what I have heard in one dhammapada verse

You heard this verse wrongly. This verse says all modes of behaviour are created by mind and, when the mode of behaviour is impure, suffering follows; and when the mode of behaviour is pure, happiness follows. This Dhammapada verse is about "kamma" rather than "solipsism".
Since Buddhism teaches suffering is caused by craving, attachment & self-centredness and suffering ends when craving, attachment & selfing are abandoned, whether things exist or not is not relevant to Buddhism.

If, while he is dwelling by means of this dwelling, his mind inclines to speaking, he resolves that 'I will not engage in 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 kings, robbers, & ministers of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street & the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the world & of the sea; talk of whether things exist or not.' In this way he is alert there.
MN 122


Did the Buddha ever mentioned what is the cause for having lovers / marriage?

Geshe Michael Roach taught that the cause for finding a companion was to give companionship.  He recommended nursing homes as one place to go and offer companionship to others to create the cause for relationship.  He also said that there is a text that did list "deeds" and the "consequences".  I am not sure if it is words of the Buddha.  Unfortunately, I don't know the name and I don't think it has been translated into English.  When someone wanted to change something that was sticking them, he would go into the book and find out exactly what they needed to do.
I have used the basic ideas of cause and effect to find a spiritual partner.  I was looking for someone to share my spiritual journey with me and support my practice.  Knowing the general idea is to do to others what you would like to have or have done to you, I figured out a way to do this.  I located a person in long term retreat and set up a monthly donation to their practice.  I don't think they even knew.  I then dedicated my practice to their enlightenment.  My current partner and I met soon after I started this, although it was a few more years before we became a couple.  I am essentially a hermit, so finding a partner really is a miracle.  We've been together 5 years.
To leverage cause and effect, simply find ways to help people have relationships or encourage people to stay in relationships or improve their relationships.  Be creative.  Offer what you would like to receive.  Get detailed about what you would like to receive, do those actions, and dedicate what you do to your goal.
I was taught about a sutra called The Teaching of the Four Practices that teaches how to purify karma.  Perhaps you already know a purification practice that you can undertake to clear your obstacles. You can create new causes, but always good to get rid of old causes for not being in relationship.
The four practices (or powers) in brief are:

Foundation power  - this is simply Buddhist refuge
Destruction power - recognizing what you did will come back to hurt you (if you don't have a memory of it, just realize that in some life you harmed relationships - your own or others)
Power of restraint - resolve never to harm relationships again
Power of antidote - studying and understanding emptiness and karma  as well as undertaking action to undo what you did (in this case, helping people stay in relationship and/or being a nice companion)


Will smoking cigarettes permanently hinder meditation?

This is a form of intoxicating addictive substance. Any such substance will hinder your meditation and quality of life. Things like unhealthy food (some foods induce the 5 hindrances) and drinks also have a similar effect.

Also when meditating you should be both mentally and physically fit. The addiction will reduce your metal fitness and the health effects will reduce your physical fitness. So your lung capacity also will play a role.

This does not mean which you should not attempt meditation as a smoker. Perhaps you should take a residential course where you do not get the chance to smoke / drink, as to get results you need to have mental and physical well being. Then you can leverage on the meditation to slowly get you out of addiction.


What is the recommended time of day for meditation?

No such recommended time. Especially if you are doing Vipassana meditation, you are advised to practice Samma Sati all the time. But early morning(just before dawn) is said to be a good time for meditation since the world is still sleeping and the mind is very clear and less distracted. So you can easily attain Samadhi. You'll find that it's a very good time to study as well. You can easily memorise things. All the Buddhas have attained enlightenment just before dawn as I've heard. Yes, you can do meditation before going to bed. If it's Vipassana meditation, drowsiness won't be a problem as you can meditate on the drowsiness. Some people with insomnia try meditation at nights to help them fall asleep.


Are there any scientifically validated practices for Buddhists?

The Buddha himself advocates the scientific method:

  the teaching realizable in this very life, immediately effective, inviting inspection, relevant, so that sensible people can know it for themselves --SN35.70

The practice of Buddhism is essentially endless lab experiments with reproducible results. The results are subjective and difficult to measure externally. For example, what meter can one buy to measure "tranquility"? A heart rate monitor that measures tranquility as low BPM? Maybe not, since dead people are quite tranquil at 0 BPM.

Because science prefers instrumented measurements over self-reported assessments, a scientist interested in measuring the results of Buddhist practice objectively (i.e., vs. "are you tranquil?") must do so a bit indirectly. For example, there is interest in MRI scans of meditators.

Although the reliance on instruments is fascinating, it's also a bit more than what is actually needed. If we experience a cessation of suffering, do we really need external instrument validation? And what would convince someone more to try the Noble Eight Fold Path: a scientific paper, or a friend with a clear heart?


Looking for Buddhist story on Nirvana after being abused

The Therigatha might have examples of this. One I found was the verses of Sumangalamaata:

  O woman well set free! how free am I,
  How throughly free from kitchen drudgery!
  Me stained and squalid 'mong my cooking-pots
  My brutal husband ranked as even less
  Than the sunshades he sits and weaves alway. (23)

  Purged now of all my former lust and hate,
  I dwell, musing at ease beneath the shade
  Of spreading boughs–O, but 'tis well with me! (24)

Patacara is maybe another good example:

  Wailing in her woe– 'My children both are gone, and in the bush
  Dead lies my husband; on one funeral bier
  My mother, father, and my brother burn,'
  she wandered around from that day forth in circles, and because her skirt-cloth fell from her she was given the name 'Cloak-walker.' And people, seeing her, said: 'Go, little mad-woman!' And some threw refuse at her head, some sprinkled dust, some pelted her with clods.

source

There's also the story of an old man who, after giving all his wealth to his children, is left destitute when they refuse to care for him in his old age, so he becomes a monk. I can't remember the name though.


Does Krishnamurti claim of No Path, No Progress, No Goal fit with Buddhist thought?

The idea there is no path is itself a path, which obviously has a goal. If there was no goal, why did KM teach?

The Buddha's path, properly comprehended, is the abandonment of craving & letting go. This is similar to what KM was attempting to teach but, unlike KM, the Buddha comprehended there is actually a path (patipada) or method (gamini).


Can a person get into any stage of enlightenment without being aware of it?

Samyutta Nikaya - Maha Vaggo (2) Sotapatti Samyuttaya

Here you can find sutta where Buddha explains who a Sotapatti stream winner is.

Unwavering impression of Buddha
Unwavering impression of Dhamma
Unwavering impression of Sangha
Maintains Aryakäntha sîla

There are other places in Tipitaka where Buddha mentions the first three and the fourth one as

No doubt of The Four Noble Truths (Sammä Ditti) -

A definitive answer may be found here:

  Samyutta Nikaya - Maha Vaggo (2) Sotapatti Samyuttaya - 11.1.5

As you might notice, as long as there is doubt (Vicikiccä) you are not sothäpanna. By observing your own mind, you can confirm if you are sothäpanna or not.

To go a step further, it is wise to practice Buddhism with the thoughts

As long as I make assumptions using "me", "mine", "my soul" I need to practice detachment.
As long as I have craving, anger or delusion, I will practice detachment, metta and vipassana (Sammä Ditti)

This way, one won't waste time thinking am I this, am I that. Where there is craving, anger, delusion, there is harm for oneself and others. Therefore, you can practice this just by deciding to be harmless.

 English Version


Does meditation giving you 'joy' because there is lack of suffering, or does it give something positive?

