Does the Dhamma suggest to change external unfavourable conditions

The Buddha did not intend monks to participate in politics, as seen in DN 2:

  "Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in
  faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these —
  talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and
  battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents;
  relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women
  and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead;
  tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future],
  the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things
  exist or not — he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as
  these. This, too, is part of his virtue.

However, the Buddha did intend for lay people to participate in constructive nation building, in accordance with the Dhamma in DN 16:

  At that time the Venerable Ananda was standing behind the Blessed One, fanning him, and the Blessed One addressed the Venerable
  Ananda thus: "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis have frequent
  gatherings, and are their meetings well attended?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that this is so."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline.

  "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis assemble and disperse
  peacefully and attend to their affairs in concord?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that they do."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline.

  "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis neither enact new decrees
  nor abolish existing ones, but proceed in accordance with their
  ancient constitutions?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that they do."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline.

  "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis show respect, honor,
  esteem, and veneration towards their elders and think it worthwhile to
  listen to them?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that they do."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline.

  "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis refrain from abducting
  women and maidens of good families and from detaining them?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that they refrain from doing so."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline.

  "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis show respect, honor,
  esteem, and veneration towards their shrines, both those within the
  city and those outside it, and do not deprive them of the due
  offerings as given and made to them formerly?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that they do venerate their shrines, and that
  they do not deprive them of their offerings."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline.

  "What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis duly protect and guard the
  arahats, so that those who have not come to the realm yet might do so,
  and those who have already come might live there in peace?"

  "I have heard, Lord, that they do."

  "So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
  be expected, not their decline."


You could choose to say the following:

"Yes i know which direction the rabbit went. I do however choose not to share that information since it will probably lead to the killing of the animal and the creation of unwholesome kamma for you (hunter)".

This way you are honest but choose not to give the information because you know what might happen. This way the rabbit might still be found and killed by the hunter but you did what you could to prevent both the killing and the hunter from performing unwholesome deeds.

How can the rabbit perform unwholesome kamma?

If the mind of the rabbit is not developed enough it might give rise to strong aversion when killed by a hunter. If the rabbit instead dies a natural death, e.g. of old age it might have less or no aversion to the experience thereby creating less unwholesome kamma. This might result in rebirth in a higher realm for the rabbit.

What is important here is your Volition and Intention. You have a wholesome intention that is based in one of the 3 wholesome roots (kusala-mula), namely non-hatred (adosa). Since the intention is not tainted or polluted by the 3 unwholesome roots the action will be beneficial for oneself and others.

Said in another way. If the source is not tainted the ones that drink from it risk no infection.


How effective are guided meditation sessions in achieving the benefits of meditation?

For the purposes of relaxation, they are very effective.  If your goal is simply to de-stress, then by all means use what works.  Even the Buddha taught a gradual path and tailored his teaching to the station and goals of his audience.  Guided meditation is one shade on a spectrum ranging all the way to enlightenment.

However.  While guided meditation is an excellent way of slowing down mental chatter and decompressing, that's about as far as it will take you.  If you are really interested in Buddhism and wish to meditate for the purposes of developing insight and penetrating into the four noble truths, you have to go past the relaxed state of mind engendered by guided meditation.  You need to develop concentration.

Concentration can only be developed by you.  It is a choice that you make every moment - a choice to return to the breath when your mind starts to wander.  It's no different than physical exercise.  The more often you make the choice to maintain your concentration, the stronger your meditation becomes.  It also gets much easier with time.  Concentration is also subtle.  While you can use props like a candle or another person's voice, objects like the breath, kasinas, the body, etc. require much more focus and delicate handling.  Too much effort and they dissolve.  If you don't apply enough, they slip away.

I hope this doesn't come across as me saying that there is anything necessarily wrong with meditating simply to calm your mind.  Destressing certainly has value.  Just be sure to ask yourself what your goals are.  Your answer will determine how to make the most of your time on the cushion.


If the man was a monk, he would eventually be expelled from the monastic order. Similarly, if the man's mind has been consumed by pornography to the  point his behaviour is contrary to social norms, he should probably be forbidden from entering the temple. Often, people with addictions cannot be helped, until those people can recognise for themselves they have a serious problems.

The four brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita, upeka) include equanimity when we wish to help someone but are unable to.

In short, the monks who are responsible for the temple should probably telephone the police to remove the deranged man from temple. Buddhism does not have the power to save everyone.


Can Nibbana be experienced by believers in 'rebirth-reincarnation'?

"Therefore, can the thought of or belief in 'rebirth' in the mind
  result in Nibbana?"

No, it can't.

In the same way, the thought of or belief in "non existence of rebirth" in the mind, can't result in Nibanna.

  "Is the belief in 'rebirth-reincarnation' not a type of 'becoming' &
  not a 'thought formation'?"

It is a type of "becoming" and a "thought formation".

In the same way, a belief in "non existence of rebirth-reincarnation", is a type of "becoming" and a "thought formation".

When a thought or belief arises in a being due to ignorance, that being clings and craves on that thought or belief. This clinging and craving will not result in Nibanna.

When a thought arises in a being due to wisdom, that being does not cling nor crave on that thought. This absence of clinging and craving will result in Nibanna.

A belief is something that is accepted as the only truth. Thus, no belief can ever arise in a being who truly destroyed ignorance. That would be impossible. The one who destroyed ignorance, dwells in wisdom. He is the knower of the truth. How could the knower of the truth say "this is the only truth", when he knows "all truths are non truths"? That would be impossible. That's why the knower of the truth stays in the middle.


There are a few tactics which I have employed in the workplace when dealing with people such as this. They don't ALWAYS work, but with some practice they can definitely help.

1) You can try to push the conversation off tangentially to a different subject.

"Such and such customer did this when we were talking about the smith account."

"Oh right, about the smith account, I was meaning to ask you.."

2) Little to no feedback

Pretty much just what it sounds like. Just be mindful of the persons rant as nothing but noise, only giving enough mindfulness to the actual content as to be able to interact when absolutely necessary.

This sometimes works when the person either takes the hint that you aren't interested, or they become bored that their need to gossip isn't being fulfilled by you.


How does extinction fit in the 12 links?

In Buddhism, there are many kinds of causation. See this link about the five 'niyama' or 'laws of causation' (physical, biological, mental, moral & dhamma/spiritual).

The twelve links are the conditions leading to suffering; the cessation of which leads to Nirvana. They are 'dhamma niyama' or 'spiritual causation'. The twelve links are not mental causation (citta niyama).

Therefore, sense objects can be experienced without ignorance because mere sense objects (which are mental causation) are not suffering in themselves.

The only absence of causation is Nirvana, when the twelve links stop creating suffering.

As for the other four kinds of causation, they keep rolling on (unless human life becomes extinct, which would make extinct moral causation & leave three laws of causation).


Looking for sutta reference on entering into Jhana

The step before getting Nimitta can be dodged depending on the practitioner's abilities. Actually, it is not hard for the high abilities practitioner to do step by step or dodge.
Notice: I use the associated Suttas. And most of what I refer to is in the same sutta. I don't connect Sutta by my idea. I do it on the context. And there are many people from the difference schools tell me the same "bright light" from hard working on the concentration meditation, such as PaAuk-Burma, Thai Kasina Practitioner, Thai Catudhātuvavatthana practitoner. They all get bright light after meditation.
DN 22 MahāsatipaṭṭhānaSutta but actually it is KāyagatāsatiSutta because MahāsatipaṭṭhānaSutta is insight meditation and KāyagatāsatiSutta is concentration meditation. However, the translation in DN 22 MahāsatipaṭṭhānaSutta  is better for Ānāpānassati:
Present moment awareness, Silent present moment awareness

Bhikkhus, how does the bhikkhu keep his mind steadfastly on the body?
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.

Silent present moment awareness on the breath

Then with entire mindfulness he breathes in and with entire
mindfulness he breathes out.
Breathing in a long inhalation, he is conscious of breathing in a long
inhalation, or breathing out a long exhalation, he is conscious of
breathing out a long exhalation.
Breathing in a short inhalation, he is conscious of breathing in a
short inhalation, or breathing out a short exhalation, he is conscious
of breathing out a short exhalation.
He trains himself to be clearly conscious of the whole stretch of the
in-coming breath at its beginning, its middle, and at its end. He
trains himself to be clearly conscious of the whole stretch of the
out-going breath at its beginning, its middle, and at its end.

Fully sustained awareness on the breath

[By being fully conscious of the inhalation] he trains himself to calm down the strong inhalation as he breathes in. [By being fully conscious of the exhalation] he trains himself to calm down the strong exhalation as he breathes out.

