If I undergo suffering now, will my next birth be better? This answer points out that Karma is not something which is accumulated.

Hence considering karma as just cause & effect, if I undergo suffering now, like disease, disability, etc, will my future births be better since the cause has yielded a result and that cause is exhausted and will not influence my future births any more. So more suffering I undergo now, more causes I am exhausting ?

I never really understood this view, but it seems to have been held by the Niganthas. See MN 101 for a detailed argument against this sort of reasoning (too long to quote here).

Basically, though, it is like saying that if I have taken poison, I should take more poison so I feel the poisoning more quickly and thus somehow work out the result of the original poison quicker. Isn't that a ridiculous idea?

If I have performed karma X in the past that has result A in the future, performing other karmas Y and Z that also have result A doesn't do anything (except perhaps coincidentally - e.g. cutting off my arm means I can't experience pain in my hand) to affect karma X.

Another fallacy here is the idea that experiencing suffering leads to future happiness (in a way that pleasure doesn't). Really, to be objective, your question would have to include pleasure, in which case it would be, "If I undergo pleasure and pain in this life, will my next rebirth be better?" to which the answer is of course no.

An important concept to always keep in mind, according to the Buddha's teaching, is that pleasure and pain don't lead to pleasure or pain, it is good and evil that lead to pleasure and pain.


Introduction to Samadhi meditation Can anyone give me a brief introduction into practicing samadhi meditation? I could start saying i understand the common principles of meditation. I had practiced a peacefull breath based meditation in the past, but i didn't have any instruction whatsoever. Recently in my life i been practicing vipassana meditation, but i ended dropping it. I think samadhi meditation may be what i'm looking for for this moment in my life.

Insight meditation is what you ultimately strive at. You can start with Samadhi and progress to insight.

When getting instructions for Samadhi meditation it is best you get this from a competent teacher who can guide you. Have a look at the World Buddhist Directory to see if you can locate some on in your area: http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/. If you want to try out using Anapana to develop Samadhi and them progress to Vippassana perhaps you can also try out a course at: https://www.dhamma.org/en/index. (There are over 200 centres world wide.)

In case you are in the receptive area some relevant centres maybe (check if the do the type of Samatha mediation you want to practice):

http://bhavanasociety.org/
http://www.dhammasukha.org/
http://www.dhammatalks.org/
http://www.imsb.org/ (Though the name suggests insight the teacher is from Pa Auk tradition hence competent to teach Samatha)
http://cms.bswa.org.au/
http://www.amaravati.org/
http://www.samatha.org/


Can anything in Buddhist theory explain phenomena like Buck Fever? A surprising number of people whom I know, who are generally kind and compassionate, are also avid hunters or at least enthusiastically support hunting by others. They feel hunting is a healthy activity and a good way to provide food. They site biblical references to man having dominion over animals. They feel hunting is part of a tradition that should be upheld. There are also a couple who feel it's a necessary skill to learn for the inevitable doomsday; but that's a whole other thing. ;-)

So these are people who feel good about hunting. At least in theory. But there is a phenomena called Buck Fever which is described as intense nervousness by inexperienced (and sometimes very experienced) hunters. There is a video circulating around the internet now showing a little girl experiencing this "buck fever" and while it's being shared by hunting enthusiasts who think it's great, I couldn't help but feeling disturbed watching it. To me it looks like horror in the guise of exhilaration.

In Buddhism, we understand that any intentional killing will have consequences sooner or later and this is not something to be taken lightly. I wonder if this intense mind and body reaction to killing (or the intention to kill) can be explained by anything in the Abhidhamma or Buddhist theory in general. It's really intellectual curiosity about whether the mind can cause the body to malfunction when the mind perceives something on a deeper level than a person's logical reasoning. Or perhaps it's something else entirely. But I'm interested if Buddhism has anything to teach us about this. Thank you.

Angulimala (finger garland) Bandit was probably the most ruthless serial killer during Buddha's time.  I read somewhere but didnt do much research on it that in his previous life he offered food to previous buddha or arahat who was tired and weak from hunger, after that in every life, Angulimala had extraordinary strength than everyone around him.  in one of his lives he was a wild buffalo attacking the domesticated buffaloes.  The villagers got upset and set up a lynching mob to hunt him down.  He was eventually captured, tortured, and killed.  He wanted to take revenge on those who killed him.  Among the villagers, there was a girl who watched the lynching with teary eyes.   She became his mother in his last life (which woulda been his last victim if Buddha didnt intervene) and the villagers became his victims.  However, i dont think he took pleasure in killing but rather was misguided.     Kalayanamitra is certainly a blessing.


How can anyone who hasn't realised the truth, claim that Mahatma Buddha or any other person in history realised God or the Truth? Isn't it possible that whatever they have realised is just a psychological effect? Doing continuously hard practices leads to affect their mind and they tend to believe that, yes, this is the truth. They started lying to themselves that they know the truth?
I truly respect their teachings which shows us the path to live a good life. I am just talking about the real truth (if there is any).

With love.

The truth of the Buddha is the method to end suffering. When a person tests the method & it works, they know the truth of the method, similar to when medicine is effective in curing in a sickness.

In Buddhism, there is no truth apart from personal verification, as taught:

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you say, 'The Teacher is our respected mentor. We speak thus out of respect for the Teacher'?"

  "No, lord."

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you say, 'The Contemplative says this. We speak thus in line with the Contemplative's words'?"

  "No, lord."

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you dedicate yourselves to another teacher?"

  "No, lord."

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you return to the observances,
  grand ceremonies, & auspicious rites of common contemplatives &
  brahmans as having any essence?"

  "No, lord."

  "Is it the case that you speak simply in line with what you have known, seen, & understood for yourselves?"

  "Yes, lord."

  "Good, monks. You have been guided by me in this Dhamma which is to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be
  realized by the observant for themselves. For it has been said, 'This
  Dhamma is to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification,
  pertinent, to be by the observant for themselves,' and it was in
  reference to this that it was said.

  Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta


What are these three things Buddha cannot do? According to this page from BuddhaNet, it is mentioned that there are three things Buddha cannot do. They are not mentioned in there and I don't know how reliable the source is.

  The Buddha is omniscient but he is not omnipotent. He is capable of innumerable feats but there are three things he cannot do. Also, a
  Buddha does not claim to be a creator of lives or the Universe.

I just found this question discussed on Dhamma Wheel. However, most of the replies are opinion-based.

The closest I can find so far, from DN 29, are 9 things that enlightened persons (arahants) cannot do, which apply to the Buddha too:

  A mendicant who is perfected—with defilements ended, who has completed
  the spiritual journey, done what had to be done, laid down the burden,
  achieved their own goal, utterly ended the fetters of rebirth, and is
  rightly freed through enlightenment—can’t transgress in nine respects.
  A mendicant with defilements ended can’t deliberately take the life of
  a living creature, take something with the intention to steal, have
  sex, tell a deliberate lie, or store up goods for their own enjoyment
  like they did as a lay person. And they can’t make decisions
  prejudiced by favoritism, hostility, stupidity, or cowardice. A
  mendicant who is perfected can’t transgress in these nine respects.’

The above is the Sujato translation. You can find the Thanissaro translation here.


4 foundations of mindfulness I'm a bit confused about when and how I am supposed to practice each of the four foundations?  Do I do it all at the same time or do I break it down into different activities etc? Can someone please clarify?

In becoming a Bhikku with an idea of performing the practice of breathing towards samatha and vipassana (calm and insight) without first attempting kayagata-satipatthana (mindfulness as regards the body), resembles an owner who yokes the still untamed bullock (an adult bovine animal) to the cart or plough without the nose-rope. Such an owner would find oneself unable to drive the bullock at his desire. Because the bullock is wild, and because it has no nose-rope, it will either try to run off the road, or try to break loose by breaking the yoke. So first and foremost comes the practice of Mindfulness of Body – Kayanupassana.

Practice of mindfulness of body is to overcome the drudgery of binding concepts and views that we form about it.  To see the body as it is and to realize what it actually is.  So instead of looking at this body as a beautiful body, ugly body or eternal body a person learns to look at the body as it is and avoid the mental pains that are caused by looking at it otherwise. There are four major sections in the satipattana sutta. In Anapanasati – one gets to these steps in its correct order:
(1) mindfulness of body (kayanupassana)
(2) mindfulness of feelings (vedananupassana)
(3) mindfulness of mind (chittanupassana)
(4) mindfulness of mental behaviors (dhammanupassana).

Within the first major section on mindfulness of body there are five meditation methods.
(1) mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati)
(2) mindfulness of postures (iriyapatha)
(3) refelection on internal and external impurities and other vital parts (kunapa)
(4) analysis of four elements (dathu)
(5) reflection on nine stages of a dead body (nava seevaththika)

In Anapanasati, with the development of kayanupassana the meditator is in a position to bring vedananupassana to completion. Contemplation of feelings is nothing but becoming mindful of feelings: pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. Here he remains focused on feelings in and of themselves, ardent and mindful. By concentrating on anapanasati to a higher degree, he then brings the cittanupassana to its culmination.  Now he would start to develop dhammanupassana (contemplation of mind contents). To explain how to go about practicing each of these factors is not possible as it will take a lot more than a paragraph or two for each.


