Is mindfulness for quick enlightenment being exaggerated in the Sutta MN10? I was reading about mindfulness here.  At the end I found this paragraph

  Let alone seven years, anyone who develops these four kinds of
  mindfulness meditation in this way for six years … five years … four
  years … three years … two years … one year … seven months … six months
  … five months … four months … three months … two months … one month …
  a fortnight … Let alone a fortnight, anyone who develops these four
  kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for seven days can expect
  one of two results: enlightenment in the present life, or if there’s
  something left over, non-return.

Here Tathagata saying one keeping that kind of mindfulness for 7 days can get enlightenment? Is it exaggeration, translation problem or understanding problem or it's true?

Is it exaggeration, translation problem or understanding problem or
  it's true?

The translation is fine, but the reader must know the environment and situation of that sutta, before read it. If the reader read it without the pre-required knowledge, it is the reader's fail.

The explanation

In atthakathā of MN 10 wrote:

  Why Buddha taught mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta to Kuru-people? Because they had enough ability to study the advance teaching. It's told that Kuru-people, such as bhikkhu, bhikkhunī, lay men, and lay women,  always had the potential body and the potential mind because Kuru-country had the richness of temperature, etc. Their potential body and potential mind supported their wisdom power, so they can studied  the advance teaching.

So, most Kuru-people were diṭṭhi-cārita, who have little dust in their eyes, according to netti desanāhāravibhaṅga.

The diṭṭhi-cārita people can attain jhāna easily. So they don't have to meditate jhāna because of their pure mind. They can enlighten at the listening moment. That's why in the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta's atthakathā wrote:

  30,000 people enlightened as arahanta at the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta was taught.

therefore, the end of mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta wrote:

  Let alone seven years, anyone who develops these four kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for six years … five years … four years … three years … two years … one year … seven months … six months … five months … four months … three months … two months … one month … a fortnight … Let alone a fortnight, anyone who develops these four kinds of mindfulness meditation in this way for seven days can expect one of two results: enlightenment in the present life, or if there’s something left over, non-return.

But for taṇhā-carita people,who have much dust in their eyes, they have to meditate jhāna, first. After they attained jhāna, they can count down for enlightenment like what buddha taught in the end of  mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta. Because jhāna can pause their five hindrances, then their "dust in eyes" state will be same little  dust as diṭṭhi-carita and they are able to count down for enlightenment.


What is the difference between a nature and a behaviour? I believe that every person comes with a nature in-built into self and creates/maintains his/her own behaviour into self.

So, may I call it fate? Or, is there more I have to learn about? How does buddhism take it? I wish to get personal views, only.

I welcome such a discussion and find this question enjoyable, especially because it merits personal views and not just carved-in-stone texts.

Even from a scientific point of view, defining "what is nature (natural)?" has been a difficult task that has been evolved in different fields such as meta-physics, astronomy, mathematics and religious studies, etc for many many years.

A simple question as follows could solicit long discussion, which could bring up hundreds of other questions that would eventually become a "chicken or egg?" problem:

Is acid rain natural?

If one thinks in her own logical way that has been taught in school, the answer is Yes and No.

Some say it is natural in a sense that it is "cause and effect".

While some say it is not, because it shouldn't exist.

Putting science aside and leaning back on my own personal view of what I have read/learnt in Buddhist books and articles over the years:

One thing we could be sure of:

We are all born with a good heart and will. Having a good heart and will not in a sense that we start making donations to charities, look for someone to save, or counter others whose deeds we deem "bad".

Rather, we were all born a "Buddha". But we are not (yet), due to "senses (feelings)" that we so quickly acquire the second after birth.

Examples:

It tastes good.

He is handsome.

She looks beautiful.

I must do it against all odds to uphold and thus protect this, because of my tradition. (clinging)

I hate ....

It is so funny (laughters).

From my own thinking based on books that I have read, people and nature that I have met and observed (including observing my own self, too), to be "natural" (nature) is to lose those layers of "cocoons" that bar us from being a Buddha since birth.

Those layers being - senses and feeling - hence thoughts (judgements, logic, biases, preferences, liking, disliking, stubbornness, heroism, etc etc).

Other words, following the buddhist path is to become one with everything and all (even an ant is of greatest "importance" in its own existence in this space).

The preceding on "Nature" is only my personal view based on my own experience and thinking.

The following brings us to "Behavior":

Behavior, in my opinion, is what has been mentioned above - senses and feelings - all these surmises to thoughts.

Thoughts bind you to do or not do something regardless whether or not it is "right" or "wrong" or "good" or "bad".

It becomes a fuel that "supports" your actions based on senses and feelings.

Other words, behaviors are learnt since brith though sense, feeling - thus thoughts.

Examples:

"My mother told me...."

"I was trying to be nice to her, but she, nonetheless, refuses to go out with me. I guess all girl with short hair are mean."

"It feels so good, even feels better in the winter....." (senses)

"I loved him so much, although I knew he has wronged me. But I just couldn't help it, I hope he will love me one day and sees finally what I have been doing to myself out of love of him.."

All of the above behaviors could be unlearnt and thus undone, usually though:

"My mother was wrong; now I know because ..."

"No, not all girls with short hair are mean; my neighbor has short hair and she is very friendly"

"You know what, I have read that even it feels good, one shouldn't do it because ......"

"I guess I was naïve; he was not for me, now I met the greatest man of my life, who cares for me......"

The above are examples of "counter-behaviors".

In buddhist sense, the above is not the way we should lead ourselves to.

We shouldn't need to find a counter-behavior to eliminate a behavior.
Other words, we should not pick up the behavior from the beginning.

Example:

One does action (behavior) A.

Years later, one finds that action (behavior) A is bad, then she finds (learns) action B to counter action A.

1 + (-1) = 0

It would stay so, as long as action B "prevails"; if one day, through time and experiences, you find action B unpleasant or you simply lose your will to hold on to it, you revert back to carrying out action A.

In short, Buddhism teaches us to not pick up "action A" or behaviors through senses and feelings in the first place, thus eliminating the "need" to find a counter-action such as action B, because the process is clinging and un-clinging, which disturbs our peace of mind and our "Nature" to become one with everything.


How compatible are the beliefs of atheists and Buddhism? I looked around and found a couple of questions and answers on the site that discuss atheism in Buddhism, What is the difference between learning the Buddhist way and simply learning from life? & Do Buddhists believe in gods? it looks like belief in a supreme being may not be a requirement for being a Buddhist.  Strictly speaking it is possible for a person to identify as an agnostic or atheist and also identify with any mono or polytheistic church.  Though most (all?) of those actual religions do not support disbelief in their God(s), so they are not actually compatible.

Are the concepts of agnostic or atheist believers compatible with Buddhism? Does the entire belief system or specific sects require the belief in any or a specific supreme being?

I would say compatible. There is a significant Secular Buddhism movement based on agnostic, humanist and skeptical values. Stephen Batchelor is a notable proponent of this school for instance in his book Buddhism without Beliefs.

I don't think you need to go the whole way to Secular Buddhism though to appreciate the Buddha's pragmatic approach to the Dharma. In the Cula-Malunkyovada sutta he refuses to answer a whole list of metaphysical questions regarding them as a distraction for instance

  "Malunkyaputta, did I ever say to you, '[...] that 'The cosmos is
  eternal,' or 'The cosmos is not eternal,' or 'The cosmos is finite,'
  or 'The cosmos is infinite,' or 'The soul & the body are the same,' or
  'The soul is one thing and the body another,' or 'After death a
  Tathagata exists,' or 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' or
  'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or 'After
  death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'?"

  "No, lord."

Also in the arrow sutta he insists that the thing to do is engage in the practice and not to be put off by useless questioning. To paraphase if you are struck by an arrow don't concern yourself about who made it, where it came from, what direction it was fired from - just pull it out. So if you are experiencing suffering, don't worry about rebirth, the gods, ritual etc.. just pull the arrow of suffering out. Engage with the Dharma as soon as you can.


Delusion,fear and panic and shame After facing death,I passed through a period of more than six months in delusion,fear and panic associated with shame.I was very much frightened and the experience was horrifying .After so many years my personality has completely changed,I don't know for better or for worse Although I have been occupying the Same body for 64 years.How to describe different stages and passing through different states In my mortal life? can it be termed as different rebirths(any kind of) for an ordinary man In Buddhist terms.May I add that Before twenty years I took a CANCER CAPSULE and went into deep and continuous sleep without interruption for 4/5 months, I woke up for one day and went into deep undisturbed and uninterrupted sleep for another three months. finally I woke up as a normal man.I could not come to a conclusion how to describe such experience.

How to describe different stages and passing through different states In my mortal life?

This is most certainly the case with myself. In fact, after 12 months of diligently observing myself, I notice my mind states shift all the time, even from moment to moment. The governor for these shifting states could be our conditioned self. Unfamiliar arising conditions such as the one you describe can allow for a huge shift in consciousness and perhaps one reason for this transition is because they don't conform to our conditioned state, that being: there's no previous blueprint to overlay it with. The self (or conditioned state) has been shook up. My point is, that these changes are occurring all of the time but for the most part they go unnoticed; they are quite subtle. They can indeed be seen as a death and rebirth regardless of their magnitude.

