What would Buddha advise to farewell when one of your parents died? Perhaps some Buddhists will say death doesn't really exist, but in any case, when your parents die, there is something changed.

What would Buddha teach to say goodbye to your parents. Probably all kinds of feelings may be there and that is good, but worry a lot wouldn't be very advisable. But is it 'advisable' to feel joy or sadness.

For short, how to say goodbye when someone close to you died?

You can do transfer of merit.

More on this see:

How can merit be transferred?
Transfering merits
Sharing merit in Theravada Buddhism
Actions taken to transfer merit
Does Theravada believe in feeding food to hungry ghosts?

Also you can do a:

offering of cloths to the monks in memory of the dead (monks cloths were initially made of the cloth used to wrap the dead bodies)
organise a dhamma talk for the benefit of the dead (generally the night before the almsgiving mentioned below)
organise an almsgiving for the benefit of the dead (generally at 7 days, 3 months, then annually)

Some of these are covered in: Buddhist Ceremonies and Rituals of Sri Lanka by A.G.S. Kariyawasam


What does "break-up of the body after death" mean in the suttas? The Pali suttas, particularly in teachings about kamma, has the phrase: "at the break-up of the body after death".

Are there contexts other than kamma where this phrase is used?

What does "break-up of the body after death" actually mean in the suttas?

Are these words in the language of materialism?

Do they have a non-materialistic meaning?

"break-up of the body" refers to conventional death. It doesn't refer to instant death of experiences.


Translation of a Chinese Bön book about Dzogchen I am looking for a translation in english (or french) of the following book in Chinese Mandarin:
大圆满前行法海
It is a book in the Bön tradition about Dzogchen.

I coudn't find a translation, but from what I gather from the title:

大圆满 Dzogchen
前行 forward, advance
法海 Fa-Hai

法海 Fa-Hai was a Chan monk in the Tang dynasty, but is also the name of a Sino-Tibetan Lama (1920-1991) who studied both Chan and Dzogchen. Monica Esposito wrote a book in English on this blending of disciplines:
The Zen of Tantra: Tibetan Great Perfection in Fahai Lama's Chinese Zen Monastery
Hope this helps.


Is there a defined sequence of events when a Buddhist enters a temple? As there are sequence of events which happen in other religions, do such things happen in Buddhism also?

For example:

Consider Christianity, it starts with a worship, then a sermon follows, followed by offerings and then end with a blessing from the priest.

Consider Hinduism, it starts with entering the temple, a silent prayer, followed by a blessing from the priest.

So, is there a defined set of sequences when a Buddhist enters the (Buddhist) temple?

It depends on the temple and what part of it you're entering.

For instance, I used to be involved with my local Mahayana Temple.  Whenever we entered the meditation hall, we did the following..

Took off our shoes
Bowed to the altar, with our hands together in front of our chest.
After meditation, bowed each time the meditation leader rang a bell (some leaders had us do full prostrations instead).
When leaving, we turned to face the altar and repeated #2.

1, 2 and 4 were common to all the Buddhist Temple meditation halls I visited.


Should we bath after funeral? Here in India we bath after funeral, But my prior question was "What is funeral law of Buddhism?" and  answerer said that when he lived in a forest monastery in Thailand, dead monks & residents were cremated on a pile of wood in the forest & they would practice meditation on the burning corpse. Therefor I think no need to bath but let me know should we bath after funeral?

Buddhists usually cremate the bodies. But there's no Buddhist funeral law. You may or may not bath before, after or during the funeral if you see any health benefit to it.


Mental illness and the Layperson's Practice I would like to return to the practice of Buddhism.  Where should I begin?
I have a serious mental illness.  It has been well treated by medication.
When I was young, before I developed this illness I would practice meditation as best I could.
But I had no mentor and so I don't know if my practice was correct.  I do not come from a Buddhist culture so I know little about the subject other than what I have been able to read.
Will my medication interfere with meditation as it is obviously mind altering?
Should I start for example with meditation on impermanence, on mindfulness, or by attempting to reduce my desire?

A while ago, i wrote this as an answer to a similar question. I suspect you are struggling with something a bit different than the poster from that previous question, but i hope that answer can shed some light regarding the mind-altering aspect.
I don't know how your particular medication is expected to work, but giving some thought on whether you'd have an easier/harder time meditating without your medication would probably give you a clue (I am not arguing for/against using medicine here).
Provided your healthcare givers aren't giving you the red light for meditation, the choice of meditation subject is likely no different than for anyone else starting up. You can never go wrong with anapanasati. If you have the time and energy, here is a good introduction text:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/ariyadhamma/bl115.html


Willpower in Buddhism I don't see any other questions, in the suggestions of the site, linked with this precise topic.

What is the equivalent of "willpower" in Buddhism? How is it developped?

Thank you.

The term is padhana - effort, exertion, striving, as in The Four Right Exertions.

Another term is vayama, The Right Effort step of the Eightfold Path.

Another word is chanda - will or intent.

  There is the case where a bhikkhu generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for ... [specific practices]

"Generates desire" is an important phrase here.

According to my root Guru, the key to effort is joy. If effort gets you what you're looking for, it makes you happy, then you're motivated to practice more. So the key is not as much to force oneself, but rather, to find the right narrative or frame of reference in which you feel motivated.

So in Buddhism willpower is not as much just sheer force, as it is ability to control one's attention and concentration, to not let external influences change one's frame of reference from position in which the motivation exists naturally.


Feeling of unbecoming & losing I-hood There is an entity called Rohit (knowing subject) who has his own liking,  disliking,  habits etc. Or maybe these liking, disliking,  habits etc make up the entity called Rohit. By constant awareness of self identification ( and eliminating things which I'm not) , I have started losing I-ness. It is difficult to explain in entirety but it is like death of the entity. Although this death of the entity giving a sense of peace and thoughtlessness, but it has started giving fears also. Fear of losing self - all liking, disliking etc along with social associations. It's kind of void & nihilism.  It's like vanishing of selfhood & my own existence.

So,  my question is what should I do in this situation? Why it is happening? Should I go ahead against fears & continue my endeavor of non identification or I should  step back (stopping the meditation & start identification again)? Or If I continue in unbecoming,  what are the suggestions would you give?

Note: I'm aware of paradoxes I used while posting details, ignore them as there is no any way to ask other than using 'I' wherever required.

Don't try to conceptualize what is happening. Simply stay aware and let-go.

If you have reached to that point, have courage. Obviously you will be afraid, it is the death of ego, a conscious death.

Some wisdom from the Buddha,

There are only two mistakes a man can make on the path of Nibbana, one is never starting at all and second is not walking till the end.

Again as the Buddha said,

Charaiveti Charaiveti.

Edit: The third point is a fake buddha quote. My bad.
The fourth one is apperently what the Buddha said at the end of every discourse. Meaning, ' go-on go-on'. This has been said by some,  but there is not strong evidential cititation. But feels like right.


why can't we swap one desire for another and another? We know that because of impermanence, that nothing is worth clinging to. But did the Buddha say any words on why we cannot swap one impermanent source of satisfaction for another, and continue doing so?

For example, one might take drug A to induce euphoria, then when drug A wears off, replace it by drug B, and so on.

MN 75 gives the analogy of a leper and shows that by swapping one desire for another, we would simply be making our craving and attachments progressively worse, which is a slippery slope to deepening our suffering.

The reason for this is that sensual pleasures are impermanent, and either their future absence will cause suffering, or their future side effects will cause suffering. They can't be sustained forever. And when you swap one desire for another, craving gets deepened and the "sensual fever" burns deeper. This will result in suffering becoming deeper.

  "Now suppose that there was a leper covered with sores & infections,
  devoured by worms, picking the scabs off the openings of his wounds
  with his nails, cauterizing his body over a pit of glowing embers. The
  more he cauterized his body over the pit of glowing embers, the more
  disgusting, foul-smelling, & putrid the openings of his wounds would
  become, and yet he would feel a modicum of enjoyment & satisfaction
  because of the itchiness of his wounds. In the same way, beings not
  free from passion for sensual pleasures — devoured by sensual craving,
  burning with sensual fever — indulge in sensual pleasures. The more
  they indulge in sensual pleasures, the more their sensual craving
  increases and the more they burn with sensual fever, and yet they feel
  a modicum of enjoyment & satisfaction dependent on the five strings of
  sensuality.


Drop your opinions at work? When I am supposed to simply observe my thoughts and any opinions that arise from them, and not cling to them, how am I supposed to work? I have a job, and as such you cannot not have opinions. It becomes a loss of self. I could let go, but then why should I go to work and exercise my effort on doing something other than simply meditate

Could someone help out with this conflict?

You don't necessarily have to abandon your opinions. The important thing is to recognize that opinions come from conditions, and those conditions always change. Your work is one of the conditions, and it's appropriate to form an opinion for those conditions... and then be ready to change the opinions if the conditions change, or if the opinion doesn't apply in a new situation.

Like the previous commenter said, this is a 'sila' practice, rather than meditation - examining your everyday behaviour to see if it's skillful. It's probably impossible to do vipassana at work!


Does a virtuous Buddhist indicate when making a turn and no-one (else) is watching? It’s a question about the balance hetween adhering to law but also not becoming ridiculous about it.
I hope it’s not a ridiculous question.
———-
I am adding a justification for the validity of this question:
violating a law in principle is suffering related, if not for getting caught by a hiding police officer, then because of moral shame anyway. so the question is about whether getting too pedantic about the law is silly (silliness leading to suffering, I presume.)
For example, a traffic light in the middle of a desert — who would obey it but a fool?

