text:
Buddha said "Its better to travel well than to arrive", what does it mean?
I am not sure if Buddha said it or not, I was flipping around some Buddha quotes pictures and found an image saying "Its better to travel well than to arrive".
can anyone explain What does it mean ?
Thanks

I added a bit more information and references.

It means "The journey is more important than the destination."

“It is better to travel well than to arrive.” is a fake Buddhist Quote.

Meaning
Hope and anticipation are often better than reality.
Origin
This phrase is a Robert Louis Stevenson quotation, from Virginibus Puerisque, 1881:
"Little do ye know your own blessedness; for to travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive, and the true success is to labour."
Stevenson was expressing the same idea as the earlier Taoist saying - "The journey is the reward."

Source: The meaning and origin of the expression: To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive
"The journey is the reward." seems to be a Chinese Proverb

If you look at this in the context of Noble Eightfold Path and Nirvana it is better to arrive than how or how well you travel. It seems to me like the opposite of this statement is true.

Although the eightfold path is conditioned [1.1.3.1], its goal, nirvana (nibbāna), is free
from conditions (visaṅkhāra,gata) (Dh 154):
nirvana is unconditioned (asaṅkhata).
Only nirvana is
free from all conditions: it is “the stilling of all formations” (sabba,saṅkhāra,samatha).
This stilling
of all conditions is true happiness (Dh 368, 381). In the Māluṅkya,putta Sutta (S 35.95), the
Buddha defines this stilling of all formations as “the ending of suffering.”

Source: The Path of Awakening The way, the life and the liberation of the noble eightfold path by Piya Tan

Now, ayya, is the noble eightfold path conditioned or is it unconditioned?
"The noble eightfold path, avuso Visākha, is conditioned."

Cūla Vedalla Sutta
What this entails is that traveling the path itself is suffering / misery with a view to end suffering / misery. So ending of misery is better than the journey to end misery which is also miserable. Having said this as you progress if the path the misery in general will become less and less and states like Piti and Passaddhi arise. [(Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta, (Ekā,dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta]

It is better to travel well than to arrive.
Means Focus on your journey rather than drop point.

Welcome to S.E. I would request you to follow "How to answer"

This is probably not an authentic quote, as Suminda points out, and you should always check with Fake Buddha Quotes when you see such statements attributed to the Buddha on memes etc.
However, the sentiment is an authentic Zen teaching in the sense that we believe there is no 'aha!' moment after which you are enlightened and there is no further need of training.
Dogen (the Soto founder) said that practice and enlightenment were one (i.e. without conceptualising, no separation can be found between practice and enlightenment), wrote an essay on the subject of 'ascending Buddhas' (i.e. Buddhas are still and always training) and the final Bodhisattva vow can be translated as 'enlightenment is unattainable, I vow to attain it'.

I've never read the Buddha but ...sounds like it just means 'don't desire for gain' ('mushotoku'), i.e., don't have any goals for your actions, the view being that it's best simply to 'get into' undertaking them. (In psychological literature this is sometimes referred to as 'flow'.) This means that it's not about hope etc. either, including a hope for the end of the journey (as per Robert Louis Stevenson); it means you should have no goal, hence no hope for an end result. (Not that I suspect that Buddha, if he existed, wanted anyone to think in this way but - throwing ideas of goals away allows you to focus on the task itself thereby deriving genuine happiness. This said, the argument made is also against pursuing an action for the purposes of obtaining happiness too, since this would then also constitute a 'goal' of the action [in this case a desire for happiness]. He's basically arguing the Nike slogan - just do it. Don't have any desires - or goals, which reflect desires.) p.s., Although I've no idea if it's a real quotation or not, the underlying notion overlaps pretty nicely with the idea of shikantaza/just sitting - not sitting/meditating with a desire for an outcome e.g., enlightenment. Doing so seems to detract from/break meditation.

Like Gita says "Niskam Karma"

Sounds about right!

I've read it in the context of life and death. In his quote, "It is better to travel well than to arrive.", Buddha is looking at life as a journey. Although death is, ultimately, the final destination, it more important for one to live than it is to reach the 'destination'. Therefore, it is more important for one to live life well than it is for one to die.


text:
Lust arises every time I am alone
Similarly as this question When I started vipassana with my room mate and we both meditate peacefully, but now he left and I am alone, I have noticed lust in mind that it goes less me to wrong websites and in result in negative deeds.

I have tried to observe but just could not control self, I have read many related answers from all time favourite “Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena“, but regarding this answer all answers sounds very theoretical.

May I know something powerful, I know it will be difficult for me, living with another person will stop my mind, but i think that is not a solution as thoughts can again come when I am alone.
The real victory over lust should come when i am alone.

Kindly help, I really want to get rid of this.

Can you point to which answers you are referring to so I can better adjustme my answers.

Sir your answers always satisfy me and about "overcoming lust",  this was one of your answer, but practically solution seems very difficult.

You can try Beeminder. If you come to those website, you will lose money.

lets me to wrong websites

When I quit smoking cigarettes, one of the techniques I used was to make it more difficult for me to have a cigarette.
For example, if I owned a packet of cigarettes, and the craving occurred, then it was easy for me to have one and I did.
One technique for making that more difficult was to not have a packet of cigarettes. So when the craving occurred, I didn't have one available, and to get one I would have had to walk to the shop etc. That walk (which would have lasted many minutes) gave me time to rethink my craving, or enough time for the craving to go away. It was more of an effort, and gross motor rather than fine motor activity. Although I could not control whether the craving arose, however I could control whether I acted on it or gave into it: I could decide or remember that there was a reason (that I had had a reason) why I didn't own any cigarettes, and I was able to decide not to put my coat on and go outside and walk to the shop and buy more and smoke more and continue that cycle.
There were some times, while I first quit, when I literally couldn't think about anything else except for wanting to have a cigarette, and (having decided not to go to the shop and buy some) I just had to stand there and wait for that craving to pass and for a next thought about something/anything other than that to arise.
So if you want to stop visiting some web sites, perhaps you can do the same, i.e. ensure that those web sites aren't easily available to you: for example install or enable "parental control" software on your computer, or edit the etc\hosts file (see e.g. here and here) to make the site unreachable from your computer. It's true that if you change your mind, if you decide that want to access the web site, then you can undo whatever you did to block the site ... but the fact that you need to undo/unblock it makes it a little bit harder, and acts to remind you that you had blocked it for a good reason.
I suspect that's true for most addictions: for example if you're a drug addict, it's easier to quit (and harder to continue) if you decide to move to a different environment where drugs and drug-using fellows don't exist.
In summary you might find it helpful to create a safe/insulated environment (or web browser setup) for yourself where temptation is less available or completely out of reach.
Two other suggestions: one is you might find it useful to log how you use your computer (for example, look at your browser History some times) ... that's on the theory that "you can't manage what you don't measure" so you measure/monitor your use of the web in order to manage it better; the second is that it's not a bad idea to do things with good friends ... they're likely to inspire or lead you towards virtue (e.g. you might think, "he is good and behaves well, I too can do what he does").
These are mechanical/physical suggestions, not just an idea to keep in mind, because you said you you want a practical solution for even when "thoughts come again".

