text:
U ba Khin / Goenka Vipassana putting stress only on vednanupassana
The Vipassana as taught by Gautam Buddha in his Maha Sati Patthana Sutta talks about  four different feilds of meditation : Body, Sensations,mind and mental contents.
Goenka focuses solely on sensations - Isthis not an incorrect application of Buddhas teaching. If focussing on only one frame of reference could liberate the bhikku, why then would he have specifically mentioned four?

You are quite right: Guenka following U Ba Khin claims that the Sathipattana Sutra says all the other 3 items are mapped into body sensations and this is evidently untrue.
It is amazing how only very few people notice this blunt distortion of the sutra. I was searching for an explenation for that mismatch back in 2008 and could hardly find any supporting explenation until I stumbled upon this excellent article:
https://www.gurusfeet.com/opinion/too-narrow-interpretation-vipassana

Yes, had we an unbroken lineage, perhaps the issue would have been different- more holistic maybe; but here we are seeing a reconstruction based upon the written word, so in essence any one who establishes a technique, is doing so de-novo: there will be the angle of 'interpretation' involved. One should then allow space for other such interpretations! (What's the point in being parochial)

'Sensations' of the body are generally not 'vedana' (feelings). Instead, they are generally mental formations (sankhara) of stress stored in the physical body, as follows:

The craving that makes for further becoming —
  accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that —
  grows within him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances grow.
  His bodily torments & mental torments grow. His bodily distresses &
  mental distresses grow. He is sensitive to bodily stress & mental
  stress. MN 149

'Feelings' ('vedana') refer to the pleasantness & unpleasantness that is associated with sense contact via the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body & mind.

There are these three kinds of feeling: a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling and neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling. MN 74
And what is feeling? These six are classes of feeling: feeling born from eye-contact, feeling born from ear-contact, feeling born from
  nose-contact, feeling born from tongue-contact, feeling born from
  body-contact, feeling born from mind-contact. This is called
  feeling. SN 12.2

Observing only genuine vedana (feeling) can liberate a bhikkhu, per the Culatanhasankhaya Sutta.

Here, ruler of gods, a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth adhering to. When a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth adhering
  to, he directly knows everything; having directly known everything, he
  fully understands everything; having directly known everything, he
  fully understood everything, whatever feeling he feels, whether
  pleasant or painful or neither pleasant or painful, he abides
  contemplating (observing) impermanence in those feelings,
  contemplating (observing) fading away, contemplating (observing)
  cessation, contemplating (observing) relinquishment (letting go).
  Contemplating (observing) thus, he does not cling to anything in the
  world. When he does not cling, he is not agitated, he personally
  attains Nibbana. He understands: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life
  has been lived, there is no more coming to any state of being.’
  Briefly, it is in this way, ruler of gods, that a bhikkhu is liberated
  in the destruction of craving, one who has reached the ultimate end,
  the ultimate security from bondage, the ultimate holy life, the
  ultimate goal, one who is foremost among gods and humans. MN 37

Basic satipatthana formula is

a monk dwells exertive, clearly aware, mindful,
observing the ____{body | feelings | mind | dhamma} in the ____{body | feelings | mind | dhamma},
removing covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world;

Mahā Sati’patthāna Sutta
Whatever Satipatthana you take you have to avoid covetousness and displeasure. Covertness and displeasure arises due to sensations which are pleasant and unpleasant. At the apparent level you might think you are attached or displeased with an external object. But in reality this is not the case. It is the sensation created with the object comes in contact with your sense door is what you get attached or averse to. You seek more and more contact which give the same sensation. With each contact one of the 121 mind states arises, which are all accompanied by sensation. You cannot be are or know anything without the sensation as any stimulus creates sensation which are part of the process of sensing the world.
For example say you are seated for a while. Body posture is part of the body contemplation. Being in a particular posture pain arises and you would want to move. When you move the new posure is pleasure. To introspect the body you need to feel around the body to know the posture. To do this you use your body sense door. It is contact on the body sense door and the sensations it create which allows you to know the body posture.
With regard to the mind, all metal state arise with sensation. (Sabbe dhamma vedana samosarana) So mind contemplation is very much tied to sensations also.
If you take the Dhamma contemplation, it is again the unsatisfactoriness of sensations due to their impermanence and dependently arisen nature link to the 1st Noble Truth. Sensations the fuel which makes the cycle to dependent origination go around. With regard to sense bases, contact give rise to sensations. So sensation is pivotal for this contemplation.
So whatever frame of reference you have to do it on what is felt, i.e., sensations / feelings.
When practicing the 4 Satipatthana what you should scrutinise is how is leads to understanding of the 4 Noble Truths, Dependent Arising, Displacing the Unwholesome Roots (Craving, Aversion and Ignorance), displacing the 5 Hindrances, developing 7 Factors of Enlightenment, etc. How the dots connect between the concepts and in case of the 7 Enlightenment Factors how to progress from one to another. All this tie ups with feeling, being equanimous and knowing arising and passing / impermanence.
Also you can look at it from the angle. When a Liberated Person is in Nirodha Samapatti (saññā-vedayita-nirodha), sensations and perceptions cases and metal processors halt. Also at time period does not experience Dukkha since the above 2 factors have ceased. A Liberated Person will experience the worldly experiences due to past Karma but will not create new Karma as he does not react to these sensations with craving or aversion. For this explanation let me take posture of sitting which is part of the Body Contemplation. If a Liberated Person is seated in  Nirodha Samapatti no suffering nor unwholesomeness will arise from this though there is no awareness (no mental process). No suffering because there is no sensation and not unwholesomeness as there no reaction to sensations with craving or aversion. If a Liberated Person out of Nirodha Samapatti will still experience pain due to the posture after a while but there will be no unwholesomeness as you are not reacting to sensation with craving or aversion, hence no future result. A worldly person is also seated, fully are he is seated, but reacting with aversion to the pain due to the posture, which create fabrications and condition the future. So the key here is not reacting to sensations with wisdom (awareness of impermanence / arising and passing), even when doing any other Frame of Reference, which is the crux how S.N. Goenka teachers.
Also feelings (pleasant, unpleasant, neutral) is the one of the most recurring teaching or topic in the Tripitaka and in many contexts. E.g. antidote to sleepiness in Pacalā Sutta, letting go in Pahāna Sutta, 6 sense-bases in Sal-āyatana Vibhanga Sutta, Elements in Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta, Karma in Titth’ayatana Sutta, etc. This list goes on and on. Also the Buddha tailors the instructions based on the audience. For the perhaps the widest audience bases on the number of occurrence of where these instruction occur perhaps imply this is what works for the majority. Spread of the technique and the number of centres and number of people taking the courses also you can infer this also.
Also S. N. Goenka's teaching does not say focus solely on sensation. What is said is give importance to sensation.

'With regard to the mind, all metal state arise with sensation. (Sabbe dhamma vedana samosarana) So mind contemplation is very much tied to sensations also./ '  but wht about  meditation on  body and mind can they be disposed off as unnecessary ?

They are necessary. Body has Elements, Postures, Notion of Beauty. Mind has 18 Metal Examination and What is there in the Satipatthana Sutta. Similarly Dhamma. They cannot be ignored. At times some Frame may be predominant but you have to contemplate all. All this at the experiential level or on what is felt. All experiences has sensations as part of it, that is why it is Dhukka because sensations are impermanent and end in Dhukka. Nivana supases sensations and perception hence free from Dhukka.

So do we consider Goenkas technique as not fully adhering to the Mahasatipatthana sutta

It is fully adherent to the Suttas. I am yet so find another technique which can survive the scrutiny of the whole Canon. In many other techniques there are some incompatibility with some part of the Canon.


text:
How to cure pain(Heartache, Sorrow)?
We've cling to nothing, no attachments and no bond to not to being suffered. But as a layman it's going through all and face sorrow and like mind is lost. It's same I loose my mind. I don't feel nothing for what things hurt me, feel barren. Don't feels normal. How can I become normal again and feel happy?

Are you referring to trauma in general, or to PTSD?

"Don't feels normal. How can I become normal again and feel happy?" What do you mean with "normal" - do you wish the pain to go away, or do you wish happiness to arrive? For heartache (as in having lost a loved one etc.), noting it, recognizing the feeling, meditating on it, listen into your body to see what part of your body "hurts" when the feeling arises etc. would be the thing to do. Don't try to shove the feeling away, accept it for what it is, be compassionate towards the feeling and yourself.

'Normal' is like how one stay without pain (mental) not physical. Wounded body will cure but mind which is shattered by many things. I accept what comes to me but see as I tried to cling to and because of I've been suffering and that's I don't feel nothing for what I was wanted to cling to. Also I've to ask do we hurt because we compassionate(self loving) towards us?

Here is what is my problem actually http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/16073/why-im-feeling-hopeless-about-life

In a comment you wrote, "I wander to find one in my nearest city but I return back with nothing. It's little bit hard."
I'm thinking that you still have Dhamma when you don't have Sangha.
I think you don't "cure" pain, but Dhamma might teach you to recognize it when it arises: e.g. something triggers a feeling of sorrow, and you can note, "this is sorrow".
Eventually (if the experience is repeated) you learn to recognize what triggers sorrow, and perhaps you choose to not grasp (not hold to, attach to) the situation and/or sequence of thoughts which lead to sorrow.

