text:
Should I help myself by hating?
Heello,
I am not really Buddhist - although I do read sutras and have some general inkling - or anything at all.  I like to do drugs, drink, and other discretionary acts, however I am considering taking a breather from these habits in order to take revenge on a community of people I more or less despise.  I would prefer to drink, experiment, and be absorbed in my own creation, but it really screws me up physically, and then the people here like to exploit me - they enjoy seeing me miserable and groveling for mercy.  My question is should I cultivate my revenge tactic?, since it is the only thing that is keeping me from enjoying myself via my vices?  I guess the physical pain is not enough to keep me from stopping.  I'm sure you understand...
p.s. Just to be clear, the revenge is not giving the people a reason to be so proud and smug by being drug-free, and the only way I would be drug-free is by keeping up my hateful feelings towards them.  I can't imagine doing it any other way.

Perhaps that could be called an example of "skilful means" -- if what that means is, "whatever works" -- but I don't remember reading Buddhist doctrine that recommends "hatred" as a motive.
There may be some advice to give about your relationship -- but that's not what you asked about in this question.
I'd say that instead of "hatred", what Buddhism might recommend is "nibbida" -- that's sometimes translated "disgust" -- I think it literally or etymologically means, "without finding", i.e. it's how you feel about something after you try it and find it doesn't satisfy, isn't what you're looking for.
It may occasion detachment from the object.
Beware that "I am superior" or "I am inferior" are examples of what Buddhism calls "conceit" -- see this answer -- and Māna on Wikipedia which warns that it

"makes whatever is suitable ... the basis for disrespecting others and for the occurrence of suffering"

and it's canonically a cause of disputes.

Do you mean disgust for my own behavior or disgust towards them?
From the description, you seem to be "acting out" in a long-term relationship which involves intoxication and blaming. I've been there, but it's difficult for me to tell you about your situation rather than mine. Maybe that's why meetings like Al-Anon can be helpful, people talk about their own experience and as you listen you relate to some of it and so gain insight (into your own). In my experience the relationship isn't great, satisfying -- including disliking people and their behaviour, and having reactive behaviour of my own.
It seemed to me inescapable, one reaction after another and an intransigent partner. It took us decades before rediscovering a better way. But it's difficult to give you any advice without (just) "projecting" from my own experience -- so people sometimes find a "counsellor". Buddhist doctrine might offer general advice, like this. I think that disgust or disenchantment, finding things to be impermanent and suffering, ultimately applies towards a lot of "worldly" behaviour.
You're asking me a binary question, either/or: "Are you saying I should feel disgust towards my behaviour, or towards them?" I think that's a dilemma or a false dilemma. Note that the "middle way" of Buddhism means avoiding extremes -- don't try to grasp the stick by one end or the other, don't get caught on the horns of a false dilemma -- a solution might be elsewhere entirely (like in a different direction or dimension), perhaps along the lines of "Mu".
The question implies identity view -- "me", "them" -- which is maybe not the best theory or model for solving or handling the problem. Buddhism talks about "dependent origination" instead. Western sociology too has some theories about codependency.
Something that's maybe not dissatisfying, maybe the one thing or the first thing identified by Buddhist doctrine, is "absence of remorse" which results from "skilful ethics". I believe that's so. Maybe nibbida and the search for what is more permanently satisfying will result in insights like this taste of nibbana.
I don't know how to share that experience though, which I imagine is the subject of this story, with "the moon" symbolizing enlightenment:

The Moon Cannot Be Stolen
Ryokan, a Zen master, lived the simplest kind of life in a little hut at the foot of a mountain. One evening a thief visited the hut only to discover there was nothing to steal.
Ryokan returned and caught him. "You have come a long way to visit me," he told the prowler, "and you should not return empty-handed. Please take my clothes as a gift."
The thief was bewildered. He took the clothes and slunk away.
Ryoken sat naked, watching the moon. "Poor fellow," he mused, "I wish I could have given him this beautiful moon."

If I'd criticise that story though it would be on this ground -- What is the difference between 'compassion' and 'pity'? -- with "pity" being a conceit.
But ... the Buddhist path is also said to be gradual and begins with ethics (see also "blameless"). I guess that if someone is unethical they may be viewed as being in a hell of their own making.

Hate is a strong word, I might have meant contempt.
Yeah.
You know the Dhammapada starts with,

Hostilities aren't stilled
through hostility,
regardless.
Hostilities are stilled
through non-hostility:
this, an unending truth.

"Contempt" sounds like another form of conceit, i.e. it is a "comparison", e.g. "they are relatively lowly".
So far as I know, instead, Buddhism recommends the four brahma-viharas as appropriate for social relationships.

The Four Sublime States -- Contemplations on Love, Compassion, Sympathetic Joy and Equanimity by Nyanaponika Thera
Four sublime states of mind have been taught by the Buddha ...
These four attitudes are said to be excellent or sublime because they are the right or ideal way of conduct towards living beings (sattesu samma patipatti). They provide, in fact, the answer to all situations arising from social contact. They are the great removers of tension, the great peace-makers in social conflict, and the great healers of wounds suffered in the struggle of existence. They level social barriers, build harmonious communities, awaken slumbering magnanimity long forgotten, revive joy and hope long abandoned, and promote human brotherhood against the forces of egotism.
The Brahma-viharas are incompatible with a hating state of mind ...

For this kind of reason I'd be reluctant to agree that "hate" could be a recommended solution.
Like I said I think the closest (to "hate") that I know of as a recommended solution in Buddhist doctrine is nibbida -- not hate, possibly not "disgust" even -- but like disappointment, disenchantment, dispassion, turning away from, letting go of -- perhaps by replacing it, keeping something better in mind. Whereas "hate" sounds to me like just more of the same. But if it does get you out, maybe it is skilful (or "expedient") means -- re-reading the Parable of the burning house, maybe "hatred" is the "toy" which you consider attractive and for which you could be willing to leave a burning house.

Do you mean disgust for my own behavior or disgust towards them? Hate is a strong word, I might have meant contempt.

I tried to answer your comment by adding to the answer.

I am delighted by this answer! The links to further reading are very much appreciated. Thank you!

As Buddha said:

That being, this comes to be; from the arising of that, this arises; that being absent, this is not; from the cessation of that, this ceases.

The way this works, we define ourselves in relation to the world. We can't help but think either the world is wrong and I am good, or the world is good and I am f***ed up.
In your case, either the clean are jerks that should be hated and you are good, or they are the good ones and you are wrong. Guess which option you are choosing. It's the ego's defense mechanism, how else can it act?
Either way, there's an issue, whichever way you look at it you feel bad, but hating them seems just a liiiitle better. Problem is, the pendulum keeps swinging and it won't get better, it may even spiral out of control.
The only real way out is to stop defending the ego. Then the whole issue of who is right goes away. No more judgment. No broad generalizations about yourself or the others. You work on case by case basis, seeing things honestly as they are.

Yes, the Buddha strongly advice to feel strong remorse and know dirt well, develop disgust toward bad habits and do all to abound this dirt from oneself. The greatest enemies are those belittle bad habits and even approve them. So the first step is to avoid any association with that which is already knowns as low, ugly and lazy (to do efforts to restrain).

Maybe? Hate is bad but so are drugs. Maybe replacing drugs with hate is a worthwhile trade.
When you have some mental space you can contemplate the pros and cons of drugs. I know it sounds weird to say "contemplate the pros" of drugs, but an honest analysis is helpful. It's good to know exactly what you are giving up (feeling high) and what you are gaining (mental clarity, healthier body, more money, more time).
If you can afford it, I would recommend seeing a therapist/counselor. They can help you see things from different angles and not be stuck in your head.

Thanks.  I forgot to mention, I like the recovery process - the feeling that is.  This makes it more difficult to entice myself to kick the habit.

