text:
Theravadian encyclopedia/ dictionary
Is there a reference text for the theravada tradition that contains a lists of concepts for quick reference? Such as a text that allows for reference of ideas found in the pali canon when reading, like the 5 aggregates, various lists from the abhidamma, four foundations of mindfulness, fundamentals to advance stuff,etc..
I know this stuff should be committed to memory and not just referenced when coming across in a text but that takes time so until then I am looking for a good physical resource since I don't want to use tech because I find it a hinderence to mindfulness and I am a recovery tech addict.

The index page of Ven. Bodhi's "In the Buddha's Words" book should have most of the fundamental concepts. For more advanced topics, use the index page of his "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" book.

Thank you I'm reading that now but in order only skipping to the footnotes, didn't think to check out the index.

Former Bhante Varado made great Dhamma-Dana, but also other generous gifts of Venerables incl. giving broad, light as well deepened view on the Buddhas Dhamma:

Pāḷi-Dictionary
Currently implemented dictionaries:

Buddhist Dictionary, by late Ven. Nyanatiloka Thera. (classical Theravada approach)
ATI Glossary, by Upāsaka John Bullitt.
Suttas and Dhammadesanā, addopted Cross-references from the ATI general-index. (basic words in simple language)
PTS Dictionary, by the Pali Text Sociaty (in progress).
Illustrated Glossary of Pāli Terms, by Venerable Varado Mahathera.

Three specials, not found elsewhere:

all content is given toward Sangha and faithful followers (no copy-thieving)
as open to give into (wiki-like), also way to work for liberation and not stay bond by consume (insight as side-effect of giving by keeping Silas)
Content from various back-grounds and for various levels of insight as well as knowledge.

Search of words from every page best via search window (right upper corner), pre-listing sites ([dic]... marks dictionary pages).
Much insight by right pāmojja and muditā

AccessToInsight has A Path to Freedom: A Self-guided Tour of the Buddha's Teachings and the General Index by subject. Both of these are helpful.
The book "In the Buddha's Words" by Bhikkhu Bodhi is an excellent anthology of the suttas. The PDF version can be found here.
I strongly recommend this anthology as an authoritative outline of the most important concepts of the teachings, and I quote it below.
However, the sutta translations below may not all be from Bhikkhu Bodhi. They all come from SuttaCentral, instead of the book. Also, some of the sutta numbers, especially those of Anguttara Nikaya, may not match the book, but they refer to the same suttas.

The Human Condition

Old Age, Illness and Death - SN 3.3, SN 3.25, AN 3.36
The Tribulations of Unreflective Living - SN 36.6, AN 8.6, SN 22.7
A World in Turmoil - AN 2.37, DN 21, DN 15, AN 3.69
Without Discoverable Beginning - SN 15.1, SN 15.2, SN 15.5, SN 15.8, SN 22.99

The Bringer of Light

One Person - AN 1.170-186
The Buddha's Conception and Birth - MN 123
The Quest for Enlightenment - MN 26, MN 36, SN 12.65
The Decision to Teach - MN 26
The First Discourse - SN 56.11

Approaching the Dhamma

Not a Secret Doctrine - AN 3.131
No Dogmas or Blind Belief - AN 3.65
The Visible Origin and Passing Away of Suffering - SN 42.11
Investigate the Teacher Himself - MN 47
Steps Towards the Realization of Truth - MN 95

The Happiness Visible in this Present Life

Upholding the Dhamma in Society - AN 3.14, DN 31
The Family

Parents and Children - AN 4.63, AN 2.33
Husbands and Wives - AN 4.53, AN 4.55, AN 7.63

Present Welfare, Future Welfare - AN 8.54
Right Livelihood - AN 5.177, AN 4.61, AN 4.62
The Woman of the Home - AN 8.49
The Community - MN 104, MN 93, DN 16, DN 26, DN 5

The Way to a Fortunate Rebirth

The Law of Kamma - AN 4.232, MN 41, MN 135
Merit: The Key to Good Fortune - Iti 22, AN 8.36, AN 4.34
Giving - Iti 26, AN 8.33, AN 4.57, AN 5.148, Iti 107, AN 8.35
Moral Discipline - AN 8.39, AN 8.41
Meditation - Iti 27, MN 99, AN 9.20

Deepening One's Perspective on the World

Four Wonderful Things - AN 4.128
Gratification, Danger and Escape - AN 3.103, AN 3.105
Properly Appraising Objects of Attachment - MN 13
The Pitfalls in Sensual Pleasures - MN 54, MN 75
Life is Short and Fleeting - AN 7.74
Four Summaries of the Dhamma - MN 82
The Danger in Views - AN 1.306-314, Ud 6.4, Iti 49
From the Divine Realms to the Infernal - AN 4.125
Perils of Samsara - SN 15.3, SN 15.13

The Path to Liberation

Why Does One Enter the Path? - MN 63, MN 29, SN 45.41, SN 45.42-47, SN 45.48
Analysis of the Eightfold Path - SN 45.8
Good Friendship - SN 45.2
The Graduated Training - MN 27
The Higher Stages of Training with Similes - MN 39

Mastering the Mind

The Mind is the Key - AN 1.21-30
Developing a Pair of Skills - AN 2.31, AN 4.170, AN 4.94
The Hindrances to Mental Development - SN 46.55
The Refinement of the Mind - AN 3.101
The Removal of Distracting Thoughts - MN 20
The Mind of Loving Kindness - MN 21
The Six Recollections - AN 6.10
The Four Establishments of Mindfulness - MN 10
Mindfulness of Breathing - SN 54.13
The Achievement of Mastery - SN 28.1-9

Shining the Light of Wisdom

Images of Wisdom - AN 4.143, MN 146
The Conditions for Wisdom - AN 8.2
A Discourse on Right View - MN 9
The Domain of Wisdom

By Way of the Five Aggregates - SN 22.56, SN 22.82, SN 22.59, SN 22.45, SN 22.95
By Way of the Six Sense Bases - SN 35.26, SN 35.28, SN 35.147, SN 35.148, SN 35.149, SN 35.85, SN 35.234
By Way of the Elements - SN 14.1, SN 14.37, SN 14.38, SN 14.39, MN 140
By Way of Dependent Origination - SN 12.1, SN 12.20, SN 12.33, SN 12.15, SN 12.38, SN 12.44
By Way of the Four Noble Truths - SN 56.24, SN 56.20, SN 56.31, SN 56.21, SN 56.42, SN 56.32, SN 56.25

The Goal of Wisdom - SN 38.1, SN 43.1-44, Ud 8.1, Ud 8.3, Iti 44, MN 72

The Planes of Realization

The Field of Merit for the World - AN 8.59, SN 48.18, MN 22, MN 73, MN 70
Stream Entry - SN 55.5, SN 25.1, SN 13.1, SN 55.2, SN 55.1
Nonreturning - MN 64, AN 4.169, SN 55.3, SN 46.3
The Arahant - SN 22.89, SN 48.53, MN 22, AN 9.7, AN 9.26, AN 10.90, MN 140, SN 22.76
The Tathagata - SN 22.58, Iti 84, SN 47.12, MN 12, SN 56.38, MN 19, SN 22.78, AN 4.23

Thank you for this intensely word reply, I shall spend many hours digging in to it.

There's a list of lists here -- Dhamma Lists.
There are also the Resources sections of https://www.buddha-vacana.org/

Thank you that list of lists is great.


text:
Mindfulness in lay work
Mindfulness requires being non judgemental, but what should one do when the work requires judgement where a standard needs maintained? Is there a form of objective judgement that that can be used like non judgment? I realize it's rather paradoxical but it seems analogous to that an apriori standard could be met without judgement? Or perhaps I am crazy.

If you change that from a question to a statement, how does "… mindfulness requires being non judgemental, but the work requires judgement…" work for you?

In Buddhism, 'mindfulness' is a translation of the Pali word 'sati'. The word Pali 'sati' means 'to remember', 'to recollect' or 'to bear/keep in mind', as follows:

And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a
monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is mindful, highly meticulous,
remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said
long ago.
SN 48.10

Dwelling thus withdrawn, one recollects that Dhamma and thinks it
over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn recollects
that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occasion the enlightenment
factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu
SN 46.3

One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness.
MN 117

Therein what is controlling faculty of mindfulness? That which is
mindfulness, constant mindfulness, recollection, mindfulness, act of
remembering, bearing in mind, non-superficiality, non-forgetfulness,
mindfulness, controlling faculty of mindfulness, power of mindfulness,
right mindfulness. This is called controlling faculty of mindfulness.
Abhidhamma: Indriyavibhaṅga

For the most part, mindfulness at work does not require being non judgmental. Generally, it is the opposite. Mindfulness requires remembering to exercise sound judgment at work; to do what is right in relation to your work and to avoid doing what is wrong in relation to your work.
For example, mindfulness means to remember to not watch entertainment or sports videos on your mobile phone when instead you should be working; or means to remember to not get angry at a difficult client or not get angry at your boss or, even worse, to remember to not get angry at a female work colleague when she goes berserk at you.
The Pali suttas say:

One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness.
One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right speech: This is one's right mindfulness.
One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right action: This is one's right mindfulness.
One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness.
MN 117

Suppose, bhikkhu, a king had a frontier city with strong ramparts, walls, and arches, and with six gates. The gatekeeper posted there would be wise, competent and intelligent; one who keeps out strangers and admits acquaintances.  ‘The gatekeeper’: this is a designation for mindfulness.
SN 35.245

As for 'non-judgmental awareness' (something the USA Vipassana Mafia Tribe like to teach because often The Tribe doesn't want people to judge them), this is often an interpretation of certain sutta teachings, such as:

Bāhiya, this is how you are to train yourself:
In the seen, there will be just the seen.
In the heard, there will be just the heard.
In the sensed, there will be just the sensed.
In the cognized, there will be just the cognized.
This, Bāhiya, is how you are to train yourself.
Then, Bāhiya, there will be no ‘you’ in terms of this.
When there is no ‘you’ in terms of this,
Then there is no ‘you’ there;
When there is no ‘you’ there,
There is no ‘you’ here, or beyond, or in between.
Just this is the end of suffering.”
Udana 1.10

The above 'non-judgmental awareness' is not 'mindfulness' but, instead, something mindfulness remembers to do.
For example, Right Speech is not mindfulness. But Right Speech is something mindfulness remembers to do.
Similarly, 'non-judgmental awareness' is not mindfulness. But 'non-judgmental awareness' is something mindfulness remembers to do when the situation is appropriate to engage in non-judgmental awareness.
Therefore, possibly at times in your work it is prudent to practise non-judgmental awareness, such as when your boss or company does something very immoral. Here, 'non-judgmental awareness' is a synonym for 'political correctness'. However, even doing this requires judgment, i.e., the judgment it is prudent to be non-judgmental.

