text:
Dhamma riddle? What does it mean?
I found a dhamma riddle below.
What do we think it means?

The first one represents desire, grasping something whose roots are impermanent.
The next ones look like Tathagatagarbha.

OK. ChrisW gets the prize because he appeared to provide a good answer using wisdom & reasoning. Well done. Saddhu.

Some of these pictures are found in Teaching Dhamma by Pictures By Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu with the meaning. Following are the relevant pages:

You cheated!! Your answer does not count! You spoiled the fun, naughty Suminda!

Ah, but the guidelines of a 'good answer' state that one should avoid: "Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references...".

Honorable Dhammadhatu, I think you are just unhappy because he 'spoiled your fun'! :>)  Oh, and does 'based on opinion' include giving answers 'using wisdom & reasoning' without explaining the reasoning? Perhaps a question for another thread? Best, Jim

Āvuso Suminda found a published answer.
While it may sound strange of me to disagree with the author, I prefer:

The elephant is the ignorant mind with three asava (taints), per MN 9.
The frog (croaking) is vedana or feelings.
The snake is craving.
The bird is self-becoming (bhava) attached to (upadana) five branches (khandha) being chewed up by birth, aging, illness & death (impermanence).

What I find particularly profound or explanatory by the pictures is how dependent origination is not depicted as 'linear' but as something 'growing', 'building' or 'compounding' from within, with all conditions 'co-dependently-arising-together'.

The foot print of the elephant is able to contain the foot print of all other animals.
MN 28 - Maha-hatthipadopama Sutta: The Great Elephant Footprint Simile.

Ven. Sariputta said: "Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.

and:

Dependent Co-arising
"Now if internally the eye is intact but externally forms do not come into range, nor is there a corresponding engagement, then there is no appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness. If internally the eye is intact and externally forms come into range, but there is no corresponding engagement, then there is no appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness. But when internally the eye is intact and externally forms come into range, and there is a corresponding engagement, then there is the appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness.
"The form of what has thus come into being is gathered under the form clinging-aggregate. The feeling of what has thus come into being is gathered under the feeling clinging-aggregate. The perception of what has thus come into being is gathered under the perception clinging-aggregate. The fabrications of what has thus come into being are gathered under the fabrication clinging-aggregate. The consciousness of what has thus come into being is gathered under the consciousness clinging-aggregate. One discerns, 'This, it seems, is how there is the gathering, meeting, & convergence of these five clinging-aggregates. Now, the Blessed One has said, "Whoever sees dependent co-arising sees the Dhamma; whoever sees the Dhamma sees dependent co-arising. And these things — the five clinging-aggregates — are dependently co-arisen. Any desire, embracing, grasping, & holding-on to these five clinging-aggregates is the origination of stress. Any subduing of desire & passion, any abandoning of desire & passion for these five clinging-aggregates is the cessation of stress. And even to this extent, friends, the monk has accomplished a great deal.
"Now if internally the ear is intact...
"Now if internally the nose is intact...
"Now if internally the tongue is intact...
"Now if internally the body is intact...
"Now if internally the intellect is intact but externally ideas do not come into range, nor is there a corresponding engagement, then there is no appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness. If internally the intellect is intact and externally ideas come into range, but there is no corresponding engagement, then there is no appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness. But when internally the intellect is intact and externally ideas come into range, and there is a corresponding engagement, then there is the appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness.
"The form of what has thus come into being is gathered under the form clinging-aggregate. The feeling of what has thus come into being is gathered under the feeling clinging-aggregate. The perception of what has thus come into being is gathered under the perception clinging-aggregate. The fabrications of what has thus come into being are gathered under the fabrication clinging-aggregate. The consciousness of what has thus come into being is gathered under the consciousness clinging-aggregate. One discerns, 'This, it seems, is how there is the gathering, meeting, & convergence of these five clinging-aggregates. Now, the Blessed One has said, "Whoever sees dependent co-arising sees the Dhamma; whoever sees the Dhamma sees dependent co-arising." And these things — the five clinging-aggregates — are dependently co-arisen. Any desire, embracing, grasping, & holding-on to these five clinging-aggregates is the origination of stress. Any subduing of desire & passion, any abandoning of desire & passion for these five clinging-aggregates is the cessation of stress.' And even to this extent, friends, the monk has accomplished a great deal."
That is what Ven. Sariputta said. Gratified, the monks delighted in Ven. Sariputta's words.


text:
Is Uposatha on full moons or specific days?
I want to start observing Uposatha, but I'm a little unclear on what days it is. I'm finding calendars that it is the days of full moons in Sri Lanka or other countries. Should it just be celebrated on full moons then? For example, I'm in the Midwest of the USA, the full moon in September is September 6 but I'm seeing Uposatha to be August 5 on calendars. Which dates should I observe on? Also, am I correct that the eight precepts to be practiced on Uposatha are:

Do not take life
Celibacy
Do not speak false, no lies
Do not steal
Do not use any intoxicants
Only eat one meal between dawn and noon (does this need to be vegetarian to fit in with the first precept?)
Do not use a luxurious bed that night, so sleep on a sleeping mat on the ground

Are these correct?

I want to start observing Uposatha, but I'm a little unclear on what days it is. I'm finding calendars that it is the days of full moons in Sri Lanka or other countries. Should it just be celebrated on full moons then?

You can use the calendars from e.g. Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar etc.
More importantly is the practice itself, ie. the deepening of ones practice on special days of the months. Its really that which is essential from a practical Dhamma perspective.
The Wikipedia describes it as;

The Buddha taught that the Uposatha day is for "the cleansing of the defiled mind," resulting in inner calm and joy. On this day, both lay and ordained members of the sangha intensify their practice, deepen their knowledge and express communal commitment through millennia-old acts of lay-monastic reciprocity. On these days, the lay followers make a conscious effort to keep the Five Precepts or (as the tradition suggests) the Eight Precepts. It is a day for practicing the Buddha's teachings and meditation.

You can use full moon days in your country or you can use the traditional calculated calendar days.

Also, am I correct that the eight precepts to be practiced on Uposatha are. Are these correct?

The Eight Precepts are:

Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.

Adinnadana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

Abrahmacariya veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from sexual activity.

Musavada veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.

Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

Vikalabhojana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from eating at the forbidden time (i.e., after noon).

Nacca-gita-vadita-visukkadassana mala-gandha-vilepana-dharana-mandana-vibhusanathana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from dancing, singing, music, going to see entertainments, wearing garlands, using perfumes, and beautifying the body with cosmetics.

Uccasayana-mahasayana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyamiI undertake the precept to refrain from lying on a high or luxurious sleeping place.

In the comments you asked about the 1st precept;

And should the meal before noon be vegetarian to coincide with the first precept?

Several factors must be fulfilled in order to break the 1st precept.
The five factors of the first precept are:

pano -- presence of a living being.
panasannita -- one knows that it is a living being.
vadhacittam -- the intention to kill.
upakkamo -- the effort to kill.
tena maranam -- the resulting death of that being.

If one of these factors are not fulfilled, the precept is still intact.
For more information, please see "Ask A Monk: Mark Zuckerberg, Vegetarianism and Killing" by Ven. Yuttadhammo.

Thank you. And should the meal before noon be vegetarian to coincide with the first precept?

I've updated my answer to include your question.

Buddhists practice eight precepts to learn buddha's teaching and practice samatha-vipassana at forest monastery.
Nowadays, most of upasaka can not  go to forest monastery at uposatha-days, such as me, so I think "day-off" is the best day to done eight precepts. On day-off, we can learn and practice samatha-vipassana, without any other jobs.
Uposatha-day is the day that people make an appointment together to do  eight precepts, learn, and practice samatha-vipassana. So the date  is up to your appointment with your teachers and practicer-friends group.
It is look like sunday, that is day off of christian to go to church to learn with pastors.
This is thai moon calendar
https://www.myhora.com/%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%8F%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%99/

If you want to find out the traditional days you can use a moon phase website. E.g. https://www.timeanddate.com has moon phases. For Waterloo following are the moon phases: https://www.timeanddate.com/moon/phases/usa/waterloo. For other US cities you can browse USA: https://www.timeanddate.com/moon/phases/usa/.
For the purpose of Uposatha the day is counted from sunrise to sunrise so start at sunrise and keep it up until the following day's sunrise if possible.
The general days are:

the new moon,
the full moon, and
the two quarter moons in between

or in Burma:

waxing moon,
full moon,
waning moon, and
new moon

Since generally you are free on weekends or other holidays you can use these to practice. You do not have to be strict on the days.
Similarly the time you can have food is between sunrise and solar noon. You can find the sun rise and and the solar noon: https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/waterloo
Regarding eating it is advisable to be strict to keep to the precepts. General rule of thumb of breakfast at 6:30 and lunch at 11 will keep within the normal sunrise and solar noon times, unless there are daylight saving adjustments or in time zones where there is disparity the solar position.

