text:
How to reconcile 'You are already enlightened. There's no need to strive!' with 'You should strive for enlightenment. Purify your mind!'
There are some teachings that go along the lines of:
'You are already enlightened. You just need to realize it. Actually there's no need for you to do anything. If you try to strive for enlightenment you just end up falling into the trap of dualism. Samsara, Nirvana, treat it all like a dream'
On the other hand, there are teachings which are like this:
'Work hard to rid your mind from its negative qualities, ignorance, greed, delusion. Do this practice. Purify your mind. Abandon worldly attachment. Also please do this sadhana everyday if not you break your empowerment vows and fall into vajra hell'
How to reconcile this dichotomy? Is asking this question even necessary? I am aware that asking this question is inherently dualistic, and that these views don't necessarily contradict because the first is an expression of the truth at the ultimate level, while the second is the conventional level. For someone whose mind isn't at the level to embody the first view, should I continue practicing? Or am I missing something entirely?

You are what you are. No amount of any kind of practice or experience can actually make you anything else, it will still be you. The "today you" and "the enlightened you" are one and same thing. At the same time certain amount of struggle may force you the subject into actually seeing this (but beware of false realization, many psychos believe they realized something). There even is an opinion the role of any discomfort is specifically for this.

Whose wording is 'You are already enlightened. You just need to realize it. Actually there's no need for you to do anything. If you try to strive for enlightenment you just end up falling into the trap of dualism. Samsara, Nirvana, treat it all like a dream'

The key to the first philosophy mentioned is the phrase "You just need to realize it", where realize carries the two possible meanings of the word:

become fully aware of something; understand clearly.
cause (something desired or anticipated) to happen

D.T. Suzuki put it like this:

We practice zazen to express our true nature, not to attain
enlightenment. Bodhidharma’s Buddhism [i.e., Zen] is to be practice,
to be enlightenment.

Said differently, the emphasis is on expressing the true nature that enlightenment exposes, even if you do not yet fully grasp it. Enlightenment, though of course not unimportant, is not seen as a goal but as a natural consequence of this expression.
The key to the second philosophy mentioned is that it is more akin to a prescription or regime against the origin of suffering: attachment and the other mental pitfalls that stand in the way of enlightenment.
In the end, they are just different upaya to attain the same desired outcome.

I don’t know of any text that says “you are already enlightened.” There are ‘teachings’ by unenlightened people who do say that, because they misunderstand the nondual teachings of the yoga tantras. Perhaps what they are trying to say is that ‘you’ are not other than the enlightened wisdom activity that manifests this world. As such, but for a constant attachment to the glitzy ornamentation, we would recognize our natural state.
The two truths are a dualistic understanding of this, that is dissolved in the higher tantras. Which is to say, you have your answer already before you: not having dissolved the dichotomy between absolute and relative, one cannot comprend the nondual teachings properly (this becomes clear when nondual ‘teachers’ talk of a “One”, forgetting there are no entities to be found anywhere). Therefore, in order to break-free of the duality which structures your understanding, there are certain prescribed activities. Once duality is escaped, those activities are no longer needed (but are still useful at times—like having a pocketknife to cut an apple, when one happens to fall into your hands). Escaping the dualistic structuring of our understanding is still not complete enlightenment. Why? Because it tends to be held onto as another conceptual understanding at first. Thus, still a bit more work to do.
(And this is where some get lost, go a little crazy, and start running around saying: “There’s nothing to do by no one!” confusing everyone.)
As it is pointed out in the “Undiminished Victory Banner:”

Simple, yet difficult—and difficult because of being simple,
It is not an immediate state, though it is all-pervasive;
But not even Vajrasattva can point it out
By giving it a specific name.

These different doctrines are not at odds. It is our understanding that is at odds with reality. So the practices are all skillful means to help all sentient beings reach enlightenment. Holding on to certain doctrines, is just another form of attachment. Once they have served their purpose, like a boat you have crossed a river with, they are left behind, as you mount the glitzy motorcycle that will take you halfway to the mountains, at which point you walk, until the way becomes too steep, then you start using lines, anchors, and a harness, etc., until you finally reach the mountain peak.
Good luck!

Here are the pali textual references that are maybe the basis for the things you've heard. Although the expression of realizing one's enlightened nature is rather unusual for Theravada and is closer to Mahayana.

AN 1.49-52
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements."
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements."
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind."
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind."

SN 15.11
At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: "From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. When you see someone who has fallen on hard times, overwhelmed with hard times, you should conclude: 'We, too, have experienced just this sort of thing in the course of that long, long time.'
"Why is that? From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries — enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released."

Dhp 170
One who looks upon the world as a bubble and a mirage, him the King of Death sees not

Sn22.95
Form is like a glob of foam;
feeling, a bubble;
perception, a mirage;
fabrications, a banana tree;
consciousness, a magic trick —
this has been taught
by the Kinsman of the Sun.
However you observe them,
appropriately examine them,
they're empty, void
to whoever sees them
appropriately.
Beginning with the body
as taught by the One
with profound discernment:
when abandoned by three things
— life, warmth, & consciousness —
form is rejected, cast aside.
When bereft of these
it lies thrown away,
senseless,
a meal for others.
That's the way it goes:
it's a magic trick,
an idiot's babbling.
It's said to be
a murderer.[1]
No substance here
is found.
Thus a monk, persistence aroused,
should view the aggregates
by day & by night,
mindful,
alert;
should discard all fetters;
should make himself
his own refuge;
should live as if
his head were on fire —
in hopes of the state
with no falling away.

As to reconciliation, this should help;

Sn12.61
"Monks, an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person might grow disenchanted with this body composed of the four great elements, might grow dispassionate toward it, might gain release from it. Why is that? Because the growth & decline, the taking up & putting down of this body composed of the four great elements are apparent. Thus the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person might grow disenchanted, might grow dispassionate, might gain release there.
"But as for what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness,' the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is unable to grow disenchanted with it, unable to grow dispassionate toward it, unable to gain release from it. Why is that? For a long time this has been relished, appropriated, and grasped by the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person as, 'This is me, this is my self, this is what I am.' Thus the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is unable to grow disenchanted with it, unable to grow dispassionate toward it, unable to gain release from it.
"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. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.
"The instructed disciple of the noble ones, [however,] attends carefully & appropriately right there at the dependent co-arising:
"'When this is, that is.
"'From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
"'When this isn't, that isn't.
"'From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.
"'In other words:
"'From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
"'From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness...

Ted's is the best answer imo. To make his point even more explicit,
"You're already enlightened" means "fundamentally you already are outside the Matrix, so you don't need to go anywhere".
And "purify your mind" means, "you have to stop creating karma that keeps your attention trapped inside the Matrix".
And "stop striving" means "stop looking for an exit inside the Matrix, that's just yet another activity that keeps your attention trapped".
And "keep striving" means "keep stopping".

Yes, it's all very sort of counter-intuitive to what we generally learn from the world culture.

You're setting up a dichotomy where none exists.  What you're asking is akin to someone inquiring how Joe DiMaggio hit safely in 56 games while he was playing center for the Pistons.  It's a conflation of two things that aren't causal.  In your case it's a mix of ontology and methodology.  Just because all beings are naturally Buddha has nothing to do with the fact that they come to be Buddha's by cultivating the paramitas and seeing deeply into the true nature of things.
To further confound things, the approach to Dharmakaya has different phases each of which can be distinct and even contradictory from the ones that proceeded it.  Just like an Olympic weightlifter might see his lifts improve by focusing solely on his mobility for a training cycle, so to might an adept see an improvement in his understanding of the dharma by backing of his efforts.  Nonstriving is a technique and a state of mind.  It's something that we all have to learn and bring into our practice at one time or another.  It's not easily apprehended (it took Joshu the better part of 30 years to understand it!) mainly because it stands in stark contrast to the methodologies we employed to get to the point where nonstriving would be beneficial.
There are no contradictions here.  There are just different facets catching the light.

I think the notion that you are already enlightened and that there is no need to strive, comes from the Mahayana teaching of Buddha Nature or tathagatagarbha, that everyone has the natural potential to become enlightened.
This is apparently based on the sutta teaching about the luminous mind (pabhassara citta in Pali), which states that the mind is fundamentally pure, but it is defiled by incoming defilements. That's like saying, the dirty cloth, is actually pure white below all that dirt, but is soiled by dirt that got on it.
So, what you need to do is to coarsely, then thoroughly, remove the dirt from the cloth and then, prevent it from getting dirty again by ending the source of the dirt. For the mind, that's the ten fetters. The root is ignorance.
From a Theravada perspective, 'You should strive for enlightenment. Purify your mind!' is the correct way to get into the process.
If you start with 'You are already enlightened. There's no need to strive!', then you'll end up being lazy or confused. "I am enlightened, but... I am not enlightened?"
But there is a place for 'You are already enlightened. There's no need to strive!' too. In order to reach the state of jhana, the mind needs to let go of striving and simply fall effortlessly into the peace and stillness that is fundamental to the mind.
So you start with 'You should strive for enlightenment. Purify your mind!' and then go into 'You are already enlightened. There's no need to strive!' in order to reach jhana.
Ven. Ajahn Brahm is widely recognized as an expert of samatha meditation leading to jhana from mindfulness of breathing, with his book, "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond". I quote a part of this book below.

