text:
"true love", compassion and suffering
According to Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh, "true love" has four elements:

Loving kindness: this produces a lot of joy and happiness.
Compassion: it makes us and the other people suffer less.
Joy: "If love does not generate joy, it is not [true] love."
Inclusiveness: "In true love there is no frontier between the one who loves and the one who is loved."

I'd like to focus on "compassion" here. Don't people who are more compassionate suffer more because they experience the suffering of other people in some sense? So aren't the elements 2 and 3 as mentioned above contrary to each other?
I think this question is related but not identical to another question asked before: love and caring is suffering.

See also What is the difference between 'compassion' and 'pity'?

Don't people who are more compassionate suffer more because they
  experience the suffering of other people?

The above appears to be the Western/Christian meaning of compassion, namely, "to suffer with".
In Buddhism, the term "karuṇā" (often translated as "compassion") is the wish to ending suffering. It does not mean "to suffer with".

karuṇā - “ahita-dukkh-âpanaya-kāmatā,” the desire of removing bane and sorrow (from one’s fellowmen)

Thank you. But is such kind of "compassion" possible in practice? It seems to me that the compassionate person is not happy because of being aware of the suffering of his/her friend or millions of people in the world, and that motivates her/him to offer help.

@apadana in theory, the removal of others suffering could stem from unhappiness or benevolence. To my understanding buddhist compassion (karuna) emphasizes the latter as a mean to liberate yourself and others from the pain, instead of dwelling in it.

Being compassionate towards another means to see the roots of their suffering — the cravings and discontentments that drive it — not to embrace it or enter into it. When we do not see the roots of other people's suffering, we become involved in their suffering: we grow attached, which can lead us to be angry, resentful, pitying, snobbish, distant, cruel... That does nothing except compound the suffering of others, and lead us to suffer ourselves.
When we do see the roots of their suffering we can relate to them: we too have suffered under misperception. Then we are filled with kindness and tenderness. Our kindness and tenderness does more to ease their suffering than any action we could take.
Compassion is not about entering into their a person's suffering to fix what's wrong. Compassion is about seeing the person who suffers in their true (non-suffering) light, so that they can find themselves in our eyes.

I'd like to focus on "compassion" here. Don't people who are more compassionate suffer more because they experience the suffering of other people in some sense? So aren't the elements 2 and 3 as mentioned above contrary to each other?

That's why when studying the Brahmavihara/the Four Sublime Attitudes, one should be careful not to confuse these sublime states with what's called their "near and far enemies". Afterall the practice is really a selfless practice. If one's clinging to the self is not there, if there's no "I", "mine", or "myself", there's no anchor for suffering to take shape.

Loving kindness(metta): wish for welfare/happiness of others; near enemy: attachment; far enemy: ill will;
Compassion(karuna): empathy with others suffering; near enemy: worldly grief; far enemy: cruelty(vihesa);
Altruistic joy(mudita): joy from seeing others' success/good fortune; near enemy: worldly joy; far enemy: aversion, discontent(arati);
Equanimity(upekkha): impartiality towards others; near enemy: dull indifference of apathy; far enemy: attachment and aversion(patigha); For a fuller treatment, see Vism IX page 312-313;


text:
Compassion Meditation's Efficiency
In compassion meditation (metta-bhavana), does the strength of the effect depend mainly on concentration? Or are there other factors involved as well?
Thank you.

I depend on concentration and sincerity of on thoughts.
If one can keep out other distracting thoughts one's concentration increase thus increasing the effectiveness.
If one just repeating words than sincere this decreases the effectiveness.
Ultimately what is needed is:

one generates compassionate thoughts
develop compassion as a quality
break barriers where one classify beings as favourable and unfavourable

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
The Complex Abhidhamma
I have been having trouble analyzing the Abhidhamma.

Can someone explain all or the main points of the Abhidhamma, but
  simply, just so I can understand it better as I continue my studies?

Thanks!

The best starting point is to read the following summary.The Abhidhamma deals with realities existing in an ultimate sense, called in Pali paramattha
dhammā. There are four such realities:

Citta, mind or consciousness, defined as that which knows or experiences an object.
Citta occurs as distinct momentary states of consciousness.

2) Cetasikas, the mental factors that arise and occur along with the cittas.
3) Rūpa, physical phenomena, or material form.
4) Nibbāna.
http://103.242.110.22/theravadins/English-articles/abhidhamma-in-practice.pdf

Abhidhamma deals with ultimate realities (Citta, Cetasika, Rupa & Nibbana). There are 121/89 Citta, 52 Cetesika, 28 Rupa. Each Citta contain a combination of Cetesika. Since these lists are long drilling down into the specifics are pretty long, but you can locate more detail resources here: http://www.abhidhamma.com/

Abhidharma is just a compilation of all the technical concepts from suttas.
Buddha spoke about conditioned and unconditioned dharmas - let's create a list. Buddha spoke about five skandhas, let's compile everything he said about each. Buddha spoke about six doors and six bases etc. - let's get those lists.
Like that. It's an extraction and summary of all these ideas.

Jhana master has very fast and powerful mind more than people who still addict 5 strings, coulor sound smell taste touching.
Jhana produces the paññā light which can let the master see the reality easily. However, they can't understand the dependent origination themself without the Buddha.
In Buddha's time, there are many Jhana master's who become Arahanta, especially the Buddha and his genius follower, Sariputta.
This two masters realize how is it important to the understanding in reality for the insight meditation.
So, the core of Abhidhammma is "it is the key of insight meditation." No one can enlighten Nibbana without understand enough the reality in the dependent origination even the Jhana masters because no one can understand Anatta without the dependent origination knowledge.
And Abhidhamma can help about it perfectly. However, it's easier if the student meditate Jhāna to get the paññā light to see the "real" reality, atom and mind process, arising and vanishing trillion times in a second. Then the student can study Abhidhamma easily.

Do you have personal experience of jnana?

Shy >///< I know many Jhana masters, but I still not attain Appana-Jhana. I've started to focus on concentration meditation this year, however I've studied Tipitaka for more than 15 years and I trust Pa-Auk Tawya, Jhana master, for more than 8 years. The first time I read his book 8 years ago, I interjected "This is Tipitaka Memorizer's book. He is the Jhana master and he may be enlightened already". However, my karma blinded to practice myself Jhana, but this year. Lucky karma, at least I understood Tipitaka concept already at that time, so I trust in him without the concentration meditation.

Puthujjanas are obsessed with objects and their fantasy that objects have  ''a nature'' (and then that objects have ''a true nature'' hidden from humans) and that when they know this ''hidden nature'' that objects,they will know ''the nature'' of ''reality'', so they try to express what they hear about the dhamma through their cravings for objects and their fantasy that cars, houses, thoughts,  the past, the future, videos, paintings, humans, plants, whatever they see in their life have ''a nature''. Their creation is the various Abhidhammas.
All the people who create schools do this and they base their views on ''the true nature'' of things, phenomena, objects and of course when they move on to humans, they love to talk about the self and they even managed to create the wrong view called Pudgalavada. Even the westerns are infatuated with phenomenology and they claim that this close to the dhamma. This is why people love the Abhidhammas and the speculations on the Abhidhammas and hate the dhamma, since the dhamma does not focuses much on anything that is ''Mara's territory'' ( and instead on the citta iteself, sanna, vedana, like here https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.006.than.html),  for those people to be pleased by the dhamma and its lack of statements about the usual obsessions on which people will ways speculate :''why there is samsara in the first place'' and what is ''the nature of a things'' and ofc the biggest question for them ''what is the nature of a buddha''.
Since different people always invent different theories, there were plenty of Abhidhammas. Fortunately most of those books have disappeared so you do not have to worry about all the speculations by various people about the nature of ''things''.
For the Abhidhamma by the Mahavihara, ie the theravada today, you can check Bikkhu bodhi courses Abhidhamma Study Retreat'''which he holds each year
https://www.youtube.com/user/venbodhi/playlists
https://www.youtube.com/user/bauscym/search?query=Abhidhamma
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPztefkY778&list=PLIIDc2zUth8RWXXsOAHqB6WiSmZZuQdCx
https://www.baus.org/en/activities/bhikkhu-bodhi/abhidhamma-study-retreat-with-ven-bhikkhu-bodhi-cym-831-932018/

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


text:
The World • It Disintegrates
Friends, I am looking for a sutta from the Pali Canon wherein the Buddha, expounding the nature of the world, goes somewhat like this :

And what is the world ? That which disintegrates is the world. That’s why we call it is called 'the world'.

Thank you for your very much appreciated help.
With gratitude.

It is ‘breaking up,’ bhikshu, therefore it is called ‘world’.”

(Lujjati) Loka Sutta


text:
Relying on the Laity, monastics
I had questions regarding the laity, monastic relationship.

1) How exactly (the step by step or explained) does the process work
  in which the monastics rely solely on the laity?
2) How do monks publish works (such as books) and not deal with the
  money involved in their lives?

Metta!

At it's core it works out as if a person went to mountains to meditate, his friend then brings him food & clothing. Eventually the amount of people interested in supporting this project grows. Then for some reason the supporters build something and invite the meditator to stay there. At some point there might be willingness and resources for others to become full time meditators. The supporters may equip the monastery with starlink and invite monks to publish books or monks might do so on their own initiative.

The monks have to rely on lay stewards as described below.
From The Bhikkhus' Rules: A Guide for Laypeople by Ven. Ariyesako:

One can also make an invitation, 'pavarana,' to cover any
circumstances that you might not be aware of — a health problem, need
for a toothbrush, etc., by saying, "Bhante, if you are in need of any
medicine or requisites, please let me know." To avoid misunderstanding
it is better to be quite specific, such as — "Bhante, if you need any
more food...," "If you need a new pair of sandals..." Unless specified
an invitation can only be accepted for up to four months after which
time it lapses unless renewed. Specifying the time limit, or giving
some indication of the scope of the offering is good, in order to
prevent misunderstanding — so that, for instance, when you are
intending to offer some fruit juice, the bhikkhu doesn't get the
impression you want to buy a washing machine for the monastery!...
In practical terms, monasteries are financially controlled by lay
stewards, who then make open invitation for the Sangha to ask for what
they need, under the direction of the Abbot. So junior monks even have
to ask an appointed agent (generally a senior bhikkhu or abbot) if
they may take up the steward's offer — to pay for dental treatment,
obtain footwear or medicines, for example. This means that as far as
is reasonably possible, the donations that are given to the stewards
to support the Sangha are not wasted on unnecessary whims.
If a lay person wishes to give to a particular bhikkhu, but is
uncertain of what he needs, he should make invitation. Any financial
donations should not be made to 'X Bhikkhu' but to the stewards of the
monastery, perhaps mentioning if it's for a particular item or for the
needs of a certain bhikkhu. For items such as traveling expenses,
money can be given to an accompanying anagarika (dressed in white) or
accompanying lay person, who can buy tickets, drinks for the journey,
or anything else that the bhikkhu may need at that time. It is quite a
good training for a lay person to actually consider what items are
necessary, and offer those rather than money...

