Taking Vinaya as a measure of the weight of kamma?

You must be dissatisfied with my quote (in this answer) of killing humans being a parajika offense for monks vs. killing animals which is only a pacittiya offense. A parajika offense is met with immediate and irreversible dismissal from the monastic order. A pacittiya offense is met with confession, usually with the intention to not repeat it.

Firstly, let's get this right:

Killing is against the first of the five precepts
Business in meat is against Right Livelihood.
Keeping the five precepts is one of the criteria for stream entry according to AN 10.92.

However, does this mean killing any living creature has the same consequence or same effects? Does killing a mosquito bear the same consequence as killing an arahant?

The answer is NO.

According to AN 6.87, there is actually a list of people a person could kill or injure, and such a person will never be able to have the right mental state or moral capacity to learn the Dhamma:

  "Endowed with these six qualities, a person is incapable of alighting
  on the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even
  when listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?

  "He has killed his mother; he has killed his father; he has killed an
  arahant; he has, with corrupt intent, caused the blood of a Tathagata
  to flow; he has caused a split in the Sangha; or he is a person of
  dull discernment, slow & dull-witted.

  "Endowed with these six qualities, a person is capable of alighting on
  the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even while
  listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?

  "He has not killed his mother; he has not killed his father; he has
  not killed an arahant; he has not, with corrupt intent, caused the
  blood of a Tathagata to flow; he has not caused a split in the Sangha;
  and he is a discerning person, not slow or dull-witted.

According to MN 86, Angulimala killed many human beings, but he could still change and become an arahant. So, probably, he did not commit the transgressions above (killing father, killing mother, killing arahant, injuring Buddha):

  And at that time in King Pasenadi's realm there was a bandit named
  Angulimala: brutal, bloody-handed, devoted to killing & slaying,
  showing no mercy to living beings. He turned villages into
  non-villages, towns into non-towns, settled countryside into unsettled
  countryside. Having repeatedly killed human beings, he wore a garland
  (mala) made of fingers (anguli).

  (After the Buddha transformed Angulimala)

  Then Ven. Angulimala, dwelling alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, &
  resolute, in no long time reached & remained in the supreme goal of
  the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into
  homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now. He
  knew: "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There
  is nothing further for the sake of this world." And thus Ven.
  Angulimala became another one of the arahants.

On the other hand, according to DN 2, King Ajatasattu was unable to effectively learn the Dhamma because he had arranged to kill his father in order to become king:

  So King Ajatasattu, delighting and rejoicing in the Blessed One's
  words, rose from his seat, bowed down to him, and — after
  circumambulating him — left. Not long after King Ajatasattu had left,
  the Blessed One addressed the monks: "The king is wounded, monks. The
  king is incapacitated. Had he not killed his father — that righteous
  man, that righteous king — the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye would
  have arisen to him as he sat in this very seat."


Does meditation increase productivity for software developers and related professions?

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

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

By "more productive" I mean

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

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

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

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

Experiment 1: Productive time per week

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

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

Experiment 2: Accomplished tasks per week

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


yes I'm pretty sure that all beings have past lives . there was an old saying from Buddhist litriture where if you cut short the life of any living creature (intetially killing) then you are forcing that being to be born again to go through the process of life again .also the Buddha said that some have had a birth of another species and through good karma became human etc the same is true for humans going back to another lower realm ie animal if bad karma prevails...as to the rest of your questions I hope someone else will jump in ..edit : in reference to your last question about population ...yes there is a possibility as I've mentioned. Humans are born again again this is samasra ...


The original home of human beings according to the Pali Canon is the Abhassara realm, lit. "from whose bodies are emitted rays like lightning." This is the top realm of three, next above the Brahma world, in the Form world of the devas (lit. "shining beings"), corresponding to the second jhana of meditative attainment. As a result of their increasing infatuation with sensuous pleasure, at least some of the residents of this realm "fell" into rebirth in the earthly realm, the manusyaloka. Since this degeneration was gradual, it implies that there are many "vibratory" or energetic levels of human beings in our universe, ranging from animal-like human beings with short life spans (the texts mention a minimum of 10 years) to glorious deva-like beings with long life spans and great wisdom and power (the texts say 80,000 or 84,000 years, which probably symbolize an unknown but large number; 84 is a Buddhist symbolic number representing totality). The latter correspond to extra-terrestrial civilizations and perhaps trans-dimensional beings as well. The shortest-lived non-human primate has a lifespan of 8 years (including the greater dwarf lemur, purple faced leaf monkey, bare faced tamarin, and western tarsier). This implies that primates are the degenerated remnants of human beings, rather than the reverse. Since this appears to contradict the evidence for evolution, one might speculate that human evolution was triggered by some sort of intervention, but this is going beyond my knowledge of the Pali Canon. The longest-lived human beings are genderless and do not have physical bodies, but appear rather as luminous beings who fly through the air including, presumably, interstellar space. Such "luminous bisexual spheres" are also mentioned by Plato. The comparison with UFOs, the physical existence of which cannot be denied (see Dr. Jacques Vallee, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Dr. John Mack, Dr. Karla Turner, John Keel, and others), is unavoidable.


No aim. No perspective. Begin of 30y. Scared about political-decisions. Paranoid. What should I do?

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

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

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

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

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

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


If you have a Sensei or Roshi, ask them. If not, I would recommend you to start with a length which is challenging but not impossible to manage. From time to time you can do a longer meditation. In example, on a weekend sit 4 times 15 minutes with 5 minutes kinhin between. You'll find this a valuable experience. Don't just stay with a specific time without changing: no challenge means no progress. Zen meditation is about interrupting, its hard work. If you feel relaxed, work harder.

There is no official recommendation because every teacher recommends it different. In example Kodo Sawaki emphasizes Zazen and he would most likely recommend stricter practice than modern teachers.

I would definitely recommend you to find a meditation group (sangha) as the sangha is also part of the way. Questions like you asked can't be answered easily, especially by people like me who never met you. Additionally you might get theoretical answers by people like me who are not competent enough to guide you (I am not a sensei, just a student). Remember, zen is a way, not just a quantified meditation block.

However, if you don't have a sangha close (or just crazy people in it) it's better to start somehow instead of doing nothing. So I would suggest the 15 minutes and work up and keep reading old masters. I recommend sawaki specifically to you because of the question you asked.


What determines whether a style of meditation can or cannot lead to insight?

Here is the difference: a thought itself is real, but the object of the thought is conceptual. Loving-kindness is real, but the object of loving-kindness is conceptual.

When thinking, one is really thinking. When thinking of a cat, the cat is not really there, but the thought is.

When loving a person, the love is really there, but the person is only a concept.

Mind refers to the process of thinking, loving, etc., itself, not the object of the mental activity. When the mind focusses on the movements of the body, the movement is real, the focussing is real, but the body part itself (e.g. hand, foot, stomach, breath etc.) is a concept.

If one focusses on the breath, for example, going in and out of the body, one is focussing on a concept, as it is not directly related to the observation of the sensation. If one focusses on the sensation at the nose or the abdomen, then one is focussing on ultimate reality.


What do we know about the historic Padmasambhava?

The Tibetans think of Padmasambhava as the second most important person for their lineage.

http://www.dharmafellowship.org/biographies/historicalsaints/lord-padmasambhava.htm

Here is a sample from the link above - more is available for your reading or study

  There is no doubt in the mind of every practitioner of Tibetan
  Buddhism that the second most unique and extraordinary exemplar of our
  whole lineage after Pramodavajra himself, was the powerful Lord
  Padmasambhava, the Wisdom Master who was chiefly instrumental in
  bringing the tradition to Tibet. Known as the Lotus Guru (padma-guru),
  the Saint Lama (guru Rinpoche) of Tibet, and as a "second Buddha",
  Padmasambhava1 shines with the incomparable brightness of the morning
  star in the world's firmament of stellar saints. Long before he was
  born, mystics and prophets were signaling his advent. During his life
  he drew the respect and veneration of kings and emperors and after his
  death the multitude made his memory into an imperishable icon of the
  Absolute.

The history offered is extensive so will let this quote be the introduction to a very long web page.


15 Un-written BrahmaLokas in Dhammacakkapavattana sutta

Footnote 200 on page 59 of Piya Tan's translation says,

  It is interesting and important to note that the list of exulting devas stops here with the Brahmās of the 1st dhyana.
  The reason for this is that, as there is still some level of mentation here—by way of initial and sustained applications
  (vitakka,vicāra)—these Brahmās are still in contact with the sense-world. In the realms beyond the 1st dhyana,
  thought-process as we know it ceases completely so that these beings enjoy the glory of their meditative state as
  pure light or profound peace for as long as their karma fuels it. See Bhava Ss 1-2 (A 3.76-77), SD 23.13 (3).


Buddhist "code of ethics" on talking about other religions

What you've described is probably very common in meditation centres, unfortunately.

This isn't from the Vinaya proper, but in the Brahmajāla Sutta, the Buddha goes over many views, starting with superficial views his followers have of him. Here's an excerpt from Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation:

  "It is, bhikkhus, only to trifling and insignificant matters, to the minor details of mere moral virtue, that a worldling would refer when speaking in praise of the Tathāgata. And what are those trifling and insignificant matters, those minor details of mere moral virtue, to which he would refer?
  "'Having abandoned the destruction of life, [omitted for brevity]' It is in this way, bhikkhus, that the worldling would speak when speaking in praise of the Tathāgata.