Please excuse me.  SN 35.245 doesn't appear to support your argument here - in that sutta(?) the gatekeeper is a simile referring to one's own judgement of truth, rather than one's own judgement of adherence to some standard, as jwe asks.  Can you draw an equivalence between appraisal of truth, and appraisal of other qualities?

sorry i have no idea what you are attempting to say

The question asked is whether it can be mindful to pass judgement according to objective criteria, based on the misunderstanding that mindfulness involves never passing judgement.  SN 35.245's gatekeeper is irrelevant, as it is a metaphorical concept to discuss appraising truth and fitting it into one's own worldview, not passing judgement on quality of information.  The gatekeeper is not an example of an actual person.

mindfulness never involves never passing judgement.

Its quite adhammic the troll here got their & my comments deleted. This situation is the height of rudeness; when i poster makes the effort to present a lengthy answer at the request of a commentator and the answer receives no gratitude. Why does such a troll that has never contributed to this forum have commenting privileges on this subforum?

No comments have been deleted, nor am I a troll.  I do not appreciate being dismissed as such because you have more points on an internet forum than I do.  Please engage with my points with integrity, or not at all.

@Stop Obama-Biden Stop War. Given that Adam Barnes has 101 points of reputation here (which allows him to comment) I would guess he has received a +100 point Association Bonus in this and any other Stack Exchange account he has. He must be active in one or more other accounts to do so. Nothing nefarious here, just the rules. Certainly does not allow him to delete any posts. Best & Respectfully.

sorry but at your request i provided a longer answer but you did not show gratitude. pointless taking an interest in buddhism when we cannot even express simple gratitude. also, your initial comments were wrong. in Buddhism we confess our wrongs

Mindfulness requires being non judgemental
Is that so?
I think that there's a certain kind of being-judgemental that's unskilful, for example reacting like,

"Oh Gosh this is terrible, poor me I'm doomed!"
or "Oh man this is beyond good, I can't get enough of this!"

But conversely there's a certain kind of being-judgemental that is skilful, for example from MN 2

But take an educated noble disciple who has seen the noble ones, and is skilled and trained in the teaching of the noble ones. They’ve seen good persons, and are skilled and trained in the teaching of the good persons. They understand to which things they should pay attention and to which things they should not pay attention. So they pay attention to things they should and don’t pay attention to things they shouldn’t.
[...]
They properly attend: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering’. And as they do so, they give up three fetters: identity view, doubt, and misapprehension of precepts and observances. These are called the defilements that should be given up by seeing.

I apologise, it may be a bit crass to apply noble doctrine to lay pursuits. But  it may be good advice, even for lay pursuits.
So at work there are kinds of being-judgemental that would be unskilful, for example,

"I hate him because he criticised my work"

Another type of being-judgemental that might be skilful, or at least I think it's the essence of what "work" is:

"This could do with some work, needs improvement, it would be good to fix it."

Is there a form of objective judgement that that can be used like non judgment?
I think so, but it depends on the field of expertise and the training of the expert.
For example a medical doctor might have an objective judgement about a patient's medical condition, or a structural engineer about the condition of a bridge, or a bus driver about the driving of the bus.
I'd say is a "subjective" judgement in that it's a subjective experience of the expert (e.g. "I think this bus is going too fast, I'll slow it"); but it's also "objective" in the sense that the experience and judgement is shared with and agreed by other experts.

Thank you this clears much up, sometimes the merky  waters of language create confusion. It was good to use the suttas, it helped clarify things and nailed my issue.vthank again.

Mindfulness requires being non judgemental, but what should one do when the work requires judgement where a standard needs maintained? Is there a form of objective judgement that that can be used like non judgment? I realize it's rather paradoxical but it seems analogous to that an apriori standard could be met without judgement? Or perhaps I am crazy.

No, you're not crazy, but you're confused because you're following common but very wrong definitions of 'mindfulness' (sati) based on psychotherapists and confused Buddhist teachers who start listening to each other and getting corrupted style drift instead of checking with the suttas and seeing for themselves how the Buddha actually used the term.
I've collected comprehensive notes here on how the Buddha actually defined the term, directly from the suttas.
https://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/7sati/index.html
Most relevant to your question, what people think of as 'sati', the portion of 'mindfulness' that knows, comprehends, understands, discerns, is actually 'sampajāno', recursively included in the 'sati' definiton (see satipaṭṭhāna formula).
edit: addressing Chris's question in comments section.
Sati ("mindfulness") has in implicit object it operates on. Just like when we say "go", the implied objects are [you] "go" [somewhere].
Sati ("mindfulness") takes 'The Dhamma' (instructions that liberate one fully from suffering) as the implicit object.
So translated to a worldly context, the 'the (worldly) dharma at your job' would be the implicit object that one is 'mindful' of.

It's fine to post a reference, it's good to add a relevant quote from or a small summary of your reference. For example, you say that mindful is sati -- why? And that sati is remembering -- remembering what? And in particular what will someone be remembering while engaged in some lay work?

Thank you for your assistance

Good householder, Samma Sati comes after right effort (increasing also mental right livelyhood. Forerunner of right effort is right livelihood, which is the perfection of outwardly right conduct.
As long as the virtue section is not complet, as long as work and "entertainment" is not only unskilful but also strongly outwardly directed, involving much judgment outwardly, much thinking, as long as daily live isn't simple and without harm, it hardly ever possible to direct ones attention toward the four frames of references of mindfulness. Improving right view and by it right resolve, helps to turn more and more toward path and useful work for long happiness. It's useless to try to meditate if still firm caught in worldly issues and maintaining household. In most care one simply develops wrong meditation, wrong release... Once virtue is complete by having gained right view, the path develops on it's cause one by one. So good to go after the home-task at first place. What's worthy there to grasp and maintain?
Mindfulness, for one maintaining house, is eager on keeping the precepts in mind and changes ways of conduct and life, so that right remorseless can be reached, which is the base of the path.

The judgement should be based on the three unwholesome roots, i.e. non-greed, non-hated, non-delusion to be wholesome and right.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Did I disrespect the Buddha on the altar?
Why do we close a question about trying to find out if I’m disrespecting The Buddha, I learned I should not look at my altar when I’m angry or disappointed. see I’m so angry right now I don’t think I can look at my altar. I just wanted to know. And then you guess closed my question. It wasn’t offensive, in any way. I was clear, I think ,I just deleted the message after I tried to please you. I just wanted to know know if I’m disrespecting The Buddha.

The sutta below states that a memorial shrine or monument or stupa (and by extension, a statue or painting) is meant for making the mind of the beholder calm and happy. It's a source of inspiration.
So, you don't have to feel guilty or avoid looking at the Buddha icon when you feel negative emotions.
Instead, you should look at it exactly when you need to feel calmness and peace, and reflect on who the Buddha is, what he attained and what he taught.

"There are four persons, Ananda, who are worthy of a stupa. Who are
those four? A Tathagata, an Arahant, a Fully Enlightened One is worthy
of a stupa; so also is a Paccekabuddha, and a disciple of a Tathagata,
and a universal monarch.
"And why, Ananda, is a Tathagata, an Arahant, a Fully Enlightened One
worthy of a stupa? Because, Ananda, at the thought: 'This is the stupa
of that Blessed One, Arahant, Fully Enlightened One!' the hearts of
many people will be calmed and made happy; and so calmed and with
their minds established in faith therein, at the breaking up of the
body, after death, they will be reborn in a realm of heavenly
happiness. And so also at the thought: 'This is the stupa of that
Paccekabuddha!' or 'This is the stupa of a disciple of that Tathagata,
Arahant, Fully Enlightened One!' or 'This is the stupa of that
righteous monarch who ruled according to Dhamma!' — the hearts of many
people are calmed and made happy; and so calmed and with their minds
established in faith therein, at the breaking up of the body, after
death, they will be reborn in a realm of heavenly happiness. And it is
because of this, Ananda, that these four persons are worthy of a
stupa."
DN 16

You should look at your alter especially when your mind is angry or disappointed. This will help your mind to come to its senses.
The Buddha is the Spiritual Doctor. When your mind is sick, it should visit the Buddha. If you don't visit Doctor Buddha when your mind is sick, how will your mind find a cure & heal itself?

Thank you! Now I’m wondering why someone else who has be a Buddhist a lot longer than I have not want to look at my altar, when I may have upset them? I thought because they did not look at my altar, that meant I should not look at my altar because I got angry?

some folks have extreme views about things, particularly tibetans

thank you but your comment is not relevant to my answer

Thank you, sorry, I was just a bit defensive about the Tibetan heritage. But I had defend one of my staff, who is Tibetan. From an angry man. I was afraid for her safety, so I lost control of myself, to scare him away.

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


text:
Does an enlightened person have access to whatever information he wants?
I am following a guy online who claims to be enlightened. Everything about him is fine and he seems genuine and all but for one reason that he says he has no recollection of his past lives.
Is this possible? Also, on similar lines, if one gets enlightened will he have access to whatever information he wants. Not an all-knowing one, but just that which he needs or wills.

