Anīgho homi
  May I be free from trouble.
Sukhī attānaṃ pariharāmi
  May I look after myself with ease.
(METTĀ — GOOD WILL)
  Sabbe sattā sukhitā hontu.
  May all living beings be happy...

As long as one does not understand that what ever, good or bad, one does for oneself and beyond, no developing of right view and path can be expected. It's because beings do either not hold them dear or don't know the way to long lasting happiness, harming themselves in many, even perverse ways, that they being do not even master the way toward the Brahmas, or any Jhana, path or fruit.
What does no like to give and share not even made his at first place?
(Note that this gift of Dhamma is not dedicated for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to make merits toward release from this wheel)

On the contrary, how can you ever send good wishes to other person if you don't have same wishes for yourself. This is sheer hypocrisy. It sound like some kind of Buddhist impersonalization and nihilism.
JUst do real metta with concentration and determination and these kind of statements won't bother you.

SN 3.8

Then the king went down from the palace and visited the Blessed One [and told him the whole story.] And the Blessed One, understanding, thereupon uttered this verse:

Though in thought we range throughout the world,
    We'll nowhere find a thing more dear than self.
    So, since others hold the self so dear,
    He who loves himself should injure none.

I guess that what "(useless, but a good example)" might have meant is that in general people already feel metta towards themselves (even if they don't always know what's good for them):
It is because they already feel metta towards themselves, that is why the Visuddhimagga recommends it as a first stage -- e.g. to remember what metta feels like, before transferring that to other people who are less easy -- that's what calling it "a good example" might have meant.
It's not saying "metta is useless", but I think it is saying that "cultivating metta towards yourself" is preliminary and not the purpose of the exercise.
Are there any specific sources for this statement, or is this based on a determine school?
The advice to start with oneself as a subject comes fro the Visuddhimagga -- which asks rhetorically whether the practice is justified by the scripture (as if self-regard might seem like a questionable practice), and which references the sutta I quoted above as its justification for the practice.
I've also seen this quote ...

These four attitudes are said to be excellent or sublime because they are the right or ideal way of conduct towards living beings (sattesu samma patipatti). They provide, in fact, the answer to all situations arising from social contact. They are the great removers of tension, the great peace-makers in social conflict, and the great healers of wounds suffered in the struggle of existence. They level social barriers, build harmonious communities, awaken slumbering magnanimity long forgotten, revive joy and hope long abandoned, and promote human brotherhood against the forces of egotism.

... which might imply that "metta" is intended primarily toward "living beings" (i.e. not only "oneself"), and also in "social situations", and perhaps specifically the opposite of "egotism".


text:
What are the occasions did Panchasika or Pansilu meet the Buddha
The veena in Buddhist stories and Is disharmony allowed in Buddhism? mention that Panchasika or Pansilu had couple of interactions with the Buddha.
Can someone give where is this mentioned in citing the:

basket, division and subdivisions this appear in
the title of the text and numbering (E.g. if it is a Sutta the Sutta Name and Numbering)
quotation from the part of the text where the interaction is described within the cited reference

This is in Sakka-pañha Sutta in DN 21.

Then said Sakka, the king of the gods, to Five-crest the Gandhabba—‘Difficult of approach, dear Five-crest, are Tathāgatas, to one like me, when they are rapt in the bliss of meditation, and for that purpose abiding in solitude. But if you were first to gain over the Exalted One [by your music] then might I afterwards come up and visit him, the Arahant, the Buddha supreme.’
‘So be it and good luck to you!’ consented Five-crest, and taking his lyre he went to the Indra-Sal tree-cave. On coming there he thought—‘Thus far will the Exalted One be neither too far from me nor too near to me, and he will hear my voice.’ And he stood on one side, and let his lyre be heard and recited these verses concerning the Awakened One and the Truth, the Arahants and Love...
...
When Five-crest had finished the Exalted One said to him—‘The sound of your strings, Five-crest, so harmonizes with that of your song, and the sound of your voice with that of the strings, that your lyre does not too much colour your song, nor your song too much colour your play. Where, Five-crest, did you learn these verses concerning the Awakened One and the Truth, the Arahants, and Love?’

Here is the Sinhalese version.
http://pitaka.lk/16171/cs,aps

Many thanks. This is what I was looking for. I edited in bit more where the Buddha praises Pansilu (Five-crest).


text:
Conditions to break a precept
In the commentary it's said, in order to lie, all four conditions must be met:

An untrue statement
Intention to deceive
Effort is made
Other deceived by what is said

But according to original Vinaya, AFAIK, whether one is deceived or not is irrelevant. I think that is because the intention to lie arises from the doer not the perceiver. But if last condition is not met i.e. a being is not dead, how can we say someone is killing?

According to this description of the vinaya, on page 74+ the conditions for the offence "intentionally deprive a human being of life" includes the result as a necessary condition:

This rule against intentionally causing the death of a human being is best
  understood in terms of five factors, all of which must be present for there to be
  the full offense.

Object: a human being, which according to the Vibhaºga includes human
  fetuses as well, counting from the time consciousness first arises in the
  womb immediately after conception up to the time of death.
Intention: knowingly, consciously, deliberately, and purposefully wanting
  to cause that person’s death. “Knowingly” also includes the factor of—
Perception: perceiving the person as a living being.
Effort: whatever one does with the purpose of causing that person to die.
Result: The life-faculty of the person is cut as the result of one’s act.

On page 245 the conditions for telling a lie involves only two factors:

A deliberate lie is a statement or gesture made with the aim of
  misrepresenting the truth to someone else. The K/Commentary, summarizing
  the long “wheels” in the Vibhaºga, states that a violation of this rule requires
  two factors:

Intention: the aim to misrepresent the truth; and
Effort: the effort to make another individual know whatever one wants to
  communicate based on that aim.

Page 246 says,

Result is not a factor under this rule. Thus whether anyone understands the
  lie or is deceived by it is irrelevant to the offense.

The first precept is clear but is the latter one (result is not a factor) based on Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation only or original Vinaya? Can anyone provide a reference?

There's another definition here: it doesn't mention result (someone's being deceived) as a condition (whereas the result, i.e. someone dying, is mentioned here).

But do we know whose translation is that? I read somewhere it's said in the original Vinaya it doesn't talk about the last factor. Need someone to clarify this.

There's an "about this page" in the right-hand margin: that page was translated from Burmese to French by Monk Dhamma Sāmi.

A living being must die as the last factor is mentioned by Buddha in Vinaya, I think. But not sure about fourth precept.

On P.245, 2. Effort: the effort to make another individual know whatever one wants to communicate based on that aim. But on P.246 it says "result is not a factor. Thus whether anyone understands the lie or is deceived by it is irrelevant to the offense." Do they contradict each other, why?

