text:
If i am the result of an aggregate, how does one refer to oneself?
It is my understanding that illusion, reality, rebirth and reincarnation are a result of the aggregates i.e. vision, taste, sound, emotions, smell and mind. - Source
If one is am simply a composition of these aggregates, how does one refer to oneself in everyday conversation? For example, when using the term i, in sentences such as i am ..
The reason for the question is to step away from being attached to one's identity which is generally reflected in i.

Saying that you are "simply" anything is misleading your thought-process. A computer is simply a large number of transistors, but it is no longer possible for any one person to understand the complexity of it. "I" is probably the most complex and poorly understood word, but wee can still use it carefully.

Short Answer: Use "I" like you always did, but be mindful of what it does (and doesn't) refer to.
Longer Answer:
It isn't that "I" doesn't exist; rather, it doesn't exist in the way we normally think it does.  "I" does not denote a stable, independent entity that is "us".
However, "I" does exist in another sense; it's Conventionally Real. For instance, imagine you are with friends and you say something.  Then someone asks "Who said that?". How will you respond?  Will you say...

The Skhandas did?
Talking is happening?
This biological unit has spoken?

I hope not! You can respond with "I did", because that is the correct response.  After all, the other people didn't say that; if they didn't say that, then who did?  Further, if you talk about other people normally, but talk oddly about yourself, then aren't you still clinging to yourself, by holding yourself out as something different than what's around you?  Clinging is clinging; it doesn't magically stop being clinging because you clung to something different.
The issue isn't using "I", but your beliefs about it. Although language can affect thought, changing your words won't necessarily address the problem.  It's the thoughts and feelings behind those words that matter.
Words are meant to be used publicly, and as such, conventional rules regarding them should be observed if they are to be used effectively.  However, be mindful of those words; gauge the impact of certain words on your mind. When you say "I" are you really just being conventionally real, or is there a trace of clinging to self when those words leave your lips?  What feelings arise from using "I" when you are criticized or praised or threatened?
If you talk funny, you won't gain enlightenment; you'll just lose the ability to coherently communicate.

Good answer: skillful means applies to words also. Words are just a tool. Awareness makes them safer to use, like any tool.

If one tries to search for this self by either using the method of analysis where one breaks things up into the constituent parts and look at them one will not find a self anywhere.
If one uses the method of synthesis by looking at things in a relational/interdependent way by using the doctrine of dependent origination one will also not find a self anywhere. Why? Because according to dependent origination things only exist as a part/reflection of other things. Therefore no real self can be found.
The false idea of a self arises when the 5 aggregates work together as a physio-psychological machine. The false idea of a self is really just one of the 52 mental formations belonging to the 4th aggreate and all the aggregates are subject to the 3 signs of existence; anicca, dukkha, anatta.
For references see Dr. Walpola Rahula's book on "What The Buddha Taught", p. 18.
Here is a quote from the book "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, chapter: Compendium of Consciousness, Guide to §2, p. 25-26:

"From the standpoint of ultimate reality (paramatthato): According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, there are two kinds of realities — the conventional (sammuti) and the ultimate (paramattha). Conventional realities are the referents of ordinary conceptual thought (paññatti) and conventional modes of expression (vohara). They include such entities as living beings, persons, men, women, animals, and the apparently stable persisting objects that constitute our unanalyzed picture of the world. The Abhidhamma philosophy maintains that these notions do not possess ultimate validity, for the objects which they signify do not exist in their own right as irreducible realities. Their mode of being is conceptual, not actual. They are products of mental construction (parikappana), not realities existing by reason of their own nature.
Ultimate realities, in contrast, are things that exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabh±va). These are the dhammas: the final, irre- ducible components of existence, the ultimate entities which result from a correctly performed analysis of experience. Such existents admit of no further reduction, but are themselves the final terms of analysis, the true constituents of the complex manifold of experience. Hence the word paramattha is applied to them, which is derived from parama = ulti- mate, highest, final, and attha = reality, thing.
The ultimate realities are characterized not only from the ontological angle as the ultimate existents, but also from the epistemological angle as the ultimate objects of right knowledge. As one extracts oil from sesame seed, so one can extract the ultimate realities from the conven- tional realities. For example “being,” and “man,” and “woman” are concepts suggesting that the things they signify possess irreducible ultimate unity. However, when we wisely investigate these things with the ana- lytical tools of the Abhidhamma, we find that they do not possess the ultimacy implied by the concepts, but only a conventional reality as an assemblage of impermanent factors, of mental and physical processes. Thus by examining the conventional realities with wisdom, we eventu- ally arrive at the objective actualities that lie behind our conceptual con- structs. It is these objective actualities - the dhammas, which maintain their intrinsic natures independently of the mind’s constructive functions - that form the ultimate realities of the Abhidhamma.
Although ultimate realities exist as the concrete essences of things, they are so subtle and profound that an ordinary person who lacks training cannot perceive them. Such a person cannot see the ultimate realities because his mind is obscured by concepts, which shape reality into con- ventionally defined appearances. Only by means of wise or thorough attention to things (yoniso manasikara) can one see beyond the concepts and take the ultimate realities as one’s object of knowledge. Thus paramattha is described as that which belongs to the domain of ulti- mate or supreme knowledge".

So what is mentioned here is that in Conventional reality (sammuti-sacca) there exists beings, humans, cars, animals, an I, Me, Self. But these are merely concepts with no real point of reference. When one instead turns to Ultimate reality (paramattha-sacca) then one will see that everything is made up of these five aggregates. In Abhidhamma the five aggregates are instead divided into 4 categories.
Let me again use the same quote by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, p. 26-27:

In the Suttas the Buddha usually analyzes a being or individual into five types of ultimate realities, the five aggregates (pañcakkhandha): matter, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness. In the Abhidhamma teaching the ultimates are grouped into the four categories enumerated in the text. The first three - consciousness, mental factors, and matter - comprise all conditioned realities. The five aggregates of the Suttanta teaching fit within these three categories. The aggregate of consciousness (viññaoakkhandha) is here comprised by consciousness (citta), the word citta generally being employed to refer to different classes of consciousness distinguished by their concomitants.
The middle three aggregates are, in the Abhidhamma, all included within the category of mental factors (cetasikas), the mental states that arise along with consciousness performing diverse functions. The Abhidhamma philosophy enumerates fifty-two mental factors: the aggregates of feeling and perception are each counted as one factor; the aggregate of mental formations (sankharakkhandha) of the Suttas is finely subdivided into fifty mental factors. The aggregate of matter is, of course, identical with the Abhidhamma category of matter, which will later be divided into twenty-eight types of material phenomena.
To these three types of reality, which are conditioned, is added a fourth reality, which is unconditioned. That reality, which is not included in the five aggregates, is Nibbana, the state of final deliverance from the suffering inherent in conditioned existence. Thus in the Abhidhamma philosophy there are altogether these four ultimate realities: consciousness, mental factors, matter, and Nibbana.

By doing insight meditation one will come to realize the 3 signs of existence, i.e. anicca, dukkha and anatta and thereby seeing for oneself that the conditioned reality is made up of mental and physical phenomena that arises and ceases all the time. There is no "owner" of these phenomena. There is "noone" in control.
This short quote is from Mahasi Sayadaw regarding anatta:

"There is deeds but no doer.
There is movement but no mover.
There is no unmoving mover behind the movement."

By realizing through insight meditation that phenomena are impermanent one will come to realize that they are also unsatisfactory. Something that arises, persists and then perishes cannot be relied on. One has no control over phenomena. They are thereby oppresive, uncontrollable and ungovernable. When one truly sees that in insight meditation one will come to realize anatta. One will come to see that what is both impermanent and unsatisfactory is not fit to be called a self. Something that is uncontrollable, oppresing and ever-changing cannot be a self. One will come to see that the notion of a self is merely a mental formation that also arises, persists and then perishes.
Hope this might be of some help to you. If i forgot to mention something you can make a comment and i might be able to add to it.
Lanka

Referring to yourself as 'i' means nothing, there is no attachment there, nor will it cause you to suffer.
I refer to myself as 'i' all the time, but i'm also very aware of the insight gained from realising the 5 aggregates. Referring to youself as 'i' will never bring pain or suffering, but ... if it does, then you have bigger issues and more ignorance than simply a misunderstanding of a label.
The 5 aggregates mean that you are everything and anything in a constant state of flux, forever changing. In any given moment you will and can be the full sensation, the full embodiment of hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking, whereas, an 'i' is just a generic term, a possible delusion that something, 'i' is permanent!!
But, this is just my view.
Good luck, metta.

In conventional terms you have to deal with it at the level of perceptions. Hence "I", "me", "mine", "you", "him/her", "he/she", etc.
What you have to do is not to further build perceptions about ultimate reality but see it through meditation. If polarised you should reduce the polarity as per The Detailed Discourse on the (Seven) Perceptions, The Giri-m-ananda Discourse, etc.

My suggestion is to approach this the way the Buddha does. In the Dona Sutta (quoted below) and in many suttas, the Buddha refers to himself using "I", despite achieving Nirvana.

"The fermentations by which I would go to a deva-state, or become a
  gandhabba in the sky, or go to a yakkha-state & human-state: Those
  have been destroyed by me, ruined, their stems removed. Like a blue
  lotus, rising up, unsmeared by water, unsmeared am I by the world, and
  so, brahman, I'm awake.

Sometimes people think that the self doesn't exist. That's not true. The self definitely exists. However, the self is not permanent and it's not independently or absolutely existing. It's formed out of its dependencies to different aggregates according to dependent origination.
The Buddha, you and I are therefore not wrong to use "I" to refer to ourselves. It's true in a relative sense but not in an absolute sense.
The achievement of Nirvana goes far deeper than the artificial correction of semantics.

