What does deathless mean?

The Deathless is a synonym for Nibbana. The Deathless state is the state where one is freed from birth and thereby death. Conditioned phenomena constantly arise and fall. In other words: They must die. Nibbana is unconditioned, unborn, it does not arise and fall and therefore must not die.

Here are some quotes from the Majjhima Nikaya and Samyutta Nikaya where the Buddha talks about The Deathless state in relation to Nibbana. There are also some notes from the author (Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi):

  "He turns his mind away from those states and directs it towards the deathless element thus: "This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, that is, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishing of all attachments, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbana"

  -- MN 64: Mahamalunkyaputta Sutta, p. 540, Bodhi translation

Another quote:

  "Then at that point the Blessed One uttered this exclamation:

  The greatest of all gains is health,

  Nibbana is the greatest bliss,

  The eightfold path is the best of paths

  For it leads safely to the Deathless."

  -- MN 75: Magandiya Sutta, p. 613, Bodhi translation

Sutta notes:

  "The eleven "doors to the Deathless" are the four jhanas, the four brahmaviharas, and the first three immaterial attainments used as bases for the development of insight and attainment of arahantship."

  -- Notes to sutta 52, p. 1252

Sutta notes:

  MA: He "turns his mind away" from the five aggregates included within the jhana, which he has seen to be stamped with the three characteristics. The "deathless element" (amata-dhatu) is Nibbana.

  -- Notes to sutta 64, p. 1266

Sutta notes:

  "MA says that the arahantship of the dry-insight meditator is intended. MT adds that arahantship is called "the Deathless" because it has the flavour of the Deathless, being attained on the basis of Nibbana the Deathless."

  -- Notes to sutta 106, p. 1312

Here is a quote from the Samyutta Nikaya:

  "This is what the Blessed One said. Having said this, the Fortunate One, the Teacher, further said this:

  "One who desires merit, established in the wholesome, Develops the path to attain the Deathless;
  He who has reached the Dhamma's core,
  Delighting in destruction,
  Does not tremble thinking,
  'The King of Death will come."

  -- SN 55: Sotapattisamyutta, p. 1829, Bodhi translation

Another quote:

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

  "Bhikkhus, I will teach you the truth and the path leading to the truth ... I will teach you the far shore ... the subtle ... the very difficult to see ... the unaging ... the stable ... the undis integrating ... the unmanifest ... the unproliferated ... the peaceful ... the deathless ... the sublime ... the auspicious ... the secure ... the destruction of craving ... the wonderful ... the amazing ... the unailing ... the unailing state ... Nibbana ... the unafflicted ... dispassion ... purity ... freedom ... the unadhesive ... the island .., the shelter ... the asylum ... the
  refuge ...

  -- SN 43: Asankhatasamyutta, p. 1378, Bodhi translation

Sutta notes:

  "The removal of lust, etc., is a designation for the unconditioned, deathless Nibbana element. The destruction of the taints is arahantship. The removal of lust, etc., is a name for arahantship too."

  -- Notes to sutta 45, p. 1893

The Dhamma Wiki has a list of "33 Synonyms for Nibbana".


Is this a passable translation of Dogen's "without thinking"?

Think of not-thinking. How do you think of not-thinking? Be before thinking. These are the basics of zazen.

When one's perceptional faculties are acutely developed and on the cusp of awakening, logical perception will begin to occur before emotional perception.

For example, if there is a loud bang, the first perception in the mind will be, just a loud bang, nothing to fear. The very next nano second, the emotional perception will arise, suggesting fear and panic. However this emotional message will have no relevance because the event has already been cognized logically.

In modern scientific terms, one could describe it as the speeding up of the logical brain over the pre-brain.

By intently examining every moment in zazen we cause the evolution of the response time of the brain's logical faculties.

To be before thinking is indeed a very literal action.

The pre-brain, or animal-brain, or Amygdala evolved in human evolution as a primtive information processor, only emitting a binary response - fear or pleasure. It is very stupid but very quick. It keeps one alive, uses very little energy, but is useless for day to day human activity. The pre-frontal cortex is a far more sophisticated organ, whose response to inputs includes no emotion, only logic, but takes more calories, and has a slower response time.

In a normal unenlightened brain, the amygdala responds faster than the PFC. By the time the PFC gets event data it is already meddled with by the Amygdala and has been characterized as positive or negative.

To attain being before thought we train in faster response and intelligent reponse.

When we do long hours of zazen, by choice-less-ly observing events, we strengthen the nervous system leading to the pre-frontal cortex, and weaken the nervous system leading to the amygdala. Exactly like strengthening a muscle with use, and atrophying another muscle with disuse. In time the PFC reacts faster than the Amygdala to everything leading to a very logical person who's not swayed by the emotional ups and downs of life.

However, this is a physical modification, and can change with age or injury.

The real permanent change is when we also train our logical faculties to learn to recognize and discard the emotional meddling of the amygdala if and when it arrives before the PFC.

Thus even if an event is characterized as fearful or anger inducing by the Amygdala, by realizing no-self we can discard animalistic habit patterns, and utilizing the energy of mindfulness and wisdom we decide on the moment on its merits.

Eventually after practicing this until it becomes second nature, and by discarding identification and habit patterns we are finally before thought, and the turbid waters of the mind become still and clear.

CAVEAT: I am not a neural expert, this theory is solely based on personal inquiry, a little experience and a little hypothesis. YMMV.


There are three types of Sankhara. Mano,Vaci and Kaya.
Avoiding Vaci Sankhara and Kaya Sankhara considered Sila. They are also called "Papa"
Suppressing Mano Sankhara considered as Samadhi. These are also termed Kusala when practice in conjunction with Sila.

http://buddhismpathtowellbeing.blogspot.com/2017/11/18-avoid-ten-immoral-actions-dasa.html

There is another set of precepts called eight and ten precepts. They are considered higher Sila as it contained Sila required to contain wholesome mental activities.
To answer your question I would say that Samadhi is the Sila for the mind. Even the term is not used in that way.


Sit on the cushion.  You’ve posted scores of variants on this question and still seem to be under the impression that there’s an answer out there somewhere that’s going to get things to click for you - that somehow someone will say something that will miraculously make you committed and motivated to practice.  That answer simply doesn’t exist.  No amount of intellectualizing, sage advice, or sutra is going to change your mind or your circumstances.  Words don’t change behavior; behavior changes behavior.  Suck it up and sit.  It’s not going to be fun, it’s going to take monumental effort, you aren’t going to see any discernible benefit for a long time.  This is what practice looks like.  It’s why it’s called a discipline.  Effort doesn’t come from the outside.  It comes from within.  You have to provide the energy to make it happen.


What do Birth, Age, and Death mean in the first noble truth?

Here, "X is subject to birth, aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement" - means that X has beginning and end, that X changes with time and slowly falls apart, that X depends on external conditions to be just right for its existence, - and that therefore X is not 100% reliable, so you can't use X as foundation for building 100% stable peace and happiness. That X is never really what it looks like, so if you build your happiness on top of X, it will betray and disappoint you. Even if association with X may seem like bringing happiness on the short term, on the long term it will definitely bring eventual suffering. That's what this means.

Gold and silver are there as examples of worldly pursuits and worldly possessions. No matter how much you have, you can't buy happiness, can't buy health, and can't buy eternal life. At their best they can only bring intermittent short-term happiness mixed with troubles and pain, ending in eventual destruction.

So Birth here is coming together of any form (samskara) - and Aging-and-Death is its falling apart. Bhava is the continuity and cohesiveness we imagine in between the two.

Births and Deaths are not dukkha if there is no attachment: craving, grasping, denying - either "for" or "against". Attachment, in turn, comes from getting stuck on a certain mental context. If you stop getting stuck you can learn to be free. This is what they call Unbinding.

Not being stuck means things are just such, regardless of births and deaths. Being wrong against some definition of right is the nature of dukkha. Being just such is the nature of peace.


Does anyone know of any good Asubha sites?

I think these might be helpful:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2JroFk5Ke8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgDHJzBt-YU

I found it more helpful in daily life to be more aware of and look more at old people. I find it also develops helps develop a sense of respect towards fellow humans around. Old people are worthy objects of respect.

No need then for so much blood and gore. Or I have not seen the advantage of it.

I think it all depends from where one works. A sense awareness that there is the same awareness in the object, being bound to this existence, growing old, sick and dying, from my experience, is a very powerful support. More than looking at dead bodies.

Might be different for others.

After that one incident, where I looked at a woman like this, because "fallen in love", could not maintain such enamoured state, because somehow it was demeaning, my thought was I wanted to disappear into the forest and only look at my own mind, to find freedom.

Then looking at any woman at all I was not inclined to have any sexually motivated perception or fantasy anymore for months on end. Feeling very light and freed.

So, this sense, that we are all imprisoned here, going to die. Developing this at the "living object", developes some kind of compassion that one would not be able to have sexual thoughts about this.

Perhaps a bit gone of-topic, because just I find some other ways to be more useful.

Just some not so professional ideas. Hope it may help.

_/_


How does one do an "eye opening" for a new statue?

My answer refers to Tibetan Buddhism, I am not sure whether the same applies to other traditions.

Eye opening ritual is the final stage of a statue filling ritual. A newly bought statue is hollow inside and its base can be opened with a tool. If one sells an already filled statue, it is a good practice to ask in what circumstances it has been filled.

During the statue filling ritual the face of the Buddha is covered. Traditionally, the face wasn't even painted before the statue has been filled. In this case the eye-opening ceremony involved adding the actual eyes to complete the statue. Nowadays it is difficult since many statues are acquired in Asian countries to be sold in the West.

To fill the statue one needs a special transmission to do so. In the West various local Buddhist centres organize statue filling events so that people can bring their own statues and have them traditionally filled. You can see a photo relation from one of such events. I have never heard of anyone filling the statue without receiving special instructions.

Personally I own a two statues. One has been bought and filled in Germany and the second one was bought in Kathmandu and filled in a local monastery. I uncovered the eyes only when it safely arrived to my home and I placed it on my altar. I've been told it is a good practice to cover the eyes of the Buddha during the travel and open it only when you can place the statue at it's final destination.


