What is the role of kōans in contemporary Buddhism? I have a copy of The Iron Flute that I use to study individual kōans, and read the analysis provided.  I feel like this provides me with some good insight, but it also feels... backwards.

How are kōans used in modern Buddhism?

Are they intended as teaching aids, where the explanation illustrates one or more principals, or are they intended as puzzles that only sufficiently advanced students should be able to figure out?  Or can either strategy (or altogether different strategies) be employed to gainful effect?

The way my Zen Master used them (as much as I can pretend to have understood my Zen Master at all!) is to essentially give the person a hint about a particular pathological pattern the person was stuck on. So the koan would always match the elephant in the room that the student was working hard to ignore. The student could then resort to analysis, or simply mull over the koan while going along with the daily activities. In any case, solving the koan required getting an insight into oneself and one's fundamental relationship to the world, as opposed to figuring out some new external fact or gaining an analytical understanding.


Types of Meditation in Theravada Buddhism How many types of meditation are there in Theravada Buddhism? Could you also provide a list of them as well.

Thank you in advance.

At least forty:

Earth device

Water device

Fire device

Air or wind device

Blue device

Yellow device

Red device

White device

Space device

Consciousness device

A corpse that is bloated

A corpse that is livid (has patchy discoloration)

A corpse that is festering (trickling with pus in broken places)

A corpse that is cut up

A corpse that is gnawed

A corpse that is scattered

A corpse that is hacked and scattered

A corpse that is bleeding

A corpse that is worm-infested

A corpse that is a skeleton

Contemplation of the Buddha

Contemplation of the Dhamma

Contemplation of the Sangha

Contemplation of Virtue

Contemplation of Charity

Contemplation of the Devas

Mindfulness of Death

Mindfulness of the Physical Body

Mindfulness with Breathing

Contemplation of Calmness

Loving-kindness

Compassion

Sympathy

Equanimity

Sphere of Infinity of Space

Sphere of Infinite Consciousness

Sphere of No-thingness

Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception

Contemplation of the loathsomeness of food

Analysis of the four physical elements

http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=40_meditation_subjects


Does meditation increase productivity for software developers and related professions? Is there any evidence for Buddhist meditation practices increasing productivity for software developers? Just from my own experience it seems like it does but I'm just interested into other experiences or evidence, anecdotal of otherwise. If I can try to clarify this further

Is there any research on this?
Are software companies using meditation techniques at all to help
their employees? If so, what reasons do they give for this?
Does anyone have reasonable compelling evidence for this from their own experience?
If I can broaden this a little - what about related professions? - ones
that require sustained concentration and maybe a little creativity.
Do they use meditation techniques at all?

If I can just share my motivation for asking this. I'm considering giving a lightening talk at a local software user group on this topic and I just want a broader idea of what kind of evidence there is around this kind of thing. If it seems like there is something there then I will probably throw my hat it the ring and give the talk. If it just my own personal experience I probably won't. I don't want to give the talk it it is entirely unsupported.

I'm a software developer and practiced different kinds of meditation (first - sit for 5-10 minutes with open eyes and pay attention to inhaling and exhaling, second - 16th Karmapa meditation in the Diamond way Buddhism).

From my subjective experience I can say that (other things being equal), on average, I am more productive on days, where I do meditation in the morning than on days when I don't.

By "more productive" I mean

that I solve problems faster (the day of a software developer consists of making solving big and small problems/decisions) and
am less distracted by e-mail, Facebook etc.

Also, I have the impression that meditation in the morning allows me to better concentrate in a loud environment (i. e. I can easier focus on my work, when I'm surrounded by lot of talking people, whom I don't like). Same applies to situations, where I am exposed to stress.

Once in a while meditation (once in 3-4 weeks) leads to a productivity breakdown. This happens, when I discover some information about me (which you didn't realize/notice earlier). Usually, this information is a) embarassing (I've been doing ... wrong all my life!) and b) helpful in my development (you can only fix bugs, which you know exist - this applies to the mental hardware as well).

In my opinion, you can test the hypothesis "meditation increases my productivity" using at least two experiments:

Experiment 1: Productive time per week

Start tracking the time, when you are doing something useful (there are lots of fine tools out there, including those, which run on mobile devices).
Collect data on the average productive time for several weeks.
Start meditating and continue to track time.

Once you have enough data, you can use statistical methods to find out, if there is a difference in productivity and if that difference is significant.

Experiment 2: Accomplished tasks per week

Create a spreadsheet with 3 columns: Date, Task completed, Subjective size & complexity of the task (e. g. "small", "medium", "big").
Whenever you accomplish something useful during a week, add a record to that spreadsheet.
Gather data on your weekly productivity (in terms of number of small, medium and large tasks accomplished during a week) without meditation.
Do the same thing, when you regularly meditate.


Is rebirth a conventional truth within the Buddha's message? There is a lot on this site (and elsewhere) on the validity of rebirth, whether it is necessary to understand the Buddha's message, or to reach enlightenment etc. My question is slightly different where within the two truths doctrine is rebirth placed by the Buddha?

I understand that 'the two truths' developed a little later on, but in that later developments within Buddhism were and still are heavily influenced by the Buddha's words (Dhamma and Vinaya), is it possible to come to an agreement on whether rebirth deserves to be considered an ultimate or conventional truth?

Here's my thought: rebirth is conditioned by death and the workings of Kamma, therefore it seems to fit into conventional truth pretty neatly. It also makes no sense from the ultimate point of view - no conditioned experience can either be affirmed or denied within the ultimate standpoint, so whilst rebirth does not make 'positive sense' from the ultimate stand point, it also can't be denied altogether (that is to say, ultimate truth is empty of rebirth).

Is rebirth a concept that cannot be affirmed when considering ultimate truth, but cannot be denied when considering conventional truth?

(edit: I assume rebirth occurs and is evident. The fact that 'every thing that has a beginning has an ending' demands rebirth if avoiding annihalationism)

Rebirth is very central to the whole doctrine. As long as this Kammic force exists there is re-birth, for beings are merely the visible manifestation of this invisible Kammic force. Any attempt is like excluding Samsara is like excluding this from the whole equation.  Birth precedes death, and death, on the other hand, precedes birth. The constant succession of birth and death in connection with each individual life flux constitutes what is technically known as Samsara -- recurrent wandering. Buddha said that:

  "Without cognizable end is this Samsara. A first beginning of beings, who, obstructed by ignorance and fettered by craving, wander and fare on, is not to be perceived."

The cause of this Kamma, continues the Buddha, is avijja or ignorance of the Four Noble Truths. Ignorance is, therefore, the cause of birth and death; and its transmutation into knowingness or vijja is consequently their cessation. The result of this analytical method is summed up in the Paticca Samuppada. Paticca Samuppada is the discourse on the process of birth and death.

Nibbana is often conceived of as stopping this cycle. By removing the causes for craving, craving ceases. So with the ceasing of birth, death ceases. With the ceasing of becoming, birth ceases... and so on until with the ceasing of ignorance no karma is produced, and the whole process of death and rebirth ceases.


What are The Buddha's most compassionate acts? Source could be from sutras or anything else. Thank you.

Probably the decision to become a samma sambuddha for the benifit of others. Becoming an arahath and ending your own suffering is lot more easier and take lot less time.

“Then I listened to the Brahmā’s pleading, and out of compassion for beings I surveyed the world with the eye of a Buddha. Surveying the world with the eye of a Buddha, I saw beings with little dust in their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities and with bad qualities, easy to teach and hard to teach, and some who dwelt seeing fear and blame in the other world. Just as in a pond of blue or red or white lotuses, some lotuses that are born and grow in the water thrive immersed in the water without rising out of it, and some other lotuses that are born and grow in the water rest on the water’s surface, and some other lotuses that are born and grow in the water rise out of the water and stand clear, unwetted by it; so too, surveying the world with the eye of a Buddha, I saw beings with little dust in their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities and with bad qualities, easy to teach and hard to teach, and some who dwelt seeing fear and blame in the other world. Then I replied to the Brahmā Sahampati in stanzas:
‘Open for them are the doors to the Deathless, Let those with ears now show their faith. Thinking it would be troublesome, O Brahmā, I did not speak the Dhamma subtle and sublime.’
MN26


Basic readings and references: where to start Although I have read some basic articles and book about buddhism, they are all written by modern western sources, and I would like to get to know the foundations. Even when reading this site, I sometimes feel at a loss because I miss so many of the particular terms, and all the names of the classical texts are kind of mixed in my mind, I don't even know where to start. My question is then: What would be a good "programm" to introduce myself in buddhist (foundational) readings?

I am aware of other questions dealing with introductory texts to Buddhism, but, as I see it, that is easy to find. What I want is sort of a guide to start navigating the important foundational texts of which I keep hearing/reading a lot, but that I cannot grasp.

Also, I would love to learn at least a bit of the languages (Sanskrit, Pali) to improve my understanding of what I read, and some references in this sense would also be much appreciated.

You can use the book by bikkhu Nyanatusita to learn the vinaya. It has the pali, then the english translation, then the definition of all the pali words. The draft from 2008 is here
https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books14/Bhikkhu_Nyanatusita-Analysis_of_the_Bhikkhupatimokkha.pdf

the book from 2014 is here
https://books.google.com/books?id=6s3iBQAAQBAJ

For a list of suttas and a super short summary, there is always
An Analysis of the Pali Canon and a Reference Table of Pali Literature By Russell Webb and Bhikkhu Nyanatusita
https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp607s_Webb_Analysis-Of-The-Pali-Canon.pdf
which has also a huge catalog of texts on buddhism, as of 2011, and it has also  A Reference List of Pali Literature, which is also found here separately
http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil_elib/Nyt008__Nyanatusita_ReferenceTableOfPaliLiterature.pdf

The course by bikkhu bodhi for Pali is a good introduction
https://bodhimonastery.org/a-course-in-the-pali-language.html

and the little help for Pali Verb Conjugation and Noun/Pronoun Declension Tables, by Bhikkhu Nyanatusita (2005; 486k)
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanatusita/index.html

For the suttas themselves, you can begin with the short ones, so DN which is some copies of suttas form SN and AN, MN, dhammapada, sutta nipata, then SN and AN

Also do not forget the parallel suttas. Scholars already know about this since the 80s, like lamotte says in HISTORY OF INDIAN BUDDHISM (Peeters Press, 1988, page 156):

  However, with the exception of the Mahayanist interpolations in the Ekottara [the Chinese equivalent to the Pali Canon's Anguttara],
  which are easily discernable, the variations in question affect hardly
  anything save the method of expression or arrangement of the subjects.
  The doctrinal basis common to the agamas [preserved in Chinese and
  partially Sanskrit and Tibetan] is remarkably uniform. Preserved and
  transmitted by the schools, the sutras [discourses] do not however
  constitute scholastic documents, but are the common heritage of all
  the sects.