Does signaling with no traffic help to reduce suffering? Is signaling or not signaling when making a turn with no traffic related at all to the Four Noble Truths??


Why is Metta Practice so Hard? I find it very difficult to practice metta. I feel completely agitated when I sit to do metta even for a short period of time.is this normal? First I can't feel any metta being generated and I feel like I'm just repeating empty words to people I'm really not quite fond of to be honest.metta practice is unbearable i feel the urge to  rub my face on sand paper when I do it.I use to think metta was an easy meditation to do as I hear people do it before their main meditation but how can this be,when it so difficult..I don't buy it. Also i found out metta means friendliness and i think this is the problem as I may not be born with this quality.My question is Is metta supposed to be hard? If yes then why is it hard?

A lot of people find metta practice hard. I find metta practice hard. Where I practice they have even run day retreats called 'I hate the metta bhvana' to try to address this.

If I can maybe address some of you points with what I've been told and maybe my own experience

  I can't feel any metta being generated

It does feel like the task is to pump out as much metta as you can but I was told by a very experienced practiconer that this is an unhelpful way to think about it. Rather than trying frantically to be a metta generating machine he said the task is to be with whatever comes up when you bring people to mind. That might be metta, it might be irritation, it might be a big aching feeling of numbness. If it is then that is what it is and the task is to be open to that. Perhaps being sensitive to metta if it is there but being sensitive to it's absence if it isn't.

  I feel like I'm just repeating empty words

The traditional formulations can feel very fake. If they do then maybe don't do them and just try to have an awareness to that person. Someone said of the formulations that they are like a submarine pinging a sonar out and seeing what if anything comes back. Personally I don't often do them but sometimes I will say them to myself after another (breath) meditation and that can give other mediation a more metta-ful quality.

  metta means friendliness and i think this is the problem as I may not
  be born with this quality

Not knowing you but knowing human beings I'm going to say you do have this quality but it can be just numbed out of you by day to day living,. I think this is where faith (śraddhā) comes in. Have faith that you do have this quality and it is a universal human quality that everyone can connect with.

  metta practice is unbearable

Be kind to yourself. The beginning of the practice is have metta to yourself. Give yourself a break during practice by coming back to the breath or take a break from the practice for a time. If at all possible, don't give up completely.

  it so difficult.

It is difficult. You are doing a difficult thing. You and everyone that does this are heroes for even trying it. Own the difficult. It's difficult because it's difficult and celebrate yourself for engaging with it. You are amazing for doing it.

Good luck.


Sati-Sampajañña (Mindfulness) Hello folks I have some questions on mindfulness.

How do I maintain mindfulness in stressed or high stimulus environments? It's easy at home and when I do my things alone but once I'm at work (delivering food on a bike), at school or being with someone it's very hard to stay mindful. Any suggestions?
I couldn't really see any good explanation of buddhist mindfulness. If someone has an easy explanation please send me a link, however it combines alertness or concentration with a clear knowing what is going on (a label), isn't it so? But after an experience has been labeled it's not done yet. The practitioner needs then to do something to change from a unwholesome state/behaviour to a wholesome state/behaviour, right?
This question is related to the first one. If I am at work my mind is jumping from thought to thought and I feel in my body that I want to do things really fast. So in essence, my mind and body feels hasty and like a turmoil. Is there any practical advice how I can settle down the mind and body in in a fast way (especially when it's getting difficult or rather where distraction is available, e.g. at work, school, etc).

This is through maintaining Sati, Samadhi and Sampajanna it self.

1st one should keep your mindfulness in the 4 Frames of Reference. You should have Sampajanna in the following way:

  purpose (sātthaka): refraining from activities irrelevant to the path.
  suitability (sappāya): pursuing activities in a dignified and careful manner.
  domain (gocara): maintaining sensory restraint consistent with mindfulness.
  non-delusion (asammoha): seeing the true nature of reality (see three characteristics).

Source: Sampajañña also see The Four Sampajanna by VRI, Sampajanna by VRI, Sampajanna-the Constant Thorough Understanding of Impermanence by VRI,
 Sampajañña: The Fullness of Understanding - by S. N. Goenka, The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna by VRI

Though arise due to sensory input. Perhaps you can try to restrict distraction by non reaction to the sensory input, which is to maintain the domain, and also be non deluded by at least seeing arising and passing nature of the experience. Also if the thought that district you are not related to the path you can abandon them. More on this see Vitakka Saṇṭhāna Sutta. Also be careful there is no lapse of mindfulness which might lead to unwholesome
 or unsuitable thought to arise.

To quiet your active mind perhaps you can try out developing the Jhana factors. Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta. If initial and sustained application is developed within the 4 Frames of Reference this also you are keeping to the domain, purpose, doing what is suitable and non deluded, while also getting and handle on the distracting thoughts through concentration.

To apply this to daily activities always see it your mind is with the 4 Frames of Reference periodically, with initial and sustained application, contemplating the at least impermanence of the of the three characteristics, as you go through your daily activities.


Between death and offence what is the choice? One day here on this SE i had an comment to one of my answers suggesting that it is rather discomforting or hard to accept that Buddhists have chosen death as their choice in difficult situations like Genocides,War,Racial conflicts and etc against killing for survival.

But there are some war stories too. As i did not had a chance to learn all sides of this interesting question i thought to ask a question and openly invite the community to share their version of teaching on this matter.
Feel free to add your ow personal experience too.

so the questions are...

What does different schools and traditions of Buddhism teach about reacting to an
offensive or a war?

This offensive can be a one against Buddhism,race,country or any other social aspect.

Is there a Buddhist offense?

What does different schools and traditions of Buddhism teach about reacting to an offensive or a war?

The going to war is in many cases beyond your control and even if it is it is governed by norms and even law. Say another country declares war then you might not be able to do nothing. This these case if you have exhausted the avenues to stay away you might have to participate. This is not justifiable by the Dhamma but you have to comply with the laws of the land. Also be mindful of the Karmic repercussions and try to do somethings to counteract this perhaps like Metta Bhavana, helping the wounded, etc. when you can.

If you look back at Buddha's time, even his devoted disciples hard to go on war. E.g. Ajatashatru. This is a worldly norm. You can not endorse them, as any for of offensive is not endorsed in Buddhism, but they cannot be avoided and eradicated.

  Is there a Buddhist offense?

Within the Dhamma offensives are not justified.

But there are instances like Dutugamunu who when to war to save Buddhism. This is not endorsed by the teaching of the Buddha as a King wars and punishments according to regulation and norms are inevitable. These are more of individual action and retext in most cases and cannot be called Dhamma offensive. If you are willing to suffer the Karmic consequences, then offensive in the pretext of Dhamma is the choice of the person making the decision, which can be individually or collectively endorsed, but this endorsement is not in the Dhamma but by the people.


What to focus on between breaths i've been trying to practice following the whole length of the in-breath and the whole length of the out-breath, and i can see that my attention often slips between the breaths. Any thoughts on what to focus on between two breaths?

Grateful for help and with kind regards,
Tord

I would advise labeling the in and out-breath by using the same name (for instance just 'breath'). In time, you will be able to observe the whole in and out-breath, including the moment in between, as a whole, in the same way you are able to see (quiet naturally) someone's body as a whole although it is made of parts.

I would advise against the counting of the breath, but if you do count, rather count the in and out breath as one [of the same cycle]. The in-between is in-between two moments of the same cycle of breath. Maybe see it as such.


Heaven and Hell in Buddhism I need to understand some concept about Buddhism.

Does Buddhists believe on after live of Paradise and Hell? What are the belief of Buddhists regarding this?

Yes, there are 31 realms of existences.

From top to bottom:

4 immaterial realms
16 fine material realms
6 heavens
human realm
Asura hell
ghost hell
animal hell
Niraya(hells of unimaginable suffering)

Life spans of each realm varies, but there are no ever lasting places of existence. Yes, you will keep being born in these places again and again according to your Karma, every time you die, until you attain Nibbana and end the process.


Are the Jhanas related to some of the 31 realms of existence When I say 'related' in this sense means more about the hue that accompanies a jhana, this might be a very pleasant feeling, mind state or perception.

I don't know what school this question refers to. I'm just responding from some kind of intuition so any Buddhist sect is fine.

The jhanas are related to to Brahma realms

  "There is the case where an individual, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the devas of Brahma's retinue. The devas of Brahma's retinue, monks, have a life-span of an eon. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  "Again, there is the case where an individual, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Abhassara devas. The Abhassara devas, monks, have a life-span of two eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  "Again, there is the case where an individual, with the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Subhakinha devas. The Subhakinha devas, monks, have a life-span of four eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  "Again, there is the case where an individual, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Vehapphala[4] devas. The Vehapphala devas, monks, have a life-span of 500 eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  AN 4.123

So as you can see, if a person dwell in the first jhana often until he dies then he will reappear in the brahma’s retinue. So I think you have to master the first jhana and dwell there very often and not lose the ability to enter it until you die. Only then you might be reborn in the Brahma retinue. If you enter the first jhana once and start killing your parents or an arahant then you probably won’t appear in the Brahma realm and will go straight to hell because you will probably lose the ability to enter jhana.

If you want to know more about the 31 planes of existence then go to this link. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html


Mental illness: can Dhamma, meditation help? Can people with poor mental health not just benefit from meditation, but realize  its goals?

Some people with a mental health history have actually benefited from meditation.

