Role of the Buddhist in preserving the original teachings This is a very common dilemma.

If you go look for some Buddhist books here in the west (I guess the same thing happens in the east) you will easily find books written by monks and general authors, it is not common to find the suttas. That would be equivalent to look for books on Christianism and don't find the Bible, curiously it doesn't happen, it is easier to find the Bible than books written by priests for instance.

The point that I'm trying to make is that sometimes those books, unfortunately, ignores or even contradicts some of the basic Buddha's teachings, they can create misconcepts in people's minds. I'm not talking about different schools, I'm talking about the original teachings shared by most of them, the suttas.

When a Buddhist faces this situation, when he finds someone with a wrong concept, something that clearly has no basis on the Buddha's teachings, either Vinaya or Sutta Pitaka, what should he or she do? Should he/she correct the person or just let it be?

I would go with "correct" however you will see that most Buddhist leaders don't do that, they prefer to ignore misconcepts and focus on what they believe to be right, there are lots of precautions to avoid long debates in Buddhism... this is why it becomes a dilemma! What to do?

First a couple of comments...

It is to be expected that in a non-Buddhist country you wouldn't find as much authentic Buddhist literature as you would in Buddhist countries. In Thailand, for example, it is quite easy to obtain a full translation of the entire tipitaka... two different translations, actually.

Of course, the fact that the tipitaka is tens of times the size of the bible makes it relatively expensive to translate, print, ship, etc., and so it is not exactly the kind of thing you see in hotel rooms (for other reasons as well).

I think there are several reasons for the plethora of misleading or quasi-Buddhist literature available today: the sheer magnitude of the teaching can lead to lopsided interpretations; the difficulty in penetrating the teachings can lead to sloppiness, etc.; the general usefulness of the teachings can lead to misappropriation of the teachings due to ulterior motives, etc.

But, to answer your question.  It's important to distinguish between what a monk should do and what a lay person should do. There is relatively little in the Buddha's teaching about what lay people "should" do in matters like this; there isn't always definitive guidelines even for monks. Buddhism is much less a religion of "should" than it is a religion of "can", in the sense of laying out a description of reality and pointing out the causal relationships between actions and reactions.

There is some guidance to be found in this particular matter, though; specifically in the Brahmajala Sutta, which begins with a nice intro tale of how to react to those who malign (or praise) the Buddha, Dhamma, or Sangha:

  "If, bhikkhus, others speak in dispraise of me, or in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Sangha, you should unravel what is false and point it out as false, saying: 'For such and such a reason this is false, this is untrue, there is no such thing in us, this is not found among us.'

  DN 1

So, there's a "should" for you. There are also rules of protocol in the vinaya on how to deal with monks who profess wrong views, e.g.:

  Should any bhikkhu say the following: “As I understand the Dhamma taught by the
  Blessed One, those acts the Blessed One says
  are obstructive, when engaged in are not
  genuine obstructions,” the bhikkhus are to admonish him thus: “Do not say that,
  venerable sir. Do not slander the Blessed One, for it is not good to slander the Blessed
  One. The Blessed One would not say anything l
  ike that. In many ways, friend, the
  Blessed One has described obstructive acts, and when engaged in they are genuine
  obstructions.

  Pāc 68

but these are of course restricted to within the monastic order.

A lay person who speaks in dispraise of the dhamma may be ostracised by the monks (Sg 8), though I don't suppose this relates directly to your question.

Ultimately, I think there is precedence for pointing out when someone has clearly misrepresented the Buddha. Whether one "should" do so seems highly dependent on circumstance and ability - both of oneself to correct, and of the other to accept correction.


Within Theravāda tradition, what are the differences in doctrine and practice between schools and sects around the world? I'm considering spending some time in the future in retreats to have a taste of what monastic life is like.
It seems that Theravāda is the current tradition most related and compatible to my moral principles and philosophical ideas.

But before spending too money on flight and residence without complete certainty on the differences and traits of schools around the globe, I'd like get enough information.

So, as I've written in the title, what are the main differences between schools, lineages, branches and sects in the Theravāda tradition?

Also, only if possible -and if it's allowed by the forum's rules-, if you were to go forth, what monastery would you choose, and why?
(Just in case, I'm not asking what tradition is better or what is the closest one to the original teachings, because every sect can say that they're the ones).

Thanks for your time!
Have a nice day!

It appears that some teachers and traditions are more focused on samatha and jhana like Pa Auk Sayadaw and Ajahn Brahm.

And then there are other teachers and traditions that are more focused on vipassana like Mahasi Sayadaw, Ledi Sayadaw, Sayagyi U Ba Khin and his student S.N. Goenka, Ajahn Tong Sirimangalo and his student Yuttadhammo.

Samatha is cultivation of concentration and vipassana is cultivation of insight.

Ultimately both are needed.


Did Gautama Buddha know his path? When Siddhartha Gautama started his path, before acknowledging the possibility of achieving and passing on the path to enlightenment, is there reference of his thoughts before making the decision to influence the world and ease its suffering?

Possibly. For example, MN 4:

Before my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened Bodhisatta, the
thought occurred to me ... If anyone, when speaking rightly, were to say: 'a being not subject to delusion has appeared in the world for the benefit & happiness of many, out of
sympathy for the world, for the welfare, benefit & happiness of human
& divine beings,' he would rightly be speaking of me.


Vipassana report on breathing In the vipassana practice, my teacher asks me to give a detailed report of one of my breathing rise and falling. I've tried but he tells me that the report is too general, that I need to provide more details. Can someone give me an example of a detailed report? Here it is mine. Some feedback?

Rise:
1- the belly starts to rise slowly, with ease
2- then it speeds up and takes in a lot of air
3- I feel a resistance, belly is close to the maximum volume, but the breathing goes on and it even hurts a bit. It slows down and stops.

Falling:
1- breath out very fast from the beginning. I feel a relieve on the belly.
2- continue to breath out fast
3- I feel there is not much air left and I feel a resistance on the belly, pain again, until it slows down and stops.

This is not for other people to answer.

This is your own work. Only we ourselves can work and develop ourselves.

It can actually be harmful for a meditator to hear what lies ahead on the path before he or she has attained those fruits. That is because the Mind can then try to search for the things one has heard or read. That is not good. They should come naturally as practice develops.

Go meditate and find your answers or ask your teacher if you do not understand the practice or technique.


Does the Buddha suggest a change in practice after the unfolding of Sotapanna? For two years there has been daily meditation. For 10 months there has been the addition of satipathanna practice and present moment awareness. 4 months ago the self was seen as a creation of imagination. There followed two hours of laughter and joy. Later that day there were demon images in the mind. Inwardly smiling they disappeared then the body became electrified and there was a sense of being in the precise moment. One week later occured a formless jhana in the shopping centre. It appears three awakenings or major shifts happened in the space of one week.

It seems like an unknown force is guiding things now. Troublesome thoughts can be dismissed very easily. Suffering has reduced by about 60 percent. There has been strong desire for women and feeling bad towards family members. This is where the sense of self seems strongest.

After the unfolding of Sotapanna which is massively transformational, does the Buddha suggest a change in practice?

No, the practitioner no need changing the practice.

The practitioner has to comprehends 3 characteristics of 5 aggregates, which cycling as the dependent origination, from being ordinary until arahatta-magga. But the teaching literature may be difference. See the description after the below quote.

So, in Sutta. Saṃ. Kha. Sīlavantasutta taught the same meditation for all people, ordinary and all noble one:

  On one occasion Ven. Sariputta & Ven. Maha Kotthita were staying near
  Varanasi in the Deer Park at Isipatana. Then Ven. Maha Kotthita,
  emerging from seclusion in the late afternoon, went to Ven. Sariputta
  and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an
  exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he
  was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "Sariputta my friend,
  which things should a virtuous monk attend to in an appropriate way?"

  "A virtuous monk, Kotthita my friend, should attend in an appropriate
  way to the five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a
  disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a
  dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. Which five? Form as a
  clinging-aggregate, feeling... perception... fabrications...
  consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. A virtuous monk should attend
  in an appropriate way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant,
  stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction,
  alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that
  a virtuous monk, attending in an appropriate way to these five
  clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would realize the fruit
  of stream-entry."

  "Then which things should a monk who has attained stream-entry attend
  to in an appropriate way?"

  "A monk who has attained stream-entry should attend in an appropriate
  way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a
  disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a
  dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that a monk
  who has attained stream-entry, attending in an appropriate way to
  these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would
  realize the fruit of once-returning."

  "Then which things should a monk who has attained once-returning
  attend to in an appropriate way?"

  "A monk who has attained once-returning should attend in an
  appropriate way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant,
  stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction,
  alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that
  a monk who has attained once-returning, attending in an appropriate
  way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would
  realize the fruit of non-returning."

  "Then which things should a monk who has attained non-returning attend
  to in an appropriate way?"

  "A monk who has attained non-returning should attend in an appropriate
  way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a
  disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a
  dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that a monk
  who has attained non-returning, attending in an appropriate way to
  these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would
  realize the fruit of arahantship."

  "Then which things should an arahant attend to in an appropriate way?"

  "An arahant should attend in an appropriate way to these five
  clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an
  arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, an emptiness,
  not-self. Although, for an arahant, there is nothing further to do,
  and nothing to add to what has been done, still these things — when
  developed & pursued — lead both to a pleasant abiding in the
  here-&-now and to mindfulness & alertness."

But the teaching literature may be difference. Each enlightenment depend on each personal understanding-ability because each person has difference own understandable dhamma, i.e. Pañcavaggī were professional of aggregates before he meet buddha, but Dīghanakha were  professional of six sense fields  before he meet buddha, etc.

