How does an ordinary person adopt Right View concerning the the hardships of the Buddha's earthly life? As we know, the Eightfold Path begins with Right View, and then from Right View follows Right Intention.  Right View - belief in suffering, the relief from suffering and the Triple Gem; from this follows Right Intention - the "desire" or resolve to follow the Buddha Way.
(This is of course closer to the Theravada belief; the Mahayana belief is too esoteric to describe in words, or to have any logical progression, but is a sudden overwhelming experience of "feeling" one is totally Buddhist.  Correct?  I'd like both Theravada and Mahayana perspectives on this question.)
Here is the problem: we know that the Buddha suffered hardship in this world, including sickness and requiring a physician at times.  We know that he had enemies who wished him harm.  How then is it possible to believe that the Buddha was the happiest or most fortunate person ever to exist?  Surely, out of all of history, with billions of people, there must have been somebody with fewer sicknesses and fewer enemies!
How does one believe, WHY does one believe, that he was totally free from misery or mental anguish?  Does one believe this merely because it is taught as doctrine?
How is it possible to believe that he was "happy" or "the happiest" as we, being mere humans, would understand the term?  How is it possible to believe that he was "most fortunate" or "most blessed" as we would understand it?
If he was not "the happiest", "the most fortunate", or other similar expressions, as -we- would understand them, then how does a mere mortal with real-world human struggles form the resolve to follow the dharma unconditionally?
Should one believe that Buddhism can bring earthly blessings, or not?  And if not, then how can a human being who suffers from a desire for/lack of earthly blessings form the motivation to follow the dharma whole-heartedly?
In the simplest terms, why would an ordinary human being with ordinary struggles want to live the life of the Buddha?  Is it even possible for an ordinary human being with a difficult life to want to be like the Buddha?

Well first putthujjanas won't know anything about the dhamma until they become at least sotapanna. Until this, all puthujjanas have is believes and doubt. It's completely normal.
All the puthujjanas can do is cultivate what the buddha recommend to be cultivated, that is the 8 fold path. This is pretty hard for anybody. It's worse when there is no buddha.
Since the big claim of the buddha was that craving causes dukkha, you test this and can keep a diary for a few weeks where

you note when you notice a craving
you note the object of your craving
you note when you do not crave some objects and in this case if you suffer from not-craving those objects
you note when you suffer
you note if you think that you suffering can be linked to some craving for something (ideas or just sense objects) and if you see them as part your self
you note what happens if you try to force to view as not-self all the stuff you so far view as self


Does Sotapanna have the fear of death? Does Sotapanna have the fear of death?
Recently I spoke to a monk about Sotapanna. He said the best test to understand whether someone is Sotapanna is to see whether he has fear of death.

There is nothing I know of about the qualities arising from sotapanna attainment that preclude the arising of fear of death. A sotapanna has eradicated wrong view of self, attachment to non-essential practices and vows, and doubt about the triple gem. Fear of death as a view would not arise I don't think, e.g. "death is fearsome", but as an emotional reaction to thoughts of death, there is no reason to think it couldn't possibly arise.  Fear, according to the Vism Maha-tika, is based on anger, which a sotapanna can still give rise to. Only an anagami is free from anger entirely.


Buddhist social networking site? I'm looking for more friends on the Buddhist path and would there for like to ask: Are there any social networking sites for Buddhists? Some features that I'm looking for:

Friends list
Seeing online status of friends
Sending direct messages to a friend
Chatting with a friend
Open forums
Sharing images
News feed

Grateful for help!

Kind Regards,
Tord

My favorite is NewBuddhist, but I don't know that it has all those features.

I'd be interested in developing this as a project, I have been thinking of the "digital sangha" social network and I'm relieved I'm not the only one.


How can I overcome the breathing trouble while meditating and increase concentration? At  certain point of meditation,I feel like I can't breathe properly as in the beginning of meditation(lose of oxygen) and thus I stop meditating and try to get oxygen into my brain.
I do no know why this is happening or how to overcome this condition.
Is that not a correct way of meditating? Or what am I doing is wrong ?Or do I have to push through?

It is difficult to answer your question due to not many facts. However, the impression is you are suppressing your mind or pushing your forehead down into your body; making your mind & forehead/forebrain rigidly still; and, at the same time, pushing your air/breath/outbreathes out; clenching your jaw & emptying the lungs & nostrils of breath.

In Buddhist meditation, the face should be relaxed and the mind/brain bright, awake & open. The Buddha taught to start meditation by establishing awareness in front of one's face. Possibly do some practise keeping your eyes gently open and keeping your face & jaw relaxed. Buddhist meditation is the practise of "non-attachment" rather than forceful suppression.

It is probably best to visit a Buddhist/meditation centre and talk to a teacher.


Can one's karma be affected by the karma of another? Can one person's karma be affected by the karma of another person or other persons?

The short answer is “Yes”… Olivia Glad,… because the others provide the grounds, the right conditions for a kamma to bear fruit. How this comes to pass needs some explanation.

The laws of kamma are not just based on causes and effects, they depend on conditions. This is what prevents laws of kamma being deterministic. Understanding this would make it clear that one’s future is not determined by one’s past actions or kamma alone. Thus past kamma do not necessarily lead to kamma vipāka.

What first gets created is a kammā beeja, or a kammā seed. For that kamma beeja to bring about its result (kamma vipāka), suitable conditions must exist.

We can avoid many possible bad kamma vipāka by being mindful and not providing conditions for them to appear.  We can also make conditions for good kamma vipāka to bring about good results. If one goes into a bad neighborhood at night, that is providing conditions for any suitable bad kamma seeds waiting to bring about their bad vipāka.

Once a bad vipāka materializes, we can certainly manage it to minimize its effects, and in some cases even get rid of it by working to making conditions for a good kamma seed to overcome it. Kamma will not bring about any kamma vipāka, if and  when one attains the Sotapanna / Stream Entrant stage.  One can then erase all kamma vipāka that would lead to the four lower world realms.


Why did the Buddha suffer before he died? I understand that the Buddha became severely ill prior to his death as a result of eating bad food. I also was under the impression that perfectly enlightened beings have obliterated, or rendered ineffective, all of their karma. If this is the case, why would the Buddha, the most perfectly enlightened of all, experience great suffering at the end of his life?

"I also was under the impression that perfectly enlightened beings have obliterated, or rendered ineffective, all of their karma"

The five skhandas are roughly understood as "past kamma". Even arahants experience the fruits of their past kamma and are only free of it in parinibbana. For example, there are suttas describing arahants being hurt. In the case of the Buddha specifically, there's a well known one where he had his foot hurt:

  I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha at the Maddakucchi Deer Reserve. Now at that time his foot had been pierced by a stone sliver. Excruciating were the bodily feelings that developed within him — painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable — but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed. Having had his outer robe folded in four and laid out, he lay down on his right side in the lion's posture, with one foot placed on top of the other, mindful & alert.

  -- SN 1.38

"If this is the case, why would the Buddha, the most perfectly enlightened of all, experience great suffering at the end of his life?"

It's generally understood that he suffered body pain (at least when not in jhana). His own teaching carries this (like the quote above):

  "And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by tolerating? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, endures. He tolerates cold, heat, hunger, & thirst; the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles; ill-spoken, unwelcome words & bodily feelings that, when they arise, are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, displeasing, & menacing to life. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to tolerate these things do not arise for him when he tolerates them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by tolerating.

  -- MN 2

A well known sutta on this subject is the The Arrow which illustrates the differences between pain and suffering. Thus, pain could be understood as simply bodily discomfort (even if sharp), but unable to do anything beyond that, say, to his mind (which is naturally not the case for any "normal" person). However, like in the foot episode, he does appear managing these discomforts:

  Then the Blessed One — having spent most of the night instructing, urging, rousing, & encouraging the Kapilavatthu Sakyans with a Dhamma talk — said to Ven. Ananda, "Ananda, speak to the Kapilavatthu Sakyans about the person who follows the practice for one in training. My back aches. I will rest it."

  -- MN 53

Finally, body pain (vedana in general) does not cease permanently with nibbana, if a body still has vitality.


How to "attend to the perception of light"? In  AN 7.58, the Buddha instructed Maha Moggallana on what do to about his nodding:

  "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then attend to the perception of light, resolve on the perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night. By means of an awareness thus open & unhampered, develop a brightened mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.

Elsewhere (AN 4.41), this same practice is described as one that leads to knowledge & vision1.

How is this to be understood and practiced in detail? What is meant by "perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night"?

Is it as simple as imagining light? Are there ancient or modern detailed comments on this practice?

1In Bodhi translation, he says the Manorathapūranī understand this as divine eye, but in other places it can be insight knowledge or full enlightement.