Ajahn Chah on craving, and handling it:

When we undertake to train the mind to be at peace with every
situation, please understand that in the beginning when a defiled
emotion comes up, the mind won't be peaceful. It's going to be
distracted and out of control. Why? Because there's craving. We don't
want our mind to think. We don't want to experience any distracting
moods or emotions. Not wanting is craving, the craving for
non-existence. The more we crave not to experience certain things, the
more we invite and usher them in. 'I don't want these things, so why
do they keep coming to me? I wish it wasn't this way, so why is it
this way?' There we go! We crave for things to exist in a particular
way, because we don't understand our own mind. It can take an
incredibly long time before we realize that playing around with these
things is a mistake. Finally, when we consider it clearly we see, 'Oh,
these things come because I call them'.
Craving not to experience something, craving to be at peace, craving
not to be distracted and agitated: it's all craving. It's all a
red-hot chunk of iron. But never mind. Just get on with the practice.
Whenever we experience a mood or emotion, examine it in terms of its
impermanence, un-satisfactoriness, and selfless qualities, and toss it
into one of these three categories. Then reflect and investigate:
these defiled emotions are almost always accompanied by excessive
thinking. Wherever a mood leads, thinking straggles along behind.
Thinking and wisdom are two very different things. Thinking merely
reacts to and follows our moods, and they carry on with no end in
sight. But if wisdom is operating, it will bring the mind to
stillness. The mind stops and doesn't go anywhere. There's simply
knowing and acknowledging what's being experienced: when this emotion
comes, the mind's like this; when that mood comes, it's like that. We
sustain the 'knowing'. Eventually it occurs to us, 'Hey, all this
thinking, this aimless mental chatter, this worrying and judging :
it's all insubstantial nonsense. It's all impermanent, unsatisfactory
and not me or mine'. Toss it into one of these three all-encompassing
categories, and quell the uprising. You cut it off at its source.
Later when we again sit meditation, it will come up again. Keep a
close watch on it. Spy on it.
It's just like raising water buffalos. You've got the farmer, some
rice plants, and the water buffalo. Now the water buffalo, it wants to
eat those rice plants. Rice plants are what water buffalos like to
eat, right? Your mind is a water buffalo. Defiled emotions are like
the rice plants. The knowing is the farmer. Dhamma practice is just
like this. No different. Compare it for yourself. When tending a water
buffalo, what do you do? You release it, allowing it to wander freely,
but you keep a close eye on it. If it strays too close to the rice
plants, you yell out. When the buffalo hears, it backs away. But don't
be inattentive, oblivious to what the buffalo is doing. If you've got
a stubborn water buffalo that won't heed your warning, take a stick
and give it a stout whack on the backside. Then it won't dare go near
the rice plants. But don't get caught taking a siesta. If you lie down
and doze off, those rice plants will be history. Dhamma practice is
the same: you watch over your mind; the knowing tends the mind.

Not an answer, just a note for someone in future in 2 languages..
This question clearly depicts the current state scenario.
Doing things which you don't like, and recovery is likable, things which you don't like are still done because that is enjoyable.
Is this meditation journey to revenge against evils or avenge for the bad on good ones??
Or is this to prove something?
Or is this to have infinite happiness?
Or is this because this is what you are, this is what attracts you the most, this is what's best for you naturally?
यह प्रश्न वर्तमान दृश्य को स्पष्ट रूप से दर्शाता है।
जो चीजें आपको पसंद नहीं हैं उन्हें करना, और  सुधार भी पसंद है, जो चीजें आपको पसंद नहीं हैं वे अभी भी की जाती हैं क्योंकि यह आनंददायक है|
क्या यह ध्यान यात्रा बुराइयों से बदला लेने या अच्छे लोगों पर की बुराई का बदला लेने के लिए है ??
या यह कुछ साबित करने के लिए है?
या इससे अनंत सुख पाना है?
या ऐसा इसलिए है क्योंकि आप यही हैं, यही आपको सबसे ज्यादा आकर्षित करता है, यही प्राकृतिक रूप से आपके लिए सबसे अच्छा है?


text:
What is Buddhist doctrine about debt, debtlessness, duty?
When I search for the word "debt" on this site -- https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/search?q=debt -- many of the posts are from the same author -- including two recent ones:

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/48450/254

seek out for people teaching the Dhamma not training consuming fools and suggestions that they could escape the debts

What's the effect of living on alms (social services) and not doing duties, being unrestrained?

The answer to the latter question puzzled me -- because I'm not sure what the difference is between a state welfare recipient thinking "I have a right", compared with an employed wage-earner's having the same kind of thought.

What is Buddhist doctrine on that subject?
The only reference that come immediately to my mind is the debt towards parents, which is so immense that it cannot be repaid, and which is acknowledged by the fact that monks are allowed to help care for their own parents in person.
There are few references on Access to Insight:

Ina Sutta: Debt (AN 6.45) sounds like it might be a parable or analogy -- i.e. that a monk who behaves badly suffers consequences like a layman who goes into debt
The Lessons of Gratitude by Thanissaro Bhikkhu seems to say to repay your benefactors by becoming a better person
Anana Sutta: Debtless (AN 4.62) says that "debtless" is one of the states that a house-holder can enjoy -- along with "having" and "using" wealth, and being "blameless" -- the debtless isn't the import bit in this sutta, which says it's next to nothing compared with being blameless
Vasala Sutta: Discourse on Outcasts (Sn 1.7) says that denying a debt is one of many examples of misbehaviour that would cause someone to be considered an outcaste

Can you summarise Buddhist doctrine about debt?
Should you try to be more conscious of debts? If not what should you try to be more conscious of?
Part of this question is exemplified by this from Thanissaro Bhikkhu's essay:

In other words, as the first passage shows, it's perfectly fine to appreciate the benefits you've received from rafts and other conveniences without feeling any need to repay them. You take care of them simply because that enables you to benefit from them more. The same holds true for difficult people and situations that have forced you to develop strength of character. You can appreciate that you've learned persistence from dealing with crabgrass in your lawn, or equanimity from dealing with unreasonable neighbors, without owing the crabgrass or neighbors any debt of gratitude. After all, they didn't kindly go out of their way to help you. And if you were to take them as models, you'd learn all the wrong lessons about kindness: that simply following your natural impulses — or, even worse, behaving unreasonably — is the way to be kind.
Debts of gratitude apply only to parents, teachers, and other benefactors who have acted with your wellbeing in mind. They've gone out of their way to help you, and have taught you valuable lessons about kindness and empathy in the process.

As a corollary, if the "raft" there might be an analogy of the Dhamma, what do you think of that? If people publish the Dhamma, after which find and use it, you may appreciate that -- is it something to feel "indebted" about, and if you don't feel properly indebted then are you like stealing it from its rightful owner (e.g. the Sangha), and/or is the person who published it some kind of thief?

Debt means not free and bound. Duty is the obligation to stay either in a certain relation, or to gain rightly release. Debtlessness means to be no more bond, completed the task.
This works in regard of certain worlds, as well in relation with the path beyond.
One not doing his duty (sacrifices for maintaining a relay-tion) is an indebter (slave). One not following the rules, a thief.
And one comparing the Dhamma with grass is not only a deep red marxist, but a total hopless hell-bond idiot.

Dhamma-reader and enjoyer, not doing their duties toward the owner (the Sangha), but supplying thieves, Robin-hoods, companies, ... co-work in depriving it from the owner, or co-thieves in robes, are not only, by denying obligation, incapable to ever grasp it, since pulling it in their house of wrong view "I have a right", but "ever-bond" to remain as hungry ghost in the left behind ruins of the royalty. Occasionally there will be some doing sacrifices toward former ancestors, and will try to feed them, but because their mouth of intellect is tiny formed as a needle, they are only feed-able with rotten left over, previous eaten, fermented, yet only for very short satisfied.
"Simple" an Ancestor-duty, then either well placed at the Sangha, if really wishing them being able to meet them in later existence.

