text:
Are the 16 stages of Insight mentioned by the Buddha in the early Pali texts or are they a later addition to the Dharma?
I am reading Practical Insight Meditation: Basic and progressive stages by Mahasi Sayadaw. In the book he elaborates on the 16 stages of insight meditation as a kind of road map of what to expect. I was wondering if these stages are part of the Theravada tradition or an integral part of the Dharma canon.

The Seven Stages of Purification are summarised in the Visuddhimagga (The Path of Purification), a 5th century Theravada text (about 800 years after the Buddha lived).

the seven visuddhis come from the Ratha-vinita Sutta (MN 24), and the sixteen stages of knowledge are found in the Patisambhidamagga. –  yuttadhammo
This comparison between practice and "seven relay chariots" points at the goal. Each purity is needed to attain the next. They are often referred to as the "Seven Stages of Purification" (satta-visuddhi):[3]

Purification of Conduct (sīla-visuddhi)
Purification of Mind (citta-visuddhi)
Purification of View (ditthi-visuddhi)
Purification by Overcoming Doubt (kankha-vitarana-visuddhi)
Purification by Knowledge and Vision of What Is Path and Not Path (maggamagga-ñanadassana-visuddhi)
Purification by Knowledge and Vision of the Course of Practice (patipada-ñanadassana-visuddhi)
    Knowledge of contemplation of rise and fall (udayabbayanupassana-nana)
    Knowledge of contemplation of dissolution (bhanganupassana-nana)
    Knowledge of appearance as terror (bhayatupatthana-nana)
    Knowledge of contemplation of danger (adinavanupassana-nana)
    Knowledge of contemplation of dispassion (nibbidanupassana-nana)
    Knowledge of desire for deliverance (muncitukamyata-nana)
    Knowledge of contemplation of reflection (patisankhanupassana-nana)
    Knowledge of equanimity about formations (sankharupekka-nana)
    Conformity knowledge (anuloma-nana)
Purification by Knowledge and Vision (ñanadassana-visuddhi)
    Change of lineage
    The first path and fruit
    The second path and fruit
    The third path and fruit
    The fourth path and fruit

The "Purification by Knowledge and Vision" is the culmination of the practice, in four stages leading to liberation and Nirvana.
The emphasis in this system is on understanding the three marks of existence, dukkha, anatta, anicca. This emphasis is recognizable in the value that is given to vipassana over samatha, especially in the contemporary vipassana movement.

@Devindra - see note 2 Mahasi Sayadaw;The progress of insight

Are you stating that the Visuddhimagga is an early text? AFAIK, it is a later addition to the canon, though it is now very popular, it is not without a lot of controversy.

The earliest source for the enumeration of sixteen stages of knowledge that I know of is the Paṭisambhidāmagga, a treatise ascribed to Sāriputta, included in the Myanmar version of the Khuddaka Nikāya. So yeah, pretty standard Theravada.
Discussion of the knowledges is found throughout the commentaries and makes up most of the section on wisdom in the Visuddhimagga. They are also enumerated in the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha, a famous summary of the Abhidhamma.
Reference to each of the knowledges can be found in the Buddha's words, for example:

udayabbaya-ñāṇa:

yo ca vassasataṃ jīve, apassaṃ udayabbayaṃ.
  ekāhaṃ jīvitaṃ seyyo, passato udayabbayaṃ.
"And better than a hundred years lived without seeing arising & passing away, is one day lived seeing arising & passing away."
-- Dhp. 113

ādīnava-ñāṇa:

“katamā cānanda, ādīnavasaññā? idhānanda, bhikkhu araññagato vā rukkhamūlagato vā suññāgāragato vā iti paṭisañcikkhati — ‘bahudukkho kho ayaṃ kāyo bahuādīnavo? iti imasmiṃ kāye vividhā ābādhā uppajjanti, seyyathidaṃ — cakkhurogo sotarogo ghānarogo jivhārogo kāyarogo sīsarogo kaṇṇarogo mukharogo dantarogo oṭṭharogo kāso sāso pināso ḍāho jaro kucchirogo mucchā pakkhandikā sūlā visūcikā kuṭṭhaṃ gaṇḍo kilāso soso apamāro daddu kaṇḍu kacchu nakhasā vitacchikā lohitaṃ pittaṃ madhumeho aṃsā piḷakā bhagandalā pittasamuṭṭhānā ābādhā semhasamuṭṭhānā ābādhā vātasamuṭṭhānā ābādhā sannipātikā ābādhā utupariṇāmajā ābādhā visamaparihārajā ābādhā opakkamikā ābādhā kammavipākajā ābādhā sītaṃ uṇhaṃ jighacchā pipāsā uccāro passāvo’ti. iti imasmiṃ kāye ādīnavānupassī viharati. ayaṃ vuccatānanda, ādīnavasaññā.
"What, Ananda, is contemplation of disadvantage (danger)? Herein, Ananda, a monk having gone to the forest, or to the foot of a tree, or to a lonely place, contemplates thus: 'Many are the sufferings, many are the disadvantages (dangers) of this body since diverse diseases are engendered in this body, such as the following: Eye-disease, ear-disease, nose-disease, tongue-disease, body-disease, headache, mumps, mouth-disease, tooth-ache, cough, asthma, catarrh, heart-burn, fever, stomach ailment, fainting, dysentry, swelling, gripes, leprosy, boils, scrofula, consumption, epilepsy, ringworm, itch, eruption, tetter, pustule, plethora, diabetes, piles, cancer, fistula, and diseases originating from bile, from phlegm, from wind, from conflict of the humors, from changes of weather, from adverse condition (faulty deportment), from devices (practiced by others), from kamma-vipaka (results of kamma); and cold, heat, hunger, thirst, excrement, and urine.' Thus he dwells contemplating disadvantage (danger) in this body. This Ananda, is called contemplation of disadvantage (danger).
-- AN 10.60 (Piyadassi, trans.)

nibbidā-ñāṇa:

“sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā””ti, yadā paññāya passati.
  atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiyā.
"'All formations are impermanent' —  When one sees thus with wisdom, one becomes disenchanted in regards to dukkha. This is the path to purity."
-- Dhp 277

Translations would be most welcome!

Epilepsy, diabetes and cancer?

"So yeah"... maybe giving five, next time meeting...

I believe they are later addition.  I have never come across any sutta or Buddha-Wajana about the 16 stages of insight.  Let me know if you saw one.

I believe in Dasuttara Sutta in Dīghanikāya, while discussing Nines, Buddha lists 9 Visuddhis, not just 7, as are explained in Vusiddhimaggo. The nine are:
1. Sīlavisuddhi
2. Cittavisuddhi
3. Ditthīvisuddhi
4. Kankhavitarana Visuddhi
5. Maggāmagga Ñanadassana Visuddhi
6. Patipadā Ñanadassana Visuddhi
7. Ñanadassana Visuddhi
8. Pañña Visuddhi
9. Vimutti Visuddhi
I hope that makes it clear that Visuddhis are not later additions then.
Metta...

'Visuddhi' means 'purification'. DN 34 refers to 9 purifications rather than 9 insights. "The nine factors in wrestling for utter purity, to wit, the purification of morals, of the mind, of views, the purification of escaping from doubt, that of intuition and insight into what is the [genuine] path, and what is not, that of intuition and insight into progress, the purification which is intuition and insight, that which is understanding, that which is emancipation." Regards

Katame nava dhammā bhāvetabbā? Nava pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgāni—sīlavisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃpārisuddhi, cittavisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, diṭṭhivisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, kaṅkhāvitaraṇavisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, maggāmaggañāṇadassanavisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, paṭipadāñāṇadassanavisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, ñāṇadassanavisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, paññāvisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ, vimuttivisuddhi pārisuddhipadhāniyaṅgaṃ. Ime nava dhammā bhāvetabbā.

There are lists of knowledges in several texts; patisambhidamagga, sarvastivadin abhidhamma, vimuttimagga, visuddhimagga, abhidhamma commentary.
Of these only the patisambhidamagga is theravadin canon.
However these lists are generally not the same as to the number of items and the knowledges themselves. Only the sarvastivadin abhidhamma and vimuttimagga have the same list iirc.
Afaik the commentaries do not attempt to show how these are inferred from the teachings known as true.
This is one of the various problems with the manual of insight when compared to the Sutta.


text:
What is the difference between 'hard' and 'soft' Jhanas?
I have on a few occasions come across the distinction between a 'hard' and 'soft' Jhana and would like to know what the experiential distinction between these two terms might be.

Here is a quote on the terms "Hard and Soft Jhana" from the book "Mastering The Core Teachings Of The Buddha" by Daniel M. Ingram, p. 136-137:

"Many traditions use the breath as the primary object initially and then shift to the qualities of the states themselves as the object of meditation when they arise and the concentration is strong. The quality of a jhana can either be “soft” or “hard” depending on how solidly one is in the state. In soft jhana, the qualities of that particular state are definitely recognizable in a way that is different from the ordinary experience of those qualities to the degree that we are confident we are in the altered state defined by those qualities.
  ￼￼￼￼￼￼
Concentration vs. Insight
In really hard jhana, it feels as if our mind has been fused to those
  qualities and the object with super glue, as if we were nothing but a solid block or field of those qualities or that object, as if they and the object were the whole world with nothing else remaining. Getting into really “hard” jhana states dramatically increases the beneficial effects of the practice, though it takes greater strength of concentration and usually requires more favorable practice conditions to do so. Taking the beneficial factors of the jhana solely as the object of concentration is helpful for this, as can be using an easily identified external object such as a candle flame or colored disk."

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How was Chögyam Trungpa's behaviour justified by his lineage?
As well as being a preeminent teacher of Tibetan Buddhist, Chögyam Trungpa was notorious for his more extreme behaviour such as drinking, smoking, sleeping with students, crashing cars and so forth. While this seems unusual behaviour for an advanced Buddhist practioner I was told that senior figures in his lineage (Kagyu and Nyingma) and  were very comfortable with his actions.
So how were his more controversial actions justified by others within his lineage? Is there a tradition within Tibetan Buddhism which encompasses seemingly unethical behaviour? Was there any precedence within his lineage for this kind of thing or was he just a very unusual character?

