text:
Anapanasati with Dhatu Manasikara
In Maha-Rahulovada Sutta monk Rahula asks the Buddha for instructions on developing Anapanasati. The Buddha didn't directly give instructions to him of Anapanasaati but instead, gives instructions on developing Anatta on the earth property, the water property, the fire property, the wind property, & the space property.

"Rahula, {any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' There are these five properties, Rahula. Which five? The earth property, the water property, the fire property, the wind property, & the space property."

It also states developing the four Brahma Viharas, the perception of Unattractiveness and Impermanence.
After that only the Buddha gives instructions on Anapanasati.
I also have heard that for the people who are untrained in Anapanasati, they may meditate on the elements and then go to Anapanasati. (Some say it is better to do this way since not doing Anapanasati properly can lead to difficulties in the mind)
PS - I tried the above approach and it was somewhat smoother than directly going into Anapanasati.
Q1. Is doing Dhatu manasikara first and doing Anapanasati afterward a smoother and an effective way of doing Anapanasati?
Q2. Also, can I know the simple explanation of what these actually mean

I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.
I will breathe in sensitive to rapture.
I will breathe in sensitive to pleasure.
I will breathe in sensitive to mental fabrication
I will breathe in calming mental fabrication.
I will breathe in sensitive to the mind.
I will breathe in satisfying the mind
I will breathe in steadying the mind
I will breathe in releasing the mind
I will breathe in focusing on inconstancy.
I will breathe in focusing on dispassion.
I will breathe in focusing on cessation.
I will breathe in focusing on relinquishment.

What do these mean and how to achieve this is Anapanasati?

Q1. Is doing Dhatu manasikara first and doing Anapanasati afterward a smoother and an effective way of doing Anapanasati?

Certainly. MN 62 is a very powerful sutta for establishing an ideal attitude towards meditation. I used to use MN 62 for guided meditation when I was working on meditation retreats, years ago.
Firstly, the meditation on the five elements:

Generates a grounded balanced open awareness of the physical body. We should follow the sutta exactly by viewing/picturing each bodily part that relates to each of the five elements, as written. Let the mind naturally feel the breathing while it scans & views all of those body parts.
Reduces thoughts of self, craving & hindrances.
Allows the sixth element of consciousness to become clear, bright & distinguished from the other five elements, as stated in MN 140:

There remains only consciousness: pure & bright. MN 140

Then MN 62 gives a very powerful analogy, which helps the mind: (i) remain grounded in the physical elements of the body (including the breathing) and; (ii) remain non-attached, non-craving & non-judgmental. It states for each of the five elements:

Rahula, develop the meditation in tune with earth. For when you are developing the meditation in tune with earth, agreeable & disagreeable
  sensory impressions that have arisen will not stay in charge of your
  mind. Just as when people throw what is clean or unclean on the earth
  — feces, urine, saliva, pus or blood — the earth is not horrified,
  humiliated or disgusted by it; in the same way, when you are
  developing the meditation in tune with earth, agreeable & disagreeable
  sensory impressions that have arisen will not stay in charge of your
  mind.

This is very important because the primary instruction in Anapanasati & Satipatthana is:

The monk on that occasion remains... ardent, alert & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

Excellent. I will take these into an account and practice it. Thank you very much.

Q2. Also, can I know the simple explanation of what these actually mean

I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.

This is a mistranslation. It should be 'body fabricator'. The body fabricator is defined in MN 44 as the in & out breathing.
The breathing is the body fabricator because when the breathing is calm, the body is calm; if the breathing is agitated, the body is stressed.; if the breathing is unhealthy, the body is unhealthy. If the breathing ends, the body dies. If the breathing starts, the body lives.
This calming the breathing is achieved by having a quiet non-attached mind, which unifies itself with the breathing.

I will breathe in sensitive to rapture.

When the breathing & body calm sufficiently, rapture will arise to be the predominant object of meditation. It generally takes at least 60 to 75 minutes of calming the breathing constantly for rapture to arise.
Remember, the mind must be non-attached & in the present moment rather than craving for results & thinking about the future.

I will breathe in sensitive to pleasure.

If the mind remains non-attached & concentrated, the rapture will calm and pleasure or happiness will appear, which is a more refined pleasant feeling than rapture. Rapture (piti) is very vibrant, bubbly, agitating & seductive where as happiness (sukha) is more subtle, calm & soothing.

I will breathe in sensitive to mental fabrication

This again is a mistranslation. It should be 'mind fabricator'. Rapture & happiness are the mind fabricator (citta sankhara) because they seduce the mind and, if the mind is not mindful, rapture & happiness will fabricate craving, greed, love, attachment in the mind. This is why they are called the mind fabricator because they fabricate or condition defilment in the mind.

I will breathe in calming mental fabrication.

Just like when the breathing is calmed, by remaining non-attached & equanimous towards rapture & happiness, they will calm.

I will breathe in sensitive to the mind.

When rapture & happiness cease, the mind-heart (citta) itself becomes the object of meditation. Here, the mind has concentration. The mind is not thinking.
However, there will be some residual defilements in the mind such as greed, anger & confusion that subtly arose in response to the rapture. For example, sometimes the mind does not like rapture because the rapture disturbed the mind when it was peacefully watching breathing.
At stage 9, any residual defilements (kilesa) of the mind are observed & calmed.

I will breathe in satisfying the mind

When the defilements are calmed, the mind feels joy due to the cleansing of the defilements. This joy are more refined & subtle than rapture & happiness because the mind is now much more pure.

I will breathe in steadying the mind

When the joy calms, the mind concentrates deeply, in a one-pointed manner because it is pure.

I will breathe in releasing the mind

The mind (automatically) purifies itself of the one-pointedness of concentration & becomes open, bright & perfectly non-attached.

I will breathe in focusing on inconstancy.

At the previous stage the mind became liberated, open & non-attached.
Now, the impermanence of whatever subtle sense objects come to the mind is seen very clearly.
Here, the impermanence is so predominant that the mind sees mostly impermanence (rather than specific objects of impermanence). It is like watching a movie at very fast speed.

I will breathe in focusing on dispassion.

In seeing the crazy impermanence, craving is destroyed more because the impermanence makes sense objects look ugly, unattractive & undesirable.

I will breathe in focusing on cessation.

As craving is crushed or suspended, a taste of nirodha/Nibbana/no suffering/perfect peace occurs.

I will breathe in focusing on relinquishment.

The mind now fully knows all the experiences & things are not-self. It gives up holding anything as self.
The above is the fulfillment of stream-entry on the level of neighbourhood concentration. It is not jhana. It might take a few continuous meditation retreats to achieve this if the mind has no hindrances because reaching stage 9 in a very clear way can be difficult. However, one meditation retreat should be enough to reach stage 8 (if there are no hindrances).
Reading here: Buddhadasa: Mindfulness With Breathing Secrets of Life

Thank you for the explanation. It makes more sense now. Also Anything on doing Datumansikara followed by Anapanasati as mentioned in the question?

Good analysis, Dhammadhatu.

The Datumansikara are not found in MN 118 although the other preliminary practises (metta, asuba, perception of impermance) are. The Datumansikara was given specifically to Rahula because he clung to the aggregates of himself & Buddha as 'self'. This said, MN 62 gives a very powerful teachings not only about the elements being not-self but about meditating "like earth, like water, like space" so the mind does not judge, attach to or crave anything. I think this is the most powerful teaching in MN 62. Regards

There is relation between Anapanasati and four Satipathanas.
ānāpānasati & the first satipaṭṭhāna
"[1] Now, on whatever occasion a monk breathing in long discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, discerns that he is breathing out long; or breathing in short, discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, discerns that he is breathing out short; trains himself to breathe in... &... out sensitive to the entire body; trains himself to breathe in... &... out calming the bodily processes:
On that occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I tell you that this — the in-&-out breath — is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/what-is-the-difference-between-satipa-hana-and-anapanasati/4796/2

After the 1st triad in Anapanasati Sutta:

First Tetrad: Contemplation of the Body (kāya)

Discerning the in and out breathing
Discerning long or short breaths
Experiencing the whole body (sabbakāaya)
Calming bodily formations

In the Maha Satipatthana Sutta other forms a Body Contemplations are mentioned.

"There are in this body
(1) the earth-element,
(2) the water-element,
(3) the fire-element,
(4) the air-element."

