text:
questions about my practice
I have been practicing insight meditation daily now for over 6 years. I have learnt the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition. I focus on my abdomen rising and falling and notice when my attention goes to something else which seems to be mostly thoughts and then I gently bring it back. When my attention goes to a sensation I watch the sensation for a while until it is no longer holding attention then I bring it back to the breath. After 6 years of doing this I can't say that I have had profound insight into the true nature of reality etc. Most of the time I just feel really bored and doubtful that sitting all this time is actually changing anything. My concentration is only marginally better.  I understand Dukha, Anicca and Anatta but its more from reading about it than sitting.  I sit for an hour in the morning and 45 mins at night.  Im not sure whats going on but just feels something is missing.  I read about and hear people talking about the profound changes they experience and how their lives are filled with peace and joy from practicing so I wonder where Im going wrong?   As far as Metta practice goes I am told that at first it may feel contrived but if you keep going it begins to work but I have to say that after all these years not much has changed on that front either.  It seems that the effort and energy I apply massively out weighs the benefits. So I'm confused about this.

Boddhidharma sat for 9 years.
The last time I was in Japan, I had an oppertunity to sit Zazen in a very old temple. I remember one of the monks talking me through the process of what I should do/expect, etc... Before the sitting commenced.
He gad no idea tgat I'd been sitting fir over a decade, but that's fine. I remember him attempting to discribe what it might be like if I have an "experience" (huge mistake, experience in Zazen can not be reduced to words).
Anyway, when he was done, I just smiled, nodded my head, and told him, I'm not anticipating having any experience. I just intend to sit... Just sit. And that's what I did.
But the fact is, I have had experiance from zazen before, not every time, but it has happened. You have to engage the practice wuth absolutly zero preconceptions, empty your mind, and stay fixed in the moment. Constantly, reducing that moment more and more until it is merely this instant.
When you are in this instant, that means that nothing else exists to you. That moment, that just passed, dies not exist. That moment, which is approaching, does not exist. Nothing exists except this instant. And then... This instant becomes eternity for you. And you are no longer locked in time.
There are no words that can exoress that experience. It dies not resemble any other experience that you can relate to. There is no point in trying to imagine what it might be. If you search for it, you can nit find it, because you have no idea wgat you are searching for.

I'd say you are expecting something to happen. Chasing something outside, when really you need to stay calm and let things happen on the inside.
Whether anything happens or not, you must meditate for however much time you can. It seems like you are doing it, but you are weighing yourself down by burden of expectations and reading or listening to too much anicca or whatever. I am doing this too much reading around thing. So I am talking out of what I experienced. I don't care about what the Buddha experienced. Honestly. You have to drop it. The mind is caught up with all that, plus worldly affairs and loses balance. And you feel bogged down. Stop pushing at it.
I'll say it again, Drop your expectations. And simply meditate.

Though I have some exposure to the Mahasi the angle more based directly from the Suttas.

I have learnt the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition. I focus on my abdomen rising and falling and notice when my attention goes to something else which seems to be mostly thoughts and then I gently bring it back. When my attention goes to a sensation I watch the sensation for a while until it is no longer holding attention then I bring it back to the breath.

When your attention is lost your mind gets "lost" on a bodily feeling which in many cases is a pain or thoughts of the past and future mainly. In essence these feeling are 3 types: pleasant, unpleasant and neutral. So when you mind wanders away depending on if you liked, disliked or was neutral to the new object (object which stole your attention) you will get pleasant, unpleasant and neutral sensations.
Now you have to let go of the sensation. Pleasant sensations lead to the craving, unpleasant lead to aversion and neutral lead to ignorance. In this situation you have to maintain Wise Attention, i.e., you have to be equanimous can seeing impermanence. Your mind should be void of any form of craving or aversion to sensations (not generating unwholesome roots), the hindrances, Vipallasa, created fabrication (visualisation, verbalisation, intellectualisation, etc.), mental volitions (4 kinds of nutriment - mano-sañcetanā).

After 6 years of doing this I can't say that I have had profound insight into the true nature of reality etc. Most of the time I just feel really bored and doubtful that sitting all this time is actually changing anything. My concentration is only marginally better. I understand Dukha, Anicca and Anatta but its more from reading about it than sitting. I sit for an hour in the morning and 45 mins at night. Im not sure whats going on but just feels something is missing. I read about and hear people talking about the profound changes they experience and how their lives are filled with peace and joy from practicing so I wonder where Im going wrong?

2 things can happen:

You practice in the wrong way
This practice is not right for you

Also perhaps it might be worth trying another technique. Also see this answer for pitfalls of the Mahasi technique.

As far as Metta practice goes I am told that at first it may feel contrived but if you keep going it begins to work but I have to say that after all these years not much has changed on that front either. It seems that the effort and energy I apply massively out weighs the benefits. So I'm confused about this.

Metta achieve the following things:

Reduce aversion and develop benevolence
Break barriers 1, 2

Self, dear ones, neutral, foes
Direction: People from the North, people from this or that direction
Geographies: This or that country, region, town
Race
Species
etc.

Main thing here is when you think about a being you might classify in 3 sections: favorable (friend, same race, same town, same part of the country, etc.), unfavorable (foe, citizen of an enemy country, etc.) and neutral. This results in sensations which are pleasant, unpleasant and neural.1 Before developing benevolence you have to get rid of the aversion. The way to do this is be equanimous to the unpleasant sensation noting its impermanence. If you are experiencing either Pīti, Sukha, Passaddhi wish that this peace is shared with the person. Generally people try to save good things for themselves. The best to share is the best experience you have. Also think about sharing merits of the meditation with someone. Also when there is a chance try to do it though physical or vocal action also.
Also this answer might be of help.

1

In the Bhadraka Sutta, the Buddha explains the origin of suffering by giving illuminating examples. The village headman Bhadraka wants to know the cause of suffering that afflicts mankind. In reply, the Buddha asks him to think of his son and imagine that his son is meeting with unexpected misfortunes, or getting arrested by the king’s order or facing a severe punishment. Bhadraka imagines as he is told and finds that such thoughts give rise to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, grief and despair in him. When he imagines a stranger to be placed in a similar situation, facing similar predicament, he finds that he is not troubled at all with any mental agony. He explains to the Buddha that the difference in his mental reaction to the two situations lies in the fact that he loves his son with a parent’s love and is very fond of his son, whereas he has no such feeling towards the stranger.
Next the Buddha asks him if any love, passion or desire arises in him before he meets or sees or hears about the woman who has become his wife. Bhadraka replies that only when he meets, sees and hears about her that does he develop passion and attachment towards his wife. When the Buddha asks him further whether he will suffer from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, grief, despair, if anything untoward happens to his wife, he confesses that he will suffer more than these agonies; he might even lose his life through intense suffering.
The Buddha points out then that the root cause of suffering in the world is craving, greed, passion and desire that engulf mankind. It has been so in the past, as it is now , and so it will be in the future.

Essence of Tipiṭaka
2 See this answer and this answer.

 I understand Dukha, Anicca and Anatta but its more from reading about it than sitting.

This is the place to be improve. practice 'sathipattana' for real understanding.

When meditation brought profound changes to my life, this occurred when I was practising for around 8 hours per day continuously for 3 months in a meditation retreat monastery. The profound meditations that built 'momentum' were those where I sat for over 75 minutes, to 2.5 hours, during the after breakfast & after lunch sessions. The momentum would carry into the evening session but the early morning sessions were generally uneventful.
Personally, I have never practised meditation only for one hour each morning & each evening therefore I have not experienced the results this may bring. However, I imagine it would not bring profound results because morning meditation is generally not the best and, while evening meditation is generally the clearest (when not eating after lunch), this is only after long afternoon meditation. In other words, when I have lived a normal life, working in an office during the day, the mind is tired at night, particularly once it develops some samadhi-calmness, it has a tendency towards sloth/sleepiness at night.
I imagine practising only for one hour each morning & each evening would be good for a 'mental health checkup', to observe & manage what unwholesome states the mind has accumulated during the day. However, I doubt profound samadhi could be developed in such a short time.

Oh really!   So it sounds like you're saying that unless one lives the life of a monastic there isn't all that much point in meditating.

I said it is good for 'mental health checkup'; to ensure the mind remains wholesome & in touch with how emotions are affecting life. It can also help people learn to remain calm. In summary, it has moral benefits. Regards

Yes x 10000000!!!  An hour is really not long enough to change anything.  You are just getting warmed up at that point!  Personally, I meditate for an hour on my lunch break and sit for about 1 1/2 to 2 hours when I get home from work.  Generally I'll also take a short, 15 minute nap when I get home to dispel tiredness.  You can have a deep practice living a lay life, but you have to make sacrifices!  Regular retreats are also absolutely essential.  That's where the real change happens!

Samadhi? You mean momentary Samadhi?

Low intensive practice can yield results ,  subtle results over a longer period of time.

True, but the don't match those obtained through intensive practice.  To slightly rephrase the great bodybuilder Ronnie Coleman - "Everybody wanna be enlightened, but no one wanna do any long ass sitting!"  https://youtu.be/4UlgXIL0-3g


text:
Could the Buddha have touched goal and gems in the 7 weeks after enlightenment
Lord Buddha and other 'rahath'  priests are prohibited to touch any jewels. So how could Lord Buddha stay inside the ruwan ge, which is totally made with gems?

For example, Main places to honor and pay homage in Deva Hela (Janbudveepa) says,

The stone chamber and the stone seat (length 6.5 feet width 3 feet) made and offered to Buddha by King Muchalinda using the highest technology prevailed to that date are still exist there. Earlier it was called Ruwan Geya[29].