Fully sustained attention on beautiful breath
DN 10 SubhaSutta (I recommend this sutta to be the reference of Jhana because it is long enough and step by step. Notice, some part of this sutta is same as  KāyagatāsatiSutta which I refer to Ānāpānassati above):

‘And what, Ānanda, is this so noble body of doctrine regarding self-concentration (Samādhi) in praise of which the Venerable Gotama was wont to speak; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm?’
Restraint of the Sense Faculties
“And how, young Brahman, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense faculties? Herein, young Brahman, having seen a form with the eye, the bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves restraint over the faculty of the eye.
...

DN 10 SubhaSutta for Experiencing the beautiful Nimmita.

“Having abandoned covetousness for the world, he dwells with a mind free from covetousness; he purifies his mind from covetousness. Having abandoned ill will and hatred, he dwells with a benevolent mind, sympathetic for the welfare of all living beings; he purifies his mind from ill will and hatred. Having abandoned dullness and drowsiness, he dwells perceiving light, mindful and clearly comprehending; he purifies his mind from dullness and drowsiness. Having abandoned restlessness and worry, he dwells at ease within himself, with a peaceful mind; he purifies his mind from restlessness and worry. Having abandoned doubt, he dwells as one who has passed beyond doubt, unperplexed about wholesome states; he purifies his mind from doubt.

Remember someone may say this light is sunlight and try to refer sutta or commentary. Don't trust him because this is normal for the concentration meditation practitioner who practice hard enough only. They sit 12+ hours everyday for many months or years to get this light which can shine in their mind trough the dark night. It is shining breathe or meditation's object, not sunlight. Today, many of them have not been laying on a bed for 20 years. I know at lease 1 person.
Why this light is important?
DN 10 SubhaSutta (again):

Quite secluded from sense pleasures (escape from object), secluded from unwholesome states (escape from object's unwholesome recognition), he enters and dwells in the first jhāna, which is accompanied by applied and sustained thought and filled with the rapture and happiness born of seclusion. He drenches, steeps, saturates, and suffuses his body with this rapture and happiness born of seclusion, so that there is no part of his entire body which is not suffused by this rapture and happiness.

There are only 3 objects: sense pleasures (5 strings and associate), non sense pleasures, and illusion.
Sense pleasures person can't know non sense pleasure object and it's illusion until he can attain it.
What is non sense pleasure object and it's illusion?
Non sense pleasure object: Rūpa-jhāna/Bhava, Arūpa-jhāna/Bhava, Nibbāna and 8 Super-mundane paths.
it's illusion: It's concept and name, such  Rūpa-jhāna person and "Rūpa-jhāna person" word which refer to the real  Rūpa-jhāna (we can know  Rūpa-jhāna person and word but we can't refer it to the real Rūpa-jhāna).
So, the only left way to get "Quite secluded from sense pleasures (escape from object)" is developing sense pleasures illusion to be non sense pleasures illusion of RūpaJhāna (bright light) by meditate mind's quality. Better minds is lighter light. The lighter light can overwhelm below in DN 10 SubhaSutta (again) (the practitioner practice below  in moral discipline but it turn into professional/master by the light, patibhāga-nimitta because this light overwhelm "the sign or the details"):

‘And what, Ānanda, is this so noble body of doctrine regarding self-concentration (Samādhi) in praise of which the Venerable Gotama was wont to speak; to which he used to incite the folk, in which he established them, and made them firm?’
“And how, young Brahman, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense faculties? Herein, young Brahman, having seen a form with the eye, the bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves restraint over the faculty of the eye.

Another, important of this light
DN 10 SubhaSutta (again):

“Further, young Brahman, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the previous passing away of joy and grief, the bhikkhu enters and dwells in the fourth jhāna, which is neither pleasant nor painful and contains mindfulness fully purified by equanimity. He sits suffusing his body with a pure bright mind, so that there is no part of his entire body not suffused by a pure bright (pari-odāta) mind.

This mind is bright because it's own power. The mind is not shining because mind has no color. However, this mind power create bright object and bright location base, hadaya-vatthu. It also turn the practitioner body bright as well, good health (depending on how strong of unwholesome karma in the past).
This bright light is for 8 Vijjā
DN 10 SubhaSutta (again):
Again, this is not a bright color mind. Mind has no color. This is a mind which has bright object and bright location base.

“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright (pari-odāta), unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge and vision. He understands thus: ‘This is my body, having material form, composed of the four primary elements, originating from father and mother, built up out of rice and gruel, impermanent, subject to rubbing and pressing, to dissolution and dispersion. And this is my consciousness, supported by it and bound up with it.’
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to creating a mind-made body. From this body he creates another body having material form, mind-made, complete in all its parts, not lacking any faculties.
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the modes of supernormal power. He exercises the various modes of supernormal power: having been one, he becomes many and having been many, he becomes one; he appears and vanishes; he goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, and mountains as if through space; he dives in and out of the earth as if it were water; he walks on water without sinking as if it were earth; sitting cross-legged he travels through space like a winged bird; with his hand he touches and strokes the sun and the moon, so mighty and powerful; he exercises mastery over the body as far as the Brahma-world.
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the divine ear-element. With the divine ear-element, which is purified and surpasses the human, he hears both kinds of sound, the divine and the human, those which are distant and those which are near.
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the knowledge of encompassing the minds (of others). He understands the minds of other beings and persons, having encompassed them with his own mind. He understands a mind with lust as a mind with lust and a mind without lust as a mind without lust; he understands a mind with hatred as a mind with hatred and a mind without hatred as a mind without hatred; he understands a mind with delusion as a mind with delusion and a mind without delusion as a mind without delusion; he understands a contracted mind as a contracted mind and a distracted mind as a distracted mind; he understands an exalted mind as an exalted mind and an unexalted mind as an unexalted mind; he understands a surpassable mind as a surpassable mind and an unsurpassable mind as an unsurpassable mind; he understands a concentrated mind as a concentrated mind and an unconcentrated mind as an unconcentrated mind; he understands a liberated mind as a liberated mind and an unliberated mind as an unliberated mind.
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the knowledge of recollecting past lives. He recollects his numerous past lives, that is, one birth, two births, three, four, or five births; ten, twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty births; a hundred births, a thousand births, a hundred thousand births; many aeons of world contraction, many aeons of world expansion, many aeons of world contraction and expansion, (recollecting): ‘There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance; such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such my span of life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance; such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such my span of life. Passing away from that state I re-arose here.’ Thus he recollects his numerous past lives in their modes and their details.
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the passing away and reappearance of beings. With the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, he sees beings passing away and reappearing—inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate—and he understands how beings fare according to their kamma, thus: ‘These beings—who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, and mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wrong views, and undertook actions governed by wrong views—with the breakup of the body, after death, have reappeared in the plane of misery, the bad destinations, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings—who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, and mind, who did not revile the noble ones, held right views, and undertook actions governed by right views—with the breakup of the body, after death, have reappeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.’ Thus with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, he sees beings passing away and reappearing—inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate—and he understands how beings fare in accordance with their kamma.
...
“When his mind is thus concentrated, pure and bright, unblemished, free from defects, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the destruction of the cankers. He understands as it really is: ‘This is suffering.’ He understands as it really is: ‘This is the origin of suffering.’ He understands as it really is: ‘This is the cessation of suffering.’ He understands as it really is: ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of suffering.’ He understands as it really is: ‘These are the cankers.’ He understands as it really is: ‘This is the origin of the cankers.’ He understands as it really is: ‘This is the cessation of the cankers.’ He understands as it really is: ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of the cankers.’
...


Here is another translation

  385. He for whom there is neither this shore nor the other shore, nor yet both, he who is free of cares and is unfettered — him do I call a holy man. [27]

Here's a footnote:

  (v. 385) This shore: the six sense organs; the other shore: their corresponding objects; both: I-ness and my-ness.

Here's a Sutta which includes the parable of the 'raft' and 'other shore':
Asivisa Sutta: Vipers

  "'The great expanse of water' stands for the fourfold flood: the flood
  of sensuality, the flood of becoming, the flood of views, & the flood
  of ignorance.

  'The near shore, dubious & risky' stands for self-identification. 'The
  further shore, secure and free from risk' stands for Unbinding. 'The
  raft' stands for just this noble eightfold path: right view, right
  resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort,
  right mindfulness, right concentration. 'Making an effort with hands &
  feet' stands for the arousing of persistence. 'Crossed over, having
  gone to the other shore, he would stand on high ground, a brahman'
  stands for the arahant."

I'm not sure why the Sutta praises "the further shore" whereas the Dhammapada praises non-awareness of shores. I suspect that the former is 'renunciation' whereas the latter is either 'middle way' or 'meditative absorption/concentration' ... but this/my interpretation might be non-standard i.e. wrong.