Such benefit is known to occur on a case-by-case basis, similar to how not every person that lives as a monk benefits from monkhood.

Many meditation centres have experience with mental health and generally require approval from a persons's psychologist or psychiatrist before permitting attendance on meditation retreats.

I have read many sincere accounts of people reducing mental health issues with meditation.

Also, the atmosphere of genuine metta (loving-kindness) at Dhamma centres is also helpful in reducing anxiety & other self-esteem issues.

The loving-kindness of a Buddha radiates upon all beings, neglecting none (including fake monks).


Can insight be gained at any point in insight meditation, or do you have to go through all 7 purifications of insight? Can insight into impermanence suffering and not-self be gained at any point in insight practice or do you have to go through all 7 purifications of insight?

The seven purifications are not all related to insight; only the sixth specifically deals with the realization of three characteristics. The first purification is related to morality, and the second to concentration. The seventh is super-mundane, so is not related to realization of the three characteristics. The fourth and fifth do somehow relate to the three characteristics, but the fourth has more to do with understanding cause and effect, and the fifth to do with finding the path rather than walking it.


Buddhist perspective on uncertainty I was reading some books containing an anthology of Ajahn Chah's Dhamma Talks to both laymen and monks. In the introduction of one of those books, the translator indicated that AC used to translate 'anicca' as 'uncertainty', mainly because, to his eyes, "impermanence" seems too abstract wjen compared to the former translation; we can all relate to the experience of uncertainty, which one can say is the manifestation of impermanence in our daily lives.

While I agree that 'uncertainty' is an specially useful translation, even more when considering the target audience (laymen, unacquainted with buddhist terminology), I'm confused about the accuracy of such rendering when trying to stick to the canonical teachings.

What did the Buddha told about the relation between impermanence and uncertainty?

If we're to believe the texts literally, there are multiple occasions when the Buddha was able to see into future of some individuals. Does that tell us that life may seem uncertain only most people, to those who don't possess such gifts and abilities, but that in the end, reality is "fixed" and already determined? Is reality and future events actually uncertain?

Thanks in advance for your time and patience!

Your health, wealth, reputation, career, family are all impermanent. Your life is also impermanent. Nothing lasts forever and everything changes over time. Nothing bad like disease and death can be avoided forever. Nothing good like your loved ones can be preserved forever. This is anicca.

This causes uncertainty for individuals when they think about their future. Uncertainty is one way to summarize the effect of impermanence. Uncertainty is maybe a more directly meaningful term to people than impermanence.

Anicca is also discussed in the context of the five aggregates being impermanent and in fact, all conditioned things being impermanent and changing.

The Buddha saw only a limited future based on cause and effect. Just as if you see the cloudy sky and forecast rain. The Buddha's prediction of the future is not because all events in the future are fixed and predetermined.

In Buddhism, the only thing that's permanent and fixed is Nibbana.


Remaining in first jhana, while walking, talking, eating Is it possible to attain the first jhana, then remain in first jhana, while walking, talking, eating and performing other daily activities?

Or does one remain in first jhana only while in sitting meditation, then he has to leave the jhana and meditation, before he is able to perform daily activities such as walking, talking and eating?

From AN3.63:

With the giving up of pleasure and pain, and the ending of former happiness and sadness, I enter and remain in the fourth absorption, without pleasure or pain, with pure equanimity and mindfulness.
When I’m practicing like this, if I walk meditation, at that time I walk like the gods.
When I’m practicing like this, if I stand, at that time I stand like the gods.
When I’m practicing like this, if I sit, at that time I sit like the gods.
When I’m practicing like this, if I lie down, at that time I lie down like the gods.

There are some who find the above an indication that walking meditation in jhana is possible. There are also those who find the above impossible given the depth of absorption in which senses recede and physical processes such as breathing stop.
There is also the matter of the Vinaya, which prohibits public discussion of attainments. To illustrate the difficulty of translation for those bound by the Vinaya, note that where Bhante Sujato uses "walking meditation", Bhikkhu Bodhi translates the section on walking in AN3.63 with more ambiguity. Both are bound by the Vinaya:

Then, brahmin, when I am in such a state, if I walk back and forth, on that occasion my walking back and forth is celestial.

Discussion of jhana attainments is problematic given the prohibitions of the Vinaya. In other words, the monastics who understand jhana are forbidden from discussing it. Therefore, this question can never be answered definitively in a public forum such as this.


How were dreams and visions seen in the context of Chinese Buddhism? This question is prompted by reading the 23rd Minor Precept in the Brahma Net Sutra

  After my passing, if a disciple should, with a wholesome mind, wish to
  receive the Bodhisattva precepts, he may make a vow to do so before
  the images of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and practice repentance before
  these images for seven days. If he then experiences a vision, he has
  received the precepts. If he does not, he should continue doing so for
  fourteen days, twenty-one days, or even a whole year, seeking to
  witness an auspicious sign. After witnessing such a sign, he could, in
  front of images of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, formally receive the
  precepts.

At the modern moment, the normal advice regarding dreams and visions is to ignore them. So while I appreciate the concern, I'm not mainly trying to get advice about what to do about dreams and visions.

What I see, in the above text is a positive perspective on dreams and visions, but the author assumes the reader knows what he's talking about when he says "vision"-- is this a reference to dreams, near-hallucinations during meditation, or "signs" like seeing something remarkable like crows listening to a dharma talk?  Is this a reference to dream yoga that I hear about in Vajrayana?

Good question. Most Buddhist teachers do advise us to try to ignore dreams and visions. Hard to do, sometimes. Still, in some places, they do place credence on dreams. During the Kalachakra Initiation, a 2 or 3-day affair, after the first day's teachings, the student is advised to try to remember his dream from that night.  [http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/x/nav/n.html_554862326.html] The common factor between your question and the above, perhaps, is that a Boddhisatva or a Buddha is presemed to be giving the initiation, and perhaps the dream, too. There is also a Dream Yoga practice in the "Six Yogas of Naropa" practices. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_yoga]. In the advanced practice of the Completion Stage of the Mahamudra, the Six Yogas are practiced. One of them is the Dream Yoga practice, which is, again, only useful for advanced practioners. [http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/advanced/mahamudra/karma_kagyu_mm/commentary_aspiration_prayer_definitive_meaning_mm/mm_prayer_commentary_02.html?query=six+yogas+of+naropa] Hope that helps.
ps. I tried to make a comment on your Brahma Net Project site, but for some reason the FaceBook login does not work on the network where I work. And I can not figure out how to get an account on your site. Maybe you need an "how to get an BNP site account for dummies page" there. Thanks.


Types of LHA in the tibetan tradition According to Tibetan Buddhism, what does it mean LHA? (LHA body?)

Please check out the second link (Tibetan Medicine Education Center) for more details.
From Nalanda Translation's "Lha or is it La?" page:

Lha La (lha bla)
Some confusion exists between two Tibetan words, sometimes used
interchangeably:lha and la. The first, lha, is the Tibetan word used
to translate the Sanskrit deva, meaning “deity,” “god,” or “divine.”
This is also the term used in the Shambhalian sense of natural
hierarchy: lha, nyen, and lu. (If we were to be more daring in writing
this word like it is actually pronounced, we might spell it hla!)
The word la (bla) literally means that which is “higher” or “above,”
as in the word lama, the Tibetan translation of the Sanskrit guru
(which literally means “heavy,” —heavy with good qualities, as the
tradition explains). Lama Ugyen once explained lama as “one who looks
down from above (la) with the love that a mother (ma) has for her
children.” La is also a Pön term, meaning “soul,” “life force.”

From the Tibetan Medicine Education Center's page on "Lha and Lha Ceremony":

THE LHA BODY
What is the lha?
“Lha” (bla) in Tibetan means ‘superior body‘, or
‘energy body‘. According to the Tibetan medicine and astrology
concepts, between the physical body and the mind is the Lha body,
which develops like a body copy, a shadow or reflection of the
physical body. Therefore it is called subtle or energy body. It can
hardly be seen by naked eye. The Lha body is very important to the
health of the body/mind, as it always protects, nourishes and gives
energy to the physical body, keeping it strong, stable and powerful.
It gives psychological confidence, sense of ego and it plays a
defensive role. The natural shape and form of the Lha body is exactly
like that of the physical body and therefore they can be thought as
dual bodies. When the subtle Lha body and the physical body are in
correct position, it could bring harmony, the person feels well, has
only few doubts and confusion, has a good concentration, a stable mind
and a good immune system. If our physical body is healthy and in good
condition, of course our mind and emotions are more stable and
function well. But the modern stressful life, traumatic situations and
many natural conditions can weaken the equilibrium between the
physical body and the subtle Lha body, creating the conditions for a
possible division, weakening, or loss of contact between the two
bodies. This result of losing the Lha body is called: «lost Lha ». Lha
can be damaged, become ill or leave the physical body, which could
cause serious effects for the person.


Did Manjushri, Vajrassatva, Avalokiteshvara live? Did Manjushri, Vajrassatva or Avalokiteshvara live?

Are Manjushri, Vajrassatva or Avalokiteshvara manifestations or special names of Buddhas or Bodhisattva?

