Who are your mother and father? Considering the development of embryo technology, who does Buddhist Dharma consider as your mother and father: is it the biological parents, or the legal parents?

The reason I ask this question is that killing your mother and father is a heinous kamma.

One of the monks said that heinous kamma is applicable only for biological mother and the father (i.e. donors of the sperm and the egg). Is this so, and why?

I suppose you can separate mother and father into those of nature and those of nurture. Whoever provides the genetic code becomes the natural parent, whoever raises the kid becomes the nurturing parent. I wouldn't place much value on the code though - the seriousness of the act of killing a parent is probably more tied to the fact that they have devoted a large fraction of their lives to the rasing of a child.


What is Buddhist law of marriage ? Is there any? Should both partners be Buddhist in a marriage?
If they want get a love marriage can they still get married if one of the partners is not Buddhist. What is the law in Buddhism about marriage?

There is no such as a Buddhist law on marriage. If you like to have a long time partner its always good to have the same tendencies as he/she but such is not merely up to religion. Virtue, generosity, gratitude... all this things are not limited to a certain religion. So to seek for a partner with equal virtue or virtues one likes to follow, is quite good.

And there is no such as any cultural, national, or what ever discrimination. Of course such plays, even so, always a rule in live and society as much traditions have also to do with common virtues. The world is not full of Arahants and Noble Ones.

(thoughts come up sometimes ...and now they like to be great yogis ...  :-)  "I wan it all", but not to speak about those who even do not take on the responsibility of partnership)


Right livelihood with modern (potentially dangerous) products Besides right livelihood described by Buddha, we also have to avoid action that is harmful.

Some people claim that the long-term side effects associated with various modern products are unknown, or unpredictable at best: including products such as GM foods, EM radiation from cell phones and power transmission lines, etc.

If you worked in an industry which makes or sells products like these, would you consider this as right livelihood or not?

Note that since this is not a science forum, I don't want to discuss whether these examples (GM foods or EM radiation) are actually harmful, these are just examples of a more general question.

I would love to hear your thoughts about how to consider the question from the perspective or right livelihood.

Buddhism is not about following set rules. Monks have 227 rules &, if you have ever lived with monks, you will notice certain monks trying to find loop holes to circumvent the rules (rather than live according to the spirit, purpose & essence of the rules).

The matter of right liveihood is something you must decide for yourself according to your spiritual conscience. While the scriptures list 5 kinds of wrong livelihood (trading in weapons, human beings, meat, intoxicants & poisons), there are many other jobs you may chose not to do due to their lack of ethicalness. If you personally find fault in GM foods, best you not work in that industry.


Questions about meditation Should concentration improve? I sit for an hour in the mornings and most days my focus does not stay on the breath for more than 2 breaths before I notice thoughts again. Is this normal? I find my mind full of doubts because of this. I think to myself that after 7 years I thought concentration would improve but maybe I'm incorrect. When the doubts arise I usually mentally note them.

Yuttadhammo Bikhu says to mentally note the rising and falling of the abdomen on the breath then if pain arises for example then to note pain until it goes then gently bring awareness back to the breath. But many times for me the pain does not go. It remains for the entire hour sit. Do I just sit there noting pain the whole time?

Another practitioner told me that if I can't seem to focus then to try not focusing on anything. I tried this but find I just become lost in thought even more.

The way I was trained, it's not like you'll have fewer thoughts - because the nature of mind is to think, it's more like, your mental balance will shift from thoughts to "nothing" that "does not change" as thoughts come and go. So instead of taking the thoughts too seriously and getting carried far away, as your practice develops you should be letting go of them a lot more easily, until they are just like children with their toys. The children can get excited or upset and crying over their toys, but you're like: "whatever, in a minute they will forget about it, not a big deal".

What's more important is not thoughts (although over time they will change too, but that's just a side-effect) - it is integration in the space beneath the thoughts. It's the feeling of no inner conflict, no fighting with oneself, not blaming - that's what should improve over time.

IMO, paying attention to breath and especially on the diaphragm/abdomen area helps see that "space beneath the thoughts" - which is where trouble is most of the time. Coming back from a movie played by the thought is important because what you're working on is that space, not the thoughts. And then at some point things should get peaceful enough that you don't need to worry about that space either. Thoughts come and go, the emotional foundation has some signless syrup slowly boiling, and everything is just the way it should.

Remember, what you are after is not any particular state, but rather, the whatever-happens-is-fine attitude of peace and integration, so having no thoughts is not the point, the point is having no worries - including worries about worries.

Of course, it's not like on your way to this attitude of all-acceptance you don't work at all. There is a lot of hard work in paying attention, letting go, and integrating - but it is a type of "hard" opposite to what we call "hard" when we torture ourselves. It's like slowly letting oneself fall into a bottomless abyss, which involves constant fight with one's fear and the instinctual grabbing on stuff, and that's where all struggle is.

And then as you go through this, if you're paying any attention, you will inevitably start learning about "the way things work" - and then things like Four Noble Truths etc. suddenly start making total sense, referring directly to your first-hand experience.

That's my experience anyway, your mileage may varyTM.


If the Buddha praised Samatha, why is it losing importance? It seems like these days, teachers are looking down to Samatha meditation, I would like to understand why, based on the suttas, this the meditation praised by the Buddha.

Could someone explain why Vipassana is so much more present in Theravada tradition, eventhough the Buddha practiced a lot of Samatha? I'm sure there are good reasons.

" And what kind of meditation did the Blessed One praise? Here, brahmin, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the first jhana … With the stilling of applied and sustained thought, he bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the second jhana … With the fading away as well of rapture … he bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the third jhana … With the abandoning of pleasure and pain … he bhikkhu enters upon and abides in the fourth jhana … The Blessed One praised that kind of meditation."

Majjhima Nikaya 108.27

The Pali canon and commentaries do indeed carry considerable encouragement to practice the jhanas. The distinction between samatha and vipassanā aren't really spelled out in the original teachings and it was only much later that the doctrine of the two as separate (and separate-ableon) meditation practices arose. By the time of Buddhaghosa (5th century AD) the distinction was pretty firmly established, though some later teachers dismiss the distinction as unnecessary. Ajahn Chah of the Thai Forest tradition liked to say that samatha and vipassanā are like two ends of a stick - when you pick up the stick, both ends come along See Ajahn Chah's essay on this from his book, "Unshakable Peace".

The emphasis on vipassanā which one finds nowadays came about for very practical and pragmatic reasons, but this topic as a bit much to delve into deeply here. The brief overview is that a method was needed that could be undertaken by a lay meditator on a 30 day retreat and provide the practitioner with a reasonable shot at arriving at the first stage of enlightenment - stream entry. Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw is perhaps the main exponent of this method and it seems to work quite well for many people. In contrast to this, to properly develop "Visuddhimagga-style" jhanas is beyond the reach of most lay people (and most monastics) not least because of the time commitment necessary.

There's more to the story of course, but that's a thumbnail sketch of the situation.


Conflicting schools of thought Trying to get useful and helpful information on this site is very difficult. Why do Buddhists have so many conflicting opinions? It's kind of ridiculous and just one more reason why I can never take religion seriously even though I appreciate some of the teachings that resonate with me.

Some examples I've noticed-
The western insight tradition emphasises acknowledging, turning toward, facing whatever is present so for example if anger arises one is to recognise it, investigate how it feels in the body etc but to not identify with it. The same goes for everything else, thought, sensations, emotions etc.
But Ive noticed one school of thought with people on this site who say you must try to rid your mind of certain unskillful feelings and thoughts and try to replace them with skillful ones.

These two ideas seem to conflict with each other. You can't face and turn towards and get rid of at the same time.  I have to say it makes much more sense to me to acknowledge what is already present and notice how it goes away of its own accord because of anicca rather than forcing it.

Another conflict I've noticed is the labeling, noting. Again the western insight tradition, Mahasi Sayadaw, yuttadhamma Bikhu emphasise the labeling. One teacher that took a retreat I went on has been practicing for over 40 years and still labels when walking etc. But then other people on here say you shouldn't.
Yuttadhamma Bikhu says that by labelling you are replacing the thoughts etc with clear thought. So instead of being lost in proliferation you say to yourself in your mind  "thinking thinking" and then you have replaced the thoughts.  I have to say that this works. As soon as a thought is recognised and named its gone. So again not sure why some say it's not correct. It works for me so I will keep on doing it.

In the end I believe spirituality is a personal journey and no one can really tell another what is right without it just becoming dogmatic.

There are many techniques that were taught by the Buddha and also later, other techniques were developed by Buddhist teachers over history, that are based on the Buddha's teachings. You are right that some of these techniques may appear to be in conflict with each other.

However, we must understand that each technique is used for a particular purpose, for a particular situation, to cater for a particular need.

It is just like how a master chef uses various techniques to craft the best results based on the needs. Sometimes you need to boil, sometimes you need to bake, sometimes you need to fry and sometimes you need to sautee. These techniques are mutually exclusive but used at different times to achieve different results.

You can find guidance on the basics of insight meditation in the booklet entitled "How To Meditate" by Ven. Yuttadhammo. This technique is used to gain insight into the workings of dependent origination. Also read "The Way of Mindfulness" by Ven. Soma Thera, which is an essay that discusses the Satipatthana Sutta. This the technique that involves noting.

But you can't progress in insight meditation, if you are strongly assailed by the five hindrances. To solve this, one technique is in the Vitakka-Santhana Sutta which teaches the forceful removal of unskillful thoughts. Forceful removal of thoughts is not part of insight meditation, but if you are too disturbed by unskillful thoughts, then you need to forcefully remove it.