The hindrance of sensual desire, such as delighting in or defending prostitutes or pornography, was called a "debt" by the Blesssed One:

In the same way, when these five hindrances are not abandoned in
himself, the monk regards it as a debt, a sickness, a prison, slavery,
a road through desolate country. But when these five hindrances are
abandoned in himself, he regards it as unindebtedness, good health,
release from prison, freedom, a place of security. Seeing that they
have been abandoned within him, he becomes glad. Glad, he becomes
enraptured. Enraptured, his body grows tranquil. His body tranquil, he
is sensitive to pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes
concentrated.
DN 2

Similarly, being beholden to Karl Marx & anyone else worldly, was considered a "debt" by the Blessed One:

I’ve done many of the sort of deeds, that lead
to a bad destination. The result of my deeds has
already struck me,, so I enjoy my food free of
debt.
MN 86

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
The Sangha extinguished, the Dhamma sold out: what now?
It's hard to imagine that there is any valid and not actually defeat group of monks out their, Dhamma has been sold out, reformed, reproduced and shared by blind. AI will soon be, or is already, your only 'friend'.
What now? What to do if getting clear that their is no more refuge to be found?
What should one go after, if having missed the last train leaving, finding oneself booked in the mass train?
YouTube: Stop That Train (I Want to get off) -- a reggae song

The premise of the question is completely inaccurate.

https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/41216/when-the-dharma-will-have-been-forgotten-by-most

Dharma is not exclusive to just Buddhism - people share it in their own creative ways. Buddha taught free inquiry as a means to validate the free expression of dharma. There are so many different forms of the teachings that don't look Buddhisty. Thank goodness for such flexibility, for such creative wisdom. Maybe try to look beyond the constraints of the Buddhist lens.

Listen to The Lion:

The Lion - Sīha Sutta  (AN 4:33)
“Monks, the
lion, the king of beasts, leaves his lair in the evening. Having left
his lair, he stretches himself. Having stretched himself, he looks all
around the four directions. Having looked all around the four
directions, he roars his lion’s roar three times. Having roared his
lion’s roar three times, he heads out for game. Any animals who hear
the sound of the roar of the lion, the king of beasts, for the most
part feel fear, terror, & fright. Those who live in holes go into
their holes. Those who live in the water go into the water. Those who
live in the forest go into the forest. Birds flee to the air. Even
royal bull elephants, bound by strong leather bonds in villages,
towns, & capital cities, bursting & breaking their bonds, frightened,
scattering their urine & feces, run to & fro. So powerful among
animals, monks, is the lion, the king of beasts—so mighty & majestic.
“In the same way, monks, when a Tathāgata appears in the world—worthy
& rightly self-awakened, consummate in clear-knowing & conduct,
well-gone, an expert with regard to the cosmos, unexcelled trainer of
people fit to be tamed, teacher of devas & human beings, awakened,
blessed—he teaches the Dhamma: ‘Such is self-identification, such is
the origination of self-identification, such is the cessation of
self-identification, such is the practice leading to the cessation of
self-identification.’1 Any devas who are long-lived, beautiful,
abounding in pleasure, established for a long time in high palaces, on
hearing the Tathāgata’s Dhamma, for the most part feel fear, terror, &
fright: ‘Being inconstant, it seems, we supposed we were constant!
Being impermanent, we supposed we were permanent! Non-eternal, we
supposed we were eternal! We—inconstant, impermanent, & non-eternal,
it seems—are encompassed in self-identification.’ So powerful in the
world with its devas, monks, is the Tathāgata—so mighty & majestic.”
...
Note

See MN 44.

It's hard to imagine that there is any valid and not actually defeat group of monks
Is a reason for the Sangha so that you can confess to each? I imagine that implies a little humility and forgiveness, of moments of heedless and behaviour and even of views.
And you tagged the question mahayana, the Bodhisattva Precepts include

Not to broadcast the misdeeds or faults of the Buddhist assembly, nor encourage others to do so.
Not to praise oneself and speak ill of others, or encourage others to do so.

What to do if getting clear that their is no more refuge to be found?
Refuge is in the "Noble"  (arya) Sangha.
AI will soon be, or is already, your only 'friend'.
You wrote this in the context of "Dhamma being sold out" -- but that is a topic or theme about which you seem perennially hostile -- and so perhaps this is a topic or subject which, instead of discussing, it is better to let go of (like you might avoid any "fetter of views", and pacify hostility with non-hostility).
As for "friend", I don't know. I read that monks are not supposed to address each other as "friend", so, do monks have friends?
Something I read long ago, from a non-Buddhist source -- "To have a friend you need to be a friend."
So if not having friends seems like a problem, maybe you can find or make opportunities to be a friend, occasionally.
What should one go after
Well "going after" might imply craving, and "want to get off" craving too (vibhava-taṇhā).
There is "laying down the burden" as an end, and "absence of remorse" as a basis:

Kimattha Sutta: What is the Purpose? (AN 11.1)

And "absence of remorse" is founded on "skilful ethics".
I'm not sure what "skilful ethics" means for a monk? Does it only mean following the Vinaya to the letter? Perhaps the Vinaya isn't everything, in that the original Sangha didn't have "rules", and the rules were introduced as necessary, case-by-case.
So perhaps there's more to it, a way of working (together), a (shared) purpose, a goal, apart from the rules which are maybe peripheral.
Might "ethics" be occasioned by friendship? An example of ethical behaviour, for which in retrospect there's no remorse, is to "do right by" a friend.
There's a sutta -- cited here -- which says that when the "heart is possessed and overwhelmed by" the hindrances, then you can't see, but that

a man dwells with his heart not possessed, not overwhelmed by sense-desires... ill-will... sloth-and-torpor... worry-and-flurry... doubt-and-wavering... [like the five bowls of water not as previously described, but 'clear, limpid, pellucid, set in the open']... then he knows and sees, as it really is, what is to his own profit, to the profit of others, to the profit of both himself and others. Then even sacred words he has not long studied are clear to him, not to mention those he has studied.

... and perhaps that's a definition of "skilful ethics".

So Ananda live as your own island, your own refuge, with no other
refuge. Let the teaching be your island and your refuge, with no other
refuge.
Tasmātihānanda, attadīpā viharatha attasaraṇā anaññasaraṇā, dhammadīpā
dhammasaraṇā anaññasaraṇā.
DN 16

People follow & associate     for a motive. Friends without a motive
these days    are rare. They're shrewd for their own ends, & impure.
Wander alone like a rhinoceros.
Snp 1.3

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


text:
Teachings on truthfulness
In MN 61 the Buddha teaches his young son the importance of being truthful.
This is an amazing sutta! So wise, and yet so elegant and straightforward, that even a seven-year-old can learn something from it.
Are there other suttas in the canon that explain the importance of not lying to oneself, or to others?

The most succinct explanation I've read was, "What need (is there to lie)?" -- in a novel, Kim, where a horse-trader and spy conversing with a Tibetan Abbot asks, "Thou hast never lied?”, and the Abbot answers, “What need?”, which is impressive, “O Allah, hear him! ‘What need’ in this Thy world! Nor ever harmed a man?”

Do you think Kipling knew what his character meant by that "answer"? (I haven't read the book)

In the previous sentence he was praising the Abbot for his simplicity (also sinless and holy) -- contrast that with his own, presumably complicated and deceitful, life as a spy. I imagine Kipling "knew" at least a little about the character, he's one of the main characters in the book.

Fair enough. BTW, do you know how, or why points disappear without explanation? Is it normal?

Re. "reputation" on this page I see "user was removed" 2 days ago and you lost 25 points which implies one upvote (10) and one accepted answer (15). I think that's because this topic was deleted and I don't know why (but can guess). So yes it's normal when a user is removed or deletes their own account. But in this case I don't know why that user was removed, I'll ask about it.

Thanks. "show removed posts" was disabled, I see it now. I thought the karma police were after me.

MN 114 expands on this some.

‘I say that there are two kinds of verbal behavior: that which you should cultivate, and that which you should not cultivate. And each of these is a kind of verbal behavior.’ That’s what the Buddha said, but why did he say it? You should not cultivate the kind of verbal behavior which causes unskillful qualities to grow while skillful qualities decline. And you should cultivate the kind of verbal behavior which causes unskillful qualities to decline while skillful qualities grow.

And what kind of verbal behavior causes unskillful qualities to grow while skillful qualities decline? It’s when someone lies. They’re summoned to a council, an assembly, a family meeting, a guild, or to the royal court, and asked to bear witness: ‘Please, mister, say what you know.’ Not knowing, they say ‘I know.’ Knowing, they say ‘I don’t know.’ Not seeing, they say ‘I see.’ And seeing, they say ‘I don’t see.’ So they deliberately lie for the sake of themselves or another, or for some trivial worldly reason. They speak divisively. They repeat in one place what they heard in another so as to divide people against each other. And so they divide those who are harmonious, supporting division, delighting in division, loving division, speaking words that promote division. They speak harshly. They use the kinds of words that are cruel, nasty, hurtful, offensive, bordering on anger, not leading to immersion. They talk nonsense. Their speech is untimely, and is neither factual nor beneficial. It has nothing to do with the teaching or the training. Their words have no value, and are untimely, unreasonable, rambling, and pointless. That kind of verbal behavior causes unskillful qualities to grow while skillful qualities decline.