From your question, I am assuming that you are concerned with the problem of how to refer to oneself because you believe that referring to yourself as 'I' causes you to become attached to your identity.
I think the real question is whether referring to yourself as 'I' causes you to be attached to your identity or not. According to what the Buddha taught, your attachment to your identity comes from your ignorance of the nature of reality. So I think we can conclude that referring to oneself as 'I' is not the cause for attachment to your identity and therefore not referring to yourself as 'I' will not cause you to step away from being attached to your identity.
You might now ask, how can I come to understand the nature of reality so that I am no longer ignorant of the nature of reality, and therefore step away from my attachment to my identity?
The Buddha has the answer to your question. He said that by practising the 'Four foundations of mindfulness', you can come to understand the nature of reality. How can you practise the 'Four foundations of mindfulness'?
By following the instructions of this great monk called Yuttadhammo, who explains in this book (http://static.sirimangalo.org/howto/HTM.pdf) how to practise comprehensively the four foundations of mindfulness according to how the Buddha taught it.
I hope that you are able to practise the four foundations of mindfulness successfully, and therefore come to understand the nature of reality, and therefore be able to solve your problem of being attached to your identity.

A direct answer to this very question is found in SN 1.25


text:
Is 'Just Sitting' the same as zazen?
In the Triratna Buddhist Community we do a practice that we call Just Sitting. It's described as

Just Sitting is a space of non-action in which anything can emerge.
  Often the fruit of the previous practice only emerges when you stop
  ‘doing’ it. And Just Sitting is the non-doing space in which that may
  (or may not) happen. Just Sitting also allows assimilation of what has
  just been done, and provides the necessary counterpoise to activity
  and effort. Just Sitting is a matter of simply ‘being’ with whatever
  happens in awareness, without attaching to it or rejecting it.

Link to quote is here.
I've always wondered if this is something that we've just kind of invented or adapted or is it common to other Buddhist traditions? Is it the same as zazen practice perhaps?

It just another form of meditation called Bare Attention

Bare Attention, Choiceless Awareness, Shikantaza.  Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shikantaza

"zazen" literally means seated meditation.  "just sitting" is usually, at least in the circles I'm familiar with, the English rendering of "shikantaza" which is the meditation style usually taught in Soto Zen, particularly the American brand.

good question, zen basically means think, and zazen sit & think: the terms are quite basic terms, and can be applied with differing shades of meaning, and in Zen, zazen generally means seated contemplation; just sitting could be simply just sitting, but  is more of a nonAsian phrase and is seen with differing meanings ranging from laudatory to neutral to pejorative(which the latter would generally be considered in such context as inappropriate)

The term Zazen (Chinese 坐禪, zuò chán) just means seated meditation. It doesn't itself specify what kind of meditation is being practiced.
Just Sitting refers to Shikantaza, which is the type of meditation taught by Dōgen Zenji, the founder of the Sōtō school of Japanese Zen. He famously explained it in the Fukanzazengi saying :

Once you have adjusted your posture, take a breath and exhale fully,
  rock your body right and left, and settle into steady, immovable
  sitting. Think of not thinking. Not thinking-what kind of thinking is
  that? Nonthinking. This is the essential art of zazen.

There are similar practices in other schools of Zen in China and Korea, but it is less prominent as Koan practice is more common.

Or the Korean Seon version of Koan, hua tou

Zen Mind Beginner's Mind by Shunryu Suzuki might offer you the perspective that goes beyond words to intention. If we aim at beginner's mind, then just sitting or zazen or meditation is aiming at beginner's mind. The intention of the person sitting is the most significant factor.
There are times I have fallen asleep sitting. Perhaps I was tired or my intention was not clear.
Other times when intention is clear the sitting becomes the bow, the awareness the arrow and intention the one drawing the bow. When intention draws the bow, the arrow cannot miss the mark.
Here is a copy of the book. Sip a page or two at a time and report back in a year - me saying words will not draw the bow.
http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/zenmind.pdf

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What is the buddhist way of responding to compliments?
"Hey David you're a genius!" "Hey David you look so fine!"
I think blushing and feeling a little nervous isn't really buddhist... But sometimes if you don't react this way you might look as if youre being rude
What exactly do the scriptures say of how one should respond in these situations? I've seen quotes about the Buddha saying the brahmin is "indifferent to compliments and indifferent to criticism".
I'd like to know what the scriptures say about its possible harms, etc.  I think it is an interesting question that deserves some thought as it is part of our lives.

Just because you're Buddhist doesn't mean you can't say "thank you" :P
All facetiousness aside, Buddhism is clear about the practice.  For instance, it stresses compassion and non-attachment, so evaluate your course of action against those two.

If someone compliments you and you don't politely acknowledge the
compliment, this person may be offended.  That isn't compassionate of you.
If someone compliments you and you let it get to your head, you could
be fostering attachment towards self, the thing about which you were
complimented, and the praise of others.

So how can you approach compliments in a way that takes the above into account?  Well, you could thank the person while remembering that you are thanking them out of compassion and consideration for their feelings and not because they gave you some validation you needed.
Ultimately, it's about skillful means.  Don't seek every possible situation in Buddhist texts; rather, make sure you understand the principles and use that understanding to guide your actions.

Mindful mediation : a handbook for Buddhist peacemakers by John A McConnell` might be a good book to read.
Also The Discourse to Sundarika Bhāra,dvāja mentions that if the complaint is irrelevant simply just do not accept it and react to it.

Why is it a good read? i'm not seeing the connection. Also, can you extrapolate what parts of the book that it would germane to this?

Right Speech: be beneficial, timely, skillful.
Right:
A: You are a genius!
B: Thank you, I appreciate it. [undazzled, undeluded]
Wrong:
A: You are a genius!
B: Ah shucks, no, no, not at all, I have a whole bunch of things I've been stupid it--it's just that--
(unbeneficial because you are rejecting their positive esteem--which is all it is)
(untimely because now is not the time to bring up "whole bunch of things"--especially after the person has just gained their trust in you)
(unskillful because you are overtaken by the compliment rather than skillfully using it to keep their trust, move the conversation forward to more mutually beneficial topics)

Reply with "thank you" but you don't necessarily have to blush and become nervous. The action of thanking others remain the same and is in accordance with politeness and the decorum of society. If you are internally not emotionally attached to what is praised (as Barzell says, don't let it get to your head), then you won't respond by blushing.
Also, don't reply back with "There is no need to praise me or others because according to the anatta principle, there is no self in all phenomena". Haha.

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


text:
Which sutta is it in which Sariputta asks his disciples .. friend if someone asks, is the world eternal
I remember reading once, disciples of Sariputta were going out into the world and he ask them the question: "Friend what if someone ask you is the world eternal or is not eternal". Then his passed his disciples when they just quote Dependent Origination "depending on contact, feeling arises, depending on feeling, craving arises..etc..
I'm trying to look for that sutta again. Anybody know which sutta is it or my memory has been corrupted, there never was such a sutta.

I found two that are similar, but not identical.
The Kalara Sutta is similar, in that it's Sariputta talking about Dependent Origination. However, in that sutta, it's the Buddha who is asking the questions; Sariputta has no disciples; and instead of asking whether the world is eternal, the question is whether birth is ended. This could perhaps be the one you're thinking of, because the Buddha asks questions like, "But, Sāriputta, if they were to ask you ..."
Or there's the The Greater Discourse on the
Elephant-Footprint Simile, which starts with Sariputta addressing the bhikkus as "Friends", and ends by repeating that "He who sees dependent origination sees the
Teaching; he who sees the Teaching sees dependent origination."

If you want to add to this answer, SN 22.2 is the only example I can find of Sariputta addressing monks taking leave of Sariputta.

@Chris Thanks, but not the one I'm looking for__@yuttadhammo Thanks, but not it.

SN 22.2 is the Devadaha Sutta: At Devadaha. In summary I think it teaches renunciation or dispassion, especially dispassion for the skandhas, because they're subject to change.


text:
What are the positions of the different schools on a primordial mind?
Different Buddhist traditions have some mention of an original, primordial mind of some sort. If there is one, what are its attributes.

This kind of question varies according to tradition and sect and I think that it needs to be further specified. Perhaps you should rephrase it as "Is there an original mind according to school x" or "what are the positions of the different schools on a primordial mind" or something like that.

@Bakmoon- thanks I taken your suggestion and wording.

Bhavanga, Pabhassara-cita and Nibbana (Theravadin perspective from Ajahn Mun's Thai forest tradition)
To get from bhavanga, pabhassaara to nibbana and understand how kamma effects are stored in the present and transmigrated to the future we have to explore some terms.
What happens in-between times when we are not thinking, when we are in a dreamless sleep? Is there still the arising and falling of consciousness (citta)?
In this tradition there is the bhavanga-citta which arise after the rebirth-linking consciousness (patisandhi-citta) that form the “life-continuum” in the next existence.

The 'Visuddhimagga' (XIV, 114) states with regard to the bhavanga-citta:
  When the patisandhi-citta has ceased, then, following on whatever kind of rebirth-consciousness it may be, the same kinds, being the result of the same kamma whatever it may be, occur as bhavanga-cittas with that same object; and again those same kinds. And as long as there is no other kind of arising of consciousness to interrupt the continuity they also go on occurring endlessly in periods of dreamless sleep, etc., like the current of a river.

A bhavanga citta is a vipaka citta (kamma-result), but called bhavanga (literally meaning “factor of life”) because it performs the function of the “life continuum”.
Now we come to the question how is it stored?
Dynamically maintained throughout one life to another is just a postulation with no-doctrinal evidence:

“.., kamma and vipaka don't get stored into some kind of immutable and centralized "repository", instead they're continuously and dynamically re-inforced or weakened from life to life with the patisandhi citta acting as the "link".”

Now onn how kamma is stored from doctrinal text.

