Is there a gradation of proper and improper deeds?

I don't think there is a gradation where the quality of the action itself is concerned. All actions are always either kusala or akusala.

kusala: skillful, wholesome, good, meritorious
akusala: unskillful, unwholesome, bad, demeritorious

As people, though, we will always feel compelled to judge and compare actions. Stealing from the cookie jar is not as bad a stealing a car. Killing a fly is not as bad as killing a bird. But these distinctions are mind-made: in the end there is just kusala and akusala.

Now, whether there is a gradation tied to the kamma produced by any given action is an entirely different question (to which I have no answer, but I'd guess that there is a correlation between kamma and quality of the action).

  is an unwholesome action exacly the same as an action that produces bad kamma?

Yes. Without mincing words, both of these are two sides of the same coin.

(Also, in your two sample lists, you could also mention that an action could go with or against the Noble Eightfold Path.)


So how about Gossiping or the tattling about others lives ?

You are wasting your time and others time. Talk that is productive towards betterment of oneself, which lacks proper reasoning (mud slinging), if you are monk not connected with the goal, the pratice, the Dhamma or Vinaya.

  How does Buddhism explain specifically about TATTLING ??

If it is to divide people then it is not right speech. Also it should not be with malice, but say you are a witness of a wrong doing then perhaps might have a social or legal or moral obligation to report it but even this case some aversion arises as you are averse to the fact that something does not fall to your moral, social or legal idea but in society, work and as a householder you have to do these things sometimes.

  How one should practice not to Gossip about others lives ?

If it can be an example to others then maybe it is OK. Otherwise change the topic to something productive or something you can learn from.

  In the other way how one should practice to face others Gossiping about himself/herself ?

If you can learn something from it then try to. Sometimes in Business and Work situations you have to promote or market yourself and also engage in chatting to a maintain cordial relationships. This is not unproductive endeavour or killing time by chatting.

Even in a personal situation you what you have to see if the chatting is directed at achieving something productive to yourself and listeners. Does it help you understand something better. Is there something listener can lean by a situation some one else has been in. If it is wasting time try changing the topic or move on it it is not inappropriate or rude. For a householder trying to build relationships, networking and friendships is productive and endeavor, even at a personal level, hence may not be idle chatter.


Why are children represented as inessential in some Buddhist text?

Such texts should be read in context: written for and by the Sangha - and mostly for and by male-sangha, though you found one quote that sounds like a tired grandmother.

Buddhism is really a dual religion. The religion for lay-people is very practical: attend to your duties and avoid wrong-doing. That includes taking care of any partner and children. Traditionally things like meditation were limited to the Sangha, and a minority in there as well.

If you want to become a monk or nun, obviously children are an obstacle as long as they're young. And women do - especially when there is no good medical help - suffer physically from childbirth. Without proper medical attention women die in childbirth in alarming numbers. Women who survived that and grew to an age where they were free to become nuns (very much a minority at any time in Buddhist history) would be encouraged to meditate on topics that helped them let go of their attachment to their children and focus also on the limitations of the body that bore them. No wonder one writes:

  … Ten children I bore from this physical heap. Then weak from that, aged, I went to a nun. She taught me the Dhamma

The Buddha himself walked away from his wife and son - which is hardly a good example to follow. The only mitigating circumstance was that his father was rich and quite capable of taking care of them.

As lay people we should read such texts within their context: written by monks, for monks. They're not written for lay people. Lay people did not have access to texts and most of the texts that survived don't portray even nuns very well.


increased body temperature during meditation

There's all kinds of wackiness that can occur during meditation.  Some of it is mental, some of it is somatic, and still other phenomenon are a blend of the two.  None of these things are any reason for concern and it's best not to pay them much mind.  Some of these experiences will come and go while others are will appear quite regularly almost becoming like your own personal brand of meditation.  To be honest, elevated body temperature is actually pretty tame compared some of the other stuff that can happen.  Just wait until your skull twists into a spiral, your hands inflate to the size of beach balls, and you suddenly find yourself sitting at the lunch table on the 117 day of fifth grade!


Are the majority of humans reincarnated from the lower worlds?

Teacher of the Devas:

  In the round of samsara it is extremely rare to rise above the realms
  of woe, where the way out of suffering cannot be followed, and a human
  birth is even more favorable to awakening than birth in the realm of
  the gods.

Given that human life, because of its possibility for awakening, is even higher in terms of value to that of the devas, it would seem surprising in my opinion that the majority of humans come from lower realms where virtuous karma is very difficult to generate.

The majority of humans, from a relative viewpoint, have had greater karma than the majority of sentient beings:
The Nakhasikha Sutta says:

  "In the same way, monks, few are the beings reborn among human beings. Far more are those reborn elsewhere [...]"

Hence, even seemingly unfortunate individuals of the human realm have had a very fortunate rebirth, wherever they came from.

Also, there is a certain futility in speculating about karma, I believe, and the Buddha has somewhat suggested this in the Acintita Sutta:

  "There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four? [...] The [precise working out of the] results of kamma [...]"

Because rebirths may take different paths, and an individual may be reborn in the lower realms from lifetimes in the heavenly realms, or vice versa, there seems to be little meaning as to what realms human beings come from: they come from samsara. If a human being comes from the lower realm when they have spent infinite eons in every other realms, only a minute perspective would make their last rebirth significant; seeing the vastness of samsaric life, any specific rebirth is meaningless in the whole. My take is that such a minute analysis was what was reprimanded by the Buddha. Only a vast perspective gives a right impression.

I mean, is there a meaning to a person reincarnating from heavenly realms to the hellish realms to a human birth, different from the hellish realms to the heavenly realms to a human birth? I don't see any.

Now, relative to your exact question, 'Is the majority of humans from lower realms', there is the notion of different periods of time such as anatarakalpas, where different levels of fortune and virtue appears among human beings. If fortunate karma is different across time periods for humans, how could the same phenomenon of rebirth explain this? Do low points of human civilization and high points with the presence of Dhamma involve the same process of rebirth? Difficult to say. I think that Maitraya's time involving eighty-thousand years of life and the subsequent period where humans live ten much worse years may not have the same level of karmic fortune.

All this to say that these considerations -- even without including the perspective of selflessness of phenomena -- suggest that the question is a difficult one.

Hope this helps!


Was the kamikaze against the Mongol empire considered a supernatural event in Buddhism?

I don't think the line between Shinto and Buddhism has been very clear in Japan, just as the line between Hinduism and Buddhism was never very clear in India.

For that matter, whenever any religion travels it is forced to either defeat or integrate its newest cultures. Religion can't take prisoners of war, it has to conquer by assimilation or destruction.

I don't have personal knowledge of this branch of Buddhism, but I've made use of a search engine to find these sources.

Syncretism of Shinto & Buddhism in Japan

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2007/09/04/reference/japans-shinto-buddhist-religious-medley/

  Most in Japan may know Buddhism has something to do with controlling
  lust and anger, and is associated with funerals and graves, while
  Shinto involves venerating nature, and weddings. But many people have
  trouble making theological distinctions between the two or even
  telling a Buddhist temple from a Shinto shrine.

  The internationalists in the Japanese court welcomed Buddhism. Others
  saw it as a threat to the status quo, with Buddha nothing more than a
  “jajin,” or devil.

  Prince Shotoku (574-622) promoted Buddhism and it took hold. Still,
  Japan would never see a full conversion away from its indigenous
  religion, as occurred to a much greater extent across pagan Europe
  with the introduction of Christianity. Rather, Japanese absorbed
  Buddhism gradually, mixing it with local folk religions.

  This process played out in the divine realm, too, with certain Shinto
  gods coming to be seen as protectors of the Buddha. One was Hachiman,
  the Shinto god of war, who legend has it aided the construction of the
  Great Buddha statue in Nara during the Nara Period (710-784). This act
  of kindness won him the name “Great Bodhisattva (Buddhist saint)
  Hachiman” in 781.

  Reflecting this meeting of religions, Hachiman was sometimes depicted
  in sculptures as a very unwarlike Buddhist monk.

  But what does the eighth century have to do with mixups over temples
  and shrines now?

  The syncretism, or weaving together of religions, would continue over
  centuries as Japan went about absorbing Pure Land, Zen and other
  Buddhist sects from China. Over time, cross-pollination between
  Buddhism and Shinto would deepen in a process known as “shin-butsu
  shugo” (Shinto-Buddhism coalescence), or less flatteringly as the
  “shin-butsu konko” (Shinto-Buddhism jumble).

  Much of the convergence amounted to Buddhism trying to make a mark on
  the host culture. Buddhist monks felt certain Shinto divinities needed
  salvation. So they chanted sutras in front of shrines that were the
  gods’ sacred homes.

  Meanwhile, temples started sprouting up next to Shinto shrines, to be
  called “jingu-ji,” meaning “shrine-temples.” By the 16th century, such
  mixing and matching had become official policy.

Kamis vs Butsus

http://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/shinto-deities.html

  In modern Japan, both Shintō and Buddhist practice among the common
  folk has taken on the air of “this-worldly benefits” (concrete rewards
  now; Genze Riyaku). To many Japanese, Shintō and Buddhist
  faith is primarily involved with petitions and prayers for business
  profits, the safety of the household, success on school entrance
  exams, painless child birth, and other concrete rewards now, in this
  life. Shintō deities are called KAMI, SHIN , JIN , SAMA , TENJIN
  , GONGEN , and MYŌJIN  to distinguish them from their Buddhist
  counterparts. The latter are known as BUTSU  and NYORAI (all
  mean Buddha or Tathagata), BOSATSU (meaning Bodhisattva), TEN
  (meaning Deva), MYŌ-Ō  (meaning Luminescent Kings).


Sexual misconduct is defined in the Pali scriptures as having sex with someone else's partner or fiancee and with those living under the protection of their parents or an institution (in the case parents, if the parents disapprove).

The purpose of refraining from sexual misconduct is to not harm/damage existing relationships.

Therefore, having sex for pleasure, using a condom, circumcision, masturbation & oral & anal sex are not, in themselves, sexual misconduct (even though some of these things can be unwholesome & unskilful).