I think you were hoping for an answer which didn't "sound very theoretical"; but you might wonder how this answer related to Buddhism.
Firstly, when I wrote the answer I was reminded of this topic: “Guard the sense doors”- What does this mean, and what is it's application?. That topic include, for example:

Guarding the sense doors is a way of protecting ourselves from being overcome by passion for the sensed object (which leads to dukkha). In his video Yuttadhammo mentions three ways to do this.

Physically avoiding the object (in relation to your example, when on alms round monks may keep their eyes facing down to avoid lust from seeing a beautiful woman).

So a mechanism which physically "hides your eyes", puts a barrier in place, might be an effective solution.
Secondly, there's a Buddhist doctrine of the "Twelve Nidanas", which teaches that what you think and feel and become attached to is conditioned by your senses, and specifically by contact between the sense-organ (eye) and sense-object (web site on a computer screen). Again that suggested that if you can't control your thoughts and attachments (which are conditioned by or which arise as a result of contact), perhaps you can control whether there's contact (again, by putting more of a barrier or filter between the sense-organ and sense-object).
Thirdly, Buddhist often choose or recommend seclusion or "a retreat": to avoid distraction etc. You might want to adopt a similar attitude -- especially on Uposatha days.
Lastly I'm reminded of this sutta, which describes how to overcome torpor -- not the details of it, but the strategy, the structure: "Do this: maybe this will work. But if doing this doesn't work, then do that. And if doing that does work, then ... and if that doesn't work, then ..." and so on, 7 or 8 different methods. So, whatever you previously tried (e.g. contemplating the body as a Bag of Bones), if that was too theoretical, then try something else!
Back to my personal experience, my experience is that it might be easier to control your (my) behaviour than thoughts: thoughts happen (uncontrolled) but you may be able to control (or decide to not act on) your reaction subsequent to those thoughts. Similarly it may be easier to control large movements of body over a longer time period (e.g. do you or don't you go for a walk) than small (hand or face) movements which you might do without much thought.
You're right though, it's kind of alarming to discover that you "can't control yourself". Buddhism sort of warns you about that, saying for example, "don't call thoughts my 'self' because if they were my 'self' then I'd be able to control them". Still it is possible to change, to learn to change, a habit (habitual behaviour).

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

The cause of lust is ignorance. The suttas state:

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

When I was a boy, there was a very beautiful girl at our school. Later, she became a model & posed in pornographic magazines. A few years later, she committed suicide.
When I worked in a meditation centre in Asia, I met a beautiful European teenage girl who worked as a prostitute making lots of money. She had many problems in Asia and was brought to the meditation centre by a lady. She never stopped crying during the meditation retreat & when she returned home to Europe, she was put into a psychiatric hospital.
I also met another young lady who worked in pornography. I was was very nice to her and she became obsessed with me & would not leave. The nuns in the monastery had to take her to the airport and send her home to Europe. It was as though no man has ever loved her in her life.
I can tell many other stories like  this from my life experience.
Metta-karuna (loving-kindness, compassion & non-harming) is the best way to overcome lust.
It is 'ignorance' that goes to wrong websites because ignorance has the wrong view that the people on those websites are doing pleasurable things that bring happiness. In reality, the prostitutes & performers on those wrong websites, particularly the women, are suffering. Many are addicted to drugs & alcohol. Many of these women & men have committed suicide or died of drug overdose & sexually transmitted diseases.
The woeful states taught by the Buddha of animal realm (immorality; ignorance), hungry ghost (craving addiction) & hell (suffering & torment) do not necessarily exist after death. These woeful states exist in the here-&-now.
The victory that can occur is over 'ignorance' ('not-knowing'; 'wrong view').

Thank you sir, but please understand my problem.
I am married and i have 27 days old beautiful daughter, When i am with my wife or any friends , these thoughts never come close to me.
But when i am alone in a room and i have internet access, i think this will give me pleasure (due to ignorance which is true), but it never happens or happens rarely if i am accompanied.

Offer a direct and an answer based on economy/profit & loss: every time you let lust take over yourself, you lose your vital energy/ life force.
When humans are born in this world, they take with them the amount of life force in full, over the time, this life force burning up bits by bits, until it's depleted a human dies. The most activity that consumed the most of energy is related to lust. That's why the highest of the energy release could produce another life: offspring.
When a thought of lust arose, it triggers the pituitary, this comes along the path down through the spine, to the bottom of the body its reproduction system. When this life force is in it's original form, it doesn't take a form, the Ancient Chinese called "Shen" (神), when it takes the form of energy, its called "Qi" (氣/炁) (maybe call "Prana" by the Brahmanic/Vedic?), when it becomes the material our worldly method could measure, called "Jing" (精). That's why the semen is called "Jing Ye", namely, the liquidized Jing.
Now you know that every time there lust arises, you lose your energy. You don't want to waste your energy on something unproductive, something that actually is taking out to spend from your "Life Bank", right? The media promoting sex and lust for health, for wealth, or for any god-knows-goodies are lying, stealing your life force so that they converted it into the money, i.e., they ripped off your life force so that they become more powerful. (Yeah, the cosmos when it's in form, it's about the consuming of the non-Me, so that the strong one will become the dominate. This is playing out in the galactic systems, star systems, black hole and supernova... etc.. The Act of Devouring is not just on the level of Eating.)
That's why Buddha given the rules to the Bhukikus one is of celibacy, this not only for leading a pristine life, it helps to reserve the life force, in turn this life force will be all directed to enlightenment. Enlightenment also needs the fuel of life force/ energy, meditation in it's lotus prose (cross-legs) is the best way to preserve, re-direct, re-generate this life force.

Does Enlightenment means to get free from lust, anger, greed and hatred ?

@Rishi of course, these are all eating up the life force, called 漏 (translated as Effluent at this moment?).

IIRC, In Vedic traditions the energy contained in the semen is taken from what's referred to as 'Ojas' which is (again)- Life/ Mental energy

@Oyiwai what is IIRC? that's true, it's not simply egg-white/ protein one found in Tofu or Cheese ;)-

"IIRC" is an abbreviation for "If I recall correctly" (in other words, "I'm not sure of this, but, according to what I remember, ...").

