If all things are impermanent, then how can Buddhism make absolute assertions?

You friend has indulged into what is called the logical fallacy of false equivalence.

Buddhism teaches that all things are impermanent which means that there is no static nature to the things or static nature of the basic elements that everything is made up of.

So it means that the 5 aggregates are in a state of constant flux it's changing every moment, and not that it is ceasing to exist.

Now,

Buddhism can make an assertion that there are 5 aggregates because the assertion is 'about' the 5 aggregates. Furthermore, it can tell that there are four noble truths because 'four noble truths is the nature of the process, not the process itself'.

It's something like saying, 'if uncertainity principle is right we should be uncretain about the uncertainty principle'. It is a logically fallacious statement.

So, you should have replied to your friend saying,

  If the second law of thermodynamics is true, how would you like your Beer?

A story you might like;

  Two monks were watching a flag flapping in the wind. One said to the
  other,

  “The flag is moving.” The other replied, “The wind is moving.”

  The Zen master overheard this. He said, “Not the flag, not the wind;
  the mind is moving.”

  From there comes KungFu Panda he says, "most probably, it's your mouth
  that is moving."

Also, a story for any such further conversation you might have, from a discourse on Dhammapada the way of the Buddha.

  There were two temples in Japan, both enemies to each other, as
  temples have always been down the ages. The priests were so
  antagonistic that they had stopped even looking at each other. If they
  came across each other on the road, they would not look at each other.
  If they came across each other on the road they stopped talking; for
  centuries those two temples and their priests had not talked.

  But both the priests had two small boys - to serve them, just for
  running errands. Both the priests were afraid that boys, after all,
  will be boys, and they might start becoming friends to each other.

  The one priest said to his boy, "Remember, the other temple is our
  enemy. Never talk to the boy of the other temple! They are dangerous
  people - avoid them as one avoids a disease, as one avoids the plague.
  Avoid them!" The boy was always interested, because he used to get
  tired of listening to great sermons - he could not understand them.

  Strange scriptures were read, he could not understand the language.
  Great, ultimate problems were discussed. There was nobody to play
  with, nobody even to talk with.

  And when he was told, "Don't talk to the boy of the other temple,"
  great temptation arose in him. That's how temptation arises.

  That day he could not avoid talking to the other boy. When he saw him
  on the road he asked him, "Where are you going?"

  The other boy was a little philosophical; listening to great
  philosophy he had become philosophical. He said, "Going? There is
  nobody who comes and goes! It is happening - wherever the wind takes
  me...." He had heard the master say many times that that's how a
  buddha lives, like a dead leaf: wherever the wind takes it, it goes.
  So the boy said, "I am not! There is no doer. So how can I go? What
  nonsense are you talking? I am a dead leaf. Wherever the wind takes
  me...."

  The other boy was struck dumb. He could not even answer. He could not
  find anything to say. He was really embarrassed, ashamed, and felt
  also, "My master was right not to talk with these people - these are
  dangerous people! What kind of talk is this? I had asked a simple
  question: 'Where are you going?' In fact I already knew where he was
  going, because we were both going to purchase vegetables in the
  market. A simple answer would have done."

  He went back, told his master, "I am sorry, excuse me. You HAD
  prohibited me, I didn't listen to you. In fact, because of your
  prohibition I was tempted. This is the first time I have talked to
  those dangerous people. I just asked a simple question. 'Where are you
  going?' and he started saying strange things: 'There is no going, no
  coming. Who comes? Who goes? I am utter emptiness,' he was saying,
  'just a dead leaf in the wind.

  And wherever the wind takes me....'" The master said, "I told you
  before! Now, tomorrow stand in the same place and when he comes ask
  him again, 'Where are you going?' And when he says these things, you
  simply say, 'That's true. Yes, you are a dead leaf, so am I. But when
  the wind is not blowing, where are you going? Then where can you go?'
  Just say that, and that will embarrass him - and he has to be
  embarrassed, he has to be defeated. We have been constantly
  quarreling, and those people have not been able to defeat us in any
  debate.

  So tomorrow it has to be done!"

  Early the boy got up, prepared his answer, repeated it many times
  before he went. Then he stood in the place where the boy used to cross
  the road, repeated again and again, prepared himself, and then he saw
  the boy coming. He said, "Okay, now!"

  The boy came. He asked, "Where are you going?" And he was hoping that
  now the opportunity would come....

  But the boy said, "Wherever the legs will take me...." No mention of
  wind! No talk of nothingness! No question of the nondoer! Now what to
  do? His whole ready-made answer looked absurd. Now to talk about the
  wind would be irrelevant.

  Again crestfallen, now REALLY ashamed that he was simply stupid: "And
  this boy certainly knows some strange things - now he says, 'Wherever
  the legs take me....'" He went back to the master. The master said, "I
  have told you NOT to talk with those people - they are dangerous! This
  is our centuries-long experience. But now something has to be done. So
  tomorrow you ask again, 'Where are you going?' and when he says,
  'Wherever my legs take me,' tell him, 'If you had no legs, then...?'
  He has to be silenced one way or other!"

  So the next day he asked again, "Where are you going?" and waited.

  And the boy said, "I am going to the market to fetch vegetables."

Live Unpredictable, Live Prepared.


Statement from visuddhimagga regarding mental and material body

You said: The above statement seems to confirm that mind doesn't have occurrence without material body, and vise versa. Both factors are interdependent and seemingly co-exist.

Correct. In my (personal) understanding of Buddhist teaching, speaking in modern terms, Mind is Information. Information needs Media to carry it. And Media is Energy that takes certain Form due to the shaping influence of Causes and Conditions carrying Information. So Energy, Matter, and Information are aspects of the same underlying "ground of all".

"But, once, I heard that one's mind does't end at death of material body: how can that match with the above statement"?

In my (personal) understanding of Buddhist teaching, there is no such thing as "one's mind" - it's a mistake to think that way. Mind is not an entity, it's an aspect. Mind is like wind that goes in and out, like breath. Mind is information that is all around us, moving like wind.

I know this sounds like Materialism but it's not. With this interpretation we are not declaring the primacy of Matter. What I am saying is that "regular" Information and Energy is what the ancients called "spirit". This is what animates Matter. As a matter of fact, Matter, if you look at it very closely (at the level of electrons), is empty. It is only a shape that Energy takes.

This may also sound like Pantheism, as in, we are declaring that Mind is a global aspect of everything and that it is God. To this I respond that sure Mind is a global aspect of everything - but so is Energy, so is Space/Time - but we do not pray to Space/Time and declare it our God? Why should we identify Mind as God?

This may also sound like Nondualism, as in "I am this global Mind, and this global Mind is speaking through me now" and "The highest realization is to awake to unity with this global Mind" - but that would be conceit and self-identification, wouldn't it? Instead, as Buddha taught, the highest realization is to be free from conceit, free from such thoughts, and free from self-identification.

My Zen Master said: "operate mind, don't let mind operate you" and "you bless god, not 'god bless you'". This means we must understand how Information works, how Universe works, and how Mind works. Once we understand how it works, we should master it. When we master Mind, we can pick our interpretation of reality. When we can pick our interpretation of reality, we can shape our reality. When we can shape our reality, we are free.


The "root" is a passage from the 18th chapter of the MMK:

諸佛或說我 或說於無我 諸法實相中 無我無非我 諸法實相者 心行言語斷 無生亦無滅 寂滅如涅槃 一切實非實 亦實亦非實 非實非非實
是名諸佛法
All Buddhas either speak of self or speak of no self. All dharmas’
true aspect, within this, there is neither self nor no self. All
dharmas’ true aspect is defined as mental activity’s and spoken
language’s ending.There is no arising and no cessation, there is calm
extinction, such is nirvāṇa. All is real, all is unreal, all is both
real and unreal, all is neither real nor unreal: this is called all
Buddhas’ dharma.


"grasping a sign", "fixed view", and suffering

I came accross this sutta about Roots of All things...
Very interesting that the enlightened persons dont even grasp to Nirvana and identify as self .

"They directly know extinguishment as extinguishment.
But they shouldn’t identify with extinguishment, they shouldn’t identify regarding extinguishment, they shouldn’t identify as extinguishment, they shouldn’t identify that ‘extinguishment is mine’, they shouldn’t take pleasure in extinguishment......
Because they have completely understood it..."

I understand this sutta as views of nirvana of those who have reached it , is not to grasp the  nirvana itself.

Way above my pay grade where I am still struggling with 5 sense gates pleasure.

But I think this sutta might help.   It is interesting to me that when you reach nirvana,  you let it (nirvana) go too (automatically? )..

https://suttacentral.net/mn1/en/sujato


Buddha's opinion on late night talk shows

No. The answer to this question can be found in Talaputa Sutta: To Talaputa the Actor (SN 42.2).  The Blessed One said:

  "Apparently, headman, I haven't been able to get past you by saying,
  'Enough, headman, put that aside. Don't ask me that.' So I will simply
  answer you. Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with,
  who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on
  things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst
  of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin
  with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more
  aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage
  in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion
  to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even
  more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on
  stage in the midst of a festival. Thus the actor — himself intoxicated
  & heedless, having made others intoxicated & heedless — with the
  breakup of the body, after death, is reborn in what is called the hell
  of laughter. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When an actor on
  the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them
  delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the
  body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas,'
  that is his wrong view. Now, there are two destinations for a person
  with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or the animal womb."

Ref: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn42/sn42.002.than.html


Questions About Pleasure in Visual Senses

In Buddhism, there are three types of kamma (action), namely: (i) bodily; (ii) verbal; and (iii) mental; each of which have results. Therefore, habitually merely visually observing pleasurable objects will making craving, addiction & the resultant restlessness grow. Thus, the Jesus teaching is similar to Buddhism; because viewing a woman with sexual objectification both grows craving, enslavement & is an error of moral-view (lacking of compassion & not considering harmful consequences).