You experience every part of each in-breath and out-breath
continuously for many hundred breaths in a row. That is why this stage
is called full sustained attention on the breath. You cannot reach this
stage through force, through holding or gripping. You can attain this
degree of stillness only by letting go of everything in the entire
universe except for this momentary experience of the breath happening
silently. Actually “you” do not reach this stage, the mind does. The
mind does the work itself. The mind recognizes this stage to be a very
peaceful and pleasant place to abide, just being alone with the
breath. This is where the doer, the major part of one’s ego, starts to
disappear.
One finds that progress happens effortlessly at this stage of
meditation. We just have to get out of the way, let go, and watch it
all happen. The mind will automatically incline, if we only let it,
toward this very simple, peaceful, and delicious unity of being alone
with one thing, just being with the breath in each and every moment.
This is the unity of mind, the unity in the moment, the unity in
stillness.
The fourth stage is what I call the “springboard” of meditation,
because from it one may dive into the blissful states. When we simply
maintain this unity of consciousness by not interfering, the breath
will begin to disappear. The breath appears to fade away as the mind
focuses instead on what is at the center of the experience of breath,
which is awesome peace, freedom, and bliss.
At this stage I introduce the term “beautiful breath.” Here the mind
recognizes that this peaceful breath is extraordinarily beautiful. We
are aware of this beautiful breath continuously, moment after moment,
with no break in the chain of experience. We are aware only of the
beautiful breath, without effort and for a very long time.
Now as I will explain further in the next chapter, when the breath
disappears, all that is left is “the beautiful.” Disembodied beauty
becomes the sole object of the mind. The mind is now taking the mind
as its own object. We are no longer aware of the breath, body,
thought, sound, or outside world. All that we are aware of is beauty,
peace, bliss, light, or whatever our perception  will later call it. We
are experiencing only beauty, continuously, effortlessly, with nothing
being beautiful! We have long ago let go of chatter, let go of
descriptions and assessments. Here the mind is so still that it cannot
say anything. One is just beginning to experience the first flowering
of bliss in the mind. That bliss will develop, grow, and become very
firm and strong. And then one may enter into those states of
meditation called the jhanas.

Just to use the natural, parallel analogy: we know how to breathe without thinking about it, but we still spend a lot of time in meditation focusing on our breath. That's because we've learned to control our breathing as an aspect of expressing thoughts, and our breathing is often affected by our emotions and our desires. The pure, simple breathing of an infant is something we have to remember, not something we have to learn, but sometimes remembering takes effort.
We all know the attitude of enlightenment, but we all have a million things pulling at us that keep us from being there. We don't need to do anything; we need to stop doing the things that push us off track.

In my view, both teachings go hand-in-hand. The first teaching explains that you are already enlightened, defining "you" as your conscience, the part of you that is already fully enlightened. Once your mind realizes this (by practicing), then your mind will coordinate with your conscience.
The second teaching defines "you" as an individual, made up of the components of conscience, mind, body, and soul. Although the conscience is already perfect, the mind needs conditioning to work in accordance with the truth/your conscience.

I think that these two ideas together are trying to tell you that trying to attain enlightenment is a bit like trying to go to sleep.
There are all kinds of things you can do to try and get a good nights' rest. A comfy bed, a dark quiet bedroom, getting some exercise and so on. These will all help, and you can do them consciously to help your sleep schedule. But the one thing that does not work is yelling at yourself to go to sleep. The more you fret about your need for sleep, the more fearful and anxious you become, and the more elusive sleep becomes.
So the second paragraph you wrote is an encouragement to get all the things that you need for enlightenment. You should practice meditation, and learn about enlightenment, and this will help you attain it. But the first idea is warning you that striving for enlightenment is still attachment, and wanting enlightenment is still desire. These will help you at first, but you can't take those with you on the journey. You will have to let them go. You will have to work really hard at striving for nothing, and that is why it is so hard and yet in some way also so easy.


text:
Where is Buddha Now?
Namaste to Buddha. How and where is Buddha now? Does he still teaching now?
I am trying to understand Nibbana and where Buddha is now.
What I understand is that Nibbana is a state rather than a location or place. This state has no physical body, no desire, no dukkha and no more incarnation.
Many have mentioned this state appears as in empty space but I would think the "empty" is a meaning of Buddhism that is 100% free from dukkha .

Endless space is called in Atthasālini ajatākāsa, 'unentangled', i.e.
unobstructed or empty space.

Why don't we realise space instead of Nibbana?
In Quantum Physics, a state is a source of energy so it's quantifiable and appears as a particle wave. An energy cannot be null or void state too as the law of conservation of energy states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only converted from one form of energy to another. Wave–particle duality
Conclusion is can I say that Buddha is still teaching and around, appears as the supreme particle wave and possibly can be communicated via meditation? Any form of energy can be interfered/communicated/entangled with based on Physic theory ?

The universe encompasses everything that exists, according to our
current understanding: spacetime, forms of energy and the physical
laws that relate them, history, philosophy, mathematics and logic.
Buddhists refer to the Universe, both visible and invisible phenomena,
as the Dharma.
The Origin of Meditation: Making Bonds with the Universe

Anyone could verify my understanding above?

@chrisw can I ask another question. topic change to "Nibbana in Quantum Physic" but content almost same

or change the ques title - "Where is Buddha now based on Quantum Physic"

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39740/can-you-explain-how-cessation-of-existence-is-known-to-be-possible maybe this

I studied "Applied Mathematics" (of Quantum Physics) at university, and what I was I taught there seems to me completely unrelated to Buddhism. I wouldn't describe the Buddha as a (physical) "wave" nor as a "particle" -- see also quantum woo and so on, and this physicist's phrase Not even wrong. For what it's worth there are a dozen Questions containing "quantum" on this site.

@ChrisW There are many research that Physics and Buddhism is related ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_science.  will check on the links that u provided. thanks Chris

@Letsbuddhism ya it's related to this ques. thanks

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
The difference between Arupaloka and Nibbana

The first level, the Realm of Formlessness (Arupaloka), consists of
four planes of brahmas who have no physical body, consisting entirely
of mind, but who may create a physical body if they want to be seen.
They are not completely free from the fetters of suffering (dukkha),
but the dukkha experienced here is much less intense than that
suffered in the Rupaloka. These brahmas are unable to hear the
teachings of the Buddha (dhamma) and they can never become
enlightened.

Buddhist rebirth in different planes of existence
Q1) What is the difference between Arupaloka and Nibbana except Nibbana has no incarnation, no dukkha and has Buddhism teaching ?
Q2) Why brahmas unable to hear the teachings of the Buddha at Arupaloka?

These brahmas are unable to hear the teachings of the Buddha (dhamma)

The difference between the formless realms and extinguishment is the degree of emptiness. In MN121, the Buddha advises Venerable Ānanda on the progressive stages of the meditation on emptiness. Here is the transition leaving the realm of form:

MN121:6.1: Furthermore, a mendicant—ignoring the perception of wilderness and the perception of earth—focuses on the oneness dependent on the perception of the dimension of infinite space.

In the above, the perception of wilderness is unsatisfactory in its impermanence, so it is natural to proceed onward to the formless. Indeed, the meditation on emptiness proceeds deeper and passes through the formless, leaving it here:

MN121:10.1: Furthermore, a mendicant—ignoring the perception of the dimension of nothingness and the perception of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception—focuses on the oneness dependent on the signless immersion of the heart.

In each transition noted during meditation, the preceding stage is perceived as unsatisfactory and impermanent. Relinquishing each attachment opens up greater freedom. Indeed, the transition out of the formless is the eighth and final liberation.

DN34:2.1.206: Going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, they enter and remain in the cessation of perception and feeling.
DN34:2.1.207: This is the eighth liberation.

Note that the conceit "I am" still permeates the formless. The observer still sees. When the observer sees, there is "this and that". With "this and that" in mind, perception and feeling still bubble and perturb. That perturbation is disturbing and unsatisfactory because it is also impermanent--"that" appeared and "that" will disappear.  If "that" is impermanent, then "this" might also be--that attachment to "this" causes anxiety. So one might attempt to perfect the formless, but that is pointless, an unsatisfactory dead end. Those who are stuck in the formless, are unwilling to accept "this" as impermanent. They cling to the notion that somehow perfecting the formless will lead to a subtle perpetuation of "this". But just as "that" appeared and disappeared, so too must "this".
Only in letting go of "this", the conceit "I am", does suffering cease:

DN34:1.4.27: Renunciation is the escape from sensual pleasures. The formless is the escape from form. Cessation is the escape from whatever is created, conditioned, and dependently originated.

