Is there a connection between the Hindu and Buddhist Centres of Psychic Energy? Further to my earlier question --What is the method for "Coupling of the Serenity and Insight Powers" referred to in the Path of Discrimination? -- a fresh question has surfaced based on the book Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism by Lama Govinda.

On page 133 of this book reference is made to "The Doctrine of Psychic Centres in Hinduism and Buddhism". As a Theravada Buddhist, the concept of psychic centres and kundalini shakthi was never alluded to, as I thought it was not a part of the Theravada doctrine. However, now, in the context of the earlier question referred to on the method for coupling of the serenity and insight powers, there seems to be a direct link between the Hindu and Buddhist Doctrines. The essential difference is that Hindu Psychic Centres (chakras) are static whilst the Buddhist ones are dynamic -- see page 134:

  "The Buddhist system is less concerned with the static-objective side of the chakras, but rather with that which flows through them, with their dynamic functions i.e. the transformation of that current or nature-energies into spiritual potentialities."

Since at the Moment of Enlightenment the Buddha is said to have generated sufficient Energy to "rock the entire universe" and the above question is also in the context of coupling the insight (vipassana) and serenity (samatha) Energies at the Moment of Path Entry, could we now see a connection between the Kundalini Shakthi of Hinduism and the Vishwa Shakthi (Cosmic Consciousness) of Buddhism?

I have been thinking about this for a while as you meditate one gets experiences which are similar to those described in yoga texts. The yoga texts discuss energy centres and the flow of energy through them starting from the Muladhara.
In Theravada Buddhism, all these experiences related to Kundalini are categorised into Piti. Also, there is no reference to for awakening and making it flow through the chakras. I guess this might be since these experiences can be a source of attachment to the blissful feeling this is not directly related to letting go of craving and also people may be preoccupied with these experiences than developing higher wisdom.
Path consciousness happens balanced with the Jhana when insight and calm are well balanced:

The First Jhāna Sotāpatti Path-consciousness together with initial application, sustained application, joy, happiness, and one-pointedness,

The Second Jhāna Sotāpatti Path-consciousness together with sustained application, joy, happiness, and one-pointedness,

The Third Jhāna Sotāpatti Path-consciousness together with joy, happiness, and one-pointedness,

The Fourth Jhāna Sotāpatti Path-consciousness together with happiness and one-pointedness,

The Fifth Jhāna Sotāpatti Path-consciousness together with equanimity and one-pointedness.

These are the five types of Sotāpatti Path-consciousness.
So are the Sakadāgāmī Path-consciousness, Anāgāmī Path-consciousness, and Arahatta Path-consciousness, making exactly twenty classes of consciousness. Similarly there are twenty classes of Fruit-consciousness. Thus there are forty types of supra mundane consciousness.

In the 1st - 3rd Jhana there is Piti which can be taken as the similarity with kundalini.


What did the Buddha say about gratitude? I'm looking for early Sutras that talk about gratitude. I'm especially interested in if there are lists of things that we can be grateful for, and there are sources that deal with gratitude for lay people.

(So far I've seen the Maha-mangala Sutta, which in the translation linked to talks about "blessings", but in another place ("Old Path, White Clouds" by Thich Nhat Hanh) is translated as "observances", so I'm not sure if it's relevant)

Thankful for help and with kind regards,
Tord

The Pali is 'kataññutā' & also 'kataññutā kataveditā'. 'Kataññutā' means 'what others have done for us'. 'Kataveditā' means 'what we must do in return'.

Kataññu (adj.) [cp. Sk. kṛtajña] lit. knowing, i. e. acknowledging what has been done (to one), i. e. grateful often in combn with
katavedin grateful and mindful of benefits
Kataññutā (f.) [abstr. fr. last] gratefulness (defined at KhA 144 as katassa jānanatā)
Kataveditā (f.) [abstr. fr. last] gratefulness:
Pali dictionary

SN 20.12 states:

Tasmātiha bhikkhave, evaṃ sikkhitabbaṃ: ''kataññuno bhavissāma katavedino. Amhesu appakampi kataṃ mā nassissatī''ti. Evaṃ hi vo
bhikkhaveva, sikkhitabbanti.
Monks. You should train yourselves thus: "We will be grateful & thankful and we will not overlook even the least favour done to us".
This is how you should train yourselves.

AN 2.31-32 state:

Now what is the level of a person of no integrity? A person of no integrity is ungrateful & unthankful.
I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. Which two? Your mother & father. Even if you were to carry your mother
on one shoulder & your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and
were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, & rubbing
their limbs, and they were to defecate & urinate right there [on your
shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents.
Mother & father do much for their children. They care for them, they nourish them, they introduce them to this world. But anyone who rouses
his unbelieving mother & father, settles & establishes them in
conviction; rouses his unvirtuous mother & father, settles &
establishes them in virtue; rouses his stingy mother & father, settles
& establishes them in generosity; rouses his foolish mother & father,
settles & establishes them in discernment: To this extent one pays &
repays one's mother & father.

As for the word 'mangala', it means 'luck' or 'blessing' (rather than 'observances')

Mangala (adj.) [cp. Vedic mangala. Expld by Dhtp 24 with root mang, i. e. lucky; see also mañju] auspicious, prosperous, lucky, festive
Nd1 87, 88; KhA 118 sq.; SnA 273, 595; Sdhp 551. -- nt. mangalaŋ good
omen, auspices, festivity


Exercise for meditation sitting I couldn't find this exact question asked before.

What kind of exercise is recommended for better physical comfort and "endurance"/"stamina" when sitting in meditation; apart from the sitting itself?
I usually sit in the half vajra position, which is quite comfortable and stable, but find it a bit tiring when I sit for many hours.

Any good exercises in "the long run"? Any good stretching or other exercises between sessions when sitting whole days?

The single best stretch you can do is the straddle stretch.  The linked video is pretty fantastic in that it not only shows you the ideal, but also the progression leading up to it.  Honorable mention goes to the frog pose.  I also really like this sequence from Kelly Starrett.  Ultimately, what you are going to want to pay attention to is hip mobility.  Most meditators experience pain in the knees and back and tend to focus on stretches and exercises that target those two areas.  Unbeknownst to them, what's really at issue is hip and psosas tightness.  The pain they experience is a symptom of a problem farther up along the movement chain; it's being caused by the body trying to adapt to a less than ideal condition imposed by poor mobility elsewhere.  Loosen up those other areas and the discomfort will lessen significantly.

And for the record, meditating for long periods of time should make you tired.  That's kind of the point.  ;-)


Where can I find a Buddist Monastery that practice hard training? I wish to master my mind, one reason is I'm so mentally weak. Like anything you want to master you have to work at it. Drill it into you. But practicing on my own hasn't work. I need a far away place that will force me to master meditation. If I get off track they will make sure I get back on track. Where is a monastery like this where I a foreigner can join for a year?

Following are some pointers:

https://www.dhamma.org/en/index
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html
http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/
https://www.paaukforestmonastery.org/
https://forestsangha.org/

With regard to the 1st 2 links, there are 10-day courses. In the case of the 1st link, you can progress to longer courses up to 60 days. 3rd link lists many other monasteries and centres which some may allow you to stay up to a year. 4th links gives meditation centres in the Pa Auk tradition which is the best if you are looking to master Jhana. 5th link gives monasteries in the Thai Forrest tradition.


Anger management - How to manage bad temper? Is there any meditation techniques that we can used to manged Bad Temper. As I know it is possible to manage angers by observing it as "feeling angry.., feeling angry!".

However the problem is with the bad temper, sometime it is little bit too late to observer the anger. Any tips to improve the mindfulness to minimise the time gap?

I used to have a problem with anger.  I have found that mindfulness meditation (in my case, part Samatha and part Vispasana) works well but that the most powerful tool is compassionate meditation, also called Metta meditation.

Here's an example from http://viewonbuddhism.org/Meditations/equanimity_compassion_meditation.html:

  Visualise in front of you three persons: at the left a good friend, in the middle a stranger, to the right an enemy or someone you cannot stand.
  - Concentrate on the friend in front and examine your feelings towards him or her.
  - Now concentrate on the stranger and examine your feelings towards him or her.
  - Now concentrate on the enemy and examine your feelings towards him or her.
  - Return to the stranger and realise that this person can easily become your friend or enemy in the future.
  - Next, look at the friend and realise that this person may become your enemy in the future when cheating or hurting you.
  - Now, look at the enemy and realise that this person may become your friend in the future when helping you.
  - Again look at your friend and try to strongly feel love and appreciation.
  - Now look at the stranger and try to hold this feeling towards this person.
  - Again look at your friend and try to strongly feel love and appreciation.
  - Now try to hold this feeling while looking at the enemy; is it really impossible to feel some love and compassion for this person?
  - Try to realise that all three, friend, stranger and enemy are completely equal in trying to become happy and trying to avoid suffering.

What I personally do is use a Loving Kindness Meditation (LKM):

  May you be happy
  May you be healthy
  May you be safe
  May you live with ease

First I focus on a loved one.  Then a friend. Then someone I feel neutral about.  Then someone I dislike.

In the moment if someone is verbally attacking me or being otherwise disquieting I think to myself, "This person is suffering. They think that what they are doing now will ease their suffering. But it won't."  And then I do the LKM silently to myself.

And at all times when I am in danger of losing my equanimity I focus on my breath.

Finally, I forgive myself if I fail and get angry.  I am not enlightened, I am just another traveler on the path.