So build up until the 1st triad of breath meditation and switch to the 4 elements meditation. (Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta mentions 6 elements.)
Elaborating all the stages of breath meditation in this format is difficult. Best is to read: ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING: Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners by BUDDHADASA BHIKKHU.
Awareness of the breath is also to establish mindfulness and there is a lot of overlap hence you want to read on this subject also: The Satipaṭṭhāna Suttas: An introduction by Piya Tan and also Satipaṭṭhāna, the Direct Path to Realization by Bhikkhu Analayo. Again is is very long to give it as an answer here.
Also Ven. Pa Auk Sayadaw teaches mindfulness of breath followed by 4 elements meditation. More on this see: Mindfulness of Breathing and Four Elements Meditation by Venerable Pa-Auk Sayadaw and Knowing and Seeing by Venerable Pa-Auk Sayadaw.


text:
Breathing Meditation and Repression
I've engaged for a while in breathing meditation, yet I've had concerns that since I'm a person with a tendency for avoidance, that meditation for me involves repressing emotions or experience.
I'm not consciously attempting to deny my experience, or push things away; however, I sometimes feel that's the outcome of my breathing meditation.
I wonder: is there anything else than the breath I could focus on? Will breathing meditation help or hinder with emotional regulation? Is it normal that I experience less thoughts and emotions while focusing on the breath, and should I just keep going?
Ideally, I'd like a technique that generates more contact with emotion, more ability to feel and let go emotions, but especially feel them.
Thanks for any thoughts.
EDIT: Would it be beneficial to sit for a certain amount of time no matter what meditative technique is used? E.g. sit--regardless of meditation type--40 min a day?

Idk, if I was you I would follow one clear path otherwise confusion and doubt could run rampant...but I suppose "sitting regardless of meditation technique" is not meant to be a mixture or something like that...maybe I don't quite understand what was meant?

You can use mindfulness of the actual sensations of the breath as your "anchor" meditation object but when there is a distraction then the distraction itself, as it is, becomes the meditation object until it falls or it is appropriate to go back to the anchor object that is usually the breath (although it could be any aspect of experience depending on who is teaching or what the technique is).
The distractions are not judged (if they are then that very  judging or partiality is a distraction that can be the next object focused on, as it is,  in the present moment).
We have all kinds of emotional feelings like anger, impartiality, sadness, disgust, disliking, liking, euphoria, delight, happiness, partiality and so on
We also have perceptions, thoughts and more or less solid opinions.
We have physical sensations that can often give us a clue to how we're feeling. Like tension in the neck and shoulders or a wonderful warm fuzzy feeling in the heart or it can just be an itch, pain, warmth, cold, shock, ache and so on.
We have all kinds of emotional feelings like anger, impartiality, sadness, disgust, disliking, liking, euphoria, delight, happiness and partiality.
These are examples of the kinds of experiences that arise through the senses and the mind all the time, if wee notice them or if we don't notice them.
When we really get into this kind of meditation, we will see how one thing leads to another and we start seeing more and more subtly in our own experience. We will often see how subtly partial we are with every experience we focus on. The idea is to have equanimity or full impartiality at even the most  subtle level. This kind of meditation with morality and concentration* will slowly show us how to let go and accept reality as it is so we can...
 ...understand how to live
 ...be ready when we get sick
 ...be ready and in harmony with death
*Some techniques have the concentration part built into the meditation such as the Mahasi Technique.
There are many techniques but all I know how to tell people about adequately is the one I do myself -- two links to the full on step by step Mahasi technique (insight meditation):

Sayadaw U Pandita: How to Practice Vipassana Insight Meditation
Bhante Yuttadhammo: How To Meditate: A Beginner's Guide to Peace

Good answer @UUU. Maybe you could add a reference to the Mahasi method to further increase quality.

There are many techniques but all I know how to tell people aboot  adequately is the one I do myself: 2 links to the full on step by step Mahasi technique (insight meditation):   Sayadaw U Pandita: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lionsroar.com/how-to-practice-vipassana-insight-meditation/amp/          Bhante Yuttadhammo: https://static.sirimangalo.org/howto/HTMl.pdf

Buddhist meditation is about taking the bull by the horn, not suppressing or avoiding. Suppression and avoidance lead to unwholesome roots.

(1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;
(2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings;
(3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings

Pahāna Sutta
Many disturbance during mediation originates due to a physical sensation of mental sensations. Say past memories come up, this also is due to the sensation a stimuli has brought about. Also when fabrications arise due to distraction your breath will lose its smoothness. How to handle this is:

know your might has gone to a distracting object
know what sensation this has brought about mentally and physically and look at it dividing and dissecting it until you see the arising and passing nature
bring bad your attention to the breath and look at if you breath is beep, shallow, long or short
periodically, perhaps at the start, middle and end look if reaffirm or review (Paccavekkhana) if your attention (Manasikāra) is with the breath. (No verbal thinking should be involved just see it is with the breath)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Two Extremes of Metta
I've practiced metta, or attempted to, with mixed results.
Sometimes I'm wondering even how to practice metta, and in my mind it feels like I'm just repeating "How can I develop compassion? How can I develop compassion?" It's almost a lack of contact with the feeling of compassion, or just tedious repetition.
However, sometimes, at other times, I feel extreme feeling of compassion, to the point where I clench my jaw to avoid the feeling (since seemingly I am very repressed). It's a mixture of being moved, and compassion, since it arises when I react to either moving events, or when I see someone suffering. But, admittedly, it's really being moved that generates the most feeling.
I have sometimes managed to generate such a feeling in meditation by visualizing people doing acts of kindness, myself included. However, whenever this happens, I feel that the feeling isn't enough, that compassion should require effort.
Is this the case? Does a feeling of being moved, or a compassionate intention and feeling, generate something positive? Or, am I right in thinking that without effort and discipline, these feelings are merely oceanic and vast but not linked with true mental development?
Also, I suspect I might lack self-compassion or something because I don't allow myself to feel these feelings, and I often--used to--feel being undeserving of all these things. Any thoughts?
Thanks
PS: I recall a Buddhist teacher reacting to my yearning to develop compassion with enthusiasm, but advising against body meditation because it could be detrimental. How could I know if metta meditation is best for me? Any signs?

Not sure, but it seems that karuna and metta are mixed. Metta, goodwill or loving-kindness (thought wishing that may yoy be happy) ; karuna, compassion, or pity (thought wishing to find a way to help). Which of those two is spoken about, or are they mixed, Nyom Eggman.

Repeating the words many times over might help you remember to do Metta when it is needed in a difficult situation. As a form of Metta it is very shallow, but nevertheless maybe beneficial. If you develop aversion when doing this best not do it at such times. When you get fed up just stop. Also the repetition may serve the basis for a change in attitude.
The most deeped way to do it is do Vipassana or Samatha Meditation. At some point you might get a pleasant feeling. When this happens bring ups the wish that others also experience this peace. This is more deeper form of Metta.
Objective of Metta is to:

develop and increase qualities Metta
break barriers thereby you consider some people of class of people more favorably than the others

What you are doing is good – keep up with the practice of Metta.  The practice of Metta can be great when your character buildup is based on all four of these:  däna (giving), seela (moral conduct), bhavana (mostly loving kindness towards others), and culminating in panna (wisdom). While these ones are being cultivated, viriya (effort), khanti (patience), adhittana (determination), metta (loving kindness), nekkhamma (renunciation), and upekkha (equanimity) too gets cultivated.
Here the giving (däna) is not only giving to the needy, to animals, to elders and yogis, etc. It also includes the abhaya däna. Here one knows that all sentient beings value one’s life the most, and thus does everything possible to save lives. Abhaya means remove “bhaya” or fright. Thus in doing this, Metta grows simultaneously too. Most categories are inter-related, and grow together. The highest giving is dhamma däna. It starts with teaching morals to others, and living an exemplary life.
Metta Bhavana is best for you. It is just that you do not know what a powerful tool this is. Also you seem to not know that there is a higher level to even the Metta Bhavana. Why this is a powerful tool is that it is possible to remove many of one’s bad kamma seeds through Metta Bhavana.
When a kamma (abhisankhara) is committed, the kammic potential of that kamma is deposited as a kamma seed. A kamma seed has the potential to germinate or come to fruition if suitable conditions appear. By “transferring merits” when one does good deeds, and also by doing the metta bhavana, specially the Ariya metta bhavana, one can get rid of that kamma seed by paying off that debt.
We have become indebted to innumerable beings in previous rebirths. In the “Metta Sutta” the Buddha has explained how much of this debt can be paid off by doing the metta bhavana and also by transferring merits to “all beings” when we do a good deed.
The metta that you do takes a higher significance if you feel for the beings in the lowest four realms (apayas) who undergo unimaginable suffering, both physical and mental. You mentioned about the suffering of this human world in your OP. The human world is included in the lowest five realms where beings have physical bodies that are subject to sicknesses, body aches, and getting old before dying.
Even in the sixth through eleventh realms are that of the devas, they could be subjected to repulsive touch, distasteful/unpleasant tastes, smells, and sounds, and visuals. No living being is free of future suffering. Unless the Sotapanna (stream entrant) stage of Nibbana is attained, even beings in the highest realm can end up in the  lowest four realms in future rebirths.
Thus it should be your wish that they attain at least the Sotapanna (stream entrant) stage of Nibbana  by comprehending the Three Characteristics of  anicca, dukkha, anatta. Then one becomes free from the four lower realms forever.
When the next stage of Nibbana (Sakadagami stage) is attained, one becomes free of births in the lower five realms where suffering due to physical ailments and diseases are possible. At the Anagami stage, one removes more akusala citta and will never be born again in kama loka including the deva realm. So in this higher metta bhavana, the words have deeper meanings. When you say “be healthy” now it is meant to be healthy forever. Unlike the one that you used to do, in this one all four Brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita, upekkha) are cultivated.
“May myself and all living beings attain the Sotapanna stage and be free from suffering in the lower four realms forever”
“May myself and all living beings attain the Sakadagami stage and be healthy forever”.
“May myself and all living beings attain the Anagami stage and be content (attain peaceful happiness)  forever”.
“May myself and all living beings attain the Arahant stage and be free from all suffering and attain the full Nibbanic bliss”.