In addition there are things you can do as a lay-person which may lead to non-sorrow. For example the practice of ethics (sila), behaving ethically, should result in a "lack of remorse". Or "identity view" results in sorrow, for which a converse might be anatta, sunyata, dana, and so on. And it's important to have or find good friends (who, you might find if you choose to join good communal activities).
Also there are things you might do to look after yourself medically, which might help your mood. For example I read an article recently where someone was describing how their doctor treated them for clinical depression: their treatment required therapy and eventually drugs, but the first thing the doctor told her was that, even if she took sick leave from her job, she should keep up her physical exercise -- in her case, running up-hill in the morning. Being depressed she didn't feel like exercising as she used to, but she found someone else to do it with, which (scheduling an appointed time to do it with someone else) helped to motivate her to do it regularly. What I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure that medical doctors recommend physical exercise as a treatment for heartache.
Also you mention "normal" twice. I suppose you're thinking of some time in the past as "normal" but I'm not sure there's such a thing. Things are impermanent, people die for example, you can't afford to think of the past as normal and the present as abnormal.
Changing your expectations might help too: if you expect to be happy and normal, and you're not, then you're surprised and unhappy. If you expect that desires and attachments cause sorrow then you're not so surprised and, having recognized "this is sorrow" and "this is the cause of sorrow" you may be better able to condition cessation of that sorrow.

How you can say can't afford past in normal and present is abnormal? Just like how we were in our past, do we had need think about sorrow but now we living with sorrow. Normal is state of mind calm, happy, restfulness .

As Buddhists, we take refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma & Sangha. If you have strong suffering, the Sangha is important, where you can talk to & be with sincere & compassionate practitioners. You should find a good Buddhist group to visit.
When I was dissatisfied with life, I left my family, country & home at 23 years old to search for something, unknown. Fortunately, 10 weeks later, I found Buddhism in a practise centre in Asia.
You have already found Buddhism but if there is no Buddhism near you, like many in history, you can consider a spiritual journey to a suitable place. Or talk to someone by phone or Skype who speaks your language. The Sangha (community of practitioners) is an equally important refuge.

Thank you so much. A monk had suggested me to be there but I was unable to be for six months or for year. But I've to find one. I'm from India sometime I wander to find one in my nearest city but I return back with nothing. It's little bit hard.

Headache and sorrow leads to unpleasant sensation which in turn lead to aversion. You have to keep your mind equanimous noting impermanence.
This is easy said than done. To practice how to do it properly take a retreat, if you have not done so already and at least once a year.

Heartache like how someone hurt my emotions and feelings. Yes and now I'm going through aversion. How do can I become normal? What I have to practice? I've been looking since it happens to get my life back on track. Please

Sign up for a meditation retreat at: http://dhamma.org/, http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/ or http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/. Within the scope of SE it is difficult to teach the full technique as it takes a number of days to lean.

My uncle had suggested me vipassana in Nashik, Maharshtra, India.

Do the source. I presume your Uncle suggested Dhamma Nāsikā. Also Dhamma Giri is close by.

Yeah I'll do, he had mentioned Igatpuri. But can't have I nearest or is it only best source than any other?

Centres in India. I meant do the course not do the source above.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is our success predestined by our past karma?
Some people are more richer other others, some are more intelligent than others, some are more beautiful than others...
Are all these predestined? I heard that one's karma in his/her past life affects his/her present life. So if one is not as intelligent/sucessful in the present life, can we attribute this to his/her bad karma in the past life?

Kamma is volitional or intentional action as Buddha said, “It is volition, bikkhus, that I call kamma. For having willed, one acts by body, speech, or mind.” It’s results ripens or takes effect in three ways; to be experienced in this very life, the next rebirth or at some subsequent occasion. Thus, as long as we travel on in the cycle of rebirths, our stockpile of kamma will  yield its due results. We have no escape from kamma so long as we make no effort to make an end to kamma by becoming at least a Stream Winner. Until one gets into the path, as Buddha said, “beings are the owners of their kamma, the heirs of their kamma; they have kamma as their origin, kamma as their relative, kamma as their resort; whatever kamma they do, good or bad, they are its heirs.”
In this way, the effect of ones past kamma determine the nature of ones present situation in life. This is a universal principle, on which Buddhist morality is based. It does not assert that everything is due to Kamma. If everything were due to Kamma, a man must ever be bad, for it is his Kamma to be bad. One need not consult a physician to be cured of a disease, for if one's Kamma is such one will be cured.
Kamma is only one of the five all-embracing five orders or processes which are laws in themselves. The other four ‘Niyamas’ which operate in the physical and mental realms other than the Kamma Niyama are… Utu Niyama, Bija Niyama, Citta Niyama, & Dhamma Niyama. Utu Niyama is that of the physical order such as seasonal phenomena of winds and rains. Bija Niyama is the order of germs or seeds. Citta Niyama is the order/power of the mind. Dhamma Niyama is that of those who tread the Path. Kamma is, therefore, only one of the five.
It is this doctrine of Kamma that can explain all the inequality of mankind. But it does not mean fate as it is possible to change or reduce the effects of these past actions through present actions. That is why if a person who has much money, but no true, righteous friends should practice sila.  Such people who have no friends, very often single but keep on hoarding wealth have in their past lives given lavishly in generosity as dana but without any sila/morals in them. A person who is very generous but not virtuous (without the any personal virtue like the observance of the five precepts ) would inherit this kind of bad kamma. Even today many rich people are highly generous but the inevitable karmic law is that no degree of generosity can cover up the lack of virtue in personal life. This karmic law cannot be deceived. This is why it has been laid down that "give dana with confidence and always be virtuous" (daanam dadantu saddhaaya - seelam rakkhantu sabbadaa). The two aspects should be complementary to each other.

Thank you for your insightful response.  But I think, considering the complexity of the Karmic low, we should talk in probability / conjecture and say may have been this and that in their past lives* etc… and avoid definitive relation

You are very right @user10522. Buddha has advised us not to question or analyse how the Kamma takes affect as it is too complex and intricate. It is just that I felt the OP demanded at least one example, and there's no harm in reminding others of the best kind of giving..  "give dana with confidence and always be virtuous" (daanam dadantu saddhaaya - seelam rakkhantu sabbadaa)

These ideas are found in the Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta, however this sutta is questionable both in terms of its composition (see this discussion) & its actual reality.
We can see in the actual reality of the world some of the most wealthy people do very evil things to acquire their wealth & some of the most beautiful people live emotionally afflicted lives. It is highly improbable that such people did something exceptionally good in a past life & then became so evil & neurotic in the next life. Further, we can know exactly the steps a person look in this life to become wealthy, as written in their biographies (eg. Bill Gates). This shows their wealth is unrelated to any actions performed in a past life.

But this does not explain the existence of prodigies right? How is it even possible that some people have talent in math, music, etc. at a very young age? Their talent is so overwhelming that normal ppl like me cannot even come close to matching their skill in my lifetime.

Also, I think Buddhists often explain that if retribution has not befallen someone, then it is only because the time is not ripe.

If beauty is related to past actions, since a person can be born very beautiful and another unsightly, why not wealth can have past actions (in other lifes) contributing to actions in this life?

No, it is determined by many other qualities in a person.
Courage, awareness etc.

Then why do people have different IQ? Why are some people born to rich parents and others born to poor ones? Why are some people luckier than others?

That is based on Karma. Karma is like someone's heritage. Heritage doesn't mean it is his success, but rather what he or she got.

How is it possible that one already has karma since we were born? Is that an indication that we have past lives?

It is. So is the animal world. Lord Buddha speaks of observing the world around oneself and notice how things taken form (reaction) based on cause (action). One could find animals showing certain human like behavior and vice versa. Believing in rebirth is part of Samma Dhitti, one of the bases of the Noble Eight Fold (Component) path.

In some sense yes. Everything is happening for a reason. So do your choices in another incarnation reflect your choices in this incarnation? Yes, because each time it is you that is doing the choosing.
So in a sense you could say. Yes you are affecting yourself.

But is there a 'YOU'  that re-incarnate?

Is there evidence that shows that out current choices will affect our next life?

@LanceHAOH Are you looking for evidence to show that the Buddha taught this or some sort of science experiment?

@LanceHAOH Evidence that the past affects the future? Dunno? Try jumping of a cliff to make sure.

@Hugh I am looking for evidence to show that our present lives are indeed affected by what we did in our past lives.

@LanceHAOH Trust me, if you want to keep doubting things about karma then it's easy to reinforce the doubt. I won't give you evidence to prove it beyond doubt. You can verify that your current actions affect your future and with sufficient calm you can verify that the mind is born repeatedly every moment. It becomes clear from watching the mind that the birth is affected by past mental states.

@Hugh Our present actions do indeed after our future. But is there even a state of mind even before we were born?

@LanceHAOH I misunderstood your question. I like to keep the view of rebirth separate from the view that karma affects our future. The way that rebirth is set up I don't think that it's possible to get any evidence against it, therefore I don't trust evidence supporting it.

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


text:
Does Buddha go to Naraka (hell) to save those tormented beings?
I heard one regarded by many a Buddhist teacher said, "Buddha will go to Naraka to save those suffering (tormented) beings, whilst those (monks, buddhists) will want to go to the Purelands. That (Buddha going to hell) is called Great Compassion."
Is this teaching correct, is it Buddha's teaching? I learnt that

One should bear one's own deeds and consequences (karma), neither a father could bear on behalf for the son, nor a daughter for the mother;
Buddha could not "give" enlightenment to anyone because enlightenment is reached by oneself;
If one who hasn't cultivated enough merits, one would be born in one of the Eight Obscured Places (八無暇) that Dharma couldn't be heard; one of the Eight Obscured Places is Naraka.

Is this saying contradictory to 3)? Why is he saying this?

Edited the original question "Buddha will (vow to) go to Naraka to save those suffering (tormented) beings" by deleting the "vow to" which was what I added, after reading Tenzin Dorje's answer, noting that "vow to" could be too easy to confuse with Bodhisattva's vow and the notion of "superior intention".

"Will go" or "would go"?

