Let's forget for a moment about "I", and "wanting". Here are some:

Negative things:

Minimise or eliminate "suffering"
Minimise attachment, and craving, associated with suffering
Minimise defilements
Minimise fetters

Positive things:

Maximize wisdom
Maximise perfections
Maximise factors of enlightenment

Learn to practice the noble eightfold path.

Practice good deeds (and speech), and generosity, which are for example "a support for the mind".

I think that, when a monk is dying, another monk may be advised to remind him of his "attainments" -- perhaps it's such "attainments", and "good deeds", that are not (or that are less) impermanent.

As for "I can't even desire Nirvana , because I never get it" -- that seems like a contradiction, you know.

Imagine "I" is like a drop of water, and "Nibbana" is like an ocean. Then "I desire Nibbana" or "I can't desire Nibbana" is like saying, "I wish this drop of water would be as big as the ocean, as permanent as the ocean, but still be the same individual drop of water."

Then people around you are like, "Dude! Let it go! Put the drop in the ocean, already!" (or, depending on the school of Buddhism, maybe, "That drop of water is already like the ocean").

I think a reason why Buddhism teaches anatta is because it's the characteristics of "I" that are associated with suffering -- craving to have things is associated with suffering; seeing and being attached to (and wanting to be attached to) an impermanent "self" that's going to die is associated with suffering; and so on.

One advice, which I remember from long ago, is to treat your sense of self (or your body) like a wound -- you take care of it, you try to treat it so as to minimize suffering, but you don't love it, you don't become attached to it.  And you don't say "I can't want to be healthy because then this wound (my sense of self) would disappear."

Also there's some middle way, for example this sutta or this sutta imply that some wanting is "right".


The "five mindfulness trainings" obviously correspond to the traditional "five precepts".

So you can find more (by other authors) on that subject by searching for "third precept", for example Buddhism and Sex.

A lot of what what "appropriate ways" means is explained fairly clearly in the paragraph you referenced, i.e.

  True Love
  Aware of the suffering caused by sexual misconduct, I am committed to cultivating responsibility and learning ways to protect the safety and integrity of individuals, couples, families, and society. Knowing that sexual desire is not love, and that sexual activity motivated by craving always harms myself as well as others, I am determined not to engage in sexual relations without true love and a deep, long-term commitment made known to my family and friends. I will do everything in my power to protect children from sexual abuse and to prevent couples and families from being broken by sexual misconduct. Seeing that body and mind are one, I am committed to learning appropriate ways to take care of my sexual energy and cultivating loving kindness, compassion, joy and inclusiveness – which are the four basic elements of true love – for my greater happiness and the greater happiness of others. Practicing true love, we know that we will continue beautifully into the future.

The simplest definition of "appropriate ways" is "not inappropriate".

Examples of "inappropriate" are described in AN 10.176:

  He gets 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.

In other words, don't break existing families. Like, first of all, do no harm.

Some people interpret this as meaning that, according to the letter of the law, casual sexual relations with otherwise-unattached (i.e. unmarried, independent) partners (or prostitutes) is OK: not wise, necessarily; and ultimately dissatisfactory; but at least not immoral, not breaking the third precept.

But Thich Nhat Hanh goes further than that, when he says, "true love and a deep, long-term commitment made known to my family and friends", which sounds to me like marriage (or celibacy).

He also says that "sexual desire is not love, and that sexual activity motivated by craving always harms": so "appropriate ways" means consequent to a loving relationship, in which in which sexual desire is not mistaken for love.

FYI this answer summarized some guidelines for choosing a marriage partner.

To summarize the paragraph:

Beware that "sexual misconduct" causes suffering
Protect other people, by not engaging in sexual misconduct
"Manage" your sexual energy accordingly

The French translation uses the verb gérer, which means "manage" (it's the word used for what a professional manager does, at work)
I'm not sure what he means by "take care of" in English.
It could perhaps mean "beware of".
Another Buddhist parable (that I read a while ago, I'm not sure where) is that you should "take care of" your body in the same way that you would "take care of a wound": i.e. don't love it, but bandage it and protect it from further harm (though perhaps that isn't what Thich Nhat Hanh was saying).

Develop "true love" (the four elements of love which he lists are more-or-less equivalent to the brahmavihāras)

Buddhist notions of virtue (sila), for each of the five precepts, equate virtue with protecting or freeing everyone from harm; and freeing everyone includes or results in a share of that freedom yourself:

  Furthermore, abandoning illicit sex, the disciple of the noble ones abstains from illicit sex. In doing so, he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the third gift...

One of the famous summaries of Buddhism is from the Dhammapada:

  Verse 183: Not to do evil, to cultivate merit, to purify one's mind - this is the Teaching of the Buddhas.

"Not doing evil" ranks highly, is important.

"Abstaining from (harmful or evil) sexual misconduct" is part of the five precepts, which is part of the first training.

It's not only a negative (absence of harm), it's also a way towards a positive.


How do Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhists make sense of Maitreya's prophecy?

I think your question embedded two questions and should be dealt separately to give clear answer: a) How do Mahayana Buddhists make sense of prophecy of Maitreya? b) How do Vajrayana Buddhists make sense of prophecy of Maitreya when there are son masters claimed to have achieved anuttara samyak sambodhi?
a) How do Mahayana Buddhists make sense of prophecy of Maitreya?
The answer for a) is very simple, almost needn't answer; Maitreya is the only next Buddha to come, it will take long long long time, 5.6 billion years according to one saying.
(i) Mahayana Buddhists (Chinese tradition) held there is only one future Buddha to come after Shakyamuni, that is, Maitreya. Though Mahayana has Sutra recounting the total of these 1000 Buddhas in this Noble Kalpa. All those enlightened, highest accomplished Bhiksus, Buddhists, even exhibiting supernormal abilities, are just achieving the Bodhisattva Bhumis accordingly. One Bhiksu achieved Bhumi level 8th, well-known said to be Ch'an Master Puan (1115-1169CE). There's no English info yet for him, English info has very tiny of the Chinese tradition. He belonged to the Lin Ji Zong (Rinzai) lineage, the 13th. For achieving 8th Bhumi, that Bodhisattva has penetrated the mystery of Dharani therefore is able to cite his own Mantra. Traditionally monastery will chant this Mantra during month of cleansing, to drive away bugs and insects, called Puan Mantra. He also made it as the Guqin melody. There is another Bhiksu called Zhigong (418-514CE), also achieved very high Bhumi surpassing material constrains but it's almost a standard practice for this type that he acted like a mad monk to conceal his identity (a Bodhisattva with advance Bhumi) in order to not to cause disturbance to society; or like Monk Budai (ceased 917CE), all these superior Buddhists will not make claim to the ordinary people who they are, not to say claiming as a Buddha, that's the Chinese tradition.
(ii) To be a Samyaksambuddha (achieved anuttara samyak sambodhi) one must receive mark (授記) from previous Samyaksambuddha. Then there will be many many lives spent as Bodhisattva. In Buddha Shakyamuni's case, he received the mark from Buddha Dīpankara. The Theravadin's interpretation of Samyaksambuddha is incorrect, at least I read from this forum. Their interpretation mixed it the same as a Pratyekabuddha. Saying it meant self-awaken is not correct, for Buddha always learns from previous Buddhas - so are we here learning as well, Buddha has teachers; also self-awaken is not a sufficient factor, he must be marked by the previous Sam. Buddha he will be another Sam. Buddha. This is another reason why Lotus Sutra must exist and completely making sense. On the contrary, those traditions missing this Sutra or the like is missing out very important teachings - traditions with incomplete teachings. Yet those who attack the Lotus Sutra, either they held hidden agenda, or needed illumination.
(iii) Due to the above understanding, anyone claimed to be a Buddha, a living Buddha, a reincarnation of a Buddha, a next Buddha, demonstrating supernormal abilities to elicit followers, a Maitreya herein, a Maitreya to be... etc. they are fraudulent. Yet there're not lack of examples throughout history.
b) How do Vajrayana Buddhists make sense of prophecy of Maitreya when there are son masters claimed to have achieved anuttara samyak sambodhi?
This was my puzzle too, when I just began my learning. I would have to declare that since I'm not following the Vajrayana tradition although I appreciate certain teachings found values in them also many historical great masters held my respect to, my answer should be regarded solely as personal opinion, derived from materials I studied only.
(i) I would sum up your referring only to the Tibetan Buddhism of the Zhügu (Living-Buddha, Tulku, reincarnation of a master) tradition. While I think it's possible the Buddhas could manifest their Nirmānakāya(s), but too many of those claims how many of them are real?
(ii) For Tibetan Buddhism, the undeniable fact is, that their religion and politics interwoven, hence, social status needed to establish for politican-monk. Historically, there're major schisms between the traditional Bon and Buddhism, and their merging and interfering. Very little is talked about, that during Tang Dynasty, Princess Wénchéng (628?-640CE) was granted to King Songtsän Gampo of Tibet, she took with her Bhiksus and Daoists, and scrolls1 of both schools. One of the Buddha Shakyamuni statues in Tibet today is reputedly said to be bought by her there. Also marked beginning the flourishing of Tibetan Buddhism; though there were Bhiksus coming directly from India before or after. From what I studied, Maitreya Buddha is not often focused, while Padmasambhava (?700?CE) was worshiped and also regarded the founder of Tibetan Buddhism. Padmasambhava appeared appro. 100 years after Wencheng's time, teaching Tantra, during the reign of Trisong Detsen (742-797CE). All these... serve quite a sound background and motive for claiming of reincarnation/continuation of certain established power player.
(iii) From here on, the emphasis of achieving Buddha-hood differs. Tibetan emphasizes on achieving Buddha-hood in one life-time, or maximum 7 lives, by practicing Tantra Yoga, with cultivation of merits/ Bodhicitta (Bodhicitta has many meanings too, not just about cultivation of the heart). One of the key methods is by "yoga-ing" (synchronizing) with the Guru, or the Yidam, so that one could acquire the same attributes of the Guru/Yidam, or the Guru can transfer his own achievement directly to the student... I'm still puzzling about how to discern these teachings, though I glean many useful knowledge from them. Up to this moment, I found that many of the evolved teachings (purely my own opinion) can be traced back to the (Chinese Mahayana2) Sutras, yet it's evolved, see? Just like many ignorant critics criticizing the Brahma Net Sutra of promoting self-immolation advocating burning oneself's fingers, body etc... even in the Chinese Buddhist community, they thought this so-called burning is a burning by the fire! Yet the disconnected interpretation could result in evolved teaching.
As in this case, one put aside the Maitreya prophecy, instead acknowledged there the Zhugu/Living-Buddha.