Formal Meditation Laziness I have the intuition, from what I've heard within Buddhism, that formal meditation is rarely ever "wrong", and provides benefit if even slight form is held.

Nevertheless, I am struggling to create a regular schedule. It has been years that I know of meditation, have investigated the techniques, and still I seem to avoid practising formally.

Despite contemplation and walking meditation, I fail to progress to a formal routine.

I wonder:

Is there really any remedy to this types of procrastination and
laziness? I feel it may be pointless to try and seek advice on this
topic, that my capacity is absent despite my present desire.
If they exist, what are the remedies to such a basic and pervasive
laziness?

Perhaps I should specify that the reasons I often tell myself against meditating (or other things) are:

Lack of obvious suffering.
Lack of ultimate goal.
Aversion to the effort.

If you don't have a pull factor (natural inclination), then you need a push factor. These are the two factors of motivation.

Suppose your doctor tells you that you have early stage of lung cancer. He tells you not to worry because it can be easily treated due to early detection, but you must give up smoking for good.

So, what do you do? Give up smoking of course. You tried before and failed, but now you have a push factor.


Is there some scripture reference to dream yoga? By dream yoga I mean the practices intended to attain lucid dreaming, and then using that ability to realize that the world as we know does not exists as perceived (as in a dream) so one can reach the fully awake condition.

This depends somewhat on how you define "scripture." It's important to emphasize that "scripture" to a Buddhist doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as "scripture" to a Protestant Christian, despite the similar language.

As Rabbit references there is a document titled the Six Yogas of Nāropa (ན་རོ་ཆོས་དྲུག་, Narö chö druk).  Naropa himself was no small figure, at least for certain traditions, and a lot of the teachings in the Six Yogas are widely practiced among certain sects.

That, by itself, might count as a "scriptural reference" if that's what you are going for. This has been taught as stemming from the Gautama Buddha's statements about the illusory or dream-like nature of reality. It is an established document that is well known.

On the other hand, as far as I can tell it isn't listed–at least commonly–as part of the Tibetan Buddhist canon or any of the other major canons. That having been said, there are a great many Buddhist texts that cover a wide variety of different practices that are not found in in those specific texts that doesn't lessen their value.

So the question comes down to what, exactly, you consider "scripture" and why you are looking to know.


is cessation of perception and felling the Nibbana? Furthermore, take a good person who, going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters and remains in the cessation of perception and feeling. And, having seen with wisdom, their defilements come to an end. This is a mendicant who does not identify with anything, does not identify regarding anything, does not identify through anything.”

https://suttacentral.net/mn113/en/sujato

What Buddha's saying is that, through not taking base in any concept, abandoning all generalizations, letting go of all reference points, ceasing all reification -- all associative perception comes to a halt and with it all emotional reactions come to a stop, too.
Indeed, as perception is semiosis, it requires grasping at signs. When grasping at signs is abandoned, semiosis cannot continue. Since semiosis cannot continue, emotional reactions have no basis to arise on.
This sterile state is characterized by the complete absence of dukkha, the only (serious!) problem with it is that it's conditioned, impermanent, and limited.
However, attaining this state allows meditator to get the first-hand insight into the fact that our dukkha is mind-made and comes from comparison. Having seen that directly, one is emancipated from it, the illusion loses its power. This emancipation is the true Liberation by Wisdom, the non-abiding Nirvana.
The same state can be attained in Zen and Vajrayana artificially, for example by startling the student in the middle of a meditation session. When you are in this state, you are lucid and yet your mind is blank. When a normal mind begins to function again, as your first impression you can't help but notice the silliness (emptiness) of it all.


Where to find multilingual and/or beautifully typeset Buddhist texts? I recently stumbled upon a lovely collection of well-typeset Vietnamese Buddhist texts. It must have taken tremendous effort to typeset this  bilingual Chinese-Vietnamese edition of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra in LaTeX, for example.

As a computational linguist and Buddhism enthusiast, I would be highly interested to discover more sources of beautifully typeset multilingual Buddhist materials.

Beautifully typed texts - http://dharmafarer.org/, also http://www.thripitakaya.org/ and http://pitaka.lk/ but in Singhala
Multilingual texts - https://suttacentral.net/ (you can say it is also beautifully formated), http://www.buddha-vacana.org/ (English and French)


When Zen monks are completing a task, why are they doing it very quickly? Recently, I watched a documentary about zen philosophy and what it is like to be zen monk on a daily basis and I noticed that in the documentary the zen monks always looked like they were in a hurry. For example, in the documentary we see the monks "rushing" to sleep. Another instance in the documentary is when one monk is waking up the other monks, we see that he is running.

The question is: is there a reason behind the speed?

Thanks

Another approach to Zen by Thich Nhat Hanh is that everything is done with a connection to the breath and things slow down. You may not complete as much but increase the awareness of each moment.

Not sure why other Zen practitioners hurry. The tea ceremony is done precisely. If you practice it over and over again perhaps there is no hesitaion and it appears faster. When the personal self is erased there is only pure action..

Here is a Zen story that advocates less hurry.
http://www.enlightened-spirituality.org/Zen_Humor.html

  Other sayings from Linji or attributed to him: “What is the frantic
  hurry to deck yourselves in a lion's skin when all the while you are
  yapping like wild foxes? A real man has no need to give himself the
  airs of a real man!”

Now I just discovered something about the documentary

  This Documentary is all about rinzai zen and Zen in common.  It will
  give you a bit of insight how Zen is lived in a strict monastery order
  and how it influenced so many things.

Soto is the form of Shunryu Suzuki and even Dogen and one I am more familiar with. This tends to be different in application than Rinzai Zen in a very strict monastery. I only watched first 7 minutes where walking is quite ordinary. Perhaps someone who can watch the 2 hour documentary will share further insights.


Sutta Question - Three Ways of Making Merit In AN 8.36: Ways of Meritorious Action, the Buddha speaks about different ways of making merit.
He teaches that one can make merit by Giving, by practicing Virtue (Morality) and by developing Meditation. He also mentions in what sphere of existence a being will be reborn according to which meritorious deeds are practiced and to what degree (small, high, very high).
In the sutta the Buddha only mentions Giving in combination with Virtue. Making merit by practicing Meditation is not mentioned.

Why is that?
What are the merits made by practicing Meditation in combination with Giving and Virtue?

Below is the quoted sutta.
Thank you for your time.

WAYS OF MERITORIOUS ACTION
"There are, monks, three ways of making merit. What three?
"There are ways of making merit by giving, by (practicing) virtue and by meditation.
"There is a person who, only to a small degree, has practiced the making of merit by giving; and, likewise to a small degree, he has practiced the making of merit by virtue; but the making of merit by meditation he has not undertaken. This one, after death, when his body breaks up, will be reborn among humans in an ill-favored condition.
"Another person has practiced to a high degree the making of merit by giving as well as by virtue; but the making of merit by meditation he has not undertaken. Such a one, after death, when his body breaks up, will be reborn among humans in favorable conditions.
"Or he will be reborn in the company of the deities of the Four Great Divine Kings. And there, the Four Great Divine Kings, who had practiced to a very high degree the making of merit by giving and by virtue, surpass the deities of their realm in ten things: in divine life span, divine beauty, divine happiness, divine power, divine sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches.
"Or he will be reborn in the company of the Thirty-three gods. And there, Sakka king of gods, who had practiced to a very high degree the making of merit by giving and virtue, surpasses...
(The same statements are made for rebirth among the Yaama gods, Tusita gods, the gods of creative joy, the gods controlling others' creations, and for the respective rulers of these realms.)
"These, monks, are the three ways of making merit."
— AN 8.36

AN8.36 is mainly dealing with giving as it comes under the category of Dana Vagga.

https://suttacentral.net/en/an8.36


Expaining The Holocaust & karma to a non-Buddhist How can you explain karma in the genocide of babies and "innocents" (For example: The Holocaust) in Buddhist terms to a non-Buddhist, without seeming cold and uncaring? Yesterday, I tried--by saying, "I cannot say unequivocally, why the millions had to suffer or whether karma came into play or not, but perhaps it is better to focus attention on the present and try to generate good karma here and now." I know Buddha said certain topics will only foster disputation and I felt like this is one of those that can only be speculation so I steered the conversation in another direction. What can you say in a better (or kinder) way to explain it to a non-Buddhist person who asks how the holocaust suffering can be justified and who expresses interest in knowing the Buddhist view about it?

The popular portrayal of kamma isn't what The Buddha believed in (if someone does good deeds then good things would happen to them or if they do evil deeds bad things will happen).

He thought that there were many different variables involved in one's experiences besides good or bad deeds.

There are also certain deeds perceived as good that are actually bad and other deeds perceived as bad that are actually good.