@TenzinDorje Since Chinese is not with the "tense" in it's character, can't be sure. But what he meant is, going to Naraka to help is part of the job of a Buddha, so to speak. He meant while others (monks) are teaching Buddha's Purelands and helping us getting there, in fact Buddha also takes care of the Naraka beings, else this Buddha cannot really be the one with Great Compassion.

As far as my study in sutta, Buddha did not go to hell to help beings in that world.  They are considered to be "unfortunate" beings; among animals, hungry ghosts, and gods in arupa world because they do not have the strength or what it takes to understand dharma.  However, in one instance, Buddha was so kind to a Naga (which considered to be a being in animal world) by telling him to observe 8 precepts on Upasatha days and he would become human faster.  In one sutta, Buddha compared beings in hell to be like a person drowning in a cesspool not even a strand of hair above it to grab pulling him out.
For question number 3) not always necessary.  In Migasala sutta, Buddha divided people into 10 groups, which one of them is;

Here, ânanda, a certain person is overwhelmed with hate and from time to time greed arises to him. He has heard something fruitful, has learnt something, has straightened his view and he personally has gained some release. After death he does not go to loss gains some distinction.

I have no idea about the 10 groups, but there is a phase 十圓滿 (10 Perfections [saṃpad ?] ), the "lucky factors" enabling one seeking enlightenment, 1/10 is being born as a human, these 8 & 10 always mentioned together. The 8 "Obscured Places" may relate to this Sanskrit term: aṣṭâvakṣaṇāḥ. One Sutra told that once a Naga morphed himself into a human thus accepted as a Bhikkhu but disqualified for during an afternoon nap his naga (snake/dragon) form was carelessly exposed, then Buddha established another rule that during Bhikkhu ordination one must answer a question: Are you a human?

Thanks for pointing out the Naga case. As far as Theravada Buddhism point of view, I never heard Buddha or his disciples go to hell to save other beings.

We say that when the Buddha was a bodhisattva, he vowed to go to Naraka to save beings suffering there. Compassion is the wish that others be free from suffering. Great compassion is the wish that all sentient beings be free from suffering. Superior intention is taking upon oneself to [do what it takes] free others from suffering and establish them in happiness. So, strictly speaking, here it is a case of 'superior intention'.
In the Tibetan Gelug tradition, we recite the Lamrim prayer of the Lama Chöpa every two weeks. At some point, it reads:

Even if I must remain for an ocean of eons in the fiery hells of Avici
  for the sake of even just one sentient being, I seek your blessings to
  complete the perfection of joyous effort to strive with compassion for
  supreme enlightenment and not be discouraged.

Still, as you say

One harvest what one has sown / None can take someone else's karma upon him
Buddha can not give enlightenment to others.
Dharma is not heard in Avici. But there is a story of a hell being generating compassion for another hell being's suffering. According to that story, the other hell being was an emanation of a buddha, and he meant for the first to generate compassion so as to create a cause of happiness.

This does not prevent us from aspiring to take upon ourselves the suffering of others, and to give away our happiness and its causes (merits). And this is the whole point: we cultivate an intention, because this intention will be a cause of achieving enlightenment.
It is just like the perfection of generosity: the virtuous intention to give. One (arya bodhisattva) can cultivate the perfection of generosity, that is the intention, even when there are still needy people in the world. Cultivating generosity does not mean eradicating poverty. Similarly, taking it upon oneself to establish sentient beings in enlightenment does not mean establishing them in enlightenment. The best a buddha can do is turning the wheel of Dharma, out of his omniscient mind, and that turning will be but a condition (not the substantial cause) of others' enlightenment.

Thank you. I understand the part about "superior intention", that's similar to "Bodhisattva's vow of saving all sentient beings even there are numberless beings". (a contradictory, for "all" and "numberless" cannot be paired off). Maybe I should delete the bracketed "vow to" which is what I added, originally he said "will go to Naraka". I perceived when he said that he was criticizing the monks, in response to being criticized by traditional Buddhist sectors that he was not an ordained guru (上師/禪師), nor a monk. Thus he emphasized he was doing the work on the level of a Buddha.

Lord Buddha has often preached about the hells and from his teachings it isn't apparent that he traveled there. However it is apparent that such beings are not capable of understanding or practicing merits. Therefore, it is unlikely Lord Buddha frequented hell to help those beings as they might likely be unable to receive it.


text:
asubha practice
why is it mentioned in the pali canon that Without the direct guidance of a teacher, this practice can be dangerous, as the canon of Buddhist literature includes a story of the Buddha teaching this mediation to pupils, a lot of whom commit suicide while the Buddha is in retreat.does this mean that I being a layperson, can't perform this?moreover, how can I not develop aversion while practising this but still reap it's benefit?

At the time accepted the answer I had not finished the answer. Below is the finished answer.

Did a few more adjustments.

why is it mentioned in the pali canon that Without the direct guidance of a teacher, this practice can be dangerous,

I am not sure if this is mentioned as dangerous in the canon. It is in the commentaries which say this is dangerous. It can be inferred as dangerous because of the above incident.

does this mean that I being a layperson, can't perform this?

You can do this. Only if done right it is not dangerous.

moreover, how can I not develop aversion while practising this but still reap it's benefit?

This is recommended if you inclined to see beauty in the physical form. That is, when you see something you evaluate it is beautiful you get strong attachment.
What is involved here is perception of beauty and the sensation.
Develope Opposite Perception and View
When you see a certain form or shape as beautiful then develop the perception  and view that is is not. This way, as your practice mature, your mental reaction to something beautiful will lesen. The form can you your form (own beauty or looks), someone else or even imaginary form.

when a monk sees a form with the eye, (in him) the agreeable arises, the disagreeable
    arises, the agreeable-and-disagreeable [the neutral] arises.
...
If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,’ he dwells perceiving the repulsive therein
... mind-object .. mind ...

Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta, Sampasadanīya Sutta
Cemetery Contemplation
Also use external form to reduce attachment to ones own body, again at the level of correcting the perception and view as well as the reflexive response of the mind, i.e., to reduce reflexing arising of craving for sensation due to perceptions on form, and should not lead to reflexing arising of aversion for sensation due to perceptions on form.

he compares this very body with that, thinking:
  "Such is the nature of this body: it will become like that—this is unavoidable."

Mahā Sati’patthāna Sutta
Changes Perception and View due to Internal Content
Also think if what is within the body is external and what was external was inside, you will be chasing animals away from pecking at you flesh! Also imagine what is below the skin. What comes out of the orifices. Imagine body parts piled up. This also a change in perception and view. The last view to break is that the stream of consciousness in internal or self.
Also see: In what Sutta(s) is there a References to Imagine the Body Inside Out and What is Below the Skin, Sampasadanīya Sutta
Whole vs. Parts and Effect on Perceptions and View
The body is made of parts. Sum of the parts are beautiful but not individually. The parts on their own does not have beauty, but put together only the perception and view of beauty arise. This way you reduce the mental reaction and attachment, to the sensation due to the mental reaction, that follows.
Also see: Mahā Sati’patthāna Sutta
Change in Form due To Decay Changes Perception and Views
Developing the view that the body is impermanent, subjected sickness, decay, old age and death. When you see someone beautiful then when they are sick, oozing excretions or on a pile of excretions, old and dead. Again this a way to adjust your perception and view so you mental reaction and the craving that result from the sensations due to how you mind's reactions are diminished.
Also see: Maha Dukkha-k,khandha Sutta, Does any Theravada Suttas / sources refer to Oozing orifices? What are the Suttas?
Method on Insight
Also when you evaluate some form as beautiful, plain or ugly you get a pleasant, neutral and unpleasant sensation. Use this to eradicate you latent tendencies for craving.

On seeing a form with the eye,
one explores a form that gives rise to pleasure,
one explores a form that gives rise to pain [displeasure],
one explores a form that gives rise to equanimity.
...
On cognizing a mind-object with the mind,
one explores a mind-object that gives rise to pleasure,
one explores a mind-object that gives rise to pain [displeasure],
one explores a mind-object that gives rise to equanimity

Sal-āyatana Vibhanga Sutta

the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;

Pahāna Sutta
In the methods mentioned above, the 1st can be dangerous (from most dangerous to the lesser dangerous ones), if you develop aversion towards form, due to the pratice. This is what happened to the monks who committed suicide. They got repulsed by their own body. Meditation on repulsiveness is to bring balance to your mind (being equanimous know it is impermanent regardless of the mental reaction) than moving from one polarity to another (i.e., reflexively seeing beauty and develop craving to reflexively seeing repulsiveness and developing aversion). Developing Insight is the safest way to practice this form of meditation as you are not trying to adjust you reactive / reflexive response of the mind with the risk of overdoing it. A experienced teacher may help detect if you have overdone it and reduce the risk.
Also see: Patikulamanasikara, Vipallasa Sutta

As a layperson, you can practise 'asubha' without a teacher however you must understand its purpose is to end lust rather than to end life. A stock phrase in the suttas is:

Asubhaṃ bhāvanaṃ bhāvehi. Asubhaṃ hi te bhāvanaṃ bhāvayato yo rāgo so pahīyissati.
Develop the meditation of the unattractive. For when you are developing the meditation of the unattractive, passion/lust will be
  abandoned.
MN 62; MN 118

In my experience, the primary issue/problem with asubha practice, as occured in the Vesali Sutta, is not so much aversion but, instead, the loss of positive regard towards physical forms in such a way that results in perceiving life as having no purpose.
Therefore, the Buddha teaches in the Vesali Sutta that once 'asubha' practise has served its purposes in generating disgust towards the physical body & abolishing lust, the mind should then develop Anapanasati to make the mind peaceful & to direct the mind to develop final gnosis.

