how to eradicate past smaskaras A monastery nearby my house, where I was about to be ordained and venture into the world of which I have been waiting so long, has now denied me ordination due to my bad habits of reading erotic literature, sensual audios and masturbating -- all of which I want to leave forever. I do go on abstinence streaks, but when something unfortunate happens to me(an incident or mishap that saddens me) I get triggered and relapse.sometimes even the most simplest of natural phenomena such a blossoming flower can be the root of the lapse.other times it's just plain advertisements on t.v which cause the downfall.it has become tedious to avoid triggers, it also leaves no time for meditation and other stuff.

Due to the kind advice of ven. Yuttadhammo bhikkhu I have quit my porn viewing addiction, but  I can't seem get enough of masturbation and other forms of pornography(though the frequency has been significantly reduced)I request the members of this forum to provide some comprehensive techniques and advice  that can be adapted with a practical approach and help me quit all these bad habits forever.

It has ruined my life to such an extent that I longer feel the state of bliss that I used to have during my abstinence streaks(i now recognise they were the best period of my Buddhist training)

P.S: if possible, do explain in detail how to inculcate "sila" in my practice, because @Dhammadhatu mentioned that a proper practitioner has to practice three methods of lust eradication (I have attained mastery over the other two).

Ven.Yuttadhammo bhikkhu has given you proper advice. Being true to monkhood is being rooted and grounded in a Life of celibacy. The benefits of celibacy (sexual abstinence) are obviously not widely understood nor fully appreciated. Even though sex may be a natural, essential part of life, so is being stuck in a physical body along with all its severe restrictions, miseries and complications lifetime after lifetime. Celibacy is a change in the direction of sex and sensuality, not its repression. But this advice is easier said than done.

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

The Buddha, in one of the Suttas pointed out that the realm of sensual pleasures resembles the forest where the wild elephant enjoys himself/herself. The Buddha Sasana, "the teaching of the Buddha",resembles the open field into which the wild elephant is first brought out. The mind resembles the wild elephant. Confidence (saddha) and desire (chanda) in the sasana-dhamma resemble the tame elephant to which the wild elephant is hitched and brought out into the open. Sila-visuddhi (purification of virtue) resembles the stockade. The body, or parts of the body, such as out-breath and in-breath resemble the post in the stockade to which the elephant is tied. Kayagati-sati resembles the rope by which the wild elephant is tied to the post. The preparatory work towards samatha and vipassana resembles the preparatory training of the elephant. The work of samatha and vipassana resembles the parade ground or battlefield of the king.

Firstly what you have to learn to do is the Meditation on loathsomeness (Asuba). There’s a series of meditations called guardian meditations, which are very helpful in using skillful perceptions to get the mind in the right mood, in the right attitude, with the right understanding, as you come into the present moment. You’ll often find, as you’re sitting here meditating on the breath, that the problem is not with the breath. It’s with the mental baggage you’re carrying with you. So you want to open up the bags and throw out all the unnecessary weight. In practicing this, you see that we all have the same garbage inside ourselves. This contemplation is helpful because it’s a guardian. There are so many people out there you could feel lust for, so cultivating this protects you from inappropriate lust. Even if you’re not practicing celibacy, you need a way to guard yourself against that kind of vagrant lust. So instead of weaving all sorts of narratives you’ve developed around beauty, it’s good to teach yourself other narratives, other associations. While at it, you should learn to do what is skillful.

  “And what is skillful? Abstaining from taking life is skillful, abstaining from taking what is not given... from sexual misconduct... from lying... from abusive speech... from divisive tale-bearing... abstaining from idle chatter is skillful. Lack of covetousness... lack of ill will... right views are skillful. These things are called skillful.”—MN 9

Also the Buddha said… “Come guard your sense-faculties; be the master of your senses. When you see something with the eye, do not get attracted to it by its appearance, but treat it with self control. So allways be mindful by controlling and guarding your senses the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body and the mind.


Wearing a bracelet to remind me to be mindful Wearing a bracelet to remind me to be mindful  ... is it a good idea ?

from previous attempt it seemed useful for a day maybe two but than i get used to wearing the bracelet and i dont notice im wearing it

What are your thoughts about doing this practice - is it useful ? are there other ways to remind yourself to be mindful ?

anything someone wants to add about this subject is appreciated

Wearing a bracelet to remind me to be mindful ... is it a good idea ?
from previous attempt it seemed useful for a day maybe two but than i get used to wearing the bracelet and i dont notice im wearing it

I guess your past experience shows this is not very useful

What are your thoughts about doing this practice - is it useful ? are there other ways to remind yourself to be mindful ?

Relying on external tools may not be the most optimal but if it helps why not.

anything someone wants to add about this subject is appreciated

When your mind wonders away be extra mindful when you bring your attention back. Look at a few breaths with sustained attention. Do a few body scans with sustained attention.
When your mind goes you bring your mind back to an object. Similarly even when your mind is on the chosen object you can repeal the re direction of the mind to the object continuously as if when initially brining the mind to the object.
This practice will help make your mindfulness stick to the chosen object.
Also as a mode of preliminary practice you can:

scan you body zig zag quickly alternating the side.
quickly alternating at the base of each nostril

This helps you redirect your attention to an chosen object like the breath continuously after initially brining to attention to it. Once you have some reasonable practice just target a chosen object repeatedly, even though you mind is not wondering away. One your mind get "sticky" with the object you an stop the continuous redirection.


Does Vinaya allow monks to do priestly rituals for the laity? In some other religions like Hinduism and Catholicism, the role of monks and the role of priests are clearly separated. However, in Buddhism, this is not clearly separated.

It is clear what the monks should not practise. DN2 clearly lists a lot of "animal" arts that monks should not practice e.g. prediction, forecasting, dream interpretation, palmistry, geomancy, selecting auspicious dates, horoscopes etc.

It is also clear that monks can ordain other monks, nuns, novice monks, novice nuns.

Does the Vinaya allow or mandate monks to perform rituals and ceremonies like the following?

If it does not, then why do they do it?

Refuge in Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha ceremony
Five precepts initiation
Worship of the Buddha image and stupa
Veneration of the Bodhi tree
Blessing by chanting
Weddings
Funerals
Blessing of newborns
Blessing of the sick (heard this from a Ajahn Brahm talk)
Blessing using holy water (a Thai tradition)
Protection by tying blessed strings on hand (a Thai tradition)
Blessing of objects like car keys (a Thai tradition)
Protection blessing (Pirit in Sri Lanka)
Housewarming (heard this from a Ajahn Brahm talk)
Offerings to the deceased and blessing the deceased
Worship of the Devas or Brahmas
Worship of Bodhisattvas
Worship of the planets (Bali in Sri Lanka)
Exorcism (Tovil and Atanatiya in Sri Lanka)

Nothing should be given as a matter of exchange, gain, honor... that is clear.

Refuge in Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha ceremony

Who else should give refuge? There is nothing wrong with it, but the opposit.

Five precepts initiation

Who else should give one precepts? There is nothing wrong with it, but the opposit.

Worship of the Buddha image and stupa

Veneration is part of practice, encourged by the Buddha

Veneration of the Bodhi tree

Veneration is part of practice, encourged by the Buddha

Blessing by chanting

Giving blessings and Anumodana is not only practicing metta and mudita, but also allowed by the Buddha

Weddings

There is nothing wrong to receive a meal, give talk on Dhamma and a blessing.

Funerals

There is nothing wrong to receive a meal, give talk on Dhamma and a blessing.

Blessing of newborns

There is nothing wrong to receive a meal, give talk on Dhamma and a blessing.

Blessing of the sick (heard this from a Ajahn Brahm talk)

There is nothing wrong to receive a meal, give talk on Dhamma and a blessing.

Blessing using holy water (a Thai tradition)

That's of cause a ritual, but follows an occation where the Buddha send out Ven. Ananda to do such.

Protection by tying blessed strings on hand (a Thai tradition)

That is not right, to give people material things aside of Dhamma, since people would think that good come from others and material.

Blessing of objects like car keys (a Thai tradition)

Terrible... again, no problem to receive food on what ever event.

Protection blessing (Pirit in Sri Lanka)

Nothing wrong with that.

Housewarming (heard this from a Ajahn Brahm talk)

There is nothing wrong to receive a meal, give talk on Dhamma and a blessing.

Offerings to the deceased and blessing the deceased

There is nothing wrong to receive a meal, give talk on Dhamma and a blessing. Also encouragement to do offering toward the death is the Buddhas way.

Worship of the Devas or Brahmas

Nothing wrong with paying respect to the Devas and Gods, the Buddha encouraged as well.

Worship of Bodhisattvas

seldom & unusual

Worship of the planets (Bali in Sri Lanka)

seldom & unusual

Exorcism (Tovil and Atanatiya in Sri Lanka)

depends on the way. In giving a talk, there is no problem. Harming a ghost, or doing healing others then by giving Dhamma might be failing.

It's not good the generalize althought sadly sure 95% of monk make a livelihood from sharing Dhamma or make other services. Look at Sutta Central... even asking directly for exchange is "normal", but people buy Dhamma and you do, or not? Hmm? So why does one crow like to pick out the eye of another. Crow is crow, and usually don't do that.

People, monks who are not trading, who really live on alms are very very rare, and be sure, with general being biased, one would not meet them even standig in front.

