text:
What did Buddha mean by the words "tranquillising the bodily formation" in the Anapanasati Sutta?

“Here a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty hut, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, and established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out.
“Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands: ‘I breathe out short.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body of breath’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body of breath.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the bodily formation.’

This passage is translated with the same words in my native language, but I don't understand what does it mean.
The other English translation translates this as "stilling the body’s motion". Does "tranquillising the bodily formation" means the same as "stilling the body’s motion"?

If you ask from meditation experience, when you do the step before, you are knowing all the beginning, middle and end of the breath. You do this till you are solidly concentrate on all start, middle and end of breath each breath without wandering your mind. Then you wish to soften the breath. It's without an effort happen. Then breath becomes softer and softer at point you can't find whether there is breath. At this moment concentration becomes strongest. But even at this moment one should try to find the breath and focus. First Dyana is the level this step completes.

"If "tranquillising the bodily formation" means "tranquillising the breath", then why didn't Buddha just said "tranquillising the breath"? – Damocle Damoclev"
"Tranquilizing the formation of body" or "stilling, calming, tranquilizing the construction of body", or "body-constructions", or most accurately "the identification with the intent to experience experience of the body", or "tranquilizing the breathing" or "stilling the body’s motion" or "releasing any inner neuroses manifesting as tensions and jerking in the body" and probably a hundred other ways of putting this are all saying the same thing but from different perspectives.
"Body" [ka ya = k-kha whatsoever], meaning in this case that which an individual considers to be 'his body', is an illusion formed from identification with the conjunction of name and form with consciousness thereof.
That which constitutes "Form" is different in different spheres of existence. In the human, it is formed at the point where earth (solidity), water (liquidity), fire (heat-and-light), and wind (motion) meet. In other realms the components (which are themselves views of a single phenomena from different perspectives - see: http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/an/idx_06_chakkanipata.htm#p41
are merged into the less tangible forms "resistance," "adhesion," "heat" and "light," and "motion" (animation).
'Breath' here is simply the movement of, or vibration of that light. It is at the point where the breath is calmed, stilled completely, that it is possible to distinguish between consciousness tied down to consciousness of form and consciousness not so tied.
This is the split of the mangos from the mango tree.
At that point it is possible, if one is aware that this is the freedom one has been seeking, to drop identification with that consciousness that has form as its object: one is able to see it as "not me" "not mine" "not my self" "not of myself" "other". Not seen as the freedom one seeks, that is temporary freedom; seen it is Nibbana.
It is for this reason that the statement is made: "Of Bodies, I say Breath is one."
Seeing, as does the ordinary human being, this body as the issue, the source of pain, an instruction such as "stilling the body's motion" or "releasing any inner neuroses manifesting as tensions and jerking in the body" is a correct instruction for the human level. This would make no sense to a deva of one of the realms above that of manusa where 'body' is perceived as purely light.
The Buddha's Dhamma is spoken of as Timeless because it was so worded that it could be heard with both ears: that of man and that of the devas.
That's why.

Given that the goal here is freedom, and that freedom takes the form (in this case) of: Abiding in body seeing body as it really is, seeing how it comes to be, seeing how it burns out, living above it all, watchful and diligent, reviewing and calming down, overcoming any hunger and thirst that may appear, downbound to nothing at all in the world; and being downbound to the world is a matter of being downbouond to the body (along with sense-experience, mental states and the Dhamma), the better reading of this would be 'stilling, calming, tranquilizing the construction of body', or body-constructions, or most accurately the identification with the intent to experience experience of the body.
Body is like a string made of light which vibrates. The more the individual is active in thought, word and deed, the greater the vibration. This practice is the practice of settling down that vibration.
There comes a point where escape from body is a matter of no longer 'doing' body.
But take a look at the instructions! This is something that you should be seeking to understand through your observations in sit-down practice, not by asking for the opinions of others. It says: "Seeing". This means it is there to see. Comes time for rebirth there's not going to be any help for you from anything but your memory. That is one meaning of this practice of memory (sati) building (patthana).  And further you will find yourself deeply doubting the authority of people you have never met and whose behavior you have never had a chance to view. Confusion at the time of rebirth, because your knowledge is not based on your own experience, will interfere in your ability to rationally deal with the rebirth process. And that is allowing Mara to dictate your next birth.
You (and not just you) need to learn to trust 'mind'. Set out with the intent to solve this problem of pain, this mind will doggedly pursue the task to the end. As long as you keep the intent straight (again and again review the Four Truths and the principles put forth in Samma Sankappa: abandoning, non-harm, and non-cruelty) and keep at it, you will not fail to arrive at seeing things as they really are for yourself.
PS (Just to clarify): This response refers to the Satipatthana practice and the question was asked about the Anapanasati practice, but in this case the answer would be the same.

Here are some excerpts;

"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. "In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications[sn41.006].
sn22.88; "Assaji, why are you troubled by remorse and regret?” 3“Formerly, venerable sir, when I was ill I kept on tranquillizing the bodily formations, but now I do not obtain concentration. As I do not obtain concentration, it occurs to me: ‘Let me not fall away!’”
*“On whatever occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, breathing in long, knows, ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing out long, knows, ‘I breathe out long’; breathing in short, knows, ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, knows, ‘I breathe out short’; trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out experiencing the
  whole body’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in calming the bodily formation;’ trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out calming the bodily formations’—on that occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief regarding the world.
“I say that this, bhikkhus, is a certain body among the bodies, namely, the breath. That is why on that occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body in the body, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief regarding the world.[mn118]
"In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself.

The commentaries also state that it is the body of breath that is calmed.
If one wants to make a case for it being a reference to the attainment of a particular jhana, it would be hard to argue against it, there are these excerpts;

“For the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breaths are thorns - an10.72
When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breaths have been stopped.
  When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has ceased.
When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has been calmed.
  When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has been stilled. -sn36.11

The pali wording would make it read more consistently where the calming and tranquilizing are the same word 'passadhi'.

The in-and-out breaths, are bodily formation.

Cūla Vedalla Sutta
So "tranquillising the bodily formation" means tranquillising the breath.

To do this, you should decide to make the breath tranquil, and go on being continuously aware of the breath from beginning to end. You should
  do nothing else, otherwise your concentration will break and fall away.

Knowing and Seeing Pa-Auk Tawya Sayadaw

This means that in step 4 you deliberately try to calm the breath.

Right Mindfulness Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu

If "tranquillising the bodily formation" means "tranquillising the breath", then why didn't Buddha just said "tranquillising the breath"? I mean, from the context, it seems to me that there can be many "bodily formations". I think that the answer I marked as correct is indeed correct.

He said; breath is a body among bodies and it is tranqulized in 4th jhana... there should be no debate here

@116PУC So you suggest that Bhikkhu Sujato was fundamentally wrong when translated this passage as "stilling the body’s motion"? Because "stilling the body’s motion" is still not the same as "tranquillising the breath".

Im not suggesting anything. If you read the answer i posted which is not at all speculative. The Sutta are clear on this matter and this is the orthodox Theravada position, is also the commentary interpretation. In this case it is easy to see how commy infers it because it's pretty much stated as is literally.

If you want more evidence look at sn22.88; "Assaji, why are you troubled by remorse and regret?”
3“Formerly, venerable sir, when I was ill I kept on tranquillizing the bodily formations, but now I do not obtain concentration. As I do not obtain concentration, it occurs to me: ‘Let me not fall away!’” +"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications - sn41.6

@DamocleDamoclev The word in question is kāyasaṅkhāra -- there are various dictionary definitions, one is here "a bodily motive force; physical motion", see also here "the material aggregate, substratum of body" etc.

This is why people decide to study pali. When you try to understand the sutta through differing English translations, you're often at the mercy of the translator, who may or may not have interpreted it correctly, are only partially, or only partially correctly under some contexts. But if you study all the pali sutta passages that explain that term or line, then you have a much better idea of what it means.
I've done a thorough study of the 16 steps here:
http://lucid24.org/sted/16aps/index.html

Here we dig through EBT passages from all suttas that reference the 16 APS, to gather what would essentially be the Buddha’s own commentary on the 16 steps.

A good starting point is looking at "step 4: pacifying bodily processes", where you get all the sutta references in the EBT that reference kaya sankhara (which is the phrase you're asking about):

SN 41.6, MN 44.15 -- why is breath a bodily-fabrication?

AN 4.38, AN 10.20, DN 33.13, DN 34.11 -- step 4 of 16 APS can take you to 4th jhāna
AN 9.31, SN 36.11, SN 36:15-18 -- breathing stops in 4th jhāna

In summary, pacifying "bodily processes" includes pacifying "breathing".

Thanks for your edit and explanation of why you posted that link (I didn't know how to interpret what you referenced). I reformatted your answer slightly, I hope it's clearer now and what you intended to answer.

You also wrote, "those are also hyperlinks which quote pali + english passages that don't cut and paste properly" -- which are the relevant hyperlinks are you referring to, which bits of text? Perhaps I can reference or copy those hyperlinks more clearly somehow, if I knew which "those" hyperlinks are that you're referring to (because I don't see many hyperlinks, except at the top of the page)?