Vajrasattva did not live in the sense you mean, because he is not a person, but he is an existent. I will explain further:

The form body (Rupakaya), is divided in two:

The emanation body (Nirmanakaya), and
The enjoyment body (Sambhogakāya)

From a Tibetan viewpoint, Shakyamuni was an emanation body of the Buddha. He merely showed the aspect of being born, aging, achieving enlightenment, passing into parinirvana, and so forth [but was actually free from birth, aging, sickness and death and so forth]. While the enjoyment body is too subtle for ordinary beings to see, the emanation body is seen by ordinary beings. Wheel-turning buddhas are thus said to be emanation bodies.

Vajrasattva, on the other hand, would be the enjoyment body in the aspect of a Bodhisattva. Such a body can be seen by arya beings. We claim that when an arya bodhisattva chooses to be reborn in a pure land in order to receive teachings there from other bodhisattvas, he receives teachings from actual bodhisattvas as well as from the enjoyement body in the aspect of bodhisattvas (such as Vajrasattva, Manjushri, and so forth). Vajrasattva is one of these aspects, manifestations. He is a subtle manifestation of the form body of buddha.

Avalokiteshvara was one of 'the eight principal Mahayana disciples of Buddha Shakyamuni', that is the sambhogakaya in the aspect of a disciple. The same is true of Manjushri. The main difference between Manjushri and Vajrasattva, in relation to their entity, is that Manjushri is said to be a [manifestation of the] wisdom truth body (i.e. the omniscient mind) and not that of the enjoyment body.


What's the origin of the Chinese Farmer story? Alan Watts told The Story of the Chinese Farmer, which is also sometimes found under the title Maybe. It appears that he told this story sometime between 1960-1969, since it was published in Watts, A. (2011). Eastern wisdom, modern life: Collected talks: 1960-1969. New World Library.

Is there any history of this story before Watts? Is there a similar story that it might have been based upon? On the other hand, has some scholar researched this question and concluded that Watts wrote it himself?

There may be earlier renditions, but this story is in the Huainanzi compiled around 139 BCE:

  近塞上之人有善術者，馬無故亡而入胡，人皆弔之 。其父曰：此何遽不為福乎

  Among the people who lived close to the border, there was a man who
  led a righteous life. Without reason, his horse escaped, and fled into
  barbarian territory. Everyone pitied him, but the old man said : "what
  makes you think this is not a good thing?"

  居數月，其馬將胡駿馬而歸，人皆賀之。其父曰：此何遽不能為禍乎

  Several months later, his horse returned, accompanied by a superb
  barbarian stallion. Everyone congratulated him. But the old man said:
  "what makes you think this is cannot be a bad thing?"

  家富良馬，其子好騎，墮而折其髀，人皆弔之。其父曰：此何遽不為福乎

  The family was richer from a good horse, his son enjoyed riding it. He
  fell and broke his hip. Everyone pitied him, but the old man said:
  "what makes you think this is not a good thing!"

  居一年，胡人大入塞，丁壯者引弦而戰，近塞之人，死者十九，此獨以跛之故，父子相保

  One year later, a large party of barbarians entered the border. All
  the valid men drew their bows and went to battle. From the people
  living around the border, nine out of ten died. But just because he
  was lame, the old man and his son were both spared.

  故福之為禍，禍之為福，化不可極，深不可測也。

  Thence, good fortune turns into bad fortune, and bad fortune turns
  into good fortune. These changes never reach an end, their complexity
  can never be fathomed.


Audio guided meditation recommendations? I know how many of you feel about guided meditations, but I am introducing meditation to some fellow university friends, and one of them is telling me he is having an incredibly hard time while sitting in silence. He asked me for some audio guided meditations so that he can ease his way into silent meditation, and still be able to sit with us.

I have never used one before, so I have no idea. Would you have any to recommend?

The "How To Meditate" YouTube video playlist by Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu is highly recommended. It includes both sitting and walking meditation. This is more like vipassana meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness.

Another good YouTube video is "Guided Breath Meditation" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. This is more like a body scanning meditation.


Are non-Theravada monks allowed to eat after noon, and to use money? What's the history behind this? I am assuming non-Theravada monks eat after noon, and use money. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If I'm not wrong, why do the sects differ in this manner?

They differ for any number of reasons.  For one, there are at least five different 'official' versions of the vinaya - each of which is prominent in different countries.  The rules in each vary slightly - some have more rules, some have less, some place greater emphasis on different things, etc.  A lot of it also has to do with tradition and the culture where Buddhism is practiced.  If there is one thing you say about Buddhism it's that it very much malleable to local custom.

A very good example of this is Japan.  Some monks there will accept money such as for funeral services.  Many will eat after noon, despite the injunction not to - it's just called "medicine" instead of a meal!  My own teacher's teacher really loved his sake despite that being a fairly clear violation of the fifth precept.  Some Japanese monks, believe or not, even get married.

I think it's helpful not to view Buddhism as a monolithic entity.  It really is as complex as the people practicing it.


Does Dogen bring good news? As I understand it, Dogen says that, at least for those new to seated meditation, there is no enlightenment outside seated meditation.

Well, to me that if true that's awful! No speech, no writing, no solidarity, etc.? I think it's this that is the stumbling block along the buddha way, for me.

Does it even have an answer?

One of Dogen's major teachings is 'practice and enlightenment are one' - what is important for Dogen is continuous effort in the dharma, and the basis of that effort is seated meditation. This applies to all practitioners, new and old alike.

Dogen tended to be disparaging of other schools, but if you want a less partisan Soto opinion you could read 'The teachings of Homeless Kodo' which acknowledges the value of other types of practice.


How to find an appropriate sex partner for a sakadagami? Is it true that sakadagami can have sex that is pure so between a wife and husband. how can one gain the attention of a wise man who intends to marry and upholds The Way of Noble Ones.

With all due respect, many people overestimate their "achievements". Just because a once-returner has remainders of sensual pleasure & anger, doesn't mean that he/she will act on those. It's of course all really speculation because none of this has been mentioned in the suttas, but I believe a sotapanna and even moreso a sakadagami has such profound level of anatta, that enables them to detach from sensual desire and anger quickly.

A Buddha would have no interest in being in a relationship.

Since you also mentioned that you are a misanthrop, I doubt that you achieved higher states because misanthropy is a generalized hatred towards human beings.

With regards to sex I guess no one can give you a definite answer because humans are way too complex, have different wants & preferences in different life periods, and also their personal attitudes (and former experiences) can influence their relationship life & sexual life.

If you seek for a more loving relationship, make sure to look for a person who has somewhat same interests and goals as you do, and ideally both should practise Buddhism (or some other spiritual endeavor).


Discovering Pureland Faith I'm an older male, actually a grandfather, and a Western convert to Buddhism. I came to Buddhism through meditation and interest in 60's mysticism - Alan Watts, D T Suzuki and the like. I read many books and for many years maintained a regular daily sitting practice, which has rather fallen by the wayside of late. But I think the meditation side of Buddhism was very important to me, I'm naturally drawn to mysticism and feel I intuitively understand it, even though most people think it's just nonsense.

I discovered a Pureland (Jodo Shinshu) sangha in my neighborhood about mid last year. I have gone to the service regularly since then. Actually the Venerable is very pleased to have a new convert as it seems to me converts are very few and far between. I very much like the Teacher and the aesthetics of the liturgy and ceremonies, albeit much is in Japanese (although some teachings are always given in English too.)

It seems to me that if you accept this path, though, you basically give up Buddhism as a kind of D-I-Y path to enlightenment. Pureland is very critical of meditation, which is 'self-power' and doomed to fail - 'only one in a million' can follow the 'path of sages'. Basically part of the message is, don't do it. A recent dharma talk made an explicit point of this.

The thing that drew me to Pureland is that I know I am not a virtuous sage, but just a flawed human with bad habits and problematical behaviours. I actually do believe there is a life beyond (and a life previous) and that I have allowed myself to become corrupted by the culture into which I've been born.

But the obstacle I have with Jodo Shinshu is that in this sense it's very like the Christian religion that I thought I had left - it requires unswerving faith, but you will never know, this side of death, whether the Western paradise is a reality and not simply a cherished belief. It was exactly that which caused me to leave Christianity. One of the reasons I chose to study Buddhism in the first place was that one could arrive at a higher understanding through meditation, even though I have since found out I have an indelible tendency to sabotage my own aspirational goals.

Accordingly, the notion that we're bombu, spiritually inept individuals who can never succeed under their own power, definitely rings true. So it's a bit of a quandary at this point. I have a small Buddhist altar which is my practice place, I have been endeavouring to practice with a Sōtō Zen type of attitude. I feel as though I should continue to make the effort to sit zazen. Not because I will succeed through it, but 'sitting just to sit', as I've always done.

It's not so much a question, as the need to discuss some of this with other practitioners and get their perspectives.

Dont pay so much attention to vocabulary and linguistic labels just do. The invitation that begins with « better not to start. once started better to finish » Is the invitation worth accepting. I urge u to follow this thing whatever it is that u are describing. Keep it up no matter how impossible it seems to be the one being in a sea of a million sentient beings. Also PS u will never find ascetics in a monastery only Bhukuni and Bhiku....where does one go to find an ascetic i wonder?
Youre quote made me laugh « higher understanding » what is understood remains the same but the one who understands makes it higher or lower. Cant get to where you are going without meeting one or two obstacles!


Doubt in being mindful when two tasks are going to happen? When we are doing some work(eating food--first task).. we hear something important  or some noise(second task), which might require us to pay attention to it(to second task)..

(means if we want to be truly mindful, then how we have to deal with this situation)

NOTE: In this case, the first task or work needs continuous attention stream of mindfulness from us..
and second one tries to hinder or abrupt first task's flow..