The Tibetan Book of The Dead is an interesting read and can be applied within the finer constituents of life itself. SEE HERE. Carl Jung has an interesting interpretation of this book.

In a strictly Buddhist sense, one could learn massively from this experience.

  can it be termed as different rebirths(any kind of) for an ordinary man In Buddhist terms.

I'm not sure what you're asking here.


Apocarteresis in Buddhism Apocarteresis is a form of suicide where a person stops taking food and/or water.

Now, I want to make it very clear that I have no intention of committing suicide anytime soon.

However, as the Buddha taught, old age, illness and death are part of life.

I believe that the most dreadful thing is not the disease itself or even death, it is my experience that in some countries (for legal reasons) doctors will insist in keeping patients alive when it would be compassionate to let the disease take its own course.

I am relatively young now, and healthy. Again, I have no desire to die soon.
However, having witnessed my grandfather's unnecessarily protracted death, I would rather not leave my life in the hands of overzealous doctors come the time. On the other hand, I would want to avoid causing suffering and accumulating kamma with an unskillful act of death.

How is apocartheresis as a form of euthanasia viewed within Buddhism in cases of terminal illness?

Your calling it "suicide" (i.e. intentionally killing yourself) and "committing" (a crime) suggest that the action/intention/view you have in mind are not appropriate.

The following paragraphs from pages 82 and 83 of this Vinaya commentary,
The Buddhist Monastic Code I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu suggest that the doctors would not be "killing" is they withhold treatment:

  Inaction. Given the Vibhanga’s definition of taking life, we can infer that
  inaction does not fulfill the factor of effort here, for it does not cut off the life
  faculty. Thus if a bhikkhu sits idly when seeing a flood sweep a person
  downstream, he commits no offense—regardless of his feelings about the
  person’s death—even if the person then drowns. Recommending that another
  person sit idly as well would also not fulfill the factor of effort here, because the
  category of command covers only the act of inciting the listener to do any of the
  four actions that would fulfill the factor of effort under this rule.

  Medical care and life-support. The same holds true if a bhikkhu decides not to
  give a patient a treatment—or to discontinue treatment—that might conceivably
  extend the patient’s life: It does not fulfill the factor of effort, for such acts do not
  cut off the life faculty. At most they simply allow it to end on its own. The Canon
  supports this inference by treating such actions not under this rule but under
  Mv.VIII.26.3-4, where it imposes only a dukka˛a on the act of refusing to give 83
  any treatment at all to an ill bhikkhu, or of discontinuing all care for an ill
  bhikkhu prior to his recovery or death. This shows that the compilers of the
  Canon did not regard these acts as cutting off the life faculty. (Mv.VIII.26.8 lists
  the ideal characteristics of a bhikkhu who tends to the sick, but does not impose
  a penalty on a bhikkhu who cares for the sick but lacks the ideal qualities; at no
  point does the Canon impose a required level of care for the sick. The compilers’
  refusal to mandate a level of care is wise. If there were a case in which the
  bhikkhus did not feel that that level of care was appropriate for their patient,
  they would have only one option: to abandon the patient, so as to incur only a
  dukka˛a and not the potentially higher penalty for not measuring up to the
  mandated care. Thus, instead of protecting the patient, a higher level of
  mandated care would expose the patient to abandonment.) For this reason,
  deciding to withhold or discontinue a particular treatment—while still continuing
  otherwise to care for the patient—would not be grounds for an offense

Beware of the way in which you talk about this subject with others. It is wrong to encourage/counsel suicide.

  c) Describing the advantages of dying. This, the third type of act covered by this
  rule, can include berating a sick person (“Why do you keep hanging on to life
  like this? Don’t you realize what a burden you are to others?”) or simply telling a
  person of the miseries of life or the bliss of dying and going to heaven in such a
  way that he/she might feel inspired to commit suicide or simply pine away to
  death. The Vinita-vatthu also includes under this type of act any statements that
  a nurse might make out of compassion to shorten the miseries of an illness by
  encouraging a patient to let go of life so as not to dawdle in the face of death.
  Thus, the Commentary notes, a bhikkhu talking to a dying patient should be
  very circumspect in how he chooses his words, focusing not on how to speed up
  the dying process but on how to inspire the patient with the following thoughts:
  “The attainment of the paths and fruitions is not out of the ordinary for a
  virtuous person. So, having formed no attachment for such things as your
  dwelling, and establishing mindfulness in the Buddha, Dhamma, Saºgha, or the
  body, you should be heedful in your attention.” The Vinita-vatthu to Pr 4
  contains a number of stories in which bhikkhus comfort a dying bhikkhu by
  asking him to reflect on what he has attained through the practice, which was
  apparently a common way of encouraging a dying bhikkhu to focus his
  thoughts on the best object possible. The suttas also contain advice on how to
  encourage patients facing death. See, for example, MN 143, SN 36.7, and AN 6.16.
  In all of these cases, the advice is aimed not at precipitating death but at inspiring
  calm and insight.

  The Vibhanga notes that a statement describing the advantages of dying
  would fulfill the factor of effort regardless of whether delivered by gesture, by
  voice, by writing, or by means of a messenger. The same holds true for any
  statements under the next type of act.

  d) Inciting a person to die, the fourth type of act, covers:
  —Recommending suicide. This includes not only telling a person to commit
  suicide but also giving advice—whether requested or not—on the best ways to
  commit the act.

There's a paragraph on page 85 which may answer your question directly:

  The Commentary extrapolates from this case to apply the dukkata to all
  attempts at suicide, including even the decision not to take food when motivated
  by a desire to die. However, it then runs into the question of how far this penalty
  applies to a bhikkhu who is ill. Its verdict: As long as medicine and attendants are
  available to him, the penalty would still apply. But then it lists two cases where
  the penalty would not apply: (a) A bhikkhu is suffering from a long and serious
  illness, and the attendant bhikkhus are fed up with caring for him, thinking,
  “When will we be free of this sick one?” If the bhikkhu reflects that, even with
  medical care, his body won’t last and that the bhikkhus are being put to
  difficulties, he incurs no penalty in refusing food and medicine. (b) A bhikkhu—
  reflecting that his illness is harsh, the forces of life are running out, and yet the
  noble attainments appear to be within his reach—may refuse food and medicine
  without penalty.

  The Commentary’s deliberations here show how difficult it is to legislate in
  this area, and there are reasons to question the way it applies the Great
  Standards here.

And page 86,

  As for ways of attempting suicide that do not endanger others, it seems
  better to follow the Buddha’s wisdom in not legislating about this issue at all, and
  to treat it as a matter of Dhamma rather than Vinaya. In other words, one
  should keep in mind his comment in SN 35.87 that the only blameless death is an
  arahant’s. If, lacking that attainment, one chooses to refuse food when ill to
  speed up one’s death, one should be heedful of the risks that death and rebirth
  can involve.

You might like to read those several pages from the Vinaya commentary in their entirety (instead of only the quotes above).

Someone also wrote a commantary on the commentary, here: Vinaya Parajika 3 do not kill – accesstoinsight detailed commentary


instant meditation - Imagining things and people in their decayed/old form? When I see something or someone beautiful, would it be good to imagine that thing or that person in decayed/old form? This idea came to me when I was reading about "Dasa sanya" (i.e. dasasaññā or "ten perceptions").

Will it be bad practice to take "Vipassana meditation" in a mental image form, like focusing on the decayed/old form of the particular object or person, instead of focusing on what I see?

My general opinion is that this would be one way of reflecting on the drawbacks/dangers of the object--namely, the sense-object perceived as beautiful is subject to aging and decay. This would be one way of attending to the sense-object that is producing lust as 'unattractive' and as not being ultimately satisfying. That can't be wrong.

Also, I assume that you would do this in order to counteract lust; so, the question is: is it effective? If it actually reduces lust for that object then it is the right thing to do.

It may be that it is not in line with some specific practices that are called 'vipassana', but I don't see why this would matter.


Lord Buddha advice on contemplation of man-made things Hundred years ago there were many natural beautiful things to observe and it was also easy to cultivate happiness. But in today's city life, we are surrounded by long buildings, roads, and traffics. We rarely spend our time with nature and are mostly surrounded by man-made things. Although breathing meditation can be done anywhere and this cultivates a lot of relief from our suffering, I was just wondering whether Lord Buddha had given any suggestion on the contemplation of manmade things to cultivate happiness/peace?
Is it possible to become peaceful by just contemplating on any man-made things and if yes then how?

OP: Is it possible to become peaceful by just contemplating on any man-made things and if yes then how?

You can meditate on kasinas. Please see the wikipedia page on kasina.
Technically, this is concentration on a man-made mental object.
I quote from it below.

