How to deal with obstacles (with Sutta reference)

Please see this answer.

I have tried to explain in that answer, using Dhammapada verses, that Buddhism teaches thinking and acting in wholesome and skillful ways. And this can be applied to facing obstacles and challenges in life, which may come unexpectedly.


Proper meditation at hard times ( to be kind, open mind and enjoy hard times )

In Buddhism, a type of meditation to be used is called EQUANIMITY MEDITATION.

Equanimity meditation is: "OTHERS ARE PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS".

Often we want to help another person but that other person cannot be helped.

If your mother has had a stroke, you must be very patient & gentle with her.

You probably should ask your mother a question, such as: "Would you like to try to do some work? I will be here with you to help you".

Instead of controlling your mother, try to assure your mother you will support her.

For example, Buddhism teaches to never teach another person Buddhism if that other person does not want to listen to Buddhism.

It is the same with your mother. You should try to encourage your mother to make her own decision about her doing some work & exercise.

Also, I recommend you ask your mother's doctor, physiotherapist &/or occupational therapist for some advice about methods of helping your mother.

Also, you could ask an occupational therapist to visit your home to help you help your mother. If a professional occupational therapist visits your mother to help you help your mother, your mother may reduce fear & trust you more because you have been taught to help her by a professional occupational therapist.


Is the world inherently good or is it something to be shunned?

In Buddhism, there is the notion that we can use a skillful technique or theme of thinking, which is the best technique or theme of thinking that it is suited for a particular situation, for a particular purpose, to cater for a particular need. Some of these techniques may be mutually exclusive or contradictory to each other.

It is just like how a master chef uses various techniques to craft the best results based on the needs. Sometimes you need to boil, sometimes you need to bake, sometimes you need to fry, sometimes you need to broil, sometimes you need to grill and sometimes you need to sautee. These techniques may appear to contradict each other, but are used at different times to achieve different results.

First example:

For overcoming lust (as a hindrance of sensual desire), you can use the contemplation on unattractiveness (see this question). But too much of it may lead to negative thoughts of suicide, in which case, use the mindfulness of breathing (see this answer) to counter it.

Second example:

The Buddha taught that not everything we experience is caused by what we did in this answer. This is the Buddha teaching anatta, so that we can let go of the self-view.

  Again, when the Buddha was asked by the naked ascetic Kassapa whether
  suffering was of one's own making or of another's or both or neither,
  the Buddha replied "Do not put it like that." ...  He then said
  "Kassapa, if one asserts that 'He who makes (it) feels (it): being one
  existent from the beginning, his suffering is of his own making,' then
  one arrives at eternalism. But if one asserts that one makes (it),
  another feels (it); being one existent crushed out by feeling, his
  suffering is of another's making,' then one arrives at
  annihilationism. Instead of resorting to either extreme a Tathaagata
  teaches the Dhamma by the middle way (by dependent origination)".

But in some cases, for other practitioners, it might be useful to think that we are the creators, owners and heirs of our kamma. The Themes Sutta has many examples of different themes of thinking and what problems can be resolved by such ways of thinking. One of those is to think that what we experience is caused by what we did, in order to eradicate unvirtuous habits.

  “And for the sake of what benefit should a woman or a man, a
  householder or one gone forth, often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of
  my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my
  relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma,
  good or bad, that I do’? People engage in misconduct by body, speech,
  and mind. But when one often reflects upon this theme, such misconduct
  is either completely abandoned or diminished.

Now back to your question ...

Based on this, I would say that thinking of the world as disgusting and to be abandoned is a technique to be used if you're addicted to the pleasures of the world. But if you're depressed and negative about the world, then its useful to think about the world as being beautiful and harmonious but it's only your thinking that's the problem.

What is the inherent nature of the world? It is neither good or bad, or ugly or beautiful. It simply is conditioned (sankhara) and impermanent (anicca) i.e. everything in the world is always changing being influenced by other things.

This is also corroborated by physics - everything in the universe changes, influenced by everything else, including space, time, matter and energy. These can be seen in the consequences of General Relativity and Special Relativity, e.g. curvature of space-time, time dilation, gravitational waves and, equivalence of matter and energy.

In most Mahayana Buddhism schools, the inherent nature of the world is emptiness. See this answer for details.


Is it considered against standard Buddhist doctrine to meditate with music?

I am aware of some studies that suggest that "noise" can be an aid to concentration - i.e. people who doodle at meetings tend to be more attentive, people who chew gum in class tend to remember more, and people who listen to classical music write more fluently.  In preliminary stages of meditation, you might even find it easier to gather your mind when there is an outside stimulus.  Guided mediation is just one example of this.  That being said, all four of those activities refer to modes of thought that are distinctly different from what you are aiming at in deeper meditation.  When sitting in a Buddhist sense (i.e. for jhana meditation, vipassana, koan practice, etc.), you need to work towards developing applied and sustained thought in a way that is as free from distraction as possible i.e. "Quite secluded from sense pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states of mind..."  MN 4.  This also infers that the influence of the five hinderances needs to be limited.  It goes without saying that listening to music is fairly antithetical to that end.

Regarding your experience that you hear music more readily when sitting - that's a fairly common occurrence.  You are just becoming aware of another level of your mind that was previously obscured by grosser thought (for what it's worth, I have the same experience when I'm backpacking or doing any other activity that isn't thought-intensive).  You do need to get beyond that state, however.  As you apply concentration, you will eventually push past that boundary and into deeper, more silent layers of the mind.


What is the appropriate use for the term bhante?

From the Mahaparinibbana Sutta:

  "And, Ananda, whereas now the bhikkhus (monks) address one another as
  'friend,' let it not be so when I am gone. The senior bhikkhus,
  Ananda, may address the junior ones by their name, their family name,
  or as 'friend'; but the junior bhikkhus should address the senior ones
  as 'venerable sir' or 'your reverence.'

  Footnote: "Friend," in Pali is avuso, "venerable sir" = bhante, "your
  reverence" = ayasma.


Want a simple explanation that sense restraint is an important aspect of ethical conduct, for a loved one who is not into Dhamma

Right view means understanding the four noble truths.

Right intention follows as a consequence of right view.

There are three intentions (renunciation, non-aversion or loving-kindness, and non-injury or compassion).

  And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve. (SN 45.8)

Right view gives motivation to renounce attachment (clinging to pleasure, fame, and so on ... these are usually seen as desirable but with right view you see that they lead to dukkha ... with right view you naturally choose to renounce them).

I'm not sure whether that's an important aspect of ethical conduct, though ... according to many definitions of "ethical", it's the intentions of loving-kindness and compassion, not the intention of renunciation, that motivates ethical conduct.

Still, I suspect they develop together (the factors of the eightfold path are inter-related).

It may be possible to think of examples of where someone has hurt or ignored another, either because they're busy greedily chasing a sense-pleasure or because they're suffering the consequences of misplaced attachment -- for that reason even if "ethical" is taken to mean "good to others", renunciation (to avoid attachment and suffering) is "an important aspect" (which, for example, may make it easier to follow the precepts).


Are there different experiences of equanimity?

On an ultimate level, equanimity is simply a feeling associated with a mind state; it is the quality of the mind state itself, independent of the equanimity, that determines the ethical nature of the state.

For example, lobha (greed) can arise with either a pleasant or a neutral feeling, both of which are unwholesome of course. Purely delusional mind states (moha-mūla-citta) arise only with equanimity - there are two of these, worry and doubt, and they are both unwholesome.

On the other hand, beautiful (sobhana) mind states also can arise with either pleasant or neutral feelings, and they are purely wholesome.

In the middle, there are the six sense resultant consciousnesses that are always accompanied by a neutral feeling (except physical, which can be associated with painful or pleasant feeling, IIRC). None of these are wholesome or unwholesome.

As to your specific question, equanimity as a defilement of insight is not necessarily qualitatively different from equanimity at the 11th stage, since the defilements of insight are none of them "bad". It is only the clinging to the states as the path to enlightenment that causes the true path to be neglected, hence "sullying" one's insight. Ostensibly, the equanimity itself is a positive sign of progress, but it is not the path - the four satipatthana are.

That being said, the equanimity that arises prior to the eleventh stage of knowledge, even if based on insight (it is often based rather on tranquility), is immature and unstable, whereas at the 11th stage it is lasting and firm, unshakable, and universal. It is the culmination, or maturation, of any insight-based equanimity that may have arisen previously.

As to equanimity in general, the Visuddhimagga (IV.84) lists ten types of equanimity, some of which are of the same quality:

six-factored equanimity - equanimity of an enlightened arahant
equanimity as a divine abiding - as a specific samatha meditation practice
equanimity as an enlightenment factor - having to do with relinquishment of desire
equanimity of energy - neither lax nor overexerted energy
equanimity about formations - 11th stage of knowledge, having overcome hindrances, regarding all formations as impermanent, suffering, and non-self
equanimity as a feeling - refers to the basic quality of neutrality common to many mind states
equanimity about insight - investigating states with objective intent
equanimity as specific neutrality - the balance of mental qualities as neither deficient or excessive
equanimity of jhāna - through being absorbed in an object to the point of abandoning pleasure and displeasure
equanimity of purification - describes the purification of the mind of partiality through various means.

Most of these just refer to different ways in which the concept of equanimity is used in the suttas and abhidhamma; in ultimate reality, as stated, most are called equanimity simply due to their shared quality of being associated with a neutral feeling. The difference is rather in their other specific qualities like wholesome or unwholesome roots, and the cause that brought about the equanimity - insight, tranquility, delusion, etc. More specifically, numbers 1-3 and 8-10 are all qualitatively the same as each other, as are 4 and 6 with each other. 5 and 7 are unique.


Are there any specific stories or talks where Buddha discussed using mind altering substances other than alcohol?