The footnote translates this as

[29] The house or the chamber of gems.

Essentially what you are asking is can / will a Buddha do something in contradiction to the Vinaya.
In the olden days the King is not under the law he imposes. Likewise, after forbidding miracles, the Buddha announced the he will perform the Twin Miracle. A King asked you just put a rule not to display miracles and you are just going to perform one. Then the Buddha pointed out like the King being exempt from his own rules the Buddha is exempt from the Vinaya rules, i.e., Vinaya rules are only for the disciples.
Assuming you are from Sri Lanka, this is there in the old syllabus Buddhism curriculum (which was in effect in the school leaving year of 1997). I forget what year, and the exact details, but likely year 10 text book.
In this context, though a monk cannot be in a chamber of gems the Buddha can. Having said this, the chamber of gems is also not real, as it is mind made through psychic powers. In such a case I do not think there is an issue for a monk prior to the forbidding of psychic power display. As in this case there were not witnesses hence, if a does this, in private it will still not break the rule of touching gold (it is not real - it is just a mind projected image). This is just my opinion, there might be other vinaya rules in play.

In addition this is not the traditional account:

The stone chamber and the stone seat (length 6.5 feet width 3 feet) made and offered to Buddha by King Muchalinda using the highest technology prevailed to that date are still exist there. Earlier it was called Ruwan Geya

More orthodox account of it is:

The Golden Bridge
In the third week, the Buddha saw through his mind’s eye that the devas in the heavens were not sure whether he had attained enlightenment or not. To prove his enlightenment the Buddha created a golden bridge in the air and walked up and down it for a whole week.
The Jewelled Chamber
In the fourth week, he created a beautiful jewelled chamber and sitting inside it meditated on what was later known as the "Detailed Teaching" (Abhidhamma). His mind and body were so purified that six coloured rays came out of his body — blue, yellow, red, white, orange and a mixture of these five. Today these six colours make up the Buddhist flag. Each colour represented one noble quality of the Buddha: yellow for holiness, white for purity, blue for confidence, red for wisdom and orange for desirelessness. The mixed colour represented all these noble qualities.
...
The Mucalinda Tree
The Buddha then went and meditated at the foot of a mucalinda tree. It began to rain heavily and a huge king cobra came out and coiled his body seven times around the Buddha to keep him warm and placed his hood over the Buddha’s head to protect him from the rain. After seven days the rain stopped and the snake changed into a young man who paid his respects to the Buddha. The Buddha then said:
"Happy are they who are contented. Happiness is for those who hear and know the truth. Happy are they who have good will in this world towards all sentient beings. Happy are they who have no attachments and have passed beyond sense-desires. The disappearance of the word "I AM " is indeed the highest happiness."

Life of the Buddha - Chapter 18: Seven Weeks After Enlightenment
The Jewelle Chamber is separate from the time under the Mucalinda Tree.

Do you know where the orthodox account which you referenced comes from? I thought it might be from the beginning of the Mahavagga, but I don't see it there.

It should be from the commentaries or sub commentaries . Does not seem to be from the Tipitaka. Also found in Pujawaliya by Ven. Mayurapada Parivenadhipathi Buddhaputhra

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What does "nose breath" mean?
What does the following mean?

You should not try to find the point where the moving air strokes the nostrils, but keep your focus at the nose breath.

This comes from the followingpage that was linked to from another person:
http://mahamevnawa.lk/ananda-sutta-leading-to-awakening/
I'm really not sure what they mean by "the nose breath". I generally have trouble with focusing anywhere near the nose. I can feel some coolness when breathing in, but I can feel nothing on the way out.  I have tried for years and it has never become easier.  That is why I focus on the abdomen as in the Mahasi style, but I still would like to know what this article means.  Can you please explain to me what "nose breath" means?

"You should not try to find the point where the moving air strokes
  the nostrils, but keep your focus at the nose breath".

This means to not try to feel, track or be aware of the breath sensations. Instead, it means to only keep the mind exclusively focused towards the nose. It means to never concern yourself with watching the breath, even if the breath comes into the mind as an object of awareness. Just keep the mind still & anchored in one place.

But surely being aware of breath sensations is the same as -
"Breathing in long, he knows that he is breathing in long.
Breathing out long, he knows that he is breathing out long.
Breathing in short, he knows that he is breathing in short.
Breathing out short, he knows that he is breathing out short"
If its not then i really dont understand the difference.

Suminda Sirinath  made comment in my other post which is contradicting what you say -
"try to be in touch with sensations in the triangular area above the upper lip and top of the nose"
So one of you is wrong.

I am not wrong. When you are running or walking up a very steep hill, you are not required to make any intentional effort to know the breathing. Similarly when the mind is still & quiet it does not have to make any intentional effort to know the breathing. Alternately, when the mind attempts to make an intentional effort to know the breathing, that very intentional effort is a hindrance to knowing the breathing because it makes the mind busy. As I said in my post: "It means to never concern yourself with watching the breath, even if the breath comes into the mind as an object of awareness."

Suminda Sirinath is instructing to "try". There is no need to "try". The Buddha did not teach to "try". The Buddha taught: "There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree or to an empty building, sits down...holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out.". The practise is "setting mindfulness to the fore" & being "always mindful". As for the breathing, the body breathes by itself. As for knowing the breathing, the mind knows the breathing by itself. Please do not "try". This is craving.

The instruction I got was to allow the attention to fall on a single point like a leaf falling upon a still pool of water.  The contact is light, consistent, and sustained.  Following the breath is a useful way of establishing that point - and that may even be your practice for a very long time. Ultimately, however, it should be left behind.

No. It is the opposite. Keeping attention on a single point is a useful way of establishing following of the breath. Following breath is not the basic practise. Instead, following the breath is a result or sign of correct practise. The basic correct practise is keeping the mind clear & free.

Dhammadhatu, you said that when the mind is calm it will naturally go to the breath. So what do you do when you want to meditate? Do you just come down without any focus on an object? Or do you do prior to anapanasati a meditation like loving kindness etc and then go from there? I am complicating things way too much, but you said volitional/intentional focus on the breath is not "buddhist"

Just keep the mind empty of thought.

As already mentioned in this answer, you can start by looking if:

Breathing in long, he knows that he is breathing in long.
Breathing out long, he knows that he is breathing out long.
Breathing in short, he knows that he is breathing in short.
Breathing out short, he knows that he is breathing out short.
Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful, he breathes out.

If you already have not taken a retreat perhaps you can try one.
Also following book might be a additional references:

ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by BUDDHADASA BHIKKHU
Ānâpāna,sati Sutta
Mahā Sati’patthāna Sutta

It looks like you have found the right article on how to practice the Breathing Meditation. Than rejecting this, instead try to concentrate on training the mind. All the Buddha’s teachings— on generosity, virtue, and meditation, or on virtue, concentration, and discernment—are aimed at training the mind because the mind is what shapes our experience of pleasure and pain, happiness and suffering. A well‐trained mind can deal with issues that you come across in meditation.  This require effort. They go against the grain. You have to learn not to let your resistance to the effort get in the way. You need a clear sense of cause and effect. That’s what discernment is all about: seeing what really works in terms of cause and effect, what doesn’t really work, and then adjusting your actions accordingly.  We’re here to train the mind to be its own best friend.
One way of doing this is to focus on your breath.  It is best if you’ll sense the breath as the feeling of the air moving in and out of the nose, but if it is difficult, then be aware (but not solely focus on) the rise and fall of the abdomen, the rise and fall of the chest. Sometimes can sense even in your arms or your legs whether you’re breathing in or breathing out. Allow breath to come in as long as is comfortable, and then allow yourself to breathe out as long as is comfortable. Try to sensitize yourself to what feels good right now in terms of the breathing.  Think of yourself as hovering around the breath. You’re not squeezing it out; you’re not forcing it in; you’re just staying very close to it, watching it, letting it adjust in whatever way feels good, giving it space to adjust. The more satisfying the breath is, the easier you will find it to stay with the breathing. If the mind wanders off, just bring it right back to the breath. If it wanders off again, bring it back again.
Mind will want to wander around. That’s what the mind is used to doing. But if you’re firm with it, and if you can master just this one skill, you change the way you relate to your body, you change the way you relate to the present moment, you have a greater reserve of wellbeing to draw on in any situation. Do not be too grim about the meditation. Find pleasure in, and be happy even if it a short while that you were with the breath. It takes time, it takes training, it takes discipline. But you must remain happy to do it well.

You haven't really answered my question about what nose breath is?  If people are to meditated correctly according to Buddhas instructions then it needs to be less vague.

@Titsiana, meditation comes later after you acquired a good knowledge of the true dhamma. So sorry to say this, but the problem lies with you. There are at least 20 other meditation types that you can practice to get you into the right frame of mind before doing the breathing meditation. To your question proper, if you focus too much at your nose, you will end up getting a headache. While your eye muscles are relaxed, closed & looking straight ahead, it is ONLY with your MIND that you keep tab of  breath @ nosetril. BTW Gnanananda Thero of Mahamevnawa is THE BEST Teacher. Read his Essay again.

In this guide, Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote:

Only when you have cleared the mind in this way, and set outside
  matters aside, are you ready to focus on the breath. Bring your
  attention to the sensation of breathing. Breathe in long and out long
  for a couple of times, focusing on any spot in the body where the
  breathing is easy to notice, and your mind feels comfortable focusing.
  This could be at the nose, at the chest, at the abdomen, or any spot
  at all. Stay with that spot, noticing how it feels as you breathe in
  and out. Don't force the breath, or bear down too heavily with your
  focus. Let the breath flow naturally, and simply keep track of how it
  feels. Savor it, as if it were an exquisite sensation you wanted to
  prolong. If your mind wanders off, simply bring it back. Don't get
  discouraged. If it wanders 100 times, bring it back 100 times. Show it
  that you mean business, and eventually it will listen to you.