The most famous Tibetan "Mad monk of the Dragon Lineage" Drukpa Kunley would be an example and precedence.

He was known for his crazy methods of enlightening other beings, mostly women, which earned him the title "The Saint of 5,000 Women". Among other things, women would seek his blessing in the form of sex. His intention was to show that it is possible to be enlightened, impart enlightenment, and still lead a very healthy sex life. He demonstrated that celibacy was not necessary for being enlightened. In addition, he wanted to expand the range of means by which enlightenment could be imparted, while adding new evolutionary prospects to the overarching tradition. He is credited with introducing the practice of phallus paintings in Bhutan and placing statues of them on rooftops to drive away evil spirits.[2] Because of this power to awaken unenlightened beings, Kunley's penis is referred to as the "Thunderbolt of Flaming Wisdom" and he himself is known as the "fertility saint". For this reason women from all around the world visited his monastery to seek his blessing.[3][4]

The drunken saint Drukpa Kunley
Poems and songs of Drukpa Kunley
Poem about happiness

I am happy that I am a free Yogi.
So I grow more and more into my inner happiness.
I can have sex with many women,
because I help them to go the path of enlightenment.
Outwardly I'm a fool
and inwardly I live with a clear spiritual system.
Outwardly, I enjoy wine, women and song.
And inwardly I work for the benefit of all beings.
Outwardly, I live for my pleasure
and inwardly I do everything in the right moment.
Outwardly I am a ragged beggar
and inwardly a blissful Buddha.

Song about the pleasure

A young woman finds pleasure in love.
  A young man finds pleasure in sex.
  An old man finds pleasure in his memoirs.
  This is the doctrine of the three pleasures.
Who does not know the truth, is confused.
  Those who have no goals, can not sacrifice.
  Those who have no courage, can not be a Yogi.
  This is the doctrine of the three missing things.
Even if a person knows the way of wisdom;
  without practicing there is no realization.
  Even if a master shows you the way,
  you have to go it by yourself.

The five spiritual ways

I practice the path of self-discipline.
  I meditate every day.
I go the way of embracing love.
  I work as a mother and father of all beings.
I do the deity yoga.
  I visualize myself as a Buddha in the cosmic unity.
I read the books of all religions
  and practice all at the right moment.
The life is my teacher
  and my inner wisdom is my guide.

More on The Sublime Life and Songs of Drukpa Kunley

I've personally known a teacher who was claiming that abusing his female students was a way of teaching (a few of them ended with serious condition in mental hospital); and his followers believed that. I find it easier to think "that guy might have been realized but still a jerk", than justifying his behavior with the supposition that enlightened people always behave ethically.

Everyone has a view, except the enlightened guy!

Exactly. I've heard bunch of similar statements justifying "spiritually" what he was doing. Including him denying that. Come on.

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


text:
Does being in a commited married life make it impossible to attain Nirvana? If not, how can one progress towards Nirvana?
Married life is a form of attachment. If one is in a commited relationship he/she is bound to have a multitude of attachments like a wife, children, personal belongings, wealth etc. But Buddha has once said :

Costumes Do Not Mar Virtue:
"Even though adorned, if living in peace
  calm, tamed, established in the holy life,
  for beings all laying force aside:
  one pure, one peaceful, a bhikkhu is he."
Verse 142, DHAMMAPADA.

Need some verification as to how someone can be in a commited relationship and at the same time achieve nibbana.

King Bimbisara had a queen and he also had to rule the kingdom. Yet he was able to attain the state of Sotapanna.
King Suddhodana married twice and took care of both prince Rahula and prince Nanda while ruling the kingdom. He was able to attain enlightenment. Anathapindika was married and he was able to attain the state of Sotapanna. Queen Samavati was able to attain the state of Sotapanna. So many examples

The question has already been answered in this post: Can a lay person become an Arahant according to the Sutta

Much thanks for the comments. But with the present day distractions, it is quite a paradox how someone can attain sotapanna. Internet, Facebook, Skype and others makes this task quite difficult.

You might find this link helpful http://arointroduction.org/

how someone can be in a commited relationship and at the same time achieve nibbana
I had a dream recently in which my wife went out for the evening without me: I was jealous, craving her and self-centred (wanting her to pay attention to me instead), clinging (wanting to not to lose her, wanting to not lose or to repeat the happy experience/relationship I had earlier with her), and averse to the situation (not wanting to be left alone), and angry (with her for making the decision to go out without me).
Because I was jealous and so on I was unhappy. Even when she came home she still seemed unhappy and avoided me.
Then I thought (after I woke up), maybe it's because I was unhappy like that she wanted to go out without me. Who wants to spend time with some unhappy man? Can you even ever satisfy someone who is craving and clinging?
Our relationship would be better if I were happier in myself, more "unconditionally" happy ... or more possessed of equanimity and metta and less of ego and so on. Then when she came home I could say, "Oh, nice to see you, how are you?" and so on and be a better friend.
a commited relationship is bound to have a multitude of attachments
Perhaps it's helpful to distinguish between "attachment" and "responsibility".
For example maybe you have a responsibility to try to help your children, feed and educate them.
When I was first born my father wanted me to grow up to be a good cricket player: that was his ambition, he put a cricket bat in my cradle, etc. I tried cricket a few times (he played) but not very often. It's probably best that he wasn't too "attached" to the idea of me becoming a cricket player.
In this answer yuttadhammo wrote,

In brief, duty and responsibility should be what dictate our worldly affairs, not concern or care.

advice for marriage partners
In the book I mentioned in this answer the author tries to summarize the Buddha's advice for laypeople. Chapter 6 of that book is about "establishing a marital partnership" and includes the following advice:
For him:

Show respect to her
Refrain from words that might hurt her
Practice faithfulness
Give up dominance
Respect her fondness for beauty

For her:

Work in an organized way
Handle family relationships
Be faithful
Take steps to protect the family wealth
Show skill and energy
Play an active role as his companion and guide

Te book mentions that a lot of Buddhist literature is written by and for monks, and that the role of lay people in society isn't the same as monks'.
Chapter 5 of that book suggests that your partner should be someone who might help your own spiritual progress and life.

In the Gihi Sutta (Householder Sutta), the Buddha said:

"Sariputta, when you know of a householder clothed in white, that he
  is restrained in terms of the five training rules and that he
  obtains at will, without difficulty, without hardship, four pleasant
  mental abidings in the here & now, then if he wants he may state about
  himself: 'Hell is ended; animal wombs are ended; the state of the
  hungry shades is ended; states of deprivation, destitution, the bad
  bourns are ended! I am a stream-winner, steadfast, never again
  destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening!'

You may read the sutta for details of the five training rules and four pleasant mental abidings. Basically, it means that a householder can definitely reach at least stream entry, which is the first stage of enlightenment. After stream entry, he will attain Nirvana within seven rebirths, either as a human or in higher realms.
You can remain a married householder with responsibilities, but you need to slowly get rid of the fetters which are all within yourself and not in the people or situations around you. It's in your mind and heart, not in your life situation. Getting rid of the fetters is related to the fourth pleasant mental abiding. The importance of intention can be seen in this answer, where the hunter's wife is a stream winner who is free from the sins of her husband's profession, because she does not harbour any ill intentions and only fulfills her responsibilities as his wife.
For e.g. if your loved one passes away, you may grieve deeply for a long time, but, if you understand intellectually and subconsciously that nothing is permanent, then you can accept it easily and move beyond it quickly. This is possible when one has progressed well along the path.
When one is still new on the path, as suggested by @ChrisW in his comment with this story, marriage and the lay life of a householder can provide stimuli e.g. in the form of grief in order to prod one towards the path to enlightenment.
You can find many more relevant advice from the Buddha for lay persons on how to manage finances and on many other topics, in the Sigalovada Sutta. These can be considered additional guidance on the path to enlightenment.
I also enjoy the conversation between the Buddha and Dhaniya the cattleman-householder in the Dhaniya Sutta. A small part at the end quoted below. But you should read the whole thing - it's very good.

The Buddha: "Having broken my bonds like a great bull, like a great
  elephant tearing a rotting vine, I never again will lie in the womb:
  so if you want, rain-god, go ahead & rain."
The great cloud rained down straightaway, filling the lowlands & high.
Hearing the rain-god pour down, Dhaniya said: "How great our gain that
  we've gazed on the Blessed One! We go to him, the One with vision, for
  refuge. May you be our teacher, Great Sage. My wife & I are compliant.
  Let's follow the holy life under the One Well-gone. Gone to the far
  shore of aging & death, let's put an end to suffering & stress."

Your answer contrasts, "grieve deeply" with "accept it easily and move beyond it quickly". The OP quotes verse 142 of the Dhammapada: and the story associated with that verse implies that it's after or because of the grief which results from (lay) life that a lay person might go for refuge.

Because of grief, we can pursue the end of suffering. That can be one usefulness of lay life. But also one who has already become free of fetters can accept the loss of a loved one because he understands that nothing is permanent. I will update my answer.

No, being in a commited married life does not make it impossible to attain Nirvana.
Being in a commited married life helps you towards reaching Nirvana.
Suffering always helps you reach Nirvana.
When suffering is present, commited married life can arise.
When commited married life arises, good action and bad action towards liberation arise.
When good action arises more than bad action, knowledge leading to liberation rises.
When knowledge leading to liberation has rised enough, liberation follows.
When liberation follows, suffering has come to an end.
When suffering comes to an end, compassion for suffering of other beings is arised.
When compassion for suffering of other beings is arised, only good action towards these beings is arised.
When good action towards beings is arised, your strive to help these beings become liberated is arised.
If suffering comes to an end while being in a commited married life, your strive to help your woman (or child, or family,...) reach liberation is arised. Sometimes this means ending the relationship. Sometimes it means staying in the relationship.
You see, when you reach Nirvana while being in a commited married life, it's like reaching Nirvana while being a butcher in your own farm (the case is extreme, but it is not impossible). When you reach Nirvana while being a butcher in your own farm, what do you do with your animals? Yes, you stop killing your animals. But, do you let them go? No, because letting them go, would be the same as killing them, as they don't know how to survive because they were domesticated by you. So, you decide paying the price for your past bad actions - you stay with the animals, feed them, nourish them, teach them how to survive, help them towards their strive to end their suffering. Only after you've done everything you could to help your animals, you let go of them. Only a liberated mind can know when he has done everything he could to cleanse his past deeds. Once you let go of them, you never, ever, build your own farm again.