"breathing stops in 4th jhāna" - do you mean, completely stops? This can't be possible.

chris, not in that particular document (yet), but in all of my more updated research articles, all sutta references will also be hyperlinked to the full suttas in pali+english. How did you produce the image png screen snapshot? Is there an easy way to do that?

damocle, we know free divers can hold their breath for 7 minutes, or something like that. 4th jhana breath stopping is not that. It can be maintained for hours. Whatever is actually going on in that state at a cellular level or through the skin, the lung breathing is so slow or suspended that the meditator's perception is breathing has stopped.

Yes SE's markdown doesn't support tables (one can instead render a translation as alternating lines of Pali and English). To produce the image, I used the Windows 10 snip tool to select the rectangle on my screen (also called a "screenshot") -- then in the markdown editor press Ctrl-V to paste (i.e. insert) the image from the clipboard into the message. Alternatively the snip tool can save the image to a disk file (instead of just the clipboard), and/or Ctrl-G in the markdown editor.

"tranquillising the bodily formation" means releasing any inner neuroses manifesting as tensions and jerking in the body as well as rapid, suppressed or otherwise troubled breathing.

I downvoted your answer, because you didn't provide a reference for it. It's a good answer, and its partially correct (does not address the kaya sankhara as in and out breath), but without a sutta reference, what's your justification for it?

Could it be an inaccurate translation?
The opinion of the author below seems to be that it should be "tranquilizing the body-conditioner" rather than "tranquilizing the bodily formations aka bodily conditions".
My summary:

Sankhara has 3 meanings: conditioner (that which conditions), condition (or the conditioned thing), conditioning (the process or activity)
The translation "bodily formations" implies condition i.e. the thing which is conditioned - in this case, it's the body and activities in the body
However, Buddhadasa Bhikkhu says, the accurate translation based on the context in this case, is body-conditioner i.e. tranquilizing the body-conditioner
What is the body-conditioner? It's the breath

I'll quote here the explanation of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu from his book "Anapanasati - Mindfulness with Breathing":

I would like to take this opportunity to discuss all the meanings of
  the term "sankhara." This is a very common and important word in the
  Pali scriptures, but many people have problems with it due to its
  different uses and meanings. Languages are like that, uncertain and
  seemingly unreliable. The single word "sankhara" can mean
  "conditioner," the cause that conditions; it can mean "condition," the
  result of the action of conditioning; and it can mean "'conditioning,"
  the activity or process of conditioning. We use the same word for the
  subject of the conditioning, "the concocter," as well as the object,
  "the concoction." We even use it for the activity, "the concocting,"
  itself. This may be a bit confusing for you, so please remember that
  "sankhara" has three meanings. The correct meaning depends on the
  context. This knowledge will be valuable in your further studies. (74)
Study the three meanings of sankhara in this body of ours. There is no
  need to study it in books or in a theoretical way. The body itself is
  a sankhara. It has been conditioned by a variety of causes and by the
  many things of which it is formed. Thus, it is a sankhara in the
  meaning of "condition." Once this body exists, it causes the arising
  of other things, such as thoughts, feelings, and actions. Without the
  body these thoughts and actions could never happen. Thus, it is a
  "conditioner" because it causes other actions. Lastly, in this
  flesh-body sankhara of ours, there is the process of conditioning
  going on constantly. We can discover all three aspects of the word
  sankhara within this very body.
  Study the meaning of sankhara in this
  comprehensive way. Then you will find it easy and convenient to
  realize more and more profound Dhamma as you go on. (75)
EXPERIENCING SANKHARA
In step three - "experiencing all bodies," experiencing both the
  breath and this flesh-body - each of these three meanings is
  practiced. First, we contemplate the flesh-body as the thing
  conditioned by the breath. Then, we see the breath as the conditioner
  of the flesh-body. Lastly, we observe the activity of conditioning
  that always exists simultaneously between the two of them. Thus, in
  the practice of step three we see the conditioner, the condition, and
  the action of conditioning. This conditioning of the body is the
  physical level of sankhara. We have not yet seen it on the mental
  level. Step three is this work of seeing these three things together,
  simultaneously and continuously, within the mind. Then, you will see
  everything concerning the term "sankhara," especially as it relates to
  the kaya and its activity, right here in step three. (76)
When we have studied this fact until it is plainly, obviously, and
  universally understood as explained above, then we will be able to
  experience all three of these facts together in one moment. Even for
  the duration of just one in-breath, or for just one out-breath, we can
  experience all three facts in just one stroke of the breath. If we are
  able to do so, then we have "fully experienced the kaya-sankhara
  (body-conditioner)" and step three is successfully completed. (77)
The essence of practicing step three is to know that there are two
  kaya, and to be able to regulate one kaya through the other kaya. That
  is, we can regulate the flesh-body through the breath-body. Once we
  are certain or this, once we see it dearly, once we are convinced by
  our experience of this fact with each in-breath and out-breath, then
  we have realized success in our practice of step three. (78)
STEP FOUR: CALMING THE BREATH
After we know that we can regulate the flesh-body with the
  breath-body, we begin to practice step four. The Lord Buddha described
  step four as "calming the body-conditioner (passambhayam
  kayasankharam)." We are able to do this once we know that we can use
  the breath-body to control the flesh-body. (79)
The subject of step four is to calm the body-conditioner
  (kaya-sankhara) while breathing in and calm the body-conditioner while
  breathing out. This means we can make the body-conditioner. (breath)
  calmer and calmer at the same time that we inhale and exhale. This is
  the matter which we now will explain. (80)
Note the specific wording of this step. "Calming the
  body-conditioner" refers to calming the breath-body. In step four,
  the aim of our practice is to calm the breath. We make it fine and
  peaceful using various techniques which are available to us. If we can
  calm the breath, there will be very interesting and powerful results.
  First of all, the flesh-body will become very gentle, relaxed, and
  tranquil. Then there will arise a calming of the mind, also. There
  will be other results as well, but they will be left alone until
  later. The immediate lesson is to calm the breath. To manage the breath
  is the first point to be considered in the practice of step four. (81)


text:
How to do the Koan study?
I want to work on the Koan,'What was your original face before you were born' and 'Who am I',How do I go about it.
Should I constantly ask myself this question? Should I write it down?
How is the Koan practise done?

I would not see either question as a koan but as just a question. These are two of the crucial questions all truth-seekers ask, and the answer would be same in each case.

additional data re the situation & quiet contemplation development could be helpful for specific suggestions for consideration of the koan.

with koan study most of all, it's just not gonna work without a teacher... sorry. just repeat the koan to yourself as you meditate haha

Koans break the intellectual mind and require deeper investment.

SN41.6:1.4: “Householder, there are three processes. Physical, verbal, and mental processes.”

Practice a koan physically, verbally and mentally. For example, walk with it, speak it and feel it.
This sounds mysterious, but is actually practical. To walk with a koan, one might attend to "left foot original face", followed by "right foot original face". When meditating, one could silently speak the koan. To feel it one could look at anything that appears as "this tree original original face feels tall", "this car original face feels fast". And so forth. In other words, tie the koan into everything seamlessly.
In this way one discovers "original face" and can answer the Roshi by presenting the original face. It takes much practice because most of us are distracted by other stuff day-to-day and moment-by-moment.
My koan was Joshu's Mu. Everything was Mu. Same practice, however.

Thank you for the answer but can you please be more verbose and more elaborate as to exactly how to do, walk speak feel it. Sorry if I am being annoying.

Apologies for my terseness, I tend that way overmuch. Added more text for clarification.

"Hey, Newbie!  What was your original face before you were born?"
Choose ONE koan. Not two. Of the two you refer to, I recommend 'original face', unless you are spending a LOT of time with your teacher, as the second one will become a philosophical fiasco otherwise.
Don't rationalise. It's not a philosophical or intellectual exercise.
Ask yourself the question when you are not thinking about it.
Lots of Zen practitioners write it down. Paint it. Draw it, etc.
Does it help? Maybe.  Maybe not.
Don't talk about it. It's your practice. Don't talk about your practice except to your teacher. Maybe your students, one day.
Importantly, it's not a question about rebirth. You don't need to believe in rebirth in order to realise this koan.
Also, and paraphrasing @OyaMist's answer, also, there's nothing special about you either.  So when you perceive anything, you can ask yourself in that moment: "what was its original face before it was born?", whereas for @OyaMist, it's often "does it have the buddha nature?"
The main, core, essential process?  Just sit.
It's going to kill you. That's the point. But don't lose your life. If you are on the correct path, the path itself is an enriching and empowering experience. Hard work sometimes, painful sometimes.
I have heard of students kicking and screaming; having to be literally dragged to sanzen. Maybe ask yourself: Why is that?

Maybe a koan is provided, maybe by The Teacher, when appropriate, and might be selected by The Teacher for the Student: there are a number of documented koan. Asking what to do with it/them, eg. is a start. Maybe some patience, and typically koan mightn't be suggested to someone right away etc. Describing koan with words is sort of counter to koan. Maybe consider it some, and develop quiet contemplation. Thats maybe more when addressing koan would be done more. Maybe aren't lots of specific schedules for it either in terms of months, years etc. Maybe write them down, or, they're brief enough, may be able to remember them. Attempting to consider koan at the outset & before some development of quiet contemplation may tend to result in less effectiveness.