Footnotes:
1. Scrolls in Chinese would be needed to translate into Tibetan, I assumed, hence evolved teaching from disconnected interpretation during translation. Example, when studying the Madhyamaka, since most of the English translations are based on Tibetan version, or so-called Sanskrit version, many of the analogies were incomplete/nonsensical, almost illegible, indicated these not only the translators' problem, could also be in the source texts. Yet such problem doesn't exist in the Chinese version of Kumarajiva's. Hence, it's logical to infer that the Tibetan is translated from Chinese, or Sankrit translated from Chinese then to Tibetan. Anyhow, the surviving versions Chinese is the oldest.
2. The translation of Sutras from Sanskrit (it's a generalized term since the ancient Chinese regarded all those such as Prakrit, Siddham... etc in one major group, called 梵語/Brahma Language) to Chinese was the most professional and under strictest rules, with large league often composed by more than 3000 Bhiksus/intellectuals, leading by great translators, such as Kumarajiva, Xuanzhang, Paramārtha3... etc. Since the Chinese language has highly modular capacity many Buddhist etymologies were created, that not only authentically transmitted the meaning, also enriched the Chinese vocabulary. Famous examples like: Tathagata = 如來, 12 Nidanas = 12 因緣, Vijnana = 識, Citta = 心... etc.
3. There is misleading writing in Wikipedia on Mahāsāṃghika4 quoting Paramartha said about how the Mahayana Sutras came about, that is completely a fabrication hidden under unknown agenda. What Paramartha left are just Sutras/Sastras translated, there's no record of his direct own words, how possible that Wikipedia amateur author is able to quot something that doesn't exist? Nevertheless, there is huge effort behind certain entity to promote what so-called Early Buddhism and sticking on Mahayana many different hats.
4. General accepted account of the schism in the 2nd Buddhist Council was initiated by the Elders who wanted to add more rules to the Vinaya. The sect who were the majority kept the original Vinaya without altering it since the Buddha's passing away was Mahāsāṃghika, school carried Mahayana teachings.


Here is a quote on Buddhist Chanting. In here it's told why Buddhists chant and the benefits of it. The quote is from an article named "The Practice of Chanting in Buddhism" by Ven. Bhikkhu Dhammasami:

"Chanting is very common to any religion. Buddhism is no exception in this regard. However, the aim and purpose of chanting is different from one religion to another. Buddhism is unique in that it does not consider chanting to be prayer.
The Buddha in many ways has shown us to have confidence in our own action and its results, and thereby encouraged us to depend on no one but ourselves. This in fact is the sum and substance of His last message in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta. One of the passages in this discourse reads: "Ananda, be dependent on yourself, take refuge in yourself and not in others, by this mean be dependent on the Dhamma, go for refuge to the Dhamma -- the righteous principles".
When a Buddhist does chanting, he is not asking some one to save him from evil nor is he hoping to be given a place in heaven as a result after he dies. Instead, through chanting he may be learning, teaching, philosophising or re-memorising the discourse.
Actually, in the Anguttara Nikaya there are some discourses dealing with chanting like Dhammavihari Sutta. It mentions five categories of people who make use of the discourses.
The first one studies it just for the sake of study without putting it into practice or explaining it to others. He even does not reflect deeply on what he has studied. He is known as 'Pariyatti-bahulo' who is keen on studying it alone.
The second one preaches or teaches what he has learnt from the discourses but does not follow it himself. He is 'Pannyatti-bahulo' who is keen only on teaching.
The third one does chanting. He philosophises about the discourses, trying all the time to satisfy his philosophical thirst. He forgets to make use of as mode or life. He is called 'Vitakka-bahulo' who is eager only to indulge in philosophical aspects of the Suttas (Discourses).
The fourth one is the one who chants the discourses to make them last for a long time in his memory. He memorises and re-memorises. Nevertheless, he does not go further to follow it in daily life. He is 'Sajjhayaka-bahulo' who is enthusiastic only in memorising or chanting the teachings of the Buddha, He may even expect some magical power from chanting.
The fifth and last one is who studies the discourses, teaches them to others, reflects on their philosophical points, chants them regularly and above all actually practices it in daily life. He is the one the Buddha praises to be 'Dhammavihari' -- a practitioner of the Dhamma, which he has learnt from the discourses.
Having reflected on this Sutta, it is left to us to judge ourselves to which category we belong and why we study or chant the discourses.
I would like to dwell a bit more on chanting in general. This is, after all, an All-night Chanting ceremony. It is nothing but right for us to be fully convinced of what we are doing. Initially I did mention that Buddhism is unique because it does not consider chanting to be a form of prayer.
Then why do we, Buddhists, chant?
In the olden days, before there were sufficient support materials for study like books, translations and computers we had to memorise to learn a discourse. After we had learnt it, we still had to chant regularly to protect it and hand it down to future generations. If we did not recite it daily we might forget it and omit some part of it. The Anguttara Nikaya says that if the discourses are poorly maintained this will lead to the disappearance of the Sasana. It was so important those days to memorise and chant it regularly. This must have definitely contributed in developing chanting practice. Chanting meant almost for the survival of the Dhamma itself.
Now we have sufficient support materials, why we should then be still chanting? Is there any more reason to do this?
There are some reasons sufficient to continue chanting practice. Regular chanting gives us confidence, joy and satisfaction, and increases devotion within us. This devotion is really a power. It is called the Power of Devotion (Saddhabala). It energises our life in general. I do not know about the others. For me I often have a joyous feeling when the chanting goes right. I become more confident of myself. I see it as a part of developing devotion.
In Buddhist monastic education tradition, chanting and learning by heart still forms a part of it. We study some of the Theravada Abhidhamma texts -- the highest teachings of the Buddha which deal with the ultimate nature of things -- in that way in Burma. We are explained the meaning and how the logic develops in the Abhidhamma. In the night we try to chant without having learnt it by heart. We could do it because of the technique. It is known as evening-class (nya-war) over there. It means a certain technique of studying the Abhidhamma and some of the Suttas. It is very helpful as it helps you to reflect very quickly".

Lastly, here is a website where you can listen to different Buddhist chantings e.g. Chinese Pureland and Pali Devotional Chanting.


Any living teachers claim to be able to attain vajrasamadhi?

vajrasamadhi translates as "adamantine absorption"(http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php?title=Vajrasamadhi). as (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajrasamadhi-sutra). According to buddhist scholar Buswell, the Vajrasamadhi-sutra is regarded to be an "apocryphal scripture". The problem with Buddhism is that practitioners are not recommended to speak about their different types of samadhi experience in public cause it can lead you to unskilled clinging to such experience. Try visit local Chan/Zen centres and ask sensei about it.


Looking for mentions of karma related to actions taken while dreaming

I think it's listed as a point of controversy in the Abhidhamma -- Kv 22.6:

Controverted Point: That all dream-consciousness is ethically neutral.
22.6.1 Theravādin: You admit, do you not, that a dreamer may (in dreams) commit murder, theft, etc.? How then can you call such consciousness ethically neutral?
22.6.2 Uttarapāthakas: If I am wrong, was it not said by the Exalted One that dream-consciousness was negligible? If so, my proposition holds good.

I think the (Theravādin) argument is that intention (e.g. intention to murder) may be present, therefore it's not ethically neutral.
I think the counter-argument is that there's no material result, so if it's not neutral it's negligible.
See also the Vinaya -- that defines offences (e.g. killing) in some detail or legalistically (i.e. in more detail than the suttas do) -- and there, there are various (several) conditions which must be met for the offence of e.g. "killing" to have occurred, one of which is that somebody has to die -- and in a dream, nobody is really killed, so that wouldn't be counted (and punished) as the offence of killing.
The Abhidhamma is considered part of the Pali canon, even if it isn't all quotes from the Buddha.
In Tsongkhapa's Praise for Dependent Relativity it is mentioned that the karma of killing in a dream was a question answered by the Buddha, but no sources are provided.
So far as I known, the commentary to the Vinaya pronounces the non-punishment of sexual actions performed while dreaming (while also saying it's better not to).
It's not exacty right to equate the working of kamma with the rules of the Vinaya, however that may be the best we have -- because the Vinaya is defined in detail whereas the suttas don't describe kamma in every detail -- even say that the precise workings of kamma is known to the Buddha but is unconjecturable -- and, the Vinaya was defined by the Buddha.


Are there things that one shouldn't be mindful of?

Yes there are. Being mindful of "signs" that turn the mind to anger (or lust etc.) is unwholesome. E.g. someone irritates you and you insist on attending (upaṭṭhāna) to that particular experience (a product of your mind!), instead of focusing on something more positive.