When I started vipassana with my room mate and we both meditate
peacefully, but now he left and I am alone,

This looks like that parting with the a loved one has cases some stress. This manifests when meditation also and making your practice less peaceful.
When thoughts arise about your roommate these thoughts can be about the past, present and future involving oneself and the other person. This leads to craving. In total there are 108 such motivation of craving. (Vicarita) Tanha Sutta In this case the thought pattern is becuase of my room mate I am happy.
Craving is dependent on sensation. So take a moment to scan the body from head to foot looking at the sensation that arise. If distractions arise see what sensations these bring. A happy memory pops up there is sensation in both body and mind. Look at the mental sensation and how this has a knock on effect on the bodily sensations. Sometimes it might be bodily pain arises. Have a close look at this sensation analysing dividing and dissecting it. (Totality of awareness see this answer.) Look at the mental reaction to it. Similarly if you see, hear, smell, touch, taste, think do the same.

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

Essence of Tipitaka by U Ko Lay
The takeaway from this is if you are attached to someone suffering follows. So let go by being equanimous and looking at all experiences as impermanent. [Pahāna Sutta, Avijja Pahana Sutta 2] Initially look at impermanence at a gross level. A sad through about companion ship as arisen. Not it is gone. This body pain has stated. No it is gone. As times goes try to look at them more closely. These through create both pleasure and pain, see this answer and this answer for detail.

living with another person will stop my mind, but i think
that is not a solution as thoughts can again come when I am alone

Generally you should try to develop solitude.

PHYSICAL SOLITUDE. Possessing this aggregate of noble moral virtue, this aggregate of
  noble sense-restraint, this aggregate of noble mindfulness and full awareness, and this aggregate
  of noble contentment, he resorts to a secluded dwelling: a forest, the foot of a tree, a mountain, a
  gully [gorge], a hillside cave, a cemetery, a remote forest [jungle grove], the open air, a heap of
  straw.
  Returning from his almsround, after his meal, he sits down, crosses his legs, keeps his body
  erect, and establishes mindfulness before him.
MENTAL SOLITUDE. (1) Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells
  with a mind devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of covetousness.
  (2) Abandoning ill will and anger, he dwells with a mind devoid of ill will, sympathetic with
  the welfare of all living beings. He cleanses his mind of ill will and anger.
  (3) Abandoning sloth and torpor, he dwells with a mind devoid of sloth and torpor, mindful,
  alert, perceiving light. He cleanses his mind of sloth and torpor.
  (4) Abandoning restlessness and worry, he dwells undisturbed, his mind inwardly stilled. He
  cleanses his mind of restlessness and worry.
  (5) Abandoning spiritual doubt, he dwells having crossed over doubt, with no perplexity with
  regard to wholesome mental states. He cleanses his mind of doubt.

Sāmanna,phala Sutta
Also see Viveka,nissita by Piya Tan
Also try to understand the case of your thoughts about lonelyness and try to stop them:

MIND-BASED PROLIFERATION
Avuso, dependent on the mind and mind-object, mind-consciousness arises.
The meeting of the three is contact.
With contact as condition, there is feeling.
What one feels, one perceives.
What one perceives, one thinks about.
What one thinks about, one mentally proliferates.
From that as source, proliferation of conception and perception
  assails a person regarding past, future and present mind-objects cognizable through the mind.

Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta
The main point there is once you cognise you know (pleasant, unpleasant, neutral sensation - Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta) followed by perceive something you give a evaluation as good, bad or neutral which is followed by sensation of pleasure, pint or neutral followed by a mental reaction of craving, aversion or ignorance. Train yourself to see the evaluation / judgement given and the sensations that arise so your mental reaction does not arise. When you cognise you feel some pain but bulk of the pain is when you perceive. Since the perceptual level evaluation is mental this can be also seen as being hit by two bullets in the spirit of Sallatha Sutta.

Thank you sir,i have read it but i will read it over and over again , in order to pick multiple things from this answer.
Thanks a lot for giving a lot of time and knowledge for these wonderful answers.

You are welcome. I have modified the answer.

Sir actually i do not care about my friend, i do not even think about him.
It is just that me alone in a room results in bad thoughts and feeling, however i will try my best to follow what you mentioned above

Formal, yet maybe not possible for lay people, but the root is the same

Then Ven. Upāli[1] went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, “Lord, I want to spend time in isolated wilderness & forest lodgings.”
“Upāli, it’s not easy to endure isolated wilderness & forest lodgings. It’s not easy to maintain seclusion, not easy to enjoy being alone. The forests, as it were, plunder the mind of a monk who has not gained concentration. Whoever would say, ‘I, without having gained concentration, will spend time in isolated wilderness & forest lodgings,’ of him it can be expected that he will sink to the bottom or float away.
“"Imagine, Upāli, a great freshwater lake...

[See, read, link]

“What do you think, Upāḷi? Isn’t this dwelling more excellent than the earlier dwellings, and more refined?”
“Yes, lord.”
“It’s when seeing this quality within themselves that my disciples spend time in isolated wilderness & forest lodgings, and they dwell having attained their true aim.
“Please, Upāḷi, live with the Saṅgha. Living with the Saṅgha, you will have ease.” (Upāli Sutta: To Upāli)

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose or other kinds of low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange]

"When a monk's fermentations that should be abandoned by seeing have been abandoned by seeing, his fermentations that should be abandoned by restraining have been abandoned by restraining, his fermentations that should be abandoned by using have been abandoned by using, his fermentations that should be abandoned by tolerating have been abandoned by tolerating, his fermentations that should be abandoned by avoiding have been abandoned by avoiding, his fermentations that should be abandoned by dispelling have been abandoned by dispelling, his fermentations that should be abandoned by developing have been abandoned by developing, then he is called a monk who dwells restrained with the restraint of all the fermentations. He has severed craving, thrown off the fetters, and — through the right penetration of conceit — has made an end of suffering & stress."
That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One's words. - Sabbasava Sutta

As you can see this sutta talk about different methods.
Please also focus on developing new skillful qualities sometimes we neglect it.

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
The path and the desire to reduce the suffering of others?
It seems to me that the Noble Eight-fold Path is designed to reduce the suffering of the self.
But how do we use its guidance to reduce the suffering of others?
If the Buddha was walking down a road after enlightenment and saw
a strong man fighting a weaker man, or two equally strong men fighting, would he:

Desire to help one escape the other (and follow that desire)?
Desire to help one defeat the other (and follow that desire)?
Or (having no desire at all), keep on walking down the road?

And how should one who is still following The Path act in this situation?

By walking the path yourself you will be of great benefit to others. You are giving the gift of harmlessness.
A living example of the Dhamma, which is the path of complete peace and freedom.
The Buddha was a liberated one, a pure being, a great one. He no longer had any attachments whatsoever.
Helping others when asked or when a situation arises (proper, beneficial) is what pure beings do.
Having eradicated all mental defilements. Freed from avidity, anger, no longer having any kind of delusion, ignorance about the true nature of things.
Pure beings will never harm others, in any circumstances. Any possibilities to do so can no longer manifest themselves since they can no longer arise. Therefore they would never resort to violence, aggressive behavior and such.
What would the Blessed one do? I can only speculate for I am not such a great one...
It is said that the Buddha had supramundane powers. He knew exactly what was proper, as in the right course of action, what and when it was beneficial.
If reasonable and wise words could be beneficial in that particular instance, he would speak such words.
If not, he'd probably radiate metta ''goodwill'' and be on his way.