Buddhist modernism just refers to Buddhists who only accept the aspects of Buddhism they consider to be compatable with the modern world. Usually the term is used to describe Buddhists who reject things like Karma and Rebirth but still see the Dharma as having things to offer. It's not a movement, just a catch all term used to describe people like that.

I think it is worth noting though that the term is relative to some extent. For one group of people it would be considered modernism to suggest that the traditional stories passed down aren't 100% accurate, and in other groups rejecting such stories might be the norm. I also think that there is a legitimate place for questioning and analyzing the core claims of Buddhism, although I think that the claims actually stand up whereas people who get called Buddhist modernists tend to think that's not the case for some of them.


What is the reason for attributing Lord Buddha's statues to days the of week?

Bytebuster, as a fellow Bangkokian I’m happy to try to answer this question!
This arrangement of images in various postures according to the days of the week is a Thai Buddhist practice, and it doesn’t seem to be very old, dating from the early Bangkok Period (post 1780s).
Let’s consider them from an artistic perspective first.  According to Jean Boisselier:

The gestures and attitudes of a Buddha image permit identification of a particular moment in the Buddha’s career, even when there is no other narrative context for the figure.  They are fully intelligible only to Buddhist worshippers or to those with adequate knowledge of the main events in the Buddha’s life. [...] It should be emphasized here that the frequently employed term mudrā has no real meaning except in the context of Mahāyāna, where each mudrā is, in the strictest sense, the mark of a particular Jina and thus a means of differentiating the Buddhas who, by nature, are all alike.  The mudrās do not suffice to represent all the great miracles, and in the Theravāda – especially in the iconography of Thailand – the term mudrā is not used.

So each posture is meant to show an event in the historical Buddha’s lifetime, they do not identify different bodhisattvas.  Rāma III, a king who ruled from roughly 1825 to 1850, had a list of 40 postures compiled which became the standard for Thai art.  Artists during earlier dynasties sometimes innovated new postures, an example being the graceful “walking Buddhas” of the Sukhothai period (13-15th centuries).  Besides a posture for each day, there are postures assigned to the twelve months and the twelve years under the Thai calendar (a cycle similar to the Chinese year of the horse, tiger etc.)  While these monthly and yearly postures are not as well known, you might find them represented in temple art if you looked.
Here’s a list of the days and postures:

Sunday – Gazing at the bodhi tree (standing, with hands crossed over the thighs)
Monday – Restraining the kinsmen (standing, left hand down and right hand raised, palm open as if repelling something)
Tuesday – Reclining (on right side with head on hand).  This is also interpreted as “asking Rahu to return the sun and moon which he has swallowed” – maybe a more astrological reading?
Wednesday morning – Carrying the alms bowl (standing, holding the bowl with both hands)
Wednesday afternoon – In the Pālileyyaka Forest (sitting as if on a chair, with hands on knees, right hand palm upward).  Here a monkey and an elephant are offering food, the Buddha having retreated to the forest to escape a quarrel among his followers.
Thursday – Meditating (seated with folded legs, both hands in lap with palms upward)
Friday – Reflecting (standing, with hands crossed over the breast)
Saturday – Meditating, sheltered by the nāga Mucalinda.  The Palelai Forest Buddha may appear on this day rather than Wednesday, it seems.

Note that some very common and meaningful postures, like the abhayamudra or subduing Māra, seated with right hand touching the ground, are not part of this set.
It’s true that these day-images are mainly for laypeople, and it may be frowned upon for monks to occupy themselves with something you might regard as superstition.  Often when the images are arranged in a row with candles in front, people pay respect to each one in turn by pouring oil on the candles, rather than focusing on their day only.  There are always more prominent images (and murals) in the assembly hall in any case.  More generally, we shouldn’t be tempted to think of Thai Buddhists as solely concerned with protective magic and astrology.  King Mongkut, who succeeded Rāma III, had been a monk for over 20 years.  As king, he founded the Thammayut order partly because he wanted the sangha to concentrate on textual study rather than magical practices.
Finally, let me point out that Burma has something similar to this. The Buddha images at each day’s station (arrayed around the central stupa) don’t vary, but there are different animals for each (a tiger for Monday and so on).  Take a look at the wiki page for the Shwedagon Pagoda for details, as well as a picture of Barack Obama “pouring water over the shoulder of the Friday Buddha”!  For the Burmese, the day of your birth also can influence the name you are given, one example being the 1950s prime minister U Nu, whose memoir was entitled “Saturday’s Son”.
Note:  The quote here is from Jean Boisselier, The Heritage of Thai Sculpture (Asia Books 1975) p. 202.  For information in Thai, look for titles like พระพุทธรูปปางต่างๆ.  ปาง (paang) is the Thai word for posture here.  In English there is K. Matics, Gestures of the Buddha.


Are feelings (vedana) always caused by ignorance?

Passa Pacchaya Vedana ~
  Paticca Samuppada

Feeling is caused by contact


What practices can aid (or not ruin) the mahasi style meditation?

The easiest thing to do to aid in your practice is to stop being so scattered!  Pick one technique and stick to it.  That you're all over the place exploring other systems and looking for results indicates to me that you are having a hard time staying focused on the cushion.  Trust, trust, trust in the process!  It's the only way you are going to make any progress.


Can we reach deep meditative states without teachers?

A teacher is generally required but difficult to find. The Pali suttas say:

  Tathāgatappaveditassa dhammavinayassa desetā puggalo dullabho lokasmiṃ

  Rare in the word is a person who teaches the teaching and training
  proclaimed by a Realized One.

  AN 6.96

For an individual with a keen intellect, this 'teacher' could simply be the Pali suttas. However, even in this case, the discernment of what the Path is must be acutely discerned. Generally, even an intelligent person needs a 'rare teacher' to verbally guide through the true meaning of the Pali suttas.


What is the antidote for conceit (mana)?

What should one contemplate for mana?

Here's what the early texts say:

  He should develop the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the
  conceit, 'I am.' For a monk perceiving inconstancy, the perception of
  not-self is made firm. One perceiving not-self attains the uprooting
  of the conceit, 'I am' — Unbinding in the here & now."
  -Ud 4.1, AN 9.1, AN 9.3

  "When a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of
  not-self in what is stressful, his heart is devoid of I-making &
  my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with
  regard to all themes, has transcended pride, is at peace, and is
  well-released. If, when a monk's awareness often remains steeped in
  the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is not
  devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and
  externally with regard to all themes, has not transcended pride, is
  not at peace, and is not well-released, then he should realize, 'I
  have not developed the perception of not-self in what is stressful;
  there is no step-by-step distinction in me; I have not arrived at the
  fruit of [mental] development.' In that way he is alert there. But if,
  when a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of
  not-self in what is stressful, his heart is devoid of I-making &
  my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with
  regard to all themes, has transcended pride, is at peace, and is
  well-released, then he should realize, 'I have developed the
  perception of not-self in what is stressful; there is a step-by-step
  distinction in me; I have arrived at the fruit of [mental]
  development.' In that way he is alert there.
  -AN 7.46

  Venerable sir, how should one know, how should one see so that, in
  regard to this body with consciousness and in regard to all external
  signs, I-making, mine-making, and the underlying tendency to conceit
  no longer occur within?”

  “Any kind of form whatsoever, Rahula, whether past, future, or
  present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior,
  far or near—one sees all form as it really is with correct wisdom
  thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’

  “Any kind of feeling whatsoever … Any kind of perception whatsoever …
  Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever … Any kind of
  consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal
  or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near—one
  sees all consciousness as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This
  is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
  -SN 22.91, SN 22.92


Renunciation in Buddhism is related to going forth from the lay or householder life to life as a monk or nun.
It doesn't apply to lay people renouncing property or inheritance.
In fact, lay people are advised to manage their finances well.
There is good discussion in this article, this article and this article. You can read those for much advice.
For canonical advice:
The Sigalovada Sutta states:

The wise endowed with virtue Shine forth like a burning fire,
Gathering wealth as bees do honey And heaping it up like an ant hill.
Once wealth is accumulated, Family and household life may follow. By
dividing wealth into four parts, True friendships are bound; One part
should be enjoyed; Two parts invested in business; And the fourth set
aside Against future misfortunes."

The Dighajanu Sutta states:

"And what does it mean to maintain one's livelihood in tune? There is
the case where a lay person, knowing the income and outflow of his
wealth, maintains a livelihood in tune, neither a spendthrift nor a
penny-pincher, [thinking], 'Thus will my income exceed my outflow, and
my outflow will not exceed my income.' Just as when a weigher or his
apprentice, when holding the scales, knows, 'It has tipped down so
much or has tipped up so much,' in the same way, the lay person,
knowing the income and outflow of his wealth, maintains a livelihood
in tune, neither a spendthrift nor a penny-pincher, [thinking], 'Thus
will my income exceed my outflow, and my outflow will not exceed my
income.'
"These are the four drains on one's store of wealth: debauchery in
sex; debauchery in drink; debauchery in gambling; and evil friendship,
evil companionship, evil camaraderie. Just as if there were a great
reservoir with four inlets and four drains, and a man were to close
the inlets and open the drains, and the sky were not to pour down
proper showers, the depletion of that great reservoir could be
expected, not its increase.

The Adiya Sutta discusses the 5 benefits obtained from one's wealth. The fifth is charity.
And don't forget that income should come from Right Livelihood, as stated in the Vanijja Sutta:

"Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business.
Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in
meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.


A question about DN 23 and existence of soul

You wrote ...

  (Payasi argues there is no soul so no afterlife.)

  However, Kassapa, one of the principal disciples of Gautama Buddha, argues there is a soul.

... but I don't think so. Instead I think the dialog or argument in the sutta is:

Payasi: there is no afterlife because we don't see a visible soul leaving the body at death
Kassapa: the existence of a visible soul is not necessary for there to be an afterlife (for example when you dream there's no visible soul living the body) -- the non-existence of a visible/separating soul doesn't prove there is no afterlife

That (saying "the existence of a soul isn't necessary, and needn't be assumed") is not the same thing as saying "there is a soul".
The main argument is about "afterlife", it is not about "soul".

