text:
How to develop Chanda?
How to develop Chanda?
Anything you have to add on this subject is welcomed and appreciated.

Chanda (Desire) is the first of the Four iddhipada. An important reading in this regard is the Iddhipada Samyutta - The connected sayings on the four bases of spiritual power. Iddhipaada can be defined as the state of reaching completeness or perfection. Iddhiya: of attaining completion or perfection; pado: root or basis. The root or basis of attaining completion or perfection. Hence it is called iddhipada. Desire is considered one of the iddhipada, the bases of success.  It is said:

By chanda iddhipada (Chanda Samadhi Padhana Sankhara Samannagata iddhipada) is meant desire to obtain, desire to attain, desire to reach, desire to fulfil, desire to accomplish, The desire indicated here is extreme or excessive desire. There is nothing within or without one's personality that can obstruct that desire. It is the kind of desire that evokes the thought, 'If I do not attain this accomplishment in this life, I shall not rest content. It is better that I die rather than that I shall not attain it.'

One way to develop Chanda is by developing Citta as an iddhipada. Citta iddhipada (Citta Samadhi Padhana Sankhara Samannagata iddhipada) means: attachment to iddhi when one comes in contact with the sasana (Buddha's Dispensation) and hears the Dhamma. It is attachment that is extremely ardent and strong.

...One attains satisfaction and tranquillity only when one's mind is absorbed in matters connected with the iddhi. It is like the absorption of the alchemist engaged in the transmutation of the baser metals into gold or silver. Such an alchemist has no interest in anything else but his alchemy. He forgets to sleep or whether he had slept or eaten. He does not notice anything when out walking. Citta is great absorption or attachment of this nature.

For this you require Viriya (great energy and effort.)

A person with this viriya is infused with the thought that the aim can be attained by energy and effort. He is not discouraged even though it is said to him that he must undergo great hardships. He is not discouraged even though he actually has to undergo great hardships. He is not discouraged even though it is said to him that he must put forth effort for many days, months, and years. He is not discouraged even though he actually has to put forth effort for such long periods.

Didnt read it well - will re-read it later after i sleep -  but just to get an answer ...   so for chanda i need Viriya ?  thought the order is opposite -  meaning you if you have chanda it helps you have viriya ////  also what im trying to figure out is what is the thing i should concern with focus on to get my practice going and steady and strong  --- cause i fail again and again and i tried so many approaches to it -  not formal meditation - tiny meditaitons - gung ho meditations - i had a teacher and it didnt help to get an advice (and asked a few monks)  just frustrating

in short : i thought if i focus on getting chanda somehow all else falls in to place  --   so like  everyday you do 3 hours of X that is suppose to give you chanda and its a no fail way to get viriya

To develop Chanda, one of the other three different qualities will help, as you may have a better hold these other three. There's no particular order to them. Meditation for some, is fired by desire. For others, persistence & the energy of sticking to it, or when the practice is based on the quality of intent, when you dive in and give it your entire attention. Other people find that analysis works. Taming this monkey is not an easy thing. So you have to take baby steps in the beginning. Even if your attempt at meditation takes only a few seconds, or a couple of minutes, be happy about it.

Its just so very complex -  its very strange that a religon like buddhism  which is based on the "mind"  donst have a clear advice for motivation -  for getting chanda

It is the people that make the Dhamma complicated. It does not have to be so. It is you who is making things hard for yourself. If you could only learn how to take delight in the things that you do in this Path. Learn to take delight in the fact that you’re on the right path, because that delight is what makes the path grow. That is why Sila / Morality is the most important thing, and not meditation. Do not kill even a mosquito. Do not steal even a pin from your workplace. Do not say even a white lie. These are the first step. If you try to meditate without doing these things then it is wrong.

I keep the 5 precepts - doing it from the start - wiht no effort even

If you keep the 5 precepts to the letter, and no matter what the 'setbacks' if you are NOT hard on self then 'Chanda' will develop with time. Be patient. What the Buddha has said is against the conventional thinking. Buddha knew this well. So now onwards do not tell others of your personal practice - not even to your own loved ones. This is a very private thing. It is like this. What you do in the toilet is v. private. You will not keep the toilet door open, for all to see. Just so, you will only share your experience with a chosen one or two noble friends in Dhamma. ALWAYS heed their advice.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

To often reflect on the First Noble Truth in the context of a daily life.
And to do maranasati (contemplation of death).

In its introduction to Kāmacchanda (Desire for Sensual Pleasure), Dharmafarer describes or defines Chanda as a "morally neutral" term. It's too long to quote, but:

There are 'negative' forms of Chanda which include taṇhā (craving), upādāna (clinging), and desire for sense-objects.

Chanda can also be used to describe a 'positive' desire:

When desire is rooted in any of the three wholesome roots (non-greed,
non-hate, non-delusion), it is said to be motivated by a wholesome mind (kusala,citta). Once
moved by such a wholesome state, we have the desire (chanda) to arouse and direct our effort to letting
go of the evil we have been doing, to keep on avoiding it, to cultivate good, and maintain it. Here,
chanda is clearly a word for right effort (sammā vāyāma). The Commentaries regard this as a wholesome
desire (kusala-c,chanda),
a spiritual desire (or Dharma-moved desire, dhamma-c,chanda),
the desire (or
will) to create wholesome states.

Assuming it's 'positive' chanda that you want to develop, I think the above suggests several answers:

If or given that "chanda is clearly a word for right effort", then learn to develop "right effort". I say that because, because "right effort" is a factor of the noble eightfold path, there might be a lot more spoken and written about "right effort" than there is about "chanda" -- for example here are some quotes about right effort.
Understand what's meant by the "three wholesome roots" (and the "three unwholesome roots").
It might be worth considering, why did the Buddha do what he did? Well, legend has it was that what triggered Siddhārtha Gautama's search was the Four sights. That fits in with this answer, which gives "first noble truth" and "contemplation of death" as relevant factors.

There is a (non-Buddhist) maxim, that people develop ability in accordance with their need: if you want to increase your ability you should increase your need. A silly example of that is that when I was learning to swim, when I was young, I jumped into the deep end of the swimming pool (then struggled from there to the edge of the pool, and so on, jumping in repeatedly).
In my opinion there are times in life (losing things and/or people you were attached to) when the "need" for dhamma (and maybe the need for mindfulness and so on) become more apparent. I think it wouldn't be nice of me to say that "I hope your chanda increases, because I hope your need increases, because I hope you lose what you're attached to!" Nevertheless that may be what you do for yourself: i.e. you contemplate the nature of attachment, remember that things are impermanent, and so on, so that you're better prepared for such events.
And I guess that's what monks do: i.e. voluntarily renounce various things they might be attached to.
And I guess there are going to be moments, big moments in your life, and little moments in your day, when you become of aware of the first noble truth:

association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha

That might be a time of naturally-occurring "need" on your part. You said in a comment that you want to practice "tiny meditaitons - gung ho meditations" ... it's when/whenever you're aware of 'suffering', that might be when you have an opportunity to "meditate" in one way or another.
I suspect that after a while of practice you might make a 'right effort' earlier, before stress really even arises. For example if you were an alcoholic, then you might suffer a lot, and that suffering might prompt a big effort to quit alcohol. Later you might relapse into alcoholism again, and then repeat this cycle several times. After a while, when you're sober, you might be aware of just a little suffering which is triggering a desire to start drinking ... and be able to forestall that with just a small right effort.

I Wonder if theres a word for that "need"  - its a good answer  i would like to ask a question to expand on this but have no idea how to ask - got an idea for a question ?
also do you think giving up attachments is the same as loosing stuff as far as creating the "need" ?   cause if so maybe i will just give up stuff
but what bothers me is i did give up stuff more than ones  -  kept 8 precepts (with and without meditation)   so i guess i had the "need" still didnt help me get to a regular practice - or to some advancement (getting less attached ect)

Unfortunately, as I wrote in the answer, that saying that ability develops as a result of need is, as far as I know, not a specifically-Buddhist concept. But dukkha is sometimes translated as "stress", maybe that's a word that would approximate "need" in this context: i.e. you "need" when you experience dukkha (or suffering). I suppose you also "need" when you experience unwholesome roots (you need wholesome roots), or kilesas.

In your case I'm guessing that you think you "want Chanda" (the English word "want" can mean "I desire Chanda", or "I experience a lack, an absence of Chanda") ... you want Chanda, as an antidote to what you think is a "meditation hindrance".

When someone experiences a major or minor loss in their life is, IMO, an example of their having a need.