What you are seeing or describing here is the impermanent and uncontrollable nature of conditioned phenomena.
The ultimate solution is to win Nibbana, the unconditioned. Here there exists no arising or passing away.
While in Samsara, you can practice Vipassana meditation and change meditation object according to whatever arises. You don't have to note everything. Try to balance the faculties to ensure restless and agitation does not arise.
Eat and be mindful of the entire process and if/when another object comes into contact with a sense door, e.g. the ear-door, note that object and return then to your primary meditation object, i.e. the eating-process.
The below Instructions for Mindful Eating is given by Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw. Note that these detailed instructions are used on retreat or when you have enough free time to practice in this way. If not, then use general awareness of the eating-process.

Instructions for Mindful Eating
1.Look at the food, noting "seeing."
2.Notice whether or not you are hungry.
3.Note "intending to move."
4.Turn your right or left hand laterally until it's resting on edge, perpendicular to the knee. Stop.
5.Raise your hand straight up until it's more or less at table-height. Stop.
6.Move your hand forward toward the fork or spoon. Stop.
7.Grasp the fork, being aware of the sensation of touch as you do so. Stop.
8.Lift the fork. Stop.
9.Move the fork toward the food. Stop.
10.Place a bite of food on the fork. Stop.
11.Slowly raise the fork to your mouth. Stop.
12.Touch the fork to your lips. Stop.
13.Open your mouth. Stop.
14.Put the food in your mouth. Notice the feel of your lips touching the fork, and the contact or temperature of the food on the tongue. Don't let yourself chew yet. Stop.
15.Lower your hand slowly. Stop.
16.Place the fork on your plate. Stop.
17.Return your hand to your knee. (You still haven't begun to chew.)
18.Chew the food. Flavor will appear. Mentally try to isolate the flavor from the tactile mass of the food, the movement of your mouth, and any desire that arises. Flavor is its own object, separate from all these things. If the flavor is strong you should focus on it. But if the flavor is bland, focus on the movement of the jaw or tongue. Note "moving," "tasting," "desire," "touch," and so on, as appropriate.
19.As you swallow, note "swallowing."
20.Be aware your mouth is empty.
21.Notice whether or not you feel full.
22.Note the intention to take another bite.
23.Repeat steps 1-22. (Although mental notes were not given for all the steps, you may wish to add them, labeling "moving" for steps 3-5 and so on.)
If you need both hands to cut something, focus your attention on one hand only. Apply the same step-by-step procedure to drinking: observe the intention first; extend your hand; grasp the cup; move the cup toward you; take a sip of water; and finally, bring the cup back to the table, stopping completely after each action.
When mindfulness and insight are strong you may not recognize what you are eating. This experience is a revelation. Instead of green beans or rice on the plate, you see only color. Rather than meat or cheese, you taste an unnamed burst of sensation. This experience is difficult to describe, but if it happens you will immediately understand what we are talking about.
The step-by-step eating technique is intended mainly for meditation retreats. During daily life it usually isn't practical to eat this way, except on special days or when you have free time on the weekends. When you are unable to eat in the step-by-step manner just use general mindfulness to be aware of what you are doing as you eat the meal.


Is killing vermin and insects justifiable? The first precept goes something similar to

  I undertake the training rule to abstain from killing.

Now, I understand that, for instance, eating meat is allowed, but what about, for instance, killing vermin which might damage food or cause disease (such as mosquitos in places where malaria is common)?

Is killing justifiable then?

The beauty of the precepts is that they are impossible for ordinary human beings to fully observe.  The precept against killing is an example of this. My body's immune system kills all lifeforms that it doesn't recognize.  I step on and crush innumerable microorganisms.  But the first precept asks us to minimize the amount of harm we do in the world.  In the teachings of Thich Nhat Hanh, the precepts are trainings, not commandments.


What is the intermediate state before birth (Gandhabba)? What is the intermediate state before birth ("Gandhabba"), mentioned in some Buddhist traditions?

I have only heard the word so I can't explain the question any further.

I would like a detailed description of it if possible.

As far as I know, Theravada Buddhism refuses an intermediate state and says that a new life begins right after the death of a being. Although I have heard the theravada buddhist monk Ajahn Brahmali, mention in one of his videos, that there is an intermediate state.
So maybe there are different views on this topic, within Theravada Buddhism. Anyway, be careful about limiting yourself, to one tradition regarding this topic. No one really knows what happens in this stage, unless one has reached the necessary levels of insight, supernormal powers or enlightenment.
In Tibetan Buddhism, we have descriptions of the intermediate states between death and the beginning of a new life. The in-between-states are called Bardos. I remember reading about them in the "Tibetan Book of Living And Dying".
This is an amazing book, that I think every Buddhist should read, no matter what tradition one follows. This book is filled to the brim with pearls, treasures, insights and jewels.
Here is a quote from the book, on the Bardo of Becomming:

THE DURATION OF THE BARDO OF BECOMING
The whole of the bardo of becoming has an average dura- tion of forty-nine days and a minimum length of one week. But it varies, just as now some people live to be a hundred years old, and others die in their youth. Some can even get stuck in the bardo, to become spirits or ghosts.
Dudjom Rinpoche used to explain that during the first twenty-one days of the bardo, you still have a strong impression of your previous life, and this is therefore the most important period for the living to be able to help a dead person. After that, your future life slowly takes shape and becomes the dominant influence.
We have to wait in the bardo until we can make a karmic connection with our future parents. I sometimes think of the bardo as something like a transit lounge, in which you can wait for up to forty-nine days before transferring to the next life. But there are two special cases who don't have to wait in the intermediate state, because the intensity of the power of their karma sweeps them immediately on to their next rebirth.
The first are those who have lived extremely beneficial and positive lives, and so trained their minds in spiritual practice that the force of their realization carries them directly into a good rebirth. The second case are those whose lives have been negative and harmful; they travel swiftly down to their next birth, wherever that might be.
-- Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, p. 295

I would suggest that you read the entire chapter "Bardo of Becomming (p. 291)", but also the chapter "The Process of Dying (p. 248)". The entire book is highly recommended but also takes a lot of time to read. So pick and choose if your time is limited.


Developing Positive Qualities and Diminishing Negative Qualities I wondered recently whether the ideas of developing positive qualities and abandoning negative qualities are different. To me, it seems developing positive qualities requires an active effort, a type of striving. In contrast, abandoning negative qualities requires a relinquishing, a restraint.

Are these endeavours two different aspirations? Does achieving one ascertain the achievement of the other or not?

In other words, does one lead automatically to the other, or should one intentionally implement both?

In my opinion, this boils down to the differences I previously outlined between "formless" and "form-full" paths.

The formless path is about relinquishing negative qualities without explicitly striving to generate the positive ones - an activity which would require creation of (contrived) forms.

On the formless path, the positive qualities are expected to manifest implicitly, as a by product of removing the negative. We say the positive qualities "co-emerge". While the form-full path involves strong emphasis on defining objectives and reaching them, which is an explicit way to generate the positive qualities.

In terms of drawbacks, the formful path is prone to issues associated with Form, such as attachment, reification, and pride. While the formless path is prone to the opposite set of issues such as loss of motivation, uncertainty, and low self esteem.

It seems that most people naturally incline towards one or the other, and so in practice it becomes a matter of recognizing the pitfalls associated with either path and knowingly compensating for them.


Could someone help me transcribe a Pali chant? I'm working on the subtitles for a YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxKbO4bLDQM) and could use some help transcribing the chant at the beginning. I suppose it's one of the relatively common ones? Thanks!

Pali : Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa.

  English : Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened
  One.

If you are interested in this chanting, you should read The Divine Mantra.


How to use meditation to boost logical thinking (or avoiding suffering with unrational scenario) Sometimes I catch my mind wandering and mixing up all the worst case scenarios for the future.

Currently I have a problem that will, most likely, have a small or medium impact on my life, however my mind has proven to have this hability of finding the worst of the worst possible scenarios, a real chaos, and when I think about this remote scenario I suffer really bad, eventhough the odds are very small, the feeling is terrible.

I try to use reason and use logic to show myself this scenario is highly unlikely, but it doesn't work very well, even the smallest possibility is a cause for strong suffering, so the question is: Is there anyway we can use meditation as a tool to calm ourselves AND show to us in a very effective way that this fear is unrational and this terrible scenario is highly unlikely?

Can meditation enable logical thinking?

Seated mediation, as I've been taught to practice, is not about logical analysis.  That said, when it comes to 'thinking the worst', the practice of attention recognizes that these are just thoughts.  In a sense, it doesn't matter whether the events are likely or unlikely, because the thoughts are just thoughts.  There can be value in rationally analyzing fears, but meditative practice starts with just observing the fears as they are, regardless of whether they are rational.  When the whirlwind of doubt starts up again, just return to the object of meditation (often, the breath) and let things settle.  This isn't easy, but that's why we practice.

A bit of an aside, but here is a passage from the Dhammapada, Mind (translation by Ananda Maitreya), that I think relates to this:

Just as an arrowsmith shapes an arrow to
  perfection with fire,
So does the wise man shape his mind,
Which is fickle, unsteady, vulnerable, and
  erratic.

Like a fish taken from the safety of its watery
  home
And cast upon the dry land
So does this mind flutter, due to the lure of the
  tempter.
Therefore one should leave the dominion of
  Mara.

How good it is to rein the mind,
which is unruly, capricious, rushing wherever
  it pleases.
The mind so harnessed will bring one happiness.