In the book "The Way Of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera it's described how to overcome to the hindrance of Sloth and Torpor. Here he writes about the perception of light. I have made highlights in the quote:

3. Sloth and Torpor
Through wrong reflection on a state of boredom and the like, sloth and torpor come to be. Boredom is just dissatisfaction. Lassitude is bodily laziness. Languidity of body is the bending of the body torpidly in getting up and in similar actions. Lethargy after a meal is a dizziness or slight faint which is due to eating a principal meal. It is also called the discomfort which follows such a meal. The mind's sluggishness is the dullness of the mind. An abundance of wrong reflection on boredom and similar states of mind produces sloth and torpor. Therefore the Blessed One said that much wrong reflection on boredom, lassitude, languidity of body, lethargy after a meal, and the mind's sluggishness, is a condition for the production of fresh sloth and torpor and the increase and expansion of sloth and torpor already come into being.
Through right reflection in inceptive energy and similar states of mind is brought about the overthrow of sloth and torpor. Inceptive energy is the effort first set afoot. Exertion is more powerful than the inceptive energy because it leaves indolence behind. And because of its assailing further and further of the destructive condition, progressive endeavor is more powerful than exertion. By the exercise of right reflection intensely on this threefold strenuousness sloth and torpor are cast out. Therefore the Blessed One said that the condition for keeping out new sloth and torpor, and for casting out sloth and torpor that is old, is abundant right reflection on the element of inceptive energy, of exertion and of progressive endeavor.
There are six things which lead to the casting out of sloth and torpor: The seeing of the reason of sloth and torpor in the fact of eating too much or gluttony; the changing of the postures completely; reflection on the perception of light; staying in the open; sympathetic and helpful companionship of the good; and stimulating talk that assists in dispelling sloth an torpor.
There is the following explanation of these six things: The bhikkhu who has eaten gluttonously is assailed by sloth and torpor while doing his recluse duty of meditation in his day or night quarters as by a mighty elephant pressing down on him, but that one who practices moderation in food is not troubled thus with these hindrances. In one who thus sees the characteristic of sloth and torpor in gluttony there is the casting out of sloth and torpor.
Sloth and torpor disappear in him who changes over from the posture which induces sloth and torpor to another; in him who reflects on the brightness or the light of the moon, a lamp or a torch by night, and on the light or brightness of the sun by day; in him who lives in the open; in him who associates with sympathetic and helpful companions, like the Elder Maha Kassapa, who have dispelled sloth and torpor; and by stimulating talk connected with a strict recluse-regimen.
Therefore it is said: Six things lead to the casting out of sloth and torpor. The yogi understands thus: sloth and torpor cast out by these six things are stopped from arising forever in the future by the attainment of the path of arahantship.
The bhikkhu who has eaten gluttonously after the manner of the well-known types of Brahmanical gormandizers mentioned in ancient Indian books. There are five kinds of these greedy eaters: (1) He who eats until he has to be raised up by the hand from his seat. (2) He who lies rolling just where he has eaten and eats as long as he likes. (3) He who eats until he slips off his waist cloth. (4) He who fills himself with food in such a way that it seems as if a crow could peck at the food in him. (5) He who having filled his belly full and vomitted eats more food again, or he who eats until he vomits.
On the light or brightness of the sun by day: The meaning should be understood thus: Sloth and torpor vanish in him, too, who at night is reflecting on the image of the perception of the brightness of the sun he got by day.
Here it may be helpful to state the eight ways of dealing with torpor taught by the Master to the Elder Maha Moggallana: (1) One should neglect to mind the thought which says that drowsiness is descending on one, or (2) one should reflect on the Dhamma, or (3) repeat or recite the Dhamma, or (4) pull both earlobes and rub or massage the limbs with the hands, or (5) getting up from the sitting position, apply water on and rub the eyes, and look into the distance, at the constellations in the starry sky, or (6) reflect on the thought of light, or (7) fix the thought on the ambulatory, aware of the ends of it with the controlling faculties of sense turned inwards and the mind kept in, or (8) sleep conscious of the time of waking and on awaking get up quickly thinking that one will not give oneself to the comforts of lying down, reclining and languor, when all other seven ways fail.

I think it is as simple as you mentioned, i.e. to just imagine a bright light or imagine the items described in the quote.


Good method to start finding the core values of Buddhism? I've recently joined a meditation center that is very welcoming. I have went to a few meditation sessions, and so far I have felt focus on a deeper level. The community is small, though so they don't show many of the teachings. I'd like to read up on the core values of Buddhism, and furthermore, I'm looking for some good methods of finding out for myself what the values are.

If you have any personal stories, all are welcome, as they will be more than useful to me and others with the same question.

I am going to recommend three of my favorite teachers and their most popular books. Keep in mind that each of these teachers comes from a different tradition but they are mostly in agreement as to the core values of Buddhism.

"A Path With Heart" by Jack Kornfield. He was one of the very first westerners to teach Dharma in the West beginning in the 1970s.

"The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching" by Thich Nhat Hanh. A famous Vietnamese monk who can trace his lineage back to the Buddha.

"Awakening the Buddha Wihin" by Lama Surya Das. An American who studied for many years in Tibet and became a Tibetan Monk and is a very popular teacher.

All of these books are accessible and you may be able to find them at a public library or certainly find use used versions for sale online.


Can a person reach enlightment living an average life, married with children? As the Bodhisattva had to leave his wife and son behind to become the Buddha and as the monks do a similar thing (avoiding marriage etc), I would like to know if this is some kind of precondition to enlightment, if a being needs to stay away from his family for a while and avoid new karmic bonds (marriage/children) in his way to enlightment.

The short answer is Yes. Because enlightenment depends on neither external physical attributes, actions and circumstances nor knowledge and skills and even siddhi, but inner peace that one brings into the world. One's ability to be happy in every little moment and in every new things happening around and personally in one's life is important. Being in the very centre, in the heart of life, doing everything,  whether it is work, family or spiritual service; it's needed to keep staying not involved at the same time.

Not involved, in terms of not to be completely self-identified with these circumstances in order to keep clean mind, soft heart and good mood always. It's easier to do this when one is sitting in the cave alone, and it's harder and  challenging, and that's why is more valuable, living in the big city. We're born as humans, and humans live in society.


the value of a regular vipassana meditation practice What is the value in a regular vipassana meditation practice (e.g. almost daily, some days twice, typically 1hr+ per session) if, over the long haul (months), annicca, dukkha and annatta are not realized? Is the absence of these three very Buddhist characteristics an indication that the practice is, essentially, a secular practice with little-to-no spiritual value?

We practice meditation to purify our minds of greed, hatred, and delusion. We can't do this by yearning for ourselves to reach a particular stage of realization nor by yearning for special experiences within meditation.

We purify our minds of greed, hatred, and delusion by seeings these tendencies within ourselves and by seeing the objects of our greed, hatred, and delusion for what they are and becoming bored with them. When we become bored with them; we stop clinging to them. When we stop clinging altogether; we'll reach Nibbana.

This doesn't take months; it takes lifetimes. Who knows how many lifetimes we've already had to reach this point of being interested in bhavana at all? To be a human interested in the development of one's mind is very precious. You don't have to look far to see humans who are only interested in strengthening and beautifying the body, or accumulating money or possessions, or reputation or power, etc. But to be a human interested in the development of your mind, is an extraordinary opportunity.

Yes, it's valuable to practice your meditation regularly even when you don't "see" the progress. Venerable Yuttadhammo recently gave an especially encouraging dhamma talk regarding when you feel like "nothing is happening", in your meditation; it's actually bringing tremendous benefit. I will look for the dhamma talk and add it to this answer if possible. Be well. :)

added

This 10 minute long dhamma talk by Venerable Yuttadhammo has some very encouraging words for this situation. He is reflecting on the July 20 passage from http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/words_of_buddha.pdf.


Buddha said "Its better to travel well than to arrive", what does it mean? I am not sure if Buddha said it or not, I was flipping around some Buddha quotes pictures and found an image saying "Its better to travel well than to arrive".
can anyone explain What does it mean ?
Thanks

“It is better to travel well than to arrive.” is a fake Buddhist Quote.

Meaning
Hope and anticipation are often better than reality.
Origin
This phrase is a Robert Louis Stevenson quotation, from Virginibus Puerisque, 1881:
"Little do ye know your own blessedness; for to travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive, and the true success is to labour."
Stevenson was expressing the same idea as the earlier Taoist saying - "The journey is the reward."

Source: The meaning and origin of the expression: To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive
"The journey is the reward." seems to be a Chinese Proverb

If you look at this in the context of Noble Eightfold Path and Nirvana it is better to arrive than how or how well you travel. It seems to me like the opposite of this statement is true.

Although the eightfold path is conditioned [1.1.3.1], its goal, nirvana (nibbāna), is free
from conditions (visaṅkhāra,gata) (Dh 154):
nirvana is unconditioned (asaṅkhata).
Only nirvana is
free from all conditions: it is “the stilling of all formations” (sabba,saṅkhāra,samatha).
This stilling
of all conditions is true happiness (Dh 368, 381). In the Māluṅkya,putta Sutta (S 35.95), the
Buddha defines this stilling of all formations as “the ending of suffering.”

Source: The Path of Awakening The way, the life and the liberation of the noble eightfold path by Piya Tan

Now, ayya, is the noble eightfold path conditioned or is it unconditioned?
"The noble eightfold path, avuso Visākha, is conditioned."

Cūla Vedalla Sutta
What this entails is that traveling the path itself is suffering / misery with a view to end suffering / misery. So ending of misery is better than the journey to end misery which is also miserable. Having said this as you progress if the path the misery in general will become less and less and states like Piti and Passaddhi arise. [(Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta, (Ekā,dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta]


Unintended but mindless action resulted in death of a living thing I am very new to Buddhism and am learning the teachings, so I am reaching out. I avoid hurting any living thing at all cost, but this morning while walking my dogs I was texting and I crushed a snail. My heart broke the moment it happened and I felt ill. I know it was not intentional, and I mourned the loss of life, but it happened while I was distracted and not mindful. I still feel it so deep. So I guess I have a couple of questions. What are the implications of this action? And how do I correct this wrong?

What are the implications of this action?

The implication is that you will suffer. Well, actually, you already are.
Your heart broke and you felt ill. These are the immediate results of your bad kamma.
And feeling guilt and remorse is bad kamma as well, since it leads you to suffer more.

Reflect on the fact that you didn't intend the snail to die.
Reflect on how it makes you feel, with kindness and compassion.
Make the determination to avoid both in the future.
Take up the five precepts, if you haven't already. Or take them up again, if you already had and wish to renew them (https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/pancasila.html).

This is Theravada view, btw.

Be kind to yourself! :)


Where does the Buddha say 'you will be punished by your anger'? I've heard this quote attributed to the Buddha

  You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your
  anger

Does anyone know where the quote comes from? Also the The notion of punishment seems a bit non standard to me. Does anyone know the orginal term (Pali etc...) translated here as punishment and if this is an accurate translation. I do like the quote though hence the question.

The fakebuddhaquotes web site attributes it as follows:

Going back to 1993, we hit pay dirt! In To Love Is to Know Me: The Bhagavad Gita for Daily Living (Volume 3), author Eknath Easwaran says the following:

Even more intriguing to me is the karma of our health. Again, let me illustrate one or two kinds of connection. For one, the Buddha says that we are not punished for our anger, we are punished by our anger. In other words, anger is its own karma.

Note the absence of quotation marks. Eknath is not quoting the Buddha, but paraphrasing his teachings on anger and karma.