Mindfulness in and of itself is a neutral factor of feeding, the question is what you feed.


Ignorance of others when practising the teachings of the Buddha

Ignorance is a personal thing, and Buddhism speaks of a specific kind of personal ignorance -- that of dukkha.

The ignorance of others is irrelevant. Yes, one tries to help others, but transcending ignorance is a matter of transcending ONE'S OWN IGNORANCE and implies nothing about the ignorance of others.  However, one might be in a better position to be patient and hence work with others.


Wanting to improve and having expectations is in Buddhism seen as the cause of suffering. Meditation can't help you to gain your goals, but you learn how to be content with the way things already are. As a side effect you become a better person and have a better attitude, but this is not the goal of meditation. The goal of (Buddhist) meditation is insight.


According to Magga-vibhanga Sutta: An Analysis of the Path

Now what, is the Noble Eightfold Path?

Right view

  Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the stopping of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the stopping of stress

Right resolve

  Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness

Right speech

  Abstaining from lying, abstaining from divisive speech, abstaining from abusive speech, abstaining from idle chatter

Right action

  Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, abstaining from unchastity

Right livelihood

  There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with right livelihood

Right effort

  (i) There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen.

  (ii)He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen.

  (iii)He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen.

  (iv)He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen

Right mindfulness

  (i) There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, aware, & mindful — putting away greed & distress with reference to the world.

  (ii) He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves — ardent, aware, & mindful — putting away greed & distress with reference to the world.

  (iii) He remains focused on the mind in & of itself — ardent, aware, & mindful — putting away greed & distress with reference to the world.

  (iv) He remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, aware, & mindful — putting away greed & distress with reference to the world.

Right concentration

  (i) There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation.

  (ii) With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance.

  (iii) With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.'

  (iv) With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain.


Can there be "one day becoming a fully-awakened Buddha" after Parinibbana?

I have no idea why this question get so horribly down voted. I suspect it's due to angry Theravadins who see this as being against Theravada orthodoxy of final permanent Nibanna.

The fact is the Lotus Sutra aims at deliberately over turning such conception about Arahatship,  Nirvana and Buddhahood. Mahayana Buddhism relies on Prajnaparamita sutras as to establish that there is no final permanent nirvana nor the fact that Arhats are merely to remain as Arhats, but should aspire to Buddhahood with the full capacity of a Buddha. The core doctrine used to explain this view is through the understanding of dependent generation, which consequentially result in the impermanence and hence emptiness and non dual nature of any phenomena.

In the Lotus Sutra, it is therefore posited that Sariputra (Sariputta) shall one day attain full and complete unsurpassed awakening as a completely realized Buddha. The sutra further establish that only with such view, would they be True Arhats.

The sutra further explained that it is through skillful means that the Buddha teach sentient beings to give up their desires and attain Nirvana. Because most beings want to end their suffering but are afraid of taking on the challenge to become a Buddha. This is compared to the story of a rich man whose son have ran away from home, and now becomes a poor labourer. Now the poor man eventually reunite but no longer recognize his own father and is afraid of him thinking he's unworthy of being equal to the rich man. The rich man assigned the poor son various tasks until he gained his confidence and can truly inherit his father's legacy. The rich man is the Buddha who assigned the poor man that is sentient beings work, I.e. the way to end suffering Nibanna. But they should not be content with merely Nirvana but should aspire to be truly equal with the rich man e.g. the Buddha.


Freely available translations of the Dhammapada

Here's a list:

AccessToInsight's Dhammapada - various translations (Buddharakkhita, Thanissaro, and a few others) - web-based
Suttacentral's Dhammapada - various translations (Anandajoti, Buddharakkhita) - web-based
Ven. Thanissaro's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF
Ven. Thanissaro's translation of Dhammapada - web-based
Acharya Buddharakkhita's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF
Ven. Anandajoti's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF, includes Pali text
Ven. Anandajoti's translation of Dhammapada - web-based, PDF, epub and MOBI, includes Pali text
Ven. Narada's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF, epub and MOBI
Bhikkhu Pesala's version of Ven. Narada's Dhammapada - web-based, enhanced with commentary
Ven. Weragoda Sarada Thero's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF, includes commentary and Pali text
Ven. Weragoda Sarada Thero's translation of Dhammapada - web-based, illustrated
P. Lal's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF
Buddhist Legends, translated by E. W. Burlingame - in epub, MOBI - complete stories of the Dhammapada
Thomas Byrom's translation of Dhammapada - in PDF, rendered into English poetry

You can find many more Dhammapada PDF versions here.


Are there any higher education opportunities in Buddhism?

In United States, the ones I have heard something nice about, that offer a professional program in Buddhist Studies:

University of Virginia - Department of Religious Studies. Very strong Indo-Tibetan Buddhism school.
University of Hawaii - Department of Religion. Very strong Chinese/Japanese Buddhism school.
Columbia University (New York) - Department of Religion. Strong Indo-Tibetan and Chinese/Japanese Buddhism school.
Rollins College in Florida - Department of Philosophy and Religion. Buddhist Ethics.
Naropa University, Colorado. Undergrad school for kids aspiring to grow in Buddhist Studies.

Many large universities in US offer a program in philosophy (or "comparative philosophy") with concentration in buddhist studies. See for example this list from the Tricycle magazine. Buddhist studies further specialize into Early&Theravada Buddhism, Indian-Tibetan Buddhism, and Chinese/Korean/Japanese Buddhism.

In my understanding, the way this (the choice of school for PhD) is usually done is: you find yourself drawn to one of those subfields of buddhist studies and realize that you keep enjoying online articles and published books by a particular professor from a particular college. Then you go to that college and study under that specific professor or one of his/her students. Like, you're definitely supposed to know much of the professor's work before you even show up as potential PhD candidate.

Also note that since studying Buddhism academically involves studying texts, the student at PhD level is expected to know a couple of primary languages (Pali, Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese) and a secondary language (usually French, since most early 20th century study of Buddhism was in that language, or perhaps Japanese or Korean if that's what you study).

Which is why you can't simply jump from a Master's in Engineering to a PhD in Buddhism. You need to start at the grad level and get the basic background in languages, history, culture, and philosophies of the geographical area corresponding to your preferred type of Buddhism.

A slightly less academical and more pragmatic approach is to pursue a degree in "Buddhist Ethics". I believe this usually helps avoid getting pigeonholed into a specific geohistorical tradition, and gets a more "applied" perspective on Buddhism, relevant to the real life in the modern society. Buddhist Ethics is something you'd get if you want to practice Buddhist leadership as opposed to doing research and translation.

Finally, if you dream of becoming a professional Buddhist Chaplain (a "priest"), you may want to consider pursuing the Master of Divinity degree. There is one now offered by the Harvard Divinity School and a number of less famous schools such as University of The West in LA and Maitripa College in Portland.


What is the nature of impermanence, desire and anatman?

Isn't the 'point of life' meant to be a journey to stability,
  satisfaction and self control?

There's no "meant to be" in life. It's not written in the stars that you must do this or that. But you can follow the noble 8 fold path and attain stability and satisfaction while you live.

  If everything in unstable, unsatisfying and out of control

Everything is uncontrollable, but not unstable and unsatisfying. Only conditioned things are unstable and unsatisfying.


How did Maitreya become so large and rich?

In Buddhism, the Buddhist statues are essentially the artful and symbolic expressions of the Buddha teachings, with the objective to educate us the meanings and teachings of Buddhism. Therefore, we should see the statues of Buddhism as teaching aids and the cultivation of virtues we aspired to achieve. They are not meant to be statues of gods for worshiping. As we come to realize the inherent meaning of Buddhist symbolism, we will truly appreciate the sophistication and completeness of its educational values.

Maitreya Buddha, or the Laughing Buddha, or the Bu Dai monk (the historical monk figure better known in China), has widely been seen to be portrayed with immense happiness, and its statue is sculpted big in front entrance of a Buddhist temple, and is also sculpted as fat and happy with a big smile and a big belly.

The educational and metaphorical values of the happy and fat imagery of this sculpture is created with profound significance:

The Laughing Buddha is often found at front entrance of a Buddhist temple. This shows that Buddhism greets visitors with a hearty smile, welcoming anyone to come on in.
Buddhism teaches us how to get rid of sorrows and afflictions and attain happiness in our lives. The laughing statue shows visitors coming in to learn Buddhism and follow the Buddha path will attain a happy life. We should also learn to be cheerful and be courteous to all.
Buddhism teaches us to be tolerant and treating everyone fairly and equally. The big belly represents the attitude of inclusiveness, that we take in and be tolerant of anything good and bad we experience and anyone we encounter in our lives.
Some statues portrayed with riches are the artistic representations of our true inner nature of perfect, complete, and infinite treasures (metaphysically) that we all beings by Buddha-nature possess.

We can see that the above profound significance of the sculpture are actually in sync with what Buddha Sakyamuni has been teaching all of us some 2,500 years ago when he reached enlightened in this world and educated us what he is the path to enlightenment.


Should I avoid using Mindfulness to fall asleep?

If you are using meditation to go to sleep:

You are inducing a hindrance. If this becomes habitual it will block your progress.
Also when meditating you should be alert and hence reduce the hindrances and sleepiness. If you are not falling asleep it not an issue if you are meditating. It is said a Yogi never sleeps.


How/Why to be moral without believing God or any supernatural entity?

Fire

In Buddhism, fire is used to describe the destructive & harmful mental defilements of greed/lust, hatred/anger & delusion/ignorance, such as in the Fire Sermon.

Being believer or dependent on God so far in my life, I'm clueless how exactly can I become independent without turning morally
Bankrupt?

