text:
How do Buddhist monks find reincarnations of previous monks while filtering out the wrong persons?
I'm skeptical about this actually working. I would appreciate if someone could provide a logical answer that will clear up my skepticism.

To my knowledge, it's only Tibetan Buddhists who do this.  Are there others?

Sometimes it doesn't work very well: there are examples of reincarnations who behave badly.
And they must make it work: for example the current Dalai Lama wasn't keen to study, when he was young, his teacher had to make him study by threatening him with a whip.
At Home With the Dalai Lama

I also know that he wasn't a particularly good student when he was young. He had a mercurial temper and was impulsive. Monastic disciplines like meditation and scriptural study did not come naturally to him.
"Around seven or eight," the Dalai Lama told me in an earlier meeting, a mischievous gleam in his eyes, "I had no interest in study. Only play. But one thing: my mind since young, quite sharp, can learn easily. This brings laziness. So my tutor always keep one whip, a yellow whip, by his side. When I saw the yellow whip, the holy whip for holy student the Dalai Lama, I studied. Out of fear. Even at that age I know, if I study, no holy pain."
Despite his reluctance to study when he was a child, the Dalai Lama applied himself every morning. With perseverance and self-control, he learned to sit still for long periods. Gradually he was better able to control his errant impulses. Meditation and study came before play; delayed gratification became a matter of course.

See also Training.
Wikipedia has a description of how they found him, Searching for the reincarnation, which includes,

The High Lamas used several ways in which they can increase the chances of finding the reincarnation. High Lamas often visit Lhamo La-tso, a lake in central Tibet, and watch for a sign from the lake itself. This may be either a vision or some indication of the direction in which to search, and this was how Tenzin Gyatso was found.
It was here that in 1935, the Regent Reting Rinpoche received a clear vision of three Tibetan letters and of a monastery with a jade-green and gold roof, and a house with turquoise roof tiles, which led to the discovery of Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama.[26][27][28]

There's a description of the theory and practice of it here on the Dalai Lama's web site: Reincarnation

If a monk has attained one of those supernatural powers that allows seeing peoples' previous lives, he would simply just know it and there'd be no need to "filter" out the wrong persons. Otherwise, there's no guarantee on finding the right guy..

"...With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings. He sees — by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human — beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma..." ~ MN 39 ~

For the topics of supernormal powers and skepticism, see the other thread here


text:
Which buddhist traditions use silent visual applause, instead of clapping, to show appreciation and what is the origin of this practice?
In sanghas following the tradition of Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh, to show appreciation one does not clap, instead one flaps his/her hands. This silent visual applause is similar to the sign for applauds in American, British, French and possibly other sign languages used by deaf persons.
Which other buddhist traditions also use silent visual applause to show appreciation? What is the origin of this way of showing appreciation in buddhism, was it borrowed from a sign language, and if so where and when?

I belong to one of Thich Nhat Hahn's Plum Village sangha as well as Thich Nhat Hahn's Wake Up sangha. We do silently show applause like you mentioned above. However I do not know the origin, I just do it because it is fun and it makes me and others smile. I also like that it does not cause an increase is sudden noise, like clapping does, if a teacher is talking quietly or after a pleasant song is played/sung.

The Sound of One Hand = quiet sound" (Soundless Sound)

This video says that it's widespread among French and German university students, ecologists, especially left-wing, for example at political assemblies and unions. And it says that an internet search shows that it's part of the "language of signs" but that no-one knows which country it began in.
The page Monks and nuns from the Thich Nhat Hanh collective, in Plum Village, France, pay our school a special visit suggest that Thich Nhat Hahn are:

From France
Teaching 'silent applause'
Teaching 'ecologist' songs such as "I love nature"

So perhaps they adopted the gesture from that milieu (or vice versa): i.e. from European students and young ecologists.

I had no idea the visual applause was also used in such political contexts, especially as usually political meetings tend to be noisy! As for Thich Nhat Hahn, he is a vietnamese buddhist monk living in exile in France in Plum Village. (Unfortunately he is currently unwell and in hospital.)

I can't edit my earlier comment. I made a typo in Thich Nhat Hanh's name. His biog can be found on the Plum Village's website.

That's OK. When I said that "Thich Nhat Hanh are from France" I meant, "the Thich Nhat Hanh collective" as they were referred to in the title of that news item, i.e. Plum Village.

The Sound of One Hand = "quiet sound" (Soundless Sound - Emptiness)
At some point, completely quiet heart that does not even sound that can make us being distracted. Ears are hearing is still heard, but absolutely not disturbed mind. It is "beyond" all sound.
That is, in silence we "hear", "see", "understands" or "enlightenment" is many things, but when the mind is being distracted because of the "noise" we do not hear, do not see, do not understand.
The Sound of One Hand (101 storie Zen -Nyogen Senzaki)
The master of Kennin temple was Mokurai, Silent Thunder. He had a little protégé named
Toyo who was only twelve years old. Toyo saw the older disciples visit the master’s
room each morning and evening to receive instruction in sanzen or personal guidence in
which they were given koans to stop mind-wandering.
Toyo wished to do sanzen also.
“Wait a while,” said Mokurai. “You are too young.”
But the child insisted, so the teacher finally consented.
In the evening little Toyo went at the proper time to the threshold of Mokurai’s sanzen
room. He struck the gong to announce his presence, bowed respectfully three times
outside the door, and went to sit before the master in respectful silence.
“You can hear the sound of two hands when they clap together,” said Mokurai. “Now
show me the sound of one hand.”
Toyo bowed and went to his room to consider this problem. From his window he could
hear the music of the geishas. “Ah, I have it!” he proclaimed.
The next evening, when his teacher asked him to illustrate the sound of one hand, Toyo
began to play the music of the geishas.
“No, no,” said Mokurai. “That will never do. That is not the sound of one hand. You’ve
not got it at all.”
Thinking that such music might interrupt, Toyo moved his abode to a quiet place. He
meditated again. “What can the sound of one hand be?” He happened to hear some water
dripping. “I have it,” imagined Toyo.
When he next appeared before his teacher, he imitated dripping water.
“What is that?” asked Mokurai. “That is the sound of dripping water, but not the sound of
one hand. Try again.”
In vain Toyo meditated to hear the sound of one hand. He heard the sighing of the wind.
But the sound was rejected.
He heard the cry of an owl. This was also refused.
The sound of one hand was not the locusts.
For more than ten times Toyo visited Mokurai with different sounds. All were wrong. For
almost a year he pondered what the sound of one hand might be.
At last Toyo entered true meditation and transcended all sounds. “I could collect no
more,” he explained later, “so I reached the soundless sound.”
Toyo had realized the sound of one hand.

@ThanPhong, this is a wonderful koan, but is it directly related to the visual applause? If it was, I would expect all Zen buddhist traditions to use the visual applause instead of clapping. As far as I understand Korean zen buddhists do applaud noisily. This is in part why I asked which buddhist traditions use the visual applause.

@iCrazybest - I suspect that most readers of this "one-hand-clapping" story appreciate it because they are supposed to appreciate something that is so deep that they cannot grasp its meaning. Also, I suspect that this "sound of one hand clapping' really has no specific meaning, which lets the reader conjure whatever "deep" meaning he likes, and then say to himself, "Oooooo, now THAT is zen wisdom!"

Well there is a link to a book of etiquette that says "Hindu hosts are ..... waving fingers."
www.read-write-now.org/UserDir/Documents/Cultural%20Etiquette.pdf
A Chinese tradition for shaking hands involves waving hands up and down
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEkQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpeople.wku.edu%2Fhaiwang.yuan%2FChina%2Fdocs%2Fchinesecultureandcustoms.rtf&ei=9RxkVIb1JOmJsQTUzYD4DQ&usg=AFQjCNGd2Lid0ya_JeNnvRfMeNPpg7Xu8w&bvm=bv.79189006,d.cWc

The traditional Chinese ‘handshake’ consists of interlocking the
  fingers of the hands and waving them up and down several times. This
  is today rarely used (except during festivals, weddings and birthdays
  of the elderly), and the western style handshake is ubiquitous among
  all but the very old or traditional.

Of course whenever you talk about clapping and Buddhism you get the sound of one hand clapping, a traditional koan.
I replied to hopefully get some discussion going on this interesting topic. Unfortunately my googling has not show me much more. Thank you for the question.

thank you very much for this additional information, however it seems to to be about different practices. Your first link does not include your partial quote (searching for either 'Hindu hosts' or 'waving' does not show anything relevant), and you do not give the occasion for this gesture. The traditional Chinese handshake appears to be a different gesture as the fingers are interlocked and not used as a form of appreciation. So although very interesting, I don't think this addresses my question.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Lust - How Can it be Overcome?
I am an above beginner level meditator - I have been practicing Vipassana meditation regularly for past 6-7 months - By regularly, I mean 1hr of sitting meditation at least 5 times a week.
I have not been able to control my lust. I try to remain mindful during acts of sexual gratification...but they are like very few moments of awareness...rest of the time I am just going with the flow...Although I am a lay person, I want to be celibate...Please guide me.
I remember a story wherein Buddha said to someone how one should eat as if they are eating their own child having lost in a desert...are there any such stories from Buddha's life/teachings regarding this subject...Basically I need some inspiration...Please share your experience if possible

Ven. Ananda thero asked Lord Buddha a similar question on the last day of Lord Buddha. I can't post it due to lack of my english knowledge. Try to find it. It's very useful.