Both. Meditation when done properly will allow one to abandon the Five Hindrances (greed, anger, sloth/torpor, restlessness, doubt); and give rise to the Five Jhana Factors where each factor counters a particular hindrance:

Applied Examination to counter sloth/torpor
Sustained Examination to counter doubt
Joy to counter anger
Happiness to counter restlessness
One-pointedness to counter greed.

It's important to notice that meditation alone will not lead one to nibbana. It's only 1 out of 8 limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path, which a practioner will need to train to perfection.


Good question. There are several schools of thought here.

According to one, attainment of nonduality does leave the person with nothing else to be done. No goals, no ambitions.

What follows from this is an idea that before a student is introduced to nonduality, they must be first taught discipline and a high-drive attitude, so by the time they attain non-duality, they develop a habit of being strong. A kind of prophylactics against the nondual depression, we could say.

According to another school, even though there is a clear realization that in nonduality no goals make absolute sense, relatively speaking some things are still locally "better" than others, so some local goals may still make relative sense. In this context, if someone has eyes to see local problems, they will remain motivated even if globally nothing makes sense.

Finally, according to my teacher, having goals post-enlightenment is more like playing Make-Believe. One doesn't actually buy into these things, so it's not like a true (blind) ambition. But an enlightened being may act as if they were seriously engaged with something, more for the sake of others, and even for an enlightened kind of "fun", than out of greed to achieve anything.

In (Mahayana) Buddhism, they define Enlightenment as "union of wisdom and compassion" for this very reason. Wisdom refers to realization of emptiness or nonduality, which sees that both suffering and so-called sentient beings are empty. Compassion is seeing that, however empty, the experience of suffering is rather painful -- hence the drive (=ambition?) to help out.


Practical advice on not eating after noon

This advice seems relevant (by a gastroenterologist and published in Canada's largest newspaper):

Fasting tips for those with gastritis and peptic ulcer


very strong cravings for compelling images of moving exciting images

Unwholesome cravings are extinguished by using wisdom rather than by using willpower.

This requires seeing clearly & reflecting upon the danger & harm of unwholesome phenomena.

The mind must examine & investigate cause & effect very deeply.

Examples of this method are found in the Dvedhavitakka Sutta & the Potaliya Sutta.

If pornography is a problem, this requires changing wrong views in order to understand what brings women real happiness.

  And what Master Gotama, is a woman’s aim?

  A man, O brahmin, is a woman’s aim, her quest is for adornments, her mainstay is sons, her desire is to be without a co-wife and her ideal
  is domination.

  AN 6.52

The psychological problem with pornography is related to wrong view or delusion (rather than lust).

Readings: Five Mindfulness Trainings & Sexual Responsibility by Thich Nhat Hanh


In this commentary on the Vinaya, on page 308, it says,

  Raw flesh and blood are allowed at Mv.VI.10.2 only when one is possessed
  by non-human beings. Thus, in more ordinary circumstances, one may not eat
  raw fish or meat even if of an allowable kind. This would include such things as
  steak tartare, sashimi, oysters on the half-shell, raw eggs, and caviar.
  Furthermore, even cooked fish or meat of an allowable kind is unallowable if the
  bhikkhu sees, hears, or suspects that the animal was killed specifically for the
  purpose of feeding bhikkhus (Mv.VI.31.14)


How do your thoughts appear to you? (asking for mechanics)

To me, thoughts appear as relationships or associations. When I think of something, I remember something else related to that, and then the next thing, or several next things. All these memories are at first very vague - more like feelings - and then if I give one of them attention, it becomes more specific. Now, if I look more carefully at a single thought - it is not a solid thing, it is just a pointer to more memories related to it. So to me all thoughts are empty connections with one another.

I can also visualize objects as images, and sometimes these visual images float from memory all by themselves - so some of my thinking is visual. Or sometimes I remember sounds or tactile sensations. But those are more like "memories" than "thoughts".

I also have inner dialog at times, but by now I have mostly learned to stop it when needed. So when I think I mostly don't think in words, but in those connections I described above. When I do have an inner dialog it sounds like memory of my own voice, i.e. like I'm talking very quietly to myself, or rather remembering how my voice would sound if I said those words.

When I think about something complex, organically (i.e. not reasoning step by step), I may have some kind of complex interconnected structure appear in my head. It's like a mesh of interconnected wires, each wire being a thought connected with other thoughts. Sometimes I look at the entire mesh from afar and try to see high-level patterns, or a particular way seemingly unrelated things are connected. This entire structure is multidimensional, not 3D. Sometimes two thoughts may appear as two separate thoughts, but if you trace them into another dimension you will see that they are in fact two projections of the same one thought and that's how you see they are connected.

Working with these thoughts-as-connections requires using feelings. Feelings are like queries you can send to the mesh, to find relationships, or to find a particular thought.


How does buddhism describe what exactly, or where exactly, or how exactly, consciousness exists?

As a computer scientist you are bringing some baggage with you that will continue to get in the way of what you want to find in the Dharma. I am speaking from the perspective of a computer scientist that spent thirty years looking into the same questions you are asking, ultimately finding the answers  in contemplative practice.
While consciousness is categorized in the Dharma in ways that may have led you to believe that consciousness is some thing that exists separate and apart from its cognitive contents, reaching out to contact that content, the actual structure, which you can discover first-hand through meditative practices (today’s mindfulness meditation being the first baby-step on the path) is the inverse of what you believe it to be.
For me, the ultimate roadblock on the path you are following was explaining human creativity (rather than explaining it away), because, upon analysis, the proposed solutions to explaining it always assumed the result, and thus were never more than magical thinking. An example is the foundational belief, found widespread in many fields of knowledge, that order arises randomly—and sticks around—without some organizing principle driving it. That’s magical thinking.
Consciousness of some object being taken as a structure of real things harboring a ghost in the machine that somehow imparts a new feature onto its dull matter, no matter how subtly the mechanism is crafted, must assume as a given, the ability to know, be aware, or be cognizant of those skandas you’ve read about. It’s not to be found in dull matter, so you have to turn the problem around.
If you want a textual reference to an in-depth treatment of mind, and specifically “where is mind?” I highly recommend the Surangama Sutra, also known as The Sutra of Heroic Progress. There are three extant English translations of it, with my favorite being the Goddard translation because of it’s conciseness (repeating material being skipped), and the lengths gone to by the translators and the editor, Goddard, to not use unfamiliar terminology.


I explain why I prefer discuss Buddhism intellectually but others don't seem to accept my point. Why is that?

Here's a very suitable sutta for this question. Self-explanatory.

From Dhammaviharin Sutta (AN 5.73):

  Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having
  bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to
  the Blessed One, "'One who dwells in the Dhamma, one who dwells in the
  Dhamma': thus it is said, lord. To what extent is a bhikkhu one who
  dwells in the Dhamma?"

  "Monk, there is the case where a monk studies the Dhamma: dialogues,
  narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous
  exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question &
  answer sessions. He spends the day in Dhamma-study. He neglects
  seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of
  awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on study, not one who
  dwells in the Dhamma.

  "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard
  & studied it and teaches it in full detail to others. He spends the
  day in Dhamma-description. He neglects seclusion. He doesn't commit
  himself to internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk
  who is keen on description, not one who dwells in the Dhamma.

  "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard
  & studied it and recites it in full detail. He spends the day in
  Dhamma-recitation. He neglects seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to
  internal tranquillity of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen
  on recitation, not one who dwells in the Dhamma.

  "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard
  & studied it and thinks about it, evaluates it, and examines it with
  his intellect. He spends the day in Dhamma-thinking. He neglects
  seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of
  awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on thinking, not one who
  dwells in the Dhamma.

