Where is careless attention (ayonisomanasikāro) in Dependent Origination? AN 10.61 says:

Thus not associating with good persons, becoming full, fills up not
hearing the good Dhamma. Not hearing the good Dhamma, becoming full,
fills up lack of faith. Lack of faith, becoming full, fills up
careless attention (ayonisomanasikāro). Careless attention, becoming full, fills up lack
of mindfulness and clear comprehension. Lack of mindfulness and clear
comprehension, becoming full, fills up non-restraint of the sense
faculties. Non-restraint of the sense faculties, becoming full, fills
up the three kinds of misconduct.
AN 10.61

Since careless or improper attention (ayonisomanasikāro) results in non-restraint of the sense faculties, it appears this ayonisomanasikāro arises before sense contact in Dependent Origination. Is this true?
If the above is true, where do we think careless or improper attention (ayonisomanasikāro) should be placed within the standard teaching of the twelve conditions of Dependent Origination?

MN 148 (my emphasis added) ...

  Mind consciousness arises dependent on the mind and thoughts. The meeting of the three is contact. Contact is a condition for what is felt as pleasant, painful, or neutral. When you experience a pleasant feeling, if you don’t approve, welcome, and keep clinging to it, the underlying tendency to greed does not underlie that. When you experience a painful feeling, if you don’t sorrow or wail or lament, beating your breast and falling into confusion, the underlying tendency to repulsion does not underlie that. When you experience a neutral feeling, if you truly understand that feeling’s origin, ending, gratification, drawback, and escape, the underlying tendency to ignorance does not underlie that. Mendicants, after giving up the underlying tendency to greed for pleasant feeling, after dispelling the underlying tendency to repulsion towards painful feeling, after eradicating ignorance in the case of neutral feeling, after giving up ignorance and giving rise to knowledge, it’s totally possible to make an end of suffering in the present life.

... so maybe unwise attention happens at the "feeling" stage (and the converse is "guarding the senses").

You could probably say it's associated with other nidanas too, e.g. ignorance (which is arguably the "root"); and/or namarupa (per the definition you referenced here, i.e. that nama includes "Feeling, perception, intention, contact and attention").

Also MN 2 says that the "thicket of views" associated with self-views arises when attending inappropriately -- and MN 148 (quoted above) also says it's possible (but wrong) to identify with eye, eye-object, eye-consciousness, contact, feeling, craving, etc. -- so maybe that would be some inappropriate attention associated with all of these nidanas.

But because AN 10.6 says it results in "restraint of the sense faculties" I think that's talking about "guarding the senses" and therefore e.g. not delighting in feeling.

Maybe not "before" sense contact though -- before and after. I think the DO relationship is more complicated than strictly chronological e.g. "once around the clock, clockwise".


When did Vasubandhu, the teacher of Dignāga, live? Vasubandhu is known to be the teacher of Dignāga. When did he live? What are the sources that say so?

The problem is that in the oldest known source (Paramartha's "Life of Vasubandhu", compiled around 550 CE) conflicting dates are mentioned. This has lead to several different theories about the exact dates that mark Vasubandhu's life.

According to Wikipedia Vasubandhu lived in the 4th century CE. For this information they refer to this essay where it says:

  it is known that he was a contemporary of Emperor Candragupta I. Ramashankae Tripathi, History of Ancient India (Delhi 1942), gives the dates 320 to circa 335 AD for the reign of Candragupta I, and c. 335-375 for that of his militant successor Samudragupta. This situates the life of our Vasubandhu between 290 and 370 AD.

However in 1951 Erich Frauwallner, a professor in Buddhism, wrote an article called "On the date of the Buddhist master of the law Vasubandhu" in which he posted a theory that there were 2 Vasubandhus;

the first Vasubandhu was the co-founder of the Yogācāra school and lived  from 320-380 CE,
and a second Vasubandhu, the author of the Abhidharma-kośa, who lived from 400-480 CE.

This view has been criticized and doesn't seem to be widely accepted. More info in these papers:

Dan Lusthaus - What is and isn't Yogacara (against the two Vasubandhu-theory)

  Since the progression and development of his thought, however, is so strikingly evident in these works, and the similarity of vocabulary and style of argument so apparent across the texts, the theory of Two Vasubandhus has little merit.

Marek Mejor's - The problem of the two Vasubandhus reconsidered (in favor of the two Vasubandhu-theory)


What is taught about Buddha nature in Theravada Buddhism? Reference: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/snapshot02.htm

The very last row talks about Buddha Nature. According to this page, Buddha Nature is not taught in Theravada Buddhism, and to my understanding, Buddha Nature is the potential for a being to become Enlightened. Is there any reason why the potential to become Enlightened isn't taught? It seems - to me - to be common sense that anyone can find their way to become Enlightened. After all, the Buddha is an example of what all beings could become.

Is my understanding of Buddha Nature wrong or is there more to this than I'm seeing regarding how Theravada Buddhism incorporates this in their teachings?

Consider this: Theravada posits Nirvana as a remote goal, while Mahayana posits Buddha-Nature as self-existing state of affairs. This is the key.

The reason Gautama Buddha declared Nirvana, is because he was modeling the Path after his own quest. Because he achieved his Enlightenment after having gone through numerous trainings and realizing Three Marks of Existence, Twelve Nidanas and Four Noble Truths, he saw that all students must go through similar experiences in order to achieve the same Liberation. Indeed, for someone without basic discipline, critical thinking skills, and capacity for self-reflection, attaining Buddha-Eye is outright impossible.

By the time of Mahayana though, because Buddhism became very popular and the essence of Teaching was somewhat lost in the noise of speculative philosophy and esoteric speculation, many new students would become obsessed with the idea of Nirvana, and instead of training the skilfull qualities of mind required for Enlightenment, would engage in fruitless search of Transcendental Realization. Out of compassion for future seekers, Bodhisattvas established the notion of Buddha Nature, openly declaring that Enlightenment is not something remote you have to attain, but rather one's innate nature to be recovered.

So Buddha-Nature is basically Nirvana or Enlightenment, except now you know you already have it, and only need to open your eyes, instead of running around the world seeking it. That said, you still have to work on dropping all attachments, deconstructing the ego, and becoming the master of your mind/emotions before you can take legal ownership of your rightful possession :)


What does Buddhism say about dealing with negative people? I live and work around a person (relative) whom is constantly negative in my life. He always belittles me about what I do, and whenever I succeed at something, he claims it was luck. When I fail at something, he usually mocks me or says it was my fault, or calls me deragatory terms. Given this is a relative, he does care about me, but I think it is from caring too much that he always puts me down or spreads negative karma when I am around him. If I am too afraid to do something, he calls me a coward.

Being that my environment calls for existing around this person for much of the time, is there any way I can respond as a Buddhist? It will be awhile before my living condition changes. I tried Metta and showing compassion, and I read stories on how Buddha had historically handled insults from strangers. The hard part about this is that this person is a relative and family member. I tell myself to not be attached to my ego or self image, but I am very much a beginner, and when reality hits me, I find my peace broken by the negativity. I find the day poisoned by this bad karma.

It is like I wish for others' opinions to not bother me or steal from my inner peace, but somehow what others say or think about me eventually robs me of the day's equanimity. Eventually I succumb to the negative energy. I always feel low in self-esteem after this happens. I always think as if I have failed in my practice by being bothered and robbed of my sense of harmony. One morning I woke up for Samatha meditation, and as soon as I left my room to begin the day I was greeted with a barrage of cold remarks.

I'm wondering what Buddha taught on this? I feel as if I am wrongly clinging to my self image or sense of self-worth in life. Sometimes I am mindful of it, and realize the attachment is there.

Thank you, peace on you all.

With an ensō (and "the beauty of imperfection") as an avatar, you might like a Zen story: Obedience. The story reminds me of my mother, a nursery school teacher (very young children) -- she said that instead of trying to control their behaviour by criticizing them, "I wait until they do something right and then praise them" (e.g. "Thank you for putting your work away", or "Thank you for sharing", or etc).

One of the funniest stories I remember was of one of her assistants who, instead of directly addressing and criticizing the whole class, raised her voice just loudly enough for everyone to hear and said to my mum: "Mrs. Teacher, where have all the quiet children gone?"

I can't easily fathom your relative's motive. You're talking about "self image": could it be that he wants you to be like him (or, like his image of himself), or that he wants to be like you?

Would it be fair to say that you are already behaving well? You say that your peace is stolen and your equanimity robbed, but I'm hoping you don't fuel the flames, e.g. try to take revenge on him and so on. If you can stay untainted by misbehaviour, harsh speech and so on even when he's making "cold remarks" then you're already doing well. This article for example claims that, "The satisfaction of leading a blameless life is the highest form of satisfaction that a layman can have".

I just want to add that "blameless" doesn't mean "holier than thou", which would be more self-image.

Anyway, to answer your question, "I'm wondering what Buddha taught on this?"

I wonder whether you might be interested in reading about "fame". That might be another side of the coin of what you're talking about -- i.e. being motivated by how we think others see us (and maybe identity-view too, how we see ourselves).

This search for 'fame' and 'lay' on Access to Insight finds articles that may be a useful introduction, or another perspective.

One more thing, is that your language includes the feeling of being "robbed" of your equanimity.

I think that's kind of a dangerous view to have; for example the Dhammapada starts with,

  "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.

Perhaps that should be contrasted with the Zen story, The Moon Cannot Be Stolen.

You wrote, "Sometimes I am mindful of it, and realize the attachment is there"; but attachment isn't only to "self image or sense of self-worth in life" -- an attachment can also be to a "feeling" (such as equanimity), so thinking of it as "my equanimity" might be dangerous.

And maybe you're treating equanimity like glass, as if an equanimity could be broken; instead maybe you could see it as more fluid, less rigid or resistant, perhaps more like water (an ocean) or air or fire.

Or maybe a traditional metaphor is of the moon reflected in water, if the water is troubled then the image is harder to see, but the moon itself is not troubled.


How many nana stages? What is the difference between the 16 stage insight meditation vs. 10 stage insight meditation? What about 0 stages any teacher teach 0 nanas?

What is the basis for "nanas" is the suttas?