No. The dharma is about returning to your buddha mind or original mind unaltered. The use of mind altering drugs goes directly against the return to the unaltered mind literally by definition. I would venture to say that Mind Altering things (ie. TV/EGO/DRUGS/External Attachments) are what the middle way and the dharma are trying to be free from.


Why would the Buddha refrain from instructing?

I thus wonder, why wouldn't the Buddha wish to show the way to someone clearly mired in wrong view the right path to practice at his first request ?

It's difficult to exactly know what was going on without being there ourselves to see the specific context and background situation while they were talking. One thing we do know is that the Buddha was not only a master of Dhamma knowledge but also a master of how to best convey the idea to his audience in the most effective way that which brings real radical transformation in the listener. Maybe this three-attempts approach had something to do with that, to rouse up the actor's curiosity, his persistence, his attention, etc. to a degree sufficient enough to receive and absorb the Teaching in the most effective and beneficial way.


Minimum common grounds for all sotapanna and all arahant

For stream-enterer we have:

AN6.34:4.4: But those who have experiential confidence in the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha, and have the ethics loved by the noble ones, do know that they are stream-enterers.”

For arahant we have release from ten fetters:

AN10.13:1.1: “Mendicants, there are ten fetters. What ten? The five lower fetters and the five higher fetters.
AN10.13:1.4: What are the five lower fetters? Identity view, doubt, misapprehension of precepts and observances, sensual desire, and ill will. These are the five lower fetters.
AN10.13:2.1: What are the five higher fetters? Desire for rebirth in the realm of luminous form, desire for rebirth in the formless realm, conceit, restlessness, and ignorance.

The interpretation may differ, but the above definitions are common ground.
A key point of potential dispute is the validation of "experiential confidence." Historical, this was even an issue in the Buddha's time:

AN3.21:2.3: The personal witness, the one attained to view, and the one freed by faith. These are the three people found in the world. Of these three people, who do you believe to be the finest?”

For those who experienced confidence in the Triple Gem via first jhana, they would be a personal witness.

AN3.21:5.7: Because this person’s faculty of immersion is outstanding.”

For those who experienced confidence in the Triple Gem via deep study of the Dhamma, they would be attained to view.

AN3.21:7.7: Because this person’s faculty of wisdom is outstanding.”

For those who experienced confidence in the Triple Gem via faith, they would be attained by faith.

AN3.21:3.7: Because this person’s faculty of faith is outstanding.”

Yet the Buddha answered quite simply and inclusively:

AN3.21:12.1: In this matter, it’s not easy to definitively declare that one of these three people is finest.”


As I was just explaining in a comment to one of my answers, the term "Hinayana" is widely used by Tibetan Buddhism teachers to refer to basic/elementary/foundational (and because of this often simplified) aspects of Buddha-Dharma. If you'd go to their lectures, you'd hear this notion of Hinayana-understanding vs. Mahayana-understanding discussed in almost every other lecture. Amongst tens of books written by the teacher I consider my Root Guru, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, a recently published 3-volume set has its first book, of 680 pages, dedicated to Hinayana, with this word used on almost every page.

Again, to emphasize, "Hinayana" is not used to refer to Theravada at all. Rather, it is used in two senses: one, to refer to a primitive interpretation of Buddha-Dharma (by a member of any school, and of any standing, but usually a beginner, or a "senior junior") and two, to refer to the first phase of Buddhist upbringing, during which the student is introduced to the most basic discipline and doctrines, that serve as the foundation for subsequent education & practice.

Imagine two teachers discussing their students with each other: "I have 3 Hinayana-level students, 2 Mahayana-level, and 1 Mahamudra" or "This guy is stuck at Hinayana level, perhaps I should try Kriyayogatantra..."

Whoever thinks the term is derogatory misses the point. The term is indeed used to refer to "primitive" or "elementary" level of Dharma. But we don't consider "elementary education" a derogatory term, do we? Or perhaps, in countries where Parliament comes in two houses, we don't consider The Lower House of Parliament a derogatory term? And when the rental cars come in three classes: economy, business and luxury -- we do not insist that the use of the term "economy" should be discouraged because it hurts the feelings of lower-income people etc.

The term "Hinayana" is an important term, used by thousands of gurus over thousands of years to teach their students a very important point: that Dharma, like any other non-trivial area of human activity goes far beyond simple logic, and requires depth, sensitivity, ability to compromise, to go beyond black-and-white view of the world, to juggle multiple contradicting needs, to understand different perspectives, and in general to not get stuck at the level of mechanical application of formulaic if-then-else rules.

Besides the negative connotations ("black-n-white understanding of the beginner"), the way it was presented by Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche I feel "hinayana" also has positive connotations like "fundamental basic teaching" and "spartan discipline".

Here's how Trungpa praised hinayana in his famous short talk, Never Forget Hinayana (edited for readability):

  Good evening. Ladies and gentlemen, it is a very profound time and profound experience for us to realize how important is the hinayana teaching.

  The hinayana teaching should not be regarded as something that you can just carry out and then get rid of, or discard. The hinayana teaching is the life force that carries our practice and discipline, which goes on continuously. From that point of view the hinayana should be regarded as life’s strength.

  It is [important] for us to understand that basic life [force], that basic strength. It is very important to us, and inseparable from our lives and our existence as individuals. It is the life force that carries [you] on whether you are going through the hinayana, mahayana, or vajrayana [levels]. It is our substance and our sustenance.

  NEVER FORGET HINAYANA!


The mind observes. Consciousness observes. Awareness observes.

  I've heard it taught by various secular teachers that through mindfulness one can uncover the "true authentic self"

No. Buddhism does not teach there is a "true authentic self".

  because we realise that we are not thought but that we are awareness
  of thought.

No. Ultimately, there is no "we". Buddhism explains there are only five aggregates, namely:

Physical body
Feeling/sensation
Perception
Thinking/emotions
Sense consciousness

  Please correct me if I'm mistaken but in my understanding this is not in alignment with Buddhist teachings and a misunderstanding of
  mindfulness.

Correct. What various secular teachers are teaching is not in alignment with Buddhist teachings.

  We can discover that there is an awareness of thought, emotion etc
  but are we this awareness?

The mind discovers & the mind is aware. Consciousness knows thought, as follows:

  Dependent on the intellect & ideas there arises consciousness at the intellect. The meeting of the three is contact.

  If anyone were to say, 'The intellect is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of the intellect are discerned.
  And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow
  that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable
  if anyone were to say, 'The intellect is the self.' So the intellect
  is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Ideas are the self,' that
  wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self and ideas are
  not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Consciousness at the intellect is
  the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self,
  ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self. If
  anyone were to say, 'Contact at the intellect is the self,' that
  wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are
  not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the
  intellect is not-self.

  MN 148

  'Consciousness, consciousness': Thus is it said. To what extent, friend, is it said to be 'consciousness'?

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

  Discernment (wisdom) & consciousness, friend: Are these qualities conjoined or disjoined? Is it possible, having separated them one from
  the other, to delineate the difference between them?

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

  MN 43

  Wouldn't Buddha say that even awareness is not self?

Yes.

  If we are not thought, not awareness, who or what is the observer?

The mind is the observer; awareness is the observer; but "we" is not the observer.

  Is the observer just more impermanent phenomena?

Yes. Refer to SN 12.61

  It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the
  mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four
  great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four,
  five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But
  what's called 'mind,' 'intellect' or 'consciousness' by day and by
  night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey,
  swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of
  it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one.
  Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's
  called 'mind,' 'intellect' or 'consciousness' by day and by night
  arises as one thing and ceases as another.

  SN 12.61


What should a 11-17 years old Buddhist do?

It all depends on the individual's effort and potential, and how much Dhamma they've been cultivating since countless previous lives. Sorta like child prodigies who can become accomplished medical doctors, mathematicians, or musicians in their teens.


What is the (middle length) sutta, where Buddha exposes a monk, who has an ignorant view of non-self?

Possibly MN 38, where the monk held:

At one time the Lord was staying near Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in
Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. Now at that time a pernicious view like
this had accrued to the monk called Sāti, a fisherman's son: “In so
far as I understand Dhamma taught by the Lord it is that this [same;
identical; <a
href="https://suttacentral.net/define/ana%C3%B1%C3%B1a" rel="nofollow noreferrer">anañña]
consciousness itself runs on, fares on, not another."

Note: I chose the translation of I.B. Horner to avoid the contradictory eternalism of the other translators, who use words such as "transmigration" or add words that do not even exist in the sutta, such as "round of rebirths".


I enjoy sex just like I enjoy good movie. What is wrong about it?

Sex(1) is unwholesome(2) according to the Buddha's teaching.

If one is on this forum just to enjoy oneself then that is probably unwholesome. If the real intention to be on this forum is to learn and/or help people then that is most likely a wholesome intention and is good kamma.

Wanting to be compassionate is a wholesome intention. Not everything we want is unwholesome.

(2) Unwholesome actions lead to suffering. Unwholesome actions are usually entangled with a wrong view of self, nonacceptance of reality and/or not letting go of reality.

(3) Wholesome actions are usually in harmony with acceptance of reality, letting go of reactions to reality  and/or the correct view of self

(1) Why is sex between consenting adult laypeople unwholesome? I don't know precisely but I do have faith in the Buddha's teaching. Even just wanting to exist is also unwholesome, so I wouldn't get my feathers ruffled over it.


What are the six beads at the end of a mala used for? And what is there meaning if there is one

Depending on your tradition and the design of your mala, they're for counting cycles (if they can be slid around the tassels/cords), representing the Triple Gemn and/or Six Perfections, or just decoration.