  "Or he might say: 'Having abandoned taking what is not given, [omitted]'

  "Or he might say: 'Having abandoned unchaste living, [omitted]'
  "Or he might say: 'Having abandoned false speech, the recluse Gotama abstains from falsehood. He speaks only the truth, he lives devoted to truth; trustworthy and reliable, he does not deceive anyone in the world.'

  "Or he might say: 'Having abandoned slander, the recluse Gotama abstains from slander. He does not repeat elsewhere what he has heard here in order to divide others from the people here, nor does he repeat here what he has heard elsewhere in order to divide these from the people there. Thus he is a reconciler of those who are divided and a promoter of friendships. Rejoicing, delighting, and exulting in concord, he speaks only words that are conducive to concord.'

  "Or he might say: 'Having abandoned harsh speech, the recluse Gotama abstains from harsh speech. He speaks only such words as are gentle, pleasing to the ear, endearing, going to the heart, urbane, amiable, and agreeable to many people.'

Also, in the Theragatha (found in the ) we have the verses by Vangisa Bhikkhu (according to ATI, the bhikkhu whom the Buddha designated as his foremost disciple in the composition of spontaneous verse):

  One should speak only that word by which one would not torment oneself nor harm others. That word is indeed well spoken.
  One should speak only pleasant words, words which are acceptable (to others). What one speaks without bringing evils to others is pleasant.
  Truth is indeed the undying word; this is an ancient verity. Upon truth, the good say, the goal and the teaching are founded.[19]
  The sure word the Awakened One speaks for the attainment of nibbana, for making an end of suffering, is truly the best of words.


OP: My recent experience is breathing can't be noticed.

As you progress in meditation breathing becomes subtle and stops. As many prematurely think breathing has stoped when it becomes subtle but not completely stopped as one is not sensitive to detect it.

Breathing is tied to bodily formations.

  The in-and-out-breaths, avuso Visākha—these are states bound up with the body.

  Therefore,
  they are bodily formation.

  Avuso Visākha, one, having first thought and pondered, then breaks out into speech.

  Therefore,
  thinking and pondering are verbal formation.

  Perception and feeling—these are mentally-connected states, bound up with the mind.

  Therefore, perception and feeling are thought formation.

Cūla Vedalla Sutta

  When a monk is attaining cessation of perception and feeling,  ayya, which states
  end first:

  bodily formation, or
  verbal formation, or
  thought formation?

  When a monk is attaining cessation of perception and feeling, avuso Visākha,

  verbal formation ends first,
  then bodily formation, and
  then thought formation.

Cūla Vedalla Sutta

  OP: But sensation of the body is present.

Perception and feeling \ thought formation is what ends last.

  OP: Most of the time sensation of the body appears such as pain, dissolves without any discomfort.

As you progress most of the sensations are pleasant but unpleasant sensations disappear fast.

  OP: Thoughts are less.

Thoughts/ verbal formation is what ends 1st. They initially reduce and subside.

  OP: Sound can hear but no thoughts on those sounds which were heard. What is this state?

This seems like a preliminary stage in meditation.

  OP: How to continue from hear?

Keep doing more meditation to go deeper. Double-check if you are practising correctly and have selected a proper technique which is conducive to you further in meditation.

Also, try increasing the number of hours.


Does Kwan Yin hold a place in Theravada Buddhism?

Kwan Yin wasn't taught by the Buddha in the Pali suttas and I'm certain Kwan Yin isn't mentioned in the Pali commentaries. Usually the teachers in the Theravada tradition strictly base how they teach on the Pali Canon but a lot of times they aren't so strict. There are Theravada teachers that are more like Mahayana teachers and Mahayana teachers that are more like Theravada teachers. In the end, the tradition one chooses isn't as important as the teacher one chooses.


This is not medical advice and you seek a doctor for your condition. The way I understand that Samatha meditation will not help with this condition. Samatha meditation generally suppresses your feelings and awareness. However, Vipassana meditation will help you as it promotes body awareness. Generally in Vipassana meditation, you learn to accept the way you and your body as it is with awareness. Also, make sure that you have good eating habits and a good daily exercise routine.


Why is Nanavira considered controversial?

If I had to speculate I would suggest that he was very intellectual.
That can be intimidating.

From the site Nanavira.org:

  Notes on Dhamma has been variously described as "arrogant, scathing, and condescending", as "a fantastic system", and as "the most important book to be written in this century". The Ven. Ñānavīra Thera himself remarked of the book that "it is vain to hope that it is going to win general approval... but I do allow myself to hope that a few individuals... will have private transformations of their way of thinking as a result of reading them".


Fruition is more related to the 4 stages of sainthood. This is realising of the fruit (Pala) of practice. What his means is you realized the path.


Within my own experience of this, I think it is entirely down to personal opinion. Throughout my upbringing, I was very lucky to be brought up in a country with so many temples and religions that there was hardly any discrimination and a huge encouragement to take part in celebrations. I have always been taught that each religion is equal, and that they mostly aim to reach the same goal: Love and Compassion to alleviate suffering. I think due to modernisation and differing ideologies — e.g. a Westerner's take on Buddhism is rather different to an Asian's take on Buddhism simply due to social and cultural differences — texts have been interpreted in a whole multitude of ways, which therefore causes a whole host of problems. Some will say all religions are very different, others will say they all wish for peace, etc.

My mother was brought up Taoist and Buddhist, she does prayer, and goes to the temple every time we are back in our native country. However, she calls herself a Christian. She believes in God, and at no point do I feel I have the right to question any of her beliefs. I also feel it is easy for her to believe in differing religions because our home town embodies the churches, mosques and temples. She happily practices what she believes in, regardless of its religion. Buddhism in itself is a philosophy, like the Tao, and it is wholly accepting of all religions. If my mother is happy, let her be happy, as long as she feels she is living a good life.


Where does it say 'You Are Already Enlightened'?

It's a basic Mahayana doctrine, important in other schools as well as Zen.

  Hongaku is an East Asian Buddhist doctrine often translated as
  "inherent", "innate", "intrinsic" or "original" enlightenment... It is
  first mentioned in the Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana scripture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongaku

Wikipedia also says it can be traced back to sayings of the Buddha in the Anguttara Nikaya: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-nature#Earliest_sources


Where is the Buddha quoted as saying do not believe anything I say until you can prove it by yourself?

The quote comes from Kalama Sutra (AN 3.65) and is often taken out of context, hence misunderstood.

People of Kalama found themselves bombarded by tens of spiritual teachers, each claiming authority and expertise in spiritual matters. These teachers' doctrines were rather different from each other, but each was presented as The truth. Each teacher seemed quite certain of himself and was able to articulate the teaching logically.

When Buddha on one of his tours around the country arrived at Kalama and presented his teaching, the citizens honestly told him, that what he posits as The truth, to them looks like yet another teaching. "Is there any way" they asked, "that we can figure out which of these teachings is real?"

And that's when Buddha gave his famous answer, the point of which:

It is by its results that a teaching should be evaluated.

A teaching can be elaborate and logical, with precise definitions. According to some people's preconceptions, these are the marks of a true teaching.
A teaching  could be profound, deep and mysterious. Some people assume, if chasm is deep and they can't see the bottom, there must be something in there.
A teaching could match student's view of the world, e.g. the scientific worldview, or a spiritual worldview, or both. Many people interpret Kalama Sutra this way, that they should not believe a teaching unless it matches "common sense". They don't seem to realize that what they assume as common sense is in fact the very tangle of preconceptions that holds them in Samsara.
A teaching could go against student's preconceptions and introduce a completely new theory of everything. Some students are very excited about such esoteric teachings and their eyes glaze over teachers that, in their opinion, profanate Dharma by assuming it speaks about our everyday lives.
A teacher can look confident and speak well, or be soft-spoken and funny, like Dalai Lama. Many people find it hard to relate to a teacher who mismatches their archetype of Sage or Wise Old Man.

According to Buddha, all these are secondary factors, that can't be used as identifying markers of Sat-Dharma (True/Eternal Law/Tradition). Instead, it is by the effects it brings out, both in student's psyche as well as in the world, that a teaching should be measured.

Sat-Dharma is famously good in the beginning, good in the middle and good in the end.

Good in the beginning means, even the outermost layer of Dharma, the one seen by non-Buddhists, has good influence on people. Even the laypeople who don't really practice, but are merely guided by basic Dharma principles, benefit from it. They find that Dharma not only happens to match their highest secular moral and wisdom, but that while secular moral is often too flexible, the compass of Dharma never wavers. When followed at large, True Dharma must lead to reduced suffering and increased harmony in daily lives of common people.

Good in the middle means, when someone practices a slightly superficial version of Dharma, without fully understanding it yet, it greatly reduces amount of suffering one generates inside and around. Student learns to watch his mind and recognize its state, learns to stay mindful of the body and notice arising emotions, learns to not let harmful thoughts and emotions control him, learns to let go of attachments and preconceptions. This leads to increased quality of life, as the student can now stay cool through various life challenges.

