Why Shakyamuni Buddha choose Indian subcontinent as a favorable place to teach Buddhist way of living? Current India was previously not as big and united as it is now. Multiple countries quarrel for existence. Life was not normal for people. Chaos and Imbalance was on its height.

Is that the reason, Shakyamuni Buddha choose Indian Subcontinent as a favorable place to teach Buddhist way of living?

If so, next destination for Buddha to teach may be Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or even United States. If next Buddha is seen in some other place besides Indian Subcontinent, will he/she be recognized as Buddha? What if Jesus was a form of Buddha? What if new Buddha change the way Buddhism is what we are following, according to current situation?

(I think you know about who a Bodhisattva is....)

While a Bodhisattva is in the heavenly realm (Thauthisa) he chooses the
Best time,Best parents,Best cast,Best kingdom,Best country to be born. This is an essential process that all Bodhisattva's go through before being born as a human being.

  Here are the reasons why.....

As you know democracy is really new,what existed before is a cast system with nobles and lower casts. Your name sounds Indian so i presume there is no need of explaining the difficulties that a lower cast person will have to go through to get to any higher level in anything. At the age of kings there is no better place to get accepted than being born as a prince and that's why it happened like that in this era.

I have learned that there is an auspicious place on the Human realm that all Bodhisattvas (Who are destined to be A Lord Buddha) reach nirvana and become Lord Buddhas. And this place is the same place every time even after all the destruction that can happen. This time it was India and next time maybe there will be no India, Next time it may be on an island. What we are talking about is a universal position that does not change,its geography,name and other things may change but it will always be the same place in the universe.

Another Buddha can't be born in a particular realm while there is already a previous Buddha's teaching.

(Please not that this is "Theravada Buddhism" and "Mahayana Buddhists" believe in multiple Buddhas in different realms. But even them do not believe that another Buddha can be born in a particular realm while there is already a previous Buddha's teaching.)

  Can Lord Buddha be a woman....

No, As Lord Buddha explained a woman who start the life of a Bodhisattva will soon turn into a male in the most nearby life and continue to be male. Because of this reason a Lord Buddha will always be a male.

Please note that this does not mean that a woman can't be a Lord Buddha. What this means is that when she start her practice as a Bodhisattva she will soon get a life as a male and therefore a woman being a lord Buddha does not happen because of this gender change between births.

  Can Jesus or any other recent teachers be a Buddha....

No, Because as far as my knowledge goes none of the schools accept that two Lord Buddhas will exist in the same planet at the same time or two  teachings would exist at the same time.

  Will Buddhism change or modify to suit the time....

No, Because there is one unique thing about Buddhism. And that is....

Akalika = Timeless

As Lord Buddha said there is no need of updating or changing the teaching as it is timeless and complete.

Also Lord Buddha challenged saying that no one can add or remove a single teaching as too much or non worthy.

So there can be differences in

The Language
The explaining method
The idioms
The examples

when two Lord Buddhas teach the path. But the core will always be the same. The only difference will be Grammatical and explanatory differences.


A noobs balance. Where to go on my journey? I’ll keep this short and sweet. Recently I’ve been pondering the idea of becoming a professor of Eastern Religions, particularly Buddhism. I can’t put my finger on it exactly, but something about Buddhism, it’s core teachings and practicality, the Buddha himself, and my interactions with avid practitioners (especially my advisor in college who is a Zen Buddhist herself and someone who I greatly admire) have shown me that this is what I want to do with my life. I do not want to be a monk, as my dream is also to be an educator who inspires people and one day have a family.
My question is:

Where do I go from here? One thing I have learned about Buddhism is the danger of over-intellectualization.

How do some of you find a balance between Buddhist practice (which aims to free us from our minds), and using your mind effectively (to learn about the teachings or follow your passion and calling in life)?

Also, for those of you that have PhD’s in this field, what is your advice?
If you have any further questions you need feel free to ask and I greatly appreciate your help.

Edit:
At the moment, I am a 21 year old rising college junior pursuing a major in religious studies.
I meditate daily using the app 10% happier, but as I progress would like to learn more advanced Buddhist specific techniques. There is a sangha run by my professor every Tuesday that I hope to attend when I return to school in a week.
I would say I have a decent grasp of a basic history and understanding of Buddhism and its teachings, yet find myself daunted by just how much there is to learn and a concern of mine is losing myself in the teachings/history which would be required of me if I pursued the career I hope to. Perhaps though, this in itself is a great opportunity to learn balance and the challenges mentioned are all the more reason to pursue. Thank you.

Where do I go from here? One thing I have learned about Buddhism is the danger of over-intellectualization.

That's not true at all. There is a sutta where monks specializing in absorption meditation (jhana) disparaged monks specializing in the study and teaching of the Dhamma (Buddha's teachings), and vice versa.

Here's what Ven. Maha Cunda eventually advised them to do in AN 6.46:

  “Thus, friends, you should train yourselves: ‘Being Dhamma-devotee
  monks, we will speak in praise of jhana monks.’ That’s how you should
  train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard
  to find in the world, i.e., those who dwell touching the deathless
  element with the body.

  “And thus, friends, you should train yourselves: ‘Being jhana monks,
  we will speak in praise of Dhamma-devotee monks.’ That’s how you
  should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing
  people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who penetrate with
  discernment statements of deep meaning.”

So, while AN 5.73 warns those over-intellectualizing to also practise meditation, AN 6.46 reminds us that learning and understanding the Dharma is quite important too.

There is nothing wrong for those specializing in being Dhamma scholars, and for those specializing in jhana meditation, as long as there is balance and moderation.

However, you must remember that these two suttas are directed at monks, not lay people. Lay people are generally advised to practise the five precepts, practise virtue (Right Action, Right Speech, Right Livelihood) and learn the Dhamma (to have Right View).

Right View is the forerunner of the Noble Eightfold Path according to MN 117. So, if you help others learn the Dhamma in order to help them have the Right View (assuming that you already have Right View), then you are giving them the supreme gift, for Itivuttaka 100 says:

  "There are these two kinds of gifts: a gift of material things & a
  gift of the Dhamma. Of the two, this is supreme: a gift of the Dhamma.

  "There are these two kinds of sharing: sharing of material things &
  sharing of the Dhamma. Of the two, this is supreme: sharing of the
  Dhamma.

  "There are these two kinds of assistance: assistance with material
  things & assistance with the Dhamma. Of the two, this is supreme: help
  with the Dhamma.

  "There are these two kinds of mass-donations: a mass-donation of
  material things & a mass-donation of the Dhamma. Of the two, this is
  supreme: a mass-donation of the Dhamma."

How do some of you find a balance between Buddhist practice (which aims to free us from our minds), and using your mind effectively (to learn about the teachings or follow your passion and calling in life)?

As mentioned above, having the Right View is the forerunner of the Noble Eightfold Path. So, it makes a lot of sense to learn the teachings.

Basically, I'm trying to encourage your interest in having an academic career in Buddhist Studies, as a means to study the Buddha's teachings in-depth and convey its message, albeit in an academic form, to students, the scholarly community and people everywhere.


How does chanting work in Nichiren Buddhism? This question came up in my book club.

Chanting is a central practice in Nichiren Buddhism. How does it work, what effects or benefits come from it?  Has this changed much between from historical and modern times?

Incidentally, Nipponzan-Myōhōji, a modern religious movement that emerged from Nichiren sect, was my first contact with real-life Buddhist practice. In Nichiren, chanting NA-MU-MYO! HO! REN! GE! KYO! is revered as a symbol of what they call "the true cause of Buddhahood". The idea being, if one never hears about Enlightenment one cannot get onto the path, so in each individual case of Enlightenment, the process must have started with someone dropping the word which planted the seed in the student's mind.

Nichiren (the founder) must have thought very low of his times -- chanting a title of a sutra(!) sounds like a suitable teaching for hell, the inhabitants of which would otherwise have no chance of asking "What does this mean, NA-MU-MYO-HO-REN-GE-KYO? Hm... glory to the Sutra of the Lotus of the True Dharma... So what is this True Dharma thing?" question.

A contemporary Buddhist teacher my friend Dennis Wallez explains:

  Indeed Japan was quite in disarray at the time, torn by wars and famine and persecutions... Nichiren thought this partly was the karmic consequences of the perversion of Buddhism by previous schools. The notion of "Latter days of the dharma" was in full swing too and many teachers saw the local situation as a confirmation...

So to summarize, in Nichiren chanting is both a symbol and practice of seeding the basic seeds, a seemingly primitive work that is never beneath a compassionate Bodhisattva.

This is why Terasawa Junsei, a prominent teacher of Nipponzan-Myōhōji, was (and still is) such a big advocate of chanting NA-MU-MYO-HO-REN-GE-KYO in public, especially in troubled areas such as zones of armed conflicts.


how important is self forgiveness in karma ? I am trying to understand karma, I have and continue to read about intention and letting go. I am struggling with something. Could you help me ?

A) If I acted (unwisely, unkindly, causing suffering), not knowing that what I was doing was wrong, and never realizing it to be wrong, I believe this is neutral.

B) If I acted (unwisely, unkindly, causing suffering), while knowing that what I was doing was wrong, and continued to understand it to be wrong, I believe this is bad.

C) If I acted (unwisely, unkindly, causing suffering), while knowing that what I was doing was wrong, and then saw that the act resulted in something good, I believe this is bad.