The way you memorized the 4th condition is wrong.
The four conditions:

The statement must be untrue.
There must be an intention to deceive.
An effort must be made to deceive.
The other person must know the meaning of what is expressed(whether he is deceived or not).

So it's not a lie if you say something false to your dog.

Where are those four conditions defined?

Updated with a link

I was wondering whether those conditions are listed in the canon somewhere: in a sutta? Or a commentary or later analysis?

I would look in the commentary. Suttas usually don't go into detail.

I wonder whether we need to go into more detail just because it's from commentary. Five precepts I think are more about our relationship with other human being rather than other being. How do we exactly know whether others know the meaning of what is expressed or not? Regarding dog, some dogs or pets can be quite smart. Some people experience accident the result is unable to talk, no one knows whether that person can understand or not. Is that not lying if one tells something false to them?

In order to steal, article must be taken according to commentary. But not everything can be physically taken yet not given and cause harm to others, for example, illegal downloading, copy other pharmacist's formula, etc.. I'm wondering if Buddha had a reason why he kept, in this case, precepts to be universal. Because once we understand/interpret it personally it becomes difficult to apply universally. Not that I'm against commentaries, though.

Commentaries are very useful in understanding what the Suttas mean when they are not clear. They are inline with the teachings of the Buddha and praised by the wise(Kalama sutta). The dog was given as an example for a being who can't know the meaning of the false statement. You can also substitute a human who doesn't speak your language.
Illegal downloading breaks the law. But it doesn't break the precept. There's a separate question for that topic.

That is indeed a separate topic but I think it will remain an argument. The purpose of precept particularly five precepts is to prevent harm and can't be separated from social structures of Buddha Gautama era or our era. In that activity such as copying other pharmacist's formula or illegal downloading is obviously taking something that is not given And causing harm to others. It's against the spirit of Buddhist precept in my opinion. Let's back to topic.

But this is about the fourth precept. Not the 2nd. The answer accepted in the link I gave addresses your views. I suggest you should post there, if you wish further discussion on the topic of copyrights.


text:
Lord Buddha's Noble values
We all know the famous nine values of Lord Buddha that we often recite when worshiping Lord Buddha. But i've heard the extended versions of those 9 values. Can someone point me a source to learn them?

The qualities of the Buddha Dhamma and Sangha is found in the Dhajagga Sutta, Velu,dvāreyya Sutta this might be a good starting point to study the qualities. Also Buddhânussati by Piya Tan has more discussion including that of the the Mahayana parallels. The 10 Characteristics discussed in the Wikipedia article Buddhahood seas to be the Mahayana point of view. A more comprehensive book written in the subject is Suwisi Maha Gunaya by Rerukane Chandawimala Thero would be a the best starting point for a for some one who knows Sinhala. A similar book perhap not this extensive in English would be Manual of Excellent Man: Uttamapurisa Dipani by Ledi Sayadaw

Thank you Suminda, i wanted this to do an article on my blog and use for my knowledge as well. I share that good karma with you. Namo Buddhaya!

Nice to know it was helpful.

Google returns many results (with explanations, for example this one or this one), if you search for buddha nine characteristics (or 'qualities' or 'virtues'), rather than nine 'values'.
Or Wikipedia mentions 10 characteristics.

Thank you chris, i wanted this to do an article on my blog and use for my knowledge as well. I share that good karma with you. Namo Buddhaya!


text:
How can the idea of reincarnation be true if all the information of who we are is already destroyed
Because our consciousness can only persist in our brain. When the brain is destroyed, our consciousness is destroyed as well. We become no one. How can the idea of reincarnation be true if all the information of who we are is already destroyed. We are just new when we are born and we can't pass the consciousness or memory to any new born baby.

I downvoted because I fail to take your statement as a question. Maybe you could add an actual question mark somewhere.

Could you state (what you think is) the nature of the relationship between brain and consciousness? Are they causally related according to you? If so, what type of cause would the brain be? Or are they related by way of being the same entity?

Have a look at following link, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/truth_of_rebirth.html

@gaj If you think that link answers the question, then please post it as an answer (not as a comment) and quote whichever piece of it is most relevant to the question.

In Buddhism, 'consciousness' ('vinnana') is sense awareness. It is not 'memory'. Also, consciousness does not carry or store mental impurities, such as ignorance & craving. It is the 'citta' (mind-heart) that stores mental impurities. This is why the state of enlightenment is called 'citta vimutti' or 'liberation of mind' rather than 'vinnana vimutti' or 'liberation of consciousness'. When the Buddha declared his liberation, he said: "the citta has entered into that state which cannot be conditioned by craving again". Therefore, I am not sure of the focus on consciousness being reincarnated.

if you take it literally, Buddhism does not teach "reincarnation" because to actually reincarnate, there has to be something permanent like a soul to transmigrate from one life to another.  Consciousness is not permanent.  It raises and falls all the time.    Now, to understand "reforming" in Buddhism, you need to understand "Satanam/being".  it is  another term as difficult as nirvana because it does not have sign or dimension or anything/.. Buddha said "because ignorance as barrier, desires as bindings, satanam continues to moves in samsara".  In my own words, there is a thing outside of time and dimension that latches on consciousness and takes it as self, me, mine..  as long as ignorant and desires persist, satanam will latch on another consciousness when this one connected to your brain ceases to work.   As long as that feeling we all have that we call "I, me, my" exist, when this body is broken, the "I, me, my" will instantly latch into other body and call that body (5skandhas) as ours.  Do not take satanam or "being" to be the same as permanent soul.   here is link to look up being or satanam

The Vajira Sutta (SN 5.10) provides more information about the meaning of 'satta'.

Because our consciousness can only persist in our brain. When the brain is destroyed, our consciousness is destroyed as well.

Not necessarily but the brain helps as a more convenient store, hence brain damage can hinder memory. Also why you cannot remember of past lives is that you now have a new brain.
Jhana meditators can recall past lives hence this is not necessarily true as sense impressions have persisted. 5 Hindrances is one case of we cannot remember and as meditation overcomes this you can remember better. [(Nīvarana) Sangarava Sutta]
As for conciseness it arises and passes. At death it passes in one body and arise in another. This process don't end at death or with brain damage or death.

How can the idea of reincarnation be true if all the information of who we are is already destroyed. We are just new when we are born and we can't pass the consciousness or memory to any new born baby.

Sense impressions are tied to the mental body while conceptual impressions are tied to the physical body. So if you get brain damaged you cannot think and perhaps learn new concepts but past impressions stay, [Mahā,nidāna Sutta] these sense impressions do persist beyond death as part of the Bhavanga Citta. Recallability depends on the level of hindrances. [(Nīvarana) Sangarava Sutta] The mental impressions that remain are part of the mind (Nama) which does not die at death but passes away in one body and arise in another. For further understanding perhaps you can study the Buddhist rebirth process.