The emphatic paragraph on conceit makes this the right answer. +1

What is the difference between Arupaloka and Nibbana except Nibbana has no incarnation, no dukkha and has Buddhism teaching ?
The arupa ayatanas are the subtle enclaves of the coarse human
consciousness. The word consciousness here means the continuum of experience derived from the arising of sensate phenomenon, which is more accurately described using the five aggregate model: with the arising of form, feeling/perception come into play from which two reactions arise: aversion and attraction. In this world/body relationship consciousness becomes a self-replicating repository, and it is in its very ability to self-replicate that one finds a continuum called Sue, Bob or John. Those entities then haul around the regrets of their history - which is akin to hauling around a slab of concrete - and make feeble attempts to offset these regrates by projecting favourable images of a better future. In essence, it is a neurotic consciousness where one creates a stressful here and now. That is the delusion, and that is what Dogen calls The Ten Thousand Things.
This is a very noisy situation - so noisy that one cannot discern or even conceive of another way. Practice aims to reduce this type of noisy consciousness so that illuminating knowledge of another way can be discerned. Once one has reduced a substantial degree of this type of consciousness, you enter into the arupa ayatanas. A comparison between the arupa ayatanas and nirvana only serves a mind intent on food for thought. It gives something for the mind to lick - like an ice cream. It is better to not alight on anything with regard to comparisons.
Q2) Why brahmas unable to hear the teachings of the Buddha at Arupaloka?
They don't have ears... but to bring an answer closer to earth in terms of meditative qualities: it is only the last two arupa ayatanas where one cannot discern a state, a non-state, or neither a state nor a non-state simply because the consciousness there is extremely tenuous. In other words, a teaching cannot be accessed. It is only in retrospect that can one come to understand the last two arupa ayatanas; when one has emerged from those states, then it is possible, by means of reflection, to know those states. But when you are in those states, you cannot be taught anything. Regardless, the mind is radically changed by such subtle types of consciousness. It becomes a wafer several microns thick, primed to snap at the mercy of the lakshanas.

the consciousness there is extremely tenuous.--> i assume this statement means consciousness  is very low here . but in encyclopedia they said six higher spiritual powers start to appear.?? how come higher spiritual powers not even able to hear or communicate? http://encyclopedia.uia.org/en/development/12320120

Yes, the six-sense consciousnesses are progressively thinned out from the first arupa ayatana to the last. Tenuous refers to its thinning out or weakening.

Q1) What is the difference between Arupaloka and Nibbana except Nibbana has no incarnation, no dukkha and has Buddhism teaching ?

Arupaloka beings still attach to their "atta" (self conception).

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


text:
Brahmas at formless realms are unable to hear the teachings of the Buddha
Why Brahmas at formless realms are unable to hear/communicate/understand the teachings of the Buddha when they have high intelligence?

Alara Kalama is wise, competent, intelligent. He has long had little
dust in his eyes. What if I were to teach him the Dhamma first? He
will quickly understand this Dhamma.
MN 26

I mean not just Alara Kalama but other Brahmas still living there?
Like the deaf in human realms which much lower intelligence still able to learn?
This is relevant to Form in the formless realms and The difference between Arupaloka and Nibbana

Because they don't have ears.  They're formless.

I get the impression that a "human" birth is seen as the best for gaining enlightenment:

A lower birth (e.g. animal, ghost, hell) has too little ability -- not enough intelligence, or too much unrelenting suffering
A higher birth has too little need -- no desire for enlightenment, renunciation,  liberation -- like if everything seems heavenly, or if you seem all-powerful, or if you and your friends all seem to live forever, then how could understand talk about "suffering"?

The formless realms are associated with the highest heavens -- see here for example: The Thirty-one Planes of Existence

Combining 1. and 2., perhaps it stands to reason then, that if the formless realm results in highest heaven, then it is not conducive to enlightenment.
That's maybe in addition to more mechanical explanation, like,

The inhabitants of these realms are possessed entirely of mind. Having no physical body, they are unable to hear Dhamma teachings.

Also earlier in MN 26 you have it that Alara Kalama himself attained the formless realm, and who taught the Buddha when he was a seeker --  and was (unlike the Buddha) apparently satisfied with that.

any post explains what are Brahmas, Buddha and Arhats doing there? seem they dont have ability to feel "good" cause they're always good. i.e. take a walk to beautiful park to feed some turtle/fish?

or samsara is created to feel good :) but not to abuse it

@little star - it is not necessarily a location, but more a means to describe progressive mind states which still remain conditioned, meaning that whatever formless realm you are in one is still subject to the pitfalls of samsara. However, if you like Buddhist cosmology, then watch this excellent series by Ajahn Sona and Ajahn Punnadhammo.

@Chrisw Thanks. Something interesting


text:
Canki Sutta (MN95) Buddha's use of "Bharadvaja" as a term of address
In the Canki Sutta (MN95) the Buddha talks to a Brahmin youth called Kapathika, but addresses him as "Bharadvaja". Does this litterally mean "supporter of the cow pen"? What might a more poetic translation be?

Apparently Bharadvaja was one of the seven most elite Brahmin gotras. Taken literally this would mean that Kapathika traced his lineage from the ancient sage Bharadvaja by unbroken male descent. Although I doubt we should take it literally, more on that later.
In any case, Bharadvaja is like a family name, so you're not supposed to translate it. But if you really want to, "Bharata" means "maintainer of hearth and home" and "dvaja" means "twice-born" or "born from two fathers" (in the sense of having achieved spiritual realization). Taken together the two parts create connotation of spiritual nobility or noble spirituality, something very elite and traditional.
Whether we take it as a family name or look at the literal translation, it definitely is a very cool name and the fact that Buddha uses it for this Kapathika guy is significant.
From the sutta we see that Kapathika is young and notoriously arrogant. Indeed, he interrupts Buddha's conversation with older Brahmins and Buddha has to rebuke him.
In this context it seems clear that Buddha uses the name of the famous ancient sage in a kind of mocking gesture. It is like calling out an arrogant physics freshman: "Mr. Einstein, would you stop interrupting?"
BTW your nickname is of the same kind, a mocking claim to be a wise and virtuous professor of Dharma. I'm sure you are well aware of this, and since this is your first post, I assume you wanted to make a greeting gesture. Well, hello and welcome, professor :)

According to the Buddhist Dictionary of Pali Proper Names entry on "Kāpathika":

A young brahmin, sixteen years old, well versed in the Vedas, and with
his head shaven. He was "of good stock, well informed, a good speaker
and a scholar of ability." He visited the Buddha at Opasāda, where he
interrupted a conversation which the Buddha was holding with some aged
brahmins; they rebuked him for interrupting his elders, but Cankī, who
happened to arrive at that moment, interceded on his behalf. The
Buddha, knowing that Kāpathika had questions to ask of him, gave him
an opportunity for so doing, and there followed a discussion on
various points, detailed in the Cankī Sutta. At the end of the
discussion the youth declared himself a disciple of the Buddha
(M.ii.168ff).
In the Sutta the Buddha addresses Kāpathika as Bhāradvāja, perhaps
because he belonged to that gotta.

The dictionary here speculates that Kapathika was called Bharadvaja because that's his gotta (in Pali) or gotra (in Sanskrit). Gotra means patrilineal lineage.
That means Kapathika may have belonged to the lineage of the ancient Vedic sage Bharadvaja, who was one of the seven great sages (saptarishis).
In fact, the same sutta mentions Bhāradvāja, the ancient sage, and other ancient great sages by the Pali version of their names.

“How then, Bhāradvāja, the ancient brahmin seers, the creators of the
hymns, the composers of the hymns, whose ancient hymns that were
formerly chanted, uttered, and compiled, the brahmins nowadays still
chant and repeat, repeating what was spoken and reciting what was
recited—that is, Aṭṭhaka, Vāmaka, Vāmadeva, Vessāmitta, Yamataggi,
Angirasa, Bhāradvāja, Vāseṭṭha, Kassapa, and Bhagu—did even these
ancient brahmin seers say thus: ‘We know this, we see this: only this
is true, anything else is wrong’?”— “No, Master Gotama.”
MN 95


text:
What exactly is a Desire?
What exactly is the anatomy of a Desire and why does it have such a potent effect on our psyche and life?
Is it a thought of wanting something we don't have, but then we have so many thoughts about so many things? Is it a feeling of missing something or something being wrong in the present moment, but then we have so many other feelings? Is it a mental reaction, or perception of thought and feeling? Is it some mental energy illumined by consciousness? Or is it will want?
The Buddha went as far as saying, taṇhā ("craving, desire or attachment") is the cause of suffering. I want to understand what is this as a phenomenon?

This question may be a duplicate of existing questions. Please see if the linked questions answers this question. If you feel your question is different, or if you wish to change your question, please write to me here.

Desire is whatever it is except from what you call & think about it.

Srmantically the word 'desire' has 'it desires, it desires' for designation. It desires this or that, therefore it is called desire.

If it is confusing id recommend a primer on general semantics, some popularization of 'science & sanity', eg 'Tyranny of Words'.

The linked questions covers multiple terms in Buddhism that are related to desire, which is a very broad English word - craving (tanha), clinging (upadana), desire (chanda), sensual desires (kammacchanda), sensual lust (kamaraga). And these questions have also discussed differences between these terms. So, I hope, they answer this question adequately too. Otherwise, you can change it to become focused, specific and unique.