Simple answer: you get motivation from thinking. Thinking about the consequences of doing this way or doing that way, or consequences of not doing anything. Tell yourself a story, add details, tell it again, focus on the details that make the point - here you go, motivation. If you can't tell yourself a story, then read a story. Or go to a place that inspires you. Simple, right? The power of narratives can create miracles - should not be underestimated.
On the deeper level, why do you think you need motivation/desire? Usually it is the other way - desire finds you and makes you run around. Maybe desire is sickness and you are healthy? ;)


text:
How does Buddhism explain consciousness if there is no self?
One major differing point between Hinduism and Buddhism is the understanding of the self. Buddhist reject the Brahminical notion of an eternal, non-material soul substance that is distinct from the mind, body and sense organs. How then, is consciousness explained? Acts of cognition must occur from a cogniser, a subject that knows, because consciousness does not belong to the body or the mind. Could it not be therefore inferred that this cogniser exists as the self - a non-material soul? How can Buddhism explain  consciousness?

Welcome to the site. I hope you find it helpful.

Acts of cognition do not require a "cogniser, a subject" that knows (apart from the mind itself), because consciousness belongs to the body & mind.
The original question contains an implicit assumption that is invalid.
Cognition results from consciousness; just as a mirror reflects without a self.
Buddhism explains there are five aggregates (khandha) that compose a human life. SN 22.81 explains the idea of 'self' is ignorantly created by the 'sankhara khandha' (mental forming aggregate) and not the 'vinnana khandha' ('consciousness aggregate'). SN 22.59 clearly states each aggregate is 'not-self'. The sankhara created 'self' is a temporary product of ignorance (SN 22.81) & suffering (SN 5.10).
Despite ideas contained in later-day Buddhism about 'relinking' or 'stream of consciousness', the Pali suttas report the Buddha taught there can be no arising of consciousness without sense organs (MN 38), without other aggregates (SN 22.53) and without a mind-body (SN 12.67).
Also, the suttas do not explain a 'cause' ('hetu') of consciousness, i.e., the parts or sub-elements that create consciousness (similar to how water, clay & pain are the parts used to make a cup or how ignorance, craving & attachment mix together to create suffering). The suttas only state consciousness has a requisite 'condition' ('paccaya'), which is the mind-body ('nama-rupa') & sense bases ('salayatana').

Remember the Buddha refuses to answer "Is there a self?" and "Is there no self?". He frequently points out things which are not self which is in line with his teaching "sabbe sankhara annata" (All compounded things are not-self).
What you experience as consciousness is not-self because you cannot control it which is explained in the annata-lankana sutta

Bhikkhus, consciousness is not self. Were consciousness self, then this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.' And since consciousness is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus

Consciousness is also impermanent. You can theorize all you want about whether consciousness is a self but if you attach to the way your consciousness is then you will suffer. When you go to sleep your consciousness stops, that is a sign of impermanence. When you drink a lot of alcohol you can fade in an out of consciousness, your consciousness is hazy, if you were attached to your consciousness being a specific way then when you drink you'll suffer.

In Buddhism, a being is subdivided into five aggregates.
Rupa(Body/Form)
1. Rupa - Materiality(earth element, water element, fire element, air element etc.)

Nama(Mind)
 2. Vedana  - Feeling(pleasant, unpleasant, neutral)
 3. Sanna - Perception(of form, of sound, of smell etc.)
 4. Sankhara - Mental Formation(greed, anger, delusion, love, kindness etc.)
 5. Vinnana - Consciousness(eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness etc.)

'Consciousness' here means the bare awareness. Awareness is a caused phenomenon just like the rest of the five aggregates. It is not under your domain.
ex: when you open your eyes, you cannot prevent from being aware of form. If you close your eyes or if there's no light, you cannot make eye-consciousness to arise. If you can control awareness you should be able to be aware of only pleasant sights, sounds, smells, tastes etc. But you can't.

"Acts of cognition must occur from a cogniser"

Not! That is an assumption one makes due to paying unwise attention(Ayoniso Manasikhara) to experiences. When congnising happens, it should be noted in the most unadulterated form. It is simply 'cognising'.
"I am cognizing" is a fabrication or a perverted thought. It does not reflect reality.
According to Buddhism there are 4 such false views of 'self'.

Owner
Dweller
Doer
Experiencer

'Consciousness' is merely a momentary mental phenomenon that arises due to causes and performs the task of being aware. Nothing more, nothing less!

One way to view consciousness is e.g. as described in this Wikipedia article: Vijñāna.
My paraphrase is there are three things for each of the six senses:

An internal sense-organ (e.g. "ear")
External sense-objects (e.g. a "sound")
Corresponding sense-consciousness

There's something translated as "contact", if and when all three touch (e.g. if an "ear" and a "sound" contact each other, together with "auditory consciousness").
I suppose you can theorize that any of these three might (or might not) exist independently of such contact: e.g. maybe a sound-object exists even where there isn't an ear, or an ear without a sound, or ear-and-sound without consciousness, or consciousness without ear-and/or-sound, etc.
Anyway there's "contact" when all three coincide. Contact is something with arises-and-dissolves.
I say "six senses" because I think that "idea and mind" are viewed as a sixth "sense": i.e. the mind perceives an idea (or series of ideas), in a similar way to the eye perceiving a sight (or series of sights).
So, given those definitions ... is such consciousness (i.e. sense-consciousness) "me", is it worth viewing it as self or as a non-material "soul"? Would you say for example, "there's a sight, and there's an eye seeing it, there's contact/consciousness of seeing it, the object being seen has the form and name of (i.e. it is, and it is called) "a tree" for example, or "a car", or whatever the external object is?
Is such consciousness "eternal", in your opinion? And would viewing consciousness as "self" lead to liberation and/or realization?
Buddhism argues that views of self (i.e. seeing anything as "me") leads to a "thicket of views" and other problems -- for example, quoting from the Alagaddupama Sutta

"You may well accept, monks, the assumption of a self-theory[27] from the acceptance of which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. (But) do you see, monks, any such assumption of a self-theory?" — "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such assumption of a self-theory from the acceptance of which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair."

My paraphrase of that is, "You're welcome to have a view about the self from which sorrow doesn't arise ... but do you see any such view? Because your answer is 'no', because you don't see such a view (i.e. a view of self from which sorrow doesn't arise) then don't assume such views (don't assume views of self from which sorrows do arise).

In the teaching of the Buddha consciousness and mind aren't strictly distingushed, mind (mano) is subsumed under consciousness (vinnana) which constitutes one of 5 aggregates (khandhas, processes which comprise the entire human experience)
An act of cognition is performed by consciousness being conditioned by contact (phassa) of the 5 senses with the phenomena or of the mind with ideas. There's no necessity in existence of a permanent independent entity for the act of cognition.

This is how consciousness happens in Buddha's teachings.
Seeing

There is object to see
Eye

When Eye and object meet, consciousness of seeing happens. This moment is very short and consciousness of seeing is stop being exist and replace by memorize. After memorization is done, judging happens whether the object seen is good or not. After judging, deciding happens whether the seer likes the object seen or dislikes.
From this sequence, the moment of consciousness of seeing is very short not even last for a second. If you are looking for notion of an eternal, non-material soul substance that is distinct from the mind, body and sense organs in that sequence, you will find none because it does not even exist. For example, there are few people who is blind at birth. The consciousness of seeing will never happen for him/her.
The sequence of mind for Hearing, Smelling, Tasting, Touching, Thinking follows the same way as Seeing does. In Buddhist literature this is called Law of sequence of mind and it is constant and not mutable by any means. You cannot find "self-ness" in this sequences what you everyday have. Collectively, you can say "I see", "You see", "He/she see", but upon disintegration to details level, you cannot find the idea of "self" called Atta which is your own, controllable by you or which is own by the creator, controllable by creator. Because of this pure sequence of mind, you cannot find the sense of cogniser in anywhere.