Kasiṇa meditation is one of the most common types of samatha
meditation, intended to settle the mind of the practitioner and create
a foundation for further practices of meditation. In kasiṇa
meditation, a mental object (kasina) is used as the object of
meditation, being used to keep the mind focused whenever attention
drifts.
The meditation treatise the Visuddhimagga is centered around
kasina-meditation. According to American scholar monk Thanissaro
Bhikkhu, "[t]he text then tries to fit all other meditation methods
into the mold of kasina practice, so that they too give rise to
countersigns, but even by its own admission, breath meditation does
not fit well into the mold." He argues that by emphasizing
kasina-meditation, the Visuddhimagga departs from the focus on dhyana
in the Pali Canon. Thanissaro Bhikkhu states this indicates that what
"jhana means in the commentaries is something quite different from
what it means in the Canon."
There are ten kasiṇa described in the Visuddhimagga, which are also
mentioned in the Pali Tipitaka:

earth पठवी कसिण (Pali: paṭhavī kasiṇa, Sanskrit: pṛthivī kṛtsna)
water आपो कसिण (āpo kasiṇa, ap kṛtsna)
fire तेजो कसिण (tejo kasiṇa, tejas kṛtsna)
air, wind वायो कसिण (vāyo kasiṇa, vāyu kṛtsna)
blue, green नील कसिण (nīla kasiṇa, nīla kṛtsna)
yellow पीत कसिण (pīta kasiṇa, pīta kṛtsna)
red लोहित कसिण (lohita kasiṇa, lohita kṛtsna)
white ओदात कसिण (odāta kasiṇa, avadāta kṛtsna)
enclosed space, hole, aperture आकास कसिण (ākāsa kasiṇa, ākāśa kṛtsna)
consciousness विञ्ञाण कसिण (viññāṇa kasiṇa, vijñāna kṛtsna); in the Pali suttas and some other texts; bright light आलोक कसिण āloka
kasiṇa according to later sources, such as Buddhaghosa's
Visuddhimagga.

The kasiṇa are typically described as a colored disk, with the
particular color, properties, dimensions and medium often specified
according to the type of kasiṇa. The earth kasiṇa, for instance, is a
disk in a red-brown color formed by spreading earth or clay (or
another medium producing similar color and texture) on a screen of
canvas or another backing material.


Is Enlightenment a momentum with a continuum or can have regressions? According to buddhism , does the enlightenment have a continuum from an initial momentum or can have also regressions?
I suppose if a specific state of mind has been acquired from innumerable causes it can’t return back, can just evolve toward a vector even if we force ourself in a condition of ignorance, so the bodhisattvic principle.

Do you see an old woman or a young one? Or can you see both?

Once you've seen, can you forget how to see it?
Until we see the world as it is we don't see it, but once we've seen it we cannot 'unsee'. We may fall back on old habits and patterns (old ways of seeing the world), but enlightenment (honestly) is just seeing the world as it is. It's our natural state, something we're drawn away from by our egoic selves, but which pulls us back to itself whenever we stop fighting against it.
I know, sometimes people feel the need to walk all the way around the block to get back to their own front door; the craving for progress can delude us as easily as any other craving. C'est la vie.


Does anybody know the composition of the 6th council and how the delegates were chosen? Nyanatiloka and Nyanaponika were the only Western born monks to attend the 6th Council. I am curious to know the composition of the 6th council and how the delegates were chosen.

Wikipedia says:

  The council was attended by 2,500 monastics from eight Theravada Buddhist countries.

Clearly there would have been more countries involved than the 8 Buddhist countries. Also the delegates from countries which were not predominantly Buddhist sponsored by a Buddhist country they lived in. Also how come Nanamoli Bhikkhu and Ven. Ñāṇavīra Thera did not make it as delegates?

I have been asking around and done some research, but got nothing specific to answer your questions. Some years ago I spoke with an elder Norwegian Buddhist, who said that no less than 12 countries(to his knowledge) was present, plus a number of schools from each country. He said that extra invitations were sent out by the original invited and that this was allowed. A bit like how the Buddhist UN conferences work - just without all the fancy food... :)


Does emptiness & no-self work together? Emptiness seems to be very prevalent in Dhamma after Theravada.
But I have seen that it still exists in Theravada, it has just been ignored compared to other teachings.

Why is emptiness ignored so much in Theravada & can emptiness be harmonious alongside the teaching of no-self?

If my question is not clear, please inform me. :)

Metta to all!

Yes the buddha says that conditioned things are empty, which means they are empty of self like he says so in https://suttacentral.net/sn35.85/en/bodhi or even https://suttacentral.net/sa273/en/choong

In fact he even says that knowing that things are empty, not self, dukkha and all that is the trigger for liberation

  ‘The first absorption is a basis for ending the defilements.’ That’s
  what I said, but why did I say it? Take a mendicant who, quite
  secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities,
  enters and remains in the first absorption. They contemplate the
  phenomena there—included in form, feeling, perception, choices, and
  consciousness—as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as an
  abscess, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling
  apart, as empty, as not-self. They turn their mind away from those
  things, and apply it to the deathless: ‘This is peaceful; this is
  sublime—that is, the stilling of all activities, the letting go of all
  attachments, the ending of craving, fading away, cessation,
  extinguishment.’
  https://suttacentral.net/an4.124/en/sujato


Who am 'I'? Verification as to the demarcations of 'Sankhara' It maybe a very confusing question. But I have been contemplating this quite a lot recently.

Ven. Ajahn Chah preached, as the Lord Buddha once said :

  One who sees Sankhara and is purged of attachment has happiness. Mind is Sankhara. Body is Sankhara. Sankhara is not us or ours. Thus those who see Sankhara are at peace. They see the mind and body not as 'self' but only as 'Sankhara'. (pg.22, paragraph 3)
   - Excerpt from 'Being Dharma' By Ven.Ajahn Chah

When I contemplate these deep words, I feel that 'Sankhara' means 'things that are conditioned, impermanent, ever changing and not reliable sources of happiness'.

Wikipedia defines 'Sankhara' as follows:

  Saṅkhāra (Pali; Sanskrit saṃskāra) is a term figuring prominently in Buddhism. The word means 'that which has been put together' and 'that which puts together'.
  In the first (passive) sense, saṅkhāra refers to conditioned phenomena generally but specifically to all mental "dispositions".[1] These are called 'volitional formations' both because they are formed as a result of volition and because they are causes for the arising of future volitional actions.[2] English translations for saṅkhāra in the first sense of the word include 'conditioned things,'[3] 'determinations,'[4] 'fabrications'[5] and 'formations' (or, particularly when referring to mental processes, 'volitional formations').[6]
  In the second (active) sense of the word, saṅkhāra refers to that faculty of the mind/brain apparatus (sankhara-khandha) that puts together those formations.[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%E1%B9%85kh%C4%81ra

But when we think even deeper, if both mind and body are 'sankhara', then who is the 'being' within our minds, who travels through this eternity of existence? This 'being' that some refer simply (and quite wrongly) as an 'Āthma' or in other ways as 'existence'? If 'Āthma' or 'existence' is Sankhara, then how does it endlessly exist? Sure it changes from one existence to another, but it is endlessly existing , which contradicts the nature of 'Sankhara' itself, making 'our existence' immortal.

It is like a man travelling from house to house. The house breaks down, but the man is eternally travelling. Who is this man, and how is he eternally travelling, is he is also 'Sankhara'? Shouldn't he also end at some point or the other? In this analogy, the man is the 'existence', and the house symbolizes our body and mind.

I know this is very confusing material, but I consider this site a realm filled with knowledgeable beings. I would find myself very happy to find any number of meaningful replies.

Thankyou!!!

who is the 'being' within our minds, who travels through this eternity
  of existence?

'being' is simply a label given to nama-rupa. There's no being within the mind. It's like asking "what is the car within the car? Is it the engine? Wheels? Frame? Seats?". No such thing! 'Car' is simply a label given to a certain arrangement of all that.

  Who travels through this eternity of existence?

Nobody! A being traveling through a Samsara is simply used in the metaphoric sense to give teachings at conceptual level. In reality, it's just Paticcasamuppada.

Sankhara paccaya Vinnana - Dependent on Karma consciousness arises

  Sure it changes from one existence to another, but it is endlessly
  existing

What do you mean by 'it' here? Is it Nama, or is it Rupa? A single Rupa unit only lasts for 17 thought moments. The next Rupa arising is not the same as the previous. Nama vanishes even quicker. So what exactly is endlessly existing?

"It existing" here is simply a false view of reality about a Sanna(perception) caused by contact at the sense doors. Ignorance covers up impermanence, so instead of taking Sanna as just Sanna that rises and dies, we take Sanna as something existing.

Remaining questions are based on the above mentioned.


How in buddhistic terms one can explain life evolution? How can in Buddhistic terms explain life evolution, that is how can new beings evolve  from previous nama-rupa? How could a vipāka (resultant-consciousness) "move" from cuti-citta (dying-consciousness) to the patisandhi-citta (rebirth-consciousness) of a being not yet existing?

Here is a quote from the book "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi. The quote is from the chapter: "The Process of Death and Rebirth", p. 220-223:

  §36 The Mind at the Time of Death

  Thereafter, attending to that object thus presented, the stream of consciousness in accordance with the kamma that is to be matured, whether pure or corrupted, and in conformity with the state into which one is to be reborn continually flows, inclining mostly towards that state. Or that rebirth productive kamma presents itself to a sense door in the way of renewing.

  Guide to §36

  In the way of renewing (abhinavakaraoavasena): that is, the kamma presenting itself does not appear as a memory image of something that was previously done, but it appears to the mind door as if it were being done at that very moment.