"Which day is Uposatha?" is a good question and very importand for Bhikkhus who even need to ask if not knowing. Since it is not easy to answer, best keep the Uposatha always, like Upasaka Lanka already mentioned in his answer.
Actually, althought the Buddha allowed his monks to learn the calculation of the full moon and half moon days, there seems to be no (public/broadly know) transmission.
Since the day depends on the certain location (note that the day starts at sunrise not at 00:00! to understand, which can be very different), althought the event of full or empty is equal for the whole world, is best to request or inform you from the Bhikkhu-Sangha where you took/asked/declared refuge and received the precepts or you follow, if not avaliable, your near personal community.
The simple counting, starting from the full moon day, is eight and then fourteen/fifteen days. So it matches 29 Days a month. Since a moon-month has a little bit more than 29 days, different traditions compensate it in different ways.
As for the traditional observing and gathering days (note that the more often or even always, the better: To the Sakyans (on the Uposatha)) they are held "weekly" (see Upasaka Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena answer) at large but also on further days:

pakati-uposatha
  pati-jagara-uposatha
  pati-harika-pakkha-uposatha
The times for keeping the pakati-uposatha are the 5th, 8th, 14th and 15th of the waxing moon and the 5th, 8th, 14th and 15th of the waning moon.
The times for keeping the pati-jagara-uposatha are the five days of the waxing moon, i.e., the 4th, 6th, 7th, 9th, and the 13th, and the six days of the waning moon: the 1st, 4th, 6th, 7th, 9th, and 12th or 13th. That makes eleven days in a month for the observance of this type of Uposatha.
The four months of the rainy season, or vasso, starting on the first night of the waning moon of the seventh month and ending in the middle of the eleventh month, is the period for observing the pati-harika-pakkha-uposatha.
The commentary to the Raja Sutta explains that the pati-harika-pakkha-uposatha is the Uposatha that is observed continuously throughout the three months of the rains. If one cannot keep the observance for the full three months of the rains, then it should be kept for one month, from the first day of the waning moon of the tenth month to the eleventh month. If one is not able to keep the observance for one full month, then it should be kept for a half month, from the first day of the waning moon of the tenth month to the end of that month. Any period of this observance is called pati-harika-pakkha-uposatha.
Some texts define (the time for keeping the pati-harika-pakkha-uposatha ) as the five months from the seventh month up to the eleventh month.
Some Acariyas say the three months are the seventh, eleventh and third months.
Yet other sources explain that the four days, i.e., the 7th, 9th, 13th and 14th, both waxing and waning, are the only days for the observance of the pati-harika-pakkha-uposatha.
(source)

In regard of which precepts are observes, the questions list misses abstaining beautifications and participation on entertainments. Upasaka Lanka had listed them all well in his answer. But next to the many commentaries and explainings deriving from monks Vinaya, the Sutta in its regard might be the best: Uposatha Sutta: The Uposatha Observance.
Generally possible useful help on how might be found here: How to come to be able to observe precepts?
There might be found answers to other details when searching for Uposatha here. How ever, best to speak direct and gain advices from those successfull practice them (of which are maybe less and not always to find).
In regard of the detail question "does this need to be vegetarian to fit in with the first precept?": Not unconditionally. Importand not to kill for yourself, bring others by words or signs to kill and not to feel joy or acceptance, mental approve, for killing. The last includes not to eat meat if a living being was killed for you personally (if seen, heard or suspected). Eating what ever is not alive, does not carry any unskillfulness within it. Killing, urge to or agree, does and whould for the bodily and verbal action cause a break of the first precept, and bad effects (kamma) in all three ways of actions.
May you put effort on the foundation for liberation and observe the Uposatha eager, and if not done or forgotten, todays event, now, is for sure the best time to start or to re-start.

Sīlena sugatiṃ yanti.
  Sīlena bhoga-sampadā.
  Sīlena nibbutiṃ yanti.
  Tasmā sīlaṃ visodhaye.
Through virtue they gain a good stream.
  Through virtue they gain wealth.
  Through virtue they come to liberation.
  Therefore we should clean our virtue.

Anumodana
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]

You said 8 and listed 7 -- I think you're missing one.
The one you didn't mention is the one about "flower garlands and music" which I understand to mean "pursuing sensuality".
I think people are meant to give that (pursuit of sensual delight) a rest, and instead have some time to think (i.e. meditate).

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
What buddhist topics cover the arise of meaning?
I'm convinced that I give meaning to whatever I perceive. Which either can make me suffer or happy. So I have seen that I create my own suffering. That state is reflected in my body (or bodies?). Objective reality holds no meaning it itself. The meaning arises the moment I interpret information. This insight came to me after meditation where I saw things arising from nothing. I could choose to stay in the nothingness by not interpreting, or observe, interpret and meaning arose.
What buddhist topics are related to this phenomenon?

You might want to look at The 5 Aggregates, namely the aggregate(s) of Perception, Mental Formations and Consciousness.
Especially the forth aggregate of mental formations relates to what you are describing, since it contains volition (cetana). See also SN 12.38: Cetana Sutta.
The Abhidhamma goes into further detail on the topic of Citta & Cetasikas.
Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi has written an execellent summary called "The Abhidhammattha Sangaha - A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma".

When you try to give meaning to what you experience lead to Conceptual proliferation this can lead to latent tendencies which creates suffering.

“Bhikshu, as regards the source from which proliferation of conception and perception assails a person: if one were to find nothing there to delight in, nothing there to welcome, nothing to cling to—this is the end of

the latent tendency of lust,
the latent tendency of aversion,
the latent tendency of views,
the latent tendency of doubt,
the latent tendency of conceit,
the latent tendency of desire for existence, and
the latent tendency of ignorance.

This is the ending of the taking up of the rod and the sword, quarrels, disputes, mayhem [strife], slandering and lying —here these evil unwholesome states cease without remainder.”
…
Avuso, dependent on the [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind] and [form | sound | smell | taste | touch | mind-object], [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind]-consciousness arises.

The meeting of the three is contact.

With contact as condition, there is feeling.

What one feels, one perceives.

What one perceives, one thinks about.

What one thinks about, one mentally proliferates.

From that as source, proliferation of conception and perception assails a person regarding past, future and present [forms | sounds | smells | tastes | touch | mind-objects] cognizable through the [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind].

Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta

Thank you for answering. I disagree with "What one perceives, one thinks about". I disagree that I would think about everything I perceive. From my experience my subconscious may invoke some reaction to something I perceive without thinking. Like pulling my hand back when I touch something that is unexpectedly hot. I read that signal does not even come from the cognitive brain. Or is thinking defined otherwise here? I think of thinking as what you consciously apply to solve a puzzle for instance. Could you maybe elaborate on how I would need to view 'thinking' in this context? Thank you.

About the URL you provided: I find it difficult to plow through to extract information I am looking for. Maybe buddhist literature is not for me :) I feel I do not need to read about who caried a golden stick when at what age to understand the proces of arise of meaning. No offense though. What I surely take away from this all is the Conceptual proliferation you pointed out. Thank you.

When you see a good shirt. You might stop to think whether to buy it. Is it worth the piece. Etc. If you touch yourself and it has bunded you hand you then assess if it needs meditation. Do you just put you hand in cold water. Etc. This is the thinking part.