A wise man should pay attention to his mind,
Which is very difficult to perceive.
It is extremely subtle and wanders wherever it
  pleases.
The mind, well-guarded and controlled,
Will bring him happiness.

One who keeps a rein on the wandering mind,
Which strays far and wide, alone, bodiless,
Will be freed from the tyranny of the tempter.

A man of fickle mind
Will never attain wisdom to its fullest,
Since he is ignorant of the Dhamma
And has wavering faith.

The heart of the fully conscious man
  is fearless--
He has freed his mind of lust and anger,
He has transcended both good and evil.

Observe this body, as fragile as an earthen vase.
Build a mind as solid as a fortified city,
Then confront Mara with the weapon of
  insight
And (proceeding without attachment)
Guard what you have already conquered.

Certainly before long this body will lie on the
  ground,
Lifeless and unconscious,
Cast aside like a useless log.

A mind out of control will do more harm
Than two angry men engaged in combat.

A well-directed mind creates more well-being
Than the wholesome actions of parents
Toward their children.


What is the method for "Coupling of the Serenity and Insight Powers" referred to in the Path of Discrimination? Visuddhimagga (English translation by Bhikkhu Nanamoli) XXII.46 quotes from the Path of Discrimination (Patisambidhamagga) as follows:-

  "Coupling of the Powers'. At the time of developing the eight mundane attainments the serenity power is in excess, while at the time of developing the contemplation of impermanence, etc., the insight power is in excess. But at the Noble Path moment they occur coupled together in the sense that neither one exceeds the other"

The quote concludes by stating

  "He develops serenity and insight coupled together in the sense of emergence (Patisambidhamagga ii,98)".

My understanding of the above is that the yogi needs to develop the method to ensure that coupling occurs at the Noble Path Moment.

My question is anyone able to throw some light on this coupling from the scriptures or from some other source or from personal experience?

Discovered later that a possible answer to this question may be found in "Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism" pdf by Lama Govinda' p. 175. where reference is made to three zones viz. Earth (materiality), Universe and Human. The Human Zone is the plane of ''individual realization in which the forces of the earth and the universe become conscious in the human soul as an ever present and deeply felt reality'. If Earth and Universe could be related to Samatha and Vipassana we may be homing in on a solution to a problem that has bedeviled many a good yogi-that of coupling (yuganaddha) both these entities to realize Nibbana. Would appreciate a feedback, especially from those who are familiar with Vajrayana and ''Buddhist Kundalini'' energies.

"He develops serenity and insight coupled together" is originally found in the Pali sutta MN 149, as follows:

  When the noble eightfold path is developed, the following are fully
  developed: the four kinds of mindfulness meditation, the four right
  efforts, the four bases of... power, the five faculties, the five
  powers and the seven awakening factors.

  Tassa evaṃ imaṃ ariyaṃ aṭṭhaṅgikaṃ maggaṃ bhāvayato cattāropi
  satipaṭṭhānā bhāvanāpāripūriṃ gacchanti, cattāropi sammappadhānā
  bhāvanāpāripūriṃ gacchanti, cattāropi iddhipādā bhāvanāpāripūriṃ
  gacchanti, pañcapi indriyāni bhāvanāpāripūriṃ gacchanti, pañcapi
  balāni bhāvanāpāripūriṃ gacchanti, sattapi bojjhaṅgā bhāvanāpāripūriṃ
  gacchanti.

  And these two qualities proceed in conjunction: Tassime dve dhammā
  yuganandhā vattanti—

  serenity and discernment. samatho ca vipassanā ca.

  https://suttacentral.net/mn149/en/sujato

A reason why samatha can be unbalanced and not have vipassana is because the practitioner is actually not practising the Noble Path but, instead, is practising the Hindu style yogic manipulations that are actually taught in the Visuddimagga.

In the suttas (MN 118 and SN 48.10), the Buddha taught meditative factors are mature when they have the quality of "letting go" ("vossagga"). This is the practise of the Noble Path, namely, the "letting go" or "abandoning of craving".

If you try to watch the breathing, for example, or watch kasina coloured discs, and similar non-sense taught in the Visuddhimagga & Abhidhamma, this is craving; this is not practising the Path. This is why most 'Buddhists' make little progress with meditation. They try to cling to a meditation object, like a baby clings to its mother. They are too scared &/or too attached to wrong teachings to 'let go'.

As for vipassana (insight) being overbalanced, this sounds like illogical (even though there is one or two suttas that teach similar non-sense). Since the suttas (such as SN 22.59; MN 118; etc) correctly explain vipassana results in dispassion; then obviously a dispassionate mind will be calm or have samatha.


How do I let go the ownership of the mind? If someone offense me on physical things like "You are not beautiful, You are poor, You are not smart", I can bear it. Actually I don't care much.

But, If someone offense me on my thoughts like "You are not kind, You are greedy", It's hard to bear. Sometimes, I got aversion.

How can I overcome this ?

I asked a related question here.

How Am I not the owner of the mind?

This is due to subtle Upadana. (clinging)
There are three kinds of clinging.
-Kama Upadana (it seems you have less of this)
-Dithi upadana
-Atta upadana. (perhaps this is your problem)
-Silabbatha Upadana

upādāna:
Clinging; attachment; sustenance for becoming and birth — attachment to sensuality, to views, to precepts and practices, and to theories of the self.

The way to eliminate Upadana is to follow the Noble Eightfold Path. It is a gradual training of Sila (virtues), Samadhi (concentration) and Panna (wisdom).


What do you do to prepare for death? There are probably a lot of ways to prepare for death. I myself can't come up with more than:

Reflecting on ones own death on a daily basis;
Don't buy stuff that's useless so that it's easier for loved ones to clean up after you.

Are there more things one could do? And what do you yourself to prepare?
Looking for inspiration.

So, I'm not so much interested in the process of dying, but what you do on a daily basis in the years and decades before.

I prepare for death by watching clouds.

Appearances of entities arise when certain elements come together, and then morph beyond recognition as elements drift apart.

Death is all around us at all times. Everything is changing, always. I prepare for death by letting go of fixed ideas about who I am. Every moment is a different configuration and there's no me in that.

There is no birth and death, only continuous transformation. I learned this by watching the clouds.


Difference between Sampajanna and Vipassana If Sampajanna is clear comprehension and Vipassana is clearly seeing how or are they distinguishable?

Sampajanna is a prerequisite for right concentration. Vipassana is a result of right concentration.
Mindfulness > sampajanna > concentration > vipassana > liberation > nibbana
Sampajanna is a product of active volition & mindfulness; what is called 'wise or careful attention' (yonisomanasikāro); as described in AN 10.61:

Mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said: careful attention (yonisomanasikāro). AN 10.61

Vipassana is the automatic seeing of ultimate truth that occurs when the mind is clear & concentrated, as described in AN 11.2.

For a person whose mind is concentrated, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I know & see things as they actually are.' It is in the nature of things that a person whose mind is concentrated knows & sees things as they actually are. AN 11.2

Sampajanna (applied wisdom) is the preliminary wisdom that mindfulness (remembering; recollection) brings to mind to establish meditation. Again, to quote AN 10.61:

The four establishments of mindfulness, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the four establishments of mindfulness? It should be said: ... mindfulness and clear comprehension. AN 10.61

For example, when meditation is established, sampajanna applies the types of wisdoms listed below, when required:

observing breathing brings peace therefore it is beneficial to observe the breathing

craving & attachment cause suffering & disturbances therefore I should meditate without craving & attachment

this hindrance harms myself & harms another therefore it should be abandoned

Bhikkhu Buddhadasa has explained 'sampajanna' & 'vipassana' below:

sampajanna, wisdom-in-action, ready comprehension, clear comprehension: the specific application of  panna as required in a
given situation.
vipassana, insight: literally, "clear seeing," to see clearly, distinctly, directly into the true nature of  things, into
aniccam-dukkham-anatta. Vipassana is popularly used for mental
development practiced for the sake of true insight. In such cases, the
physical posture, theory, and method of such practices must not be
confused with true realization of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness,
and not-self. Vipassana cannot be taught.
SAMPAJAÑÑA
Sampajanna is wisdom as it meets up with and immediately confronts a problem, as it deals with and wipes
out that problem -- this is wisdom-in-action. It is only that wisdom
specifically related and applied to a particular situation or event.
The word "wisdom" (paññä) encompasses many
meanings and understandings, we can't even begin to estimate its
content. However, the word "sampajanna" is far more limited in its
meaning. It is exactly that wisdom directly needed for the problem
that confronts us. Active wisdom isn't general, it is a matter of
particulars.
We can compare wisdom (paññä) with the medicine chest in our house. In it we store a wide variety of drugs, pills, capsules, ointments, powders,
and syrups for possible use. When we're actually sick, we must choose
from among the many the one drug which will be effective in treating
our ailment. We can't take them all; we take just what is needed to
cure our illness here and now. The same is true for wisdom. Understand
that there's an incredible amount of what we call paññä,
but that we only apply a little bit at a time. We apply just that
portion which can take care of the immediate situation. Know how to
use the Dhamma, the paññä, which is exactly relevant to our situation
and problem. The Dhamma or wisdom which controls that situation and
problem is what we call "sampajanna."
The Scientific Cure of Spiritual Disease


According to Buddhism, how can a woman get a male soul? How can women get male anima? Women bear many sorrowful feelings all of their lives. So how can they escape those lives and be men?

