text:
Interpretation of Siddhartha by Herman Hesse
Siddhartha by Herman Hesse is an excellent book and is written with the spirit of mystery and wonder that also permeates most Buddhist teachings.

  At the end of the book, Siddhartha has attained what appears to be Nirvana.  He is sitting with his friend Govinda.
  Govinda has spent the entirety of his adult life seeking Nirvana, and he is lamenting about this to Siddhartha; practically begging for some guidance and teaching.
  Siddhartha, feeling great compassion for his friend's suffering, instructs him to kiss his [Siddhartha's] forehead.  Govinda finds this odd, but is compelled by a great love of Siddhartha to accept.  As he does this; he attains some kind of enlightenment -  and though it's always seemed to me to be less 'significant' or permanent than what Siddhartha has attained - it is still a profound and magical moment of transformation.

Does anyone know what Hesse intended us to derive from this sequence? Specifically, has he spoken upon this issue, or written about it? It's always been completely mysterious to me.
I'm looking for something more solid than unverified speculation.  I'm not opposed to opinions, but I'd like that any opinion be informed by some source - either Hesse, or another writing about Hesse's works.

Interesting question but I think it might lead to primarily opinion-based answers.

@Lanka - Does my edit bring it closer to the appropriate guidelines for questions?

I have not come across any comments that Hermann Hesse has made on his  novel “Siddhartha. The interesting thing about this book is that the same person reading this book at different times of his/her life see different truths / insights. So as @Lanka has said you will only get primarily opinion-based answers to this OP.

@SapthaVisuddhi - I agree completely about reading at different times in life.

@user1167442, If there is one last book that a person (of another faith or one who has not seen the Saddhamma) should read in his/her life, it is this booklet “Siddhartha”. Nearly 25 years ago I gave it to my father to read – seven days before his untimely death. He was very much at peace after reading it – and that must have helped him to a good birth in his next life in one day seeing the light.

The paper titled "Between reverence and revolt:
Hesse and the two faces of religion" suggests that Hesse was primarily a (Christian) Protestant.
It says for example that in his 1921 diary he wrote:

“And now the whole of Buddhism increasingly appears to me to be
  a kind of Indian Reformation, an exact equivalent of the Christian one”

So far as I know, a primary Protestant belief is that people are saved by God (maybe by their love of God and/or by God's love): a Christian's duty (to God) is faith and obediance, which God rewards with salvation (perhaps miraculous salvation).
I think it's also (especially in contrast with pre-Reformation Catholicism) something to do with a personal relationship, unmediated by clergy (and perhaps by ritual), between each person and God.
I guess that influences this sentence:

 But while Govinda with astonishment, and yet drawn by great love and expectation, obeyed his words, bent down closely to him and touched his forehead with his lips, something miraculous happened to him.

You wrote, " It's always been completely mysterious to me." Perhaps that's because it's so Christian-influenced.

I'll have to read that article, but that is a very interesting answer.   I've read a lot of Buddhism into the book - particularly in relationship to Samsara - but I've not considered any of it from a Christian context.  Good excuse to read it again.

Siddhartha asks Govinda to kiss him on the forehead. As he
does so, for Govinda "a certain contempt for his friends's words conflicted with a tremendous love...for him ." Govinda then goes through a kind of mystical experience, as Siddhartha's face somehow merges with and contains a continuous stream of thousands of other faces, which he appreciates in each of their specificity.  Govinda emerges from the kiss with tears uncontrollably trickling down his face and an overwhelming feeling of great love for his friend, and through him [quote] "of everything that he had ever loved in his life, of everything that had ever been of value and holy in his life."

"So in the end Siddhartha is not only capable
  of love himself, but of spreading it powerfully to others."
  WAS HESSE'S SIDDHARTHA CAPABLE OF LOVE?
  A Sermon by Dean Scotty McLennan
  University Public Worship
  Stanford Memorial Church
  July 11, 2004

Thanks.  I gave it an upvote - but apart from the link doesn't really add anything that can't be grasped from reading the book itself.

It just what you have asked actually is "Does anyone know what Hesse intended us to derive from this sequence? Specifically, has he spoken upon this issue, or written about it? It's always been completely mysterious to me.
I'm looking for something more solid than unverified speculation. I'm not opposed to opinions, but I'd like that any opinion be informed by some source - either Hesse, or another writing about Hesse's works." then obvious need to read book to know more than that. I thanks to you because of you we got about it. I was curious to know about it. Thank you @-}--

This represents the practice of one of the brahmaviharas, namely compassion.
Practicing any of these "divine abodes" is enough to enlighten a person if practiced deeply enough.
In this case, Govinda, who had spent most of his life stuck in a state of "wanting Nirvana" (and thus being all the more distant from Nirvana) finally comes closer to it by kissing the forehead of someone who is Enlightened--symbolic of accepting one's innate Nirvana rather than being stuck in wanting.

Having read five of his books I can tell you they are nearly all about spirituality,Knowledge and credibility. He believed in god and remarked that Christianity lived not preached made him most of what he was. He could be regarded as a pantheist (although I never read he stated that) as he saw god in nature and felt man was getting to far away from nature and therefore god. At least one of his wives was Jewish and he had various other religion exposures. Narcissus and Goldmund was the parallel Christian version to Siddhartha. Siddhartha is the Buddha.

This does not answer the question which is: "Does anyone know what Hesse intended us to derive from this sequence? Specifically, has he spoken upon this issue, or written about it?". Please address the question.


text:
Is there concept of recollection in Buddhism?
Quoted below is from, Kitagiri Sutta MN 70

…There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a
  teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one
  lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the
  Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of
  the teachings. Penetrating the meaning,

The question is where it says “one remember the Dhamma ” does this mean that the person is recollecting from previous forgotten knowledge?  To be specific does mindstream-continuum from previous life reaching the person been thought contain knowledge of the Dhamma albeit forgotten?

Is there concept of recollection in Buddhism?

Recollection meditation is a form of contemplative meditation. You should recollect as such, in the case of recollection of the Dhamma:

Well-taught is the True Teaching [the Dharma] of the Blessed One,

visible here and now,

immediate,

inviting one to come and see,

accessible,

to be personally known by the wise.

Source: (Agata,phala) Mahanama Sutta, Dhajagga Sutta
The outcome of this contemplative practice if done right is:

mind is straight

gains inspired knowledge in the goal [the meaning of Dharma],

gains inspired knowledge in the truth [the Dharma],

gains gladness connected with the Dharma;

when he is gladdened, zest is born;

when the mind is zestful, the body is tranquil;

the tranquil body feels happy;

when one is happy the mind becomes concentrated.

Source: (Agata,phala) Mahanama Sutta

The question is where it says “one remember the Dhamma ” does this mean that the person is recollecting from previous forgotten knowledge?

In the Kīta,giri Sutta mentions the following list with regard to training:

he who has faith (in a teacher) approaches him.

Approaching him, he respectfully draws near to him.

Respectfully drawing near to him, he lends his ear [listens attentively] to him.

He who lends his ear, listens to the Dharma.

Having listened to the Dharma, he remembers [memorizes] it.

Having remembered the teachings, he investigates their meaning.

Having investigated their meaning, he reflectively accepts the teachings.

Having reflectively accepted the teachings, desire [will-power] arises in him.

When desire [will-power] has arisen in him, he exerts himself [he applies his will].

Having exerted himself [Having applied his will], he weighs [balances his practice].

Having weighed [balanced his practice], he strives on.

Having strived, he realizes through his own body the supreme truth and sees it by penetrating
it with wisdom.

What is said here is to learn attentively, remember what is taught and understand the theory and practice.

To be specific does mindstream-continuum from previous life reaching the person been thought contain knowledge of the Dhamma albeit forgotten?

This remembering is to commit to memory what has been though and nothing to do with past life recollections.

In Buddhist meditation there are also techniques to recollect past lives. For this you have to develop abhiññā through Jhana.

See this question and the answers below.
It is indeed possible in the Buddhist view to remember past lives.
However in the quote presented I believe they are talking about remembering a teacher's Dhamma within the same lifetime it was taught.  It seems to more be speaking towards interdependence of events and causality than the remembrance of past lives.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Does Vesak means Vaishakh?
Vesak means on the day Buddha born and is word Vesak (Pali; Sanskrit: Vaiśākha) means Vaishakh month by marathi calendar(Maharshtra, India)?