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


text:
What does a normal person lose by following the path?
I have a person I know who, as far as I can say, has been intermittently long interested in Buddhism, but never made a big leap in her practice to achieve and cultivate bigger achievements. She is sufficiently versed in basic buddhist teachings but, as this person told me more than once, is afraid of reaching a "point of no-return" - that is, to not be able to enjoy and do all the things she was used to once she crosses a certain stage of the path.
I tried to dispense some advices by offering details about my own experience and telling that, in reality, now I'm even more able to appreciate the same things I had before. This and a few other attempts never convinced that person (I never tried to persuade her, since I prefer that any person makes the choice that they most prefer) and my being aware that, to a certain extent, the progress in the path can be highly subjective, can only make things more difficult.
Not being able to offer a more satisfactory answer to Will I be able to enjoy life as much as I did before?, what convincing reply would you offer based on your personal experience and, if relevant, buddhist scriptures?
Please finally note that I do not demand that this, like many other persons, should follow the path to the fullest and most hardcore level. She may acquire a taste of what it is like practicing meditation, mindfulness and insight practices for a while and then settle at a level that she finds comfortable.

i suppose e.g. .greed

From my personal perspective, I have certainly lost a few things. Now, whether this is universal or due to my mistaken understanding or practice, I don't conclusively know. But there is certainly risks involved:

Motivation for worldly gains and activities. While I'm generally interested in knowing what's going on in the world, I have barely any interest in participating in it. Neither achievement nor entertainment stimulate my interest enough. I am very occasionally motivated by a new adventure or challenge, when it comes to me - but not to the point of seeking one myself. It's not that I am lazy - I can easily force myself do difficult things, if there is any external reason for it, but finding internal motivation has been rather difficult.
Being able to relate with normal people. There are very few things I have in common with people. I am not taking sides in most of the current social/political arguments, I don't work on a personal project so appreciating someone else working on a project is not something that comes naturally. I don't watch movies or read fiction books. Even though I do follow the news, my perspective on things is always very different, and not enough common points exist for me to discuss it with others. A few topics I do do have in common with people, like children and the basic household activities, show my rather shallow concern towards matters pertaining to this world, so I usually find myself listening, learning and getting amazed at the extent people tend to optimize every little part of their lives towards the pursuit of ephemeral success.
Ego. Since I am trained to let go, be open to other perspectives, and take all suffering upon myself, rather than making others feel even the slightest pain - I can easily be a victim of other people abuse. I have to be exceedingly careful and sometimes go against my buddhist values - just to be able to survive and not be walked over by the people of this world. Trying to be an occasional egoist and defending my own interests makes me cause hurt to others - and feeling their pain hurts me twice as much. Dealing with this controversy is pretty exhausting.
Joy. It's hard to be joyful when you see things as they really are. It's not that I necessarily have a negative perspective on things. It's just that having a direct vision of how things work takes away the naive appreciation and replaces it with an adult concern for the inevitable side-effects or the dark underside of every happy event. I can't say that I'm depressed all the time, my mood is usually pretty flat, with occasional up and downs, but I certainly don't enjoy the silly things other people find amusing.

Now, the jury is still out on how much of this is my own bias vs inherent to Buddhism. You could argue that for every point above, there is a Buddhist teacher who demonstrate 100% perfectly normal behavior: perfect motivation to build temples, organize groups, translate texts, give lectures and do other worldly activities in support of spreading the Dharma; perfect relationships with normal people not just in teacher-student capacity, but also doing creative activities and even personal relationships; being able to be strong, centered, and persuading with all type of people - and in fact motivate people to change despite their resistance; and finding joy in all kinds of everyday activities.
That said, in a way my issues are all Buddhism-induced, even if due to my own mistakes, so having other people be leery of this is not a bad thing.

What you gradually lose by practicing the path is:

Taṇhā
Nīvarana see: Nīvaraṇa by Piya Tan
Akusala,mūla
Anusaya see: Anusaya by Piya Tan
Saṁyojana
Kilesa
Asava

None of which are pleasant to have or worthwhile to have or keep around. What you gain is unshakable peace and happiness (free from Dukkha or Nirvana). In addition you end Jarāmaraṇa and the cycle of Dependent Origination.
As per what you said in your text you are able to enjoy more which perhaps is due to reduction of the above undesirables. Once the are completely gone only happiness remain. This happiness is stable and not dependent on anything else and does not end. Therefore, you will be able to enjoy life like never before through not they type of enjoyment you have experienced before (ämisa sukha). This is a more higher type of enjoyment (niramisa sukha).

Your craving towards sensations don't make the sensations any better or make them last longer.
ex: if you eat an ice-cream, your craving towards the taste will neither make it sweeter nor make the taste last longer. The craving will just set you up for disappointment as the taste disappears.
This is a classic example of Kama-chanda(sensual desire) - one of the five hindrances, hindering one's spiritual progress.

The Buddha talk just two things, suffering and how to lose suffering. For the most, to understand suffering, see it, the first Noble truth requires to face strong suffering by one self to investigate further and make use of the path that goes beyound it. Its usually called drunken in youth, health and drunken in life called by the Buddha.
Since liberation mean to get free, free of the cause of suffering, losing hunger/thist (taṇha)...
My person recently came accross this wonderful talk which might be very useful to read or listen to:

Train Your Hunger (The Sea Squirt)
  November 11, 2016
There’s a little animal called the sea squirt. It’s not very big, and its most complex organs are its brain and its digestive system. After it’s born, it moves around in the ocean and finds a spot that it likes, where it senses that the food will be good. Then it stays there for the rest of its life. And one of the first things it does after it’s found its spot is to digest its brain, so it’s just left with a digestive system, basically to show who’s in charge.
This is true not just for sea squirts... read further or listen audio

Practice Dhamma, for the most is like that of a Sea Squirt and easily we forget that Mara is still after us and still capable to get us. We still don't see the backwards and forget the Noble Truth.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gain.)

I have experienced the same things that Andrei has mentioned, i.e., loss of joy, relating with normal people, loss of interest in entertainment and other worldly stuff (in no particular order). It even became crippling at one point when I didn't clearly understand what was happening and tried to correct myself unskillfully. But as with many things it was a phase and I no longer suffer from those issues. Some things can become worse before getting better, so even if certain things seem to become problematic at some point it doesn't mean that it will remain that way. I know its not wise to generalize, but that is my experience anyways.


text:
Is it true that Lord Buddha was born in Sri Lanka?
I've heard there's a rumor saying that lord Buddha was born in Sri Lanka and ancient "Dambadiwa" is not India but Sri Lanka. There's a "sal" tree in Sri Lanka which matches to the exact tree that we believe which was there in the birth of baby prince  "siddhartha" . I dunno whether they're true or not I just wanna know whether there's a truth behind it, whether what we believe so far is just a lie?! (Ps not Buddhism but the life story of Lord Buddha)

Three of the answers here (one of which is from a high-rep user, and another from a moderator) just say "I personally think it's not true", without presenting any evidence. What is the threshold for evidence on this website? Is it not the same as on the rest of Stack Exchange?

@LightnessRacesinOrbit The policies here are unlike those of many other SE sites -- see FAQ index (summary of site policies). References are welcome but are not required (see What about providing sources?). Unreferenced answers could be questioned or challenged politely, using a comment, or you can use a comment to suggest an improvement; but e.g. these answers are presenting statements as personal opinions. If you have further questions like this, please ask on Meta.

Where he was born is of no importance whatsoever. The fact that he was born, had all these amazing insights and was a fantastic teacher is what is important. Being fixated on historical facts like this blinds you to the message. Worshipping or venerating a place is not what Buddhism is about. Following the path Buddha taught is. Being fixated on places is being fixated and attached to this world, which is not what Buddha taught. Sure, treat them with respect, but you should do that to everywhere and everything anyway regardless of if Siddhartha was maybe born there or not.

Prince Siddhartha was raised, according to Buddhist texts, in Kapilawastu (I will not present sources for this as I think this would be undisputed).
The modern name for Kapilawastu is unknown: I will quote a note from Wikipedia page for Gautama Buddha.

The exact location of ancient Kapilavastu is unknown. It may have been either Piprahwa in Uttar Pradesh, northern India, or Tilaurakot, present-day Nepal. The two cities are located only fifteen miles from each other.

The Buddha's birthplace is said to be Lumbini, and it should not be any farther from Kapilawasthu than few days of travel by horse-carriage. So the birthplace must still be in the India or Nepal, even if one discounts the pillar erected by Emperor Ashoka at Lumbini. (The place previously known as Rummindei was renamed to Lumbini when the Ashokan pillar was found in 1896.)
The note quoted above is well cited, and it is evident that although the exact birthplace is unknown, it has been at least reduced to a very small area, thousands of Kilometers from Sri Lanka.
The disputes for birthplaces of religious figures are not uncommon in present day. For example, even though there is overwhelming evidence suggesting that Jesus was born somewhere in Middle East, there are Christian groups who believe that he was born in some place in United States, for example, Alabama.

Lumbini, Nepal has been recognized as the birthplace of Siddhartha Gautama since a stone pillar was placed at the site by the emperor Ashoka circa 245 BCE.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumbini

I personally believe that Buddha was born in Lumbini in Nepal through in recent times there are a few small groups in Sri Lanka saying otherwise. I personally would be careful about these movements and groups.

There's no truth in it. But people usually like to hear new things. So any new idea presented with some make-belief evidence can get a following.