"For Laypeople: A lay-person should never offer money directly to a
bhikkhu... even if it is placed inside an envelope or together with
other requisites. They should either deposit the money with the
monastery steward, put it in a donation-box or into the monastery bank
account. They may then state their invitation to the bhikkhu(s)
regarding the kind or amount of requisite(s). In Thailand, for
example, knowledgeable lay-people would deposit money with the steward
and offer to the bhikkhu(s) an invitation note mentioning the details
of the offering." (HS ch.14)

"People who have good faith in bhikkhus may entrust money (lit.,
silver and gold) into the hand of a [steward] and order him to
purchase allowable things for bhikkhus. Bhikkhus may be glad at the
allowable things bought by the steward with that money. This is not
regarded as being glad at that money. This is called the [Me.n.daka
Allowance.] Bhikkhus should not request suitable things from the
steward in excess of the money deposited with him." (EV,II,p.135)

"When a fund has been set up with a steward indicated by a bhikkhu:
Obtaining an article from the fund as a result of having prompted the
steward more than the allowable number of times is [an offence of
Confession with Forfeiture.]" (Nis. Paac. 10; BMC p.206)

Good householder,
in regard of 2):
To lead the holly life (use it) and make ones living by publishing books for lay-people, although common, is for the most wrong livelihood (sg 13). The primary task of a monk is to gain the highest fruit, liberation.
To lead the holly live just to become well-known, famous, for honor... is likewise wrong as learning and publish Dhamma to win over others is. Many are just disputer, contribute, like all of them for sensuall pleasures, becoming, to maintain support.
Not seldom, byways of stealing, they even touch Pārājika-faults.
Those many popular provider of food in books (even as sold stuff or for direct trade) usually simply make a living from it, holding money, or take controll over it, and do a lot not proper to Vinaya, starting from fondraising, trade, till encouraging to steal Dhamma. Depending on there "students", customers, the Dhamma grows corrupt. This being the case, monks are actually not allowed to receive something after/in exchange with Dhamma.
To be clear, a Monks task, who has still not arrived at Arahat-ship, is in no way obligated to teach, not to speak of producing entertainments for householder.
How ever, likewise the Buddha dedicated his rest of life for the Dhamma, as it is not pleasing to dwell without dedication, his Arahat disciples had been encouraged to teach. Yet it's somethink total voluntary.
Of what a monk should do is giving an encouragement after having received generosity out of faith.
As there had been cases that other sects got famous by teaching people on Uposatha, while the Buddhas monks remained in seclution, on request of a King, the Buddha allowed his disciples to give talks on Dhamma on this day.
There are, how ever, cases  that books might come into being, but such is exclusively a product of generosity by wise lay people, contributing them as gift. Something very selfdom actually.
It's also usually in traditional lands that lay people would support the share of Dhmma books for the monks, the Sangha, hepling, assisting to maintain their heritage.
It's a modern confusion, with the start of the last Dhamma-Period, that monks started to contribute Dhamma, incl. the Tripitaka, to householder.
Dhamma of which is shared or gained in improper way has no conductive effects at all and for those not understanding the whole issue and the way and economy of the Noble Ones, the demanding or trading common people with grave wrong view and no faith in regard that giving first is the reason for gain more sublime, there is no way to prevent them falling deeper and deeper.
in regard of 1):
Early in the morning a monk would take his bowl and walk for alms in nearby settlement. Wise people, on seei.g him, would give alms, take the seldom change to make merits.
Generally it's a matter of Upanissaya to ever met such. For sure good monks to not run "fire houses" next villages or in towns, and where such as natural generosity has already died of, on places where is actually no condition for Dhamma, good monks would not dwell. Neither having given, give inwardly and outwardly food, relation doesn't grow, dies off.
16.3: Candūpama Sutta — Comparable to the Moon give best answer to 1) and 2), to understand, that there is actually no relation in both ways anymore, no duities for the world.
Here you are, or, and what do you think would be smart to do? You wouldn't either, right? That's the way it goes.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape from corruption, to gain independency]


text:
A beginner facing Culadasa
I am a complete beginner who was looking for a good Buddhist guide for meditation. I discovered the book "The Mind Illuminated" by Culadasa and I thought I had found the grail: the shape of the guide seemed perfect to me. It is simple and clear, based on the anapanasati, up to the jhanas, step by step.
But I have just discovered the scandals surrounding Culadasa and now I totally doubt the quality of his teaching. I attach great importance to the morality of a teacher of these issues.
Where do I go from here? What do you recommend? Is there another guide as good in its form made by a recognized teacher, without scandals?
Thanks.

If I told you a fast river was dangerous and you shouldn't jump in it, but then you learned I lied on my taxes. Would you jump in the river?

I understand your argument, but morality (sila) is a basis of Buddhism. Isn't it a great risk to follow a teacher without a base?

Would you follow other teachers blindly?

"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."
Err... not literally...
The point of this quip is that attachment to a teacher is itself something that must be overcome. Even if you are lucky enough to meet a truly enlightened teacher, that teacher's enlightenment is his enlightenment, and you have to find your way to your own.
I'm not familiar with Culadasa or his issues, but a quick google search tells me he indulged in prostitutes and sex outside of marriage. It could be worse — he didn't seem to misuse the student/teacher relationship, as I've seen too many other teachers do — but it still displays some moral turpitude that shouldn't be ignored. Clearly he has a number of miles yet to walk on the path. That is his concern.
Your concern is whether his work advances you on your path. At this point you are not going to be able to see the path all the way to its end; what you want is something that will give you a reliable map for the next few miles, and when you get to the end of that you'll find something that takes you farther. If Culadasa's work feels 'right' to you, follow it for a while. He may have strayed off off his own map into the mire, but that doesn't mean his map is bad, it just means he lost his way.
Trust me, he spiritual path is littered with teachers who have become object lessons for their own teachings. It's ok to use them as guideposts, so long as you commit yourself to turn right where they turned wrong.

Culadasa is a funny guy. So far all he does is

claims to be a at least a sotapanna https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMindIlluminated/comments/8pscyd/how_long_did_it_take_culadasa_master_the_stages/
writes a book about a mix of tibetan samatha and  theravadan  samatha
does not talk explicitly about insight, whereas the whole novelty of being a sotapanna is about wisdom, especially the lack of ''identity view''
he creates his own ''model'' about ''reality'' with his new buzzword ''subminds''
when it comes to insights, he just copies Mahasi like here
https://dharmatreasure.org/wp-content/uploads/Meditation-and-Insight-I.pdf
https://dharmatreasure.org/wp-content/uploads/Meditation-and-Insight-III.pdf
Like all the people  who claim to be ''pragmatic'' he claims that there is no ''final step.''. They do this precisely to keep their doctrine open ended in order to change it later on, or speculate about comparing ''maps'' and trying to see if they are still ''arhants'' according to''other maps''.
https://old.reddit.com/r/TheMindIlluminated/comments/az9mdm/has_culadasa_ever_publicly_claimed_4th_path_is_he/

Overall, he is pretty disappointing, especially for an alleged sotappanna.
Anyway, Contrary to the people who follow vipassana  meditation and ''pragmatic dhamma'' and end up getting completely lost, to the point of trying to mix their practice with Advaita, Mahamudra, Dzogchen and some other weird wrong views about ''the witness'', What you can do to go beyond is either stick to visuddhimagga, if you really want to, or just go back to the suttas, but the suttas are not super detailed, which is why people create commentaries and create their own view and try to pass that for the dhamma.
The best you can do is to is lots of ''mindfulness and clear comprehension'', ie to remove ill-will and so on https://suttacentral.net/an10.51/en/bodhi in order to improve your mind,

“One should ask oneself: (1) ‘Am I often given to longing or without
  longing? (2) Am I often given to ill will or without ill will? (3) Am
  I often overcome by dullness and drowsiness or free from dullness and
  drowsiness? (4) Am I often restless or calm? (5) Am I often plagued by
  doubt or free from doubt? (6) Am I often angry or without anger? (7)
  Is my mind often defiled or undefiled? (8) Is my body often agitated
  or unagitated? (9) Am I often lazy or energetic? (10) Am I often
  unconcentrated or concentrated?’
“If, by such self-examination, a bhikkhu knows: ‘I am often given to
  longing, given to ill will, overcome by dullness and drowsiness,
  restless, plagued by doubt, angry, defiled in mind, agitated in body,
  lazy, and unconcentrated,’ he should put forth extraordinary desire,
  effort, zeal, enthusiasm, indefatigability, mindfulness, and clear
  comprehension to abandon those same bad unwholesome qualities. Just as
  one whose clothes or head had caught fire would put forth
  extraordinary desire, effort, zeal, enthusiasm, indefatigability,
  mindfulness, and clear comprehension to extinguish the fire on his
  clothes or head, so too that bhikkhu should put forth extraordinary
  desire, effort, zeal, enthusiasm, indefatigability, mindfulness, and
  clear comprehension to abandon those same bad unwholesome qualities.

after you memorize the path, ie this

“I say, bhikkhus, that (1) true knowledge and liberation have a
  nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment
  for true knowledge and liberation? It should be said: (2) the seven
  factors of enlightenment. The seven factors of enlightenment, too, I
  say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the
  nutriment for the seven factors of enlightenment? It should be said:
  (3) the four establishments of mindfulness. The four establishments of
  mindfulness, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without
  nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the four establishments of
  mindfulness? It should be said: (4) the three kinds of good conduct.
  The three kinds of good conduct, too, I say, have a nutriment; they
  are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the three
  kinds of good conduct? It should be said: (5) restraint of the sense
  faculties. Restraint of the sense faculties, too, I say, has a
  nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for
  restraint of the sense faculties? It should be said: (6) mindfulness
  and clear comprehension. Mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I
  say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the
  nutriment for mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said:
  (7) careful attention. Careful attention, too, I say, has a nutriment;
  it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for careful
  attention? It should be said: (8) faith. Faith, too, I say, has a
  nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for
  faith? It should be said: (9) hearing the good Dhamma. Hearing the
  good Dhamma, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment.
  And what is the nutriment for hearing the good Dhamma? It should be
  said: (10) associating with good persons.

https://suttacentral.net/an10.61/en/bodhi
If you want to follow other bikkhus, people love ajahn brahm so
https://www.youtube.com/user/AjahnBrahmRetreats/videos
https://www.youtube.com/user/BuddhistSocietyWA/videos

The Visudhimmaga seems interesting but really complicated.... Thank you for your answer!