To eradicate the hindrance of ill-will, you can use Loving Kindness (metta) as the technique for eradication. Intentionally generating thoughts of loving kindness is also not part of insight meditation.

For overcoming lust (as a hindrance of sensual desire), you can use the contemplation on unattractiveness (see this question). But too much of it may lead to negative thoughts of suicide, in which case, use the mindfulness of breathing (see this answer) to counter it. Intentionally contemplating on unattractiveness, is also not part of insight meditation.

Also, samatha meditation (see the article entitled "Entering the Jhanas" by Leigh Brasington) is yet another technique used to calm the mind, and create focus and concentration. This is yet another technique that could help insight meditation. But it can be developed on its own too.

If you are continuously disturbed in every way in meditation and cannot progress further, then the technique to solve this, is the development of virtue (sila) outside of meditation - see this answer for details.

So, although different approaches appear to be conflicting with each other, they are actually complementary. The Buddha taught the practitioner to be multi-skilled. That's why there's the Noble Eightfold Path, rather than a Noble One Single Technique to End Suffering. No one technique is sufficient to achieve the results.


Is there a name for being totally dependent? During the last days I experienced that I felt total dependent. I was walking from A to B and there was no choice for me to make, neither to stop nor anything else. In fact, I felt like a robot...

Is there a name for this kind of total dependance?

I think the closest real "thing" in Buddhism that touches on what you've described is thina-middha, or "sloth and torpor" (one of the Five Hindrances). It's characterized in part by a lack of energy (which can be mental in addition to physical). This isn't necessarily what you shared, but a lack of mental energy could make one feel as if driven by an external force, bound by choices made elsewhere. Only you could really say for sure if that particular hindrance was at play in how you felt.

There is also the Pāli word upanissayo which is sometimes translated as "destiny", but is closer in meaning to "basis" or "tendency". It's as close as you get to the notion of predestination in Pāli. (Again, not what you described, but a word that somewhat connects to the idea.)


Any advice for beginners about Vipassana traditions? There are many Theravada Vipassana traditions according to this wikipedia page and more according to this answer.

My questions are:

Are any, or all, of these traditions suited to beginners?
And why?
Are any of them more especially suited for beginners?
If you recommend a tradition for beginner, how can one begin it: books; weekly lessons with a teacher; ten-day retreats; Youtube; ... ?
Please reference (i.e. quote, cite, or link to) advice, from any of them, that's especially intended for beginners.

Some of the traditions include:

Ledi Lineage (Ledi Sayadaw, U Ba Khin, S.N.Goenka, Anagarika Munindra, Dipa Ma)
Mahasi Lineage (U Narada, Mahasi Sayadaw, Nyanaponika Thera, Bhikkhu Bodhi, Goldstein, Salzberg)
Thai Forest Tradition (Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Sumedho, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Kornfield)
Pa Auk Sayadaw Lineage (based on Visuddhimagga)
Mogok Sayadaw
Anagarika Munindra (combined Goenka and Mahasi methods)
and more

Beginners would benefit most from having an attitude of being a beginner. According to the Zen tradition of the Soto branch, the object of practice is not to achieve great knowledge, powers or concentration but to discover and weed out things that block the experience of what Shunryu Suzuki calls beginners mind. He is not talking to Soto Zen students. He is talking to Buddhists everywhere in all traditions. Every Buddhist tradition can lead to that fresh perception of reality that awakening reveals. If a tradition only provides you with a set of beliefs and does not point the way to awakening then keep looking. Everyone has the right to choose their own path, and if it serves its purpose or does not help you, move on.
www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/zenmind.pdf

I ask myself daily, am I ready to be a beginner. There are no advanced students in Buddhism. We are all beginners. Some beginners have walked the path longer and are aware of the inner mysteries to a greater degree. The Buddha never said I am enlightened and you are just mere mortals. He recognized the Buddha consciousness in all.

When I came to Buddhism I attended meditations in as many traditions as possible. Sometimes I clicked when I read a book but did not click at a local meditation. It does not matter what path you choose as long as it is one that is in harmony with your inner self and one that you practice every day in your meditation and in your living. It is a path of yielding and melting away any sense of separate self so we do not need to attain or accomplish great things
"just flow like the river
going to the sea,
flow around every bend and turn
Until all that's left is eternity."


Is the definition of sexual misconduct now obsolete? DN 31 says:

  In five ways, young householder, the parents thus ministered to as the East by their children, show their compassion: (i) they restrain
  them from evil, (ii) they encourage them to do good, (iii) they train
  them for a profession, (iv) they arrange a suitable marriage, (v) at
  the proper time they hand over their inheritance to them.

The definition of sexual misconduct in the suttas (addressed to men) is as follows:

  He engages in sensual misconduct. He gets sexually involved with those who are protected by their mothers, their fathers, their
  brothers, their sisters, their relatives, or their Dhamma; those with
  husbands, those who entail punishments, or even those crowned with
  flowers by another man. AN 10.176

A Commentary explains the precept as follows:

  In the case where the father is gone, or the mother provides support such as food and clothing, the mother guards [her] thinking "I will
  give [her] to a good family when she comes of age." This is called
  "protected by the mother". By the same means "protected by the
  father", etc., should be understood.

It appears quite obvious the Buddhist way of life when the Buddha was alive was for parents to arrange the marriage of their children in Indian traditional practise. This tradition would have provided little scope for sex outside of marriage, apart from outcastes and in the upper classes (who had courtesans, concubines, sex slaves from war captives, etc).

Since the norms of society has changed greatly since the Buddha's time, is the definition of sexual misconduct now obsolete?

From another more modern translation (Kelly, Sawyer, Yareham) of DN31:

  "And, the mother and father so respected reciprocate with compassion
  in five ways: by restraining you from wrongdoing, guiding you towards
  good actions, training you in a profession, supporting the choice of
  a suitable spouse, and in due time, handing over the inheritance.

In the Piya Tan commentary, it says:

  Patirupena darena samyojenti, lit “they have him bound to a suitable woman,” which is said in reference to Indian society in the Buddha’s
  time. In contemporary terms, this has to be contextualized to “they
  let their son or daughter find a suitable spouse.”

Also, we can assume that adult men and women who no longer stay under the care of their parents and become independent, would no longer fall under the category of being protected by their parents. And vice versa.

So, while the definition of sexual misconduct has not become obsolete, it has become "updated", so to speak.


Is Karma different for accidental killing than intentional killing? Ever since I have started following Buddhism, I have stopped killing any type of insects but during the course of time I have accidentally killed few insects when I had no intentions of harming them like
1) While using touchscreen a tiny insect of few millimeters in length came between my screen & finger.
2) Accidental killing mosquito in sleep as they bite us.
3) Ants come under my feet whenever I am busy going from A to B (Here I mean totally immersed in work mode where you don't have time to think of anything else.

So is Karma different for such types of incidents because I never intent to harm such beings, forget about killing them or will I get the same punishment for intentional killing?

The background story to the first verse of the Dhammapada is of an arhat killing insects accidentally, because he's blind.

The verse says,

  All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the hoofprint of the ox that draws the cart.

I think we're meant to infer that if you don't act with an evil mind (or act without an evil mind), that if the killing is accidental or unintentional, that's not as bad as intentional killing.

Something similar is found in the monastic rules (page 29):

  In analyzing offenses for the purpose of determining penalties, the
  Vibhanga divides an action into five factors: the effort, the perception under which
  it is made, the intention motivating it, the object at which it is aimed, and the
  result. In some of the rules, all five factors play a role in determining what is and
  is not a full offense. In others, only two, three, or four play a role. For example,
  under the parajika rule forbidding murder, all five factors have to be present for
  a full offense: The object has to be a human being, the bhikkhu has to perceive
  him/her as a living being, he has to have murderous intent, he has to make an
  effort for the person to die, and the person has to die.

  If any of these factors is missing, the penalty changes. For instance, object: If
  the bhikkhu kills a dog, the penalty is a pacittiya (i.e. a less-severe penalty]. Perception: If he cremates a
  friend, thinking that the friend is dead, then even if the friend is actually alive but
  severely comatose, the bhikkhu incurs no penalty. Intention: If he accidentally
  drops a rock on a person standing below him, he incurs no penalty even if the
  person dies. Effort: If he sees a person fall into the river but makes no effort to
  save the person, he incurs no penalty even if the person drowns. Result: If he
  tries to kill a person, but only succeeds in injuring him, he incurs a thullaccaya [which is another less-severe penalty].


Meditation technique to reduce/control pain/sorrow/loss So I have been doing different meditation techniques to control/reduce different poisons(Klesha) of mind. Such as I do

Asuaba(Perception of Unattractiveness) for Lust
Perception of Loving Kindness (Metta) for Hatred
Anapanasati for overflowing of thoughts
Perception of Compassion (Karuna) for thoughts of harming
Perception of Sympathetic-Joy (Muditha) for jealous and so on.

But when ever I encounter thoughts or memories of sorrow and pain, loss, I  get confused on what meditation technique I should use to overcome it. All the dark memories haunt me, and i tend to fight them. But most of the time I fail to overcome them. And in that process my mind and body energy is already consumed and i become tired and sometimes i get a migraine.

Is there any specific technique to overcome sorrow and pain? I know that Satipattanaya is there only way of overcoming sorrow, pain and loss, But i want to know the specific technique that I could practice on.

A sutta reference is appreciated.

-Metta

Each technique a type of character or mental biase.

  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.

See: Kammaṭṭhāna

The main techniques to overcome sorrow are:

Anapanasati and
4 Satipatthana

These address the root cause.