THere is a short book The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A Comparative Study Based on the Sutranga Portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyuktagama by Mun-keat Choong
http://www.ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/The%20Fundamental%20Teachings%20of%20Early%20Buddhism_Mun-keat.pdf

and of course lots of work by Bikkhu Analayo

A Comparative Study of the Majjhima-nikāya

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/compstudyvol1.pdf

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/compstudyvol2.pdf

Madhyama-āgama Studies

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/mastudies.pdf

Saṃyukta-āgama Studies

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/sastudies.pdf

Dīrgha-āgama Studies

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/dastudies.pdf

Ekottarika-āgama Studies

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/ekottarikastudies.pdf

Vinaya Studies
https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/vinayastudies.pdf

Early Buddhist Meditation Studies

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/ebms.pdf

Perspectives on Satipaṭṭhāna
https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/perspectives.pdf


Kamma associated with "Provocation" The question is: How does Kamma associate with "provocation"?

Example 1:
A says to B "Hit/kill me if you dare."

Example 2:
A tells B that killing is justified if the cause is right.

In the above examples, and if B did the hitting/killing after the provocation, who's kamma is worse? A or B? And Why?

Kamma is largly based on intention...in both the cases you have given the intention is not clear.

Moreover Kamma is not some measurable quantity that can be quantified...so you cannot ask such questions like whose Kamma is more bad...


Attachment to trifling material things Just a practical question on attachment to trifling material things.

I struggle to put it in words but from my younger age, I have a habit of being angry when someone takes a minor item without asking. He/she could be my best friend but still, the feeling is there. I don't think it been stingy because been asked or not even asked I would give the same person or even a stranger x100 times the value of the item but when taken without my consent it is all a different matter.

My question is how do I get read of it?

A thinker once told me: if you claim to not-care for these things then when someone takes these items and you feel the anger go burn two more of the items to show that you're in control... this method did help me to quench the anger, but the character still lingers?

Many Thanks.

The reason to this state is actually not bound to things that's been taken, it's the worthiness (treating it's the best) that you given to the action of politeness. In simple word, asking permission or informing before taking something.

So the core of the buddhism is this. If you try to keep things the way you want (way you want means is the worthiness you have assigned to -> it can be anything like an action, an attitude, a person, a thing, etc..), you are doing a mistake. Because the things in the world are not in our control. Everything happens as a result of a reason.

Of course we can make reasons and control it right? But there are incidents that though we control (make reasons) things won't go the way we want right? If you think about this further the reason for that is,

First case -> Our actions had some space to impact on the existing
state
Second case -> Our actions had no space to change the existing state, because existing state had stronger reasons

So simply, though we think, we can 100% control things, actually we cannot. Without knowing this, we label things as politeness and we expects it from others, it won't happens the way you want it to be. Our foolishness is (not mean to offence) we crazily expect things like that from others and the world. And as a result we get angry. Which is bad for us. Why bad for us -> just have a look on this video which you can get an idea.

That's where the Buddhism comes useful. If we give worthiness to the world and expects things to be the way we want and when we try to control things the way we want, it results in anger which is bad. (Of course there's another side of the same on attraction to the things also doing bad for us, I won't speak about it here, since not relevant to the question)

So let it go, there are things that you can't change because the things are not the way you want, they behave based on their own reasons. So by getting angry by trying to change won't do any good for you but bad. You still can try to change without anger, if there are reasons it might be success.

With Metta..!


How do you identify the 5 factors associated with Jhana? How do you recognise the different factors associated with Jhana and the level of Jhana you are in? (Not necessarily when you are in Jhana.)

More particularly how do recognise the factor of applied thought as such, factor of sustained thought as such, factor of rapture as such, factor of happiness as such and factor of one-pointedness of mind as such. How does the experience and correlate with the named factor such that it can be properly ascertained that this is infact this factor, and that factor has arisen and not something else or miss evaluation?

Applied thought and sustained thought are not the factors that you recognize, they are the factors that you generate. You know when you have them, because you are doing them!

Once you use applied and sustained thought properly, the factors of joy and ease (what you called rapture and happiness -- the translations I don't find precise) will emerge. These are very easy to recognize, because you will feel joyful and at ease! ;)


What is the best translation of Anatta into English? Is the best translation of Anatta "non-self" or "there is nothing that you can take as me, mine, self or non-changing everlasting controllable part which can be identified as me, mine or everlasting core" or something else based on the interpretation of different lineages?

CORELESSNESS

Before we can pick a translation we must understand what it is that we are translating.

Prefix an- is a simple negation.
Hindu concept of Atman should not be confused with Aham (the simple reflexive "I", "ego" or "self") nor with Jiva (the vitality that makes an animate being an animate being). Atman means "inner spirit" or "core" and refers to what is supposedly the unchanging subject of experience, also known as "The Knower of the Field" (Purusha), and the source of its own activity. Basically, Atman is that fictitious little boss that sits in our head, looks through our eyes and decides what to do.
Pali ending of -tta often corresponds to English -ness:

  -tta: expresses the state, nature or quality of being that which is denoted by the adj. or noun: puthujjana, a common man +tta=puthujjanattaṃ, the state of being a common man; buddha, a buddha +tta=buddhattaṃ, Buddhahood; atthi he is +tta=atthittaṃ the state of "he is", existence.

From these three, the word can be translated as no-spirit-ness, or in proper English spirit-less-ness -- but such rendering is misleading. First, because in English "spiritless" has connotations of weak, demotivated and barely alive. And second, because Buddhism does not exactly deny "spirit" as an abstract aspect of relationships and interactions.

Another option is to take Atman as "subject" and render anatta as subjectlessness. This choice sounds true to the original meaning, but directly contradicts the western understanding of experience as comprised of subject and object.

A philosophically more correct option IMO would be core-less-ness. This matches both a simple understanding of anatta as an absence of substantial independent self in sentient beings, but also the wider Madhyamika philosophy which postulates that all entities are contextually defined imputations lacking any kind of self-identical ontologically existing core.

P.S. In western philosophy the notion of corelessness is sometimes identified with Bundle Theory of David Hume. Also, the relationship between observation and delineation of entities is one of the major topics of Hierarchy Theory.


Do Buddhist children from outside of Buddhist countries ever become monks temporarily? In Buddhist countries, young or teenage boys, and sometime girls, sometimes (or often, depending on the country) become monks temporarily. Do any Buddhist children from other countries (e.g., Western countries) ever do this? Is there anywhere (e.g. a monastery) where this would happen?

In my country (Belgium) and I presume in most Western countries, children are of course allowed to follow programs like these. However, a child joining a monastic order is considered controversial as it collides with laws regarding the protection of minors. Also, consider that many other Western religious orders impose minimum age requirements themselves.

There was a case a few years ago of a 15-year old boy who wanted to join a Tibetan monastery. He was stopped by police on his way to a flight to India. After a court appeal was he permitted to depart a month later.

Though not exactly the same thing, court cases will take into consideration the legal age required to choose/change one's religion without parental consent. The minimum age varies somewhat in European countries.

In Austria and Germany, children can change their religion without parental consent from the age of 14 years;
in Estonia and Slovenia, from the age of 15 years;
in Cyprus, Portugal and Romania, from the age of 16 years.
In Bulgaria, Denmark and Finland, the minimum age for changing religion without parental consent is 18 years.


Meditation in stressful environments My significant other is an extremely busy person who constantly lives life on the road and rarely has moments to himself. He's an incredibly stressed out person and because of this I've recommended meditation to him. I've given him a pair of mala beads and well wishes but I'm not sure how else I can help him.

What are some tips that I can offer him? It pains me to see him so stressed so often and I would like to help him relax and reflect.

Thanks so much in advance!

This is based on nothing more than my own experience so please take it in that light.

I'm fairly busy at times as well. When I am super busy I find it very difficult to do any 'formal' meditation. It makes me more stressed sometimes to have to do 'another thing'. One thing I find useful is posture. There are no meditation police (i think) telling you that you must sit for meditation. Why not try lying down and doing nothing, perhaps watching the mind and paying attention to the desire to do something else; the desire to check your phone, write an email, get up and so forth. It's all there going on and worth a look.

I sometimes find it useful to set a timer for a small amount of time (10 mins say) and just do that. I don't find it stressful and it does alleviate the whir of the mind. If nothing else your partner gets to lie down for 10 mins. If your partner really struggles for time this can always be done last thing at night. Everyone has to go to bed at some point so there is a little time there maybe.

As I say, this is just what I have found useful when struggling. A teacher once said to me that meditating lying down wasn't cheating so it's kind of based around that idea. Anyway best of luck to you and your partner.


Physical Exercise as a Monk? Is a monk allowed to exercise the body in order to keep it fit and healthy? I reckon both 'healthy' and 'fit' as attachments, but is there an overall rule/teaching that explains this?

Healthy and fit body does not need to be seen as an attachment. If a monk took the Bodhisattva Vow, all his activities will be done with the wish to benefit others. A healthy body is actually a very useful tool if one wants to help other beings. During a long life free from illnesses one can do much more than during a short life with numerous visits to doctors and hospitals (which are usually costly). Precious human body is also a topic of various teachings (see this or that) which invite us to realise how rare it is to obtain a well-functioning human body and how easy it is to lose it. With that in mind, maintaining a healthy body is a very wise thing to do.