I think the main problem is that you've already claimed to have understood consciousness.  I think that you should reconsider your claims about consciousness before attempting to tie it in with the concept of rebirth.
As far as I'm aware, the process of becoming a realized individual in Buddhism involves understanding the nature of something such as consciousness.
Overall, my point is that the information you're seeking is something that only a fairly realized individual can convey to you.  If you're really intent on finding out about that, I'd suggest finding a good teacher and learning from that individual.

The Pali Buddhist scriptures contain a number of statements about consciousness that may help decide if consciousness is related to reincarnation, including the following:

It cognizes, it cognizes': Thus, friend, it is said to be
'consciousness.' And what does it cognize? It cognizes 'pleasant.' It
cognizes 'painful.' It cognizes 'neither painful nor pleasant.' 'It
cognizes, it cognizes': Thus it is said to be 'consciousness.' MN 43
And what is consciousness? These six are classes of consciousness:
eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness,
tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness.
This is called consciousness. SN 12.2
Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises...Dependent on ear
& sounds, ear-consciousness arises...Dependent on nose & aromas,
nose-consciousness arises...Dependent on tongue & flavors,
tongue-consciousness arises...Dependent on body & tactile sensations,
body-consciousness arises...Dependent on intellect & ideas,
intellect-consciousness arises. MN 18
It's good, monks, that you understand the Dhamma taught by me in this
way, for in many ways I have said of dependently co-arisen
consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is no
coming-into-play of consciousness. Consciousness, monks, is
classified simply by the requisite condition in dependence on which
it arises. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the eye & forms
is classified simply as eye-consciousness...etc' MN 38
Were someone to say, 'I will describe a coming, a going, a passing
away, an arising, a growth, an increase or a proliferation of
consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from
fabrications,' that would be impossible. SN 22.53
Very well then, Kotthita my friend, I will give you an analogy; for
there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that
intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said.
It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one
another. In the same way, from mentality-&-materiality as a requisite
condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite
condition comes mentality-&-materiality. SN 12.67
It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to
hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the
mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the
four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three,
four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or
more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by
day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. SN 12.61
"Now what do you think of this, O monks? Is consciousness permanent
or impermanent?" "Impermanent, O Lord." SN 22.59

Consciousness does not reside in brain. Otherwise re-incarnation of any form is not possible. Consciousness is the holding structure without which body and mind does not function and therefore cease to exist. This holding structure too contains part of memory and therefore memories live for sometime. But even this structure is not a permanent and disjoint phenomenon. It is like a wave which arises and perishes in ocean. You can call ocean of consciousness as super-consciousness from where individual consciousness arise as a wave and then dissolves. But the wave does not dissolve completely. Some part of wave is preserved and some part is picked up from ocean. Therefore suffering belongs to all of mankind not individual. Also mankind needs to evolve to lower suffering of individual. That is the reason Buddha or any enlightened person never talks about it. It is pretty much a complex subject. I have tried to give a very simplified version.


text:
Should I practice Anapana after 10 day Vipassana course?
I have completed 10-days Vipassana course and I would like to keep on practicing back home. Goenkaji's discourse tells us to practice Vipassana 1 hour each morning and evening every day.Is there a need to practice Anapana along with Vipassana if so how often?

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have a Guide and a Resource tab for new users that you might like.

Anapana in the context of the one hour sessions should be practiced if your mind not not calm, i.e., :

Lot of distracting thoughts
You are emotional
Hindrances have come up
etc.

It is always good to do about 5 to 15 minutes to start with, to calm your mind.

You should practice Anapana ANY time of the day when you feel your attention needs to focus Here and Now, never forgetting Anicca, Anicca, Anicca.
When you take the practice to daily live, including motion, while standing, eating, etc. After a while you will be able to do body scans in-motion too.
It will be easy when you don't follow your stories (thoughts), simply gently go back to the sensations. Every time start again. The gaps will become shorter,
you are bound to be successful!


text:
four types of beings (reference searched)
I remember hearing somewhere about 4 types of beings in relation with the satipatthana sutta and that for each group one of the satipatthanas is most important/suitable to practice. Can somebody please give me a reference from the suttas or commentaries?

affective, slow temperament - body
intellectual, fast temperament - mental contents
affective, fast temperament - sensations
intellectual speculation, slow temperament - mind

Sourced from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satipatthana_Sutta
This is not found in the Suttas but in the commentaries. This is taken from Papañcasudani


text:
How do I prevent non-buddhists from going against fourth precept?
As we know fourth precept is the one precept that the Bodhisatta has never said to have broken since he started cultivating Paramita.
When I need to prevent a Buddhist person form lying, I state the above statement. And that is the reason that I was also prevented by telling lies.
But if we need to prevent a non-Buddhist person from telling lies or  going against fourth precept, how can we do. How can we motivate him/her not to lie?

Hello Tharindu and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have a Guide and a Resource tab for new users that you might like.

There are very many non-buddist people (some billions of people) so you can not watch everyone and police them against breaking a precept.
But you can forget about anyone else and watch yourself instead. That way you'll use your time wisely.
If you go judging other people you'll create pride  ( I am superior to the others because I can do this and that)
you will create anger and aversion because someone is not obeying a rule.
You have to watch yourself, forget about watching others.

Simply ask him whether he likes to be deceived and cheated if some one else did it to him. If someone cannot be trusted would you act on what he says. How comfortable would he be to have to put up or deal with a person who is trying to deceived him. Lies cannot always be kept under wrap and if it surfaces what might happen. This would be a better way to a Buddhist also.

But if we need to prevent a non-Buddhist person from telling lies or going against fourth precept, how can we do. How can we motivate him/her not to lie?
I think the whole point in Buddhism is, that you can't change someone else. You can only change yourself. This is dukkha, people are doing bad things even though you're trying to stop them. Keep that in mind.
You could try to make a philosophical argument telling the truth (e.g. Immanuel Kant).

Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.

Which means more or less 'One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself'

Kant asserted that lying, or deception of any kind, would be forbidden under any interpretation and in any circumstance. In Grounding, Kant gives the example of a person who seeks to borrow money without intending to pay it back. This is a contradiction because if it were a universal action, no person would lend money anymore as he knows that he will never be paid back. The maxim of this action, says Kant, results in a contradiction in conceivability (and thus contradicts perfect duty). With lying, it would logically contradict the reliability of language. If it were universally acceptable to lie, then no one would believe anyone and all truths would be assumed to be lies. The right to deceive could also not be claimed because it would deny the status of the person deceived as an end in itself. The theft would be incompatible with a possible kingdom of ends. Therefore, Kant denied the right to lie or deceive for any reason, regardless of context or anticipated consequences.