It seems as though you were following the method and not the man, and having some success with it. Don't make your practice about him continue on with what you were doing.

His teaching seems awesome. Maybe find another beginning teacher and then come back to the Mind Illuminated. That way you won't have to battle doubt unnessisarily.
  There are a lot of teachers that are pretty much in harmony with his techniques. Here are a couple off the top of my head that I personally found very helpful:

Bhante Yuttadhammo has a succinct video series for beginners on Youtube called "how to meditate" and he also has it out in a free pdf download. Then he has a lot of videos about the Dhamma and videos with answers to questions meditators ask. They changed my life.
Venerable Sujiva has a free online book that is pretty beginner friendly yet goes very in depth called "The Tree of Wisdom (The River of No Return)" that reminds me of Culadasa's book a little bit. Venerable Sujiva isn't afraid to explore what may be of benifit from the western side of the world while being grounded in the traditional eastern approach.

Its unlikely Culadasa ever knew what 'jhana' really was.
I recommend two books:
Buddhadasa Anapanasati Secrets of Life, which explains the progression of Anapanasati properly but doesn't really provide any compelling advice on how to practise (apart from very basic exercises or "skillful tricks", which are only for starters but not advanced).
Ajahn Brahm - The Jhanas, which provides compelling advice on how to practise using "letting go"; provides a clear picture of how advanced or lofty jhana is; but does not explain Anapanasati properly (due to what appears to be a deliberate doctrinal bias for doctrinal differentiation).

"Its unlikely Culadasa ever knew what 'jhana' really was." Why ? Thank you for the recommendations but I'm looking for practical advice for anapanasati and then jhanas

I provided you with practical advice.

"Its unlikely Culadasa ever knew what 'jhana' really was." can you explain, please ?

Jhana occurs due to a mental purity that has been developed & brings a pervasive bliss with which ordinary sexual desire will be dissolved. Even when not in jhana, if jhana has been reached, there will be no or very little sexual desire. If you personally (Kalapa) remain interested in sex then it is unlikely your mind can reach jhana.

As a beginner, it can be very difficult to find which way to go.  There are many teachers now and many nuances and subtle differences to the teachings. First, it might be nice to see what flavor of the Dharma you’re drawn to; Theravada, Mahayana or Vadrayana. Once that’s done, look around for the teacher you are drawn to. Sometimes they emphasize compassion or loving-kindness, others favor study and the deep philosophical underpinnings of the Path. Find out what really resonates with you.
I was lucky. I started when there were very few books and teachers. In the last 20 years, there has been an explosion so much so that finding even a quality beginner book can be difficult. I still find “Mindfulness in Plain English” quite good and “What the Buddha Taught” as a nice basis to stretch out from.  While the teacher is important, getting the bones of the teaching  will give you a guide on what to avoid and lead you away from folks that are suspect. Good luck!


text:
Monastics & Hygiene
I had questions on monastic hygiene in Theravada:

Do monks/nuns brush their teeth and put on deodorant etc.?

If monks/nuns are only allowed to bathe every 2 weeks, how do they deal with the health concerns, or are there none?

Do monks/nuns wear the same robes for long periods of time and if so, are there any health concerns to doing such a thing?

Bhante, comment section is not for answering questions. Please post your comment as an answer.

Monks and nuns generally take good care of their bodies so they may be better able to continue to share the dharma with those who may benefit. They keep good hygiene of their robes and living quarters to prevent disease and be healthy.
Here is an excerpt that gives a specific example of personal hygiene:

In the Anguttara Nikaya there is a short sutta in which the Buddha describes the benefits of using a tooth stick (dantakaṭṭha), the ancient Indian equivalent to our tooth brush. The advantages of regular brushing, the Buddha said, include that it is that it is good for the eyes, the breath does not have a bad smell, the taste buds are cleaned, bile and phlegm do not mix with the food, and food becomes more palatable (A.III,250).

Modern monks and nuns adapt the ancient teachings with regards to modern knowledge of hygiene. An example:
pācittiya 57

yo pana bhikkhu orenaddhamāsaṃ nahāyeyya aññatra samayā, pācittiyaṃ. tatthāyaṃ samayo, diyaḍḍho māso seso gimhānanti vassānassa paṭhamo māso iccete aḍḍhateyyamāsā uṇhasamaso, pariḷāhasamayo, gilānasamaso, kammasamayo, addhānagamanasamayo, vātavuṭṭhisamayo, ayaṃ tattha samayo.

Do not wash more than twice a month if the body is not dirty. Except than in exceptional situations, if a bhikkhu washes his body before half a month has elapsed since his previous washing, he commits a pācittiya.
These are the exceptional circumstances that permit a bhikkhu to wash:
during the hot season (period of two and a half months from the May new moon until the August full moon);
in case of illness, fever or any other medical reason.;
after having carried out a physical work that has caused sweating;
after having made a trip of a distance of at least half a yūjanā – between five and six kilometres;
when dirty (dust, mud, sand, excessive transpiration, etc.)
Attention: This rule only applies in the "majjhima desa" region of modern northern India, where the Buddha lived. In fact, bhikkhus living outside this region can freely wash, without committing a fault.

Discipline is for the sake of restraint,
restraint for the sake of freedom from remorse,
freedom from remorse for the sake of joy,
joy for the sake of rapture,
rapture for the sake of tranquillity,
tranquillity for the sake of pleasure,
pleasure for the sake of concentration,
concentration for the sake of knowledge
and vision of things as they are,
knowledge and vision of things as they are
for the sake of disenchantment,
disenchantment for the sake of release,
release for the sake of knowledge and vision of release,
knowledge and vision of release
for the sake of total unbinding without clinging.

-- Parivaara.XII.2 (BMC p.1)


text:
Monks, their hospitalization and their medical treatment
I have questions regarding hospitalization and its morals

Are monks/nuns allowed to be hospitalized and can they go to a hospital or doctor if sick? (because aren't they not allowed to request anything according to the vinaya?)

Can a monk/nun take painkillers or will that be a breach of the fifth precept?

If there is a parasite or other being inside of someone, can they take medicine to cure themselves of it, or would that break the first precept, or is it not if the being isn't sentient?

Have you read Vinaya Pitaka?https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/index.html

Exept if biten by snake, they can not ask for it, but if invited, given, yes. 2. They are allowed to accept pain reducing medicine. 3. Difficult. Depends on ones perception.

When I lived in Thailand:

Monks were admitted to hospital.
Monks took painkillers.
Monks used medicine for internal parasites.

Medicine is one of the only possessions a monk can “desire” and can dedicate their time to procuring. Suchly are medical needs to be given priority and utmost attention.

Go and see a doctor.  No amount of pondering or meditation will help you if you are very sick/dead.

That isn't what the Buddha taught, good householder, but the opposite, since sickness and death are actually unavoidable.

Yes, but sickness is curable.  Unless Buddha a against that as well?

His path leads to lasting cure and he wouldn't send one off searching heal in where it can not be found. So saying his path is useless, seek for usual ways is a strange answer under the topic Buddha.

But does it?  Really?  And if so, has it been backed up by lots of medical studies?  The  questioner is asking in regards to the precepts and not about whether any magical healing powers will save him. If someone is ill and you tell them NOT to get treatment you could get into trouble.  Also, every other answer here seems to agree with me.

There isn't any being which will not get old, sick and die, but it pretty normal that beings seek refuge where there is no. Less benefit if answering questions and not familare with the matter at all, yet thinking smart as well. May good householder go on as he feels fine.

I am fairly certain there is a jataka where a monk with worms is given medicine causing him to vomit.
Didn't take note of the reference.


text:
What does ཕལ་པོ་ཆེ། (translated to the Flower Ornament Sutra) really mean?
I am not versed in Tibetan language but wanted to know what the literal meaning of ཕལ་པོ་ཆེ། is, which is translated into either of these

The Sūtra of the Buddhas' Vastness
The Flower Ornament Sūtra

Those are very different words, so I'm wondering what the essence of the etymology or whatever is. Wondering if one could layout the literal components of the word and how they could possibly be translated.

ཕལ་པོ་ཆེ་ is mdo phal po che (Dopel Poché in Standard Tibetan) according to the Rigpa

mdo means "sutra"
phal by itself means "ordinary (person)"
po is a masculine agentive
che means "great", "greatest"

One of the English translations on this site is "great host".


text:
Why Mind is Fickle?
Monkey mind
I don't think.
I live in present.
My mind always thinking.
Past thinking
Future thinking.
Hate thought..
Worry thought..
Pleasure thought..
Lust thought..

The nature of the mind is dominated by attachment (greed), aversion (fear), and ignorance(curiosity). There are six mind doors with millions of objects. So the mind is continual scans (attention) these objects with a short span of time.
If you can keep your attention on only one object, it is called Jhana. Once you eliminated or suppressed attachment, aversion and ignorance then you can keep your attention on a neutral subject without mind fickle.

Bhante Vimalaramasi talks about this in his talk about MN18
2015 Day 4 Easter Retreat 2 "Perceptions" MN18 - Bhante Vimalaramasi
Bhante discusses sutta MN18 from the majjhima nikaya on the subject of Perception. How perception leads to thinking and craving. Proliferations of mind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1hNpff_JaA

Quoting from Master Junhong Lu's dharma talks -- V 10-9 By Emptying your Mind completely, where do Contaminants settle?:

Don’t let your mind waver, in other words, you mustn’t casually desire for anything you see, as that means you have a wavering mind, and that usually spells trouble. You must understand that if you mind frequently allows itself to get distracted, then it means you don’t have control of it, and it’s easy for you to become defiled. The hardest thing to control is one’s own mind; if you can’t control it, then it’s easy for it to be dragged down by the karmic forces of other sentient beings.