In Tibetan Buddhism one of the main meditation practices involves doing physical  prostrations. In Vajrayana traditions all practitioners - monks and lay ones - need to complete at least 100.000 prostrations as a part of preliminary practices. Some practitioners continue to do prostrations on daily basis and even Dalai Lama admitted that he indeed does them every day.


Does suffering entail being overwhelmed for the person who is suffering? Also are there behaviors that all humans do when they suffer? For instance, do all humans try to alleviate suffering when they experience it?

-- "Does suffering entail being overwhelmed"

Yes, I think it often does...

...In some cases, when a disagreeable experience arises (irrespective of its sensory modality) we have a strong and completely unconscious attachment - and so suffering arises immediately and without any resistance. In this case we can't speak about "overwhelming" (or else we could categorize this as an absolute "overwhelming" that meets zero resistance) This probably happens more often to children and to people with relatively undeveloped Emotional Intelligence...

-- But in most cases, modern people have developed various coping techniques to try and alleviate potentially disagreeable experience and prevent it from turning into suffering.

The main technique I see people using every day, many times a day, is "reinterpretation". This is when a person re-frames a (potentially) disagreeable experience to make it agreeable. For example, someone drives to a supermarket and sees all parking spots near the entrance taken. The spots in the middle of the lot are taken too. The only available spots are on the far end of the parking lot. The person then re-frames the experience by saying (out loud or to oneself): "This is even better. Will make me walk a longer distance, and I can use some exercise."

Most healthy people have very "healthy" but also rather unconscious habit of re-framing everything they encounter as to protect their inner comfort. They re-frame circumstances, objects, people, and events in such a way as to reduce a sense of failure, doom, inadequacy - and ensure inner peace. Because we are intelligent species, many of us (but not all) prefer these re-interpretations to be logically consistent and to add up to some sort of more-or-less cohesive life philosophy. This requirement of logical consistency makes this process exhibit a kind of self-sustaining growth, what I call hardening of the ego. What I mean by that is the fact that for most people, their newly made (re-)interpretations arise from -- and add to -- the existing set of internalized interpretations. In other words, the new interpretations are offered by the ego to ensure its integrity. If a new re-interpretation successfully manages to prevent a disagreeable experience from turning into suffering, and does not meet too much rejection from the external world, it is added to the ego's collection of workable interpretations. Thereby tightening up ego's space of possible interpretations, or "hardening the ego".

For example, if someone's life grew out of a difficult background, and he or she was not taught positive re-interpretation, this person's ego starts framing the difficulties as something normal and expected, using this as its coping mechanism -- suffering getting reduced when experience match expectations. This interpretative style continues to accumulate new interpretations until it hardens into a cohesively negative or pessimistic worldview. Other people harden into an optimist, a villain, a victim - with corresponding worldview to match.

Most people who grow up in a consistent and non-conflicted environment, by the time they reach adulthood end up having a virtually impenetrable ego with no possibility of interpretative ambiguity - and therefore no space for maneuver when a re-interpretation is required to alleviate another piece of disagreeable experience - but no logically consistent interpretation can be offered without breaking the logical network of assertions comprising the ego. When this happens, we end up being helpless in the face of the disagreeable experience, which at that time can be said to "overwhelm" us and arise as full-blown suffering.

As Buddhism developed historically, it developed various techniques for dealing with this entire pattern of suffering, its arising and prevention. These techniques range from primitive, such as simply "enduring"; switching attention; and forcing the thoughts out, to re-framing, such as seeing things "phenomenologically" as mere "stimuli", "notions", "feelings", "energies" etc; to detachment or letting go of deep-lying assumptions&preconceptions that lead to evaluation of experiences as something negative, to methodical deconstruction of ego's existing interpretations, to non-evaluating acceptance of all experiences, and finally to interpretative ambiguity.

What's cool about interpretative ambiguity is that it ends up being rather enduring in the face of disagreeable experiences of all kinds. The complete mastery of interpretative ambiguity prevents any possibility of being overwhelmed with a disagreeable interpretation of any and all experience. In other words, it prevents suffering.


How was the Buddha Jayanti edition of the Tripitaka derived? I've read that the three Theravada countries Sri Lanka, Thailand and Myanmar all three have their own version of the Tripitaka.
I've also read that in 1956 they held the Sixth Buddhist convention with the goal of creating one standard edition of the Tripitaka, called the Buddha Jayanti-edition. The Dutch version of the Wikipedia page on the Pali canon claims that

  The Buddha Jayanti-Edition, however, was composed by the most distinguished monks of the three main Buddhist countries and is considered the most correct version
  (original wiki page here, English translation here)

I was wondering if this is true. How do they know that the Buddha Jayanti-edition is the most correct version? What exactly are the differences between the 3 Tipitaka versions and how did the monks resolve them?

I have some experience comparing the BJT Pali with the Pali Text published by the Pali Text Society and the version found on the CSCD. I have read and proofed the BJT of numerous suttas throughout the Sutta Pitaka, the complete Anguttara Nikaya, and the first two volumes and many other suttas from the Samyutta Nikaya. On the whole the BJT and the PTS agree with some spelling differences and an occasional insignificant difference in text matter. Both have errors. The BJT has the advantage in that for the most part it has unabridged the text. (Trying to figure out which previous phrase was intended by '...pe...' is no easy matter!) The BJT has errors resulting from copy and paste where sections are repeated with a change but where the change was not made. The Pali Text Society text is, as far as I am concerned, the most authoritative simply because the compilers consulted numerous manuscripts for its compilation. The CSCD is also commendable for that reason, but it has not got the advantage of eliminating all the abridgments.

This does not cover the complete scope of your question, but hopefully it will chip away around the edges. To best see what I have done with the Pali texts and the PTS translations visit the 'What's New?' page at:
http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhammatalk_forum/whats.new.htm
I cannot claim that this work is error free as it is being done with excessive haste, but it should provide a strong platform for a future completely unabridged pali and translation of the Sutta Pitaka. It should also be helpful to beginning translators as the text is broken up at the original line breaks which helps to overcome the despair inspired by a huge block of Pali. Translations are linked to the other available free translations.

obo


Can Buddhism give any justification for military violence? In Buddhism can there be found any justification (whatever the perceived provocation) for war and military violence?

In the Theravada tradition, there's no justification for killing. But justification is a personal thing. Buddhism tells you about the consequences of an action. Not whether it is justified or not. Killing intentionally is always bad Karma, whether you, the society, a religious community, a religious book, judges of courts, a god, inner voice, patriotism, honor etc. justify it or not.

But one highlighting factor is that if you kill virtuous beings, you get a lot of bad karma, whereas killing an immoral being will result in comparatively less bad karma.
A person who is trying to kill you is already an immoral being. And you may think of a justifiable reason to kill him. But killing him is still bad Karma which can cause much suffering to you in the future as well as corrupting your present mind state.

Karma is a law of nature. It is not a god who punishes you depending on how justified your reasons are for doing something.
ex: Think of a newborn baby touching fire. Having no knowledge of fire, is it fair for it to get burnt? Is it justified? Probably not! But why does it still get burnt? Because fire doesn't judge. It's simply a process of causes and effect. So is Kamma.


Being a monstery monk while training in career online? Is it OK to be a monastery monk (eating community gruel, etc.) but using your laptop to study for your career during half the day (instead of meditation with all of it)? Would the administrator be OK with freeloaders like that?

I would help maintain the monastery, especially if it is related to my line of work (website development, etc.). Heck, I'd work full-time for free out of compassion.

I'm thinking of asking this at a local monastery, especially since I don't care to be stuck in the cycle of apartment paying and being stuck at low-ranked IT job and being crushed by loans. I would rather take time to master certain subjects while cultivating and then come back to the city when I can achieve a higher salary to match the high cost of living as a city-dweller these days... and pay off my weighty student loans.

My question pertains to monastery in California or the rest of the US. Especially those good with wifi connections. :-D

I think it is best to ask the monastery, instead on Stack Exchange.

IMHO, may I comment on a few things:

What is one's motivation to become a monastery monk?

Monks are messianic individuals who wish to vigorously study Buddha's teachings hoping one day to attain the highest level of wisdom to be able to deliver all beings from suffering.

Responsibility

Buddhist monks receive offerings from faithful lay people, seeking answers to solving their problems. These offerings are precious and sincere, and one should not take these offerings lightly.

There is a Chinese saying that loosely translates as: "A lay person offers a grain of rice, such offering is as heavy as Mount Sumeru, if one doesn't attain enlightenment in this life, repay wearing your hide and horn in your next life."

Monks do not only teach people, even Devas respect and learn from highly accomplished masters.

Ksitigarbha Sutra depicted the dire consequence of stealing from monasteries, which results in millions of aeons of endless torment in the deepest pits of Avici. This is because Buddhist monasteries are essential establishments to facilitate Buddhist teaching, they contain offerings from realms in all 10 directions, from beings desperately yearning to liberate from the eternal agonies of Samsara.

A monastic life isn't necessary to attain enlightenment. In today's society lays are more likely to accomplish because today's monks have more complicated problems to help lays to solve. Furthermore, leading a monastic lifestyle isn't enough, one needs to embrace the purpose of monastic life at heart, and let go of worldly attachments and eventually leave Samsara.

Turn challenges into opportunities

Buddhists do not ask Buddha to alleviate our lives' problems. We brave hardship. We do not cut off our problems from our lives, we turn challenges into opportunities to better ourselves, turn anxiety and stress into Bodhi, and gratefully thank life when it gives us lemons.

In closing, please do not take my words as criticisms. I genuinely thank you for this interesting question that allows me to contemplate on my practice and write out this submission to help bring more clarity to my thinking. If there is anything I could improve on please do not hesitate to share your feedback.


