What are the canonical definitions of common terms used in the context of satipaṭṭhāna from the Tripitaka or related literature What are the canonical definitions of the following words (sati, sampajañña, appamada, atappa, manasikara, satipaṭṭhāna) from the Tipitaka, commentaries, sub commentaries, including primary, secondary or tertiary source with citations:

Image source: Sati (Buddhism)

Mindfulness is not "awareness". Mindfulness is remembering, as follows:

  When one has heard the Dhamma from such bhikkhus one dwells withdrawn
  by way of two kinds of withdrawal—withdrawal of body and withdrawal of
  mind. Dwelling thus withdrawn, one recollects (anussarati) that Dhamma and
  thinks it over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn
  recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occasion the
  enlightenment factor of mindfulness (sati) is aroused by the bhikkhu; on thatoccasion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness;
  on that occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to
  fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.

  https://suttacentral.net/sn46.3/en/bodhi

  One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter (upasampajja) & remain (viharati) in right
  view: This is one's right mindfulness (sati).

  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html

  "What is sammasati? Sati means to bear in mind or bring to mind. Sati
  is the state of recollecting, the state of remembering, the state of
  non-fading, the state of non-forgetting. Sati means the sati that is a
  Spiritual Faculty, the sati that is a Spiritual Power, Sammasati, the
  Sati that is an Enlightenment Factor, that which is a Path Factor and
  that which is related to the Path. This is what is called sammasati."
  Vbh.105, 286

Sampajanna (saṃ + pajāna) is active supervisory wisdom. It means ready wisdom, situational wisdom, to thoroughly understand. Sampajanna is not Western/Jewish 'bare zombie awareness'. When SN 47.35 briefly defines ‘sampajana’, it uses the word “vidita” (pp. of vindati), which means “to understand” or “understood”, as Bhikkhu Bodhi properly translated as “understood”, as follows:

  And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu exercise clear comprehension? Here,
  bhikkhus, for a bhikkhu feelings are understood as they arise,
  understood as they remain present, understood as they pass away.
  Thoughts are understood as they arise, understood as they remain
  present, understood as they pass away. Perceptions are understood as
  they arise, understood as they remain present, understood as they pass
  away. It is in this way, bhikkhus, that a bhikkhu exercises clear
  comprehension.

  Because I understand the diversity of faculties as it applies to this person.

  Indriyavemattatā hi me, udāyi, imasmiṃ puggale viditā.

  MN 66

  However, I have recognized individual differences.

  Api ca mayā puggalavemattatā viditā”ti.

  SN 12.17

Manasikara is manas or thought. Thus it is attention directed by thought or intention (rather than mere or pure consciousness/vinnana). For example:

  Hearing the good Dhamma, becoming full, fills up faith. Faith, becoming full, fills up careful attention. Careful attention, becoming full, fills up mindfulness and clear comprehension. AN 10.61

Satipaṭṭhāna, according to Bhikkhu Sujato, means establishing of mindfulness.

  The function of satipaṭṭhāna as support for jhāna is suggested in a
  very common Sutta idiom, whose significance tends to be obscured in
  translation. The term satipaṭṭhāna (establishing of mindfulness)
  resolves into sati and upaṭṭhāna. The alternative resolution into sati
  and paṭṭhāna, though favoured by the commentaries, is spurious. The
  difference between the two is that while upaṭṭhāna expresses the
  subjective act of establishing or setting up mindfulness, paṭṭhāna
  would refer to the ‘foundations’ of mindfulness, the objective domains
  on which mindfulness is established. The basic meaning of upaṭṭhāna is
  to ‘stand near’, and it is commonly used to mean ‘serve’, ‘approach’,
  even ‘worship’. Taranatha Tarkavacaspati’s Sanskrit dictionary
  gives the meaning of ‘causing to remember’...,
  which would be identical with sati, but as this does not seem to be
  attested in any early text it is probably under Buddhist influence. We
  have already remarked that the closest parallel in the Upaniṣads is
  the term upāsana. Page 185


What raised mudra is depicted on the Buddha rupa at the London Peace Pagoda and what does it mean? What raised mudra is depicted on this particular Buddha rupa at the London Peace Pagoda and what does it mean? Also, which Buddha is this?

This guide -- The Battersea Park Peace Pagoda -- says,

In this statue the Vitarka Mudra, associated with explaining the Buddha’s teachings, with the right hand right raised and the tips of the forefinger and thumb touching, is combined with the Tarjani Mudra for warding off evil, with forefinger and little finger outstretched.


Who do we call Buddha? Gautama Buddha was not the only Buddha. There were many Buddhas in the past and there will be many in the future.

My question is: what characteristic of a person defines Buddha?

My answer is that Buddha is the knowledge of Truth.Anyone who has realized the Truth is the Buddha.Some say Buddha is a title ... just as King is the title. But they forget that King can be stupid i.e position of title King can be occupied by an undeserving candidate. But any person who occupies the title of Buddha must be the one who has realized the Truth.
All Buddhas of the past, present and future tell the same eternal truths again and again... they feel the same compassion and equanimity for all the beings.

My second question is : is the past Buddha an ancestor to the future Buddha? In other words can future Buddha recall the past Buddha and say that that was me in my previous manifestation ?

EDIT: I think my answer to who is Buddha is wrong one. Buddha indeed occupies an office and Brahma appoints the Buddha through a process mentioned in Manual of Buddhism by Hardy Spence.

Any prospective Buddha needs to possess at least following three qualities:

1.Should be a Boddhisat.

2.Should have a wish to become the teacher of the three worlds.

3.Should hold the wish to release sentient beings from the evils of existence.

I quote from p.88 which translates the whole process of electing Buddha by Brahma.

  The beings who will in due course become Budhas are called Bodhisat.
  They are numberless ; but the name, in common usage, is almost
  exclusively confined to those who have become avowed candidates for
  the high office. When many ages have elapsed without the appearance of
  a Budha, there arc no beings to supply the continued diminution of the
  numbers in the brahma-lokas. This excites the attention of some
  compassionate brahma, who, when he has discovered the cause and the
  remedy, looks, out to see in what world the Bodhisat exists who will
  next become an aspirant for the Budhaship ; and when he has discovered
  the Bodhisat in question, he inspires him with the resolution that
  enables him to form the wish to become the teacher of the three
  worlds, that he may release sentient beings from the evils of
  existence. The ages that succeed this period are divided into three
  eras; in each of which we have legends of Gotama.
  1. The era of resolution (1). 2. The era of expres-, sion (2). 3. The era of nomination (3).

Dona asked this question to the Buddha in the Dona Sutta:

  "When asked, 'Are you a deva?' you answer, 'No, brahman, I am not a
  deva.' When asked, 'Are you a gandhabba?' you answer, 'No, brahman, I
  am not a gandhabba.' When asked, 'Are you a yakkha?' you answer, 'No,
  brahman, I am not a yakkha.' When asked, 'Are you a human being?' you
  answer, 'No, brahman, I am not a human being.' Then what sort of being
  are you?"

  "Brahman, the fermentations by which — if they were not abandoned — I
  would be a deva: Those are abandoned by me, their root destroyed, made
  like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not
  destined for future arising. The fermentations by which — if they were
  not abandoned — I would be a gandhabba... a yakkha... a human being:
  Those are abandoned by me, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra
  stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for
  future arising.

  "Just like a red, blue, or white lotus — born in the water, grown in
  the water, rising up above the water — stands unsmeared by the water,
  in the same way I — born in the world, grown in the world, having
  overcome the world — live unsmeared by the world. Remember me,
  brahman, as 'awakened.'

The Buddha is the one who is awake, whereas the other unenlightened people are "asleep".

The Buddha is not an ancestor to the future Buddhas. He is able to see into future or past through some degree of omniscience, but he is not recalling them.


Explaining the 6th fetter? What is exactly meant by "Material rebirth lust", and how is it properly abandoned?

The 6th fetter's meaning pretty straightforward: the craving for the fine-material (or form) existence/Rupa-Raga. The lower 5 fetters are lower because they're all related to our world, which is the sensuous world (Kama-Loka), while the 5 higher fetters are those that are tie to the 2 higher worlds above Kama-Loka: Rupa-Loka (form or fine-material world), and Arupa-Loka (or immaterial world) (see Planes of Existence and RupaRaga for further details).


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

There are 2 types of Nibbana which are:

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

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


Sources on the lifespan of Dhamma Everyone is saying that the Dhamma will last 5000 years after the parinibbana. That it will last in Sri Lanka. So far I haven't found any authentic sources even in Tripitaka saying that

Are there any sources if so please do provide. If not, is this some fact created by people in Sri Lanka back in the days ?

Please see the essay "The Coming Buddha, Ariya Metteyya" by Ven. Sayagyi U Chit Tin:

  During the period from the time of Buddha Gotama to the minimum life
  span, the Buddha's Dispensation (Buddha-sasana) will disappear. When
  the Buddha agreed to create the Bhikkhuni Sangha, he told Ven. Ananda
  that the Sasana would last only half as long because of this. Instead
  of lasting one thousand years, it would last five hundred years. The
  commentary on the Abhidhamma text, Dhammasangani, says that when the
  First Buddhist Council convened by Ven. Maha-Kassapa rehearsed the
  Pali Canon, this made it possible for the Sasana to endure for five
  thousand years.[48]

  The commentaries on the Vinaya Pitaka[49] and the Anguttara-nikaya[50]
  say that the eight important rules which the Buddha gave to the
  Bhikkhuni Sangha will make his Teachings last for five thousand years
  rather than five hundred. There will be one thousand years for Arahats
  who attain analytical insight, one thousand years for Arahats without
  those attainments, one thousand years for Non-returners, one thousand
  years for Once-returners, and one thousand years for Stream-winners.
  After these five thousand years of penetration of the true Doctrine
  (pativedha-sadhamma),[51] the accomplishment in the texts
  (pariyatti-dhamma) will remain. After the accomplishment in the texts
  disappears, the signs (linga) will continue for a long time.