If it helps, good, if not: well, this is how it is.

Meditation is not just about sitting in a certain postures, concentration etc etc. It is about understanding order of things. Meditation implies inwardness i.e. focus on yourself not on others. You yourself are not perfect. How can you ask others to be perfect or follow a path or a percept? Become perfect if not then at least disciplined and people will follow you.

People confuse meditation with meditation technique. Sure Buddha recommended many techniques. Many disciples of Buddha created their very own techniques. But the key to Meditation is understanding Nature and its order. If one identifies himself as Buddhist and others as non-Buddhist its a pride, a sense of superiority. There are only two kinds of people on this Earth - conscious and unconscious. If you are conscious, unconscious people will follow you and automatically all percepts of Buddha. Ranting against non-Buddhist will not help.


text:
Is forgiving someone an issue in Buddhism and what does it mean?
In most religions forgiving each other or by God is very common but is in Buddhism forgiving something wiht any value? If so what does it really mean, what does it effect and how is it done?

Hatred is, indeed, never appeased by hatred in this world. It is appeased only by loving-kindness. This is an ancient law.

Source: Dhammapada Verse 5 Kalayakkhini Vatthu
In Buddhism forgiveness is between one another than by an external agency. Having said this no external agency is behind Karma. It is only your tainted or pure mind. And once done the results follow.

All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the hoofprint of the ox that draws the cart.

Source: Dhammapada Verse 1 Cakkhupalatthera Vatthu
... similarly for good deeds good results follow ...

All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind, happiness (sukha) follows him like a shadow that never leaves him.

Source: Dhammapada Verse 2 Matthakundali Vatthu
Following highlights no external agency can affect Karma than the mind itself:

This is explained in the Pathama Mahanama Sutta, by the simile of an earthern pot filled partly with gravels and stones and partly with fat and butter. By throwing this pot into water and smashing it with a stick, it will be seen that gravels and stones quickly sink to the bottom while fat and butter rise to the surface of the water. Likewise, when a person who has established himself in the five wholesome dhammas of faith, conduct, learning, charity and insight dies, his body remains to get decomposed but his extremely purified mental continuum continues in higher states of existence as birth-linking consciousness, patisandhi citta.
In the concluding suttas are expositions on the Middle Path, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Path of Eight Constituents.

Source: Guide to Tipitaka - 6. Samyutta Nikaya by Professor Ko Lay

A purpose of Buddism is to be without 'defilements' -- Wikipedia introduces Kleshas (Buddhism) as,

Kleshas (Sanskrit: kleśa; Pali: kilesa; Standard Tibetan: nyon mongs), in Buddhism, are mental states that cloud the mind and manifest in unwholesome actions. Kleshas include states of mind such as anxiety, fear, anger, jealousy, desire, depression, etc. Contemporary translators use a variety of English words to translate the term kleshas, such as: afflictions, defilements, destructive emotions, disturbing emotions, negative emotions, mind poisons, etc.

I would add verse 3 and 4 of the Dhammapada to the verses which Suminda's answer already quoted:

"He abused me, he ill-treated me, he got the better of me, he stole my belongings;"... the enmity of those harbouring such thoughts cannot be appeased.

"He abused me, he ill-treated me, he got the better of me, he stole my belongings;"... the enmity of those not harbouring such thoughts can be appeased.

If you feel hurt by someone and will not "forgive" them, then you would retain feeling hurt and enmity.

So perhaps you should take it for granted that "not harbouring such thoughts" is desireable.
One more thing is that, further to the above, I think it's difficult to hurt an enlightened person.
For example they might have a different view about what "my belongings" are, what "me" is, whether you can "get the better of me", and so on.
So assuming that you will forgive people, perhaps the process of forgiveness (or "how it is done", as you asked) might be informative (enlightening): for example, you might learn what kind of clinging, clinging to what, allowed you to feel hurt in the first place; or you might learn further compassion for whoever was in a situation where they hurt you.

Lastly, some people say that the Vinaya isn't interesting to (doesn't apply to) lay people, but I think it's interesting because it details rules about how to live together in society.
I guess that according to the Vinaya, "forgiveness" isn't entirely one-sided i.e. the "injured" person isn't the only one who participates in the forgiveness process ... for example the wrong-doer too is also supposed to confess what they did wrong; and a wrong-doer who won't cooperate might be banished.

P.S., sometimes people want to know how reliable a statement is.

I think the first statement above (which quotes the Dhammapada) is fairly reliable.
The second (that you might learn something from the process of forgiving someone, i.e. learn what you did that allowed you to feel hurt in the first place) is my opinion.
The third (about forgiveness and confession within the Vinaya) is not reliable, and is based on my superficial reading of the rules and not based on actual experience.

You focused on somenone who is hurt but what in case if you self are the cause of problems.


text:
Lack of Grasping of the Object of Meditation
I asked a question previously about the object of meditation being faint. Perhaps I'd like to reformulate my question more specifically as I still encounter these kinds of problems, and I will provide the sensations I experience.
When trying to meditate on the breath at the aperture of the nostrils, the breath is not present and cannot be felt, no matter how much I try to arouse attention. It could only be slightly felt at the level of the abdomen. When I try to visualize any object, this object is usually extremely faint and transparent almost. I have the impression my mental agitation is feeble, but also that the clarity of my mind is very dull.
I'm wondering what could be the causes of this. Is it a too weak concentration? Too weak mindfulness? Is it a kind of lethargy and dullness?
How can I remedy to this? Of the possible solutions I've read about I understand arousing attention (which I have difficulty doing), applying certain antidotes as the perception of light or enlivening the mind, or perhaps some other solution I don't know about. Perhaps changing the object? I'm actually unsure of any of these solutions.
Greatest thanks.

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have a Guide and a Resource tab for new users that you might find useful.

Meditation is non-doing.  However, you must prepare and devote time and space to this "non-doing."  That preparation is infact an act of doing in an effort to partake in an act of non-doing.  What is in the process of being done has a goal.  The goal is to partake in an endeavor of what is not being done.  Meditation by it's very nature creates a paradox for the participant.  The answer is to relinquish the paradox.  How does one do this ?  The act, or non-act if you will, must at first be recognizable.  Then there is a calling to fuse the act and the participant into one state of beingness. How does one transmute?  If you were to focus on the 5 strengths that might be of some use.  Conviction, persistence,mindfulness, concentration and discernment can create a looping effect in the mind whereby the one meditating can constantly reflect on how each strength effects not only the current state of mind but also the relation of the 5 strengths themselves.   The distraction of the mind becomes the essence of the meditation.  In order to break through the thraldom of the senses and the inertia of conceptualized thought patterns the mind needs to be distracted.  To have a goal in meditating is not the answer.  To be able to transmute the energy of who and what is currently proclivitating in and around us into what is our true nature is meditation.  I hope this helps.