Vesak is the day marking the birth, enlightenment, and passing away of the Buddha, which according to traditional accounts all occurred on the full-moon day of May. Vesak (by that I mean the three events) has nothing to do with the Vaishakh Month in India.It is just that the three event happen to fall on this month.
The three great events that took place on Vesak day in the life of the Buddha are - the birth of Prince Sidhartha, the Bodhisatva at the Royal Park of Lumbini, His attainment of the Perfect Enlightement in his 35th year under the shade of Sri Maha Bodhi at Buddha Gaya, and His Parinirvana. His Pari-nibbhana, at Kusinara in the Sala Grove, Upavartana that belonged to Royalty of Malla-occured on the Vesak Full Moon Poya Day. It is renowned as the most sacred Poya Day in the Buddhist world over.
Although the recognised Vesak Full Moon ‘Poya’ (holiday) Day falls in the month of May, there is an additional Vesak Full Moon called "Adhi Vesak Full Moon Poya Day". This Adhi ‘Poya’ occurs once in 3 years, due to the change of planentary movements. There are 365 days in an year. According to astrology (SriLankan ‘Nekath’), they calculate a year usually as 360 days. The planets rotate round the Sun. Sometimes the course of the planetary movements change. According to astrological calculations, this leads to an additional month.
Here I should mention the name of Sir Ponnambalam Ramanthan, who was a Member of the Legislative Council of Ceylon from 1879 to 1892, Solicitor General from 1892 to 1906, a member of the Legislative Council from 1911 to 1921, and from 1924 to 1930. A Barrister by profession, he was elected by a broad coalition of Buddhists and Hindus. He supported the efforts of the Theosophical Society to establish Buddhist denominational schools. He worked tirelessly for Hindu Buddhist unity. He was responsible for making Vesak, the birth anniversary of the Buddha, a public holiday in colonial Ceylon.

I had asked because Vesak depend on full moon and I noticed also it always come in this Vaishakh month. I thought those both words making sense or related.

Vaishakh Month in India is the most sacred of all months as it is Lord Vishnu’s favorite month. So it is the best month of the year for worshipping Lord Vishnu. Vaisakha has the capacity to remove the sins of past births and liberate the worshipper from worldly bondage, it is said.

So it'd be vary by region then seem not related even literally. It's Vesak day we celebrate as Buddha's birth and enlightenment.

The three events took place in the month of Vesak (Ceylon), or Vaisakha in, Telegu, Marathi, Hindi and Nepali. In fact it was a Hindu Tamil (Sir Ponnambalam Ramanthan ) who was responsible for making VESAK,  a public holiday in colonial Ceylon.

The wikipedia article on Vesak mentions that this name is derived from Vaisakha month in Hindu calendar .

The name of the observance is derived from the Pali term vesākha or
  Sanskrit vaiśākha, which is the name of the lunar month in the Hindu
  calendar falling in April–May.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesak

As Marathi calendar is also related to Hindu calendar, there is an obvious relationship between Vesak and the Vaishakh month.

Vaisakha (Telugu: వైశాఖ) Vaishakha (Marathi: वैशाख) or Baisakha
  (Hindi: बैसाख) (Nepali: बैशाख) is a month of the Hindu calendar that
  corresponds to April/May in the Gregorian Calendar
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaisakha

It's vary by region so I think Vesak is it's place as it is and other regions has their own celebrations and traditions.

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


text:
Teachings vs self experience
As my mind willed I visited my local temple for a chat with the monks .
Surprised to learn,  this time I was advised to independently seek out my emancipation from suffering and only use the dharma for a guide !! Then arose this question ...are other peoples  experience etc on this path valid for my own personal path ( if u could call it so as mind has no beginning or end nor an owner , but the ego claim !!)
So why read up on Buddhism at all ? If my inner being is not compatible with the author of the book/ books ?

Ask and you shall receive ;) Experience is definitely necessary. For me what helps is comparing notes with other people after the fact.

If you want to build a house, it is easier done having read a book about it than without. It will guide you through the process, hint you at problems that may arise and give possible solutions. But then, there may be other solutions around, no problem with that.
On the other hand, reading the book alone will not be much beneficial; without actually building your house, you will not be able to sleep under the protecting roof.
As for "being not compatible" - I think this is rather unlikely, as long as you are open-minded. Of course, one has to be careful not to take laziness as incompatibility, i.e. it would be too easy to give up meditation after 30 seconds, labelling it "frustrating, my mind isn't built for that".
So I take the literature as a wealth of wonderful ideas I can ponder on.

independently seek out my emancipation from suffering

Nobody can emancipate you. Only yourself. Reason being liberation is based on experiencing the reality and not doing things which are not conducive / unskillful and doing what is conducive / skillful. No bodies experience can be a substitute to your experience. Say someone describes a taste of a good dish, you cannot reconstruct this task by any description without tasting it yourself.

use the dharma for a guide

The taught Dhamma is guide. It has theoretical and practical aspects about stress and the was out of it. The theoretical aspects will be milestones in the path for you to validate if you are in the right route. The practical aspect is how to travel the path. Anybody who walks the path will reap the benefits of the practice.

are other peoples experience ... on this path valid for my own personal path

You cannot validate the path by other people's experience. If there is an epidemic and you and your neighbour both sick you have to take medicine to become better. Just because your neighbour taking medicine will not make you better.

So why read up on Buddhism at all?

To learn the path and the milestones.

but the ego claim

There is much material regarding this in: self, anatman
Always our notion of self is deluded and tied with craving. Unless we let go of this deluded notion of self there is misery.

If my inner being is not compatible with the author of the book/ books ?

Buddhism is universal regardless if you agree with it or not. There are lot of misinformation about Buddhism. Some of this will become clear when you practice. Each step of the way validate the results at the experiential level. Also validated what you practice with the original teaching.

I guess this is helpful I've just been reflecting on my questions and the Buddha's words " in this life the only certainty is death ..." You know it ..I guess why I question at all is there is doubts in his own dharma...just to add even other philosophy and religion also don't offer the guarantee etc of being safe from death ..suffering ...sickness (life in general) !!

are other peoples experience etc on this path valid for my own personal path?

To an extent, you have to see patterns. What they did, how things happened, etc., But spiritual path is a very subjective process, your internal nature as it has happened by your past accumulations and external circumstances. It is about YOU. Unconscious and conscious mental/physical impressions have played a large part in how you are right now.
One more thing, please don't split yourself up into parts like ego, etc., It is all a mental construct. Throw it away. You are one person. Please be that first, and start from there.

So why read up on Buddhism at all ?

Why not? Simply read? Take what you feel is right? There are many explanations. You may be mislead. That's why I said simply read. Don't stop yourself from reading/exploring. But why should you get carried away by what's in the books of a person? Most importantly, start reading your own life. Look at what's happening to you in situations, how you react, how you respond, what you are doing. Take conscious actions. That will give you more than enough knowledge on what you need than all the books in the world.

If my inner being is not compatible with the author of the book/ books ?

What is this inner being? Define that clearly. For yourself. Ask yourself. Then worry about authors of books or something else.

You speak truth and have a strong ideas ...I guess the nxt thing my temple friends said won't offend you ...but we have to learn then let it all go to the void ( nothingness)..

my mind willed I visited my local temple for a chat with the monks…

You did the correct thing in seeking the company of the friends in Saddhamma. But is is not easy to find a true disciple.  On the ‘Noble Friend’s guidance, Ananda, one of many principal disciples of the Supreme Buddha, once asked the Buddha if half of the reason for the spiritual life was friendship with others. The Buddha turned to Ananda, rebuking him mildly with the words, “Don’t say that, Ananda. The whole of the spiritual life is for friendship.” This shows that the Buddha elevated spiritual friendship to the highest status.

was advised to independently seek out my emancipation…

Sadly many are of this view in the present day. So it is important that we compare todays views to the Sutta & Vinaya Pitaka, and to find out the truth of the matter. Always remember that the Scriptures are out Teacher. Buddha once said that “By not understanding, and not penetrating this doctrine beings have become entangled like in a knotted ball of thread and have become like munja grass and rushes, unable to pass beyond the woeful states of existence, and Samsara, the cycle of existence.”

are other peoples experience etc. on this path valid…

The simple answer is Yes. Specially at the outset, until you become a Stream Entrant others company & guidence is important. Just as the great ocean gradually slopes and inclines and shelves without any sudden drop, so too this Dhamma and Discipline there is gradual training and work and practice without any sudden penetration of final knowledge.

So why read up on Buddhism at all ?...

Because that is The ONLY Way. . Buddha said “Let an intelligent person come to me, sincere, straight forward and honest; I shall instruct him in the doctrine so that on my instruction he could practise by himself in such a way that before long he would himself know and himself realize …”(M.II.44)

Methodology of learning …

It starts with careful listening with full attention (Suthaa).
Then what he has heard has to be registered in the mind (dhathaa).
The next step is to familiarize himself with what has been learned by reciting (vacaya paricita).
Then it has to be internalized with pondering over it, contemplating the meaning by applying it to yourself.  (Manasaanupekkhitha)
The next step is practising what one has learned to become a real knower of the teaching - The realization. It is the result of the above 4 actions.  (Ditthiya Suppatividdha)

If my inner being is not compatible with the author…

The issue of compatibility is not what is important. Of utmost importance is whether your inner being has recognized the URGENCY. Whatever means that you will employ to instil a sense of urgency, then that is the way to go. If there is one single word that is more important than any other in the whole of the Dhamma of the Supreme Buddha, it is URGENCY. In whatever way, if one could develop a sense of urgency, then by all means stick to it. For that you have to develop a sense of dismay (samvega) with what is happening around you. To see the other side of life -  the universality of suffering and develop an attitude of heedfulness (appamada) to avoid being duped by types of desires that come our way.  How many will have a sense of urgency towards the practice of Dhamma?


text:
Does the wicked have a better bargain at death in Buddhism?
Does the wicked have a better bargain at death in Buddhism considering that there are no soul to transmigrate?
Let's assume there are two persons A and B, born to similar condition. Person A surround himself with virtuous people, learn the Dhamma and practice it. Person B surround himself with wicked people, don’t respect the Dhamma and does evil deed.
In this very life, both persons have conditioned free will, but person A open for himself preferable condition of choice by acting virtuously. For example, the joy of virtuous act as a condition to be preferred is only open to person A, person B will never feel this joy until he correct his volition. Likewise, both persons feel sensual pleasure the same, but person B crave for more endlessly, and he live in want.
Person A been compassionate to all beings future or present he delighted when he hear that, at time of death, because of his virtuous act the mindstream-continuum will form another being in favorable condition.
Person B is also happy when he hear the fruit of karma at death,because been evil he care less for condition of future beings and he is also happy that his life of want and endless craving will end at death, and he will be no more.