  §37 Death and Rebirth-Linking

  To one who is on the verge of death, either at the end of a cogni- tive process or at the dissolution of the life-continuum, the death con- sciousness, the consummation of the present life, arises and ceases in the way of death.
  Immediately after that (death consciousness) has ceased, a rebirth-linking consciousness arises and is established in the subsequent existence, apprehending the object thus obtained, either supported by the heart-base or baseless, as is appropriate; it is generated by a volitional formation that is enveloped by latent ignorance and rooted in latent craving. That rebirth-linking consciousness, so called because it links together the two consecutive existences, is conjoined with its mental adjuncts, and acts as the forerunner to the conascent states as their locus (or foundation).

  Guide to §37

  To one who is on the verge of death: The last cognitive process begins when the bhavanga is interrupted, vibrates for one moment, and is then arrested. Thereafter follows either a sense-door process taking as object some sense object presenting itself at one of the five sense doors or a bare mind-door process taking as object either some sense object or a mental object presenting itself at the mind door. Within this termi- nal process the javana phase, by reason of its weakness, runs for only five mind-moments rather than the usual seven.

  This process lacks original productive kammic potency, but acts rather as the channel for the past kamma that has assumed the rebirth-generative function. Following the javana stage two registration cittas (tad±rammaoa) may or may not fol- low. In some cases the bhavanga may follow the last process cittas. Then, as the very last citta, the death consciousness arises performing the func- tion of passing away from the present life. With the ceasing of the death consciousness, the life faculty is cut off. Then the body remains a mass of inanimate material phenomena born of temperature, and continues as such until the corpse is reduced to dust.

  Immediately after that has ceased: Following the dissolution mo- ment of the death consciousness, there arises in a new existence the re- birth-linking consciousness apprehending the object thus obtained in the final javana process of the previous life. This citta is supported by the heart-base in realms which include matter, but is baseless in the imma- terial realms. It is generated by a volitional formation, i.e. the kamma of the previous javana process, which in turn is grounded in the twin roots of the round of existence, latent ignorance and latent craving. The rebirth consciousness is conjoined with its mental adjuncts, i.e. the cetasikas, which it serves as a forerunner not in the sense that it pre- cedes them, but in that it acts as their locus (or foundation).


The Buddha and the Gods realm So according to Buddhism , the gods realm is part of the cycle of existence.
What are the references of this  , according to all buddhists canons?

the gods realm is part of the cycle of existence.

Correct, while devas' lifespan is much longer than ours and they enjoy a lot more bliss/pleasure, they too will die eventually:

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard:
"When a deva is about to pass away from the company of devas, five omens appear: his garlands wither, his clothes get soiled, sweat comes out of his armpits, a dullness descends on his body, he no longer delights in his own deva-seat. The devas, knowing from this that 'This deva-son is about to pass away,' encourage him with three sayings: 'Go from here, honorable sir, to a good destination. Having gone to a good destination, gain the gain that is good to gain. Having gained the gain that is good to gain, become well-established.'" ~~ Iti 76 ~~


What advice should i give for a person with self destructive thoughts? If someone is really depressed and having self destructive thoughts and behavior what can i do to help such a person?

Is there a good meditation for such a one?

What kind of advice will it be best for a such a one?

Metta meditation can help as it subdues hatred which is a major cause for suicide.
Other Samatha meditations like Anapanasati can help to attain extremely pleasant states of the mind like the Jhanas where there's no depression.
Vipassana can be practiced to make one not react to unpleasant feelings or thoughts and eventually achieve lasting peace.


What is a good response when some-one says 'sadhu' to you? Is there an appropriate phrase when some-one says 'sadhu' to you, for example after making an offering at a monastery?
Saying 'no worries', or 'that's okay' doesn't seem appropriate.
Is there a appropriate response, or should I just smile and accept the compliment?

'Sadhu' means good. So you can say 'Sadhu' back. Here in Sri Lanka we commonly say "Theruwan Saranai", which means "May the noble triple gem be your refuge".


How could the Buddha know that he had attained enlightenment when he didn't know what it was? Having learned and gained complete mastery from the two most famous teachers of his time, he decided to apply extreme austerities for some six years. With these skills acquired, driving a powerful concentration,  he abandoned it all in favour of a skill he discovered when as a child at the Kings Plowing Ceremony, where he entered the first jhana [Dhyāna] quite effortlessly.

Furthermore, added to this cache of tools, he prior added a powerful determination to not move from that spot, even if his blood should dry up, etc, etc. The subsequent release of this energy resulted in a spectacular display of meditative attainment.

In the first watch of the night investigating Kamma with respect to successive past lives, revealing causal sequence. In the second watch of the night, investigating Kamma with respect to consequences of currently available choices. In the third watch of the night, the realisation of deliverance.

Not much is said about the results of the third watch. It is a fairly common experience where insights coming from seeing a new possibility after examining two different phenomena with a common factor giving rise to a eureka moment.

But what may have happened in this case, such a eureka event further resulting in a realisation that Dukkha had ceased? The Buddha's quest finally achieved.

During the next eight weeks, the problem of describing a way of enabling others to achieve this result, though necessarily not in the same way, given the death of the two teachers, plus avoiding austerities, plus the absence of psychic powers.

In developing a tangible expression for the inexpressible, the Buddha further developed the right view, that Dukkha exists, arises and ceases according to conditions. Enabling the further development of the 'noble eightfold path'. According to tradition, all this happened in an instant, that is to say, the sequence happened very rapidly: the problem is to give it coherent expression. The result: the four noble truths.

In the third watch of the night He had the knowledge of the exhaustion of cankers, knowing that He had eradicated all defilements and made an end of ill.

The Three Supreme Knowledges of Lord Buddha

So the Buddha knew he had overcome defilements and was enlightened due to knowledge of the exhaustion of cankers.

Also with the arising of knowledge of the exhaustion of cankers the Buddha knew what enlightenment was.


Is this an accurate introduction to different paths and traditions? The accepted answer to What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share? includes Compassion, the Triple Jewel, the Four Noble Truths, the Eight-fold Way, Dependent Origination, the Three Marks of Existence, the 37 Factors of Enlightenment, and more.

It also implies that Mahayana acknowledges one Path of Purification (visuddhi-marga):

Is that one Path the same (or basically the same) as The Visuddhimagga which Wikipedia says is "the 'great treatise' on Theravada Buddhist doctrine written by Buddhaghosa approximately in 430 CE in Sri Lanka"?

Furthermore, accepting that there's one "Path of Purification", the Wikipedia article titled "Buddhist Paths to liberation" seems to suggest that there's almost a different Path for each tradition.

Is this a reliable article?
Does it properly list the various schools/tradition and accurately summarize their paths?

When I've read elementary/contemporary/English-language introductions to various schools (e.g. Zen Flesh Zen Bones for zen), or visited a Chinese-in-Canada Mahayana temple, or dimly remember a Westerner writing a century or more ago about Tibetan/Mongolian beliefs and practices, they seem to have little in common with each other: e.g. Zen seems to be about being spontaneous or 'original', Chinese about things being better in the Pure Land, Tibetan about the cycle of rebirth.

Is it true, as stated in these Notes, that for all Buddhist traditions, the "Noble Eightfold Path is considered to be the essence of Buddhist practice"?

The article on Tibetan Buddhism begins, "Tibetan Buddhism comprises the teachings of the three vehicles of Buddhism: the Foundational Vehicle, Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna" where 'Foundational Vehicle' links to the article on "Hinayana".

Do the practioners of various schools know, are they taught, what the Hinayana doctrine is, and do they accept it a "foundational"?

Is that one Path the same (or basically the same) as The Visuddhimagga
  which Wikipedia says is "the 'great treatise' on Theravada Buddhist
  doctrine written by Buddhaghosa approximately in 430 CE in Sri Lanka"?

The Visuddhimagga is the name of a book, and when traditions talk about a path of purification, they aren't using the term to refer to the title of this book, but just as a general term meaning a means of purification. I don't think that the other traditions even had access to the Visuddhimagga prior to modern times.

  When I've read elementary/contemporary/English-language introductions
  to various schools (e.g. Zen Flesh Zen Bones for zen), or visited a
  Chinese-in-Canada Mahayana temple, or dimly remember a Westerner
  writing a century or more ago about Tibetan/Mongolian beliefs and
  practices, they seem to have little in common with each other: e.g.
  Zen seems to be about being spontaneous or 'original', Chinese about
  things being better in the Pure Land, Tibetan about the cycle of
  rebirth.

All of these traditions are very vast systems of teaching and practice, and they all use very different terminology, and some traditions emphasize certain points while others might not emphasize a particular point, but that doesn't mean that they reject them. Just because these teachings are held in common between all traditions doesn't mean that they describe them using the same terms, or even teach them in an explicit manner. Take Zen Buddhism for example. For the past 1000 years, the main slogan of the Zen school has been "See mind, become Buddha" meaning that the practice is to see the nature of the mind and as a result one becomes enlightened. This terminology is very different from how the Theravada tradition would describe it, as the Theravada school would give a quote like this:

  "What do you think, monks — Is form constant or inconstant?"

  "Inconstant, lord."

  "And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?"

  "Stressful, lord."