All of the answers given so far are correct, but ultimately incomplete.  Your practice will not be effective until you learn to work with samadhi.  Koans will never reveal themselves to you unless you sit facing emptiness.  There's a stock passage from the sutras that describes the nuts and bolt of koan study (and really all forms of insight practice):

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished,
  rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to
  imperturbability, I directed it to..." (MN 4)

We enter samadhi to brighten our minds and temporarily rid ourselves of our coarser defilements.  When we shift these obstacles to the side, we are better able to work with our original minds and directly see what the koan is pointing at.  Our smaller mind is simply unequipped to perceive what the bigger mind is capable of investigating.  It works with logic and language.  The big mind we access through samadhi, on the other hand, works with the unintelligible fragments of our store house consciousness that koans seek to address.  Put another way, trying to answer a koan without samadhi is like trying to hear a symphony with your nose.  Your nose is great if you want to smell a flower, but it is useless for the purposes of listening.  Koan study requires that we direct the proper, purified sense to the case we are given.
Before you embark on koan study, it is absolutely essential that you learn to purify your mind and body.  Work with your breath.  Master doing nothing.  Mingle your eyebrows with those of the patriarchs and pass the barrier where the foaming billows wash the sky.  Until you do, koans will remain inaccessible.

Man, downvoted?  Apparently 15 years of Rinzai practice ain't worth the price of admission!

yes, that seems sort of grim, irrespective of veracity considerations: it certainly isn't mean sounding; plus, it includes/ alludes to: What is the smell of Riceplanting Song Singing, and, What is the sound of The Flower.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is there a Buddhist school / tradition wich recognizes the endless cycle of rebirth but doesn't teach that we should get liberated from it?
And even more, that we should embrace it and accept it (while at the same time avoiding the sufferings) ?

Zen, Tibeten...-folkbuddhism? At least most Mahayana "Bodhisattas" wish to be the last liberated.

Many Mahayana Buddhist traditions believe that liberation is specifically freedom from suffering rather than freedom from being present in the universe.
But suffering is not to be avoided. It is to be prevented. The avoidance of suffering is what binds us to it.  Recognising it's root causes and eliminating them is the journey to enlightenment.
This is why 'Right View' is so important within Buddhism. When we are able to see that the root cause of our misery is the mistaken view that sees permanence where there is none, sees joy where there is none, and sees self-existence where there is none, then our new view engages in a transvaluation of our experiences.  Because of this transvaluation, our attitude towards some things will invariably change.  For instance, we may look at a new car in a showroom - and just see it as a source of new trouble rather than as a source of joy.
So accepting and embracing the continuum of rebirth is to be encouraged; But to accept and embrace the unmodified, ignorant view of the transitory, empty, miserable shit-hole of the unenlightened state, and holding onto the idea that there is joy to be found in it - that's not a buddhist thing.

Embracing samsara and avoiding suffering is an oxymoron, since samsara equals suffering. Therefore it's impossible and goes against the four noble truths. If the definition of buddhism is adherence to the four noble truths, the answer to your question is no.
To complicate things, i am sceptic that buddhism teaches that we should liberate ourselves from samsara, but i'm probably getting caught in semantics now. My point is that buddhism says there's a way out of samsara, without imposing the noble eightfold path on people.

Some Buddhist schools such as Dhammayutaa tradition believe in Nibbana as an objective reality. The opponent's Buddhist schools argue that the objectification of Nibbana is not inline with Buddha's teaching.

References to that and what is a non-objective-reality? Aside of that, what has this answer do with the question?

I don't think there are Buddhist schools that teach this explicitly.
There are some that say don't train for the cessation of suffering in this life, instead you can be a Buddha in some trillions of years, when you then pass away you go to the special Buddha heaven from where you can keep interacting with people stuck in Samsara for all of eternity.
Basically i don't think there is a school which would put it like this "our goal is to stay in samsara" but if one analyzes the doctrine it might turn out that their Dhamma is counterfeit and doesn't lead to liberation because it's closer to sci-fi than reality, complete with impossible worlds, a soul and other unforunate ideas of how things work.

The entirety of Buddhist teaching is about how one can achieve long-lasting happiness. No Buddhist school teaches that we MUST get liberated from suffering. But IF you want to get liberated, THEN Buddhism offers a path. If one has already achieved long lasting happiness, then there is no need of Buddhism. Similarly, if one does not want to end one's suffering, then there is no need of BUddhism. To talk of samsaric cycle, is to talk about the endless cycle of suffering. To come out of the ednless cycle is synonymous to ending suffering. Buddhism, taught out of compassion, will always teach about how one CAN come out of the endless samsaric cycle.

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


text:
Is there a ritual free form of Buddhism?
Is there, aside from Secular Buddhism, a sect or tradition of Buddhism that does not include rituals and chanting as a part of it's liturgy?

Yes. Zen. Rituals are a minority interest in Buddhism anyway, and I'm not sure the word 'liturgy' is appropriate beyond the context of theistic worship.

Yes, it starts with reaching the path, Sotapanna, for every one, althought it should not be understood that path conductive practices are abound, but natural. Who ever did not reach the stream will have problems with conductive practice, thinking "childstuff" and eager seek "ritual free" outwardly, suitable to ones defilements. Vhanting isn't a ritual abond by Noble Ones, but a way of reflection and remember the original Dhamma, if that is used for it. So the question might be contradicting itself, good householder. First things first, and the teaining starts with body and speech.

For such a minority interest, it sure is done by a majority of Buddhists. Rituals are useful even for the highly attained.

Yes. The "original tradition" i.e. of the time of the Buddha himself, did not have a lot of the rituals and customs that are practised today.
There was some recitation of the Dhamma and Vinaya, but it did not amount to liturgical chanting in the Buddha's time. Certainly, monks did not chant for blessing, in the Buddha's time. Recitation was just a form of recollection, as it was initially an oral tradition. Recitation of the Dhamma and Vinaya did not have mystical effects.
There were no statues or idols or images in the Buddha's time, and certainly no rituals were performed to those idols or images. There were stupas, as we could find in DN 16, but those were just memorials for inspiration and not for worship. In fact, the tradition of making Buddha images originated centuries after the Buddha, influenced by ancient Greek art.
There were no Buddhist temples in those times. Only monasteries and some stupas.
The Buddha strongly criticized astrology, palmistry, divination and such practices in DN 2.
Prayer beads or rosaries, mandalas, incense etc. all came much later and was not part of the original tradition.

Chanting isn't necessarily ritualistic but it can be. Probably no such traditions.
The way people worship nowadays with statues and rituals seems to have gained popularity some 500 after Buddha's death.
There is a version of a pali vinaya that has a story of Buddha not allowing statues of him be built but making an allowance for the statue of a Bodhisatta. Either way the Earliest Buddhist imagery is exclusively footprints and symbolism.
I guess some people don't care much for the rituals but it's deeply established in populations and is more or less present in most if not all communities.
The common cultural traditions and buildings are for the utter most part no older than 300 years.


text:
Is practice of Vedanta a prelude to practice of Buddhism?
Prince Siddharta was schooled in Vedanta, which was the predominant philosophy prevailing in India 2500 yrs ago. Majority of Buddhists today seem to have ignored the study of Vedanta and dived into the deep end of mastering the Tripitaka first, especially Abhidhamma. 'The Path of Purification' - Visuddhimagga - has referred to the learning of the 'Three Vedas.' (vide Chapter XII.44 of Bhikkhu Nanamoli's English translation). Given the fact that not many yogis become Arahants today, is it possible that Buddhists need to master the fundamentals in Vedanta first, as the Buddha himself would surely have done in his youth?

Edit to add:
What might the answer be, if this question asked about "the Vedas" instead of "Vedanta"?

You changed Vedanta to Vedas. Could you keep the original question and add a new section below?

Answered a similar question here https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/35974/buddhas-relation-to-hinduism

I find the question rather muddled.The Vedas predate the Buddha. The Upanishads bring the Vedantic teachings into line with Buddhism. I see the choice between Shankara's Advaita and Mahayana as just a matter of preferred methodology.and aesthetics. The Buddha rejected the Brahmanic vedanta of his time, but then so did Shankara. Seems to me your question doesn't allow for all the subtleties.

My understanding is that the Vedas focus initially on the basics of Life and Living. The Buddha  showed a Path to Enlightenment. Today many yogis spend time ''seated on cushions'' expecting some spiritual experience without  first mastering the basics of Life and Living spelt out in the Vedas, before graduating to seeking  Nibbana.  I believe, 2500 yrs ago the Art of Life and Living as taught in the Vedas, was practiced in every household. The Buddha expounded his doctrine from this launchpad. On the contrary,  21st century households have Eastern and Western launchpads.

No, but candidates from kamma-believing sects have been prefered by the Buddha, in regard of ordination and giving teachings, good householder, and are also the most taught found in the Suttas.

If you read the Vedanta page on Wikipedia, you will find this info:

Vedanta or Uttara Mīmāṃsā is one of the six (āstika) schools of Hindu
  philosophy.
Some of the better known sub-traditions of Vedanta include:

Advaita Darshan - established by Adi Shankara (788–820 CE)
Vishishtadvaita Darshan - established by Ramanujacharya (1017–1137 CE)
Dvaita Darshan - established by Madhvacharya (1238–1317 CE)
Bhedabhed (or Dvaitadvait) Darshan - established by Nimbarkacharya (c. 7th century CE)
Shuddhadvait Darshan - established by Vallabhacharya (1479–1531 CE)
Achintyabhedabhed Darshan - established by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486–1534 CE)

On the other hand, if you read the Wikipedia page on the Buddha:

The times of Gautama's birth and death are uncertain. Most historians
  in the early 20th century dated his lifetime as c. 563 BCE to 483 BCE.
  More recently his death is dated later, between 411 and 400 BCE, while
  at a symposium on this question held in 1988, the majority of those
  who presented definite opinions gave dates within 20 years either side
  of 400 BCE for the Buddha's death. These alternative chronologies,
  however, have not been accepted by all historians.