Yes. Buddhism explains immoral (harmful) mental tendencies occur due to ignorance, not-knowing or cluelessness, as follows:

Monks, ignorance is the leader in the attainment of unskillful qualities, followed by lack of conscience & lack of concern. In an
unknowledgeable person, immersed in ignorance, wrong view arises. In
one of wrong view, wrong resolve arises. In one of wrong resolve,
wrong speech... In one of wrong speech, wrong action... In one of
wrong action, wrong livelihood... In one of wrong livelihood, wrong
effort... In one of wrong effort, wrong mindfulness... In one of wrong
mindfulness, wrong concentration arises.
Avijja Sutta

The rationale here about needing God is similar to a violent dog that needs to be kept behind a fence or in a cage; or a evil person that must be isolated from society in a prison.
In Buddhism, it is taught people have an evil disposition due to nature. We can observe the tendency to merciless violence in animals. People have obviously evolved from animals (rather than were created by & in the image of a god).
Buddhism teaches the minds of people can dwell in different mental states called:
(i) human (moral);
(ii) godly (powerful);
(iii) animal (immoral);
(iv) hungry ghost (addicted); and
(v) hell (suffering).
People who are immoral in nature & behaviour dwell within a mind in the animal world & eventually end up in hell (suffering).

When I start believing in experience I become somewhat immoral, without any good feelings.

Genesis 6.5 of the Bible states:

the Lord saw how wicked everyone on earth was and how evil their thoughts were all the time, he was sorry that he had ever made them
and put them on the earth. He was so filled with regret

This seems to show following the Abrahamic god creates an evil nature. In other words, the immoral feelings are due to how your religion created you, as explained in Genesis 6 of the Bible.
The history of the world seems to show people who believe in a supernatural entity like God are more evil than those that don't. For example, Christians have been at war among themselves & with others for hundreds of years & have destroyed many indigenous cultures with their imperialism. Even today, the American prison system contains more theists than atheists. I would suggest this is because God-believers want to exercise violent power over others; following the example of God as depicted in various scriptures that show God excising violent absolute power. Even the evil of atheist dictatorial Communism was created by Jews, with a violent dictatorial yet classless ideology similar to Judaism. Thus theistic religions have a tendency to attract evil people who lust for power and who want to act on this earth towards the humans as though they are gods.
Unfortunately, the good human people of this earth have to endure these wanna-be gods, like we must do, such as endure the evil politicians who today run the USA and are God-believers, both Christian & Zionist; who finance & arm Saudi terrorists that murder people while screaming: "Allah U Akbar" or "God is Great".

How & Why to be moral without believing in supernatural entity like God?

In Buddhism, morality equates with harmlessness. Morality is not a commandment or doctrine but, instead, harmlessness. To understand morality, one must comprehend harmlessness. If harmlessness is not comprehended, it is difficult to maintain morality.
Buddhism explains when you are moral, you no longer harm yourself. Being moral is a method to love yourself & benefit yourself.
If you examine with reason & intelligence the behaviours Buddhism considers to be immoral, such as killing, stealing, promiscuous sex, lying, drug taking, gambling, etc, you will find people who engage in these actions bring suffering & problems to their own lives (and, of course, suffering to the lives of others).
For example, men go to war, return with PTSD & even commit suicide. People who steal, end up in prison or lose their jobs. People addicted to promiscuous sex end up with broken relationships & mental disorders. People who lie are not trusted (even though they make money as evil politicians or business leaders). People who take drugs destroy their lives with bad health. People who gamble & borrow money greedily end up ruined.
Therefore, in Buddhism, we reflect or think deeply about the harmful consequences of immoral behaviour.
In addition, in Buddhism, another method to become moral is to develop 'empathy', namely, 'putting oneself in the place of another'. For example:

All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

All tremble at violence; life is dear to all. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness
hereafter.

One who, while himself seeking happiness, does not oppress with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will find happiness
hereafter.

Speak not harshly to anyone, for those thus spoken to might retort. Indeed, angry speech hurts, and retaliation may overtake you.

If, like a broken gong, you silence yourself, you have approached Nibbana, for vindictiveness is no longer in you.

When the fool commits evil deeds, he does not realize (their evil nature). The witless man is tormented by his own deeds, like one burnt
by fire.

Dandavagga: Violence

What are the ways to become independent?

To become independent, the Buddhist scriptures (SN 56.120) explain an 'animal' mind must realise the Four Noble Truths & practise the Noble Eightfold Path to become 'human'.
The full development of moral empathy is explained in the Veludvareyya Sutta, as follows:

"I will teach you, householders, a Dhamma exposition applicable to
oneself. Listen to that and attend closely, I will speak."
"Yes, sir," those brahmin householders of Bamboo Gate replied. The
Blessed One said this:
"What, householders, is the Dhamma exposition applicable to oneself?
Here, householders, a noble disciple reflects thus: 'I am one who
wishes to live, who does not wish to die; I desire happiness and am
averse to suffering. Since I am one who wishes to live, who does not
wish to die; who desires happiness and is averse to suffering; if
someone were to take my life, that would not be pleasing and agreeable
to me. Now if I were to take the life of another -- of one who wishes
to live, who does not wish to die, who desires happiness and is averse
to suffering--that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other
either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and
disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is
displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself
abstains from the destruction of life, exhorts others to abstain from
the destruction of life, and speaks in praise of abstinence from the
destruction of life. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in
three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to take from me what I have not given, that is, to
commit theft, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I
were to take from another what he has not given, that is, to commit
theft, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other either.
What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and
disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is
displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself
abstains from taking what is not given, exhorts others to abstain from
taking what is not given, and speaks in praise of abstinence from
taking what is not given. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified
in three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to commit adultery with my wives, that would not be
pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to commit adultery with
the wives of another, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the
other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is
displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon
another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected
thus, he himself abstains from sexual misconduct, exhorts others to
abstain from sexual misconduct, and speaks in praise of abstinence
from sexual misconduct. Thus this bodily conduct of his is purified in
three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to damage my welfare with false speech, that would
not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to damage the
welfare of another with false speech, that would not be pleasing and
agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and disagreeable to
me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict
upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having
reflected thus, he himself abstains from false speech, exhorts others
to abstain from false speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from
false speech. Thus this verbal conduct of his is purified in three
respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to divide me from my friends by divisive speech, that
would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to divide
another from his friends by divisive speech, that would not be
pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and
disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too.
How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to
me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from divisive speech,
exhorts others to abstain from divisive speech, and speaks in praise
of abstinence from divisive speech. ' Thus this verbal conduct of his
is purified in three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to address me with harsh speech, that would not be
pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to address another with
harsh speech, that would not be pleasing and agreeable to the other
either What is displeasing and disagreeable to me is displeasing and
disagreeable to the other too. How can I inflict upon another what is
displeasing and disagreeable to me?' Having reflected thus, he himself
abstains from harsh speech, exhorts others to abstain from harsh
speech, and speaks in praise of abstinence from harsh speech. ' Thus
this verbal conduct of his is purified in three respects.
"Again [Furthermore], householders, a noble disciple reflects thus:
'If someone were to address me with frivolous speech and idle chatter,
that would not be pleasing and agreeable to me. Now if I were to
address another with frivolous speech and idle chatter, that would not
be pleasing and agreeable to the other either. What is displeasing and
disagreeable to me is displeasing and disagreeable to the other too.
How can I inflict upon another what is displeasing and disagreeable to
me?' Having reflected thus, he himself abstains from idle chatter,
exhorts others to abstain from idle chatter, and speaks in praise of
abstinence from idle chatter. Thus this verbal conduct of his is
purified in three respects."


You might want to check out MN 135 and MN 136:

"Here, student, some man or woman kills living beings and is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. Because of performing and undertaking such action, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell. But if on the dissolution of the body, after death, he does not reappear in a state of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell, but instead comes back to the human state, then wherever he is reborn he is short-lived. This is the way, student, that leads to short life, namely, one kills living beings and is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings."


Can someone regain a Beginners Mind when it has gone?

In the Mahasi tradition we don't have the idea of beginner's mind, just a continuous refinement of the process. Many times throughout my practice, I've learned that some phenomena or thought process was just that—where previously I mistook it for a deeper reality. And I continue to experience these refinements.

But to attempt to answer your question, try not to hang on to the desire for Beginner's Mind. It will come back on its own. In addition, I would say be gentle to your mind and body. Those particular helped me the most when I was struggling in my practice. Maybe it will work the same way for you, in that being gentle with yourself may allow the Beginner's Mind to return when you least expect it.


Enlightenment, or Bodhi, refers to coming to a direct realization of the truth. Nibbana is the timeless state of perfect peace and happiness which occurs as a result of attaining Enlightenment, and it will occur immediately after attaining any of the four stages of enlightenment, and can be re-cultivated as well.

Parinibbana in common usage today refers to when a fully enlightened Arahat (one who has overcome all attachment and will not be reborn) undergoes bodily death. Instead of being reborn, they enter into Nibbana again, only this time they stay that way.


What titles apply to non-monastic/lay Buddhists? (upasaka/upasika savaka/sravaka)

you might get a few answers but here is my thought:

Śrāvaka (Sanskrit) or Sāvaka (Pali) means "hearer" or, more generally, or"disciple", or "one who sits near", "one who lend ears"

Gender neutral and describes all level of achievements.


The kamma of silence and/or "not acting"?

I think the Sangha primarily exists to maintain the Noble Dhamma in the world for those few who search for liberation from the world.

When the world becomes rotten to the core, such as the American and most governments, and when these governments become totalitarian (which is gradually occurring), for bhikkhus to criticize these governments may endanger the Sangha and the maintenance of the Dhamma.