Vesak 2561/2017 TODAY Where in western world can traditional & benefical celebrations be aspected? Valued Upasaka, Upasika,

Dear seeker for way to awakening and readers,

Vesak-Pūjā (Birth, Awakening and Paranibbana-Remembering day of the Buddha, (Vesak= Name of the secound month of the luna calender/pi: Visaka; Pūjā = sacrify, veneration.)

It's the near end of an auspicious period in which most Nikayas cellerbrated Uposatha in timely union. A season in which seldom, even last oppotunities and possibilities that place.

Only some view more days the bigges celebration, now undertaken nearly all over the world (!) - some say it's the fist time and actually so that it is cellebrated in the whole world - and the main and biggest Veneration of our times Buddha, takes place.

Where in the western world are such as a real Sangha established and traditional and benefical Vesak-Pūjās undertaken by the Ven. Monks where people, young and old, rich or poor, could part-take also in their own county on 10. of May, today?
Where in traditional countries are - usually much by serious "western" people from abroad frequented - traditional and benefical Vesak-Pūjā taking place.

(Please, if knowing, do not share often usual kermis and trade fairs)

May you rejoice by sharing merits and invitations to such, as well those many able to take part on you futune. Anumodana!

So where to got today evening to make sacrifies to the Buddha? May all take up this possibility today and gain liberating joy with it!

(Note: This question is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpoes or other wordily gains.)

For this Vesak, I will be going to the Mahamevanawa Buddhist Monastery & Buddha Meditation Centre of Greater Toronto. On this day I, together with 300+ others will be observing 24+ Uposatha Sil. Buddha recommended that the disciples follow additional precepts to the first 5 precepts whenever time permits. These are known as the Uposatha Precepts, or simply the Eight Precepts. They are traditionally observed on the full-moon days (uposatha). This give us the opportunity to practice some of the renunciation that those who follow the Buddha’s teaching to the highest goal of enlightenment give up completely. So when we spend time following these training rules, we can remember that we are imitating these great spiritual beings. It is said that:

  Whatever wealth exists within this sphere— pearls, gems, and beryl, an excellent stone, singi gold or natural mountain gold, and the gold called hataka— those are not worth a sixteenth part of an uposatha complete in the eight factors, just as all the hosts of stars do not match the moon's radiance.  - Visakha Uposatha Sutta (Numerical Discourses, AN 8:43)

On this day I will participate in a special “Pirith Sajgayana” (recitation) that will last till dawn. We normally get together at least once every month to chant Pirith (from 7.00 pm to past midnight usually & covering all of the important suttas) to help turn away all sorrows, (sabba dukkha), ailments, (sabba roga), and all fears ( sabba bhaya).

The Supreme Buddha said, “One who abides in the Dhamma, delights in the Dhamma, meditates on the Dhamma and bears the Dhamma well in mind, does never fall away from the Sublime Dhamma". By reciting Pirith we do all of the above and help invoke the blessings of the Triple Gem for protection.

On this Vesak Day we celebrate three great events. These three great events in the life of the Buddha are - the birth of Prince Sidhartha, the Bodhisatva at the Royal Park of Lumbini, His attainment of the Perfect Enlightenment in his 35th year under the shade of Sri Maha Bodhi at Buddha Gaya, His demise after a noble ministry that lasted 45 years at Kusinara in the Sala Grove, Upavartana that belonged to Royalty of Malla. These 3 events occured on the Vesak Full Moon Poya Day. It is renowned as the most sacred Poya Day in the Buddhist world over.

There is an additional Vesak Poya called "Adhi Vesak Full Moon Poya Day" that occurs once in 3 years, due to the change of planetary movements. Whether it is Wesak or Adhi Wesak, or any other day, the need of the hour is to follow the Message of the Buddha Dhamma. The knowledge of Buddhism is the key to the higher Path.

Mahamevnawa was established by much venerated monk, Ven. Kiribathgoda Gnanananda (VKG). He was not born Buddhist. Baptized as Jude Cabraal, born on 1st July 1961, he was the third child & the first son of the Roman Catholic family. When in University (age 17?) he became a monk. But his higher ordination, his disillusion of a namesake ordination made him opt out to become a Samanera again, since the Vinaya is not given a due prominence. He de-robed, misguided that his search for truth can be achieved as a lay “Upasaka”. Later he became a monk again, portraying his unwavering resolve to achieve his final goal. Today the Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery, that he formed has several branches in the Western World. Given below is a list of most of them:

Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery Toronto, Canada.  - 11175 Kennedy Road , Markham , Ontario , L6C 1P2 Canada   Tel: (905) 927 7117  E-mail: info@mahamevnawa.ca

Mahamevnawa Buddhist Nuns' Center and Meditation Center of Halton Hills. 9148 MAIN STREET SOUTH, ACTON, HALTON HILLS, ONTARIO, L7J 1X9. Canada.

Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery Edmonton, Canada. 13036 SHERBROOKE AVE NW, EDMONTON, AB T5L 4E8.

Buddha Meditation Centre Saskatoon, Saskatoon, Canada. 602 Stonebridge Common, Saskatoon SK S7T 0M9. Telephone: (306) 374-2840, Email: info@mahamevnawasaskatoon.com

Buddha Meditation Centre, Winnipeg, Canada. 2610 St Mary’s Road, Winnipeg, MB R2N 4A2

Mahamevnawa Meditation Monastery, Offenbach, Germany

Mahamevnawa Monastery, Sydney, Australia 105, Wisemans Ferry Road,
Cattai NSW 2756 Australia. +61 245 728 872

Mahamevnawa Monastery, Melbourne, Australia 71 Monbulk Road,
Mount Evelyn, VIC 3796  +61 03 9736 3937

Mahamevnawa Buddhist Monastery, Adelaide, Australia 1105, Grand Junction Road,
Hope Valley, SA 5090. +61 08 8364 4879

Mahamevnawa Monastery,  UK Dhamma land, Hardings Elms Road
Crays Hill, BILLERICAY, Essex CM11 2UH.  01268 533870.. Web    mahamevnawaimc.org;
mahamevnawaimc.co.uk;  mahamevnawa.uk;  buddhameditation.uk;  Email  admin@mahamevnawaimc.org

Mahamevnawa Monastery, New Jersey, United States

Mahamevnawa Monastery, California, USA 9917, Mission Blvd, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509
Phone: 714 884 3894

Mahamevnawa Monastery, Florida, USA. 2714 DOERUN CT, TAMPA, FL 33618
(813) 961-5296

Mahamevnawa Monastery, Washington D.C., USA 5004 Stone Rd, Rockville, MD 20853, USA

Mahamevnawa Monastery, Ireland

Mahamevnawa Monastery, France 6 bis Rue Maurice Laisney, 92600 Asnières-sur-Seine.  +33 9 70 99 46 65


Difference between Theravada's self and Mahayana's intrinsic essence With reference to this comment:

  An intrinsic nature, essence or characteristic that is unique to some
  phenomena that can be described as that phenomena's self. The self of
  chair would be that intrinsic nature, essence or unique characteristic
  or set of characteristics that imbue chairness on a chair. Western
  philosophers might describe it as a platonic ideal.

In Theravada Buddhism, "sabbe dhamma anatta", means all phenomena is not self. This can also be rephrased as there is no self in all phenomena, with the understanding of "self" as a permanent and eternal core or soul or self at the center of beings and also non-beings. A chair, a tree, a cat, the mind, empty space and Nibbana all do not have a self, according to Theravada. All things except Nibbana, are subject to change, arising and passing - these are known as "sankhara", or conditioned and/or compounded things. The term "dhamma" refers to phenomena, which includes Nibbana and also all sankharas. Basically everything falls under "dhamma". The emptiness of Theravada refers to the notion that all phenomena is empty of a self. "Sabbe dhamma anatta" is accepted by Mahayana Buddhism too.

Meanwhile, in Mahayana Buddhism, specifically in Madhyamaka, all phenomena is empty of intrinsic essence. Emptiness itself is also empty of intrinsic essence - sometimes called the emptiness of emptiness. intrinsic essence is called "svabhava". I can say that in Madhyamaka, there is an equivalent "sabbe dhamma asvabhava" of sorts.

Generally, the difference between the two is understood as "Mahayana says everything is not ultimately real", but on the other hand, "Theravada says everything is not-self, but are real (even if not constant and not permanent)".

The commentator above now introduced a new set of terminology saying that Theravada's self or atta refers to the "self of persons", while the Mahayana svabhava (or intrinsic essence) of a chair is a "self of chairs".

So my questions would be:

Do other Mahayana Buddhists apart from the commentator above, also call the intrinsic essence (svabhava) of a chair, as the "self of chairs"?
If Theravada states "sabbe dhamma anatta" and Mahayana states "sabbe dhamma asvabhava", does it mean that anatta = asvabhava, and therefore, atta (self) = svabhava (intrinsic essence)?
Depending on your view: if the Theravada atta (self) is different from the Mahayana svabhava (intrinsic essence), then what really is the difference? OR if the Theravada atta (self) is same as the Mahayana svabhava (intrinsic essence), then does that make the Mahayana emptiness a redundant concept?

1. Do other Mahayana Buddhists apart from the commentator above, also call the intrinsic essence (svabhava) of a chair, as the "self of chairs"?

Yes, this is a common expression in Mahayana texts on the topic.

2. If Theravada states "sabbe dhamma anatta" and Mahayana states "sabbe dhamma asvabhava", does it mean that anatta = asvabhava, and therefore, atta (self) = svabhava (intrinsic essence)?

I think Mahayana states "sabbe dhamma shunyata" - which can be explained as "sabbe dhamma asvabhavata" and "sabbe dhamma pratityasamutpida". From this it also follows that all dharmas are anicca (ephemeral) and dukkha (here, faulty/unreliable).

If we don't nitpick too much about the meaning of the equal sign, I think I can agree with your statements that "anatta = asvabhava" and "atta = svabhava". More on this in a second.

3. Depending on your view: if the Theravada atta (self) is different from the Mahayana svabhava (intrinsic essence), then what really is the difference? OR if the Theravada atta (self) is same as the Mahayana svabhava (intrinsic essence), then does that make the Mahayana emptiness a redundant concept?