“Questions about the persistence of latent dispositions and accumulation of karmic potential thus remain: once the cognitive processes are activated, are they transmitted through the six modes of cognitive awareness? If so, why do they not influence these forms of mind? If not, how do they persist from one moment of bhavaṅga-citta to the next without some contiguous conditioning medium? The bhavaṅga-citta does not directly address these persisting questions, adumbrated in the Kathavātthu so many centuries before. Nor, to my knowledge, do subsequent Theravādin Abhidhamma traditions discuss these questions in dhammic terms.”
  - Waldron, William S. Buddhist unconscious: the ālaya-vijñāna in the context of Indian Buddhist thought. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003. p.83.
Rupert Gethin in  'Bhavanga and Rebirth According to the Abhidhamma.' in The Buddhist Forum. Vol III. T. Skorupski and U. Pagel (eds.), London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, pp. 11–35.
“..it does not seem possible on the basis of what is said explicitly in the texts to justify the claim that the bhavanga carries with it all character traits, memories, habitual tendencies, etc." .

From the above it appears that the Theravada Commentators have resisted the temptation to create mechanism for the "transmission" of kamma, in contrast to other traditions.
Briefly, in the tradition of the Yogacara Buddhist they have a concept of store –consciousness  (alaya-vijnana).
We shall now leave the subject of bhavanga, and how kamma is stored in the consciousness and turn elsewhere for help.
Unable to find any doctrinal support, we shall now turn to the people most qualified to speak on the subject, the meditators, who many believed to have experience the ultimate and have spoken on it and I refer to Ajahn Mun of the Thai forest tradition and he spoke of the luminous mind(pabhassara-citta)
I quote from the above link:

“The mind is something more radiant than anything else can be, but because counterfeits – passing defilements – come and obscure it, it loses its radiance, like the sun when obscured by clouds. Don’t go thinking that the sun goes after the clouds. Instead, the clouds come drifting along and obscure the sun. So meditators, when they know in this manner, should do away with these counterfeits by analyzing them shrewdly... When they develop the mind to the stage of the primal mind, this will mean that all counterfeits are destroyed, or rather, counterfeit things won’t be able to reach into the primal mind, because the bridge making the connection will have been destroyed. Even though the mind may then still have to come into contact with the preoccupations of the world, its contact will be like that of a bead of water rolling over a lotus leaf.” ..from Ven. Ajahn Mun, ‘A Heart Released,’ p 23. Found in Ajahn Pasanno and Ajahn Amaro, The Island: An Anthology of the Buddha’s Teachings on Nibbāna, pages 212-213.

In the same link above Pabharassa-citta is identified as bhavanga.

“The Theravadin Angutta Nikaya Atthakatha identifies the luminous mind as the bhavanga, the "ground of becoming" or "latent dynamic continuum", which is the most fundamental level of mental functioning in the Theravada Abhidhammic scheme.[11] Thanissaro Bhikkhu holds that the commentaries' identification of the luminous mind with the bhavanga is problematic, but Peter Harvey finds it to be a plausible interpretation.
  In Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s translation of the Pabhassara Sutta he gives his reason in Note 1.

(I’ll refer to Note 1 to it later).
I do not have access to Peter Harvey’s views. But in the Brahma-nimantanika Sutta(MN49) translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, there is a description of “'Consciousness without surface, endless, radiant all around” and in his Note no. 9 in MN49 he argues that:

Consciousness without surface (viññanam anidassanam).. for the arahant, nibbana is not an object of consciousness. Instead it is directly known without mediation. Because consciousness without feature is directly known without mediation, there seems good reason to equate the two.

That this consciousness is Nibbana!
But yet in his Note 1(which I promise to come back) in Pabhassara Sutta  he says:

Another interpretation equates the luminosity of the mind with the "consciousness without feature," described as "luminous" in MN49, but this interpretation also has problems. According to MN 49, that consciousness partakes of nothing in the describable world, not even the "Allness of the All," so how could it possibly be defiled? And, because it is not realized until the goal of the practice is reached, why would the perception of its luminosity be a prerequisite for developing the mind? And again, if "mind" here means consciousness without feature, how could the sutta talk of its development?

Here is Ajahn Sujato's Pabhassara reading that the mind is somehow radiant!

The beginning of the Sutta has the Buddha (presumably, although it doesn’t actually say so), saying, “This mind is radiant…” The particle “idam”, “this”, functions to limit and specific: This mind, not “the mind” (as in Thanissaro’s translation). As well as the gold/samadhi passages, we might compare to the Upakkilesa Sutta, where the Buddha speaks of how he meditated, then light arose, but because of “defilements” (upakkilesa, the same word as our sutta), the light vanished. The word for light is different (obhasa), but is from the same root with the same basic meaning.
This is the normal way the Buddha talked about the mind. It is not that it is “naturally” radiant or defiled: it is naturally conditioned. When the conditions for darkness are there, it is dark, when the conditions for light are there, it is light. Our passage, which is unique, without parallels in any early Suttas, syntactically awkward, clearly the subject of editing, can be read as suggesting a different take on things, that the mind is somehow “radiant” even when covered by defilements. Or it can be read in line with the other, more clear suttas.
In either case, there is no suggestion here that the “radiant mind” be connected with Nibbana. Quite the opposite: the whole point of the sutta is that it can be defiled, so it cannot be Nibbana.

Ajahn Sujato stop short of connecting the "radiant mind" with Nibbana because ..it can be defiled.
The answer is provided by Ajahn Mun’s description:

“The mind is something more radiant than anything else can be, but because counterfeits – passing defilements – come and obscure it, it loses its radiance, like the sun when obscured by clouds”…. “When they develop the mind to the stage of the primal mind,..”

So in the Pabhassara sutta  when it is said:

“Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9}
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10}
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1}
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2}

Both Ajahn Mun and the Buddha are saying the same thing but Ajahn Mun had clarified that the luminous mind has lost it radiance when it is obscured by defilements and that we have to get rid of the defilements to reach the state of the primal mind (why would we want to go back to the primal mind, only if it is inherently luminous).
The Buddha stated very clearly that whether the mind is defiled or not it is still an inherently luminous mind. (inherently - my addition in light of Ajahn Mun's clarification)
Is an inherently luminous mind therefore the same as "consciousness without feature" i.e. Nibbana?
What Ajahn Mun's has said is that the primeval mind is defiled in the way of being obscured by defilements and not as altered ". What is intrinsically bright cannot be defiled by alteration but can be obscured, ...like the clouds covering the sun.
The inherent luminous mind obscured by defilements is therefore bhavanga.
1) So is the true characteristics of Bhavanga, Pabhassara and Nibbana, the same, "consciousness without feature", except that Bhavanga has defilements obscuring its true nature?
2) Or is Bhavanga and Pabhassara the same, both luminous primodial mind, and different from Nibbana?
3) Or is Pabhassara, a luminous primodial mind with Avijja, not the same as Nibbana, pure awakened mind with vijja and Bhavanga just "emanations" of Pabhassara?
The Thai forest tradition of Ajahn Mun seems to adopts the third view.

In light of further research I've added Ajahn Sujato's reading of the Pabhassara sutta and his comments.

Vajrayana(Primordial mind, clear light and Primordial Buddha)
In Vajrayana the primodial mind ((Wylie: 'hod-gsal, 'od gsal), Clear light (Sanskrit prabhasvara)or "Radiant Light":

..refers to the intrinsic purity of the substratum of the mindstream , which is the moment-to-moment continuum (Sanskrit: saṃtāna) of awareness, which provides a continuity from one life to another.The concept developed in later Yogacara, to avoid “making real” of the store consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna) – *which is a store for kamma results.

Definitions
Patrul Rinpoche et al. (1994: p.410; p.403) define 'Clear light' (Tibetan: 'od gsal) as the:

...spontaneous, luminous (or knowing) aspect of the nature of Mind - or awareness (rig pa), the original state of Mind, fresh, vast, luminous, and beyond thought.[6]
In the tradition of Namkha'i, it is held that Ösel reveals the natural luminosity of emptiness, the 'true nature of Mind' (Sanskrit: cittatva).[citation needed] Ösel is taught as one part of the six yogas of Naropa.
Keown, et al. (2003) identify the Ösel or "clear light", as that by which the natural luminosity (Five Pure Lights) of emptiness (Śūnyatā) is apprehended. [7]

Berzin, in the Berzin Archives Glossary,

identifies the "mental continuum" (Sanskrit: citta santana) as constituted by the "clear light awareness" which is his rendering of ‘od-gsal (Wylie). Berzin defines ‘od-gsal thus:
The subtlest level of mental activity (Mind), which continues with no beginning and no end, without any break, even during death and even into Buddhahood. It is individual and constitutes the mental continuum of each Being. It is naturally free of conceptual cognition, the appearance-making of true existence, and grasping for true existence, since it is more subtle than the grosser levels of mental activity with which these occur. IT is named the Light. [8]

Commentary and critique:
Kapstein (2004: p.124) in mentioning the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā and Haribhadra states:

Though some later Tibetan authors do suggest that this lends support to the concept of a sort of luminous spiritual substance underlying the mind, the most influential of the Indian commentators on this text, Haribhadra, by contrast says: "Wherefore it is far removed from the nature of the one and the many, the nature, or essence, of Mind, being unoriginated, is clear Light" for the darkness of all conceptions of being is destroyed." Thus, Haribhadra will commit himself to no more than a metaphorical interpretation of the Light of Mind. In this, his perspective seems entirely continuous with the dominant scholastic trends of early Buddhism.[9]

Clear light, Primodial Buddha and Creator God by Dalai Lama:

