Has lord Buddha ever told something like this?

This is the origin story of Sattasuriyuggamana sutta. During Buddha's time there was a monk who was indulged in astrology and auspicious times. Once he asked Buddha whether the stars or planets have any effect on humans as it's told in astrology. Buddha didn't answer that straight away but chose the night to answer this question. During the night he pointed at the sky and asked the question from that monk.

  Do you believe that star still exists where we can see it
  ...

As a result of this discussion Sattasuriyuggamana sutta was taught by Budddha to show that these planets and stars have no effect on humans and these are just natural phenomena.

I wasn't able to locate this origin story in English in the web, although it's available in Sinhalese here.

  Sattasåriyasuttaü- Seven suns.

  007.02. I heard thus. At one time The Blessed One was living in Ambapali's mango orchard. The Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus from
  there:

  ßBhikkhus, determinations are impermanent not stable, there is nothing
  to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn away from,
  get disentangled from and be releasd from all determinations.

  Bhikkhus, the highest peak of the Himalayas, is eighty four thousand
  yojanas high from sea level. (a yojana is seven miles) Eighty four
  thousand yojanas in breadth. It is eighty four thousand yojanas deep
  down in the sea. Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many
  hundreds of thousands of years there comes a time when it does not
  rain. When it does not rain, all seed and vegetation born plants such
  as medicinal grass, plants trees and forests dry up and wither and are
  no more. Bhikkhus, thus determinations are impermanent not stable,
  there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should
  turn away from, get disentangled from and be releasd from all
  determinations.

  Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of
  years there comes a time when a second sun rises. When a second sun
  rises whatever streams, rivulets dry up and wither and are no more.
  Bhikkhus, thus determinations are impermanent not stable, there is
  nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should turn
  away from, get disentangled from and be releasd from all
  determinations.

  Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of
  years there comes a time when a third sun rises. When a third sun
  rises, the great rivers such as the Ganges, yamuna, Aciravatie,
  Sarabhu and Mahi dry up and wither. Bhikkhus, thus determinations are
  impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is
  suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be
  releasd from all determinations.

  Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of
  years there comes a time when a fourth sun rises. When a fourth sun
  rises, the great ponds mintained by the great rivers such as Anotatta,
  Sihapapata, Rathakara, Kannamunda, Kunala, Chadanta and Mandakini dry
  up and wither, they become no more. Bhikkhus, thus determinations are
  impermanent not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is
  suitable that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be
  releasd from all determinations.

  Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of
  years there comes a time when a fifth sun rises. When a fifth sun
  rises, the water in the great ocean recedes one hundred yojanas, two
  hundred yojanas three hundred yojanas, five hundred yojanas, six
  hundred yojanas and seven hundred yojanas. The water recedes to the
  height of seven, six, five, four, three, two palms and even one palm.
  The water recedes to the height of seven, six, five, four, three, two
  men, or even one man. It recedes to half the height of a man. It
  recedes to the knee depth of a man, to the ankle depth of a man. When
  the fifth sun rises there would not be water in the ocean to wet the
  fingers up to the knots. Bhikkhus, thus determinations are impermanent
  not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable
  that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be releasd
  from all determinations.

  Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of
  years there comes a time when a sixth sun rises. When a sixth sun
  rises, the great earth and the peak of the Himalayas smokes, and gets
  filled with smoke. Like when something made by a potter is cooked. It
  smokes and gets filled up with smoke. In the same manner when a sixth
  sun rises, the great earth and the peak of the Himalayas smokes, and
  gets filled with smoke. Bhikkhus, thus determinations are impermanent
  not stable, there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable
  that you should turn away from, get disentangled from and be releasd
  from all determinations.

  Bhikkhus, after the lapse of many years, many hundreds of thousands of
  years there comes a time when a seventh sun rises. When a seventh sun
  rises, the great earth and the peak of the Himalayas blazes and catch
  fire. When the great earth and the peak of the Himalayas blaze and
  catch fire, flames tossed by the winds reach upto the world of Brahma.
  When the peak of the Himalaya mountain burns, peaks as high as a
  hundred yojanas, two hundred yojanas, three hundred yojanas, four
  hundred yojanas and five hundred yojanas crumble. Bhikkhus, when the
  earth and the Himalaya peak is burning ash or cream of ash is not
  evident. Bhikkhus, thus determinations are impermanent not stable,
  there is nothing to comfort in them, so it is suitable that you should
  turn away from, get disentangled from and be releasd from all
  determinations. Bhikkhus, when the earth and the Himalaya peak is
  burning, whatever divine sayings and beliefs be, they also get burnt
  and are no more, would attained right view remain?

  Bhikkhus, in the past, there was a Teacher called Sunetta, one free of
  greed who helped to cross the ford. The Teacher Sunetta had
  innumerable hundreds of disciples .Bhikkhus, this Teacher taught, to
  be born in the world of Brahma. Those who completely knew the
  dispensation of Sunetta, after death, were born in a good state in the
  world of Brahma. Some of those who did not know the complete
  dispensation of Sunetta, after death, were born with those attached to
  the creation of others. Some attached to creation, soome with the
  happy ones, some with the Titan gods, some with the gods of the
  thirty-three and with the guardian gods. Others were born with high
  clans of warriors, Brahmins and householders.

  Then it occured to the Teacher Sunetta. `It is not suitable for me to
  be born in the same plane as my disciples, after death, what if I
  develop loving kindness further.'

  Then the Teacher Sunetta developed loving kindness for seven years.
  Having developed loving kindness for seven years, he did not come to
  this world for seven forward and backward world cycles. During the
  forward world cycles he was born a radiant god and during the backward
  world cycles was born in an empty Brahma paradise. There he was Brahma
  the supreme Lord, not conquered with sure insight wielding authority

  There, he was Brahma, Brahma the great, the unconquered lord and
  master with sure insight, holding authority for seven timesòhirty six
  times he was Sakka the kng of gods. Innumerable hundreds of times he
  was the righteous universal monarch, winning the four directions and
  establishing states. Bhikkhus, he was endowed with these seven jewels,
  such as the jewel of the wheel, the elephant, the horse, the jewel,
  the woman, the householder and the advisor. Bhikkhus, he had over a
  thousand courageous sons with valiant figures, for crushing foreign
  armies. They lived ruling over the earth righteously, without weapons
  as far as the limit of the ocean. Bhikkhus, that Teacher Sunetta with
  long life and long standing was not released from birth, decay, death,
  grief, lament, unpleasantness and displeasure, I say not released from
  unpleasantness.

  What is the reason? For not realizing and experiencing four
  things.What four?

  Not realizing and experiencing the virtues, concentration, wisdom and
  release of the noble ones. Now he has realized and experienced the
  virtues, concentration, wisdom and release of the noble ones. The
  craving to be is uprooted, the leader of being is destroyed. Now he
  has no more birth. The Blessed One further said:

  Famous Gotama, has realized noble virtues, concentration, wisdom and
  release

  And declaring the Teaching to end unpleasantness is mindfully
  extinguished. (Source: Sister Uppalavanna from Galla)


Related to Andrei Volkov's answer, I don't think we need to tie supra-mundane phenomena (chakras, etc) into our explanation of why this happens.

However, in a Buddhist sense, this is very relevant and related to how the concept of self is formed. Because what we perceive as the self is not a "true inherent fact" and is, in fact, a dependent and co-arising phenomenon that occurs with many causes, it is dependent moment-to-moment on many different things. Any person who has drank alcohol can speak to how that affects a person. There are many studies about psycho-active drugs or medications of many kind which affect what we consider to be the self. In terms of company being kept, psychology can refer to it as "Mirroring".

When you speak to someone and they have expectations about you, they are not just keeping those expectations in mind- they are in fact crafting the conversation with the idea of you they have in mind. So someone who has not spoken with you in years will continue to expect you to be the same, and will craft their conversation based on this. You might then see that the conversation almost creates a slide for you. If you behave as expected, the conversation goes more smoothly. Due to attachment and aversion, we generally dislike being in awkward social situations, so when we behave in a mindless way, we get on that slide in a drive towards what we like (social cohesion) and away from what we dislike (social awkwardness). If you instead behave differently, it is like stopping yourself on the slide, standing up, and going a different direction. You throw the other person off-balance (at least for a moment, they might quickly recover) and create at least a small amount of social awkwardness. Many many people have a lot of aversion towards even momentary social awkwardness.

This also happens when you keep company with people in general, but it's especially noticeable when you are very different from them, or when they remember a different set of behaviors from the one you have now. People try to make conversations go as smoothly as they can, generally, and they do so based on their own experiences or memories.

One thing the Buddha talked about was keeping good company. In this way, we can use Mirroring to our advantage. If we have friends who are virtuous and expect others to be virtuous, it becomes easier for us to also be virtuous. So, in a mundane sense, if you find yourself behaving in a way you dislike when speaking to certain people, it's reasonable to avoid those people as a result.

If you are unable or unwilling to cut contact with these people, following the Buddhist path will be helpful. As you become less attached to social cohesion and less averse to social awkwardness, it will be easier to face the walk away from the slide. Cultivating mindfulness will also help you notice when you are being affected by others in this manner, allowing you to manually step in and stop it.


There are four main ways to get the citta into samadhi:
http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/04/an04-041.html

THe most famous is the jhana, but today  Puthujjanas prefer to speculate whether there are sounds in the jhana and they talk about access concentration and other concepts they have invented.
Since most puthujjanas cling too much to kama, they do not know what ''being secluded form the senses'' mean, what ''renunciation'' means

The samadhi about light is the least detailed. he says tHis one is the one to get to know karma and rebirth.

