If someone constrain me to build my bad Karma or it wouln't be Karma?

If due to some contain you cannot follow through with your action this does not become a potent karma with the potential to give rebirth but the volition forms a mild karma which can give result after rebirth.

Regardless of if you follow through with a action of intend to do some action as retaliatory or not, action and intention will become karma.


looking for citation, pīti and sukha of 4 jhānas compared to dying of thirst, seeing water in distance, and drinking it

what is the citation of that piti sukha simile for the 4 jhanas from?

It's from the Visuddhimagga-Ch IV.100 (pg. 139):

  And wherever the two are associated, happiness is the contentedness at getting a desirable object, and bliss is the actual experiencing of it when got. Where there is happiness there is bliss (pleasure); but where there is bliss there is not necessarily happiness. Happiness is included in the formations aggregate; bliss is included in the feeling aggregate. If a man, exhausted31 in a desert, saw or heard about a pond on the edge of a wood, he would have happiness; if he went into the wood’s shade and used the water, he would have bliss. And it should be understood that this is said because they are obvious on such occasions.

.

  might this sutta, MN 40, be what inspired that simile for jhana piti/sukha differentiation? Should the words piti sukha appear in MN 40 lotus pond, but got lost in transmission?

Possibly. But notice the context is different between MN 40 and Vism IV.100. In MN 40, the lotus pond simile was used to illustrate the benefits of cultivating the Four Divine Abodes and how it benefits everyone; while the Vism's simile was for describing the Piti/Sukha absorption factors of the Jhanas concentration practices.

  What does the MN 40 lotus pond simile mean on its own terms, just for this sutta? What are the 4 directions referring to?

The Four Divine Abodes.


What is the deep sound that buddhist monk make during meditation called

From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_chant

  Tibetan monks are noted for their skill at throat-singing, a specialized form of chanting in which, by amplifying the voice's upper partials, the chanter can produce multiple distinct pitches simultaneously. Japanese esoteric practitioners also practice a form of chanting called shomyo.

From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtone_singing#Tibet

  Tibetan Buddhist chanting is a subgenre of throat singing, mainly practiced by monks of Tibet, including Qinghai (Khokhonor) province in the Tibetan plateau area, Tibetan monks of Nepal, Bhutan, India, and various locations in the Himalayan region. Most often the chants hold to the lower pitches possible in throat singing. Various ceremonies and prayers call for throat singing in Tibetan Buddhism, often with more than one monk chanting at a time. There are different Tibetan throat singing styles, such as Gyuke (Tibetan: རྒྱུད་སྐད་, Wylie: rgyud skad) – this style uses the lowest pitch of voice; Dzoke (Tibetan: མཛོ་སྐད་, Wylie: mdzo skad), and Gyer (Tibetan: གྱེར་, Wylie: gyer).


What are the strengths and weaknesses of attempts to describe Nirvana in scripture?

The Pali suttas provide accurate descriptions of Nirvana, such as the 'destruction of craving' (Dhammapada 154; MN 37); 'visible here-&-now destruction of greed, hatred & delusion' (AN 3.55; SN 45.7); 'supreme happiness' (Dhammapada 203); and 'Simile of the Ocean'.

Therefore, the description by Nâgasena given to King Millinda in his 80th dilemma should be compared to the Pali suttas to test its accuracy.

That Nagasena offered a very lengthy answer shows he did not really have a "dilemma" & spoke falsely, when he said: 'Nirvâna, O king, has nothing similar to it. By no metaphor, or explanation, or reason, or argument can its form, or figure, or duration, or measure be made clear.'

These links might help: Nibbana For Everyone & Bhikkhu Pesala What Is Nibbāna?

Have you bothered to read the text or are you a university student looking for an easy answer?

  'O happy word, Nâgasena! Speak then, quickly, that I may have an
  explanation of even one point in the characteristics of Nirvâna.
  Appease the fever of my heart. Allay it by the cool sweet breezes of
  your words!'

  'There is one quality of the lotus, O king, inherent in Nirvâna, and
  two qualities of water, and three of medicine, and four of the ocean,
  and five of food, and ten of space, and three of the wish-conferring
  gem, and three of red sandal wood, and three of the froth of ghee, and
  five of a mountain peak.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, that one quality of the lotus which you said was inherent in Nirvâna,--which is that?'

  'As the lotus, O king, is untarnished by the water 3, so is Nirvâna
  untarnished by any evil dispositions. This is the one quality of the
  lotus inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those two qualities of water which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As water, O king, is cool and assuages heat, so also is Nirvâna
  cool, and assuages the fever arising from all evil dispositions.
  This is the first quality of water inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O
  king, as water allays the thirst of men and beasts when they are
  exhausted and anxious, craving for drink, and tormented by thirst, so
  does Nirvâna allay the thirst of the craving after lusts, the
  craving after future life, and the craving after worldly prosperity
  . This is the second quality of water inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those three qualities of medicine, which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As medicine, O king, is the refuge of beings tormented by poison, so
  is Nirvâna the refuge of beings tormented with the poison of evil
  dispositions. This is the first quality of medicine inherent in
  Nirvâna. And again, O king, as medicine puts an end to diseases, so
  does Nirvâna put an end to griefs. This is the second quality of
  medicine inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as medicine is
  ambrosia, so also is Nirvâna ambrosia. This is the third quality
  of medicine inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those four qualities of the ocean which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As the ocean, O king, is free from (empty of) corpses, so also is
  Nirvâna free from (empty of) the dead bodies of all evil
  dispositions. This, O king, is the first quality of the ocean
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as the ocean is mighty and
  boundless, and fills not with all the rivers that flow in to it; so is
  Nirvâna mighty and boundless, and fills not with all beings (who
  enter in to it). This is the second quality of the ocean inherent in
  Nirvâna. And again, O king, as the ocean is the abode of mighty
  creatures, so is Nirvâna the abode of great men--Arahats, in whom the
  Great Evils and all stains have been destroyed, endowed with
  power, masters of themselves. This is the third quality of the ocean
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as the ocean is all in
  blossom, as it were, with the innumerable and various and fine flowers
  of the ripple of its waves, so is Nirvâna all in blossom, as it were,
  with the innumerable and various and fine flowers of purity, of
  knowledge, and of emancipation. This is the fourth quality of the
  ocean inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those five qualities of food which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As food, O king, is the support of the life of all beings, so is
  Nirvâna, when it has been realised, the support of life, for it
  puts an end to old age and death. This is the first quality of food
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as food increases the strength
  of all beings, so does Nirvâna, when it has been realised, increase
  the power of Iddhi of all beings. This is the second quality of food
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as food is the source of the
  beauty of all beings, so is Nirvâna, when it has been realised, the
  source to all beings of the beauty of holiness. This is the third
  quality of food inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as food puts
  a stop to suffering in all beings, so does Nirvâna, when it has been
  realised, put a stop in all beings to the suffering arising from every
  evil disposition. This is the fourth quality of food inherent in
  Nirvâna. And again, O king, as food overcomes in all beings the
  weakness of hunger, so does Nirvâna, when it has been realised,
  overcome in all beings the weakness which arises from hunger and every sort of pain. This is the fifth quality of food inherent in
  Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those ten qualities of space which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As space, O king, neither is born nor grows old, neither dies nor
  passes away nor is reborn, as it is incompressible, cannot be
  carried off by thieves, rests on nothing, is the sphere in which birds
  fly, is unobstructed, and is infinite; so, O king, Nirvâna is not
  born, neither does it grow old, it dies not, it passes not away, it
  has no rebirth, it is unconquerable, thieves carry it not off, it
  is not attached to anything , it is the sphere in which Arahats
  move, nothing can obstruct it, and it is infinite. These are the ten
  qualities of space inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those three qualities of the wish-conferring gem which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As the wishing-gem, O king, satisfies every desire, so also does
  Nirvâna. This is the first quality of the wishing-gem inherent in
  Nirvâna. And again, O king, as the wishing-gem causes delight, so
  also does Nirvâna. This is the second quality of the wishing-gem
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as the wishing-gem is full
  of lustre, so also is Nirvâna. This is the third quality of the
  wishing-gem inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those three qualities of red sandal wood which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?' 'As red
  sandal wood, O king, is hard to get, so is Nirvâna hard to attain to.
  This is the first quality of red sandal wood inherent in Nirvâna. And
  again, O king, as red sandal wood is unequalled in the beauty of its
  perfume, so is Nirvâna. This is the second quality of red sandal wood
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as red sandal wood is praised
  by all the good, so is Nirvâna praised by all the Noble Ones. This is
  the third quality of red sandal wood inherent in Nirvâna.'
  [322] 'Venerable Nâgasena, those three qualities of the skimmings of ghee 1 which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As ghee is beautiful in colour, O king, so also is Nirvâna
  beautiful in righteousness. This is the first quality of the ghee inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as ghee has a pleasant
  perfume, so also has Nirvâna the pleasant perfume of righteousness.
  This is the second quality of ghee inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O
  king, as ghee has a pleasant taste, so also has Nirvâna. This is
  the third quality of ghee inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Venerable Nâgasena, those five qualities of a mountain peak which you said were inherent in Nirvâna,--which are they?'