  "Then there is the case where a monk studies the Dhamma: dialogues,
  narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous
  exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question &
  answer sessions. He doesn't spend the day in Dhamma-study. He doesn't
  neglect seclusion. He commits himself to internal tranquillity of
  awareness. This is called a monk who dwells in the Dhamma.

  "Now, monk, I have taught you the person who is keen on study, the one
  who is keen on description, the one who is keen on recitation, the one
  who is keen on thinking, and the one who dwells in the Dhamma.
  Whatever a teacher should do — seeking the welfare of his disciples,
  out of sympathy for them — that have I done for you. Over there are
  the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monk.
  Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message
  to you."


Is Pratītyasamutpāda just cause and effect?

One must be quite careful with this formula. In fact it never mentions causation and in general early Buddhist texts do not. Even if it purported to be a theory of causation, it tells us nothing at all about causation. It simply tells us that one thing arises in the presence of another and ceases in its absence.

Causality is a very tricky subject. As David Hume pointed out in the 1700s one never sees "causation" one only ever sees sequence. We assume that when one event follows another in close proximity in space and time. But the assumption is impossible to prove one way or another, and we a frequently wrong about it. Immanuel Kant argued that the idea of "causation" is something that we humans bring to the interpretation of sense experience, a preconceived notion that we use to make sense of experience. So "causation" is still not something we can observe, but something we assume must be present because we cannot conceive of the world any other way.

The formula of conditionality specifically refers to the arising of the items on the list of twelve nidānas. Although I think we can better understand it as applying to experience arising from the contact between sense-object, sense-faculty, and sense-cognition. One image for understanding it is that it's like relationship between the foundations, walls and roof of a house. The foundations must be in place for the walls to stand, but the foundations certainly don't cause the walls. And similarly for the walls and roof.

So the short answer is that imassmim sati idaṃ hoti formula is emphatically not intended as a theory of cause and effect. The early Buddhists were interested in the conditions that contributed to the arising of experience, which they also called "dukkha".

That said, later Buddhists tried to apply this idea conditionality to many things besides experience, creating huge unresolved philosophical problems. And at the same time it is often presented these days as a theory of causation - even by quite clever people who should know better. So modern Buddhists are often quite confused about what the imassmim sati idaṃ hoti relates to and attempts to describe.


Wikipedia says, about Vietnam:

  Followers in Vietnam practice differing traditions without any problem or sense of contradiction. Few Vietnamese Buddhists would identify themselves as a particular kind of Buddhism, as a Christian might identify him or herself by a denomination, for example.

... and goes on describe aspects of Vietnamese Buddhist practice.

It also says:

  The overall doctrinal position of Vietnamese Buddhism is the inclusive system of Tiantai, with the higher metaphysics informed by the Huayan school (Vietnamese: Hoa Nghiêm); however, the orientation of Vietnamese Buddhism is syncretic without making such distinctions. Therefore, modern practice of Vietnamese Buddhism can be very eclectic, including elements from Thiền (Chan Buddhism), Thiên Thai (Tiantai), Tịnh độ Pure Land Buddhism, and popular practices from Vajrayana.

... and:

  The central and southern part of present-day Vietnam were originally inhabited by the Chams and the Khmer people, respectively, who followed both a syncretic Śaiva-Mahayana (see History of Buddhism in Cambodia) and Theravada Buddhism.

And about Cambodia:

  Theravada Buddhism is the state religion of Cambodia, which has had been presented since at least the 5th century.

Tu Vien Hong Duc is described as:

  While Tu Vien Hong Duc is therefore best classified as a Pure Land Buddhist temple, it is much more a Vietnamese Buddhist temple.

According to Google Maps, Phuoc Vien and Tu Vien Hong Duc are located in the same building.


If a snake is eating a frog in front of me, what should I do?

Don't hit snake, but better we understand it's the nature. We cannot get snakes to eat non-veg. We can't change the nature of the world.

Animal world is described as one of 4 hells in Buddhism. Their Karma stance causes them to born in different worlds. The most eligible karma they have done in their sansara (chain of lives birth, live, die) will bring their life events to them.

Also If we kill the snake, we get it on our Karma account. Karma is like a chain which keep our lives continuing through sansara.

Please refer http://justbegood.net/MoreQuestions.htm for better understanding of Karma and their consequences.


MN1 The Root of All Things addresses watching for the untrained ordinary person as:

  They perceive the seen as the seen. But then they identify with the seen … Why is that? Because they haven’t completely understood it, I say.

In contrast, for the trained mind SN35.96 we have:

  ...in the seen will be merely the seen;...

The simplicity of "merely the seen" is itself non-doing. Ordinarily we identify with thoughts, latch onto them with greed, aversion or delusion. That latching onto thoughts is the doing to be relinquished. Yet we perceive the latching onto thoughts as "not-doing", hence the seeming paradox.

As we practice, we start noticing the doing, the grasping. And with a measure of watchful restraint we counteract the tendency towards "doing". From AN3.60:

  When there is sense restraint, one who has sense restraint has fulfilled a vital condition for ethical conduct.
  When there is ethical conduct, one who has fulfilled ethical conduct has fulfilled a vital condition for right immersion.

Find the razor's edge between doing and not-doing. Explore that.


Should we correct Buddhist wrong believes or respect it?

Those rules you have mentioned are only for monks. They do not apply to lay people. Lay people can consume any type of meat even if the animal is killed for them, as long as they don't break the 1st precept.

Yes, you can try to explain to people who look down on you, saying that being vegetarian is merely a food preference in Theravada Buddhism. Mahayana Buddhism seem to recommend a vegetarian diet by default. But that is not an excuse to look down on someone. You might also come across some confused Theravada Buddhists who follow vegetarianism like a religion, even putting it above what's said in the Suttas. Such practices usually fall under Silabbata-paramsa. One gives up on that when one becomes Sotapanna. Trying to correct them might push them away from the Dhamma. You can always practice Upekkha alongside Metta in such cases.


Can anyone give me a suggestion of a good monk to learn Buddhism?

For the doctrinal/technical side of the Teaching, you can't go wrong with Bhikkhu Bodhi. He actually live streams his courses from Chuang Yen monastery every Saturday morning US Eastern time at 10 AM. Simply go to youtube.com and type: "chuang yen". Also check out his excellent book In the Buddha's Words


Did Buddha saw his two teachers were born, where living beings did not have physical body?

I believe this has nothing to do with whether or not these men had ears that could hear. The Devas are able to communicate via reading and projecting thought.

The problem teaching Dhamma in the higher spheres has more to do with the fact that there is no painful sensation experienced there and apparently no memory of past lives such as could provide the understanding of pain as experienced personally.

The Buddha and other bhikkhus do manage to visit some of the lower higher realms such as the Brahma Lokas, so there must be some further explanation.

I suggest without personal experinence that I can recollect that this has to do with the enormous length of life in these spheres. The arahant that lived outside Time could visit (via a wormhole?) these higher realms, but once manifested there, if even for so short a time as it takes to snap the fingers, his return would occur millinia later. It would spoil the Buddha's mission.


In short , was something ever done by me?

Conventionally speaking, yes.

Ultimately speaking, no.

Be aware that no matter how hard you try to understand this intellectually, it will never happen.

Anatta can only be grasped truly and completely through the practice of Vipassana meditation.