So long as there's a nearby internet connection, then this might be true for everyone. However, there is a different kind of knowing, one that is not governed by intellect, words or language. It is this knowing or discernment that one begins to tune into. One becomes familiar with what that sense of knowing is like for them. It is a knowing that is absent of thought, but it can use thought as an extension to express itself. That is what sharing the dhamma is.

The Buddha stated that it is possible to be all-knowing, but not all at once.
That means it is possible for the Buddha to know and understand all things if he tried to learn it, but not simultaneously. This means he has the capacity to know all things, but it doesn't mean that he indeed knew all things.

Then the king said to the Buddha, “I have heard, sir, that the ascetic
Gotama says this: ‘There is no ascetic or brahmin who will claim to be
all-knowing and all-seeing, to know and see everything without
exception: that is not possible.’ Do those who say this repeat what
the Buddha has said, and not misrepresent him with an untruth? Is
their explanation in line with the teaching? Are there any legitimate
grounds for rebuke and criticism?”
“Great king, those who say this do not repeat what I have said. They
misrepresent me with what is false and untrue.” ....
Then the king said to the Buddha, “Sir, might the Buddha have spoken
in reference to one thing, but that person believed it was something
else? How then do you recall making this statement?”
“Great king, I recall making this statement: ‘There is no ascetic or
brahmin who knows all and sees all simultaneously: that is not
possible.’”
“What the Buddha says appears reasonable.
MN 90

But what kind of knowledge does the Buddha definitely possess? According to MN 71 (quoted below), he definitely possessed the three knowledges, and at the same time he denied complete omniscience.
As for knowledge apart from the three knowledges, the Buddha possessed the capacity to know and understand them, but he does not know them all at once.

“Sir, I have heard this: ‘The ascetic Gotama claims to be all-knowing
and all-seeing, to know and see everything without exception, thus:
“Knowledge and vision are constantly and continually present to me,
while walking, standing, sleeping, and waking.”’ I trust that those
who say this repeat what the Buddha has said, and do not misrepresent
him with an untruth? Is their explanation in line with the teaching?
Are there any legitimate grounds for rebuke and criticism?”
“Vaccha, those who say this do not repeat what I have said. They
misrepresent me with what is false and untrue.”
“So how should we answer so as to repeat what the Buddha has said, and
not misrepresent him with an untruth? How should we explain in line
with his teaching, with no legitimate grounds for rebuke and
criticism?”
“‘The ascetic Gotama has the three knowledges.’ Answering like this
you would repeat what I have said, and not misrepresent me with an
untruth. You would explain in line with my teaching, and there would
be no legitimate grounds for rebuke and criticism.
MN 71

However, much later tradition exaggerated the claims of the Buddha's omniscience, for e.g. Mil 6.2.8 and Mil 3.6.2. The Milindapanha was authored 400 to 700 years after the Buddha's passing away.
In Mil 6.2.8, Ven. Nagesena was asked why did the Buddha introduce the monastic rules little by little rather than altogether at once, since he was omniscient. He answered that although the Buddha knew all the monastic rules from the beginning, he did not want to scare people with too many rules, so he introduced new rules only when they were needed.
In Mil 3.6.2, Ven. Nagesena was asked the same question, but here he answered that a physician dispenses medicine only after the disease shows symptoms, even if he knew how to treat all diseases.
Mil 6.2.8 and Mil 3.6.2 make the same kind of excuses that was ridiculed in MN 76 (quoted below). So, I feel that it is not good to unnecessarily exaggerate claims about the Buddha, as it will put off intelligent people from learning the Buddha's teachings.

“Sandaka, take a certain teacher who claims to be all-knowing and
all-seeing, to know and see everything without exception, thus:
‘Knowledge and vision are constantly and continually present to me,
while walking, standing, sleeping, and waking.’ He enters an empty
house; he gets no alms-food; a dog bites him; he encounters a wild
elephant, a wild horse, and a wild cow; he asks the name and clan of a
woman or man; he asks the name and path to a village or town. When
asked, ‘Why is this?’ he answers: ‘I had to enter an empty house,
that’s why I entered it. I had to get no alms-food, that’s why I got
none. I had to get bitten by a dog, that’s why I was bitten. I had to
encounter a wild elephant, a wild horse, and a wild cow, that’s why I
encountered them. I had to ask the name and clan of a woman or man,
that’s why I asked. I had to ask the name and path to a village or
town, that’s why I asked.’
A sensible person reflects on this matter in this way: ‘This teacher
makes such a claim, but he answers in such a way. This spiritual life
is unreliable.’ Realizing this, they leave disappointed.
MN 76

in buddhism, the fully enlightened are called 'Arahants'
there are Arahants, such as Sariputta, who had no psychic powers; therefore were unable to know certain worldly phenomena
then there are Maras who have psychic powers
again, considering reading: SN 22.70 about how the fully enlightened are such due to wisdom rather than due to omniscience

Depends. If it's a fully enlightened Buddha then yes - such a being can learn and understand whatever he directs his mind to.

Welcome to Buddhism Stack Exchange. The system flagged this as a low quality answer. This answer is too short and doesn't contain enough details. Also, if possible, it is preferred to cite sources to support the answer. Did you intend it to be a comment under the question? If not, please see this guide on how to write a good answer.

What does good householder likes to know in regard of good in this world, the next and the path beyond?
(As for the "guy". There are no householding Arahats, Buddhas or Paccekabuddhas, not even Once or No-returner in this time. Simply this, seeing one still in trading, will cut off 98% of awakened around)

this answer appears to be unsubstantiated (false) speech. however, if the poster claims to have psychic powers to justify what they wrote, this appears to be a Vinaya transgression

there appears no such thing as recollection of "past lives" in the Buddha's teaching
there is only one sutta explaining the meaning of recollection of past "nivasa" ("abodes"; "dwellings") and it does not appear to be about "past lives"
you can read it, here: SN 22.79


text:
Using money and improper dependency of monks on householders?
If one reads this quote by a monk, who is referring to donations to SuttaCentral:

...For the past week or so, we’ve been actually losing money on Stripe: paying more in settlement fees than we get in donations.

What should one assume in regard of observing Vinaya while letting people believe to act in preserving a noble tradition?
This seems to be referring to asking people to donate money,  to preserve a noble tradition (i.e. the scriptures published by SuttaCentral) -- but can they be doing this and observing Vinaya?

Maybe some can quote some related texts to money and relation issues from open resources on the matter to try to catch bite the tail (don't forget to donate...). What faults can come into play? What's required to make with things attained wrongly?
What can be assumed when Bhikkhus share food and success, trade together with lay people?
To answer this question, perhaps quote from available from resources, on issues such as money and relationships. Are these faults?  Is this an example of Bhikkhus sharing food, and success, and trading commercially with lay people?

I would rather not have Buddhism Stack Exchange's Q&A be used to slander and attack public figures or other platforms, or be used for political agendas, but Q&A about the monastic rules, is ok.

A moderator suggested this question we closed as "unclear". But I think I understood what you were asking, so I added my rewording of the question in italics to try to clarify.

Close is fine, since it will nevertheless just be used to feed defilements and hardly any with possibility to escape curruption to be found here.

It's not only asking but taking on it, handle it, do even unskilful and harmfull with the money...

See... either users here or there, without any compassion, selfish, blind, even assist in wrong doing. Who could prevent them from hell and war... nobody. You would pay everything that it fits your defilements, even give last chances... Later you will claim that the stackholder misused you and start to fight them...

Sigh... This is not the first time you've made a strongly worded post about SuttaCentral, but I'm still not clear what your objection to them is.  Do you want them to close down and not present the dharma on the internet? that seems like a loss...

According to the Theravada Bhikkhu Patimokkha (quoted below), lay stewards of the monks or nuns should handle money, to my understanding.
If needed, exceptions or modifications to minor monastic rules can be made, based on The Great Standards. And not to forget "If it is desired, Ananda, the Sangha may, when I am gone, abolish the lesser and minor rules". (DN 16)

Rule 10: In case a king, a royal official, a brahman,
or a householder sends a
robe fund for the sake of a bhikkhu via a messenger, (saying,) "Having
purchased a robe with this robe fund, clothe the bhikkhu named
so-and-so with a robe": If the messenger, approaching the bhikkhu,
should say, "This is a robe fund being delivered for the sake of the
venerable one. May the venerable one accept this robe fund," then the
bhikkhu is to tell the messenger: "We do not accept robe funds, my
friend. We accept robes (robe-cloth) as are proper according to
season."
If the messenger should say to the bhikkhu, "Does the venerable one
have a steward?" then, bhikkhus, if the bhikkhu desires a robe, he may
indicate a steward — either a monastery attendant or a lay follower —
(saying,) "That, my friend, is the bhikkhus' steward."
If the messenger, having instructed the steward and going to the
bhikkhu, should say, "I have instructed the steward the venerable one
indicated. May the venerable one go (to him) and he will clothe you
with a robe in season," then the bhikkhu, desiring a robe and
approaching the steward, may prompt and remind him two or three times,
"I have need of a robe." Should (the steward) produce the robe after
being prompted and reminded two or three times, that is good. .....
Rule 18: Should any bhikkhu accept gold and silver, or have it
accepted, or consent to its being deposited (near him), it is to be
forfeited and confessed.
Rule 19: Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of monetary
exchange, it (the income) is to be forfeited and confessed.
Rule 20: Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of trade, it (the
article obtained) is to be forfeited and confessed.
(Bhikkhu Pāṭimokkha, translated by Ven. Thanissaro)

"According to the Theravada Bhikkhu Patimokkha, lay stewards of the monks or nuns should handle money, to my understanding.", the Buddha never gave lay people duties, so the answer somehow has the idea as if money would be required. The Buddhas sons simple don't accept it, not order others to act on money, nor keep households... It's fundamental corrupt if learning rules to seek ways as usual on it.

What about starting with rules: 18. Should any bhikkhu accept gold and silver, or have it accepted, or consent to its being deposited (near him), it is to be forfeited and confessed.

Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of monetary exchange, it (the income) is to be forfeited and confessed.

Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of trade, it (the article obtained) is to be forfeited and confessed.