How ever, usually kammaṭṭhāna-monks seldom to never, join such folk fests. If really listening to Dhamma would be expected, they would follow an invitation to a meal which might look similar.

May you come out of certain bias and selfdestructing views soon (and yes that's a blessing, sometimes it helps). Better look of what you can give then to demand.

Some advices: (Q&A) Details on what may be given as alms (Tips for alms-giving)

Don't forget that there are also reasons why monks would turn over the bowl. One might not fear such thinking "I can buy or trade for it and what I desire" Sure... but here "we" (you, they) go...

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial use or other lower wordily gains by ways of exchange or trade]


How to interpret "cessation"? Throughout the suttas, we find the following stock passage:

  "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering."

On that text, I interprete the word "cessation" in "cessation of that very ignorance" as indicating a complete cessation of such ignorance. Is this interpretation of the cessation also applied to the other processes indicated next in the stock passage?

For instance, if the passage says "cessation of fabrications", is this implying a complete cessation of fabrications, just like in the last example?

Also, what is this "remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance"? Is this referring to Nibbāna or to Parinibbāna?

If it's indicating what happens after Nibbāna, then does this mean that fabrications (and all the posterior nidanas) cease to arise after Nibbāna as well?

If not, then should we read cessation in all the other nidanas (i.e., in all except in ignorance) as the "cessation of X nidana tainted with ignorance"?

But if, on the other, it's indicating at what happens at Parinibbāna, then Nibbāna is not the "remainderless fading & cessation of ignorance"

In sum, is the interpretion and implications of the word "cessation" dependent on the phenomenon which is ceasing?

Thanks in advance for your time!

Kind regards!

Firstly, there are the five aggregates and the five clinging aggregates. From SN 22.48 and from this question:

  “And what, bhikkhus, are the five aggregates? Whatever kind of form
  there is, whether past, future, or present, internal or external,
  gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: this is called the
  form aggregate. Whatever kind of feeling there is … this is called the
  feeling aggregate. Whatever kind of perception there is … this is
  called the perception aggregate. Whatever kind of volitional
  formations there are … these are called the volitional formations
  aggregate. Whatever kind of consciousness there is, whether past,
  future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or
  superior, far or near: this is called the consciousness aggregate.
  These, bhikkhus, are called the five aggregates.

  “And what, bhikkhus, are the five aggregates subject to clinging?
  Whatever kind of form there is, whether past, future, or present … far
  or near, that is tainted, that can be clung to: this is called the
  form aggregate subject to clinging. Whatever kind of feeling there is
  … that is tainted, that can be clung to: this is called the feeling
  aggregate subject to clinging. Whatever kind of perception there is …
  that is tainted, that can be clung to: this is called the perception
  aggregate subject to clinging. Whatever kind of volitional formations
  there are … that are tainted, that can be clung to: these are called
  the volitional formations aggregate subject to clinging. Whatever kind
  of consciousness there is, whether past, future, or present, internal
  or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, that
  is tainted, that can be clung to: this is called the consciousness
  aggregate subject to clinging. These, bhikkhus, are called the five
  aggregates subject to clinging.”

Secondly, from this answer, you can see that the Buddha still had intentions and could plan his afternoon. So, living arahants still have sankhara of the volition kind. Living arahants also have sankhara of the kind where you have physical, verbal and mental activities (from this answer).

In SN 12.38, we read that intention and planning alone are insufficient for the continuation of suffering. There must also be latent tendencies (anusaya). This was discussed in this answer.

So, living arahants still have  sankhara. What they do not have is latent tendencies (anusaya), defilements (kilesa), effluents (asava), fetters (samyojana), craving (tanha) and clinging (upadana).

More precisely, living arahants have the aggregate of sankhara but not the clinging-aggregate of sankhara, because they have stopped clinging. See SN 22.48.

Thirdly, according to Iti 44 (quoted below), once liberated, the living arahant's ignorance, suffering and burning of the aggregates with the fires of aversion, hatred and delusion have ended. The fires have been quenched, but the embers are still glowing. These embers are the five aggregates (not clinging-aggregates). They will continue till the arahant's physical death. This is explained in Thanissaro Bhikkhu's commentary.

  And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the
  case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who
  has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden,
  attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released
  through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing
  to their being intact, he is cognizant of the agreeable & the
  disagreeable, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of
  passion, aversion, & delusion is termed the Unbinding property with
  fuel remaining.

  And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is
  the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended,
  who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden,
  attained the true goal, ended the fetter of becoming, and is released
  through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished,
  will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with
  no fuel remaining."

  Commentary (Thanissaro):
  With fuel remaining (sa-upadisesa)
  and with no fuel remaining (anupadisesa): The analogy here is to a fire.
  In the first case, the flames are out, but the embers are still
  glowing. In the second, the fire is so thoroughly out that the embers
  have grown cold. The "fuel" here is the five aggregates. While the
  arahant is still alive, he/she still experiences the five aggregates,
  but they do not burn with the fires of passion, aversion, or delusion.
  When the arahant passes away, there is no longer any experience of
  aggregates here or anywhere else.

Now, let's apply all of the above to the stock phrase that you had quoted.

  "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance
  comes the cessation of fabrications.

A foetus has ignorance. With that as the cause, the fabrications (physical, verbal and mental) arise. The rest of the clinging aggregates will also arise and dependent origination will become fully operational.

After he grows up, he becomes a living arahant. When ignorance has been overcome with no remainder, the five clinging aggregates will cease. But the five aggregates (of the non-clinging kind) remain till his physical death, as we saw in Iti 44.

  From the cessation of fabrications comes the cessation of
  consciousness. From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation
  of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation
  of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media
  comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes
  the cessation of feeling.

Once again, this simply says that after liberation from suffering, the five clinging aggregates have ceased, because their cause has ceased. But not the five aggregates. The five aggregates, which are like glowing embers after the fire has ceased, will keep functioning till physical death.

Name-and-form is simply the mind-body link, which is anyway part of the five aggregates. The nidanas of fabrications (sankhara), consciousness (vinnana), name-and-form (namarupa), six sense media (salayatana) and feeling (vedana) are all located within the five aggregates. Hence, the distinguishing of aggregates from clinging aggregates in SN 22.48, is fully applicable to these nidanas. Also, the notion from Iti 44 that the five aggregates remain operating in an untainted way till physical death for a living arahant is also applicable to these nidanas.

  From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the
  cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From
  the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming.
  From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the
  cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain,
  distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire
  mass of stress & suffering."

When ignorance has ceased, the clinging aggregates cease. With this, craving, clinging, becoming and the rest of suffering, all cease for a living arahant.

The only thing that remains are the aggregates, untainted, till the living arahant's physical death.

If the five aggregates are different parts of a guitar, then dependent origination simply explains how the different parts of the guitar work together to create music (see Lute Sutta). Music here refers to the self (atta), which is what becoming (bhava) and birth (jati) is about.

For a living arahant, the music has stopped, but the guitar remains. One day, even that will be destroyed. The five clinging aggregates is like a guitar vibrating with music, while the five aggregates not subject to clinging is like a silent peaceful guitar.

Although I said music, it's more like noise. When the noise stops, you have peace. That's the living arahant's mentally cognized peace of nibbana.


Meditation not linear I've heard it said that meditation is not a linear path and that every time you sit is like the first time but that you get better at sitting for the first time.  If this is the case and you don't actually make gains in a linear way then can it also be said that if you stop doing it that you will not go backwards or lose what you have learnt because you didn't go anywhere to begin with?

Meditation is not linear, as it involves the whole of ourselves. There is one part/side of us that is connected to our rationality, logic, linear thinking, and understanding. The other side of us is connected to feelings, nurturing, caring, compassion, love, and all the emotional qualities. This is how our right and left hemisphere in the brain is programed. The left side of the brain processes information in a linear manner. It processes from part to whole. It takes pieces, lines them up, and arranges them in a logical order; then it draws conclusions. The right brain however, processes from whole to parts, holistically.

Intellectual understanding about meditation is never the same as the actual experience of it.  It is similar to that of having to bite into a mango to know its taste. We can read everything that there is about a mango – that it can be sweet, delicious, soft, etc. but we cannot imagine its taste unless we get the feeling of the mango on our tongue and have the personal experience. Then we can no longer debate whether the mango is sweet or not, because we have experienced the truth. This is the difference between just thinking or thinking coupled with the experience of feeling.

Once the meditator goes beyond the second Jhana level, the internal thinking comes to a stop, and memory of past experiences never come up.  From there on there is no such thing as a linear process.  From there on it is total awareness in staying with the breath. This is being one with your meditation.   This is ekaggata, as in ekaggatarammana, oneness of preoccupation, or singleness of preoccupation; and ekaggatacitta, singleness of mind. This kind of oneness applies to all levels of jhana. It means being focused on one thing, like the breath. You stay steadily focused on it, at the same time making it the one thing filling your range of awareness.


Right effort and concentration I was reading about the noble eightfold path and Right effort, thought and concentration, they seem to be very similar. What are the differences?

Right Efforts is about removing unwholesome states and cultivating wholesome states. Right Concentration deals with developing the Jhana as a means to displace certain subset of unwholesome states. Jhana is a wholesome state hence arousing Jhana can be viewed as applying efforts to abandon the 5 hindrances. This done through developing the Jhana factors. A mind with the Jhana factors aroused is wholesome.