THe samadhi form sati sampajanna is the most clear and easiest: clear directions and a puthujjana knows whether the training to get sati sampjana is correct or not.
http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/08/an08-009.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.035.than.html

THe samadhi about finding out the conditions of dukkha is of course the hardest.

THe buddha first get the citta into samadhi through sati sampjanna where he spend his time discriminating between 'thoughts of ill will and craving for kama'' and ''thoughts of good will and renunciation'', between pleasure of the 5 senses'' and ''pleasure of the citta''.
That leads to samasamadhi, meaning the jhanas, once the citta in samadhi, he ''turned the citta'' to the knowledge of karma and rebirth.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.019.than.html

THen he turned his citta to the ''arising & falling away with reference to the five clinging-aggregates'', ie yoniso manisakra, meaning the cessation of the asavas.

SO do just like him, discriminate between sensual pleasures and pleasures of seclusion, between thoughts of ill-will and thoughts of good will, and avoid lust for kama and thoughts of ill-will. Once you get good at knowing vedana, sanna and thoughts, and rejecting thoughts of ill will and craving for kama, you will get the samasamadhi and then you can ''turn your citta'' to the samadhis to end dukkha.

you can alternate the training to get the citta into samadhi with various contemplation, typically developing the perception of anatta, anicca, disgust and so on
https://suttacentral.net/an4.169

If you want to do ''breath mediation'', then the task is to calm the 3 sankharas first, then destroy them with perception of anicca and so on
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.062.than.html

if you struggle already with sati and sampajanna, you must live around good people first, and avoid bad people
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.11.irel.html
so that you will spend most your tie doing good actions https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.061.than.html


If you practice samatha for any length of time, that will happen fairly frequently especially in a retreat situation.  One of the key points of samatha practice, after all, is the dropping off of body and mind.  Sleep does that rather effectively though we are rarely conscious for the event.  If you are suddenly awakened, there is a often a gap before mind and body reassert themselves.  Related to that, what you are experiencing is also the reason why it's better to sit first thing in the morning.  You sort of get to ride that gap a little bit.  The waters of your mind haven't yet been muddied with all the detritus that normally gets kicked up as you go about your day.


When a meditator achieves e.g. the 5th jhana of infinite space, is he
  or she still in this world?

Yes, he doesn't disappear. When you sleep, you are not aware of what's happening around you. But that doesn't mean the world is gone.

  Obviously the body is, but what about the mind?

Yes, the mind is still associated with the body. Just that it's focusing on the space element.

  can sentient beings perceive the world of form as something formless?

Atoms are 99.9999999999999 percent empty space. They say If you remove all the space in the atoms, the entire human race could fit in the volume of a sugar cube. That gives you an idea of how much our senses fool us. It's mostly empty space.


Has Ram Bahadur Bomjon already proclamed that he is a Buddha?

The international and Nepali media, as well as direct witnesses and victims had described Bomjon as too far from even from a normal ethically firm human beings, far from a law-abiding person and too far from compassion. He had attacked seriously dozens of people, luring his victims to himself through promises of secret initiations. They come to his jungle, for a few days or weeks are loved and cared by his resident "Sangha", and at one point, out of the blue, attacked at Bomjon's order by maroon-robed monks, chained or locked up in his secret houses, beaten with sticks and hands to black and blue, and many of them kept for weeks and even as long as 3 months in his captivity, telling to the outside world that they are in "secluded meditation"! During that, further tortures are inflicted on these victims, if they are women, often even raped and tortured so extremely that two of his victims did not survive. Yet, unfortunately, he has a political backing in his country, and huge money resources, especially from foreign devotees, who are securely kept away from learning the truth.

Have a look at these sights, among many others you can easily Google out:

https://buddhaboymedia.wordpress.com/

http://irregulartimes.com/?s=bomjon


What is the meaning of 'defiled cognition'?

In Mahayana, "defiled cognition" is ignorant apprehension of standalone (svabhava) entities, both internally (as personal self) and externally (as various quasi-separate objects).

It is on the basis of this that experience is then divided up into "wanted" and "unwanted", a necessary condition of suffering.


third eye experience of mindful breathing

This sensation is being experience probably because you are deliberately focusing your intention on your forehead. Your post states:

  I tried to...just keep watching my forehead.

Practising mindful breathing probably takes your concentration directly to your forehead because you are probably concentrating with your forehead.

There is no need to 'concentrate' to practise mindfulness with breathing. If you simply let go & make the mind quiet, awareness of breathing will still occur.

This is because when the mind is quiet & not craving, breathing becomes the most gross or dominant sense object for the mind.

That is why the 8 fold path does not start with concentration but ends with concentration.

'Mindfulness' means to let go of craving. When the mind is quiet, it starts to 'collect' or 'gather' itself, which is the meaning of 'concentration' ('samadhi' - 'collectedness').


Is physical pain only 'remembered' or 'anticipated' so actually there is no pain? If so, how to understand?

In the Buddha's teachings feeling is of three kinds: pleasant, unpleasant, neutral. Feeling is dependent on contact with the senses: sight, smell, taste, touch, sound, mental object ( idea, thought, other)

  "An untaught worldling, O monks, experiences pleasant feelings, he experiences painful feelings and he experiences neutral feelings. A well-taught noble disciple likewise experiences pleasant, painful and neutral feelings. Now what is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists herein between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling?

To see the difference read the continuation here: Sallatha Sutta: The Dart (SN 36.6)


Should mantras always be sung in Tibetan/Pali/... or may I sing them in my native language?

Since it seems that Mr Marcos Valle wishes and beg form somebody, its good that he/she/they understand you wishes, speak this languages. As for Mr. Marcos Valle it would be good to know what he wishes for, given that they will fulfill simply what he requests. :-) not easy, especially the fist one.

As for chants (repeating what other said, or what one likes to say), they are not well put, if sung. It could district not only your mind but also the listener and they could argue about it or fall even in love with it. (for some ideas about it, see "Teaching Dhamma" in Respect-BMC2)

Its quite ok and good, to use the own language, especially if one does not know the meaning. And you are explicit allowed to do so even with the Buddhas teachings, by the Buddha, to do so. (see also BMC2 which give a good reasoning) So no worry, but keep them correct in their meaning and be clear about it. Many Monks today would chant in two languages, so that the listener understands. There are no such as simply chants, which are actually not teachings. So one does not have benefit form simply hearing a pleasant sound. But to get and share the meaning, or reflect on it while doing.

Chanting generally is primarily done to do not forget and preserve the teachings for later generations and others to listen.

If your language is English, there are many pali chants in two languages in audio and here also as text.

(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)


Relationship between sampajanna definitions in SN 47.2 and SN 47.35

In line with what I said in my other answer, both are descriptions of self-awareness, of not getting carried away by the circumstances.

This does not refer to "zombie bare awareness" executed mechanically, but to normal, pragmatic, careful self-awareness of an intelligent person.


Hmmmm... interesting. Try this: do controlled breathing for a dozen breaths (count breaths on fingers and do a moderately-slow deliberate breath-ins and breath-outs), then for a dozen breaths let the breathing happen on auto-pilot (keep counting on fingers. I assume you have twelve fingers LOL).

When you breathe deliberately you can't possibly NOT notice the breath, right? After all, at that time you are deliberately using the muscles of the chest and diaphragm to suck air into your lungs. So you should feel yourself pulling pulling pulling not too fast, slowing down, then stopping, holding a little, then going down and out out out not too fast, slowing down again, a tiny pause. It is what you yourself are doing, so you can't miss it, right?

Then when you let it happen naturally, the same attention you used for deliberate breathing should continue on to natural breathing.

Also, do you sit in Lotus / Half-lotus? Try sitting in Vajrasana - it arches your back a little more and forces to open the chest and diaphragm. Perhaps (I don't really know but I'm guessing) your breathing is too shallow because you are in the habit of blocking your lower abdomen? Vajrasana is a good posture for this kind of practice, to penetrate the lower chakras.


How could craving be the habit of reification?

Reification is simpistic naive superficial perception. It's a generalization of the same problem that children have with toys. A child sees a new shiny toy and because he does not think deeply, because his perception is superficial - in his mind the toy is attractive and desirable.

Reification is seeing the outer image and buying into its glow, its fake promise to make you happy.


Are there canonical texts for secular Buddhism?

I think it varies tremendously based on what tradition they are adapting their teachings from. People following a secularized vipassana tradition probably uphold the Satipatthana sutta, and secular Zen practitioners probably take interest in the Heart Sutra, the Diamond Sutra, and the Platform Sutra.

From my interactions with secular Buddhists I get the impression that when they do study canonical texts they don't have a very wide selection, just a few that they consider important.


It is more gentle than that. Consider the first tetrad of anapanasati:

Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long';
or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.'
Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short';
or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'

And the second:

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to rapture.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to rapture.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to pleasure.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to pleasure.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to mental fabrication.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to mental fabrication.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming mental fabrication.'
He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming mental fabrication.'

Emphasis are mine. These are strong hints.
From my understanding, stiffness, rigidity, force should be absent -- only the minimum should be allowed so one doesn't fall on the ground, or sleep; any small amount of extra effort disturbs the mind.