Secondly the argument in Pali uses various words like:

  āyu
  life; vital power; duration of life, life-time; long life.
  jīva

Those words are used in several suttas -- in MN 63 for example, where various questions about the body and soul are declared to by the Buddha to be "not declared":

  And why haven’t I declared these things? Because they aren’t beneficial or relevant to the fundamentals of the spiritual life. They don’t lead to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.

Thirdly, even if Buddhist doctrine did say that something like that existed, and if someone translated that statement or that word as "soul", I'd try to doubt whether the word "soul" there has the same kinds of meanings as is taught by other religions


As you can see from people's comments (non-answer) it's hard to answer this question -- not specific enough -- it's phrased as an own-problem without enough detail about its cause or symptoms or the range of acceptable solutions.

Your mentioning "faith" though reminds me of this topic -- What are the differences/similarities in the concept of faith as used in Buddhism and Christianity? -- because it seems to me that Buddhism doesn't have much to to do with "faith" as I understand that word -- maybe it's more to do with "knowledge" (whereas "faith" it sometimes denotes an opposite or absence of knowledge). So almost the opposite of some expressions of Christian doctrine, I think that Buddhism is based on "what you know for yourself to be true" (not only "faith"), which is an attribute of the Dhamma.

  The Dhamma is well declared by the Bhagavā:
  visible here and now, immediate,
  inviting to come and see, effective,
  to be individually ascertained by the wise.

One example is AN 3.66, but the rest of it too, I think that true of all the stages.

Christianity to me only makes sense to the extent that its values are embodied in someone -- if you meet someone who acts like a Christian -- maybe that was an essential part of that religion, starting with the Christ being a person.
Quite possibly some forms of Buddhism (relationship with a teacher, maybe learning from experience) might be like that too.

I'm guessing that "loss of faith" might have one of three causes:

Believing in or having faith in a doctrine -- something supernatural perhaps -- without that doctrine's really making sense to you
Ditto having faith in some practice
Ditto having faith in some person or society

There are any number of possible remedies, I imagine:

Improve your understanding of the doctrine, ask questions perhaps
Improve -- or return to -- your practice, starting with "right view" perhaps

I can't tell you much about Tibetan Buddhism -- which is the only other part of your question. I understand it might involve some personal relationship (with a teacher) therefore possibly vulnerable to the third type of "loss of faith" listed above.

There are dozens of topics on this site which might be related to 'faith' -- see here -- you could browse those titles, to see whether any of those are asking what you're asking and might have an answer.


I don't know much about this but according to Wikipedia (here and here) it was Ananda who narrated the stories in the suttas.

  A council of 500 Arahats was held at Rajgir (Sanskrit: Rājagaha) to agree the contents of the Dhamma and Vinaya. Ananda recited the Suttas, such that each begins: ‘Thus have I heard’.


Are there Buddhist traditions without monks?

SGI, for example, describes itself as a "lay Buddhist organization".

I'm not sure I'd want to call it orthodox Buddhist, though.

Traditionally there might have been a split in lifestyle between monastery (and a literate life) and fields (and manual labour). I think I remember seeing a TV documentary with teenagers, monk-candidates, studying texts in a monastery: one said that the (academic) study is difficult/onerous, nervertheless easier (therefore a better career choice) than spending life working in a (agricultural) field.


How does rebirth work for arahant and non-arahants?

Indeed puthujjanas knows that it makes no sense to ask where a fire go once it is put out, unless those puthujjana managed to create a fantasy where they deify fire..., so the buddha says that It makes zero senses to ask where an arhant goes, or if an arhant exists after parinibbana, by creating a parallel between fire and craving (or fire and existence).
Same thing about the stupidity of trying to figure the non-existence of a buddha.

It is craving that is the path to vedana, the 5 aggregates, birth, dukkha and all that stuff, so once there is no craving, well there is nothing left and there cannot be birth again.


Beginner: Should I switch to a less advanced samatha practice?

This sounds really caught up in all kinds of cravings for spiritual attainments. If this 'craving' is dropped, the path the Buddha taught, which is the abandonment of craving (rather than mental gymnastics & magical formulas) might be learned. Samatha & vipassana are natural fruits of the properly established or collected mind - aka samadhi. The Buddha taught:

  What is the faculty of concentration (samadhi)? There is the case
  where a noble disciple, making 'letting go' his meditation object,
  attains concentration, attains singleness of mind.
   SN 48.10

As for the practises mentioned in the original post, they are not 'advanced'. The more complicated & willful they sound, the less advanced they are. The most 'advanced' practises are the most simple. That is why the statement: "Do nothing" often frightens people. Simply 'let go'.


Whenever I sit for meditation, there are several problems, like increased salivation, feeling of being pressed in the chest and like not getting breath after a few minutes...

As a physiotherapist I would like to briefly explain the anatomy of poor posture related to meditation practice.

First of all, you want to sit on a firm surface, not a soft surface like a bed. Thats due to the anatomical structure of the spine. The spine has an "S"-curved shape meaning that biomechanically it allows to act like a spring when loaded.

When sitting on a soft surface your muscles need to work much harder in keeping your spine erect. Failing to do so results in slumping. Slumping here means that the posterior hip and spine muscles contract, thereby limiting the working space available for the diaphragm. You see the diaphragm needs to be able to move up and down in order for the lungs to expand. When one is slumped over one is actively putting restriction on the air passage by decreasing the thoracic cavity.

That is why you are feeling like the chest is being compressed and air moves slower and restricted. An analogy would be having a water hose and then bending the hose so that the water flow gets restricted.

When sitting in an upright posture with spine erect the diaphragm can move up and down unhindered thereby increasing ventilation and air passage.

My advice would be to change your sitting posture from a soft surface onto a firm surface.

When sitting you want to:

Keep the spine erect to increase working conditions for the diaphragm.
Keep pelvis in neutral position. Look at the nice and neutral position of the pelvis in the illustration with proper posture. Now look at the left illustration with the malalignment. See how the pelvis is posteriorly tilted. That is not a good posture since it causes many secondary problems to arise.

Regarding sitting options there are various options to try out. See illustration below.

The insight meditational way to deal with e.g. increased salivation, uncomfortable sensations in the body would be to take them as an object, note them and let them go.

If for example increased salivation is happening, take the feeling of the saliva touching the inner mouth parts and note that a couple of times and then let it go.

If an intention to swallow arises, note that intention. That is the "nama" part of reality. The saliva arising is the "rupa" part. Rupa arises and nama knows it. Nama knows rupa. Rupa does not know nama.

You will come to see the physical and mental aspect of reality. The two streams.
You will come to see the characteristics of conventional reality, i.e. impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and uncontrollability of conditioned phenomena.

If you need further help feel free to contact me. Email is on profile page.


Can anyone recommend some guided anapanasati resources on the Web?

The best is to go to directly to the Sutta or what the Buddha directly had to say about it. There are 2 good translations by Piya Tan:

Anapanasati Sutta
Anapanasati Sutta, Trilinear edition

A more detail explanation of the Sutta is available in Mindfulness with Breathing: a Manual for Serious Beginners, 2nd edition which does a wonderful detailed explanations. (Don't use the 1st as this is a poor translation.) In addition there are some lectures by Budddhadasa Bikkhu: Anapanasati by Ven. Buddhadasa.

For the very basics have a look at: Mini Aanapana.

Also

Anapana Sati Sutta by Bhante Vimalasiri
Anapana Sati Sutta by Ven. Bikku Bodhi

would be helpful guides.

Also you can try to locate a more formal retreat like through: http://www.dhamma.org/en/index or http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/ which will solve the issue that you do not have a teacher.


Hesitation between Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta

If you want to know the truth about reality, you have to learn how to make impartial observations of nature. When you ask questions like "Who is waking up? Who is witnessing?", you have already made the assumption that there is an entity involved. The moment you do that, you drift away from reality and the experiment becomes biased. It's the same as asking "Who is making it rain? Who is making the sun rise from the east? Who is making the fruits fall to the ground?".

To take an example, if you impartially analyse the experience of seeing, you wouldn't be asking the question "who is seeing?". You would ask something like "what are the different aspects of seeing?". That question does not add anything assumed/fabricated/artificial to the test environment. Then you will notice a physical aspect and a mental aspect to the experience that took place. Physical aspect is the light, eye and the mental aspect is the awareness of it. Upon further investigation, you will notice that these experiences do not just happen magically. You will notice that they arise due to causes. You will notice that the awareness aspect of the experience is also something that arises due to causes and that it is impersonal.

Likewise, if you want to know reality, throw all of  the assumptions out of the window and take each experience as it is. If you do not hypothesize or fabricate, the truth will reveal itself.


Will 10,000 hours of Vipasanna be enough for Enlightenment?

I think you are coming at this from the wrong place.  Enlightenment isn't something that we add to ourselves.  It's best not to approach meditation as another skill to master or the dharma as another field where we might gain expertise.  It really doesn't make sense to count your practice in hours, days, or years.  Buddhism isn't a transaction - it's an offering that can't be measured by any metric.  Ultimately, there is no upper limit to how much we can sacrifice ourselves.


Saṃvega or something else? Integrating sammuti sacca with paramattha sacca

Philosophical thoughts can come to the mind at anytime. You shouldn't get too excited about them as that can lead to complacency, ego and false self assessments. Simply note them rising and passing away. If you are not enlightened, you are not safe no matter how deep you feel or think.

Don't focus much on love. Usually Patikulamanasikara meditation is recommended to people with lust issues. The details are in the Visuddhimagga. You can also do Silanussati and try to perfect your virtue. One suggestion is to stay in a forest monastery for a while, stay away from women and work on taming the mind.


"Take joy! I am your guarantor for getting 500 dove-footed nymphs."

Imagine you are going to a car shop to buy a station wagon only because that's the best car you know and then your wise relative comes to you and shows you ferraris and lamborghinis, saying that if you give up the station wagon and follow his advice, you will soon be able to afford these much superior cars, what would you do? You would take his advice, especially if you trust him and have the ultimate respect for him.