In short:

Abandoning hindrances and developing the Jhanas, Right Concentration, is a subset of Right Efforts hence the similarity
Right Effort deals with abandoning all unwholesome states and developing wholesome states, while Right Concentration deals with developing the Jahan, hence the difference

Right Effort

  (6) And what, bhikshus, is right effort?
  Here, bhikshus, a monk
  brings forth the desire for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome states; he makes an effort,
  rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives;

  he brings forth the desire for the abandoning of arisen evil unwholesome states; he makes an effort,
  rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives;

  he brings forth the desire for the arising of unarisen wholesome states; he makes an effort, rouses
  energy, applies his mind, and strives;

  he brings forth the desire for the maintenance of arisen wholesome states, for their non-decay,
  increase, growth and fulfillment by cultivation; he makes an effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and
  strives.

  This, bhikshus, is called right effort.

Right Concentration

  And what, bhikshus, is right samadhi [concentration]?
  Here, bhikshus,

  (1) a monk, detached from sensual pleasures, detached from unwholesome mental states,
  enters and remains in the first dhyana,
  accompanied by initial application and sustained application,
  accompanied by zest and happiness, born of detachment [ie born of samadhi].

  (2) With the stilling of initial application and sustained application,
  by gaining inner tranquillity and oneness of mind,
  he enters and remains in the second dhyana,
  free from initial application and sustained application,
  accompanied by zest and happiness born of samadhi.

  (3) With the fading away of zest, he remains equanimous,
  mindful and clearly knowing,
  and experiences happiness with the body,
  he enters and remains in the third dhyana,
  of which the noble ones declare,
  ‘Happily he dwells in equanimity and mindfulness.’

  (4) With the abandoning of pleasure and pain—
  and with the earlier disappearance of joy and grief—
  he enters and abides in the fourth dhyana,
  that is neither pleasant nor painful,
  with a mindfulness fully purified by equanimity.
  This, bhikshus, is called right samadhi.

(Magga) Vibhaṅga Sutta also in Sacca Vibhanga Sutta


Practice of my meditation When Itry to reach to the toothbrush in the morning I saw my mind intention to take  it and the hand movement is felt like as I was in a magnetic  field. What is it ?

When Itry to reach to the toothbrush in the morning I saw my mind intention to take it and the hand movement is felt like as I was in a magnetic field. What is it ?

All actions are preceeded by the mind. An intention (Cetana in Pali), which is a mental formation, is the initiator behind the subsequent action done by the body - in this case the bodily action of reaching out for the toothbrush.
In reality that movement can be broken up into many smaller steps suchs extending the arm, flexing the wrist, flexing the fingers etc. There's also the feeling of touch sensation when holding the toothbrush and the awareness/consciousness of all the movements.
Beginning to see intentions is an important, vital step in understanding how the mind/body complex works. It's a sign that introspection is beginning to happen.
My advice would be to find a good teacher or undertake a meditation course to develop your practice further.


What are the Eighteen Buddha Attributes? There are Eighteen Buddha Attributes, that belong only to a perfectly enlightened Buddha. What are they?

The Eighteen Unshared Features of a Buddha:

The eighteen features of a Buddha that are not shared with those of lesser attainment – specifically, with shravaka or pratyekabuddha arhats – concern four general aspects of a Buddha: his behavior, realization, enlightening influence (‘ phrin-las, Skt. samudacara, Buddha-activity), and deep awareness.

The Six Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Behavior

(1) A Buddha’s physical composure can never be ruffled. Wherever he goes and whatever he meets, he is never fooled by appearances. He is always calm and clear.
(2) A Buddha’s enlightening speech never cries out or makes meaningless sounds. No matter what happens, he is never shocked or surprised, and never exclaims anything in anger, pain, or pleasure. Furthermore, a Buddha does not have any melodies, songs, or meaningless phrases compulsively going through his head, and he never mindlessly hums or mutters to himself.
(3) An omniscient Buddha’s enlightening mind never forgets anything or anyone.
(4) There is never a time when his mind is not totally absorbed on voidness.
(5) He never has even the slightest recognition or feeling of anything existing in a way other than the way in which it actually exists. Having rid himself of his cognitive obscurations concerning all knowables, he never experiences his mind giving rise to discordant, deceptive appearances of true existence.
(6) A Buddha is never so indifferent as not to check on others. He always cares about everyone equally and keeps a constant watch to see who is ready to make spiritual progress so as to help him or her accordingly. When someone is ripe, he never forgets to show him or her the way.

The Six Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Realizations

(7) His intention to help everyone never declines. This is due to the force of his great compassion, as he cares for everyone as a mother would for her only child.
(8) His joyful perseverance to help everyone never declines. He is never reluctant to go anywhere or do anything, even for the sake of one wandering being.
(9) His mindfulness of everyone’s situation never declines. It requires no effort for an omniscient one to be aware of all beings. His awareness is like an enormous clear mirror reflecting the total extent of what exists.
(10) His absorbed concentration never declines. He is always totally focused on voidness, no matter what he does.
In the list of these unshared features given in The Furthest Everlasting Continuum, this feature is omitted and replaced by the fact that the sight of his deep awareness, which is utterly freed from all mental obscuration, never declines.
(11) His discriminating awareness of voidness never declines.
(12) His state of being utterly freed from the two types of mental obscuration never declines.

The Three Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Enlightening Influence

All the actions of a Buddha’s enlightening (13) physical, (14) verbal, and (15) mental faculties are preceded upon and carried through with deep awareness.
Because he has deep awareness simultaneously of both appearances and their voidness of true existence, he can exert an enlightening influence on everything around him while always maintaining his omniscient awareness.

The Three Unshared Features Grouped under a Buddha’s Deep Awareness

A Buddha’s deep awareness permeates everything, in seeing (16) the time already-passed (‘ das-pa’i dus), (17) the time not-yet-come (ma-‘ongs-pa’i dus), and (18) the time presently-happening (da-lta-ba’i dus), all without any attachment or impediment.
Time is an amount or length of duration measured in the continuum of the occurrence of a karmic causal action and its result, and is a nonconcomitant affecting variable (ldan-min ‘ du-byed) – a nonstatic (impermanent) factor that is neither a form of physical phenomenon nor a way of being aware of something and which is imputable on the mental continuum of a being.
A Buddha has no attachment to what he can see because he has rid himself of all emotional obscuration, and no impediment because he has no cognitive obscuration.


Can't meditate anymore I used to meditate daily, about 2 or 3 years ago I stopped.
A week ago I decided to start meditating again. I sat down closed my eyes... and suddenly I am halfway through cleaning my dishes.

So I try again sit down close my eyes, and I am doing laundry.

I don't consciously see myself stopping and starting these chores. I completely space out on what is going on and "come to" doing a chore or task.

What is going on? I have never had this problem before, and normally consider myself to be pretty mindful.

It's not a problem. It's the human mind. Meditation is not meant to stop thought. It's meant to help you notice "what is". You have noticed how busy and restless your mind is. That is good. As you get more into your practice again you will notice more moments of stillness also. Just accept where you are at and let go of any expectations for things to be any differently or the way they used to be.


Attitude Towards Speculation and Fantasy I'm experiencing a lot of speculative thoughts and fantasizing about the future when I'm going about my day. I'm wondering whether I should attempt to deny these thoughts, or merely let them arise without judgment. I'm also wondering whether engaging in concentrative breathing meditation will reduce this thoughts in the rest of the day, and whether the arising of these elements or other negative elements such as anger, lust, hatred, pride and narcissism can impede spiritual progress.

I think the main question is: should one allow such thoughts non-judgmentally, even if they are delusional, or should one reduce them e.g. via the breath. The speculative and fantasy related thoughts seem to take my time, and so I wonder how one can let these thoughts arise in non-judgment without detrimental effects.

There are two methods to reduce thoughts:

(1) Wisdom method, which is replacing unwise thoughts with wise thoughts. This will reduce the thoughts & build the wisdom that stops the re-arising of such thoughts in the future. Examples of wise thoughts are exactly what you have posted, which is thinking to yourself: "These fantasies are delusional & are a waste of time".

(2) Concentration method, which is to use the breath to feel calmness. When the mind feels calmness, it will not be inclined to think unnecessary thoughts.

Before the Buddha attained enlightenment, he generally used the wisdom method to reduce his unbeneficial thoughts (refer to MN 19). This is called 'yoniso manasikara' or 'wise reflection'.

The mind is difficult to know clearly & manage therefore this is a task we each much learn. The Dhammapada states:

  33. Just as a fletcher straightens an arrow shaft, even so the discerning man straightens his mind — so fickle and unsteady, so
  difficult to guard.

  36. Let the discerning man guard the mind, so difficult to detect and extremely subtle, seizing whatever it desires. A guarded mind brings
  happiness.

In your situation, the wisdom method is probably the best method since you ask lots of questions here about meditation, which shows you probably need to know your mind more.

As for 'non-judging', the Pali suttas do not really teach the practise of 'non-judging' towards unbeneficial thoughts. In addition, fantasies themselves are 'judgmments'. Therefore, if the mind was really abiding in 'non-judgment', it would not be fantasizing about the future.


