text:
The object of meditation
I have been focused on the breath in meditation and I am interested in Vipassana, but I am confused about the object of meditation.
I have read that you focus on the breath and as thoughts arise, you should observe them and then return to the breath and that it is the returning to the breath that increases one's mindfulness.  I have also read that in Vipassana meditation, one shifts the object of meditation to the thoughts that arise and make them the object of mediation.
This approach seems to be just sitting and letting your thoughts wander.  Do I misunderstand the meaning of making arising thoughts the object of meditation?  As it is now, I continue to make the breath the object and observe my other thoughts but generally do not pursue them, rather just categorizing the thought (like "planning the future" or "reliving the past") and then return to the breath.

In the meditation taught in the original Buddhist scriptures, the mind stays with the breath & free from thought.
In the original Buddhist scriptures, there is no 'shift' when vipassana is practised. Instead, calmness (samatha) & insight (vipassana) are developed simultaneously. The scriptures state:

These two qualities occur in tandem: tranquillity & insight.
MN 149

In the original Buddhist scriptures, the term 'vipassana' refers to the 'clear seeing' of the impermanent (anicca), unsatisfactory (dukkha) & not-self (anatta) characteristics of the five aggregates (body/breathing; feeling sensation; perception; thought/mood; sense consciousness).
For example, the breath arises & passes continually; a breath appears & disappears; a new breath appears, then disappears; another breath appears then disappears. To see/experience clearly impermanence of breathing is vipassana.
To see clearly that it is the physical body that breathes (rather than the 'self' or 'I' that breathes) is also vipassana of 'not-self' in relation to breathing.
'Unsatisfactoriness' means to see that because X breath & Y breath is impermanent; that breath cannot form the basis of or be relied on for lasting happiness (due to its fleeting impermanent nature). It can also mean the impermanent nature of a breath, if clung to, will lead to suffering.
The ordinary distracting thoughts the mind has are not really suitable for vipassana because they actually diminish awareness, clarity & discernment of the mind.
For the mind to practise effective 'vipassana' in relation to thought (sankhara aggregate), 'samadhi' (mental clarity & stability, aka 'concentration') must ideally be very developed & pure (empty).
Ultimately, true 'vipassana' is 'enlightenment'. It is very profound because it discerns the 'not-self' nature of the five aggregates.
Believing 'you' are observing 'your thoughts' or thinking 'my thoughts' are impermanent is not really vipassana because vipassana sees 'not-mine' or 'not-yours' (anatta) rather than 'my' or 'yours'.
To conclude, categorizing the thought (like "planning the future" or "reliving the past") and then return to the breath is the right method according to the original scriptures.

You shouldn't chase after the past or place expectations on the future. What is past     is left behind. The future  is as yet unreached.
  Whatever phenomena/truth (dhamma) is present you clearly see right there,
       right there. Not taken in, unshaken, that's how you develop the heart.
Bhaddekaratta Sutta

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

The focus of this meditation is breath. Keep coming back to that. I recommend you seek out some in-person meditation instruction - it will really help your meditation.

Thanks for your suggestion- I have been considering pursuing a personal teacher.

Here is a book you might be interested in.  It's compilation of about 30 sutta by Buddha about breathing mediation.
AnapanaSati per Bhudda wajana

Thank you for your recommendation- I will investigate these suttas.

Vipassana means 'seeing clearly'. That means you cannot practice Vipassana, because it is the result of the practice. Likewise if you practice Samatha, you don't sit down and become calm & one-pointed right away. The practice and the result are not the same.
In order to practice Vipassana Bhavana (= development of insight) you would traditionally use the instructions from the Satipatthana Sutta. The foundation/object of this practice is not whatever comes up. There are 4 things you should be mindful of (body, feelings, mind, mind objects).
All necessary instruction can be found in this guide: How to Meditate

Interesting...  I have heard Vipassana translated as insight meditation, but I see that is not a good translation.  Thank you for your answer.

There are 4 frames of reference in Vipassana

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
To simplify it a bit more, the key is removing covetousness and displeasure in the world which appears in each instance. This is by being equanimous and knowing impedance.
E.g. If you take the body and sub section of posture. Some postures may be comfortable, neutral or painful. You just have to maintain equanimity and see the impermanence of the sensations.[Pacalā Sutta, Dīgha,nakha Sutta, Pahāna Sutta]


text:
Did Shakyamuni Buddha say anything in regard to fear
I'm sure that at some point Shakyamuni talked about fear, but I am wondering more specifically if he had listed something like "the five types of fear" or something like that(e.g. Four noble truths, ten worlds, ten factors, five eyes).

In the Cātumā Sutta (Majjhima Nikāya, 67) Buddha talks about four types of fear in the case of Bhikkus just as there are dangers and hazards in a sea like stormy waves, crocodiles, whirlpools, and sharks. Those four fears were temper (ill will against those who instruct them and guide them); gluttony (dissatisfaction with training rules such as those concerning taking of meals), women and pleasures of senses.
(http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/34.7-Catuma-S-m67-piya.pdf)
Also Buddha spoke of four reasons as to why we fear death. They are:  attachment to the body,  attachment to sensual pleasures; knowledge that we’ve done cruelty to others and the resulting fear that after death we’ll have to face consequences for it,  and lastly the fear of not having seen the true Dhamma, or for still having doubts about its truth.
Then in the Sangaha Bala Sutta, (The Discourse on the Powers (in connection with conciliation) Aṇguttara Nikāka  9.5)  Buddha talks about how to free yourself from five common fears.
http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/2.21-Sangaha-Bala-S-a9.5-piya.pdf
Those five fears are the fear of livelihood; ājīvika bhaya (2) the fear of disrepute; asiloka bhaya (3) the fear of nervousness before an assembly; parisa,sārajja bhaya (4) the fear of death; and maraṇa bhaya (5) the fear of a bad destiny [rebirth]. duggati bhaya
Another Sutta that talks about fear is  ‘Pancha Bhayavera Sutta’ or the discourse on the five fears and hates. [Disadvantages of breaking the Five Precepts] (Anguttara Nikaya  5.174)
http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/6.4-Vera-S-a05.174-piya.pdf
A noble disciple will overcome these five factors that caused fear and hate. The first is to abstain from killing. The second is to abstain from stealing. The third is to abstain from wrongful sexual conduct. The fourth factor is to abstain from falsehood. The last factor is to live refraining from intoxicants.
The Dutiya Anagata-bhayani Suttam (The Discourses on Future Dangers )  is another of interest:
http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/ati/an/05_fives/an05.078.than.ati.htm

"Monks, these five future dangers, unarisen at present, will arise in the future. Be alert to them and, being alert, work to get rid of them. Which five? …
"There will be, in the course of the future, monks undeveloped in body,[1] undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind, undeveloped in discernment. They — being undeveloped in body, undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind, undeveloped in discernment — will give full ordination to others and will not be able to discipline them in heightened virtue, heightened mind, heightened discernment. These too will then be undeveloped in body... virtue... mind... discernment. They — being undeveloped in body... virtue... mind... discernment — will give full ordination to still others and will not be able to discipline them in heightened virtue, heightened mind, heightened discernment. These too will then be undeveloped in body... virtue... mind... discernment. Thus from corrupt Dhamma comes corrupt discipline; from corrupt discipline, corrupt Dhamma.

There are, monks, four powers. The power of wisdom, the power of energy, the power of an unblemished life and the power of
benevolence....Now, monks, a noble disciple endowed with these four
powers has left behind five fears: the fear for his livelihood, the
fear of disrepute, the fear of embarrassment in assemblies, the fear
of death and the fear of an unhappy future destiny.
AN 9.5

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Should sensual pleasure be actively avoided, rather than simply not sought? I am particularly interested in regards to taste
I understand that the active seeking of sensual pleasure is not seen as good, but it's not clear to me whether it should be actively avoided.
I was preparing some noodles to eat this morning and inside the pack was a sachet of flavouring. I pondered upon this for a moment; should I add it to the food?
The following thoughts occurred in favour of adding the flavour:

I am eating the noodles for the purpose of feeding the body, not for the sensual pleasure. Why not add it?
Deliberately depriving oneself of the little sensual pleasure there is in a meal could be regarded as self-mortification.

The following thoughts occurred in opposition of adding the flavour:

Does the very notion of considering this only highlight my craving of sensual pleasure?
Why should I feel compelled to add the flavouring for reasons other than nutritional value?

I am interested in whether any Buddhist teachings directly address this sensual pleasure in such a situation, and more broadly whether sensual pleasures should be actively avoided in such a manner.

Carefulness is advised in rejecting sensual pleasures for laypeople. It can build up a lot of aversion in the mind. The Buddha said that until he reached the jhanas he could not abandon sensual pleasures. One can enjoy sensual pleasures with care as to not become obssessed. The minds needs to be happy to be healthy and a mind deprived of sensual pleasures will not be happy.

Be moderate about your sensual pleasures. The key for ending craving for sensual pleasures is to experience a higher pleasure of concentration. Then the mind will be automatically attracted to this new pleasure. Practice metta. In my experience, the practice of metta brings a higher pleasure (higher than the sensual pleasures).

Reading your post, i remembered the Middle Way or the Noble Eightfold Path as a path of moderation, between the extremes, any sensorial pleasure provokes addiction if not moderated.
In the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, it reads:

these two extremes ought not to be practiced by one who has gone forth from the household life. (What are the two?) There is addiction to indulgence of sense-pleasures, which is low, coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to self-mortification, which is painful, unworthy, and unprofitable.
Avoiding both these extremes, the Tathagata (the Perfect One) has realized the Middle Path

Depending on the spiritual tradition, some are more strict on interpreting moderation, and some like my own have a stronger focus on the self conscience: If you are mindful your unconscious urges will be apparent to you, and you will know what causes suffering to you and what does not.
Having said so, Monastics were advised in the 8 precepts not to indulge in any sensual pleasures, because I believe Budha regarded that as a problem if one was to attain enlightenment since it is so prone to cravings which will result in suffering.
In the Kamma Sutta:

If one, longing for sexual pleasure, achieves it, yes, he's enraptured at heart. The mortal gets what he wants. But if for that person — longing, desiring — the pleasures diminish, he's shattered, as if shot with an arrow.

