text:
I am seeking advice for blasphemous intrusive thoughts
I suffer with Pure obsessive compulsive disorder. I regularly have intrusive thoughts of all different kinds and I can be pretty anxious sometimes. Although I know that thoughts are only just thoughts, I can't help but feel that the thoughts have a negative karmic effect. I never agree with such thoughts and do my best to just maintain awareness of them and letting them go.
Although they sometimes do take over my mind, It's generally alright to deal with. However, earlier today, I was in the middle of a crude act. I.e masturbation. During the session, I had intrusive, blasphemous thoughts of a Bodhisattva. My mind had created a thought which involved seeing the bodhisattva in a sexual way. Even just typing this is making me feel extremely uncomfortable but I desperately need advice. It was obviously never my intention to think those thoughts. What are the karmic effects of this? I respect all Buddhas and all Bodhisattvas immensely. I respect all beings immensely. Have these thoughts planted a very negative seed?
I have a huge fear right now of a hell rebirth. Although I know that I didn't intend for those thoughts to happen and I know that I don't agree with such thoughts and I know that thoughts are just thoughts, do these kinds of thoughts hold a stronger 'weight' to them? I know that a violent thought is bad. But is a blasphemous thought towards a Buddha or bodhisattva really bad?
Please help. I'm grateful for any wise words.

Let me ask you this - which is more powerful, the original thought or the regret and repentance you have for having thought it?  The stronger one is more determinate of your karma than the weaker.

From my own experience, anything I think about -- e.g. people, places, feelings, bits of text -- is going to be recalled or come to mind sometimes. My mind produces bits of imagery more at less and random, like the waves on the ocean, little memories arise and cease.
So if you think about sex (or objects of lust), and about Bodhisattvas, I'm not very surprised that occasionally you remember or imagine both at more or less the same time.
I think that's an autonomous part of how the brain works -- it picks things (memories) more or less at random, and maybe tries/imagines them together to see if they fit somehow. And so the mind makes new connections -- apparently, I think that modern science says, that's part of learning and remembering and dreaming.
If you don't want thoughts of sex to arise at inappropriate times, you might find that would happen if you stop making a habit of thinking about it and wanting to think about it.
In summary I suppose that the fact you imagined these is the fruit of past kamma i.e. the result of what you thought about in the past. And the thought wasn't intentional, and you developed no further intention to act as a result of the thought (or the only "intention to act" that you developed was the intention to post a question about it on this site), perhaps to that extent it wasn't developing new kamma.

Thank you for your response - the mind putting things together randomly definitely seems to be right and definitely fits into what I'm experiencing. I think I've just developed a fear towards this aspect of the mind. It's as if I can't just let the thoughts slide in the same way as if I were to witness a horrific car accident, I wouldn't be able to just simply look away and move on. I'd 'have' to look, if that makes sense? Yet I've heard that the best thing to do when confronting these thoughts is simply to 'look away'.

I think I've just developed a fear towards this aspect of the mind. -- or it's just kind of unsatisfactory, tedious ... dukkha! :-)

as if I were to witness a horrific car accident -- right, so that reminds me of "post traumatic stress disorder", which can dominate some people's lives. People offer different advice: "look away", "look at it until it goes away", "accept its existence without reacting to it", etc... one therapy for PTSD is to try to remain mindful (and sense-conscious) of the present (instead of the past) -- e.g. be conscious of what is happening now (instead of being conscious of the car accident which isn't happening any more).

I do think I have a very slight complex post traumatic stress disorder due to my childhood. I'll practice what you suggested and try to be as sense-conscious as possible. I do notice that when I am actively trying to be aware of my surroundings, the mind and thoughts don't have much impact. Thanks for your input!

In short, it's a rare predicament but i doubt that you are the first or the only person experiencing this.
People have to deal with all kinds of conditioning and the general framework is universal.
Lust can not be contained because it's unreasonable in nature. People are lusting after the inappropriate and socially unacceptable, fondness of form it is not  called a perversion of view for a honorable expression.
In Buddhism all fondness of form is to be abandoned in it's entirety, the object of the desire is of no fundamental relevance.
Some people lust after wives of friends, family members or dead corpses, these predicaments are very common.
As it actually is lusting is shameful period. It is socially accepted to lust after certain people but not another.
I am not saying it's all the same but in the Dhamma it's all wrong and shameful as it's an act that cultivates passion which is a cruel thing to do towards oneself and another whoever it may be.
Lust when cultivated towards the acceptable eventually just burns like a wildfire and is not going to be  contained,  it doesn't conform to these arbitrary restrictions of acceptable & unacceptable as it is a corruption based on delusion and it is not a self nor personal, it simply begets irrational behavior.
Perception of unattractiveness counters lust.
From what i know, the merits you acquire by focusing on solving these issues can potentially negate going to hell as you can theoretically become even a non returner by abandoning lust completely not to speak of lower attainments and going to heavens.
That being said i guess that if you are going to spend your life being devoted to attacking with the hand then you are probably going to feel bad because of it in this life and the next.

Thank you for your insights. In that case, would it be acceptable to be Buddhist and have a long-term partner? If lust is uncontainable, then why are there happily married people with no intention of cheating or anything like that? I understand what you mean and perhaps there's a part of me that doesn't want to hear it due to delusion. What you are saying makes complete sense. However, would that not mean that every single person will just go into a frenzy of sexual misconduct at some point in their lives? People can't help how they lust but they can choose how they act upon it, right?

These tendencies develop over lifetimes and are also conditioned by circumstances into which people are born and find themselves in eventually. Therefore people are born with different inclinations due to past conditioning.

The Buddha explained that sensuality is a stumbling block on the path and these things impede the path generation. Perception of the attractive in the unattractive is not to be sustained & developed. As to whether that makes one non-Buddhist that depends on whether one has the faculties of faith, mindfulness, wisdom, persistence, concentration and whether one has love & affection for the Tathagata.

One who has those things id call a Buddhist, if a Buddhist does wrong-doing it's just that and Buddhists are certainly capable of wrong-doing. Wrong-doing is not called such because its budshist and complies with teachings.

People are stubborn and have a lot of attachment. Some monks refuse to keep certain rules thinking 'i can do with this transgression' and not seeing fault other people likewise think 'i can do with non-celibacy'. It's a spectrum of a lack of urgency in regards to attaining the goal and not seeing fault in transgressions.

What you said makes sense, I do understand that sensuality is something to be discarded to the best degree possible. I guess I'm somewhat reluctant to disregard it completely and take the eight precepts, for example, due to the 'pressure' I would feel to keep it up - especially at my relatively young age. I would feel bad if I took some sort of vow now only for me to go back on it a few years later and decide it isn't right for me.

In continuation of my last comment... similarly, with ordaining monks, I suppose each monk has their own path that leads them to complete renunciation right? Maybe they might travel the world before deciding to leave it or maybe they might go out of their way to eat their favourite chocolates before ordaining. Would this be a plausible thing? Or do monks, who ordain, simply leave their former lives on a whim? I'm interested to know because I have thoughts of ordaining one day later on in life. Yet I would also love to experience the world (moderately) before doing so.

Each to their own but you shouldn't underestimate the power of temporarily following 8 precepts ie on uposatha days or else. If you set the bar as high as a desire for complete renunciation, that intention might never appear strongly enough for going forth to occur. Also if you do go forth you might not find a good community and have to revert. Therefore i think moderation is advisable.

It's a war you know. Nobody can force you to go into this battle thought by the world to be unwinnable. You too are abused & harassed with these thoughts and how much worse can it get for you? It's up to you to fight the good fight or go along seeing your own defiled acts.

So what you suggest that temporarily following the 8 precepts on uposatha days now is far better than leaving it until a few years until I feel more comfortable completely integrating it into my life?

Yeah. Id suggest something like this. Making an opening for yourself in reasonable future to try occasionally putting in some work to generate the path effectively to best of your ability and that by emulating the arahants.

Thanks for your suggestion, I do appreciate it! In regards to your previous comment, I am definitely fighting the good fight to the best of my current ability. I've only become a lay Buddhist early this year so I understand I have a lot to learn. Again, knowing my own nature and anxieties, for me, going full-force into a completely new lifestyle is not the right way. I personally try not to think of it as a war because of that 'pressure' feeling. Regardless, I hope that we can prevail!

I don't think it better, id go as far as saying that it might make the difference in establishing the necessary perspectives on things and not establishing the neccesarry perspectives on things. One who goes forth on a weak desire, out of fear or due to some nervous breakdown is in ill shape. Much more can be expected by one who goes forth due to having cultivated a lot of good qualities as a lay person.

Actually, I take back what I said about me fighting to the best of my ability. I would be braking the precept of no false speech saying that. I recognise I have a lot to learn and a lot to improve on - I am definitely not fighting to the best of my ability due to various reasons such as mental health, general laziness etc. I guess it's good that I have found the Sangha though. Talking to all of you guys can be comforting.