The direct danger comes from developing aversion to one's own body and other bodies. In short starting to view your own body and that of others as a "sack of shit" or just a general "sour grapes attitude" towards yourself and others. People have apparently commited suicide as a result of these views.
To avoid it, the contemplation needs to be structured with an element of compassion(Karuṇā) so that bodily vulnerabilities are contemplated and one developes a healthy caring attitute towards the concept of a body. Elements of Metta may be needed to balance out aversion hostility if such was to manifest in behavior. It seems that the aversion does have a natural tendency to manifest itself and a correction from a teacher is usually needed at some point if one is to do it on his own.
If one's mind is powerful enough there can rise alot of visions and signs, which can be used to enter Jhana, but if not done correctly these will be very frightening and uncontrollable and one will go crazy in most cases. IE: Vivid visions of rotting corpses, corpses dragged around, people attacking you etc, not during meditation but during daily life. These states are described as potential complications by Ven. Maha Bua in the book "Wisdom creates Samadhi"
In general it can get tricky, and the meditation is very powerful so there is no saying how a session will affect one. The views can change quickly, changing them back can prove to be difficult.
That being said i think its a wonderful technique if one does it under competent guidance. Preferably someone who has trained it himself and has trained many other people and can react adequately to complications.
I dont think this is something i would recommend to people, i think it has its place and probably is optimal way to train for some personality types if they wanted to train Samatha but in general its not the only option and runs a real, unnecessary risk. I think its worth noting that the bahavior is the last thing to change, views change much faster so by the time the problem behaviors manifest it may be hard to change it back and many teachers wouldnt even know how to do it.


text:
How does 'Om Mani Padme Hum' protect us from danger?
'Om Mani Padme Hum' (translation: 'Hail the jewel in the lotus') is a six syllable invocation (mantra) of Avlokitesvara, one who is invoked as the Protector from danger.
Does it mean protecting from danger as purifying :

Om (Pride / Ego)
Ma (Jealousy / Lust for entertainment)
Ni (Passion / desire),
Pad (Ignorance / prejudice)
Me (Greed / possessiveness),
Hum (Aggression / hatred)

Beside the metaphorical meaning of "protection", it's also possible for a literal meaning too. If practicing correctly by reciting it with a purified heart and a focused mind, then the recitation in effect is a comprehensive training of all 3 limbs Sila/Samadhi/Panna, which needless to say, generate very wholesome Kamma which could potentially protect one from danger literally.

I'm going to try to answer your question by equating "danger" with Mara (devils).
Buddha used Mara both literally and figuratively, such as gods in heavens who hold wrong views, 5 skanda, attachment to sensual pleasures etc.  He said meditation from 1 first Jhanna is a safe place to hide from those dangers.
However, if danger in a sense of things happen to you like car accident, danger from natural disaster, sickness, aging, and causes of death, nothing can help for those are the way it is and from Karma.

@Dean_A. Can you describe " such as gods in heavens who hold wrong views, 5 skanda, attachment to sensual pleasures etc. He said meditation from 1 first Jhanna is a safe place to hide from those dangers?"

(imo) In that the phrase points to the Buddha and his message (convoluted though it may be for those not in the know!), whilst at the same time recognizing the terms for some of dangers present within experience, that the Buddha pointed to, there is both a 'carrot' and a 'stick' in this phrase, in regards to the path.
Since 'danger' is effectively based on Kamma coming to fruition - Kamma being conditioned by an individual's thoughts, words and actions - this phrase  should incline the mind to avoid some negative kammic fruits, whilst influencing it to take up the Buddha and his message.
(I assume the 'jewel in the lotus' is the Buddha.. for this, the phrase deserves some caution, because the Buddha primarily wished his followers to follow his Dhamma - through personal insight, rather than substitute personal progress by placing him on a pedestal)

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


text:
In what Sutta(s) is there a References to Imagine the Body Inside Out and What is Below the Skin
In a Sutta there is a reference to imagine the body inside out, in which case you will be chasing animals from pecking at you.
Also perhaps in the same Sutta or another you imagine what is beneath the skin.
What are these 2 references?

Could it be the Puttamansa Sutta: A Son's Flesh SN 12.63 that you are seeking?
In this Sutta, Buddha speaks of four kinds of nutriment: edible food, sense-impressions, volitions, and consciousness. Under Sense-impression there is this simile of a skinned cow that points out that wherever she stands, will be ceaselessly attacked by the insects and other creatures living in the vicinity.

"And how, O monks, should the nutriment sense-impression be considered? Suppose, O monks, there is a skinned cow that stands close to a wall, then the creatures living in the wall will nibble at the cow; and if the skinned cow stands near a tree, then the creatures living in the tree will nibble at it; if it stands in the water, the creatures living in the water will nibble at it; if it stands in the open air, the creatures living in the air will nibble at it. Wherever that skinned cow stands, the creatures living there will nibble at it.
"In that manner, I say, O monks, should the nutriment sense-impression be considered. If the nutriment sense-impression is comprehended, the three kinds of feeling are thereby comprehended. And if the three kinds of feeling are comprehended, there is, I say, no further work left to do for the noble disciple.

Like a skinned cow, man is helplessly exposed to the constant excitation and irritation of the sense-impressions, crowding upon him from all sides, through all six senses.

Is there another Sutta which say to imagine if the internal organs were hanging outside and what is outside was in side?

Yes there is @Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena. I will give some time for someone else to come up with the answer. If no one comes forward to answer, I will give the name of one more sutta.

Looking forward getting the the other Suttas also.

Sampasadanīya Sutta has the latter element but not the former.

I am still looking for the 1st half of the question.


text:
Schopenhauer’s inexplicable disturbance in the heavenly calm of Nirvana?
Arthur Schopenhauer on his famed work titled “On the suffering of the world” relate as quoted below as to how he think Buddhism's doctrine describe how the world of suffering came into being.
Are there any proper Buddhist reference to support his claims? Is in Samsara beginning-less cycle? And can there be any inexplicable disturbance in Nirvana?

According to the doctrines of Buddhism, the world came into being as
  the result of some inexplicable disturbance in the heavenly calm of
  Nirvana, that blessed state obtained by expiation, which had endured
  so long a time — the change taking place by a kind of fatality.

Studies in Pessimism,On the Sufferings of the World

Perhaps Mr. Schopenhauer had something in mind similar to this description by one of my teachers (not related to Buddhism per se): There are two real things - the Void (like shunyata), and Experience (everything that can be known). In the beginning was only the Void, but "the Void can't know itself", so it gave rise to Experience. So, the 'disturbance' is completely explicable, although we may not be able to comprehend it. I don't think that it is worthwhile to waste any effort on beginning stories like these, but they can help take the mind off of the question, by giving a plausible answer.

There is a similar question here: What is the starting of Samsara?.
I would be surprised if there was any Buddhist reference supporting Schopenhauer's claim that "the world came into being as a result of some disturbance in the heavenly calm of Nirvana." To me, this statement even sounds "plain weird."
Samsara refers to two phenomena:

A place
The contaminated aggregates

In Buddhism, the expression "the world" might refer to either, depending on the context -- see What does the word “world” mean in the Buddhist context? In either case, although it is said that the world is produced due to karma and afflictions, it is usually said to be without beginning. There are countless traditional texts and authoritative teachings establishing this statement. Here are a few:
In Cutting the Root of Samsara, Lama Zopa Rinpoche says:

[Suffering] comes from the past karma created by the self-cherishing
  thought and it is also dependent on our present-life attitude as well.
  From beginningless rebirth, it's been like this.

The Abhidharma Sutra says:

It is said: "Though beginningless, it entails an end -  What is
  naturally pure and consists of permanent dharmas  Is not seen, since
  it is obscured by a beginningless cocoon[...]

The third Karmapa's commentary to it reads:

Consequently, though samsara is beginningless, once the reality[...]

There are four types of nirvana. Without going in details, nirvana is the final analytical cessation achieved in dependence upon a union of calm abiding (shamata) and special insight (actual vipassana) directly apprehending the nature of reality, emptiness. According to Mahayana, abiding nirvana is the complete and definitive abandonment of afflictive obscurations while non-abiding nirvana is the complete and definitive abandonment of afflictive and knowledge obscurations. There is no disturbance "in" nirvana.
It is definitely not like we ever abided in nirvana and subsequently "fell" from it. There is no such "genesis" in Buddhism.

Digha Nikaya 27 https://suttacentral.net/en/dn27 is a 'Genesis' within classical Buddhist thought, and it gives a glimpse into how Samsara grows and prospers, so in a way giving people access away from it into a stable Nibbana. Bear in mind this account is one of the 62 discounted in the Brahmajala Sutta https://suttacentral.net/en/dn1 - and is therefore, in my opinion, not the core teaching of the Buddha, which is the understanding of stress, its origin, and cessation.
The Buddha never claimed a beginning for Samsara. It is not 'a circle', without a beginning, but simply not evident.

"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a father... the
  death of a brother... the death of a sister... the death of a son...
  the death of a daughter... loss with regard to relatives... loss with
  regard to wealth... loss with regard to disease. The tears you have
  shed over loss with regard to disease while transmigrating & wandering
  this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is
  displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than
  the water in the four great oceans. "Why is that? From an
  inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not
  evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving
  are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced
  stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries —
  enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to
  become dispassionate, enough to be released."

(dunno the reference)
'This whole mass of suffering' starts with ignorance in the 12 links  https://suttacentral.net/en/dn15
Nibbana is beyond coming and going, beyond conceptual construction, as Nagarjuna would say.

There can not be an inexplicable disturbance in nibbana because there are no conditions with nibbana. Nibbana is an experiencial state of mind.