For lay people it is recommended in the 5 precepts to abstain from sexual misconduct, which along with some guidelines more or less sprinkled in the Buddhist literature, I believe it should be interpreted in light of cultural and traditional practices, or even the self own conscience.
Citations from here:
Noble Eightfold Path
Buddhism and sexuality
Five Precepts

Thank you. Could you further elaborate on what you mean by "moderation" (not in the literal sense, in the teaching sense)? It seems to me upon reflection that any indulgence would provoke the addiction.

In the teaching sense it will depend on the spiritual tradition, some traditions are more strict, others like my own have a stronger focus on the self conscience. If you are mindful your unconscious urges will be apparent to you, and you will know what causes suffering to you. Hope this helps

It does help, thank you. If you edit your answer to include this I may accept it after others have been given a chance to give an alternative.

Glad it helped. May you be free from suffering. Metta

I think that's an advanced/difficult question.
In summary I think it's recommended that you to avoid becoming 'attached' to sensual pleasure[s]. Seeking (sensual) pleasure (i.e. 'thirsting' or 'craving' for pleasure) might be a symptom of and a precursor to being attached to it. And 'contact' with objects, from which arise 'feelings' of pleasure, might lead to 'craving' and 'attachment'.
I think the above is part of the theory of the Twelve Nidānas (sense base -> contact -> feeling -> craving -> attachment).
I'm not sure but maybe theoretically you can break the chain anywhere: if you avoid contact for example then it doesn't arise; or if you have contact but avoid feeling; or etc.
Food is a difficult subject partly because (unlike sex, drugs, music, money) it isn't possible to avoid contact.
I guess that to the extent that monastics eat what they're given, they don't choose it and so it's easier to see it as uncontrolled/non-self/impermanent -- not a karmic act maybe (not an act of will) -- nothing to worry about (though this about "not worrying" is more-or-less idealistic on my part -- in practice they cope with hunger).
Another reason why I assume that this topic is difficult is because, according to the Four stages of enlightenment,  "freedom from sensual desire" is associated with one of the last two stages.
Here is an annotated version of the Sekha Sutta (which Saptha Visuddhi's answer recommended). It begins to explain terms like "one whose sense-doors are guarded". Even so it might require more to understand, for example it says "he grasps neither its sign nor its detail" which supposes you understand the word "sign" (which is annotated in a footnote but also mentioned in the introduction to this Sutta Discovery essay).
It's possible that you'll find basic teaching helpful: "Thinking about food but don't get attached to the thought, let it go, keep breathing" or "This is the arising of stress, and the cessation of stress" or "Not me or mine" etc.
You mentioned "mortification" but, in English anyway, I think that means literally "putting to death" i.e. it's an extreme. Foregoing a useless snack isn't necessarily it. I think the theory is that by avoiding attachment/craving for sensual pleasure you can avoid suffering and find a more lasting ease. Mortification is wrong but (for monks, more or less 'advanced') something like disillusionment/revulsion (Nibbidā) is recommended in various of the Pali suttas.

I think the teaching varies with the school and the student: e.g. to start with you're meant to avoid attachment (to what you're attracted to), then (later) some schools want you to avoid or free yourself from aversion -- see this answer for example and these answers -- so you may get seemingly mutually contradictory answers unless you know e.g. which school you're asking (and perhaps for what kind of student).

The scriptures tell us that all beings subsist on food. So we have to eat. But there is a big difference between live to eat and eat to live.  That’s why there is a precept for monks against eating after noon or before dawn. It is there for them to not give into pleasures of taste. So it is OK to taste the tastes, but being mindful about is, as in how Buddha advised Mahànàma, on how does the noble disciple partake food reflecting? .
The discourse “where there is passion” in Samyutta Nikaya or  Atthi Raga Sutta Buddha says that there are four kinds of nutriments.  One is material or physical, while the other three are mental nutriments.  It is important that we understand these four nutriments clearly to understand how they nourish us resulting in rebirth. Also it will answer your next question. Of course you should add the flavour. Also you should have the full awareness when you taste the flavour. This is how my teacher, Ven. Kiribathgoda Gnanananda Thero, explained it:

” To understand this factor, I will explain in this manner.  Our consciousness is with the physical food we consume.  For example, do we have a desire for food?  Yes, we have.  Do we not derive pleasure from what we eat?  Yes, we do.  Do we have a passion for what we eat?  Yes, we do.  Thus our mind is attached to the food.  When our mind is attached, consciousness arises and grows.  It grows like a tree.  Therefore the cause for the growth of consciousness is passion, delight or pleasure and craving.  When consciousness arises, mentality-materiality (nama rupa) alights.  We will try to understand what this means in the following manner. For example, we see some tasty food.  Then what happens in our mind?  The food was something that we saw from our eyes.  What happens next?  We develop a desire to consume it.  Therefore desire for taste has arisen.  Then what happens?  We feel like buying it, to cook it, to taste its flavour.  What has grown is consciousness.  When consciousness arises, mentality-materiality is established.  When we see some tasty food or think of food, there is secretion of saliva.  What does it mean?  It is a reaction in our body - contact and feelings have arisen automatically.  There are six factors that manifest itself.  The four elements that constitute our body - the material phenomena (rupa); contact (phassa), feeling (vedana), perception (sanna), volition (cetana) and attentiveness (manasikara).”
”If you think carefully you would realize this happens when our thoughts are with food.  As we think of food, before we could flutter an eyelid, desire for food arises and consciousness is established.  Then mentality-materiality alights.  Where mentality-materiality alights, there is the growth of fabrications resulting in the ‘kamma’ process, and thus renewed becoming and rebirth results. Birth results in ageing, sickness and death, and sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair.”
”In the same way the Tathagatha has explained the nutriment of physical food to be regarded.  It should be for sustenance and not for its passion, delight or desire.  To cultivate one’s mind in this manner is difficult but not impossible.  In the modern world we are often misled by the propaganda to promote the sale of various kinds of food.  The mentality of our society is to satisfy man’s senses and desires.  Food advertisements often rouse our desires and they do not show reality.  That is why the Buddha said when one consumes food one should not think that the food consumed is to gain strength, sensual desire or to be athletic. We should consume food with the thought that it is for sustenance.  This would help in our moral training and would also help in the development of mindfulness.  We should think that food is subject to change, is impermanent, it gets spoilt and perishes.  Then the desire, craving for food will not arise.  Then we would learn to be mindful that all conditioned things are impermanent (anicca).”

Thank you, I think you're right about the live to eat part; I was eating to live and there was some pleasure available as part of the process. Still not clear cut, but "food" for thought

I'm a bit busy right now, but I will try to expand on this later. With metta...

The Buddha never asked us to avoid certain things for fear of getting attached. He never asked us to close our eyes so that we don't see beautiful things. Instead, what the Buddha said was to train your mind so that you don't get attached to these things.
So with the noddles, I think it's ok for you to put the flavour packet in and have a tasty meal, but while you're eating, eat it mindfully. Make sure that you don't cling to it, remember that the taste is impermanent etc.
You can also practice 'Asubha' with regards to food if you're very attached to this taste. You can think that this taste only lasts momentarily whilst it's in my tongue. After that point, you don't feel any taste at all. And imagine what happens to this food after it goes into the body and digests itself. So in that way, you can try to reduce and control your craving/ clinging to this taste, and still have pleasant meals.

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

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


text:
What were the Buddha's meditation methods and practices during his pre-enlightenment wandering years in India?
I am not clear about one important phase of the Buddha's life: when he was a wandering aspirant, after leaving his two earlier teachers of yoga. There is not much reliable information available about how the Buddha conducted his practices of meditation and thought control.
The best I know is some fragment of a text wherein the Buddha talks about how he sought to control his thoughts by jamming his tongue to the roof of his mouth. At best, that description sounds like a struggle, not a practice or a method.
Is there any sermon where he talks about his struggle? Or a sutra which gives an account of his efforts?
Can you throw some light? Thank you.

I also remember vaguely such a sutta, where he talks about a method of meditation with the element to do something like this with the tongue, but I don't remember which sutta this was. I think he refers to some esoteric meditation-style which was somehow common between the sameras/ascets and has to do with intensifying the energy-flow in connex with breath (reminds me a bit of the "dynamic meditation" of the Osho's) He said in the sutta, that even this method did not lead anywhere, as far as I remember...

The german version gives something in DN 1, 1.4 the term "oben anschlagen". In the comment below it is written "oben Anschlagen = 'uddham aghatanam' ist eine Redewendung und bedeutet so viel wie sexuelle Energie in geistige Energie umwandeln, die im Sex gebundene Energie nach oben in den Kopf zu bringen." But I didn't see a related construct in the accesstoinsight-vers of that sutta, hmmm - See http://palikanon.com/digha/d01_4.htm the (*3)-remark. Surely it is not the place to conclude that this was a method he tried after he left his second teacher. Don't know from where I took that idea

In the Pali-version http://palikanon.com/pali/digha_mula/digha01.htm at paragraph 75 there occurs the term uddhamaghatanam so perhaps this is only left out in the english version (perhaps regarded as uninteresting) or translated to a different word.

The tongue is mentioned as part of one of the meditation techniques in the Vitakkasanthana Sutta (MN 20).