Good fortune to you. Yet if he has merely faith, merely affection for the Tathaagata, that man, too, does not go to... states of woe. - Sarakaani Sutta

Thanks for sharing, good fortune to you too! So does that mean even just respect for the Buddha can project us far into a good state? If someone does not practice to the best of their ability but can appreciate and love the Buddha then that's implanting positive seeds?

Here is more context; "Take the case of another man. He is not even endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha. He is not joyous and swift in wisdom and has not gained release. But he has just these things: the faculty of faith, of energy, of mindfulness, of concentration, of wisdom. Yet if he has merely faith, merely affection for the Tathaagata, that man, too, does not go to... states of woe. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn55/sn55.024.wlsh.html#fn-8

Thank you friend. I will study and read more into the Suttas in due time! I appreciate the wisdoms you have shared.

On a seed; A disciple remains in such a [good] teaching, practicing in line with that teaching, practicing it properly, living in line with that teaching.This is what I call a good seed. https://suttacentral.net/sn55.25/en/sujato

But is a blasphemous thought towards a Buddha or bodhisattva really bad?
Yes, (but not so much need to get into in regard of "bodhisatta", a Bodhisatta isn't a good refuge at all), nothing, or less, more bad. Such may happen, and of course is heading on to hell. Yet, it fault is seen, if having made amend toward the Gems, taken Refuge anew, and resolve not to go after such in future, makes one pure again and able to walk on.
As for general avoiding, there is nothing more of help then proper assosiation and avoiding all which deals with doubts, give into specualation or even critic toward the Gems.
Pardon and Vandami (Veneration) is a practice usualky made regulary, mostly in evening chanting and before ceremonies, Sila-days. Heal refuge is very importand, otherwise one is off the track.
Good to seek out for a mature Parisa and to avoid the many destructive "Dhamma-places" within commercial medias and under doubters.
Bhante Thanissaro shortly translated a very related Sutta on that matter: The Great Lion’s Roar Discourse - Mahāsīhanāda Sutta
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for escape from this bond.]

Thanks for your answer, I am grateful. What if those thoughts are involuntary? Especially since I suffer from pure obsessive compulsive disorder? I have heard some other people say that karma is based on intentional action. If I experience and react to these thoughts without intending to do so, is this still hell-worthy?

Good householder, may he feel given to make use of the sphere here, since not a real proper place here and also not wished to talk on matters here.

How does one use that sphere? It looks interesting, how do I use the talkbox?

Who ever wishes for his own and others wel-being would not have much problems in giving into effort to take birth in this sphere, good householder. Not even necessary to hide name and face if dwelling in secure spheres or skilful deeds, puñña-kiriya-vatthu.

I would suggest you to handle the issue from different aspects.
If you have been suffering with obsessive compulsive disorder it's not bad to see a psychiatrist. Some times a small pill can alter the brain chemicals and can give you a great relief if there is a real disorder.
Secondly keep your spiritual practice(Reading, contemplating  & meditation) consistent without forcing yourself too much.
As chris pointed out and also from your own experience the way the thoughts pop up is random and we may not have much control over it. But consistent spiritual practice will help in reducing the frequency of occurrences. Slowly you will have the wisdom to see things while they are happening without being over powered by them. It's a gradual thing and isn't going to happen overnight. Even when over powered by obsessive thoughts, accept the failure without being too much self critical and continue your practice.
Bodhisattvas are not mere physical beings, they are embodiment of infinite compassion and wisdom.
Finally reflect on the story of Angulimala and be out of too much self criticism.
Though he was a brutal murderer he was saved by the wisdom of buddha. We are all in the same boat.

Thanks for the insights, I appreciate it. I'm somewhat reluctant to take pills because of the notorious side effects that may occur, although maybe I will try them out if this carries on despite diligent spiritual practice. You mentioned that having the wisdom to see things while they are happening, is this the mental faculty that subsequently lessens the impact of karma? Like with Angulimala?

@ Tomato Tomato, using an analogy from Ramana Maharshi, when the husband dies all of his wifes(assuming he has many), will be equally widowed.  So is the case when one is out of avijja all the bonds of karma are severed. Please don't take the analogy literately and i am not supporting polygamy or any other thing.

It is plain from your post that this has troubled you deeply and that you have waged a long struggle with obsessive thoughts. Let me first express empathy to you and support for your effort to heal what troubles you.
It’s critical to acknowledge that when we are sexually aroused, all logical thinking goes out the window, and through that open window any number of attractions may enter that we later, with clearer minds, find to be deeply disturbing. It never helps us to simply recoil in horror at our own minds, we have to look at what’s happening there. There are many possibilities. Perhaps a feeling of guilt over masturbating clashed unconsciously with a desire to be pure (represented by a Bodhisattva) and that tangled illogically into a sexual fantasy. Perhaps a sexualized Bodhisattva was seen as taboo and therefore exciting, as there is a power rush that comes from breaking sexual taboos. Perhaps your mind was unconsciously testing your own limits of faith to see if you’re willing to degrade a revered personification into a mere sexual aid. Perhaps it’s a mix, perhaps it’s none of the above, but I think it’s worth reflecting upon to try to determine why this thought arose. However, again I stress, don’t expect a totally logical answer. Sexual excitement is not logical, it’s sensory and emotional, which is why we can easily look back at our sexual acts and ask, “Why on earth did I do that?” The answer is because now you’re thinking logically and earlier you were following sensations, and those are two completely different thought processes.
In the end, trying to untangle the “why” is not as important as “so what do I do now?” The core effort for Buddhist laypeople in regard to sexuality is to be constantly aware of rising sensations, remove the fuel if they’re leading in an unhealthy direction, and only allow sensations to progress if they’re leading in healthy, loving directions. Sensations arise in everyone, whether you have OCD or not. The challenge for all of us is to do exactly what you said you’re already doing: “just maintain awareness of them” and let them go. But we can’t do that when we’re caught up in sensual pleasure, literally in the act of masturbation. Had that troubling thought come to you in a calm moment, probably you’d note it and let it go. But once we’re aroused and in the act, it’s much harder to stop the train of thoughts. So what to do now? I bet you already know the answer, it just helps to hear it from others: don’t beat yourself up, don’t be angry at yourself, it wasn’t something you intended to do. Recognize that illogical and disturbing attractions can arise when we give in to sensual pleasure, so we must be skillful at the outset to direct our sexual lives in a loving, healthy direction. When we consciously set that direction toward loving relationships (or if you’re single, on loving fantasies) then there’s much less risk of being pulled off course.
Your fear of a hell rebirth over a single bad moment feels to me like a Christian-influenced punishment mindset – do one thing wrong sexually and that’s it, you’re going to hell. Karma is not punishment meted out by an angry Other. Karma is the cause and effect results of your thoughts and actions. If you obsess over your failures and feel great anxiety, you’re putting yourself in hell right now. If you consistently and intentionally belittled personifications of goodness into sexual objects, that thoughtlessness and slavery to craving would leave you no better than an animal or hungry ghost and perhaps cause such a rebirth. But that’s not you. That’s not what happened. You had a momentary failure and now you’re doing the right thing, you’re working to understand it so you don’t repeat it. People who do that consistently and genuinely don’t need to worry about a bad rebirth. In life, as in meditation, we must constantly work through these failures of focus and intrusions of desire as we progress to stages where we master them more and more. Hope this helps, and best wishes to you.

Thank you so much for your kind and thoughtful response. I really appreciate it and it's because of people like you which is why I turn to the sangha for help. I don't think there was any 'uncontained' lust or sexual attraction at all to the bodhisattva at all. These kinds of intrusive thoughts occur to me even when I am not masturbating. I even experience these thoughts towards my family members. I even experience a variety of these intrusive thoughts which doesn't just involve sexual stuff - infact sexual intrusive thoughts are the least experienced. I usually... (continue on next comment)

experience harmful intrusive thoughts the most i.e thoughts where I am harming others in some way. I recognise that all of these thoughts, which could be sexual, blasphemous or harmful, are all based on fear. I realise that this is the nature of obsessive compulsive disorder, it's based on fear and what we reeeally don't want to happen. I had those blasphemous intrusive thoughts during an act of masturbation. I knew it was fear based but even so, I was overwhelmed with doubt (e.g what IF those thoughts weren't fear-based and It was 'secretly' lust-based?) and so I came here for advice.

I posed this question on reddit too, in the Buddhism subreddit. People told me that it was all to do with intention and that if I never intended to lust of the bodhisattva or otherwise engage with any those intrusive thoughts in 'that' way then I am fine. This has been quite helpful as I realise that we all experience all types of thoughts, from good to bad. I think us OCD suffers just tend to get very caught up in the bad which can be very overwhelming.

I think the realization that your OCD is fear-based is a valuable insight. Regarding fear and intention, that gets back to the root of Buddhism - being aware of desire and delusion, both of which are the basis for fear and intention. It's always a challenging, endless effort to maintain that awareness of desire and investigation into delusion, but I hope the support you find among the people in your life helps you continue to succeed.