I would suggest that only a raising of consciousness can deal with this issue. This is why I like the Zen approach of just allowing the process to work without having to fight like a saint against ones unwanted predilections.  .

I have found that metta help me overcome lust and be a celibate. You just have to invest more in meditation and build up impressions of metta in your mind. Metta purifies heart. I remember it took me 2 years of mantra chanting to start overcoming lust in my life.

By trying to "control it", you are putting the (idea of) lust outside of yourself.  In effect you are seeing "the lust" and yourself as two separate entities.  That (conceived) separation sets up a duality.  On one side is "lust", which it sounds like you are labeling as "bad".  On the other side is self, which it sounds like you want to label as "good".  And you're attached to both these concepts, lust is bad and self is good (or "should" be good).
If you choose to acknowledge the sensations you are describing as "lust", the duality will disappear.
Try sitting whatever form of meditation you prefer, that doesn't involve visualization.  When sensations that you describe as "lust" come up, acknowledge them.  This is the difficult part.  "Acknowledge" means you accept the feeling, don't judge it or yourself, and watch what happens to the thought or feeling.  Then return to your practice.
In effect I'm suggesting you acknowledge the aspect of yourself that you conceive of as lust.  That acknowledgement will integrate you and dissolve the duality.  And lust will resume its normal, healthy role in your psyche.  May your life go well.

Since you are seeking inspiration similar to the simile how one should eat as if they are eating their own child having lost in a desert, to understand the drawbacks of lust, I think Alagaddupama Sutta is a good place where Buddha gave ten similes to understand the true nature of sensual pleasure.
Here, Buddha says that one should see sensual pleasure as either bare bones, a lump of flesh, a torch of straw, a pit  of burning coal, a dream, borrowed goods, a fruit tree, a slaughter house, a stake of swords or a snake's head to understand there true nature.
According to commentary and subcommentary sensual pleasure here means sexual intercourse or expressing sexual desire by other ways including hugging, petting and other acts to satisfy lust. The first 7 of the 10 similes are explained in further detail in Potaliya sutta as well as here (summary of all 10 explanations).

Bare bones, fleshless, blood-smeared, are thrown to a starving dog but
cannot satisfy the animal’s hunger. Similarly, sense-desires give no
lasting satisfaction
A lump of flesh for which birds of prey fight each other; if the bird
that has seized the lump of flesh, does not yield it, it may meet
death or deadly pain from the beaks and claws of the other birds.
Similarly, the sense-desires are common to many (bahusādhāraṇa), i.e.,
the same sense objects may be claimed by many and may become the cause
of deadly conflict
A torch of straw carried against the wind may cause severe burns to
the careless man if not quickly discarded. Similarly, sense-desires
will severely burn (anudahana), i.e., greatly harm him who
thoughtlessly, and unaware of the great danger, partakes of them in
the belief that they will bring light and joy to his life.
A pit of burning coals towards which a man is dragged by others; if he
cannot free himself from the grip, he will be thrown into the fire and
consumed by it. Similarly, sense-desires are like a vast conflagration
(mahābhitāpa) into which the victim is dragged by bad company, or by
his own deeds, causing his rebirth in miserable states of woe
A dream of a beautiful landscape that vanishes on awakening. Similarly, sense-desires are a brief illusion (ittara-paccupaṭṭhāna) like a dream, and disappointing after one awakens from infatuation to reality
Borrowed goods on which the borrower foolishly prides himself in public; but which are withdrawn by the owners when they see the boastful man. Similarly, sense-desires are temporary (tāvakālika) and not a true and lasting possession of him who enjoys them, filled with vain glory.
A fruit tree climbed by one who craves for the fruits; but another man, likewise greedy for them but unable to climb, chooses another method and fells the tree; and unless the first man quickly descends, he will break his limbs. Similarly, in the blind pursuit of sense pleasures one may “break all one’s limbs” (sabbaṅga-paccaṅga-bhañjana), may suffer severe injury of body and mind. The Sub-Comy refers also to punishment and torture incurred by reckless deeds to which people are driven by sense infatuation.
A slaughter house (or place of execution): because sense-desires are like a butcher’s (or executioner’s) block (adhikuṭṭana). This may mean that sense-desires kill much that is noble in man and cut off his higher development.
A stake of swords: sense-desires are piercing (vinivijjhana) penetrating deep within, causing wounds where there had been none. Unfulfilled or frustrated desire, or the pains of jealousy, are, indeed, like that ancient torture of the state of swords.
A snake’s head: sense-desires are a grave risk and peril (sasaṅka-sappaṭibhaya) for the present and future welfare, if one walks unwarily.
Alagaddupama Sutta [Nyanaponika Thera trans]

Lust is a biological impulse without which you would not have been born in the first place.
So honor it and respect it as nature's method to keep our race going.
Thus, realize it a powerful force and there are also repercussions to bashing it down or inhibiting yourself. Don't use any method that involves self-criticism, self-judgment, self-harm, hatred, etc. Otherwise you may make the problem worse and be sucked into a love-hate cycle.
The best methods from my experience:

the skeleton method upon yourself and others
breathing meditation. Go for the 1st samadhi, after learning about it if you do not know about it.
watching thoughts. Watch your thoughts until they disappear, this includes even your judgment of the process of this watching. Just watch detachedly. Keep letting go.
avoid sexy medias: music, shows, fantasies. If thoughts come up use the above method.
read as much buddhist parables and original scriptures as possible. Replace the habits that create more seeds of lust in the first place (see Right Effort).

It takes about a month of doing this to replace the neural wiring that causes excessive lust in the first place.
The friction is definitely worth it because with this clean, pliable mind you can focus on anything of your choosing. This is your real mind. (not to be confused with Real Mind)

The son's flesh simile is from SN 12.63 (Puttamansa Sutta: A Son's Flesh).
Lust is a very powerful force and it'd need a combination of various strategies to counteract it, everything including diets, moral disciplines, persistence, etc.
MN 20 (Vitakkasanthana Sutta: The Relaxation of Thoughts) suggests 5 helpful strategies to counter unwholesome thoughts:

He should attend to another theme, apart from that one, connected with what is skillful
(Then, if evil thoughts still arise) he should scrutinize the drawbacks of those thoughts
(Then, if evil thoughts still arise) he should pay no mind and pay no attention to those thoughts
(Then, ...) he should attend to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts
(Then, ...) with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he should beat down, constrain, and crush his mind with his awareness

Don't try to force this on to your self. You could try parts of @Christopher-Lee's answer to a certain extent. This should not reverse polariser your mind in the opposite direction though. This is something to watch out for.
In addition to this always keep looking at the sensation when there is a lustful through or state of mind. You will see there are certain sensation through out the body associated with lustful thoughts and state of mind. You have to be very equanimous looking at it's arising and passing away without aversion towards sensations or attachment towards the sensations which arise and pass away. As time goes you will become less lustful and also you will have more control.
See: Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta, Sal,āyatana Vibhanga Sutta

you mean not to turn craving into aversion...right??

@TheDarkKnightRules http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upekkha implies "freedom" from lust, not "aversion" to lust. Aversion and desire are presumably two of the three poisons: you want neither one nor the other.

Please be advised that, although many people will give you their take on how lust is to be "mindfully integrated" into daily life, this is the complete opposite of the Buddha's teaching.

Soṇa Sutta: Soṇa

It's not easy, living at home, to practice the holy life totally perfect, totally pure, a polished shell.
-- Ud 5.6

Bhikkhuni Sutta: The Nun

Then Ven. Ananda approached the nun and, on arrival, sat down on a prepared seat. As he was sitting there, he said to the nun: "This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying on food that food is to be abandoned.
"This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.
"This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.
"This body comes into being through sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge.
-- AN 4.159

Alagaddupama Sutta: The Water-Snake Simile

"Yes, indeed, lord. I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, and those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in are not genuine obstructions."
"Worthless man, from whom have you understood that Dhamma taught by me in such a way? Worthless man, haven't I in many ways described obstructive acts? And when indulged in they are genuine obstructions. I have said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. I have compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. I have compared sensual pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a snake's head: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. But you, worthless man, through your own wrong grasp [of the Dhamma], have both misrepresented us as well as injuring yourself and accumulating much demerit for yourself, for that will lead to your long-term harm & suffering."
-- MN 22

Nibbedhika Sutta: Penetrative

The passion for his resolves is a man's sensuality,
not the beautiful sensual pleasures
  found in the world.
The passion for his resolves is a man's sensuality.

The beauties remain as they are in the world,
while the wise, in this regard,
  subdue their desire.

-- AN 6.63

The OP asked "how" to overcome it: and didn't ask "whether" to overcome it, nor ask "how to integrate" it.

