text:
Meditating as sleep aid
Every book that I have read about Buddhism and medititation says that, as meditation cultivates concentration and awareness, one should never fall asleep while doing it.
So, what about when I cannot sleep? Can't I meditate to help me sleep, or only before I go to bed?
(I mostly practice Vipassana meditation)

I would think the main trap that advice is trying to warn you about is breaking the discipline of your meditation.  Using a meditative technique to help you sleep would not bring the full benefit of meditating, and may lead to worse habits in your regular sitting.  I would also think there are different or better mental techniques to use to help you sleep, and it would be more helpful to have something distinct.  I am very much in a layman phase though, so I will wait for a more informed answer.

A fine line which may be useful here: there is a difference between practices which simply aren't helpful vs those that make the meditation ineffective vs harmful practices which cause more harm than not meditating at all. I have found a lot of situations where that difference is important. A non Buddhist example would be a physical exercise that I do which we are instructed "always start on the right side." Further inquiry showed that it wasn't damaging to start on the left, it just wasn't deemed helpful to practice both directions and it could take away from the time I spent doing it right.

This is my experience/opinion, it's unreferenced and it may be wrong.
There's a form of meditation called awareness of the body or awareness of the breath. Maybe that form (or something like it) can be useful when you're trying to rest (or sleep).
'Awareness of the breath' means that you try to keep awareness of your breathing (e.g. the feeling of air flowing through the nose). It's described as being, like a hunter who waits for an animal next to its lair. The hunter knows that although the animal may be out, it will come back to the lair sooner or later. Similarly though the mind may be away, thinking about something else, it returns to the body sometimes.
If I'm awake in bed I'll try to be aware of various things.
One is breathing. If I'm not aware of breathing then maybe my thoughts (of whatever other things I'm thinking about) are keeping me awake. And part of the point of sleeping (IMO) is to have some nice relaxed breathing. Closing your eyes doesn't always cause sleep, but they ('sleep', and 'eyes closed') "co-arise" ... similarly, developing (enabling or participating in) some relaxed breathing (is it called 'oceanic' breathing?) may be a good condition for eventual sleep (and, even before sleep, it is a good condition for the body's resting and cleaning itself).
Another, is awareness of feeling in the body. For example I exercise my legs during the day, and blood circulation reroutes to go to feed those muscles e.g. in the calf. Meanwhile my feet get cold. In bed I feel (and promote the feeling of) places inside my calf muscle relaxing or unknotting, so that blood is freed to circulate through to elsewhere e.g. the feet, toes, skin. I think this kind of thing (i.e. changes in 'circulation') is a reason why (a mechanism via which) sleep is restful or restorative to the body.
So, I figure that if I'm in bed because I want to rest the body, then even if I'm not asleep (or before I'm asleep) I can consciously begin to rest the body. Knowing that the body is resting helps to reason with the mind: "Oh no, I'm not asleep! What a disaster, I'd better do something about it!" -- "Yeah don't worry about. You're relaxing the body already, the body is getting what it needs. Breathe again."
Another thing I find is that thoughts change as I go to sleep: I begin to dream. Dreaming takes the form of unexpected images ('unexpected' meaning 'inappropriate', unrelated to current events). For example (last night) I imagined a wolf's face. And then a spaceship (in outer space). Then the next thought was that this was going to be a story, of a wolf on a spaceship. The next thought was of a whale, shaped like a submarine, underwater. I'm not sure what to tell you about that: I think this kind of ideation/imagery is incompatible with conscious thinking, but it's a stage I seem to go through between conscious (waking) and unconscious (sleep). It's more spontaneous (randomly-generated), imaginative, and obviously a fantasy, than worrying-about-day-to-day thinking. So though I try to 'wake up' enough to discourage the 'worrying' type of thought (and return from there to consciousness of the body), but the 'dreaming' type of thought I just note ("this is the beginning of a dream/sleep"), my body is already deliberately resting, and maybe I'm asleep soon after that.
Lastly (and most dubiously) if you suffer from 'racing thoughts' (e.g. sometimes someone might say, "I couldn't get to sleep, I was up all night thinking!") there may be other techniques or 'objects' to occupy or on which to focus the mind, to stabilize emotions: a koan, a mantra, taking refuge in the Buddha, metta (mentioned in another answer), lack of remorse, visualizing oneself as if from the outside.

Yes Meditation can help you sleep...
There is a meditation called "Meththa" also known as the "Loving kindness Meditation". This Meditation is very helpful to the daily life as well as the path. It can help you sleep better, But Let me provide the details....
The profits of doing "Meththa" (Loving kindness Meditation) as to Lord Buddha

Not seeing bad dreams
Calmly falling into sleep
calmly waking up
Friendly attitude from other beings like Devas (gods),demons,spirits & animals
Loosing enemies and gaining friendly's
Being born in higher realms after death (Deva realm,Brahma realm)
and many more....
Here's a link to learn more to learn more.

So if you have trouble sleeping this is your answer, Let me provide a Audio link so you could learn and practice. We all do it and it is very easy to learn.
Loving Kindness Meditation - Click to open

Mettanisamsa sutta is a better reference. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.016.piya.html

@dmsp , yes indeed. i am adding it to the answer. Thank you

Can you reference anything that relates to breathing meditation, or awareness of the body: is that helpful or is it better avoided if "I cannot sleep" (perhaps to help physically relax and/or to slow the racing of thoughts)?

Definitely it can help you sleep. Since you are talking about sleep here, I thought I would just mention the possibilities for meditation in your sleep - not only for your sleep. You can also practice Vipassana and other kinds of meditation in your sleep. If you try this out you will have 24 hours of presence. I did not have much faith in lucid dreaming until i tried it. I only trained for two weeks before I had my first lucid dream. I would recommend B Alan Wallace's book about this.  The book is called "Dreaming Yourself Awake: Lucid Dreaming and Tibetan Dream Yoga for Insight and Transformation" and it has been a nice expansion in my practice.
Sleep well!

I don't know about worldly situations but if one has insomnia at a retreat then that just means more time for meditation.
I've always gone to sleep right away when I was  practicing while laying down, although I have always taken that as a curse and not a blessing.
The more we are in an inclined position when meditating, the better the chance is that we fall asleep.
Remember that lots of the time when we think we need to sleep it's often just "sloth & torper" sneaking in.


text:
Miracles from Lord Buddha vs messages from Gods?
I live in Sri Lanka and many good Buddhist ceremonies take place all year long. And more often than not in almost all of these major functions something extraordinary happens that leave the whole country speechless. These events take place not once or twice but annually as these big functions happen every year.
None of these events happen in broad daylight and no one has been able to explain how they occur and that includes all the well renowned Professors and other science related organizations and universities.
These events have broken the once accepted idea that they are some kind of weather or other anomaly as they have happened annually in perfectly equal circumstances that includes a major Buddhist event,a whopping number of pilgrims,a very pleasant environment & etc.The Somawathi Stupa is a fine example....
The best part is none of these events took place when this place is vacant, all of this happened when it was full of Buddhists and everyone there (at least few thousand people every time) witness the events.

Here is one event on video in broad daylight...
Rays of lights on Somawathi Stupa
Images of the event taken in few different days and angles...

A 3D Hologram like image of Lord Buddha appeared in front of this stupa recently...

According to this description on the banner this is supposedly a image of a group of Devas visiting the Stupa...

As there has been no proper explanation to these events what so ever people have came to the conclusion that this is the power of Lord Buddha, There is another idea. Some think it's the Devas trying to encourage the people to do good more.

Is there any explanation that you can find?
Has such events happened in recent history in any other Buddhist countries,monasteries or events?

There is a lot of business with it, especially in Asian countries and people love to share each other such stuff on facebook. Yes 1000 of such events :-) They would just not see if an Arahat would cross their ways, or not even look deeply in the Miracle of Dhamma by practicing it.
Attached to form, sound, smell, taste, bodily sensations not to speak of intellect, its had to see.
Once you meet Devas, that you do not need to seek for such on Facebook. Some inspirations:

Knowledge
This is called manomayiddhi. When the mind is firmly established, you
  can go see these things. Or you can go to the land of the nagas, the
  different lands on the human level — sometimes, when you get tired of
  human beings, you can go visit the heavens: the heaven of the Four
  Great Kings, the heaven of the Guardians of the Hours, the
  Thirty-three gods, all the way up there to the Brahma worlds. The mind
  can go without any problem. This is called manomayiddhi. It's a lot of
  fun. Your defilements are gone, your work is done, you've got enough
  rice to eat and money to spend, so you can go traveling to see the
  sights and soak up the breezes. That's manomayiddhi.

(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)

Your answer is very true bhante, but these aren't events shared on facebook. a lot off people witnessed these events,most often thousands. I asked this question seeking an explanation. But what you say is completely true. These events gave a sudden rise to Buddhism and to the path as it was taken as an example to show the power of Buddhism. And actually this brought a lot of people who were lost back in to the path and now we hear a lot of stories from monks about lights visiting temples all over the island. Maybe it was a trick from Devas maybe not, but whatever that was it worked...

Now we often hear stories from temples and monks about Upasakas dying moments. A lot of good Upasakas are visited by higher realms in last moments. All of these events raised the bar and now we have a good uprising among Buddhists and soon we will have a daily telecasting Buddhist channel on free band television completely funded by Upasakas. Can you take the time to explain the events that i mentioned above? It would be nice to have a explanation from a great one like you. @samana johann

rupa and when it touches vedana... sanna... sankhara... Its not important. If it gives rise to certain faith that there is more as we perceive what could be perceived end even that is anicca, that its great. Upasaka Thereavada.