Good in the end means, one eventually arrives at Liberating Realization, whereby one is no longer dominated by arbitrary formations, but can instead juggle formations freely.

While some kind of "Good in the end" is obviously the goal of all alternative teachings, it is "Good in the middle" and "Good in the beginning" that is a characteristic mark of True Dharma.

So when Gotama said, "do not believe anything I say until you can prove it by yourself" (or however you want to put it), this is what he meant. He did not mean we should reject a teaching unless it matches our preconceptions. He meant we should evaluate a teaching by its effect on our lives. The proof is in the pudding.


Choosing a Buddhist partner ain't beneficial to spreading Dhamma?

Choose a person with compatible generosity, compatible morality, compatible faith and compatible wisdom. That means even among Buddhists, you still have to filter out the potential spouses.

Marrying a person of a different religion could be highly problematic if you are a practicing Buddhist. I have seen some people make it work, but those are mostly people who are simply Buddhist by birth and not interested in it much and don't care about what religion their children pick. So either you have to be that way or the other person have to be that way to make it work.


Your dog guards your house from robbers and other criminals. But if it barks at your friends and relatives, shouldn't you shush it? Is that being ungrateful to the dog?

Rice is the staple diet of most asians. But are you ungrateful to rice if you refuse to eat spoilt rice? You eat rice when it is healthy to eat. In the same way, agree with scientific teachings when they are beneficial and true. Reject them when they are mere hypotheses based on wrong views.

Integrity is the quality of being honest. It is Anatta like everything else. But Anatta does not imply that one should not cultivate good qualities.


I can thoroughly recommended Dipa Ma-The Life and Legacy of a Buddhist Master, a short biography of Dipa Ma, She was an housewife, mother and highly developed Buddhist teacher living in Calcutta. I think it's inspirational, particularly for people interested in how to practice Buddhism in the modern world.

Also I've been personally recommended Wild Ivy which is an biography of Hakuin the 18th century Japanese Zen master. I haven't personally read this but I have attended study groups when we have been taking reading from this and it is excellent.

Finally Gautama Buddha: The Life and Teachings of The Awakened One is a well recommended recent biography of the original Buddhist teacher. I have received a fair few personal recommendations that this is a good one even if you think you are very familiar with the story of the historical Buddha.


Which Sutta does Sakkra asks 14 Questions from the Buddha?

Sakka-pañha Sutta: Sakka's Questions.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.21.2x.than.html


The 'three poisons', or three 'unwholesome roots' (akusala-mūla), are named as ignorance, attachment, and aversion — and the "wholesome roots" are their opposites:

  Opposite wholesome qualities

  The three wholesome mental factors that are identified as the opposites of the three poisons are:

  amoha (non-bewilderment); prajna (wisdom)
  alobha (non-attachment)
  adveṣa (non-aggression, lack of hatred); mettā (loving-kindness)

  The principal aim of the Buddhist path is to cultivate these and related positive qualities.

They're mentioned in for example, the Sammaditthi Sutta:

  "And what is the root of the wholesome? Non-greed is a root of the wholesome; non-hate is a root of the wholesome; non-delusion is a root of the wholesome. This is called the root of the wholesome.


The way you deal with it depends on the type of meditation. But for beginners, whether you cultivate Samata or Vipassana does not make so much difference in that respect.

It is usually advised to beginners to emphasize the application of alertness. Alertness is like a spy: it is a mind that check where you find yourself, how you are doing, whether you still focus on your object and in what way. The more alert you are, the less inattentive you are. When you are not alert at all, you wander without noticing that you are wandering. In other words, it is advised not to try to hold onto the object very tight, but to often check how you are doing. In the beginning, you will lose your object of concentration a great deal, so you will have to realize that you lost your object as often. This is bound to happen. You can not simply set out to stay with your object without loosing it in the beginning, for that would not be realistic. So, your goal as a beginner ought to be something like "I will notice every time I lost my object", "I will not wander for too long", "I will not be inattentive and dive into objects mindlessly" rather than "I will hold onto my object so tight I will never ever loose it." It is a way of saying that on the outset, the cultivation of alertness is more important that that of mindfulness.

There are exercises you can engage in, that will show you how "funny" your mind is. Hopefully they will help you find a way to cultivate concentration. For instance, sit for half an hour in a meditation posture, and tell yourself "Whatever happens, wherever my mind goes, it's fine by me. I will not interfere, I will not judge, I will not try to change its course. I will simply step back and observe." When you do that, your mind behaves surprisingly well. But as soon as you stop observing it, it goes wild. There is an idiom that goes "When the cat's away, the mice will play".

On the opposite side, you can try to not think of an elephant for a couple of minutes. Set out to purposely not think of an elephant, for two minutes. Try very hard. The more you purposely try not to think of an elephant, the more you think of it. In fact, once, I received this instruction "not to think of pizza for two minutes", and I managed quiet well when, instead of setting out to not think of a pizza, I told myself "It's okay if you do. Just observe your mind." Why? It is because when you do that, you take a step back, you disengage from the external object, you do not dive into it. Whereas when you plan to not think of this or that, you will tend to dive into whatever you are not supposed to think of. It shows you that, if you lost your object of concentration because you were thinking of something else, it will not get better if you are forceful and beat yourself up, and regret loosing your object, etc.

Of course, you mind wanders because it lacks habituation. Actually, it's used to jump from one thing to the next. It's good news: there is nothing that doesn't get easier through training. Another thing is that your mind wanders because you do not see things the way they are. That is why, even if you want to cultivate Samata, it is good to sometimes engage in analytical meditation on death, impermanence, suffering, and so forth. Because this will support your non-attachment, non-anger, etc. Not attached, your mind will wander less. Not angry or frustrated, when you will loose your object, you will not want to be separated from your "failure" so badly that it will hinder your concentration.


What is the "nature of reality" according to the Buddha?

Realities are called Paramattha Dhamma in Buddhism. There are 4 such realities.

Citta(consciousness)
ex: Vipaaka-citta, Karma, Kiriya-citta.
Cetasika(mental concomitants)
ex: Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara
Rupa(materiality)
ex: Patavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo
Nibbana

  What is the "nature of reality" that the Buddha talks about?

The first 3 realities listed above have 3 qualitative natures:

Anicca(impermanent)
Dukkha(unsatisfactory)
Anatta(impersonal)

The fourth reality only has the impersonal nature.

The cause for suffering is craving according to the 2nd noble truth. But craving cannot arise without ignorance. It also cannot be uprooted without eliminating ignorance. Ignorance is given as the first link of Paticca Samuppada, the dependent arising process which explains the origins of suffering.

I don't recall any sutta in which the Buddha making that exact statement, but it is inline with Buddhism. It would be more correct if you say "The cause of suffering is craving, which arises due to the ignorance of the nature of reality".


Transfering merits to parents after their death

Give an alms giving to monks dedicated to your parents and ask them to perform the ceremony. It will look something like this http://buddhistbugs.blogspot.com/2011/03/transference-of-merits-to-departed-ones.html?m=1


What are any and all of the exceptions to eating after noon if you've taken 8 precepts?

In order to understand the precept for lay people, it is useful to look at the rules for monks. For monks, there are four types of edible requisites, according to their lifetime:

1. Yavakalika

Solid food; including milk, soya milk, rice milk, etc.

This type can only be taken during the morning hours and may not be stored beyond noon of the day it was received.

2. yamakalika

Most types of uncooked, pulp-free fruit, vegetable, flower, root, or leaf juice.

This type can be taken any time of day, but only kept until dawn of the day after it was received.

3. satthahakalika

Medicinal tonics: ghee, oil, butter/cheese, honey and sugar.

This type can be taken any time of day by a monk who is sick in a way that will be assuaged by taking the tonic (usually stomach upset or hunger due to inability to keep food down). These may be kept for seven days.

4. yavajivaka

Anything normally considered as a medicine, within reason (any fruits, roots, flowers, bark, salts, etc. that are considered medicine by the world)

This type can be taken any time of day provided there is a compelling reason (i.e. a sickness that is ameliorated by taking the medicine). They may be kept one's entire life.

The sixth precept probably follows the same pattern as the monastic practice (leaving aside the part about how long items may be kept), so unless one is sick, the only thing that can really be taken outside of the morning hours is uncooked, pulp-free fruit or vegetable juice.

Tea, coffee, ginger, etc. are medicine and should only be taken if they are known to ameliorate a sickness one currently has.

Note that the five tonics can be useful for people unable to otherwise keep eight precepts due to health concerns. I once had an elderly student who was afraid to keep the eight precepts, and I suggested she try and if unable to take some butter. She was against the idea of taking butter due to its high cholesterol content, but I convinced her to try anyway. In the night, she sent a request for food so I had someone send her back a small butter pot. In the morning she came back all smiles, astonished at how well the butter worked to protect her stomach and feeling no adverse effects of keeping the precepts.


The answer comes in the Akkosa Sutta below. Even if someone insults him or speaks to him in a hurtful manner, he doesn't accept it i.e. react to it. And so it goes back to the originator.

However in the case of the Giant Buddha Statue, perhaps they have no choice but to walk on its head in order to clean it. The Buddha statue is not the Buddha himself. It's only a symbolic representation.