I understand the Primordial Buddha, also known as Buddha Samantabhadra, to be the ultimate reality, the realm of the Dharmakaya-- the space of emptiness--where all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras. However, in the context of your question, the tantric tradition is the only one which explains the Dharmakaya in terms of Inherent clear light, the essential nature of the mind; this would seem imply that all phenomena, samsara and nirvana, arise from this clear and luminous source. Even the New School of Translation came to the conclusion that the "state of rest" of a practitioner of the Great Yoga--Great Yoga implies here the state of the practitioner who has reached a stage in meditation where the most subtle experience of clear light has been realized--that for as long as the practitioner remains in this ultimate sphere he or she remains totally free of any sort of veil obscuring the mind, and is immersed in a state of great bliss.
We can say, therefore, that this ultimate source, clear light, is close to the notion of a Creator, since all phenomena, whether they belong to samsara or nirvana, originate therein. But we must be careful in speaking of this source, we must not be led into error. I do not mean chat there exists somewhere, there, a sort of collective clear light, analogous to the non-Buddhist concept of Brahma as a substratum. We must not be inclined to deify this luminous space. We must understand that when we speak of ultimate or inherent clear light, we are speaking on an individual level.
Likewise, when we speak of karma as the cause of the universe we eliminate the notion of a unique entity called karma existing totally independently. Rather, collective karmic impressions, accumulated individually, are at the origin of the creation of a world. When, in the tantric context, we say that all worlds appear out of clear light, we do not visualize this source as a unique entity, but as the ultimate clear light of each being. We can also, on the basis of its pure essence, understand this clear light to be the Primordial Buddha. All the stages which make up the life of each living being--death, the intermediate state, and rebirth--represent nothing more than the various manifestations of the potential of clear light. It is both the most subtle consciousness and energy. The more clear light loses its subtlety, the more your experiences take shape. ...

Mahayana (Tathagata-garbha, Buddha-nature, Buddhabood, Indra's net)
Eight Consciousnesses

The Eight Consciousnesses is a classification developed in the tradition of the Yogacara school of Buddhism. They enumerate the five senses, supplemented by the mind, defilements of the mind, and finally the fundamental store-house consciousness, which is the basis of the other seven.
All surviving schools of buddhist thought accept – "in common" – the existence of the first six primary consciousnesses (Sanskrit: vijñāna, Tibetan: རྣམ་ཤེས་, Wylie: rnam-shes).[1] The internally coherent Yogācāra school associated with Maitreya, Asaṅga, and Vasubandhu, however, uniquely – or "uncommonly" – also posits the existence of two additional primary consciousnesses, kliṣṭamanas and ālayavijñāna, in order to explain the workings of karma.
The ālaya-vijñāna  doctrine arose on the Indian subcontinent about one thousand years before Tsong kha pa. It gained its place in a distinctly Yogācāra system over a period of some three hundred years stretching from 100 to 400 C.E., culminating in the Mahāyāna-saṁgraha, a short text by Asaṅga (circa 350), setting out a systematic presentation of the ālaya-vijñāna doctrine developed over the previous centuries. It is the doctrine found in this text in particular that Tsong kha pa, in his Ocean of Eloquence, treats as having been revealed in toto by the Buddha and transmitted to suffering humanity through the Yogācāra founding saints (Tib. shing rta srol byed): Maitreya[-nātha], Asaṅga, and Vasubandhu.

In Mahayana schools of Chan/Zen Buddhism, the alaya-vjnana is identical with the tathagata-garbha, and is fundamentally pure.
Mahayana other schools, starts with the interpretation of the Luminous Mind (Prabhasvara citta)

According to Wayman, the idea of the tathagatagarbha is grounded on sayings by the Buddha that there is an innately pure luminous mind[18] (prabhasvara citta[19]), "which is only adventitiously covered over by defilements (agantukaklesa)"[19] This luminous mind is being mentioned in the Anguttara Nikaya:[20] "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements."

The Mahāsāṃghika coupled this idea of the luminous mind with the idea of the mulavijnana (*Eight consciousnesses), the substratum consciousness that serves as the basis consciousness.
Pure consciousness

From the idea of the luminous mind emerged the idea that the awakened mind is the pure, undefiled mind. In the tathagatagarbha-sutras it is this pure consciousness that is regarded to be the seed from which Buddhahood grows:
  When this intrinsically pure consciousness came to be regarded as an element capable of growing into Buddhahood, there was the "embryo (garbha) of the Tathagata (=Buddha)" doctrine, whether or not this term is employed.
Mahayana further developed Dharma-dhātu - The realm of the Buddha in the Lotus Sutra which results in the Tiantai, Tendai and Nicheren school of Buddhism. The Lotus Sutra asserts ..
"..Skillful means of most enlightened Buddhas is itself the highest teaching (the Lotus Sūtra itself), in conjunction with the sutra's stated tenets that all other teachings are subservient to, propagated by and in the service of this highest truth, that there are not actually Three Vehicles (three kinds of teachings, each tailored to the capacity of a specific set of practitioners) as previously taught, but only One Vehicle (Skrt. Ekayāna, the Buddha’s ultimate teaching transcending limitations in the capacity of practitioners) leading to Buddhahood."
Then came the development of AvataṃsakaSūtra – the Huayan school of Chinese Buddhism , characterise by a philosophy of interpenetration: all levels of reality are related and interpenetrated. This is depicted in the image of Indra's net.

It is my thinking that for an original mind to be it has to have an essence, i.e. essentially existent.  All other phenomenon are  without essence and consequentially conditional, relatively existent.


text:
Is there any canonical descriptions of the physical characteristics of the Buddha?
Question is in the title.
Im aware of descriptions of the Buddha in which he is described as "god-like" or "supernatural".
Im looking for any canonical descriptions of the physical characteristics of the Buddha that are bit more down to earth.
Thank you for your time.

From DN 30 - Marks of the Superman:

There are thirty-two special marks of the Super-man, brethren, and for the Superman possessing them two careers lie open, and none other. If he live the life of the House, he becomes Monarch, Turner of the Wheel, a righteous Lord of the Right, Ruler of the four quarters, Conqueror, Guardian of the people’s good, Owner of the Seven Treasures. His do those seven treasures become, to wit, the Wheel treasure, the Elephant treasure, the Horse treasure, the Gem treasure, the Woman treasure, the Housefather treasure, the Adviser treasure making the seventh. More than a thousand sons will be his, heroes, champions, vigorous of frame, crushers of the hosts of the enemy. He, when he has conquered this earth to its ocean bounds, is established not by the scourge, not by the sword, but by righteousness. But if such a boy go forth from the life of the House into the Homeless State, he becomes Arahant, a Buddha Supreme, rolling back the veil from the world.

Also from MN 91 - Brahmayu Sutta:

At that time the Brahmin Brahmàyu had a pupil, a young man named Uttara who had learned the three Vedas, knew the rites and rituals as officiating priest, the phonology and etymology of words and the marks of a Great Man. The Brahmin Brahmàyu addressed his pupil and said. 'Dear Uttara, approach the recluse Gotama, son of the Sakyas, who is said to be perfect, ... re.... enlightened and blessed, and find out whether these qualities are really so, or not. You should examine good Gotama for me,' 'Sir, how should I know whether good Gotama is endowed with these qualities or not,' 'Uttara, the two and thirty marks of a Great Man have come down to us in the sayings. One endowed with these marks has two courses of action and not another. If he leads the household life, becomes the Universal Monarch, a stable, righteous king with power in the four directions, endowed with the seven jewels. They are the jewels of the, wheel, elephant, horse, gem, woman, householder, and the advisor. He has more than a thousand sons, with heroic figures, clever and able to subdue foreign armies. He rules over the country bounded by the ocean righteously, without stick or weapon. If he leaves the household and becomes hermit, he will be perfect and all knowing and would remove the veil of darkness. I have given you this knowledge and you know that.'


text:
Examples of Buddhist traditions that are derived from popular superstitions
In the online book Good Questions, Good Answers  there is the question

Why do people do all kinds of strange things in Buddhist temples

In the answer it says

It's true that some of the things Buddhists do have their origin in
  popular superstition

There are no examples to illustrate this statement though in the text. So can anyone give one or two examples of Buddhist traditions (from any school) that owe more to cultural or popular superstitions than the teachings of the Buddha.
Note - this is in no way meant to denigrate any particular school of Buddhism. I'm sure that the practices of many (all?) religions take something from local culture. I just would like some examples to illustrate this particular quote from this text.

This article describes the celebration of Vesak Day or Wesak Day 2015 at a Thai Buddhist temple (and therefore of the Theravada tradition) in Malaysia, near the capital city.
The author provides an example:

This leads to the highlight of the day - chanting and blessings by
  monks and ending the short session (which lasts no more than 5
  minutes) with a shower of "holy water".
The monks softly chants a Thai variety of the Ti-Ratana Vandana
  (homage to the Triple Gem), five precepts and punnanumodana (sharing
  of merits). For most however, these chants are exotic and spiritual,
  and are perceived to have "supra mundane" powers. It is no wonder then
  that many devotees place their personal belongings - amulets,
  religious icons and even car keys - onto a tray held by the monk who
  performs the chanting.
Their belief - mistaken or otherwise - is that these chants contain
  "spiritual powers" which are then transcended into their items, which
  when worn or used, protects them from harm or danger. The ceremony
  ends with the tying of yellow coloured strings on the wrist, a
  symbolic notion of the presence of the Sangha in the laity. Of course,
  if one wishes, they can also make a donation to the monk concerned for
  his service by putting money into a metal box.


text:
Is mindfulness the path or the goal?
Some of the reading that I have been doing recently makes me wonder what is the place of mindfulness in the Buddhist path. My previous (current?) view is that mindfulness is central and is in some way the goal of the Buddhist path. As one progresses one gets more and more mindful until at the end you are mindful all the time in a absolutely complete way. Mindfulness becomes almost synonymous with Nirvana (almost).
However I'm starting to think that mindfulness is just one tool among many and it may have a greater or lesser role as time goes on. It is just a way of seeing or helping us see more clearly and it is the clear seeing that is important.
So which view if any is closer to how things are? Is mindfulness a tool on the path or is its continuing refinement the entire point? Is it the path or the goal?

might help to specify a tradition... goal is also slippery - arahant or Buddha?

is mindfulness different from clear seeing?