The topic of if householders or laypeople can attain Arahantship is highly debated. There is a list of laypeople having attained Nibbāna in AN 6.119-6.139, but this is a very isolated scripture which could have been a later addition.
The usual consensus it that a householder is capable of attaining the path anāgāmi or non-returner, but that Arahantship is highly unlikely. If Nibbāna is possible for someone committed in a marriage? By deduction, you could say is very highly improbable.
I think that rather than focusing on Nibbāna, you should concentrate on the path of stream entry (sotāpanna). Even that is very difficult to attain, let alone Nibbāna. Once you do reach sotāpanna, you will then have other things to worry about. :)

Anapanasati(mindfulness of breathing)meditation technique is given by the Buddha for the lay men/women married life. One can practice this while doing household chore. As a stream entry, there is still attachment for his/her spouse, only three fetters got rid of. Then if progress to be a Sakadagami, this attachment for the spouse just lessen, still not get rid of. Only at attaining Aanāgāmi, no more attachment to spouse still need not to be a monk.


text:
Do we know in what posture the Buddha sat under the Bodhi tree?
I was reading yesterday this blog by a Zen nun and in this post she casually says in the third to last paragraph that we don't know in what posture the Buddha did sit under the Bodhi tree.
I found that curious because I always assumed that the Buddha sat in a full lotus position.
Is this claim true? Do we not know the actual posture in which the Buddha sat under the Bodhi tree?

Did the Buddha ever give mention to any advantage of the full lotus position? IS there any advantage? Why would we assume he would sit in the full lotus position simply because its uncomfortable ?

How can we possibly answer whether the claim is true? You mean, do the texts mention it? I'm pretty sure the Theravada texts mention it. If that's what you're asking, I can try and find it.

@yuttadhammo A mention in the texts would be an excellent answer, I was just curious about this claim since I have seen plenty of paintings and sculptures representing the Buddha sitting in a lotus posture. So, I just assumed this would have been the posture he adopted.

@Samadhi even if the Buddha did attain those mental states, it doesn't follow that he sat in the lotus position, unless you're claiming that one's mental state is a function of how one is willing to contort one's body.

The story of the Buddha is a teaching story of his night or possibly years. As a human, he had to get up and perform nature's duty. None of this contradicts his accomplishment of liberating consciousness. The posture he sat in, it could have been in a chair, didn't dictate his state of awareness, concentration.What is relevant is what process prepares one's consciousness for liberation. What can we do today to make progress?That is the question I ask.The Buddha responded to who am I by saying "Awake." I want to feel and identify so much with being awake that that is what I feel is my identity.

@Ryan according to Hindu scriptures and yoga manuals the advantage of the lotus position is that it is self supporting. In arupa-jhanas (also well known and practiced by Hindus) when one has lost all sense of the body and mind, a lotus posture will ensure one doesn't fall over.

The story of Jesus has so many controversies - was he really a carpenter, was he really born to Joseph and Mary, was he married and so on. Despite having lived earlier than Jesus there are relatively few such issues with the story of the Buddha, not because there is better objective evidence, but because the eastern way is to let go of these trivial details as unimportant. Who can prove what posture he sat in or other things - the dharma is useful and good and can be realised in any posture. The intellectual mind seeks comfort in facts - yet even objective facts are ultimately subjective.

Thanks @Buddho, I am also not too bothered about whether we can prove the exact posture or not. This question originated more from a curious interest since, as you mention in your first comment, the lotus position has well proven advantages for a meditator.

I hunted down a reference to the lotus posture in the Satipatthana Sutta where it is stated in passing, as a matter of fact; so it is likely the lotus posture was one of those very obvious things to Indian yogis of the time that doesn't need much specific mention.

Nisidati pallankam abhujitva ujum kayam panidhaya parimukham satim upatthapetva so satova assasati sato passasati = "Sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him. Mindful he breathes in, and mindful he breathes out."

And, as I already mentioned in the comment above, according to Hindu scriptures and yoga manuals the advantage of the lotus position is that it is self supporting. In arupa-jhanas (also well known and practiced by Hindus) when one has lost all sense of the body and mind, a lotus posture will ensure one doesn't fall over.
This doesn't specifically mean the Buddha sat in this posture under the Bodhi tree, but if he's advising others to do so, it is likely this was how he sat always.


text:
In Mahayana Buddhism, what is the relation between nirvana and phenomenon?
I have seen nirvana described as the unborn, unconditioned, etc, but then how is it possible to experience nirvana if the experiencer is a conditioned phenomena? I feel as though there is a causal connection implied by that, which would make nirvana dependently originated and subject to permanence.

Are you asking about the official Mahayana stance, or interpretations of Nirvana?  For instance, I take a secular view of Buddhism and have a particular interpretation of this claim, but don't want to submit an answer if you're looking for something different.

I would love to hear your input, I only added the "in mahayana" because I am not very familiar with the more traditional sutra stuff, and moreso with madhyamaka and yogacara texts, and a couple of purely mahayana sutras.

To assume there is an experiencer separate from experiencing is indeed the fallacy that keeps us adrift.  It is a very subtle point, one that can only be reached by diligent study, reflection, and meditation.  Experiencing requires no experiencer.

Sova, I'm aware that the separation between experiencer, experiencing, and experienced is imagined, I've spent some time studying a couple of the maitreya texts. Perhaps my question is worded badly. This question is more about the character of nirvana and how it relates to or doesn't relate to phenomena.

I guess my main problem is the description of it as 'unconditioned', maybe I am just interpreting this word wrong.

@JoeMcDonagh I've seen some Buddhists treat it literally, turning Nirvana and the unconditioned into a transcendent metaphysical reality, and get into all sorts of hair-splitting (and irrelevant) theological debates about it. So I think your interpretation reflects the views of some Buddhists.

Barzell your perspective is appreciated I think you made me look at the term 'unconditioned' more appropriately.

Since you said individual interpretations are ok, here is mine. I'm approaching this from a secular Buddhist perspective, one which treats Buddhism as a psychology and rejects anything unscientific.
Everything is conditioned, including Nirvana.  Furthermore, since enlightenment is realizing the self is conditioned, it makes no sense to claim the enlightened "self" is unconditioned.
However, one can use "unconditioned" in a relative sense when speaking of Nirvana.  Our contentment is usually a function of what we encounter, and in this we are conditioned.  Yet if our contentment is relatively independent of what we encounter (Nirvana) then we can speak of us/Nirvana being unconditioned -- relatively speaking.
Again, this is to be taken in a very relative, phenomenological sense.  Our biology is still conditioned, what brought us to Nirvana was conditioned, etc... Yet our experience feels unconditioned as our well-being is not dependent upon the usual conditions, and in that sense we can say we are unconditioned or that Nirvana is unconditioned.
I hope this helps.

I can get behind this

If you are look at this problem according to a dichotomy between a subject and an object - in this case the self that perceives and a nirvana that is experienced - then you will inevitably conclude that that one conditions the other.  After all, everything else we know in this world has a form that contacts the self through the sense gates and, in turn, gives rise to feelings and our thoughts about what we perceive.  But what happens when we gain insight and remove that thinking subject from the equation?  What happens when we gain the wisdom of non-self and directly see that everything shares in the same emptiness?
With this wisdom, the entire conditioned chain is broken.  Vijja replaces avijja and action, rebirth, mind, matter, the senses, contact, feeling, birth, and all other links in the causal chain never arise.  Nirvana isn't something that a "self" perceives.  Nirvana is the extinction of self.  It is deathless because it is never born according to the twelve links of causation.  It doesn't exist "out there" in some secret place that the the mind has to discover.  One doesn't find nirvana, one becomes it.

Mahayana
In Mahayana Chan tradition the primodial mind is called the Buddha nature. But the zen tradition also emphasises that the Buddha nature is sunyata (emptiness),the absence of an independent and substantial "self".

Hsing Yun, forty-eighth patriarch of the Linji school, equates the Buddha-nature with the dharmakāya in line with pronouncements in key tathāgatagarbha sūtras. He defines these two as:
is the inherent nature that exists in all beings. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, enlightenment is a process of uncovering this inherent nature … The Buddha nature [is] identical with transcendental reality (*nibbana). The unity of the Buddha with everything that exists.

So awakening is the mind seeing it own primordial mind, unblemished. Although they all have slightly different definitions of the Buddha nature(primordial mind). See below:
Tibetan Buddhism

Gelug
The 14th Dalai Lama, an important Gelug figure, speaking from the Madhyamaka philosophical position, sees the Buddha-nature as the "original clear light of mind", but points out that it ultimately does not exist independently, because, like all other phenomena, it is of the nature of emptiness:
Once one pronounces the words "emptiness" and "absolute", one has the impression of speaking of the same thing, in fact of the absolute. If emptiness must be explained through the use of just one of these two terms, there will be confusion. I must say this; otherwise you might think that the innate original clear light as absolute truth really exists.
Jeffrey Hopkins conveys the same understanding:
The basis of purification is the Buddha nature, which is viewed in two ways. One is the clear light nature of the mind, a positive phenomenon, and the other is the emptiness of inherent existence of the mind, a negative phenomenon, a mere absence of inherent establishment of the mind.[90]

Bön/Dzogchen

Germano relates Dzogchen, via Buddha-nature to Madhyamaka, Yogācāra and Abhinavagupta:
...the Great Perfection represents the most sophisticated interpretation of the so-called "Buddha nature" tradition within the context of Indo-Tibetan thought, and as such, is of extreme importance for research into classical esoteric philosophic systems such as Madhyamaka and Yogacara, while also providing fertile grounds for future explorations of the interconnections between Indo-Tibetan and East Asian forms of Buddhism, as well as between Indo-Tibetan Buddhism and contemporary Indian developments such as the tenth century non-dual Shaivism of Abhinavagupta.[96]
The 19th/20th-century Tibetan Buddhist scholar, Shechen Gyaltsap Gyurme Pema Namgyal, sees the Buddha nature as ultimate truth,[97] nirvana, which is constituted of profundity, primordial peace and radiance:
Buddha-nature is immaculate. It is profound, serene, unfabricated suchness, an uncompounded expanse of luminosity; nonarising, unceasing, primordial peace, spontaneously present nirvana.