Here's a version in French (I don't know whether buddha-vacana.org has an English-language translation of the Dhammapada)
whose footnote gives the same explanation/interpretation of 'shore' as the accesstoinsight.org footnote does:

  1 cette rive, l'autre rive: 'cette rive' correspond aux six āyatanas internes (œil, oreille, nez, langue corps, esprit), et 'l'autre rive' correspond aux six āyatanas externes (objets externes correspondant chacun des six āyatanas internes).

At the bottom of the page it says its translation is based on work by Daw Mya Tin and documents on the DLMB web site.

So, here (on the DLMB web site) is a detailed analysis of the Pali. It ends with a commentary which says,

  Mara once approached the Buddha and asked him what does the word para (the other shore) mean. The Buddha knew that it was Mara and replied with this verse, saying that the other shore is the Nirvana, which only the Arahants can reach.

On this page (the work by Daw Mya Tin) is perhaps the simplest or most complete description. I copy-and-paste the whole below (but note that this web site has a similar page of description for each other verse in the Dhammapada):

  Dhammapada Verse 385
  Mara Vatthu

  Yassa param aparam va
  paraparam na vijjati
  Vitaddaram visamyuttam
  tamaham brumi brahmanam.

  Verse 385: Him I call a brahmana who has for him neither this shore (i.e., the sense-bases) nor the other shore (i.e., the sense objects), and who is undistressed and free from moral defilements1.

  1 'This shore' and 'the other shore' are used in the sense of the internal and the external ayatanas. The internal ayatanas are the sense bases, viz, the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body and the mind; the external ayatanas are the sense objects, viz., visible object, sound, odour, taste, touch and mind-object.

  For a true Brahmana (i.e., arahat) there is neither 'this shore' nor 'the other shore' which means that the senses of the arahat are calmed, and his passions extinguished.

  The Story of Mara

  While residing at the Jetavana monastery, the Buddha uttered Verse (385) of this book, with reference to Mara.

  On one occasion, Mara came to the Buddha disguised as a man and asked him, "Venerable Sir, You often say the word 'param'. What is the meaning of that word?" The Buddha, knowing that it was Mara who was asking that question, chided him, "O wicked Mara! The words 'param' and 'aparam' have nothing to do with you. 'Param' which means 'the other shore' can be reached only by the arahats who are free from moral defilements."

  Then the Buddha spoke in verse as follows:

  Verse 385: Him I call a brahmana who has for him neither this shore (i.e., the sense-bases) nor the other shore (i.e., the sense objects ), and who is undistressed and free from moral defilements.

Given this translation I don't understand why the 'further shore' are 'sense-objects' and why that further shore can only be reached by the arahats. The internal/external ayatanas are introduced e.g. in this Wikipedia article.

  Āyatana (Pāli; Sanskrit) is a Buddhist term that has been translated as "sense base", "sense-media" or "sense sphere."[1] In Buddhism, there are six internal sense bases (Pali: ajjhattikāni āyatanāni; also known as, "organs", "gates", "doors", "powers" or "roots"[2]) and six external sense bases (bāhirāni āyatanāni or "sense objects"; also known as vishaya or "domains"[3]).

My only guess is that it might be related to some desire to 'see things as they really are, beyond illusion/subjectivity' or something like that.


One of my early teachers suggested:

Externalize the core of anger within yourself as "not me". Meaning, you say to yourself "this is my ego getting angry", "this is my ego feeling hurt", or "this is my ego wants to feel superior" etc. Blame it on the ego, then discipline the ego like a misbehaving child.
identify the source of anger in an attachment. You say to yourself: "looks like I assign too much importance to X" or "looks like I'm overgeneralizing Y" or "looks like I stereo-typically identify A with B while in fact they are not always the same". As you identify the attachment, you know it's not you who's angry, it's your attachment that is angry (ego is made of attachments). Let go of the attachment and the anger will subside.

My root guru also taught a more advanced technique:

See your anger directly as somatic energy overlayed on the body-image. As you look at it directly you can transmute it from whatever it is to pure energy, or in the worst case to regular headache :)


What object should one focus on when meditating to reduce anxiousness?

Just feel the body in general as one breath in and out. Then allow the body to relax. As the body relaxes, so does the cognitive mind.


Why did Buddha refrain from finding knowledge of the whole universe?

I like to know the reason for this.

Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be
conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

https://suttacentral.net/an4.77/en/thanissaro
In plain english, the reason for this is that these types of questions are not required for the path towards nirvana at best, or straight up misleading at worst.

Will all this knowledge be worthless if I find nibbana someday?

I wouldn't put down a physicists knowledge of the world, but it has little or nothing to do with buddhas dharma.


Whatever bad deed done with this deed-born body is all to be experienced here

What does deed-born body (karajakāya) really mean?

It appears to mean "body born of causing".

It's a compound, e.g. kara ("causing") ja ("born of") kāya ("body").

The PTS dictionary entry for Kara includes ...

  Kara (p. 195) Kara Kara [fr. kṛ] 1. (adj.) ( -- ˚) producing, causing, forming, making, doing

... and ...

  ja "born of kamma" in karaja -- kāya the body sprung from action, an expression always used in a contemptible manner, therefore=the impure, vile, low body A v.300; J i.5; Vism 287, 404; DA i.113, 217, 221; DhA i.10; iii.420; DhsA 403. karaja -- rūpa Vism 326.

Also ...

  Ja (p. 277) Ja Ja ( -- ˚) [adj. -- suffix from jan, see janati; cp. ˚ga; gacchati] born, produced, sprung or arisen from.

So it's literally or etymologically kara-ja-kaya i.e. "body born from kara", where kara is defined as "producing, causing, forming, making, doing".

I don't see exactly why kara and kamma are being equated, but they're obviously pretty similar.

Given this translation ...

  Whatever bad deeds I have done in the past with this deed-born body I will experience here.
  yaṃ kho me idaṃ kiñci pubbe iminā karajakāyena pāpakammaṃ kataṃ, sabbaṃ taṃ idha vedanīyaṃ

... I think the literal word-for-word translation is something like ...

  Whatever my something in-the-past I have with this body-born-of-causing bad-deeds done, entirely in-this-world I will know them.

Perhaps you might as well just read it as kaya (i.e. body).

There are other bits in the sutta which just refer to body, e.g. ...

  For neither women nor men take this body with them when they go.
  Itthiyā vā, bhikkhave, purisassa  vā nāyaṃ kāyo ādāya gamanīyo.


Why is "idle speech" one of the ten unwholesome actions?

So how should I interpret the Buddha's teachings on idle speech for lay followers?

Opening pleasantries are not idle talk; they frame a discussion by providing social context:

  He went by carriage as far as the terrain allowed, then descended and approached the Buddha on foot, and exchanged greetings with him. --DN16

And neither is talking about suffering, its origin, its escape and the path to escape.

  “Mendicants, do you remember the four noble truths that I taught?"

Have you noticed that although people may idly brag about their wealth, good family and good fortune, what they often really wish to talk about is their...suffering? Indeed, there seems to be a high correlation between idle talk and suffering.

Therefore, from a practical point of view, I've found that we can all talk about our own suffering and its escape. Such talk is not idle and often leads to friendships and trust.

In terms of movies and shows as idle talk, even these are opportunities to discuss suffering. Movies and shows are all about suffering.

So when someone approaches with idle talk, gently listen and ask them about their suffering. Then listen and speak with an open heart. Become a quiet person known as a good listener and a good friend.

  Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life. --SN3.18


If you can attain the real peace of meditation, it is like becoming a millionaire.

Since you have so much knowledge, who can easily get a job and earn a living, you can consider taking a holiday for a year or more to explore meditation.


There are several large scholarly collections you can access freely:

Organizations:
International Association of Buddhist Studies

Sanskrit:
Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon

Chinese:
WWW Database of Chinese Buddhist texts
Digital Database of Buddhist Tripitaka Catalogues

Japanese:
The SAT Daizōkyō Text Database

English:
English Translation of the Buddhist Canon and Publication Project

hope this helps


If there be no soul or transmigrating entity that takes rebirth, who or what bears or enjoys the consequences or fruits of karma?

The question is irrelevant because there are two levels of teaching in Buddhism (refer to two sorts of right view in MN 117). The Buddha generally did not teach about "kamma-vipaka" and "not-self" (anatta) together.

"Kamma-vipaka" is mainly for puthujjana (common village people who need to be taught morals so to avoid self-harm) and "anatta" is for Noble People. Only later heretics (such as the Brahman philosopher Buddhaghosa) taught "empty not-self phenomena are reborn in a Twelvefold Voidness".