Is Anapanasati a complete path? Does it, by itself, lead to nirvana? I have been doing meditation of various forms (Goenka body-scanning, anapanasati, just sitting, kaya, citta, and vedana nupassana, etc.) but am trying to figure out something about anapanasati in particular.

My question is partly about Buddhist history, partly practical.

If I understand the story of Buddha's enlightenment process, he began by practicing anapanasati and attained to the various mystic absorptive states, including the eight jhanas. Yet, he failed to attain insight into dukkha, annica, and annata in any meaningful way, and remained in samsara. Eventually, after relaxing self-mortifying ascetic practices, he resolved to become enlightened, and accordingly practice anapanasati--again.

What changed in the end? Wasn't Siddhartha practicing anapanasati all along? Why did it suddenly lead to nirvana after years of mere dead-end concentration.

Practically speaking, does anapanasati in its purest form--that is, simply focusing on the breath to the exclusion of any and all other thoughts, sensations, etc.--actually lead to the deep and abiding understanding of annata, annica, and dukkha?

Initially the Bodhisattva was practicing a form of Pranayama in the form of holding or controlling one's breath. [Deva Sangarava Sutta, Maha Saccaka Sutta]

The Breath meditation practiced later was was observation of phenomena. Each 4 Sathipattana is covered in sets of 4 Tetrad with a total of 16 steps. Also it is the complete path. The 16 steps can be found in Anapanasati Sutta and Anapanasati


Do you know of ways to financially support the Sangha? I wonder what people, groups and projects one can support?

Both monastic and lay fields are on topic.

The easiest approach would be to find a temple/monastery in the tradition you want to support and go to their website or visit them in real life if possible. Their website often contains details on how to to support them, e.g. via Paypal with a single or monthly donation. Some places also have a "wishlist" with items they need such as toiletpaper, gardening tools, food supplies etc. Other places have projects that they need help with such as a library project or physical buildings that need to be build. Manual labour can be a great way of helping out too.

Many monasteries have a social media page as well, e.g. Facebook where they allow people to make donations.


Self invoked feelings during meditation allowed? I'm new to meditation and I struggle with my mind being 'blank' whilst meditating.

I came across an interesting statement while trying to figure out how to advance further under circumstances when feeling I make no progress.

  Someone wrote:

  "I used the 'blankness' to find something in my memory that made me feel something about anything, then sit with the experience and
  monitor the feeling."

It sounds like it could work well for me as a trigger to invoke certain feelings that I then can observe.

My challenge is that my mind goes completely 'blank' (no thoughts whatsoever) when I meditate, although I still feel completely focused, awake, present and aware. I feel this prevents me from getting any real deeper benefit from it, other than experiencing some sort of blissful state.

The 2 questions I have, are:

Is this at all recommended for meditation? (Also, if not, why not?)
Is this perhaps a particular established form of meditation?

Yes, it is a properly defined method of meditation.

Meditation isn't the absence of thoughts, but the awareness of them. Training the mind to a point when you can sit still without any thoughts is an extraordinary feat (which I suppose you're referring to as "blankness"), but in the Buddhist manner of training, it is also only the first step.

After you are keeping still, the second step is the single-pointed concentration or Samatha, where you keep your focus on one single activity/phenomenon, usually your breath.

Samatha is followed by Vipassana, i.e. meditation of insight, also sometimes called analytical meditation. From Samatha, you can move on to choose a phenomenon/event that you want to gain insight into (Buddhists usually contemplate on Buddha's teachings such as emptiness). Once chosen, you can move to dissect it pieces by pieces. It is important to retain the single-pointed concentration while doing this.

I personally as a practitioner prefer to be in Samatha for about 5-15 minutes, before I choose to go deeper into Vipassana. I have used it to analyze things such as my fear of house lizards or spiders. In here, I try to dissect the problem into smaller more precise questions such as:

Why I am scared of spiders > 1) They can kill me? 2) They can give me diseases? 3)They are ugly? 4) What makes they ugly? 5) Do they bring me any benefits?

I think dissecting the issues like this during meditation brings amazing clarity into irrational behavior, and helps us realize the emptiness of any being or phenomena existing from its own side.

The nun who taught me meditation once told me about how she would use the analytical meditation to think about the act of her boyfriend cheating on her, back when she had a lay life — an event which had an overbearing effect on her life.

She would dissect into smaller questions like "Was it the fact that he humped someone other than me?" "Is it the act of two sweaty bodies just going against each other that hurt me?" "Was it the breaking of the promise of exclusivity?" "Was it my sense of him "belonging" to me? Or, being my "possession" of sort?"

So, yes, you don't just have to sit still trying to avoid thoughts. The purpose of buddhist cultivation of mind is to gain insight into life, not avoid living.


What is an "enlightening being"? Thomas Cleary uses the term "enlightening being" extensively in his translation of the Avatamsaka Sutra. This term isn't defined in the glossary of that book, or in my copy of The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Is there a canonical definition of "enlightening being"?
Edit: Thanks useful comments by @ChrisW and @KayCee, I see in Appendix 1 "bodhisattva or enlightening being". I'm finding it helpful to read this Appendix before returning to the Introduction.

That's Cleary's translation of "bodhisattva":

Compare that with this translation:

The Four Holy Truths
At that time, Manjushri Bodhisattva Mahasattva told all the Bodhisattvas: “All of you Disciples of the Buddha, in this Saha world, the Holy Truth of Suffering is


what is personality view? inner conversation of mind has reduced now.after a period of had stopped during meditation.is it due to Samadhi which achieved?And what is personality view?

Inner conversation will greatly decrease in the second jhana, I'm happy you have experienced this. Yes, this is a development of Samadhi and you are on the right track. A lack of personality view basically speaking, means that you know deeply within yourself that you are simply body, feeling, mental formation, consciousness and perception. That's all, no matter how hard you look that's all you can find. and that's fine. The more developed Samadhi becomes the more the concept of personality fades. It must fade for Samadhi to arise. Keep in mind that until fully awakened you will still have a concept of personality, you need one to survive, however and any time you can turn inwards and try to look for the self or personality and find nothing, it is a very pleasant and peaceful feeling. In that moment you understand that you are everything and nothing simulatiously and nothing can touch you. The fully awakened arahant would reside continuously in this nothingness of self which would, unless he/she retreated to a forest for the lifetime, would find existing in society quite difficult. This is the final fetter of conceit the Buddha talks about. Furthermore, when one understands how personality and personality traits occur one understands them as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not self. Additionally, this is underscored and affirmed by recollecting past lives and seeing how much of a different person you were depending on different circumstances, this helps you to let go of attachment to the personality traits you have. Everything changes.


Modern and original versions of Chan and Seon According to the answer to this question there is a clear distinction between the traditional Zen practised in Japan until 19th century and its modern version invented by Suzuki. Is there such a clear distinction within Korean Seon and Chinese Chan? If not, which version of Zen do they correspond to?

Korean Seon and Chinese Chan both have distinctive styles and practices.
Here is a detailed study of Korean Seon that will be selectively quoted to draw conclusions about differences between the two and zen in Japan.
http://www.acmuller.net/articles/ogahae-oxford.html

  "...Thus, the well-ingrained custom of interpreting Korean Seon based
  on the models of Japanese Zen or Chinese Chan has also changed little
  over time, with Korean Seon regularly being seen through the lens of
  caricaturized takes of Tang-Song Chan with its radical non-scriptural
  tendencies and focus on encounter dialog, or a Japanese Sōtō/Rinzai
  model where textual studies are largely limited to the Shōbōgenzō and
  Zen poetry, and where meditative practices consist of either
  shikan-taza ("just sitting") or a graduated series of hundreds of
  kōans—and perhaps some sort of cultural admixture with the martial or
  fine arts. While Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen do have certain
  fundamental features in common with Korean Seon, the Korean tradition
  is in significant ways unlike the "meditation schools" of its two
  neighboring cultures. One of the more interesting distinctive aspects
  of Korean Seon, especially as compared with Japan Zen, is the
  character of its core literature.... And while it is true that we can
  also see in the sermons and private teaching records of many Seon
  masters through the Goryeo and Joseon periods the typical shouting,
  striking, and exhortation toward investigation of the hwadu that one
  would associate with classical Chan, there is at the same time a
  substantial amount of attention paid to scriptural study, recitation,
  and exegesis. Nonetheless, this study and exegesis is of a different
  character than the doctrinal work carried out during the in China and
  Korea during the Tang and Silla periods in that it has a distinct
  "Chan" orientation to it both in literary style and in the choice of
  topic texts."

So the above citations begin to outline the differences between Zen, Chan and Seon.
The question is did these different traditions radically change at a certain point in history like Zen in Japan under Suzuki.

  The Diamond Sutra is cited everywhere in the Seon teaching records of
  the Goryeo. Beyond its distinctive thematic orientations, the extent
  of its influence in Korea also has to do with its central role in the
  myth of the creation of the Platform Sutra, the story of which
  provides the source for the very name of the Jogye school.2 The
  Diamond Sutra also has its own special thematic affinity with Chan
  practice, as it is seen throughout the Mahāyāna schools of East Asia
  as the locus classicus of what is arguably the most fundamental
  teaching/practice of Chan: "non-abiding" (K. muju;Ch. wuzhu).

Seon for the most parts goes through fewer changes then either of its "parents." Now Gihwa enters the scene after centuries of decline in Seon in Korea and tends to revitalize and refocus Seon. Here is a little of his biography.

Gihwa (1376-1433)

  The lifetime of Gihwa (also known by the monastic name Hamheo
  Deuktong) fell in the midst of one of the most dynamic periods of
  social, political and religious upheaval on the Korean peninsula. The
  Goryeo regime, which had endured for over four centuries, but had
  become corrupt in its latter period, was on the verge of collapse, and
  as the leading Buddhist figure of his generation, many of the episodes
  in Gihwa's career had to do with his dealings with the epochal events
  of this juncture in history.5 Gihwa addressed in his writings a wide
  variety of Buddhist and non-Buddhist religious themes, but one of his
  favorite topics was the renewal of Jinul's argument for the
  essence-function connection of Seon and Gyo, which he addresses
  primarily within the context of the Oga hae. Besides this commentary
  on the Diamond Sutra, Gihwa also wrote the major Korean commentary to
  the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment,6 a commentary on Xuanjue's Yongjia
  ji7 and an essay on the intrinsic unity of the "three teachings" of
  Buddhism, Confucianism and Daoism that is considered to be a landmark
  work in Korean intellectual history, entitled Hyeonjeong
  non(Manifesting the Correct). He also wrote a separate essay on the
  theme of the Diamond Sutra, entitled Geumgang banyabaramilgyeong yun
  gwan ("The Penetrating Thread of the Diamond Sutra"), as well as a
  number of shorter essays and versified works on various doctrinal and
  meditation-related topics.