  'As a mountain peak is very lofty, so also is Nirvâna very
  exalted. This is the first quality of a mountain peak inherent in
  Nirvâna. And again, O king, as a mountain peak is immoveable, so
  also is Nirvâna. This is the second quality of a mountain peak
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as a mountain peak is
  inaccessible, so also is Nirvâna inaccessible to all evil
  dispositions. This is the third quality of a mountain peak inherent
  in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as a mountain peak is a place where no
  plants can grow, so also is Nirvâna a condition in which no evil
  dispositions can grow. This is the fourth quality of a mountain peak
  inherent in Nirvâna. And again, O king, as a mountain peak is free
  alike from desire to please and from resentment, so also is Nirvâna.
  This is the fifth quality of a mountain peak inherent in Nirvâna.'

  'Very good, Nâgasena! That is so, and I accept it as you say.'

If you are a beginner student to Buddhism, what is important to understand is the words 'birth' & 'death' mean conceiving the thoughts: "I am born" & "I will die", as described in MN 140. Therefore, in Nibbana, there is no birth & no death because there is no view of "I am" or "self".

  The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these
  foundations, and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him
  he is called a sage at peace.’ So it was said. And with reference to
  what was this said?

  “Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I
  shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall
  be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a
  conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be
  non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be
  neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is
  a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming
  all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage
  at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and
  does not yearn. For there is nothing present in him by which he might
  be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he
  die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should
  he yearn?

  MN 140


What is taught about Buddha nature in Theravada Buddhism?

Consider this: Theravada posits Nirvana as a remote goal, while Mahayana posits Buddha-Nature as self-existing state of affairs. This is the key.

The reason Gautama Buddha declared Nirvana, is because he was modeling the Path after his own quest. Because he achieved his Enlightenment after having gone through numerous trainings and realizing Three Marks of Existence, Twelve Nidanas and Four Noble Truths, he saw that all students must go through similar experiences in order to achieve the same Liberation. Indeed, for someone without basic discipline, critical thinking skills, and capacity for self-reflection, attaining Buddha-Eye is outright impossible.

By the time of Mahayana though, because Buddhism became very popular and the essence of Teaching was somewhat lost in the noise of speculative philosophy and esoteric speculation, many new students would become obsessed with the idea of Nirvana, and instead of training the skilfull qualities of mind required for Enlightenment, would engage in fruitless search of Transcendental Realization. Out of compassion for future seekers, Bodhisattvas established the notion of Buddha Nature, openly declaring that Enlightenment is not something remote you have to attain, but rather one's innate nature to be recovered.

So Buddha-Nature is basically Nirvana or Enlightenment, except now you know you already have it, and only need to open your eyes, instead of running around the world seeking it. That said, you still have to work on dropping all attachments, deconstructing the ego, and becoming the master of your mind/emotions before you can take legal ownership of your rightful possession :)


Can you focus on the feeling of your body on the chair for reaching the jhanas?

Jhana is not "access" concentration. Jhana is called "attainment" concentration.

Focusing on the feeling of feet on the ground may result in access concentration (because the mind may be relatively open, pliant & non-attached when focusing on the feeling of the feet) however:

The focus should not be overly forced or rigid because, for access concentration to occur, the mind must have the pliancy to fall into the body.
When access concentration occurs, the mind will automatically experience the breathing.

Methods such as feeling the feet on the ground; listening to silence via the ears; or sitting with a very quiet non-doing non-ambitious mind are often more effective in manifesting access concentration (than clumsy direct attempts at watching breathing). Because the Buddha actually taught his Path is the abandonment of craving, often practise is counter-intuitive.


Can a Buddhist monk use social media for his teaching?

A monk can appear in all social media, but there are, according to the Navakovada, some things he cannot talk about, if certain conditions are not met. Since he does not know whom is out there doing what, he might choose not to teach the Dhamma.

This is a bit of a grayzone, so it is up to each monks own evaluation whether he will do it or not.


First of all, it is incorrect to say "arhats have vijnana (etc)". The word "have" implies someone who has, but in case of an arhat there's no entity, no one to "have" vijnana. The right way to phrase this question is to say: In case of an arhat, are there vijnana and namarupa?"

Second, an arhat will not be reborn exactly because there is no entity to be reborn, and this realization is part of cessation of ignorance which normally keeps the Twelve Nidanas rolling.

Third, in this context vijnana and namarupa refer to nidanas, not to skandhas. The twelve nidanas describe the process of gradual taking shape and hardening of a certain subjective world and the person living in it. Vijnana and namarupa refer to early stages of this process. First, there develops a tendency to recognize and discriminate, and from that tendency appear various objects and entities. That's what vijnana and namarupa refer to in context of twelve nidanas. They refer to the naive, ignorant discrimination and to the illusory entities that it delineates.

In case of an arhat, the discernment is no longer ignorant and it therefore does not posit illusory entities. Buddha clearly said, with cessation of ignorance, there's cessation of tendencies, with cessation of tendencies there's cessation of vijnana etc. This refers to cessation of naive, ignorant automatic discrimination which contrives objects and then believes they are absolutely ontologically real.

So we are not saying that the skandhas disappear with attainment of arhathood, not at all. Arhathood is cessation of nidanas, the causal chain that leads to emergence and hardening of the illusory world and the illusory self.

And of course arhats are not mindless dummies. In case of an arhat there's a function of right discernment. This function is called prajna. The object of this discernment is yatabhuta, things as they truly are. This refers first and foremost to seeing samskaras as samskaras, instead of the fixed entities. Because samskaras are seen as samskaras, they are seen as Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta, and at Mahayana level, as Shunya.

So the short answer is, no, in case of an arhat there's no vijnana and namarupa - there's prajna and samskara/shunyata.


Benefits of sleeping in a sitting posture

The practice of sleeping in a sitting posture can be explained as one of the 13 Dhutanga.

  Sitter's Practice (nesajjik'anga) — living in the three postures of walking, standing and sitting and never lying down.

The advantages of sleeping less as described by the Buddha can be found in Jāgariyasutta

  Vigilance

  This was said by the Lord…

  "Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu should be vigilant; he should live mindful, clearly comprehending, concentrated, happy and calm, and should know when it is suitable to cultivate those things that are wholesome. Bhikkhus, for a bhikkhu who is vigilant and living thus, one of two fruits is to be expected: final knowledge here and now or, there being some residual defilement, the state of non-returning."

  You vigilant ones hear this:
  Wake up, you who are asleep!
  Vigilance is better than sleep:
  There is no fear for the vigilant.

  One who is vigilant and mindful,
  Comprehending and concentrated,
  Joyful and calm in his thoughts,
  By rightly investigating the Dhamma
  With unified mind, will in time
  Destroy the darkness of ignorance.

  Therefore be devoted to vigilance,
  An ardent, discerning, meditative bhikkhu.
  Having severed the fetter of birth and decay,
  One may here and now attain
  Enlightenment which is supreme.

Note that the pali word 'Jāgaro' which means 'deprive sleep' is translated as 'vigilant' in the above sutta translation.


Did the Buddha approved the idea of a council or was it a decision made after he passed away?

The Buddha's final exhortation was for his monks to rely primarily upon themselves and their own memory as the means to guide them:

  Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, that his body is more comfortable.

  Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.

  —Maha-parinibbana Sutta, DN 16

If you tell your followers to be "islands unto yourselves," can that be construed as "after my death, gather together a council of arahants"?

It seems that the Buddha wanted no central authority at all after he was gone.


Did the Buddha teach receivers to be ungrateful?

The Buddha taught people (especially monks) to be "worthy of offerings" -- that's in the Saṅghānussati for example, which also says that such a recipient is "worthy of respectful salutations" and  "a field of merit".
Apparently that (being "worthy of offerings") does not imply fawning on laypeople in gratitude.
On the subject of fawns though, AN 2.31-32 does talk about gratitude and especially in relation to parents:

Now what is the level of a person of no integrity? A person of no integrity is ungrateful & unthankful. This ingratitude, this lack of thankfulness, is advocated by rude people. It is entirely on the level of people of no integrity. A person of integrity is grateful & thankful. This gratitude, this thankfulness, is advocated by civil people. It is entirely on the level of people of integrity."
"I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. Which two? Your mother & father. [etc.]


I suppose the buddhist way to deal with awkwardness is similar to any emotion: Accept it, don't act on it, and go on with life.

Unless it's awkward in a precept-breaking way. If so, refer to the vinaya.


How and when does one not invest in others in Buddhism?

These kinds of questions will always be difficult to answer because we only have one side of the story. We lack the vital perspective that comes from a. knowing you, and b. knowing the people that you are in conflict with. The fact that you are in conflict, but don't seem to be able to acknowledge your part in creating the conflict tells me that I don't have the full story. However, one of my teachers gave me some excellent general advice on communication some years ago: he said that if a communication goes badly, then assume that you have not expressed enough mettā.

In order to relate empathetically one must drop one's own agenda (as teacher or benefactor) and try to feel what they feel and then ascertain the reasons they feel that way. One has to put oneself in their shoes. To do this one must drop all pretence of being superior and of having something to teach them. Drop all the conceit. If you have something they value, they'll ask you about it. That the situation has devolved to the extent you intimate, suggests that you are in conflict with their values. Perhaps you present yourself to them incongruously - you see yourself as having something to teach them, but they don't think of you as having anything to teach them.

I think one is already in trouble if one is modelling oneself on the Buddha or if one is relating to people on the basis of "teaching" them or having something to "impart". It sounds like this is getting in the way of you establishing an empathetic relationship with them. Is the problem that they refuse to see you as a "teacher"? Is that why you are labelling their response to you as "passive aggressive"?