  I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying
  near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary. Then the
  brahman Akkosaka Bharadvaja heard that a brahman of the Bharadvaja
  clan had gone forth from the home life into homelessness in the
  presence of the Blessed One. Angered & displeased, he went to the
  Blessed One and, on arrival, insulted & cursed him with rude, harsh
  words.

  When this was said, the Blessed One said to him: "What do you think,
  brahman: Do friends & colleagues, relatives & kinsmen come to you as
  guests?"

  "Yes, Master Gotama, sometimes friends & colleagues, relatives &
  kinsmen come to me as guests."

  "And what do you think: Do you serve them with staple & non-staple
  foods & delicacies?"

  "Yes, sometimes I serve them with staple & non-staple foods &
  delicacies."

  "And if they don't accept them, to whom do those foods belong?"

  "If they don't accept them, Master Gotama, those foods are all mine."

  "In the same way, brahman, that with which you have insulted me, who
  is not insulting; that with which you have taunted me, who is not
  taunting; that with which you have berated me, who is not berating:
  that I don't accept from you. It's all yours, brahman. It's all yours.

  "Whoever returns insult to one who is insulting, returns taunts to one
  who is taunting, returns a berating to one who is berating, is said to
  be eating together, sharing company, with that person. But I am
  neither eating together nor sharing your company, brahman. It's all
  yours. It's all yours."


What is the different between Nirodha Samapatti and Phala Samapatti?

Phalasamapatti is a meditative state in which a person is absorbed in Nibbana itself. In this attainment there is a special kind of consciousness present called Lokuttara-citta.

In contrast to this, in Nirodhasamapatti there is no consciousness at all. In Chapter 8 section 42 of the Abhidhammatha Sangaha it describes it like this:

  Having proceeded, thus, up to the base of nothingness, one then
  attends to the  preliminary duties such as the resolution, etc., and
  enters the base of neither-perception- nor-nonperception.    After
  two  occasions  of  javana  in  absorption,  the  continuum  of
  consciousness  is  suspended.    Then,  one  is  said  to  have
  attained  cessation  (nirodha- samāpatti).

Another difference is in who can attain them. Phalasamapatti is attained by each of the four kinds of noble beings just after attaining the knowledge of the path, and it can be cultivated and extended by them as well. Nirodhasamapatti however, can only be entered by non-returners and arahats.


Is it true that whatever is subject to cessation is subject to origination?

Buddha said:

  yaṃ kiñci samudayadhammaṃ, sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhamman'ti

or "whatever is samudaya-able -- all that is nirodha-able".

Samudaya means "to come together", "to arise from coincidence of multiple conditions".
Nirodha means "to stop".

So the meaning of the phrase is "Whatever arose from coincidence of multiple conditions will stop when one of those necessary conditions is no longer operative."

You're asking, what about the opposite? Can something that has stopped like that - can it arise when the necessary conditions come together again?

The answer is, yes of course it can - but is that new "something" the same as the original "something"? In Buddhist understanding, this answer depends on clinging and identification. If we cling to it and identify with it as the same - then for us it is the same. If we don't cling and don't identify - then it's not.

The next question you ask: if suffering comes from coincidence of multiple conditions, and one of those conditions is craving, if that craving is removed, the suffering stops - but can the suffering arise again? Yes, of course it can - if all the necessary factors, including craving, come together again.

Why would craving happen again? Craving happens when we think that object of craving is desirable. Why do we think that object of craving is desirable? Because we think that getting that object will lead to good experience for us. Why do we think that getting that object will lead to good experience? Because we think that good experience comes from the object, not from ourselves. Why do we think that good experience comes from the object? Because we don't understand how our mind creates experience. This is called "ignorance".

So if there is still this "ignorance" => there will be craving => there will be suffering.

Nirvana is permanent cessation of suffering attained with complete cessation of ignorance (of how mind creates experience).


What is meant by "No limiting action remains there"? MN 99

I am not sure but i think it is something like this from MN 43:

  "The immeasurable awareness-release, the nothingness awareness-release, the emptiness
  awareness-release, the theme-less-awareness-release: There is a way of
  explanation by which these qualities are different in meaning &
  different in name, and there is a way of explanation by which these
  qualities are one in meaning and different only in name.

  "And what is the way of explanation by which these qualities are
  different in meaning & different in name? There is the case where a
  monk keeps pervading the first direction[4] — as well as the second
  direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with
  good will. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around,
  everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing world with an
  awareness imbued with good will: abundant, expansive, immeasurable,
  free from hostility, free from ill will.

  "He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second
  direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with
  compassion ... an awareness imbued with appreciation...

  "He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second
  direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with
  equanimity. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around,
  everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing world with an
  awareness imbued with equanimity: abundant, expansive, immeasurable,
  free from hostility, free from ill will.

  "This is called the immeasurable awareness-release.

  "And what is the nothingness awareness-release? There is the case
  where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the
  infinitude of consciousness, [perceiving,] 'There is nothing,' enters
  & remains in the dimension of nothingness. This is called the
  nothingness awareness-release.

  "And what is the emptiness awareness-release? There is the case where
  a monk, having gone into the wilderness, to the root of a tree, or
  into an empty dwelling, considers this: 'This is empty of self or of
  anything pertaining to self.'[5] This is called the emptiness
  awareness-release.

  "And what is the theme-less awareness-release? There is the case where
  a monk, through not attending to all themes, enters & remains in the
  theme-less concentration of awareness.[6] This is called the
  theme-less awareness-release.

  "This is the way of explaining by which these qualities are different
  in meaning & different in name.

  "And what is the way of explaining whereby these qualities are one in
  meaning and different only in name?

  "Passion, friend, is a making of limits. Aversion is a making of
  limits. Delusion is a making of limits. In a monk whose fermentations
  are ended, these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like
  a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not
  destined for future arising. Now, to the extent that there is
  immeasurable awareness-release, the unprovoked awareness-release is
  declared the foremost. And this unprovoked awareness-release is empty
  of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

  *"Passion is a something. Aversion is a something. Delusion is a something. In a
  monk whose fermentations are ended, these have been abandoned, their
  root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions
  of development, not destined for future arising. Now, to the extent
  that there is nothingness awareness-release, the unprovoked
  awareness-release is declared the foremost. And this unprovoked
  awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of
  delusion.

  "Passion is a making of themes. Aversion is a making of themes.
  Delusion is a making of themes. In a monk whose fermentations are
  ended, these have been abandoned, their root destroyed, made like a
  palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined
  for future arising. Now, to the extent that there is theme-less
  awareness-release, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared the
  foremost. And this unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion,
  empty of aversion, empty of delusion.

  "This, friend, is the way of explaining whereby these qualities are
  one in meaning and different only in name."*

Therefore i would guess that when it is said;
"When the deliverance of mind by loving kindness is developed in this way, no limting action remain there, none persists there"
It means that a mind established in the pervading everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will etc does not give rise to mental, verbal and bodily deeds which would be limiting one's potential for the unprovoked awareness-release which is declared as the superior to the measureless release.

  Now, to the extent that there is immeasurable awareness-release, the unprovoked awareness-release is declared the foremost. And this unprovoked awareness-release is empty of passion, empty of aversion, empty of delusion.


Are some of the supernormal powers a direct contradiction to old age, sickness, and death being unavoidable?

Then the real question is whether we humans are capable of seeing all the facts there are in the world? Carl Sagan put it best with his flatlander simile: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0 . Now say there's some being who possesses supernormal powers living in a cave on those extremely remote mountains, s/he'd probably has no interest to come down to our civilized world to prove anything. So in scientific term, it's a matter of the sample size. And in the words of another great scientist, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, don't dismiss the "whale" just yet: http://moniquill.tumblr.com/post/92432571651/claiming-there-is-no-other-life-in-the-universe-is

About the contradiction to old age, sickness,...well, there's no contradiction. According to the suttas and commentaries, the meditator has to meditate on a particular element kasina in order to be able to manipulate that element (ie. meditate on the water kasina to walk on water, on the earth kasina to go thru earth, etc.), in other words, s/he can only temporarily perform such feats under certain levels of concentration. They themselves are subjected to impermanence..


What type of Buddhist monks are only allowed to eat two meals per day and why?

Those monks who follow the pātimokkha (Sk. Prātimokṣa), either Mahayana or Theravada, keep this rule (or, in certain cases, a rule to eat only one meal per day). The rule is simply:

  37. Should any bhikkhu chew or consume staple or non-staple food at the wrong time, it is to be confessed.

The wrong time is generally understood to mean outside of the morning hours between dawn and noon. So, technically, one could eat ten meals during this time if one so desired. The Buddha himself enjoined a single meal, as stated in the Bhaddāli Sutta (MN 65):

  “Bhikkhus, I eat at a single session. By so doing, I am free from illness and affliction, and I enjoy lightness, strength, and a comfortable abiding. Come, bhikkhus, eat at a single session. By so doing, you too will be free from illness and affliction, and you will enjoy lightness, strength, and a comfortable abiding.”

  (Bodhi, trans.)

Later, the monks were concerned about eating rice soup in the morning, thinking (I assume) that it would be considered a second meal. The Buddha enjoined them to partake of it, citing physical benefits (can't find the source right now, will try to add it later). So, it is generally understood that one should eat a single meal before noon, but may partake of something light at first light of dawn as well.