Ultimately, the Dhamma is lokuttara. Ultimately, the Buddha did not arise in the world to teach about kamma, worldly sila or sīlabbata-parāmāsa.

'Kamma' is not actually a teaching of the Buddhas. The Buddhas teach
 the following:

  Bhikkhus, this Dhamma taught by me is unrefuted, undefiled, irreproachable, and uncensured by wise ascetics and brahmins. And what
  is the Dhamma taught by me that is unrefuted, undefiled,
  irreproachable, and uncensured by wise ascetics and brahmins?

  ‘These are the six elements’: this, bhikkhus, is the Dhamma taught by me that is unrefuted … uncensured by wise ascetics and brahmins.
  ‘These are the six bases for contact’ … ‘These are the eighteen mental
  examinations’ … ‘These are the four noble truths’: this, bhikkhus, is
  the Dhamma taught by me that is unrefuted, undefiled, irreproachable
  and uncensured by wise ascetics and brahmins.

  AN 3.61

'Kamma' teachings the Buddha said are defiled with attachment, as follows:

  And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered,
  what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions.
  There is this world & the other world.

  MN 117

Kamma is this world & the other world; where as Nibbana is not this world & not another world.


The mind occurs in both passive and active modes. The passive gives
  way to the active when a stimulus is received through one of the sense
  doors. The passive state of mind is called bhava"nga, cuti, or
  paa.tisandhi, according to the occasion.

  Bhava"nga. The bhava"nga citta, mentioned earlier, is the primary form
  of mind. It flows from conception to death except when interrupted by
  a stimulus through one of the sense doors. Read more...

The stream of Bhavanga citta is what you have in deep(dreamless) sleep. It is a result of your past birth Karma. The process doesn't stop until the being attains Parinibbana, except in the case of being born in the Asaññasatta realm.


How does one become victim of one's own Karma?

Karma is facilitated by emptiness. Because we are empty of essence, each choice and action you make leaves an imprint on your mind that, like all things, decays over time. So, if you make a negative action, you leave a negative imprint on your mind. Now, since we are empty of essence, you are more likely to perform actions with similar characteristics to the ones you have performed before. The more negative actions you choose to make, the more negative and troubled you become. This is why mindfulness and all the right stuff (view, speech, etc) is crucial. You have no nature other than what you choose and what you surround yourself with. If you let all that negativity build up by not being mindful of your actions and choosing rightly, you're going to have a lot of work to do towards purification.

Now, how does that relate to others in the way you're asking? Well it turns out that everything is empty of essence. Therefore beyond your mind, you leave an imprint on the world with similar characteristics as your actions, thus encouraging others to act in a similar way. And since you're inseparable from this gloriously intertwined existence, you are likely to reap what you've sewn.


The method in the Noble Eightfold Path in right speech for persuasion and influence

While persuading and influencing are not part of the standard definition of Right Speech, it certainly is considered inappropriate for monks and not part of Right Speech for monks, in the context of monetary gain or politics or other worldly endeavours not suited to the holy life, as seen below.
From DN 2:

"Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in
faith, are addicted to running messages and errands for people such as
these — kings, ministers of state, noble warriors, brahmans,
householders, or youths [who say], 'Go here, go there, take this
there, fetch that here' — he abstains from running messages and
errands for people such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.

"Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in
faith, engage in scheming, persuading, hinting, belittling, and
pursuing gain with gain, he abstains from forms of scheming and
persuading [improper ways of trying to gain material support from
donors] such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.


What kind of mental state does the meditation on four elements generate?

I don't know but maybe this passage about a skilled butcher from chapter III of the Book of Zhuang Zi is a clue.

  Prince Hui's cook was cutting up a bullock. Every blow of his hand,
  every heave of his shoulders, every tread of his foot, every thrust of
  his knee, every whshh of rent flesh, every chhk of the chopper, was in
  perfect harmony,—rhythmical like the dance of the Mulberry Grove,
  simultaneous like the chords of the Ching Shou.

  "Well done!" cried the Prince. "Yours is skill indeed."

  "Sire," replied the cook; "I have always devoted myself to Tao. It is
  better than skill. When I first began to cut up bullocks, I saw before
  me simply whole bullocks. After three years' practice, I saw no more
  whole animals.

  And now I work with my mind and not with my eye. When my senses bid me
  stop, but my mind urges me on, I fall back upon eternal principles. I
  follow such openings or cavities as there may be, according to the
  natural constitution of the animal. I do not attempt to cut through
  joints: still less through large bones.

  "A good cook changes his chopper once a year,—because he cuts. An
  ordinary cook, once a month,—because he hacks. But I have had this
  chopper nineteen years, and although I have cut up many thousand
  bullocks, its edge is as if fresh from the whetstone. For at the
  joints there are always interstices, and the edge of a chopper being
  without thickness, it remains only to insert that which is without
  thickness into such an interstice.

  By these means the interstice will be enlarged, and the blade will
  find plenty of room. It is thus that I have kept my chopper for
  nineteen years as though fresh from the whetstone.

  "Nevertheless, when I come upon a hard part where the blade meets with
  a difficulty, I am all caution. I fix my eye on it. I stay my hand,
  and gently apply my blade, until with a hwah the part yields like
  earth crumbling to the ground. Then I take out my chopper, and stand
  up, and look around, and pause, until with an air of triumph I wipe my
  chopper and put it carefully away."

  "Bravo!" cried the Prince. "From the words of this cook I have learnt
  how to take care of my life."

Since the elements are really expressing states i.e. water is not really water but liquid, wetness, changing, the idea is perhaps about the composition (and decomposition) of bodies. Individual bodies like yours and mine but also the larger structures we belong to: our families, our nations, the international community etc., which also function like bodies, where different people playing different roles and where mind work is at the top and support work is at the base. In starvation, the human body will take food from itself to feed the brain and keep it going and will only take from parts of the brain to feed the most important parts of the brain when it has no choice. And what is an ox/bullock in the ancient world? The source of work/energy. Hence harnessing/yoking and the plough.


How should satipatthana be understood in regard to external/internal minds?

Here is a short quote from an article on BuddhaNet called "The Vipassana Retreat - The Six Sense-spheres". In here it's talked about how internally and externally should be understood.

The Vipassana Retreat

The Six Sense-spheres

The teaching of the sense-spheres is to be found in the Contemplation of Mind (dhammanupassana) in the text we are following: the Satipatthana Sutta, which by now is familiar to you as the Four Establishments of Mindfulness.
After each section in the text in the Satipathana Sutta, you will find this passage: "In this way he abides contemplating the body as a body (or feelings, mind states and mental phenomena) internally, externally, and both internally and externally". What does this mean? It means that the focus of one's attention changes from the subjective (internal) to the objective (external) and by "both" is meant the understanding of the interrelationship or interdependence.
The focus of the practice so far has been mainly introspective; now the watchfulness or attentiveness can be expanded to include the external as well. That is, the attention is switched from the subjective to the objective. This is done by orientating to the sense-spheres, which are about the relationship between oneself and the outer world. Practising both internal and external satipatthanas can prevent self-absorption, and achieve a skilled balanced between introversion and extroversion.
The importance of contemplation of the sense-spheres is that it directs awareness to the six “internal” and “external” sense-spheres and the fetters (samyojana) arising in dependence on them. Although a fetter arises dependent on sense and object, the attaching nature of such a fetter should not be attributed to the senses or objects themselves, but to the influence of the hankering pull of desire (tanha)...

The article says further on how to make an orientation to a sense-door:

Orientation to a Sense-door
To make an orientation to a sense-door, you start by literally coming to your senses - seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and smelling. These are the five sense-doors or sense bases; the 'sixth sense' is 'consciousness of something', which is the mind-base with its eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, etc. You also need to be aware of the senses internally as well as externally. That is, the organs and their sense objects: nose/smell, tongue/taste, body/tactile objects, ear/sound, mind/mind-objects or consciousness.
Attentiveness or 'presence of mind' at one of the sense-doors during a sense impression is the way to practice. For example, most people are predominantly visual, so being attentive at the eye-door allows you to notice the effects of the contact between the eye and the visible objects and how you are relating to them.
The process is this: there is the eye (the internal base), and a visible object (the external base). With contact or a sense impression between the sense-door and external object, consciousness arises followed by feeling. The moment of consciousness ordinarily is too rapid to catch while the feeling tone can be more easily known and apprehended.
This orientation to a sense-door brings awareness of what is happening during the moment of contact or the sense impression, and with it the ability to monitor the associated feelings and consciousness that arises. When this feeling tone is apprehended, the link to liking and disliking is broken and therefore one is free at that moment from conditioned suffering.

Here is a quote from the Wiki on the 6 sense bases:

Ṣaḍāyatana (Sanskrit) or saḷāyatana (Pāli) means the six sense bases (Pāli, Skt.: āyatana), that is, the sense organs and their objects. These are:
Eye and Vision
Ear and Hearing
Nose and Olfaction
Tongue and Taste
Skin and Touch
Mind and Thought
That is, in Buddhism, the sixth "internal" and "external" sense bases are: mind (Skt., manas; Pali, mano); and, thought (along with memory and emotion) (Skt., dharma; Pali, dhamma).
Ṣaḍāyatana is the fifth link in the Twelve Nidānas of Pratitya-Samutpada (Dependent Origination) and thus likewise in the fifth position on the Bhavacakra (Wheel of Becoming). Ṣaḍāyatana (Sense Gates) is dependent on Nāmarūpa (Name and Form) as condition before it can exist.


Your idea to practise alternate metta & breath meditation sounds ideal.