  In the commentary to the Theragatha[52] the Sasana is said to consist
  of five periods: (1) the age of deliverance (vimutti-yuga), (2) the
  age of concentration (samadhi-yuga), (3) the age of morality
  (sila-yuga), (4) the age of learning [the texts] (suta-yuga), and (5)
  the age of generosity (dana-yuga). Ven. Dhammapala says, concerning the
  disappearance of learning, "In a region where there is no purity of
  morality, accomplishment (in the texts) remains through taking up
  great learning, through the desire to acquire, etc. But when
  accomplishment in the summary [i.e., the Patimokkha] is completely
  ended, it disappears. From that time on, only the mere sign (linga)
  remains. Then, having accumulated riches in various ways, they give
  away gifts (dana); this, truly, is the last right practice. Then, [the
  period starting] after the disappearance of learning is the last time
  (pacchima-kala). Others say that it is from the time of the
  disappearance of morality." According to the tradition in Burma, the
  Sasana will last five thousand years. The five periods will occur
  twice. The first half of the Sasana has just passed, with each of the
  five periods lasting five hundred years. We are now in the second
  half, when these periods will be repeated, each lasting for another
  five hundred years.

Footnotes:

  [48] As 27, see Expos. 35.
  [49] Sp 1291.
  [50] Mp IV 136f.

List of Abbreviations:

As =   Atthasalini (trans., Expos.).
       BN 630/862 = Bibliotheque nationale, Pali mss
       630 and 862, commentary on Anag. We thank Mme J.
       Filliozat for making available a copy of her
       transcription of this text.
Expos.=The Expositor (As).
Sp =   Samantapasadika (commentary on the Vinaya Pitaka).
Mp =   Manorathapurani (commentary on the Anguttara Nikaya).


The concept of being the part of the universe Very respectfully,i am very much new to this community but have always been interested in Buddhism. I know some people who are Buddhist and they often talk about being one with the universe or being the part of it, literally. How does that work? I mean are we born from universe and when we say the word "universe", what exactly do we mean?

"I mean are we born from universe and when we say the word "universe", what exactly do we mean?

The idea (or what is discovered) is that we are in a sense born from the universe (in a way this is obvious) but it may be better to say we are the universe. It could even be said we are not born at all. Even the statement 'we are' would be denied.

If 'Universe' means 'all that exists' then this is not a Buddhist meaning of the word since it would leave out the source of existence. This source would real where all else would be created thus not metaphysically or independently real. The Buddhist 'universe' is bigger than the universe of physics since it includes the totality of Reality and Appearance or both of Nagarjuna's 'two worlds', but also smaller since space-time and its contents would be reducible.

Hence the Buddhist Universe is a fundamental concept where the scientific concept is non-reductive. This would be why Buddhism has a coherent metaphysic while physics cannot find one. How we define 'universe' is therefore important. If we follow the scientists and say it is 'all that exists' we will have no hope of a fundamental world-theory.


What are the requirements in order to happen a complete sin? Imagine someone perform an action. What are the requirements should be completed for it to be a complete sin?
Explain it by using killing an animal as an exaple

I don't think it's thoroughly explained in suttas.

I know you tagged this topic lay-buddhism, but it might be relevant to mention that the topic is extensively discussed in the Vinaya (the "discipline", the rules for monks).

Pages of 74 through 86 of The Buddhist Monastic Code says:

  This rule against intentionally causing the death of a human being is best
  understood in terms of five factors, all of which must be present for there to be
  the full offense.

  Object: a human being, which according to the Vibhaṅga includes human
  fetuses as well, counting from the time consciousness first arises in the
  womb immediately after conception up to the time of death.
  Intention: knowingly, consciously, deliberately, and purposefully wanting
  to cause that person’s death. “Knowingly” also includes the factor of—
  Perception: perceiving the person as a living being.
  Effort: whatever one does with the purpose of causing that person to die.
  Result: The life-faculty of the person is cut as the result of one’s act.

It details a number of exceptions: if you kill a person by accident; if you thought they were already dead; or etc.

It also details some non-exceptions, e.g. telling someone else to kill does count as "effort".

Perhaps I could mention that attempted murder (where the victim doesn't die as a "result") is considered still an offence, and punished ... but with "lesser penalties".

The penalties (and the deeds for which monks are punished) in the Vinaya aren't necessarily the same as the working of kamma -- they're more well-defined (and so easier to list in detail).


If i use visualization mediation will the nimatta still appear? I'm having trouble truly understanding nimattas. I use visualization for my jhana mediation. It's what focus my mind best and allowed me to almost enter jhana. But if i do visualize, will the nimatta still appear? How would i recognise it? And once it appear do i move off my object to it?

Also i read this passage explaining what a nimtta means in the modern day. I wish to know does this do a great job explaining it.

  Now certainly it is true that if you become VERY concentrated you might see an image that looks like "a star or a cluster of gems" or "chariot wheel or the moon's disk," etc. And it is also true that you can with sufficient concentration absorb into that experience so deeply that you no longer hear sounds, or are aware of your body, or are even aware of the passage of time. This is not what is described in the suttas; however, this is indeed what the later commentaries mean when they use the word "nimitta."

the question is regarding nimittas, following of visualisation . A little effort to answer you,aroused  after  thought giving based on understanding of buddhist teachings after simple teachings of goenka guruji and book by william hart "The art of living-vipassana as taught by goenka". teachings of buddha as per my understanding is very simple. not developing new sankharas and eradicating accumulated sankharas since many lives  and thus attaining shunyata i.e no volitions left (nibbana). to attain this simply observations of bodily sensations arised upon the contact of the sensory bases,remaining neutral i.e not to avert the unpleasant and not to crave for the pleasant ones , and thus slowly weakening the habit of mind of reacting(aversion or craving) and finally totally liberated from the habit/conditioning of reacting of mind.  now in your case the visualisation . who will visualise? the answer is mind and the mind is solely responsible for the suffering. it is master in deceiving and keeping the self engrossed in innumerous nimittas . Afterall how it will allow to eradicate its habit/conditioning which will be its death. buddha has stubbornly discouraged being distracted/engrossed by the so called nimittas,visions,some ecstasic  feeling .   I  have not tried the visualisation bcs from the very beginning i had mis or right conception that , if at all it is matter of visualisation then why not to visualise that nibbana is attained. alas it would have been so simple. hope little bit light upon your question . to add one thing , in indian language the meaning of nimitta means excuse. in english "catalyst" but advantageous in reverse way i.e instead of boosting the chemical reaction the nimitta here retards it . hoping and wishing to you for getting still more right understanding of buddha's teachings and starting the journey.


Is love in this life 'artificial'? In this life we experience love with family, friends, spouses and others. From my understanding of reading through this site and researching, love leads to suffering.

Is the love we feel towards others in this life just temporary or does it pass on to the next life?

For example, I love my family. I want to live the longest possible time with them. I know that one day we will depart one another. I hope to see them again in the next life. Does this thinking led to suffering?

Every conditioned thing is temporary and subject to destruction and changes including feelings.  Wanting to meet again means that one has to have a new birth or self in next life and it comes with all the heap of drawbacks and unsatisfactory.

In case you still want to have new birth, then the following sutta might interest you.

A loving couple asked Buddha this exact same question, and here was his reply:

  Householders, if both husband and wife wish to see one another not only in this present life but also in future lives, they should have the same faith, the same virtuous behavior, the same generosity, and the same wisdom. Then they will see one another not only in this present life but also in future lives.”

Here is full sutta: the same in living


When is it time to meditate and when is it time to act? As a Mahayana follower I keep growing my wish to help all beings. To accomplish this, I have developed the wish to become a Buddha. As I meditate and follow the teachings, I really wish to help all beings to be free from suffering and want them to be happy, and I really can feel by my own experience that I can make them happy by practicing.

Although sometimes I also have the feeling I should help in other ways. Like giving them food or even doing some volunteer work to help them to be free from suffering, at least for a short period of time.

When is the time to meditate, and when is the time to help others (and of course by doing this wanting them to be free from suffering)?

I think there is a certain tendency in the west to take the Bodhisattva vow as mandate for humanitarian action.  The reams of material that have been written on socially engaged Buddhism are pretty exemplary of that.  I personally don't think there is anything wrong with working to make someone suffer a little less.  I also think that proponents of this kind of engaged Buddhism are on some pretty solid theological ground.  Helping others is an essential part of anyone's practice.  It's no accident that the first paramita (in all traditions!) is generosity.

I think I need to qualify this though.  No matter how much effort you exert, you aren't going to end suffering in the world.  No government plan, social service, or movement can accomplish that.  It's impossible.  To even think along those lines is completely contrary to Buddhist teaching.  The only surefire means we have of ending suffering is through our own liberation.  It is imperative that we don't lose sight of that.  So many people get caught up in outward directed effort that they lose touch with their individual practice.  One wonders how truly useful they can be as Buddha-beings when their best weapons in the fight against suffering - their loving-kindness, compassion, patience, and generosity - aren't sharpened by daily practice!

It's always time to help others and if you practice Buddhism sincerely, you will always be doing exactly that.  The hours that you sit benefit all sentient beings in ways just as powerful as any hour you spend working at a soup kitchen.  If you feel called to do something more tangible than just sitting, that's fine.  It's even recommended lest you begin to develop an indulgent attachment to the bliss of concentration.  Just don't let outward efforts distract you from your own liberation.


What are the core Mahayana and Vajrayana Sutras? When starting a more in-depth study of the Dharma from a Mahayana and Vajrayana perspective, what are the core (3 most recommended) Sutras (or texts), and the reasons why they are considered important, to have on your reading list in each of those traditions?

I think your question is much larger than can be answered with just three texts. Mahāyāna is not one thing, it is many Prajñāpāramitā, Madhyamaka, Pure Land, Yogacāra, Chan/Zen, Huayen etc. Similarly Vajrayāna is not one thing either.