That worked for venerable Nanda. It may not work for everyone. But then the Buddha knows what a person needs to hear to get him inclined towards the practice. The Buddha redirected his craving towards a woman by altering his goal to something superior to get him to follow the path that actually eliminates craving. Even parents do this with their kids. They promise to buy a gift the kid likes very much if he passes the exam well. So the kid studies hard to get the gift and as a result passes the exam.


To use your own analogy, if you were trying to learn how to implement an OO design pattern in JavaScript, would it be more expedient for you to try and figure it out for yourself or to learn it from someone who had already mastered the concept?  Buddhism can be a very technical religion.  There are some problems that will arise (and meditation alone is chock full of them) that you just won't be able to get past without someone there to guide you along.  What's worse, sometimes you don't even know what questions you should even be asking!  You might be doing something totally wrong, but without a teacher there to point it out, you'd never be the wiser.  You likewise might master somethings, but not know where to turn your attention next.

I don't think the importance of a teacher can be overstated.  One of the qualities of the Buddha is that he is an anuttaro purisadammasarathi - an unsurpassed teacher of persons to be tamed!  That wouldn't be in the Buddhanussati Gatha if it wasn't important!


Why did Buddha passed away in fourth Jhana?

Buddha emerged from the 4th jhana and passed away with equanimity; to demonstrate he passed away with an ordinary mind viewing ordinary reality (rather than passing away in an altered state of consciousness). This shows faithful disciples they do not need jhana or any non-ordinary mind to pass away at peace. All that is needed is equanimity & wisdom.

  Then the Blessed One, emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, entered the dimension of neither perception nor
  non-perception. Emerging from that, he entered the dimension of
  nothingness... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the
  dimension of the infinitude of space... the fourth jhana... the
  third... the second... the first jhana. Emerging from the first jhana
  he entered the second... the third... the fourth jhana. Emerging from
  the fourth jhana, he immediately was totally Unbound. DN 16

However, the Buddha practised the jhanas before his passing to show he had not lost any mental mastery; per MN 12:

  I am now old, aged, burdened with years, advanced in life, and come to the last stage: my years have turned eighty. Now suppose that I had
  four disciples with a hundred years' lifespan, perfect in mindfulness,
  retentiveness, memory and lucidity of wisdom. Just as a skilled
  archer, trained, practiced and tested, could easily shoot a light
  arrow across the shadow of a palm tree, suppose that they were even to
  that extent perfect in mindfulness, retentiveness, memory and lucidity
  of wisdom. Suppose that they continuously asked me about the four
  foundations of mindfulness and that I answered them when asked and
  that they remembered each answer of mine and never asked a subsidiary
  question or paused except to eat, drink, consume food, taste, urinate,
  defecate and rest in order to remove sleepiness and tiredness. Still
  the Tathagata's exposition of the Dhamma, his explanations of factors
  of the Dhamma, and his replies to questions would not yet come to an
  end, but meanwhile those four disciples of mine with their hundred
  years' lifespan would have died at the end of those hundred years.
  Sariputta, even if you have to carry me about on a bed, still there
  will be no change in the lucidity of the Tathagata's wisdom. MN 12


Different state of mind during dhamma talk

Has anyone experienced moments like being in a state of restlessness during a dhamma talk?

The 5 Hindrances can surface any time. It is not necessarily in meditation. It can happen during Dhamma Talks, while working, etc. So Restlessness-worry being one of it can arise any time.

  A sense of relieved, moment of temporary escape but yet the mind is actively running wild, almost gone into a state where one feels like tearing.

This is the nature of the mind. Do not analyse and this is what I expect of my mind, this is what do not expect of the mind, this is I do not care where by generating pleasant, unpleasant and neutral sensations followed by craving, aversion and ignorance.

  I wonder could it be due to the stress and sorrow the person going through, therefore the person entered into such state of mind.

Stress and sorrow generally co exists with unwholesome mind state. This can lead to hindrances arising.

  I always thought during dhamma talk, one's mind supposed to be calm and steady or somewhat shielded from any harmful agent from the outside world. Anyone mind to share?

If you have wise attention (equanimous and seeing the 3 universal characteristics), then only then you get shielded from any harmful agent from the outside world.


Can bad karma be created and paid back in the same lifetime

Sue. While I am not suggesting you write an auto-biography, your post is lacking in information. However, making assumptions based on what you wrote and offering mere speculative examples based on what you wrote:

Your mother was probably lonely and without support.
Having an affair with a married man was possibly a way to have a relationship or gain some companionship and physical affection without the perceived threat of a committed relationship that impinged upon her family and a duty of care she felt she had towards her disabled husband.
If you cut your mother out of your life because she had a affair with a married man, this can be perceived as both reasonable and unreasonable.
HOWEVER, IMPORTANTLY, you should list or define (to yourself) the reasons why you cut your mother out of your life because these are the actual causes of why you cut your mother out of your life.
You should then list or define the reasons (to yourself) why your own children cut you out of their life.
These reasons could be related to the mental attitude you had for cutting your mother out of your life; such as you having a lack of forgiveness, a lack of tolerance, being demanding, having a lack of understanding, being morally overzealous, etc.
Or the reasons for your children's decision could be due to their own unwholesme mental attitudes.
The point is the reasons & causes are either your mental tendencies, your children's mental tendencies or a combination of both.
Buddhism teaches various mental attitudes & behaviours are either: (i) wholesome; or (ii) unwholesome.
If you get angry a lot or criticise a lot, this can be unwholesome. Therefore, others may reject or avoid you for this.
In summary, its all about current attitudes, habitual tendencies & behaviours rather than past & future lives.
Therefore, if you have habitual unwholesome qualities that are not changed; the same rejection from others may occur in the future.


Do modern day Buddhists still believe in the magical siddhis?

Is it possible for a modern Buddhist to believe in what sounds like fantasy or magical powers (Rddhi) ?
If there is a belief in these things, then there exists conceptual artefacts. I certainly don't believe in them. In Buddhism, if they occur for you, - and they can occur in some quite powerful ways - they can be seen to have only an indicative value, both for personal practice and in how you skilfully integrate with others. Personally, I was plagued by these things, but given the correct attention, they served my practice well.
Do any current day Buddhists practice these?
Off the top of my head, Daniel Ingram is quite vocal about the siddhis. Whilst he is certainly an interesting character, I would find it difficult to recommend many of his practice methods to others for many reasons. For one, he teaches Buddhist practices that are far too powerful and disproportionately off-centre from the eightfold path for the average run-of-the-mill person, and some of those practices can't even be considered Buddhist in nature.
Are the eight classical Siddhis or Rddhi now rejected or reinterpreted ?
They are neither rejected nor reinterpreted. The approach to the siddhis from the suttas tells us two things: 1) to much wrong attention towards the siddhis is not helpful towards the primary task at hand: the ending of suffering. 2) the siddhis are only symptomatic of the primary task at hand. In other words, they are a sign that the radiant mind is opening further.

Then Venerable Anuruddha went up to Venerable Sāriputta, and exchanged
greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were
over, he sat down to one side and said to him:
“Here’s the thing, Reverend Sāriputta. With clairvoyance that is
purified and surpasses the human, I survey the entire galaxy. My
energy is roused up and unflagging, my mindfulness is established and
lucid, my body is tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind is immersed in
samādhi. But my mind is not freed from the defilements by not
grasping.”
“Well, Reverend Anuruddha, when you say: ‘With clairvoyance that is
purified and surpasses the human, I survey the entire galaxy,’ that’s
your conceit. And when you say: ‘My energy is roused up and
unflagging, my mindfulness is established and lucid, my body is
tranquil and undisturbed, and my mind is immersed in samādhi,’ that’s
your restlessness. And when you say: ‘But my mind is not freed from
the defilements by not grasping,’ that’s your remorse. It would be
good to give up these three things. Instead of focusing on them, apply
your mind to the deathless.”
After some time Anuruddha gave up these three things. Instead of
focusing on them, he applied his mind to the deathless. Then
Anuruddha, living alone, withdrawn, diligent, keen, and resolute, soon
realized the supreme culmination of the spiritual path in this very
life. He lived having achieved with his own insight the goal for which
gentlemen rightly go forth from the lay life to homelessness.
He understood: “Rebirth is ended; the spiritual journey has been
completed; what had to be done has been done; there is no return to
any state of existence.” And Venerable Anuruddha became one of the
perfected.
With Anuruddha


According to Buddhism, rebirth can take one of four types:

Opapatika - spontaneous rebirth
Samsedaja - born or arisen from moisture
Andhaja - born in an egg, oviparous
Jalabuja born from a womb, viviparous

Most insects belong to the andhaja group, I think. But yes, as others have mentioned, insects are considered a potential realm of rebirth.

Examples from the texts:

Queen Upari (Ubbari)

  Persons favored by fortune enjoying privileges of wealth, family, education, rank, physical beauty etc., are prone to exhibit haughtiness in their dealings with others. Shrouded in their own vanity and self-esteem, they become neglectful in their performance of meritorious deeds. Humility plays no part in their make-up. The Blessed One had taught in the Cūḷakammavibhaṅga sutta that such vain-glorious, haughty persons are liable to land up in lowly inferior re-births. On the other hand, unpretentious persons who show humility and pay reverential respects to those deserving of homage will be reborn in noble families.

  Queen Upari of our story was extremely beautiful and being the chief queen of the ruling monarch was of very high status in life. She had her head turned by these pre-eminent qualities and looked down with contempt on those she should have shown her respects. For such unwholesome attitudes and actions, it may be presumed she was reborn a lowly female cowdung-beetle. On hearing this account of rebirth of his beloved queen as a female beetle, King Assaka promptly rejected it, saying "I don't believe it."

  The hermit replied, "I can show you the female beetle and make her talk too." The king said, "All right. Please do and make her talk too." The hermit using his supernatural powers of abhiññā made a vow for both the male and female beetles to make their appearance before the king.

  When the male and female beetles emerged from the heap of cowdung into the presence of the king, the hermit said, "Oh King, the female beetle which is following from behind was your chief queen Upari devi. Having abandoned you, she is now trailing the male cowdung-beetle wherever it goes. Oh King, have a good look at the female beetle who was lately your chief queen Upari."