Sunset_Limited

(1) It's good to remember Kisagotami Theri and Pañcasata Patacara: The Soothing of Grief and all the teachings about the cause of suffering: "Beyond Coping: The Buddha's Teachings on Aging, Illness, Death, and Separation"

(2) It's good to keep the Uposatha as long as possible.

(3) Sure, not that one might get like a piece of cake, but what ever the departed might be able to take as possibility. For their best possible wellbeing in the future, one looks after providing to keep the Dhamma alive. Read more: [Q&A] How can merit be transferred? and [Q&A] Hungry ghosts and food offerings to the dead, [Q&A] Body feels like crying - Death of beloved

Practicing metta, possible start with the beloved and then expand it is good. To bring alms food to monks and dedicate it, is good. It's in buddhist countries usual to give sets of house tools, starting from glas, pot, ... to what ever good for a new house hold, dedicate it as present for the departured and give such to monks.

It's good to have a small shrine for ones ancestors and other spirits near and to give best aways a share before eating. (one might put the food firt on this place, offer it, and the ask to take it, before eating one self). Reminding that ever new appearing living being around could be ones previous beloved, is a very good present best act, taking them as such and avoid harming best possible.

Also a retreat and/or attentive talks with wise monks or nuns are conductive.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]


Prior to Nichiren's time, reading the Lotus Sutra in its entirety was said to result in benefit, or good effects, in this life and the next. As part of Nichiren's efforts toward his goal of "saving all people" as he put it, he said that reciting the title (prefaced by the Sanskrit word Nam) was enough to gain the same benefit. It is in this context that Nichiren wrote. Here is a quote from the same letter (gosho), The One Essential Phrase, where he provides a rationale. As can be seen, he refers to earlier writers in support of his teaching.

  The spirit within one’s body of five or six feet may appear in just one’s face, which is only a foot long, and the spirit within one’s face may appear in just one’s eyes, which are only an inch across. Included within the two characters representing Japan is all that is within the country’s sixty-six provinces: the people and the animals, the rice paddies and the other fields, those of high and low status, the nobles and the commoners, the seven kinds of treasures and all the other precious gems. Similarly, included within the title, or daimoku, of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo is the entire sutra consisting of all eight volumes, twenty-eight chapters, and 69,384 characters, without the omission of a single character. Concerning this, Po Chü-i[1] stated that the title is to the sutra as the eyes are to the Buddha. In the eighth volume of his Annotations on “The Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra,” Miao-lo states, “When for the sake of brevity one mentions only the daimoku, or title, the entire sutra is by implication included therein.” By this he means that, although for the sake of brevity only the title of the sutra is spoken, the entire sutra is contained in the title alone.
  Everything has its essential point, and the heart of the Lotus Sutra is its title, or the daimoku, of Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Truly, if you chant this in the morning and evening, you are correctly reading the entire Lotus Sutra.

And another, similar, quote from a different letter, Expedient Means and “Life Span” Chapters -

  First of all, when it comes to the Lotus Sutra, you should understand that, whether one recites all eight volumes, or only one volume, one chapter, one verse, one phrase, or simply the daimoku, or title, the blessings are the same. It is like the water of the great ocean, a single drop of which contains water from all the countless streams and rivers, or like the wish-granting jewel, which, though only a single jewel, can shower all kinds of treasures upon the wisher. And the same is true of a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, or a million such drops of water or such jewels. A single character of the Lotus Sutra is like such a drop of water or such a jewel, and the hundred million characters[6] are like a hundred million such drops or jewels.

(the quotes were added in response to a request in the comments.)


For the United States there is a great resource: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/therapists/buddhist
For the UK: https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/counselling/buddhist
After filtering for location it's possible to add many other filters, for example for types of therapy (CBT, ACT, MBSR, etc)

It's also possible to change the country in the upper right of the page
It seems that in general you first need to filter by area and can then add filters. "Buddhist" is one of the filters which can be found under the "more..." button in the "faith" column

I hope this helps someone!


Comparing Chinese Agama the ? Bundles of Reeds Simile with Pali Nalakalapiyo Sutta

OP: Are these two Sutra/Sutta equivalent but different versions?

Yes, I think so. According to SuttaCentral, SA 288 and SN 12.67 are equivalent. I could find "三蘆立於空地" from your quote inside SuttaCentral's SA 288, so I guess it is the same.

  OP: If they are equivalent Sutra/Sutta, which is more reliable? Or, more accurate?

SuttaCentral links the Chinese agama SA 288 to the Pali sutta SN 12.67 and the Sanskrit sutra SF 155. Only the Pali sutta has English translations from Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Bodhi.

The Sanskrit sutra comes from "TRIPĀṬHI, Chandrabhal 1962. Fünfundzwanzig Sūtras des Nidānasaṃyukta ( = Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden VIII). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag."

Let me quote the other versions below.

From Pali sutta SN 12.67 named "Naḷakalāpīsutta":

  Suppose there were two bundles of reeds leaning up against each other.

  Seyyathāpi, āvuso, dve naḷakalāpiyo aññamaññaṃ nissāya tiṭṭheyyuṃ.

From Sanskrit sutra SF 155 named "Naḍakalāpikasūtra":

  tadyathā dvau naḍakalāpāv ākāśe ucchṛtau syātām anyonyaṃ niśṛta

I don't really know Sanskrit, but I guess that the two bolded terms above in Pali and Sanskrit mean TWO in reference to the bundles of reed.

So, the Pali and Sanskrit versions agree with each other, but not the Chinese version.

Based on the above evidence, I would say that most likely the Chinese agama version was modified from the original version which was probably in Sanskrit, or otherwise, in Pali. So, the Pali version is likely to be more accurate and reliable than the Chinese version, in my personal opinion.

But then again, I'm not a professional scholar of Buddhist Studies. So, I should quote the opinion of one. Prof. Dr. Bhikkhu Analayo is not just a monk, but also an academic scholar in the field of "comparative studies of Early Buddhist Texts as preserved by the various early Buddhist traditions" (according to Wikipedia).

Prof. Analayo wrote the following in the book "Three Chinese Dīrgha-āgama Discourses without Parallels". While this is not related to the Bundles of Reed Sutta/ Sutra, it definitely proves that there has been a precedent for the Chinese Agama to add to or modify the original version.

  The  three  discourses  in  the  Chinese  Dīrgha-āgama that  are
  without  parallels in other early discourse collections appear to be
  later additions  to  the  collection.  They  share  in  common  an
  attempt  to  map  doctrinal  terminology.  While  the  Discourse
  Increasing  by  One  (DĀ11)  and  the  Discourse  On  the  Three
  Groups  (DĀ  12)  still  seem  to  belong to an early stage in the
  developing of such maps, the Discourse On a Record of the World (DĀ
  30) appears to reflect a later stage.  The circumstance that all three
  discourses in the Chinese Dīrgha-āgama that are without parallels
  appear to be later additions should not  be  taken  to  reflect  a
  general  rule,  however,  assuming  that  any  discourse without
  parallels must be a later addition. It is always possible that a
  discourse is now extant from only one textual lineage due to  the
  vicissitudes  of  transmission.  An  example  would  be  the
  Jīvaka-sūtra  of  the  Sarvāstivāda/Mūlasarvāstivāda Dīrgha-āgama.
  Until  the  recent discovery of fragments of the Jīvaka-sūtra, only
  the Majjhima-nikāya version  of  this  discourse  was  known.  This
  was  because  the  Sarvāstivāda/Mūlasarvāstivāda  reciters  had
  allocated  this  discourse  to  their  long  discourse  collection,
  whereas  the  Theravāda  reciters  placed  their  version  of  this
  discourse  in  their  middle  length  collection. So lack of a
  parallel may simply be the result of differences in the  distribution
  of  discourses  among  the  four  discourse  collections,  transmitted
  by various Buddhist schools.

Whether name-and-form should be together or separate I think is out of the scope of this question and could be asked in another question.

  OP: They obviously have marked disagreement - can three reeds leaning against each others to stand up, or two reeds?

Maybe two reeds cannot lean on each other, but surely two bundles of reed can lean on each other just like these two cards below. It just depends on how the bundles of reed are tied together.

Here are two books leaning on each other:

EDIT:

I removed the statement that the Pali Suttas do not separate nama from rupa. There is actually such a separation in DN 15:

  ‘Name and form are conditions for contact’—that’s what I said. And
  this is a way to understand how this is so. Suppose there were none of
  the features, attributes, signs, and details by which the category of
  mental phenomena is found. Would linguistic contact still be found in
  the category of physical phenomena?” “No, sir.” “Suppose there were
  none of the features, attributes, signs, and details by which the
  category of physical phenomena is found. Would impingement contact
  still be found in the category of mental phenomena?” “No, sir.”
  “Suppose there were none of the features, attributes, signs, and
  details by which the categories of mental or physical phenomena are
  found. Would either linguistic contact or impingement contact still be
  found?” “No, sir.” “Suppose there were none of the features,
  attributes, signs, and details by which name and form are found. Would
  contact still be found?” “No, sir.” “That’s why this is the cause,
  source, origin, and condition of contact, namely name and form.

Nama and rupa is also separated in AN 10.27:

  “When it was said: ‘A question about two, a concise statement about
  two, an explanation of two,’ with reference to what was this said?
  When a bhikkhu is completely disenchanted with two things, completely
  dispassionate toward them, completely liberated from them, completely
  sees their delimitations, and completely breaks through their meaning,
  in this very life he makes an end of suffering. What two things? Name
  and form. When a bhikkhu is completely disenchanted with these two
  things … in this very life he makes an end of suffering.


Why the Buddha didn't originally allow ordination of women

Interesting, this is the first question answered in this month's Buddhism.SE Book-of-the-Month Women in Buddhism - Questions & Answers.

  It was the right time for Maha Pajapati (the Buddha's step mother) to consider following
  the teaching and the practice of the Buddha seriously. But
  when she approached and asked for permission the Buddha
  simply said, “Please do not ask so.” The Tripitaka, which
  is the most important primary source, did not provide any
  reason for not allowing women to join the Order.