As explained in the Maha Kammavibhanga Sutta (MN 136) there are certain people who do evil deeds who still go to heavenly worlds after death and other certain people who do good deeds who still go to hell after death:

  "Now there is the person who has killed living beings
  here... has had wrong view. And on the dissolution of the body, after
  death, he reappears in a happy destination, in the heavenly world. But
  (perhaps) the good kamma producing his happiness was done by him
  earlier, or the good kamma producing his happiness was done by him
  later, or right view was undertaken and completed by him at the time
  of his death. And that was why, on the dissolution of the body, after
  death, he reappeared in a happy destination, in the heavenly world.
  But since he has killed living beings here... has had wrong view, he
  will feel the result of that here and now, or in his next rebirth, or
  in some subsequent existence

  ..."Now there is the person who has abstained from killing living beings here... has had right view. And on the dissolution of
  the body, after death, he reappears in the states of deprivation, in
  an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell. But (perhaps) the evil
  kamma producing his suffering was done by him earlier, or the evil
  kamma producing his suffering was done by him later, or wrong view was
  undertaken and completed by him at the time of his death. And that was
  why, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappeared in the
  states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in
  hell. But since he has abstained from killing living beings here...
  has had right view, he will feel the result of that here and now, or
  in his next rebirth, or in some subsequent existence." (Maha
  Kammavibhanga Sutta, MN 136)

Here we see The Buddha explaining the variables involved earlier kamma, later kamma, and the view at the time of death.

The person will always feel the effect their deeds in some form, but how that happens relies on many different factors.

As explained in the Lonaphala Sutta:

  "Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual takes him
  to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped
  in [contemplating] the body, undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in
  mind, undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling
  with suffering. A trifling evil deed done by this sort of individual
  takes him to hell."

  "Now, a trifling evil deed done by what sort of individual is
  experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears
  for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is
  developed in [contemplating] the body, developed in virtue, developed
  in mind, developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted,
  dwelling with the immeasurable. A trifling evil deed done by this sort
  of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part
  barely appears for a moment." (Lonaphala Sutta, AN 3.99)

So you see there can be many people perceived as good but undeveloped in many aspects (contemplating the body, virtue, mind, discernment, heart) so any trifling evil deed they did in the past many take them to hell (or cause them to have negative experiences).

And there can be many people perceived as evil but developed in many aspects (contemplating the body, virtue, mind, discernment, heart) so many trifling evil deeds they did in the past still may not take them to hell (or cause them to have negative experiences).

There have been many genocides in history besides the holocaust, the genocide of the Jews. There have been for instance the persecution and execution of Buddhist monks by many different groups in history.

How this ties in is that there are many different variables involved in one's experiences...it does not necessarily mean that those who took birth into a region or time-period where they were persecuted and executed for no real reason are evil-doers or came from one of the three lower destinations (hell, the animal realm, realm of ghosts) although it does mean that they are exhausting their evil kamma that was caused for some reason or another (and also means that the one executing the violence is causing evil kamma).

If mankind as a whole wants violence to end all around the world we have to cause good kammas (bodily, verbal, mental) such that only good beings can exist on Earth...if you look the global homicide rate and violence around the world that time hasn't come yet...but will certainly come sometime in the future if more and more people continue doing good deeds and practicing metta (loving-kindness).


How is Nichiren Buddhism different from other branches of Buddhism? Nichiren Buddhism is a branch Mahayana Buddhism founded by Nichiren in the 13th century Japan. How is it different from other sects and branches of Buddhism? What are it's tenets, philosophy and practices? Do they venerate Buddha as a God or as a great personality and spiritual master?

Nichiren Buddhism differs from other schools of Buddhism in focusing on this world, and in its view that it is the only correct tradition. It also emphasises the importance of individuals taking responsibility for improving themselves. Although it can be seen as a highly self-focused religion, followers of Nichiren Buddhism believe that individual empowerment and inner transformation contribute, in turn, to a better and more peaceful world.
Beliefs: instant enlightenment

Instant enlightenment is one of the key elements of Nichiren Buddhism. It teaches that enlightenment is available to everybody. One writer has encapsulated this idea as a "shortcut to salvation". The essence of enlightenment is opening a person's innate Buddha-nature in this world.

Nichiren, the founder, came to believe that he was living in a degraded age, an age of mappo (very similar to the English term "end times") where Buddha's teachings were misinterpreted and as a consequence many bad things were happening. Nichiren followed the Lotus Sutra in his teaching that all living beings could attain enlightenment on earth and could do this through chanting and 'human revolution'. Nichiren emphasised the Lotus Sutra to the extent that he taught that it was the only way that could lead to true Buddhahood, and create a truly good world. He taught that other Buddhist practices no longer provided a road to enlightenment, and that it was the neglect of the Lotus Sutra that was responsible for the evils of his time; including such things as earthquakes. Nichiren was not just a scripture scholar, he was an activist. Having worked out what was wrong with contemporary Buddhism he did something about it. He engaged in shakubuku. This Japanese word means "to break and subdue".

The main practice of Nichiren Buddhists is chanting, primarily the mantra Nam Myoho Renge Kyo which means 'I devote my life to the law itself'. Chanters repeat this mantra to enter more deeply into the spiritual tradition of the Lotus Sutra.
Nam Myoho Renge Kyo is both the heart and title of the Lotus Sutra, which teaches the enlightenment of all living beings. Believers also recite sections of the Lotus Sutra as part of their daily practice. The chant is performed in front of a scroll called the Gohonzon. Chanting is usually performed for about 30 minutes night and morning and is believed to bring about changes in a person's life and reverse bad karma.
Nichiren Buddhists specifically believe that everyone can change their destiny and bring about the effects they desire. Followers are encouraged to write their personal goals down on a piece of paper and have it in front of them while chanting. The aim of the practice is to establish high states of self-development. As Yukio Matsudo writes, it "works as a regular and constant inspiration to manifest the qualities of the Buddha in one's daily life."
Chanting versus prayer: This chanting tradition is very different to the tradition of chanted prayer in many other religions. Those who practice it believe that the chant is "an influence at work in the metaphysical economy" and actually changes the force and action of karma.


Did the Buddha ever mentioned what is the cause for having lovers / marriage? I know there are clear explanations of cause and effect for things like the 5 precepts whereby;
Killing is the cause for short live, stealing is the cause for being poor etc...
But did our Lord Buddha or in any Sutta mentioned what is the cause for having romantic partners / marriage? Why do some people have lots of relationship, gets married and able to establish a family at a young age while some people might doesn't even have a lover?
This is aside from worldly conditions such as being good looking or rich. We all have seen some people whom might not be good looking or rich but was always attached while the good looking and rich lived a lonely life.
I'm not asking is it due to sexual misconduct whereby a relationship is broken due to adultery etc but rather the cause (Karma) for having a partner.
Thank you.

Geshe Michael Roach taught that the cause for finding a companion was to give companionship.  He recommended nursing homes as one place to go and offer companionship to others to create the cause for relationship.  He also said that there is a text that did list "deeds" and the "consequences".  I am not sure if it is words of the Buddha.  Unfortunately, I don't know the name and I don't think it has been translated into English.  When someone wanted to change something that was sticking them, he would go into the book and find out exactly what they needed to do.
I have used the basic ideas of cause and effect to find a spiritual partner.  I was looking for someone to share my spiritual journey with me and support my practice.  Knowing the general idea is to do to others what you would like to have or have done to you, I figured out a way to do this.  I located a person in long term retreat and set up a monthly donation to their practice.  I don't think they even knew.  I then dedicated my practice to their enlightenment.  My current partner and I met soon after I started this, although it was a few more years before we became a couple.  I am essentially a hermit, so finding a partner really is a miracle.  We've been together 5 years.
To leverage cause and effect, simply find ways to help people have relationships or encourage people to stay in relationships or improve their relationships.  Be creative.  Offer what you would like to receive.  Get detailed about what you would like to receive, do those actions, and dedicate what you do to your goal.
I was taught about a sutra called The Teaching of the Four Practices that teaches how to purify karma.  Perhaps you already know a purification practice that you can undertake to clear your obstacles. You can create new causes, but always good to get rid of old causes for not being in relationship.
The four practices (or powers) in brief are:

Foundation power  - this is simply Buddhist refuge
Destruction power - recognizing what you did will come back to hurt you (if you don't have a memory of it, just realize that in some life you harmed relationships - your own or others)
Power of restraint - resolve never to harm relationships again
Power of antidote - studying and understanding emptiness and karma  as well as undertaking action to undo what you did (in this case, helping people stay in relationship and/or being a nice companion)


Who actually is the 'Devil King Of the Sixth Heaven'? I want to ask who is the devil king of the sixth heaven actually is and i also want to ask what happen to the people who suicide in buddhism ?

Mara is the leader of a faction in the 6th heaven:

(11) Devas Wielding Power over the Creation of Others (paranimmita-vasavatti deva)
These devas enjoy sense pleasures created by others for them. Mara, the personification of delusion and desire, lives here.

He's neither the king there nor the king of all demons. Demons mostly belong to the first heaven. That faction is just opposed to anyone trying to attain enlightenment or lead others to enlightenment.
People who commit suicide usually have an unskillful state of mind in their final moments. So it is most likely that they end up in a lower realm. But there can be rare exceptions.


11th Soul - last lessons My niece has very wrinkled palms and a Buddhist man all dressed in orange took her little 6 year old hand and told her it was a very special thing to have. He told her that her palms showed she was carrying her 11th soul and lessons of life had been learnt and she would be wise as she grew older and have an inner peace.

I have been trying to find some more information about this,  has anyone else hear of this before?

It doesn't sound anything like Buddhism. A Buddhist monk violates a Vinaya rule, if he touches a girl or woman, regardless of age or relationship, but Buddhist monks aren't the only ones who wear yellow clothing.