When a Noble Person realises the reality of not-self (anatta), they no longer perform immoral actions because there is no longer selfishness or self-interest within their mind. Also, there is no self-referent to any past kamma. Refer to AN 6.63, which says:

  Just this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right
  mindfulness, right concentration — is the path of practice leading to
  the cessation of kamma.

But for the common village people who have not realised not-self (anatta), the Buddha taught they themselves are the owners & heirs of their personal actions, as follows:

  Bhikkhus, beings are the owners of their kamma, the heirs of their kamma; they have kamma as their origin, kamma as their relative, kamma
  as their resort; whatever kamma they do, good or bad, they are its
  heirs.

  AN 10.216

The later is true because when kamma-vipaka occurs, the idea of "self" arises in the mind of the recipient of kamma, such as the regret: "Why did I do that bad deed? What did I do to myself? I have ruined my life".

In summary, whenever "rebirth" occurs, it is a "rebirth" of "self". Inwardly, it is never "not-self".


How to make my thoughts non influencial on my happiness and presence?

There are several Sutta that deal with this namely;

Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking
Vitakkasanthana Sutta: The Relaxation of Thoughts

They are very self explanatory

There is another Sutta that will be helpful -- this one in particular will help understanding the cause of the particular thoughts you are having:

Tanha Sutta: Craving

If you want to take it to the next level yet study "the 18 mental explorations" and "the 36 states of attachment", mentioned in this sutta:

Salayatana-vibhanga Sutta: An Analysis of the Six Sense-media

These are to be studied and remembered, they are quite easy to understand and i recommend just writing them down. This will be very useful in shedding light on how the mind works in general.

If you are having obsessive thoughts that are making you restless you might also consider these things ;

Settling your quarrels

  Avoiding restless people & seeking out calm people

  "Monks, when the mind is agitated,[3] that is the wrong time to cultivate the enlightenment-factors of investigation-of-states, of energy, of rapture. Why? An agitated mind is hard to calm through these factors.
  "When the mind is agitated, that is the right time to cultivate the enlightenment-factors of tranquillity, concentration, equanimity. Why? Because an agitated mind is easy to calm[4] through these factors.

  There is quietude of mind; frequently giving wise attention to it — that is the denourishing of the arising of restlessness and remorse that have not yet arisen, and of the increase and strengthening of restlessness and remorse that have already arisen. — SN 46:51

  Six things are conducive to the abandonment of restlessness and remorse:
  1. Knowledge and pondering of the Dhamma;
  2. Asking questions about the Dhamma;
  3. Familiarity with the Vinaya (the Code of Monastic Discipline, and for lay followers, with the principles of moral conduct);
  4. Association with those mature in age and experience, who possess dignity, restraint and calm
  5. Noble friendship;
  6. Suitable conversation.
  (List from commy to satipatthana sutta)

Practice not getting involved in conflicts and restraint of speech leading to much discussion

  Moggallana, should you train yourself: 'I will speak no confrontational speech.' That is how you should train yourself. When there is confrontational speech, a lot of discussion can be expected. When there is a lot of discussion, there is restlessness. One who is restless becomes unrestrained. Unrestrained, his mind is far from concentration. (Nodding sutta)

Lower your expectation in regards to being liked or being attended
to properly by others

  "Furthermore, Moggallana, should you train yourself: 'I will not visit families with my pride[3] lifted high.' That is how you should train yourself. Among families there are many jobs that have to be done, so that people don't pay attention to a visiting monk. If a monk visits them with his trunk lifted high, the thought will occur to him, 'Now who, I wonder, has caused a split between me and this family? The people seem to have no liking for me.' Getting nothing, he becomes abashed. Abashed, he becomes restless. Restless, he becomes unrestrained. Unrestrained, his mind is far from concentration.

Training supportive mediations such as ie Metta, even if done very briefly will snowball and be of great benefit.

Mindfulness is always useful. Choose wisely which thoughts and themes you let stay in charge and where effort is directed.

Gl


What does the first para of Lonaphala Sutta mean?

This is how I understand it.  You don't get back exactly what you put in, but you get back the results of it.
Example,  if you kill someone, it is not necessary that you will get killed back in return but you will get results from your killing which depends on many factors.  This sutta,  Buddha taught us that is possible to work on those many factors that could produce a better results.
Like , if I killed someone, then later worked to become a stream enter, a result that could have sent me to hell next life changed to make me a sickly person.  Etc. A Finger bandit arahat is another example.
It is clear to me that karma is not fate or fixed destinations or replacement of a will from a god.


Why am I getting upset after meditation and sleepy during meditation?

Ven. Vijithananda said this is due to practicing Samatha meditation. When you practice Samatha you have the irritation towards any disturbances to your meditation such as sound and the people around you. You also irritated for not being able to experience that meditative happiness.
As per Ven. Vijithananda, sleepiness is some sort of progress (defeating four Maras) however you have to go beyond sleepiness.
The solution for this is to practice Satipathana.


What happens after the great doubt of koan practice?

Andrei's answer is pretty spot on, but I think you need a little background on koan practice to really get the gist of the kind of doubt it's referring to.    Say you are given the Mu koan.  You might sit with that for a couple of months.  During an interview with your teacher, he might ask what mu is or to show it to him.  You might say "it's emptiness".  Ding!  He rings the bell.  Wrong answer.  You go back to sitting.  You go to him again and say something like "thoughts stopping".  Ding!  Back you go.  "No mind?"  Ding!  "Everything is one."  Ding!  "The cypress in the garden."  Ding, ding, ding!

The whole time this is going on, you are getting frustrated.  Your hope is getting crushed.  It seems like everything you say is wrong.  All your theories are dashed.  Even what you take to be subtle observations aren't the answer your teacher is looking for.  Your mind has no refuge.  You have nothing to hold onto.  It's all not this, not this!  That is great doubt.  And it's visceral.  Mumon even likens it to swallowing a hot ball of iron.

But if you practice, you will eventually come tottering into a place where insight is possible.  You might say something to your teacher, something you take to be completely outlandish or that you don't even understand yourself, and he'll pass you on your koan.  On some occasions, you may even get a pretty clear, momentary glimpse of the blue sky through the clouds.  But most of the time, and I don't mean to disappoint, but even after "answering" your koan, you'll walk away feeling just as confused as ever.  The doubt comes slamming back down on your head and back to the cushion you go...just this time with a different koan.

Koans are like holes knocked into a wall with a sledgehammer.  Every one that you answer does a little damage.  Some might even let a little light through.  But over time, if you smack it enough, it will eventually fall over.  Only then is anything really shattered.  It's best not to have hope.  Hope is a temporary refuge.  Better to come at that wall with the full force of your doubt.


Anatta isn't something which continues- it just refers to the lack of an inherent (non-dependent) self nature, which is true of everything, everywhere and always.

Contemplating dependent origination shows why anatta is true- since everything arises in dependence on something else, and extinguishes when that condition disappears, nothing can have an inherent self nature.

Nibbana is the disappearance of the conditions that cause something to arise, and so, because of dependent origination, it's also the disappearance of the thing itself.


What to make of Jhanas as explained in the pragmatic dharma movement?

Unfortunately, the canonical definition for jhanas is too vague.

  Quite secluded from sense pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states of mind, he enters and dwells in the first jhana, which is accompanied by applied thought and sustained thought with rapture and happiness born of seclusion. (M.i,1818; Vbh.245)

Restricting only to the first jhana and Considering only the above, one could gloss over the seclusion part and interpret applied/sustained thought, rapture and happiness in any convenient way.

Probably the most superficial understanding would further conflate rapture and happiness as just some pleasant feeling, and regard applied and sustained thought as a very ordinary kind of concentration (e.g the one required to read or observe and describe something). Naturally, this would make jhana a very ordinary experience.

Richard sankman wrote a book about jhanas ("the experienxe of samadhi") where half of it is devoted to interviewing monks and lay teachers on how they interpret many of those things. Though some do not set the bar much higher, it seems none of them had such a loose understanding of jhana.

In a more traditional interpretation, the bar is higher (and jhana is nothing ordinary): the factors are more delineated, better identified and it takes a lot of practice to develop them -- like building the trust of an extremely scared animal. Even access concentration which precedes the first jhana requires some hard work.

But even here there are some disagreements (e.g. Can one hear sounds while absorbed?)

In any case, In this stronger interpretation, While it may take little time for a seasoned yogi to be absorbed (depending on how strong the factors are), i think the gross movements and speech are quite incompatible with this state. Thus, they might be telling a different story.