@ChrisW True, though I believe he asked for inspiring passages that would motivate him to stop. Since he did get other answers (or comments) advising the integration of a healthy level of lust, I felt it would be right to clearly distinguish that from the teachings of the canon. In doing so, my hope was that the doubt of "whether it's actually important" would lessen, hence aiding in the subduing of a hindrance, making this a 'how to' answer in this way. Take care.

Was just wondering about the "attitude" with which "Worthless man" is said in this context. Is it with sympathy and compassion? Or one of irritation?

The following is taken directly from wikipedia Five Hindrances

Analogy
The hindrance of sensory desire is compared to taking out a loan – any pleasure one experiences through these five senses must be repaid through the unpleasantness of separation or loss which invariably follow when the pleasure is used up. There is also interest to be repaid on the loan. Thus, the Buddha said that the pleasure is small compared to the suffering repaid.
Antidote
In order to overcome the hindrance of sensory desire (kamacchanda), the meditator must first apply mindfulness and recognize that the hindrance is present. Then one must look at the hindrance, analyze it, make it the object of our meditation, experience it fully. The meditator can then apply specific techniques such as contemplating the impermanence of the pleasant desire.
  Ajahn Brahmavamso emphasizes the technique of letting go of concern for the body and the five senses completely; he states:
  In meditation, one transcends sensory desire for the period by letting go of concern for this body and its five sense activity. Some imagine that the five senses are there to serve and protect the body, but the truth is that the body is there to serve the five senses as they play in the world ever seeking delight. Indeed, the Lord Buddha once said, "The five senses ARE the world" and to leave the world, to enjoy the other worldly bliss of Jhana, one must give up for a time ALL concern for the body and its five senses.

http://insightmeditationcenter.org/ has this to say about lust:

If there is excessive preoccupation with lust, one can focus on the body’s non-attractive parts, such as
  urine, saliva, pus, feces, phlegm, sweat, body hair, teeth, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver,
  spleen, intestines, undigested food, blood, fat….
• If desiring something that is harmful to us, we can focus on the consequences of getting what we want.
  Maybe you are craving potato chips and it gives you high blood pressure. Reflect on the possible effects
  of high blood pressure.
• If we desire something that might be appropriate, but we are clinging to that desire, we feel we just have
  to have it, we can focus on the impermanent nature of what we want. How long will the satisfaction last
  if the desire is fulfilled? This desire will fade. It may come back, but it’s not permanent.

concentrating on non-attractive parts seems helpful...thanks for the response

Given that you're a Vipassana meditator, I hope you'll understand when I say this- do not have aversion to lust or lustful thoughts. You need to be patient. Avoid sexual misconduct, but you need to cleanse a lot till you're free of lustful thoughts. Keep going at your meditation, but again- no aversion (and ofcourse no attachment)

I will provide some helpful suttas and then I'll tell which technique helped me.
First thing is understanding you're not your thoughts they are tools that helps us to function in this world.
And then you need to understand how thoughts like sensual pleasures can lead to suffering of oneself and others. (Generating Loving Kindness)

The Blessed One said, "Monks, before my self-awakening, when I was still just an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'Why don't I keep dividing my thinking into two sorts?' So I made thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness another sort. [MN19]

*For married people, they can follow precepts and moderation.
Second thing is understanding how lust arises from improper attention.

And what is the food for the arising of unarisen sensual desire, or for the growth & increase of sensual desire once it has arisen? There is the theme of beauty. To foster inappropriate attention to it: This is the food for the arising of unarisen sensual desire, or for the growth & increase of sensual desire once it has arisen. [SN 46.51]

This sutta doesn't talk about improper attention but it can lead you to the insight of improper attention.

Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya. [Ud 1.10]

Acknowledging when you feel they're arising but not welcoming and fastening to them.

As he doesn't relish that feeling, doesn't welcome it, & doesn't remain fastened to it, delight doesn't arise.  [MN38]

For example, mostly trying to live in the present moment & developing new habits because even if you know all teachings above but if you don't create new skillful habit then old sankharas might trigger from time to time so you might go up & down in those habits. (morden terms they use word like Neuroplasticity)
And it's not like one day you practice you master it and it's done. It is more like cause & effect when condition arises it can grow again.
That's why I think Buddha used to meditate daily because mind is fickle.
If you can't meditate daily for now then you can atleast try to be Mindful.
Now some people might progress gradually so have patience and keep practicing.
And sometimes other emotions like aversion or boredom can also trigger it. So, you can replace it with other habits like mindful breathing or mindful walking etc. (Right Effort)
*If you understand these things and even if you're married then you can control these feelings at will by adjusting your perception at will only towards partner and keeping it in balanced way.
I'm not master but I think I've worked on this so I wrote this answer and there are many things I'm still learning. So, if this doesn't work or might not seem beneficial then you can use other skillful methods.
Metta!

I have not been able to control my lust
"Abstain from sexual misconduct" has various interpretations, one of which is:

Sex between consenting adults is OK
Sexual assault, rape, is not OK

When you say, "I have not been able to control my lust" it's not clear what you're talking about; but basic compassion might be enough reason to deter you from assaulting people.
And I don't know you but I suspect you have been able to control your lust, frequently, perhaps most of the time.
Someone asked a question about controlling anger recently, on another site, How to get over anger at inconsiderate drivers, which I tried to answer by introducing Buddhist perspective. Maybe controlling anger is a skill you learn gradually, through repeated practice.
And it's gradual: it's not being "always angry" versus "never angry", and it's situational too; you might learn to avoid situations which make you angry, you might learn to avoid the desire to become angry, you might learn skills which you can use instead of becoming angry, you might learn how to let your anger disappear easily if it starts to arise.
Maybe the same is true of lust as it is of anger.

I try to remain mindful during acts of sexual gratification
I think that the Bhikkhuni Sutta suggests it's possible to be mindful when eating (to destroy old feelings [of hunger] and not create new feelings [from overeating]); and, even that craving (for awareness and for freedom) and conceit (that one can be like someone else who benefited from Buddhism) can be helpful. But, not sexual activity:

Sexual intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge.

I.e. if you do want to be "celibate" and "mindful" then you probably cannot do that "during acts of sexual gratification".

I remember a story wherein Buddha said to someone how one should eat as if they are eating their own child having lost in a desert
There are innumerable stories in the world, of women who visit allegedly spiritual teachers: the teachers engage in sexual activity with their students ... and the students don't get much out of it.
I suppose that might be true in Buddhism as well, for example:

Vipassana teacher Jack Kornfield quotes one unnamed female Buddhist teacher, wherein she talks about an "old" "realized" lama choosing a thirteen- to fourteen-year-old nun to become his sexual consort every year.[11] After talking to "a number of Western women who had slept with their lamas" this same unnamed individual concludes the practice benefited only the lamas.[12]

If you want to help other people then treating them as a sex object might be missing the point.
On the subject of being aware of the "unattractive", there's a story (I can't find it at the moment) of someone being shown an illusion of an attractive body, which then ages until it's old and ill and dies. I think that's supposed to teach you to not "fall in love with" the body.
Conversely, the Abhisanda Sutta suggests that breaking any of the precepts is dangerous and that by not breaking the precepts you gain various worthwhile rewards: so as well as considering "non-attractive" parts of lust it should be possible to be happy about the rewards from "abandoning" harmful behaviour and from "abstaining" from breaking precepts.

The provided definition of sexual misconduct is problematic: two adults having a side affair while being married and committed would still perform it under consent. May I suggest: Sexual conduct that has the immediate potential of causing trouble. In my experience I've found that even staring at women can fall under this category, as strange women might have partners, and catching you staring might provoke problematic emotions and thoughts (greed, anger, delusion) inside themselves - something which you don't want to take responsibility for.

Lust - it can be overcome. Is this your question or are you asking if you 'should' be celibate? What you should do is wake up! So if what you are doing is not working yes try doing it's opposite.
How to overcome it? Specific to the individual. An avg male sentient being should probably do charnal ground knowledge until they see only skeletons when a person stands before them. This is what a monk would do no?
This sounds grim but if one was not a monk and did charnal ground meditation until one saw only skeletons where a human stands they could still have fulfilling sex (I assume) doing tantra working with yidams

By trying to be mindful of it you feel as if its a task and then just drop it and go with the lust .Your lust here is possessive of you ,its more fun for you than meditation ,meditation has become a routine not a way of being .You want to have choice & freedom .
First step is not to fight it .Its the attitude you have towards lust that you meditate upon not the lust itself.There is no problem in lust ,spiritual ego may feel its going to drop spiritually if it falls to lust .When actually the teaching is about making you fearless ,there is nothing to fear even fear itself ,you don't apply the teaching to go somewhere,you are the teaching,the person who tries to apply is ego .
Its said that Puma a disciple of Buddha wanted to go preach in a far away city and asked permission of Buddha .Buddha told him these people are violent and nobody went there before to teach them .He said but somebody has to go.Buddha said well what will you do if they insult you .He said I will thank them for not torturing me .Buddha said what if they torture you .Puma replied I will thank them ,they could've killed me .Then Buddha said what if they killed you .Puma said I will thank them for liberating me from a life where mistakes could've been made.Buddha told him now you can go anywhere ,there is no fear on you.