Does the wicked have a better bargain at death in Buddhism considering that there are no soul to transmigrate?

Though there is no soul (unchanging, eternal core in a being) there is a dependently arisen continuity of a person. If your are wicked, you continue in lower realms which are dominated by suffering, through like other doctrines this is not internal. In other words there is a continuum in the form of a causality driven process, but there is not solid, unchanging entity or part as person.
There is a probabilistic element what will be your last mind as this decides the next birth. In balance of probability your last mind will be good only if have done a great lot of good deeds near your death and habitually being doing good deeds. Also you do not know whether you die young or old so you have to cultivate goodness whenever you can.
Also being born in the different realms are like gravity. Lower realms attract the most. Also there is a higher chance that a bad thought will pop up at the last moment. So majority of humans end up lower. If you were to have a chance of getting to a higher realm you have to be very good. Therefore, it is the good that has some bargain for an upgrade from where they are.

Person A surround himself with virtuous people, learn the Dhamma and practice it.

Good friends are the main cause of being able to practice the Dhamma.

Person A surround himself with virtuous people, learn the Dhamma and practice it.

You should be careful when you act. If you act unwisely the result will not be desirable? If you are wise and act accordingly you will be able to reap favorable results.

crave for more endlessly, and he live in want

Unsatisfied desires is also a source of misery and stress. This produces additional karma which also result in stress.

happy that his life of want and endless craving will end at death, and he will be no more.

Reality is not what someone believes. Generally believes are far from reality. Dhamma is reality. You need to know it at the experiential level.
A person with the roots (craving, aversion or ignorance for lower rebirths and unselfishness, hatefulness and undecidedness for higher rebirths) will always be reborn. A person who is not liberate will have the roots. Also see: The Roots of Good and Evil by Nyanaponika Thera

Thank you I will read the Book by Nyanaponika Thera. But can we say person B will continue in lower realms. The mindstream-continuum will form another being on next life not person B.Person B is endowed with conditioned free will here and now and does the act of evil.

If there is a Mr. A who dies and is reborn as Mr. B, they are not the same not different. B is continuum of A but not A. Similarly, each moment that passes new person is created. If you take yourself now this is not the same as a moment ago not different. You are a process of causality based process, but there is not entity wise solid, unchanging, everlasting core. You can also say B is and rebirth / reincarnation of A, but this is not my means of transmitting the soul (everlasting, unchanging, eternal core) from A to B.

It mostly depends upon your state of mind at death. However, it is also said that your karma comes to weigh heavy on you at that time. When a good person dies, he dies with goodness and light karma. When a bad person dies, he dies with a disturbed mind and heavy karma.
There are six possible state of rebirth in samsara: hell, animal, preta, asura, deva, and human. They correspond to hate, ignorance, craving, jealousy, pride, and humans have not to much of any of these. So, this person you describe would be reborn as a preta. A preta is a craving monster who's appetite cannot be satisfied. A horrible fate.
Likewise, a good moral person who is born in the heavens of the devas gets to enjoy the heavenly life. I would say that the good person is luckier. Even though that existence, like all such in samsara, is limited.
Better to be reborn in the pureland of a Buddha. But you have to take refuge in that Buddha and end these mental deficiencies. It is the training ground of bodhisattvas who can eventually transcend samsara.


text:
What am I doing wrong?
I was introduced to meditation many years ago through a short course and a book. Essentially I tried the mindful breathing meditation. I kept at it for a couple of years after which different circumstances resulted in me forgetting all about the meditation. Maybe it was due to my not noticing any discernable effects. But now I am trying to pick it up again. Currently I am following the book "Wherever you go, there you are" by Jon Kabat-Zinn.
However, I have a few questions:
1) Everywhere I keep reading stuff of the kind "Observe your thoughts without judgment". What does that really translate into in practice? How do you observe without judging? I mean, if you get sad thoughts, you get sad too. Thats why they are called sad thoughts. I never understood how to actually follow this advise.
2) Again, I keep reading "Observe this particular moment", "be in this moment" etc. What other moment are we normally in? What special tasks do we need to undertake to be in this moment? I mean, as long as you don't daydream about the future or wallow in the past, you're in the moment, right? This is something I again fail to comprehend clearly.
3)"Observe the breath". Do I feel the breath? Or note that I am breathing? Or count the breath? It just feels like more thinking.
4) How do you ever "know" that your meditation is working right? Or how do you even know your practice is headed in the right direction? I got tired after 2 years of it and nothing in return. Okay maybe I did it wrong, but how would it have been had I done it right? Is there a time frame within which you can expect some sort of result if you do it right?
5) There seem to be many kinds of meditations, each with its own set of fanboys. Are these different types simply different paths to the same goal? Or are they meant for different goals? Moreover, are their learning curves different? How do I know what is right for me? Does this analysis even matter at all or am I just complicating things needlessly? My aim is to be able to concentrate and think clearly without getting overwhelmed.
Clearly I am doing it wrong, for I feel no difference. The meditation books are full of hollow cliches and deep-sounding mumbo-jumbo which isn't helping at a practical level.
Just to put the facts out: I am a mathematics grad student deeply interested in algebra and computing, and a Hindu by birth. I find religion and mythology fascinating from a historical perspective though am not spiritual or too keen on the underlying philosophies. I have also faced recurrent issues with OCD and clinical depression and insomnia, but medication, therapy and most importantly, time, have made things better. I am, and have always been curious about meditation, but have not been too successful or consistent with it. I am not opposed to religious imagery or artefacts in the meditation practice, though I'd prefer it to be as objective as possible.
Any advise/suggestions would be great. Thanks!

I think you did a really good job of breaking down your doubts into individual points.

1) Everywhere I keep reading stuff of the kind "Observe your thoughts without judgment". What does that really translate into in practice? How do you observe without judging? I mean, if you get sad thoughts, you get sad too. Thats why they are called sad thoughts. I never understood how to actually follow this advise.

In Buddhism we separate the initial thought from the emotion which we apply to it. The thought isn't a bad thing until we start to apply our ideas to it, we call it sadness and we want to get away from it, we start to think of how good life would be if we could avoid sadness. It is only after we apply our ideas that this thought becomes bad.
As humans it's very hard not to see sadness as a bad thing, we cannot immediately control our reactions to avoid labeling sadness as bad. When beginning with meditation we practice allowing the sadness to be present in the mind and not try to get rid of it.

2) Again, I keep reading "Observe this particular moment", "be in this moment" etc. What other moment are we normally in? What special tasks do we need to undertake to be in this moment? I mean, as long as you don't daydream about the future or wallow in the past, you're in the moment, right? This is something I again fail to comprehend clearly.

You're right that thoughts about the future and past are not part of the practice but sometimes we get distracted without going to the future or past. For example if we see a bar of chocolate we have sight in the present moment; then we might get distracted and start to think "Where are these chocolates made?" or "How many calories are in the chocolate?". These thoughts aren't about the past or future but we are now lost in thinking and we are not in the present moment.
As an extra note, if you change from seeing chocolate to thinking "How many calories are in the chocolate?" then the present moment changed from sight to this thought about calories, you could remain in the present by observing the thought but observing a thought is different from just thinking it.

3)"Observe the breath". Do I feel the breath? Or note that I am breathing? Or count the breath? It just feels like more thinking.

Some of the suggested techniques do involve more thinking than others. One aim of meditation is to reduce the amount we get caught up in thoughts. Just feeling the breath involves less thought than counting the breath, in that way feeling is better than counting. You know from meditating that it is difficult to stay aware of the breathing, some people are so stressed that they have to count their breath, it is too difficult to only feel the breath. For these people counting is a good idea until they are calm enough to just feel the breath.

4) How do you ever "know" that your meditation is working right? Or how do you even know your practice is headed in the right direction? I got tired after 2 years of it and nothing in return. Okay maybe I did it wrong, but how would it have been had I done it right? Is there a time frame within which you can expect some sort of result if you do it right?

If you are doing meditation correctly then you should notice an improvement in your reactions to things. Maybe before when a person shouts at you then you get angry and shout at them, after meditating for months when a person shouts at you then you notice your anger and you don't immediately think that you have to shout.