I think svabhava is a broader concept than atman (atta). To me, atman is only one case of reification, or one case of attributing svabhava to abstractions and observations.

Therefore, Mahayana's emptiness is not redundant. True -- it is not something entirely new that was absent in Theravada, but in my opinion it gives proper emphasis to something that is kind of implicit and not explained enough in the Pali Canon (even if ever-present "between the lines").


What is the meaning round beads around the neck of Sha Wujing? As a kid I enjoyed watching drama Journey to the West (1986),

Wiki : Shā Wùjìng is one of the three disciples of the Buddhist pilgrim Xuanzang. He appears as a character in the novel Journey to the West written by Wu Cheng'en in the Ming dynasty, although versions of his character predate the Ming novel. In the novels, his background is the least developed of the pilgrims and he contributes the least to their efforts. He is called Sand or Sandy and is known as a "water buffalo" for his seemingly less developed intelligence in many English versions of the story.
His Buddhist name "Sha Wujing", given by Bodhisattva Guanyin, means "sand aware of purity". His name is rendered in Korean as Sa Oh Jeong, into Japanese as Sa Gojō, into Sino-Vietnamese as Sa Ngộ Tịnh.
He is also known as 沙僧 "Monk Sha", "Shā Sēng" in Mandarin Chinese, Sa Tăng in Sino-Vietnamese and Sua Cheng in Thai .

I saw actor "Sha Wujing" necklace with huge, weighing up to 5kg.
I want to ask the meaning of this kind of necklace. ?
In Buddhism, Who had that necklace?

Today the beads are generally used for counting the breaths, however there is also a use for divination. In the latter each bead is assigned a meaning according to the breakdown of sense experience (vedana) as follows:

The six senses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) X pleasant, unpleasant, neither-pleasant-nor-unpleasant
Bound up in the worldly = 18 +
Not bound to the worldly = 18 = 36
X Past, Future, Present = 108.

So bead #1 = past pleasant sensation down-bound to the world related to the eye

When asked a question the diviner finds the bead most appropriate to the question and visualizes (from his associations with that sense-experience) and interprets to attain an answer.


Did the Buddha mean this by "rebirth"? I suspect the Buddha used the term "rebirth" in a sense different from its traditional meaning. Probably he meant that our sense of separate self is repeatedly being born, decaying, dying and being reborn until we attain Nirvana. In this sense, rebirth happens only in our present life and not after our physical death. Is there any evidence in the early canon to support that the Buddha used the term "rebirth" in the above sense?

I suspect the Buddha used the term "rebirth"

The entire premise of your question is faulty, unfortunately. The Buddha never, afaik, used a term that could be translated as "rebirth". In fact, the idea of anything being reborn goes against orthodox early Buddhist teachings. Throughout the Buddha's teachings, it is made clear that at the breakup of the body there is birth, not rebirth - as in birth of new things, not the return of anything old.

  Probably he meant that our sense of separate self is repeatedly being born, decaying, dying and being reborn until we attain Nirvana.

Since the Buddha never taught the idea of self and denounced any view of self as leading to suffering (MN 22), this is highly unlikely to be correct.

  In this sense, rebirth happens only in our present life and not after our physical death.

To repeat, according to early Buddhism, rebirth never happens. In this life, there is what is called khaṇika-maraṇa - death of a moment. Each momentary experience is born and dies, never to arise again. At the moment of conceptual death (sammuti-maraṇa), this process of momentary birth and death continues unimpeded unless one has experienced "death by cutting off" (samuccheda-maraṇa) - i.e. of the defilements (q.v. Vism VIII.167) - in which case there is no further arising.

To put it succinctly, physical death isn't even real according to early Buddhism; it is a concept based on the artificial construct of a "being" who is "born".

  Is there any evidence in the early canon to support that the Buddha used the term "rebirth" in the above sense?

No.


How can killing of Muslims by Buddhists in Myanmar be justified? Considering whatever atrocities Muslims did (I don't know if they did any) or are going to do, is killing Muslims the only solution the Myanmar Buddhists could adopt?
Is it wise?

Is violence recommended in Buddhism (or by Buddha) under any extreme circumstances??

If no, why have the Myanmar Buddhists chosen that path?

For context, here are some news links on this topic:

BBC: Why are Buddhist monks attacking Muslims?
CNN: Anti-Muslim tension simmers ahead of Myanmar election

Here's a good story of a Buddhist reaction to a genocide in Lord Buddha's time.

"Lord Buddha's family/cast (Shrathriya/Shakya) was at the top of the casts at the time and they were very proud of it.Once a kind requested a princess for a marriage from Shrathriya/Shakya cast.But because of their ego they tricked the king by sending a pretty slave girl as a princess.Time went by and she had a son,he visited the Shrathriya/Shakya relatives one day and went back.But one of his men forgot his weapon and came to get it back.That's when he heard what a slave was saying while she was eagerly washing the room that prince stayed in, She was saying look how high a slave's boy has come. The guard went back and said the whole story and the truth was revealed.He took his army and came to kill all the Shrathriyas/Shakyas.Lord Buddha saw this and stopped him not once but twice.In the third time Lord Buddha looked back in time and understood that these people are about to be slaughtered as an effect of a old Karma.This time lord Buddha did nothing.The prince went and killed all of the Shrathriya/Shakya cast brutally.That is why there is no more left today from Lord Buddha's family."

Lord Buddha said that we must come above the lust to be alive,to be born,to not to exist.Lord Buddha said that we must understand the impermanence.But we as normal people still love to live.

If you look into Buddhism you will see how many villages,casts,races have faced death/genocide. Whether we like it or not the only option is to stand like men an take it because if we raise an arm we commit bad Karma.

What happened in Myanmar can't be justified. That is not the advice of Lord Buddha.We are not permitted to kill.

You can't be a Buddhist and a warrior at the same time,it is simple as that.
This might be a hard pill to digest but here is a good example why this concept is right...

Khantivādī Jātaka: J 313 (A Bodhisattva story of our Buddha)

In the Jātaka Tale, Patience Teacher Birth Story (Khantivādī Jātaka: J 313), a jealous king repeatedly asked an ascetic what the ascetic taught, to which the ascetic replied, "Patience," which the ascetic further defined as "not to get angry when injured, criticized or struck." To test the ascetic's patience, the king had the ascetic struck two thousand times with a whip of thorns, had the ascetic's hands and feet axed off, cut off the ascetic's nose and ears, and then kicked the ascetic in the heart. After the king left, the ascetic wished the king a long life and said, "Those like myself do not feel wrath." The ascetic died later that day.

Kshanti (Sanskrit kṣānti) or khanti (Pāli) is patience, forbearance and forgiveness.1 It is one of the pāramitās in both Theravāda and Mahāyāna Buddhism.

It is comforting to have the licence to kill but as Bodhisattva's had done for eons there is only patience and Kshanti for a Buddhist. Go to India and ask what happened to the Buddhists, all of them were impaled on Trishulas by Hindu people. This is not the only time a Genocide happened. No matter who is the victim it is only wrong. Imagine why a teaching like Buddhism vanishes every time it appears in this world, every time it has been a genocide. Your mind will not support the idea first but if you read enough sources the massage is clear. Lord Buddha said one must not harm or kill another even if it cost him his own life .You can either be a Buddhist and make your mind to die the glorious death in Kshanti or you could pick a weapon and go to war. This is where we differ from Christians,Hindus and Islamic, With all due respect to them we do not have a holy war. A good Buddhist is ready to happily accept the other end of the gun.

The offensive of a Buddhist King

But if you are a rebel i recommend you learn the story of** King Dutugamunu . This King protected the lives and the Theravada teaching of srilanka against the Hindu invader's Genocide. As to the prophecy this king will be one of the Great followers of Maithri Buddha in the future.


The Vanishing of Greed, Hatred, and Delusion ~ Nyanatiloka At the beginning of his talk, The Vanishing of Greed, Hatred, and Delusion,  Ajahn Viradhammo reads verses about Nibbana from a translation by Nyanatiloka of a fragment of the Pali Canon, from the Asaṅkhata Saṃyutta I suppose:

  This, Oh monks, is called the Unconditioned: the vanishing of greed, hatred, and delusion.
  This Oh monks, is called the Boundless:  the vanishing of greed, hatred, and delusion.
  This Oh monks, is called Freedom from [?]:  the vanishing of greed, hatred, and delusion.
  This Oh monks, is called the True: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Further Shore: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Subtle: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the [?]: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Ageless: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Permanent: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Beyond of All Manifoldness: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Peace: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Deathless: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Sublime: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Auspicious: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the [?]: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Wondrous: ...
  This Oh monks, is called the Sorrowless: ...
  .. etc...

Is anyone aware of such a translation by Nyanatiloka being available on line ?

Thank you for having taken the time to read this, your kind and generous help is very much appreciated.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the taintless and the path leading to the taintless.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the truth and the path leading to the truth.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the far shore and the path leading to the far shore.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the subtle and the path leading to the subtle.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the very difficult to see and the path leading to the very difficult to see.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unaging and the path leading to the unaging.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the stable and the path leading to the stable.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the undisintegrating and the path leading to the undisintegrating.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unmanifest and the path leading to the unmanifest.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unproliferated and the path leading to the unproliferated.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the peaceful and the path leading to the peaceful.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the deathless and the path leading to the deathless.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the sublime and the path leading to the sublime.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the auspicious and the path leading to the auspicious.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the secure and the path leading to the secure.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the destruction of craving and the path leading to the destruction of craving.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the wonderful and the path leading to the wonderful.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the amazing and the path leading to the amazing.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unailing and the path leading to the unailing.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unailing state and the path leading to the unailing state.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the Nibbana and the path leading to the Nibbana.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unafflicted and the path leading to the unafflicted.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the dispassion and the path leading to the dispassion.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the purity and the path leading to the purity.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the freedom and the path leading to the freedom.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the unadhesive and the path leading to the unadhesive.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the island and the path leading to the island.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the shelter and the path leading to the shelter.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the asylum and the path leading to the asylum.