Upasaka (lay follower) Lal shared a nice approach on his website: Sexual Orientation – Effects of Kamma and Gathi (Sankhara), Olivia Glad.

Whether one seeks direct liberation or best possible conditions also afterwards, there is only making merits which is conductive.

A short quote from the article:

  One is born male or female due to whether one cultivates “purisa sankhara” or “iththi sankhara” by thinking, speaking, and doing things accordingly. One does not do either punna abhisankhara or apunna abhisankhara here.

A nice approach that might have some personal hints that are maybe not so tasty for moderns, but over all a very releasing work on this most hard opinioned topic.

And a Verse of the Blessed One given in regard of Growth  of female lay disciples (SN 37.4):

  She grows in conviction & virtue,
  discernment, generosity, & learning:
  A virtuous female lay disciple
      such as this
  takes hold of the essence
  right here within herself.

Important for oneself, one thinking "I am a woman", "I am a man", "Neither woman nor man I am", conceit and suffering is not abandoned.

So here a list of some inspirations, "Women and Buddhism", and may Olivia and other be careful not to fall into strong conceit and greed, hatred and delusion in regard of gender and situations which had causes.

Note: This answer is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or to use the content for other wordily gains.


Given that Buddhism could accommodate people's prior religious beliefs, why is Buddhism itself now described as a religion? Read somewhere that Buddhism does not advocate to go away from the beliefs of a person. Or in a way accommodate one's rooted beliefs from childhood. The main objective of following the path of Buddha is for self-realization. That too not disturbing others and their beliefs.

Since Buddha advocated for education to all humankind without considering race or color, will it be like a revolutionary thought came before centuries (like communism, socialism ...)?
But most of the world refers to it as a religion. Is it because of the transformation to idol based community from a spiritual community created by Buddha?
Does Buddism has more affinity towards a free-thinking society based on modern science OR towards a ritual-based society based on fears that remind the mind to do good acts?

As with anything else, that completely depends on what you consider a “religion” is, or what is a “religious belief”.

When westerners first came in contact with Buddhism they considered it a “philosophy” as they could not conceive of a religion that did not have a “god” at its center. The idea of an atheist religion did not make sense. You can see that such bias still exists in modern dictionaries.

But when does a philosophy become a religion and when is a religion a philosophy? Is Nihilism a religious idea or a philosophical one? What about philosophical skepticism? Can science itself be considered a religion?

Although Buddhism is very flexible and personal, it is very clear that to progress in the Buddhist path you have to accept a set of beliefs (e.g., Samsara and the eight-fold path) and reject others (e.g., atman/soul ).  It is possible to enter the path while still holding to incompatible beliefs, however sooner or later these beliefs will conflict with the teachings.

It is also very hard for most people to let go of the idea of a “god”, of atman, and many others. This sets a limit to progressing on the path.


Does one need to make amends for a bad-action done accidentally? Note: Originally I wrote "unintentionally" and not just "accidentally" but I have realized that even the "accidental" action described in the example below involves the person's intentions of their movements and thus even if the person's intention wasn't to break the vase they still broke the vase through their intentional action and I believe they would necessarily suffer for breaking the vase.

Example:

A person is walking through a friend's house and accidentally knocks a vase and causes it to fall and break. The friend asks for the person to buy them a new vase, but the person refuses.

Does the person necessarily suffer for refusing to buy their friend a new vase?

You say "unintentionally" but your friend might see it as "negligence".

I didn't mean to break it!
Yes but you should have looked where you were going! No one else broke it...

I suspect that Buddhism might classify negligence too as volitional, karmically active, and a cause of suffering.

Anyway, I think that arguing about it with the friend probably counts as intentional.

FWIW a civil court might try to apportion blame e.g. based on where the vase was placed. Who knows, maybe it would be appropriate to share the blame.


Is it ethical to develop software for financial company? I'm wondering whether it is ethical to work as software engineer for financial company that develops software for exchanges and banks. When we consider exchange, different things are traded there, i.e. commodities, currency, money and equities. Unfortunately some of commodities are pork bellies (dead hogs), however there are hundreads other goods which are not meat.

Moreover, markets are not only for speculators (who risk their money by "gambling") but also hedgers (who want to manage their risk by using financial market, so it's good reason). Also, exchanges make it possible for companies to acquire money for further investments. Furthermore, implementing new legislations makes markets more secure against financial crises, e.g. MIFID II.

I assume you're looking for an answer based on this definition:

  A lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.

I'd guess so (that it is ethical or not inethical to develop software for a financial company).

Consider telecommunications or telephony software, for example: theoretically the internet and telephone system is also used for trading meat, but, that's not exactly your responsibility: the same is true for anything -- making cars, for example: a few cars, too, are used in the trade of meat.

I think I mostly just avoided employment with aerospace (i.e. defence, weapons) manufacturers.


What is the phantom in the conclusion of the Diamond Sutra? This is the version I am referring to:

  Thus shall ye think of this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble
  in a stream; A flash of lightning in a summer cloud; A flickering
  lamp, a phantom, and a dream.

No phantom, no...

The Diamond Sutra in Classical Chinese, wherein one of the verses instantly enlightened the 6th Patriarch Huineng, the corresponding verse to your quote is this:

  一切有為法，如夢幻泡影，如露亦如電，應作如是觀。

This beautiful verse was done by this guy with his league of national selected translators:

Kumarajiva is held by some Great Buddhist Masters as the "return of Sariputra". A memorial was built for him right after his cremation wherein housed his tongue Śarīra,  Kumarajiva Temple in Gangsu, China:

Recently out of curiosity I studied some Vinayas, one incident got description of Sariputra, said he was with small built; immediately echoing with the above image in my mind... though that saying remained just a saying.

If I render the above verse, it should read as:

All conditional things are, like mirages of the bubbles also an illusive dream, like dews also as if lightning, as such thus should be seen.

This verse transmitting the message that all existences are empty, constructed as if mirages and dreams; short-lived like morning dews, fleeting like lightning.

The phantom could be a different translation of mirage. A star at dawn could be the different translation of dew since by sunrise the dew will evaporate without trace... etc.


How do enlightened people think? Most of our thoughts are caused by desire. So, what are the thoughts of a person who has no desire?

Another way of asking the same question: if we remove desire based thoughts, what will remain?

Edit: I'm asking this because I want to experience enlightenment. I know I am not enlightened, but If I am enlightened, how would my thoughts be? How would I feel it through awareness?

Enlightened people do not overgeneralize.

(This can be supported by both Pali Canon as well as Mahayana sources.)

Concepts like "enlightened", "person", "I", and "thinking" are all overgeneralizations, which enlightened people do not dwell in.

They may use generalizations as skilful means, to communicate the teaching, but they themselves are not bounded by them.


What is the difference between Citta contemplation and Dhamma contemplation in Satipathana? What is Citta?
What is Dhamma?
What is the difference between above two in Satipathana?

These are the two last stages in the 4 foundations of mindfulness:

Citta means "mind". Dhamma refers to the Buddhist teachings.

Cittanupasana is the meditation on the mind: the observation of the arising and setting of thoughts and desires. It is required to understand the impermanent nature of mind, which is wrongfully perceived as a permanent self.

Dhammanupasana is meditation on the Dharma, the Buddhist teachings. Typically a student will be asked to meditate/research one of these topics:

The Five Hindrances
The Four Noble Truths
The Seven Factors of Enlightenment
The Five Aggregates
Canon Literature


5 Skandhas / 5 aggregates My question is what is the action each of the 5 aggregates perform. If I was not clear about the question please drop me a message here I will try to be much clearer. Please provide a Sutta as a reference.

"And why do you call it 'form'? Because it is afflicted, thus it is
  called 'form.' Afflicted with what? With cold & heat & hunger &
  thirst, with the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles.
  Because it is afflicted, it is called form.

  "And why do you call it 'feeling'? Because it feels, thus it is called
  'feeling.' What does it feel? It feels pleasure, it feels pain, it
  feels neither-pleasure-nor-pain. Because it feels, it is called
  feeling.

  "And why do you call it 'perception'? Because it perceives, thus it is
  called 'perception.' What does it perceive? It perceives blue, it
  perceives yellow, it perceives red, it perceives white. Because it
  perceives, it is called perception.

  "And why do you call them 'fabrications'? Because they fabricate
  fabricated things, thus they are called 'fabrications.' What do they
  fabricate as a fabricated thing? For the sake of form-ness, they
  fabricate form as a fabricated thing. For the sake of feeling-ness,
  they fabricate feeling as a fabricated thing. For the sake of
  perception-hood... For the sake of fabrication-hood... For the sake of
  consciousness-hood, they fabricate consciousness as a fabricated
  thing. Because they fabricate fabricated things, they are called
  fabrications.

  "And why do you call it 'consciousness'? Because it cognizes, thus it
  is called consciousness. What does it cognize? It cognizes what is
  sour, bitter, pungent, sweet, alkaline, non-alkaline, salty, &
  unsalty. Because it cognizes, it is called consciousness.

  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html

My comments:

I think the description of 'perception' above is to highlight the perception of 'difference', 'contrast', etc. Thus, it could include shapes, length, sound frequencies, texture, sensations, etc.
The meaning of 'sankhara' above is question in itself. However, the key term is 'abhisaṅkharonti' ('fabricate'; a verb), which generally refers to 'attachment' in the suttas (eg. SN 12.51) and is also used in suttas about 'kamma' (eg. SN 12.25). Therefore, the description of 'sankhara' above appears to refer to 'mentally constructing' ('abhisaṅkharonti') each of the aggregates as 'self' and 'pertaining or belonging to self'. It appears to mean 'mental constructing' ('abhisaṅkharonti') each of the aggregates into something much more than they actually are. For example, SN 12.2 refers to 'producing' (abhinibbatti) views of 'beings' (sattānaṃ) in respect to the 'appearance or manifestation of the aggregates' (khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo).
The description of 'consciousness' above & below, in terms of both 'tastes' (above) and 'feelings' (below) appears to highlight consciousness as a 'sensory impact'.