The Buddha talks about this in MN 36: Maha-Saccaka Sutta. It's quite a long and detailed passage, in which he describes how he went to different teachers who taught him the Jhanas and starved his body to the extreme. His story sums up the extreme ways of practicing, that one should avoid using The Middle Path: First living in sensual indulgence & luxury while growing up in a powerful family, then leaving this live behind and almost starving himself to death.

"I thought: 'Whatever brahmans or contemplatives in the past have felt painful, racking, piercing feelings due to their striving, this is the utmost. None have been greater than this. Whatever brahmans or contemplatives in the future will feel painful, racking, piercing feelings due to their striving, this is the utmost. None will be greater than this. Whatever brahmans or contemplatives in the present are feeling painful, racking, piercing feelings due to their striving, this is the utmost. None is greater than this. But with this racking practice of austerities I haven't attained any superior human state, any distinction in knowledge or vision worthy of the noble ones. Could there be another path to Awakening?'

thank you. the middle path indeed is the best contribution of Buddha to spirituality.

MN 12 also gives an account:

"Sariputta, I recall having lived a holy life possessing four factors. I have practiced asceticism — the extreme of asceticism; I
  have practiced coarseness — the extreme of coarseness; I have
  practiced scrupulousness — the extreme of scrupulousness; I have
  practiced seclusion — the extreme of seclusion.[17]
"Such was my asceticism, Sariputta, that I went naked, rejecting conventions, licking my hands, not coming when asked, not stopping
  when asked; I did not accept food brought or food specially made or an
  invitation to a meal; I received nothing from a pot, from a bowl,
  across a threshold, across a stick, across a pestle, from two eating
  together, from a pregnant woman, from a woman giving suck, from a
  woman lying with a man, from where food was advertised to be
  distributed, from where a dog was waiting, from where flies were
  buzzing; I accepted no fish or meat, I drank no liquor, wine or
  fermented brew. I kept to one house, to one morsel; I kept to two [78]
  houses, to two morsels;... I kept to seven houses, to seven morsels. I
  lived on one saucerful a day, on two saucerfuls a day... on seven
  saucerfuls a day; I took food once a day, once every two days... once
  every seven days, and so on up to once every fortnight; I dwelt
  pursuing the practice of taking food at stated intervals. I was an
  eater of greens or millet or wild rice or hide-parings or moss or
  ricebran or rice-scum or sesamum flour or grass or cowdung. I lived on
  forest roots and fruits, I fed on fallen fruits. I clothed myself in
  hemp, in hemp-mixed cloth, in shrouds, in refuse rags, in tree bark,
  in antelope hide, in strips of antelope hide, in kusa-grass fabric, in
  bark fabric, in wood-shavings fabric, in head-hair wool, in animal
  wool, in owls' wings. I was one who pulled out hair and beard,
  pursuing the practice of pulling out hair and beard. I was one who
  stood continuously, rejecting seats. I was one who squatted
  continuously, devoted to maintaining the squatting position. I was one
  who used a mattress of spikes; I made a mattress of spikes my bed. I
  dwelt pursuing the practice of bathing in water three times daily
  including the evening. Thus in such a variety of ways I dwelt pursuing
  the practice of tormenting and mortifying the body. Such was my
  asceticism.
"Such was my coarseness, Sariputta, that just as the bole of a tinduka tree, accumulating over the years, cakes and flakes off, so
  too, dust and dirt, accumulating over the years, caked off my body and
  flaked off. It never occurred to me: 'Oh, let me rub this dust and
  dirt off with my hand, or let another rub this dust and dirt off with
  his hand' — it never occurred to me thus. Such was my coarseness.
"Such was my scrupulousness, Sariputta, that I was always mindful in stepping forwards and stepping backwards. I was full of pity even
  for (the beings in) a drop of water thus: 'Let me not hurt the tiny
  creatures in the crevices of the ground.' Such was my scrupulousness.
"Such was my seclusion, Sariputta, that [79] I would plunge into some forest and dwell there. And when I saw a cowherd or a shepherd or
  someone gathering grass or sticks, or a woodsman, I would flee from
  grove to grove, from thicket to thicket, from hollow to hollow, from
  hillock to hillock. Why was that? So that they should not see me or I
  see them. Just as a forest-bred deer, on seeing human beings, flees
  from grove to grove, from thicket to thicket, from hollow to hollow,
  from hillock to hillock, so too, when I saw a cowherd or a shepherd...
  Such was my seclusion.
"I would go on all fours to the cow-pens when the cattle had gone out and the cowherd had left them, and I would feed on the dung of the
  young suckling calves. As long as my own excrement and urine lasted, I
  fed on my own excrement and urine. Such was my great distortion in
  feeding.
"I would plunge into some awe-inspiring grove and dwell there — a grove so awe-inspiring that normally it would make a man's hair stand
  up if he were not free from lust. When those cold wintry nights came
  during the 'eight-days interval of frost,' I would dwell by night in
  the open and by day in the grove.[18] In the last month of the hot
  season I would dwell by day in the open and by night in the grove. And
  there came to me spontaneously this stanza never heard before:

Chilled by night and scorched by day, Alone in awe-inspiring groves,
  Naked, no fire to sit beside, The sage yet pursues his quest.
  51. "I would make my bed in a charnel ground with the bones of the dead for a pillow. And cowherd boys came up and spat on me, urinated
  on me, threw dirt at me, and poked sticks into my ears. Yet I do not
  recall that I ever aroused an evil mind (of hate) against them. Such
  was my abiding in equanimity. [80]

"Sariputta, there are certain recluses and brahmans whose doctrine and view is this: 'Purification comes about through food.'[19] They
  say: 'Let us live on kola-fruits,' and they eat kola-fruits, they eat
  kola-fruit powder, they drink kola-fruit water, and they make many
  kinds of kola-fruit concoctions. Now I recall having eaten a single
  kola-fruit a day. Sariputta, you may think that the kola-fruit was
  bigger at that time, yet you should not regard it so: the kola-fruit
  was then at most the same size as now. Through feeding on a single
  kola-fruit a day, my body reached a state of extreme emaciation.
  Because of eating so little my limbs became like the jointed segments
  of vine stems or bamboo stems. Because of eating so little my backside
  became like a camel's hoof. Because of eating so little the
  projections on my spine stood forth like corded beads. Because of
  eating so little my ribs jutted out as gaunt as the crazy rafters of
  an old roofless barn. Because of eating so little the gleam of my eyes
  sank far down in their sockets, looking like a gleam of water which
  has sunk far down in a deep well. Because of eating so little my scalp
  shriveled and withered as a green bitter gourd shrivels and withers in
  the wind and sun. Because of eating so little my belly skin adhered to
  my backbone; thus if I touched my belly skin I encountered my
  backbone, and if I touched my backbone I encountered my belly skin.
  Because of eating so little, if I tried to ease my body by rubbing my
  limbs with my hands, the hair, rotted at its roots, fell from my body
  as I rubbed.

53-55. "Sariputta, there are certain recluses and brahmans whose
  doctrine and view is this: 'Purification comes about through food.'
  They say: 'Let us live on beans'... 'Let us live on sesamum'... 'Let
  us live on rice,' and they eat rice, they eat rice powder, [81] they
  drink rice water, and they make various kinds of rice concoctions. Now
  I recall having eaten a single rice grain a day. Sariputta, you may
  think that the rice grain was bigger at that time, yet you should not
  regard it so: the rice grain was then at most the same size as now.
  Through feeding on a single rice grain a day, my body reached a state
  of extreme emaciation. Because of eating so little... the hair, rotted
  at its roots, fell from my body as I rubbed.

"Yet, Sariputta, by such conduct, by such practice, by such performance of austerities, I did not attain any superhuman states,
  any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. Why
  was that? Because I did not attain that noble wisdom which when
  attained is noble and emancipating and leads the one who practices in
  accordance with it to the complete destruction of suffering.

Please read the Anupada Sutra
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html
From what I have gathered over the years, before the lion of the Shakya clan (Buddha Shakyamuni) was enlightened, he had found teachers to teach him various methods and practices, and he would master all of them.
He found that his most advanced teacher of the period taught him all the way to the state of neither perception nor non-perception which he figured out to be "pretty cool but really only puts the cosmos matrix on pause and is not taking me all the way to liberation"
So I think if you go through the jhanas, those were basically the states he was able to master, and if you can practice them (and use them as a ladder) you can eventually tap into the Sublime Holy state of Emptiness, which transcends all the jhanas.
Blessings and stillness be with you

Hi Sova. While MN 111 describes what the two arupa jhanas are, MN 26 provides an account of the pre-enlightenment with these two arupa jhanas. Regards: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.026.than.html

The Buddha practised extreme fasting, mental concentration, breath control, wilderness retreats, and living in cemeteries (he says somewhere that he used a pile of human bones for a pillow). I have theorized that one might describe the types of asceticism in which the Buddha engaged as proto-Shaivite, the earliest text of which is approximately dated to the parinibbana of the Buddha (but the actual traditions encoded in texts are invariably older).

This answer also says there's a Jain influence.

Thank you. There are some definite yogic methods that the Buddha used. Back then, the Buddha didn't worry too much about theory - he just focused on practice.