I echo what Suminda and Sankha has already mentioned.
Be cautious about what you hear or read.
I doubt that the Buddha was born in Sri Lanka. Personally, I don't believe it to be true.
As Sankha mentioned - it might be a tactic to gain followers.

Buddha was born at Lumbini, Nepal.That is also close on india border . So nowadays , india also claim birthplace of buddha was India.But , there is no chance that buddha birthplace is Srilanka.


text:
Spinning sensation during meditation?
This other day I was meditating and I got a feeling as if I spinned around on an axis, counterclockwise wise and really fast. Later on it became more of a left>right feeling alternating feeling in short bursts, and eventually it subsided.
What is this? Is it a sign of progress?

What is this?

It's merely a feeling. Just note it, observe its characteristics and return to the primary object. If you get attached or interested in it, then note that and take it as an object. Then move back to the primary object.
In Vipassana meditation one treats every object equally.

Is it a sign of progress?

Yes, ie. if you were mindful during the processes of the object, not after or later, but while they were happening.
You noticed it proceeded in bursts, meaning its not permanent but ever-changing. You noticed that it eventually subsided meaning you saw (if you were mindful of it) that it was subject to cessation and uncontrollability.
Whether you saw these things, I cannot know, only you can know. But if you saw these characteristics, you have seen the Three Marks of Existence, which all compounded phenomena are subject to.

These types of experiences happen due to karmic or just due to the nature of conditioned existence. With this experience of any other just know that there is such feeling without any additions or subtractions to the experience like thinking or pondering, conceptualisation (trying to give it meaning), verbalization, visualization, ignoring, suppressing, etc. By adding or subtracting additional elements the above you will be clouding real nature of the experience, than putting you full effort to understand the underlying process, which also is changing much faster than you can apply any though / thinking based component to it like labeling, logical or intellectual analysis, any form of visualisation, etc. Trying to suppress it also will not work, permanently or as you would want it to, since it might bounce back with a vengeance sometime later.
The best cause of action is to put all you effort to examine it more closely, while keeping your mind clear without other additions and subtraction to see things clearly as they are, at the experiential level, and try to understand what is happening and bring you mind to a state that these experiences cannot cause emotional disturbances. If you think this is progress and sometime it stops you would be disappointed. There are the emotional databases which you should try to avoid. As you analyze you will see each cluster of sensation are made up of smaller sensation. Also when you keep examining it you will start seeing the nature of it is to arise and pass. This can be considered progress.
In these situation the progress is how much equanimity you can have, not the experience itself. If you are mentally reacting you are not making progress. If you are equanimous and analyzing it as arising and passing then you are making progress.
In the process of analysing the experience you will see that you calcifying some experiences as favorable, some as unfavorable and other as you do not care. These reaction happen due to the nature of the this experience. Also you will be one of the following sensations associated with it which can be pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.
These sensations are Dependently Arisen or Causality Arisen of which you do not have control over the process. When the cause disappears so does the sensation. When a new cause appears and associated sensation arises. If the sensation is pleasant and you have to part with it it is misery. Some sensations are unpleasant and miserable on their own. Neutral sensation are also in a way miserable as you cannot depend on them, i.e., they also do not last. Form this you should understand delighting on this particular experience or any other experience, or being averse will end in some form of unsatisfactoriness. This understanding also can be considered progress.
Furthermore, you will start seeing the experience and the cause are not in one's control, also they are subjected to change which one cannot influence. This experience starts and ends, and you cannot say I want more of this or less of this experience and it will happen as you wish. This also is progress.
Futher exramination you will see this experance leads to craving or the unwholesome roots of ignorance that you cannot depend on the experience when it is neutral, longing for more when it is pleasant and wanting less of it when unpleasant. These also cause unsatisfactoriness and understanding this is progress.
So progress in this case would be developing the right understanding of the experience than the experience itself.

This is completely normal.  Other things that might happen are feelings of your body twisting, your face, hands, or head disappearing, your body swelling, your body contracting, etc. etc. etc.  Any of the above phenomenon are nothing to be alarmed about nor do they hold much significance beyond serving as an indicator that you are just beginning to touch the edge of your bigger mind.

Yes I experienced this too while doing chakra Meditation as guided by my spiritual guru.Next day, I felt more relaxed and centred In one word-consciously aware.Just let go and call on the angels, spiritual guides for protection before during these meditations.

I have not attained the first Jhana yet so it is hard to say it is normal.
I suggest you keep your eyes open when you do meditation.


text:
Dogen writings on reality and death
What is meant by body mind and the world is born simultaneously ...Buddha nature will never break apart. Do we die or is life eternal.

Hello and welcome to Buddhism SE. Could you add a reference to where you have read or heard these words?

Buddha-Nature refers to the mind free from suffering or free from 'self-views'. Buddha-Nature is the pristine purity of clear-light-radiant mind.
'Death' does not occur to Buddha-Nature because Buddha-Nature does not have any ideas, thoughts or views of 'self'.
Try to realise the worries, fears & traumas about 'death' are all related to beliefs in 'self'.
When there is no belief in 'self', both internally & externally, there is no 'death'.
This is called 'The Deathless'.

To study the Buddha Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad
  things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well
  as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of enlightenment
  remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.
Dogen

As for 'body & mind', these are just elements of nature that form the natural world. Dogen, above, emphasises dropping way the false idea that various bodies & minds are 'myself' & 'other selves'.

If you take the 12 Links of Dependent Origination the mind and body is created due to consciousness. Mind and body is also known as the world because what we know about the world is the mental model that we have in our mind.
Whatever is born eventually dies. What ever that starts come to an end. So we have to die and life is not eternal. Everything that is conditioned or causality arisen is impermanent. Death is an eventual part of the process governed by causality or Dependent Origination (DO). As long as the wheel of DO spins there is birth and eventual old age and death.


text:
How/Why to be moral without believing God or any supernatural entity?
Being believer or dependent on God so far in my life, I'm clueless how exactly can I become independent without turning morally Bankrupt? Being devotee I'm automatically moral & lovingly but When I start believing in experience I become somewhat immoral, without any good feelings. How & Why to be moral without believing in supernatural entity like God? What are the ways to become independent because I want to be moral without being devotee or dependency on the God?

You don't have to, but the question might be clearer if you gave some example[s] of what you mean by "moral" and "immoral".

An interesting approach would be to explore how you rely on God for morality, and explore the question of how aware you are of what that process entails.  An awareness of this will help if you wish to depend less on the support of an external supernatural entity.

You may find The Way to Happiness to be extremely valuable.  As it transcends all cultures and religions, it is even used by Buddhist monks.

@CortAmmon I'm moral automatically in devotion.

Are you moral when not in devotion?

Well let's take an example of deliberately causing someone pain. If not in devotion, would you ever deliberately hurt someone for your own pleasure or gain? Your posts seems to suggest you'd have no problem doing this. Would you be OK with someone doing the same to you? Society benefits from people treating others they wish to be treated themselves. At the very least, you should act in a moral way in good faith that your peers will do the same, to prevent a barbaric society. I may not have a problem with stealing, but I do have a problem when someone steals from me, so I don't steal.

How can you set aside your current beliefs and replace it with something else so quickly? Make that into a teaching! I would love to find out your mental processes on how you can (if you can) put aside your current belief system, by mere choice.

If you can't determine right from wrong you lack empathy, not religion.

@DeepSpace - Great point. When expanded It's probably the answer to the question. .

I feel the question highlights the importance and usefulness of a belief in God as an approximation. The belief may not be quite justtfied or correct but it works -  just as Newton's physics works for most purposes but is not quite correct. Theism is not necessary to morality but if we have no better theory or deeper knowledge to guide us then a belief in God has immense utility. On this view monotheism is morality for the layman - practical, worthwhile and largely effective but not fully informed and with a tendency to be egoistic. .  .      . .  .

Fire

In Buddhism, fire is used to describe the destructive & harmful mental defilements of greed/lust, hatred/anger & delusion/ignorance, such as in the Fire Sermon.

Being believer or dependent on God so far in my life, I'm clueless how exactly can I become independent without turning morally
Bankrupt?