And what kind of verbal behavior causes unskillful qualities to decline while skillful qualities grow? It’s when a certain person gives up lying. They’re summoned to a council, an assembly, a family meeting, a guild, or to the royal court, and asked to bear witness: ‘Please, mister, say what you know.’ Not knowing, they say ‘I don’t know.’ Knowing, they say ‘I know.’ Not seeing, they say ‘I don’t see.’ And seeing, they say ‘I see.’ So they don’t deliberately lie for the sake of themselves or another, or for some trivial worldly reason. They give up divisive speech. They don’t repeat in one place what they heard in another so as to divide people against each other. Instead, they reconcile those who are divided, supporting unity, delighting in harmony, loving harmony, speaking words that promote harmony. They give up harsh speech. They speak in a way that’s mellow, pleasing to the ear, lovely, going to the heart, polite, likable and agreeable to the people. They give up talking nonsense. Their words are timely, true, and meaningful, in line with the teaching and training. They say things at the right time which are valuable, reasonable, succinct, and beneficial. That kind of verbal behavior causes unskillful qualities to decline while skillful qualities grow. ‘I say that there are two kinds of verbal behavior: that which you should cultivate, and that which you should not cultivate. And each of these is a kin

KN Iti 25, makes the same point as MN 61, that lying leads to every other kind of evil

♦ “eka-dhammaṃ atītassa, bhikkhave, purisa-puggalassa
“one-thing transgressed, *********, (for a) person,
nāhaṃ tassa kiñci pāpa-kammaṃ a-karaṇīyanti
there is no evil-action not-(to be)-done.
vadāmi.
(this I) say.
katamaṃ eka-dhammaṃ?
Which one thing?
yadidaṃ bhikkhave, sampajāna-musā-vādo”ti.
just-this, monks: deliberate-lie-telling."
etam-atthaṃ bhagavā avoca.
this-(is the)-meaning (of what) the-blessed-one said.
tatth-etaṃ iti vuccati —
(with regard to)-that thus (was it) said.
(verse)
♦ “eka-dhammaṃ atītassa,
"one-thing transgressed,
musā-vādissa jantuno.
lying-speech (by a) person,
♦ vitiṇṇa-para-lokassa,
rejecting-[concern for the]-after-world,
natthi pāpaṃ a-kāriyan”ti.
(there is)-no evil (he will) not-do."

“Further, he reflects thus: ‘If someone were to damage my well-being by telling a lie, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to me. And if I were to damage the well-being of another by telling a lie, that would be displeasing & disagreeable to the other. What is displeasing & disagreeable to me is displeasing & disagreeable to others. How can I inflict on others what is displeasing & disagreeable to me?’ Reflecting in this way, he himself refrains from telling lies, he gets others to refrain from telling lies, and he speaks in praise of refraining from telling lies. In this way, his verbal behavior is pure in three ways."

~ the Buddha, Veḷudvāreyya Sutta: The People of Bamboo Gate, transl. Thanissaro https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN55_7.html


text:
Is “there is no such thing as a ‘thing’” a buddhist view?
On the Eleven-ThirtyEight blog, I found the following statement:

[...] the Buddha would argue that there is no such thing as a ‘thing’ - that the concept of an independent, autonomous ‘thing’ is an illusion. Every action affects every other action in some way or another, no matter how great or small. Every act of being affects another act of being, which affects another act of being, anon and so forth.

Is this really a Buddhist view? If yes, are there more authoritative sources supporting and explaining it? Thanks.
The question is specifically about “there is no such thing as a ‘thing’” or “the concept of an independent, autonomous ‘thing’ is an illusion”, not just about the idea that all things (assumed to exist) are interdependent. I see this as different from pratītyasamutpāda, which I understand to refer to the latter.

That blog you cite says that it's describing Pratitya-Samutpada -- there is e.g. a Wikipedia article about that here (which I haven't read). That that article is longer or more detailed, than an answer on this site can probably be; so would you like to be more specific about what you're asking here?

Not that Wikipedia is an especially authoritative source but that article has 250 "Notes" from 40 "Sources".

@ChrisW Although it says pratityasamutpada, but the quoted text sounds more like the Madhyamika concept of emptiness (shunyata) that everything is empty of inherent substance (svabhava). In Theravada, there is one thing that is not impermanent, and doesn't depend on anything else, or is not conditioned by anything else, and that's Nibbana. In Madhyamaka, Nirvana is semantically dependent on dukkha.

@ChrisW Thanks. I tried to clarify my question.

As ruben2020 wrote in a comment this sounds like shunyata.
I am not the best person to explain that.
Wikipedia's Śūnyatā is long and maybe the doctrine has differed some according to different schools.
Its Prajñāpāramitā sūtras section includes wording that's similar to what you quoted:

The Prajñāpāramitā (Perfection of Wisdom) Sutras taught that all entities, including dharmas, are empty of self, essential core, or intrinsic nature (svabhava), being only conceptual existents or constructs. ... The Prajñāpāramitā sutras also use various metaphors to explain the nature of things as emptiness, stating that things are like "illusions" (māyā) and "dreams" (svapna).

I don't think that's saying "Nothing exists" -- there's a Zen story about that, quoted here.
Let's parse the phrase in question again, i.e. "the Buddha would argue that there is no such thing as a ‘thing’ - that the concept of an independent, autonomous ‘thing’ is an illusion. "

I assume that the first clause -- i.e. "there is no such thing as a ‘thing’" -- is a summary of what's explained in the second clause.
So ignore the first clause (though you seized on it as the title of this topic) and look at the second clause which explains it -- i.e. "the concept of an independent, autonomous ‘thing’ is an illusion."
I think that second clause is saying two things:

Things aren't really independent and autonomous
Conceiving them as such is an illusion

I guess that's not very different from the "pratītyasamutpāda" which you described as "just about the idea that all things (assumed to exist) are interdependent".
Your parenthesis -- "(assumed to exist)" -- indicates that what you find surprising is the idea that things might be not assumed to exist.
But it's not talking about "not having existence" -- it's talking about not having Svabhava -- and the original or authoritative sources of that are I think Nāgārjuna and others (which I am not familiar with).

For a different point of view there's this essay -- We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make the world -- which is one of series of analyses of so-called "fake Buddha quotes" by this author. I think he tends to write based on the Pali canon.
Anyway that essay includes (I quote selected extracts),

The essential message is that the qualities of our mind determine whether or not we suffer. There’s nothing in the Pali original that mentions “thoughts” or “the world” at all, never mind that that we are what we think, or that our thoughts create the world.

But didn’t the Buddha himself teach that the world is an illusion? I’m sure some Buddhists believe he did, and the existence of Hindu-Buddhist hybrid texts like Byrom’s Dhammapada is no doubt one reason they do. But while the Buddha said that we have delusion (moha) about the nature of the world, and that we have cognitive distortions (vipallasas) he did not say that the world was an illusion, or māyā — an important term in Hunduism, which is found in the Pali scriptures but only to mean something like “deceit,” “fraud,” “hypocrisy,” etc. He didn’t deny the existence of the world, although he did point out that we make gross errors of interpretation regarding the nature of the world, seeing permanence where there is only change, seeing sources of suffering as sources of joy, and believing there is a separate and permanent self when no such entity does or can exist.

Nor did the Buddha teach the notion that we are what we think.

Perhaps you can find further explanation by searching this site for the "sunyata" tag -- Highest scored 'sunyata' questions.

"Your parenthesis -- "(assumed to exist)" -- indicates that what you find surprising is the idea that things might be not assumed to exist."  It is not that I find it surprising, this is actually how I understood “there is no such thing as a ‘thing’” and I wanted to check whether this is a correct understanding and whether this is a Buddhist view. I put this in a parenthesis because talking about interdependence implicitly seems to assume that there are things subject to such interdependence.

I've read people on this site talk about this doctrine, i.e. explain finer points of it in reply to specific questions; it's part of e.g. Tibetan Buddhism. If I recall correctly they distinguish between whether a thing has "real existence" as opposed to whether it has "true existence" -- but the distinction, their explanation, is lost on me as I haven't learned or studied what they're discussing, and so I may be misquoting too. But I think it's not that "things don't exist", it's that "things don't have true existence".