One last thought. Since you feel your OCD is largely fear-based, I wonder if you would find relief and stability through meditation on the Brahma-viharas - loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity. This is a common practice, you can google for the relevant suttas and practice approaches. Perhaps it would increase your overall sense of goodwill and ease and be an antidote to fear.

Thanks for your suggestion of loving-kindness meditation, I've been suggested this by others too and so I will dedicate more effort towards it. I've noticed a few times that when I have done metta meditation, I end up crying and releasing the supressed fears within me - powerful stuff!


text:
How to quit a hardcore porn addiction?
Basically I trained my brain to be dependend on porn over the last 10 years(im 21).
Is like a crack addiction but I have infinite crack at 3 seconds away from me,on my phone and laptop.
I tried to install filters but it takes a few minutes to disable them,even these of them with password.
Please help me, it ruins my mental integrity, it makes me feel dirty and filthy. It makes my mind weaker and it causes a lot of brainfog.Also I become obsessed with porn stars and porn scenes.
I am not a budhist,neither a religious one per se,but I know that God exists.
Also I've been meditating a lot in the last months,but I still fail to abstain,and after one relapse there comes 100 more because of the coolidge effect.
I am very open minded to anything.
Thank you in advanve, much peace and love.

Find better food.

@Andreivolkov example of better food that similar level of dopamine?

@littlestar for example Sports, Performing Arts.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to overcome fear for lost of opportunity?
I get fear when I'm trying to choose something over buddhist teaching.

Listening to Dhamma instead of studying something else
Reject a job offer to get some free time
Not having relationship (with a person who have great qualities) because it increases clinging, lust etc. and it causes suffering

My doubt is that those opportunities may help my journey to enlightenment.

Having a good job may make free time later
Good person may help me to understand buddhism more.

So, How can I decide what to give up and what not to give up ? Prince Siddhartha gave up lot of great things. (Kindom, Wife, Parents). But I don't have such a great mind like him. I have ignorence. So how to overcome this fear? Did Lord Buddha mention these kind of situations in his teachings?

In Buddhism, you can choose to be a lay follower, who observes the five precepts and the non-noble version of the path (which has defilements remaining) as a lay person, or you can follow the Noble Eightfold Path of a monk who renounces the worldly life.
If you choose to be a lay follower, then you obviously need a source of income and you can choose to have a life partner - in both cases, subject to the five precepts, Right Action, Right Speech and Right Livelihood. You may also need to spend some time learning non-Dhamma knowledge that may help your worldly life. To feel guilty or remorse for any of that is not skillful.
Please read this answer to "Can a Buddhist own and run a billion dollar business?". That should remove your doubts about the lay follower path. Also in this answer, you can see that lay followers are told to set aside some time for meditation. Also please read this answer to "Is it “bad” to want a “materialistic” happiness?"
So, you should make your choice of being a lay follower or a renunciate, and follow the path laid out, without feeling guilty or remorse. You can also change your mind later. But don't choose to remain a lay follower and feel conflicted about it - that's unskillful.

To fear the opportunity of an occasion to make merits, to do not follow an arosen kusala-citta (one of non-harming, non-disputing, renouncing, giving), is what the Buddha had called something that needs really to be feared, avioded.
As good householder sees here: as soon as starting to rationalize, giving doubt changes, all good gained decays, and another seldom opportunity fades, and not sure if another arises, as it's stream had died off by not nourishing it, giving into.
So it's actually this which should be feared, or better to give into what's not cutting of bad (a-ku-sala). What isn't given, hold on, is lost.
The earlier one goes into the holly life, the lesser his many risks to never be able, got caught along the way, and the lesser the changes to bend straight again.
It's not possible to increase chances by taking and trades in the world, such is just the way of excuses made up by defilements.
Nothing to mention if one with doubt seeks advices by doubters, a prisoner asking prisoners how to escape... kind of association is ones gain or lose.
The Sublime Buddhas teachings are full of mentions of failing people and the reasons why.
And, as mentioned: It's very needed having  and maintaining a relationship (with a person who have great qualities, one more advanced in real liberality, Nissaya) because it bonds one to desire toward liberation, leading to an end of suffering.
AN 1.071-080: Kalyāṇamittādivaggo: Good companionship and others contains the particular answers from the source of Unbond.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape from this wheel]

One idea that might help is to focus more on what you can give instead of what you can acquire.
You say you're worried about losing opportunity as if you want to gain or have opportunity -- have job, have relationship, "my journey", etc.
Instead you might wonder, "what can I do (what option do I have) that is most helpful, ethical, generous?" -- towards others.

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


text:
Is the Tathagata 'special'?
Mahayana or Theravada, or any other offshoot. Is a Buddha an exception? Or a personification?

You need to define “special.”

The question is not clear enough. What does "special", "exception" and "personification" mean here?

To tell someone is special, we have to compare him/her with someone else. So the answer for your question is entirely depend on whom the blessed one compare with. The number of sets which all the persons/things other than blessed one belonged to is countless. So please narrow your question to something like "Is Tathagata special from another Tathagata?" or "Is the Tathagata special from other Arahants?" or "Is the Thatagata special from puthujjana?" or "Is the Thatagata special from other conditioned things?"

I can only answer for the last part of your question until you change the question. The blessed one said "Sabbe Dhamma Anatta". Here, "Dhamma" means all including Nibbana. So the Tathagata is not an exception. In other words, the blessed one is also no-self.

It is not personification. There is evidence that Gotama Buddha exists in India. He is special so he was called Samma Sambuddha.
================
when the Buddha is designated a sammā Sambuddha, "a perfectly enlightened one," this highlights not only the fullness of his enlightenment but his authority and reliability as a spiritual teacher.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/arahantsbodhisattvas.html

Why does good householder Ilya, so long and often wisely involved, as such a fullish question, actually knowing for her self? Why would on join a "Tathagata-form" at first place, if perceiving him as common?
Everybody, seeing the Dhamma could see the Tathagata, and in as far every not blind person could reach same "Tathagata-hood", once there, is common under Arahats. And also "fox and sour graps"-thinking is common under those not inside or heading toward different ancestorship.
Although householders question could be marked as special unwise, it's actually common under common. If liking common... well then... the world stands open for such.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, nor for delight in pseudoliberalism, but for escape from this wheel]


text:
What would be the relationship between mindfulness, enlightenment and incubation?
From Incubation (psychology) - Wikipedia:

Incubation is one of the four proposed stages of creativity, which are preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification. Incubation is defined as, when attending to a different task, humans forget about the previous unsuccessful attempts and can engage with the task anew, often leading to finding the solution. Incubation is related to intuition and insight in that it is the unconscious part of a process whereby an intuition may become validated as an insight. Incubation substantially increases the odds of solving a problem, and benefits from long incubation periods with low cognitive workloads.

I see that incubation is what essentially what Buddhism would call as "enlightenment":

The experience of leaving a problem for a period of time and then finding that the difficulty evaporates on returning to the problem, or, even more striking, that the solution "comes out of the blue" when thinking about something else, is widespread. Many guides to effective thinking and problem solving advise the reader to set problems aside for a time.

However, incubation seems to be directly contradict with mindfulness (be here now), as it can be essentially summed up as:

the process of thinking about a problem subconsciously while being involved in other activities

Is my understanding correct?

Their principle relation is they are merely words and concepts with obvious and less obvious "mental molding". Mindful of the process or not, setting aside or not, we can not fully explain in words even the simplest of sensations, like lifting your arm, or the taste of fruit. Words are extremely limiting if you truly want to describe your complete experience of reality. For example, if you see a "table", you will limit your perception and mentally push aside the potential of this object being a drum, a raft, or firewood.
As long as one thinks of enlightenment as the "solution", they will "push aside" the reality right in front of them. Attainment does not "promote" one vision of reality over all other ones. It is the concepts limiting our vision of reality that are shown to be void of distinction.
The same goes for "incubation". Most "problems" are mental constructs based on language and grammar. For example, in Indo-Germanic languages such as English, a verb must have an object. So we get strange constructions like "it's raining", or "problems have dimensions" and think of these constructs as real. What you describe as incubation is used in some Buddhist schools in some form or another, for example with Zen Koans. It is however not the same the experience as attainment. It's more like a "mental tripwire" that  a teacher will set up, that lets your mind stumble out of its preconceptions, for just a moment. The "lightning that strikes" at this moment is a glimpse of reality before it is conceptualized.

On a cold winter night, a big snow storm hit the city and the temple
where Dan Xia served as a Monk got snowed in. Soon it ran out of heating
fuel and  everybody was shivering in the cold.
Dan Xia began to remove the wooden Buddha Statues from the display and put
them into the fireplace.
"What are you doing?" the monks asked. "You are burning our holy religious
artifacts! You are insulting the Buddha!"
"Are these statues alive and do they have Buddha nature?" asked Master Dan Xia.
"Of course not," replied the monks. "They are made of wood. They cannot have Buddha Nature."
"Then they are just pieces of firewood and therefore can be used as heating
fuel," said Master Dan Xia. "Can you pass me another piece of firewood
please? I need some warmth."
The next day, the snow storm had gone and Dan Xia went into town and brought back some replacement Buddha Statues. After putting them on the displays, he began to kneel down
and burn incense sticks to them.
"Are you worshiping firewood?" asked the monks.
"No. I am treating these statues as holy artifacts and am honoring the Buddha." replied
Dan Xia.