As for phenomenon it is Maya - an illusion

In Mahayana... Under the influence of ignorance, we believe objects and persons to be independently real, existing apart from causes and conditions. We fail to perceive them as being empty of a real essence, whereas in fact they exist much like māyā, the magical appearance created by the magician. The magician's illusion may exist and function in the world on the basis of some props, gestures, and incantations, yet the show is illusory. The viewers participate in creating the illusion by misperceiving and drawing false conclusions. Conversely, when appearances arise and are seen as illusory, that is considered more accurate.
Altogether, there are "eight examples of illusion..: magic, a dream, a bubble, a rainbow, lightning, the moon reflected in water, a mirage, and a city of celestial musicians." Understanding that what we experience is less substantial than we believe is intended to serve the purpose of liberation from ignorance, fear, and clinging and the attainment of enlightenment..

See post of the Primordial mind of different schools

Wonderful and in-depth post. My one problem here is that in some instances nirvana is said to be unconditioned yet the DL says it doesn't exist independently, which seem to be contradictory ideas. If nirvana doesn't exist independently, then it must be conditioned. Or is it that nirvana is some type of dependently originated thing that is not subject to decay? Seems like a stretch of sorts.

When the DL says nirvana doesn't exist independenly, he meant it exist in the nature of emptiness & unconditioned.

Right. The emptiness of liberation is discussed in the last third of the MMK which I have put some time into; it seems my problem was understanding the term 'unconditioned'. I think my perspective has been shifted straight though and I will be marking this as answered. Thank you for your input!!


text:
Why is my voice changing?
I'm vegan is about 1 year, and as time.
I felt my voice became deeper and more resonant.
I watched some of the monks has such voice
Why is my voice changing?

You are probably reaching puberty. :) Anyways, veganism is a dietary habit and has nothing to do with Buddhism. This question is better suited for http://health.stackexchange.com/.

I agree. I don't think this is really a question about Buddhism so doesn't belong on the site in my opinion. Sorry

I guess that the pitch (whether it's "deeper") is related to how tight your vocal cords are; and how "resonant" it is may depend on details of your breathing (including your diaphragm) but see also Vocal resonation.

I don't mind this question; it would have been nice if it included "from a Buddhist perspective", but I think we can assume it is implied. Even if the answer is simply "Buddhism says nothing about this", it still seems valuable to have it on our site.

I don't know whether lion's roar is meant to imply anything about the tone of voice (except confidence); "voice deep and resonant" is one of the Physical characteristics of the Buddha.

If the implication is that veganism changes one's voice, then I'd want to say that this doesn't belong on the site, except that I think some schools of Buddhism do advocate something like vegetarianism, and thus may have something to say about the benefits.

It's probably to do with the absence of tension. When you're relaxed, your voice tends to be lower. If you meditate or do yoga the voice naturaly goes in that direction. It's possible something similar happens when you eat very healthy and remove other kinds of tensions.

I agree. This happens to monks too, I think; tension can make one high-pitched.

Yes, Bhante. And everyone can remember some ocasion in their life when a big problem was just solved and they sigh with relief and peaceful relaxation. Right after this, the voice is lower. This is what happens in the long run with the problem of suffering itself.

The voice is a "wind-instrument" and it relies on resonance. We have different cavities in the body, e.g. the nasal cavity and the chest cavity. These cavities are where the sound vibrations resonate and thereby gain frequency, e.g. low or high frequency.
When there is tension in the body, i.e. in muscles and ligaments there is restriction and contraction creating less space for the sound vibrations to resonate in. Sound vibrations love more space and tension kills them. Relaxation is important in order to create rich sound vibrations. A lowering of the voice can take place if there is a "bigger" cavity to resonate in, due to less tension in the body, thereby giving the vibrations a larger range of frequency to resonate in.
Its difficult to answer whether or not vegetarianism plays a role in your voice changing. There are many factors involved. You could try asking the question on the other SE's, e.g. "Health and Biology" to gain more answers or ask your doctor for a strictly medical answer if thats what your looking for. I would say get a lot of different opinions on it instead of limiting yourself to one perspective. Then you can evaluate the different answers you got and find out which one fits the best.

From a buddhist perspective an answer will be that your voice changes because it belongs to the 5 aggregates, i.e. the 1st aggregate of form. These aggregates are subject to the 3 signs of existence and therefore they are unstable, in a constant flux and ever-changing.

I think we should just assume an implied "from a Buddhist perspective" with such questions... I don't think we need close this one, since we can answer either a) Buddhism doesn't have anything to say about that, or b) Buddhism says x about that.

@Bhante. I see your point and i have retracted my close-vote.


text:
Did the Buddha try to effect social change?
This month is Buddhist Action Month in the UK when we try to be a bit more socially engaged. To quote from the website

Despite Buddhism's reputation for stillness and withdrawal from the
  world, UK Buddhists are engaged in a wide range of social-change
  projects, alleviating suffering at home and abroad

So leading on from this, I was wondering whether the Buddha promoted this kind of social engagement. Was the Buddha active in addressing political and social injustices of his time or did he more work within the social norms and bring about liberation in that way. I'm particularly interested in references to the Pali Canon to illustrate answers but answers from other traditions and texts would also be interesting.

What kinds of action were they promoting, what kinds of change were they hoping to effect?

All kinds really. We are having an awareness raiser for veganism, some meditation flash mobs in Leeds City Centre, money awareness, something about the environment. I'm going to do a session about family and supporting others but that's probably going to be August now so won't quite fit into the program

@ChrisW here's the program http://leedsbuddhistcentre.org/june-is-buddhist-action-month/

Let me narrow down "engaged Buddhism" to "applying the Dharma to social and political injustices".
In the Kathavatthu Sutta, the Buddha did not prefer monks to engage in discussions concerning mundane things:

Then the Blessed One ... addressed the monks: "For what topic of
  conversation are you gathered together here? ..."
"Just now, lord, after the meal, ... we ... engaged in ... conversation about kings, robbers, &
  ministers of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing,
  furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns,
  cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street &
  the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the
  world & of the sea; talk of whether things exist or not."
"It isn't right, monks, that sons of good families, on having gone
  forth out of faith from home to the homeless life, should get engaged
  in such topics of conversation ....
"There are these ten topics of [proper] conversation. Which ten? Talk
  on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on
  arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on
  release, and on the knowledge & vision of release.

At the same time, the Buddha advised the lay followers in the Sigalovada Sutta on how good friends should be. From here, I extrapolate that lay Buddhists can become good friends of their fellow members of society, and exhort them to be likewise. This can be one way to Engaged Buddhism.

"Young man, be aware of these four good-hearted friends: the helper, the friend who endures in good times and bad, the mentor, and
  the compassionate friend.
"The helper can be identified by four things: by protecting you when you are vulnerable, and likewise your wealth, being a refuge when
  you are afraid, and in various tasks providing double what is
  requested.
"The enduring friend can be identified by four things: by telling you secrets, guarding your own secrets closely, not abandoning you in
  misfortune, and even dying for you.
"The mentor can be identified by four things: by restraining you from wrongdoing, guiding you towards good actions, telling you what
  you ought to know, and showing you the path to heaven.
"The compassionate friend can be identified by four things: by not rejoicing in your misfortune, delighting in your good fortune,
  preventing others from speaking ill of you, and encouraging others who
  praise your good qualities."

Actually for the followers, it is more about doing what they have to do for the closed ones as preached in Singalovada sutta. A good wife, a good son, a good friend can expect them to get rebirth in heaven. It is more about being the change you wan to make. But too much in Political involvement is never recommended in Buddhism and there are 31 topics a lay follower should avoid when he obeys the eight precepts or more. Kings and ministers are in the top of the not to list.
Lord Buddha had made significant social changes, but followers who are not enlightened were never encouraged for waging in such a change. Equality in Buddhism, ie anyone one from any caste, country or such was ordained if he had the ability to understand Dhamma and practice. Lord Buddha denied caste discrimination totally and it was a social change. And the increased social status of the woman. They got the chance to get ordained and Mother was called as the Lord Buddha of home. And when Magadha tried to wage in war against Vajji and capture it, Lord Buddha preached about Saptha Aparihaniya Dharma, which is can be thought to have the best elements from modern ideologies. Further, the Ten Royal qualities were also preached. And there are many other teachings for royalties.


text:
Is there any authenticity to the book 'The Deathbed Sutra of the Buddha: Or Siddhartha's Regrets'?
I found this book in a local bookstore and went online to research it. I could not find much reference to it.  The author, George C. Adams Jr., purports to have been given a lost sutra of the Buddha, given on his deathbed, to Ananda. It looks like a work of complete fiction to me but was wondering if anyone has more information on it.

I'm the author of the Deathbed Sutra, so I can assure you that it's fiction.  It was intended as a work of philosophical fiction which examines some problematic aspects of the Buddha's teachings in the Pali sutras.