You correctly understand that the development of rapture & jhana generally require retreat conditions thus generally cannot be cultivated when there is limited time.


In which suttas does The Buddha cover annihilationism (ucchedavāda)?

perhaps you will find what you want in the vagga about wrong views
http://obo.genaud.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/sn/03_kv/idx_24_ditthisamyutta.htm


Why are so many Buddhists in the west hostile to academic analyses of the religion?

You have strayed from the direct path free from [reified concept of] intrinsic being, and wandered down the wrong path of strict rationalism. And as you apply yourself to the labors of your own imagination, the obstructions to the correct path mount ever higher. What do you derive from this constant accumulation of words?

~Candrakirti, as quoted in "The Emptiness of Emptiness: An Introduction to Early Madhyamika" by C. W. Huntington & Geshe Namgyal Wangchen


This is based on nothing more than my own experience so please take it in that light.

I'm fairly busy at times as well. When I am super busy I find it very difficult to do any 'formal' meditation. It makes me more stressed sometimes to have to do 'another thing'. One thing I find useful is posture. There are no meditation police (i think) telling you that you must sit for meditation. Why not try lying down and doing nothing, perhaps watching the mind and paying attention to the desire to do something else; the desire to check your phone, write an email, get up and so forth. It's all there going on and worth a look.

I sometimes find it useful to set a timer for a small amount of time (10 mins say) and just do that. I don't find it stressful and it does alleviate the whir of the mind. If nothing else your partner gets to lie down for 10 mins. If your partner really struggles for time this can always be done last thing at night. Everyone has to go to bed at some point so there is a little time there maybe.

As I say, this is just what I have found useful when struggling. A teacher once said to me that meditating lying down wasn't cheating so it's kind of based around that idea. Anyway best of luck to you and your partner.


Reference request: no rest for those with ill will

Yes that's verse 3 of the opening chapter 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.


Quoting from Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha,

  And the Blessed One said: "Whosoever, Ananda, has developed, practiced, employed, strengthened, maintained, scrutinized, and
  brought to perfection the four constituents of psychic power could, if
  he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of
  it. [21] The Tathagata, Ananda, has done so. Therefore the Tathagata
  could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the
  end of it."
  But the Venerable Ananda was unable to grasp the plain suggestion, the significant prompting, given by the Blessed One. As though his
  mind was influenced by Mara, [22] he did not beseech the Blessed One:
  "May the Blessed One remain, O Lord!. May the Happy One remain, O
  Lord, throughout the world-period, for the welfare and happiness of
  the multitude, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, well
  being, and happiness of gods and men!"
  And when for a second and a third time the Blessed One repeated his words, the Venerable Ananda remained silent.
  Then the Blessed One said to the Venerable Ananda: "Go now, Ananda, and do as seems fit to you."

So the above is a textual reference.

Off-topic to the question, this (i.e. not having asked the Buddha to remain) is a reason why Ananda was reproached at the first council after the Buddha's death. Later in the same sutta Ananda realizes what the Buddha had been saying and asks him then (asks him three times), but the Buddha says no:

  And the Blessed One answered, saying: "Enough, Ananda. Do not entreat the Tathagata, for the time is past, Ananda, for such an entreaty."

and,

  "So also at Vesali, Ananda, at different times the Tathagata has spoken to you, saying: 'Pleasant, Ananda, is Vesali; pleasant are the shrines of Udena, Gotamaka, Sattambaka, Bahuputta, Sarandada, and Capala. Whosoever, Ananda, has developed... Therefore the Tathagata could, if he so desired, remain throughout a world-period or until the end of it.'

  "But you, Ananda, were unable to grasp the plain suggestion, the significant prompting, given you by the Tathagata, and you did not entreat the Tathagata to remain. For if you had done so, Ananda, twice the Tathagata might have declined, but the third time he would have consented. Therefore, Ananda, the fault is yours; herein you have failed.
  "Yet, Ananda, have I not taught from the very beginning that with all that is dear and beloved there must be change, separation, and severance? Of that which is born, come into being, is compounded and subject to decay, how can one say: 'May it not come to dissolution!' There can be no such state of things. And of that, Ananda, which the Tathagata has finished with, that which he has relinquished, given up, abandoned, and rejected — his will to live on — the Tathagata's word has been spoken once for all: 'Before long the Parinibbana of the Tathagata will come about. Three months hence the Tathagata will utterly pass away.' And that the Tathagata should withdraw his words for the sake of living on — this is an impossibility.


'Complacency' would be a lack of urgency, thus a deficiency in wisdom.

'Sloth & torpor' is a lack of energy (tiredness) or mental dullness ('sinking mind'), which can occur in concentration development & thus a deficiency in optimum concentration technique.

As for 'contentment' & 'complacency', yes, they could occur together when a practitioner is content with a liberating yet lower level of attainment, such as stream-entry or jhana.


I've always had a feeling that there is more to life and death. Is this normal?

first of all let me congratulate you for having this feeling bcs many are in the drunken state of life issues. the very existing you now is the greatest proof that you existed previously and have gathered causes to enable you in rebirth. learning truth of rebirth is rejoicing bcs we aasure ourselves that i am going to be there in next birth after i will be dead in this birth. The deathfear is slightly smoothened . But according to buddha ,  there is rebirth or it is not there also. whole thing depend on you. if you are content in this life and also hope the same shall be in next life also then go on happily. But a little fraction of the futility of life comes to know you though temporarily through any means for e.g love break,cheating partner,loss in career ,deceived by friend or may be due to unknown reasons then the search begins to get rid of causes causing this. then the knowledge begins , what are the causes for getting this life . when learnt ,one strives to avoid them to avoid next birth. buddha's teachings are for this only. i suggest to read "art of living by william harts ,a very convincing analysis of buddha's teachings as taught by goenka guruji who is in lineage of lady sayadaw,sayagyi u ba khin . as per my personal experience i immediately grasped the analysis and feel blessed for  developing faith in the teachings of buddha. hoping and heartily wishing to develop the same in you also.bcs we are all diseased and once the diagnosis is done treatment can be done by a neighbourhood chemist also.


Is there any historical evidence or sayings that Buddha went to America and Africa continent for some discourses or teachings

No. There is no indication the Buddha ever left north-eastern India (now Uttar Pradesh, Magadha, and Nepal.)


Call of duty during a Dharmic war : a Buddhist perspective

While violence and destruction is strongly discouraged in Buddhism, it is ok for a ruler or government of a country that adheres to Buddhist principles, to establish police and armed forces to:

protect and guard the people
ensure peace
ensure that justice prevails

Please see Pali sutta quotes below.
However, what about the hypothetical case of Buddhists being persecuted in non-Buddhist lands? Buddhists in this case, should not bear arms and become freedom fighters or terrorists, as that is against the first precept and also other teachings e.g. removing mental aversion.
In this case, persecuted Buddhists should either leave the country (as what the 14th Dalai Lama had done in March 1959) or pursue peaceful legal means of action (as what Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King had done) which could include petitions and letters to government officials and elected representatives, statements on media etc.
From DN 16:

"What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis duly protect and guard the
arahats, so that those who have not come to the realm yet might do so,
and those who have already come might live there in peace?"
"I have heard, Lord, that they do."
"So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to
be expected, not their decline."

From DN 26:

‘But sire, what are the noble duties of a wheel-turning monarch?’
‘Well then, my dear, relying only on principle—honoring, respecting,
and venerating principle, having principle as your flag, banner, and
authority — provide just protection and security for your court, troops,
aristocrats, vassals, brahmins and householders, people of town and
country, ascetics and brahmins, beasts and birds. Do not let injustice
prevail in the realm. Pay money to the penniless in the realm.


Shouldn't we take Lord Buddha's word above the all others?

It is correct, that the Dhamma is both universal and timeless.

The Dhamma is described as being an ancient path, that fully enlightened Buddhas discover by themselves and then teach it to other beings.

The words from a fully enlightened Buddha need not to be renewed or changed.

One needs only to practice insight meditation to find out if these words are true or not.

So there is no need for renewal of the Dhamma. The Dhamma is complete as it is. The Dhamma does not change.

Don't worry about the shifting away from the Dhamma. That is bound to happen. That is why there will arrive a future Buddha. The next fully enlightened Buddha to be, is Maitreya, whom arrives when the Dhamma has been completely forgotten. That is just the nature of a world system.


There are two implications to the question you ask:

If you imply that being reborn so that they can come back to earth to teach again like the Tibetan lamas, the answer is no. That is the path of a bodhisattva. The zen tradition is to gain enlightenment, instantly or gradually.

The second is that, have those patriarch reached enlightenment so that they will never be reborn? If you believe they were enlightened then they will not.


What kind of life is required for practicing Metta?

"content & easy to support" is Santussako ca subharo ca.

There's a fairly long description of that, with sutta references, in this definition of asantuṭṭhitā.

I think that "easy to support" is one of the things that the Buddha said that monks ought to be.

It's a formula, a phrase that's used in several suttas (I imagine it's in the Vinaya too).

The commentary says that the Karaniya Metta Sutta was addressed to a group of all/only monks.


Soul in the context of Buddhism is that was contemporary considers atman, which is permanent, pleasant and controllable. What is established in Buddhism is that there is nothing as such and everything constituting a being is subjected to the 3 Universal Characteristics.

Also there is not entity as a being. What is there is a causality arising process, which also is presented as the 4 Noble Truths, Dependent Origination, Conditional Relations. The continuity of the causality process can be taken as a trip in a vehicle. Each point of the journey is different from the other but still point of the same journey, hence there is a continuity but not also the entirely the same. Death is like changing vehicles.