For the Mahāyāna a comprehensive guide would have dozens of texts. At a minimum:

Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra
Mulamadhyamikākārikā śastra
Abhidharmakośabhāsya śāstra
Yogacārabhumi Sāstra
Sukhāvativyūha Sūtra (x2)
Sūtra of Huineng
Saddharmapuṇḍarikā Sūtra
Avataṃsaka Sūtra

For Vajrayāna the situation is different. Tantras cannot be read on their own. For Shingon the two main texts are

Mahāvairocana Sutra (aka Mahāvairocana Abhisaṃbodhi Tantra)
Vajraśekhara Sutra (aka Sarvatathāgata-tattvasaṃgraha)

A good introduction can be found in Kūkai: Major Works by Yoshito Hakeda. Tibetan Tantra includes many more texts, such as:

Guhyasamāja Tantra
Hevajra Tantra
Kālacakra Tantra

But most teaching is done through commentaries. Many of these texts cannot be understood without a commentary. Some of them require specific initiations.


what is zen's attitude / teaching on keeping a journal? Not much more to elaborate than just the question. But the website is making me type more stuff. So here it is.

There is no "Zen" attitude about anything. That in itself is not Zen. If someone keeps a journal, then someone keeps a journal. That's all it means, and it is neither good nor bad. It is just keeping a journal.


What is known about enlightenment before the lifetime of the Buddha? Are there any claims that he was the first? I am a non-Buddhist who is curious about Buddhism.
In modern times, Eckhart Tolle reports spontaneous awakening as a result of a sudden realisation that came out of intense suffering. As far as I am aware he was uninfluenced by Buddhism and underwent none of its training or techniques.
I understand that the Buddha sat under a tree "until he was enlightened". This suggests to me that he knew of the phenomenon beforehand.
Are there any claims that he was the first to achieve this state? What, if anything, do we know historically of the phenomenon of enlightenment before the life of Buddha?

Good householder,
there had been serial Buddhas before our Gotama Buddha. In a world/cosmos-period there might appear a Samma-Sambuddha who is capable to point out the way out of suffering, Samsara. When there is no full self-awakened Buddha and the Dhamma (his teaching) is unknown, there may appear so called Paccekabuddhas (Privat-Buddhas), who, althought having found the way out by themselves, are not capable to teach the path in sufficient way for others. While a Samma-SamBuddha apears or his Dhamma through direct originated disciples (Sangha of recluses) is still alive in the world awakened people (Arahats) would just arise within his Sangha, join his fellowship, hold refuge into the heritage.
There might be such as the first stages of awakening without having come direct contact with the Tripple Gems, but such happens just for those who might have gained certain access in previous existances and in every case such "reborn minor awakened" would join the Sangha.
Paccekabuddhas would not appear as long as a Sublime Buddhas teaching is still alive.
Collection of text which provide ideas about "our" Sublime Buddhas life might be found here.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange or what ever world-binding trade but for an escape from this wheel.]


Does there exist a Pali Canon sutta that claims that a Bodhisattva can only be a male Brahmin or Kshatriya? If yes, is it possibly apocryphal? I ask this question as someone on Twitter was arguing that Buddhism is casteist. He claimed that only upper castes were permitted to enter monkhood. I told him this was completely false and shared the example of Upali the barber. He shared the following link: Buddhism: An Atheistic and Anti-Caste Religion? by Edmund Weber.

The standpoint which caste a Buddha should belong to has not been revised in Buddhism up to the present day. It is dogmatised in the Lalitavistara in the following way: a Bodhisattva can by no means
come from a lower or even mixed caste:

“After all Bodhisattvas were not born in despised lineage,
among pariahs, in families of pipe or cart makers, or mixed castes.”

Instead, in perfect harmony with the Great Sermon, it was said that:

“The Bodhisattvas appear only in
two kinds of lineage, the one of the brahmanas and of the warriors (kshatriya).”

I corrected him that the document referred to Bodhisattvas and not ordinary monks who could grow to become full Arahants. He claimed that the religion was still casteist as only Brahmin and Kshatriyas could become Bodhisattvas. What does the Pali cannon say regarding this? Can you share any studies done on this by scholars?

List of the named Buddhas

In countries where Theravāda Buddhism is practiced by the majority of people, such as Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, it is customary for Buddhists to hold elaborate festivals, especially during the fair weather season, paying homage to the 29 Buddhas described in the Buddhavamsa. The Buddhavamsa is a text which describes the life of Gautama Buddha and the 27 Buddhas who preceded him, along with the future Metteyya Buddha.[2] The Buddhavamsa is part of the Khuddaka Nikāya, which in turn is part of the Sutta Piṭaka. The Sutta Piṭaka is one of three main sections of the Pāli Canon of Theravāda Buddhism.

I note that in this table the class (varṇa) of all 29 is listed as either Kshatriya or Brahmin (except 3 which aren't listed).
So the answer seems to be "yes" if you include the Buddhavamsa -- which I imagine is the only text which says that.

Along with the Apadāna and the Cariyāpiṭaka, the Buddhavaṃsa is considered by most scholars to have been written during the 1st and 2nd century BCE, and is therefore a late addition to the Pāli Canon.


Past Buddha's : Sources I came  along with this (http://www.aathaapi.net/dwncounter.php?number=29)  detailed description of the Buddhas (during vag and mano pradani era of Gautama Bodhisattva) before the 28 Buddhas. 512000 in number to be exact. I have also heard about this fact in some texts as well.

Is this stated in the pali canon? What are the sutras?

I would check out the (dubious) Digha Nikaya, particularly the Mahāpadāna Sutta.

  It is now ninety-one aeons ago, brethren, since Vipassī, the Exalted One, Arahant, Buddha Supreme, arose in the world. It is now thirty-one
  aeons ago, brethren, since Sikhi, the Exalted One, Arahant, Buddha
  Supreme, arose in the world. It was in that same thirty-first aeon,
  brethren, that Vessabhu, the Exalted One, Arahant, Buddha Supreme,
  arose in the world. It was in this present auspicious aeon, brethren,
  that Kakusandha, the Exalted One, Arahant, Buddha Supreme, arose in
  the world. It was in this auspicious aeon, brethren, that Koṇāgamana,
  the Exalted One, Arahant, Buddha Supreme, arose in the world. It was
  in this auspicious aeon, brethren, that Kassapa, the Exalted One,
  Arahant, Buddha Supreme, arose in the world. It is in this auspicious
  aeon, brethren, that now I, an Arahant, Buddha Supreme, have arisen in
  the world.

MN 50 also contains a story.

  Venerable Mahāmoggallāna saw the Evil One stuck in the throat and said, I see you there too. You are stuck in the throat. In the past
  there was an Evil One named Dūsi. To me there was a sister named Kāli.
  You were her son. Then you were my nephew. It was at the time of the
  perfect rightfully enlightened Blessed One Kakusanda's time. To the
  perfect rightfully Enlightened One, Kakusanada, there were two chief
  disciples named Vidura and Sañjīva

(Disclaimer: Based on human & social evolution, I personally doubt there were any past Buddhas. For example, the Mahāpadāna Sutta appears state the very first Buddha had 6,800,000 or 68 lacs arahant disciples; the older the Buddha, the more arahant disciples they had, which seems to contradict historical evidence of human population. The above genre of suttas that number a handful among 1,000s of suttas, which also contradict SN 22.79 in talking about literal 'personal' past lives, I would speculate were later writings rather than words of the Buddha.)


Can loving kindness, compassion and sympathetic joy be developed through Vipassana meditation? As far as I understand, Vipassana meditation trains attention and equanimity. Which makes sense because you are basically doing body scans all the time and remaining equanimous to bodily sensations, whether they are pleasant or unpleasant. Cool. But ... how can you develop love, compassion and sympathetic joy by doing that? How can "watching equanimously your bodily sensations" make you a more loving and compassionate person? At best you should become a very neutral, equanimous, cold person with a very high level of awareness, but then how would you cultivate sympathetic joy, loving kindness, compassion? Does one need to complement vipassana with other techniques to develop those qualities?

Your concern is based on invalid definition of Vipassana/Vipashyana. "Watching equanimously your bodily sensations" is not what Buddha meant by insight meditation. Insight meditation is rigorous introspection of one's mental processes seeking answers to questions like:

What is it that we call "I" and how can it be identified exactly in our subjective experience? Who or what is the subject of experience that does the watching?
What are the limits to the extent that we can be said to have free-will and to have an identity?
How do the trains of thought work?
What exactly happens when the mind engages in relative judgement?
How does the mind create its notions of entities?
How is reality we perceive relate to the mind perceiving it?
How do emotions work and what do they depend on?
What are preconceptions and attachments and why they are problematic?
What are overgeneralization and reification and why are they problematic?
Why exactly do we feel unhappy?
How do psychosomatic experiences relate to our subconscious mind and to our emotions?
How is emotional energy drained and how is it generated?
What can we change in our behavior in light of all the factors above, in order to be stronger and happier?

Now, this is vipashyana - sitting and looking at one's mindstream in order to get answers to these questions.

Once you get some answers to most of the above - and with your new perspective you look back at the state of humanity -- you suddenly find yourself having the very same loving kindness, compassion, and sympathetic joy arising quite spontaneously ;)


What do you regard as noteworthy differences in the popular pali to english translations? What do you regard as noteworthy differences in the popular pali to english translations of the Sutta?

From Dhp 282 translated by Ven. Buddharakkhita:

Wisdom springs from meditation; without meditation wisdom wanes. Having known these two paths of progress and decline, let a man so
conduct himself that his wisdom may increase.

The same was translated by Ven. Thanissaro here:

From striving comes wisdom;
from not, wisdom's end.
Knowing these two courses
— to development,
decline —
conduct yourself
so that wisdom will grow.

The word "meditation" in one translation is the same as "striving" in the other. The Pali word here is "yoga" as seen here, which also translates it as "meditation".