D) If I acted (unwisely, unkindly, causing suffering), not knowing that what I was doing was wrong, and later realized it to be wrong, I believe this is neutral. If (now that I understand) I harbor guilt and attach to this guilt I am doing bad. Here I am asked to forgive myself and move on. If I continue to wallow in the guilt then I am doing more bad.

(assuming I am correct on A-C) the problem I have with D is likely based in the faith of my birth (catholic), where I was made to believe that guilt is really like a payment and the worst the act the longer you need to pay for it (like a monetary value) by continuing to hurt yourself with guilty feelings.

in Buddhism, if attaching to guilt is bad, then how long do you need to feel it ? do you just move on as soon as you realize it was wrong ? If the suffering impacted someone else do they have a "say" in how long you cause yourself suffering (if not literally, then in some kind of moral equivalence that you calculate yourself ?)

thank you for sharing your insight.

In my understanding,

The original action is one source of karma.
The hidden agenda (intention,attitude) behind that act is another source of karma.
Our thoughts reflecting on that after it happened is the third source of karma.
Our decision to explain what happened and why, in one specific way, is the fourth source of karma.

Each of the four components can be wholesome or unwholesome, so there are 16 combinations in total, or 16 gradations - from 100% unwholesome, to 100% wholesome. Also, the combinations vary by the timing of their effects, producing a complex mixture of some immediate and some latent results.

In context of this question, what we are interested in is the difference between the last two components.

The thoughts about the event (going over it, analyzing, evaluating oneself) can generate either pride and joy, or shame and guilt. This guilt, by itself, is a dukkha, disease. Maintaining oneself in a maimed and injured condition creates negative karma that keeps the vicious circle going.

The decision to explain what and why happened, in a specific way, is the most important component for the long term effects of the action. What is "specific way"? Usually, real life situations are not unambiguous. Instead, they usually have an element of ambiguity, a quantum element so to speak. In most situations we can come up with a number of narratives or interpretations, that will present situation and your role in it rather differently.

What often happens when we analyze a troublesome situation, is we can't decide which perspective we should take. So we keep going over it again and again, replaying it in our head, which can bring a lot of guilt and suffering. Instead, if we decide on one perspective, and make a firm decision to stick with it - then we can stop replaying the situation, and clearly describe what happened and exactly why, and based on this choice of explanation our future will change accordingly.

The perspective Buddha suggest we should take, is that of responsibility, but at the same time the one that will make us strong, not sick with guilt. Here's what happened, here are the attachments that were at play, here is the confusion that was at play, here's the lust and aversion that were at play. Here's why I thought it was a good idea to act like that at the time. However, now I clearly see how and why my actions created that harmful effect.

It is an important skill, according to my teacher, to never betray one's past decisions. If we decided to act a certain way, we must have done it out of our best understanding at the moment. Given our understanding at the moment, we could not have acted differently (if we could we would). However, if we act now, we will act out of our new best understanding, which may be different this time.

The only function of "taking the blame" is to admit that situation indeed happened the way it happened, and that our actions played a role in that. We were acting out of our best understanding, but because our perspective was limited, we participated in creating these negative results. With our new understanding we can see that a better action is possible, and we want to try it that way next time.

This is called "master mind" as opposed to "leaking mind". Leaking mind is the mind that betrays its own foundation, it's own past decisions all the time. Leaking mind says "oh I was so stupid yesterday" or "so wrong" etc. Master mind has an element of confidence and stability, it honorably inherits its past actions and choices, while never getting attached or stuck in the past and taking into account new information as it becomes available.


What is rhys david dictionary's license for now? What is  rhys david dictionary's license for now?

  Pali-English. Dictionary. EDITED BY. T. W. RHYS DAVIDS F.B.A. D.Sc.
  Ph.D. LL.D. D.Litt and WILLIAM STEDE Ph.D. Personal scientific use
  only. [1921-1925]

The blurb on Amazon.com says (about the PTS dictionary specifically),

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

Looking at Wikipedia's descriptions of copyright durations (USA and UK) suggests that may be so (though I'm not a lawyer).
If you access it via a web site or other publisher, they may (I don't know) have other terms of use.

A PTS news page says,

10 May 2013
Following the generous donation of a long-standing member of the Society, the Pali Text Society is pleased to announce that the following works, whose copyright is owned by the Pali Text Society, are now issued under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licence (CC BY-NC 3.0) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.
The Pali Text Society retains all commercial rights, but permission is granted to reproduce, reformat, transmit and distribute these works for non-commercial use without further need to contact the Society.

So it's CC BY-NC 3.0 at least, and some sources (perhaps not the PTS) suggest it's public domain.
Its content exists (sometimes remixed with other content) on various web sites, which I use for free (i.e. gratis), so I suppose these are "non-commercial" sites which publish it noncommercially.


How did Buddha Explain the Creation Of the World? I have heard that Buddha explained how the world is recreated after a destruction, in Aggan̄n̄a Sutta.

  One tale told by the Buddha in the Aggan̄n̄a Sutta describes the process of recreation on this grand scale. An old world-system has just been destroyed, and its inhabitants are reborn in a new system. To begin with they are spirits, floating happily above the earth, luminescent and without form, name or sex.
  The world in these early stages is without light or land, only water. Eventually earth appears and the spirits come to taste and enjoy it. Their greed causes their ethereal bodies to become solid and coarse and differentiate into male and female, good-looking and ugly. As they lose their luminescence the sun and moon come into being.Gradually the beings fall into further wicked habits, causing themselves - and the earth itself - to become less pleasant.
  Source- BBC

However, the modern science describes the creation of the world in a different way. According to scientists, the first life on earth started in water. Later these water animals came to land and evolved to the types of animals that we see today. It is said that the humans evolved from monkeys. It's evident that Dinosaurs lived on earth before humans.

Which explanation is true? Buddha's or Scientists'? Did Buddha lie When explaining the creation of the world because the people at that time didn't understand these scientific facts?

Very sorry for my bad English.

Which explanation is true? Buddha's or Scientists'? Did Buddha lie When explaining the creation of the world...

No enlightened being lies for any purpose. Scientific knowledge is based on hypothesis. The Dhamma is what the Buddha understood through direct knowledge.

  It is said that the humans evolved from monkeys. It's evident that
  Dinosaurs lived on earth before humans.

In Buddhism, humans are not identified as animals. They devolved from self-luminous gods(brahmas). Not monkeys! Agganna sutta is about how human beings came to dwell on Earth. It doesn't mention about the origin of the animals.

In any case, dinosaur bones being older than human bones doesn't prove that humans came later.

  " they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving
  through the air, glorious — and they stay like that for a very long
  time." -Agganna Sutta

A being with such a form cannot be expected to leave any bones behind when they die. It's only much much later their bodies started to harden.

According to Science, dinosaurs lived between 230 and 65 million years ago. Land plants had evolved on Earth by about 700 million years ago and land fungi by about 1,300 million years ago. According to Agganna sutta, the earth didn't even have trees when the first humans came.

We were here even before the first mushrooms(fungi) appeared on earth:

  Then, mushroom-like plants began to grow so fast that they replaced
  the mud-like ocean. The creatures began to devour them as well, and
  they also found it delicious, like sweet honey and milk. Their body
  hardened more and details began to turn finer. -Agganna Sutta


Can an ordained person keep a late sleep schedule? If a person has health reasons that make sleeping late (say, 3am-11am) a necessity, can such a person appropriately hold monastic vows in the Geluk tradition of Tibetan Buddhism?  Are there certain sleeping restrictions mentioned in the vows?

Yes, such a person can appropriately hold monastic vows in the Geluk tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. There are sleeping restrictions in the Vinaya, but not regarding the time or length of sleep. Although Vinaya states that sleep is an impediment to the three trainings, in any case over-sleeping (are 8 hours of sleep over-sleeping? this is open to interpretation) would not constitute a downfall since it is not the breaking of a vow.

However, sleeping at such hours and for so long would be seen as inappropriate by many. In addition, a monk could hardly stay in a monastery or in a center (even in the West) with such a schedule, because there are (1) monastery-schedules, and (2) rules that are not Vinaya but institutional. It is not rare to have pujas in the morning, etc. Of course, Western institutions are not as strict as  the Tibetan ones (for Tibetan have to wake up at 5:30 am, and if they do not, they are fined by the disciplinarian) but still.

Most of the western sangha are relatively wealthy elderly women who live in their houses, enjoying various floors, living with their cat, great gardens and the like, on their own, and not all taken that seriously by monks.

I suggest you read Lama Yeshe's Advice for monks and nuns.


Four Noble Truths contradicting? I don't even like to post a question like this but I just want to share a misconception that people from other beliefs have regarding Buddhism. Please what this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ws36pd-Q0.

 What this person says is that according to the third noble truth sorrow can be eliminated by getting rid of desire. And when desire is eliminated there is no reason to have a fourth noble truth which talks about the 8 fold path. This is just absolute illogical and misleading statements. But I just do not have the proper knowledge to make my Muslim friends understand why this is wrong. Please do share your views. Thank you

If you compare suffering to a sickness, the first noble truth would be knowing that you are sick. The second noble truth would be knowing the cause of the sickness. The third noble truth would be knowing that the sickness can be cured or knowing that there's a healthy state. The fourth noble truth would be knowing how to cure it or knowing how to reach that healthy state.