The general principle of Buddhist ethics is that when things go wrong, that we looks for our own unskilful motivations. The unenlightened (dare I presume you are one of us?) are always motivated by attraction and aversion. Sometimes when things go wrong, one must just own up to one's own unskilful motivations. It can be difficult, because it is humiliating or humbling (depending on how you see it). In relating to other people we only have control of our side of the relationship. If things don't go right, we can only ask ourselves if our own attraction or aversion has soured things.

Of course there are times when it is better to walk away. If one realises that one is too entrenched in attraction and aversion to make a change, for example. Sometimes the necessary change is too great to manage in the short term. But one cannot blame the other. For this. If relations break down, it is our own failure. Generally speaking if we are expressing mettā rather than conceit, there is no need for relations to break down. Of course, it's a big ask.

But if the thought is "if only these people would follow my advice" then I would see this as problem of conceit, not of unreceptiveness.


You can use it if it serves you the purpose of one-pointedness attention.
But you should remember the benefits of using the breath as your point of attention.
The breath is both a concious and unconcious function and because of that it serves as a bridge bwtween them.
Also in Tibetan Buddhism conciouness is said to "ride" in the winds (prana) of the body so by focusing in the breath you are also focusing in your mind.
Once you have achieved mindfulness thru the attention to your heart beat, it is better to switch to your breath.


Anapana (Breath-In/Breath-Out meditation)

Anapana is suitable for people who frequent train of thoughts. If you are easily distracted person Anapana is well suited technique as meditation. Thoughts are hindrance to meditation. It is also one of Five hindrances prohibit meditator not to achieve keen concentration to clearly see the bubbles of matter and non-matter states. If you are seeing images/thinking about images during meditation, it is some kind of restlessness (uddhacca) and this does not allow your progress in meditation (whatever goal you are trying to achieve).

Please keep in mind that meditation does not help healthy body or energy. The mindfulness/proper attentiveness plus having insightful knowledge of eating habit of your own (when you have to eat, how much do you have to eat and which one you can eat) can only help sound body and energy. Other than walking with normal pace, physical exercises are not recommended as body building is not recommended for those who practice meditation.

2-3 Samatha Recommendations

Based on your hobbies and attitudes, you need to choose which type of Samatha is suitable for you. Usually, this is done when you go retreat to some meditation centers. Generally people nowadays are easily distracted and that is the reason Anapana is ubiquitous choice in many meditation centers. For the people with distraction it is recommended to do meditation in confined space and do meditation walking in open space is not suitable. There are some constraints in choosing type of meditation for particular type of people with specific hobbies but nobody is master in choice, only combination with own personal determination/reasoning on type and experienced teacher from meditation centre can do approximation.

Below are some of the type of Samatha for the person with specific hobbies, attitudes and inclinations but you are warned to seek proper guidance from centers instead of choosing the type of Samatha your own.

Anapana - for most distracted people
Marananusati (intensive mindfulness of dying) - for people of pride
Asuba/32 Human parts - for people with strong sexual/sensory desire
Metta - for people with strong aversion

There are many more; colors, four elements, and 10 anusati including Marananusati. All are for people with different hobbies, attitudes and inclinations. I hope you could find your most suitable techniques of meditation by consulting a good teacher in meditation center and make progress in meditation.


What they mean, is that our experience is assembled from hints presented by the sense organs. The eyes, ears catch glimpses of what's going on, esp. as we move around - and then build a theory from those hints, theory that we see as reality. There's a lot of assuming going on during that process, a lot of interpretation, and a lot of habit.

EDIT

Once you "let go" enough, you start seeing it. By "let go" I mean the unconscious process by which we maintain our contrived world. Nowadays I see it at both micro and macro level. For example as I hold the cup and look at it I can see how the mind "grasps" the "signs" - raw momentary snapshots of some distinct features, and how it "tells" itself what these signs imply by inferring the cup from them. I see how the mind goes over these "signs" again and again in circles, telling itself the story of the cup. Similarly, at the macro level, I can see how the mind grasps the facts of the world and builds the narrative of my life from these.

When some people practice mindfulness, they practice the opposite of letting go. They think mindfulness is when your observation is watertight. But watertight observation is really just a tighter version of the assembly process by which we contrive the world. Instead, as you stop trying to be in control of experience, you start seeing the gaps in the model. These gaps is what we are after - but you can't contrive your way into them, you can't control it - it only comes from letting go, which involves handling tremendous amount of insecurity.

EDIT2

What @xxxx means with his "looking for keys" analogy: normally the way our mind works is, we get a hint from sensory organs, we build a hypothesis of what we are looking for/at, and then we validate it by examining the evidence from sensory organs. If we approach meditation with the same attitude, we would say to ourselves: hey, I must be looking for gaps in experience, gaps in the modeling process, and here is how it's supposed to look like. But you can't see the real gaps with this attitude, this would be contriving gaps with your mind, like dreaming yourself a dream. Instead, it comes from letting go of the inner dialog, of re-telling yourself the story of what you see (micro), and the story of your life (macro).


Does pasteurization count as cooking in prep of juices for after noon?

Heating juice is allowed; cooking it is not:

“I allow reheating.”
Mv.VI.17.6


How does practicing restraint and performing actions of merit purify the mind?

Well, it seems obvious to me now, but it wasn't always, that our immoral impulsive behavior, both of possessive type and of repulsive type, comes from emotional hangups, so giving in to those hangups feeds them, or creates circumstances that feed them indirectly. So, if this immoral behavior comes from the mind, then by managing behavior we learn to control what?

Anyone who tried the precepts knows they are impossible to keep without paying attention to one's mind and emotions. Precepts force us to control our external behavior, which requires controlling our mind, that's it. No magic.


I have never read 'anatta' is 'pure bliss'. 'Bliss' is a feeling where as 'anatta' is a characteristic of things that is realised by wisdom.

As for 'Atman', this appears to be a concept that changed & evolved throughout the history of Brahmanism & Hinduism. At the time of the Buddha, it appears 'Atman' did not mean bliss or a transcendent state.

  The earliest use of word "Ātman" in Indian texts is found in the Rig Veda (RV X.97.11). Yāska, the ancient Indian grammarian, commenting on
  this Rigvedic verse, accepts the following meanings of Ātman: the
  pervading principle, the organism in which other elements are united
  and the ultimate sentient principle.

This is probably why the word 'anatta' does not mean 'not-bliss'.


Breath, and those interested, those possible worthy of special gifts, capable to take,

assuming that accurate is meant in regard of the followed question that might be rephrased "Does the Buddha say here: Giving does not lead to merits, when saying: 'If one were to develop even for just a finger-snap the perception of inconstancy, that would be more fruitful than the gift, the great gift, that Velāma the brahman gave, and [in addition to that] if one were to feed one person...'.

Actually this Sutta (or better wrong understandig of it) is in fact for most wester and modern people the reason why they deny that making merits, developing goodness, is needed and so deny the developing of generosity, sila, if even, without goodness cause of letting go for the sake of beyond.

Most western, moder "Buddhist" are actually training in line of th Jains who seek refuge in what is called householder-equanimity by the Buddha, meaning that they develope ignorance in the cloth of equanimity the construct around the actual path of letting go and factually do not give anything but merely amass in this way. Make simply sacrifies to keep the flame of death alive, loka-dana. See: [Q&A] What happens when your tank is empty, and you’ve got nothing left to give

It's message is also (and with the same cause) that giving without virtue "regardless of whether a gift is coarse or refined, if it is given inattentively, disrespectfully, not with one's own hand, as if throwing it away, with the view that nothing will come of it", or an object of virtue (without reflecting and keeping "buddha, Dhamma, Sangha", un-deluded in mind, has not much value for the path.

Giving so, no good perception of something worthy for gifts (because there is no worthy known or traced), the gift, sacrify is for like-alike, sacrify for like-alike or even lower, leads one there, keeps one there, simply for the sake of keeping the flame of death alive.

Like many (Brahmans, some even for what they think that it leads them to become Buddhas, being Velama, yet not even have wealth to share, to possible differents to Vemala) here. They possible think that they make merits why carring about an "unclean" place, are attached to like-alike and not directing their sacrifies to the three juwels, the Sangha as the unexcelt field of merits. So they nurish just whe world, what ever one nurishes will grow (inwardl and outwardly), and that counts for staring as well.

Doing "merits" in such a way, it is clear that people putting effort into perceptions which are not worthy of special sacrifies, actually just sacrify for their own sake, becoming and selfish purpose.

That is why one should keep right joy in giving in mind, using the three juwels as persection, Nibbana and what leads there, as object of ones deeds, one who seeks for gaining merits, goodness, that leads upwards and beyound. It such is done in an enviroment that does not provide for developing such, has not the purpose for such, is not supported by proper joy, people directed to Nibbana, but simply fot the worlds and becoming sake, to keep the flame of becoming, death alive, its of no fruits of no merits at all:

  "Householder, regardless of whether a gift is coarse or refined, if it is given inattentively, disrespectfully, not with one's own hand, as if throwing it away, with the view that nothing will come of it: Wherever the result of that gift comes to fruition, one's mind will not incline to the enjoyment of splendid food, will not incline to the enjoyment of splendid clothing, will not incline to the enjoyment of splendid vehicles, will not incline to the enjoyment of the splendid five strings of sensuality. And one's sons & daughters, slaves, servants, & workers will not listen to one, will not lend ear, will not make their minds attend for the sake of knowledge. Why is that? Because that is the result of inattentive actions."