Meditation Retreat in India Are there any good places for meditation retreats in India ? ( Theravada/Vipassana ) Could someone share their personal experience ?

A list of center can be found in:

https://www.dhamma.org/
http://www.buddhanet.net/

Also it is best not to discuss meditative experiences and many traditions forbid this as individual experiences differ from one person to another since the sum total of your Sankara (conditioning /fabrication) differs. When you discuss experience what happens if people crave for different experiences and your meditation becomes unsuccessful.


Can anyone explain Sanskara / Sankara indepth? Can someone provide a canonical explanation to  Sanskara/Sankara?

I appreciate if you can provide some sources,Suttras/Suttas so that i can expand my knowledge.

There's an article in English titled Anicca Vata Sankhara in which Bhikkhu Bodhi describes the various meanings of the word. Here are very brief extracts from that article, a summary:

The word sankhara is derived from the prefix sam, meaning "together," joined to the noun kara, "doing, making."

The suttas distinguish the sankharas active in dependent origination into three types: bodily, verbal, and mental.
A second major domain where the word sankharas applies is among the five aggregates. The fourth aggregate is the sankhara-khandha, the aggregate of volitional formations. The texts define the sankhara-khandha as the six classes of volition (cha cetanakaya): volition regarding forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile objects, and ideas.
The third major domain in which the word sankhara occurs is as a designation for all conditioned things. In this context the word has a passive derivation, denoting whatever is formed by a combination of conditions; whatever is conditioned, constructed, or compounded.

The suttas
I don't know whether there is a good/long/detailed canonical description in the Suttas.
Suminda's answer references the Abhidhamma.
One of the places it's described is the Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta, very short:

And what are fabrications? These three are fabrications: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, mental fabrications. These are called fabrications.

The aggregates
This page contain three essays by Ajaan Lee. The last essay on that page titled "Part III: The Buddhist Way" describes various types of Sankhara, which is "a brief outline of the Buddha's teachings based on the synopsis of the Ovada Patimokkha". It includes (again I'm heavily summarizing the article):

"Sankharas on the level of the world": status, fortune, praise
"Sankharas on the level of the Dhamma": Dhatu, Khandha, and Ayatana

I think that all khandhas are sankharas, i.e. each khandha is some-things-put-together; for example they include:

Putting things together so that they can be sensed (or more specifically, contact between the sense and sense-object)
Putting a "feeling" with the thing (e.g. "I feel that's good" or "I think that's bad")

The sense of self (identity view) is presumably a sankhara too (see the simile of the chariot).
The same article also mentions some important attributes of sankharas, e.g. impermanence:

The Buddha taught in line with the true nature of the world. He said, "Khaya-vaya-dhamma sankhara, appamadena sampadetha," which means, "All sankharas, once they have arisen, decay by their very nature. Don't be heedless or complacent. Be thoroughly mindful and completely alert, and you will attain peace and security."
What this means is this: All things that appear in the world arising from actions (kamma) are called sankharas — formations, fashionings, compounded things. Sankharas, by their nature, or of two sorts — sankharas on the level of the world and sankharas on the level of the Dhamma.

I may be wrong but I suspect that vipassana meditation might be supposed to help you understand that, at least at the sensory level. I think vipassana is supposed to make you aware of impermanence, but because sankharas are impermanent perhaps "becoming aware of impermanence" means "becoming aware of sankharas".
I also like the explanation, "All things that appear in the world arising from actions (kamma) are called sankharas": because I think that helps to explain why sankharas are sometimes translated as not just "formations" but "volitional formations": i.e. perhaps it's because kamma (action) is also associated with will (see "This volition and the resultant actions constitute kamma" in this commentary).

One of the five aggregates
The terminology turns out to be confusing because all five khandhas are sankharas, but also one of the khandhas in particular is called sankharas.
I think that means "all khandhas are fabricated or put together, but one of the khandhas is what people do when they put things together or fabricate things in their mind."
Wikipedia summarizes this meaning of sankhara as a specific one one of the five aggregates:

"mental formations", "impulses", "volition", "fabrications" or "compositional factors" (Skt. samskāra, Pāli saṅkhāra, Tib. 'du-byed): all types of mental habits, thoughts, ideas, opinions, prejudices, compulsions, and decisions triggered by an object

This too matches (is an even better match for) the "volitional formation" translation.
The footnote to that Wikipedia paragraph begins with, "The Theravada Abhidhamma divides saṅkhāra into fifty mental factors".

All conditioned things
There's an example of this usage in the Buddha's last words (in the The Mahāparinibbāna Sutta),

And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: “Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!”58

This was the last word of the Tathāgata.

The footnote gives the Pali,

Handa dāni bhikkhave āmantayāmi vo: Vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādetha.

Jayarava explores that phrase, and how difficult it is to translate, in this article, The last words of the Buddha.


Noble Eightfold Path - applicable by lay practitioners? To my understanding, the 8 factors are of course something that require cultivation (practise/training). However, noble right view, for example, is an experiential part, and not an intellectual one.

  And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view."

When exactly is this seen? At stream entry level?

Furthermore, Right Intention and Right Effort both require one to abandon anger and desire. While anger can be let go much easier, most lay people cling to the five senses (which among them includes the desire for sex).

So there again I see no applicability for lay practitioners.

"Right Speech" is a difficult one, because if we take the arya vacca then we basically only speak about the dhamma, particularly the cessation of dukkha.

Right Samadhi is also unlikely for lay because it is basically Jhana, and Jhana itself requires a lot of letting go of attachments and absolute no sensuality in the mind.

So what is your response to this?

The Noble Eightfold path is a path of celibacy. Sexual misconduct in the Noble Path is defined as "unchastity" ("abrahmacariyā"). In the 1st sermon, the Buddha taught the Middle Way, which avoids sensuality, is for those who have left the household life.


What does 'all the phenomena related to the senses are "not real"' mean? Upasaka Angus asked on another place:

  What do you mean that all the phenomena related to the senses are "not real"?

So what does a statement '"all the phenomena related to the senses are "not real (anicca)"' dhammical mean?

What are phenomena related to the senses?

(Note that question in Dhamma is not dedicated for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to make merits toward release from this wheel)

I think that "not real" is not a good translation, and is not a translation that I'm used to seeing on Access To Insight or other careful translations.
It's a phrase I used to see written sometimes in some author's modern paraphrase of Buddhism, and before I discovered the translations of the suttas -- but it's a phrase I didn't understand at that time, and which might be (in my experience) a little harmful because it makes Buddhism sound like nonsense (e.g. because I don't understand it).
For that kind of reason I wish that people wouldn't use the phrase ("not real"). As well as being unclear, and maybe untrue, the phrase "not real" also seems to be a bit unkind -- if someone is grieving a loved one's death, for example, would you say "the grief you feel isn't real"? That kind of message ("grief isn't real") is not the kind of message I get from the suttas (though the suttas do describe a way towards the end of suffering).
I think the conventional (non-Buddhist, English-language) understanding of "not real" is something like "illusory" or "not existent" -- also "not tangible" or "not thing-like" -- but that sort of meaning might be refuted by this Zen story:

Nothing Exists
Yamaoka Tesshu, as a young student of Zen, visited one master after another. He called upon Dokuon of Shokoku.
Desiring to show his attainment, he said: “The mind, Buddha, and sentient beings, after all, do not exist. The true nature of phenomena is emptiness. There is no realization, no delusion, no sage, no mediocrity. There is no giving and nothing to be received.”
Dokuon, who was smoking quietly, said nothing. Suddenly he whacked Yamaoka with his bamboo pipe. This made the youth quite angry.
“If nothing exists,” inquired Dokuon, “where did this anger come from?”

The word anicca is usually translated "impermanent".
The "phenomena related to the senses" are usually described as "dependently originated", "not fit to be regarded as 'self'", "changeable", maybe "not satisfying", and by implication "not reliable" etc. (though they're also described as "The All" in one sutta).


Buddha's Comment on Compassion Meditation I think I recall reading about the Buddha saying that compassion meditation was far superior to compassionate action, hundreds (or some great number) times more. Is this accurate? What is the source for this?

I am also interesting in knowing if this is true in people's experience on here.

Buddha taught that one should develop compassion or karuna both with actions and meditation. This can be seen in Mettanisamsa Sutta:

"Monks, for one whose awareness-release through good will is cultivated, developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken, eleven benefits can be expected"

Although good-will or metta is not the same with compassion, both of them are considered two of the four sublime attitudes, brahmavihara. In this sutta, Buddha mentioned that good-will has to be perfected both in mind and actions for the benefits to be experienced. Thus, the same approach applies to compassion as well.

Besides, in my experience, practicing only metta meditation without performing skillful actions related to loving-kindness still makes me feel like I am a "selfish" person. it is only with the practice of both meditation and skillful actions does one able to perfect the sublime attitudes; meditation depends on skillful actions and skillful actions depend on meditation.

References:
"Metta (Mettanisamsa) Sutta: Good Will" (AN 11.16), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight (BCBS Edition), 23 July 2013, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.016.than.html


Relation of Productivity and Entertainment I've read a question here on music, which caused me to ponder the relationship of effortful, productive behaviours and of consummatory behaviours. I wonder:

Are productive, beneficial behaviours such as spiritual practice, intellectual pursuits, or artistic endeavours benefitted by entertainment as music, films or games? Or do such forms of entertainment detract from other more meaningful goals?

I'm wondering because I surmise maybe entertainment produces positive emotions, which are positive in themselves. However, I am uncertain of my conclusion; what is the Buddhist view on these topics?