I had strange things showing up while meditating So... i turned 15 a few months ago and i discovered some youtube channels that spoke about spiritual ilumination and other stuff,i watched a lot finding myself relating to almost everything there and decided i should try because why not. One day i went to my bed and first i took 5 minutes of controled deep breathes and then closed my eyes and cleared my mind,at that moment i seen "something" from my back like my field of view got bigger. I had my eyes closed but i would still see the things behind me and my room,and all that with my ryes closed. I got scared as this was my very first time experiencing something like this so i opened my eyes. I tryed again after half and hour but i was not calm enough so i went to sleep. The very next day in the morning i went to my desk and had deep breathes again. 5 seconds in and 5 out. Then closed my eyes. After like 1 minute i got really calm but then i started seeing a red thing in front of me. Was looking like a tomato but not perfectly rounded and then my eyes started moving involuntary and then turned down. My 2 questions are : is all i went trough these 2 days good or bad? And why do my eyes move involuntary and turn down.
Thanks.

Your question is about immersion, so let's address that first:

AN4.41:1.1: “Mendicants, there are these four ways of developing immersion further. What four?
There is a way of developing immersion further that leads to blissful meditation in the present life.
There is a way of developing immersion further that leads to gaining knowledge and vision.
There is a way of developing immersion further that leads to mindfulness and awareness.
There is a way of developing immersion further that leads to the ending of defilements.

Your question can then be understood as asking whether there is bliss, knowledge and vision, mindfulness and awareness and the ending of defilements. If not, then this is not right immersion.
Studying more in the suttas, we read that immersion is preceded by seven other steps. We must therefore ask ourselves if those steps have been followed:

AN6.63:13.1: And what is the cessation of sensual pleasures? When contact ceases, sensual pleasures cease. The practice that leads to the cessation of sensual pleasures is simply this noble eightfold path, that is: right view, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right immersion.

And yet even the first step is mysterious. What is right view?

SN45.8:3.1: And what is right view?
Knowing about suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the practice that leads to the cessation of suffering.

These are the four noble truths. Without knowing the four noble truths, we fall into wrong immersion.
Keep studying the suttas. Keep meditating. Find a good teacher. Be a good person.


What is known/taught about yawning during meditation? At some point in life I learned I could focus on some bodily awareness that resulted in the following experience:

Piloerectus; Not once, but it stays throughout the meditation while I keep on focusing.
A smile is slowly coming on my face (slowly as in it could take 20 seconds or so). It intensifies when I focus on that particular bodily feeling. It feels mechanically. When I take a picture of this I genuinely look happy.
Yawning; I cannot suppress this yawning when I focus on that particular bodily feeling. I yawn almost every minute intensely.
Energy swirls through my body. which can even make pains go away. Like pains from stress as facial muscle cramps or so.

This all can instantly go away when I have thoughts of doubt, fear, resentment or any other negative thought.

The smile and energy swirls I understand. Why piloerectus and yawning occur I do not. I am not feeling tired at all when the yawning happens. And when I stop to focus on this particular bodily feeling, the yawning stops. I do not yawn during a whole day, for instance. To me the yawning is a reproducible sign that indicates whether I am focused or not during meditation. But why does it happen?

In this pubmed article it is described that yawning is controlled by dopamine release (amongst other neurotransmitters).

I was wondering if there is something written about this yawning during meditation in the teachings of the Buddha.

There are a whole host of phenomenon that happen at the early stages of meditation.  Some others you might experience are a feeling that your face is swelling, that your sinuses are filled with cotton, your muscles might twitch involuntary, it may feel like your hands or other parts of your body are disappearing, that your body is being twisted, that someone is messing with your hair, and so on and so forth.  None of these mean anything, but they are a good indication that you are just touching the edges of samadhi.  As your concentration deepens, all of these phenomenon will ultimately disappear.


How can a person become a real Buddhist? In this society a lot of people say "I'm a Buddhist" but they're just saying that. So my question is, how can a person become a real Buddhist? And how do we know he's a real Buddhist?

You become a real Buddhist when you walk the path of Dhamma. The Buddhist teaching is to be experienced here and now and to be verified here and now. There are many ways this has been put forward:

Sila - Samadhi - Panna where later is realisation at the experiential level or at the level of wisdom
Pariyatti - Patipatti - Pativedha where the latter is the experience
sutta-maya-panna - cinta-maya-panna - bhavana-maya panna where the latter is experiential wisdom

When you have the 1st vision of the Dhamma your faith never changes. This is because nobody can convince you otherwise of what you have already seen for yourself.


Vibrating Sensation in Middle of forehead during meditation? Recently during my meditation sessions I have been getting a vibrating sensation between the eyebrows sometimes it can be quite intense.

I have looked online and from what I can find it suggests this sensation refers to the "third eye". Just wondering if this is mentioned in any buddhists texts and is sensation normal?

Yes the sensation is a normal condition.

It is just muscle/nerve spasms. They may be happening throughout the day but go largely unnoticed. They are also at level of neuron firings so you typically will not be able to see them physically. During meditation you are probably more aware of the tiny changes in your body. One thing I notice during meditation is how loud my stomach has been this last week. The more you become aware of them the more intense they will probably appear to manifest. Unless it is a medical condition such as a hemifacial spasm they will typically go away on their own.


Relationship with bad parents (kamma and issues) One of the main sources of bad kamma in Buddhism is doing wrong to your parents and not taking care of them. Buddha said it is very very hard to repay your parents, however how should one behave if he or she has bad parents? Maybe a parent that was an alcoholic or didn't take care of him properly, abandoned him, banned from his house or maybe stole from him? There are countless possibilities, what to do?

My father was an alcoholic, and I suffered a lot of grief from him - so I might as well try and answer this one.

The way my first teacher taught me about this (back when my father was still alive and I still encountered him a lot) the circumstances like this come from our karma, specifically from our attachment to decency and spirituality. The more we are attached to decency and to spirituality, the more we hate people who are indecent and lowly, the more we will have to face them. So the only way to stop this particular kind of painful circumstances, is to drop the attachment to decency and to spirituality, by no longer putting decency and spirituality above love and above existence itself. This was the teaching method my first teacher employed, very effective.

The way my last teacher taught me about this, long after my father passed away, is that in such cases freedom comes from forgiveness, understanding, the intent to stop the chain of suffering. We should understand that family issues are passed down the chain, although not necessarily in the same form. When father has certain issues, the child will have certain other issues - that will affect lives of their children and so on. Even my father's behavior was not his own, he inherited it from his childhood family - his father was a very violent guy, a commander of a penal military unit, a place where the criminal soldiers served. Behind a violent alcoholic there is often a hurt little boy. This is important to understand.

So these are two lessons from my Buddhism teachers, one is to let go of attachment to decency and spirituality and abandon hatred and aversion based on them, and two is to understand your parent's own background and suffering.

As to what to do, I think the best way to work with such people is as if you were working with a child. No matter how adult they look or pretend to be, if they act like that they are still immature, far from it. So working with them like you would with your own child, with tough love, compassionate but strict, seems to be the best course of action.


How to be mindful while studying? I am a science student at an university and I practise mindfulness in the Mahasi tradition. My question is, how can I be mindful while studying? This is a very important question for me since most of my time as a student is spent in studying.

Thank you very much.

I am not sure if this fits your tradition, but perhaps it might be a value addition to you or perhaps another reader.

The best source to find out on how to be mindful is to get the information from the Maha Satipatthana Sutta. Here it mentioned that the awareness should be on the 4 foundations of mindfulness (these relate to the aggregates). In doing this you should pay particular attention to arising and passing of phenomena. You have to divide and dissect the foundation that you are looking at - e.g. if you look at body you should divide and dissect until you come to the level of Kalapa (sub atomic particles). You have to look piecing and penetratingly looking inside and out - e.g. if you take the body look at phenomena on the surface and also inside like in the organs. What ever part of the body or if you look at the whole body you should be sensitive to seeing phenomena arising and passing. You should try to actively or passively calm the fabrications.

Now coming back to studying there will be a lot of mental activities. Some of this can be mental or verbal fabrications. You cannot avoid this. But any mental activity creates a sensation. You can keep looking at these sensations with out reaction. Pleasant sensation can be used to eradicate craving, stressful sensation to eradicate aversion and neutral sensations to eradicate delusion (see A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma for the technicalities). Also try keeping your mind focused on the studying. If it goes to something else bring back your mind to the breath for a short while and continue studying keeping your thinking limited to studying. When taking a break whatever object your mind is on keep dividing and dissecting and look at it piercing and penetratingly. Also look at your breathing if you feel agitated or restless when studying for long hours. If you feel sleepy scan your body part by part staying on one place until you can feel something; if your body is already sensitive scan in rapid space. What ever the case keep your mind equanimous (devoid of craving and clinging) towards any sensation you experience.

Hope this is helpful. If you need anymore clarification please comment or post another question.


What is right gifting? I came across this explanation by Buddha,
from the Dana Mahapphala Sutta.

  THE BEST WAY TO GIVE. Or, instead of thinking, ‘When this gift of mine is given, it calms
  my mind. Satisfaction and joy arise,’ he makes a gift, thinking, ‘This is an adornment for the mind, a
  support for the mind.’

I couldn't understand the statement. How does one do this? What should be the state of mind when gifting? When does one start to give gift? Does one have to wait till one's moral conduct is good and has insight?