Samantha techniques temporarily suppresses the hindrances which being clarity to continue into Vipassanā. So some of the techniques you mention are not the most suitable through if you practice the Brahmavihara and loathsome mediation in such a way that it develops Insight this also can be helpful. The more sure way is always 4 Satipatthana and Anapanasati practised as Vipassana than to develop Samatha.

As for specific techniques, they are described below. In short, what you have to do is concentrate on the feeling of sorrow and other experiences until you understand it.

One of the shortest renderings of Insight meditation is as follows:

  (1) having put away covetousness and displeasure in the world, a monk dwells exertive, fully aware, mindful, contemplating body in the body.

  (2) Having put away covetousness and displeasure in the world, he dwells exertive, fully aware, mindful, contemplating feeling in the feelings.

  (3) Having put away covetousness and displeasure in the world, he dwells exertive, fully aware, mindful, contemplating mind in the mind.

  (4) Having put away covetousness and displeasure in the world, he dwells exertive, fully aware, mindful, contemplating phenomena [dharmas] in the phenomena.

Sacca Vibhanga Sutta and also similar passage is found in (Magga) Vibhaṅga Sutta

One of the recurring elements here is putting away covetousness and displeasure in the world which is the task at hand. In addition you have to put effort to that task and also you should not have a lapse of mindfulness when doing this task, otherwise you will not attend to it and perhaps do something else. In short the key elements are awareness, clear comprehension and abandoning craving.

Covetousness and displeasure are result of mental reaction to sensations:

  (1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;

  (2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings;

  (3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings.

Pahāna Sutta

In addition the 6 sense bases can be the source of these sensations which result in unwholesome roots:

  i. On seeing a form with the eye,

  one investigates the form that is the basis for mental joy,
  one investigates the form that is the basis of mental pain,
  one investigates the form that is the basis of equanimity.

  ii. On hearing a sound with the ear,

  one investigates the sound that is the basis for mental joy,
  one investigates the sound that is the basis of mental pain,
  one investigates the sound that the basis of equanimity.

  iii. On smelling a smell with the nose,

  one investigates the smell that is the basis for mental joy,
  one investigates the smell that is the basis of mental pain,
  one investigates the smell that is the basis of equanimity.

  iv. On tasting a taste with the tongue,

  one investigates the taste that is the basis for mental joy,
  one investigates the taste that is the basis of mental pain,
  one investigates the taste that is the basis of equanimity.

  v. On feeling a touch with the body,

  one investigates the touch that is the basis for mental joy,
  one investigates the touch that is the basis of mental pain,
  one investigates the touch that is the basis of equanimity.

  vi. On cognizing a mind-object with the mind,

  one investigates the mind-object that the basis of mental joy,
  one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of mental pain,
  one investigates the mind-object that is the basis of equanimity.

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta

To prevent your mental reaction to sensation becoming unwholesome you can try:

  “Nothing is worth clinging to”

  When this was said, the venerable Mahā Moggallāna said this to the Blessed One: “In what way, bhante, in brief, is a monk freed through the destruction of craving, that is, one who has reached total perfection, the total security from bondage, the total holy life, the total consummation, the highest amongst gods and humans?”

  “Here, Moggallāna, the monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to. And, Moggallāna, a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things [he directly knows the nature of the all]. Having directly known the nature of all things, he fully understands all things.

  Having fully understood all things, he knows whatever feelings there are, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant.

  As regards to those feelings, [Section on Disillusionment and Revulsion (Nibbida) follows]

  he dwells contemplating impermanence in them;

  he dwells contemplating dispassion [fading away of lust] in them;

  he dwells contemplating ending (of suffering) in them;

  he dwells contemplating letting go (of defilements).

  When he dwells contemplating impermanence in them, contemplating dispassion in them, contemplating ending in them, contemplating letting go, he does not cling to anything in the world. Not clinging, he is not agitated; being not agitated, he himself surely attains nirvana.

Pacalā Sutta

Another rendering of the same is as follows:

  If he feels a pleasant feeling,

  he understands that it is impermanent;
  he understands that it is not to be clung to;
  he understands that there is no delight in it.

  If he feels a painful feeling,

  he understands that it is impermanent;
  he understands that it is not to be clung to;
  he understands that there is no delight in it.

  If he feels a neutral feeling,

  he understands that it is impermanent;
  he understands that it is not to be clung to;
  he understands that there is no delight in it.

  If he feels a pleasant feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.

  If he feels a painful feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.

  If he feels a neutral feeling, he feels it in a detached manner.

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta

You should be careful that you do not react to the sensation with unwholesome thoughts which are craving, aversion or ignorance.

  (1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;

  (2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings;

  (3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings.

Pahāna Sutta

Now to reduce mental chatter you can use initial and sustained application:

  When, bhikshu, this samadhi has been cultivated, well cultivated by you, then you should train yourself thus:

  “I will dwell exertive, clearly aware, mindful,

  observing [contemplating] [body | feeling | mind | dhamma] the in the [body | feeling | mind | dhamma],

  removing covetousness and displeasure [discontent] in regard to the world.”

  Thus, bhikshu, you should train yourself.

  When, bhikshu, this samadhi has been cultivated, well cultivated by you, then, you, bhikshu,

  THE 1 ST DHYANA:

  should cultivate this samadhi with initial application, with sustained application;

  should cultivate this samadhi without initial application, with only sustained application;

  THE 2 ND DHYANA:

  should cultivate this samadhi without initial application, without sustained application;

  should cultivate this samadhi with zest;

  THE 3RD DHYANA:

  should cultivate this samadhi zest-free;

  should cultivate this samadhi attended by comfort;

  THE 4 TH DHYANA:

  should cultivate this samadhi attended by equanimity.

Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta

Also one should abandon fabrications. [Samma Ditthi Sutta] One such fabrications is thinking and pondering. [Cūla Vedalla Sutta] Beyond the 1st Jhana you can cut this out. Also thinking and pondering leads to latent tendencies (see: Anusaya by Piya Tan). Suppressing it thinking and pondering suppresses concept proliferation which in turn suppresses the latent tendencies. The Jhana also suppress the 5 Hindrances.

  “Bhikshu, as regards the source from which proliferation of conception and perception assails a person: if one were to find nothing there to delight in, nothing there to welcome, nothing to cling to—this is the end of

  the latent tendency of lust,
  the latent tendency of aversion,
  the latent tendency of views,
  the latent tendency of doubt,
  the latent tendency of conceit,
  the latent tendency of desire for existence, and
  the latent tendency of ignorance.

  This is the ending of the taking up of the rod and the sword, quarrels, disputes, mayhem [strife], slandering and lying —here these evil unwholesome states cease without remainder.”

  …

  Avuso, dependent on the [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind] and [form | sound | smell | taste | touch | mind-object], [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind]-consciousness arises.

  The meeting of the three is contact.
  With contact as condition, there is feeling.
  What one feels, one perceives.
  What one perceives, one thinks about.
  What one thinks about, one mentally proliferates.

  From that as source, proliferation of conception and perception assails a person regarding past, future and present [forms | sounds | smells | tastes | touch | mind-objects] cognizable through the [eye | ear | nose | tongue | body | mind].

Madhu,piṇḍika Sutta

Above clarity from the suppression of hindrances and latent dependencies can be used to further develop Insight.

One should also contemplate causality:

  As such, bhikshus, the instructed noble disciple closely and wisely attends to dependent arising itself, thus:

  “When this is, that is;

  with the arising of this, that arises.
  When this is not, that is not;
  with the ending of this, that ends.”

  Bhikshus, dependent on pleasant contact, a pleasant feeling arises. With the ending of the pleasant contact, the pleasant feeling that arose in dependent on that pleasant contact, ceases, is stilled.

  Bhikshus, dependent on painful contact, a painful feeling arises. With the ending of the painful contact, the painful feeling that arose in dependent on that painful contact, ceases, is stilled.

  Bhikshus, dependent on neutral contact, a neutral feeling arises. With the ending of the neutral contact, the neutral feeling that arose in dependent on that neutral contact, ceases, is stilled.

Assutava Sutta 2

The arising and passing nature of the sensations result in unsatisfactoriness. Uncontrollable nature results in unsatisfactoriness. What cases sensations are also arising and passing which case the sensations to arise and pass. The cause of sensations are not controllable. Therefore, the whole sphere of experience is unsatisfactory.

  pleasant feeling is pleasant when it persists, painful when it changes;
  painful feeling is painful when it persists, pleasant when it changes;
  neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge of it, painful when there is no knowledge of it.

Cūla Vedalla Sutta

The whole sphere of what can be experienced can be categorized into 3 sensations and their variant. (Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta and Sal,āyatana Vibhanga Sutta different shades of these sensations.) As noted above the whole sphere of sensations is unsatisfactory. Since what can be experienced and know fall into the 3 sessions the whole sphere of experience is also unsatisfactory. The aggregates of consciousness is unsatisfactory as what it cognises is unsatisfactory. The aggregates of sensations is unsatisfactory. The aggregate of which classifies as favorable, unfavorable and neutral is unsatisfactory as the mental reaction to such and the sensations that follow are unsatisfactory. The experience thought the body is unsatisfactory and the perceptions about form is unsatisfactory. This lead to the 1st Noble Truth.

  What does one know [cognize]
  with that consciousness?

  One knows, "It is pleasant."
  One knows. "It is painful."
  One knows, "It is neutral."

Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta

Also see:

Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta
Sal,āyatana Vibhanga Sutta
Samma Ditthi Sutta

Finally the way to develop the Brahmavihara along with insight is as follows:

The goal of Metta meditation is to develop friendly feeling towards all living beings though Sila, Samadhi and Panna (in combination with equanimity) can be developed with it.