  The king refused to believe the hermit. "I can't believe that such an intelligent being as my queen Upari was reborn as this female beetle", said the king.

  True, for those who do not quite believe in the laws of kamma and its resultant effect, who do not understand the principles of conditionality or causal relationship, as explained in Paṭiccasa-muppāda, it would be difficult to accept that a being of the human world should have gone down so low as to become a mere beetle. Even in these days of sāsanā when Buddha's teachings are widely prevalent, there are some people holding the view that "when man dies, he cannot descend into an existence inferior to that of a human being". So it is not surprising that during the dark ages when Buddha's dispensations were yet unheard of, such stories of incarnation were received with scepticism.

  http://static.sirimangalo.org/mahasi/Dhammacakkappavattana%20Sutta.htm

Ven. Tissa

  Tissa.-An Elder of Sāvatthi. He once received a length of coarse cloth as a gift and handed it to his sister to be made into a robe. She had the cloth pounded and spun into fine yarn and made of it a soft robe-cloth. At first Tissa would not accept it but was prevailed upon to do so and had it made into a soft robe by skilled robe-makers. He died on the night it was finished and, as a result of his fancy for it, was reborn as a louse in the robe. After his death, the monks wished to divide the robe but the louse started shouting. The Buddha, hearing this by his power of divine audience, asked the monks to lay the robe aside for seven days. At the end of that period, the louse was reborn in the Tusita world. DhA.iii.341ff.

  http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/t/tissa.htm


Trouble understanding the path factor of Right Effort

There're different antidotes to the different unwholesome states that arise. Ven. Bodhi in his "The Noble Eightfold Path"'s Chapter 5 wrote:

  For desire a remedy of general application is the meditation on impermanence, which knocks away the underlying prop of clinging, the implicit assumption that the objects clung to are stable and durable. For desire in the specific form of sensual lust the most potent antidote is the contemplation of the unattractive nature of the body, to be dealt with at greater length in the next chapter. Ill will meets its proper remedy in the meditation on loving-kindness (metta), which banishes all traces of hatred and anger through the methodical radiation of the altruistic wish that all beings be well and happy. The dispelling of dullness and drowsiness calls for a special effort to arouse energy, for which several methods are suggested: the visualization of a brilliant ball of light, getting up and doing a period of brisk walking meditation, reflection on death, or simply making a firm determination to continue striving. Restlessness and worry are most effectively countered by turning the mind to a simple object that tends to calm it down; the method usually recommended is mindfulness of breathing, attention to the in-and-out flow of the breath. In the case of doubt the special remedy is investigation: to make inquiries, ask questions, and study the teachings until the obscure points become clear.


What is the root condition for (each of the) unwholesome roots of greed, ill-will and delusion (raga, dosa, moha)?

All Buddhist teachings revolve around the same core, Dependent Co-Arising, usually described as the Twelve Nidanas.

Dependent Co-Arising refers to the process of development of informational (representational, semiotic) reality, starting with unconscious causational/informational tendencies, to basic inclings of rudimentary representation, to development of mind, to emergence of representational "entities", culminating in an idea of Self as Subject of experience and Agent of action.

This process grows hand-in-hand with (co-develops in conjunction with) development of behavioral tendencies for attraction, repulsion, and judgement in general (of things as "good" and "bad"). When these two things - the representational reality made up of entities and self - and the judgement-based attraction/repulsion - come to maturity, we end up having something that thinks of itself as a sentient being acting in a world of good and bad entities, trying to acquire the good, and get rid of the bad. But because the fundamental assumption this is all based on is false - because in fact the world is not made of fixed entities, and they are not inherently good (desirable) or bad (undesirable), this situation leads to all kinds of turbulence, that to these so-called "sentient beings" looks like a valid struggle against trouble and suffering, towards some imagined idealized happy state. The funny thing though is, the more each of these "sentient beings" acts to obtain happiness for itself, the more trouble they (us) create for each other, and therefore for all of them (us). So to them (us) it looks like they (we) are trying hard to make things better, but in fact they (we) end up perpetuating this confusion and struggle.

This situation is the core condition of the vast amount of uninstructed worldlings. They (we) think their (our) subjective idea of the world is what the world is, and they (we) seriously try to act within it, only causing more trouble, endlessly.

The Three Roots are a distilation of the above to three basic tendencies in the minds of sentient beings. A tendency for assuming something as desirable, a tendency for assuming something as undesirable, and a tendency for taking subjective (representational) things at the face value as if they were objective.

It's kinda sad, if you think about it.  Even tragic, if you ask me. Out of this vast field of energy develop formations capable of representation, and then these formations seriously think they need a new cell phone or a bigger breast. It would be comical if it weren't so sad.


See pages 96-97 of Piya Tan's essay:

  The Saṁyutta Commentary paraphrases the significance of the two verses, thus (as the Buddha’s
  arrière pensée):

    Though I have stood for such a long time waiting for alms, you would not give even a spoonful;
    but now that I have revealed all the Buddha-qualities to you as though spreading out sesamum
    seeds on a mat, you wish to give. This food has been gained, as it were, by singing a song
    (gāyanena gāyitvā). Therefore, as it has been ‘chanted over with verses’ (gāthā’bhigīta) it is not
    fit to be eaten by me. Since there is the Dharma (dhamme sati), out of respect for the Dharma,
    established in the Dharma, the Buddhas sustain their life. This is their rule of conduct, this is their
    way of livelihood (esā vutti aya ājīvo). Such food should be discarded and only what is properly
    gained should be eaten.” (SA 1:232; see Miln 228-232)

  The Critical Pali Dictionary defines abhigīta as “spoken over with mantras,” suggesting that the Buddha
  rejects the offering by the brahmin because he has chanted over it with the sacrificial hymns. However,
  Bodhi thinks that “it is doubtful that the Buddha would reject food for such a reason. Further, according
  to [SED], gāthā is not used with reference to the verses of the Vedas, and thus here the word likely refers
  to the Buddha’s own verses” (S:B 446 n446).
  To suggest that the Buddha rejected the brahmin’s offering simply because it has been chanted over
  with Vedic mantras would suggest that the Buddha is superstitious! The real reason has to do with right
  livelihood (sammā,ājīva).

His translation is a bit different from Ven. Sujato's, i.e.:

  Gāthā’bhigītaṁ me abhojaneyyaṁ
  The gatha-sung should not be partaken by me,

  sampassataṁ brāhmaṇa n’esa dhammo
  O brahmin, this is not the way of those who see.

  gāthā’bhigītaṁ panudanti buddhā
  Buddhas reject what is gained by the singing of verses,

  dhamme sati brāhmaṇa vuttir esā.
  When there’s Dharma, brahmin, this is the rule.

I re-read the "food" chapters of these Vinaya summaries ...

The Bhikkhus' Rules --
A Guide for Laypeople
The Patimokkha Rules
The Khandhaka Rules

... and didn't see anything there about ex-sacrificial food not being allowable as alms food.


Of course others have responsibility to rectify the wrong views. There were several individuals spreading wrongly grasped views on Dhamma even during Buddha's time like Arittha, Sati and Sunakkhattha. Buddha's and other monks' reactions on such situations are detailed in Alagaddupama sutta and Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta.

Buddha explains the plight of such people, as if grasping a snake from it's coils in the water snake simile in Alagaddupama sutta.

  there is the case where some worthless men study the Dhamma... Having studied the Dhamma, they don't ascertain the meaning of those Dhammas with their discernment. Not having ascertained the meaning of those Dhammas with their discernment, they don't come to an agreement through pondering. They study the Dhamma both for attacking others and for defending themselves in debate. They don't reach the goal for which [people] study the Dhamma. Their wrong grasp of those Dhammas will lead to their long-term harm & suffering. Why is that? Because of the wrong-graspedness of the Dhammas.
  Alagaddupama sutta

But for people studying the Dhamma for its real purpose, that is the cessation of suffering, Buddha's advice is to question him or an experienced monk when there's doubt.

  "Therefore, monks, when you understand the meaning of any statement of mine, that is how you should remember it. But when you don't understand the meaning of any statement of mine, then right there you should cross-question me or the experienced monks.
  Alagaddupama sutta


What does Buddhism say about pragmatic retribution?

There are countless examples of non-retaliation being depicted as admirable.

One that comes to mind is this one: Is That So?

Not that you'll necessarily find the mere fact that it's "admirable" is necessarily a good or sufficient reason -- instead a good reason includes to minimize suffering, allow the cessation of suffering, of those involved.

I don't want to answer the part of the question about diplomats (that seems to me a matter of politics rather than Buddhism).

"Pragmatic retribution" is what I'd call, Tit for tat. It's a popular game (or model, strategy, game theory), but simplistic to the point of stupidity, and I think not Buddhist.

On the subject of divorce, I'd suggest (from experience) that maybe both parties in a divorce should have legal counsel, and perhaps avoid making agreements and concessions without legal counsel (or at least, I think that's the way it works in "my country"). That's not a matter of retribution though, it's a matter of being equitable and finding a division (a "separation agreement") that's fair or as beneficial as possible to both parties.

Also I'm not sure that I agree with the premise of "understanding those who hurt us". Apparently there's a proverb that "to understand is to forgive", but maybe Buddhism has a different take on that subject. I'm thinking of the opening lines of the Dhammapada:

  Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.
  Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow.
  "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.
  There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die. But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.

The first line is about intention: your intention matters (for example whether you intend to hurt someone, or don't intend to hurt someone).

The third verse seems relevant though. Rather than "understanding those who hurt us" maybe it's better to understand (i.e. maybe "Buddhism would recommend" that you understand) yourself (or the things which you take to be yourself): how and why you're "hurt", what the nature of that hurt is, maybe what "views" you might change (or "abandon") to not be hurt in future. Maybe hurt can be caused by attachment (to something impermanent); considering something (or someone) as "yours"; hurt "pride"; and so on.

I recommend the truth of the sixth verse to you.

It's not clear to me how one can avoid engaging in retribution in some cases.