Six types of temperaments and techniques for them

Where can I find the references mentioned? (in Niddesa, Abhidhamma,
Visuddhimagga)

Visuddhimagga > Chapter 3 KammatthanaggahanaNiddesa (Describing the way to recite and learn the meditation from the teacher) > cariyāvaṇṇanā (Describing the mental behavior [for stopping PariyutthanaKilesa] for the teacher to analysis his student behavior), and it's sub-commentary.

What are the recommended techniques for the different temperaments?

In VisuddhiMagga recommend high quality teacher. There are many qualifications to be a teacher in Theravada.

Is this (#2) found in the scriptural sources? Please provide
references.

It is techniques for the meditation not theory or rule, no standard, so in Visuddhimagga...

yasmā pana idaṃ cariyāvibhāvanavidhānaṃ sabbākārena neva pāḷiyaṃ na aṭṭhakathāyaṃ āgataṃ, kevalaṃ ācariyamatānusārena vuttaṃ, tasmā na sārato paccetabbaṃ. rāgacaritassa hi vuttāni iriyāpathādīni dosacaritādayopi appamādavihārino kātuṃ sakkonti. saṃsaṭṭhacaritassa ca puggalassa ekasseva bhinnalakkhaṇā iriyāpathādayo na upapajjanti. yaṃ panetaṃ aṭṭhakathāsu cariyāvibhāvanavidhānaṃ vuttaṃ, tadeva sārato paccetabbaṃ. vuttañhetaṃ ‘‘cetopariyañāṇassa lābhī ācariyo cariyaṃ ñatvā kammaṭṭhānaṃ kathessati, itarena antevāsiko pucchitabbo’’ti. tasmā cetopariyañāṇena vā taṃ vā puggalaṃ pucchitvā jānitabbaṃ. ayaṃ puggalo rāgacarito, ayaṃ dosādīsu aññataracaritoti.
However, the six types of temperaments analysis   neither come from Tipitaka nor Commentary. All are from many teachers' idea, so it's not standard. Actually, the proper gesture, etc., for greedful person might be proper for  hateful person who having strong mindfulness, too. And the various  guesture, etc., can't be in  a person who having complex temperament (most people has one personal gesture, etc.) Actually, the six types of temperaments analysis   from Commentary is standard whether "the teacher, who can know of other minds-Cetopariyanana, can know student's temperaments and teach the (proper) meditation. If not, the teacher can talk the student to get personal information." So, the temperaments can be known by these 2 ways.


In which Sutta, Buddha wore cloth of dead body?

It is in  SN 16.11.

  ‘Your outer robe of patches is soft, Kassapa.’–‘Venerable sir, let the Blessed One accept my outer robe of patches, out of compassion.’–‘Then will you wear my worn-out hempen rag-robes? ’–‘I will, venerable sir.’ Thus I offered the Blessed One my outer robe of patches and received from him his worn-out hempen rag-robes.

However, the English translation doesn't mention that the Buddha wore a cloth wrapped to a dead body instead it just mentions worn-out hempen rag-robes. In the pali version it says the robe was paṃsukūlāni (rags discarded on the ground).

The Buddha has obtained it from the dead body of a servant named Punna lying in the cemetery (this part is in the commentary). He wore this robe until he exchanged it with Maha Kassapa.


How do I practice Buddhism to attain peace of mind and know the inner self?

Read the Satipattana Sutta and the Anatta Lakkhana Sutta and do Satipattana meditation. Examine the things you consider to be the self and see if they are worth taking as a self. As for the inner self, examine if there's anything inside you that is worth considering as a self.


Is it possible to have a romantic relationship without attachment? Just based on pure love and with equanimity?

I won't say that all relationships must end; but if a relationship doesn't end, one of the partners will die.

When we knew that my partner was dying, I think then we both/each experienced more love and less attachment than we had previously.

Perhaps that is inevitable, the only sane response to dying.
Or perhaps we were fortunate, we allowed each other that experience towards the end.
Perhaps we were unfortunate, we didn't allow each other that experience when we were younger (and instead had less love and more attachment during our earlier life together)

Sankha might be right: we might have been better to have been friends than to have "loved" each other.

I'm not sure about Rabbit's answer; that answer says, "our natural state is non-discriminative love", but a typical, old-fashioned "romantic" relationship is perhaps discriminative and exclusive: it says, "I will love you and no-one else" (or, "I love you in a way that I don't love anyone else").

A famous saying about love is, "love is when the other person's happiness is more important than your own." I suspect that love can cause attachment, which makes happiness more difficult, and makes your happiness less under your own control. You give your partner control over whether you feel happy: you allow them them to hurt you (and they feel hurt by you).

Whether it's "possible" to have a "romantic relationship, without attachment, just based on pure love and with equanimity" presumably varies from person to person. Maybe it becomes easier as you get older and if you become wiser.

Now after my friend died I still remember her. Perhaps I remember her without "attachment", i.e. without hurting myself by wishing that things are other than as they are. When I (still) dream about her, which I did last night, I feel less conflict between the dream (of her being present) and reality (her having died).

I suppose the above doesn't seem like a strong recommendation.

I suppose that on the plus side, if you are able to eventually (and it might take years or decades, if you're ever able to at all) overcome your many faults, it gives you an opportunity to help two people (you and your partner) to experience that love.

It might matter, whether you and your partner have the same "values": whether you value the same thing. For example, do you both value "relationship without attachment" and "love with equanimity"? Buddhism? If so perhaps that's a friendship, a community. If not, an unequal or one-sided relationship.


Returning to the object of noting sounds like Khanika Samadhi

  Pure Vipassana yogis can appreciate and understand the power of Khanika concentration. For when their noting gains momentum, they can see for themselves how the noting goes on by itself uninterruptedly without a break. The noting seems to run on its own steam without any need for the yogi to make any concerted or deliberate effort. Thus, it is not unusual for a yogi to be able to sit for an hour, and even several hours, absorbed in noting. During good noting, especially at the insight knowledge of equanimity (sankhara-upekkhañana), the mind just stays put on its objects and refuses to wander. Even if one wants to send the mind out, it refuses to go and it recoils back to whatever Vipassana object it is noting. There have been cases of yogis being able to sit for six or seven hours in a stretch, or even longer. From this, one can deduce that there must be strength in Khanika concentration; otherwise how would yogis be able to sit in rapt concentration for such lengths of time.

http://www.angelfire.com/indie/anna_jones1/vip-jhana.html


Is another person necessary to produce merit?

From Iti 60:

  This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "There are these three grounds for meritorious activity. Which three? The ground for meritorious activity made of giving, the ground for meritorious activity made of virtue, and the ground for meritorious activity made of development [meditation]. These are the three grounds for meritorious activity.

And with just meditation alone, the generated peace and serenity could very well benefit many other beings with form or without form living nearby..


Does each person have a particular True Nature, according to Buddhism?

To the best of my knowledge Essentialism is not a part of any school of Buddhism. Essentialism deals with metaphysical essentialism, and is essentially on the opposite end of the spectrum from emptiness/sunyata, which might be refereed to by some as Metaphysical anti-realism. However I have not met many Buddhists that want to jump into that classification. Taoists love it though. The Buddhists will assert that there is an Ultimate truth, and so can never truely be metaphysical anti-realists. At least not in the most extreme case of the view. They do show some grey areas from time to time.

A quick dirty and brief summery of metaphysical anti-realism is that there is no "Truth"
but some views are more true than others. It is found in various places within eastern philosophy.

Also Buddhism is not nihilistic, never do they throw up their hands and say, nothing matters do whatever you want. The only term with nihilism in it that might come close to paralleling with the Buddhist worldview that I can think of is Mereological nihilism.


What are the relevant vinaya guidelines if a bhikkhu was to find a likely abandoned dwelling?

It's not a matter of how long, since you can't know for certain anyway. If you perceive it to be abandon, then you can go ahead and use it as deem fit.


Reincarnation of a Sotapanna person (Stream Enterer)

I'm answering this with some experience I know similar to this.

It's says that 7years is the minimum age that it would take to understand Dhamma. I haven't seen a reference for this but it is said by many people. An example for this is prince Rahula become a monk when he was at age of 7years.

Anyway according to some stories I've heard present day, They no need to practice anything, they them selves starts to realise that there's a problem in the things they do. That's because they have the right view. So that right view starts to conflict with the view of the other people (puthujjana). So with their understanding they have started to search for Dhamma. And they have come and stopped at some monks. And these monks' view is not accepted by the majority of the people (same as in this forum). But those stream entrants people say that it is what they have looked for.

  How long does it take?

Can't give an exact answer to that. But as mentioned earlier it's said that minimum age is 7. With the experience it can go up to 20, 30 as well.

Only way to tell about past life is through pubbe-nivās-ānussati-ñāṇā (which is used to see the past lives) which can be obtained by meditation, or by asking buddha. But a rough idea can be get by asking the right view

With metta..!


How to die professionally?
What did mean by that?

The untrained mind, i.e. a mind that has not been subjected to systematic, continual practice, development and purification, can be classified as an "amateur" mind. It does not know how to deal with physical or mental objects such as pain, ill-will, greed etc. It is therefore more likely to cling in the event of death, thereby leading to rebirth.
A trained mind that sees clearly with no obstructions, has insights into the true nature of reality, knows how to deal with conditioned phenomena and has consistently been trained in meditation, is a mind that is more likely not to cling in the event of death. The trained mind will be able to merely observe what happens in the death process, thereby liberating itself from Samsara.
That mind can be classified as a "professional" mind.


If sex is prohibited, how do we survive?

Sex is prohibited for monks and nuns

If you are not observing higher precept like 8 or 10 precepts sex is not prohibited for lay person. Lay person has only to adhere to 5 Precepts. This prohibits wrongful sexual acts, i.e., sex with someone under another's protection... and other acts.

As you said sex is craving and can lead to suffering. But not very body or householder is in the stage to eradicate higher stages of craving for sensual pleasure than the rudimentary level which might lead to misconduct. At the basic level this is what is required. As you progress in the path you have to remove sexual urge.