Bhante Ñāṇadassana made a work about all/the ñāṇas as they are found in the skripts:

Wisdom and the seventy-three Kinds of mundane and supramundane Knowledge

Introduction
The `Seventy Three Kinds of Knowledge' appear as a
Summary or Table of Contents (màtikà) in the first Treatise
on Knowledge (¥àõa-kathà) of the Canonical book Pañisambhidà-magga (translated by Bhikkhu ¥àõamoëi as The
Path of Discrimination, PTS ed. 1982), and then explained
in detail.
Expounded by The Buddha in His discourses (suttas) to
audiences according to their level of progress in the path to
deliverance (and found now scattered throughout the Pàëi
Canon1
), these knowledges were, as it is traditionally accepted, compiled and grouped in their sequential order, dealt
with under special headings and amplified (in the Pañisambhidà-magga) by The Buddha's chief disciple, Venerable Sàriputta, the one declared by Him foremost amongst His disciples that possess great wisdom (mahà-pa¤¤à: A i.23), and thus second in wisdom only to Himself. (SA ii.45)...

(Not put on accesstoinsight.eu, as htlm, for now, so letters are here not proper displayed, open work, but fine in the pdf)

An approach in teaching with pictures, in accordiance with the Visudhimagga can be found here:

Teaching Dhamma by pictures: Explanation of a Siamese Traditional Buddhist Manuscript

A current ongoing discussion "Suttas vs. (modern) Vipassana"- Discussion can be found here:

What are khanika, Upacara and Appana Samadhi?, on D&D


Cause or how to get rid of ocd compulsions Since quiete some years I'm suffering from ocd compulsions mainly characterized by repeating simple actions like closing the door, putting light on and off, typing something several times, etc.... And other simple actions. In my head it's something like something must 'feel' perfect or the right way and if it doesn't feel 'ok' I repeat until it does... kinda weird but ok... Is this a lack of self control? How do I get rid of this self thought behavior? I started doing this in a really stressfull period.

Thanks in advance,

Namaste

In Buddhism, the practise is called 'mental cultivation', which similar to OCD, repeatedly cultivates a Buddhist practise. For example:

  What do you think, Rahula: What is a mirror for?

  For reflection, sir.

  In the same way, Rahula, bodily actions, verbal actions & mental
  actions are to be done with repeated reflection.

  MN 61

Therefore, when OCD keeps repeating the thought: "Its not good enough; its not good enough"; Buddhist practise would keep repeating the opposite thought in order to make the OCD thought subside, i.e.: "Its good enough; its good enough".

MN 20 states to replace an unskillful thought with the opposite type of thought, as follows:

  When unskillful thoughts... arise in a monk through reflection on an
  adventitious object, he should, (in order to get rid of that), reflect
  on a different object which is connected with skill. Then the
  unskillful thoughts are eliminated; they disappear. By their
  elimination, the mind stands firm, settles down, becomes unified and
  concentrated, just within (his subject of meditation).

  Like an experienced carpenter or carpenter's apprentice, striking hard
  at, pushing out and getting rid of a coarse peg with a fine one,
  should the bhikkhu in order to get rid of the adventitious object,
  reflect on a different object which is connected with skill. Then the
  unskillful thoughts are eliminated; they disappear. By their
  elimination the mind stands firm, settles down, becomes unified and
  concentrated, just within (his subject of meditation).

  MN 20


Reality, Experience and Information. How are these three terms related to each other? Many times I have found myself thankful for being aware of Buddhism, and also for being connected to all of the people here. Information, experiences, doubts, references and views, everything that we have had shared helps make me a good man. Whenever I get time, I read questions, answers and comments.

BUT, I have observed that reality lies in the nature of the experience, and the information that is already present (maybe through text or speech) in the mind can be considered worthless after the experience. Can someone tell me how experiences and the text/speech information work together? I know it works but I want to know how it works.

This is a beautiful question, because it's not only about the spiritual aspect of life, but about living a spiritual life -- where your practice and your daily life are not separate.

There is that beautiful adage, "the finger that points to the moon is not the moon," which seems specially relevant to your query.

Our minds can be harnessed like a magnifying glass into understanding phenomena.  Since all phenomena share certain characteristics, by deeply understanding a fragment we can understand the whole.

The key is knowing where to look, what to focus on.  This is why oral teachings and scriptural knowledge are so important, especially in any serious practice of the Buddha's teachings.  We get our bearings, a basic "map with landmarks" that we can use to find our way around.

Language can be viewed a few ways; mainly as an expression of life, and also as a tool which we can use to help one another.

Ultimately, as you say, it is like a reflection.  The "mirror of mind" can become apparent with steady practice and rigorous reflection.  A good analogy to the words or language, the oral instructions that make this understanding possible might be: a key, or fine tuning, or two magnetized ends finally coalescing.

The words and teachings help unlock truth, which can be understood, and whereafter -- as you have said -- the words themselves seem hollow or insignificant in comparison to the actual experience of understanding.

That said, we must always be thankful for our stepping stones.  You can climb up a ladder and see the view from the mountain top, which doesn't render the ladder useless, but if your truth was "ladder ladder ladder" and now it's "whoa! check out the view!" there can be a sense of disparity.

The truth is, all the teachings are skillful means for realizing the ultimate nature of reality -- actualizing an understanding that is beyond description.  Buddha called it the deathless, among other descriptions, and although study and understanding of the words is very important, the actual experience is the intention.

Back to your question, ultimately the three Reality, Experience, and Information are inseparable.  It may appear that the cliff and the sky are separate, but there is no gap in their continuity.


How to deal with fixation towards an old relationship? I broke up with my girlfriend a couple of years ago. We haven't talked to each other since then. A few months back we met at a job interview. We spoke to each other and she was very friendly. I thought she is no longer mad at me. Few days ago I came to know that we both got the job. I texted her to congratulate. She has seen it but hasn't replied. Now I can't stop checking my messages on the phone to see if she has replied. I know this is fixation but just don't know how to deal with it. What could be a way out of this?

Now I can't stop checking my messages on the phone to see if she has replied. I know this is fixation but just don't know how to deal with it. What could be a way out of this?

Not much else to do other than to be mindful of it. You see the mind works in the way of habits. The more time spent on something, e.g. thinking about the past or future, that will incline the mind more towards that direction.
When being mindful of the (compulsive) thinking process it will interrupt it. Instead of enforcing the feed-back loop, mindfulness will momentarily break it.
Since we are working with habits, the mind will soon fall into this way of thinking about past and future again when mindfulness is absent. That's when one must apply mindfulness again. When doing this over and over the mind will slowly begin to incline itself towards that direction - the direction of mindfulness, wakefulness and clarity of mind. When that happens compulsive thinking will stop. It cannot go on since it's not being fed anymore. There's no fuel to burn.
In short, just be mindful of these thoughts when they happen. Do that again and again until you can be free from them. That is the only way one can go about this.
Pinning them down with willpower will only suppress them and cause them to erupt violently later. Shifting attention away from them will only bring temporarily relief.
If you want to become free from them for good, you need to observe them with mindfulness until they change, become exhausted and pass away.
May you be well and happy.


Are there "safe" practices to follow before meeting one's teacher? I sincerely want to practice Tibetan Buddhism. It is a tradition which places great emphasis on one's relationship with their teacher. This makes a lot of sense to me. I plan to visit a Karma Kagyu centre near me when the coronavirus pandemic and associated quarantine measures subside and it is open to the public again. Are there any "safe" preliminary practices I can do in the meanwhile given that I have not formally taken refuge, received any empowerment or explanation and all my knowledge comes from literature? I am particularly unsure about whether it is a good idea to practice mantra meditation and mandala offerings without a teacher's guidance and my current view is that it is not.

For what it's worth I have been practicing breathing meditation and calm abiding (zazen) daily for a few months now as well as reading Buddhist texts and commentaries. But I don't feel like it has led to any non-intellectual understanding or insight yet.

Do not rush out trying to find a teacher. When you are ready the teacher will find you. Let the Buddha be your teacher and the Dharma be your medicine. When you do go to the center consider them as Sangha and learn how to engage them and see what you can learn. Be mindful of your own expectations and excitement for what that meeting will be like.

It is important to integrate the teachings in a heartfelt and sincere way. Intellectual understanding is important, but not nearly sufficient. Without actually practicing the teachings mere intellectual understanding can do nothing to help us. It is like being a chemist and understanding perfectly well the chemical mechanism of a medicinal drug. Unless one actually takes the medicine - not just understands how it works - there will be no hope of benefiting from it.

As for what practices to start out with... have you tried cultivating the four immeasurables as the Buddha instructed? The dharma is safe and you should feel free to practice it to your best understanding. I would begin with mindfulness, cherishing others, reducing or at least recognizing the non-virtuous minds, lay vows/practices and understanding what refuge is and means along with the four immeasurables.


Where does Buddha mention about Sanatana dharma (Hinduism)? Hindupedia states, on its page about the Sanātan Dharma principle, that:

  Although Buddha usually spoke of the Sanātan Dharma, he sometimes used other synonymous terms for "Sanātan Dharma," such as "Akaliko Dharma," and "Poranako Dharma."

Can I know the all the verse numbers of scriptures, where Buddha mentioned "Sanātan Dharma" "Akaliko Dharma" and "Poranako Dharma." ?

sanantana

  adjective

  primeval; old; eternal

Doing a quick search, the Pali word 'sanantana' appears to be found rarely in the Pali suttas.

Apart from being used in references to the Vedic (pre-Hindu) teachings about 'Brahma' & 'Eternal Youth' in DN 19, a quick search finds 'sanantana' used in only two Buddhist phrases, as follows:

  Saccaṃ ve amatā vācā, esa dhammo sanantano; Sacce atthe ca dhamme
  ca, āhu santo patiṭṭhitā.

  Truth indeed, is deathless speech — this is the ancient/eternal Dharma. On
  truth, its study and practice both, they say are the Peaceful firm.

  Snp 3.3

Most famously in the Dhammapada:

  Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone
  is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.

  Na hi verena verāni, sammantīdha kudācanaṃ; Averena ca sammanti, esa
  dhammo sanantano.