Deathbed Sutra of the Buddha
From the customers' reviews of the book, I get the impression that it is a fictional work to provoke a reassessment of one's thinking in light of controversies.
A few reviews from customers:

This book a very clever merging of philosophy and fiction, which examines and challenges some fundamental Buddhist beliefs in a manner that manages to be both deeply insightful but also delightfully entertaining. It’s a short work, but packed full of dense analysis of Buddhist thought, using the clever device of a fictional conversation between Buddha and his attendant, Ananda. Readers are likely to love it or hate it, but in either case it’s definitely a great read.
While it's not a "DaVinci Code for Buddhists" as stated on the back cover, it does offer a fast moving narrative conversation that moves along through the final night of the Buddha's life. It left me wondering what will happen next, and what will the Buddha say next? Thought-provoking and fun at the same time.

MVFWIW is if you are new to Buddhism then it is advisable to learn about the authentic teachings first and when you have cultivated wisdom and faith then to challenge that faith and wisdom with controversies.
As it is Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana have provided enough divergent materials for your wisdom and faith to work on.

"The Da Vinci Code" is fiction (so if its publishers compare this book to The Da Vinci Code that's evidence for its being fiction i.e. Historical fiction)

Based on one of the reviews of the book:

The conversation recorded in this Sutra, between Lord Buddha and his
  closest disciple Ananda, largely unravels the core teachings of
  Buddhism, and portrays the Buddha as condemning himself to hellfire on
  his own deathbed for the errors in his teachings which he suddenly
  confesses to. In these, his final teachings, Buddha is in fact veering
  in a completely new direction, away from the austerities, sensory
  deprivation and renunciation which are the hallmarks of his teachings
  in the Pali Cannon, which form the traditional basis of Buddhism. He
  practically does a u-turn, and goes full speed towards a more
  humanistic teaching, one that discourages renunciation and accepts
  romantic love, one that honors the sacred value inherent in sensory
  contact with the objects of the world, and even affirms the existence
  of a Self – an entity consisting of the noblest essence of the
  personal identity. Having spent much time around several Enlightened
  Masters of the modern age, I personally cannot imagine any of them
  having such a deathbed renunciation of their core teachings. Such a
  strange turn of events would, I think, be reserved for deluded
  teachers such as Rev. Jim Jones, or perhaps Andrew Cohen, who after
  three decades of claiming himself Enlightened suddenly admitted that
  he wasn’t Enlightened after all. I certainly never imagined the Buddha
  to be in that category.

Sounds to me like the author is trying to create some controversy to sell his book by promoting his own ignorant understanding of Buddhist teachings. Wrong View, Wrong Intention, Wrong Speech, Wrong Action and Wrong Livelihood being displayed here. Bad karma all around.


text:
Pride and Shame in Buddhism
Lately I've been noticing how often people in my everyday life mention being proud of themselves or their loved ones for some good effort or action or being ashamed of themselves (or decrying others should be ashamed of themselves) for some lack of good effort or bad action. Even in court precedings, it seems judges take into account whether or not the convicted is "showing remorse" when sentencing. It seems to be considered a positive thing to display your pride or even your shame when appropriate.
In my studies of Buddhism so far, I don't really recall learning anything specific about pride and shame but have only a vague notion that these emotions don't seem very "Buddhist"; maybe being related to ego or judgement.
Did the Buddha teach anything about pride and shame? Are they ever considered positive mind states in Buddhism?
Thank you.

Regarding the Eight Worldly Dhammas you might want to check out "The Buddha and His Teachings". It has a large section on these dhammas in chapter 43.

@Lanka, thank you! Looks like very interesting reading.

Lokavipatti Sutta on the eight worldly winds:

Monks, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions. Which eight? Gain, loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain. These are the eight worldly conditions that spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly conditions.
"For an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person there arise gain, loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain. For a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones there also arise gain, loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain. So what difference, what distinction, what distinguishing factor is there between the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones and the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person?"
"..the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person..he welcomes the arisen gain and rebels against the arisen loss. He welcomes the arisen status and rebels against the arisen disgrace. He welcomes the arisen praise and rebels against the arisen censure. He welcomes the arisen pleasure and rebels against the arisen pain. As he is thus engaged in welcoming & rebelling, he is not released from birth, aging, or death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, or despairs. He is not released, I tell you, from suffering & stress.
"..the disciple of the Noble ones does not welcome the arisen gain, or rebel against the arisen loss. He does not welcome the arisen status, or rebel against the arisen disgrace. He does not welcome the arisen praise, or rebel against the arisen censure. He does not welcome the arisen pleasure, or rebel against the arisen pain. As he thus abandons welcoming & rebelling, he is released from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is released, I tell you, from suffering & stress.
"This is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor between the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones and the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person."

I suppose before we gain enlightenment equipoise or equanimity would be the appropriate response, then again use Upaya-kaushalya (skilful means), if you have the wisdom

I believe what you are mentioning is called the "Eight Worldly Dhammas":

"These conditions are inconstant & impermanent.
Gain and Loss
Pleasure and Pain
Praise and Blame
Fame and Disrepute (status/disgrace)"

Ven. Yuttadhammo also writes about them in his book "Lessons In Practical Buddhism" in the chapter: Dangers, p. 12-24. Here is quote from the chapter:

"The third set of dangers are most important for a meditator to become familiar with so as to not be dissuaded from the goal because of them. The Buddha taught these dangers using the metaphor of crossing a body of water. Just as one attempting to cross a large body of water, much danger awaits for a meditator wishing to escape from samsara to the farther shore where safety and freedom from suffering are found. The four dangers the Buddha enumerated are
1) waves
2) crocodiles
3) whirlpools
4) sharks.
These are four dangers for one wishing to reach the farther shore. They are also metaphors for the dangers that may stop us from reaching peace, happiness and freedom from suffering.
The first danger, waves, is what the Buddha called the eight worldly dhammas, eight vicissitudes of life that we easily get caught up in, even though they are worldly things of no inherent benefit. When we come to practice meditation, we try to leave behind worldly things, doing away with our attachment and aversion to the ways of the world. If we get caught up in such things, they will toss us about like waves on the ocean, and may even drown us with their force.
  The eight worldly dhammas are fame and obscurity, praise and blame, gain and loss, and happiness and suffering. When we are famous, or have high status in society, it is easy to get caught up and proud of it. Some people become addicted to fame, constantly thinking of ways to become better-known or rise up in social status. Such people become devastated if they find themselves without status or fame, and thus are tossed about chasing after the peak of the next wave. Even meditators may succumb to such danger, letting their minds wander into thoughts of becoming famous or successful in the worldly sphere.
Likewise, when we receive praise, we can easily become caught up in it, addicted to the esteem of others, and tossed about whenever we receive dispraise. Some meditators become angry and obstinate when criticized by their teachers, refusing to listen and even leaving the meditation centre without finishing their training simply because of their inability to withstand criticism. Others become caught up in their worldly accomplishments, relishing the praise that comes from involvement in the world, and so are unable to focus their minds on meditation, thinking only of the pleasure that comes from being among those who shower them with praise.
Gain as well can be a great hindrance to meditation if one worries about ones possessions or if craving for new possessions arises. Some monks become dissatisfied with the monastic life because of their remembrance of pleasant experiences when they were lay people. Some monks become infatuated with the lives of lay people and give rise to craving for what seems to be a life of happiness as compared to the difficult life of a monk. Some monks are even enticed by rich lay supporters to disrobe, with the promise of marriage or financial support once they disrobe. Likewise, those meditators who have much wealth will often fail to put out any real effort in the practice, unafraid as they are about the future, thinking that they are already safe and that their riches will protect them from all dangers. Often this prevents such people from even attending a meditation course, since they are unable to see the dangers that await even rich people if they are negligent."

They are also mentioned in verse 29 of "Nagarjuna's Letter to a Friend":

"29) O Realizer of the Transitory World.
Don't have as objects of your mind
The eight transitory things of the world:
Namely, material gain and no gain, happiness and unhappiness, Things nice to
Hear and not nice to hear, or praise and scorn. Be indifferent (toward them)".

Edit:
When reading your question again i see i misunderstood it a bit when reading first. Now i see that you are asking about the internally generated pride, e.g. because of ones own achievements and the like. I think that too can fall under "praising", here praising oneself.
Pride can be refered to the so called asmi-māna meaning the "I-am-conceit". Here the Buddha teaches that one can create a self on 3 levels: I am inferior, I am superior or I am equal. They are all wrong view since they refer to a self of some kind which is not to be found anywhere.
Also pride is one of the 10 fetters that are to be destroyed in order to reach Nibbana. According the palicanon.com pride vanishes completely only at the entrance to arahantship.

Thank you for reminding me about the "waves" analogy Lanka. While I was initially thinking more about an internal welling up of pride or shame rather than externally being praised or blamed; it really does amount to the same I think. :)

You are welcome. I have made an edit to the answer that might address the question more precise.

It would be useful to be very precise about what we mean by "pride" and "shame".
Wikipedia mentions these relevant terms from the Theravada Abhidharma tradition:
The unwholesome mental factors (akusala cetasikas) include:

Ahirika - lack of shame or disgust for doing evil
Anottappa - disregard for consequence, lack of shame for consequences
Māna - conceit or pride
Kukkucca - regret or remorse, shame of past mistakes or actions

The beautiful mental factors (sobhana cetasikas) include:

Sati - mindfulness
Hiri - shame or disgust at doing evil
Ottappa - regard for consequence, or shame for consequences

Looking at the Wikipedia article, Hiri seems to me more like "a preference to not feel remorse" and not for example "actively/actually feeling shame for past and present transgressions".

Hiri is not remorse. That's kukkucca. Hiri is feeling ashamed in a way that prevents one from doing evil. For example being ashamed of paedophilia

For example if I avoid paedophilia then I have no cause to be ashamed of it, and so (having no cause to feel shame) I don't feel shame at doing evil: perhaps it's wanting to avoid shame that's skillful ... whereas doing wrong and feeling shame isn't skillful (and isn't what's meant by Hiri).