5) There seem to be many kinds of meditations, each with its own set of fanboys. Are these different types simply different paths to the same goal? Or are they meant for different goals? Moreover, are their learning curves different? How do I know what is right for me? Does this analysis even matter at all or am I just complicating things needlessly? My aim is to be able to concentrate and think clearly without getting overwhelmed.

Largely the different meditations are different paths to the same goal. Any meditation which involves observing an object (the breath, the body, a coloured disc, a flame) the object is unimportant because eventually in deep meditation you will not be able to see/feel the object. Because breath meditation is so popular there are many many variations of how to watch the breath but you just need to find the one that works best for you. The only way to know what is right for you is to experiment with different types, a month should be long enough to know if you like it. None are perfect so just find one that is good enough for you.
Last bit of advice: Meditation involves letting go of what is happening. If you are trying very hard to follow your breath then you are preventing yourself from being relaxed. Ideally you should not require effort to remain aware of the breathing, you just won't get distracted by other things because you are calm.
I hope that some of these answers help you to develop a fruitful practice.

1) Everywhere I keep reading stuff of the kind "Observe your thoughts without judgment". What does that really translate into in practice? How do you observe without judging? I mean, if you get sad thoughts, you get sad too. Thats why they are called sad thoughts. I never understood how to actually follow this advise.

When any thoughts arise there is a feeling accompanying them. Thei can be pleasant (happy throughs) or unpleasant (anger, sad, fear) or neutral.

On cognizing a mind-object with the mind,
one investigates the mind-object that the basis of mental joy,
one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of equanimity.

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta
If they are pleasant this leads to craving / covetousness and if they are unpleasant they lead to aversion, which you should avoid.

 a monk dwells exertive, clearly aware, mindful,
 observing the mind in the mind,
 removing covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world

Mahā Sati’patthāna Sutta
Non judgemental way is not to have any attachment or aversion to the pleasant, unpleasant and knowing the nature of neutral sensations arising from the thoughts.

the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;
the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings;
the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings.

Pahāna Sutta

pleasant feeling is pleasant when it persists, painful when it changes;
painful feeling is painful when it persists,   pleasant when it changes;
neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge of it,
    painful when there is no knowledge of it

Cūla Vedalla Sutta
If you do become judgemental this leads to attachment or aversion which should be avoided.

Taking the painful as pleasurable

Vipallasa Sutta

when the latent tendency of lust takes over, we are lustful;
when the latent tendency of hate takes over, we are hateful;
when the latent tendency of ignorance takes over, we are delusive

Pahāna Sutta
If you are non judgemental where by maintaining complete equanimity and towards any sensation knowing their impermanence, you will not be overcome by latent tendencies.
Also it is the sensations as there are many Suttas which are assertive about it:

all mental states flow along with feeling - Vedanā samosaranā sabbe dhammā

Kiṁ Mūlaka Sutta
and

Ānanda, two kinds of feeling, relatively speaking [by way of instructing], have been spoken of by me.
Three kinds of feeling, too, relatively speaking, have been spoken of by me.
Five kinds of feeling, too, relatively speaking, have been spoken of by me.
Six kinds of feeling, too, relatively speaking, have been spoken of by me.
Eighteen kinds of feeling, too, relatively speaking, have been spoken of by me.
Thirty-six kinds of feeling, too, relatively speaking, have been spoken of by me.
One hundred and eight kinds of feeling, too, relatively speaking, have been spoken of by me.
Thus, Ānanda, has the Dharma been shown by me in a relative manner.

Pañcak’aṇga Sutta
Also see this answer for a more generic description and more references.

2) Again, I keep reading "Observe this particular moment", "be in this moment" etc. What other moment are we normally in? What special tasks do we need to undertake to be in this moment? I mean, as long as you don't daydream about the future or wallow in the past, you're in the moment, right? This is something I again fail to comprehend clearly.

Your thoughts tend to roll and be preoccupied in the past and future most of the time than the present and many of these thoughts are either pleasant or unpleasant leading to craving and aversion. There are times you mind is in the present also dwelling in pleasant or unpleasant thoughts which also should be avoided.

Thus, there are thirty-six such preoccupations with craving regarding the past,
preoccupations with craving regarding the future,
and preoccupation with craving regarding the present,
making 108 preoccupations with craving

Tanhā Jālinī Sutta
Being is the present means to be aware of the sensations resulting from thoughts and mental activity observing their arising and passing nature.
All sensations are unsatisfactory. This is the key point which links to the 1st Noble Truth in the 4 Noble Truths and the main link (among the 12 links) which you can break the vicious cycle of Dependent Arising. In this specific case every thought that arises in your mind you should try to understand the working of Dependent Arising and 4 Noble Truths at the experiential level. This is not a logical thinking exercise just keep looking at the arising and passing of the sensations due to your thinking and metal activity.

3)"Observe the breath". Do I feel the breath? Or note that I am breathing? Or count the breath? It just feels like more thinking.

You should not count, visualise or verbalise as this leads to creating verbal fabrications.
Breath meditation at early stages involve Vitarka and Vicara which is like thinking and pondering.

4) How do you ever "know" that your meditation is working right? Or how do you even know your practice is headed in the right direction? I got tired after 2 years of it and nothing in return. Okay maybe I did it wrong, but how would it have been had I done it right? Is there a time frame within which you can expect some sort of result if you do it right?

There are many measures of progress. See these answers one answer on progress, another answer on progress. Also if you are too concerned with the progress this will lead to excessive efforts and also resentment which hinder progress.

5) There seem to be many kinds of meditations, each with its own set of fanboys. Are these different types simply different paths to the same goal? Or are they meant for different goals? Moreover, are their learning curves different? How do I know what is right for me? Does this analysis even matter at all or am I just complicating things needlessly? My aim is to be able to concentrate and think clearly without getting overwhelmed.

Many meditation have different goals. E.g. Samatha does not deal with ultimate peace but limited to mastery over the mind. There are many types or Kammaṭṭhāna. Vipassanā is what aims at ultimate peace and happiness. This also has been thought in different ways with some techniques being effective than the other overall. Also a technique that works for one may not be the best suited for another. You have to figure what works. If you have not already tried it have a look at:

http://www.dhamma.org/, or
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/

which follows the tradition of Ledi Sayadaw, Saya Thetgyi, Saya Gyi U Ba Khin, Webu Sayadaw.
In addition there are lineages and tradition which you might be able to find from:

World Buddhist Directory

Notable other traditions are:

Pa Auk Sayadaw's Tradition
Thai Forest Tradition

Also do not change your practice too often. Give any type of meditation and ernest and fair trial for about 6 months to 1 year and if it does not work more on. If you see that one technique is working and you are making continuous progress then stick to it without changing.
Also validate if the theory and practice is congruent and the practice validates the theory.

You have asked your question systematically. However, as a practitioner, in conclusion, you do not find the right way. "Observe your thoughts without judgment"... "Observe the breath"... etc., this so-called techniques however does the one advocated it really understand, try and prove? For example, counting the breathe, many people misunderstand it by counting from 1, 2... 100 and on, like counting sheep for sleep. No. Counting breathe (隨息) it should count like: 1, 2... 10; then 10, 9... 1. And it's not like counting breath-in: 1, breath-out: 2... No. It should be counting breath-in, hold-on, mindless/mindfulness, concentrate on your nose-tip, until release: 1; repeat: 2. I shouldn't say too much in breathe technique since personally I'm not so interested in this at the moment. The other called "observe your thoughts" etc will take too much time to explain. But as what you reported in your question, those are wrong.
One less complex method you may try, chanting "Om, Ah, Hum". Either just concentrate to listen to the sound you chant, or with thought on: "Om" is vibrating in your head, "Ah" is vibrating in your heart, "Hum" is vibrating in your abdomen. Mantra chanting maybe is an easy way to follow if you don't have a real teacher and you can't read the Dharma text. There are many Buddhist Sutras and techniques in Classical Chinese however I doubt if these are translated into English or any language for you; if the translation is correct.


text:
How does Karma works?
Will happen same with me the way I had build my bad Karma?
e.g If I've stolen money then will I face same, will someone steal my money?
Or do I've to pay more than that?

Kamma works in visible ways. If you steal money, the results (vipaka) of that kamma (action) can include worrying you will get caught & getting punished if you get caught. People will not trust you. Your reputation will be bad.
The Pali suttas (AN 6.63) state kamma ends when the eightfold path is practised. If you stop stealing & know with clear wisdom why should never steal again, the old kamma ends.
If you stole money from someone you know, you can repay it if you can, to make it all better. If you cannot repay it, no problem.
There is nothing that will guarantee the same theft will happen to you in return.