Are positive emotions only virtuous if accompanied by an underlying motivation towards a meaningful aim?

Thank you

There is work and there is play and both can be clung to. Personally I cannot motivate myself if there is no play so what I do is try to turn all my play into productive work.  I make music and I try to incorporate that into the Dhamma like I try to incorporate the need for food, clothing, shelter and medical care into spiritual practice.


"grasping a sign", "fixed view", and suffering I heard that "grasping a sign" is considered a bad thing in Buddhism. Why is that so and what does that refer to?

We know that "attachment to views" is a bad thing too. Are these related? (signs and views)?

Does Buddhism say anything about broad generalizations vs. careful analysis? Is this topic connected with signs and views, too?

Does all of the above tie to suffering somehow?

I came accross this sutta about Roots of All things...
Very interesting that the enlightened persons dont even grasp to Nirvana and identify as self .

"They directly know extinguishment as extinguishment.
But they shouldn’t identify with extinguishment, they shouldn’t identify regarding extinguishment, they shouldn’t identify as extinguishment, they shouldn’t identify that ‘extinguishment is mine’, they shouldn’t take pleasure in extinguishment......
Because they have completely understood it..."

I understand this sutta as views of nirvana of those who have reached it , is not to grasp the  nirvana itself.

Way above my pay grade where I am still struggling with 5 sense gates pleasure.

But I think this sutta might help.   It is interesting to me that when you reach nirvana,  you let it (nirvana) go too (automatically? )..

https://suttacentral.net/mn1/en/sujato


Is it possible for a human being to live without the mind? If a human being consists of two parts as mind and body, is it then possible to live without mind?

Appreciate your ideas.

To answer this question accurately is very difficult if you are not a scientist but often people have accidents that results in them being in a coma for an extended period, where their physical body is alive but their mind is not conscious. If the mind is not conscious at all here then that physical body is living without mind (however from a Buddhist perspective, this is probably not a "human" living since, in Buddhism, the word translated as "human" means to have a reflective & wise mind).
Also, there is a meditation state where the mind becomes unconscious, called 'the cessation of perception & feeling'. This meditative state is compared to a dead body, where even breathing cannot be felt yet the 'life force' or 'vitality' of the body & heat remain.
For example, in the Buddhist scriptures, there are stories about monks that enter into the meditation state of 'the cessation of perception & feeling' & people watch them meditating (not moving) under a tree for many days, believe they are dead & try to bury or cremate them.
Therefore, it appears it is possible to that a 'human' can live without mind.

What is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time; and a monk who has attained the cessation of perception &
feeling?
In the case of the one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily fabricator (breathing)...his verbal fabricator (thinking)
... his mental fabricator (perception & feeling) have ceased & subsided, his vitality is
exhausted, his heat subsided & his (five sense) faculties (eye, ears, nose, tongue & body nervous system) are scattered.
But in
the case of a monk who has attained the cessation of perception &
feeling, his bodily fabricator... his verbal
fabricator ... his mental fabricators have ceased & subsided, his
vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not subsided & his (five sense) faculties
are exceptionally clear (pure).
This is the difference between one who is
dead, who has completed his time, and a monk who has attained the
cessation of perception & feeling.
Mahavedalla Sutta


Days related to Buddhism Growing up in a conservative family, I saw my community elders choose a good day for events or celebrations.

Including, a good day to travel, a good day to start a business, a good day for haircut and much more.

Do they adopt animism?
Or is it related to Buddhism?

According to DN 2, calculating auspicious dates is considered an "animal art" and wrong livelihood. It is prohibited for monks:

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as: calculating auspicious dates for marriages — both those in which
  the bride is brought home and those in which she is sent out;
  calculating auspicious dates for betrothals and divorces; for
  collecting debts or making investments and loans ... — he
  abstains from wrong livelihood, from "animal" arts such as these.

There are plenty more such "animal arts" in the sutta, including astrology, geomancy, palmistry, omen reading, dream interpretation, magic etc.:

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as: reading marks on the limbs [e.g., palmistry]; reading omens and
  signs; interpreting celestial events [falling stars, comets];
  interpreting dreams; reading features of the body [e.g., phrenology];
  reading marks on cloth gnawed by mice; offering fire oblations,
  oblations from a ladle, oblations of husks, rice powder, rice grains,
  ghee, and oil; offering oblations from the mouth; offering
  blood-sacrifices; making predictions based on the fingertips;
  geomancy; making predictions for state officials; laying demons in a
  cemetery; placing spells on spirits; earth-skills [divining water and
  gems?]; snake-skills, poison-skills, scorpion-skills, rat-skills,
  bird-skills, crow-skills; predicting life spans; giving protective
  charms; casting horoscopes — he abstains from wrong livelihood, from
  "animal" arts such as these.

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as: determining lucky and unlucky gems, staffs, garments, swords,
  arrows, bows, and other weapons; women, men, boys, girls, male slaves,
  female slaves; elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, cows, goats, rams,
  fowl, quails, lizards, rabbits, tortoises, and other animals — he
  abstains from wrong livelihood, from "animal" arts such as these.

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as [forecasting]: the rulers will march forth; the rulers will not
  march forth; our rulers will attack, and their rulers will retreat;
  their rulers will attack, and our rulers will retreat; there will be
  triumph for our rulers and defeat for their rulers; there will be
  triumph for their rulers and defeat for our rulers; thus there will be
  triumph this one, defeat for that one — he abstains from wrong
  livelihood, from "animal" arts such as these.

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as [forecasting]: there will be a lunar eclipse; there will be a solar
  eclipse; there will be an occultation of [a conjunction of the moon or
  a planet with] an asterism; the sun and moon will be favorable; the
  sun and moon will be unfavorable; the asterisms will be favorable; the
  asterisms will be unfavorable; there will be a meteor shower; there
  will be a flickering light on the horizon [an aurora?]; there will be
  an earthquake; there will be thunder coming from dry clouds; there
  will be a rising, a setting, a darkening, a brightening of the sun,
  moon, and asterisms; such will be the result of the lunar eclipse ...
  the rising, setting, darkening, brightening of the sun, moon, and
  asterisms — he abstains from wrong livelihood, from "animal" arts such
  as these.

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as [forecasting]: there will be abundant rain; there will be a
  drought; there will be plenty; there will be famine; there will be
  rest and security; there will be danger; there will be disease; there
  will be freedom from disease; or they earn their living by accounting,
  counting, calculation, composing poetry, or teaching hedonistic arts
  and doctrines [lokāyata] — he abstains from wrong livelihood, from
  "animal" arts such as these.

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as: calculating auspicious dates for marriages — both those in which
  the bride is brought home and those in which she is sent out;
  calculating auspicious dates for betrothals and divorces; for
  collecting debts or making investments and loans; reciting charms to
  make people attractive or unattractive; curing women who have
  undergone miscarriages or abortions; reciting spells to bind a man's
  tongue, to paralyze his jaws, to make him lose control over his hands,
  or to bring on deafness; getting oracular answers to questions
  addressed to a spirit in a mirror, in a young girl, or to a spirit
  medium; worshipping the sun, worshipping the Great Brahmā, bringing
  forth flames from the mouth, invoking the goddess of luck — he
  abstains from wrong livelihood, from "animal" arts such as these.

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal" arts
  as: promising gifts to deities in return for favors; fulfilling such
  promises; demonology; reciting spells in earth houses [see earth
  skills, above]; inducing virility and impotence; preparing sites for
  construction; consecrating sites for construction; giving ceremonial
  mouthwashes and ceremonial baths; offering sacrificial fires;
  administering emetics, purges, purges from above, purges from below,
  head-purges; ear-oil, eye-drops, treatments through the nose,
  ointments, and counter-ointments; practicing eye-surgery [or:
  extractive surgery], general surgery, pediatrics; administering
  root-medicines and binding medicinal herbs — he abstains from wrong
  livelihood, from "animal" arts such as these. This, too, is part of
  his virtue."

  "A monk thus consummate in virtue sees no danger anywhere from his
  restraint through virtue. Just as a head-anointed noble warrior king
  who has defeated his enemies sees no danger anywhere from his enemies,
  in the same way the monk thus consummate in virtue sees no danger
  anywhere from his restraint through virtue. Endowed with this noble
  aggregate of virtue, he is inwardly sensitive to the pleasure of being
  blameless. This is how a monk is consummate in virtue.


Evidence of Pali Canon's Origin Are the Buddha's words the source of the Pali Canon? What evidence is there of the Pali Canon's origin? What do scholars say?

I encourage you to read the following: Bhikkhu Sujato & Bhikkhu Brahmali. The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts.
In this work, their project is to investigate the question of authencity systematically. In that, the approach is quiet academic and might be to your liking.
Page 7, they state a feature of the early Buddhist texts:

The Buddha’s presence as a living figure in the EBTs is overwhelming
and unmistakable. It stands in stark contrast with all other Buddhist
literature, where the Buddha has faded to legend.

Page 8, they assert that, although they accord with the meaning of Buddha Dharma...
> We are not denying the obvious fact that the texts bear all the marks
> of redaction and editing, and that they have been optimised for the
> oral tradition.

Page 151, they state what we owe to the early Buddhist texts:
> We know when the Buddha lived, where he lived, who he associated with,
> how he lived, and what he taught. We know these things with greater
> certainty than for almost any other historical figure from a
> comparable period. And we know this because of the EBTs. All other
> historical and archaeological information about the period depends on
> the EBTs to make sense.
Their overall conclusion is that although the Pali canon "bears the marks of redaction and editing", the meaning accord with the intent of the Buddha. Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali expose various argument (sorted out by chapters, that all constitute different angles: geographical, historical, and so forth) in order to highlight the proximity between what is written in the Pali canon and what the Buddha [presumably] said.