Laying down for the benefit of all sentient beings I heard a Dhamma talk wherein a monk said that Mara blamed the Buddha being lazy cause he laid down and the Buddha replied something like "I am laying down for the benefit of all sentient beings".

Can someone explain the logic behind his answer and expand on this issue?  Is there a practice wherein you gain a mind set to take action for your own good while thinking you are doing every action? ie.   "for the benefit of all sentient beings"

Mara is symbolic. Mara taunt is about being worldly, being productive instead of lying idle. Buddha was pretty young when he left the world in search of Truth. In those times, people used to leave household in later half of their lives. Young were supposed to take care of old ones. Perhaps this aspect is reflected in the anecdote.


The spiritual significance of the sand mandala in Tibetan Buddhism I have heard of and seen sand mandalas in Tibetan Buddhism.

Here is a picture:

I have two questions, which are related:

I have heard that upon completion they are erased to represent transience. Is this what the erasure represents?
What other spiritual significance does the mandala have in Tibetan Buddhism. I seem to remember something relating to a spiritual journey being represented in the mandala yet I am unsure. I would like clarification on this.

According to The Tibetan Monks of Drepung Gomang Monastery

  When finished, to symbolize the impermanence of all that exists, the colored sands are swept up and poured into a nearby river or stream where the waters carry healing energies throughout the world.

    In general, all mandalas have outer, inner, and secret meaning.  On the outer level they represent the world in its divine form; on the inner level, they represent a map by which the ordinary human mind is transformed into the enlightened mind; and on the secret level, they predict the primordially perfect balance of the subtle energies of the body and the clear light dimension of the mind.  The creation of a sand painting is said to affect purification and healing on these three levels.


Is Anapanasati considered Samatha? I'm new to Buddhism, and I have some trouble understanding some core aspects on meditation. Is Anapanasati considered Samatha or Vipassana?

It depends on how it is practiced. According to the tradition of the commentaries(I think it comes from the commentary on the Kattavathu, the fith book of Abhidhamma but I'm not totally sure), the distinction between samatha and vipassana meditation lies in what the object of meditation is. In this model, meditation on an object of ultimate reality (that is to say, meditating on that which is experienced directly such as sensations, feelings, etc...) is considered vipassana, and meditating on an abscract concept that is more than just direct experience is samatha.


Is it ethical to kill plant life while gardening? I live in Denmark and here we have gotten an amazing concept called "City Gardens". Its basically a 3 x 3 meter garden in the middle of the city granting city dwellers acces to grow their own vegetables, flowers etc.

Yesterday i got one of these gardens (see picture below). I thought about cleaning it up and plant some new stuff in it but then i saw that there were many small plants and flowers growing in it already.

I do know that the first precept is not broken since it covers life that has a breath and a consciousness. But i was wondering if im breaking any other buddhist ethics or precepts by interfering with that plant life already living there?

Help would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Lanka

The Buddha reportedly ate a meal of pork at least once in his life. So one pig had to lose its life. The Buddha ate rice pudding so some cow had to eat the grass to produce milk and some weeds must have lost their life to have grown the rice.

It seems that no matter what we do in life some harm is done. Maybe do less harm would be more sensible. The Buddha advocated the middle way between hedonism and asceticism. The Tibetan Buddhists eat meat. So what are we to do?

Do no harm against life for selfish ends. Do no harm against our neighbor to gain advantage. Dedicate your work to all beings.

In your case you could donate some of the crop to food pantries servicing the homeless or needy.

In another sense there is only consciousness. When we weed the garden in meditation we make room for a new consciousness. When we plant seeds in the garden or consciousness, we are planting the divine seed of awakening.

Being paralyzed by fear of doing harm is not the middle way as I see it.

Perhaps the saying should be Clear your intentions of doing harm. Have an intention of giving life.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Eightfold_Path

  Right intention[edit] Right intention (samyak-saṃkalpa / sammā
  sankappa) can also be known as "right thought", "right resolve",
  "right conception", "right aspiration" or "the exertion of our own
  will to change". In this factor, the practitioner should constantly
  aspire to rid themselves of whatever qualities they know to be wrong
  and immoral. Correct understanding of right view will help the
  practitioner to discern the differences between right intention and
  wrong intention. In the Chinese and Pali Canon, it is explained
  thus:[19][19][21][31][32]

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

  It means the renunciation of the worldly things and an accordant
  greater commitment to the spiritual path; good will; and a commitment
  to non-violence, or harmlessness, towards other living beings.


If consciousness arises from mental formations is it correct to say that consciousness has a specific tone or opinions with it? Example:
I see something moving, there's contact.
Then there's an unpleasant feeling and perception recognize it as a spider.
Mental formations on how to deal with the "threat" of a spider arises.

A new consciousness is born. Does it contain the mental formation that caused it to arise?

Thank you

Good question. The way it was explained to me, the twelve nidanas are all "made" from each other, they are all made from the same "stuff". It's like when there is water, the wave on the water and the foam on top of the wave - they all "grow" from one another. Similarly, consciousness is "made from" mental formations and feelings/perceptions "grow from" consciousness like foam on top of the wave.

So when the "new" consciousness is "born" - yes, it certainly "contains" (rides on top of, made of) the mental formations that led to it. Which is one of the ways karma perpetuates itself.

Mental formations (aka "tendencies") define the overall shape of the future action in broad brushstrokes, and then consciousness, feelings, perceptions, craving, etc. get more and more specific until the action itself, which leads to some results, that manifest as new experience on the next cycle and so on - this is how "tendencies" perpetuate themselves.

Tendencies (formations), consciousness, attraction/aversion, and karma grow from each other and carry the impulse of each other, so Samsara keeps rolling forward like this.


Is Meditation a cure or just fighting of symptoms? I meditate daily for 30 minutes, and right after each session my mind is very calm, centered, stable; I just exist in the present moment without much thinking.
However, after a while, the compulsive thinking comes back, wants to drag me towards unhappiness. I feel this is like an illness. Therefore, is meditation a cure to this illness (will it go away one day if I meditate more/longer? What should I do?) or is it just a temporary easing of symptoms? I want to cure the illness. Thanks.

That depends on the type of meditation you do. To most people, meditation is all about focusing the mind on one thing and enjoying the bliss that comes with it. This type of meditation is called Samatha(tranquility) meditation. There are many forms of Samatha meditation. Ex: breath meditation, loving kindness meditation, repeatedly chanting a word etc.

Samatha meditation is taught in Buddhism too, but the meditation type that is unique to Buddhism is Vipassana(insight) meditation. Samatha meditation is mostly about fighting off the symptoms and looking for a temporary relief. Vipassana meditation is about curing the sickness that causes the symptoms. Here's a handbook on how to practice Vipassana.


Did Gautama Buddha cease to exist after death? After death did Gautama Buddha ceased to exist? Or  does he still exist?

This is exactly one of the topics (i.e. whether a Tathagata exists or doesn't exist after death, or both) which the Buddha "didn't declare" -- see the Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta (MN 63):

  And why are they undeclared by me? Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life.


How to deal with people giving reviews to the teaching? I recently asked a question here and like always some good friends helped me, Their references were right on point and they referred the correct Sutras and i'm forever thankful for that. But when i kept on reading i found it very hard to forgive the author of this particular article on Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta.

I do not know who that person is but he has written a review on the teaching on a site that most of us use as a reference source. The only question was that he had taken the teaching and given historic definitions of his own to certain parts of that sutra. He somehow say that "King Alexander the great" is the person that Buddhists took inspiration to form a story on Devas and the great king who make earth his empire.

Here is some....

  Discourses such as the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta (D 16) and the Mahā Sudassana Sutta (D 17) allude to “the celestial city of the devas,” Āḷakamandā,28 which could be Alexandria on the Indus, founded by Alexander the Great in 325 BCE, or Alexandria-of-the-Caucasus,29 some 150 km north of today’s Kabul in Afghanistan. Possibly, the stories about Alexander (the prototype of the world conqueror) and the subsequent presence of the Indo-Greeks,30 inspired the ancient Buddhists to formulate the “great man” ideology.

So according to this person Sutra pitaka of tipitaka is a work of fiction. I want to be honest, i was real angry when i saw someone quoting the teaching and telling the world that it is a work of fiction, i was very ashamed of the fact that one of his own references was from a man from my own country.I would also like to request our good friends here to read the whole article before posting as an answer,because someone might get caught up in the wrong side of the isle after reading some person's foolish efforts to review Lord Buddha's realization.

Please give me some good advice on how to deal with such people. (I would love an answer from Ven.Samana Johann)

someone might get caught up in the wrong side of the isle after
  reading some person's foolish efforts

There will always be reviews coming from writers who are not comfortable with things like heavens and divine beings. People with materialistic views will be drawn to such articles naturally. If you get angry at them, you might be clinging to the Dhamma as "my religion" or "my belief".

Having everybody to believe in the same thing is not the goal and wanting that to happen will only frustrate you. The goal is to use the Dhamma to attain Nibbana. You can certainly help others to stay away from misinformation while doing that, but it should come from compassion, not clinging or aversion.


Bodhisattva Precepts I've been really into the ethical and moral foundation of buddhism and stumbled onto the precepts. Would it be wrong of me to recite the bodhisattva precepts that I've found online that I identify with as a beginner to myself every morning?