Bhikkhus, I will teach you the refuge and the path leading to the refuge.

Samyutta Nikaya 43.14 to SN 43.43 translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi


What are the major sects of Buddhism? Every major religion has several different belief systems (sects) that have the same general core belief, but have a significant enough different to have be separated from each other.

What are the major (3-10) sects of Buddhism?  How are they different from each other?

Mahayana is not a sect at all; it is a vehicle.

Major traditions in Buddhism are usually country or region related. We can distinguish three major branches of Buddhism in the World by what they keep as canon.

Tibetan, Mongolian, and Russian Buddhism share Tibetan canon.
Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Buddhism share Chinese canon.
Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, etc share Pali canon.

Some countries mix several aforementioned branches.


Is it wrong to buy a Buddha statue in Thailand from a Buddhist point of view? I understand in Thailand they can confiscate Buddha statues in the customs unless you have a special permit that takes days to be processed and a lot of paperwork.

It is clear that from a "wordly point of view" it is not a good idea to buy and take it away without permission but from a Buddhist point of view: Is there anything wrong with it? Of course I'm talking about a person that will use the statue to worship and will not treat it with disrespect. (Not an antique of course, just a regular statue)

I think this is because many foreigners buy them to decorate their bathrooms. That has made life difficult for even the genuine foreign Buddhists. But they probably wouldn't stop a monk from taking a statue abroad unless it has antique significance.


Must Lay Arahants become Buddhist Monks? A lay person who becomes an Arahant must become a monk or they will die?

Can anyone explain what this teaching means?

Do they have to become a Buddhist Monk?

Can they just leave the world and become a hermit?

Could it be appropriate to just die and enter parinibbana?

If and when a lay-follower attains arahant-ship, he or she has to either enter the Order that very day or else must attain parinibbàna. This is a Dhammata. This is conformity to the Dhammaniyāma – a general rule in Dhamma.
This is discussed in the Milindapanha, which is a set of three Buddhist books that records the dialogues between the Indian monk Nagasena and the Indo-Greek king Milinda.

Milinda: "You say that if a layman attains arahantship he must either enter the Order that very day or die and attain parinibbàna. Yet if he is unable to find a robe and bowl and preceptor then that exalted condition of arahantship is a waste, for destruction of life is involved in it."
Nagasena: "The fault does not lie with arahantship but with the state of a layman, because it is too weak to support arahantship. Just as, O king, although food protects the life of beings it will take away the life of one whose digestion is weak; so too, if a layman attains arahantship he must, because of the weakness of that condition, enter the Order that very day or die."


Can someone mention few good web sites to learn theravada Buddhism? I run a Buddhist blog with daily updates and i am facing a bit of trouble finding sources for it as i try to update it everyday with at least a single new article or a book everyday.

I am already using "Accesstoinsight.org" as a primary source of good materials.

Can you please mention a few more such good web sites?

A Handful of Leaves has books and papers. Also http://www.dhammatalks.net/, http://www.wisdomlib.org/, http://www.buddhanet.net/ (multiple authors) and http://www.dhammatalks.org/ (by Thanissaro Bhikkhu), http://www.aimwell.org/. In addition https://archive.org/ does have many old Buddhist books. http://static.sirimangalo.org/pdf/ has also got scans of some old books.

http://www.abhidhamma.com/ has many Abhidhamma books.

Also there is Piya Tan's website - http://dharmafarer.org/ which has essays and traslations.

Also VRI (Ledi / U Ba Khin tradition) has couple of online resource:

http://www.vridhamma.org/Research-Index
http://www.vridhamma.org/Research
http://www.vridhamma.org/Online-Books-and-Pamphlets

Also you can look into magazine like: https://tricycle.org/, http://www.mindful.org/, http://www.lionsroar.com/ to get material.

Also have a look at: https://what-buddha-said.net/. This is a blog which posts something new on Buddhism nearly every day.

Also following are other sites like http://www.accesstoinsight.org/: https://suttacentral.net/, http://www.tipitaka.org/, http://newguide.org/


Does an Arahant accumulate kamma in his/her life? Cetana (Intention) is a universal mental factor which can be seen in every consciousness even in Arahants'.
Kamma is the intention in one's consciousness.

I have thought about the below statements based on the above mentioned two factors. But couldn't come to a conclusion. My questions are,

"An Arahant accumulates kamma in his/her life and has kammic fruit for that kamma in the same life." Is this statement true?
"An Arahant accumulates kamma in his/her life but has no kammic fruit for that kamma." Is this statement true?
"Intention (The mental factor, Cetana) is not kamma in Arahants' consciousness" Is this statement true?

Cittas are classified in various ways. One such classification is according to their nature. In this classification we have:

Cittas which are resultant states of consciousness, vipaaka, the effects of previous kamma.
Cittas which are causes for action (kamma) through body, speech, or mind. We may call these "causative cittas." A wholesome citta (kusala citta) will issue in wholesome action and an unwholesome one (akusala citta) in unwholesome action.
Cittas which are neither kamma nor its result. These are called kiriya cittas. They are kammically ineffective, being merely functional. Some kiriya cittas perform simple functions in the process of consciousness, others represent the actions and thoughts of arahants, who no longer generate fresh kamma. Read more here

Therefore,

Statement 1: False
Statement 2: False
Statement 3: True, but they are called kiriya cittas. The term is indicative of the functional nature which is different from the intention of a worldly person.


Can you translate, from Pali, this sutta about Equanimity? I have been trying to find out the meaning and nature of Equanimity or Upeksha.

I came across this Sutta which says something about Equanimity but it is in Pali.

Mahālomahaṃsacariya (Cp 35, i.e. number 35 in the Cariyāpiṭaka)

Can anyone please translate this Sutta from Pali to English ?

The Pali is:

  Susāne seyyaṃ kappemi,  Chavaṭṭhikaṃ upanidhāyahaṃ;  Gāmaṇḍalā
  upāgantvā,  Rūpaṃ dassentinappakaṃ.

  Apare gandhamālañca,  bhojanaṃ vividhaṃ bahuṃ;  Upāyanānūpanenti,
  haṭṭhā saṃviggamānasā.

  Ye me dukkhaṃ upaharanti

  Whatever difficulty presents itself

  ye ca denti sukhaṃ mama;

  Whatever comforts he is offered/Whatever happiness he offers (?)

  Sabbesaṃ samako homi

  Always/everywhere existing (with) the same (calmness)

  dayā kopo na vijjati.

  Kindness but no irritation is found

  Sukhadukkhe tulābhūto

  Remaining/existing/being balanced in pleasure, pain [feelings]

  Yasesu ayasesu ca

  Fame/success & obscurity

  Sabbattha samako homi

  Always/everywhere existing (with) the same (calmness)

  Esā me upekkhāpāramī”ti.

  That is perfect equanimity

  https://suttacentral.net/cp35/pli/ms

Click on the Sutta Central link; then click on the cog wheel at the top right; active the Pali-English function; highlight the Pali & try to do the translation for yourself.


How to find the right Dhamma teacher The practice of Buddhism, as with any other spiritual development, largely relies on the guidance of a good master. With the large variety of traditions and practices out there, how should one go about looking for the right teacher to guide one along the (right) spiritual path? I have been to retreats conducted by teachers from the Theravada and Chinese Mahayana tradition, and I am interested to find out more about Tibetan Buddhism.

At this point I venture to say that the school one picks is largely irrelevant. It's much more about the teacher's ability to connect the map of the teaching with the jungle of your immediate living experience. Once you see how the two relate, you can start making progress. As was said in Kalama Sutta:

  Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," -- enter on and abide in them.

The right teacher will capture your attention and inspire motivation by appealing to things that you yourself value high. Using samsaric inertia as the fuel and stepping stone, he or she will help you cut through habit and get a fresh look at obvious issues that you have been ignoring far too long. The right teacher makes you feel extremely uneasy AND inspired at the same time. Uneasy, because the teacher holds a mirror for you to see that you have been a fool all along. Inspired, because in front of your very eyes you see a perfect role model, a living example of what Dharma actually stands for, far beyond theoretical constructs.

In my experience, traveling/lecturing "rockstar" teachers rarely provide the level of up-and-close personal guidance required to break through. Retreats and books help to a degree but nothing replaces the immediate influence of watching a master go about everyday things.

I'm inclined to say, the best bet is to find a resident teacher/master/lama and join the sangha of students on a permanent basis. Many Zen masters run meditation circles, with some degree of study and personal guidance mixed in. Tibetan lamas regularly take students for the preliminary Ngondro course, from which one can graduate to Vajrayana proper to receive in-depth guidance. In any case, I would suggest, search locally for little sanghas organized around a resident master - whether at a temple, or a secular meditation circle.


How to remove dullness of mind, without sitting meditation, in regular activity? When you have to perform a certain task, you can't meditate during that time, but mind needs clarity. I feel very dull during that time, I want to increase my awareness and alertness in that performance time.

So, how I can remove dullness of mind (while performing a certain task during which I can't meditate)? What are the causes that lead to dullness?

You can indeed meditate(Vipassana) while performing any task.
ex: if you are sweeping, keep reminding: sweeping.. sweeping..  sweeping..

Dullness or boredom is a form of aversion. Ignorance is the cause of it.
To overcome dullness, simply note it as it is without taking it as "I am bored" or "it is boring".


The mind during Shikantaza In Soto-Zen Buddhism there is a sitting meditation known as Shikantaza which is the art of just-sitting. My question, what techniques are given to Soto-Zen practitioners to prevent the mind from being "sticky" or "stuck" during Shikantaza. For example,

I have been told by some practitioners that they would call sight, sound, taste, touch, smell and mind as objects. By referring to the six sense organs as objects they disconnect themselves from the object to prevent the formation of subject. Although it sounds interesting that doesn't sound like, at least by what I've read, as Shikantaza.
Another practitioner told me they simply listened to silence or emptiness. This reminded me of Eckhart Tolle's meditation instructions especially given in his book "Stillness Speaks". The problem I find through this method is the practitioner is focusing on an object, as Lao tzu mentioned in his book the "Tao Te Ching"; the form which is formless. Also, Dogen encouraged the sitter to just sit with no attention to a single object. Concentration on emptiness is neglecting sitting and the original face.
Finally, another practitioner explained he would simply try to keep his attention centered as if he were sitting inside of a dome. That is, trying to be aware of the world and his thoughts while building a kind of cushion between himself and object. Almost but not exactly a combination of the first two.