Do beings without conscious experiences have buddha nature

This question may seem speculative, but I think it actually has a basis in Buddhism. There is a class of beings called nonpercipient beings that don't have any consciousness at all. However, they are basically just a body that doesn't do anything, not a zombie per se.

Such a being would have Buddha nature because by the Tathagatagarbha Sutras teach that all beings have Buddha nature.


The initial instinct will be to assign blame, or to approach the issue from a victim perspective.

As meditators, we must know better and let go of these views.

Powerful emotions can be very good teachers if we know how to harness the energy.

The teachers in the Thich Nhat Hanh sangha have a detailed conflict resolution guide for exactly this situation that I suggest you review

http://orderofinterbeing.org/docs/Conflict-Guide.pdf

Background: http://www.orderofinterbeing.org/2013/11/conflict-resolution-guide/

We are often the victims and the attackers, if we can realize this, we can solve anything.

A poem by Thich Nhat Hanh

  Please Call Me by My True Names

  I have a poem for you. This poem is about three of us. The first is a
  twelve-year-old girl, one of the boat people crossing the Gulf of
  Siam. She was raped by a sea pirate, and after that she threw herself
  into the sea. The second person is the sea pirate, who was born in a
  remote village in Thailand. And the third person is me. I was very
  angry, of course. But I could not take sides against the sea pirate.
  If I could have, it would have been easier, but I couldn’t. I realized
  that if I had been born in his village and had lived a similar life
  - economic, educational, and so on – it is likely that I would now be that sea pirate. So it is not easy to take sides. Out of suffering, I
  wrote this poem. It is called “Please Call Me by My True Names,”
  because I have many names, and when you call me by any of them, I have
  to say, “Yes.”

  Don’t say that I will depart tomorrow — even today I am still
  arriving.

  Look deeply: every second I am arriving to be a bud on a Spring
  branch, to be a tiny bird, with still-fragile wings, learning to sing
  in my new nest, to be a caterpillar in the heart of a flower, to be a
  jewel hiding itself in a stone.

  I still arrive, in order to laugh and to cry, to fear and to hope.

  The rhythm of my heart is the birth and death of all that is alive.

  I am the mayfly metamorphosing on the surface of the river. And I am
  the bird that swoops down to swallow the mayfly.

  I am the frog swimming happily in the clear water of a pond. And I am
  the grass-snake that silently feeds itself on the frog.

  I am the child in Uganda, all skin and bones, my legs as thin as
  bamboo sticks. And I am the arms merchant, selling deadly weapons to
  Uganda.

  I am the twelve-year-old girl, refugee on a small boat, who throws
  herself into the ocean after being raped by a sea pirate. And I am the
  pirate, my heart not yet capable of seeing and loving.

  I am a member of the politburo, with plenty of power in my hands. And
  I am the man who has to pay his “debt of blood” to my people dying
  slowly in a forced-labor camp.

  My joy is like Spring, so warm it makes flowers bloom all over the
  Earth. My pain is like a river of tears, so vast it fills the four
  oceans.

  Please call me by my true names, so I can hear all my cries and my
  laughter at once, so I can see that my joy and pain are one.

  Please call me by my true names, so I can wake up, and so the door of
  my heart can be left open, the door of compassion.

  ~Thich Nhat Hanh


Are accepted social norms and the law of the land moral sexual conduct according to Buddhism?

I was taught by my Buddhist teacher, that sexual conduct falls under the law of cause and effect, aka karma.  And that every action we do creates a future result.  If we would like to have a pleasant future in samsara then we undertake activities that will provide a pleasant result.  The laws of the land and accepted social norms often times "accept" behavior that will result in unpleasant karmic consequences.  (For instance, white lies are "accepted" by social norms, but would not constitute "right speech" and would lead to undesirable consequences.)
I can't back up this idea with a reference, but logic would say that the laws of the land and accepted social norms may not be "right sexual conduct" according to Buddhist thought.


What are the cylinders in front of the Buddha statue at Nanzō-in Temple, Japan?

The urns are numbered.

The Many Faces of Fukuoka’s Nanzoin Temple says,

  There are 365 urns in front of the Buddha.  Visitors travel long distances to place messages to their dearly departed loved ones in the urn marked with the day they died.


Is there a historical connection between Buddhism and martial arts?

There is a legend that Bodhidharma instructed the monks at the Shaolin Monastery in ways to increase their physical fitness. These exercises later became the Shaolon kung fu.  As one of the documents involved seems to be a forgery, scholars now doubt this connection.

Also see here and here.

Additionally the concept of Do has influenced many japanese martial arts, changing the craft (-jutsu) of fighting to a way (-do) of fighting (e.g. karate-do, ken-do)


How is the Anatta (not-self) doctrine useful?

The 'self' is an idea/assumption born from craving for & attachment to things (Parileyyaka Sutta, paragraphs 9 to 11). When the things attached to pass away (due to impermanence) there is suffering because of the 'self-clinging' or 'self-identity' with those impermanent things produces the sense of 'loss'. The Nakulapita Sutta explains this very well & simply.

Therefore, yes. The purpose of anatta is to produce not-clinging to end suffering & reach Nibbana.

The Anatta-lakkhana Sutta answers your question, particularly the last paragraphs (below):

  ...all...must be regarded with proper wisdom, according to reality,
  thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.'

  O monks, the well-instructed noble disciple, seeing thus, gets
  wearied of form, gets wearied of feeling, gets wearied of perception,
  gets wearied of mental formations, gets wearied of consciousness.
  Being wearied he becomes passion-free. In his freedom from
  passion, he is emancipated. Being emancipated, there is the knowledge
  that he is emancipated. He knows: 'birth [of self] is exhausted, lived
  is the holy life, what had to be done is done, there is nothing more
  of this [self] becoming.'

  This the Blessed One said. Pleased, the group of five monks were
  delighted with the exposition of the Blessed One; moreover, as this
  exposition was being spoken, the minds of the group of five monks
  were freed of defilements, without attachment.


How do you reach Nirvana when you are craving Nirvana?

You do not need to crave Nirvana to reach it.

Nirvana is present in every moment. The belief that you need craving to observe Nirvana is contradictory because it is incorrect.

Since it is always present, there is no prerequisite to observe it. This is how spontaneous enlightenment is possible.

Because it is present in every moment, there is no maintaining that needs to be done.

The reason the Buddha created his teachings was to combat craving. Craving is what distracts us from observing Nirvana in every moment. That's why he teaches non-attachment. It is only through uninterpreted experience that the illusory separate self and Nirvana can be seen clearly.


Buddha's past lives in the Pali Suttas outside of Jataka

Are there other such canonical stories of the Buddha's past lives in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, outside of Jataka?
There's a bit in DN 16 -- not detailed, only that he was reborn here from a previous existence in Tusita heaven (the which event is one of the reasons why a great earthquake can happen):

Furthermore, when the being intent on awakening passes away from the group of Joyful Gods, he’s conceived in his mother’s belly, mindful and aware. Then the earth shakes and rocks and trembles.
Puna caparaṃ, ānanda, yadā bodhisatto tusitakāyā cavitvā sato sampajāno mātukucchiṃ okkamati, tadāyaṃ pathavī kampati saṅkampati sampakampati sampavedhati.

There's also the Buddhavamsa and the Cariyapitaka -- I'm not sure whether you count these as "suttas": i.e. they're in the Khuddaka Nikaya (in the Sutta Pitaka), as are the Jataka tales.


When is it time to meditate and when is it time to act?

I think there is a certain tendency in the west to take the Bodhisattva vow as mandate for humanitarian action.  The reams of material that have been written on socially engaged Buddhism are pretty exemplary of that.  I personally don't think there is anything wrong with working to make someone suffer a little less.  I also think that proponents of this kind of engaged Buddhism are on some pretty solid theological ground.  Helping others is an essential part of anyone's practice.  It's no accident that the first paramita (in all traditions!) is generosity.

I think I need to qualify this though.  No matter how much effort you exert, you aren't going to end suffering in the world.  No government plan, social service, or movement can accomplish that.  It's impossible.  To even think along those lines is completely contrary to Buddhist teaching.  The only surefire means we have of ending suffering is through our own liberation.  It is imperative that we don't lose sight of that.  So many people get caught up in outward directed effort that they lose touch with their individual practice.  One wonders how truly useful they can be as Buddha-beings when their best weapons in the fight against suffering - their loving-kindness, compassion, patience, and generosity - aren't sharpened by daily practice!

It's always time to help others and if you practice Buddhism sincerely, you will always be doing exactly that.  The hours that you sit benefit all sentient beings in ways just as powerful as any hour you spend working at a soup kitchen.  If you feel called to do something more tangible than just sitting, that's fine.  It's even recommended lest you begin to develop an indulgent attachment to the bliss of concentration.  Just don't let outward efforts distract you from your own liberation.


How do you help or take on the sufferings of others?

Lay practitioner here. I expect more educated answers will follow. But for me, I don't think a person can exactly "take on" the suffering of another. It is up to each of us to work our way through the mental delusions that permit our own suffering. Having said that, the peace we exude has, I believe, an effect on those around us. Just as when we act with anger in our hearts, our actions are likely to reflect this mental state, when we act with peace in our hearts, our actions will reflect that, and will have a positive effect on those with whom we interact.

One way to look at it is that instead of the view that "this person is suffering," think that, "there is suffering." The fact that it's "their" suffering or "your" suffering is illusion. There is simply suffering, and the work "you" do to reduce the causes of suffering has an effect on all suffering.


Is there a budhistic way to experience suppressed emotions?

By prolonged meditation, suppressed emotions & experiences will generally inevitably rise into to the surface of consciousness awareness.


can any one please explain me the significance of Talipot fan in Buddhism?