Yes. Buddhism explains immoral (harmful) mental tendencies occur due to ignorance, not-knowing or cluelessness, as follows:

Monks, ignorance is the leader in the attainment of unskillful qualities, followed by lack of conscience & lack of concern. In an
unknowledgeable person, immersed in ignorance, wrong view arises. In
one of wrong view, wrong resolve arises. In one of wrong resolve,
wrong speech... In one of wrong speech, wrong action... In one of
wrong action, wrong livelihood... In one of wrong livelihood, wrong
effort... In one of wrong effort, wrong mindfulness... In one of wrong
mindfulness, wrong concentration arises.
Avijja Sutta

The rationale here about needing God is similar to a violent dog that needs to be kept behind a fence or in a cage; or a evil person that must be isolated from society in a prison.
In Buddhism, it is taught people have an evil disposition due to nature. We can observe the tendency to merciless violence in animals. People have obviously evolved from animals (rather than were created by & in the image of a god).
Buddhism teaches the minds of people can dwell in different mental states called:
(i) human (moral);
(ii) godly (powerful);
(iii) animal (immoral);
(iv) hungry ghost (addicted); and
(v) hell (suffering).
People who are immoral in nature & behaviour dwell within a mind in the animal world & eventually end up in hell (suffering).

When I start believing in experience I become somewhat immoral, without any good feelings.

Genesis 6.5 of the Bible states:

the Lord saw how wicked everyone on earth was and how evil their thoughts were all the time, he was sorry that he had ever made them
and put them on the earth. He was so filled with regret

This seems to show following the Abrahamic god creates an evil nature. In other words, the immoral feelings are due to how your religion created you, as explained in Genesis 6 of the Bible.
The history of the world seems to show people who believe in a supernatural entity like God are more evil than those that don't. For example, Christians have been at war among themselves & with others for hundreds of years & have destroyed many indigenous cultures with their imperialism. Even today, the American prison system contains more theists than atheists. I would suggest this is because God-believers want to exercise violent power over others; following the example of God as depicted in various scriptures that show God excising violent absolute power. Even the evil of atheist dictatorial Communism was created by Jews, with a violent dictatorial yet classless ideology similar to Judaism. Thus theistic religions have a tendency to attract evil people who lust for power and who want to act on this earth towards the humans as though they are gods.
Unfortunately, the good human people of this earth have to endure these wanna-be gods, like we must do, such as endure the evil politicians who today run the USA and are God-believers, both Christian & Zionist; who finance & arm Saudi terrorists that murder people while screaming: "Allah U Akbar" or "God is Great".

How & Why to be moral without believing in supernatural entity like God?

In Buddhism, morality equates with harmlessness. Morality is not a commandment or doctrine but, instead, harmlessness. To understand morality, one must comprehend harmlessness. If harmlessness is not comprehended, it is difficult to maintain morality.
Buddhism explains when you are moral, you no longer harm yourself. Being moral is a method to love yourself & benefit yourself.
If you examine with reason & intelligence the behaviours Buddhism considers to be immoral, such as killing, stealing, promiscuous sex, lying, drug taking, gambling, etc, you will find people who engage in these actions bring suffering & problems to their own lives (and, of course, suffering to the lives of others).
For example, men go to war, return with PTSD & even commit suicide. People who steal, end up in prison or lose their jobs. People addicted to promiscuous sex end up with broken relationships & mental disorders. People who lie are not trusted (even though they make money as evil politicians or business leaders). People who take drugs destroy their lives with bad health. People who gamble & borrow money greedily end up ruined.
Therefore, in Buddhism, we reflect or think deeply about the harmful consequences of immoral behaviour.
In addition, in Buddhism, another method to become moral is to develop 'empathy', namely, 'putting oneself in the place of another'. For example:

All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

All tremble at violence; life is dear to all. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness
hereafter.

One who, while himself seeking happiness, does not oppress with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will find happiness
hereafter.

Speak not harshly to anyone, for those thus spoken to might retort. Indeed, angry speech hurts, and retaliation may overtake you.

If, like a broken gong, you silence yourself, you have approached Nibbana, for vindictiveness is no longer in you.

When the fool commits evil deeds, he does not realize (their evil nature). The witless man is tormented by his own deeds, like one burnt
by fire.

Dandavagga: Violence

What are the ways to become independent?

To become independent, the Buddhist scriptures (SN 56.120) explain an 'animal' mind must realise the Four Noble Truths & practise the Noble Eightfold Path to become 'human'.
The full development of moral empathy is explained in the Veludvareyya Sutta, as follows:

"I will teach you, householders, a Dhamma exposition applicable to
oneself. Listen to that and attend closely, I will speak."
"Yes, sir," those brahmin householders of Bamboo Gate replied. The
Blessed One said this:
"What, householders, is the Dhamma exposition applicable to oneself?
Here, householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'I am one who
wishes to live, who does not wish to die; I desire happiness and am
averse to suffering. Since I am one who wishes to live, who does not
wish to die; who desires happiness and is averse to suffering; if
someone were to take my life, that would not be pleasing and agreeable
to me. Now if I were to take the life of another -- of one who wishes
to live, who does not wish to die, who desires happiness and is averse
to suffering--that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other
either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and
disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is
displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself
abstains from the destruction of life, exhorts others to abstain from
the destruction of life, and speaks in praise of abstinence from the
destruction of life. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in
three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to take from me what I have not given, that is, to
commit theft, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I
were to take from another what he has not given, that is, to commit
theft, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either.
What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and
disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is
displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself
abstains from taking what is not given, exhorts others to abstain from
taking what is not given, and speaks in praise of abstinence from
taking what is not given. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified
in three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to commit adultery with my wives, that would not be
pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to commit adultery with
the wives of another, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the
other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is
displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon
another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected
thus, he himself abstains from sexual misconduct, exhorts others to
abstain from sexual misconduct, and speaks in praise of abstinence
from sexual misconduct. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in
three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to damage my welfare with false speech, that would
not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to damage the
welfare of another with false speech, that would not be pleasing and
agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to
me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict
upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having
reflected thus, he himself abstains from false speech, exhorts others
to abstain from false speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from
false speech. Thus this verbal conduct of his is purified in three
respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to divide me from my friends by divisive speech, that
would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to divide
another from his friends by divisive speech, that would not be
pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and
disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too.
How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to
me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from divisive speech,
exhorts others to abstain from divisive speech, and speaks in praise
of abstinence from divisive speech. ' Thus this verbal conduct of his
is purified in three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to address me with harsh speech, that would not be
pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to address another with
harsh speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other
either What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and
disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is
displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself
abstains from harsh speech, exhorts others to abstain from harsh
speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from harsh speech. ' Thus
this verbal conduct of his is purified in three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to address me with frivolous speech and idle chatter,
that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to
address another with frivolous speech and idle chatter, that would not
be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and
disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too.
How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to
me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from idle chatter,
exhorts others to abstain from idle chatter, and speaks in praise of
abstinence from idle chatter. Thus this verbal conduct of his is
purified in three respects."

In Buddhism, morality is evaluated by the fruits of our actions. Grossly speaking, actions that are observed to promote or mature into suffering or added burden are regarded as immoral, while actions that promote or mature into happiness and ease are regarded as virtuous.
But actions themselves are not just judged by their outcome, but also by the intention that manifested it and who they harm or benefit. Buddhism emphasizes the study of our actions in order to become skillful in creating happiness -- that is, in order to become virtuous.
This question also has an echo in the Pali literature. In one sutta, the Buddha tells his audience to consider a person who exercises and fulfills four virtuous characteristics: equanimity, compassion, benevolence and sympathetic joy (happiness from other people's successes):

“This noble disciple, Kālāmas, whose mind is in this way without enmity, without ill will, undefiled, and pure, has won four assurances in this very life.
“The first assurance he has won is this: ‘If there is another world, and if there is the fruit and result of good and bad deeds, it is possible that with the breakup of the body, after death, I will be reborn in a good destination, in a heavenly world.’
“The second assurance he has won is this: ‘If there is no other world, and there is no fruit and result of good and bad deeds, still right here, in this very life, I maintain myself in happiness, without enmity and ill will, free of trouble.
“The third assurance he has won is this: ‘Suppose evil comes to one who does evil. Then, when I have no evil intentions toward anyone, how can suffering afflict me, since I do no evil deed?’
“The fourth assurance he has won is this: ‘Suppose evil does not come to one who does evil. Then right here I see myself purified in both respects.’
-- AN 3.65

In other words, no matter what a person may believe about the after life or about the laws of karma, this person who has such virtuous behavior has, at the minimum, created for herself a less burdening, happier and blameless life here and now as a direct result of her conduct -- without having to wait for death to realize the benefits of it, if any. Moreover, if the laws of karma are true or if there's an after life where the results of our actions affect us, then such a person will also enjoy happiness after death, as a result of her conduct in this life.