Consider hate. Sometimes we find thoughts of hate displeasing and that turns us away from it or we find them harmful and we repress them. But having frequent thoughts of hate (say, as an escape for some pain), our mind develops into hatred. When we feel pleasure with it, we obsess and our thoughts and imaginations are colored by hate -- we imagine situation where we act on hate and we find pleasure in them. This further inspires us to act on hate. Later on, some event may happen and we act instinctively and naturally on hate because of the mind being developed on it. As this is now ingrained in ourselves, part of our thoughts and act, we essentially became a hateful person.
Then, this is the way that there is development in hate.

It's the same with metta or compassion. The feeling of being moved, even when the circumstances are sad as in the case of compassion, is a sublime feeling (probably, hence the name of brahma-vihara), and also pleasant.
As it turns out, the mind naturally inclines towards that pleasant feeling -- even though some of us are a bit scared by it and instinctively repress it. When that feeling is nurtured, our thoughts and imaginations are colored by it. So we might see or imagine a person being very compassionate or kind and think "I wish I was like that person". In this way, we become inspired. Then, our thoughts and imaginations further makes us adapt and feel comfortable with acting in the same way, as these thoughts and imaginations are pleasing.
Later on, some event may happen and, because of that development, we act instinctively and naturally on compassion or kindness. As this is now ingrained in ourselves, part of our thoughts and act, we essentially became a compassionate or kind person.
Then, this is the way that there is development in kindness or compassion.

“Bhikkhus, whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. [...] If he frequently thinks and ponders upon thoughts of non-ill will ... non-cruelty and he has abandoned the thought of ill will ... cruelty to cultivate the thought of non-ill will ... non-cruelty, then his mind inclines to thoughts of non-ill will ... non-cruelty.
-- MN 19

Finally, there are ways of developing these factors deeper through specific types of meditations, much of which have been discussed here previously. There seems to be (at the moment of writing this) 28 questions with metta in their title and a few more with "kindness" in the title. They might give some pointers to learn more about this practice.

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


text:
What is the difference between Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca?
In the Madhupindika Sutta: The Ball of Honey (MN 18), what is the difference between Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca?

Vitakka-vicāra is  'thought-conception and discursive thinking'.  Before we speak on something, always conscious, deliberate thoughts on what we are going to say (out loud) takes place within us. In Dhamma, this is called ‘vaci sankhara’.  Or as “vitakka vicara vaci sankhara“, which means “vaci sankhara are ‘vitakka  &  vicara“ - our conscious, deliberate thoughts.
‘Vitakka’ points the mind to a given thought object – the initial ‘thought’. ‘Vicara’ keeps the mind engaged on that thought object, i.e., generating new thoughts about it – thinking through/further on this initial ‘thought’. This has been compared to a bee flying to a certain flower (Vitakka) and then buzzing around that flower (Vicara) while drinking nectar.
Buddha said “dhammo ha vé rakkati dhammacari” or “dhamma will guide one in the direction of dhamma that one follows”. This happens once a person becomes a Sotapanna (stream entrant). Once you attain this initial state in the PATH, your internal dialogue ( any conversation that takes place that is 'inner' and 'unspoken') is in keeping with dhamma. This inner conversation always guide you in the direction of dhamma that you follow.
Vitakka (focused application of thoughts), when cultivated in the Dhamma Path become samma sankappa. Thus Samma Ditthi leads to the next step in the Noble Eightfold Path: Samma Sankappa. “Samma” means “san” (adding things to perpetuate the suffering/rebirth process) + “ma” (remove or get rid of). Thus Samma Ditthi is the vision (anicca, dukkha, anatta) that helps removing “san“; Samma Sankappa are the thoughts that help remove ‘san“.
There are people who attain ‘anariya jhanas’  or ‘mundane jhanas’ by focusing the mind on any thought object (vitakka) that come their way. This could be the breath, a kasina object, or any other religious symbol of any religion, and then fixating the mind on this object.
For one who contemplates the ‘Tilakkhana’ of anicca, dukkha, anatta at least to some extent, such thought objects (vitakka) are in keeping with Dhamma, and it is possible to attain Ariya jhanas. It is because this contemplation gives rise to ‘niramisa sukha’ or a ‘cooling down’ over time. This is what we call ‘kammatthana’ to cultivate jhana.  These ‘kammatthana’. The thing is one has to know the meaning of these Pali phrases, for one to think through. These phrases cannot be used just as a chanting object without understanding what is meant by it.
When meditating, in the first absorption, it reads in Pali "vivicceva kamehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkam savicaram vivikajam pitisukham pathamajjhanam upasappajjha viharati." It is when Vitakka-vicāra comes to an end, and Savitakka-Savicāra remains.
Papañca can be said as an unhealthy direction that vitakka-vicāra would lead us to if we do not guard against this very Papañca. Papañca always lead to conflict. The Buddha once described this in the Attadanda Sutta (Arming Oneself– SN 4:15):

“I will tell of how I experienced samvega. Seeing people floundering like fish in small puddles, competing with one another– as I saw this, fear came into me. The world was entirely without substance. All the directions were knocked out of line. Wanting a haven for myself, I saw nothing that wasn’t laid claim to. Seeing nothing in the end but competition, I felt discontent.  And then I saw an arrow here, so very hard to see, embedded in the heart. Overcome by this arrow you run in all directions. But simply on pulling it out you don’t run, you don’t sink.”
  Buddha wanted to see why rather than trying to solve the problem by looking for a larger puddle for oneself or ones fellow fish, as to why people would want to be fish in the first place. That is when he found an arrow embedded in his own heart. This arrow is papañca. Papañca is a type of thinking that causes conflict within those who think it, and leads them into conflict with people outside.

If we take Papañca  to mean “objectification”,  then it’s from treating yourself and the world around you as objects–rather than, say, as events or processes–that the perceptions causing inner and outer conflict derive. , It’s because you have passion, desire, delight, or craving for something that you identify with a given thing. In identifying with it, you become tied there. Then you see your sources of food within that puddle as dear, and anyone who blocks those sources as not-dear. From this distinction come envy and stinginess, hostility, violence, rivalry, and ill will.
If we take Papañca to mean falsification and distortion, then the three types of thought: craving, conceit, and views, functions to slow the mind down in its escape from saṁsāra. It is the previous memory of mental events play in influencing mental proliferations. These previous memories are equivalent to what are known as āsava in Pali - an important element responsible for defiling the mind. It is the Papañca that makes us think that people are such and such, when the truth be is the opposite of what we thought of it.

Thanks SV.Can I say Mitya Sankappa as Papanca?

Sadhu! Maybe useful The Arrows of Thinking - Papañca & The Path to End Conflict, it list also the kind of thought called papanca, Nyom Saphta Visuddhi, @SarathW .

Yes, and No… @SarathW. I am still not clear on Papañca. Think of it this way… If your wife or friend has done something, and without asking her as to why she did that, you come up with other thoughts as to why she could have done that… - that is Papañca. You could have given the benefit of the doubt to her, or you could have asked her as to why she did it. So most conflicts start because of Papañca. Papañca is the vitakka-vicāra that we do, that lead to conflicts.

In 16 steps breath meditation, are you in Vitakka/Vicara mode? Why it is not Papanca?

After the first jhana you go beyond the Vitakka/Vicara mode to the  Savitakka/Savicara mode. These states are without reflection and discursive thinking (Avitakka/Avicara). Where there is no Avitakka/Avicara, there are no possibility for Papañca to occur.