+1. I agree and good answer. Maybe you could further improve content-quality by adding a sutta reference describing Nibbana?

The Brahmanistic folk-lore in Digha Nikaya 27 is probably the closest to Arthur Schopenhauer's viewpoint. However, DN 27 does not support Schopenhauer's viewpoint because it states:

Hoti kho so, vāseṭṭha, samayo yaṃ kadāci karahaci dīghassa addhuno accayena ayaṃ loko vivaṭṭati. Vivaṭṭamānevivaṭṭa loke yebhuyyena sattā
ābhassarakāyā cavitvā itthattaṃ āgacchanti. Tedha honti manomayā
  pītibhakkhā sayaṃpabhā antalikkhacarā subhaṭṭhāyino ciraṃ
  dīghamaddhānaṃ tiṭṭhanti.
There comes a time, Vāseṭṭha, when, sooner or later, after the lapse of a long, long period, this world passes away [devolves]. And when this happens,
  beings have mostly been reborn in [shifted to] the World of Radiance; and there
  they dwell, made of mind, feeding on rapture, self-luminous,
  traversing the air, continuing in glory; and thus they remain for a
  long, long period of time.

This 'Abhassara World' seems to be the purest state found in DN 27, which equates to the 2nd meditative jhana (rather than is Nibbana), for example:

Again, there is the case where an individual, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, enters & remains in the second jhana:
  rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free
  from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. He savors
  that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there —
  fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then
  when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Abhassara devas. The
  Abhassara devas, monks, have a life-span of two eons. AN 4.123

**

Here, Udayi, the bhikkhu... abides in the second jhana...this is the... world (lokassa) of only pleasant feelings (ekantasukhassa). MN
  79

Also, in this Abhassara state/world, there is the idea or perception of "beings" ("sattā"), which can only occur in 'samsaric' becoming fueled by ignorance & craving.

....beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are roaming around & wandering on.
SN 22.99

**

'A being (sattā),' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?
Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'
Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications...
Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a
  being.'
SN 23.3

Therefore, this purest state of Abhassara in DN 27 is not Nibbana nor it is Buddhist thought. It is Brahmanistic folk-lore, as stated in the sutta, as follows:

Surely, Vāseṭṭha, the brahmins have quite forgotten the past (the ancient lore) when they say so?


text:
Why did Buddha choose sacred fig for meditating and austerity?
Is there any reason or any sutta tells why Buddha choose sacred fig for meditation and austerity?

The ‘Asathu / fig’ Bodhi Tree (Ficus Religiosa) ඇසතු  බෝ  (අස්සත්ත) - was born, it is believed, on the same day as the Buddha Himself, who sat under that tree in his quest for Enlightenment. Also others such as Princess Yasodhara, Kanthaka Horse, his elephant, his charioteer Channa, Ven. Ananda etc. were born on the same day and year. The term Bodhi is used by Buddhists to denote any tree under which a Buddha has attained Enlightenment.
If you take the seven Buddha of the last 90 kalpa,....
Vipassi Buddha attained Enlightenment under a Palol tree (Stereospermum chelonoides) පලොල් (පාඨලී );
Sikhi Buddha under a  Etamba tree or Sri Lankan Mango tree (Mangifera zeylanica) ඇටඹ  (පුන්ඩරික);
Vessabhu Buddha under a Maha-sala tree (Shorea Robusta) ඉන්දියානු සල් (සාල) ;
Kakusandha Buddha under a Mara tree / Gulmohar tree or the Royal Poinciana (Delonix regia) මාර / මහරි / (සිරිස);
Konagamana Buddha under a Attikka (Dimbul) Ficus glomerata. අට්ටික්කා (උදුම්බර);
Kassapa Buddha under a Bayan tree (Nigrodha) නුග / මහනුග (නිග්‍රෝධ).
All Buddhas attain Buddhahood under a tree. Asathu Bodhi Tree was meant to be for Gauthama Buddha. That is why it sprung up on the day Bodhisatwa was born. Please note that trees which serve as Bodhi for all the Buddhas had sprung up on the days when those Bodhisatwas were born for the last time. A Pipila Tree had shaded Deepankara Buddha කප්පිත්ත / පතන බෝ  of the past (whom many know of from the Suttas). It is said that Maithri Buddha’s Bo Tree will be a ‘Na’ or Iron Wood Tree.

One guess I have is that, according to the first sutta referenced in this answer, he chose the place (a piece of countryside) for other reasons (i.e. he chose the place because it had a river, villages, etc.). Maybe he chose the Bodhi tree because it was there.
Another quote is something I remember from this article:
Oldest Buddhist Shrine Uncovered In Nepal May Push Back the Buddha's Birth Date

She was cautious about the oldest Buddhist shrine claim.
"The worship of trees, often at simple altars, was a ubiquitous feature of ancient Indian religions, and given the degree of overlap between Buddhist ritual and pre-existing traditions, it is also possible that what is being described represents an older tree shrine quite disconnected from the worship of the historical Buddha," Shaw says.

I assume that it's now called "sacred" and religiosa because the Buddha chose it, not vice versa.
Also you can see from images like this one that when it's big its roots provide shelter for sitting.

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


text:
How much of our initial conditions come from past Kamma?
When we come into this world, in a rebirth, how much of our situation is predetermined by our past Kamma? I think I have some understanding of the role of inherited Kamma in our personhood. But, are there teachings which indicate if our genetic makeup (good or poor) and our initial social/economic situation (born to rich or poor circumstances) are influenced by it?
To ask in another way, does a person with negative Kamma have a likely-hood of being born with worse health and in poorer circumstances than one with positive? Or are these 'random' factors, uninfluenced by Kamma? Or is this an unanswerable question?
I sense these are unrelated but I have not found guidance yet in this issue.

It is obviously unanswerable. It will simply lead to unnecessary speculation. And countless misinterpretations from "texts".

Again, By that I mean, saying "I do not know" instead of attempting to answer it by some thought process is much much better.

Buddha addressing the issue of Kamma in the Chula-Kammavibhanga Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya No. 135) has shown us why “No two people are alike and why human beings differ in their skills, beauty, longevity, health, personality, etc..”. It was in response to a question asked by Subha. Subha asked as to why no two human beings are alike? Why some people are short lived, and others long lived, some sickly and others healthy, some beautiful, and others ugly, some influential and others non-influential, some rich and others poor. In response Buddha said:

” beings are the owners of their own actions, born out of their actions, related through their actions, and have action as their arbitrator.  Action is what determines and differentiates beings in terms of their processions, character and the qualities they inherit.”

From this we can take that the effect of ones past kamma determine the nature of ones present situation in life. As I pointed out before, everything is NOT due to Kamma. Kamma is one's own doing reacting on oneself, and so one can divert the course of Kamma and the degree to which depends on oneself. Only the Buddha had the perfect knowledge about kamma. He is the only one who fully realised kamma. He is the ONLY one who could teach the nature of kamma, how it works, how it originates, how it is eliminated. For you and me, it is too complex an issue to try to understand. For example, ONLY when a person gets married that for him/her all hell would break loose and the marriage end in divorce. That person can never find contentment in marriage even in subsequent marriages to others. Then there are those who can never find success as a recluse/bhikku. That is their Kamma. Thus from a Buddhist standpoint, our present mental, intellectual, moral and temperamental differences are mainly due to our own actions and tendencies, both past the present. So in short yours is an unanswerable question.
AN 3:76 Bhava Sutta: Becoming, gives us an analogy to describe how becoming is produced:  “Kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the moisture.” Kamma gives us a range of possibilities in which the seed of consciousness can be planted and on which it can feed. Craving is the moisture that keeps the seed alive and allows it to grow into a state of becoming.
Then there is this aspect too. Kamma can mean different things in different contexts. Once Buddha said that “Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect.” — AN 6:63. In others, kamma means also the results of that action. The six sense media (Ayatana) are old kamma. Whatever kamma one does with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma.” — SN 35:145. kamma is complex because the relationship between old kamma and new kamma is intertwined. It is so complex that that past kamma does not absolutely determine one’s experience of the present moment. There is a tendency for a certain type of kamma to lead to a certain type of result, but the intensity of that result is not a fixed thing. It is also influenced by a factor of present kamma: one’s state of mind now when a particular instance of past kamma ripens. Thus the kamma of one’s state of mind in the present moment plays a crucial role in influencing how the ripening of past kamma is experienced.

Thank you. Following the reference to Majjhima Nikaya #135 and subsequent related texts has led me toward the answer for which I have been seeking. The interactions are, indeed, complex but the connections seem clearer.

A being's subconsciousness and most of the conditioning during a given alife is decided by the regenerative karma, which is past Karma.
Natural order (Niyama) of all being are only partly affected by Karma. Complex interference of the other factors may negate or even enhance some effects of Karma which some experiences may have nothing to do with Karma and based solely on one or more of the other factors.
A person with negative Karma has the possibility that this last thought not being good hence a possibility of a lower life. Karma is complex and only fully comprehended by a Buddha alone hence it is difficult to answer question on Karma with definiteness.