At my last retreat, we recited the Bodhisattva vow quite frequently.

Sentient beings are numberless; I vow to save them. Desires are
inexhaustible; I vow to put an end to them. The Dharmas are boundless;
I vow to master them. The Buddha Way is unattainable; I vow to attain
it.

Not the precepts themselves, which were only recited by a preceptor when the precepts were being taken.
I would advise against regularly intoning them; it's an interesting question whether we can take them unofficially. Why not recite the nembutsu instead?


How does one calm one's bodily fabrications? I personally start looking at the speed of the breath and then it slows down. In the Tripitaka are there recommended methods to accomplish this? What do different teachers and commentaries say about it?

One meditation teacher I found who emphasizes calming of the bodily is Bhante Vimalaramsi in 6Rs. But exact mechanics is not really covered on how the relaxation happens. Does this also lead to or linked to calming of the bodily fabrications? Are there more explicit instructions, especially those we can source from the Tripitaka?

The Visuddhimagga ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf ) starting on page 268 gives a detailed explanation of Anapanasati Sutta MN 118 ( http://suttacentral.net/en/mn118 ). The specific method is the 8 steps starting on Vism. page 272..


Which Buddhist traditions have no gender divisions at all I had a conversation with a friend and she was very upset that there were some gender division in the group I practice with. We have some single sex retreats and some study groups are single sexed. But mostly things are mixed.
If my friend wanted to practice Buddhism with a group with no gender divisions whatsoever - what group would that be? So all study, retreats, events would be mixed and if there is a monastic community then that would be mixed too.

Our branch of Rinzai Zen has no gender division other than that we segregate by sex when bunking up for sesshin.  I can’t think of too many Buddhist communities in the US that would even consider that, quite frankly.  I think the group you’re with would be the exception in the West, at least.


Cutting Computer in Evening I have recently managed to restrict my eating period to about 8h per day, which is supposed to help circadian rhythm.

Yet, to further promote sleep and circadian rhythm, I should also cut out blue light from a computer a few hours before bed (and go to bed at the same time each day). Since I get bored when I cut the computer at this hour, I always revert to using the computer, delaying bedtime in the process.

What would Buddhism suggest as solution towards such a computer use? In the evening, I'm unable to find activities interesting enough, I always revert to using the computer.

Would avoiding the computer at other times decrease my attachment to it overall? What might help?

When using a computer you get a lot of input or information to process. This leads to more vitakka and vicara hence dispersion of the mind. It is best to limit this and try to be more mindful when using computer and phones.


Certainty and Skeptical Investigation I know Buddhism promotes skeptical investigation, and finding things out with a personal conviction about them, i.e. not believing the Buddha on hearsay but rigorous examination.

I wonder: how is such a certainty achieved? I would think the combination of shamatha and vipassana is the answer, but I wonder what EXACTLY is the closest determinant of a feeling of certainty, whether sensory (seeing something and feeling quite certain of the perception) or cognitive (feeling certain of some analytical reasoning).

Personally, I feel like I often achieve a feeling of certainty, but it usually fades into doubts and alternate hypothesis. I can't seem to generate a sturdy sense of truth.

I appreciate any answer to this question.
Thank you.

Thanissaro Bhikkhu explained this very well in one of his works, can't find the link at the moment. He said, Liberation is more like a hands-on skill than a pure sterile insight. As with any skill, the understanding and the dexterity grow in lock-step supporting each other. You learn through trial and error, and as you watch the results of your attempts, you infer the mechanisms at play. At the same time, you study theory - explaining the mechanisms - which sheds light on your practice.

Certainty comes as a result of having acquired the skill. This may or may not come from theory, and may or may not be something you can explain in words. Conceptual model is the optional part that aids one's practice and helps transmit the teaching forward, but cannot give the sense of certainty by itself.

In Vajrayana schools, certainty also comes from the lineage blessings through a ritual known as empowerment (abhisheka).


Satipathanna sutta in audio English (long version) Can anyone direct me to the full audio version of the satipathanna sutta?

NOTE: I'm not looking for a guide or a talk just the plain sutta spoken clearly in English.

I guess this is what you are looking for


Other people may misinterpret my "calming my mind" I'm not an "official" Buddhist but I have accepted the idea that "calming my mind" is good -- by not getting emotional about little setbacks (to the degree I can).  To some degree, I have accomplished this.

As a result, I can keep my head while others are losing theirs.  So far, so good.

But God help me if I get convicted of a serious crime.  Whether I'm remorseful or not (or whether I did it or not), the judge is likely to give me extra punishment if I don't show remorse.

And I once met a friend of a friend with whom I similarly held my reactions in check.  She later described me as being "an emotionless monster" as if I walk around the streets at night eating children and small animals.

What can I do to keep people from thinking something's wrong with me just because I don't get wildly emotional at every little thing?

This question is not off-topic.  Please don't edit it.  Answers that don't directly answer the question as asked will be ignored (no XY-ing, please).

There is a difference between getting wildly emotional at every little thing and having empathy for others. I don't know your friend, or how you interact with her, but I can imagine she may have told you something that was emotional for her and your reaction was deadpan.

This is not kind. It communicates to another person that their life and suffering is unimportant to you and breaks any social bonds you might have with that person.

It sounds like you are so attached to unattachment that you don't consider how your actions may affect others around you. You can stop people from thinking "something is wrong with you" by forming deep connection with people and showing genuine caring kindness for them.


What's the buddhist stance on cognitive behavioral therapy? Is it a good idea to expose yourself to situations that trigger fear and anxiety and use meditation to get through it, or is the desire to overcome fear and anxiety "bad" because it's technically a desire? (And fear and anxiety are only temporary states anyway and should be recognized for being just that.)

Would it even be possible to meditate through a triggering situation since one wouldn't be calm enough to see clearly in such a situation?

To put it more simply: could meditation be used as a substitute for CBT? If not, does Buddhism encourage or discourage CBT?

Is it a good idea to expose yourself to situations that trigger fear and anxiety and use meditation to get through it [?]

Maybe -- and it depends on what you mean by "meditation". But since the context is about CBT, I'm not sure this would be advised, specially without professional assistance.

  or is the desire to overcome fear and anxiety "bad" because it's technically a desire?

Desires for well being, for good, and further aspirations are not considered "bad", on the contrary. In Buddhism, two technical terms for things we strive to overcome are craving (pali taṇhā) and clinging (pali upādāna). These are specific kinds of desire that present problems.

  (And fear and anxiety are only temporary states anyway and should be recognized for being just that.)

Indeed, they should. But again, in context of CBT, I don't think recognizing the temporariness of such things are usually enough for remission.

  Would it even be possible to meditate through a triggering situation since one wouldn't be calm enough to see clearly in such a situation?

Again, it depends on what you mean by "meditation". If you mean bringing up attention and mindfulness, calming the breath and "observing", yes, naturally.

Of course, the success will mostly depend on one's skill, and how strong these fears and anxieties are. Thus, if the former is weak and the later are strong, intentionally putting oneself in such situations where more harm can be done is probably a bad idea.

  To put it more simply: could meditation be used as a substitute for CBT?

As someone who is not a doctor, but only familiar with DBT (a form of CBT) and who was close to people with disorders who relied on such therapy: hardly. While "mindfulness meditation" is considered an important and integral practice in the process, I personally think is nowhere near an adequate substitute of the entire therapy program. I also don't know of any research suggesting the remission efficacy of disorders with meditation only vs. CBT (or DBT).

  If not, does Buddhism encourage or discourage CBT?

I don't see anything in these therapies that would present a dilemma  with the Buddha's teachings.


Did lord buddha preach not to get angry even if a leg is cut? Has lord Buddha preached not to get angry even if limbs are cut if you are a real follower of me? If so, please quote from the relevant sutta

Supreme Buddha said that even if someone were to cut you to pieces with a two-handed saw, if you got angry you wouldn’t be a true disciple of his -- Kakacupama Sutta: The Simile of the Saw, MN 21:

  “Dear Monks, if a person does not get angry or form a hateful mind even when he is dragged, placed upside down, moved his legs to sides, and cut with a saw, he is indeed a disciple who recalls my advice.”

In this Dhamma article the Mahamevnawa Theravada Buddhist Monastery once elaborated on this as:

  Thus the Supreme Buddha always preached and praised about living free of hatred. He preached that there is one circumstance in which a person cannot realize the Dhamma; that is when the Sangha is not peaceful. If the Sangha is not peaceful or someone acts to break their unity/peace, then one cannot practice the Dhamma since they blame each other. They blame one another saying that each person is wrong. In such situation, they cannot recall the Dhamma and instead they accumulate bad karma. These unwholesome deeds bring great misfortune. So remember that a hatred is formed in a person when he is either in an office, a house, a temple, or in any other place, it is not for the good of any person at all. It is a universal truth. It is because hatred never ends any quarrel. It is ended by not being hateful. It is a universal Dhamma. This Dhamma of the Supreme Buddha is a universal truth. What is this Dhamma? It is the spreading of loving-kindness. Ending hatred by not being hateful (a universal truth). The Supreme Buddha’s Dhamma is no longer exists in India where the Buddha’s Dhamma was born. What is the reason for the Dhamma to disappear from India? It is the hatred that formed in that time. As a result of hatred that formed in the people at that time, they argued and disgraced and insulted on each other. They further used governmental power for that. This resulted in hatred. Hatred is the reason for the Gautama Supreme Buddha’s Dhamma to vanish from India. Therefore, we should not practice to hate for one another. We shall spread our loving-kindness to all beings in all ten directions. One first spread loving-kindness to oneself and not give into being hateful. He dislikes to be angry or hateful and get rid of it quickly. He frees himself from hateful mind and practices the loving-kindness mind.