Giving material things has the purpose to learn letting go, to give up what one assumes to be his own. It's actually not an easy training and very less are really able to give. People usually give like trade, sometimes even a hug farmer joyful feeds his pigs. Neither he nor the pigs have much merits and gains in this way.
When ever you come in a situation "he/she does not have, I have" than just think of "why do I not give" if you don't do it automatically yet.
Even a short delay, listening to the defilements and you have lost:

Verse 116: One should make haste in doing good deeds; one should restrain one's mind from evil; for the mind of one who is slow in doing good tends to take delight in doing evil.
The Story of Culekasataka

It's not good to train this training for certain wordily low purposes: To reach this, to control that, to actually feed what is ones own again, or objected as such, which is mostly the case if you give somebody you are attached to. You are not really giving, but do for certain higher or lower gains.
A support for the mind means, release for the mind. If one really gives up something, the mind do no more hold on it. Whereas if you give something for your joy with it, it still clings on something and would be sad if that joy would be disturbed.
How ever, there are times and occasions where gifts are proper given, so that one has a line to follow and a security to do not unaware foster backyard defilements: Kaladana Sutta: Seasonable Gifts
Atma would not recommend Piya Tan in regard of such issues, since he has certain wrong views and does not understand the training of letting go yet.
A general overview of Dana you may find on the Path to Freedom and if you seek for more "technical" explaining Abhidhamma in Daily Life, by Ashin Janakanbhivamsa [pdf] (or online, switch language) is recommended. How ever, the best way to find out and learn is always doing by one self and by doing it, looking what's going on in oneself, what are the hindrances, what are the results. Is a practice that needs certain mindfulness and wisdom and to maintain and develop such. There are really less people, especially in modern world, who can be even called slaves of Dana (doing it for the great joy by giving), not to speak of people who are masters of Dana, may they have trained (or thought that they do) meditation for many many years, most have not even started to work on the gross defilement, so greedy are they. Yet stinginess is an obstacle fo even reach any Jhanic state...
Here is one useful talk: Sensitivity through generosity. It's not out of reason that the Buddha tells: association with people of right view, joy in giving, hostility, sharing merits... is the foundation for success to gain right view for oneself, yet it requires much sacrify to even come in contact with such people, stay with them.
(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)


How compatible are (Theravada) Buddhism and the Western life? There are a lot of people practicing their religion at home (to some extent). But how practical is that for a Buddhist?

My question came boiling up when a family-member said that I ultimately have to choose between 'my western life' or becoming a Monk because they think they aren't compatible and to be honest, I don't really know.

I feel myself to become quite less social when I practice Buddhism which is by my knowledge a common reaction when you get to see things as they are. The Vinaya Pitika describes 227 rules to ordained Monks for the sake of becoming enlightened. There are many distractions which keeps you from the right path and you will break 220 on average each day.

I woud say Theravadan Buddhism is compatible with the West because it is already happening. Jack Kornfield studied with Ajahn Chah and then went on to found the Insight Meditation Centre which is partially inspired by this practice (though doesn't wholly identify as Theravadan). Ajahn Chah's lineage itself has come to the West with the  Thai Forest Tradition and to quote from here

  They provide centres for monastic training, as well as, teaching and
  practice for the lay community.

So you don't need to be a monk to practice. My own group the Triratna Buddhists are also very influenced by Theravada Buddhism and we have no concept of monks. Even order members are considered to be lay followers.

As Buddhism moves Buddhism changes. As it moves into the West and as Western culture influences into the East then (Theravada) Buddhism will change. But Buddhism will always teach liberation - how could it be any other way. So I would humbly say that yes you can practice but the practice might not be quite as it was before.


Will parents full of Dhamma attract good minds for their babies? Is it more likely that a mind with more positive Kamma and closer to the Dhamma will reborn as a son of a couple that follows the Dhmma? Is there like an attraction due to the Dhamma?

There is a story that Buddha once told a couple that if they have the same religion, similar dana and sila they may meet again in the next life.

In addition to what Suminda said. What usually happens is, whatever is a hidden trait in parents, it attracts a child mind with the same trait manifested explicitly. This works both ways, good and bad. If parents quietly despise imperfect people, they will attract the child mind that openly hates the whole world and may eventually develop a drug addiction or something. The same way, parents with few attachments will attract a child mind that may be too unfettered, perhaps to the point of having issues in school etc. So it's not as much bad => bad and good => good, as it is inner => outer and subtle => explicit.


How to develop Chanda? How to develop Chanda?

Anything you have to add on this subject is welcomed and appreciated.

Chanda (Desire) is the first of the Four iddhipada. An important reading in this regard is the Iddhipada Samyutta - The connected sayings on the four bases of spiritual power. Iddhipaada can be defined as the state of reaching completeness or perfection. Iddhiya: of attaining completion or perfection; pado: root or basis. The root or basis of attaining completion or perfection. Hence it is called iddhipada. Desire is considered one of the iddhipada, the bases of success.  It is said:

  By chanda iddhipada (Chanda Samadhi Padhana Sankhara Samannagata iddhipada) is meant desire to obtain, desire to attain, desire to reach, desire to fulfil, desire to accomplish, The desire indicated here is extreme or excessive desire. There is nothing within or without one's personality that can obstruct that desire. It is the kind of desire that evokes the thought, 'If I do not attain this accomplishment in this life, I shall not rest content. It is better that I die rather than that I shall not attain it.'

One way to develop Chanda is by developing Citta as an iddhipada. Citta iddhipada (Citta Samadhi Padhana Sankhara Samannagata iddhipada) means: attachment to iddhi when one comes in contact with the sasana (Buddha's Dispensation) and hears the Dhamma. It is attachment that is extremely ardent and strong.

  ...One attains satisfaction and tranquillity only when one's mind is absorbed in matters connected with the iddhi. It is like the absorption of the alchemist engaged in the transmutation of the baser metals into gold or silver. Such an alchemist has no interest in anything else but his alchemy. He forgets to sleep or whether he had slept or eaten. He does not notice anything when out walking. Citta is great absorption or attachment of this nature.

For this you require Viriya (great energy and effort.)

  A person with this viriya is infused with the thought that the aim can be attained by energy and effort. He is not discouraged even though it is said to him that he must undergo great hardships. He is not discouraged even though he actually has to undergo great hardships. He is not discouraged even though it is said to him that he must put forth effort for many days, months, and years. He is not discouraged even though he actually has to put forth effort for such long periods.


Lower realms rising? recently i read an article about a troubled young man who was brought to attention by one of his friends to a temple.
Here is a brief description....

A young guy suddenly started acting really weird which was noticed by a good friend of him. This person was a regular guy and he suddenly developed an unnatural state of mind which his friends first assumed to be a typical porn addiction.
But his behavior soon became worse and he started being really indecent and started doing some perverse things like groping women on the bus and such.
He was accompanied by his friend when they traveled to "Ruwan Weli Stupa" (The monument with highest number of Lord Buddha's remains on earth) in hopes that some advice and worshiping the stupa would be sufficient to re-discipline him.
As he was worshiping he started acting weird and the friend asked for the help of monks. As Monks were chanting (In suspicion of the influence of a lower realm) he started talking in a rough voice.
The voice said....
I will not go away without taking him, he is like us.
I was passing by one day when i saw him looking at a picture box, he was by two humans in coitus (Porn) and i cling on to his body. I liked sex too, specially the taste of men. Now i only influence him he watch it and i get to feed.
After further questioning These were revealed....
We are building power among humans, it is easy now that they are seduced easily in the present. Food for us is not rare anymore.
Our kind cant know each other's gender until the season comes. When it comes they rip each other with claws to feed on each other. So we find satisfaction while clinging on to humans and letting them do our bidding.
We have captured the other parts of the world (this happened in Asia), almost all of those humans are born among us when they die. Soon we will establish our power here too (Asia)

This is not some article but a national newspaper published by a one of the most well respected monasteries.
What can we take as reference from the teaching to understand this & What would be the proper cause of action other than precepts?

If the man was a monk, he would eventually be expelled from the monastic order. Similarly, if the man's mind has been consumed by pornography to the  point his behaviour is contrary to social norms, he should probably be forbidden from entering the temple. Often, people with addictions cannot be helped, until those people can recognise for themselves they have a serious problems.

The four brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita, upeka) include equanimity when we wish to help someone but are unable to.

In short, the monks who are responsible for the temple should probably telephone the police to remove the deranged man from temple. Buddhism does not have the power to save everyone.


Possible to intentionally kill without "intention"? The 5 criteria of killing
1) There is life present
2) The person knows "there is life present"
3) Intention to take away the life
4) Action or speech that causes "life is taken away"
5) Life is taken away

Is it possible for a person to fulfil criteria 1, 2, 4 and 5 but not 3?

For example, a person orders me to kill and I did it unwillingly. Many times, I've heard people insisting that it's not counted as killing because the intention to kill is absent. But I kind of disagree thus posting this question for advice.

Perhaps, to explain my understanding. You know an action will cause life to be taken away but chooses to act upon it. That choice itself is the intention.

Quoting from The Pāṭimokkha Rules
Translated & Explained
by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu

  The non-offense clauses state that there is no offense for a bhikkhu who acts unintentionally, not knowing, or without aiming at death. In the Vinita-vatthu, unintentionally is used to describe cases in which a bhikkhu acts accidentally, such as dropping a poorly held stone, brick, or adze; removing a pestle from a shelf and accidentally knocking off another one. Not knowing is used in cases in which the bhikkhu deliberately does an action but without knowing that his action could cause death. An example would be giving food to a friend not knowing that it is poisoned. Not aiming at death is used in cases where the bhikkhu deliberately does an action but does not intend that action to result in death. Relevant examples include trying to help a bhikkhu who is choking on food by slapping him on the back and inadvertently causing his death; telling a bhikkhu to stand on a piece of scaffolding while helping with construction work, only to see the scaffolding collapse; describing the joys of heaven to an audience, only to have a member of the audience decide to commit suicide in hopes of going there.