These ideas arise from interpretations of the Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta. However this sutta is questionable both in terms of its composition (see this discussion) & visible actual reality. Or otherwise, it is wrongly interpreted due to the complex 'dhamma language' contained in it.
In the visible actual reality of the world, some of the most wealthy people do very evil things to acquire their wealth & some of the most beautiful people live lives of emotional turmoil. It is highly improbable such people did something exceptionally good in a past life & then became so evil & neurotic in the next life. Further, we can know exactly the steps a person look in this life to become wealthy, as written in their biographies (eg. Bill Gates). This shows their wealth is unrelated to any actions performed in a past life but often related to greed & deceit in the present time.
This visible reality is confirmed by suttas such as SN 1.28 & SN 3.7, which state:

Those of great wealth and property,
Even khattiyas who rule the country,
Look at each other with greedy eyes,
Insatiable in sensual pleasures.

~~~

I saw that even affluent nobles, affluent brahmans & affluent householders — rich, with great wealth & property, with vast amounts
  of gold & silver, vast amounts of valuables & commodities, vast
  amounts of wealth & grain — tell deliberate lies with sensual
  pleasures as the cause, sensual pleasures as the reason, simply for
  the sake of sensual pleasures.
That's the way it is, great king! That's the way it is! Even affluent nobles, affluent brahmans, & affluent householders... tell deliberate
  lies with sensual pleasures as the cause, sensual pleasures as the
  reason, simply for the sake of sensual pleasures. That will lead to
  their long-term harm & pain.
That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-Gone, the Teacher, said further:
Impassioned  with sensual possessions, greedy, dazed by sensual pleasures, they don't awaken to the fact     that they've gone too far —
        like fish into a trap set out.  Afterwards it's bitter for them:
    evil for them       the result.

Or in the visible actual reality of the world, some individuals born into the world into very poor families eventually become very wealthy. It is illogical that a person with a disposition towards accruing wealth would choose to be reborn into a poor family.
Or in the visible actual reality of the world, it is rare to find beautiful children born to ugly parents. It would seem quite obvious that physical beauty is related to cellular genetics rather than to past lives.
MN 64 states when a new child comes into the world, it has underlying tendencies (anusaya) that are common to all new born children. MN 64 does not support the Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta & state new born children are born with underlying tendencies to be short-lived & long-lived people are to be seen, sickly & healthy, ugly & beautiful, uninfluential & influential, poor & rich, low-born & high-born, stupid & discerning, etc.
Similarly, AN 3.61 states whatever happiness, suffering or neither-happiness-nor-suffering a person experiences is not caused by what was done in the past. AN 3.61 states when one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, there will be no desire & no effort to change one's life situation and one will abide bewildered & unprotected.
The Mallikadevi Sutta is very similar to the Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta however it uses more straightforward & temporal language.  It does not use words such as 'kāyassa bhedā paraṃ maraṇā', which have specific real meanings but are capable of being interpreted in worldly ways. It seems obvious the Mallikadevi Sutta is referring to spiritual wealth & spiritual beauty rather than physical wealth & physical beauty because it states a woman getting angry cause her to reappear (paccājāyati) as ugly.
There are many suttas that distinguish between physical & spiritual attributes, such as:

There are these five kinds of wealth. What five? The wealth of faith, the wealth of virtuous behavior, the wealth of learning, the
  wealth of generosity & the wealth of wisdom. AN 5.47

~~

Householder, a noble disciple who gives food gives the recipients four things. What four? He gives life, beauty, happiness and
  strength. (1) Having given life, he partakes of life, whether
  celestial or human. (2) Having given beauty, he partakes of beauty,
  whether celestial or human. (3) Having given happiness, he partakes of
  happiness, whether celestial or human. (4) Having given strength, he
  partakes of strength, whether celestial or human. AN 4.58

~~~

Dhammapada Verse 204: Health is the greatest gift, contentment is the greatest wealth, a trusted friend is the best relative, Nibbana is the
  greatest bliss.

~~

As the stainless moon
moving through the sphere of space
outshines with its radiance
all the stars in the world,
so one accomplished in virtuous behavior,
a person endowed with faith,
outshines by generosity
all the misers in the world.
the Perfectly Enlightened One’s disciple,
surpasses the miserly person
in five specific respects:
life span and glory,
beauty and happiness.
Possessed of wealth
he rejoices in heaven.
AN 5.31


text:
Are Therevada's cosmology and the Mahanaya's sutras physically impossible?
Are Therevada's cosmology and the Mahanaya's sutras physically, rather than only psychologically, plasusible?
I read about the former in the abhidharmakosabhasyam, about all the hells and heavens that await us. And the Mahayana sutras often include reference to e.g. celestial bodhisattvas.
I'm skeptical that these things have physical, rather than psychological, truth, empirical (we've this heaven) or otherwise (we have evidence that these heavens exist). As with with classical georgraphy, and history. My specific question is:

do we have good reason to believe that physics will end up allowing a Buddhist timeline of events?

If you're sceptical (as I am) about all the gods, dragons, gandharvas, kimnaras etc. which appear in Mahayana sutras, then just look on them as symbolic.

Buddhism is a definite, and it is the same Dhamma preached by all Buddhas. Popular science is always changing with new theory replacing old ones. But having said this some similar theories have emerged:

Parallel universe - Multiverse
Multiple worlds - Planetary habitability
Cyclical universe - Cyclic model, One Big Bang, or were there many?, Multiple Big Bang theory could bring 'Copernican revolution' says Astronomer Royal

Also might be of interest:

Loka: The Buddha’s Formulation of the Universe by Richard R. Crutcher
Parallel universes by Piya Tan

I suppose one may wonder about multiverses we don't, and maybe never will, have a physical theory of. That we can imagine strange heavens, does not mean that they must exist, IMVHO, but it leaves that door open, whatever time it could open. So I accept your answer, I think it's a good one tbh

There are two ways in which physics could disallow a Buddhist form of cosmology:

A law of nature which creates measurable predictions in our universe (the human realm of existence) is discovered, and this law contradicts a prediction of Theravadin cosmology.
We gain the ability to measure new phenomena such as interactions with another realm or measuring a beings' mindstream. With these new measurements we can test a prediction of Theravadin cosmology and find that the prediction is false.

For the first point, Theravadin cosmology doesn't contradict any known laws (e.g. conservation of energy or non-decreasing entropy). Does Theravadin cosmology make any further predictions about things which we can measure but don't yet have a complete theory of? If so then there's a chance we could develop our theory and find Theravadin cosmology to be impossible. If not then we can't use this approach to question Theravadin cosmology.
For the second point, we really have to speculate about what we might or might not be able to measure in the future. Because this is based on speculation I don't think this counts as a good reason to believe that physics will end up allowing a Buddhist timeline of events.

Relational quantum mechanics is the mathematical description of co-dependent origination in my opinion, really neat too. It doesn't prove the cosmology but does seem to point to the accuracy or the main insights of the Buddha.
If you are talking about the cosmology word for word (like Digha Nikaya 27) then it would be a stretch - a lot of conceptual construction. The inflation/deflation Universe is cool though, and sounds like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce..
The Multiverse interpretation of QM (somewhat essentialist), gives for an interesting take on transmigration, in that the 'copies' can't be said to be either the same or different to each other.. Seems like a plausible image of transmigration to me.

The question: "Are Therevada's cosmology and the Mahanaya's sutras physically plasusible?" is impossible to answer & outside of the scope of Buddha-Dhamma, which is described as:

This Dhamma is to be seen here & now, immediate, inviting inspection, pertinent, to be realized/verified by the observant for themselves. MN
  38

SN 35.23 states:

The eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, mind & mind objects. This, monks, is called the
  All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe
  another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his
  statement, would be unable to explain and would be put
  to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range.

The various realms in the Pali suttas include psychological examples therefore obviously this is all that can be known. For example:

It is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the world, the origination of
  the world, the cessation of the world and the path of practice leading
  to the cessation of the world. AN 4.45

And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is
  contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From
  feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a
  requisite condition comes clinging. From clinging as a requisite
  condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes
  birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death,
  sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. This is
  the origination of the world. SN 12.44

Follow not the vulgar way; live not in heedlessness; hold not false views; linger not long in worldly existence. Blind is the world; here
  only a few possess insight. Only a few, like birds escaping from the
  net, go to realms of bliss. Lokavagga

Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect. And what is the cause by which kamma comes
  into play? Sense contact is the cause by which kamma comes into play. And
  what is the diversity in kamma? There is kamma to be experienced in
  hell (niraya), kamma to be experienced in the realm of animals (
  tiracchānayoni), kamma to be experienced in the realm of the hungry
  shades (pettivisaya), kamma to be experienced in the human world
  (manussaloka), kamma to be experienced in the world of the devas
  (devaloka). This is called the diversity in kamma. AN 6.63

I have seen, bhikkhus, the hell named ‘Contact’s Sixfold Base.’ There whatever form one sees with the eye is undesirable, never desirable;
  unlovely, never lovely; disagreeable, never agreeable. Whatever sound
  one hears with the ear … Whatever odour one smells with the nose …
  Whatever taste one savours with the tongue … Whatever tactile object
  one feels with the body … Whatever mental phenomenon one cognizes with
  the mind is undesirable, never desirable; unlovely, never lovely;
  disagreeable, never agreeable. SN 35.135

Here, Udayi, the bhikkhu secluded from sensual desires and thoughts of demerit abides in the first jhana: Overcoming thoughts and thought
  processes and the mind in one point internally appeased, without
  thoughts and thought processes abides in the second jhana. Again with
  equanimity to joy and detachment, feeling pleasant with the body too,
  abides in the third jhana. To this the noble ones say abiding in
  pleasantness with equanimity. Udayi, this is the course of actions,
  for realising the world of only pleasant feelings (ekantasukhassa
  lokassa).MN 79