In Buddhism Ghosts and Spirits are not tormented souls of past being. They themselves are life forms which inhabit the 31 planes of existence. When one dies and is reborn as a Ghost or Spirit this is like any other rebirth. This is a new existence. It is not the same being in the previous birth or nor a different being, but the continuation of the causality process.


You will see the monks in the early morning going on a procession called Pindapata, or Bindabat in Thai (at least I think that's how it's spelled). That is the time  you will want to offer Dana. Approach with the food and they will uncover the alms bowl and let you put the food in.

When approaching a monk you should always put your hands together at about heart level facing forwards and bowing your head so your forehead is parallel with your hands. Here is a link that talks about how to do it with a nice picture with three examples. With monks, do the version shown on the far right: http://www.phuket.com/magazine1/dos.htm

Women aren't allowed to have physical contact with monks and when receiving offerings other than food in their alms bowl in Thailand they will lay out a white cloth for you to set the offering on.

I'll edit more in if I think of anything.


Looking for references to skeptical debates on the subject of rebirth

The problem is not new. Several disputes on the subject of rebirth are recorded in traditional texts. In Pāḷi we have the Katthāvatthu - a record of various intellectual disputes with other Buddhists by the Theravādins. In Sanskrit there is Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakārikā (MMK) which disputes the Mainstream Buddhist view of karma and rebirth. Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa records disputes between Sarvāstivādins, Sautrantikas, and others on this subject.

There are a number of points of dispute, but two principle and related arguments. These arguments assume that rebirth is what happens after we die, and that karma is the driving force behind rebirth - or in other words, that rebirth is the primarily effect (vipāka) of actions (karma). It's not well understood that the early Buddhists texts in particular do not teach "actions have consequences" so much as they teach "actions cause rebirth".

Firstly there is the problem of action at a temporal distance. I first described this problem in an essay called "Does Karma Break the Rules." The basic question here is, how does karma manifest an effect (vipāka) long after the cessation of the condition? This is specifically denied by the principle of dependent arising (pratītyasamutpāda), which says that when a condition ceases the effect must also cease, with the implication (in the grammar of the statement) that this happens either simultaneously or in immediate sequence. There is no question of a delayed effect from a condition in dependent arising. This argument is made by Nāgārjuna, for example, in chp 17 of MMK:

  If the action endures to the time of maturation, then it would permanent
  If it is destroyed, then being destroyed, what fruit will it produce?
  (MMK 17.6. Siderits and Katsura, p.176)

Since the main "effect" of karma is precisely rebirth, then this is a very important question to decide. Nāgārjuna answers it by saying that:

  Defilements, actions, and bodies, agents, and fruits, are similar to the city of gandharvas; they are like a mirage, a dream (MMK 17.33, p.191)

But this answer was not routinely accepted by other Buddhists, because even though it solves the problem on the surface, the implications are that nothing is real and most Buddhists found this unsatisfactory. Nāgārjuna was accused of being a nihilist. And in any case the Theravādins ignored these developments in India.

Three main theories emerged to try to show how karma might cause rebirth. The doctrine of momentariness, the doctrine of always existent (sarva-asti) dharmas, and the seed theory.

In momentariness, adopted by the Theravādins, each karma is conceived of as a citta (In AN 6.63 the Buddha says cetanāhaṃ kammaṃ vadāmi - "intention is what I call karma"). This citta arises and passes away in a very short space of time (a moment) and is the condition for the arising of a second identical citta. That citta arises and passes away and is the condition for a third citta. And so on until the final effect of the action manifests, usually combined with other cittas to produce a final citta at death (cuticitta) that conditions the first citta of a new life elsewhere (paṭisandhicitta).
The always existent theory, associated with the Sarvāstivāda, argues that if a dharma (i.e. a mental event) has an effect in the future, then it must exist in the future, else it violates pratītyasamutpāda. Similarly if a past dharma has an effect in the present, then it must still exist in the past or it violates pratītyasamutpāda. Thus dharmas must always exist, in some form, but may only be "active" in the present - which is why we only perceive them in the present. This is a much better theory than most Buddhists give them credit for. Most other Buddhists modified dependent arising to allow for karma, but the Sarvāstivādins opted to retain dependent arising unchanged and modified dharmas. Of course other schools rejected this as a form of eternalism.
The seed theory starts off as a metaphor: cittas are like seeds that are planted in the soil and grow into a plant. The plant and the seed are not the same, nor do they co-exist in time, but one develops into the other. This is an elegant metaphor, but we have no idea of the underlying mechanism. Vasubandhu takes this metaphor and formalises it - this is definitely how karma and rebirth work. He introduces the idea of the ālayavijñāna "store consciousness". But his Yogācāra followers reified the metaphor and made the ālayavijñāna a real thing, thus making the theory eternalist and a wrong view.

Of the three, only 1. and 3. are currently in use, but 2. was very prominent in North India for many centuries.  Each theory introduces a number of ad hoc alterations to the received tradition - indicating that they could not see how karma and rebirth worked as things stood. Unfortunately none of the new formulas really solved the problem (nor did any of the less influential attempts not mentioned here). In several articles on my blog I show that the logic of these solutions to the problem, though in some cases admirable and elegant, actually fail to explain how karma and rebirth work. See especially The Logic of Karma. This leaves us in the present with no workable theory of karma and rebirth. And this is before we invoke science!

Secondly, this led to another big argument, the one over the interim realm (antarābhava). The doctrine of momentariness requires that the stream of cittas be unbroken. For this purpose they had to invent a kind of "neutral gear" called the bhavaṅgacitta which is what the mind is doing when it is not doing anything. It primarily provides continuity when our mind is inactive - such as when we sleep or in the nirodhasamāpatti "attainment of cessation". In this case there can be no gap between death and rebirth or the stream of cittas would be broken.

On the other hand, for other Buddhists the idea of an instantaneous transition did not make sense. Some pointed out that a cart carrying rice from one village to another took an appreciable time to get there. How could a citta fly from one person to another in no time? So they had to invent the interim realm, the antarābhava or bardo in Tibetan, to accommodate this.

At most, only one of these views can be correct. There can either be an interim or not. This dispute is never resolved in Buddhism so that today the official position of the Theravāda school is that there can be no interim realm, and Tibetan schools make the bardo between death and rebirth a particular feature of their teaching. Ironically many modern Theravādins (such as Bhikkhu Sujato) find the interim realm plausible, even though it destroys the stream of cittas that underlies their view of karma and rebirth.

I have been writing essays on this subject for some years now including critiques of the traditionalist views of some prominent Buddhists. Some of my work has also been published in academic journals. A complete list can be found under the heading Afterlife.

In addition I was interviewed by Ted Meissner of The Secular Buddhist on the subject of karma and rebirth:

Doug Smith of the Secular Buddhist Association has also critiqued the Traditionalist view of rebirth: http://secularbuddhism.org/2013/05/29/a-secular-evaluation-of-rebirth/

Someone put together this discussion between me and David Chapman on Twitter on storify.


Domanassa & Dukkha in enlightened beings?

OP: What is the difference between domanassa & dukkha?

There are many classifications of feelings:

Vedanā (Feeling)
According to the 5-fold classification, a distinction is made between mental and physical pain and pleasure.

Vedanā (Feeling)
In this classification, physical pain (Kāyika dukkha) is called simply dukkha and mental pain (cetasika dukkha) is called domanassa. Kāyika dukkha and cetasika dukkha are also dukkha, hence classified as such in 3 fold classification.

Dukkha - General Application, & various views regarding dukkha. As simple sensation (: pain) & related to other terms: (a) principally a vedanā, sensation, in particular belonging to the body (kāyika), or physical pain (opp. cetasika dukkha mental ill: see domanassa).
Domanassa - Domanassa means unpleasant feeling in mind. lit. 'sad-mindedness', grief, i.e. mentally painful feeling (cetasika-vedanā), is one of the 5 feelings (vedanā, q.v.)
OP: Does domanassa arise in enlightened beings?

No. An enlightened person feels Dukkha (Kāyika dukkha) but not Domanassa:

Bhikshus, when the instructed noble disciple is touched by a painful feeling, he does not sorrow,
or grieve, or lament, or beat his breast, or become confused. So he feels (only) one feeling: the bodily, not
the mental.

Sall’atthena Sutta

OP: Does bodily dukkha arise in enlightened beings?

Yes. An enlightened person feels Dukkha (Kāyika dukkha) but not Domanassa:

Bhikshus, when the instructed noble disciple is touched by a painful feeling, he does not sorrow,
or grieve, or lament, or beat his breast, or become confused. So he feels (only) one feeling: the bodily, not
the mental.

Sall’atthena Sutta


Are there suttas that recommend a specific order of the buddhist practices?

Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the
  forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In
  one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. In one of right
  speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In
  one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right
  mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In
  one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right
  knowledge, right release comes into being. Thus the learner is endowed
  with eight factors, and the arahant with ten.

  MN 117

  Bhikkhus, this is the forerunner and precursor of the rising of the
  sun, that is, the dawn. So too, bhikkhus, for a bhikkhu this is the
  forerunner and precursor of the breakthrough to the Four Noble Truths
  as the really are, that is, right view.

  SN 56.37

  Mendicants, the dawn is the forerunner and precursor of the sunrise.

  In the same way right view is the forerunner and precursor of skillful
  qualities.

  Right view gives rise to right thought. Right thought gives rise to
  right speech. Right speech gives rise to right action. Right action
  gives rise to right livelihood. Right livelihood gives rise to right
  effort. Right effort gives rise to right mindfulness. Right
  mindfulness gives rise to right immersion. Right immersion gives rise
  to right knowledge. Right knowledge gives rise to right freedom.