Many monks these days stretch or even break these rules, drinking milk, soya milk, etc. or even eating in the evening, but those who follow the rules, in both Mahayana and Theravada, will generally stick to one or two meals per day.

Eating once per day is actually specified as an optional (dhutanga) practice, meaning one would forgo even rice soup in the morning.


Are the higher arupa jhanas supernatural states expanding beyond the physical body?

The canon does not mention them as Jhana but formless states, good householder Ruben, to mention that.
Are these supernatural states?
Yes, since based on the 4 Jhanas. Detail discussion on Parajika 4 on supernatural states in BMC might be useful.
Does the plane of infinite consciousness of the sixth jhana refer to the Universal Consciousness or Cosmic Consciousness of Advaita Vedanta?
Any answer here would be speculation for the most unless one would have attained also knowledge of what is thought of it in the Advaita Vedanta and Awakened to beyond as well. There is of course much reasonableness behind to compare it.
Do the fifth, sixth and seventh jhana takes the meditator beyond his physical body and into infinite space, infinite consciousness and infinite nothingness?
Yes: formless states
Can the meditator now observe things in other galaxies by entering these states? Can they see what is happening in the deva or brahma worlds by entering these states? Can they sense through the senses of other living beings?
Form, objects of the senses, are absent, so not very reasonable. Not forgetting that Dhamma can't be received as well here.
Or are they simply different states of mind?
The question doesn't make sense in regard of 'or'. Of course they are different states of mind.
I have also heard that they are related to compassion, loving kindness and other Brahmaviharas - how is this the case?
Best sample on it has been already given by Upasaka Karl.
General good advices and explainings on concentration, at least in regard of the aim of the practice *räusper*, can be found in Right Concentration in "Wings of Awakening", generously by Bhante Thanissaro.
[Note that this has not been given for stackes, exchange, other worldbinding trades, but for release from this wheel.]


The fourth noble truth states that the path to ending suffering is the noble eightfold path.

Right view
Right resolve
Right speech
Right action
Right livelihood
Right effort
Right mindfulness
Right concentration

1 and 2 are the foundations of wisdom. 3, 4 and 5 are the foundations for virtue, 6, 7 and 8 are the foundations of meditation.

This is a very broad outline of the path to nirvana. You should be wary of people who give a simple precise description with promises of results like "Just follow my practice for 10 years and you'll be nearly enlightened".


Having spend a mindful day with dana, a day having begone with refuge, spend with Sila, one is able to rejoice:

Buddhanussati, 2 min remembering the Buddha
Dhammanussati, 2 min remembering the Dhamma
Sanghanusati...

Remember ones Generosity
Remember ones Virtue
Remember/reflect ones virturs equal the Devas

Having given causes, one gains concentration. Not having given causes, trying to concentrate by effort will always be just developing wrong concentration.

Useless to invest in a roof when foundation is not given.

Duties first: this is not a path for lazyness's fruits. Not the path of demanding and claims.


Is there a concept of after life in Buddhism?

There are 2 types of Nibbana which are:

sopadhishesa-nirvana (nibbana with a remainder) - while alive
parinirvana or anupadhishesa-nirvana (nibbana without remainder, or final nirvana) - after death

Nibbana is being blown out. So once you die for a person who has attained Nibbana does not go any where. The person is extinguished. This is like when you blow out the candle the flame does not go any where. The conditions for combustion are not there hence it extinguishers. This is similar to Nirvana. Conditions for future rebirths are no longer present hence you get extinguished.


How can anyone who hasn't realised the truth, claim that Mahatma Buddha or any other person in history realised God or the Truth?

The truth of the Buddha is the method to end suffering. When a person tests the method & it works, they know the truth of the method, similar to when medicine is effective in curing in a sickness.

In Buddhism, there is no truth apart from personal verification, as taught:

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you say, 'The Teacher is our respected mentor. We speak thus out of respect for the Teacher'?"

  "No, lord."

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you say, 'The Contemplative says this. We speak thus in line with the Contemplative's words'?"

  "No, lord."

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you dedicate yourselves to another teacher?"

  "No, lord."

  "Knowing thus and seeing thus, would you return to the observances,
  grand ceremonies, & auspicious rites of common contemplatives &
  brahmans as having any essence?"

  "No, lord."

  "Is it the case that you speak simply in line with what you have known, seen, & understood for yourselves?"

  "Yes, lord."

  "Good, monks. You have been guided by me in this Dhamma which is to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be
  realized by the observant for themselves. For it has been said, 'This
  Dhamma is to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification,
  pertinent, to be by the observant for themselves,' and it was in
  reference to this that it was said.

  Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta


Deep emptiness (nothingness) while meditating

Provided that your mom is well and healthy, your description fits with the buddhist perception of emptiness (sunyata). It's not dangerous, and the experiences could be the result of a progressed concentration thanks to meditation.

In short, sunyata can be described as a state during meditation - just like you described it - but it also has connections to a way of perceiving the world, in a general sense.

Below is a link that discusses the phenomenon, as well as referring to relevant suttas:

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.122.than.html

(Perhaps an online translation service can help to display this content in sinhala)

Lastly, an unsolicited advice would be to consult a buddhist monastery, where you might be able to recieve some more substantial guidance from experienced practicioners.


Can Buddhist accept prayers from other religions?

We do not pray for religion. We pray for people. People of all kinds. No discrimination. If Christian or Hindu or Muslim prays for us then we should accept it gratefully...


OP: Nothing is satisfying. Everything feels shallow, meaningless. There is no joy in eating, ...

The whole sphere of experiances are either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral and all such experiences are unsatisfactory

  pleasant feeling is pleasant when it persists, painful when it changes;
  painful feeling is painful when it persists, pleasant when it changes;
  neutral feeling is pleasant when there is knowledge of it, painful when there is no knowledge of it.

Cūla Vedalla Sutta

Each type of sensation corresponds to the 3 categories of dukkha:

Unpleasant feelings - Dukkha-dukkha, the duḥkha of painful experiences. This includes the physical and mental sufferings of birth, aging, illness, dying; distress from what is not desirable.
Pleasant feelings - Viparinama-dukkha, the duḥkha of pleasant or happy experiences changing to unpleasant when the causes and conditions that produced the pleasant experiences cease.
Neural or neither pleasant not unpleasant feelings - Sankhara-dukkha, the duḥkha of conditioned experience. This includes "a basic unsatisfactoriness pervading all existence, all forms of life, because all forms of life are changing, impermanent and without any inner core or substance." On this level, the term indicates a lack of satisfaction, a sense that things never measure up to our expectations or standards.

  OP: And even after realising this I can't seem to get out of this rut. What do I do?

One should use

pleasant feelings to abandon lust,
unpleasant feelings to abandon aversion
neutral feelings to abandon ignorance

by being

equanimous to them and
seeing their impermanence

For more details what needs to be done see this answer.

This is condensing the instruction of more than 10 days into above. Best is attend a course to get to know the exact details of the practice. For that you can try a course at:

Vipassana Meditation: As taught by S.N. Goenka in the tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin or
International Vipassana Meditation Centre: In the tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin and Mother Sayamagyi


The Buddha often taught in forest groves, the most famous being Isipatana (Deer park) where he delivered his first lecture (Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta),

and Jetavana (Jeta Grove) (famously recorded in Buddhist epics as purchased by Anadapindika by paving the ground with gold) where there's still believed to be architectural remains of the Buddha's hut (Gandhakuti) from his stay there. Buddhist texts record that there were several imposing architectural structures constructed there, including an imposing arch, though almost none of it remains today.

  Some of the chief buildings attached to the Jetavana are mentioned in the books by special names, viz., Mahāgandhakuti, Kaverimandalamāla, Kosambakuti and Candanamāla. SNA.ii.403. Other buildings are also mentioned - e.g., the Ambalakotthaka-āsanasālā (J.ii.246). According to Tibetan sources the vihāra was built according to a plan sent by the devas of Tusita and contained sixty large halls and sixty small. The Dulva also gives details of the decorative scheme of the vihāra (Rockhill: op. cit.48 and n.2).

source: http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/j/jetavana.htm

There's also Vulture's peak, frequently referred in the suttas as one of the Buddha's favoured places to retreat to.

Many of the other locations that are referenced in the suttas, or where ruins of buildings still exist feature prominently on buddhist pilgrimage routes.

In later periods very prominent Buddhist Viharas, or universities functioned for over a 1000 years at the same spots, namely at Taxila (present day Pakistan) and Nalanda (present day India). They housed at their peak thousands of monks and novices, living and training for years together.
Eminent personages such as Shantideva, the 8th-century Indian Buddhist monk and scholar emerged from these universities.


Have a look on that.
Might be a first step.

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?t=7990

Much Metta.
Thierry


In short this can be due to:

past fabrications surfacing rapidly and creating uncommon experiences
perhaps less likely but a possibility is Piti which sometimes create vibrating and / or pulsating experiences

Also see: eye movement during meditation, I get rapid eye movement as soon as meditation starts

These experiences are neither good nor bad. Also do not get attached or averse to them. In additions concentrate on the task at hand than giving importance and distracting your self when there experiences do arise in your meditation session.