This is achieved by breaking down the mental classification you have towards individual beings or classes of them into groups which you deem favorable, unfavorable or neutral and reacting to them with pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feeling associated with each classification. One such classification systems would be me, beings I like, neutral or unknown beings and being you do not like. When you break down the classification you will like everyone like yourself. Another classification could be same country, neutral country and enemy country. When you break down the mental classification system you will love everyone as your fellow country men. Another classification could be higher life forms, lower life forms and same level life forms. When you break down this classification you will love all living beings equally.

When you classify if a being is from a favorable category you react with pleasant sensation, unfavorable category with unpleasant sensation and neutral category with unpleasant sensations. These sensation lead to the unwholesome roots of craving for the favorable and pleasant, aversion towards the unfavorable and unpleasant and ignorance towards the neutral, as discussed in the Pahāna Sutta. When such reaction stops you stop creating negative mental states and come out of misery.

In order to develop Metta you should wish every one in every category you can imagine to be well and happy. Also know how the classifications are woulding in the back of your mind and know mental reaction and sensation. Say you remember and foe look at the mental reaction and sensations that follow. If you remember a loved one see the mental reaction and the sensations that follows. Try to be equanimous knowing the changes and and arising and passing nature of the sensations.

Once the favorable and unfavorable categorisations are broken you do not despair if you meet with non loved one and with equanimity you do not get attached to others. Others cannot cause you stress.

The Metta pratice encompases the the 3 Fold Training and Noble 8 Fold Path:

Sila - because you with metta you act for one’s well being and that of other
Samadhi - Metta build some level of concentration by repeated thoughts
Panna - if you look at how you categorise and perceive how beings are favorable or unfavorable and how sensation arise, your mental reaction due to craving and clinging, (impact on the current and future 5 aggregates) then this can develop insight

Karuṇā and Muditā meditation, apart from developing the qualities, can in understanding the process behind perceptions, view, thoughts and mental state due to other beings which you calcify and in and inferior situation and superior situation. E.g. is some one is better or the natural dependency is for jealousy to arise, and through Muditā you counteract this. Also if someone is worse off the tendency is Māna to arise, and through Karuṇā you counteract these.

At initial stages conducive thoughts about Brahmavihara will bring about morality. Also continuous focus on the subject of will bring about concentration. The key to Insight is to know how throats, view, perceptions about a being influence your mental state, what current sensation associated with these unwholesome mental states and volitions in the present lead to unpleasant sensations in the future, how perceptions and view about beings proliferate to latent tendencies, how these sensation leads to craving and how these sensations are entirely unsatisfactory. Sensation associated with mental states can be used as the basis for moral restraint, developing a conducive environment for concentration and also wisdom, which can be achieved through Brahmavihara. Also see: Sedaka Sutta (Sila), Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta (Samadhi), Kīta,giri Sutta (Sila, Panna).

Foulness meditation does my not counteract sorrow if practiced for the purpose of reducing polarity or the mind or temperament, but can also lead to In sight which leads to liberation from sorrow. It also is it dangerous if over done, or improperly done, as you might develop aversion towards one's own body. This has lead to suicides. But it does have its usefulness if practiced correctly. This is to be practiced if one is lustful, that is you have the perversion (see: Vipallasa Sutta) of seeing beauty is form. By contemplating on foules you are cultivating the opposite perception, view and thoughts. When this neutralises the lustful tendencies you do not react to beauty with lust. If you overdo it you might start loathing your own body in which case you have to try to see beauty in the form until your mind and tendencies are no longer polarised. Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta discusses developing the opposite of perceptions that arise. In addition to developing the opposite of a lustful temperament you can also build insight of how perception works, what sensations arise due to form and what the mental reactions are. E.g. you see a beautiful body see the sensations, perception of beauty arsing and the metal reactions. Now you should try to understand the following:

On seeing beauty what sensations arises (vedanā), how recognise (saññā) it or how you judge (saññā) it or how you evaluate (saññā) it followed by your mental reaction (saṅkhāra)
now imagining that a person was skinned and is a pile of body part see what sensations arises (vedanā), how recognise (saññā) it or how you judge (saññā) it or how you evaluate (saññā) it followed by your mental reaction (saṅkhāra)
now imagining what the body ages and is old see what sensations arises (vedanā), how recognise (saññā) it or how you judge (saññā) it or how you evaluate (saññā) it followed by your mental reaction (saṅkhāra)
now imagining a decaying corpse what sensations arises (vedanā), how recognise (saññā) it or how you judge (saññā) it or how you evaluate (saññā) it followed by your mental reaction (saṅkhāra)

Repeat the above imagining the body was yours, especially in the case you are beautiful or smart.

Thought his try to understand how craving and clinging works and how the 5 aggregates works and how 5 aggregates come into being. Current mental reactions fueled by craving and clinging to unpleasant / neutral sensations creates fabrication which in turn creates the future consciousness and 5 aggregates to experience unpleasant sensations and opposite in the case of pleasant vipaka. Through this you can use foulness meditation to liberate yourself from misery also. But tread with care!


Discussion with Chih-Tao in the Platform Sutra ... does not have the appearance of origination and does not have the appearance of cessation, much less the cessation of origination and cessation. Thus, nirvana is right here. But although it is right here, there is no
  concept of it being right here, which is why it is called everlasting
  bliss. This bliss is not experienced by anyone, nor is it not
  experienced by anyone. So how could anyone say there is one body much
  less...

  ordinary fools call it death

  other sects claim it's the end

  those who follow the Hinayana

  think of it as non action....

From Red Pine's translation page 283.

Are ordinary fools right to call "Maha Nirvana" death: is that an aspect of it?

From the Platform Sutra in Classical Chinese:

  T48n2008_p0357a19(05)║...剎那無有生相，剎那無有滅相，
  T48n2008_p0357a20(04)║更無生滅可滅，是則寂滅現前。當現前時，
  T48n2008_p0357a21(05)║亦無現前之量，乃謂常樂。此樂無有受者，亦無不受者，
  T48n2008_p0357a22(01)║豈有一體五用之名？何況更言涅槃禁伏諸法，
  T48n2008_p0357a23(00)║令永不生。斯乃謗佛毀法。聽吾偈曰：
  T48n2008_p0357a24(00)║「無上大涅槃，　　圓明常寂照，
  T48n2008_p0357a25(00)║凡愚謂之死，　　外道執為斷，
  T48n2008_p0357a26(00)║諸求二乘人，　　目以為無作，
  ...

In 'a split second' (ksaṇa (क्षण)) there is no sign (相, logo, form, nama) of arising; in a split second there is no sign of ceasing; further, there is no arising-ceasing [impermanent activities] to be annihilated (extinguished, ceased, terminated, stopped); thus 'absolute annihilation' (寂滅 Nirvana) emerges. When this emerged, it does not have the quality of emerging {亦無現前之量}, thus this is called constant bliss. For this bliss that is not obtainable, nor that is not unobtainable...

The above is equivalent to your quoted "... does not have.... not experienced by anyone". The bold Chinese quote are the words that's been translated.

This comes from the episode about Chih-Tao inquired the 6th Great Huineng his unable to understand the Mahanirvana Sutra (涅槃經), about the "arising-ceasing (or birthing-dying) annihilated, absolute annihilation as the constant bliss" (生滅滅已，寂滅為樂). It's too much too complex to explain in full. In short, in Nirvana, all signs (logos) created or conceived by the intellect and consciousness ceased (extinguished, annihilated). There, it is not even intellect or consciousness. In the whole one Ksana, it is constant bliss, this is Nirvana. Ksana has to be hinted for our intellect and consciousness created the space/time, Ksana is the minimal unit we could infer when using words to explain ideas. In the other way to say, in Nirvana there is no space/time; no space/time, thus no birth/death, for any change must have the element of either space or time, but space/time is an illusion, the absolute is Śūnyatā, Emptiness, it is beyond all the human intellect categories. Therefore "Maha Nirvana" has nothing to do with death. Death is only applicable to body, form, sign, existence, impermenance, and it's viability depended on the Birth.

Remark:

The newly bold are:

無上大涅槃，圓明常寂照，
凡愚謂之死，外道執為斷，
諸求二乘人，目以為無作， ...

These are part of the lines of Buddhist Hymn (偈) given by Great Huineng, to summerize what he taught Chih-Tao. The purpose of Hymns is to let students easily memorize, thus it's always concise, poetic and rhythmic in nature, for at that time people used to learn by heart instead of using CPU for data and search engine!

It goes as:

The unsurpassed Maha Nirvana, Perfect and bright, in constant absolute splendor;
unenlightened laity said that is death {凡愚謂之死}, heretical stuck that is cessation;
those secondary practitioners, regarded it as non-Doing...

In simplicity, Great Huineng commented those laity (your "oridnary fools") said death is Nirvana, which is incorrect.


I have forgotten how to live The previous years of my life feels like a dream. I was happily living, consumed with studies, learning things, watching youtube and stuff, enjoying a lot, mind was busy in various entertaining stuffs. But, I don't know how it started, but all those passions are waning. Its almost as if I've forgotten how to live. Live as in the previous ways of my living. I am now trying to find a way to live as I've lived in the past but can't seem to go back to the old ways. I mean I want to find something fun for my mind as I had in the past but I just cant bring up enough passion.

What is happening to me ?

I cannot of course say what is happening with you. But here is a thought, since you have used the tag of impermanence for this question (and quite correctly, I think).