I try to remain mindful during acts of sexual gratification...

The above is not possible. At least if one is practicing the Noble Eightfold Path, any sexual gratification (such as masturbation or, much more deadly & worse, pornography) is a loss of mindfulness. Mindfulness is called 'The Gatekeeper' in the suttas. Its role is to maintain wholesome thoughts & actions and to prevent unwholesome thoughts & actions. One cannot be mindful during sexual gratification.

I want to be celibate...Please guide me.

Refer to Bharadvaja Sutta, particular the first of the three instructions, which is to view each woman as either a mother, sister or daughter. If you a not a man, then the opposite. If you are gay, adapt it.

I remember a story wherein Buddha said to someone how one should eat as if they are eating their own child having lost in a desert...

Food is one of the necessities or requisites of the Holy Life. Sex is not.

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

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


text:
Does Buddhist's Time Dilation have something to do with Physics's Time Dilation?
I've just seen Interstellar. And they say 1 year on the planet is equal to 7 years on earth. because it sounds familiar to the Buddhist text I used to read ,if they both refer to the same thing, how did the ancient people know it?

I think what you are saying has some validity. I remember somewhere in the suttas one of the devas in a higher realm started preparing an offering of flowers when he heard that Buddha was born. But he couldn't finish it until Buddha's parinibbana.

I am interested what this Sutta is.

What is Buddhist time dilation?

@ChristopherLee It might be something like (quoting from this Hindu web site), "One of the Buddhist Sutras states that a hundred years of our existence is equal to one day and one night in the world of the thirty three gods."

hmmm. I would not really consider that time dilation. In the same fashion I would not call the creation story in the Torah of G-d creating the world in seven days a time dilation theory as well.

@SumindaSirinathSalpitikorala The Visakhuposatha Sutta says something like that, i.e. it says "That which among men is fifty years, Visakha, is one night and day of the devas of the Four Great Kings" etc.

@Suminda Sir, Payasi Sutta also talks similar thing, I just answered below.

Time dilation due to special relativity happens because the speed of light is constant and is expressed using equations which include the Lorentz factor.
Time dilation due to gravitation is a related concept.
Assuming that "time dilation" is a concept in Buddhism, have you evidence that the theoretical/conceptual cause of that dilation is the speed of light being constant being all frames of reference, or, the acceleration of frames of reference e.g. due to gravity? Do Buddhist scriptures (mathematical equations) mention the Lorentz factor, somewhere? If the answer is "no" then I suggest that "they both refer to the same thing" is false, i.e. that Buddhism's "time dilation" and Physics' "time dilation" actually refer to different concepts.
I don't want to say that Buddhism in't helpful towards understanding Physics; but it was my experience that my learning Physics wasn't much help towards understanding Buddhism.
Working with, studying or applying Physics might count as a form of "right livelihood" in Buddhism.
I think it would be missing the point of Buddhism to see it as a way to get miraculous leaning/knowledge/insight/invention of the detailed models of (i.e. the hypotheses or theorems about) the universe which are used by physicists, chemists, biologists, engineers, doctors, etc.
If you read from the Pali canon for example then the Buddha is talking about something else entirely.

How come physics wasn't helpful in understanding Buddhism? What about cause and effect-relationships?

The "Physics" I learned was all equations: "force equals mass times acceleration", or "force is the product of two masses divided by the square of the distance between them", and so on. I don't see how that could be helpful in understanding Buddhism? As for "cause and effect" I kind of prefer the theory of "co-arising": because sometimes it's hard to say whether A causes B, or whether it's B causing A ... so, to say that they "co-arise" seems to me truer.

In buddhism, 5 khandha arising and vanishing speed are  constant, too. See abhidhamma.

@ChrisW. Physics, maths etc., isn't that part of Conventional reality?

Yes, it's somewhat similar to concept of time dilation in physics too. For eg. Time moves slowly in Heavenly Realms and when one stays 2- 3 days in those realms many years would have passed in earthly realm.

In the Payasi Sutta there is debate of Buddha's disciple with an skeptic and in one question asked there it is told that time moves in different pace in Heavenly Realms:

"Hmm. Well, Prince… Consider this. In the Heaven of the Thirty Three Gods, time passes at a different pace, and people live much longer. In the period of our century, one hundred years, only a single day, twenty four hours would have passed for them. Thirty of these hundred year days make up one of their months, twelve such months make a year and a thousand such years is roughly the life span of those born into the Heaven of the Thirty Three Gods. Suppose your friend decided, "I will go back to that unclean world just long enough to deliver my message to the Prince – I shall set out tomorrow. Or perhaps, after I have seen some more of this place, in two or three days, I will set out to go see him." – would he have been able to?"

  "Of course not, Reverend Kumara, because, by the reasoning you have given, we should all be long dead by the time he had spent three days there. However, I do not think that those born in the Heaven of the Thirty Three Gods would be so long lived, or that time has a different pace. How do you know about their lifespan or their time?"

So, spending few days in Heavenly realms is analogous to time dilation experienced in movie Interstellar.

To be straight, both things are the same. Lord Buddha chanted all the things that are discovered by Science today & things that are even discovered upto now. In Buddhism we are taught about the nature of the world, universe, matter & energy. As well as the time durations taken by faraway palnets for their revolution, Lord Buddha has also chanted about the distances for those planets from the Earth. Search the web on "Buddhism & Time travel" for more details.


text:
Were psychedelics used in the past by Buddhists?
I know it's discouraged for Buddhists to intoxicate their body, but were there any known cases of monks using psychedelic drugs intentionally in the past?

I'm asking because I know psychedelics can cause out-of-body experience and often lead to better understanding the world and life. This seems similar to what can be achieved during mediation.

Wikipedia says that "it can excite feelings of newly formed understanding" but I don't know whether it's true to say "often lead to better understanding". That's why I deleted that initial sentence from the question. Also it doesn't seem to me necessary to the question: it's possible to ask whether people have used drugs in the past, without trying to claim or assume whether the drugs did or didn't have some particular effect on their understanding and experience.

Buddhism is about having in-body experiences not out-of-body experiences. Psychedelics distort one's experience/perspective of reality and Buddhism is about experiencing reality for what it really is. Thus psychedelic drugs are the opposite of the dharma path and not used by monks or nuns.

The first part is questionable at best... You open up with an opinion as if it lends credibility to the concluding fact. You may experience distortion of reality while under the influence of psychedelics, while another may experience a glimpse into emptiness. Perspective is to be annihilated.

The short answer is "yes, historically, though it is generally frowned upon by many if not most modern Buddhists." I'm trying to find better citations than the ones than I am digging up immediately, but the best sources for this don't appear to be readily available online (or require more reading through to figure out what is being referred to).  If anyone has some better references I'd love to see them, since mostly what I am finding are three or four pieces that reference one another.
Regardless, moving on to the actual answer: In older texts you see a lot of references to what is probably Datura (certainly in some cases, likely in others) in early Buddhist magical texts and in a lot of precursors/early forms of Vajrayana. Ronald M. Davidson's Indian Esoteric Buddhism, for example:

Moreover, many of the siddha scriptures discuss ointments and drugs, especially those applied to the eyes or feet. The use of the various species of datura (especially datura fastuosa [Datura metel]) is particularly evident.

This is most likely used for the entheogenic use. I've found some other references along these lines but I want to chase down a translation of the original rather than depending on a secondary sources before posting it here.
Depending on your view of the Saṁvarodaya-tantra it describes the use of datura (which is translated "thorn apple"–from sanskrit dhatūr, which is where we get the word datura–by Shinʹichi Tsuda in The Saṁvarodaya-tantra: Selected Chapters), but not really the imbibing of it, as far as I can tell, just the use for magical purposes. There are quite a few of these and similar references in older Indian sources, see for example Datura Rituals in the Vajramahabhairava-Tantra. I wouldn't necessarily take the examples given, however, as indicating entheogenic uses as opposed to, say, sympathetic ones.
There are also numerous examples of–particularly Western–individuals who have experimented with this, see for example Zig Zag Zen, though I don't know that any of the references described in that book are of monks (I haven't read it, just found it while researching).
It wouldn't surprise me if, once one does some digging, one can find some sect of Buddhism somewhere that uses or used datura and/or cannabis for entheogenic reasons. There are sources that indicate that this is not even controversial, and while at the moment I am having difficulty tracking some of them down, there are certainly plenty of examples with the consumption of alcohol.
This doesn't mean it is widely accepted or a good practice, however, and as the expression goes: "you drink because of the ritual, you don't go to the ritual to drink."

IDK but Psychoactive Plants in Tantric Buddhism suggests that tantra with datura was "not monks", i.e., it says, "There are several reasons to look to tantra for psychoactive substance use in pre-modern Buddhist Asia. The first and most important is that non-tantric monastic Buddhism is far less tolerant of violations of scriptural precepts than tantric Buddhism. Buddha's injunction against consuming intoxicants precludes the open use of psychoactive substances by members of the Buddhist monastic establishment.