Is there a Vipassana meditation in the Mahayana tradition?

Mahayana is not a single tradition. It is a variety of forms the live teaching has taken as it was internalized by people belonging to different cultures and lifestyles over ~2600 years of the realization-transmission cycle.

The same direct experience (of Enlightenment) is introduced in different ways. Everyone agrees it is about seeing (aka insight) and cultivation (aka liberation), but how exactly the two are approached varies wildly.

The method of vipassana (insight meditation) is radical attention to present moment, with experiences interpreted in context of Buddhist teachings. We could say vipassana relies on three activities: the study undertaken before meditation, the active-watching during meditation, and the review in post-meditation. That's it, there is nothing magical about vipassana. It's all about what you study, and what you pay attention to, and how you connect the two.

Before you can do active watching, you have to tame your mind and make it into an instrument of insight. The same taming also serves as a pre-realization part of liberation-cultivation (remember, it's not just insight, there is also liberation). This preliminary meditation is known as samatha, but it really is not that different from vipassana. The only real difference is in the level of skill, familiarity, and insight. This is like with learning to play guitar: first you do scale exercises, then you play whole pieces, then you improvise. In all cases you are playing the instrument, the difference is in your sensitivity and control. Samatha is mostly about tranquility, vipassana is mostly about insight -- but there is no one without the other.

Not all schools of Mahayana differentiate between samatha and vipassana. Most Zen schools (I believe) teach one meditation, zazen (did you know "zen" is the same word as "jhana"?). This is like giving student a guitar and saying: here, learn to play this. No scale exercises, no sheet music. This is accompanied with plenty of very deep oral instructions on what a good music sounds like, but no specific mechanical exercises. I'm simplifying to make a point. Most teachers do provide some guidelines (e.g. basics of anapanasati; common mistakes etc.), but the emphasis is definitely on self-learning.

While in Theravada the pendulum seems to swing almost too far the other way: "Teacher, but when are we going to play music?" -- "Forget about music, dummy, and focus on your study and exercises, that's where music comes from!"

In Tibetan schools practice and study seems to be pretty balanced. They do differentiate between shamatha and vipashyana at beginner stages and speak about "unity of shamatha and vipashyana" at more advanced stages. As far as specific techniques, at least in some schools (Gelug) Tibetan vipashyana takes analysis of the four jhanas as its object of investigation. Four jhanas are also approached in context of Generation Stage meditation, while what you know as satipatthana in Theravada can probably be compared with Completion stage meditation in Vajrayana... And then there are Mahamudra and Dzogchen, which are like playing jazz improvisations...

Much of it depends on the student and on a particular teacher. An enormously talented student can learn playing just by watching a teacher, but most of us need gradual instruction. Some teachers believe in analytical understanding, others think technique can only come from drills, while yet others believe it's all about the feeling etc.


What is the difference between anger and frustration?

If I remember correctly my Abhidharma lectures, both anger and frustration are the types of aversion. Anger is how aversion manifests when you feel that you are stronger than the object of your aversion, while frustration is when you feel weaker than the object/cause of aversion.


Who are this people in white, often attend to monks?

He is probably an anagarika.

Anagarika, literally "homeless one", is a stage of practice between lay followers (upasaka) and novice monks (samanera). They usually wear white and act as part time or full time volunteers at monasteries or temples.

They observe the Eight Precepts and are able to handle money unlike novice monks and fully ordained monks (bhikkhu).


Relationship with bad parents (kamma and issues)

My father was an alcoholic, and I suffered a lot of grief from him - so I might as well try and answer this one.

The way my first teacher taught me about this (back when my father was still alive and I still encountered him a lot) the circumstances like this come from our karma, specifically from our attachment to decency and spirituality. The more we are attached to decency and to spirituality, the more we hate people who are indecent and lowly, the more we will have to face them. So the only way to stop this particular kind of painful circumstances, is to drop the attachment to decency and to spirituality, by no longer putting decency and spirituality above love and above existence itself. This was the teaching method my first teacher employed, very effective.

The way my last teacher taught me about this, long after my father passed away, is that in such cases freedom comes from forgiveness, understanding, the intent to stop the chain of suffering. We should understand that family issues are passed down the chain, although not necessarily in the same form. When father has certain issues, the child will have certain other issues - that will affect lives of their children and so on. Even my father's behavior was not his own, he inherited it from his childhood family - his father was a very violent guy, a commander of a penal military unit, a place where the criminal soldiers served. Behind a violent alcoholic there is often a hurt little boy. This is important to understand.

So these are two lessons from my Buddhism teachers, one is to let go of attachment to decency and spirituality and abandon hatred and aversion based on them, and two is to understand your parent's own background and suffering.

As to what to do, I think the best way to work with such people is as if you were working with a child. No matter how adult they look or pretend to be, if they act like that they are still immature, far from it. So working with them like you would with your own child, with tough love, compassionate but strict, seems to be the best course of action.


How do I do "contemplation of death" meditation? And is it dangerous?

How to do "contemplation of death" meditation ?

With each and every in and out breath reflect: "life is impermanent, but death is certain, hence will attend to what need to be done without delay."

    “But how, bhikshu, do you cultivate the mindfulness of death?”

    “Here, bhante, I do it thus:

    'Indeed, should I live just the time it takes to breathe in and then out, to breathe out and then in,
    I would wisely attend to the Blessed One’s teaching, much indeed would be done by me!'

    Thus, bhante, I cultivate the mindfulness of death.”

Source: (Aṭṭhaka) Maraṇa,sati Sutta 1 and also similar passage is in: (Chakka) Maraṇa,sati Sutta 1

A more detailed outline of the pratice is covered in: Maraṇa Sati Kathā by Piya Tan

  and is it dangerous ?

Not if you pratice it correctly. Even crossing the road the wrong way will have dangers so does meditation. Key to do it the right way as with any other endeavor.

The intention of this pratice is to create urgency and eliminate procrastination as time is running out and what can be done within a lifetime ends with death. (Also see section How do you banish laziness?) Instead if you are developing a phobia or fear of death or some attraction to death or romanticizing with the concept of death or developing sorrow towards your pending death or of loved ones, then you are doing it wrong.

  Cause i read it might cause someone to suicide - so how do i make sure i won't reach that situation ? and how exactly should i do this meditation - ...

As far as I know repulsive meditation has resulted in suicides, but not sure on contemplation of death. These are 2 separate practices. The purpose of repulsive meditation is to counteract the perception of beauty in the form and shape of oneself and others and developing lust and taking pleasure and delight in such formations. If you are developing aversion towards the body one oneself as unclean or the perceived lack of beauty then you are doing it wrong.

Both these practices do also reinforce the perception of impermanence, more particularly impermanence of life as well as our corporal body.

  ... and for how long each time - ...

I think a few minutes will do or as much as to keep you motivated to attend to what need to be done without procrastination.

Also an occasional reminder on the need of urgency as time is running out during the day may be helpful.

  ... and how many times each day ?

(Aṭṭhaka) Maraṇa,sati Sutta 2 and (Chakka) Maraṇa,sati Sutta 2 mentions you should do it 2 times at least when the day has ended and when the night has ended. You contemplate some mishap can happen your life can end in the next part of the day hence be attentive to what needs to be done without fail.

Also see my answer to: Is contemplation of death auto-suggestion?


Is there any buddhist explanation for deja vu?

The psychology of C. G. Jung who wrote a preface to Bardo Thodol (The Tibetan Buddhist Book of the Dead) may explain the deja vu experience as restimulation of experiences of the collective unconscious in the bardo interval between death and the next rebirth, that he called "archetypes" or universal prototypes for ideas. However before drawing such a conclusion, know that the Sabbasava Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya 2) warns against questions which are seen as "unwise reflection" and lead to attachment to views relating to a self. They include: Did I exist in the past? Did I not exist in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past?


How do I practice the Dhamma in an environment where it's not supported?

The Buddhism as a religion which can be seen practiced nowadays is often and in many ways quite different to the practices in the texts. Therefore your group is right to worry about you imo. There are several sects even within the Theravada and a variety of disagreements, chances are they already got you:)

Perhaps try approaching the whole Buddhisms more like an academic pursuit and experiment with meditation, shouldn't be a big deal if someone wants to explore those things. The problem arises when you come of as a lunatic and they are unable to communicate because they are not trained in that system of language (dhamma).


What are the canonical definitions of common terms used in the context of satipaṭṭhāna from the Tripitaka or related literature

Mindfulness is not "awareness". Mindfulness is remembering, as follows:

  When one has heard the Dhamma from such bhikkhus one dwells withdrawn
  by way of two kinds of withdrawal—withdrawal of body and withdrawal of
  mind. Dwelling thus withdrawn, one recollects (anussarati) that Dhamma and
  thinks it over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn
  recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occasion the
  enlightenment factor of mindfulness (sati) is aroused by the bhikkhu; on thatoccasion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness;
  on that occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to
  fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.

  https://suttacentral.net/sn46.3/en/bodhi

  One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter (upasampajja) & remain (viharati) in right
  view: This is one's right mindfulness (sati).