So, Vedanta came after the Buddha, and I suspect that Advaita Vedanta appeared as a philosophical response to Buddhism.
So, the Buddha could not have studied Vedanta, and this question is moot.

Please see my response above.

As Ruben2020 has answered well, Vedanta came after Buddhism. Secondly, even if Vedanta came before Buddha and is somehow a pre-requisite for Buddhists, Buddha himself would have mentioned this and so would have the various traditions of Buddhism. Neither does Buddha mention this (in fact he entirely rejects the Brahminic philosophy) nor does any surviving tradition or school of Buddhism mention that vedanta is to be mastered. Furthermore, while it is true that Buddha mastered some other techniques, he did not find them satisfactory. Therefore he did not teach those techniques and developed his own.

There may be some confusion on the term Vedanta. In India, Vedanta is associated with the Vedas, a philosophy which goes back to over 5000 yrs. Two of the Buddha's teachers Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputra were versed in the Vedas. The Buddha disagreed with these two teachers on certain issues only and not the philosophy per se. Since the Vedas was the accepted philosophy at the time, I believe it was not necessary for the Buddha to advocate its teaching. The Vedas enunciate the eternal principles of Life and Living.   In order to be more specific, I have edited the question.

@DevindaKalupahana As an Indian, I assure you Vedanta connotes the Vedanta school of philosophy. All schools of Hindu philosophy associate with Vedas. The 2 great masters were indeed well versed in philosophy that goes back to 5000 years. Buddha did not disagree with them on Philosophical issues because Buddha did not philosophise. Vedanta philosophy, whether as the school that came up in 7th CE or any other school associated with Vedas, are fundamentally different from what the Buddha taught and what the later buddhist scholars philosophised. After having learned them, Buddha rejected them.

Please see my response to Peter J above.  I've been following an online course conducted by the Vedanta Institute, Colombo which is affiliated to the Vedanta Academy in Poona. As a Buddhist, I was inspired by the very fundamentals of Life and Living, which are covered on this course. Somehow these fundamentals do not attract the same emphasis in the Doctrine of Buddhism, where the focus is more on practicing the 37 x Aids to Enlightenment. I thought that the Buddha too, would have endorsed these fundamentals of Life and Living, whilst focusing on showing '"The Way'' to Enlightenment.

An understanding of the Vedas, in particular the Upanishads, can indeed inform Buddhist practice by providing key references and context. Yet there are points of difference which might present challenges and confusion when applied to actual practice. For example, the Chandogya_Upanishad discusses essential practice (per Wikipedia):

The Chandogya Upanishad opens with the recommendation that "let a man meditate on Om".[21] It calls the syllable Om as udgitha (उद्गीथ, song, chant), and asserts that the significance of the syllable is thus: the essence of all beings is earth, the essence of earth is water, the essence of water are the plants, the essence of plants is man, the essence of man is speech, the essence of speech is the Rig Veda, the essence of the Rig Veda is the Sama Veda, and the essence of Sama Veda is udgitha

In contrast, the Buddha emphasizes right practice (i.e., the Noble Eightfold Path):

MN117:34.3: Right view gives rise to right thought. Right thought gives rise to right speech. Right speech gives rise to right action. Right action gives rise to right livelihood. Right livelihood gives rise to right effort. Right effort gives rise to right mindfulness. Right mindfulness gives rise to right immersion. Right immersion gives rise to right knowledge. Right knowledge gives rise to right freedom.

And what is right view? Venerable Sariputta explains how right view is rooted in the skillful:

MN9:3.1: “A noble disciple understands the unskillful and its root, and the skillful and its root.  When they’ve done this, they’re defined as a noble disciple who has right view, whose view is correct, who has experiential confidence in the teaching, and has come to the true teaching.

He explains further what is skillful:

MN9:6.2: Avoiding killing living creatures, stealing, and sexual misconduct; avoiding speech that’s false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical; contentment, good will, and right view.

Because of these differences, Buddhist practice doesn't require the practice of the Vedas. However, the richness of the Vedas truly provides a marvelous context for understanding nuances in Buddhist scriptures such as:

DN18:20.2: “What do the good gods of the Thirty-Three think about how much the Buddha has acted for the welfare and happiness of the people, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans?

Buddhist do not need to master the fundamentals of Vedanta or Vedas. I myself(although I do not consider myself as Buddhist) have not read any Vedas but I understand what Buddha says because Buddha teaches about Suffering, Origin of Suffering , Cessation of Suffering and Path leading to Cessation of Suffering and nothing else. It is always good to have knowledge of all prevailing religions because we might get tempted by those philosophies and we should know why there is no solution in those belief systems.
Mainly Buddha teaches true Dhamma. Dhamma which leads you to dispassion and ultimately Nirvana.
If you study it you will find there is no mention of Vedas or Bible or Quran.

To answer this comment ...

Somehow these fundamentals do not attract the same emphasis in the Doctrine of Buddhism, where the focus is more on practicing the 37 x Aids to Enlightenment. I thought that the Buddha too, would have endorsed these fundamentals of Life and Living, whilst focusing on showing '"The Way'' to Enlightenment.

... as well as the original question, some people find that studying more than one religion (or more than one teacher) helps to increase their understanding of "everything" and sheds some new light what they learned previously.
On the other hand some people warn against it, e.g. that it might be a mistake to view Buddhism through the perspective of another religion.
It is true that the Gautama studied with several teachers before he was enlightened, and that many of the suttas are intended for Brahmins and so on.
I think there's quite a lot in Buddhist doctrine about "fundamentals" -- for example it is called a gradual training, it emphasises virtue as a basis, and generosity, and teaches about ideal versus harmful interpersonal relationships.
I don't know how Buddhism is taught, in your experience, I guess it's possible that the "emphasis" isn't on fundamentals.
I found this book interesting -- The Buddha's Teachings on Prosperity: At Home, At Work, In the World by Bhikkhu Basnagoda Rahula -- I think that shows that the Buddha's doctrine does include fundamentals for laypeople, even if you haven't heard them emphasised before.
I also think that different religions differ in their metaphysics -- for example, is there a God, or many Gods, is there eternal life, what happens after death, is there a soul, what are the divine or doctrinal commandments, how can we get supernatural assistance, what is the authoritative text and lineage? But that different religions might tend to say similar things about fundamentals, or see them in a similar way -- maybe respect for teachers and parents, something about social duty and maybe selflessness, and so on.
I read vedas in translation a long time ago -- wasn't taught them, didn't find them very interesting at the time, have forgotten them, so I can't quote them in this answer. But to pick a different example, i.e. Christianity, it's my opinion that the list of Christian "sins" ...

Lust
Gluttony
Greed
Sloth
Wrath
Envy
Pride

... is a pretty good match for some of the Buddhist doctrine. If that hadn't been a "emphasis" or "focus" when you learned Buddhism, then if you studied Christianity after that then you might have asked this question, i.e. "Is practice of Christianity a prelude to practice of Buddhism?"
I guess my answer is that it can be (and sometimes is) a prelude. But that it doesn't have to be, because Buddhist doctrine is large -- and it claims to be complete, i.e. teaching everything that needs to be known.
It's most likely true though that different teachers (and students) might somehow "emphasise" or focus on different parts of the doctrine. That's true in ordinary secular school too, when you're growing up the curriculum teaches different things in different years to different ages.

These inputs are  invaluable.. There appears to be no attempt however -develop Buddhist fundamentals into a Structured Methodology to build the launchpad that the Vedas and the Bible provide.  The Vedanta Academy in Poona conducts a 3 yr course to make the Vedas "user friendly."  https://www.vedantaworld.org/about/vedanta-academy   In contrast, the Introduction to the Path of Purification p.xli (Bhikkhu Nanamoli) goes way beyond "User Friendliness" to a 'Strict Regimen' i.e.the Unique System to reach Nibbana, put together by Buddhagosa. In between these two, there appears to be a yawning gap.

The yawning gap referred to in my comment above, occurs due to the absence of the launchpad provided by the Vedas or the Bible. and not as erroneously stated above by me.

@DevindaKalupahana I didn't read the Bible when I was a child. Instead they (teachers) taught the elements of Christianity, which they thought were suitable for children, at "Sunday school". I don't think that the Bible is better or more suitable for children than the Sutta Pitaka, at explaining fundamentals. It was the teachers not the book, the "church" (i.e. the christian equivalent of the "sangha") who organized lessons for children and for parents. Is there not something equivalent to that in your experience?

We do have Sunday School, yet not structured and less likely to make an impact to serve as a launchpad. My original question was the need for such a launchpad as a stepping stone to realizing Nibbana. The Vedanta Academy in Poona is an exception and as you can see from the video the stress is on Life and Living. Regrettably even in India today, this is the exception than the rule. In Buddha's India, youth were not chasing jobs, cars, smartphones and computer games! In Sri Lanka, private tuition classes for A/L or O/L is the order of the day, not the fundamentals in spiritual learning.