One of my favourite quotes is an old Zen adage

  You should sit in meditation for twenty minutes every day - unless
  you're too busy; then you should sit for an hour

I find that both infurating and inspirational at the same time. So on the zen theme, when I am just way too busy I can't do mindfulness of breathing or metta practice. So the one I turn to is a just sitting or zazen type practice. I just sit there and ask - what is it like to be this. It might not be traditional zazen but it helps me.

Ironically when meditation is going well and seems to be taking off (if that makes sense) then I also do just sitting. It's the beginning and end of practice for me.


What is the correct definition for Mindfulness?

Sati

That which is mindfulness, recollection, recall, mindfulness, remembrance, bearing (in mind), not losing, not confusing, mindfulness, the Faculty of Mindfulness, the Strength of Mindfulness, Right Mindfulness: this is called ‘mindfulness.’
Therein what is mindfulness-awakening-factor? Herein a monk is mindful, furnished with excellent mindfulness-penetration, he remembers, remembers constantly, what has long been done and long been said (concerning release). This is called mindfulness-awakening-factor.
Unshakability by negligence as the meaning of the power [strength] of mindfulness
The mindfulness which on that occasion is recollecting, calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty, mindfulness as power, right mindfulness—this is the faculty of mindfulness that there then is.

These are theravadin abhidhamma and patisambhidamagga excerpts

The Blessed One said, “Suppose, monks, that a large crowd of people comes thronging together, saying, ‘The beauty queen! The beauty queen!’ And suppose that the beauty queen is highly accomplished at singing & dancing, so that an even greater crowd comes thronging, saying, ‘The beauty queen is singing! The beauty queen is dancing!’ Then a man comes along, desiring life & shrinking from death, desiring pleasure & abhorring pain. They say to him, ‘Now look here, mister. You must take this bowl filled to the brim with oil and carry it on your head in between the great crowd & the beauty queen. A man with a raised sword will follow right behind you, and wherever you spill even a drop of oil, right there will he cut off your head.’ Now what do you think, monks: Will that man, not paying attention to the bowl of oil, let himself get distracted outside?”
“No, lord.”
“I have given you this parable to convey a meaning. The meaning is this: The bowl filled to the brim with oil stands for mindfulness immersed in the body. Thus you should train yourselves: ‘We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.’ That is how you should train yourselves.” https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.020.than.html


Is there any meditation technique to develop the feeling of Gratitude?

It has occurred to me that if I have a sense of gratitude towards life and towards what has already been given to me then it's not
  possible to develop desires.

Are you sure? Where do the suttas say gratitude leads to the realisation of anatta & Nibbana?

  I don't know why gratitude is not one of the Brahmaviharas. Lot has been said about it by the Buddha.

Brahma-Vihara is more detached than gratitude. Brahma-vihara is a type of liberation (MN 43). Where as gratitude is often mixed with obligation. The Pali word for 'gratitude' is 'katannukatavedi', which means: 'what others do for me; what I must do in return'.

  I was looking for any technique to develop gratitude towards life or in general.

Simply reflect upon the benefactors you have in life. Mother, father, friends, teachers, employers, employees, bus drivers, shop keepers, nature, food, environment, etc.

About worldly meritorious right-view, MN 117 says it is right view to believe: "There is mother & father". What this means is there are "benefactors" (towards which gratitude should exist). Ingratitude is a sign of wrong view.


I won't try to guess exactly what you're experiencing, but one thing that trips people up a lot is the expectation that meditation is a one-way road to greater and greater calm. In reality, there's an initial calming, followed by the emergence of various kinds of experiences at other layers of the mind, some of which are pleasant or orderly, some of which aren't.

One thing that Buddhism teaches is that the mind is a sixth sense alongside vision, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. This means that thoughts and mental imagery are on the same level as sights and sounds- they are data that enters through "your" doors of perception from "outside". They don't belong to you and are largely out of your control.

This is contrary to our usual Cartesian model of thinking that our Thoughts are the expression of our core Self, and it's also contrary to the common idea of meditation as the conscious quieting of all thoughts.

I only have my own experience to go on, but I believe that the ability to achieve a complete stilling of the roiling, random soup of images in our minds is very very rare, if it exists at all, and not a requisite for good practice.


What's the meaning of the Buddhist boy's message to Neo in the movie The Matrix?

It means that so-called reality is actually our interpretation. When our perspective changes our experienced reality changes. This is why the boy says, don't try to change reality (bend the spoon). Change your mind, and your reality will change automatically.
There is no enemy to fight, no prize to attain. It is your mind that creates these interpretations "enemy" and "prize". Therefore, "there's no spoon".


Why do users of psychedelic drugs tend to gravitate toward Buddhism and other Eastern philosophies?

Also, interestingly, in Ram Dass's book, "Be Here Now!", which I just recently read (though it came out in the late 70's, I think), prior to visiting India, and finding his guru, Neem Karoli Baba, he and Timothy Leary did a LOT of LSD, and drugs. His personal finding was that the drugs were awesome in giving him a different view of mind, etc., but he always had to "come down". He turned to Hinduism, (and Buddhism, often) for a way to never have to "come down". The rest is history, so to speak. Just my 2 cents. Take care.


Scriptural source for the lost son story

As mentioned in another answer the story as written is published in at least one book by Thich Nhat Hanh. The following is copied from Being Peace, it's slightly more elaborate than the version you posted (e.g. "velvet bag" instead of "little bag") but with many of the same phrases:

Thay doesn't attribute a source for this story.
The next story on the page of stories which you linked to, i.e. Angry Buddha, is attributed to Being Peace -- so I suppose that probably is where they found the Lost Son story too.
I gather that the Vietnamese tradition is eclectic so in theory Thay might have gathered that story from anywhere, but I think the content or 'moral' of the story suggests it probably is from the Mahayana or Zen tradition.


How does big bang happen in terms of Buddhism?

The Pali Buddhist scriptures concern themselves with suffering & freedom from suffering rather than ideas about the creation of the universe. Therefore, the 'Big Bang' is unrelated to Buddhism because it is unrelated to freedom from suffering & because it is not knowable,i.e., it is superstition.