What enters the mind of an idle Buddha? What enters the mind of a Buddha when left idle? Suppose a Buddha were confined to a hospital bed or prison cell. One cannot remain within the conditioned states of jhana indefinitely. If one is unconditionally content, even in states of pain, it would seem there is no need to reflect or contemplate anything. Can you cite specific examples from the Buddha's life?

From parinibbana suttha

    16: The Gracious One’s Sickness

  Then the Gracious One, after living near Ambapālī’s Wood for as long
  as he liked, addressed venerable Ānanda, saying: “Come Ānanda let us
  approach the little village of Beluva.”

  “Very well, reverend Sir,” venerable Ānanda replied to the Gracious
  One. Then the Gracious One together with a great Community of monks
  arrived at the little village of Beluva. There the Gracious One lived
  near the little village of Beluva.

  There the Gracious One addressed the monks, saying: “Go, monks, and
  undertake the Rains Retreat in the vicinity of Vesālī living like
  friends, like companions, like comrades, and I will spend the Rains
  Retreat right here at the little village of Beluva.”

  “Very well, reverend Sir,” and those monks, after replying to the
  Gracious One, undertook the Rains Retreat in the vicinity of Vesālī
  living like friends, like companions, like comrades. But the Gracious
  One spent the Rains Retreat right there at the little village of
  Beluva.

  Then while dwelling for the Rains Retreat, a heavy affliction arose
  for the Gracious One, and continued with strong and death-like
  feelings. There the Gracious One dwelt mindfully, with full awareness,
  and without being troubled. Then this occurred to the Gracious One:
  “It is not suitable that I, without having addressed my attendants,
  without having given notice to the Community of monks, should attain
  Final Emancipation. Having energetically dismissed this affliction, I
  could live on after determining the lifespan.”

  Then the Gracious One having energetically dismissed that affliction
  lived on after determining the lifespan. Then the Gracious One’s
  affliction abated. Then, the Gracious One, having risen from that
  sickness, not long after rising, departed from the Sick Room and sat
  down on the prepared seat in front of that Room.

  Then venerable Ānanda approached the Gracious One, and after
  approaching and worshipping the Gracious One, he sat down on one side.
  While sitting on one side venerable Ānanda said this to the Gracious
  One:

  “I have seen, reverend Sir, the Gracious One comfortable, I have seen,
  reverend Sir, the Gracious One bearing up while sick, and my body,
  reverend Sir, became faint as it were, and although I could not see
  straight, and things were not clear, it appeared to me, reverend Sir,
  that the Gracious One was sick, but it was some small comfort that the
  Gracious One would not attain Final Emancipation until the Gracious
  One had spoken regarding the Community of monks.”

  “But what, Ānanda, does the Community of monks expect of me? The
  Teaching has been taught by me, Ānanda, without having made a
  distinction between esoteric and exoteric, for the Realised One there
  is nothing, Ānanda, of a closed teacher’s fist in regard to the
  Teaching.

  To whoever, Ānanda, this thought occurs: ‘I will lead the Community of
  monks’ or ‘I am the instructer of the Community of monks’ let him
  speak, Ānanda, regarding the Community of monks. But to the Realised
  One, Ānanda, this thought does not occur: ‘I will lead the Community
  of monks’ or ‘I am the instructor of the Community of monks’. Then
  why, Ānanda, should the Realised One speak regarding the Community of
  monks?

  I, Ānanda, at present, am old, elderly, of great age, far gone,
  advanced in years, I am eighty years old. It is like, Ānanda, an old
  cart, which only keeps going when shored up with bamboo, just so,
  Ānanda, I think the Realised One’s body only keeps going when shored
  up with bamboo.

  When the Realised One doesn’t pay attention, Ānanda, to any of the
  signs, when all feelings have ceased, he lives having established the
  signless mind-concentration, and at that time, Ānanda, the Realised
  One’s body is most comfortable.

  Therefore, Ānanda, live with yourself as an island, yourself as a
  refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the
  Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge. And how, Ānanda, does a
  monk live with himself as an island, himself as a refuge, with no
  other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the Teaching as a
  refuge, with no other refuge?

  Here, Ānanda, a monk dwells contemplating the nature of the body in
  the body, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and
  sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the nature of
  feelings in feelings, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing
  avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the
  nature of the mind in the mind, ardent, fully aware, and mindful,
  after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells
  contemplating the nature of things in various things, ardent, fully
  aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the
  world.

  Thus, Ānanda, a monk lives with himself as an island, himself as a
  refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the
  Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge. For whoever, Ānanda,
  whether at present or after my passing, lives with himself as an
  island, himself as a refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching
  as an island, the Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge, those
  monks of mine, Ānanda, will go from darkness to the highest—whoever
  likes the training.”

  The Second Chapter for Recital is Finished.


5 precepts and the mental factor of sila Once the 5 precepts is observed from a monk, is there any rupa of sila being formed as a kind of mental factor in the observer? And this rupa of sila (like a vase?) if thus polluted,it can be cleansed, but once broken, it can not be amended. Is this saying correct?

The undertaking of the five precepts normally refers to the lay people. While monks also practice them, their discipline is far more numerous and it is called Patimokkha. The five precepts should not be seen the same way as "The Ten Commandments" as they serve as practice  guidelines instead of an absolute rule handed down by a supernatural being. If a lay person were to conduct an action against the precepts, there is no penalty or punishment although the action is unwholesome and unskillful. However, it is possible that such an action will result in unpleasant karmic retribution in the future. On the other hand, if a monk were to break one of the rules in the Patimokkha, the offense depends on the seriousness of the unskillful actions.


MN 36 parallels for section where Buddha as a 9 year old boy has first jhana I read up on B. Analayo's Agama comparative notes between the passage in question in various EBT schools (pali, more than one agama lineage, sanskrit...).

But he didn't have the part I'm interested in. He talks about how one recension talks about Buddha as a boy experiencing all 4 jhanas instead of just first jhana for example.

Does anyone have quote and references for the passages in question?

In the pali version, all it says is while his father was working, buddha sat down in the cool shade of a tree and spontaneously entered first jhana.

I'm especially interested in one of the Agamas, which says the same thing, but adds that right before he entered jhana, he had been observing the dukkha of watching earthworms getting eaten by birds.

I could find the part about the 4 jhanas instead of only the first jhana, but I could not find the part about the earthworms.
From Ekottarāgama 31.8 of the Taisho Tripitaka:

「爾時，我作 是念：『今日可食一果。』爾時我便食一果。當 我食一果之日，身形萎弱不能自起居，如 年百二十，骨節離散不能扶持。比丘當知，
爾時一果者，如似今日小棗耳。爾時，我復作 是念：『非我成道之本，故當更有餘道。』爾時， 我復作是念：『我自憶昔日，在父王樹下無
婬、無欲，除去惡不善法，遊於初禪；無覺、 無觀，遊於二禪；念清淨無有眾想，遊於 三禪；無復苦樂，意念清淨，遊於四禪。此或
能是道，我今當求此道。』

Using Google Translate, I got:

"At this time, I just said: "I can eat one fruit today." At this time,
I eat one fruit. When I eat one fruit, I am weak and unable to live by
myself. For example, when I am a hundred and twenty, my joints cannot
be separated. Support. Bhikkhus should know that when there is a
fruit, it is like today's jujube ears. When you are here, I repeat it
by saying: "It is not the foundation of my enlightenment, so I should
have more surplus." "I recall from the past, under my father’s tree,
there was no lust, no desire, no evil and unwholesome dhammas,
swimming in the first meditation; no awareness, no insight, swimming
in the second meditation; pure mind without many thoughts, swimming in
the third meditation; Resume suffering and happiness, pure mind, swim
in the four meditations. This may be the Tao, I should ask for it
now."

The Chinese used in the agama is probably a bit different from modern Chinese, so the machine translation may be inaccurate.
Ekottarāgama is the Sanskrit equivalent of the Pali collection of Aṅguttara Nikāya.


If there is no "I", who or what is controlling my animalistic urges? All sorts of impulses and urges in human and other beings are invoked by nature in order to sustain life. In my way of thinking, it is a rational "I" who attempts to control reacting to these impulses and urges. If there is no "I", how am I supposed to see or think of my acting self? Is this "citta" or the "empirical self"?

As I understand it "I" am not an unchanging thing but merely an accumulation of conditioning resulting in habits; a point of view to which modern science would likely not oppose. However, I have or am, then, still a mind (citta)? Is it this mind that has accumulated karma in this and past lives? And how is that, then, not, in a way, "me"?

The "I" is a survival function of the (unenlightened) human mind & is actually created by the very impulses & urges it seeks to control. (Or otherwise this type of "I" is also created by social or religious conditioning).

For example, sexual urges arise due to hormones & other physical & psychological mechanisms and then, a short time later, the mind thinks: "I feel sexual". Thus, the urge occurs before the "I". The "I" is a product (result) of the urge rather than the producer (cause) of the urge.

A child (not conditioned by its parents or religion about right & wrong) does not attempt to control its impulses & urges. A child simply follows its impulses & urges. It is only later, when the child or adult learns through experience that some of its impulses & urges lead to harming itself or are dangerous that it tries to control its impulses & urges.