Ven. Thanissaro's translation of Dhp 277-278 translated "sankhara" as "fabrications" and "dukkha" as "stress".

When you see with discernment,
'All fabrications are inconstant' —
you grow disenchanted with stress.
This is the path
to purity.
When you see with discernment,
'All fabrications are stressful' —
you grow disenchanted with stress.
This is the path
to purity.

Ven. Buddharakkhita's translation of Dhp 277-278 translated "sankhara" as "conditioned things" and "dukkha" as "unsatisfactory". I feel this is more accurate.

"All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
purification.

"All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
purification.

In MN 49, there was a "consciousness without surface" or "consciousness that is invisible, infinite, radiant all round" (viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ) that some people imagined to be a permanent consciousness of sorts, which turned out to be a mistranslation, according to the answers of this question. The sutta was talking about Nibbana. I've also explained this in detail in this answer.
Ven. Sujato translated part of MN 49 as:

Consciousness that is invisible, infinite, radiant all round—that’s
what is not within the scope of experience based on earth, water,
fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the gods of streaming
radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of abundant fruit, the
Overlord, and the all.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ, ...

It should rather be:

That which could be known or cognizable (i.e. Nibbana), is invisible, infinite, radiant
all round—that’s what is not within the scope of experience based on
earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the
gods of streaming radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of
abundant fruit, the Overlord, and the all.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ, ...

Ven. Sujato translated "jāti" in SN 56.11 as "rebirth".

Now this is the noble truth of suffering. Rebirth is suffering; old
age is suffering; illness is suffering; death is suffering;
association with the disliked is suffering; separation from the liked
is suffering; not getting what you wish for is suffering. In brief,
the five grasping aggregates are suffering.

In SN 56.11, Ven. Bodhi translated "jāti" as "birth". This is quoted below. Ven. Thanissaro also translated it here as "birth".

“Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is
suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is
suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation
from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is
suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are
suffering.


Disguised negative emotions and the mindless brawl called an election With the election and all the hyperbole on both sides in the US,  I've never seen emotions running this high.. ever.. and I've been though elections since the 1950s.  Like just about everyone in the US I've gotten sucked into this incredibly unmindful sickness and it definitely has had an negative impact on my practice in the last month - I own this.

I had been trying to practice loving kindness with both candidates and felt like it was working, but realized that there is a slightly more subtle emotion than raw hate that metta practice addresses, but not head on and I was sucked in.  So I wanted to comment on it - both because I suspect it may be tripping up others and see in general if anyone thinks it worth commenting on and has any advise.

It concerns this word, and its effect on one's practice:

  scha·den·freu·de
  ˈSHädənˌfroidə/

  noun: Schadenfreude; noun: schadenfreude

  pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.

Though I'd felt like I wished them both happiness, health, and to be free of suffering and its causes - and convinced I sincerely felt it.   I had discovered with some introspection a huge amount of glee felt when the candidate(s) not of my choice had some significant misfortune. It may sound obvious to many, but it wasn't to me.. Somehow it seemed rather innocuous to laugh when something bad happened to them and it didn't come to the forefront of my awareness like naked hatred - though it really is in a thin disguise.

I realize just how much work I need, and that there is still a lot of media I now avoid. I would appreciate any constructive advice.

Be Well!

yetanotherguy

Yes friend ...I think what you are referring to is media pollution or media puppetry ...as well as unresolved issues in your practice . the exertion if will power sometimes is not enough power to overcome ingrained emotional intelligence ie, hatred, anger ,fear all three if these go way back to when we were all in caves wondering how we would get the next  meal!! So Buddhism is unique as it allows the practitioner at any level to go further I.nquire a little more and learn through observing our own efforts and inner mind so that we can effect positive change.
Lastly staying away from powerful stimulus like media biast TV is not so bad after all for some its only a distraction from the real picture ...I wish you well..


How can I remedy the erratic energy-power that arises from vipassana aka cessation-contemplation meditation so I can feel more in-control? I notice that when I don't meditate it is easier to ignore things (e.g. other people, situations) and focus on my own thing--even though I might not be as concentrated. This is of course not the right way to live--like a zombie.

On the other hand though, when I meditate well--really well, noticing my thoughts and being very present... I notice that afterwards I have lots of energy. I become highly productive and get things, powered by Truth and unconditional joy, happiness and acceptance.

In social situations I don't know if this is very beneficial--I can act quickly and I feel like some people might perceive me as very smart but erratic. Maybe it is because of my lack of social finesse but when I am talking with a woman I might be a little erratic, unusually detached, and just have some abnormal responses. I also tend to be impatient and don't care to develop a relationship with a woman as "normal" people would, asking her questions about her family, etc. I'd rather talk about the world, analyze her peronality, and do brain-y but unattractive, boring things which actually drains energy.

A part of me thinks this is a problem but the bodhisattva part of me says, who cares just keep practicing even whilst sharing conversation with others because I am definitely causing no harm and oftentimes sharing things with people they are happy for later...

How can I remedy the erratic energy-power that arises from vipassana aka cessation-contemplation meditation so I can feel more in-control? Especially in social situations.

I am not sure it is a problem at all actually because I certainly do no harm to others and I am definitely more productive in the rest of my life.

You do not specify what sort of meditation you practice (saying vipassana or cessation-contemplation doesn't tell much), but Buddhist meditation shouldn't be a direct cause for "erratic energy-power". It should lead to an overall more balanced, tranquil state of mind that is energetic, but not excessively so.
What is more likely is that your meditation has brought up or accentuated qualities of your own mind that lay dormant, and you are now being forced to deal with them. This is common, and these qualities should, in the case of vipassana meditation become objects of meditation themselves.
In no case should one try to "remedy" phenomena in vipassana meditation - the object is to see things as they are, not change them.
The same goes for gaining a sense of control; this is in direct contravention of the concept of anatta, so it should not be aspired to. One should rather aspire to discard the need for control in favour of clear vision; it is through clear vision that one comes to navigate life's difficulties, not through forced change.

“sabbe dhammā anattā”ti, yadā paññāya passati.
atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiyā.
"All dhammas are non-self" - when one sees this with wisdom,
and thence becomes diinterested in suffering, this is the path to purification.
-- Dhp. 279

It is probably true that a successful meditator becomes less successful in certain social situations, e.g. picking up dates or entertaining friends, but this is more because of the unwholesome expectations of the other parties involved than a fault of the meditator who will still be friendly, cordial, and kind.


GAUTAM -Buddha(BUDDHADEV) and The capability of having several lives for an ordinary man or hallucination? A friend of mine said GAUTAM-Buddha(BUDDHADEV) passed through several lives(Births and Rebirths)and finally he attained NIRVANA.In present day context do the experience s feel like walking on an Astro-turf or living in mothers womb.This is my personal experience which should not be considered BLASPHEMY.I divulged my experience to my friend.So he advised me to search books.After death is such an experience possible?

the path to Nirvana is very simple logic. Here's what I learned from my teacher:

You should divide everything you do (including every word and even every thought) in two groups: whether you're doing it to feed your ego or whether it's actually useful. You have to be very precise. Very precise, with every single word and every single thought you should know why you're doing this. If it's for defending the ego or indulging in pleasure, you should not do it like that, should not think like that or say that. If you're doing it because you think it's actually useful, then you should do it.

  Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still only an unenlightened Bodhisatta, it occurred to me: ‘Suppose that I divide my thoughts into two classes. Then I set on one side thoughts of sensual desire, thoughts of ill will, and thoughts of cruelty, and I set on the other side thoughts of renunciation, thoughts of non-ill will, and thoughts of non-cruelty. MN 19

Then, when you live like this for several years, your mind will be pure and you will be able to see the path to Nirvana by yourself.

  To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind — this is the teaching of the Buddhas. The Dhammapada 14.183

My teacher said, this world is a magical place where everything is possible, as long as you're free in your mind - and now I know he was right.

So, divide your thoughts like that, and learn to be very very precise with that - and you will see for yourself. This is better than me telling you "Yes, All of that is real". Hope this helps.


How is body language linked with meditation success? Body language (smiling) seems to be linked to meditation success as per Bhante Vimalaramsi:

smiling is an important aspect for the meditation. Learning to smile with mind and raising slightly the corners of the mouth helps mind to be observant, alert and agile.
Source

What are the mechanics behind this or how it works?

In addition these talks through not related to make suggestion that there is a link between body language, smiling and our well being:

Your body language shapes who you are
The hidden power of smiling

Thich Nhat Hahn is the only one I have read who attributes a significance to smiling. It may have to do with the challenging times he has had to endure.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marianne-schnall/beliefs-buddhism-exclusiv_b_577541.html

The interview with him contains much of his practice, but here is an excerpt about smiling

  We humans have lost the wisdom of genuinely resting and relaxing. We
  worry too much. We don't allow our bodies to heal, and we don't allow
  our minds and hearts to heal. Meditation can help us embrace our
  worries, our fear, our anger; and that is very healing. We let our own
  natural capacity of healing do the work.

  Total relaxation is the secret to enjoying sitting meditation. I sit
  with my spine upright, but not rigid; and I relax all the muscles in
  my body. Breathing in, I bring my attention to one part of my body;
  breathing out, I smile with gratitude and love to that part of my
  body. For example, I breathe in and I bring my attention to my face.
  On my face there are about 300 muscles, and whenever I get worried,
  angry or sad, these 300 muscles harden, and anyone who looks at me can
  see that I'm tense. But if while breathing in I can be aware of my
  face, and breathing out I can smile to my face, then that tension
  immediately dissipates. It's almost like a miracle. In just a few
  breaths we can feel peace, happiness, and relaxation on our face. Our
  face becomes light, fresh, like the kind of flower it was before.
  Every face is a flower.