Therefore, what are the steps Soto-Zen practitioners are encouraged to take in order to practice Shikantaza. To clarify, I'm not interested in physical postures such as sitting, hand positions, the position of the tongue, etc... but rather, what is the sitter doing with his/her mind and the steps they are taking to separate subject from object.

Look, there is nothing special about Shikantaza or any other type of meditation. If you ask me honestly, I say that meditation is for fun really. You don't do it to achieve anything. In fact the idea is to let everything be. And NOT achieve anything. No "Nirvana", No "Moksha", No "separation", No "clinging" or whatever labels we like to create.

There is really no answer to this question apart from experience. You just sit and go on with whatever happens, your physical and mental sensations. Until they cease (or not). The moment you start thinking anything about it or whatever to do about it, the point is lost.

What I mean is whatever you are thinking right now about the way to do it, or "am I doing it right?" or "what should I focus on?" or such like questions are mere thoughts and are invalid.


No aim. No perspective. Begin of 30y. Scared about political-decisions. Paranoid. What should I do? Please make sure you read the whole text before giving me an answer.
I'm very serious about this and search a very good advise, something I didn't think before.

This year I'll become 30 years and I'm standing in the middle of nothing.
My boss fired me and all in all I feel I quitted more jobs in my life than changing my underpants.
I've no motivation to do something cause I've no aim for something.
When I started to do something (no matter what) I concentrate on it for a few days / weeks / months and than I left it and do something new or nothing, cause everything makes me bored from time to time or stressed me to much.
Then there are times I decided to do something very cool. These are the times I started to do something new for a particular time. But when I'm into it and I don't "throw it away" I think about all the political decisions (internationally) and get paranoid of a world war 3 or something like this. That's the reason why I don't want to do anything, cause I think "When I do something and the worstcase comes over us, there was no need to learn / do it."
I'm very deep in conspiracy theories and work sometimes hours, days, weeks and month to find out "the truth".
That's the reason why I think like I mentioned above.
And that brings me to another fact: I seriously hate this system of life.
I've the opinion we are not on this planet to work and pay taxes. In my point of view, both are waste of time --> Working for money, to make a low life - never become that successful, that I don't have to worry about the most money-cases.
In my opinion we are here to find a higher self.
Now there are 2 possibilities:

I want to stay in a monastery. Become a monk. But I can't cause of my girlfriend.
(But I think her thinking is right as well: "You just want to flee from everything".)
I don't want to build a future with making decisions with/for her when we broke up anyway someday.
(That's just my thinking)

My girlfriend is telling me, I should concentrate more on myself than on her.
I should do more what I want, not what she want or what is "best" for a common future. (Yes, she really loves me - no sarcasm here)

I've a handful of friends more or less but nothing I can work with for my personal life. It's not cause of them, it's cause of me, cause I don't like to talk about the most things.

And I've less than a handful of leisure activities.
I had no plan in the past and I don't have one right now.
In my carreer I developed a photography-eye so my references in photography are remarkable.
But I hate to stress myself out to search for some work for it (freelance) and I don't like to work with people at all (commercial studios who work for quantity, not quality).
The second thing I can do very well is solving computer problems of all kinds. Even when I've to search in the www for solutions I can solve every problem since I'm a child. Hardware & Software. No matter which kind of operating system. Just doing it like I never did anything before.
My actually situation is: I've safed a little money to survive for the next 1 - 2 month.
I could search for another job, but the possibility I really hate it is very high and will quit anyway.
And I feel myself is to old to do something totally different and become SO good in it, that I become very successful with it.
So what should I do generally?
I feel like "I just want to quit life and try something else." (if you understand what I mean)
Cause everything I do is making me bored.
Everything I aim on is not SO special (in my mind), that I would spend my life for it. (For example: Become a programmer: Oh no, it's not THAT cool ... and on and on)

I think I see your karmic situation very clearly. You have a very strong predisposition to become a serious Buddhist. As they say these days, "you are a natural".

At the same time, you're kinda late in your cycle being in your 30s. If you start now you may not finish by the end of this life -- and in a next life, while major karmic and mental dispositions carry on, the conceptual knowledge and practices have to be restarted from scratch.

My advice to you is to not go to monastery at this age, and instead do a 100% watertight saint-type practice in your daily life. I believe this is your only chance. Then by the time you're ~50 you'll hopefully make the breakthrough and still have enough time and energy left to take care of future lives.

The gist of the practice is, you have to be perfect. I'm not joking (you wish I would). Obviously, life is an optimization game against many mutually competing variables but in every daily situation there is always the point of best balance. Which means, for next decade or so, you have to remove yourself from the equation and focus on achieving the best objective outcome in every situation regardless of your personal feelings. That's all there is to it: remove yourself from the equation, be impeccable, optimize every single situation as perfectly as you can.

This obviously includes your sense of self-worth (connected with praise and reward). Part of removing yourself out of the equation includes dropping all worry about how you look in the eyes of others. Your sense of the right must not depend on praise and blame of others. When you act like a de-facto saint (externally AND internally -- including not having negative thoughts about others or self-praising thoughts), then you know you are 100% right so you don't need to depend on others' opinions anyway.

Does this make sense? It's a very simple practice conceptually, the only difficulty is to be sincere with yourself - in order to make it watertight. From what you told us I see that this should work very well for you, if you have the guts to follow it through.


Is the Karma theory an essential component of Buddha's teaching? Stephen Batchelor claims in several speeches and books that

Buddha never said the Karma and rebirth theory was true,
it is not important to Buddha's teachings, and
when he was a Gelug monk and asked for support for the Karma and rebirth theory, he didn't get any sufficient answers (despite the fact that Gelug Buddhists tend to focus on scientific methods of acquiring knowledge).

According to Batchelor, the Karma theory was a common worldview in India at the time. Siddhartha Gautama's contemporaries believed in Karma like we believe in the Big Bang theory and evolution. Neither of these theories can be proved or refuted with an affordable effort (in order to prove evolution for yourself, you need substantial knowledge of biology plus systemic thinking skills -- both of which are hard to acquire).

Also, neither of these theories affects the main purpose of Buddhist practice -- to reduce suffering. If tomorrow someone proved the Big Bang theory to be definitely true (or definitely wrong), it wouldn't make most of the people happier/unhappier than before.

However, the question about Karma theory affects the Buddhist practice.

If someone believes in rebirth, then they would spend most of their time meditating and preparing for the next lives. This is not just theory -- in some Buddhist communities advanced members spend almost all their evenings in the Buddhist center and almost every vacation on some retreat. It looks like they don't have their own life apart from this practice.

If someone does not believe in the Karma theory, they will focus on making the best of this life (which may be the only one we get). Buddhist practice is a means to live the one life one has as effectively as possible. Basically, you meditate in the evening in order to better achieve your personal goals during the day.

Is the Karma theory an essential component of Buddha's teaching or not?

There is no Buddhism without Karma. Paticcasamuppada (the Law of Dependent Origination) is all about Karma and it's consequences.

Akiriya-ditthi is the false view or opinion of the inefficacy of action: That neither moral good nor moral evil action have any delayed consequences for anyone.

This wrong view was taught by Pūrana-Kassapa during the time of the Buddha.

Today also there are people like Pūrana Kassapa who spread such views. What is more dangerous is that instead of presenting such views as their own beliefs, they try to present them as the teachings of the Buddha and mislead many who are new to Buddhism.


Is there are difference between 'self' & 'soul' in Buddhism? A core teaching of Buddhism is 'anatta' or 'not-self'.

Does the word 'atta' refer to both 'self' & 'soul' or can these two ideas (self & soul) be different in Buddhism to give them different meanings?

In other words, are the ideas 'self' & 'soul' (be they used in Buddhism or non-Buddhism) necessarily synonymous in Buddhism?

You tagged this question pali.

The PTS dictionary does gives two meanings:

  The soul as postulated in etc.
  Oneself, himself, yourself. etc.

There is for example a chapter of the Dhammapada called Attavagga, whose verses include the word; for example:

  Attana hi katam etc.

  Verse 165: By oneself indeed is evil done and by oneself is one defiled; by oneself is evil not done and by oneself is one purified. Purity and impurity depend entirely on oneself; no one can purify another.

You could try to read/understand this as, "By the soul indeed is evil done", to see whether that makes more sense to you; but the conventional translation of it is, "By oneself is...".

I'm not sure that I should try to grasp this topic, for example because of the warning in the Sabbasava Sutta that questions like "what am I?" will result in various types of "views of self", a "thicket of views", a fetter -- and because I think it's an intellectual idea, which may be associated with "Mara".

According to the introduction of Piya Tan's Is There a Soul? one of the principle attributes of the alleged or Brahmanistic soul is that it's "eternal". I guess that "eternal" might contradict another of of the "three characteristics", i.e. impermanence.

I'm told that there is such a thing (a state) as nirvana and maybe timelessness; but I think that those are not maybe associated with a personal "self".


Did the Buddha really say that "life is suffering"? I often see the first noble truth (duḥkha) stated as "life is suffering". I have yet to come across a passage in a Buddhist text which phrases it like this - mostly they don't talk about "life" in this sense. So where does the idea that "life is suffering" come from?

There's been some discussion about the definition and translation of the word "dukkha" also. Is there a definitive definition?