Here, he says "don't bear down too heavily with your focus". That means, that goal of this exercise is not to investigate how the movement of air is working on the nostril. Rather, the goal of the exercise is to focus or latch the mind onto something it can concentrate on, and keep it from wandering.

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

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


text:
how to practice correctly
This article which i have linked to at the bottom seems to contradict itself. It seems to be saying that the way vipassana is taught where you note what comes to your attention is incorrect.   Im finding it confusing as I am trying to get clear about my practice but different people seem to say different things. I am getting to a point with Buddhism where I dont know who to listen to anymore and wait before you say "listen to yourself" I have been trying that for years and not really progressing hence the reason I am looking for some more clarity and riding such articles.  My question is how do I figure out if I am practicing correctly?   Some people even say that there is no such thing as "incorrect" meditation
"if one continually tries but cannot establish mindfulness on breathing, then he can practise other kinds of meditation for the time being."
but then goes on to say
"Most of the meditation practices that have become popular today are not in line with the Dhamma. Those practices are to note in your mind, “pain, pain”, when you feel pain in some part of your body during meditation, and this they say is vedananupassana – contemplation on feeling. If your mind goes somewhere, they say to note “going, going”, and this they say is cittanupassana – the contemplation of mind. If you feel sleepy, they say to note “sleepy, sleepy”. And, if a desire or agitation presents itself in the mind, they say to note “desire, desire”, or “agitation, agitation”, and this they say is dhammanupassana – the contemplation of mind objects. Those are the incorrect practices today that people are being taught as meditation."
http://mahamevnawa.lk/ananda-sutta-leading-to-awakening/

Suzuki stresses in Zen Mind Beginner's Mind the importance of not having any gaining idea when practising zazen. Remember: the goal of Buddhism is not to attain enlightenment but to end suffering. Of course you cannot end suffering in any absolute sense but you must try. I think you might be worrying too hard about achieving something. Where is this enlightenment I seek?
This is attachment.
The ending of suffering (of you, me, the world etc.) doesn't depend on you attaining enlightenment but on the ending of suffering. We meditate to see and to understand. Right understanding leads to right speech and action. But really you don't need to understand. This is why traditional lay practise is based on the five precepts relating to speech and action. This is why you have apparently unintelligent people who are good at their jobs and apparently intelligent people who don't even have jobs.
But really you don't need to attain/obtain anything. Everything is temporal and comes into existence and goes out of existence in time. A thing has a beginning and an end. Depending then on any thing can only make you unhappy because by its nature it won't last.
A dog is made up of atoms. The word dog is made up of the three letters d-o-g, one sound from the larynx (vowel) and two sounds from restricting the sound via the mouth (consonants) at the beginning and the end. The word dog has entered the French language as "dogue" (mastiff). A physical dog will die. The idea of a dog will last longer but will still eventually die. Bears and dogs share a common ancestor. Once there were no dogs.
Everything changes. You cannot depend on the temporal.
And yet you have to.
You have to eat food and breathe air to provide that collection of attached particles you call "you" with energy so it can continue to hold together.
You need some attachments. To live is to suffer.
What can you do then?
Well, fewer constraints is better than more constraints. Freer is better than not free at all.
How do you find freedom?
Through choices.
How do you get choices?
Through being a source of something that others want/need. If you reduce their suffering they will be drawn to you. The more you are in demand, the more you will have choices. In such a scenario you are free to engage (bind/tie) or not to engage. They are happier because you have decreased their suffering. You are happier because you are freer.
Anyway, it all ends in tears so I wouldn't worry too much. Give the world what it is happier for having and take care of yourself. Don't worry about attaining enlightenment. Don't worry about correct meditation, just keep going and focus on ending suffering.

I like that answer. You have decreased my suffering a little.  Thanks :)

Anyone that uses the term "mindfulness of breathing" is practising & teaching in the wrong way; totally against what the Buddha taught. Yes, this includes nearly every famous translator & monk.
The Pali word 'sati' or 'mindfulness' means 'to remember'. The breathing that is active in the present moment is not something that can be remembered because the present moment breathing is a physical sensation and only mental phenomena can be remembered.
What the term 'anapanasati' really means is 'mindfulness with breathing' or 'mindfulness when breathing'.
What this means is the mind remembers to practise the 'teachings of the Buddha' while/when breathing in & when breathing out.
The 'teachings of the Buddha' are as described in the previous post from Suzuki's Zen Mind Beginners Mind, namely, remembering to keep the mind free from craving & thus free from suffering.
The purist meditation practise has only one goal, which is to remember to keep the mind free from craving; or free from covetousness & distress.
Greed or desire to watch the breathing is covetousness. Worry about not being able to watch the breathing is distress. Both covetousness & distress are not the practise of mindfulness.
Therefore, when sitting, the only focus should be on sitting without any craving & attachments.
The Pali suttas state:

One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. MN 117

The monk remains...ardent, alert & mindful — putting aside covetousness & distress with reference to the world.
A monk develops mindfulness as a factor for awakening dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion (non-craving), dependent on
  cessation (of craving & suffering), resulting in relinquishment
  (giving up; letting go).
Anapanasati Sutta

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

The Thai teacher Buddhadasa summed this up as follows:

As for samadhi (concentration), an empty mind is the supreme samadhi, the supremely focused firmness of mind. The straining and striving sort of samadhi
  isn't the real thing and the samadhi which aims at anything other than
  non-clinging to the five khandas (aggregates) is micchasamadhi (wrong or perverted
  samadhi). You should be aware that there is both micchasamadhi and
  sammasamadhi (right or correct samadhi). Only the mind that is empty
  of grasping at and clinging to 'I' and 'mine' can have the true and
  perfect stability of sammasamadhi. One who has an empty mind has
  correct samadhi.
Heartwood from the Bo Tree

+1, but I'm not entirely sure if I agree that's completely right.  The Buddha did teach for a very long time.  It stands to reason that his pedagogy evolved over those 40 years.  There's no reason not to think that he didn't add additional meditation methodologies.  Not everyone is able to sit with a mind free from suffering from the get-go.  They have to be eased into it.  I think mindfulness of the breath is a very deliberate and effective scripturally based way of arriving there.

It is not possible to be mindful of the breath because mindfulness does not mean 'consciousness/awareness'. It is you and not the Buddha lost in pedagogy.

Well, we are going to have to agree to disagree there.  Every translation I've seen of sati has consciousness/awareness as one possible definition.  Personally, I'm not fond of that reading - I think "bring into the mind's eye" is more accurate practically speaking (albeit a bit clumsier).  With that rendering, memory and awareness can both be reconciled with the same word.

The translations are wrong. That is what i wrote in my post. SN 48.10 defines mindfulness & MN 117 in particular describes mindfulness. 'Sati' means 'recollection' or 'memory',i..e, to 'keep in mind'.

I absolutely get what you're saying, but I still thing that mindfulness of breathing is a valid introductory practice.  Call it anapanavicāra then!  ;-)

Dhammadhatu, so mindfulness according to the Buddha has nothing to do with being concentrated in the present moment or on an object but to contemplate on the buddha's teaching and avoid the 3 poisons/5defilements?

Yes. Absolutely. Mindfulness means to keep the mind in a state that is free from the 3 poisons. However! when this is done, the automatic results will be awareness of breathing & abiding in the present moment.

My question is how do I figure out if I am practicing correctly?

You do not have to do this too often but see if your are progressing. There many measures of progress but them in would be equanimity towards sensations such that unwholesome roots do not arise. For more details see this answer and this answer.
Now having established what is progress, try to achieve it. Be equanimous in the towards sensations while noting their impermanence.
Now comes the question some times or some parts off the body you do not feel any sensations. For this you have to sharpen your awareness. For this look at your body part by part looking to see if you feel any sensation. If you are doing breathing meditation through in the initial stages it might be just enough to know the length of the breath and which nostril (left, right both) the air flows from as you you go on try to be in touch with sensations in the triangular area above the upper lip and top of the nose. If you start feeling the sensation after a while leave this spot and more to another and see if you feel the breath there. Do this narrowing the area also until you are in a small area. The hardest place is the centre of your upper lip for many. Practice until you feel sensations there. When you come to a state you can feel the whole in and out breath, also look at your body to see if it is sensitive nought to see sensation and any chosen location.
Now just keep looking at what is happening in the chosen spot. If the breath is there the breath also. Sometimes the sensation can be hot, itchy, pulsating, etc. Each of this sensation you will be itching and evaluation as desirable, undesirable and neutral resulting in the sensation being pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. For these sensations it is natural to be inclined to generate craving, aversion and ignorance. This reaction creates fabrication. Based on if the fabrication is born out of aversion, craving or ignorance they also will have some sensation associated with it. More effort you put into being equanimous and seeing impermanence the fabrication process also will become less. Keeping your attention at one point will reduce verbal fabrications.
To complement the above resource you might want to read: ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING: Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by BUDDHADASA BHIKKHU

In the Anguttara Nikaya (Sutta 4.180), the Buddha taught that when any monk taught that such and such were the teachings of the Buddha, we should, without scorning or welcoming his words, compare the words of the monk with the Suttas and the Vinaya (the texts containing the code of monastic discipline). If they are not in accordance with the Sutta-Vinaya, we should reject them. It is only in this way that we will be able to distinguish between a teacher who teaches the true Dhamma and another who has wrong views.
In the Girimananda Sutta, you will learn about some other types of meditations. For example we get to contemplate on the foulness in this body, in the four elements thatare there in any form, including our body. In Girimananda Sutta (AN 10.60) The Buddha tells Ananda:

“Herein, Ananda, a monk contemplates this body upward from the soles of the feet, downward from the top of the hair, enclosed in skin, as being full of many impurities. In this body there are hairs on the head, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, intestines, intestinal tract, stomach, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, grease, saliva, nasal mucous, synovium (oil lubricating the joints), and urine. Thus he dwells contemplating foulness in this body. This, Ananda, is called contemplation of foulness.”