  'It cognizes, it cognizes': Thus, friend, it is said to be
  'consciousness.' And what does it cognize? It cognizes 'pleasant.' It
  cognizes 'painful.' It cognizes 'neither painful nor pleasant.' 'It
  cognizes, it cognizes': Thus it is said to be 'consciousness.'

  Discernment (wisdom) & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not
  disjoined. It's not possible, having separated them one from the
  other, to delineate the difference between them. For what one
  discerns, that one cognizes. What one cognizes, that one discerns.

  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.043.than.html

  'The six classes of contact should be known.' Thus was it said. In
  reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms there
  arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three is contact.
  Dependent on the ear & sounds there arises consciousness at the ear.
  The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the nose & aromas
  there arises consciousness at the nose. The meeting of the three is
  contact. Dependent on the tongue & flavors there arises consciousness
  at the tongue. The meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the
  body & tactile sensations there arises consciousness at the body. The
  meeting of the three is contact. Dependent on the intellect & ideas
  there arises consciousness at the intellect. The meeting of the three
  is contact. 'The six classes of contact should be known.'

  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.148.than.html

  At Savatthi... There are these four nutriments for the maintenance of
  beings who have come into being or for the support of those in search
  of a place to be born. Which four? Physical food, gross or refined;
  contact as the second, intellectual intention the third, and
  consciousness the fourth. These are the four nutriments for the
  maintenance of beings who have come into being or for the support of
  those in search of a place to be born.

  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.063.than.html


Is samadhi the same as samatha? Is there khanika samatha? I read the following on the internet:

Notice there's a wide spectrum on the Samatha/Vipassana scale, but
even on the extreme spectrum of Vipassana, the "dry-insight", there's
still element of Samatha ( the khanika/Samadhi/Momentary Concentration,
see Ven. Gunaratana's "The Jhanas" for more details ).

It is said the Buddhist commentaries refer to Khanika (momentary), Upacara (neighborhood) and Appana (attainment) Samadhi.
Are 'samatha' & 'samadhi' synonymous?  Does Buddhism refer to Khanika/Momentary Samatha?

If I sit dow on the cushion for a moment, that's momentary samatha. Samatha is simply calmimg.  It can take place anywhere.  Samatha can lead to samadhi, but the two are by no means identical.  It would be akin to equating the ingredients to a fully baked cake.


Can a person with harmful thoughts still meditate? If a person has enemies and wants to take revenge, then can he meditate? Will those thoughts stop the person from meditating even if he doesn't think those things while meditating?

If a person has enemy's and wants to take vengance, than can he do meditation?

Of course he can. Insight meditation is the only way to permanently uproot the causes for those thoughts, i.e. the root defilement of hatred and namely Ignorance (avijja).

  Will such thoughts never let the person do meditation even if he don't thinks such things while meditating?

All formations are impermanent so its not possible for something to "never let" anyone do something. That's an extreme view.

It might be more challenging to do meditation while the hindrances are present. But it is necessary. One can only purify the mind by dealing with the hindrances. It just means that there is work to be done.

Loving-kindness meditation is a great way of over coming thoughts of hatred, vengeance and the like. See my answer here for a detailed description on how to practice Metta meditation.


Why sitting meditation, and is vippasana and breath meditation sufficient? Why do we have to watch body sensations separately by sitting meditation, when even in our daily life we are experiencing sensations moment to moment (and realizing everything is vibrating in our body)?

And can we achieve omniscience and knowledge of our past lives, karma, etc., by watching breath and watching body sensations only? Or there is more to it in vippasana meditations, other than watching breath and body sensations?

(This question was originally titled "tibetan buddhism chanting om mani padme hum and watching the breath meditations and watching mental states")

Breath meditation, vipassana and Samadhi meditation are two sides of the coin. Breath meditation is about focused attention that quiets the mind of chatter and noise. It's as if you let a muddy pool settle after stirring it up. Once the mud (chatter) has settled, the water (mind) becomes clear and can now focus more easily and powerfully than before.

Now that's all well and good but what do you do with this focused mind? You point it towards the three marks of existence, and/or the four noble truths. While breath meditation is sufficient as a vehicle to carry you into higher states of concentration (the jhanas) if it is not coupled with insight meditation or some sort of reflection then all you will be doing is building up your concentration faculties without reflection or thought.

There is a section in the Visuddhi margaya that talks about reflecting after exiting the jhanas that is essential to jhanic meditation. I'm at work now but can find the reference later today.


Learning materials for Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda) in Theravada Buddhism I am listening through the talks and guided meditations from the retreat at Amaravati Just One More: Dependent Origination and the Cycles of Addiction Retreat, where there are a number of references to the teachings, and using them in meditation. However, although I've found many websites referencing the Paṭiccasamuppāda, I've been unable to find study materials for learning how to practically use the teachings.

Not having any teacher nearby, I have been looking online for materials. Wikipedia mentions the Twelve Nidānas, but that resource is mostly fact oriented, which is not what I am looking for. Can anyone direct me towards any online materials (website, pdf, audio, video) that help develop techniques in this area?

EDIT for clarification. There are many writings on the subject, and many try to explain the concepts of dependent origination. However, this question is regarding finding practical instructions to applying the teachings in meditation. In other words, instead of focusing on acquiring some intellectual "understanding" of the teachings, I am following the "see for yourself" approach, by not taking anyone's word for granted. Instead, using the teachings to access the wisdom they describe.

In essence, it's like being thirsty, and finding a sign saying "water this way ->". You have the choice to walk the path leading to the water, and drink, or study the sign, which won't leave you any less thirsty.

Here's a few of resources from our tradition:

http://www.aimwell.org/dependentorigination.html - a book by the Mahasi Sayadaw, one of Burma's greatest meditation teachers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_llBSCXt6c - a video by me, some monk from the Internet

http://www.sirimangalo.org/teachings/lessons-in-practical-buddhism/practical-dependent-origination/ - a written piece based on the above video.

You'll find a lot of stuff centring on the debate over three-life/one-life, which is terribly unhelpful, IMO. Here's a piece I appreciated from one of Thailand's top scholar monks:

http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Payutto_Bhikkhu_Dependent_Origination.htm

Edit: here's something I wrote about practical application of PS:

http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/2009/07/three-teachers-or-buddhist-addiction.html


Intuition in Buddhism I was told that intuition is not to be cultivated in Buddhism. Intuition is blind and not to be followed. Following something blind can be quite dangerous.

At the same time, there is a book called 'Intuitive Awareness' by Ajahn Sumedho.
So I'm confused now which one is the correct one. The more mindful you are, more things are opening up, you understand more things, some answers just come without any reasonable explanation.

Can someone explain Buddhism's view on intuition? Thanks.

This is probably just a case of a word having many (conflicting) uses.

Intuition is an elusive word. It seems we often associate it to a kind of feeling about something. Because that "kind of feeling" is also elusive and could be pretty much anything, it may be regarded as unreliable. Perhaps this explain why you were told it is not something to be valued.

However, intuition can be used to describe not-so-elusive kinds of knowledges, like tacit/implicit/non-verbal knowledge we all use daily (e.g. intuitively knowing where the north is, or how to solve a puzzling problem).

Finally intuition can also mean some kind of immediate knowledge of reality. I found the following dictionary descriptions interesting:

direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.
a keen and quick insight.
the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight.
pure, untaught, noninferential knowledge.

This description is close to wisdom (but in Buddhism, it's a little more specific than that: see paññā/vipassanā, yoniso manasikāra and yathā bhūta ñāna dassana). And wisdom is something that has been systematized in Buddhism: there is both a large body of practice and evaluation. One can speak of attainments, higher and lower wisdom. One can identify when one's wisdom is lacking, and when it improved. Finally, one can practice to develop it.

"Mere intuition", on the other hand, as just "some feeling", has a high risk of being just this: a mere feeling. And mere feelings are often wrong. And once wrong or right, we are lost as to why. To explain it, one ends up creating some sort of (creative) theory or borrowing from some religious tradition or superstition ("the channeling with spirits was not clear", "I ate meat at an inappropriate time", etc.), which further tax one's beliefs, and might bring one closer to the blindness referred to.


Killing neighbours dog Hi may I know what is the karma of killing a dog please?

My neighbours dog starts barking from 5am daily and I don't get enough sleep. I am so tired at work and cannot focus. I've tried soundproofing my walls and using ear plugs  but they don't work I can still hear the barking.

I've spoken to the neighbour but he tells me that he is a human and he can't ask ask his dog to keep quiet (whatever that means).

I am at my wits end, I am so tired, I never get enough rest. Can I kill the dog? May I know what is the karma for killing a dog?

The karmic result for killing a dog is:

Possible retaliation by your neighbor.
Possible legal action by neighbor and government.
Possible regret & guilty conscience in your heart.
Getting scored negative on Buddhism Stack Exchange.
Not woken up at 5 am; getting an improved night's sleep; more focus & energy at work.
Woken up at 4 am by a new different dog.