Putting faith on an external entity lightens the burden on the mind. You would believe that an external source would work things out for you than doing it yourself. This give a sense of comfort.
Also when you are mentally burdened discussing these problems with other lighten the burden. Similarly mentioning this in prayer also lightens the burden.
Though this is mentally conferring, what you might need to asses is does everything you pray for materialise as your wish. Also see if this leads to procatination where you do not do what need to be done when it needs to be done. If it does not have you ever had a feeling of being let down. Buddhism gives a solution for this through the Noble 8 Fold Path which is on account of how things playout keeping you mental state and emortions in check.
When it comes to morality, it is completely in your control. Since you have free will the choice is yours. In this case there is not God who makes you moral. One has to make the effort.
Faith is based on ideas and there is a human tendency to get attached to ideas. E.g. many wars have been fought for ideals, politics and religion. In some cases the attachment to and ideal or idea far exceeds that of the value of one's own life. These ideas are very hard to stake off but there is a techniques called Vipassana which might help. Vipassana meditation has its roots in Buddhism but is practiced by Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Atheists, etc. alike. You can try it out. Following are some pointers where you can locate a course:

http://dhamma.org/
http://internationalmeditationcentre.org/
http://www.buddhanet.info/

I'm already a Vipassana meditation.

@Suminda One of the better explanations I've read on why people believe and the importance of personal responsibility with regard to morality.

How to become independent of any external moral authority? The Southern Baptists ask me this one a lot.
What makes people think they will turn to a life of crime and debauchery absent the moral compass provided by religion? You know ... we DID have villages and even some social order prior to "established" religion. So how did that happen without us killing one another?
Human beings have an internal sense of morality. In its absolute BAREST form it is revealed in toddlers as they comprehend the golden rule and, thus, develop empathy. You'll see them behead toys and kill a bug - that's how they learn it. It's actually hard wired into our brains in the frontal cortex for communication purposes. That formulation they make (or more precisely don't) is actually a leading psychological suspect for sociopathic behavior.
So you start off with a hard wired golden rule ... then you begin adding in the "social" moral codes. Ones made so that we respect boundaries. These change with culture so the line between them and the biological one is blurry and shaded. This is followed by changes as a matter of belief. This changes not only by culture, but then by specific beliefs within that culture.
So of those 3 stages of moral construction one is completely independent of religion . . and it takes a biological defect to stop it. Thus there's no total breakdown of morals in society as so many theists seem to fear.
Like some proof? Turn to youtube and research actual mourning done by the animals on this planet who have a frontal cortex brain structure such as our own. Elephants, orcas, primates, corvids, dolphins - all of the animals on this planet with a highly develop communication structure such as ours exhibit empathy in this fashion. It's biology and it's a fact.
As for further examining how morality is advanced within Buddhism - not necessary to answer your question. Plus the guys above me are much more familiar with that side of it. This, however, is my specialty. Comparative animal behavior. And it says you have innate morals.

True but for the record we have a lot of people who lack empathy and are still able to survive just fine even without a moral compass. Plus the way humans develop most people don't have a fully formed Compass when it comes to morality until they reach the age of 25. That is kind of why we created civilization in the first place though this seems the mostly be an evolutionary quirk that happens when you reach a certain level of intelligence because we only seem to find creatures born with a lack of empathy or that have to be taught it in humans and apes

Undertaking actions simply because they are decreed by a super-natural rule maker is hardly being moral at all. It is simply doing what you're told for fear of punishment - equivalent to Kohlberg's pre-conventional stage of moral reasoning.

Not out of fear of punishment but out of love.

Arguably a love-based motivation is more sophisticated than a fear-based one, but regardless such morality still falls well short of principled ethical reasoning. Also, it should be noted that many religions do explicitly call upon the faithful to be fearful.

IMHO (an oversimplified idea to think of it in another way)
You could do a simple logic game (maybe oversimplified but will give you an idea).
1) you need other people. You are submerged in a social system, is built on trust and rules, the more you cheat the harder it is to get your goals, because you'll be wasting a lot of resources into avoiding being cheated.
2) People work better when they feel happy.
3) People is not happy when you break their trust, or do harm to them (very oversimplified), because it will mean they'll have to waste or have wasted resources as in 1)
So, In order to achieve your goals efficiently, you need other people to be efficient. For that you need trust, and basic satisfaction. So basically is in your best, egotistical interest that other people is happy.
That's basically what capitalisms does, sells you happiness so you conform to a system and keep doing your work.
This way you can build a parallel to the other awesome and extensive answer about Buddhism, that states that harmfulness is a way of ignorance. When you frame it as the logic I've stated, if you harm someone, you are being ignorant of the ways it will come back to you and make your life harder (i'm not referring as karma per-se, but the physics of the energy of interactions).
Recently i've read this book "Ethics for Amador" which basically explains my idea but properly and with good basis (among several other things).
I recommend a read to it. I wish i had read that book before.
http://fp.reverso.net/tustareasdesociales-over-blog/6225/en/pages/etica-para-amador-4867607.html

Morality is human not divine
Human morality basically derives from human experience. Our shared experience includes an instinct of self-preservation, aversion to pain and harm, empathy and the value of community. Because humans are communal animals, any actions we take which harm the community are harmful to ourselves as well, not just when we feel empathy for the suffering of others, but also because we cannot be happy in a broken and violent community, at risk of harm from others.
Human morals don't therefore come from some deity, but are a natural response to the human condition. If you are feeling a lack of empathy or outright indifference for the suffering of others when not devoted to a god, the problem is most likely an in-group/out-group feeling. Humans are naturally protective of their in-group, while can be aggressive/indifferent to people outside the group. To be moral outside of the commands of/dovotion to a deity, requires you to identify as a member of another group of humans (or humanity in general).
Just realizing all humans are related and part of one large family and that moral behaviour towards others will be more likely to create a society where others behave morally towards you should be sufficient. On the other hand if you dehumanise others or dismiss and other them as part of some "out-group", you will be less likely to include them in your moral considerations.

Morality is independent of religion, but yet inherent to it. The concept of a particular deity, with its likes and dislikes encourages certain behaviour, and much of this behaviour can be called social law. In buddhism, you adhere to the teachings of several buddhas, and from these teachings are also derived morality. But any morality can be invented ad-hoc  (mormons are a good example, as are scientologists), and most often - to make this morality more authoritative, a deity is invented/reused in the process.
I consider buddhism to be a philosophy, and while I do not practice it (as I am a jew, and such heresy is strictly forbidden!), I understand that it does not require any concept of a divine patriarch, or pantheon, for its followers to behave in a manner that isn't harmful to other members of the same society.
The concept that such and such benevolent acts yield benevolence from
one's surroundings is not misguided. It is usually a direct cause-effect relationship, but it is not a guarantee. Nor are malevolent acts similarly punished. It is a reference for people to subscribe to the philosophy.

The ultimate aim of Buddhism is to discard both moral and immoral.

Isn't it to shed the self?

Perhaps I would have said that ultimate aim of Buddhism is to discard both wholesome and unwholesome.

How astute. It is like other some other systems of belief in essence an escape from reality. That is the ultimate aim. That the processes of evolution crafted us imperfect omnivores who must reproduce or perish does not enter into any buddhistic texts.

What is the reason for the minus vote?

Your lack of faith. 'I believe in the god of carnage. The god whose rule's been unchallenged since time immemorial' - always happy to mentor buddhists.

In Noble Eight fold path there are two aspects. Lokiya and Lokutara. Lokiya is the wholesome path. Lokuttara path is a gradual elimination of wholesome aspect as well. These are the deep teaching of Buddhism. I am not sure of your level of understanding. By the way in your case please stick to wholsome aspect of the path.

Aha? What path is best?

It is gradual training. We all have to start (climbing the mountain) from base camp one. -)


text:
Where to concentrate exactly during meditation?
In a chance I had read 'Mindfulness in Plain English' by the Buddhist monk Venerable H.Gunaratana Mahathera.

It says "After joining inhaling with exhaling,fix your mind on the point where you feel your inhaling and exhaling breath touching.Inhale and exhale as one single breath moving in and out touching or rubbing the rims of your nostrills."
I have heard about different meditation practices and I doubt that there is no such a point is drawn in Chakra Meditation.
Then,
What is the purpose of concentrating on the rims of the nostrils  ?
Where I have to concentrate during meditation as a beginner?
And could you explain the point , "rims of nostrills" ?