In my personal view, I have come to see 'signs' as another form of conditionality. I recall last year while meditating I saw a beautiful 3 dimensional white elephant with the Buddha sat on the top. My sangha said it was a very auspicious sign and I was encouraged to look into it further, purchase an ornament, worship that ornament and so on and so so forth. Instead, I killed it and continued with practice which perplexed some of my sangha.
No matter how wonderful or enigmatic things may appear they are still name and form and thus conditioned and further, impersonal.
Here is a conversation in which Sariputra's qualities of wisdom are compared to the qualities of Venerable Anurudd who is able to travel through the wondrous cosmic planes. Sariputra imparts his wisdom upon Venerable Anuruddha in such a way as to detach Venerable Anuruddha from his Siddhi abilities and focus solely on attaining nibbana.

Then Venerable Anuruddha went up to Venerable Sāriputta, and exchanged greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to him: “Here’s the thing, Reverend Sāriputta. With clairvoyance that is purified and surpasses the human, I survey the entire galaxy. My energy is roused up and unflagging, my mindfulness is established and lucid, my body is tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind is immersed in samādhi. But my mind is not freed from the defilements by not grasping.”
“Well, Reverend Anuruddha, when you say: ‘With clairvoyance that is
  purified and surpasses the human, I survey the entire galaxy,’ that’s
  your conceit. And when you say: ‘My energy is roused up and
  unflagging, my mindfulness is established and lucid, my body is
  tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind is immersed in samādhi,’ that’s
  your restlessness. And when you say: ‘But my mind is not freed from
  the defilements by not grasping,’ that’s your remorse. It’d be good to
  give up these three things. Instead of focusing on them, apply your
  mind to the deathless.”
After some time Anuruddha gave up these three things. Instead of
  focusing on them, he applied his mind to the deathless. Then
  Anuruddha, living alone, withdrawn, diligent, keen, and resolute, soon
  realized the supreme culmination of the spiritual path in this very
  life. He lived having achieved with his own insight the goal for which
  people from good families rightly go forth from the lay life to
  homelessness. He understood: “Rebirth is ended; the spiritual journey
  has been completed; what had to be done has been done; there is no
  return to any state of existence.” And Venerable Anuruddha became one
  of the perfected.

13. kusināra - 130. Anuruddha (2nd)

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
In Depth Study of today's Dharma Teachers teachings
Does anyone know of any site on the internet (or elsewhere) that studies profoundly and carefully, the works of Dharma teachers? Like Mahasi Sayadaw,or Ajahn Chah, or any Dharma  teacher for that matter?
For instance, Mahasi Sayadaw's book, "The Progress of Insight" can be hard to comprehend, so what if a teacher got together with a group of students to study such a book of teachings in depth.
Perhaps something like the following:
Each pertinent sentence might be studied one by one, the translation of each sentence might be scrutinized, the scriptural origins would be analyzed and each sentence might be made better understood with real examples of what is meant.
I'm sure that sites such as these are out there but I for one have found that they can be hard to find.
I put "today's Dharma Teachers" in the question here not because I wanted to exclude answers about  in depth studied of older teachings. I would like to know of these in depth kind of study groups no matter how old the teacher or teachings are. I suppose I thought that if I didn't put "today's Dharma Teachers" that the answers would consist of the more common study of older teachings & teachers and the newer teachings & teachers might be overlooked. -Metta

Still it is not clear, if "today's Teacher" refers to living or death. As for the living ones, if they are Teacher, best to join them directly, if the heart tends to him/her.

@Samana Johann  Of course you are correct but teachers aren't always accessible. Living or deceased teachers is what was meant, respectfully.

Let us say, it would require some scarifies to meet them. Well of course such would be difficult. So what is looked for is a kind of quick on demand access?

It would be gurus on the video phone! or students of gurus.

There are many people who are attached to Mahasi Sayadaw on Dhammawheel and Bhikkhu Pesala (http://aimwell.org/ or on DW) is for sure on person (since he translated much) who can help out in the sphere of his understanding.
You also can try to get in contact with Upasaka Florian. He runs a blog and pages on facebook and g+ concerning much about Mahasi Sayadaw and communities around it and he had studied much. He would for sure also know other places.
As for Ajahn Chah, Atma is sure, that it would really not make sense to

Each pertinent scentence might be studied one by one, the translation of each scentence might be scrutinized, the scriptural origins would be analyzed and each scentence might be made better understood with real examples of what is meant.

You would, in the case of Ajahn Chah, need to meet an Ajahn Chah and most would and do not like it to be confronted by him, even get mad. And you even would need to start with sweeping and other services.
Atma would also say, if not even understand an interpreter, is better to do it among the original source and get then an understanding of what the particular teaches tells.
Having read some of his books a little Atma thinks that there are less who would understand many things, if not good leaned in the scripts or have certain experiences by one self. The teachings also carry much danger of developing certain views.
The problem of not understanding the path or not coming on to it, is most seldom the teaching or the explaining, but simply the not willingness to start seriously with the home work. Dana, Sila.

Making Tables & Chairs
It's good to make the mind pure and at peace, but it's hard. You have
  to start with the externals — your bodily actions and words — and work
  your way in. The path that leads to purity, to being a contemplative,
  is a path that can wash away greed, anger, and delusion. You have to
  exercise restraint and self-control, which is why it's hard — but so
  what if it's hard?
It's like taking wood to make a table or make a chair. It's hard, but
  so what if it's hard? The wood has to go through that process. Before
  it can become a table or a chair, we have to go through the coarse and
  heavy stages.
It's the same with us. We have to become skillful where we aren't yet
  skillful, admirable where we aren't yet admirable, competent where we
  aren't yet competent.
Maggots
When we give rise to right view in our hearts, we can be at ease
  wherever we are. It's because we still have wrong views, still hold
  onto ideas that are poisonous, that we're not at ease. Holding on in
  this way is like being a maggot. Where it lives is filthy; its food is
  filthy. Its food isn't fit to be food — but it seems fitting to the
  maggot. Try taking a stick and flicking it out of the excrement where
  it's feeding, and see what happens. It'll wiggle and wriggle, eager to
  get back to the pile of excrement where it was before. Only then does
  it feel right.
It's the same with you monks and novices. You still have wrong views.
  Teachers come and advise you on how to have right view, but it doesn't
  feel right to you. You keep running back to your pile of excrement.
  Right view doesn't feel right because you're used to your old pile of
  excrement. As long as the maggot doesn't see the filth in where it's
  living, it can't escape. It's the same with us. As long as we don't
  see the drawbacks of those things, we can't escape from them. They
  make it difficult to practice.
(108 Dhamma Similes)

Atma likes to add, that if you, a group, friends... would seek for an environment to do such, lessons, teaching, what ever, please feel free and invited to use the environment of this online monastery and don't hesitate to ask for help or what ever in this regard. Your are free to perform it if you like to put an effort into it.
(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)

Well, I wrote something like the following: "Each pertinent scentence might be studied one by one,..." I wasn't saying things had to be like that at all. I was just giving ideas as to how it could work.

Atma is sure that you nevertheless make the best out of it. Its not meant as a demand. Being in company of those who actually practice the path is important since there is more to learn aside of words like habits and other fine things.

http://www.acidharma.org/aci/index.html
The website link above has breakdowns of works by Je Tsongkhapa, -- (Specifically his work on Lam Rim)
-- Nāgārjuna, Shantideva, and various lojung texts with their respective analysis.
The audio classes are MP3 streams, and the teachers tend to do a sentence by sentence breakdown of the works being discussed.
They come with PDFs of student notes, lectures and outlines, and readings in both English and the original Tibetan.
Some sutras are also available in both languages, and the website is entirely free of any charges.

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


text:
Which is the most read journal on Buddhism?
I got confused while googling about which is the most popular (widely distributed, published continuously in a large number) journal on Buddhism (or Buddhist journal). It is very obvious for the publishers to advertise their products  but I want to have an actual information so that I can get authentic knowledge as well as send my articles to them. I know that there are a number of Buddhist journals published from throughout the world but my primary concern is with academic publication. I will be grateful for every information. I have not been talking about any particular branch of Buddhism e.g. Theravada, Mahayana etc. but I want to know which is the most recognised journal as a whole; I mean an academic journal that includes all of them. I want to know in detail.

Because you mean an academic journal I guess this would be on-topic on the Academia.SE site. You could try a question like, "How can I find out which is the most popular journal in a given field? Specifically, in the field of Buddhism?"

This page: http://www.cbs.ugent.be/node/403

The Journal of Buddhist Ethics might be one, but Atma would not call it "Buddha Dhamma" journal; yet it is another Buddhism nourishing place with interest to put the Dhamma into the ways of thinking of people in the world, rather that otherwise.
They are for sure in line with your thoughts and intentions.
For a more or lesser traditional place it might be useful to get in contact with http://www.bps.lk/ which is for sure the most known one and inventor of certain "Trade on Dhamma", made it presentable even for monastics.
As for Dhamma in line of Dhamma, Atma is not aware of any journal. http://www.inquiringmind.com/ might have tried such ways, but finished its task.
For sure not a final answer but maybe it give some thoughts.
Well known university journals are maybe:

Numata Center for Buddhist Studies at the University of Hamburg
Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies.

German and British Scholars are historical in a strong battle in regard of Buddhist topics on Papañca and translations.


text:
What is the meaning of *suffering*?
What is the meaning of the word suffering or (pali) dukkha when it is referred to in topics around Dhamma and Vinaya or Buddhism?