The Final Moment of the Buddha's Realization

Your question somehow seems to superimpose onto Buddhism the Hindu Advaitin idea of an illusory self merging into God the Ultimate Reality, except that instead of God, you have Nibbana. Buddhism is different.
Eternalism and annihilationism
There is no eternal self. That would be eternalism. If we associate the self with the mental idea of Nibbana, or eternal consciousness or God or Ultimate Reality etc., that would be eternalism, a false view. In MN 38, we read that Sati made this mistake of associating consciousness with the self and assuming it to be eternal or unconditioned.
It is also wrong to say that there is no self at all, or that the self gets destroyed at death or at Nibbana. That would be annihilationism.
Quote from the Acela Sutta (This comes from here but the full text can be found here).

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).

According to the Attakari Sutta, it also doesn't make sense to say that there is no self-doer at all. It is obvious that you can will your hands and legs to move and they will move.
What is the self?
The self is just an idea of the mind that is dependently originated based on conditions and is impermanent. The "birth" (jāti) nidana of dependent origination is the birth of the idea of the self. Snp 4.14 calls this the thought "I am the thinker". This mental idea of the self is reborn from moment to moment i.e. it's changing dependent on conditions.
In the Vina Sutta, we read the analogy of the lute, where different parts of the lute work together to create music. But if you take the lute apart into pieces, you cannot find music. Similarly, the mental idea of the self is constructed by the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, consciousness and mental formations, by the process of dependent origination. If you take them apart, you cannot find the self. Music here refers to the self (atta), which is what becoming (bhava) and birth (jāti) is about.
According to the Khemaka Sutta, even a stream enterer already fully understands this (i.e. no longer has self-view), but he still has conceit (the self-habit or self-obsession). He KNOWS that "I am the body" or "the body belongs to me" are false views, yet he still FEELS that "I am the body" or "the body belongs to me". That's the difference between self-view and self-habit. Please also see this answer.
In fact, the stream enterer still has seven of the ten fetters. The non-returner would still have all the higher fetters, namely, desire for material existence, desire for immaterial existence, conceit, restlessness and ignorance.
What is Nibbana?
Next, what exactly is Nibbana? It's not an Ultimate Reality or Truth or God.
Nibbana is a mental object to be experienced by the mind. It is that which is experienced by the mind when it is free from defilements.
From this answer, we read:

So, Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind,
not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a
feeling. However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana, which is not
conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not
arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. The mind
can therefore experience Nibbana, but it cannot feel it or think about
it.

From AN 9.34:

Ven: Sariputta: “Reverends, Nibbana is bliss!
Ven. Udayi: “But Reverend Sāriputta, what’s blissful about it, since
nothing is felt?”
Ven. Sariputta: “The fact that nothing is felt is precisely what’s
blissful about it.

Final moment of realization
So, what happened at the final moment of the Buddha's realization?
From MN 36:

“When my concentrated mind was thus purified, bright, unblemished, rid
of imperfection, malleable, wieldy, steady, and attained to
imperturbability, I directed it to knowledge of the destruction of the
taints. I directly knew as it actually is: ‘This is suffering’;…‘This
is the origin of suffering’;…‘This is the cessation of
suffering’;…‘This is the way leading to the cessation of
suffering’;…‘These are the taints’;…‘This is the origin of the
taints’;…‘This is the cessation of the taints’;…‘This is the way
leading to the cessation of the taints.’
“When I knew and saw thus, my mind was liberated from the taint of
sensual desire, from the taint of being, and from the taint of
ignorance. When it was liberated there came the knowledge: ‘It is
liberated.’ I directly knew: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life has
been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming
to any state of being.’
“This was the third true knowledge attained by me in the last watch of
the night. Ignorance was banished and true knowledge arose, darkness
was banished and light arose, as happens in one who abides diligent,
ardent, and resolute. But such pleasant feeling that arose in me did
not invade my mind and remain.

It's basically the destruction of all ten fetters, the last being ignorance. Ignorance is uprooted by enlightenment, the complete understanding of how it all works. Also uprooted are the underlying tendencies, which are deep-seated habits, hard to be removed.
The buddha became free from rebirth (of the mental idea of the self) and also free from death, i.e. the death of the self. To be deathless, i.e. to not experience the death of the self, because the mental idea of the self is no longer constructed by dependent origination.
When ignorance has been destroyed, craving (a habit of reification) no longer arises from feeling. Without craving, there is no clinging, becoming and birth of the mental idea of the self.
From Khemaka Sutta, we read that the cleaned cloth of the non-returner still has the scent of the self that needs to be finally smoked out, by complete enlightenment:

"Just like a cloth, dirty & stained: Its owners give it over to a
washerman, who scrubs it with salt earth or lye or cow-dung and then
rinses it in clear water. Now even though the cloth is clean &
spotless, it still has a lingering residual scent of salt earth or lye
or cow-dung. The washerman gives it to the owners, the owners put it
away in a scent-infused wicker hamper, and its lingering residual
scent of salt earth, lye, or cow-dung is fully obliterated.
"In the same way, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned
the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five
clinging-aggregates a lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am'
desire, an 'I am' obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on
the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five
clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origin, such its
disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are
fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its
disappearance.' As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of
these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit,
'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated."

Parinibbana
Then what is Parinibbana?
Well, there is such a thing as clinging aggregates. According to this answer, for a living arahant, when ignorance is uprooted, this breaks dependent origination, that ends craving, clinging and suffering. In the chain of dependent origination, clinging aggregates would also cease.
The living arahant according to Iti 44, attained nibbana with fuel remaining (sa-upadisesa), meaning the non-clinging aggregates are still functioning like glowing embers, although the fires of passion, aversion and delusion have ceased.
Parinibbana is when the non-clinging aggregates stop functioning. This is nibbana without fuel remaining (anupadisesa) according to Iti 44.
For a living arahant, the music has stopped, but the lute remains. One day, even that will be destroyed. The five clinging aggregates is like a lute vibrating with music, while the five aggregates not subject to clinging is like a silent peaceful lute.
Although I said music, it's more like noise. When the noise stops, you have peace. That's the living arahant's mentally cognized peace of nibbana.
What happens after Parinibbana?
From Yamaka Sutta:

"And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a
truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to
declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a
monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is
annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?"
"Previously, my friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil
supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Dhamma, I
have abandoned that evil supposition, and have broken through to the
Dhamma."
"Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A
monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents: what is he on the
break-up of the body, after death?"
"Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form is inconstant... Feeling...
Perception... Fabrications... Consciousness is inconstant. That which
is inconstant is stressful (suffering). That which is stressful has
ceased and gone to its end."

Change of perspective
A change of perspective is needed i.e. rebirth, birth, death, and parinibbana should not be linked to any permanent consciousness or identity. The first noble truth is that there is suffering. It's not there is my suffering or your suffering but simply there is suffering. This also relates to anatta (not self).
Also, think about the core teaching, sabbe dhamma anatta - all phenomena is not self. There is no permanent consciousness or identity or individuality or self in all phenomena.
There is suffering, and it arises because of the mental idea of the self, that arises because the mental idea of the self was constructed by the mind-body phenomena (the five aggregates) through the process of dependent origination, due to ignorance.
Suffering is connected to the mental idea of the self through papanca (reification). This is explained in this answer.
Craving itself is a habit of reification. The self is also a result of reification.
The rebirth of the mental idea of the self from moment to moment is sustained by craving.
When ignorance is uprooted, reification is stopped, craving ceases, which then causes the mental idea of the self to be no longer constructed, and thus suffering is ended.
The key defining feature of the Buddha's enlightenment is not about no more self or no more craving, but rather, no more ignorance. Ignorance is the root of it all.
Please also read SN 12.20 about self-view:

“When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple has clearly seen with correct wisdom
as it really is this dependent origination and these dependently
arisen phenomena, it is impossible that he will run back into the
past, thinking: ‘Did I exist in the past? Did I not exist in the past?
What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what
did I become in the past?’ Or that he will run forward into the
future, thinking: ‘Will I exist in the future? Will I not exist in the
future? What will I be in the future? How will I be in the future?
Having been what, what will I become in the future?’ Or that he will
now be inwardly confused about the present thus: ‘Do I exist? Do I not
exist? What am I? How am I? This being—where has it come from, and
where will it go?’