That sounds weird. Is it conceivable that things can exist without having a true existence or without truly existing?

I also find the concept of "true existence" puzzling, a fortiori if it is presented as a property that things would have.

I guess part of the problem is translation into English. The translation must use English words like "true" etc. I assume that is all technical jargon, with meanings and shades of meaning carefully explained in the source text -- and that's why I'm unable to understand the discussion, i.e. because I haven't studied it, I don't know the "technical vocabulary". I think that's an issue in other schools too, "dhamma" and "dukkha" and so on having no single translation and a range of meanings -- and eventually people learn and use original vocabulary like svabhāva as loan-words in their English.


text:
How to deal with mediocrity
I am mediocre at my job and I am fine with it. But lately, I am having this fear of losing my job because of my mediocrity and there are far more intelligent and skilled people than me. How do I deal with this anxiety?

First of all - there will always be someone better than you, unless you are a Fully Enlightened Buddha (Sammasambuddha). Our Buddha was also called the "peerless one" because he had no peers. Noone could match his qualities and attributes (except other Sammasambuddhas but there can only be one at a time).
So you can't really do anything about that aspect unless/until you become a Fully Enlightened Buddha if that's your goal.
Dealing with mediocrity, anxiety, fear etc. in Buddhism is dealt with in the same way as everything else, i.e. with mindfulness. The mind has to see phenomena clearly until it begins to let go of clinging to them. That letting go will lead to less attachment and more peace, happiness and wisdom.
In order to arrive at this Wisdom you will need Concentration and to get that you need to practice Sila (morality) which is the foundation of the Buddhist path. I advice taking Refuge in the Triple Gem and then take either the Five or the Eight Precepts.
For meditation instructions I advice to either find instructions in the tradition(s) you want to follow, check Youtube and better yet contact a meditation teacher/Buddhist monk and do an intensitive meditation retreat.
All the best.

sila means 'control of mind', but it can be extrapolated to mean morality

I never heard that translation before and I don't think that's correct. Translated from Pali it means morality, ethics, skillful conduct.

Ok,  but keep an open mind...ease of mind requires training, morality is nothing but skillfulness

The most mediocre is self.  The way to change is self. So go forth the way that is best, else suffer the time
Edit: the compact person is superior. So be compact. Be without an external facade.
edit:  it's only an influx (asava) of ego amigo.  we are all mediocre.  it's called manas (man).  that is hard to avoid.

You might want to practice homelessness.  That will at least give you some protection against an all out blitzkrieg.

Lord, I want—having shaved off my hair & beard and putting on the
ochre robe—to go forth from the household life into homelessness. May
I receive the going-forth in the Blessed One’s presence? May I receive
acceptance?”

I guess if you were to say, I lost my job because I'm not smart enough, Buddha would likely accept you.  Of course, you would have to deal with the rest of the order too.  But at least you tried. That reminds me of Steve Jobs, who supposedly was trying to become a Buddhist monk at some point.  But somehow he was told by some guru type he would be better off starting Apple.
Note, when I say practice homelessness, I don't mean you should go searching for alms.  I mean cut down on consumption and the like.


text:
The Buddha on fun, play & time management during practice & Dharma work
Did the Buddha teach anything about scheduling or time management? Did the Buddha ever recommend anything relating to play (as opposed to work that requires effort) as part a good practice routine? Do you know why he taught or did not teach play or time management?

I once wrote a sutta about precisely this, in which the Buddha delivered a couple of rap style lyrics to a monk about the importance of enjoyment and energy. Although its very wise and funny, I can't imagine that it would be welcome in such a formal website like this, though.

@Max You could probably post it on the chat site; or via email.

@ChrisW - thanks for offering this option. I'll try to fish it out from my immense collection of poems, suttas, notes and journels.

@ChrisWToo bad conversations aren't allowed temporarily right when the question is posted. Then after a short period of time, the conversation can be moved by mods, algos or "filtered" by the user.  I wonder why users aren't allowed to filter their own content.

@ChrisW Do you have any insight as to why users can't filter their own content? Thanks, I highly value your feedback.

Too bad conversations aren't allowed temporarily right when the question is posted. I guess I usually do allow them; especially when they're relevant to the question, or conversational (except maybe from a user who seems to make a habit of posting odd or seemingly-hostile remarks). The help says comments aren't for "extended" conversation, which I take to mean, "off-topic"; and I try to guess whether the comment might be welcome, whether you might want the conversation. In your case I believe you don't mind the chat site, so I suggested that.

As for filtering, there's an option in the user profile to highlight or suppress topics based on their tag, which is useful on a site with more topics-per-day than this one. Re. filtering comments, I guess the site design and software is intended at least initially for new users, who may not even have a user profile -- in theory the front page should be as described in ...

The Tour, -- We're a little bit different from other sites. Here's how: Ask questions, get answers, no distractions This site is all about getting answers. It's not a discussion forum. There's no chit-chat.

That's the theory -- the Q&A format makes it a useful resource, a way for people to share, a suitable for people who like that. But then there is chat also where users can talk about anything -- maybe that is the filter! Just on this site hardly anyone ever uses chat, and I don't know why. Certainly I have seen chat used more on other sites, sometimes to discuss the site, or the topic (e.g. Buddhism) or for personal or any "off-topic" conversation.

Similar Question: What Leisure Activities Did The Buddha Partake In?

Here's a sutta (AN 8.80) on grounds of laziness and arousal of energy:

"Monks, there are these eight grounds for laziness. Which eight?
"There is the case where a monk has some work to do. The thought
occurs to him: 'I will have to do this work. But when I have done this
work, my body will be tired. Why don't I lie down?' So he lies down.
He doesn't make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained,
the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the
as-yet-unrealized. This is the first grounds for laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk has done some work. The thought
occurs to him: 'I have done some work. Now that I have done work, my
body is tired. Why don't I lie down?' So he lies down. He doesn't make
an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of
the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This
is the second grounds for laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk has to go on a journey. The
thought occurs to him: 'I will have to go on this journey. But when I
have gone on the journey, my body will be tired. Why don't I lie
down?' So he lies down. He doesn't make an effort for the attaining of
the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the third grounds for
laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk has gone on a journey. The
thought occurs to him: 'I have gone on a journey. Now that I have gone
on a journey, my body is tired. Why don't I lie down?' So he lies
down. He doesn't make an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the fourth grounds for
laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk, having gone for alms in a
village or town, does not get as much coarse or refined food as he
needs to fill himself up. The thought occurs to him: 'I, having gone
for alms in a village or town, have not gotten as much coarse or
refined food as I need to fill myself up. This body of mine is tired &
unsuitable for work. Why don't I lie down?' So he lies down. He
doesn't make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the
reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the
as-yet-unrealized. This is the fifth grounds for laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk, having gone for alms in a
village or town, does get as much coarse or refined food as he needs
to fill himself up. The thought occurs to him: 'I, having gone for
alms in a village or town, have gotten as much coarse or refined food
as I need to fill myself up. This body of mine is heavy & unsuitable
for work, as if I were many months pregnant. Why don't I lie down?' So
he lies down. He doesn't make an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the sixth grounds for
laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk comes down with a slight illness.
The thought occurs to him: 'I have come down with a slight illness.
There's a need to lie down.' So he lies down. He doesn't make an
effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the
as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is
the seventh grounds for laziness.
"Then there is the case where a monk has recovered from his illness,
not long after his recovery. The thought occurs to him: 'I have
recovered from my illness. It's not long after my recovery. This body
of mine is weak & unsuitable for work. Why don't I lie down?' So he
lies down. He doesn't make an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the eighth grounds for
laziness.
"These are the eight grounds for laziness.
"There are these eight grounds for the arousal of energy. Which eight?
"There is the case where a monk has some work to do. The thought
occurs to him: 'I will have to do this work. But when I am doing this
work, it will not be easy to attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't
I make an effort beforehand for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the
attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the
as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is
the first grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has done some work. The thought
occurs to him: 'I have done some work. While I was doing work, I
couldn't attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't I make an effort
for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the
as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he
makes an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the
reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the
as-yet-unrealized. This is the second grounds for the arousal of
energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has to go on a journey. The
thought occurs to him: 'I will have to go on this journey. But when I
am going on the journey, it will not be easy to attend to the Buddha's
message. Why don't I make an effort beforehand for the attaining of
the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the
attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the
as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is
the third grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has gone on a journey. The
thought occurs to him: 'I have gone on a journey. While I was going on
the journey, I couldn't attend to the Buddha's message. Why don't I
make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the
reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the
as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the fourth grounds for
the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk, having gone for alms in a
village or town, does not get as much coarse or refined food as he
needs to fill himself up. The thought occurs to him: 'I, having gone
for alms in a village or town, have not gotten as much coarse or
refined food as I need to fill myself up. This body of mine is light &
suitable for work. Why don't I make an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the
attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the
as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is
the fifth grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk, having gone for alms in a
village or town, does get as much coarse or refined food as he needs
to fill himself up. The thought occurs to him: 'I, having gone for
alms in a village or town, have gotten as much coarse or refined food
as I need to fill myself up. This body of mine is light & suitable for
work. Why don't I make an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized?'1 So he makes an effort for
the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the
as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is
the sixth grounds for the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk comes down with a slight illness.
The thought occurs to him: 'I have come down with a slight illness.
Now, there's the possibility that it could get worse. Why don't I make
an effort beforehand for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the
reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the
as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the seventh grounds for
the arousal of energy.
"Then there is the case where a monk has recovered from his illness,
not long after his recovery. The thought occurs to him: 'I have
recovered from my illness. It's not long after my recovery. Now,
there's the possibility that the illness could come back. Why don't I
make an effort beforehand for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained,
the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the
as-yet-unrealized?' So he makes an effort for the attaining of the
as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the
realization of the as-yet-unrealized. This is the eighth grounds for
the arousal of energy.
"These are the eight grounds for the arousal of energy."
AN 8.80