  After breathing three or four times with "breathing in I am aware of
  my face; breathing out I smile to my face," then I can breathe in and
  bring my awareness to the muscles in my shoulders, because our
  shoulder muscles are often tense. As I breathe out, I relax and smile
  with my shoulders. Gradually we can move through the whole body, so
  after just a few minutes we can already normalize our body so it feels
  light and relaxed.

  This is something everyone can do in the first minutes of sitting, and
  not only when we are in the meditation hall. Wherever we sit, we can
  sit beautifully, just like we are doing sitting meditation, and we
  will feel stability and freedom. Sitting down to eat or do paperwork,
  we sit upright and relaxed. Let us sit like the Buddha.


Do modern-day Buddhists take "Mara The Evil One" literally? I find that a good number of believing Christians and Muslims think that Satan literally exists and is a very real actor in the real world.

Is "Mara the Evil One, the Tempter" a rhetoric device in Buddhist tales -- a personification to enable the construction of a certain kind of parable?

Or is "Mara" understood by contemporary Buddhists as an evil being who actually exists in the physical plane that we inhabit?

Of course, I can't speak for all modern-day Buddhists, but for myself, those that I have learned from, and those that I have known, we believe that Mara is the metaphorical personification of the forces that oppose enlightenment. I've not met any Buddhist who believes that Mara is a literal personal being.


Translation of Parayana - definition Is it correct to translate 'parayana' as 'the other shore'? Or is there another and better synonym ?

A recurrent image in [Pali Canon] is of life as a raging flood — a flood of birth, aging, and death; sorrow and lamentation; stress and suffering. The purpose of spiritual practice is to find a way across the flood to the safety of the far shore [parayana].

However:

  Parāyana, (Parāyaṇa) (nt.) (fr. parā+i, cp. Vedic parāyaṇa highest instance, also BSk. parāyaṇa e.g. Divy 57, 327) 1. (n.) final end, i.e. support, rest, relief S. I, 38; A. I, 155, 156 (tāṇa lena dīpa etc.); J. V, 501=VI, 375 (dīpañ ca p.).—2. (adj.—°) (a) going through to, ending in, aiming at, given to, attached to, having one’s end or goal in; also: finding one’s support in (as daṇḍa° leaning on a stick M. I, 88; A. I, 138), in foll. phrases prevalent: Amata° S. V, 217 sq.; tama° Pug. 51; Nibbāna° S. IV, 373; V, 218; brahmacariya° S. I, 234; Maccu° S. V, 217; sambodhi° D. I, 156; II, 155; Pug. 16. Cp. also Sn. 1114 (tap°=tad°, see Nd2 411); Miln. 148 (ekantasoka°); DhA. I, 28 (rodana, i.e. constantly weeping). ‹-› (b) destined to, having one’s next birth in. , e.g. Avīci° J. III, 454; IV, 159; duggati° PvA. 32; devaloka° J. I, 218; brahmaloka° J. III, 396; Miln. 234; sagga° J. VI, 329; PvA. 42, 160; sugati° PvA. 89 similarly nīlamañca° Pv. II, 25. See also pārāyana.

  Pārāyana, (nt.) (late Sk. pārāyaṇa, the metric form of parāyana) the highest (farthest) point, final aim, chief object, ideal; title of the last Vagga of the Sutta Nipāta A. III, 401; Sn. 1130; Nd2 438; SnA 163, 370, 604. >
  parāyaṇa : (nt.) support; rest; relief; the final end (in cpds.) aiming at; ending in; destined to; finding one's support in.

  pārāyana : (nt.) final aim; chief object.

It seems to me parayana has a connotation of "the ultimate". I guess you could also call it "completion".


Is there a way to "reset" all karmic conditions with immediate effect? It is my basic understanding that certain actions such as killing one's parents or harming the Buddha has immediate karmic reactions. Are there actions that have immediate "wholesome" outcomes or ones that allow you to start with a clean slate?

There is a very famous simile in the Lonaphala Sutta: The Salt Crystal. An excerpt:

"There is the case where a trifling evil deed done by a certain individual takes him to hell. There is the case where the very same sort of trifling deed done by another individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.

The Buddha gives a simile of dropping a salt crystal into a cup and asking if the water was fit to drink and, of course, the answer is no. It would be too salty due to the small amount of water in the cup. The Buddha then asks if a salt crystal were to be dropped into the  Ganges River if it would be fit to drink and, or course, the answer is yes because of the large amount of water in the river.
So the same action does not necessarily lead to the same effect nor to the same length of time for the ripening of the effect. The Buddha then gave some very helpful details of what type of people may experience lessor effects of their bad karma.

Now, a trifling evil act done by what sort of individual takes him to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped in the body, 2 undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind [i.e., painful feelings can invade the mind and stay there], undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling with suffering.   A trifling evil act done by this sort of individual takes him to hell.
'Now, a trifling evil act done by what sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is developed in the body,[3] developed in virtue, developed in mind [i.e., painful feelings cannot invade the mind and stay there], developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted, dwelling with the immeasurable. A trifling evil act done by this sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.

So while there may not be an immediate reset button to avoid the effects of past karmic actions, there is the idea of performing wholesome actions now and building merit to dilute "the salt" of past bad deeds and to become the type of person who experiences lessor effects of bad karma. Some people concentrate on building merit by giving offerings (dana), by practicing virtue (sila), and by practicing meditation (bhavana) in this effort.


Doubts about Karma and/or Rebirth I have been a staunch follower of the Buddha's words for the past 1.5 years. I do believe in the Buddha in so far as the Denial of God, Creationism, Destiny is concerned but considering the events in my life and what I see around, I am now absolutely sure that there is no Karma nor Rebirth.

In my own life experience, I was married about an year back, arranged by my family according to the traditions. Obviously I did not know the Girl before marriage nor had any sexual relations with her. It so followed that after marriage following a few days of sex with me she went ahead and had sex with her boyfriend (her friend close to her before marriage).

What followed was - She obviously found him to be more suitable for her sexual desires and immediately after that she started mentally irritating me and abuse followed. She did other stuff (like creating fissures in family) and ultimately left me after a few months. Now she is extremely happy and posting happy messages and photos in social networking and abusing me happily. The marriage laws in my country are pro female and I cannot do absolutely anything.

But the fact of the matter is that she is extremely happy (both sexually and otherwise) while I feel cheated and wronged.

Further I do see in my country in India due to a hierarchical Caste system, extremely poor people made to clean others toilets etc and pick trash due to their birth. I just spoke to an old man (about 65 years old) who told me (while crying) that he has been doing this job (cleaning toilets and picking trash) for 45 years and he is not allowed to do any other work except this and there is nobody to help him because the traditions in the country are like that.

I would like to ask you for those who believe in Karma: Where is Karma acting?

The failure of your marriage could be due to a past bad Kamma you have done. But it is also a result of you giving the chance for that past bad kamma to come into fruition. There are 4 factors affecting the results of past Kamma. Payoga Sampatti is one of them. It means skillfulness, diligence and intelligence. You can use this to avoid the results of certain past bad Kamma.
You probably could have avoided such a heartbreak had you at least got to know her as a friend for about an year and studied her character. Even in proposals, you can do that, after both families agree. You didn't have to marry her immediately.

You should stop focusing on the girl who left and use your Payoga Sampatti to do a better job in the future when selecting partners. Focusing on her will likely create hatred in your mind and make your situation worse. If she has done wrong, she will suffer for it in the future. But your situation will not improve whether she suffers or not. She could be enjoying life now because of her past good Kamma, her own Payoga Sampatti and Upadi(good looks) Sampatti.

In case of the old man, one is born into a low caste because of the following reasons:

  There is the case where a woman or man is obstinate & arrogant. He/she
  does not pay homage to those who deserve homage, rise up for those for
  whom one should rise up, give a seat to those to whom one should give
  a seat, make way for those for whom one should make way, worship those
  who should be worshipped, respect those who should be respected,
  revere those who should be revered, or honor those who should be
  honored. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the
  break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in the plane of
  deprivation... If instead he/she comes to the human state, then he/she
  is low-born wherever reborn. This is the way leading to a low birth:
  to be obstinate & arrogant, not to pay homage to those who deserve
  homage, nor rise up for... nor give a seat to... nor make way for...
  nor worship... nor respect... nor revere... nor honor those who should
  be honored. -Cula Kammavibhanga Sutta


Is Dhamma-thinking considered wise attention? According to AN 5.73 (translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu):

  "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard
  & studied it and thinks about it, evaluates it, and examines it with
  his intellect. He spends the day in Dhamma-thinking. He neglects
  seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of
  awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on thinking, not one who
  dwells in the Dhamma.

Another translation of AN 5.73 by Bhikkhu Sujato:

  Furthermore, a mendicant thinks about and considers the teaching in
  their heart, examining it with the mind as they learned and memorized
  it. They spend their days thinking about that teaching. But they
  neglect retreat, and are not committed to internal serenity of heart.
  That mendicant is called one who thinks a lot, not one who lives by
  the teaching.

Is Dhamma-thinking considered yoniso manasikara or wise attention or appropriate attention? Please explain your answer.

If yes, then why is it not useful, without internal tranquility of awareness (cetosamatham)?

If no, then what is needed to upgrade Dhamma-thinking to wise attention? What is it missing?

Yes, if that Dhamma-Thinking is arising continuously without five strings, without five hindrances, and with understanding the real reality, more than trillion times in a second, with it's real relation.
However, most people are thinking of Dhamma with five hindrances in between because they have not enough concentration meditation power, so their mind can't meditate to the end, Nibbāna.


Which are the Buddhist vows? Could you please explain the traditional vows in Buddhism?

I would like to know which are and their qualities according to Lord Buddha.

I'm not sure.

In Theravada there are "precepts" (for laypeople) and "monastic rules" (for monks) but I'm not sure they're called "vows".
In this description of Theravada ordination (also here), the precepts are phrased as "I undertake to" which could be called a "vow", for example,

Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
(I undertake to abstain from harming or taking life).