Consider this.
Without thinking or thoughts, there is no thinker.
Without experiencing or experiences, there is no experiencer.
Without an object, there is no subject.
These things are like 2 sides of a coin. The subject/consciousness cannot stand alone. "Who hears/sees?" is not a valid question based on a wrong assumption. A valid question would be "How does hearing/seeing occur?". All processes without an inner core.
Quote:
in many ways I have said of dependently co-arisen consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is no coming-into-play of consciousness.'
"Consciousness, monks, is classified simply by the requisite condition in dependence on which it arises. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the eye & forms is classified simply as eye-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the ear & sounds is classified simply as ear-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the nose & aromas is classified simply as nose-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the tongue & flavors is classified simply as tongue-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the body & tactile sensations is classified simply as body-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the intellect & ideas is classified simply as intellect-consciousness.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.038.than.html

Acts of cognition must occur from a cogniser

Really?  The shining of the sun is happening naturally without the need for a "shiner"
Where does cognizing happen?
Or even better, if you drink a cup of tea, where is the drinker?
Is the drinker in the hand?
In the tea?
In the cup?
Buddha Shakyamuni taught that there is no independent, lasting self, which is what selflessness alludes to from the perspective of pure wisdom.
The fact is, even a single action by a single person requires the rest of the universe to come into alignment at all.
Now, when coming to consider our very personal and intimate experience of the world, we find that we all have proclivities, patterns, and pathways or courses through life that are distinct and fairly individual.  However, all beings wish for freedom from pain and discomfort, and yearn for bliss and happiness, we all just go about it in ways that may be contrary to our goals, and the Buddha taught true causes, true effects, true pathways to where we want to go.  One of the contemplations taught by the Buddha was the contemplation of selflessness.
Without faith, it is not possible (in my limited perspective and ignoramus opinion) to realize selflessness.  With doubt we can sharpen our perception and acumen to a degree, but when one sits down to try and realize truths that were illuminated by the Lion of Speech (another pet name for the Buddha), doubt is a huge obstacle.
So rather than doubt whether or not selflessness is true, we can doubt the notion of a self.
We can investigate: if there is a self, where does it dwell?  Does it dwell in the body, does it dwell in the mind?  Is it the same as the body?  Is it the same as the mind?  When your attention is focused on a sound or on a flavor or on a taste, would this experiencing be a Self?  What happens when the experience dissolves or the rest of the cosmos transitions.  Where did this "lasting self" go?  Was it ever actually there?
We may be fooled and think selflessness means that we have no agency or power in the universe, but it is precisely because identity is not a static thing that we can grow and make our way towards Awakening.
So consider with any phenomenon: where is its self nature.  Does it perhaps come into being based on all the phenomena around it?  Does this computer exist in the way we think it to, or does it arise due to the circumstances and all the parts and intentions coming together?
anatman may be translated as selflessness or identitylessness and both terms are great for meditating.  If they are difficult to accept as truth or reality, then we must contemplate them over and over and ask questions.  Finally, when we have faith that there is no alternative to all forms of existence exhibiting the (three) marks of existence [selflessness/identitylessness being one of the three marks] then we can sit down to meditate with great faith and inspiration and gratitude to the Buddhas.

On some levels this entire discussion causes me sadness. I have spent decades considering just this issue and it wasn't until I stepped back and used some objectivity that I found my answer.
First, it is neither my place nor even my intent to disparage the understanding and beliefs of others. We each have our own worlds that we build and reside within and while they do affect one another I feel we should respect that others may see things in a different light than ourselves.
That said - I take solace in the views of Buddha concerning attachment. Shakyamuni Buddha understood that his views themselves may be improved upon or further expounded. Thus we see avenues of divergence such as the Theravada and Mahayana views on the anatman. There is certainly nothing to say that these are the only two views that may be taken. Far from the case actually.
I have settled upon another view taken from study of the upanishads and the dhammapada. While I agree on the 5 aggregates of existence, I differ on most views regarding the 5th skandha - consciousness. I consider the consciousness to be the self so referenced in the Katha upanishad. The chariot driver. The one which is AWARE. In fact, I believe it much more accurate and eases understanding to just call it "awareness".
Thousands of years ago we were not blessed with the scientific knowledge that we have today. We did not understand the biological basis behind many of the things that we defined such as feelings and urges and desires. With ALL of the physical stripped away we still have the "experiencer". The driver. And at that point we can identify all of the physical components so listed in the 5 aggregates - leaving only awareness.
At this point is where we find the conflict of "self". I find the eternalism view here to be the correct one for MY understanding. As proscribed in Isha the "self" is one and everywhere. But it would be, again, more accurate to merely refer to this as pure awareness. Much like collecting air in a bag and closing off the open end. Awareness that WAS everywhere and one now has a portion trapped in a vessel of limited perceptions. Whereas before it was eternal and everywhere, now a portion of it is subjected to limitations and the ravages of time. This is actually the self. And it IS an illusion. Because it's really not an individual any more than a bottle of water is different from the ocean. Once free of these constraints it may emerge back into the whole again - provided it is not colored (for lack of another word to use) with karma that keeps it from remerging into the ether.
There are many areas of confusion that arise in the definitions of words from culture to culture and century to century. One must learn not to be overly attached or bound to specific words and focus more on the machinations and ideas themselves and see how they comport with what we understand today. As our science and even philosophy and social knowledge increases we lend credence and support to many teachings of the past as well as discovering misgivings in others.Physical basis for consciousness? new studies

Without repeating everything above, I'd like to add something very simple to the discussion, amongst the many quotes from suttas and texts :-)
Consciousness is an Illusion. The assumption that one's experience of the Universe somehow necessitates "Consciousness" is not valid, since it requires an absolute.. aka. Consciousness, to make it.
It is an infinite regress, and thus must be illusory. Or.. at least.. that conclusion seems closer to Truth.
The question becomes then, if Consciousness is illusory, what the heck is going on? How are any of us even making assumptions in the first place?
And that is just what Buddhism is trying to figure out. I suppose we'll all be let in on it when it does :-)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What does "abandoned for no future renewed existence" mean in this sutta?
In SN 35.72, the buddha had an exchange which goes like this:

“What do you think, bhikkhu, do you regard the eye thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self’?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“Good, bhikkhu! And here, bhikkhu, you should clearly see the eye as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ Thus this first base for contact will be abandoned by you for no future renewed existence.
(Repeats for the remaining 5 sense bases, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind...)

When the buddha said, this base for contact will be abandoned by you for no future renewed existence, does he mean that your future existence will be devoid of that sense base i.e. being born without sight?

No, it means to give up the clinging towards eyes and sights since they are neither you nor yours. As a result, eyes and eye contact cannot cause you to be reborn again in Samsara.

What Pali word is used for (is translated as) "abandoned"?

pahīnaṃ https://suttacentral.net/pi/sn35.72/8.149-8.155

The Pali word "Pajahati" is to give up, renounce, forsake, abandon, eliminate, let go, get rid of.

These kinds of teachings always mean to abandon craving & attachment towards the five aggregates & sense spheres, such as SN 22.53, which states:

If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there
  is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed,
  not increasing, not concocting, is released. Owing to its release, it
  is steady. Owing to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing to its
  contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is
  totally unbound (Nibbana) right within.

Iti 44 & others suttas unambiguously explain the fully enlightened arahant still has five aggregates & sense bases, as follows:

Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the
  burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely
  released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties
  remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and
  disagreeable and feels pleasure & pain. It is the extinction of
  attachment, hate & delusion in him that is called...
  Nibbana...

There is this hierarchy in the teaching. One such is in the Nama, of the  rupa (material phenomena) & nama (mental phenomena).  Nama is broken down into Vedana (feeling) , Sanna (perception),  Sankhara (mental activities),  Passa (contact) , and manasikāra (mental advertence). Buddha placed Passa & Manasikaara to the end for a reason. For the three things: feeling, perception and volition (vedana, sañña, and cetana) to be born contact has to be there. Dependent on contact only manasikāra (mental advertence) happens.
There is sankhara (kaya sankhara, vaci sankhara and citta sankhara), and when we open our eyes, consciousness arises with ignorance. With the six faculties, six kinds of consciousness arise. consiousness of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and consciousness of mind. Because of consciousness, mentality and materiality arise. For example, in order to cognize a form, there should be attention to the form. When attention is there, consciousness arises. When there is consciousness, there is contact (the meeting of eye, form and consciousness of eye).
Passa (Pāli) is a Buddhist term meaning "contact" or "touching.  By fully understanding (abandoning) this link in the chain of the 12 Part Cycle of Dependent Origination, you can solve the puzzle and be free from it.  The thrust of the formula is such that when certain conditions are present, they give rise to subsequent conditions, which in turn give rise to other conditions and the cyclical nature of life in Samsara can be seen.
We cannot escape from contact and consciousness.  It is inevitable.  Therefore what we have to eradicate is not contact and consciousness, but desire for what we see, hear, smell, taste, touch and think. Buddha explained this by a simile.  Suppose a flayed cow was released.  To escape suffering, it jumps into water, then the creatures living in the water would attack it.  If it were to stand leaning against a tree, the insects on the tree would attack it.  If it were to stand exposed to the air, the creatures living in the air would attack it.  In the same way, we cannot escape from the nutriment of contact.  One cannot run away from reality.  We should be mindful and realize the truth that it is only by eradicating desire that we could eradicate unwholesome mental factors.
Nibbana is conceived of as stopping this cycle. By removing the causes for craving, craving ceases. So with the ceasing of birth, death ceases. With the ceasing of becoming, birth ceases... and so on until with the ceasing of ignorance no kamma is produced, and the whole process of death and rebirth ceases. In fact the opportunity for change comes between the stages of sensation and desire, since it is craving that drives the whole process. If one can simply experience sensations without desiring, then craving will not arise, and one can begin to be free from the cycle of birth and death. It is Passa paccaya vedana, With Vedanā as condition, Tanhā arises. So do you get the picture?