Anyways, it sounds like he was simply trying to say something magical to make the child feel fascinated. Most of us like to hear someone saying something special about us to feel good, depending on a body feature or some other external factor. Instead, we should examine our mind states to see if we really have the wholesome qualities praised by the wise.


Mutually Exclusive Approaches I had begun writing a question, but it was so long I needed to re-frame it simply in fewer words. The basic theme of my question was: aren't some Buddhist techniques mutually exclusive?

The simplest idea which comes to mind is traditional techniques of avoiding and analyzing detrimental states (e.g. Vitakka-Santhana Sutta) versus the modern notion of mindfulness (e.g. Jon Kabat-Zinn). I feel it is difficult to combine these two aspects.

Similarly, I thought the way of emptiness as found, for example, in the Dalai Lama's book The Middle Way alters completely all reference for reality. With Nagarjuna's philosophy, nothing exists intrinsically in itself, but as dependently originated. Dhammas as ultimate and essential realities are invalidated.

I cannot help but feel all these aspects of Buddhism are somewhat exclusive, to a degree. I could conceive their unity through a kind of symbiotic compromise, but I have trouble understanding at a mundane level (i.e. conventional reality) how these can interact.

Thank you for your time.

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

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

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

I'm not sure, but I guess Kabat-Zinn's mindfulness is similar to insight meditation (vipassana). You can find guidance on the basics of insight meditation in the booklet entitled "How To Meditate" by Ven. Yuttadhammo. This technique is used to gain insight into the workings of dependent origination. Also read "The Way of Mindfulness" by Ven. Soma Thera, which is an essay that discusses the Satipatthana Sutta.

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'm not sure what did you consider as being mutually exclusive concerning emptiness. Philosophically, emptiness is defined differently in the Theravada and Mahayana traditions. You can find out about it in this question. Emptiness in the Theravada tradition is about the five aggregates and in fact all phenomena, being empty or devoid of a self. This is relevant for insight meditation, in the contemplation of mental objects (dhammas) i.e. for the fourth foundation of mindfulness.


Why are plants not sentient beings? Why in Buddhism plants are not recognized as sentient beings?

Can it be immoral to kill a plant?  Can a plant be reincarnated as an animal?  Is a plant alive?

Edit: I read somewhere a theory according to which Buddhism did not consider plants as sentient beings, part of saṃsāra, because although they are alive they do not have the 5 khandhas and especially they do not have consciousness (viññāṇa) although they have perception (saññā).  A sunflower perceives the sun and reacts by turning towards it but it is not conscious of its perception, it has no metacognition.  I found this idea interesting but I don't know how true it is since Buddhism seems to define consciousness more as what allows discrimination than as what allows metacognition.

Can it be immoral to kill a plant?

It's contrary to the Vinaya for monks -- I don't know whether you consider that as implying that it's "immoral".

  DESTROYING VEGETATION

  The common belief at the time of the Buddha was that plants (and even soil) were 'one-facultied life.' Today we have ecologically 'green' beliefs that are often equivalent — at least they seem to lead to much the same attitudes.[41] (In Thailand, forest monks are well known as the best protectors of the jungle.)

  The eleventh Confession offence concerns destroying plant life. It originated because a bhikkhu harmed 'one-facultied life' by cutting down trees. He continued to cut down a tree even when the tree-deva asked him to stop, so she went and complained to the Buddha. This led to lay criticism of such behavior and a rule was set down:

    "Intentionally damaging or destroying a living plant is [an offence of Confession.]"(Summary Paac. 11; See BMC p.294)

  Therefore destroying a living plant — for instance, felling a tree, uprooting a flower, burning grass — is a Confession offence; as is picking fruit from a tree, a flower from a bush, etc. It is an offence of wrong-doing (dukka.ta) to damage or destroy fertile seeds or pips, or viable seedlings. (See Kappiya).

  Bhikkhus who live in tropical forest monasteries constantly have to protect both the jungle and themselves. When paths are overgrown, snakes and other dangerous 'creepy-crawlies' can be trodden on — and bite back! There also may be a need for firebreaks. One way that forest monks cope with this is a daily routine of sweeping the paths. However they are not allowed to dig or clear the land.

  The tenth Confession offence arose when bhikkhus dug the ground and got others to dig, and the local people criticized them because they considered the earth to be 'one-facultied life.' The rule is phrased like this:

    "Should any bhikkhu dig soil or have it dug, it is [an offence of Confession.]" (Paac. 10; BMC p.292)

  Digging, breaking the surface of the earth, lighting a fire on it, pounding a stake into it are all disallowed. (If such 'earth' is more gravel or sand than 'soil' — and has no living creatures in it — it may then be dug.)

  It is, however, allowable for monks to hint to laypeople or novices about what needs doing as long as the words or gestures fall short of a command. When bhikkhus need paths to be cleared, necessary work done on the ground, firebreaks made, etc., any lay attendant wanting to help should listen out for hints and indications: 'A post hole dug over there would be useful'; 'make this ground allowable,' etc. What is needed can then be clarified.

  One practical and long term effect of these rules is that they have steered bhikkhus away from involvement in agriculture and land ownership. Such a development would also have isolated bhikkhus from the lay community because they would no longer have needed to depend on alms food.

See also Harmlessness to non-sentient nature and can consciousness (pure awareness) exist?

An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics: Foundations, Values and Issues says on page 175,

So "one-facultied" means "possessing the sense of touch". I guess that might imply non-sentient if it's incapable of thought -- or, it says, it's a "borderline" case.

It also says that people perceive them as alive and that it's therefore not seen as being harmless to kill them.

Whether they are actually sentient isn't stated e.g. by the Buddha, nor in the Abhidhamma.


are mundane acts of compassion meaningful? Did the Buddha say anything of the value of mundane acts of generosity which may temporarily alleviate the suffering of others in a temporary, worldly way, but do not free others from from suffering?

For example, helping someone get what they desperately "need" will not free them from craving, nor will curing a disease free someone from old age, sickness, and death. The following quotes support this point, i.e. how  mundane work or acts of generosity - which give material comfort but are not the gift of the dhamma - do not free anyone from the causes of suffering.

Dalai Lama:

  Science and technology have contributed immensely to the overall development of humankind, to our material comfort and well- being as well as to our understanding of the world we live in. But if we put too much emphasis on these endeavors, we are in danger of losing those aspects of human knowledge that contribute to the development of an honest and altruistic personality.

  ...

  No one can deny the material benefits of modern life, but we are still faced with suffering, fear, and tension— perhaps more now than ever before.

Bhikku Bodhi:

  The pāramitās begin with dāna-pāramitā, the perfection of giving. Social engagement can certainly be included under this category, as it involves giving others material gifts and the gift of security. But these gifts, as worthy as they are, do not equal in value the gift of the Dharma, for the gift of the Dharma leads to the permanent extinction of suffering.

Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche:

  How many scientists do you know who have become enlightened? Have you heard of any? Well, if a scientist trains in this, he becomes enlightened. That’s pretty neat, isn’t it? These days scientists are praised as being the most eminent people in this world, because they make devices through which you can instantly talk to someone on the other end of the world, or you can fly through the skies. Well, with this practice you can go beyond being a scientist. Actually, what science can create is pretty amazing, but still, all science is on this side of the shore of knowledge. The profound samadhi means the other shore of knowledge, having transcended dualistic mind. Right now, if we compare ourselves with a scientist, a scientist seems to be better, right? But once the scientist arrives on the other shore, any mental doings is of no use at all! At that point, as far as we are concerned, it is much better to arrive on the other side at transcendent knowledge. Here’s a question for all of you: exactly how much benefit is there from scientific knowledge the moment you are in the bardo? Think about it well. When a scientist is in the bardo he no longer has any gadgets to help him, no spy satellites or jet planes to move around in. In the bardo isn’t whatever one created of absolutely no use? Scientific knowledge is not transcendent. The knowledge that we are supposed to train in is transcendent knowledge, prajnaparamita.

  Honestly, whatever mundane, unspiritual actions we do show themselves to be a total waste at the end of this life. They are good for absolutely nothing. Any work that one bothers to complete is pointless unless it is connected with a virtuous outcome.

Upasika Kee:

  Don’t think that you were born to gain this or that level of comfort. You were born to study pain and the causes of pain, and to follow the practice that frees you from pain. This is the most important thing there is. Everything else is trivial and unimportant.

What acts of compassion and generosity were considered worthwhile to the Buddha?

Yes. Generosity, kind words and helpfulness are all meaningful to the Buddha, however small.

From Vaccha Sutta:

  "I tell you, Vaccha, even if a person throws the rinsings of a bowl or
  a cup into a village pool or pond, thinking, 'May whatever animals
  live here feed on this,' that would be a source of merit, to say
  nothing of what is given to human beings. But I do say that what is
  given to a virtuous person is of great fruit, and not so much what is
  given to an unvirtuous person.

From Itivuttaka 26:

  This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have
  heard: "If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing,
  they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of
  selfishness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite,
  their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared, if
  there were someone to receive their gift. But because beings do not
  know, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they eat without
  having given. The stain of selfishness overcomes their minds."

From Sangaha Sutta:

  "There are these four grounds for the bonds of fellowship. Which four?
  Generosity, kind words, beneficial help, consistency. These are the
  four grounds for the bonds of fellowship."