However, in reality, it is not the "I" that is trying to control the impulses & urges that have lead to hurt, pain & suffering. In fact, it was not really the "I" that experienced pain & hurt. Instead, it is simply the 'citta' (mind-heart) that experienced hurt & it is simply the wisdom of the citta through feeling hurt that seeks to control impulses & urges. That is why enlightened minds (cittas) do not need an "I". Such enlightened minds are guided by wisdom (i.e. neurological sensitivity) only.

It is like breaking a leg. First the pain of the broken leg arises and, a short time later, the mind thinks "I am hurt". The "I am" is not required for the mind to feel the hurt. The mind itself knows the hurt & the "I am" is extra or the commentary.

That said, this business of "I" is very deep. It is natural for the minds of people to develop the "I". Since months after child birth, most feelings, sensations, urges & impulses have been deemed by the mind to be "I am". This is all part of natural human development. Generally, a mind without a development of "I" (to give it personal & social boundaries) will have some kind of mental illness.

The best Buddhist explanation about the "I" is probably 'Anatta and Rebirth' by Buddhadasa.

The citta (mind) certainly accumulates 'kamma'. An example is a drug addict, which accumulates addiction or craving symptoms for a drug. The drug addict decides to break the addiction and successfully enters into 'cold-turkey'. This shows the person is not the accumulated kamma of drug-addiction since the drug addiction (accumulated kamma) can be broken & cleansed.

Similarly, the teachings (AN 6.63) state the Noble Eightfold Path is the path for the ending of accumulated kamma. Accumulated kamma is also something conditioned & subject to impermanence & change when the conditions that created it are removed.

This is why the teachings (AN 3.61) also state what we experience is not due to past lives but to how the mind responds to (internal & external) sense experience/stimuli in the here-&-now.

For example, a certain kamma in the past may have once hurt us (the mind-heart). But if there is a change in attitude or response towards that kamma, such as regarding that kamma as a "lesson" rather than "hurt", that kamma will stop hurting us.

That is why the teachings state "old kamma" ought to be viewed as the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body & mind (since "old kamma" is only sense stimuli arising in the present).

Therefore, accumulated kamma is not something fixed & static but something that people can learn from, i.e., a teacher.


four types of beings (reference searched) I remember hearing somewhere about 4 types of beings in relation with the satipatthana sutta and that for each group one of the satipatthanas is most important/suitable to practice. Can somebody please give me a reference from the suttas or commentaries?

affective, slow temperament - body
intellectual, fast temperament - mental contents
affective, fast temperament - sensations
intellectual speculation, slow temperament - mind

Sourced from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satipatthana_Sutta

This is not found in the Suttas but in the commentaries. This is taken from Papañcasudani


Buddha's past lives in the Pali Suttas outside of Jataka According to this answer for the question "Does Theravada Buddhism accept Jataka Stories?":

  The Theravada accepts the Jataka stories as commentarial literature;
  they are not canonical, but are considered a reliable account by a
  learned Buddhist scholar. What are canonical are the verses that
  accompany the stories ...

  It's not uncommon for modern Theravada Buddhists to question the
  authenticity of the stories, especially given their often fantastical
  content.

Based on the above, it looks like the stories of the Buddha's past lives from Jataka are merely commentarial, and not canonical.

However, I found one possible story of the Buddha's past life as told by him in MN 83, which is part of the Sutta Pitaka, but outside Jataka. Being part of the Majjhima Nikaya, I take it that this is canonical.

It's a story about the just and principled King Makhadeva who started the practice of retiring from the throne at an advanced age to become an ascetic. He practiced the Brahmaviharas, and was reborn after the break-up of the body, after death, in the Brahma realm. He established and passed on this good practice to his descendents who carried on doing it, till King Nimi's son Kaḷārajanaka who stopped this practice.

The plot twist is when the Buddha tells Ananda:

  And having developed the four Brahmā meditations, when his body broke
  up, after death, King Nimi was reborn in a good place, a Brahmā realm.
  But King Nimi had a son named Kaḷārajanaka. He didn’t go forth from
  the lay life to homelessness. He broke that good practice. He was
  their final man.

  Ānanda, you might think: ‘Surely King Makhādeva, by whom that good
  practice was founded, must have been someone else at that time?’ But
  you should not see it like this. I myself was King Makhādeva at that
  time. I was the one who founded that good practice, which was kept up
  by those who came after. But that good practice doesn’t lead to
  disillusionment, fading away, cessation, peace, insight, awakening,
  and extinguishment. It only leads as far as rebirth in the Brahmā
  realm. But now I have founded a good practice that does lead to
  disillusionment, fading away, cessation, peace, insight, awakening,
  and extinguishment. And what is that good practice? It is simply this
  noble eightfold path, that is: right view, right thought, right
  speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right
  mindfulness, and right immersion. This is the good practice I have now
  founded that leads to disillusionment, fading away, cessation, peace,
  insight, awakening, and extinguishment. Ānanda, I say to you: ‘You all
  should keep up this good practice that I have founded. Do not be my
  final men.’ Whatever generation is current when such good practice is
  broken, he is their final man. Ānanda, I say to you: ‘You all should
  keep up this good practice that I have founded. Do not be my final
  men.’”

The Pali version side-by-side with English:

  I myself was King Makhādeva at that time.
  Ahaṃ tena samayena rājā maghadevo ahosiṃ.

  I was the one who founded that good practice,
  Ahaṃ taṃ kalyāṇaṃ vattaṃ nihiniṃ,
  mayā taṃ kalyāṇa vattaṃ nihitaṃ;

Questions:

Is my interpretation correct that the Buddha was King Makhadeva in his past life, based on the Pali version?
Are there other such canonical stories of the Buddha's past lives in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, outside of Jataka?

Are there other such canonical stories of the Buddha's past lives in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, outside of Jataka?
There's a bit in DN 16 -- not detailed, only that he was reborn here from a previous existence in Tusita heaven (the which event is one of the reasons why a great earthquake can happen):

Furthermore, when the being intent on awakening passes away from the group of Joyful Gods, he’s conceived in his mother’s belly, mindful and aware. Then the earth shakes and rocks and trembles.
Puna caparaṃ, ānanda, yadā bodhisatto tusitakāyā cavitvā sato sampajāno mātukucchiṃ okkamati, tadāyaṃ pathavī kampati saṅkampati sampakampati sampavedhati.

There's also the Buddhavamsa and the Cariyapitaka -- I'm not sure whether you count these as "suttas": i.e. they're in the Khuddaka Nikaya (in the Sutta Pitaka), as are the Jataka tales.


Specific sutta in the Majjhima Nikaya: Where is past and future discussed? Im looking for a specific sutta in the Majjhima Nikaya.

In the sutta past and future is being discussed and also how a practitioner on the insight path can gain seclusion from the 5 aggregates.

Help would be much appreciated.

Lanka

A few suttas fit this, but try this first -
Bhaddekaratta Sutta: An Auspicious Day
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.131.than.html


Dependent Origination in terms of conventional truth or teaching (Vohara Desana) and Ultimate truth or teaching (Paramattha Desana)? It appears many of my doubts and questions about Buddhism is the result of not being able to marry the teaching of conventional truth and the ultimate truth. For instance, when we take Jati in Dependent Origination, in terms of Vohara Desana it applies to the physical rebirth of a person. However, in the ultimate sense, there is no person then who is re-born? Ultimate sense what is re-born is the attachment, aversion, and ignorance.
We can apply this duality to all 12 links of DO.
Actually, this dilemma is very similar to the problem of scientists who are trying to understand the relation between the universe and the atoms.

Does Dependent Origination cover both conventional teaching and Ultimate teaching?

The Buddha did not teach Dependent Origination has a "conventional truth". Dependent Origination, as taught by the Buddha, only explains the arising of the ideas of "beings" ("satta") which cause the arising of suffering.

  In the course of the future there will be monks who
  won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep,
  deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are
  being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing
  them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But
  they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works
  of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of
  outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and
  set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as
  worth grasping & mastering. In this way the disappearance of the
  discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their
  meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.


Attending my first Buddhist Retreat This weekend I will be attending my first retreat with Zen monks. It is at a camp ground and I will be camping in a tent for the weekend. Does anyone have any advice on attending a retreat for the first time? Is there anything I should expect, or bring that I might not think of? Any advice or experiences with retreats and facing monks for the first time will be appreciated.

May you be happy.
Bowing to you.

My guess is that you can probably expect an orientation first.   All the same, it really depends on the group and the nature of the retreat.  If it's a formal sesshin, you've got a lot to expect.  For one, the energy will be amazing.  Zen is sesshin and sesshin is Zen.  There are no words that can describe what the experience is like!  As for the more mundane - there will be no talking.  These retreats are silent, but if you have a question about what you should be doing for a work period or what have you, you aren't violating any rules if you approach a senior student with a question.  Also regarding the talking bit - you will be given a chance to talk to the guy in charge during dokusan.  Try to save your practice related questions for then.  Two, your legs will hurt...a lot!!!  Expect this from the get go, but don't be afraid of it (easy to say, right??).  Stretching a bit helps purge your muscles of the lactic acid that builds up.  Oh, and during meal times, if they give you a yellowish looking pickle, don't eat it!  You use that to wash your bowl.  You can eat it after.  ;-)

All in all, just do the the best you can.  No one sits like a stone on their first retreat.  It takes years of practice to get to that point.  Also, don't expect any earth shattering revelations or anything of the sort.  The world will seem to move a lot faster once you come back home, though.  This will last a couple of days.  It will also be a bit easier dealing with stressful situations, your mind will a bit clearer, and you'll just be kinda happy for no reason.  That should whet your appetite to go back!