The word 'porāṇaka' appears to be not found in any teachings attributed to the Buddha; however appears found in later-day commentaries & Jataka Tales; as shown in this search list.

The word 'akālika' is supremely important in Buddhism, being one of six attributes of the Dhamma spoken by the Buddha, as follows:

svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo: perfectly spoken is the Dhamma of the Blessed One
sandiṭṭhiko: visible in the here-&-now
akāliko: immediately effective; without delay; 'timeless'
ehipassiko: inviting inspection
opaneyyiko: leading onwards (to experiencing here-&-now Nibbana)
paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī: to be verified by the wise for themselves.

Every morning and every evening, the above verse is chanted by Theravada Buddhists as the recollection of refuge in the Dhamma.

Since the word 'akāliko' is often translated as 'timeless', it appears the word 'akāliko' might be mistaken for 'sanantana' & 'porāṇaka'. However, 'akāliko' means 'immediate' rather than 'eternal'. In short, it appears the Pali word 'akāliko' is not synonymous with  'sanantana' and 'porāṇaka'.


Trying to find causes of everything Is trying to find causes of everything not a good practise? Isn't having rational mind a good thing?
I know that the Lord Buddha advised us to not to think about beginning of life. Because it make us crazy. There may be some other things like this.
I realize that this thinking causes me to loose sati. Why that thing happen? How long does it exists? etc. Most of these thinking causes to stuck at a loop. It feels like it wastes lot of energy for nonsense.
But I have fear of stopping this. Do I have to just stop thinking and let it go? Do I have to forget things without knowing causes of it? How do I select what to think and what not to think? How this affects sati? What Lord Buddha said about this? How should I handle this rationality?

It's correct that these things should not be contemplated due to their ability to destabilize the mind, making it less suitable for meditation practice. Thinking about such topics is useless from a Buddhist point of view.
Just be mindful of the habit and the thoughts when they arise. With time and practice they will subside.


"No trace" conceptual origins and term There is a quote by Shunryu Suzuki which says:

When you do something, you should do it with your whole body and mind; you should be concentrated on what you do. You should do it completely, like a good bonfire. You should not be a smoky fire. You should burn yourself completely. If you do not burn yourself completely, a trace of yourself will be left in what you do.

I think I've read this elsewhere described in terms of a snowflake in a fire, and everything turned to ash.
Is there an original source(s) of this concept, and if so, is there a succinct name for it in Chinese or Japanese Zen?

"Wholeheartedness" is the term we use in my Rinzai lineage.  In Japanese, you can probably get away with the term "kanshin" which loosely translates to "the mind with no remainder".  Think of it as a mind that is so engaged, there's nothing left over that could be doing something else.  Like if you're hoeing beans, you are hoeing beans and not thinking about your taxes or whether Gincarlo Stanton will finally play a full season for the Yankees.
This is the place where not even a needle can enter.  It is a practice that is so close that no air can escape.


Nature of spiritual advancement and material advancement How would you balance, material advancement and spiritual advancement in terms of Buddhism? I consider this because something material is close to what we see and feel in the moment, and related to desires of creating something and/or modifying it to suit our needs and ego (and suchlike consequences) and probably being attached to that which you created.

This may be a question of how to balance spiritual and professional commitments. Isn't commitment a form of attachment?

Because of the existence of mind and matter there will always be feelings when they come in contact. So professional or material advancement is not the real problem. The problem is that your mind identifies things which you cannot exercise absolute control of possession as mine. When classify something as unwanted or wanted you react. Letting go of this identification leads to spiritual progress. (Letting go of this of lay life may make time for more serious practice though.)

The main problem is the reaction which results when mind and matter comes in contact giving rise to feeling. If you react to this as desirable and undesirable and you keep reacting creating new conditioning which keeps you rolling in misery. Keeping equanimity towards feelings and knowing their impermanence is the actual measure of spiritual progress.

There were many lay followers who were wealthy but also achieved spiritual progress. E.g. Visakha and Anathapindika. All of them attained it through developing insight. Also having material wealth may not be an issue in many cases like the above.


How different is the lifestyle of male monks from that of the female monks? Lifestyle means the daily activities carried out, the monasteries, the rules and regulations, etc.

If there are more than one types of the traditions, then please focus your answer on Tibetan Buddhism.

Bhikshuni Thubten Chodron founded Sravasti Abbey in 2003. It's based i the US, not Asia, but Venerable has her education and tradition from Asia (education India/tradition Tibet).  Male and female monastics train together there as equals—brothers and sisters supporting each other on the Dharma path.

They write a lot on their site about monastic life in general, see more: http://www.sravastiabbey.org/about/index.html

"Ordination in the Tibetan Buddhist Tradition" is an article from H.H. The Dalai Lama on both male/monks and female/nuns. http://www.dalailama.com/messages/buddhism/ordination-in-the-tibetan-tradition


Is this just a logic or experience about mind(reality)? While doing self enquiry kind of meditation(also doing vipassana) there is feel of understanding/experience/logic that make myself convinced(but not strongly) that "me" is not the thoughts or the body or sensual experience. I don't continuously feel this, but I find concentration, calmness etc getting better.

What is this am I experiencing?

How to go beyond this?

And some teachings says that if you can disassociate ourself from mind and body then we can experience oneness(or conciousness), but I don't experience oneness or anything that I haven't experience before except the feeling of dissociation, why?

Sounds like the hinderances have been temporarily tamed to some degree.

Oneness as I experience it using metta, self investigation and mindfulness just means there doesn't nessasarily have to be a distinction made by us human beings between me and other, us and them, tree and it's background, hand and fingers, sky and ground, good and bad, out and in, foot and ground, right and left, eyelid and eye,  you and me, up and down and so on. If no distinctions are  taken for granted one can transcend only perceiving distinctions and percieve everything as one yet distinct.

Dissociation with the concept of oneness or dissociation with needing to bring on oneness might be desirable as oneness can so easily be clung to.

How do you get beyond? Simply don't try to get beyond, that detached kind of  attitude is in harmony with getting beyond.  Keep at it, it sounds to me like your doing alright.


What if there is no rebirth? Recently, I found a rather interesting quote of HH Dalai Lama XIV, which he said in Bodhgaya interviews, 1981:

  “Buddhists believe in rebirth. But suppose through various investigative means, science comes one day to a definite conclusion that there is no rebirth. If this is definitely proven, then we must accept it and we will accept it.” — see, for example, here

First of all, it's worth mentioning that this phrase seems to be one of the most progressive thought I have ever seen.

However, I would like to know, how exactly the Buddhist community will behave in case if, indeed, scientific method proves some day that one of key concepts of Buddhism (not necessarily, rebirth) is not correct. Obviously, it's impossible to rewrite sacral books, rethink important consequences of a mentioned concept, restructure rituals, etc.

Also, many people are happy with current paradigms, and such discovery may have disastrous effect on many of them.

There is a freely available talk by Vessantara, an order member in the sangha I practice with (Triratna) that addresses this kind of issue. If one entirely rejected rebirth (or if it were proven to be untrue) then what would this do to the Dharma? My previous opinion was rebirth was a cultural accretion not a core teaching so if rebirth wasn't true the Dharma would remain essentially the same. There might be some reframing and reemphasising but the essentials would be the same. However Vessantara disagrees. The following parts of the Dharma would be shaken, possibly irreparably damaged (list not exhaustive)

The Bodhisattva Ideal. It is difficult to see how one could hope to aim for the enlightenment of all beings in one lifetime. It's not going to happen
The Buddha enlightenment experience. A central part of this was his visions of previous rebirth. Are we saying that this is not true. What other parts of his enlightenment experience are also not true
Death proximate Karma. There is no rebirth so the powerful karmic effects at the point of death are unreal.
The niddanas. There are one lifetime interpretations of these admittedly but other interpretations (3 lifetimes) would be thrown out
Enlightenment as the deathless. This is common imagery in texts such as the Dhammapada. Without rebirth what could deathless mean? It's unclear (to me)
Nirvana as 'blowing out'. Enlightenment as the concept of stepping off the wheel of samsara. Without rebirth there is no endless round so what are we stepping off from.

I could go on (i won't). I was just impressed with the talk and I think it's an interesting exercise to see where a rejection or disprove of rebirth might end up. I'm certainly not banging the drum for rebirth, in fact I remain at best agnostic. I know that rebirth-less interpretation of each of the six points are available but the question is - are we twisting the Dharma completely out of shape? This talk argues that we would be.

As a footnote an alternative view is available from another order member, Nagapriya in his book Exploring Karma and Rebirth. This book takes the opposite to Vessantara and argues that all rebirth-less interpretations are valid and do not lose their meaning. The talk and the book taken together give excellent (and opposing) views - companion pieces almost.


Does duḥkha apply to animals too? Life is inherently full of suffering. I wonder if the concept of dukkha applies to non-human animals.

Yes.  Hell, Preta (hungry ghost), and Animal (non-human) often referred to as Dukkhathi Bhumi (realms of pain and suffering) by Buddha.


What are habits in buddhism? How are habits seen in buddhism - how are they explained ?

read now about habit making - and would love to hear users views on habits -  and what they see habits as

And what people think about habit making and its effectiveness and why

How are habits seen in buddhism - how are they explained ?

Habitual tendencies persist from life to life. Say you were a monkey than then born a human sometimes the tendency to jump last.
Only the Buddha can overcome habitual tendencies. Even an enlightened person will have habitual tendencies.

read now about habit making - and would love to hear users views on habits - and what they see habits as
And what people think about habit making and its effectiveness and why

A worldly person does many thing habitually. Though habitual action is at the pre conscious level they have karmic potent. So if you develop wholesome habits this definitely would be a bonus for this life and after. In absence of weighty and near death Karma, habitual karma decides the next life.
Also see:

Anusaya by Piya Tan
The Unconscious by Piya Tan
Unconscious Views by Piya Tan


Where are the Eight Worldly Winds and how to deal with them described? To refresh your memory, the Eight Worldly Winds are:

Pleasure
Pain
Praise
Blame
Gain
Loss
Fame
Ill-repute

Mentioned in both the Lokavipatti Sutta in the Pali Canon, and in verse 29 of Nagarjuna's "Letter to a Friend."