  Generosity, kind words, beneficial help,
  & consistency in the face of
  events,
  in line with what's appropriate
  in each case.
  These bonds of fellowship [function] in the world
  like the linchpin in a moving cart.

From Sigalovada Sutta:

  "Young man, be aware of these four good-hearted friends: the helper, the friend who endures in good times and bad, the mentor, and
  the compassionate friend.

  "The helper can be identified by four things: by protecting you when you are vulnerable, and likewise your wealth, being a refuge when
  you are afraid, and in various tasks providing double what is
  requested.

  "The enduring friend can be identified by four things: by telling you secrets, guarding your own secrets closely, not abandoning you in
  misfortune, and even dying for you.

  "The mentor can be identified by four things: by restraining you from wrongdoing, guiding you towards good actions, telling you what
  you ought to know, and showing you the path to heaven.

  "The compassionate friend can be identified by four things: by not rejoicing in your misfortune, delighting in your good fortune,
  preventing others from speaking ill of you, and encouraging others who
  praise your good qualities."

From Dullabha Sutta:

  "Monks, these two people are hard to find in the world. Which two? The
  one who is first to do a kindness, and the one who is grateful for a
  kindness done and feels obligated to repay it. These two people are
  hard to find in the world."

From Itivuttaka 75:

  "And how is a person one who rains everywhere? There is the case where
  a person gives food, drink, clothing, vehicles, garlands, scents,
  ointments, beds, dwellings, & lights to all brahmans & contemplatives,
  to all of the miserable, the homeless, & beggars. This is how a person
  one who rains everywhere.

  A person responsive to requests,
  sympathetic to all beings,
  delighting in distributing alms:
  "Give to them! Give!" he says.
  As a cloud — resounding, thundering — rains,
  filling with water, drenching
  the plateaus & gullies:
  a person like this is like that.
  Having rightly amassed wealth
  attained through initiative,
  he satisfies fully with food & drink
  those fallen into the homeless state.

From Itivuttaka 100:

  "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."


Difference between Yoniso Manasikāra and Sammā sati with Sampajaññā I would like a clarification regarding the terms Yoniso Manasikāra and Sammā sati with Sampajaññā. Is the meaning of these two:

the same,
totally different,
somewhat similar with certain differences, or,
are they used in different situations with contextual differences in meaning?

Yoniso manasikara is investigating or examining something for the purpose of either newly or thoroughly understanding it. For example:

SN 45.62 says yonisomanasikara is the forerunner and precursor for the arising of the Noble Eightfold Path; therefore yonisomanasikara is also the forerunner and precursor for the arising of the 7th factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, namely, sammāsati.

Similarly, AN 10.61 says: "Hearing the good Dhamma... fills up careful attention; careful attention... fills up mindfulness and clear comprehension". Again, yonisomanasikara operates prior to sati-sampajanna.

Similarly, DN 18 says: "After some time they hear the teaching of the noble ones, properly attend to how it applies to them & practice accordingly. So aparena  samayena ariyadhammaṃ suṇāti, yoniso manasi karoti, dhammānudhammaṃ paṭipajjati". Then, later on, DN 18 refers to the four satipaṭṭhānā.

Iti 16 says: "in regard to internal factors, I do not perceive another single factor so helpful as wise attention (yonisomanasikaro) for a bhikkhu who is a learner".

SN 12.10 provides an example where yoniso manasikara was used to discover dependent origination. Since dependent origination remained unknown or undiscovered, sati-sampajana could not be used because sati-sampajanna only brings to mind preexisting knowledge

While MN 95 does not use the term 'yonisomanasikara', it provides a similar explanation when it says: "Next, they place faith in them. When faith has arisen they approach the teacher. They pay homage, lend an ear, hear the teachings, remember the teachings, reflect on their meaning (upaparikkhato) and accept them after consideration."

Sati-sampajanna is the bringing to mind and keeping in mind past learned or realised knowledge/wisdom to a specific present situation. This is indicated in SN 45.62 & SN 45.62 quote above or otherwise unambiguously explained in SN 46.3 & MN 117 quoted below:

When one has heard the Dhamma from such bhikkhus one dwells withdrawn
by way of two kinds of withdrawal—withdrawal of body and withdrawal of
mind. Dwelling thus withdrawn, one recollects that Dhamma and thinks
it over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn
recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occasion the
enlightenment factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that
occasion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness;
on that occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to
fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.

One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right
view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right view.
One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right
resolve: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right resolve.
One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right
speech: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right speech.
One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right
action: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right action.
One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in
right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three
qualities — right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run &
circle around right livelihood.
Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the
forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In
one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. In one of right
speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In
one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right
mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In
one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right
knowledge, right release comes into being.  Thus the learner is
endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten.

In summary, SN 45.62 says yonisomanasikara is the forerunner for the arising of the Noble Eightfold Path. Where as MN 117 says sammasati is the 7th factor of the Noble Eightfold Path.
I will end with an example:

When the mind is ignorant, it does not understand not referencing quotes is not only theft (plagiarism), but it also causes trouble for others. Therefore, such an ignorant mind must examine & reflect repeatedly until it understands the harm, evil, sinfulness & wickedness of not referencing quotes. This is the use of yonisomanasikara.

Where as a mind with wisdom that knows referencing quotes is beautiful behaviour, may occasionally forget to reference a quote. Such a mind will quickly rectify this mistake using mindfulness & clear-comprehension. There is no need for this mind to use yonisomanasikaro because it has already understood the dhammic significance of the matter thoroughly.


In which ways do anagamis still experience ignorance? According to the ten fetters model, one of the five fetters which are only removed at attaining arahantship is ignorance (avijja). This means that anagamis are still subject to ignorance in some way. But it's also evident that anagamis possess a lot less ignorance than ordinary people. For example, belief in a self (sakkaya-ditthi) is abandoned at the first stage of enlightenment. So which forms of ignorance would an anagami still experience, and which forms not? Or is ignorance something that only sometimes arises in an anagami, the same way ill-will is only sometimes present in ordinary people?

Thanks in advance for your answers!

According to MN 9 (below), as long as you still have fermentation or effluents, you would still have ignorance, and vice versa (also see this question). Ignorance is a very deeply ingrained and deeply lingering fetter.

  From the origination of fermentation comes the origination of
  ignorance. From the cessation of fermentation comes the cessation of
  ignorance. .....

  From the origination of ignorance comes the origination of
  fermentation. From the cessation of ignorance comes the cessation of
  fermentation.

There is a vicious cycle between ignorance and fermentation.

There seems to be four types of fermentations in the Dhammawiki page of fermentation:

  The mental fermentation of sense-desire (kāmāsava), Ex: 'All is pleasant'
  The mental fermentation of desiring existence (bhavāsava), Ex: 'Being is good'
  The mental fermentation of wrong views (ditthāsava), Ex: 'My opinion is best'
  The mental fermentation of ignorance (avijjāsava). Ex: 'Suffering exists not'

According to this wikipedia page on ten fetters, the Anagami still has the fetters of lust for material existence, lust for immaterial existence, conceit, restlessness and ignorance.

So, the Anagami would have overcome the mental fermentation of sense-desire (kāmāsava) and the mental fermentation of wrong views (ditthāsava). However, he would still be challenged by the mental fermentation of desiring existence (bhavāsava). I take it that conceit is related to bhavāsava.

What does this mean?

The Anagami has overcome self-view, attachment to rituals, doubt, sensual desire and ill will. But the Anagami still has the mental fermentation of wanting to exist. And this will cause ignorance to continue.

You know the Four Noble Truths very well, dispelled wrong views (including self-view), overcame sensual desire and overcame ill will. But when someone threatens your life, you may get scared. Why? It's because you still want to exist.


Is Buddhism now lost until the birth of Matreiya Buddha? Has pure Buddhism now been lost from the present sociological environment (lost from today's world, lost from present society), until the Maitreya Buddha will be born?

Pure Dharma can be defined as clear, unmistaken explanation of the path all the way to complete awakening, endowed with Buddha's blessings.

"Buddha's blessings" here mean that a teacher doesn't only say words and explain theories, he also does it with proper atmosphere.

For example, some lecturers might explain "correct words" but with disrespectful attitude or with restless mind, and so these "correct words" are not well perceived by listeners, so they will not practise them.

Unmistaken explanation means, in particular, that words correspond well to the situation - it's not like explaining a teaching poorly suitable for the present case.

Thus a good teacher should have clear understanding of what he teaches and how that relates to our situations;

he should have clear mind - with proper attitude and "atmosphere";

he should speak what he knows and refrain from speaking what he doesn't truly know.

Expounded with clear mind, explanations are clear.

With correct "blessings", they are accepted by people and inspire them to practise.

There are such teachers nowadays: they practice thoroughly, they awaken, and they teach clearly.

Thus pure Dharma exists now, it is not lost.


Buddhist (Theravada) cure for "Insecurity"? While the Pali scriptures address (or at least reference) a number of specific sufferings that a human being can be subject to (Jealousy, Anger, Fear, etc.), do any of the teachings deal with the specific suffering of Insecurity (and how to overcome it)?  Meaning a lack of self-confidence, usually caused by the mind making itself subject to fears and illusions that creep in and which it lacks the strength to banish or prevent in the first place.

1.One of the ways to deal with anxiety,insecurity or lack of self confidence is by developing Sila (Morality,Integrity,Virtue,Ethics).