That's one of the reasons to have a lawyer each, or a mediator in common (or even two lawyers and a mediator). They can be a bit more dispassionate, professional, in dealing with the other party (and you can be more professional when you're dealing with them).


Is modern capitalism inherently opposed to Buddhism?

I agree with @ChrisW. In addition to his answer:

Here is a quote from the Sigalovada Sutta that supports investment in business.

  The wise endowed with virtue Shine forth like a burning fire,
  Gathering wealth as bees do honey And heaping it up like an ant hill.
  Once wealth is accumulated, Family and household life may follow. By
  dividing wealth into four parts, True friendships are bound; One part
  should be enjoyed; Two parts invested in business; And the fourth set
  aside Against future misfortunes."

The Adiya Sutta discusses the five benefits that can be obtained from wealth.

The Dighajanu Sutta discusses how to maintain one's livelihood in tune:

  "And what does it mean to maintain one's livelihood in tune? There is the case where a lay person, knowing the income and outflow of his
  wealth, maintains a livelihood in tune, neither a spendthrift nor a
  penny-pincher, [thinking], 'Thus will my income exceed my outflow, and
  my outflow will not exceed my income.' Just as when a weigher or his
  apprentice, when holding the scales, knows, 'It has tipped down so
  much or has tipped up so much,' in the same way, the lay person,
  knowing the income and outflow of his wealth, maintains a livelihood
  in tune, neither a spendthrift nor a penny-pincher, [thinking], 'Thus
  will my income exceed my outflow, and my outflow will not exceed my
  income.'

  "These are the four drains on one's store of wealth: debauchery in sex; debauchery in drink; debauchery in gambling; and evil friendship,
  evil companionship, evil camaraderie. Just as if there were a great
  reservoir with four inlets and four drains, and a man were to close
  the inlets and open the drains, and the sky were not to pour down
  proper showers, the depletion of that great reservoir could be
  expected, not its increase.


Which suttas in the Pali canon give instructions for how to cultivate equanimity?

Indriya-bhavana Sutta translation 1

Indriya-bhavana Sutta translation 2 with commentary


In the book Parallel Worlds, does Michio Kaku believe in Nirvana and Genesis?

Reading more from the excerpt which you quoted,

  When I was a child, I had a personal conflict over my beliefs. My parents were raised in the Buddhist tradition. But I attended Sunday school every week, where I loved hearing the biblical stories about whales, arks, pillars of salt, ribs, and apples.

Perhaps that answers your question, "What's his religion?"

I suppose that the following helps explain why he describes the "11th dimension" as "Nirvana":

  These creatio ex nihilo myths stand in marked contrast to the cosmology according to Buddhism and certain forms of Hinduism. In these mythologies, the universe is timeless, with no beginning or end. There are many levels of existence, but the highest is Nirvana, which is eternal and can be attained only by the purest meditation. In the Hindu Mahapurana, it is written, "If God created the world, where was He before Creation? . . . Know that the world is uncreated, as time itself is, without beginning and end."

In Buddhism, "Nirvana" is I think described as a state which is:

Unconditioned (i.e. it doesn't depend on or come into being as a result of other things as its condition)
Timeless (perhaps also translated as "ever-present" or "eternal")

He's saying that the "11 dimensions" described in one of the theories of Physics has similar properties, i.e. it exists without a cause (perhaps unlike "this universe", which I take it is presumed to be embedded within those 11 dimensions, and which has a cause e.g. the "Big Bang").

There's also this sentence:

  What is gradually emerging from the data is a grand synthesis of these two opposing mythologies. Perhaps, scientists speculate, Genesis occurs repeatedly in a timeless ocean of Nirvana.

I don't think that means he literally believes in the Biblical story of Genesis. Its in a section of the chapter titled, "Baby Pictures of the Universe". I think the phrase "Genesis occurs repeatedly in a timeless ocean of Nirvana" is meant as, and should be understand as, "something-created (I guess/presume he's talkig about 'four-dimensional space-time' there) occurs repeatedly (or maybe 'fluctuates') within a timeless higher-dimensional space", and he's using pseudo-religious phraseology.

My personal opinion is that it's a pointless (meaningless and unhelpful) analogy.

A similar tendency exists elsewhere, e.g. Quantum mysticism suggests a link between quantum theory and consciousness ... whereas this guy suggests we equate his cosmological/mathematical theory with Nirvana (or with certain characteristics/descriptions of Nirvana taken out of context).

It may or may not (depending on your preconceptions) be a helpful description/analogy of 11 dimensions ... I guess it's an idiosyncratic description of his ... and I'd guess it's not a good description (not a canonical description) of the Buddhist Nirvana.


How does *Buddhist* meditation differ from others and lead to awakening?

Very good question.

Buddhist meditation is based on the understanding of the mechanism of arising and cessation of suffering. Suffering arises whenever there is a conflict between "is" and "should". Craving for any "should" because of attachment to that (usually to a concept within a framework) is the generator of suffering. Letting go of the "should", or even better, transcending the boundaries of a framework that served as the foundation for the concept, leads to cessation of suffering.

Buddhist meditation involves methodically applying the above principle from coarse to progressively finer "shoulds".

As you thus let go of these attachments, preconceptions, prejudices, and overgeneralizations - the notion of self dissolves as the hidden counterpart of these overgeneralizations.

However, I think you got the relationship wrong way. It's not that the peace of no-attachment (no-should, no-overgeneralization) is a step that leads to selflessness which then leads to Enlightenment. It is the other way: freedom from attachments, preconceptions, prejudices, and overgeneralizations -- including the overgeneralization known as "Self" - leads to Enlightenment and Peace.

Non-Buddhist meditation is either trial and error, or something trivial like gazing at the candle or running water, or it is brute-force stopping the thoughts, or it is visualization of some images that has useful side effects, or working directly with psychosomatic energies. The last two types were later repurposed by Tibetan Buddhists and integrated into Buddhist framework of progressive attainment of suchness.


There are many views among Buddhists on the issue of euthanasia, but many are critical of the procedure.

An important value of Buddhism teaching is compassion. Compassion is used by some Buddhists as a justification for euthanasia because the person suffering is relieved of pain. Keyword is intention (cetana). However, it is still immoral "to embark on any course of action whose aim is to destroy human life, irrespective of the quality of the individual's motive."

For bhikkhus the rules are explicitly spelled out.

The monastic code (Patimokkha) states:

  "Should any bhikkhu intentionally deprive a human being of life,
  or search for an assassin for him, or praise the advantages of death,
  or incite him to die (thus): 'My good man, what use is this wretched,
  miserable life to you? Death would be better for you than life,' or
  with such an idea in mind, such a purpose in mind, should in various
  ways praise the advantages of death or incite him to die, he also is
  defeated and no longer in communion."

On the other side, there are the Vakkali Sutta and the Channa Sutta.

a) In the Vakkali Sutta (SN 22.87), the monk Vakkali, who is "sick, afflicted, gravely ill," tells other monks of his intention to use a knife to commit suicide. Upon learning of Vakkali's intention, the Buddha personally visits Vakkali to speak with him. In the course of their discussion, it becomes apparent that Vakkali is well progressed on the path to enlightenment—having already gained direct and genuine insight into the impermanent, self-less, and ultimately unsatisfactory nature of existence. After the Buddha parts company with Vakkali, he goes to the nearby Mount Vulture Peak to dwell for the rest of the day and night, and that night he is visited by "two devatas of stunning beauty" who remark to him that Vakkali is "intent on deliverance" and that "he will be liberated as one well liberated." The next day the Buddha has monks deliver a message to Vakkali recounting the devatas' auspicious visit and assuring Vakkali that his death will be a good one: "Do not be afraid, Vakkali, do not be afraid! Your death will not be a bad one. Your demise will not be a bad one." After Vakkali receives this message from the Buddha, he "uses the knife," as planned, and kills himself.
Upon receiving word of Vakkali's suicide, the Buddha leads a group of monks to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope, where Vakkali's corpse can be seen:

"Then the Blessed One, together with a number of bhikkhus, went to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope. The Blessed One saw in the distance the Venerable Vakkali lying on the bed with his shoulder turned. Now on that occasion a cloud of smoke, a swirl of darkness, was moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermediate quarters. The Blessed One then addressed the bhikkhus thus: 'Do you see, bhikkhus, that cloud of smoke, that swirl of darkness, moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermediate quarters?' 'Yes, venerable sir.' 'That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali, wondering: 'Where now has the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali been established?' However, bhikkhus, with consciousness unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbāna.'"

b) In the Channa Sutta (SN 35.87) the monk Channa, who is suffering intensely due to sickness, tells the monks Sariputta and Mahacunda that his condition is worsening and that he intends to kill himself using a knife:

"Friend Sariputta, I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Strong painful feelings are increasing in me, not subsiding, and their increase, not their subsiding, is to be discerned. Just as if a strong man were to split my head open with a sharp sword, so too violent winds cut through my head. I am not bearing up… Just as if a strong man were to tighten a tough leather strap around my head as a headband, so too there are violent pains in my head. I am not bearing up....Just as if a skilled butcher or his apprentice were to carve up an ox's belly with a sharp butcher's knife, so too violent winds are carving up my belly. I am not bearing up....Just as if two strong men were to seize a weaker man by both arms and roast him over a pit of hot coals, so too there is a violent burning in my body. I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Strong painful feelings are increasing in me, not subsiding, and their increase, not their subsiding, is to be discerned."

Sariputta and Mahacunda exhort Channa not to kill himself but he decides to do so anyway, asserting that he has led a “blameless” life. Sariputta, believing that Channa may have broken precepts of the Patimokkha by having inappropriately close relationships with laity—and assuming that Channa would not attain Nibbana upon death as a result—approaches the Buddha to inquire about the nature of Channa's rebirth. The Buddha replies that Channa has done nothing wrong and that he has, in fact, attained freedom from the round of birth and death:

"The Venerable Channa did indeed have these friendly families, Sariputta, intimate families, hospitable families; but I do not say that to this extent one is blameworthy. Sariputta, when one lays down this body and takes up another body, then I say one is blameworthy. This did not happen in the case of the bhikkhu Channa. The bhikkhu Channa used the knife blamelessly. Thus, Sariputta, should you remember it."