In the book "Buddhist Ceremonies and Rituals of Sri Lanka" by A.G.S. Kariyawasam, there is a sub-chapter on the Pirit Ceremony which states:

Pirit (or paritta) is a collective term designating a set of
protective chants or runes sanctioned by the Buddha for the use of
both lay-men and bhikkhus. Pirit-chanting is a very popular ceremony
among the Buddhists of Sri Lanka. As the term itself implies it means
a safety rune (paritta = protection), the ceremonial recital of which
is regarded as capable of warding off all forms of evil and danger
(vipatti), including disease, the evil influence of the planets, evil
spirits, etc. These may be real dangers to the safety of persons and
property as well as superstitiously believed-in calamities. In
addition to this curative and positive aspect, pirit is also chanted
for the attainment of general success (sampatti,siddhi).  In the
domestic  and  social  life  of  the  Sri  Lankan Buddhist no
important function can be considered complete without this ceremony.
However, the ceremony may vary from the simple to the highly
elaborate, depending on the occasion and the status of the sponsor.

Going deeper, it states:

Until the monks arrive for the pirit chanting, the devadutaya is
kept  confined  and  guarded.  Once  the  monks  arrive  and  take
their seats inside the pavilion, a dialogue takes place between the
devadutaya and a monk, the purpose of which is to reveal to the assembled gathering that the task of the messenger, which was
to invite the gods to partake of the merits, has been done and that
all the gods have arrived. The devadutaya makes this statement
standing and guarded by the swordsmen, at the entrance (dorakada) to
the  chanting  pavilion  within  which  the  monks  have  taken  their
seats. It is this statement of the devadutaya which thus comes to be
called the dorakada-asna, meaning “the message read at the
thresh-old.” The gist of this statement, written in the same kind of
stilted language as the vihara-asna referred to earlier, is that all
the gods invited have arrived for the pirit ceremony so that they
may dispel all misfortune and bring about prosperity to all.
After the dorakada-asna,  another  monk,  standing  within  the
pavilion, reads out a similar text called the anusasana-asna,
wherein all the gods assembled are requested to rejoice in the merits
of the entire ceremony. This monk holds in his hand a round-handled
fan made of the talipot leaf, elaborately decorated, a symbol of
authority and  high  ecclesiastical  position.  These  three
ritualistic  texts  mentioned  in  the  foregoing  account  (i.e.,
vihara-asna, dorakada-asna, and  the anusasana-asna)  were  all  composed  during  the  Kandyan period (18th century) when ceremonies
and rituals, especially those connected  with  the  gods,  became
more  popular  than  during  the earlier periods.

So apparently, the use of the talipot fan (as a ceremonial fan) originated in Sri Lanka in the Kandyan period (18th century) and its use is as a symbol of authority and to show the high ecclesiastical position of certain monks. From there, it's not surprising that it spread to other Theravada countries.
I speculate that to say that the purpose of the talipot fan (as a ceremonial fan) is for monks to hide their faces for anonymity and humility, is perhaps a modern spin to shift the purpose of the talipot fan from being a symbol of authority to being a symbol of anonymity and humility.
Further note: I think the talipot fan originally was used just as a fan to produce breeze or to shade from sunlight, but at some point, it was given a ceremonial function and became elaborately decorated.


What happens if you drop and break a plate of fruit from the Buddha's altar?

Is it bad karma? Well, karma is about intention. If you did not intentionally drop and break the plate of fruit, then there is no consequence for you, from the perspective of karma.

Is it a bad omen? Definitely not. The Buddha did not teach his followers to believe in omens. In fact, we should not cling to unskillful thoughts like superstitious belief in omens.

How should I interpret the incident? All conditioned things are impermanent (sabbe sankhara anicca). Everything that arises, must eventually cease. That applies to the plate of fruit too. If you leave the fruit where it is, in due time it will rot and dry up, even without your intervention.

What should I do? It would be skillful, virtuous and thoughtful of you to clean up any mess that you created, even if done accidentally.

What should I not do? You should not carry remorse or regret for breaking the plate. It's unskillful to cling to remorse. Instead, you should resolve to be more careful next time - that's skillful. You should also not deceive others into thinking that you did not break the plate, as lying is against one of the five precepts.


What is a Sangha? Do you have to be a Buddhist to join a Sangha?

According to the Wikipedia article about Sangha,

It's a Pali word meaning meaning "association", "assembly," "company" or "community"
It usually means the monastic community of ordained Buddhist monks or nuns
As a separate category, those who have attained any of the four stages of enlightenment (for example Sotāpanna), are referred to as the ariya-sangha or "noble Sangha".
The word Sangha sometimes also includes laymen and laywomen who are personally dedicated to the discipline of Dharma-Vinaya
Some lay practitioners in the West these days use the word "Sangha" as a collective term for all Buddhists, but the Pali Canon uses the word parisā (Sanskrit, parisad) for the larger Buddhist community — the monks, nuns, lay men, and lay women who have taken the Three Refuges — reserving ‘Sangha’ for a more restricted use.

So according to these conventional (non-inclusive) definitions, only Buddhists (and of those, not all Buddhists) are in the "Sangha".


What are the Five Pungent (Vegetables/Roots/Spices) and when were they first proscribed?

At the risk of posting something that's more of a comment rather than an answer ...

I thought of "Jains" (from the same kind of era as Buddhists) -- apparently they too don't eat garlic, leeks, scallions, onions (apparently their rationale is that these are root vegetables) -- but (I may be wrong) I read that they (and Brahmins) can eat asafoetida. I don't know the history of it though, nor the Buddhism.

I suppose you might look in the Vinaya (where else?), for what you're looking for.

Can monks and nuns eat garlic? (for example) gives a reference to this, which includes ...

  Monks, garlic should not be eaten. Whoever should eat it, there is an offence of wrong-doing.

... and ...

  I allow you, monks, to eat garlic in the case of illness.

And the last post in that thread says ...

  Should the same approach of moderation be taken for all five "pungent spices," i.e., leeks, scallions, garlic, onion, and ginger (if I have them correctly)?

... which might make sense? Ginger is "pungent" and is another plant-root (avoiding plant-roots is, I think, part of being as harmless as possible -- in the Jain doctrine at least -- I think that forest-dwelling Buddhist monks, too, aren't supposed to dig i.e. disturb the soil).


Noting craving for food : Ven. Mahasi Saydaw tradition

It is not Mahasi noting, but the core of the Buddha's teaching: Dependent origination(D0) and others.

Depending on contact feeling arises, depending on feeling craving arises, depending on craving, clinging arises, depending on clinging becoming (this is when intention arises and action(kamma) begins.

The first point is contact, don't go near food when it is not meal time!
For your mindfulness is not strong enough yet!

When feeling, craving arises you still have the choice of breaking away from contact with the food (move physically or mentally away)for clinging to arise. All this comes from the very basic practice which the Buddha taught guarding the senses or sense door.

If you have strong attachment for food there is a practice recommended by the Buddha contemplation of the foulness of food, that the end product of eaten food is faeces. See food as also only the four great elements..and other insight practices to actually deal with the craving.


How are the 31 planes of existence (especially Bṛhatphala planes) a practical metaphor?

Is there an overarching metaphorical meaning of the 31 lokas, ...

According to the metaphorical style of interpretation, 31 planes of existence are a map of various lifestyles and mind states (with lower realms corresponding to neurotic conditions, and the higher realms to the meditative trance states) with examples of attitudes leading to and perpetuating such states.

  ... and the various kinds of beings that inhabit them? What is the meaning, ...

Based on my study of texts and my insight meditation, here are some very condensed and simplified descriptions. Please don't take these as all-encompassing definitions, they are just basic pointers:

hell is a subjective state characterized by heavy antipathy and helplessness, in which "how things are" is 100% opposite of "how you think it should be" and you can't do anything about it.
animal realm is a life style characterized by complacency towards hardships and inconveniences, ignorance, lowly values and lack of ownership over one's destiny.
preta's realm is a neurotic condition in which confusion, craving and negative prejudice continuously give rise to a cycle of false hope to attain something 100% worthy, alternating with bitter disappointment when every consecutive object of one's pursuit fails to satisfy one's childishly simplified expectations.
human's realm is lifestyle and condition dominated by attachment to and preoccupation with what one holds important or dear, such as errands, projects, group interests, conflicts etc.
asura's realm is a mindset and attitude of extreme intelligence and ambition / competitiveness, without regards for others' well-being.
gods' realm or heaven is a temporary state when the objective state of things 100% matches one's expectations and one is deluded into assuming that things will never change. Deva' realms from 6 to 11 are different kinds of this state.
the form realms (#12 to 27) are semi-enlightened lifestyles and mindstates characterized by predominance of abstract thinking and substantial levels of insight into the nature of phenomena, resulting in relative absence of strong emotions. The only remaining source of conflicts and suffering in these realms is rigid adherence to one or the other philosophic position.
the formless realms (#28 to 31) are the predominant mindstates of yogis bent on the practice of transcendental absorption (cultivation of meditative trance) which are characterized by a temporary bliss followed by the inevitable return to the empirical world with its problems and pains.

  ... and how does this meaning help the practitioners of Buddhism, ...

Study and meditation on the realms helps practitioners of Buddhism to disidentify / step aside from their own biases and states of mind, as well as to identify the conditions of others, and hopefully pick an appropriate corrective action towards the Liberation-By-Wisdom.

  ... how [realms #21 and 22] metaphorical meaning helps practitioners ...

Realms #21 and 22 is a reference to mindstates of non-buddhist practitioners succeeding in meditation. Even though they may achieve bliss (#21) or suspension of consciousness (#22) because of their Wrong View they are bound to fall back to the lower realms. Metaphorical illustrations like these help the practitioners of Buddhism understand the subtle differences between correct and incorrect practices at advanced stages of the path.

  ... and all earthly beings?

All Buddhist practices directly or indirectly help "all earthly beings" as you call them, by reducing the amount of "suffering pollution" generated due to confusion and ignorance.