In my experience, the depth of tranquility and concentration before the first jhana makes it quite challenging to articulate long discursive thoughts without causing disruption -- e.g. the mere lookup for analogies to describe something would weaken the concentration significantly, as the focus moves away from the meditation object. Let alone speak such descriptions during the absorption, specially when we feel very disinclined to say a word or make disruptive movements as we progress towards it (say, when we are so focused that it requires significant effort to use any mental faculty that was already put to rest or to drive the mind away from the object of meditation).


How does an enlightened mind distinguish itself from all other phenomena?

The mind of a fully enlightened one is completely empty of discursive thoughts. It does not conceptualize at all. In fact, this has already occurred to an Arya being at the 7th Bhumi let alone a fully enlightened Buddha. So the answer to your question is that an enlightened mind DOES NOT distinguish itself from all other phenomena.
For references I draw from this commentary by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche on Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara.
Here is a screenshot and highlight of the table of contents of the pertinent sections:

When we turn to page 369 we see a verse describing the way in which an Arya being achieving the 11th Bhumi (full Buddhahood) knows suchness and associated commentary:

Right after this passage the next verse is an objection. I think the objection is coming from someone espousing the Cittamatra tenet system as this is the last labeled objector in the text. Anyway, here is the objection:

A little further down we see a verse by Chandrakirti himself giving a simile of how it can be that a Buddha's mind can be totally free from discursive thought all the while being of benefit to other sentient beings. This seems to be the thrust of the OP's question if I'm not mistaken:

Here's the really dispositive part. A little bit later in the text Rinpoche affirms that the standard interpretation of the text and of Tibetan Buddhist schools is that a Fully Enlightened Buddha is entirely free of discursive thought and elaborates a bit. He says the answer to your question is basically that an enlightened mind DOES NOT distinguish itself from all other phenomena:

There is so much more in this commentary and I encourage you to read all of it as it is an absolute treasure. Of course, this commentary and root text are from the masters of the Prasangika Madhyamaka and so keep in mind this as the basis for understanding the text.


The Buddha was not a vegetarian.

The precepts call for no killing, but it does not say that meat cannot be eaten.

A clarification on this can be found in MN55:

  Thus have I heard: At one time the Lord was staying at Rājagaha in
  Jīvaka Komārabhacca's Mango Grove. Then Jīvaka Komārabhacca approached
  the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a
  respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance,
  Jīvaka Komārabhacca spoke thus to the Lord:

  “This is what I have heard, revered sir: that they kill living
  creatures on purpose for the recluse Gotama, and that the recluse
  Gotama knowingly makes use of meat killed on purpose and specially
  provided for him. Those who speak thus, revered sir: ‘They kill living
  creatures on purpose for the recluse Gotama, and the recluse Gotama
  knowingly makes use of meat killed on purpose and specially provided
  for him’, now, are these quoting the Lord's own words, revered sir,
  not misrepresenting the Lord with what is not fact, are they
  explaining in conformity with Dhamma, and does no reasoned thesis give
  occasion for contempt?”

  “Jīvaka, those who speak thus: ‘They kill living creatures on purpose
  for the recluse Gotama, and the recluse Gotama knowingly makes use of
  meat killed on purpose and specially provided for him’, these are not
  quoting my own words, but are misrepresenting me with what is not
  true, with what is not fact. I, Jīvaka, say that in three cases meat
  may not be used: if it is seen, heard, suspected (to have been killed
  on purpose for a monk). In these three cases I, Jīvaka, say that meat
  may not be used. But I, Jīvaka, say that in three cases meat may be
  used: if it is not seen, heard, suspected (to have been killed on
  purpose for a monk). In these three cases I, Jīvaka, say that meat may
  be used.

Regarding the Buddha being poisoned by pork, please see this answer.


Does the middle way apply to objects as well as the skandhas?

The middle way -- between annihilationism and eternalism -- does apply to objects. Objects are neither existent nor not existent. They are interpretative imputations made on the basis of multiple causes and conditions temporarily coming together in their non-stop motion, transformation, and interaction.

Objects we have consciousness of are not "made of" substance, according to Mahayana Buddhists. Objects are interpretative imputations made by the observer. The so-called material substance is but a small part of all conditions, combination of which leads to arising of this particular delineation and designation.


What does the term 'Sammasambuddha' mean?

We pay homage to the Buddha by saying ”Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa” three times. The widely practiced translations of it take the following forms:

“Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy (Exalted) One, the supremely (fully) Enlightened One!”

“Homage to the fully Enlightened One who found the truth about the existence and became free of all defilements!”

“Veneration to Him, the Most Exalted, the Purified, the Supremely Enlightened Buddha (the Rightly Self-awakened One.)”

Here the term Sammâ-sambuddho means  that Buddha understood the Four Noble Truths without anyone’s help. Buddha is really the one and only Teacher who first taught the Four Noble Truths. These Truths explain the realities of life. Buddha understood the realities of life, without anyone’s help. By knowing this, we can establish an unshakeable confidence based on this quality.

There can be only one Samma Sambuddha, in the entire universe, at any given period. During most aeons (Kalpa), there are no Samma Sambuddhas. Hence they are very rare. A Samma Sambuddha is called ‘Asama Sama’, i.e. incomparable with any other being but can be compared only to other Samma Sambuddhas who had lived in the distant past. Hence it is not feasible for all to aspire to be a Buddha.

The Buddha himself said that the best way to pay homage to him is to learn Dhamma and to follow the Path. This is the more deeper meaning of the Namaskaraya, “Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa”.

Once Buddha said, “Attä hi attano nätho, kö hi näthö paro siyä”, meaning, ”One indeed is one’s own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one?”. Each one has one’s own mind. And that is what is needed to be purified in order to attain a peaceful life now, a better life in the next, or even Nibbana. But it all starts with going for refuge in the Buddha Dhamma & the Sangha. When we say the Namaskaraya with understanding and resolve, we develop citta pasada or calmness and joy of mind.


Is the concept of Gandhabba Brahmanical teaching?

From MN 93 (though translated by Sujato, I replaced "spirit being reborn" with "gandhabba"), the sentence in question is:

  An embryo is conceived when these three things come together—the
  mother and father come together, the mother is in the fertile part of
  her menstrual cycle, and the gandhabba is present.’
  Idha mātāpitaro ca sannipatitā honti, mātā ca utunī hoti, gandhabbo ca paccupaṭṭhito hoti; evaṃ tiṇṇaṃ sannipātā gabbhassa avakkanti
  hotī’ti.

Pretty much in Buddhism and Hinduism, Gandharvas are a kind of musician devas . According to the wisdomlib page on Gandharvas:

  A Gandharva (Sanskrit) or Gandhabba (Pali) is one of the lowest
  ranking devas in Buddhist theology. They are classed among the
  Caturmaharajikakayika devas, and are subject to the Great King
  Dhrtarastra, Guardian of the East. Beings are reborn among the
  Gandharvas as a consequence of having practiced the most basic form of
  ethics (Janavasabha sutta, DN.18). It was considered embarrassing for
  a monk to be born in no better birth than that of a gandharva.

  Gandharvas can fly through the air, and are known for their skill as
  musicians. They are connected with trees and flowers, and are
  described as dwelling in the scents of bark, sap, and blossom. They
  are among the beings of the wilderness that might disturb a monk
  meditating alone.

As stated in the Hinduism.SE answer linked by Dhammadhatu in his comment, Kandarpa is another name for Kamadeva, the cupid god of Hinduism, from the wisdomlib page on Kandarpa:

  Kandarpa (कन्दर्प).—Another name for Kāmadeva. Kāmadeva was born of
  the mind of Brahmā and as soon as he was born he turned to Brahmā and
  asked "Kaṃ darpayāmi?" (Whom should I make proud?) So Brahmā gave him
  the name Kaṃdarpa alias Kandarpa.

It doesn't make sense that a Gandharva is present for conception.

It could make sense that cupid (Kandarpa) is present for conception, so this is the first hypothesis from me. Of course, cupid here could be a personification of romantic or sexual passion. So, this could just mean that sexual passion is present.

From the wisdomlib page on Gandharvavivaha or Gandharva marriage, we find:

  Gāndharvavivāha (गान्धर्वविवाह):—The Gāndharva marriage (vivāha).—This
  is a marriage arising out of the voluntary union of a maiden or her
  lover which springs from desire and has sexual intercourse for its
  purpose. It can be compared with the modern love marriage.

Based on the definition above, once again, "Gandharva" being present, could just mean sexual passion being present.