Maha Pajapati and 500 other women shaved their heads, donned yellow robes, and walked to where the Buddha was. Ananda went to the Buddha on their behalf to ask for their permission to join the sangha, but the Buddha's response was "“Ananda, please do not ask so.”.

Some of the considerations and concerns that might have been present include the fact that:

  According to
  Indian social mores, to lead a religious life is not the path
  for women. ibid

There may also have been practical concerns as these women had lived in comfort before and the reality of living a reclusive life outdoors might be difficult. The current sangha did not have enough teachers who would have been suitable to teach this large group of women. There could have been criticism that having women join the sangha was breaking up families. These may have been some of the reasons behind the Buddha's hesitation to allow women to join the sangha.

When Ananda asked the Buddha if women were capable of attaining spiritual enlightenment; the Buddha's answer was yes. The book notes:

  We have to mark this statement, as this is the first time
  in the history of religion that a religious leader declared
  openly that men and women are equal on spiritual grounds.
  Previously in the Hindu context, the Vedas, the most sacred
  religious texts, were available only to men. Buddhism has
  transcended race, nation, caste and gender differences to
  declare that the highest spiritual achievement transcends
  obstacles or discrimination of gender. With this important
  reason, the Buddha allowed women to join his Order. ibid

So while women weren't allowed to join the sangha immediately, eventually they were.


A recurrent image in [Pali Canon] is of life as a raging flood — a flood of birth, aging, and death; sorrow and lamentation; stress and suffering. The purpose of spiritual practice is to find a way across the flood to the safety of the far shore [parayana].

However:

  Parāyana, (Parāyaṇa) (nt.) (fr. parā+i, cp. Vedic parāyaṇa highest instance, also BSk. parāyaṇa e.g. Divy 57, 327) 1. (n.) final end, i.e. support, rest, relief S. I, 38; A. I, 155, 156 (tāṇa lena dīpa etc.); J. V, 501=VI, 375 (dīpañ ca p.).—2. (adj.—°) (a) going through to, ending in, aiming at, given to, attached to, having one’s end or goal in; also: finding one’s support in (as daṇḍa° leaning on a stick M. I, 88; A. I, 138), in foll. phrases prevalent: Amata° S. V, 217 sq.; tama° Pug. 51; Nibbāna° S. IV, 373; V, 218; brahmacariya° S. I, 234; Maccu° S. V, 217; sambodhi° D. I, 156; II, 155; Pug. 16. Cp. also Sn. 1114 (tap°=tad°, see Nd2 411); Miln. 148 (ekantasoka°); DhA. I, 28 (rodana, i.e. constantly weeping). ‹-› (b) destined to, having one’s next birth in. , e.g. Avīci° J. III, 454; IV, 159; duggati° PvA. 32; devaloka° J. I, 218; brahmaloka° J. III, 396; Miln. 234; sagga° J. VI, 329; PvA. 42, 160; sugati° PvA. 89 similarly nīlamañca° Pv. II, 25. See also pārāyana.

  Pārāyana, (nt.) (late Sk. pārāyaṇa, the metric form of parāyana) the highest (farthest) point, final aim, chief object, ideal; title of the last Vagga of the Sutta Nipāta A. III, 401; Sn. 1130; Nd2 438; SnA 163, 370, 604. >
  parāyaṇa : (nt.) support; rest; relief; the final end (in cpds.) aiming at; ending in; destined to; finding one's support in.

  pārāyana : (nt.) final aim; chief object.

It seems to me parayana has a connotation of "the ultimate". I guess you could also call it "completion".


Hosting people who are making me feel angry

This is my personal favorite. I have had this happen so many times although the victim was my mother who had to do a lot of things and I contributed a bit in a constructive fashion. This seems to be a fairly common case experienced by many hospitable people.

So the deal here is that I would not worry what the noble eight fold path says or whatever. This is rather general i.e., in terms of how best to deal with things that happen. It is about the choices you make and consequence you receive. There are lots of options to consider and each one would have a consequence. But without hurting others, (although I wouldn't mind giving the guests a piece of my mind), choose the best and most congenial option available. Sometimes it may be best to go out or do something else wherein you are busy.

Funny thing is they know they are being unhelpful too. But they still stick around. You could employ the tactic of asking for help when and if you need it.

There is nothing wrong with being practical about such matters. But know that you always deserved everything that came to you. Feeling something about it, either positive or negative, makes no difference to the matter. This is a little hard to take.
I am not asking you not to feel guilty or angry but know that when it comes, it is pointless to act on a whim. There are other ways to deal with the matter.

One other important thing is that, trying to satisfy other people is not your problem. You can treat/guide them to an extent. And in the world I have observed that no matter what you do you will be criticized in some way. Even Jesus was criticized. Buddha has been criticized. It's important how they took it. Because they were in total control of how they reacted.

Again I am not perfect and nobody is, and sometimes I get irritated too. But being practical and working on distancing yourself from emotions is important. The rest is how you conduct yourself.


I also was told that Kosher/Halal dealt with dispatching the animal in a way that minimized suffering to the animal. So if eating meat at all had a karmic effect would eating in this way minimize it.

I think that this (the karma of meat-eating) is a doctrine on which different schools of Buddhism differ.

I considered replying to your "dispatching the animal in a way" but remembered that Buddhism considers it:

Wrong to kill
Wrong to counsel (advise) someone else to kill

There are a few "offences" that are so grave that a monk would be expelled or "defeated" -- intentionally killing is one of these grave offenses -- and so is advising someone else to kill.

The end of page 79 of The Buddhist Monastic Code I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained says,

  Again from the
  Vinita-vatthu: A bhikkhu tells an executioner to kill his victims mercifully with a
  single blow, rather than torturing them. The executioner follows his advice and
  the bhikkhu incurs a parajika, for the recommendation to kill mercifully is still a
  recommendation to kill.

Earlier on page 79, it says it's bad when the killer carries out your detailed instructions (what kind of weapon to use and so on).

My (this) answer is disingenuous because the Patimokkha Rule is actually/only/specifically about killing human beings -- even so I don't suppose you'll find Buddhist doctrine that recommends killing, nor how to kill.

Getting the Message says, in part,

  Killing is never skillful. Stealing, lying, and everything else in the first list are never skillful. When asked if there was anything whose killing he approved of, the Buddha answered that there was only one thing: anger. In no recorded instance did he approve of killing any living being at all. When one of his monks went to an executioner and told the man to kill his victims compassionately, with one blow, rather than torturing them, the Buddha expelled the monk from the Sangha, on the grounds that even the recommendation to kill compassionately is still a recommendation to kill — something he would never condone. If a monk was physically attacked, the Buddha allowed him to strike back in self-defense, but never with the intention to kill.


What is meditation and are we dulling the mind through what is considered formal meditation?

It sounds like a result of the process of suppressing the mind. You don't want to do that. Just accept everything as it is.

My approach is more to do with the reversal of the roles of the thinking mind and awareness in ordinary life. Normally the thinking mind is in control and awareness takes a back seat, but through persistence it's become the opposite. This feels more like the thinking mind is just having a rest, rather than it being dulled. I can switch it on whenever I want and it works probably better than it used to.

There really is no need for meditation because you can just use life as the grinding stone for the self. It's something you can do all the time and is no different to your ordinary life plus perhaps the idea of throwing yourself into circumstances that would be beneficial to your refinement. All you have to do is stay in that unborn mind state as much as possible. It just eats through everything of its own accord, just as it should do in meditation.


Let's assume that bhava means "existence".

I think that the a prefix means "not" (it appears in a lot of Buddhist words, like anatta and so on).

I think that the vi prefix might mean "the reverse of" (see e.g. the dictionary definition quoted here).

So my guess is that abhava means "non-existence", whereas vibhava means "destruction".

The phrase vibhavataṇhā is used in the definition of the second noble truth in SN 56.11, so you can read various translations of vibhava in the various translations of that sutta, for example:

  craving for extermination (of what is not liked)
  craving for non-being
  craving for non-existence (self-annihilation)
  craving for non-becoming
  craving for non-existence [for extinction].

The first translation of SN 56.11 that I read translated bhavataṇhā and vibhavataṇhā as "the craving to live and even the craving to die", so that's the way I remember it.

In summary, maybe they mean the same thing (i.e. "non-existence"); but if they aren't synonyms, then one simply means "non-existence" and the other implies a "transition from existence to non-existence" for example "annihilation, destruction, extinction, death".


Which Vinaya has the least number of rules?

Of the extant Vinayas, the Mahasanghika has the least rules, if by "rules" you mean "patimokkha rules".

As per your post, the difference is almost entirely in the number of sekhiya rules, which are essentially table manners and the like. Indeed, in the early sources the number "150" rules is mentioned, and I believe this means that patimokkha in the time of the Buddha did not include the sekhiya rules. So if we were to count the rules as per the "original" patimokkha, there would be almost no difference between the Vinayas.

The patimokkha rules, however, are only a small, albeit important, collection of rules. Throughout the Vinaya there are many minor and incidental rules and procedures. Since these often occur by way of permutations of factors for other rules, it is difficult to count them exactly, and I don't believe anyone has done so.

The fact that the Mahasanghika has fewer sekhiya rules has been misinterpreted to imply that the Mahasanghikas were lax in Vinaya, and that their Vinaya text is early. In fact, from this we can't really draw any conclusions about the Vinaya practice of the Mahasanghikas (since the details that differ deal with tiny matters of etiquette), nor about the historical development of the Vinaya texts (since in other aspects the Mahasanghika Vinaya appears later than the Theravada).


How and when should a child be introduced to Buddhism?

I have a daughter who is nearly 4 now. I first took her to the local Buddhist Centre when she was about a year old on a family day that we organised. The Buddhist practice involved running around the shrine room and shrieking. Someone said at the time though that bring her at such a young age was auspicious and I'm enought of a romantic to lap this up. I took here again a few months ago and her Buddhist practice is much the same - running and shrieking. But we all enjoyed it and she's had a positive experience.

As far as meditation goes. Mmmmmmmm, She decided to have her first meditation a week ago. I think I timed 5 seconds. Better than I thought it would be. I have to say my local centre doesn't really teach meditation to people younger than 16 but I think that more of a guardianship issue rather than the impossiblity of younger children meditating. I've been in meditation sessions in festivals with 12 year old and they seem to get on fine.