If there is no literal rebirth, why have samvega (a sense of urgency) Some people believe in rebirth after this life because (for them) it seems that the suttas claim literal rebirth.

And it somewhat makes sense because in some passages it'd be harder to believe in "just" mental birth, especially here:

"With the break-up of the body, re-appeared in..." (difficult here ro believe that body means the "body" of the 5 aggregates)

& here:

  "Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering.
  “Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination.

SN 56.11

Elsewhere I read that birth (jati) means birth in a particular realm (mind dwelling), which is caused by a sense of "I", and this in turn is caused by craving & the underlying asavas, but even if this is true (& per the sutta it arguably is), Why have samvega (sense of urgency that death may strike) without believe in literal rebirth

Why not live a normal life? This may sound provocative, but it really should not. Surely one can reply "because suffering", but most people living their live imperfectly okay, with some suffering here & there, but still find meaning & go through live with all its ups & downs.

With warm wishes.

Why have samvega (sense of urgency that death may strike) without believe in literal rebirth?

You could argue it both ways. Why have sense of urgency if you will be reborn? On the other hand - Why have sense of urgency if you're not going anywhere?

Dharma is called "Safe Bet". Whether there is literal rebirth or not, Liberation is deathless. Whether there is literal rebirth or not, dying without Liberation is scary - because either you may go to some strange inhuman worlds, or you disappear forever.

Hence the sense of urgency to attain Liberation.


The rites of marriage and death are a significant part of most religions The rites of marriage and death are a significant part of most religions. How does Buddhism celebrate these or any other rites?

In supramundane Dhamma (Lokuttara Dhamma) marriage (sensual desire) and "rites" are fetters, which stall progress to experience nibbana. Clinging to rites and views is called silabattupadana, which the stream entrant (sotapanna) has shaken off.

Marriage however is endorsed for lay practitioners, given they're at least undertaking the five precepts.

Above said, it is evident that the Buddha rather talked about which qualities husbands and wives should have, and not necessarily how these customs are celebrated.

  "In five ways, young householder, should a wife as the West be ministered to by a husband:
  (i) by being courteous to her,
  (ii) by not despising her,
  (iii) by being faithful to her,
  (iv) by handing over authority to her,
  (v) by providing her with adornments.

  "The wife thus ministered to as the West by her husband shows her compassion to her husband in five ways:
  (i) she performs her duties well,
  (ii) she is hospitable to relations and attendants
  (iii) she is faithful,
  (iv) she protects what he brings,
  (v) she is skilled and industrious in discharging her duties.

~

Parents, on the other hand, have the duty to arrange a marriage, but this has to be understood in the historical context.

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

~

Concerning death, I believe that most Buddhists choose to be cremated (especially monks).

But there is probably no definite answer, since the are a lot of sectarian Buddhisms out there, which are strongly interwoven with i) current society and its customs; ii) " non-canonical customs & teachings not spoken by the Buddha, which have been inherited since forever, to make Buddhism fit into everything; iii) The Dhamma is only concerned about stress (dukkha) & its cessation:

  And so, Anuradha — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'Friends, the Tathagata — the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment — being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death'?"
  "No, lord."
  "Very good, Anuradha. Very good. Both formerly & now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress."


How does Buddhism see Required Military Service? I live in the United States, where although unlikely, a draft could happen. There are also many other countries that require military service in some capacity.

I know Buddhism generally opposes killing and murder, so how does Buddhism see required or involuntary military service?

I am a thai. In thailand, they except a monk who has a degree of natinal buddhist educational background (นักธรรม-nakdhamma).

Generally, most of thai people know the way to do with the very religious people, because we have various religious in our country. So, if the buddhist person tells to a military's buddhist teacher "I can't not kill, because I am a religious person. If you send me to kill, I am surly that I can't help anyone by killing. You can send me to work in the other job instead. I can do everything, except precept-offending". He will test that buddhist person, then send him to work in the other position, such as the military medical assistant, instead.


How come enlightened people don't have any laziness? I just heard that enlightened people have zero laziness. How is it possible? What is "laziness" ? What is the connection between laziness and ego/desire?

Edit: Also that monk said: "Laziness is caused by ignorance."

Speaking from the first hand experience, laziness comes from attachment, fear, or ignorance. No attachment, no fear, and no ignorance - translates to no laziness.

And how does attachment cause laziness? Someone is attached to what they think is a pleasant pastime, taking delight and enjoying that experience. For such person, anything apart from that experience is unpleasant, hence they will have inner resistance and avoidance: laziness.

And how does fear cause laziness? Someone is afraid of failure or is afraid of judgement or is afraid of difficulties, or is afraid of all three. For such person, doing anything that has a risk of the three looks dangerous, hence they will have inner resistance and avoidance: laziness.

And how does ignorance cause laziness? Someone is confused about what is important, confused about what's good and what's bad for oneself and others, confused what actions lead to what outcome. For such person there's no understanding: "this needs to be done". Having no understanding, they have no motivation. Having no motivation, they are lazy.

An enlightened one, having no attachment, taking no delight in pleasant experiences, having overcome the sign of "pleasant", having no fear, having no resistance to difficult experiences, having transcended the notion of "difficult" - does not have a basis for the arising of inner resistance and avoidance, therefore laziness can't arise. Having the perfect understanding of what's good and what's bad, knowing what is important, an enlightened one acts with wisdom and compassion.


Is wanting to do something = desire? Is wanting to do something = desire ? Doesn't enlightened people want to do anything ? They just react to whatever comes ? ( "react" may not be a suitable word).

A related question that I hope to ask in Buddhism SE: How a enlightened monk differs from a enlightened lay person ?

As I know:

Monks have intention to teach dhamma to others.
Monks can live more than 7 days.

The first one have some relation to this question.

An enlightened mind has eradicated the fetters that bound that mind with wandering around with suffering born from ignorance and craving.

What kind of craving?

In the Discourse of the Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma (SN 56.11), the Buddha said this about the kind of desires than bind to suffering and dissatisfaction:

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

These three kinds of craving are called Tanha, or 'thirst'. As the objects desired from that thirst are impermanent, the emotional and mental thirst is never quenched by getting this or that object.

Other kinds of desire may still arise for the enlightened mind. The main difference is that such kinds do not lead to suffering, because ignorant expectations, assumptions and generalizations about the world have been uprooted. For such liberated mind, the task has been done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world.

Kind regards!


How & why can sexual intentions be harmful to others? MN 19 says:

  And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued
  with sensuality arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with
  sensuality has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to
  the affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs
  discernment, promotes vexation, & does not lead to Nibbana.'

While I gain the impression the macho blokey male Buddhist internet scene appears to have men hoping to score jhana or Nibbana, which they imagine is a higher form of pornographic sexual orgasm, in this respect, it seems MN 19 is clear when it says sensuality is harmful to "oneself", in that sensual & sexual thoughts hinder jhana & Nibbana.

But why are sensual or sexual thoughts & intentions harmful to "others", as stated on MN 19?

Then, as I meditated—diligent, keen, and resolute—a sensual thought arose. I understood: ‘This sensual thought has arisen in me. It leads to hurting myself, hurting others, and hurting both. It blocks wisdom, it’s on the side of anguish, and it doesn’t lead to extinguishment.’ When I reflected that it leads to hurting myself, it went away. When I reflected that it leads to hurting others, it went away.

If one has a sensual thought about another person, one feels an attraction, a craving, a grasping. And as one acts upon that sensual thought, that other person becomes a sense-object, an object of craving. We objectify them, reducing them to mere objects of satisfaction. This is harmful to others in that it diminishes them.

And although the person to whom we are attracted may delight in our attention, they may come to crave that attention and seek it again. This is harmful to others in that we lead them astray, tempting them to seek attention.

If the person to whom we are attracted has an unattractive friend, we ignore that unattractive friend in our pursuit of the attractive friend. This is harmful to others in that we treat them with aversion.

These are only some of the ways sensual thoughts can hurt others and why they are unskillful.


Samatha meditation feels a space at the top of the head? When  doing walking felt a space  at the  top  of the  head. After done  some meditation  the space  began to expand .What is this?And there is a kind  of a heart beat like  inside the space.

It's just a sign that your mind is starting to enter access concentration.  It's really quite common.  People also report sensations like their head swelling, body twisting, face disappearing, hands inflating, etc., etc., etc.  How these feelings manifest is as unique as the person experiencing them.  They're kind of like your own personal brand of samadhi entry.  The sensations themselves are also not particularly important; you don't need to pay them any mind.  Eventually, as your concentration deepens and you move closer to jhana, your meditation will start to take on a character more reminiscent of those described in the sutras.


Why does the third noble truth not include the ten fetters? The Four Noble Truths are defined in the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta as:

  "The Noble Truth of Suffering (dukkha), monks, is this: Birth is
  suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is
  suffering, association with the unpleasant is suffering, dissociation
  from the pleasant is suffering, not to receive what one desires is
  suffering — in brief the five aggregates subject to grasping are
  suffering.

  "The Noble Truth of the Origin (cause) of Suffering is this: It is
  this craving (thirst) which produces re-becoming (rebirth) accompanied
  by passionate greed, and finding fresh delight now here, and now
  there, namely craving for sense pleasure, craving for existence and
  craving for non-existence (self-annihilation).

  "The Noble Truth of the Cessation of Suffering is this: It is the
  complete cessation of that very craving, giving it up, relinquishing
  it, liberating oneself from it, and detaching oneself from it.