The more I learn about the modern Vipassana movement the more I feel it promotes an incorrect or inadequate view.

The modern Vipassana movement started with the renewal of interest in meditative practices in Burma due to the work of Ledi Sayadaw. It spread to the west many due to contact of many westerners with the teaching of Mahasi sayadaw.

Vipassana movement has many lineages with diverse practices some instructions between lineages even contradicting each other. There may even be elements which contradict the teaching in the Tripitaka and commentaries in some practices. Some may slant towards the commentaries more than others. Some may slant towards the Sutta Pitaka more than the Abhidhamma Pitaka. Some are more orthodox than the other which does no have incorrect or inadequate views.

  But I don't know the movement well so I thought I'd ask what others here think about this increasingly popular approach to the practice.

The onus is with oneself to study and see what confirms to the original teaching, than others pointing it out in an open forum, as there are reasonable following to may of the lineages.

I personally tried with the New Burmese method and Goenka's method and settled for the latter. You can try it out through a course:

http://www.dhamma.org/en/index
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html

If you want to try out some of the other lineages you can try searching for a course or centre through:

http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/

  It seems to discard much of the Buddha's teachings and focus on a quite mundane approach to living ...

Lineages try to justify their practice in terms of the Tripitaka and commentaries. Some slant more towards commentaries than the others. Some more towards the Suttas than the Abhidhamma. Nearly all of them accept the teaching of the Buddha.

Some lineages do have controversial practices which contradict the teachings but still, they nominally accept the teachings and confirms to reasonable parts of the teachings.

  ... that has no metaphysical justification or philosophical significance, ...

The Dhamma has the quality of open invitation for others to come and see and to practice for oneself. Dhamma does not have any mysticism about it.

Also, the Dhamma should be validated through experience than just being philosophical tenents.

  ... bringing some of the benefits of meditative practice without requiring the aspirant to commit to any particular idea of Truth and Reality.

One's knowledge of the Dhamma should be balanced with the meditative experience. So when one starts one does not need to commit to much other than there is something beneficial in the Dhamma.

As one progresses and the understanding deepens, as more theory gets validated by the practice and experience. This way one can progressively deeper truths and realities.


Which place is good for vipassana meditation?

Following have a wide outreach:

http://www.dhamma.org/en/index
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html

So there might be a place near to where you live.

Also you can try: World Buddhist Directory


If there were such a sutta then maybe AN 8.54 would have been a good place to put it. It begins,

As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One,

"We are lay people enjoying sensuality; living crowded with spouses & children; using Kasi fabrics & sandalwood; wearing garlands, scents, & creams; handling gold & silver. May the Blessed One teach the Dhamma for those like us, for our happiness & well-being in this life, for our happiness & well-being in lives to come."

But that sutta only warns against debauchery in sex, drink, gambling, and evil companionship; and against improper or immoderate use of wealth; and not against sensual pleasures per se. Also the warning is that these are "drains on one's store of wealth".
Conversely it also doesn't recommend sensual pursuits as being "qualities that lead to a lay person's happiness and well-being in this life" (instead it recommends good work, good friendship, etc.).

The more famous DN 31 is a little more wide-ranging -- it warns against frequenting "theatrical shows":

"There are, young householder, these six evil consequences in frequenting theatrical shows. He is ever thinking:
(i) where is there dancing?
(ii) where is there singing?
(iii) where is there music?
(iv) where is there recitation?
(v) where is there playing with cymbals?
(vi) where is there pot-blowing?


How should a monk address subjective questions?

Being attached to some rule about how to answer certain questions isn't the point.
Good answers come out of being present and aware.

The same question will be answered differently at different moments depending on what the moment calls for.

"Every possible opportunity" is an interesting phrase. If someone isn't ready to learn something there no opportunity to teach him something. Being a good teacher means to know what someone can learn and then give him that lesson. It's not about throwing a lot of spaghetti on the wall and hoping that something sticks.

Christian missionaries do thing that it's the intention that counts. Christian missionaries will lecture someone whether or not there an opportunity to teach something. For them the act in itself is important.

Buddhism is different. It's about being skillful and only teach when the student can learn. Teaching requires patience and waiting for a possible opportunity.


How much is the minimal time for practicing Vipassana in daily life for achieving better mindfulness?

Geez, ya'll are crazy. 30 minutes?
I'd say WORK up to that maybe after a few months of practice but in the beginning it is best to LIKE MEDITATION and do PRACTICE PROPERLY rather than just loiter around and try to sit tight for 30 minutes thinking about Jane and Bob.

I have had 3-5 minute sessions where you would NOT believe how much baggage I dropped and how refreshed and happy I felt.
And then I've had 30 minute sessions where I came out worse than I went in, because I was obsessing over thoughts instead of taking time to write them out and therapatize myself.

Meditation is NOT the time to therapatize oneself, so make sure not to get stuck in that habit!
If you have 30 minutes, use 20 minutes to understand how to meditate and journal and get rid of your baggage and then 10 minutes to meditate perfectly, dropping all things away and just being mindful of your object (breath, thoughts, or whatever else) the entire time as cohesively as possible. Repeat until you can do that 10 minutes. You will feel an enjoyable buzz and a helpless smile and lightness if you practice correctly.

At my current stage, every session (morning, pre-lunch, evening) I have doing 3 20-minute meditations, each with a different meditation object that I have chosen. I have a 1-5 minute break in between each object.

For beginners I would reccommend 5 to 10 minute sessions. When you ACTUALLY meditate that long... increase it by 5 minutes. When you LONG TO MEDITATE longer, increase. Do not force yourself to sit too long. You will idle.
Instead, put your energies into meditating properly and perfectly for a few minutes. This will increase your mindfulness, because you don't have as much time to fool around."

Nonetheless, don't let what I am saying stop you if you yearn for long periods of time! You will not attain samadhi unless you practice for HOURS at a time. So if you feel like you can actually pay attention that entire time... godspeed!
But above all else, do not scare yourself away from your gradual climb in meditation abilities by making meditation frustrating. Enjoy it and do not underestimate the Power of Less is More.

Let me leave you with this excerpt from a Buddhist book I am reading "Mind Experiment":

  "It is better to meditate often for a shorter time than for a long
  time but infrequently. To make real progress, meditation should become
  a vital part of one’s daily life. Meditation masters recommended to
  their students: “Do it with an aspiration so strong that it will be
  the cause of fulfilling your provisional and final aims. Meditate in
  this way during four sessions: predawn, morning, afternoon, and at
  nightfall. Furthermore, if at first you meditate for a long time, you
  will be readily susceptible to laxity and excitement. If this becomes
  your habit, it will then be difficult to correct your awareness.
  Meditate in many short sessions. If you end your session while still
  wanting to meditate, you will be eager to reenter each future
  session."


What is the fastest way to reach enlightenment?

You're probably thinking of the Bahiya Sutta (Udana 1.10).

Once there was a bark-clad ascetic Bahiya who thought he was enlightened, but a deva told him that he wasn't and asked him to seek out the Buddha for his guidance.

He found the Buddha who gave him a brief instruction, which resulted in his near-immediate enlightenment. Very shortly after that, he was killed in a freak accident. The Buddha said that Bahiya became totally unbound (i.e. enlightened).