So far as I have read, one requests ordination and the rules are recited. This might be described (in English) as "taking monastic vows", and a vow (to obey the rules) might be implicit in the ordination, but I don't see such a "vow" being spoken explicitly.

The term "vow" seems to be used more in Mahayana, for example:

Monastic vows (quoting from Ordination in the Tibetan Buddhist Tradition),

His Holiness the Dalai Lama feels that it is important to know that nuns and monks ordained in the Tibetan tradition follow the vows set forth in the Mulasarvastivadin school of monastic codes. The gelong/gelongma (bhikshu/bhikshuni--the fully ordained monk/nun) level are recorded in the Mulasarvastivadin school's Individual Liberation Sutras. Interspersed throughout their Tibetan translation is an easy to remember set of chantable verses summarising the gelong or gelongma vows. These versified mnemonics are known as the "Interleaved Summaries of the Vinaya Discours".

Vajrayana vows (quoting from Samaya),

The samaya (Tibetan: དམ་ཚིག, Wylie: dam tshig, Japanese and Chinese: 三昧耶戒, sanmaya-kai, Sānmóyéjiè), is a set of vows or precepts given to initiates of an esoteric Vajrayana Buddhist order as part of the abhiṣeka (empowerment or initiation) ceremony that creates a bond between the guru and disciple.

The Bodhisattva vow,

The Bodhisattva vow is the vow taken by Mahayana Buddhists to attain complete enlightenment for the sake of all sentient beings. One who has taken the vow is nominally known as a Bodhisattva. Whereas the Prātimokṣa vows cease at death, the Bodhisattva vow extends into future lives.


Life of Buddha, to be taken seriously? I've been studying Buddhism for the past few months and part of it entails reading about Siddartha's life story, including his path to enlightenment.

What's been confusing to me is whether or not one is to believe all of the "magic" that is described in his past - things like his birth and walking, leaving behind him roses in his path (a newborn baby walking?); or later when he doesn't eat for incredibly long periods; when he creates a golden bridge in the sky and walks it to prove his enlightenment (week 3 after enlightenment);when a king cobra wraps itself around him to keep him warm (6th week after enlightenment)?

All of these things seem very unrealistic, akin to stories about Jesus in the christian bible. My struggle is that, as far as I'm understanding and what has truly drawn to Buddhism, this religion is supposed to be based on logic.... these events do not strike me as "logical", i.e., they defy our understanding of science and the material world.

Are these stories, therefore, meant to be understood as metaphors, or are they believed as fact?

Thanks for any thoughts on this!

Kevin

the Buddha taught that there is unsatisfactoriness in this world and the way out of it which is more systemised as the 4 Noble Truths.

If these stories help you understand unsatisfactoriness and help you come out of it or inspire you in any way to practice and strengthen your faith, by all means use them. If not leave them aside without outright rejection and concentrate on what appeals to you.

What is most important is you follow the Noble 8 Fold Path divided into the 3 Fold Training which results in understanding the 4 Noble Truths.


Sila before samatha, samatha before vipassana according to AN 11.1-3? In discourses given to monks in AN11.1, AN11.2 and AN11.3, the Buddha gave very similar messages on the purpose and benefit of virtue (sila) and how it leads to knowledge and vision of release.

I quote the Thanissaro translation of AN11.1:

  “Thus in this way, Ananda, skillful virtues (sīlā) have freedom from
  remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward.
  Freedom from remorse (avippaṭisāro) has joy as its purpose, joy as its
  reward. Joy (pāmojjaṃ) has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its
  reward. Rapture (pīti) has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its
  reward. Serenity (passaddhi) has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as
  its reward. Pleasure (sukhaṃ) has concentration as its purpose,
  concentration as its reward. Concentration (samādhi) has knowledge &
  vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge &
  vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge &
  vision of things as they actually are (yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ) has
  disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward.
  Disenchantment (nibbidā) has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as
  its reward. Dispassion (virāgo) has knowledge & vision of release as
  its purpose, knowledge & vision of release (vimuttiñāṇadassana) as its
  reward.

According to the Yuganaddha Sutta (AN4.170) spoken by Ananda, insight can be developed before concentration, or concentration can be developed before insight, or both can be developed in tandem.

However, in the AN11.1-3 suttas spoken by the Buddha, the chain of causes starts with virtues (sila), and passes through rapture (piti), pleasure (sukham), concentration (samadhi), then goes to "knowledge and vision of things as they actually are" (yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ).

To my understanding, "knowledge and vision of things as they actually are" is the goal of vipassana (insight), right?

So, I take it that AN 11.1-3 implies the following sequence:

Every person (monk or lay person) should start with the cultivation of virtues (sila) - the starting point for virtue according to other suttas is the five precepts
Virtues (sila) eventually leads one to rapture (sila), pleasure (sukham) and concentration (samadhi), which is the goal of samatha (tranquility) meditation.
Samatha (tranquility) meditation then leads on to vipassana (insight) meditation
Vipassana (insight) meditation results in the "knowledge and vision of things as they actually are"

So, is my interpretation correct that the correct sequential order of practice is first sila, followed by samatha, followed by vipassana?

On the other hand, MN 149 does say:

  Thus for him, having thus developed the noble eightfold path, the four
  frames of reference go to the culmination of their development. The
  four right exertions... the four bases of power... the five
  faculties... the five strengths... the seven factors for Awakening go
  to the culmination of their development. [And] for him these two
  qualities occur in tandem: tranquility & insight.

So, which is the right interpretation?

The one in AN 4.170 stating that insight before tranquility or
tranquility before insight or tranquility in tandem with insight, are
all good.
The one in MN 149 stating that tranquility and insight happens in tandem
The one in AN 11.1-3 stating clearly that virtues should come before tranquility, and tranquility should come before insight?

As I explained in "Is samatha meditation more suited to lay people than vipassana?", the factors of "being good", "feeling good", "calming down", "understanding", and "liberation" are designed to support each other.

In Mahayana, it is generally understood that the exact path depends on the student's propensity.

People of intellectual type are better suited for "understanding"-first paths.

Simple people caught up in the drama of life, are better suited for "calming down"-first paths.

For most people in between these theoretical extremes, there is a mixture of "understanding" and "calming down" developed in tandem, with slightly more accent on one or the other, depending on exact situation.

For people of extremely brilliant intuition, there's the fourth path of cutting through directly to suchness. Again in real life these "extremely bright" students do not exist. There is usually some combination of study and practice required to remove all doubts.

The general principle here is that the coarsest / biggest / most obvious obstacles should be removed first. I think it was Thrangu Rinpoche who went as far as to say that we should work on them one at a time, completely focusing on the worst mental/emotional/behavioral issue until it's resolved, before moving on to next.


Is it dangerous to focus on ticks from childhood during meditation? At the panditarama vipassana retreat they ask us to focus and observe on the object that pops up our attention, such as a pain or thought.
I started having ticks that I had on my childhood, such as closing and opening my right eye intermittently very fast. The tick does not stop if I observe it, and it does stop if I focus on something else, such as the rise and falling of the abdomen.

Is it dangerous to continue focusing on the tick? Will it then appear in my life when not practicing meditation?

Acknowledge the tick only a few times as it appears, but then acknowledge what else appears, your mind reacts to it somehow -- fear, anxiety, memories, analyses etc. And go back to the anchor (step or breath). This way the tick will lead you to the stuff underneath; if you stay focused on the tick, you are practicing concentration and will miss that reaction. Mindfulness consists in both the ability to acknowledge what is there right now (not what was there two seconds ago) and also the ability to let it go quickly (back to the anchor).

It is normal that things don't disappear when you acknowledge them. Do you expect to start levitating when you acknowledge sitting?

It is likewise normal that childhood stuff appears in meditation (be it really from childhood, or only believed to be, that does not matter), and such symptoms might get worse temporarily; acknowledge worries about it (you seem to be worried about it being dangerous) and keep practicing, that's the way to clear it out, and the truth will show itself.

Usually (no guarantee; speaking of my experience) these things disappear as meditation wears off in daily life (e.g. feelings of craziness, extraordinary/painful sensitivity, physical symptoms etc).

Good luck!

(P.S.: since you are in Panditarama, won't the teachers give you an instruction when you ask them?)


Do the words Sacred, Divine and Spiritual have any context in Buddhism? Edit: *In our lay following of the path of Dhamma we need an external object of veneration and an external connotation to actions, which gives it a positive meaning, to help us stick to the actions.
Going beyond simple logic, to do good karma and follow the Samma or right way we need something supra-mundane to transcend the mundane as a clear reason to act in that direction.

Such examples can be, experiencing the Sacredness in the Idol of Buddha at an altar in your house.

Having a mental image of the Buddha as a Divine being rather than just another human having achieved Nibbana through life times of practices

Thinking your path as something supra-mundane which is Spiritual in meaning of it...that something having to do with spirit(non-material aggregate).

This gives added meaning to your existance thereby adding flavour to otherwise dry following to the prescribed discipline in its entierity.*

I undersatnd that Sacred is something religious, but as form is emptiness,

Can we call Buddha's statue as Sacred?

Buddha is not the body and body is not to be identified with, if by divine we mean Godly: transcending the  experience of mundane reality....same flower different experience.

Buddha in His body, can we call Him Divine?

As opposed to mundane life of chasing women, money and fame...defining spiritual life as holy life towards Nibbana...knowing that there is no spirit to be found...

Can we call the path of Dhamma as Spiritual path?

OR

Will these terms create mis- understanding about Dhamma?

I don't think we are (nor should we be) looking at sacredness of the idol but rather Buddha's emanation and nature in our own mind. We can find a Buddha in ourselves. That is at least true in context of Mahayana and Vajrayana (emulating Buddha's mind or Deity's mind). In Pure Land however, this gets very Idol-based so sacredness is stressed, on the other hand it's Amidaba Buddha, not Shakyamuni. Zen has tendencies to do the opposite, the story of "cutting off Buddha's head" or famous "kill the Buddha" koan are some examples of desacralisation. With Theravada I do not know but I have seen Thai Theravadins in a temple taking Buddha's sacredness as an idol quite literally, praying and chanting to statue as if to the divine being - at least that was my impression.