Mindfulness means to recollect, bring to mind & keep in mind preexisting, even learned, knowledge/understanding, as follows:

When one has heard the Dhamma ...one recollects that Dhamma and thinks it
over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus... recollects
that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occasion the enlightenment
factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that occasion the
bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness; on that
occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to fulfilment
by development in the bhikkhu.
SN 46.3

In other words, mindfulness is about obedience & conformity rather than about individual creativity. It follows Buddhist mindfulness has no relationship to the Wallas staged model of creativity.

In the Wallas stage model, creative insights and illuminations may be
explained by a process consisting of 5 stages:
(i) preparation (preparatory work on a problem that focuses the
individual's mind on the problem and explores the problem's
dimensions),
(ii) incubation (where the problem is internalized into the
unconscious mind and nothing appears externally to be happening),
(iii) intimation (the creative person gets a "feeling" that a solution
is on its way),
(iv) illumination or insight (where the creative idea bursts forth
from its preconscious processing into conscious awareness);
(v) verification (where the idea is consciously verified, elaborated,
and then applied).


text:
I am asking personal help, I want to renounce my home?
Sorry for what I want seek help from someone. The matter is most serious.
I belong to middle class family of Indian village. My father died when I was 7 years old. My mother took very pain to raise me up to higher education and then I was seeking a job. That time is very hard for me, for I failed at every interview. Life is full of sorrow and pocket barely have any money to cope with any difficulties which I received from my mother time to time.
Then I nearly broke and felt the pain when my sister's husband beat her in one instance. I literally cried and pain was dual as I am even jobless. It was year 2012 then, my time almost lost in loneliness and solitude. I started praying and reading Buddha's word and found something to come from pain. I heartily followed Buddha's path of purity upto my level and when I eat, I eat a little with my attention verily focus when I eat.
Suddenly a light came, that was year 2012. The light goes on expanding year on year till 2013 and my mind attained full of bliss. I could stand on my terrace like a lamb immersed in the bliss for nearly 8 months. Its like I am at the feet of Lord. Afterwards when the bliss fades away, there comes the insight.
The word started appearing on my fore and I concentrated it day by day. But, suddenly when the word appears, I felt heavenly sound like beating of drum or flute playing, I move to that with my focus from where this sound coming. Then there appear 2nd word and I felt very joy, like I have found someone. Its like my Teacher is appeared before me. I concentrated day and night to be with that word.
I surprisingly got the job in Bank as a officer, even in interview I gave silly answers as my mind want to be monk at that time. 2013-2017 I work in the bank, but I feel I am going back towards the painful world. In 2017 I left that job,as people scolded me as I left the Government job, including my mother. My foot turn back to home, to tell my story and path to my mother. How I got it and it's the path choose me to leave the job. I felt before leaving my 62 year mother alone, I have to tell the way. In that period, something flashed in closed eye and I attained vision, like union with teacher.
Then in 2019 I got covid19 like symptoms all over my body, even before China declared the outbreak. Nothing happened to me except same symptoms of covid19 for days. After some time even that symptoms vanished and I felt amaze the very people on earth suffering the same. I felt again dejected, would I be the epicenter and responsible person to death of many.
Now I am lost and I desperately want to leave home. Can't do with my 62 year old mother. She will be alone. No one to care for her. I sometimes felt, somebody attacked me, like Mara. Or someone is taking the pain of this humanity by giving me Covid19.
I felt sometime that I am sacrificial person. Sometime, the words of Buddha comes to me, 'Only few saints and sages can't revive the pain of mankind, king asks: so what you would do then? Buddha replied: I don't know'. May be he was searching to relieve the pain of mankind with heavenly help. May be he sacrificed himself, just like what is happening to me.
I need a guide now. What shall I do? Should I leave home right away leaving my mother behind alone?
Sorry for the personal matter to bother everyone. But, may be someone can help! May all being happy!

You can search my story on my Facebook account how I started telling others to surrender, act in purity. The words came automatically to my mouth. Even in Bank I use to give this message to my customers. They all laughed at me, everytime. Timelog is there from 2012-2019. I am not lying.

Interpersonal skills are necessary to get a job. I can get a job at any time. But my individuality vanished and in earning I lost my interest. I have good amount of saving that my mother can be taken care of. I am asking help from masters. In Particular, Buddhist teachers!

Related: Do monks not have responsibility towards parents and family?, Permission of your parents in your renunciation, Support for Parents, Duty to parents?

Have you thought about finding a teacher? Someone that can guide you on the path.

Nicely detailed question; please be very welcome to discussion re your questions and aspects of Buddhism in 'Buddhism1' chat room:, which can be accessed by clicking on the 'Chat' link in the Buddhism column in the bottom left part of this screen, & then clicking on 'Buddhism1' in the window that opens. Thank you :)

Now I have found out the answer. I met one Monk which he said of no religion. He beg from house to house. I told my story with him. His eyes filled with pity and tear. He said, You have attained the truth, only not understand what has happened. He said, same happened to him. When he attain vision, his body suffered from trauma of unknown disease. He said , this material world is a property of not of our master, it belongs to time or death. When a seeker crosses from this time binding, by piercing it, the king of death beat the drum of death. He said its a blow to the king of death.

He said, It' when you have attained truth, leave everything else you grasped as not me or mine. Then automatically you are on the other side safe shore. He told me to renounce everything and become one with light.Unless the deluder or king of death, confuse you for some time, even though you are free.Even though you are free, it delude in many ways that you are bound. I touches his feet and left in amazement and new kind of freedom.Thanks all for your kind words and compassion which you shows towards me.

I am leaving my home, although the Monk said, you have already leaved everything, but leave inwardly and outwardly and see the real free man! I pray all being may happy and free. Sadhu!

There once was a potter named Ghaṭīkāra, who was the chief supporter of Buddha Kassapa. He was a lay person, deeply devout, and was once asked why he did not go forth.

MN81:11.2: ‘Dear Ghaṭīkāra, you have heard this teaching, so why don’t you go forth from the lay life to homelessness?’

His answer was simple:

MN81:11.3: ‘Don’t you know, dear Jotipāla, that I look after my blind old parents?’

Ghaṭīkāra was also a non-returner.

MN81:18.6: Ghaṭīkāra has gone for refuge to the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha. He doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit sexual misconduct, lie, or take alcoholic drinks that cause negligence.  He has experiential confidence in the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha, and has the ethics loved by the noble ones.  He is free of doubt regarding suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation.  He eats in one part of the day; he’s celibate, ethical, and of good character.  He has set aside gems and gold, and rejected gold and money.  He’s put down the shovel and doesn’t dig the earth with his own hands.  He takes what has crumbled off by a riverbank or been dug up by mice, and brings it back in a carrier. When he has made a pot, he says,  “Anyone may leave bagged sesame, mung beans, or chickpeas here and take what they wish.” He looks after his blind old parents.  And since he has ended the five lower fetters, Ghaṭīkāra will be reborn spontaneously and will become extinguished there,

The story of Ghaṭīkāra shows that one can take refuge in the Buddha, the teaching and the Saṅgha while living a simple life at home.
May your suffering ease in the limitless.

Thank you, sir. For your kind answer. This story of Ghatikara certainly have some message to tell and act on. I know what this story means to me. Thanks once again. Also my best wishes for you and entire seekers to be free of pain. Sadhu!

First of all it's importand to do not take ones ideas higher as what one would be taught and trained once gotten accept by a serious Sangha, propably after a longer "test-period" as good householder seemingly is a "previous member of other sects". If good householder could imagine to lower himself for a secure going forth, then good for the secound point:
Good householder should speak in any case open and with lot of gratitude with his mother on his aspiration, and then, if sure, asking her for going forth and accept her decision.
Of course good anyway to seek out for a Sangha and a teacher (personal Nissaya) whom good householder may ask if he accepts him, so that he could announce one when asking for acceptance. Good also, to get more familar to community life in chosen monastery. All much good householder would need to look for, for now. And nothing to worry, since one serious and not just confused, the Devas will open the gates.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape from this wheel]


text:
What are the effects of discourageing one from going forth?
Since popular, one thinking compassionate, what might be it's effect, thought that's actually, after assisting ones benefactors, giving, the undertaking most praised by wise? So only foolish, or of much harm for others, oneself?
The same like if encouraging one to leave the holly life?
What are the roots, mind qualities, giving one such deeds set?
How should association with people not praising and seeking the full holly life be seen?
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for escape from this wheel]

This question is presumably related to this answer.

That's good householders pulling in. Better then to assume things in relation would be to reflect why he himselves may discourage and what the effects of such, and cause of such, will be.