What's the mental handicape if starting with denying obligation at first place? Affliction with the evil within oneself?

Good to get known the outstand non-corrupt approach by a late Samana: The Use of Money by Monks.


text:
Multiple meditation practices
Would there be a conflict if I were to practice meditation from various schools? For instance mahasi insight meditation, Tibetan Samantha meditation, as long as the skills are kept separate?

Probably fine at the exploratory stage. But once you've found the method most suitable to your own development and growth, then it'd be best to dive deep into just that single method. Sorta like pursuing a college degree or graduate degrees, one would take some general courses in his freshman and sophomore years, but then would have to focus on courses specific to their major in junior and senior years.

In the immortals words of Ron Swanson - "Don't half ass two things; whole ass one thing".  Why scatter your attention and your efforts?  Pick one and follow it wholeheartedly.  Being able to make that commitment alone will be more beneficial than any advantage pursuing multiple paths might bring.

While both of the techniques mentioned will ultimately bring limited results if 'mastered', there is no conflict or detriment for a newbie to practice both.


text:
Worry about life, body, health: obstacle for Arahataphala?
Is worry about life, body health, e.g. householding, status-maintaining, obstacles for Arahataphala? Is this in accordance with what the Teacher taught? And why is such an obstacle?
Would one believing no former, no next life (deny rebirth), not hold either strong on kaya (Sakkaya), worry about life and health, or falls into ideas of "abounding life will be Nibbana, end of suffering"?

Sadhu for effort in spell and gramma correction. Nevertheless "does" is more proper then "is". That does importand!

Worry is an obstacle (to Enlightenment) and should be attended to with mindfulness.

Please read here for more information about answering questions.

Welcome to Buddhism Stack Exchange. The system flagged this as a low quality answer. This answer is too short and doesn't contain enough details. Also, if possible, it is preferred to cite sources to support the answer. Did you intend it to be a comment under the question? If not, please see this guide on how to write a good answer.

Is worry about or attachment to life, health, material wealth, family, house-holding, career-building etc.  obstacles for Arahataphala?
Yes, of course. These are part of the ten fetters.
A person who has attained stream entry has only overcome the lowest three fetters, and would still be subject to the rest of the fetters.

"There are these ten fetters. Which ten? Five lower fetters & five
higher fetters. And which are the five lower fetters? Self-identity
views, uncertainty, grasping at precepts & practices, sensual desire,
& ill will. These are the five lower fetters. And which are the five
higher fetters? Passion for form, passion for what is formless,
conceit, restlessness, & ignorance. These are the five higher fetters.
And these are the ten fetters."
AN 10.13

And where does worry about stand, life, health fits in? Lower or higher fetter, which, good householder?

@Samana All of those are covered in sensual desire, passion for form, conceit etc.


text:
Is this a right explanation of phenomena of enlightenment by Osho?
Some months back I had written a comment (not able to find it atm) to a post in BSE which resonated with the following explanation of Enlightenment by Osho, that ' Enlightenment is consciousness conscious of itself '. But it was not taken well.
The following is taken from his book, The Last Testament. I am very much in tune with this particular explanation and my practice also more or less depends on this. I just want to know is this accepted by any branch of Buddhism, whether Theravada, Mahayana or Vajrayana.

First, watch your actions of the body.
Second, watch your actions of the mind: thoughts, imaginations.
Third, watch your actions of the heart: feelings, love, hate, moods, sadness,
happiness.
And if you can succeed in watching all these three, and as your witnessing grows
deeper and deeper, a moment comes that there is only witnessing but nothing to
witness.
The mind is empty, the heart is empty, the body is relaxed.
In that moment happens something like a quantum leap. Your whole witnessing
jumps upon itself. It witnesses itself, because there is nothing else to witness. And
this is the revolution which I call enlightenment, self-realization. Or you can give it
any name, but this is the ultimate experience of bliss. You cannot go beyond it.

*Please no personal attacks on Osho, I consider him as a genuine enlightened master.

Why do you think Theravada does not accept it? The bolded parts sound like one of the jhana levels to me.

@ruben2020 because in a part Theravada defines Nibbana to be cessation of suffering not some kind of mutation in consciousness. But that's my thinking I might be wrong.

@ruben2020 I edited the question, i would like to gain theravada opinion aswell.

Looks like Osho has - unintentionally - described a part of the Satipatthana practice, which, allegedly, leads to Anagami or Arahant. I even have my own approach to body awareness, which is based on the Satipatthana practice. There are other teachers who use body awareness too. Its success depends on what kind of person you are, how you're karmically composed.

Personally, I don’t take ‘enlightenment’ to be a fixed destination, but rather, it is a continuing journey, so Osho’s definition is true, but for me, incomplete.
For example, in the Surangama Sutra, the meditation path of Avalokitasvara has 14 progressive stages, the very first of which corresponds to Osho’s ‘enlightened’ state:

First, because I did not listen to sounds and instead contemplated the listener within, I can now hear the cries of suffering beings throughout the ten directions, and I can bring about their liberation.

The bit you quoted reminds of the chapter titled The benefits of the Kusulu's meditation and the few chapters before that, in the book Vivid awareness by Khenchen Thrangu.
It says that (I paraphrase)

The nature of the mind is to know [perhaps that's the same as "witness"]
Realising the nature of the mind is what's called "transcendant intelligence" or "great mother" in the second turning of the wheel
That's related to buddha-nature [and so, "enlightenment"] in the third

"Actions" are mentioned seven chapters earlier.
In between, it mentions that:

Two types of meditation (i.e. tranquility and insight) are taught
The clarity needed for insight [into the nature of the mind] depends on tranquility
This teacher recommends they be practiced together.

And example of "tranquility" is "resting peacefully free of thoughts within the empty aspect of the mind" [which is like the quote's saying "nothing else to witness"], but that "we do not really recognise the mind" which is what makes that tranquility without "insight" -- clarity and emptiness are both important to budda-nature.
Perhaps you can see parallels (between this and Osho's teaching).
However I don't know about the first quote i.e. "... conscious of itself". The book I'm referring to seems to talk about consciousness of "emptiness" or of "clarity", but not IMO of "self" or of "self-consiousness"; which ("self") I think of as a "tangle" and one of the primary differentiators between the Buddhist and Hindu traditions -- with Hinduism teaching Atman, maybe contradicted by the Buddhist doctrine of Anatta.
Perhaps someone could say they're "ultimately" the same or similar. I guess I find the Buddhist doctrine easier or more "liberating". Like Occam's razor ("prefer the simplest explanation" and "shave away unecessary assumptions"), I find the doctrine easier without any references to "self".

Although there are many points in common between Osho's teaching and the Buddha's, there are some subtle differences. In particular, Osho talks about self-realization, while the Buddha addresses the end of suffering:

MN10:2.1: “Mendicants, the four kinds of mindfulness meditation are the path to convergence. They are in order to purify sentient beings, to get past sorrow and crying, to make an end of pain and sadness, to end the cycle of suffering, and to realize extinguishment.
MN10:3.1: What four?
MN10:3.2: It’s when a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
MN10:3.3: They meditate observing an aspect of feelings—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
MN10:3.4: They meditate observing an aspect of the mind—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
MN10:3.5: They meditate observing an aspect of principles—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.

The Buddha also gives a clear warning about wrong immersion. Not all meditation is right. Some meditation is wrong:

AN10.119:13.1: ‘Wrong immersion has a bad result
AN10.119:13.2: in both this life and the next.’

I learned a lot reading Osho's books, but I had questions left unanswered until I read the suttas. And one sutta in particular answered a lot of my questions. In MN8, the Buddha talks about self-effacement, not self-realization. In MN8, the Buddha explains the importance of ethics:

MN8:10.1: It’s possible that some mendicant, going totally beyond the dimension of infinite consciousness, aware that ‘there is nothing at all’, might enter and remain in the dimension of nothingness.
MN8:10.2: They might think
MN8:10.3: they’re practicing self-effacement.
MN8:10.4: But in the training of the Noble One these are not called ‘self-effacement’;
MN8:10.5: they’re called ‘peaceful meditations’.

And in his teaching to Venerable Mahācunda, the Buddha simply says:

MN8:12.2: ‘Others will be cruel, but here we will not be cruel.’
...

Right immersion requires a basis in ethics, and Buddhist ethics are very subtle, deserving careful study. Without ethics, we fall into wrong immersion, wrong knowledge and wrong freedom.

MN8:12.19: ‘Others will have wrong immersion, but here we will have right immersion.’
MN8:12.20: ‘Others will have wrong knowledge, but here we will have right knowledge.’
MN8:12.21: ‘Others will have wrong freedom, but here we will have right freedom.’

Perhaps the question we might ask ourselves is not "is this self-realization?". Perhaps we might better ask "is this right immersion?"  And to answer THAT question, we would need to examine our entire practice for right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right immersion and right knowledge.

Thank you for the answer...it is very descriptive and informative..only one thing...I think it is very difficult to differentiate Osho's 'self-realization' that he has described in many of his books from Buddhas 'end of suffering'. After all, Nirvana must also be bringing the ultimate bliss transcending everything mundane...that may be called as self-realisation...

A few points that occur to me...

First, when perception (witnessing, seeing, noting or noticing, awareness, etc) has an object there's still a duality, a mind-iness, a separation of this from that. Those separations are where dukkha and tanhā grow. The passage:

Your whole witnessing jumps upon itself. It witnesses itself, because
there is nothing else to witness.

...is a self-reference, and so it hasn't quite eliminated that objectification. We can even sense that residual mind-iness in the last phrase, where we have corralled the mind into taking a self-referential object, but it's still the mind taking. Perhaps it's just bad phrasing on Osho's part, but...

Second, Osho's description sounds a bit solipsistic (or perhaps narcissistic) to my ear. He puts more emphasis on bliss than I would; he seems to suggest that we should shut out the world until we are left with ourselves alone and the pure joy that entails. As presented here, it feels like a heating contraction into the self, not a cooling expansion into the world. There are different styles of practice and practitioners with different temperaments, so this may work for some. But ultimately I think one must align the world and the self, and I don't see how this gets one there.