It would be like studying metaphysics before physics or studying both in tandem.
It's a completely different system of thought & expression.
It might be helpful where the metaphysics happen to seem aligned with truth but it's generally wrong & useless.


text:
Electric current during meditation
There have been some similar questions, but still not quite the same.
Whenever I want to (not only during meditation), I can generate an electric current.
I sort of have to open up at the third eye, do something in my gut area, and then can direct it, or hold it a short time.
I also seem to be able to pass it on to others.
What can or should I do with this? Or should I just ignore it? But it feels right, to use and play with it.
Thanks for any input

Don't play with yourself during meditation.  You're wasting your time and I hear that you can go blind if you do it too often.
Seriously, though, what you are experiencing is just your own internal energy.  Call it qi, call in prajna, call it whatever.  It's important, but if you get obsessive about it, it's going to undermine your meditation practice.  Buddhist meditation is about liberation.  It has nothing to do with working with subtle bodies, astral projection, or healing your Aunt Milly's lumbago from across three continents.
It's important that you don't try to raise this energy.  Any forced, willful manipulation of it is completely artificial and potentially nothing more than self delusion.  Removed from the hindrances, secluded, putting aside grief and covetousness for the world (including feeling that energy), it will rise all of it's own accord.  When it does, just let it do what it's going to do.  It will probably start to feel different.  It may disappear entirely.  You might also start to feel uncomfortable tension in your body; most likely you'll start to get antsy...whatever happens just sit in it.  Don't move.  Eventually, you will pass through a barrier.   On the other side of it, all of that will dissolve and you will be left in a place that feels spacious and open.  That's where you ought to be aiming for.
Don't expect this to happen all at once.  It will most likely take several years of practice.  You might get glimpses of it here and there, but let me assure you that when you finally arrive there, the experience will be unmistakable.  Then your practice actually begins!
For now, put everything else aside.

Thank you, this is helpful. So this is maybe what the vrittis in yoga are describing? I can completely neglect it during meditation, since it comes and goes by my choice. But I thought, I could somehow accelerate with it, whatever I am trying to achieve during meditation.

There are different types of Pīti:

Weak rapture only causes piloerection.
Short rapture evocates some thunder "from time to time".
Going down rapture explodes inside the body, like waves.
Exalting rapture "makes the body jump to the sky".
Fulfilling rapture seems to be a huge flood of a mountain stream.

Going down rapture explodes inside the body, like waves.

May also feel like a current or flow running through your body.
As with any meditation experience, this is a product of:

past accumulated conditioning, and
conditioning created by meditation.

None of which are in your absolute control.
So thinking along these lines:

I sort of have to open up at the third eye, do something in my gut area, and then can direct it, or hold it a short time. I also seem to be able to pass it on to others.

as these experiences are not fully controllable.
Dwelling or trying to control these experiences as mentioned:

What can or should I do with this? Or should I just ignore it? But it feels right, to use and play with it.

also lead to attachment which is counterproductive to the goals of Buddhist meditation.
One can try to develop mastery over the Jhana factors with caution so that this does not lead to attachment and distraction from the goals of meditation.

Ok, thank you for your advice. I will put it aside and focus on my meditation


text:
How to experience Karma?
Today I realize that, if something good or bad happens to me, it is caused by Karma. It gave me a huge relief. Because before I would experience aversion when something bad happened to me. But now, I believe that I am 100% responsible for whatever happens to me.
But, As I know, not everything is caused by Karma. There are some other reasons such as whether, Dhamma etc. So how can I know the real cause behind something for sure? (Is it Karma or some other cause?)
It is said that someone needs to experience the truth to understand the truth. So how can I build a solid understanding of the cause behind things and Karma?

You're experience in every second. Every moment. Your life is also.

Yes. It's true that not everything is caused by karma. Some things are caused by other reasons, like the weather. The Sivaka Sutta talks about this. There's a summary at the bottom:

Bile, phlegm, and also wind,
  Imbalance and climate too,
  Carelessness and assault,
  With kamma result as the eighth.

The Acintita Sutta states that you can't work out karma and its results precisely:

"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is an
  unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring
  madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

What's more skillful is to develop one's virtue (sila), concentration (samadhi) and wisdom (pañña) as stated in the Lonaphala Sutta. That will mitigate the ill effects of past karma.

It is said that Someone needs to experience the truth to understand the truth.

Not necessarily, there's something called logical inference. If you see someone being stabbed in the groin, by just witnessing the painful expression on their face is enough for you to infer about the excruciating pain they're going through. You'd never ask the attacker to also stab you in the groin in order for you to "understand the truth", would you? Similarly for the Buddha's teaching. The thing with Kamma is that until one's already at a high level of attainment and possessed those supernormal powers like being able to see previous lives, there's no way to 100% see exactly the working of Kamma. That doesn't mean one cannot logically infer about its direction. Also, the Buddha's teaching in the Safe Bet Sutta offers some very useful and pragmatic insight into why one should spend some time contemplating on His teaching about Kamma.

Try get a better grasp on how the word is used in the pali Sutta;

Intention (pali Cetana), I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect.
"And what is the diversity in kamma? There is kamma to be experienced in hell, kamma to be experienced in the realm of common animals, kamma to be experienced in the realm of the hungry shades, kamma to be experienced in the human world, kamma to be experienced in the world of the devas. This is called the diversity in kamma.
"And what is the result of kamma? The result of kamma is of three sorts, I tell you: that which arises right here & now, that which arises later [in this lifetime], and that which arises following that. This is called the result of kamma.
And what are fabrications? These six classes of intention (cetana)

Here Sutta method of expression is that what is Called Kamma is also called Intention and what is called intention shares meaning also with word Fabrications sankhara.
Reasoning is that they are comorbid, conjoined coexistant and tied up. It's somewhat like the elements of both mass and speed are known & inferable from the one notion of 'a moving object'.
When you have a moving body, you know there is speed element and a mass element. Here they arent the same but one can't take speed out of the moving object as to separare mass from speed but they are different elements with clear difference in how we think about when seeing them with intellect.
Mind is different to a moving object, for one It arises as one thing ceases as another

Contact, reverends, is one end. The origin of contact is the second end. The cessation of contact is the middle.
“The past, reverends, is one end. The future is the second end. The present is the middle. And craving is the seamstress …

When further it is expressed;

"And what is the cause by which kamma comes into play? Contact is the cause by which kamma comes into play.

Contact is also a cause for dependent origination of other elements one can think about as conjoined with sankhara or think about in general, it's dependent origination all classes of the perceived & conceived. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html#part-5
What one experience that one knows, what one knows that one cognizes, what one cognizes that one perceives, what one perceives that one senses, what one senses that is brought about [fabricated, sankhata],what is fabricated is conceived, what is conceived is inacted [verb conceiving, ie past conceiving is done, performed, inacted; is, will be or has been inacted]; what is inacted (kamma) is intended(cetana)
Is my method of expressing it.

To put it very simply, karma [sanskrit] (kamma[pali]) is usually translated as action, a sort of cause-effect relation. Therefore, if you subscribe to the view that all things that happen in the world happen due to causes and conditions, then you are subsricbing to karma. If, on the other hand, you subsrcibe to the view that there are things in the world that do not happen because of any cause or condition (that is, nothing is responsible for their coming into being and neither are they resonsible in producing any effect) then, there is no karma.
As per Buddha and very important BUddhist scholars, we are a collection of phenomenon ourselves (the 5 aggregates). Each aggregate is a result of causes and conditions being satisfied and their coming together is a cause for the individual phenomenon. One is thus a phenomenon (dharma[sanskrit] dhamma[pali]) oneself and therefore, like all phenomenon, a karma- arising due to causes and producing effects. To experience karma, is in this way, akin to experiencing the phenomenon fo aggregates. Or simply, one's life is nothing but fruition of accumulated karma.
Since we are ourseleves, like every other dharma, a truth; to experience the phenomenon (mind-body, from grossest to subtlest) is to experience the truth, knowing the truth (likewise from boradest to the deepest) experientially.


text:
What are the texts which say or imply what the Buddha looked like?
My ignorance of Buddhism will show here, so please forgive me, but I've seen many depictions of the Buddha with hair, seemingly after his Bodhisattva form. I've also read that these might actually be snails which represent Buddhist philosophy rather than actual hair.
I've seen other posts on here, but none referencing the actual text. What do the texts actually say about the appearance of the Buddha?

The Marks of a Great Man
Lakkhaṇasutta
===========
The Buddha said this:
Bhagavā etadavoca:
“There are thirty-two marks of a great man. A great man who possesses these has only two possible destinies, no other.
“Dvattiṃsimāni, bhikkhave, mahāpurisassa mahāpurisalakkhaṇāni, yehi samannāgatassa mahāpurisassa dveva gatiyo bhavanti anaññā.
https://suttacentral.net/dn30/en/sujato
Further discussion.
https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=28550&hilit=Buddha+look+like

Sometimes the Buddha was invisible.