From the wisdomlib page on apagabbha, we read:

  apagabbha : (adj.) (apa + gabbha) not destined to another rebirth; (a
  + pagabbha) not haughty.
  (Source): BuddhaSasana: Concise Pali-English Dictionary

  Apagabbha, (adj.) (a + pa + gabbha) not entering another womb, i. e.
  not destined to another rebirth Vin.III, 3. (Page 50)
  (Source):
  Sutta: The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary

From this page (quoted from Max Mueller's book "Vinaya Texts"), we see that this comes from the Vinaya, where the Buddha said:

  He who has freed himself, Siha, from the necessity of returning in
  future into a mother's womb, and of being reborn into new existences
  who has rooted out (his being subject to) rebirth, and has done away
  with it, as a palm tree is rooted out, so that it is destroyed and
  cannot grow up again - such a person do I call apagabbha.

So, if "apagabbha" means one who is not destined for descending into a womb, then presumably "pagabbha" means one who is destined for descending into a womb i.e. being to be born. It's possible that "pagabbha" became changed into "gandhabba".

So, these are my two theories:

"Gandhabba being present" just means sexual passion is present.
"Gandhabba being present" was originally "pagabbha being present", meaning the one who is to be born is present.

The second theory originated from Andrei's comment on gabbha.

  ‘But do you know
  ‘Jānanti pana bhonto—

  for sure whether that spirit is an aristocrat, a brahmin, a merchant, or a worker?’
  taggha, so gandhabbo khattiyo vā brāhmaṇo vā vesso vā suddo vā’ti?

This part nullifies the first theory, so we are left with the second i.e. "gandhabba being present" was originally (probably) "pagabbha being present", meaning the one who is to be born is present.

This is probably the same meaning as "sambhavesi" in the Karaniya Metta Sutta which according to the wisdomlib page on sambhavesi means:

  sambhavesī : (m.) one who is seeking birth. || sambhāvesi (aor. of
  sambhāveti), esteemed; honoured; mixed with.
  (Source):
  BuddhaSasana: Concise Pali-English Dictionary

It simply means one who is to be born.

The OP asked whether there is a spirit or soul or being that is born or reborn?

If one answers "yes", that would eternalism. If one answers "no", that would be annihilationism.

According to SN 23.2, there is the definition of "being" as follows:

  As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "'A being,' lord.
  'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"

  "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is
  caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

  "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception...
  fabrications...

  "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha:
  when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a
  being.'

There is another definition of "being" in SN 5.10:

  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.

  Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
  The word 'chariot' is used,
  So, when the aggregates are present,
  There's the convention 'a being.'

  It's only suffering that comes to be,
  Suffering that stands and falls away.
  Nothing but suffering comes to be,
  Nothing but suffering ceases.

So, there is a being in Buddhism, but it's not eternal and it is constructed dependent on conditions.

The concept of "rebirth" in Buddhism is simply the continuation of suffering beyond death. There is no eternal person or being or soul or spirit or consciousness or self that dies and is reborn. In fact, it's not even the same being or person or consciousness throughout a single lifetime. It's always changing.

However, looking at the context of the sutta, the Buddha simply wanted to prove that there is no such thing as caste from birth.


Kalachakra Tantra (translation of the original text)

This footnote suggests you might be looking for "Kilty, G: Ornament of Stainless Light, Wisdom 2004".


Where in the Tripitaka completion of the formation of Karmic result is mentioned?

I think that the "conditions to transgress precepts" are spelled out in the Vinaya in great detail. For example, in The Buddhist Monastic Code I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained,

Pages 245 through 247 define what "a lie" is
Pages 54 through 74 define "stealing"
Pages 75 through 85 defining "killing"

And similarly for other (monastic) precepts.


Does the question "what are the pitfalls to improvement?" further the purpose (to improve)?

It depends. In the simplest case, yes of course - and Buddha talks a lot about this in the Pali Canon: For any obstacle Xi: what is the exact nature of Xi? what are the necessary and sufficient factors required for Xi to arise? which factor Xi-1 of these factors can we remove to prevent Xi from arising? (Repeat recursively as needed for the factor Xi-1 in place of Xi, and then its necessary factor Xi-2 etc. until X0) Finally, what is our exact plan of attack to uproot the whole chain?

Now, as Mahayana practitioners figured out, the desire to advance on the path can itself be a major pitfall. This is even recognized in the Pali Canon itself, which says that udhacca-kukkucca (restlessness and anxiety about one's Dharma practice) is one of the fetters that must be eradicated on the advanced phases (along with arrogance & conceit on the other extremum).

My favorite illustration of this is Dutiya Anuruddha Sutta (AN 3.128 or 3.130 or 131 depending how you count):

  Then venerable Anuruddha came to venerable Shariputra and said:
  -- As much as I, friend Shariputra, look at things with purified Heavenly Eye, see things with thousandfold-superhuman vision, train in confidence unmovable, in awareness undimmable, in tranquillity imperturbable, and in focused mind unscattered, still I can't "having stopped feeding the asavas, achieve liberation of mind".
  -- All these dharmas, friend Anuruddha, of the kind "I look at things with purified Heavenly Eye, I see things with thousandfold-superhuman vision" -- this is your conceit.
  And the dharmas like "I train in confidence unmovable, in awareness undimmable, in tranquillity imperturbable, and in focused mind unscattered" -- this is your udhacca.
  And the dharmas like "still I can't "having stopped feeding the asavas, achieve liberation of mind" -- this is your kukkucca.
  You'd better, friend Anuruddha, these three dharmas abandon; To these three dharmas not attending, on the deathless aspect focus your mind.

In this scenario, worrying about one's improvement was actually itself an instance of "feeding the asavas".

Compare this with the following verses from Prajnaparamita-Ratnagunasamcayagatha which says:

  Also, not the position of body, nor of feelings, nor thoughts, nor volitions,
  Nor of consciousness -- position even a little does not bother him.
  Thus, not getting stuck on any single dharma, without a "home",
  Not clinging, he attains Enlightenment of the Lucky Ones.

  Having stopped again and again wavering searching for wisdom,
  "Whence?", "Why?" -- of such dharmas empty,
  Having stopped getting upset, caught up, or scared,
  Soon he can reach Enlightenment, such Bodhisattva.

So yes, inquiring into the pitfalls to improvement does further, including inquiring into these notions of "inquiring" and "improvement" themselves.

P.S. and what is that "deathless aspect" (amrita-dhatu) that Shariputra was talking about? As is said in KN Ud 1:10,

  Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.


What is the Buddhist term for each moment being subtlety unique?

Maybe the term is "Tathata" that means "suchness" or "thusness". It is a Mahayana term. It means "Things as they are" or "reality". It's ultimate reality as opposed to conceptual reality.

It comes from the word the Buddha used to describe himself," Tathagata" that means "one thus gone".

  In Chan stories, tathātā is often best revealed in the seemingly mundane or meaningless, such as noticing the way the wind blows through a field of grass, or watching someone's face light up as they smile.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tath%C4%81t%C4%81


How to remove dullness of mind, without sitting meditation, in regular activity?

You can indeed meditate(Vipassana) while performing any task.
ex: if you are sweeping, keep reminding: sweeping.. sweeping..  sweeping..

Dullness or boredom is a form of aversion. Ignorance is the cause of it.
To overcome dullness, simply note it as it is without taking it as "I am bored" or "it is boring".


My guess is that you can probably expect an orientation first.   All the same, it really depends on the group and the nature of the retreat.  If it's a formal sesshin, you've got a lot to expect.  For one, the energy will be amazing.  Zen is sesshin and sesshin is Zen.  There are no words that can describe what the experience is like!  As for the more mundane - there will be no talking.  These retreats are silent, but if you have a question about what you should be doing for a work period or what have you, you aren't violating any rules if you approach a senior student with a question.  Also regarding the talking bit - you will be given a chance to talk to the guy in charge during dokusan.  Try to save your practice related questions for then.  Two, your legs will hurt...a lot!!!  Expect this from the get go, but don't be afraid of it (easy to say, right??).  Stretching a bit helps purge your muscles of the lactic acid that builds up.  Oh, and during meal times, if they give you a yellowish looking pickle, don't eat it!  You use that to wash your bowl.  You can eat it after.  ;-)

All in all, just do the the best you can.  No one sits like a stone on their first retreat.  It takes years of practice to get to that point.  Also, don't expect any earth shattering revelations or anything of the sort.  The world will seem to move a lot faster once you come back home, though.  This will last a couple of days.  It will also be a bit easier dealing with stressful situations, your mind will a bit clearer, and you'll just be kinda happy for no reason.  That should whet your appetite to go back!


Is reflecting upon a choir conducive to the path of Enlightenment?

"But is it wrong to get energized or inspired by a choir, even if the inspiration is towards the path of enlightenment?"

In principle, I don't think so. It's quite reasonable actually to regard the verses in the suttas having that precise purpose (otherwise, why write in verses?). Additionally, many traditions do chanting.