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

  AN 4.77

~~~

  '...talk that is base, vulgar, common, ignoble, unbeneficial, that does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion,
  cessation, calm, direct knowledge, self-awakening or Nibbana —
  i.e., talk about...the creation of the world & of the sea...

  MN 122


Does it matter if the mind is neurologically originated or not?

In short: it doesn't matter.
Why? Because drilling down on this topic will not free you from suffering. Instead, it may well create more.


Latent tendencies, memories of this life and brain damage, dementia

The question seems to misconstrue the idea of "momentariness".

"Momentariness" does not mean everything exists for a "moment". "Momentariness" is merely the recognition that consciousness & thought arises for a moment (but other things do not necessarily exist for a moment).

SN 12.61 may help, here:

  It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the
  mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four
  great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four,
  five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But
  what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by
  night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey,
  swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of
  it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one.
  Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's
  called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night
  arises as one thing and ceases as another.

That SN 12.61 says the physical body can be seem to last for a long time supports the view in the question that tendencies & memories are stored in the brain. Personally, I don't see the point of speculating about scriptures in the situation where both science & personal experience tell us where latent tendencies & memories are stored. You know as an observable fact that brain injury impairs memory therefore what is the point of denying this reality and seeking to explain it in an alternate speculative unknowable way?

In MN 64, the Buddha said the underlying tendencies exist within the new born child, even though these underlying tendencies are yet to arise into the child's conscious mind. The Buddha said nothing about "past lives" here. The underlying tendencies are natural elements (dhatu). They have no relationship to past lives. Men & women are born with sexual organs and sexual apparatus (such as a womb). When their bodies mature, these sexual tendencies start to produce chemicals and hormones which result in the salient arising of sexual lust in the young man and young woman. We can see through mere observation that the growth in the mental defilement of lust is related to the growth & maturity of the physical body.


Here is a quote from "The Majjhima Nikaya 43 - Mahavedalla Sutta: The Greater Series of Questions and Answers" that explains the term "Vital Formations":

  VITAL FORMATIONS

  "Friend, are vital formations states of feeling or are vital formations one thing and states of feeling another?"

  "Vital formations, friend, are not states of feeling. If vital formations were states of feeling, then when a bhikkhu has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, he would not be seen to emerge from it. Because vital formations are one thing and states of feeling another, when a bhikkhu has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, he can be seen to emerge from it."

  "Friend, when this body is bereft of how many states is it then discarded and forsaken, left lying senseless like a log?"
  "Friend, when this body is bereft of three states - vitality, heat, and consciousness - it is then discarded and forsaken, left lying senseless like a log."
  "Friend, what is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time, and a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling?"

  "Friend, in the case of one who is dead, who has completed his time, his bodily formations have ceased and subsided, his verbal formations have ceased and subsided, his mental formations have ceased arid subsided, his vitality is exhausted, his heat has keen dissipated, and his faculties are fully broken up. In the case of a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling, his bodily formations have ceased and subsided, his verbal formations have ceased and subsided, his mental formations have ceased and subsided, but his vitality is not exhausted, his heat has not been dissipated, and his faculties become exceptionally clear. This is the difference between one who is dead, who has completed his time, and a bhikkhu who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling."

  -- The Middle Length Discourses in the Majjhima Nikaya, Ch. 5: The Shorter Division of Pairs, (Culayamakavagga), p. 392-393, by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi

Here is another quote from the same book. This is from the chapter "Notes to sutta MN 43":

  "Vital formations" (ayusankhara), according to MA, denotes vitality itself. They cannot be states of feeling because they are required to keep the body of a bhikkhu alive when he has attained to the cessation of perception and feeling. This special meditative attainment, in which all mental activity ceases, is accessible only to non- returners and arahants who also have mastery over the eight attainments on the side of serenity. For a brief discussion see the Introduction, p. 28, and for the full scholastic account, Vsm XXIII, 16-52. The cessation of perception and feeling will be taken up again in MN 44.

  -- Ibid, p. 1237

Lastly, here is a quote from the "Visuddhimagga" explaining the term "Vital Formations":

  “‘Vital formations’ are the same as life span; though some say that they are the life span, heat and consciousness. These are the object only of his normal consciousness. There is no death during cessation because dying takes place by means of the final life-continuum [consciousness]. He should attain only after adverting thus, ‘Let sudden death not occur.’ For in the case of sudden death he would not be able to declare final knowledge, advise the bhikkhus, and testify to the Dispensation’s power. And there would be no reaching the highest path in the case of a non-returner” (Vism-mhþ 904).

  -- Visuddhimagga - The Path of Purification, p. 740, by Ven. Buddhaghosa


Sutta references which Discuss Self and Not Self under Different Contexts

In Sallatha Sutta: The Arrow gets you to see that the 6 sense bases as not self  IMHO… There’s a simile where a man is suffering from pain. He gets tied up in anxiety and misery around the pain. And the Buddha says it’s like being shot with an arrow and then shooting yourself with a second arrow. The physical pain is the first arrow; the mental pain is the second one. And it’s the mental one that’s important. As the Buddha says, the enlightened person, the awakened person, may still get shot with those first arrows but doesn’t shoot him or herself with the second.  It is because an Arahant has gone beyond the last of the four kinds of clingings – the Attavada Upadana (attachment or upadana is “firmly grasping”.) Attavada is the last of the attachments which is in other words a hindrance to the realization of Nibbana. So this tells us how not to shoot ourselves with that second arrow. The question is: How do we learn not to do that?  If a person who has gained very exalted states in meditation and responds by saying, “I am at peace. I am released”, the “I am” in those statements is what’s causing the problem. It shows that this person still has some connection, still has some clinging. After all, craving combined with clinging is what causes the suffering. You impose that idea of who you are on all kinds of experiences.

In the discourse of the snake simile Alagaddupama Sutta points to the contemporary notion of Atta IMHO… In this Buddha explained the doctrine of soullessness in another way, comparing Dhamma to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto.  Sabbe Dhamma anatta—all dhammas are not‐self—applies here, where you might see nibbana as a dhamma, as an object of the mind. As long as you perceive it in that way, there’s going to be attachment, there’s going to be a dhamma to hold on to. At Nibbana, these dhammas have done their work, so an Arahant put them aside. A person who uses the Dhamma to criticise, to find fault, or for other reasons than for its intended purpose is like a person who has got hold of a snake by the tail or the coil.  The wrongly held ‘pseudo’ doctrine will destroy him / her.

In the Khemaka Sutta: About Khemaka, SN 22.89  it discusses the doer as not / non self IMHO:

  Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still, in relation to the five aggregates subject to clinging, there lingers in him a residual conceit ‘I am,’ a desire ‘I am,’ an underlying tendency ‘I am’ that has not yet been uprooted. Sometime later he dwells contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging: ‘Such is form, such its origin, such its passing away; such is feeling … such is perception … such are volitional formations … such is consciousness, such its origin, such its passing away.’ As he dwells thus contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging, the residual conceit ‘I am,’ the desire ‘I am,’ the underlying tendency ‘I am’ that had not yet been uprooted—this comes to be uprooted.

In the Dīghā¬vu ¬U¬pāsa¬ka¬ Sutta, SN55.5 internal controller as not / non self IMHO… ie., perception of impermanence (anicca,saññā), the perception of suffering in what is impermanent (anicce dukkha,saññā), the perception of not-self in what is suffering (dukkhe anatta,saññā), the perception of abandonment [letting go of defilements] (pahāna,saññā), the perception of fading away [dispassion] (virāga,saññā), the perception of cessation (of suffering) (nirodha,saññā).:

  "Therefore, Dighavu, when you are established in these four factors of stream entry, you should further develop six qualities conducive to clear knowing. Remain focused on inconstancy in all fabrications, percipient of stress in what is inconstant, percipient of not-self in what is stressful, percipient of abandoning, percipient of dispassion, percipient of cessation. That's how you should train yourself." ….. Dīgh’āvu later passes away and arises spontaneously in the Suddh’āvāsa as a non-returner.

Upasena Sutta: Upasena, SN 35.69 discuss the body as not / non self IMHO:

  Records the incident of the death of Upasena Vangantaputta from a snake-bite. Summoned by him, Sāriputta looked at him and said that he noticed no change at all in Upasena, either in his body or in his faculties. Upasena answered that that was because he had long before quelled all lurking tendencies of "I" and "mine."

In the Maha Satipatthana Sutta of the Digha Nikaya - discuss the world is non / not self IMHO…  We grasp the world as if it is our own. Seeing through eye, we grasp things as if they are our own. Hearing through the ear ,we grasp sounds, likewise by smelling, tasting and touching we grasp things as they are real and our own. Through all these, either we practice attachment or revulsion.

  The Buddha said "'This is the only way Bhikkhus, for the purification of beings (ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo sattanam visuddhiya). Buddha has clearly pointed out that both attachment or revulsion should be avoided by the wise. In this Sutta, emphasizing the four contemplation, namely, contemplation on the body, feeling, consciousness and Dhamma, the Buddha instructed one to contemplate the body in the body, feeling in the feeling, consciousness in consciousness and mental objects (Dhamma) in mental objects. That is in ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful, having overcome in this world, covetousness and grief (atapisampajano satima vineyyaloke abhijjhadomanassam). Here, in this context the term abhijjhadomanassa is very important because abhijja is covetousness or attachment, its counter part is domanassa or revulsion. So the Buddha's advice here is to overcome both, attachment and revulsion. That is the path prescribed by the Buddhas for emancipation. It is the only way.