Does he see any discouragement in this answer, and if why? As for Sila no transressions could be seen there, yet mind, kamma... the doers known secret. Nevertheless "funny" answer, thinking that easy leaving home and duties for low purposes, maybe thinking even equal this Ariya-Puggala, and of course even no blind parents and social networks "doing" there duties while consuming elsewhere... But that's another story of defilement.

Since here an area where discourage of going forth is nearly obligated: there are hundreds of answers dispraising goning forth and in-pulling for ones feed.

Since all meta (some metta), does good householder have questions in relation of the questions understanding? Just in case he looks for doing moderation and wishes to keep things simple on topic.

In the tradition of Thailand, every Buddhist man ordain as monk for a rainy season before get married. Therefore, in Thailand, many monks are not encouraging many more men to remain in the Holy Life. The Holy Life is bitter for a man without virtue that has strong survival instinct of "self".
When I live in the monastery, for many years, I see many defiled monks lusting after women. It was good to see these men disrobe and find the motherly warmth they needed from a woman.
In the Bible, the Saint Paul said: "It is good... to remain unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with lust".
The Dhammapada says:

Difficult is life as a monk; difficult is it to delight therein

There are many evil characters and uncontrolled men wearing the saffron robe. These wicked men will be born in states of woe because
of their evil deeds.

It would be better to swallow a red-hot iron ball, blazing like fire, than as an immoral and uncontrolled monk to eat the alms of the
people.

The Buddha taught to go forth and be a monk, persevering and achieving the goals of the holy life.
Otherwise, if that is not possible, then try to do well as a lay person, persevering and achieving the goals of the worldly life.
Even the latter is better than growing old, achieving nothing at all.
From Dhammapada 155-156:

They, who in youth have neither led the life of Purity nor
have acquired wealth, waste away in dejection like decrepit herons on
a drying pond deplete of fish.
They, who in youth have neither led the Life of Purity nor
have acquired wealth, lie helplessly like arrows that have lost
momentum, moaning and sighing after the past.

The story in the traditional commentary:

While residing at the Migadaya wood, the Buddha uttered Verses (155)
and (156) of this book, with reference to the son of Mahadhana, a rich
man from Baranasi.
The son of Mahadhana did not study while he was young; when he came of
age he married the daughter of a rich man, who, like him, also had no
education. When the parents on both sides died, they inherited eighty
crores from each side and so were very rich. But both of them were
ignorant and knew only how to spend money and not how to keep it or to
make it grow. They just ate and drank and had a good time, squandering
their money. When they had spent all, they sold their fields and
gardens and finally their house. Thus, they became very poor and
helpless; and because they did not know how to earn a living they had
to go begging. One day, the Buddha saw the rich man's son leaning
against a wall of the monastery, taking the leftovers given him by the
samaneras; seeing him, the Buddha smiled.
The Venerable Ananda asked the Buddha why he smiled, and the Buddha
replied, "Ananda, look at this son of a very rich man; he had lived a
useless life, an aimless life of pleasure. If he had learnt to look
after his riches in the first stage of his life he would have been a
top-ranking rich man; or if he had become a bhikkhu, he could have
been an arahat, and his wife could have been an anagami. If he had
learnt to look after his riches in the second stage of his life he
would have been a second rank rich man, or if he had become a bhikkhu
he could have been an anagami, and his wife could have been a
sakadagami. If he had learnt to look after his riches in the third
stage of his life he would have been a third rank rich man, or if he
had become a bhikkhu he could have been a sakadagami, and his wife
could have been a sotapanna. However, because he had done nothing in
all the three stages of his life he had lost all his worldly riches,
he had also lost all opportunities of attaining any of the Maggas and
Phalas."

How could they answer... since if knowing, if aware, they wouldn't do such simply to justify their short-comings and doubt... evil, evil, evil... really misfortune if caught in such association.
And yes, it can be down-voted if such helps a little.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other householding-trades, but for escape from this wheel]


text:
How come movies/video games decrease the motivation to do buddhist practises?
I practised buddhism a lot in holidays given due to Covid-19. I listen to dhamma and meditate each and every day. When my college started, I was not ready for the exam. I got stress. Somehow I found some interesting videos on a video streaming platform and I watched videos such as movies, gaming videos and funny videos. It helped me to forget the problems. At the beggining, I had a lot of resistance to watch that kind of useless videos. But at the end, I lost that resistance. Watching a video became nothing. Even after 2 months gone, I still watching videos. I passed days without doing anything related to buddhism. I can't be mindfull as before.
What happened to me? How those videos cause me to lost my interest for buddhism? How I lost that resistance? Have you any personal experiences like this? How can I get back to that previous state?

Meainwhile, many gamers follow Theravada Buddhism ;-)

What happened to me? How those videos cause me to lost my interest for buddhism? How I lost that resistance?

I suspect something you wrote points to the answer – you wrote that college work stressed you out, and these videos “helped me forget the problems.” People respond to stress in their own way, e.g. overeating, indulging in drugs or sensual pleasure, or zoning out on YouTube videos. They’re all easy distractions that are pleasurable in the short term and an escape from your troubles. As you’ve found, watching videos online can become compulsive – there are always endless more videos to watch, endless suggestions and enticements. It may not cause the same obvious physical downsides caused by overeating or drug use, but there is a definite negative effect as it takes over your time and stunts your motivation for other, healthier endeavors. Internet addiction in general is a very real thing, and perhaps reading a bit about it will give you some insight as to how your mind has been affected by your time online.

How can I get back to that previous state?

Not to get technical, but there’s no such thing as going back to a previous state, nor should you want to. You’re currently learning a challenging but important lesson – distractions will always exist, and now you know that a weak spot for you is internet videos. Guess what? You’re going to get through this, and then you’re going to encounter the next challenge and overcome that one, and so on. And at each step you’re going to become wiser about pitfalls, how to avoid them, and how to climb out of them. I suggest you start by reading (or re-reading) about the five hindrances and their antidotes. Of the five hindrances to progress – sensory desire, ill will, sloth-torpor, restlessness-worry and doubt – you seem to be plagued by a mix of the last three. They each have their specific antidotes, in this case such aspects as rousing energy, having a schedule/routine for meditation, and developing contentment and trust in the process. Underlying all of this are the constants of Buddhism: being mindful of our thoughts and impulses, investigating them to understand them, and detaching from them as you realize they’re not “you” and they’re just as transient as anything.
I believe having a schedule/routine for meditation is critical. As the body and mind get used to it, we just automatically do it and are less likely to skip it in favor of distractions. Keep to the schedule and give yourself time to get in a groove. Don’t beat yourself up if it’s tough at first. I noticed that the election week stress threw me off, and I’m just now getting more focused day by day. Best wishes to you.

Whatever you give frequent attention becomes the inclination of mind.
This is similar to how recitation & memorizing works, as more attention is given the recall becomes easier.
Video games are in the scope of sensuality and  it becomes the inclination of mind.
It is based on tendencies that are wrong such the perception of attractiveness in the unattractive. It cultivates wrong path.

could it be because those entertainments are one of five hindrances?

Simple answer. But I think, this is the best answer. Thanks :)

This answer was flagged as low quality. Is it a comment or an answer? If it's an answer, maybe you can explain which hindrances they refer to and why. And any other details. Thanks.

I remember watching a YouTube talk by Ven. Dhammavuddho who stated that the five hindrances obsess and enslave a person, not just during meditation but also at other times.

At many times in our lives, the food given us is given in faith. This is certainly true of monks. It is also often true of householders who have yet to earn a living.

AN7.72:11.2: Which is better—to have a strong man force your mouth open with a hot iron spike and shove in a red-hot copper ball, burning, blazing, and glowing, that burns your lips, mouth, tongue, throat, and stomach before coming out below dragging your entrails? Or to enjoy alms-food given in faith by well-to-do aristocrats or brahmins or householders?”

The Buddha's message here is sobering:

AN7.72:14.1: “I declare this to you, mendicants, I announce this to you! It would be better for that unethical man to have a strong man grab him by the head or shoulders and make him sit or lie down on a red-hot iron bed or seat.  Why is that? Because that might result in death or deadly pain. But when his body breaks up, after death, it would not cause him to be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.  But when such an unethical man enjoys the use of beds and seats given in faith by well-to-do aristocrats or brahmins or householders, that brings him lasting harm and suffering. When his body breaks up, after death, he’s reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell.

Being mindful of the faith others have in us, we bear what has to be born, turn off the TV, take exams. And if the exams are stressful, meditation can help us let go of anxiety so that we might express our gratitude for that which was given by working or practicing for our own benefit and others.