Also Vipassana Meditation can help reduce sexual urge. There are Samatha techniques also but if you take the insight root you kill 2 birds with one stone. You can try http://dhamma.org or http://internationalmeditationcentre.org which has centres in many cities and faily large outreach.

You loose complete sensual desire is when you become a non-returner where by you eliminate the fetter of sexual desire. If you take human world number of being achieving this state is small. Hence there is no risk of extinction. Also a stream enter will have lust and a lay follower may engage in sex as long as it is lawful (a stream enter does not engage in sexual misconduct).


Please visit:
http://buddhadust.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/sutta_toc.htm
This is the index page to all the suttas contained on the site.

This site is focused on the 4 Nikayas, and has:

All the Nikayas in the original Pali: both the PTS version and the BJT version, and a version that combines both;

All the Pali Text Society translations: one version in the html format, one a PDF of the originals (likely what you see in the bookshelf).

All the translations of Bhikkhu Thanissaro.

All the freely released translations of Bhikkhu Bodhi.

A great collection of very early translations as well as quite a few from 'lesser-known' translators, including myself.

All the translations are linked to the Pali and to all the other translations available.

The PTS translations and the Pali are mostly (not entirely) unabridged.

The PTS translations and the Pali are mostly (not entirely) broken down to their phrasing for clarity of meaning.

PS: For a good deal in purchasing the hard-cover books (recommended) join the Pali Text Society. Members get a free book every year and a 20% discount on purchases.


What is the difference between 'compassion' and 'pity'?

This answer is based on my own understanding of compassion and pity.

Compassion is an honest and true way of wanting to help another being. One sees and understands this beings situation and wants to help. In this type of help there is no attachment involved. This way of helping is pure.

Pity is different. In pity there is an element of attachment present. One might even feel guilty or obliged to help. One helps because one wants to ease the bad conscience that has arisen.

So compassion is a pure and genuine wanting to help while pity is wanting to help based on attachment in order to ease ones own guilty conscience.

If i can make a comparison then compassion is like having a real rose and taking care of it because of its gentle nature. Pity is like having a plastic rose that one does not need to give any special care.

I stumbled upon a video by Ven. Yuttadhammo that you might find useful. It's called "Ask A Monk: Compassion vs. Pity".

A little summary of it is as follows:

The question was, "It's easy to feel compassion for someone who's worse off than I am; but how can I feel compassion for someone who's better off, who I don't pity?"
The answer started by saying that the brahma viharas are meditations in their own right which you can practice if you feel yourself lacking in them; but that according to the tradition which he follows they are not considered to be crucial or essential because the more important thing is wisdom: if you have wisdom then you'll naturally be compassionate.
Compassion manifests as "non cruelty"
When someone else does evil things then you feel compassion because you know they're suffering or are going to suffer
Compassion has no bearing on whether someone people is badly off or someone is well off: it's a state of non-cruelty, it's a state of wishing to help people who are in suffering and not wishing to hurt people; it's a state that's in harmony, that's free from the evil where we do hurt other people and try to get the better of them.


What constitutes virtue and how to train myself in virtue?

Virtue or sila at the very minimum is the five precepts. Further practice of virtue is by the eight precepts, ten precepts, Right Livelihood, Right Speech and Right Action.

Further information can be found in AccessToInsight's virtue (sila) page, including sutta verses.

To practice virtue (sila), the first step is to vow to undertake the training of the five precepts, and then practice them with heedfulness (appamada).

The second step is to adopt this thinking from AN 5.57:

  “And for the sake of what benefit should a woman or a man, a
  householder or one gone forth, often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of
  my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my
  relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma,
  good or bad, that I do’? People engage in misconduct by body, speech,
  and mind. But when one often reflects upon this theme, such misconduct
  is either completely abandoned or diminished. It is for the sake of
  this benefit that a woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth,
  should often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my
  kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my
  resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do.’

The third step is to understand more deeply from the Dhamma on Right Livelihood, Right Speech and Right Action, and practise them with heedfulness (appamada).


I believe Singapore can be a good stop to visit many Buddhist Temples from different regions. There are

Thai Buddhist Temple
Burmese Buddhist Temple
Sri Lanka Buddhist temple
Buddha Tooth Relic Temple and Museum at ChinaTown

For meditation, it might be quite difficult as you might need to join a group to mediate in a specific place or find a quiet place inside the temple to meditate.

If you are visiting Yangon in Myanmar/Burma Country, you should definitely visit Shwedagon Pagoda. You can find a lot quite place to meditate and you might also see a large crowd celebrating Buddhist festival at Full-Moon day.


Happiness vs. Euphoria from a Buddhist's point of view

Euphoria may result in happiness but this is temporary. Reason being is you have not absolute to maintain the world to your liking. Every good movie or party eventually does come to an end. The base of this happiness is creating temporary pleasant sensation. In the case of a movie it is looking at the story line and playing the concept of the story. In the case of food it is taste from the tongue. All these sensations arise to pass away. Also when the stimulus is not there it does not arise any more.

The best way to have lasting happiness if in different to the arising and passing away of sensations and achieving an unconditioned state where you do not need an external stimulus to create pleasantness.


You are not alone on this… @Ashwin Kumar. You have good company. When you stop and think about it, that’s what a lot of people do in this world. They do something because they think it makes them better than other people. That whole mindset—the idea of wanting to be better than others or that they are worse than others or equal to others—is a real trap because it tends to swing you back and forth between extremes: either exaggerated self-esteem or exaggerated self-hatred, back and forth, back and forth. And either extreme can make you miserable because the idea of self, of who you are, becomes the big issue in life. You have to do everything you can to shore it up. Then when you find yourself doing things that are not up to that high standard, you feel like a failure. It’s good to remind yourself that all those issues are useless. They don’t accomplish anything at all. We are practicing this Dhamma to overcome conceit, but conceit has its uses.

So as long as there’s going to be conceit in your mind—i.e., the idea that you define yourself in a certain way and you define yourself against other people in a certain way—try to use standards that are wise. Look in terms generosity, virtue, conviction, discernment. At the very least be your own best friend in terms of your values and try to keep those values clear and articulate so that you notice when you’re deviating from them. So that even though we’re living here in a land of wrong views, you try to create an island of right views around yourself.

When you can let go of that conceit of over expectations and over-confidence—even though you can’t totally conquer it, at least put it out of your mind for the time being—it allows you to look at situations less in terms of what you are, and more in terms of what you can do with the range of skills at hand.


What does the Tibetan book of the dead say happens 14 days after death?

In general, the process of the Bardo can last between 7 - 49 days with a chance of rebirth or liberation every 7 days.

Depending on your friend's knowledge of the Bardo he could either still be in the Bardo, or in the process of seeing his next life / being reborn / in utero.


What is required to achieve Nirvana in Buddhism?

To answer your question let me draw an analogy. What is required to become a professor?
According to Wikipedia, "A professor is a highly accomplished and recognized academic, and the title is in most cases awarded only after decades of scholarly work to senior academics". Being a professor is not a concrete state, it is a label they put on years of hard work, culminating in professional realization.

Similarly, Nirvana is not a concrete state, it is a common name for the condition of a highly accomplished spiritual practitioner. This condition is not something you can contrive knowing the requirements, it is a result of years of personal transformation.

Nirvana can be characterized as condition of having transcended suffering & death. The requirement for this is said to be a complete cessation of Attraction (obsessing over something as desirable), Rejection (obsessing over something as undesirable), and Ignorance (mistaken understanding of how everything works). One of the key components of Ignorance is a deeply lying conviction in existence of substantial self and a tangle of reflexes that grow around that. Much of Mahayana practice is targeted at destroying this belief, not just at conceptual level, but at the level of basic day-to-day instincts.

If we could simplify the requirement for becoming a professor to "complete cessation of ignorance in the field of study one specializes in", we could perhaps make a stretch and define Nirvana as "complete cessation of ego complex, along with negative experiences and behavioral tendencies it generates". As any simplification, this is not entirely accurate: just as becoming a professor requires tons of practical skill and experience outside of the primary field of study, attaining Nirvana requires cessation of all mental and emotional obscurations, a tendency to get stuck on anything, not just on self.

Now, for the purposes of this discussion I'm equating Nirvana with Enlightenment, which depending on a school may or may not be the right thing to do. Specifically in Mahayana, Nirvana is considered a conceptual projection (a shadow of ego so to speak) that has to be transcended as part of awakening to Self-Existing Buddha Nature (=Enlightenment).


Abhidhamma deals with ultimate realities (Citta, Cetasika, Rupa & Nibbana). There are 121/89 Citta, 52 Cetesika, 28 Rupa. Each Citta contain a combination of Cetesika. Since these lists are long drilling down into the specifics are pretty long, but you can locate more detail resources here: http://www.abhidhamma.com/


Are social interactions always helpful in solving problems?

Not always:

If you're sick and go to someone who's not a doctor, who's incompetent or a thief, that won't help (except perhaps as a placebo)
If you're sick with an incurable (untreatable) illness and go to a doctor, that won't help (well it might help with managing symptoms and explaining what's happening)

The Sigalovada Sutta (DN 31) details long lists of examples and differences, between "good socialising" and "bad socialising" for lay people.
I think Buddhism includes two themes:

Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.
Maha-parinibbana Sutta (DN 16)

and:

As he was sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."
"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path.
Upaddha Sutta (SN 45.2)


What is the history and (current) location of the root text sources comprising the Pali Cannon?

Please read the book "The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts" (hard copy can purchased here) by Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali.

The abstract states:

  This work articulates and defends a single thesis: that the Early
  Buddhist Texts originated in the lifetime of the Buddha or a little
  later, because they were, in the main, spoken by the Buddha and his
  contemporary disciples. This is the most simple, natural, and
  reasonable explanation for the evidence.