At the very outset Buddha preached on soullessness in the Anattalakkhana Sutta of the Samyutta Nikaya for the five disciples. Here Buddha discuss consciousness as the last aggregate to realise as not / non self IMHO…  In this sutta the Buddha takes up each of the five aggregates namely, form (rupa), feeling (vedana), perception (sanna), mental formations (sankhara) and consciousness (vinnana) shows that none of these should be viewed as ‘this is mine’, ‘this I am’ or ‘this is my soul’. The belief in the soul is a vain attempt to keep within one’s control things which are dependently arisen and therefore not capable of bringing within the range of one’s supervision and control.  The Buddha clearly demonstrates that one cannot demand any of the aggregates to behave in the way one wishes it to be.

Ambalatthika-rahulovada Sutta: Instructions to Rahula at Mango Stone discuss no self as an extreme view IMHO.. in seeing ‘self’ as view the four physical elements (dhatu) of nature: Earth, Water, Fire and Wind (pathavi, apo, tejo, and vayo) as Elements of solidity, fluidity, heat and motion.
(1)        Earth element (pathavi-dhatu) has the property of hardness, strength, thickness, immobility, security and supporting.  - they represent the solidity property of forms.
 (2)        Water element (apo-dhatu) has the property of oozing, humidity, fluidity, trickling, permeation and cohesion.  - they represent the fluidity or cohesiveness property of forms.
 (3)        Fire element (tejo-dhatu) has the property of heating, warmth, consuming and grasping.  - they represent the heat or cold temperature property of forms.
 (4)        Air element (vayo-dhatu) has the property of motion, supporting, coldness, ingress and egress, easy movement and grasping.  - they represent the distended-ness property of forms.

The Mahahatthipadopama Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya discusses the aggregates and as not self
The sutta shows that this so called man is nothing but “five aggregates affected by clinging” and are dependently arisen. The desire, indulgence, inclination, and holding based on these five aggregates affected by clinging is the origin of suffering (chando alayo anunayo ajjhosanam, so dukkha samudayo). Once the Buddha said in short, the five aggregates affected by clinging are suffering (sankhittena pancupadanakkhandha dukkha). If one does not grasp things as one’s own and eradicate “I” concept (upadana) completely one can achieve the Enlightenment (Anupadana).

Uppādāsutta - The Discourse on the Orderliness of the Dhamma AN 3.136 shows us that action is not / non self. that is …
 “Subbe dhamma anatta…  All compounds are devoid of self.”  Or as this sutta shows:

  all conditioned phenomea are impermanent (sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā'ti)
  all conditioned phenomena are suffering (sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā'ti)
  all phenomena are non-self (sabbe dhammā anattā'ti.)

which means: All states are not self...

  This body is neither yours, nor anybody else's...
  These feelings are neither yours, nor anybody else's.
  These perceptions are neither yours, nor anybody else's.
  These mental constructions are neither yours, nor anybody else's.
  These verbal constructions are neither yours, nor anybody else's.
  These bodily constructions are neither yours, nor anybody else's.
  This consciousness is neither yours, nor anybody else's.
  They are results of old kamma, prior actions, something to be seen as generated and shaped by accumulations of past intention, emerging as effects to be sensed now...


This refers to a dream that Queen Maya had after trying for many years to have a baby with her husband. The reality is, they wrote that he was born to a woman who had been married for twenty years,

This Blog will help to clear your idea. http://www.rightreason.org/2009/the-virgin-birth-of-buddha/


Do Buddhism and Atheism contradict each other?

Within the canonical texts of the various schools of Buddhism there are various beings that roughly correspond to that of deities, in particular Devas and Brahmas. Both Devas and Brahmas are particular types of beings who have taken very high rebirths as a result of their good Karma. They have very long lifespans and many wonderful benefits.

However they aren't the objects of reverence that they are in other religions. Although one might pray to or request one of these beings for help in worldly matters it is understood that these beings are rather limited, and they eventually die like any other being.

In practical terms rejecting the existence of such beings doesn't really present major problems as it isn't an essential doctrinal teaching. One can be a practicing Buddhist without believing in them.


‘If a monk, intending to steal, takes from a village or from the
  wilderness what has not been given to him— the sort of theft for which
  kings, having caught a thief, would beat, imprison, or banish him,
  saying, “You’re a bandit, you’re a fool, you’ve gone astray, you’re a
  thief”— he too is expelled and not in communion.’ Second Parajika rule

This is for monks, but it's pretty clear - or at least it leaves the subjectivity to individual jurisdictions! (so in Italy, if you are starving and steal food, it's ok. If it's less than the value of a good shield (1/4 dinar), then in Sharia countries you are not in trouble)

With regards to possession, who possesses and to what extent, are probably useful measures. Who possesses is usually well defined (if not, then theft becomes a gray area). To what extent - how long should patents and copyright last, whether you can even effectively charge for something like streetlighting - are all likely subject to a social consensus.

Overall, if you perceive the object of your desire to be in the possession of someone else, or that someone else directly tells you so (asking is always a nice way to establish possession), then any intentional act to take such a thing, against the wishes of the owner would be theft, regardless of social consensus.

Piracy and claims as to the injustice of any and all economic systems are ancient claims, modernity only offers a novel spin on them.

If you think/believe/know that within a jurisdiction, a thing is claimed by someone and they don't have any desire to relinquish it, intentional taking of it is theft. Whether that possession is rightfully in their hands or not, is for their kamma, not yours.


Is it a sin to organize liqour & meat on cutomer request as a prt of my job?

Karma is a state of mind. If you intentionally order animals to be slaughtered, it breaks the first precept. If you order meat(dead animal bodies), it does not break the first precept. Serving liquor to clients does not break the fifth precept.

But both serving liquor and selling meat can come under Micca Ajiva(wrong livelihood)as you are doing it to make a living.


Can a person live by the Dhamma and have another religion as well?

In short: no, you can't. Even cursory knowledge of the teachings of the Buddha and the dogmas of Christianity (or any other religion) will prove enough to realize these are irreconcilable. Just to give a quick example, take the Buddhist belief (one of the "Four Seals") that all things/phenomena are empty and devoid of self: this is enough to negate the whole of Christian dogma at once! There is no doubt that the view that Buddhism can be seen as simply a "way of life" stems from a profound ignorance of the teachings and practice of Buddhism, usually based on a feel-good, watered down version of the teachings that doesn't even come close to trying to get to grips with understanding something as essential as impermanence, interdependence, and emptiness.

EDIT: The above comment is not meant in any way to insinuate that non-Buddhists cannot greatly benefit from studying the dharma—far from it, especially when most Western Buddhists come from a (at least vaguely) Christian upbringing. It was only meant to express that truly abiding by the Buddha's teachings entails a worldview that is not fully compatible with that of the major religions.


Can the body be stuck in a state during practice?

Past sankhara and sanna create bizarre experiances when meditation. Don't get alarmed, just look at the sensations and keep meditating.

To rule out any sensations due to medical issue, it is also best to see a doctor when pain or tightness arise. If there is no medical issue then don't fret about it too much and do meditation as usual.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


I think the word you're looking for is Anupassanā

[abstr. of anupassati, cf. Sk. anudarśana] looking at, viewing, contemplating, consideration, realisation

It's used in compound words like Kāyānupassanā (and Vedanānupassanā, Cittānupassanā, and Dhammānupassanā).
The fact that the second 'a' in "Kāyānupassanā" is long (i.e. with an accent on it, 'ā') is I think a hint that it's a compound of two 'a's, i.e.
Kāya + anupassanā = Kāyānupassanā

Wikipedia's Vipassanā (Etymology) says ...

Vipassanā is a Pali word derived from the older prefix "vi-" meaning "special", and the verbal root "-passanā" meaning "seeing". It is often translated as "insight" or "clear-seeing". The "vi" in vipassanā has many possible meanings, it could mean to '[see] into', '[see] through' or to '[see] in a special way.

... so there's a "root" "-passanā" -- which doesn't have an independent entry in the PTS dictionary, it just says ...

Passanā (p. 447) Passanā Passanā see anu˚, vi˚.

... i.e. referencing anupassanā and vipassanā.

The Sanskrit is Pashyana or Paśyana -- meaning "see", apparently.
Also there's https://www.buddha-vacana.org/toolbox/pref.html#anu which gives six possible meaning for the prefix "anu".

after, behind (motion viewed from the front backward).
ex: dhāvati: to run > anu·dhāvati: to run after
bala: military force > anu·bala: rearguard
bhāsati: to speak > anu·bhāsati: to speak after, repeat

for, towards an aim, on to, into, over to, forward (motion viewed from the back forward).
ex: pavecchati: to give, bestow > anu·pavecchati: to hand over
rodati: to cry, weep > anu·rodati: to cry for
pavisati: to enter > anu·pavisati: to enter into

(emphasis).
ex: dayā: sympathy, kindness > anu·ddayā: pity
yoga: application, endeavour > anu·yoga: devotion, dedication
vitakketi: to consider, reflect > anu·vitakketi: to ponder over

according to, in conformity with, along.
ex: ñāta: kown, well-knwon > anu·ñāta: permitted, allowed
mati: opinion > anu·mati: consent, agreement
rūpa: form > anu·rūpa: conform
anu·dhamma: in conformity with the dhamma
karoti: to do > anu·karoti: to imitate

secondary, supplementary, inferior, minor, smaller.
ex: pabbajā: ascetic life > anu·pabbajā: discipleship in ascetism
majjha: average > anu·majjha: mediocre
pavatteti: to set in motion > anu·pavatteti: to keep in motion

each, every, one by one.
ex: disā: direction > anu·disā: each direction
pubba: previous, former > anu·pubba: 'each after the previous one' ie. gradual
pañcāha: five days > anu·pañcāha: every five days.


Which is the Buddhist holy book? Where can it be read?

There isn't exactly one short Buddhist bible (see Why isn't there a Buddhist Bible?).

The Tripitaka is the Pali canon, possibly the earliest (or at least, among the earliest) of the surviving Buddhist literature. It has three parts, and of these three the Sutta Pitaka is the most relevant (to us).

You can read it (or at least begin to read it) online. Web sites with the Pali suttas translated include:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ -- popular, accessible, maybe a minimum of commentary
http://dharmafarer.org/ -- suttas are introduced with a lot of commentary by the translator
http://www.buddha-vacana.org/ -- not so many of the suttas are translated, but those which are here are given with word-by-word Pali-to-English translations
https://suttacentral.net/ (click on "Sutta" in the heading of the page) -- perhaps the most extensive collection (for example if eventually you're looking for a specific sutta, and find that it's not one of the suttas translated on Access to Insight, then look for it here)

See also the answers to these topics:

English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon
Chronological or other sequence for beginners

Note that although the Pali canon (which is the associated with the Theravada tradition) is among the oldest literature, there are also newer (or later) Buddhist schools with their own canonical literature -- so if you want to find "all the teachings of Buddhism" you might also investigate Mahayana literature (including Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan) as well as modern/contemporary literature.

The simplest answer to "how to behave, rules" might be to say "the five precepts".