Our minds are addicted to sensations- craving of pleasurable sensations and aversion to painful sensations. The addiction is to react, depending on which type of sensation one is experienceing, which changes from time to time (hence the impermanence in the subtlest form). An addicted mind, like an addict, grows accustomed to a high- once staisfied with one drug (here 'fun'), it wants another. Addict wants a high and once that is satisfied, it will want another high. This wanting of high (craving) is a conditioned pattern of mind, at the deepest level- conditioned because of our ignorance to the impermanent nature of phenomenon.

What you thought of as fun, is now boring. But the mind is addicted to 'fun'. So now it is in a bad mood since it can't find something new, a new fun thing to do. Don't get me wrong, having fun is important. The obsession is harmful- we loose the balance of mind.


Should a Buddhist lay-practitioner schedule his/her daily life I'm currently considering making schedules for my daily life in order to counteract boredom and restlessness. Does anyone has experience with doing this and maybe can give me some tips? Is it beneficial and if yes, how strict should you schedule your day?

Routine is a good thing to have for a Buddhist, I believe. While this will vary person to person based on their circumstances, these are my suggestions to incorporate in a daily routine of a lay Buddhist.

Throughout the day continue to

maintain and develop the 10 skillful deeds.
efface and prevent the 10 unskillful deeds.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.176.than.html

These 2 items were recommended by the Buddha as daily contemplations, almost must haves in any schedule.

Recollect the 5 daily subjects of contemplation as part of the morning, afternoon or evening ritual
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html
Perform this check in the evening.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.101.than.html

Once a week keep the Uposatha practice:

The Buddha's strong recommendation of this practice is found
here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.046.than.html
Details of the practice is found here:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.070.than.html

There are many other beneficial contemplations and practices that can be incorporated into a routine.

Do share your routine once you have compiled it.

May you be happy -/\-


Why five aggregates instead of just three? If feeling, perception and consciousness are conjoined or mixed, and it is not possible to separate them or delineate them or disjoin them, then why do we have five different aggregates instead of just three?
What is the significance and usefulness in the teaching to have feeling, perception and consciousness clearly distinguished into three different aggregates? Why were they not combined into a single aggregate?
From MN 43 (translated by Ven. Thanissaro):

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not
disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another,
to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one
perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these
qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having
separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among
them."

From MN 43 (translated by Ven. Sujato):

“Feeling, perception, and consciousness—these things are mixed, not
separate. And you can never completely dissect them so as to describe
the difference between them. For you perceive what you feel, and you
cognize what you perceive. That’s why these things are mixed, not
separate. And you can never completely dissect them so as to describe
the difference between them.”

Very good question, which i imagine i will post more about at a later time.
Firstly, about the translations, I suspect the translations of "paññāpeti" as "delineate", "describe" or "declare" may possibly be questionable. "Paññāpana" (from "paññāpeti") is found in SN 22.82 and taken by Bhikkhu Bodhi to mean "manifestation", which fits the context of SN 22.82. Therefore, substituting into MN 43, it might read as: ???????
Secondly, the three types of feelings are related to the arising of the three types of defilements, such as explained in paragraph 30 of MN 148. Therefore, it appears most essential to highlight the feeling aggregate. As said in paragraph 15 of AN 3.61:

Now it is for one who feels that I proclaim: ‘This is suffering,’ and
‘This is the origin of suffering,’ and ‘This is the cessation of
suffering,’ and ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of
suffering.’

Again, AN 10.58 says:

vedanāsamosaraṇā sabbe dhammā
All dhamma practices converge/meet on feelings.

As we understand by MN 148, MN 38, MN 37, AN 3.61, etc, feeling can arise without there being the arising of craving and suffering. Before the Buddha, I imagine people were seeking a nirvana that was without feeling. Even today on the Buddhist internet, we witness individuals posting obsessively and mistakenly about the cessation of perception & feeling as though it is Nibbana. But the Buddha declared the only possible here-&-now Nibbana and Liberation cannot be without feeling. Therefore, it appears essential to the Buddha-Dhamma, as already explained, to highlight the importance of feeling.
Also, there are conscious experiences that are predominantly feelings, such as jhana. While consciousness arises & lands on such pleasant jhana feelings, obviously the feeling aggregate starts apart in and dominates such jhana consciousness.
Thirdly, as for "perception", at least in relation to what is 'supramundane', there are many suttas about perverted perception and enlightened perception, such as AN 4.49 and AN 10.60. Therefore, it appears to highlight the perception aggregate is also important and it needs to be distinguished from consciousness and feeling.


Ten fetters in saṃsāra during meditation How are the 10 fetters being destroyed?

Can the chain of fetters be seen during vipassana meditation?

The 10 fetters are destroyed by reaching the different stages of enlightenment.
Meaning the Sotāpanna gets rid off the first three fetters; the fourth and fifth are weakened by the Sakadāgāmi and completely destroyed by the Anāgāmī.
Fully free of all the fetters is the Arahant.
See http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/s_t/samyojana.htm) for a short list.

I'm not sure what you mean by the chain of fetters. Could you specify this?
Anyway, yes the fetters can be seen/experienced during vipassana meditation.


What did the Buddha mean when he spoke about samma samadhi? What did the Buddha mean when he spoke about samma samadhi?
Did he mean access concentration (upacara samadhi) or full absorption (appana samadhi) or momentary concentration (khanika samadhi)?

The Suttas usually define Samma-Samadhi as the four jhanas, but in some Suttas it gives a different explanation. For example, in the Mahacattarisa Sutta the Buddha said:

  The Blessed One said: "Now what, monks, is noble right concentration
  with its supports & requisite conditions? Any singleness of mind
  equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right
  speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, & right
  mindfulness — is called noble right concentration with its supports &
  requisite conditions.

  (Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html )

In the interpretation of the commentaries, any of the three levels of concentration can be sufficient, but in the case of momentary concentration, it would at least need to have the intensity of access concentration although it wouldn't have the duration of access concentration.


Can you focus on the feeling of your body on the chair for reaching the jhanas? I feel like focusing on the feeling of my feet on the ground is easier than focusing on the sensations of the breath. Is this a viable object for access concentration/jhana?

Jhana is not "access" concentration. Jhana is called "attainment" concentration.

Focusing on the feeling of feet on the ground may result in access concentration (because the mind may be relatively open, pliant & non-attached when focusing on the feeling of the feet) however:

The focus should not be overly forced or rigid because, for access concentration to occur, the mind must have the pliancy to fall into the body.
When access concentration occurs, the mind will automatically experience the breathing.

Methods such as feeling the feet on the ground; listening to silence via the ears; or sitting with a very quiet non-doing non-ambitious mind are often more effective in manifesting access concentration (than clumsy direct attempts at watching breathing). Because the Buddha actually taught his Path is the abandonment of craving, often practise is counter-intuitive.


Meditation or practicing technique has benefits of prenatal elaboration? I had heard in the yoga class there's something like prenatal elaboration and it's benefits. Then if a pregnant woman will practice meditation or techniques so baby will born wise, calm, intelligent, kind and curiosity of Dhamma ? Will it born heartily and spiritually Buddhist?

When one make positive vibration (Kamma) this effect people around you. This is like the hanky effect. Say you wrap a perfumed flower (good person) then the hanky (another person) then the hanky will also smell good. If you warp dried fish (bad person) then the hanky will smell bad. Likewise if the mother is creating good vibrations then the child maybe influenced.

Also if the mother has been good even before conception then this would attract a good child with also more merit.


Buddha's self-declaration without identity view and without conceit In this question, the OP asked:

  In the context of the four stages of enlightenment would it be right
  to say that, without identity-view, there's no such thing as an
  "enlightened person": instead there are maybe "enlightened moments" or
  moments of enlightenment?

The Buddha in the MN 26 quote below, declared "I, the unexcelled teacher. I, alone, am rightly self-awakened ... I am a conqueror (of evil qualities)."

However, as the enlightened one, we can be sure that the Buddha did not have identity view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) and also did not have conceit (māna).

So, how could a declaration like "I am the unexcelled teacher" or "ahaṃ satthā anuttaro" be made without identity view and without conceit?

Could it be possible that it is OK to use personal pronouns and also stating truthful facts relating to one's person, without identity view and without conceit? How?

In MN 26:

  "Then, having stayed at Uruvela as long as I liked, I set out to
  wander by stages to Varanasi. Upaka the Ajivaka saw me on the road
  between Gaya and the (place of) Awakening, and on seeing me said to
  me, 'Clear, my friend, are your faculties. Pure your complexion, and
  bright. On whose account have you gone forth? Who is your teacher? In
  whose Dhamma do you delight?'

  "When this was said, I replied to Upaka the Ajivaka in verses:

    All-vanquishing,
    all-knowing am I,
    with regard to all things, unadhering.
    All-abandoning,
    released in the ending of craving:
    having fully known on my own,
    to whom should I point as my teacher?

    I have no teacher,
    and one like me can't be found.
    In the world with its devas,
    I have no counterpart.

    For I am an arahant in the world;
    I, the unexcelled teacher.
    I, alone, am rightly self-awakened.
    Cooled am I, unbound.

    To set rolling the wheel of Dhamma
    I go to the city of Kasi.
    In a world become blind,
    I beat the drum of the Deathless.'

  "'From your claims, my friend, you must be an infinite conqueror.'

    Conquerors are those like me
    who have reached fermentations' end.
    I've conquered evil qualities,
    and so, Upaka, I'm a conqueror.'

  "When this was said, Upaka said, 'May it be so, my friend,' and —
  shaking his head, taking a side-road — he left.

SN 1.25

  [Deva:] He who's an Arahant, his work achieved, Free from taints, in
  final body clad, That monk still might use such words as "I." Still
  perchance might say: "They call this mine." ... Would such a monk be
  prone to vain conceits?