The previous sutta is related:

“These eight things lead to the decline of a mendicant trainee. What
eight? They relish work, talk, sleep, and company. They don’t guard
the sense doors and they eat too much. They relish closeness and
proliferation. These eight things lead to the decline of a mendicant
trainee.
These eight things don’t lead to the decline of a mendicant trainee.
What eight? They don’t relish work, talk, and sleep. They guard the
sense doors, and they don’t eat too much. They don’t relish closeness
and proliferation. These eight things don’t lead to the decline of a
mendicant trainee.”
AN 8.79

Regarding play (SN 23:2):

“Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Rādha:
when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be ‘a
being.’
“Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles (lit:
dirt houses): as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love,
thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that’s how
long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them,
feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion,
desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles,
then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or
feet and make them unfit for play.
“In the same way, Rādha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish
form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving
for form.
“You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for
play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.
...

However, the Buddha did speak of the pleasure of concentration, and of the contentment of a developed mind.
Regarding time management:
It is an abstract concept, power propaganda, designed to funnel thinking and effort in a certain direction. The Buddha spoke of other things, things conducive to ending suffering. Like skill, heedfulness, harmlessness... These sorts of things are what should inform all of our decisions.

this is a great example of becoming disenchanted.  of course, there is the problem of dwelling in that disenchanted spirit

@blue_ego Disenchantment can be understood to signal change. Change is one of the "three forms of stressfulness." If we're on the Right Path, it signals to us that we're going in the Right direction. So the "feeling" of disenchantment is not necessarily problematic.   https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN11_1.html

I understand but goal-oriented ppl are getting burnt.  the goal is big, and the burn is long.

We have equanimity as a fallback.

You actually meditate?

Yes, I see potential in it. Hopefully, I'll get the hang of it eventually.

the Buddha's last words relate imho to this
―All component things must decline and decay. Attain your goal through diligence.‖ (Parinibanna Sutta)
(why "play" /waste time when we know how to practice toward Awakening?)


text:
What is mirror wisdom?
What is the right way to understand (or apply) mirror wisdom?  Is it buddha-nature, bodhisattva (ripe for awakening), or both?  Is it cultivated, or does it spring up naturally with enlightenment?  If it's a method, how can it be utilized to curb conceit?  Is it a prerequisite for non-duality?  Does it have a place in mindfulness meditation?
EDIT: from what i understand it's one of five wisdom types.  that's about all i know.  that and wondering about the people across from me on the subway, when i think maybe this is when i should work with the mirroring...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_wisdoms

Ādarśa-jñāna

There is no such thing as mirror wisdom.

Mirror wisdom is when you realize reality and dūkha are two sides of the same coin. When you avoid dukkha, you avoid reality - this is fine for a lifetime, but then what?  Eventually you have to settle down - like a second or third wife.
Here is a real contraction: The Benefits of Love

A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'...
My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE...
Myoho-Renge-Kyo
Represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence – the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source.
Consciousness (enlightenment)
Is it self the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future – right down to the minutest particles of dust – each being an individual ripple or wave.
The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration.
‘Who or What Is God?’
If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us.
Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter – I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist.
For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects – including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction.
It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars – none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent.
In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is.
Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses.
To break it down – Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example:-
The state of Myo
Is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists – including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them – our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant – our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma and more importantly, our enlightenment.
The other state ho
Is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory – whenever we experience or express our emotions – or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma.
When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing.
The second law – Renge
Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho – these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence.
The final and third part of the tri-combination – Kyo
is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge – or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter – as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed The Universal Law of Communication – perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists.
Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us – all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux – constantly controlled by these Three fundamental laws.
In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws Myoho-Renge-Kyo – the basis of, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing.
That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation – rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge – and by way of Kyo.
Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents.
Nam, or Namu – which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’.
On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives – as well as the environment from moment to moment.
By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives – even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect.
That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances – turn them into positive ones – or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma.
This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are – regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations.
As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect – the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication.
For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything.
NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one.
When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self – this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things – such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally – rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within – including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need.
Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time – to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers.
It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.

Your post looks good, but remember to use paragraphs. Welcome!

This was copy-and-pasted from elsewhere e.g. perhaps here and here and many other places.


text:
Advice for a prostitute, from the wisdom of Buddha
I consider the profession unwise and harmful to all. But I'm looking for a compelling argument against it.
PS. Maybe "compelling" is too strong a word.

If you consider working to meet the basic needs: warmth, food and shelter, then that would be compelling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule

Unsatisfied with his own wife, with others’ wives he’s seen in tow,
corrupted too with prostitutes— that’s the way to disaster’s woe
Snp
1.6

More here.

The Therigata includes their saying "free" from "crooked old" and or (elsewhere) "shameless" husband.
But I'm not sure that can be understood, or explained to someone:

Neither the goal -- because if I have never experienced it, then I may understand it only as idle and irrelevant-to-me words
Nor the means -- is the advice "actionable", how is it feasible for me to get from here to there?

And reading Wikipedia's Prostitution in Thailand I'm not sure there is anything really "compelling" in the canon: because if there were then perhaps it wouldn't prevail in a Buddhist society?
Thig 15 is about a nun who says she was rejected by her husband, because in a former life she had been a man who slept with another man's wife and therefore suffered consequences (including rebirth in hell and as an animal). If you, or "the prostitute" to whom you want to give advice, took that to be true then that might be compelling advice -- i.e. that infidelity/unchastity leads to hell -- but even then I think people take a narrow view from the canon of what the third precept means and use that to argue that prostitution is explicitly permitted.
Two arguments you could try:

There's no future in it -- youth, health, good looks fade, this is not a long-term employment opportunity
Find a better class of friend, a more moral/respectful society, that's important in this life

Are you trying to offer "going forth" as the alternative?
If not must you consider what the person's mundane employment alternatives are? Because that may be what they find "compelling".

Interviews like these suggest that prostitution maybe a symptom or consequence of larger problems.

Thanks for your thoughts and suggestions, Chris. I understand that compelling arguments against something (or for it), explaining, teaching... are usually not the difficult part. The difficult part is usually going to be clinging, not listening, ignoring, or as the Buddha says, "Intoxicated and heedless." But I still think it's okay to ask the question, if only because it's worth thinking about, and reflecting on.