I also liked, The Buddha's Teachings on Prosperity: At Home, At Work, in the World because it selects from the Pali canon the suttas which contain behaviour recommendations for lay-people. For example this answer is my summary of one its chapters (the book references specific suttas, which my summary doesn't).

Buddhism seems to me to be rather a large topic, so almost any introduction to it will give a somewhat distorted or one-sided view of it. In my answer to the topic New to Buddhism I tried to give an overview, and also said that people recommend In the Buddha’s Words by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

Another answer wrote that "Buddhism is not a religion based on a Holy Book" which is more or less true:

If you are one of the so-called People of the Book, perhaps you could over-estimate the importance of a "book" or Bible.
Even so, some words that I guess may be equally important in Buddhism include Buddhavacana, Sangha, Dhamma, (not to mention "lineage"), and various (practical) practices.

So instead of or as well as a Bible, people might recommend you look for (one or more) Buddhist teachers and/or communities.


How do you trade a career for a life geared toward becoming awakened?

I'd recommend reading the book "Dipa Ma: The Life and Legacy of a Buddhist Master" by Amy Schmidt. It's a very good illustration of how one can pursue the Buddhist path to a very significant degree, including coming through significant personal tragedy, and still be immersed in the day to day challenges of the world.


Two interpretations of the three levels of suffering, Dukkha Sutta and Tibetan

The words in SN 38.14 are not even attributed to Buddha, they are Sariputra's. I don't know why Theravada took them as the basis of their analysis.

Instead, the authoritative definition of dukkha is found in SN 56.11, the first and main sutra of Buddhism, The Sutra of Setting the Wheel of Dharma in Motion:

  Now this, wanderers, is the nobles' truth of dukkha: Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair are dukkha; association with the unloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; unsatisfied thirst is dukkha. In short, the five heaps of fuel (upadana-skandha) are dukkha.

As I understand, in Tibetan classification "the suffering of suffering" is a generalization of the apparent dukkha such as the pains of "birth, aging, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair". "The suffering of change" is a generalization of "association with the unloved / separation from the loved" aka "the unsatisfied thirst", and "the all-pervasive suffering" stands for the "In short, the five heaps of fuel are dukkha". The sequence preserves the ordering of the original Buddha's quote.


Why aren't more people interested in Dhamma?

In the Ayacana Sutta (SN 6.1), the Buddha explained that for the masses who are strongly clinging to sensual pleasures and other things like name, fame, wealth, health, relationships etc., it is hard to understand the full depth and breadth of the Dhamma.

  Then, while he was alone and in seclusion, this line of thinking
  arose in his awareness: "This Dhamma that I have attained is deep,
  hard to see, hard to realize, peaceful, refined, beyond the scope of
  conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. But this generation
  delights in attachment, is excited by attachment, enjoys attachment.
  For a generation delighting in attachment, excited by attachment,
  enjoying attachment, this/that conditionality and dependent co-arising
  are hard to see. This state, too, is hard to see: the resolution of
  all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending
  of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding. And if I were to teach
  the Dhamma and if others would not understand me, that would be
  tiresome for me, troublesome for me."

And then, most terrifyingly to us:

  As the Blessed One reflected thus, his mind inclined to dwelling at ease, not to teaching the Dhamma.

Fortunately the Buddha was persuaded otherwise:

  There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.


While it's certainly a noble deed, just remember the Dhamma emphasizes both compassion and wisdom. They are like the 2 wings of a bird and are both equally important. A good Buddhist should also be a good and skillful problem solver. So before resorting to sacrficing oneself, one should be smart and use his intelligence to come up with novel creative solutions that maximize the benefits to both others and oneself first. Self-sacrifice is most noble because not everyone can do it, but it should be a last resort if one decides to do it AFTER all other options have been exhausted.


If there is no soul or self, why did the Buddha speak of his past lives?

How is it possible that he had past lives?

Because until he became the Buddha he hadn't eliminated craving.
Craving leads to clinging, clinging leads to becoming, becoming leads to birth.

  how did he know they were his? What defines them as his?

Do you remember your childhood? If so, why do you call it your childhood? Because your current existence(assuming you are an adult now) is conditioned by how the child behaved. In the same manner, if your mind had the power to go further back in time, even before your birth, you would see what actions you performed in your last life to condition your present birth. In that sense, it makes it your past life.

But here we are merely talking about a causes and effect relationship. Such a relationship does not require an existence of a soul. A mango seed does not require a soul to result into a mango tree. It rather requires sunlight, water, fertilizer, air etc. Water does not require a soul to turn into steam. It requires heat.

In order for something to qualify as a soul, it has to be under your total control. Which means, it shouldn't be existing without your consent, it shouldn't be changing without your consent, it shouldn't be dying without your consent. Can you find anything in your mind or body that meets those conditions? Could the child have stayed as a child if he/she didn't like to become an adult?


Is the definition of sexual misconduct now obsolete?

From another more modern translation (Kelly, Sawyer, Yareham) of DN31:

  "And, the mother and father so respected reciprocate with compassion
  in five ways: by restraining you from wrongdoing, guiding you towards
  good actions, training you in a profession, supporting the choice of
  a suitable spouse, and in due time, handing over the inheritance.

In the Piya Tan commentary, it says:

  Patirupena darena samyojenti, lit “they have him bound to a suitable woman,” which is said in reference to Indian society in the Buddha’s
  time. In contemporary terms, this has to be contextualized to “they
  let their son or daughter find a suitable spouse.”

Also, we can assume that adult men and women who no longer stay under the care of their parents and become independent, would no longer fall under the category of being protected by their parents. And vice versa.

So, while the definition of sexual misconduct has not become obsolete, it has become "updated", so to speak.


DO starts with Depending on Ignorance, mental volition arise, depending on volitions consciousness arise, depending on consciousness, name & form, depending on name & form 6 sense base, depending on 6 sense base contact..etc..

It is commonly accepted (?) that the re-birth linking consciousness(patisandhi) descends into the foetus around 6 months.

At that stage of DO the resultant(vipaka) consciousness from previous existence give rise to name & form, which give rise to 6 sense base. These stages are when our form and senses are conditioned according to our resultant consciousness. The quality and characteristics of our senses etc...

Until the 6 sense base become functional and there is a sense object then only is there contact, feeling and the rest of DO.

So things like people playing music for the yet to be born baby to listen to, do make sense when the ear base is developed.

That's my take on it.


How can Name-and-form be the cause and condition for the manifestation of the consciousness aggregate?

From the Mahanidana Sutta (DN15):

  "If one is asked, 'From what requisite condition does contact come?'
  one should say, 'Contact comes from name-and-form as its requisite
  condition.'

  "If one is asked, 'From what requisite condition does name-and-form
  come?' one should say, 'Name-and-form comes from consciousness as its
  requisite condition.'

  "If one is asked, 'From what requisite condition does consciousness
  come?' one should say, 'Consciousness comes from name-and-form as its
  requisite condition.'

  "Thus, Ananda, from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes
  consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes
  name-and-form. From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes
  contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From
  feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a
  requisite condition comes clinging. From clinging as a requisite
  condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes
  birth. From birth as a requisite condition, aging, death, sorrow,
  lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the
  origination of this entire mass of stress.

Did you notice the loop?

Piya Tan in his commentary on Dependent Origination, talks about five versions of Dependent Origination in the Pali suttas:

  Roderick S Bucknell (1999) identifies five main variations or versions
  of dependent arising: the standard version(s), the branched
  version, the looped version, the Sn (Sutta nipāta) version and the
  ancestor of the standard version.

  The looped version is so called because it represents consciousness
  and name-and-form as mutually conditioning each other,
   and "this causal loop is confirmed when the series is reiterated in
  summary in the  "normal" or forward direction," thus:

  Conditioned by name-and-form is consciousness.
  Conditioned by consciousness is name-and-form.
  Conditioned by name-and-form is contact

  The most famous example of the looped version is found in the
  Mahā Nidāna Sutta ; other examples  are  found in the
  Nala, kalapiya Sutta and  the Mahâpadāna Sutta.

The Mahanidana Sutta (DN15) continues in its explanation:

  Name-and-form

  "'From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.'
  Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from
  consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If
  consciousness were not to descend into the mother's womb, would
  name-and-form take shape in the womb?"

  "No, lord."

  "If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart,
  would name-and-form be produced for this world?"

  "No, lord."

  "If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off,
  would name-and-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this
  is a requisite condition for name-and-form, i.e., consciousness."

  Consciousness

  "'From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.'
  Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from
  name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If
  consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a
  coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress
  in the future be discerned?

  "No, lord."

  "Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this
  is a requisite condition for consciousness, i.e., name-and-form.

  "This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing
  away, and re-arising. This is the extent to which there are means of
  designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which
  the sphere of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle
  revolves for the manifesting (discernibility) of this world — i.e.,
  name-and-form together with consciousness.

Piya Tan explains this in his same commentary on Dependent Origination:

  However, in the looped versions of Diagram 5b, the nāma-rūpa
  that feeds viññāṇa is what, in Abhidhamma, is called the
  bhav’aṅga,  the “birth continuum.”  At the moment of dying, this
  bhav’aṅga is the cuti-citta, “death-consciousness,”
  and is also the  paṭisandhi citta,  “rebirth-consciousness”
  of the next life.
  The modern term for this is the existential consciousness .

So, DN15 says that name-and-form is the condition for consciousness, which is the condition for name-and-form, which is the condition for contact. This is in the looped version of Dependent Origination.