In contrast, tantric Buddhism can allow for, and even applaud, shocking transgressions as a sign that the yogi has transcended ordinary patterns of valuation and behavior.
While non-tantric Buddhist practice was overwhelmingly the purview of ordained monks and nuns in medieval India, practitioner of tantra was often a layperson."

Yup, no dispute it was predominantly a lay practice from what I can see of the available resources. What we see with some of these texts, however, is that there commentaries written by monks. Some of whom injected information on cannabis and/or datura. I need to do more digging.

Psychedelic is an intoxicant leading to heedlessness hence not acceptable in Buddhism even for lay people. When it comes to monks who have a higher standers of Sila this is certainly not acceptable. I don't think monks would have used such substance at any point in history without breaking the Vinaya.
This is well explained in "THE FIVE PRECEPTS" which is a very good read on the 5 precepts.

The fifth precept reads: Surā-meraya-majja-pamāda-ṭṭhānā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi, “I undertake the training rule to abstain from fermented and distilled intoxicants which are the basis for heedlessness.” The word meraya means fermented liquors, sura liquors which have been distilled to increase their strength and flavor. The world majja, meaning an intoxicant, can be related to the rest of the passage either as qualified by sura,meraya or as additional to them. In the former case the whole phrase means fermented and distilled liquors which are intoxicants, in the latter it means fermented and distilled liquors and other intoxicants. If this second reading is adopted the precept would explicitly include intoxicating drugs used non-medicinally, such as the opiates, hemp, and psychedelics. But even on the first reading the precept implicitly proscribes these drugs by way of its guiding purpose, which is to prevent heedlessness caused by the taking of intoxicating substances.

Siddhartha and Jesus of Nazareth are always quoted but the citations to their authorship is really reality vague! Tantric vs. Non-Tantric, i know the way and that's not it because Drama told me so and on and on it goes....... 1. Learn to extinguish your ego 2. Work, Compassion, Knowledge all the well springs of human nature... drink from these wells. 3.Cultivate Stillness as a practice 4. Lastly: " When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home." Tecumseh, Shawnee Warrior,Leader, and no doubt a Buddha. Oh Yea i almost forgot Don't forget to laugh... especially at your self. ROGER THAT>OVER&OUT. re: Psychedelics can help but be very careful...they are not the way only a map reference. Ayahuasca may help somewhat. Good Luck on your journey.

Taking drugs is does not provide any clarity only more maya or illusion.

Hello Chris and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some information to help you get started here.


text:
How does a monk address parents and relatives?
In Theravada tradition, after one becomes a monk. Does he still call his parents and relatives the same as before he ordains. Or does he call them like everybody else? Does he call his parents "mom" and "dad", his siblings "brother" and "sister",...?

From what I have seen, they still call their family members by their proper titles. This may very from culture to culture. I am part of a Vietnamese lineage.

In this blog a nun from that lineage refers to her mum and dad in writing as Mum and Dad.

It may depend on the tradition, but in the Pali suttas, the language changes unequivocally to more formal modes of address like "gahapati" (householder), "upaasaka/upaasikaa" (lay follower), etc.

Then the clansman Raṭṭhapāla rose from his seat, and after paying homage to the Blessed One, he departed, keeping him on his right. He went to his parents and told them: “Mother and father, as I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is not easy while living in a home to lead the holy life, utterly perfect and pure as a polished shell. I wish to shave off my hair and beard, put on the yellow robe, and go forth from the home life into homelessness. Give me permission to go forth from the home life into homelessness.”

...

Then the venerable Raṭṭhapāla’s former wives clasped his feet and said to him: “What are they like, my lord’s son, the nymphs for whose sake you lead the holy life?”
“We do not lead the holy life for the sake of nymphs, sisters.”
“Our lord’s son Raṭṭhapāla calls us ‘sisters,’” they cried and right there they fainted.
Then the venerable Raṭṭhapāla told his father: “Householder, if there is a meal to be given, then give it. Do not harass us.”

-- (MN 82 - Bodhi, trans)

No, householder, such is not proper for one having left home.
He would address them proper like he would address other laypeople. Householder, good man, Brahman... Here in Cambodia the usual addressing of householders by monks is Nyom (Ñom(a)), as a polite and proper third person approach when speaking direct. For mother and father, Nyom would be attached with male and female and understanding would come from attentive following the context. Speaking about third people, Upasaka, Upasika or Nyom attached with name, male or female, would be used.
Speaking general about lay people "householders" would be used. Often the use of Buddha-Parisatas (gathering around the Buddha) would be used to speak about lay or mixed groups.
It's a special hard issue for modern and wester people, even more hard to bear for those strongly marxistic influenced and/or be-favored by monks seeking after followers, something very wrong and trading introduced to non-traditional societies. Pretty annoying for devoted followers who have joy to keep their objects reminding on their refuge in Sublime position.
One might be more interested in matters of respect, fundamental important for a real refuge and to grow toward such: Respect and veneration, apacāyana

Kandarayana Sutta
..."Brahman, the Blessed One — the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened — has declared the level of one who is venerable and the level of one who is a youngster. Even if one is venerable — 80, 90, 100 years old — yet if one partakes of sensuality, lives in the midst of sensuality, burns with sensual fever, is chewed up by sensual thoughts, and is eager in the search for sensuality, then one is reckoned simply as a young fool, not an elder.
"But if one is a youngster, youthful — a black-haired young person endowed with the blessings of youth in the first stage of life — yet does not partake of sensuality, does not live in the midst of sensuality, does not burn with sensual fever, is not chewed up by sensual thoughts, and is not eager in the search for sensuality, then one is reckoned as a wise elder."
When this was said, Kandarayana the brahman rose up from his seat, arranged his cloak over one shoulder, and bowed down at the feet of the monks who were youngsters, [saying,] "You, sirs, are the venerable ones, standing on the level of those who are venerable. We are the youngsters, standing on the level of those who are youngsters.

How ever, not to be mistaken! Wise praise the gratitude and support toward parents and in this manner the Buddha gave many allowances to uphold this. Near relatives are also the only lay people which a Bhikkhu would be allowed to address in need, if wishing. He may also leave even Vassa (rain retreat) for seven days for his patents and siblings. And he would be allowed to share what is given to him in faith to support parants in need.
Since a general gard to bear topic, that of not equal or even contrary usuals, one should not hesitage to ask further, best here, on this matter, most are scared to take on it, living often in improper dependency of lay people communities, fearing worldly and support disadvantages.
(Note that this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks, entertainment and akusala deeds, but as a share of merits and to continue such for release)

After receiving the Discipline (10 novice or novice nuns) . Carrying their line of Thich ( with its own performance measures Ex: Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh).
So when the monks of their own homes, their family should not be called by its old name. You should call the name in the temple.(Ex: "uncle", "aunt").


text:
In the Tirokudda Kanda food and drink are given for dead relatives. Is this a superstitious scripture most likely not uttered by Buddha?
Surely the Buddha never said to do this as there is not a single case I have ever heard of where a dead being was able to eat food and drink from our dimension of living.

Tirokudda Kanda (as well as dharmafarer.org's traslation of Tirokuḍḍa Sutta) mentions doing this for the benefit of the dead. Meritorious acts cause positive telepathic vibes which can help betterment of the dead especially if the see and rejoice in the meritorious acts we do.
So this does not look out of place as a later composition. It is the merit that is given not the food.
Also even if you leave out food this can be of some enjoyment to the spirits. Say a person liked a certain type of food and you leave it out. His spirit would naturally be attracted to it through he cannot physically partake it. As I see this is not what is mentioned in the Sutta, but the transfer of merit.
Transfer of merit works in two way:

Positive vibe associated with the positive through having a positive externality on the person concerned
The entity rejoicing at good action creating positive karma and betterment on its own


text:
There is a text where Buddha says that the Dharma he teaches is not a secret doctrine so why are there sects which maintain secrecy?
These three things are conducted in secret, not openly. What three? Illicit affairs, sorcery, and wrong views - says Buddha. So does this mean that secret teachings of many monks like Yogis I believe are doing one of these three things?

please elaborate on the question...what secret teaching?...which yogis?

@TheDarkKnightRules Presumably things like, "the practice is kept "secret" outside the teacher/student relationship" and Is it our responsibility to maintain the secrecy of unpublished texts?

Today I saw a documentary on Zen Buddhism. There the master gives his disciples koans to meditate on and these koans are highly personalised depending on the individual so that s/he may benefit most from it. So in this sense some practices can be very personalised and these can be matter of student-teacher confidentiality which should be of no concern to any other disciple.
So as a whole the teaching might be open but depending on the state of mind of the disciple objects of meditation can differ from disciple to disciple which can be a secret between the master and the student

Buddha said that the Dhamma he teaches is not a secret doctrine...By this he meant that the Dhamma is out in the open for everybody to know...It was there even before the times of Siddhartha Gautama. The only difference is Buddha stated it explicitly so that even lay people could understand it. Although the language of the priestly class during the times of Buddha was Sanskrit, Buddha taught in Prakrit/Pali the language of lay people so that everyone could practice it. Buddha's Dhamma is 'Svakkhato' i.e. it is well propounded and well explained by the Buddha. So in that sense it is not a secret doctrine.
And regarding secret teachings, I don't know what exactly you mean by that. But to check if something is Buddha's Dhamma or not, one yardstick would be to check if the teaching helps us to

Refrain from evil doings
Engage in good works
Purify our mind

Also the suttas from the Pali canon are freely available these days on various sites. So the best way to capture these posers is to keep an open, rational and analytical mind and develop our own wisdom through the practice.