I don't really have much more advice - just my own experience. I have to say though I agree with Richard Dawkins (though i have to say not in such strident terms) in that children should be old enough to chose the religion they belong to - not just inducted into it. However I believe that Buddhist ethics, Buddhist stories and a little bit of an understanding that's its OK just to be a little be quiet now and then, would be good for any child.

Generally being kind to yourself and kind to others is what I want my daughter to know and if that's in a Buddhist framework then fantastic. We are going to go on a Buddhist family retreat in North Yorkshire (UK) so we'll see how it all goes there. Wish us luck!


The practice of the eightfold noble path leads to the experience of nibbāna, just like the act of adverting the mind to the eye door leads to seeing light. Light, the object of seeing, is saṅkhata (conditioned), but nibbāna, the object of supermundane consciousness, is asaṅkhata (unconditioned). So nibbāna isn't the result of the eightfold noble path, the experience of it is.


It is true that worldly love finally ends up with sufferings; that worldly forms of love is a root to suffering. The only people without suffering are enlightened people. It may appear in the society there are plenty of people who lead very happy and non-suffering lives with love but this appearance is not true.

If the people with full of honesty mostly get cheated and suffer their lives, how can such sinlessness (honesty) be the result of previous sins & merits? Such an idea is illogical.

People with full of honesty get cheated because of acts of evil people.

If I am a good person & an evil person wants to murder me, how can I stop this? I cannot.


See:
http://obo.genaud.net/dhammatalk/dhammatalk_forum/dhamma_talk/dt_019.previous.buddhas.htm
for a table giving various features of the previous 7 Buddhas. The Direct answer to your question is that Kassapa and our Buddha were both born in this kappa, that is, world-cycle, or aeon. The kappa consists of a period of evolution, a period of stasis, a period of devolution and a period of stasis. This current period is the period of devolution (as if anyone had to tell you). It is not clear, but it is likely that Kassapa was born in the period of Evolution.

The kappa is described as: 10,395,902,500 years: 103,959,025 sesame seeds removed from a Magadhan Karika one at a time every hundred years (see Magadha Karika)


The Central Idea of Buddhism is the cessation of suffering.  Everything else is a means to that end.

The goal is not to be objective, but rather, being objective can serve or be a milestone along that goal.  Here's how it works out.

We suffer because we are attached to desire.  Therefore, we let go of desire to stop suffering.  Since desire permeates our experience, when we let go of desire, we transform our experience.  This experience may still have desire, but we are not attached to it -- we see the desire as part of our experience and are not wrapped up in it.  This is "seeing things as they are" or "objectivity".  The subjectivity is there, but we're more aware of the subjective layer as something we add rather than part of the thing itself.

Judgments, preferences, and so on can still be there; after all, if the Buddha didn't have them, he would have just sat around until he starved to death.  However, we are not attached to these preferences and so on.  We don't get bent out of shape over them.

Why prefer this way?  Well, because you want to cease suffering.  If you don't care about suffering, there's no point in Buddhism.


Why is swastika in buddhism is in this 卍 format and not in this 卐 format? What is the difference between the two? What is the meaning of each sign?

Buddhism explains the dependent origination of suffering, which is the 'wrong path' (SN 12.3).

Conversely, 'dependent cessation' is called the 'right path' (SN 12.3).

Dependent origination is often pictorially depicted as spinning clockwise, as follows:

The clockwise direction is the direction of 'origination' or 'creation'.

Theistic religions, such as Judaism, Islam & Hinduism worship creation, therefore it is expected they would worship a clockwise swastika.

Where as Buddhism honors cessation rather than creation, i.e., turning back creation.


What are the ways to be conscious in all situations?

Ways to be conscious in all situations

Just like anything else, to be good at martial arts, at playing the piano, at math, etc... the only way is to practice, practice, and practice. Practice mindfulness meditation diligently and one will be able to have very sharp awareness/mindfulness any time, any place. For a straightforward and practical advise on the what and how, check out Ven. Gunaratana's excellent "Mindfulness in Plain English"

How to do one thing at a time ?

Actually if one's able to be good with step 1 above, whether one does one thing or many things at a time no longer matters. S/he'd have just as much awareness/mindfulness at all time!


Does any Theravada Suttas / sources refer to Oozing orifices? What are the Suttas?

The Theravada satipatthana sutta contains the same reference:

  “Again, bhikkhus, as though he were to see a corpse thrown aside in a charnel ground, one, two, or three days dead, bloated, livid, and oozing matter, a bhikkhu compares this same body with it thus: ‘This body too is of the same nature, it will be like that, it is not exempt from that fate.’

(MN 10 - Bodhi, Trans)

The Visuddhimagga explains the phrase (festering = oozing):

  The festering: what is trickling with pus in broken places is festering (vipubba).
  What is festering is the same as “the festering” (vipubbaka). Or alternatively,
  what is festering (vipubba) is vile (kucchita) because of repulsiveness, thus it is
  “the festering” (vipubbaka). This is a term for a corpse in that particular state.

  -- Vism. VI.3 (Nyanamoli, trans)


But in rebirth, there is no soul

The Buddha didn't say there was no soul.

The problem with saying there is a self or there is "no self" requires a view which the Buddha said was incompatible with the practice:

  ... a certain monk said to the Blessed One: "Which birth, lord? And whose is this birth?"

  "Not a valid question," the Blessed One said.
  If one were to ask, 'Which birth? And whose is this birth?'
  and if one were to ask,
  'Is birth one thing, and is this the birth of someone/something else?'
  both of them would have the same meaning,
  even though their words would differ.
  When there is the view that the soul is the same as the body, there isn't the leading of the holy life.
  And when there is the view that the soul is one thing and the body another, there isn't the leading of the holy life.
  Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata points out the Dhamma in between: From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth."

  SN 12.35

He didn't say the one thing (there is a self) or the other thing (there is no self), he said the thing in the middle, which is that with certain phenomena as a requisite condition, other phenomena arise.

He didn't answer the big question of what does and does not exist, he answered the small question about how a thing arises.

Some reading: No-self or Not-self?

  So why should we care about our karma regarding our rebirth

One thing that the Buddha consistently affirmed, though, is the efficacy of action and the results of kamma. He would go out of his way (MN 101) to refute ideas that personal action had no consequences or was totally predetermined.

He just didn't link together action and an individual's identity through multiple lifetimes or say that they weren't linked. Either view prevents the living of the holy life.

Seeing action as efficacious and producing results is the thing that is necessary; understanding the arising of phenomena is necessary. Talking about souls is not necessary.


One possible answer is that meditation relies both on the theoretical understanding on what's going on, but also the direct experience. They are mutually dependent as far as i can see.

A mere theoretical understanding of meditation will not take us very far in the progress, just like meditation without a theoretical description of the phenomena involved probably won't take us far either.


What are some examples of Buddhist rulers?

A good example is Asoka who ruled most of the India subcontinent  between 269 BCE to 232 BCE. He converted to Buddhism after witnessing the slaughter at Kalinga, a slaughter that he was responsible for. A rock inscription made at the time details this.

  His Majesty feels remorse on account of the conquest of Kalinga
  because, during the subjugation of a previously unconquered country,
  slaughter, death, and taking away captive of the people necessarily
  occur, whereat His Majesty feels profound sorrow and regret.

Asoka went on to rule for forty years on Buddhist principle and was one of the main people responsible for the initial spread of Buddhism out of the Indian mainland. He sent monks to many places throughout Asia and beyond including Mongolia, Burma, Afghanistan, Persia even as far as Turkey and Italy.

Such is his enormous repute they even made a Bollywood film about him. I have to confess that I've never seen it. I would be interested to know if it is worth the watch.

Additional Note

BBC radio have just done an excellent program on Asoka as part of the (also excellent) In Our Time series. Very much worth a listen if anyone is interested in this part of Buddhist history.


Depopulation of the World - Buddha's Explanation

AN 3.56: Paloka Suttaɱ

Woodward translation:
The Rich Man
http://buddhadust.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/an/03_threes/an03.056.wood.pts.htm

A wealthy brahmin has heard the story told by the ancients of a time when this world was densely populated and villages and towns and cities grew up right next to each other. He asks Gotama why it is that this is no longer the case and is told that it is because at this time the people are obsessed with lusts, depravities and wrong views resulting in a number of calamaties that depopulate the earth.

A tough sutta for modern man to digest for several reasons. Nobody I think will argue that the people today are not as depraved as described, and that that results in wars, but that this depravity affects the weather and crops and causes the unleashing of demonic beings will be harder to see. And then there is the issue of feeding such a dense population ... and this was speaking of a time when the lifespan of man was in the tens of thousands of years.

How can this be seen?

This world is a work of the imagination, individual and collective. The individual has no way to know the nature of 'the real world', what he can know is simply the three experiences through the senses, what he 'sees' and 'hears' and 'tastes' and 'touches' has no more concrete reality to it than a dream, but because man desires to live collectively he agrees to believe the world is of a certain nature, possesses certain properties beyond solidity, liquidity, heat and light, motion, space and consciousness. Thus the apparent world is one which is arrived at by consensus*. That consensus changes over time.

That's how.

Today we have heard that because of wide-spread lockdowns limiting human activity, the surface of the globe has experienced a reduced vibration. The poles of the earth are moving. There is a huge increase in seismic activity in places where there has been none in centuries. There is global warming and the rise in sea-level. Fires rage uncontrolled destroying millions of acres of vegetation. The US has experienced flooding that has seriously compromised food supplies. There is even a plague of locusts! As for demonic beings, put aside pre-conceptions as to how these beings look and you may see them in the actions of human-form monsters. We have school shootings, mass shootings, terrorists, assassans, child-women-human trafficers... the list of monsterous activities by so-called human beings is endless.

*Actually examined closely it will be seen that outside the sangha there are hardly two people in the world that agree with each other about almost anything. What it is is a 'consensis reality' arrived at by the hoodwinking of weak, ignorant majorites by powerful ignorant minorities.


What is Death? What did Buddha say regarding the experience of Death?