So Gihwa did revive some of the traditional methods and warned about the dangers of extremists within Seon

  Gihwa should be seen as the major reviver of Jinul's argument against
  exclusivist positions taken by certain members of the meditative,
  mind-to-mind transmission oriented "Seon" school as opposed to the
  text-oriented, doctrinal stance of Gyo. While Gihwa was a Seon monk
  with a strong meditation-oriented perspective to religious
  cultivation, at the same time he also felt that the denigration of Gyo
  study methods by Seon extremists was unnecessary, and even harmful. We
  can see Gihwa's interest in the re-valorization of scriptural study
  both in direct prose addressing the issue, as well as in the mere fact
  of his extensive exegetical work.

So there may be others who revitalized Seon, but in many ways the traditional practices and texts of Seon remained unchanged over a long time. Of all 3 Seon, Zen and Chan, the Korean practice seems the most like a mono culture with a tendency to remaining close to traditions.

Cited from: The Oga hae seorui (Commentaries of Five Masters on the Diamond Sutra) http://www.acmuller.net/articles/ogahae-oxford.html#ixzz3CuhRVrTv


In any Buddhist Context, is there a Necessary Existent I'm asking this ontological question as in the context of, e.g., an Aristotelian Prime Unmoved Mover, or some other first cause.
My guess is that there isn't, probably based on Dependent Origination or maybe even the Heart Sutra. (I hope I have not misconstrued those.)
Thanks

Yes, you have misconstrued.
Dependent Origination is about the origin of suffering (sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair) rather than about the origin of the physical universe (refer to SN 12.2).
Dependent Origination says the 1st cause for the origin of suffering is ignorance; for which no preceding cause can be found (refer to AN 10.61).
In addition, DN 11 clearly says the question: "where do the 4 physical elements cease without remainder?" is an invalid question. This means the ending and also the beginning of the 4 physical elements (earth, wind, fire & water) cannot be known.


What is citta in the four frames of reference? I am trying to understand the four frames of reference. I could understand the body. I could comprehend the sensations (to be honest not completely). I could not understand the mind (citta).

This has been my observation. I'm sensitive to noises. I feel irritation (sensation) and anger generated towards the person who created it, and the mind stays angry and continues to in that way. Is this what citta is ? That which continues to be in that state even after the sensation that caused it ceased to exist ?

Citta is mind. In Four Frames of Reference, it means your overall state of mind:

  "And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

If you feel a strong emotion in your body immediately after the noise - that is vedana (what you called "sensation"). The state of anger generated towards the person is a kind of aversion.

But this is not complete awareness of citta yet. In order to see the entire citta you need to expand your awareness further.

In this case, the reason you feel irritated when the noises happen, is because in your mind (in your citta) you have established a certain intent, a certain desire, or a certain expectation, -- an expectation of a quiet environment conducive to concentration. This expectation serves as a background or counterpart to noise, it is what the noise is compared with - and since the noise and this expectation are obviously in conflict - you get irritated and angry, because of the mismatch. Now, this expectation of quiet environment probably comes from an even deeper intent, for example, you may be trying to achieve a certain state that you have read about in a book. Etc.

At every moment of time we have a certain frame of reference inside of which we are operating. This frame of reference is made from some concepts. Most of the time, we are not actively thinking about these concepts but they stay "on the periphery" of our minds. These peripheral framing concepts are maintained or renewed through a mechanism known as "upadana" in Buddhism. The way it works is, every time we hear, see, or think about something connected with these concepts, we "feed" them, so they keep staying on our (background) mind.

Now this is a more complete picture: you have read about some state in a book, now you keep thinking about that state, you wanted to attain a similar state, you think that in order to attain this state you need to concentrate on something, and therefore you see all noises as enemies, getting in the way of you attaining your state. Therefore you get irritated and angry. (Your situation may be different, I'm making this stuff up, but you get the idea. You need to learn to clearly see your "background intent" - in every case, not just in this case.) On top of this, you may have some preconceptions about noisy people, that identify them with being sloppy, uncultured, uncaring etc.

So your complete state of mind at that point includes all of that - from very high-level mental frameworks - to very specific thoughts and sensations.

This entire configuration, when you take all of it at once and look at it "panoramically" has a certain flavor or a certain taste. It can't always be described in words, but it is something you can experience if you look at all of the above all at once.

That panoramic assessment of the all-inclusive quality of your mindstate is what we're after in this meditation. This panoramic awareness of the entirety of one's mind, including its implicit frames-of-reference, is called cittanupassana or simply vipassana.


What is a wrathful Buddha? In reading this answer to another question there were many references to "the peaceful and wrathful buddhas" in the quote from The Tibetan Book of the Dead. This is a tradition that I'm not very familiar with. Is it possible to explain what a wrathful Buddha is and how Buddhist teachings on considering anger as a poison might align with the idea of a wrathful Buddha? Thanks for any clarification on this.

Wrathful Buddhas (or wrathful gurus for that matter) are not actually angry, in the way untrained people are. In Vajrayana before we even reach highest tantra, we learn to transmute emotions. If you are not good at it yet, at the very least you should be able to transmute anger into headache. Once you reach some mastery though, you can transmute any emotion into pure energy. When you have direct insight into the nature of mind, emptiness, attachments, and emotions - you can ride a wave of energy and even display wrath (an appearance of anger) without really taking it seriously. This is then used as a tool in those cases that demand such approach. Like getting angry at kids, you are half faking it, half letting yourself get carried by anger - to add your show more weight.


Where is this mountain quote in the Sinhala edition? I am comparing translations to see how the Sinhala would work, and, granted I am using Google Translate on the Sinhala version, I would at least expect it to be generally somewhat reflective of what is being said. But it doesn't say what I am looking for.

I am looking for this quote here or here:

As a mountain of rock
is unwavering, well-settled,
so a monk whose delusion is ended
doesn't quiver —
just like a mountain.

However what I find in the Sinhala version here or here is this:

  "Just as a gal can stand steady, so the brain will not be a sin in the mind."

Or

  The stanza is so immovable that it does not become immovable.

I am just picking pieces that appear close in the same area of text. Does one know if these translations in Sinhala are accurate? (And that it's just a major Google translate issue). Does that quote exist somewhere in the Sinhala?

I am trying to make do snippets of translation myself and am looking for a good example of interesting quotes. If one could paste the quote in Sinhala that would be amazing.

Or is this just an example of a translator taking "poetic expression" to the extreme, and they just took a general quote like "යම්සේ ගල්පව්වෙක් අචල වැ මොනොවට පිහිටියේ ද, එසේ ම මහණ තෙම මොහය ක්ෂීණ වීමෙන් පව්වක් මෙන් නො සැලේ.", which Google translates as "Even if a galvanist is immobile, the loss of his brain will not be a sin.", and they just made up a poetic metaphor to translate it into English?

I think that https://suttacentral.net/ud3.4/si/zoysa is the Sinhala version of Ud3.4 on suttacentral.
Google Translate translates the last sentence of that into English as follows ...

නොසෙල් වෙන්නාවූ මනාව පිහිටියාවූ ගල් පර්වතය යම්සේද එසේ මෝහය නැතිකර දැමූ භික්‍ෂුව පර්වතයක් මෙන් කම්පා නොවෙයි.
Like a well-formed rock, the monk who loses his lust does not shake like a rock.

The Pali says,

Yathāpi pabbato selo,
acalo suppatiṭṭhito;
Evaṃ mohakkhayā
bhikkhu,
pabbatova na vedhatī”ti.

... which I think says, "destruction of ignorance" (i.e. Moha) or "delusion" -- not "lust".


If there's nobody to get enlightened, why bother? It seems the goal of Buddhist practice is to become an Arahant - someone who won't take a rebirth, and therefore will be eternally relieved from suffering.

But WHO is this someone who doesn't get reborn?  I mean if there never was a self to begin with, then who exactly achieved Nirvana?

Seriously, this line of thought is screwing up my motivation. All this work, just so someone who doesn't exist yet, and never will, doesn't have to suffer.

Buddhism doesn't promise relief from suffering in the current lifetime, in fact it guarantees us we'll all die, and most of us will suffer from sickness and old age (not to mention loads of other suffering), but it promises an end by not taking a rebirth - but the whole concept of rebirth is made utterly confusing by the concept of non-self.

This linguistic terminology generally has caused a lot of miscommunication and misunderstanding.

The notion of not self is that is there no:

unchanging everlasting component which we can identify as self. Other contemporary teachers tried to identify such a part which they called Atman
there is nothing to which any one can have absolute or ever lasting control over either externally or internally

Also the notion of self, self consciousness, ego, thoughts relating to oneself all is:

delusional
a source of misery

Since you do not have any control over any of the what make up this self you cannot have futuristes view of your self and destiny. Also since your influence to the external world is limited, you can get to own or control is also limited. But when we think about I will to this or that, there is a sense of absolute control of destiny or the environment. This is delusional as you cannot to things to absolute certainty and any deviation result is you becoming disappointed.

If you drill down more deeply when some tough or contact comes through your sense doors. (E.g. some one is scolding you or you remeber someone is scolding you.) 1st you recognise this is some one is scolding, then you identify this incident it is me who is getting scolded. At this point you get a bad feeling (literally) in your body. You have a mental reaction to this and then form volitional though like I will scold him back. Likewise if it praise you get an opposite feeling. Though this itself is subtle you lose the balance of your mind, as you might get puffed up, when some one does this type of talk. Also you cannot get the pleasantness of praise to last always which sometimes lead to subtle disappointments. Thus each time you get any notion of I, me, mine, etc. coming up in your mind some disappointment is bound to happen if you analyze it fully and realistically, thus not understanding this fast is a delusion. So the notion of no self, in this this context. If you you hold onto a notion of self (Pudgala - Sanna) misery arises, letting go of the notion of self your mind gets free from misery. Hence the linguistic rendering of no self.