I completely agree. There are no secrets in the Dhamma because all of the teachings and realizations can be seen by anyone in life. We either have an ignorant mind or we don't!! The Dhamma will lead all ignorant minds towards wisdom and freedom from suffering!

I think s/he was talking about Vajrayana

Vajrayana is not secret -- go buy any text on Amazon and read, good luck trying to understand it though. The teaching is taught in progression, from simple to more advanced, not the other way around -- that's all.

It's like anything else - something that's experiential based easily gets corrupted by those without the necessary context for understanding.  Let's take koans for example.  Someone could rattle off the "answers" to a whole slew of them.  The person receiving these answers might be able to feign an understanding, but would have no experiential basis for what the koan is actually getting at.  This hampers their progress immeasurably.  The fall into an intellectual rut and miss the moon for the finger.  What's even more dangerous is that they might try to pass their on their spurious understanding.  I think the latter is the main reason why these so-called "secrets" are guarded.  It protects the tradition.  I'd speculate that the higher tantras are guarded for much the same reason.


text:
How should a monk address subjective questions?
Suppose a monk is invited to a house for food and the lay person asks how the food is? How does a monk reply to such a question. I am sure a monk in his lifetime comes across many such subjective questions. How should he deal with them? Does he:

Just reply something to satisfy the lay person
Give him/her a teaching on impermanence of everything

From the stories in Buddha's life, it is clear that he laid great emphasis on timing his teachings to someone. Many a time he would say that this is not the right time for him/her to learn the Dhamma. Having this in context, does it make sense to impart teaching at every possible opportunity.
Please incorporate any stories if any to showcase the tradition.

If you are interested as an aside, HH Dalai Lama was on Aussie Mater Chef. He said he liked all the food. In one case he said the contestant tried her best. He did express preferences. He said that he was no expert on food, and eats and accepts what he gets. And that each of the foods had a unique character. He said he had no right to prefer one food to another, though he did express a preference at one point and also that all mammals are pleased to receive food. It's on YouTube. I thought I'd write this aside as an amusing modern story compared to what you probably expected!

Being attached to some rule about how to answer certain questions isn't the point.
Good answers come out of being present and aware.
The same question will be answered differently at different moments depending on what the moment calls for.
"Every possible opportunity" is an interesting phrase. If someone isn't ready to learn something there no opportunity to teach him something. Being a good teacher means to know what someone can learn and then give him that lesson. It's not about throwing a lot of spaghetti on the wall and hoping that something sticks.
Christian missionaries do thing that it's the intention that counts. Christian missionaries will lecture someone whether or not there an opportunity to teach something. For them the act in itself is important.
Buddhism is different. It's about being skillful and only teach when the student can learn. Teaching requires patience and waiting for a possible opportunity.

Though not directly related to Buddhism "How to speak so that people want to listen" gives a good strategy to be used in such situation. It is:

Being truthful coupled with
Compassion

And not being blunt though trueful. In this cases you can be very tactful like answering question like was the food good, etc.

nice lesson in that vid...thanks for pointing it out

My Guru said that if she was eating in someone's home and they put non-vegetarian food in front of her, not knowing she had chosen to not eat meat, she would eat anyway and be grateful for the gift of care and attention the person had made. She did not say (as far as I know) how to answer directly such a question as you asked, but I would say: 1) express pleasure if you enjoy the food 2) express gratitude and whatever you can politely say otherwise, only if asked. I think this is normal common sense, and applies to Monks as well. I can usually find something nice to say about any meal. It is good training for not being so picky, so eat out as much as you can!

Please incorporate any stories if any to showcase the tradition

I cannot say what a monk should do, so this answer is off-topic, and theoretical, for what it's worth.
I had e.g. here a very small amount of insight into conversation when there's a disjoint view of reality.
You might be worried that because the monk and the host have a different view/insight about the food, therefore it's not a topic/subject which they can share a conversation about.
I'd suggest that the 'monk' might try to react/respond to the person, not to the food. Perhaps something like, "It's kind of you to invite me" or "It's kind of you to care about my welfare" or just "It's good" ... and then try to reciprocate, perhaps inquire after the welfare of the person you're talking to.
Also my mum taught pre-schoolers. Part of her advice for controlling their behaviour was, instead of scolding them for bad behaviour, wait until they show some good behaviour and praise that. So you might not want to be scolding a layperson about impermanence. In fact the book described in this answer was written by a monk who deals with laypeople in Texas: and it claims, explicitly, that "impermanence" and "dukkha" and so on are concepts which were more intended for monks than for laypeople.

Please incorporate any stories if any to showcase the tradition
Here's one Zen story that could be relevant to what I was saying above:
No Loving-Kindness

"To think I fed that fellow for twenty years!" exclaimed the old woman in anger. "He showed no consideration for your needs, no disposition to explain your condition. He need not have responded to passion, but at least he should have evidenced some compassion."

I think a moral of that story is, 'Loving-kindness: don't leave home without it.'
An article like Detachment and Compassion might be apposite.

Here is another:

Brother Stream handed out clementines and we all learnt how to peel and eat the fruit slowly and mindfully, enjoying the bright orange colour, the citrus fragrance and the crisp sound as we each held a Clementine up to our ear and gently removed the peel in one long piece, before holding a segment in our mouths and enjoying the taste.

This one is a bit different:

It's with school-children
Eating is just one activity (read the article for the 'bell' before eating and the 'singing' afterwards)

I found a couple of stories to add.

Suppose a monk is invited to a house for food and the lay person asks how the food is? How does a monk reply to such a question.

I do not know how a monk would answer such questions since i'm not a monk myself.
Being asked how the food is one could answer in different ways.
If one answers: "The food is good. I like it" one is in a way confirming one's own attachment to the food. That could become an issue since one is trying to overcome attachments and purify oneself of defilements.
One could instead answer: "Thank you for the food. I appreciate the effort put into making it. Food is important to the upkeep of the human body. Upkeeping the human body is important since it allows one to practice longer and help other beings more".
Then one could as you suggest give a teaching on the impermanence of conditioned phenomena or one could give a teaching on dependent origination regarding the danger of attaching to sense pleasures and how that leads to suffering and further becoming.


text:
Are there different types of craving?
According to Buddhist tradition are there different types of craving? It occurs to me that the following could all be described using the English word craving

Being thirsty (for water)
Really wanting a new car
Wistfully missing a loved one when they are temporarily absent from
your life

However they do feel like they are very different things. So are there categorisations of craving within Buddhist philosophy and if so how would my examples fit into those categories.
I'm interested in answers from any tradition but I suspect that there might be some kind of list of craving within something like the Abidharma
EDIT
These are great answers so far but I wonder does anyone have anything to add on a more experiential basis perhaps referencing meditation practice.

How do they feel like "very different things"? You sit here and you imagine something else over there. The only difference is in the object, no?

@AndreiVolkov  I guess it's through reflection and meditation. The quality of the experience feels different to me. Thirst and wistful remembrance seem to have very different experiential qualities (to me). Maybe more reflection is required (of course it is!)

Indeed, there are four levels of craving.

Craving for one's life - Highest level
Craving for one's organs
Craving for loved ones
Craving for external objects - Lowest level

Chathurarya Sathya (Four Noble truths) by Rerukane Chandawimala Thero

Craving for life arises as perceiving the five aggregates as self and this is the highest level of craving. As an example, during a natural disaster someone would first try to save his own life at any cost, then the lives of his loved ones and finally when everyone is safe, he would try to save his possessions.
From the given example, satisfying thirst may fall under first type, wanting a car falls under fourth and missing a loved one falls under the third level.
Note- The author of the book hasn't referred to any text in Pali canon whether this is  a categorization of Buddha or if it appears in Abhidhamma.

If you look at dependent origination and the Nidānas closely, craving arises due to feeling. You analyze the feeling and classify it as something desirable or undesirable or neither desirable or undesirable. These cravings can be:

sense-craving
craving to be
craving not to be

The above can be one classification of the types of cravings along with what @dmsp mentioned.

There's an analysis on Wikipedia:

The Buddha identified three types of taṇhā:[1][4][5][6][7][a]

Kama-tanha (sense-craving): craving for sense objects which provide pleasant feeling, or craving for sensory pleasures.
Bhava-tanha (craving to be): craving to be something, to unite with an experience. This includes craving to be solid and ongoing, to be a
  being that has a past and a future,[8] and craving to prevail and
  dominate over others.
Vibhava-tanha (craving not to be): craving to not experience the world, and to be nothing; a wish to be separated from painful
  feelings.

IIRC I first met these in an English-language paraphrase of the four noble truths at the Sermon at Benares:

... the craving to have what you don't have, the craving to keep what you can't keep, the craving to live, even the craving to die ...