In my opinion, keep only Buddha as your role model otherwise you will be in for a dissapontmemt. The next option is to keep any other teacher who is passed away without any known bad publicity. It is not advisable to keep any other living teacher as your role model. However, you can keep any living Kalyanamitta (spiritual friend) as your role model. The reason being you can accept any drawbacks of your spiritual friend as you know they are not perfect.


Why monks have to take alms for their food?

I don't hink there is a canonical answer in the Pali-canon about the "why".

But in the books of Thich Nhat Hanh which I accept as quite authoritative there is an explanation in the following spirit (don't have the exact text at hand):
at one hand the monks shall not be concerned with the common daily life and samsara and what else and thus should -in priciple- should stay with the common samanas'/ascetics' practice. However, to avoid the danger that the monks become too remote from the society, from the human world(so to say) they should somehow remain in contact.

Derived from this that has two intertwined advantages: the monks give the people the chance to try and experience wideheartedness so they help them to train wholesome emotions, thoughts and practice, and even help them to simple stay aware of the existence of the Buddha's sangha, teachings and doctrine - and the monks themselves don't loose the contact with that from where they come from, with their own history and samsaric relations and don't become, for instance, hypocrites (the latter is a word from me, I don't really think that Thich Nhat Hanh had used this expression).

All in all, I find this a nice and very helpful interpretation - but as I said in the first sentence: I've no idea at the moment whether and where the Buddha might have been given such an explicite explanation of the "why" .


Choosing between contemplative traditions

That quote has absolutely no founding in reality.  You could plumb the psychological depths of the alayavijnana in Tibetan Buddhism or Rinzai Zen, paint masterful works in Soto, compose gathas in the Theravadan, or do absolutely none of those things in any of those traditions.  A good teacher is worth more than the lineage he or she teaches.


Are there research based or scientific explanation on the working of Abhiññā / Iddhi?

Gathering of knowledge for attaining supernatural powers?

There has been a lot of research on this. During the '60's many universities in the US did various forms of paranormal research. Test subjects were collected and some filled with various kinds of experimental drugs to get results of different kinds. Some of these studies has been published for public viewing and some not. Also the Russians did research on this, but it is not known how far they got and nothing has ever been published. There are some rumors saying that they are still very active in this field.

There is an article on the subject here
http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195393521/obo-9780195393521-0112.xml


Relics/ dhathu have supernatural powers?

The supernormal acts can happen in 2 ways:

The Person has Jhanic powers and made a strong determination that so and so should happen with the relicts
A deva or being which the power influence matter in the human realm influences the relicts

Generally in my opinion the latter is happens when relicts mysteriously appear in shrine rooms and places of worship. If the relicts do not get veneration in where they are a deva may bring them to another place where they might get the veneration.

The former case may be associated with crystallizing of the relicts. E.g.: http://www.bdcu.org.au/bddronline/bddr12no7/Mun168.htm


If you're in Western Australia, and interested in Theravada, the best teacher for you would be Ajahn Brahm. You can find videos of his talks on the Youtube channel of the Buddhist Society of Western Australia (BSWA) and also here. I don't reside in Australia, but I've attended Ajahn Brahm's talks when he visited my city. The next most senior monks at BSWA after Ajahn Brahm seem to be Ajahn Appichato and Ajahn Brahmali who may also be helpful.

Although I am not familiar with him, if you stay in Victoria, Ajahn Kalyano of the Buddha Bodhivana Monastery can be your teacher. Here's a Youtube video of one of his talks.

In New South Wales, there's the Bodhisaddha Forest Monastery (although I do not know who are the teachers there) and Wat Buddha Dhamma (whose abbot seems to be Ajahn Khemavaro). Perhaps, Ajahn Khemavaro can be your teacher. Here's a Youtube video of his talk. Here's another talk from him.

The teachers and monasteries above are all from the Thai Forest Tradition, of the lineage of Ajahn Chah. There may be other monasteries from this tradition in other parts of Australia.


The furthest east that the Buddha traveled was to Kajaṅgalā (noted in AN 10:28). This area is known today as Kankjol, and is located near the border of India and Bangladesh. So there's no record of any visit to Northeast India, but anything is possible!


Is low self-esteem a Western phenomenon?

I recall around 20 years ago an Australian university psychology professor wrote a local newspaper article about what he regarded as superior self-esteem in Thai children. I have lived in traditional (provincial/village) Thai culture & I can attest to this.

I would suggest, at least for Thailand, this is obviously a combination of cultural factors, including: (1) the loving-kindness of the Thai monks in Thailand; (2) the traditional strong maternal culture in Thailand & the amazing lovingness of Thai mothers (3) the traditional material simplicity of the culture; and (4) the general morality of the culture.

For example, with the recent huge growth of commercial (Western) materialism in Thailand and cultural focus upon the accumulation of wealth, being physically beautiful, having social status, etc, I would imagine the lack of self-esteem issues would be growing.

The Buddha taught self-respect (including lack of regret) comes from the practise of morality & generosity. I would suggest Western self-esteem issues arise from judgmental religious culture, patriarchal culture, unloving parenting, childhood abuse, narcissistic media/commercial/entertainment expectations &/or unskillful behavioral conduct, particularly sexual.

In women this can be most prevalent, as seen in body-image issues, but also in men, particularly with expectation of sexual bravado. Traditional Thai culture, for example (contrary to the sex-tourism stereotype) has a matriarchal bent & men are raised to not be sexually aggressive & women are raised to be assertive.

British culture in particular is traditionally authoritarian towards children whereas in Thailand, for example, children do not stand up for adults on a crowded bus. It is the opposite. Adults give children the seats on crowded buses. Traditionally in Balinese culture, the children were considered to be the 'gods'.

This Thai video is an interesting insight because we would not expect children visiting a western religious institution to behave as free, without fear & uninhibited as shown in the video.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yaTT7nUAxE


Vipassana sharpens my ability to feel the feelings of others, but I'm not yet sure how best to use that?

I also see what could be done to really help them.

I doubt the above very much. While I do not doubt you are more & more feeling & seeing the situation of others; it seems what you believe can help others is actually what has helped you; which may not actually be what can help others.

Its similar to you had cancer & took a medicine to heal your cancer and now you wish to give your cancer medicine to another person suffering from AIDS. Although you can see the suffering of the person with AIDS, your cancer medicine will not cure AIDS.

  The challenge I'd like to understand has to do with learning how to communicate these notions to people in ways that are helpful to them,
  in ways that aren't perceived to be self-righteous on my part, of
  know-it-all-y, or whatever.

There is nothing special that can be communicated to others; just as nothing special was communicated to you.

Thousands of people do meditation retreats each year. Each of these thousands of individual persons receive the same teachings. Possibly 1% of these thousands attain a special benefit. This 1% success rate is due to the individual's disposition & readiness for meditation and not due to the teachings. Even the Lord Buddha was unable to enlighten every person he spoke to.

In short, your mind might be blinded by the results of your meditation, similar to being blinded when looking into the light of the sun. My answer to you is to simply keep practising what you are practising & keep helping the meditation retreats & Buddhism when you can. But nothing special is required to help others; apart from understanding meditation will not help everybody.

Many people do meditation retreats because they are suffering & confused. However, the help different people actually need is often different. For example, most people need help about the skills & attitudes required to have successful lasting relationships because this what they really want in life. I spent a number of years working meditation retreats & this is the problem most people had & wanted to resolve, namely, broken or dysfunctional family & personal relationships. They were not really interested in meditation & meditation was not really what they needed.


Is even Buddhahood itself a short straw next to material wealth and pleasure and fame?

Not just complete enlightenment. The Buddha taught that even the fruit of stream entry (the first stage of enlightenment, incomplete) exceeds sole dominion over the Earth and lordship over all worlds.
From Dhammapada 178:

Sole dominion over the earth,
going to heaven,
lordship over all worlds:
the fruit of stream-entry
excels them.

The commentary for this verse:

The Story of Kala, son of Anathapindika
While residing at the Jetavana monastery, the Buddha uttered Verse
(178) of this book, with reference to Kala, son of Anathapindika, the
well renowned rich man of Savatthi.
Kala, son of Anathapindika, always kept away whenever the Buddha and
his company of bhikkhus came to their house. Anathapindika was afraid
that if his son kept on behaving in this way, he would be reborn in
one of the lower worlds (apayas). So, he enticed his son with the
promise of money. He promised to give one hundred if the youth
consented to go to the monastery and keep sabbath for one day. So, the
youth went to the monastery and returned home early the next day,
without listening to any religious discourses. His father offered him
rice gruel, but instead of taking his food, he first demanded to have
the money.
The next day, the father said to his son, "My son, if you learn a
stanza of the Text from the Buddha I will give you one thousand on
your return." So, Kala went to the monastery again, and told the
Buddha that he wanted to learn something. The Buddha gave him a short
stanza to learn by heart; at the same time he willed that the youth
would not be able to memorize it. Thus, the youth had to repeat a
single stanza many times, but because he had to repeat it so many
times, in the end, he came to perceive the full meaning of the Dhamma
and attained Sotapatti Fruition.
Early on the next morning, he followed the Buddha and the bhikkhus to
his own house. But on that day, he was silently wishing, "I wish my
father would not give me the one thousand in the presence of the
Buddha. I do not wish the Buddha to know that I kept the sabbath just
for the sake of money." His father offered rice gruel to the Buddha
and the bhikkhus, and also to him. Then, his father brought one
thousand, and told Kala to take the money but surprisingly he refused.
His father pressed him to take it, but he still refused. Then,
Anathapindika said to the Buddha, "Venerable Sir, my son is quite
changed; he now behaves in a very pleasant manner." Then he related to
the Buddha how he had enticed the youth with money to go to the
monastery and keep sabbath and to learn some religious texts. To him
the Buddha replied, "Anathapindika! Today, your son has attained
Sotapatti Fruition, which is much better than the riches of the
Universal Monarch or that of the devas or that of the brahmas."
Then the Buddha spoke in verse as follows:
Verse 178: Far better
than sovereignty over the earth, or far better than going to the
abodes of the devas, or far better than ruling supreme over the entire
universe, is (the attainment of) Sotapatti Fruition.