Avijja - ignorance or delusion;     With Avidyā as condition, Sanskāra arises
Sankhara - kamma-formations;  With Sanskāra as condition, Vijñāna arises
Vinnana – consciousness;     With Vijñāna as condition, Nāmarūpa arises
Nama-rupa - mind and matter;     With Nāmarūpa as condition, Salāyatana arises
Salayatana - six sense bases;    With Salāyatana as condition, Sparśa arises
Passa - contact or impression;   With Passa as condition, Vedanā arises
Vedana – Feeling;        With Vedanā as condition, Tanhā arises
Tanha - craving ;        With Tanhā as condition, Upādāna arises
Upadana – clinging;  With Upādāna as condition, Bhava arises
Bhava – becoming;   With Bhava as condition, Jāti arises
Jati – rebirth;         With Jāti as condition, Jarāmarana arises
Jara-marana - old age and death;

authors: Баян Купи-ка

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


text:
Meditation, compassion: How to handle people who dominate you in the office?
I have been doing meditation for long time and have felt a change in me. I have started developing strong compassion, and due to this I am speaking very politely to everyone and always agreeing with the views of others. In fact, I am helping others in their work. However, now people have started taking me for granted.
As I speak kindly with my subordinates, they are taking advantage of me by commanding me to do their work and are trying to dominate. They have started speaking in rude ways to me as they have started feeling that I am not harmful for them and cannot do anything. I am now becoming a victim of their politics.
How to overcome this problem? I cannot leave my post as this is the only way of earning my bread and butter.
Being on the path of Buddhism, how to maintain relations with your colleagues?

I think this question is probably a duplicate of (i.e. already has some asnwers at) Can Buddhists be good workplace leaders?

To not hold ill will against others should not be confused as compulsively saying "yes" to everything. Know that Buddhism is not in conflict with earning your living, with time and practice comes understanding, and questions like these you will quickly answer.

This isn't really a formal answer, but I would say that it's just as important for yourself to be treated respectfully as it is for you to be respectful to others. What is important in buddhism is to also have strong moral courage and not to let people take advantage of you. (I don't mean to say that you havn't at all done that, but I just wanted to highlight it).

" always agreeing with the views of others"? What happens when they have conflicting views?

...always agreeing with the views of others. Seems to imply that previously there were disagreements. Did your views actually change?

Every worker has a duty to become proficient in & do their work. A proper leader must nurture this. Also, rude speech is improper in the workplace; just as rude speech is improper in Buddhism.
In reality, the values in original Pali Buddhism perfectly fit a secular world. For example, if the Pali scriptures are read, it will not be found the Buddha speaking very politely to everyone and, particularly, always agreeing with other's views. Often the Buddha was firm (but always fair) to others in his speech & the Buddha always conformed with what is ethically & dhammically correct thus often correcting or even admonishing the wrong views of others.
Just like the Dhamma-Vinaya (Doctrine-&-Disciple) has clear rules, a workplace has set rules & delegation of duties. These should be adhered to, without prejudice, which results in a lack of confusion.
If you are a leader, you have the opportunity to nurture a clear, ethical & unconfused workplace. It is when workplace leaders become corrupt, prejudiced or too wavering when confusion arises & difficulties begin, particularly for ethical workers. Most people take any chance to dominate. A fair & ethical leader is rare.
In short, less focus on personalities (including your own) and more focus on rules & responsibilities.

Kesi, I train a tamable person [sometimes] with gentleness, [sometimes] with sternness, [sometimes] with both gentleness &
  sternness.
Kesi Sutta

Some references:
Right Speech From His Own Lips
A Constitution for Living: Buddhist Principles for a Fruitful and Harmonious Life
Sigalovada Sutta: The Layperson's Code of Discipline

Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world.  What four kinds?  The four kinds are:
Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised,
  according to the truth, at the proper time.
Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be
  blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.
Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and do not praise those who should be
  praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praise those who should be praised, according
  to the truth, at the proper time.
Potaliya, these four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world.  Of these four kinds of people, that kind should be the most
  fair and right, the most refined, to you?
"Venerable Lord Gotama, of all those four kinds of people, the kind of person who does not blame those who should be blamed, according to
  the truth, at the proper time, and does not praise those who should be
  praised, according to the truth, at the proper time; is the kind of
  person who is the most beautiful and refined to me.  What is the
  reason for this?  Because this is fair and right with upekkha
  (equanimity)."
Potaliya, of all those four kinds of people, whichever kind of person blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the
  proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the
  truth, at the proper time; this kind of person is the most beautiful
  and refined of these four kinds of people.  What is the reason for
  this?  It is fair and right because such a one knows the right time in
  those circumstances.

~~~

Avoiding the biases: when an administrator is carrying out his functions, he should not allow the four biases, or deviations from
  righteousness, to interfere:
Chandagati: biased conduct on account of like
Dosagati: biased conduct on account of dislike
Mohagati: biased conduct on account of delusion or foolishness
Bhayagati: biased conduct on account of
  timidity and fear

The Buddha once asked several of his monk disciples how they were able to live together `in harmony, mutual appreciation and agreeability. This is found in the (Anuruddha) Upakkilesa Sutta.

i'm afraid the sutta doesn't apply since in the case of the three monks all of them pursued the same goals and adhered to the same principles. Ven Anuruddha said: "We are different in body, but one in mind"

Buddha is cited as Victor for a reason: a good Buddhist is strong and certain - not weak and doubtful. These strength and certainty come from standing firmly with both feet in reality (Tatha) - standing firmly with both feet in Dharma. A good Buddhist does not surrender to what is false, nor does he (or she) cling to what is false. Because there is nothing in him that is false, he can be strong and certain.

and always agreeing on others view

very wrong message, polite disagreement is completely normal
try to overcome it by ceasing being meek and docile, because people are animals and take kindness for weakness, and then the following saying is at work

the willing horse gets the whip

without knowledge of the hierarchy and distribution of powers at the workplace it's difficult to offer suggestions, but if there're enough powers to effect a dismissal of such manipulative and brazen subordinates, they can be given a warning, maybe in an indirect form

Apparently English has sayings which say the opposite: e.g. that you should "never spur a willing horse".

maybe, but it has no known to me counterpart in Russian...

I have experienced some brief training as a novice monk in a short term monastic retreat in the Chinese Chan (Zen) tradition, and I can assure you that you get a lot of tough love. The disciplinary monks are very stern and you can expect a good earful if you make careless mistakes. That is how they push the monks really hard into a disciplined life style. It's effectively a boot camp for mindful living. I have been unable to maintain the same standard of discipline in my lay life but it has changed me.
But as you get to know the teachers you realized they actually has a very soft side and are very compassionate in training us harshly even though it means they might not be liked.
Don't take abuse from people. It's not acceptable.

I am speaking very politely to everyone and always agreeing with the
  views of others.

It is not compassionate to be overly lenient towards others and allow them to push you around. If you do this, you allow their egos to grow and their bad qualities to rise. A compassionate Buddhist should behave to others in a way that he believes will be the most beneficial to everyone. This means speaking clearly and openly to others. If one disagrees with something, one can say it clearly and frankly, but in a kind, considerate way. Repressing one's own opinions and wishes is not going to benefit anyone. Clear communication, interaction and occasional compromises are necessary for a harmonious work-environment.
Moreover, as a leader, it's your duty to take the lead and tell your subordinates what to do in some way or the other. That doesn't mean you have to be overly bossy, or refuse to listen to the viewpoints of your subordinates. However, it means you need to take both views into account and, in the end, make balanced decisions as a leader. Sometimes this may mean putting your foot down and say you disagree with some of the wishes/views of your subordinates. As a part of right livelihood you need to fulfill your obligation and agreement with your employer. As a part of that obligation, you have made a promise to be a leader. (It's part of your job.) If you don't fulfill that obligation, you are not keeping your promise to your employer. Thus, it would not be right livelihood, since you'd be breaking your obligation and word. You need to act as a leader, as you're expected to. The challenge for you is to combine this with being compassionate and kind. This is hardly easy, but it's what the Buddhist path can be like.

You could also ask this question on Workplace.SE.
Here I'll try to give an answer that relevant to Buddhism .SE.

As I speak kindly with my subordinates, they are taking advantage of me by commanding me to do their work and are trying to dominate.
It has happened, when I was working somewhere, that a friend/colleague told me that he'd decided to leave and go and work elsewhere. Instead of being annoyed (that they were leaving), I wanted to be happy for them (i.e. mudita): that they were free to find another job that they preferred.
An opposite (a negative), to be avoided, is to have a "mind of ill-will". I think you can (should) "speak kindly to your subordinates" and avoid having ill-will towards them.
That needn't mean they "dominate you", though, for a few reasons:
"Compassion" means, "may they be free from suffering". You seem to be treating this as a zero-sum game (they win if you lose, and compassion means that you should let them win). Instead of "zero-sum" I prefer to see work as a cooperative endeavour, i.e. "we win if we cooperate". You can want them to be free from suffering, without wanting them to dominate you. You might also do this with children or animals: if you know what's good and bad for them, you tell them and insist on that.
Also, "equanimity": part of the Buddhist teaching on equanimity is to reflect that everyone is the owner of their  kamma. For example once, when I was working as a software developer, I had one colleague, who couldn't do the work, and who smelled of alcohol at work. I told my boss, and he was fired. I didn't have ill-will towards this man, and it wasn't my fault he was drinking: but this wasn't the right job for him.
Buddhism has a concept of "right livelihood", i.e. that in order to be moral you shouldn't have immoral employment. Buddhism doesn't have much to say about it for lay people, there are very few rules describing right livelihood for lay-people. Nevertheless I think that one of the rules is "not cheating": for example if your employer hires you to be a manager, then you owe it (to your employer) to be a good manager. This needn't mean being a cruel manager (if it does then maybe you need a different employer), but IMO your job as manager is to balance the needs of the employer with the needs of the employee (and the rest of society too, i.e. the employer's owners and customers etc.).
So for example you define work, assign it to employees, supervise the quality of the work, integrate their output with other people's work, etc. The fact that you're trying to do right livelihood means that it's inappropriate as a manager to be a push-over, to be too dominated. You might find it help to read this collection of definitions of right speech ... which even permits some things said which other people don't like, which they find "unendearing and disagreeable":

In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.

That quote is taken from the Abhaya Sutta, which also includes this line:

What do you think, prince: If this young boy, through your own negligence or that of the nurse, were to take a stick or a piece of gravel into its mouth, what would you do?"
I would take it out, lord. If I couldn't get it out right away, then holding its head in my left hand and crooking a finger of my right, I would take it out, even if it meant drawing blood. Why is that? Because I have sympathy for the young boy.

Another concept more-or-less related to Buddhism might be being impersonal. For example when I was the "chief software developer" at a company, I didn't think of it as my job to supervise the people: I saw it as my job to supervise the software that was being created. I'd talk to people about the software (e.g. "this software which you wrote is good and/or bad"), not try to dominate the people (e.g. "you are good and/or bad").
When reviewing their software I tried to have three (not just two) categories of comment:

This is good: acceptable, well done.
This is, in my opinion, not (yet) good enough, for this and that reason: please change it in this and that way before I accept it.
Well, OK; I wouldn't have done it that way. FYI I would have done it so and so. If you like/agree/prefer you could change it to include my suggestion, or we can keep it the way you've done it: it's acceptable.

Giving my opinion on the software was something I was relatively competent at. Because I was focused on the software, people couldn't easily "dominate" me except my giving me high-quality software, which is what I (and my employer) wanted.
Similarly you find it better to be shoulder-to-shoulder with your subordinates, assessing the work, working together, instead of face-to-face and trying to dominate each other.
Also I remember, just once, it happened that someone wasn't willing to let me review their changes to the software. Well, responsibility and authority tend to go together. In this case I was (part) responsible for the quality of the software and I had the corresponding authority (e.g. I had the Administrator password and authority to use it). Instead of arguing with the person, I used Administrator functionality to remove their write-access to the software, so that they couldn't (so that only I could) write their changes. That was kind of forceful but it was the really least amount of force, harmless, an appropriate response to the risk/threat of unreviewed software being written.

They have started speaking in rude ways to me as they have started feeling that I am not harmful for them and cannot do anything.
It might be worth telling them: "Don't be rude to me. I'm trying to do a useful job here, and trying to help you do a good job."
If that doesn't work, you might talk to your boss about it. Note that "X is rude to me" and "X is rude to others" and "X isn't doing their job" and "X doesn't accept my advice" are various different statements you could make to your boss.

authors: Баян Купи-ка


text:
What to do for fasting on full moon?
From this coming full moon I've to start fasting and keep it on, so what I've to practice on this day ?

Visakha Uposatha Sutta AN 8.43  and  Muluposatha Sutta: The Roots of the Uposatha AN 3.70  are good reads in this regard. Also in the Uposatha Sutta— Practicing uposatha —AN 3.71 the Buddha defines how lay people should practice Uposatha and describes the different types of devas.
Uposatha practice is the practice by which lay people rest from their daily work, devoting a day on the full moon, new moon, and quarter moon days,  to listening to the Dhamma and training the mind in meditation. The question is whether one does it the proper way or not. The practice of taking the eight precepts in the morning, then taking the five precepts again in the evening, is not proper. In the Uposatha Sutta, Buddha describe it as ‘the Cowherd’s Uposatha.’  It is not the Uposatha of the Noble Ones. The eight precepts should be observed for at least twenty-four hours.
Another thing to be mindful about is that those persons who, on uposatha days plan to go to quiet places to meditate they inadvertently fall into other trappings. They at times end up in the company of friends and get into other unrelated conversations, because they have no control over their minds. Even in meditation even when they attempt to direct their minds to the samatha (calm) or metta (loving-kindness), their thoughts get scattered aimlessly and they end up only with the visible manifestation of the recitation. The 24 hour uposatha is for the mind, and not for the body. Lastly, it is important for one be mindful to take the five precepts to formally end the uposatha, whenever one wants to terminate it.

Is this calender correct because I'm living in India ? And I have to practice also on half and new moon day or Uposatha only on full moon day ? http://www.watmetta.org/news/Uposatha2016.1.pdf

The full moon day is called the 'Uposatha'. It may help to google the word & read it about, for example:

Buddhanet: Observance Day (Uposatha)
Access to Insight (which categorizes it as a type of sila, virtue): Uposatha Observance Days
Wikipedia: Uposatha


text:
What are the broad categories of the different types of meditation?
I have heard that there is insight meditation (mostly as part of practicing Buddhism) and Samantha (which involves Buddhism, but really just as a tool in the beginning of a meditation).
This question springs from a question below and reading this answer about (Samantha) Anapanasati:
https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/9185/8475