Mindfulness is very important, but it is part of the path, not the goal. It is the seventh of the eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path, and the path can be grouped into three trainings. The wisdom training, the morality training, and the concentration training. Mindfulness falls under the training of concentration.
In MN 29, the longer heartwood simile discourse, the Buddha talks about the different reasons for practicing and compares them with different parts of a tree, and he warns against thinking that the parts of the path (including morality, meditation, and wisdom) as being the goal. It says:

"Just as if a man in need of heartwood, seeking heartwood, wandering
  in search of heartwood — passing over the heartwood of a great
  standing tree possessed of heartwood — cutting away the sapwood, were
  to go off carrying it, thinking, 'heartwood.' A man with good
  eyesight, seeing him, would say, 'Ah, how this good man didn't know
  heartwood, didn't know sapwood, didn't know inner bark, didn't know
  outer bark, didn't know twigs & leaves! That's why he, in need of
  heartwood, seeking heartwood, wandering in search of heartwood —
  passing over the heartwood of a great standing tree possessed of
  heartwood — cutting away the sapwood, went off carrying it, thinking,
  "heartwood." Whatever heartwood-business he had with heartwood, his
  purpose won't be served.'
"In the same way, monks, there is the case where a certain son of good
  family, out of conviction, goes forth from the home life into
  homelessness, [thinking,] '...Perhaps the end of this entire mass of
  stress might be discerned!' Having thus gone forth, he encounters
  gain, offerings, & fame. He is not gratified with that gain,
  offerings, & fame, his resolve not fulfilled. He is not intoxicated
  with that gain, offerings, & fame, not heedless about it, and does not
  fall into heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves consummation in
  virtue. He is gratified with that consummation in virtue, but his
  resolve is not fulfilled. Because of that consummation in virtue he
  does not exalt himself or disparage others. He is not intoxicated with
  that consummation in virtue, not heedless about it, and does not fall
  into heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves consummation in
  concentration. He is gratified with that consummation in
  concentration, but his resolve is not fulfilled. He is not intoxicated
  with that consummation in concentration, not heedless about it, and
  does not fall into heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves knowledge
  & vision. He is gratified with that knowledge & vision, his resolve
  fulfilled. Because of that knowledge & vision he exalts himself and
  disparages others: 'I dwell knowing & seeing, but these other monks
  dwell not knowing & not seeing.' He is intoxicated with that knowledge
  & vision, heedless about it, and falls into heedlessness. Being
  heedless, he dwells in suffering & stress. This, monks, is called a
  monk who grasps the sapwood of the holy life, and with that he falls
  short.
"Furthermore, there is the case where a certain son of good family,
  out of conviction, goes forth from the home life into homelessness,
  [thinking,] 'I am beset by birth, by aging-&-death, by sorrows,
  lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs, beset by stress, overcome
  with stress. Perhaps the end of this entire mass of stress might be
  discerned!' Having thus gone forth, he encounters gain, offerings, &
  fame. He is not gratified with that gain, offerings, & fame, his
  resolve not fulfilled. He is not intoxicated with that gain,
  offerings, & fame, not heedless about it, and does not fall into
  heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves consummation in virtue. He is
  gratified with that consummation in virtue, but his resolve is not
  fulfilled. Because of that consummation in virtue he does not exalt
  himself or disparage others. He is not intoxicated with that
  consummation in virtue, not heedless about it, and does not fall into
  heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves consummation in
  concentration. He is gratified with that consummation in
  concentration, but his resolve is not fulfilled. He is not intoxicated
  with that consummation in concentration, not heedless about it, and
  does not fall into heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves knowledge
  & vision. He is gratified with that knowledge & vision, but his
  resolve is not fulfilled. Because of that knowledge & vision he does
  not exalt himself or disparage others. He is not intoxicated with that
  knowledge & vision, not heedless about it, and does not fall into
  heedlessness. Being heedful, he achieves a non-occasional liberation.
  And it is impossible, monks, there is no opportunity, for that monk to
  fall from that non-occasional release. [1]
"Just as if a man in need of heartwood, seeking heartwood, wandering
  in search of heartwood, cutting away just the heartwood of a great
  standing tree possessed of heartwood, were to go off carrying it,
  knowing, 'heartwood.' A man with good eyesight, seeing him, would say,
  'Ah, how this good man did know heartwood, did know sapwood, did know
  inner bark, did know outer bark, did know twigs & leaves! That's why
  he, in need of heartwood, seeking heartwood, wandering in search of
  heartwood, cutting away just the heartwood of a great standing tree
  possessed of heartwood, were to go off carrying it, knowing,
  "heartwood." Whatever heartwood-business he had with heartwood, his
  purpose will be served.'
  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.029.than.html

This Sutta makes it clear that it is incorrect to identify a part of the path such as mindfulness as somehow being identical with the goal. Mindfulness is a tool, not the result.

Mindfulness (read: paying attention) is a vehicle to True Reality (seeing without the influence of kleshas).
After this permanent consciousness transformation has occured, the struggle at mindfulness is no longer required as it was during mindfulness training.
Someone: Who are you? Are you a god?
Buddha: I am Awake.

According to the 'four noble truths' doctrine, mindfulness is the path (or part of the path).
The Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta says,

"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

In other words, the whole Noble Eightfold Path is described as the path rather than the goal (the goal is cessation of stress); and this Eightfold path includes mindfulness ... and also includes what you call "clear seeing" (if that's the same as what it calls "right view").
However alternatively note that this answer says that different schools of Buddhism appear to have different views about the goal, and about the path.

Mindfulness is the path which leads to the goal. You are right in saying that 'clear seeing is the most important' but I think you might be mistaken to think that mindfulness is just one of many ways to seeing clearly. This is because mindfulness IS the seeing clearly.This is what the Buddha himself said during an occasion. He said that the practise of mindfulness is the only path to Nibbana (the final goal that the Buddha taught us to achieve).
I think your confusion might stem from those 'lists' of factors that you have to purify. By training in mindfulness, you can balance all the other factors automatically, whether you are thinking about the eight fold noble path or the 37 enlightenment factors.
Other practises like Samatha meditation can be an aid to practising mindfulness, but it doesn't lead to clear seeing by itself (which is what the training in mindfulness does), and therefore can't lead to Nibbana.

Alan Wallace - in his Attention Revolution - seems to put forward the idea that there really is no difference between goal and path. To differentiate would be instrumental thinking.

I'm decidedly not an expert in this--but I'd argue it is both. Your goal is to be mindful of each passing moment: in, of, and for itself. But that is also the path. There is nothing to do, but do to it--stop worrying, stop analyzing: just be in the present moment, mindful of all that is.
But mindfulness is hard. As soon as you try to meditate, thoughts bubble upwards, your monkey mind takes you a dozen directions. The goal is for all of that to stop, but the only way to achieve this is practice--and that is done by following the path.

if only you were a bit more specific in saying that the Path is the Noble Eightfold Path…  Being mindful of each & every moment, is in itself a type of meditation. It becomes a private experience by the wise only when there is INSIGHT or vipassana. But insight (vipassana) depends on samadhi or CONCENTRATION. And concentration (samadhi) depends on Sammaditthi or RIGHT VIEW.

There are 37 factors (Bodhipakkhiyādhammā) you have to cultivate in balance to get to Nirvana. Out of which one (you can say the most important of them all) is Awareness. If you loose this you cannot cultivate the rest as it is the controller as well as the measuring instrument as to how much each factor has developed.
Measurer - awareness will tell you which factors are imbalanced
Controller - realising some factor is imbalanced you can start working on making it balanced


text:
What meditation practice will allow me to sleep less and focus more?
I have an issue picking meditation to practice during my free time as a medical student. My free time is limited and my stress levels are sky high. What is the best meditation practice for me out there? something that will keep me awake as well as improve my power of focus. My attention deficit is creating huge problems in my studies.

Thanks you guys... the 1st answer is the most comprehensive. I do remember when I was a teenager I used to practice Metta mediation and had a better time falling asleep. But as I became a medical student and am currently studying in my 3rd year, my mind got clogged with the ever increasing amount of knowledge and stress, that I felt like I was trapped in this dogma of man made knowledge and lost all the freedom I had as kid. But I feel now, that that freedom I lost is actually mostly because I lost my path as a meditator and a Buddhist practitioner more than anything else. I should find the time to do these little things, because they are those little things that makes us complete. Thanks so much for the responses!

Hi, this question will invite opinionated answers. You might try, "can meditation help me sleep less?" Or similar.

Hello and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some helpful tips to get started here.

I've converted this to a wiki, since there isn't likely one clear answer - the accepted answer isn't "the" answer, it's "a" answer - a good one, too.