Hi @ruben2020, went through the links. Thankyou for the comment.


text:
Are we Mindful in Jhana?
When a person enters into Jhana (particularly 2nd onward):

What is he mindful of?
What kind of meta awareness or introspective awareness(Sampajānakārī) is there?

Note: it says that the 2nd onward is without vitaka and vicara. So my doubt is, if there is no object of attention, then what is one mindful of? And what is one peripherally aware (Sampājano) about?
Tripitaka, and even no person, is referring to "co-existence of mindfulness and Jhana". Am I missing something very obvious?

Firstly, you should check what your current understanding of mindfulness means - it's probably erroneously stuck in concepts. In jhana one is mindful of knowledge, but it is not knowledge in the conventional sense of knowledge. It is knowledge that is not bound by the restraints of language. However, some people need to be directed with regard to knowledge in jhana due to preoccupation with rapturous sensations. Ever so slightly bring in your current understanding of anicca, dukkha and anatta - might as well go for the jugular.

A very good translation of jhana is gnosis. That might help you form the correct understanding of it, although all such understandings tend to obfuscate what these actually are, so use it less as an understanding and more as a means to undo any misunderstanding.

I think this was really useful, speaking as a novice who’s not very attuned to the jargon. The comments underneath come across to me as a bit harsh!

Yes, you are missing the experience of jhana!  All kidding aside (though to be fair, once you enter jhana, this will make a lot more sense), it's actually pretty simple.  Jhana is absorption.  Vitaka and vicara are unnecessary in the 2nd jhana on because one is fully locked into single-pointednesss.  You essentially allow yourself to get sucked into the counterpoint sign.  In fact, you usually have to intentionally abandon applied and sustained thought in order for that to happen (though in some circumstances, the pull is strong enough where intention isn't necessary).  Think of it like getting caught up in a river.  When you are still close to the banks where the water is shallow and your feet can touch the ground, you have to apply effort to move downstream.  That's applied and sustained thought.  Once you are further out into the depths and can intentionally pull your feet off the ground and float (i.e. abandon applied and sustained thought), the current will carry you down without you exerting any effort on your own.  A very strong current or especially deep water, of course, will carry you without intentionality on your part.
So now we're floating down the stream.  Once you enter jhana and are locked in, there are other factors co-occuring with single pointedness (notably joy and rapture).  Since you are locked into one pointedness, these don't occur at the forefront of consciousness but rather exist on the periphery.  This is like seeing the the bank of the river as you float down the center.  Your concern is going downstream so your eyes are directed forward.  Nevertheless, the bank of the river brushes the edge of your consciousness.  You don't pay it much mind though every so often maybe you float past a moose and this grabs your attention completely and briefly pulls you out of jhana (this often happens with piti or rapture).
What the remaining jhanas do (i.e. #'s 3 and 4) is incrementally remove these peripheral objects.  In the third jhana, piti goes away.  In #4, so does joy (sukkha).  In the end, you are only left with equanimity.  Here, the ground is gone, the banks have fallen away, and there is no more current.  Yay.

Wow this simily is really great to open up. and you are right I have not yet experience Jhana... but Still my question is un answered.. what are we mindful of? Are we mindful of piti rapture, equanimity etc in that particular state. I am sorry if this question still look kiddiss to you.

Hmm,I heard counterpoint sign first time.. So are we mindful of that ? and will it also drop later?

Excellent answer! +1

downvoted your answer, you're not describing what happens to the sutta's definition of the jhana. You would not be able to explain what sato and samapajano are doing in third jhana.

Downvoted. this is just a farce of commentarial & contemporary talking points and has little to do with Right Contentration and Jhana as they are explained in the Sutta and Abhidhamma. It's not a useless answer but it's rather poorly explaining a very narrow subset of what has to do with samadhi development.

Also terminology is wrong and therefore i don't like it, had you got the terminology correct without insisting on overriding EBT definitions then i wouldn't mind this.

Like Max mentioned in the comment above, I think you are missing what mindfulness means in the context.  Mindfulness is particularly useful in entering jhana.  For instance, on my way in, I maintain vigilance and note the arising of the hindrances.  As you approach access  concentration, however, piti starts to arise and, if you relax and let it in, it begins to suffuse the mind/body with energy.  This greatly lessens the hold the hindrances have on you.  From here until the first jhana, it's not so much a matter of noting mindfully (though the hindrances do still arise)....

Instead, you want to focus on opening up to that energy.  Mindfulness in the conventional sense is too discursive and shifty to be of much use here.  You more or less follow the same process from here on out.  Just as you "let go" of your resistance in mind and body and dropped applied and sustain thought to allow in piti and enter the first jhana, eventually, you let go of piti on you way to the 3rd, then sukkha on the way to the fourth.

I'll just give sutta references to most relevant passages having to do with what is called jhana;

This is what occurred to Sariputta through insight into mental qualities one after another:
"There was the case where Sariputta — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities — entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Whatever qualities there are in the first jhana — directed thought, evaluation, rapture, pleasure, singleness of mind, contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness,[2] desire, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention — he ferreted them out one after another. Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided. He discerned, 'So this is how these qualities, not having been, come into play. Having been, they vanish.' He remained unattracted & unrepelled with regard to those qualities, independent, detached, released, dissociated, with an awareness rid of barriers. He discerned that 'There is a further escape,' and pursuing it there really was for him. - mn111

Then, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, I enter and dwell in the first jhāna, which consists of rapture and pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by thought and examination. With the subsiding of thought and examination, I enter and dwell in the second jhāna, which has internal placidity and unification of mind and consists of rapture and pleasure born of concentration, without thought and examination. With the fading away as well of rapture, I dwell equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, I experience pleasure with the body; I enter and dwell in the third jhāna of which the noble ones declare: ‘He is equanimous, mindful, one who dwells happily.’ With the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the previous passing away of joy and dejection, I enter and dwell in the fourth jhāna, neither painful nor pleasant, which has purification of mindfulness by equanimity.
“Then, brahmin, when I am in such a state, if I walk back and forth, on that occasion my walking back and forth is celestial. If I am standing, on that occasion my standing is celestial. If I am sitting, on that occasion my sitting is celestial. If I lie down, on that occasion this is my celestial high and luxurious bed. This is that celestial high and luxurious bed that at present I can gain at will, without trouble or difficulty.” - an3.63

“Well, sir, while meditating diligent, keen, and resolute, we perceive both light and vision of forms. But before long the light and the vision of forms vanish. We haven’t worked out the reason for that.”
“Well, you should work out the reason for that. Before my awakening—when I was still unawakened but intent on awakening—I too perceived both light and vision of forms. - mn128

Mahanama, at any time when a disciple of the noble ones is keeping in mind the Tathāgata, his mind is not overcome with passion, not overcome with hate, not overcome with delusion. His mind is straightened, based on the Tathāgata.
And when the mind is straightened, the disciple of the noble ones gets inspired by the goal, gets inspired by the dhamma, gains joy connected with the dhamma.
When he is joyful, rapture arises.
When the heart is rapturous, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, he experiences happiness.
When he is happy, the mind becomes composed.
Mahanama, you should develop this recollection of the Buddha while walking, standing, sitting, or lying down. You should develop it while engaged in work and while living at home in a house full of children. - An11.12

Approaching them [monks], I will ask, ‘Venerable sirs, did the master [Buddha] ever come to Sāvatthī?’
If they tell me that he did come to Sāvatthī, then I will conclude that ‘Undoubtedly the master used a rains-bathing cloth of mine, or a meal for newcomers, or a meal for those going away, or a meal for the sick, or a meal for those tending the sick, or medicine for the sick, or gruel gifted every day.’
For me, recollecting that, joy will be born. When joyful, rapture will be born. When the heart is rapturous, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, I will experience happiness. When I am happy, the mind will become composed
That will be the development of my (five) faculties, (five) strengths, and (seven) factors of enlightenment. - Visākhāvatthu (Vinaya)

Basically Jhana can & should be developed in many ways,  not only with lights & visions as many unlearned people will have you believe.
Here on what is that 'mindfulness' in abhidhamma and sutta expression;

= Therein what is mindfulness-awakening-factor? Herein a monk is mindful, furnished with excellent mindfulness-penetration, he remembers, remembers constantly, what has long been done and long been said (concerning release). This is called mindfulness-awakening-factor.