Based on Piya Tan's explanation, the first name-and-form is from the previous life, which is the condition for consciousness. This consciousness, at death, is what the Abhidhamma calls cuti-citta or the "death consciousness" of the previous life, and is the same patisandhi citta or "rebirth consciousness" of the new life. This consciousness, is the requisite condition for the name-and-form of the next life. The second name-and-form is therefore the name-and-form of the next life. This is very clearly proven by the DN15 quote:

  "'From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.'
  Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from
  consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If
  consciousness were not to descend into the mother's womb, would
  name-and-form take shape in the womb?"

  "'From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.'
  Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from
  name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If
  consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a
  coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress
  in the future be discerned?


Interdependence in regards to myself and the universe

First of all, the material parts of you cannot be utterly destroyed ie., made non-existent. The physical universe is governed by the laws of conservation of matter and energy. What does this mean? It means that the total amount of matter/energy in the universe cannot be altered, just rearranged in different forms.

So if you were destroyed all that would happen to the universe is that it would be in a different arrangement of matter and energy. However, this is what happens for every moment of the universe. It is constantly in flux. No moment of the universe is the same as any other moment. The universe is constantly rearranging itself from moment to moment.

The truth of the matter is that you are a part of the universe in the same way that your nose is a part of your body. Consider: if your nose was destroyed would your body also be destroyed? If your body was destroyed would your nose be as well? No and yes, right? However, can you alter one without altering the other? No. They are interdependent in this way. The same is true of you and the universe. And richly so... the interdependencies go far beyond this trivial level. See if you can't figure out some other interdependencies :)

In general, we sentient beings are absurdly overly confident in our own independence. Truthfully, we are so utterly dependent that any notion of independence is really foolish and comical. :)

Consider the ways in which you are dependent upon others... You are dependent on your mother, father, and their mothers, fathers, etc, going back (at least) millions of generations for your very life. Each one of those people was dependent upon myriad acts and people to sustain their lives long enough to produce offspring that eventually produced you. You depend upon countless people to produce the supply chains of food for your daily nourishment. You depend on countless construction workers and supply chains for your daily shelter. The water you drink is made possible by countless engineers and people responsible for maintaining the aquaducts and reservoirs used to provide fresh water. When you go to the grocer you depend upon all the people who worked to stock those shelves and produce the food and the packaging and the huge supply chains that went into it. Your clothing is produced by the people working the fields for cotton and other fibers. The machines used to harvest that fiber was itself designed and manufactured - by engineers and inventors - and required ore and other raw materials that itself took huge supply chains to produce. All the people above were similarly dependent on their parents for their lives. And all were dependent upon education in the various trades on their teachers. The teachers were also dependent through and through. The dependency graph is so thorough with so many nodes utterly replete with dependency that it boggles the mind!

That bug in china and you are not one. You are separate beings. However, both of you are utterly suffused with dependency and there are undoubtedly countless nodes in common between the dependency graph of that bug and your own dependency graph. It takes just a little imagination to come up with numbers of ways in which your story and that bug's are interrelated and mutually dependent.

Maybe, "you cannot alter one without altering the other" is not the definition of interdependent, but it sure seems a necessary condition! Any two things where you can truthfully say, "you cannot alter one without altering the other" you can be darn sure are interdependent :)

Another way of thinking about your question is trying to understand the relationship between a whole and the parts that make it up. Consider a car. Is a car dependent upon the things that make it up? Does the car depend upon the tires? Does it depend upon the brakes? Does it depend upon the windshield? The engine?

Say you start taking parts away from a car... at what point or at what part that you take away does it make the car no longer a car? This is a great question to consider and has been contemplated very deeply by Buddhist masters for thousands of years. Of course, earlier generations of Buddhists considered chariots not cars. The greeks considered ships.  What's your answer? :)

Hope this helps!


In modern terms, Buddhism defines dukkha as a state of mind that is in conflict between "is" and "should". The logical opposite of dukkha is a state of peace and harmony with no such conflict.

The conflict between "is" and "should" can be resolved in one of three ways:

By changing the "is" (acting externally)
By changing our perception of "is" (acting internally)
By changing our idea of "should" (acting internally)

Now, when it comes to acting (whether internally or externally) all our actions and choices can be broadly classified in two types:

Those that lead to eventual peace and harmony.
Those that explicitly or implicitly provoke / sustain the state of unsatisfaction and cyclic pursuit.

When you feel hunger, would suppressing the hunger lead to peace (of health) or to unsatisfaction (of sickness)? It depends on your dietary condition, of course. If you are overweight, abstaining from food intake may have a positive effect on your overall health. Alternatively, would acting externally to obtain food lead to peace or would it lead to trouble? It depends on how you obtain food, doesn't it? If you steal it, it would lead to short-term peace but long-term suffering.

This is the basic formula of Buddhist karma.

What's called "attachment" in Buddhism refers to a mistaken idea about either the "is" side or about the "should" side, due to some sort of misinformation or overgeneralization. For example, in case of hunger, attachment could be an invalid idea about priorities. You could be mistakenly prioritizing feeling of cheap satisfaction from eating pastries or fast food over genuine goodness of healthy diet. Or, on the opposite end of spectrum, it could be an invalid idea about spirituality vis-a-vis fasting - that extreme fasting leads to spiritual breakthroughs etc. In short, attachment is always some kind of irrational idea the person is stuck on.

Like, when you're in love and the person is irreturnably gone, an irrational idea (attachment) would be to keep wanting the person back. Or as you get old an irrational idea (attachment) would be to keep wanting to stay young. That kind of stuff.

Why do we get stuck on irrational ideas? Because they carry emotional significance to us. They bring us a (fake) sense of comfort. They help us sustain a comfortable image of ourselves (Ego) and its mirror projection, comfortable image of the World. So in a way, attachment to irrational ideas is a primitive coping mechanism against dukkha, just not a very efficient one. Sooner or later, reality gives us a wake up call, and then we get hit by dukkha really hard. So holding on to attachments, to illusions, to an idealized image of self (ego), to generalizations about the world is definitely something that long-term leads to eventual suffering, not to peace.

Understanding this in practice was a big part of my own training back when I started. In Mahayana we are taught to prioritize the Global Good over individual gratification. From this perspective, any idea that we hold on to, out of a subconscious desire to protect our ego, as opposed to it being objectively-strategically-globally good, is considered an attachment.

So the rule of thumb for recognizing attachments is to ask yourself the following questions:

Will this lead to long-term good (peace, health, harmony) for myself and others? Or will it serve to sustain conflict, pursuit, and passions?
Is this truly objectively so or am I being biased because of subconscious desire to protect my ego or my generalizations?
Even if both 1 and 2 are true, what is my primary motivator? If it looks like it's genuinely good, but the reason I'm doing it is to congratulate myself on being holy and awesome, then it still counts as an attachment.

You have to question yourself really hard, especially regarding #2 and 3 - because the normal mind has a very strong tendency to not see its own biases.


Is there an absolute and known hierarchy in the Dharma?

"Are there resolved authorities in what is called Buddhism or is there an array of separate, respected lineages practicing different things, believing different premises, and therefore in dispute on innumerable points of knowledge and aim?"

Before Gautama Buddha died, he oriented his disciples to look at the teachings (say, instead of looking for a person) and refused to appoint any kind of successor or "leader of the group". That is the "Buddhism" side. The social and historical side shows (many centuries afterwards) different groups with different important figures emerging, leaders of some sort of that particular group or just influential personalities or teachers.

"Are monks and nuns more advanced than what are called lay practitioners?"

Advanced in practice? Not necessarily. The monastic idea in Buddhism is for those who want to have a greater commitment, whereas dedication with lay life would not be possible or much harder. And since people have different degrees of understanding, it's natural that being monastic or lay is not, in itself, a mark of greater or lower spiritual accomplishment.

IIRC, reports of advanced lay practitioners go back to the time of the Buddha.

However, greater commitment and proper conditions means progress is expected to be faster -- again, that's the whole point of becoming monastic, to be dedicated full time to it.

"Can we assess someone's 'Buddhist progress' by how they look, the way that they dress, speak, and behave?"

Yes. Observable signs include basic traits such as honesty, kindness and harmlessness which are easier to see ordinarily. The greater the progress, the more subtle (and difficult to assess) the signs can be.

"Will someone with knowledge of the Dharma necessarily have read a large number of sermons, tracts, or scriptures from known and agreed authorities"

Not necessarily. Someone with full knowledge of the Dharma necessarily have perfect understanding of suffering, can directly see it's origin, it's ending and, having mastered the way to end it, ended it for good. Since, in the Buddha's dispensation, this is synonym with "Dharma".

That, of course, if we understanding "Dharma" above as the principles of reality of interest. Since "Dharma" can also mean "the teachings of the Buddha" (conflated from "buddha-dharma"), in that case, one certainly has to know the recorded words of the Buddha, which are his teachings.

"Are there 'solitary saints' whose innate knowledge of the Dharma is so forged as part of their being that exposure to the religion which is Buddhism was unnecessary for their role as a catalyst in waking people up?"

Generally, in the Buddhist tradition, these people are known as Buddhas: those who discovered the way out of suffering without being exposed to the teachings of another Buddha. In the tradition, all Buddhas discover the same laws, so what they teach is essentially the same.

The designations get a bit more detailed to distinguish between different people.