Also the absence of anything upon which you can exert absolute control or any component which is permanent, to which you can reliably apply the label this is me or myself - the eternal me (this part of me never changes) or this is image of me (a good person, strong person, etc.) or belongs to me or in my control (this should be as I wish or will it to be) - viz. noting identifiable as self, me, mine, I. Since there is nothing we can use the word or label with the word self, considering either of the properties of everlasting, absolute control, we say there is no self.

This does not mean you do not exist in any colloquial sense or any sense outside the above definitions (permanent, controllable properties). So if you or any body practices to get you mind to be stress and disappointment free, the benefits are to be reaped by the person getting enlightened. So you should be be motivated to achieve it. So do not get some play on words deter you. (These are very difficult to understand concepts, thus should be careful of misconceptions using the same wording or rendering.)

Also developing this notion (any concept or notion is Manasikara) as a beginner (though you have to abandon this view also at higher stages of meditation) can help dissolve your ego, self consciousness, self awareness, concept of self in you mind. This can be an early stage catalyst in your progress (also helping you reduce stress and disappointment due to the concept of I, me, mine) than somethings reducing your motivation to practice

In Buddhism you should experience the peace within this lifetime and in each step you take. More you practice more powerful your peace becomes. Lesser mental reaction you have towards great, pleasant, unpleasant, hurt, sour, etc. feelings caused by external stimuli more balance your mind will be and more peaceful you will get.

Also remember Buddhist concepts are not easily explainable in words as the concepts are not really mainstream, thus the the language and ability to communicate them has not developed. When translating these into languages with not Buddhist or related culture, things are even more difficult.


Does this statement by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu conflict with traditional mettā meditation? I'm a beginner and I'm studying (and trying to practice) both meditation on breathing and mettā meditation, and in the book Anapanasati by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, which i'm following with some initial success, when dealing with preliminaries and false views, it is said:

"[...] Some forms of "radiating loving kindness" are phrased in an amusing way, for instance: "May I be happy, free from suffering hatred, difficulties, and troubles, and may I live in happiness!" This really reflects fear and self love on the part of the speaker. How could a person with such a weak mind ever put forth the effort necessary to realize impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and non-selfhood? With this kind of ritual he will only disturb his mind all the more. [...]"

Now, i think almost every book and guide on mettā I've read suggests phrases like the one took as example in the above cited text. For example in Brahmavihara Dhama by Ven. Sayadaw it is suggested the phrase "May i be happy and free from misery" and similars. So the above mentioned paragraph confused me a bit. Do the Buddhadasa teachings conflict with traditional mettā practice? What view of things should a beginner follow, between these?
Thanks in advance!

I suggest this book you are studying might be too complex for a beginner, even though the section on metta is reasonable. The book 'Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners' might be more suitable.

As for metta meditation in relation to Anapanasati, Buddhadasa's point is obviously straightforward and correct, namely, to realise enlightenment the idea of "I" must be abandoned. The Buddha taught suffering can only be extinguished when the idea of "I" is abandoned therefore the Ven. Sayadaw idea "May I be free from misery" is obviously illogical, as the suttas show, as follows:

  ...it's because Ven. Sariputta's I-making & mine-making and obsessions with conceit have long been well uprooted that even if
  there were change & alteration in the Teacher, there would arise
  within him no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress or despair. SN
  21.2

Buddhadasa's idea may conflict with the majority of teachers who consider themselves to be Buddhists but Buddhadasa's idea obviously does not conflict with the Dhamma of the Buddha. The Pali suttas generally refer to what Buddhadasa said in his earlier paragraph, namely, "metta is radiated towards all living beings based on reason & insight", as follows:

  There is the case where a monk keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an
  awareness imbued with good will. Thus he keeps pervading above, below,
  & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing world
  with an awareness imbued with good will: abundant, expansive,
  immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will. MN 43

  And he lets his mind pervade one quarter of the world with thoughts of Love, and so the second, and so the third, and so the fourth. And
  thus the whole wide world, above, below, around, and everywhere, does
  he continue to pervade with heart of Love, far-reaching, grown great,
  and beyond measure. Just, Vāseṭṭha, as a mighty trumpeter makes
  himself heard—and that without difficulty—in all the four directions;
  even so of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that
  he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with mind set free,
  and deep-felt love. DN 13

  Wishing: In gladness and in safety,  May all beings be at ease. Whatever living beings there may be;     Whether they are weak or strong,
  omitting none, The great or the mighty, medium, short or small,   The
  seen and the unseen, Those living near and far away,  Those born and
  to-be-born — May all beings be at ease! Let none deceive another,     Or
  despise any being in any state. Let none through anger or ill-will
    Wish harm upon another. Even as a mother protects with her life     Her
  child, her only child, So with a boundless heart  Should one cherish
  all living beings; Radiating kindness over the entire world. Sn 1.8

Occasionally, there are teachings in the suttas about 'self-love' but unlikely to practitioners of samatha-vipassana. For example, in Ud 5.1, the Buddha makes a comment to himself about unenlightened worldlings who love themself more than others:

  Having gone around in all directions with the mind, There is surely no one found who is loved more than oneself.

  In the same way others each love themselves, Therefore one who cares for himself should not harm another.

  Ud 5.1

This teaching in Ud 5.1 is about the 'Golden Rule' or 'morality' rather than about Anapanasati.

In conclusion, the teaching of metta in the Anapanasati Sutta itself shows Buddhadasa is correct & all of the other teachers, regardless of how many of them exist, are wrong. The Anapanasati Sutta includes the following instruction, as found in MN 62:

  Develop the meditation of good will (metta). For when you are developing the meditation of good will, ill-will will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of compassion. For when you are developing the meditation of compassion, cruelty will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of appreciation. For when you are developing the meditation of appreciation, resentment will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of equanimity. For when you are developing the meditation of equanimity, irritation will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of the unattractive. For when you are developing the meditation of the unattractive, passion will be
  abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of the perception of inconstancy. For when you are developing the meditation of the perception of inconstancy, the
  conceit 'I am' will be abandoned.

This shows metta is to be developed together with abandoning the conceit "I am".

Therefore, the statement by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu certainly conflicts with traditional (worldly) mettā meditation  but does not conflict with the mettā meditation the Buddha taught.


Is curiosity, for non Dhamma subjects, a bad thing? Curiosity can lead to desire (for knowing something), attachment and therefore suffering. Also, questions based on pure curiosity were left unaswered by the Buddha

On the other hand, curiosity is what makes us evolve, so is it good or bad? How should one sees it?

Asking questions / being inquisitive can lead to intelligence.

Having said this the quest for knowledge can lead to:

attachments to per suits of no benefit to this life, after life or liberation hence wasting time and effort
attachments to the quest of seeking answers leading to pure study / research or philosophising, this also may not always be time well spent.

If you are leading a householders life you cannot avoid these always. But your per suits should be fruitful for either:

This life
Next life
Liberation

Beneficial to either:

oneself
others, or
both

If your quest is not profitable best is to leave it a side.


Doing evil knowingly and unknowingly In the Milindapanha, Nagasena points out to king Milinda that doing evil knowingly accrues lesser demerit than doing evil unknowingly. Does the Buddha make the same statement anywhere in the Suttas?

The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit, one who knowingly does evil, or one who does evil unknowingly?"
The elder replied: "Indeed, your majesty, for him who does evil not knowing is the greater demerit."
"In that case, venerable Nagasena, would we doubly punish one who is our prince or king's chief minister who not knowing does evil?"
"What do you think, your majesty, who would get burned more, one who knowing picks up a hot iron ball, ablaze and glowing, or one who not knowing picks it up?"
"Indeed, venerable sir, he who not knowing picks it up would get burned more."
"Indeed, your majesty, in the same way the greater demerit is for him who does evil not knowing."
"You are clever, venerable Nagasena."

Milindapanha - Access to Insight
My interpretation of this is not about unintended action vs intended action as one of the answers suggests. Instead I see it as comparing intended action with the view that the action is unwholesome vs intended action with the view that the action is wholesome. It's not about intending harm vs not intending harm, instead it's about intending harm knowing that causing harm is bad vs intending harm not knowing that causing harm is bad.

The source is Miln III,7,8 [84].

The other day, I happened to read a discussion of this passage in "Development in the Early Buddhist Concept of Kamma/Karma" by James Paul McDermott (page 113-114).

Based on what I have read, I do not believe that there is any specific quote in the Suttas / Vinaya that specifically supports this passage. The Suttas (AN 6.63) equate kamma with volition / intention and as McDermott explains, this was developed in the Abhidhamma (particularly the Kathāvatthu), further developed in Milindapañha and even further developed in the Abhidharmakośa. Of course, the commentaries developed the concept of kamma to a new level again (this was beyond the scope of McDermott's book).

One has to be careful with interpreting this parable of getting burned by the hot iron. The point is that a unskillful act done with wrong view will generate more weighty kamma... somebody who knows that the unskillful act is wrong will have less volition / intention when performing the unskillful act as compared to another person who sees absolutely nothing wrong with the unskillful act (i.e. accompanied by wrong view).

@Jayarava, I have admired some of your writings / posts. Thanks for prompting me to look deeper at this passage (I love to learn). Here is the passage in Pāḷi:

  Rājā āha ‘‘bhante nāgasena, yo jānanto pāpakammaṃ karoti, yo ajānanto pāpakammaṃ karoti, kassa bahutaraṃ apuñña’’nti? Thero āha ‘‘yo kho, mahārāja, ajānanto pāpakammaṃ karoti, tassa bahutaraṃ apuñña’’nti. ‘‘Tena hi, bhante nāgasena, yo amhākaṃ rājaputto vā rājamahāmatto vā ajānanto pāpakammaṃ karoti, taṃ mayaṃ diguṇaṃ daṇḍemā’’ti? ‘‘Taṃ kiṃ maññasi, mahārāja, tattaṃ ayoguḷaṃ ādittaṃ sampajjalitaṃ sajotibhūtaṃ eko jānanto gaṇheyya, eko ajānanto gaṇheyya, katamo [kassa (ka.)] balavataraṃ ḍayheyyā’’ti. ‘‘Yo kho, bhante, ajānanto gaṇheyya, so [tassa (pī. ka.)] balavataraṃ ḍayheyyā’’ti. ‘‘Evameva kho, mahārāja, yo ajānanto pāpakammaṃ karoti, tassa bahutaraṃ apuñña’’nti.