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


text:
Sutra reading stage
Is there a stage in practice when the practitioner is drawn to read the sutras? My problem is that I'm at a point where I'm confused w.r.t. what should I do. Performing actions seems pointless, there is no access to "higher" feeling like delight, joy, love, etc. Everything is "ok", which makes it dull.

What actions are you talking about?

All actions....

Sit with the dullness of it. Get to know the dullness.
One of the greatest challenges of Buddhism, is to learn to avoid aversion.
Dullness, is generally speaking, unexciting. When you feel unexcited, it makes you want to get away from that feeling. Don't try to get away from it. Sit with it. Discover what happens when you just let it be.
First and foremost, ask yourself, " what is going on with me, that I am having an emotional reaction to this experience?"
Not just when you are having unplesant emotional reactions, but also when you are feeling good about it. And not only your experience with your buddhist practice, but with everything, all the time.
Even with the feelings you are having right now as you read my reply.

We are just algorithms proving theorems in a very clever way.

Good point. Everything is empty but we are afraid of it because of our existence and social norms. Hence we jump into "doing something".

Is there a stage in practice when the practitioner is drawn to read the sutras?

No.

My problem is that I'm at a point where I'm confused w.r.t. what should I do.

What do you want to do? What are you trying to achieve?

Performing actions seems pointless, there is no access to "higher" feeling like delight, joy, love, etc. Everything is "ok", which makes it dull.

Yes it is pointless, but if you want to, you can attach a point to it like everyone seems to do. But that would be moving away from the truth/fact of the matter. Do you want to do that? It depends on you.
But I want to say that today you will ask this question, and in a few days you will forget this question, and then you will ask the same question in a different form after sometime.
These are not questions to be answered like Q&A. They are subjective experiences and feelings which only you know and which don't have an answer as such. Please accept this fact. And help yourself (or not if you don't want to).

Generally whenever you feel that your actions are pointless you can be assured you are in a nihilistic state of mind and not in the Middle Way of Buddhism. In Buddhism actions ALWAYS matter.
Without critiquing the merits of various suttas and sutras, I would have to say many are not suitable for beginners because the average person lack the required experience and will as pointed out interpret it incorrectly, leading to a usually nihilistic outlook.
This is where many Mahayana sutras shine with emphasis in skilful means to teach the difficult to grasp concept to people at various levels. One of the most popular being the Pure Land Buddhist sutras such as the Amitabha Sutra. It is to be chanted and Practice until you reach the Pure Land through direct experience. And yes the Pure Land is glorious. Just what a person who is seeking higher emotions like you is looking for. You will need to have some faith for this. Don't let scholars and even other Buddhist doubt the meaning and authenticity of this teachings. You can be assured the generations of masters know what they are doing and talking about.

Meditation is not an easy path & does not bring guaranteed happiness. Generally, meditation requires lots of time & intensive retreat practise to develop well.
My personal opinion is reading the suttas without meditative realisation will result in many misunderstandings of the suttas.
However, there are suttas for laypeople, which are about skilful ways to live ordinary life.
If you want to look at some suttas, In The Buddha's Words may be good (however, the translator's commentary footnotes may not be accurate representations of some more complex teachings).


text:
Question about the contrast between Buddhist statements and Christian doctrine
In the Christian Bible (especially in the Book of John), Jesus often talked about Himself as using phrases like:

I am the light of the world
I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.

Now Buddhism seems to point more on emptiness and nothingness etc.
Why is that?
Why didn't Buddhists say such things about themselves, as Jesus did?
Are there any Buddhists who also said things like, "I am the bread, the light, etc", like Jesus said?

The word 'Buddha' means 'Enlightened'. It is the Buddha that is the light of the world. Buddhism states there can be only one Original Buddha in a world-system (MN 115). Jesus was a new light for Judah but not for the world. Jesus brought light to the violent tribal hypocritical religion of Judaism but Buddha (obviously; probably) brought light to Jesus.
When Jesus came to Judah and taught new teachings, which were different to Judaism, such as: (i) forgiveness, (ii) non-violence, (iii) showing the other cheek, (iv) non-hatred, (v) universal love & mercy, (vi) deeds before faith; (vii) God is love, (viii) celibacy, (ix) wandering like a monk, (x) not thirsting again (xi) liberation from the world, (xii) a kingdom not of this world, (xiii) eternal life (not experiencing death), etc, these new teachings obviously came from Buddhism because they have no source in the pre-Babylonian-exile Old Testament. All of these teachings have direct parallels in Buddhism, including the idea that 'God (Brahma) is love', which the Buddha taught to Brahmans in the Tevijja Sutta.
The Buddha revolutionized the ancient spiritual world, such as the famous Hindu book called the Bhagavad Gita (300BC), which is about Krishna, who is very similar to Jesus, being a human incarnation of god. Although the Bhagavad Gita refers to god & its theistic, its more profound principles are very similar to Buddhism (such as giving up craving & attachment).
The Buddha did not 'give up his life' for 'sheep' because the Buddha taught: (i) to not sacrifice one's life for another (Dhp 166); and (ii) he was the teacher of gods & humans (rather than animals or 'sheep'). Unlike Jesus, the Buddha forbade the practise of miracles for the religious conversion of others (DN 11). Unlike Jesus, a Buddha must live the whole term of his natural life as a demonstration of his virtue, i.e., his social harmony.
Unlike Jesus, the Buddha did not wander around picking fights with the religious establishment. The fact that Jesus (supposedly) violently died on the cross & was (supposedly) killed by Jews resulted in a religion that perpetuated violence and engaged in revenge killing against Jews for 2,000 years, which ultimately influenced the 'Holocaust'. This cycle of revenge was not one-sided, with (wealthy) Jews also plotting for hundreds of years to destroy Christianity. In short, the (supposed) sacrifice of Jesus has not really brought peace to the world but the opposite. Where as practitioners of the Buddha's noble path are peaceful & don't engage in conflict with other religions.
The Buddha called himself the 'Spiritual Friend' or 'Noble Friend' because he showed people a path for individual freedom that was self-reliant. The Buddha said:

Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable
  people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to
  develop & pursue the noble eightfold path. It is in dependence on me
  as an admirable friend that beings subject to birth have gained
  release from birth, that beings subject to aging have gained release
  from aging, that beings subject to death have gained release from
  death, that beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress &
  despair have gained release from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress,
  & despair.
Upaddha Sutta

In his first sermon & many other places, the Buddha described his teachings as 'light':

'This is the Noble Truth of the Cessation of Suffering': such was the vision, the knowledge, the wisdom, the science, the light that arose
  in me concerning things not heard before.
Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

The following phrase is found many times in the Buddhist scriptures about the 'lamp' of the Buddha:

It is, good Gotama, as if someone were to set up something that had been knocked down, or to reveal what had been hidden, or to point out
  the right path to a man who had got lost, or to bring an oil lamp into
  a dark place so that those with eyes could see what was there — just
  so has the good Gotama shown me the truth in various ways!