For example, Gautama Buddha is referred to as a sammasambuddha: a perfectly enlightened person. This designation is reserved to those who (re)discover the dharma and decide to teach. Because of their special dedication and strivings (and mistakes along the way), they are broadly developed and have full command of the "do's and don'ts" to achieve the goal -- hence being regarded as the "best teacher".

It's generally believed that no sammasambuddha arises while the teachings of a previous Buddha is known. Only when there's no trace of a previous dharma, there are conditions for someone to become a Buddha.

Another designation which is related to the question is the pratyekabuddha, referring to those Buddhas who, after (re)discovering the nature of suffering and ending it, choose to live in solitude instead of teaching.


The analysis quoted here says that, literally, it could be either; but that, looking at various places in which it's used in context, it makes more sense if it means 'direct'.
The people on that site seemed to agree that that's the best analysis.

And, this article makes a similar argument to explain why 'direct' is a more fitting meaning than 'only'.


What does Anusaya Kilesa means? How to remove them completely?

After attaining Nirvana, there is not any anusaya kilesa lying dormant. Nirvana is the uprooting of the anusaya kilesa.

Also, anusaya kilesa is not exclusively karmic influence. Anusaya kilesa starts as a natural in-born element, unrelated to kamma, as follows:

  For a young tender infant lying prone does not even have the notion
  ‘identity,’ so how could identity view arise in him? Yet the
  underlying tendency to identity view lies within him. A young tender
  infant lying prone does not even have the notion ‘teachings,’ so how
  could doubt about the teachings arise in him? Yet the underlying
  tendency to doubt lies within him. A young tender infant lying prone
  does not even have the notion ‘rules,’ so how could adherence to rules
  and observances arise in him? Yet the underlying tendency to adhere to
  rules and observances lies within him. A young tender infant lying
  prone does not even have the notion ‘sensual pleasures,’ so how could
  sensual desire arise in him? Yet the underlying tendency to sensual
  lust lies within him. A young tender infant lying prone does not even
  have the notion ‘beings,’ so how could ill will towards beings arise
  in him? Yet the underlying tendency to ill will lies within him.

  MN 64

Anusaya kilesa is "uprooted" by seeing clearly the five aggregates and six spheres are not-self (anatta), as follows:

  Bhikkhu, when one knows and sees... nonself, the underlying tendencies
  are uprooted.

  SN 35.56

Or as follows:

  And what is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the
  ending of defilements?

  It’s when a mendicant meditates observing rise and fall in the five
  grasping aggregates.

  ‘Such is form, such is the origin of form, such is the ending of form.

  Such is feeling, such is the origin of feeling, such is the ending of
  feeling.

  Such is perception, such is the origin of perception, such is the
  ending of perception.

  Such are choices, such is the origin of choices, such is the ending of
  choices.

  Such is consciousness, such is the origin of consciousness, such is
  the ending of consciousness.’

  This is the way of developing immersion further that leads to the
  ending of defilements.

  AN 4.41

As for Dr. Ambedkar, his statement is false and an unwholesome wrong view about Buddhism for political purposes.

Also, the truth of Buddhism cannot be understood without scriptural texts.


Vajrayāna (Sanskrit: वज्रयान, Bengali:
বজ্রযান)

is also known as Tantric Buddhism, Tantrayāna, Mantrayāna, Secret Mantra, Esoteric Buddhism and the Diamond Way or Thunderbolt Way. The Lama and the Guru yoga are central in this system.[1] Vajrayāna is a complex and multifaceted system of Buddhist thought and practice which evolved over several centuries.

Although known with different names they are slightly different according to their practices.
There are many ways in which Vajrayana can be divided or classified and one way is to differentiate according to schools

..there is historical evidence for Vajrayana Buddhism in Southeast Asia and elsewhere (see History of Vajrayana above), today the Vajrayana exists primarily in the form of the two major sub-schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Esoteric Buddhism in Japan known as Shingon, with a handful of minor subschools utilising lesser amounts of esoteric or tantric materials.

The Tibetan schools are:

Tibetan Buddhism
Nelpalese Newar Buddhism
Ari Buddhism
Azhali region

Japanese schools are:

Shingon Buddhism
Tendai Buddhism
Shugendo

etc...
History of Vajrayāna:

Vajrayāna probably came into existence in the 6th or 7th century, while the term Vajrayāna itself first appeared in the 8th century. The Vajrayāna was preceded by the Mantrayāna, and then followed by the Sahajayāna (*8th century - long haired Sahaja(founder of Mahamudra)-siddhis) and Kalacakrayāna (*10th century - which includes messianism and astrology).

Fourfold division in Tibetan Buddhism

The best-known classification, by the Gelug, Sakya, and Kagyu schools, the so-called Sarma or New Translation schools of Tibetan Buddhism, is to divide the Tantras into four hierarchical categories:

-Kriyayoga, action tantra, which emphasizes ritual;
-Charyayoga, performance tantra, which emphasizes meditation;
-Yogatantra, yoga tantra;
-Anuttarayogatantra, highest yoga tantra, which is further divided into "mother", "father" and "non-dual" tantras.

Shingon and Tibetan Buddhism

The primary difference between Shingon and Tibetan Buddhism is that there is no Inner Tantra or Anuttarayoga Tantra in Shingon. Shingon has what corresponds to the Kriyā, Caryā, and Yoga classes of tantras in Tibetan Buddhism. The Tibetan system of classifying tantras into four classes is not used in Shingon.
Anuttarayoga Tantras such as the Yamantaka Tantra, Hevajra Tantra, Mahamaya Tantra, Cakrasaṃvara Tantra, and the Kalachakra Tantra were developed at a later period of Esoteric Buddhism and are not used in Shingon.

So Tantrayana as far as I know is another name for Vajrayana which is different from Shingon and other Chinese Esoteric Buddhism. Tantrayana or Vajrayana is the latest 10th century tradition which includes the highest yoga tantra (Anuttarayogatantra).


Lack of objective thinking in Buddhist practitionners

... so many gurus with repulsive behavior, and to the buddhist websites like Tricycle and Lion's Roar which continuously publish the writings of someone like Chogyam Trungpa. And I certainly can't see in the Dalai-Lama a personification of the Buddhist teachings, let alone his former friend Sogyal Rinpoche.

This is your projection and your interpretation, isn't it? Based on your (limited?) knowledge of Buddhism and the people you mention. And based on your own understanding of ethics. Assuming you are not Enlightened, I would not be surprised if your perception and interpretation were biased.

If you knew what is "Spiritual Snobbism" and "Spiritual Ego" and why they are extremely dangerous, you would appreciate why some teachers go a loooong way towards shedding off any traces of that, even at the expense of hurting their public image (Trungpa) and making fools of themselves (Dalai Lama). Scandalous behavior is part of a longstanding and very respected tradition called "Crazy Wisdom" that aims to "transcend the dualistic view of repulsive and nonrepulsive" in student's mind and melt the spiritual ego.

  I am very disturbed by the situation in Myanmar (Burma)

The situation in Burma is extremely complicated. However, there are little reasons to be "very disturbed" by it. As any situation, it arose from objective causes and conditions - and when you understand and appreciate these objective causes, in other words when you think about it rationally, you should see exactly what's going on, why it keeps on going, and why it is rather difficult to rectify. Sentient beings have a tendency to reify & overgeneralize => identify with => attach => take sides => create conflict. This ignorant tendency can take any form, up to and including turning Dharma into adharma. Watching this play out in Burma should only increase your faith in True Dharma, not feed your frustration with humans ;)

  Third, the very lucrative "mindfulness" industry selling Buddhism, like just any commodity, not without some harmful and dangerous consequences.

I don't think there is nearly as much money made on "mindfulness" as on alcohol, videogames, porn, and weapons. So I would not characterize "mindfulness" industry as "the very lucrative". Yes, there are some people who make living on helping others, and some of these people are charlatans - but it is far from being as "harmful and dangerous" as for example the glamour industry, or Hollywood etc. In fact, if mindfulness improves some lives, and/or serves as gateway into more real study and practice, it will pay off its debt to Buddhism to which it owes its existence.

Finally, you should always remember that Buddhism is about YOUR state of mind, not the minds of others. It is your negativity, your frustration with the world, your spiritual ego, and your attachment to high ideals and its inverse projection onto the reality your mind creates, that you should worry about and work with. Once you got some of that through, you can start helping others who deal with the same problem, since you will now know it first-hand. That would be the most rational thing to do.


Where is the most concrete exposition on the Buddhist ethics in the source material?

The Buddha taught for 45 years therefore his teachings are infinitely larger than those of Jesus. Therefore, there are so many (reported) discourses on ethics. Below are merely a few examples:

Magga-vibhanga Sutta: Noble Eightfold Path (for monks)
Cunda Kammaraputta Sutta: Ten Wholesome Actions (for laypeople)
Veḷudvāreyya Sutta: The Golden Rule (for laypeople)
Sigalovada Sutta: The Layperson's Code of Discipline (in detail)
Vanijja Sutta: Right Livelihood (for laypeople)
Samajivina Sutta: Marriage (for laypeople)
Karaniya Metta Sutta: The Buddha's Words on Loving-Kindness

The above said, a fitting equivalent to the Sermon on the Mount, in terms of both content & style, is the Maha-mangala Sutta, which similarly is about "Blessings".

In addition, as the Sermon on the Mount was spoken 500 years after the Buddha, most of the topics in it would be found in the Buddha's teachings, such as:

Integrity & Dhamma having the taste of salt
Anger
Lust and sense control
Retaliation & Love Your Enemies
Spiritual treasure
Don't Judge Others
Crossing the floods with unshakable faith.

As for divorce, the Buddha taught life-long marriage is the ideal (Samajivina Sutta) yet it appears did not prohibit divorce when a wife is immoral.


If there is no Self , what Self is there to be affected by the karma which non-Self now performs?

This comes from the Acela Sutta (although this quote comes from here). Basically, it's pointless to ask questions like this, according to the Buddha. Instead, we should approach it from the perspective of dependent origination.

  Again, when the Buddha was asked by the naked ascetic Kassapa whether
  suffering was of one's own making or of another's or both or neither,
  the Buddha replied "Do not put it like that." When asked whether there
  was no suffering or whether the Buddha neither knew nor saw it, the
  Buddha replied that there was, and that he both knew and saw it. He
  then said "Kassapa, if one asserts that 'He who makes (it) feels (it):
  being one existent from the beginning, his suffering is of his own
  making,' then one arrives at eternalism. But if one asserts that one
  makes (it), another feels (it); being one existent crushed out by
  feeling, his suffering is of another's making,' then one arrives at
  annihilationism. Instead of resorting to either extreme a Tathaagata
  teaches the Dhamma by the middle way (by dependent origination)"
  (S. XII, 17/vol. ii, 20).


"Marks of Existence" and "Gates To Enlightenment", are they Same?

Pretty generally speaking, realising the truth is enlightenment. So if the three(or four) marks of existence are true then realising them would be the gates to enlightenment.
The different sects of buddhism are forming distinct views and belief systems, which is not wise, this is what results in very confusing and difficult reading.