It is noteworthy that Channa’s suicide appears to be something of a non-issue in his case, and we may reasonably conclude from this sutta that suicide—when carried out to avoid unbearable physical pain associated with terminal illness—was considered, by the Buddha himself, to be an acceptable course of action."


Can anyone explain the hua-yen sutra accroding to tendai, to me?

i am a student of Hua-Yen philosophies, have read a handful of western derivative works and am currently working my way through Cleary’s translation of the Avatamsaka Sutra.  I have, however, no experience with TienTai.  I know how difficult it can be to find perspectives on Hua-Yen so I wanted to volunteer my effort here, but I need a little more to work with in terms of a query.  Avatamsaka Sutra is a very large collection of work, as you know.
Regarding the metaphor of Indra’s Net, this spiderweb analogy is a good one.  The idea is that of an infinite net with glass beads at every node.  As light shines through the beads one can examine any bead and see the reflection of all other beads in this single bead...and also the reflection of all beads that appears on each bead is visible if we have strong enough perception.
This also relates to a Fazang teaching regarding li and shi.  The absolute interpenetrates all phenomena non-obstructively AND all phenomena interpenetrate non-obstructively.
So, my personal interpretation here is not that identity is annihilated by the light of the absolute, but despite the uniqueness of each bead (even if all beads are clear glass, they may have random bubbles or chips and scratches) any and all other beads can be discovered by studying only one.  But none can be found at all that does not have the light of the absolute shining in and through it, no matter how chipped, scratched, cloudy or colorful it may be.  For me that light represents Tathagatagarbha...Buddha Nature.
I hope this is somehow helpful and if not that you will forgive the clumsiness of my effort.


It depends on how it is practiced. According to the tradition of the commentaries(I think it comes from the commentary on the Kattavathu, the fith book of Abhidhamma but I'm not totally sure), the distinction between samatha and vipassana meditation lies in what the object of meditation is. In this model, meditation on an object of ultimate reality (that is to say, meditating on that which is experienced directly such as sensations, feelings, etc...) is considered vipassana, and meditating on an abscract concept that is more than just direct experience is samatha.


For bikkhus, You can look at the vinaya, Monks’ Pācittiya 3,
https://suttacentral.net/pli-tv-pvr1.2/en/horner-brahmali

the buddha says that you go to hell when you slander the buddha or the noble ones, like here https://suttacentral.net/sn6.9/en/sujato

https://suttacentral.net/t211.30/en/beal

but for slander of a puthujjana by another puthujjana, that's seems to be the usual harsh speech, so no explicit direct destination.


Does Zen have an unusual view of samadhi?

'Samadhi' generically means 'collectedness' or 'concentration'.

The Pali states there are two types of concentration, namely, 'right' & 'wrong':

  In one of right concentration, wrong concentration is abolished...

  MN 117

'Right concentration' is defined as concentration that has seven supporting & requisite factors:

  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.

  MN 117

Therefore, an expert marksmen trained to assassinate people in war has 'samadhi' but it is 'wrong samadhi' because it is not supported by the above seven factors.

In fact, if a 'Zen samadhi' is not supported by the above seven factors, particularly 'right view', it is not 'right concentration' according to the Pali.

As for the word 'jhana' or 'absorption', this generally refers to a 'meditative' concentration.


'Kaya-sankhara' in Anapanasati & Paticcasamuppada? Are they related?

No.

Saṅkhāra-paṭiccasamuppāda cause viññāṇā-resultant, nāma&rūpa-resultant, saḷāyatanā-resultant, phassa-resultant, and vedanā-resultant.

Kāya-saṅkhāra is breath, cause of body's living, breath's effect. But breath is an effect, cittaja-rūpa, of paṭiccasamuppāda's elements. Especially for this question, saṅkhāra-paṭiccasamuppāda cause kāya-saṅkhāra, breath, and many other effects.

In cūḷavedallasutta, MN 44, they talking about (1) concentration meditation then (2) three saṅkhāra than nirodhasamāpatti-attainment and  (3) nirodhasamāpatti-rising.

Because of above 3 contexts, the 3 saṅkhāra must relate with jhāna. And the proper relating saṅkhāra with saṅkhāra in MN 44 is kāya-saṅkhāra that we can found in ānāpānassati-pabba and ariyavasa-sutta. They are effect-saṅkhāra that are ceased by jhāna.

If breath is saṅkhāra-paticcasamuppāda, arahanta will can't breathe because buddha taught in cessation paṭiccasamuppāda:

  With the fading and cessation of ignorance without a remainder determinations cease.

But the fact appear in many sutta that arahanta still breath, except arahanta who achieving 4th jhāna, and nirodhasamāpatti. For the example in dutiya –– ariyavasasuttaṃ:

  Bhikkhus, how is the bhikkhu with appeased bodily determinations? Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu dispelling pleasantness and unpleasantness and earlier having dispelled pleasure and displeasure, abides in the fourth higher state of the mind. Thus the bhikkhu is with appeased bodily determinations.

The context of many sutta related with ānāpānassati, already described itself:

  He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'

  Alternative translation: He trains himself, 'I will breathe in decreased breathing effort.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out decreased breathing effort.'

Sāriputta described in paṭisambhidāmagga also:

  What is "I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication, I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication"?

  What is bodily fabrication?

  Long breathing (that is the first element in ānapāna-pabba) relating with body = That long breathing involve with body, cause of body. The practitioner trains to calm=to stop=to cease that bodily fabrication.

In abhidhamma, vibhaṅga, is the same.

For more information, see ānāpānakatha in path of purification.

The very important information is: ariyavasasutta that memorized by anuruddha school, ānāpānassatisutta+cūḷavedallasutta that memorized by sāriputta school,  and mahāsaṭipaṭṭhānasutta that memorized by ānanda school, relating with each other with out any lacking.

Why?

Because they were arahanta who perfectly ceased every bias, then they recited and memorized tipitaka together, not just read.
No, they are not the same, they are used in very difference contexts.


What's the difference between perception and consciousness?

In relation to the five aggregates, the consciousness aggregate solely refers to main minds, such as the eye-consciousness, the ear-consciousness, and so forth. This excludes mental factors. Mental factors are consciousnesses but they are not included within the category of consciousness aggregate. Except feelings and perception (or 'discrimination', etc.) mental factors are included in the category of compositional factors.

Because perception is a consciousness, it is clear and knowing. It means that it has the capacity of taking the aspect of the object it apprehends, and it knows/apprehends its object.

According to Mahayana Abhidharma, perception is one of the five omnipresent mental factors. It means that perception accompanies every single main mind. Here is an example: an eye-consciousness seeing blue takes the aspect of blue, and that aspect is apprehended by the perception factor that is in the retinue of the eye-consciousness as well. A main mind and its concomitant mental factors share five similarities that are explained by Yeshe Gyaltsen in his Necklace for Those of Clear Awareness Clearly Revealing the Modes of Minds and Mental Factors.

Regarding the entity of perception, the Compendium of Knowledge says:

  QUESTION: What is the defining characteristic of discrimination
  [Tib. 'du shes, literally, aggregation-knowing]?

  RESPONSE: It has the characteristic of knowing upon aggregation. It has the entity of
  apprehending the sign and apprehending the mark, through which one
  designates an expression to objects of perceptions, hearing,
  differentiation and knowledge.

Yeshe Gyaltsen explains further:

  Just as it has been said above, it is a knower that, upon the
  aggregation of the three – object, sense power, and primary
  consciousness – apprehends the uncommon sign of an object. Also, A
  Discussion of the Five Aggregates says:

Later in the text, he explains two division:

  The apprehension of a sign with regard to an object means to
  apprehend it through individually distinguishing the object's
  particularities, such as blue, yellow, and so forth.
  The
  apprehension of a sign with regard to a convention means to apprehend
  it through individually distinguishing the convention's
  particularities, as when one thinks, "This is a man; that is a woman."


What is meant by the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw in regards to "The Attainment of Fruition"?

Fruition Knowledge : That again is immediately followed by knowledge that belongs to the final stage and continues in the course of its predecessor. It abides in that same Nibbana, which is void of formations since it is the cessation of them. This is called "fruition knowledge."

It seems they are both talking about the knowledge of cessation that arises after cessation.

Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw is saying that each experience of Nibbana is approached and achieved in the same manner, each time( Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami, Arahant). Each time it is attained, however, it may last longer and is more purifying than the previous time, more complete.

What Narada Maha Thera is pointing out is that each of the four instances of "intuiting nibbana", as he puts it, i.e. attaining Sottapana, Sakadagami, Anagami, Arahant, each occur only once.

Thats the jist of it as far as I understand. Hopefully I didn't fumble any technicalities!


What are the 4 wheels and 9 doors in Snp 1.29?

four wheels and nine doors

It means 4 limbs(?), 9 body openings (7 head, 2 lower) -- so, a human/being in sensual world. By cutting off kama-chanda, one leaves the sensual realm (human would & other sugati realms, is bound to higher heavens). As quick perceived. It seems not related to direct Nibbana (although "with its roots" is mentioned, but the wish was related to the dirty sensual realm).

See also AN 2.35: Samacitta Sutta — Minds in Tune

Further investigations in regard of "cakka", wheel:

More common is Chakra, for the "wheels" and might be also denote old indian models of "life-energy", usualy 5 or 7 charkras, which leads to

  The esoteric traditions in Buddhism generally teach four chakras.[3] In some early Buddhist sources, these chakras are identified as: manipura (navel), anahata (heart), vishuddha (throat) and ushnisha kamala (crown). en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakra

but as still not really proper seeming, a Pali research gives a better answer:

  catucakka an instr. of four, a lucky tetrad, a fourwheeler of the body as expressing itself in the four kinds of deportment, iriyāpathas A ii.32; S i.16, 63 (catucakkaŋ). In this sense generalized as a happy state, consisting of "4 blessings": paṭirūpadesa -- vāsa, sappurisûpassaya, atta -- sammāpaṇidhi, pubbe -- kata -- puññatā, https://dsalsrv04.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=Cakka&searchhws=yes

(sugati loka, human with certain merits)

bog: refers to birth in a womb, phlegm... swamp. The questioner obiviously aware of asubha of body, form.