"I know that even thinking about this is also a sign of attachment, as even those thoughts are impermanent."

Not necessarily. Inspiration does not entail craving, and feeling inspired is very important, I don't think anyone who have directed their lives to this path would be able to gather energy to do so without inspiration.

Moreover:

  [...] and he gains inspiration in the meaning, gains inspiration in the Dhamma, gains gladness connected with the Dhamma. When he is glad, rapture is born in him. in one who is rapturous, the body becomes tranquil; one whose body is tranquil feels pleasure; in one who feels pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated.

  --   Vatthūpama Sutta, MN 7

also:

  This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Endowed with two things, a monk lives in ease in the present life and is appropriately aroused for the ending of the fermentations. Which two? A sense of urgency & awe toward things that should inspire urgency & awe and, feeling urgency & awe, appropriate exertion. Endowed with two things, a monk lives in ease in the present life and is appropriately aroused for the ending of the fermentations."

  Feeling urgency, awe / toward what should inspire it / the wise,  masterful /
  ardent monk / should investigate / with discernment. / One who lives thus / ardently / not restlessly, at peace / committed to awareness-tranquillity / would attain the ending / of suffering & stress.

  -- Iti 2.10

However, as we know, it's not always like this:

  Bhikkhus, have you not known me to teach the Dhamma in such a way as this: ‘Here, when someone feels a certain kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states increase in him and wholesome states diminish; but when someone feels another kind of pleasant feeling, unwholesome states diminish in him and wholesome states increase [...]?" — "Yes, venerable sir."

  -- Kīṭāgiri Sutta, MN 70

By "inspiration", we are presumably talking about, say, something that acts as a vehicle to something else. But when it ends in itself, that is just sensual delight:

  And what, bhikkhus, is the nutriment for the arising of unarisen sensual desire and for the increase and expansion of arisen sensual desire? There is, bhikkhus, the sign of the beautiful: frequently giving careless attention to it is the nutriment for the arising of unarisen sensual desire and for the increase and expansion of arisen sensual desire.

  -- SN 46.51

In more detail:

  "Monks, in whatever monk or nun there arises desire, passion, aversion, delusion, or mental resistance with regard to forms cognizable via the eye, he/she should hold the mind in check. [Thinking,] 'It's dangerous & dubious, that path, thorny & overgrown, a miserable path, a devious path, impenetrable. It's a path followed by people of no integrity, not a path followed by people of integrity. It's not worthy of you,' [...].

  -- SN 35.205

That is, craving through the five aggregates.


Does anyone have High resolution Buddha wallpapers for computer?

Have you tried these links pinterest, guoguiyan, desktop-screens


All this involve conceptualisation which can lead to delusional thoughts as with any mind constructed concept it is easy to lose sight of its true nature. This is called Vipallasa as discussed in Vipallasa Sutta.

Sometimes you cannot avoid doing intellectual work like a puzzle or mathematical work. This is not ideal, but any kind of mental activity or when you cognize you experience some sensation. (Titth’ayatana Sutta, Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta, etc.)

So if you are sensitive enough then perhaps you can try to look at the arising  and passing of these sensations with equanimity.

Some analysis from the Suttas.

  Cognizing a mental object with the mind, one examines the mental object as the basis for
  pleasure, or for pain, or for neither-pain-nor-pleasure

Source: Titth’ayatana Sutta. Hence the puzzle and math problem inevitably create some sensation which falls into the the 3 categories of either pleasant, painful or neither pleasant or painful. Similar passage appears in Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta also.

  If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell rejecting both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, and dwell in
  equanimity, mindful and fully aware,’ he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and fully aware

Source: Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta. Clearly the math problem or puzzle is unrepulsive but you have to be equanimous when doing this.

  he dwells contemplating states that arise in the ... he dwells contemplating states that fall away in the ... he dwells contemplating states that arise and fall away in the ... he maintains this mindfulness: ‘There is ...’ just sufficient for knowing and awareness And he dwells independent, not clinging to anything in this world ...

Source: Mahā Satipatthāna Sutta. Here ... And he dwells independent, not clinging to anything in this world ... is equanimously, in your case not getting excited about the problem. ... just sufficient for knowing and awareness ... means there is no conceptualisation and though proliferation, which you your case is present but this has some sensation as previously discussed. If you are sensitive enough you can look at these sensations.


What is the 'key' to these tantrika works?

From Lotus Sutra:

  He has thus taught this sutra in many places for the sake of the
  sentient beings. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of Brahma. Sometimes
  he has appeared in the form of Śakra. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of Īśvara. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of Maheśvara.
  Sometimes he has appeared in the form of the great commander of the devas.
  Sometimes he has appeared in the form of Vaiśravaṇa. Sometimes he has
  appeared in the form of a noble emperor. Sometimes he has appeared in the
  form of a minor king. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of a wealthy
  man. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of a householder. Sometimes
  he has appeared in the form of a state official. Sometimes he has appeared in
  the form of a brahman. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of a monk, nun,
  layman, or laywoman. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of the wife of
  a wealthy man or a householder. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of
  the wife of a state official. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of the wife
  of a brahman. Sometimes he has appeared in the form of a boy or a girl. Sometimes
  he has appeared in the form of a human, or a nonhuman such as a deva,
  nāga, yakṣa, gandharva, asura, garuḍa, kiṃnara, or mahoraga.
  “In this way he has expounded this sutra and saved those in the states
  of being of hell-dwellers, hungry ghosts, animals, and those in difficult circumstances.
  Sometimes he has transformed himself into a female in royal harems.

...

  If he is able to save them in the form of a śrāvaka, he teaches
  the Dharma by changing himself into the form of a śrāvaka. If he is able to
  save them in the form of a pratyekabuddha, he teaches the Dharma by changing
  himself into the form of a pratyekabuddha. If he is able to save them in
  the form of a bodhisattva, he teaches the Dharma by changing himself into
  the form of a bodhisattva. If he is able to save them in the form of a buddha,
  he teaches the Dharma by changing himself into the form of a buddha. Thus
  he transforms himself in various ways according to the capacities of those
  who are to be saved. If he is able to save them by means of parinirvāṇa, he
  manifests parinirvāṇa to them.


Is there a Connection between Sila and Fear?

Fear is considered an unwholesome state, containing as it does aversion (patigha):

paṭighacittuppādavasena hi bhāyanaṃ
Indeed, fear [arises] due to the arising of a mind accompanied by aversion.
-- Vism-T 21.3 (751)

So no, there should be no connection between morality and fear. ottapa, often translated as "fear of wrongdoing", is a mind state that recoils from doing evil; it is a quality of mind that involves the disinclination to perform evil, not necessarily related to aversion or fear. It is wholesome.
As to practicing morality for selfish reasons, every part of the Buddha's teaching should be practiced to benefit oneself. Helping others can only come through one's own self-improvement. Of course, disregard for the suffering of others can be a sign of cruelty, which is unwholesome, but the two states are mutually independent; you can be focussed on helping yourself without disregarding the suffering of others, or you can be focussed on helping yourself and meanwhile disregarding the suffering of others.

One should first establish oneself in what is proper; then only should one instruct others. Thus the wise man will not be reproached.
...
Let one not neglect one's own welfare for the sake of another, however great. Clearly understanding one's own welfare, let one be intent upon the good.
-- Dhp. 158 & 166 (Buddharakkhita, trans)


Did the Buddha intend for everyone to be enlightened?

Answer to the original question:

The Buddha doesn't have wantings per se. He has uprooted craving. He simply helps beings to achieve freedom from suffering out of compassion. Beings are infinite, so any thought of making everyone enlightened is absurd. The Buddha certainly had no such ambition.

Answer to later additions:

I do not follow Dalai Lama and the use of the word 'concern' is not appropriate as enlightened beings are not 'concerned' per se. But there's a big difference between saying what everyone should do and having an ambition that everyone will do it. Ex: It's fine to say "everyone should eat healthy food at all times". Because that's just good advice to all. But having that as an ambition is not realistic.


Why is my head going all Poltergeist on me

The experience you describe is not a common experience but meditators do get very uncommon experiences due to sudden outburst of past Karma / Snakhara. When you have stopped creating new Karma though Vipassana sometimes deeply hidden karma suddenly pops up to give results. (Many times cited by S.N.Goenka in his lectures.)

Also if would be an idea to also see a doctor and perhaps a serious meditator too to rule out any medical condition just be on the safe side.


What does the Abhidhamma say about impermanence?

i meant the change that happens in milliseconds

I guess the following is what you heard?