Once you have calmed your sense faculties, you can follow the instructions of this Girimananda Sutta to do breath meditation:

"[i] Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.' [ii] Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.' [iii] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' [iv] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'
"[v] He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to rapture, and to breathe out sensitive to rapture. [vi] He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to pleasure, and to breathe out sensitive to pleasure. [vii] He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to mental processes, and to breathe out sensitive to mental processes. [viii] He trains himself to breathe in calming mental processes, and to breathe out calming mental processes.
"[ix] He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the mind, and to breathe out sensitive to the mind. [x] He trains himself to breathe in satisfying the mind, and to breathe out satisfying the mind. [xi] He trains himself to breathe in steadying the mind, and to breathe out steadying the mind. [xii] He trains himself to breathe in releasing the mind, and to breathe out releasing the mind.
"[xiii] He trains himself to breathe in focusing on inconstancy, and to breathe out focusing on inconstancy. [xiv] He trains himself to breathe in focusing on dispassion,[1] and to breathe out focusing on dispassion. [xv] He trains himself to breathe in focusing on cessation, and to breathe out focusing on cessation. [xvi] He trains himself to breathe in focusing on relinquishment, and to breathe out focusing on relinquishment.
"This, Ananda, is called mindfulness of in-&-out breathing.”


text:
I have been meditating by myself since 2015 but nothing worked for me
Please help me, what to do. I've been meditating but not working for me anything. I get only tingling sensation on my forehead & constant buzzing sound. Besides, I have not gotten any slight improvements in my behavior.
Would be helpful if someone suggests me following things.

How to meditate finally? That one method that can bring peace and calmness to me.
When to do ? Prerequisites.
How much to do?

Hi and welcome to Buddhism SE. We have a Guide and a Resource tab for new users that you might like. Enjoy your stay.

I get only tingling sensation on my forehead & constant buzzing sound.

Do not give too much importance to this for the moment, i.e., do not consider it as good and crave for it or do not consider it bad and be averse towards it. Just keep your equanimity knowing they arise and pass.

Besides, I have not gotten any slight improvements in my behavior.

Behaviour doesn't change overnight. In the past, given 10 situations you react in an unwholesome way. If this changes to 9 out of 10 or 8 out of 10 situations, this is an improvement. So if there is a slight improvement also, this is immaterial, so just keep doing what you are doing.
Also there could be no improvement because you are practicing wrong or the techniques you are practicing might not be suitable to you.

How to meditate finally? That one method that can bring peace and calmness to me.

When you meditate calmness and insight grows. So do both:

Anapanasati, and
Satipatthana

When to do ?

Whenever possible. But this might help:

5 - 10 minutes after waking up (awake but just not yet out of bed)
until you fall asleep (in bed but not yet fallen asleep)
1 hour session in the morning
1 hour session in the evening / night

Prerequisites.

The main thing is morality hence contemplate on morality and make a determination to be moral. In addition the following may would be helpful:

Develop some faith in the practice so you would be earnest in the effort you put into it
Develop gratitude towards the Triple Gem, otherwise you will not have got the chance to practice
Develop a sense of urgency to practice, think this might be the last chance
Develop Metta

How much to do?

Generally do 2 session of about 1 hour or more formally. Use this as a booster to continue the practice during daily activities. Ultimately it is being mindful during daily activities that gives the real results.
In doing 2 sessions, if one session is not productive then the other might be more productive. At the start of the session, you might not be meditating much hence it should be long enough to settle down and put some solid practice.

This little plant of Dhamma requires service now. Protect it from the criticism of others by making a distinction between the theory, to which some might object, and the practice, which is acceptable to all. Don’t allow such criticism to stop your practice. Meditate one hour in the morning and one hour in the evening. This regular, daily practice is essential. At first it may seem a heavy burden to devote two hours a day to meditation, but you will soon find that much time will be saved that was wasted in the past. Firstly, you will need less time for sleep. Secondly, you will be able to complete your work more quickly, because your capacity for work will increase. When a problem arises you will remain balanced, and will be able immediately to find the correct solution. As you become established in the technique, you will find that having meditated in the morning, you are full of energy throughout the day, without any agitation.
...
When you go to bed at night, for five minutes be aware of sensations anywhere in the body before you fall asleep. Next morning, as soon as you wake up, again observe sensations within for five minutes. These few minutes of meditation immediately before falling asleep and after waking up will prove very helpful.
...
Daily meditation of two hours and yearly retreats of ten days are only the minimum necessary to maintain the practice. If you have more free time, you should use it for meditation. You may do short courses of a week, or a few days, even one day. In such short courses, devote the first one third of your time to the practice of Anapana, and the rest to Vipassana.

Source: The Discourse Summaries by S.N.Goenka

People experience all kinds of varied phenomena when trying to practice awareness / meditation. Getting itches or feeling other sensations like tingling or feeling of lightness or a floating sensation are some of the common ones. It is because, as relaxation sets in, the nervous system begins to pass sensory signals more efficiently. They are sensory data that were kept blocked before. When the body gets relaxed or more aware, it gives rise to these unique sensations. So try to see it as just sensation. Try not to get too excited about it. If you are practicing awareness, make it a part of the practice. Just observe as to how it come up and watch it pass away. The main thing is not to get involved. Keep your distance, and just observe.
Even if you don't feel at ease, or you can't relax, try to just observe it, without letting it rule you. Let those feelings arise and look at them mindfully. If you just sit still and observe your agitations, they will eventually pass. They come and they go. They have no real grip on you at all.
Sometimes a little tingling or a little stirring around that you feel could be that stirring of a thought beginning to occur. You must keep an eye on the mind to notice when it begins to show signs that it’s about to wander off. The mind could start looking for someplace else to go, something else to think about. If you’re really alert, you can catch it before a distracting thought is fully formed. The more quickly you can see that process, the better. The tingling that you feel could be either physical or mental. It could be either. There will come a point, though, when the mind decides that the stirring is a potential for a thought. It looks into it and turns it into a thought world. The more quickly you can see that happening, the more you’re able to catch it at the very beginning of the act.

This might be a good time for reflection: Like "Why am I practicing? What did the Buddha teach and how am I able to apply it? Do I want to achieve something? But isn't the goal of meditation to let go and not to get?"
How do you know that meditation didn't work? Only because it wasn't pleasant or peaceful enough or even physically and mentally painful? If the goal of meditation is to overcome suffering, should I expect it to be easy and pleasant all the time, just as I want it?
Watch out to fall into generalizing things like "it's all like this, nothing ever worked, ..." and really look and you'll possibly remember occasions when meditation did had a positive effect.
Good reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu3ajzTFGSg

Very important factor for preparation for meditation is to practice Sila. (at least the five precepts)
I think the buzzing sound is the tinnitus in your ear and I have the worse case of ringing ear, which does not bother me at all. Do not pay attention to it.


text:
How can I as a layperson approach the discourses given to monks?
Most discourses that I've read have been given to monks or nuns (and not laypeople), so I'm wondering what the practical application is of these many discourses for a layperson like myself. Are the practices presented in these discourses something to strive for? Is it better (as laypeople) to focus our effort on deepening our understanding and practice of for example the five precepts?
Grateful for help and with kind regards,
Tord

Related topic: Can the noble eightfold path be followed in its entirety by a lay follower?

The four noble truths & dependent origination simply explain how suffering comes to be & how this suffering can be ended.
As a layperson, it is inevitable you suffer (for example, when your motor car is damaged in car accident). Therefore, you  can use these teachings to understand & overcome your suffering.
For example, your motor car is damaged in an accident. You reflect:

I am suffering because I am attached to the car & do not want the car to be damaged.
However, this wanting & suffering is ignorant because the Buddha taught all material & conditioned things are subject to damage & impermanence. Therefore it is ignorant of me to suffer over things that are inevitably prone to damage & impermanence.
Also, the motor car is not-self. It is not really 'mine'. It is only something I use temporarily.

The above is an example of how to use the four noble truths & dependent origination to understand & end the everyday suffering of a lay person.

If you do not clearly understand the four noble truths, it is:

All suffering is summarised as attachment to the five aggregates.
This suffering arises when there is craving that leads to new self-becoming.
This suffering ends when craving ends.
The noble eightfold path is the way to end suffering, which is summarised as using mindfulness to bring wisdom (right view) to sense experience.

If you do not clearly understand dependent origination, it is simply the same as the four noble truths but more detailed, in that it traces the arising of suffering back to ignorance. It states:

Ignorance conditions ignorant mental formations.
Ignorant mental formations condition an ignorant consciousness.
Ignorant consciousness conditions an ignorant mind & body.
An ignorant mind & body condition ignorant sense organs.
Ignorant sense organs condition ignorant sense experience.
Ignorant sense experience conditions ignorant feelings.
Ignorance feelings condition craving.
Craving conditions attachment.
Attachment conditions self-ego-becoming.
Becoming conditions the birth of self-identity. (eg. 'My motor car').
Birth conditions aging-&-death (eg. 'My motor car is destroyed & dead).
Aging-&-death conditions sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, despair & all sufferings.