I am also a second year medical student, and I also used to face the same problems that you do.
The meditation practice of 'Anapanasati' will allow you to sleep less and focus more. For instructions on how to practise it, follow this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=206&v=YKFl4E3YhlI
Practising this meditation makes your mind calm, concentrated and will give you a lot of mental power. The strength and the duration of these effects are dependent on how long you practise (a session of 1 hour would be optimal, but feel free to get up and go if you wish to before the full four), how frequently you practise (at least twice a day would be optimal), how regularly you practise  (try to stick to the schedule as best as you can), and the intention with which you practise (intend to let your mind become calm and concentrated). This practise of Anapanasati is exactly for this purpose of building attention and eliminating any stress you have, and it is also very powerful at accomplishing this purpose, provided you practise correctly and appropriately.
If you practise this meditation appropriately, you will find that your attention will grow rapidly and that your stress levels will be non-existent.
You will also find that you will have a lot more free time, because your elevated attention and non-existent stress levels allows you to get a lot more study done in much less time.Because your mind is very calm (since practising this meditation will declutter your mind) as a result of successful and appropriate practise of this meditation, you will find that your sleep will become very deep, and so you will not only need less sleep but you will also be much more refreshed.
The video that I linked to you that has the instructions on Anapanasati may seem too short, and not very comprehensive. But my advice to you is that comprehensiveness of instruction is not at all the key to success in this meditation, and not much more than what he says in the video needs to be known for successful practise of Anapanasati. The key is to be persistent and stick to the breath as much as you can, and gradually your concentration, calm and mental power will develop.
Although what I am about to say may cause some amount of sensation to arise in people who are attached to their insight meditation traditions, I would advice, from my personal experience, that you don't practise insight meditation exclusively (the anapanasati meditation that I recommend is not an insight meditation, it is a calming meditation) since it will cause many troubles, especially in a student life like ours. This is because exclusive practise of insight meditation will initially cause many defilements to come about (although the goal is the contrary) - for example, all kinds of craving will come about. This is not conducive at all to a successful student life.
You can, however, practise insight meditation during daily life (rather than the main meditation practise) such as while walking and eating and so on, without getting into much trouble, ASSUMING that you have a solid practise of Anapanasati going on.
I said earlier in the post that a sitting session of one hour at least twice a day is optimal. This might seem too much in the beginning, but the effects of sticking to this regular schedule will change your life so much that you will find that it is not too much at all, given the benefits that it provides you, and you will find that in fact it gives you a lot more free time than before.
To clarify what I meant by insight meditation, it is the exclusive practise taught by the Buddha whereby you will be able to understand reality clearly and therefore be free from suffering. Here is a manual on how to practise insight meditation, written by a great monk called Yuttadhammo: http://static.sirimangalo.org/howto/HTM.pdf
My addition of insight meditation here may seem irrelevant to your question, since Anapanasati is the exclusive answer to your question, but I am assuming that you understand the doctrine that the Buddha taught and that you have set yourself on the path to freedom from suffering. So do bear in mind my warnings regarding insight meditation in the context of student life, so make sure that you are only practising Anapanasati during your sitting meditation session, and practise insight meditation during your daily life to the best of your ability.
You will find that if the calming meditation (Anapanasati) and insight meditation (the exclusive practise that the Buddha taught to be free from suffering) are practised together in the manner I described above, insight meditation will not only no longer be a hindrance (because your mind has become powerful and stabilized by your solid practise of Anapanasati, you won't be overcome by craving and other defilements) but it will support your Anapanasati practise, which in turn will support your insight meditation practise as well. In fact, the meditation schedule that I prescribed to you seems to be also what  even the Buddha seems to have taught to some people on a certain occasion, where he provides instructions on both the Anapanasati meditation and the insight meditation (traditionally known as the practise of 'Satipattana').
Feel free to ask for any clarifications, I hope what I said makes sense to you and that you too will be able to solve your problems.

Your answer is quite comprehensive. Thank you so much for your time and patience. I will incorporate these advices into my daily schedule and see if it does create change in my life. Thank You.

I disagree that "Anapanasati is the exclusive answer to your question" - many different types of meditation exist, some that might equally or even better achieve OP's goals.

As of now this answer's content is a one-line long recitation. I got suspicious and thought that some edits could have been made to it; indeed, in the answer's revision it is possible to find its previous complete content. I have no idea why some user changed it to something (apparently) meaningless. I am not reverting its changes but only making noticing that there have been some.

I'll rectify: I issued a rollback to the answer and brought it a stage earlier before my edit. If any one ever finds a reason (though I doubt there really is one) to undo my edit, then they can always do that.

Meditation on Metta (loving kindness, or good will) has a traditional list of 11 benefits, three of which are about good sleep:

"Monks, for one whose awareness-release through good will is
  cultivated, developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis,
  given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken, eleven
  benefits can be expected. Which eleven?
"One sleeps easily, wakes easily, dreams no evil dreams. One is
  dear to human beings, dear to non-human beings. The devas protect one.
  Neither fire, poison, nor weapons can touch one. One's mind gains
  concentration quickly. One's complexion is bright. One dies unconfused
  and — if penetrating no higher — is headed for the Brahma worlds.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.016.than.html

When I practice mediation, I try to think as well as escape myself from thinking.
As a human being, I accept it without hesitation even when mediating.

What is the best meditation practice for me out there?

Okay, for me (and you may like it too):

Breath slowly and deeply
Think positively (the storm will go away, and the sky will be clear, ...)
Think for the good of another (my family members, my friends, ...)
Think for forgiveness (to those I want to apologize ...)

Of course, remember not to invoke the above thoughts if it does not come naturally.
Have a happy life!

Hello and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some useful tips to get you started here.


text:
Elder Beginner Practicing Theravada
I am new to Buddhism (Theravada). I am 80 years old and am keen to learn and practice it during my remaining time. I wish to get in touch with a well read person whom I could write and ask for explanations of aspects I find difficult to understand . It will be a great help.
Is it possible?

IMO, this question is better posted on Reddit, a larger community where you can actually message each other for the mentorship you seek.

Hi Krishan: welcome to the site. There actually seem to be some fairly well-read people, who have replied to questions on this site. Can you give some examples of the kinds of question that you will want to ask?

Hello krishan aggarwal and welcome to Buddhism.SE. We've put together some information to help you get started here

There are many well read people in this forum itself who can help clarify aspects of Theravada that you find difficult to understand.

On a side note however, there is not much you need to learn or know about Theravada in order to practise it successfully during your remaining time, as long as you grasp the fundamental principle of Theravada and clearly understand what the path of Theravada Buddhism entails.
My personal suggestion is that you watch and read some of this monk's (Yuttadhammo) essential video series and his book. Here are the links:

The Buddhist TV – In this video series, he explains the core principles of Theravada buddhism and how to incorporate it into all aspects of your life
Introduction to Meditation: How To Meditate – In this video series, he explains what meditation is (the core practise of Theravada Buddhism) and instructions on how to practice it comprehensively
How To Meditate: A Beginner's Guide to Peace – This book is a written version of the video series on meditation, and is more detailed and comprehensive than the corresponding video series.

From my personal experience, watching these video series and reading his book is sufficient to help you understand clearly the core of what the Buddha taught and how to practise it successfully, and thereby it will also set you on the path to the goal of Theravada Buddhism - destruction of the mental defilements and freedom from suffering. In the process, they will also clarify aspects that you find difficult to understand about what the Buddha taught.

I am 80 years old ...

Age is not barrier. You can start at any age. Maybe you can use a chair to sit if you find sitting difficult. Also double check with the centre about stairs and slopes. If you mention before hand about your age and if you do have any difficulties then you might be able to get a convenient location with less stair or slopes to climb.

... and am keen to learn and practice it during my remaining time.

You can locate a meditation centre from the following list for your practice:

S.N. Goenka has about 200 centres world wide - https://www.dhamma.org/en/index
World Buddhist Directory also lists many centres by different masters which you can choose to pratice: http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/

I wish to get in touch with a well read person whom I could write and ask for explanations of aspects I find difficult to understand.

For theoretical understanding you can use a site like this. Best is you discuss with a meditation teacher.
I don't think many Buddhist meditations centres per say would really do correspondence in answering questions only as their focus is on the practice. Once you do a course you can stay in touch with the teachers and then ask them questions.
But you can use forums like this for Q&A and there are other forums (e.g. http://www.dhammawheel.com/) which you can use for discussions.

Do you know whether these centres would participate in the written correspondence (Q+A) that the OP is asking about?

That is not how meditation centres would generally operate. So I don't think so.

Yes, it is possible.
Why don't you post your deeper questions here just as you did now?
Reddit is also a fantastic place filled with even more intelligentsia and you can get answers very quickly.
To answer your other doubts:
If you have an interest in learning the Path and can generate detachment, then you will easily adopt into this simple but important school.
The most important process in Theravada is going through the Stages of Insight (see "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha).
This Stages of Insight process happens automatically when practicing awareness meditation (vipassana) correctly.
One must retreat: make an extensive amount of time to practice and pay clear attention to mind (strong Five Faculties on the Four Foundations) all day and night, with moderate sleep and food.
Even though most of us are not actually Enlightened, walking the path to it is just as simple as this. Being clearly, effortlessly aware of present reality. (read: high level of 5 Spiritual Faculties)
The "advanced questions" are all about Right View and understanding the component structures better and learning to let go of attachments (this might involve reading non-Buddhist things).
Although I do not recommend it for beginners, the retreat can be done without any retreat instructor. One may use a retreat manual.
In many cases, a retreat manual is better than a bad retreat place where people just talk all day and share their problems/life-content.
Some Taoist wisdom here: conserve your jing (semen): be celibate. At your age, it is easy to calm your mind but the jing essence (life force) is already low. If one elder manages to reach the higher stages and then loses the sila of celibacy (due to increased sexual desire), then one can die due to one's higher energetic state. Conserve jing.
(Buddha says the same thing but smartly does not go into the energetics of it because people will focus on that too much.)

The first sentence "Why don't you post your deeper questions here?" could be a comment under the question: to try to understand why the question is being asked, and/or to invite further question. But the rest of this answer doesn't answer the literal question which was asked.

Yeah you're right, taken literally, the answer to this question is a simple "yes."
I think overall this question itself is a Reddit kind of question.

Does reddit do Q+A where you can post questions? Or is it, instead, a place to post a link to anything you have read?