The instruction is to feel the touch or strike of the breath/wind/air against the flesh of the inner nostril, where it is most sensitive. If this touch in the nostril is not clear to your mind, then place your finger gently against your upper lip below your nostril and feel the touch of the wind/breath against your finger. Keep your finger there until you can feel the breath against the nostril & finger so the in-breaths & out-breaths are discerned/recognized clearly & unconfused. It is important that the mind here is unconfused about when the breath is coming in and when the breath is going out.
This practise narrows the awareness & thinking of the mind. By doing so, it also makes the breathing very fine & calm , which makes the mind calm. This is the purpose of the practise.
However, for the beginner, this deliberate narrowing of mental focus & refining of the breath can eventually make the mind sleepy.
A beginner can experiment with & practise this method of observing the touch of the in & out breaths at the nostrils. It can bring good results of calmness.
However, if the mind becomes sleepy or 'sinking', the beginner should open their awareness and return to observing the breath within the body, particularly the flow of the breathing & its movement in the throat, chest &/or abdomen.
Again, if the flow & movement is lost here, place a hand on the abdomen & another hand on the chest to clearly feel & know in-breathes & out-breathes in an unconfused manner.

Still I am confused about the term/points - 'rims of nostrills' and 'inner nostrills'.It would be more helpful, if you post a diagram with these points marked.Thank you.

A quote: "Generally, we use the furthest point in the nose where the breath makes contact, which is usually at the tip. That point is the easiest and most simple to guard, unless you have a hooked nose that comes down low and a high upper lip. Then you might feel the breath’s touch just above the upper lip. For each of us the point will be in a different place, depending on the shape and structure of each nose and lip". http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Bhikkhu_Buddhadasa_Anapanasati_Mindfulness_with_Breathing.htm

@Michel You must find the place that is most sensitive to you. The place can be in the upper nostril; or along the whole inside front of the nose; or on the upper lip. What is important is to know when the breath strikes the nose when breathing in; and when the breath strikes the nostril or lip when breathing out. The mind remains at one point, noting the striking of the in & out breathes against the skin of the inner nostril.

Thank you for such an informative advice.Now it's time for me to find a point where both inhaling and exhaling breath touches!


text:
Resources for Sutta study/discussion for beginners
What texts would you recommend for sutta discussion sessions, where a majority of the participants will be new to discussing suttas?
with metta

This is my standard recommendation for beginners:
a)Read BuddhismCourse. (Take about 12 hours to read and give you a good idea about the teaching)
http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/PDF_BuddhismCourse/
b)Print a copy of this Dhamma Chart and refer to it while studding Buddhism.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=16785
c) Read Buddha’s Teaching by Narada. Start from chapter 15.
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/buddh ... gsurw6.pdf
d) While you reading above texts please listen to the following Dhamma Talk by Joseph Goldstein.
http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/96/talk/6162/
e) Start reading Sutta.
Good starting point would be to read Bikkhu Bodhi’s “In the Buddha’s Word”
Then read Sutta Central. Start from Majjhima Nikaya. https://suttacentral.net/m

If you would listen to nirapekshathwayemaga Season 8 - (there are 30 video clips in all), you will get to learn the Dhamma with all the relevant sutta references. These 30 sermons are of such importance, that I am going to translate the contents into English in the near future. I will launch a brand new website "A MEDITATIVE LIFE", for the benefit of all within one year.

Mukhapatha is the best. So easiest way is listen directly from pa-auk teachers.
The tipitaka memorizers can teach Beginner's Buddhist Course Syllabus By Ancient Pali Canon easier more than try to done it yourself.
You have many other ways more than mukhapatha, but if they will been the best way to teach, the buddha will used them. But he never.


text:
What Buddha taught by his knowledge about human life?
Buddha taught that everything is ephemeral and everything is grief. What a seeker should do in the above circumstances?

Buddha taught all worldly things are ephemeral but did not teach everything is "grief". "Grief" is an emotion created by the mind rather than a characteristic of things.
The seeker keeps reflecting & examining how all worldly things are ephemeral until the mind realises completely that ephemeral things cannot be any other way or 'suchness' ('tathātā').
This will result in the mind giving up desires & expectations towards ephemeral things.
This is described at the end of the Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta, as follows:

O monks, the well-instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets wearied of form, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception,
  gets wearied of mental formations, gets wearied of consciousness.
  Being wearied he becomes passion-free. In his freedom from passion, he
  is emancipated.

Eliminate (let go of) attachment, aversion, and ignorance towards all Sankhara.

It might be more helpful if another word was used in the place of sankhara, such as 'things'.


text:
On Sati-Sampajanna
So if I am mindful of let's say a sensation or I am just mindful of a specific body part should I label that "event", e.g.: thinking, thinking, touching, touching, seeing, seeing?
I am asking because the buddha also said that one should use sati in tandem with comprehension and therefore one should constantly remind oneself of the three characteristics. So first the labeling and then a short contemplation of the 3 characteristics? How are you guys doing mindfulness in buddhist terms?
Thanks in advance
With metta

So if I am mindful of let's say a sensation or I am just mindful of a specific body part

This statement is wrong understanding. Mindfulness does not mean to be aware, conscious or observant of a sense object. Instead, 'mindfulness' means 'to remember' to have right view towards a sense object. Please refer to MN 117.

should I label that "event", e.g.: thinking, thinking, touching, touching, seeing, seeing?

No; unless you are a complete beginner who must develop conviction in the truth of the teachings or unless you are dealing with a difficult to manage hindrance or distracting thought.
If you label every experience, your meditation will become very busy & convoluted.
Please refer to MN 19, where the Buddha-To-Be labelled things for the purpose of preliminary understanding but later made the mind quiet for the purpose of developing concentration.

I am asking because the buddha also said that one should use sati in tandem with comprehension

Correct. 'Clear-comprehension' (sampajanna) simply means 'active-situational-wisdom'. However, 'sampajanna' is not merely labelling things in situations where labelling is helpful. 'Sampajanna' also knows when to keep the mind quiet when the mind needs to be quiet, such as when developing samadhi (concentration).
As for 'sati' ('mindfulness'), its role is to remember or to bring/deliver 'sampajanna' (situational wisdom) to specific situations.

therefore one should constantly remind oneself of the three characteristics.

Very good. This statement is correct understanding. 'Mindfulness' means to 'constantly remind onself' and the 'three characteristics' is one type of wisdom that often needs to be applied in the development of concentration (samadhi) & insight (vipassana).
This said, there are many types of wisdom & understanding that sati-sampajanna must use.

So first the labeling and then a short contemplation of the 3 characteristics

Correct. This is preliminary understanding (Right View, 1st factor of eightfold path) that must be reflected upon & used so the mind can develop the path.
However, once the path & concentration is developed. the three characteristics will be directly seen & known (which is vipassana).
Therefore, the three-characteristics as 'sampajanna' is required to help you develop the path of concentration. Where as the three-characteristics as 'vipassana' is an automatic result/fruit of developing the path.

How are you guys doing mindfulness in buddhist terms?

As described. 'Mindfulness' means to 'remember' or 'constantly remind onself'.
In my practise of mindfulness, the primary thing I remember to do is keep the mind free from craving & attachment because sampajanna knows freedom from craving & attachment is the cessation of suffering (according to the Four Noble Truths).
If craving & attachment arise, then I remember (sati) to apply different wisdoms (sampajanna) to eradicate that arisen craving & attachment.

When vipassanā-cittāni&cetasikāni arising:

Saññā mark vipassanā-object to remind again after.
Vitakka let's them go to vipassanā-object.
Vicāra let's them hang around vipassanā-object.
Sati let's sobhana-citta&cetasikā unforget to do their work to
vipassanā-object.
Balavavipassanā-sampajañña uses 3 marks (3 characteristics) to
comprehend vipassanā-object.


text:
Helpful or ego-stroking?
How do I know if I enjoy answering questions because I feel helpful or because it strokes my ego?
Why does this program demand that I add more words to my question?

What about feeling helpful and stroking ego at the same time. I think the 2 are not mutually exclusive.

I did actually wonder about that.

If I remember correctly, this is built in to the SE concept i.e. channelling that urge to be seen as an expert into helping others. The more you help others, the more you win :-)

perhaps ego that is intent on enlightenment, can be stroked with good fruit?

Ego is identification. Some thought experiment, that consider the option to have action without identification, may point it out:

Would you invest the same amount of time if it was completely anonymous?
If someone would downvote your answer, how would you feel?
Would it make a difference whether your answer is downvoted with your name in in the answer, or completely anonymous.
If you could choose to add your name or signature to it, would you care?
If you had to choose up front, with your name/signature, or without, not knowing whether your answer will be up or down voted. Would you wish you have added your name/signature if everybody is upvoting your answer like crazy. And would you be happy that you didn't add your name when everybody was downvoting it like crazy.
Some extremes to create clear contrast: Someone asks a question why to continue with life because he/she is horrible depressed for years and seriously considers suicide. You provide an answer and he/she completely turns around and started living life to the fullest, the moment he/she read your answer. Would you tell this story to your friends/family including that it was you that provided the helpful answer. Or would you just tell how someone was helped by some answer and don't care at all to mention that you gave the answer.