In Buddhism, is Escapism seen as a bad thing to take part in?

Escapism does not address the core issue. Say you have X experience which you do not like and you distract yourself with Y experience with you take pleasure in. The solution is temporary as Y ends you are left unsatisfied again.

The case of much of the suffering are the unwholesome roots in craving, aversion and ignorance. Buddhist practice aims to remove them.

Now let's take experiance you like. What happens is you think "Ah, I like this" hence the notion of I arises in your mind. Likewise with many forms of craving and aversions. So if you remove the craving or aversion by being equanimous (and also remove ignorance being aware of the arising and passing nature of phenomena) you stop perceiving a self. There is not separation of self from the body, it is just that you do not perceive a self as an entity. Also any perception of self is a concept or abstraction created by our mind which is never in tune with the true nature of what actually is there. Hence you have to get rid of any concepts about self (which in all cases will be wrong).

  Escapism

  How is Vipassana different from escapism?

  Vipassana is to face the world. No escapism is permitted in Vipassana.

Source: http://www.vridhamma.org/Question-and-Answers#escapism


What did the Buddha mean by "no truth can be spoken?"

The truth about the nature of reality is, strictly speaking,  cannot be spoken, because reality is so multifaceted that it can never be fully and precisely expressed in words and concepts.

This is in line with the rest of Diamond Sutra which tries to give the reader a taste of the experience of Emptiness.


life-continuum is Bhavanga-citta. It's the filler thought moment/moments between every 2 thoughts/experiences. It keeps you from dying when the senses cannot provide an object to the mind. When you are in dreamless sleep, your mind mostly has Bhavanga-cittas.

It's the first thought moment in your life and the last thought moment of the previous life. It is a resultant thought moment, thus Karmicly neutral. For humans and above, it's always a result of good Karma. For hell-beings, it's a result of bad Karma.


Why has the "3rd precept" of the 5 precepts been interpreted as being so permissive?

I have explained the original Buddhist teachings about sexual conduct & misconduct, before.

The 3rd precept in the Pali suttas (e.g. AN 10.176) says a daughter is to be "protected" by her family.

  Abandoning sensual misconduct, he abstains from sensual misconduct. He
  does not get sexually involved with those who are protected by their
  mothers, their fathers, their brothers, their sisters, their
  relatives, or their Dhamma; those with husbands, those who entail
  punishments, or even those crowned with flowers by another man.

  AN 10.176

Per the later Commentary, the word "protected" means, per the DN 31 sutta, the daughter is "restrained from unskillful behaviour" until the "parents arrange a suitable marriage" for her into a good family.

  In five ways, young householder, a child should minister to his
  parents as the East:

  (i) Having supported me I shall support them,

  (ii) I shall do their duties,

  (iii) I shall keep the family tradition,

  (iv) I shall make > myself worthy of my inheritance,

  (v) furthermore I shall offer alms in honor of my departed relatives.

  In five ways, young householder, the parents thus ministered to as the East by >their children, show their compassion:

  (i) they restrain them from evil,

  (ii) they encourage them to do good,

  (iii) they train them for a profession,

  (iv) they arrange a suitable> marriage,

  (v) at the proper time they hand over their inheritance to them.

  DN 31

This is no different to the instructions in any other major religion.

Also, the suttas (Snp 1.6) literally condemn having sex with prostitutes.

  Unsatisfied with his own wife, with others’ wives he’s seen in tow,
  corrupted too with prostitutes— that’s the way to disaster’s woe.

  Snp 1.6

The impression is contemporary Buddhism is so permissive because monks don't want to make any waves with Cultural Marxist Hollywood brainwashed laypeople, which monks view as "metta".


According to Theravāda perspective, Lord Yama is considered to be a vemānika-asura who sometimes enjoys all the pleasures of heaven, in a celestial mansion and at other times experiences the fruits of his kamma by being the king in hell (niraya). Lord Yama belongs to the Cātummahārājikā deva (god) category. So according to my knowledge, lord Yama and lord Suyama of Yama are two devas.
When sentient beings appear near the hell gates, hell-wardens (nirayapalas) seizing them by the arms present them to king Yama. According to "Devaduta Sutta: The Deva Messengers", he always try to remember the good deeds one did in his/her previous existence. He does not order hell-wardens to punish the sentient beings in the hell. So, he is a good king.
For more information please read this.
Note: This is what I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.


Can someone be a monastic in their own home?

In Mahayana traditions, there are monastics on their own (in their house, hut, living with their parents and taking care of them, etc). It is not that monks have to give everything away (savings and all) before they take ordination. As a matter of fact, both the FPMT (Tibetan Gelug) and the Kwan Um School of Korean Zen encourage monks and nuns to keep what it takes to live at least 3 or 4 years, because they are not incline to sponsor newly ordained monks. A monk is not supposed to work for a living, but it happens that the teacher encourages someone to do just that. A monk is not supposed to have debts either, but some own a loft that they bought or inherited and did not completely pay yet. A fully ordained one is not supposed to sleep in the same house as laypeople for more that four days, but some live with their parents. These are minor breaches. The most important is to follow your teacher's advises. I know of teachers who encouraged specific students to work.

For instance, in the Tibetan Gelug tradition, H.H. the Dalaï-Lama encourages newly ordained renounciates (rabjung) and novices (getsül) to stay and study at a monastery for at least 4 years. He also encourages fully ordained monks (gelongs) to stay in a monastery for 5 years after ordination. This is because he does not want unlearned monks to roam free. It makes sense, since monks are representative. He wants monks to be able to answer Dharma questions.

The short answer is: yes, it is possible, at least in most (if not all) Mahayana traditions, but I suggest you rely on a qualified teacher.


How can I end my attachment to holidays?

As Japanese Zen Master Dogen said in Genjō Kōan:

  We get nostalgic when the blossoms wither but hate it when the weeds blossom.

This is a typical example of The First Noble Truth. We look at the beautiful cherry blossoms and morn their transience. We get attached to the experience of beauty and want it to go on forever. But because we know it won't last long we get nostalgic even before they wither. And once they actually dry up and fall, we feel the sadness. This is an example of attachment-based-dukkha.

At the same time, when the weeds grow high in our yard, when they thrive and bloom - we do not feel the joy of beauty. On the contrary, we feel joy when the weeds wither and die. We'd rather kill the weeds with a lawnmower or a herbicide chemical than see them flower. When the weeds thrive despite our efforts to kill them, we feel frustration. This is an example of aversion-based-dukkha.

In both cases, a plant grows flowers which bloom and then eventually wither and fall. But we think that the cherry blossoms are good because they are beautiful and the weeds blossoms are bad because they are ugly. It is our attitude (aka "attachment") that determines whether we experience dukkha or not. But what is the nature of this attachment and how can it be removed?

If you look at your mind directly, you will see that you have this fixed preconception - "holiday is good and work is bad, because _______". Just like with flowers and weeds. You need to look at your mind directly and see the formula that you are stuck on, e.g.: "work is stressful, because at work I'm continuously bombarded by endless requests and don't have time to even use the toilet" - or something like that.

These type of formulas often come from some implied social stereotypes that we subconsciously absorb from the social interactions. For example, if most people around you assume that hard work is for dummies and that the "smart/successful" people do not work much, you may internalize this attitude as "hard work is for losers" - which may lead to the kind of aversion to workdays and attachment to holidays you're talking about. The exact formula will be different for everyone, but there is always some kind of formula involved, you just need to see what it is.

Once you see your formula directly, you can get rid of attachment/aversion by simply letting go of the formula. If your vipashyana is not strong enough yet to do it directly, you can use a counter-fabrication like seeing peace in effort and stress in rest - or as Buddha have said, "see doing in not-doing and not-doing in doing". In other words, you can analyze the two situations (holiday-time and work-time) upclose, find the elements that go contrary to the attachment, and upadana those element-signs - to fuel the counter-fabrication by going over the signs again and again.

An internalized preconception - what I called "the formula" - is an example of reification at play. We generalize some description ("There is a hard line dividing weak and successful people => The weak people are forced to work a lot => The successful people are smart enough to avoid hard work => Overtime work is for dummies => If I work overtime, I'm a loser => Attachment to holidays, feeling stressed when there is work on weekends => Dukkha") and then we reify this description into a wordless formula that contains all of that description in a highly condensed form. Every time we think about working overtime, we feel stressed, with the entire description quickly replaying in our heads.

The technique that Buddha taught -- "seeing the non-pleasant in pleasant and seeing the pleasant in non-pleasant" and "finding the not-doing in doing and finding the doing in not-doing" -- works by breaking the generalizations we make about the components of the formula. We can attack the formula that "Overtime work is for dummies" by finding factual evidence that makes the formula false, for example: "Successful people actually work a lot, they work crazy hours - in fact, that's how they become successful!" -- Here, we have found an example that goes contrary to the generalization we have internalized (that "Successful people do not work hard"). By thinking about this counter-fabrication over and over again we can weaken the original reification and destroy the formula that leads to suffering.

Or, in the other example, one where "I" felt that "work is stressful, because I'm continuously bombarded by endless requests" - we could approach it like this: "Why do I think that being bombarded by requests leaves no time for anything else? Indeed, it is up to me to control my work pace. Why don't I slow down a little to make it more comfortable?" In this case the unquestioned generalization was the formula that "being bombarded by requests leaves no time for myself". We have internalized an assumption that we must handle every request as soon as possible, with no regard to our own comfort level. Identifying and deconstructing that assumption allows us to change our behavior and our perception of the situation - eliminating the source of aversion that leads to suffering.

Holiday is holiday and work is work - but you don't have to love one and hate the other. You can learn to be at peace in the suchness of here-now, whether it's work or holiday. You just need to understand how dukkha comes from reification and how reification can be dispelled by challenging one of it's underlying assumptions.