Maybe another way of looking at it is to feel disgusted or repulsed at the prospect of doing evil.

in court proceedings judges consider whether the convicted is "showing remorse"
The Bhikkhuni Sutta (that I mentioned in a comment a few days ago) says something,

Then the nun — getting up from her bed, arranging her upper robe over one shoulder, and bowing down with her head at Ven. Ananda's feet — said, "A transgression has overcome me, venerable sir, in that I was so foolish, so muddle-headed, and so unskilled as to act in this way. May my lord Ananda please accept this confession of my transgression as such, so that I may restrain myself in the future."
"Yes, sister, a transgression overcame you in that you were so foolish, so muddle-headed, and so unskilled as to act in this way. But because you see your transgression as such and make amends in accordance with the Dhamma, we accept your confession. For it is a cause of growth in the Dhamma & Discipline of the noble ones when, seeing a transgression as such, one makes amends in accordance with the Dhamma and exercises restraint in the future."

There is a lot about "confession" in the Vinaya: the breaking of various rules is described as "a fault of confession".
And this answer mentions that "skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward" etc. So a person's experiencing remorse might be seen as a motive or incentive for their not repeating the offence.
being proud of someone for some good effort or action or being ashamed
However Māna (pride or conceit) is variously seen as a "poison", as an "unwholesome mental factor", as a "fetter".
I don't see "shame" mentioned explicitly (as wholesome or unwholesome), but I wonder if maybe shame is the same coin as pride: this comment suggests, not that "good" and "bad" actions don't exist, but that thinking "I am better" or "I am not as good" might indicate identity view or conceit.
On the other hand (to take a more positive view), "being proud of their loved one for some good effort or action" sounds like it could be related to this one of the brahmaviharas (which is a "positive mind state"):

Empathetic joy (Pāli and Sanskrit: muditā):
  joy in the accomplishments of a person—oneself or another; sympathetic joy; "the wholesome attitude of rejoicing in the happiness and virtues of all sentient beings."

See also answers to your question What is Right Action for a Buddhist regarding talking about personal success?
I mentioned this psychology experiment to my mum yesterday:

Children are given a task
At the end, praise some of the children for how clever they are; and praise others for how much effort they put into it
When you then give them another difficult task, the observed results were:

Those who had been praised as clever would abandon the new task, when they found it difficult and that they weren't making progress
Those who had been praised for persevering continued the task

Anyway I don't know in what context you've been hearing "proud" but something like that better side of "pride" might be seen in some words/phrases of the suttas: "well said!", "praised by the wise", "noble".


text:
What is effluent?
The Brahmana Sutta, for example, mentions "effluent":

So it is with an arahant whose mental effluents are ended ...

Or in Adhimutta,

One gone to the far shore
  without clinging
  without effluent
  his task completed,
  welcomes the ending of life,
  as if freed from a place of execution.

This Glossary gives a definition but I don't really understand it,

āsava:
  Mental effluent, pollutant, or fermentation. Four qualities — sensuality, views, becoming, and ignorance — that "flow out" of the mind and create the flood of the round of death and rebirth.

There's a longer (perhaps easier to understand) article on Wikipedia: Āsava

What is "effluent" (do you have anything to add to the Glossary and Wikipedia definitions above)?
What is the difference (or connection) between "karma" and "effluent"?
Is there a specific practice for ending "effluents"? Are they an effect or a cause?
Three of these effluents (ignorance, becoming, and sensuality) are also listed as 'defilements' ... what kinds of 'views' are considered effluent?

If this is too many questions, please feel free to answer just one or two.

What is "effluent" (do you have anything to add to the Glossary and Wikipedia definitions above)?

Efflunent are "outflows". How is it outflows? The mind which is the originator of "things", thougts, "goes-out" and make things out that is seen, or heard..etc. When we stay with just the seeing and hearing, there is only visual  object as yet unidentified, sound as yet unrecognised, and it can stay that way. When it does stay that way the mind cannot make anything out of it so remains uninvolved with it.
But when it identifies it then it starts fondling it, and the chain/links of dependent origination runs.
When the mind stays with just the perceiving, i.e seeing, hearing, etc.. without "making it out" it is said to be in a state of awareness called Atammayata. This pali word is attributed to have been discovered by Buddhadasa

What is the difference (or connection) between "karma" and "effluent"?

Kamma ( usually meant as result,vipaka) is the result of an action. Whereas effluent is a tendency (kilesa, unskilfulness) of an untrained mind.

Is there a specific practice for ending "effluents"? Are they an effect or a cause?

Seeing that all things are empty will stop the mind from fondling them.  They are tendencies so come under cause, see above link for Atammayata.

Three of these effluents (ignorance, becoming, and sensuality) are also listed as 'defilements' ... what kinds of 'views' are considered effluent?

Any views that incoporate dualities, i.e. subject and object.

Thank you; I think your answer is clear and descriptive (and short), and the references that you gave are also clear.

I think the "views" that effluents refers to is the same group of views that "the 10 root afflictions" refers to, namely the view of a self, one-sided views, rituals, and impure views..

In summary it seems to mean approximately the same thing as a "fetter".

There's a definition of āsava in the Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines by Maha Thera Nyanatiloka, which is copied into the Dhamma Wiki.
The definition in the Dhamma Wiki is almost the same as in the manual, except that in the Wiki there is added an example of each of the four types. I think an example helps make it easier to understand:

The mental fermentation of sense-desire kāmāsava, Ex: 'All is pleasant'
The mental fermentation of desiring existence bhavāsava, Ex: 'Being is good'
The mental fermentation of wrong views ditthāsava, Ex: 'My opinion is best'
The mental fermentation of ignorance avijjāsava. Ex: 'Suffering exists not'

The term "āsava" is also introduced in the dharmafarer translation of the Jhāna Sutta (AN 9.36), including,

As “mental influxes,” the oldest list is probably the set of 3 influxes—of sense-desire
  (kām’āsava), of existence (bhav’āsava), and of ignorance (avijjâsava)
   -- which are essentially the same
  as the 3 graspings (ti,gaha) of craving (tanhā), conceit (mana) and views (ditthi), on account of which
  arise, resp, the notions “this is mine,” “this I am,” and “this is my self”), such as in the Vatthûpama
  Sutta (M 7).

The second half of the Dhamma Wiki definition says that these are destroyed at various stages of enlightenment, e.g. Stream Entry:

Through the path of Stream-Entry, the fermentation of views is destroyed; Through the path of Non-Returning, the fermentation of sense-desire; Through the path of Arahatship, the fermentations of existence and ignorance. M. 2 shows how to overcome the fermentations, namely, through insight, sense-control, avoidance, wise use of the necessities of life.

I think this implies that these four asavas correspond to, are not different than, four of the ten fetters.
The Sabbasava Sutta (MN 2) implies that beyond these four there are other asavas, for example ill-will (which too corresponds to another of the ten fetters)

Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will...

The introduction to the dharmafarer translation of the Sabbāsava Sutta (MN 2) describes asavas in even more detail, including,

Apparently, the three influxes were in due course expanded into the ten fetters.

This Manual of Abhidhamma (on page 365) contains another definition of asava:

âsavà— is derived from à +√ su, to flow. They
  are so called either because they flow up to the topmost plane
  of existence or because they persist as far as the Gotrabhå
  consciousness (i.e., the thought-moment that immediately
  precedes the Path-consciousõess of the ‘Stream-Winner’—
  Sotàpatti). These âsavas are latent in all worldlings and may
  rise to the surface in any plane of existence. They lie dormant
  in all from an indefinite period and are treated as strong
  intoxicants or drugs that infatuate beings. Defilements,
  Corruptions, Depravities, Taints, Intoxicants, Stains are suggested
  as the closest equivalents for this ‘infamously famous’
  Pàli term. See Compendium, p. 170, n. 1, p. 227.
Of the four âsavas kàmàsava means attachment to
  sensual pleasures, bhavàsava is attachment to Råpa and
  Aråpa planes of existence, diññhàsava are the sixty-two kinds
  of erroneous views (see Brahmajàla Sutta, DN1), and avijjàsava is ignorance with
  regard to the four Noble Truths, past life, future life, both
  past and future lives, and the Law of Dependent Arising.

The "Compendium" which is referenced above is the PTS Compendium of Philosophy, which says it's difficult to translate:

We agreed to let this term, infamously famous, remain
  untranslated. Nothing to fit has yet been discovered.
  Warren's 'depravities' and Neumann's 'Wähnen' make
  no pretence to be literal. 'Floods' and 'Taints' (Rhys
  Davids) convey the idea of spreading movement, of
  disaster, of defilement, my 'Intoxicants' and 'Drugs'
  that of poison. The former idea seems alone active in the
  minds of the Commentators; and yet,
  if A. i., 124, § 7, be compared with Jataka IV., 222 (3):

There is in the world an Asava1 called strong drink,

1 Jataka Commentary: i.e. 'a poison' (visaij), from flower-asava and the like.
the latter idea may claim some canonical support (cf. Dialogues of the Buddha, i. 92 ; ii. 28). To the general
  Buddhist, Asava probably conveyed no more 'visualizable' meaning than sin does to the Christian, although,
  in either case, the moral vibration in consciousness is heavy
  enough.

Different suttas describe how to end the asavas; for example:

The Sabbasava Sutta (MN 2), which starts with:

The Blessed One said, "Monks, the ending of the fermentations is for one who knows & sees, I tell you, not for one who does not know & does not see. For one who knows what & sees what? Appropriate attention & inappropriate attention. When a monk attends inappropriately, unarisen fermentations arise, and arisen fermentations increase. When a monk attends appropriately, unarisen fermentations do not arise, and arisen fermentations are abandoned. There are fermentations to be abandoned by seeing, those to be abandoned by restraining, those to be abandoned by using, those to be abandoned by tolerating, those to be abandoned by avoiding, those to be abandoned by dispelling, and those to be abandoned by developing.