I believe that the key word is "ajānanto". In the translation above, it is rendered as "unknowingly". T.W. Rhys Davids translates this as "inadvertently". Bhikkhu Pesala translates this as "unconsciously". PED uses translations such as "unaware" and "unsuspecting".

I do not think "ajānanto" is equivalent to "ignorance" (delusion / moha). "Ajānanto" seems to be closer to "unwise attention", not seeing things as they truly are. For this reason, I think wrong view is a better handling, even though "micchādiṭṭhi" is not used in the text. @Jayarava, your knowledge of Pāḷi is far superior to mine, so I would be very willing to be corrected.

Oops, I just read your answer below, so let me add more...

I am an Abhidhamma teacher and this certainly colours my world view :-) Let me put an Abhidhamma spin on this to see if it helps. The Milindapañha was written after the Abhidhamma, so it is possible that in this passage, Nāgasena is attempting to clarify a doubt from the Abhidhamma.

Kamma comes from intention. The ethical quality of the kamma created comes from the roots (attachment / aversion / delusion for unwholesome, non-attachment / non-aversion / understanding for wholesome).

I do not believe that this passage from the Milindapañha is talking about the ethical quality of the kamma created.

I do believe that this passage from the Milindapañha is talking about the weightiness / intensity of the kamma created... and this is a different issue. The weightiness / intensity of the kamma created is a question of strength of volition.

In the case of unwholesome kamma-creating mental states, the strength of volition can depend on pleasant / neutral feeling (pleasant feeling contributes to stronger volition), prompted / spontaneous (spontaneous contributes to stronger volition) and associated / disassociated with wrong view (associated with wrong view contributes to stronger volition). I believe that this passage from the Milindapañha is talking about the third factor; "associated / disassociated with wrong view".


Benefits of Producing and Caring for Children Genetically speaking producing your own children perpetuates your own genes.

Buddha spoke at length about the 31 Planes of Existence.

What is Buddhism's (not just Theravada) position on having children? Namely the benefits of producing and caring for children?

Or does Buddhism mostly see them as a constraint (i.e. Rahula "chain") and there is no connection between between your own progeny and the afterlife?

Ahmed,
From "Living in the World" in Awareness Itself by Ajaan Fuang Jotiko:

§ Once, when one of Ajaan Fuang's students was being pressured by her parents to look for a husband so that she could settle down and have children, she asked him, "Is it true what they say, that a woman gains a lot of merit in having a child, in that she gives someone else the chance to be born?"
"If that were true," he answered her, "then dogs would get gobs of merit, because they give birth to whole litters at a time."

How ever, once you have organiced your "Rahulas" production, you have certain duty out of you "linga"-worshiping (bhava-tanha) or craving after sensuality (kama-tanha) to care for it and get rightously ride of it (tanha). That starts with not harming it right from the moment of conception. "This has come into beeing."
So seeing such, the burdens and sacrifies other need to bear, one does no more desire for birth and a womb but tries to pay ones last dept of gratitude, giving all back and maybe even share the highest gift, once then made his own.
If you would not have been father, mother, son, daughter once, if not having Upanissaya to the Dhammas father, how could this seed possible cause a conception of light, here and now?
Its good to celerbrate the fathersday, and getting the lessons of gratitude understood rightly by performing.
Nobody called you to come.
(Note: This is a seed of Dhamma and not meant for commercial puposes or other wordily gains.)


Has a teacher referred to sleep as a form of 'lazy nirvana'? The other night at a group meditation meeting, I mentioned to another practitioner that sleep is a 'lazy form of Nirvana'.

My memory tells me that Tara Brach or another teacher jokingly referred to sleep in that way, but after looking on Google, I can't find the reference :\

I would feel a little guilty if my reference was false, but I know that Nirvana is in a lot of ways the opposite of sleep and I'm sure she did too.

I ask this as a joke, but has anyone heard of sleep referred as a 'lazy form of Nirvana?' If so, which teacher made that reference?

Sleep is not really Nibbana because Nibbana is defined as the "uprooting" & "destruction" of the mental defilments, as follows:

  To whatever extent there are phenomena conditioned or unconditioned, dispassion is declared the foremost among them, that is, the crushing
  of pride, the removal of thirst, the uprooting of attachment, the
  termination of the round, the destruction of craving, dispassion,
  cessation, nibbāna.

  AN 4.34

In sleep, the mental defilements of an non-fully-enlightened mind remain dormant as "underlying tendencies". Therefore, sleep cannot be Nibbana.

However, the teacher Bhikkhu Buddhadasa make some comments about how the 'Nibbana element' operates in everyday life, here: Nibbana for Everyone. which includes 'sleep'.

  Nibbāna is one of the dhātus (natural elements). It is the coolness that remains when the defilements – greed, anger, fear, delusion –
  have ended.

  Any reactive emotion that arises ceases when its causes and conditions cease. Although it may be a temporary quenching,
  merely a temporary coolness, it is still Nibbāna, even if only
  temporarily. Thus, there’s a temporary Nibbāna for those who can’t yet
  avoid some defilements. It is this temporary Nibbāna that sustains the
  lives of beings who continue hanging onto defilement. Anyone can see
  that if the egoistic emotions existed night and day without any pause
  or rest, no life could endure it. If such life didn’t die, it would go
  crazy and then die in the end. You ought to consider carefully the
  fact that life can survive only because there are periods when the
  defilements don’t roast it. These periods outnumber the times when the
  defilements blaze.

  These periodic Nibbānas sustain life for all of us, without excepting even animals, which have their levels of Nibbāna, too. We are able to
  survive because this kind of Nibbāna nurtures us, until it becomes the
  most ordinary habit of life and of mind. Whenever there is freedom
  from defilement, then there is the value and meaning of Nibbāna. This
  must occur fairly often for living things to survive. That we have
  some time to relax both bodily and mentally provides us with the
  freshness and vitality needed to live.


Rebirth in the human realm I need to find the Sutta in where it is stated how a human being will be reborn. There should be different states for example if you are born in a high society you were respectful towards parents, elders, teachers and so forth in the previous life/lives. If you were into torturing and harming people you will be reborn with a poor health, if you were killing people you will be reborn with a short life span. There are more states but i do not know them.

Help would be much appreciated. Thank you.

You might want to check out MN 135 and MN 136:

"Here, student, some man or woman kills living beings and is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Because of performing and undertaking such action, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell. But if on the dissolution of the body, after death, he does not reappear in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, but instead comes back to the human state, then wherever he is reborn he is short-lived. This is the way, student, that leads to short life, namely, one kills living beings and is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings."


What are the commonalities between Jewish and Buddhist thought? I've pondered for a while on the possible links between Jewish and Buddhist thought. I have been on Buddhist retreat with people who identify as Jews. Also there is the Buddhist Jew phenomena as exemplified by Leonard Cohen. In addition some of my favorite authors appear to have Jewish background - Sharon Salzberg, Larry Rosenberg, Jack Kornfield etc...

So leading on from this and also inspired by this answer - is it possible to summarise what Buddhist and Jewish thought have in common. I appreciate that this is a big topic but I wonder is it possible to put together the main 3 or 4 points that they might have in common and why there appears to be such a connection between Judaism and Buddhism.

I'm glad to see my previous answer proved inspiring / thought-provoking.

Following up on that:
I'm speaking from the Jewish perspective, specifically the Hasidic perspective. My knowledge of Buddhism is pretty limited, so I will not really be able to give too many points, and I'm sure if you dig into my answers you find specifics that don't line up in the two faiths. I know that there are probably more points where Buddhism and Judaism differ strongly, noticeably when it comes to religious cosmology, attitudes towards deities/G-d, and views on an individual's purpose in life. The same is probably true for almost any two religions -- the specifics are often VERY different.

However, I do feel that Buddhism and Judaism have these broader themes in common:

The concept of an enlightened individual who serves as an exemplary model: In Judaism we have the Tzadik, akin perhaps to the Bodhisattva. Both are individuals who have attained a special degree of awareness about the reality of existence, which somehow "pulls them out" from the normal frame of reference perceived by normal humans. Both are truly selfless individuals (i.e. individuals devoid of personal ego), who possess the potential to abandon the confines of human existence, and yet who nonetheless persist in engaging in the human world for the sake of others. Both are individuals who attain a clarity of vision which gives them far deeper insight into the cosmic order.
An emphasis on self-refinement through specific practices: The laws (mitzvot) associated with Jewish observance are akin the Noble Eightfold Path, both of which provide the individual with a means to increase their spiritual refinement and sensitivity. Diverging from these practices is seen in both religions as only deepening our enslavement to the very things we wish to escape.
A strong emphasis on mental/intellectual cultivation as a means to promote righteous action: Particularly in the Hasidic movement Chabad-Lubavitch, with which I am affiliated, we place huge emphasis on training one's mental faculties to control the emotional faculties. The specifics of this abstract idea are of course complicated, but I find it VERY similar to the concept of Mindfulness, which promotes a rational, objective viewpoint that gives one the clarity to pursue true, meaningful things, while avoiding vain pursuits of personal passions. Mindfulness is a concept which I find so relevant to Jewish observance, that I've gained tremendous personal spiritual inspiration by incorporating it into my own worldview.

I suspect a large part of the reason why many Jews are involved in Buddhism, and one of the reasons I know I find Buddhism more "approachable" than other religions, is that Buddhism presents an extremely existential, personal, non-judgmental system, and human-oriented approach to spiritually, which does not immediately seem to conflict with Judaism's very concrete, objective presentation of a Deity-oriented reality.