Looking at your example I suppose that "being thirsty" might be a craving to live, "wanting a new car" might be craving a sense-object, and "wanting your loved one" might be craving to be separated from a painful feeling of not being with them.

vi-bhava could also be translated as other-bhava. So, it could be craving for other-being. Such reading extends non-being connotation.

I suppose "craving for the end of this" and "craving for something other than this" (or "... after this") are similar.

One way to look at it is in terms of needs versus wants. Clearly, your body needs water. I don't know of anyone who overdoes the desire for water, so I would not call this a craving / want at all: it is just a signal from your body like the "low oil" lamp in your car. A new car versus simple transportation is a want, so this is a classic desire scenario. Look in to what the want is trying to address? You will learn a lot about yourself from this, so the evidence of the "craving" is highly beneficial. Examine, do not suppress. Wistfully thinking of others is on the line, it could be both. We do need to care for and support each other. We could want something positive-feeling from someone. This is what I found to be the very hardest thing on my path: How to get valid needs met when so many "formations" are in the way? No fun at all.
Another way to look at what you said, which is that the English word "craving" is used in many ways:
I love drinking water. I love my new car (25 years ago when I got one). I love my loved-ones. This is why words are not useful for everything. They are not used in perfect ways like mathematical symbols (which also provoke many misunderstandings.)

No, there are not different types of craving, there are only different things for which one might crave, whether bodily or other in form, or conditional, events, etc. The fact of persisting in the desire for a thing, of clinging, is the dynamo by which anguish (dukkha) is generated and its interruption (as if extinguishing a candle flame; nirvana) is the simple, basic, aim of Buddhism.


text:
What are the elements (Mahābhūta) references in the Sarvastivada Satipaṭṭhāna?
According to Satipatthana Mula (By Sujato Bhikkhu edited by Piya Tan) Dharmaskandha references 6 elements that the traditional 4 elements in Theravada. They are not explicitly mentioned in the text. What are these elements? What are the citation for this in English? Does this coincide with the 6 elements in the Theravada Abhidhamma?

I'm not sure if there're English versions out there. Anyway, Chapter 9 of the Dharmaskandha's Chinese version, the Foundations of Mindfulness, refers to the same Mahabhuta as the Pali version: earth, water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness. ("唯有種種地界水界火界風界空界識界。如是思惟諸界相時。")


text:
Do Buddhists believe in Akashic records?
I was reading the wiki page about Akashic records and in 'See also' there is link to Glossary of Buddhism, so it seems like it's connected.
Therefore do you believe in akashic records or something similar where all events and our experiences are stored?

I don't see "Akashic" or "record" in the linked "Glossary of Buddhism" ... so the term "Akashic" might be Theosophist and/or from a tradition other than Buddhist, but I don't know.

Buddhism does believe in "Kamma" which I suppose is a way of saying that "events and experiences are stored".

The Wikipedia article references a 19th century book titled "Esoteric Buddhism" which says,

Early Buddhism, then, clearly held to a permanency of records in the Akasa, and the potential capacity of man to read the same when he has evoluted to the stage of true individual enlightenment.

There is something similar to that described in, for example, the Kevatta (Kevaddha) Sutta (in which the Buddha is someone who "evoluted to the stage of true individual enlightenment"), which says towards the end,

Recollection of Past Lives
"With his mind thus ... he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives (lit: previous homes). He recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, ... , many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in their modes and details. Just as if a man were to go from his home village to another village, and then from that village to yet another village, ...

That's part of the "miracle of instruction" (i.e. it's a miracle and instructive). Towards the top of that same sutta, the Buddha says,

Kevatta, there are these three miracles that I have declared, having directly known and realized them for myself. Which three? The miracle of psychic power, the miracle of telepathy, and the miracle of instruction.

That is somewhat quoting out of context, though.
It would be better to at least read the whole sutta than only the paragraph I quoted above, and to understand why the Buddha would call it "instructive" i.e. what he is trying to teach.

Yes.
In Mind-Only school of Buddhism, there is something called the 8 consciousnesses.
The 8th consciousnes, aka the alaya storehouse consciousness, is the closest equivalent to a "Akashic record."
It is an easily misunderstood concept according to the Surangama Sutra and the late Zen Master Huai-Chin Nan's lectures because apparently one can easily become confused about it.
Shakyamuni Buddha (Gautama) said:

"The storehouse consciousness [alaya] is very deep and subtle; All its
  seeds are like a torrential flow. I do not explain it to the ignorant,
  For fear they will cling to it and consider it a self."

It poses as the last barrier to Complete Enlightenment aka Buddhahood and also has to be transformed. There is not much information available in English on this topic because it such a high-level topic and is irrelevant for most people who are at a very low leve of cultivation, according to Master Nan. Also, according to Master Nan, there is no point in going into it much because no one has samadhi in the first place and when you come even close to transforming the skandha of consciousness, you will be receiving lessons from angels and bodhisattvas on the matter anyway... so no need to be learning about all that late-game stuff! Focus on what's immediately before you namely, learning to meditate and attain samadhi and bodhi!
With that as a warning, here is an article written by Zen Master Nan's student, Bill Bodri, that goes at length on the alaya consciousness.

A “Buddha” doesn’t mean Buddhism. It means a completely enlightened
  being, from any place within the Triple Realm, who has overturned the
  alaya and escaped the Three Realms, and who can thus survey the Three
  Realms clearly from without and know all such things within it like:

What is right or wrong in each and every condition.
What the karma is of every sentient being - whether of the past, present or future.
All the various stages and types of dhyana and samadhi.
The powers and faculties of all sentient beings.
The desires or moral direction of every sentient being.
The actual condition of every sentient being.
The direction and consequence of all dharmas, events, functions, happenings or circumstances.
All causes of mortality and of good and evil in their reality.
The end of all beings and Nirvana.
The destruction of all illusions of every kind.

Note: the above records is AFTER the alaya as well as the stages prior to it are penetrated and purified..
The book by the author of that article, How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization, goes into this topic and many other supplementary and complementary topics at length in satisfying extensively scientific detail. Topics covered:

I read it 10 years ago and since then I have become enamoured with the spiritual path. Since then I have read thousands of spiritual and religious content and it is still the highest level book available. I highly recommend it.

The Alaya conscience (8th consciousness) in Buddhism as mentioned above IS CORRECT.  AKASHIC in the Original terminology is called "Akasa" and refers to space.  The "storehouse" is space and mind and in that view "mind" includes "space."
In the Mahayana Buddhist approach, there is the "9th Consciousness" which refers to Buddhahood directly.

The "Ākāśic Records" are associated with a famous of the literati from the late 1800s named Madame Blavatsky. She founded a religious movement called "theosophy" based on her tutelage under some Mongolian Lamas as well as her own idiosyncratic spiritual ideas and reading. The notion of the "Ākāsic Records" is traced to Helena Blavatsky and is based on some Buddhism and some Hinduism and some of Blavatsky's own interpretation.


text:
What is storehouse consciousness?
I've been reading Peter Harvey's Introduction the Buddhism and I've come across the concept of storehouse consciousness. It's in relation to Yogācāra and Chan Buddhism - originally with Yogācāra. It contains karmic seeds (not sure what they are to be fair). Can anyone give me an explanation of this concept. At the moment it seems to me to be some sort of real existence that underpins reality but I'm sure that's not it.
I appreciate that there is an explanation on wikipedia about it but I'm not finding that hugely illuminating.

Useful talk by Thay, http://www.mindfulnessnyc.org/index_files/watering_our_good_seeds.htm (transcript) & video of a similar talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJE3eye2BXg

In Mind-Only school of Buddhism, there is something called the 8 consciousnesses. The 8th consciousnes, aka the alaya storehouse consciousness, similar to an "Akashic record."
It is an easily misunderstood concept according to the Surangama Sutra and the late Zen Master Huai-Chin Nan's lectures because apparently one can easily become confused about it.
Shakyamuni Buddha (Gautama) said:

The storehouse consciousness [alaya] is very deep and subtle; All its
  seeds are like a torrential flow. I do not explain it to the ignorant,
  For fear they will cling to it and consider it a self.

It poses as the last barrier to Complete Enlightenment aka Buddhahood and also has to be transformed. There is not much information available in English on this topic because it such a high-level topic and is irrelevant for most people who are at a very low leve of cultivation, according to Master Nan. Also, according to Master Nan, there is no point in going into it much because no one has samadhi in the first place and when you come even close to transforming the skandha of consciousness, you will be receiving lessons from angels and bodhisattvas on the matter anyway... so no need to be learning about all that late-game stuff! Focus on what's immediately before you namely, learning to meditate and attain samadhi and bodhi!
With that as a warning, here is an article written by Zen Master Nan's student, Bill Bodri, that goes at length on the alaya consciousness.
The book by the author of that article, How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization, goes into this topic and many other supplementary and complementary topics at length in delicious scientific detail. I read it 10 years ago and since then I have become enamoured with the spiritual path. Since then I have read thousands of spiritual and religious content and it is still the highest level book available. I highly reccommend it.