What is death acoording to Buddhism? Here is one definition

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma5/viewdeath.html

  Death and the impermanence of life

  In the teaching of the Buddha, all of us will pass away eventually as
  a part in the natural process of birth, old-age and death and that we
  should always keep in mind the impermanence of life.  The life that we
  all cherish and wish to hold on.

  To Buddhism, however, death is not the end of life, it is merely the
  end of the body we inhabit in this life, but our spirit will still
  remain and seek out through the need of attachment, attachment to a
  new body and new life. Where they will be born is a result of the past
  and the accumulation of positive and negative action, and the
  resultant karma (cause and effect) is a result of ones past actions.

  This would lead to the person to be reborn in one of 6 realms which
  are; heaven, human beings, Asura, hungry ghost, animal and hell.
  Realms, according to the severity of ones karmic actions, Buddhists
  believe however, none of these places are permanent and one does not
  remain in any place indefinitely. So we can say that in Buddhism, life
  does not end, merely goes on in other forms that are the result of
  accumulated karma. Buddhism is a belief that emphasizes the
  impermanence of lives, including all those beyond the present life.
  With this in mind we should not fear death as it will lead to rebirth.

  The question about when death occurs is even more important, because to a practitioner of Buddhism, death is not an eventuality that will arrive someday. Death and meeting death is part of our daily practice of meditation. We don't think of the body dying but day by day we face and face again the temporal nature of life and ask ourselves if we are making the most of life for spiritual advancement by learning to come to terms with death.

Here is an illustrative story from a PBS special on Buddhism
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/tibet/understand/dying.html

  An example of this attitude can be found in the bioraphy of Milarepa,
  who began his meditative practice after having killed a number of
  people through black magic. The realization of his impending death and
  the sufferings he would experience in his next lifetime prompted him
  to find a lama who could show him a way to avert his fate. His concern
  with death was so great that when he was medititing in a cave his
  tattered clothes fell apart, but he decided not to mend them, saying,
  "If I were to die this evening, it would be wiser to meditate than to
  do this useless sewing."1

  This attitude epitomizes the ideal for a Buddhist practitioner,
  according to many teachers. Atisha is said to have told his students
  that for a person who is unaware of death, meditation has little
  power, but a person who is mindful of death and impermanence
  progresses steadily and makes the most of every precious moment. A
  famous saying of the school he founded, the Kadampa, holds that if one
  does not meditate on death in the morning, the whole morning is
  wasted, if one does not meditate on death at noon, the afternoon is
  wasted, and if one does not meditate on death at night, the evening is
  wasted.

Here are a couple quotes attributed to the Buddha that imply what Buddha thought most important, cessation of suffering and Nibbana.
http://www.life-changing-inspirational-quotes.com/buddha-quotes.html#Death

  Buddha Quotes on Death

  "Even death is not to be feared by one who has lived wisely."

  "It is better to travel well than to arrive."

This trend of thinking beyond life and death continues here
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha

  Even death is not to be feared by one who has lived wisely. As quoted in Wisdom for the Soul: Five Millennia of Prescriptions for Spiritual Healing (2006) edited by Larry Chang, p. 193 This is actually a pithy modern-day 'summary' of the "Abhaya Sutta" (AN 4.184). It appears in "Buddha’s Little Instruction Book" by Jack Kornfield (p88).

Another example that Shakyamuni Buddha reveals his lack of concern about death is under the Bodhi tree before his realization.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha

  Let my skin and sinews and bones dry up, together with all the flesh
  and blood of my body! I welcome it! But I will not move from this spot
  until I have attained the supreme and final wisdom. The Jatka (From
  the Attainment of the Buddhaship. Also is in the Nirvana Sutta.)

The essence of the Buddha's teaching is not to cling to physical existence and in the same line do not fear death. What dies is the life we conceptualize in our mind. What is untouched by death is the consciousness that the Buddha invites us to develop in our practice.


What are your thoughts on Ajahn Maha Bua?

I've read some of his stuff on the asubhasannam training & progression. It's pretty good/interesting. Title is "Samadhi begets wisdom" or something like this.

I've also read excerpts from his other book, that about Ajahn Mun. That one makes me think that the author, if he himself believes those things, at the time of writing, is quite certainly not Ariya.

I think he is probably an accomplished yogi in general tho. Maybe like Alara Kalama or Uddaka Ramaputta attainments & views.

That book i recommended is pretty shocking, it's hard to imagine what life was like for ven. maha bowas and of his monks.

Another thing is that sometimes he seemed somewhat cruel, like on occasion he said some things about children as being just out of hell. The way he carried himself in general from what i've seen has been less impressing, chewing tobbacco, crying, harshly complaining about children.

I've heard he said once to fill a new meditation house that was done built, knee deep, with excrement.

Im sure some might think these are eccentrisities of an Ariya but i see nothing of this sort in the Sutta Pitaka nor Jataka.

This is my impression.


What if there was no one to offer food to monastics?

There are several monastic orders that currently allow monks to cook their own food, but usually there is a lay community that donates the cash or food.

I don't know of anyone who starved merely because there was no one to offer food. The Vinaya is real but so is reality. I think most will find an empty stomach is more real than the Vinaya.

In any case the making an honest living, if absolutely necessary isn't a parajika offense - a monastic may prove to his/her peers that it was essential to earn money, and if the peers agree, there is no penalty. Even if it is found to be an honest mistake, it won't be treated as harshly as if one had broken a parajika vow.

  The four transgressions which incur a Parajika, the penalty of
  automatic disrobal, are as follows:

  Engaging in sexual intercourse with another being of either sex.
  Stealing something of value (which includes smuggling, cheating or deliberately avoiding payment of a tax).
  Purposely killing a human being or encouraging him or her to commit suicide (this includes inciting another to murder somebody and it also
  includes convincing a woman to have an abortion.
  Boasting that one has realised a high spiritual attainment, knowing that one is lying. For example, claiming to be enlightened, to be
  Maitreya Buddha, to have entered Jhana (deep meditation-ecstasy) or
  that one can read minds when one knows that one hasn't reached any of
  these states.

source: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut019.htm


In which text first time "Gautama leaving Yashodhara for searching truth" story is written?

See also Which suttas in the Pali canon are relatively early or late? -- I'm not sure we know the sequence in which suttas were written -- so we can't say for sure which time is "the first time", though some people guess or assess via textual analysis that some bits might be later or altered somehow -- and/or maybe all suttas were written at the same time (i.e. at the 4th council).
If they were first time recorded in fourth council, then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Buddhist_council says it happenned in 1st century BC. And Gautama was in fourth century BC. So can we deduce that first time, it was recorded 200-300 years after him?
I think we're meant to understand that the suttas were remembered when they were first spoken (e.g. spoken by Gautama) ... and "recorded" in the First Council ("a gathering of senior monks of the Buddhist order convened just after Gautama Buddha's death in ca. 400 BC").
By "recorded", I mean that they agreed on what to memorise, what to consider as "canon".
They were later written in the Fourth Council:

The council was held in response to a year in which the harvests in Sri Lanka were particularly poor and many Buddhist monks subsequently died of starvation. Because the Pāli Canon was at that time oral literature maintained in several recensions by dhammabhāṇakas (dharma reciters), the surviving monks recognized the danger of not writing it down so that even if some of the monks whose duty it was to study and remember parts of the Canon for later generations died, the teachings would not be lost.

I don't know in which texts "Yashodhara" (or Yasodhara) is mentioned by name -- there are some References in her Wikipedia article.
One the sources (the main source?) of the detailed story of Gautama from before his "noble search" started (i.e. the story with details of his leaving his wife) is in the introduction to the Jataka tales (e.g. here) -- perhaps she isn't mentioned by name though, though his son (named "Rahula") is:

Within the chamber was burning a lamp fed with sweet-smelling oil, and the mother of Râhula lay sleeping on a couch strewn deep with jasmine and other flowers, her hand resting on the head of her son. When the Future Buddha reached the threshold, he paused, and gazed at the two from where he stood.
"If I were to raise my wife's hand from off the child's head, and take him up, she would awake, and thus prevent my departure. I will first become a Buddha, and then come back and see my son." So saying, he descended from the palace.

I'm not sure what the provenance is of the Jataka Tales. They're included in the Khuddaka Nikāya of the Sutta Pitaka but somehow not exactly suttas (I'm not sure whether or when the Buddhist councils were involved with them).


Did the Buddha say "There is no path to happiness.. "?

Apparently it wasn't the Buddha - it was  A. J. Muste.

  The American Dictionary of Quotations ascribes “There is no way to
  peace. Peace is the way” to a piece by Muste in the New York Times
  dated 16 November, 1967, although he definitely used the phrase well
  before that time.

Ref Fake Buddha Quotes

The more relevant Buddha quote is perhaps the fourth noble truth

  There is a way leading to the end of suffering, the eight-fold path,
  which is to be practiced.

The path to the end of suffering - which isn't quite the same as happiness to be fair.


Working on your hobbies, advancing your career, growing a business, developing a family, nurturing a child, improving your health through good diet and exercise, going on vacations, increasing your wealth, using your money for the enjoyment or development of yourself and others, raising your status in the world, attaining fame in society etc. could all make you happy.

It would not just make you happy, but also your family and people around you. If you start a business, you might create jobs for others. If you buy goods and services, you sustain others' income.

All these types of worldly happiness definitely need sensual cravings (kama tanha) and cravings of becoming something (bhava tanha).

Buddhism teaches the pursuit of happiness and the elimination of suffering (dukkha). The short term happiness goal in Buddhism is worldly happiness, when it is achieved through virtue, merit, charity and harmony. Also see this answer to the excellent question "Can a Buddhist own and run a billion dollar business?".

Here's another example of a sutta where worldly happiness is preached in Buddhism. From AN 5.58:

  He always does his duty toward his parents;
  he promotes the welfare of his wife and children.
  He takes care of the people in his home
  and those who live in dependence on him.

  The wise person, charitable and virtuous,
  acts for the good of both kinds of relatives,
  those who have passed away
  and those still living in this world.

  He benefits ascetics and brahmins,
  and also the deities;
  he is one who gives rise to joy
  while living a righteous life at home.