Theravada abiddhamma formalizes "an experience" (thought process) in 17 discrete moments ("thought moments", cittakkhanas), or 17 cittas. An example from Abhidhammatha Sangaha ( Chap. IV - Compendium of the cognitive process):

While this is not a presentation on impermanence per se (nor it's about physical body) it's is an abbhidhamma topic that attempts to discriminate something in its detail.

It's not clear how long such a process or any of it's steps last; some say it's much much less than a millisecond.


The meaning v of this phrase in Satipattana Sutta

And so they meditate observing an aspect of the body internally,
  externally, and both internally and externally.

  Iti ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, bahiddhā vā kāye
  kāyānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati;

  They meditate observing the body as liable to originate, as liable to
  vanish, and as liable to both originate and vanish.

  samudayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati, vayadhammānupassī vā
  kāyasmiṃ viharati, samudayavayadhammānupassī vā kāyasmiṃ viharati.

  Or mindfulness is established that the body exists, to the extent
  necessary for knowledge and mindfulness. They meditate independent,
  not grasping at anything in the world.

  ‘Atthi kāyo’ti vā panassa sati paccupaṭṭhitā hoti. Yāvadeva
  ñāṇamattāya paṭissatimattāya anissito ca viharati, na ca kiñci loke
  upādiyati.

  That’s how a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of the body.

  Evampi kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kāye kāyānupassī viharati.

This is according to suttacentral.net. See: https://suttacentral.net/mn10/en/sujato
Under settings you can activate showing the Pāli.


What arguments are there for "karma" -- that the agent inevitably experiences the result of their actions?

UPDATE based on the edited question with a suggested definition of karma.

While it is true that the Buddha taught that each and every volitional action has specific consequences this is most definitely not in opposition to the fact that repeated actions based on volitional thoughts can be habit forming. Indeed, consequences of a karmic action can be that it leads to further such actions.

If I were to tell you right now not to think of a pink elephant the chances are likely that you will do so in the immediate future. What's more, it is likely that many beings reading this will be thinking of pink elephants in a more distant future as a consequence of the pink elephant they are bringing to mind right now. I invite you to observe your monkey mind at work with its discursive thoughts and see if you can't trace the cause and effect consequence of each thought leading to others in a more or less continuous process. One moment of mind gives birth to the next and on and on.

Surrounding the definition in the Stanford Encyclopedia is a discussion of how karma and rebirth are in some tension with the Buddha's teaching on emptiness. I believe the correct conceptual understandings of emptiness, karma and rebirth resolve this tension.

This whole notion of the fruits of karmic action being delayed as some sort of puzzle is itself somewhat puzzling to me. In my very life I have observed that my actions can have far reaching consequences. Far reaching in time and space. What I have done or failed to do when I was young (decades ago) has manifested in the situation I am in now. Isn't that just obvious for you as well?

Asking where the consequence of a karmic action (that has ceased) is stored in time and space betrays the wish for a metaphysical explanation. And this metaphysical explanation leads to the doctrine of emptiness as it explains how things exist and how they do not. In what manner they exist and in what manner they do not. Asking where the consequence is stored (in time and space) betrays the idea that phenomena (including karmic actions) have substantial inherent own-being. They do not. That is explained and reasoned through by the teaching on emptiness that Nagarjuna has expounded.

The sutra below explicitly lays out that the Buddha says that the consequence is not stored in time and space. And it goes on to show that actions, consequences, death, birth, karma, are all void of own being. This is the teaching on emptiness.

Believing that the teaching on emptiness somehow is problematic for dependent origination or the law of cause and effect is just wrong. In fact, it is quite the opposite as Nagarjuna has said in his famous treatise! Without emptiness - that is if things had their own-being - then actions could not be performed and there would be no cause and effect or dependent origination.

Would encourage you to study Nagarjuna and trace his arguments if you can.

Although I am not certain about what your question actually is about I thought I'd share this passage from a rather obscure sutra that may help your mind:

  THE NOBLE SUTRA OF THE MAHAYANA DENOMINATED - "THE PASSAGE THROUGH
  EXISTENCES"

  Homage to all the Buddhas and Bodhisattvaas. Thus have I heard. Once
  the Bhagavant stayed in Rajagrha, in the Bamboo-Forest, in the place
  of the kalandakas, in the company of a group of one thousand two
  hundred and fifty bhiksus and of very numerous great Bodhisattvas.
  Then, the Bhagavant, while he was surrounded by many hundreds of
  thousands of his followers, looking at them, expounded the Dharma and
  expounded in its integrity the Brahmacarya beautiful in its beginning,
  beautiful in the middle, beautiful in its end, fair in its meaning,
  fair in its expression, without confusion, completely fulfilled,
  completely pure, completely immaculate.

  Then Sreniya Bimbisara, King of the Magadha country, going out from
  the town of Rajagrha, with great royal pomp, with a great royal force,
  went to the Bamboo-Forest where the Bhagavant was. On arriving, after
  bowing down at the feet of the Bhagavant and turning (around the
  Bhagavant) the right side towards him three times, Sreniya Bimbisara,
  King of the Magadha country, spoke thus to the Bhagavant : "O
  Bhagavant, how do actions, (a long time) after having been done (and)
  accumulated, a long time after having ceased, (re)appear in the mind,
  on being near the moment of death? All conditioned things (samskara)
  being void, how do actions pass without being annihilated?"

  So (the King) spoke, and the Bhagavant to Sreniya Bimbisara, King of
  the Magadha country, said thus : "O great King, just as for instance a
  man, in a dream while he is sleeping, dreams that he extremely enjoys
  himself with a beautiful woman of his country and, when he awakes from
  his sleep, remembers that beautiful woman of his country (he has seen
  in his dream) - what do you think, O great King : does that beautiful
  woman of the country, (seen) in the dream, (really) exist?"

  (The King) said : "O Bhagavant, she does not exist."

  The Bhagavant said : "O great King, what do you think : that man who
  ardently desires the beautiful woman of his country, (seen) in his
  dream - is he a wise man?"

  (The King) answered : "O Bhagavant, he is not - if it is asked why, O
  Bhagavant - because that beautiful woman of the country, (seen) in the
  dream, does not exist at all; and although he does not perceive her,
  (nevertheless) he goes on thinking of enjoying himself extremely with
  her. Thus that man, being deprived of her, has a destiny of sorrow."

  The Bhagavant said : "O great King, in the same way, an ordinary man,
  foolish, ignorant, on seeing with his eyes lovely forms, ardently
  desires those forms which are agreeable to his mind. While ardently
  desiring them, he becomes attached to them. On becoming attached to
  them, he feels a passion for them. On feeling a passion for them, he
  performs with his body, speech and mind,, actions that are born out of
  desire, hatred and error. And those actions, after having been
  performed, cease. And after having ceased, (those actions) stay
  neither in the east nor in the south nor in the west nor in the north
  nor up nor down - nor in any region of space. But, at any other time,
  at the moment near the instant of death, when the karma corresponding
  (to the life that is being concluded) is exhausted, at the (very)
  moment the last consciousness ceases, those actions (re)appear in the
  mind (of the dying man) - just as for instance the beautiful woman of
  the country (in the mind) of the man that wakes from his sleep. O
  great King, immediately after the first consciousness has ceased,
  there arises the series of consciousnesses, which corresponds (to the
  life that is beginning), and in which the ripening (of actions
  previously performed) will be experienced. O great King, although no
  element of existence (dharma) passes from this world to another world,
  nevertheless death and birth take place. O great King, the last
  consciousness which ceases is called 'death'; the first consciousness
  which arises is called 'birth'. O great King, the last consciousness,
  at the moment it ceases, does not pass to anywhere; the first
  consciousness, which forms part of the (new) birth, at the moment it
  arises, does not come from anywhere. If it is asked why, (I answer:)
  because of their lack of an own being. O great King, although the last
  consciousness is void (of the own being) of death, action is void (of
  the own being) of action, the first consciousness is void (of the own
  being) of a first consciousness, birth is void (of the own being) of
  birth, (nevertheless) actions do not perish. O great King, immediately
  after the first consciousness, which forms part of the (new) birth,
  has ceased, there arises without interruption the series of
  consciousnesses, in which the ripening (of actions previously done)
  will be experienced."

This sutra speaks directly to karma and how it ripens from moment to moment and life to life even though actions previously arisen have ceased and exist no where whatsoever in space or time and yet they ripen at later times and continue to produce fruit. The important point is that the manner and way this happens from moment to moment in this very life is the same manner and way it happens from life to life. There is no difference in extent or manner.

And note that the doctrine of emptiness is very definitely tied up with this ripening of past karma. Karma could not function without emptiness. Were things not empty, there could not be actions and the ripening of those actions. Understanding emptiness is indispensable in understanding how actions ripen and bear fruit and that is why it is said that emptiness and dependent origination go hand in hand.