Is Mind in Buddhism connected to Brain (the physical organ)? According to Buddhism, is the Mind (known by Citta, Manas, Vinnana or any other name that corresponds to Mind/Consciousness) connected with the organ called Brain?

Is the brain (or loosely speaking, head) referred to in Buddhist writings as the seat of mind, consciousness or the cause of human behaviour?

There is a nice analysis in this article here. But basically, the Buddha said:

  This body of mine, made of material form, consisting of the four great elements, procreated by a mother and father, and built up out of boiled rice and porridge, is subject to impermanence, to being worn and rubbed away, to dissolution and disintegration, and this consciousness of mine is supported by it and bound up with it.

My comment: mind is an informational phenomena. The information is made of relations that are passed from one carrier (not necessarily human or even a sentient being!) to another, through various media. In case of a sentient being, body is one of such temporary carriers of the information. When information is embodied in a living organism, it is known as mind.


Why should we worship statues of Lord Buddha? Why should we worship Lord Buddha statues with flowers, lights and food, even when we know Lord Buddha is not alive and does not exist? Did Lord Buddha instruct us to do so or is there any other reason?

I am not sure we should worship statues itself as that would be some sort of idolatry. Buddhists worship Buddha, and statue or other image is just symbol, something that bring into our memory good qualities of Buddha. It's mindfulness of Buddha. Statue is a symbol, and symbol is communication which states about its subject, Buddha in our case. Thus, showing respect before statue should be directed to Buddha as Jewel, and not to statue. Mindfulness and respect to the Saint and Teacher is good action.

Btw, Buddha is not disappeared, he stated that he will remain in his Teaching (Dharma).


Right Livelihood and Veterinarians I went to the vet last weekend and it got me thinking- veterinarians often kill animals in order to relieve suffering; would this form of killing be considered to violate the first precept, even though it would be done out of compassion? If so, would a career in vet medicine not be considered right livelihood? It seems as though leaving animals instead to die a slow and painful death would be inhumane.
Just curious, thanks for reading. Ian

Found this interesting article via a similar question, if anyone is still interested: http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf/geth0401.pdf

What a great question and a tough one. I do not have a final answer to this but i will try to give my input from a point of view of Theravada buddhism.

If i were to answer your question "hardcore" i would say that a Livelihood where one kills other living beings cannot be considered Right Livelihood.

Why is that?

Let's take a look at the 1st precept and which factors one must fulfill in order to break the precept.

Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami; I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.

In order for one to break the first precept the following factors must be fulfilled;

pano -- presence of a living being.
panasannita -- one knows that it is a living being.
vadhacittam -- the intention to kill.
upakkamo -- the effort to kill.
tena maranam -- the resulting death of that being.

If these factors have been fulfilled the first precept has been broken.

What if the vet kills the animal out of compassion?

From a theravada buddhist point of view it is not possible to give rise to the intention to kill when certain mental states are present, for example compassion. When these states are well developed from following the noble 8-fold path then the intention to kill cannot arise since it is an unwholesome state of mind.

In that sense i do not think the vet does it out of compassion. If he had compassion he would not give rise to the intention to kill the being. He might give rise to the intention kill out of ignorance of the true nature of reality. Because of the ignorance he might believe that he is helping the animal by killing it.

What is really going on here is that by seeing that animal suffer, he is experiencing the 5 aggregates. I would think that he is especially experiencing the 2th aggregate of sensations. When viewing this from the perspective of dependent origination (paticca-sammupada), ignorance of the true nature of reality, founded by not understanding the 3 signs of existence and the 5 hindrances, is what leads him to create kamma.

If we jump to the 6th link in the dependent origination which is contact we will see that when the mind goes out to the object and contact is established, there arises feeling. Feeling can be pleasant, unpleasant or neutral as the initial reaction to contact.

I suggest the feeling the vet experiences here is unpleasant which leads to aversion. That aversion is what later leads him to create an action.
On basis of the 3 signs of existence, namely anatta the vet is here creating a self in the 10th link of dependent origination which is becomming. According to the Buddha one creates a self in 4 ways. Let's take the 2th aggreate as an example.

I am the feelings
The feelings are in me
I am in the feelings
The feelings belong to me

What is happening here is that the vet is creating a self. In order to contain the feelings (the object) and react to them one needs a vessel, a container. That container is the self that is being created. The vet is now identifiying with the feelings. He is taking ownership of them. In reality the feelings are just arisen impersonal phenomena that will cease to exist again.
The feelings are not his and do not belong to him.

Why?

Because he has no control over them. He cannot say "i want to feel only positive feelings and never negative feelings". That is impossible and because of that the feelings are uncontrollable, they are ungovernable. What is uncontrollable and ungovernable is oppressing and that is not fit to be called a self.

What the vet should do in that situation according to buddhist practice is to merely observe the phenomena that has arisen and then observe how they will disintegrate after a certain amount of time. What is subject to arising is subject to cessation.
In other words - do Vipassana meditation and learn about the true nature of reality. He will discover that a self is nowhere to be found. Everything works just fine without the need for a self to exist.

Now i would like to make another important point regarding the interfering with the death process of a being.

The fact that the vet does not know what the experience of the animal is the vet might interfere with the death process of that being.
He might interfere with that being's comming to terms with its own death. We know that death holds some of the most profound insights that can have great significance for a beings path to enlightenment. By ending that beings life before the death process is finished the vet might take away that beings possibility to achieve these profound insights.

Also that being is experiencing the results of its own past deeds so by killing it in the middle of that process the vet breaks that “kamma-receiving process” which might result in that being getting a unfortunate rebirth where it must continue to receive the unfinished kammic results from its past life.

Suffering is like the fertiliser for our spiritual life. Suffering should not be "stopped" by killing (reacting) to it. Instead it must be understood in order to achieve insights based on it.

I think that part of the problem is due to most beings spending most time in conventional reality (sammuti sacca) which is based on concepts for example "a man, woman, animal etc.". These things do not really exist. They are merely convenient designations we apply to the comming together/a collection of a number of factors.

This misunderstanding of reality happens if a being does not understand how reality functions in terms of the 3 signs of existence.

Mahasi Sayadaw compares physical matter, materiality, to sea foam (p. 65). From far away sea foam looks like it has a structure to it but when you inspect it up close you will see that it is empty of any form. It is hollow and filled with air bubbles. Modern physics will tell you that solid matter is merely an illusion and that it actually consists of mostly empty space. This is due to the enormous amount of empty space there exists in an atom between the nucleus and the electrons.

If beings were to spend more time in ultimate reality (paramattha sacca) then they might view the situation of an animal suffering differently, as bare experience; "seeing, hearing etc.".

As i said in the beginning i do not have a final answer to this question. Please see only this answer as an input. It might not be as i have described here. If i have misunderstood anything please feel free to correct me.

Lanka


How to not let the attachment to a self and its preferences influence the choice of a particular tradition in buddhism? I have recently dedicated my life towards a search for an practice of a right livelihood. I was acquainted to buddhist philosophy before and set my mind on clearing any preconceived ideas about it and start from the very beginning available for me. Since there is absolutely no way to meet a teacher in person in the present for me, I tried to grasp the right understanding through various sources on the web, including this SE.

At first I was convinced that I should follow a Theravada practice. Doubts arose and sent me to an alternative path. This is, most likely a result of my ego, interested in a more profound modification of daily life with emphasis on real "personification" of the doctrine. This made me look for Zen tradition.

I believe this episode is just a way for me to perceive that any choice I make now will be a direct effect of the attachment to an ego. Thus, I am humble to notice that beautiful opportunity this doubt has brought to me in order tO seek for any available guidance right now.