  Having done what is good,
  he is worthy of veneration and praise.
  They praise him here in this world
  and after death he rejoices in heaven.

However, worldly happiness is a short term type of happiness. Nothing ever lasts.

Your health and youth would not last forever. Your loved ones or friends may forsake you. Your career or businesses may dwindle. Your money and possessions may get stolen. Your peaceful life in your country may be replaced by civil unrest.

No one knows this better than the Buddha, who was a prince who had everything. Realizing that worldly happiness would not last forever, he set out to find permanent happiness and eventually found it. To achieve permanent happiness, you must uproot craving.

There are three types of craving (tanha): craving for sensual pleasures, craving to become something (that makes someone have ambition) and the craving to not become something (that makes one suicidal or withdrawn).

If you crave for food, and eat some tasty food, you may cling to it or become attached to it. You think and fantasize about it even when it's not there. That's clinging or attachment. Craving gives rise to clinging and clinging gives rise to greed or lust to acquire it.

If someone prevents you from getting the tasty food that you cling to, then you feel angry. That hatred or aversion arises because you were denied what you cling to.

If this anger makes you enraged that you go and harm this person who prevents you from getting what you want, this is delusion. Delusion clouds your better judgment.

The craving to become something is similar. Examples are like wanting to get a gold medal or to get a promotion or to become doctor or professor or get recognition etc.

If you crave to get recognition and get it once, you may cling to it and want it even when it's not present. This leads you to do things to get recognition as you have greed (or lust) for it.

If you don't get recognition, but someone else does, you become envious. That's aversion.

If continuously not getting recognition leads you to become depressed, which clouds your normal healthy state of mind, then that's delusion.

That is how craving is the root of all suffering. When you uproot craving, you will uproot suffering.

Of course, it is not a MUST that you seek the permanent happiness of Nibbana. If you are only seeking the short term type of happiness, that is worldly happiness, make sure you include virtue, merit, charity and harmony. At the very minimum, the practice of the five precepts is needed.


What Ahosi kamma really is?

Imagine you have a seed. That seed has the possibility to turn into a tree but only if the right conditions are met.

For example, the seed needs water, fertile soil and maybe a little fence around it so that people will not step on it. If the seeds grows into a small young tree, then again it needs certain conditions to continue growing. For example it needs fertile soil, sunlight, water and again a little fence around it, so that cattle won't eat its leaves.

Its exactly the same case with Kamma. Kamma needs the right conditions to ripen and thereby come to fruition. If these conditions are not met, then the Kamma will not ripen and it will instead become Defunct (ahosi) Kamma.

For example, in the case of an Arahant. All their accumulated kamma from the past which was due to ripen in future lives, will become defunct when the Arahant passes away, since he/she will not get reborn. The Arahant has destroyed all fetters and cut all roots and thereby all causes and conditions for the past kamma to ever come to fruition.


Difference between abiding nirvana and non-abiding nirvana?

Non-abiding Nirvana is a standard Mahayana doctrine, described as non-abiding in contrast with (Hinayana's) Nirvana which is considered abiding.

(As always, I have to remind everyone that Theravada is NOT equivalent to Hinayana. Hinayana refers to a primitive level of understanding of Dharma. There are Mahayana practitioners still on Hinayana levels; There are Theravada practitioners on Mahayana level.)

In Hinayana thinking, beginner thinking, we imagine Nirvana as some state we achieve or some place we enter ONCE AND FOREVER. In Hinayana-level thinking, first you get rid of coarse turbulence in your life, then you quit society and spend most of your time in meditation, then you basically give up worries about all kinds of things, then you go through Jhanas, so in the end you achieve this 100% peaceful 100% quiet 100% perfect mind - with no conflict, no dukkha whatsoever, and you enter and dwell in that state. This is abiding nirvana.

This is because, in Hinayana thinking, you can't, for example, be in society, have job, family etc. - and be in Nirvana. Can't happen, because regular life creates too many disturbances, too many conflicts and issues. On this level of understanding, you despise disturbances, conflicts, and issues - because they disturb your peace, they break your attempts at stabilizing your mind and attaining some semblance of Nirvana. You keep craving a perfect peace, perfect suchness - which is how you imagine Nirvana to be. This perfect peace is Abiding Nirvana.

In contrast to that, on Mahayana level, we achieve the real Nirvana that the Buddha taught (in Pali Canon, too) - the unconditional, non-abiding Nirvana. Non-abiding Nirvana means that we do not abide, do not dwell, in any single position or state of mind. We no longer get disturbed by the circumstances because we have mastered the dynamic equilibrium of non-craving and non-attachment. We do not feel that life interferes with our practice or interferes with our peace, because on this level, life IS peace, life IS nirvana - if you are not attached to a particular shape or  position.

On the traditional gradual path, the non-abiding Nirvana is attained as the last step of the gradually perfecting the mind of peace. It is attained through transcending the very duality of sukkha/dukkha, the very duality of suchness/wrongness.

It's like, first we get rid of coarse disturbances and conflicts, then smaller and subtler ones, this is described as the progression of jhanas - and on each level the very things that we thought were important for practice are now considered obstacles that should be let go. So on some level you learn to use positive thinking aka self-suggestions (vitakka/vicara), you learn to change your perspective - and once you get good at that, you outgrow it and on that level using self-suggestion seems very artificial - and yet you have to master it first. Then on the next level, you apply pyschosomatic methods - like breathing, working with energies. Then you master that and transcend it too; now it seems artificial and contrived to the new you. Then you practice being emotionally sober, get good at that, outgrow it. Then you practice pure mindfulness, which is basically pure suchness. And theeeeeeeeeeeeen your practice gets so thin, so perfectly refined, that your mindfulness and your suchness is present all the time, regardless of what you're doing, regardless of you paying attention or not. At the same time, your insight into Emptiness reaches maturity and you penetrate the notion of right vs. wrong deeply, you really get the principle of relativity, you understand the limit of suchness. This is when the magic moment occurs....

Once you clearly see the limit of suchness AND your mindfulness is ever-present, your practice gets so thin as to basically disappear. From this moment on, everything is your practice, and everything is Nirvana, regardless of how things change in the world.

By this time, there is no separation between Nirvana and Samsara, no limits to suchness, all conceptual dualities are transcended. So whatever life throws at your is fine, whatever happens, happens. You have no position, no shape, nothing to regret - you can't be pinned down. You are neither coming nor going, you're invisible and neither regular humans nor gods can recognize you because you don't look any different.

Nothing can be said about anything at this point, because all descriptions require a base for assertion, but there is no such base anymore. Everything is... just is. IS.

But life goes on. And this is non-abiding Nirvana.


What is the difference between Dhamma Diksha and Dhamma Parivarta

I think that Diksha and Pravartan both mean something like initiation or commencement.

Diksha apparently means "preparation" and "initiation" (and may be used ceremonially).

Pravartan is used in the Sanskrit name of the Dharmacakrapravartana Sūtra which is translated as "The Setting in Motion of the Wheel of the Dharma".

How the words are used might vary depending on the school.

I think the phrase is used in the Dalit Buddhist movement:

  Twenty-two vows of Ambedkar

  After receiving ordination, Ambedkar gave dhamma diksha to his followers. The ceremony included 22 vows given to all new converts after Three Jewels and Five Precepts. On 14 October 1956 at Nagpur, Ambedkar performed another mass religious conversion ceremony at Chandrapur.

  He prescribed 22 vows to his followers:

  I shall have no faith in Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwara, nor shall I worship them.
  ...

The "Three Jewels" (also called "Refuge") and the "Five Precepts", which are mentioned in the quote above, are the traditional Buddhist initiation ceremonies -- taking refuge (and various numbers of precepts) are common to all schools of Buddhism, and are one of the definitions of "being a Buddhist".


What is the relationship between the New Kadampa Tradition and Tibetan Buddhism?

The New Kadampa Tradition (or NKT for short) is an offshoot group that broke away from the Gelug school. One of the primary areas of controversy between the NKT and the mainstream Gelug school is the position of a figure called Dorje Shugden, who among the NKT is considered to be Manjushri emanated as a spirit in order to keep the Gelug school pure from teachings from other schools. Among the NKT Dorje Shugden is propitiated as an enlightened being, but within the Gelug school now it is understood that Dorje Shugden is a worldly spirit only, and should not be treated as an enlightened being.

As a result of this split, the NKT is very insular, and will generally only read a selection of books written by their founder, Kelsang Gyatso, and in general are not considered to be part of the Gelug school any more due to Kelsang Gyatso being expelled from his home monastery of Sera Me, but their selection of teachings and practices are all drawn from the Gelug school.


intellectualism or anti-intellectualism and Buddhism

I don't think Buddhism is inherently anti intellectual. Theravada's Abhidharma, Late Indian / Early Tibetan Mahayana preserved and developed by Gelugpa - are highly intellectual, to name a few.

It's an old adage in Buddhism that Dharma is medicine for the mind, and particular form the teaching takes depends on student's disposition.

There are certainly schools that grew out of concern that some students obsess over concepts and don't see the forest behind the tree. These schools, like many lineages within Tibetan Kham's Kagyu and Nyingma emphasize personal practice and insist on simple no-nonsense pithy instructions passed in private from generation to generation.

Some schools like Ch'an were born as radical response to then increasingly obsessive and speculative intellectualism, true, but Ch'an is far from being the largest or the most influential school. Perhaps the most famous in the West, exactly for its irrational presentations.

The truths that Buddhism teaches are complex and subtle, but in my opinion totally explainable. It's only a matter of time I think until western culture develops enough insight into things Buddhism taps into, and creates an authentically western intellectual representation of them.

We see it already in various forms of literature on topics as diverse as self-help, emotional intelligence, philosophy of mind, bundle theory, hierarchy theory, and others.


This question is about words. The Pali words are 'vedana' ('feelings') & 'sankhara' ('formations').