  [The Blessed One:] Bonds are gone for him without conceits, All
  delusion's chains are cast aside: Truly wise, he's gone beyond such
  thoughts.  That monk still might use such words as "I," Still
  perchance might say: "They call this mine." Well aware of common
  worldly speech, He would speak conforming to such use.


Is OM MA NI PADME HUM flag useful? May I use this Tibetan flag above door and will this protect house from negative and bad energy?
I know importance of chanting OM MA NI PADME HUM.
So is it helpful or just feng shui thing?
I thought to ask before having one above the main door.

If it helps guard your and others' hearts as a summons to mindfulness it is quite useful.

If it is intended to ward off a jet falling from the sky it is not so useful.

If you are looking for a guard against "Negative and bad energy (black magic)" you are looking for a place without fear.


Why is Rupa (not) Ultimate Reality? When we see "a car' then there is the "seeing of the car formation" and that is mind or "nama". At the same time there is the rupa car formation that is not a concept from our mind. I always thought rupa was "the experience or hardness , softness, roughness ect.. but I guess this is wrong because rupa is it's own ultimate reality?

According to the Abhidhamma, we don't "see a car". It is a bit more complicated :-)

According to the Abhidhamma, sensing involves seeing a small patch of colour. The small patch of colour is rūpa, an ultimate reality.

How small is this patch of colour? Extend your arm and hold out your thumb. Scientists say that the size of your thumbnail as compared to your entire field of vision is what that retina can process at one instant. The rods and cones of the retina respond to specific colours.

Once this small patch of colour (the ultimate reality) has been seen, it becomes a concept (the tadanuvattikā manodvāravīthi process). Sensing is finished and now thinking takes over. The first thing that thinking does is the “grasp the object as a whole” (samudāyagāhikā); in other words, thinking builds up the entire field of vision from these “thumbnail-sized” patches of colour.

How is this done? It is not in the linear mechanical way that a TV screen image is built up. Scientists say that the eye focuses first on areas of high contrast, on faces and on movement before filling in the rest of the scene.

Once the entire scene has been built up, the thinking mind recognizes colours (vaṇṇasallakkhaṇā). Next, a shape or “entity” is extracted from the pattern of colours (vatthugāhikā). Next is the thinking process of recognizing the share or “entity” (vatthusallakkhaṇā). Next is a thinking process of gasping the name (car in the example you gave) (nāmagāhikā) and the thinking process of recognizing the name (nāmasallakkhaṇā).

Scientists explain that the activity in the brain extends from the visual cortex to involve memory.

Of course, next comes the idea of the car, judgements and associations regarding the car, obsessions and fantasies about the car.

What we see is the ultimate reality of a small patch of colour. Once seeing of this small patch of colour is complete, then thinking of concepts takes over.

This is explained in Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" (page 164).


A few questions about "becoming" How is "becoming" (bhava) defined in the context of Dependent Co-arising?

If there is craving, will that craving always result in "becoming"?

Is there something like craving without "becoming"?

Thanks for your time and patience!

EDIT: as I made the mistake of asking more than one question in the same post, I have two different answer (1231546 and Dhammadhatu's) which dissipated my doubts.

Thanks!

How is "becoming" (bhava) defined in the context of Dependent Co-arising?

it is explained as formation of various existence in the three ranges of existence;

  AN 3.76  Bhava Sutta: Becoming (1)

  Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down
  to him and sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
  Blessed One, "Lord, this word, 'becoming, becoming' — to what extent
  is there becoming?"[1]

  "Ananda, if there were no kamma ripening in the sensuality-property,
  would sensuality-becoming be discerned?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
  moisture.[2] The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance
  & fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a lower property.
  Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.

  "If there were no kamma ripening in the form-property, would
  form-becoming be discerned?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
  moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance &
  fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a middling property.
  Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.

  "If there were no kamma ripening in the formless-property, would
  formless-becoming be discerned?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
  moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance &
  fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a refined property.
  Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future. This
  is how there is becoming."
  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.076.than.html

If there is craving, will that craving always result in "becoming"?

Yes craving is always for a state with certain conditions or a state without certain conditions, either way craving for something dependent on conditions becoming like this or otherwise, becoming better or worse, good or bad etc.

If one talks about craving for the cessation of craving, such craving can be explained as being dispersive of becoming to the extent that it is for abandoning of craving and therefore becoming but still it is craving for a conditioned state, a state without certain conditions, without craving. There is nothing further after that and craving is at that point uprooted due to complete disenchantment.

  Then Ven. Ananda approached the nun and, on arrival, sat down on a
  prepared seat. As he was sitting there, he said to the nun: "This
  body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying
  on food that food is to be abandoned.

  "This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying
  on craving that craving is to be abandoned.https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html

Is there something like craving without "becoming"?

i am not sure what you mean.


Does Zen Buddhism have canonical texts? I'm aware that Theravada, Tibetan and Chinese Buddhism have a canon of texts. However I have never heard of a canon for Zen Buddhism. Does it have a canon or does it just not bother with such a thing? If it doesn't have a canon of texts then are there texts which can seen as foundational?

Zen Buddhism is part of East Asian Buddhism in general and accepts the entire Chinese Canon, although they don't find a lot of it to be relavent to their practice. Zen Buddhism has always been based primarily off of the meditation practice itself combined with oral teaching, but even if Zen isn't purely derived from the Sutras in the way other schools are, the Sutras are still a very important part of Zen learning.

Originally the main text for the Zen school was the Lankavatara sutra, but as time went on, this very difficult Sutra became less popular and the Diamond Sutra became a much more central text, along with the Heart Sutra. The Platform Sutra which actually tells the story of Huineng, the sixth patriarch of Zen, and how he rose to prominence also became a primary text.

A treatise called the Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana was very influential, and the Sutra it was based on, the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment also had a good deal of influence, although it isn't quite as famous these days.

Next in importance to these canonical texts are the two famous Koan collections, the Gateless Gate and the Blue Cliff record, at least in the traditions where Koan is a major focus. For the Soto Zen School which began to de-emphasize Koan practice, the great classic is the treatise called the Shobogenzo, written by Dogen Zenji, the Soto Schools founder.

Those are all the major zen texts I could think of.

(Added in later):

There are a few others I forgot about. All of the Sutras that are about Buddha nature (The Tathagatagarbha Sutra, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, the Srimaladevi Sutra, and especially the Lotus Sutra were very important in Zen. Also, the Uttaratantrashastra was important although it's a treatise, not a sutra. From very early on, the main slogan of Zen was "See mind, become Buddha" which meant that by directly meditating on the mind, one sees the Buddha nature of the mind and becomes enlightened.


A practice built on positive incentive? I am thinking about making a practice based on enjoyment to help gain motivation to do stuff  - a positive incentive  but not sure how to do it (or even if i should do it)  -  all tips appreciated even if its just one

i do correct vipassana meditation finished with a short metta meditation  - still i dont enjoy it really not the 1 minute meditation not the 2 hour meditation

and i am aware of benefits of the practice from study and from experience but not enough to combat the hindrances -  and since i stop practicing for few months try and stop try and stop my motivation is really low

maybe if i say i eat a piece of chocolate/listening to music/watching videos etc  after i meditate ?  but that is to much greed and will probably harm the meditation cause i will think about the "prize" at the end

im asking based on an answer i got here on a different topic which made me think about it :

  There is a big obvious difference between doing something because you
  want it and enjoying the effort, VERSUS beating yourself with a stick
  like a horse. In one case you are working hard but you're enjoying it,
  you doing what you believe in, you're getting deep sense of
  satisfaction from it. In the other case, you are forcing yourself,
  breaking yourself, torturing yourself - you don't really believe in
  it, you hate yourself for doing it, but you're still doing it.

  My teacher said that the feeling of special enjoyment or satisfaction
  is a key criteria for success in spiritual practice. If you're doing
  too little, you will not be happy with yourself. If you are pushing
  yourself too hard, you will not be happy with yourself. If you are
  doing it right, it may be hard and painful - but you will feel happy
  and proud and inspired.

from  :

Pushing onself too much ?

i do correct vipassana meditation finished with a short metta meditation - still i dont enjoy it really not the 1 minute meditation not the 2 hour meditation

Vipassana meditation is not meant to feel enjoyable. It might sometimes but thats not really the point of the practice. The practice is undertaken in order to purify the mind from defilements. Its a purification process.

  maybe if i say i eat a piece of chocolate/listening to music/watching videos etc after i meditate ? but that is to much greed and will probably harm the meditation cause i will think about the "prize" at the end.

This approach defeats the purpose and will just increase delusion and craving.


How to do metta for a long time (before sleep)? Usually i do a short metta after vipassana  -  saying good wishes to myself than to someone close than to people i like lsess and less and in the end include all beings

i want to do metta before sleep so i can sleep better-   but it usually takes me a long time to fall asleep no matter the stuff i tryed  ---  so in case i have an hour maybe two before sleeping  -  or even 10 minutes is a long time for me to do metta

how do i extend the metta time ?  -  just repat the metta cycle again and again and again ?

just repat the metta cycle again and again and again?

I guess you mean "repeat the words"?

I think not.

As an analogy: if I decide to go somewhere, then I might be verbal or have some specific direction[s] initially -- I might decide, for example, "I will travel, to that place". After I have started, while I'm going there, however, I won't keep repeating that same phrase -- instead, I am conscious of 1) being somewhere 2) moving in a direction toward a destination 3) what I see on the way.

If I decide to start meditating, instead of what I was doing before, then discursive thinking (producing words) stops. Instead of thinking about words, I think about "real" (defined as "actually existing as a thing", so physical as well as sentient) people, who as people exist here and there in directions more or less far away from me.