Dīghanakha enlightened nibbāna as sotāpanna by comprehending 3
characteristics  of the dependent origination (nāma-rūpa) in Sutta.
Ma. Ma. Dīghanakhasutta.
A thousand jaṭila  enlightened nibbāna as arahanta  by comprehending
3 characteristics of the dependent origination (six sense fields, six
contacts, six feeling) in Sutta. Saṃ. Saḷa. Ādittapariyāyasutta.
Koñḍañña-pañcavaggī enlightened nibbāna as sotapanna  by comprehending
3 characteristics of the fourth noble truth in Sutta. Saṃ. Ma.
Dhammacakkappavattanasutta.

All pañcavaggī enlightened nibbāna as arahanta  by comprehending 3
characteristics of five aggregates, which is continuous from the five
clinging-aggregates suffering noble truth of
Dhammacakkappavattanasutta above, in Sutta. Saṃ. Kha.
Anattalakkhaṇasutta.


Does any sutta talk about the right conditions for teaching the Dhamma? I've read in other posts (such as this one) about the right way to teach the Dhamma.

But is there a way to know about the "when", i.e. when to reach out someone else to teach the Dhamma?

In specific, I'd like to know if one should teach only when asked for it, or if one should make assumptions about the other's needs or degree of knowledge when trying to help him/her (regardless if that person asked for that helped or not).

If you could provide information about suttas where this is talked about, I'd really appreaciate it. I'd even be grateful if personal experiences are given.

Thanks for your time and patience!

Part Three: The 16 Dealing with Teaching Dhamma
57. I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an umbrella in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.

I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a staff in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a knife in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a weapon in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.
[62.] I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing non-leather [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a vehicle who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits clasping his knees and who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing headgear who is not ill: a training to be observed.
I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head is covered (with a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to be observed.
Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be observed.
Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training to be observed.
Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting who is not ill: a training to be observed.
Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed.
Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking on the path who is not ill: a training to be observed.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/sv/bhikkhu-pati.html


What is the sutra where the Buddha emits fire and water from his body? I've seen pictures that depict the Buddha floating in the air and emitting fire from this torso and water from his legs. The fire and the water might be the other way around. I think the picture illustrates a sutra or other text. Does anyone know what the original text might be?

It's called the "twin miracle": The DPPN entry under Yamaka pātihāriya says,

  The Twin Miracle is described at DA.i.57, and in very great detail at DhA.iii.204; see also J.iv.263ff. etc.


Trouble understanding "sensual misconduct" Is this phrase analogous to over-indulgence in sense pleasures, or is indulgence in any sense pleasure at any level considered a form of misconduct? Thankya

It is true, the precept reads "kāmesu", which literally means "in regards to sensuality", but in this instance as elsewhere, kāma refers specifically to sexual sensuality - it's one recognized meaning of the word:

kāmesūti methunasamācāresu methunavatthūsu vā.
"kāmesu" means either "in regards to sexual activity" or "in regards to the objects of sexuality".
DN-A 3.10.33

So, the meaning really is "wrong behaviour in regards to sexuality", and the definition of what is wrong is fairly specific; not all sexual behaviour is considered wrong for the purposes of this precept, and certainly not all sensual indulgence. This has been covered in answers to another question about this precept already.


Panpsychism and philosophical interpretations of buddhism I got wondering, idly it's not part of any practice or effort, that everything has something like empathy, but of one thing, empathy for the buddha.

Can that be read into buddhism, or panpsychism at all?

Might the answer to this fall under the terms "empathy" and "response", as drawn from the lotus sutra?

I promise this will be my last question, sorry for starting so many :)

All is consciousness and all is not consciousness and neither of the preceding is true. This is the kind of logic that Zen sees the world in ways that at best are uncertain.

In one sense you are asking does a table have Buddha nature?

This has been answered in this post Does a dog have Buddha nature?
The Buddha-nature of a dog

I have only found one thing that helps me, when I find empathy and compassion for all beings. What their nature is does not seem to affect me. My own acts in consciousness do affect me directly.


How important is the Sixth Precept to monks and nuns? I can only speak from the Mahayana world but I'd be very interested in the Theravada side. I'm suspect it will be enlightening.

How important is the Sixth Precept to monks and nuns? In my experience the few that profess a claim to follow it refer to "noon" as something nebulous or in a different time zone. Every monastic I know eats after noon. Also if it doesn't have to be followed then why? It seems the bending of precepts can be a dangerous thing or like the proverb says "Hell is full of good meanings, but heaven is full of good works".

Thank you so much for your time.

Here's an alleged quote from the Dalai Lama,

  After my lunch I come here to my office until about 5:30. Then at 6:00 I have my evening tea-as a Buddhist monk, no dinner, sometimes just a few biscuits or some bread. At that time I always watch BBC television. Then evening meditation for about one hour and at 8:30, sleep. Most important meditation! Sleep is the common meditation for everyone-even for birds. The most important meditation. Not for nirvana, but for survival!

In other words he "eats" but doesn't "have dinner".

In this video Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu explained why he prefered to eat once a day.
It's noticeable that both his companions laughed at time 12:15 of this video.


How to "abandon the fetters completely"? I was thinking about this comment ...

  Yes, my target is to abandon the three fetters completely. I can make sense of 'Doubt' and 'grasping at precepts+practices', getting rid of the identity view is the hardest.

... and wondering about what "completely" means. I thought this answer implies that identity view (abandoned at first stage) and conceit (abandoned at last stage) are somewhat on a continuum.

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

I think that the Abhidhamma talks of "moments" (thought-moments), but that the suttas don't, so ... (knowing little of the Abhidhamma) I'm not sure whether this ("enlightened moments") is a good description.

There was also this ...

  The definition of a path is: A virtuous mind conjoined with renunciation.

... which, put me in mind of different moments (places, instants) along a path.

If "enlightened moments" is a good metaphor e.g. for a sotapanna, I was wondering what the difference is between that and the "higher" stages of enlightenment -- and how to achieve or progress towards those, what (what practice and/or realization) is required?

Is it right to say that the difference is more a matter of degree than a matter of kind? Something like ...

  A Once-returner (Sakadagami) has greatly attenuated:

  Sensual desire
  Ill will

  A Non-returner (Anāgāmi) is free from:

  Sensual desire
  Ill will

... suggests this may be gradual, progressive?

Does the "dhamma-eye" being associated with stream entry imply that "the Dhamma" is already seen at that stage, and thence can only become more ever-present (more of the same)?

Is it 'only' that 'enlightened moments' become more continual, regular, longer, normal, without intervals?

If that's so then is that related to so-called "mindfulness" -- which I imagine might mean "the ability to (more or less continually) remember the dhamma" and also "guarding the senses (to avoid getting carried away)".

So, lastly, why does Right Concentration (samma samadhi) talk exclusively about jhanas? Are they, how and/or why are they, at what point or stage are they, relevant and necessary for any (further) progress?

Can you outline any connection between practising jhanas and living/acting/thinking in the world? Or are they unrelated, is a "seclusion" the only path and the ultimate goal (or at least through, i.e. up to and including, non-returner)?

Phew, big question! Let's see if I can address some of that...

"The process" definitely gets harder to talk about as it progresses. This is true not only in my personal experience, but is also substantiated by the tradition. Indeed, if Enlightenment was simple and straightforward to explain, wouldn't everyone be enlightened by now? More seriously, would Buddhism evolve so many different schools with their unique ways to talk about it?

According to most schools, the mind of Buddha is indescribable. Some schools insist Buddha is completely mindless (the consciousness ceases), while others posit that while Buddha does have awareness, it is completely beyond concepts. Buddha himself said:

  A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with.

If the above does not explain, it at least provides some justification for why the talk about Enlightenment can hardly not be metaphorical, beating around the bush, and involving multiple mutually contradicting descriptions.

Is it gradual?

Yes and No. It is gradual in the sense that it involves work and unfolds increasingly over time... It's not "gradual" in the sense that it can not be achieved by doing the same thing again and again mechanically, and waiting for it to just happen. (Google "Zen polishing the tile" story.)

One of my teachers said: "Enlightenment is a choice we keep on making". This highlights one aspect of it, that it's not necessarily asymptotic nor is it irreversible, but because it's "a choice" we must learn to "keep on making", there is a sense in which Enlightenment is a skill that is developed over time.

You do know that this very question (gradual vs. sudden) was the main point of debate between the schools of Chan, as well as between Chan and Tibetan Buddhism? Although, some modern scholars conclude that such a reified distinction between schools was more like a rhetorical device used by the subsequent schools, and that none of the historical schools (to an extent that we can even talk about distinct "schools") were in fact fully "sudden" or "gradual".

Is it more and more moments?... there's no such thing as an "enlightened person"...

I would rather characterize it as "less and less" rather than "more and more". In my experience, it is less and less grasping/attachment, less and less overgeneralization, less and less confusing abstractions with reality, less and less losing emotional balance. And yes, less and less "enlightened person", less and less thinking/worrying about oneself in general, less and less trying to characterize oneself as something specific (enlightened or whatever). Less and less thinking of oneself as one distinct entity or agent. Less and less conflict, less and less suffering. It's like, the tangle gets progressively looser, until it's barely in a single piece anymore. Or, a fire that is pulled apart, into individual pieces of wood...

I was wondering what the difference is between [sotapanna] and the "higher" stages of enlightenment -- and how to achieve or progress towards those, what (what practice and/or realization) is required?

I think it requires the kind of practice that Buddha metaphorically described as leveling of the earth, starting from the mountains, then hills, then progressively smaller features, until even the ground itself is "flattened away", followed by space and the very mind itself. The way I understand this, we should keep looking for obstacles to suchness - the sources of existential conflict that generate the experience of suffering.