MN49:26.10: And while invisible I recited this verse:  ‘Seeing the danger in continued existence—that life in any existence will cease to be—I didn’t welcome any kind of existence, and didn’t grasp at relishing.’


text:
How to stop thinking about metaphysical questions?
I have been practicing seriously for a month now. I'm mindful a lot of the time but not 100% yet and whenever I'm not I start thinking about metaphysical questions or what could be after death or if it is nothing etc. How can I stop this? Or how to stop thinking about something in general when you don't want to? For some reason I can't be equanimous with metaphysical questions. They run through my head like there's no tomorrow and nothing more important than that. It's quite annoying. Would noting help?

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/25630/8527 check that answer.

@116PYC thank you

As a metaphysician I feel there's no reason not to think about such questions and much to be gained, just as long as its not an obsession and you don't expect to get any simple yes or no answers. After all, it would be necessary to think about metaphysics to see what Nagarjuna was getting at. The idea is not to allow such thinking to become a waste of your time, as it so easily can become.

@peterj it's become a waste of time for me. I wouldn't mind talking about it etc. but it's making me depressed thinking about it so much and it's overwhelming. I would rather stop the suffering for me around it.

@peterj and I don't know what to gain from it except for accepting that I don't know

@buddhismcuriousity - Whether you can gain from it would be entirely dependent on your circumstances and, more crucially, how you go about it. It's main value is to prove the plausibility and logical soundness of Buddhist doctrine, while for a practitioner it may be an effective guardian against error. But if it causes problems best to take the Buddha advice and wait to discover the answers in practice rather than theorise.

@peterj yes thanks that's what I was thinking. I'll gain more from it when actually learning it from practice instead of therorizing. For me at least. Thanks for the comments

Practice Vipassana meditation using breath or walking. This will help you to contemplate on wholesome thought. If you want to stop Vitakka and Vicara you have to practice Samatha meditation. Vitakka and Vicara stop at second Jhana which is I have not experienced myself. Being aware that your mind is unrest alone is meditation. If you can increase this awareness, you will improve your meditation eventually.

I've been practicing vipassana now for around 4 months. Will check out the other mentioned methods though. Thanks

My suggestion is to stay with Satipathana. Vitakka and Vicara (thoughts) are not such a bad thing as far as they are wholesome thoughts. It is pleasant to have wholesome thoughts and lead to Nibbana. The second Jhana is a temporary state. Air for a more permenanent state.

Take a look at the suggestions in the Discourse on the Relaxation of Thoughts or also called the Discourse on the Removal of Distracting Thoughts.
Below, let me summarize the techniques found in that sutta or discourse. This is the recommended sequence. If the first one works, you don't need to go to the second one.

Think about something else, which is skillful
Scrutinize the drawbacks and unskillfulness of the distracting thoughts and see how they result in suffering
Pay no attention to those distracting thoughts
Force yourself to stop thinking about those distracting thoughts
With your teeth clenched and your tongue pressed against the roof of your mouth - you should beat down, constrain, and crush your mind with your awareness.

Thanks  I'll check it out.

I can actually give you an answer...but would that satisfy you? Would you trust this stranger enough to trust her words?
"metaphysical questions or what could be after death or if it is nothing etc"
The answer is neither of those things happen. What happens is something that you cant imagine. Its impossible to imagine, it is unfathomable. If it could be experienced through a break down of the body (NDE), it would still be innefible (unexplainable or impossible to put into words.) This being the case, it is not a matter to think about but to experience. You can actually uncover this knowledge through deep meditation, the eightfold path, total purification of the heart and mind. This is what the buddah and thousands buddahs and thousands arhants have done; they have diligently practiced to the point of reaching this total wisdom about the fabric of reality. They could not think about it, it is inefficient to think about it...they practiced their way into it. The knowledge fell on their lap so to say, as inevitably will happen to an ascetic practicing meditation diligently and with loving compassion and luck.

Recite a mantra like Buddho each time you think of it. Then, you'll eventually break the habit

Don't you think metaphysics is only a grammar-playing with "transcendental" or "universalia" !?

You play with concepts when you ask about the border between the finite and infinite or about the place where the space is ...

Better paint something as a kind of vipassana ...

Better learn new language and you'll see new paradigms of metaphysics ...

Metaphysics is rendering Language as Reality. Grammar as Physical Law. That's why The Buddha answered wth epoché to Metaphysical questions and added PRACTICE IN PHYSICAL LIFE and body's (Sati)patthana.

“IN THEORY
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICE,
IN PRACTICE
THERE IS.”
&
“You can observe a lot
by just watching.”
— Yogi Berra

This typifies the Zen approach to koan practice, in which the master gives the student a koan which cannot be answered by conventional methods. This eventually causes the student to break down which in Zen is called The Great Doubt. This is seen as the breaking down of the intellect which can cause a myriad of unsettling symptoms - annoyance being one such symptom - but leads to a more refined and fluid version of mental processing.
In your particular case, the koan you unwittingly stumbled upon might be "what was your original face before your parents were born?"


text:
How to deal with post meditation frustration?
I agree I may be impatient here. I am doing Zazen and Anapan sati like breath awareness for quiet a while now. But I get no results, no satori and no Jnana and no present moment breath awareness.
This creates frustration after meditation as I dont go into silent spaces. This creates discouragement for sitting for next time.
Can someone please point me a way to look at this in a somehow positive way and keep me encouraged.

Some advice given by Ajaan Fuang in "Awareness Itself":

§ "When the meditation goes well, don't get excited. When it doesn't
  go well, don't get depressed. Simply be observant to see why it's
  good, why it's bad. If you can be observant like this, it won't be
  long before your meditation becomes a skill."
§ "Everything depends on your powers of observation. If they're crude
  and sloppy, you'll get nothing but crude and sloppy results. And your
  meditation will have no hope of making progress.

And also others:

§ "Other people can teach you only the outer skin, but as for what
  lies deeper inside, only you can lay down the law for yourself. You
  have to draw the line, being mindful, keeping track of what you do at
  all times. It's like having a teacher following you around, in public
  and in private, keeping watch over you, telling you what to do and
  what not to do, making sure that you stay in line. If you don't have
  this sort of teacher inside you, the mind is bound to stray off the
  path and get into mischief, shoplifting all over town."
§ "Persistence comes from conviction, discernment from being mindful."
§ "Persistence in the practice is a matter of the mind, and not of
  your posture. In other words, whatever you do, keep your mindfulness
  constant and don't let it lapse. No matter what your activity, make
  sure the mind sticks with its meditation work."
§ "Meditating isn't a
  matter of making the mind empty, you know. The mind has to have work
  to do. If you make it empty, then anything — good or bad — can pop
  into it. It's like leaving the front door to your home open. Anything
  at all can come strolling right in."
§ A young nurse practiced meditation with Ajaan Fuang several days
  running, and finally asked him one day, "Why wasn't today's session as
  good as yesterday's?"
He answered: "Meditating is like wearing clothes. Today you wear
  white, tomorrow red, yellow, blue, whatever. You have to keep
  changing. You can't wear the same set of clothes all the time. So
  whatever color you're wearing, just be aware of it. Don't get
  depressed or excited about it."
§ A few months later the same nurse was sitting in meditation when a
  sense of peace and clarity in her mind became so intense that she felt
  she would never have a bad mood infiltrate her mind again. But sure
  enough, bad moods eventually came back as before. When she mentioned
  this to Ajaan Fuang, he said, "Looking after the mind is like raising
  a child. There will have to be bad days along with the good. If you
  want only the good, you're in for trouble. So you have to play
  neutral: Don't fall in with the good or the bad."
§ A student came to complain to Ajaan Fuang that she had been
  meditating for years, and still hadn't gotten anything out of it. His
  immediate response: "You don't meditate to 'get' anything. You
  meditate to let go."
§ The seamstress, after practicing meditation with Ajaan Fuang for
  several months, told him that her mind seemed more of a mess than it
  was before she began meditating. "Of course it does," he told her.
  "It's like your house. If you polish the floor every day, you won't be
  able to stand the least little bit of dust on it. The cleaner the
  house, the more easily you'll see the dirt. If you don't keep
  polishing the mind, you can let it go out and sleep in the mud without
  any qualms at all. But once you get it to sleep on a polished floor,
  then if there's even a speck of dust, you'll have to sweep it away.
  You won't be able to stand the mess."

Sometimes expectation may lead to conterproductive meditation.

The place where not even a needle can enter I will leave aside for now, but when the
  foaming billows wash the sky, what will you do with yourself then?
A monk asked Kyorin, "What is the meaning of Bodhidharma coming from the
  West?"
  Kyorin replied, "Sitting long and getting tired."

Imagine you just started running.  Your first day out, you put your feet to the pavement and start jogging.  Those first couple of minutes are exhilarating.  You exalt in the feeling of your body exerting itself.  For a brief moment, you feel like you could go all day.  Then reality hits.  All of those days on the couch, all that bad food, all that laziness hits you right around the quarter mile mark.  You are sucking wind and life is sucking generally.  Why in the hell did you even bother?  Running is terrible!
Meditation is no different.  When we first start sitting, our minds are in horrible shape.  While those first couple of minutes may feel wonderful, eventually the reality of our spiritual flabbiness becomes apparent.  We become plagued by doubts.  Our minds feel terribly unsettled.  After about ten minutes, maybe our legs even begin to hurt.  What was a blissful, uplifting practice ten minutes ago suddenly goes to hell.  Meditation sucks.
I'm not going to lie to you.  If you are sincere about your practice, meditation is going to have frequent sucky moments that you are going to have to contend with.  It's an essential part of the process.  But like the Hekiganroku tells us, "if you run away from arrows and evade swords you will be a failure in Zen" (Case 17).  You have to confront these challenges.  Just like jogging, or the last couple of reps when you're lifting weights, that edge space of difficulty is where small, incremental change happens.  Unless you visit that place again and again, your practice won't get any stronger.  Learn to embrace difficulty.  When it comes, you are growing.  Frustration is cause for celebration.
There are no bad sits save for the ones that you don't do.  Don't crave silence.  Don't crave difficulty.  Simply work with what the sit gives you.  If you're consistent, eventually those small changes will add up and that barrier you are currently facing will topple.  You may not notice this as having happened, but one day you will plop down on the cushion and have a sit that will make Manjurshri himself jealous.