That which is mindfulness, recollection, recall, mindfulness, remembrance, bearing (in mind), not losing, not confusing, mindfulness, the Faculty of Mindfulness, the Strength of Mindfulness, Right Mindfulness: this is called ‘mindfulness.’
The mindfulness which on that occasion is recollecting, calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty, mindfulness as power, right mindfulness—this is the faculty of mindfulness that there then is. (Theravadin abhihamma)

The Blessed One said, “Suppose, monks, that a large crowd of people comes thronging together, saying, ‘The beauty queen! The beauty queen!’ And suppose that the beauty queen is highly accomplished at singing & dancing, so that an even greater crowd comes thronging, saying, ‘The beauty queen is singing! The beauty queen is dancing!’ Then a man comes along, desiring life & shrinking from death, desiring pleasure & abhorring pain. They say to him, ‘Now look here, mister. You must take this bowl filled to the brim with oil and carry it on your head in between the great crowd & the beauty queen. A man with a raised sword will follow right behind you, and wherever you spill even a drop of oil, right there will he cut off your head.’ Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil, let himself get distracted outside?”
“No, lord.”
“I have given you this parable to convey a meaning. The meaning is this: The bowl filled to the brim with oil stands for mindfulness immersed in the body. Thus you should train yourselves: ‘We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.’ That is how you should train yourselves.”
Suppose, monk, that there were a royal frontier fortress with strong walls & ramparts and six gates. In it would be a wise, experienced, intelligent gatekeeper to keep out those he didn't know and to let in those he did. A swift pair of messengers, coming from the east, would say to the gatekeeper, 'Where, my good man, is the commander of this fortress?' He would say, 'There he is, sirs, sitting in the central square.' The swift pair of messengers, delivering their accurate report to the commander of the fortress, would then go back by the route by which they had come. Then a swift pair of messengers, coming from the west... the north... the south, would say to the gatekeeper, 'Where, my good man, is the commander of this fortress?' He would say, 'There he is, sirs, sitting in the central square.' The swift pair of messengers, delivering their accurate report to the commander of the fortress, would then go back by the route by which they had come.
"I have given you this simile, monk, to convey a message. The message is this: The fortress stands for this body — composed of four elements, born of mother & father, nourished with rice & barley gruel, subject to constant rubbing & abrasion, to breaking & falling apart. The six gates stand for the six internal sense media. The gatekeeper stands for mindfulness. The swift pair of messengers stands for tranquillity (samatha) and insight (vipassana). The commander of the fortress stands for consciousness. The central square stands for the four great elements: the earth-property, the liquid-property, the fire-property, & the wind-property. The accurate report stands for Unbinding (nibbana). The route by which they had come stands for the noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration." (Sutta)

Thanks a lot.. I guess there is big different between How sariputa dwels in Jhana and How moglana dwels in Jhana. Sariputa never loose mindfulness, and sampjana.  and I guess tibetans are follower of moglana and theravadin are followers of sariputa. I also noted in AN3.63 sariputa says he is walking and doing daily activity in the state of 4th Jhana. So he is not absorbed like How Samatha practitioners describes absorbtion.

An3.63 is a different Sutta, it's The Buddha speaking there. Very generally speaking jhana are wholesome states conducive to development, at that time one is secluded from unwholesome mindstates. The thing with lights & visions, those vision attainments are conducive to perfecting the power of concentration (samadhi, it's power is non-distractedness). The lights and visions are to be developed, there is nothing wrong with that but it's not the only kind of development, this is what i wanted to get across

In other words many states qualify to be called jhana due to the maturity of the faculties necessary for their attainment and the seclusion that there then is, they are right concentration if they are factor of the path & thus conducive to the undoing of rebirth.

I added a few paragraphs defining 'sati' which is usually translated as  'Mindfulness'. An increasingly popular translation is also 'retention'.

In the suttas, jhana is not a frozen stupor absorbed in a visual kasina, with body senses shut off. What sati and sampajano are doing in 3rd jhana, which explicitly state the jhana factors "sato and sampajano", is explained in AN 4.41, and MN 111. At the minimum, one is aware of the flux in changing sensations, perceptions, and verbal thoughts arising, persisting, fading.

"sato and sampajano" does not mean being conscious of phenomena.


text:
Should I practice a single mantra or multiple?
I've received empowerment for Seven Line Prayer & have been practicing it consistently ever since.
Once in a while, a thought arises that I would like to practice other mantras for 'worldly situations', e.g. Green Tara when there is a situation of illness & disease
Should I concentrate my efforts on a single practice? Or is it beneficial to 'spread out' my practices. My goals are stream-entry as a layperson

If your goal is stream entry, then you need to break the first three fetters. These fetters are (in no particular order):

Self-view: the state in which clinging to the five aggregates creates a sense of self — an 'I', 'me', or 'mine' — that appears as permanent or irreducible
Rites and Rituals: the state in which practices or doctrine are treated as though they have power in themselves to create attainment, regardless of one's understanding
Blind Skepticism: the state in which intellectual theories and arguments are allowed to outweigh and supplant experience

Mantras have their uses, but they fall too easily into the 'Rites and Rituals' category. The ideal of a mantra is to embody the spirit of the mantra, but far too many people repeat mantras endlessly, without ever grasping the real essence of them. That is of no use.
With all that in mind, well... Make a choice and commit to it. If you choose to stay with one mantra, stay with it, and dive into it. If you choose to experiment, experiment fully and diligently. Know in your heart that whichever path you chose you will eventually have to abandon. The mantra — if it's well-given, and well-designed — is there to break a fetter, and once the fetter is gone the mantra will be pointless. Then you will move on to other, higher, better practices (which you will also ultimately have to abandon).
Sigh...
Stream entry means leaving the sure footing of the dry earth of common understanding and giving yourself to the waters of potential. No one does it unless they throw themselves (calmly and confidently) into it. But the commitment isn't to the waves; the commitment is to the far shore. Understanding that distinction is what one must focus on.

From my experience of Tibetan Buddhism, you probably need an empowerment for each mantra. Empowerments are effectively introductions.

The implication in the question suggests that you have an inner inclination to recognize worldly suffering. From my experience, whilst this was a tough undertaking, it was a necessary part of my practice. I had been drawn to hold the world's suffering and not just at the planes of materiality but down into the collective human unconscious - literally going through the hell realms. In Zen terms this is called The Great Doubt. It had led to a great, unfounded compassion and an understanding of the suffering of others in all situations and at different levels.
I could go into more detail with that, but it would drown out the focus of this answer. Suffice to say, that one does not necessarily need to 'pain' themselves to such a degree, but that one makes a sign of recognition to the suffering of other beings in a way that is conducive to your current karmic structure. The thing about the karmic structure is that we cannot really know where our practice will take us; it is different for everyone. But there are universals that show themselves from time to time and that is why we have a context - like Buddhism - where other travellers who have fared the road leave clues, markers, and little signs written on scraps of cardboard.
I don't know anything about the seven-line prayer, but briefly scanning over it suggests that it promotes great reverence towards a particular guru. I was never drawn into salivating over teachers in this way. The point is to find your own reliance and not become hazed by someone else's idea of what a path is - no matter what robes they wear or what lineages they bonk you on the head with. These things are only fluff sprinkled with glitter.
Now, ask yourself: is it sincerely possible to focus your efforts onto a single practice with the goal of stream-entry?... No! No! No...
The Japanese Zen Master, Hakuin, points this out with succinct beauty:

“People see it as if it is far away. What a pity! They are like a man
who, standing in water, complains of thirst”

The supposed supernatural benefits of mantras are questionable, in my opinion. Mantras are a learning device to help fix the mind on a single area of concentration. All of the most profound mantras are mostly silent. They are contenplative strings of meanings assigned to non-semantic or semantic syllables.
I mean, perhaps "oṃ bhaiṣajye bhaiṣajye mahābhaiṣajya samudgate svāhā" can cure an illness, but personally I have no faith in the material medicinal benefit in chanting these words. IMO, and as I have been taught in the esoteric teachings I have received in the past, the mantra is a pedagogical device for leading the mind towards liberation, not for transforming the physical maladies that plague the physical body and the world it is in. That being said, in the texts that transmit these mantras as well as in the living traditions that do so, supernatural, supernormal, and/or magical benefits are supposed to accompany their usage. I won't say that there's no such thing as a seemingly-miraculous event caused by a mantric recitation, but I've certainly never witnessed such a thing with my own person.
If you've taken formal refuge with a Tāntrika guru, if you practice the guruyoga, only your guru can answer this question. In a Vajrayāna context, there is nothing wrong with reciting a mantra or dharani that does not require a specific ordination/empowerment. The Medicine Buddha mantra requires no ordination or empowerment. Similarly, the Prajñā mantra (i.e. "gate gate" etc.) requires no initiation or empowerment. Ask your guru if the mantras you are attracted to require specific initiations ("lung" in Tibetan).


text:
Relying upon a Spiritual Guide, who created this idea? Is it actually a necessity for liberation?
I have a friend who is in/with the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) and she states the importance of relying upon a spiritual guide.
I know that this meditation practice is a part of the Tibetan Lamrim practice.
What I ask is who created this "necessity" or concept in Buddhism?
This seems to me that it completely contradicts the Buddhas teaching!
From the mahaparinibbana sutta:

"Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto
yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your
island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.

There is more to that sutta but I do not want to link massive paragraphs.
While conventionally we need teachers to teach us things. We even had a teacher, our parents, teach us how to bathe correctly!
Though from my understanding in Buddhism, the Buddha IS the teacher! He IS the example and the dharma IS his teachings of the truth.
So who taught this necessity for a teacher and to what degree is this a necessity?
From my understanding only a Buddha is self realised, and arhant is a disciple so by definition an arhant has relied upon a teacher, but that teacher can specifically be Buddha, via the suttas.