Is like in MN96:

  “Brahmin, it is like a poor miserable man against his wish was told, here good man, you should eat meat and you should not spend money on it. In a likewise manner, without the consent of recluses and Brahmins, have appointed these four services. Brahmin, I do not say all services should be done. I do not say, all services should not be done. When doing those services if there is evil, that service is not good. I say it should not be done. When doing those services, if there is no evil, that service is good. (and vici vera).

Like the person who had put Sister Uppalavannas translation with a lot of sacrifies on the web (obove linked), he had possible made it in a manner of no fruits to aspected from it, althought it might come to frutaions. Possible without keeping Silas, respectless, thinking on amasing for ones own sake or what holding as self/real. Doning for reputations, wealth (physical, mental by knowledge), praise, pleasant feeling... invest his sacrifies for unreal and not to real directed sakes. Not to tend up-wards, most not even tend as it currently is, up simply wasts his als goodness, merits away.

Many of modern lay or opposing undertakings and practices, and their ways, unguided, self-over-estmating in wealth and possiblities, simple waste old merits an goodness possible earlier attained. So it is with all that meditation stuff and well-ness-buddhism, all simple certain ego or not-ego trips.

Be attentive, pay proper attention and learn to judge more wisely, step by step, with real benefical sacrifies and their targets!

[Later Addition (on account of an answer here) to understand quality of Dana better:

There are 3 factors:

The giver (his mindstate, directed to...? free of moha, lobha, dosa, or not) - since Velama was an "ordinary" being, perfection can not be aspected, he also had neither inwardly nor outwardly an access to the tripple gems or the/a Buddha, could possible not even images such.
The recipient (since at this time there where no Buddha no Sangha and the gifts might not have been given to a Pacceccabuddha, they have been directed to "ordinary" people.)
The gift (it was clearly outstanding and therefore had it's certain frutation)

The Suttas give direct 6 factors: Dana Sutta: Giving

When one has the wrong perception of a worthy recipient, holding something not really worthy for worthy, thinking this or that wordling is a Noble one, having no perception of those following the Noble One, it is to be assumed that the gifts are given out of right view and so have not much value in direction of Nibbana. People think normal not in spheres of free of fetters but on what ever benefits or wordily aims. Having the tripple Gems possible still present, many are gifted with that unexcelt field of merits and it is merely "sad" if not used.

That is why just a spoon of rice, with the right mindstate to a worthy person excells even the biggest wealth given if this two factors are not perfect. Or just the Veneration torward a Noble is many times higher as doing charity to torward ordinary people day by day, the whole year. See dhp]

More on Dana, note that the princip in it counts also for the merits sila, samadhi, can be found with references and discussion here: Dana (Generosity, Charity) "Abhidhamma in daily life "

May this sacrify made by me, benefit those able to rejoice with it, lead to highest bliss, path and fruit, and may the Devas inform those who do not have seen or heard yet.

Anumodana!

A possible extended answer as well as space for questions and discussiin can be found here.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, and not meant for commercial purpose or other gains in this world.]


Where's the story in which the Buddha praised a non-returner for keeping the knowledge of his attainment private?

"I hope, sir, that there were no white-clad householders there."

"No, friend, there were no white-clad householders there."

"It's good, sir, that there were no white-clad householders there."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.023.than.html


I think you did a really good job of breaking down your doubts into individual points.

    1) Everywhere I keep reading stuff of the kind "Observe your thoughts without judgment". What does that really translate into in practice? How do you observe without judging? I mean, if you get sad thoughts, you get sad too. Thats why they are called sad thoughts. I never understood how to actually follow this advise.

In Buddhism we separate the initial thought from the emotion which we apply to it. The thought isn't a bad thing until we start to apply our ideas to it, we call it sadness and we want to get away from it, we start to think of how good life would be if we could avoid sadness. It is only after we apply our ideas that this thought becomes bad.

As humans it's very hard not to see sadness as a bad thing, we cannot immediately control our reactions to avoid labeling sadness as bad. When beginning with meditation we practice allowing the sadness to be present in the mind and not try to get rid of it.

    2) Again, I keep reading "Observe this particular moment", "be in this moment" etc. What other moment are we normally in? What special tasks do we need to undertake to be in this moment? I mean, as long as you don't daydream about the future or wallow in the past, you're in the moment, right? This is something I again fail to comprehend clearly.

You're right that thoughts about the future and past are not part of the practice but sometimes we get distracted without going to the future or past. For example if we see a bar of chocolate we have sight in the present moment; then we might get distracted and start to think "Where are these chocolates made?" or "How many calories are in the chocolate?". These thoughts aren't about the past or future but we are now lost in thinking and we are not in the present moment.

As an extra note, if you change from seeing chocolate to thinking "How many calories are in the chocolate?" then the present moment changed from sight to this thought about calories, you could remain in the present by observing the thought but observing a thought is different from just thinking it.

    3)"Observe the breath". Do I feel the breath? Or note that I am breathing? Or count the breath? It just feels like more thinking.

Some of the suggested techniques do involve more thinking than others. One aim of meditation is to reduce the amount we get caught up in thoughts. Just feeling the breath involves less thought than counting the breath, in that way feeling is better than counting. You know from meditating that it is difficult to stay aware of the breathing, some people are so stressed that they have to count their breath, it is too difficult to only feel the breath. For these people counting is a good idea until they are calm enough to just feel the breath.

    4) How do you ever "know" that your meditation is working right? Or how do you even know your practice is headed in the right direction? I got tired after 2 years of it and nothing in return. Okay maybe I did it wrong, but how would it have been had I done it right? Is there a time frame within which you can expect some sort of result if you do it right?

If you are doing meditation correctly then you should notice an improvement in your reactions to things. Maybe before when a person shouts at you then you get angry and shout at them, after meditating for months when a person shouts at you then you notice your anger and you don't immediately think that you have to shout.

    5) There seem to be many kinds of meditations, each with its own set of fanboys. Are these different types simply different paths to the same goal? Or are they meant for different goals? Moreover, are their learning curves different? How do I know what is right for me? Does this analysis even matter at all or am I just complicating things needlessly? My aim is to be able to concentrate and think clearly without getting overwhelmed.

Largely the different meditations are different paths to the same goal. Any meditation which involves observing an object (the breath, the body, a coloured disc, a flame) the object is unimportant because eventually in deep meditation you will not be able to see/feel the object. Because breath meditation is so popular there are many many variations of how to watch the breath but you just need to find the one that works best for you. The only way to know what is right for you is to experiment with different types, a month should be long enough to know if you like it. None are perfect so just find one that is good enough for you.

Last bit of advice: Meditation involves letting go of what is happening. If you are trying very hard to follow your breath then you are preventing yourself from being relaxed. Ideally you should not require effort to remain aware of the breathing, you just won't get distracted by other things because you are calm.

I hope that some of these answers help you to develop a fruitful practice.


Sense of calmness in meditation, what is it?

The sensation of the body 'feeling heavy', very relaxed, 'numb' or almost as if it's disappearing is quite normal. When there is nothing new happening, sort of, when bodily sensations don't change, the mind 'loses interest' and kind of deactivates those sense inputs. This can be beneficial for focusing on the mind experience, since there are no longer as many body sensations impinging on the attention.

Going looking for the same sensations again can get you stuck instead of moving forward, so it sounds like a good idea not to seek it, as you mention. More likely, you may experience different types of calmness and other experiences, when you let go and are not chasing an experience you've had, previously.

The calmness you are referring to, sounds like samadhi - a deep calmness brought about by "single pointedness of mind". In deepest samadhi, absorption is so complete that all sense of "self" disappears, and subject and object are completely absorbed into each other. However, there are many kinds and levels of samadhi.

Wikipedia: Samadhi


When will Maitreya Buddha come according to the Manimekalai?

Let's bear in mind that according to the sources referenced in the Wikipedia page Manimekalai, this book was written either before the 5th century CE, in the 6th century CE or latest 950 CE according to different experts.

Anne E. Monius is a Professor of South Asian Religions at Harvard University and "a historian of religion specializing in the religious traditions of India. Her research interests lie in examining the practices and products of literary culture to reconstruct the history of religions in South Asia." She wrote the book "Imagining a Place for Buddhism: Literary Culture and Religious Community in Tamil-Speaking South India".

She talks about the book Manimekalai and 1616 prediction in this book, for which you can find the excerpt here. Please pay attention to the last paragraph on page 94, and the next two pages.

Her best guess is that since the Buddhist calendar usually starts counting from the final passing (parinirvana) of the Buddha (also see this answer), this refers to the year 1616 on that calendar. She is not sure about how this number was derived.

From the Wikipedia page on the Buddha, the date of the passing away of the Buddha is given as either 483 BCE or 400 BCE. That puts 1616 at 1133 CE or 1216 CE. This is definitely centuries after the authorship of the Manimekalai. So, that's quite sensible. Prof. Monius stated that this is more specific and substantially earlier than the estimates given in the Pali sources, for the coming of the next Buddha.

According to accesstoinsight.org's page on the Chronology of Theravada Buddhism:

  Year 1 of the Buddhist Era calendar is the year of the Buddha's
  Parinibbana (death and final release), which occurred in the Buddha's
  eightieth year (480 BCE according to the "historical" timeline; 544
  BCE by tradition).

If we use 544 BCE as the year of the Buddha's parinirvana, then 1616 would be 1072 CE, which is still centuries after the authorship of the Manimekalai (if we assume that it was authored in the 6th century CE).