Ultimately, I believe that the answers about meditation for this question are inadequate. I may be alone here, but the current answers do not specify a practical technique for meditation (assuming that mindfulness is a subcomponent). Categorizing the different types of meditation may help in for these underlying reasons:

Best type of meditation for attention
Technique for Concentrative Meditation
What exactly differentiates Vipassana from Samatha meditation?

Lastly, I intent to make a venn diagram showing the similarities and such...
Here are related questions:

Does Zen distinguish between concentration and insight meditation?
Buddha's advice regarding meditation practice

I don't understand your question. The answers you've already linked pretty much answer that there is samatha and vipassana and explain what they are.

I am asking for any more broad categories. I may have said the brunt of them. For example, Vipassana is under the category of insight meditation. But what about "inner fire" meditation? I don't know! I assume this kind is also another type of insight meditation, but there could be more broad categories.

@OidaOudenEidos I think the question is, are there other categories apart from these two? What about Anussati for example: is that Samatha, Vipasanna, or something else? Or is Metta Bhavana another category? How about Zen? Chanting/mantras? Etc.? And where does TM fit among these categories?

@AdamUraynar  Ok, I understand what was meant by 'broad category'

THE BROADER CATEGORIES ARE MENTIONED WITHIN SOME OF THE TYPES OF MEDITATIONS LISTED BELOW, and ALSO IS LISTED HERE:
Reflective meditation

There are a series of meditations that can put you in the right frame of mind.  The guardian meditations are one tool to reduce the power of the hindrances.

Buddhanussati  (reflection on the qualities of the Buddha)
The first guardian meditation is recollection of the Buddha, keeping in mind his Awakening. It is the reflection on the nine supreme qualities of the Buddha.
Metta (Loving Kindness Meditation)
The second guardian meditation is goodwill.  If one is friendly to oneself, that person will not harm himself/herself. If a person is friendly to others, that person would not harm others’ lives. Therefore, the friendship that brings good to oneself and others is called Mettā.
Asubha (Meditation on loathsomeness)
The third guardian meditation - Here one reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.'
Maranasati (Meditation on the recollection of death)
The fourth guardian meditation - “Mindfulness of death, when developed and cultivated, is of great fruit and benefit, culminating in the deathless, having the deathless as its consummation.” – Anguttara Nikaya 8.7

There are 10 Anussati meditations - 8 reflections and 2 on mindfulness.  Anussati means repeated reflection or constant awareness or mindfulness on some object.

Dhammanussati (reflection on the qualities of the Dhamma)
. The second of the 10 is Reflecting on the virtues of the Dhamma (Dhammanussati). It is the reflection on the six supreme qualities of the Teaching of the Buddha.
Sanghanussati (reflection on the qualities of the Sangha)
The third of the 10 is the Sangha is the third of the Three Jewels in Buddhism. It is the reflection on the supreme qualities of the ideal community of Noble Ones (ariya-sangha) — those monks, nuns, laywomen, and laymen who, throughout history, have by their own diligent efforts successfully carried out the Buddha's instructions and gained at least a glimpse of the supreme happiness of nibbana.
Silanussati (meditation about virtue)
The fourth of the 10 is is the recollection of one's own moral virtue.
Devatanussati (meditation about heavenly beings)
This is the fifth of the 10 is this. We should cultivate the Sēkha Bala Dhamma – Saddhā (faith), Sīla (virtue), Sutha (Dhamma knowledge), Thyāga (generosity), and Paññā (wisdom of the Dhamma) – at this present time. These are qualities that are found in the Devas. If you develop them, then there is divinity within you.
Chaganussati (meditation about generosity)
The sixth of the 10 is Chaganussati. - Reflecting on Giving (dana) is one of the integral parts of the practice of Dhamma. When practiced in itself, it is a basis of merit or wholesome kamma, but only when combined with morality, concentration and insight, will it lead to liberation from samsara, the cycle of repeated existence. So it is of the recollection of one's own generosity.
Reflecting on the peace in Nibbana (Upasamanussati)
The 'recollection of the peace of Nibbana', is the last of the 10 recollections anussati.

3.

Karuna (Compassion meditation)
The way to cultivate Karunā meditation - the second of Four Divine Abodes… May I be free of bodily pains… May I be free of mental pains… May I be physically healthy… May I be mentally healthy… May I live well and happy… I and … (Karunhā meditation can be cultivated in Mahaggata Chētō Vimukkti and Appamānha Chētō Vimukkti methods similar to the Mettā and Mudita meditations.)
Mudita ( Altruistic-joy meditation)
Loving-kindness, compassion, altruistic joy, and equanimity are known as “the Four Divine Abodes (satara brahma viharanha)”.  The third of the group is the cultivation of Muditā to get rid of discontent about wholesome actions… The happiness we feel about others’ progress/wellbeing is Muditā. One can thrive with money, lands, vehicles, and so on by earnest and righteous livelihoods. If we can be happy by seeing such development of others without getting angry about it, it is Muditā. The Buddha preached to cultivate Muditā to get rid of discontent (aratiya) about wholesome actions.
Upekkha (Equanimity meditation)
This is the last of the four. We do this in order to not get upset from the eight vicissitudes of life.  One who practices equanimity will not mourn when sufferings, troubles find that person. He will not get excited when pleasure, happiness find him. He/she will feel all with an indifferent mentality. What we all have to face is the eight vicissitudes of life (ata lō dahama). One shall cultivate equanimity in order to not to worry or sorrow from the eight vicissitudes of life.

4.

Nava Sivatika (Nine cemetery contemplations)
The last exercise in mindfulness of the body is a series of "cemetery meditations," contemplations of the body's disintegration after death, which may be performed either imaginatively, with the aid of pictures, or through direct confrontation with a corpse. By any of these means one obtains a clear mental image of a decomposing body, then applies the process to one's own body, considering: "This body, now so full of life, has the same nature and is subject to the same fate. It cannot escape death, cannot escape disintegration, but must eventually die and decompose."

5.

Cittanupassana (Contemplation of the mind)
Cittanupassana-satipatthana means mindfulness which is firmly established on thoughts or mental processes, such as thoughts associated with the passions or dissociated from the passions.

6.

Dhammanupassana (Contemplation of mental objects or thoughts)
Dhammanupassana-satipatthana means mindfulness which is firmly established on phenomena such as nivarana (hindrances), etc.

Mindfulness

Kayanupassana (Contemplation of the body)
This is the first of the Four Foundations of Mindfulness.  Buddha's advice is to look at the body, as it is, neither getting attached nor developing aversion towards it. The Buddha's advice is to observe and analyze it without being biased by any views or prejudices and to develop mindfulness. Within the first major section on mindfulness of body there are five meditation methods.
(1) mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati)
(2) Satisampajaññya (awareness) meditation in Satara Satipatthana
(3) mindfulness of postures (iriyapatha)
(4) refelection on internal and external impurities and other vital parts (kunapa)
(5) analysis of four elements (dathu)
(6) reflection on nine stages of a dead body (nava seevaththika)

Concentrative

Mindfulness of Breathing (Anapanasati)
The Buddha explained to Venerable Ananda, “This one factor is Anapanasati, which when developed and pursued brings the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (Cattaro Satipatthana) to completion. The Four Foundations of Mindfulness, when developed and pursued bring the Seven Factors of Enlightenment to completion. The Seven Factors of Enlightenment, when developed and pursued bring Clear Knowing and Release to completion.” in the Ananda Sutta.
Iriya patha (Meditation on postures of the body)**
The postures of the body can be good subjects leading to the proper establishment of concentration. Here one attempts to be mindful of walking, standing, sitting, lying, bending, stretching, eating, drinking, chewing, savouring, defecating and urinating.

Uncategorized
Dhathu Manasikara (analysis of four elements)
It is the meditation of the four physical elements (dhatu) of nature: Earth, Water, Fire and Wind (pathavi, apo, tejo, and vayo) as Elements of solidity, fluidity, heat and motion.
Combinations

sati sampajanna

The Pali word for alertness is sampajañña. It doesn’t mean being choicelessly aware of the present, or comprehending the present. Sampajañña means being aware of what you’re doing in the movements of the body, the movements in the mind. This is why mindfulness and alertness should always be paired.

I guess many of these are one 'broad category', i.e. they are "anussati" meditations on various objects (Buddha, Dharma, etc.). And maybe the four brahmavihara meditations also all belong to one category, i.e. they're all "bhavana" meditations?

Yes, @ChrisW, so far I’ve touched on those two broad categories. Then there is ‘Ahare Patikkula Saññā’ (perceiving the impurity of material food), ‘Sabba Loke Anabhirata Saññā’ (not taking delight in worlds), ‘Sabba Sankharesu Anicca Saññā’ (impermanence of all aggregates), Panca Nivarana ((Meditation on five hinderances), Panca Upadanaskanda (Meditation on five groups of clinging), Walking Meditation, etc. to name a few other types that I have not touched on yet..

Thank you. The question is especially asking for "broad categories", so try to identify the broad categories). I think the OP is trying to get an overview or 'big picture', or to read of ways to categorize them.

Also I think you're copy-and-pasting definitions. You should reference (e.g. hyperlink to) the sources you copy from, and/or use quote formatting, when you do that.

Thanks, @Adam Uraynar.. I greatly appreciate your help on this. I do not think that I can find the time to edit my own. I agree with ChrisW. I have 'clipped copied' from my own personal notes from my past readings. Finding the source for these is going to be too time consuming, and I'd rather delete this post than going through that trouble. Then it is again Supreme Buddha's Word that we are all sharing, and no one else have any right to any authorship. To protect the integrity of authorship every writer should quote the scriptures. ie. Sutta-Vinaya.

The link referred to uses the ideas of the monk Yuttadhammo as a guide. Yuttadhammo is connected to a certain idiosyncratic Burmese meditation tradition that appears to misapprehend Anapanasati.
The very fact that the Pali scriptures report Anapanasati is 'The Tathagata's Dwelling' (SN 54.11) shows believing Anapanasati to be only 'samatha' is an error.

If anyone, bhikkhus, speaking rightly could say of anything: "It is a noble dwelling, a divine dwelling, the Tathagata's dwelling", it is of
  concentration by mindfulness with breathing that one could rightly say
  this.
SN 54.11 (no direct link)

Anapanasati, when performed correctly, develops both samatha (tranquility) & insight (vipassana) together. In the majority of discourses in the Pali suttas, Anapanasati is recommended as a complete system of meditation, where samatha (tranquility) & insight (vipassana) are developed in tandem.
There cannot really be different kinds of meditation, when meditation is practised correctly & successfully. The reason for this is because when attention & concentration are properly developed, insight will naturally occur as an automatic result. But if concentration is practised incorrectly, such as by suppressing & forcing the mind, insight will not occur and the samatha that occurs will be unclear & drowsy.
Similarly, if the Burmese 'insight' techniques can be practised successfully, true insight will lead to the mind's hindrances/defilements/thoughts stopping, which will result in the mind automatically developing concentration.
This is why the Dhammapada states there can be no concentration without insight & no insight without concentration.

372. There is no meditative concentration for him who lacks insight and no insight for him who lacks meditative concentration. He in whom
  are found both meditative concentration and insight, indeed, is close
  to Nibbana

The meditation methods developed in Burma, which Yuttadhammo teaches, appear to have been developed to avoid the lethargy of mind that occurs from when samatha meditation is developed improperly, which is extremely common. It is probably a fact that most people do not practise Anapanasati in an ideal manner, which results in misunderstandings about Anapanasati.
The very fact that most translators translate 'Anapanasati' as 'Mindfulness Of Breathing' demonstrates an inherent misunderstanding of what 'Anapanasati' is (since the translation should be 'Mindfulness With/When/While Breathing').
The so-called 'Insight' techniques taught by Yuttadhammo are designed to keep the mind open, awake & alert; to avoid the lethargy of wrong anapanasati practise.
While this may seem to be a very positive thing, the best thing is to correct one's misunderstandings of Anapanasati rather than preach misunderstandings about Anapanasati.
Ultimately, we must choose the technique that is best for us. For those unable to practise Anapanasati as instructed in the suttas (which is based on the practise of 'letting go' called 'vossagga'), the Burmese 'insight' methods of Mahasi Sayadaw that Yuttadhammo teaches may be a better option if they wish to develop alertness & attention.

...a monk develops mindfulness as a factor for awakening
  dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on
  cessation, resulting in relinquishment (vossagga).
He develops analysis of
  dhammas (insight) as a factor for awakening dependent on seclusion, dependent on
  dispassion, dependent on cessation, resulting in relinquishment
  (vossagga).
Anapanasati Sutta