What did the Buddha mean when he spoke about samma samadhi?

The Suttas usually define Samma-Samadhi as the four jhanas, but in some Suttas it gives a different explanation. For example, in the Mahacattarisa Sutta the Buddha said:

  The Blessed One said: "Now what, monks, is noble right concentration
  with its supports & requisite conditions? Any singleness of mind
  equipped with these seven factors — right view, right resolve, right
  speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, & right
  mindfulness — is called noble right concentration with its supports &
  requisite conditions.

  (Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html )

In the interpretation of the commentaries, any of the three levels of concentration can be sufficient, but in the case of momentary concentration, it would at least need to have the intensity of access concentration although it wouldn't have the duration of access concentration.


In the Dependent Origination formula, shouldn't perception precede craving instead of feeling?

Vedana and Sanna are conjoined not disjoint.
When it says Vedan it implies there is Sanna as well.

=============

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness, friend: Are these qualities conjoined or disjoined? Is it possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them?"

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.043.than.html


Could unwholesome craving cause the wholesome desire for enlightenment?

Based on theoriginal question:

Householder,

Aside that craving (tanha), lit. thirst, does not really differ in meaning to desire, will, cetana..., it is not necessary unskilfull, but required all along the path => refined becoming (bhava), and becoming, caused by tanha, is also the prerequisite for being able to develop the path:

  "Fabrications have ignorance as their prerequisite, consciousness has fabrications as its prerequisite, name-&-form has consciousness as their prerequisite, the six sense media have name-&-form as their prerequisite, contact has the six sense media as its prerequisite, feeling has contact as its prerequisite, craving has feeling as its prerequisite, clinging has craving as its prerequisite, becoming has clinging as its prerequisite, birth has becoming as its prerequisite, stress & suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction has stress & suffering as its prerequisite, joy has conviction as its prerequisite, rapture has joy as its prerequisite, serenity has rapture as its prerequisite, pleasure has serenity as its prerequisite, concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite, disenchantment has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present as its prerequisite, dispassion has disenchantment as its prerequisite, release has dispassion as its prerequisite, knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite." (Prerequisites)

For whom?

  the ending of the effluents is for one who knows & sees, I tell you, not for one who does not know & does not see. For one who knows what & sees what is there the ending of effluents? Prerequisites

One may look out for "The Four Right Exertions",  in The Wings to Awakening

  Perhaps the most surprising element in right exertion is the role played by desire, which is usually associated with the craving that acts as a cause of suffering. We will treat this topic in more detail under the bases for success [II/D], and simply note here that the Buddha recognized that desire can be either skillful or unskillful, and that he freely admitted that skillful desire is a necessary factor in the path to the end of suffering and stress...

Whats the problem with the use of the word craving, tanha?

The Buddha used this world, for the most, as craving after the world, the six senses:

  And what is craving? These six are classes of craving: craving for forms, craving for sounds, craving for smells, craving for tastes, craving for tactile sensations, craving for ideas. This is called craving.

Now think, better look with proper attention, of what you are actually g/crave for?

So when ever reading tanha, keep in mind that it is not thirst per-se, but desires in the world that distracts one from developing thirst after beyond.

(Note that this gift of Dhamma is not dedicated for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to make merits toward release from this wheel)


Seeing there is no subject experiencing subject and object?

Knowing is a part of the experience. An experience is merely the arising and vanishing of the five aggregates: Rupa(form), Vedana(feeling), Sanna(perception), Sankhara(mental formations), Vinnana(knowing/awareness).

If the meditation is done correctly, the awareness can be seen as merely an aspect of the experience along with the other 4 that comes and goes. Not as a person.


Did the Buddha speak the Mahanidana Sutta in the Digha Nikaya?

It is true that Maha Nidana Sutta in the Digha Nikaya points out Paticcasamuppada  (the process of Dependant Arising), and of Nāma-kāya Rupa-kāya - (mentality and materiality) together with vinnana (consciousness) somewhat different to some other suttas.  Paticcasamuppada is the most important of all other related teachings. It is a deep and complex doctrine, and understanding this is Key to seeing the Truth. So one cannot rule out Maha Nidana Sutta in the Digha Nikaya by just such observations as that you’ve pointed out. We should remember well Buddha’s words:

  By not understanding, and not penetrating this doctrine of Paticcasamuppada, beings have become entangled like in a knotted ball of thread and have become like munja grass and rushes, unable to pass beyond the woeful states of existence, and Samsara, the cycle of existence.

For Buddha to exclude Ignorance, Volitional Activities, and Six sense-bases, there is a reason. It is just that you and I have not yet found out as to why it is so.  In Maha Nidana Sutta it is said:

  "Thus, Ananda, from Nāma-Rupa as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes Nāma-Rupa. Then from Nāma-Rupa as a requisite condition comes contact..."

It was shown thus because one cannot exist without the other. The Buddha showed this with an example of two bundles of reeds to make it easy to understand. Two bundles of reeds are kept on the ground with a little space between them leaning against each other with their top ends, that both the bundles are kept standing with the support of each other. Removing one removes the other.

I will try and find the answer to your question within the month, but let us keep in mind that learning is a gradual process. The Buddha said that his method is gradual training, gradual action and gradual practice. So I will look into ‘Pancha Bhaya Wera Sutta’, ‘Nalakalapa Sutta‘, ‘Loka Sutta’, ‘Maha Nidhana Sutta‘ etc. on Paticca Samuppadaya.

Until we find a proper answers let us not discard any of the original suttas. Let us not put away what we feel are contradictory statements till we have understood thoroughly the fundamentals. Only if when we detect the structural principles of such paticcasamuppada links, in the entirety of the teaching, then you would have arrived at the true Dhamma. So let us try to dig a little deeper.


The technology/internet makes things more complex, makes the mind more active. Youtube, Facebook, Twitter other social media platforms or other internet sites etc.(and now with digital things people is able to engage in these things all the time because internet is not only in computers but now it is in people's "hands" all the time). One thing after another arises in the mind and people identify with everything that arises in their minds.

So people are in the mode of "This is important, another evil coming in!".."A text message..It must be important".."Somebody just posted something in facebook"..And the attention is completely absorbed by these things. It was bad already before the digital things but now it is amplified. It causes more stuff in the mind. One thought after another, one text message after another, one facebook post after another, one unpleasant memory or anxious thought after another. And imagine living like that for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. What kind of "person" would that life-style and mind state produce? Angry or anxious..Continuously dissatisfied..Continuously needing desperately the next thing. And life becomes permanently "never enough".

https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/86df2c99/dms3rep/multi/mobile/Internet_addicts_suffer_from_withdrawal_symptoms_Camino_Recovery-500x462.jpg

And it is same for the music as well. In the cafes they generaly play the same songs that becomes famous in the last times. I heard a song recently in a cafe that had this words: "I would not stop the blood that would shed for the sake of you". And I opened the youtube clip of the song and I saw that the singer is smiling with deep "joy" while saying these words. And I read the comments under that video-clip and countless of people wrote(and ofcourse still writing) praising, glorifying things about the singer and the song.

To give another example of the internet's effect on the human mind: I saw that an important character in another internet platform(And that person is the "idol", "guide", "teacher", "leader" admirable person for that group of people) had a picture that gives the message of glorifying and advocating killing.  The picture is no longer on that profile(in my computer I can't see a picture in that profile anymore) but we all know that these things exist in all of the internet world.

That's the reason why watching youtube, social media and many other things in internet makes people more absorbed than simple reading of harmless things.

The Buddhist path leads it's followers to realize that humans are not the reference point. Most areas of internet leads people to the opposite direction. While accepting and realizing this (humans are not the reference point) is the hardest thing for the meditators(but it is necessary to find permanent peace and freedom), it is not a useful thing to engage in internet too much. One of the best solution for these things is to have a sangha(living or spending a lot of time with meditators). As Thich Nhat Hanh said:"Don't be a drop of water". In many places of the world this is hard but in Western and Buddhist countries plus Australia this is possible. With having a Sangha a person can more easily save the mind from these things or at least diminish the time that s/he spends in the craziness of the internet world.

And yes it is about lack of mindfulness but internet world naturally leads people to unmindful state. So the solution is try to be mindful while spending the time internet and gradually spend less time. So the mindfulness would not diminish and replaced by the internet world's effects.


Read the nice anecdotes of Ajaan Fuang. A small selection below.

  § A woman came to Wat Dhammasathit to observe the precepts and
  meditate for a week, but by the end of the second day she told Ajaan
  Fuang that she had to return home, because she was afraid her family
  couldn't get along without her. He taught her to cut through her
  worries by saying, "When you come here, tell yourself that you've
  died. One way or another, your family will have to learn to fend for
  themselves."

  § "We keep disagreeable people around the monastery as a way of
  testing to see if our defilements really are all gone."

  § "Don't make a journal of your meditation experiences. If you do,
  you'll start meditating in order to have this or that thing happen, so
  that you can write it down in your journal. And as a result, you'll
  end up with nothing but the things you've fabricated."

  § "When the meditation goes well, don't get excited. When it doesn't
  go well, don't get depressed. Simply be observant to see why it's
  good, why it's bad. If you can be observant like this, it won't be
  long before your meditation becomes a skill."

  § A student came to complain to Ajaan Fuang that she had been
  meditating for years, and still hadn't gotten anything out of it. His
  immediate response: "You don't meditate to 'get' anything. You
  meditate to let go."

  § "You should watch visions (in meditation) the same way you watch TV:
  Just watch it, without getting pulled inside the tube."


What do Buddhists think in quick prayers (at graves, near altars etc.)?

I'm not Eastern Asian but I'd guess that the brahmaviharas would be appropriate -- including e.g. "may you be well", and mudita in the form of "recollection of virtue".