Also interesting is this excerpt from the book by Monius (on pages 95 - 96):

  In fact, if one looks beyond, or more appropriately before, the Pali
  literature that obviously concerns itself with the future Buddha,
  scattered bits of evidence can be found to suggest that the
  Manimekalai was not alone in the sixth century in imagining the
  arrival of a living Buddha within centuries rather than billions of
  years. In the various renditions of the life of Buddhaghosa, for
  example, it is reported that the monks of the Mahavihara greeted the
  composition of the Visuddhimagga by crying out to its author, "Without
  doubt he is Metteyya!" (nissamsayam sa metteyo). Although such a
  statement might easily be interpreted, on the one hand, as hyperbolic
  praise, likening only rhetorically the genius of Buddhaghosa to
  the wisdom of the future Buddha, on the other hand, such an
  identification might well depend on the expectation, like that of the
  ascetics confused by the miraculous events accompanying Aputtiran's
  rebirth in the Manimekalai (xv.23-35), that Metteyya's arrival on earth
  can happen at any moment. Such scattered phrases are certainly
  difficult to evaluate. Much more interesting and potentially useful
  for the consideration of the Manimekalai's vision of the future, given
  the central place of the wondrous almsbowl, Amutacurapi, in the text,
  is a story told by the fifth-century Chinese pilgrim to India and Sri
  Lanka, Faxian (Fa-hsien), concerning the begging bowl of the Buddha
  and the coming of Metteyya/Maitreya to earth.

You can read on in the same section, the story of Faxian, and how he obtained the story of the Buddha's almsbowl from an Indian monk.

Monius writes further on pages 96 - 97:

  Faxian's story of the Buddha's almsbowl and its intimate connection to
  the  coming of Maitreya provides a potentially enlightening parallel
  to the narrative of the bowl and the coming of the Buddha found in the
  Manimekalai. Such a parallel, especially given the relative proximity
  to the time and place of the Manimekalai's composition, of Faxian and
  the Indian monk who tells the story at the Sri Lankan Mahavihara, may
  help to illumine the Tamil text's vision of the future and the
  community to form around the coming Buddha.

Based on this, I would guess that the Manimekalai is a literary work of fiction, based on Faxian's story that came not long before the authorship of the Manimekalai. While it is unknown how Manimekalai's author derived the number "1616", we can speculate that he intended his readers to look forward to the coming of the future Buddha within a few centuries, perhaps to motivate the Tamil-speaking Buddhist community at the time, and also to kindle the interest of the non-Buddhist Tamil-speaking people, in Buddhism.


How to talk to a friend about "lack of control" in what happens to her son?

I suppose it largely depends on how close you are to her, or how seriously she would take and act on any advice.

These types of neurotic/anxious behaviors aren't something that are going to disappear by themselves overnight, or by you citing some scriptural passage to her that makes her see the light (most likely, there are cases where people do become enlightened in the scriptures from hearing verse, but in practice this is the exception not the rule).

The most practical way would be for you to, depending on the type of friendship you have, introduce the idea of meditation to her. Spin it in such a way that she is able to see that it doesn't have to in any way be connected with a "religion" or sectarian ideology.

I don't know what your experience with meditation is, but if you have some then you have even more authority it explaining to her that meditating will allow her to see experientially that things are largely uncontrollable, and that all she is doing is creating her own misery in worrying about these uncontrollable things.

Perhaps even convince her to go to a retreat with you, if at all possible :)

Ultimately, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. If she isn't ready to hear this, all you'll be doing is blowing hot air into the room. The best way to show others the benefit of meditation is to live your life as an example of the benefits of it.


If Buddha had unconditional love, why did he "kill" some of his monks?

The "killing" reference would be this one probably -- Kesi Sutta (AN 4.111)

Perhaps that's analogous to a doctor's not giving medicine to a patient who won't benefit from it.

And perhaps the Buddha had the welfare of others -- the whole Sangha -- to consider too.

Another instance is Channa in DN 16.

And there are a few other examples on pages 89-90 of Piya Tan's analysis of the Kesi Sutta:

  The untamable

  Those who cannot be tamed. While most of the suttas record how the Buddha’s
  teachings convert many and inspire others, there is a handful of important discourses where,
  apparently, the protagonists lack the capacity for spiritual change. Interestingly, in all such cases, the
  Buddha does indeed teach them the Dharma. However, for some reason, the protagonists remain
  unmoved despite being admonished by the Buddha himself.

  Such discourses are very few, that is, where the protagonists (one may even call them “antagonists”) are “dead” to the Dharma-Vinaya.
  The best known of these are:

  the Mahā Taṇhā,saṅkhaya Sutta (M 38), where the monk Sāti holds on to the wrong view that our
  consciousness passes on unchanged in rebirth;34
  the Alagaddûpama Sutta (M 22), where the monk Ariṭṭha wrongly views that sensual pleasures
  (including sex) are not “stumbling blocks” to the celibate holy life;35
  the Udumbarikā Sīha,nāda Sutta (D 25), where, despite listening and accepting a long inspiring
  discourse from the Buddha, the wanderer Nigrodha and his followers still neither renounce nor go for
  refuge.

  The most notorious case of one who is “dead” to the Dharma-Vinaya is clearly the monk
  Deva,datta. Despite being the Buddha’s cousin and listening to numerous Dharma teachings, he still
  shows antagonism against the Buddha, desiring to take over the leadership of the monastic sangha from
  the aging Buddha. The Devadatta narrative where he is depicted as the Buddha’s antagonist is, however,
  not without problems, and should be carefully studied to understand its significance.

  The most famous case of a person who seems to be intractable is the elder Channa, the erstwhile charioteer of the Bodhisattva himself.38 On account of Channa’s closeness to the Bodhisattva and
  then the Buddha, he became arrogant, thinking “Our Buddha, our Dharma,” besides his inherited conceit
  of being a kshatriya (khattiya,māna). Channa’s “butler” narcissism and arrogance were, in the end, selfdefeating. He failed in his tasks as a monk even while the Buddha lived. While dwelling in Kosambī, he was
  unwilling to acknowledge an offence he committed that the Buddha decreed a formal act of suspension
  (ukkhepaniya,kamma), forbidding him commensality (eating together) and dwelling with the monks.

  He continued to commit other offences, especially disrespecting and reviling senior monks. One of
  the Buddha’s last acts was to instruct Ānanda to impose the “supreme penalty” (brahma,daṇḍa), that is, a
  total boycott of Channa by the sangha.41 After the Buddha’s death, Ānanda executed the order.

  The closing of Culla,vagga 11 of the Vinaya records how when Ānanda conveys the supreme penalty to
  Channa at Ghosit’ārāma, in Kosamb, he faints at the thought of being boycotted by the order. Almost
  immediately Channa diligently works to correct himself—as movingly reported in the (Lakkhaṇa) Channa
  Sutta (S 22.90; V 2:292).

  The (Lakkhaṇa) Channa Sutta (S 22.90) records in an almost humorous tone, how he
  attempts to seek Dharma instruction from other monks. Apparently, no monk actually boycotts him,
  since they try to answer his questions, albeit careful to not offend him. Finally, Ānanda teaches him the
  Kaccāna,gotta Sutta (S 12.15) on how dependent arising counters the two extreme views of eternalism
  and annihilationism, and how self-view is replaced by the realization that it is only dukkha that arises and
  ceases—and he breaks through to the Dharma. The supreme penalty is automatically lifted at the
  moment of Channa’s final attainment.

  This is perhaps the only account we have of any monastic close to the Buddha who is apparently
  declared “dead” to the sangha. However, by his own efforts, Channa returns alive and well to be with the
  sangha, in due course, as an arhat.

The Kesi sutta is about tameable and untameable. I think you've quoted "little dust in their eyes" yourself. Maybe it's not appropriate to question how the Buddha handles the supposedly "untameable".

Whether the Buddha behaves morally and maintains a mind of good-will is presumably unconditional, unaffected by the behaviour or temporary misbehaviour of others.

You might read Positive Response -- How to Meet Evil With Good for example if you can.

It suggests that "tit for tat" is a common strategy in the world but, it says, never works in the realm of spirituality. It references the (famous) Parable of the Saw, for example.

One other thing I'd note about the Buddha is his ability to enter the minds of others and to know when they are ready or not ready -- I think you see that in suttas like AN 8.30.

It might be a mistake for you to imagine that you can do the same -- to enter the minds of others.

It might also be a mistake to assume that they can behave unconditionally -- and unaffected by real or imaginary misbehaviour of yours, by their own projections, etc.

But by definition it means to try to behave well and with good will even if someone else doesn't.


What is the Difference between Desire and Compulsion?

In Buddhism, there are wholesome/skillful & unwholesome/unskillful desires.
Unwholesome desires are called 'craving' or 'tanha', which are the 'compulsion' referred to.

Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this craving which leads to new becoming, accompanied by
delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for
sensual pleasures, craving to be, craving not-to-be.
SN 56.11

'Craving' or 'compulsion' (namely the 'lust', 'resistance' & 'ignorance' quoted below) is shown by a lack of self-control, enslavement ('fettered') & the final result of suffering when not getting or losing the object of compulsion.