Therefore, if ignorance is ended by reflecting: "material & conditioned things are impermanent", the craving, attachment, becoming, birth & death that cause suffering will not arise. The mind will be free from suffering about motor cars.

Not only the motor is non-self, also the money to fix it. It doesn't have intrinsic value - its only purpose it to... let go. ;-)

Buddhism for sure is very overwhelming for a beginner – a layperson. Even for me, just 12 years ago, it was too much information to process. “Starting out” in Buddhism is exciting for a lot of people, but learning the Dhamma is a painstakingly slow, gradual process. Sadly a great many want to jump right in and become enlightened the next day. The truth is, Buddhism is very difficult, and there are no shortcuts. It is an entire lifetime worth of study, and the practice must be incorporated into your daily life. But it must be taken at a very gradual, slow pace to really absorb and learn anything.
First study only the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path. It may take you at least a full two years to make sense of the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination. If you delegently keep at it and acquire a good knowledge of dhamma while practicing the Five Precepts to the Letter, then you are ready for meditation.
There are Suttas aimed at Life of a Layman. Few of them are…. Chalabijathi Sutta, Devadaha Sutta MN 101, Gayha Sutta SN, Janussoni Sutta AN 10.177, Jara Sutta SN 48.41, Mahanama Sutta AN 11.13, Patama Nathakarana Sutta AN, Pattakamma Sutta AN 4.61, Sallekha Sutta MN 8, Sattabharya Sutta, Sigalovada sutta DN 31, Sihasenapati sutta AN 5, Vyaggapajja Sutta AN 8.54.

Being a lay beginner myself, my experience is rather limited.
Most of the texts I've read so far seem to be rather universal in their message. Developing the mind within a monastry might be a lot easier without all those distractions of a layperson's life. But always remember that practicing the dhamma is not limited to meditation. Good actions are beneficial as well - your life may offer many opportunities.
I consider the five precepts as the fundamental practicing rules. Easy enough to follow most of the time in auto-pilot mode; and teaching occurs in the other occasions.
So of you have a text that doesn't speak to you at all at the moment, I'd just skip it for now and grab another one.

Most discourses that I've read have been given to monks or nuns (and not laypeople)

Whatever addressed to monks and applicable and relevant to laypeople also.
Whether you are in robes or not you get stressed and getting out of stress you get peace.
When the Buddha addresses as Bhikkhu this includes lay people.

Are the practices presented in these discourses something to strive for?

These solve the problem of being stressed and also how to get out of it hence it is worth striving for unless you want to remain in misery.

Is it better (as laypeople) to focus our effort on deepening our understanding and practice of for example the five precepts?

This is the foundation hence it is a necessity before Mastery Over the Mind and Wisdom.

The ultimate for Buddhist Dharma is to tame the Citta (Mind/Heart), once it's done, one is free from suffering. The 5 Precepts are not just for the lay people, but for any citizen to live an ethical life. It is the basic for any Buddhist, and the righteous.
The discourses, many are addressing the monks (Bhikkus), yet the audiences, in many of the sermons, including all followers, from rulers, noblemen, citizens and different classes. (Usually it's set in certain open place, no lighting effect or stage setup necessary for the Buddha himself is illuminating, the Celestial Beings raining the flowers and jewels, filled the atmosphere with fragrance and radiance {sometimes this kind of phenomena could still be seen in some sacred mountains, the colour-tinted clouds in shape of lotus petals, rainbow-halo of the sun... etc.}, and of course no entrance fee charged ;). Apart from those human eyes can see, there are Bodhisattvas, the Nagas and their Eight Leagues of Might, the Non-human Beings... etc. And of course if you by any chance read the Sutra, the audience included you then, read as if you are in the sermon, or among the monks. While the monks are with their particular customs - the Kāṣāya, but putting on the robe doesn't necessarily make one the true monk, nor a lay people without the robe deemed unable to understand the teaching.
There are many discourses delivered to the monks in daily living together with the Buddha, most are recorded in the Agama Sutras. Those teachings about what so termed "mindfulness meditation" could be learnt as much as one is able to. However, to a certain stage, the White Skeleton Meditation is to be cautioned, not only this was recorded in the Sutra certain monks took their lives when so absorbed in getting disgusted with the body, also it would weaken the body; meditation on nourishing and right way of eating to replenish is required. Yet it would be a miracle if anyone get to the depth of the White Skeleton Meditation without the right teacher or his own right understanding, thus this is really like, it wouldn't happen or if it happened the solution is also produced. Thus the Buddha let all these be written down openly, anyone has the wisdom and merit(功德), anyone is deemed to have the Great Cause across eons of Kalpas to arrive at it.
One the other hand one could read the intellectual part of the Dharma. This part is so rich and splendid, over thousands of years, books, treatises, theses are littering and piled up like Himalaya. One is easily got lost but emptied the whole life never really get to the skin of it. Thus one should read right Sutras. Reading the Sutra is the most guaranteed way to receive authentic teachings, and of course the Sutra must be well written, able to transmit the Buddha's teachings, likewise, authentically.


text:
How do I focus from the distraction of people who look attractive?
I am a 21 year old college student studying physics. When I walk around campus, I am in a meditative state; enjoying the surrounding nature and the mathematical fruit it bears.
My thoughts become interrupted when an attractive woman will walk by me. With something as simple as an exchange of smiles, or simply their youthful beauty, I can be completely removed from my meditation. Commonly, I am left feeling like what I am pursuing is not as interesting as the passerby.
I do not want to be distracted from my meditation; more importantly, left feeling like my path is wrong and lesser. After I collect myself I can regain the motivation to pursue my maths and physics meditation, but this back and forth process feels burdening.
How do I incorporate the beautiful youth around me into my meditation of math, physics and nature, instead of being a process like a type 1-a super nova, where the youth is the white dwarf consuming the star of meditation?

edit - describing my meditation
Periodically, I will focus on my breath doing a samatha meditation. When I look at nature I try to understand impermanence, but I do not believe all things are temporal. I believe symbols/ideas like the hexagon transcend time. My meditation also consists of trying to understand the objects that exists whether I am here or not (maths) and the transducer (physics) between these symbols/ideas and the temporal physical world.

Are you sure this is the right place to ask this question? Can you reframe "maths and physics meditation" into the aspect relevant to Buddhism? Your meditation could be similar to different types of Buddhist meditation so there would be different answers depending on what your meditation style is like.

You wrote, "I am posting this on the philosophy exchange": I hope you noticed that you have posted on Buddhism.SE, and not Philosophy.SE! That said, I think this question is more on-topic here than it would be there.

@ChrisW Srry, they told me to come here. haha

Since you are philosophical, ponder: "What is beauty? Why does it exist? What is its purpose?"
In Buddhism, five questions are always asked about a thing:
(1) How does the thing arise (samudaya)?
(2) How does the thing pass (atthaṅgama)?
(3) What is the attraction (assāda) of the thing?
(4) What is the drawback or danger (ādīnava) of the thing?
(5) What is the method to escape (nissaraṇa) the danger? (which may include, with some things, escaping the danger while utilizing the attractive quality.)

Bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling does not understand as it really is the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger and
  the escape in the case of form, feeling, perception, volitional
  formations and consciousness.
But, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple understands as it really is the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger and
  the escape in the case of form, feeling, perception, volitional
  formations and consciousness.
SN 22.74

You thinking seems to be tainted by Vipallasa

what is impermanent is taken to be permanent;
what is painful is taken to be pleasurable;
what is not self is taken to be a (or the) self; and
what is impure is taken to be pure.
- abopted from Vipallasa Sutta

You should try to keep your mind free from Vipallasa then the path factor develops automatically.

Dawn, bhikshus, is the forerunner, the harbinger of sun-rise.
    Even so, bhikshus, for a monk this is the forerunner, the harbinger of the arising of the noble eightfold
    path, that is, accomplishment in wise attention.
Bhikshus, when a monk is accomplished in this wise attention, it is to be expected that he will
    cultivate the noble eightfold path, develop the noble eightfold path.
And how, bhikshus, does a monk who is accomplished in this wise attention cultivate the noble eightfold
    path, develop the noble eightfold path?
- Yoniso Manasikāra Sampadā Sutta

.

When I walk around campus, I am in a meditative state; enjoying the surrounding nature and the mathematical fruit it bears.

.

And what, bhikshus, is right mindfulness? Here, bhikshus, a monk dwells exertive, clearly knowing, mindful,
   observing the body in the body,
      removing covetousness and displeasure in the world;
a monk dwells exertive, clearly knowing, mindful,
     observing feelings in the feelings,
        removing covetousness and displeasure in the world;
a monk dwells exertive, clearly knowing, mindful,
   observing the mind in the mind,
      removing covetousness and displeasure in the world;
a monk dwells exertive, clearly knowing, mindful,
   observing dharmas in the dharmas,
      removing covetousness and displeasure in the world.
This, bhikshus, is called right mindfulness.

- (Magga) Vibhaṅga Sutta

The key here is: "removing covetousness and displeasure in the world." So do not get attached or averse to what you see, hear, touch, taste, smell.

After I collect myself I can regain the motivation to pursue my maths and physics meditation, but this back and forth process feels burdening.

You can motivate yourself to study without attachment. This is developing intention but not crave for it.
Taking pleasure also is based on craving and is not without it. Alagaddupama Sutta

When I look at nature I try to understand impermanence

At a mundane level if you understand this is good. But this should be understood at the experiential level. For this you should do Vipassanā Meditation to see things as they are and not as you think they are or as you might want them to be.

My meditation also consists of trying to understand the objects that exists whether I am here or not (maths) and the transducer (physics) between these symbols/ideas and the temporal physical world.