  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html

  "What is sammasati? Sati means to bear in mind or bring to mind. Sati
  is the state of recollecting, the state of remembering, the state of
  non-fading, the state of non-forgetting. Sati means the sati that is a
  Spiritual Faculty, the sati that is a Spiritual Power, Sammasati, the
  Sati that is an Enlightenment Factor, that which is a Path Factor and
  that which is related to the Path. This is what is called sammasati."
  Vbh.105, 286

Sampajanna (saṃ + pajāna) is active supervisory wisdom. It means ready wisdom, situational wisdom, to thoroughly understand. Sampajanna is not Western/Jewish 'bare zombie awareness'. When SN 47.35 briefly defines ‘sampajana’, it uses the word “vidita” (pp. of vindati), which means “to understand” or “understood”, as Bhikkhu Bodhi properly translated as “understood”, as follows:

  And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu exercise clear comprehension? Here,
  bhikkhus, for a bhikkhu feelings are understood as they arise,
  understood as they remain present, understood as they pass away.
  Thoughts are understood as they arise, understood as they remain
  present, understood as they pass away. Perceptions are understood as
  they arise, understood as they remain present, understood as they pass
  away. It is in this way, bhikkhus, that a bhikkhu exercises clear
  comprehension.

  Because I understand the diversity of faculties as it applies to this person.

  Indriyavemattatā hi me, udāyi, imasmiṃ puggale viditā.

  MN 66

  However, I have recognized individual differences.

  Api ca mayā puggalavemattatā viditā”ti.

  SN 12.17

Manasikara is manas or thought. Thus it is attention directed by thought or intention (rather than mere or pure consciousness/vinnana). For example:

  Hearing the good Dhamma, becoming full, fills up faith. Faith, becoming full, fills up careful attention. Careful attention, becoming full, fills up mindfulness and clear comprehension. AN 10.61

Satipaṭṭhāna, according to Bhikkhu Sujato, means establishing of mindfulness.

  The function of satipaṭṭhāna as support for jhāna is suggested in a
  very common Sutta idiom, whose significance tends to be obscured in
  translation. The term satipaṭṭhāna (establishing of mindfulness)
  resolves into sati and upaṭṭhāna. The alternative resolution into sati
  and paṭṭhāna, though favoured by the commentaries, is spurious. The
  difference between the two is that while upaṭṭhāna expresses the
  subjective act of establishing or setting up mindfulness, paṭṭhāna
  would refer to the ‘foundations’ of mindfulness, the objective domains
  on which mindfulness is established. The basic meaning of upaṭṭhāna is
  to ‘stand near’, and it is commonly used to mean ‘serve’, ‘approach’,
  even ‘worship’. Taranatha Tarkavacaspati’s Sanskrit dictionary
  gives the meaning of ‘causing to remember’...,
  which would be identical with sati, but as this does not seem to be
  attested in any early text it is probably under Buddhist influence. We
  have already remarked that the closest parallel in the Upaniṣads is
  the term upāsana. Page 185


How death anniversaries take place by Buddhist rituals?

Sadhu, Nyom. What ever day, is a good day to show respect toward the ancestors, to give Alms to the Sangha to benefit them, to listen to the Dhamma by your self.
Don't forget, if it had not been done in the past by your ancestors you would not ever had met the Dhamma.

Of what one should not miss when giving: Sila, virtue, what ever dedicating, is just the good given, if it does not harm others.

Invite many to take part on the merits and share them with all.

Mudita


This Pali Canon parable is one of the two most popular images among Mahayana students (the other one being the parable of toys used to lure children out of the burning house).

The other shore is Nirvana and the raft is the concepts (of Dharma). The concepts are used to get across, but the final destination is beyond concepts. Rafts don't move on dry land, sun rays have nowhere to fall if there's no ground. Concepts don't hold in Emptiness, they have nothing to hang on.

The whole point of Buddha's teaching is liberation of mind. The entire appearance of samsara with all its problems and sufferings is a giant self-perpetuating complex of concepts. Our problems are concepts in the space of relative definitions. To be a master of concepts rather than victim of, is what the practice is all about. Being a master of concepts one can create and destroy concepts as needed, without being bounded by them.

Unbounded, vast, limitless, open - is the other shore. The raft of Dharma is a vehicle, not the destination.


Which book by Nagarjuna provides an introduction to his teachings?

The word "introduction" may be out of place, but anyway his most important work would be the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. A translation, along with an extensive commentary, is available in The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way by Jay Garfield (here is a previously published commentary of chapters 1, 2 and 24). Bear in mind that this is a very, very difficult text to understand, even with the (indubitably necessary) help of commentators. Toward that end, let me point out Nāgārjuna's Madhyamaka: A Philosophical Introduction by Jan Westerhoff, which provides a synoptic overview of the arguments in Nāgārjuna's corpus concerning different philosophical problems with the aim of presenting an account of the whole of his philosophy (here is a helpful review of the book).


Buddha said "Its better to travel well than to arrive", what does it mean?

“It is better to travel well than to arrive.” is a fake Buddhist Quote.

Meaning
Hope and anticipation are often better than reality.
Origin
This phrase is a Robert Louis Stevenson quotation, from Virginibus Puerisque, 1881:
"Little do ye know your own blessedness; for to travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive, and the true success is to labour."
Stevenson was expressing the same idea as the earlier Taoist saying - "The journey is the reward."

Source: The meaning and origin of the expression: To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive
"The journey is the reward." seems to be a Chinese Proverb

If you look at this in the context of Noble Eightfold Path and Nirvana it is better to arrive than how or how well you travel. It seems to me like the opposite of this statement is true.

Although the eightfold path is conditioned [1.1.3.1], its goal, nirvana (nibbāna), is free
from conditions (visaṅkhāra,gata) (Dh 154):
nirvana is unconditioned (asaṅkhata).
Only nirvana is
free from all conditions: it is “the stilling of all formations” (sabba,saṅkhāra,samatha).
This stilling
of all conditions is true happiness (Dh 368, 381). In the Māluṅkya,putta Sutta (S 35.95), the
Buddha defines this stilling of all formations as “the ending of suffering.”

Source: The Path of Awakening The way, the life and the liberation of the noble eightfold path by Piya Tan

Now, ayya, is the noble eightfold path conditioned or is it unconditioned?
"The noble eightfold path, avuso Visākha, is conditioned."

Cūla Vedalla Sutta
What this entails is that traveling the path itself is suffering / misery with a view to end suffering / misery. So ending of misery is better than the journey to end misery which is also miserable. Having said this as you progress if the path the misery in general will become less and less and states like Piti and Passaddhi arise. [(Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta, (Ekā,dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta]


Judging from your answer to this, it sounds like you're more interested in different varieties of Madhyamaka and how they treat the subject of Relative Truth and Ultimate Truth. As for Relative Truth, some schools say that all phenomena exist as nominal designations, while others say that to assert any existence or non-existence of phenomena is a mistake - although we may go with the conventions of the majority for practical purposes. As for the Ultimate Truth, some schools says any assertions about it are empty but the Truth beyond assertions is not empty, while others say that this was an assertion as well - and the best thing is to avoid any assertions.

In my opinion, as long as you get what the argument is about there is not much sense in nitpicking the exact words. However, some traditional teachers - particularly in Gelug school - insist that these polemics facilitate analysis and therefore deeper understanding of emptiness.

There are many works comparing Madhyamaka flavors - it would be excessive to list them all here.

One work have I recently read that comes to mind is The Ri-me Philosophy of Jamgon Kongtrul the Great: A Study of the Buddhist Lineages of Tibet


How does metta sutra develop loving kindness

When you understand the suffering of others, this would result in you developing your compassion (karuna) and not exactly loving kindness (metta). So, compassion is a bit different. Compassion is how one deals with others' suffering (dukkha) while renunciation is how one deals with one's own suffering. Of course, there may be some overlap between the two.

Then what about loving kindness (metta)? This term metta has also been translated as benevolence, friendliness, amity, good will and universal love.

You're perfectly right that all beings cannot be happy-minded at once.

Cultivating metta is about changing YOUR state of mind, and not actually changing other people's state of mind.

Loving kindness is about you changing your thoughts, emotions, intentions, attitude, outlook and conduct, in such a way that it radiates with benevolence and friendliness to all beings (including yourself). It is so that you become the true friend who wishes everyone, without discrimination, to be happy and at ease with themselves. Loving kindness is a cure for one's ill will towards others.

On the other hand, compassion is about you trying to understand the suffering of others and trying to alleviate the suffering of others, or at least not make it worse. Compassion is a cure for one's contempt for others.


The Path is the same for all beings, although since all beings have different kamma due to past actions, all beings are on different stages of the Path.

So one being might need to practice certain path factors, e.g. Sila more than another being and vice versa.

Regarding The Ten Perfections (Paramis) they are often compared to jars and when one practices a parami one fills the jar with a drop. So again, how full a jar is, is different from being to being. One being might have worked extensively on the Dana-parami, while lacking in the Aditthana-parami.

  Is the path an individual journey?

The Path proclaimed by a fully englightened Buddha is always the same. A fully enlightened Buddha does not invent the Path. He discovers the Path by himself with no help from anyone else, then he proclaims it and teaches it to other beings. Its often described as discovering an ancient path (purānam añjasam), covered by a dense forest which leads to a bygone kingdom.