  Thus, to fulfill the factor of intention here, a bhikkhu must be acting intentionally, knowingly, and aiming at death.

  The word-analysis covers all the same points—although it shuffles the terms around—when it defines intentionally as “having willed, having made the decision knowingly and consciously.” Without teasing out the differences in terminology, we may simply note the important point added in its analysis, which is that an act of manslaughter counts as intentional here only when the bhikkhu has made a clear decision to kill. Thus if he were to strike a person unthinkingly in a sudden fit of rage, without being clear about what his intention was, it would not qualify as “intentional” here. The Commentary seconds this point when it defines having made the decision as “having summoned up a reckless mind state, ‘crushing’ through the power of an attack.” The Sub-commentary does not explain crushing or attack here, but apparently they mean aggressively overcoming, through a brute act of will, any contrary or hesitant thoughts in the mind.

Quoting from Getting the Message (also by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu),

  Killing is never skillful. Stealing, lying, and everything else in the first list are never skillful. When asked if there was anything whose killing he approved of, the Buddha answered that there was only one thing: anger. In no recorded instance did he approve of killing any living being at all. When one of his monks went to an executioner and told the man to kill his victims compassionately, with one blow, rather than torturing them, the Buddha expelled the monk from the Sangha, on the grounds that even the recommendation to kill compassionately is still a recommendation to kill — something he would never condone. If a monk was physically attacked, the Buddha allowed him to strike back in self-defense, but never with the intention to kill. As he told the monks,

    "Even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves."

    -- MN 21


Lies as self defence vs. Physical self defence Why is a lie for the purposes of self defence necessarily unwholesome? Why is using a lie as defence for another from attack considered  parajeeka for a monk when a monk can use physical self defence and it's not parajeeka? Why can't a monk misrepresent reality(lie) for self defense instead of resorting to physical violence?

As long as you know what the truth is why give it to someone who would exploit it?

I was thinking that our intentions aren't unwholesome because we lie but a lie is unwholesome because of our unwholesome intentions. -Metta

The key is intent to deceive and the person understanding the deceptive communication. If the intention to deceive is not there then there is no unwholesome. If you mistakenly believe something and say this it is not breaking the precept of lying because there is no intention to deceive.

Generally, people do not like being deceived, even for their own good. So if you are motivated to deceive for their own good, then this is still lying.

If you make a promise you do not intent to keep this also is lying. If you make a promise which you know will never happen then this is not lying (e.g. I will give you an angle to marry if the sun rises in the North.) The latter type of tact was used on Nanda, in which case the promise was if you meditate.

Also I do not think a monk can resort to violence.

Also need not always tell what you know. You can simply refuse to answer, but if you answer it should be the truth.


Noble Friendship (Kalyana Mitta) in modern times Would "noble friendship" in modern times also refer to dhamma teachings via the Internet? Of course being surrounded by wise people is of course preferable, but how is this exactly to be understood?

Regards

Kalyāṇa is a word translated as "beautiful, charming; auspicious, helpful, morally good", by the way -- not the same word as ariya (which is the word that's usually translated as "noble").

Kalyāṇa is used in lots of other contexts, mostly not to do with "friends" (i.e. where the adjective qualifies a noun other than "friend" or "friendship") -- e.g. in the first search result from that list (AN 10.47), it's an adjective used to describe "good deeds":

  What is the cause, sir, what is the reason for doing good deeds, for performing good deeds?”
  “Ko pana, bhante, hetu ko paccayo kalyāṇassa kammassa kiriyāya kalyāṇassa kammassa pavattiyā”ti?

So what does the adjective mean when it's ascribed to, when it describes, friend and friendship? That's explained in three ways:

What are the qualities of a good friend (what do they 'have')?
What is the function of a good friend (what do they 'do' for you)?
What is the effect of a good friend?

Piya Tan wrote a translation of the Upaḍḍha Sutta with some analysis in its introduction.
Several paragraphs of that introduction include the phrase, "According to the Sutta Commentary" (so I think that his introduction is based on or inline with that commentary).

"What they have?" appears to be these qualities:

  The accomplishment of faith (saddhā,sampadā),
  The accomplishment of moral virtue (sīla,sampadā),
  The accomplishment of charity (cāga,sampadā),
  The accomplishment of wisdom (paññā,sampadā)

"What they do?" appears to be this (I think it's this bit of Piya Tan's introduction that's most worth quoting, because it's the most definitive):

  Spiritual friendship, in other words, is the effecting of the three trainings (ti,sikkhā), that is, in moral
  virtue, mental concentration, and wisdom. On the moral level, the mentor as spiritual friend serves as a
  virtuous exemplar. On the mental level, he is a teacher who gives a meditation subject to the pupil, and
  further inspires and nurtures his meditation and mental cultivation. And on the spiritual level, the mentor motivates his mentee to aspire towards spiritual liberation in this life itself. Spiritual friendship is the mutual
  rejoicing of both the teacher and this pupil in the Dharma as well as in the goals that such a friendship
  entails, namely, awakening.

  Spiritual friendship is the whole of the holy life in the
  sense that the “holy life” (brahma,cariya) is basically our training in moral virtue, that is, the taming and
  refining of our bodily actions and our speech, or what we do and how we communicate with others. This
  is the “external” or social aspect of our spiritual training, so called because our moral training, in an important
  way, is how wholesomely we relate with others in keeping with at least the five precepts.

  Spiritual friendship as moral training is the basis of our mental training, where our spiritual friend is
  our mentor in mental cultivation. In either case, there is a vital level of instruction from the spiritual friend
  and wholesome communication between mentor and mentee. This instruction is sometimes known as “the
  voice of others” (parato ghosa), that is, the beneficial instructions and inspiration from the spiritual
  friend. The Anguttara Commentary explains parato ghosa in the context of giving rise to right view as
  that of “hearing the true Dharma” (saddhamma,savana) (AA 2:157).

  “The voice of another” is one of two ways in which right view arises; the other way is the personal
  effort of wise attention (yoniso manasi,kāra). “Wise attention” here is the mindfulness that is the basis of
  proper mental cultivation leading to mental focus and wisdom. Our wise attention is fortified through
  spiritual friendship by way of an inspiring and experienced guide.

  Moral virtue is our wholesome relationship or interbeing with others, which in turn is also the wholesome
  conditions that nurture our mental cultivation and wisdom (the other two trainings). Moral virtue is
  always present in the arhat. When we are still worldlings, moral virtue is a catalyst to our spiritual development,
  and when we become noble disciples, as awakened beings, moral virtue comes naturally to us.
  We are then spiritual friends to those who are less developed than we are. Hence, spiritual friendship is
  the whole of the holy life.

"What's their effect?" is (explained simply as being) your development of the noble eightfold path.

In summary (my own summary):

It's not just "wise" people, it's "good" people.
IDK to what extent you can learn morality via the internet ...
I think that people do correspond with their mentors -- e.g., in pre-internet times, by writing letters.
I think Buddhism is a.kk.a. Dhamma-vinaya ...

  Dhamma-vinaya [dhamma-vinaya]: "doctrine (Dhamma) and discipline (Vinaya)." The Buddha's own name for the religion he founded.

... the "vinaya" being a.k.a. the monastic code (rules of conduct etc.). That's what I think of and IMO it's to miss something important (including presence, personal example, discipline) if you take the phrase (kalayanamitta) out of (that) context.


Doubting the quick attainments of the Mahasi Tradition I have noticed that a lot of Mahasi practitioners seem to reach sotopanna very quickly.
What is the difference from other methods of Buddhist Meditation and the Mahasi Method, relative to the apparent speed of attainment in the Mahasi Method?
Maybe you think Mahasi style practice does not lead to these better results?
If so, who, what, where, when and why do you think this?
I hope this is an appropriate question but if it's not, that's ok :) metta
PLEASE NOTE: I have,
"doubts about such quick progress in the Mahasi Tradition, not pride"
It appears, many assumed something else.
My mistake, I should have been clearer.

To help get an understanding  into who, what, where, when and why about Mahasi Sayadaw, I started to read “Practical Vipassana Meditation Exercises, by Mahasi Sayadaw: Part 1, Basic Practice. It was interesting to note that nowhere in that whole document any reference being made to the Scriptures (the Suttas). If there were any, @Uuu, even you would have found out for yourself what I came to know of him and his “meditation instructors”. Be it Mahasi, his ‘instructors, you or any one of us in this Group, we can only be 'DISCIPLES' of the Supreme Buddha. And nothing more. If we follow the scriptures (original Suttas & Vinaya) to the letter, we can be guides to others. In this document Mahasi never defined WHAT a Sotapanna / Stream Entry is, and HOW a Stream Entry occur.

In his reply to the OP How does stream entry occur?
@yuttadhammo (Ven.) answered this clearly, and precisely. He took the Rathavinita Sutta (The only sutta that fully explains the seven purifications) to explain the road to become a Sotapanna. This Sutta explains in full the seven purifications (SAPTHA VISUDDHI) taught by the Buddha. The Ratha-vinita Sutta: Relay Chariots  (MN 24; M.I,145)  To fully explain each of these seven purifications would require a separate OP for each.