The rest of the sutta gives example of inappropriate and appropriate attention.
The dharmafarer introduction to this sutta has 15 pages, and among other things it tries to show that these methods correspond to the various factors of the noble eightfold path.
Incidentally the example in the sutta of "attending appropriately" is,

He attends appropriately, This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts & practices. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by seeing.

The Jhana Sutta (AN 9.36), which starts with:

"I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception.

The dharmafarer introduction to this sutta says,

The (Āsava-k,khaya) Jhāna Sutta (A 9.36) describes
  the attainment of arhathood or non-return through meditation that applies calm (samatha) as a
  basis for insight (vipassanā). This is one of the four approaches or strategies to meditation as laid out by
  Ānanda in the (Yuganaddha) Paṭipadā Sutta (A 4.170), makes a very clear reference to the various
  vehicles for mental cultivation for the attaining of arhathood, as follows:

Insight preceded by calm.
  When the path arises in him, he pursues it, so that the mental
  fetters are abandoned and the latent tendencies are destroyed.
Calm preceded by insight.
  When the path arises in him, he pursues it, so that the mental
  fetters are abandoned and the latent tendencies are destroyed.
Calm and insight coupled together.
  When the path arises in him, he pursues it, so that the
  mental fetters are abandoned and the latent tendencies are destroyed.
A monk’s mind is seized by agitation caused by higher states of mind;
  but there comes a
  time when his mind becomes internally steadied, composed, unified and concentrated. Then the
  path arises in him, and while he does so, the fetters are abandoned and the latent tendencies are
  destroyed.

Asava was a type of liquor, a sweet fermented barley drink with honey and spices. Here in Buddhism it is used as a metaphor for mental intoxicant. Usually it is used in functional sense, anything that intoxicates the mind can be called an asava. Upon requests to provide examples, Buddha sometimes gave major types of asava:

kama-asava (the intoxicant of sensual desire)
avijja-asava (the intoxicant of ignorance -- or rather delusion/confusion)
ditthi-asava (the intoxicant of a fixed viewpoint or position)
bhava-asava (the intoxicant of quasi-individual existence)

This list should not be understood categorically, but rather as a set of examples. In the broad sense four asavas (intoxicants), four oghas (floods), four yogas (bonds), four ganthas (ties), four upadanas (fuels), five or six nivaranas (hindrances), seven anusayas (latent tendencies), ten sannojanas (fetters), ten kleshas (affects, poisons) -- all are examples of obstacles to enlightenment, given by Buddha to different levels of students.

+1 Whatever else is said of it, your answer seems to match the PTS dictionary definition.

The following words, in order of their psychological subtlety and manifestation (arising), are to be understood: (1) anusaya (underlying tendencies); (2) asava (outflows); (3) nirvarana (hindrances); (4) tanha (cravings); (5) cetana (intentions); and (6) kamma (action).

anusaya is the subconscious underlying tendencies (AN 7.11 and MN 64)
when anusaya flow out or erupt into the conscious mind, this is 'asava'. Asava is at the level of 'ignorance' in dependent origination (MN 9):

With the arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints (asava). With the arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance.

on a mental level, asava take the form of the five hindrances. Hindrances are also at the level of 'ignorance' in dependent origination (AN 10.61):

Ignorance, too, has its nutriment, I declare; and it is not without a nutriment. And what is the nutriment of ignorance? 'The five hindrances,' should be the answer.

Note: The five hindrances are not the 'cause' of ignorance but the
food that keeps ignorance alive
asava and hindrances trigger off distracting internal memories, perceptions, feelings, thoughts & disturbances of breathing, which is 'kaya, vaci and citta sankhara' in dependent origination
if mindfulness does not stop the push of hindrances and sankhara at nama-rupa/mental contact, the hindrances will become 'craving-intentions' for external sense objects
when the cravings & intentions are acted out mentally, verbally and/or physically, at 'becoming', this is kamma

Some quotes to ferret out the subtleties --
SN12.63:

If the nutriment of intentional thought is comprehended, the three kinds of craving are thereby comprehended.

AN 6.63

Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect.

AN 3.76

Kamma is the field...the consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance & fettered by craving is established in to a
  sensual...material...immaterial element (dhatu). Thus there is the
  production of new becoming in the future. If there were no kamma
  ripening in the sensual...material...immaterial element, would
  becoming be discerned?

SN 14.12

In dependence on the sensuality element [anusaya; asava & nirvarana] there arises sensual perception [sankhara; nama-rupa; vedana]; in dependence on the sensual perception there arises
  sensual thought/kāmasaṃkappo [sankhara; nama-rupa]; in dependence on the sensual thought there arises
  sensual zeal/kāmacchando [nama-rupa; tanha]; in dependence on the sensual zeal there arises
  sensual fever/kāmapariḷāho [tanha; upadana]; in dependence on the sensual fever there arises a
  sensual quest [upadana; bhava]. Engaged in a sensual quest, the uninstructed worldling
  conducts himself [bhava; kamma; jati] wrongly in three ways - with body, speech and mind.

My Guru said something similar to the effect that if one catches a thought immediately as it arises, it stops a flow (or flood?) of thoughts which then take attention away. After that, emotion arises. If the emotion is not caught, the body reacts and it becomes extremely hard to reverse the tendency. This pattern recurs constantly in our experience, so we get lots of chances to learn to intercept it earlier and earlier. But only realization cuts off the initial reaction / uprising.

I agree. Most teachers do not teach Dependent Origination precisely. The very 1st most subtle thoughts that arise (which are not 'kamma' or 'volitional') are at 'sankhara' (2nd link). This is the 'leakage' of 'asava'. The nama-rupa (mentality-materiality) must 'catch' these thoughts at contact or 'plug' these 'leaks', otherwise the nama-rupa will be 'flooded' & controlled by these thoughts, which then leads to the craving, attachment, becoming, kamma of Dependent Origination generating suffering or 'drowning in the great flood' .

I added a hyperlink to each reference, even though I didn't hyperlink to exactly the same translator/translation as each of your quotes

Interesting question, I have never heard 'effluent' referred to before. I would say that it is not the same as Karma (as you ask) because Karma means either "What I am here to do" (my duty or purpose) or: What comes back to me as a result of my actions - which is the usual understanding. If effluent refers to something flowing from me, then that does not line up.
There is a famous quote from At the Feet of the Master: "You are not your mind, but it is yours to use." I think people focus way too much on the concept of self as some sort of repository of good and bad that must be purged, polished, purified, emptied, etc. I think of the mind as like a bucket that holds things temporarily. So, if I take a bucket of water and use it to wash my feet for example, then pour it back in the river, this has no effect on others: nothing "flows out". But if I take the bucket of water and fling it at everyone around me, then something (my views, mood, etc) is going out from me and probably making others miserable! This is how I see this word at this time.

Extra point if you get the moon to reflect in your bucket. 100 points if you get the moon to reflect in others' buckets. 1000 points if your bucket breaks while the moon is reflected in it (old koan story). Lazy 8 points if you say something that causes someone else's bucket to break. But then, there would be no one to get the points... I have not heard of this happening while inquiring in to definitions, but I suppose it could.


text:
How are 'conceit' and 'identity-view' not the same?
Looking at the Lists of fetters I see "conceit" and "identity view" listed separately ... and the four stages of enlightenment say that identity view will be abandoned (in the first stage) before conceit (in the fourth stage).
Wikipedia article about Conceit includes,

There is conceit or pride when we consider ourselves important.

How is it that "conceit" could continue after "identity view" has been abandoned?

Mana vs Sakkayaditti

materially important, right?

@user3293056 I don't understand your comment?

@ChrisW i was just momentarily flabaghast that a sage could consider themselves important for what they've realised rather than some other aspect like their calligraphy, fame or influence

@user3293056 Realisation and calligraphy are both empty so I don't get why there needs to be flabbergasted feelings about one and not the other.

i guess you're right, but @Lowbrow being important for how others see you may have some conventional and analytic bite. does that makes sense? i'm "important" if others think i'm important, famous and successful. but if they think i'm "important" for my spiritual qualities this is just a mistake, because there is (most would agree) a fact of the matter about such things over and beyond how i am considered as opposed to talked about

Are u asking how the can co exist? They can only in the “unenlightened” mind whatever that is.

@4N4G4M1N I was asking, given that they are defined as different "fetters", what is the difference? And (as part of explaining how they're different) how can "conceit" continue (until final enlightenment) after "identity-view" is eradicated (at stream-entry)?

Conceit cant continue and must be abandoned in jhana by the sakadagami. Identity view refers to ones identity or lack thereof.

Any identity at that point is delusion or inpossible

But can walk on earth

U may have abandoned yr identity already and not even noticed. Who needs it anyway!