And this, as Jesus taught (from Buddha):

Open are the doors to the Deathless to those with ears.
MN 26

As for the term 'emptiness', it means 'empty of self', such as found in the term 'kenosis' in  Philippians 2:7:

Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to cling to, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a
  servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance
  as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death—even death
  on a cross.…

Also Luke 17:33:

If you cling to your life, you will lose it, and if you let your life go, you will save it.

To conclude, the Buddha is the true light of the world. The Buddha shows the path of the best wisdom & the best human ethics. Many, such as Jesus, obviously adapted the Buddha's teachings to try to make people free. However, the Buddha is the original & the best, as the Buddha said:

Of all the paths the Eightfold Path is the best; of all the truths the Four Noble Truths are the best; of all things passionlessness is
  the best: of men the Seeing One (the Buddha) is the best.
Dhammapada
  273

Though second paragraph sounds plausible, it might be speculative -- the influence of Buddhism on Christianity has been considered, apparently, but isn't universally accepted: Buddhist influences on Christianity. I think there have also been published opinion (speculation) about the influence of (and on) Stoicism.

What (reference/scripture) were you referring to when you wrote, "the idea that 'God (Brahma) is love', which the Buddha taught to Brahmans"?

From Buddhist perspective, when examining cause & effect, it is highly probable. The issue is western scholarship is not only Biblical-centric but thinks Hinduism influenced Buddhism where in reality it is the opposite. The old Brahmanism is far more limited than Buddhism and the later Hinduism involved from Buddhism. In the Old Testament, the teachings (3rd part of Isaiah & Proverbs) similar to Christianity are Post-Exilic, i.e., also post-Buddhist. The language Buddhism & Biblical Christianity can be very similar.

Tevijja Sutta.  Love is the way to union with Brahma. Also http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.4.106-112x.irel.html#iti-106

I think that Jesus's most famous saying, along those lines, was:

I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

I'm wondering whether the Buddha might make an analogous statement.
I think not because, as you said, the Buddha realized and taught emptiness or egolessness. Buddhist doctrine is that ego or views of "self" are a source of suffering (maybe some examples of egoistic views could include "I live", "I will die", "I am wealthy", "You have stolen from me", etc.).
The Buddha teaches that forms, and feelings and ideas, must be regarded as "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self."

O monks, the well-instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets wearied of form, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception, gets wearied of mental formations, gets wearied of consciousness. Being wearied he becomes passion-free. In his freedom from passion, he is emancipated. Being emancipated, there is the knowledge that he is emancipated.

There are several suttas where the Buddha refuses to be identified as anything in particular, except perhaps as Tathāgata, and a few other epiphets such as trackless.
Another difference is that Buddhist are expected to reach liberation by their own effort. There is a way towards that liberation: and what's special about the Buddha is that he discovered (or rediscovered) that path, and, he was able to teach it (some people discover it for themselves but don't teach it) ... that's not the same as saying though that the Buddha himself is the way.
There is some identification of the teacher (the Buddha) with the teaching, for example the following which the Buddha said to his disciples as he was passing away:

Now the Blessed One spoke to the Venerable Ananda, saying: "It may be, Ananda, that to some among you the thought will come: 'Ended is the word of the Master; we have a Master no longer.' But it should not, Ananda, be so considered. For that which I have proclaimed and made known as the Dhamma and the Discipline, that shall be your Master when I am gone.

But I don't think you see in that the same kind of "I am" message that you quoted in the OP.
To go a bit further, "I am" is a statement that's attributed to God ("I Am that I Am"). I think there's some similar "I Am" messaging in the Hindu doctrines of Atman and Brahman ... which, I contrast with the Buddhist "no-self" doctrine.


text:
What does Buddha mean with '' to not sacrifice one's life for another' (Dhp 166)?
What did Buddha mean when he told not to sacrifice?
Does "sacrifice" mean the same thing as in the Jewish or Christian traditions?
Btw: don't feel offended when I compares some things, I'm just wondering the differences.

I like this reference to the Dhammapada, because it includes the "story" behind each verse (note that it's the verse itself that should be treated as "Gospel", the story is commentary, sometimes allegorical).
So verse 166 can be found here: Dhammapada Verse 166 ... from which I take the following to be the essential message:

The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus,

"Bhikkhus, those who love and revere me should act like Attadattha. You are not paying me homage by just offering flowers, perfumes and incense and by coming to see me; you pay me homage only by practising the Dhamma I have taught you, i.e., the Lokuttara Dhamma."

In other words, the Buddha taught what he did to let each person to attain liberation. That's what the Buddha wants: for each person to attain liberation. So if you do something other than that, "for the sake of another's benefit", then you're missing the point of the Buddha's message.

Also, "not sacrifice your life" is a paraphrase or extrapolation of the verse, not a quote; actually it says,

Verse 166: For the sake of another's benefit, however great it may be, do not neglect one's own (moral) benefit. Clearly perceiving one's own benefit one should make every effort to attain it.

Also there are stories (fables) of the Buddha having sacrificed his own life, in past lives: for example, there's the story of the tigress (here's the short version and a longer version). Actually that story is told as admirable and perhaps even as a necessary step in the Bodhisattva's evolution towards birth as a Buddha. The Jataka tales are not entirely canonical though.

Also Buddhist are taught that generosity is a virtue (perhaps the first virtue; or maybe the second virtue after "harmlessness").
I'm not sure that generosity is seen as "sacrifice" though.
And literal "sacrifice" (perhaps using fire?) was a feature of the contemporary (pre- and post-Buddhist) religion: performed by priests of the "Brahmin" caste.
I think that the whole last chapter of the Dhammapada is on that topic: saying that what makes a person "holy" isn't sacrifice and so on, but self-restraint and so on.
There are some similar doctrine addressed to a Brahmin in the suttas also.

Buddha did not believe in blood sacrifice, such as when Brahmans sacrificed animals to their gods or when the Hebrew patriarch Abraham was going to blood sacrifice his only son Issac.
There is no benefit in blood sacrifice. In Buddhism, to believe otherwise is superstition.
For example, many Jewish rabbis criticised Zionists in World War 2, accusing Zionists of deliberately sacrificing Jewish people for the sake of establishing Israel (refer to Ten questions
to the Zionists by Rabbi Michael Dov Weissmandl.). Ben Gurion, a father of modern Israel, said:

If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel. (Wiki-quote)

This shows what happens when blood sacrifice is considered to be a virtue. More here.