Bhikkhus, there are three kinds of persons found existing in the world. What three? (1) “Here, bhikkhus, some person generates
  afflictive bodily activities, afflictive verbal activities, and
  afflictive mental activities. In consequence, he reappears
  (upapajjati) in an afflictive world. When he reappears in an
  afflictive world, afflictive contacts touch him. Being touched by
  afflictive contacts, he feels afflictive feelings, exclusively
  painful, as in the case of hell-beings. (2) “Someone else generates
  unafflictive bodily activities, unafflictive verbal activities, and
  unafflictive mental activities. In consequence, he reappears in an
  unafflictive world. When he reappears in an unafflictive world,
  unafflictive contacts touch him. Being touched by unafflictive
  contacts, he feels unafflictive feelings, exclusively pleasant, as in
  the case of the gods of refulgent glory. (3) “Still another generates
  bodily activities that are both afflictive and unafflictive, verbal
  activities that are both afflictive and unafflictive, and mental
  activities that are both afflictive and unafflictive. In consequence,
  he reappears in a world that is both afflictive and unafflictive. When
  he reappears in a world that is both afflictive and unafflictive, both
  afflictive and unafflictive contacts touch him. Being touched by both
  afflictive and unafflictive contacts, he feels both afflictive and
  unafflictive feelings, mingled pleasure and pain, as in the case of
  human beings, some devas, and some beings in the lower worlds. These,
  bhikkhus, are the three kinds of persons found existing in the world.
  AN 3.23

Sensual desire… ill-will (anger)… sloth & drowsiness… restlessness & anxiety… uncertainty is an obstacle, a hindrance that overwhelms the
  mind and weakens wisdom… when a monk has not abandoned these five
  obstacles… for him to understand what is for his own benefit, to
  understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is
  for the benefit of both, to realize a superior human (manussa) state
  (dhammā), a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is
  impossible. AN 5.51

Sooner, I say, would that blind turtle, coming to the surface once every hundred years, insert its neck into that yoke with a single hole
  than the fool who has gone once to the nether world would regain the
  human state. For what reason? Because here, bhikkhus, there is no
  conduct guided by the Dhamma, no righteous conduct, no wholesome
  activity, no meritorious activity. Here there prevails mutual
  devouring, the devouring of the weak. For what reason? Because,
  bhikkhus, they have not seen the Four Noble Truths. What four? The
  noble truth of suffering … the noble truth of the way leading to the
  cessation of suffering. SN 56.47

Bhikkhus, a god, a human or any other good state would not be evident from actions born of greed, hate and delusion. Yet, bhikkhus, from
  actions born of greed, hate and delusion a hellish being, an animal
  birth a ghostly birth or some other bad state would be evident. AN
  6.39

Bhikkhus, these two bright principles protect the world. What are the two? Shame and fear of wrongdoing. If, bhikkhus, these two bright
  principles did not protect the world, there would not be discerned
  respect for mother or maternal aunt or maternal uncle’s wife or a
  teacher’s wife or the wives of other honored persons, and the world
  would have fallen into promiscuity, as with goats, sheep, chickens,
  pigs, dogs, and jackals. But as these two bright principles protect
  the world, there is discerned respect for mother… and the wives of
  other honored persons. AN 2.9

Now on that occasion the wanderers of other persuasions had come together in a gathering and were sitting, discussing many kinds of
  bestial (animal) topics, making a great noise and racket. AN 10.93

Beings (sattā) are few who, when they pass away from the animal realm (tiracchānayoniyā) are reborn (paccājāyanti) among humans
  (manussesu)… those beings are more numerous are reborn in hell…. For
  what reason? They have not realised the Four Noble Truths. SN 56.102
  to 131

There are these four kinds of generation. What are the four? Egg-born generation, womb-born generation, moisture-born generation and
  spontaneous generation. What is egg-born generation? There are these
  beings born by breaking out of the shell of an egg; this is called
  egg-born generation. What is womb-born generation? There are these
  beings born by breaking out from the caul; this is called womb-born
  generation. What is moisture-born generation? There are these beings
  born in a rotten fish, in a rotten corpse, in rotten dough, in a
  cesspit, or in a sewer; this is called moisture-born generation. What
  is spontaneous generation? There are gods (devā) and denizens of hell
  (nerayikā) and certain (ekacce ca) human beings (manussā) and some
  (ekacce ca) destined to suffer (vinipāta); this is called spontaneous
  generation. MN 12

i've edited the question to clarify


text:
Is the emptiness of persons an emptiness of essence or just substance?
Is the emptiness of persons an emptiness of their essence, which (I think) would be a defining characteristic, like how "fire" is always "hot", or just substance?
Do any Buddhist texts say no?

In the Pali suttas, 'emptiness' ('sunnata') refers to emptiness of 'persons' or 'self' rather than emptiness of defining characteristics, which is why the Pali suttas state the five aggregates are empty, or the sense spheres are empty, or the elements (dhatu) are empty.
'Consciousness' does lose its defining characteristic of 'cognition'; the earth element does not lose its defining characteristic of solidity; the fire element does not lose its defining characteristic of heat; the Nibbana element does not lose its defining characteristic of peacefulness.

Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of
  a self or of anything pertaining to a self?
The eye is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness... Eye-contact is empty of a self or of
  anything pertaining to a self.
The ear is empty...
The nose is empty...
The tongue is empty...
The body is empty...
The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a
  self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the
  world is empty.
SN 35.85

And why, bhikkhus, do you call it form? ‘It is deformed,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called form. Deformed by what? Deformed by cold,
  deformed by heat, deformed by hunger, deformed by thirst, deformed by
  contact with flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, and serpents. ‘It is
  deformed,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called form.
And why, bhikkhus, do you call it feeling? ‘It feels,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called feeling. And what does it feel? It feels
  pleasure, it feels pain, it feels neither-pain-nor-pleasure. ‘It
  feels,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called feeling.
And why, bhikkhus, do you call it perception? ‘It perceives,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called perception. And what does it
  perceive? It perceives blue, it perceives yellow, it perceives red, it
  perceives white. ‘It perceives,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called
  perception.
And why, bhikkhus, do you call them formations? ‘They construct the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called formations. And what
  is the conditioned that they construct? They construct conditioned
  form as form; they construct conditioned feeling as feeling; they
  construct conditioned perception as perception; they construct
  conditioned formations as formations; they construct conditioned
  consciousness as consciousness. ‘They construct the conditioned,’
  bhikkhus, therefore they are called formations.
And why, bhikkhus, do you call it consciousness? ‘It cognizes, ’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called consciousness. And what does it
  cognize? It cognizes sour, it cognizes bitter, it cognizes pungent, it
  cognizes sweet, it cognizes sharp, it cognizes mild, it cognizes
  salty, it cognizes bland. ‘It cognizes,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is
  called consciousness.
Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever … Any kind of feeling whatsoever … Any kind of perception whatsoever … Any kind of
  formations whatsoever … Any kind of consciousness
  whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external,
  gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all
  should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not
  mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
SN 22.79

And what is the earth property? The earth property can be either
  internal or external. What is the internal earth property? Anything
  internal, within oneself, that's hard, solid, & sustained [by
  nutriment]: head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh,
  tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, membranes, spleen,
  lungs, large intestines, small intestines, contents of the stomach,
  feces, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's hard, solid,
  and sustained: This is called the internal earth property. Now both
  the internal earth property & the external earth property are simply
  earth property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with
  right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my
  self.'
MN 62

in what way if any are the five aggregates a self, one without substance i mean

'self' is an idea or thought concept. refer to http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.081.than.html

hmm thanks. what does it refer to, everything about the world??

'self' is a personal pronoun. it does not related to things, like 'clouds', 'sky', 'earth', 'consciousness', etc. 'self' is the sense of 'me', 'mine', 'I', 'you', 'them', 'us', 'ours', etc. these personal references or beliefs cause suffering. but the 'sky' or a 'cloud' does not cause suffering, until it becomes "my cloud". regards

so what does it refer it ?

Sabbo pajjalito loko,
  sabbo loko pakampito, pakampito
The entire world is burning, the entire world is vibrating, vibrating.

Source: Sīsūpacālātherīgāthā, Upacālāsutta
The entire physical structure and entire mental structure is is just wavelets of vibration and heat. There is not solidity are where, thus can be considered empty.
Also see: Closing Talk by S.N. Goenka (and Presentation of the First Volumes of Tipitaka in Devanagari script)


text:
What is this picture?
Even after referring to several books I simply cannot understand what this picture is depicting. I am not a Buddhist and am hence finding it difficult to decipher.

I found it on this page, whose title is, "The Buddha of Purification with consort". The description on that page says it depicts a manifestation of

"unity of the fully developed masculine and feminine energy: the complete purity and highest state of enlightenment".

If that's an accurate description, could you provide the explanation of that phrase?
The Buddha himself didn't want to get entangled in samsara, let alone unite with the other sex; so isn't this contradictory?

It's best to mention where (on which web site page) you found that image?

http://www.tibetan-buddhist-art.com/heruka-vajrasattva-by-carmen-mensink/

The page says, "The Buddha of Purification with consort" and says it depicts a manifestation of "unity of the fully developed masculine and feminine energy: the complete purity and highest state of enlightenment". I guess that doesn't answer your question though. So can you say what further question you have about that? Or do you want to ask for explanation of that description/phrase? Or are you asking for explanation of the various details depicted/symbolized in the art?

no..no..you have quite aptly answered the question.thank you!!

but it would be nice if you could provide the explanation of the phrase?buddha himself didn't want to get entageld in samsar,let alone unite with the other sex.so isn't this contradictory

I added the [tag:tibetan-buddhism] tag: I assume you're asking for answers from within the perspective of Tibetan Buddhism (since you're asking for an explanation of what's depicted by Tibetan art).

A related topic: Can somebody explain me this Kalachakra print?

I mean you no offense, but If you don't have a highest yoga tantric initiation, there is no need for you to "decipher it".

It's very dangerous to read a layman's writing who trying to use his own words and understanding to "tell" the reader an "occult" practice - for it is occult obviously the secret is concealed from the outsider, except for the teacher and his chosen student.

@Bhumishu米殊 Are you saying that the OP should have known that this topic is "obviously occult"?