This is often an issue: you attempt to focus, but instead feel a sense of dullness, flatness, "spaced out" ... what have you. Increasing the effort to focus usually increases dissatisfaction with the results. In truth, sensations come and go, some are intense, some are dull. It may help to place the emphasis on being "receptive" over being "concentrated". After all, there is no point in focusing on a sensation that may not even be there.
Instead of saying to yourself "I must focus on sensation" try "I will be receptive to sensation".
Instead of "I must concentrate on my breath" try "I will follow the breath".
Some practices do place an emphasis on focused and willfull concentration, but it is counter productive to force it if you are not at that stage.

Mental dullness goes hand in hand with drowsiness. The drowsiness do not have to be strong but there will be mild drowsiness. If this is the case use the techniques in Pacala Sutta to eradicate them.
The way to increase concentration is to do sustained pratice of Anapana with continuously smaller areas in which you look for sensations:

triangular area from top of the nose to the base of the nose and upper lip
triangular areas from tip to the base of the nose and upper lip
base of the nose and upper lip
a spot in the centre of the upper lip

Even if you do not feel anything it does not matter as long as you are continuously trying to and your attention is in the area. The success criteria is not that you feel anything but there is sustained and continuous effort to feel sensation in this area. If you do not feel anything do not get agitated or defeated about this or any trace of anger because you do not feel it. Also there should be no craving for the object but mear effort to still your thinking and pondering mind and stay focused by redirecting your mind to the chosen object where by stilling your verbal fabrications whilst seeing the arising and passing of phenomena clearly at the concentration point.
One you feel the sensation, you should scrutinise the sensation to see smallest elements which make it. At some point you will see they are smaller clusters of sensation and finally the arising and passing of these sensations.
Also see my aswer to: Faintness of Object of Meditation

"I asked a question previously about the object of meditation being faint. [...] When trying to meditate on the breath at the aperture of the nostrils, the breath is not present and cannot be felt"
If your breath really was not present, you would be dead by now, wouldn't you?
It's important to understand that it's not the breath which is faint, it's the faculty of mindfulness that is. The breath is always there, always in a observable state.

"And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" [...]
"Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.' Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.' -- MN 10

So if you really can't find your breath, there is nothing wrong about it. Meditation is all about observing and letting go. Just know 'short breath' or 'subtle breath' or 'no breath'. Don't search the breath, try to be clear and present no matter what.
"no matter how much I try to arouse attention"
You named this question Lack of Grasping of the Object of Meditation. I actually think this is the problem. You're trying to grasp the object. Don't grasp. The goal is letting go which is the opposite of grasping. Concentration comes from awareness, awareness comes from surrendering to the present moment.
Understanding Right Effort
Right Effort is key for directing your mind towards the meditation object. Changing your meditation object will not help you, since both problem and solution are lying within your own mind.
Right Effort is trying without trying. If it feels like effort, it's not right effort. If it feels like no effort at all, it's still not right effort. It's about keeping the balance between dullness and restlessness, the middle way.
Also, concentration is often wrongly understood as constant applying of effort, but it's more about clarity and awareness of mind than that.
I suggest you to listen to this explanation of Right Effort by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

"Now what do you think, Sona. Before, when you were a house-dweller, were you skilled at playing the vina?" "Yes, lord."
"And what do you think: when the strings of your vina were too taut, was your vina in tune & playable?" "No, lord."
"And what do you think: when the strings of your vina were too loose, was your vina in tune & playable?" "No, lord."
"And what do you think: when the strings of your vina were neither too taut nor too loose, but tuned (lit: 'established') to be right on pitch, was your vina in tune & playable?" "Yes, lord."
"In the same way, Sona, over-aroused persistence leads to restlessness, overly slack persistence leads to laziness. Thus you should determine the right pitch for your persistence, attune ('penetrate,' 'ferret out') the pitch of the [five] faculties [to that], and there pick up your theme." -- AN 6.55

Two little tricks:

Wet your finger and dab the rim of each nostril.  Breath in and out normally.  You should be able to pick up the sensation enough from there to keep your focus on it after the water evaporates.
Instead of trying find the breath a the edge of the nostrils, see if you can find the temperature change at the edge of the nostrils.  The in breath is cool, the out breath is warm, cool, warm, cool....

And remember.  One breath at a time.  Just this breath.


text:
Can Buddhism be harmful?
There is the much talked about example of "zen sickness".
But I wondered can any buddhist theory or practice can ever be harmful to a human?
I'm looking for an answer from anyone, not necessarily a Buddhist perspective. Though, of course, I'd be dismissive of anything unreasonable.

i can say that Buddha was mindful of every word he said making sure they are beneficial to all beings.  However, there might be some thing that seems to be harmful in short term but actually good in long run.  For example, during Buddha's time, 500 monks committed suicide after contemplating unpleasantness of body and 5 skandha.  (Buddha often talked about the drawbacks of all things that create sensual pleasures).  Those monks took it over the top and felt disgusted by their conditions so they took the wrong way out.  Later, someone asked Buddha if he didn't see that coming, Buddha said those monks would have taken their lives anyway from past karma.  at least they got some true knowledge in dhamma while they were still here which would benefit them in the future.
So in short,  practicing Buddhism according to Buddha (8 folds path) is not harmful.

good answer, tho i found the implied statement that the buddha only taight the 8 fold path, a little suspect

Buddha certainly did not talk only about 8 fold path, however, every thing about general practice could be group into one of the 8 fold path.  However, you could find teachings to individuals outside 8 fold path.  example, when buddha replied to deva (usually very short).  Deva came and told Buddha there was no love greater than a mother for her child  or first Child brings the most happiness to parents.  Buddha corrected that deva that love for self is the greatest (largest-not best), and obedient child brings most happiness to parents etc.

further more to add to my answer above, teaching of the unpleasantness of body is a step for samma sankappa (right intention-intention to remove from ill will and attachment to sensual pleasures)  for one to remove from sensual pleasure, you have to see their drawbacks .  Buddha taught those monks and to inspire them for "right intention or sammā sankappa" .  unfortunately the power of karma got those monks to walk in the wrong path however, they walked away with right intention in their pockets so to speak.

But I wondered can any buddhist theory or practice can ever be harmful to a human?