The sense of "I" is just one of such sources (albeit a major one). Another big source of suffering, recognized in Mahayana, is the idea of Enlightenment itself (aka the idea of Nirvana as goal "over there"). At some point the practitioner is supposed to "get over" (to quote my Zen Master) the notion of the goal, because the very notion of the goal dependently co-creates anxiety of not having reached the goal. Just another "bump" to be "leveled". Then there is this idea of reincarnation or rebirth, which is really just the good old Self in disguise. And then there are myriads other "bumps" not necessarily as universal but equally important for an individual practitioner. Someone is hung up on the unrequited love, someone has a problem of being self-conscious and shy in the social setting, someone is passive-aggressive etc. Every one of these is supposedly rooted in some sort of attachment/overgeneralization that must be transcended on the way to complete Enlightenment.

In this light, achieving progress towards the higher stages definitely requires going beyond the basic morals/meditation/philosophy and into the nitty-gritty of our everyday life situations and hang-ups. Like, definitely, 100%.

Does the "dhamma-eye" being associated with stream entry imply that "the Dhamma" is already seen at that stage...

As I said in other answers, I think that stream-entry is by definition the point when one gets more or less clear about the problem, the goal, and the method - and hence "enters the stream" of right practice solving the right problem, leading to the right goal. With stream-entry, suffering has been directly recognized as subjective condition, relationship between craving/attachment/overgeneralization and suffering has been directly seen, the cessation of suffering has been directly realized in at least one real case, and -- most importantly -- the overall way "things work" has been intuitively grasped.

Practice subsequent to stream-entry may certainly involve new discoveries and realizations, it's not like you stop learning - but all these discoveries and realizations should all fit within / feed back into, this basic framework of 4NT and "the way things work".

In a recent answer I said, stream-entry is when a student is supposed to completely get it 100% with no doubts, unlike Buddha who has to figure it out from scratch having doubts until the last moment. But in practice that 100% point-in-time understanding was only possible back when Buddha was still alive and Dharma was delivered straight from the source. As time passes between the lifetimes of Buddha and the student, the Dharma gets gradually more "corrupted" (diluted, mixed-up), and the phenomenon of stream-entry gets gradually less straightforward. The future students of Buddhism must do more and more work by themselves to figure out the puzzle, which makes their paths increasingly closer to that of the Buddha, at least in this one sense.

, and thence can only become more ever-present (more of the same)? ...is that related to so-called "mindfulness"?

In my experience, as Dharma is internalized, and the habit of grasping is reduced, what I call "hard mindfulness" (keeping a constant watch over oneself) gives way to something much more fluid, more like the effortless ice skating. So, if we can speak about "more of the same" - it's more of the same fluidity and effortlessness. It's not that due to mindfulness your "moments of enlightenment" keep growing until it's one continuous Enlightenment. It's more like, due to the letting go and non-grasping, the GAPS between samsaric moments occur more and more frequently, until the whole thing gets so loose that it's not there anymore. Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche spoke about this at length, the porous nature of reality, the soda-bubbles, the ping-pong, the gaps, and the space dancing with itself. I think it's a nice way to describe it. In fact, one of the biggest virtues of Tantra (in my opinion) is providing a language to talk about these indescribable experiences in a way that can be shared and understood.

Why does Right Concentration (samma samadhi) talk exclusively about jhanas? Are they, how and/or why are they, at what point or stage are they, relevant and necessary for any (further) progress?

My teacher said that in the Eightfold Path, concentration (Samadhi) is not your regular "concentration" as in focusing on an object. It's more like ability to shift your attention of your subjective world to achieve a particular perspective on things. For example, we can look at things from a biological standpoint, or a sociological standpoint, or a semiotic standpoint, or a Buddhist standpoint. According to my teacher, in the Eightfold Path, concentration (Samadhi) requires developing an ability to control our perspective/attention of how we see the moment and life at large.

Specifically in Buddhism, first we develop ability to see the world phenomenologically as The Six Senses, Five Skandhas etc. Then we step it up a notch and develop ability to see Emptiness of all phenomena and the subject. Finally, we develop ability to let go of any position and sustain nirvikalpa-jnana, which is a completely unreified / unovergeneralized mode of awareness. Apparently this is what's actually referred to as Samadhi in the Eightfold Path.

Can you outline any connection between practising jhanas and living/acting/thinking in the world?

This is a big topic, but basically, the practice of jhana manifest in the everyday life as positive, upbeat attitude. You are supposed to understand the mechanisms of mind enough to be able to always maintain yourself in a good mood.

So there's all that on one hand... Now, let's put all this aside and talk about the following. In one sense, everything is already perfect. This includes the world and all sentiment beings including yourself (myself) in whatever state they are. Everything is perfect just as it is, with all its imperfections, that's a fact. Achieving a direct clear vision of this is known as the Sudden Enlightenment. It has an effect of completely liberating one from all suffering. After all, what suffering can there be, if everything is perfect? So when the Sudden Enlightenment schools make fun of gradualists, they understandably contrast the never ending perfectionism of gradualists with their own nice and simple way to be free, if only one can see it directly. Everything is perfect. Enlightenment is a choice we keep on making.

There's an opinion that Anuttara-Samyak-Saṁbodhi of the Buddha entails having both views of Enlightenment, gradual and sudden, coexist in one mind at the same time, with no cognitive dissonance whatsoever. I guess this is why Buddha's mind is said to be indescribable?


In the Anapanasati Sutta, what is the difference between mind and mental processes? The book Breath by Breath by Larry Rosenberg splits the Anapanasati Sutta into 4 tetrads. The wildmind website does a similar thing. In the second tetrad there is a verse that is rendered

  He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to mental processes, and to
  breathe out sensitive to mental processes.

and in the third tetrad there is the verse

  He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the mind, and to breathe
  out sensitive to the mind.

What is the difference between mental processes and the mind? In their English translations they look very similar. What is the original Pali words or phrases? Do they have difference translations or nuances that may make the differences clearer.

From the Anapanasati Sutta

"Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors for awakening to their culmination. The seven factors for awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination."

The four tetrads correspond to The Four Frames of Reference referred to above. They are (in Pali and English):

Kāyānupassanā satipaṭṭhāna: being mindful of the body as a frame of reference.
Vedanānupassanā satipaṭṭhāna: being mindful of feelings as a frame of reference.
Cittānupassanā satipaṭṭhāna: being mindful of the mind as a frame of reference.
Dhammānupassanā satipaṭṭhāna: being mindful of mental qualities as a frame of reference.

So the second tetrad in your example is mindfulness of feelings (vedanā) and the third is mindfulness of mind (citta).
A basic distinction of these is here:

1: The Body merely as a transient and compounded Form..
2: Feelings just as vanishing Reactions to sense-contact..
3: Mind only as a group of habitual and conditioned Moods..
4: All Phenomena (dhamma) simply as discrete momentary Mental States..


Are there any higher education opportunities in Buddhism? I am searching if Buddhism can be studied in Universities academically.

I searched for PhD positions, most are in US with ambiguous postings. There are programs in Thailand but most of the postings look expired.

So, can you help me know if there is any way to be an Academic Buddhist scholar? Are there any universities you know offering Buddhist studies? Any other suggestions in this direction.

In United States, the ones I have heard something nice about, that offer a professional program in Buddhist Studies:

University of Virginia - Department of Religious Studies. Very strong Indo-Tibetan Buddhism school.
University of Hawaii - Department of Religion. Very strong Chinese/Japanese Buddhism school.
Columbia University (New York) - Department of Religion. Strong Indo-Tibetan and Chinese/Japanese Buddhism school.
Rollins College in Florida - Department of Philosophy and Religion. Buddhist Ethics.
Naropa University, Colorado. Undergrad school for kids aspiring to grow in Buddhist Studies.

Many large universities in US offer a program in philosophy (or "comparative philosophy") with concentration in buddhist studies. See for example this list from the Tricycle magazine. Buddhist studies further specialize into Early&Theravada Buddhism, Indian-Tibetan Buddhism, and Chinese/Korean/Japanese Buddhism.

In my understanding, the way this (the choice of school for PhD) is usually done is: you find yourself drawn to one of those subfields of buddhist studies and realize that you keep enjoying online articles and published books by a particular professor from a particular college. Then you go to that college and study under that specific professor or one of his/her students. Like, you're definitely supposed to know much of the professor's work before you even show up as potential PhD candidate.

Also note that since studying Buddhism academically involves studying texts, the student at PhD level is expected to know a couple of primary languages (Pali, Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese) and a secondary language (usually French, since most early 20th century study of Buddhism was in that language, or perhaps Japanese or Korean if that's what you study).

Which is why you can't simply jump from a Master's in Engineering to a PhD in Buddhism. You need to start at the grad level and get the basic background in languages, history, culture, and philosophies of the geographical area corresponding to your preferred type of Buddhism.

A slightly less academical and more pragmatic approach is to pursue a degree in "Buddhist Ethics". I believe this usually helps avoid getting pigeonholed into a specific geohistorical tradition, and gets a more "applied" perspective on Buddhism, relevant to the real life in the modern society. Buddhist Ethics is something you'd get if you want to practice Buddhist leadership as opposed to doing research and translation.

Finally, if you dream of becoming a professional Buddhist Chaplain (a "priest"), you may want to consider pursuing the Master of Divinity degree. There is one now offered by the Harvard Divinity School and a number of less famous schools such as University of The West in LA and Maitripa College in Portland.


Is there any biological constraint to attain Nibbana? This question may look like a copy of this question, but I am asking in a broader sense including age limit.

The historical reference of a person attaining Nibbana in oldest age is Joshu, apparently, he became enlightened at the age of 80 and then settled down to become a master. But he looks like some kind of exception.

Gotama Buddha attained Nibbana in His 30's, from scriptures all the others seem to be between 30's to 40's nobody is told to be very old. Neither was Bodhidharma, Zen patriarchs, Tibetan masters like Milarepa, Marpa all seem to be somewhere in 30's or 40's during their Nibbana, based on what all things they did after that.

So, I am asking is there any biological limitation, age limitation, for Nibbana?