The Path is an individual journey. No one can walk the Path for us. We ourselves has to work. Only oneself can free oneself. Only oneself can issue liberation from the rounds of suffering by practicing the Dhamma.

One has to become ones own refuge. The Buddhas only show the way and guide us but we ourselves must walk the Path. Throughout the Buddha's 45 years of teaching-career he constantly emphazized the importance of practicing diligently, consistently and with great effort in order to win Nibbana.

If you are interested in further readings about the self-reliance-factor of the Path, then I recommend the following chapter in the book "What Buddhists Believe", by Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda.


Doctor assisted suicide - does doctor break the first precept?

Assisting suicide would be considered an offence of defeat in a monk.

  Whatever monk should intentionally deprive a human being of life, or should look about to be his knife-bringer, he is also one who is defeated and is no more in communion.

-- Attitudes to Euthanasia in the Vinaya and Commentary


What should I tell other people about giving money to a Beggar?

The Buddha has mentioned that it is the givers qualities that matters most in giving. He says for example that if he were to receive something from Ven. Sariputta, that would not be as meritorious as if he gave the same thing to Ven. Sariputta.

So, if you are a person with Arya qualities, as long as your giving is also Arya, the effects will be much greater than that dictated by the receivers qualities.

Arya giving is letting go at a distance.


Is chanting mantras a common practice in Theravada Buddhism?

There is chanting of Pirith. This is not done as a meditation but sometimes advocated to be done when sloth and torpor is preventing you from meditating to raise energy levels. So in a way it can be used as part of your meditation sitting through not exclusively doing this but use it when needed to progress your meditation siting.


Why do we still don't know exact birth & date year of the Buddha?

Knowing the precise date of the Buddha's birth is not very useful knowledge within the Buddha's teaching, as it is presented in the Pali Suttas. How will knowing this precise birthday help any student transcend their own suffering? Only the most worldly and materialistic forces within any tradition would care about such superficial things.

The Pali Suttas(and arguably the Sanskrit Sutras) are the closest to what the Buddha actually taught. All traditions derive their truth from the Suttas/Sutras and other truths that might or might not be so compatible with the Buddha's actual original teaching. These additions were made for reasons of culture, politics and practicality IMHO.

If one wants to know what was likely the truth that the Buddha taught then one might stick to the core teachings that the Buddha repeated over and over again in the Suttas/Sutras.

It seems to me that these core teachings fit within themselves with great precision. Their potential is so awe inspiring to me that I wonder what, in 2500 years, has been stopping so much of humanity from embracing the Buddha's teaching or any teaching like the Buddha's teaching.-Metta :)


It has nothing to do with Buddha and his teachings, although sometimes parts of Suttas (Pali) are used in the text. Mostly the texts recites Brahmanic-verses (Sanskrit), sometimes mixed.

The script here is mostly - like here in your samples - Khmer (Cambodian), which was used also in Thailand till a Thai King invented own script.

This so called "yoan"s "yantras" are protective charms, also used for flags which are placed on the roof cross-beams of a house.

Usually soldier hire "monks" to do these, especially those active in war. Many monks in SEA have been soldier.

In regard to tattoos being "done by monks": The Buddha called that a "livelihood of animals". It is not allowed and is a second-heaviest violation of the Vinaya (rules of monks).

You may understand that my person will not put effort into translating it.

Just a general notes, regarding tattoos: beautification of the body is not something conducive for one's real protection and practice. Not to speak of harming the body unnecessarily.

Today there are many monks making livelihood with such, even paint themselves. Most (not all) can be considered as outside of the Buddha's disciples. Today's monks doing such usually have also not even an idea of meditation, which one ever.

It you wish to translate it, here a list of the script's letters. You could in this way write Pali in Roman letters, and then either ask Pali/Sanskrit scholars or search dictionaries. Since the script is different to modern, my person attached a picture including the older script.

(Since my person just came across again: Santidhammo Bhikkhu, eager in discovering Tantric Theravada, wrote some articles about yantras: Yantra in Cambodian Buddhism - Boran and Yantra Tattoo and Tantric Theravada traditions

Some details about the meanings can be found in links given by Rahul at freesangha.com: Samatha Journal, soravij.com)


What is meant by this description of a type of person in the suttas?

Can anyone please give a simple explanation or some reference to other translation or commentaries?

The sutta is describing four ways to practice:

"practice that is pleasant in the present but yields pain in the future" -- seeing no harm in sensual pleasures
"practice that is painful in the present and yields pain in the future" -- an ascetic life, which is "devoted to the practice of tormenting & afflicting the body"
"practice that is painful in the present but yields pleasure in the future" -- someone who is passionate/aversive/deluded and consequently experiences grief (in the present), yet lives the holy life
"practice that is pleasant in the present and yields pleasure in the future" -- someone who is not passionate/aversive/deluded, who is equanimous, withdrawn from sensuality, entering the four jhanas

What you quoted in the OP is a list of various (several) ascetic practices. I presume these were actual (current/contemporary) behaviour practiced by some people at the time.

There's a bit about Ascetism in Indian religions on Wikipedia.

Siddhārtha Gautama tried to practice austerities himself, but found it unhelpful; e.g. MN 36 describes many types of austerities he practiced, which end with his thinking:

  But with this racking practice of austerities I haven't attained any superior human state, any distinction in knowledge or vision worthy of the noble ones. Could there be another path to Awakening?'

That "other path" is the Middle Way which he tells to his five (former) companions when he meets them again after his enlightenment.

So the details are not important, just the fact that one tortures oneself?

They were presumably actual practices, which the sutta is listing as explicitly austere (unnecessary).

See also Dhutanga practices which are optional (regarding which this commentary says these are not extreme, and may optionally be adopted to further simplify a monk's life).

I'm not sure what the motive is or was for asceticism; I could guess (e.g. ascetism is also associated with devotees of Shiva), but with the Buddha stating that asceticism is fruitless (or, more specifically, is painful in the present and leads to hell in the future) I don't see much point in pursuing that topic.


Any teaching that has one or more of the following elements is not the authentic Dhamma:

eternalism (god or self or soul or world is eternal)
annihilationism (there is no self and nothing after death)
an independent, standalone and eternal entity or agent at the core of all experience (the self or the soul)
extreme asceticism
extreme sensual indulgence
does not contain the four noble truths
does not contain the noble eightfold path
promotes non-virtue (killing other beings, lying, stealing, sexual misconduct, intoxication, hurtful speech etc. - typical example is "waging holy war")
promotes wrong livelihood (trade in prostitution, slavery, meat, weapons, poisons, intoxicants etc.)

The authentic Dhamma is the opposite of the above.


Are absences empty / conceptual constructions, according to all Buddhists?

Are absences empty / conceptual constructions
I thought this answer implied that an absence is unconstructed:

So the absence of remorse is conditioned, but not being an existing thing, not having been constructed (sankharaed)-- it was the result of not-doing, is not itself subject to ending and is a small taste of Nibbana.

is it -- perhaps -- a fact independent of language that there is no elephant in this room?
I don't know -- sense-contact with the room gives rise to various perceptions, but none which I would label "elephant".
they are devoid of causal powers
You're saying that as if that's a bad thing. :-)


Good householder,
although wondering why one who steady teaches others about what is Sublime, Higher, Perfect, ask about the meaning of Ariya...
PTS-dictionary:

Ariya, (adj. -n.) (Vedic ārya, of uncertain etym. The other Pāli forms are ayira & ayya) 1. (racial) Aryan D. II, 87. ‹-› 2. (social) noble, distinguished, of high birth.—3. (ethical) in accord with the customs and ideals of the Aryan clans, held in esteem by Aryans, generally approved. Hence: right, good, ideal.

In regard of people:
The answer by Dhammadhatu isn't that bad aside of a grammar issue making "without enemy" to a dual or in both direction valid, but actually means that oneself sees nothing and nobody as enemy. It might be, and even in the Buddhas case, that an Ariya has people around who look after harming or winning over him.
Ariya is a Sublime person beyond ordinary, worthy of hospitality, veneration and gifts, one who has metta toward all beings, one having reached tge level of integrity, the Stream, has faced the Deathless and to certain amount awakened. One training after reaching this ancestor-ship is called a lower-Ariya (Dhamma-, Faith-follower practicing proper, having universal metta; having heard the good Dhamma and regards the Gems, bound to become Ariya before death).
In regard of qualities and deeds: Likewise Sublime, Exalted, not ordinary, common.
So if one touches or 'inter'-acts with the Sublime Gems one is wise to always regard them as Sublime, beyond even kings, world-ruler, Gods, father, mother, child, oneself.
Disregard or even harm of what is Ariya has very disadvantageous impact not only downwardly but can even totally cut one of from an upward path for long time.
This is why asking for forgiveness is a common and frequently conducted practice as one would be otherwise out of refuge, cut off the Gems.
Worthy to mention as very importand: One who does not recognize such as Ariya, Sublime, a common 'communist' is absolutly incapable to either work his way upwardly nor ever able to reach path or fruits, like one denying swimming is possible is actually bound to drow.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding and common trades but to gain escape in becoming an Ariya, not staying a slave of commu/onism]