What did the Buddha teach him? (translated by Thanissaro)

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

Alternative translation from here (Ireland):

  "Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be
  merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the
  sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely
  what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya.

  "When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the
  cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be
  'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you
  will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then,
  Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two.
  Just this is the end of suffering."

This is a teaching on anatta.

However, this may not work for everyone as it did on Bahiya, because Bahiya apparently was already advanced in attainment. Please see this answer.

For complete beginners, study of the Dhamma (in order to cultivate Right View) and practice of the five precepts and virtue (sila) is recommended. Please see this answer.


Samsara is a continuum of our  individual mind moments.

Dukkha is the deep down feeling that something is missing or wrong that occurs throughout Samsara.


Hungry ghosts and food offerings to the dead

Interesting question...

  What are the hungry ghosts or hungry shades really?

Likely no one can really explain in words so to make you understand unless you reach the 4th Dhyana/Jhana and see them yourselves ;). Because only by reaching 4th Dhyana you can have Rddhi/Iddhi (psychic power) - to see other dimensions. Yet unlikely meditator if do complete the 4th Dhyana will go around proclaiming he/she achieved 4th Jhana! Imagine an Arhat/Arahant going around town telling everybody he achieved Arahant-hood?!

However, some hints from the Sutras/Suttas. Hungry-shades are related to one of the Five Hinderances: Greed. In your quoted Ven. A. L. Dhammadharo's, the summerized characteristic is they can't have the way to consume food even they wanted to.

heads as big as large water jars, but their mouths are just like the eye of a needle: Can't swallow food
Some of them have legs six yards long, but hands only half a foot: Can't reach food or break their bodies
Some of them have lower lips with no upper lips, some of them are missing their lips altogether, with their teeth exposed all the time: Can't eat/chew food

When one contemplate the Hinderance of Greed: Greed is always unsatisfiable, not because of lack, it's the unsatisfiable-ness, wanting more that we called greed, so even there's plenty, to the greed it still means lack, needs more. This unsatifiable-ness backfires caused actualizing their lack-ness: needle mouth, over-short hands, no lips. When this mental state becomes the dominate it will manifest as a physical form that match such mental state. All forms are the manifestation of corresponding consciousness (consciousness is not really an exact term but can't think up better one yet). Animal form is animal consciousness, human form human consciousness. Beware and condemn those Neo-Buddhism followers those have an apetite for twisting the Dharma/Dhamma and fitting it into their self-invented "self-views". If an animal mental state is a self-view of a human how does the existence of animal realm exist in our world? It's ludicrous for those clever men taking a literal term "mental state" treating like a real Buddhist doctrine.

  Could they be microorganisms? Have any Buddhist scholars considered this possibility?

That's very insightful. I would agree partly with this. Yes, as far as I know there is one Chinese Buddhist teacher Nan Hui-chin said so. I would say this realm some take it as also include the microorganisms, or, mcgms are in-between realms of animals and Hungry-shades. I think the realms should not be read as rigid territories. Like we say rainbows have 7 colours, but we know we can't really exactly say that is red, that is orange in the rainbow. The realms are like this too.

  Is offering of food to the dead still practised today?

I think in Asian countries most likely, in occasions, like during Qhingming Festival, but many are cultural traditions, not Buddhist tradition. Monasteries may do this too - but for Hungry-shades, as part of their daily practice of sending merits and blessings to all the sentient beings. In Mahayana Monasteries, they usually also throw 7 grains to the courtyards for the Garudas. Because when the Garuda King converted to the Buddha and promised not to kill, however he mentioned there was a difficulty, for the karmic effect all Garudas must eat Nagas as food, or die. Thus the Buddha promised him from then and to the future his Bhikhus will feed them with the grains, so they wouldn't die even didn't eat Nagas. Just read about this story haven't been bother to find any Sutra/Sutta reference yet, but that's what the monasteries do. Would be interested to know if it also practiced by the Theravada monasteries :).

  Is this a recommended practice or is it not recommended? And why? According to this answer, the Buddha neither rejected nor endorsed the practice.

Personal opinion, I don't think it should be recommended. The Hungry-shades won't be able to consume the food. Unless it's on a specific day or with specific blessing by an accomplished Buddhist/Bhikhus, Bodhisattva or Buddha. If also included the mcgms, it's bad to the hygiene, and mcgms have their way already in natural environment.

  Does the opinion of the different Buddhist schools differ from each other on this?

As far as I study, I think the general principles are same but may vary in practice.


Does breeding dogs fall under right livelihood?

Depends on which system your in. In the Mahayana system, the precepts have an animal liberation theme, i.e. not using animals for anything.

In the Upasaka precepts.

  (15) If an upāsaka who has accepted this precept raises cats or
  foxes, he has committed the sin of negligence. ...
     (16) If an upāsaka who has accepted this precept raises animals,
  such as elephants, horses, cows, goats, camels, or donkeys, and
  refuses to give them away to someone who has not received the
  [upāsaka] precepts, he has committed the sin of negligence. Without
  rising above this impure act, which is conducive to continuing his
  cyclic existence, ... he cannot avoid going down an evil
  life-path.

ref: http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra33c.html

And in the Brahma Net Sutra precepts

  On Harming Sentient Beings

  A disciple of the Buddha must not sell knives, clubs, bows, arrows, other life-taking devices, nor keep altered scales or
  measuring devices.  He should not abuse his governmental position to
  confiscate people's possessions, nor should he, with malice at heart,
  restrain or imprison others or sabotage their success.  (82) In
  addition, he should not raise cats, dogs, foxes, pigs, and other such
  animals.  (83) If he intentionally does such things, he commits a
  secondary offense.

ref: http://www.buddhasutra.com/files/brahmanet.htm

I'm a vegetarian myself, and sympathetic to animal right issues-- the pet trade, zoos, and circuses do involve a certain amount of unneeded suffering and death on the animals parts, but for some people, their dog or cat is the only reason they have any sympathy at all for non-humans. So pets are a sort of unvolunteered diplomats for their species and animals in general.

Anyhow, here is one asian, dog charity I follow- https://www.facebook.com/pages/Duo-Duo-Animal-Welfare-Project-%E5%A4%9A%E5%A4%9A/380841222033262


What Buddhist texts describe the doings of syncretized Hindu deities?

Malalasekera's Dictionary of Pali Proper Names is a great place to find this sort of information; for instance, the entry on Sakka has a whole list of sources for info on the entity, both canonical and commentarial.

On the other hand, I can't think of any other divine beings that have been expropriated in the same way as Indra; in fact I'm not sure expropriation is the proper term, since Indra just means "chief", and so it could just be the Buddha using the Hindu name to describe Sakka.

Edit: Yama shows up in the Devaduta Sutta (MN 130)


The moment your awareness was drawn to the reality of a living being about to experience dukkha dukkhata, the most karma neutral action you could do is to take it away from its apparent predicament and go about finishing your meditation without allowing any after thoughts about this past event.


Why I can't think in anything while I'm meditating

You are not necessarily doing anything wrong. It depends on what kind of meditation you are practicing and what your purpose with the meditation is.

It sounds like you are practicing Samatha Meditation (tranquility meditation) but instead you would like to practice Vipassana Meditation (insight meditation).

In samatha meditation one keeps attention on a single object, e.g. the breath trying to make that object stable. This type of meditation is creating a unification of mind. The goal here is to build deep and powerful states of concentration. When the mind is concentrated, i.e. by only paying attention to one object, other objects disappear. They slowly stop arising. This is only temporarily. This only happens as long as the power of concentration is present. When concentration weakens or when one stops the session and goes up and do other things then slowly the unification wears off and other objects e.g. thoughts and ideas come back into the mind.