As far as I know the youngest arahant in the sutta's was 7 years old. Unfortunately I don't remember which sutta this is.

So, I would say: no, there is no limitation to reaching arahanthood or nibbana.


how to label changing postures? Up until now when i change postures i said in my language the word for changing to a sitting posture and then "sitting" three times - now i think it overdoing it and i think maybe its best just to say "sitting sitting sitting" when changing posture form standing to sitting

and also the opposite instead of say "rising rising rising" and than "standing standing standing" i wonder if its best just to say "standing standing standing"

What is the offical accepted view on how one should lable the changing of postures in the mahasi sayadaw technique - specifically what ven.yuttdhammo is teaching ?

i wouldnt mind hearing opinions about this subject on whats best to do ect - but i would also like to know what is commonly recommended to most practitioners officially to do, what is the standard way of labeling the changing of postures -

also im asking on how to this in daily life and also when mediating or at a retreat -   if i dont have time to label 3 times "sitting sitting sitting"  but only 1 time "sitting" - whats the way to label in that case ?  (im asking what to label in on both scenarios)

The whole point of using words to note is that you are labeling the thing you are meditating on in accordance with what it is. If you are rising up to stand, you aren't actually standing at that time, so it is inappropriate to note it with the word standing, as you want the noting to be simultaneous with the object itself.

Ajahn Yuttadhammo explains some of the principles of the labeling being simultaneous in his section on walking meditation on page 16 of his meditation booklet where he writes:

  One should make the mental note   at the exact moment of each
  movement,  neither before or after the movement.

  If the mental note, "stepping right",  is made before the foot moves ,
  one is noting  something that has not yet occurred. If  one  move s
  the  foot first and then note s,  "stepping right", one is noting
  something in the past. Either way,   this cannot   be   considered
  meditation,   as   there   is   no awareness of reality in either case
  .


What did Buddha mean by the words "tranquillising the bodily formation" in the Anapanasati Sutta? “Here a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty hut, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, and established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out.
“Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands: ‘I breathe out short.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body of breath’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body of breath.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillising the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillising the bodily formation.’

This passage is translated with the same words in my native language, but I don't understand what does it mean.
The other English translation translates this as "stilling the body’s motion". Does "tranquillising the bodily formation" means the same as "stilling the body’s motion"?

"If "tranquillising the bodily formation" means "tranquillising the breath", then why didn't Buddha just said "tranquillising the breath"? – Damocle Damoclev"

"Tranquilizing the formation of body" or "stilling, calming, tranquilizing the construction of body", or "body-constructions", or most accurately "the identification with the intent to experience experience of the body", or "tranquilizing the breathing" or "stilling the body’s motion" or "releasing any inner neuroses manifesting as tensions and jerking in the body" and probably a hundred other ways of putting this are all saying the same thing but from different perspectives.

"Body" [ka ya = k-kha whatsoever], meaning in this case that which an individual considers to be 'his body', is an illusion formed from identification with the conjunction of name and form with consciousness thereof.

That which constitutes "Form" is different in different spheres of existence. In the human, it is formed at the point where earth (solidity), water (liquidity), fire (heat-and-light), and wind (motion) meet. In other realms the components (which are themselves views of a single phenomena from different perspectives - see: http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/an/idx_06_chakkanipata.htm#p41
are merged into the less tangible forms "resistance," "adhesion," "heat" and "light," and "motion" (animation).

'Breath' here is simply the movement of, or vibration of that light. It is at the point where the breath is calmed, stilled completely, that it is possible to distinguish between consciousness tied down to consciousness of form and consciousness not so tied.

This is the split of the mangos from the mango tree.

At that point it is possible, if one is aware that this is the freedom one has been seeking, to drop identification with that consciousness that has form as its object: one is able to see it as "not me" "not mine" "not my self" "not of myself" "other". Not seen as the freedom one seeks, that is temporary freedom; seen it is Nibbana.

It is for this reason that the statement is made: "Of Bodies, I say Breath is one."

Seeing, as does the ordinary human being, this body as the issue, the source of pain, an instruction such as "stilling the body's motion" or "releasing any inner neuroses manifesting as tensions and jerking in the body" is a correct instruction for the human level. This would make no sense to a deva of one of the realms above that of manusa where 'body' is perceived as purely light.

The Buddha's Dhamma is spoken of as Timeless because it was so worded that it could be heard with both ears: that of man and that of the devas.

That's why.


Is there any ritual or ceremony for House-Warming? I'm thinking house-warming for our new house so Is there any ritual or ceremony for house-warming in Buddhism and how do they perform? In which sutta it is discoursed?

Generally, we invite Sangha for a meal.
After the meal, they chant some blessings.
In Sri Lanka, we have overnight Pirith chanting in the new house.


Are there different types of enlightenment? I came across this article by Jack Kornfield in which he says that it is better to talk about enlightenments, since there are different versions of it. (So, this is not about different levels of enlightenment, but different enlightenments.)

Of course, I can imagine that Mahayana teaches something different than Theravada or other traditions and vice versa, but this article refers also to different types of enlightenment within Theravada.

Added by request:

  enlightenment as a shift in identity;

  liberation from greed, hatred and delusion;

  devotion and surrender, being carried by the Buddha’s “grace";

  When you actually experience consciousness free of identification with changing conditions, liberated from greed and hate, you find it multifaceted, like a mandala or a jewel, a crystal with many sides. Through one facet, the enlightened heart shines as luminous clarity, through another as perfect peace, through another as boundless compassion. Consciousness is timeless, ever-present, completely empty and full of all things. But when a teacher or tradition emphasizes only one of these qualities over the others, it is easy to be confused, as if true enlightenment can be tasted in only one way. Like the particle-and-wave nature of light, enlightenment consciousness is experienced in a myriad of beautiful ways.

He also describes different gates through which one can get enlightened:
The gate of impermanence, suffering, no-self. So far there is no surprise.
He then mentions more gates:

  There are many other gates: the gates of compassion, of purity, of surrender, of love. There is also what is called the “gateless gate.”

The way enlightenment expresses is also different according to JK:

  This is enlightenment as love.

  This is enlightenment as emptiness.

  He expresses enlightenment as fullness.

  Enlightenment as mindfulness.

  The Dalai Lama personifies enlightenment as compassionate blessing.

  He expressed enlightenment as wisdom.

(I would suggest to read the article.)
Naturally, I'm a bit puzzled now.

Do suttas also talk about different types?

The are the 3 Bodhis: Sammasambuddha, Pacceka-Buddha, Arahath. Then there is Sopadisesa-nibbana and Anupadisesa-nibbana. But I don't think that's what you are asking about when you say different types.

What you need to keep in mind is that same thing can be described in many different ways. To give an analogy, an elephant can be described as 'heavy' by some, 'tall' by some, 'large' by some, 'gracious' by some, 'noisy' by some etc.

One person can say "spreading the light" to which another might say "dispelling the darkness". But they both refer to the same thing.

On the other hand, different teachers and traditions might label different experiences as enlightenment depending on their understanding or misunderstanding. That does not mean there are many types of enlightenments. Otherwise the Buddha would have listed them down under the Third Noble Truth.

  enlightenment as a shift in identity

This is cutting off of identity-view(Sakkayaditti) when one attains Sotapanna. It is also partial liberation from delusion.

  liberation from greed, hatred and delusion;

This is when one attains Arahanthship. So it appears that Jack Kornfield might have gotten confused by the descriptions of different stages of enlightenment and different stages of mental purifications.

  devotion and surrender, being carried by the Buddha’s “grace";

This is not a description of enlightenment in Theravada Buddhism. But it may just mean that if one devoted oneself to the Buddha and submit to the practice of holly life under him, one will attain enlightenment.

  There are many other gates: the gates of compassion, of purity, of
  surrender, of love. There is also what is called the “gateless gate.”

There are only 3 real gates. Others may bring one close to enlightenment, but the meditator still has to attain absolute certainty of either impermanence, suffering or non-self to get to Nibbana. Read here for more details.

  This is enlightenment as love.

This maybe referring to attaining the Jhanas through Metta meditation. But there is more work to be done from there to reach enlightenment.

  This is enlightenment as emptiness

This maybe talking about ākiñcaññāyatana(infinite nothingness), the 7th Jhana or the 3rd Arupajhana. But it's still not enlightenment.

  He expresses enlightenment as fullness.

This maybe talking about the rapture and joy arising in the first jhana or the fruits of Buddhanussati meditation: "When a bhikkhu is devoted to this recollection of the Buddha, he is respectful and deferential towards the Master. He attains fullness of faith, mindfulness, understanding and merit. He has much happiness and gladness." -Visuddhimagga

  Enlightenment as mindfulness.

Mindfulness leads to enlightenment and Arahaths are said to be always mindful. But mindfulness itself is not enlightenment.

  The Dalai Lama personifies enlightenment as compassionate blessing.

Dalai Lama is not Theravada, but he could just mean that enlightened beings are compassionate and a blessing to the world.

  He expressed enlightenment as wisdom.

Wisdom leads to enlightenment. Seeing impermanence, suffering and non-self is wisdom.


Is there concept of recollection in Buddhism? Quoted below is from, Kitagiri Sutta MN 70

  …There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a
  teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one
  lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the
  Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of
  the teachings. Penetrating the meaning,

The question is where it says “one remember the Dhamma ” does this mean that the person is recollecting from previous forgotten knowledge?  To be specific does mindstream-continuum from previous life reaching the person been thought contain knowledge of the Dhamma albeit forgotten?

Is there concept of recollection in Buddhism?

Recollection meditation is a form of contemplative meditation. You should recollect as such, in the case of recollection of the Dhamma:

Well-taught is the True Teaching [the Dharma] of the Blessed One,

visible here and now,

immediate,

inviting one to come and see,

accessible,

to be personally known by the wise.