  "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to
  change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?"

  "No, lord."

  ...

  Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows
  disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with
  perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with
  consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through
  dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the
  knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the
  holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this
  world.

But this difference of expression doesn't preclude the existence of things in common. Both of these explanations present enlightenment as the result of seeing the nature of something, even though the language and style may be very different. Tibetan Buddhism holds to the same position as well, saying that enlightenment results from gaining a non-conceptual realization of the emptiness of all phenomena. Pureland Buddhism hold on to these teachings as well, but sees the appropriate time for actually practicing such things to be after one is reborn into the Pureland, and even that is only one interpretation of Pureland Buddhism. Chinese Buddhism fuses Zen and Pureland practices together for example.

There are real differences between the traditions, I'm not saying that there aren't. However, all schools of Buddhism hold on to this set of common teachings, even though they differ in their interpretations and their importance.


Refuge in the modern vipassanā movement (the concept/practice, not the ceremony/commitment) How much discussion of refuge is there in the modern vipassanā movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vipassana_movement)? If there is significant emphasis, what is its character?

I am particularly interested in Western vipassanā circles such as IMS and Spirit Rock, but also their Eastern progenitors.

I am not speaking here of the formal ceremony or commitment of taking refuge as much as the concept and ongoing practice of refuge.

By taking refuge you are aspiring to build the qualities of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha in your self than any ceremonial right or ritual.

There are virtues can also be further used as a form of recollection meditation to gain inspiration from the qualities and develop them within oneself:

Buddhanusssathi
Dhammanussathi
Sanghanussathi


Is there a universal definition of a crime? .. I am starting to read Smith and Hogan's Criminal Law, which is of course, not the law of Dhamma, but a common law from one island in Europe. This is the title of the first chapter, but it makes me think. I am interested whether there is a parallel within Buddhist law.. at the very least, given that legal systems should be comparable, I think the question is worth asking! :)

So, what delineates a crime within Dhamma/Buddhism?

tort /tɔːt/ Learn to pronounce nounLAW

  a wrongful act or an
  infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to legal
  liability.

  "public nuisance is a crime as well as a tort"

  What is negligence?

  Negligence is a failure to take reasonable care to avoid causing
  injury or loss to another person. There are four steps in proving
  negligence. The plaintiff must prove:

  that there is a duty in the circumstances to take care duty of care
  that the behaviour or inaction of the defendant in the circumstances did not meet the standard of care which a reasonable
  person would meet in the circumstances (breach of duty)
  that the plaintiff has suffered injury or loss which a reasonable person in the circumstances could have been expected to foresee
  (damage)
  that the damage was caused by the breach of duty (causation).

  Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it:
  'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction,
  to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful
  bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on
  reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the
  affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily
  action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily
  action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do

  MN 61

  The kings are informed of someone’s bad deed: ‘While under the
  influence of alcoholic drinks that cause negligence, this person
  murdered a woman or a man. Or they stole something from a village or
  wilderness. Or they had sexual relations with women or maidens under
  someone else’s protection. Or they ruined a householder or
  householder’s child by lying.’ Then the kings have them arrested for
  being under the influence of alcoholic drinks that cause negligence,
  and execute, imprison, or banish them, or do what the case requires.
  Have you ever seen or heard of such a case?

  Sir, we have seen it and heard of it, and we will hear of it again.

  AN 5.178


Does Vipassana arise from Samatha/Anapanasati meditation? or is it another trap of monkey mind? I'm novice to meditation and Buddhism. Apologies if this is silly question

I've been practicing antipasti meditation for few months. While I watch/understand my breath, when a thought arise I use 6 Rs and let it go and come back to breath.

However when meditation gets bit deep while the mind is somewhat still, I come to a deep realization. It's like everything's zoomed in. - Is this an early levels of Vipassana?

Then I get confused that this is a call from my monkey mind so I go back to 6Rs.

Is my practice correct? Bit confused over my approach. Also I don't have a meditation teacher.

Appreciate your feedback :)

The word 'vipassana' means 'to see clearly'. It refers to seeing clearly the liberating truths of Buddhism, such as:

Craving & attachment cause stress/suffering.
Non-craving & non-attachment cause de-stressing/peace.
Conditioned things are impermanent therefore cannot be attached to.
Things are not-self, i.e., they are natural phenomena or elements.

Therefore, if in Anapanasati practise, the mind clearly sees the above, this is vipassana.

For example, if the mind clearly sees 'the body breathes' rather than the 'self' breathes, this is vipassana.

Or if the mind clearly sees craving, attachment & other monkey-mindedness cause disturbing agitated vibrations in the breathing, this is vipassana.

Or if the mind clearly sees equanimity of mind causes the breathing to become calm and the body to feel relaxed, this is vipassana.

Or if the mind clearly sees each breath appears, stays, then disappears, this is vipassana.


Should I maintain my mindfulness 24 hours a day? I love mindfulness but when I sleep I loose all my mindfulness. I see dreams in which I am unaware of the Truth.

Should I maintain my mindfulness 24 hours a day?
If yes , how can I maintain my mindfulness 24 hours a day so that mindfulness extends into my sleep?

Mindfulness will increase with correct, consistent practice. At some point, if continued practice occurs, the sleep cycle will be affected too, in the form of a lighter sleep with less dreaming and more awareness.

When balancing the Five Spiritual Faculties, Mindfulness is the only factor that is not balanced meaning one can cultivate as much mindfulness as possible without creating any imbalances in the mind.

I would recommend watching the video "How Mindfulness Creates Understanding (The Buddhist TV)" by Ven. Yuttadhammo.


How reputable is D.T. Suzuki among modern Zen Buddhists? Over the past year I've been studying Zen, and eventually came across a compilation of the writing of D.T. Suzuki, an anthology of such.

Needless to say I was impressed and profoundly influenced by this anthology, but I wonder what the reputation of his work is among modern Zen Buddhists. Do they typically consider it an accurate depiction and representation of Zen? And if not, where would one come across an accurate representation?

He’s pretty phenomenal if you ask me.  I’d highly recommend most of his earlier writings.  People forget that he had some training as a monk under a fairly renowned master.

Just remember, however.  There’s only one authentic representation of Zen - that which you find on the cushion staring into mushin.


Can meditation heal physical diseases? I recently read the Discourse to Girimananda Thera. In it, the Venerable Girimananda was "afflicted with a disease, was suffering there from, and was gravely ill". The Blessed One was petitioned by another monk who stated: "It were well, bhante, if the Blessed One would visit the Venerable Girimananda out of compassion for him".

To this the Blessed one replied: "Should you, Ánanda, visit the monk Girimananda and recite to him the ten contemplations, then that monk Girimananda having heard them, will be immediately cured of his disease".

Is this possible? Has anyone experienced immediate healing of some disease first hand? If the answer is yes, then I would be curious to know what the limitations (if any) there are for physical healing and if the effects were permanent.

Disclaimer: I am completely new to Buddhism (less than 6 months of practice).

In case it matters, another translation says,

  "If you were to recite to the mendicant Girimānanda these ten perceptions, it’s possible that after hearing them his illness will die down on the spot."

I think everyone translates the Pali, "Ṭhānaṃ kho panetaṃ", as "It is possible that".

Also, though this doesn't answer your question, Piya Tan has an introduction to this sutta if you want to read it -- Giri-m-ananda Sutta (A 10.60) -- which includes a page connecting ancient Indian medicine with early Buddhism (and explaining the ten perceptions in more detail).


Help with finding a specific sutta I'm looking for a sutta wherein the Buddha explains how beings we meet in this life (family, friends, animals etc.) have all been our parents, friends, loved ones, pets etc. in previous lives. What sutta is that?
Thank you for your time.

From SN 15.14:

At Sāvatthī.

“Mendicants, transmigration has no known beginning. … It’s not easy to find a sentient being who in all this long time has not previously been your mother.

Why is that? Transmigration has no known beginning. … This is quite enough for you to become disillusioned, dispassionate, and freed regarding all conditions.”


What does the word "world" mean in the Buddhist context? The Hemawatha Sutta Is a (very old)? sutta in "Sutha Nipatha" of KN, Just after the first sermon of "Dammachakka". 'Hemawata' (General of yakka's ) is also a listener of that. He give the news about Buddha to his friend 'sathagira' and both came to meet load. That Dialog is in this sutta. some extract of it as follows

...
The Great One like a lion who lives alone,
among all pleasures he’s expectation-free,
let us draw near that we may ask of him
how to escape from the snarefulness of death.
O proclaimer of the Dharma, expounding it too,
one who’s beyond all dharmas’ Further Shore,
all fear and hatred you’ve utterly overcome
both of us then of Gotama inquire—
Hemavata
What co-arises with the world?
With what’s it make acquaintance?
The world grasps after what indeed?
Why’s the world afflicted?
Buddha
Six with the world do co-arise,
with six becomes acquainted,
the world’s attached to six indeed,
so, world’s by six afflicted.

The word 'world' is used in this verses and throughout the thipitaka.
What is the meaning of this word in this context?