The first noble truth is actually amazingly relatable for the most part, as in no reasonable person could find fault with it. Since it doesn't appear to have been mentioned, I will post a full literal translation of the first noble truth from the Dhammacakkappavattanasutta:

  jātipi dukkhā
  Birth is dukkha

  jarāpi dukkhā
  Old age is dukkha

  byādhipi dukkho
  Sickness is dukkha

  maraṇampi dukkhaṃ
  Death is dukkha

  appiyehi sampayogo dukkho
  Association with the disliked is dukkha

  piyehi vippayogo dukkho
  Separation from the beloved is dukkha

  yampicchaṃ na labhati tampi dukkhaṃ
  Not obtaining one's wishes is dukkha

  —saṃkhittena pañcupādānakkhandhā
   dukkhā.
  In brief, the five clinging aggregates are dukkha

People have a tendency to focus overly much on the final one, which is terribly difficult to translate into english, it can be explained but can't be rendered in a pithy way which does justice to the meaning. Putting aside that which is difficult to translate, the rest of it is very straightforward, and are about the actual physical and emotional sufferings in life we can all relate to.

These points are easily understood at a conceptual level, and make an excellent starting point of investigation. For example with the emotional pain of "being separated from the loved", I noticed I would experience a piercing pain the chest in association with being rejected by someone I loved, and I would note that that person was not in fact stabbing me in the chest and that therefore the painful feeling warranted serious investigation since it did not make sense.

It should be noted that the first noble truth does not make irrational statements such as "Association with the beloved is suffering", we may reason that being separated from the loved is inevitable and so that kind of pleasure is like a honeyed barb, it is pleasant at first but will cut us later. Nevertheless the first noble truth does not deny the reality of that pleasure.


Explanation of the six temperaments Greedy, hating, deluded, faithful, intelligent, speculative

I know they may seem self exploratory on the surface, but I'm looking for an understanding to more properly determine how one is to know which one he/she is someone else is.

One of the most important topics in Buddhism is the lack of basis for "identity view". This comes out, for example, in MN62:

  “Rāhula, you should truly see any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’”

Having faith that identity view is baseless, one is led to conclude that those who cling to identity view are often:

Greedy, which can be recognized in the unfairness and suffering of those excluded from shared resources such as drinking water during a drought.
Hating, which can be recognized in a lack of compassion for others such as saying "steerage passengers will have no lifeboats."
Deluded, which can be recognized in a never-ending grasping at the vanities of health, youth, and life.

Yet those who have identity view can also be:

Faithful, which can be recognized in a willingness to experience the fruit of teachings of the Buddha personally
Intelligent, which can be recognized in a discernment between skillful qualities and unskillful qualities
Speculative, which can be recognized in a struggle to understand the meaning and worth of the teachings of the Buddha such as "This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self,’"


Are Good Qualities Proportional to Our Efforts? I mused that clearly, certain efforts are necessary for the path. But, I can easily imagine a person exerting lots of efforts towards a detrimental goal, or a person exerting a bit of effort towards a wholesome goal. So, effort in itself seems not directly related to good qualities.

Another example is a proficient meditator for whom meditation might be easier, but more potent and pleasant; this contrasts with the beginner who struggles and must apply effort. The experienced meditator might generate more effect with less effort.

What is the relationship in Buddhism of effort to its resulting benefit? Is it indirect?

Thank you

From MN 117, we read that Right Effort (samma vayamo) must go in the right direction:

  "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is
  one's right effort...

  "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into right resolve:
  This is one's right effort...

  "One tries to abandon wrong speech & to enter into right speech: This
  is one's right effort...

  "One tries to abandon wrong action & to enter into right action: This
  is one's right effort...

  "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into right
  livelihood: This is one's right effort."

Not just the right direction, but also the right amount of effort - not too much and not too little.

From AN 6.55 (a vina is an indian stringed musical instrument):

  "And what do you think: when the strings of your vina were too taut,
  was your vina in tune & playable?"

  "No, lord."

  "And what do you think: when the strings of your vina were too loose,
  was your vina in tune & playable?"

  "No, lord."

  "And what do you think: when the strings of your vina were neither too
  taut nor too loose, but tuned to be right on pitch, was your vina in
  tune & playable?"

  "Yes, lord."

  "In the same way, Sona, over-aroused persistence leads to
  restlessness, overly slack persistence leads to laziness. Thus you
  should determine the right pitch for your persistence, attune the
  pitch of the [five] faculties [to that], and there pick up your
  theme."


What motivates a fully awakened person in a loving relationship? Loving relationship here is meant specifically as a mutually intimate partnership like husband and wife and boyfriend and girlfriend. There would be the case where one would become fully awake and therefore abandons all teachings but whilst still in a relationship. Would this change the dynamics of that relationship in some major way?

What do the Suttas say about this if anything?

Remark: This is not (yet?) a full answer, but more an extended comment.

For one impression of how might a loving relation be revered see  "A.IV. 55 Nakulapitá und Nakulamátá" ; although the couple is not called arahants they are mentioned as "top on lay disciples" (see "A I.24")  "The foremost of my laymen ...(...) ... who are intimate is the householder Nakula’s father.”
So there's no right-out disregard of being a loving couple.

Next it might be interesting a story about the (later) arahant (Maha) Kassapa about the problem of being married and having a desire for ascetic life at the same time. Hellmuth Hecker has compiled a story about this which I found some time ago at the access-to-insight site (I think) . Here is a part of that text on the biographic tale about Kassapa:

  (...) Like the two chief disciples, Sariputta and Maha Moggallana, Maha
  Kassapa too descended from the brahmin caste, and again like them, he
  was older than the Buddha. He was born in the Magadha country, in the
  village Mahatittha, as the son of the brahmin Kapila and his wife
  Su-manadevi.

  (This account of Maha Kassapa's early life is taken from the commentary to the Samyutta Nikaya.)

  He was called Pipphali. His father owned sixteen villages over which he ruled like a
  little king, so Pipphali grew up in the midst of wealth and luxury.
  Yet already in his young years there was in him the wish to leave the
  worldly life behind, and hence he did not want to marry. When his
  parents repeatedly urged him to take a wife, he told them that he
  would look after them as long as they live, but that after their
  deaths he wanted to become an ascetic. Yet they insisted again and
  again that he take a wife, so to comfort his mother he finally agreed
  to marry -- on the condition that a girl could be found who conformed
  to his idea of perfection. For that purpose he shaped a golden statue
  of a beautiful woman, had it bedecked with fine garments and
  orna-ments, and showed it to his parents, saying: "If you can find a
  woman like this for me, I shall remain in the home life."

  His parents approached eight brahmins, showered them with rich gifts,
  and asked them to take the image with them and travel around in search
  of a human likeness of it. The brahmins thought: "Let us first go to
  the Madda country, which is, as it were, a gold mine of beautiful
  women." There they found at Sagala a girl whose beauty equaled that of
  the image. She was Bhadda Kapilani, a wealthy brahmin's daughter, aged
  sixteen, four years younger than Pipphali Kassapa.

  Her parents agreed to the marriage proposal, and the brahmins returned to
  tell of their success.

  Yet Bhadda Kapilani also did not wish to marry, as it was her wish,
  too, to live a religious life as a female
  ascetic. Such identity between her aspiration and Pipphali Kassapa's
  may well point to a kammic bond and affinity between them in the past,
  maturing in their present life and leading to a decisive meeting
  between them and a still more decisive separation later on.

  When Pipphali heard that what he had thought most unlikely had actually
  occurred, he was -- unhappy and sent the following letter to the girl:
  "Bhadda, please marry someone else of equal status and live a happy
  home life with him. As for myself, I shall become an ascetic. Please
  do not have regrets."
  Bhadda Kapilani, like-minded as she was,
  independently sent him a similar letter.
  But their parents,
  suspecting such an exchange would take place, had both letters
  intercepted on the way and replaced by letters of welcome. So Bhadda
  was taken to Magadha and the young couple were married. However, in
  accordance with their ascetic yearning, both agreed to maintain a life
  of celibacy. To give expression to their resolve, they would lay a
  garland of flowers between them before they went to bed, determined
  not to yield to sensual desire. This young wealthy couple lived thus
  happily and in comfort for many years. As long as Pipphali's parents
  lived, they did not even have to look after the estate's farms. But
  when his parents died, they took charge of the large property.
  (...)

Now,  further after the death of Pipphali's parents, Pipphali and also Baddha took the yellow robe and left home, but walked together. Then this happened:

  (...) When walking on, Kassapa went ahead while Bhadda followed behind
  him.    Considering this, Kassapa thought: "Now, this Bhadda Kapilani
  follows    me close behind, and she is a woman of great beauty. Some
  people -    could easily think, 'Though they are ascetics, they still
  cannot live    without each other! It is unseemly what they are
  doing.' If they spoil    their minds by such wrong thoughts or even
  spread false rumors, they    will cause harm to themselves." So he
  thought it better that they    separate. When they reached a
  crossroads Kassapa said: "Bhadda, you    take one of these roads, and
  I shall go the other way." She said: "It    is true, for ascetics a
  woman is an obstacle. People might think and    speak badly about us.
  So please go your own way, and we shall now    part."
  She then
  respectfully circumambulated him thrice, saluted him    at his feet,
  and with folded hands she spoke: "Our close companionship    and
  friendship that had lasted for an unfathomable past comes to    an
  end today. Please take the path to the right and I shall take the
  other road." Thus they parted and went their individual ways, seeking
  the high goal of Arahatship, final deliverance from suffering.
  It is
  said that the earth, shaken by the power of their virtue, quaked and
  trembled.

From: MAHA KASSAPA: FATHER OF THE SANGHA by Hellmuth Hecker
Revised and enlarged translation from the German by Nyanaponika Thera

Translated and adapted from //Wissen und Wandel// XXI, 6 (1975)
Wheel Publication No. 345
Copyright 1987, 1995 Buddhist Publication Society
                      BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY
                      KANDY              Sri Lanka

So here we find something like "platonic love" between ascetics but in this instance much deeper, Hecker proposes the expression "karmic bond" for something which we might assume as an exotic example for a very deep arrangement of love over an already long chain of rebirthes...