Third — and this point may be a bit abstruse — mediation is merely a practice, and skill in the practice of meditation is not the same as realization. Realization is an attitude, in the deep, philosophical sense of the term 'attitude': a way of holding oneself within the world with perfect attention and skill. We practice that attitude on the cushion — just as an athlete might practice the attitudes of his sport at a gym — but what happens on the cushion is ultimately as inconsequential as what happens at a gym. I have no doubts that Osho's practice will take one as far as he claims; it's good practice as far as it goes. But what he holds here as the 'ultimate experience of bliss' isn't the ultimate aim.

Osho's statement quoted by OP:

The mind is empty, the heart is empty, the body is relaxed. In that
moment happens something like a quantum leap. Your whole witnessing
jumps upon itself. It witnesses itself, because there is nothing else
to witness.

The statement above sounds a bit like the jhana levels, especially the fourth jhana level according to the sutta quote below.
However, it doesn't sound anywhere close to Nibbana and full liberation from suffering.
This is not unusual as many self-proclaimed gurus in modern times (perhaps like Eckhart Tolle), in the past (perhaps like Osho) and also in the time of the Buddha (like Alara Kalama), have apparently attained various levels of jhana, but had not necessarily attained Nibbana. Of course, I can't say this with certainty, but it would be a reasonable speculation.
Even if those teachers are not completely liberated, I'm sure they have something useful to teach to students who are not as advanced as them.

"And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure and stress — as
with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress — he enters and
remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness,
neither-pleasure-nor-pain. He sits, permeating the body with a pure,
bright awareness, so that there is nothing of his entire body
unpervaded by pure, bright awareness.
"Just as if a man were sitting wrapped from head to foot with a white
cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white
cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating his body with
a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body
unpervaded by pure, bright awareness.
AN 5.28

Hi @ruben2020 thank you for your answer...can you guide me to any link or resource which you think is a precise description of Nibbana...I know I can google search and even search this site which has many descriptions of nirvana but I want to read the answer that you think is as a exact definition of nirvana...

@TheWhiteCloud Please see this answer, this answer and this answer.


text:
Best time, reason to leave according to Dhamma?
Say one dwells somewhere, somehow, enjoys or feeds on certain hospitality, at which occasion, at which point, it would be proper to leave and no more return?
So what's the time? Is time running out?
Koan-cracks also welcome!

Say one dwells somewhere, somehow, enjoys or feeds on certain hospitality, at which occasion, at which point, it would be proper to leave and no more return?

I think the best time to leave is when there's no more questions from the caretakers and when one has done whatever one could to repay the hospitality and make sure the caretakers are well and happy. Then one can leave and go to help others.


text:
Which sutta(s) say that Rahula was the Buddha's son?
I have seen some suttas where the Buddha addressed Rahula. Are there suttas which explicitly state that Rahula was the Buddha's son, or does this come from the commentary?

I am known as “Fortunate Rāhula”
because I’m accomplished in both ways:
I am the son (putto) of the Buddha (buddhassa)
and I am seer of truths.
Thg 4.8

Also, it seems logical the student in MN 61 would be the Buddha's son due to the special & very firm attention given to him in relation to such a very basic yet important teaching.
Also, I cannot recall another sutta similar to MN 147 where the deities act as follows; as though it is a very special occasion, which logically supports the view Rahula is the Buddha's biological son:

Now on that occasion many thousands of deities followed the Blessed
One, thinking: “Today the Blessed One will lead the venerable Rāhula
further to the destruction of the taints.”

Probably not in the Sutta-Pitaka since after joining the Order, Ven. Rahula had to address the Buddha using His formal title just like other monks, and similarly for when the Buddha spoke to Ven. Rahula. But the proof is there in the Vinaya's Mahakhandhaka where the famous rule: "one should not give the going forth to a child without the parents' permission" was based on the real story of the Buddha allowing his son Rahula to join the Order when he was a child. King Suddhodana, the Buddha's father and Rahula's grandfather then expressed his concern about the incident which eventually led to the establishment of the new rule.

"real story". really?

This is the best answer. It comes with the story of "why we decide Rahula as Siddhattha's son"


text:
MN 62 Translation Request
In "The Longer Advice to Rāhula" the following appears:

Muditaṁ, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi.
Muditañhi te, rāhula, bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato yā arati sā pahīyissati.

Bhante Sujato translates this as

Meditate on rejoicing.
For when you meditate on rejoicing any discontent will be given up.

Thanissaro Bhikkhu:

“Develop the meditation of empathetic joy. For when you are developing the meditation of empathetic joy, resentment will be abandoned.

Bhikkhu Vagga:

"Rāhula, develop meditation on altruistic joy; for when you develop meditation on altruistic joy, any discontent will be abandoned.

Can somebody please explain which terms correspond to which here, and how the translation is carried out? Thank you

Take advantage of the lookup feature at: https://suttacentral.net/mn62/en/sujato After clicking the given link, click the "views" icon (the "eye" icon at top right corner) > Check "Line by line" under "View root text with translation" > Check "English" under "Activate Pali word lookup". Now you can see both Pali and English texts being shown line-by-line. Then click on any Pali terms and there should be a translation pop-up window at the bottom of the page.

Can somebody please explain which terms correspond to which here

"Muditaṁ"

rejoicing
empathetic joy
altruistic joy

"bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi"

Meditate on
Develop the meditation of
develop meditation on

"Muditañhi" and "bhāvanaṁ bhāvayato" (repeated as above)
arati

discontent
resentment

pahīyissati

given up
abandoned

how the translation is carried out?
I guess you're asking how translators learn to understand a new or "foreign" language?
I think people often have a teacher, when they're learning.
And when they learn, they learn:

Grammar
Vocabulary
Subject matter

... so they learn the meanings of words and also what the author is likely to be saying when they use those words.
I suppose you learn the "meaning" of a word by seeing it used in context and recognising it when you see it again. For example I think that "the meditation to develop metta" is called "metta bhavana" -- and I recognise "mudita" as being one of the four bhamaviharas (of which metta is another) -- and so together perhaps that helps me to understand or recognise what "Muditaṁ bhāvanaṁ bhāvehi" means (i.e. substituting mudita for metta).
Why is it that Aarti is translated as resentment in one case, but discontent in the others?
I think they ("resentment" and "discontent") are similar in meaning.
There are some essays about the brahmaviharas here: https://accesstoinsight.org/search_results.html?&q=brahmaviharas
One of those says,

These four attitudes are said to be excellent or sublime because they are the right or ideal way of conduct towards living beings (sattesu samma patipatti). They provide, in fact, the answer to all situations arising from social contact. They are the great removers of tension, the great peace-makers in social conflict, and the great healers of wounds suffered in the struggle of existence. They level social barriers, build harmonious communities, awaken slumbering magnanimity long forgotten, revive joy and hope long abandoned, and promote human brotherhood against the forces of egotism.
The Brahma-viharas are incompatible with a hating state of mind [...]

I think they're taught as being not only good-in-themselves but also as antidotes to "hating" (or hateful) states of mind, and more specifically four different remedies to four different types of hate.
I think mudita is the antidote to a type of hate that's called "envy" in English -- for example perhaps "he has all those nice things and is happy, I live in poverty and am sad, I deserve more than he does because I am virtuous and he's a cheat", and so on -- those are unhappy thoughts (which could be translated as both or either of the words "discontent" and "resentment").
And mudita tries to be happy because of someone else's success, for example -- "I'm happy that he's materially comfortable" ... or "I'm happy that other people praise him".

Thank you. I understand how translators learn a foreign language, my question here could have been better put: what are the specific textual arguments that support this translation over the one? “Resentment” and “discontent” have different meanings in English; discontent is a very broad term, whereas resentment is much narrower.

If one is broad and the other is narrow then perhaps they're not "different" in the sense of being "contradictory" -- instead a person might feel both, one includes the other. It's not uncommon with translations of Pali words -- for example look at how many 'different' English words are used to translate dukkha. As you learn, the original word e.g. "mudita" means something to you -- perhaps a range of meanings -- and so you use that in your thoughts and speech, instead of English translations.

Can you please change my username to "Order of the Lotus Irelia"? I can't change it for 30 days. Thank you.

Arati is feeling boring, sad, annoying, mad, no-right, or envy when someone getting good resultant, something good or happiness, such as one feel boring when the opposite party win an election, or an ex-boyfriend feeling sad for an ex-girlfriend getting new partner.
Mudita is feeling happy, congratulation for someone getting good resultant, something good or happiness, such as one feel congratulation when the opposite party win an election, or an ex-boyfriend feeling happy for an ex-girlfriend getting new partner.

Why is it that Aarti is translated as resentment in one case, but discontent in the others?

Other translations also translate this word differently (as 'dislike', for instance).

In other words, Thanissaro has translated Arati in the way you suggest; i.e., resentment is the feeling of disliking somebody else's good result. Whereas the other translations are translating Arati more broadly

"girlfriend" = "sexual misconduct"

The anger in either sexual misconduct or right conduction has no mudita. Mudita is happy for other's happiness, resultant. Karuna want to help people form the bad resultant which originated by the misconduct. So, the practitioner should be happy for happy no virtue ex girlfriend while he feeling Karuna to her for her  misconduct too. Any anger is bad even anger in other's misconduct.


text:
Translation of Pali term "Arati"
The Pali term "Arati" is defined in Sutta Central as
https://suttacentral.net/define/arati

dislike, discontent, aversion

Others translate it differently, however. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, for example, translates it as "resentment." What textual evidence is there from the Pali Suttas, as well as the parallels, that supports one or the other of these translations?

when i lived in Thailand, i recall "envy" was the opposite of "mudita". Possibly Thanissaro was influenced by Thai teachings.

do you have resentment towards my answer? did you give it a tick out of gratitude or even choose it as the most useful answer? thanks

@DhammaDhatu I had neither upvoted nor downvoted your answer; however, looking at it now, it seems like a well researched answer, and so I gave it an upvote. I would still be interested to know if there are any suttas which fit “resentment” better than “discontentment.”