Source: (Agata,phala) Mahanama Sutta, Dhajagga Sutta
The outcome of this contemplative practice if done right is:

mind is straight

gains inspired knowledge in the goal [the meaning of Dharma],

gains inspired knowledge in the truth [the Dharma],

gains gladness connected with the Dharma;

when he is gladdened, zest is born;

when the mind is zestful, the body is tranquil;

the tranquil body feels happy;

when one is happy the mind becomes concentrated.

Source: (Agata,phala) Mahanama Sutta

The question is where it says “one remember the Dhamma ” does this mean that the person is recollecting from previous forgotten knowledge?

In the Kīta,giri Sutta mentions the following list with regard to training:

he who has faith (in a teacher) approaches him.

Approaching him, he respectfully draws near to him.

Respectfully drawing near to him, he lends his ear [listens attentively] to him.

He who lends his ear, listens to the Dharma.

Having listened to the Dharma, he remembers [memorizes] it.

Having remembered the teachings, he investigates their meaning.

Having investigated their meaning, he reflectively accepts the teachings.

Having reflectively accepted the teachings, desire [will-power] arises in him.

When desire [will-power] has arisen in him, he exerts himself [he applies his will].

Having exerted himself [Having applied his will], he weighs [balances his practice].

Having weighed [balanced his practice], he strives on.

Having strived, he realizes through his own body the supreme truth and sees it by penetrating
it with wisdom.

What is said here is to learn attentively, remember what is taught and understand the theory and practice.

To be specific does mindstream-continuum from previous life reaching the person been thought contain knowledge of the Dhamma albeit forgotten?

This remembering is to commit to memory what has been though and nothing to do with past life recollections.

In Buddhist meditation there are also techniques to recollect past lives. For this you have to develop abhiññā through Jhana.


How to deal with people and colleagues who are angry, complaining or seeking attention? For some reason I'm a magnet to bad people or people who are chronic complainers or attention seekers. They often come to me when they need to talk or vent. Especially at work. I don't really want to talk to them but I'm too friendly and not good at setting boundaries and I often just listen to them offering advice. It stresses me, especially when they are angry and they come to me to talk about it.
How can I deal with this in a skillful manner? I tried practicing Metta towards them which didn't work due to their negativity being too strong.

Difficult question because you wouldn't want these angry people turning on you because such people in the workplace often do. These people are often loitering in the workplace and can be a real danger. I left my last job due to such a person, who for years, I listened to, so often helped them with their work & at times even did their work for them. They were a talk-aholic, who had very low productivity (who I could manage due to my high productivity). But, during a certain issue, they turned against me & were used as a pawn to attack me.
Your 1st priority is your work. You don't want to be seen by your employer spending your time talking to others rather than working. The suttas say:

The employees thus ministered by their employer show their compassion
to him in five ways:
(i) they rise before him, (ii) they go to sleep after him, (iii) they
take only what is given, (iv) they perform their duties well, (v) they
uphold his good name and fame.
Sigalovada Sutta

In Buddhism, it is taught to never harm oneself for the sake of another.

Let one not neglect one's own welfare for the sake of another, however great. Clearly understanding one's own welfare, let one be
intent upon the good.

Dhammapada

You can possibly begin by replying: "I am really busy now and must focus on my work. Maybe we can talk during the tea break or lunch break".
You might find these people won't want to waste their tea & lunch break talking.


Buddha's views on the origin of the universe Did buddha comment anything about the origin of universe and about origin of life? And if no WHY?? So far whatever texts i have read, i haven't come across any such statement. Though it is not very important for man to know about it and rather he must concentrate on the present time on his actions and thoughts but atleast for the sake of satisfying curiosity of man he must have told .

And if no WHY??

The Buddha's explanation using that famous forest leaves simile from SN 56.31:

Once the Blessed One was staying at Kosambi in the simsapa1 forest. Then, picking up a few simsapa leaves with his hand, he asked the monks, "What do you think, monks: Which are more numerous, the few simsapa leaves in my hand or those overhead in the simsapa forest?"
"The leaves in the hand of the Blessed One are few in number, lord. Those overhead in the simsapa forest are more numerous."
"In the same way, monks, those things that I have known with direct knowledge but have not taught are far more numerous [than what I have taught]. And why haven't I taught them? Because they are not connected with the goal, do not relate to the rudiments of the holy life, and do not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. That is why I have not taught them.


Very speed mind and calm mind With mindfulness experience  that  there is a mind operating  very speed and realized  not worth.  After little time of thinking get rid of uneasiness happens automatically .That leed to feel happiness. What was the state of mind at this stage of meditation?is it the stage where mind operates on it's own?Mindfulness  mind is very  calm  but feel like not worth attach to it even.

You told so little information which could be many state.

The lowest state of the simple meditation of a person who can't ever do sitting meditation whole day through years.
The high state of a person who can do sitting meditation whole day through years simply.

Which one your are is depending on various information that you didn't told us. Calming, happiness,  feeling like not worth attach to it, etc. are not enough information to judge your state.

How long you sit per days?
Do you have the "instead characteristics of major characteristic and minor characteristic  (PaṭibhāgaNimitta for concentration meditation; Pure 3 characteristics and pure smallest realities for insight meditations are the instead object of Nimitta and Anubyañjana)"?
Do you realize that both meditations and Buddha's teaching are the only main path for your lives from now on.
etc.

We need more information from you  to consider of what you are.


What are the teachings in Buddhism for good social Social Health? Lord Buddha preached about the importance of physical, social, mental and spiritual health. Lord Buddha has taught about the characteristics of the four Good friends and the four evil friends. Apart from that, what are the teachings on Buddhism which help somebody to have a good social health, trustworthy friendships etc.? Thanks for any answer in advance!

I think the Sangaha Sutta would be helpful here, It gives the following as the basis for the bonds of fellowship

  Generosity,  kind words,  beneficial help, & consistency in the face
  of events,

Also the Sigalovada Sutta has a lot of advice concerning ones social relationships. Advice is given to 6 groups corresponding to the six directions of worship. The groups are

North - Friends
East - Parents
South - Teachers
West - Wife
Down - Workers
Up - Ascetics

Advice is given for each direction. I think this gives a good coverage of ones social obligations and interactions even today. The text is not too long and gives specific advice on each categories of interaction. Also wikipedia has a useful summary chart.

There is a lot more advice from the Buddha. The book The Buddha's Teachings to Laypeople: Practical Advice for Prosperity and Lasting Happiness is a useful jumping off point if you want to go into more depth. It goes into social relationships, business relationship, conflict etc... and gives the Buddha advice from the Pali canon. It makes one appreciate the depth of the advice the Buddha gave his lay followers in such matters,


Killing a mouse in the house with a third party I have read the question How not to kill the mouse in my house? and this got me thinking. Would it be wrong to own a cat that would then kill the mouse? I'm not referring to buying a cat strictly to kill a pest, but rather letting a prevously owned pet cat do as it pleases, and turn a blind eye when the mouse is gone.

Directly, you're not the one harming the creature, and a cat killing a mouse is completely natural.

Indirectly, you've caused the death of the mouse, and have reinforced the killing behavoir in the cat.

Would intervening in the cat's hunting practices be good karma? The cat has plenty to eat, and the mouse only provides accomplisment to the cat.

You are not responsible since the mouse came into your home upon its own volition. Also, you are not purposefully trying (wishing?) to create conditions in which a being would get killed.

But since you are aware of the situation, about a mouse and a cat roaming free inside your home. You should try to catch the mouse and then release it elsewhere in nature. In the meantime, you could try to prevent the cat from reaching this mouse.

The Buddha said: I declare that the mere arising of an intention of performing good deeds is productive of great benefits. - MN 8


Beliefs about the 14th Dalai Lama What are the Tibetan Buddhist beliefs of the Dalai Lama being an incarnation of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara? Do all Buddhists agree with this idea?

The institution of the Dalai Lama, as an emanation of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, is officially recognized only by Tibetan Buddhism.

The concept of tulku where teachers like the Dalai Lama, Panchen Lama and Karmapa, may intentionally reincarnate again and again as custodians of certain religious lineages, is only found in Tibetan Buddhism. It's not clear if other Vajrayana traditions also have tulkus.

The Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara is found prominently in many Mahayana sutras, and has the ability to incarnate as any kind of being, including human, to help and teach others. But the Mahayana sutras do not identify the Dalai Lama as an emanation of Avalokiteśvara.

The Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, though present in temples in Theravada countries (probably due to Mahayana influence), is not found in the Pali Canon.


let go of wanting to change the past in my meditation practice I remark that, when I am doing my meditation practice, I am still clinging to want to change the past. To make short, due to parents who had their own special way of education, I had quite a difficult adolescence (little freedom, constant shouting and constant dissatisfaction from my parents despite having quite good scholar results and causing no major problems (no drugs, no smoking ...),  constant humiliation from my parents & my peers in middle & high school ).
It was unfair and it was cruel.
On an intellectual level, I understand I cannot change the past. But on a deeper level, I still wished I could have had a "normal" adolescence.
I feel that due to a low level of confidence, I missed some good opportunities.
And I am still clinging to this wish during my meditation practice (concentration on the breating). Could you give me some suggestions to help me ?
By the way, I do not know if this question belongs in this forum. If this is the case & you tell me, I will delete this question.
Edit after reading & thinking about the answers provided:
First, I want to thank you all.
Second, I had some epiphany after reading answers, thinking about them and listing to a meditation which was mentionned in one of the answers. I explain: in the meditation, the teacher speaks about a trip in which he was in a bus for nearly a day. He was stuck in a seat close to a place that was very smelly, and unfortunately, there was no other seat available. He first decided to focus on his breathing, but remarked after a few hours, that this had resulted in building tension. He remarked that he had used meditation to push the uncomfortable situation out of his mind. Once he  used meditation to open to the uncomfortable situtation, things went better. And I thought: Oh, this is exactly what I was doing. I used meditation to push uncomfortable thoughts & feelings ouf of my mind. In fact, I realized that I did not want to accept what I had suffered. I thought I had accepted but deep down I had not. So now in my meditation practice, I try to open up to uncomfortable feelings & thoughts.
Thank you all

The scripture Iti 74 says a child who practises Dhamma is superior to parents who do not practise Dhamma.
You cannot change the past.
However, you can clearly comprehend the immoral & wrong actions of your parents and then aspire to live in the opposite way.
You can aspire to not be like them, which means you treat other people in the manner you yourself wished you were treated.
In other words, you aspire to never ever repeat your parents mistakes & errors.
If you have some care for your parents, you can dedicate your efforts to your parents, as though to make merit for their sins.
As for 'gratitude to parents', the scriptures say children honor & venerate their parents who have been compassionate (rather than cruel) towards them. Refer to Iti 106.
Also, refer to my answer to this related question.