  Our argument covers two main areas:
  1. The grounds for distinguishing the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) from later Buddhist literature;
  2. The evidence that the EBTs stem from close to the Buddha’s lifetime, and that they were generally spoken by the historical
  Buddha.

  Most academic scholars of Early Buddhism cautiously affirm that it is
  possible that the EBTs contain some authentic sayings of the Buddha.
  We contend that this drastically understates the evidence. A
  sympathetic assessment of relevant evidence shows that it is very
  likely that the bulk of the sayings in the EBTs that are attributed to
  the Buddha were actually spoken by him. It is very unlikely that most
  of these sayings are inauthentic.

Also, "A History of Mindfulness" (and here) by Bhikkhu Sujato (as suggested by Andrei Volkov).

Another good source is "History of the Buddhist Canon" by Daniel Veidlinger, who teaches Comparative Religion at the California State University.

Also: "On the Very Idea of the Pali Canon" by Steven Collins.

This chapter maybe interesting to you: "Recent Discoveries of Early Buddhist Manuscripts: And Their Implications for the History of Buddhist Texts and Canons" by Richard Salomon.

For a scholarly paper on early manuscripts, see "The Senior Manuscripts: Another Collection of Gandharan Buddhist Scrolls" by Richard Salomon. But this paper discusses only one set of manuscripts that was discovered.

Perhaps, it should be made clear that the oral tradition of the Pali Canon is much more important than the written version. Please see "Pali Oral Literature" by L.S. Cousins. I quote below:

  Early Buddhist literature is an oral literature. Such a  literature is
  not without its own characteristic features. A widespread use of
  mnemonic formulae is one of the most typical of these. I would refer
  to the considerable body of research on the nature of oral epic
  poetry. In such poetry the formulae are used both as an aid to actual
  performance and to maintain the continuity and form of the epic
  tradition.

  Both these features are certainly present in the sutta literature. In
  the first place many suttas are clearly designed for chanting. We
  should assume that, then as now, their chanting would produce a great
  deal of religious emotion - the pamojja and piti-somanassa of the
  texts. The difference of course would be that the language of the
  suttas would still be directly comprehensible to the hearers. In these
  circumstances suttas would be chanted by individual monks both for
  edification and for enjoyment. We may compare the recitations
  attributed to Ananda and Upali in accounts of the First Council. In
  practice they would have to be tailored to the needs of the particular
  situation ~ shortened or lengthened as required. An experienced
  chanter would be able to string together many different traditional
  episodes and teachings so as to form a coherent, profound and moving
  composition.


Original Pali Buddhism does not teach about 'non-dualism'. Instead, it teaches about 'voidness' (selflessness; sunnata).

  The world is empty...In what respect is it said that the world is empty? Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a
  self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty.

  SN 35.85

In a number of places, it states there are internal & external phenomena.

  The six internal media should be known. The six external media should be known.

  MN 148

  Owing to a dyad (pair), monks, consciousness comes into being. And how, monks, does consciousness come into being owing to a dyad?

  "Owing to the eye and forms arises eye-consciousness. The eye is impermanent, changing, 'becoming-otherwise.' Forms are impermanent,
  changing, 'becoming-otherwise.' Thus this dyad is fleeting and
  transient; impermanent, changing and 'becoming-otherwise.' That cause,
  that condition, that gives rise to eye-consciousness — that also is
  impermanent, changing, becoming-otherwise.' And how, monks, could eye
  consciousness, having arisen dependent on an impermanent condition,
  become permanent? Now the coming-together, the falling together, the
  meeting-together, of these three things: this, monk, is called
  'eye-contact.' Eye-contact, too, is impermanent, changing,
  'becoming-otherwise.' And how, monks, could eye-contact, having arisen
  dependent on an impermanent condition, become permanent? Contacted,
  monks, one feels. Contacted, one intends. Contacted, one perceives.
  Thus these states also are fleeting and transient; impermanent,
  changing, 'becoming-otherwise.'

  SN 35.93

MN 1 lists the perception of 'oneness' ('ekatta') as not Nirvana & as one a many possible experiences.

  He perceives earth as earth...He perceives water as water... fire as fire... wind as wind ... beings as beings... gods as
  gods...Pajapati as Pajapati...Brahma as Brahma... the luminous gods as
  luminous gods... the gods of refulgent glory as gods of refulgent
  glory... the gods of abundant fruit as the gods of abundant fruit...
  the Conqueror as the Conqueror ... the dimension of the infinitude of
  space as the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of
  the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of
  consciousness... the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of
  nothingness... the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception
  as the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception[3] ... the
  seen as the seen... the heard as the heard... the sensed as the
  sensed... the cognized as the cognized ... singleness as singleness (ekatta)...
  multiplicity as multiplicity ... the All as the All ... Nirvana as
  Nirvana...

This essay may help: Dhamma and Non-duality.


Would Buddhists help non-Buddhists continuing their attachments?

Reading your question I feel like you are little misled about what Buddhism is (or maybe I don't understand your question at all). So however, I will give you an answer as I understand your question.

First of all, as I know the word "attachment" is wrongly translated from the "Pali" word "Ragha".
The meaning of "ragha" can philosophically explained by using the words like greed, sensuality, desire, attachment or excitement for sensory objects, lust, sexual desire and passion. Now, because of the "ragha" when you lost something or someone you love or even when you can't have something or someone you love, you face an unbearable pain. This unbearable (or bearable) pain called in 'pali' as "dukkha".

Now, you cannot control losing things or people and not being able to having things or people you love. Nothing and no one last forever. Things decay they brake, people age they die. Even we didn't lose them when we alive, we die eventually then we lose them in the moment of our death.

In Buddhism it teaches about reincarnation, a cycle of birth, living and death (Sansara). After someone died they reborn again based on what they did in their past lives(Karma). Every living being suffer in various ways sicknesses, injuries, pain of losing loved things, does't matter rich or poor, powerful or not, every one suffer as life goes on. So, as the cycle of livese goes on the pain (dukkha) continues. So the Buddhism is all about braking this cycle of lives and ending the continuous pain (attaining nibbana). Buddhism teaches us that holding onto things/attachments (Ragha) is one of the reason this cycle goes on. To break the cycle you have to lose the 'Ragha'. The way to lose ragha is being well aware of that everything is not lasting forever and accepting the reality of world (practicing Upekha). If you truly master this 'Upekha' you wouldn't be in pain of loses. This doesn't mean that Buddhists have to leave or stop protecting their loved ones, loved things or Stop trying to achieve things, earn money and doing jobs. People need those things to be alive, to survive. Buddhism teaches to be aware of the fact that things don't last. Love people knowing that someday we lose them, use things knowing they break, they don't last, Earn money to survive not out of greed, Eat food only to be healthy not because taste good.

Now about your question, If you understand what I explained above you will realize that helping a child to find her mother is not helping her to stay in attachment. Doesn't matter you help her to find her mother or not she always will be attached to her mother, even the mother is dead. As long as the girl don't understand and not accept the concept of 'dukkha' she will always feel the pain of losing her mother, doesn't matter you didn't help the girl or not. One cannot be removed from attachment(ragha) by just being away from others. That attachment(ragha) is a state of mind, a way of seeing the world. Helping the girl doesn't make her or you any more or less 'ragha' person. It's not ultimately helping her to be in attachment it will only be helping her to survive and allow her to be with the people she loves.

Same like that helping Bob and Alice will only be helping them to communicate and understand the situation and helping them to continue with their lives.

Helping others to live or helping them to continue their lives with ease doesn't make any bad effects on your ultimate freedom (Nibbhana). However, if someone did those things with 'ragha' mind that will affect his 'nibbana'.

My vocabulary is not that good to explain things in the Buddhism. I don't know the most suitable english words and phrases to explain these things. I hope you understood and got the answer you needed.


Be mindful of everything you do. That is meditation. Distractions are meditation objects. Not showstoppers. Showstoppers are mostly your strong wrong views like God, soul or nihilism.


In Buddhism can all we percieve / experience b used as teachers?

The Buddha told us the three marks of existence, all things which exist in the mind have these properties:

Sabbe sankhara anicca
Sabbe sankhara dukkha
Sabbe dhamma anatta
All conditioned things are impermanent, All conditioned things are suffering, All things are without a self.

This means that everything has the potential to teach us. We can learn about impermanence, dukkha, and not-self from anything which arises in the mind.


How to understand Buddhism original dogma?

I like The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching by Thich Nhat Hanh as a beginning book on the core of the Buddhist teaching. It is well written and modern in style, and covers essentials such as the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path as well as slightly deeper topics. It will give you a grounding and a place from which to appreciate the sutra's.

There are various web based repositories of sutra's which you can explore, I found http://www.accesstoinsight.org to be pleasant and good. The book includes many references to sutra's which you can look up online.

One thing to be aware of in Buddhism is that the different schools hold differing opinions on the words of the Buddha. There is a doctrine called the Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma, which sets out the Mahayana view on the Buddha's teaching, while the Theravadan view is that the Pali Cannon which constitutes much of the Mahayana tradition's First Turning is authoritative by itself.

The Tibetan tradition has composed a series of texts called lamrims, of which there have been many following on from Atiśa's 11th-century original text A Lamp for the Path to Enlightenment. These aspire to order the sutra's in a logical order of progression for actual practice.


According to my teachers (Korean Zen and Tibetan Vajrayana), because Buddhism explicitly denies existence of soul (see anatta), the concept of rebirth does not refer to reincarnation of the same person, but rather to propagation of information from one life to another.

Recollection of past lives then is not to be understood literally but as a metaphor for clearly seeing patterns of karma acting out from one generation to another. This requires shedding an irrational belief in existence of "I" as a solid entity, subject of experience, and independent agent of action.