Young householder,
It can happen in regard of asking and answering of questions for the sake of entertainment too!
Yet the mind, not free from desire after sensuality, from the even greater desire for becoming, gaining a stand, needs, if not inclined toward Jhana, an entertaining, a livelihood.
Good to seek out for a "hobby", kammatthan, something given, causing no harm for others, oneself, and dedicated not toward the low and equal but upwardly, toward the Gems.
Giving not at proper time, toward those without metta, Sila, wrong view, ones sacrifices do not bear much to no fruits, even bind one down: the way of sacrifices by the "commpassionate" fools... for it's difficult to lower ones stand and serve more sublime yet feed ones defilement when gaining the notion "look, I help!"
No Sila, no notions of generosity, no desire to renounce... nothing but wrong conncentration for the sake of compensation, the sake of investment toward stand, toward home, house.
Gained some reputation, an approve, fought another battle, decay... toward another game, question, quest in conquering with improper attention another wind-mill monster under run-a-mill.
One would be much wiser to leave the gamers and players domains and seek for sacrifices far aways from drug addicted, dedicated toward something worthy for gifts, for there is no incease of happiness to be excepted investing in what's dedicated for the world.
Encouragement to avoid pirvat, commercial social medias
No Sila, after sensual pleasures, slander around, no conncentration, no exame, lose in this and next world...

(3) "What are the six channels for dissipating wealth which he does not pursue?
(a) "indulgence in intoxicants which cause infatuation and heedlessness;
(b) sauntering in streets at unseemly hours;
(c) frequenting theatrical shows;
(d) indulgence in gambling which causes heedlessness;
(e) association with evil companions;
(f) the habit of idleness.

"Free" social medias, fb, google, exchange... incl. their inhabitats, are (e). All duties and advices on good friends for young householder here: The Layperson's Code of Discipline
Care for you duties in your relation and don't follow the fools who believe themselfs being monks while holding on house. The food you gain isn't given in faith but as a trade which asks for compensation. Otherwise you fool yourself double, end up as lossy beggar who still clings to sensuality and coupling in his old... standing behind the walls, feeding on left overs by degenerated social-monks shares... running around and citing texts like a small girl dreaming being princess i wonderworld.
[Note that this is not given for stacks, exchange and other world-binding entertainments or to maintain a mast-pet relation, but to escape from this wheel]


text:
Does one usually "need" to earn a living, or does on usually "want" to earn a living?
...and why?
Is the a case where one would neither need nor want?
What's (or would be) a "trade" purified on one or both sides and it's quality, effect, if given into? That of one pulling one out, not in.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, or other world-binding earning but for a pull out of the wheel.]

A monk does not have to earn a living, but can get his food from alms.
However, what about a layperson? In the context of a layperson, the Buddha condemns laziness and making excuses for not working.
From Sigalovada Sutta:

And what six ways of squandering wealth are to be avoided? Young man,
heedlessness caused by intoxication, roaming the streets at
inappropriate times, habitual partying, compulsive gambling, bad
companionship, and laziness are the six ways of squandering wealth.

Also from the same sutta:

"These are the six dangers inherent in laziness: saying, 'It's too
cold,' one does not work; saying, 'It's too hot,' one does not work;
saying, 'It's too late,' one does not work; saying, 'It's too early,'
one does not work; saying, 'I'm too hungry,' one does not work;
saying, 'I'm too full,' one does not work. With an abundance of
excuses for not working, new wealth does not accrue and existing
wealth goes to waste."

From Parabhava Sutta:

The man who is fond of sleep and company, inactive and lazy, and
manifesting anger —this is the cause of his downfall.

In the sutta below, the Buddha praises the five benefits obtained from "wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained".
From Adiya Sutta:

"There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones — using the
wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the
strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow,
righteous wealth righteously gained — provides himself with pleasure &
satisfaction, and maintains that pleasure rightly. He provides his
mother & father with pleasure & satisfaction, and maintains that
pleasure rightly. He provides his children, his wife, his slaves,
servants, & assistants with pleasure & satisfaction, and maintains
that pleasure rightly. This is the first benefit that can be obtained
from wealth.

"begging" for alms is for an ordinary person also just a livelihood. Good householder hasn't got the essence of the question, aside of the fact that one livelihood isn't something gained by birth but a matter of coice, unless an animal... Again the question was about want and need and what's even beyound.

...aside... does householder find a hand full of people who "amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained" around him...

It's "fantastic" how improper attention rules the crowd and rulers here...

@SamanaJohann From the suttas quoted (and also others like Dhammapada 155-156), it sounds like lay persons begging for alms instead of earning their livelihood, can be considered laziness. Can you find any sutta stating that lay persons can beg for alms, as part of their Right Livelihood (for lay persons)?

Could good householder focus on the question? (Sure, taking of what is given, without trade, is highest livelihood, but hard to do. My person had the "luck" while still living in white and observing 10 precepts. Sure, often it wasn't much or things like a month instant noodles, while living on given place.) But again, the question is about "want" certain, "need" to do task, and beyond (just a field for merits.

(Also again, there are pretty many beggars out there, yet not at all noble, even in robes. A Non-returner, still needing to look for his old mother is reported being a trash collector of which he then sold. Many monks, btw. are actually trading like householder, sometimes much more wants and desires, and wrong livelihood (Sg 13) isn't unusuall. It's not a matter of lay or just robes at all.)

Living from social support is a very usual wrong livelihood for example (or large parts of ones living, just thinking on medical things...) or dwelling for "free" and use things for "free", especially in internet, without compensations.

Everyone needs to earn a livelihood.
The Dhamma is ādi-kalyāṇaṁ majjhe-kalyāṇaṁ pariyosāna-kalyāṇaṁ; beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle, beautiful in the end.
Similar to a beautiful woman who earns livelihood being a beautiful fashion model; the livelihood of a bhikkhu is to be an example of beautiful conduct.

"Go forth, o bhikkhus, for the good of the many, for the happiness of
the many, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, for the
good, for the happiness of gods and men. Let not two go by one way.
Preach the doctrine that is beautiful in its beginning, beautiful in
its middle, and beautiful in its ending. Declare the holy life in its
purity, completely both in the spirit and the letter."
Mahavagga, Vinaya Pitaka.

"Everyone needs to earn a livelihood.", who says aside of ditthi? No body needs, yet the Aharahants want, of cause, other then Arahats. Useless and thoughless polemic, like always. For how would a loosy person make his living differently here...

Noble Eightfold Path includes Right Livelihood as a factor.


text:
Is begging for alms acceptable for lay persons?
Receiving alms is definitely part of the monastic life.
Is begging for alms acceptable for lay persons?
Is begging for alms considered Right Livelihood for lay persons?
Is begging for alms considered skillful for lay persons, compared to earning their livelihood in accordance with the five precepts, principles of Right Livelihood and teachings of the Pali Canon (or other scriptures)? Or is it considered laziness?

I don't see fault in begging. Some people are annoyed by it and i think that is worthy of consideration but it is generally an honest way to make a living as i see it.

I dont know how the word 'begging' came into Buddhism. BHIKSHA is a sanskrit word which translates nearly to Begging in Modern Indian social sense. But the word is rooted into Pali as the donation to Bhikku. This 'alms'(please dont consider the modern English meaning ) is not the result of begging. In the early era of Buddhism, the bhikkus/bhikkunis were Teachers/Gurus to the common men, and in return to their teaching / services to the Society ; their daily needs as Food / cloths were given as the form of donation. These kind of donations are utilized for the management of Dhamma Sanghas.
Later only, the Bhiksha word became derogatory due to the social religious changes in India. Donation is a main source of resources in major religions, Xianity for example, they run churches by donation. But in Buddhism, it not about begging / taking for granted. The Bhiksha we give to Bhikkus/Bhikkunis are the reward we offer to the teachers.
thank you

It has been suggested the word "bhikkhu" means "one who sees the danger" (from bhayaṃ ikkhatīti: bhikkhu).

When one is observing Uposatha one is living on charity or donations of others.
Also in many traditional meditation centres which do not charge a fee, this is the case, as one is living on the donations or charity of others.
This is not as apparent or take the form like beggars seen in other situations, in modern settings. But essentially on is getting ones food through alms. The key here is that one is doing it to unburden oneself householder responsibilities and ego with a view to practice the Dharma, not mear sustenance.

One intended to merely make a wellness-retread, knowing to return to ordinary, is someone who actually misuses gifts in faith, falls into debts and usually becomes a "Sasana-slave". But there might be the case where one does not celebrate the Uposatha of the Cow-boys, or that of the Jains, of which both are not only out of this reason for less benefit, but takes part, leads the Uposatha of the Ariyas.

I will not accept my own answer to my own question.
But here I found a sutta which allows begging for alms by laypersons.
From SN 7.19:

When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to
one side and said to the Buddha, “Master Gotama, I seek alms by
legitimate means, which I use to provide for my mother and father. In
doing so, am I doing my duty?”
“Indeed, brahmin, in so doing you are doing your duty. Whoever seeks
alms by legitimate means, and uses them to provide for their mother
and father makes much merit.
A mortal provides for their mother
and father by legitimate means;
because they look after
their parents like this,
they’re praised in this life by the astute,
and they depart to rejoice in heaven.”
When he said this, the brahmin who provided for his mother said to the
Buddha, “Excellent, Master Gotama! Excellent! … From this day forth,
may Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone for
refuge for life.”

I think begging is OK for a layperson as far as it is not practiced as a profession. The problem is begging has become a big business practiced as chrities.