According to the Suttas, there are three categories of Dukkha:

"There are these three forms of [Dukkha], my friend: the [Dukkha] of
  pain, the [Dukkha] of fabrication, the [Dukkha] of change. These are
  the three forms of [Dukkha]."
  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn38/sn38.014.than.html

(I've put in the original Pali for the sake of clarity)
Dukkha of pain refers to when something is literally painful either physically or emotionally. When I stub my toe or feel sad or upset, that is the Dukkha of pain.
The Dukkha of fabrication is a deep existential thing. It means that all fabricated things (i.e. everything that comes about through causes and conditions) cannot give us the happiness we want from it. That doesn't mean that everything is painful, but rather that everything is imperfect.
The Dukkha of change refers to the fact that pleasant things change. I like ice cream, but eventually I will eat the whole thing. This fact is called the Dukkha of change.
It is very important to understand that when Buddhist texts say that all formations are Dukkha, they always mean it in the sense of the Dukkha of formations or the Dukkha of change, not the Dukkha of pain, because obviously there are things in the world that are pleasurable.

Dukkha is the characteristic of all human experiences (or what is felt) either pleasant, painful or neutral. Pain is Dukkha in it's own right. Parting with pleasantness is Dukkha. Also any conditioned existance is Dukkha even in the neutral experiences as becoming is present which has inherent suffering like birth, aging, painful life experiences and death .

Definition of dukkha
This article, Dukkha, is a page of references to three or four suttas which define dukkha.
The first definition on that page is the description of the First Noble Truth, in the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta:

Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress:[1] Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful.

Sariputta's elaboration describes all these various terms in more detail.
I'm used to thinking of dukkha as, "the First Noble Truth", but perhaps I should note that it's not the first thing mentioned in the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: the first thing mentioned is the Middle Way, and the second thing mentioned is the Eightfold Path.
Various translations
The page then gives a "contemporary definition" i.e. a list of possible English-language synonyms or translations (words). To this list of words I'd add that "stress" is another translation (some people have disagreed with whether it's a good translation). I might also suggest "dis-ease" or "uneasiness".
Antonym of sukha
I think it's worth noting that dukkha may be (may have been understood as) an antonym of sukha.

Sukha is a Sanskrit and Pali word that is often translated happiness, ease, pleasure or bliss. From the time of the earliest early scriptures, sukha is set up as a contrast to preya "pleasure", where sukha is a deep and authentic positive, fulfilling state of being that is lasting and not merely transient and ultimately unsatisfying, requiring constant modification, like preya. In the Pāli Canon, the term is used in the context of describing laic pursuits, meditative absorptions and intra-psychic phenomena.

Types of taṇhā
Given that stress and craving are related (as described in the Second Noble Truth), you might understand it further by knowing the different types of craving described in the Second Noble Truth:

And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.

Wikipedia has a further description of the three types of craving ... and each term such as 'Vibhava-tanha' is mentioned in several posts on this site.
Types of dukkha
There is a sutta which describes "three types of dukkha".
I'm not sure how to interpret that: Bakmoon's answer gave what I think is the usual explanation; however this article, Three forms of suffering, reinterpreted suggests another interpretation, i.e.:

sankhāra-dukkhatā doesn't mean, "the suffering of conditioned existence" nor "fabricated things are unsatisfactory" ... instead, what it means is that there's a type of dukkha that's fabricated.
vipariṇāma-dukkhatā doesn't mean, "anything that's impermanent is unsatisfactory" ... instead, what it means is that there's a type of dukkha that's impermanent, and/or a dukkha which re-arises because pleasure is impermanent

I'm not sure about the second of these (I suspect that other suttas say explicitly that what's impermanent is unsatisfactory) but I hope that at least the first (about sankhāra-dukkhatā) may be a useful description/insight.

So when did the interpretation of sankhāra-dukkhatā  and vipariṇāma-dukkhatā -- or at least change of order -- arise? I have posed this as a new question -- http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/13909/original-source-for-all-pervasive-suffering-etc


text:
Psychic Powers and the Kevatta Sutta (DN 11)
In the Kevatta Sutta (DN 11), the Buddha seems to categorize "Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one" as a psychic power, which is later seems to denounce "..I feel horrified, humiliated, and disgusted with the miracle of psychic power."
Yet, later in the sutta the Buddha classifies the same psychic powers (appearing as many) as miracles of instruction which are praised.
Can someone please help me understand this?
Many thanks.

There are 2 things here.

developing supernormal powers
displaying supernormal powers

Developing supernormal powers as side benefit of meditation is welcome and long as they are used to teach and further the understanding of the Dhamma. E.g. Meditation master using though reading to see if the partitioner has understood the instructions. Also when meditating you goal should not be to be after these powers but just to realise the Dhamma but have them developed as a side benefit.
Displaying the powers for vanity is what is not encouraged.

The Vinaya forbids such (BMC1, 10), some Teachers praise such, as for example Ajahn Lee in his teachings on Knowledge (as use, not explicit showing directly!).

So. Now that we've cleared away these splinters and thorns so that everything is level and smooth, we can relax. And now we're ready for the knowledge that we can use as a weapon. What's the knowledge we use as a weapon? Iddhividhi. We can display powers in one way or another, and give rise to miraculous things by way of the body, by way of speech, or by way of the mind. We have powers that we can use in doing the work of the religion. That's called iddhividhi.

Ven. Bhante Thanissaro, in his discussions about this matters (for example The Brahma Invitation) states reasonable, that althought the Buddha used such, he could not really trust others to use it in the right situation:

Nevertheless, there are other instances in the Canon — most notably in
  the story of the Kassapa brothers (Mv.I.15-22) and that of Angulimala
  (MN 86) — where the Buddha was able to display his powers to good
  effect. Still, because he could not trust even his arahant disciples
  to possess his same sense of when such powers would work and when they
  would backfire, he forbade his disciples from displaying psychic
  powers to lay people. (See Cv.V.8; Buddhist Monastic Code, vol. 2,
  chapter 10.)

It might give also certain answers to the questions in Arhat Culapanthaka's display of psychic powers to a layman (DP Verse 25)
All in all, Atma would say its how ever not good if it (performance) could be traced back to a certain person (Monk), because it's not the best to make people properly more attached to an individual person that to the Buddha in such a way and the danger of misuse, corruption ... even fear of people is/would be endless.
As for the path and real attainments, is simply a side effect, but actually of no use and not needed to be seen as a skill worthy to cling on.
At the beginning of the Vinaya (Mahavagga) there is a long "battle" of miracles to get a leader of a sect confidence, who what ever miracle was performed by the Buddha still said "...great..., but my virtue is higher..." (normally something what the Buddha keeps as more of value) till an event where he did no more look from above but compared it and lend the Buddha an ear.
A small collections of suttas in regard of this topic see: Supranormal powers
But once again, maybe Mr. Kaveenga Wijayasekara likes to tell more about the intention of why he likes to know it.
There is a Sutta where a certain Brahman was also very attached this matter. Let's see, maybe Atma will find it.

"Now, brahman, of these three miracles, which one appeals to you as the highest & most sublime?" (AN 3.60)

(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)


text:
Meaning of Dhamma for lay
What is Dhamma for lay person? How to know Dhamma in the way it was meant to be ?
Is Dhamma same for all sentient , remain same over the period of time or does Dhamma undergoes change ?
Are there different versions of Dhamma?

Here's an essay about two suttas, titled Dhamma for Laypeople

@Lowbrow the link is a 404

Conventional: Upasaka (male layperson), Upasika (female layperson) lit. "attendant", "those who serve" denotes the follower or disciples of the Buddha, who are not monastics. As an assembling or in mixed groups called parisa (gathering)
Ideal: The not monastic part of persons of the Noble Sangha, the fourfold assembling: Monks, Nuns, lay men, lay woman, who have already attained one of the stages of "saintliness" (eight persons, divided in path and fruit attaining)
More maybe here Upāsaka and Upāsikā on Wiki, although Atma knows well that wiki is a very not so trustworthy place or out of conflicts rather blank in regard of issues which are often wrong introduced from mainstream Buddhisms. Topics that supports or touch the ego.
A list of famous Laypeople found in the Canon:

AN 1.248 Chaṭṭhavaggo - male
AN 1.258 Sattamavaggo - female

For whom are certain teachings?
There is no such as "Dhamma for this and that kind of person" outwardly things, but of cause there have been teachings given to Laypeople and teachings given to Monastics and teachings given to other ascetics ...
So its always good to keep in mind the persons and the circumstance of certain talks. In matters of ideal, every teachings is of use and Dhamma for everyone nut not always of use if a person is bound to certain things. Useful source in regard of how to read the suttas: Befriending the Suttas, by Upasaka J. Bullitt:

As you read a sutta, keep in mind that you are eavesdropping on the
  Buddha as he teaches someone else. Unlike many of the Buddha's
  contemporaries from other spiritual traditions, who would often adhere
  to a fixed doctrine when answering every question [AN 10.93], the
  Buddha tailored his teachings to meet the particular needs of his
  audience. It is therefore important to develop a sensitivity to the
  context of a sutta, to see in what ways the circumstances of the
  Buddha's audience may be similar to your own, so you can gauge how
  best to apply the Buddha's words to your own life situation.
As you read, it can be helpful to keep certain questions circulating
  gently in the back of your mind, both to help you understand the
  context of the sutta and to help you tune in to the different levels
  of teaching that are often going on at once. These questions aren't
  meant to make you into a Buddhist literary scholar; they're simply
  meant to help each sutta come alive for you.
To whom are the teachings directed?
  Are they addressed to a monk [SN 35.85], nun [AN 4.159], or lay follower [AN 7.49]? Are they addressed to one group of people, while someone else within earshot actually takes the teaching to heart [SN 35.197]? Is the audience a large assembly [MN 118] or an individual [AN 4.184]? Or are the listeners followers of another religion altogether [MN 57]? What is the depth of their understanding? If the audience consists of stream-enterers striving for arahantship, the teachings presented may be considerably more advanced than if the audience has only a limited grasp of the Buddha's teachings [AN 3.65]. These questions can help you assess how appropriate a particular teaching is for you...(and many more good advises)