It is similar with an untaught worldling: when touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. So he experiences two kinds of feeling: a bodily and a mental feeling.
Having been touched by that painful feeling, he resists (and resents) it. Then in him who so resists (and resents) that painful
feeling, an underlying tendency of resistance against that painful
feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful
feeling he then proceeds to enjoy sensual happiness. And why does he
do so? An untaught worldling, O monks, does not know of any other
escape from painful feelings except the enjoyment of sensual
happiness. Then in him who enjoys sensual happiness, an underlying
tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind).
He does not know, according to facts, the arising and ending of these
feelings, nor the gratification, the danger and the escape, connected
with these feelings. In him who lacks that knowledge, an underlying
tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his
mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a
neutral feeling, he feels it as one fettered by it. Such a one, O
monks, is called an untaught worldling who is fettered by birth, by
old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He
is fettered by suffering, this I declare.
SN 36.6


There's a line in the Ariyapariyesana Sutta which I think implies he "did normal things" as well as meditating:
Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search

"In search of what might be skillful, seeking the unexcelled state of
sublime peace, I wandered by stages in the Magadhan country and came
to the military town of Uruvela. There I saw some delightful
countryside, with an inspiring forest grove, a clear-flowing river
with fine, delightful banks, and villages for alms-going on all sides.
The thought occurred to me: 'How delightful is this countryside, with
its inspiring forest grove, clear-flowing river with fine, delightful
banks, and villages for alms-going on all sides. This is just right
for the exertion of a clansman intent on exertion.' So I sat down
right there, thinking, 'This is just right for exertion.'
"Then, monks, being subject myself to birth, seeing the drawbacks of
birth, seeking the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I
reached the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Being
subject myself to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement,
seeing the drawbacks of aging... illness... death... sorrow...
defilement, seeking the aging-less, illness-less, deathless,
sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I reached the
aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from
the yoke: Unbinding. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my
release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'

So, doesn't that imply meditation, but also alms-going etc.?
The Buddha was human and was by that time practicing the Middle Way: therefore, I think, no asceticism.

But there are other suttas which imply otherwise, for example:
Bodhi Sutta: Awakening

I have heard that on one occasion, the Blessed One was staying at Uruvelā on the bank of the Nerañjarā River at the root of the Bodhi tree — the tree of awakening — newly awakened. And on that occasion he sat at the root of the Bodhi tree for seven days in one session, sensitive to the bliss of release. Then, with the passing of seven days etc.

Bhikkhu Bodhi narrates it as follows:
The Buddha and His Dhamma

Now he was alone, and complete solitude allowed him to pursue his quest undisturbed. One day, when his physical strength had returned, he approached a lovely spot in Uruvela by the bank of the Nerañjara River. Here he prepared a seat of straw beneath an asvattha tree (later called the Bodhi Tree) and sat down cross-legged, making a firm resolution that he would never rise up from that seat until he had won his goal. As night descended he entered into deeper and deeper stages of meditation until his mind was perfectly calm and composed. Then, the records tell us, in the first watch of the night he directed his concentrated mind to the recollection of his previous lives. Gradually there unfolded before his inner vision his experiences in many past births, even during many cosmic aeons; in the middle watch of the night he developed the "divine eye" by which he could see beings passing away and taking rebirth in accordance with their karma, their deeds; and in the last watch of the night he penetrated the deepest truths of existence, the most basic laws of reality, and thereby removed from his mind the subtlest veils of ignorance. When dawn broke, the figure sitting beneath the tree was no longer a Bodhisatta, a seeker of enlightenment, but a Buddha, a Perfectly Enlightened One, one who had attained the Deathless in this very life itself.
For several weeks the newly awakened Buddha remained in the vicinity of the Bodhi Tree contemplating from different angles the Dhamma, the truth he had discovered. Then he came to a new crossroad in his spiritual career: Was he to teach, to try to share his realization with others, or should he instead remain quietly in the forest, enjoying the bliss of liberation alone?

In the above, the first paragraph describes meditation in which the Buddha resolved not to move at all, and reached enlightenment after one night. After he is enlightened, the next paragraph describes him remaining "in the vicinity of" (which means "near") the Bodhi Tree for several weeks.


How would I know if I was suffering from spiritual materialism?

You absolutely can recognize it in yourself. Not only can, you definitely should put effort in doing so -- it makes a huge difference in one's practice (from my own experience being a student).

Spiritual Materialism, (or we could call it Spiritual Accumulation or Spiritual Aggrandizement or Spiritual Indulging) is a tendency of samsaric mind to use spirituality (in its general sense, as an antonym of worldliness) as food for one's ego. Until the illusion of ego disintegrates, that is all the way until Enlightenment, ego uses all kinds of tricks to sustain itself, up to and including Buddhism.

Here are some of telltaling signs you are suffering from S.M. (you don't need to have them all, one is enough):

You surround yourself with Buddhist paraphernalia (tangkas, statues, prayer wheels, bumper stickers, incense, mantra CDs, tattoos, themed handbags) or you despise people who surround themselves with paraphernalia, for being too superficial;
You enjoy Buddhist workshops and lectures as socializing events, or when others enjoy Buddhist workshops and lectures as socializing events, you stay on sidelines, secretly despising everyone for not being serious about Dharma;
You are too interested in levels of realization and how yourself measure up; or you never think about levels of realization, "because advanced practitioners are above that kind of stuff".
You are eager to study obscure Buddhist philosophy and feel that understanding technicalities of Dharma makes you a better practitioner; Or you despise people who indulge in Buddhist philosophical speculation and instead take pride in being a Zen or Tantra student.
You are snappy and irritated with worldly people with their childish interests; Or you are being a super-nice or super-humble selfless holy Bodhisattva, while secretly enjoying the glow of your halo;


Does enlightenment mean achieving purity?

There are four stages of enlightenment (as described in the Anapanasati Sutta), Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami and Arahant; stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner and Arahant; respectively.

Stream enterer: A stream-enterer reaches arahantship within seven rebirths upon opening the eye of the Dharma.

...with the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, are stream-winners, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening...

Once-returner: Both the stream-enterer and the once-returner have abandoned the first three fetters. The stream-enterer and once-returner are distinguished by the fact that the once-returner has weakened lust, hate, and delusion to a greater degree.

...with the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, and with the attenuation of passion, aversion, & delusion, are once-returners, who — on returning only once more to this world — will make an ending to stress...

Non-returner: The non-returner, having overcome sensuality, does not return to the human world, or any unfortunate world lower than that, after death.

...with the wasting away of the five lower fetters, are due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, destined never again to return from that world...

Arahant: The fourth stage is that of Arahant, a fully awakened person. He has abandoned all ten fetters and, upon death will never be reborn in any plane or world, having wholly escaped saṃsāra.

...who are arahants, whose mental effluents are ended, who have reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, laid to waste the fetter of becoming, and who are released through right gnosis...

Individuals may experience nirvāna as an object of mental consciousness. Certain contemplations with nibbana as an object of samādhi lead to the level of non-returning. At that point of contemplation if the individual realizes that even that state is constructed and therefore impermanent, the fetters are destroyed, arahantship is attained, and nibbāna is realized.
With regard to nirvana, a distinction is made between a person's experience of nirvana during their life and after their death. These two aspects of nirvana are described as:

Nirvana during life (nirvana with remainder) - indicating the experience of someone who has experienced nirvana in their lifetime but still remains in their physical body.

Nirvana after death (nirvana without remainder) - indicating the experience of nirvana for someone after their death.


How does Buddhism deal with psychopaths & serial killer

By letting law enforcement do their thing?

Regret is not needed for the consequences of your actions to happen.


In my opinion, this is basically practicing four Jhana by gradual training. For instance, a person who likes killing stops his habits gradually. Say stop killing humans, then animal then fish then insects, etc. Another example is substituting angry thoughts with lovingkindness thoughts.
==============
iv “If, while he is trying to forget those thoughts and is not giving attention to them, there still arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with hate, and with delusion, then he should give attention to stilling the thought-formation of those thoughts. When he gives attention to stilling the thought-formation of those thoughts, then any evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with hate, and with delusion are abandoned in him and subside. With the abandoning of them his mind becomes steadied internally, quieted, brought to singleness, and concentrated. Just as a man walking fast might consider: ‘Why am I walking fast? What if I walk slowly?’ and he would walk slowly; then he might consider: ‘Why am I walking slowly? What if I stand?’ and he would stand; then he might consider: ‘Why am I standing? What if I sit?’ and he would sit; then he might consider: ‘Why am I sitting? What if I lie down?’ and he would lie down. By doing so he would substitute for each grosser posture one that was subtler. So too…when a bhikkhu gives attention to stilling the thought-formation of those thoughts…his mind becomes steadied internally, quieted, brought to singleness, and concentrated.
https://suttacentral.net/mn20/en/bodhi


In the last couple of months i have experienced a chronic headache in my forehead and after checking with doctors etc nothing could be found. I then kind of had the intuition it could be related to my meditation practice. Its more the 2 years I meditate daily for 20/30 mins or more.

Are you meditating while "looking" at your nostrils with eyes closed?

If so, that creates tension in the eye muscles, namely the medial rectus muscle and the inferior/obliquee rectus muscle. The function of the medial rectus muscle is to turn the eye towards the midline and nose, while the inferior/obliquee muscles are responsible for vertical movement, in this case depression of the eye, i.e. looking downwards.

This is a common problem for many meditators who use the area around the upper lip and/or nostrils (anapana region) as a meditation object. They tend to look at that spot with their eyes closed, hence the build up of muscle tension.

Some meditators falsely think that doing something with their physical eyes will actually produce the nimitta. Nothing in the practice is the result of doing anything with the physical eyes.

  ... I have now taken a break from my daily practice and the headache got much better and nearly disappeared ...