Thinking about that physicality (with the intention of being kind "in real life") switches off my discourse. Switching off my discourse, my breathing changes, instead of shallowly I breathe deeply. Conscious of suddenly breathing relatively deeply I'm conscious of being more relaxed, of well-being, of well-being being associated with metta.

Conscious of well-being (or of "travelling in the right direction") I have no desire to change that direction, and instead want to continue in that state. If you're travelling (for example on foot or by car) and start to veer towards the right or the left, then you correct the steering to resume the right path/direction. If I start to leave the state of well-being then I'm conscious of what I'm beginning to do wrong (for example, thinking about myself instead of expanding my conscious attention to include and wish well towards other people, or for example beginning to think discursively again), and undo that (don't continue in the wrong or less rewarding direction) to return to the right direction.

Doing this in bed is especially pleasant: relaxed, warm (under cover), eyes closed. Eyes closed makes it easier to expand/extend my awareness (or imagination or consciousness) of space (instead of being stuck behind my eyes and looking in one direction, i.e. visual consciousness).

Warm and relaxed, and breathing, contributes to the feeling of well-being. Sometimes my thought (or focus of awareness) comes back to my body (instead of being 'out there'). I think that's because it "needs attention" e.g. it's tense or uncomfortable in some way ... it's enough to consciously relax that part (musculature) that feels of tense, for the feeling (of tenseness) to go away, after which my mind is free to leave again.

It usually isn't very long before I'm asleep, though. See also Meditating as sleep aid.

Another pleasant thing about a metta meditation is that it's time to do nothing except goodwill (i.e. wishing people well). It's time to stop making practical plans, to switch off the discursive machinery.


Which gift has more benefit for the giver? What are the dangers? There is the case where a person gives toward a monk, having a joyful perception of the good Sangha, while he gives.

There is the case where a person assumes a certain monk assuming being a Noble One and gives with such a joy.

There is a person who is not able to trace either a monk nor the Sangha and gives an householder, willing to think "more worthy is he".

What would give the most benefits? What are the problems for an ordinary person, and a most secure way? What are the dangers of overestimating ones capacities of judgment? What it a person thinks that his ideals are those of a Noble One "I know", yet total wrong?

(Note: this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks or binding entertainment here, but as a tiny door to escape the wheel corrent and since a long caught in)

The most beneficial giving (dana [Pali], act of generosity) is that which is done without the thought (without the conceptual constructs) of giver, giving and reciever.

The prbolem for an ordinary person, like us, is that we start evaluating the worth of the giving, worth of the person to whom it is being given and the worth of what is being given. (Certainly these are important things to think and decide, certainly there is merit in them as well; but the most meritorious, the highest dana  goes beyond these conceptual constructs). WHen we think of worthiness, we get caught up (attached, we cling, we grasp) with these thoughts and therefore loose more merit that would have been gained if we were beyond the concepts of giver, giving, receiver and other related notions as worth, etc.

One danger of overestimating one's capabilities is that we would make wrong decisions (since we have not judged our own capability correctly).

'Noble one' are categories that help in positing the progress of people on the path of Nirvana. One can only make correct judgements about people who are behind oneself in the path (ref. Arya Candrakirti's 'The Entry into the Middle way'). We cannot judge people who are at advanced stages as compared to us. All we can judge is that they are ahead- for such progress on the path shows in one's actions, speech and thoughts.


Chronological or other sequence for beginners At least one of the "introductions to Buddhism" that I read included elements from, some biography of, the life of the Buddha, including:

Early life
Searching for enlightenment
Sermon at Benares (a.k.a. "Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion")
Death (i.e. "Behold etc. ... Work out your end with diligence").

Is the Tipitaka arranged in useful sequence? I feel like I'm walking into a library, looking at the Dewey Decimal Classification and wondering which I should read first.

I take it that the Tipitaka is not chronological!

Am I right in think that the Dhammacakkappavattana is the first and most important sutta?

If so is it sensible that, there, it is "SN 56.11" (i.e. not the first sutta)?

What other "important" suttas should I read "first"?

Is more known about the sequence in which the Buddha himself delivered them (e.g. if the Sermon at Benares was the first, was the Fire Sermon the second, and which then was the third, etc.)?

Please answer any or all questions above.

Or you could answer this question by commenting on what it says at Which suttas should I read? Do you agree with what it says there, do you have anything to add to what it says there, or to take away?

Am I right in thinking that the Dhammacakkappavattana is the first and most important sutta?

I wouldn't say most important but, taking into account other discourses, it seems it was the first discourse expounded by the Buddha.

If so, is it sensible that, there, it is "SN 56.11" (i.e. not the first sutta)?

It depends on how you'd want to organize the discourses. Since SN is organized thematically, this is one of the reasons for it being in the last section (SN 56).

What other "important" suttas should I read "first"?

I struggle with this question since there is a plethora of "important" or "good" discourses. Personally, I enjoy so many discourses in the canon that I've lost count. Nevertheless, here are some which I consider important (The subsequent bolded filtering are those discourses which I consider to be the core. I'd recommend reading all of them nonetheless):

Dīgha Nikāya: 1, 2, 9, 15, 16, 29
Majjhima Nikāya: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 38, 43, 44, 47, 55, 58, 60, 61, 63, 66, 70, 72, 74, 82, 86, 88, 95, 96, 107, 108, 109, 117, 118, 121, 125, 136, 139, 141, 149, 150
Saṃyutta Nikāya: 12.2, 12.15, 12.17, 12.33, 12.34, 22.2, 22.59, 22.81, 22.85, 35.28, 35.116, 36.6, 36.7, 36.8, 36.11, 38.14, 41.6, 45.8, 46.51, 46.55, 47.10, 47.19, 48.42, 51.15, 55.7, 56.11
Aṅguttara Nikāya: I'd recommend looking at Bhikkhu Bodhi's Thematic Guide and reading the discourses by whatever topic interests you. A discourse that usually stands out in this nikāya is AN 3.65. (I also like 3.61, 3.68 & 3.69)
Khuddaka Nikāya: I recommend reading fully the Dhammapada, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Sutta Nipāta, Theragāthā & Therīgāthā. They are small and easy to read. If I had to choose one, I'd say the Sutta Nipāta.

Is more known about the sequence in which the Buddha himself delivered them (e.g. if the Sermon at Benares was the first, was the Fire Sermon the second, and which then was the third, etc.)?

These are the orders I've seen:

1. Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
2. Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta
3. Ādittapariyāya Sutta [Source]

1. Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
2. Hemavata Sutta
3. Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta [Source]

Can't recollect anything else regarding this topic.


Is it forbidden to fight to defend your possessions from a thief? From the last few days i have been trying to meditate to generate equanimity.

My question is simple: If i practice equanimity, compassion, loving kindness, forgiveness, there would always be people who would take advantage of that right? For instance if someone comes to steal from me, i should give him my belongings right? Like thats the Buddhist way right? Fighting and resisting is forbidden right?

And he informs 10 other thieves about this kind man. How to be wise in this situation where you know people take advantage of your compassion, niceness?

Resisting or protecting what you have is not forbidden. But you shouldn't kill. It is perfectly fine to say no to someone who is trying to take advantage of you. It's perfectly fine to have  a non-lethal security system for your house. That does not get in the way of Brahmavihara.


The buddhist dillema on lesser evil Imagine this scenario: A serial killer is pointing his gun at an innocent person John and wants to kill John. An arahant is near the killer and knows that the killer will kill 5 more innocent people after he kills the innocent person John. The arahant can choose to kill the killer before the killer kills John and the other 5 innocent persons. Would the arahant kill the killer? Would a Buddha kill the killer? If yes, why? If no, why?

"Would the arahant kill the killer? Would a Buddha kill the killer?"

  'Yes, Sutavā, you heard correctly [...]. A bhikkhu who is an arahant [...] is incapable of transgression in nine cases. (1) He is incapable of intentionally depriving a living being of life"

  --  AN 9.7 (Bodhi trans.)

  "Here, Visakha, a noble disciple considers thus: 'For all their lives the arahants dwell having abandoned killing living beings, refrain from killing living beings, they have laid down their staffs, laid down their weapons, they are conscientious, sympathetic, compassionate for the good of all living beings; so today I dwell, for this night and day, having abandoned killing living beings, refraining from killing living beings, I am one who has laid down my staff, laid down my weapon, I am conscientious, sympathetic, compassionate for the good of all living beings. By this practice, following after the arahants, the Uposatha will be entered on by me.'"

  -- AN 8.43

"If no, why?"

  Through greed a covetous man kills breathing things [...]. Through hate a malevolent man kills breathing things[...]. Through ignorance a deluded man kills breathing things... Will that be long for his harm and suffering?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
  [...]
  Through non-greed an uncovetous man does not kill breathing things [...]. Through non ill-will an unmalevolent man does not kill breathing things. [...] Through non-delusion a man with true knowledge does not kill breathing things... Will that be long for his welfare and happiness?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
  -- AN 3.66

Summarizing, it's wrong action:

  And what is wrong action? Killing, taking what is not given, illicit sex. This is wrong action.

  -- MN 17


Breath mediation during daily acvities Is it possible to do breath meditation during daily activities ?