And the Dhamma is timeless akāliko

Sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko |
  to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting all to come & see

As for the label(s) "Lay Dhamma", Lay-Buddhismus, Secular Buddhimus... such is a modern appearance which mostly rejects the necessary of the Sangha (monastic disciples) and believes on the maintaining of the Buddha Dhamma without the need and use of the Holy Life. Its a kind of Buddhism 2.0 and the main introduced way in modern and western countries where actually no real Sangha exists or have been established.
Becoming a lay person
With the refuge to the Buddha, Dhamma and the Sangha (of the Monks), people became and become lay followers. Although its usual suggested and more that good to take on the 5 precepts, it's not necessary to be called a Lay follower (Buddhist Layperson). Traditionally such a requesting/taking of refuge and precepts requesting/taking is made by asking Monks or Nuns who would recite and also explain the certain texts. If not available, one could also consulate a knowledgeable and virtuous lay person or do it for one self (how ever, it goes deeper and drives one more if made in the traditional way)
See also the stages of being a Lay-Buddhist: Mahanama Sutta: Being a Lay Buddhist
The practice of lay people:
The practice of laypeople is usually:
 - Giving or Generosity (Dāna): material giving, and meritorious deeds Transference of merit, and Rejoicing in other’s merit.
 - Moral conduct or Virtue (Sīla): Virtue, incl. the meritorious deeds Reverence, and Service.
 - Meditation or mental Development (Bhāvana): incl. the meritorious deeds Expounding (discussing) the Dhamma and Listening to the Dhamma.
All this deeds are supportive or include the main task: Correcting one’s view.
If one changes the way of live to somebody who lives from the alms of the country, then Dana - the material giving - is no more necessary (even not possible, since one has given up all unnecessary and does no more amass material possession) if practicing seriously and straight forward.
Vinaya for Laypeople
There is a Sutta where the Buddha taught a young man about the use of his ritual traditions he uses to perform. In this Sutta the Buddha described the good behavior, moral and duty of a lay person: Sigalovada Sutta: The Discourse to Sigala
What can be attained on this path?
Actually all path and fruits can be attained on this path, even to the highest attaining, Arahatship (AN 6.119-139). How ever, if one reaches the highest level, one is no more able to live and maintain an more or less normal live and would seek for the way of the Holy Live, homelessness. If such can not be attained, the Canon reports that people will leave there last body with a week.
Overview
Anagarika Isi Dhamma (before Monk) gives a nice and easy understandable explaining in general in his The laity practice

Who is a lay person?
Finally, among the people who adhere to the dhamma, all those who are
  not bhikkhus, or sāmaṇeras, or nuns are laity. We can divide lay
  people into three categories:

There are some laity who, although approving Buddha's word, only dedicate their life a little, or not at all, to the practice of the
  dhamma. They like to claim that they are Buddhists, but do little else
  than run after pleasures and engage in business activities; if they
  observe one or two precepts, it is only because it is easy for them;
  they don't want to dedicate any effort to the rest. Even though they
  claim to be inclined to meditation, they convince themselves that they
  never have any time to practice it.
There are also lay people who try to dedicate more time and effort to follow a way suitable to the development of knowledge (of reality).
  They more or less observe the five precepts (sometimes the eight),
  they like everything that concerns the dhamma aesthetically
  (monuments, statues, ceremonies), they readily spend time reciting
  texts dealing with Buddha's teaching, watching the quality of their
  actions, regularly making donations, attending meditation sessions,
  and sometimes, taking ordination for a short period.
Finally, there are laity who, within their possibilities, try their best to progress quickly and effectively on the path to the cessation
  of suffering. These ones very regularly train in being generous, in
  being vigilant and in applying full mindfulness. Their observance of
  the five precepts, if not eight, is scrupulous. Some of them even
  intend to lead a monastic life permanently.

(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)

Pl. elaborate Holy Life.

Usually described as the life of a Noble Beggar (Bhikkhu/Monk, Bhikkhuni/Nun) by the Buddha which allows the perfection of virtue in its way of livelihood. It is lived for the aim of the Buddhist path, Nibbana (Unbinding, Deathless). Its a way of live and practice, mostly described in Vinaya (rules for monks and nuns) to give the best possibilities for the practice of samadhi (Meditation) and pañña (Wisdom). Although a Layperson can also attain the highest goal, become an Arahat, after the attainment, he/she would not be able to live (maintain) a different way of live as this.

"akaliko/timeless" could be ambiguous: e.g. it could mean "eternally unchanging", or "ever-present/applicable now" -- there's reason to believe it means both of these, and that Dhamma is therefore an exception to the rule that every (compound) thing is impermanent.

Where exactly would Upaska Chris see a significant different?

Here are two example of a difference between "always the same" and "always now": people are eternally talking (so somebody somewhere is always talking now) but their speech (language and subject) is impermanent (not always the same); similarly, weather has been going on since unconstruable beginnings, and continues today, but is not the same every day.

And how is it now?

I think it's good, thank you: on-topic, detailed, clear, referenced, precise, and not false.

Atma was asking about the weather and so on, but still it seems that those things are timeless anicca. :-) Never trust!

I see. Recently here, it looked sunny when I went out and it was sunny while I was out; but it rained hard as soon as I came in again; but now a few minutes later, at this moment, it's sunny again.

Timeless, akaliko?

Dhamma is universal and timeless hence does not undergo any changes, through people's understanding of the same may change due to experiences, views, perceptions, etc. General understanding like a person's understanding does undergo changes. The true understanding of the Dhamma happens at the experiential level, i.e., through meditations in which case this is in line with true reality which is universal and timeless.

What is Dhamma for lay person?

A lot of the suttas are intended for monks: see for example this answer.

How to know Dhamma in the way it was meant to be?

Perhaps answering that question would be the role of a teacher.

Is Dhamma same for all sentient , remain same over the period of time or does Dhamma undergoes change? Are there different versions of Dhamma?

I might be wrong but I think that Dhamma has (at least) two meanings or aspects:

A description of what the world is, and how it works
A description of what to do, or how to be or not to be, within the world

I think there are different answers to your question:

To some extent, Buddhist Dharma changes -- or, at least, is augmented, with newer Dharma being added onto although not replacing the older Dharma -- see for example Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma.

To some extent, Buddhist Dhamma is unchanging -- for example doctrine like this says that all Buddhas teach the same Dhamma:

On one occasion, Thera Ananda asked the Buddha whether the Fundamental Instructions to bhikkhus given by the preceding Buddhas were the same as those of the Buddha himself. To him the Buddha replied that the instructions given by all the Buddhas are as given in the following verses

There's also a term upāya or upāya-kosalla, which I think is used to say that there are different teaching-aids.


text:
Is intention and purpose the same?
Given that there are 'intentions' (cetanā) which lead (if they're not neutral) to either wholesome fruits or unwholesome fruits -- then is the same also true for 'purpose' (sankappa), i.e.:

Are there wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral purposes?
Which purpose could be 'wholesome' (if there is a purpose that fits that description)?
What is the difference between a 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome' purpose?
How could a wholesome purpose look like?

Definitions:

'Purpose': objective, agenda, goal, target (outwardly, 'more or less', 'near and far', 'time and place').
'Intention': state of ceto in action (inwardly)

Samples:

If your purpose is to accumulate (material things, a state of becoming): is it possible to maintain wholesome intentions?
For example: you like to have a monastery be built, you like to have a medi-community to grow, to be maintained.

If your intention is wholesome, is it possible to strive after a non beneficial purpose?

If your purpose is to let go (of material things, states of becoming): is it possible to maintain unwholesome intentions?
For example, you have buliding material and you are willing to let go of it, you have time and you are willing to let go of it.

If your intention is unwholesome, is it possible to strive after a beneficial purpose?

The wholesomeness and unwholesomeness and neutrality is decided by what you would perceive when you experience or feel the result. This is the differentiation between them.
Generally aversion are painful when doing and so is when you get the result.
Generally clining based acts are pleasant when doing and also when you get the result.
Generally neutral sensations are when they are neither the above but still with the root of ignorance.
The motivation associated with the purpose decides what is the result. This also has some sensation associated with it. This can be used decide what is wholesome or not when the volition is formed as detached observer as sometimes these minds spontaneously arise. (All 121 Citta has sensation associated hence any through arising is Dukkha - Dukkha Dukkha, Viparinama Dukkha, Sankhara Dukkha - whatever the sensation.) There are 7 roots which are Ahetuka (only enlighten person experiences this), Loba, Dosa, Moha, (unwholesome) Aloba, Adosa, Amoha (wholesome). When minds rooted in the above arise the Dukkha (painful experience, pleasant experience - unsatisfactoriness of change is pleasent experience, neutral experience - fabricated existance) or sensation associated with the roots are there also and you experience unsatisfactoriness in a subtle way. The sensation can be used to identify what the volition behind a purpose when the classification of the roots are not clear cut.
Though the action is same this might be might be motivated by different intentions or purposes in which case the results and wholesomeness will differ based on the motivation and what roots are present. Hence the Dukkha when volition forms and the Dukkha when the results do manifest will also differ accordingly, but distinction is from the Dukkha you experience or type of sensations. E.g. the purpose of a surgeon cutting a person is motivated to save the life but in the case of a robber it might be greed and aversion to kill and rob, but the action is same but the purpose is different. Also you maybe donating something to a allied country motivated block import of the same from another country hence indirectly economically sabotage another country, in which case you seemingly doing good but the purpose is not. With the volition you experience the sensation associated the root and many more times amplified when you experience the fruit.
Intention, action and result decides the karmic formation. Sometimes good intention may not result in positive outcome nevertheless the though does bear fruit perhaps not as weighty as a rebirth linking Karma. If you have the intention but not follow though you still have a weak Karma. If you have intention and follow through and the desired result happens then this is a more intense Karma. Whatever the case motivation decide the feeling associated resulting experience and also see it when the volition forms. The taste of the fruit you take and plant will have the same taste and the fruits the tree would bear. Intention is the initial fruit from which you take the seed to plant.