  "The Noble Truth of the Path Leading to the Cessation of Suffering is
  this: It is the Noble Eightfold Path, and nothing else, namely: right
  understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right
  livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration.

From this, it is widely assumed that to end suffering, we must end craving and that's it.

However, according to SN45.179 and SN45.180, it is not just craving that must be ended, but also the ten fetters, through the Noble Eightfold Path.

  “Bhikkhus, there are these five lower fetters. What five? Identity
  view, doubt, the distorted grasp of rules and vows, sensual desire,
  ill will. These are the five lower fetters. This Noble Eightfold Path
  is to be developed for direct knowledge of these five lower fetters,
  for the full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for
  their abandoning.”

  “Bhikkhus, there are these five higher fetters. What five? Lust for
  form, lust for the formless, conceit, restlessness, ignorance. These
  are the five higher fetters. The Noble Eightfold Path is to be
  developed for direct knowledge of these five higher fetters, for the
  full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for their
  abandoning.

So, why is craving singled out in the third noble truth, rather than including all of the ten fetters?

Craving cannot be eliminated at will. You need to do something to eliminate it. That is what the fourth noble truth is about. In other words, one needs to cultivate wisdom to eliminate craving. Elimination/weakening of fetters are the mileposts of developing wisdom.


"Anyone can be enlightened" To my limited knowledge, in Zen, it is believed that anyone can be enlightened(if dedicated enough).
Does everyone have this potential in other branches of Buddhism?
Can everyone achieve this through meditation?
Is this what is meant by Buddha nature?
Is it exclusive to humans(is language necessary?)

Buddhist philosophy, or even philosophy in general makes words difficult to use consistently. The concept of everyone is one of those words. Which makes the answer yes and no to the question: Can everyone be enlightened?

In, I believe, all schools and branches of Buddhism, all sentient beings can eventually gain enlightenment. With emphasis on "eventually".

Animals are not able to, as long as they are an animal.
Dwellers of lower realms, have an extremely hard time becoming enlightened so, and would probably need to accumulate some positive karma to become a human before they have a chance to.
Beings of higher realms like deva's tend to have such a happy and fun life, practising is difficult, but not impossible.
The human realm is seen as the best of all worlds in terms of practice.
Humans that have committed "Anantarika-karma" or Heinous Crime, (matricide, patricide, killing ahrat, wounding Buddha, creating a schism in the sangha) can no longer achieve enlightenment in this life.

Can everyone achieve this through meditation?

Now this is a difficult one. In the texts some of the enlightened students became so by listening to the words of the Buddha. Others became through practise. The main attributes needed seem to be a pure mind and insight, whether gained by meditation or otherwise.

Is this what is meant by Buddha nature?

I think it is, to an extend. This seems to be mainly a Mahayana concept and I'm not that familiar with it. I believe it's considered literally: "the potency to become a Buddha"
In the books I read of the Dalai Lama it is mainly revered to with respect to developing loving-kindness: "Training or developing your Buddha nature."

Is it exclusive to humans(is language necessary?)

Heavenly beings can also practise and become enlightened. I'm uncertain whether language is necessary, I can remember no sutta's about the subject.


Is there a mistranslation of definition of ignorance? Ignorance is the cause of suffering.
Buddha says in SN 12.2 :

  “And what, bhikkhus, is ignorance? Not knowing suffering, not knowing
  the origin of suffering, not knowing the cessation of suffering, not
  knowing the way leading to the cessation of suffering. This is called
  ignorance.

Note that Buddha says "not knowing".And what is knowing ? Knowing is for example I know my name. I know my house address. I know history etc.
Now that I 'know' suffering. Now that I 'know' origin of suffering. Now that I 'know' cessation of suffering. Now that I 'know' the way leading to the cessation of suffering. My ignorance should be removed and my suffering should end. But that doesn't happen , which means there is some mistranslation from Pali. Actually I guess the wording should be :Ignorance is not knowing suffering , not knowing the origin of suffering , not knowing the cessation of suffering ,not walking(or applying or practicing) the way leading to the cessation of suffering.

My question is : Is there a mistranslation of definition of ignorance?

There are 3 types of wisdom

suta-maya panna: wisdom gained by listening to others
cinta-maya panna: intellectual, analytical understanding
bhavana-maya panna: wisdom based on direct knowledge or meditative(Vipassana) wisdom

Knowing here means the third type. When a monk preaches or when you read a sutta on your own you usually gain type 1 and type 2. Those are not strong enough to cut off craving. You need to see the four noble truths based on direct knowledge. In other words, through Vipassana meditation.


Meditations on Paṭiccasamuppāda While meditating on Dependent Origination, I have come to understand certain things that I hesitatingly put forth here:

Though the links in the chain of Dependent Origination are cyclical in nature, Avijjā is the one that can be said to be the root of deception and the primal cause of the infinite repetitions of the cycle. Also, it is present in each and every link all the time. So, as an example, though Avijjā gives rise to Saṅkhāras, it is Saṅkhāras (plus Avijjā), that gives rise to Viññāna and, in turn, it is Viññāna (plus Avijjā) that leads us to the next Nidāna, i.e., NāmaRūpa, and, so on and so forth.

The ‘self’, the deceptive ‘individual’, is present only in an incipient form till, I feel, up to the Nidāna of Phassa and starts getting organized, as it were, from the link of Vedanā, getting totally entrenched and almost ‘irreversibly solidified’ by the time the level of Upādāna is reached.

The weakest links are those of Vedanā, Taṇhā and Upādāna, and that is why it is possible to break the chain at these three places, the relatively easiest being the passage from Phassa to Vedanā and the most difficult that from Taṇhā to Upādāna.

Before Phassa, the ‘self’ is too vague and incipient and, therefore, quite weak to attempt its own break-up.

After the Nidāna of Upādāna, the ‘self’ is too deeply entrenched and solidified and, therefore, its break-up again becomes almost impossible.

Is this right? Am I only partly right? Or, is it that I have got it all wrong?
And yes, is it possible to have a profound insight directly into the primal link of Avijjā, so that the later interventions are not required at all?

When confusion persists, it's good to review basics.
An understanding of dependent origination requires an understanding of contact:

DN34:1.2.8: What one thing should be completely understood?
DN34:1.2.9: Contact, which is accompanied by defilements and is prone to being grasped.

You may be interested in DN1, which describes all the tangles involved in thinking about 'self'.

DN1:3.58.0: 4.3. Not Possible
DN1:3.70.1: Now, when those ascetics and brahmins theorize about the past and the future on these sixty-two grounds, it is not possible that they should experience these things without contact.
DN1:3.71.0: 4.4. Dependent Origination
DN1:3.71.12: Now, when those ascetics and brahmins theorize about the past and the future on these sixty-two grounds, all of them experience this by repeated contact through the six fields of contact. Their feeling is a condition for craving. Craving is a condition for grasping. Grasping is a condition for continued existence. Continued existence is a condition for rebirth. Rebirth is a condition for old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress to come to be.

Ultimately, the tangles are not so important as the escape.

DN1:3.72.0: 5. The End of the Round
DN1:3.72.1: When a mendicant truly understands the six fields of contacts’ origin, ending, gratification, drawback, and escape, they understand what lies beyond all these things.
DN1:3.72.2: All of these ascetics and brahmins who theorize about the past or the future are trapped in the net of these sixty-two grounds, so that wherever they emerge they are caught and trapped in this very net.
DN1:3.72.3: Suppose a deft fisherman or his apprentice were to cast a fine-meshed net over a small pond. They’d think: ‘Any sizable creatures in this pond will be trapped in the net. Wherever they emerge they are caught and trapped in this very net.’
DN1:3.72.4: In the same way, all of these ascetics and brahmins who theorize about the past or the future are trapped in the net of these sixty-two grounds, so that wherever they emerge they are caught and trapped in this very net.

Don't get caught in the net.


Suggestions for Buddhist themed crafts and activities for children I organise an afternoon where we invite parents and children to out my local Buddhist centre. I put on some craft type activity for the children and then we do a mini reflection and a story. The adults eat cake. Previously I have been shamelessly inspired (i.e. pinched) the ideas for crafts from the local Methodist church (my wife used to go to their family afternoon). But I would really like some crafts and/or activity that are themed around Buddhist practice and or texts and stories.

The children are between 1 and about 7 years old but some older ones did attend last time and it was particularly challenging to think of something for them. I think they got bored. I don't mind spending money on materials - I do that anyway in the spirit of contribution to the centre.

Many thanks for any all ideas

Meditation for children is a good video series for kids. It's also available in DVD format.
There are some cartoons of the Jataka stories in youtube
There are about 550 Jataka stories available which you can read to kids. Here are some simple English translations.


If someone insults you what should you do? There is a famous story of such an encounter between the Buddha and a ‘difficult person’ named Akkosina. Akkosina’s name means “Not Getting Angry” but he was the exact opposite of his name. Akkosina was easily angered and was always angry about something or someone. When he heard that the Buddha did not get angry with anyone he immediately decided to visit him. He went up to the Buddha and scolded him for all sorts of things, insulting him and calling him awful names. At the end of this angry speech, the Buddha asked this man if he had any friends or relatives. “Yes.” Akokosina replied. “When you visit them, do you take them gifts?” the Buddha asked. “Of course, I always bring them gifts.” The angry man replied. “Then what happens if they don’t accept your gifts?” The Buddha asked. “Well I take them home and enjoy them with my own family” “And likewise,” said the Buddha, “You have brought me a gift here today that I do not accept, and so you may take that gift home to your family.”

source: Akkosa sutta (SN 7.2)

Is there more to learn from the story of the angry man? If someone insults you, it is hard to not be affected by it. So how to balance out your emotions and begin the day from a place of happiness, and how to respond in the same light?