Vitakka/Vicara are the factors which gives rise to thoughts. When Vitakka/Vicara subsides the through ability is lost. Papanca is the stream of thoughts in succession resulting from an initial thought.
Say I get the desire to have burger. This is the 1st thought. This arises partly due to Vitakka/Vicara. If Vitakka/Vicara is missing the you cannot get this thought. Now you start planning the way to get this. This is your next thought, followed by a lot more thoughts on the subject. You will think shall I go to this restaurant or that. The road you take. Etc. This is Papanca. (The additional throughs arise due to the fact that Vitakka/Vicara is present.)
Vitakka/Vicara is present in all Papanca. Papanca is the snowballing of thoughts starting from initial thought. In all proliferated thought Vitakka/Vicara is present.
If the train of thoughts are represented like this:

initial thought - unprompted by other thoughts - Vitakka/Vicara only - e.g. a smell
next thought - as reaction to thought 1 - Vitakka/Vicara (without Vitakka/Vicara no thoughts will arise) and Papanca - e.g. some one who wore the perfume - this is a related thought
next thought - as reaction to thought 2 - Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca - e.g. party that person was in - fills in details
next thought - as reaction to thought 3 - Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca - e.g. something that happened in the party - fills in details
next thought - as reaction to thought 4 - Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca - e.g. something about another person involved with the incident - relate thought
next thought - as reaction to thought 5 - Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca - e.g. if this has happened like this it would have been better - imagination about the past
next thought - as reaction to thought 6 - Vitakka/Vicara and Papanca - e.g. if I was in a similar situation I would do this - imagination about the future

...
Also note: Unwholesome Vitakka/Vicara is generally Papanca but this leads to be scatterbrain than concentrated. Also leading to Restless Worry. This does not result in any Jhana. Also Papanca is obsessed with a thought. If a memory or thought comes and you do not keep thinking along the initial thought it is not Papanca. If you continue thinking from the initial though then it is Papanca. When you say Papanca aimless string of thoughts. If you maintain wise attention then thinking and planning will not be unwholesome.
Also see: What is Papañca? BY ANDREW OLENDZKI

Thank you, Suminda. Vitakka and Vicara are defined as initial application and sustained application. How do you reconcile this with Papanca?

I updated. See if this is more clear.

@SarathW why the downvote?

It is not me. Sorry

Thanks all.
Based on your answers I came to the following conclusion.
Papanca is the unwholsome Vicara just before the first Jhana.
Further reading.
https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=29748&p=428110#p428110
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/wh ... ca/5706/10

Unwholesome Vitakka/Vicara is Papanca but this leads to be scatterbrain than concentrated. Also leading to Restless Worry. This does not result in any Jhana. Also Papanca is obsessed with a thought. If a memory or thought comes and you do not keep thinking along the initial thought it is not Papanca.

Yes, that is how I understand it now. Thanks.


text:
Is there a concept of after life in Buddhism?
I know that Nirvana is not like heaven the one they have in Christianity and Islam, but rather just a state of mind in the present world. Then what happens to someone who dies after becoming the enlightened one or becoming a Buddha? Where does he/she go?

If you are new to Buddhism pls be reminded that there are different schools, the main are Theravada and Mahayana, their views are very different almost contradictory. The answerers represent their conviction of adopting certain schools.

There are 2 types of Nibbana which are:

sopadhishesa-nirvana (nibbana with a remainder) - while alive
parinirvana or anupadhishesa-nirvana (nibbana without remainder, or final nirvana) - after death

Nibbana is being blown out. So once you die for a person who has attained Nibbana does not go any where. The person is extinguished. This is like when you blow out the candle the flame does not go any where. The conditions for combustion are not there hence it extinguishers. This is similar to Nirvana. Conditions for future rebirths are no longer present hence you get extinguished.

This is a Theravadin/Pali view, your view. I advise you to use the Pali word: Nibbana, instead.

According to my understanding of the Pali canon, that (i.e. "Where does he/she go?") might be a tricky question to ask of the Buddha even when he's alive (or have an unexpected answer): see for example the topic, Why is the Buddha described as trackless?
Also a classic understanding is that birth is equated with suffering, and enlightenment is equated with no further birth (see for example the comment about the "house builder" on this page): so maybe there is a concept of an after-life in Buddhism (see also Samsara) ... but not for the enlightened Buddha!
On the other hand, Nirvana itself is described as Deathless.
Canonically there are several unanswered questions, of which the one you asked is one: see the Kheme Sutta (SN44.1),

I start answering these things and I want to pull out a bunch of references and quote books etc.... Then I think "thats just ego if I dont need it to answer". So let's try it this way.
Yes, most definitely an after-life exists in Buddhism. We are not really this body. We are the drivers inside it. NOT the brain though, thats physical. That preserves memories and identifies patterns. We are the actual feeling part of the emotions.
So we have this shell of a body that dies. It doesn't come back. Inside we have the driver, our consciousness, and it doesn't die. Truthfully it was never an individual. Our consciousness is part of the consciousness whole ... which is subject to all of the feelings of the universe and not just our crappy little 5 senses. Our awareness is limited to this vessel right now. A limitation that goes away as we return to the whole.
Once our bodies die we just keep doing this same cycle of crap until we ascend dimensionally.

Are you saying that Consciousness is permanent and lasting? Also what is the Consciousness-whole?

This sounds like the view of Senika (which the Buddha disputed in the Nirvana Sutra).

In the Nirvana Sutra the Buddha delineated between the body and the consciousness and acknowledged the consciousness as infinite. to wit:
"Illustrious youth, I do not say that the six external and internal organs, or the various species of knowledge, are permanent, etc; but what I say is that “that” is permanent, full of joy, personal, and pure, which is left after the six organs and the six objects of sense, and the various kinds of knowledge are all destroyed."
The body dies but the consciousness does not ... even after "the various kinds of knowledge are all destroyed".

Can you give chapter & verse no of Nirvana Sutra?

I am sorry. I used the Dharmaksema interpretation of the MNS from my notes. I will have to research to answer your question like that. I am still a new student. My apologies.

"actual feeling part of the emotions" is also in the brain, and most other mammals have these same parts in common with us (that's why you can see when your dog is happy or depressed). Carl Sagan called this part, common to most or all mammals, and responsible for the emotions, the "limbic system" in his book The Dragons of Eden.


text:
What are the differences between faith and fides?
What are the differences between faith/devotion and fides (deities)?

It would be more clear if you defined "fides". Thanks

There was a discussion of "faith" in Buddhism in these topics.
My summary of this answer is that "faith" in early Buddhism is similar to the faith you have in a doctor: you take medicine because you believe it will work, because you hear it will work, because the doctor recommends it.
The fides you mention isn't a Buddhist term, is it, nor a translation of the Buddhist term? I think that the Latin word fides implies the kind of faith you find in faithfulness: if you're a "faithful husband" or wife, for example, then I think that means you make yourself reliable, predictable, trustworthy, constant ... keeping promises ... you see that in the English word "fidelity".

There are two levels of faith. If by fides, what you meant was ‘good faith’ or ‘trust’, then it is the “unbreakable” faith (saddha) in Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha, that is the other level of faith. The two types of faith that is described in Buddhist teaching are:
Blind, irrational, baseless or rootless faith – amulika saddha; and
Confidence based on reason and experience – akarawathi saddha.
The Buddha asked his disciples to not blindly follow him or his teachings but encouraged them to question, explore and investigate them in order to develop confidence in the teachings through experiential verification. Faith or devotion associated with strong emotions (amulika saddha) will not last long, and can become an obstacle to the disciple’s spiritual development (such as in the case of the Vakkali Thera, who was enamored by the Buddha's appearance). The Buddha admonished Vakkali, stating that “The sight of my foul body is useless; he who sees Dhamma sees me, yo dhammam passati so mam passati; yo mam passati so dhammam passati.”
Unlike faith-based religions where faith is a significant factor for salvation, in Buddhism devotion alone will not help one to attain Nibbana. In the Vimansaka Sutta of the Majjima Nikaya, the Buddha encouraged monks to critically inquire, investigate and clarify what is said as that would lead to the development of confidence based on investigation and conviction.
A disciple with strong faith but weak wisdom (panna) may remain in blind devotion with poor progress while a disciple with strong wisdom but weak faith may become too rational and cunning which would also hinder spiritual progress. The five spiritual faculties of Confidence (saddha), effort (viriya), mindfulness (sati), concentration (samadhi) and wisdom (panna) become spiritual strengths or powers—bala—when they have become unshakable and strong enough to control any opposing factors.
There exists a Conventional Truth and an Absolute Truth in Theravada Buddhism. Most of the time it is the conventional truth that is present in what we perceive. The disciples who are endowed with akarawathi saddha, have the developed wisdom to doubt, question and investigate the commonly translated Buddhist doctrine, to see this higher truth that is consistent with understanding of meaning (Artha), understanding of doctrine (Dharma), understanding of grammar (Nirukti) and understanding of eloquence (Pratibhaana).


text:
Why is 'attention' ('manasikara') included within 'nama-rupa'?
In respect to Dependent Origination, the Pali suttas state:

Vedanā, saññā, cetanā, phasso, manasikāro - idaṃ vuccatāvuso nāmaṃ. Cattāri ca mahābhūtāni catunnañca mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya rūpaṃ. Idaṃ
  vuccatāvuso rūpaṃ. Iti idañca nāmaṃ idañca rūpaṃ - idaṃ vuccatāvuso
  nāmarūpaṃ.
Feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention — these are called mentality. The four great elements and the material form
  derived from the four great elements — these are called materiality.

Alternate translation:

Feeling, perception, intention, contact & attention: This is called name. The four great elements and the form dependent on the four great
  elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called
  name-&-form.

Why do we think 'attention' ('manasikara') is included within 'nama-rupa'?

Note: I personally do not have a definite answer to this question, apart from personal speculation therefore I have asked the question for people to think about & answer.