Many people pratice certain techniques as Buddhist pratice. When you come across a pratice that someone says is a Buddhist pratice you should try to ascertain:

is this actually the Buddhist pratice comparing it with the original words of the Buddha in record or have you learned the right things
have you understood the pratice correctly and to the enough detail or do you understand the theory behind the pratice well enough
is what you are practicing the correct pratice or despite you have learned the right thing and know the theory are you putting it to practice the proper way
does your pratice fit your character type. Now within the the different meditation techniques there are suitability based on character type.

If any of the above are not met you cannot blame the pratice.
Also if you pratice Insight meditation then nothing can go wrong. More particularly you should contemplate on the arising and passing of sensations pertaining to:

Sensation from beauty or ugliness of physical form and sensations arising from the states of material form
Sensation on their own right due to perceiving something is favorable or not
Sensation due to mental states
Sensations due to mental content

One case of Zen Sickness (Zen Sickness by zen master Hakuin) mentions about excessive striving. In Buddhism you effort should be balanced. Excessive striving can lead to craving, restlessness and doubt:

you are caving for the result or some experience which you are chasing after through meditation. You are accumulating craving instead of reducing it.
you are too frequently measuring your progress hence restless about getting the results fast or doubting the technique, the teacher, and your ability. Resentment follows if it is less and excessive pleasure if it is more. Also you are doing something other than meditation which is measuring progress. Also if measuring lead to doubt you are engrossed in doubting that practicing.

This is a simple tip for your mind. The real Buddhism is the religion which have mentioned by the Lord Buddha. Its the only way which shows the path to nirvana. If you want to study, feel and follow the Buddhism, then I prefer you to follow the real Buddhism which mentioned by the Lord Buddha. The real path(real Buddhism) will never let anyone to a harmful way. You may feel, if you able to find a little time to study the real Buddhism. Friend, I think, the "Zen sickness" that you have mentioned is a trend in modern culture.

ok i appreciate the intent, however clumsily expressed

No offense. Pardon, if anything has wrongly or unnecessarily described.

no offence taken! it's just not a very good fit for an answer on a q&a site

Dear friend, next time try to be a bit more elaborate with the words. After all we humans loose all that we express indirectly once we express our feelings in words as there is no way to express Tone or feelings like we do with voice. Someone might take the words in a completely different manner, Namo Buddhaya!


text:
What is the perfect truth in Tientai Buddhism?
It it well known that Tientai teaches the identity of the mundane and real truths.

In its complete teaching, what is being equated?

Is it equating the real truth of the separate teaching with the complete teaching's mundane truth?
The so called "separate teaching" is what Yogacara and Hua-yen Buddhists claim, and Zhiyi says (translated by Swanson) says that therein:

I'm going to answer based on a hunch. Swanson notes, in his translation of the Mo-Ho-Chih-Kuan, that

These three [truths as] expressions [of the perfect teaching] seem to
  be the same as the formulation in the Distinct Teaching, but as
  Chan-jan points out (BT–I, p. 284), the Distinct Teaching takes each
  of these formulations to be a separate level of understanding.

My hunch is that:

for the separate teaching, the mundane truth does not contain anything of the
absolute, and is only its negation.

As the perfect teaching merely integrates the three truths of the separate teaching (see above quote) it only teaches:

neither existence nor emptiness, and not neither existence nor emptiness.

And, because the perfect teaching includes both truths of the separate teaching, the perfect teaching must include:

existence and nonexistence

All three truths in perfect teaching, beyond words.

The three types [of truth such as "emptiness"] are all empty because they are beyond verbalization

My second hunch is that:

we can only express what is beyond verbalisation to say it is merely provisionally true.

Then the perfect teaching must only state that

any proposition that mentions existence, or non-existence, or
emptiness, or non-emptiness, is merely provisionally true.

Whatever, that is, "existence" is translated as.

The Threefold Truth The Tiantai school took up the principle of The
  Threefold Truth, derived from Nāgārjuna:
Phenomena are empty of self-nature, Phenomena exist provisionally from
  a worldly perspective, Phenomena are both empty of existence and exist
  provisionally at once.[5] The transient world of phenomena is thus
  seen as one with the unchanging, undifferentiated substratum of
  existence. This doctrine of interpenetration is reflected in the
  Tiantai teaching of three thousand realms in a single moment of
  thought.[5]
The Threefold Truth has its basis in Nāgārjuna:
All things arise through causes and conditions. That I declare as
  emptiness. It is also a provisional designation. It is also the
  meaning of the Middle Path

I am far from qualified to answer this question. But conceptually I believe it's not too difficult to understand the Three Truths, essentially it boils down to the following:
First, understanding that things are empty. Based on dependent origination, we realize that all phenomena that arises are subject to cessation. This is because that is, this is not because that is not. Hence, based on Nagarjuna designation, it is seen as empty.
However, seeing everything as empty doesn't tell us what really goes on. So we at least need to know how to make use of this emptiness. We need to be able to turn our ignorance and delusion into wisdom. We need to perceive the effects of the Four Noble Truths, see the Dharma from Suffering to End of Suffering. We need to become enlightened. We also need to avoid the dangerous pitfall of thinking there is nothing at all and become annihilistic.
Finally when we have attained some wisdom, we also need to realized that whatever attainments we have made, is too impermanent and subject to change. This realization is the middle way. That things are neither merely empty nor truly existent. This is the Middle Way between annihilism and eternalism.


text:
How to bless someone?
How to bless someone with special words in Buddhism ?
My friends ask me for keep them in my pray but we don't believe in praying.
So what should my answer to them ?

No ordinary human being can bestow blessings. Only spiritually advanced can give blessings to someone, out of their causeless mercy.

If someone is willing to be blessed the Buddha's way, then I could think of no more suitable & special words than the words from the Mangala Sutta that tells us what are the blessings in one's life:

To not associate with fools.
  Those who drag us down with their foolishness; drunkards, layabouts etc.
To associate with the wise.
  Those who encourage us to grow spiritually. The Buddha emphasized the importance of good companionship in many ways; when Ananda remarked that good friends were half of the Holy Life, He replied " Say not so! Good friends are the whole of the Holy Life!"
To pay repects where they are due.
  Making puja to the Triple Jewel, honouring our teachers and elders; to have this opportunity is a blessing not to be missed!
To reside in a suitable location.
  A place congenial to life, peaceful and with such a society and economy that we can live free from want and fear.
To have previously done meritorious deeds.
  Thus, we can enjoy the fruit now. But don't be one who just lives off her capital! Invest in yourself by making more good merit now.
To be heading in the right direction.
  If we are advancing spiritually, growing in wisdom and compassion, then we are surely blessed.
To have much learning.
  Being well educated in the broadest sense; a well-rounded individual. In particular to have knowledge of the Dhamma is to possess a jewel beyond price.
To be skilled and knowledgeable.
  Every useful skill we possess, crafts, trades, special knowledge can be of some use in improving life for ourselves and others.
To be restrained by a moral code.
  A sound morality is the basis of peace and happiness.
To have beautiful speech.
  That is; truthful, timely, pleasant speech connected with meaning. Such speech that others are delighted and improved by hearing.
To be a support for your parents.
  The opportunity to repay the enormous debt we owe to our mother and father should be seen as a blessing and not as a burden.