It's certainly ok to ask the question. I'm not sure I understand the comment. There's a Quaker phrase, "speaks to thy condition", which I think means, "say things which are relevant to personal experience, understood, and actionable good advice". There's a lot of advice in the suttas but I'm not sure what would speak to their condition. I guess there's something in their material/social/psychic circumstance which leads or "compels" them to assess prostitution to be their best or only option; and without knowing how to address that I don't think I have convincing answer to the question.

And given how the third precept is explained, I'm not sure there's something specifically about prostitution, perhaps that was even an exemption to the rule. That, and going forth seems to be a) the highest good, b) the principle audience, and c) the general direction of the advice, so will or can you suggest that as their alternative and if not then what else? There may be advice about how to be a good wife or something but again I'm not sure that this person would understand that as a helpful answer.

"I'm not sure there's something specifically about prostitution..." "relevant to personal experience..."
Your focus is too narrow. I intentionally didn't give any specifics. If the Buddha didn't talk about prostitution, I wouldn't be surprised, but that doesn't mean he didn't cover that specific type of wrong action.

Well, I do not know from the Suttas perspective exactly. The way I see this profession is that it leads to corruption and unwholesome states of mind. The reason is because the person is constantly exposed to one of the strongest pleasurable feelings. These are not easy to remain unattached to and sooner or later strong clinging will develop. This translates to suffering. Also another reason, not all the clients will be according to the prostitute's liking and the ones which she dislikes she will have to put up with, She will be negotiating her hygiene/risk of disease etc for some money and this is bad I think - kind of like selling one's soul. Thus I believe it is bad for one's mind.


text:
What's the most important teaching of the Buddha in the canon?
Or, what would be the best teaching to spark an interest in someone who knows little or nothing about the teachings of the Buddha?

Possible duplicate or related: How to explain what Buddhism is?

I could have used the word inspire, I chose spark instead. I don't think it's the same question.

That makes this question different, yes, and it's a good question. Maybe the problem described in my question, was that I wan't approaching it from that perspective i.e. sparking.

I was speaking to a group of people recently, and I noticed something very interesting: each person was being spoken to from a very different place. You see, the perspective of the response changes depending upon who you're speaking to. This comes about from knowing the entire geographical terrain of your own mind, its weather phenomena and its solar cycles. One knows them with such intimacy and detail that one cannot trip on the peaks and troughs, bend from the wind, nor be darkened by the solar storms.
From this 'place', which we might call situational awareness, one can then respond to other minds in accordance to the particular region they may be. The response appears to draw upon the experiential knowledge obtained by 'the journey that led to nowhere' alongside an intuitive awareness of the person and the particular nature of their inquiry.
Listening to another person is very fascinating, indeed. The entire body listens and the mind plays a very minimal role in the process, if barely any. It's even possible to 'listen' to random members of the public in this way, which might reveal some interesting things. It certainly makes a for rich experience when walking through the shopping center!
The Buddha had the same approach where everyone was responded to personally from their perspective taking into account their temperament: that manner of acting, speaking, feeling and doing – basically the formation of the unique set of sankharas that swing their minds hither and yon; that is what he spoke to.
He spoke to that particular potential (sankhara) in those particular people, or even groups, respectively so: with Bahiya, he gave the in the seen, there is just the seen teaching; in the background to the satipathanna sutta, it's said that the Buddha spent some time carefully observing the Kuru people, before concluding that their wisdom was far beyond most other groups of people. From this observation spawned the satipatthana teaching, which is widely renowned in Buddhist circles, if not seen as the most important teaching.
All in all, what initially seems to spark the attention of many people is the idea of compassion, love, kindness, and attentiveness.
After all, beneath the incessant urgency and commotion drummed-up by society, these things we all have in common. Peace in the heart is what everyone wants, whether they know it or not. When it has been found in yourself, it will spread in the most amazing and unusual ways!
Note: I prefer Mahayana's conception of compassion, which is generally framed in terms of virtue and is something tangible for the practitioner to hold. Having said that, compassion as a virtue in its finality makes no sense – all moral schemes erode. Something of compassionate acts are performed, but without a structural framework and/or seemingly at the confusion of the worldly ego minds. One cannot understand why a realized one does what they do, for their wisdom eye is wider than the universe itself.

Karaniya Metta Sutta, nice, a heartfelt choice.

the problem with compassion is you have to apply it yourself as well. that's a conundrum i suppose

compassion doesn't seem like a perfecting quality.  to let be, that is a compassionate idea, but evil wants to be good!

@Max Bāhiya Sutta, also important, and inspiring.

i mean u have to actually have compassion.  i don't know, is it just empathy?

@blue_ego -  Empathy, at least in the egoic sense, is the particular way we transfer our lack of understanding to other people. For instance, someone shares their struggles, and we feel those struggles. The response comes from that feeling of pain and in the conditioned world, we call that response 'empathy.' But this frames the person's struggles into a duality, where the listening party gives confirmation to the victim status of the other. Empathy is a game of psychological inferiority/superiority struggles between two peoples fears. Compassion doesn't play those games.

Yes, compassion is a different game

Having read a lot about Buddhism and practiced meditation, I once told a monk-to-be that I felt really inspired by Buddhism. So he asked me, "What are the Four Noble Truths?" And I could not answer. That shocked moment of silent perplexity sparked a newfound interest and a conviction to learn. It was the first true step.

SN56.27:1.1: “Mendicants, there are these four noble truths.
SN56.27:1.2: What four?
SN56.27:1.3: The noble truths of suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering.
SN56.27:1.4: These four noble truths are real, not unreal, not otherwise.
SN56.27:1.5: That’s why they’re called ‘noble truths’.
SN56.27:2.1: That’s why you should practice meditation …”

For me the most important teaching is the noble truths, i.e. understanding sorrow and its ending.
Doctrines like anatta follow from that and so I'd call them secondary (and yet instrumental and non-obvious).
Beyond just "me" are social doctrines e.g. about sila and the brahma-viharas.

Two other aspects of the teaching that I consider important and remarkable, which distinguish it, are:

Dhammānusati

The Dhamma is well declared by the Bhagavā: visible here and now, immediate, inviting to come and see, effective, to be individually ascertained by the wise.
Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo: sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī ti.

This is different from the argument proposed in some theistic religions, i.e. "Do not sin, because sin is against God's will, and for sin you are punished on Judgement Day" -- i.e. a hypothetical future and arbitrary rules, which you may not believe in

The idea that "the Noble Sangha" and "the wise" might assess whether something is "Right" -- I find that more concrete than the idea that there's a God who judges (there may be analogs in a theistic religion, e.g. Saints and Church, but even so).

I love Vinaya.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/ebook_index.html#bmc
Except that I am a big fan of Nanda Sutta(Udana 3:2)

"I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. And on that occasion Ven. Nanda–the Blessed One’s brother, son of his maternal aunt–announced to a large number of monks: “I don’t enjoy leading the holy life, my friends. I can’t keep up the holy life. Giving up the training, I will return to the common life.”

"Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he told the Blessed One: “Lord, Ven. Nanda–the Blessed One’s brother, son of his maternal aunt–has announced to a large number of monks: ‘I don’t enjoy leading the holy life, my friends. I can’t keep up the holy life. Giving up the training, I will return to the common life.’”

"Then the Blessed One told a certain monk, “Come, monk. In my name, call Nanda, saying, ‘The Teacher calls you, friend Nanda.’”

"Responding, “As you say, lord,” to the Blessed One, the monk went to Ven. Nanda, on arrival he said, “The Teacher calls you, friend Nanda.”

Responding, “As you say, my friend,” to the monk, Ven. Nanda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, “Is it true, Nanda, that you have announced to a large number of monks: ‘I don’t enjoy leading the holy life, my friends. I can’t keep up the holy life. Giving up the training, I will return to the common life’?”

“Yes, lord.”

“But why, Nanda, don’t you enjoy leading the holy life? Why can’t you keep up the holy life? Why, giving up the training, will you return to the common life?”

“Lord, as I was leaving home, a Sakyan girl–the envy of the countryside–glanced up at me, with her hair half-combed, and said, ‘Hurry back, master.’ Recollecting that, I don’t enjoy leading the holy life. I can’t keep up the holy life. Giving up the training, I will return to the common life.”