I've read that a common phrase is ...

  Anicca vata sankhara — "Impermanent, alas, are all formations!" — is the phrase used in Theravada Buddhist lands to announce the death of a loved one [but I have not quoted this line here in order to begin an obituary].

You said you didn't want a mantra but here is a longer quote -- it's not very long.

    Aniccā vatha sankhārā
    Uppāda vaya dhamminō
    Uuppajjitvā nirujjhanti
    Te san vūpa samō sukhō

    (Mahā Parinibbāna Sutta)

  This verse is actually not in the Dhammapada, but it is a very common verse. In Sri Lanka (and possibly in other Buddhist countries), it is displayed at funerals in order to emphasize the “fleeting nature” of life. It actually has a much deeper meaning, and explains why we face sorrow inevitably (because death is inevitable), and how it can be permanently removed to attain the Nibbānic bliss.

  This verse is said to have been uttered by Sakka, the King of the Dēvas, just after the Parinibbāna (passing away) of the Buddha.

  A common translation is:

    All things are impermanent
    They arise and pass away
    Having arisen they come to an end
    Their coming to peace is bliss

I don't know whether there are "prayers" as a Western theist (e.g. "Abrahamic religion") might understand that word -- see e.g. Paccha-bhumika Sutta (SN 42.6) -- so I think it's a person's own virtue that's important, rather than intercessionary prayer -- though there are different schools of Buddhism, some of whom pray (e.g. here) though perhaps not for the same reason as a theist.

I think it is common too (in some cultures anyway) to make some offerings to ghosts -- there's a popular ghost festival. I'm not sure but I think that the Theravada teaches that the "ghost realm" is one of the states (of suffering) into which someone way be reborn, and that the only way they can eat there is if someone is kind enough to remember to share their food with them.


You can find a study guide here by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: The Ten Perfections
A Study Guide
There seem to be four types of perfection, and not three.

Passages in this guide are drawn from the Pali canon and from the teachings of Ajaan Lee Dhammadharo.

The four determinations:
One should not be negligent of discernment,
should guard the truth,
be devoted to relinquishment,
and train only for calm.

— MN 140

You can find a further commentary here by Bhikkhu Bodhi: A Treatise on the Paramis
From the Commentary to the Cariyapitaka


Will an electronic gadget designed on reward/punishment mechanism of brain help improve meditation?

First only puthujjanas who are materialists care about the brain.

Second, the word mindful for sati or satipatthana  is really used by people lacking vocabulary.
Same situation for the word mind, but even worse, since is there no mind in pali, but a declination into 3 words. THere is ''citta'', there is ''mano'' and there are the 6 ''Vinnana'', ie the consciousness aggregate (viññāṇakkhandha).
THe wandering of the mind is the ''papanca'' of the mano.

Third, the way to be concentrated on something is to be relaxed and have joy,  piti. Once you are concentrated, you have joy and once you have joy your citta is not dispersed to the point of not being disturbed by little pains, sounds,  or worries . In other words, you cannot be concentrated without having joy.

Your fantasy of naggering the person filled with papanca and struggling to reduce the papanca has nothing to do with this joy.

  "Furthermore, the disciple of the noble ones is endowed with verified confidence in the Dhamma... verified confidence in the Sangha... virtues that are appealing to the noble ones: untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered, liberating, praised by the wise, untarnished, leading to concentration. Not content with those virtues pleasing to the noble ones, he exerts himself further in solitude by day or seclusion by night. For him, living thus heedfully, joy arises. In one who has joy, rapture arises. In one who has rapture, the body becomes serene. When the body is serene, one feels pleasure. Feeling pleasure, the mind becomes centered. When the mind is centered, phenomena become manifest. When phenomena are manifest, he is reckoned as one who dwells heedfully.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn55/sn55.040.than.html

Since you care about papanca, here is the method to avoid it: first  you become a disciple, you do satipaṭṭhānaṃ , you have confidence in the buddha and when you are around people you do satipaṭṭhānaṃ , confidence in the buddha and you are ''nice guy'' which means you show''Khantiyā, avihiṃsāya, mettacittatāya, anudayatāya'' ie patience, harmlessness, friendliness and sympathy. https://suttacentral.net/sn47.19/en/bodhi

THen you go to a place alone. Then your mano has Pīti, then your body has passambhati, then has sukhaṃ vediyati, which is pleasant vedana, then the citta has sukhha, and once it has sukkha it has samādhi, which is centered or ''not dispersed''. Once you live like that, you are a person who ''lives diligently'' and ''knows phenomena when they manifest''.


Buddhist point of view in the research process

I can attempt to answer this from a Theravada standpoint. Though I can try to draw a parallel between the mind and ocean but this might not be the Mahayana standpoint. But I found this if this might be of interest: Make Your Mind an Ocean: Aspects of Buddhist Psychology by Ven. Lama Thubten Yeshe Edited by Nicholas Ribush

Also what has being quoted seems related to the Bible as it is said this person turned to Christianity or could have been a mix and match from Buddhism and Christianity. Strikingly similar passages Isaiah 57:20, Ephesians 4:14 and James 1:6.

When you learn or do research you learn a concept (paññatti). First you will have words labeling (nama-paññatti) certain concepts (attha-paññatti). To describe this you will use a vocabulary which gives meaning to the conceptual terms (nirutti). There perhaps would be a language around how the words are used.

In learning when conceptualising something you recognise elements by which you want to build the concept. Say initially a baby sees his mother then applies the labeling "mother" and concept associated with it. As you learn new things there are 2 parts. 1st apply a label and then associate meaning with the lable.

For a more theoretical discussion on this see:

  Two kinds of paññatti are distinguished. One is called nama-paññatti and the other attha-paññatti. The first refers to names, words, signs, or symbols through which things, real or unreal, are designated: “It is the mere mode of recognising (saññakaramatta) by way of this or that word whose significance is determined by worldly convention.” [128] It is created by worldly consent (lokasanketa-nimmita) and established by worldly usage (lokavoharena siddha). [129] The other, called attha-paññatti, refers to ideas, notions, or concepts corresponding to the names, words, signs, or symbols. It is produced by the interpretative function of the mind (kappana) and is based on the various forms or appearances presented by the real elements when they are in particular situations or positions (avattha-visesa). [130] Both nama-paññatti and attha-paññatti thus have a psychological origin and as such both are devoid of objective reality.

Source: The Dhamma Theory Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa

Formulating a thesis or research ideas involve conceptualisation. Also these have to be expressed or communicated as finding or publication. More on this is as follows:

  Nama-paññatti is often defined as that which makes known (paññapanato paññatti) and attha-paññatti as that which is made known (paññapiyatta paññatti). [131] The former is an instance of agency definition (kattu-sadhana) and the latter of object definition (kamma-sadhana). What both attempt to show is that nama-paññatti which makes attha-paññatti known, and attha-paññatti which is made known by nama-paññatti, are mutually inter-dependent and therefore logically inseparable. This explains the significance of another definition which states that nama-paññatti is the term’s relationship with the ideas (saddassa atthehi sambandho) and that attha-paññatti is the idea’s relationship with the terms (atthassa saddehi sambandho). [132] These two pairs of definition show that the two processes of conceptualization and verbalization through the symbolic medium of language are but two separate aspects of the same phenomenon. It is for the convenience of definition that what really amounts to a single phenomenon is treated from two different angles, which represent two ways of looking at the same thing.

  The difference is established by defining the same word, paññatti, in two different ways. When it is defined as subject it is nama-paññatti—the concept as name. When it is defined as object it is attha-paññatti—the concept as meaning. If the former is that which expresses (vacaka), the latter is that which is expressible (vacaniya). [133] In this same sense, if the former is abhidhana, the latter is abhidheya. [134] Since attha-paññatti stands for the process of conceptualization it represents more the subjective and dynamic aspect, and since nama-paññatti stands for the process of verbalization it represents more the objective and static aspect. For the assignment of a term to what is constructed in thought—in other words, its expression through the symbolic medium of language—invests it with some kind of relative permanence and objectivity. It is, so to say, crystallised into an entity.

Source: The Dhamma Theory Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa

I Buddhism there concepts which are ultimate realities which may be the subject of Buddhist research. Following describes how these are learned and understood at the conceptual level.

  Now the definition of attha-paññatti as that which is made known by nama-paññatti gives rise to the question as to what its position is in relation to the real existents (dhammas). For if the real existents, too, can be made known (= attha-paññatti), on what basis are the two categories, the real and conceptual, to be distinguished? What should not be overlooked here is that according to its very definition attha-paññatti exists by virtue of its being conceived (parikappiyamana) and expressed (paññapiyamana). Hence it is incorrect to explain attha-paññatti as that which is conceptualizable and expressible, for its very existence stems from the act of being conceptualised and expressed. This rules out the possibility of its existing without being conceptualised and expressed. In the case of the dhammas or real existents the situation is quite different. While they can be made known by nama-paññatti, their existence is not dependent on their being known or conceptualised. Where such a real existent is made known by a nama-paññatti, the latter is called vijjamana-paññatti, [135] because it represents something that exists in the real and ultimate sense (paramatthato). And the notion or concept (= attha-paññatti) corresponding to it is called tajja-paññatti, the verisimilar or appropriate concept. [136] This does not mean that the real existent has transformed itself into a concept. It only means that a concept corresponding to it has been established.

Source: The Dhamma Theory Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma by Y. Karunadasa

An untamed mind your thoughts rise and fall like sea waves. So effort should be put to tame your mind. With continuous stilling of the mind the resistance or hindrances to achieving this is overcome.

Interestingly a few others have things along similar lines but all share some resemblance to Bible verses adopted to the Buddhist context. Perhaps since "mind like the sea" passages even in a Buddhist context are adopted from bible passages.

  Conquer Yourself

  “It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell.”