"Five blessings, householders, accrue to the righteous person through his practice of virtue: great increase of wealth through his diligence; a favorable reputation; a confident deportment, without timidity, in every society, be it that of nobles, brahmans, householders, or ascetics; a serene death; and, at the breaking up of the body after death, rebirth in a happy state, in a heavenly world."
— DN 16*

2.Anxiety comes from fear and fear comes from aversion,a way to counter act aversion is by practicing metta bhavana (to yourself First,make sure you spend a lot of time on yourself,lack of self confidence masks self hatred).

3.Counteract Fear by developing one of the five spiritual faculties,Faith.Take refuge in the Triple Gem,Take refuge in the Present Moment.Embrace the present moment.Anxious or not.Don't fight it or get upset that you got anxious.This just makes it worse.Just note it.Anxiety.Be present for it.Hold it in Awareness and compassion.Yes you might feel worse or uncomfortable but that's okay.You can note.Uncomfortable.No matter what arises due to insecurity to anxiety you can always Note.Which means there is something bigger than anxiety and that is Mindfulness.And soo you will see it changes.So have faith in the Buddha's teaching,put it to practice and see for yourself.


Incorporeal entities in buddhism I don't know anything in depth about Buddhism but as I figure there are three possibilities in life at it's end, either:

the soul is released from the physical world and returns to where it originated from;
the soul remains in the physical world and is then passed on and contained within another living entity; or
the soul remains in the physical world and is not contained within any physical body.

The latter I believe I would not favour.

If I am correct about my deduction then the latter entity would be incorporeal.
Buddhism as much as I know is based upon transference of souls to other living entities so how does it deal with the possible existence of incorporeal entities or does it refute the idea?

There is one possibility at the expense of the humanity of things there could be no soul god forbid.

According to Milindapanha 3.5.5, one is reborn without the need for a transmigrating soul:

  The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, is it so that one does not
  transmigrate (saṅkamati) and one is reborn (paṭisandahati)?"

  "Yes, your majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is reborn."

  "How, venerable Nagasena, is it that one does not transmigrate and one
  is reborn? Give me an analogy."

  "Just as, your majesty, if someone kindled one lamp from another, is
  it indeed so, your majesty, that the lamp would transmigrate from the
  other lamp?"

  "Certainly not, venerable sir."

  "Indeed just so, your majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is
  reborn."

  "Give me another analogy."

  "Do you remember, your majesty, when you were a boy learning some
  verse from a teacher?"

  "Yes, venerable sir."

  "Your majesty, did this verse transmigrate from the teacher?"

  "Certainly not, venerable sir."

  "Indeed just so, your majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is
  reborn."

  "You are clever, venerable Nagasena."

Ven. Narada Mahathera wrote here about hungry ghosts:

  Peta-yoni (pa + ita) lit., departed beings, or those absolutely devoid
  of happiness. They are not disembodied spirits of ghosts. They
  possess deformed physical forms of varying magnitude, generally
  invisible to the naked eye. They have no planes of their own, but live
  in forests, dirty surroundings, etc.

Milindapanha 3.5.6 states:

  The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, is a soul to be found?"

  The elder replied: "According to ultimate reality, your majesty, a
  soul is not to be found."

  "You are clever, venerable Nagasena."


Why does Mara, the Evil One one comes looking for consciousness at death? Is this explained in the Pali Canon?

  Then the Blessed One went with a large number of monks to the Black Rock on the slope of Isigili. From afar he saw Ven. Vakkali lying dead on a couch. Now at that time a smokiness, a darkness was moving to the east, moving to the west, moving to the north, the south, above, below, moving to the intermediate directions. The Blessed One said, “Monks, do you see that smokiness, that darkness …?” “Yes, Lord.” “That is Mara, the Evil One. He is searching for the consciousness of Vakkali the clansman: “Where is the consciousness of Vakkali the clansman established?” But, monks, it is through unestablished consciousness that Vakkali the clansman has become totally unbound.”— SN 22:87

In many cases Mara the Evil One appears when he realises that someone somewhere is about to escape from his grips, when they are practising ardently, about to attain enlightenment, and his purpose is to arouse fear, trepidation, and so on to disrupt their practice.Kassaka Sutta,Brahma-nimananika Sutta,Soma Sutta,Sister Vajira Sutta etc..

IMHO Mara is searching to see if Vakkali has actully escape from him. If Mara has to search, that means that that consciousness has already gone beyond his domain.


Is better sati cause to better memory? Did Lord Buddha tell something about this ? (Relationship between sati and memory)

There was a monk in Buddha's time who is enlightened but didn't have a strong memory. To be enlightened, some has to have a strong sati.

Normal memory is bound up in craving (e.g., "I remember that pretty face"). Or normal memory is bound up in aversion (e.g., "You ALWAYS pick on me!"). Or normal memory is bound up in delusion (e.g., "I want to be like that famous person").

The memory of sati requires awareness without craving, aversion or delusion. That's surprisingly difficult and requires steady and constant practice.

  AN5.14:4.1: And what is the power of mindfulness?  It’s when a noble disciple is mindful. They have utmost mindfulness and alertness, and can remember and recall what was said and done long ago.


Why is life so important? When asking around, I've never heard anyone agree that a young, healthy person should end their life by suicide. But I also don't know what reason there is for that consensus.

Did Buddha teach anything regarding what makes life worth living?

The first book I read about Buddhism described the Sermon at Benares, i.e. the Dhammacakkappavattana, as explaining that the cause of suffering (the second noble truth) is,

... the craving to have what you don't have; the craving to keep what you can't keep; the craving to live; even the craving to die.

And here is the same quote from Access to Insight,

"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.

So I think that suicide must be missing the most important, fundamental truth of Buddhism.
Suicidal ideation is a risk factor: Suminda said, "You shouldn't even think about things like suicide".

Similarly, the "middle way" doctrine says not to afflict or self-mortify the body.
And, the doctrine of rebirth suggests that, although there are problems in life, these problems can't be escaped simply by dying. It was by 'unbinding' (not suicide) that in the Ariyapariyesana Sutta the Buddha said,

I reached the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'

According to the Vinaya even 'describing the advantages of dying' is wrong.

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

As for "what makes life worth living": Buddhism can even seem quite 'negative' ("life is suffering") ... and so I asked this question, How to explain what Buddhism is? ... and people's answers to that explain it in more 'positive' or constructive terms: morality; concentration; and wisdom.
My dad told me, when I was young, that suicide is painful for the friends and family who are left behind (i.e. it causes suffering for others): I thought, even that is enough reason to avoid suicide.
And, for example, I lived with a friend: who became relatively enlightened, especially during the last year of her life. So it was more perfect, for her and for others, that she lived as long as she did, instead of dying earlier.
Perhaps what makes life worth living is that it's an opportunity to "live the holy life".
Many Buddhist descriptions try to describe the experiences of one person (e.g. in meditation), or even of 'no self'.
But part of the "holy life" is in the relationships between people, for example,

As he was sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."[1]
"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life.

Perhaps you don't feel you have that (or are that) at the moment but there is every chance you might in future.

Unfortunately there are things which can make life seem unimportant: bad companions, "heedlessness", "restlessness", etc.
Instead, try to remember what Right intention is:

And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve.

Also, problems are fixable: problems, too, are 'conditioned' and therefore changeable.


What should you do when someone teaches false Dharma? I was part of a religious group that claimed to be everything that the Buddha teaches. But, when you listen to their teachings, you can tell discrepancies between their teachings and Buddhist teachings.

I just saw many people being misguided, but I do not know what to do. (Just to clarify, the religious group I'm referring to is neither Mahayana nor Theravada. But, the question can be generalized further if necessary.)

On one end, I do not wish to create any conflict among anyone.
On the other end, I feel sad that many people are misguided into the teaching.

So, the question is: What should I do?

Any answers based on experience would be AWESOME, and experience + Scripture references (said by famous teachers or based on Pali Canon) would be an Awesome+++infinity. :) Once again, I hope to find a method that does not create animosity.

Thanks Buddhist Community! Praises to the Dharma.
******As for an explanation on how this question is different from the forum titled "How to address wrong view", it's pretty much the same, except this is more scenario-based. I just wanted a different perspective/insight to this specific scenario. My ultimate goal is to avoid conflict!!!

You can share with them DN 16's Four Great Referrals:

“Here, monks, a monk might speak like this: ‘I have heard this directly from the Gracious One, friends, directly I learned it: “This is the Teaching, this is the Discipline, this is the Teacher’s Dispensation.”’ That monk’s speech, monks, is not to be rejoiced over, not to be scorned at. Without having rejoiced over it, without having scorned it, after learning those words and syllables well, they should be laid alongside the Discourses, they should be compared with the Discipline.
If, when these are laid alongside the Discourses, compared with the Discipline, they do not fit in with the Discourses, they do not compare well with the Discipline, you may here come to this conclusion: ‘Certainly this is not the Gracious One’s word, it is not well learned by that monk,’ and, monks, you should abandon it. If when these are laid alongside the Discourses, compared with the Discipline, they do fit in with the Discourses, they do compare well with the Discipline, you may come to this conclusion: ‘Certainly this is the Gracious One’s word, it is well-learned by that monk.’ This, monks, is the first Great Referral you should bear in mind.