What is NKT? New Kadampa Tradition?

Yeah, new kadampa tradition. thank you for tidying up the question BTW. I am not used to the etiquette of this site or script used here.

It's true that DN 16 says rely on yourself but it doesn't mean you don't need a teacher, just as a student in university relies on his own effort to study for exams, do assignments, projects etc. but may need guidance from his lecturer or professor.
The following sutta states that one who doesn't know what is to be known, should seek a teacher.
The term for teacher here is satthu in Pali. In Pali, there are no definite articles like "a" or "the" and also no upper case and lower case, as in "a teacher" and "the Teacher", so it may very well refer to the Teacher i.e. the Buddha, as it is found in Ven. Sujato's translation.

“Bhikkhus, one who does not know and see as it really is
aging-and-death, its origin, its cessation, and the way leading to its
cessation, should search for a teacher in order to know this as it
really is.
“Bhikkhus, one who does not know and see as it really is birth …
existence … clinging … craving … feeling … contact … the six sense
bases … name-and-form … consciousness … volitional formations, their
origin, their cessation, and the way leading to their cessation,
should search for a teacher in order to know this as it really is.”
SN 12.82 (translated by Ven. Bodhi)

The following sutta shows five ways of learning and practice that leads to liberation. Only the first involves a teacher. So, a teacher is not absolutely necessary.

(1) “Here, bhikkhus, the Teacher or a fellow monk in the position of a
teacher teaches the Dhamma to a bhikkhu. In whatever way the Teacher
or that fellow monk in the position of a teacher teaches the Dhamma to
the bhikkhu, in just that way he experiences inspiration in the
meaning and inspiration in the Dhamma. As he does so, joy arises in
him. When he is joyful, rapture arises. For one with a rapturous mind,
the body becomes tranquil. One tranquil in body feels pleasure. For
one feeling pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated. This is the first
basis of liberation, by means of which, if a bhikkhu dwells heedful,
ardent, and resolute, his unliberated mind is liberated, his
undestroyed taints are utterly destroyed, and he reaches the
as-yet-unreached unsurpassed security from bondage.
(2) “Again, neither the Teacher nor a fellow monk in the position of a
teacher teaches the Dhamma to a bhikkhu, but he himself teaches the
Dhamma to others in detail as he has heard it and learned it. In
whatever way the bhikkhu teaches the Dhamma to others in detail as he
has heard it and learned it, in just that way, in relation to that
Dhamma, he experiences inspiration in the meaning and inspiration in
the Dhamma. As he does so, joy arises in him. When he is joyful,
rapture arises. For one with a rapturous mind, the body becomes
tranquil. One tranquil in body feels pleasure. For one feeling
pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated. This is the second basis of
liberation, by means of which, if a bhikkhu dwells heedful, ardent,
and resolute, his unliberated mind is liberated, his undestroyed
taints are utterly destroyed, and he reaches the as-yet-unreached
unsurpassed security from bondage.
(3) “Again, neither the Teacher nor a fellow monk in the position of a
teacher teaches the Dhamma to a bhikkhu, nor does he himself teach the
Dhamma to others in detail as he has heard it and learned it, but he
recites the Dhamma in detail as he has heard it and learned it. In
whatever way the bhikkhu recites the Dhamma in detail as he has heard
it and learned it, in just that way, in relation to that Dhamma, he
experiences inspiration in the meaning and inspiration in the Dhamma.
As he does so, joy arises in him. When he is joyful, rapture arises.
For one with a rapturous mind, the body becomes tranquil. One tranquil
in body feels pleasure. For one feeling pleasure, the mind becomes
concentrated. This is the third basis of liberation, by means of
which, if a bhikkhu dwells heedful, ardent, and resolute, his
unliberated mind is liberated, his undestroyed taints are utterly
destroyed, and he reaches the as-yet-unreached unsurpassed security
from bondage.
(4) “Again, neither the Teacher nor a fellow monk in the position of a
teacher teaches the Dhamma to a bhikkhu, nor does he teach the Dhamma
to others in detail as he has heard it and learned it, nor does he
recite the Dhamma in detail as he has heard it and learned it, but he
ponders, examines, and mentally inspects the Dhamma as he has heard it
and learned it. In whatever way the bhikkhu ponders, examines, and
mentally inspects the Dhamma as he has heard it and learned it, in
just that way, in relation to that Dhamma, he experiences inspiration
in the meaning and inspiration in the Dhamma. As he does so, joy
arises in him. When he is joyful, rapture arises. For one with a
rapturous mind, the body becomes tranquil. One tranquil in body feels
pleasure. For one feeling pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated.
This is the fourth basis of liberation, by means of which, if a
bhikkhu dwells heedful, ardent, and resolute, his unliberated mind is
liberated, his undestroyed taints are utterly destroyed, and he
reaches the as-yet-unreached unsurpassed security from bondage.
(5) “Again, neither the Teacher nor a fellow monk in the position of a
teacher teaches the Dhamma to a bhikkhu, nor does he teach the Dhamma
to others in detail as he has heard it and learned it, nor does he
recite the Dhamma in detail as he has heard it and learned it, nor
does he ponder, examine, and mentally inspect the Dhamma as he has
heard it and learned it, but he has grasped well a certain object of
concentration, attended to it well, sustained it well, and penetrated
it well with wisdom. In whatever way the bhikkhu has grasped well a
certain object of concentration, attended to it well, sustained it
well, and penetrated it well with wisdom, in just that way, in
relation to that Dhamma, he experiences inspiration in the meaning and
inspiration in the Dhamma. As he does so, joy arises in him. When he
is joyful, rapture arises. For one with a rapturous mind, the body
becomes tranquil. One tranquil in body feels pleasure. For one feeling
pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated. This is the fifth basis of
liberation, by means of which, if a bhikkhu dwells heedful, ardent,
and resolute, his unliberated mind is liberated, his undestroyed
taints are utterly destroyed, and he reaches the as-yet-unreached
unsurpassed security from bondage.
AN 5.26

The following Vinaya quote shows that the Buddha intended for monks-in-training to definitely have a preceptor. That's absolutely required.

At that time the monks did not have preceptors or teachers, and as a
result they were not being instructed. While walking for almsfood,
they were shabbily dressed and improper in appearance. While people
were eating, they held out their almsbowls to receive leftovers, even
right over their food, whether it was staple food, non-staple food,
delicacies, or drinks. They ate bean curry and rice that they
themselves had asked for, and they were noisy in the dining hall.
People complained and criticized them, “How can the Sakyan ascetics
act like this? They are just like brahmins at a brahminical meal.”
The monks heard the complaints of those people. The monks of few
desires who had a sense of conscience, who were contented, afraid of
wrongdoing, and fond of the training, complained and criticized them,
“How can monks act like this?”
They then told the Buddha.
Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the
monks: “Is it true, monks, that monks act like this?”
“It’s true, Sir.”
The Buddha criticzed them, “It’s not suitable for those foolish men,
it’s not proper, it’s not worthy of an ascetic, it’s not allowable,
it’s not to be done. How can they act like this? This won’t give rise
to confidence in those without it or increase the confidence of those
who have it, but it will hinder confidence in those without it, and it
will cause some with confidence to change their minds.”
Then the Buddha spoke in many ways in dispraise of being difficult to
support and maintain, in dispraise of great desires, discontent,
socializing, and laziness; but he spoke in many ways in praise of
being easy to support and maintain, of fewness of wishes, contentment,
self-elimination, ascetic practices, serenity, reduction in things,
and of being energetic. After giving a teaching on what is right and
proper, he addressed the monks:
“There should be a preceptor.
The preceptor should regard his student as a son and the student his
preceptor as a father. In this way they will respect, esteem, and be
considerate toward each other, and they will grow and reach greatness
on this spiritual path.
And a preceptor should be chosen like this:
After putting his upper robe over one shoulder, a student should pay
respect at the feet of a potential preceptor. He should then squat on
his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerable, please be my
preceptor.’ And he should repeat this a second and a third time. If
the other makes it understood by body, by speech, or by body and
speech: ‘Yes,’ or, ‘No problem,’ or, ‘It’s suitable,’ or, ‘It’s
appropriate,’ or, ‘Carry on with inspiration’—then a preceptor has
been chosen. If the other doesn’t make it understood by body, by
speech, or by body and speech, then a preceptor hasn’t been chosen.
Pli Td Kv1 sub-chapter 15

The qualities of a good teacher and preceptor can be found in Pli Td Kv1 sub-chapter 16, Mil 4.5, AN 5.159.
And finally we have the famous Rhinoceros Sutta telling us that for renunciants on the path to liberation, it's best to find companions who are on par or better. If not found, then go alone.