Everybody wanna be a bodybuilder but don't nobody wanna to lift no heavy ass
  weights."  - Ronnie Coleman

Know thyself!
Frustration, anger, discouragement, depression and such as are related emotions are reactions to unpleasant sensations and can be a result of two opposite factors: Either you have not trained properly in generosity (especially in the mental generosity of the four godly thoughts) ethical behavior, self-control, or knowledge of the Dhamma before attempting jhana; or your jhāna practice has been successful enough to bring about withdrawal and the resulting withdrawal symptoms from some bad habit.
Unpleasant sensations arise as a result of meditation when you are untrained in the basics because you have mentally progressed to a refined (peaceful) state of mind while your active behavior is still in a crude state producing crude results.
In this case you should analyze the situation: These are bad states of mind. When bad states of mind are increasing and good states of mind are decreasing, you should stop doing what you are doing.
Do your yoniso-mana-sikaro (investigate the phenomena down to its point of origin). There you will see: "This unpleasant sensation is a consequence of ... lack of generosity, unethical behavior, lack of self-control, or lack of knowledge of the Dhamma." And, putting aside emphasis on your meditation practice, develop knowledge of the Dhamma, generosity, ethical behavior, and self-control.
If you see that the case was that of unpleasant sensations arising as a result of ending a bad habit (e.g., hard-drug withdrawal; going from gluttony to one meal a day; the beginning stages of the practice of celibacy; etc.), the symptoms will pass relatively quickly and you can re-evaluate the situation (tracing the unpleasant sensations back to their point of origin): "This was actually a good state that was increasing," and you can again take up the meditation and here you should register awareness that you need to control your reaction to unpleasant sensations.
It is an interesting phenomena that when an unpleasant sensation is perceived as a symptom of withdrawal from a bad habit (that is, that it is a good thing), the perception of the sensation itself will change and be experienced as pleasant or not unpleasant-but-not-pleasant. See the section on 'sensation' in the Sati-patthana Suttas:
http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/dn/idx_digha_nikaya.htm#p22

Well, first of all, you've really got to stop waiting for something to happen.
One way of looking at it is - travelling on the path to enlightenment is like being on a bus.
At any moment, in session or out of session, you are either on the bus or you are off the bus. Your work is to stay on the bus.
If you aren't sure if you are on the bus or are off the bus, you are off the bus.
If you have lost recollection of keeping on the bus, you are off the bus.
If you have forgotten why you want to be on the bus, you are off the bus.
Stay on the bus.
Don't worry about the depot.  Just stay on the bus. Enjoy it. The only struggle is that which you bring to it.
When can you remain on the bus in every moment, effortlessly, and with joy - then you won't be worried about getting to the depot any more.
Enjoy the journey!

Short and sweet answer; you are tied to these ideas. You say you are doing Zazen, breath meditation...that you do not achieve Jhanna, etc...all this talk of concepts and ideas is not what meditation is about. Just sit down and breathe and try to stay outside and off your phone for a whole day.


text:
Do insects feel less pain and humans more?
Buddha has asked to refrain from killing. However if small insects do not feel any pain then what is the harm in killing them?
To simply put :  Do insects feel less pain and humans more ?

Does good householder feel lesser pain then my person? Who knows how much pain good householder feels?

What ever runs after existance, life, does actions, seeks food, is driven by pain. Who runs fater after food, the insect or good householder?

If yoor idea worked then it would okay to kill human beings as long as we don't cause them pain. And I have no idea how we could prove that any other beings feels pain or pleasure or anything at all. In philosophy this is the 'other minds' problem.

The purpose of the precept is to protect you and lift you up in terms of virtue (sila).
Undertaking the first precept of not killing is about changing YOUR state of mind.
It's so that YOU become compassionate, wishing for happiness of other beings, and not have violent and harmful tendencies.
Cultivation of virtues also has the effect of freedom from remorse, which leads to enlightenment. This is according to AN 11.1.
Also, please see this answer.

I do not agree entirely with ruben2020's answer. The precept is VERY MUCH  to protect the small insect as well. If it were only about protecting onself and lifting onself up in terms of virtue, it would be a very selfish endeavour. It certainly is about changing one's state of mind.

@HomagetoManjushri I'll remove the first sentence. But I would say that the focus of Theravada and Mahayana may be different.

Yes you are right. Though I prefer to use the word emphasis. But focus is also a good word to use nonethelss. But we might get off topic here!

All living things feel pain. Feeling pain is a mark of having a life. What seperates insects and humans is that we not only feel pain, but also suffering. Pain is in the physical body. Suffering is in the mind. Buddhism is about the end of suffering. Pain, a physical thing, is unavoidable since we have a physical body in the world and things happen. But the suffering, which is what we make of pain (physical sensations), is in the mind. That is an important difference between pain and suffering.

From where does good householder know that certain being do only have bodily pain and no mental? Is such even possible?

Read the answers carefully. Nowhere has HomagetoManjushri written that "certain being do only have bodily pain and no mental". But, understandably, we are all masters of our own inferences.

So what should be the different between pain and suffering, householder pointed out serial times in his answer?What ever stress/suffering not bodily is called mental stress. Physical=body.

I agree with Ruben's answer because it answers correctly from virtue point of view.I also agree with HomagetoManjuShri but I think I need add few more thoughts to it.
First and foremost , All beings are capable of experiencing suffering. The suffering is a result of grasping of five aggregates. Different beings grasp at different level. For example if you kill an ant it may not mean much but if you destroy an ant colony it hurts the whole ant family. Moreover Buddha said there is no being which is immune to suffering. Had it been so he would have recommended that state of existence as bliss. There is intelligence everywhere. Insects are also capable of expressing that intelligence and experiencing pain. If we compare human suffering with the suffering of an ant , I think human would like to be an ant because there is so much less suffering. But when change occurs all beings suffer the pain and lamentation which grows with level of grasping of five aggregates. Therefore humans or insect may or may not experience same level of pain. Intensity of pain depends of level of attachment which varies from being to being.   So why hurt anyone ? You never know how much pain they feel.


text:
How can the world's youth discover careers that are aligned with consciousness and Buddhism?
Millennial's and the young workforce are faced with a difficult choice of discovering alternate careers/gigs. Can spirituality, universal consciousness, meditation, environment trigger a human-plus careers?

Good householder, interested,
It's good and praiseworthy if one is after encouraging youth to moral and generosity and righteous way of live, blameless, Sadhu.
To trace out a good path, finding good ways, by listening and conviction in what the Buddha taught, is a very individual issue (matter of Nissaya, Upanissaya, conditions worked out with past and present deeds), like all else. That there are mostly less, very less, who encounter the Dhamma of a Sublime Buddha is very normal, but who ever goes after the highest blessings, if not yet gifted, would match the right track.
Ideas about a universal consciousness are ideas not found in the Sublime Buddhas teachings but generally the moral and ethic is on a fast decaying track currently, so actually hard for many, if even eager after right livelihood and freedom from remorse.
How ever, as individual, as the Sublime Buddha told, if it would not be possible, he wouldn't have encouraged to it, but because right conduct, leading to right livelihood is possible, the Buddha taught not only right effort, but the prerequisites and steps after it toward even highest independency and unbound.
(Note: this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks but for liberation from this wheel bond to the world)

Yes certainly!!
But let me make a couple of points clear.
So long as one thinks of a career in terms of a money-making exercise and therefore looks at Buddhism, one will make a business out of it and render it extremely useless, if not harmful. Any teaching of compassion demanding money in return is not compassion at all.
But if one thinks of a career as a means to earn livelihood to live in the world, there is no problem.
Now about which career.
That is a question each should think for herself/himself. Buddhism certainly doesn't tell anyone what to do in their lives in terms of career.
One can learn from Buddhism, how to be at peace and achieve long lasting happiness and avoid all negative emotions. Buddhism really is a teaching about winnng the war within, aligning oneself with spirituality, consiousness, nature, wisdom, compassion. When one is at peace within, happy within, then career choices and the exercise of career itself will bring nothing but peace and happiness to oneself and others.

There are many teachings by the Sublime Buddha, good householder, on how to work, trade, even about duties...so "Buddhism certainly doesn't tell anyone what to do in their lives in terms of career." would:'t be right (maybe for certain Buddhism just. At leat the Buddha didn't taught anything else than what to do and what not to do. Maybe good householder, after good investigation, likes to edit his answer, so that he might not lead others wrong in the name of the Tripple Gems.