I disagree. Forty volumes of theoretical material in the Pali Canon would say otherwise. Buddhism is a philosophy above all. The cultivation of wisdom is the essential salvific activity. Meditation is a support.


text:
is the 'magical'/spiritual world another dimension of mind and thus an illusion
I have a question. is the 'magical'/spiritual world another dimension of mind and thus an illusion to leave through meditation whether it is obviously part of life and not one men's mind time?
in my experience, I'm very happy and easily, but still straggle with 'the magical/spiritual world (sorry I don't use scholars words, or being careful enough) starts to be clearer and nice. I start to like it after many years. but I still got the feeling - although its my daily reality, and I need to deal with it in the best way I can and learn it - that it might be also a level of illusion, that I have to get out of. I still like the simple life. its easier and lovely enough... so I'm between - 1. maybe that is my ego denying the real truth... should I focus on something special, or just go on with this nice tour. 2. I admit, a lot of that is west of time for me when it comes to others differences: like again and again. ok there is no me, but we know that already, and your angry still, and I'm tiered, or at that point I don't know what to do.... the good side is the 'little monks' (nick name) with them its at home and happy, joy, not u me, and good perspective, wisdom... but because of the duality, pleasant not pleasant... it always like maybe I should stop talking at all - like treat all of that like mind, time - yes not only mine, but still the same, and just let it flow in silence, meditate. is that the answer? it sounds like a good answer. is it to lie, to insist emptiness is the truth, or sort of miss understanding the world.
thank you <3

tnk you my friends. I have to practice the metta suta. I realize my week spots. and things moves better and better now. you all took me back to my heart and the way to the stable silent place I'm looking for. giving with love, and recognizing it more in more in every place. thank you. love you with all my heart

Sacredness and spiritualism are states of being that we can never fully analyse or rationalise.  It can be felt deep within ones self, but this feeling cannot be captured fully by using words.  The way of the sacred, as Lao Tzu have said “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.”
One of 20th century eastern philosophers, J. Krishnamurti saw the spiritual nature of solitude. He compares it with aloneness, which is very different to loneliness:

“…This aloneness is not aching, fearsome loneliness.  It is the aloneness of being; it is uncorrupted, rich, and complete. That tamarind tree has no existence other than being itself.  So is this aloneness.  One is alone, like the fire, like the flower, but one is not aware of its purity and of its immensity.  One can truly communicate only when there is aloneness.  Being alone is not the outcome of denial, of self-enclosure.  Aloneness is the purgation of all motives, of all pursuits of desire, of all ends.  Aloneness is not an end product of the mind.  You cannot wish to be alone.  Such a wish is merely an escape from the pain of not being able to commune.
“Loneliness, with its fear and ache, is isolation, the inevitable action of the self.  This process of isolation, whether expansive or narrow, is a product of confusion, conflict, and sorrow. Isolation can never give birth to aloneness; the one has to cease for the other to be. Aloneness is indivisible and loneliness is separation.  That which is alone is pliable and so enduring.  Only the alone can commune with that which is causeless, the immeasurable.  To the alone, life is eternal; to the alone there is no death. The alone can never cease to be.” ( Krishnamurti, p. 17) Krishnamurti, J., Commentaries on Living. The Theosophical Publishing House, Wheaton, Ill. U.S.A. 1967.

amazing this is...

To insist emptiness is the reality without having realized what the words mean brings no benefit..  in order to become realized one must train in both merit/virtues and wisdom.  Through gathering the two accumulations of merit and wisdom one can arrive at the perfectly awakened state.
What is your question?  The entire world is rather magical!

I'm not debating what is magical or not. I'll ask simply again: I talk to beings I feel/see with more than five senses, I see more, I know .... I want it to be simple and clear as earth. in this second world, in which through meditation I reach so much, is the goal the same. here i'm not only me, I'm not alone, and I'm asking is it an illusion, a mind trick to avoid, or something to learn, emptiness is without it. that I sense. but I don't know if to treat this second world any differently - like earth (dharma, sensitivity... ) or like mind let it fly away, concentrating on silence?

Ah ok, I understand more clearly your query.  Yes, the goal is always the same: the end of suffering.  Even if we suffer in a dream, we want it to go away.  If we are happy in a dream, we want it to last, but everything changes and there is no solid ground to stand on.  That is Ok!  You are perhaps more sensitive than the average personage so befriend all beings when possible.  Please check out the Metta Sutra! =)

@dalila http://quotes.justdharma.com/love-for-all-beings/ is something wonderful

I don't know about all that but there isn't much magical about "seeing reality as it is", meaning consistantly focusing on something arising in your own experience, as it arises, moment by moment , in a nonreactive, nonconceptual and impartial way. If something magical seeming  does happen then see it as it is and it won't be  magical anymore because it was seen without concepts such as "magical".

its true. but we need the word on the way. and they r fine as limited as they r. they help as move and be what we are. more and more at list. there is something magical - love. and its amazing to find it, again and again. I got it. today is new. tomorrow is another  day. tnx

I didn't mean to imply that the words of the Buddha weren't useful and necessary. May you be happy and know boundless friendliness with all beings :)


text:
I'm feeling hopeless about life after nearly leaving Buddhism in order to marry
I was born a layman. I tried to have a loving life, but my partner wanted me to convert to her religion (Islam) to marry. I was ready to do so. When she left me, I realised how silly I was. Now I'm completely distracted from life. I don't feel having family and I don't think a girl who knew about my past would accept my love. She would know I was ready to leave Buddhism. She did ask me, "Don't you think this is wrong ?" I want to apologize her and promise "I'll spent my whole life as a Buddhist". How do I get rid of my state of mind?

Thanks for everyone @-}-- Guys I was hesitant to ask this kind of question here but no one gets angry with me and really help me. I got beyond what I expected. Thank you so much @-}-- Love Buddha <3

I understand I was going through ignorance , unknowable things . I'll care for ignorance . I was unknown about it . Thank you so much @-}--

If you're looking for a marriage partner, this might be useful: Any authentic sutta from any tradition that gives guidance on what kind of partner to choose?

I wish to encourage you at this point of confusion. Having done many mistakes in your life, or at least finding them as mistakes is truly a place that can cause much confusion and self-criticism. But hopefully soon enough you'll be able to see things clearly and realize that through this journey you took, you realized the way back to a place which is truthful for you. There is nothing to be sorry about! I hope that you will find the strength soon to reestablish your course of life again. I wish to encourage you to find optimism in your realization, because there is much to be found.

She did asked me "Don't you think this is wrong ?". I want to apologize her and promising "I'll spent my whole life as Buddhism "

I think that once you let go of your past, you will be able to go back to the life you wish to take, safely and happily. And your partner, your future or intended spouse, will accept you just as you are. Budhism doesn't have to be a religion. It's a way of life. Muslim, just a title. I know things might be more complicated than that in real life. But at the end, these are only titles. I'm sure you'll be able to find your true way of life, with this title or the other. And find a person who accepts you and understands.

You're saying finally there are just titles I had tried to make person to understand it just a label. But I think different titles taught different way to living life so I've peaceful way Thank you so much @-}--

I guess the reason why you were feeling hopeless is that you were anxious about the past, a memory ... but the past isn't something you can conveniently change.
You were also anxious about the future ... "I don't think a girl who know about my past will accept my love" ... but the future too is something you can't easily change ... it's beyond your control at the moment (for example because it isn't happening yet) and because you can't control it it's easy to feel hopeless (or helpless) about it.
Instead of being "distracted from life" by anxiety about the past and future, maybe the one thing you can affect more easily, one thing you can reach, is the present. You're aware of what you're doing now, how you're thinking now ... maybe you can use Buddhist practices to relieve your suffering now, your present suffering ... maybe in fact that's something you can hope for, i.e. you can hope that Buddhism can help you.
Another reason why you might be feeling helpless is because "I tried to have loving life" -- a lot of people in society want that, but it maybe "hopeless" to depend on someone else loving you (again, because you can't control that).
FYI this answer has some advice on how to choose a marriage partner.
Also, is it true to say that "hope" isn't a big factor in Buddhism? There are things that are like hope, e.g. faith and confidence.
Hope is maybe similar to ignorance, e.g. you 'hope' that something is true when you don't 'know' that something is true. Maybe it's better to concentrate on what's knowable, on what makes sense, rather than trying to hope for what's unknown (and the future is maybe not just unknown but unknowable).
I found (only) a couple of essays by Thanissaro Bhikkhu about "hope". One is All About Change ... which says that it may be stressful to have "hope" in things that are impermanent. It then goes on to describe a search for "the Deathless" via concentration. You said "I born as layman" so, I don't know, maybe you're saying you're not interested in that ... but maybe the essay is worth reading anyway, because it's lucid and includes a question from the Buddha that's worth considering:

"What, when I do it, will lead to my long-term well-being and happiness?"

Another short essay was a Dhamma talk about The Sublime Attitudes. It includes this quote:

Notice that the teaching on equanimity is a reflection on the principle of karma. Of the four chants we have for the sublime attitudes, it's the only one that's simply a statement of fact. The others say:

"May all beings be happy.
    May they be free from stress and pain.
    May they not be deprived of the good fortune they're experiencing."

The first three are wishes, attitudes, things you would like to see happen. "May... May... May..." The fourth one is simply a reflection on the way things are.

"All living beings are the owners of their actions, heir to their actions...
    Whatever they do, for good or for evil, to that will they fall heir."

This reflection actually turns up in lots of different contexts. In the five reflections, the reflection on karma is the one that gives hope. You realize that you're in charge of your actions. You're not simply a victim of fate or of the stars or of some other being acting through you. You're the one who's making the choices. That's what gives you hope.

I guess the difference is that you can be hopeful about what you do (instead of trying to depend on someone else).

Thank you so much @-}-- You just understand my problem really. I got things beyond I was expecting. I'll try to not dwell in the past. I have to bury my past. And need start a new day. May not hoping but dreaming I'll care for things wouldn't be unknown . I'll care for ignorance. I'll hope for knowable things. And I'm so emotional about "Tathagata". I cry because I'm not skilful and like I've to surrender where is only kindness , peace and enlightenment.