Nāma is not name. Name is called nāma-paññatti. Nāma has nāma-paññatti as "nāma" word, that is fancied by citta. But nāma is not fantasy of citta.Nāma arise by causes, but nāma-paññatti never arise, no cause. Nāma-paññatti is fantasy of citta.

The sub-comment box is made for comment about the question/answer. Why I should not comment about the wrong point of the question? How people can answer the wrong question?

Wrong translation is not wrong translation, is what you mean. Nāma & Rupa & nibbāna are paramaṭṭha, Name & the others are paññatti. But your translation convert the position of them, as name is paramaṭṭha, that's wrong.

There is this hierarchy in the teaching. One such is in the Nama…..  of the  rupa (material phenomena) & nama (mental phenomena).  Nama is broken down into Vedana (feeling) , Sañña (perception),  cetanā (mental activities),  Passa (contact) , and manasikāra (mental advertence). Buddha placed Passa & Manasikaara to the end for a reason. For the three things: feeling, perception and volition (vedana, sañña, and cetana) to be born contact must be there. Dependent on contact only manasikāra (mental advertence) happens.
Vedanā, saññā, cetanā multiple series of mental events are rapidly arising and passing away from moment to moment. Only if contact happens -  Passa paccaya vedanā, saññā, cetanā….  with vedanā as condition, Tanhā arises.  Passa (Pāli) is a Buddhist term meaning "contact" or "touching”.  Dependent on contact only manasikāra (mental advertence) happens.
In the case of an arahant the manasikāra is in accordance with the Dhamma. They live in the timeless present. For an Arahant in reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. For him it is only “Passa”, whereas for you and me, it is ‘sampassa’ (san+passa).
“San’ is basically the term for “good and bad things we acquire”. When we are thinking about an experience in the past or worrying about a future event, it all happens in the present moment. They are all activity of nāma-rūpa happening only in the present. From this ‘sampassa’ (san+passa) comes Ayonisomanasikāra.
Thus Manasikāra simply means ‘attention’. This in essence is the ability to be aware of the activity of the senses and the origin of mental phenomena, as it happens. The activity of the six senses. (1) Eye and forms (objects), (2) ear and sounds, (3) nose and odours, (4) tongue and tastes, (5) body and tactile objects, (6) mind and mental phenomena (mind objects). This happens both in you and me, as well as in Arahants.
In Arahants there is cetanā. In you and me it is san+ cetanā.  There is a distinction between sankhara and abhisankhara. Sankhara involves everything that we do to live in “this world”; these include breathing, walking, eating, etc. Even an Arahant has to be engaged in sankhara until Parinibbana or death. The prefix “abhi” means “stronger” or “coarse”. Sankhara become abhisankhara by engaging in the “wheeling process”. The sansaric process or the rebirth process is fueled by abhisankhara.

Why do we think 'attention' ('manasikara') is included within 'nama-rupa'?

Attention is a mental factor (cetasika) that arises based on several other factors, one of those being intention (cetana). It performs one of several cognitive functions that allows for consciousness of an object to arise. This can be experienced through the practice of insight meditation. As this is purely a mental function it is included in Nama-rupa, i.e. the Nama-aspect.
In walking meditation the meditator can experience the four great elements as actual processes (ultimate realities), e.g. the feeling of lightness that occurs in the lifting-phase of the foot. That right there is the experience of the fire element. The awareness of that feeling of lightness belongs to Nama and that feeling can only be experienced if attention is present and performing its mental function. Again, we see why attention can be included in the Nama-aspect.
So to answer the question: Attention
 is a mental factor. Mental factors belong to Mentality. Mentality is the Nama-aspect of Nama-rupa.

Citta and cetasica can not work their job without attention.
You can not know/memorize/feel anything, if you don't have attention on it. No one memorize stuff, that they never mind.
Full translation is:

Vedanā, saññā, cetanā, phasso, manasikāro — these (example of 53 lokiya-nāma) are called (53) nāma.
The 4  mahābhūtā rupū  and (24) rūpā, that depend on mahābhūtā rupū,  — these are called (28) rūpa.
These both, nāmā and rūpā, are called nāmarūpa.

Source:

Vedanā, saññā, cetanā, phasso, manasikāro - idaṃ vuccatāvuso nāmaṃ. Cattāri ca mahābhūtāni catunnañca mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya rūpaṃ. Idaṃ vuccatāvuso rūpaṃ. Iti idañca nāmaṃ idañca rūpaṃ - idaṃ vuccatāvuso nāmarūpaṃ.

So, nothing to doubt. Pali is clear.

Nice to see Upasaka Vorapol doing some sacrifies on fathersday. How ever, don't forget the precepts and possible give source-links if given to share. Just to give akasa for possible further kusala mahabhuta or does nama do not need rupa?

Just see the top of page to see link, Johann. I take it from there. However, all pali canons that have age over 100 years are public domain license. We need link just for reference to prove and to check. It is not about license. And however, you can not read pali, johann. There is no value for you. Whatever, see top of page, if you need to see the pali link, what you can not translate. I very tried to tell you learn pali. You learn it near my time, but you understand it so late, so slow.  Because you attached in western's culture, and never want to change anything to be eastern samana.

Very good & helpful answers, including @Saptha Visuddhi's reference to ayonisomanasikāra:

They are all activity of nāma-rūpa happening only in the present. From this ‘sampassa’ (san+passa) comes Ayonisomanasikāra.

I was giving attention to this in meditation this morning and I decided upon this similar answer:

Dependent origination arises from ignorance &, of particularly relevance is, the absence of mindfulness & wisdom at sense contact. About this, MN 38 states:

On seeing a form with the eye, he lusts after it if it is pleasing; he dislikes it if it is unpleasing. He abides with mindfulness of the
  body unestablished, with a limited mind and he does not understand as
  it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom
  wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder.

In respect to this lack of mindfulness & wisdom, AN 10.61 states:

Lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, has its nutriment; it is not without a nutriment. And what is the nutriment of the lack
  of mindfulness and clear comprehension? 'Unwise attention,' should be
  the answer.
When unwise attention (ayonisomanasikāro) prevails, it will make prevail lack of
  mindfulness and clear comprehension.
AN 10.61

In summary, I think attention is included within nama-rupa because ignorance conditions/prepares nama-rupa for unwise/ignorant attention, which in turn will make sense contact unwise/ignorant.

Is it true?
The uninformed run-a-mill-person, touched by form (sound, smell, tast, bodily sensation, idea - here of seeing a fault) on the eye (ear, nose, tongue, body, intelect), pays it wrong attention. Having payed wrong attantion, not having considered it wisely, taking attention as real, lasting, statisfaction, it as "mine", grasps after it, take hold on it, and make it to a matter. So after becoming, mind and matter come to birth.
If a little wisely, one would see, what ever comes to birth, what ever one takes on attention in the mind-matter sphere, all this is subject to decay.
But the uninformed run-a-mill-person, caught in pride and conceit, is incapable for proper attention, incapable to understand mind eg. feeling, perception, intention, contact & attention.
My person tells you, it would be better if he would take form as lasting, satisfacting, for his own, self. Why? Because he could see it's decay.
And how does a disciple of the Noble One considers, acts and pay attention?
Touched by form... touched by attention on the intellect, he gives not unwise ("selfinvolved") attention, considering "this is suffering, this is the cause the origin of suffering, this is the cessation suffering, this is the way leading to the cessation of suffering", giving proper attention in "this has come into being", gives proper attention, does not take grasphold of it. Not taking on it, it does not become matter for mind, nama-rupa does not come into be and stress and suffering is end, released.


text:
Proper way to ask a teacher to become their student
I'm seeking a meditation/dharma teacher to help strengthen my practice, once I find one and establish some relationship what is the proper way to request becoming their student. I'm interested in The etiquette for lay or monastic. Also where I am there is not a strong community of practice what suggestions if any does anyone have about online teachers/instruction? (Hazards/cautions) if the relationship has to be long distance what steps can I take to make it more beneficial?

To start to introduce your self with name and face, is maybe a good 1. advice, what does ?? think? Some general advices for sure useful here. The better you ways and understanding what is good conduct the better the chances to gain a good teacher. To ask such is already great but its also good to ask at proper places with certain usuals.

Maybe just very politely and sincerely ask them. Maybe as good posture as possible, and be dignified in keeping with the level of the place.