Then, taking Ven. Nanda by the arm–as a strong man might flex his extended arm or extend his flexed arm–the Blessed One disappeared from Jeta’s Grove and reappeared among the Devas of the Heaven of the Thirty-three [Tāvatiṁsa]. Now on that occasion about 500 dove-footed nymphs had come to wait upon Sakka, the ruler of the devas. The Blessed One said to Ven. Nanda, “Nanda, do you see these 500 dove-footed nymphs?”

“Yes, lord.”

“What do you think, Nanda? Which is lovelier, better looking, more charming: the Sakyan girl, the envy of the countryside, or these 500 dove-footed nymphs?”

“Lord, compared to these 500 dove-footed nymphs, the Sakyan girl, the envy of the countryside, is like a cauterized monkey with its ears & nose cut off. She doesn’t count. She’s not even a small fraction. There’s no comparison. The 500 dove-footed nymphs are lovelier, better looking, more charming.”

“Then take joy, Nanda. Take joy! I am your guarantor for getting 500 dove-footed nymphs.”

“If the Blessed One is my guarantor for getting 500 dove-footed nymphs, I will enjoy leading the holy life under the Blessed One.”

Then, taking Ven. Nanda by the arm–as a strong man might flex his extended arm or extend his flexed arm–the Blessed One disappeared from among the Devas of the Heaven of the Thirty-three and reappeared at Jeta’s Grove. The monks heard, “They say that Ven. Nanda–the Blessed One’s brother, son of his maternal aunt–is leading the holy life for the sake of nymphs. They say that the Blessed One is his guarantor for getting 500 dove-footed nymphs.”

Then the monks who were companions of Ven. Nanda went around addressing him as they would a hired hand & a person who had been bought: “Venerable Nanda, they say, has been hired. Venerable Nanda, they say, has been bought.1 He’s leading the holy life for the sake of nymphs. The Blessed One is his guarantor for getting 500 dove-footed nymphs.”

Then Ven. Nanda–humiliated, ashamed, & disgusted that the monks who were his companions were addressing him as they would a hired hand & a person who had been bought–went to dwell alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute. He in no long time entered & remained in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself right in the here-&-now. He knew, “Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world.” And thus Ven. Nanda became another one of the arahants.

Then a certain devatā, in the far extreme of the night, her extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta’s Grove, approached the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to him, she stood to one side. As she was standing there, she said to the Blessed One, “Lord, Ven. Nanda–the Blessed One’s brother, son of his maternal aunt–through the ending of the effluents, has entered & remains in the effluent-free awareness-release & discernment-release, directly knowing & realizing them for himself right in the here-&-now.” And within the Blessed One, the knowledge arose: “Nanda, through the ending of the effluents, has entered & remains in the effluent-free awareness-release & discernment-release, directly knowing & realizing them for himself right in the here-&-now.”

Then, when the night had passed, Ven. Nanda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, “Lord, about the Blessed One’s being my guarantor for getting 500 dove-footed nymphs: I hereby release the Blessed One from that promise.”

“Nanda, having comprehended your awareness with my own awareness, I realized that ‘Nanda, through the ending of the effluents, has entered & remains in the effluent-free awareness-release & discernment-release, directly knowing & realizing them for himself right in the here-&-now.’ And a devatā informed me that ‘Ven. Nanda, through the ending of the effluents, has entered & remains in the effluent-free awareness-release & discernment-release, directly knowing & realizing them for himself right in the here-&-now.’ When your mind, through lack of clinging, was released from the effluents, I was thereby released from that promise.”

Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:

In whom

the mire of sensuality is crossed over,2

the thorn of sensuality crushed,

the ending of delusion reached:

He doesn’t quiver

from pleasures & pains

: a monk.

OP: What's the most important teaching of the Buddha in the canon?

I would say the most important teaching of the Buddha, for a very advanced person, would be the Bahiya Sutta, which is already referenced in Max's answer. The Buddha could only teach one thing to Bahiya and he taught this teaching about anatta:

"Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be
merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the
sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely
what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya.
"When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the
cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be
'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you
will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then,
Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two.
Just this is the end of suffering."
Bahiya Sutta (Ud 1.10)

OP: Or, what would be the best teaching to spark an interest in someone who knows little or nothing about the teachings of the Buddha?

Now this is a totally different question from the first one.
To a complete beginner, who is usually also a lay person, who has never heard of any teachings from the Buddha, the following opening verses of the Dhammapada would be interesting:

Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering
follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.

Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness
follows him like his never-departing shadow.

"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.

"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.

Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.

There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die. But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.
Dhammapada chapter 1

And also the golden rule:

Searching all directions
with your awareness,
you find no one dearer
than yourself.
In the same way, others
are thickly dear to themselves.
So you shouldn't hurt others
if you love yourself.
Ud 5.1

In the Mahasatipatthana sutta, Buddha says the following, at the very start of the sutta and at the end of the sutta-

"This is the one and the only way, monks, for the purification of
beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the
extinguishing of suffering and grief, for walking on the path of
truth, for the realization of Nibbana: that is the fourfold
establishing of awareness."

In the light of Buddha asserting it to be the one and the only way, I think it can be said to be the most important teaching of the Buddha; though the teaching on Four Noble Truths in Dhammacakkapavattana sutta may well be put in the same category.

Probably the Anapassatisuta Sutta.
Here's an example quote from the sutta
"Mindfulness of Breathing
And how does a monk live contemplating the body in the body?
Herein, monks, a monk, having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree or to an empty place, sits down with his legs crossed, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness alert.[3]
Ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. Breathing in a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a long breath"; breathing out a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a long breath"; breathing in a short breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a short breath"; breathing out a short breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a short breath."
Why is this so crucial and very important?
Well, this is a basic practice to help one cultivate wisdom or knowledge.
How so? How can simply being mindful of the breath help someone become more wise or knowledgeable?
Well, anything we practice, we get better at it. So if we practice knowing,then we become better at knowing things, which means we would gain more knowledge.
Now how would it help one gain more wisdom?
Let's start here, what is wisdom?
Wisdom according to Google is,
"the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise."
So how does being mindful of the breath lead to wisdom? Well, to be mindful of the breath is to simply be aware of the breath, it takes no effort to be aware of the breath.
But to be aware of something is to know something.
So, the practice of knowing, or the practice of knowing the breath can lead to more knowing, or more wisdom.

MN 117 is the most important teaching in the Canon.
MN 117 explains notions of 'rebirth' are not part of the Noble Eightfold Path; therefore also explains (by default) notions of 'rebirth' are not part of the Four Noble Truths.

It is the one that makes you progress in the very instant you perceive it or somewhat later.
So, it changes from person to person and from instant to instant.

Saṁyutta Nikāya 3:25 Pabbatopama Sutta: The Simile of the Mountains

transl. Thanissaro (text) https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN3_25.html

(mp3 audio) https://suttareadings.net/audio/sn03.025.than.mp3

Didn't Guatamala Buhddalicious suggest being mindfull? ahem mindful? I think that's important (sure hope it's a precept, or in the canon or whatever.)
I grew up when non-(za)Zen type of Buddhism was popular, but I discover "becoming one" with it all right when I needed it the most. Let's just say, it felt like I was having "bad" Karma, but really, it all worked out. For me.
I read books like "Hardcore Zen" by Brad Warner, the "Zen of Juggling" byt Dave Finnegan, & two books by Philip Toshio SUDO, "Zen Computer/Guitar". & alsom started watching Alan Watts' old school colorless movies on public access cable television (somebody got a mindnight timeslot. midnight! ahem)
I've of course studied more since then, but those things helped to spark my consciousness, personally.
I wouldn't worry too much about pressuring anybody into this kind of thing. & yes, exposure to something you have expressed no interest in can sometimes feel like, one is a horse, being lead, to, play a game of horse shoes.
U
Good luck.
........(five minutes later)
I think I was being mindless, and not the good kind (I'm freeing my mind, ok freeing my mind here we go). I forgot I helped make this video, it could spark a person. Actually, it did, the event, & the video. here, take this: https://archive.org/embed/dalai-lama-magic-mouse-stringless-yo-yo-jj-fixed-analog-audio-ver-1.0
i'll go now. be well/safe, party on, good luck. (leaving my typos. they are fine. at least they're not spelling errors, right? & good luck is better x2-JJ)

Thanks, hope you feel better soon.