The Buddha taught it is 'ignorance' ('not-knowing') that creates unskilful actions rather than 'our self'. The Buddha taught (in SN 12.17) to believe: "I create my own suffering" is a wrong view. That is why the Buddha does not blame people for unskilful actions but blames ignorance.

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

Since you have seen the error of the action & regret it, the Buddha has forgiven you. The Buddha always forgives a person who confesses an error (for example, at the end of the Samaññaphala Sutta).
The Buddha taught it is best to marry a person of the same religion (faith) as your self. If you do not sincerely believe 'God' exists, it is best to not marry a Muslim because problems will arise in the marriage & respective families.

The Blessed One said: "If both husband & wife want to see one another
not only in the present life but also in the life to come, they should
be in tune [with each other] in faith, in tune in virtue, in tune in
generosity, and in tune in discernment. Then they will see one another
not only in the present life but also in the life to come."
Samajivina Sutta: Living in Tune

Also, a Muslim should not marry a Buddhist who is skeptical about 'God'. Wikipedia states Muslim women are forbidden from marrying non-Muslim men according to Islamic law.

Thank you so much @-}-- I realize that I was about to follow wrong path. Buddha taught love , kindness , affection and not just religion kindness , love is beyond religion and everything so why need to change it . Humanity is important than religion. I realized buddhism and I love buddha <3

There are times in our lives that we may make negative judgments about ourselves and are at a loss at making positive ones.  It may not seem easy to get out of a rut but we need to realize that we have what it takes to get out of such mindsets. We should have the willingness to look at what we’ve been doing. We have to realize that it is only our actions that have been unskilful.  We must pass judgment on our actions, and not on ourselves. Even though our intentions and actions in the past have been unskilful, we are not stuck there. 'Isn't it nice to think that tomorrow is a new day with no mistakes in it yet?  We can change our minds. We can change our habits.  So let us use our sense of shame in a skilful way, to use our sense of judgment in a skilful way.

Lot of things help me here , I was dwell in the past but I must start a new day like you saying with no mistakes . I'm thinking like wiser and be skilful. Thank you so much.

It may take a bit of a long time, but it is always possible to find true happiness. Everything in life is impermanent. Even ‘hopeless’ feelings. Just like in that ‘this too shall pass story’.  (http://www.citehr.com/346028-too-shall-pass-thought-provoking-story.html)  . If you follow the teachings of the Buddha, you can always give this life a meaning. With thoughts of Loving-kindness (metta), sympathetic joy (mudita), Compassion (karuna), and Equanimity (upekkha). So loving kindness meditation is a great start. So good luck to you, @Swapnil. - with Metta.

if ur a budhist use your tools. there's nothing wrong. u can go back gently. all this suffering is just a wave in your mind. watch it, let it go. the feelings r temporarily. they r there, look at them, smile at them, create a distance...walk back to the silent place in ur heart, home.
I can relate. I am a jew by birth, I believe in many things. I can imagine converting for someone I love. giving that. my heart will remain the same. the truth is the same. in any language. its naked. maybe u'll get to a different conclusion.
someone here referred me to the Metta Sutta: Good Will (accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.than.html). I think it can help. welcome back, be well.

why cant you just combine them? accept ur dids simply. at the end it's just titles. so u'll be/was a unique Muslim, the one that came from Buddhism.  after all, a good man, muslim or what ever, wouldn't ask u to stop meditating on god, to be a vegi, to do ur best. these r all possibilities, choices. it can be hard to accept other manners, and find yourself there. but it can be easy or hard be respectable. at the end it just a change of names, its the same. go with a good spirit, u got the opportunity to learn about another religion. what the shame in that? visiting israel, the dalai lama once said to the druze spiritual leaders/cadis 'I also was a druze'...

I was silly that I had decided to be changed but now I realise how much silly I was. I don't believe in praying and that's what she wanted. When I said "I love you" her reply "Only god know"  Where is god so ? How she knows that only god know ? And also I study her religion and I got worst so now I've to regret , it's my chance to surrender. There's only Buddha teach dukkha and just philosophy to how to spent life peacefully. I just want to be what I am that is Buddhist.  I asked her "Who's religion is best ?" she couldn't answer so as her require she thought her own. So why not mine. Sorry.

I just want someone understand my problem and help me please. Sorry @-}--

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


text:
How are the importance of sutras determined?
I assume that there variations of sects within buddhism that deem certain sutras  as more "correct" or being closer to the buddha's teaching. I personally see the Lotus sutra as the "true teaching", but I know that some other sects often see the Flower-garland sutra as being closer to the "true teaching".  Is there a system for determining such assertations, or is it more based on text evidence? I have little knowledge with buddhism outside of the sect I'm apart of, so I'm interested in how other parts of Buddhism work.

In the Indo-Tibetan traditions, questions such as "what are the sutras of definite meaning? in what way are they different from sutras of interpretative, provisional meaning? what makes them sutras of definite meaning?" arise when we investigate the meaning of emptiness. This is because, since the wisdom realizing emptiness is the direct antidote to ignorance, it abandons the obstructions to liberation. Therefore, ascertaining the meaning of emptiness is of utmost importance, and it is why one has to rely on sutras 'of definite meaning' in order to do such ascertainment.
Roughly, a sutra of definite meaning is "more correct" when it comes to ascertaining the meaning of emptiness, but not necessarily with respect to other topics such as the method-side.
Thus, most texts and textual genres that mainly teach emptiness explain what sutras of definite meaning are and why they are taken to be so. They do that to show that they rely on reliable sutras, i.e. sutras of definite meaning, as opposed to sutras of interpretative meaning.
Examples of texts teachings emptiness are:

Candrakirti's Madhyamakavatara and commentaries to it,
Nagarjuna's Karika and commentaries to it,
Maitreya/Asanga's Abhisamayalankara and commentaries to it,
Texts on the Tathagata Essence such as Maitreya's mahayanottaratantra-ratnagotravibhanga,
Presentation of the Special Insight Lam Rim chapter such as Atisha's and so forth.

The introductions to the Kagyu & Nyingma commentaries of Maitreya's Ornament are worth studying in that respect. It explains the three turnings of the wheel and what is definite. (Blue-covered thick books titled Gone Beyond, and Groundless Paths)
Although the Tibetan traditions really are **Indo-**Tibetan, various Buddhist schools did not elaborate on and expanded much on Indian commentaries such as the ones I listed above. For instance, Chan (and later on Zen, Thyen, Seon) does not particularly rely on Indian sources. This means that you will hardly find what Chan masters answer to your question in commentaries to those texts. However, there are aspects of early Madhyamika (and thus Nagarjuna) even in Chan.
Nagarjuna and Maitreya/Asanga are Indian sources that have been elaborated on a great deal by Tibetan Scholars, but also by other traditions such as Tiantai, Pure Land, etc.

The Prasangika-Madyhamika school of Tenets say:

Sutras of the Pali canon are provisional and are the first turning
Perfection of Wisdom Sutras are of definite meaning and are the second turning
Sutras of the third turning are usually of provisional meaning, except those which meaning accord with the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, such as the Tathagatagarbha Sutra.
Prasangika posit that a sutra which main subject-matter is emptiness is of definite meaning. Sutras of the Pali canon that speak of emptiness are not of definite meaning because they do not teach the final view on emptiness, the lack of inherent existence.

The condensed version of the Pefection of Wisdom sutras is the Heart Sutra.

Chan masters were initially called 'Lankavatara masters'. However, the Lankavatara Sutra was so difficult to understand that, later on, as Chan popularized and became less provincial, the Avatamasaka Sutra (Garland of Flowers Sutra) took over. Thomas Cleary made an amazing translation of this particular sutra, about than 1'600 pages. Furthermore, the introduction of the English translation of the Avatamsaka states that according to Chan:

The Avatamkasa was taught by Buddha in a pure Land, after he showed the aspect of achieving enlightenment and before he taught the sutras of the Pali canon. It is of definite meaning.
Sutras of the Pali canon & Perfection of Wisdom Sutras are the second turning of the wheel, and of interpretative, provisional meaning.
The Lankavatara Sutra, Tathagatagarbha sutra, etc. are the third turning and, like the first turning, of definite meaning.

The third turning of the wheel sutras explain the three natures. It is called 'the turning of correct differentiation (between what is and what is not truly existent)'. The condensed version of the Avatamsaka is the King of Prayers.
Pure Land Buddhism highly regards the following three sutras:

Infinite Life Sutra,
Amitabha Sutra,
Meditation Sutra.

However, I do not know whether they posit them as being 'of definite meaning', and which turning of the wheel they claim these sutras belong to.
My answer is all in all very incomplete.

In the beinging of the answer when you wrote about emptiness, can you elaborate more on as to what exactly you mean? I have heard it refrenced quite often on this site, but I don't have a very clear understanding of the concept and its implications. My best as to what it means is that, once one realizes emptiness, then infinite meaning is found in everything and all of its phenomena.

Dear @MorellaAlmann I feel elaborating more on emptiness would not answer your initial question, and SE is not a forum but a question/answer platform. Feel free to create a new topic with a question on its own, or even a chat room to discuss more freely and I will gladly accept your invitation.

@MorellaAlmann The answer suggests that understanding emptiness is the whole endeavour, that trying to explain emptiness is the subject of many "suttas of definite meaning" and commentary which are listed in the answer. So "can you elaborate more" might be difficult, because where to begin? A specific question about it might be easier to answer . As you said there are also some other/existing topics on this site -- see for example topics on this site tagged sunyata.

Also you wrote, "My best as to what it means is that, once one realizes emptiness, then infinite meaning is found in everything and all of its phenomena". This answer did say something, a little, about it: what it said was, "we investigate the meaning of emptiness because, since the wisdom realizing emptiness is the direct antidote to ignorance, it abandons the obstructions to liberation".