In the quote you have provided, the “world” is the six senses. The Buddha often used the word “world” in a metaphorical sense. Here are some Suttas where "world" is used in a similar way:

SN 35.82:

  Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "'The world, the world' it is said. In what respect does the word 'world' apply?
  "Insofar as it disintegrates, monk, it is called the 'world.' Now what disintegrates? The eye disintegrates. Forms disintegrate. Consciousness at the eye disintegrates. Contact at the eye disintegrates. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too disintegrates.

  (repeat for ear, nose, tongue, body and mind-sense)

SN 12.44:

  Dwelling at Savatthi. There the Blessed One addressed the monks: "I will teach you the origination of the world & the ending of the world. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

  "As you say, lord," the monks responded to the Blessed One.

  The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

  (repeat for ear, nose, tongue, body and mind-sense)


third eye experience of mindful breathing I am practising mindful breathing and after a while it takes my concentration directly to my forehead. I tried to be in thoughtless state and just keep watching my forehead. After this practice for 2 or 3 days i feel a kind of pressure in my forehead for a day now. is this normal ? i am hesitated to continue my practice because of this. why i experience this sensation ?

This sensation is being experience probably because you are deliberately focusing your intention on your forehead. Your post states:

  I tried to...just keep watching my forehead.

Practising mindful breathing probably takes your concentration directly to your forehead because you are probably concentrating with your forehead.

There is no need to 'concentrate' to practise mindfulness with breathing. If you simply let go & make the mind quiet, awareness of breathing will still occur.

This is because when the mind is quiet & not craving, breathing becomes the most gross or dominant sense object for the mind.

That is why the 8 fold path does not start with concentration but ends with concentration.

'Mindfulness' means to let go of craving. When the mind is quiet, it starts to 'collect' or 'gather' itself, which is the meaning of 'concentration' ('samadhi' - 'collectedness').


Is Buddha immortal? (in Mahayana) As I know Buddhism, it says 'Nothing is permament'

I just came across this in Wikipedia:

  ...a Buddha is immortal. Even though he descends in the samsara to
  preach Dharma and save sentient beings from suffering, his original body remains in a transcendent realm. That body will not die upon the death of the physical body of Buddha, and hence a Buddha is beyond arising and passing away...

It is given as a Mahayana Perspective of the Lotus Sutta.

So, what does this really mean?
Is it that there exists something even after Parinirvana?
Or have I understood it wrong?

First, there are permanent phenomena and impermanent phenomena. All products are impermanent, whereas all negative phenomena are permanent. For instance, space, emptiness, mental images are permanent due to not being products, that is not arising due to causes and conditions.

Second, the meaning of permanent is that of not being subject to change. There are permanent phenomena that are not eternal but occasional: for instance, the emptiness of the cup no longer abides if you break the cup.

Then, there are various bodies. The Dharmakaya has two parts (bodies) :

The wisdom truth body, which is the omniscient mind of a buddha. As it is a mind, it is impermanent, it is compounded
The nature truth body, which is the emptiness of the omniscient mind of a buddha. As it is an emptiness - suchness without defilement - it is permanent and uncompounded

The Dharmakaya is endowed with four aspects:

Permanent, in the sense of not being subject to birth [not taking even a mental body, as opposed to an arya bodhisattva who takes a menal body due to uncontaminated karma and knowledge obscurations]
Constant, in the sense of not being subject to the inconceivable transformation of death [of a mental body] and therefore his enlightened deeds are un-interrupted
Peace, in the sense of being free from all harm
Unalterable, in the sense of being free from aging [contrary to even the arya bodhisattva on a pure ground]

Most Mahayana traditions consider Shakyamuni Buddha's body - the one ordinary being could see - as an emanation body (not a mental body), emanating from the pure dharmakaya.

For more information, See Maitreya / Asanga's Sublime Continuum and commentaries, such as Gyaltsabe Je's.


What are the relevant vinaya guidelines if a bhikkhu was to find a likely abandoned dwelling? Suppose a bhikkhu living in the forest was to come across an abandoned shelter not frequented for several years. Dwelling is clearly in decay and not maintained, with spider webs & hornet's nest etc.

Suppose it's natutally assumed to be an illegal structure by law of the land.

Can he make use of the dwelling and appropriate the requisites if those are otherwise allowable, to do with as he sees fit? Can he dismantle the dwelling? How long does it take for requisites to be considered forsaken and fit to make use of in general?

Im looking primarily for relevant guidelines & anecdotes from the vinayas & commentary of early schools, not interested in mahayana/vajrayana answers.

It's not a matter of how long, since you can't know for certain anyway. If you perceive it to be abandon, then you can go ahead and use it as deem fit.


How can we choose more congenial Kammattana? Among the 40 Kammattana how can I choose more suitable Kammattana for me?

You will need trial and error but generally based on the personality types.

The Pali commentaries further provide guidelines for suggesting meditation subjects based on one's general temperament:

Greedy: the ten foulness meditations; or, body contemplation.

Hating: the four brahma-viharas; or, the four color kasinas.

Deluded: mindfulness of breath.

Faithful: the first six recollections.

Intelligent: recollection of marana or Nibbana; the perception of disgust of food; or, the analysis of the four elements.

Speculative: mindfulness of breath.

The six non-color kasinas and the four formless states are suitable for all temperaments.

Source: Kammaṭṭhāna

The forty subjects are also differentiated according to their appropriateness for different character types. Six main character types are recognized — the greedy, the hating, the deluded, the faithful, the intelligent and the speculative — this oversimplified typology being taken only as a pragmatic guideline which in practice admits various shades and combinations. The ten kind of foulness and mindfulness of the body, clearly intended to attenuate sensual desire, are suitable for those of greedy temperament. Eight subjects — the four divine abidings and four color kasinas — are appropriate for the hating temperament. Mindfulness of breathing is suitable for those of the deluded and the speculative temperament. The first six recollections are appropriate for the faithful temperament. Four subjects — mindfulness of death, the recollection of peace, the defining of the four elements, and the perception of the repulsiveness in nutriment — are especially effective for those of intelligent temperament. The remaining six kasinas and the immaterial states are suitable for all kinds of temperaments. But the kasinas should be limited in size for one of speculative temperament and large in size for one of deluded temperament.
Immediately after giving this breakdown Buddhaghosa adds a proviso to prevent misunderstanding. He states that this division by way of temperament is made on the basis of direct opposition and complete suitability, but actually there is no wholesome form of meditation that does not suppress the defilements and strengthen the virtuous mental factors. Thus an individual meditator may be advised to meditate on foulness to abandon lust, on loving-kindness to abandon hatred, on breathing to cut off discursive thought, and on impermanence to eliminate the conceit "I am" (A.iv,358).

Source: The Jhanas in Theravada Buddhist Meditation by Henepola Gunaratana
Anapanasati and 4 Satipatthana are generally safer type of meditations.


Trouble understanding the notion of interconnectedness I started meditating regularly a few months agowith the aim of practising mindfulness,  primarily using Headspace.  I also read Sam Harris' Waking Up and listened to the Science of Mindfulness lectures by Ronald D. Siegel.

I find a lot of the ideas very compelling (living outside of the present moment as a source of unhappiness, the impermanence of all things) and I am also beginning to see the benefit of meditation for my mental state.

The only concept I have trouble taking on board is the interconnectedness of all beings.  I have read various descriptions, some coming from the modern, Western take on mindfulness and this notion still doesn't resonate with me. My reaction remains 'we're not connected whether we believe in separate selves or not.'  So perhaps I'm taking this too literally. Is interconnectedness just a way of saying 'we're all in the same boat and will have a run of bad luck in the end' rather than some sort of mystic connection?

I'm not sure how clearly I stated what my confusion is but I would appreciate any insight.

"Interconnectedness" in Buddhism arises from the principle of "dependent origination". Dependent origination is an alternate way of viewing cause-and-effect relationships. Rather than saying "A causes B", (that is, one fixed object or idea leads to another fixed object or idea), it says instead:

"B arises and is supported in dependence on A, so that if A passes away, B also passes away".

That then extends to the fact that A also depends on supporting conditions, and those supporting conditions also depend on other supporting conditions, and so on and so on ad infinitum. Nothing exists independent of supporting conditions that allow it to continue existing.

So your "being" exists dependent not only on other beings, but on a whole mess of other conditions (such as the composition of your body, the environment...) and all those things also have infinitely long chains of dependence. As a result, everything is in flux and nothing has a completely self-referential, independent existence.

(This, by the way, is the source of a common misconception that Buddhism teaches that "nothing exists" or "nothing is real". It does teach that nothing exists absolutely, but things most definitely do exist in relation to their supporting conditions, which is why you should still look both ways before crossing the street :) )

You can take this on a very empirical and non-mystical level. But through practices like vipassana where you start to get a felt sense of the constant flux, the constant creation/destruction of your own experience rooted in ever-changing conditions, welllll... you could start to feel that there's something mystical (or at least, indescribably big!) about it.

Editing to add something more to the point of your question: Practice also brings ever-widening insights into the way that you impact others and the way they impact you, which aren't necessarily "mystical", but they are subtle, and call into question the boundaries of your personality. It's more mundane than "I am one with the universe"; but it's richer than "stuff happens". Somewhere between the two :)


Is there anything akin to 'Jhana' in Zen Buddhism? I have read about 'Jhana' in Ajahn Brahm's book, 'Mindfulness, bliss and beyond'. It looks like, from his teaching of Theravada Buddhism, 'Jhana' is a pre-requisite to attain 'Nirvana'.
I want to ask, is there anything similar to 'Jhana' in Zen.
From my readings it does not seem it's 'Satori'.