That religious group will have no ground to criticize you for the above comes straight out of the Buddha's Discourses. Also freely share good Dhamma resources like accesstoinsight.org, suttacentral.net, tipitaka.wikia.com, etc. so that group members can go and find out the truth for themselves.


How was Chögyam Trungpa's behaviour justified by his lineage? As well as being a preeminent teacher of Tibetan Buddhist, Chögyam Trungpa was notorious for his more extreme behaviour such as drinking, smoking, sleeping with students, crashing cars and so forth. While this seems unusual behaviour for an advanced Buddhist practioner I was told that senior figures in his lineage (Kagyu and Nyingma) and  were very comfortable with his actions.

So how were his more controversial actions justified by others within his lineage? Is there a tradition within Tibetan Buddhism which encompasses seemingly unethical behaviour? Was there any precedence within his lineage for this kind of thing or was he just a very unusual character?

The most famous Tibetan "Mad monk of the Dragon Lineage" Drukpa Kunley would be an example and precedence.

  He was known for his crazy methods of enlightening other beings, mostly women, which earned him the title "The Saint of 5,000 Women". Among other things, women would seek his blessing in the form of sex. His intention was to show that it is possible to be enlightened, impart enlightenment, and still lead a very healthy sex life. He demonstrated that celibacy was not necessary for being enlightened. In addition, he wanted to expand the range of means by which enlightenment could be imparted, while adding new evolutionary prospects to the overarching tradition. He is credited with introducing the practice of phallus paintings in Bhutan and placing statues of them on rooftops to drive away evil spirits.[2] Because of this power to awaken unenlightened beings, Kunley's penis is referred to as the "Thunderbolt of Flaming Wisdom" and he himself is known as the "fertility saint". For this reason women from all around the world visited his monastery to seek his blessing.[3][4]

The drunken saint Drukpa Kunley

Poems and songs of Drukpa Kunley

Poem about happiness

  I am happy that I am a free Yogi.

  So I grow more and more into my inner happiness.

  I can have sex with many women,

  because I help them to go the path of enlightenment.

  Outwardly I'm a fool

  and inwardly I live with a clear spiritual system.

  Outwardly, I enjoy wine, women and song.

  And inwardly I work for the benefit of all beings.

  Outwardly, I live for my pleasure

  and inwardly I do everything in the right moment.

  Outwardly I am a ragged beggar

  and inwardly a blissful Buddha.

Song about the pleasure

  A young woman finds pleasure in love.
  A young man finds pleasure in sex.
  An old man finds pleasure in his memoirs.
  This is the doctrine of the three pleasures.

  Who does not know the truth, is confused.
  Those who have no goals, can not sacrifice.
  Those who have no courage, can not be a Yogi.
  This is the doctrine of the three missing things.

  Even if a person knows the way of wisdom;
  without practicing there is no realization.
  Even if a master shows you the way,
  you have to go it by yourself.

The five spiritual ways

  I practice the path of self-discipline.
  I meditate every day.

  I go the way of embracing love.
  I work as a mother and father of all beings.

  I do the deity yoga.
  I visualize myself as a Buddha in the cosmic unity.

  I read the books of all religions
  and practice all at the right moment.

  The life is my teacher
  and my inner wisdom is my guide.

More on The Sublime Life and Songs of Drukpa Kunley


First Effort in "Right Effort" The first effort states to prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states

How is this done? How can we prevent something beforehand? By avoiding situations? By trying to be in a rational and/or 'dhammic' frame of mind?

If there is contact with an object, either ignorance or wisdom arises subsequently in response, and AFTER THAT, we can use sati-sampajañña to get rid of the unwholesome state (2nd factor of right effort).

But how is the first factor to be practised?

The following theme for reflection from AN 5.57 (quoted below) can prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states. It encourages shame of evil (hiri) and fear of evil (otappa), which are mentioned as beautiful mental factors in the Abhidhamma.

  “And for the sake of what benefit should a woman or a man, a
  householder or one gone forth, often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of
  my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my
  relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma,
  good or bad, that I do’? People engage in misconduct by body, speech,
  and mind. But when one often reflects upon this theme, such misconduct
  is either completely abandoned or diminished. It is for the sake of
  this benefit that a woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth,
  should often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my
  kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my
  resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do.’


Is fifth precept included in the Noble Eightfold Path? In the following video this monk said that consuming alcohol is a latter addition to the fifth precept and hence not part of the Noble Eightfold Path. I wish to know your thoughts on this.

https://youtu.be/VI3dT4aXkfM?t=3163

Without watching the video, I think it is a late addition.

It was noticeable when writing this answer that several of those core suttas (MN 9; DN 31; SN 55.7) identify four precepts.

It apparently wasn't among the first of the Vinaya rules either (see this origin story).

I do think alcohol is problematic though, in my experience: better to avoid it.


Meditation and Internal Tremors Happy New Year to you!

I suffer from internal vibrations and PPPD and I've been trying to use meditation to calm my nervous system. Could any of you please suggest what I could do to further this and work on the amygdala too please? I also suffer from chronic fatigue.

Thanking you
Louise

This is not medical advice and you seek a doctor for your condition. The way I understand that Samatha meditation will not help with this condition. Samatha meditation generally suppresses your feelings and awareness. However, Vipassana meditation will help you as it promotes body awareness. Generally in Vipassana meditation, you learn to accept the way you and your body as it is with awareness. Also, make sure that you have good eating habits and a good daily exercise routine.


Understanding that Perception and Consciousness are temporary In five aggregates I'm bit confused when it says Perception and Consciousness are temporary . I can see form , feelings and formations are temporary by practice. Could someone provide me some more context to see this in practice ?

Mr/mrs nish1013

Perception (remembrance, preoccupation): How did you understand the word "world" when you have been 4 years, 15 years, now? Or let me ask: When you saw a attractive man/woman when you have 6 was it the same perception as with 16, and now? When did you learn what red looks like? How does pure red looks like. How do you feel about the person who writes you this answer? How will you perceive it later?

Consciousness (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, intellect): What is your current consciousness, of what are you aware right now? Of what have you been aware when you wrote this question? Have you been aware of a certain sound, form? Is it still present?

And let Atma then also ask you back of what you estimate being formation, feeling and body.

(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.)


Dharma without Karma? I simply ask myself rather one could make sense of the Dharma and apply it without the concepts of rebirth and kamma?

Though for me it is my personal approach to the Dharma, which i find to be highly meaningful in both theoretical and practical manner. As like no other intellectual complex, I think the Dharma could claim something like describing the essence and nature of being - if such claim should ever be stressed.
I would not dare to discuss this question as a devout follower. My interest is simply philosophical in its nature.

So i am just about to read C.W.Gorwans "Philosophy of the Buddha" and I am very pleased about how well balanced and respectful he treats the topic as a scholar of analytic philosophy.
Considering the concepts of kamma and rebirth, ONE of the approaches the author offers, is that the Lord Buddha just simply took kamma and rebirth as beliefs deriving from his culture, beliefs so deep and taken for granted that he would not spend a second on doubting it - although he must have been very critical to all kinds of believe. But for example, if you consider doubtful questioning in western philosophy, such as "the meditations" of Descartes and Husserl, it seems mostly obvious that doubt could never ever stressed out in the whole sense. Even though while claiming that radical doubt will set up everything to the disposition of rational examination, there will always be some "leftover" belief as remains (for Descartes it was god , for Husserl it must have been the ego). The latter should also be a position that C.Taylor stresses in his historical treatise "Sources of the Self".

Ok, but coming back in addressing my question to you as experts in the Dharma, what are your opinions about this issue? Could we make sense of the teaching of the Lord Buddha without believing that we will be reborn?

As for the concept of kamma, it is possible to make sense of it without believing in rebirth.

Well I do not expect a discussion on a very high intellectual level, but maybe an exchange of ideas and opinions on the applicability of "Buddhism" and its precious teaching in a mindset that could be called "western".
As I found out that it is a major critique of native Buddhists about western fellows that they don't sufficiently reflect the teaching according to their own culture and should not simply adopt it as a belief - which would actually be contradicting the Dharma.

warm regards!

Though "dharma without rebirth" have appeared here more than once ...

What if there is no rebirth?
What's the value or harm of a literal belief in rebirth?
Is a belief in rebirth a necessity for Buddhist practice?
Is rebirth a delusional belief?
Is rebirth/reincarnation central to Buddhism?

... I'll tackle some of the points as they come to me with a interesting clothing.

"Considering the concepts of kamma and rebirth, ONE of the approaches the author offers, is that the Lord Buddha just simply took kamma and rebirth as beliefs deriving from his culture"

I'm not a buddhologist, so personally, for me to take the proposed idea seriously, the author would have to show, at least:

why the Buddha took the view of those that believe in rebirth and karma?

there's evidence that his context was diverse in regard to beliefs, and that belief in rebirth and karma may not have been as popular as we would think. So why picking this one in particular, when other views are available and believed?
If rebirth/karma was indeed such a deep part of the culture he was in, why he would "sacrifice truth for pedagogy sake" in that particular case?