~~~

And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go
  (vossagga), attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.
SN 48.10


text:
Should I consider multitasking while listening to audiobooks? Is it a danger to mindfulness?
One of the several advertised benefits of listening to audiobooks is that it is an ideal activity to accompany those many chores, such as washing the dishes, doing the laundry, running outside etc., that considered all together subtract a considerable amount of free time.
For normal people doing this may look like a great idea, but as a meditator and buddhist practitioner I also see which dangers are there in relation to the mindfulness practice. In particular, I am afraid that by listening to audiobooks or, more generally, by conducting too many activities all at once, I may easily undo the effects of concentration meditation and mindfulness or lead my mind too astray.
Even though I'm planning to do the experiment myself, I would nevertheless like to ask: have you ever been able to integrate your mindfulness practice with doing multiple activities at the same time? What have been, specifically, the results regarding listening to audiobooks, provided you have ever tried this?

In my experience, multi tasking is really hard. I can't do any but the simplest of tasks while listening to an audio book without taking away some of the joy of listening to it. When running, I need to concentrate on the ground and my feet and all of my body and I couldn't do that with headphones. But I'm not sure this can or should be generalized to all people. Best just try it for yourself.

In my experience, though I'd hardly call myself a mindfulness expert, I don't feel audiobooks and the small level of multitasking they allow me to take on really negatively affect my mindfulness.
I guess, truly, the challenge is to resist the temptation to multi task or listen to books when you SHOULD be being mindful.  I suppose everyone's mileage varies, but I became an avid audiobook listener before beginning my mindfulness practice.
Mostly I listen to these while driving or if I'm doing some menial tasks like cleaning.  These aren't exactly places and times I find myself practicing really being present anyway.
Just my 2 cents.  Hope it helps someone. :)

No, I wouldn't recommend a practitioner to multi-task while working. As Alan Watts explained,

"Zen does not confuse spirituality with thinking about God while one is peeling potatoes. Zen spirituality is just to peel the potatoes."

Your job as a practitioner is not to think about anything while working. It is through work that mind-body falls away. What does that mean? While washing the dishes your job is to only concentrate on washing the dishes. No aim, no goal, no thoughts, no expectations, no Buddha but washing dishes. This is your practice. No thinking, "I am washing the dishes" or "I am not thinking while washing dishes" because you're not allowing mind-body to fall away. Simply wash the dishes with non-thinking. Here's a quote by Bodhidharma,

"Not thinking about anything is zen. Once you know this, walking, sitting, or lying down, everything you do is zen.

Finally, I want you to consider why you're wanting to multi-task? Does your mind get bored? Are you trying to avoid certain sensations? Is it hard to concentrate? Does your mind get frustrated in the silence? Why are you wanting to entertain the mind? This is your practice.

What matters is how you want to do a particular activity and how important it is to you in the worldly context. You can take your Buddhist practice to an activity that you are doing and do it with as much focus as possible, like you and your mind don't exist. Only the activity is happening. That's how it is done. Choiceless awareness of the activity.
This mindfulness word has been marketed or thrown around a lot. It doesn't mean anything apart from a latest marketing fad. It is not a proper translation of any Buddhist term like Jhana or Dhyana. This may be my opinion but I have shut off all this marketing terms or practices and listening to audiobooks (or whatever people like to dump their mind with garbage from society).
Keep things simple, do one thing and do it fully. Nothing matters but the awareness of the task at hand. That's the essence of activity in Buddhist terms. If you look at Zen, you'll understand what they are getting at.
Now it depends on you.

"mindfulness has been marketed...", well said and good observation! i totally agree with u :))

When you multi-task you do not give the fullest attention to what you do. Also you may think that you are multi-tasking, but in reality you are not. Just see how the following things happen so quickly when our five senses comes in contact with the related one of the outside?  For instance, when body, tangible object and consciousness come together, there arises contact. With the arising of contact, simultaneously, there arises feeling (vedana) – feeling born of body contact. Since feeling is conditioned by contact, feeling differs in accordance with the change of contact. Then, there is the recognition of perception. This is called sañña (perception). These things happen so quickly when our five senses comes in contact with the related one of the outside, that only a highly developed and ‘quiet’ mind can differentiate the time difference.
Jhana can be said as a sense of wellbeing and stability you can develop from within. For this one has to close all other doors, and have open only one sense door – leaving no room for ‘multi-tasking’. Only inside Jhana, can the sapta bodhyanga (Seven factors of enlightenment) can be fully developed. For this one has to practise Samatha and Vipassana properly. Then a different kind of ‘multi-tasking’ takes place. When you are practicing concentration, you are developing several factors of the Noble path at once. There’s right resolve, the resolve to renounce sensuality, to find a pleasure that’s not involved with
sensual passion; right mindfulness, which is the theme of right concentration; and right livelihood, looking after your needs in a skillful way.

Multitasking or engaging in activities like listening to audiobooks is not an issue for mindfulness. What is needed is Wise Attention, i.e., being free from unwholesome roots, hindrances and Vipallasa.

On hearing a sound with the ear,
one investigates the sound that is the basis for mental joy,
one investigates the sound that is the basis of mental pain,
one investigates the sound that the basis of equanimity.

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta similarly in Titth’ayatana Sutta
Also be aware of your reaction to the content agreeable or likable, disagreeable or unlikable, indifferent. These are what leads to the sensations of joy, pain or equanimity above.
So what ever you hear know impermanence of the sensations what arise with it and be equanimous. Being equanimous displaces aversion and craving and seeing impedance displaces ignorance. [Pahāna Sutta] Having Wise Attention all 8 Path Factors develop automatically. [Yoniso Manasikāra Sampadā Sutta]

When you visit & stay in Buddhist centers, you listen to audio talks about Buddhism while you meditate. Deep meditation & listening to audio can occur at the same time. Therefore, I doubt listening to audio information impairs meditation. I listen to as much audio information as I can (rather than read books) since I have never been partial to reading books.
As for multi-tasking, meditation can help a lot there. A nibble mind can multi-task better.


text:
Reasons against practicing insight meditation as a main (sitting) practice for medical or other recondite-subject majoring students?
("Recondite-subject majoring" is meant to mean the more challenging subjects, such as electrical engineering or a doctorate based major.)
If a student who has one hour to meditate, every day, and one more hour on the weekend, will practicing an insight meditation be counterproductive to concentration and calmness? The main aim is to be a better student. [This purpose may seem narrow minded, but I do not know where else to ask this question.] This question sprung from a recommendation:

Although what I am about to say may cause some amount of sensation to
  arise in people who are attached to their insight meditation
  traditions, I would advice, from my personal experience, that you
  don't practise insight meditation exclusively (the anapanasati
  meditation that I recommend is not an insight meditation, it is a
  calming meditation) since it will cause many troubles, especially
  in a student life like ours. This is because exclusive practise of
  insight meditation will initially cause many defilements to come about
  (although the goal is the contrary) - for example, all kinds of
  craving will come about. This is not conducive at all to a successful
  student life.
You can, however, practise [sic] insight meditation during daily life
  (rather than the main meditation practise) such as while walking and
  eating and so on, without getting into much trouble, ASSUMING that you
  have a solid practise [sic] of Anapanasati going on.

Does not insight meditation, such as Vipassana, involve anapanasati in the beginning? It just feels counterproductive to go back to doing anapanasati only for the hour available. Actually, it just seems hard to do that. (There may be a sort of attachment to the body scanning technique happening here?)

Research

Toward the integration of meditation into higher education: A review of research ~ What specifically are mindfulness-based interventions? What is a specific technique for a student (beginner)? Most importantly, is "mindfulness-based" the same as "insight" meditation?
Meditation, social change, and undergraduate education ~ authors informal attempt of Zen in group sits (no real help)
[Other studies will be listed in my answer. It is getting too lengthy here.]