Personally, I gravitate towards seeing Buddha as an object of my true self using a specific practise (like certain Sadhana), thus I completely negate sacredness, divinity and refrain from idolising the Buddha in any way. I consider such divine elevation a hinderance and obscuration to be removed in order to realise Selflessness of things and achieve meaningful progress on the path.

Everyone is divine and therefore no one is divine - everyone is the Buddha, we just have to see this capacity.


How can we know what is mundane? How can we know what is mundane? Mundane life contains many components that superficially overlap with the Buddhist path:

religious belief
unusual experiences
changes to character
epiphanies
etc.

Aside from taking a poll of monks or devout Buddhists, is there a means to test whether we have made any progress?

Unless you are, at least, a Sotapanna, everything you experience is mundane.


Rules for creating thangkas? In this article the author discusses the problems of the commercialization of creating thangkas. Nowadays thangkas are created quickly and sold to tourists in shops in the streets of Lhasa.

I was wondering, what exactly makes a Tibetan Buddhist painting a genuine thangka? I know that traditionally thangkas are made according to a ritualistic process and have to follow strict iconography rules. But what exactly is this process? And where can I find information about these rules?

In the article the author gives an example of a iconography rule that apparently is formalized somewhere:

  Buddhist texts dictate that the Ghanta is at the left hip and the Dorje in the right hand.

I know there are books available on this (e.g. this one). However, I'm not sure if the information in there is correct and complete. I'd prefer more original sources (translated scriptures) if that's possible.

It should be highlighted that there are two different aspects of thangka painting - iconography and methods. The book mentioned in the question describes the methods only and such knowledge should not be considered as a part of some Buddhist teachings. Iconography, however, is an important aspect of Tibetan Buddhism used in thankgas, statues and visualisation practices.

It is not straightforward to get access to texts describing the details of a given Buddha form. Tibetan Buddhism is based on a direct (usually oral) transmission and some texts are allowed to be used only after the authorization from the teacher. For example, I did receive the authorization to practise the meditation on Vajrasattva and I totally agree that the Dorje should be in the right hand of the deity. (Admittedly, this very detail can easily be checked on Google images by typing in 'Vajrasattva' or 'Dorje Sempa'.)

Iconography of Yidams (Buddha forms) is very strict and systematic. Every detail of a form has a meaning and thus if one wants to use the thankga (or a statue) for practise purposes, it has to be painted correctly. In practice it means that the artist should have a proper training - possibly a direct transmission from another artist and/or meditation master. I've also heard that the best if the artist is meditating on the Buddha form while he is painting it.

I know some people who are buying thangkas and statues in Nepal to be later distributed in European Buddhist centres. They said that they never buy ready-made thangkas as most probably they are made for the tourist market that is for the customers that use them as a decoration rather than for a proper Yidam practice. The most reliable way of obtaining a genuine thangka is to find a renowned artist and commission a specific thangka from him. Then one can be sure that it will be done with all the due care as the artist knows that he can spend days or weeks on one painting because he will be paid for his hard work immediately. Afterwards the thankga should be checked by some master who has a transmission on that Buddha form to confirm whether it indeed has been done correctly. One may wonder why it is such a hassle. Well, either one wants to have a nice decoration on the wall or one wants to practise on Yidams. There is nothing wrong with having some Buddha picture on the wall if one finds it inspiring and calm-giving. If the thangka lacks some details, no harm is actually done. If one wants to practise on Yidam, however, the Yidam itself has to be painted with all the fine details. But then it presumably means that one obtained some authorization and explanations from the teacher who is also able to check the quality of the thangka.


Is all property communal for the monks? The bowl, the robes, the lodgings, the medicines - are these private property, or shared within a Sangha of monks?

I was a monk for ten years. To answer your question, the answer is no, they are not communal property.


How much is the minimal time for practicing Vipassana in daily life for achieving better mindfulness? How much is the minimal time for practicing Vipassana in daily life for achieving better mindfulness? Is 30 minutes enough?

I ask this question because I currently have some trouble being mindful, and (I think) it has become the source of many problems. If 30 minutes is not enough, perhaps you can give some suggestion based on your experience or the suttas.

Geez, ya'll are crazy. 30 minutes?
I'd say WORK up to that maybe after a few months of practice but in the beginning it is best to LIKE MEDITATION and do PRACTICE PROPERLY rather than just loiter around and try to sit tight for 30 minutes thinking about Jane and Bob.

I have had 3-5 minute sessions where you would NOT believe how much baggage I dropped and how refreshed and happy I felt.
And then I've had 30 minute sessions where I came out worse than I went in, because I was obsessing over thoughts instead of taking time to write them out and therapatize myself.

Meditation is NOT the time to therapatize oneself, so make sure not to get stuck in that habit!
If you have 30 minutes, use 20 minutes to understand how to meditate and journal and get rid of your baggage and then 10 minutes to meditate perfectly, dropping all things away and just being mindful of your object (breath, thoughts, or whatever else) the entire time as cohesively as possible. Repeat until you can do that 10 minutes. You will feel an enjoyable buzz and a helpless smile and lightness if you practice correctly.

At my current stage, every session (morning, pre-lunch, evening) I have doing 3 20-minute meditations, each with a different meditation object that I have chosen. I have a 1-5 minute break in between each object.

For beginners I would reccommend 5 to 10 minute sessions. When you ACTUALLY meditate that long... increase it by 5 minutes. When you LONG TO MEDITATE longer, increase. Do not force yourself to sit too long. You will idle.
Instead, put your energies into meditating properly and perfectly for a few minutes. This will increase your mindfulness, because you don't have as much time to fool around."

Nonetheless, don't let what I am saying stop you if you yearn for long periods of time! You will not attain samadhi unless you practice for HOURS at a time. So if you feel like you can actually pay attention that entire time... godspeed!
But above all else, do not scare yourself away from your gradual climb in meditation abilities by making meditation frustrating. Enjoy it and do not underestimate the Power of Less is More.

Let me leave you with this excerpt from a Buddhist book I am reading "Mind Experiment":

  "It is better to meditate often for a shorter time than for a long
  time but infrequently. To make real progress, meditation should become
  a vital part of one’s daily life. Meditation masters recommended to
  their students: “Do it with an aspiration so strong that it will be
  the cause of fulfilling your provisional and final aims. Meditate in
  this way during four sessions: predawn, morning, afternoon, and at
  nightfall. Furthermore, if at first you meditate for a long time, you
  will be readily susceptible to laxity and excitement. If this becomes
  your habit, it will then be difficult to correct your awareness.
  Meditate in many short sessions. If you end your session while still
  wanting to meditate, you will be eager to reenter each future
  session."


Computers and Buddhist monks, offering computer to monk makes bad karma to both monk and donor? Yes, in this information age, computer is like essential part in normal people life. But for monks, does it apply same way like that? Or computer can make harm than good to a monk?

Does a book is better than electronic book on computer (in term of donation and uses by monk)?

Typewriter (or more basic pen and book) is more distract-free than a computer?

In this cruel world of advertisement, it is almost impossible a monk can avoid some explicit content while browsing internet. And internet and computer can be a great deal of wasting precious time of a monk if improperly used. Monks are not allowed to use/manipulate money but money is required to use a computer (buying softwares/applications/electronic books etc). Piracy is another serious potential issue for a monk who uses computer (it could lead to end of monk's life if stealing is involved).

So is it better not to offer a computer to a monk or is there any chance that computer cannot make any harm to donor and monk both? If there are more harm than good, why do we need to care to offer a computer to a monk?

If you are a monk and using computer but you are almost free from the harms that I described above, please let me know how this can be achieved? Please include do and don't if possible. It is expected that practices are Vinaya-complied uses of computer.

In western monasteries isn't not uncommon for monks to use computers to teach the dhamma online or write books. However, a monk wont own the computer, you'll be giving the computer to the sangha.

You shouldn't have to worry about whether a pen or a computer is more of a distraction, the monk should be able to handle his own mind and distraction. If he knows that a computer is too distracting for himself then he will use a pen.

As for the Vinaya, you may want to search for terms "piracy" and "pornography" in Thannisaro Bhikkhu's book The Buddhist Monastic code I.

Piracy isn't against the vinaya but if a monk wanted to avoid piracy then unintentional stealing is not against the Vinaya. Accidentally seeing pornography isn't against the Vinaya but staring lustfully at a woman's parts (without intending on emitting semen) earns the lowest punishment- a dukhata.


In what way(s) does engaging in sexual activity affect meditation practice? Does sexual activity (masturbation and beyond) hinder vipassana meditation practice? If so, does anyone know through experience or references exactly how this activity affects the practice? For example, does it decrease one's ability to focus?

Sensual pleasure is one of the Five Hindrances which are like "canals dissipating the force [awareness/discernment strength] of a river current" as taught by the Buddha in AN 5.51:

"Sensual desire is an obstacle, a hindrance that overwhelms awareness and weakens discernment. Ill will... Sloth & drowsiness... Restlessness & anxiety... Uncertainty is an obstacle, a hindrance that overwhelms awareness and weakens discernment. These are the five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment. And when a monk has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, when he is without strength and weak in discernment: for him to understand what is for his own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible."
"Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a monk has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, when he is without strength and weak in discernment for him to understand what is for his own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible."


Who is really suffering in Hell and Enjoying in Heaven? When a person dies, s/he goes to heaven or hell based on present life karma and any past karmas. In Buddhism, if there is no soul, who is punished in hell and who enjoys in heaven? as there is no physical body to feel pain and pleasure. If that person has learnt the art of detachment, how can s/he suffer/enjoy in hell/heaven?
Does different realms really exists and do we travel through them?