The technique for achieving this level of insight is known as vipassana or "special insight meditation", to be preceded by "calm abiding meditation", samatha, in order to attain the necessary clarity of mind.


Are there any body who achieved Nibbana currently (in the current world)

The Pali scriptures describe 4 levels of enlightenment, which equate to 4 levels of Nibbana.

The Nakhasikha Sutta states in the 1st level of enlightenment the vast majority of the previous suffering has been ended & extinguished.

Many Buddhist practitioners have tasted Nibbana (freedom from suffering). However, I suspect those that have reached the highest Nibbana are not many.

In Thailand, monks would say Ajahn Maha Bua & Ajahn Chah (both now deceased) reached the highest Nibbana. You can watch these videos:

Ajahn Chah - Bio 43 - Talking about enlightenment
Ajahn Chah - Bio 44 - How attained was Ajahn Chah?

I think Ajahn Brahm is close to the highest Nibbana.

The Buddha said if people practise the 8 fold path in the right way, people will know Nibbana.

This article, 'Nibbana for Everyone', may be helpful.


Is here-and-now-view one of the wrong views in DN1?

There are five wrong "here-and-now" views listed in DN1. These five views are part of the "net of views" that prevent progress. Here is the first:

  DN1:3.20.2: ‘When this self amuses itself, supplied and provided with the five kinds of sensual stimulation, that’s how this self attains ultimate extinguishment in the present life.’

This view is a trap because it asserts that there can be a self entangled in hedonism and perpetual gratification via the senses. Those who have gained more wealth than one could spend in a life would get trapped in this view.

The other four "here-and-now" views attempt to escape the first wrong view and its successors. But in each of these five wrong views, there is an assertion of and clinging to self that tempt one to stop in the Noble Eight-fold Path.


Where can I learn more about cita niyama?

Following is a link to the Niyama Dhammas in Wikipedia. Following is a translation from Pali Sources. Also this is a text by Ledi Sayadaw called "THE NIYAMA-DIPANI: The Manual of Cosmic Order".

If you have the power of deep Jhana and make a strong determination (which is part of the perfections) then there is a possibility that the something similar desired outcome materialises based on the power of your mind (depending how deep the absorption Samadhi is). This can be done to a more limited extent without Samadhi also as this moment influences the next as per Dependent Origination.

But this is not recommended as this may generate bad Kamma as this practice can lead to covetousness. See Kammapatha. Also such use of Samadhi will not be Samma Samashi.

Matter of clarification, these are two concepts but there are much similarities.

I hope this helps. Comment if you want more information.


Did the Buddha work with teachers from other spiritual traditions?

Jatila brothers who had thousand disciples had some relationship with Lord Buddha. But they had evil intentions inside. But Lord Buddha knew their evil intentions. But they soon realized Lord Buddha was superior. Jatila brothers along with their thousand disciples became arhats after listening to Aditta Pariyaya Sutta. You can read the story here. I am unable to recall some other instances where other teachers had good relationships with Lord Buddha, but there must have been.


Is there a pali term for "natural concentration"?

I used to study Ajahn Buddhadasa very comprehensively. However, Handbook For Mankind was a book I was never partial towards. While it contains many basic teachings, I always found the verbal style of delivery difficult or abrasive to read. However, merely browsing and offering an answer:

The book is from 1956 lectures the Venerable Buddhadasa Bhikkhu gave to a group of prospective judges. Therefore, the two chapters on meditation are addressed to laypeople.
The chapter on "Nature Method" concludes: "Summing up, natural concentration and insight, which enable a person to attain the Path and the Fruit, consist in verifying all day and every day the truth of the statement that nothing is worth getting or being."
The statement: "nothing is worth getting or being" essentially comes from MN 37. It is a statement of Right Understanding: Samma Ditthi.
In his book Heartwood From The Bo Tree, Bhikkhu Buddhadasa said about concentration: "As for samadhi, an empty mind is the supreme samadhi, the supremely focused firmness of mind. The straining and striving sort of samadhi isn't the real thing and the samadhi which aims at anything other than non-clinging to the five khandas is micchasamadhi (wrong or perverted samadhi). You should be aware that there is both micchasamadhi and sammasamadhi (right or correct samadhi). Only the mind that is empty of grasping at and clinging to 'I' and 'mine' can have the true and perfect stability of sammasamadhi. One who has an empty mind has correct samadhi."
To conclude, the teachings above by Bhikkhu Buddhadasa accord with the following sutta teachings about samadhi:

sattahaṅgehi cittassa ekaggatā parikkhatā sammādiṭṭhi pubbaṅgamā: mind with single intent equipped with seven factors in use where right view is the leader (MN 117)
samādhindriyaṃ vossaggārammaṇaṃ: faculty of concentration reliant upon letting go (SN 48.10)
samādhisambojjhaṅgaṃ vivekanissitaṃ virāganissitaṃ nirodhanissitaṃ vossaggapariṇāmiṃ: concentration factor of enlightenment that relies on solitude, dispassion & cessation maturing as letting go (MN 118).

In summary, "natural concentration" means "concentration without craving".


OP: Is it possible to have awareness without a self-sense?

Yes, why not? It's very hard to imagine how enlightened ones think about what they use, their parents, relatives, etc... without self-sense. They use things with knowing that this is not me, this does not belong to me, this cannot be kept as I wish. How beautiful that thinking is!
Do you know even a non-returner lived in a home, did a job (without earning money), and looked after his old blind parents? I quoted here Kassapa Lord Buddha's own words about him, to understand how he did those without self-sense in order to imagine a little about how enlightened ones think.

But Ghaṭīkāra doesn’t get upset, nor will he. Ghaṭīkāra has gone for refuge to the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha. He doesn’t kill living creatures, steal, commit sexual misconduct, lie, or take alcoholic drinks that cause negligence. He has experiential confidence in the Buddha, the teaching, and the Saṅgha, and has the ethics loved by the noble ones. He is free of doubt regarding suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the practice that leads to its cessation. He eats in one part of the day; he’s celibate, ethical, and of good character. He has set aside gems and gold, and rejected gold and money. He’s put down the shovel and doesn’t dig the earth with his own hands. He takes what has crumbled off by a riverbank or been dug up by mice, and brings it back in a carrier. When he has made a pot, he says: “Anyone may leave bagged sesame, mung beans, or chick peas here and take what they wish.” He looks after his blind old parents. And since he has ended the five lower fetters, Ghaṭīkāra will be reborn spontaneously and will become extinguished there, not liable to return from that world.

~ Cited from: Ghaṭīkāra Sutta (MN 81)
I have provided this answer by assuming the OP's intended sakkāya-ditthi by the word, self-sense. To my understanding absence of self-sense (sakkāya-ditthi) is not something that totally abandon you from outer world or conventional relationships. We can understand this by reading the following conversation between Ghaṭīkāra and Jotipāla.

Jotipāla: Dear Ghaṭīkāra, you have heard this teaching, so why don’t you go forth from the lay life to homelessness?
Ghaṭīkāra: Don’t you know, dear Jotipāla, that I look after my blind old parents?

Note: This is how I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.


Can stream entry be reached by focusing on the links in dependent co-arising

It depends what you mean by "focussing on". If by that you mean thinking about mentally, then no, that is not possible, since the mind will be focussed on an abstract object and not be able to see impermanence, suffering, and non-self.

If by that you mean observing empirically then yes, since the links are ultimate reality. By focussing on them, you will see impermanence, suffering, and non-self, which is the path of purification, according to the Buddha.


Why are the Perfection of Wisdom sutras seen as a coherent collection?

All of these sutras are on the subject of wisdom, or "voidness", "sunyata", or the "emptiness".

Śūnyatā
Introduction to Meditation on Voidness (Emptiness).

There are many good teachings on the concept; here's one: Advice for Studying Voidness (Emptiness)

Every school has its own teachings on the subject. Indeed, all of them (I think) advocate meditation on the concept at some point. One form of Mahamudara meditation advocates using it from the beginning: Mahamudra Meditation Manual.

Good stuff!


The Buddha's teachings were often tailored to the audience he was addressing.  Teachings like karma, merit making, and securing a good rebirth are available to anyone regardless of how much time they wish to dedicate to meditation.  If you are after true liberation, however, there are no shortcuts.

There is a koan that goes something like this:

  Nangaku (Ch. Nanyue) asks, “What are you doing these days?”
  Baso (Ch. Mazu) says, “These days Dōitsu just sits.”
  Nangaku says, “What is the aim of sitting in zazen?”
  Baso says, “The aim of sitting in zazen is to become buddha.”
  Nangaku promptly fetches a tile and polishes it on a rock near Baso’s hut.
  Baso, on seeing this, asks, “What is the master doing?”
  Nangaku says, “Polishing a tile.”
  Baso says, “What is the use of polishing a tile?”
  Nangaku says, “I am polishing it into a mirror.”
  Baso says, “How can polishing a tile make it into a mirror?”
  Nangaku says, “How can sitting in zazen make you into a buddha?”

You can actually achieve enlightenment without ever sitting.  Since this is going to be my last post on this site, I'll candidly tell you that my first truly deep kensho experience happened before I ever met my Zen teacher.  In fact, it happened on my way to Wendy's to buy a hamburger!  Things like this do happen from time to time.  Unfortunately, this has led a lot of people in the modern age to read this koan as saying that consistent, long periods of meditation are not required for liberation.  That's rubbish.  More poignantly, one of the things this koan is saying is that there is no transactional relationship between enlightenment and zazen.  1,000 hours of meditation does not equal 1,000 credits of enlightenment.  Instead, meditation creates the conditions for enlightenment to occur.  Think of it like planting a garden.  Seeds grow all on their own in the right conditions, but as anyone who has planted a garden will tell you, getting that garden started is a lot of work.  You have to establish decent soil, you have to make sure that your plot has a good solar aspect, you have to ensure that there is adequate water, and you have to sow your seed.  Some gardens need more remediation to get going, others less.  And even then, once your plants are started, your work still isn't done.  In some ways, it's just started!  Now, you have to maintain the plot.  You have to weed it, ensure that it has the right amendments, and you have to keep the critters out.