The short answer on how to deal with them is: see them for what they are. Transient sources of suffering.


Reference request for "our Buddha nature chooses not to be enlightened"? I seem to remember that Mahayana Buddhism said somewhere something along the lines of, "Our Buddha nature (or the Buddha) chooses not to be enlightened".

I am not sure if I am remembering this correctly. Does anyone know the teaching to which I am referring, and would someone be so kind as to clear this up, perhaps with some sort of quote, for me?

When a sight comes before the eyes, a sound to the ears or a smell to the nose, there is no choosing involved here in terms of seeing, hearing or smelling. The seeing, hearing & smelling occur automatically, without choosing.

Similarly, when the mind is actually getting enlightened by experiencing the truth, it is not involved in choosing.

The mind may choose to establish itself in the path, that is, choose to develop concentration. However, the path is only the path & not the destination.

Developing & establishing concentration is similar to removing dust from the eyes, wax from the ears or mucus from the nose.

When the concentration is complete, i.e., when the mind is lucidly clear, the enlightenment occurs without any choosing.


What are the cylinders in front of the Buddha statue at Nanzō-in Temple, Japan? I recently visited Nanzō-in Temple, Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan, home of a very large bronze reclining Buddha. In front of the statue are many vertical metal cylinders. My initial thought was that they are prayer wheels - and you may tell me that this is the case - but I did not see any obvious means for them to rotate. What are these cylinders?

(image from Wikimedia Commons, licensed CC BY-SA 2.0. Original at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanzoin_temple#/media/File:Reclining_Buddha_statues_of_Nanzoin.jpg)

The urns are numbered.

The Many Faces of Fukuoka’s Nanzoin Temple says,

  There are 365 urns in front of the Buddha.  Visitors travel long distances to place messages to their dearly departed loved ones in the urn marked with the day they died.


What does it mean to "see the Dhamma" In a number of the books I'm reading on Buddhism, and in a number of talks I've heard on the subject, I repeatedly encounter the idea that the Buddha "saw the Dhamma" or that he "witnessed Dhamma" or the like. Other times, I've heard/read that the Buddha "saw" beings dying and taking rebirth, or that he "saw" the reality of anicca, dukkha, anatta, and the Four Noble Truths, etc.

I'm having difficulty understanding what this all means. Is this metaphorical sight? Is it literal sight, in the sense of a vision or dream?

In terms of our own meditation practices, when we are told that we should "see" certain things, e.g. seeing a nimitta, should we expect something similar? Metaphorical "sight"? Literal sight? Something else entirely?
Thanks!

In "seeing the Dhamma", it's figuratively said, that is he witnessed for him self experientially the nature of reality, as opposed to intellectually understanding it.

  "[A] monk who cultivates the Noble Eightfold Path, who assiduously practices the Noble Eightfold Path, comprehends with higher knowledge those states that are to be so comprehended, abandons with higher knowledge those states that are to be so abandoned, comes to experience with higher knowledge those states that are to be so experienced, and cultivates with higher knowledge those states that are to be so cultivated.

  What, monks, are the states to be comprehended with higher knowledge?
  They are the five groups of clinging. Which five? The body-group, the feeling-group, the perception-group, the mental-formation group, the consciousness-group...

  What, monks, are the states to be abandoned with higher knowledge?
  They are ignorance and the desire for [further] becoming. And what, monks, are the states to be experienced with higher knowledge?
  They are knowledge and liberation. And what, monk, are the states to be cultivated with higher knowledge?
  They are calm and insight."
  SN 45.159

As far as seeing other beings taking birth and dying, I don't have magical powers, but I understand this as being something like the eye of the mind expanding to actually witness this happening. With nimitas, they are lights that appear in the minds eye so are "seen" by the eye within as well.

Ajahn Brahm talks a lot about Nimitas


Does Theravada believe in feeding food to hungry ghosts? Certain Buddhist schools perform rituals to offer food to hungry ghosts. And I've heard and read stories that psychic mediums at the rituals saw hungry ghosts came eating the food. Some also reported that they saw Buddha and Bodhisattas accompany the hungry ghosts.

I really wonder and would like to know if Theravada believes in these.

Theravada tradition believe in the transferring of merit to the deceased in case they are in need of merit. If born in a relm where you can sence and rejoice in the meritorious deeds performed you can gain merit. This does not imply that these beings are fed.

There is a Ancient India and Sri Lankan practice in doing leaving food for the Petas but this doesn't relate much to Buddhism. Ratana Sutta does mention harantia balin. So the Buddha did not reject it but I don't think this should be taken as an endorsement also by the Buddha. Hence this practice is outside Buddhism where Buddhism don't accept or reject the social practice at that time.


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

There was a discussion of "faith" in Buddhism in these topics.

My summary of this answer is that "faith" in early Buddhism is similar to the faith you have in a doctor: you take medicine because you believe it will work, because you hear it will work, because the doctor recommends it.

The fides you mention isn't a Buddhist term, is it, nor a translation of the Buddhist term? I think that the Latin word fides implies the kind of faith you find in faithfulness: if you're a "faithful husband" or wife, for example, then I think that means you make yourself reliable, predictable, trustworthy, constant ... keeping promises ... you see that in the English word "fidelity".


What can I do to have my destination confirmed? I have seen a lot of great buddhists who change their paths due to some kind of conditions. Recently, I also face a that kind of situation. When, I faced a dissapointment, I forgot all teachings that I have learnd. It got some time to understand the situation. It just a small one and I had knowledge to understand the situation. There may be some situations that out of my understandings.

What can I do to have my destination enlightenment , confirmed ?

Related question: What makes a monk to be a house holder ?

Im not sure about guarantees but there are these relevant passages;

  Association with people of integrity is a factor for stream-entry.
  Listening to the true Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.
  Appropriate attention is a factor for stream-entry.
  Practice in accordance with the Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.
  — SN 55.5

  There is the case where a monk remains focused on unattractiveness with regard to the body, percipient of loathsomeness with regard to food, percipient of non-delight with regard to the entire world, (and) focused on inconstancy with regard to all fabrications. The perception of death is well established within him. [One such as this] attains the immediacy that leads to the ending of the effluents. -an4.163 (excerpts)

  Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path. -sn45.2

  When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on greed, qualities based on aversion, qualities based on delusion, thinking: 'There in this venerable no such qualities based on greed, anger or delusion, with his mind overcome by which qualities, he might say, "I know," while not knowing, or say, "I see," while not seeing; or that he might urge another to act in a way that was for his/her long-term harm & pain he places conviction in him.

  With the arising of conviction, he visits him & grows close to him. Growing close to him, he lends ear. Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas. There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates (lit: "weighs," "compares"). Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment. -mn95 (xcerpts)

As to related question. The analogical reasoning in the sutta is smth like this 'there are dangers on the journey, as there are for a sailors; sharks, waves, weather and whirlpools . That some warriors tremble and run away hearing drums of the enemy, some tremble at the sight of their banners, some are defeated in hand to hand combat, some get injured and recover, some get injured and do not recover.'

I assume many things may cause one to disrobe, longing for this or that, perhaps one has to take care of parents.

If one disrobes it doesn't necessarily mean that one's practice stagnates. I think pali lore has a story of a monk disrobing, becoming enlightened and rejoining the order.


Suggestions for when practice has plateaued Over the past few months I've been experiencing a lot of personal issues and as a result, my practice seems to not only have plateaued but also digressed. Sitting for an hour has become incredibly difficult physically and mentally. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to to return to the beginner's mind, or how to rid the mind of distractions?

What do you mean your practice has plateaued?! Are you perfect? Don't you have day-to-day challenges?

Practice is not just meditation. Your "personal issues" are practice too. See if you can trace your personal issues to improvement opportunities. Take responsibility. Stalk your ego patterns. Reconcile with "enemies". Break through your fears, stereotypes, projections. Life is an endless source of practice opportunities, day after day after day. If you are serious about this, you'll never get bored!

Yes, sometimes we plateau when we solve one set of problems, and wallow around for a while until we can grasp the pattern in our behavior / situations that then can be traced the next set of problems. As Buddho said, this is perfectly normal - as long as you are aware that you are in between jobs.

Take a rest, open your eyes and look around. The pathways to next levels are hiding among the obvious, long used to, unquestioned pains.


Confusion Over Intense Experience During Meditation Today, I sat for a 30-minute meditation session, and towards the end of the 30- minutes (since I heard the timer bell ring a few minutes after the start of the experience), I started to feel an intense acceleration in the mind, and just after that, everything else clearing out of my mind. At the same time, I felt my heart beating faster and I am making heavy breaths. I could really pay attention to the heavy breaths and I was keeping my mind there. And then, I saw some soft, satisfying light, lighting up from beneath my eyes (like lighting a torch from below when your eyes are closed). I got really scared of the entire thing, I tried to continue, but I couldn't because I felt I was going to blow up and ended the session. The whole thing was not a calm experience. It was like a free fall. Is this something normal or something that I should be worried about?

When stored accumulate stress dissolves, pure energy can rise up into the brain, causing this experience of "acceleration", "cleansing out of the mind" and "softening calmness".

The "heart beating faster" and "heavy breaths" is both exhilaration and the beginnings of fear (since the mind has not experienced this before).

Finally, the "fear" became strong and broken the meditation; because the mind could not handle the loss the control and the loss of self.

Unless you have a history of mental illness, the experience should not be worried about. It was a perfectly normal & ordinary meditation experience. If fact, the experience was a sign of progress (in terms of the calming & purification process).

When the body & mind cleanse themselves in meditation of accumulated stresses, these "special effects" will happen and then subside.

When the Buddha taught meditation, he provided the following basic instruction to be followed always; 99% of the time:

  There is the case where a monk remains... ardent, clearly comprehending & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.


Significance of Three Customs Involving String I've noticed three different customs involving string at Theravada temple service. If by chance anyone is familiar with the significance of any of these; it would be nice to know. The service is not in my native language so I miss a lot of nuances and end up forgetting to ask when I have a chance.

The monks sit up on a raised area and occasionally seem to be winding string around various objects creating a web like display. What does this signify?
At times long pieces of string are sent through the group of lay followers and everyone tries to hold a piece of the string. What does this mean?
At the end of the service people sometimes line up to receive a small string bracelet and a blessing from a monk. Is this just a nice gesture or does it have a particular meaning? Does anyone know what the blessing is for?