Mindfulness and Awareness is not a concept only to be practiced during Meditation. Practicing Mindfulness and Awareness during the day, with Parents, Teachers, Customers ... and all other Beeings is a powerfull and healthy practice. It is a tremendous challenge,

The Buddha spoke of the power of mindfulness in a very emphatic way:

  Mindfulness, I declare, is all-helpful.
  SAMYUTTA, 46:59

and

  All things can be mastered by mindfulness.
  ANGUTTARA, 8:83

and

  Further, there is that solemn and weighty utterance opening and
  concluding the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta, the Discourse on the Foundations
  of Mindfulness:
  This is the only way, monks, for the purification of
  beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the
  destruction of pain and grief, for reaching the right path, for the
  attainment of Nibbana, namely the four foundations of mindfulness.

See THE POWER OF MINDFULNESS

and A Guide to Awareness

There is no sense in not beeing mindfull and aware during your carmic activities, you know Buddhism ... it is not all about your breath, it is all about your awareness and mindfullness during the day, the week.

If you feel you need more help, teaching or instructions, look for a good teacher with a solid reputation and established traditions along a respectable linage.

Addendum:

Perhaps the publication Essentials of Insight Meditation Practice is of some aid and section OTHER DAILY ACTIVITIES a good introduction.


If someone steals my goods/harms me then is it ok to take revenge on him/her? If someone has done some big bad thing bad to me, which can't be forgotten easily, then is it ok to take revenge on them, if that person is guilty in this matter?  Will it generate any negative karmic impression in me? should it? Which is important: peace or justice?

I think that the opening verses of the Dhammapada, for example, make it clear that "revenge" is not a way to appease emnity; and that "the wise" would "cease their quarrels" instead.

  "He abused me, he ill-treated me, he got the better of me, he stole my belongings;"... the enmity of those harbouring such thoughts cannot be appeased.
  "He abused me, he ill-treated me, he got the better of me, he stole my belongings;"... the enmity of those not harbouring such thoughts can be appeased.
  Hatred is, indeed, never appeased by hatred in this world. It is appeased only by loving-kindness. This is an ancient law.
  People, other than the wise, do not realize, "We in this world must all die," (and, not realizing it, continue their quarrels). The wise realize it and thereby their quarrels cease.

The problem seems to arise with the initial thought, "someone has done some big bad thing to me". I think that's the kind of problem which the doctrines of anatta and averena are meant to help solve.


What is "Patigha", and how does it differ from "Dosa"? I would like to know what is defined as "Patigha" (Skt. "Pratigha"), and how it varies from "Dosa" (Skt. "Dvesha").

Thank you.

Here are some sources:

Patigha (dictionary definition)
Lobha,Dosa, Moha versus Raga, Patigha, Avijja

Although on an ethical level they're synonymous, pathiga goes deeper than dosa. It's more on the level of (dormant) tendencies.


What is Buddhism "for" (in favor of)? Aside from ending suffering, encouraging compassionate action and leading one to nirvanna, is there anything that Buddhism promotes, or says is good?

The reason that I ask is because in another recent question I asked about musical composers, and as I  look around at related questions, I find that dance, singing and listening to music seem to go against the 7th Precept. I am not aware of any sutras promoting art or creativity, other than skillful actions and insightful discourse. It seems pretty flat to me, but I cannot find fault with it.

As a person who has always danced and listened to music, and sometimes draws or paints, I am wondering just what we should be doing with our "one wild and precious life"? (Assuming that this is the last one.) Is life good in itself, once cleared of defilements? Can it not be enjoyed - meaning that something worthwhile is done that uplifts self and others?

In one of the teachings I received, there is this concept of Five Joys:

The joy of having your basic needs satisfied (food, shelter, safety).
The (higher) joy of material comfort and sensual enjoyment.
The (even higher) joy of professional/creative realization.
The (very high) joy of helping society: teaching, healing.
The (highest) joy of Enlightenment.

So assuming you're in your 50s and done with the first three, I suppose you can derive joy from helping the less lucky ones?


Is rebirth/reincarnation central to Buddhism? Would you characterize belief in rebirth as a central component of Buddhism?

Are there Buddhists who do not believe in it?

How is this concept understood, i.e., what does rebirth mean (in as much detail as possible) to a Buddhist?

There are two concepts here. We pass away every moment and arise every minutes. Other is rebirth after death. Rebirth is partly a belief but much of the Dhamma should be realised at experiential level. What is much needed is that at the last moment is that you maintain equanimity so you do not take a new birth. The level of stillness can be achived only by a fully accomplished person who has complete mastery over the mind and cognitive process. The aim is to develop this. Generally Buddhist take rebirth at face value but belief in this is not necessary to practice Buddhism as the emphasis is to realise the truth through ones own experience. Your experience re-enforces your belief.


Buddhist Jhanas, how best to describe them? I’m conducting research into the phenomena of Buddhist Jhanas/Dhyanas, and am looking for a good place to start.

In addition to primary sources that discuss what this phenomena is, how would you describe what the Jhanas are to a person unfamiliar with any sort of meditation practice? How do they differ across different sects/schools? How are they viewed sociologically or philosophically from OUTSIDE the lens of a practitioner or one who believes in the concept of enlightenment to begin with?

TL; DR seeking primary source information on Jhanas/Dhyanas. What is their history? How do they differ across schools/sects? How would an outsider or an academic understand them?

Thank you for your time.

I would say that Jhanas are the final stages of the progressive development of the state of inner harmony, that is the Buddhist path.

The entire Buddhist path is based on one principle, that psychological discomfort comes from inner conflict and that therefore eliminating inner conflict leads to inner harmony. Secondarily, outer conflict leads to inner conflict, and ethical behavior is defined as that which prevents outer conflict.

The prerequisite to Jhanas, therefore, is to eliminate all coarse conflicts that serve as obstacles to the attainment of harmony, such as external entanglements and various real life sources of personal drama and regret. Hence the emphasis on ethics, non-attachment, and non-egoism for beginners.

Once the life of an individual is more or less peaceful on a day to day basis, the student can focus solely on their mind and attain Complete Harmony. This is the role of Jhanas.

Jhanas are generally divided into two stages. On the first stage, student uses emotional intelligence techniques to generate a state of happiness. On the second stage, the student contemplates the way things work and perfects the state of harmony, culminating in what's known as suchness. The premise here is that harmony is a refinement of happiness, and suchness is perfectly refined harmony.

The particular techniques used to generate happiness vary between schools. In early Buddhism, the main technique was to review one's own ethical purity,  one's philosophical realizations (insights), and one's peaceful lifestyle, comparing that with regular people, and by congratulating oneself on actually measuring up very well, generate the sought state of euphoria.

In conservative descendants (Theravada) this technique was preserved as part of the so-called anussati (recollection meditation), but divorced from the practice of jhana proper. In fact Silanussati, Caganussati, Buddhanussati, Dhammanussati, and Devatanussati are perfect themes for the first jhana. See e.g. this explanation for details on each. Since connection between positive recollection and the first jhana has been lost in Theravada, for them jhana became an exercise in brute-force one-pointed concentration, which eventually leads to a similar state of joy but requires much more time and effort.

In Tibetan schools, the technique was largely retained but shifted from recalling ones actual achievements, to substituting one's self-image with that of a deity ("yidam"). I imagine this so-called "generation-stage meditation" to be a development of the Devatanussati technique. This is thought to have a better effect, since the imaginary self has no limits to its perfect qualities and can be optimized to counteract particular student's emotional hangups. Naturally, this goes at the expense of no longer having one's ethical achievements be the necessary basis of meditation, which Tibetan schools compensate by greatly emphasizing compassion.

The second phase of jhanas is perfection of harmony. This is when the student realizes that the contrived state of happiness cannot be perfectly sustainable and instead learns to accept the natural uncontrived moment by moment state as the basis for the absence of inner conflict. This deepest acceptance of whatever arises at every moment, inwardly and outwardly, is known as suchness and is the summum bonum of Buddhist path.

Again, the original technique underwent mutation in historical schools. In Theravada they say that upon contemplating Three Marks of Existence seeing impermanence of all contrived states and inevitably of occasional suffering, the student must go through catharsis of accepting the existential failure, and emerge having completely lost all grasping to any experience. Reference "Sixteen Stages of Insight".

In most of the meditating Mahayana (such as various types of Chan/Zen), a state of non-judgmental awareness (don't accept, don't reject, just watch) is practiced as a straightforward way of cultivating suchness (following the beginner's breath meditation, therefore skipping the generation phase), but it's place in the big scheme of things is not usually explained, other than mysteriously stating that this is the very state of the Buddha.

Finally, in Tibetan schools, this phase is practiced in conjunction with study of emptiness. For philosophically inclined students, analytical meditation on emptiness serves to dispell doubts that any contrived state cannot be It. What follows from that is staying in a wordless realization of this profound groundlessness, which serves as an entry into suchness. For students of less intellectual bent, the practice takes form of so called meditation of no-meditation, which is a name given to cultivation of appreciation of suchness as the primordially natural state.

In any case, the path usually starts with removal of coarse obstacles, following by cultivation of the seemingly perfectly conflictless state, followed by realization that any contrived state is inherently unsustainable and conflict-ridden, followed by contemplation of the implications of this realization, followed by direct cultivation of suchness and complete liberation. The Jhanas symbolically refer to the non-preliminary stages of this sequence.

I'm necessarily glossing over many nuances and simplifying a bit, but I think this covers most of what you asked, let me know if you have further questions.


Can meditation be harmful? I often see promotion of the positive benefits of meditation in the media and even in school and government settings.  However, there is evidence meditation is not always beneficial.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-science-behind-behavior/201604/the-little-known-downsides-mindfulness-practice

Is there much discussion of the possible negative aspects of meditation in Buddism?

For instance, could it leave one susceptible to malicious spirits?

What Buddha recommended was the right concentration (Samma Samadhi) a part of Noble Eightfold Path.
Wrong concentration (Mitya Samadhi) may be harmful.