You can only search the suttas (here) until you find an unambiguous contextual example.
For example, AN 6.133 Arati Sutta is not unambiguous but points to 'resentment' inciting revenge:

Mendicants, there are these three things. What three? arati,
cruelty (vihiṁsā) and unprincipled conduct (adhammacariyā). These are the three things. To give
up these three things you should develop three things. What three? You
should develop rejoicing to give up arati, harmlessness to give
up cruelty and principled conduct to give up unprincipled conduct.
These are the three things you should develop to give up those three
things.

SN 9.4 appears more clear and points to "dissatisfaction":

Seeing so many vacated seats today, Arati viya mejja khāyati, it
seems to me that they must have become dissatisfied. Bahuke disvāna
vivitte āsane; They were so learned, such brilliant speakers! Te
cittakathā bahussutā, Where have these disciples of Gotama gone?” Kome
gotamasāvakā gatā”ti

You keep examining suttas as above until conclusive (if possible). In fact, the above method is the only method of understanding the True Dhamma.
SN 5.1 below is clearer:

Sensual pleasures are like swords and stakes; Sattisūlūpamā kāmā, the
aggregates are their chopping block. khandhāsaṁ adhikuṭṭanā; What you
call sensual delight Yaṁ tvaṁ kāmaratiṁ brūsi, has become no delight
for me.” arati mayha sā ahū”ti.

Based on the above, it appears "discontentment" is the most general meaning.
Again, Snp 3.2 below supports "discontent":

Sensual pleasures are your first army, Kāmā te paṭhamā senā, the
second is called discontent, Dutiyā arati vuccati; hunger and thirst
are the third, Tatiyā khuppipāsā te, and the fourth is said to be
craving. Catutthī taṇhā pavuccati. Your fifth is dullness and drowsiness, Pañcamaṁ thinamiddhaṁ te,
the sixth is said to be
cowardice, Chaṭṭhā bhīrū pavuccati; your seventh is doubt, Sattamī
vicikicchā te, contempt and obstinacy are your eighth. Makkho thambho
te aṭṭhamo.

Again, AN 1.13 below clearly points to "discontentment" or "lack of joy":

Mendicants, I do not see a single thing that gives rise to dullness
and drowsiness, or, when they have arisen, makes them increase and
grow like discontent, sloth, yawning, sleepiness after eating, and
mental sluggishness. “Nāhaṁ, bhikkhave, aññaṁ ekadhammampi
samanupassāmi yena anuppannaṁ vā thinamiddhaṁ uppajjati uppannaṁ vā
thinamiddhaṁ bhiyyobhāvāya vepullāya saṁvattati yathayidaṁ, bhikkhave,
arati tandī vijambhitā bhattasammado cetaso ca līnattaṁ.

The above sutta concludes my search.
In summary, while resentment can be a form of discontentment, it appears the general meaning of 'arati' is 'discontentment' or 'lack of joy/appreciation'.

I assume it's the same root as in 'ratana' which means 'a gem', 'precious', 'jewel', 'treasure' and with a negative prefix for 'not-precious' with semantic properties of 'disliked', 'unwanted' etc as aratana. The ratana to rati is as aratana to arati.


text:
What is the meaning of delusion? and how to get rid of it?
What is the meaning of delusion ? and how it is different from lust , passion or greed ?
What is the meaning of non-delusion ? and how it is different from no lust , no passion or no greed?
And finally , how to get rid of delusion ?

Partially answered here: What is the difference between moha (delusion) and avijja (ignorance)?

Mindfulness and wisdom (panna) dispels delusion.

When asked about greed, hatred and delusion, Venerable Ānanda replied:

AN3.71:4.2: A deluded person, overcome by delusion, intends to hurt themselves, hurt others, and hurt both. They experience mental pain and sadness.
AN3.71:4.3: When delusion has been given up, they don’t intend to hurt themselves, hurt others, and hurt both. They don’t experience mental pain and sadness.
AN3.71:4.4: A deluded person does bad things by way of body, speech, and mind.
AN3.71:4.5: When delusion has been given up, they don’t do bad things by way of body, speech, and mind.
AN3.71:4.6: A deluded person doesn’t truly understand what’s for their own good, the good of another, or the good of both.
AN3.71:4.7: When delusion has been given up, they truly understand what’s for their own good, the good of another, or the good of both.
AN3.71:4.8: Delusion is a destroyer of sight, vision, and knowledge; it blocks wisdom, it’s on the side of anguish, and it doesn’t lead to extinguishment.
AN3.71:4.9: This is the drawback we’ve seen in greed, hate, and delusion, and this is why we advocate giving them up.”

To get rid of delusion, there is a path:

AN3.71:5.4: “It is simply this noble eightfold path, that is:
AN3.71:5.5: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion.
AN3.71:5.6: This is the path, this is the practice for giving up that greed, hate, and delusion.”

Although AN3.71 defines delusion in terms of its effects on ourselves and others, a list of delusions might help. Notice that identity view is #1 in the list of delusions (Sakkāyadiṭṭhi...moho):

AN6.90:1.3: Identity view, doubt, misapprehension of precepts and observances, and forms of greed, hate, and delusion that lead to rebirth in places of loss.

Delusion is unskillful because it leads us to value and chase impermanent things again and again.  When asked about their identity, people will often respond with a list of impermanent things (e.g., my house, my job, my car, my computer, my partner, etc.). That identification leads to inevitable suffering, which is why identity view is a delusion. The hook of delusion is desire, a desire for impermanent things. Desiring impermanent things is delusion for those seeking an end to suffering.

SN42.11:4.4: “Then was it because you saw or heard of her that you had
SN42.11:4: desire or love or fondness for her?”
SN42.11:4.6: “Yes, sir.”
SN42.11:5.1: “What do you think, chief?
SN42.11:5.2: If Ciravāsi’s mother was executed, imprisoned, fined, or condemned, would it cause you sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress?”
SN42.11:5.3: “How could it not, sir?”
SN42.11:5.4: “This too is a way to understand:
SN42.11:5.5: ‘All the suffering that arises is rooted and sourced in desire.
SN42.11:5.6: For desire is the root of suffering.’”

This last point is a difficult teaching. In particular, the monks who heard this same teaching in MN1 were not happy:

MN1:172-194.30: That is what the Buddha said.
MN1:172-194.31: But the mendicants were not happy with what the Buddha said.

It doesn't give direct answer to the question : What is delusion?

Thank you. Added a list of delusions.

Delusion is a destroyer of sight, vision, and knowledge; it blocks wisdom, it’s on the side of anguish, and it doesn’t lead to extinguishment. But how ?

Thanks for the clarification.  Added explanation about root of suffering.

@SacrificialEquation: There isn't really a set of instructions on how to remove delusion. One comes to understand what delusion is. That understanding comes about through knowledge and wisdom brought about by inclining the mind towards wholesome things. Having understood in this way, delusion perishes.

Delusion, gives birth to lust, passion and greed. When the Delusion is conquered, there is nothing to attaching with lust, passion or greed. No one to feel those feelings.
The biggest Delusion is the delusion of self. The process of interpreting the external stimuli with past memories allow us to both identify and evaluate our interpretation of the world. This world we make ourselves is unique and personal to each person. The primary reason for building the whole world is to ascertain that I exist:

I can see the world. The World exists, Because I can see the word I exist.
I can hear the world. The World exists, Because I can hear the word I exist.
I can taste the world. The World exists, Because I can taste the word I exist.
I can feel the world. The World exists, Because I can feel the word I exist.
I spoke to the world. The World exists, Because I can spoke to the word I exist.
I remember seeing this house, talking to this person, tasting this taste, feeling this thing, hearing this sound yesterday. I remember the past, therefore I existed in the past.
I will say, do, see, hear, feel tomorrow as well, therefore I will exist in the future.

Studying the Dukkha Sacca from Four Noble Truths, we can clearly see that the (Please read this answer which explains Dukkha Sacca in 4 noble truths. For brevity, I will not repeat it.) this person we think as I is the biggest Delusion that we create. When we are caught in this Delusion we spend all our energy in continuously ascertaining that I exist. Not only that based on that Delusion, we continue to evaluate our interpretation of the world, and start interacting with it with lust, greed, passion, anger, grief, etc. We think the person (I) is interacting with the world. But in reality, the world and the process of interpretation (that we call I) are one and the same. So, the lust, passion, greed, whatever the emotion, its only you. Its not the outside. Its only an interpretation of;

photons that the eye collected
sound wave the ear collected
touch that the skin collected
chemical that the tongue collected
chemical that the nose collected
an idea that the mind collected

The delusion is that we make a whole world based on the above, not only that we make a self who perceives it. This is the biggest Delusion.
Studying the four noble truths paves clear path out of this Delusion.
Please refer:

MN 1 Mūlapariyāyasutta
MN 44 Cūḷavedallasutta
MN 2 Sabbāsavasutta
DN 9 Poṭṭhapādasutta
MN 8 Sallekhasutta
Saccavibhaṅga

Did you confuse between delusion (moha) and ignorance (avijja)?

I need a quote from suttas to explain what is delusion....

What you appear to need is to give up delusion. The suttas explain there are three type of defilements, namely, greed, hatred & delusion.  Therefore when a sutta such as MN 7 lists 16 types of defilements https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.007.nypo.html or a sutta such as MN 8 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.008.nypo.html lists 44 types of defilements, all of these defilements fall into the three basic categories of greed, hatred & delusion. You should attempt to exercise your own intelligence and work out which sub-defilements are greed, are hatred, are delusion.

@StopObama-BidenStopWar: All the emotions one feels are due to the delusion of self. Without that delusion, you won't face any such feelings. At Arihath state the saknkna of 'self' is no longer there, As there is no one to suffer, no suffering can take place. I was not talking about categorizations.