To do not disturb the moderator purposes and SE purposes, discussion and comments can be found here and continued if wished (comments have been deleted here).

It seems I don't know, don't understand, or don't agree with your definitions (of cetanā and sankappa).
You start by assuming that there is wholesome and unwholesome cetanā: and then you ask whether there is wholesome and unwholesome sankappa.

Firstly so far as I know there is definitely wholesome and unwholesome sankappa. I say that because Right Resolve (samma sankappo) is the second of the eight path factors in the Noble Eightfold Path:

The definition
"And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve."

And the Maha-cattarisaka Sutta defines "wrong resolve" as the opposite of this: "Being resolved on sensuality, on ill will, on harmfulness".
The "Right Resolve" page referenced above also quotes six other suttas.
And I think that "right" and "wrong" resolve can be understood as "wholesome" and "unwholesome".

Secondly, I don't know whether there is such a thing as wholesome cetanā.
I say that because Karma is intention (cetanā), good actions lead to good rebirths, bad actions lead to bad rebirths, however I thought the goal (or a goal) was for there to be no more becoming at all: to stop karma, which I think means stopping cetanā.
I admit that there are fruits (phala) defined, but still.
Don't the suttas on the subject of cetanā suggest that it's best to have no cetanā at all?

Cetana Sutta: An Act of Will (AN 11.2)
For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue.
[...etc...]

Cetana Sutta: Intention (SN 12.38)
[...etc...]
But when one doesn't intend, arrange, or obsess [about anything], there is no support for the stationing of consciousness. There being no support, there is no landing of consciousness. When that consciousness doesn't land & grow, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. When there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress.

Cetana Sutta — Intention (SN 27.7)
"Monks, any desire-passion with regard to intentions involving forms [or any of the 6 sense-objects] is a defilement of the mind.

Note that the definitions of Right Resolve involve negatives or absences:

Renunciation (i.e. non-covetousness, non-desire, non-attachment, non-sensuality)
Freedom from ill-will
Harmlessness (i.e. non-injury)

I think that fits with it being right to have an absence of intention. And so does the goal, of being 'unbound' and apada (and similar 'negatives').
There are (as well as these 'absences' or 'negatives') also a couple of 'positives' -- quoted from the "Right Resolve" reference above:

"abundant, exalted, measureless in loving-kindness, without hostility or ill-will"
"one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others is, for that reason, to be praised"

Perhaps (I guess) these are "binding" resolves rather than "unbinding" resolves, and (perhaps) these have corresponding wholesome cetanā, and perhaps these are why later ("Mahayana") schools began to emphasize the Bodhisattva way.
There are texts (e.g. Dharma talks) which talk about kusala and akusala-cetana but I don't know of a sutta in the Pali canon which says that cetana is wholesome.

Thirdly, you ask whether a monastery can be built, or whether you can grow a medi-community, with wholesome intention?
I think the answer is "yes"; because:

The Buddha (for example) grew or accumulated such (or was instrumental in their growth, or allowed them to be accumulated), and I suppose that his intention and/or resolve was wholesome
Right resolve includes non-covetousness, but I think that doesn't not have to preclude there being a community: because "practice for self and others" is also part of "Right Resolve"; and for example because of e.g. the Upaddha Sutta (and kalyanamittata etc.)
Maybe the concept of upaya (i.e. teaching aids) allows the accumulation of such things or states
Maybe it's a matter of balancing or alternating between conventional and ultimate, between action and meditation, between "right resolve" and "not intending".

Is intention and purpose the same?, if wished since it developed into a discussion which might be not the purpose of SE or the team.

According to Mahayana (Yogacara) Abhidharma, cetana is connected with traces and dispositions (samskara) left by previous actions and experiences. (What follows is my understanding based on my study and practice. Not official but I did spend some time contemplating this stuff, and I think I've got some insights) Like you said, cetana can be kusala or akusala (healthy or unhealthy). It is like having healthy habits or unhealthy habits. Our habits define our directionality of mind and our tendency to act or react. The concept of cetana is part of the model in which everything happens by itself, there is no person who intends - instead, if your habit is e.g. to indulge in negative thoughts, your attention will keep getting drawn to imperfections - even if there are many other potential objects. Cetana is impersonal and automatic.
Sankappa (samkalpa) or aspiration is part of a different model. It is what you want, you're trying to achieve with your behavior, what you're going after. So samkalpa is a lot more personal, it is not happening by itself, it is what you are driving at. Now, sometimes (actually a lot of time for the untrained people), we don't actually act with a clear purpose in mind. Oftentimes we simply let our traces and dispositions drive us. We act out our opinions, preferences, aversions, desires etc. without thinking of consequences that much, and not even having a clear goal of what we're trying to achieve. So what Buddha meant with his "samyak-samkalpa" (I'm using Sanskrit spelling here) is acting with a constructive purpose in mind, trying to make things better - not just puking out our predispositions.
By now you should have an idea that cetana and samkalpa are kinda different in one sense and kinda two sides of the same thing in another sense. In one sense, cetana is how your tend to act "unconsciously", whether you're paying attention or not - whereas samkalpa is what you think are trying to achieve "consciously". In the second sense, samkalpa is really just a manifestation of cetana at a higher organizational level. In yet another sense, both are manifestations of samskara (imprints, traces).
All models have limits though - this becomes apparent when you try to connect these two models (impersonal and personal) together: can we say that healthy predispositions always manifest as wholesome aspirations and vice versa? Not so much!
One example is when we force ourselves to act against our (bad) habits. Should we say that in this case our cetana is unhealthy but our samkalpa is wholesome? Or should we say that in fact some positive change of cetana has already happened, although at this point it is only a partial/superficial change? Another example, is when we have wholesome aspiration (e.g. to attain Nirvana) out of an unhealthy cetana (e.g. aversion of the world). Should we consider an unhealthy cetana as healthy when it drives a wholesome aspiration?
From Mahayana perspective, this is an example of Emptiness kicking in - this makes it clear that cetana and samkalpa are not truly existent entities that are strictly in one state at a time. They are merely simplified designations for a large number of samskaras responding to various stimuli. Things only look concrete when you look at them from the distance. Once you step in closer, they split into multiple components that work by their own rules.
So does it mean cetana and samkalpa could be kusala or akusala independently of one another and there is nothing useful we can learn about them? Luckily, that is not so bad. The general rule we can extract from this, is that our mind exhibits the quality of inertia: Having an aspiration for something does not automatically mean we have changed deep inside. Sometimes we may ourselves not realize the hidden agenda behind our action, which can come from unhealthy predispositions and be in fact unwholesome, egoistic etc. We have to apply right view, right effort etc. over a long time in order to overcome the inertia and have dharma become our second nature. As one of my teachers explained, the transformation is complete when our acts are spontaneously wholesome without any effort needed from our side.
For a teacher on the path, this inertia can be used as upaya - motivating the student by taking advantage of their illusions/attachments/aversions. For a student on the path, this inertia can manifest as a form of hypocrisy - when the student is superficially a Buddhist but in essence is still full of grasping, negativity, conceit, us/them thinking etc.
To get to your examples:
If your purpose (samkalpa, aspiration) is to accumulate (material things, a state of becoming): is it possible to maintain wholesome intentions (cetana, habitual tendencies)?
Yes. The purpose/aspiration "to accumulate" is not necessarily unwholesome. It could be wholesome (kusala) at mundane level but not conducive to liberation (sasava, not anasava). A householder aspiring to accumulate wealth to provide for well-being of the family and community is a wholesome aspiration, just not a liberating one. So one can totally be a good householder aspiring to accumulate things while maintaining healthy cetana.
Now, if you are asking if one's aspiration "to accumulate" could be a compatible with the Path (anasava) - the answer is, provisionally yes and ultimately no. On the initial stages, the task of the practitioner is exactly "to accumulate". To accumulate what? Merit (good karma) and knowledge (of the basic teaching). This is why such stage is called The Path Of Accumulation. However if one gets stuck on this stage for too long, it can turn into Spiritual Materialism, when we accumulate goodness and knowledge as a way to feed our ego - instead of deconstructing it.
Buddha recommended the right aspiration (samyak-samkalpa) to be the aspiration towards progressive improvement, which on initial stages is identical with accumulation of mundane wholesome qualities but on the advanced stages becomes distinct as we get to stalking our ego/attachments, practice non-abiding (baselessness) etc.
For example: you like to have a monastery be built, you like to have a medi-community to grow, to be maintained.
Dreaming about monastery sounds like a typical case of spiritual materialism. Instead, someone should focus on non-abiding (baselessness) - which includes letting go of the raft. Once the first bhumi has been achieved, and there is no longer aspiration to attain Nirvana, one can build monastery etc. and it won't longer be an obstacle.
If your intention (cetana, habitual tendency) is wholesome, is it possible to strive after a non beneficial purpose (samkalpa, aspiration)?
Yes. There are two cases here. One is like I said, you could be mistaken about your intentions (predispositions). You could think you're a Buddhist while in fact being a regular sloppy person who just happens to know a lot about Buddhism or a regular grumpy person etc. Second case, your predispositions could be healthy but because of the change in your environment you could be forced to act with unwholesome aspiration in mind. This depends on the supporting condition of ignorance. An example of this is a well-brought up child of a good family who gets into a bad company. The natural instincts (cetana) of such child are still good but the environment provides negative motivation, which effects the wrong view, which drives unwholesome aspiration.
If your intention (cetana, habitual tendency) is unwholesome, is it possible to strive after a beneficial purpose (samkalpa, aspiration)?
Yes, like I said, because of the inertia you may have habitual tendencies (cetana) that go contrary to your aspirations. You can have unhealthy predispositions (cetana) while aspiring towards a more healthy vision.
If your purpose (samkalpa, aspiration) is to let go (of material things, states of becoming): is it possible to maintain unwholesome intentions (cetana, habitual tendencies)? For example, you have building material and you are willing to let go of it, you have time and you are willing to let go of it.
It's not like our goal is to let go of everything for the sake of letting go. Then the poorest person would be the Buddha - this sounds like the extreme path of renunciation, not the Middle Path. In Buddhism our goal is Unbinding, which is about not getting stuck - not about avoidance/isolation.