I like your approach of asking those questions here. It would appear I actually enjoy just helping others no matter if I am ID'd for it or not.  I get a rush from helping others, but have questioned even my own motive at times.
At that point it seems almost selfish. I get a little dopamine boost for helping others AND people think highly of me for it? That's like a two-fer. So there must be a catch.

I like your feedback. Espescially that you seem to stay in the moment as you write you get a boosr from it. That is the moment you are doing it you are enjoying it and not some future imagined goal you wish to accomplish. That is the right intent if you ask me. Keep it going! Thanks for your question btw. I needed a moment to think about it and came to realize where I have ego related motives to investigate.

How do I know if I enjoy answering questions because I feel helpful or because it strokes my ego?

By undertaking the practice of insight meditation, one will actually weaken the sense of Self.
One will come to realize that the idea/sense of self is merely a mental formation belonging to the 4th aggregate of mental formations.
By diligent and repeated practice, one will come to see the 3 signs of existence, i.e. the mental formation is both impermanent, unsatisfactory and uncontrollable/ungovernable, meaning it cannot be a Self.
If a Self could exist it would be something that one is in control of, something that is amenable to ones will. Through insight meditation, we find that nothing in the conditioned realm, is really like that.
Here is a Dhamma talk on Anatta, by Ajahn Punnadhammo. In here he talks about how the Buddha explained the 4 four ways in which we create a Self and the 3 levels on which we create a Self. The talk is highly recommendable.
In the "Discourse on the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta", by Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw, he explains as well, the 3 leves on which one can create a Self:

Clinging to Things as Mine
Of the above three forms of grasping, “This is mine” is clinging with craving; “I am this” is clinging with conceit; “This is my self” is clinging with wrong-view. When one has taken delight in an object with craving, even if the object does not belong to oneself, it is grasped with craving as if it were one’s own. On seeing delightful objects in the shops, one takes delight in them as if one already owned them. One imagines putting on jackets and longyis that one likes. One also imagines trying on shoes, as if they were already one’s own. One grasps everything, animate or inanimate, as if it were one’s own if one likes them.
Therefore, the Blessed One asked, whether it was wise to grasp and take delight as, “This is mine,” regarding things that are impermanent, unsatisfactory, and subject to change, whether it is ﬁtting to delight in terrible suffering. The matter in one’s own body is constantly originating and dissolving. If one sees this arising and dissolution as it really is, one would be fearful just like having to live in a dilapidated building. Even though one might feel well and happy at the present moment, a change for the worse may occur depending on circumstances.
Once it is realised that it is not enduring even for a moment, always changing, and therefore terrible suﬀering, how could one take delight in it? Would anyone choose with great pleasure as one’s life partner, someone who is going to become an invalid within hours or days or who is going to die soon. No one would take delight in such a course of action if they really know what is about to happen. Likewise the meditator who sees the unceasing process of origination and dissolution of the aggregates ﬁnds only terrible suﬀering in them. Finding them as such, the meditator has no desire to grasp materiality as “This is mine.” The group of ﬁve monks therefore answered that it is not ﬁtting to regard materialiy as mine. This is an account of the questions and answers on how, having seen the characteristics of suﬀering, it is unﬁtting to take delight in it as happiness, as something that is satisfactory.
Clinging With Conceit
To consider materiality as “I am this,” is to cling to it with conceit. When one has good sense-faculties and can see or hear well, one takes pride in them: “I have good eyes and ears,” “I look beautiful,” “I have a pleasing voice,” “I am healthy,” “I am strong.” Is it ﬁtting to cling to materiality in this way with conceit? Conceit is developed regarding one’s possessions when there is a misconception that they are permanent. The material qualities of eyes, ears, visible forms, etc., are wrongly regarded as permanent, and consequently, vanity develops about them. Take for instance the case of a person who has a cache of gold or silver hidden in a certain place. The owner is full of pride over this wealth.
However, if he or she learns that the cache has been robbed and he or she no longer owns any treasure, the bubble of conceit is burst. Likewise, clinging to the material qualities of eyes, etc., which become manifest at the moment of seeing, hearing,etc., and thinking they are still in existence, conceit is developed about them. The meditator who notes constantly knows that they all vanish after they have arisen and ﬁnds no reason to be proud as “I have good eyes,” or “I am beautiful.” Therefore when the monks were asked, “Is it ﬁting, to regard materialiy as “I am this,” their reply was, “It is not ﬁting, Venerable sir.” The Blessed One let it be known by means of this dialogue that there is conceit when things are conceived as permanent; there is no conceit when they are known to be impermanent.
Clinging With Wrong View
Holding on to the belief “This is my self” is clinging with wrong-view. This wrong view is held fast when there is belief that the materiality in one’s person is everlasting, and amenable to one’s control. When knowledge arises that it is unstable, constantly arising and vanishing, and unsatisfactory because it is unstable and subject to dissolution, there is no more reason to cling to materiality as a self, as a living entity. When the meditator knows that materiality cannot be controlled by wishing, “Let everything be pleasant and wholesome, let nothing unpleasant or bad happen, let all pleasant materiality remain permanently,” there is nothing to cling to as a self. Thus to the question, “Is it ﬁtting to regard materiality as ‘This is my self,’ the ﬁve monks replied. “No, Venerable sir.

I  have bias this answer to pali-canons because  pali-canons' contents comprehend the reasons, for all profits, more than people today, who cut some possible reasons off and kepp only their attached profits. I also have to use too much pali words, because my english is terrible and dhamma is very hard. I have to use 2 hours to write this little answer.
Board-ego = māna & taṇhā & micchādiṭṭhi & avijjā & ahiri & anotappa & uddhacca.
The best way to see your board-ego are "checking and proving"  your&the others' answers in every ways such as pali of tipitaka, commentary, sub-commentary, and the other teachers' comments.
Why checking&proving are the best way?
Because:

Micchādiṭṭhi and taṇhā, that always arise with kusala,
viewing&attaching wrong causes&effects. Sammādiṭṭhi viewing right
causes&effects. While checking&proving about causes&effects of the
whole contents of topic's page, the good practicer  can see
his/her/the others' wrongs&rights, but the bad practicer can not
(avijjā). Because they have not checking&proving enough to notice
(vijjā) his/her/the others' wrongs&rights. They have not enough
respect in the others' right causes&effects that having many
pali-references. So enough checking&proving can let you notice
wrongs&rights of causes&effects.
Māna can not change their status, that attached by taṇhā. Māna, that
arising after micchādiṭṭhi, can not change their wrong viewing and
attaching. So  enough checking&proving can let you notice māna.
Ahiri and anotappa can not respect in the others' right
causes&effects that having many pali-references. So enough
checking&proving can let you notice asaddhā (distrust), that always
arise with kusala (wholesome), in the others' right causes&effects.
Uddhacca can not catch any causes&effects. While good practicer read
topic, they will try to understand the others' references. But bad
practicer will not try, because bad practicer  can not catch any
causes&effects.  So enough checking&proving can let you notice your
uddhacca.

You can also notice board-ego by the other cetasika, such as dosa, issā, alobha,passaddhi, etc., too.This method is called "cittānupassanā-satipaṭṭhāna". I just write the most important cetasika for this topic.
Sadly, people today are so hastily and judge someone according to the appearance. So checking and proving are not important now.
In my experience:
Almost  everyone in every forum often told me to practice myself, such as "you are stroker. you are close-minded." I checking&proving then answer them, that sometime I accepted to develop myself, sometime I asked for the reference, and sometime I explained.
But on the contrary, almost everyone didn't call me for reference, accept me to develop themselves, or explained their view.
This is very big difference that always show to me from every forum discussion. It is called "open-mined" and "close-mined".


text:
Tantric self generation as a deity
Why does self-generation as a deity (yidam) require annutarayogatantra empowerment (wang, abhiṣeka), while visualizing it as a separate image doesn't?

Lighting a lamp, you need another lamp. Because during self generation you are the Buddha, and in order to have 100% conviction that you are the Buddha, you must be told(initiated) by the Buddha himself. That is why it is said that seeing/recognising the guru as the Buddha himself is important in Tantra. Further the guru himself must have an unbroken lineage starting from the Buddha himself.

Agreed. Our faculty of faith is weak, so we require external support.