Thanks for any insights. :)

Chanting and good thoughts of the monks (even any other being) generate positive vibes. The string is used as a better means of conducting the vibration than may be air. (If you attach a tin to the end of two string and you speak into one you can hear the voice in the other.) Generally the string is wrapped around a vessel of water which cases the water to vibrate in tune with the chanting. These strings and water is given out as it the vibrations will carry some positive conditioning.


How can I explain soullessness to other one? One of my friend don't accept Buddhism theory of soullessness.She is also buddhist.So my question is how can I explain the soullessness to her?

Both soul exists and soul does not exist are extreme view:

  Ananda, if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of eternalism [the view that there is an eternal, unchanging soul]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of annihilationism [the view that death is the annihilation of consciousness]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, would that be in keeping with the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?

Ananda Sutta

Simply there is nothing worthy of identifying as self, because you are not in control, whatever you identify as self are not entirely pleasant.


When to delight and when not to delight? Namo Buddhaya. During various discourses , monks after hearing Buddha delighted or did not delight.  This is one discourse in which Monks did not delight at the end. In almost all other discourses , monks delight at the end.

There are various places in which Buddha has given directions to the monk on when to delight and when not to delight.
For example: One should not delight in sensual pleasures,One should not delight in any form. etc.

Modern day Gurus like Sri Sri Ravi Shankar say one should always delight or be always happy.
Honestly I take delight in posting to this forum.But should I take delight?

My question is : Is there any direction given to Monks by Buddha on when to delight and when not to delight ?

I am only aware of one sutta, namely, MN 1, where the bhikkhus did not delight in the Buddha's words, as follows:

  Na te bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti

  na
  (negative particle) not; no; nor; neither

  abhinandati
  rejoices at, welcomes; approves of; is pleased at.

Bhikkhu Bodhi comments:

  The bhikkhus did not delight in the Buddha's words; apparently because the discourse probed too deeply into the tender regions of
  their own conceit, and perhaps their residual brahmanic views.

Bhikkhu Thanissaro comments:

  The Buddha taught that clinging to views is one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus
  recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to
  views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in
  their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind
  reads into experience. This is a point he makes in the following
  discourse, which is apparently his response to a particular school of
  Brahmanical thought that was developing in his time — the Samkhya, or
  classification school.

  This school had its beginnings in the thought of Uddalaka, a ninth-century B.C. philosopher who posited a "root": an abstract
  principle out of which all things emanated and which was immanent in
  all things. Philosophers who carried on this line of thinking offered
  a variety of theories, based on logic and meditative experience, about
  the nature of the ultimate root and about the hierarchy of the
  emanation. Many of their theories were recorded in the Upanishads and
  eventually developed into the classical Samkhya system around the time
  of the Buddha.

  Although the present discourse says nothing about the background of the monks listening to it, the Commentary states that before their
  ordination they were brahmans, and that even after their ordination
  they continued to interpret the Buddha's teachings in light of their
  previous training, which may well have been proto-Samkhya. If this is
  so, then the Buddha's opening lines — "I will teach you the sequence
  of the root of all phenomena" — would have them prepared to hear his
  contribution to their line of thinking. And, in fact, the list of
  topics he covers reads like a Buddhist Samkhya. Paralleling the
  classical Samkhya, it contains 24 items, begins with the physical
  world (here, the four physical properties), and leads back through
  ever more refined & inclusive levels of being & experience,
  culminating with the ultimate Buddhist concept: Unbinding (nibbana).
  In the pattern of Samkhya thought, Unbinding would thus be the
  ultimate "root" or ground of being immanent in all things and out of
  which they all emanate.

  However, instead of following this pattern of thinking, the Buddha attacks it at its very root: the notion of a principle in the
  abstract, the "in" (immanence) & "out of" (emanation) superimposed on
  experience. Only an uninstructed, run of the mill person, he says,
  would read experience in this way. In contrast, a person in training
  should look for a different kind of "root" — the root of suffering
  experienced in the present — and find it in the act of delight.
  Developing dispassion for that delight, the trainee can then
  comprehend the process of coming-into-being for what it is, drop all
  participation in it, and thus achieve true Awakening.

  If the listeners present at this discourse were indeed interested in fitting Buddhist teachings into a Samkhyan mold, then it's small wonder that they were displeased — one of the few places where we read of a negative reaction to the Buddha's words. They had hoped to hear his contribution to their project, but instead they hear their whole pattern of thinking & theorizing attacked as ignorant & ill-informed. The Commentary tells us, though, they were later able to overcome their displeasure and eventually attain Awakening on listening to the discourse reported in AN 3.123.

  Although at present we rarely think in the same terms as the Samkhya philosophers, there has long been — and still is — a common tendency to create a "Buddhist" metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the "All" — the entirety of our sensory & mental experience — is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have most often originated among meditators, who label (or in the words of the discourse, "perceive") a particular meditative experience as the ultimate goal, identify with it in a subtle way (as when we are told that "we are the knowing"), and then view that level of experience as the ground of being out of which all other experience comes.

  Any teaching that follows these lines would be subject to the same criticism that the Buddha directed against the monks who first heard
  this discourse.

  Translator's Introduction


Can one get into the heart of Zen Buddhism without Chinese? Do we know any Zen teachers/masters that do not have Chinese origins and do not speak Chinese? For example English?

P.S. I know that such type of logical questions are taken humorously in the zen culture, as it does not really matter but still my "small mind" is curious. Does one need to know Chinese in order to get to the heart of the teachings?

A famous example is Thích Nhất Hạnh, who is Vietnamese.
He has given talks in several languages, including English and French.

There's also Korean Zen, and of course Japanese.

There are (and/or have been) many English-speaking Zen teachers in, for example, America.


What can be done about fake monks? in the city where i live (Toronto, although this is an issue in many cities around the world), there are people dressed as monks soliciting others on the street for donations. In return, various good luck charms are offered.

The fake monks speak little English, and will try to justify their begging with the claim that donations are for building a temple back home.

Is there anything I can or should do about this?

Are these fake monks giving Buddhism a bad name, or at least obscuring Buddhism's true message?

Are the fake monks doing an ironic good by giving people the chance to practice generosity?

I have some suggestions.

Guard yourself against any possibility of Wrong Speech by not saying anything about these persons, their motives, or actions that you don't personally know to be true; even if it seems extremely likely that they are being deceptive. If you want to warn family & friends, stick only with what you know to be true such as "In the tradition I study, monastic rules don't allow monks to ask for money or sell good luck charms."

Guard yourself against the arising or continuing of any negative states by not identifying with this issue. This is not personal. Cities have always been magnets for people inclined to do "creative fund raising". ;-) City dwellers are pretty savvy about this type of thing and it's unlikely the media will downplay it indefinitely. It's too quirky of a story for them to ignore forever.

Guard yourself against the attachment of "me and my" Buddhism getting a bad name. Truly awful things have happened in the contexts of other religions; bloody wars, sexual exploitation, financial scandal.

The teachings of the Buddha shine on. A little thing like this can't tarnish it. :)


Lack of Pleasure and Joy I noticed aside from gross sensory pleasures such as eating, or sometimes writing, I don't feel much pleasure or joy. It is as though the emotional spectrum of joy and pride, and other such positive emotions, is limited in myself.

This considered, is there any likelihood of success to any meditations or practices given I am doing things without happiness and joy?

I feel like I'm trying to move forwards while something is inherently lacking.

Thank you.

QUESTION: Also, what are the wholesome pleasures and joys usually implied in the Buddhist path?

EDIT: I would like to say that it feels as though such positive emotions are unFELT, but not unSOUGHT. Basically, I am drawn to positive situations and joys, e.g. listening to music, but the FEELING seems absent. Anyone have any idea what is going on?

Sounds like you are looking for positive emotions from entertainment (e.g. music). That is one way to get positive emotions... not necessarily invalid but rather superficial and not lasting.

Another way to get joy is through setting challenging goals and achieving them. When you can overcome your weakness / limits, you will feel rewarded, and worthy of self-respect.

In Buddhism the challenging goal we set is Right Bodily Behavior, Right Verbal Behavior and Right Mental Behavior. When we overcome our bad habits and achieve certain level of perfection, we can truly congratulate ourselves and that gives the special type of joy. (And then the joy of Completion, which is the highest.)

But even on mundane level, you can set challenging goals, like sport, raise yourself to challenge despite pain and weakness - and then congratulate yourself. Try it, it really does work ;)


What is the duration of Jhana? What is the duration of Jhana?
How long the duration of each Jhana.
For instance, what is the duration of the first Jhana?
Say if I have first Jhana only for one minute, can I say that I was in the first Jhana?

After the absorption, the practitioner can say he is the obtainer of the first Jhana if the five hindrances still not arise instead of Jhana practice.
If that obtainer can't absorpt the first Jhana, but he has not an arising of the five hindrances, we still can call him as the obtainer of the first Jhana because he is in access concentration state, Upacāra-Jhāna, of the absorption concentration state, Appanā-Jhāna, which certainly going to arise if he still can keep the access concentration go on continuously.
The five hindrances are a major one important keyword of this question. Focus on it.

At the first time absorption, Jhana arises only one moment, but it is going to take the longer duration when the practitioner practice that Jhana to be the mastery skillful expert, Vasī.
It's like when the practitioner practices the weight training, no one can hold up the weight in long duration, but the practitioner can hold the weight up longer and longer after training the weight more and more.
The path of purification, pathavikasinaniddesa:

Sā ca pana ekacittakkhaṇikāyeva.
Ñ(IV,78): But that (first time of the first Jhana) absorption is only of a single conscious moment.
Sattasu hi ṭhānesu addhānaparicchedo nāma natthi paṭhamappanāyaṃ, lokiyābhiññāsu, catūsu maggesu, maggānantaraphale, rūpārūpabhavesu bhavaṅgajjhāne, nirodhassa paccaye nevasaññānāsaññāyatane, nirodhā vuṭṭhahantassa phalasamāpattiyanti.
Ñ: For there are seven instances in which the normal extent [of the cognitive series] does not apply. They are in the cases of the first absorption, the mundane kinds of direct-knowledge, the four paths, fruition next after the path, life-continuum jhāna in the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming, the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception as condition for cessation [of perception and feeling], and the fruition attainment in one emerging from cessation.