@SamanaJohann The teachings such as you mention, are directed at particular people or at a particular group. They are not meant as general teachings for everyone. As for this distinction- right for certain Buddhism not for others- these disctinctions are all philosopphical (therefore interpretation) based. Not based on the actual teachings of Buddha. Again, let me be very specific- Buddha taught how to end suffering. Depending on certain students' position in society, he offered advice. The teachings on how to end suffering are meant for all. The advice is meant for particular students.

@SamanaJohann Furthermore, as you correctly write, many teachings by Buddha are about how to be a good householder, how to work etc. That is what I have answered- the teachings are about 'how to'; not about "what to'. Thus, if one is a trader, there is a teaching on how to be a good trader. But there is no teaching which says one should be a trader or not. This is what I mean. (And you should not assume that it's a he answering :))

Sigala Sutta contains advices for students, for example, all, as well as about duties of all kind of stuff, master...

"This is what I mean", then good to write so, or?

Yes, advice on how to be a good student. NOt that one should be a student studying in a university or one should be a business person. WHatever career paths one chooses, teh advice and teachings are on how to be a good person, therefore, a good student or a good business person. This is the point I am trying to convey.

I think any career which allows one to practice the five precepts, Right Livelihood, Right Speech and Right Action (which includes the five precepts) without any obstruction, is a career that is aligned WITH Buddhism. I think we should not make lay Buddhism more complicated than it should be.
Of course, a career as a monk or nun or lay Buddhist teacher is a career IN Buddhism. That's different.
Here are the five precepts:

I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

Here's a reminder of Right Livelihood from AN 5.177:

"A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which
  five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat,
  business in intoxicants, and business in poison."

Also from MN 117:

And what is wrong livelihood? Scheming, persuading, hinting,
  belittling, & pursuing gain with gain. This is wrong livelihood.

Here's a summary of Right Speech from SN 45.8:

"And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive
  speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right
  speech."

Especially in view of the current corona pandemic this is a very relevant question. Clearly modern economic plans are falling apart. Even the strongest economies in the world are severely affected. It is quite possible that our denial of climate change,  lack of sensitivity to all beings (not only human), exploitation of the weak by the strong, making financial profit the sole purpose of work, scant regard for spirituality etc., are a few of the many causes for this pandemic. Analyze the other possible causes/factors that have contributed to this sorry state. Use this analysis to carve out a new model, based on the advice given by the Buddha and other spiritual leaders, to create a society based on Righteousness. Ensure that this society is climate friendly and where possible close to nature, people friendly i.e. community based, measuring success not in terms of dollars made but in terms of the level of contentment achieved at all levels and work ethics that are in concert with religious ethics. With such a model, there is hope for a "New World" for the Young. Bhutan is a country that measures growth, not in terms of GDP but in terms of GDH (H for Happiness)! Yes, you can!

I am Gen Z, born in 96. The difficult choice is as it has always been--to go against the current. To cross over to the other side.
"Leaving the way of darkness, let the sage cleave to the way of light: let him leave home for the homeless life, that solitude so hard to love (Nirvāna). Putting away lust and possessing nothing, let the sage cleanse himself from every evil thought."
"Few cross over the river. Most are stranded on this side. On the riverbank they run up and down. But the wise man, following the way, Crosses over, beyond the reach of death."
I do not wish to make a living but to extinguish. There is no living to be made. Work just like everyone else, or beg just like everyone else (for food and water and shelter, to maintain the body for the purpose of the holy life.) But to think of using the dhamma as a career is sacriligious and not the dhamma (firstly, it is Wrong View.)
To think of a career or of money while thinking of the dhamma is to not understand the dhamma. It is not about ideas or intelectual stimulation, its an actual practice, and the practice literally consists in going ALL IN, in being a recluse, a meditator, a mendicant, a hermit, owning nothing, eating once a day, spending the days in open air. Its a practice based on unbinding, detachment, dispassion. This is the path. Out of compassion it has been clearly expressed to us by the Blessed One. It is explained in full, with little to no contradiction. There are thousands of acounts of monks who following the path have achieved true fufilment and complete wisdom and happiness. This being the case, Do with the dhamma as you see fit, you own your actions and your thoughts--your fate depends on these.
The reply above says
"That is a question each should think for herself/himself. Buddhism certainly doesn't tell anyone what to do in their lives in terms of career."
Buddhisms main teaching is the Eightfold Path. It is the entirety of the path. It starts and ends with the 8fold path. The Eightfold Path consists of Right Livelihood. This is extremely important.
If this comes off as antagonistic, please dont think of it as such. I am very nice. It just that when writing you dont hear tone of voice, expression, facial gestures, etc. Much love.


text:
What's the meaning of "Pāli" and its relevance in regard of the Buddha's Dhamma?
Do you know about the etymology of the Pāḷi word “Pāḷi”, how it breaks up and from what root it is formed etc.? And can you recall any more or less lengthy scholarly or otherwise discussions to which you could kindly refer me to? I know it is a Dravidian loanword, but I remember having came across some papers or books trying to elaborating on it also from a standpoint of Pāḷi philology. It would be very grateful if possible give ways to find out more about the significance of the word and it's meaning.

In a comment Samana Johann linked to this answer -- Pāli Etymology Question -- which suggests (with references) that the etymology of the word is related to its role in preserving the Dhamma ... for example, “dam”, “dike”, “bridge”; or “to recite”; or  “protecting”.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

According to British philologist and Professor Emeritus of Indian Studies at Cambridge University, Kenneth Roy Norman, Pali was mistakenly made to be the name of the language of the Canon. He explains how, below. He also links it to the Canon.
From "The Pāḷi Language and the Theravādin Tradition" (1983) by Kenneth Roy Norman:

The dialect  of Middle Indo-Aryan which is found in the texts of the
  Theravadin  Buddhists and usually called "Pali" by European scholars
  is nowhere so called in the Theravadin canon. The word pāli is found
  in the chronicles and the  commentaries upon the canon, but there it
  has the meaning "canon" and is used in the sense of a canonical text
  or phrase as opposed to the commentary (aṭṭhakathā)  upon it. This
  usage is made  clear by the  fact that  the  word pāli sometimes
  alternates with tanti.
It would seem that the name "Pali" is based upon a misunderstanding of
  the compound pāli-bhāsā "language of the canon", where the word
  pāli was taken to stand for the name of a particular bhāsā,
  as a result of which the word was applied to the language of both canon and
  commentaries. There is evidence that this misunderstanding occurred
  several centuries ago.

According to Bhikkhu Bodhi (from here - taken from "In the Buddha's Words" (2005), Wisdom Publications, page 10):

Scholars regard this language (Pali) as a hybrid showing features of
  several Prakrit dialects used around the third century BCE, subjected
  to a partial process of Sanskritization. While the language is not
  identical to what Buddha himself would have spoken, it belongs to the
  same broad language family as those he might have used and originates
  from the same conceptual matrix. This language thus reflects the
  thought-world that the Buddha inherited from the wider Indian culture
  into which he was born, so that its words capture the subtle nuances
  of that thought-world.


text:
Why am I getting upset after meditation and sleepy during meditation?
I've started to meditate in recent days. After meditation, one day I feel happy and the other day I feel upset, angry and depressed. Also, at the end of the meditation I feel like I just woke up from sleep.
Why is this happening to me? Is there any solution to overcome this issue?

Ven. Vijithananda said this is due to practicing Samatha meditation. When you practice Samatha you have the irritation towards any disturbances to your meditation such as sound and the people around you. You also irritated for not being able to experience that meditative happiness.
As per Ven. Vijithananda, sleepiness is some sort of progress (defeating four Maras) however you have to go beyond sleepiness.
The solution for this is to practice Satipathana.

Are you sure you’re not just noticing your regular mood fluctuations?  Meditation makes us more aware of our internal states.  Without sitting, we are often oblivious to what’s going on within us.  When you start sitting, you begin to notice the good along with all the time you really spend being tired, despondent, and annoyed.

This happens because the meditation lack alertness. You focused on calmness without cultivating vitality. That will surely bring about drowsiness, and it leads to sleepiness.
In this state of non-wakefulness, of non-clarity, discernment is very weak. So, it's easy for any mental obscurations such as anger or sadness to build up without your noticing. So, by the time you 'got up' from the blurry state, your mind is filled with them.
Here's an easy way to prevent this: Meditate with your eyes open.

Meditation link people easily to the spiritual world including underworld as well.  This is why lots of people declared that they can “see” the ghost or other beings without physical bodies in spiritual world and at the same time they usually have physical or mental health problems because the ability to “see” is die to them being possessed by the spirit.  So it is not recommended for ordinary people to do meditation especially without being guided by a professional around.  The safest way to reach enlightenment is by reciting for an example in Guanyincitta Yin Citta Dharma Door the daily homework’s and combined mantras called Little House paying back karmic debts.  With the debts reducing for the time being, one will live healthy and happily since the spirit/karmic creditor and the karmic obstacles are the root reason for problems.

It is good that you take note of your mind throughout the day.
When you discern these mindstates you can learn how to they come into being and start to discriminate which states get to direct your behavior, eventually one can attain seclusion from unprofitable states and get deep into meditative composure.
Things you might want to study on this are sutta dealing with;
- timely development of factors of enlightenment
- denourishment of 5 hindrances
- stilling of distracting thought sutta
- 36 mental explorations mn140
- honeyball sutta
- verbalizations of craving sutta
- noble search sutta