...when he clearly refused in other circumstances, let alone, that he stated "whatever a Tathagata says from the moment of his enlightenment to his parinirvana, that is so, and not otherwise" -- DN29.
In the case of textual corruption inserting rebirth/karma doctrine, how these corruptions took place, and why?

it would certainly have to happen very early on. Maybe with the cumplicity of all monks and disciples (an extremely ambitious project, I'd say).

"[...] beliefs so deep and taken for granted that he would not spend a second on doubting it"

There's plenty of evidence of the Buddha being careful about his statements (see also number 2 above). Not having knowledge about something (specially something about dharma, his specialty) and declaring it would be quite careless on his part.

"Dharma without karma?"

As for the above, the tradition rejects this view. It's not just a matter of "because it's on the suttas" -- though it's overwhelmingly on the suttas. But I think that (a) the doctrine itself is intimately intertwined with these concepts; (b) it provides a complete picture of the grand scheme of things; and (c) it justifies in a very strong way the importance of the buddhist soteriology, nirvana.

But rebirth/karma seems to be something put aside by secular buddhists. I think their method for rejecting is through empirical evidence and their focus is on practicality. That is, they reject because of the lack of empirical evidence for both concepts, or inability to conciliate them with related empirical evidences:

  It is for reasons such as these that any contemporary, scientifically informed Buddhist practice should reject belief in rebirth and its associated kammic causation. The Path is rich enough without them. And while we can make good use of kamma and rebirth as metaphor for our moment-to-moment lived experience of change, or of skillful and unskillful action, we simply cannot make any more of it and expect to end up with a system which is compatible with our best understanding of the way the world works.

  -- http://secularbuddhism.org/2013/05/29/a-secular-evaluation-of-rebirth/


Where to get the Pali Canon in Pali? Does anyone know of a place on the Internet, where one can find the entire Pali Canon written in Pali ? I did a basic search but could not find any such resource.
          Also, where can one buy a hard-copy of the entire Pali Canon(written in Pali) ? It would be helpful even if someone can point me to hard-copies of at least the Sutta-Pitaka in Pali ?

You can get a hard copy text of the Pali Text Society edition from:

The Pali Text Society: http://palitext.com
(they also have sets of the translations) Become a member and receive a nice discount.

You can find an on-line version of the BJT text at:
Metta Net Lanka:
http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/index.html

You can get a searchable CD from the Vipassana Research Institute:
http://www.vridhamma.org/Chattha-Sangayana-CD-ROM-Update

Access to insight
http://accesstoinsight.org
has the pali text linked to the suttas they have posted. This is the BJT text and I believe has the entire Pali, not just the ATI-linked suttas.

I have a different version, linked to the suttas I have posted. It is based on the BJT version, proofed against the PTS version. Incomplete, but formatted in a way that is very readable. Working towards completion. Not likly for a good time yet.
http://obo.genaud.net
see the What's New Page for new listings, the Sutta Index for what is now available.


"Mystics" in buddhism? ("There is nothing hidden in my teaching" and the like) For our next meeting in the "interreligious dialogue" we members are asked to do a statement about the "mystics" in each ones religion.

Now, "mystics" is itself a mysterious term, I looked via wikipedia at some sources, what exactly the term means - well, not much more than that there is something hidden that noone else can see/sense/know, derived from the greek root of the term saying "closing eyes, closing the mouth". (Which does not mean that the term was not used for many speculative or intimate concepts in many religious threads, be it in Brahmanism (later, around the Buddha's time with the Upanishads and even later many that threads which we subsume now under "Hinduism"), Judaism ("Kabbala"), even Christianism (especially in the medieval east-european religious scene), Gnosticism and also Islam (by "Sufism") and surely other religious stands which I cannot name all here, and that it does not have a very broad usage over the cultures.)

For me, Buddhism (as I know it from the Tipitaka) has never been a matter with (systematically) "hidden" things/concepts (at least not prominently), so I tend to develop my statement towards something like "mysticism (in this sense) has not been intended by the Buddha" - and I remember vaguely that there is a sutta, where he explicitely says, there is no "closed fist" in my teaching or something very similar.
(Of course, meditating towards the occurrence of Jhanas, the Jataka-stories, the Deva-worlds, the sutta about the Kalpas and the non-accesible "Beginning-of-all" deals with concepts which cannot be seen and need closed eyes, closed mouth and might be used as source for extended mysticism in folklore (I just recall the funny story of Maha-Mogallana, when he saw an otherwise invisible skeleton flying around and how this bizarre event made its way even into a discourse with the Buddha ...), but for me these are not so prominent as the teachings and guides for the analytic access to the relevant world)

So, my question is : in which sutta did the Buddha speak (explicitely/citeable (!) ) about that his teaching has nothing closed/hidden in it (as I think to recall with the term "fist")?

Addendum: I've put so much context around my question because it might as well be that there are (again explicitely/citeable) sayings which contrast this in a sensical way - of course when we meditate also we "close the eyes to look inside" and focus on the "inner world"...

It's the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, DN 16:

31. And the Blessed One recovered from that illness; and soon after his recovery he came out from his dwelling place and sat down in the shade of the building, on a seat prepared for him. Then the Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One, respectfully greeted him, and sitting down at one side, he spoke to the Blessed One, saying: "Fortunate it is for me, O Lord, to see the Blessed One at ease again! Fortunate it is for me, O Lord, to see the Blessed One recovered! For truly, Lord, when I saw the Blessed One's sickness it was as though my own body became weak as a creeper, every thing around became dim to me, and my senses failed me. Yet, Lord, I still had some little comfort in the thought that the Blessed One would not come to his final passing away until he had given some last instructions respecting the community of bhikkhus."
32. Thus spoke the Venerable Ananda, but the Blessed One answered him, saying: "What more does the community of bhikkhus expect from me, Ananda? I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. Whosoever may think that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give last instructions respecting them. But, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such idea as that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him. So what instructions should he have to give respecting the community of bhikkhus?
(source)

The Pali is simply:

natthānanda tathāgatassa dhammesu ācariyamuṭṭhi.
Ananda, there is no teacher's fist in regards to the dhammas of the Tathāgata.


Right Livelihood Monastics Since we know (in some traditions) monks and nuns can't work, what is meant by right livelihood for them?

Right Livelihood for monks (in the Theravada tradition) would equate to following the dhamma-vinaya.

That is to work towards liberation for the benefit of all living beings and to act in accordance with this goal. The Buddha provided a set of 227 rules, which monks should abide by, for those who want to walk and live the path to its fullest extent.

Hopefully others can weigh in and quote exact passage from the cannon

Edit:

I was reading and stumbled upon a sutra, which may add to the discussion.

  “And what, monks, is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with right livelihood. This, monks, is called right livelihood."

  An Analysis of the PathMagga-Vibhaṅga Sutta  (SN 45:8)


Is Constant Meditation Hindering my Creativity? I recently became more consistent with focused breathing meditation. I feel that since I practice, I tend to fall into such breath-focused meditation while walking, on public transport, etc. Yet, this type of practice is both much less focused than formal sitting, and it seems to inhibit otherwise free thought which I used for creative purposes.

Is there a drawback to constant focused-meditation?

Clearly, some times are needed to contemplate situations. How does one know how to balance focused-meditation and other types of attention?

Yes, the Buddhas way or creativity, of meditation, has only one aim: to stop creativity, e.g all kinds of concentrations for becomings sake. So nothing wrong for one with right view or vision toward liberation.

What ever comes into being is a matter of the act of concentration, now this can be used, by right concentration, to gain independence, as concentration depends always on food.

So the question might more a matter of fear of independence, right, i.e doubt in the Rightly-selfawakened and meditating without having gone for a refuge?

Well it's of cause that one fears if having no refuge as base.

{note: not given for concentration, burning of food and feeds for the world, but to gain liberation by observing the Dhamma with proper attention}


Is really that "Breath Stops when Thought Stops" Is Body - Breath - Mind are connected to each other, and Thinking process really need oxygen to operate. When I sit for meditation i feel my breath is stop (Gap) and thought slows down, but for very minimum time.

Mental Fabrications is associated with sensations, hence will not stop until sensations stop. There are ways to stop thoughts is to develop Nirodha Samapatti or realise Nirvana by other means. When you have Nirvana as object only will your thinking stop. Verbal fabrication which is Thinking and Pondering will stop in the second Jhana.

When breathing stops your bodily fabrications have stopped. But when thoughts arise new fabrications arise which might have bodily impact hence breathing start again.

The there is a gap or breathing stops you have to contemplate the sensations you experience in the upper lip or even the whole body. See: LECTURE FOUR: MASTERING THE VEDANA by ANAPANASATI - MINDFULNESS WITH BREATHING Unveiling the Secrets of Life: a Manual for Serious Beginners. When the breath is there look at the flow and touch of the breath. When it is not the sensations on the last point the breath touched. (2nd Tetrads)

Do not get alarmed if your breath stops for a long duration but this should not be forced.

Source: Anapanasati


Should I practice Anapana after 10 day Vipassana course? I have completed 10-days Vipassana course and I would like to keep on practicing back home. Goenkaji's discourse tells us to practice Vipassana 1 hour each morning and evening every day.Is there a need to practice Anapana along with Vipassana if so how often?

Anapana in the context of the one hour sessions should be practiced if your mind not not calm, i.e., :

Lot of distracting thoughts
You are emotional
Hindrances have come up
etc.

It is always good to do about 5 to 15 minutes to start with, to calm your mind.