The path of purification, Vasī:

Tatrimā pañca vasiyo āvajjanavasī, samāpajjanavasī, adhiṭṭhānavasī, vuṭṭhānavasī, paccavekkhaṇavasīti.

Ñ: Herein, these are the five kinds of mastery: mastery in adverting, mastery in attaining, mastery in resolving (steadying the duration), mastery in emerging, and mastery in reviewing.
... (See the explanation inside the link and book)...


New to the site, new to Buddhism New to the idea of getting external help, too. I have several questions about this path after read this Q&A:

New to Buddhism
How to get to Nirvana?

What attracted me to buddhism was

Meditation: Practice it many times on Padmasana because I thought that was the unique meditation form. Then I knew I can meditate over a skateboard, too.
Mindfulness: Dreaming about achieving it.
Hatha Yoga: Practiced it many times.
Ninjutsu: Practiced it several months on Bujinkan Dojo school (not a recommendation to go there). The concepts I got from Japanese culture were great though. They are attached to Buddhism but I think they misimpreted the message.
Kriya yoga: Autobiography of a yogi.

Some of my greater achievements:

Leave drugs
Leave alcohol
Became vegan
Practiced a lot in the non-attachment in objects and people too.

These questions are general, mine are more precise. Please be open minded about my questions, they are very real.

Was Buddha an artist of our times?
Edit: I know a lot of teachers, I don't know any monks I can remember.

What's special about Buddha?
Why should someone follow him?
I see this like being someone else. Is this a bad concept about Buddhism?
Why he has in fist sight all the answers?

I read that is some kind of comparison about Buddhism schools and Cristians religions, but I learned that Buddhism is not a religion but a lifestyle. Is it or not?
About Yin and Yang, is that part of Buddhism?
The 12 universal laws are part of Buddhism?

That's all for the moment. Oh, I forgot, the most important one: About this little part of me you could read, is there a school recommendation?

Thanks for reading.

Some quick answers, which I may add to later:

Buddhism is certainly not a religion because it states all of its teachings are to be known & verified by its wise followers. It is certainly a way of life, which leads away from suffering to peace. Buddha defined it as the 'holy way of life'.
Buddha is the most special individual human being because history shows he was the first to fully & truly diagnose what suffering really is and, more importantly, the methods to overcome suffering. Although today there are many religions & disciplines incorporating direct or indirect principles of the Buddha to overcome suffering, the Buddha was the 1st to fully diagnose suffering & its solution.
The Buddha actually does have all of the answers to all important questions. The teachings of the Buddha cover all facets of life, including money, work, relationships, human behaviour, meditation & spiritual wisdom that overcomes suffering. However, as the saying goes: "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear". To test the Buddha, we can ask questions about different things and a well-educated Buddhist can offer answers from the Buddha. By asking questions, we can learn how wise the Buddha was.
Buddhism is not the same as Christianity because Buddhism holds everything is just natural elements (dhatu) where as Christianity believes in God. However, Christianity does share some principles with Buddhism about charity, morality, love, non-violence & some aspects of mental development. But Christianity does not explicitly teach the higher wisdom of Buddhism, such as the four noble truths, three-characteristics, not-self (anatta), emptiness (sunnata), the elements (dhatu), etc.
Buddhism is very straightforward, extremely thorough in its analysis and the language used is literal. Where as Christianity can often be very vague and the language used is often metaphorical. Jesus himself said he taught in parables to hide his teachings from certain people.
Ying & yang is not really related to Buddhism because ying & yang is a principle that explains the creation of natural things where as Buddhism is about ending suffering (rather than natural creation). However, some ying & yang principles are found in Buddhism, such as in its description of male & female faculties & it is description of the vicissitudes of life. While the psychology of Buddhism certainly explains ying & yang principles pertaining to the cyclical relationship between pleasure, craving & suffering, the goal of Buddhism is to transcend or be beyond ying & yang (rather than to embrace or celebrate ying & yang).
Similar to ying & yang, the 12 laws of the universe are mostly about creationism & therefore not related to the liberative purpose of Buddhism (although Buddhism would agree with some of them but not all). For example, since Buddhism transcends 'self', the idea of 'we reap what we sow' is not central to Buddhism, although it does exist in Buddhism. This idea is only morality for worldly people that believe they are a 'self' & believe 'they personally' reap & sow.
As for being an "artist of our times", most of the world still must advance towards the spiritual evolution of the Buddha. Buddhism states the way/path of the Buddha is "timeless" (akaliko). As long as beings or minds exist that can experience suffering, the way/path of the Buddha will properly address such suffering.
Finally, about 'schools of Buddhism', this depends on your disposition. i.e., the Law of Attraction. The Buddha taught individuals of different dispositions are attracted to different teachers with different emphasis. The general distinctions between Buddhism schools are:

(1) Helping oneself versus helping others.

(2) Individual self-reliant practice versus teacher lead

(3) One present life focus versus reincarnation/rebirth focus.


Meditation practice - Meditation Odd Effect - I am doing vipassana meditation from last six month and had done two 10 days course  of S N Goenka Vipassana Meditation.Doing daily 2 hours meditation in morning and evening. I am having constant sensation on my right cheek and on forehead during meditation and even after meditation almost 24 hours.

Also have continure sensation  in head in brain, on top, Side and back side of head ,I am not able to sleep due to it and  I am feeling i am doing some thing wrong. As i understand that i am not monk who engage in meditation 24 hours. Should i do simple anapana, Not vipassana ? What should i do ? How can overcome it ? Or I should leave meditation and leave life as earlier as i was living ?

Kindly provide solution in detail how to do, Like do it yourself ?

Should I do simple anapana, Not vipassana?

Spend 1/3 time in Anapana and 2/3 time in Vipassana. If you are doing a 1-hour session to about 10 to 20 minutes of Anapana and then Vipassana.

  How can overcome it?

When you are doing mediation different sesations surcafes due to past conditioning and perceptions surfacing. People experience different sensations like tingling, falling, inflating, deflating, floating, burning, frightening images, please images, traumatic memories of the past, etc. The objective of meditation is to train one's mind to be equanimous to them and face them. So do not get averse, or worried about that you are experiencing and be equanimous about it and continue your practice.


Auto-suggestion and buddhism and how to use it Two questions about Auto-suggestion :

What is buddhism's view on Auto-suggestion? What does Auto-suggestion affect?
How to use Auto-suggestion?

You can answer one question or both: the more you explain the better, but all answers and links are appreciated.

I would like people to expand on the subject, because I couldn't find much about it

Edit :  i mean to use it not for meditation itself or to affect it - but on all other aspects like  "i will meditate a lot" "i wont do things for fun" ect ...

To be even clearer : I know how to meditate - im not asking about how to improve my meditation with autosuggestion but how to use it to make myself meditate more and act better in daily life

what i wonder is : can i say "meditate" or "dont do stuff for fun"  and "brainwash" myself somehow to help advance my practice somehow ?

A widely used human strategy when someone has to deal with difficulty is autosuggestion.  Whenever anything unpleasant comes up, we convince ourselves that it is pleasant rather than unpleasant. This is auto-suggestion.  But what the Buddha pointed out is quite the opposite. He never wanted us to hide or disguise an unpleasant matter, the Buddha's teaching encourages us to examine it to the fullest. It is important that we confront the less pleasant aspects of existence, and, to see ourselves in an unbiased way, complete with all our sorrows and inadequacies. Confronting unpleasantness when it arises is really being kind to oneself.

Auto-suggestion means implanting feelings that you don't really have or avoid feelings that you do have. The truth of the matter is that if you are miserable, in reality you are miserable.  So rather than avoiding this reality, we have to learn to confront it, to observe it mindfully.  The only way out of such phenomenon is to thoroughly examine it. Do this by taking the phenomenon apart piece by piece. Then you are free from such trappings.

Buddha talked about it in this way not because He is pessimistic but because He is optimistic. He has a solution. Life is suffering and that is the real truth. We have to learn to confront this uncomfortable reality of pain, death and illness. To learn how to deal with it is not pessimism, but a very pragmatic form of optimism. Pain is inevitable, but suffering is not. They are two different things. Life can seem pleasant for most of the time, but there comes a time that we have to face the unpleasant. So it is advisable that we invest some of our time and energy in learning to deal with unpleasantness, because some pain is unavoidable.

There are occasions, as in the case of illness, which weaken the mind, when hetero-suggestion has been found to be more effective if you have not yet learnt to confront the situations by self. Hetero-suggestion is used by one person to influence another at times of great illnesses. Here another will help you to think through the Dhamma. The Buddha has shown that the mind is very closely linked with the body that mental states affect the body's health and wellbeing.  There is no such thing as a purely physical disease. It is possible so to change one’s mental state grounded in reality, as to cause mental health and physical well-being to follow thereafter.

A couple of examples of what I mean by "hetero-suggestion" in the context of Dhamma:
Maha Kassapa Thera Bojjhanga Sutta is a chant that Buddha recited when both both Ven. Maha Kassapa and Ven. Maha Moggallana were sick.  (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/piyadassi/wheel001.html )

Girimananda Sutta was recited when Bhikku Girimananda was diseased, in pain, severely ill. (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.060.than.html)

  The Supreme Buddha never rejected any activity, if that was wholesome and profitable to the people. The Buddha said that if through some kind of incantation or a mantram, or through a well-spoken word, or through a traditional Act of Truth, or through some mystical power of the Three Refuges, good could be done to the people, then an attempt should be made to bring about that kind of blessing.
  - Mahamevnawa Pali-English Paritta Chanting Book

Bhanava is not quite the same thing as auto-suggestion. At some places in the Suttas, the Supreme Buddha explained: “If one does this, these things will happen”. We come across places where Dhamma is explained directly in this manner. In Asavakkhaya Sutta and the Nibbida Sutta, the Supreme Buddha explains, “Oh Bhikkhus, there are five activities which if practiced, if practiced extensively results in the eradication of defilements”. Buddha adviced a bhikku in his deathbed to do this same five meditations. If one feels that there is no possibility of getting liberated from samsara such a person has the fear for samsara. It exists at times of grave illnesses and one has to live in that fear. If an individual is certain that he has a chance of getting liberated from samsara his fear of samsara starts to desipate. The understanding in such a person will turn out to be a realization.