IMO I don't see anything wrong with lay people who aren't monks or nuns, but are keeping 8 or 10 precepts and spending most of the their time in spiritual practice and asking for almsfood. I don't know that there's any institutional rules to give any answer to your satisfaction, but if it were me, I wouldn't be looking for an authority to give a blessing. It would just be a practical question. Is there somewhere I could live where I could do that? Maybe in a Buddhist country like Thailand or India. If people see you meditating all the time they probably would be happy to support you.

It's just about a certain element, good householder, and a handful of those bond.

Good householder Ruben,
Normal, ordinary begging is a usual livelihood. Millions go after it. It's just in modern times and areas of strong wrong view that people tent to even criminalize it. The are areas in Europe where such is even forbidden (!). As you are living in areas of grave wrong view, where generosity is even seen as weakness, people not know that gain comes from giving, and having associated with people of wrong view, hardly trained yourself in giving, it might be hard for you to meet generosity yourself, if chosing such livelihood. But not for sure.
Yet, if a little attentive, the worthless Brahmans, outcast calling themself nevertheless Buddhists, here, rejecting benefits from giving, renouncing, assistance for parents, givers: of what do they live on here? They use Dhamma given in faith without feeling even obligated, using "free" stuff, thinking worthy of it, and of what they earn elsewhere, they are far from righteous gain, far from living from proper traded, far from any conductive in right view. Thieves having the view that one must steal, otherwise weak. A life never even knowing what work and making righteous trade means. Selling of, if good, of what not even rightly belongs to them, or gained by fraud or open debts.
For one becoming under a clan of well treaded pets, such would be of more luck then if one is in relation of those approved here by most. Nothing of more destructive condition as to become under communists.
A real poor community around you, a real poor existance under hopeless and people with grave cognitive problems.
Right lifelihood is the key for being able to progress toward path and fruits. If livelihood isn't pure, Sila isn't, wring view and wrong resolve has still it's drive and any meditation practice is actually useless for gains upwardly. One might come to the first stage with 5 precepts and good ordinary livelihood, but wouldn't progress, if not turning toward Brahmachariya and real right livelihood, one confirm with metta without a spot.
If using the four paccayas (food, shelter, cloth, medicine) just for non-harming of other beings, and in proper way, not for pleasure, why not, if honest obtained without cheating or things like "keeping orphans" for ones ways to make a living.
So five precepts alone wouldn't be sufficent, but Brahmacariya is, starting with eight (not after sensual pleasures and gains in the world).
A person "seeing the danger in the world" (Samvega as the main reason), not, and that is importand, one after just happiness and life at ease, easy going.
In most cases such one might be in the sphere of homeless already. If able to keep 10 precepts, for example if wandering life wouldn't be possible, out of what ever reason, living from what is given is always highest lifelihood. Whether others would understand, even accept, that's another issue, but usually also no problem it pure. One practicing on the base of metta is also worthy of gifts.
If not physical bound, or no other hindrances blocking ordination, it's of course not reasonable not to join the order, or at least near the monks. There should be also no problem to go on alms round, even if "just" in white, if leading the Brahmacariya. Yet sure good if kind of introduced by monks.
Some might have wise and supportive family, friends, community around, who would understand ones way and, if keeping Vinaya, such living would be also a right, yet merely seldom to be such gifted.
Being servant, or kind of "priest", dedicating all to a monastery, living simple even with family, such is very usual in SEAsia, by living just on given. Even in Western-world, thinking on church servants, such isn't unusall. Yet of course it's not always right livelihood, sometimes even equal stealing. There are also many, often elder, or "smart" who either travel from one monastery to another, taking part on events, looking for gaining much donations... or those living as servants and enjoy all kinds of pleasures from the fonds given in faith.
My person had to remember Upasaka who worked, assisted here, keeping 10 precepts, linging from the daily "left over" of a monks alms round. Being sick, he was send into the village alone, adviced how to conduct and to just spread metta, he was amazed about the kindness and generosity which wasn't even asked or suggest to do.
If pure in right resolves, just try it. For sure nothing wrong in right livelihood, by living of what has been given, indebting till Arahathood toward doing the task, toward Unbond.
Again, if there is actually no reason why not ordaining, people would be curious and one gets easy suspected, so one should be careful to do not just seeking for an easy living.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange or other world-binding trades but for an escape from this wheel]

The question is based in wrong view. The livelihood of a bhikkhu is not begging for food. A bhikkhu gains requisites for doing the internal & external duties of the Brahmacariya (Holy Life).

"Go forth, o bhikkhus, for the good of the many, for the happiness of
the many, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, for the
good, for the happiness of gods and men. Let not two go by one way.
Preach the doctrine that is beautiful in its beginning, beautiful in
its middle, and beautiful in its ending. Declare the holy life in its
purity, completely both in the spirit and the letter."
Mahavagga, Vinaya Pitaka.

Similarly, a layperson should earn livelihood doing meaningful work. Begging for alms is not acceptable for a layperson if the layperson is not working to develop virtues.

I did not explicitly say begging for alms is the livelihood of monks.


text:
What is the destination of unenlightened monk reviling Noble Layperson?
I recall reading the Buddhist scriptures say those who revile Noble Ones are reborn in hell.
Does this also apply to an unenlightened (puthujjana) monk that reviles a Noble Layperson?

not disagreeing, but I wondered if you could quote the sutta that appears in? obviously, many mahayanists are somewhat offensive to Buddhist saints.

Sure. But they wouldn't risk much here in regard of touch Noble Ones, or? Even a fault couldn't be expected here, as not possible to trace it an area of Upasaka, Upasika, for the most.
How ever, even if a Noble One would act wrongly toward another, such would block his progress as long as not pardoned, brought to be solved again.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape frim this wheel]


text:
You are simply seeing light touching your eyes
I was listening to a buddhist monk talking about masturbation addiction and his advice about it:

When you see the human body or these sexual acts on a screen or
magazine page you are not actually seeing these things. You are
simply seeing light touching your eyes. And when you can come to
this realization, where seeing is simply seeing, then you will have no
thought of the person's hair, teeth, beasts, etc. There is only
seeing. So you are able to see anything and see it simply for what it
is. Thus there is no connection made. Seeing is seeing, because that's
what it is. You don't see a human body and say that it is beautiful,
because you realize it's ridiculous to say that, because this is
simply light touching my eyes

I have difficulty to understand what the monk means by that, what is the difference between seeing a screen and the "seeing light touching your eyes"
Could you give me some pointers ?

That's a great insight. Might you by any chance be able to add the name of the monk?

the videos are on YouTube "Ask a monk" , the adress is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5Lg9P-VekA, but I found the reference in a book by Paul Taniguchi on masturbation addiction

for the previous comment, I am not sure if I violate some rules. If it is the case, please delete it.

The attribution seems quite proper and gives Ven. Yuttadhammo due credit for an open and inspiring lecture. Thank you.

@Makoto Are you sure you have the right link? I clicked on it and all I got was light touching my eyes and sounds touching my ear. There was nothing else.

Broadly, he was saying "the map is not the territory". Sadly, it seems - in your interpretation - he put it so poorly as ro render it mostly meaningless.

Comment only: Almost all comments and answers, and the original quote conflate masturbation and pornography as if they are inseparable. While they are usually companions, and while considering it impossible for them not to be may be common,  this is not a necessary association. Examining this point may be  of benefit.

The quoted passage reminds me the Bāhiya Sutta. "When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

Reality is our interpretation. The signs that stimulate lust (certain curves, sounds, lines, colors) take your effort to get converted into an erotic picture in your mind. If you stop applying that effort you'll just see the raw signs - shapes, colors, lines - that's it.
It's up to you to see it erotically or to see it as something else. The interpretation happens in your mind. You can learn to control it, or at least to see through it.

thanks a lot for your answer !

Andrei Volkov appears to be saying the Buddha recommended using pornography as a meditation object.

Hence it was said:'He saw the bones that were her teeth'.