  He who can conquer himself is greater than the mighty. To conquer yourself you must conquer your mind. You must control your thinking. Your thoughts cannot be tossed to and fro like the waves of the sea. You may be thinking, “I can’t control my thoughts, if a thought comes, it comes.” To that I say, you may not be able to stop a bird from flying over your head, but you can certainly stop him from building a nest in your hair. Dismiss thoughts that are contrary to the life you desire to live. Buddha said, “It is a man’s own mind, not his enemy or foe that lures him to evil ways.”

Source: 10 Must Read Life Lessons from Buddha

  “It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles.”

  -Buddha

  "One must find the source within one's own Self, one must possess it. Everything else was seeking -- a detour, an error."

  -Siddhartha

  I firmly believe in the realization of one's self. From it stems the true meaning of my life. From here am I, bestowed with the understanding and courage to follow my righteous path.

  Unless we learn to control our 'self', we will be swayed by it. I believe that whatever you desire and dream, is attained, once you agree to the notion that it is you, and you only that needs to be conquered. To discover and unravel the fountainhead of everything - passion, greed, peace, anger, anxiety, and true happiness, you need not go anywhere but listen to your inner voice. Your mind knows only some things, but your inner voice tells you everything.

  However your inner voice, your internal speech or your conscience, whatever you may want to call it, has been burdened, thwarted and gradually emptied by the vices in your life. Your conscience has yielded to the perfect examples of how ordinary men should live their lives. It has been designed by the beliefs in popular magazines and opinions others have of you. It has even been wrongly submerged under your own sea of thoughts, most of which you believe, define you as a being. However, it isn't the truth. Far from it.

  That silvery voice speaks to you every so often. To be receptive, you must halt your mind from obstructing it. Hence, to conquer yourself, you must conquer your mind. You must pay heed to, but constrain your thinking. Your thoughts cannot be tossed to and fro like the waves of the sea. You may be thinking, “I can’t control my thoughts, it comes, if it wants to.” Buddha says "You may not be able to stop a bird from flying over your head, but you can certainly stop him from building a nest in your hair." If you dream of a life with endless possibilities, live with an unsatiated curiosity for the knowledge of 'self' and dismiss thoughts negating your promise-filled belief.

Source: What is the most important belief that propels your life? and What is your most unshakeable belief? but this mis attributes one of Martin Luther King, Jr. or Martin Luther quotes as one of the Buddha's.

  As Martin Luther once said with regard to temptation and tempting thoughts: we cannot control what birds fly over our heads. We can only control whether they build nests in our hair.

Source: Did Jesus Ever Sin?


I don't think recorded miracles will help you much for even if there're detailed records, there'll always be 2 camps: the skeptics will always have their own explanation/interpretation while the believers will always believe it their way. So the best way is to practice and see it in your own experience. Check out Ven. Hsuan Hua's great commentary on the Lotus Sutra at http://www.cttbusa.org/dfs25/dfs25.asp . And per his explanation from the website, if one chants/recites half-heartedly simply for the sake of "testing it out", then s/he's gonna be disappointed.

  At that time, the farmer did not remember that E shi yun was a line from the Great Compassion Mantra. After the man left, he remembered, "He is a Dharma Protector in the Great Compassion Mantra!" This is an inconceivable state manifest from the Great Compassion Mantra. But if you recite it just to test it out, E Shi Yun is not going to show up. It is only if you recite and believe in the Mantra that unlucky circumstances can be turned into lucky ones. If you run into E Shi Yun, be sure to recognize him. Do not be like the farmer who did not remember who he was until he was gone."


Skipping Meditation After Great Exertion

Meditation shouldn't be viewed as a need. You should neither regret that you skipped nor  wish that you do it.You are getting attached to the joy of meditation and this in itself is counterproductive to the practice.

Do it simply willingly any time you feel like it.Naturally then a rhythm will form that suites your lifestyle.

And remember that the practice should be applied in the real world.


Does the first precept require me to check the shower for bugs and make sure to remove all of the bugs before using it?

I recently noticed that perhaps fewer than 10 bugs seem to be in my shower.

The reason many bugs show up in one place is usually due to that place having "things" that attract them, whether it's smell, shed skin cells (as their food source), humidity (their suitable dwelling environment), etc. So, instead of doing it the hard way, try tackling the issue at its root cause, try to keep the shower clean, free of residues, or humidity, etc. after you've finished using the shower, and you won't have to worry much about those bugs the next time you use it.


why is all of Buddhas past lifes referes to times of kings

then how can we be even sure about enlightenment

I think there are schools of Buddhism which say that enlightenment becomes less possible, as the centuries go by and the Buddha's doctrine becomes distorted.

There are also schools which say that enlightenment is already attained (by the Buddha), therefore enlightenment is certain.

Or that all saṅkhāras (conditioned things) are impermanent, but that some dhammas (especially nirvana) are unconditioned (and not-self), and "timeless" (or immediate).

People also often say that it (the path to enlightenment) is something you should experience for yourself, i.e. have direct experience of.

if sansara can change

I think that sansara is expected to change: that it's considered "impermanent" in Buddhism.

What seems more-or-less constant about it is a cycle of death and life (perhaps you you'll agree that death and life still exist), and suffering (oceans of tears), and causes of suffering, etc., as described in Dharma.

what is to say that some day all beings that achieved nibbana will not again be reborn?

I think that some schools of Buddhism assert that some relatively-enlightened beings are reborn (see for example "Bodhisatvas" and "tulkus").

But perhaps the statement "beings that achieved nirvana may be reborn" is a nonsense phrase, for example because it assumes that "the same being" may be "reborn" ... whereas, sansara and impermanence posit that anything "reborn" is necessarily a different being.

Also, enlightenment and "being" might be mutually contradictory. It reminds me of this Vajira Sutta:

  Why now do you assume 'a being'?
  Mara, have you grasped a view?
  This is a heap of sheer constructions:
  Here no being is found.

I think that's connected with for example this discussion of 'trackless'.

Beware too that this is (or is nearly) a topic for which it's difficult to get sensible answers: the unanswered questions include questions about whether the Tathagata exists after death, and the four imponderables includes

  The Buddha-range of the Buddhas [i.e., the range of powers a Buddha develops as a result of becoming a Buddha]

The warning is that speculation on these topics may be counter-productive -- not the right way.


How does a Buddhist survive in a harsh world?

So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path?

I hope this is a false dilemma.

Some of the Buddhist principles that might help you to prosper (rather than "to be eaten") include:

Right livelihood (work for a living, don't cheat people, have fair business dealings)
Have good friends, but avoid bad friends
Be cautious, prudent, avoid being irrational or ignorant, when making decisions about business and family etc.
Save part of your earnings (which will help you to survive thieves and taxes and so on)
Equanimity (be kind but don't be swayed too much, don't be swayed more than is proper, e.g. to help other people with their misfortunes -- remember that each inherits their own karma)
Generosity (if you do benefit someone, don't feel that you suffer that as a loss)

The best example would be the Axis Powers during World War 2

I'm not sure that's a good example. Buddhism includes doctrine like,

  "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
  "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
  Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.

I'm not a historian but, for example, perhaps if the "allies" had been more generous at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 at the end of WW1, if the French hadn't wanted to further weaken defeated Germany as much as possible, then the conditions wouldn't have arisen for Germany to want to go to war again 20 years later. Maybe ditto if the USSR hadn't made a secret non-aggression pact with Germany in 1939 (which it did maybe because of its own fear of Germany but also because of its own greed to invade Eastern Europe). Maybe they're all, you know, a bit guilty: could have done better.

If you react harshly, where does that ever stop? And what behaviour do other people learn from you?

Yet, Buddhism has survived 2500 years and even flourished at a time where war and cruelty were rampant. So there must be something there, and it bugs the heck out of me.

Well, social cooperation (rather than social aggression) is maybe a winning strategy. For example people respect (and try to help) Buddhist monks, partly because they are intentionally harmless.


Are the Chakras present in the original Buddha's teachings?

There is nothing supernatural about chakras. They are psychosomatic phenomena; they exist only in the subjective world of a person. That's why you can't photograph a chakra, or measure its "field intensity" with some kind of device.

If you inspect your subtle tactile perceptions, you will surely notice feelings in and around your chest, stomach, forehead, eyes, hands, wrists, feet etc. Subjectively, these feelings are not located on the surface of, or inside the body, but rather "in the air" around it.  They are not produced by a contact with an external object, and they are not as sharp as itching or pain. What are they then?

Chakras are somatic projections of our emotional state onto the internal map of the body. They are indicators of what goes on inside our brains, below the threshold of awareness. Some of the emotions most often accompanied by chakra sensations are worry, urge, longing, resentment, irritation but also the positive ones e.g. love, fondness.

In Chinese Mahayana, Buddhism is often taught in combination with Tai-Chi, Qi-Gong, and other forms of "energy management" exercises focused on developing one's psychosomatic skills. The Chinese (also Korean, Vietnamese, etc.) recognize three main chakras: lower dantian (lower abdomen), middle dantian (chest) and upper dantian (head). The Indians  recognize more chakras, but if you think about it, these are just alternative ways to emphasize some of the most important locations in person's subjective space.

Even though Buddha did not mention chakras directly, his various mindfulness practices are essentially chakra exercises. Specifically, kayagata-sati (mindfulness rooted in the body) involves paying constant attention to feelings around throat, chest, solar plexus, lower abdomen, and feet. Similarly, anapana-sati (mindfulness of breathing) involves paying attention to the diaphragm, esp. the sensations experienced around the moment when the breath reverses its direction.

But to answer your question directly, no, Buddha of Pali Canon did not speak about chakras, these and other practices (yoga, tantra) were incorporated later, as people realized their affinity with Buddhism's goal and methods.


I am a Buddhist, happy, content prostitute.  I am not a greedy person, nor am a sex addict (or anything of the like).  This is the chapter in which my life is.  I have used my current profession to touch the lives of many humans, male and female.  I also do advocacy work for prostitutes and know that there are many different types of persons in the sex trade industry.