Quoting Bhante Gunaratana from Mindfulness in Plain English (from which I have admittedly gotten almost all of my knowledge of Buddhism): "[Buddhism's] flavor is intensely clinical, much more akin to what we might call psychology than to what we would usually call religion." I suppose that "flavor" is less of a turn-off than that of another, say Abrahamic religion, all of which have very specific, belief-oriented models of the universe.

Hope this helps!


If you are/become very sensitive for sounds what could be the reason/cause? If you get disturbed at night by tiny sounds or find it difficult to hear loud sounds at day is there a particulary cause known for that in buddhism. Is it bad and what to do about it?

Sensitivity could just mean your senses are being noticed. Something that you once ignored is now being noticed because your living in the present moment. You're aware of things which you didn't notice before. It may seem louder than usual because your mind is no longer being occupied by something else. Another explanation could be sensory adaptation to a new environment. It's not uncommon for practitioners who return from retreats to be more sensitive to their environment. Their ears have adapted to the silent lifestyle but eventually adapt to usual city noise over time.


Is there a standard way to cite Buddhist scriptures? Is there anything for Buddhist texts equivalent to the typical way of citing Biblical verses? (e.g. John 1:1)

[Related question on Tripitaka Section Numbering.]

As I keep looking myself, this seems to be less well-specified than one might hope. But a couple of useful things so far lead me to one option being something like:

  DN 16 (PTS DN ii 72)

Trouble is, although that's probably quite a precise form, it's for the Pali. See below for the references that help explain it.

Access to Insight, as always, has something useful to say. Unfortunately, the especially relevant-looking link in note #1 at the bottom of that page is dead. However, I googled for the title and I think I found it, or something like it as follows:
The Contents and Structure of the Pali Canon and its Commentaries on this page at BuddhaSasana. (I also searched for it on https://ukabs.org.uk, which is the organization that AtoI's reference suggests originally hosted the document, but I couldn't find it).


Dukkha and happiness Was reading the article linked to below about how happiness is merely the absence of dukkha in much the same way that darkness is the absence of light.  That happiness is alway there. All we need to do is change our mind. We confuse gratification with happiness. We think that accomplishing, achieving, attaining will make us happier but we are misguided. I understand this, it makes perfect sense however say for example I feel lonely because I have no friends. I can sit there and experience what it feels like to be lonely and make peace with that or I can take action to make new friends so that I feel more connected and thus less lonely. If I do the latter then aren't I accomplishing, gratifying etc? Surely it's a good thing to make efforts to connect. Buddhism seems to be saying it's all in your own head but then if this is so why try to change anything?  Why go out and try to make new friends when I feel lonely?  Why go out and try to make money when I don't have enough? Etc etc. doing these things creates a better life, one of less struggle. Surely that is a good thing and leads to more happiness?   http://www.raptitude.com/2010/07/good-news-happiness-doesn't-exist/

Both happiness and sadness are feelings. Both of them fall under the first noble truth or the noble truth of suffering. Sad feelings come under suffering for obvious reasons and happy feelings come under suffering for being impermanent, deficient, incompetent, unreliable etc.

There is something better than happy feelings. Something permanent and peaceful. That is what the Buddha experienced first hand while he lived. Guiding us to find that while we live is what Buddhism is all about. It's not about trying to experience happy feelings or going to a heaven after death and experiencing some more happy feelings for a while.

Feeling lonely is a form of suffering. That suffering cannot be eliminated by looking for company. Being with friends is just a temporary consolation. That does not mean you will not get bored in the future. Buddhism doesn't tell you not to make friends or not to experience the comforts of life, especially if you
 are a layman. Buddhism offers a permanent solution to your problems. Instead of simply relying on friends every time you feel lonely, what if you are able to uproot the cause of being lonely? Then you will never feel lonely in the first place.


Awakening into meditative state One night I awoke straight into meditative state(I practice Samatha),it was so odd that really awoke me for real.If I hadn't of been so surprised I might have just gone with it.anyone else ? Other than being slightly surprising it was OK.

If you practice samatha for any length of time, that will happen fairly frequently especially in a retreat situation.  One of the key points of samatha practice, after all, is the dropping off of body and mind.  Sleep does that rather effectively though we are rarely conscious for the event.  If you are suddenly awakened, there is a often a gap before mind and body reassert themselves.  Related to that, what you are experiencing is also the reason why it's better to sit first thing in the morning.  You sort of get to ride that gap a little bit.  The waters of your mind haven't yet been muddied with all the detritus that normally gets kicked up as you go about your day.


Masculine and Feminine Potencies In several places–for example, in texts around the Nine Purification Breaths–I've seen references to either masculine or feminine "obstacles linked with potencies" that are described as being "masculine" or "feminine."

What are the obscurations and "obstacles linked with potencies" that are "masculine" or "feminine" and what are their characteristics?

This article on wikipedia discusses some of the kleshas or poisons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleshas_(Buddhism)#Two_obscurations

Some of them appear to be feminine (emotional) and some masculine (intellectual)

Two obscurations[edit]
Mahayana literature often features an enumeration of "two obscurations" (Wylie: sgrib gnyis), the "obscuration of conflicting emotions" (Sanskrit: kleśa-avaraṇa, Wylie: nyon-mongs-pa'i sgrib-ma) and the "obscuration concerning the knowable" (Sanskrit: jñeya-avaraṇa, Wylie: shes-bya'i sgrib-ma).[19]


What are the six in SN 1.70? The sutta quoted below has a riddle about the six.

What are the six? And why?

What is the message of the sutta?

SN 1.70 translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi:

  “In what has the world arisen?
  In what does it form intimacy?
  By clinging to what is the world
  Harassed in regard to what?”

  “In six has the world arisen;
  In six it forms intimacy;
  By clinging to six the world
  Is harassed in regard to six.”

Cha Chakka Sutta is another Sutta which has a play of the number 6. Here more elaboration is given on what each set of 6 is.

Source: Cha Chakka Sutta

The Singhala translation is less of a riddle than the English. English retranslation is mine:

  (අධ්‍යාත්මික ආයතන) සය උපන් කල්හි ලොව උපන්නේ නම් වේ.

When the 6 sense bases arises the world arises

  (රූපාදී බාහිර ආයතන) සයෙහි සඞගමය කෙරෙයි.

By non-reaction to the external sense objects, the world is stilled

  (අධ්‍යාත්මික ආයතන) සයම ප්‍රත්‍යය කොට ගෙන

By means of the 6 sense bases

  (බාහිර ආයතන) සයෙහි ලෝ වැසි තෙම පෙළෙයි (වෙහෙසෙයි)

The 6 external sense objects trouble the worldlings

ලොක ( හෙවත් ජස්සුලොක ) සූත්‍රය

අධ්‍යාත්මික ආයතන - world - internal senses - eye, ear, ....

බාහිර ආයතන - external sense objects

So what is covered here is the 1st 2 items in the list of items in Cha Chakka Sutta:

the 6 internal senses
the 6 external senses


Buddha Statue Identification and Explanation Is there a name of this particular Buddha, and what is the mudra called, what does it mean, and what is in his left hand and what does it mean?

That fits the description of the "the Medicine Buddha",

  Bhaiṣajyaguru is typically depicted seated, wearing the three robes of a Buddhist monk, holding a lapis-colored jar of medicine nectar in his left hand and the right hand resting on his right knee, holding the stem of the Aruna fruit or Myrobalan between thumb and forefinger.

... but I have no better explanation than that.

I suppose the "medicine nectar" is 'the deathless' e.g. as in this answer -- see also 'nectar' is mentioned in other topics on this site.


Buddhist point of view in the research process I'm looking for some texts where the Buddha explains the nature of mind in relation with the process of learning/researching. I was reading a quote by a famous mathematician known to be very interested in Buddhism and I thought his point of view was related to some teachings of the Buddha. I would like to read more Buddhist literature to see if this connection is real. The quote:

  The unknown thing to be known appeared to me as some stretch of earth or hard marl, resisting penetration… the sea advances insensibly in silence, nothing seems to happen, nothing moves, the water is so far off you hardly hear it.. yet it finally surrounds the resistant substance. (Alexander Grothendieck)

I believe the idea of the "Rising Sea" can be understood in Buddhist terms. From my experience Buddhism has a lot of metaphors showing the mind/consciousness as an entity similar to the sea. I would like to see some texts where I can draw an analogy between the awakening process and the process of discovering something new.

I can attempt to answer this from a Theravada standpoint. Though I can try to draw a parallel between the mind and ocean but this might not be the Mahayana standpoint. But I found this if this might be of interest: Make Your Mind an Ocean: Aspects of Buddhist Psychology by Ven. Lama Thubten Yeshe Edited by Nicholas Ribush

Also what has being quoted seems related to the Bible as it is said this person turned to Christianity or could have been a mix and match from Buddhism and Christianity. Strikingly similar passages Isaiah 57:20, Ephesians 4:14 and James 1:6.

When you learn or do research you learn a concept (paññatti). First you will have words labeling (nama-paññatti) certain concepts (attha-paññatti). To describe this you will use a vocabulary which gives meaning to the conceptual terms (nirutti). There perhaps would be a language around how the words are used.

In learning when conceptualising something you recognise elements by which you want to build the concept. Say initially a baby sees his mother then applies the labeling "mother" and concept associated with it. As you learn new things there are 2 parts. 1st apply a label and then associate meaning with the lable.

For a more theoretical discussion on this see:

  Two kinds of paññatti are distinguished. One is called nama-paññatti and the other attha-paññatti. The first refers to names, words, signs, or symbols through which things, real or unreal, are designated: “It is the mere mode of recognising (saññakaramatta) by way of this or that word whose significance is determined by worldly convention.” [128] It is created by worldly consent (lokasanketa-nimmita) and established by worldly usage (lokavoharena siddha). [129] The other, called attha-paññatti, refers to ideas, notions, or concepts corresponding to the names, words, signs, or symbols. It is produced by the interpretative function of the mind (kappana) and is based on the various forms or appearances presented by the real elements when they are in particular situations or positions (avattha-visesa). [130] Both nama-paññatti and attha-paññatti thus have a psychological origin and as such both are devoid of objective reality.