Karma is dependent on:

intensity of your volition and number of thoughts involving the action
purity of the subject of the action

So if you seal from a very good person the the karma will be strong likewise you take time to execute with a lot of effort and /or you feel very strongly overcome by greed then this will cause more strong Karma.
Now to overcome this Karma if you make a donation the same apply. In this case the motivation is not strongly rooted in greedlessness hence Karma may be week. Hence giving many time over what you stole may not defunct this Karma.
Also note your roots of good are generally weaker than roots of good. This again means unwholesome action (stealing) and counteraction (donation) in the balance of probability might be heavier.
All this is balance of probability. There are rare cases where people who have done a loot of good and little bad have got bad results and people who have done a loot of bad and little good have got very good results, hence this is also a motivator to get out of the cycle of birth than accumulating Karma may it be good or bad. Whenever you face a situation alway try your level best to accumulate good karma and not the bad though.
Also if you perceive someone to be good to do something against them you need stronger volition regardless of the person being good or bad. Also you repent and regret the action more increasing your Karma. Regardless of the level of volition of perception if a person is good he is like a mirror. If you steal from such a person the Karma will be greater.
Also see: The Working of Kamma, 2nd ed, by Ven. Pa Auk Tawya Sayadaw

If you perceive a pure person as somebody who is impure then does stealing from them cause extra-bad results? I mean what is of importance, their purity or your perception of their impurity?

@Hugh I think both important but more importantly is your perception of them.

In very brief terms,
‘You will reap what you sow.’ So, if you perform good actions with a good mind, you will receive positive results. If you do bad things with bad intentions, you will receive punishment from the universe.
No one can say with 100% certainty (except Buddha) when this karma is going to yield results for you, whether it’s at an exact time or in a future birth.
Humans have a natural common sense to distinguish between what’s bad or good. However, some incorrect belief concepts can plant wrong things as right, which won’t yield good results for them.

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


text:
Meditation or practicing technique has benefits of prenatal elaboration?
I had heard in the yoga class there's something like prenatal elaboration and it's benefits. Then if a pregnant woman will practice meditation or techniques so baby will born wise, calm, intelligent, kind and curiosity of Dhamma ? Will it born heartily and spiritually Buddhist?

When one make positive vibration (Kamma) this effect people around you. This is like the hanky effect. Say you wrap a perfumed flower (good person) then the hanky (another person) then the hanky will also smell good. If you warp dried fish (bad person) then the hanky will smell bad. Likewise if the mother is creating good vibrations then the child maybe influenced.
Also if the mother has been good even before conception then this would attract a good child with also more merit.

'Birth', comprises the entire embryonic process beginning with conception and ending with Giving Birth (Childbirth). It is the springing into existence of the groups materiality, feeling, perception, mental constructions, & consciousness. So a calmer and more focused mind in meditation has pass to a child in the womb, as this study by the Vivekananda Yoga Research Foundation in India shows.


text:
If someone constrain me to build my bad Karma or it wouln't be Karma?
If someone building their bad Karma by manipulating against me and if I've do something for revenge then It'd be my bad karma or wouldn't considered as Karma? Or It'd be same as "The Lady and the Ogress - Dhammapada Stories." Not in other, next life but in this life.

If due to some contain you cannot follow through with your action this does not become a potent karma with the potential to give rebirth but the volition forms a mild karma which can give result after rebirth.
Regardless of if you follow through with a action of intend to do some action as retaliatory or not, action and intention will become karma.

this may not be direct answer but more of friendly reminder of 6 things one should know about Karma,

intention is karma
causal of Karma (nidana) which is detection through sense gates.  This is important because it is not a common knowledge.  Those who have not heard Dhamma would think pleasures or sufferings are caused by self, others, etc.
Vemattata, or level, magnitude, differences of karma.  Karma that causes being to be in hell, animal realms, hungry ghost, human, heaven.
Timing, karma in the here and now, later, and even further away.
Ending.  Karma ends because detection from sense gates is ended.
path of ending of karma, 8 fold path

And to put things in perspective, Buddha said throughout the Samara, each of us had been a thieve so many times. all of the blood shed from the punishment when caught in all those life time is more than the oceans combined.  And the opportunity for one to be born in a human is as rare as a chance of a Buddha to appear.
your karma hypothetical question is impossible to be answered by anyone but Buddha because of the complexity of karma.


text:
Why my Mind told me to Sleep?
I have observed one thing, when i meditated first time Vipassana last week, i saw vibrations in my body, but after that day its been many days i have not seen them, in-fact i can not sit for long  (only 15-20 minutes), its not that my legs hurt,
But its my mind, it says “Why are you doing this, lets sleep, when i tell it no, it says its more comfortable to meditate in sleep”.
and then i sleep, How do i control it, am i missing something ?

There are good answers regarding this topic at https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/8889/being-present-with-the-help-of-body-sensations-then-how-to-proceed/8894#8894 or https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3485/sloth-torpor-restlessness-worry/3523#3523

i saw vibrations in my body, but after that day its been many days i have not seen them

When you experience something like vibration you should understand this is also not permanent. You should not crave to experience it again.
This craving can also lead to arising of hindrances.

But its my mind, it says “Why are you doing this, lets sleep, when i tell it no, it says its more comfortable to meditate in sleep”. and then i sleep, How do i control it, am i missing something ?

This can be either you being merely lazy and trying to find and excuse to doze off or sloth and torpor taking its hold. Whenever, you experience something like vibration this stirs up deep rooted Saṅkhāra which might manifest itself like aches and pains or hindrances.
Sloth and torpor is nourished  by unwise attention, you should denourish it by wise attention and exertion. Also see The Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest: Selected Texts from the Pali Canon and the Commentaries compiled and translated by Nyanaponika Thera and also Pacalā Sutta which deals with dozing off. Also there are many answers, which I have given, which deal with Pacalā Sutta which which are listed here and relevant to this context and also this answer. Also more content may be tagged meditation-hindrances and five-hindrances which are also relevant. Content I have created under the above tags are found here and here which might be less noisy and more relevant. Also Nīvaraṇa, Thīna,middha by Piya Tan might be useful.
The Vipassana method, as in the Pacalā Sutta, is as follow:

“Nothing is worth clinging to”
When this was said, the venerable Mahā Moggallāna said this to the Blessed One:
    “In what way, bhante, in brief, is a monk freed through the destruction of craving, that is, one who has reached total perfection, the total security from bondage, the total holy life, the total consummation, the highest amongst gods and humans?”
“Here, Moggallāna, the monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to.
    And, Moggallāna, a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things [he directly knows the nature of the all].
    Having directly known the nature of all things, he fully understands all
    things.
Having fully understood all things, he knows whatever feelings there are, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant.
As regards to those feelings, [Section on Disillusionment and Revulsion (Nibbida) follows]
he dwells contemplating impermanence in them;
he dwells contemplating dispassion [fading away of lust] in them;
he dwells contemplating ending (of suffering) in them;
he dwells contemplating letting go (of defilements).
When he dwells contemplating impermanence in them, contemplating dispassion in them, contemplating ending in them, contemplating letting go, he does not cling to anything in the world.
    Not clinging, he is not agitated; being not agitated, he himself surely attains nirvana.


text:
Which suttas in the Pali canon are relatively early or late?
Do people (monks and/or scholars) have a sense of how old (or relatively old) each sutta is in the Pali canon: i.e. which suttas are considered "earlier" or "later"?
If not for individual suttas, how about for whole Nikayas: are some Nikayas viewed as being probably earlier and/or later?
If the answer is "yes", is there a reference on this subject suitable for a non-expert ("suitable" meaning "readable" and "not controversial, generally accepted by other experts" and preferably "identifies the evidence on which it bases its conclusions" ... and preferably also translated into English)?
How does this (notion of some progressive history of earlier and of later suttas) fit with the Buddhist councils? Were different suttas adopted at different councils? The Wikipedia article about the councils gives me the (perhaps wrong) impression that all suttas were recorded in the first council. Do differences arise from when the suttas were transcribed as translated rather than from when they were accepted into the remembered/oral canon?

Piya Tan's analysis of DN 30 includes text like the following:

Historically,
  the Buddha has none of these superhuman marks, but his authenticity and spirituality are in no way
  diminished or affected. They are at best mythical marks of the fruits of his past good karma, as detailed in
  the Lakkhaa Sutta (D 30).12 We will now examine how and why these marks arose.
The earliest sources of a full list of the thirty-two marks are the following
  suttas: ...
Earliest allusions: ...

Should I take that as implying that he has a reference that tells him which are the "earliest" suttas? Or is he saying there that all suttas are the earliest source?
Taking this paper as an example, should I infer that the current state-of-the-art is that some scholars try to decide what's early and late by comparing different versions (e.g. Pali and Chinese) of a sutta: but that though with a lot of work they try that for one sutta, such hasn't been done for most suttas and there's no reference of dates (of specific suttas) nor even generalization (e.g. about Nikayas).
I think I've read various people mention other examples too, of topics evolving: for example that earliest suttas talks about fewer than five lay precepts.

Related question: Which are considered to be the oldest suttas?

Related answer: When were Buddhist suttas written?

I can't translate the whole of question, however I tried to answer as I can do.