If you gain a mature companion,
a fellow traveler, right-living & wise,
overcoming all dangers
go with him, gratified,
mindful.
If you don't gain a mature companion,
a fellow traveler, right-living & wise,
wander alone
like a king renouncing his kingdom,
like the elephant in the Matanga wilds,
his herd.
We praise companionship — yes!
Those on a par, or better,
should be chosen as friends.
If they're not to be found,
living faultlessly,
wander alone
like a rhinoceros.
Rhinoceros Sutta (Snp 1.03)

I appreciate that rhinoccerous sutra quote.

The first quote from the SN I have bukkhu bodhis book here on ebook and the notes suggest that it was a Buddha, meaning looking for the Buddha as the teacher.

Whether  it be  the Buddha  or a  disciple,  the one in
dependence  upon  whom  one  gains  path  knowledge  is
called a  teacher  (satthii,  a  word  usually reserved for  the
Buddha); he should be  sought for.

Is a teacher necessary for liberation and to what degree?

A teacher is necessary insofar as you cannot attain it on your own.
If you are so talented that you completely get it just from reading the Heart Sutra, or the Cuckoo's Song of Total Presence or the original suttas etc. then why would you need a guide. There are people like that, they are rare but they certainly do exist. There's nothing wrong with being a genius.
However if after reading some texts you feel like you still have a way to go, then it is only natural to rely on someone for guidance, at least to some degree. I mean, you asking this question here is an act of asking for guidance, isn't it.
And if you are really desperate for Enlightenment, it makes perfect sense to throw everything you've got at the teacher's feet and beg for instruction. The famous masters of the past did precisely this.
It is foolish to assume there were no people born before you who made it the task of their lives to get to the bottom of this Buddhism thing. If such people existed (and there were plenty of them in the last 2600+ years) it only makes sense to assume that some of them actually got it.
Now, if they got it, wouldn't it make sense for you to listen to what they have to say, to save you the hassle of stumbling on your own? Or is that too disturbing for the good old EGO, to have to follow a lead?
Finally, as the traditional metaphor goes: all rivers of India have their water come from the Himalayas. All instructions you get from the secondary texts and contemporary teachers are ultimately the Buddha's teaching. Relying on a good Buddha's student you're relying on the Buddha.

Seems you misunderstood the question entirely.

"Is a teacher necessary for liberation and to what degree?" - if this is not your question please edit your post and its title to clarify.

This question is a perfect example of why you need a teacher.
Are we Mindful in Jhana?
The Sutras are a great 10,000 foot guide to Buddhism, but they lack specificity.  It's akin to someone directing you to San Francisco to NY.  The suttas pretty much say "go east young man".  At best, they might tell you to pass through Chicago and Denver on the way.  Your teacher (and commentarial literature) is responsible for fleshing out those directions.  He might tell you to take interstate 80, avoid driving directly through Chicago, and to be sure to stop at some awesome truck stop on the way.  He might even make sure you know how to drive a frigging car before sending you on your way.
The suttas are great, don't get me wrong, but you are going to get lost if you follow those directions alone.  Further more, it's always nice to be able to stop for clarification along the way

But who stated this? From what you said this is your opinion, using a useless analogy of directing instructions of travelling. The Abhidhamma is the commentary to the practices, the teacher himself would have learned from such teachings and what you state is as if the suttas and by default Buddhas instructions have no validity, and/or are unable to be understood! Which would just make them useless nonsense, which they are not!

It's not that they have no validity, it just that over time the pedagogy of conveying them has matured.

I think this sutta explains such pedagogy maturation https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn20/sn20.007.than.html

The suttas and additional literature aren't mutually exclusive.  I practice Rinzai Zen and still read the Pali canon and can even read quite a bit of Pali.  That said, I'm frankly grateful for the additional detail that's been added over the centuries.  It's helped my practice immensely.

If it aligns with teacher's instruction then it is good and it is then not a 'peg' making me wrong in equating what you called the maturing pedagogy with the example in the sn20. In general sects that do not emphasise the sutta memorizing don't do it for a not noble reason and therefore i was compelled to take a stab at this answer. I still don't think you should say "you are going to get lost if you follow those directions alone" because who are you to make such evaluations when the teacher said that is exactly what one ought to memorize & master.

@user21874 forgot to tag

I still stand by that.  If all you do is memorize and study the suttas on your own, you are in danger of misinterpreting them.  I would also add that they are highly technical in places and often gloss over important subtleties.  As in the question I mentioned, the suttas don't have anything to say, for example, to a student who is struggling between access concentration and jhana.  They simply provide a stock description.  It's not that what they say is wrong, it's just that what they say isnt always the most helpful.

In short it is one's own responsibility to make effort and finding suitable teachers is essentially all of that 'making an island'.
Canki Sutta explains how to choose a teacher who claims to have attained some distinct knowledge & vision.
Ariyapariyesana Sutta tells us how The Bodhisatta approached several teachers claiming various knowledge & vision.
Samadhi Sutta explains how a person who has attained either insight or tranquility should be looking to approach a suitable individual who can complement his development so that he can attain both tranquility & insight.

Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."
"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path. - SN 45.2

I want to emphasise 'admirable' once again and that a teacher has to be carefully observed in regards to qualities of greed, anger & delusion before one visits & lends ear.

Relying upon a spiritual guide is a technique that helps one to develop faith in something other than your own troubled faculties. In my current understanding, this too can become troublesome. It can cause a fracture in the psyche, where the person always refers to an imagined entity for direction - which is another figment of the mind. It seems to be largely a Tibetan thing, but knowing how mastered the Tibetans are in this region, it probably works well for them and their students.
In all its rudiments, I think under well supervised conditions, what one is actually being taught (or should be taught) is how to reach that part of your mind that is receptive to the spiritual voyage. It is just that we often feel the need to personify that part of us, when in the clear light of day the spiritual guide grows into a sensitive, flexible, willing and responsive participant of this world which amounts to the simplicity of you, and not any ideas about other entities.

So you are saying the reliance of a spiritual guide is a means to an end to enable us to communicate directly with the inner guru, sati guru?

Yes, they are both one and the same. But some traditions are quite clear in that the guide is a separate entity. Not my kind of thing, so I wouldn't go there.

In addition to the quote from this answer I'm reminded of advice from another (non-Buddhist) tradition: "Don't just study the lesson -- study the teacher".
I think that makes sense in any context -- if you really wanted to learn to practice Mathematics for example, you probably really need to study mathematicians and how they practice, and not simply study mathematics.
There's also a limit to what can be conveniently explained in words. In a Tai Chi class yesterday, the Master warned that some people read a lot and get the wrong the idea from books (instead they ought to practice a lot), and that sometimes books are misleading, and that you learn more from watching and copying the teacher. Incidentally he also said that when the teacher corrects you, then that's one thing; but pay attention when they correct someone else, because it's often easier to see someone else's mistake being corrected than to see it is to see your own mistake.
Also, your quote from the mahaparinibbana sutta: that was to his own students, after he had been teaching for 50 years or so, presumably to solidify their resolve and prepare them for his passing. What I said above (about needing a Master) may apply less when you are a Master yourself and no longer a novice -- when you "have had" a Master.
The term "spiritual guide" in the OP might perhaps be analogous to Kalyāṇa-mittatā in Pali and in the suttas.

I had read the question with the implication that spiritual guide and spiritual teacher are two distinct artefacts, one being a non-physical entity and the other physical. But you - and some others - have only addressed the physical teacher aspect. Perhaps I'm missing something?

"Kalyāṇa-mittatā" Well he does mention this in the sutta, I just didn't want to copy paste massive paragraphs of the most largest sutta.  Obviously the tibetan guru/student relationship is something different than just this, which imo is refuge to sangha.

@Remyla Thank you for for clarifying. You can add the [tag:tibetan-buddhism] tag if you wanted to limit the topic (and answers) to Tibetan Buddhism only. You wrote, "it completely contradicts the Buddhas teaching", I think that I and several other answers were trying to identify some parallels which may be found in the Buddha's teachings.

@Max The thought didn't even occur to me that a "Guide" might be a non-corporeal entity. Even recollecting the "Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha" trilogy I'd personally imagine the Buddha embodied as a "physical" teacher.