... and ...

Don’t involve yourself too deeply into all matters within the human realm. In other words, don’t be attached to anything in the human realm. If you constantly think that something must be like that, or something must be done by you, then you’ll be contaminated in the world. You must be in a state of emptiness to confront all afflictions. What is the state of emptiness? It’s to empty your mind; it’s not to have any expectations or thoughts about something. It’s to be devoid of hate or love. Nothing is there, and therefore it’s empty. As long as you use the state of emptiness to confront all afflictions, then your afflictions disappear. Your afflictions of today might disappear tomorrow.

Both your answers so far link to sites in a vaguely promotional manner. Please review How not to be a spammer.

Thanks, what do you suggest how to post the quotations origin.

If it really is a quotation, make it clearer through the formatting and add your own commentary to explain why the quotation makes for an answer in this particular situation.

The ideal is, a) include a hyperlimk or reference to what you're quoting b) include a quote from whatever you link to or reference c) format the quote as a quote (using a > as explained here). d) Maybe at least one sentence in your own words to say how the quote answers the OP's question. e) Advertising unrelated to the question (e.g. "Master Junhong Lu is the ambassador for peace in UN and UK in 2014") shouldn't be in the answer but you may include it in your user profile.

Look here too see how I formatted a quote using >, and a hyperlink using [] and (). You can also ulso use a blank/empty line to separate text into paragraphs.

Thanks for the detailed info.

I think he is asking why we have subconscious mind that lead to lust, worry, fear, etc and what is subconscious mind. I m interested to know also .

Fickleness is a disease because the person having this disease will have difficult time understanding Dhamma. It can be cured by strictly following the Nobel eight fold path.
All the different thoughts will converge to love ,compassion and Dhamma.What is required is a commitment. But if fickleness has become a chronic disease then may be some medicines will be required to cure.Doctors can prescribe medicines. Being a monkey is not the disease. Inability to see the suffering is the real disease. Inability to develop a compassionate heart is the real disease.

Why is mind fickle?

Mind is fickle because of past karma which was probably driven by some kind of greed.

If you examine nature, much of nature is fickle -  volcanoes erupting, winds blowing, clouds forming, earthquakes, rain, flood, drought, etc. Then there are animals programmed to look for food & sex. Then there is growing, aging & passing. People are they same. Unless you believe in god and volitional-self-speculations of reincarnation, all life forms are similar. If you believe in Evolution, you understand you are descended from monkeys, gorillas, baboons and chimpanzees.

Nice example bro


text:
Should we be vegan?
I am non-vegetarian but since reading through Buddhist scriptures, I felt like going towards Vegan would be prefered approach in order to follow and know Buddhism.
Please guide me on this dilemma.
Regards

I think some Buddhists are and some aren't -- and that it may vary depending on which school (or 'tradition') of Buddhism -- also depending on whether vegan food is available! There are a lot of existing topics tagged  [tag:vegetarianism] -- I'm not sure what you're asking that is different from what's been asked already?

There is a salient difference between being a vegetarian and being a vegan in the modern world. Vegetarianism is a dietary restriction meant to reduce harm to animals who are raised and slaughtered for their flesh. Veganism, on the other hand, is a way of life that includes a cuisine in which all animal-derived products are left out, and alternative plant-based means to arrive at the same texture, taste, and presentation are used. It goes beyond that to a total eradication of the use of animals for any human activity that can cause harm to the animal--eg, no leather, circuses or killing…

"Pure and earnest bhikshus, if they are true and sincere, will never wear clothing made of silk, nor wear boots made of leather because it involves the taking of life. Neither will they indulge in eating milk or cheese because thereby they are depriving the young animals of that which rightly belongs to them." Surangama Sutra, Chap Two, "Importance of Keeping the Precepts" https://medium.com/p/e84c1abb029b


text:
Samatha while studying
I heard about the practice of concentration. But I work 13 hours per day doing coding. How can I meditate while studying, thinking really deep?
I can focus on one static object, but not reading (coding) documentation, write code remaining in one state of completely self center

Higher levels of concentration is not possible while the mind is active but you can have some level of non-exclusive focus on like the breath or bodily sensations while working. You need to develop initial and sustained focus on a chosen object.

this could partially reply https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/31772/is-mindfulness-the-opposite-of-multitasking so that studying  code, or solve a programming problem becomes a multitasking activity by default, and I should focus to act for priority


text:
When we do any moral act on the basis of greed, we get merit or sin
I am hindu. So
My  mind  say if you Will help anyone .
 you get rewards for example  job,beautiful wife, health,
Rebirth good place and  rebirth in  healthy human beings.
So I do good act for rewards.
This is also my greed .?
This is sin?
This is good deed?

The Buddha speaks of three sorts of kamma:
Deeds done with the intention to create the experience of pleasure,
deeds done with the intention to create the experience of pain,
and deeds done with the intention to end kamma.
Good deeds, your helpful deeds, are deeds done with the intent to create pleasureable experience. Such deeds will create pleasurable experience.
There is no denying that. Good deeds that produce pleasurable experience tend to result in attachment to the things of this world and the things of this world, being ending things, will result in pain to one who is attached to them. But there is no thing in Buddhism like 'sin'. It is a matter only of personal welfare.
In Buddhism the goal is the ending of kamma, and good deeds are kamma, so the advice for one seeking the goal is not only to eliminate bad deeds, but to eliminate good deeds as well.
Deeds that end kamma are those based on the 8-fold Way. They are intentional deeds of not-doing and letting go. For example, Samma Vaca, High Talk, speaks of training yourself to abstain from saying what is not true. Faced with a desire to get something that is thought to be obtainable only through a lie; one intentionally abstains from that lie. By that abstention from reaction to that desire, that old kamma that resulted in the desire is halted, and that potential stream of kamma that would have resulted from the lie is still-born, dead in its tracks. The whole of the 8-fold Way consists of those places and behaviors and ideas which when followed result in the ending of kamma.

when it comes to giving, the buddha says that the expecting  a good rebirth out of giving is not the best view, but at least there is still good rebirth out of it. As usual with the buddha what matters a lot is how the mind is when giving.
He says the best view is to know that dana is part of the path.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.049.than.html
here is a way to give
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.037.than.html

You will probably have good material reward, which gives you pleasure on many levels; however, your dukkha (your attachment to pleasures as one of many causes of dukkha) does not subside as intended with respect to true practitioners of the Dharma.

See the world from this view.

When people born they will die someday.
When poison is eaten he killed no matter whether it is purposely eaten or mistakenly eaten.
When baby touches the flame of a candle he get burnt, no matter baby does or doesn't know it.

This is the world, it behaves in a way that it supposed to be. Sometimes we can control it (we think we can but it is not how it should be understood) sometimes we can't.
In that world there's something called karma which explains the variations of living beings in tge world. If you do a good you will get back a good one day. If you do a bad you will get back a bad one day.
If you look more deeper;

Imagine you take a stone from the ground and you place it on a table
  Now what have you done? you have made change (make it unstable) to a balanced and a stable system by changing the location of a stone. Now when the system get a chance to be stable again it tries to get the stone back to they where it was. (Imagine someone accidentally hits the stone and it directly goes to the ground level)
  You may think its gravity. Yes of course ots gravity. But what happened the system always tries to keep its stable position by using all those forces. That's the nature!

Now when we apply this to sin and good deed, by doing good or sin you are unstabling the system. When ever the system get a chance it does stable the system. If you do good you will be given good. If you do bad you will be given bad.
Now to answer your question, doing bad while doing good, your results should be the same.
If we take some examples on this, you may have seen very rich people who they can't enjoy the life because they are busy or they don't like to enjoy. Tha's because they have done the good but in a bad way
So do good but do not expect rewards for that. You will get it definetly. Just try to be happy on what you did but not on what you are supposed to get..!

Great bro  last paragraph great

@BhupendraRajput, upvoting the answer would be also a good way of appreciation :) :)

When I feel  anger.
My speech and body and mind are both rude...
Every one knowing these experience...
When I feel fear
My speech and body and mind are  scared .
When I do any act base on greed .
My body speech and mind are ....
No experience now

Experience of greed:: pressure increases within body -can be felt easily as tension in head , voice either becomes decompressed or becomes too high or comes with a small pressure above stomach & below chest, thoughts behind thoughts runs too fast.


text:
Different lyings
Here are my questions:

Can lying be nonverbal? like in action?
Is cheating lying?
Is writing the wrong answer when you know the correct answer lying?
Is skipping the line cheating, and in a sense lying?
If I break a promise, is that lying or in anyway kammically bad?

Can lying be nonverbal? like in action? Strict Buddhist sense "Yes" But there are conditioned to be fulfilled.
Is cheating lying?I would say yes.
Is writing the wrong answer when you know the correct answer lying?I would say yes
Is skipping the line cheating, and in a sense lying?I would say yes
If I break a promise, is that lying or in anyway kammically bad? I would say yes


text:
Awkwardness in the world
Here is my question:

How does a lay Buddhist respond to awkwardness and how does a monk
  respond to awkwardness such as dropping something while ordaining or
  falling on the floor?

I suppose the buddhist way to deal with awkwardness is similar to any emotion: Accept it, don't act on it, and go on with life.
Unless it's awkward in a precept-breaking way. If so, refer to the vinaya.


text:
Not doing anything
q:

Is not doing anything in a situation and just being mindful breaking
  any of the precepts?

In addition, to observe the five precepts Buddha also recommends doing.
Do not kill = Practice loving-kindness
Do not steal = Giving or generosity
Do not indulge in sensual pleasures = Celibacy
Do no lie = Tell the truth
Do not consume alcohol = Practice mindfulness.


text:
Sources for the Whole Tipitaka
q:

Can someone name the books in the shelf of Yuttadhammo in his videos
  or all the books in the Tipitaka and sources to get them in English?
  or at least what has been  translated to english?