@TenzinDorje　Thanks for the offer, I created a public chat room for this. Here is the link: http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/43305/the-meaning-of-emptiness-in-buddhism

Every one of the 18,000 plus suttas are important in their own way as the Buddha taught the Noble Eightfold Path to his followers according to a "gradual" system of training. We are all at different levels and none are at the same level in this road less travelled.  The Paccattam veditabbo viññuhiti quality of Dhamma is to be realized by the wise, each for himself.  So one sutta will speak for one, but not the other.  But there are two Suttas in the Anguttara Nikaya that will apply to all. It is the Pathama Lokadhamma Sutta and the Dutiya Loka,dhamma Sutta.  They are about the Eight Worldly Conditions (Vicissitudes) Of Life. Everyone of us sorrow when we face of our everyday sufferings and troubles, and we joy when we face the moments of pleasure and happiness. There are eight such vicissitudes of life (ata lō dahama). We are slaves of the vicissitudes of life. These sermons help develop a better range of strengths to deal with these eight vicissitudes of life. So please read:
http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/42.2-Lokadhamma-S-1-a8.5-piya.pdf
http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/42.3-Lokadhamma-S-2-a8.6-piya.pdf
If you seek Advice on the Practice, suttas such as Bhaddaali Sutta MN 65, Bodhiraja Kumara Sutta MN 85, Chathuma Sutta MN, Chula Sakuludai Sutta MN, Dhamma Dayada Sutta MN 03, Ganaka moggallana Sutta MN 107, Giminananda Sutta AN 10.60, Hatthigamaka Ugga Sutta AN 08, Lomasangiya Bhaddekaraththa Sutta MN 131, Maha Rahulovada Sutta MN 62, Sakkara Garukara Sutta, Samadi Bhavana Sutta AN 4.41, Sambodhi Pakkhiya Sutta, Vasijatopama sutta would be helpful.
If you want to learn about Skillful & Unskillful Thoughts read Kalama Sutta AN 3.65, Kodhana Sutta AN 7.60, Kukkuravatiya Sutta MN 57, Maha Dhamma Samadana Sutta MN 46, Maha Vacchagotta Sutta SN 44.8, Malunkaya Putta Sutta SN 35.95, Sakka Panna sutta SN 35.118, Vassakara Sutta AN 4.35, Vitakka Santhana Sutta MN 20.
If you want to read on Skillful, Unskillful Actions the following suttas will do: Chakkavatthi Sihanada Sutta DN 26, Gopalaka sutta AN 11.18, Ina Sutta AN 6.45, Jivaka Sutta AN 8.26, Kandaraka Sutta MN 51, Lakkana Sutta AN 3.2, Subha Sutta MN 99.
Then there are Suttas aimed at Life of a Layman.  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.
On Intentional action_Kamma you can check out the suttas: Cula Kamma Vibanga Sutta MN 135, Hemavatha Sutta KN, Lonaphala sutta AN 3.99, Maha KammaVibanga Sutta, Mallika Sutta SN 3.8, Purisa Indriya gnana Sutta.
Then on the seven_enlightenment_factors  - Kundaliya Sutta SN 46.6
And on the Noble Eight Fold Path (Arya Ashtangika Margaya) - Maha Chattarisaka Sutta, Sachcha Vibhanga Sutta MN 141, Samma Ditthi Sutta MN 9,

In Pali Buddhism, the original sole purpose of the teachings was to end suffering. However, overtime, certain suttas were introduced to promote morality in laypeople (which emphasise kamma & 'rebirth') & to create propaganda against & convert people from Brahmanism.
Therefore, in Pali Buddhism, the most important suttas are those connected with Emptiness (sunnata) & the ending of suffering, such as the First Three Sermons of the Buddha on the Four Noble Truths, the Three Characteristics & on the Fires of greed, hatred & delusion.
Ultimately, the only suttas that can be deemed to be fully authentic are those that accord with the principle of 'paccattam veditabbo viññuhiti', namely, to be realized by insight, each for himself.

Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning,
transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will
lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these
teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train
yourselves.
Ani Sutta

~~

What I have revealed is: 'This is Suffering, this is the Arising of Suffering, this is the Cessation of Suffering, and this is the Path
that leads to the Cessation of Suffering.' And why, monks, have I
revealed it?
Because this is related to the goal, fundamental to the holy life, conduces to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, tranquillity,
higher knowledge, enlightenment and Nibbaana, therefore I have
revealed it.
Simsapa Sutta: The Simsapa Leaves

There are accounts or records of Buddhist councils which were convened to determine (and record) what suttas were true/accurate/well remembered versions, of discourses which were spoken, heard and remembered during the Buddha's lifetime, and which were then passed on by word of mouth.
I think that the Theravada school maybe doesn't see the Lotus sutra (nor the Flower Garland nor any 'Mahayana' sutras) as "canonical" -- I don't know why that is: my uninformed guess is that it's because the authorship/provenance of those sutras is too late (and maybe too distant geographically), and the intent of the Theravada school is to preserve the 'original' teachings as far as possible; and maybe that there are 'enough' Pali suttas, and that the original teachings are seen as sufficient (because for example there's a record of teaching being effective during the Buddha's lifetime).
See also Pāli Canon and Āgama  and Sutta Pitaka.

In Theravada Buddhism, during which period of Shakyamuni Buddha's life did he expound what is, to Theravada Buddhism, cannonical?

I think the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta is seen as the first sutta: which he gave after he was enlightened. There are suttas which narrate the earlier period of his life (e.g. MN 26), but maybe that story (of pre-enlightenment) was told after his enlightenment? There are Jataka tales (describing his miraculous birth and previous lives) but maybe these are only semi-canonical. So I think that in Theravada Buddhism he expounded, from his "sermon at Benares" until his parinirvana.

See also Chronological or other sequence for beginners -- whose answers contain some people's recommendations of which suttas to read first.

Think about martial arts. One'd be a lot more reserved before walking into any dojo and claim that his style is the one true style. Why? because he knows that his claim will sure be put to the test inside the ring. And until he walks out of that ring alive and on two feet then all his words don't mean a thing. Just like that, the Buddha Dhamma is there for a purpose, not for mere talk. He actually emphasized that when instructing Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī in AN 8.53. Anyway, as you mentioned you have little knowledge with Buddhism outside your own sect and you're interested in how other parts of the Teaching works, I'd strongly recommend you checking out accesstoinsight.org and suttacentral.net. The "Befriending the Suttas" link is particularly useful for the Buddha's original teaching is there and treasured by all schools (the Theravada's Nikayas and the Mahayana/Tibetan's Agamas):

"Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'
"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"


text:
Does being Emotionial generate new sankaras?
I just finished a vipassana retreat and well, I am still confused with just observing and feeling, and holy **** that was a h**** of an experience.... a-bomb (more bad then good, but we all need it, I felt pain from others in distance, and well I need this pain to project later on metta bavahna, but annicca,annicca,. The day I left (today) I was crying and well spotted a sensation in the throat, observed it, crying, don't even know why, should I look for the why? And is the crying equanamously crying, or was I? Didn't feel like doing stuff for 3 hours. Is that generating new sankaras? Or it's just old sankaras coming up? It like a bad sensation makes me forget ANNICCA, but a good sensation makes me more ANNICCA... I mean I am still confused if I am allowed to get angry and observe, then cry and observe, and being sure that, I am equanimous.... I do not want to read books anymore on this lol, I had enough, so I continue the body scan, I mean I keep calling the people from vippa... and everytime everything is different, and I am confused with the emotions....
Thanks to anyone who can clarify and guide me better on the DHAMMA!
Love to you all!
May you all remain equanimous!
alexei

Did anyone advice you to focus on the five and the eight precepts once you end the retreat?  Following the precepts is an important part of any meditation. When you are fully grounded in the precepts your intentions are skillful, as you can break a precept only intentionally. It gives you the inner resolve as you will do no harm to any being by killing, stealing, engaging in illicit sex, lying, or by taking intoxicants. Such a person is always mindful and alert. Then you can continue to practice the meditations that you’ve learnt like staying with the breath without any ill effects.
Meditation retreats are rather regimented. By that I mean very strictly organized or controlled. As a result, a lot gets left out in that approach. So it is not so healthy. That is why I asked you whether anyone adviced you to focus on the five and the eight precepts.  A retreat does not help in the whole mind training and being heedful. That is why you are going through all these emotional ups and downs as you have not developed the strengths to overcome such emotions.  You should have developed the ability to say NO to such negative states of mind. A sense of hiri-ottappa  (a sense of shame – but NOT in a negative way) accompanied by mindfulness  helps you to overcome such.  I do not think that at the retreat any emphasis was given to the five Sekha strengths. One who has the ability to develop and live in association with the five Sekha strengths and does not abandon them, have the ability overcome such situations. The five Sekha strengths are a must for everyone in this path.  They are… Saddha (Confidence), Hiri (shame), Ottappa (fear), Viriya (energy) and Panna (wisdom). These strengths helps you to weather any emotional waves you go through.
‘Sankhāra’ means intention (volitional effort).  So as I said at the outset, your intentions needs to be skillful. An intention occurs according to what we perceive - about a figure that is recognized. Likewise, intentions occur about sounds, smells, tastes, and contacts that are recognized. When a mind’s thoughts are perceived, intentions occur according to those thoughts. All these intentions that are formed in various ways are Sanskhāra Upādānaskandha. So you are correct in identifying with sankhara.

so... try and follow the precepts by always witnessing and observing of sensations in the body? No matter how painful they are, I mean will there be a time, even in the most holy moly times, I will be able to keep my equanimity and remember annicca?