The above said, it is probably wrong to say Jesus was sacrificed in line with the Jewish tradition because there is actually no tradition of human blood sacrifice in Judaism (see link). When God asked Abraham to blood sacrifice Issac, this was only a test.
Therefore, when Jesus blood sacrificed himself, calling himself: 'The Lamb of God', & exhorted his disciples to "drink his blood", this sounds like the own idea of Jesus rather than a Jewish idea because Jews are forbidden from eating animal meat with blood in it, let alone human blood.
To most religious Jews, the idea of 'drinking blood' is alien & repulsive, which is at least one reason the vast majority of Jews for 2,000 years have rejected & even despised Jesus.

The Buddha cherished & valued all life, including animals. In Buddhism, it is a sin to kill living beings, including animals (unless absolutely necessary).
To not sacrifice one's life for another means to not harm oneself when helping others.
The Buddha said:

“Having gone around in all directions with the mind,
  There is surely no one found who is loved more than oneself.
“In the same way others each love themselves,
  Therefore one who cares for himself should not harm another.”
Ud 5.1.

Please try to ensure that answers are more about Buddhism than they are about Judaism etc. If someone asks a "comparative" question perhaps we we should assume that they already know (needn't be told) about the other religion.

Ok...next time i will try to keep your request in mind

Thank you. That's a basis on which we're to evaluate any "comparative" questions: i.e. they ought to be asking more about Buddhism than about something else, otherwise they're off-topic.

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


text:
What is The eighth jhana and how can i practice it?
I am new to meditation. If i understand correctly there are two types of meditations, Two forms of meditation eight jhanas and vipassana (insight).
One thing that capture me and made me want to start meditating was the ability to focus my mind on anything i wish to deeply focus on. To have a understanding with my mind and work with it. I feel like eight jhanas is the best method but i dont understand how to begin. I looked it up but lost. Any ideas?

@ DeusIIXII,  what you are referring to is the last of the four formless meditations that exist. The eight attainments (atthasmapatti) in meditation (attaining Adhicitta) broadly has two parts - namely, the first four rupa jhanas and the four arupa jhanas. These last four are higher stages of mental concentration – the formless states - enable one to gain supernormal powers.
Eventhough we see the mind as normally inter-dependent with body, there are levels of existence where only mental phenomena exist, with nothing whatever of rupa.  The four 'formless' (arupa) meditative states are attainable from the fourth jhana onwards. They are:
The sphere of infinite space (Akasanañcayatana);
This is attained by transcending any cognition of rupa, by abandoning the metal image that was previously the object of concentration, and seeing that space is infinite.
The sphere of infinite consciousness (Viññaaañcayatana);
In this second state, the focus is on the consciousness that had been aware of infinite space.
The sphere of nothingness (Akiñcaññayatana);
In the third, this object (Viññaaañcayatana) is dropped, and the focus is on the apparent nothingness remaining.
The sphere of neither-cognition-nor-non-cognition (Nevasaññanâsaññayatana).
In the fourth, this object (Akiñcaññayatana) is dropped and the mind is in an attenuated state where it is hardly functioning.
If you want to know these stages in more detail please read the following Suttas:

SD 24.11 _ Pathama Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Savitakka) Pathama Jhana Sutta. Progressing in the 1st dhyana.
  SD24.12a _ Dutiya Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Avitakka) Dutiya Jhana Sutta. Progressing in 2nd dhyana.
  SD 24.13 _ Tatiya Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Sukhena) Tatiya Jhana Sutta. Progressing in the 3rd dhyana.
  SD 24.14 _ Catuttha Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Upekkhaka) Catuttha Jhana Sutta. How to progress in the 4th dhyana.
  SD 24.15 _ Akasanañcayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of infinite space.
  SD 24.16 _ Viññaaañcayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of infinite consciousness.
  SD 24.17 _ Akiñcaññayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of nothingness.
  SD 24.18 _ Nevasaññanâsaññayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.

You might find this book useful: "Practicing The Jhanas",
by Tina Rasmussen and Stephen Snyder.
They were both students of Pa Auk Sayadaw and undertook a Samatha Meditation Course under his guidance.
They write in the book how they achieved the 4 material jhanas and the 4 immaterial jhanas.

This book may help with jhana: Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond by Ajahn Brahm.

By mastering access concentration, the 1st jhana, the 2nd, the third, and so forth.  You really can't just suddenly up and practice the eighth jhana (and that jhana specifically for some very technical reasons).  There have been a host of books written on the topic.  A lot of them (including the one mentioned in Dhammadhatu's answer) are pretty good.  However, there is no substitute to working with a teacher.  That's especially true as you first get started.  I would recommend that you seek out a jhana teacher in your area or go on a meditation retreat.  Simply googling "jhana retreat" will return quite a few places you could attend worldwide.

Theory
3 “‘The sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, the sphere of neither-perception-nor-nonperception,’
it is said. What now is the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception?

4 Then, avuso, this occurred to me:
‘Here, bhikshu, by completely transcending the sphere of nothingness, he enters and dwells in the
sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.’8
Practice

5 Then, avuso, by completely transcending the sphere of nothingness, I entered and dwelled in the
sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.
While I dwelled therein, avuso, perception and attention accompanied by sphere of nothingness
assailed me.

Realization
6 Then, avuso, the Blessed One approached me by means of psychic power and said this to me:
‘Moggallāna, Moggallāna! Do not be heedless, brahmin, regarding the sphere of neither-perceptionnor-non-perception:
steady your mind in the sphere of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception, nevasaññānāsaññ’āyatane cittaṁ saṇṭhapehi,
unify your mind in the sphere of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception, nevasaññānāsaññ’āyatane cittaṁ ekodiṁ karohi,
concentrate your mind in the sphere of
neither-perception-nor-non-perception, nevasaññānāsaññ’āyatane cittaṁ samādaha.’

7 Then, avuso, on another occasion, by completely transcending the sphere of nothingness, I entered
and dwelled in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.
Spiritual friendship

8 Now, avuso, if one speaking rightly, were to say, ‘He is a disciple who attained to greatness of
direct knowledge with the help of the Teacher,’
it is of me that one speaking rightly would say, ‘He is a disciple who attained to greatness of direct
knowledge with the help of the Teacher.’”

N’eva,saññā,nâsaññ’āyatana Pañha Sutta
Before getting there you have to practice the 7 leading upto the 8th. For more reference on this see this answer.
Also I am not sure if you can reach this without a proper teacher. Many teachers do not teach this. Perhaps one teacher who might teach it is Venerable Pa-Auk Sayadaw of the Pa-Auk Forest Monastery. Perhaps Ajahn Brahm also might be teaching this according to another answer. You can inquire if one of these teachers or their assistants are willing to teach you.
Also not everyone can achieve this level of deep Jhana.


text:
What would Buddhists say about 'pantheism'
I take 'pantheism' to be the belief that all our talk about God can resolve into "the world", while retaining the divine status of "God", perhaps because our words about God retain their structure.
What would Buddhists say about the idea that the world or universe is God?