English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon

Please visit:
http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/sutta_toc.htm
This is the index page to all the suttas contained on the site.
This site is focused on the 4 Nikayas, and has:
All the Nikayas in the original Pali: both the PTS version and the BJT version, and a version that combines both;
All the Pali Text Society translations: one version in the html format, one a PDF of the originals (likely what you see in the bookshelf).
All the translations of Bhikkhu Thanissaro.
All the freely released translations of Bhikkhu Bodhi.
A great collection of very early translations as well as quite a few from 'lesser-known' translators, including myself.
All the translations are linked to the Pali and to all the other translations available.
The PTS translations and the Pali are mostly (not entirely) unabridged.
The PTS translations and the Pali are mostly (not entirely) broken down to their phrasing for clarity of meaning.
PS: For a good deal in purchasing the hard-cover books (recommended) join the Pali Text Society. Members get a free book every year and a 20% discount on purchases.

You can read all the Sutta in Sutta Central.
https://suttacentral.net/
You can by the Tipitaka from Wisdom publication. Be aware they quote prices from USD.


text:
Arahants and exersise
Q:
Would an arahant get physically exausted if he/she was to exersise, like if they were to run 5 miles? Would this in anyway shake their mind?

Buddha's mind is unshakable. But they still get tired and has to rest.
"Ananda, speak to the Kapilavatthu Sakyans about the person who follows the practice for one in training. [2] My backaches. I will rest it."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.053.than.html

Arahants don't run. But they walk long distances.


text:
Sociality and meditation
I had a question.
I have been getting deeper into the Buddha's teaching and meditation & I feel awkward to be around or to talk to people, specifically those who do not meditate.

How do I overcome this or is this OK?

This is actually a good sign. It means you are advancing. Everyone who makes spiritual advancement will no longer be interested in material life and will feel repulsive towards ordinary sinful materialistic people wh don't meditate.

Talking to people, even if they are not meditators, shouldn't feel awkward if this talk has some meaning and is not mere chit-chat. Therefore, use conversation as another form of your practice, trying to be aware of what are you talking about, with what intention. Also, try to stay away of not so uncommon tendency among people who meditate to look upon to people who don't. This is another way of practice, developing compassion and understanding for all people, all beings, even when they behave differently. Since we are all in the same boat, we can't separate ourselves from them and we really shouldn't. Instead, just trying to look at them with more compassionate, more loving eyes. And sometimes that's not so easy. :)


text:
Walking bare foot?
q:

Why is it some monks (Yuttadhammo specifically) walks barefoot in his
  alms rounds as well as while doing walking meditation?

Is there a purpose to it?

Walking meditation barefoot has taught me how to be gentle, mindful and adaptable. So I just keep doing it.

The Ancient Greeks used to think the Romans 'bourgousie' for wearing shoes everywhere. Try it, very freeing, and makes you much more mindful of each step!

Good householder, Monks, who follow the Buddha, don't wear shoes generally. If they make exceptions accourding to allowances by the Buddha to wear on rocky roads, in their mnastery (to keep the floor of buildings clean) or if foot sickness, and some other, they (inmost cases) are to bag them bag some meters before a settlement. Almsround is a case where less allowances to wear world fit. (Details see under footware here )

"One should not enter a village while wearing leather footwear. Whoever should enter: an offense of wrong doing." ... "I allow that an ill bhikkhu enter a village while wearing leather footwear." — Mv.V.12

and so on...
On why a "beggar" does not wear shoes should be general clear, a matter of humble and modesty of a simple live, at least on alms and a matter of respect and staying mindful, not turning the eyes orher than some meters before one on the ground. People generally are used to put off the shoes when enter others homes...
The way of a Buddhas disciple: Bhante makes that very exemplary, at least to be seen on alms in Sri Lanka on video.

As a bee — without harming
      the blossom,
      its color,
      its fragrance —
  takes its nectar & flies away:
  so should the sage
  go through a village.
*and it's dhp-story

Btw., it's good and a sign of respect, to put of ones shoes as well and try to settle oneself a little lower so that ones almsgiving is a higher and dedicated for upwardly and beyound.
A more refined possibility to step forward to understand, might be to step on this without taking ones shoes inbetween the reality of effects of touch.
(Note: this is not given for stacks exchange and trade or commercial purpose, binding in this wheel of bonds, but for liberation from it.)

Buddha walked barefoot.
There are some accounts that walking barefoot is good for your health but there are no Vinaya rules to address this issue.
Ven Yuttadhaammo injured his foot be walking barefoot so you have to be very mindful if you walk barefoot.

While attending a retreat at a Burmese monastery (here in the States), I was instructed by the monk there to walk without my socks, because if provided better ability to get sensation in the feet.

Barefoot used to be normal -- and wearing shoes was disrespectful and/or a sign of feeling superior.
The Vinaya used to explicitly allow footwear in outlying areas -- and not in public.
Lay society has changed, so wearing shoes is now seen as polite, and the custom has adapted accordingly -- i.e. you might see monks with footwear now - similarly there are times and places where the climate isn't appropriate for bare feet.
But I don't think of bare feet as remarkable. I used to walk barefoot as a teen (not for those same reasons), obviously enough it's feasible.

In ancient India , most of sages used to walk barefoot like tirthankar jains , buddha , their best students. Walking barefoot was also among poor locals. Nowdays too , few forest tribals of North-East India , Chhattisgarh & M.P. live barefoot.
Among sages , barefoot living was an indication to :

Simple life (like common man)
Egolessness
Vairagya (no interest in pleasures)
Energy tranfer occurs through foot
To not kill small beings ,even unwillingly(slight chance) cause barefoot increases sensations.
Truth-Seeker has stopped too much travelling and gone forth for deep meditation within a small area.
No anger.

Moreover ,as Meditator becomes strong in meditation , tendency towards barefoot increases, without any enforcement of sheel(Vinaya) .

It is also very practical because one needs not dry out shoes or socks, going barefoot or wearing sandals of some kind solves this. The staying dry comes into play a lot as it gets cold andor wet, it takes a lot of maintenance and winter shoes are weighty.
Afaik people can comfortably walk thus partially exposed to cold even in low temperatures like -20C but it requires some conditioning.
Basically It solves the problem of having more requisites than one can carry, in particular the 2-3 pairs of footwear & socks. One is saving ~3kg of weight there which is a lot considering that it's probably going to make up for ~20% of the total weight of requisites which can be comfortably carried.

benefits of walking barefoot, some scientific study (small study)
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Earthing/DtQVwPcBrr4C?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover
edit: (this was too long to add as a comment)
To the people who downvoted my answer, You should add an explanatory comment to explain why so everyone can understand why they should be avoiding the type of answer I gave. This anonymous downvoting  creates a culture of distrust and discourages experts from responding because they're trying to protect their 'reputation' and 'credit rating'.  Now my answer has nothing to do with Buddhism, which is why I assume it was downvoted. But I qualified my answer stating it was so, and I have no affiliation with the author of the book, I simply found it to be very useful and interesting and worth sharing. So go ahead and keep downvoting me people, I'm going to share what I feel to be useful information whenever it's relevant, I care not about your opinion of me and your reputation badges and what not.

I down-voted this answer for three reasons: 1) unrelated to Buddhism; 2) I'm suspicious/skeptical of "alternative medicine" doctrines; 3) the answer wasn't well-formatted, it should e.g. include a quote and/or summary of what's being referenced (I don't want to read the  whole book in order to guess which bit of it was the "scientific study" that you intended to reference).

My person never votes, since it makes no sense at all (since anonymous) and for the most used as a pulling tool and for the site benefitor a tool to save stuff investment and for lazy people to avoid generosity. (just for the case if wishibg to know why neither).

The "reputation" mostly reflects how often a user have posted on the site. A high reputation -- i.e. above a few hundred -- implies you've seen enough of how people use the site to understand what its conventions are. You won't "lose credit" as the result of one or two downvotes. Voting is a simple way to comment on the quality of a post (it's not meant as a comment on the qualities of the author). I should probably have deleted this (it's off-topic if answers should be based on Buddhist doctrine) instead of downvoting, but sometimes I don't like to delete a post unless other users complain.

Thanks, I understand where you're coming from Chris. It comes down to a trade off. I recommended an excellent book, but I don't have the time and interest to justify it with a quote from the book and a short summary. But too much laxity from moderators then threads become flooded with tangents and make it hard to read and sift through like most internet forums in general.

My frustration also stems from the fact that several times on answers I've given, I've been downvoted or had my post response removed by moderators for what I believe are very good answers that at first didn't appear to be Buddhist or relevant to the question, but I just didn't have the time, energy, and interest to justify and contest it.


text:
Pleasure in Shower
Q:
I follow Yuttadhammo's tradition and I wanted to know how to prevent the pleasure I get in taking showers. Everytime I take them, I have a clinging to the warmth of the water and the feeling of it.

How do I prevent this or come to disattach from the experiences I
  have in showering and getting pleasure from it?

The idea isn't to prevent pleasure nessasarily.
The only way  that you can really go, is to be mindful of the pleasure and the other experiences that arise and fall in your field of attention as they are occurring. That is the way to detach from what is being clung to. If you're asking yourself "how can I prevent or detach from X then that is another thing that can be clung to.
However you also can investigate on an intellectual level. With the previous experience of being mindful it is more than your usual intellectual endeavor. While being mindful(ideally) You can ask things like:
Why do I cling to the pleasure?
What is the pleasure?
What is it that clings to the pleasure?
What triggered the clinging?
Also, you might want to set a time limit for the shower that would set boundaries and help balance consentration.

We have an on-demand water heater. That is essentially the infinite hot shower. At some point one realizes that too much of anything is undesirable and one turns off the shower.
Therefore the point to consider is when to turn off the shower, not how to dis-attach from shower craving. If one is always mindful of personal, societal and environmental considerations, then one sees the hand moving automatically to turn off the shower.
For example, since I don't eat after lunch, sometimes I am careless in clothing and get quite chilled. So I take a warm shower and resolve to be more careful in keeping my body warm by staying properly clothed. And in taking that warm shower, I apologize to those whom I have deprived of water and electricity and gas for my lack of mindfulness, offering gratitude and a resolve to be more skillful.

you may be under dressed, insufficiently warm all the times you're not in a comfortable hot shower. Wear more layers, keep your body warm, do enough cardiovascular and other physical exercises everyday (at least 30min)  to improve your base body temperature and overall physical health. Then when you step in a hot shower, it won't feel like anything especially comfortable. When your reserve energy is strong, you feel like you could eat or not eat, sleep or not sleep, get a massage or a hot shower and it will just feel neutral, nothing special. But if you lack nutrients, you will be ravenously hungry, you lack body heat, hot showers will feel great, if you lack good circulation, a massage and hot shower will feel great, etc.
On the mental cultivation side of things, develop kusala habits to replace akusala habits. Before I take a shower, I resolve to not waste water, get in and out quickly just to get the job done. Probably that's less than 1 minute of water running, 3-4 minutes of rubbing, drying, etc. Also, there's no need to lather a thick layer of soap everywhere on the body, or even a thin layer. You just need to make sure to use enough soap on the areas that actually need it, and this way you don't dry out your skin and nutrients in the skin. Once you form good habits, it just becomes automatic and you don't even have to think or fight temptation. And if you take care of the physical health aspect as described above, your health will be robust enough where you don't even feel temptation of the pleasure of hot showers.