Trying to understand is an intellectual game. This creates move Vipallasa and clouds your view than come out of it. You should keep to the 4 frames of reference without craving or aversion to the feelings that may arise. You should be equanimous to all that is felt and knowing it is impermanent.

How do I focus from the distraction of beautiful people?

Seeing Beauty in something is a Vipallasa. Everything ultimately disintegrates and falls apart. Therefore, beauty is temporary. You have to realise your mind analyses something and gives it an judgement as beautiful or ugly and to this evaluation you feel good when you see someone beautiful and feel bad when you see someone who is ugly. You have to be equanimous and seeing impermanence of the feeling that arises. More on this see this answer.

FORM
The ideal girl
And what, bhikshus, is the gratification with regards to form?
    Now, bhikshus, suppose there were a kshatriya girl or a brahmin girl or a householder’s girl, fifteen or
    sixteen years old, not too tall, not too short, not too thin, not too fat, not too dark, not too pale. Is this the
    time, bhikshus, when her beauty and complexion would be at its height?”28
    “Yes, venerable sir.”
    “Now, bhikshus, the joy and pleasure that arise on account of that beauty and complexion is the
    gratification with regards to form.
And what, bhikshus, is the disadvantage with regards to form?
    This same woman here, later on, at eighty, ninety, or a hundred years old, crooked as a rafter, doubled
    up, supported by a walking-stick, tottering, frail, youth long gone, teeth broken, grey-haired, having little
    hair, bald, wrinkled, limbs all blotchy.
What do you think, bhikshus? Have her previous beauty and complexion vanished, the disadvantage
    (now) evident?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“This, bhikshus, is the disadvantage with regards to form.
Again, bhikshus, you might see this very same woman, afflicted, suffering and gravely ill, lying
    fouled in her own excrement and urine, lifted up by some and set down by others.
    What do you think, bhikshus? Have her previous beauty and complexion vanished, the disadvantage
    (now) evident?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“This, bhikshus, is the disadvantage with regards to form.
Again, bhikshus, you might see this very same woman as a corpse, cast aside in a charnel ground,
    dead for a day, dead for two days, dead for three days, bloated up, livid, and oozing with impurities.
What do you think, bhikshus? Have her previous beauty and complexion vanished, the disadvantage
    (now) evident?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“This, bhikshus, is the disadvantage with regards to form.
Again, bhikshus, you might see this very same woman as a corpse, cast aside in a charnel ground,
    eaten by crows, or being eaten by hawks, or being eaten by vultures, or being eaten by dogs, or being
    eaten by jackals, or being eaten by various worms and bugs.
…as a skeleton with flesh and blood, connected by sinews,
…as a skeleton, fleshless, smeared with blood, connected by sinews.
…as a skeleton, flesh and blood all gone, connected by sinews,
Again, bhikshus, you might see this very same woman as random disconnected bones, scattered
    in all directions, a hand-bone here, a foot-bone there, a shin-bone here, a rib there, a thigh-bone here, a
    pelvic bone there, a back-bone here, a shoulder-bone there, neck-bone here, a jaw-bone there, a tooth
    here, a skull there.
What do you think, bhikshus? Have her previous beauty and complexion vanished, the disadvantage
    (now) evident?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“This, bhikshus, is the disadvantage with regards to form.
Again, bhikshus, you might see this very same woman as a corpse, cast aside in a charnel ground,
    the bones bleached, looking like conch-shells,
    …the bones piled up over a year old,
…the bones reduced to a powder;
What do you think, bhikshus? Have her previous beauty and complexion vanished, the disadvantage
    (now) evident?”
    “Yes, venerable sir.”
    “This, bhikshus, is the disadvantage with regards to form.
And what, bhikshus, is the escape with regard to form?
    It is the removal of lustful desire, the giving up of lustful desire for form. This is the escape with
    regards to form.
It is truly impossible for those ascetics and brahmins who do not understand according to reality
    gratification as gratification, disadvantage as disadvantage, escape as escape with regards to sense-desires
    either to fully understand sense-desires through their own practice or to instruct another so that one can
    fully understand sense-desires.
It is indeed possible for those ascetics and brahmins who do understand them according to reality…
    either to fully understand sense-desires through their own practice or to instruct another so that one fully
    understands sense-desires.

Maha Dukkha-k,khandha Sutta

You words inspire me. To motivate without attachment is not something I have heard, and will look down that path. Thank you for the stories and taste of something new to explore.

You are welcome. Also try to take up vipassana meditation.

Like it or not, you have been born into a male human body here on planet earth.  You are in prime breeding age for a human male.  The way I understand it, Buddha tried severe aestheticism regarding the senses and ruled that out.  He decided that the middle-way was better that trying to force the mind, because the mind was a continuous, natural thing and was not force-able.
I would enjoy this experience, knowing it was transitory, an act by a human male, and being aware, resume the meditation as the feeling passed.  Remember all things are transitory and will fade to nothingness in the end. This way your meditation will not be disturbed by your wanting "water to run uphill," which it will not do. Also remember, that you are presently fully enlightened, and it is only your "thinking machine" that blocks the realization of it.

You might get catch-all advice for dealing with distractions but different styles of meditation deserve different solutions to distractions. Usually we can find a solution which compliments the style of your meditation and helps in working towards the goal of that meditation.
If you were doing samatha meditation and focusing on the breath the aim of this is to calm the mind. When you get distracted you could observe the distraction without judgement and then bring your awareness back to the breathing. This helps to teach you to remain calm when an opportunity for sense-indulgence occurs.
If your meditation was a type where you observe the changing nature of things the goal of this is to understand impermanence. When you are distracted you can observe that the distraction arose and then allow it to pass. This isn't just getting rid of the distraction, the distraction is just another opportunity to learn about impermanence.
Likewise if your goal is to see mathematical beauty then the distraction can be an opportunity for progressing to your goal. For example:

What mathematical beauty can you see in being distracted?
Can you see a mathematical beauty in returning from the distraction back to being aware of your surroundings?
When you are distracted by a person perhaps you could look past the human beauty to see the mathematical beauty in their appearance.

I just came up with three approaches but you understand your meditation better than I do. I think you can come up with what's best for yourself.

I will consider how to better describe my meditation. Periodically, I will focus on my breath doing a samatha meditation. When I look at nature I try to understand impermanence, but I do not believe all things are temporal. I believe symbols/ideas like the hexagon transcend time. My meditation also consists of trying to understand the objects that exists whether I am here or not (maths) and the transducer (physics) between these symbols/ideas and the temporal physical world.

@Tsangares This is a bit off topic but Buddhists also don't believe that everything is impermanent. Only things which arise will pass away, the hexagon geometry which exists outside of you doesn't arise so it doesn't pass away. However, your perception of a hexagon is something which arises and after a while it will pass away because you start to think about other things.

@I like that thank you. Where can I go to learn about Buddhism? It is a series of books written by Buddhists?

@Tsangares I think the best way to start is to read a recent book written by a buddhist practitioner. "What the Buddha taught" is a great book and it's fairly short. The pdf is online too https://web.ics.purdue.edu/~buddhism/docs/Bhante_Walpola_Rahula-What_the_Buddha_Taught.pdf  Don't be put off by the length of the pdf, half of it is an appendix of Buddhist verses.

Try skeleton meditation, don't even see the their skin. Always have your X-ray eyes on, seeing the flesh, bones, and organs of everything and everyone around you and yourself at all times. Turn them off when you feel you have enough.


text:
How does a Buddhist survive in a harsh world?
The following video got me thinking:
Machiavelli’s Advice For Nice Guys
Machiavelli believes that being kind and compassionate is good, but one often needs to learn to be harsh and ruthless in order to survive so that good may triumph. The best example would be the Axis Powers during World War 2 - if the Allies had been nice, they'd have been no match for the Axis Powers for their sheer ruthlessness.
On a smaller scale in everyday life, it's the nicer, more helpful people who are constantly taken advantage of.
So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path?
Yet, Buddhism has survived 2500 years and even flourished at a time where war and cruelty were rampant. So there must be something there, and it bugs the heck out of me.

What is your evidence that "nicer, more helpful" people are "constantly taken advantage of"?
In my experience it is the self-centered who are often significantly more gullible!

People often confuse kindness with weakness. There is a tendency for the two to be paired, because kindness is a result of empathy, which makes one more open to other's experiences. This also makes one more gullible. It is not enough to be kind- those who have malevolent motivations will simply sweep away those who are just kind. One must also be strong and active, never wavering in the face of opposition. If you can have that same strength while still working for good, not only will you be making the world a better place, but nothing will be able to stop you.

So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path?
I hope this is a false dilemma.
Some of the Buddhist principles that might help you to prosper (rather than "to be eaten") include:

Right livelihood (work for a living, don't cheat people, have fair business dealings)
Have good friends, but avoid bad friends
Be cautious, prudent, avoid being irrational or ignorant, when making decisions about business and family etc.
Save part of your earnings (which will help you to survive thieves and taxes and so on)
Equanimity (be kind but don't be swayed too much, don't be swayed more than is proper, e.g. to help other people with their misfortunes -- remember that each inherits their own karma)
Generosity (if you do benefit someone, don't feel that you suffer that as a loss)

The best example would be the Axis Powers during World War 2
I'm not sure that's a good example. Buddhism includes doctrine like,

"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
"He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.