Where can I find a reference for someone becoming a sotapanna through meditation? I've come across many stories in the Tipitaka where people attained arahanthood or became non-returners through meditation. However, I cannot recollect any instance where someone becomes a sotapanna through a meditation practice (including vipassana).

Can someone provide me a reference for such an instance (or multiple instances) from suttas, commentaries or any other source in the Pali canon (ideally excluding Visuddhimagga)?

The reason why I'm asking this is that there's a claim by certain lineages that stream entry cannot be reached through meditation, at least based on Tipitaka evidence.

I've come across many stories in the Tipitaka where people attained arahanthood or became non-returners through meditation.

The different doors through with you can get liberation are given in Vimutt’āyatana Sutta, which are:

listens to the Dharma
teaches the Dharma in detail
recites the Dharma
applies his mind to the Dharma
properly grasps some concentration-sign

Which in turn leads to:

gladness arises in him;
because of gladness, zest arises;
because of zest, the body becomes tranquil;
when the body is tranquil, he feels happy;
a happy mind becomes concentrated
unfreed mind of a monk, dwelling heedful and exertive, finds freedom; or where the mental influxes, not wholly destroyed become wholly destroyed, where the unattained unsurpassed safety from the yoke is attained.

Meditation is only one of them.

    Mahanama, Sarakani the Sakya kept the training (in moral virtue, concentration, and
    wisdom) at the time of his death.

Sarakani Sutta 1

Sarakani became a stream winner because keeping up the training though he was a drunken also. This might happen all at once where one becomes liberated or may achieve it in stages, entering through any of the doors above, where sotapanna is 1st of the stages:

    Bhikshus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge
    is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress.

Kīta,giri Sutta


Is Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra later creation? I was thinking to read this big text because the chapter claims to be the teachings of Gautam Buddha while departure from the Earth. Before buying I wanted to be sure whether the text is authentic or not & actually contains last teachings of Gautam Buddha or not. Can anyone shed light on the authenticity of the text Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra?

I cite here from my older discussion, where I copied&pasted from a website on the MPNS but which possibly does no more exist, didn't check it (but noticed such a remark in a more recent discussion found via google).

(my original compilation should be findable using google on the newsgroup de.soc.weltanschauung.buddhismus beginning at 10.apr.2007)

  (...)
  Historical Background (2)
  There follows a fascinating, informative and thought-provoking
  lecture (originally delivered at the University of London, SOAS, in
  early spring 2006) by Buddhist scholar and translator, Stephen
  Hodge, on the Tibetan version of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra. I here
  hand over to Stephen!
  [S.Hodge]
  (...)
  It seems reasonable from the chronological data alone to deduce that
  the MPNS was formed during the Úâtavâhana era. The Mahâmegha-sûtra,
  which is a precursor to the MPNS itself, mentions a Úâtavâhana king
  who was the “restorer of the lineage” and this must be none other
  than Gautamîputra Úâtakarn.i (r106- 130 CE),
  (...)
  Virtually 90% of the remaining text of the MPNS involves this person
  as the untiring interlocutor who by his questioning draws out of the
  Buddha a wealth of teachings concerning the permanence of the
  Buddha, the importance of preserving the authentic Vinaya, the need
  to purge the San.gha of miscreant monks, the importance of upholding
  and promulgating the MPNS, and most of all the tathâgata-garbha
  doctrines. Is it possible that we are hearing the actual voice of a
  historical individual , called Sarvasattva-priya-darúana by his
  devoted followers, his words transformed into a sûtra format to
  ensure the preservation and dissemination of his teachings ?
  THE ICCHANTIKAS
  (...) help, who are excluded from this message of hope: a group of
  people collectively known as the icchantikas - the “extremists”.
  In the later strata of the text, the MPNS fulminates stridently
  against these people, repeating statements like
  “apart from icchantikas, the cause of enlightenment will become
  present in everybody”
  or
  “even those who commit the downfalls or perpetrate the heinous deeds
  and those who believe that the generation of the aspiration to
  enlightenment to be unnecessary will be established in the cause of
  enlightenment - apart from icchantikas who are like death”.
  So who were these people that the MPNS calls “virulent serpents” ?
  This question is succinctly answered thus - “any person, no matter
  whether they are a monk, a nun, a lay-man or lay-woman, who rejects
  this sûtra with abusive words, and does not even ask for forgiveness
  afterwards, has entered the icchantika path . . . . Those who have
  no concern about the
  (...)
  And make no mistake about this - the fate of the icchantikas is
  indeed terrifying, for the sûtra says,
  “the cause of enlightenment will not be and cannot possibly be
  engendered in icchantikas”,
  “they resemble burnt seeds because they have extinguished their
  wholesome roots”,
  “the icchantika has no seed and there is no possibility of him
  having any thought of confessing and begging for forgiveness”.
  In other words, the MPNS is quite emphatic in its view that these
  icchantikas will never awaken the potential of their
  tathâgatagarbha, never achieve liberation and never become Buddhas
  throughout all eternity.
  CONCLUSION
  There is one final twist to the story. As we have seen, the sad-
  dharma and the bodhisattvas who uphold it were predicted to
  disappear around 220CE, if our calculations are correct. It seems
  likely that the MPNS was circulated as the final life- belt for the
  sinking raft of the Dharma - those who had ears to hear had this
  last opportunity to save themselves. But what then ? No more
  authentic Dharma, no more true teachers and no hint here of future
  Buddha-saviours to come in this corner of sam.sâra. In fact, there
  is this chilling passage in the MPNS:
  “Who do not see the goal ? It is the icchantikas who will not see
  the goal, for they will not see the goal as long as cyclic existence
  lasts. I have summarized and taught the significance of this, but
  you should fear what is extremely fearful ! Supposing that all
  beings in unison were to become fully awakened to supreme and
  perfect enlightenment, then even if it were possible for the sinful
  icchantikas to become fully awakened to supreme and perfect
  enlightenment, they would not see the goal. In that manner, you, o
  hero, should understand things !
  “Whose goal does not end in failure ? The Tathâgata's goal does not
  end in failure. When all beings who dwell in the cycle of existence
  have become fully awakened to supreme and perfect enlightenment,
  then the Tathâgata's goal will not have ended in failure and then,
  having passed into parinirvân.a eternally, the Buddha will become
  impermanent, like the flame of a lamp whose wick has been consumed.”

Hieran anschließend folgt die Einschätzung:

  in this world - and eventually in the entire universe. Then, those
  who by definition can never be liberated - the icchantikas - will be
  left behind to wander lost life-time after lifetime for all
  eternity. What a bleak scenario !


Not remembering past life(s)? I wanted to ask how Buddhism explains why we don't remember our past lives?
Why bother with the Buddhist path when we will not remember this temporary life in our next? I heard that for example contrary to rebirth in the human realm, beings who are reborn in the Pureland of Amitabha can remember their past life. Why bother practice other methods and not only just focus on reaching Sukhavati?
If I won't remember the temporary "me" of this life in the next, why bother practicing at all? Isn't it better to know about my continuity in the next life for progression?

Do you remember what you had for lunch yesterday? We remember only if we are interested in that thing or it is extremely important for us. We continually become because we are not happy with the past or present. The time of the arrow goes only forward.


Can environmental degradation be used as a justification for the culling of an invasive alien species? We have a lot of feral foxes in Australia which decimate the local wildlife. Foxes are not native to Australia but where introduced by humans. Local wildlife is not adapted to these predators and are an easy prey for foxes. What is the Buddhist view on killing an invasive alien species destroying the local environmental life cycle?

This is a complex question to which there is no right answer.

Karma is created by our intention.  The intention with which we engage in an action.  You can look at your intention.  Are you engaging in it for your own convenience or a well considered belief that it will ease suffering?

Do you know enough to make a decision about the situation?  Will the suffering of foxes you kill be less than the suffering of the native animals?  Do you know that the environment should be restored or is that just your own attachment to how things should be?

When I consider situations like this and the questions that arise it becomes clear the world we live in is messy and there are situations for which there is not a right answer.  Purity within samsara is not possible.  What I can do is work to purify negative karma, accumulate good karma, and develop wisdom.

Ultimately, killing is killing and most of us have ignorance of self-grasping.  Killing invasive foxes with self-grasping ignorance creates its own karma.  Very strong conviction that it was the best course of action would be required before I took on such karma.


The meaning/concept of maññassavā / Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta (MN 140) travellers -
I was struck by the term maññassavā in the Dhatuvibhanga Sutta.

They have four foundations, standing on which the streams of
identification don’t flow. And when the streams of identification
don’t flow, they’re called a sage at peace. yattha ṭhitaṃ maññassavā
nappavattanti, maññassave kho pana nappavattamāne muni santoti
vuccati.