If you are able to, you may want to consider bathing with a bucket and glass. It uses a lot less water and is a much simpler approach. Try to make your necessities into luxuries.

How do I prevent this or come to disattach from the experiences Ihave in showering and getting pleasure from it?

Try to note the different experiences when taking a shower. Note the warm water as "warm, warm, warm" and if any liking arises, change object and note the liking as "liking, liking, liking". Keep noting it until it goes away. If it doesn't go away after a long time you can change the object back to rising and falling of the abdomen or any other object that arises, e.g. the sound of water or the feeling of feet touching the ground.

I think the important thing is to stay mindful, and not become distracted by the sensations of a warm shower. The purpose of a shower is to clean my body: Once my body is clean, I get out of the shower.
On most days, I find it helpful to set the shower to the lowest comfortable temperature. The goal is to maintain a neutral sense of temperature, setting the water neither too hot nor too cold. This tends to make it easier to avoid the distraction.
Also, don't worry too much if you feel yourself being drawn to the warmth, as it is only natural. Just acknowledge it, watch it fall dissolve, and continue on your way.
From the Satipatthana Sutta:

And further, monks, a monk lives contemplating mental objects of the five aggregates of clinging.
How, monks, does a monk live contemplating mental objects of the five aggregates of clinging?
...Thus is feeling; thus is the arising of feeling; and thus is the disappearance of feeling...
Thus he lives contemplating mental objects internally, or he lives contemplating mental objects externally, or he lives contemplating mental objects internally and externally. He lives contemplating origination factors in mental objects, or he lives contemplating dissolution factors in mental objects, or he lives contemplating origination-and-dissolution factors in mental objects. Or his mindfulness is established with the thought, "Mental objects exist," to the extent necessary just for knowledge and mindfulness, and he lives detached, and clings to nothing in the world. Thus also, monks, a monk lives contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the five aggregates of clinging.


text:
Buddha's relation to Hinduism
Q:

Did the Buddha copy Hinduism and add his own stuff? Why is Buddhism
  connected to thoughts in Hinduism if he didn't do so?

Similar topic: Is Buddhism just Hinduism stripped for export?

Dhamma4All — you've been asking a lot of very short, very broad questions. You'll get better results from this site if you ask fewer questions, and explain what you want to know in more detail.

@TedWrigley Yes...I understand it's just that I have limited time to submit my questions within a period of days and want to be able to understand the answers as soon as I can because I live in a household that doesn't support my following, so whenever I get the time to get out questions as fast as I can to read them, I do so. But I understand what you are communicating. It's just been tough to learn and get answers to many questions when I have very limited time and resources to do so.

It's all good. I'm just suggesting that you'll get more value out of your questions if you put more attention into your questions.

@TedWrigley I'll make note of that for my future questions. Thank you for the advice. :)

The Buddha didn't need to copy anyone. We all live in the same reality so inevitably Buddhism an Hinduism are overlapping doctrines and methods. The results of scientific study and meditation don't vary with which 'ism' we endorse.  .

'Hinduism' did not exist when the Buddha was alive, as follows from Wikipedia:

This "Hindu synthesis" started to develop between 500 BCE and 300
  CE, after the end of the Vedic period (1500 to 500 BCE), and
  flourished in the medieval period, with the decline of Buddhism in
  India
Wkipedia: Hinduism

When Buddha was alive, the religion of the Brahmin priests we call 'Brahmanism', which was far more limited in scope than Hinduism, per the stock description from the Pali suttas below:

Now at that time the brahmin...had mastered the Three Vedas, together
  with their vocabularies, ritual, phonology and etymology and the
  testament as fifth. He knew philology and grammar, and was well versed
  in cosmology and the marks of a great man.
MN 91

The Three Vedas are explained in Wikipedia as follows:

The canonical division of the Vedas is fourfold (turīya) viz.,

Rigveda (RV)
Yajurveda (YV, with the main division TS vs. VS)
Samaveda (SV)
Atharvaveda (AV)

Of these, the first three were the principal original division, also
  called "trayī vidyā"; that is, "the triple science" of reciting hymns
  (Rigveda), performing sacrifices (Yajurveda) and chanting songs
  (Samaveda). The Rigveda is the oldest work, which Witzel
  states are probably from the period of 1900 to 1100 BCE. Witzel, also
  notes that it is the Vedic period itself, where incipient lists divide
  the Vedic texts into three (trayī) or four branches: Rig, Yajur, Sama
  and Atharva
Wiki

If you read the Brāhmaṇa Vagga in the Majjhima Nikaya, there was no Hinduism. In fact, Hinduism, as inferred by Wikipedia (in the 1st quote above), probably copied from Buddhism.
For example (while I am happy to be corrected), I do not recall reading in the Pali suttas any detailed discussion/debate between the Brahmins & the Buddha about respective theories/doctrines of karma & reincarnation. In the little I researched, I found no systematic doctrine of karma & reincarnation in the Three Vedas. Even when I browsed some later 'Upanishads', I found no mature systematic doctrine about karma & reincarnation (apart from the ideas of one certain individual philosopher).
Again, if we read the Brāhmaṇa Vagga in the Majjhima Nikaya, we find the Brahmins were similar to the Hebrews (and probably many other tribal groups), where their belief system was about how they were 'God's chosen people' or 'born from Brahma's mouth/breath' (while the other castes were born from lesser parts of Brahma's body).
Some useful links from Sutta Central, with lots of links, books & research, are:

The early Upanishads: a nice introduction to the pre-Buddhist tradition
Rebirth & reincarnation in the Brahman Vedas

Note: While the Pali suttas never mention the 'Upanishads', the reincarnation orientated leader of Sutta Central, namely, Bhikkhu Sujato, appears intent to follow conventional historians rather than follow the Pali suttas, in his efforts to back-date the Upanishads to prior to Buddhism. If we place our trust in the Pali suttas, we find what existed prior to the Buddha was the Three Vedas & their accompaniments.
An answer about this topic by Bhikkhu Yuttadhammo is here: Did the Buddha ever mention the Upanishads or the Vedas?
Lastly, if you wish to be a real Buddhist, it is not possible to believe the Buddha copied any of his core teachings from Brahmanism/Hinduism because the suttas say what the Buddha taught he "never heard before". "A Buddha" cannot copy other doctrines otherwise he/she cannot be called "A Perfectly Self-Enlightened Buddha" ("Sammasambuddha").

'Arising, arising!' — At this thought, monks, there arose in me,
  concerning things unheard of before, vision, knowledge, understanding,
  light.
'Cessation, cessation!' — At this thought, monks, there arose in me,
  concerning things unheard of before, vision, knowledge, understanding,
  light."
SN 12.10

Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before:
Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

'Hinduism didn't exist before buddhism' , can also be depicted from ,there are no temples found more than 2000years old by Archeology department ,other than paintings of animals ,rivers inside caves. AT that time only Aghori(sacrificing animals & humans as well) knowledge was there alongside Jainism.

[Even when I browsed some later 'Upanishads', I found no mature systematic doctrine about karma & reincarnation ] Just बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद itself has the word Karma (कर्म) 38 times.
When it comes to reincarnation: there is an entire yajna process for Rudra to attain a body to avoid rebirth (to escape recurring births and death) called the Prayaga yajna.
Not sure where you are reading stuff.
[ Pali suttas never mention the 'Upanishads']  What does this mean? Upanishad is a term used to denote certain sections of Vedic literature. For example, the attic is a portion of the house.

The Upanishads are later texts than Buddhism. I literally posted the Upanishads are never mentioned in the Pali Suttas. Only the Three Vedas are mentioned in the Pali Suttas. Please write your own answer to the question rather than make comments that are merely generalisations. Thank you

[The Upanishads are later texts than Buddhism] In your post you already confirmed Vedas were there prior, so how come Upanishads came later? it's a very specific question, the corpus of Upanishads is many but the primary one if taken into consideration, are you stating that someone wrote them as books later to Vedas? (Ignoring Buddhism being a part of this for now). This will answer your pali script reference.

[Please write your own answer] I have all the right to have a productive conversation within the guidelines since its written in a public forum and not in private

hello. obviously this comment is incorrect. i would suggest to raise your issues & ideas about Veda & Upanishad on the Hindu Stack Exchange

Anyway, at least for those who wish to know ( not those who just writing about Vedas that they haven't practiced or read but preach to others). Upanishad is not the title of a book. A section of the Veda itself is called in current terms an Upanishad. This means if Shukla Yajur has 500 hymns, out of which 'x' number of hymns from the Brahmana section and 'y' number of hymns from its Aryanka itself is today referred to as Upanishad, because Acharyas of sects labeled it so. The same goes for Taittirīya Upanishad which is nothing but the 7 to 9 th section of Taittirīya Yajur Veda.

Upanishad in Veda is added to Veda at a later time

pls ask help from someone to read my comment and help you understand.

Buddha used ideas common to the Indian spiritual circles of his time, including Hinduism, but was far from simply copying them. Some of these ideas he strongly opposed, like the one of eternal atman. Some of them he included into his teachings, like karma/kamma, but gave it different meaning, more in line with his stressing importance of ethical quality of our intentions and subsequently our actions.

In his introduction to the translation of the early upanishads, Patrick Olivelle writes-

The Upanisads were composed at a time of great social, economic, and religious change; they document the transition from the archaic ritualism of the Veda into new religious ideas and institutions. It is in them that we note for the first time the emergence of central religious concepts of both Hinduism and of the new religious movements, such as Buddhism and Jainism, that emerged not long after the composition of the early Upanisads. Such concepts include the doctrine of re-birth, the law of karma that regulates the rebirth process, and the techniques of liberation from the cycle of rebirth, such as mental training associated with Yoga, ascetic self-denial and mortification, and the renunciation of sex, wealth, and family
  life. Even though theoretically the whole of the vedic corpus is accepted as revealed truth, in reality it is the Upanisads that have continued to influence the life and
  thought of the various religious traditions that we have come to call Hindu. Upanisads are the scriptures par excellence of Hinduism.