Two questions, if I may: one is, perhaps I don't understand the paragraph with "upaya" and "taking advantage of their illusions" (maybe that's obviously true by definition for as long as the student isn't "trackless", but it might be clearer with some example[s]); and your mentioning "bhumi" and "path of accumulation", Google finds Wikipedia as the first reference for those words, but you could optionally cite a reference other than Wikipedia for those terms/doctrines.

Good questions. I'm hesitant to expand the answer further as it's already gotten too long - but briefly, an obvious example of upaya would be that episode in Life of Milarepa when he wants to become a sorcerer to revenge his uncle and meets a Buddhism teacher who promises to make him just that, while in fact teaching him Dharma. There can be much more subtle examples of the same basic principle as you can imagine. For the second one, added a link to wikipedia.

How should we understand the saying ..."for a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will"
Is it not right to say that a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue the person's act of will is one with Dhamma.
I think the answer lies within "Ayacana Sutta: The Request", but I'm in the dark and don't yet understand why the Blessed one only surveyed the world with the eye of an Awakened one after request by Brahma Sahampati to teach the Dhamma.
HE.

Hello and welcome to Buddhism SE. Could you add a reference to the sutta you mention and preferable explain why you think the answers lies in this sutta. Thank you.

Hi Lanka, I was responding to the Sutta ChrisW quoted above.

Cetana Sutta: An Act of Will (AN 11.2)
For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue.

In Ayacana Sutta we read that the Blessed One, although inclined to no action when self-awakened, he consent to teach the Dhamma out of compassion for beings.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn06/sn06.001.than.html

Because this isn't an answer to the original question, so it shouldn't be posted as an answer. It questions my answer so a good place to post it would be as a comment, under my answer; however it's a bit too long for a comment, and I doubt I could answer it ... so I'd like to suggest that you post this as a new question. It's questioning the meaning of a phrase in a quotable sutta, so it would work fine as a new/stand-alone question.


text:
Rituals in Buddhism
Are there any rituals in Buddhism? Do rituals in itself can be become a source of attachment? The more grandiose the ritual , the more the merit! If there is a ritual, what is the right way of conducting a ritual that doesn't invoke materialistic thoughts and actions.

Mr/Mrs 8CK8,
The meritorious rituals in brief:

Giving or Generosity (Dāna)
Moral conduct or Virtue (Sīla)
Meditation or mental Development (Bhāvana)
Respect or Reverence (Apaciti)
Service in Helping others (Veyyāvaca)
Transference of Merit (Pattānuppadāna)
Rejoicing in otherʼs Merit (Abbhanumodana)
Expounding or Teaching the Dhamma (Desana)
Listening to the Dhamma (Savana)
Correcting one’s View (Diṭṭhijju-kamma)

once one has entered the Dhamma, the stream, all those thing will be natural and no more performing as a ritual and habit is needed. He/she has abounded the fetter of being attached to rites and rituals.
How all this ritual are good and best made and learned, one would learn best at a monastery (Wat pali Vatta: that which is done, which goes on or is customary, i. e. duty, service, custom, function vata: a religious duty, observance, rite, practice, custom) or being in association with those who practice it in daily life.
So for example, if you would feel that you like to ask a question, you would address certain person, persons in a proper moment, fold your hands, ask for pardon to disturb, or great, or bow, what ever the situation and the people in front of you. You would take a lower seat. You would ask if it is ok to ask and then, invited, you would go on. Just one sample with many many more details in regard of Savana here.
People who tell that rituals and merits are child stuff and just bind are mostly (1) not able to perform the basics, (2) try to get the fruits without a seed and simply try simulate sublime stages. They would be much to greedy to do such things and make scarifies. Otherwise it would be that modern world is full of Ariya disciples. (who btw. would not stop to do such when it is proper and within their community)
What you are doing and how you are doing things are also rituals and habits but mostly no good habits, so the first, before even thinking of letting go all, is to change to good rituals. You final aim is to give up all kind of kamma, but not before you start your work and reach the working place.
What is the right way of conducting a ritual that doesn't invoke materialistic thoughts and actions
What ever is inspired by a confident heart, by a faithful heart, by a devoted heart, a staunch heart, will conduct a mist beneficial ritual. And confident, faithful, devoted, staunch to what? Confident, faithful, devoted, staunch in regard of the Buddha, in regard of the Dhamma, in regard of the Sangha, in regard of your own virtues results.
Since Dhamma and defilements of the worlds beings are timeless, and the todays situation is the same like in Buddhas times, it might be good for you to learn about the different of Uposatha. Like in this times there have been people performing the Uposatha like cowherd, thinking simply on fruits and how to get them and the much more dangerous branch with is most dominant to day since there is such as lay-Buddhism is the tradition of the ninganthas, the jains, who today bear the clothes of the Buddha, teaching meditation, anatta and abhidhamma. Certainly and with reason even called thieves by the Buddha:

At the end of the night, he resumes the consumption of his belongings,
  even though they aren't given back to him. This counts as stealing, I
  tell you. Such is the Uposatha of the Jains, Visakha. When this
  Uposatha of the Jains is undertaken, it is not of great fruit or great
  benefit, not of great glory or great radiance.

There was a lady who came to the monastery to perform meritorious rituals and the Buddha explained here of what rituals are of benefit:
Muluposatha Sutta: The Roots of the Uposatha
(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)

Are there any rituals in Buddhism?

Culturally there is. E.g. Kandy Esala Perahera. Even morality or even service or even generosity sometimes maybe in the form f a rite or ritual. There can be some merit in doing something as a rite or ritual but the results are not the best you can reap. Dana Maha-p,phala Sutta discusses this in the context of generosity. (Giving in account of tradition is akin to a ritual.)

Do rituals in itself can be become a source of attachment?

Yes. This is one fetter than binds you to Samsara.

The more grandiose the ritual , the more the merit! If there is a ritual, what is the right way of conducting a ritual that doesn't invoke materialistic thoughts and actions.

The results are decided on your metal volition and that of the beings gaining benefit. More grandiose the ritual the effort put into it is more an at a certain point the intensity of volition may diminish and may not be as meritorious as a more simpler act with more intense volition.
Say I have a pen which I am attached to. When I see it I get present sensations or experience. Now I decide to give it which can have either pleasant or neutral sensations. If the recipient is happy receiving the gift you may feel more happy or experience more pleasant sensations. By truly knowing the sensations are impermanent, unsatisfactory and non self only can you pratice true giving. Also having initial and sustained awareness of the thoughts of giving can intensify the results. Likewise of any other act which can be in form of a rite or ritual can be turned into something more fruitful.


text:
Which Chinese Buddhist schools were gradualist?
There is a famous multicentury argument in the history of Chinese Buddhism as to if enlightenment is something achieved after gradual practice and improvement or something you realize or achieve in a flash of inspiration.
Which schools were gradualists? Was this an actual distinction or was this a rhetorical device? Are there any surviving (as in existing right now) gradualist schools? Was Tien Tai/Tendai/Nichiren Buddhism gradualist?

I'm not a scholar of Chinese Buddhism, all I known is that the gradual enlightenment tradition was referred to as "The Northern School of Chan" and the sudden enlightenment got known as "The Southern School of Chan". Googling for these two terms turns up some useful references. Let's see what we can learn from these...
Wikipedia articles on Chan Buddhism - Southern School, East Mountain Dharma Gate, Subitism - Chan, and Shenhui provide some historical information about the two approaches.
From all the evidence it looks like the distinction was made up and promulgated by Shenhui, the student of Huineng whose adversary Shenxiu was later portrayed as that infamous monk in the Platform Sutra who lost the famous verse contest for their common teacher Hongren of East Mountain Dharma Gate (the original Chan school tracing back to Bodhidharma himself).
Shenhui sharply criticized Shenxiu's Northern School's emphasis on ceremony and sutra study - and contrasted it with seated meditation of Huineng and the original East Mountain Dharma Gate:

Shenhui traveled north to live amongst his ideological enemies in the capital city of Luoyang. While in the city he spoke publicly against the teachings of the Northern School:

...

"[Northern School teachings] are the methods of the ignorant. ... In the six generations that have come before [!!! - AV], not a single person performed the practices of Shenxiu."

...

This was a polemical exaggeration, since both schools were derived from the same tradition [of Bodhidharma, Daoxin, and Hongren - AV], and the so-called Southern School [the Shenhui's sect - AV] incorporated many teachings of the more influential Northern School [which was a direct descendant of the original Chan! - AV]. Eventually both schools died out, but the influence of Shenhui was so immense that all later Chan schools traced their origin to [Shenhui's teacher - AV] Huineng, and "sudden enlightenment" became a standard doctrine of Chan.