I took the Thayodhamma sutta(Abandon three things at a time)......  to explain the skills that should be developed to achieve this supreme task.

The Sotāpanna attains an intuitive grasp of Dhamma (right view) and has complete confidence in the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha) WHEN the Sotapanna  have "opened the eye of the Dhamma" (dhamma chakkhu), because he has realized that whatever arises, will cease. (impermanence). His conviction in the true Dhamma is unshakable. Instead of these three supreme protections - The Three Jewels (Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha) – Mahasi talks about “Four Protections”. This is the first time that I came across such. I have read but a very few suttas. So if someone could refer me to where these “Four Protections” came from I’ll be thankful. The Three Jewels are mentioned in the Dhajagga Sutta. Taking  refuge in the 3 jewels of Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha was recommended by the Buddha as providing protection from afflictions. It is specifically mentioned in the **Dhajagga-paritta ("Banner Protection") - SN 11.3.

@Uuu, please compare Mahasi’s explanation of the nine supreme qualities of the Buddha and my reply to the OP Why worship Buddha?. Mahasi describes Lokavidû as “World Knower”.  I have explained this fifth quality “Lokavidu” to mean ‘knower of the three worlds’ – the Human, the Deva, & the Brahma, and as It is one who understands the origin of all worlds, understands the cessation of all worlds, and understands how to escape from all the three worlds.

I can go on and on and on in comparing Mahasi Sayadaw’s article to the Scriptures, but I do not want to. It should be clear to you by now, that WHERE those who fall into such trappings will go NO-WHERE. Let us now analyze our lives. By not realizing the truth, we have travelled this long and sorrowful cycle of birth and death, with great suffering and pain. Due to ignorance and delusion we perceive self in what is not self. When we are caught up in this delusion, we view, perceive and think erroneously. These wrong views prevail in the world until a very few amongst us accept only the original suttas – the scriptures – and be true to it – be committed to it. The Supremely Enlightened One reveals the true nature ONLY if we commit to the Truth. The Blessed One proclaimed how one can achieve deliverance from ignorance and delusion,  but hardly anyone amongst us will ever get there.

Supreme Buddha explained this WHY with a simile. The Blessed One placed a little soil on the tip of a fingernail, and compared that to all the soil on this great Earth. The soil on the tip of the fingernail is insignificant in comparison to the soil on this great Earth. Even so insignificant, are the beings who reach perfect sanctity, the final liberation from suffering. Here Buddha is referring to Sotapanna Disciples.

A Sotāpanna (Pali) or "He who entered(āpanna) the stream(sota)." ‘stream” is a metaphor for the third of the Four Noble Truths, Noble Eightfold Path. A stream which rigidly flows will not stop until it enters the sea. A Sotapanna has completely entered in to the Eightfold Noble Dhamma Path (has gained the first magga-phala). So he will surely achieve Arhathood within seven births that are born in human and heavenly happy realms and his spiritual development will not descend.

Therefore, it is clear that this is not something that can be accomplished effortlessly. Each individual has to put forth the necessary effort, and work out his own deliverance with mindfulness. A noble disciple, who possesses unflinching energy with firm determination to realize the Four Noble Truths, will be able to work out his deliverance.

Let’s Live Close to the Perfect One, the Tathagata.


Which Pau Auk branch to stay at? I am writing to you today for your advice.  I have been considering ordination in the Pau Auk tradition. I am planning a trip to stay for a month in May to see what the life is like.  I am undecided whether to go to the main monastery in Mawlamyine or pyin oo lwin branch.  I was hoping you could provide any information to help this decision.  I am a Westerner from the USA if that has any influential factor.  Thank you very much!  With metta,

From my experience in the monastery located at Mawlamyine is that they are able to greet, accomodate with all that they might need and guide foreigners (that are quite numerous at times) with proper care. I have met a lot of very inspiring foreign/local lay followers and monks there.

The ordination process is fairly simple and straightforward (I would advice, if you were to go there, to ask for a "kuti" which is a hut, after ordination as you're more likely to have a suitable one that hasn't a leaky roof or that is being destroyed by termites), you usually have a short daily interview with a teacher for questions in regards to your practice (have you already been acquainted with the Pa-auk method of practicing ?). And if ever you wished I'm reasonably sure that you could also visit the one in Pyin oo lwin (and perhaps beyond ? There are a lot of different places foreigners can go to).

With regards to the comments to your initial post, I would nevertheless suggest reflecting on the decision as there might also be a lot of different opportunities to stay in monasteries in the United states and cannot foresee what may happen with the local conflicts there, I reckon uncertainty is an underlying reality wherever we are. But please do be careful ! (you can check restricted areas to avoid at all times). I still do know numerous foreign monks there who engage with great dedication to the path without meeting substantial obstacles related to these conflicts up until now.

Also, please do consider that May is a very hot season in Myanmar.

With mettā.


Body energy and vibrations I’ve recently started meditation after a very stressful time. I’m having strong vibrations and energy. It feels like I’m starting to learn to control it some. My mind is telling me it can be used used to heal others? I’m trying to figure this all out, but it’s very powerful.

In "Awareness Itself", Thanissaro Bhikkhu reported this from the life of his teacher Ajaan Fuang:

  A Bangkok magazine once carried the serialized autobiography of a
  lay meditator who used his powers of concentration to treat diseases.
  One installment mentioned how he had visited Ajaan Fuang, who had
  certified that he (the layman) had attained jhana. This didn't sound
  like Ajaan Fuang's style, but soon after the magazine came out,
  unusual numbers of people came to the wat under the impression that
  Ajaan Fuang, like the author of the autobiography, could treat
  illnesses through meditation. One woman asked him if he treated kidney
  diseases, and he answered, "I treat only one kind of disease: diseases
  of the mind."

Supernaturally healing others' physical illnesses in any way, is not a part of Buddhist practice.

However, healing one's mind and helping others to heal their minds (if you're a teacher), is part of Buddhist practice.

For example, Ajaan Fuang told another person:

  After the (cancer) treatment Ajaan Fuang visited her at the hospital. She told
  him that she had been able to concentrate her mind so as to endure the
  pain, but it had left her exhausted. He advised her: "You can use the
  power of concentration to fight off pain, but it squanders your
  energy. You have to approach the pain with discernment, to see that
  it's not you. It's not yours. Your awareness is one thing, the pain is
  something separate. When you can see it in this way, things will be
  easier."

The Buddha taught this in SN 22.1 (below), instead of supernaturally healing people.

  "When this was said, the Blessed One said to me, 'So it is,
  householder. So it is. The body is afflicted, weak, & encumbered. For
  who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true
  health, except through sheer foolishness? So you should train
  yourself: "Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be
  unafflicted." That is how you should train yourself.' That's how I was
  sprinkled by the Blessed One with the deathless ambrosia of a Dhamma
  talk."

Treatment of medical conditions is best left to medical professionals. The Buddha forbade monks from providing services of medicine, surgery or pharmacy to lay people in DN 2.

The Buddha also advised people to take good care of their health, for e.g. he advised against overeating in the Donapaka Sutta.


How to increase my potential in daimoku? What if i cant chaant on a regular basis ? I want to increase my number of hours and i don't understand how to do it ?

Daimoku simply refers to the reciting of the title of the Heart Sutra. While this is a Tendai tradition, all Tendai monks would have been intimately familiar with the actual content of the Sutra. What you are asking is similar to "how can I get a better grade on my book report by just reading the cover?".

The Heart Sutra states: there is no gain. Daimoku is a method, a vessel to get you to the other side. There's no point in finding a bigger boat as you won't be carrying it on your back once you reach the other side. Like you would leave the boat on the shore, Daimoku will just drop away. It's not a question of how much you recite, but of how.


Definition of Sathpurisha What is the definition of "Sathpurisa/Sathpurusha" according to the Buddha?

Please provide sutta references.

Metta.

How about the eponymous Sappurisa Sutta (AN 4.73):

  "Now, a person endowed with these four qualities can be known as 'a
  person of integrity.' Which four?

  "There is the case where a person of integrity, when asked, does not
  reveal another person's bad points, to say nothing of when unasked.
  Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who
  speaks of another person's bad points not in full, not in detail, with
  omissions, holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable
  one is a person of integrity.'

  "Then again, a person of integrity, when unasked, reveals another
  person's good points, to say nothing of when asked. Furthermore, when
  asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of another
  person's good points in full & in detail, without omissions, without
  holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a
  person of integrity.'

  "Then again, a person of integrity, when unasked, reveals his own bad
  points, to say nothing of when asked. Furthermore, when asked, when
  pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of his own bad points in
  full & in detail, without omissions, without holding back. Of this
  person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of integrity.'

  "Then again, a person of integrity, when asked, does not reveal his
  own good points, to say nothing of when unasked. Furthermore, when
  asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of his own
  good points not in full, not in detail, with omissions, holding back.
  Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of
  integrity.'

  "Monks, a person endowed with these four qualities can be known as 'a
  person of integrity.'"