Well actually your question has 2 different aspects,so does the Buddhism. They are 'laukika' and 'lokottara'.

The excellency of Buddhism always goes with its 'lokottara' content, where the path to nirwana. For a person who are in lokottara track, what to do when some one scolding is just to ignore. It is all about removing tanha from our mind. If we can't hold other's scolding that's just because we have tanha on our image/social aspect or any other.

But as most of us are just partially or not at all lakottara people, we may feel hard to do that. But at least we can behave thinking about the consequences what will be happened if we get into a counter argument/fight etc. So at least we should be able to understand that the best way to bear it is the silence and make that person convince, not to be get tempered.


What is the Origin and History of Milindapanha? What is the Origin and History of Milindapanha? When was it 1st written? How did evolve over time? What are the notable changes to it if any? Since when was it in the current form?

Summarizing briefly from the introduction to the translation and analysis by A.V. Paribok:

The ancient parts are Book 2 and parts of Book 1 -- most likely written in Punjab (North-Western India) about 0 CE. The language of the original was probably Hybrid Sanskrit.

Book 1 (the narrative introduction) was evidently expanded and elaborated at a later time, probably to make it better fit with Theravada - the late parts include: the story of monks traveling to the heavens, Nagasena's birth, his travel to Pataliputra, Buddha's prediction of Nagasena's birth, the episode of Nagasena teaching Abhidharma expanded with TOC of Theravada's Abhidharma-pitaka.

Book 2 is the MP proper, ending with "In Milindapanha the questions and answers are finished".

The next part is Book 3 (the largest), written in 1st-2nd century CE, probably still in Hybrid Sanskrit. The way it explains controversial Buddha's quotes by interpreting them either as ultimate teaching or a mere provisional guidance, can be seen as an early element of Mahayana.

Books 2 and 3 are evidently the most interesting parts of Milindapanha as far as Buddhist teaching and philosophy.

Books 4-6 were written even later, most likely in Ceylon - already in Pali language. Of them book 4 is the earliest, written as a response to the question about existence of Buddha in Book 2 Chapter 5. Book 5 is written to address the unanswered question of Book 1: why go forth as a monk if the Goal can be attained in lay life. Book 6 was written even later, imitating the style of books 4 and 5.

The content of the text in its present form has probably stabilized by 500 CE.

In Theravada, Milindapanha is considered the middle ground between the Canon and the commentaries - because the commentaries often quote MP. Although it seems clear that MP belongs to the Sthavira family of schools (as opposed to Maha-sangha) - however when analyzed critically, MP does not exactly match the teaching of any single school, clearly mismatching Theravada on many points.

For those who'd like to read MP online, the versions I find available are T. W. Rhys David's early translation circa 1890 and Bhikkhu Pesala's highly abridged and simplified version - which he himself calls "free rendering". Unfortunately Horner's translation titled "Milinda's Questions" is only available in hard copy and the cost is prohibitive. Access To Insight has excerpts from Books 2 and 3.

There is also an abridged version edited by  N. K. G. Mendis which is based on Horner's translations with some borrowings from T.W. Rhys David plus editor's own translation - this is supposed to be pretty good to deserve Bhikkhu Bodhi's endorsement but I'm not entirely convinced the editor was not biased to Theravada school.


Can one meditate in the "anechoic" chamber? It is not necessarily but I wonder what would happen if monk will meditate in  "anechoic" chamber?

The Orfield Labs room was recognized as the quietest in the world

If you stand in it for long enough, you start to hear your heartbeat.
A ringing in your ears becomes deafening. When you move, your bones make a grinding noise.
Eventually you lose your balance, because the absolute lack of reverberation sabotages your spatial awareness.

Here is link

  There will be -20db silence in the room.
  So may we know how much db of silence (internally) is produced while mediating?

So will monk be able to meditate in this room or he will suffer the effect of it?

When we can hear heartbeat, bones grinding noise will he able to concentrate on breathing and could meditate without suffering?

Yes in a video ajahn brahm said that ajahn chah went into such a room. I think he said there was nothing special according to ajahn Chah.
The video was some Q&A, but you can ask for more on his forum https://bswa.org/forum/


Is this an ok understanding of Dharmakirti's vināśitvānumāna? The point is that such moment by moment destruction is spontaneous
  (ākasmika) and is the uncaused real nature of things, because it
  cannot be an effect of any cause. The effect of such a cause, i.e.,
  the absence of the entity, would have to be a type of non-being
  (abhāva), and non-being is unreal.

  A key underlying principle of the vināśitvānumāna is that negative
  facts, such as absences, are not part of the ultimate furniture of the
  world, but are just fictional conceptual constructions, as they are
  devoid of causal powers. Equally, a fiction lacking causal powers is
  not the effect of something else. While it is obviously impossible to
  deny that hammers smash pots, the absence (abhāva) of the pot, i.e.,
  the non-existent pot, is not an effect, just as other non-existent
  things (abhāva), like horns of rabbits, are not effects of anything
  either. Hammers and the like are thus not actually causes of the pot's
  absence but of it turning into potsherds. That idea is perhaps
  defensible, in that arguably the mere absence of something—a purely
  negative fact—might be less real and less efficacious than the
  presence of other things.[16] Nonetheless, the rest of the argument
  looks to consist in a number of non-sequiturs going from that
  difference in efficacy and reality between absences and presences to
  the idea that perishing is somehow the real nature of things, that it
  must be intrinsic to them, and that therefore things must perish
  spontaneously moment after moment. Let's grant the Buddhist view that
  the perishing of x is the real property of changing into a new thing,
  and not just x becoming absent. If it is accepted that hammer blows do
  change pots into potsherds, then why couldn't someone skeptical about
  the Buddhist's arguments just take that as the model of how things
  perish when they do? It does not follow from that model of perishing
  that a pot could not endure for quite a while.

Is it a non sequitur?

If there are no absences then is nothing excluded from the causal context of an effect? If so, then couldn't we just conclude that causation is beyond conceptualization, so that any cause (the hammer) of e.g. destruction (the broken pot) is also not the cause, and the effect of destruction must be "the real nature of things", so invariant?

Is that a good reconstruction of the argument, or have I misunderstood?

I'm not familiar with Dharmakirti, but from a cursory skim of the argument, it seems he is using typical Nagarjunian reductio-ad-absurdum to yet again show that all (spatially and temporally) discrete things are mental imputations.

It seems he is saying, if things were real, then they would have to perish for real, but if things perished for real, then the effect of the cause that would lead to such perishing would have to be something completely absent. Now, since absence is not real in any sense other than as a mental abstraction, the perishing cannot be anything other than an abstraction. Since perishing is an abstraction, then temporally discrete things must be imputations, hence the ontological momentariness which is just another facet of Emptiness.


How does one become victim of one's own Karma? I understand Karma as describing habitual mind patterns which cause one to behave impulsively according to certain mental predispositions conditioned by previous actions and intentions.

My question is how does Karma work in situations of violence/abuse. I understand how a perpetrator of violence or abuser is more likely to commit violence or abuse towards another person later in this life or in the next life.  However, I do not understand how the abuser would through this violent behavior be more vulnerable to become a victim of this type of violence.

In short, how does the Karma (habit energy) one builds up as a perpetrator cause one to fall on the other side of the equation (to become a victim)?

Karma is facilitated by emptiness. Because we are empty of essence, each choice and action you make leaves an imprint on your mind that, like all things, decays over time. So, if you make a negative action, you leave a negative imprint on your mind. Now, since we are empty of essence, you are more likely to perform actions with similar characteristics to the ones you have performed before. The more negative actions you choose to make, the more negative and troubled you become. This is why mindfulness and all the right stuff (view, speech, etc) is crucial. You have no nature other than what you choose and what you surround yourself with. If you let all that negativity build up by not being mindful of your actions and choosing rightly, you're going to have a lot of work to do towards purification.

Now, how does that relate to others in the way you're asking? Well it turns out that everything is empty of essence. Therefore beyond your mind, you leave an imprint on the world with similar characteristics as your actions, thus encouraging others to act in a similar way. And since you're inseparable from this gloriously intertwined existence, you are likely to reap what you've sewn.


Helpful or ego-stroking? How do I know if I enjoy answering questions because I feel helpful or because it strokes my ego?

Why does this program demand that I add more words to my question?

Ego is identification. Some thought experiment, that consider the option to have action without identification, may point it out:

Would you invest the same amount of time if it was completely anonymous?
If someone would downvote your answer, how would you feel?
Would it make a difference whether your answer is downvoted with your name in in the answer, or completely anonymous.
If you could choose to add your name or signature to it, would you care?
If you had to choose up front, with your name/signature, or without, not knowing whether your answer will be up or down voted. Would you wish you have added your name/signature if everybody is upvoting your answer like crazy. And would you be happy that you didn't add your name when everybody was downvoting it like crazy.
Some extremes to create clear contrast: Someone asks a question why to continue with life because he/she is horrible depressed for years and seriously considers suicide. You provide an answer and he/she completely turns around and started living life to the fullest, the moment he/she read your answer. Would you tell this story to your friends/family including that it was you that provided the helpful answer. Or would you just tell how someone was helped by some answer and don't care at all to mention that you gave the answer.