From Milindapanha:

  -- “What is it, Nàgasena, that is reborn?”
  -- “Mind and matter (namarupa).”
  -- “Is it this very mind and matter that is reborn?”
  -- “No, it is not, but by this mind and matter deeds are done and because of those deeds another mind and matter is reborn; but that mind and matter is not thereby released from the results of its previous deeds.

Just like an adult "inherits" results of the choices made by the child - even though most of the original body cells are gone, similarly future existence "inherits" karma from the past existence.

  --“Can there be any rebirth where there is no transmigration?”
  --“Yes there can, just as a man can light one oil-lamp
  from another but nothing moves from one lamp to the
  other; or as a pupil can learn a verse by heart from a teacher
  but the verse does not transmigrate from teacher to pupil.”

It is information and causation that is reborn, or is re-embodied. Or, as Chogyam Trungpa said, it is our neuroses that are reborn.

as there is no physical body to feel pain and pleasure?

Oh yes, there is definitely a body every time. Information always needs some kind of media, it does not exist without media... But that media could be virtual as well -- after all, form is emptiness and emptiness is form. Depending on a particular realm it may not be a crude material body. Besides, pain and pleasure do not require a body. Did you never experience mental pleasure and mental pain?

If that person has learnt the art of detachment, how can s/he suffer/enjoy in hell/heaven?

If that person has learnt the art of detachment, why would he or she be reborn in heaven or hell?

Does different realms really exists and do we travel through them?

Of course they really exist, just not necessarily in a naive way below the ground or above the sky ;) Yes, we do travel through them. Even in this world some people live in hell - don't you agree?


Does Buddhism give methods to ask questions when you are proliferating? From What is the Buddhist view in Socratic questioning?, I get that it is important to ask questions to get out of sufferings. However, when we are getting stuck it is very difficult to realize that we are stuck. With concepts such as sunyata, nirvana, papanca, dharma, detachment, does Buddhism have any guideline to ask questions in such situation? Or is the answer simply "when you are aware that you are in papanca, then try to get to nirvana and the questions will come"?

With concepts such as sunyata, nirvana, papanca, dharma, detachment

I suppose you internalise or become familiar with these concepts, so they (i.e. the concepts, not the descriptions of the concepts) appear (in your mind) as an antidote and/or a diagnosis when that's appropriate.

Analogously a couple of other concepts (from the suttas), perhaps fundamental, is to recognise, "this is (arising of) 'stress' (and/or craving, attachment), and this is 'cessation' (thereof)".

does Buddhism have any guideline to ask questions in such situation?

I think Buddhism recommends very simple questions.

For example, MN 61 (taught to Rahula when he was young) -- "Is this good or bad?", or more specifically

  This [...] action [...] — would it lead to (is it leading to, did it lead to] self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be [is it, was it] an unskillful verbal action, with painful consequences, painful results?

This is a single, general-occasion or all-purpose question, suitable any time.

Another example of a question like that might be, Is That So? That's like asking, "Ok, so this is a "view", but am I sure it's true -- the only truth?"

There's Buddhist doctrine about "views" -- e.g. right view, wrong view, also cessation of views:

DN 34

  What four things should be given up? Four floods: sensuality, desire for rebirth, views, and ignorance.

(or more specifically "view-flood", possibly "flood of views")
AN 7.51

  Because of the cessation of views, monk, uncertainty doesn't arise in an instructed disciple of the noble ones over the undeclared issues

There are suttas (e.g. here) which seem to warn against taking views at all, and/or that "views" are one of the many things that a noble one is liberated from (I haven't found a good reference for this though, this might be an inaccurate paraphrase or out of context).

It warns that there are certain types of question that are inappropriate -- see A thicket of wrong views

I found this topic informative too -- How are 'conceit' and 'identity-view' not the same? -- helping to define what "a view" is or isn't.

Buddhism also (in my opinion) associates papanca with conceit, by saying they are both a cause (or are both the cause) of arguments (especially doctrinal or sectarian arguments) -- I suppose it's saying the motive is egocentric i.e., "I am right!", or, "My view is better!", and so on.

Or is the answer simply "when you are aware that you are in papanca, then try to get to nirvana and the questions will come"?

I was tempted to say, "That's not quite the answer: a better answer is ...", but I'd better not, isn't that so? :-)

"Trying to get to nirvana" is a dubious (i.e. possibly misleading) proposition -- on the one hand there is Right Effort, but on the other hand that might be the very definition of "craving".


Shambhawi mudra and Buddhism Do Buddhists use the Shambhawi mudra ?
What kind of tradition use it and for which purpose?
(if possible with some references)

This answer is only from the Theravada viewpoint. It's likely that you can find more diverse meditation techniques in Vajrayana.
Shambhavi Mudra is apparently an eyebrow center gazing gesture.
This source states:

Shambhavi Mudra is an eye-crossing technique which is used as a hack
to activate the parasympathetic nervous system—which is cognate with
the medulla oblongata and the ajna chakra (or the so-called third
eye). A sign that the mudra is being practiced properly is the result
of having pressure build in the sinus cavities.

While there is no Shambhavi Mudra in Theravada Buddhism, the closest thing to it is parimukham. Please read this answer for a detailed analysis on the term parimukham, with respect to the mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati) meditation, in the Pali suttas.
This is often translated as concentrating on the sensation of the breath at the tip  of the nose in the mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati) meditation. That does not refer to the tip of the nose at the eyebrow center, but rather, it refers to the nostrils and area around the nose and mouth where the sensation of the breath can be felt.
But the sensation of the breath can also be felt at the diaphragm and abdomen. Please also see this answer.
The concept of chakras, and stimulating the nervous and endocrinal system is also not found in Theravada Buddhism.
On another note, there is however, something similar to Kechari Mudra in Buddhism, in this question. But again, the purpose is different. It's not to stimulate the nervous and endocrinal system.
The purpose of Buddhist meditation is to still the mind and use it to observe the processes of the mind and the mind-body connection, to understand the nature of the mind-body, and how it relates to the four noble truths, dependent origination and the three marks of existence. It's not meant for obtaining psychic abilities or supernatural powers - though that may be possible.


Which Buddhist council included the conclusions that there is no creator-god and no day of judgment? After the Buddha is said to have achieved Nirvana, there were subsequent Buddhist Councils that were held.

Some years ago I came across an article that said that it was in one of these Councils that it was made official for Buddhists that there is no creator-god and no Day of Judgment. Which council was that? I think it was the Fourth? But I just can't find that information again.

It is incorrect that this is later development. From the onset in the Buddhism teaching did not have the teaching of a Creator God or Judgement Day.

The Buddhist notion of a creator is the stained mind or conditioned mind or unliberated mind. We keep creating our next moment due to Kleshas. This is further explained in Dependent Origination and the Links of Dependent Origination. This is evident from the Udana 'Anekajati samsaram sandhavissam' in which refers to the creator as Ignorance.

  Aneka jati samsaram,
  Sandhavissam anibbisam;
  Gahakarakam gavesanto,
  Dukkha jati punappunam.
  Gahakaraka ditthosi,
  Puna geham na kahasi;
  Sabba te phasuka bhagga,
  Gahakutam visankhitam;
  Visankharagatam cittam,
  Tanhanam khayamajjhaga.

  -Udana uttered by the Buddha after His enlightenment.

  So many births I have taken in this world, seeking in vain the bui1der of this house; in my search over and over, I took new birth, new suffering.

  Oh! house builder, now I have seen you, you cannot make a new house for me; all your beams are broken, the ridge pole is shattered; my mind is freed from all the conditionings of the past, and has no more craving for the future.

  [ The 'house builder' referred to above is avijja (ignorance). 'house' or 'new house' referred to above is nama-rupa (the mind-matter continuum) which is infact the 5 aggregates (pancakkhanda)-matter or body (rupa) and the 4 parts that constitute the mind, consciousness (vinnana) perception (sanna), sensation (vedana), reaction or conditioning (sankhara).]

  This has been discussed in more depth later on under "cause-effect (paticca-Samuppada)".

Above extracted from http://www.buddhanet.net/bvk_study/bvk212a.htm


Non duality in daily life What is this like in daily life ? How  does it manifest when dealing with insults? Ambition? Materialism?

Non-duality in essence means that samsara and nirvana are one, and this further corresponds to emptiness and interconnectedness of all beings. For instance, we have mostly positive and comfortable, wealthy lives in the West, but that corresponds to the terrible situation in the third world countries that are exploited to provide West with all the comfort (example given, China or some African, exploited countries). Another common example is that there cannot be Lotus without Mud, one allows the other to exist. Or Left political wing cannot exist without the Right.

Non-duality is mainly Mahayana and Vajrayana concept. If you'd like to know more, read Heart Sutra along with some decent commentary. I recommend "The heart of understanding" by Thich Nhat Hanh, if you are getting lost in the practical way.

Another example from perspective of realised being (Bodhisattva), Diamond Sutra explains it quite well as a universal teaching:

  However many species of living beings there are—whether born from
  eggs, from the womb, from moisture, or spontaneously; whether they
  have form or do not have form; whether they have perceptions or do not
  have perceptions; or whether it cannot be said of them that they have
  perceptions or that they do not have perceptions, we must lead all
  these beings to nirvana so that they can be liberated. Yet when this
  innumerable, immeasurable, infinite number of beings has become
  liberated, we do not, in truth, think that a single being has been
  liberated

For one there is pledge for non-discrimination, which requires non-dual way of thinking (i.e. Me versus Them, Ugly versus Beautiful), but also aspect of spontaneous helping; helping without distinguishing between the person that's being helped, and the helper.

Concluding, I think what you really mean is not non-duality per se, but applying wisdom of the teaching through Mindfulness. This way is fully described by Buddha in step four of the Noble Truths; Eightfold Path that is.

You don't have to really do much more, everything is there! Do good, avoid evil, purify your mind and also, remember three characteristics; impermanence, no-Self and that there is suffering. If you keep recollection of these at all times, you will transform your drives and habits.