Your quote is taken from http://www.meditationexpert.com/zen-buddhism-tao/z_highest_states_in_buddhism_versus_hinduism.html -- I was wondering in which sutta the Buddha was alleged to have said that (I searched http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ for "alaya" and "storehouse" and didn't seem to find matching results) but www.meditationexpert.com claims that he said, "I do not explain it to the ignorant For fear they will cling to it and consider it a self" and "Shakyamuni threfore gave very few teachings on the alaya consciousness"; and so maybe that's a teaching from "esoteric Buddhism".

Surangama Sutra. It's an extremely long set, all volumes available on Scribd. It's hard to translate so I wouldn't expect to gain much benefit from it by reading it straight.
All in all, this is a very conflicting topic among the Buddhists (whether this sutra is real or not, etc.) and I would suggest getting a copy of How to Measure instead, it has a lot of other concepts that make the spiritual path clear as day.

The Lankavatara Sutra is shorter and goes into great (some might say nit-picking) detail.

I think that quote is fake because Buddhas have no fear

Shinshu Buddhism also refers to this
http://amida-ji-retreat-temple-romania.blogspot.com/2011/12/alaya-storehouse-consciousness-and.html

The alaya consciousness or storehouse consciousness is the place where
  all the actions and experiences in this life and the previous lives
  generated by the seven consciousnesses are stored as karma, being the
  only consciousness which comes along with every birth. This
  consciousness influences at the same time the workings of the other
  seven consciousnesses.
We take this alaya consciousness with us in all our births in the
  various realms of existence. It contains the seeds of various types of
  karma, and it is the storehouse of the habitual evil karmic tendencies
  that we have cultivated for eons. Because of the karmic seeds
  contained in the alaya consciousness one may die a premature death, be
  stricken with unexpected disease or inexplicable misfortune, overcome
  by strong desires, aversions and obsessions, can think and do things
  that one should never even imagine, etc. So strong is the influence of
  the alaya consciousness. .. When Shinran is recorded as saying in
  chapter 13th of Tannisho: “a person may not wish to harm anyone and
  yet end up killing a hundred or a thousand people”, he is in fact
  referring to the influence of past karma contained in the alaya
  consciousness.
Blockquote

So this storehouse consciousness sounds like the karma dump or receptacle where all the seeds of previous intentions and actions reside. It sounds like just a different way of categorizing one of the basic principals of karma and the seeds that generate more illusory experiences. It is only creating a category for where the karma remains until it manifests.
THere is further info that might be useful further down on the page of the link above.
Hope this helps some.

We are made up of 5 aggregates : form ( body , matter ) , sensation ( feeling ) , mental activity , perception  , consciousness ,   According to Mind school Of Mahayana , consciousness has 8 levels , the 8 th consciousness is called alaya or storehouse consciousness . Every thought , action , words , repeated many time will be stored as karmic seeds . When we wake up every morning , we resume our thinking as it is never disrupted because our 7 th consciousness or Mana bring them out . Based on the time to our death we sow , there are 2 types : the farther karmic seeds and the close karmic seeds ( such as we die in calm states or in angry mood ). If based on the seriousness of our deed , there are 2 types : lighter karmic seeds & heavier karmic seeds . After death , 5 aggregates is disbanded , the heaviest karmic seeds or the close karmic seeds will meet a foetus in a female body and an being develops
It similar to the situation like this : suppose the government give each tax payer an tax return of $ 100 . People will spend this money according to their habit , those who like drink will buy wine , those who love food will go to restaurant to enjoy food , those used to save will save it . So the same with karma , which parents , which situation we will be reincarnate in to depends on our karmic seeds . Seeds means Inclination , potential . Modern physics proves particles ( electrons , protons ... ) -are not particles , they are potential , inclination , always in constant flux . We can say the same with karmic seeds .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Consciousnesses

The alaya-vijnana has two basic functions: First it answers the question how do the actions, or karma, that I enact in my life today effect me later. That later can be within moments, later in life, and later into our next life, rebirth. The alaya-vijnana maintains both the result of past actions and karmic potentials (vasana) or habit energies in which we will enact sometime in the future, that how karma works. These imprints of our actions in the alaya-vijnana are called bija, usually translated as seeds. For example, if I act out or say something out of anger it is due to some past karma that imprinted anger into my subconscious and that had effected my behavior. The other function of the alaya-vijnana is rebirth. For the yogacarins it is the alaya-vijnana which is a continuous subconscious mental stream that transmigrates at death and into the mother's womb at conception. Essentially, it is our karmic energy that is being transmitted not our person. The yogacarins did not pull this out of their hat. There understanding was based on earlier teachings and practice. In fact, the Pali Abhidharma of the Theravadan's postulate the Bhavanga which is also an subconscious mental stream of karma was probably what the yogacara based their alaya-vijnana on.

Think of the storehouse consciousness as the infinity inside your skin holding all sensory inputs -- which includes thoughts and dreams -- of your entire life.  It is what remains of you after your body is dust.  You want to fill that infinity of personal storage with as much beauty, goodness, love, courage, positivity, humor, joy, honesty, meritorious intention, compassion, endurance and discernment as you possibly can because it is and remains literally the stuff of existence for all existence forever.

people have five senses connected to their human organs .they work in normal natural  way that one can explain in medical terms.but if we look closely the linkage which they keep each other intact is the key to the understanding of the human mind. apart from these glands there is a misterical software that governs these  glands. the  store house conscience has the link to this entire function. that will also answer the question of reincarnation or Atman. and the yogacara   system has some explanation on this but  incomplete.

Hello Kumar and welcome to Buddhism SE. If you want to improve your answer then put in some references to back it up. We have also some guidelines for new users that you might find useful.


text:
Did Buddha ever say that educated people would be a problem?
I was reading the book "Daham Danum Sangrahaya 1" about facts of Buddhism written by a Buddhist monk. And it says if all the people in a region are educated it would be a problem.
I want to know if Buddha has ever said something like that? That education could be a problem for the society.
Thanks.

please mention the book name, author and page number so that if anyone else has read that book they could easily relate to your question

"Daham Danum Sangrahaya 1" I dont think anyone have read it. It's in Sinhala language.

What was the surrounding context then? Anti-intellectualism is a common feature of modern dicussions of spirtuality and the afterlife because common spirtual themes like reincarnation do so poorly when subjected to empirical methods. One way to deal with this is to dismiss scientists and intellectuals and irrelevant problem-makers, charlatans and so on which allows one to keep faith in miracles, reincarnation, rakshas, etc. Other authors do a better job of finding productive common ground.

Perhaps you could quote an entire paragraph or two, to see whether anyone understands or recognizes what was said.

Actually, I think this relates more to the idea that too much education leads people to intellectualize everything. That is by far considered the most prevalent problem in modern society by many people, Buddhists, Hindus and others alike.

It's important to read the full context of what that teacher said. Also, if someone simply says: "The Buddha said this or that", then that's not good enough. He'll need to provide backup sutras/suttas references. For example, in the suttas education is very important:

"Friend, the Blessed One has described you as being endowed with seven amazing, astounding qualities. Which seven? 'Hatthaka of Alavi is endowed with conviction. He is virtuous. He has a sense of conscience. He has a sense of concern. He is learned. He is generous. He is discerning.' Friend, the Blessed One has described you as being endowed with these seven amazing, astounding qualities." ~ AN 8.23 ~
"Even so, he who is experienced and has a well-trained mind, who is learned and dependable, 2 clearly knowing, he can help others to understand who are willing to listen and ready to receive" ~ Sn 2.8 ~

I haven't really come across such a remark in the suttas in Theravada. If the book doesn't refer to any sutta in the canon the monk is probably writing down his own opinion.
On the contrary, in the Mangala sutta Buddha praised learnedness when answering a question by one of the devas regarding what brings the highest blessing to a person,

[Deva:]

Many devas and human beings give thought to protection, desiring
  well-being. Tell, then, the highest protection.

[The Buddha:]

[..]
  Living in a civilized land,
  having made merit in the past,
  directing oneself rightly:
      This is the highest protection.
Broad knowledge, skill,
  well-mastered discipline,
  well-spoken words:
      This is the highest protection.
  Support for one's parents,
  assistance to one's wife and children,
  consistency in one's work:
      This is the highest protection
[..]
Mangala sutta [Thanissaro Bhikkhu Trans]

Just like anything, if you approach a subject thinking that all you need to do in order to understand it is to reduce it into terms you already feel comfortable with, terms that are already socially acceptable, you're going to face obstacles in getting to the deeper message.
Getting an academic education today, and the ego boost it can leave you with if you're prone to that kind of thing, is bound to be a kind of obstacle to understanding.
I suspect that the intention of the author was to imply just this, and not that reason is to be thrown out the door.

It is not being educated itself that is an issue. People who becomes educated sometime distance themselves from those who don't. Thus, that create some sense of ego boost and have the urge of not "feeling enough". The thoughts that they need to be educated to better than others are the causes of pain and suffering.
The term being intellectual in Buddhism isn't necessarily the same thing as obtaining more knowledge, it is more into trying to understand the meaning of what is being learned, why is it the way it is, and how would that affect someone in some way. It is not about "hey, I know more than you do." Instead, it's more like "Oh I see... that's why it is what it is."