Layers of pali literature already being in buddha-living-period.
There are many pali literature in buddha's time, such as buddha's literature, sāriputta's literature, mahākaccāna's literature, upāli's literature, etc. Because every mahāsāvaka have there own students.
But the most influential literature are buddha's literature and sāriputta's literature.
4 nikaya are buddha's literature, most of the others cannon are sāriputta's literature, because he is the one who buddha said "sāriputta is the best teacher who can teach like me". So everyone always go to meet sāriputta to listen his teaching, in his literature. But if someone need buddha's literature, they will go to meet buddha or ānanda, who is the best in sutta memorizing.
So, abhidhamma is difference from sutta, because commentary said "abhidhamma is memorized by sāriputta". And the other buddha's sāvaka book also have literature look like sāriputta's literature because everyone in buddha-living-period often go to learn dhamma with sāriputta (see:mahāgosiṅgasālasuttaṃ).
7 Vinaya-pitaka, is  memorized by  Upāli and his students. He also author some path of parivāra because buddha said in tipitaka (a.n.) "Upāli is the best vinaya-memorizer" (vinayadharānaṃ yadidaṃ upāliฯ).
Suttanta-pitaka is memorized by Ānanda. But in 1st saṅgayanā, 500 arahanta decide to separate whole sutta to 4 nikya.Then they gave each nikya to a group of 4 etadagga and his student to especially memorize it.
Who are the members, of group of 4 etadagga?  Ānanda and his students (tn), Sāriputta's students (mn), Kassapa and his students (sn), Anuruddha and his students (an). (The others have learned and memorized dhamma, too, but buddha said "ānanda is the best", so everyone need him in 1st saṅgayanā).
Abhidhamma-pitaka, paṭisambhidāmagga, niddesa, buddhavaṃsa, cariyā-pitaka, except kathāvatthu of moggalliputta, is learned by Sāriputta, But then they are memorized by every arahanta, because everyone in buddha-living-period often go to listen Sāriputta (see:mahāgosiṅgasālasuttaṃ).
Origin: http://www.tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/s0101a.att0.xml

What does "literalness" mean? Can you suggest any alternate translation[s] of that word (because I'm not sure "literalness" makes sense)?

literalness=structure of pali. Literal is adjective, so I think I can't use it as noun. My english is terrible. I'm sorry.

I think you say, for example, "buddha's literality", I think you mean "text in which the Buddha's words are quoted ... text which is attributed to the Buddha".

What is the word mean pali structure ,pali context, pali syntext?

Those (structure, context, syntax) are all good words. Did you mean "literature" (which means, "text which people read and study")?

I would hold the view that all Theravada Suttas were recorded in the 1st council. There was a split that happened in the 2nd council which resulted in schism which lead to Theravada and Mahayana. The Mahayana school did develop new Suttas but also preserved the old in the Agamas.
Many scholars referring to figure out if a Sutta is early or later compares these Theravada and Agama source this are very similar but having disimilarities also. If they tally they rationalize this is an early source. If there is any addition they consider this perhaps a later composition. I would personally believe if something is missing in the Agamas this would have been transmission error as the Mahayana school was not as metriculers as to preserving wording as the Theravada tradition. (Since there are many later additions in the Mahayana school.) Also Mahayana texts were translations whereas Pali language was close to or same as Magahi which was spoken by the Buddha himself. So here also discrepancies could have arose.
After the 3rd council the likelihood of changes to the Theravada Tripitaka would have been very small as Buddhism spread to to multiple location which survived in countries like Burma. If there would have been discrepancies then the version in the countries would diverge.
In the 4th council the Tripitaka was put in writing. This would have eliminated any room to discrepancies as this was also not confined to one country. Any changes would lead to discrepancies.
The Theravada councils were more heard to collect compare all the sources and redistribute the aggregate source than new compositions.
Also in the case of the Bahudhātuka-sutta certain parts were missing in the chinese version which prompted to ascertain than this is a later composition by the Theravada school which would resonate well with modern through with equal rights to women. I feel this seams like biases in the research there the research was bent to fit modern thought and outlook. Sometimes it might be personal perceptions backed by evidence and logic to rationalize.
Also taking the intersection than the union may not be the way to go in my opinion as Satipatthana Mula by Piya Tan this would leave out some aspects of the Sutta which does make practical sense. Also note certain areas in this analysis does have common areas from more than one independent school which indicate certain parts may have been lost than composed.
At least in the Theravada school miss attributing anything to the Buddha or changing the words would have been very much feared hence would have been preserved well.
Among the current editions the discrepancies are very rare, but there are some discrepancies. One example is Pacalā Sutta.
Ultimately what is the Dhamma and what is not should be settled not at intellectual speculation but at experiential level and practice wherever possible, though some insights may not arise in every one. Any discrepancies regarding the practice should be verified by the practice.

I imagine the 1st three suttas of the Buddha (SN 56.11, SN 22.59 & SN 35.28) are universally held to be as such. These 1st three suttas are exclusively focused on individual practise for renunciates (those that had left the household life) & here-&-now realisation. As time passed, it appears likely the scope of the Buddha's audience increased and eventually the scope of the audience of the Buddhist religion increased. Thus the transition from very precise & supramundane suttas using very precise language to more broad & worldly suttas using less precise language would logically be indicative of earlier versus later discourses.
For example, the Digha Nikaya would likely include many later suttas because DN 15 departs from the usual description of Dependent Origination and because the DN contains suttas about past lives, past Buddhas and the origin of the physical world, which are obviously alien to the subject matter of the 1st three suttas & alien to the core message.
Even the topic of the Three Knowledges, while probably spoken by the Buddha himself, indicates a description of enligthenment given at a later period for a broader audience (since the language contained within is multi-interpretable). That the Three Knowledges are often spoken to Brahmans & laypeople support this view.

I think I don't understand what's meant by "supramundane" in the last sentence of the first paragraph. Aren't the first three suttas practical, "real" in some sense, and therefore precise and "wordly"; and isn't "supramundane" more or less a synonym for "supernatural": which might include topics such as other realms (e.g. of devas), other lives, perhaps iddhis, etc.?

"Supramundane" refers to "lokuttara" or "transcendent". "Lokuttara" means "beyond or above the world". All teachings of absolute verifiable liberating truth are supramundane. Where as any teaching that cannot be verified or is a general (but not absolute) moral principle (eg. kamma & result) is "lokiya" or "worldly". Refer to the two sorts of right view in MN 117. Therefore, the 1st three sermons are supramundane or lokuttara. Regards

Bhikkhu Sujato & Bhikkhu Brahmali are of the following opinion (in The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts):

Early Buddhist Texts [EBTs]: Texts spoken by the historical Buddha and his contemporary disciples. These are the bulk of the Suttas in the main four Pali Nikāyas and parallel Āgama literature in Chinese, Tibetan, Sanskrit, and other Indian dialects; the pātimokkhas and some Vinaya material from the khandhakas; a small portion of the Khuddaka Nikāya, consisting of significant parts of the Sutta Nipāta, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Dhammapada, and Thera- and Therī Gāthā. The “Suttas” in a narrow sense are those passages that are directly attributed to the Buddha himself (and to a lesser extent his direct disciples).
Non-EBTs: Abhidhamma, Mahāyāna Sūtras, Buddha biographies, historical chronicles, as well as the majority of the Khuddaka Nikāya and
  the Vinaya Piṭaka. The Jātakas are non-EBT, but derive from stories that in some cases may even be earlier than the Buddha. Commentaries and other late texts may contain some genuine historical information alongside much later invention.

If I recall correctly, Bhikkhu Analayo has a similar view as well, though he considers only the verses of the suttas in the Khuddaka EBT set to be EBT, and not the contextual text that precede them.
Back to Sujato & Brahmali, they also write (references elided):

Even in the stylistically oldest part of the Khuddaka Nikāya, such
  as the Sutta Nipāta, the Udāna, and the Dhammapada, there is substantial divergence between the schools. This is despite the fact that these texts do have a common core, which is found across the different traditions. With texts such as the Abhidhamma, despite a small common core, the divergence is even greater. But the vast majority of Buddhist texts are exclusive to the individual schools and do not have any parallels at all.
[...]
Finally, it has also been proposed that the first three of the 9 aṅgas
  [of the Saṁyutta nikaya] should be identified with the proto-Saṁyutta, based on a statement by Asanga and on the pattern of distribution of texts within these collections.

"should I infer that the current state-of-the-art is that some scholars try to decide what's early and late by comparing different versions"
The comparative studies are also used to shed light on the age of discourses. But the texts themselves may give some clues as to their age by analysis of style, metre of verses or vocabulary. For example, a text may use terms that are reminiscent of a certain period, or use terms that are not found in a larger body of text that is presumed to be old.
Also:

I think quotes found in commentaries are too used to estimate how old is a passage.
errors, which are usually copied along the chain might be used to place a text in a timeframe.
geopolitical descriptions contained in the text may be used, together with archeology, to position it in time, as well as inscriptions found in ancient artifacts.