The people of the world can be categorized into two groups. The ones who believe in a single God, accept eternalism (sassata ditthi) after death. The other group are the ones who are in Communist countries, who do not believe in a single God, & accept nihilism. Nihilism (ucceda ditthi) is the direct opposite of eternalism. The Buddha, in many ways, has avoided these two extremes. The faith of the people who believe in a God is different those who have the confidence in the Triple Gem. Faith in the Buddhist perspective derives through proper understanding and realisation of truth and not through fear of the divine or a need to satisfy the emotions. Real faith appears in the mind when it reaches the unshakable state. Blind faith or religious beliefs have no place in the Buddha's Teaching. There is no such thing as ‘God’ in the Teachings of the Supreme Buddha.

hm, i think you are right, that pantheists would retain the idea of a self caused and substantive thing. thanks!

I think that Buddhists don't assume that there's a "one God". So there's no need to explain the relationship between God and World.
Wikipedia's Pantheism in religion mentions many religions, but not Buddhism. Maybe the concept (of "pantheism") is meaningless when there's no concept of (no meaning attributed to the word) "God".
I suppose the nearest Buddhist analog might be the concept of Buddha-nature.

What would Buddhists say about the idea that the world or universe is God?

That it is purely speculation, a belief, contained in the 4th aggregate of mental formations.
This is clearly visible through the practice of insight meditation.

Now I remember, that the Kyoto school of Buddhists / comparative philosophers claim that Buddhism is not "pantheism" but closer to "panentheism": especially the term "transcendental immanence".
See e.g. The Nothingness Beyond God, which is a commentary on Nishida's philosophy.


text:
Why Dharma(धर्म) is pronounced as Dhamma in Buddhism?
First for all I know that the correct Sanskrit word is धर्म (pronounced as Dharma) same goes with Nibbana (Nirvana, निर्वाण in Sanskrit) as Siddharth was born in India.
So either Pali is just a local dialect as people in Nepal region are not able to pronounce R र.
Same goes with native English speaker they roll R, I mean when we say car in India our tongue vibrates, which doesn’t happen with Native english speaker.
Why do we use Dhamma instead of Dharma?

Dharma (Sanskrit) or Dhamma (Pāli) in Buddhism can be taken to mean the same, and as having two primary meanings: the teachings of the Buddha which lead to enlightenment, and the constituent factors of the experienced world. But to me Dhamma (Pāli) is “Suddhamma” and refers only to the teachings of the Supreme Buddha. Whereas Dharma is regarded variably by different traditions, and generally regarded as an ultimate and transcendent truth which is utterly beyond worldly things.
The Importance of learning PALI Language, and using the Pali words is mainly because today Buddhism is many things to many people, mostly laden with rites, rituals, icon worship, so-called collection and transference of merit etc. - things the Buddha clearly rejected as non-Dhamma. To study SudDhamma, it is important that we learn Pali, at least to some degree as all translations are hazardous. The Dhamma (as opposed to Dharma) is found only in the Teaching that were taught by the Buddha himself - Suttas and connected texts such as the Sutta Nipâta, Dhammapada, Udâna, Itivuttaka, and Thérathéri Gâthâ. [I here refer only to Théravâda Buddhist Text].
To make my point clear may I mention here the statement “Vidya Dadati Vinayam” - this is written not in Pali, but in Sanskrit. Therefore, it has no connection with Buddhism, as we think. Secondly, it was not the Buddha who stated that learning gives discipline, but the brahmins who maintained their authority through the means of education. What Buddhism reiterates is exactly the opposite of this. What is repeatedly stated in the Pali Canon is that discipline should be achieved before learning. The motto of Buddhism is “first discipline, second learning”.
But again if we take later text such as “Milinda Panha”, it was originally a Sanskrit Buddhist text. For those who do not know what I am coming to….  King Menander I (Milindu/ Milinda in Pali language) was a powerful Indo-Greek monarch who ruled “Sagalapura” in historical India (Now Sialkot in North-east of Panjab province in Pakistan at the foot of the Kashmir hills near the Chenab river), somewhere in the 150 BCE.
King Milindu learnt dhamma from Arahanth Nagasena - with his famous questions and Arahanth  Nagasena successfully answering all of them which led the king to ordain under the Arahanth abdicating his throne and later, attained Nirvana (Nibbana). The questions of King Milindu and the answers given to them by Arahanth Nagasena are recorded in the “Milinda Panha”, probably written in Sanskrit at the beginning and later translated to Pali. Today, there are many translations of the book in different languages.

Dhamma is the pali version of the word- In the time of Buddha , there was a conscious decision to record the teachings in Pali rather than Sanskrit. As sanskrit was not accessible to all and created a division between those who has access to it and who were interested in higher knowledge, but Pali was a common tongue in the region.
But it is to be understood that Dharma(be it sanskrit or pali) in the context of Buddhism means much more than mere Duties as the common usage in Sanskrit means.
Dhamma is the very body of Buddhas teachings which is said to be universal in truth.

Also Pali was not a language confined to nepal alone, it was widely spoken in the regions where Buddha travelled in India as well.

`धर्मः तस्माद्धर्मात् परं नास्त्य् अथो अबलीयान् बलीयाँसमाशँसते धर्मेण यथा राज्ञैवम् ।
यो वै स धर्मः सत्यं वै तत् तस्मात्सत्यं वदन्तमाहुर् धर्मं वदतीति धर्मं वा वदन्तँ सत्यं वदतीत्य् एतद्ध्येवैतदुभयं भवति ।।
Nothing is higher than Dharma. The weak overcomes the stronger by Dharma, as over a king. Truly that Dharma is the Truth (Satya); Therefore, when a man speaks the Truth, they say, "He speaks the Dharma"; and if he speaks Dharma, they say, "He speaks the Truth!" For both are one.
— Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 1.4.xiv [43][44]`
Source Wikipedia

I just want to inform you that Sanskrit is the oldest language, it is so deep that ancient sages have spent multiple life times to understand vedic mantras written in so many languages, as far as word Dharma is concerned it is of highest priority in Hindu as well which we were aware 11000 years.
Mahatma Buddha is well respected in India, after all he was born here, got enlightenment here.

@Rishi I'm absolutely all agreeing with you! As esthetical concern, the word "Dharma" is more well proportioned than the "Dhamma". I heard Koreans don't hv "p" so they couldn't pronounce it but make it like "f" or what... Just yesterday I was searching internet "why Pali has so few "r" but replaced with double "m"s. I only get to know those Pali words in this forum.