When doing samatha meditation one temporarily suspends mental activity. When finishing the session this suspension of mental activity can last for a while afterwards but will eventually stop.

In vipassana meditation one does not keep attention on a single object instead one is giving attention to whatever arises whenever it arises. One has the abdomen as an anchor (mahasi sayadaw tradition) which one comes back to after having observed or noted objects as they arise and fall in the present moment. The anchor is a tool that one uses so that the mind will not get lost and follow after objects.

One is keeping attention on the rising and falling movements of the abdomen. When a thought arises then one shifts attention and watches the thought. One notes it a couple of times saying "thinking, thinking" and then returns to the abdomen. If a feeling or a sound arises then one shifts attention towards these objects and notes "feeling, feeling" or "hearing, hearing". One can also note the feeling more specifically, e.g. if anger arises one notes "angry, angry" or "sad, sad" if sadness arises.

When doing the noting it's important to sent the mind out to the object and not to keep attention on the "mental label". So when noting e.g. pain in the leg one is noting "pain, pain" but ones attention is on the pain in the knee and not on the mental label.

In vipassana meditation one tries to be with the objects as they arise when they arise. The goal is to learn about their true nature, i.e. the 3 signs of existence (impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and the uncontrollable nature). One does not follow after objects. One also does not try to find out where e.g. a thought came from. This is not important. What is important is to see that thought as an object that arise and cease. One does not give special attention to any object at all.

For more information on how to practice this method see Ven. Yuttadhammo's video series called "How To Meditate" or his book "How To Meditate: A Beginner's Guide to Peace".

Hope this helps. If you have any questions to anything i wrote let me know.


Is there a ninth fold to the Eightfold path or is it just eight?

There is the:

8 Fold Path is the practice up to Sotapanna, and
10 Fold Path for full enlightenment

The Noble 8 Fold Path is the practice up to Sotapanna.

Source: Maha Cattarīsaka Sutta intorduction

To go beyond Sotapanna one must add 2 more elements under liberation/release which are:

right knowledge
right freedom

Maha Cattarīsaka Sutta


Has Buddha attained Nirvana after death?

There is no physical signs of that and we can not verify it. Probably only enlightened beings (such as other buddhas) can verify this, so until we are enlightened we can't.

Btw, he also attained Nirvana before his death too. So-called nirvana with remainder.


What is the relationship between dana and tax?

Do you mind an unreferenced answer?

I think the answer is "generally, no"; but that you're asking after any examples, however rare, where the answer has been yes.

Also I guess that gifts of wealth are usually made to an institution e.g. a monastery (as opposed to less-easily-taxable gifts of food and other requisites, given to a monk).

Historically where a country had Muslim conquerors (e.g. India, Afghanistan) there was sometimes a poll tax (a head-tax) on non-Muslims.
There were a few short periods, a thousand years ago or so, where Chinese emperors were troubled by the tax-exempt (and war-exempt) status of Buddhists, and tried to regulate or tax or suppress it
In the Soviet Union under Stalin (e.g. in 1928), they decided that Buddhism (even though atheist) was anti-revolutionary, and taxed monasteries
In Thailand a few years ago there was a proposal to tax monasteries (however I think that was not implemented)
In 1985-1987 Kyoto tried to add a tax to the price of admission tickets which the Buddhist temples sold to tourists


Did Avalokiteśvara, Mañjuśrī, Samantabhadra, and Kṣitigarbha exist before Śākyamuni?

From a canonical perspective, Shakyamuni is one of many Buddhas (i.e. humans who attained satori) and many lived before him, so the answer would be yes.

According to Therevada, each Kalpa has 1.000 Buddhas. Theravada lists some of these as "the named Buddhas":

Vipassī (the 998th Buddha of the vyuhakalpa)
Sikhī (the 999th Buddha of the vyuhakalpa)
Vessabhū (the 1000th and final Buddha of the vyuhakalpa)
Kakusandha (the first Buddha of the bhadrakalpa)
Koṇāgamana (the second Buddha of the bhadrakalpa)
Kassapa (the third Buddha of the bhadrakalpa)
Gautama (the fourth and present Buddha of the bhadrakalpa)

In Mahayana, Amithaba was originally a monk called Dharmakāra in very ancient times (long before Shakyamuni).

From a historical research perspective, the Mahayana deities first appear in scriptures hundreds of years after Gautama's lifetime.


Buddhist ethics & hydroponics: ethical issues?

There is no prohibition for laypeople to involve farming activities. There are some wrong livelihoods for a layperson, but farming is not one of them.
Theravada monks are prohibited from involving in any farming activity.


Is it possible to share merit to all beings like Angels, hungry ghosts, animals etc

Not sure Dhammadhatu's answer is direct answer for this question.
So sharing merit (telling your good merit) to animals doesn't work because they (almost every of animals) do not have any mind to understand good merit and eventually not able to be happy/together with you about your merit. So they will not share the effect of being happy/together of good merit.
Angles (frequently gods in Buddhist literature) may have little chance to know/care about your good merit since their lives are more about consuming the effects of good karma instead of cultivating good karma and sharing merit of others. There might possibility that some lower angels (gods) wandering on earth or living like human among us who can be shared our good merit but it is not so strong effects like on hungry ghosts because it is greatly differ in terms of necessity.


Well in one sense impermanence is ultimately true. In the other sense though it's just a concept, an idea, used to make a point. The objective of the point is to preempt grasping for things as if they were permanent, and the purpose of non-grasping is prevention of suffering. But even prevention of suffering is merely one of many motives that leads a person to enlightenment, other motive for example being perfection or conceit. In this sense everything is just a skillful mean inasmuch as it pushes some people in the right direction.


What would you say about being overly optimistic or overly pessimistic about the ways of approaching the path?

Being overly optimistic creates a turbulent mind, and in this Dhamma path it is important to calm your mind. Overly optimistic may fuel this “optimism bias” and specially in meditation takes you off base. An optimism bias, if its expectations are not met, its absence can signal anxiety or depression, its pessimistic opposite. The Buddhist term for this is Uddhacca-Kukkucca.

Many are the obstacles which block the road to spiritual progress and uddhacca is one such. Uddhacca is a Buddhist term that is translated as "excitement", "restlessness", etc. Here I have to remind you that uddhacca is not the same as what we mean by “restlessness” or “agitation”, used in conventional language. Even when there is pleasant feeling, for example, when we are attached to a quiet place, there is restlessness, uddhacca, which arises together with lobha-mūla-citta. We may think that we are calm at such a moment, but we have actually “mental excitement”. In the Theravada tradition, uddhacca is defined as a mental factor that is characterized by disquietude, like water whipped by the wind. Uddhacca or 'restlessness', belongs to the 10 fetters (samyojana), and to the 5 hindrances (nīvarana). It is one of those 4 mental factors inseparably associated with all unwholesome consciousness. Uddhacca is a close friend to moha (ignorance). Uddhacca spreads and disperses and wanders around. It is said to be like throwing of a stone into a heap of ash. In its presence, citta becomes restless and upset.

The person who develops belief and confidence in Satipatthana will not be in a hurry. Also he will not be lazy. Many people have this indecent hurry. They are in an unnecessary hurry. That is why they try to practice for hours at the beginning itself. Such a person is in an unnecessary haste. That unnecessary haste is due to impatience. One who has trust in Satipatthana or has confidence in it is not in haste. What does he have? Patience. The nature of one who is pleased with Satipatthana, who trusts it, who understands it becomes patient. Patience arises in him. Why does he have patience? Why does patience arise in him? Why is he not in a hurry? Because of confidence. What is his confidence? It is the unflinching confidence in the Triple Gem.