Fire is a destructive force that will consume whatever we give it, yet in return, fire cooks our food, heats our homes, gives us light, and accompanies our reveries. Meditation is a kind of destructive force as well. Meditation helps us break the hold that our dramatic lives have on our emotions and thoughts. It also shows us the illusory nature of so much that we take to be real, that harms us, and it frees us from that suffering. Meditation breaks down the barriers that keep us constrained to just a limited corner of our otherwise powerful minds. And it allows us to find our way to our true nature. Finding this way is up to us, and that is what your quotation was saying.
However, like fire, mediation can have some powerful, and possibly harmful effects depending on how you react to them. That’s why it’s been said, in regard to meditation: It’s better not to start; but once started it’s better to finish. The ‘lifeguard’ that saves you from possibly being psychologically damaged by what you experience is a qualified teacher who knows what the expected experiences are that will arise, if you maintain a dedicated practice. And by “know” I don’t mean “read about it.” A qualified teacher will have been through it themselves, and will have internalized an explanatory framework to allow them to communicate what is happening to you, and why it’s happening. This is why you need a teacher.
Modern meditation that is offered up online and in classes are only meant to help you reduce stress, lose weight, get over emotional issues, and get the partner of your dreams (and whatever else the marketing department comes up with). The teachers often only know that much, and in many cases, haven’t gone beyond that point, so if you go too far with your mediation practice, you’re playing with fire, without a resource to protect you, because you don’t have a qualified teacher.
This, by the way, has inspired a whole new field of research that falls under the title: “The Dangers of Meditation.” Do a web search, there’s lots of articles. What it all boils down to though, is that modern secular meditation has been disassociated from the traditional explanatory frameworks that protect meditators. Outside of those frameworks, and Buddhism is (the best ) one, you fall into the fire analogy again—which in itself is proof that mediation has real effects, that go way beyond simple mindfulness.
Unfortunately, those that research these issues that arise from secular meditation practices, aren’t much more informed about traditional teaching of meditation, so they don’t realize the cause (that of having disassociated meditation from traditional explanatory frameworks) and just claim meditation is the cause, period, when (IMHO) it’s incompetence and ignorance, coupled with a large amount of hubris on the part of those who spawned the mindfulness industry without truly understanding what was at stake.
I added that last paragraph, to cutoff the possibility that someone reading this might get scared to meditate. Find a qualified teacher, listen to what they say, get their phone number, and then it’s all on you to practice.
Good luck!

That copy paste was horrible and not relevant to the discussion at all. Shame I am too new to downvote it, not that it makes any difference.

When you ask a question on SE, it is no longer your question, it belongs to the community. That’s why it can be edited. The answers are directed at your question, but are for anyone who may come along in the future. Someone with sincere intentions. You want a name to blame to win an argument with your friend? The ‘idea’ isn’t a cause. Humans have always sought out teachers, as far back as prehistoric societies. My answer explains the need in the case of meditation. The ‘idea’ is just a recognition of the need, as is the prescription to seek a teacher. My words, btw.


text:
anapanasati: nimitta or ambient light?
I have started facing a weird problem which I wouldn't earlier.
While meditating during daytime, I sometimes doubt whether I am actually experiencing nimitta or my vittaka has waned and, instead of making way for ekaggata, my closed eyes are in fact picking up ambient light.
This inevitably keeps me from attaining stable anapana-nimitta in that session and the progression plateaus, irrespective of how effortless maintaining concentration has become. That leads to restlessness and I either don't feel like keeping my aditthana, or if I can nullify that I emerge from the session somewhat disappointed that I didn't utilize the session well.
I'd like to clarify that I not seeking any jhanic factor or for anapana-nimitta to emerge, and I can attain anapana-nimitta and subsequently absorption for desired time period before progressing to the higher jhanas during night-time because I know I can't be confounded by ambient light...
So, other than only sitting at nighttime, which isn't really a solution, what do I do? Any pointers?

The technical terms were an attempt to keep the question specific :) you seem like someone who hasn't had this problem (it's funny indeed). So how do you tell one from another? Looks like someone (probably you) has an aversion to jargons, which is fine i guess if i receive an actionable tip.

People cover their eyes, to block the light, when they want to sleep when it's light outside (Google for "eye mask" or "sleep mask") -- it is effective at blocking the light, but I haven't seen that as a Buddhist practice.

That would create an aversion to external conditions, similar to using earplugs while meditating to block out sounds that might disrupt the session, and then not being able to practice unless at a quiet place. IMO that would defeat the purpose. I am not looking for technical fixes. the lighting of the room doesn't bother me, the thought that it might confound my experience of nimitta does rear up from time to time, and tends to take the jhana with it. In a nutshell, the root cause is doubt, not light.

I wasn't trying to express aversion with the tetminology. i thought to point out that using many technical terms whilst essentially asking what they mean makes me averse to answering because i think that it invites an undoing of other people's work and will be disagreeable by default. I deleted it because in hindsight i think i made a hasty judgement and shouldn't criticize, i think there is value in keeping things simple and i guess you can see that it is a bit funny.

Hey, no issues, I was just pulling your leg ;). As an aside, aren't all judgements hasty?

I think I have meditated too much today.

Nah, a wise person considers both what is and isn't right before making a judgement whereas a foolish person judges a case hastly. Says so in Dhp

Your practice is too tight, too stringent, too systematic. Oh, and welcome to BuddhsimSE. ;-)

The key phrase in your question is "I sometimes doubt [...]". The "I" in this phrase is your mind entering to question your meditation practice, because that's what the thinking mind does: it looks for problems to worry about so that it can keep itself active. There are three things you can do about it, depending on your inclinations:

Decide (for no reason whatsoever) that it is ambient light, and forget about it
Decide (for no reason whatsoever) that it is nimitta, and be content
Decide (for no reason whatsoever) that it is unimportant mind-stuff, and wait until it goes away

Whatever the case is will be self-evident once your mind gets out of the way, so feed, soothe, or ignore the thinking beast until it subsides.

We don't care about  nimitta or ambient light. We care only  the breaths.
The  nimitta or ambient light is naturally appearing at focusing the breath. Thinking of light or nimitta is not thinking of breaths. Thinking out of breath is losing the meditation. Focus on the breaths. Don't think of  nimitta or ambient light, although it is appearing so shiny.
When the meditation on breaths are in balance and powerful, the  nimitta or ambient light will be stable and powerful at the breath together automatically without any attempt on them.
That strongest meditation level is when the practitioner letting go the breath and take the strongest & brightest  light instead of the breath. This step is call "Vivicceva kamehi [letting go 5 strings, breath, etc., by getting the shine bright Nimitta instead.]" and "Alokasanna [Light Memory]".

As other answers hinted at, you having these worries and doubts about your experiences and what they mean, is a sure sign that you got too obsessed with the concept of progress.
This concept is just an idea in your head, a kind of hook you are on. Paradoxically, the only way to get to the next level is to drop this notion of levels and progress altogether.
Try and let go, and see what remains of your meditation.

Whether it is or isn't a vision of light i can't tell and i would advise you not to care about the classfication. Rather just discern it's arising, persistence, change & cessation as one would in course of general kayagatasati development.
I guess you are disturbed by this because you think that if it is ambient light then it is distracting you from the perception of breathing but seeing ambient light isn't really a problem lest you make it a problem.
Did you know that according to the Sutta the particular benefit of anapanasati is the cutting off distracting thoughts rather than seeing lights & visions?

He should develop perception of unattractiveness so as to abandon lust... good will so as to abandon ill will... mindfulness of in-&-out breathing so as to cut off distractive thinking... the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am. An9.1

If your inclination & bent is seeing white lights, then there is really no point in maintaining mindfulness of the breathing over a perception of diffused light lest the perception of diffused light is causing distracting thoughts.
Also the in & out breaths are technically the internal air element and if you contemplate them as such and make it your inclination, then you can be expected to attain absorbtion based on the air kasina.
Whereas if you use the breathing merely to calm down whilst generally tuning your mind to the perception of light, to a pleasant feeling, to the deathless element or whatnot, then it can go either way once one is sufficiently secluded and it's not easy to guess what turns out to be the dominantly effective inclination.

For starters, be aware that anapana-sati (breath meditation remembrance) as defined in the suttas is quite a different practice.
As this is a forum about Buddhism in general, it would be helpful if you designate what tradition you're practicing "anapana". Most people I would think, would assume when you say 'anapana', you're referring to sutta based practice which is completely different.  I've done the style of anapana you're describing before, and have experienced those same problems and much more.
My advice is, if you want to continue that type of anapana you're doing now, there are Taoist systems that do a much better job of it (working with visual light, third eye, states of formlessness and frozen stupor). If you're doing 'anapana' and having all kinds of problems that and have lost any connection with physical breath, how can it even rightly be called anapana?
(my notes with detailed studies on how sutta defines anapana, and how later Buddhism redefine into something else)
https://lucid24.org/sted/16aps/index.html

Ambient light perceptions are impermanent and should simply be observed:

SN22.102:1.2: “Mendicants, when the perception of impermanence is developed and cultivated it eliminates all desire for sensual pleasures, for rebirth in the realm of luminous form, and for rebirth in a future life. It eliminates all ignorance and eradicates all conceit ‘I am’

Since ambient light perceptions are impermanent, they will cease:

iti72:2.3: Renunciation is the escape from sensual pleasures. Formlessness is the escape from form. Cessation is the escape from whatever is created, conditioned, and dependently originated.

Aversion to light is not the escape from ambient perceptions. Aversion to light is simply clinging to the dark. Both ambient light and the perception of ambient light are impermanent and will change and disappear on their own without intervention. If Mara whispers "meditate only in the dark", be very careful. Furthermore, consider that light is actually important.
Indeed, the Buddha encourages us to develop the radiant mind independent of ambient perception, open to all perception without clinging:

AN6.29:5.1: Furthermore, a mendicant focuses on the perception of light, concentrating on the perception of day regardless of whether it is night or day.
AN6.29:5.2: And so, with an open and unenveloped heart, they develop a mind that’s full of radiance.

Light brings knowledge, but how will you understand? It’s a true problem