I'm not a historian but, for example, perhaps if the "allies" had been more generous at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 at the end of WW1, if the French hadn't wanted to further weaken defeated Germany as much as possible, then the conditions wouldn't have arisen for Germany to want to go to war again 20 years later. Maybe ditto if the USSR hadn't made a secret non-aggression pact with Germany in 1939 (which it did maybe because of its own fear of Germany but also because of its own greed to invade Eastern Europe). Maybe they're all, you know, a bit guilty: could have done better.
If you react harshly, where does that ever stop? And what behaviour do other people learn from you?
Yet, Buddhism has survived 2500 years and even flourished at a time where war and cruelty were rampant. So there must be something there, and it bugs the heck out of me.
Well, social cooperation (rather than social aggression) is maybe a winning strategy. For example people respect (and try to help) Buddhist monks, partly because they are intentionally harmless.

The historical assumptions in the examples are questionable, both WW2 & Buddhism.
As for Buddhism:
(1) It became extinct in India, the land of its birth.
(2) It became extinct in Persia & Afghanistan, the first regions of its expansions.
(3)It became a ritualistic feudal dictatorship in Tibet.
(4) It often encountered great conflict & opposition in China.
(5) It was a minor religion in Japan.
(6) It became virtually extinct in Indonesia, with some principles surviving in Hindu Bali.
(7) It was in such decay in Ceylon, at the time of colonialism, the order of monks had to be restored by the Burmese.
(8) It flourished in Burmese, after wars over Buddhism by the Burmese
(9) It flourished in Thailand, even though the monks, probably learning from their mistakes in India, did not act to change the other indigenous religions.
(10) In the USA & the West, Buddhism is often dominated by left-wing ideologies.
(11) Overall, to expand, Buddhism has generally always sold-out (betrayed) its core principles to gain supporters.
In brief, unlike the doctrine of Machiavellianism (which is based on competing over the world), Buddhism survived when it did not compete for & interfere with the world.

In MN8 it says:

"But herein, Cunda, effacement should be practiced by you:
(1) Others will be harmful; we shall not be harmful here — thus effacement can be done.
(2) Others will kill living beings; we shall abstain from killing living beings here — thus effacement can be done.
(3) Others will take what is not given; we shall abstain from taking what is not given here — thus effacement can be done.
...
(44) Others will misapprehend according to their individual views, hold on to them tenaciously and not easily discard them;[18] we shall not misapprehend according to individual views nor hold on to them tenaciously, but shall discard them with ease — thus effacement can be done.

"So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path?"
Buddha was actually very clear on that subject. As in The Simile of the saw:

"Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.

But I don't think that these two qutoes say that you should behave passive and let others abuse you all the time. If you have compassion for others, you don't want them to make unskillful actions which you can prevent.

In Sri Lankan history there were instances where the monks disrobed an participated in the wars to protect Buddhism.
In this kind of question there is no right answer. In face of invaders trying to destroy Buddhism, if you did not fight back then there would have been no Buddhism by now.

Buddha knew that both States did have strong armies and that they are needed for the protection of their people. Buddha did not advice minister Vassakara that the concept on 'Army' is against Buddhism and that he should advice the king not to declare war against Vajjis but to desolve the army. Buddha at this instance also brought up important lessons in 'state craft.'

Buddhism & The Soldier by Major General Ananda Weerasekera

Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten.

There are instances where this also has succeeded. E.g. Mahatma Gandhi's fight for Indian freedom was done on total non violence and also won.
In Sri Lanka there is a saying which says if someone is continuously attacking you when you are compassionate you are a fool. If you keep attacking someone who always compassionate you are a fool. In this light some middle road perhaps might be chosen, and depends on the situation, the opponent, etc.
Also might be of interest: The Buddha and the Four-Limbed Army: The Military in the Pali Canon - Matthew Kosuta Ph.D.

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


text:
Does Zen have an unusual view of samadhi?
There was a book titled Zen in the Art of Archery:

Zen in the Art of Archery is a short book by German philosophy professor Eugen Herrigel, published in 1948, about his experiences studying Kyūdō, a form of Japanese archery, when he lived in Japan in the 1920s. It is credited with introducing Zen to Western audiences in the late 1940s and 1950s.

Not only archery, there are other lay activities too which I somehow think of as associated with Zen, for example: tea; gardening; poetry; sitting; sword-play; calligraphy and painting; maybe music; ...
I just read this comment:

Samadhi means “absorption,” but fundamentally it is unity with the whole universe. When you devote yourself to what you are doing, moment by moment — to your kōan when on your cushion in zazen, to your work, study, conversation, or whatever in daily life — that is samadhi. Do not suppose that samadhi is exclusively Zen Buddhist. Everything and everybody are in samadhi, even bugs, even people in mental hospitals.

Is this statement even true (or is it mistaken), according to Zen?

If it's true, do other schools of Buddhism have a similar or comparable view of samadhi?
I get the impression (perhaps I'm wrong) that some traditions see samadhi as associated with meditation, and meditation as distinct from (even deliberately renouncing) any other activities.

When I answered this question I wanted to say something from my 'personal' experience of becoming absorbed in or engaged with some activity. I decided not to because this is a site about Buddhism and so an answer based on only my personal activity or experience might be off-topic.
I know next to nothing about Mahayana (e.g. Zen or Tibetan) Buddhism. Can you reference some recommended text on the subject of "absorption", absorption in lay activity? Maybe something that might help to answer Rishi's question?

The only theory I have heard of about activities (apart from that it's virtuous to engage in activities which are helpful or beneficial) is Flow (psychology). But that is not (so far as I known) a Buddhist theory. Does Buddhism have anything to add to or to contradict that theory, analogous?

If absorption in activity is (kind of) legitimate, what's the important difference between sitting (meditating) on a cushion and e.g. sitting at a potter's wheel, or sweeping the floor, or whatever?

Once many many years back I read Robert M. Pirsig's book,  “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” . It was a powerful book. Still to this day I recall that experience of reading it. It was Pirsig  who once said, “The Buddha resides as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain.” Little incidents that I recall from this book are moments of “Samadhi”. So what is “Samadhi”? It is nothing but a mind established, a mind solid in its footing. Thoughts may come and may go, but without destroying the concentration.

@SapthaVisuddhi I guess comments are meant for discussion or clarification. If you can convert this comment into an answer that would be better. Thanks.

@ChrisW I would like to just add this link here, related to Samadhi, lot of Buddha references, not necessarily "Buddhist", but close. (I am unable to draw a Buddhist line anywhere because that would mean just playing/interpreting words said by the Buddha and by somebody else.)

On the Wikipedia page of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, I found this -> The title is an apparent play on the title of the book Zen in the Art of Archery by Eugen Herrigel. In its introduction, Pirsig explains that, despite its title, "it should in no way be associated with that great body of factual information relating to orthodox Zen Buddhist practice. It's not very factual on motorcycles, either."

@esh thanks the link, v good article. however the Mahasamadhi/Nirvana Sadhguru explaint seemed different from the Buddha's version. currently in the middle of reading the Mahaparinirvana Sutra...

@ChrisW imo those cannot be termed "Samadhi" just like those flooding the word "Ch'an" in everything, everywhere. The consequence is more misunderstanding the Buddhist teaching. Those could only be worded as: mindfilness, concentration... etc. in Samadhi, one should at least exhibit the extra-human capacities such as seeing the future or past many lives, do those?

I think the Japanese Zen take on samadhi is inseparable from Japanese culture.  There is quite a bit of cross pollination between traditional Buddhist concepts and preexisting Japanese ideas.  What the quote you mention is describing is the experience of kanshin - and it's a really beautiful idea.  In a martial or artistic context, it means something along the lines of the "mind with no remainder".  The experience is one of such full engrossment that there is literally no mind left to attend to other things.  Kanshin is the pure, wholehearted engagement with the world that Zen values so highly.  It is a kind of samadhi in the sense that you are focused, but the important part is that you are engaged - i.e. when you chop wood, really chop wood; when you sit, really sit, etc.
Words are a tricky thing.  Over time, they do take on tangential meanings that may or may not have anything to do with what they pointed to when they were originally spoken.  As our understanding grows, so do the possible definitions of the words we use.  Zen does use the word samadhi to describe one pointed attention as in meditation.  This usage is no different than the experience described by the Pali word "ekagatta" (e.g. single/one - concentration).  That said, the definition has grown much broader and can include "engagement", "wholeheartedness", "kanshin", etc.
Derrrr.  This came to mind this morning.  If you want a Theravadan term that comes closer to how samadhi is being used in that passage, it would be something very close to sampajañña.

'Samadhi' generically means 'collectedness' or 'concentration'.
The Pali states there are two types of concentration, namely, 'right' & 'wrong':

In one of right concentration, wrong concentration is abolished...
MN 117

'Right concentration' is defined as concentration that has seven supporting & requisite factors:

Any singleness of mind equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood,
  right effort & right mindfulness — is called noble right concentration
  with its supports & requisite conditions.
MN 117

Therefore, an expert marksmen trained to assassinate people in war has 'samadhi' but it is 'wrong samadhi' because it is not supported by the above seven factors.
In fact, if a 'Zen samadhi' is not supported by the above seven factors, particularly 'right view', it is not 'right concentration' according to the Pali.
As for the word 'jhana' or 'absorption', this generally refers to a 'meditative' concentration.