Buddhist practice is no different.  The seed of enlightenment will grow in a plot tilled with moral discipline and meditation.  For some people, this may happen quickly.  Their karmic soil is fertile and will allow wisdom to grow with little effort.  Others can sit wholeheartedly for decades without experiencing daikensho.  But in either case, the better conditions they create, the better chances they have of seeing success.  Moreover, once they have had an enlightenment experience, the easier it will be for them to maintain it.  As is often the case with spontaneous kensho, as deep as my first experience was, it only lasted for a couple of months.  Eventually, it began to fade - overwhelmed by karmic weeds that could reestablish themselves since I wasn't maintaining my mind with an equally deep meditation practice.

You never reach the end of the path.  There are always deeper strata of karma to tend to - even after enlightenment.  You need sharp tools and strong back to reach the really subterranean stuff.  You develop both with sincere, dedicated, daily practice.  I'm not going to lie, sometimes that work can have the character of drudgery.  Your legs will hurt, you will get frustrated, and you will even be bored.  Let me assure you, however, that as your practice grows, this very same practice will become absolutely transcendent.  In time, meditation will become your favorite thing in the world.  It truly is a wish bestowing gem.  And it is one that is available to everyone.


Great question. Sure, Buddhism speaks about seeking praise and fame. The reason we seek praise and fame (to which seeking attention and validation is very similar) is because they give us a sort of energy, they pump us up. In modern terms, they trigger the reward mechanism in our brain, which produces dopamine, the happy hormone.

Now, according to Buddhism, this is not the right way to get energy. This way of getting energy makes us dependent on our (projected) image in the eyes of others. This image, also known as "ego" then gets its own life of sorts and makes us do crazy things, like being a comedian you mention, in order to get its "fix". Needless to say, having a big ego makes one very vulnerable to the opinions of others, very emotionally unstable.

Instead, Buddha said (SN 22.43):

  Monks, be islands (alt. trans. lamps) unto yourselves, be your own refuge, having no other; let the Dhamma be an island(/lamp) and a refuge to you, having no other.

Initially, this means crosschecking our choices and actions against the Dharma and the opinions "of the wise" - instead of trying to get attention and validation from everyone around. This process of crosschecking everything against the reference point of Dharma/guru/elders is called "mindfulness". Taking Buddha (as the role model), Dharma (as the conceptual framework), and Sangha (of elder practitioners, as confirmation/validation) as your reference point for all decision making is called "taking the refuge". For as long as you are on the path, the Triple Gem becomes your source of praise and validation, your source of energy.

Eventually, we should develop our own wisdom to see what's right and our own mental/emotional stability to the point where we can be independent of others as far as our energy. Basically we become egoless - meaning, we can now stop worrying about our image in the eyes of others, because we have completely internalized Dharma, we become the proverbial "wise" and "worthy".

When that happens, attaining the second Jhana occurs spontaneously, since you have now rid yourself of the perpetual conflict between differing opinions and can truly become your own source of clarity, praise and energy.


All the things happen is not a result of Karma.
Actually in Buddhism there are Fivefold Niyama where as Karma Niyama is a just one of them.

The Fivefold Niyama is as follows

uthu-niyama: the caloric order, the climate of the geographical location.

bija-niyama: the germinal order, things you inherited from the genes.

kamma-niyama: the moral order, is the one you are talking about.

chitta-niyama: the psychical order.

Dhamma-niyama: natural phenomenal sequence. we all get old and we all die its a natural thing for all of us

more details: http://www.buddhivihara.org/niyama.htm


Are monks expected to accept life lessons from (time spent with) the laity?

In Ubon Ratchatani Luang Por Char talked about (translating from Isaan language) how "everything is teaching us."

Also, working with people was developing strength in him, he said.


From the perspective of training I received, this is a (very) obvious case of "attachment" - to things being "right", and likely also to success and praise.

I suspect, your frustration and anger are your reactions to dukkha generated when in your mind there is a mismatch between your expectation of how the task is supposed to proceed, and how it actually goes.

In my understanding, there are two steps here: one, attachment to an idea of things going perfectly generates dukkha; and two your aversion to dukkha generating frustration and anger. I would not be surprised if there were an element of self-reflection going on as well. As in, thoughts like "why don't other people run into these problems and I do?" or "this is my bad luck". And probably some reverse projection of these back onto the world e.g. "I'm running into these issues because someone else did a sloppy job." and/or "This world is broken! Things never go right and everything is in a mess! It's hopeless!"

From Buddhism's perspectives these are all pathological thoughts rooted in attachment, aversion, and confusion. The root of all this is ignorance - an incorrect expectation of how things are supposed to work, based on an incorrect (overly simplified!) idea of how things work in general.

So, naturally, the remedy is to meditate on how things work!

why exactly things don't go perfectly?
where do the obstacles come from?
if it's the other people who did it imperfectly, why could they not do it perfectly?
what are all the factors at play?
can things ever be perfect?
what is "perfection" anyway, and does my mind play the role in defining it?
is my definition of "perfection" truly objective, or is it partially biased and somewhat one-sided?
aren't things already perfect in some global sense?
does my attachment to idea of how things should be, that leads to frustration, does it help me or others?
does being in a frustrated state lead to my long-term happiness?
when things go different from my idea of how they were supposed to, can I learn to not lag behind reality in my mind and to keep updating my idea to always match reality?
if I learn to stay in sync like that at all times, would I not be stable and at peace?
could it be that this is what Buddhism is actually about?

The last question is obviously a leading question on my part, sorry about that ;)

But yes, analysis like this, and resulting change in perspective is how these things are to be resolved, in my opinion.


Do enlighted people cry? Did the Buddha ever cry?

Crying can be caused due to both physical and mental reasons.
Physical reasons:

Irritation in the eyes.
Sickness affecting the eyes.
Side effects of strong medication or extremely spicy food.

Mental reasons:

Sadness(obvious sadness and the sadness disguised as compassion), depression, aversion to pain, fear
Clinging to happy/pleasant/joyful states of the mind.

Assuming that this question is aimed at the 2nd category, it is highly unlikely that a fully enlightened being would cry as they no longer become sad or cling to pleasant states of the mind.
Arhanths only have Kiriya Cittas. Those are of 3 types.
i. Consciousness turning to impressions at the five doors
(panca dvara-avajjana) accompanied by feeling of indifference(Upekkhā).
ii. Consciousness turning to impressions at the mind-door
(mana dvara-avajjana) accompanied by feeling of indifference(Upekkhā).
iii. Consciousness of the genesis of smile (hasitoppada
citta) accompanied by joy(Pīti).
Hasita(a smile which slightly reveals the tips of the teeth) is their reaction to joy. If they ever cried, there should be another called the Assuppada citta. But there isn't! :)


From a Theravada perspective, there is absolute good and absolute bad. The 2 can exist mutually exclusively.

Suffering is absolutely bad and the mind states that lead to suffering are absolutely bad.
Nibbana is absolutely good and the mind states that lead to Nibbana are absolutely good.

There is no suffering in Nibbana and there's no Nibbana in suffering. They arise/exist without requiring the presence of eachother.


Importance of the first three Brahmaviharas in Theravadan Buddhism

Brahmavihara manifest naturally from non-defilement. Regardless, Brahmavihara is taught as a preliminary practise to Anapanasati. For example, from MN 62 and MN 118:

  Develop the meditation of good will. For when you are developing the
  meditation of good will, ill-will will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of compassion. For when you are developing the
  meditation of compassion, cruelty will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of appreciation. For when you are developing
  the meditation of appreciation, resentment will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of equanimity. For when you are developing the
  meditation of equanimity, irritation will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of the unattractive. For when you are
  developing the meditation of the unattractive, passion will be
  abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of the perception of inconstancy. For when you
  are developing the meditation of the perception of inconstancy, the
  conceit 'I am' will be abandoned.

  Develop the meditation of mindfulness of in-&-out breathing.
  Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of
  great fruit, of great benefit.

  And how, Rahula, is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed &
  pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit?

  There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the
  shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs
  crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the
  fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out.

It is reported that, for the Buddha, metta was very important. For example:

  Monks, if for just the time of a finger-snap a monk produces a thought
  of loving kindness, develops it, gives attention to it, such a one is
  rightly called a monk. Not in vain does he meditate. He acts in
  accordance with the Master’s teaching, he follows his advice, and eats
  deservingly the country’s alms-food. How much more so if he cultivates
  it!

  AN 1:6.3–5


Is it possible to become a buddhist without a formal teacher?

Pretty much so. Buddhism is a path of personal growth, so you do what you feel it's best for your own development.

It's not something that I recommend, but you can even be a Buddhist and break all the precepts. The only requirement is that you mindfully explore the consequences of your actions (i.e. their kamma). Then you have a chance to learn why you are following the precepts, i.e. not because someone commanded you but because you know by personal experience.

If personal experience tells you that you need a teacher, then go for it. If you do better by personal research, then go for it. Experiment while always being mindful. That can never fail you.

Also read this: How does one become a lay Buddhist?


I have never read or heard of this story before. The Buddha did not teach Buddhists to seek or worship 'god' (Brahma). Further, the scriptures report the Buddha said to Brahmans that no Brahman teacher has ever seen god (Brahma) & also taught Brahmans that the way or path to Brahma is to radiate love in all directions (refer to Tevijja Sutta on the internet). For the Buddha, 'god' or 'the gods' are states of mind. In the Mulapariyaya Sutta, different gods are equated with mental states of meditation. In the Brahma-Nimantanika Sutta & Culatahnasankhaya Sutta, the Buddha visits 'gods', who are obviously human beings with super-normal spiritual attainments.