This is just a suggestion, but in the Mahayana practice, there is a sect called the SGI. The followers consider them selves "lay-buddhists" and the goal of the practice is to atrain buddhahood and ultimately help create a world of world peace. The community in my experience is very supportive and a nice community to become apart of. I know that it is seen by some as a religion that doesn't have value and that the leader isn't enlightened, but part of the reason for that is because the sutra on which the SGI is based upon is the lotus sutra which is very different ideologically than that of many other sutras. In my opinion, the religion itself, since it doesn't have monks or nuns, as well as other common aspects of many religions, is more of a philosophy. The philosophy, in my opinion, has lots of depth and is very interesting. Here is a website if you want to learn more:

What the SGI is about:
http://www.sgi.org/our-story.html

The main website:
http://www.sgi.org


Interdependent origination Is the doctrine of interdependent origination found in Vedas . What is real origin of this?  I have heard of indra net .just curious

The doctrine of (Inter) Dependent Origination is solely the doctrine of the Buddha & unrelated to the Vedas. If it was related to the Vedas there would be no Buddha and no Buddhism since the term 'Buddha' solely rests on the premise that the Buddha 'discovered' or 'was enlightened' to the previously unknown truths that lead to Nirvana (here-&-now perfect peace & freedom of suffering).
There are some secular scholars such as Joanna Jurewicz, Linda Blanchard & possibly Richard Gombrich that claim Dependent Origination is related to the Vedas in that: "the 12-nidana chain mirror the creation myth involving the deity Prajapati & the Buddha repurposed the Brahmanic creation myth ". This view is wrong & primarily arises from a misunderstanding of the term 'nama-rupa' (the 4th link in Dependent Origination). 'Nama-rupa' is a term that originates from the Vedas however the Buddha redefined the term to mean 'mentality-materiality' ('mind-body') instead of the Vedic 'name-form'.
Unfortunately, the majority of official Buddhist translators today, such as Bhikkhu Bodhi & Thanissaro Bhikkhu, while not sharing the Vedic views of Linda Blanchard, etc, also mistranslate 'nama-rupa' in Dependent Origination as 'name-form'. This mistranslation occurs because there are contexts in the Buddhist scriptures where the Buddha is answering questions to Brahmans who have no understanding of Buddhism thus in these contexts (but not in the context of Dependent Origination) the translation of 'name-form' is appropriate since it has the same meaning as found in the Vedas.
The real origin of Dependent Origination is described in the Maha Sakyamuni Gotamo Sutta, where, before his enlightenment, the Buddha-To-Be was searching for how suffering occurs.
The Buddha-To-Be asked himself: "Why do people suffer?" He replied: "People suffer due to change & loss; due to aging & death"...he continued...Why does aging-&-death occur? Because of 'birth' ('identity'). People self-identify themselves to be 'of this clan', 'of this family', 'this self' or 'this person'. Why does 'birth' occur? Due to becoming. People 'become' what they believe themselves to be. Why becoming? Attachment. The mind attaches to sense objects & pleasurable feelings. Why attachment? Craving. The mind craves for sense objects & pleasurable feelings. Why feelings? Sense contact. Why sense contact? Sense organs. Why sense organs? Having a body & mind. Why does a body & mind exist? Due to consciousness. Why does consciousness exist? Due to having a body & mind. Why is the body, mind & consciousness not at peace & primed to create its own suffering? Due to 'sankhara' ('inner formations'). Why sankhara? Ignorance.
In summary, those that claim Dependent Origination has its origin in the Vedas cannot be Buddhists (since they deny the Buddha's enlightenment) and simply do not understand how suffering comes to be & how suffering is extinguished (which is the sole purpose of Buddhism).
The Buddha declared: "What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering". Thus, the Buddha did not teach from the Vedas.


Ten thousand world systems I keep pondering over the below questions and thought of posting it here.

Is the physical universe(the one we observe with stars, galaxies, black holes etc) contained in the 31 planes of existence or the other way around?
A "ten thousand world systems" imply that there are other universes besides ours, which gives support to the multiverse hypothesis in science?
Are there ten thousand of world systems or infinite of them? Just trying to ponder if its infinite, then imagine the probability of being born as a human and able to understand dhamma, that is mind blowing. That also goes to show the sheer magnitude of samsara.

The planes are closer to what we mean by dimensions of a system.
All that can be known to exist can be measured & thought about as a system of information, energy or just formation.
The conception & perception of the system occurs within the system. It is a closed system of all information. We can not have information about a beyond the scope of information, can't know the unknowable.
if one could infer information about something which is analogical to the system of energy or information wherein thinking occurs then that would make the two systems conjoined & connected by inference, it would create a paradox where one conceives of two general systems of information which are neither connected nor are separated.
It's a fallacy and is proven by contradiction to be an impossible assertion.
There is one system, it is perceived & conceived in & by itself here or there by this or that being.
Planes are fields & classes of perception which are a scope of the alliness of formation.
The system is thought to change as it persists and has one most powerful percepient at it's any given state, in the doctrine of self that is either a Buddha or a Brahma.
There are sub systems within this system and these collectively are what is spoken of as a ten thousandfold world system, each is said to have earth, sun, humans, four kings & a sakka god.
When a Buddha arises in the world the this 10 thousandfold system is said to shake.
But we don't see a Buddha or anyone go from one human like system to another, eg we don't see Buddha meeting multiple Sakkas kings of gods.
It is philosophically difficult to work out why not. I have some idea but i don't think this has been addressed anywhere in the texts. I don't see much point in going to detail as to my understanding at this point.
The cosmology of Buddhism isn't philosophically simple and is closer to astrophysics theory. Eg sutta speak of dark cosmic voids where the light of the moon & sun doesn't reach and nobody seems to know what is being spoken of.


How does Shambhala differ from traditional Vajrayana Buddhism as it is practiced in Asia? How is Shambhala Buddhism as founded by Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche and continued by folks like Pema Chodron different from traditional Tantric Buddhism such as that practiced by the Dalai Lama?  Does Shambhala rely on the same texts as Tibetan Buddhism?

In the editor's preface of my copy of Trungpa's 'Shambhala - The Sacred Path of the Warrior' it is claimed (and I do well agree with that), that the Shambhala teaching is "a major departure" from Trungpa's earlier, popular but quite orthodox Tibetan Buddhist books. This is further elaborated, saying that the outlook is rather secular than religious and in the broadest possible way universally-human.

This fits quite well with my personal impression of the teaching, that it tries to avoid anything too specifically buddhist, too 'sectarian', too foreign (for westerners), too 'exotic', but rather attempts to - if I may say so - lead westerners (that unmistakably are the audience talked to) back to a common human source of dignity rather than providing yet another foreign source of 'spirituality' to draw from.

This also means, that it does not rely on any scriptural source, rather - in a rather unimportant and personal way - it relies on the tradition of the Shambhala kingdom.


Is Chögyal Namkhai Norbu correct when he says our life is unreal and that Buddha taught that life is just like a dream? In this video clip you can see renowned Tibetan master Chögyal Namkhai Norbu saying that life is unreal and that the Buddha taught it is just like a dream. Is he correct? I've transcribed below:

Sometimes we have very nice dream. Fantastic dream... And we enjoy. We
are very happy. We are dreaming, for example... ...I'm looking and
someone is selling... lottery ticket. Very, very big lottery. I am
taking and buying from someone and I am returning home. And I am
seeing the television. And when I am looking at my number... The
television is saying that number! Then I feel very happy. "Oh, what do
I do now?" All this money. I am really happy and then I wake up. When
I wake up, I discovered that is a dream, unfortunately. I am not
happy. Or sometimes... very, very bad dream. There are many people
that want to kill me. They are arriving in my house. Then they are
starting to kill me. I feel very afraid. That moment I wake up. And I
discover, "Oh, that is only a dream!" I am very happy. You see, good
or bad. Even good or bad. A dream is a dream. Unreal. So Buddha is
saying, our life is just like a dream. Big dream. Dream of night is a
very small dream, but... Our life's dream, it has many day and night,
day and night etcetera. When we discover that... Dreams, we discover
when we wake up. But big dreams, we discover... When we are dying and
being in a state of Bardo (transitional state).

Emphasis mine.
A closely related question (with answers) is here.

It might be possible for you to gain the understanding you need from these two powerful excerpts. The first is from the Phena Sutta; the second is from chapter 32 of the Diamond Sutra.

The Phena Sutta
Form is like a glob of foam;
feeling, a bubble;
perception, a mirage;
fabrications, a banana tree;
consciousness, a magic trick —
this has been taught
by the Kinsman of the Sun.
However you observe them,
appropriately examine them,
they're empty, void
to whoever sees them
appropriately.

[ADDITION]
How can the Phena Sutta be describing something that is dream-like? The aggregates give their fascination over to form-based ideas such that they develop an unhealthy reliance on those ideas. This is called clinging. Clinging presents itself in two ways: attraction and aversion. It is not objects that we cling to, but it originates from our interpretation of those objects; the way in which those objects are cognized. Therefore, the clinging is always from that origin: the mind - the neurotic mind clings to the body. It is this motion of aversion and attraction that creates a noisy haze in our consciousness, stimulated by feeling/perception. This is pananca. This haze hinders our view; we don't see clearly. This not seeing clearly is avijja from which suffering arises. The experience of suffering is a method by which the body tries to eject wrong views born from that very ignorance, but we misperceive its function. Suffering then becomes an identity instead of knowledge. This is how the aggregates can present themselves as dream-like. It's just another way to speak about ignorance. It doesn't matter how you word it. If dream is suitable for you, then fine, as long as you understand the mechanisms behind it.

The Diamond Sutra
“Subhuti, how can one explain this Sutra to others without holding in
mind any arbitrary conception of forms or phenomena or spiritual
truths? It can only be done, Subhuti, by keeping the mind in perfect
tranquility and free from any attachment to appearances.”
“So I say to you – This is how to contemplate our conditioned
existence in this fleeting world:”
“Like a tiny drop of dew, or a bubble floating in a stream; Like a
flash of lightning in a summer cloud, Or a flickering lamp, an
illusion, a phantom, or a dream.”
“So is all conditioned existence to be seen.”
Thus spoke Buddha.


Did the Buddha endorse a cyclical cosmology? One of my physics professors implied that Buddhism is false because, unlike the Abrahamic religions, Buddhism claims a cyclical cosmology. He argued that since the universe is expanding and its expansion is speeding up, the universe cannot be cyclical.
I was under the impression that the idea of a cyclical universe was carried over from Hinduism into Buddhism implicitly and that the Buddha never made any claims regarding cosmology.
Did the Buddha suggest a cyclical universe?