And also the eponymous Sappurisa Sutta (MN 113):

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through having a
  high-ranking family that the quality of greed goes to its end; it's
  not through having a high-ranking family that the quality of
  aversion... the quality of delusion goes to its end. Even though one
  has not gone forth from a high-ranking family, if — practicing the
  Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, practicing masterfully — he is one who
  follows the Dhamma, he is to be honored for that, praised for that.'
  So, giving priority just to the practice, he neither exalts himself
  for having a high-ranking family nor disparages others. This is the
  quality of a person of integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through having a family
  of extensive wealth that the quality of greed goes to its end; it's
  not through having a family of extensive wealth that the quality of
  aversion... the quality of delusion goes to its end. Even though one
  has not gone forth from a family of extensive wealth, if — practicing
  the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, practicing masterfully — he is one
  who follows the Dhamma, he is to be honored for that, praised for
  that.' So, giving priority just to the practice, he neither exalts
  himself for having a family of extensive wealth nor disparages others.
  This is the quality of a person of integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through being well-known
  & highly regarded that the quality of greed goes to its end; it's not
  through being well-known & highly regarded that the quality of
  aversion... the quality of delusion goes to its end. Even though one
  is not well-known & highly regarded, if — practicing the Dhamma in
  line with the Dhamma, practicing masterfully — he is one who follows
  the Dhamma, he is to be honored for that, praised for that.' So,
  giving priority just to the practice, he neither exalts himself for
  being well-known nor disparages others. This is the quality of a
  person of integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through gains that the
  quality of greed goes to its end; it's not through gains that the
  quality of aversion... the quality of delusion goes to its end. Even
  though one is not one who gains robe-cloth, alms-food, lodgings, &
  medicinal requisites for the sick, if — practicing the Dhamma in line
  with the Dhamma, practicing masterfully — he is one who follows the
  Dhamma, he is to be honored for that, praised for that.' So, giving
  priority just to the practice, he neither exalts himself for his gains
  nor disparages others. This is the quality of a person of integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through being a
  Dhamma-speaker that the quality of greed goes to its end; it's not
  through being a Dhamma-speaker that the quality of aversion... the
  quality of delusion goes to its end. Even though one is not a
  Dhamma-speaker, if — practicing the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma,
  practicing masterfully — he is one who follows the Dhamma, he is to be
  honored for that, praised for that.' So, giving priority just to the
  practice, he neither exalts himself for being a Dhamma-speaker nor
  disparages others. This is the quality of a person of integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through being a
  wilderness dweller that the quality of greed goes to its end; it's not
  through being a wilderness dweller that the quality of aversion... the
  quality of delusion goes to its end. Even though one is not a
  wilderness dweller, if — practicing the Dhamma in line with the
  Dhamma, practicing masterfully — he is one who follows the Dhamma, he
  is to be honored for that, praised for that.' So, giving priority just
  to the practice, he neither exalts himself for being a wilderness
  dweller nor disparages others. This is the quality of a person of
  integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'It's not through being one who
  eats only one meal a day that the quality of greed goes to its end;
  it's not through being one who eats only one meal a day that the
  quality of aversion... the quality of delusion goes to its end. Even
  though one is not one who eats only one meal a day, if — practicing
  the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, practicing masterfully — he is one
  who follows the Dhamma, he is to be honored for that, praised for
  that.' So, giving priority just to the practice, he neither exalts
  himself for being one who eats only one meal a day nor disparages
  others. This is the quality of a person of integrity.

  "But a person of integrity notices, 'The Blessed One has spoken of
  non-fashioning even with regard to the attainment of the first jhāna,
  for by whatever means they construe it, it becomes otherwise from
  that.'  So, giving priority to non-fashioning, he neither exalts
  himself for the attainment of the first jhāna nor disparages others.
  This is the quality of a person of integrity.

  "A person of integrity notices, 'The Blessed One has spoken of
  non-fashioning even with regard to the attainment of the dimension of
  neither perception nor non-perception, for by whatever means they
  construe it, it becomes otherwise from that.' So, giving priority to
  non-fashioning, he neither exalts himself for the attainment of the
  dimension of neither perception nor non-perception nor disparages
  others. This is the quality of a person of integrity.

  "A person of integrity, completely transcending the dimension of
  neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the
  cessation of feeling & perception. When he sees with discernment, his
  effluents are ended. This is a monk who does not construe anything,
  does not construe anywhere, does not construe in any way."


Problems with Inactivity My question is basically as to what constitutes skillful and unskillful activity.  I noticed I return to unskillful craving-related activities when I am idle. However, I cannot ascertain what is skillful in terms of activities. I would think the application of effort is important in terms of an activity, because I am often contemplating/analyzing ideas, but in a slightly lazy way.

Concretely, is idleness bad? For example, I often take public transport, wherein I contemplate certain subjects. But, I often tell myself I should read in public transport instead.

I think to me, some contemplative activity occurs when idle, but it is not focused, nor effortful. Can mere contemplation without much effort or focus be called meditation? Or is it simply wasting time?

Thank you.

EDIT: Also, I would think activity and industriousness generates energy in some sense. What states accompany idleness? (e.g. lethargy, fragmentation, etc.)

Skillful activity is getting your head and your heart to respect each other, and in being mindful as you go about in life. Then your head and your heart can take each other far when you can remain mindful, even amidst the hustle and bustle of everyday life. Your heart needs the help of your head to generate and act on more skillful emotions. Your head needs your heart to remind you that what's really important in life is putting an end to suffering. They need each other.  When you come to this realism, you will dwell in “kaya passaddi”.

To explain the above, I must give you another meaning to words like “Kaya”. Such words come under Adhi-vacana – meaning - the same word has different meanings depending on the sutta, and how it gets used. Here “kaya” refers to action; action of the mind. So, “passaddi” refers to serene, tranquil nature of action. Actions of mind become tranquil only when the mind is devoid of “heat”, resulting from the existence of defilements such as lobha (greed) and dosa (aversion).

There is a tendency of mind to grasp objects. The action of mind (kaya) is always to grasp something. When one’s mind reaches the stage of passaddi (quietude, serenity), the action of grasping takes place in a tranquil manner.  A person who has developed this quietude of mind discerns greed or aversion exactly at the time that these qualities appear in his mind. This discernment which synchronizes with the arising of greed or aversion in mind is the correct way of “anupassana”. Anupassana means “discard according to the principles learned” (“anu” means according to and “passana” means to get rid of).

Let’s take an example where a youth coming face to face with a pretty girl. The sight of a pretty girl is a sensuous sense object for a young guy. If this guy is one who cultivates good or worthwhile qualities in the mind, then, he sense the arising of greed at the sight of the pretty girl. Therefore, he applies “anupassana” in respect of the sense object. Likewise, if this girl walks past the boy completely ignoring him, that could cause anger in him. If the boy could note the anger in his mind, then, he applies “anupassana”. As his sole objective was to maintain a wholesome state of mind, devoid of greed and aversion, he was successful in doing so at the sight of a pretty girl. This is meditation, if you take it in its truest sense of meaning.

When you conduct yourself in this way, in whatever you do, or wherever that you go, then you experience that more often than not, your body calms down and your mind is completely relaxed. Your brain's thinking is slower, your mind is clear and you may even feel slightly drowsy or idle. But worry not, as this is “being intelligent”. Being intelligent signifies being able to exist with a happy, blissful mind. Happiness is the tranquil nature of mind. Happiness arises in mind. It manifests through bodily and verbal actions.  Such a person will go about things in a happy, blissful way.

However, such a mental state is shrouded with our own suffering if we cannot get our head and heart to respect each other, and in being mindful. Once this is done and once the suffering is eliminated, dormant happiness begins to surface in a mind. Then anything that you do constitutes skillful activity.


Understanding Saṅkhāra in dependent origination as *choices* of body, speech and mind? Continuing to try to understand Dependent Origination from my own reading of the suttas as well trying to grok the understanding of other skilled practitioners and I've come across an interesting debate. The second nidana of D.O. is commonly translated as 'volitional factors' or 'choices' as seen by this translation of SN 12.2:

  And what are choices? There are three kinds of choices. Choices by way
  of body, speech, and mind. These are called choices.

However, I've detected that maybe not all skilled practitioners on this forum agree that this is an accurate translation? It has been suggested that the best means of figuring this out - as the Buddha instructed! - is to put it to empirical test in personal meditation practice. Marvelous suggestion and I'm hoping to conduct just such an experiment!

However, I want to nail down the actual disagreement if there is one - I'm still not entirely sure there is - and to figure out how to setup the experiment to reveal the truth.

First, I've seen alternative translations on this site which omit the 'volitional' or 'choices' connotation and use the alternative 'accumulated tendencies' to describe the Saṅkhāra. Is it agreed by Theravada that this is the proper translation? How about by Mahayana?

I've found support for the proposition that not all Saṅkhāra is intentional from SN 12.38:

  If you don’t intend or plan, but still have underlying tendencies,
  this becomes a support for the continuation of consciousness. When
  this support exists, consciousness becomes established. When
  consciousness is established and grows, there is rebirth into a new
  state of existence in the future. When there is rebirth into a new
  state of existence in the future, future rebirth, old age, and death
  come to be, as do sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress.
  That is how this entire mass of suffering originates.

Second, what is the proper translation? ... assuming there is disagreement that 'accumulated tendencies' is the proper translation - even though it omits the connotation of choice. Could it simply be 'actions resulting from ignorance?'

Third, is it proper to think of the labored breathing that comes from the arising of disturbing emotions as Saṅkhāra? It does seem to me to be non-volitional... Is this right?