Once many many years back I read Robert M. Pirsig's book,  “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (ZatAoMM)” . It was a powerful book. Still to this day I recall that experience of reading it. It was Pirsig  who once said, “The Buddha resides as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain.” Little incidents that I recall from this book are moments of “Samadhi”. So what is “Samadhi”? It is nothing but a mind established, a mind solid in its footing. Thoughts may come to mind and thoughts may go, but without destroying the concentration. When you are riding, surrounded by the passing scenery, and no obstacles in-between, you are in the midst of a spaciousness where thoughts can come to mind but without destroying the concentration. Thoughts would come and go, but you are in oneness with that moment of time in Samadhi. You are very much alive at such moments with the mind in the right center for itself in the body. Everything feels just right. It is a moment when the mind settles down in a healthy, sound, and wholesome way. Sadly in wearing a protective helmet you will not experience this oneness.
Such moments can happen even when you are in the middle of some activity, in this case when riding a motorcycle. It may not qualify as jhana, even though some people tend to equate Samadhi to Dhyna which is a meditative stage. But it’s a steady foundation. It’s a foundation of mindfulness. It’s an establishing of mindfulness.  In this book, ZatAoMM, the narrator brings about Rumi’s ‘Rubàiyat of Omar Khayyàm’ as a nimitta for the Samadhi state. He would recite the Rubàiyat of Omar Khayyàm, to himself as he rides along. Rumi happened to come to deep Samadhi states in his grief over the untimely death of his mistic friend Shams. In his grief Rumi would go round and round a pole in his backyard and reciting poetry off the top of his head – what came to be known as the Rubàiyat of Omar Khayyàm.- that were full of deep spiritual wisdom.
It is not entirely incorrect to define creative acts as those that are divinely inspired – inspired by the ‘God within you’.  Great works of art are created when the creator is in a state of Samadhi, when such qualitative works are done.  Setbacks at such times are gumption traps as the narrator describes it in ZatAoMM. This state of Samadhi (or the quality that the narrator seeks in ZatAoMM) is a state of sacredness can not be precisely defined because of its subjective nature.  It is an unseen force that nourishes and illuminates, but ultimately transcends the physical world. As the Tao te Ching says, the way of the sacred “is like a well: used but never used up.  It is like the eternal void: filled with infinite possibilities.  It is hidden but always present.”
Specially in Japanese space and spatial concepts, we can see this manifestation of the sacred. In the search for the manifestation of the sacredness we could look at the Japanese ‘tea ceremony’ as in this enclosed space we can find the true spirit of Japanese space. This is another of the many creations of an artist, creating a space of Samadhi according to Zen. In his book, “The Zen of Seeing,” (1973) Frederick Franck explained about this intuitive self that helps make such creations:

“Who is man, the artist?  He is the unspoiled core of every man, before he is choked by schooling, training, and conditioning until the artist-within shrivels up and is forgotten.  Even in the artist who is professionally trained to be consciously ‘creative’ this unspoiled core shrivels up in the rush toward a ‘personal style,’ in the heat of competition to be ‘in’…. I believe that in seeing/drawing there is a way of awakening the ‘Third Eye,’ of focusing the attention until it turns into contemplation, and from there to the inexpressible fullness, where the split between the seer and what is seen is obliterated.  Eye, heart, hand become one with what is seen and drawn. Things are seen as they are – in their ‘isness.’  Seeing things thus, I know who I am.  [Franck. p.15]  ”

In this book on learning the art of sketching, Franck tells us how to get in touch with this collective unconscious – our intuition – and how to be in oneness with ones subject in a state of Samadhi. The Tea Ceremony, and it’s environs, are an example of architecture that fosters this quality of Samadhi. I would say that such places are spiritual. These places help one to dwell in the eternal timeless present and live the truth that one understands, immediately. Truth is never in the past.  Truth is a living thing, and not within the field of time. Sacredness is not found in the past, in memory. For the Japanese, space is experiential and sensuous unlike that of the west, where space is more objectively conditioned by shape and measurement.  The Japanese tea ceremony, which has had a far-reaching influence on all forms of art, is a good example of this experiential approach to space.
It was the Japanese tea master Sen no Rikyu who further improved the tea ceremony, though it existed long before as a way of entertaining the visitors who come to a Zen Monastery.  He created a distinct space that was later accepted throughout Japan, called wabi-sukiya space – a designated space separated from the outside world, for the purpose of drinking tea.  Originally a pastime of the upper classes, this was widely adapted by the common people by the sixteenth century.  The tea ceremony (Cha-no-yu) brings together four spiritual elements: harmony, wa; reverence, kei; purity, sei; and tranquillity, jaku.  These four elements join in making this ceremony a success.  All participants of the tea ceremony must be in harmony with each other.  In the days of the samurai, to participate in the tea ceremony, the samurai had to remove the sword that symbolised his social rank.  Within the room all are considered the same irrespective of their cast, creed, race or religion.  The participants would talk with reverence to each other on subjects of mutual interest. The tea ceremony incorporated in it the aesthetic appreciation of poverty that emerged by the end of the medieval period.  Rikyu’s art of tea is called wabi sabi, meaning poverty of simplicity.  In Buddhism the word sabi is understood as a state of absolute nothingness, a state of void, that is every Buddhist’s ideal.  The simplicity of the teahouse, sukiya, is derived from the ceremony of purification where the participants strip themselves of all but the simplest and most basic characteristics.  Suki-ya, which literary means gap-space, was used for the teahouse as it is separated from the main dwelling.  This implies that suki-ya/teahouse has been derived by the concepts of void-space, that Lao-Tzu considered as dynamic.  Thus, Taoist emptiness and Buddhist impermanence dictated the distinct spatial idea of the teahouse.
The teahouse, both within it, and without, characterises the impermanence of all things, that life is an ever-changing phenomenon.  The teahouse consists of a tea-room that can accommodate a maximum of five persons, an anteroom or mizuya, where the tea utensils are washed and kept ready to be brought in, a waiting room or machiai, where one has to wait till the ceremony begins, and the garden, roji, which connects the tea-room and the waiting room.  The waiting room protects the visitor from the weather while reminding the person of the ever-changing nature.  Two other elements that imply impermanence are the primitive lavatory near the teahouse, and the gate.  The simple privy symbolises the incessant changes that process the human body.  The gate to the teahouse signifies the constant passing in and out of visitors.  The roji, garden, helps break the connection with the outside world, and is in itself the first stage of meditation.  Generally the garden is planned in the kaishyu or stroll style.

but fundamentally it is unity with the whole universe

In light of Alagaddupama Sutta, this does not fit with:

‘The self is the world; after death, I will be
  permanent, everlasting, eternal, unchanging
  in nature, eternally the same; I will endure as long
  as eternity’—this, too, he regards thus, ‘This is mine; this I am; this is my self.’

Alagaddupama Sutta

Seated thus at one side, he said this to the Blessed One:
  “Venerable sir, it is said, ‘Right view, right view.’ In what way, venerable sir, is there right view?”
“This world, Kaccāna, mostly
  depends upon a duality: upon (the notion of) existence and (the
  notion of) non-existence.
But for one who sees the arising of the world as it really is with right wisdom, there is no
  notion of non-existence regarding the world.
And for one who sees the ending of the world as it really is with right wisdom, there is no notion of
  existence regarding the world.

Kaccā(ya)na.gotta Sutta

I shall be no part of all the world.

Atammaya Sutta
Which might lead to eternalist view. The above statement makes the link of "thatness" with the universe. Ultimate reality is neither that nor this. But causality gives the notion of "this" dependent on "that", when "this" arises "that" arises, when "this" ceases "that" ceases. Not "this" in "that" or "than" in "this".

When Māluṅkyā,putta, you are ‘not by that,’ then you will ‘not be therein’.
When, Māluṅkyā,putta, you are ‘not therein,’ then you will ‘be neither here nor beyond nor
  in between the two’.

(Arahatta) Maluṅkyā,putta Sutta
There are many levels of absorptions which are described in the Suttas numbered from the 1st to the 9th Jhana:

Paṭhama Jhāna Pañha Sutta
Dutiya Jhāna Pañha Sutta
Tatiya Jhāna Pañha Sutta
Catuttha Jhāna Pañha Sutta
Ākāsânañc’āyatana Pañha Sutta
Viññāṇāñc’āyatana Pañha Sutta
Ākiñcaññ’āyatana Pañha Sutta
N’eva,saññā,nâsaññ’āyatana Pañha Sutta
Animitta Ceto,samādhi Pañha Sutta

In the 1st 4 Jhana you develop the following factors:

Movement of the mind onto the object (vitakka)
Retention of the mind
on the object (vicāra)
Joy (pīti)
Happiness (sukha)
Equanimity
(upekkhā)
One-pointedness (ekaggatā)

As you progress you have to drop the factors which you initially cultivated until only the last remain. This can be in order or out of order. Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta
The nature of the experience is also given in Sāmanna,phala Sutta:

He permeates and pervades, floods and fills this very body with the zest and joy born of solitude.
...

.

meditation as distinct from (even deliberately renouncing) any other activities

It is born out of solitude. More on this see: Viveka,nissita by Piya Tan
One way to progress in the path is "a mind seized by restlessness". (Yuga,naddha) Paṭipadā Sutta Kōan seems to be doing the same. (How do kōans work?) But thi is not the pured form of concentration as there might be Vipallasa, Verbal and Mental Fabrication, Mental Nutriments (Ahara) and unwholesome roots.

I have to say the question is very broad, but this does not light up much about Mahayana style/Zen.

If it's true, do other schools of Buddhism have a similar or comparable view of samadhi?

I'm not sure I understand why you see it as synonymous with self-view and eternalism: partly because awareness of the universe may imply awareness of impermanence, especially impermanence of anything that might be viewed as "self"; for example if a drop of water might have a self-view like "I am a drop of water" but what happens when that drop of water is added to (unified with) the ocean? Mainly, isn't a current/actual awareness/absorption/investigation of "frog" and "pond" not the same as self-view, and because it's an alternative to self-view it temporarily makes self-view impossible?

If "this" is identified with "that"  it lead to eternalism. There is a notion of "that" exists and "this" exits. Since the absorption identified universe which exists, absorption exits. Updated the texts above.