Source: The Dhamma Theory Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa

Formulating a thesis or research ideas involve conceptualisation. Also these have to be expressed or communicated as finding or publication. More on this is as follows:

  Nama-paññatti is often defined as that which makes known (paññapanato paññatti) and attha-paññatti as that which is made known (paññapiyatta paññatti). [131] The former is an instance of agency definition (kattu-sadhana) and the latter of object definition (kamma-sadhana). What both attempt to show is that nama-paññatti which makes attha-paññatti known, and attha-paññatti which is made known by nama-paññatti, are mutually inter-dependent and therefore logically inseparable. This explains the significance of another definition which states that nama-paññatti is the term’s relationship with the ideas (saddassa atthehi sambandho) and that attha-paññatti is the idea’s relationship with the terms (atthassa saddehi sambandho). [132] These two pairs of definition show that the two processes of conceptualization and verbalization through the symbolic medium of language are but two separate aspects of the same phenomenon. It is for the convenience of definition that what really amounts to a single phenomenon is treated from two different angles, which represent two ways of looking at the same thing.

  The difference is established by defining the same word, paññatti, in two different ways. When it is defined as subject it is nama-paññatti—the concept as name. When it is defined as object it is attha-paññatti—the concept as meaning. If the former is that which expresses (vacaka), the latter is that which is expressible (vacaniya). [133] In this same sense, if the former is abhidhana, the latter is abhidheya. [134] Since attha-paññatti stands for the process of conceptualization it represents more the subjective and dynamic aspect, and since nama-paññatti stands for the process of verbalization it represents more the objective and static aspect. For the assignment of a term to what is constructed in thought—in other words, its expression through the symbolic medium of language—invests it with some kind of relative permanence and objectivity. It is, so to say, crystallised into an entity.

Source: The Dhamma Theory Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa

I Buddhism there concepts which are ultimate realities which may be the subject of Buddhist research. Following describes how these are learned and understood at the conceptual level.

  Now the definition of attha-paññatti as that which is made known by nama-paññatti gives rise to the question as to what its position is in relation to the real existents (dhammas). For if the real existents, too, can be made known (= attha-paññatti), on what basis are the two categories, the real and conceptual, to be distinguished? What should not be overlooked here is that according to its very definition attha-paññatti exists by virtue of its being conceived (parikappiyamana) and expressed (paññapiyamana). Hence it is incorrect to explain attha-paññatti as that which is conceptualizable and expressible, for its very existence stems from the act of being conceptualised and expressed. This rules out the possibility of its existing without being conceptualised and expressed. In the case of the dhammas or real existents the situation is quite different. While they can be made known by nama-paññatti, their existence is not dependent on their being known or conceptualised. Where such a real existent is made known by a nama-paññatti, the latter is called vijjamana-paññatti, [135] because it represents something that exists in the real and ultimate sense (paramatthato). And the notion or concept (= attha-paññatti) corresponding to it is called tajja-paññatti, the verisimilar or appropriate concept. [136] This does not mean that the real existent has transformed itself into a concept. It only means that a concept corresponding to it has been established.

Source: The Dhamma Theory Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa

An untamed mind your thoughts rise and fall like sea waves. So effort should be put to tame your mind. With continuous stilling of the mind the resistance or hindrances to achieving this is overcome.

Interestingly a few others have things along similar lines but all share some resemblance to Bible verses adopted to the Buddhist context. Perhaps since "mind like the sea" passages even in a Buddhist context are adopted from bible passages.

  Conquer Yourself

  “It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell.”

  He who can conquer himself is greater than the mighty. To conquer yourself you must conquer your mind. You must control your thinking. Your thoughts cannot be tossed to and fro like the waves of the sea. You may be thinking, “I can’t control my thoughts, if a thought comes, it comes.” To that I say, you may not be able to stop a bird from flying over your head, but you can certainly stop him from building a nest in your hair. Dismiss thoughts that are contrary to the life you desire to live. Buddha said, “It is a man’s own mind, not his enemy or foe that lures him to evil ways.”

Source: 10 Must Read Life Lessons from Buddha

  “It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles.”

  -Buddha

  "One must find the source within one's own Self, one must possess it. Everything else was seeking -- a detour, an error."

  -Siddhartha

  I firmly believe in the realization of one's self. From it stems the true meaning of my life. From here am I, bestowed with the understanding and courage to follow my righteous path.

  Unless we learn to control our 'self', we will be swayed by it. I believe that whatever you desire and dream, is attained, once you agree to the notion that it is you, and you only that needs to be conquered. To discover and unravel the fountainhead of everything - passion, greed, peace, anger, anxiety, and true happiness, you need not go anywhere but listen to your inner voice. Your mind knows only some things, but your inner voice tells you everything.

  However your inner voice, your internal speech or your conscience, whatever you may want to call it, has been burdened, thwarted and gradually emptied by the vices in your life. Your conscience has yielded to the perfect examples of how ordinary men should live their lives. It has been designed by the beliefs in popular magazines and opinions others have of you. It has even been wrongly submerged under your own sea of thoughts, most of which you believe, define you as a being. However, it isn't the truth. Far from it.

  That silvery voice speaks to you every so often. To be receptive, you must halt your mind from obstructing it. Hence, to conquer yourself, you must conquer your mind. You must pay heed to, but constrain your thinking. Your thoughts cannot be tossed to and fro like the waves of the sea. You may be thinking, “I can’t control my thoughts, it comes, if it wants to.” Buddha says "You may not be able to stop a bird from flying over your head, but you can certainly stop him from building a nest in your hair." If you dream of a life with endless possibilities, live with an unsatiated curiosity for the knowledge of 'self' and dismiss thoughts negating your promise-filled belief.

Source: What is the most important belief that propels your life? and What is your most unshakeable belief? but this mis attributes one of Martin Luther King, Jr. or Martin Luther quotes as one of the Buddha's.

  As Martin Luther once said with regard to temptation and tempting thoughts: we cannot control what birds fly over our heads. We can only control whether they build nests in our hair.

Source: Did Jesus Ever Sin?


Looking for an online resource of the commentary(SNA.ii.476; SA.i.155) which says that the Brahma Sahampati was an Anagami from the Suddhavasa realms This page mentions the following:

  The Commentaries say (SNA.ii.476; SA.i.155) that he was an Anagami
  Brahma born in the Suddhavasa, there to pass a whole kappa...

I'm looking for an online resource for SNA.ii.476; SA.i.155.

Thanks!

The Sutta Nipata source is Sn-A 3.10:

Roman Pali:

http://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/s0505a.att2.xml

Sinhalese Pali:

http://tipitaka.org/sinh/cscd/s0505a.att2.xml

The relevant passage is:

Atha kho brahmā sahampatīti ko ayaṃ brahmā, kasmā ca bhagavantaṃ upasaṅkamitvā etadavocāti? Ayaṃ kassapassa bhagavato sāsane sahako nāma bhikkhu anāgāmī hutvā suddhāvāsesu uppanno, tattha naṃ ‘‘**sahampati brahmā’’ti sañjānanti.

අථ ඛො බ්‍රහ්‌මා සහම්‌පතීති කො අයං බ්‍රහ්‌මා, කස්‌මා ච භගවන්‌තං උපසඞ්‌කමිත්‌වා එතදවොචාති? අයං කස්‌සපස්‌ස භගවතො සාසනෙ සහකො නාම භික්‌ඛු අනාගාමී හුත්‌වා සුද්‌ධාවාසෙසු උප්‌පන්‌නො, තත්‌ථ නං ‘‘සහම්‌පති බ්‍රහ්‌මා’’ති සඤ්‌ජානන්‌ති.

Roughly:

"And then the Brahma Sahampati" - Who was this brahma? And from what [cause] did he, having approached, say this? This one, a bhikkhu named Sahaka in the sasana of the Kassapa the Blessed One, having become an anagami, arose in the Pure Abodes; there, they knew him as "Sahampati Brahma".


Is it possible to have awareness without a self-sense? Is it possible to have awareness without a self-sense? Does an awareness presuppose  a self being aware no matter how refined or subtle that sense of self might be? Or to reframe the question slightly - can awareness be non-dual i.e. the being aware of the subject without the object.

Many thanks as always

OP: Is it possible to have awareness without a self-sense?

Yes, why not? It's very hard to imagine how enlightened ones think about what they use, their parents, relatives, etc... without self-sense. They use things with knowing that this is not me, this does not belong to me, this cannot be kept as I wish. How beautiful that thinking is!
Do you know even a non-returner lived in a home, did a job (without earning money), and looked after his old blind parents? I quoted here Kassapa Lord Buddha's own words about him, to understand how he did those without self-sense in order to imagine a little about how enlightened ones think.

But Ghaṭīkāra doesn’t get upset, nor will he. Ghaṭīkāra has gone for refuge to the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha. He doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit sexual misconduct, lie, or take alcoholic drinks that cause negligence. He has experiential confidence in the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha, and has the ethics loved by the noble ones. He is free of doubt regarding suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation. He eats in one part of the day; he’s celibate, ethical, and of good character. He has set aside gems and gold, and rejected gold and money. He’s put down the shovel and doesn’t dig the earth with his own hands. He takes what has crumbled off by a riverbank or been dug up by mice, and brings it back in a carrier. When he has made a pot, he says: “Anyone may leave bagged sesame, mung beans, or chick peas here and take what they wish.” He looks after his blind old parents. And since he has ended the five lower fetters, Ghaṭīkāra will be reborn spontaneously and will become extinguished there, not liable to return from that world.

~ Cited from: Ghaṭīkāra Sutta (MN 81)
I have provided this answer by assuming the OP's intended sakkāya-ditthi by the word, self-sense. To my understanding absence of self-sense (sakkāya-ditthi) is not something that totally abandon you from outer world or conventional relationships. We can understand this by reading the following conversation between Ghaṭīkāra and Jotipāla.

Jotipāla: Dear Ghaṭīkāra, you have heard this teaching, so why don’t you go forth from the lay life to homelessness?
Ghaṭīkāra: Don’t you know, dear Jotipāla, that I look after my blind old parents?

Note: This is how I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.