This further supports the hypothesis that the pain is caused by muscle tension in the eye muscles.

The solution to the problem is to first and foremost stop looking at your nostrils. That is very difficult in the beginning but after a while it will become easier. Start by doing short meditation sessions such as a couple of minutes and then progress to 5, 10 minutes and so forth.

Before meditation try to relax your eyes. This can be done in several ways:

Consciously place attention on your eyes/eye sockets and try to relax them. Be aware of how your eyes move during meditation and if they begin to turn towards the nostrils or upper lip, then again try to relax them. When meditating your eyes should not do anything at all. They should just be relaxed and not moving.
Do these stretching exercises for the eyes. Follow the instructions given. These exercises should be done 3 times a day. They work both as a preventive measure and treatment for headaches caused by tension in the eye muscles.

Hope this helps.

By the way, I'm a meditator and a licensed physiotherapist.


What does "developed in discernment" mean?

The word translated "developed in discernment" is bhāvitapañño, i.e. increased or developed pañña.

The dictionary entry for pañña says,

  of wisdom, endowed with knowledge or insight, possessed of the highest cognition

The dictionary definition lists a lot of places where it's used in various compounds, (possibly describing various types of wisdom or insight) -- including the bhāvita compound, which is used in for example SN 35.127 (in summary, immune to sexual desire, and guarding the senses) and AN 10.24 (in summary, immune to various unwholesome mental factors).

I'd say these describe the effect of wisdom rather than describing the object of wisdom -- but, that's not surprising because what it's describing is "developed wisdom" i.e. the effect of having perfected wisdom.

I guess you'd have to look at other places pañña is used by itself (to find a description of pañña itself), and/or other pañña compounds (for descriptions of the various types of pañña).1

Wikipedia says it means "insight into the three characteristics": quoting Gombrich and others.

It's one of the several perfections (i.e. virtues which can be "perfected" or completed).

1 Not easy to summarise:

A search of SuttaCentral returns 500 results -- many from the Abhidamma and so on.
AN 8.2 describes 8 different types of discernment (which may confirm my theory that there are many different types or aspects of wisdom, that's it's not a term with a narrow meaning)
Pañña is an entire branch of the Threefold Training, so I expect it includes right view and right intention


Rupa is also known as the 1st aggregate - the aggregate of material form. Here are some notes on it by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi:

  "...This includes all the material factors of existence, every type of material phenomena. The most important of these is the body, the physical organism through which one experiences the world. The Buddha analyses the aggregate of material form into two basic substances..."

There is also an audio dhamma talk by him on "The Five Aggregates".

Here is a quote from the book "What Buddhists Believe" by Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda, p. 111:

  Mind and Matter (Nama-Rupa)

  ‘What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind.’

  ACCORDING to Buddhism, life is a combination of mind (nama) and matter (rupa). Mind consists of the combination of sensations, perceptions, volitional activities and consciousness. Matter consists of the combination of the four elements of solidity, fluidity, motion and heat.
  Life is the co-existence of mind and matter. Decay is the lack of co-ordination of mind and matter. Death is the separation of mind and matter. Rebirth is the recombination of mind and matter. After the passing away of the physical body (matter), the mental forces (mind) recombine and assume a new combination in a different material form and condition another existence.

  The relation of mind to matter is like the relation of a battery to an engine of a motor car. The battery helps to start the engine. The engine helps to charge the battery. The combination helps to run the motor car. In the same manner, matter helps the mind to function and the mind helps to set matter in motion.

  Buddhism teaches that life is not the property of matter alone, and that the life-process continues or flows as a result of cause and effect. The mental and material elements that compose sentient beings from amoeba to elephant and also to man, existed previously in other forms.

  Although some people hold the view that life originates in matter alone, the greatest scientists have accepted that mind precedes matter in order for life to originate. In Buddhism, this concept is called ‘relinking consciousness’.
  Each of us, in the ultimate sense, is mind and matter, a compound of mental and material phenomena, and nothing more. Apart from these realities that go to form the nama-rupa compound, there is no self, or soul. The mind part of the compound is what experiences an object. The matter part does not experience anything. When the body is injured, it is not the body that feels the pain, but the mental side. When we are hungry it is not the stomach that feels the hunger but the mind. However, mind cannot eat the food to ease the hunger. The mind and its factors, make the body digest the food. Thus neither the nama nor the rupa has any efficient power of its own. One is dependent on the other; one supports the other. Both mind and matter arise because of conditions and perish immediately, and this is happening every moment of our lives. By studying and experiencing these realities we will get insight into: (1) what we truly are; (2) what we find around us; (3) how and why we react to what is within and around us; and (4) what we should aspire to reach as a spiritual goal.

  To gain insight into the nature of the psycho-physical life is to realise that life is an illusion, a mirage or a bubble, a mere process of becoming and dissolving, or arising and passing away. Whatever exists, arises from causes and conditions. When the causes and conditions cease to be, the thing will cease to exist.


Are the results of positive Kamma good from a Buddhist's perspective or good from a "Samsaric's" perspective?

Are the results of good Kamma something dangerous and misleading?

Positive karma, conditioned by ignorance is dangerous and misleading because it helps to extend the samsara . Good and bad karma appear in dependant origination in two places as Formations (Saṅkhāra) and Being (Bhava).

Formations are divided into meritorious (Puññābhisaṅkhāro), demeritorious (apuññābhisaṅkhāro), and imperturbable (āneñjābhisaṅkhāro) deeds or volitional actions of body, speech, and mind which is a cause for Consciousness.

  Tattha katame avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā? Puññābhisaṅkhāro,
  apuññābhisaṅkhāro, āneñjābhisaṅkhāro, kāyasaṅkhāro, vacīsaṅkhāro,
  cittasaṅkhāro

  http://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/abh02m.mul5.xml

Being (Bhava), which conditioned by clinging, can be further divided as kammabhava and upapattibhava. Kammabhava is again meritorious, demeritorious, and imperturbable (Jhana) things we do. Here, Kammabhava is a cause for Upapattibhava (different realms) and Birth.

  Tattha katamo upādānapaccayā bhavo? Bhavo duvidhena – atthi
  kammabhavo, atthi upapattibhavo. Tattha katamo kammabhavo?
  Puññābhisaṅkhāro, apuññābhisaṅkhāro, āneñjābhisaṅkhāro – ayaṃ vuccati
  ‘‘kammabhavo’’. Sabbampi bhavagāmikammaṃ kammabhavo

  http://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/abh02m.mul5.xml

From dependant origination, it is evident that the meritorious acts or good karma (conditioned by ignorance and clinging) and there results play vital roles in turning the wheel of life and extending our samsara.

Any discourse mentioned it and how to deal with it?

In MN 9 Sariputta thera mentions about Formations and how to deal with it,

  "When, friends, a noble disciple understands formations, the origin of formations, the cessation of formations, and the way leading
  to the cessation of formations, in that way he is one of right view...
  and has arrived at this true Dhamma.
  "And what are formations, what is the origin of formations, what is the cessation of formations, what is the way leading to the
  cessation of formations? There are these three kinds of formations:
  the bodily formation, the verbal formation, the mental formation. With
  the arising of ignorance there is the arising of formations. With the
  cessation of ignorance there is the cessation of formations. The way
  leading to the cessation of formations is just this Noble Eightfold
  Path; that is, right view... right concentration.
  "When a noble disciple has thus understood formations, the origin of formations, the cessation of formations, and the way leading to the
  cessation of formations... he here and now makes an end of suffering.
  In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view... and has
  arrived at this true Dhamma."

  MN 9

about Being and how to deal with it,

  "When, friends, a noble disciple understands being, the origin of being, the cessation of being, and the way leading to the cessation of
  being, in that way he is one of right view... and has arrived at this
  true Dhamma.
  "And what is being, what is the origin of being, what is the cessation of being, what is the way leading to the cessation of being?
  There are these three kinds of being: sense-sphere being,
  fine-material being and immaterial being. With the arising of clinging
  there is the arising of being. With the cessation of clinging there is
  the cessation of being. The way leading to the cessation of being is
  just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right
  concentration.
  "When a noble disciple has thus understood being, the origin of being, the cessation of being, and the way leading to the cessation of
  being... he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a
  noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true
  Dhamma."

  MN 9

Because of this, I believe it is better to be born in a place where you can hear the Dhamma, rather than extending the samsara by doing positive or negative kamma.


Dignity in Buddhism is not built-in, it is to be earned. A realized person is respected because they deserve to be respected. If someone can control one's emotions, does not fall victim to one's weaknesses, has deep vision and wise judgement, flexible mind, and clear moral - then one can be respected. The word "arahant" ("arhat") is a Buddhist term for a realized person - it means "worthy" (of respect). The word "arya" is another such term which means "noble" or "civilized" in the highest sense.

Then there is compassion. This is when someone does not deserve to be respected, but nevertheless we don't disrespect them either, out of compassion. Compassion reminds us that at fundamental level we are products of our environment, our experience, and our choices - so no one is fundamentally better than another because they "are actually" better. They could be better off due to luck or circumstances or their own good karma or someone else's compassion etc. So compassion tells us to not disrespect those whom we can't respect.

And then of course on the personal level, for one's own perspective on oneself, the notion of Buddha-Nature reminds us that we have the same right to be here as the stars and the trees, that at the most fundamental level we are the heirs to Buddha-Dharma, and that we are not less worthy of Enlightenment than the closest students of Buddha, if we make the effort to take it.