DN 1 states:

There comes a time, monks, when after the lapse of a long period
this world contracts (disintegrates) ...
But sooner or later, monks, after the lapse of a long period, there
comes a time when this world begins to expand once again.

This may or may not correspond to the Big Bounce model of physics.
For more info, please read the 2020 Wired article "What If the Big Bang Was Actually a Big Bounce?", by Charlie Wood.
Despite this, if you look at the whole body of the Buddha's teachings, the Buddha discouraged such speculation.
He preferred the seeker to focus on the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path, the path that leads to the permanent cessation of suffering (dukkha).
Speculating on the origin of the universe is totally unimportant in Buddhism. Whether it was a Big Bang or Big Bounce or an infinitely existing universe, the validity of the Four Noble Truths does not change in any way.
Please read the wikipedia article on the Parable of the Poisoned Arrow.
In AN 4.77, he taught:

"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an
unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring
madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

In AN 10.70, he taught:

As he was sitting there, he addressed the monks: "For
what topic of conversation are you gathered together here? In the
midst of what topic of conversation have you been interrupted?"
"Just now, lord, after the meal, on returning from our alms round, we
gathered at the meeting hall and got engaged in many kinds of bestial
topics of conversation: conversation about kings, robbers, & ministers
of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing,
furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns,
cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street &
the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the
world & of the sea; talk of whether things exist or not."
"It isn't right, monks, that sons of good families, on having gone
forth out of faith from home to the homeless life, should get engaged
in such topics of conversation, i.e., conversation about kings,
robbers, & ministers of state... talk of whether things exist or not.


My thinking mind as subject of my meditation stops my thinking Just recently I changed my subject of meditation: I try to "watch" my mind while it is thinking. This nearly instantaneously makes my mind calm. It kind of stops my thinking. And this feels great. It's also easier to come back to this state, once my mind starts to wander around. I use this occasions to watch my mind as well.

[There is in principle an infinite regression (I could also watch my mind, watching my mind thinking), but I never came to make use of that.]

Is there some more guidance in the buddhistic literature or stuff that support this kind of meditation? Is there a name of this mental state?

Mindfulness of mind is one of the four Satipathanna, that is, foundations of mindfulness. This is the basis of meditation that the Buddha taught. Generally speaking, as far as I know, meditation based on the four Satipathanna is referred to as Vipassana.

How to meditate - Ven. Yuttadhammo


Are any of the three poisons considered stronger or more difficult to break than the others? Are any of the three poisons (unwholesome roots) of greed, hatred and delusion considered stronger or more difficult to break than the others. Or are they all seen as equally difficult to break, perhaps only differing in strength depending on the individual.

I'm interested in teachings from any of the schools of Buddhism about this. I'm not really asking for personal perspectives but rather specific advice from established teachers of the Buddhist schools.

As per Buddha of Pali Canon (AN 3.68, thanks to @Unrul3r for the reference):

Aversion (aka anger, aka hatred) has much blame, but is quick to fade away;
Obsessive desire (aka greed, aka lust) has little blame, but is slow to fade away;
Confusion (aka delusion) both has much blame, and is slow to fade away.

As explained in commentary on dharmafarer.org:

  The Anguttara Commentary to AN 3.68 explains that “has little blame” means “both by way of worldly blame and by way of its (karmic) results”, that is, both in the worldly and the spiritual senses. It goes on to show that lust (lobha) “has little blame”by the fact that there is no social stigma to marriage, although it is rooted in sexual desire (that is, if lust remains within the moral limits). Such lust would not in itself lead to a painful rebirth in lower states. As such, it is less blameworthy in regard to karmic consequences.

  This statement may appear strange in
  view of the fact that greed (lobha) is one of the roots of the unwholesome or evil and that it also falls under the wider-ranging term of Craving, the fundamental cause of suffering. Yet greed is “less blameworthy” than hate in all those instances where the gratification
  of lust does not violate basic morality and is not harmful to others, as, for instance, the enjoyment
  of delicious food, sex gratification within the bounds of the Third Precept, and so forth.

  Lust, however, is “hard to remove” as it has deep roots in human nature, and is “as hard to remove as oily soot, and a particular attachment might follow a person even through two or three lives”. In a single moment the roots of lust can sink deeply into man’s heart; its fine hair roots of
  subtle attachments are as difficult to remove as the great passions, or even more so.

  The Anguttara Commentary similarly says that “much blame” means “both by way of worldly blame and by way of its (karmic) results,” that is, both in the worldly and the spiritual senses.

  Hate (dosa) is more blameworthy than lust and delusions because the results of a hateful act are often
  immediate apparently, widespread and protracted. Hate is almost always behind killing, acts of violence
  and life-threatening deeds. As such, hate is greatly blameworthy. However, people often quickly forget
  such violent acts when they are distracted by other pursuits, especially those concerning living needs,
  comfort and pleasure: in other words, they are more easily distracted by the drive of lust.

  Delusion (moha) is both greatly blameworthy and hard to abandon. It is always at the root of the
  motivation in the breaking of the precepts, indeed in any evil unskillful act.

  Both hate and delusion are regarded as blameworthy in society and have negative karmic results, as both may lead one to rebirth in painful states. Hate, however, is an unpleasant state of mind, and as beings naturally desire happiness, they will generally wish to abandon it. Moreover, by asking for forgiveness from those one has wronged through anger, it is easier to nullify the negative effects of anger in oneself and in others. Delusion, however, is usually deeply rooted in craving, wrong view and conceit, and as such will be as hard to remove as lust.


How can I escape the suffering of losing my Father? One day my Father will leave me. I love him a a lot. It will cause suffering when he leaves.

My question is : How can I escape the suffering of losing my Father?

Let go of what is going to cause the suffering. I.e. your attachment towards him. Practice Satipattana meditation.


Could Lobha(craving) and Dosa(aversion) be working in tandem? Is wishing for a pain to go away an instance of aversion(Dosa) or an instance of craving(Lobha)? Or both working in tandem?

ex: leg pain while doing sitting meditation.

Aversion is obvious, if the pain becomes unpleasant. But there is also the wanting for it to disappear(Vibhava Tanha) or the desire for the non painful state.

An Abhidhamma answer would be much appreciated.

If you want an abhidhamma answer, you have to speak in abhidhamma terms. "Wishing for pain to go away" is a sutta statement. It involves a wisher, and describes a sutta action.
lobha and dosa cannot arise in the same citta, certainly. They are mutually exclusive cetasika that arise in the javana cittas of the process of a single experience, and all of the javanas in any given thought process are said to be the same, since they arise from the same votthapana citta.

Only one type of citta runs for all seven occasions of the javana process.
-- Bhikkhu Bodhi, Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, p. 157

One act - of wishing for pain to go away, for example - may contain many such processes, each one with javana of different makeup.  So, in wishing for pain to go away, there are probably multiple consecutive lobha, dosa, and moha cittas - though all unwholesome cittas contain moha.


What's the difference between Samma Sambuddho and Buddho Both are in the nine qualities of the Buddha but I can't see a distinctive difference.  Is there supposed to be a distinctive difference or are these qualities an example of repetition?

According to the Visuddhimagga in its description of the contemplation of the attributes of the Buddha:

  Vism. XII

  He  is  fully  enlightened  (sammásambuddha)  because  he  has  discovered (buddha) all things rightly (sammá) and by himself (sámaí).

  ...

  He is enlightened (buddha) with the knowledge that belongs to the fruit of liberation, since everything that can be known has been
  discovered (buddha) by him.

So the tittle Samasambuddho refers specifically to the Buddha's attainment as the result of self effort, and the title Buddho refers to the attainment itself.

Also, the term Buddho refers to any being that has seen the truth, so a Paccekabuddha is one who attains enlightenment on their own but doesn't teach, and if I'm not too mistaken an Arahat can technically be called an Anubuddha, meaning one who attains enlightnenment through following the teaching of a Sammasambuddha.


Was it ever stated that monks can’t show their psychic powers to lay people? I heard it was one of the monk rules. What sutta says monks can’t show their powers to lay people? The Buddha showed his psychic powers to many lay people so why can’t monks?

Perhaps you have confused with this rule from the Bhikkhu Patimokkha:

Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an
unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed. -
Pācittiya 8

This rule is more about attainments (e.g. jhana, stream entry etc.) rather than about psychic powers.


If buddha never got angry, why do so many buddhist teachers say anger is inescapable? Some buddhist teachers say anger is inescapable, or even necessary and healthy, are they not enlightened ?

Because teachers, or even if they are arahats, are not Buddha.  They often err or have some imperfection in their teachings.  They may have destroyed all or some of the fetters but they are not perfect as Buddha in Dhamma (both in seeing and how to articulate it).  In Ani Sutta, Buddha said not to lend ear to new teachings. I have not seen "anger is inescapable, or even necessary and healthy" in any sutta that could be credited to Buddha's original teachings.  As for myself, I disregard it.

PS.  I certainly not to be disrespectful to your teachers.  They may be imperfect in their teachings but it is still a good idea to hangout with people who are virtuous in their precepts.  IMO.

PS2.  wanting to be near, approach those with virtuous actions, keeping precepts is a sign of Saddha.