Once you find the right teacher, your search for one is over, and there is no need of thinking about how you should approach him or her, as this will happen like that of a reflex action. The big question is how to find this right teacher.
This is because a person needs to be fully established in this path in coming to one of the path factors above that of a stream entrant but this person can present a completely different image to others.
Therefore, it is very difficult to know another person. It is difficult to know whether a person is in the correct path or not, or whether you can place your trust or not, whether you will get into trouble by sharing your experiences with that person or not. It is a great relief if we knew how to understand a person whether that person is a person of integrity or a person of no integrity. It is far greater relief if we have such a person in our life to share our experiences with.
But if you take the trouble to learn the Dhamma contained in the original scriptures to some extent, whether it is from books or online, you will be in a better position to know how to identify ‘a person of integrity’ and ‘a person of no integrity’. In Sappurisa sutta of Anguttara nikaya the Lord Buddha explains how to identify ‘a person of integrity’ and ‘a person of no integrity’.  Here, the Buddha explains ‘a person of integrity’ and ‘a person of no integrity’ can be identified by their qualities.
This, however, is where the tricky part is: You can't be a fair judge of another person's integrity until you've developed some of your own. This is probably the most uncomfortable truth of all, for it requires that you accept responsibility for your judgments. If you want to test other people's potential for good guidance, you must pass a few tests yourself. Again, it's like listening to a pianist. The better you are as a pianist, the better your ability to judge the other person's playing.

Kammatthanagahananiddesa   (chapter 3 of visuddhimagga page 81) and mahakhandhaka in vinaya mahavagga pali, are the best concluded answers.
I don't have the best translated link of them in my hand. I'm sorry.

Perhaps you can add your own translation or summary of it.

I have added visuddhimagga link, but I am not sure for quality of translation.  I can not translate or conclude them, because they are very long and sensitive in sequence of operating procedures. Also, my english skill is terrible, too.  I often use transliteration to avoid translation mistake.

Before teaching the Dhamma, the Buddha would expect certain thing from one: Respect, generosity, patient and the willingness to virtue, before then teaching about the Devas and good dwellings in the world, the disadvantage and if possible followed till here, the Four Noble Truth.
Knowing that many of you might have access to his teachings, my person tries to give a practical teacher for each step. If you do not have the right people next to you, living the talk, although you might have access to the words, you might not succeed: but sometimes, better than searching for the perfect teacher, is to look for one that helps you right where you are stuck for now.
So if, after wise reflecting, you find out that you have authority problems, seek for somebody able to tame you, friends who practice paying respect with body and speech and learn that, till you are able to give gratitude rise.
So here are some bits of advice for the foundations, to gain enough right view, to be able to be considered worthy for sacrifies, and if having the feeling that you are not worthy at all out of wrong self-estimate, just go on and serve and help around and for a person you believe that he represents good attributes and has wisdom.
Don't search for people who you estimate as lower or equal in regard of good virtues, as you would like to when you look for a friend; but look for someone you really can develop "love", a certain kind of fear and respect, people who are able to dominate you and tame you; while at the same time, be sure that they do not depend on you even a little, whether materially nor immaterially. A paid teacher is no teacher at all; a honor-needing teacher is never a high teacher. A teacher accepting you as his disciple for not just giving you as as possible leave, is not free of defilements.

Some practical general advices of behaviour in regard of giving, receiving and approching.

In regard of bodily appearence, name also on internet-Avatar and User placements

In regard of generosity - Better to Give than to Consume

In regard of respect- Opening the Door to the Dhamma: Respect in Buddhist Thought & Practice

In regard of search for teacher general - The Power of Judgment

In regard of fear: Seeds of Becoming and Fear of others

Wherever you are able for now, start to give: for your consumer attitude will never bring you to the Dhamma, how ever much merits you might have, how ever much access to information you have, you might stay as poor as you are and live a live of a hungry ghost again and again, when not turning to give at first place and practice that on and on.
All you estimate as not grasp-worthy, painful, annoying for now and not praising generosity, service for inferior and going forth, all this are you many teacher you should work with.
Only if one wisely prepares one step by step to be possible be tamed and cuts of all his ways out of this prison of practice, can estimate good teachers (inwardly and outwardly) and success in liberation.
If one seeks for liberation before taking on this prison or other ways around, there is no way to success, even all possible control in this world.
Upasika Nina van Gorkum wrote some words on The Greatest Blessings, the Mangala Sutta, which also explains well the Steps to be fulfilled to get the highest gift of teaching and being able to take and penetrate it.
At the end a short list of duties in regard of teacher, be they lay people or ascetics:

(i) by rising from the seat in salutation,

(ii) by attending on him,

(iii) by eagerness to learn,

(iv) by personal service,

(v) by respectful attention while receiving instructions.

(i) by lovable deeds,

(ii) by lovable words,

(iii) by lovable thoughts,

(iv) by keeping open house to them,

(v) by supplying their material needs.

The Layperson's Code of Discipline

An extended version of the answer you find here: [Q&A] Proper way to ask a teacher to become their student (Sadhu for spelling, grammer layout edits)
(Note: this is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gain.)


text:
Beginner's Buddhist Course Syllabus By Ancient Pali Canon (Ganthadhura And Vipassanādhura)
How to learn dhamma as Māhāvihāra Theravāda Buddhists?
How Māhāvihāra Theravāda Buddhists learn kammaṭhāna and dhamma for over 2600 years?

Posting questions in order to answer them yourself is not encouraged on this site: May I share my research, by posting questions on this site and self-answering them?

Should I delete this topic?

You later asked a new question, which seemed to be a duplicate of this question, and which Suminda answered. I merged that duplicate into this one, so this one now contains Suminda's answer too.

Māhāvihāra is not 2600 years.

Oral system, Mukkhapatha, has been using over 2600 years to keep Tipitaka go on. Writing system in Buddhism is very late. And Mahavihara choose to keep Tipitaka by Oral system from the directly inherited Sangha in the 1 buddhist council. Mahavihara has the historical record in VN Parivara "“By whom has it been conveyed?” It has been conveyed by a succession (of teachers)......"

This is through teacher and student lineages through though the years some changes have occurred.
Early on the Dhamma was also preserved this way through oral tradition handed down from teacher to pupil.
One of the best preserved lineages is that handed down from Ledi Sayadaw which has teachers like: Saya Gyi U Ba Khin, S. N. Goenka. It is believed that this is the exact teaching transmitted to Burma through Sona and Uttara. This probably would have the best resemblance to that was taught at Māhāvihāra early on.

I concluded this subject from cakkhupālatheravatthu in dhammapadaṭṭhakathā and vinayapitaka and commentary. My every topics base on Māhāvihāra Theravāda Buddhism. You can see pali source in Māhāvihāra Theravāda Buddhism cannon.

Cakkhupāla lived with upajjhā, who must graduated in bhikkhuparisūpaṭṭhāpaka course, to practice himself to be graduate in nissayamuccaka course, by memorization method (mukkhapatha).

What is nissayamuccaka course, that every monk, like cakkhupāla, must be done, before choose his way in ganthadhura or vipassanādhura?

There are 2 course of beginner, layman/novice course and nissayamuccaka course.

1. layman/novice course
In the introduction of khuddakapātha-commentary said about that 'At 1st saṅgāyanā, 500 bikkhu had concluded some little texts, that popular to teach the newbie in buddhism. It was called kuddhakapātha. It content 9 texts: saraṇa, sikkhāpada, dvattiṃsākāra, kumārapañha, maṅgalasutta, ratanasutta, tirokuṭṭa, nidhikaṇḍa, mettasutta'.

Note: this is the reason the why all theravāda country always teach to memorize these 9 sutta first. They teach follow to 1st saṅgāyanā commentary's syllabus.

 2. nissayamuccaka course
(for person who has done the first course)
In ovādakasikkhāpada-commentary wrote about 7 titles course syllabus:

Bhikkhu must skillfully memorized bhikkhu and bhikkhuni pāṭimokkha, fluently, be firmly fixed in the mind, understand clearly, word by word, meaning by meaning, and the whole story.
Bhikkhu must skillfully memorized 4 bhāṇavāra (about 4 multiple of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta), fluently, be firmly fixed in the mind, understand clearly, word by word, meaning by meaning, and the whole story.
Bhikkhu must understand every saṇghakamma.
Bhikkhu must learn kathāmagga (abbrev of bikkhu advising such as cūḷalāhulovādasutta).
Bhikkhu must learn 3 sutta for 3 biṇḍapāta jobs: vivāha, maṅgala, and avamaṅgala.
Bhikkhu must understand clearly through samathayānika way or vipassanāyanika way.
Bhikkhu must live with upajjhā at least 5 years.

These 7 titles must be done, to be nissayamuccaka. Nissayamuccaka can go everywhere without upajjhā.

When cakkhupāla had done nissayamuccaka course in 5 years, then he made the decision between ganthadhura, or vipassanādhura.

Ganthadhura and Vipassanādhura
In cakkhupālatheravatthu declared Ganthadhura and Vipassanādhura as:

Ganthadhura is job of  nissayamuccaka or higher, who memorized tipitaka and learn commentary such as 1 nikāya, 2 nikāya, or whole tipitaka.

Vipassanādhura is job of  nissayamuccaka or higher, who has not enlighten, then trow every stuff, go to live without 5 kāmaguṇa, then do udayabbayañāṇa and higher, with a purposeful mind (can trow away their life to enlighten) to go to enlighten.

Both need to memorize tipitaka more than nissayamuccaka, too. Ganthadhura memorize books, but Vipassanādhura memorize their sutta and commentary, that they use to meditate.