Zen and Jhana are the same word. Jhana is a word in the original spoken language. In Sanskrit it is written as Dhyana. Channa or Chan is how it came to Chinese language, and Zen is how it subsequently came into the Japanese (in English transliteration).
Jhana or Zen means the mind of meditation.
If you ever heard the phrases "attain the state of Zen" or "show me your Zen" - that refers to the same practice/result as Jhana. (The popular image that it refers to being a crazy wacko is a modern misunderstanding. "Attaining Zen" is breaking through to spontaneous clarity as a result of quality meditation practice.)
Of course if you are looking for the one-to-one Zen equivalents of each of the four jhanas or the eight jhanas, you will be disappointed - because such cut-and-dry categorization of practical experience would be very much against the spirit of Zen which emphasizes the first-hand discovery and learning-by-doing while avoiding the step-by-step instructions a-la Theravada as a dangerous trap for the mind. So in Zen everything is a little more fluid and the practice of meditation is not split in discrete phases. Nevertheless, the kind of meditation practiced in Zen is an authentic Jhana, functionally equivalent to the fourth Jhana of Theravada Buddhism.
Now, if you expand your scope beyond Zen and take a look at Vajrayana, it has two types of meditation closely associated with the first and second/third jhanas. I'm talking about Generation-phase and Completion-phase meditations correspondingly.
I imagine someone daring might combine the traditions and practice the Generation-, then the Completion-, then the Zazen/Shikantaza-meditation with great results.


What are the paṭiccasamuppāda theory and it's products? Is there any differences in Paṭiccasamuppāda ,Dependent arising and dependent co-arising?

Dhamma Greetings Gawesaka, the answer is: No. The first word is Pāḷi and second and third are just different English renditions of that expression. Best Wishes


Are monks expected to accept life lessons from (time spent with) the laity? In general, the monks are expected to preach the Dhamma and the laity should listen. But "behind the scenes", so to say, should monks really be learning from at least some situations they run into without the attitude they know better or that they already have the full truth?

I think I might know the answer, but I am looking for any sutta/tipitaka references or analyses.

Also, additional/complementary mahāyāna point of views and references are  welcome.

In Ubon Ratchatani Luang Por Char talked about (translating from Isaan language) how "everything is teaching us."

Also, working with people was developing strength in him, he said.


Breath patterns in texts What is the canonical reference if I wanted to read about breath patterns and their mapping to specific mind states?

A while back I came across an online text which contained some very hard-to-remember tables of breath sequences. It was, if I remember correctly, a Visuddhimagga style Theravada text. It listed breath sequences such as a 2s-4l-2s breath sequence (s-short, l-long) followed by 2s-2l-2s etc. and mapped them to specific stages on the way to Jhanas and nanas.

It also had explanations about the kind of person who would get a certain sequence - for example a person who's upheld sila would get so-and-so breath pattern as opposed to a person strong in samadhi etc.

Does this sound familiar to anyone?

I'm open to such texts from any tradition.

The breath patterns you are mentioning (2s-4l-2s breath sequence (s-short, l-long) followed by 2s-2l-2s) is generally found in Yoga / Pranayama than in Theravada Buddhism.

Nevertheless, Anapana Sutta does mention about the long and short breaths. The breath is considered a bodily fabrication and it is tied to the body. (If you stop breathing then you are dead.) In meditation you have to calm your fabrication, out off which the bodily fabrication generally cease before mental fabrications. As you get concentrated your bodily fabrications also slow down hence shorter breaths. When you come out of meditation your breaths become longer as you start creating fabrication. If you start thinking and pondering (verbal fabrications) again your breath becomes longer as these fabrications influence bodily fabrications.

Kamabhu Sutta, Culavedalla Sutta & Rahogata Sutta covers more on the 3 fabrications out of which bodily fabrication is tied with the breath and breathing process.


Is love a destiny or coincidence in Buddhism? There are many examples, a couple wants to be together but break up after long-term dating, they want to get married but they never get married. A person wants to get close with another person and vice versa but they can never get together no matter how hard they try, etc.

In Buddhism, our life is not destined so how are we supposed to understand above situation?

What makes someone has the affinity to become someone's parents or children for, for example, two lifetimes? What power determine the meeting? Is the affinity merely automatically created from the person we normally associate with in daily life?

The Samajivina Sutta, as follows, can hopefully shed some light on this question.

  Once the Blessed One was staying among the Bhaggas in the Deer Park at
  Bhesakala Grove, near Crocodile Haunt. Then early in the morning the
  Blessed One put on his robes and, carrying his bowl and outer robe,
  went to the home of the householder, Nakula's father. On arrival, he
  sat down on a seat made ready. Then Nakula's father & Nakula's mother
  went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat
  to one side. As they were sitting there, Nakula's father said to the
  Blessed One: "Lord, ever since Nakula's mother as a young girl was
  brought to me [to be my wife] when I was just a young boy, I am not
  conscious of being unfaithful to her even in mind, much less in body.
  We want to see one another not only in the present life but also in
  the life to come."

  And Nakula's mother said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since I as a
  young girl was brought to Nakula's father [to be his wife] when he was
  just a young boy, I am not conscious of being unfaithful to him even
  in mind, much less in body. We want to see one another not only in the
  present life but also in the life to come."

  [The Blessed One said:] "If both husband & wife want to see one
  another not only in the present life but also in the life to come,
  they should be in tune [with each other] in conviction, in tune in
  virtue, in tune in generosity, and in tune in discernment. Then they
  will see one another not only in the present life but also in the life
  to come."

  Husband & wife, both of them  having conviction,  being responsive,
    being restrained,   living by the Dhamma,   addressing each other   with
  loving words: they benefit in manifold ways.  To them comes bliss.
  Their enemies are dejected    when both are in tune in virtue. Having
  followed the Dhamma here in this world,   both in tune in precepts &
  practices, they delight in the world of the devas, enjoying the
  pleasures they desire.


Barrier of "tumult" during meditation Could someone help me understand, or at least name, a phenomenon which may be standing in the way of meditative practice. It is so hard to express that I'm at a loss to know where to begin to seek help.

It could perhaps be best expressed as a sudden tumult of sensation (mainly voices and images), like a confused radio or instrument panel on an aircraft struck by lightning. It is almost impossible to comprehend its contents and, sadly, like with very sudden external noises, and the like, jolts me out of practice such that it suddenly irretrievably ends the session. It has no fixed emotional or intellectual content, but is nevertheless strongly emotional and intellectual in an unfixed way, like the sea is strong but fluid. It is not a somatic (body) sensation (ie not tingling, or whatever), but one of the mind. I suppose if pushed, many images include people I love, but that is a tiny part. It is draining.

It begins some time after I transfer from a meditating for calm and emptiness (which is familiar and which I've practised for years, principally through concentration, mindfulness, non-clinging to thoughts and images, awareness of body, etc) into noticing and contemplating the way things are per se, without objective beyond understanding (ie no for).

I'm interested in the scholarship of religion (a theology geek) and so have taken time to understand, intellectually, the ideas behind Buddhist practice, along with many other religions, without any real sense of membership.

But it's only recently that I've begun to consider these in the context of meditation (ie the thing rather than the idea).

I would be interested to know what this is, what the right thing to do with it is in order that I could proceed with meditation, ideally not dropping out of it whenever it happens. Does it help to keep a structure to this form of meditation rather than drifting to it from intellectual knowledge and a calmed state?

If it has a name that I could look for it in books, etc, that would be particularly useful.

I won't try to guess exactly what you're experiencing, but one thing that trips people up a lot is the expectation that meditation is a one-way road to greater and greater calm. In reality, there's an initial calming, followed by the emergence of various kinds of experiences at other layers of the mind, some of which are pleasant or orderly, some of which aren't.

One thing that Buddhism teaches is that the mind is a sixth sense alongside vision, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. This means that thoughts and mental imagery are on the same level as sights and sounds- they are data that enters through "your" doors of perception from "outside". They don't belong to you and are largely out of your control.

This is contrary to our usual Cartesian model of thinking that our Thoughts are the expression of our core Self, and it's also contrary to the common idea of meditation as the conscious quieting of all thoughts.

I only have my own experience to go on, but I believe that the ability to achieve a complete stilling of the roiling, random soup of images in our minds is very very rare, if it exists at all, and not a requisite for good practice.


Why I find it difficult to breathe when meditating, a lack of oxygen in my head? And how to overcome it? I just get started three days ago. When meditating, I felt hard to breathe and even the lack of oxygen to the brain. I felt my bell and chess were stiff and this intervene me in getting enough oxygen.  My posture is right (I so sure about that). How do I overcome it? Should I keep going or find some changes?

This could happen if you change your breathing pattern hence cutting off oxygen. As long as you breathe naturally there will be no issues.

In meditation, you are not support to hold your breath but to test your lungs you could try hold your breath for 10 seconds. If you cough or get any discomfort then it is best to get in touch with a doctor.