Some of Buddhism's cardinal doctrines like karma, reincarnation and ahimsa, compassion are found in the pre-Buddhistic early upanishads.
First, let us take the Brihadaranyaka upanishad. Regarding the date of this upanishad, the following are the opinions of most scholars -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brihadaranyaka_Upanishad

The exact year, and even the century of the Upanishad composition is unknown. Scholars have offered different estimates ranging from 900 BCE to 600 BCE, all preceding Buddhism. Brihadaranyaka is one of the first Upanishads, along with that of Jaiminiya Upanishad and Chandogya Upanishads.[13][14] The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad was in all likelihood composed in the earlier part of 1st millennium BCE, around 700 BCE, give or take a century or so, according to Patrick Olivelle.[11] It is likely that the text was a living document and some verses were edited over a period of time before the 6th century BCE.[13]

Thus, this upanishad was before the time of the Buddha, as per almost all scholarly opinions.
Further, there are about five pre-Buddhistic upanishads, according to scholars, and the Brihadaranyaka is one of them.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upanishads

The early Upanishads all predate the Common Era, five[note 6] of them in all likelihood pre-Buddhist (6th century BCE),[18]
[note 6] The pre-Buddhist Upanishads are: Brihadaranyaka, Chandogya, Kaushitaki, Aitareya, and Taittiriya Upanishads.[18]

Death and transmigration have been described in the Brihadaranyaka upanishad -
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122058.html
I am referring to the above link only for the Sanskrit text. I will give translation of Patrick Olivelle in order to remove any possible accusations of hindu bias.

.....tena pradyotenaiṣa ātmā niṣkrāmati—cakśuṣṭo vā, mūrdhno vā, anyebhyo vā śarīradeśebhyaḥ; tamutkrāmantaṃ prāṇo'nūtkrāmati; prāṇamanūtkrāmantaṃ sarve prāṇā anūtkrāmanti; savijñāno bhavati, savijñānamevānvavakrāmati । taṃ vidyākarmaṇī samanvārabhete pūrvaprajñā ca || 2 ||

Here I am giving Patrick Olivelle's translation (not from the above link).

Then the top of his heart lights up, and with that light the
  self exits through the eye or the head or some other part of the body. As he is de-parting, his lifebreath (prana) departs with him. And as his lifebreath departs, all his vital functions (prana) depart with it.
  He then descends into a state of mere awareness and develops into one who is thus endowed with perception. Then learning and rites, as well as memory, take
  hold of him.
tadyathā tṛṇajalāyukā tṛṇasyāntaṃ gatvānyamākramamākramyātmānamupasaṃharati, evamevāyamātmedaṃ śarīraṃ nihatya, avidyāṃ gamayitvā, anyamākramamākramyātmānamupasaṃharati || 3 ||
tadyathā peśaskārī peśaso mātrām apādāyānyannavataraṃ kalyāṇataraṃ rūpaṃ tanute, evamevāyamātmedaṃ śarīraṃ nihatya, avidyāṃ gamayitvā, anyannavataraṃ kalyāṇataraṃ rūpaṃ kurute—pitryaṃ vā, gāndharvaṃ vā daivaṃ vā, prājāpatyaṃ vā, brāhmaṃ vā, anyeṣāṃ vā bhūtānām || 4 ||

Olivelle's translation again -

"It is like this. As a caterpillar, when it comes to the tip of a blade of grass, reaches out to a new foothold and draws itself onto it, so the self (atman), after it has knocked down this body and rendered it unconscious, reaches out to a new foothold and draws itself onto it.
"It is like this. As a weaver, after she has removed the colored yarn, weaves a different design that is newer and more attractive, so the self, after it has knocked
  down this body and rendered it unconscious, makes for himself a different figure that is newer and more attractive—the figure of a forefather, or of a Gandharva, or
  of a god, or of Prajapati, or of brahman, or else the figure of some other being.

Now, let us look at a different section of the upanishad -
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc120049.html

tadyathānaḥ susamāhitamutsarjadyāyāt, evamevāyaṃ śārīra ātmā prājñenātmanānvārūḍha utsarjanyāti, yatraitadūrdhvocchvāsī bhavati || 35 ||
sa yatrāyamaṇimānaṃ nyeti—jarayā vopatapatā vāṇimānaṃ nigacchati—tadyathāmraṃ vodumbaraṃ vā pippalaṃ vā bandhanātpramucyate, evamevāyaṃ puruṣa ebhyo'ṅgebhyaḥ saṃpramucya punaḥ pratinyāyaṃ pratiyonyādravati prāṇāyaiva || 36 ||

Patrick Olivelle's translation -

"It is like this. As a heavily loaded cart goes along creaking, so this bodily self (atman), saddled with the self (atman) of knowledge, goes along groaning as he is breathing his last.
   36
   Now a man grows feeble on account of either old age or
  sickness. "It is like this. As a mango or a fig or a berry detaches itself from its stem, so this person frees himself from these bodily parts and rushes along the same path and through the same opening back again to a new life (prana).

The above quotes show that the doctrine of reincarnation is present in the pre-Buddhistic brihadaranyaka upanishad.
Now, let us come to the doctrine of karma in the same upanishad. (The bold highlighted Sanskrit below shows that the exact word karma was used in this upanishad. So not only is the doctrine of karma found here, but also the exact word karma was used to describe the doctrine).
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122058.html

yathākārī yathācārī tathā bhavati—sādhukārī sādhurbhavati, pāpakārī pāpo bhavati; puṇyaḥ puṇyena karmaṇā bhavati, pāpaḥ pāpena | atho khalvāhuḥ kāmamaya evāyaṃ puruṣa iti; sa yathākāmo bhavati tatkraturbhavati, yatkraturbhavati tatkarma kurute, yatkarma kurute tadabhisaṃpadyate || 5 ||
tadeṣa śloko bhavati |
                tadeva saktaḥ saha karmaṇaiti
                liṅgaṃ mano yatra niṣaktamasya |
            prāpyāntaṃ karmaṇastasya yatkiñceha karotyayam |
            tasmāllokātpunaraityasmai lokāya karmaṇe ||
        iti nu kāmayamānaḥ; athākāmayamānaḥ—yo'kāmo
  niṣkāma āptakāma ātmakāmo na tasya prāṇā utkrāmanti,
  brahmaiva sanbrahmāpyeti || 6 ||
What a man turns out to be depends on how he
  acts and on how he conducts himself. If his actions are good, he will turn into something good. If his actions are bad, he will turn into something bad. A man turns
  into something good by good action and into something bad by bad action. And so people say: 'A person here consists simply of desire.' A man resolves in accordance
  with his desire, acts in accordance with his resolve, and turns out to be in accordance with his action.
On this point there is the following verse:
  A man who's attached goes with his action,
  to that very place to which
  his mind and character cling.
  Reaching the end of his action,
  of whatever he has done in this world—
  From that world he returns
  back to this world,
  back to action.
  "That is the course of a man who desires.

A different translation is given in wikipedia, but the essence is similar.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brihadaranyaka_Upanishad#Karma_theory

One of the earliest formulation of the Karma doctrine occurs in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.[46] For example:
Now as a man is like this or like that,
  according as he acts and according as he behaves, so will he be;
  a man of good acts will become good, a man of bad acts, bad;
  he became pure by pure deeds, bad by bad deeds;
And here they say that a person consists of desires,
  and as is his desire, so is his will;
  and as is his will, so is his deed;
  and whatever deed he does, that he will reap.
— Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, Hymns 4.4.5-4.4.6[48][49]

Another instance of the doctrine of karma in the same upanishad -
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc118304.html

....tau hotkramya mantrayāṃcakrāte; tau ha yadūcatuḥ karma haiva tadūcatuḥ, atha yatpraśaśaṃsatuḥ karma haiva tat praśaśaṃsatuḥ; puṇyo vai puṇyena karmaṇā bhavati, pāpaḥ pāpeneti | tato ha jāratkārava ārtabhāga upararāma || 13 ||

Patrick Olivelle's translation -

So they left and talked about it. And what did they talk about?—they talked about nothing but action. And what did they praise?—they praised nothing but action. Yajnavalkya told him: "A man turns into something good by good action and into something bad by bad action."

It has been shown above that two of the cardinal doctrines of buddhism - karma and reincarnation - are already present in the pre-Buddhistic upanishads.
PS: This can become a long post, so I will either write a separate answer for other points or will extend this later.

Thanks. Very useful. The truth was true prior to the Buddha's time

What was before the Buddha? The Vedas and the earliest Upanishads (Brhadaranyaka, Chandogya) came before the Buddha.
A few other Upanishads (Taittiriya, Aitareya, and Kausitaki) and the Nyaya school of logic may have developed around the same time as the Buddha.
If you look at the scholarly dates given in Wikipedia, all Vedanta schools, Samkhya, Yogasutras of Patanjali, Purva Mimamsa school, the rest of the Upanishads (Kena, Katha, Isa, Svetasvatara, Mundaka, Prasna, Mandukya), Brahmasutras and Bhagavad Gita all came after the Buddha's time.
The closest Hindu school of philosophy to Buddhism, appears to be Advaita Vedanta. Gaudapada and Adi Shankara who founded Advaita Vedanta lived around 6th to 7th century CE. The Buddha lived over a thousand years earlier.
I imagined that Advaita Vedanta influenced Indian Mahayana schools, but it turns out that it may be the other way round. Nagarjuna, the founder of the Madhyamaka school, lived around 150 - 250 CE. Asanga and Vasubandhu, the founders of the Yogacara school, lived around 3rd to 4th century CE.
All this info can be found in Wikipedia.
So, who copied who?