A view is taking something to be true, whereas conceit falls in the category of a simple experience, which one may or may not hold to be valid. It is similar with greed; one may want something without believing it proper to want, and one may likewise feel conceit ("I am better", etc.) without actually believing in a self. This is seen when, after the arising of a conceited thought, one mentally discards it as being based on delusion rather than accepting it as valid.
Identity view, sakkāya-diṭṭhi, is the belief that the aggregates are self; it is this belief that gives rise to conceit, greed, anger, etc., but it is seperate from all of these. It is useful to remember that, while one without sakkāya-diṭṭhi can still give rise to defilement, such defilements are only remnants of past belief in self and are certain to disappear within seven lifetimes at most.
Mahasi Sayadaw discusses the difference and as always has interesting things to say:

At the stage of Sotāpanna, Stream Enterer, the fetters of Personality-belief (false view of individuality), doubts and uncertainty, and adherence to rites and rituals have been completely eradicated. But a Stream Enterer is not yet free from Asmi-māna, the I-conceit. To take pride in one's ability, one's status, "I can do; I am noble," is to hold on to the I-conceit. But a Stream Winner's conceit relates only to the genuine qualities and virtues, he actually possesses and is not false pride based on non-existing qualities and virtues.
-- Mahasi Sayadaw, Anatta-lakkhana Sutta

What he is referring to is that fact that of the nine types of conceit, only three can arise in a sotapanna. The factors are:

thinking one is superior
thinking one equal
thinking one lesser

and

one is superior
one is equal
one is lesser

(3x3=9)
and a Sotapanna can only give rise to true conceit, viz:

thinking one is superior when one is superior
thinking one is equal when one is equal
thinking one is lesser when one is lesser

Mahasi Sayadaw also discusses the curious case of Khemaka, who was struggling with the difference himself (asmi means "I am", māna is conceit):

Asmi māna was once the subject of discussion between the sixty elder monks and Ashin Khemaka, an Anāgāmi, on the question of Arahatship. The latter told them through their intermediary, Dasaka, that he could not discover atta-self, or its attributes in any of the upādānakkhandhās, aggregates of clinging. The elders then concluded that he had become an Arahat and asked him if he was. This called for further elucidation and so he said, "I cannot as yet own myself an Arahat, but I have the notion that I am still in the realm of the five aggregates of clinging (asmīti adhigatam), although I would hesitate to say that this particular thing is 'I'. Then the elders again enquired, "Does I exist in feeling, or perception, or mental formations or consciousness?"
This drove Ashin Khemaka to the presence of the elders so that he could offer a personal explanation which runs as follows-
"Brothers! I cannot say I am matter; nor can I say I am feeling or perception or mental formation: or consciousness or any other beyond the five aggregates. But there still clings to me the notion that I am still in the realm of the five aggregates. But at the same time I cannot say, "This is I."
Ashin Khemaka did not consider any one of the upādānakkhandhās as asmī in the conventional sense. This term suggests that he thought, "I know. I can. I am great." This is self-conceit which grows out of the accomplishment of virtue that he had truly achieved. Consider the fragrance of a water-lily. Does it originate from its stem? From its petals? From its anothers? One can say only conventionally that it emanates from the lily, but one cannot find any rūpa matter that produces fragrance. The notion of asmī is there; but I cannot say, "This is I".
Ashin Khemaka then continued, "An Ariya (the Noble One) destroys the bonds of individuality, doubts, false religious practices, lust and animosity. But at this stage he cannot break away from asmī māna, asmī chanda and anusaya māna. They are subtle kinds of attachment to self, desire for self and inclination toward self. If, however the Ariyan disciple notes with mindfulness the arising and passing away of the five aggregates of clinging, such subtle passions will subside.
"Consider this metaphor of a washerwoman. She washes clothes with soap and water and they become clean-white. Still they smell of soap. Only when they are kept in a scented box they lose their odour. If one continually meditates on the five aggregates of clinging, all these subtle passions will be washed away clean and one can remain without any vestiges of such passions.
-- Mahasi Sayadaw, Silavanta Sutta

TL;DR version
Sakkāya-diṭṭhi is self-view or self-belief.
Conceit or māna is self-emotion.
Long version
Identity view or personality belief (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) is the "theory of soul, heresy of individuality, speculation as to the eternity or otherwise of one's own individuality" according to Bhikkhu Bodhi. It's a wrong view or belief that one is identical with, contained in, independent of, or is the owner of, the five aggregates.
It's merely the wrong view or belief or conviction related to the self. For example, the belief in an absolute, eternal and independent self would be an example of identity view.
This is discussed in the Sabbasava Sutta:

"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view
arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true &
established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely
by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely
by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is
precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as
true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of
mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of
good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant,
everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it
is for eternity. This is called a ... a fetter of views.
Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is
not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain,
distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering &
stress.

The statement "sabbe dhamma anatta" says that all phenomena is not self. It does not say that there is no self.
Conceit (māna) on the other hand is not just a belief or view or conviction. It is also an emotion that is deep-seated. The deep-seated fetters are harder to remove than views. Only an arahant has dropped conceit completely.
Ven. Nyanaponika Thera writes as a footnote to his translation of the Pahana Sutta:

"Conceit" refers in particular to self-conceit (asmi-mano), i.e.,
personality belief, on both the intellectual and the emotional
levels."

According to the Pahana Sutta:

"If a monk has given up the tendency to lust in regard to pleasant
feeling, the tendency to resistance in regard to painful feelings, and
the tendency to ignorance in regard to neither-painful-nor-pleasant
feelings, then he is called one who is free of (unwholesome)
tendencies, one who has the right outlook. He has cut off craving,
severed the fetters (to future existence), and through the full
penetration of conceit, he has made an end of suffering."

Updated view:
Conceit in Buddhism is a technical term, referring to the deep-rooted habit or tendency of self-expression or self-clinging.
It's different from self-view or identity-view, which is more like a belief, than a habit.
The difference between overcoming self-view and overcoming conceit, is like the difference between overcoming wrong beliefs about diet and exercise, and overcoming obesity.

I like this updated view analogy, thanks.

Identity view is a view or belief that there is an entity that exist within one the five khandas, is one of the five khandas, apart from the five khandas, contains one, or more, or all of the five khandas.
When it is discerned that there isn't an entity called a "self", that it doesn't exist, that it is a made up, mistaken view, held strongly, and there are only the five khandas and the workings of Dependent Origination, there still exist the view of "I am" as a reference point.
Where there still exist a sense of "I am" as a reference point, there automatically exist the view of "another" as the other reference point.
With this view of "I am" a comparison can be made with the "another" hence the arising of conceit at 9 levels. When one is better one makes the comparison "I am better", "equal..", "less than ..", and their permutations( *sorry couldn't find the citation").
In Khemo Sutta it has been compared to a remaining scent:

"No, friends, I do not say this 'I am' is the body,... consciousness, nor that it is other than the body,... consciousness. Yet with regard to the five groups of clinging,[1] 'I am' comes to me,[2] but I do not consider it (by way of wrong views) as 'This I am.' It is just like the scent of a blue, red or white lotus.[3] If someone were to say, 'The scent belongs to the petals, or the color, or the fibers,'[4] would he be describing it correctly?"
"Surely not, friend."
"Then how would he describe it correctly?"
"As the scent of the flower, would be the correct explanation."
"In the same way, friends, I do not say this 'I am' is the body,... consciousness, nor that it is other than the body,... consciousness. Yet with regard to the five groups of clinging, 'I am' comes to me, but I do not consider it as 'This I am.' Though, friends, an Ariyan disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters,[5] there still remains in him a subtle remnant[6] from among the five groups of clinging, a subtle remnant of the 'I'-conceit, of the 'I'-desire, an unextirpated lurking tendency[7] to think: 'I am.' Later on he dwells contemplating the rise and fall of the five groups of clinging,[8] and he sees: 'This is the body, this is its arising, this is its passing away. These are feelings,... perceptions,... mental formations,... this is consciousness, this is its arising, this is its passing away.'
"So, as he dwells thus in contemplation of the rise and fall of the five groups of clinging, this subtle remnant from among the five groups of clinging, this subtle remnant of the 'I'-conceit, of the 'I'-desire, this unextirpated lurking tendency to think: 'I am' is brought to an end.[9]
"Friends, it is like a cloth, soiled and stained, whose owners give it to the washerman. He rubs it smooth with salt-earth, lye or cow-dung then rinses it in clean water. Now though the cloth has been cleaned and thoroughly purified, there still hangs about it, unremoved, the subtle smell of salt-earth, lye or cow-dung. The washerman returns it to the owners, who put it away carefully in a sweet-smelling box. Then the smell of salt-earth, lye or cow-dung that still clung to it disappears completely.
"In just the same way, friends, though an Ariyan disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters... [as above]... this unextirpated lurking tendency to think: 'I am' is brought to an end."

Samadhi when you say "With this view of "I am" a comparison can be made with the "another" hence the arising of conceit at 9 levels." what do you mean by 9 levels? Thanks.

If one is better than someone and he thinks "I am better", or "I am equal" or "I am not as good" it is conceit. If the person is equal and he thinks: "I am better" or "I am equal" or "I am not as good", it is conceit". If the person is not as good and he thinks: "I am better" or "I am equal" or "I am not as good", it is conceit. - it should be 9 permutations rather than levels.. I couldn't find the sutta to link it. I just remembered it.

@Robin111 That sounds like an argument against both pride and shame.

This video which Sankha referenced says that there are levels of perversion i.e. "perception", "thought", and "view" – and that Sakkayaditti is a view whereas Mana is a perception.
By analogy you might:

See food and get the impression of it as pleasant or attractive
Start thinking about it, where the thought arises "that food is pleasant"
Actually believe or affirm that thought (i.e. hold the view that the food is pleasant).

Another example would be the shape of the earth.
200 years ago people knew the earth as being flat. That is Ditti(view).
Today we know that the earth is round. But the person living on earth still sees it as flat. That is Sanna(Perception). An Arahath would be like the astronaut in space who both knows and sees the earth as round.

Another example might be addictive drugs: some people know that they're bad but perceive them as good.

Yea, but that highlights craving more than perception or a view

When I said "some people" I meant "drug users" -- I think that if you're a drug user then it's probably clinging (to a previous experience of having perceived it as good), and perceiving (an experienced sense-impression), not just craving (like a thief reaching for the unknown in the dark) ... I suspect it's the perception-that-it-is-good that is what make it addictive ... when the perception (that an addiction is good) contradicts the view (that an addiction is bad) then perhaps that's called an "unwilling addict".

For me It's more like Vedana(sensation) paccaya Thanha(craving) in Paticca Samuppada.
The craving to experience the pleasurable sensation again is what pulls the addict to it.

Simile:
The little boy believes in Santa Clause. At seven years of age, he discards the belief and concludes that Santa Clause is not real and never actually existed. He has eradicated the Santa Clause Personality View.
Fast forward 13 years. He puts a gift under the Xmas tree addressed to his new wife and signs it "From Santa." This came, not from Personality Belief but from conceit wherein he "compares" (I am just as good as ...) himself to Santa.

I'm not sure that matches "conceit" as defined on Wikipedia which says that conceit "creates the basis for disrespecting others". But it might match the type of conceit identified in the Bhikkhuni Sutta, in that you try to practice like Santa Claus did.

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