Anyway, this book is probably the best starting point to explore these questions. It's full of references, and also presents the view of researchers who disagree with the authors (thus, the reader gets to know the "who is who" list in the [western?] scholastic community).
"How does this (notion of some progressive history of earlier and of later suttas) fit with the Buddhist councils? Were different suttas adopted at different councils?"
As I understand, the traditional position is that the nikayas were fixed at the 1st council. Scholars, however, often talk about a later moment where a canon is "closed to addition". Certainly the existing parallel nikayas do not agree verbatim, so the historical question of the original nikayas spoken at the 1st council remains.
"Do differences arise from when the suttas were transcribed as translated rather than from when they were accepted into the remembered/oral canon?"
I think there are differences of script in manuscripts, but I don't know much more than that.
Finally, the presentation "The ur-text of the Pali Tipiṭaka" by Alex Wynne, might be of interest.

Wikipedia's Atthakavagga and Parayanavagga says,

Dating
Some scholars regard the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga as being considerably earlier in composition than the bulk of the canon, and as revealing an earlier form of Buddhism.[1] They are regarded as earlier because of elements of language and composition, their inclusion in very early commentaries, and also because some have seen them as expressing versions of certain Buddhist beliefs that are different from, and perhaps prior to, their later codified versions.[2] In this thinking, the Pārāyanavagga is somewhat closer to the later tradition than the Aṭṭhakavagga.[3] The Khaggavisānasutta (Rhinoceros Sutra), also in the Sutta Nipāta, similarly seems to reveal an earlier mode of Buddhist monasticism, which emphasized individual wandering monastics, more in keeping with the Indian sannyāsin tradition.
In 1994, a group of texts which are the earliest Indian manuscripts discovered were found in Gandhara.[note 2] These texts include a relatively complete version of the Rhinoceros Sutra and textual material from the Aṭṭhakavagga and Pārāyanavagga.

Translations of these suttas are listed here on Access to insight (Chapters 4 and 5 of the Sutta Nipata within the Khuddaka Nikaya).
Each chapter has an introduction by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (here and here). The former says that evidence for its being earlier than the rest of the canon is weak; the latter says (without explanation),

There is evidence that these sixteen dialogues were highly regarded right from the very early centuries of the Buddhist tradition.

Wikipedia also says of the Rhinoceros Sutra,

The Rhinoceros Sutra has long been identified, along with the Aṭṭhakavagga and Pārāyanavagga, as one of the earliest texts found in the Pāli Canon.[1] This identification has been reinforced by the discovery of a version in the Gandhāran Buddhist texts, the oldest Buddhist (and, indeed, Indian) manuscripts extant. It also exists in a Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit version. The early date for the text along with its rather unusual (within community-oriented Buddhism) approach to monastic life have led some scholars to suggest that it represents a holdover from a very early stage of Buddhism.

The Rhinoceros Sutra is in the first chapter of the Sutta Nipata within the Khuddaka Nikaya, i.e. here on Access to insight.

In his book, "A History of Mindfulness", Bhikkhu Sujato claims that the Samyutta Nikaya is the earliest Nikaya collection. The major tool of his argument is the comparison of the congruences of each Theravada Nikaya with the corresponding Agama of the Sarvastivada tradition. The Madhyama Agama and the Samyukta Agama of Sarvastivada are preserved in the Chinese Tripitaka while a substantial part of the Sanskrit Dirgha has been recently discovered in Afghanistan. Sujato notices that among these three pairs, the Samyutta Nikaya and Samyukta Agama pair shows the greatest structural congruence while the other two pairs are structurally very dissimilar. From this he concludes that the Samyukta had been largely closed before the separation of Vibhajyavada (Theravada) and Sarvastivada. Since the Sarvastivada counterpart of the Anguttara Nikaya is lost to us, this comparison method cannot say anything about its relative dating. But Sujato thinks that the Anguttara is anyway later than Samyutta since it was composed using the small-sized suttas that could not be included in the thematic system of the Samyutta.
Sujato's conclusion about the Samyutta's antiquity was anticipated by the Taiwanese scholar Yin Shun who argued that the contents of the Samyutta fit neatly with the first three angas (namely, sutra, geya and vyakarana) of the nine-anga classification system of the canon. According to him, the authenticity of the Samyutta in ancient times is also supported by the fact that the author of Yogacarabhumisastra, the definitive text of the Yogacara school, included an extensive commentary on the sutra-anga portion of the Samyukta in it.
So, considering the research of Bhikkhu Sujato and Yin Shun, one can say that the sutra-anga portion of the Samyutta is the oldest part of the Sutta Pitaka, apart from probably the Atthakavagga and the Parayanavagga of Sutta Nipata.
N.B. - Yin Shun has not written in English but a summary of his research can be found in Choong Mun-keat, "The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism".

As much as I am frequently impressed by Theravada Buddhists analytical and research skills, I can't help but be dismayed at how literal they seems to be taking the Pali Suttas in terms of accuracy in a manner similar to Christian biblical literalists. Resulting in often very fatalistic views when it comes to issues regarding prophesies.
There are plenty of evidence to show that the Abhidhamma was a later compilation and systematic synthesis of the Buddha's teachings. (In some early Buddhist schools, the Abhidhamma was not accepted as canon, and in fact the Mahayana and Theravada Abhidhamma differ markedly). And in fact many further schism were the result of disagreements on the doctrines presented by each schools. The fact that Abhidhamma was according to the narrative given by the Buddha to his mother in heaven should be an indication that the masters who compiled them meant them in a metaphorical manner. (In similar veins the Prajnaparamita Sutras are said to be stored in a realm of nagas, which are symbols of enlightenment).
In fact even the historical narrative differs across tradition. The Theravada claims that the Mahāsāṃghika broke away from the teachings of the elders by changing the Vinaya, when historical evidence indicates the opposite, that an elderly group 'Sthavira' (elders) wanted to add more monastic rules to the Vinaya, (presumably due to some misbehavior by monks) but was rejected by the majority and hence split away. In fact scholarly research indicates that the Mahāsāṃghika vinaya is most likely the oldest. This isn't biased in favor of Mahayana either as the vinaya of Chinese Buddhism is Dharmaguptaka, which like the Theravada also descended from Sthavira. In fact Chinese pilgrims like Faxian went to India to find the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya which was recognized as the earliest in extant.
In fact, the varieties of similar but ultimately slightly different sutras of Early Buddhism found indicate that while most of the message of Buddhism is the same, the details isn't necessarily fixed and could have been represented differently to push a particular doctrinal view.
So the narrative that the Theravada is the purest Buddhist teaching is not supported by evidence. It is indeed the most conservative, but by no means is it 'pure'. And in fact purity is not helpful if the message is not in line with the truth.
Mahayana arose exactly to counter many ontological and metaphysical claims by many early Buddhist schools, many of which are still presented in Theravada. For example, Theravada doctrine holds that Nibbana is eternal and unconditioned, the Ariyas are in special metaphysical states, such as the claims that the Arahants are perfect, Stream Enterers have no doubt. This is explicitly denied in Mahayana Prajnaparamitas Sutras teachings on Emptiness, that is because all things are dependently originated and hence all things including wisdom, enlightenment and Nirvana are ultimately as impermanent as the mental afflictions of doubt. This of course result in a very different outlook regarding the purpose of Buddhist practice, resulting in the Bodhisattva ideals rather than aiming for Final Nirvana. If anything this is far more in line with what the Buddha taught about impermanence and selflessness.
In fact if you look at Mahayana Mahapitaka (Great Basket of Scriptures), the Agamas are arranged separately early in the scriptural collection. Which indicates that Mahayana Buddhists were keenly aware that it represent an earlier set of teachings separated from say teachings on emptiness in the Prajnaparamitas Sutras and many other later Buddhist teachings such as Pure Land Buddhism. To me, this is more honest than Theravada claim of being pure Buddhism and much more reasonable than a position based on appeal to authority.

Thank you, but this doesn't seem to answer the question: which of the Pali suttas might be earlier (or later) than other Pali suttas?

It is an interesting introduction to Mahayana though, and is close to the topic (though not on-topic) by identifying doctrines which Mahayana finds dubious; so thank you again.

Forgive me for adding this elementary comment: I just read (in Wikipedia again) that the "Prajñāpāramitā sūtras" are thought to be among the earliest "Mahāyāna sūtras".

@Yinxu To preserve a scene as evident I pass on upvote. Maybe you are interested to know that how Theosophical Society built up Buddhism during and after the colonial era in Southeast Asia. I was pointed to it by a random visitor of this forum who was editing my answer of a completely unrelated question - a kind of providential revelation :D? Then everything becomes clear and all the dots joint... These people don't know what they are doing, they don't know they are editing a Buddhist Bible...

@Yinxu But I dispute your last paragraph statement "...the Agamas are arranged separately early in the scriptural collection..." thus represented as if it's the early teaching. Instead, Agamas are the basic teaching (that's why these listed at the starting of the Mahayana Sutras section-numbering) learnt by all schools, as evident evacuated fragments of Agamas are kept in different schools' sites.