The Buddha certainly used terms like karma and dharma from the culture around him, but he redefined those terms based on his teachings.
Let me give you an example. The term "karma" (which simply means action) originates from the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad that predates the Buddha by at least a century. It introduces the idea that doing good makes you good and brings good results, and vice versa.
Later, the Bhagavad Gita (in chapters 2 and 3), which comes 2 centuries after the Buddha, says that the dharma (here meaning duty) of a warrior is to fight for a just cause. If a warrior fights and kills another, while performing his duty, but does so as a sacrifice or offering to God, without any kind of attachment, including to the fruits of action, then the warrior will be freed from sin. On the other hand, if he shirks his responsibility and duty, he would incur sin. This is called karma yoga, which is the title of chapter 3.
On the other hand, in Buddhism, karma is always related to an individual's intention which starts as a thought but is later manifested and exerted through thoughts and actions. The intention is the most important thing.
From the AN 6.63:

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

In SN 42.3, a warrior asks the Buddha whether he would go to heavan if he dies in battle. The Buddha states that he would instead be reborn in hell because of exerting the intention to violently kill another human being. It's all about the mind. Please also see this answer. Killing because of duty violates the first precept. Pure self-defense may be acceptable for lay people, though.
The term dharma could mean righteousness, duty, order, religion in Hindu texts. In Buddhism, the term dharma or dhamma could mean teachings, phenomena, complex mental concepts. It's slightly different, but related.
With these examples it should be clear that although Hinduism and Buddhism share the terms karma and dharma, they are actually not quite the same.

One thing is clear. Anatta or Anatman is uniquely Buddhist, and it clearly separates all Hindu philosophy from Buddhism. There can be no Vedanta without Atman, and there can be no Buddhism without Anatman.

The Vedas were composed not all at once and over hundreds of years.
The end part of the Vedas, Vedanta ([end]anta+Veda); the Upanishads, are the first texts that in detail focus on metaphysical iquiry, general mysticism and esoteric development.
These principal Upanishads would lay out a doctrine of a self atman and relation of atman to the 'primary self' brahman.
They also introduce the idea of Karma as something that is result of moral acts and a baseline for the doctrine of energy chanels in the body.
The earlier part of vedic scripture more or less describes rebirth in heavenly realm being the goal achievable through ritualistic meritmaking, this idea is complemented and reformed as general theory of reincarnation based on the supposedly correctly inferred purity of one's acts based on the doctrines of the Vedanta.
The Upanishads come to stress the importance of having a correct understanding of how things work for a correct result and inquiry into these for some sort of liberation of mind.
Pre Buddhist period, as the Vedas are composed, there are various Shramana communities of ascetics in India region, at the time these communities are contemplating all these ideas found in Vedas and practice various yoga.
Out of these communities the Buddhist philosophy eventually emerged as a correct line of inquiry leading to ultimate purification of intellect.
Buddhism explained that the doctrine of self is untrue , why it is untrue and stressed the importance of dismantling the adherence to a doctrine of self.
Thus The Bodhisatta, being among Shramana analyzed and rejected many Vedic philosophies & assertions which were more or less popular among people at that time.
You can study history of yoga here https://ochsonline.org/

Buddhism is not what you can see today. Once the real dhamma is translated and written in Sanskrit, the real meaning has disapeared.
Due to this when reading dhamma today, people get a closer meaning to hindunism. (Since they know hindunisn) Which is not the case. Buddha had advised not to translate dhamma to sanskrit, but someone has done. That's how it is.
So just because it seems like the same thing, it is not what budhha taught...!

Can the down voters tell me why this is down voted. In pali cannon, its clearly mentioned that dhamma should not be translated to Sanskrit. This is the problem with this community. It's not the problem with the stack overflow, but the community thinks they know everything. Only thing that I can pray for you is, you may find the truth soon, otherwise with the work that you do, you will get the doors closed to the enlightenment.


text:
How to cultivate good
q:

1) How do you cultivate good?
2) what is good?

See also can you help translate dhammpada 183?

Elsewhere in the Dhammapada it suggests to cultivate good "drop by drop":

Think not lightly of evil, saying, "It will not come to me." Drop by drop is the water pot filled. Likewise, the fool, gathering it little by little, fills himself with evil.

Think not lightly of good, saying, "It will not come to me." Drop by drop is the water pot filled. Likewise, the wise man, gathering it little by little, fills himself with good.

Buddhism is called a "gradual training" -- and I think that's because it's taught gradually, step by step -- but I also think it's practised gradually, e.g. you might learn from moments of kindness or moments of suffering.
As for "what is good" one hint might be found in MN 61

Having done a bodily action, you should reflect on it:

'This bodily action I have done — did it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Was it an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?'

If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it, lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. Having confessed it... you should exercise restraint in the future. But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... it was a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then you should stay mentally refreshed & joyful, training day & night in skillful mental qualities.

There are different Pali words being used in different verses, for example puñña
, kusala, and sampadā

MN 61.. yes....

We cultivate good the same way we cultivate anything: by giving light and water, and carefully weeding out anything undesired. 'Light' in this sense is conscious attention, which focuses the source of energy for everything we are. 'Water' is compassion (for ourselves and others), that soothes and smooths over every conflict. 'Weeding' means seeing our attachments and delusions for what they are, so we deprive them of the unconscious energy they need to survive.
You don't need to worry about what 'good' is. The seeds of it are already present, and you just need to tend it so it will grow naturally.

Good is peace and what leads to peace (i.e. not to pain).
Good is harmony and what leads to harmony (i.e. not to discord).
Good is understanding and what leads to understanding (i.e. not to confusion).
Good is health and what leads to health (i.e. not to sickness).
Good is acceptance and what leads to acceptance (i.e. not to aversion).
Good is love and what leads to love (i.e. not to hate).
Good is freedom of being oneself and what leads to freedom of being oneself (i.e. not to fear).

Our every action sows the seeds that will become the causes and conditions of future results. An apple seed grows into apple-tree, it doesn't grow into cucumber. Similarly, actions of certain kind grow into results of the same nature, they don't become something completely different.

Violence and anger is a seed that grows into problems, it does not grow into peace.
Lies and divisive speech are seeds that grow into problems, they do not grow into peace.
Consuming junk physical good and junk mental food are seeds that grow into bodily junk and mental junk, they do not not grow into health.
Indulging into vulgar pleasures is a seed ...
Making friends with people who do the above is a seed ...
Watching movies and TV series about people who's goal in life is all of the above is a seed ...
Thinking negative and egoistic thoughts is a seed...
Thinking "I am (we are) good and they are not" is a seed ...

It is kind of simple. Do not sow seeds of conflict. Be selective about what you consume. Do not feed your ego. Whatever remains - be strong and don't doubt yourself.


text:
Kamma and the Physical
Does kamma bind or work with the physical realm? Such as a tsunami will kill you, but you will also die in such a way due to past kamma?

Previous & current kamma can only effect(bind) if mind is impure.  It doesn't mean that such kammas are of no effect rather these form a certain pattern which generates sankharas at subconscious state. If Ignorance still remains, clinging affect is generated due to sankharas, if not then there is no clinging affect.
This is the reason why arhants don't get disturbed by previous kamma ,cause they have no ignorance left(as only full awareness) hence sankharas cannot affect their mind rather their subconscious mind starts cleaning itself by 'letting go & to never let them come back'.
Regarding punishment through nature , if Arhant has made a commitment to do something , no nature or power can stop ,otherwise ,Arhants always remain ready to give-off their body to remove all suffering a.s.a.p. ... Still whatever the punishment is given to such Noble ones , that doesn't let their mind fickle by even a single bit. They remain at peace.
 That's why , effect of kamma within body remains to the degree/amount of  Ignorance present.

The operation of Kamma is a difficult thing to fathom.
There are five Niyamas in operating the world. Kamma is only one of them.


text:
Woman touch Buddha
q:

Can a woman touch a Buddha? And if so, what would happen, how would
  the Buddha react?

Haven't you read/heard about story between Buddha and brahmin of kuru pradesh(of ancient India) ,who wanted buddha to marry his beautiful daughter.

Yes, if that woman touch Lord Buddha with good intention, she accumulates good kamma and if that woman touch Lord Buddha with bad intention, she accumulates bad kamma. Since Lord Buddha has no defilements, there would be no reaction.

No one can touch the Buddha, Tatagatha, good householder, if not gained Arahat-ship, or at least the Dhamma temporary by oneselves, not even see.
If a woman touches, was able to touch the Buddha, she is called a Arahat, or at least Noble One, if just temporary.
(Note: This is not given for stackes, exchange, other trades, binding in the world, but to escape from this wheel)

Nothing would happen to buddha, as he has understood the reality of this world, in other words as he has realized the four noble truth. Buddha will just pay sad for this woman as she is blinded with klesha in her mind.
But for that woman, she will get bad karma if she does it with bad thoughts (ragha, dwesha, moha).

Any one can touch buddha but there is nothing happening special.
Buddha haven't "Keles" means
No attraction
No feeling (sad love ext)
No any impression only patient
meaning is likely can our|you mind mix with Water or any material.this is only simple description .and what are you asking is very deep but simply buddha is treat all living thins same.no any touch only patient


text:
Arguing of Buddhists?
Q:

Do Buddhists argue over topics? Wouldn't that be unwholesome and view
  clinging?

Suggestion: 'Debate' may be a better word to phrase your question to maintain neutrality. ('Argue' may not be the best word to use if I am correct about the context of your question)

Ddebating is an effective method for learning. The word 'arguing' suggests something more egotistical than debating, and as you say it can spill over into clinging and dogmatism.

@Krizalid_13190 Call it "arguing" or "debating" as you wish -- if you think the difference is important you could explain that in an answer.

Arguing depends upon person to person. Buddha always forbid arguing. Even at time of buddha , few of his disciples used to argue & he ,by many Upmas(lessons), used to forbid everyone to argue.
By wearing a tag of buddhism or any other tradition , doesn't mean person has become an enlightened one. If somebody is not ready to accept , it's good -let this go otherwise ,if accepts ,it's good ,still ,whatever the case is ,one must be ready to learn(if same is unenlightened) ,mustn't stick to blind-faith.
Moreover , dhamma-discussion can be done peacefully , buddha never restricted dhamma_related_discussion. You are your own master , you cannot force anyone to accept your views ,if you are forcing or arguing that means you are clinging & this is unwholesome.
Above is for full_time meditators.
For house holders::
Sometimes ,it becomes necessary to argue ,not to fulfill your desire but saving someone's life ,taking important decisions for benefit of large amount of people,etc. In such cases , arguing becomes necessary ,still this must be done while maintaining basic 5 Percepts at body & mental level.