See also: http://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/2016/09/tipitaka-memorization-is-rule-of-monks.html

cakkhupālatheravatthu:

pabbajissāmevāhaṃ, tātāti tassa viravantasseva satthu santikaṃ gantvā pabbajjaṃ yācitvā laddhapabbajjūpasampado ācariyupajjhāyānaṃ santike pañca vassāni vasitvā vuṭṭhavasso pavāretvā satthāramupasaṅkamitvā vanditvā pucchi – ‘‘bhante, imasmiṃ sāsane kati dhurānī’’ti? ‘‘ganthadhuraṃ, vipassanādhuranti dveyeva dhurāni bhikkhū’’tiฯ ‘‘katamaṃ pana, bhante, ganthadhuraṃ, katamaṃ vipassanādhura’’nti? ‘‘attano paññānurūpena ekaṃ vā dve vā nikāye sakalaṃ vā pana tepiṭakaṃ buddhavacanaṃ uggaṇhitvā tassa dhāraṇaṃ, kathanaṃ, vācananti idaṃ ganthadhuraṃ nāma, sallahukavuttino pana pantasenāsanābhiratassa attabhāve khayavayaṃ paṭṭhapetvā sātaccakiriyavasena vipassanaṃ vaḍḍhetvā arahattaggahaṇanti idaṃ vipassanādhuraṃ nāmā’’tiฯ ‘‘bhante, ahaṃ mahallakakāle pabbajito ganthadhuraṃ pūretuṃ na sakkhissāmi, vipassanādhuraṃ pana pūressāmi, kammaṭṭhānaṃ me kathethā’’tiฯ athassa satthā yāva arahattaṃ kammaṭṭhānaṃ kathesiฯ
so satthāraṃ vanditvā attanā sahagāmino bhikkhū pariyesanto saṭṭhi bhikkhū labhitvā tehi saddhiṃ nikkhamitvā vīsayojanasatamaggaṃ gantvā ekaṃ mahantaṃ paccantagāmaṃ patvā tattha saparivāro piṇḍāya pāvisiฯ manussā vattasampanne bhikkhū disvāva pasannacittā āsanāni paññāpetvā nisīdāpetvā paṇītenāhārena parivisitvā, ‘‘bhante, kuhiṃ ayyā gacchantī’’ti pucchitvā ‘‘yathāphāsukaṭṭhānaṃ upāsakā’’ti vutte paṇḍitā manussā ‘‘vassāvāsaṃ senāsanaṃ pariyesanti bhadantā’’ti ñatvā, ‘‘bhante, sace ayyā imaṃ temāsaṃ idha vaseyyuṃ, mayaṃ saraṇesu patiṭṭhāya sīlāni gaṇheyyāmā’’ti āhaṃsuฯ tepi ‘‘mayaṃ imāni kulāni nissāya bhavanissaraṇaṃ karissāmā’’ti adhivāsesuṃฯ


text:
Is it allowed to quote a Buddhist teaching in a fiction book?
I am writing a romance book. In it one of my character's recites a portion of the Dhammapada. If I publish my book, will I be violating any copyright laws? How would I go about getting permission to put the quote in my book?

See also related question; "Does illegal downloading or viewing of copyright material violate the second precept?".

Also: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/17952/dharma-should-be-free

Buddhist scriptures are so old they are not under copyright. Translations maybe. Some are made freely available. Best is just ask the author or do your own translation. Also quoting a small portion may be acceptable as fair use.

This is a contentious issue in Buddhism because the Buddha taught the Dhamma is to be given freely & because the translators are only translating rather than creating anything original. To quote:

This is the best of gifts: the gift of Dhamma.
AN 9.5

An example of 'Buddhist' copyright clauses are here: Buddhanet Copyright Details and here (bottom of page): Piyavagga: Affection.
A discussion is here: Copyright on the Dhamma and here: Dharma should be free?
The easy solution is to simply change of few words and claim it as your own translation.
If the Buddha was alive, he would say: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn".

Couldn't have said it better. With metta...

I think you mean "legally allowed", which isn't really a question about Buddhism (for example maybe it would be more on-topic at writers.se).
Anyway my understanding is that copyright laws vary from country to country. Ancient works might not be copyright, but modern translations of those works might be copyright.
You might find "copyleft" or "public domain" translations, for example here.
You might assume (correctly or incorrectly) that quoting a small portion counts as "fair use" and use it (possibly with attribution and without prior permission).
Or, getting copyright permission might be a job for your publisher (unless you self-publish).
Otherwise I think you get copyright by contacting the copyright-holder (who is usually identified, in a publication) and asking for permission.

When one uses Dhamma for commercial purposes, on does nothing good for one self and for others. If one uses Dhamma to even increase unskilfull ideas, not only to make benefit from others greed (after love here) and spreads wrong view, using it, its even more worse.
And there is nobody who could ever give you the permission to make commercial use of the Buddhas Dhamma. Everybody doing so, is involved in a thief (in measures of Dhamma). So knowing such one might maybe seek for a dealer and fence or, after wise considerations change either this or that.
Here a such a live-story of same case in fencing: On Human Right, Kamma and trade with Dhamma. They are not of much shame and if not public the trades in Dhamma, do it discrete and most would do on even if telling, even deliberatly knowing it.
One is the way in the world and on Nibbana, its not possible to take the other with it and that is what is the place of gaining path: by letting go of what gives just short pleasure.
One can ask at the worlds biggest and most succesfull public fencing place of Dhamma but there are also other around, sometimes more near.
(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other wordily gains)


text:
Changing of questions and the precept of not speaking what is not true
Venerables,
Upasaka, Upasika
Valued readers and engaged Buddhabodhisattas here,

In how far might it count as a break of the precept, abstaining from telling what is not true, if one changes the circumstances?

For example here:

There might be a question, receiving answers. Afterwards are changes of the questions, sometime seemingly slight, does a change counts as a break?
If not having the intention to missinterpret the answerer, does such anyhow possible give ground that they accure missinterpreted?

To include Abhidhamma aspects:

What are ones reasons willing to change answers, questions, delete parts, modify... afterwards if it is unskillful? Why and how could one modify, delete, change in a skilfulway that would harm in this or that way?
How to go beyound such problems, what whould be a secure solution?
What are the consequences of missinterpreting and changing the true or circumstances to display a differnt picture for ones benefit, harm of others or out of not-knowing and fear (e.g. the four roots of akusala, greed, aversion, delution, fear)?
How do you practice that, or exerianced the matter in you practice in forums and blogs?

Note that it is a general question, but also a very urged matter of all editors and edits here, yet so importand and on topic of practicing Dhamma, that it should not be taken as meta.
(This question is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains.)

Side note in regard of Bu-meta: it might be good if the moderators engage on this maater in regard of: 1. Make use of "on hold" and possible protection of question and or notification of answerers in cases of question changes. My person can not engage there, just with hints in comments, not sure if the old question there still exists.

Shouldn't this be on meta instead? Unfortunately the question is too old, can't be moved anymore.

Yes. It was migrated to Meta, later deleted on Meta, which was counted as a "rejected migration" which automatically reopened it here.

Afterwards are changes of the questions, sometime seemingly slight, does a change counts as a break?
I think it was right (skillful) of you to post this comment ...

(Maybe) Better to put your update into a new question because it would confuse everything. Maybe Beginner like to answer this question independently.

... instead of letting the OP edit their question after it was answered.
Some other Stack Exchange sites have strict rules, like,

A question must be valid (e.g. clear) otherwise it's closed until it's clarified
A (non-closed) question that has been accepted and answered cannot then be modified, if the modification will "invalidate" existing answers

On this site, the community wants/wanted to be less strict about accepting or closing questions, so we have a very liberal (permissive) policy about not closing questions, and people sometimes answer questions which aren't clear.
What are ones reasons willing to change answers, questions, delete parts, modify... afterwards if it is unskillful?
I sometimes edit other people's answers, to improve the formatting, grammar, and spelling (to make them easier to understand). I don't think I try to change the content of other people's answers. I sometimes delete or reword (soften) a fragment of an answer, if I think that fragment seems hostile.
I tend to edit (add to) my own answer, if the OP edits their question, or if the OP posts a comment which asks an additional question.
How to go beyound such problems, what whould be a secure solution?
I suppose theoretically we might lock or protect questions so they can't be edited after they're answered. But I think that would be too rigid a policy,  because instead I think it's good to clarify (improve) questions, just as it's good to improve answers, especially if it remains our policy to accept (not close) slightly unclear questions.
I suppose we should (and maybe usually do) try to draw the line at asking a completely new question. If the OP has a new question or a follow-on (subsequent, related) question, that should be posted as a new question (or perhaps as a comment under an answer, asking to clarify that answer).
Instead of a "secure" solution (automatically making questions read-only) maybe have a human or humane, flexible or responsive solution, which tries to provide appropriate responses on a case-by-case basis (e.g. the comment you posted when you decided that changing that question would be too much of a change given the existing answers).
What are the consequences of missinterpreting
I suppose a consequence is that the Q&A is less useful than it might be.
We shouldn't lose track of the fact that the Q&A is meant to help the OP and other readers. And I think it's meant to be primarily helpful to the OP (who asks and maybe revises the question), so I'd hope for a solution which doesn't make the site less usable for the OP (in this case I hope that asking the OP to post a new question might have not hurt anyone). But always locking a question, never letting an OP clarify their question, seems to me too rigid.
it should not be taken as meta
I think you don't like Meta for some reason.
On the other hand some users (perhaps most users) are uninterested in discussing how the site is run, and topics about the site (especially if the site consisted, mainly or mostly, of topics about the site) are uninteresting and off-putting.
Moderators generally do and will continue to move topics about the site, the site's policies, and how the site should or shouldn't be used, to Meta.
Make use of "on hold" and possible protection of question
I think that's going too far. But I could try to do it, if a lot of people agreed on it (e.g. if several users agreed on Meta that it's a necessary and desirable new policy).
notification of answerers in cases of question changes
The current software doesn't support that feature.
A programmer could possibly write a user script (a "stack app") to check if questions are edited after you answer them.
That job would be more complicated for you, because you have about half a dozen user accounts.