Happy, sad, elated, down - more like an emotion = sankhara ('formations'). To quote:

  When one abides inflamed by lust, fettered, infatuated, contemplating gratification, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are built
  up for oneself in the future; and one’s craving—which brings renewal
  of being, is accompanied by delight and lust, and delights in this and
  that—increases. One’s bodily and mental troubles increase, one’s
  bodily and mental torments increase, one’s bodily and mental fevers
  increase and one experiences bodily and mental suffering (kāyadukkhampi cetodukkhampi paṭisaṃvedeti). MN 149

Hot, cold, tingly, numb, all kinds of body pains or pleasant sensations = 'vedana'. To quote:

  And why, bhikkhus, do you call it feeling (vedanaṃ)? ‘It feels (vedayatī),’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called feeling. And what does it feel? It
  feels pleasure, it feels pain, it feels neither-pain-nor-pleasure. ‘It
  feels,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called feeling. SN 22.79

But some body pains are formations, such as when due to anger, stress, anxiety, etc. To quote:

  When one abides inflamed by lust, fettered, infatuated, contemplating gratification, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are built
  up for oneself in the future; and one’s craving—which brings renewal
  of being, is accompanied by delight and lust, and delights in this and
  that—increases. One’s bodily and mental troubles increase, one’s
  bodily and mental torments increase, one’s bodily and mental fevers
  increase and one experiences bodily and mental suffering (kāyadukkhampi cetodukkhampi paṭisaṃvedeti). MN 149

The core feature of 'vedana' ('feelings' or 'sensations') is they arise from sense contact. To quote:

  ‘The six classes of feeling should be understood.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said? Dependent on the eye and
  forms, eye-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact;
  with contact as condition there is feeling. Dependent on the ear and
  sounds, ear-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact;
  with contact as condition there is feeling. Dependent on the nose and
  odours, nose-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is
  contact; with contact as condition there is feeling. Dependent on the
  tongue and flavours, tongue-consciousness arises; the meeting of the
  three is contact; with contact as condition there is feeling.
  Dependent on the body and tangibles, body-consciousness arises; the
  meeting of the three is contact; with contact as condition there is
  feeling. Dependent on the mind and mind-objects, mind-consciousness
  arises; the meeting of the three is contact; with contact as condition
  there is feeling. So it was with reference to this that it was said:
  ‘The six classes of feeling should be understood. ’ This is the fifth
  set of six. MN 148

Where as formations arise from defilement (craving) & thinking (sankhara). To quote:

  What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies.
  Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of
  objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present & future
  forms cognizable via the eye. MN 18


What do you regard as noteworthy differences in the popular pali to english translations?

From Dhp 282 translated by Ven. Buddharakkhita:

Wisdom springs from meditation; without meditation wisdom wanes. Having known these two paths of progress and decline, let a man so
conduct himself that his wisdom may increase.

The same was translated by Ven. Thanissaro here:

From striving comes wisdom;
from not, wisdom's end.
Knowing these two courses
— to development,
decline —
conduct yourself
so that wisdom will grow.

The word "meditation" in one translation is the same as "striving" in the other. The Pali word here is "yoga" as seen here, which also translates it as "meditation".

Ven. Thanissaro's translation of Dhp 277-278 translated "sankhara" as "fabrications" and "dukkha" as "stress".

When you see with discernment,
'All fabrications are inconstant' —
you grow disenchanted with stress.
This is the path
to purity.
When you see with discernment,
'All fabrications are stressful' —
you grow disenchanted with stress.
This is the path
to purity.

Ven. Buddharakkhita's translation of Dhp 277-278 translated "sankhara" as "conditioned things" and "dukkha" as "unsatisfactory". I feel this is more accurate.

"All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
purification.

"All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
purification.

In MN 49, there was a "consciousness without surface" or "consciousness that is invisible, infinite, radiant all round" (viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ) that some people imagined to be a permanent consciousness of sorts, which turned out to be a mistranslation, according to the answers of this question. The sutta was talking about Nibbana. I've also explained this in detail in this answer.
Ven. Sujato translated part of MN 49 as:

Consciousness that is invisible, infinite, radiant all round—that’s
what is not within the scope of experience based on earth, water,
fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the gods of streaming
radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of abundant fruit, the
Overlord, and the all.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ, ...

It should rather be:

That which could be known or cognizable (i.e. Nibbana), is invisible, infinite, radiant
all round—that’s what is not within the scope of experience based on
earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the
gods of streaming radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of
abundant fruit, the Overlord, and the all.
Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ anantaṃ sabbato pabhaṃ, ...

Ven. Sujato translated "jāti" in SN 56.11 as "rebirth".

Now this is the noble truth of suffering. Rebirth is suffering; old
age is suffering; illness is suffering; death is suffering;
association with the disliked is suffering; separation from the liked
is suffering; not getting what you wish for is suffering. In brief,
the five grasping aggregates are suffering.

In SN 56.11, Ven. Bodhi translated "jāti" as "birth". This is quoted below. Ven. Thanissaro also translated it here as "birth".

“Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is
suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is
suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation
from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is
suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are
suffering.


Buddhist practice and physical exercises

It is ok(ethically) to do physical exercises even for the purpose of being attractive. Lay people are not expected to follow the rules of monks. Such conflicts occur mostly when you try to live a monk's life as a lay person. Is it clinging/attachment that motivates you for physical exercises? Absolutely! But it's similar to asking if it is ok to have love affairs or get married.  They all involve unwholesome mind states. But you are mostly expected to keep to the 5 precepts as a Buddhist layman. So you should focus more on the 5 precepts as they can be easily broken if you are not mindful. If you want to live a more noble life, you can get ordained. Things become conflicting and confusing when you try to walk on the fence, not picking either lifestyle.

In fact, it is clinging that makes you do the job you do. It is clinging that keeps you in lay life. If you don't have clinging, you can't live as a householder. You have to go get ordained within 7 days or die(parinibbana).


How does Nirvana fit into theory of evolution?

The scientific definition of evolution is as follows:

Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.

There is no guarantee that the offspring of a Buddha or Arahat will be an enlightened being, i.e. these characteristics are not guaranteed to be passed on to their successive generations (Not a very rigorous scientific answer but I hope you got the gist of it).
Another way to think about it is that

Has it been experimentally proved that Nirvana fits into the theory of evolution? OR, Can we design an experiment that can show if Nirvana fits into the theory of evolution?

As far as I know, these questions can not be answered as of now (Perhaps no one has tried to do it). So from a scientific point of view, I would say 'no'.


In a comment you wrote, "I wander to find one in my nearest city but I return back with nothing. It's little bit hard."

I'm thinking that you still have Dhamma when you don't have Sangha.

I think you don't "cure" pain, but Dhamma might teach you to recognize it when it arises: e.g. something triggers a feeling of sorrow, and you can note, "this is sorrow".

Eventually (if the experience is repeated) you learn to recognize what triggers sorrow, and perhaps you choose to not grasp (not hold to, attach to) the situation and/or sequence of thoughts which lead to sorrow.

In addition there are things you can do as a lay-person which may lead to non-sorrow. For example the practice of ethics (sila), behaving ethically, should result in a "lack of remorse". Or "identity view" results in sorrow, for which a converse might be anatta, sunyata, dana, and so on. And it's important to have or find good friends (who, you might find if you choose to join good communal activities).

Also there are things you might do to look after yourself medically, which might help your mood. For example I read an article recently where someone was describing how their doctor treated them for clinical depression: their treatment required therapy and eventually drugs, but the first thing the doctor told her was that, even if she took sick leave from her job, she should keep up her physical exercise -- in her case, running up-hill in the morning. Being depressed she didn't feel like exercising as she used to, but she found someone else to do it with, which (scheduling an appointed time to do it with someone else) helped to motivate her to do it regularly. What I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure that medical doctors recommend physical exercise as a treatment for heartache.

Also you mention "normal" twice. I suppose you're thinking of some time in the past as "normal" but I'm not sure there's such a thing. Things are impermanent, people die for example, you can't afford to think of the past as normal and the present as abnormal.

Changing your expectations might help too: if you expect to be happy and normal, and you're not, then you're surprised and unhappy. If you expect that desires and attachments cause sorrow then you're not so surprised and, having recognized "this is sorrow" and "this is the cause of sorrow" you may be better able to condition cessation of that sorrow.


During jhana do you eliminate all hindrance at once?

Jhanas are attained by suppressing the five hindrances via concentrating on  objects like the breath, or a kasina object, etc. But if one contemplates on anicca, dukkha, anatta, one automatically starts reducing, not just suppressing the hindrances. In this latter type of jhana, it is attained via using Nibbana as the arammana (thought object). This is not “an object” per say but a contemplation on anicca, dukkha, anatta. In both these cases – the ‘Anariya’ or ‘Ariya’ Jhanas (or the mundane or the supra mundane), the hindrances are suppressed or reduced over time, and not all at once. For this one needs to focus the mind forcefully onto one thought object (nimitta), not letting those five hindrances come to surface.

This second kind of contemplation leads one to attain the Sotapanna (Stream Entrant) stage of the Noble Eightfold Path. Then these five hindrances are reduced to a level that is sufficient to attain the first jhana with the jhana factors of savitakka, savicara, piti, sukha, ekaggata fairly easily. When the five hindrances are kept at bay, and one feels the serenity of a mind unpolluted by the hindrances, this is called samatha meditation – that attains the ‘calming of the mind.’

The two hindrances of kamachanda and vyapada were reduced to kamaraga and patigha levels at the Sotapanna stage. Kamaraga and patigha are reduced further at the Sakadagami stage, are removed at the Anagami stage. Thus an Anagami is left with rupa raga and arupa raga, and thus one has only attachment for rupa loka and arupa loka.

On the other hand, the hindrance of thina middha is easily overcome by savitakka, i.e., when the mind is focused on Nibbana (anicca, dukkha, anatta). Thus any sleepiness or lethargic feeling cannot survive and one feels energetic.  A Sotapanna is at the entry level of comprehending anicca, dukkha, anatta, and the understanding gets progressively better as one moves to higher stages.

The hindrance of Uddacca also decreases by stages. Here one should note that without cultivating jhanas, an Arahant automatically removes all five hindrances, but this also happen in stages and once it happens it is permanent. Ariya jhanas are permanent in nature compared to Anariya jhanas. Thus a Sotapanna will be able to easily get to the first Ariya jhana in any of the future lives, because some of the five hindrances have been permanently reduced, and vicikicca permanently removed.