The most helpful initially is the practice of the four satipatthanas, or establishings of mindfulness. Being ardent, alert, & mindful , helps keep the negative emotions at bay. You begin to develop an inquisitive attitude, to better understand as to why you feel, what you feel at a given moment.  Then you get a clearer sense of what’s actually going on. For any building, you need a proper foundation. The precepts are this foundation. The 'Sekha' powers are the next important thing if you want to go further in this Dhamma Path. Without it you cannot go far. The gift of forgiveness too helps.

last question, I don't know why its called insight meditation, but from feeling different stuff, I come to why it is like this and why I am like this, which answers many questions in society is that truth or its just intellecualisations? Like I get images sometimes with feelings and just observe them, but still continue to feel the sensations, like I had insight of what really "pure love is" and how it is covered up by por******* which aversively affects people in a bad way and relationships. any inisght on that my friend?

I understand @kernx. Porno is a difficult one for all. So pervasive. This mainly concerns right livelihood. porno or alcohol brings many dangers. But takes long to get rid of. Only short term cure is reflecting on the foulness of the body and then dozing off with a pure mind. This is really sensual "fever". But we are laymen. For a bhikkhus it is an offence. I think that Ananda Sutta – Leading to Awakening will help you. http://mahamevnawa.lk/ananda-sutta-leading-to-awakening/ This is how one should practice breathing meditation according to the scriptures.

any suggestions, im not sure  if 3 hours a day of vipassna is good for me, my sexual energy just keeps f******* rising to the top.... and poof..... this is really hard..... isnt vipassana suppose to help this lol?

@kernx, when a person is learning to ride a bicycle for the first time, or learning to swim, how would one go about it? You have to first take baby steps. In meditation too you have to take baby steps - not just for a few weeks, but for many months. Even if you meditate for a couple of minutes, or a couple of seconds, pat yourself in the back. In this Dhamma Path it is not the rabbit who wins the race, but the Turtle/Tortoise. So never criticize yourself. Always find some good to congratulate self - like when doing 'Vipassana' for a couple of seconds only each day.

@kernx In reply to "isnt vipassana suppose to help this", this YouTube video is one example: Ask A Monk: Pornography and Masturbation (and Addiction in General) ... and Ask A Monk: Taming One's Sexual Desires

You just finished a retreat. Give everything time to settle down. Currently, you are taking it all far too seriously.
Obviously, you had an arduous experience. Tears of relief; possibly some catharsis. There is no need to be concerned.
Give 'anicca' ('impermanence') a long term view; such as one month for those 'sankharas' to settle down.
'Sankhara' does not (exclusively) mean 'intention'. 'Sankhara' is any kind of mental formation, including non-intentional or automatic instinctual emotions.
For example. when the mind goes into 'shock' due to an accident, this is not intentional.
Similarly, during an intense retreat, emotions will arise that are not intentional.
It appears that a few emotions, more or less, is not going to increase or reduce the sankharas stored within your mind in any significant way.
I suggest, for the next few weeks, to forget the teachings you heard & return to some ordinary activity, particularly some physical exercise to burn off & settle the emotions & hyperactivity.

Yes, but I can't use exercise to numb the pain, its the same with drugs or alcohol, its just covers it up as I understood, like mast***** to cover up repressed love feelings which is completely wrong, I want to be there and not want it to change, because it's annicca right? but why forget the teachings, after all, I want my OLD sankharas to start surfacing and being Eradicated ( Arnold Accent). Like Vipassana is very important to me, I noticed how it I am with people, and I love not being jealous, not , can you give me more insight please!

I suggested to forget the teachings until your mentality settles down. You can think about the teachings at a later time. It sounds like your mentality was in a very sensitive state due to the intense Goenka retreat & was overly influenced ('brainwashed') by the teachings heard during the retreat. As for your life, in general, if you want to improve your life, simply practise the whole Buddhist path, which is morality, concentration & vipassana. The path is gradual & takes time. Thus, as I suggested, settle down from your current overexcited state so you can patiently & trustingly practise.

understood....!


text:
What can I do regarding Non-Self
After contemplating death while reading some articles on accidents, it dawned upon me (particularly strongly) that "everything" is out of our control. Everyone wants to be healthy, to have gains, not to have losses, but I recall feelings of helplessness/dejection in the inability to control when we are on the plane for example and there's turbulence and it's all in the hands of the elements, physics and fate.
I contemplated more and more, the past times when I was sick, the various times throughout when I was in the doldrums of my 31 years of life. I can literally  feel my heart has sunk as few notches. Though mentally I don't feel disturbed or weighed down, I feel overcome by the sorry fact that we (everyone) no matter how much we wished and tried our efforts, things are just out of our control, that our body, our circumstances, are all Non-self.
I would like to get to a productive state from this place. Please advise?
I feel a sense of defeated-ness acceptance regarding this Noble Truth, is there anywhere I can go from here?

It seems that you have begun to see non-self before you have lost attachment to a self, i.e. you want to have a self but you know it cannot be found. Therefore the wanting of self should be the center point of your practice, it may help to reflect on how this wanting is also non-self

The scriptures (AN 3.38) report, before his enlightenment to Buddhahood, when the unenlightened Gotama lived in three palaces, he had the vision he would get old, sick & die and this vision made him lose intoxication with his youth & life.
Then upon enlightenment, he fully realised the five aggregates that compose life (body, feelings, perception, thought function & sense consciousness) are 'not-self'; and one reason why each of the five aggregates cannot be a 'self' is because each can be subject to affliction & sickness that cannot be controlled (refer to beginning of SN 22.59).
It is reported the Buddha once taught to an elderly man that:

The body is afflicted, weak & encumbered. For who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true health, except through sheer
foolishness?
SN 22.1

Therefore, although Gotama's original vision of death as a youth resulted in great angst in his mind & a long experimental spiritual search, in the end, his Buddhahood was merely the full acceptance & thus being at complete peace with his original vision of inevitable decay, death & impermanence.
In your situation, the place to go is the development of meditative calm (samatha) & clear insight (vipassana) so the mind is at complete peace & freedom with illness, aging & death (rather than having discomfort with this initial vision). In Buddhism, this is called reaching the 'Deathless'.

Monks, mindfulness of death — when developed & pursued — is of great fruit & great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the
Deathless as its final end (culmination).
AN 6.20

Thank you for the references. To be clearer (for people who don't read the references you link to) I think that AN 6.20 doesn't say that Mindfulness of Death is by itself of benefit (except perhaps if it's "developed & pursued" correctly) -- e.g. the OP may be already "mindful of death". What is of benefit, the way in which it is of benefit, is if that mindfulness encourages you to investigate urgently and immediately: "Are there any evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by me that would be an obstruction for me were I to die?"

Mindfulness of death can be of direct benefit because it similar to the perception of impermanence, which the scriptures say abandons conceit. The Dhammapada states those who realise we all must die forget their quarrels. Thus, regardless of what is exactly written in AN 6.20, mindful of death itself can gain a footing in the Deathless when it results directly in ending craving, clinging & selfview. Also AN 6.20 also states: "But if, on reflecting, he realizes that there are no evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by him"...thus it is not only for checking the mind's impurity.

In seeing a glimpse of one insight into Dhamma (a rather big part of the Path at that) – that life is Not-Self – you now wonder what next.  Now it is good to go deeper into Buddha’s teachings on inconstancy (Anitya), stress (Dukkha), and not self (Anatma).  For this understanding and insight into Samma Dhitti to truly sink into you will take time. It is a given.  The heart of the Noble Eightfold Path is Right Concentration.  The other seven factors of the path are pre-requisites to come to that.
If you could take all three characteristics, that anything and everything in life is inconstant, stressful, and not self, and focus on them properly, it will have a big impact. Then you will be clearly established in the road to put an end to suffering. So now is the time for you to will into being the first seven qualities of the Noble Eightfold Path. Desire is a very important factor of the path towards this. Your desire to work towards this goal should far exceed all of your other worldly desires. Only then will you be able to focus on this properly, and to create the right conditions for it. Then you will start developing skilful qualities in your mind.  So the first thing that you should do is to associate with people who will encourage you in this direction. Finding the right people to associate goes a long way in furthering in this Dhamma Path. This one factor will help instil an unflinching faith in the Buddha’s awakening. This is paramount. Instilling of ‘Saddha’ is more important than anything else, as it will carry you through the rest of the way.

You wrote, "things are just out of our control".
If seeing things as impermanent and non-self is Right View, the next factors on the Eightfold Path are Right Resolve, the training in virtue (Right Speech, Action, and Livelihood), and Right Effort and so on.
The fact that there is Right Resolve, Right Effort and so implies that things aren't out of our control, or at least, not all things: for example we can (at least to some extent) control resolve, speech, effort.
Doctrine about karma suggests we can also control intention, or that we're responsible for our intentional acts.
One of the suttas (Ittha Sutta: What is Welcome (AN 5.43)) says,

Now, I tell you, these five things are not to be obtained by reason of prayers or wishes. If they were to be obtained by reason of prayers or wishes, who here would lack them? It's not fitting for the disciple of the noble ones who desires long life to pray for it or to delight in doing so. Instead, the disciple of the noble ones who desires long life should follow the path of practice leading to long life. In so doing, he will attain long life, either human or divine.
The wise person, heedful,
acquires a two-fold welfare:
welfare in this life &
welfare in the next.
By breaking through to his welfare
he's called prudent,
wise.