It is translated as "the currents of construing," by Ven. Thanissaro and as "the streams of identification," on suttacentral.net (Ven. Sujato?). There is an elaboration of maññassavā later in the sutta as, "These are all forms of identifying: ‘I am’, ‘I am this’, ‘I will be’" etc.

‘Asmī’ti, bhikkhu, maññitametaṃ, ‘ayamahamasmī’ti maññitametaṃ,
‘bhavissan’ti maññitametaṃ...

a) First - I assume the term is made up of "(a form of) maññ/maññati + assavā"?
[PTS PED] Maññita (nt.) [pp. of maññati] illusion, imagination M i.486. Nine maññitāni (the same list is applied to the phanditāni, the papañcitāni & sankhatāni) at Vbh 390: asmi, ayam aham asmi, bhavissaŋ, na bhavissaŋ, rūpī bhavissaŋ, arūpī bh., saññī bh., asaññī bh., nevasaññī -- nâsaññī -- bh.
Assava (adj.) [ā + sunāti, śru] loyal D i.137; Sn 22, 23, 32; J iv.98; vi.49; Miln 254; an˚ inattentive, not docile DhA i.7.
I only sort-of get how the compound is then understood as "streams of identification" (does the 'streams' derive from 'asava'[ā + sru]? Flow?)...
b) Where is this term "coming from," doctrinally, that is? Is it commonly used in the texts, esp. in the suttas, as a form of "I-consciouness/construction?" Are there any commentarial and/or scholarly discussions on this process of "flow of construing/identification?"
Thanks much in advance! ~ananda

This is explained by Piya Tan in his commentary on Dhatuvibhanga Sutta:

Maññassavāna-p,pavattanti, maññassave kho pana na-p,pavattamane. Here
maññassavā is resolved as mañña (“conceiving”) + assava (Skt āsrava),(a)
“purulent matter, discharge” (A 1:124); (b) tt for obstacle to
arhathood, “canker, influx, inflow, taint” (V 3:21 = 5:143 = A 5:70, V
5:225, D 3:216, M 1:55, S 5:410, Sn 535, Thī 76); also related to
āsava (spirituous liquor) because both are kept for a long time, MA
1:61 = AA 2:183 = ItA 1:114). The word assava is also related to
assavati,“it flows (on)”). In this context, pavattanti should be
rendered as “they flow” (S 2:31,J 2:104; PvA 143, 154, 198): M:ÑB
reading maññ‟ussavā (wr for maññ‟ussāvā): “the tides of
conceiving...sweep.”
Mental conceiving (mañña), closely related to “mental proliferation”
(papañca), here refers to thoughts and ideas arising from the three
roots of conceiving or mental proliferation: craving (taṇhā), view
(diṭṭhi) and conceit (māna) (Nm 280; Vbh 393; Nett 37 f). For an
interesting n on maññati, see M:ÑB 1162:n6. The “sage at peace” is the
arhat.

The term asava is usually translated as effluents or taints or defilements. You can read the question "What is effluent?"
When reading the Dhatuvibhanga Sutta (translated by Ven. Sujato), we find some details for this:

‘They have four foundations, standing on which the streams of
identification don’t flow. And when the streams of identification
don’t flow, they’re called a sage at peace.’ That’s what I said, but
why did I say it?
These are all forms of identifying: ‘I am’, ‘I am this’, ‘I will be’,
‘I will not be’, ‘I will have form’, ‘I will be formless’, ‘I will be
percipient’, ‘I will be non-percipient’, ‘I will be neither percipient
nor non-percipient.’ Identification is a disease, a boil, a dart.
Having gone beyond all identification, one is called a sage at peace.
The sage at peace is not reborn, does not grow old, and does not die.
They are not shaken, and do not yearn. For they have nothing which
would cause them to be reborn. Not being reborn, how could they grow
old? Not growing old, how could they die? Not dying, how could they be
shaken? Not shaking, for what could they yearn?

It sounds to me like maññassava is more or less the same as bhavāsava, the effluent or taint or defilement of becoming or being.
This can be found in MN 9 (translated by Ven. Bodhi):

“And what are the taints, what is the origin of the taints, what is
the cessation of the taints, what is the way leading to the cessation
of the taints? There are these three taints: the taint of sensual
desire, the taint of being, and the taint of ignorance. With the
arising of ignorance there is the arising of the taints. With the
cessation of ignorance there is the cessation of the taints. The way
leading to the cessation of the taints is just this Noble Eightfold
Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right
action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right
concentration.

And also AN 6.63 (translated by Ven. Thanissaro):

“There are these three kinds of defilements: the defilement of
sensuality, the defilement of becoming, the defilement of ignorance.
“And what is the cause of defilements? Ignorance is the cause of
defilements.
“And what is the diversity in defilements? There are defilements that
lead to hell, those that lead to the animal womb, those that lead to
the realm of the hungry shades, those that lead to the human world,
those that lead to the world of the devas. This is called the
diversity in defilements.
“And what is the result of defilements? One who is immersed in
ignorance produces a corresponding state of existence, on the side of
merit or demerit. This is called the result of defilements.
“And what is the cessation of defilements? From the cessation of
ignorance is the cessation of defilements; and just this noble
eightfold path—right view, right resolve, right speech, right action,
right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right samādhi—is
the way leading to the cessation of defilements.


Does craving include basic survival drives like hunger, thirst, reproduction? And how does one be free from craving food without starving to death ?

Hunger is not "craving" (tanha, technical Buddhist term). Craving is basically when you are in whatever state you are (let's call that X) and you imagine (visualize) some other state Y. And then you label Y as "desirable" and strongly wish that you were there, and then by inference state X becomes "unacceptable", hence you experience [mental/emotional] suffering. Makes sense?

Hunger is just a signal you get from your body: "need food". Craving is conceptual, hunger is not. Craving involves judging, taking sides. Hunger is just raw sensation.


What could be some teachings that Buddha has not revealed to us? In Maha-parinibbana Sutta Buddha has said:

"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."

however, in Simsapa Sutta Buddha says:

"there are many more things that I have found out, but not revealed to
you. What I have revealed to you is only a little."

Do we have any knowledge about the teaching that he has not revealed to us? The commentary on accesstoinsight writes, "This famous saying has been taken to justify the doctrines of various Mahaayaana schools, Theosophy and so on."
Could that be the teaching of tantra? I hope there's some good insight here.

Yes,  of-course buddha hid lot of teachings.  They were mostly related to superpowers like how to use capability of  brain to control others,  flying,  instant-transmission,  preaching to deva-lokas,  teaching in future(time travel) and what not?

Alas!  It was all for nothing as later on various tantriks at nalanda university were probably having advanced knowledge on all this and for goodness,  it was burnt down otherwise today would have been worse in terms of black magic,  sex-tantrism,  immoral monks and much more.

These type of teachings were never required and have nothing to do with attaining nibbana.


Buddhism Supernatural feats and abilities Recently i experiencing the psychic abilities, telepathy and seeing other dimension sentiment when i having this so call 3rd eye syndrome (All of it)
https://www.holycitysinner.com/2020/01/22/signs-your-third-eye-is-starting-to-see/
My psychic ability became more accurate and it's like Deja Vu then things really happened after 1-2 months. It's applicable to the stock market prices speculation price, date and how exactly it is speculated predicted 100% by mostly instinct. Sometimes when i am fully focused then i feel reading other people's mind and i will be winning throughout the night like a poker game, it's up to 90% accuracy. I am just a beginner poker player and winning all the senior players. I dont gamble much also. I felt so scared.
I used to be a Buddhism and Shaolin Kung Fu practitioner. I used to meditate in a martial arts way where there is a study that this can unlock the 7 chakra. The more I practice, the more I sense this ability. Sometime If i fully focus especially during critical time, i can think much faster, accurate even i sense future things.
I visited some doctors and my Buddhism senior. Some said use it for good, some said stop meditating.
My Buddhism senior commented that if it is so happening then it's devil abilities because I ' m really far far away from enlightenment requirement. Out of the 10 good deeds. I guess I only achieved 4 good merits, the rest just so so.
Question: Does it happen to someone just a 5-6 years Buddhism or junior practitioner ? Why such a things happening according to Buddhism? I just want to be a normal people and i dont require such abilities at the moment because my "good deed" is not good enough, perhaps i will use this for gambling or stock market or into devil's direction.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Gautama_Buddha#:~:text=Psychic%20Abilities,-See%20also%3A%20Abhijñā&text=Following%20his%20enlightenment%2C%20the%20Buddha,and%20making%20copies%20of%20himself

Psychic powers are not necessary to end suffering:

DN24:1.4.13: What do you think, Sunakkhatta?
DN24:1.4.14: Whether or not there is a demonstration of psychic power, does my teaching lead someone who practices it to the goal of the complete ending of suffering?’
DN24:1.4.15: ‘It does, sir.’

Phenomena, including psychic powers, appear and disappear on their own without our grasping at them:

AN9.36:2.3: Take a mendicant who, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first absorption. They contemplate the phenomena there—included in form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness—as impermanent, as suffering, as diseased, as an abscess, as a dart, as misery, as an affliction, as alien, as falling apart, as empty, as not-self.

Focus on the Noble Eightfold Path instead of the phenomena. AN9.36 continues further, instructing us to experience and relinquish such phenomena with deeper practice--eventually, perception of those phenomena will fade with greater skill in immersion:

AN9.36:9.4: They turn their mind away from those things,
...
AN9.36:10.2: But the two dimensions that depend on these—the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, and the cessation of perception and feeling—are properly explained by mendicants who are skilled in these attainments and skilled in emerging from them, after they’ve entered them and emerged from them.”


Conceptual reality, mettā, ignorance According to some commentaries/abhidhamma, all unwholesome states are rooted in ignorance; that ignorance is, according to Pa Auk Sayadaw, the ignorance that sees things as concepts, e.g., a man a woman etc. However, it seems like in order to do mettā and similar practices, one must take a concept as object. My question: Since wholesome states like mettā are said to be incompatible with unwholesome states like ignorance, why does it seem like mettā is rooted in ignorance?