So it looks like it was a rhetorical device coined by Shenhui and popularized by the later Chan tradition to make a case for their "Meditation leading to A-ha Realization" method as an antipode to mere "ceremony and sutra study" which they felt was a degradation of Dharma.
From this standpoint I suppose we could say that any school that does not have a notion of Aha Realization could be considered a gradualist school.
Apparently the gradual approach traces its origins to Yogachara and even further back to Shurangama Sutra and Lankavatara Sutra (According to Traleg Kyabgon Rinpoche, "The Surangama Sutra and the Lankavatara Sutra were the inspiration for Asanga and Vasubandhu to build their system of philosophy.") - while the sudden approach goes back to the prajna-paramita family of sutras.
From this I guess we could infer that those schools that taught Lankavatara and/or Shurangama sutras exclusively were probably the gradualist schools you are looking for.
Late Chan schools should be excluded by definition. It does look like the early East Mountain Dharma Gate was not gradualist either:

[Daoxin, the founder of East Mountain Dharma Gate, advocated for] the unification of the teachings of the Lankavatara Sutra with those of the prajnaparamita sutras [family], which includes the well-known Heart and Diamond sutras.

One Chan school that stands apart is Caodong, the Chinese predecessor of Soto. Apparently it's a school that emphasizes silent illumination (through sitting meditation) without any end result whatsoever. There is simply "no goal to be attained beyond the practice itself." This makes this school neither gradualist nor subitist.
Before Bodhidharma and Chan, the Hua-yen school taught Avatamsaka Sutra, which apparently "integrates the teachings on śūnyatā and Yogacara thinking" - shunyata being an element of sudden realization. Before that, Tiantai school included Avatamsaka Sutra in its "classification of teachings" scheme, and mentioned "Gradual Teaching, for those with medium or inferior abilities vs Sudden Teaching for those with superior abilities". So Hua-yen and Tiantai are not gradualist in the strict sense of the word - although we can't call them subitist either.
The only remaining Chinese schools that I know of are Tangmi (tantric), Faxiang (yogacara), and Pure Land.
Looks like Tangmi did teach Surangama Sutra - and its Wikipedia article says:

In Chinese Buddhism there was no major distinction between exoteric and esoteric practices and the Northern School of Chan even became known for its esoteric practices of dhāraṇīs and mantras.

Faxiang reportedly studied the Heart Sutra among other texts, which would put it into the "integrationist" camp in my book, along with Tientai and Hua-yen. As for the Pure Land, they say unlike in Japan in China it was never a distinct school but rather a tradition permeating other schools - including Chan.
To summarize, it looks like the only school that we can definitely call gradualist was Tangmi, the Chinese precursor of Shingon. If we were to grade schools from completely gradualist to integrative to subitist, Pure Land and Tangmi would be on the far left, then the integrationist schools like Faxiang, Tiantai and Hua-yen in the middle, followed by the early Chan (the first 5 generations from Bodhidharma to Hongren), followed by the late Chan, and finally Linji (Rinzai in Japan) on the far right with its kicking, yelling and koans. I'm not sure where to place Caodong and Soto Zen though - they could either go to the far left if we consider them "infinitely gradual" or somewhere near the middle if we assume their "the path is the goal" to be a clever upaya designed to help the student attain the non-attainment.
Alas for simple theories but this was fun. I learned a lot while working on this answer, so thank you for an interesting question.


text:
What's the role/relevance of drugs when Arada taught Buddha?
I quote Andrei from here:

Apparently, Buddha's first teacher, Arada Kalama, taught Shukla Dhyana through visualizing oneself in the center of progressively empty context (village --> empty field --> empty sky --> nothingness), culminating in a state of thoughtless concentration with no content.

On a TV show1 I once heard a description of a guided trip on magic mushrooms, which reminded me of -- that description was:

You're on a ship → then the ship's gone → the water's gone → you're gone.

What might have been the role/relevance of drugs, when Arada taught the Buddha? Is it possible that Arada (or his students) might have used some psychoactive drugs?
And is it right to find the description of Shukla Dhyana comparable with the documentary's description of "the ship gone,  etc."?

1 It was a TV documentary of Albert Hofmann, where they investigated to medicinal usage of psychedelics to help people suffering from severe depression.

I think it's difficult to know: no archaeological evidence that I know of, and the botanical descriptions if any are difficult to interpret, for example scholars no longer know what plant the Vedic Soma was.

If you'd restrict this question to Buddhism (which, you possibly should), instead of asking about "back in the time" including non-Buddhist society, then answers could reference Buddhist text, e.g. the Vinaya: in which various types of medicine are allowed when necessary (the type of medicine and whether it was effective is another matter), but which I don't believe says anything about using mood- or perception-altering drugs as a teaching aid.

In the modern world there's a wider variety of (slightly safer and/or more powerful) psychoactive drugs. Modern Buddhists tend to interpret the "fifth precept" as abstaining from those as well as from alcohol.

@ChrisW I removed "back in time" to restrict the question to Buddhism...

Thank you. Reading it carefully the question is about Aruda. I edited it again, slightly; I hope that (even after these edits) that's still the question which you wanted to ask.

@draks... I think it's a reasonable question. I ought to convert my first comments (above) into a corresponding answer, if I have the time later (except that I don't know any specifics about Aruda).

Intoxicants in Buddhism are frowned on by every Buddhist school of thought.
However you didn't ask that, so we won't dive into those details.
After some time looking i could not find any evidence that Arada, or the Sankhya practices used any kind of drugs.
It was mostly types of meditation, the last three stages can be found in this article which attempts to spell out the entire process of the practice from beginning to end in a way anyone can access and understand.

Meditation on I-am-ness: Most of the time we mistakenly think that
  "who I am" is my mind and personality. However, as we gradually come
  to witness the subtle elements, the senses, and the mind itself, we
  come to see that there is a still subtler aspect, which simply
  declares "I am!" When it stands alone in this way, it is independent
  of the other manifestations.

Followed by...

Meditation with Buddhi standing alone: Still subtler is Buddhi, which
  is the individuated intelligence itself. It doesn't yet declare itself
  to be this or that identity, but is the very intelligence, which
  supports the ego (Ahamkara), the senses and instruments of actions
  (Indriyas), and the constructs of the inner objects and physical body
  (Tanmatras and Bhutas).
One of the final resting places of the individuated person is to know
  oneself as Buddhi, this most fine vehicle of consciousness (Purusha).
  It is still constructed of Prakriti, leaving that final discrimination
  or uncovering yet to be done. To know oneself at this level of Buddhi
  is sometimes called the level of bliss or ananda, as all of the other
  levels and false identities have temporarily come to rest or been
  transcended.

and finally ...

Purusha resting in itself: Finally Purusha, pure consciousness, rests
  in itself, alone, separate from all evolutes of Prakriti. The seeker
  on the path of Self-realization seeks even a minute or a moment of
  this highest glimpse of Realization, after which he or she continues
  to purify the remaining samskaras and karmas. (See Yoga Sutras 1.3 and
  3.56)

These descriptions, as noted in the article, are designed to give the reader a general feel of the process.
To use your metaphor

You're on a ship → then the ship's gone → the water's gone → you're gone.

We can say the ship is what disappears during Meditation on I-am-ness
The water during the Meditation with Buddhi standing alone
The last part of the metaphor is slightly misleading to match up with the last stage, it is not you're gone, but the ego that disappears, sometimes refereed to as Ego Death by mystics and psychedelic users. The last stage of Sankhya Purusha resting in itself could be compared to Ego death, and is a kind of pure conciousness that does not contain an I or an Ego, or any kind of self identity. This is the goal of the practitioner.
This is also the hardest thing to ever put into words.
So in conclusion and summary : did the school and practitioners use psychedelics, likely no, they did not. These states can be reached in meditation. Are these states similar to some reported psychedelic experiences, yes.
However the key difference is that psychedelics are somewhat unpredictable. You could take the same substance and have two incredibly different experiences, and even experiences completely the opposite of Ego Death. Whereas the practices of the Sankhya are designed to always lead to the same place, with time and effort into the practices.
Further I think it is worth mentioning that Buddha moved on from this school, was not satisfied with the result as a goal. He even stated it lay on one extreme of the spectrum which the middle way lay between it and the other end of the spectrum.


text:
Buddhist councils and government involvement?
In my country (Sri Lanka) government is about to bring out a new set of laws to govern Buddhist councils. This kind of a law has never existed in my country and being a Buddhist country there is some speculation about why only one religion is effected by this new law.
There are some fears from monks about government trying to shut up the religion & it's power over people even though some are ready to examine the whole thing and come up with modifications.
There is a line about putting the "Monk imposers" in jail. And some fear this might be a bate to take down Buddhist organizations and Monks who speak against injustice.
The public literally has no clue about what to say or do. Most likely people will oppose it and there is a big potential that this might lead to some serious outbreak of violence and religious conflict.

Here are some links from news web sites about the whole thing:

Amendment of laws on Buddhist temples will take decision making power away from Maha Sangha
New laws

So far it is very dreadful.
What should be the response to this kind of a law in any country?
How to deal with government involvement in religion?

I would love a response from Ven. Yuttadhammo or Ven. Samana Johann

It's not clear what you're asking -- because you ask about "this kind of law" and "government involvement" but you haven't referenced any news article or document, which identifies what laws, what Buddhist councils, what imposters, and/or what government involvement in religion. The subject (i.e. what you're asking about) might be clearer to you than it is to others.

Atma would say that the question stays well, Mr Therevada gave just a sample to "Buddhist councils and government involvement?" and specific question details at the end: "What should be the response to this kind of a law in any country?" & "How to deal with government involvement in religion?". Of cause he could but the sample under "Sample" so to keep even astray in this current matter (you see how fast that happens) a little bit limited.