In our minds, we have the idea of "I am the thinker" i.e. the idea of the self. That's the primary object in existence in our reality. We also have the idea of non-self objects i.e. everything else. We objectify and classify everything around us, into non-self objects, according to their relationship to the self. For e.g. my hand, my car, not my friend, not my country.
When you look at the waters of the sea from up close in a boat, you may feel fear and insecurity, especially if you don't know how to swim and have motion sickness. To the sailor, it's a source of joy and adventure. To the fisherman, it's a source of livelihood and he sees it like a mine or oil field. To fish deep in the sea that has never left the waters, the concept of water doesn't occur to it at all, as it does not know any other reality.
Another example - a piece of cooked meat appears like delicious food to the meat eater, and it appears repulsive to the vegan. To a honey bee, it appears like dirt because it's not its food.
These examples go to show that objects do not have the meaning given to it by the mind. In fact, some of these are not even objects, except that they have been objectified by the mind.
What's a body of water to me is nothing at all (or perhaps everything) to the fish. The waters of the great sea, as a place to sail and swim, and as a body of liquid, doesn't really exist, except in my mind. It certainly doesn't exist in that way to the fish.
What's delicious food to me, is dirt to the honey bee. So, the delicious food doesn't really exist, except in my mind. The dirt doesn't really exist, except in the honey bee's mind.
This concept is called papanca, which is objectification plus classification, also known as reification. And it's related to anatta (the teaching that all phenomena is not self), because papanca is when non-self things are reified into objects and they are classified relative to the self. The idea of the self is also papanca.
This does not mean that things don't exist, except in my mind. It means that things don't exist as how my mind thinks it does.
From your question, you talked about seeing, let's say, attractive people on a screen. To an ant, it's just lights of different colors. If a mouse sees them - it's just an image of what it may perceive as humans - a threat. But to you, they are attractive people.  So why are they "attractive people"? It's because that's how your mind objectified and classified them relative to yourself. That's how your mind reified them. That's papanca.
Fully enlightened persons like the Buddha and the arahants see things the way they are, without objectifying and classifying them relative to the idea of the self.

What kind of mind does the honey bee have?

@JadeEmpire You can get a glimpse of that (honey bee's mind) in this video.

thanks a lot for your answer !

@ruben2020. They are sweet and cool.

Good answer to convey the idea that this world of five aggregates is a personal thing. We think we live in a same world with others and expect them to see the world as we see. But this won't never happen because we don't see the objects as they are but perceive only the eye consciousness based on the capability of our own eyes. We have to understand that the eye consciousness is not the object. It's an entirely different thing than the object.

Simply zoom in, to get more clear, and what good householder will face are just pixles... "light". What's actually there to get foolish on it? Zoom even into the single pixel. More, deeper. What's there that makes one foolish? Z00m out again, look another time.

And now try the same investigation with your skin, hair... You may come to a point where all disolves.

And after this, try to investigate touch in same way.
No! Not just intellectual, no brain-masturbation now, enough. Look and see.
So once again, as it than can be also investigated in regard of ones ideas. Fetch one and dissolve it as far as possible to find an essence.
[Strict non-commercial. Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades but for an escape from this wheel]

The advice in the video is illogical & contrary to Buddhist principles because a practicing Buddhist will never see pornographic images (apart from when doing an internet search on another topic but sometimes pornographic images appear).
The scriptures refer to controlling the mind when a monk sees a woman or a scantly dressed woman in the village while going on alms round. The scriptures do not refer to monks visiting brothels and controlling their mind in a brothel.

Monks, even if a monk is of impeccable character, he might be
suspected and distrusted as a ‘bad monk’ for five reasons.
What five? It’s when a monk frequently collects alms from prostitutes,
widows, voluptuous girls, eunuchs, or nuns.
Even if a monk is of impeccable character, he might be suspected and
distrusted as a ‘bad monk’ for these five reasons.
AN 5.102

Apart from the ordinary seeing of women, such as when walking down the street, a practising Buddhist should never see pornography because pornography is something a Buddhist totally avoids.
In summary, what the monk named Noah Greenspoon advised in the Youtube video is both illogical and is simply something an addict cannot practice. It is simply too advanced for an addict to practice.
The Buddhist path is comprised of sila (morality), samadhi (concentration) and panna (wisdom). A tree is climbed from the bottom and not from the top. The intellectual conceptual theoretical higher wisdom (panna) in the Noah Greenspoon's video is not possible for an immoral person to practice.
Buddhism teaches a person that does immoral things such as watch pornography will be reborn in hell; just as those actors in pornographic movies will be reborn in hell.

corrupted too with prostitutes— that’s the way to disaster’s woe.
Sn 1.6

For example, i went to school as a child with a beautiful blonde girl who later did soft pornography. She eventually committed suicide in her 30s. Recently, when I happened to connect with old school friends from childhood on Facebook, they were still lamenting her demise.
When I ran meditation retreats, I met prostitutes who ended up a psychiatric hospitals. Once a porn lady became obsessed/infatuated with me and the nuns in the monastery had to remove her from the monastery and put her on a airplane back to Europe.
If you do research, you can discover the many pornographic actors and actresses that have committed suicide, become addicted to drugs, become mentally ill or, most positively, quit pornography.
Pornography harms oneself & others and should be totally avoided, similar to how poison or poison snakes, sharks, crocodiles, etc, are avoided.
The tribal monk is the video named Noah Greenspoon appears not willing to condemn pornography and the tribal people in the industry for the evil they are.
Pornography is similar to drugs such as cocaine or heroin. A real Buddhist does not give advice: "after injecting heroin or snorting cocaine, after you feel the rush of its affect upon your mind, you just feel it as feeling".
If you can realise how fake & false the advice of Noah Greenspoon is, they you are one step closer to progress.
It appears you have a history of making wrong misinformed choices, such as the choice to watch pornography or choosing the wrong monks for advice. The scriptures, such as SN 14.14, refer to how similar elements are attracted to similar elements.
It is important to avoid both the sharks in the tribal pornographic industry as well as the sharks in the tribal Buddhist industry. You should take refuge in men of integrity and not anyone that is soft on the destructive nature of pornography.
In conclusion, if you are practising Buddhism, the only practise is to view an urge & thought to watch pornography as:

not personal
an energy or urge created by ignorance
leading to suffering & harm
impermanent
something that arises & passes
subject to vanishing

A practising Buddhist never reaches the stage of watching pornography itself.

Hi Dhammadhatu, thanks a lot for your detailed answer. The thing, I began to practice meditation because I did want to rely on a method based on repression, that's why I have looked for answers. The monk seems to want to help in his own way, but as I am a beginner, I wanted more explanations –

thanks but your ideas of "repression" & "beginner" are not related to buddhism. a buddhist does not watch pornography. the only work is managing internal thoughts & urges. i clearly said the ideas of Noah Greenspoon in the video are not related to Buddhism

thanks, I know it is not directly related to the topic, could you give me some reference for managing thoughts & urges ?

@Dhammadhatu Sir, Why does the first in noble eightfold path (right view) come under the last in threefold training (wisdom)? According to this answer and your comment to this answer, people practice dana and sila because of right view. https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/31206/14468

structure of threefold training is not as important as the structure of the 8 foldpath. right view always comes 1st

@Dhammadhatu Sir, Then your statement in the above answer, "The Buddhist path is comprised of sila (morality), samadhi (concentration) and panna (wisdom). A tree is climbed from the bottom and not from the top." would not be applicable here. Am I correct?

The expression of the monk is certainly not clear. As it actually is, we don't see the light 'touching' the retina, we just don't.  We can however understand and conceive of this eventuality as a requisite condition.
It can be known that the light in contact with the eye is a requisite for what is thought about as seeing and which is named 'seeing' or 'the seen'.
One might say 'the eye is for seeing.' Not necessarily true, if a person is in a dark room then even with 2 eyes he won't see anything placed in front of him.
So the eye is not for seeing but it can be inferred that when there is eye and light, then seeing can occur.
One might say 'the eye is for seeing when there is light.' Not necessarily true, if a person is unconscious or is unconscious in regards to the eye faculty, then even in a room with light everywhere and even with 2 eyes he won't see anything placed in front of him.
So the eye is not for seeing but it can be inferred that when there is eye, when there is light, when there is eye-consciousness and with the contact that can then be delineated between eye-consciousness, the eye and the forms visible by the eye, then what is thought about as 'seeing' occurs and it doesn't occur without it's requisite conditions such as the eye and etc.
In this sense eye is for seeing but that is in as far as it is a requisite.
What one thinks about the seeing, it is in the scope of thinking about seeing or the seen. What is called 'the seen' is whatever it is except from what you think about it and whatever you name it ie 'the seen'.
There is a sutta about Bahiya, therein Buddha instructs one to let the seen just be the seen. As i understand it, rather than conceiving of a self in the seen or of a self doing the seeing, one simply analyzes the causes & requisite conditions for seeing.
Rather than asking 'what do i see?', ask the question 'how do i see?'.  In asking the latter you can think about perception itself rather than getting caught up in what is thought about as being perceived.

What he means on a basic level is that porn is basically just "light from a screen", not "light reflecting from a partner". Honestly, I don't find it a good argument. The problem is, you can apply the same reasoning like this:

When you read the sutra's, it's just light reflected from paper, not the Buddha speaking
When you use the Buddhism SE, it's just light reflected from your screen
When I see a person, it's just light reflected from a bag of skin
etc.

Following the monk's reasoning, in none of the examples listed would you be able to "make a connection", as the reasoning is close to that of phenomenology.
But in fact, some people have attained enlightenment during sex (mostly in the Tantric disciplines). In some Buddhist schools, monks can get married. This surprises many Westerners, because the early Buddhist texts teach that sensual enjoyment and desire in general, and sexual pleasure in particular, are hindrances to enlightenment. However, over the centuries, Buddhism has responded to sexuality in a variety of ways, sometimes suppressing the sexual urge, sometimes sublimating it, sometimes cultivating it, and, on the highest levels, transforming it.