The important thing about metta is not the "object", but the result of the practice; it's point is so one becomes kind when kindness is not present.

Notice that Saying benevolence (metta) is rooted in ignorance if a particular practice is described in conventional terms is like saying dhamma is rooted in ignorance because it's also exposed in conventional terms.

Also, as a side note, Metta practice with a person as an object is a later development.

It would be problematic if, in this or any exercise, one nurtures and develops a wrong view (e.g. believing that a person has an eternal soul).

I'd guess the Ven. meant "seeing things as concepts" as something very specific: substituting reality for some concept. Conceptual thinking is largely intrinsic to thinking. it's problematic because it requires skill to not be confused, to not take something imagined as something real, to not develop wrong view (e.g believing an object is detached, eternal, subsisting without conditions).


What is the meaning of "dhammā" in the context of the four satipaṭṭhāna? I've been struggling with this one for quite a while now. The fourth foundation of mindfulness is called 'dhammānupassana' - vision in regards to the dhammas. The old translation I was given when I started meditating was "mind objects", which I'm pretty sure is not at all correct in this context, since it doesn't get at the distinction between the fourth set and the first three.

The phrase "mind object" is a translation of "dhammarammana". According to Nina Van Gorkom,

  Dhammarammana comprises all objects which are not included in the first five classes. These can be experienced only through the mind-door.

  http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-16.htm

So, "mind object" is a specific subset of reality in a specific context. The first five indriya and the first three elements that comprise rupakkhandha are not a part of this subset, and yet they appear in the section on dhammanupassana.

The commentary says relating the the fourth satipatthana,

  and now in order to speak of even the laying hold of the aggregates of perception and formations, he said "And, how, o bhikkhus," and so forth."

So the emphasis is supposed to be on these two aggregates (even though the five aggregates themselves are under this heading).

In Thai, the meaning is given as "that which holds (dhareti) the meditator from falling into evil", which is a definition of the truths (dhammas) taught by the Buddha. That seems appropriate, but it is still curious that there are only a limited number of subsets of the Buddha's teaching in the satipaṭṭhāna sutta, certainly not all of the Buddha's teaching.

Does anyone have a proper explanation as to why the fourth set is called "dhammas"?

I think the following perspective on all four satipatthanas will help in understanding the  meaning of the fourth one. The four satipatthanas are supposed to counter the four vipallasas (perversions) which are: permanence, happiness, self, and beauty. So, mindfulness of the body counters the beauty perversion; mindfulness of feelings (and the fact that all vedanas are included in dukkha) counters the happiness perversion; mindfulness of mind (which is anicca) counters the permanence perversion; and, finally, mindfulness of the dhammas counters the self (atta) perversion. Thus, one reviews dhammas to realize anatta. To view four perversions would be inappropriate attention (ayoniso-manasikara), but the four satipatthanas, would be training in appropriate attention (yoniso-manasikara).

So, overall, I think the meaning of dhamma in this context is exactly what they are: analytical properties of experience, ultimate phenomena, and everything else that apply to dhammas (mind objects, matikas, dhamma lists, etc).


Can somebody explain me this Kalachakra print? I would like to understand this image.

Can someone explain each part of this image? Not only the part in the middle, but also the figures all around.

This is what I have been able to determine. It does not answer all of the symbolism or identify all objects from this particular image, but it is a good start.

  "...Shri Kalachakra shining forth with stainless light rays of five
  [colours], with a body blue in colour. Having three necks the central
  is blue, right red and left white. The main face is black and fierce
  with bared teeth. The right face is red and desirous. The back face is
  yellow and in samadhi. The left face is white and very peaceful. Each
  face has three eyes.

  The hair is tied in a tuft [along with] a vishvavajra, crescent moon,
  and Vajrasattva as a crown, a vajra jewel, vajra earrings, vajra
  necklace, vajra bracelets, vajra belt, vajra anklets, vajra scarf,
  vajra mala, and a loose tiger skin skirt.

  The first [two] shoulders on the right and left are blue, second red,
  third white, for a [total] of six [pairs] of shoulders, twelve upper
  arms and twenty-four hands. The first four [right and left] are black,
  second four red, third four white. The thumbs of all the hands are
  yellow, index finger white, middle finger red, ring finger black, and
  little finger green. The first knuckle is black, second red, third
  white. All of the fingers are beautiful and radiant.

  The first four black right hands hold a vajra, sword, trident and
  curved knife.

  The four red [hold] a flaming arrow, vajra hook, a rattling damaru and
  hammer.

  The four white [hands hold] a wheel, spear, stick and a battle axe.

  The first four black left [hands] hold a vajra bell, shield, katvanga
  and a skullcup filled with blood. The four red [hold] a bow, vajra
  lasso, jewel and a white lotus. The four white [hold] a conch, mirror,
  vajra chain and the four-faced head of Brahma adorned with lotus
  [flowers].

  Above a moon, sun and rahu, standing in a very playful manner, the
  right red leg is extended atop red Kamadeva having one face and four
  hands, holding five flower arrows, a bow, lasso and a hook. Under the
  left white leg is Rudra, white with one face, three eyes and four
  arms, holding a trident, damaru drum, skullcup and a katvanga. The
  demon [consorts] Rati and Uma in a woeful [manner] hold the soles [of
  Kalachakra's feet].

  Vishvamata, yellow in colour, embraces [Kalachakra] from the front.
  The faces, from the right are yellow, white, blue and red, each with
  three eyes. There are eight arms. The [first] right hands hold a
  curved knife, hook, a rattling damaru and bead mala. The left [hands
  hold] a skullcup, lasso, white lotus with eight petals and a jewel.
  Vajrasattva [appears] as a crown. Adorned with the five mudras. The
  left leg is extended - standing together with the Bhagavan."

-- (Buton Tamche Kyenpa Rinchen Drub, 1290-1364. dus 'khor sgrub thabs bsdus pa rin po che'i snying po. gsung 'bum rin chen grub [zhol par khang] Volume 5, Pages 163-176. [TBRC W1934])

  Semi-wrathful in appearance, blue in colour, he has four faces,
  twenty-four hands and two legs. The main face is blue, right red, left
  white and the back face is yellow. Each has three eyes and an open
  mouth with slightly bared fangs. The first set of eight hands are blue
  in colour, second (middle) red and third (upper) yellow. The first
  pair of hands hold a vajra and bell crossed at the heart embracing the
  consort. The remaining right hands hold a sword, curved knife,
  trident, three arrows, vajra hook, damaru drum, hammer, wheel, spear,
  club and axe. The left hands hold a shield, katvanga staff, skullcup,
  bow, lasso, jewel, lotus, conch shell, mirror, vajra chains and the
  four-faced yellow head of Brahma. The Lord wears a long green scarf
  and a tiger skin as a lower garment. The consort, Vishvamata, is
  yellow, with four faces and eight hands. They are both adorned with
  crowns, necklaces, earrings, bracelets and various ornaments. The
  right leg of the Lord is straight and red, standing atop the figure of
  red Kamadeva. The left is bent and white, standing atop white Rudra.
  Above the layered discs of a white moon, red sun and dark blue Rahu
  (eclipse) they stand on a multi-coloured lotus blossom seat wreathed
  by the circular orange rays of pristine awareness fire.

  At the top center is the primordial buddha Vajradhara, blue, with one
  face and two hands holding a vajra and bell at the heart. At each side
  are two kings of Shambhala wearing long garments and elaborate
  headdresses. Slightly below are two lamas wearing orange and red
  monastic robes. Two celestial figures, white in colour, soar against
  the dark blue sky.

  At the left side is Sahaja Heruka Kalachakra, blue, with one face and
  two hands holding a vajra and bell embracing the consort. Vishvamata,
  yellow, holds a curved knife and skullcup. At the right is the
  tutelary deity Mahamaya, blue, with four faces and four hands holding
  a skullcup and katvanga staff and in the second pair a bow and arrow.
  The consort, Buddha Dakini, is light blue in colour, with one face and
  four hands holding the same objects as the Lord. Adorned with wrathful
  vestments, above a corpse, sun disc and pink lotus flower they stand
  in a dancing posture against an orb of red wisdom fire.

  At the bottom center is the special protector for the Kalachakra cycle
  of Tantras, Vajra Vega (Tib.: dor je shug, Eng.: Vajra Strength). Very
  wrathful, blue in colour, with four faces, twenty-six hands and two
  legs he displays the same colours as Kalachakra. At the left is the
  tutelary deity form of Vajrapani, wrathful, blue, with one face and
  two hands holding an upraised vajra in the right and a bell in the
  left. Embracing the consort, green, they stand surrounded by fire. At
  the right is Hayagriva, red, with one face and two hands holding a
  stick and lasso.

  The Kalachakra Mandala belongs to the non-dual anuttarayoga tantra
  practiced to a greater or lesser degree by all schools of Tibetan
  Buddhism. The concept of 'time' is used as the special metaphor to
  symbolize the process of transformation from mundane existence to
  complete enlightenment. From amongst the numerous lineages to enter
  Tibet the Rwa and Dro are the most famous. The Sakya school maintains
  seven distinct lineages of transmission. (See Guhyasamaja and
  Yogambara from the same set).

  Rwa Lineage: Buddha Shakyamuni-Kalachakra, the Shambala king
  Suchandra, a line of 8 Shambhala kings ending with Manjukirti and
  Pundarika, a Manjushri emanation, Chilu Pandita, Pindo Acharya,
  Kalachakrapada the younger (Naropa), Manjukirti, Samantashri, Rwa
  Chorab, Rwa Yeshe Sengge, etc.

-- Jeff Watt 3-99
Himalayan Art
https://theoldmonkeymind.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/kalachakra.jpg