@SacrificialEquation: Refer Sachcha Vibhanga sutta. Don't try to find the word, but try to understand what is explained. The whole sutta is targeted at  getting rid of delusion of self. Any sutta that explains the 4 noble truths will be telling the same. When you understand the meaning, delusion of self will be no more.

@ruben2020:  I was simply talking about delusion as it appears from the teachings as a whole. Not a specific word. If this answer is misleading in that sense, please delete it. Or even I can delete it. If an answer creates more confusion, then its not worth staying in this forum.

sorry but the idea "all the emotions one feels are due to the delusion of self" sounds wrong. refer to SN 12.12 for example

@Sampath It's ok. You don't need to delete the answer. If you can fix any issues, that's better.

@StopObama-BidenStopWar I don't understand your point. Hunger is not an emotion, its a feeling. The two are different.

@ruben2020: My answers are based on Dhamma studies and understanding I have at this point. I could be wrong, and my understanding could be wrong or limited. Please point them out and I will correct them. I'm quite bad at reciting the Pali cannon, as I learned from my teachers as well as books written in native language. Looking at this discussion, I felt that I could do more harm than good with my approach. So, I prefer to take down the answers which could create confusion. I would be most thankful if you can review my other answers as well. Thank you.

@ruben2020 I have made a few edits and added references. Please review and let me know of any further improvements. Thank You

@StopObama-BidenStopWar I have made a few edits and added references. Please review and let me know of any further improvements. Thank You.

What is the meaning of delusion?

it is one's wrong views, lack of insight, wrong conviction, the opposite of clear comprehension

and how it is different from lust , passion or greed ?

delusion is that in dependence on which the others exist.

Suppose a person is new to the game and is fascinated by it.
This fascination can be seen to be due to the novelty of the game and this passion will remain until the ignorance about the game theory & mechanics is removed by clear comprehension.
When knowledge arises and the game is comprehended then the player will know the right strategy and will no longer become upset or greedy playing the game as he did when was ignorant.
Following a strategy requires also concentration and this is how the faculties are tied up. One can furthermore exert oneself following a strategy based on faith, without having attained knowledge & vision for oneself, expecting to attain it as a matter of course.

And finally , how to get rid of delusion ?

By learning the teacher's instruction and doing as told.

AN 1.49-52 says:

Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming
defilements.
Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming
defilements.

The suttas describe the defilement "greed" or "lust" as the mind "coloured" or "painted", similar to say a woman who, under the power of lust, paints her face with make-up in order to make herself more attractive or seductive. Thus SN 46.55 says about "lust":

Imagine, Brahman, a bowl of water mixed with lac, turmeric, dark green
or crimson dye. If a man with good eyesight were to look at the
reflection of his own face in it, he would not know or see it as it
really was. In the same way, Brahman, when a man dwells with his heart
possessed and overwhelmed by sense-desires... then he cannot know or
see, as it really is, what is to his own profit, to the profit of
others, to the profit of both. Then even sacred words he has long
studied are not clear to him, not to mention those he has not studied.

In contrast, the defilement of "delusion" is described as "darkness" or "spiritual/mental blindness. Thus about "doubt", which is a form of "delusion", SN 46.55 says:

Imagine a bowl of water, agitated, stirred up muddied, put in a dark
place. If a man with good eyesight were to look at the reflection of
his own face in it, he would not know or see it as it really was. In
the same way, Brahman, when a man dwells with his heart possessed and
overwhelmed by doubt-and-wavering... then he cannot know or see, as it
really is, what is to his own profit, to the profit of others, to the
profit of both. Then even sacred words he has long studied are not
clear to him, not to mention those he has studied.

Therefore, delusion is a primal or underlying "darkness" or "blindness", which can be the foundation for "greed" or "hatred". "Greed" is a desire to get something; where has "hatred" is a desire to destroy something. Regardless, both "greed" & "hatred" have their foundation in "delusion", which is "mental/spiritual blindness/darkness".
In a very general sense, delusion is wrong view. Wrong view includes:

Being blind to the reality killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, intoxicants, gambling, etc, are harmful to oneself & harmful to others.

Being blind to the reality craving & attachment lead to suffering.

Being blind to the reality conditioned things are impermanent & lack lasting happiness and being blind to the reality all things lack self and are not self.

Being blind to the actually of the origination, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger and the escape in regard to feeling (MN 148).

For example, in SN 42.3, a man had wrong view, as follows:

Then Yodhajiva the headman went to the Blessed One and, on arrival,
having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he
said to the Blessed One: "Lord, I have heard that it has been passed
down by the ancient teaching lineage of warriors that 'When a warrior
strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down &
slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with
the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of
devas [gods; angels] slain in battle.' What does the Blessed One have
to say about that?

Or in MN 87 a man had wrong view, as follows:

The Blessed One said to him “That’s the way it is, householder. That’s the way it is—for sorrow,
lamentation, pain, distress & despair are born from one who is dear,
come springing from one who is dear.”
“But lord, who would ever think that sorrow, lamentation, pain,
distress & despair are born from one who is dear, come springing from
one who is dear? Happiness & joy are born from one who is dear, come
springing from one who is dear.” So the householder, not delighting in
the Blessed One’s words, rejecting the Blessed One’s words, got up
from his seat and left.

Or MN 115 says about right view & wrong view:

‘It’s impossible for a person accomplished in view to take any
condition as permanent. That is not possible. But it’s possible for an
ordinary person to take some condition as permanent. That is
possible.’ They understand: ‘It’s impossible for a person accomplished
in view to take any condition as pleasant. But it’s possible for an
ordinary person to take some condition as pleasant.’ They understand:
‘It’s impossible for a person accomplished in view to take anything as
self. But it’s possible for an ordinary person to take something as
self.’

There are at least two ways to get rid of delusion & wrong view:

Wise analytical reasoning/thinking/reflection, as explained in MN 19

Direct insight via meditation, i.e., developing the Noble Eightfold Path.

It doesn't give direct answer to the question : What is delusion?

Lately we have very demanding question askers here. But when u put the effort into offering a clearer answer they don't show any gratitude (such as here https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/46900/translation-of-pali-term-arati & here https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/46825/8157) . Without gratitude, there is no start on the Buddhist path. I will try to improve the answer.

You're not a teacher, and it is arrogant of you to expect "gratitude". Often you don't answer the question,  you seem to be preoccupied with proselytising your views.

Sorry but the Buddha said we have gratitude for the small kindness. Also, the answer given is true Dhamma.

Any time a model of reality in your head is out of sync with reality - that's delusion.
You know something, you think you know, and you are convinced that what you know is how it is - but it is not. You are delusional.
Perhaps someone lied to you and you believed them. Or perhaps you misunderstood. Or overgeneralized and applied knowledge that was correct about one piece - to another piece and there it's wrong. Or perhaps you just don't want to see reality as it is for emotional reasons - because admitting it would be too painful. Or even if you ate a wrong mushroom. Whatever is the reason.
Lust, passion, greed - are secondary. You are convinced something will make you happy or whole and you crave it. Delusion is the root cause.
Now, what is non-delusion? It's not simply being in-sync with reality, because we can never be 100% accurate about everything. Models are models, they are simplified and incomplete by their very nature. Although certainly being reasonably well educated and informed goes a long way. But the key requirement for non-delusion is not assuming you know more than you do!
Non-delusion requires humbleness and open mind. When we admit that our knowledge is tentative and partial, we can keep updating it as we go along. Being like this we are never out of sync, never deluded.
Not being out of sync, we are not subject to conflict. Not being subject to conflict, we do not suffer. That is how non-delusion is Peace.

Can you please change my username to "Order of the Lotus Irelia"? I can't change it for 30 days.

I don't think mods can do that. @ChrisW ?

The robbers greed on others' stuffs because they ignore(delusion) of knowing and seeing the truth whether where will they get by robbing (karma).
They can't see  their past lives, so they don't know the truth whether what is the resultant of greed on others' stuffs.
That's what the Buddha did on the enlightening night, 3 vijja.

They can't see their past lives = irrelevant

@StopObama-BidenStopWar You can do whatver you greed to do, but I will answer the way Buddha did on the enlightening night. https://suttacentral.net/mn19/en/sujato?layout=plain&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin

"nivasa" does not mean "lives". refer to SN 22.79

Opinion is opinion. I will listion to it but I will decide base on the truth.

your view is you must see your personal self's past lives before you know the truth. Since you have not seen any past lives, how can you decide what is true?

@StopObama-BidenStopWar it's not my view, it's Sutta. and is not only one Sutta, there are many Suttas like this https://suttacentral.net/mn19/en/sujato?layout=plain&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin


text:
Why is Buddhism popular in Eastern Asia compared to South Asia where it originated?
Buddhism originated in India but from what I understand it's not very big in India and instead more popular in Eastern Asia in countries like Japan, Vietnam, China etc.

This question was closed as a duplicate of existing questions. Please read the linked questions to see if the answers to those questions answer this question too.

Theravada destroyed Buddhism in South Asia by perverting the teachings into something resembling Hinduism. Where as in East Asia there was no religion similar to Hinduism. Today, the Theravadins continue to pervert the True Dhamma


text:
A question about astrology and astronomy
my question is astronomical observations and results thereof when applied to humans largely differ from astrological influencing. What Buddhists unlike other religious groups  should do to solve the problems?

How is that different from astrology?

I don't understand the question: it says, "to solve the problems" -- what problems? And how that connected to astronomical observations?

@ruben2020 Astronomy is Scientific

@chrisW Its one's realisation .like Starwars program is terrible, aweful,user 37920.

Buddhism is not really trying to solve problems in the world. Buddhism is more about internal work and purification of mind through meditation and ethics.
Buddhism is not interested in how astrology or astronomy works since it doesn't lead to freedom from suffering.
Better to just be mindful of the thinking process or the doubt when reflecting on these topics or to be mindful of the process of seeing if one is looking up in the sky.

sure thank you.user 37920

In DN 2 quoted below, the Buddha denounced practices like astrology, palmistry, divination, face reading, omen reading, magic, dream interpretation, predicting the future and so on as wrong livelihood and "animal arts" for monks. I highlighted the relevant parts.

"Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
as: reading marks on the limbs [e.g., palmistry]; reading omens and
signs; interpreting celestial events [falling stars, comets];
interpreting dreams; reading features of the body [e.g., phrenology];
reading marks on cloth gnawed by mice; offering fire oblations,
oblations from a ladle, oblations of husks, rice powder, rice grains,
ghee, and oil; offering oblations from the mouth; offering
blood-sacrifices; making predictions based on the fingertips;
geomancy; making predictions for state officials; laying demons in a
cemetery; placing spells on spirits; earth-skills [divining water and
gems?]; snake-skills, poison-skills, scorpion-skills, rat-skills,
bird-skills, crow-skills; predicting life spans; giving protective
charms; casting horoscopes — he abstains from wrong livelihood, from
"animal" arts such as these. .....
"Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
as [forecasting]: there will be a lunar eclipse; there will be a solar
eclipse; there will be an occultation of [a conjunction of the moon or
a planet with] an asterism; the sun and moon will be favorable; the
sun and moon will be unfavorable; the asterisms will be favorable; the
asterisms will be unfavorable; there will be a meteor shower; there
will be a flickering light on the horizon [an aurora?]; there will be
an earthquake; there will be thunder coming from dry clouds; there
will be a rising, a setting, a darkening, a brightening of the sun,
moon, and asterisms; such will be the result of the lunar eclipse ...
the rising, setting, darkening, brightening of the sun, moon, and
asterisms — he abstains from wrong livelihood, from "animal" arts such
as these.
DN 2


text:
Difficulty letting go of attachment
I've been training in spirituality for for about 8 years. I used to do formal meditation practice couple of times a day. Now I find that I kind of live my life more in a meditative way. I'm living a quiet life alone currently, not working at the moment and spending most of my time on spiritual and meditative practice, a bit like a monastic life in some ways.
I've done reading on various different spiritual traditions, I'd say I've been inspired more by Zen and Taoism than anything else. I'm interested in advice from any spiritual background though really. Some days now I can feel The Way and I follow it, and I'm moving slowly and taking care of myself and I can feel my mind opening up to the world. On those days I feel peace and I know how to move forwards.
Some days I'm having trouble letting go of attachment, and it's costing me a lot, of time suffering. For example at the moment, I've told some friends they can stay with me next weekend. I know really that this is not The Way. I take in too much of other people's energy at the moment and I need to be alone. I'm having incredible difficulty ringing them to discuss this, I have some powerful attachment which I can't let go of.
It's been about four days that I've been full of internal conflict about this and I'm suffering a lot. I can't digest my food, sleep well or take care of myself properly because of how strong the fight inside of me is to not let go of this attachment. I've tried to talk about it with some people but they all just say, "well maybe it will be nice if your friends come", which hasn't been so helpful.
When I try to sit with this inner conflict it's pretty unbearable. To make some progress, I commit to myself that I am going to discuss this with my friends. Then after making this commitment the conflict is bearable enough for me to sit with it for a bit, and I understand something new. Then when I have understood something new, I think 'oh I don't feel so bad now maybe it would be ok for them to come'. My conviction wanes, I don't call, and the cycle repeats.
Does anyone have some advice on a spiritual dilemma such as this? I tell myself 'well just ring then', but I've not been able to yet.

It's all legit. to call your friends to tell them there's a change of plan. It happens all the time and they'll likely won't mind. But if they already bought travel tickets, it won't be too bad either, cuz they'll just stay at your home for only 2 days for the weekend right?

I went through a similar process with attachments, particularly with friends and family. The pull of the mind can be quite strong around people, but it is more that the mind is drawn to inner conflict of one sort or another, rather than the situation or source of attachment itself.
I'm guessing the underlying narrative might be something like, "what will they think of me if I cancel?" - and there within lies the conflict born of upholding a particular kind of identity.
For me, I would often throw caution to the wind, remove myself from the mind's torment, and make a damn decision. Sometimes I looked like a fool - ah, so what! Humility dissolves the ego.

+1 for the advice about just making a decision.

SN3.18:4.3 refers to a supreme noble type of friendship, as follows:

Good friends, companions and associates are the whole of the
spiritual life. A monk with good friends, companions and associates can expect to develop and cultivate the noble eightfold path.

Per AN 3.114, it is extremely rare to find the above type of supreme noble friend in the world.
DN 31 refers to false friends & true friends as follows:

These four, young householder, should be understood as foes in the
guise of friends:

he who appropriates a friend's possessions, namely, (i) he appropriates his friend's wealth,
(ii) he gives little and asks
much, (iii) he does his duty out of fear, (iv) he associates for his
own advantage.
he who renders lip-service, namely,  (i) he makes friendly profession as regards the past, (ii) he makes
friendly profession as regards the future, (iii) he tries to gain
one's favor by empty words, (iv) when opportunity for service has
arisen, he expresses his inability.
he who flatters, namely, (i) he approves of his friend's evil deeds, (ii) he disapproves his
friend's good deeds, (iii) he praises him in his presence, (iv) he
speaks ill of him in his absence.
he who brings ruin, namely, (i) he is a companion in indulging in intoxicants that cause
infatuation and heedlessness, (ii) he is a companion in sauntering in
streets at unseemly hours, (iii) he is a companion in frequenting
theatrical shows, (iv) he is a companion in indulging in gambling
which causes heedlessness."

These four, young householder, should be understood as warm-hearted
friends:

he who is a helpmate, namely, (i) he guards the heedless, (ii) he protects the wealth of the
heedless, (iii) he becomes a refuge when you are in danger, (iv) when
there are commitments he provides you with double the supply needed.
he who is the same in happiness and  sorrow, namely, (i) he reveals his secrets, (ii) he conceals one's own secrets, (iii)
in misfortune he does not forsake one, (iv) his life even he
sacrifices for one's sake.
he who gives good counsel, namely, (i) he restrains one from doing evil, (ii) he encourages one to do
good, (iii) he informs one of what is unknown to oneself, (iv) he
points out the path to heaven.
he who sympathises, namely, (i) he does not rejoice in one's misfortune, (ii) he rejoices in one's
prosperity, (iii) he restrains others speaking ill of oneself, (iv) he
praises those who speak well of oneself

While sufficient information has not been provided, in the situation of the questioner, an impression or speculation arises the questioner fears the conduct of his/her friends may not be in harmony with his/her spiritual lifestyle. If this is true, it follows these types of friends are 'false friends' from a Buddhist perspective.
The above said, due to our past, most of us have such 'friends'. We should learn to establish appropriate boundaries with such 'friends'. We generally don't cut them off but we are clear we don't engage in their unwholesome lifestyle.
In summary, we can/should use the criteria from DN 31 to examine whether our 'friends' are true friends, false friends or a combination of both. This will help us determine our degree & manner of association with them.

Thankyou for sharing these teachings they were interesting. I can tell which friends are in harmony with my lifestyle and which aren't. I find it difficult doing boundaries with the friends who aren't, especially if they're people I've known for a long time. I think the friends who I have plans with next week are true friends

Ok. thank you for your thank you Joe

If you have invited friends, then you are a host. Skillful hosts are hospitable:

AN7.70:1.10: A mendicant should honor and respect and rely on hospitality, to give up the unskillful and develop the skillful.”

The Buddha also teaches two kinds of hospitality:

AN2.152:1.1: “There are these two kinds of hospitality.
AN2.152:1.2: What two?
AN2.152:1.3: Hospitality in material things and hospitality in the teaching.
AN2.152:1.4: These are the two kinds of hospitality.
AN2.152:1.5: The better of these two kinds of hospitality is hospitality in the teaching.”

Hospitality in the teaching is good because:

SN3.18:4.3: Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life.

Notice that the Buddha clearly emphasizes good friends as the whole of the spiritual life. So we should all be skillful hosts to good friends.

This doesn't answer my question at all, I'm asking about the inner conflict not the actual event that may or may not happen. If I ring my friend, it will be to discuss with them how it would impact them to stay somewhere else, not to tell them they can't stay here

Thank you for the clarification. A simple solution is to call your friends and simply say, "I need some alone time, may we reschedule?" However, if they have already made travel plans from a distance, then that would be cruel.  Buddhist ethics handle those inner conflicts.

this answer sounds wrong. when the Buddha referred to "good friends", he referred to those who influence you to practise the Noble Eightfold Path. the suttas says: "A mendicant with good friends, companions, and associates can expect to develop and cultivate the noble eightfold path."

The OP has now clarified the friends are good. Hopefully the conflict will dissolve since good friends, companions and associates are indeed the whole of the spiritual life. This is a critical point made by the Buddha and should not be ignored.


text:
Spirits and heaven
My two pet cats recently died in my rental house. Long story short, we sold our old home but we have no where to move yet so we rented a property while our new house is being built. Before I ask my questions I want to thank you guys for taking your time to reading this post . How can I ensure that my cat spirits go to heaven? or How can I bring their spirits to my new home? I am scared that they will be alone since the current rental price isn't cheap and I am scared that they will wait for me in this house. I just want them to reach heaven. Can animal spirits go to buddhist heaven?
I am a Theravada buddhist. Also , I am scared that there might be other spirits inside this house, I rarely don't believe in spirits but the rental house is kind of mystery itself. I am scared that those spirits might take my cat, I wish to buddha everyday that their spirits be safe and including hindu gods. How can I make merits to my cats spirit? How can I know if they got the merit? How can I transfer the merit to them so they may reach heaven?  Are animal spirits allowed to enter heaven?

From a Theravada Buddhist perspective you're cats have already been reborn another place - impossible to say where unless one is a Buddha.
Try to be mindful of the wanting for them to be reborn in Heaven - the wanting/craving is what can/will cause suffering for you. You're cats own Kamma decides where they get reborn. You did your best to take care of them and love them. Be happy about that and take good care of yourself and your mind.
You can share the merits you've earned from performing The 10 Meritorious Deeds (one of them is meditation practice). You could choose to share the merits with all beings in the universe and by doing that your cats will recieve it too.