12 & 13.  The cherishing of wife and child.
  A happy family life.(perhaps the subtle differences between 12 & 13 got lost in translation?)

To make one's livelihood without difficulty.
  A wholesome occupation that one does well and enjoys.
To make gifts.
  Giving is a source of joy for both giver and receiver. Be one blessed with a generous spirit.
To live in accord with the Dhamma.
  To have heard the Holy dhamma in this life and to have the capacity and opportunity to practice is a rare and wonderful thing.
To cherish one's relatives.
  To have a functioning extended family (clan) either in the traditional sense or a community of friends and colleagues.
To do blameless actions.
  Living one's life in an unreproachable way. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, nothing to regret.
To cease and abstain from evil.
  Having the inclination of mind that instinctively recoils from evil as if from a red hot iron ball.
To refrain from intoxicants.
  Not to need those substances which dull our precious human consciousness.
Not to be heedless of the Dhamma.
  Being mindful and compassionate; going through life with eyes and heart open . Attention to details!
To be respectful.
  Respect for the conventions is to make the life into a beautiful dance. Respect for the Buddha nature of all beings is the root of refined manners.
To be humble.
  Pride goeth before a fall and the meek shall inherit the earth.
To be content.
  Contentment with little is the magical wish-fulfilling gem! Its also a healthy attitude for our planet right now.
To have gratitude.
  The Buddha said that gratitude is rare to find in this world. Remember always that you never would have gotten this far without a lot of help!
To hear the Dhamma at the right time.
  Everyone who has experienced a word of teaching that touched the heart at just the right moment knows what a precious gift this can be.
To have patience.
  Patience is a virtue but also a blessing. Just think how much suffering comes from impatience.
To be easy to admonish.
  Make yourself amenable to teaching and those with something to teach will be ready to help you.
The sight of monks.
  The robed figure of the recluse is an archetypal call to consciousness; together with the dead man, the sick man and the old man they are called the four divine messengers.
To discuss the Dhamma at a suitable time.
  Speaking of the Holy Dhamma is the noblest use of the human power of speech. To be blessed with time and companions with which to speak of things tending to liberation is amazing grace indeed.
To practice austerities.
  In the buddhist context this means the practising of meditation; a daily practice and regular retreats.
To lead the Holy Life.
  To live devoted to the Eightfold Path and the seeking of Liberation.
Seeing the Noble Truths.
  Opening of the Dhamma Eye. This refers to a level of direct penetration well beyond the intellectual.
The realization of Nibbana.
  Going through the gateless gate. The treasure beyond any price in heaven and earth.
A mind unshaken by contact with the world.
  Being in the world but not of it.
Sorrowlessness.
  Beyond the realms of suffering.
Stainlessness.
  The end of the obscuring defilements.
Secure.
  Once found it cannot be lost.

These are the highest blessings!
  Having accomplished this
  one is always unconquered,
  one goes everywhere in peace.
  These are the blessings supreme!

"May you be well" might be a near equivalent (see also "Metta meditation" for further details).
It's easy to find more elaborate versions of that phrase, for example,

May you be filled with loving kindness.
  May you be well.
  May you be peaceful and at ease.
  May you be happy.

or for example,

May you be happy. May you be well. May you be safe. May you be peaceful and at ease.

or the metta chant.

Or maybe, instead of ritual, you could use the opportunity of their asking to talk with them about Buddhism (on the assumption that sharing with them something about Buddhism would be a kind of blessing).

One of my friend, I told him we don't believe in praying but we'd do what we can do for them(like helping hand) instead praying. I answered sometimes like that.

The closest equivalent in Buddhism would be to develop the 4 Immeasurables Meditation keeping your friend in mind.

Upasaka Swapnil,
sadly one of the best answers here has been deleted as it says "Enlighten them into the Dhamma.", which would be actually a real blessing, the highest receiveable.
If one gives a blessing, meaning wishing well in what ever way, one actually gives a blessing to oneself, since doing merits with it. Monks are not really asked and given such therefore, since it would cut of ways to make merits for others, believing that simple sound received from one may help them.
How ever, such as usually known as blessing, but actually Anumodana, meaning encouragement and approve of good deeds, benefits both. The speaker and the receiver straighten their view right with such.
As Nyom Ilya Grushevskiy stated, the greatest gift is to share the Dhamma, to encourage people to act right, so to give the causes for their well-being, no other could do. While a blessing, good-wishing, might gladden the mind of others short or longer, the fruits are not necessary based on listening, but the blessing might have given certain soil so that others good fruits could ripe. How ever, such would not help in long terms, worng actions would nevertheless performed and quick gained gladdness, might hinder to do more than just ask for such.
My person had seen that Ven. Thanissaro gave a talk on "bless yourself" which might be well to share with those asking for such.
It's totally not wrong, but the opposite (metta... practice) to give such often and everywhere, to anybody, but as told, mostly only the blesser gains merits and so one should not be greedy in learning others to say and do, think always in meassures of blessings.
One who asks what is good done, for ones own and others welfare is a blessed person, and if even meeting good and proper answers, tend to listening to the, put them into action, seldom rich blessed, yet its the result of ones Upanissaya paccaya and the "luck" to meet a tiny stream of goodness appearing and disappearing in worlds.
My persons most used "blessing", encouragement is
Abhivādana-sīlissa
    Niccaṃ vuḍḍhāpacāyino
Cattāro dhammā vaḍḍhanti
    Āyu vaṇṇo sukhaṃ, balaṃ.
For one of respectful nature who
    constantly honors the worthy,
Four qualities increase:
    long life, beauty, happiness, strength.
Lay-buddhist are used to learn blessings here where my person dwells, would eager learn citing text of spreading goodwill and wishes, starting as childs. It's good to learn such as long as not making trade with such, also many monks and priests sadly do.
Good source is the chanting guide. Sadly there are less traditional blessing of lay people avaliable in western language, while there are actually a lot. There is nothing wrong, but the opposite, to let blessings and encouragements flow out of ones metta-citta and once used to it, it is a gift for all you meet.
Bhavatu sabba-maṅgalaṃ
Rakkhantu sabba-devatā
May there be every blessing. May all heavenly beings protect you.
Sabba-buddhānubhāvena
Sadā sotthī bhavantu te.
Through the power of all the Buddhas, may you always be well.
Bhavatu sabba-maṅgalaṃ
Rakkhantu sabba-devatā
May there be every blessing. May all heavenly beings protect you.
Sabba-dhammānubhāvena
Sadā sotthī bhavantu te.
Through the power of all the Dhammas, may you always be well.
Bhavatu sabba-maṅgalaṃ
Rakkhantu sabba-devatā
May there be every blessing. May all heavenly beings protect you.
Sabba-saṅghānubhāvena
Sadā sotthī bhavantu te.
Through the power of all the Saṅghas, may you always be well. Bhavatu sabba-maṅgalaṃ
(Note that this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks and entertainment but as a means toward escape from this wheel here)

You could say some mantras for your friend, and dedicate the merit of your day to them on a day where your practice is well done.