Formal training in Buddhism I wish to learn Buddhism from monks and learn things I don't understand. Is a formal training from an institute like ( http://www.rootinstitute.ngo/ ) fruitful? Are there people who have taken training like this? I will have to invest a life-time of my savings to take this education. I want to make a good decision. Can someone please show me the way? :)

--Noob here.

Root Institute belongs to the FPMT (Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition, founded by Lama Yeshe and Lama Zopa Rinpoche). It is a Gelug-pa organization.

At Root Institute, they teach the (normally 5 years) Basic Program, but I am not sure they do it as long as 5 years. There are FPMT centers where it lasts 2 or 3 years only. The curriculum is always the same, though.

I studied the 5 years BP at Nalanda Monastery, in France (the program was in Tibetan, English, French, and Spanish). It is a lot of study, discussion groups, exams and learning by heart, "karma yoga" (i.e. community service). There are usually more lay people than monks. It is designed specifically for those who do not speak Tibetan and cannot attend the study program at Sera monastic "university". In addition, contrary to Sera, it is not exclusively monastic. The Program includes a bit of meditation (45 minutes day is not much indeed), and sometimes formal debates. Normally, the 45 minutes session has to be Lam Rim meditation.

On the importance of studying, there is a Zen nun (ven Myokyo) who said:

  Real acquaintance with the Dharma is necessary because, being what we
  are, we are prone to stray. If we do not have the framework of the
  teachings, and continuously test ourselves against it, we will very
  soon be off and away down a blind alley. Training and the teachings
  need to match, need to go hand in hand.

On a more personal level, I feel studying helped me read (in a general sense) on my own. I believe I got rid of the grossest misconceptions I had. Studying also helped me dig channels for my mind to flow, like a river (of course, it stills wanders off... finds its way to unwholesome places and dwells on what has to be abandoned). It supports meditation. The more I studied, the more I understood it can lead somewhere but it is a question of how we relate to study and how we use it.

Attending the 5 years BP is one of the best things I have done in my life.

One thing to bear in mind, though, is that the FPMT Basic Program covers just a few texts belonging to one tradition in particular. I would suggest that, once grounded in one tradition, entertaining diversity is an antidote to sectarian stances and over-simplifications.


Watching the breath during meditation is getting boring? I am following meditations as taught by Ajahn Brahm in his book Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond. I have almost reached to state of Silent Present Moment Awareness. The next stage is Silent Present Moment Awareness of Breath.
Its been days I am watching the breath and its getting no where. I get bored watching the breath.
The next stage is supposed to be Awareness of Beautiful Breath.
Thats not happening and its getting boring, even the meditation.
What to do when breath watching gets boring?

I don't train according to that book but in the anapanasati sutta there are these instructions;

'I will breathe in sensitive to mental fabrication.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to mental fabrication.'

Mental fabrications are defined;

Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications." Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications [sn41.006]."

Unpleasant feelings & perceptions associated with boredom would fall into this category.
Furthermore instruction;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the mind.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the mind.'

How is one sensitive to the mind? That is defined here;

"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion."When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released. "In this way he remains focused internally on the mind in & of itself, or externally on the mind in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the mind in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the mind, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the mind, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the mind. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a mind' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself [DN22]

Therefore when perceptions & feelings associated with boredom arise one should take note of the mind as it is with aversion, longing, delusion etc.
Furthermore instruction;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming mental fabrication.' He trains himself; 'I will breathe out calming mental fabrication'

How is this calming achieved? That is by this development;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on inconstancy.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on inconstancy.'
13) He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on dispassion [literally, fading].' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on dispassion.'
14) He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on cessation.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on cessation.'
15) He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on relinquishment.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on relinquishment.'[mn.118]

To understand what this refers to consider this;

'Whatever is felt comes under stress.' That I have stated simply in connection with the inconstancy of fabrications. That I have stated simply in connection with the nature of fabrications to end... in connection with the nature of fabrications to fall away... to fade away... to cease... in connection with the nature of fabrications to change [sn36.011].

“On whatever occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence’;trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence’;
trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating fading away’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating fading away’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating cessation’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating cessation’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating relinquishment’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating relinquishment’—on that occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating mental objects in
mental objects, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief regarding the world. [mn.118]

Calming is to be understood thus;

There are these six calmings. When one has attained the first jhāna, speech has been calmed. When one has attained the second jhāna, directed thought & evaluation have been calmed. When one has attained the third jhāna, rapture has been calmed. When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has been calmed. When one has attained the cessation of perception & feeling, perception & feeling have been calmed. Sn36

Speech here is a tricky term but here is an alternate progression description;

"When one has attained the first jhāna, the perception of sensuality has been stopped. When one has attained the second jhāna, directed thoughts & evaluations [verbal fabrications] have been stopped. When one has attained the third jhāna, rapture has been stopped. When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breaths [bodily fabrications] have been stopped.

As i understand it, as one focuses on the inconstancy and cessation of phenomena one comes to become disintetested & disenchanted with feelings. As one becomes disenchanted the feelings & perceptions are calmed, they are stilled, they cease & fade from the mind.
Furthermore it is said in the mn118;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in satisfying the mind.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out satisfying the mind.'mn.118

As the feelings & perceptions are calmed one experiences the pleasure & equanimity of renunciation;

And what are the six kinds of renunciation joy? The joy that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: That is called renunciation joy. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.)
"And what are the six kinds of renunciation equanimity? The equanimity that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: This equanimity goes beyond form, which is why it is called renunciation equanimity. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.)mn.137

The general development is summed up like this;

"And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. [an4.41]

That in itself does not guarantee progress;

"Suppose that there is a foolish, inexperienced, unskillful cook who has presented a king or a king's minister with various kinds of curry: mainly sour, mainly bitter, mainly peppery, mainly sweet, alkaline or non-alkaline, salty or non-salty. He does not take note of[1] his master, thinking, 'Today my master likes this curry, or he reaches out for that curry, or he takes a lot of this curry, or he praises that curry. Today my master likes mainly sour curry... Today my master likes mainly bitter curry... mainly peppery curry... mainly sweet curry... alkaline curry... non-alkaline curry... salty curry... Today my master likes non-salty curry, or he reaches out for non-salty curry, or he takes a lot of non-salty curry, or he praises non-salty curry.' As a result, he is not rewarded with clothing or wages or gifts. Why is that? Because the foolish, inexperienced, unskillful cook does not pick up on the theme of his own master.

"In the same way, there are cases where a foolish, inexperienced, unskillful monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on the body in & of itself, his mind does not become concentrated, his defilements[2] are not abandoned. He does not take note of that fact.[3] He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on mental qualities in & of themselves, his mind does not become concentrated, his defilements are not abandoned. He does not take note of that fact. As a result, he is not rewarded with a pleasant abiding here & now, nor with mindfulness & alertness. Why is that? Because the foolish, inexperienced, unskillful monk does not take note of his own mind.[4] [SN47.08]]

Therefore it is really important to take note of the mind, as i described above and especially with reference to mental qualities in regards to the hindrances;

[1] "There is the case where a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances? There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that 'There is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' He discerns how there is the arising of unarisen sensual desire. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of sensual desire once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of sensual desire that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining hindrances: ill will, sloth & drowsiness, restlessness & anxiety, and uncertainty.)

If one notices the hindrances one should direct the mind to a different perception which is connected with skillful qualities. In practical terms try focusing more on the inconstancy, cessation or an inspiring theme, what i do depends on the hindrance.

As a result, he is rewarded with a pleasant abiding here & now, together with mindfulness & alertness. Why is that? Because the wise, experienced, skillful monk picks up on the theme of his own mind." [SN47.08]

“Ananda, if a monk or nun remains with mind well-established in the four establishings of mindfulness, he/she may be expected to perceive grand, successive distinctions.
“There is the case of a monk who remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on the body in & of itself, a fever based on the body arises within his body, or there is sluggishness in his awareness, or his mind becomes scattered externally. He should then direct his mind to any inspiring theme. As his mind is directed to any inspiring theme, delight arises within him. In one who feels delight, rapture arises.
In one whose mind is enraptured, the body grows calm. His body calm, he feels pleasure. As he feels pleasure, his mind grows concentrated.
He reflects, ‘I have attained the aim to which my mind was directed. Let me withdraw [my mind from the inspiring theme].’ He withdraws & engages neither in directed thought nor in evaluation. He discerns, ‘I am not thinking or evaluating. I am inwardly mindful & at ease.’
“This, Ananda, is development based on directing.
And what is development based on not directing? A monk, when not directing his mind to external things, discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external
things. It is unconstricted [asankhitta] front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on the body in & of itself. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’
“When not directing his mind to external things, he discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external things. It is unconstricted front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on feelings… mind… mental qualities in & of themselves. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’
“This, Ananda, is development based on not directing.
“Now, Ananda, I have taught you development based on directing and development based on not directing. What a teacher should do out of compassion for his disciples, seeking their welfare, that I have done for you. Over there are [places to sit at] the roots of trees. Over there are empty dwellings. Practice jhana, Ananda. Do not be heedless. Do not be remorseful in the future. That is our instruction to you all.” — SN 47:10