While I cannot answer the specific question regarding the Third Precept, I would like to offer that my work and my Buddhist practice have played on one another in regards to my own livelihood.  Until another path appears to me where I can effect positive change AND make a living in NYC to support my children, I CHOOSE this work.

I am open to my friends, family, and community about my sex work.  I don't walk in darkness, but in beauty and light.  The compassion that I have is very much felt by all those around me, within and outside of my trade.  I give of my true self, but I keep an open mind and heart until the next chapter (which is probably soon because I have done this work for  almost five years).

I have gone a bit off topic, I know, but in my advocacy work I have met prostitutes from all over the world...all whom chose this, not all were necessarily happy while doing this, but often as a means to am end.  Many while working on the undergrad, and a surprising percentage while working on their masters.  Our goal is to humanize the the trade, and to give sex workers a voice because, as you see, not many out there are educated as to the actual lives of prostitutes.

Thank you for allowing me to share.


Is it bad karma if you are waiting for someone to die?

I was just wondering if it’s bad karma if you were just waiting for someone to die?

"Whatever, monks, a teacher ought to do out of compassion, for the
profit of his disciples, that I have done, having compassion for you.
"Here monks, are the roots of trees! Here are lonely places! Meditate
monks. Do not be slothful, have no subsequent regrets. Thus we charge
you."
SN 35.145

If you do not have any unwholesome intentions (greed, hatred, or delusion) tied up in doing so, no unwholesome kamma should fruit. Despite that, in many other ways unwholesome kamma will fruit (unless you are enlightened) and so instead of spending your time waiting, meditate! :)
For example, let’s say you asked your parents for permission to become a monk but they declined so you decided to wait until they leave this world before ordaining. Is it bad karma if you do this?

"Do you have your parents' permission, Ratthapala, to go forth from
the household life into homelessness?"
"No, lord, I haven't."
"Ratthapala, Tathagatas do not give the going-forth to anyone who
doesn't have his parents' permission."
"Lord, I will do what needs to be done so that my parents will give
their permission for me to go forth from the household life into
homelessness."
MN 82

It is by tradition and respect that a lay person get their parents permission to ordain. I would suggest that you ask them in a very serious manner and list solid reasons for why you wish to ordain (and even show them your practice so they can understand your point of view better) and be persistent (some people take years convincing their parents!). I would recommend you read the entire sutta quoted above (you can find it by clicking here). Refer to my answer in the previous question for if such an action will produce unwholesome kamma.


Did the Buddha state that there is only one way, and state/imply that any other path (such as those practiced by yogis) was futile?

https://suttacentral.net/en/mn11 for the Buddha's statement that there are no true recluses beyond the Sangha.

  “Bhikkhus, only here is there a recluse, only here a second recluse,
  only here a third recluse, only here a fourth recluse. The doctrines
  of others are devoid of recluses: that is how you should rightly roar
  your lion’s roar."

The Buddha is careful not to deny the achievements of others, but framing achievement through the understanding of the four kinds of clinging, he implies that others may reach a very close goal, yet through having wrong view with regards to Self, through not penetrating anatta, are still clung to it, and hence have not cut off clinging (and therefore craving, which correlates directly with suffering) at the root, when declaring so.

  "Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging. What four? Clinging
  to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and
  observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self.

  Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full
  understanding of all kinds of clinging, they do not completely
  describe the full understanding of all kinds of clinging. They
  describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures
  without describing the full understanding of clinging to views,
  clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self.
  Why is that? Those good recluses and brahmins do not understand these
  three instances of clinging as they actually are. Therefore, though
  they claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of
  clinging, they describe only the full understanding of clinging to
  sensual pleasures without describing the full understanding of
  clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to
  a doctrine of self.

  Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full
  understanding of all kinds of clinging…they describe the full
  understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures and clinging to views
  without describing the full understanding of clinging to rules and
  observances and clinging to a doctrine of self. Why is that? They do
  not understand two instances…therefore they describe only the full
  understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures and clinging to views
  without describing the full understanding of clinging to rules and
  observances and clinging to a doctrine of self.

  Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full
  understanding of all kinds of clinging…they describe the full
  understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, and
  clinging to rules and observances without describing the full
  understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. They do not
  understand one instance…therefore they describe only the full
  understanding of clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, and
  clinging to rules and observances without describing the full
  understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self."

With regards to the way to the goal, since the purpose of recluseship at the time was to comprehend experience (stress/suffering) as it actually is, with direct insight, there will only be one correct answer. In a world of anicca, anatta follows naturally, unless one relies on a transcendental (beyond experience) notion of Self. Therefore, the above quote is a fair statement.

https://suttacentral.net/en/mn26 The Buddha himself had two teachers to whom he went to before his enlightenment, Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta, who came very close to cessation in meditation, but not having the insight into impermanence, could not arrive at the true cessation of suffering.

Patanjali states that 'The restraint of the modifications of the mind-stuff is Yoga.', which is the cessation the Buddha practiced (the ceasing of mental fermentations). However, Patanjali then infers a transcendental notion of Self (I assume it is implied that once modifications to the mind cease, the True Self is said to be left), which, if it is to Be, is logically beyond conditioned experience as it is an independent entity, and hence not verifiable in the here and now. Such a position naturally creates doubt and does not lead to final release.

The only path within Buddhism is the Noble Eightfold Path, which encompasses right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. Yogis may be accomplished in many of these and that would be a great attainment for them and their students, but all other than the Buddha stumbled at right-view - the first step, because they conceived of their notions of Self.


For what reason did the Dali Lama's traditional daily schedule have washing before meditation?

Washing is a symbolic cleansing. One finds it in the Tibetan precepts ceremony. The modern Dalai Lama washes his hands before reading too.


I found an interesting introductory article, "On Torma Offering", at http://shambhalatimes.org/2009/03/15/on-torma-offering/. These tormas are "given" generally in rituals by monastics who own nothing and usually have just about that much to give so the more important aspect of the ritual is the intent or motivation, the mental attitude. Indeed, appearances are absolutely deceiving so an open mind in all aspects is very helpful. For example, in the six realms, (god, demi-god, human, animal, hungry ghost, & hell realms), every physical thing thing is said to be exactly the same with just relative views and reactions by the beings in those realms as they "see" from their own point of view. (One example given often in sutras is the river that is seen as nectar of immortality by the gods, water by the humans, and pus and the like by the beings in the hungry ghost realms.) I often think all six variations are demonstrated, relatively, right here in our world, all the time.   So, very little given with little to no attachment and great compassion for the receiver(s) (like the widow with 2 pennies and a monk or nun without attachment) can be quite an amazing gift.


Is this considered wrong? (Related to art)

A case can be made for someone involved with art as maybe being to some extent & on that account 'intoxicated' with living & pleasant forms. As being heedless in regards to developing his good qualities & at that time not focusing on the theme of renunciation, on the unattractive, on the danger & loathsomeness of existent phenomena; and making others heedless & infatuated with living.
A producer of sensual pleasure basically. Trading in sensual pleasure. Sensual pleasures corrupt people.
However it's not like one is selling drugs or weapons. The harm to oneself and others can be relatively trifling for this or that person. I think it's closer to baking cakes.
Household life is problematic in general and one's household trade is best be closest to trading simple crafted goods or attending to good people. The Anagami householders in the texts, as far as i can tell, were either being lay attendents to The Buddha & The Sangha or making clay pots and trading those for essential requisites, not using money.
Their lifestyle too isn't ideal because it falls short of going forth into homelessness. The Anagamis i have in mind did not go forth because of sick parents.


Benefits of Producing and Caring for Children

Ahmed,
From "Living in the World" in Awareness Itself by Ajaan Fuang Jotiko:

§ Once, when one of Ajaan Fuang's students was being pressured by her parents to look for a husband so that she could settle down and have children, she asked him, "Is it true what they say, that a woman gains a lot of merit in having a child, in that she gives someone else the chance to be born?"
"If that were true," he answered her, "then dogs would get gobs of merit, because they give birth to whole litters at a time."

How ever, once you have organiced your "Rahulas" production, you have certain duty out of you "linga"-worshiping (bhava-tanha) or craving after sensuality (kama-tanha) to care for it and get rightously ride of it (tanha). That starts with not harming it right from the moment of conception. "This has come into beeing."
So seeing such, the burdens and sacrifies other need to bear, one does no more desire for birth and a womb but tries to pay ones last dept of gratitude, giving all back and maybe even share the highest gift, once then made his own.
If you would not have been father, mother, son, daughter once, if not having Upanissaya to the Dhammas father, how could this seed possible cause a conception of light, here and now?
Its good to celerbrate the fathersday, and getting the lessons of gratitude understood rightly by performing.
Nobody called you to come.
(Note: This is a seed of Dhamma and not meant for commercial puposes or other wordily gains.)


Which is the best posture to Practice meditation?

Bhikkhus, the bhikkhu following the practice of my Teaching, having gone to the forest, or to the foot of a tree or to an empty, solitary place, sits down cross-legged, keeping his body erect, and sets up mindfulness, orienting it.
Then with entire mindfulness, he breathes in and with entire mindfulness he breathes out.
Maha-satipatthana Sutta

The above is the standard posture for meditation (i.e.: sit down cross-legged). Even though I can't remain in this posture for a long time due to back pain, I personally believe this is the best posture for meditation. Having said that there are many other postures suitable, depend on your situation (walking, sitting, etc.).


How do you meditate with a blocked nose?

Maybe try to troubleshoot the causes to the blocked nose first. If it's just normal nose booger, gently blow your nose before the sitting to clear nasal passage. If it's allergy/inflammation, eat high vitamins fruits/veggies and maintain regular daily exercises. Anyway, usually once you've gotten into some relatively settled absorption state, the allergy/inflammation tend to naturally subside and you'll breathe better.