Fourth, is it an accumulated tendency? Perhaps some Saṅkhāra are accumulated habits that may involve some measure of choice and some are simply non-volitional and have nothing to do with 'accumulation' per se? The labored breathing or change in breathing that comes involuntarily from the arising of disturbing emotions... the fact of it itself does not seem to me to be accumulated? Perhaps the 'accumulation' refers to some aspect of it - the extent or intensity - that could very well be accumulated? Like some people might have a very slight ripple while others - because of accumulated tendencies - might hyperventilate?

Fifth, it's been suggested that when one attains a certain proficiency in meditation the true definition of Saṅkhāra can be seen, but what level of proficiency is necessary to reveal the truth and in what form of meditation? What is the minimum level of competence necessary to verify this and the kind of type of meditation necessary?

Visualizing the experiment... I imagine one must be able to calm the mind to a sufficient degree that one can witness the waves generated when a disturbing emotion arises in much the same way we are easily be able to notice the waves generated when a rock hits a still pond. The waves would be the Saṅkhāra (some action of breath or speech or mind?) and the question would be whether there was choice involved or if any aspect of the wave was a characteristic reinforced through accumulation?

Help or ideas appreciated!

skilled practitioners

Yes.

  The second nidana of D.O. is commonly translated as 'volitional factors' or 'choices'

The above is wrong. "Volition" is 1st mentioned at nama-rupa.

  There are three kinds of choices. Choices by way of body, speech, and mind. These are called choices.

The Pali is kaya, vaci & citta sankhara, which are defined in MN 44 as in & out breathing; initial & sustained thought; and perception & feeling.

Breathing conditions the state of the body = kaya sankharo = body conditioner.

Thought conditions speech = vaci sankharo = verbal conditioner.

Perception & feeling condition the state of the mind = citta sankhara = mind conditioner.

  I've detected that maybe not all skilled practitioners on this forum agree that this is an accurate translation?

D.O. was hijacked to create a theory of reincarnation to provide moral teachings to people. Not all practitioners teach D.O. the same because some monks deliberately don't teach the truth but teach skillful means.

  It has been suggested that the best means of figuring this out - as the Buddha instructed! - is to put it to empirical test in personal meditation practice.

Yes. My explanation accords with meditation practice.

  I've found support for the proposition that not all Saṅkhāra is intentional from SN 12.38:

The above is irrelevant because it is not about the 2nd condition sankhara. It is about "becoming" or "patiṭṭhā
 viññāṇa", similar to AN 3.76. It says:

  When consciousness is established and grows, there is production of a new state of existence (bhavā) in the future.

Note: Bhikkhu Sujato translations are often ignored by serious scholars; particularly anything about dependent origination.

  Second, what is the proper translation? ... assuming there is disagreement that 'accumulated tendencies' is the proper translation - even though it omits the connotation of choice. Could it simply be 'actions resulting from ignorance?'

You are bouncing too far ahead, from ignorance to kamma. Kamma does not occur until volition, which starts at nama-rupa and then starts again at attachment.

The word "anusaya" means "underlying tendencies" and is often mentioned after contact, such as in MN 148. My point is the use of the word "anusaya" does not indicate any of the specific 12 conditions.

While "anusaya" is part of ignorance; the word "anusaya" is used in different places in the teachings.

  Third, is it proper to think of the labored breathing that comes from the arising of disturbing emotions as Saṅkhāra? It does seem to me to be non-volitional... Is this right?

Correct. This is the correct view of kaya-sankhara, as confirmed by meditation.

  Fourth, is it an accumulated tendency?

No. The underlying tendencies are part of ignorance (AN 7.11). They "asava" or "flow out" at ignorance (MN 9). They cause the breathing (kaya sankhara) to become laboured and also can trigger discursive thoughts & memories (vaci & citta sankhara).

  Perhaps some Saṅkhāra are accumulated habits

No. Please do not use Mahayana to interpret Pali. Nagarjuna was wrong about sankhara, the same as most Theravada commentators are wrong.

"Accumulated tendencies", which is an energetic drive, form part of ignorance. The "sankhara" they trigger may be classed as "habitual thoughts" however the underlying drive or tendency is part of ignorance.

In meditation, when you crush a discursive thought, the pulsating energy can still remain.

The discursive thought is "sankhara". The pulsating underlying energy is part of "ignorance", as clearly described in MN 9. Read MN 9, the very end of the sutta.

  that may involve some measure of choice

No. There is no choice at sankhara. Sankhara is the opposite. It is non-choice. The choice occurs at nama-rupa, when nama-rupa feels, perceives & has contact with the sankhara. Refer to MN 19, which clearly describes how Buddha made a choice to end the discursive thoughts.

  and some are simply non-volitional

Sankhara are non-volitional.

  and have nothing to do with 'accumulation' per se?

Not all underlying tendencies are "accumulated" from the past. Some underlying tendencies are in-born (refer to MN 64, beginning of sutta).

  The labored breathing or change in breathing that comes involuntarily from the arising of disturbing emotions...

Yes!

  the fact of it itself does not seem to me to be accumulated?

The ignorant emotion may be accumulated and "stored". But the sankhara is not accumulated. Each sankhara is a new sankhara.

  Perhaps the 'accumulation' refers to some aspect of it -

Pali does not use the term "accumulated". Forget this term.

  Fifth, it's been suggested that when one attains a certain proficiency in meditation the true definition of Saṅkhāra can be seen

Indeed.

  but what level of proficiency is necessary to reveal the truth and in what form of meditation?

Clear mind established in breathing.

Clear mind must be able to see the arise of discursive thoughts out of relative empty or thoughtless mind.

  Visualizing the experiment... I imagine one must be able to calm the mind to a sufficient degree that one can witness the waves generated when a disturbing emotion arises

Yes!

  in much the same way we are easily be able to notice the waves generated when a rock hits a still pond.

Yes!

  The waves would be the Saṅkhāra (some action of breath or speech or mind?)

Waves are formed by energy. The energy is from ignorance. The waves are sankhara.

Its not "action". Its "motion" of breath, thought or feeling/perception.

  and the question would be whether there was choice involved

There is no choice at this level. You should already understand when distracting thoughts arise in meditation (when you want to concentrate) they are not a "choice".

  or if any aspect of the wave was a characteristic reinforced through accumulation?

No. They are not reinforced at "sankhara".

They are reinforced at nama-rupa, when nama "chooses" to give "attention" to those sankhara. Remember, "nama" is "feeling, perception, intention/choice, contact & attention".

Again, read MN 19, the part where the Buddha mentions "inclination of mind". The word "inclination" is "namati", the verb of "nama".

The ignorant sankhara is either reinforced at nama-rupa, by giving attention to the ignorant sankhara; or, otherwise, the ignorant sankhara is cut & stopped at nama-rupa.

  Help or ideas appreciated!

Study very carefully or meditatively page 3 to 6 of this link: Shape of Suffering by Bhikkhu Thanissaro.

Or read my blog: Dependent origination: Namarupa and here: Dependent origination: Sankhara


Does downvoting an answer qualify as divisive and harsh speech? In a comment to an answer on this site I saw this:

To the folks who insist on downvoting, please note that downvoting is
extremely unhelpful and actually qualifies as divisive and harsh
speech.

Do others agree? Does downvoting an answer necessarily qualify as divisive and harsh speech? I've thought of it as a form of feedback. Of course, if it is possible to elaborate and provide more constructive feedback then by all means...
Does downvoting violate the precept on correct speech?

Divisive speech is speech that sets people up against each other. Divisive speech sows the seeds of conflict and suffering.
A typical example of divisive speech is telling one person or group of people something negative about another person or group of people, usually in private. This gives one side a reason to generate aversion towards the other side.
Harsh speech is rude or offensive speech usually directed at its object. For example when you disagree with a person's understanding of Buddhism you tell him or her that he or she is an idiot, completely confused about right Dharma etc.
Harsh speech sows the seeds of conflict and suffering by giving the other person a reason to generate aversion towards you and your opinions. This is especially dangerous and harmful if your opinions are actually right and beneficial, because it creates a reason for the other person to hate what's right and beneficial!
In both cases Buddha made exception for the senior bhikkhus to censor and reprimand the novice bhikkhus. He compared it with a surgeon causing temporary pain to a patient for the sake of long-term benefit. He also said, not speaking up when someone is wrong according to Dharma is by itself a problem, because it enables the wrong behavior or understanding to endure.
Finally, Buddha said that when saying things that are beneficial but unpleasant to others we must have a good sense of timing and tact, to say it in the most acceptable and the least harmful way.
From all the above we can understand that negative feedback is acceptable and even encouraged in Buddhism, provided it's done properly to make sure it lands well.
I don't think downvoting can qualify as divisive speech, because we are not (privately) setting up people against each other. Someone may say that it creates the reasons for other people to dislike the downvoted answer, but that would only be true if the answer could not be upvoted by someone else who finds it right and beneficial. At the end, it's the cumulative effect of multiple votes that matters, not a single up or down vote.
As to whether downvoting qualifies as harsh speech creating a reason for the author to dislike the downvoter, I think this would be true if the votes were not anonymous. However the way it is done on this site, no one can see who has voted something up or down so unless you tell the person you did it, their frustration does not have a specific object. This way it serves as a signal that their answer was not 100% acceptable by all readers which by itself is useful feedback IMO.
Then again, I think this falls into the territory of "the right timing and a sense of tact". Sometimes a gentle comment is more appropriate and sometimes a downvote or even a moderators flag is the right way to go.
Just my 2 cents.