@ChrisW what is OP? i'm just 'exclamation-mark'ing the flood of the internet making any type of "know-ledge" easy, cheap and handy.

@Bhumishu米殊 The OP is "littlemonk", the original poster. It sounded like maybe you were saying this question shouldn't have been asked; but I don't think there's an way for the general public (or "outsiders" as you call them) to know what is and isn't secret, is there? Or even to know that anything is secret.

fellow buddhists,i've learnt my lesson and henceforth refrain from asking such open ended questions.

@ChrisW OP = Original Poster, learnt, thank you. No, littlemonk has all the credits and rights to ask such question. An "outsider" is anyone who doesn't get "initiated"/ acquired the true knowledge, the post writer is she (I read the webpage) an "initiated"/ acquired? Thus everyone is writing something about anything. But this knowledge is not cooking recipe, if someone writing it on the public arena, not one's own dairy locked in one's own drawer, there should at least be a hint that the writer's words are "hearsay". However not everyone regards such sense of ethic.

That would be yab-yum.  I think the wikipedia entry will more than answer your question.  You can find that here.  The one thing the entry only hints at, however, is that this is an actual practice in Tibetan Tantra.  In fact, it's generally what comes to mind, for a popular audience anyway, when the word "tantra" is used.  I think it's an exercise in futility to try and justify this practice according to Theravada or Mahayana ethics.  Within a tantric context, it just is what it is.


text:
Differences between the tilakkhana and the Dhamma seal
I suppose that there is (are) differences between the tilakkhana (anicca; dukkha and anatta) and the so-called three dhamma-seals (anicca; anatta and nibbana). Can anyone help me?

This article, Four Dharma Seals, says:

As suffering is not an inherent aspect of existence sometimes the second seal is omitted to make Three Dharma Seals.

From that I get the impression that,

The tilakkhaṇa is the earliest doctrine (in the Pali canon)
Later someone added nirvana to that list (making the four Dharma seals)
Then, someone decided that if nirvana is in that list, then dukkha isn't permanent/inevitable, and so they removed dukkha from the list.

The Three Dharma Seals in an error of interpretation by Thích Nhất Hạnh based on an error of interpretation by the majority of Buddhist commentators and translators. It is an example of when an error is made based on accepting an existing error rather than refuting an existing error.
Thích Nhất Hạnh has correctly stated that "suffering" is not an inherent aspect of reality however the word 'dukkha' as one of the tilakkhaṇa does not mean 'suffering' but means 'unsatisfactoriness'.
It is an error to translate the second tilakkhaṇa as 'suffering' or 'stress' thus it is another error, as Thích Nhất Hạnh has done, to accept the wrong translation as valid and then dismiss it because this also dismisses what the Buddha taught and, more importantly, dismisses what is actually real.
Thus, as properly translated from Dhammapada 278 by Acharya Buddharakkhita:

277. "All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
  purification.
278. "All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
  purification.
279. "All things [including Nibbana] are not-self" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification

The Four Dharma Seals should be (according to reality) as follows:

All compounded things are impermanent
All compounded things are unsatisfactory (cannot bring lasting
happiness)
All phenomena [including Nibbana] are not-self/empty
Nirvana is uncompounded, the supreme & true lasting happiness (end of
suffering).

Could you discuss "unsatisfactorily" in the context of "feelings" please? TNH's criticism about suffering seems to be easy to extend to "unsatisfactorily". Sorry it seems I am bombarding you with questions tonight.... take it as a compliment :)

I doubt TNH's criticism seems to be easy to extend to "unsatisfactory". Unsatisfactory is not the same as suffering. I do not take drugs because drugs are unsatisfactory. However, this not taking drugs is not suffering. Unsatisfactory means something cannot bring you lasting happiness. Unsatisfactory does not mean something will make you suffer. For example, drinking water does not make me suffer. However, drinking water will not make me permanently happy. Therefore, water is unsatisfactory but water is not suffering.

The Four Dharma seals are wrong, because Dukkha is a part of the Four Noble Truths. Dukkha cannot be a Dharma seal because suffering can be transcended with enlightenment. But the Three Dharma Seals are the actual Truth that will always be:

All Samskara are impermanent
All dharma are without a substantial self
Nirvana is perfect peace

All three are inherent truth, not something that can be changed with enlightenment.

What's the definition of a "dharma seal", by the way? The version I know of is that "all saṅkhāras are dukkha" (and nirvana is not a sankhara). The Wikipedia article implies that "dharma seal" is a characteristic of doctrine.

So I suppose you're saying it's possible to teach Buddhism without teaching about dukkha. I suppose that's true, e.g. in this topic I mentioned that I found it difficult to begin with the "first noble truth".


text:
Can there be "one day becoming a fully-awakened Buddha" after Parinibbana?
The Buddha declare to venerable Sâriputra in the Lotus Sutra that he will become a Buddha one day as it read below, but Sariputta has achieved Parinibbana. Can there be becoming a fully-awakened Buddha one day after Parinibbana?

...Again, Sâriputra, at a future period, after innumerable,
  inconceivable, immeasurable Æons, when thou shalt have learnt the true
  law of hundred thousand myriads of kotis of Tathâgatas, showed
  devotion in various ways, and achieved the present Bodhisattva-course,
  thou shalt become in the world a Tathâgata, &c., named Padmaprabha,
  endowed with science and conduct, a Sugata, a knower of the world, an
  unsurpassed tamer of men, a master of gods and men, a Lord Buddha.

I do not agree with the down voting of an inquiry of this nature without constructive/refining commentary or an attempt to better understand the nature of the inquiry.  Such down voting is a disservice to the community.

I have no idea why this question get so horribly down voted. I suspect it's due to angry Theravadins who see this as being against Theravada orthodoxy of final permanent Nibanna.
The fact is the Lotus Sutra aims at deliberately over turning such conception about Arahatship,  Nirvana and Buddhahood. Mahayana Buddhism relies on Prajnaparamita sutras as to establish that there is no final permanent nirvana nor the fact that Arhats are merely to remain as Arhats, but should aspire to Buddhahood with the full capacity of a Buddha. The core doctrine used to explain this view is through the understanding of dependent generation, which consequentially result in the impermanence and hence emptiness and non dual nature of any phenomena.
In the Lotus Sutra, it is therefore posited that Sariputra (Sariputta) shall one day attain full and complete unsurpassed awakening as a completely realized Buddha. The sutra further establish that only with such view, would they be True Arhats.
The sutra further explained that it is through skillful means that the Buddha teach sentient beings to give up their desires and attain Nirvana. Because most beings want to end their suffering but are afraid of taking on the challenge to become a Buddha. This is compared to the story of a rich man whose son have ran away from home, and now becomes a poor labourer. Now the poor man eventually reunite but no longer recognize his own father and is afraid of him thinking he's unworthy of being equal to the rich man. The rich man assigned the poor son various tasks until he gained his confidence and can truly inherit his father's legacy. The rich man is the Buddha who assigned the poor man that is sentient beings work, I.e. the way to end suffering Nibanna. But they should not be content with merely Nirvana but should aspire to be truly equal with the rich man e.g. the Buddha.

Thank you for the explanation. May be in future I will add prefix “in the Mahayana tradition” in all questions related to Lotus Suta. That way those from other school/s may avoid reading the question through and through and feel time wasted.

Find out where in Tipitaka any of these things are being said by Buddha. There are more references contradicting Mahayana teachings than supporting. Now you see why an illusion such as Mahayana is being downvoted?

The Abhiddhamma wasn't spoken by the historical Buddha, I don't see Theravadins having qualms accepting this as Buddhadharma. In fact Mahayana exist to counter the ontological claims of Hinayanist schools.

Yes. Most Mahayana schools posit the one final vehicle (ekayana) and posit that everyone, in time, will become a fully enlightened buddha. As to the so-called Hinayana arhat, it is said that he has to enter the Mahayana path from the path of accumulation and go all the way to the path of no-more-learning, buddhahood. He has to go through the Mahayana path of accumulation, preparation, seeing, meditation.
According to Mahayana tenets, by way of generating bodhicitta, one enters the Mahayana path, whether one is established in Parinibbana (because the continuum is not severed), or abiding in nirvana with remainder, or an ordinary being.
Geshe Jamphel Gyaltsen's commentary on Shantideva's Bodhisattvacharyavatara says:

In comparison to someone who enters the Mahayana path directly, a
  Hinayana arhat faces more problems. In order to achieve
  self-liberation he has been meditating for a long time. He has gained
  a level of bliss and great happiness. Because of this habit of bliss
  and happiness it is very difficult for him to think about the
  suffering of sentient beings. It is not a spontaneous tendency for him
  to think about others´ suffering. So bodhicitta is not coming easily
  for him. Therefore, it is advisable to enter the Mahayana directly,
  even though it is not that easy, instead of going through the complete
  liberation of a Hinayana arhat and then enter the Mahayana. To
  illustrate this, there is a story about a practitioner who met
  Shariputra. Shariputra wanted to tell him about the achievement of a
  Hinayana arhat. Later on the practitioner met Manjushri who told him
  about the views of the Mahayana. Based on that he developed wrong view
  and as a result was reborn in the hells. What happened next is that,
  even though he was reborn in the hells, he still had the karmic
  imprint that connected him to the Mahayana path. Therefore it is said
  that even though he spent some time in the hells, it was still quicker
  for him to achieve the state of a buddha, than if he had gone through
  the stages shown by Shariputra. Therefore, Buddha Shakyamuni praised
  Manjushri for being so skilful in seeing that the person would react
  in a very heavy way, propelling him to the lower realms, yet that in
  this way he would achieve buddhahood quicker.

You might further study texts on 'Grounds and Paths' (Tib. Salam) as well as Asanga's bodhisattvabhumi.