It is Vitakka that inhibits the hindrance of sloth and torpor (thina middha). Then at the time when mental happiness (Piti) arises in the mind, this jhanic factor of piti suppresses the hindrance of ill will (vyapada). Then the body becomes light due to physical happiness (sukha), and it is this jhanic factor that counters the hindrance of restlessness and worry (uddhacca kukkucca). The moment that one gets to one-pointed-ness (ekgaggata) in meditation, this one-pointed-ness temporarily inhibits sensual desire (kamachanda).


Talking about Dharma - is it worthwhile?

Both quotes you cite come from the Chan/Zen tradition. It is very typical for Chan to emphasize "transmission beyond scripture" and "silent illumination". Not all of Buddhism is like that though.

Gautama Buddha for example spoke about Dharma for 40 years. Tibetan Buddhists wrote hundreds of volumes about Madhyamaka, Tantra and Lam Rim (Stages of the Path). Even Chan/Zen masters themselves left a massive library of texts - koan collections, sutras, treatises, commentaries, lecture drafts etc.

Why talk about Dharma at all? As Buddha taught, the more we give our attention to something -- the more our mind gets tuned to that -- the more it becomes part of how we see the world -- the more it shapes our thoughts and actions. So the idea is, at least in theory, that the more we talk about Dharma, the more it penetrates our minds and actions.

At the same time, Buddha himself compared Dharma to a raft. It is useful as a vehicle for taking you to the other side - but once you are there you don't have to carry it with you. In fact, holding on to the raft could be an obstacle to one's Unbinding. In other words, obsession with Dharma could easily become Anti-Dharma. There are examples documented even in Pali Canon of people quarreling about particular Dharma point with Buddha having to step in and teach non-attachment to views. Second Anuruddha Sutta (A 3.128) shows how thinking about Dharma can go contrary to fulfilling Dharma in practice. The Theravada tradition warns about getting lost in quasi-dharmic intellectual proliferation, what they call "papanca".

This is exactly the same point Chan masters emphasize. The period when Prajnaparamita and Chan developed was the time when people obsessed over the raft. The Abhi-dharma movement chewed the original suttas to the bone - and came up with what they thought was a neat distillation of Dharma - the matrikas (bulletpoint lists) of Four Truths, Three Poisons, Four Efforts, Five Skandhas, Sixteen Levels of Knowledge and so on and so forth. Several centuries after Buddha's Parinirvana, people started grasping onto the specifics and missing the forest behind the trees. Some schools seriously argued how many dharmas the world is made of, 76 or 89.

As a reaction to this extreme, there emerged the Mahayana tradition - spearheaded by the Prajnaparamita movement - whose entire method is built on the contrast between the literal meaning of the teaching, with what it points to in the actual practice. At the same time, both at the peak of Chan's popularity and today, students keep on studying texts and Chan Masters keep on giving the Dharma lectures. Knowledge of Buddhist fundamentals, in their basic conceptual form, was and remains a prerequisite for receiving the more advanced instruction.

Tibetan Buddhists go as far as to say there are in fact two Dharmas - Dharma of Transmission and Dharma of Realization. Transmission consists of memorizing and passing on the texts of the three baskets: Vinaya, Sutra and Abhidharma - or more broadly the conceptual aspect of Buddhism. Realization is the actual training in Discipline, Meditation, and Wisdom - as they apply to one's daily life. The two relate as getting the map and walking the path. While mere owning the map does not get you anywhere, without the map the next generation would simply have no idea which way to go.

Another way to see this, while Buddhism teaches "liberation through wisdom" (liberation from what? wisdom about what?) not everyone can jump straight from Avici Hell to Nirvana-with-no-remainder, not everyone even wants to - so there is gotta be a way to motivate people who are not exactly on the right track. This is another reason Dharma of Transmission is necessary.

This is kinda how I myself see this site: while it can't replace a face-to-face apprenticeship with a live master, at least it can provide inspiration and positive motivation to people who have no idea what Buddhism is even about. If in addition to that it can clarify some confusion for more advanced students and point them in the right direction, I will feel verily gratified :)) One of my biggest pains growing up was overuse of upaya by teachers I learned from - mostly due to my own bad karma - so the vow I gave to myself is to share liberating realization and basic sanity openly to help new people avoid pain and confusion I went through.

Anyway, to come back to your quote, The instant you speak about a thing, you miss the mark. - I believe this refers not as much to the horrible dangers of speaking (after all you can totally "miss the mark" while staying perfectly silent!) - as to the fundamental confusion between reality and its models. Our mind keeps on building these models trying to understand reality based on our past experience - but as we project the model back onto reality we see the pant monsters we ourselves created - not the actual reality! Attachment, aversion, and reification of such mind-made phantoms - and the mental/verbal/physical action based on these three - is the fuel that feeds the fire of Samsara. Liberation from suffering caused by such phantoms, through understanding the nature of mind, is the main point of everything I am talking about here, and when it comes to this basic point,

  when you are deluded and full of doubt, even a thousand books of scripture are not enough. When you have realized [this] understanding, even one word is too much.

It's not like understanding this point makes you instantaneously Enlightened - there is still a lifetime of practice, overcoming one's reification/attachment habits - but at least knowing this you can relax about the whole thing and not feel like a donkey chasing the carrot of Nirvana while secretly hating this world.

Of course if all we do is talk about Buddhism in the way of entertainment while holding on to our models in the daily life - we would be totally missing the mark.


You've asked for a Mahayana text, which may or may not include MN121, in which the Buddha says:

MN121 Whatever ascetics and brahmins enter and remain in the pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness—whether in the past, future, or present—all of them enter and remain in this same pure, ultimate, supreme emptiness.

Although "emptiness" is probably what you meant by "void", it's worth noting that Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) discuss several terms which can get conflated with "void." Let's look at some of these:

AN9.41:11.2: ‘Why don’t I, going totally beyond perceptions of form, with the ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that “space is infinite”, enter and remain in the dimension of infinite space?’
AN9.41:13.2: ‘Why don’t I, going totally beyond the dimension of infinite consciousness, aware that “there is nothing at all”, enter and remain in the dimension of nothingness?’
SN41.6:3.2: “But sir, how does someone attain the cessation of perception and feeling?”

The above three experiences are differentiated and transitional states leading to the experience and practice described in MN121:

MN121:3.3: ‘Ānanda, these days I usually practice the meditation on emptiness.’


what is the traditional zen stance on agriculture and animal care?

I am not a well practiced zen buddhist but just a practitioner of zen buddhism. I do not know the answer but I do know where I would look for this answer. If I were tasked with finding the above I would look in the Diamond Sutra.

"The Diamond Sutra advises us to throw away is the notion “man,” human being. This is not too difficult. When we look into the human being, we see human ancestors, we see animal ancestors, we see vegetable ancestors, we see mineral ancestors. We see that the human is made of non-human elements. We see that we are at the same time a rock, a river, a cloud, a squirrel, a rose. And if we take away all the non-human elements, the human being is no longer there.
This is the deepest teaching on deep ecology. In order to protect the human being, you have to protect elements that are not human, because these elements are our ancestors, and if you destroy them there is no way we can be here. That is why discrimination between man and nature is a wrong view. You have to see you as nature, one with nature.
That is why harmony, respect of life, is possible. So throw away the idea that the human being is the boss, man is the boss, man can do anything to nature. The key is contemplation on impermanence of non-self."
-Thich Nhat Hanh, Dharma Talk: Free from Notions, Ocean of Peace Meditation Hall
Deer Park Monastery
Sunday, September 25, 2001


What is Anuloma-nana? How does this insight works?

Ñānadassana-visuddhi - 'purification of knowledge and vision', is the last of the 7 purifications and a name for path-knowledge, maggañāna i.e. the penetrating realization of the path of Stream-winning, Once-returning, Non-returning or Arahatship.  The Knowledge of Adaptation (anuloma-ñana) comes under this seventh purification.

The only sutta that fully explains the seven purifications is Rathavinita Sutta. It explains in full the seven purifications (SAPTHA VISUDDHI) taught by the Buddha. The Ratha-vinita Sutta: Relay Chariots  (MN 24; M.I,145). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.024.than.html

The only place in the Canon where these 7 kinds of purification are mentioned is M. 24,, The Simile of the Stage-coach; There it is said that the real and ultimate goal does not consist in purification of morality, or of mind, or of view, etc., but in total deliverance and ceasing. Now, just as one mounts the first coach and travels to the second coach, then mounts the second coach and travels with it to the third coach, etc.,
in exactly the same way the goal of (I) the purification of morality (sila-visuddhi) is  (II) the purification of mind (citta-visuddhi)
its goal: (III) the purification of view (ditthi-visuddhi)
its goal: (IV) the purification by overcoming doubt kankhāvitarana-visuddhi
its goal: (V) the purification by knowledge and vision of what is path and not-path (maggāmagga-ñānadassana-visuddhi)
its goal: (VI) the purification by knowledge and vision of the path-progress  (patipadā-ñānadassana-visuddhi);
its goal: (VII) the purification of knowledge and vision (ñānadassana-visuddhi)
but the goal of this purification is deliverance freed from all clinging.

By the purification of knowledge are here meant the following, which are freed from defilements, follow the right process, and are considered as insight, namely:

knowledge consisting in contemplation of rise and fall (udayabbayānupassanā-ñāna),
in contemplation of dissolution (bhangānupassanā-ñāna),
in awareness of terror (or the fearful) (bhayatūpatthānā-ñāna),
in contemplation of misery (ādīnavānupassanā-ñāna),
in contemplation of aversion (nibbidānupassanā-ñāna),
in the desire for deliverance (muccitu-kamyatā-ñāna),
in reflecting contemplation (patisankhānupassanā-ñāna),
in equanimity regarding all formations of existence (sankhārupekkhā-ñāna) - which is followed by
in adaptation to truth (saccānulomika-ñāna) ie. anuloma-nana.

So there is a very long way for you and I to go in this Path before coming to this anuloma-nana. Wisdom derived from the preliminary nanas, the ones before it. This Anuloma nana has the characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta. In the anuloma nana, the Four Noble Truths appear clearly and distinctly.