  AN 10.121


Yes.  Hell, Preta (hungry ghost), and Animal (non-human) often referred to as Dukkhathi Bhumi (realms of pain and suffering) by Buddha.


Arhat Culapanthaka's display of psychic powers to a layman (DP Verse 25)

It was not a show for people, that's the first thing you have missed. Here is how it went and what you missed,

The function in doctor Jeewaka's house was attended by the monks of the temple and Ven. Arhat Culapanthaka was at the temple/monastery. As Ven.Arhat Culapanthaka was alone and there was work to be done multiple bodies were used to clean the temple,to sweep it and do some other petty tasks. This is when the messenger from Doc.Jeevaka's house came and saw this.

Sometimes when arahats feel that more harm can come to a society or a person by not revealing his true status the Arahat does some suitable task to prove him that. This was first done by Lord Buddha to tame the ego of "Jatila sages" who thought they are Arahat and Lord Buddha was not. It was done again to tame the ego of the "Shakya cast" who were is relatives of prince siddhartha.

What we need to understand is that Arahat does not break "Vinaya (laws & guidelines of Buddhism)" no matter what. And that has been clearly stated in Buddhism. So there is no point in Scrutinizing the "Seela" or the conviction of an Arahat because it is not up to petty beings like us. Like always it has happened it should happen by the hands of another Arahat.


Examples of Buddhist traditions that are derived from popular superstitions

This article describes the celebration of Vesak Day or Wesak Day 2015 at a Thai Buddhist temple (and therefore of the Theravada tradition) in Malaysia, near the capital city.

The author provides an example:

  This leads to the highlight of the day - chanting and blessings by
  monks and ending the short session (which lasts no more than 5
  minutes) with a shower of "holy water".

  The monks softly chants a Thai variety of the Ti-Ratana Vandana
  (homage to the Triple Gem), five precepts and punnanumodana (sharing
  of merits). For most however, these chants are exotic and spiritual,
  and are perceived to have "supra mundane" powers. It is no wonder then
  that many devotees place their personal belongings - amulets,
  religious icons and even car keys - onto a tray held by the monk who
  performs the chanting.

  Their belief - mistaken or otherwise - is that these chants contain
  "spiritual powers" which are then transcended into their items, which
  when worn or used, protects them from harm or danger. The ceremony
  ends with the tying of yellow coloured strings on the wrist, a
  symbolic notion of the presence of the Sangha in the laity. Of course,
  if one wishes, they can also make a donation to the monk concerned for
  his service by putting money into a metal box.


Can being a vegetarian actually be a hindrance for some?

I have been vegetarian since 1/1/2000. It was originally a New Years Resolution, but it became a New Millenia Resolution. I figured that given impermanence it would not be too hard to keep. :D

That resolution arose out of an understanding that the mindless consumption of meat causes harm and death to many animals. Basically the resolution was simply to exercise restraint and not require the killing of sentient beings.

Only much later did I encounter the suttas, so I started reading about and keeping precepts much later. And at that point the following made perfect sense, since I had already decided it was good principle:

  AN10.172:12.4: Not killing living creatures is a good principle.

I agree that being vegetarian can be a hindrance. Being "vegetarian" is a bit peculiar in that it has for some become a proclamation of virtue and merit that has somehow evolved into an obnoxious and contentious self-righteousness. And that would certainly be a hindrance.

  MN8:12.33: ‘Others will be stubborn, but here we will not be stubborn.’

I have found that gentle restraint suffices in body, mind and speech. A quiet explanation that "I avoid eating meat" is enough. And if asked why, I just reply, "it seems kinder."

As my Zen Roshi used to say, "Road kill is acceptable".


When were women first welcomed into Buddhist orders?

According to the texts (Cv 10), after the Buddha returned to visit his father in Kapilavatthu, his aunt and step-mother, Mahapajapati Gotami, followed him back to Vesali and eventually ordained her using the eight garu dhammas as her higher ordination. He then gave the injunction that the male monks were to ordain the female monks, which was the beginning of the bhikkhuni sangha.

1. Now Mahā-pajāpatī the Gotamī went up to the place where the Blessed One was, and bowed down before him, and stood respectfully on one side. And, so standing, Mahā-pajāpatī the Gotamī spake thus to the Blessed One: 'What course, Lord, should I pursue towards these women of the Sākya clan?'
Then the Blessed One taught Mahā-pajāpatī the Gotamī and incited her, and aroused her, and gladdened her with religious discourse; and she, so taught, incited, aroused, and gladdened, bowed down before the Blessed One, and keeping him on net right hand as she passed him, she departed thence.
Then the Blessed One, in that connexion, delivered a religious discourse, and said to the Bhikkhus, 'I allow Bhikkhunīs, O Bhikkhus, to receive the upasampadā initiation from Bhikkhus.'
2. Now those Bhikkhunīs said to Mahā-pajāpatī the Gotamī: 'Neither have you received the upasampadā initiation, nor have we; for it has thus been laid down by the Blessed One: "Bhikkhunīs are to be initiated by Bhikkhus."'
Then Mahā-pajāpatī the Gotamī went to the venerable Ānanda, and [repeated their words to him]. And the venerable Ānanda went to the Blessed One, and [repeated them to him].
'In that moment, Ānanda, when Mahā-pajāpatī the Gotamī took upon herself the Eight Chief Rules, that was to her as the upasampadā initiation.'
-- Cv 10.2 (Rhys-Davids, trans)


Is there a canonical reference for the story about the war between the Buddha's relatives?

Yes, these are striking stories given with varying details even though the 'lesson' is usually the same. I found this summary by a monk named Cittasamvaro;

  'Within the Buddhist Scriptures, there is little evidence for collective karma, though the commentaries abound with karma stories. One such is the defeat of the Sakyan kingdom at the end of the Buddha’s life, and the subsequent destruction of the conquering army through natural disaster. Though the Buddha reportedly knew that the war would occur due to past karmas, he still tried to intervene peacefully. The conquering army also paid for its part in the bloodshed, by being swept away by a flood. (Dhammapada Aṭṭhakathā 1.46, Viṭaṭūbhavatthu). Despite the Commentarial stories, stories that are not part of the direct teachings of the Buddha, there is little in the Sutta/Vinaya to suggest that there is such a form of collective karma'.


In India, the word "jati" ("birth") refers to "social role". In the Buddhist suttas, "jati/social role" is called "sattanikāye" ("category/group/class of beings"). For example, in the Angulimala Sutta, the life of a monk is called "Noble Jati/Birth" ("ariyāya jātiyā").

In moral teachings, the Buddha strongly emphasized social roles. However, in enlightenment teachings, the Buddha pointed out social role brings suffering. For example, if your social role is a mother or father, you often suffer about your children. This is why enlightenment is described as the ending of identification with social role ("khīṇā
 jāti").

For example, upon his enlightenment, the Buddha declared: "This is my last jati/birth (social role)". The Buddha fully accepted his social responsibility as The Buddha, the founder of Buddhism, the leader of the Sangha and the liberator of the wise.

However, for the Buddha's Fully Enlightened Disciples, they declared: "Jati/birth is exhausted" because they had no special social status, apart from being strictly conforming disciples of the Buddha (unlike monks today, who each try to create their own sect & own teachings).

For laypeople, the Sigalovada Sutta is the most detailed of many suttas that strictly define the social roles of laypeople.


Are loving-kindness and compassion (metta and karuna) special kind of attachments?

So is it correct the in order to practice metta and karuna, we need to have an attachment to begin with?

Well, attachment is a default software built into the core kernel of every human's "operating system", so whether we need to have it or not is kinda irrelevant. And no, there's no need to come up with some fabrication or some altered reality about the other person's personality in order to cultivate metta/karuna. It's a truth  that both evil and goodness co-exist within every single human being, it's just that the relative ratio is different from person to person. So it's not a fabrication to focus on a person's 'good side', because s/he does have a good side! So the beauty of metta/karuna cultivation is that one can start training right away, even with their existing attachment at the beginning stage. But as one proceeds to higher, deeper, more subtle levels of the Path, the attachment will naturally subside and eventually goes away completely. Once it's become second nature, Metta/karuna at that stage will no longer involves any kind of attachment at all.


Intensifying sensations during meditation after switching to an Ayuverdic lifestyle

First, good to hear that you have your health in check thanks to the medical care you mention. With their attention, we could likely rule out the medical aspect of your sensations. However, i can't tell from your description if they have been consulted about the tightness in the neck and head you describe.

  Does eating vegetables increase the "sharpness" of meditation?

It's more likely that eating vegetables keeps you from being dull or drowsy, by staying away from food that requires a lot of energy to digest. In fact, the sixth buddhist precept has this particular purpose.

  Should I quit drinking coffee/using cannabis?

According to buddhism, substances keeps us in an unbalanced way of life due to craving (tanha). If you manage to reduce your craving habits it will help you develop better karma for yourself, in turn helping calm and concentration in accordance with the fifth buddhist precept.

This goes primarily for cannabis, as it is altering your perception/concentration, but also to a lesser extent coffee, since caffeine can prevent you from developing samatha or tranquility during meditation.

  I am intrigued by what is happening in my body and have no clue which person I should consult about these sort of things. I am a vata/pitta individual living in the Netherlands.

The experiences you have are addressed in many different traditions of thought. Buddhism very much provides a framework for understanding and dealing with your questions, but may/may not correspond to ayurvedic practice (i know practically nothing about those things).

Put shortly, what you are experiencing could be considered citta sankhara, or formations of perception as a result of your habits, generally speaking. Provided it's not a medical cause for your sensations, they will probably be stilled if you continue your meditation practice.