So these are the three sides of Dignity in Buddhism. Dignity of the unlucky - thanks to compassion, Dignity of the aspirant to Enlightenment - thanks to the Buddha nature, and the fully deserved Dignity of the winner.


Buddhism explains a person's self-identity is generally based on the external things the mind attaches to (MN 44). Therefore, it is expected or normal a widow may struggle with their sense of self if their partner passes away. Buddhism calls this 'aging-&-death', i.e., when a loved one dies, something within the living partner also 'dies' (mentally).

Also, while it may sound pessimistic, Buddhism tells us all conditioned things are impermanent and ‘I must be parted and separated from everyone and everything dear and agreeable to me.’ (AN 5.57)

Buddhism also says: "Separation from what is loved/pleasing is suffering" (SN 56.11).

However, Buddhism does not instruct us to completely forget loved ones. DN 31 says: "I shall offer alms in honor of my departed relatives."

The starting point of Buddhism is Refuge in the Three Jewels, which are the Buddha, the Dhamma (Teachings) & the Sangha (Noble Community).

Since you sound aggrieved, finding a trustworthy Buddhist group may help offer some support and noble friendships.


How is Uposatha practiced in non Buddhist countries?

Uposatha day is the day when the vinaya is recited. The vinaya is of course the list of all the rules that monastics follow.

In Asia, there are well defined community practices. For example, people go to the local temple that day, or in Mahayana Buddhism, you might fast (i.e. eat vegetarian) that day, or make a stronger effort to follow the five precepts or maybe follow all 8 precepts.

Out here in the west, not a lot of community practices visible to me. I personally try to make up for it by re-reading my favorite list of rules, the "Brahma Net Sutra" on Uposatha days, which is the same thing that real life east Asian Buddhist monks do.

I suppose a lay follower who wants to keep to the spirit of the holiday, but didn't want to read or recite a particular moral code, might do a sort of "Weekly Review" like you see in system of personal productivity, except with a Buddhist theme, e.g. http://lifehacker.com/5908816/the-weekly-review-how-one-hour-can-save-you-a-weeks-worth-of-hassle-and-headache


Doubt in being mindful when two tasks are going to happen?

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

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


How different is "joy of ownership" in the Dīgha,jānu Sutta from clinging onto one's wealth?

How different is “joy of ownership” in the Dīgha,jānu Sutta from clinging onto one's wealth?

Actually the answer's already provided in the sutta itself. If one clings to one's wealth, s/he won't be able to have a balanced living, the necessary component to the joy of ownership:

"And what is balanced living? Here, a clansman knows his income and expenditures and leads a balanced life, neither too extravagant nor too frugal, [aware]: ‘In this way my income will exceed my expenditures rather than the reverse.’ Just as an appraiser or his apprentice, holding up a scale, knows: ‘By so much it has dipped down, by so much it has gone up,’ so a clansman knows his income and expenditures and leads a balanced life, neither too extravagant nor too frugal, [aware]: ‘In this way my income will exceed my expenditures [283] rather than the reverse.’
“If this clansman has a small income but lives luxuriously, others would say of him: ‘This clansman eats his wealth just like an eater of figs.’1751 But if he has a large income but lives sparingly, others would say of him: ‘This clansman may even starve himself.’1752 But it is called balanced living when a clansman knows his income and expenditures and leads a balanced life, neither too extravagant nor too frugal, [aware]: ‘In this way my income will exceed my expenditures rather than the reverse. ~~ AN 8.54 ~~


What can one do with knowings that occur from strong intuition?

Knowing is not dependent upon the external senses, otherwise, how would you know that you have dropped the senses in 2nd Jhana? How would you know the 3rd and 4th Jhanas? Now to answer your question about what is mind. Mind is created or produced by that-which-flows. That-which-flows is the activity of the unborn. Do not think that the unborn is static. It is not, but mind cannot access it. Knowing of the unborn comes by that-which-flows. A glimpse of that-which-flows is the attainment of Sotopanna. Realizing that-which-flows is the fulfillment of Sotopanna (obtaining the fruits thereof). This realization is often called self-realization (not of the ego self). Self-realization is beyond mind. It is the “turning in consciousness” spoken of in the suttas. Consciousness is changed when this realization happens. The first three fetters are dropped and you are never the same.


Both practices are valid. To be precise: you subjectively feel that meditation on the public transport to be sharp, more concentrated, and efficient, but you suspect that this subjective reaction is questionable.

Let's draw a comparison another way. Suppose you compare 2 sits on the public transport to one another. Or, two sits at an Advanced Meditators retreat to one another. We'll say we compare 2 sits which are in identical settings, of equal duration; sit(1) you diligently follow the instructions but the experience is uncomfortable, bland, and you don't see any benefits that day. Sit(2) has pleasure which is spiritual in nature, or clears out the mind, or has only positive effects all day long. Yet both were identical practices?

It is possible that the bland meditation without noticeable benefit may be just as, or more valuable, to your practice, then the pleasurable one. That's because it's a process within a system, and you can't see all the benefits. Of course we WANT the later experience, but it does not mean it is actually more productive.

It could be that your sitting at home in quiet and seclusion is dealing more deeply in some areas you might prefer not to go in? Or could it be the public transport is easier because you are more distracted?

In my own experience, I really treasure the less pleasurable sits because they are turbulent due to the things bothering me, and I feel that stuff needs to be front and center. It might be that your sits at home are of more actual benefit, but it doesn't look that way now.


You should be able to find it in the Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon. Unfortunately I don't have a Sanskrit IME to give you the direct link to the text, but doing a search should bring it up.


Why do Bhikkhunis have so many extra Vinaya rules?

Thanissaro Bhikkhu, in Access to Insight, says,

  Thus the Bhikkhunī Pāṭimokkha contains 85 rules for which there are no
  direct correspondences in the rules for the bhikkhus. Some writers
  have interpreted these added rules as sign of an attempt to oppress
  the bhikkhunīs unfairly, but it should be noted that:

  more than one third of these extra rules were formulated to protect bhikkhunīs from being the direct recipients of the abusive or careless
  behavior of other bhikkhunīs;
  two of the extra rules (Pācittiyas 6 and 44) prevent bhikkhunīs from putting themselves in a position of servitude to bhikkhus or lay
  people;
  according to the rules' origin stories, all but three of the extra rules (Pācittiyas 59, 94, and 95) were formulated only after
  bhikkhunīs complained to the bhikkhus about an errant bhikkhunī's
  behavior.

  Tellingly, these last three exceptions were formulated after
  complaints initiated by the bhikkhus, and they touch directly on the
  formal subordination of the Bhikkhunī Community to the Bhikkhu
  Community. However, they are counterbalanced by two rules exclusive to
  the Bhikkhu Pāṭimokkha — NP 4 & 17 — that were formulated at the
  request of bhikkhunīs to prevent bhikkhus from abusing their position
  in the hierarchy in a way that would interfere with the bhikkhunīs'
  practice of the Dhamma. For a more detailed discussion of the checks
  and balances in the relationships between the two Communities, see The
  Buddhist Monastic Code, volume II, chapter 23.

For what it's worth there is a further set of opinions, published here: Extra rules. This too says that the rules "primarily dealt with the protection of the nuns".


Another more precise and concise translation of the Diamond Sutra renders it differently, Chapter 29:

  “Subhuti, if someone said the thus-come comes, goes, sits, or reclines, this person doesn’t understand the meaning of what I taught. Why is that? What thus-come is, that is from nowhere comes nor anywhere goes, hence called the thus-come.

I think you have quite good intuition to come to conclude that ...From this I deduced that form provides dimension, distance and time. Without form the seagull cannot move from one position to another and...

This chapter, on the meaning of Tathagata, is touching on the Tathagatagarbha. Tathagata, generally renders as thus-come. What is Tathagatagarbha? It is formless, but from it form arises; it is emptiness, but it contains everything - the seeds. Hence is called the Tathagatagarbha (如來藏), the womb of the treasure of suchness.

When you perceive form, by it defines space/time, that is activity of the mind, which is a "negation" from the suchness. The form doesn't exist independently from your mind. In fact it is your mind limited by the 5 senses, the intellect (6th consciousness), the subjectivity (7th consciousness/ mānas-vijñāna), hence it perceives the world as it created - the forms. But it is hindered by it's own creation - the activities it engaged. When you can remove from all these activities, you are abiding in the suchness. The Buddha is abiding in the suchness therefore called the Tathagata - he doesn't engage in any activity. There are many names referring to the same ultimate reality in different contexts for different significance: Alaya, Dharmakaya, Citta (mind), the 8th consciousness... etc.

It's too board to completely elaborate, especially a lot of Sutras to help understanding it are not available in English. But the above is the condensed favour hopefully you could enjoy :)

Just as a note, your linked English version of the Diamond Sutra is awfully translated, from the perspective of someone who is able to read the Chinese Classical Diamond Sutra. That appears the same as Red Pine's version but the site belonged to one called Alex Johnson. I wonder if the Alex Johnson has infringed someone's copyright. One the other hand, I hate to say this since Red Pine appeared genuinely liking oriental cultures, I read somewhere someone said Red Pine's translation can't be taken serious. He mixed the Tibetan text with the Chinese compiled as one. Not sure which 2nd language he is fluent in, Tibetan or Chinese?

Translation of Sutra is a very very serious matter, if it is translated wrongly, it causes severe defilement to oneself, for it misleads the Dharma seekers - this is the attitude all ancient Dharma masters taken.