@Yinxu Agamas are, like school textbooks, the primary school's; or like someone studying science, the fundamentals. However, when the study progresses, it will be divided into physics, chemistry and biology; to achieve professional training, it then subdivided into quantum physics, or bio-chemistry... The Agamas, hence the Nikayas, are equivalent to as the primary school education's essential textbook, but now celebrating the status as the Bible represented end to end of the whole Buddha's teaching! :D (Remember, the 1st Sutra spoken by the Buddha is Avatamsaka.)


text:
How exactly i can access my Astral body in meditation?
Lord Buddha have access to unlimited knowledge, This information can be found in old Indian scriptures as well, that human body is capable to visiting to another planets with his/her Astral body (Suksham Sharir).
Is there some particular way or do i need Guru for this particular thing ?
Many Buddhist monk don't teach this, i am aware that Lord buddha himself have denied not to show any super powers.
These Siddhi's (powers) may lead to Ego, But going in universe have always been an interesting thing for anyone.

It is important to say that their is no meaning to aim for developing Siddhi. Doing so demonstrate that you are on the wrong way and therefore it will take much more time to reach them. Siddhi are fruits on the path.
Doing things with Astral body is possible for anyone, since it is just a part of yourself. The point is to get a part big enough of your conscience to go with it.
This as nothing to do with meditation or Buddhism.
To have a good mediation it is more important to be here and now, well centered, and therefore with your astral body inside. Nowadays, most of the person have their astral body somewhere else (high astral, low, or around).

Could you expand on the last part? The astral body inside? Seems to me like the physical body is inside the more subtle bodies (including the astral)

In addition to otaku's reply, the abilities to 'project' on the higher planes are no "Siddhis' per-se. No super powers either.

@Oyiwai The Astral body is the most mobile subtle body we have (causal one can move as well but not others). It does go out when you sleep, and most of the people are actually having it out of their physical body.  And I totally agree to disinguish Siddhis and astral travel.

The Visuddhimagga covers the topic of paranormal powers quite extensively.  A prerequisite for any, however, is a mastery of the rupa and arupa jhanas. You've got a long road ahead of you with that!  ;-)  And figure that by the time you get there, you'll probably have lost interest in siddhis anyway.


text:
Is love in this life 'artificial'?
In this life we experience love with family, friends, spouses and others. From my understanding of reading through this site and researching, love leads to suffering.
Is the love we feel towards others in this life just temporary or does it pass on to the next life?
For example, I love my family. I want to live the longest possible time with them. I know that one day we will depart one another. I hope to see them again in the next life. Does this thinking led to suffering?

Is the love we feel towards others in this life just temporary or does it pass on to the next life?
It's temporary.It may pass on to the next life but it won't stay like that forever.Making it your goal to cultivate the necessary karma to pass "things on" to the next life is wearisome and not a guarantee.
For example, I love my family. I want to live the longest possible time with them. I know that one day we will depart one another. I hope to see them again in the next life. Does this thinking led to suffering?
All conditioned things are unreliable.Their unreliable because their impermanent.So if you put your hope in them you are setting yourself  up for suffering.There are different types of love that one can have.The type of love that suttas teach to cultivate are Loving kindness or The Brahmaviharas. Try cultivating this kind of love for your family and all beings.
Edited:
Here are a few helpful links to cultivate Love as taught in the suttas.
Loving-Kindness Guided Meditation Video
Loving-Kindness Meditation by Ven.Sujiva
The Four Sublime States by Venerable Nyanaponika Thera
Brahmavihara Dhamma by Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw
Hello - with Love & Other Meditations Ven. Visuddhacara.

What kind of love are you referring to in your last paragraph. Can you provide links or subject matter for me to research?

Every conditioned thing is temporary and subject to destruction and changes including feelings.  Wanting to meet again means that one has to have a new birth or self in next life and it comes with all the heap of drawbacks and unsatisfactory.
In case you still want to have new birth, then the following sutta might interest you.
A loving couple asked Buddha this exact same question, and here was his reply:

Householders, if both husband and wife wish to see one another not only in this present life but also in future lives, they should have the same faith, the same virtuous behavior, the same generosity, and the same wisdom. Then they will see one another not only in this present life but also in future lives.”

Here is full sutta: the same in living

I believe  Nakulapitā and his wife were stream-enterers and not yet ready for higher level of dhamma so Buddha taught them Dhamma that was most appropriate for them according to their strength.  Since stream enterers would never fall into worlds of unfortunate and destination is fixed.

AN 6.16 states the wife was a stream-enterer http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.016.than.html

thanks!!!!! Dhammadhatu.  My thinking was that why Buddha would indulge them by giving an answer which might have led to a desire for new Bhava instead of pointing out that meeting again in next life would be  dangerous.   I have faith that Buddha gave best possible answer for them.  Since she (possibly husband too) were stream-enterers, they will be safe (might be bruised here and there for next 7 lives,but they are "safe" nonetheless.

Buddhism explains that separation from the loved is suffering. If you truly believe you will see your family in a next life, the idea of separation will not occur. Therefore, suffering will not occur.

Why is this answer DV? Please explain.

When Loard Buddha saw his previous lives, He observed that what ever he practices in previous lives was affecting his mind in positive way (because of his Good karma’s).

How ever if one is practicing Bad Karma’s would result in your mind becomes dirty, which will take more time to become pure.

We are born with 3 things

Age (How long you are going to live.)

Jati (Born as Human or animal.)
Bhog (Results of Bad Karma done.)

For E.g. We often see some small children are interested in different activities, Which is a result of the impression of previous lives on their mind.
While you are in deep sleep, mind doesn't get energy from soul, which means you are not aware of sleep.
But as soon as mind gets the light of soul, it will start working and you will see dreams (you will still love your family in dreams, because Buddha said "You become, what you think").
So Yes, Love is real but you don't take it to next life the way you perceive it.
Yes attachment leads to Suffering.

Why is this answer DV? Pleas explain.


text:
How many hours of Meditation in single sitting during Vipassana?
I was wondering its not much difficult to sit for one hour in meditation, but i want to know in Vipassana 10 days course, How long one will have to meditate, i mean do they do split meditation of 1 hour several times a day or 3-4 hours of continuous meditation ?

Each session is about 1 hour in courses organised in groups. E.g.
4:00 am             Morning wake-up bell
4:30-6:30 am        Meditate in the hall or in your room
6:30-8:00 am        Breakfast break
8:00-9:00 am        Group meditation in the hall
9:00-11:00 am       Meditate in the hall or in your room according to the teacher's instructions
11:00-12:00 noon    Lunch break
12noon-1:00 pm      Rest and interviews with the teacher
1:00-2:30 pm        Meditate in the hall or in your room
2:30-3:30 pm        Group meditation in the hall
3:30-5:00 pm        Meditate in the hall or in your own room according to the teacher's instructions
5:00-6:00 pm        Tea break
6:00-7:00 pm        Group meditation in the hall
7:00-8:15 pm        Teacher's Discourse in the hall
8:15-9:00 pm        Group meditation in the hall
9:00-9:30 pm        Question time in the hall
9:30 pm             Retire to your own room--Lights out

Source: https://www.dhamma.org/en/about/code
4:00 am          Wake up
4:30             Meditation in hall
5:30             Morning discourse
6:30 - 8:00      Breakfast and rest
8:00 - 9:00      Group meditation in hall (for all)
9:30             Individual instruction (for all)
11:00 - 1:00 pm  Lunch and rest
1:00 - 1:45      Meditation
2:00 - 3:00      Group meditation in hall (for all)
3:30 - 5:00      Meditation, and interviews for new students
5:00 - 6:00      Tea and rest
6:00             Evening discourse
7:30 - 8:30      Group meditation in hall (for all)
9:00             Retire

Source: http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/uk/guidelines.html
MORNING SESSION

03.30 – 04.00 a.m.                 –         Wake-up / Dress-up

04.00 – 05.00 a.m.                 –         Walking Meditation

05.00 – 06.30 a.m.                 –         Sitting Meditation

06.30 – 08.15 a.m.                 –         Breakfast dana, cleaning common areas, toilets and dorms etc.

08.15 – 09.15 a.m.                 –         Sitting Meditation

09.15 – 10.15 a.m.                 –         Walking Meditation

10.15 – 11.15 a.m.                 –         Sitting Meditation

11.15 – 12.00 p.m.                 –         Lunch Daana

AFTERNOON SESSION

12.00 – 01.00 p.m.                 –         Walking Meditation

01.00 – 02.00 p.m.                 –         Q&A / Dhamma Discussion (Every Day)

02.00 – 03.00 p.m.                 –         Walking Meditation

03.00 – 04.00 p.m.                 –         Sitting Meditation (Except the Last Day)

04.00 – 05.00 p.m.                 –         Walking Meditation

05.00 – 06.30 p.m.                 –         Dhamma Talk (Except the Last Day)

06.30 – 07.00 p.m.                 –         Mindfullness Gilanpasa (Tea) Break

07.00 – 08.00 p.m.                 –         Walking Meditation

08.00 – 09.00 p.m.                 –         Sitting Meditation

09.00 p.m.                         –         End of Day’s Program

All the access doors to the meditation premises should be closed and the lights should be turned off by 10.00 p.m.

Source: http://www.nissarana.lk/meditate-with-us/retreat-timetable/
If you are tailoring a private course for yourself maybe you can have longer sessions.
The time tables are set so both new and old students can meditate in reasonable comfort. There is nothing to worry about the time of the session lengths as many meditators do not find this an issue.