Both! You can share a simple link to all or you can create an open-ended question, qa, survey, etc.


text:
What is the relationship between patience and kindness?
I was just reading some of the commentarial literature in the Pali Canon and it occurred to me that there seems to be some kind of relationship between patience and kindness that I don't fully understand but would like to get clarity on.

Can you provide a reference to where it is mentioned in the commentary?

Kindness is descriptive of a wholesome state of mind encompassing love and compassion. These states of mind arise in the absence of states of mind having greed, anger and delusion.
Patience is the characteristic of bearing with some form of suffering (physical and/or mental). Being able to bear with suffering prevents mind states based on anger from arising. Hence developing patience allows one to bear with suffering without allowing anger to arise, which allows kindness to blossom.
This is the relationship between patience and kindness.
Although this is not your question, how is one able to bear with suffering and therefore develop patience? By seeing reality clearly. How does one see reality clearly? By paying attention to the four foundations of mindfulness.
So, practising the four foundations of mindfulness allows one to be patient such that anger does not arise while experiencing suffering, thus allowing one to be kind.


text:
Keep motivation to stick on one meditation practice :Ven. Mahasi Saydaw
Practice : Ven .Mahasi Sayadaw
I have been practicing meditation " in daily life " for a week . I felt more relaxed and also noticed  having a thought of "intention"  before most of my actions of body .
But now I feel that I'm losing the interest of doing mediation practice but to go back again on reading or listing to Dhamma talks .( mostly due to having the thought of finding a "better practice" )
And now I'm feeling the same delusion I had before and stress .
I would like to to know how could I get my motivation back to stick with one method of meditation practice ?

Also take a look at this "Q & A with Mahasi Sayadaw": http://www.saraniya.com/page/meditation/ch1-mahasi-sayadaw.html. There are a lot of interesting questions here. Good luck with your practice.

read some books it is more useful to get back your courage.

Are there any recommended books on this tradition ?

There are the 5 five hindrances that stand in the way as obstacles for developing in ones practice and for reaching Nibbana.
In brief the five hindrances are:

Sensual Desire (kámacchanda)
Aversion or Ill-will (vyápáda)
Sleepiness – sloth (thina), torpor (middha), sluggishness
Restlessness – worry about the future, regret of the past, anxiety (uddhacca-kukkucca)
Doubt (skeptical doubt) (vicikicchá)

It could be no. 4, 5: worries or doubt about the practice that you are experiencing. If you practice under the Mahasi Sayadaw Tradition then the way to deal with such hindrances is to turn them into an object of observation, i.e. a meditation object and thereby making them a foundation for realizing insights. So when worry arises one can simply note it as "worried, worried" and if doubt arises one can note it as "doubting, doubting".
If one takes them as meditation objects then one will come to see that they also are subject to the 3 signs of existence; anicca, dukkha and anatta. One will come to see that all conditioned phenomena follows a standard formula which is: Arising, Presence, Dissolution. So when taken as meditation objects one will see that the worry or doubt arises, is present and then disappears. It might come again multiple times but the same procedure should be used every time, i.e. to observe and note them.
Here you can read more about The Five Hindrances and Their Conquest.
Also here is a great audio dhamma talk on the five hindrances by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi. Here is part 1 and part 2. This talk is highly recommended and i think it might be able to give you some answers. Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi talks in depth about the hindrances and gives tools that can be used to overcome them.
Here is a great dhamma talk by Ven. Yuttadhammo that might just address your question. Its called Generating Motivation (Monk Radio). Here its talked about how one can generate motivation to practice.
Lanka

Some advice by Ajaan Fuang here:

§ Many were the times when people would tell Ajaan Fuang that — with
  all the work and responsibilities in their lives — they had no time to
  meditate. And many were the times he'd respond, "And you think you'll
  have time after you're dead?"
§ "If you're single-minded about whatever you think of doing, you're
  sure to succeed."
§ "You can't plan the way your practice is going to go. The mind has
  its own steps and stages, and you have to let the practice follow in
  line with them. That's the only way you'll get genuine results.
  Otherwise you'll turn into a half-baked arahant."
§ "Don't make a journal of your meditation experiences. If you do,
  you'll start meditating in order to have this or that thing happen, so
  that you can write it down in your journal. And as a result, you'll
  end up with nothing but the things you've fabricated."
§ "When the meditation goes well, don't get excited. When it doesn't
  go well, don't get depressed. Simply be observant to see why it's
  good, why it's bad. If you can be observant like this, it won't be
  long before your meditation becomes a skill."
§ A student came to complain to Ajaan Fuang that she had been
  meditating for years, and still hadn't gotten anything out of it. His
  immediate response: "You don't meditate to 'get' anything. You
  meditate to let go."
§ The seamstress, after practicing meditation with Ajaan Fuang for
  several months, told him that her mind seemed more of a mess than it
  was before she began meditating. "Of course it does," he told her.
  "It's like your house. If you polish the floor every day, you won't be
  able to stand the least little bit of dust on it. The cleaner the
  house, the more easily you'll see the dirt. If you don't keep
  polishing the mind, you can let it go out and sleep in the mud without
  any qualms at all. But once you get it to sleep on a polished floor,
  then if there's even a speck of dust, you'll have to sweep it away.
  You won't be able to stand the mess."

When meditation is not forced, meditation comes spontaneously. When meditation comes spontaneously, awakening comes quickly. When awakening comes quickly, your meditation practice becomes the best practice.
Any meditation practice, if not forced, becomes the best practice. There is no one practice better than the other. Choose one, don't force it (or yourself), do it spontaneously and you'll be on your way.


text:
The impact of the subconscious mind on the conscious mind
How should one consider the impact or influence of the subconscious mind on one's conscious awareness and mental processes, especially during sitting meditation? My mind seems to often exhibit a proliferation of short-lived flashes of images "from nowhere". Is consideration of the relationship between the subconscious mind and the conscious mind a futile endeavor or a worthwhile endeavor? Some brief exposé of how Buddhism views the importance (or unimportance) of the subconscious mind would be appreciated.

There is an interesting section on Visions and Signs in the teachings of Ajaan Fuang. I quote my other answer here.

§ "Don't be amazed by people with visions. Visions are nothing else
  but dreams. There are true ones and false ones. You can't really trust
  them."
§ A Bangkok housewife who was practicing meditation with Ajaan Fuang
  heard some of his other students say that meditation without visions
  was the straight path. It so happened that she had frequent visions in
  her meditation, and so hearing this made her wonder why her path was
  so winding and convoluted. When she asked Ajaan Fuang about this, he
  told her: "Having visions in your meditation is like having lots of
  lush wild greens growing along the side of your path. You can gather
  them as you go along, so that you'll have something to eat along the
  way, and you'll reach the end of the path just like everyone else. As
  for other people, they might see the greens without gathering them, or
  may not even see them at all — because their path goes through arid
  land."
§ "Visions — or whatever things appear in the course of your
  meditation: It's not the case that you shouldn't pay any attention to
  them, for some kinds of visions have important messages. So when
  things like this appear, you have to look into how they're appearing,
  why they're appearing, and for what purpose."
§ "There are true visions and false visions. So whenever you see one,
  just sit still and watch it. Don't get pulled into following it."
§ "You should watch visions the same way you watch TV: Just watch it,
  without getting pulled inside the tube."
§ "If you can't let go of your visions, you'll never gain release."
§ One of Ajaan Fuang's students asked him, "When you see something in
  a vision, how can you know whether it's true or false?"
His answer: "Even when it's true, it's true only in terms of
  convention. You have to get your mind beyond both true and false."
§ "The purpose of the practice is to make the heart pure. All these
  other things are just games and entertainment."

If meditation is done properly, kamma starts to unwind. When kamma is unwinding, visions arise. When visions arise, let them arise. When you let them arise, experience them. When you experience them, don't cling on them or be afraid of them. If you won't cling on them or be afraid of them, visions will cease and awakening will not be far away.
Visions during sitting meditation are signs of being on the right path towards awakening and final liberation.

In Theravada Buddhism, there is no such thing as a sub-conscious mind. There is what is called "bhavanga-citta", but it is not active in the sense of contributing to conscious activity; it is just a state of mind that lies in wait, kind of like a pilot light.
According to the Mahapatthana, the seventh book in the abhidhamma pitaka, there are many causal relationships, one of which is where the physical is causally connected to the arising of the mental (i.e., the physical brain at least partially conditions a thought). This is where your flashes are coming from; it also works the other way of course, where the mental affects the physical.
It could be worth your while (if you are following the Theravada) to study at least Bhikkhu Bodhi's Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, since it describes some of the building blocks of reality that are involved in this process.
Understanding causality, of course, is of great importance in Buddhism; it is the second stage of insight knowledge to understand how the physical and mental aspects of existence affect each other.

Please mention which tradition this is from ;-)

@SumindaSirinathSalpitikorala either you are being purposefully antagonistic, or you believe this answer to be biased... I do mention the tradition; all the information in this answer is based on Theravada Buddhist texts, and is held to be true by Theravada Buddhist scholars, as far as I know.

The subconscious mind in Buddhism is the Bhavanga, (mindstream, store-consciousness) where the results (vipaka)of past actions kamma is deposited. In the silence of the meditation practice sometimes they "bubble up". ruben2020 has outline what to do.

Deep rooted Sankara in the sub concious mind bubbles up during meditation (in your case thought a vision) there will always a sensation which follows (in your case when the image - frightful, lustful, etc. make contact with the mind sense door). Keeping you mind devoid of craving and aversion (with equanimity) towards this sensation, you are not creating any new Sankara for the future.
There are 3 types of sensation that arise:

Unpleasant - this is due to past Sankara of aversion. Reacting to this with aversion creates future Sankara giving again an unpleasant sensation.
Pleasant - this due to past Sankara of craving. Reacting to this with craving creates future Sankara of pleasant sensations.
Neutral - this is due to past Sankara of ignorance. Like wise this can create future Sankara of neutral sensation. Mainly in this case when effective there is a chance the Hindrances Sloth and Torpor and Restlessness will surface.