I did my first longer vipassana retreat while I was a postdoc researcher (applied math and numerics), and did many more since then. I found it beneficial to have days/weeks dedicated for intense practice (which are tough, but you're in a protected environment) and then off-retreat time for work & other stuff. After retreats, I was mostly much more creative in work (especially after the first one; I finished within weeks papers I had been  writing for months), as retreats remove a lot of negative conditions which we carry around. Sometime there were difficult post-retreat states, true, but you want to learn to face those as well.
I would not be afraid that light (1 hours and such) daily practice will cause some substantial trouble in your life; it's more about seeing stuff which is happening anyway. If you have a competent teacher, he can help you to adjust your practice if you think there is some difficulty.
That said: if you have some serious psychological condition, don't forget to take care of it along the way, using also conventional means (psychotherapy, medication) as necessary. Traditional 3 Buddhist trainings are (1) personality (they call it "morality", but it is really about having a stable psycho-social basis, as I understand it) (2) concentration (3) insight; and the first one has to be strong enough to support the other ones.
Vipassana (=3) as such does not imply separate concentration training (=2). Some schools do that (e.g. Goenka which you seem to mention implicitly -- anapanasati, then bodyscanning) but the "dry vipassana" approaches (Mahasi and similar) don't; you do vipassana and build up concentration along the way.
Being a dry person, I personally do the dry vipassana. It is very important to include all 4 foundations of mindfulness (body, feeling, mind, mind objects) in the practice. High concentration is not necessarily good; I was depressive for years and had terrible (though successful) life as a result of being very concentrated and pushing stuff away without even knowing that. In fact if you are doing PhD, odds are that your concentration is rather high. You maybe hope that if you concentrate more, you will be more successful; maybe, but maybe you won't be very happy, and maybe you will run into burn-out. It is important to be flexible with concentration (to be able to release it), to not become its slave. Concentration sometimes causes people to be excessively serious.
PS (added): "Mindfulness-based" is sometimes used to refer to secular contemplative approaches often based on vipassana, such as MBSR (mindfulness-based stress reduction), MBCT (mindfulness-based cognitive therapy) etc. You will find both mindfulness/insight meditation used as translations of vipassana (meaning "seeing distinctly/clearly"); I personally find "insight" more appropriate, since insight is the goal and mindfulness (sati) only the means, though mindfulness might become prevalent, sounding perhaps less mysterious...

Insight meditation doesn't cause defilements.
Insight meditation causes one to be able to see the defilements that have always been there.
 Real education consists in drawing the best out of yourself. -Mahatma Gandhi

Have you tried the instructions from this booklet? Seems very basic and simple, but it's actually not easy to do and quite profound. I wouldn't intellectualize about it too much (like reading studies or books). Bhikkhu Bodhi used the analogy that this is like going into a restaurant, reading the menu and then leave without eating anything.
I'm linking this talk by Ajahn Sumedo which I personally found very helpful. I don't find the source, but there is a Buddha quote that goes like 'sati (mindfulness) is always useful'. So if you find time to even meditate on your breath that's great. Also just reminding in what posture you're in (sitting, walking, lying, standing) I find to be a very powerful tool.
I've never heard the term mindfulness-based, but in general mindfulness (= reminding, reaffirming what's present) is the practice and insight (= clear understanding, knowing) is the result (likewise if you clean your house cleaning is the practice, the clean house is the result).

There are 4 ways your meditation develops

(1) insight preceded by calm
(2) calm preceded by insight
(3) calm coupled with insight
(4) a mind seized by restlessness

(Yuga,naddha) Paṭipadā Sutta
If you take (1) - (3) calm and insight are both present but only different in order in which they are developed. Hence both are needed, through the order they develop will differ.
Also see: Samatha and Vipassanā, The Buddha Discovered Dhyana


text:
How to get to Nirvana?
I am very new to Buddhism.
What would be the most accurate way to practise and reach to Nirvana?
Did Lord of Buddha show us?

yes, Buddha showed it. @Hugh had given you an idea.

The fourth noble truth states that the path to ending suffering is the noble eightfold path.

Right view
Right resolve
Right speech
Right action
Right livelihood
Right effort
Right mindfulness
Right concentration

1 and 2 are the foundations of wisdom. 3, 4 and 5 are the foundations for virtue, 6, 7 and 8 are the foundations of meditation.
This is a very broad outline of the path to nirvana. You should be wary of people who give a simple precise description with promises of results like "Just follow my practice for 10 years and you'll be nearly enlightened".

The noble eightfold path is the way to reach Nirvana. However, often the noble eightfold path is misapprehended, where: (i) the wisdom component is misinterpreted in a manner that disconnects it from the rest of the path rather than has it lead the path; (ii) 'self-views' (about karma & reincarnation) are created from the morality component; & (iii) the concentration component is practised like hatha yoga, with all kinds of rigid & structured mind-body exercises.
Fortunately, in many places, the Lord Buddha summarised the path to Nirvana as non-attachment.
To practise the noble eightfold path most accurately, every factor must be based in non-craving, non-attachment & non-egoism. Otherwise, ideas about the noble eightfold path may be followed for more than 10 years, enlightenment may never occur and ideas about reincarnation will be created to postpone practise for a future life you imagine the noble eightfold path teaches about.
In summary, the Right View component explains: (i) attaching to the five aggregates is suffering; (ii) this suffering arises due to craving & new becoming in the here-&-now; & most importantly; (iii) this craving (attachment & ego-becoming) are to be abandoned. It follows the Right Effort & Right Mindfulness factors function to keep the mind in a state of non-craving, non-craving & non-egoism, as described as follows:

Of those, right view is the forerunner (leader). One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong view & for entering into right view: This
  is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter
  & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these
  three qualities — right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run &
  circle around right view.
MN 117

~~~

A monk develops mindfulness as a factor for enlightenment dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion (non-craving), dependent on
  cessation, resulting in letting go (vossagga).
MN 118

~~~

And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is mindful...abandoning greed &
  distress with reference to the world. This is called the faculty of
  mindfulness.
And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go
  (vossagga), attains concentration, attains singleness of mind. This is called the faculty of concentration.
SN 48.10

If there is ONE Sutta that tells in a nutshell the Factors of Enlightenment,  the Path to Nibbana, it is the The Greater Discourse to Sakuludayin (Mahasakuludayi Sutta) . MN 77 . They are:

The Four Foundations of Mindfulness
The Four Right Kinds of Striving
The Four Bases for Spiritual Power
The Five Faculties
The Five Powers
The Seven Enlightenment Factors
The Noble Eightfold Path

Just as an addition to all these quite detailed answers: As I understand it you can't get nibbana. This phrase is like an oxymoron. Nibbana is a word meant to describe the state of non-clinging, meaning you're doing less and not getting something new.

(With the risk that this only corresponds to a certain interpretation of Theravada buddhism, in particular based on Mahasi Saydaw and Sayadaw U Pandita's texts.)
Nibbana is "state" when mental processes (samsara, uniterrupted moment-to-moment arising of conscious experience) cease, thus it is a "state" called supramundane, outside of time & space. It is said to have a profound impact on how one relates to experience and can be achieved through vipassana (contemplation practice). Vissudhimagga describes 16 stages of insight naturally occuring during contemplation and the knowledge of fruition (phala-nana, #15) is just this. The reason why I put "state" and "experience" in quotation marks is that the "moment" is missing from consciousness (like discontinuity in time which you only realize when it's gone). "It" is never achieved permanently but its purification effects are lasting.
The very first "experience" of nibbana is called stream-entry (sotapatti) and it can be attained repeatedly through practice.
The Buddha said that Nibbana is achieved through vipassana (which cultivates wisdom, and rests upon morality/personality and concentration), as explained in other answers in more detail.

Please take a few seconds to explain your downvote(s).

Start walking through the Eightfold Path.  Keep the first step today.  so one day you will reach the destination. If you start your journey today Dhamma has the power to take you to the destination.  That is why lord buddha told "Dhammo hawe Rakkathi dhamma chaari".  It means those who behave within the Dhamma instructions Dhamma will protect them and take them to the Nirwana.  Control you Body, Words, and Mind avoiding unwholesome acts and engaging in more and more wholesome acts while practicing one of the meditation method. Continuous engagement of this life style will take you to the right place.

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


text:
Chop wood, carry water: why?
A very famous, so famous it may be apocryphal, zen quote says:

Before Enlightenment chop wood carry water, after Enlightenment, chop
  wood carry water.

What does this mean? Specifically, is the discourse saying that time without effort is wasted time?

I hope you don't mind if I close this as duplicate.

Admittedly, I am not a well-versed student of Zen ... or Buddhism for that matter. However, I will offer my interpretation: Before you achieve enlightenment you will have to do chores associated with everyday living. Then, even after becoming enlightened, you will still have to do the same chores - becoming enlightened does not remove the need to deal with everyday things.