You said, "when we are on the plane for example and there's turbulence and it's all in the hands of the elements, physics and fate."
That's true to a certain extent. It's also in the hands of the pilot; of the people who designed, tested, and certified the plane; and in your hands when you chose whether and how to travel.
So I see the anatta view as a helpful when you can't control (e.g. after you're on the plane); but you can (try to) control whether you make a good (prudent) decision before you get on the plane. Making a good (virtuous) decision can result in a "lack of remorse" (I don't mind being on a plane ... it was the right decision to make, at the time when I made that decision).
Seeing everything as uncontrollable and inevitably dying may be an extreme (an extreme which Buddhism calls, in English, "nihilism" or "annihilationism", and is considered one of the "wrong views").
I think the definition of "Non-self" is that it's better not to think too much about the self, nor to have definite views about the self. There are other things (apart from Self) that it's good to consider: other people, Dhamma, Sila, and so on. And the classic formulation of Non-Self isn't "this is out of my control", it's "this isn't me and this isn't mine", precisely because having views of self like "this is my body (and it's out of my control)" lead to suffering.

The Ittha Sutta is not about not-self & enlightenment. it is mundane dhamma for ordinary people who want worldly 'success' & 'rebirth' in heaven. Seeing everything as uncontrollable and inevitably impermanent is exactly what the Buddha taught as being supramundane right view in the Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta. This only becomes the wrong view of 'nihilism' when 'self-view' remains, creating the wrong view that "I" will die. The word 'Deathless' refers to where there is no 'self-view' thus no subject of 'death'. In the enlightened state, there is simply the ending of the five aggregates.

Also, the simile of the 'pilot' sounds like belief in True Self or Atman. The scriptures explains its is mindfulness & wisdom (rather than a self) that 'governs' experience. Thus, although the five aggregates are ultimately beyond control, the mind is able to 'control' or 'eradicate' suffering by employing the mindfulness & wisdom of non-craving & non-clinging. I think you need to provide a quote from the scriptures that states "we can control intention or kamma" because my understanding is the Eightfold Path is for the ending/cessation of kamma (rather than controlling of kamma) per AN 6.63.

the simile of the 'pilot' sounds like belief in True Self or Atman. I don't think it's a simile: the OP was talking about a feeling of loss of control when on a literal airplane, and "it's all in the hands of the elements, physics and fate". Well it is (in the hands of the elements, physics and fate), but it's also in the hands of the airplane pilot and engineers etc. One of the things that has reassured me on a plane is trust in the diligence of aviation engineers. It's also helpful to be comfortable with the idea of dying, but knowing you had reason to trust helps the lack of remorse IMO.

Re. whether "we can control", this essay for example says, "In other words, there is free will, although its range is somewhat dictated by the past." (though this isn't "a quote from the scriptures" and this topic is debatable, "we can control" is a view of self that you may prefer to avoid). Re. scripture there is imagery like "a charioteer controlling anger" in the Dhammapada (and e.g. this might be called self-control).

You might be right though that "controlling intention" was inept, wrong or unclear. I was struggling with how to say that.

"Is there anywhere to go from here?" You go where your desires take you until you are ready to accept right where you are but we all push away where we are and cling to something else. We all do so, in some way or another unless we have mastered the Buddha'Eightfold Path(or a similar path).
Be nonreactive and impartial with things as they are as they occur and you will see how you can have peace and happiness. How? Follow the Buddha's  Eightfold Path.


text:
Being assertive/manipulative
I am facing this problem currently. I am very sensitive and fearsome. I don't like to hurt others and am scared to argue with anyone. I become very hurt if someone has a bad attitude towards me. This only ends up in my stress levels increasing and losing patience and self hatred.
Colleagues and friends say that I am not manipulative and very straightforward and that is what causes so many problems to me. I feel that I should not care whether others are good with me or are bad with me.
But I tend to become over reactive suddenly and this is creating a chain of problems. I am sure in Buddhism, there would be the way to solve my problem.

A related topic, so you might find one of these answers helpful: Buddhist (Theravada) cure for “Insecurity”?

In Buddhism there is no solution for 'my problem', because there is no problem in the first place. The mind is creating problems out of ignorance, and causing useless suffering. The title says 'Being assertive/manipulative', but as you wrote the people you ask say you're straightforward. Where is the problem? I would suggest to drop this thinking and pondering upon 'I', 'me', 'mine' and focus on the real practice. By using mindfulness ('thinking', 'emotion' ...) and in daily life applying the practice of sila (morality).
Therefore you should know the 10 skillful/unskillful actions and practice them (the skillful ones) actively in daily live (i.e. try to speak in a honest way).

It is very good that you are frank about how you feel. You have identified the problem, and have brought it to the open. You are not hiding it from self or others. Suppressed emotions like pent-up anger is not a good thing as there can be times they can collide violently with disastrous consequences. So you have to learn how to deal with your emotions in a skilful way in more perceptive, intelligent way, and see relationships through the Dhamma perspective.  Dhamma can be of great help in learning to use the mind wisely.
The most helpful initially is the practice of the four satipatthanas, or establishings of mindfulness. Being ardent, alert, & mindful , helps keep the negative emotions at bay. You begin to develop an inquisitive attitude, to better understand as to why you feel, what you feel at a given moment.  Then you get a clearer sense of what’s actually going on, and may even question “Who is this ‘me’ that’s getting worked up.
The gift of forgiveness too helps, if you could instil in self.  Then even is someone else upsets you, you will not be a victim for it. This will allow you to see things in another way. So the practice of ‘loving kindness’ meditation helps. Your egoism that makes you manipulative will be eradicated  if ‘karunaa’ is to developed. Karunaa is an important part of this spiritual path. In the Gopala Sutta: The Cowherd Buddha has pointed out that:

”Whatever an enemy might do to an enemy, or a foe to a foe, the ill-directed mind can do to you even worse.”

Then in the Kakacupama Sutta: The Simile of the Saw we were advised as to:

"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.


text:
In Buddhism what is love meant to be and how is it shown and can two people love each other?
In some denominations in buddhism there is a conventional and an ultimate reality. So from the conventional point there could be, to begin with, two people so they could love each other. But in the ultimate reality there is only one, so it looks like that there aren't two people moreover there can't be love between people.
But if I think about that it seems to be strange that there isn't love in buddhism. So what is love meant to be in buddhism and how could love be practised in the ultimate reality?

The question in the title is a question about "conventional" reality, and the question at the end of the text is about "ultimate" reality ... is that right?

Well in the title they are both meant. But the most important is finally the ultimate reality.

The Piyavagga & elsewhere refer to at least three kinds of love, namely:
(i) raga (lust);
(ii) pema; piya (affection; endearment);
(iii) universal or divine love & compassion (metta-karuna).
This is similar to the three kinds of love in Greek-Christianity, namely:
(i) eros (lust);
(ii) phileo (affection);
(iii) agape (self-sacrificing love).
People that realise the selfless ultimate reality love others with metta-karuna.

The Beatles sang “All you need is love” in our times. Then there is another song on ‘Love’ that the celestial being, Pañcasikha, wrote to his ladylove in the time of the Buddha. Pañcasikha approached the Buddha and playing on his vinā, sang of the parts of the body of his ladylove that he loves as much as the Arahants love the Dhamma. The song that this Deva sang talks about both of the carnal love of passion, and of the altruistic love of the Triple Gem. Our question here is how we can see this other “Love” through Dhamma.
The love that we project in the loving-kindness (Metta) Meditation is the true love that one exercises toward oneself and others. We spread this other-worldly ‘love’ that is altruistic in nature in two ways. The two methods are Appamānha Chētō Vimukkti and Mahaggata Chētō Vimukkti. Loving-kindness meditation is meant to be a challenge for you to really think through as to why you would want to limit your love, and to remind yourself of why it’s good to have love for everyone. In this guardian meditation, we spread love direction-wise without any limit. Also we can spread loving-kindness by expanding the area of focus progressively.
As a person progresses deeper into Dhamma, he/she discards the false values in self, in cultivating awareness and a love that is altruistic and unselfish. When a person gets into the Noble Eightfold path, he/she rises above the "fetters" (samyojana) of  (1) personality view, (2) doubt, (3) clinging to rules and rituals. This person is then possessed with qualities of honesty, uprightness, benevolence, altruistic joy, magnanimity, modesty and humility. The negative qualities of deceit, cunning, hypocrisy, jealousy, avarice, feelings of self-importance and arrogance are not found in one who begins to walk the Noble Eightfold Path. So to your question, Love still exists, but goes beyond to a level of limitless that is difficult to fathom.

So what is the highest act an enlightenent person can do for someone else?

An enlightened person is the perfection of giving. It benefits beings in many ways. Instructing them in the Dhamma is the highest act. Giving of the Dhamma (dhammadana) is supreme. Giving has an intimate connection to the entire movement of the Buddha's path, as the goal of the path is the destruction of greed, hate and delusion, and the cultivation of generosity.

On a conventional level metta (loving-kindness) means wishing all beings to be happy. It's unconditioned in a sense, since the love is not dependent on the being (i.e. whether it's someone likeable or unlikeable), but still deals with the concept of 'beings'.

Whatever beings there may be, weak or strong, without exception, long, large, middling, short, subtle, blatant, seen & unseen, near & far, born & seeking birth: May all beings be happy at heart - Metta Sutta

In ultimate reality there exist no beings at all (not even you exist). There is only the experience of one of the 6 senses (seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching, thinking). So metta would here not refer to the concept of loving other people, but rather to the state of mind that is free from defilements (anger, greed, delusion). This aspect is mentioned at the end of the Metta Sutta:

Not taken with views, but virtuous & consummate in vision, having subdued desire for sensual pleasures, one never again will lie in the womb.

Understanding love is difficult unless you are already a very loving person. People who have lived through a dysfunctional or abusive family life understandably have a cynical or negative view of love. That is a very tragic situation for anyone to be in. But, if you want to observe someone in a very loving state, then you best observe the way a young infant loves his (or her) mother and father. Concerning the Tibetan concept of sunyata, it is best learned after you learn about love. For example, the Dalai Lama argues that the experience of sunyata does not deny the existence of anything. To understand why he says that is another story.