Being neutral or equanimous to all these sensation lead to eradicating the Sankara which bubbled up while not creating new Sankara.
Through meditation as your awareness increase your consciousness becomes stronger, thus reaching into the depths of what you call the sub conscious mind, and finally coming to the stage where you are fully aware. Phenomena which you were not previously aware comes into your consciousness more easily. Your conscious mind becomes dominant, and what was previously sub concious mind becomes dormant. Everything comes into your consciousness you are aware. For a normal person when you are a sleep and have mosquito bites when you wake up you might notice that un intentionally you have scratched certain spots. When your sub conscious mind is fully encompassed by your conscious mind though you may be sleeping to give rest to your body, but still you would be awake and aware all the times - nothing escapes your conscious mind (consciousness) while you now do not have any sub conscious mind or it has lost its function.

This is not an answer to the question.

This does not provide an answer to OP's question. Its mentioned that its an add to already posted answers by other users. This add-on-answer could have been a comment to another answer but not an individual answer. I have recommended it for deletion unless clarification or re-editing of the answer is made so that it answers OP's question.

How so Ven Sir? Please provide me an acceptable rationale. This provides more information thought it follows the same pattern of the other answers? How come commendation of other users answers (in this case with part agreement though I added a few more things) can not make this an answer?

Because you haven't discussed the relationship between conscious and subconscious mind - you haven't even discussed subconsciousness in your answer.

This is better, but the OP is asking about the relationship between the subconscious and the conscious mind. The form of the question, as I understand it, is: " What is the effect of A on B? Is it worth studying this effect, or the relationship between A and B in general?"

These comments were rather helpful than just saying this is not and answer.


text:
Attention to the breath: sensations at the nostrils vs sensations at the abdomen, as they relate to serenity and insight
During sitting meditation, I attempt to anchor attention to the breathe. I have read about anchoring on the sensation(s) of the breathe at the nostril, and I have read about anchoring on the rise and fall of the abdomen. Both techniques appear to be in concert with Theravada approaches. I recently read (Wikipedia article re Mahasi Sayadaw) that Mahasi Sayadaw taught attention at the abdomen. I need an explanation, please, of the two different approaches ... the impact of each on serenity and on insight. Perhaps one is "better" for serenity, and perhaps one is "better" for insight. Thx!

If you are a beginner, then one may be easier to follow than the other.  When I started meditating, I couldn't even find my breath in my nose at all.  But I could feel the sensation in my diaphragm.  So, that's where I placed my attention.  As my practice deepened, I could then also sense the breath through my nose too.  Just my experience, I'm no authority on this.

On thing I stumbled upon over the weekend was that for some of us, the point of contact for the breath is actually inside the nostrils. That is how it is for me. I have been trying for months to discern the flow of breath with no avail, until I found this. I guess my particular anatomy is such that the flow of air in/out of my nose completely misses the tip of my nose, the tip of my lips, etc. Now that I have discovered this I am easily able to concentrate on the breath.

It really doesn't matter which location you meditate on. The only big difference between the two is that the movement of the abdomen is a very apparent thing while the movement near the nostrils is much more subtle and harder to catch.
The thing that determines if you are practicing Vipassana-Bhavana versus Samatha-Bhavana isn't the location of what you are meditating on but rather the way in which you are looking at the object of meditation. This is clear if one looks carefully at the instructions in Chapter 18 of the Visuddhimagga. Paragraph 5 of said chapter describes Vipassana according to the four elements saying:

But one whose vehicle is pure insight, or that same aforesaid one whose vehicle  is serenity, discerns the four elements in brief or in
  detail in one of the various ways  given in the chapter on the
  definition of the four elements (XI.27ff.). Then, when the  elements
  have  become  clear  in  their  correct  essential
  characteristics...there become plain ten instances of materiality
  (rupani) with the body decad...

Later in the chapter it is described also in terms of the 18 Dhatus, the 12 Ayatanas, the 5 aggregates, and again the four elements. All of these different categories are classified as being ultimate realities within the Theravada school, whereas everything else is classified as Paññatti, or concepts, meaning that they are mental representations of experiences rather than the experiences themselves.
Thus the only thing that really makes a practice Vipassana meditation is that one is meditating on the object as an experience rather than as a concept. If one is meditating on the abdomen and sets their mind on the physical feelings of the movement themselves, then one is practicing Vipassana meditation but if they are meditating on the stomach itself as being an object, then that is not Vipassana meditation.
Similarly if one is meditating at the nostrils and one is meditating on just the feelings of the air that happen at the walls of the nostril or the lip, that can be Vipassana, but if one is meditating on it just as air moving in and out, that is not Vipassana

Breath at the upper lip
(most effective even than the tip of the nose but you may choose the tip of the nose also. Traditional Theravada schools accepts either the tip of the nose and upper lip. Webu Sayadaw and teachers influenced by his teaching hold that upper lib is better. Also more consistent with "around the mouth" interpretation of Parimukam found in multiple Suttas in the Theravada Tripitaka)

Advantages:

Orthodox Theravada Interpretation
Develops concentration - serenity
More in line with many Buddhist masters and traditions (consensus)
One interpretation of Parimukam with appear in nearly all Anapana related Suttas is around the mouth. Hence according to this interpretation more consistent with the Suttas.
Covers air element, heat (change of temperature of in out breath) element, liquid element (moisture difference in the in and out breath, and perspiration at the base of the nose), solid element (body part - upper lip), sensation (of the touch of the air), and Kaya (body part - upper lip). Hence can be a basis of transitioning to this type of meditation. Also better insight since in combination with better insight.

Disadvantage:

For a some one starting this may be difficult to feel

Abdomen:

Advantages:

Easy for a beginners (as per justification of practitioners of the Mahasi Method itself)

Disadvantages:

Un Orthodox method devised by  U Nārada and popularised by Mahasi Sayadaw
Does not develop deep concentration (concentration can accelerate you development of insight.)
Progress is slow as interpreted by Buddhist masters advocating the nose, as the surface area of the abdomen is large
Based on general justification of the abdomen (from some of the practitioners from the Mahasi Method itself) the primary discriminant is the air element. A careful manuring so it does not contravene the commentaries as observed by traditional and orthodox Theravada masters. At least there seam to be some Mahasi method masters who do not hold to the traditional justification by this linage.
This tradition is considered unorthodox and controversial my some Buddhist master (See Banthe Vimalasiri's videos on the Vissudhi Magga and Mahasi Method)

(Following is directly from the Theravada Suttas. So compatible with any tradition which accepts the Theravada Tripitaka as the doctrinal basis.)
insight and serenity goes hand in hand. In Anapana Sutta the 5th and 6th steps in the 4 steps dealing with sensations has serenity.
The 16 Steps of the Anâpāna,sati as satipatthāna
The 12 steps for getting into dhyana [mental absorption]
[Contemplation of the body]
`Step 1—Experiencing a long breath
Step 2—Experiencing a short breath
Step 3—Experiencing the whole breath (or whole body)
Step 4—Calming the breath`
[Contemplation of feelings: Entry into dhyana]
`Step 5—Arousing joy
Step 6—Arousing happiness
Step 7—Understanding mental functions
Step 8—Calming the joy and happiness`
[Contemplation of the mind]
`Step 9—Experiencing the mind
Step 10—Shining the nimitta [meditation sign]
Step 11—Sustaining the nimitta
Step 12—Freeing the mind`
[Contemplation of dharmas]
`The 4 steps to take after emerging from dhyana
Step 13—Reflecting on impermanence (anicca)
Step 14—Reflecting on fading away [of lust] (virāga)
Step 15—Reflecting on cessation [of suffering] (nirodha)
Step 16—Reflecting on letting go [of defilements] (patinissagga)`
Source: The Discourse on the Mindfulness of the In-and-out-breathing by Piya Tan
Upanisa Sutta (read along with Transcendental Dependent Arising
A Translation and Exposition of the Upanisa Sutta by Bhikkhu Bodhi), The (eleven) “Without Need of Intention” Discourse - (Ekā,dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta, The (ten) “Without Need of Intention” Discourse - (Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta and other Suttas covers the formula for liberation (nibiddā formula). Extract from the elven link formulation (formula is more or less the same with minor variations):
`(1) For the morally virtuous (sīla,vata), there arises freedom from remorse (appaṭisāra).
(2) For the remorseless, there arises joy (pamudita).
(3) For the joyful, there arises a zestful mind (pīta,mana).
(4) For the zestful minded, there arises a calm body (passaddha,kāya).
(5) For the calm-bodied, there arises happiness (sukha).
(6) For the happy, there arises concentration (samādhi).
(7) For the concentrated, there arises the vision of true reality (yathā,bhūta,ñāṇa).
(8) For one who sees true reality, there arises revulsion (nibbidā).
(9) For the revulsed, there is letting go [dispassiom] (virāga),
(10) For the dispassionare, there is (10) the knowledge and
vision of liberation (vimutti,ñāṇa.dassana)`
Thus implies serenity is important. Also The Great Sixfold Sense-based Discourse - Mahā Saḷ-āyatanika Sutta mentions the need of both Samatha and Vippassana to be developed in a balanced way though the natural development (meditation method and temperament) one may precede the other though ultimately both develop (Yuga,naddha Sutta - The Discourse on the Twin Path).

the four elements are readily discernible at the abdomen... your answer is a bit biased.

Perhaps towards my tradition. Ven. Sir you seam to be biased towards your tradition. As well as other users towards theirs! What to do?

You should mention your tradition in your answer if this is the case. I usually do.

Very seldom through.