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


text:
Unguided retreat
If one wanted to do a 3 day to a one week unguided retreat what would they need to know?
I am planning on doing this, with meals purchased and prepared by me in advance.
The plan was 6 - 8 hours of sleep, meditation on awakening, yoga and a light breakfast, meditation, study of texts, meditation, light lunch, meditation, basic upkeep of the area, meditation, light dinner, meditation and repeat.
Are there other aspects to the retreat that should be added?

Time table
Best is you have a time table. Wake at about 4 am and be seated by 4.30 am. Schedule breakfast at about 6.30 am and lunch at 11 am. Skip dinner but perhaps you can try to have a light tea at about 5 pm.
Schedule about 1 hour after breakfast and lunch for coires.
Get to bed at about 9.30 pm and meditate in while lying down until you fall asleep.
Meals
Have breakfast at dawn (~ 6.30 am) and lunch before the sun has turned (~ 12 noon). See Kīta,giri Sutta, Latukikopama Sutta for taking food at proper times.
Have a light and if possible vegetarian diet. Vegetarian is not necessary a must but helps keep a hold on restlessness or sleepiness due to food abay.
Study
If you are doing this unguided you have to do the study before hand and outline the meditation you are going to pratice.
You can skip study as this can be a form of intellectual entertainment hence a distraction meditation even if it is the Dhamma.
Silence
Best is to be in total silence with no outside communications, e.g. visitors, TV, newspapers, phone, etc. When you talk this causes verbal fabrication which is something you might want to avoid.


text:
What is the destination of a Buddhist?
Where should we go for the rest what is the rest ? In mundane life living is so tough , facing sorrow , troubles and need to struggle for achieve something physical things and we get hurt because craving. As I'm doing myself I'm feeling nothing and restless because craving and got nothing after craving and everything is over . So where to focus , what is aim of one Buddhist. I never practice and now I don't understand from where to start, not feeling to start.

What is the destination of a buddhist?

There is no particular destination a Buddhist aims for. The Buddhist goal is to be stress free eradicating the cause which is systematised as the 4 Noble Truths. Once you are stress free this is called Nirvana. The path to Nirvana is achived thought the 3 fold training.
Though the Abhidhamma classifieds Nirvana as a Lokuttara Bhumi, this is not a destination as such.

Where should we go for the rest what is the rest ?

Rest is achived thought solitude. More on this see Viveka,nissita by Piya Tan.

In mundane life living is so tough , facing sorrow , troubles and need to struggle for achieve something physical things and we get hurt because craving.

Mundane life is tough because of the presence of unwholesome roots which drive us. Will (chanda) to achieve a goal in the absence of craving hence there is no unwholesome root associated with it. [(Kosambi) Unnābha Sutta, Sangarava Sutta] So you should have the will to discharge duties and attain worldly goals without craving.

... So where to focus ...

You should keep your focus on feelings or sensations.

With contact as condition, there is feeling; with feeling as condition, there is craving.
    But with the remainderless fading away and ending of that same craving comes the ending of
    clinging;

Source: (Samuday’atthangama) Loka Sutta
Also from one of Goenka's research papers: Why Vedana and What is Vedana?

Eradicate the latent tendency of craving using pleasant sensations (by equanimous observation of the pleasant sensations understanding their changing nature), eradicate latent tendency of aversion using unpleasant sensations and eradicate the latent tendency of ignorance using neutral sensations.

Another passage from the same paper:

Vedana is also a cetasikacetasika (mental concomitant). When the Buddha says, sabbe dhamma vedana samosaranasabbe dhamma vedana samosarana, it means that the experience of all mental concomitants includes and is inseparable from vedana. Hence according to my understanding of the teaching of the Buddha, not only do kayanupassanakayanupassana and vedananupassanavedananupassana involve the awareness of vedana but vedana also forms an integral part of dhammanupassanadhammanupassana and cittanupassanacittanupassana. A meditator whether practising kayanupassana or vedananupassana or cittanupassana or dhammanupassana, continues to be aware of vedana. He realizes the phenomenon of arising (samudayadhammanupassisamudayadhammanupassi) and the phenomenon of passing away (vayadhammanupassivayadhammanupassi) by maintaining awareness of vedana with the understanding of its impermanent nature. Thus he does not allow tanha to arise in response to vedana: He responds neither with tanha of craving towards a pleasant sensation nor with tanha of aversion towards an unpleasant sensation. A meditator maintains upekkha (equanimity) based on understanding of anicca (impermanence).

Ideally you should pratice the Vipassana to overcome craving and liberated your mind. You can try and take a course at http://www.dhamma.org/ or http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/. The level of support one can get in a forum or Q&A site like this is limited. To get rid of your pain you will have to take a formal meditation course.


text:
Tikapatthana in English
I am looking for a proper translation of the Tikapatthana into English which might be available online as a PDF.
Is it possible to point me to such reference. I am looking for the complete set.

Can you help me locate a PDF version of Guide to Conditional Relations Part I by U Narada

Have a look on that.
Might be a first step.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=7990
Much Metta.
Thierry

Let me check it you. If you find the links please point me there.

See English translation of Tika Patthana
I found Tikapatthana on https://archive.org/search.php?, but i belive they are w/o translation?
Vol 01: Tikapatthana of the Abhidhamma pitaka
Vol 02: Tikapatthana of the Abhidhamma pitaka
Vol 03: Tikapatthana of the Abhidhamma pitaka

I can across the last 3 which are in Pali.

Any way thanks. Can you help me locate a PDF version of Guide to Conditional Relations Part I by U Narada

@Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena Is this link helpful? http://www.undv.org/vesak2012/iabudoc/07PyiPhyoKyawFINAL.pdf

Thanks. I have come across this before. Paṭṭhāna - Guide to Conditional Relations, Part II, Paṭṭhāna:
Conditional Relations Part I, Paṭṭhāna:
Conditional Relations Part II, If you can find Paṭṭhāna - Guide to Conditional Relations, Part I this will be all that is traslated into English sofar as I belive. This is licensed for non commercial use by PTS since 2013.