Thank you for the kind advice i will try to find some. @ChrisW

I Googled and didn't find any English-language news that matched your description; but Samana Johann gave a sort of timeless answer, which seems independent of the law in question.

@ChrisW ,Yes indeed. You are right & i was wondering the same thing. What is on daily news casts on national television has not made  it to the internet. I guess Regime after regime is what we are destined to endure : )  Thanks for the reply chris!

- Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -
Sangha - Business is Sangha - Business and laymen - business is laymen business, yet lay people do not conduct to any precepts that keeps them stay away from Sangha business and of course the views of laypeople had since ever an impact on the behavior of the Sangha, at least many of the Vinayas rules have been formulated after laymans critic (it this was proper).
But Sangha needs to conduct on staying away of what ever laymen business. Doing different is a heavy fault, Sanghadisesa 13. Yet, how could Sangha even come in certain situations like you mentioned is not having violated the Sg13 at first place? Do they leave in dependency on certain people or groups? They do and so they have their problems which will not and before they do not give up there comfort they gain within this dependency. But they would, in line of there defilement not be able to do and simply live a live according to Vinaya.
It is in no means intended by the Buddha that the Sangha seeks for coalition with lay peoples interest and totally against any independency if worldly institutions would act as regulation.
The reality, how ever looks different, since the Sangha at large is merely unable to act and move in those days already and there have been lot of positive interventions of Kings and wordily leaders through the history.
One might not forget, although it looks wonderful that there are countries with thousands of monks and thousands of monasteries, that this is actually a sign of strong corruption of the Sangha, or let Atma say, of most.
If Atma takes the country where he dwells he would say that 95% of what ever communities, monks, monasteries are far away form the heir of Dhamma-Vinaya and the institutions are at large means for a livelihood, nothing else. Livelihood needs regulations and with that such things like monk-passports, licenses, allowances... start to grow.
At least there is as big tendency of desire for governing from monks and even more strong by laypeople, of both have interests in becoming and material gain.
In this world of defilement and darkness, there is no way that such as Sangha survives, and it is sure, as far as Atmas awareness can reach, that this is the last generation of holy life within Buddhas institution called Sangha. That does not mean that its physical appearance will disappear, no, it will even grow, but its ways and purpose is gone.
Governments even have no other chance as to hardily regulate everything since there are less monks who stick either simply with Vinaya or have certain own virtue already. All they will do is making politics and oppose the state. They would not dear to leave a place where the conditions are no more given for a holy life.
The most harmful action is if Sangha uses people to fight each other or to make propaganda. If the Sangha carries out correctly they would not even give certain statements but simply act in sphere of there possibilities. At least they have no rights at all and do not hold rights but at the moment they start to do so, they are subject and object of all problems and quarrels.
Even in old times, it has been on invitation and guidance of great kings who had not so much dust in the eyes, that councils take place. Today the time of real Sangha councils are gone. If there would be a meeting in line of Dhamma and Vinaya, it would be the last meeting. Where ever Monks meet today, they are no more interested in correct each other but simply on how to maintain "harmony" so that the corrupt movement can go on and livelihood can be done without disturbing each other.
There have been in the past, always small particular Sanghas, which earned rightly the respect of the leaders. For example the forest tradition in Thailand which is differently treated in all aspects. But for the large, the folk Buddhism institutions, there will be no future without been strictly governed since both, the intention and the fruits of it are of worldly interest.
As for somebody involved as a citizen in such a matter, Atma would point back to the first line: Look simply of is your own business and do not get involved, do not take position aside of simply precepts and doing what is virtuous.
To be able to live a kind of live is not a matter of right but a matter of past deeds (merits) and of conduct one sticks to. There is no more safety of all that stuff, if one does not hold any right or weapon and anybody who tells different did or do not live such a live.
So there is nothing to fear for those who walk the right path and stay independent by letting go, but of course all reason to fear for those who took, take and like to take the instruments of the Buddha as a worldly means.
Atma would on this occasion remember on 1. on the reminder of King Asoka:
That the True Dhamma Might Last a Long Time
and 2. on the urgency to practice, things are not for sure and you don't know if town and forest will be on fire tomorrow or you even live that long. So don't waste your time with politic, Upasaka Theravada and stay far away for any protesting monk and monks who make even sight signs of interests in world and politic! They are poison and dangerous, not even as dangerous as lay people can be, for the Dhamma as well as for the worlds normal harmony.
If you have certain possibilities to influence others, like family and friend, lead them generosity, virtue, discernment. No need to care of things out of your range. You'd better develop gratitude in regard of those holding power and give you many possibilities they would not need to give you our they would have the power to take it from you.

Danger is born from intimacy,
    society gives birth to dust.
    Free from intimacy,
    free from society:
    such is the vision of the sage.
Who, destroying what's born
    wouldn't plant again or nourish
    what will arise:
    They call him the wandering,
    singular sage. He has seen the
    state of peace.

What did the Buddha and all his disciples give up fist, when they entered the holy life?
Home, clan, tripe, country, king, family... Show be even a hand full of monks or laypeople in your country or in other countries who have gone that far.
Dhamma is about to demount the pole and demount the flag. Yet, not long time ago foolish people even created such as a Buddhist flag. People have no sense at all today and Buddhism is at large nothing but national socialism, of interest of becoming and being and social means to get have a large support by those who actually do not understand the way of Dhamma.
So in that regard, if you like to play a sample, give up the flag and give up to make a label like that of a particular school your identity. That would how you would act for the sake of peace.
Nobody is able to govern you, if you do not identify here and there. And when the rulers of certain territory like to bind you, if you are not attached to it, what hinders you to walk on?
Government trying to get those who have worked out independency for themselves under control try something that does not work, they could only cut of there own possibilities to get taught a way the real liberation. Its like if people think they can put certain monks under TOS. The are fools. In such groups, what they have, are corrupt monks. Look where ever you find a certain Buddhist State online. Its all the same. Those who like to carry flags will met together with those seeking refuge in flags. They live in their own made prison, yet still there is an opening in their protective castle:
Your Temple, your palace and your borders
(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)

Thank you very much for the kind answer Bhante, i will add some articles if if  i can find.

Better read some suttas or spend with practicing, Upasaka Theravada. Really not of use, the new. They are everyday coming and going, people are born, grow old, become sick and die, what ever news there might be.

Yes Bhante, it is sad but true. We are left with no option but to watch Dhamma fall before lies and shamelessness. Lord Buddha was absolutely right indeed "It is not the outsiders that bring the fall of Buudhism,it is the ones who call themselves buddhists".  I needed to ask you something bhate, I run a Blog for people who are interested in learning Buddhism. I only upload teachings from good respected teachers and i do not say a word of my own there. i am suprised to see the flow of people from all around the world,it is only a month 1/2 days old. I was wondering if there are any....

of your sermons on the internet that i can find. I already attached a lot of videos by Ven. Yuttadhammo and the visitors love them. I do this site because i cant stand that i am helpless in all of these things. This site is what i do to make up my mind at least i will be able to make up my mind that i did something to help a Good Buddhist. Please let me know if there are any sermons from you on the internet.

No such things, no camera, do youtube. Just some written words. What every you like to take but less of formal thing, Upasaka might find on in the online "monastery" sangham.net. But be sure Atma is global not such as a respected one and not a teacher (and not really jewellery you would attract many) The Buddha is the teacher. And there are talented present teachers, many, really many. There is no better help that to simply look at your self, only by your sample you would touch others much more effective.

Pardon me Bhante, Why do you use the word "Atma" when writing? I do not know what it means, can you kindly explain?

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


text:
What is the meaning of "gross or subtle" physical food as nutriments?
In the Sammaditthi Sutta it describes the 4 nutriments, and the first one - physical food as nutriment - is said to be "gross or subtle". What is the meaning of these terms?
I read that the term for nutriment (ahara) should be understood akin to paccaya (condition). So I am guessing that "gross or subtle" has something to do with the nature of food as conditionings?
Edit: The commentary adds that "And here, in a basis that is gross, the nutritive essence is limited and weak; in one that is subtle, it is strong" and "it is the basis that dispels fatigue, but it is unable to preserve; but the nutritive essence preserves, though it cannot dispel fatigue. But when the two are combined they both dispel fatigue and preserve."

Food is manifold, Mr/mrs. Shai106.
There is food which sustains the physical body and there is food which sustains the mind. Food for the eye - consciousness, food for the ear - consciousness, nose - consciousness, thong - consciousness, body - consciousness, intellect - consciousness. These six kinds of food can be considered as subtle food.
If one for example compares the nutrition of certain gross food (normal burger) so ones joy will not last long. If one put the burger an sublime image on it, let be say "Shai106-honey burger" one would have both, the gross and the fine food and this will last long. If there is just the food of "Shai106" it does not last long. So when mind get good inter-nurished between sense and intellect, its a long lasting nourishment not so like it is if there is just one sense impressed.
That's why they do not sell cars any more but images. Not gross food but identification, so that it last long. This is but a simple practical explaining.
When we talk about moderation in food, all kinds of food are meant with it. Simply to maintain the life and not for the pleasure of it.
A straight explaining in regard of food, how to use food to abound food, can be found in the Puttamansa Sutta: A Son's Flesh
You may also, of course more in detail, read The Four Nutriments of Life - An Anthology of Buddhist Texts
Also a good talk, for your daily and practical use (since not only the food but also how to gain it is most relevant), in regard of food and livelihood, from the gross to the fine art of livelihood is: Right livelihood - The Noble Eightfold Path
In MN36 the talk is also on the matter of mental and bodily development and catches also the point.
If it should be more lit. Abhidhamma, this work might be of interest: Kalāpas – Groups of matter
(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)

Thank you kindly for your explanation and references. They have already expanded the scope of my understanding, and I hope to reread them tomorrow.