For that you will have to develop the meditation on repulsiveness (Asubha Saññā’) - perceiving the impurity of the body; ‘Ahare Patikkula Saññā’ -perceiving the impurity of material food; ‘Sabba Loke Anabhirata Saññā’ - not taking delight in worlds; ‘Sabba Sankharesu Anicca Saññā’ -impermanence of all aggregates, and of ‘Marana Sati’ -to be mindful of death. (read Asavakkhaya Sutta where the Supreme Buddha explains these five). I could not find the Access-to-insight link, but you can read it in Bhikku Bodhi’s Book.
If these five meditation activities were to be carried out, dispassionateness will arise in you. When you become dispassionate with understanding, then you will begin to lose the desire and craving for materialistic things and sensual pleasures.  Your mind will become calmer and calmer. Only with such a calmed mind will it be possible to develop the special wisdoms.  Your Sakkaya Ditthi (the idea of self) will leave you. You will see results in this very life.


Can we ignore sense doors through meditation? In the process of reading a book, we need only the mind and the eyes. There is no need of ears and tongue.

In the process of hearing Dhamma,there may no need of eyes.

Are there any meditation practice to ignore senses completely for a period of time ?

(I'm looking for a specific meditation practice designed to achieve this, I know that we can achieve a similar result by doing Ānāpāna/breathing exercises,but may take much time )

One cannot avoid contact (described below) hence one cannot ignore the sense doors totally:

Cha Chakka Sutta

(Samuday’atthaṅgama) Loka Sutta

What one can do it to ensure any contact (described above) does not result in craving and break the above progression of events at feeling. This can be achieved through meditation.

See

Food and other cravings, and guarding the senses
Rejecting clinging to both pleasure and displeasure
How should I watch sensations in Vipassana meditation?
Sankhara meditation
Meditation technique to reduce/control pain/sorrow/loss

answers for more details.


Is there a correlation between sukha and passadha? Is there a correlation between sukha (the 4th component of the jhanangas) and passadha (the 5th component of the sambojjhanga)?

When Piti arises and you stay equanimously watching the arising and passing knowing its impermanence (with no attachment or craving to this feeling) then Piti will fade away and Passadhi will arise. When Passadhi initially arises you may think your meditation is regressing as you loose Piti and also board after a few hours of Passadhi.

Piti is a stage which is conducive to tame Sankara resulting from craving.

Passadhi is a stage which is conducive to tame Sankara from Ignorance or Sanna.


How is a Theravada Buddhist monastery established? There is no Theravada monastery in the country I live in. I just read a short brief about lay people going together and forming a forest monastery in Norway, and was wondering about how a monastery is established?

Who initiates the process and who makes the decision (lay people, monastics, both in combination, or either)? Thinking in terms of whether it's just monastics moving back to their home country to spread the Dhamma, or if lay people gather support and invite monks.

Not so much about the religious or practical considerations, just looking for a helicopter view.

Initially, it is the invitation of the laity to the Sangha, who then satisfy themselves that the support is adequate for their needs.  A lay community invites a Bhikkhu that they find particularly inspiring.  He finds a quorum of Bhikkhus to accompany him so as to maintain the Vinaya discipline. Lay communities often set up some kind of a committee so as to oversee and organise a physical accommodation, suitable for practice and religious observations: this varies considerably from one monastery to another.


If matter is just an illusion what is the source of it If whatever we see and feel in the 3-D world is just an illusion created by our minds and every matter, even an atom, is related to each other (interrelated); what is the origin of it? Since consciousness or self or "I" is also just a thought, how is matter created by the consciousness? How does the mind create it? Whenever I think of these things, I remember the mythological god, Zeus, who can create anything he wishes just by thinking about it? It feels like this is actually possible. So what could be the possible logic behind this complex knowledge?

If matter is just illusion

I don't think that is Buddhist doctrine. I think that Buddhist doctrine is that we tend to view matter inappropriately or with ignorance.

  what is the origin of it

I'm not sure it has an origin. That might be considered an unanswered question. Several suttas (e.g. this one) mention "inconstruable beginning", saying "A beginning point is not evident".

  how is the matter being created by the conciousness

I'm not sure that matter is created by consciousness.

But "perception" (of matter) is created when consciousness, matter, and sense-organ come into contact (see e.g. here).


Sutta that says to do mindfulness in a slow manner I remember that I once read a sutta by the buddha where he mentioned to do things slowly while being mindful in order to recognize each step. Any ideas which sutta it could be?

There is no sutta or commentary which taught to meditate slowly. The action speed depends on the practitioner skill level, some uneducated practitioner (may be) need to action slow.

But there are many sutta taught to meditate in order. And There are some commentary which have the example of the practitioner who always repeatedly his action when he forget to meditate mindfulness.

However, when we begin to do some very hard new thing  carefully, mindfully. we will be automatic slow down ourselves. Because if we do it over fast we will cross the step, mistake the practice's sequences.


Importance of Tipitaka in Mahayana Schools This site 'Buddhist Texts' says that while Mahayana schools revere Tipitaka as holy texts, they add many other sutras, the most famous being the 'Lotus Sutra' and the 'Heart Sutra'. My question is how important are Tipitaka in Mahayana schools. One may gauge its importance based on:

Is Tipitaka taught and learnt by monks in monastery?
How often Tipitaka is referenced in lectures by monks? (for e.g. I was once listening to discourses of Dalai Lama and he was talking of Nagarjuna, Milarepa, Ashvaghosha etc. It might be that he did not reference Tipitaka in those lectures but might have referenced in some other lectures)
Are laypeople encouraged to learn Tipitaka?

These are just guidelines. One might use their own criteria. Answers from different Mahayana schools are welcome.

Tripitaka is taught to and learned by monks in the monasteries and laypeople are encouraged to learn. From a Tibetan viewpoint, the texts H.H. quoted are included within one of the three baskets. Shantideva's Bodhisattvacharyavatara is included in the Sutra Pitaka (although it is not a sutra), Asanga's Mahāyāna Sūtrālamkāra kārikā is included in the Abhidharma Pitaka, Kamalashila's Stages of Meditation belongs to the Abhidharma Pitaka, Nagarjuna's Karika belongs to the Abhidharma Pitaka as well, and so forth.

In the ninth chapter of the Bodhisattva Deeds, Shantideva explains that anything that is included within one of the three baskets was the speech – or at least the intention – of Lord Buddha. His Holiness the Dalaï-Lama highlighted this principle. In Illuminating the Path to Enlightenment, he writes:

  As Dromtönpa lay dying, his head rested on the lap of one of his chief
  disciples, Potowa, and he noticed that Potowa was crying. Then Potowa
  said, “After you pass away, in whom can we entrust our spiritual
  well-being? Who can we take as our teacher?” Dromtönpa replied, “Don’t
  worry. You’ll still have a teacher after I’m gone—the tripitaka, the
  threefold collection of the teachings of the Buddha. Entrust yourself
  to the tripitaka; take the tripitaka as your teacher.”

Furthermore, in 'Transcendent Wisdom', His Holiness writes:

  The three baskets are (1) Vinaya, dealing with moral discipline; (2)
  Sutra, dealing with the training in meditative concentration and other
  facets of the path of awakening; and (3) Abhidharma (sometimes
  translated as "higher knowledge"), concerning a diversity of topics
  ranging from psychology to cosmology. For a further explanation see
  Opening the Eye of New Awareness, pp. 47-52.

We hold that the Tibetan translators showed to which basket the text they were translating belonged, by way of paying particular homage. As His Holiness writes in his commentary to Stages of Meditation:

  The intention [of the Tibetan translator paying homage when
  translating Nagarjuna and so forth] was to cearly indicate to which of
  the three divisions [the pitakas, or baskets] of the Buddha's
  teachings any sutra or commentary belongs. [It goes as follows:]
  1. Supplication is made to all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas if a text belongs to the Collection of Discourses [i.e. Sutra Pitaka].
  2. And if a text belongs to the Collection of Knowledge [i.e. Abhidharma Pitaka], supplication is made to Manjushri.
  3. In order to indicate that a certain text belongs to the Collection of Discipline [I..e Vinaya Pitaka], supplication is made to the
  Omniscient.


Please explain joy and/or the Kimatthiyasutta Can you explain something about joy?

For example it's mentioned in AN 11.1:

  “But what’s the purpose and benefit of having no regrets?”
  “Avippaṭisāro pana, bhante, kimatthiyo kimānisaṃso”?

  “Joy is the purpose and benefit of having no regrets.”
  “Avippaṭisāro kho, ānanda, pāmojjattho pāmojjānisaṃso”.

I can imagine several specific question, please answer any or none of these (from scripture or experience, any tradition of Buddhism).

I'm especially interested in the context of everyday lay life, rather than specifically/only during formal meditation.

Can you explain the joy/rapture/tranquillity/bliss/immersion sequence? What's the difference between these, what's the connection? Is some of this specifically meditative? I'm guessing that at least the start of the sequence, "skilful ethics" isn't only meditative. If this is too long to explain in an answer is there a text/reference you recommend instead?
Does some condition or thing cause joy, apart from a lack of remorse? Is it a matter of choice, at all? When dukkha arises would you say "that's dukkha, I'd better wait for it to cease", or would you say, "that's dukkha, I'd better 'choose joy' instead?"
Is it "primarily ethical", if that makes sense as a question, e.g. if ethics is doing the right thing then is joy (or choosing joy, or intending joy) also "the right thing" in that way?
Would I be right to assume that these maybe happen in stages, like one before the other -- with earlier ones having each next one as their eventual purpose? Is it something of a gradual training, does it make sense to focus on sometimes improving or cultivating one stage (e.g. joy)? How do you "cultivate" joy (is it only by cultivating skilful ethics and non-remorse or...)?
I'm a bit conscious of this answer:

  People need Buddhism when their current raft has sunk. If there is food on the table, a comfortable place to sleep, and they have no complaints about their daily routine, then our jobs as Buddhists is to rejoice in their success (mudita).