It ssems to be very personal and in regard of cases here answered, but actually it is meant in the other direction and to apply it even totaly in dhammic terms. So pulling from the business as usally to highered virtue, mind, insight. Maybe worthy another lift of the question and putting meta into the meta-section, Nyom Chris. Reading here is like if someone tells about a past occation. In that way it should be seen.


text:
Changing parts of circumstances and the precept of not speaking what is not true
In how far might it count as a break of the precept, abstaining from telling what is not true, if one changes the circumstances?
For example here: There might be a question, receiving answers. Afterwards are changes of the questions by telling about the circumstances differently, sometime seemingly slight, does a change counts as a break?
If not having the intention to missinterpret the answerer, does such anyhow possible give ground that they accure missinterpreted?
To include Abhidhamma in the question: What are ones reasons willing to change answers, questions, delete parts, modify... in retelling afterwards if it is unskillful? Why and how could one render change in a skilfulway that would harm in this or that way or make aware of it?
How to go beyound such problems, what whould be a secure solution?
What are the consequences of missinterpreting and changing the true or circumstances to display a differnt picture for ones benefit, harm of others or out of not-knowing and fear (e.g. the four roots of akusala, greed, aversion, delution, fear)

Possible duplicate of Changing of questions and the precept of not speaking what is not true

Out of reason @Dhammadhatu does like it, since childish wordligs like to hide their fault naturaly. Its not dobble, its raised one time in regard of Dhamma and one time in meta. In two different forums.

The ones who are fully established in this Dhamma Path are not an arrogant lot. We all make mistakes in life. For any significant change to take place in our lives we must first develop a sense of humility to admit to our mistakes. It is this knowledge that we all are prone to make mistakes that we say:

Kayena vaca cittena pamadena maya katan, accayam khama me Bhante bhuripanna Tathagata
  Kayena vaca cittena pamadena maya katan, accayam khama me Dhamma sandittika akalika
   Kayena vaca cittena pamadena maya katan, accayam khama me Sangha supatipanna anuttara

Asking for Forgiveness
If, due to negligence, I have done some wrong, by body, speech or mind, Forgive me of that offence, O Bhante, Perfect one of vast wisdom.
If, due to negligence, I have done some wrong, by body, speech or mind, Forgive me of that offence, O Dhamma, Visible and unaffected by time.
If, due to negligence, I have done some wrong, by body, speech or mind,
Forgive me of that offence, O Sangha, Practising well and supreme.
Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu!
It is due to this very reason that we contemplate on the following:

”May all living beings forgive me for any misdeeds that I have done to them in this long sansara and accept these merits. May I be free of all debts to all living beings. May all living beings be free from any debts that they have for me, due to any misdeeds that they have done to me. May all living beings, including myself, be free of all debts to each other. May all attain Nibbana.”
  Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu!

There are many avenues that can lead us astray. But for Nibbana there is only one road. Only one guide. That single road is thinking that “Buddha knows. I do not know” (Keetagiri Sutta).  If we regard ourselves as knowing the Dhamma well, we will be of the “I am the one who knows” mindset. Without allowing that to happen we should try to come to the view “I do not know. Only Buddha knows. I will accept it that way”.
“I am the one who knows” can be equated to a Thorn Bush. It is like this. There is a bush of thorns at the bottom of a hill. When it rains fertile soil settles down round the thorn bush after getting washed down from the hill. The soil is fertile but what gets nurtured is the thorn bush.
When it rains fertile soil comes down to the bush of thorns and it grows in a couple of days. Ultimately it becomes too big to be pulled out. Sin is also like that. So we must pull out this thorny bush and plant a good tree on that fertile soil. The biggest thorn bush we have is the notion “I know”.
This is a danger that we have to safeguard against. Therefore, we must always think “Whatever Buddha taught I will do it in that way”. Think that you are the listener. What we want is to get released from Sansaric Sorrow. When you think that way, the idea “I know” will wear off. One will always cherish the company of noble friends. One will get the opportunity to listen to Dhamma well. Yonisomanasikara (thinking wisely as mentioned in Dhamma) will arise. This person will develop the Noble Eight Fold path. This happens solely due to association with sincere friends.  We must be humble enough to do so.
The person with defilements is wrapped up in the idea of Self, is egoistic. Also that he is wrapped up in the concept “I know”.  Some people struggle to understand this simple truth in depth. That is why it is important to think and retain in your memory the following “I will obey Buddha and conduct myself in the way he wanted us to conduct ourselves. I will not do anything else”.
In this Dhamma Path, we have to still unlearn things that we taught were true. It is mainly because of Acariya Buddhaghosa who has had a strong influence on Theravada Buddhism for the past 1800 years. So we do not know whether the interpretation of the Tipitaka today is the correct version, because of the influence that Buddhaghosa has had on the present day translators.
There is a tendency to translate Tipitaka suttas word-by-word, and because of the inclusion of Sanskrit words, this has led to significant confusion and many contradictions. So we do not know whether we are following Vedic concepts, thinking that they are Dhamma.  That is why it is good to have this notion of “I do not know”. It is this knowledge that we all are prone to make mistakes that we say:

Kayena vaca cittena pamadena maya katan, accayam khama me Bhante bhuripanna Tathagata
  Kayena vaca cittena pamadena maya katan, accayam khama me Dhamma sandittika akalika
   Kayena vaca cittena pamadena maya katan, accayam khama me Sangha supatipanna anuttara
  Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu!

Can you translate the Pali which you quoted? And maybe mention what it is (what its source or title is)?

Asking for Forgiveness
If, due to negligence, I have done some wrong, by body, speech or mind, Forgive me of that offence, O Bhante, Perfect one of vast wisdom.
If, due to negligence, I have done some wrong, by body, speech or mind, Forgive me of that offence, O Dhamma, Visible and unaffected by time.
If, due to negligence, I have done some wrong, by body, speech or mind, Forgive me of that offence, O Sangha, Practising well and supreme.

For example here: There might be a question, receiving answers. Afterwards are changes of the questions by telling about the
  circumstances differently, sometime seemingly slight, does a change
  counts as a break?

Of course this is not false speech.
Often it is difficult to write an accurate question. After an answer is given, the questioner may become more clear in their mind about what they really intend to ask. Therefore, the questioner modifies the question.
The precept about honest speech is for not creating confusion, harm & deception in important relationships, such as a husband lying to his wife; or politicians in the world lying about fake terrorist acts so they can start a fake war; or fake monks lying about being a real monk.
However, the example given here about changing questions & answers, after reflection or reconsideration, is not false speech because it is not harming any one.

If Dhammadhuta would not held this vuew, he would not do it. That is why wise people are never angry when people do wrong: "if they would know, they would not do." And so not modify or even seek for punishing. For some is really not to help.

The condition for lying are:

i) The statement must be untrue.
ii) There must be an intention to deceive.
iii) An effort must be made to deceive.
iv) The other person must know the meaning of what is expressed.

Unless at the time of writing there is intention to deceive, then there is no breaking Sila due to later changes / editing in the question in a forum this like.
People make edits in question to make it clearer if they think the context of the question is misunderstood. This may invalidate answers. But this is not lying as there is not intention to deceive. Perhaps the reader will understand that the answer does not correspond to the newer question. Also if edit history is preserved, sites like this, you can cross check what and answer relates to.
Also there might edits due to other reasons by other parties. As long as there is not intention to deceive or misrepresent there will be no lying or unskillfulness.
Also when one is creating, editing content, one should be reasonably confident and thorough with what is being said. Otherwise invariantly you might misrepresenting the Buddha's teaching which also would be unskillful. Also when editing other people's content you should try to understand their intention so the editing makes it more clear than change meaning or what is said.
Also it would be wholesome if the edits are to make the content clear and more organised. Also correcting possible and obvious errors and omissions, spelling and grammar issues, etc.