What's the difference between remorse and shame of evil?

The answer below is according to the Abhidhamma.

Hiri and ottapa are both universal wholesome mental factors or universal beautiful factors.

There are in total 25 of those universal beautiful factors. Universal means that they all come together in one bunch. So, if there is hiri in the mind, then there is also ottapa in the mind together with all the other 23 universals. Other universal beauties are for instance: sati, faith, non-greed, non-hatred, tranquility and so on.

According to the Abhidhamma each factor can be defined by 4 things: it's characteristic, it's function, it's manifestation and it's proximate cause.
The function of hiri and ottapa is not doing evil. They manifest as shrinking away from evil. The Buddha called them the guardians of the world. Because they protect the world from immorality.

In short: hiri and ottapa prevent you from doing evil deeds in body, speech and mind.

Now to the unwholesome factors of which kukkucca is one.

There are 14 unwholesome factors. To name a few:

ahirika = shamelessness
anottappa = fearlessness of wrongdoing
kukkucca = worry in the sense of remorse
uddhacca = restlessness

As with the beautiful factors the unwholesome ones know some universals. In this case there are 4 universal unwholesome factors, meaning they appear as a group. These 4 are: delusion (moha), shamelessness (ahiri), fearlessness of wrongdoing (anottappa) and restlessness (uddhacca).

So, in any and every mind state with moha, there is also ahiri, anottappa and uddhacca present.

Worry/remorse (kukkucca) on the other hand is not universal, it's part of the aversion group. Meaning that worry appears only in mind states that are rooted in aversion.

So, whenever you experience kukkucca there is also moha there and ahiri, anottappa and uddhacca (since they are all universals). But if there is moha there, together with ahiri, anottappa and uddhacca, worry doesn't have to be present.
Think for instance of a mind state rooted in greed. That does know restlessness, but not worry/remorse.

Kukkucca comes up after you have done something wrong.

So, not only will moha, ahiri, anottappa and uddhacca not protect you from doing wrong. On top of that you will be rewarded with kukkucca arising. And then you are in double trouble.....

Hope this helps to clarify things.


What are Sensuality, Strings of Sensuality, and Fermentation of Sensuality?

Sensuality and strings of sensuality is a very specific translation by Ven. Thanissaro.
Piya Tan translates them in Nibbedhika (Pariyāya) Sutta (quoted below) as sensual desires (instead of sensuality) and cords of sensual pleasures (instead of strings of sensuality).

Sensual desires (kāmā), bhikshus, should be known;
The source for the arising of sensual desires should be known.
The diversity of sensual desires should be known.
The result of sensual desires should be known.
The cessation of sensual desires should be known.
The way to the cessation of sensual desires should be known.
—so it is said, but in what connection is this said?

There are these 5 cords of sensual pleasures (kāma,guṇa):
forms cognizable by the eye,
desirable, attractive, pleasant, endearing, associated with sensual desires, delightful;
sounds cognizable by the ear,
desirable, attractive, pleasant, endearing, associated with sensual desires, delightful;
smells cognizable by the nose,
desirable, attractive, pleasant, endearing, associated with sensual desires, delightful;
tastes cognizable by the tongue,
desirable, attractive, pleasant, endearing, associated with sensual desires, delightful;
touches cognizable by the body,
desirable, attractive, pleasant, endearing, associated with sensual desires, delightful.
Bhikshus, these are not sensual objects (kāma), but in the noble discipline, they are called 'the cords of sensual pleasures'

It's interesting that the last statement differentiates the two.
Piya Tan explains in his commentary:

Now that we have examined all the lines of the “kāma verse,” we can
better understand what its preceding prose line — one of the most
enigmatic statements in the early canon—means, when the Buddha
declares: “These are not sensual objects, but in the noble discipline,
they are called ‘the cords of sensual pleasures.”
In the suttas, sense-objects (kāmā) are called “the cords of sensual
pleasure” (kāma,guṇa) because we make them so in our minds. We “desire”
(kāmeti) them; we accumulate them: we make a “pile” and proliferation
(guṇa) of them—so that they become a “cord” (guṇa) that binds and
plays with us. When the enemy is named, it is known — we are in a
better position to defend, strengthen and free ourselves.

In Sabb’āsava Sutta, Piya Tan translates what Ven. Thanissaro calls "fermentation of sensuality" as "influx of sense-desire" (kām’āsava).
He explains what influxes are:

The term “influx” (āsava) refers to a category of
defilements existing at the deepest level of the mind, and which fuel
and sustain samsaric existence. The Commentaries derive
āsava (BHS āśrava, asrava) from √ŚRU, to flow. The prefix ā-can refer to
inward or outward. Hence, it can be rendered as “influxes,
influences,”since they fuel our existence and prolong our suffering.It
also refers to pus and other discharges from a bad wound; hence, it can
also be translated as “outflows, effluents,” or more poetically as
“cankers, corruptions, taints.”

Later he uses commentaries and other sources which I could not find yet, to link the influx of sensual desires to the five lower fetters of personality view (sakkāya,diṭṭhi), spiritual doubt (vicikicchā), attachment to rituals and vows (sīlabbata-parāmāsa), sensual lust (kāma,rāga) and repulsion (paṭigha).
The main cause for the cords of sensual pleasures?
From Nibbedhika (Pariyāya) Sutta:

And what, bhikshus, is the source for the arising of sensual desires
(kāmānaṁ nidāna,sambhavo)? Contact (phassa), bhikshus, is the source
for the arising of sensual desires.

What is the result of the cords of sensual pleasures?
From Nibbedhika (Pariyāya) Sutta:

And what, bhikshus, is the result of sensual desires
(kāmānaṁvipāko)? Bhikshus, one having sensual desires is reborn as
an individual into this or that existence depending on what
constitutes merit or on what constitutes demerit. — This, bhikshus, is
called the result of sensual desires.

I prefer Ven. Thanissaro's translation here for this:

"And what is the result of sensuality? One who wants sensuality
produces a corresponding state of existence, on the side of merit or
demerit. This is called the result of sensuality.

Where it lies in dependent origination?
This would be my guess - cords of sensual pleasures or strings of sensuality cover feeling (vedanā), craving (taṇhā) and clinging (upādāna). So, basically between contact (phassa) and existence (bhava). These would be feeling, craving and clinging associated with sights, sounds, smell, taste and touch.


Is there any Buddhist society / group / organisation in Mumbai, India? Where we can meet similar like minded people, attend cultural events

There are 9 listed here -- that search is filtering on "Mumbai" and "Theravada".


How does Buddhism explain the creation of everything (universe)

Buddhism says that the world has no discernible beginning.

That it runs by cause-and-effect.

That people are able to influence their own state, and have an effect on others.

And that you shouldn't spend too much attention on theoretical questions, such as "when did the universe begin?", because there are more important questions such as "how can we help to end suffering?"


What is yoniso manasikara and ayoniso manasikara?

The way my teacher explained it to me, we can either be masters of our mind, masters or information (=wise attention), or our mind can be our master, information can be our master (=unwise attention).

In the second case, we let our minds push us around. We allow information to make us think about things whether it's good for us or not. Things that are negative, or things that are useless to think about, things that make us feel bad. Our mind tells us: "see this? Because this is so and so, you have lost, there's no hope", etc. We let our negative inertia maintain ourselves in maimed and injured condition. Or, "see this? you must want this." - as is the case of lust or envy. We eat all kinds of informational junkfood without being selective. Or we let our rational mind, our logical mind, take us down the path of conceptual proliferation and fruitless quasi-intellectual speculation. We get fooled by information into believing that we must come to certain conclusions, that we don't have a choice.

Yoniso manasikāra is Emotional Intelligence. We decide what to think and how to think it - in order to feel stronger, healthier, and motivated. We actively decide what not to pay attention to, so negative mindstates cannot enter our minds. We don't let "Mara", devas, spirits, memes, advertisement, etc. and other informational viruses, to enter our informational space uncontrollably and do whatever they want to us. We are actively responsible for our mental hygiene.

We know the noble truths, so we know how attachment to expectation mismatch causes dukkha and makes us weak, and how being blameless and having no inner conflict makes us happy and strong, so we actively exploit this mechanism.

Moreover, we decide how to frame our thinking, what context and coordinates to choose. Because reality is an interpretation we make, choosing a mental framework is choosing a reality. We choose reality in which we are happy and can make others happy. We don't choose reality in which we are miserable and make others miserable.


Role of food as an allowed monastic luxury

Actually, high beds and seats are not disallowed; making them is. It's not really so cut and dried, and the Buddha seems to have allowed for the fact that (some) luxury is not the problem; attachment is.

  throwing a feast or banquet is actually encouraged as a means of merit making for the lay follower?

Not in the texts, it isn't. It is actually stated rather simply as "refined food both hard and soft". If anything, the point is to make mention of the rich people putting care and sincerity into their gift, which is very important for cultivating wholesome mind states.

  Especially when one considers how this sets apart the poor lay follower who can only afford to feed the occasional monk on his alms rounds.

The texts often make mention of the greatness of poor people giving coarse fare according to or beyond their means. The important point is one's quality of mind.

  who in their right mind could think they could honor the Buddha with a feast? If anything, he probably favored the simple flavors of fruits of the forest over puddings and rich food.

Not according to the Buddha; he was raised as a prince and his palate was quite refined; when he first went on alms as a bodhisatta, he said that it felt like his stomach was going to come out of his throat in protest of the coarse fare. I think it is unfair, though, to suggest that the Buddha favoured any type of fare. He did praise a monk who  separated his food into wholesome and unwholesome once, though, so there is that.