  Anyhow, I don't claim to have a good solution for the problem-- how do we stay optimistic and positive or happy once we realize the muddle we are in, but at least the Mahayana version, provides a path towards how to find happiness-- by taking action to solve everyone's problems.

Do you agree with that and is that all there is to say on that subject?

Does it happen that Buddhism provides a new raft, or tells a person how to swim, but they still tend to be "depressed" e.g. unhappy and ineffective, as well as troubled or restless?
There's an illustration of "household joy" and "renunciation joy" at the end of this question. Assuming I can imagine a bit what "household joy" might be, would it be worth explaining that illustration of "renunciation joy"?

"Joy" seems to me to appear quite late in the "Ten Bulls" sequence -- relatively late compared to its being quite early in the Kimatthiyasutta -- i.e. it's the last, Return to society, which says, "I am ever blissful" etc. Is that significant? Or maybe it's earlier, like at the 5th of 6th stage.

The word for joy in AN 1.11 is "pamojja":

  Pāmojja (p. 454) Pāmojja Pāmojja=pāmujja

  Pāmujja (p. 453) Pāmujja Pāmujja (nt.) [grd. form. tr. pa+mud, see
  similar forms under pāmokkha] delight, joy, happiness; often combd
  with pīti. -- D i.72, 196; S iii.134; iv.78=351; v.156, 398; A iii.21;
  v.1 sq., 311 sq., 339, 349; Sn 256; Nett 29; DA i.217; Sdhp 167. See
  also pāmojja.

The connection here is to the five hindrances.

From SN 46.40:

  “Bhikkhus, these five hindrances are makers of blindness, causing lack
  of vision, causing lack of knowledge, detrimental to wisdom, tending
  to vexation, leading away from Nibbāna. What five? The hindrance of
  sensual desire is a maker of blindness … The hindrance of ill will …
  The hindrance of sloth and torpor … The hindrance of restlessness and
  remorse … The hindrance of doubt is a maker of blindness … leading
  away from Nibbāna. These five hindrances are makers of blindness,
  causing lack of vision, causing lack of knowledge, detrimental to
  wisdom, tending to vexation, leading away from Nibbāna.

Ajahn Brahm commented on remorse (kukkucca) in this essay:

  Remorse refers to a specific type of restlessness which is the kammic
  effect of one's misdeeds. The only way to overcome remorse, the
  restlessness of a bad conscience, is to purify one's virtue and become
  kind, wise and gentle. It is virtually impossible for the immoral or
  the self indulgent to make deep progress in meditation.

So, basically, the purpose or virtue or ethics is to remove remorse, in such a way that it will cause the arising of joy. From joy, it goes next to rapture (piti), then tranquility (passadha) then bliss (sukha).

Piti and sukha seems to refer to jhana.

Hence, the joy arising from the removal of remorse, is basically the effect of the removal of the hindrance of remorse i.e. kukkucca (which is tied to kammic effect of one's misdeeds), by inculcating virtues. Why is it called a hindrance? It's because it hinders progress in meditation, immersion and insight.

Once the hindrance of remorse is removed, then joy results. With this joy (and the removal of all other hindrances), one can progress more easily into jhana.

There is only one small problem here. The word for remorse in AN 1.11 is "vippatisara", while the word for remorse in SN 46.40 as a hindrance is "kukkucca". But the dictionary entry for kukkucca solves this problem:

  Vippaṭisāra (p. 628) Vippaṭisāra Vippaṭisāra [vi+paṭisāra] bad
  conscience, remorse, regret, repentance Vin ii.250; D i.138; S
  iii.120, 125; iv.46; A iii.166, 197, 353; iv.69; J iv.12; v.88; Pug
  62; DhA iv.42; VvA 116; PvA 14, 60, 105, 152. -- a˚ no regret, no
  remorse A iii.46.

  Kukkucca (p. 218) Kukkucca Kukkucca [kud -- kicca] 1. bad doing,
  misconduct, bad character. Def. kucchitaŋ kataŋ kukataŋ tassa bhāvo
  kukkuccaŋ Vism 470 & Bdhd 24; -- Various explanations in Nd2 on Sn
  1106=Dhs 1160, in its literal sense it is bad behaviour with hands and
  feet (hattha -- pada˚) J i.119=DA i.42 (in combn with ukkāsita &
  khipitasadda); hattha˚ alone J ii.142. -- 2. remorse, scruple, worry.
  In this sense often with vippaṭissāra; and in conn. w. uddhacca it is
  the fourth of the five nīvaraṇas (q. v.) Vin i.49; iv.70; D i.246; S
  i.99; M i.437; A i.134=Sn 1106; A i.282; Sn 925; Nd2 379; DhA iii.483;
  iv.88; Sdhp 459; Bdhd 96. -- na kiñci k˚ŋ na koci vippaṭissāreti "has
  nobody any remorse?" S iii.120=iv.46. The dispelling of scrupulousness
  is one of the duties and virtues of a muni: k˚ŋ vinodetuŋ A v.72; k.
  pahāya D i.71=A ii.210=Pug 59; chinnakukkucca (adj.) free from remorse
  M i.108; khīṇāsava k˚ -- vūpasanta S i.167=Sn 82. -- akukkucca (adj.)
  free from worry, having no remorse Sn 850. Kukkuccaŋ kurute (c. gen.)
  to be scrupulous about J i.377; kariŋsu DhA iv.88; cp. kukkuccaŋ
  āpajjati (expl. by sankati) J iii.66.


Is Buddhism a fear-based religion? My general observation about religions is that they have this fundamental assumption of fear of something. For example, fear of punishment or getting into hell is present in many religions. Buddhism too has this fear of rebirth in lower realms, but also a fear of getting into sadness (dukkha?)

These days people of modern outlook tend to discount such fears as childish and practically useless. While a philosophy that distinguishes between harmful and beneficial will still be valid to a general society even after religions disappear.

How can Buddhism be helpful to a secular society that does not have any irrational fear of hell or getting into sadness? Additionally, how can Buddhism be useful to a practical society concerned with real harm and benefit?

According to Theravada Buddhism, fear is based on anger. As per the Visuddhimagga-Tika:

  na bhāyati ñāṇassa bhāyanākārena appavattanato. paṭighacittuppādavasena hi bhāyanaṃ, ñāṇaṃ pana bhāyitabbavatthuṃ bhāyitabbanti yāthāvato jānāti.

  It doesn't fear - because of the non-occurrence of the condition of fearing in this knowledge [knowledge of fearsomeness]. For, fearing is through the influence of a mind of aversion, but this knowledge knows, of a thing to be feared, merely: "it is to be feared".

  Vism-Tika 21.3

The Visuddhimagga itself (quoted above in bold) provides a good explanation of the difference between knowledge and fear:

  But does the knowledge of appearance as terror [itself] fear or does it not
  fear? It does not fear. For it is simply the mere judgment that past formations have
  ceased, present ones are ceasing, and future ones will cease. Just as a man with
  eyes looking at three charcoal pits at a city gate is not himself afraid, since he
  only forms the mere judgment that all who fall into them will suffer no little
  pain;—or just as when a man with eyes looks at three spikes set in a row, an
  acacia spike, an iron spike, and a gold spike, he is not himself afraid, since he
  only forms the mere judgment that all who fall on these spikes will suffer no
  little pain;—so too the knowledge of appearance as terror does not itself fear; it
  only forms the mere judgment that in the three kinds of becoming, which resemble
  the three charcoal pits and the three spikes, past formations have ceased, present
  ones are ceasing, and future ones will cease.

  Path of Purification, XXI.32

The important distinction here is that fear itself is unwholesome, so Buddhist practice is for becoming free from fear. Unfortunately, apart from never being subject to that which is fearsome, the only way to become completely free from fear is to practice so that one is no longer afraid of that which is fearsome (i.e. by freeing oneself from attachment to the objects about which one is afraid).

So, rather than practicing religious practices to avoid situations of which one is afraid, the point of Buddhism is to practice in a way that allows one to remove one's fear of such situations. The premise is the same; namely that one is afraid of certain situations. The difference is in how one relates to this fact. In regards to bhayañāṇa (knowledge of fearsomeness), the expectation is that the knowledge will help one to let go of one's fears, once one realizes that there is no real, lasting escape for one with fear.

The claim that non-religious people can somehow be free from fear without such practice depends in a large part on whether there is indeed life after death; still, it is most certain that those who scoff at the fears of hell and the afterlife would still experience great fear in this life if they were to meet with what is truly fearsome (disaster, danger, etc.) and so they have not really accomplished the goal by simply discarding fear of that which they don't believe to exist.

Update:

As for the criticism that Buddhism uses fear as a means of encouraging proper practice, I suppose this might be true conventionally; a person who does something not knowing the consequences of that act ought to be reminded of the danger. In a conventional sense, that may bring fear to the individual. But the individual need not be afraid, they should simply avoid the activity.

As to your additional questions, fear of hell is only irrational if there is no hell. Fear is always detrimental, though, and in fact a prime reason for being reborn in hell; only those with minds inclining towards anger will suffer from fear. Buddhism helps one become free from anger and thus fear; whether there is an afterlife or not, this is surely a beneficial thing to modern society.


How would one begin practising Buddhism? It is very easy to find lots of information on the internet about Buddhism and the concepts.
However I struggle to know where or how to start becoming a Buddhist, if that is the correct way to state it.

Find and join a sangha (buddhist community) that you are comfortable with.
Talking to the community to understand what and how they practice buddhism.
Accustom the practices based on what you can comfortably do for the moment.
Never forcing yourself to the extreme, e.g. immediately become a vegetarian, practice 1 hour sitting meditation daily, spend the whole day just talking about buddhism etc.
Buddhism practice is basically a continuous process of improving one's sila (morality/precepts), samadhi (concentration/stillness) and prajna (wisdom), until one attains the buddhahood (nibbana / nirvana).
As a start you can view Buddhism essentially is a lifestyle which would lead the practitioners to a better tomorrow.

Here is a short and nice article about Buddhist path: The Buddhist Path in 3 words