@Thubten Dorje  "there was a conscious decision to record the teachings in Pali rather than Sanskrit" this is a wrong assumption. read this post[link]http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/10679/did-the-buddha-speak-pali-are-the-suttas-his-word-verbatim[/link]

It is important to note that the Buddha taught in Magadhi, a dialect of the eastern-UP region; however much later his teachings were written down in Pali. The Buddha specifically did not teach in Sanskrit because it was the language associated with the brahmins, the high-caste priests. And it is very important to note that a lot of the Buddha's teachings were a response to brahminical ideology, so he deliberately did not want to teach in Sanskrit. Also, Magadhi was more vernacular than Sanskrit.

Nice answer, welcome to SE

@Jagger "Buddha taught in Magadhi" your assumption is wrong, read this[link]http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/10679/did-the-buddha-speak-pali-are-the-suttas-his-word-verbatim[/link]


text:
Is there any specific description of life according to Buddhism?
About 'life', I have heard people say: 'life is struggle', 'life is like a gold coin', 'life is statue of problem and sorrow'..... but i could not understand what is it?
Will some one explain clearly or does it depend on person perspective if life is like this and why and how? Thanks.

Life as human being or life in general ?

In Buddhism there is the word "dukkha", which has a number of meanings & uses:
(1) "Dukkha vedana", which means "painful feelings".
(2) "Dukkha lakkhana", which means conditioned things are unable to permanently satisfy; or "unsatisfactoriness"
(3) "Dukkha" as "suffering"; i.e., "difficult to bear"; "hard to endure".
Every person born in the world must experience 'painful feelings' from hunger, cold, heat, sickness, brokenness of the body, old age, seeing violence & ignorance of humanity. If  a person does not have wisdom when feeling painful feelings, these painful feelings will create sorrow & torment.
Every person born in the world cannot find lasting happiness from conditioned or worldly things. Even rich people become unhappy & bored and must buy new things for pleasure because the old things do not make them happy any more. If  a person does not have wisdom when experiencing the unsatisfactoriness of worldly things, their cravings & dissatisfaction will increase, like the addictions of a drug addict increase, until they die from drug overdose.
Life itself can be "dukkha", that is, difficult to bear, hard to endure, because every person must find food to eat, work & take care of a problematic physical body. This "dukkha" is because of attachment to life as "me" & "mine" or selfishness. If  a person has wisdom when experiencing the challenges of life, they will not view life in terms of "me" & "mine"; therefore they will not suffer. Life is "dukkha" when there is attachment to life in terms of "self".
Therefore, 'life is struggle' because the body gets hungry, hot, cold, sick & broken and ordinary pleasures do not bring lasting happiness. 'Life is like a gold coin' because there is nothing in the gold coin that can guarantee & secure happiness. 'Life is statue of problem and sorrow' because the ignorance of the mind will inevitably lead to problems & sorrow, which is why the world still has many wars, many social problems and why people still sorrow & grieve.
But the 'Holy Life' of the Buddha is not a struggle, not a (deceptive) gold coin and not a problem with sorrow. The Buddha explained Nirvana is undeceptive true happiness (MN 140). Nirvana is experienced when the mind does not have attachment to anything as "I", "me" & "mine".

His release, being founded on truth, does not fluctuate, for whatever is deceptive is false; Nirvana — the undeceptive — is true. Thus a
  monk so endowed is endowed with the highest determination for truth,
  for this — Nirvana, the undeceptive — is the highest noble truth.
MN 140

This is peace... the calming of all formations, the relinquishing of all attachments, the ending of craving, dispassion, cessation (of
  suffering), Nibbāna.
MN 26

Suppose I gave an good answer or a bad answer in both cases you do not get close to the reality because you will just believe me or not.
Buddhism teaches you not to believe any thing you heard just observe yourself, Focus on sensations because higher class intellect is the only thing which differs humans from animals, So be wise and see yourself through vipassana and learn Dharma.
We only ask this question when one is feeling negative sensation, Suppose you are ecstatic you would not ask this question, Why or what is life.
Buddha said "when you realize the truth(how perfect is everything) you will tilt your head to the sky and laugh at it"

A common description of life is as "samsara": which means "wandering from one world to another". There are many published descriptions of "samsara": for example here, or here.
Also, life (or "existence", or "things we've put together") is described as having three characteristics: i.e. impermanent, unsatisfying, and non-self.


text:
How can i use meditation to concentrate!
I want to use meditation as a way to deeply concentrate, I always feel as if im in my head and it stops me from doing what I want to do and stops me from getting work done. I want to use meditation. I have been doing  meditation, and I understand it a bit. But how can I achieve one pointed focus to help me stop being in my head and focus?

Possible duplicate of I have been meditating by myself since 2015 but nothing worked for me

I don't think its a duplicate but rather similar in nature.

Don't complicate things, just concentrate. Don't meditate.

Deusllxll, You ask, "I want to use meditation as a way to deeply concentrate." In the beginning, I used a "mantra" meditation to develop a rather laser-like concentration, although it was not associated with Buddhism.
First, have in mind what you are trying to accomplish. Is it a spiritual goal? Are you searching for the meaning of life, and to have a relative understanding about your existence here? Then you can begin with a mantra meditation. It will spill over beneficially to other areas of your life if you go this route, also. You will be able to concentrate the mind and hold it on one thing for extended periods, or concentrate the mind on nothing if you practice Buddhist meditation. All your meditation efforts will end up in the same place.
I started my meditation with a "devotional" slant, related to Bhakti yoga, with a 17 syllable mantra that was in spoken in the Sanskrit language.  I was instructed to do at least one hour (2 1/2 hours preferably) of meditation everyday.  The meditation was with a focus on love for the Divine, which took a while to cultivate. The love is important because it will bind you to the meditation through thick and thin, through the good times and the despair. Whenever I found myself drifting off into thoughts, I was to start over with the mantra.  A person is to keep his mind focused on the "third eye" while meditating, which some believe is where the individual is located spiritually. I did this for five years.
I eventually gravitated to Buddhism where the mantra is the incoming and out-going of the breath, and the feelings of love are compassion for all.
Any type of meditation you do will be a precursor to something deeper and more meaningful.  Those who meditate are on the path of expansion, just like a plant grows from a little seed.  The sign that you have developed an interest in meditation, and are reaching out for instruction means your path will be fuller and richer for you from now on.

In normal english language the word "concentration" has connotations of trying hard to focus on one thing. In Buddhist meditation we often develop concentration by being aware of the breath but we don't try hard to focus only on the breath.
We are always surrounded by distractions, our minds like to pay attention to those unimportant distractions instead of what we want to focus on. One way to avoid distractions is the normal method of putting in a lot of effort to focus on the important things but this is based on clinging and it can't be maintained. Instead of that we calm the mind so that when distractions appear the mind doesn't worry about them. With a calm mind we can focus on what is important without effort.
When you are meditating you can train yourself like this. If you do breath meditation don't try hard to focus on your breathing, whenever you notice you are distracted don't judge yourself just return your awareness to the breath.