What makes a great a spiritual leader? Is it nature or nurture or something else?

Notwithstanding your (questionable) second premise ... :)

I'll say that not all Tibetans are such sweet souls and you'd be hard pressed to find many that are anywhere near as incomparable as HHDL... but the answer is simple: practice of the Dharma.

His Holiness is a Bodhisattva who has been wholeheartedly practicing according to the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra
 for many, many, many years if not many, many, many lifetimes. What you are seeing is the result of such continued and amazing practice. Consider his Holiness's favorite quote which he repeats constantly during his teachings:

  With a wish to free all beings I shall always go for refuge to the
  Buddha, Dharma and Sangha until I reach full enlightenment.

  Enthused by wisdom and compassion, today in the Buddha’s presence I
  generate the Mind for Full Awakening for the benefit of all sentient
  beings.

  As long as space endures, as long as sentient being remain, until then, may I too remain and dispel the miseries of the world.

If one faithfully practices and generates this Mind of Enlightenment the results will follow. You are just observing the results.


If you read Pali suttas, you will see how Buddha says times and again, that people's opinion about a person is in large degree a reflection of person's virtue.

Basically, human ethics and Buddha-Dharma both stem from the same Reality or Truth of how things work, so naturally there is a large overlap. Things that are considered shameful by society are, for the most part, considered unskilful in Buddhism and vice-versa.

In the example of respect, the quality that is respected in society - such as consistency in applying one's (ethical) principles despite all kinds of distractions and pressure to the contrary, map to the quality of perseverance which is one of the Six Paramitas in Mahayana.

At the same time, since the end-goal of Buddhism differs from the end-goal of lay life, there are instances when the two systems disagree. In one of the (SN or AN) suttas Buddha said, it's easy enough to act skilfully when one gets approved by society, but only a wise person can uphold it when met with misunderstanding and blame. So clearly, Buddha was aware of the occasional conflict and insisted that in such cases the ethics of Dhamma must prevail.

Then, in Mahayana this is further analyzed in terms of the Two Truths: relative vs. absolute. From the perspective of the Absolute Truth, we clearly understand that the values of the relative truth are inherently pointless and purely conventional. So, for example, such a despicable act as cursing in public - is understood to be inherently empty - neither impure, nor pure. The ethical value of sounds is assigned entirely based on social convention. The sounds themselves are just that, sounds - and what may be offensive in one country could be a greeting in another.

Then again, from the perspective of the Relative Truth, our actions have real, objective effects. If someone is actually offended at our cursing, it is kinda pointless to argue whether the sounds have inherent meaning or not. The truth of the matter is, if you know that your acts will have certain effects, should you heed that or not? The answer is yes, of course.

Finally, from the perspective of the Unity of Two Truths, which is said to be the perspective of the enlightened mind, the conventional valuations existing on the relative level are understood to have grown from, or to have roots in, the Absolute Ground of All, so in that sense they are like shadows or echos of the truth, they are like reflections of The Law in pieces of broken mirror, not entirely valid, but not completely false either.

So, for example, respect in general, however conditional and superficial it may be, and regardless of the individual judgements made in all fairness or not, is still a reflection of something real that has an intrinsic value - the consistency of virtue, which is a reflection of the fundamental steadfastness and orderliness of Dharma ("Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands".)

In Tibetan Buddhism, especially in its most ancient Nyingma tradition, there is this deep respect for the wandering yogis famous for their complete and openly demonstrated disrespect for the social norms. In East Tibetan folklore there are numerous anecdotes about such yogis e.g. pissing in public and performing many other regrettable acts. The traditional moral of the stories is, the enlightened mind does not worry about the social morals, what it cares about is helping others progress on the Path, which is considered the higher virtue overriding the social norms.

At the same time, the fully enlightened mind of the Buddha is expected to be so infinitely skilfull, that its every single act is supposed to look valid and admirable from every possible point of view! Think about it, how cool is that? There may be infinitely many perspective on things in the universe and somehow Buddha is supposed to look perfect from every one of them. It's up to you to decide for yourself, whether you take this literally or as a didactic figure of speech, but the moral of the story for me is, the wiser and the more skilful we get, the less disagreement we generate with our acts - which kinda makes sense.

As for the ego question, of course Pride (in the sense of Conceit) arising from respect, and Self-Beating arising from Loss of Respect, are not the most healthy qualities of mind, according to Buddhism. Technically, both come from an idea of Self being valued high or low in the others' eyes, therefore from the ego. Not surprisingly then, learning to let go of the deeply ingrained attachment to saving one's "face" and the panical fear of being disgraced has traditionally been a big part of Mahayana's teacher/student relationship. At the same time, on the lower levels of virtue, Pride and Self-Beating could be useful motivators stirring the sentient being towards a better path, so in this sense they can be useful to a certain degree. Check out "hiri and ottappa" for the traditional take on this.

So, to summarise this overly long answer, the social conventions such as Respect and Shame are inherently empty, partially valid and useful on the relative level, ultimately to be transcended for oneself on the path to liberation, can sometimes be overridden by the higher-level Dharmic concerns, but are nevertheless never neglected even by the fully enlightened Buddhas because of their effects on the unenlightened minds.


Buddhist view on past lives influencing the present

Your question is not about whether past life actions influence present life circumstances. For that, see this answer and this sutta.

Rather, you are asking if your past life thoughts, affect your present life thoughts (or thought choices).

In a single lifetime, the answer is yes according to Dvedhavitakka Sutta.

  "Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that
  becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing
  thinking imbued with sensuality, abandoning thinking imbued with
  renunciation, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with
  sensuality.

But does this cross into other lifetimes?

From the Nakhasikha Sutta, Samudda Sutta and Pokkharani Sutta:

  "In the same way, monks, for a disciple of the noble ones who is
  consummate in view, an individual who has broken through [to
  stream-entry], the suffering & stress that is totally ended &
  extinguished is far greater. That which remains in the state of having
  at most seven remaining lifetimes is next to nothing: it's not a
  hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred-thousandth, when compared with
  the previous mass of suffering. That's how great the benefit is of
  breaking through to the Dhamma, monks. That's how great the benefit is
  of obtaining the Dhamma eye."

When one obtains the Dhamma eye, and attains stream-entry, he would only have at most, seven remaining lifetimes. The Dhamma eye is explained as the ability to see firsthand and experientially, the impermanence of the five aggregates and dependent origination.

This is obviously an example in the Pali Canon that at least some thoughts or knowledge could cross over into the next life. In this case, it is the strong and irrevocable inclination towards the Dhamma in future lives, due to the opening of the Dhamma eye.

Also see this question and this answer.

Some say that child prodigies bring with them the strong inclinations of the immediate previous life, but I think that cannot be found in the scripture, and the Buddha would not bother to answer this (parable of the poisoned arrow, parable of the simsapa leaves, etc.).


What is the difference between knowledge and wisdom?

Knowledge is conceptual, it is information, opinions and views read from books or spoken by others, whereas wisdom is the truth within the experience. Experience can not be conceptualized,  for example....try to explain what water is, then go drink some water or stand in the rain, the conceptualization and the experience are completely different, this is the difference between knowledge and wisdom!!
I hope this has helped.
Metta.

"For things to reveal themselves to us, we need to be ready to abandon our views about them."

~ Thich Nhat Hanh


How to disambiguate between various meditation practices?

I agree with Dhammadhatu in that the different meditations seem confusing when you don't know what it is all about.

When you know the underlying principle, you know how these different meditations actually approach same thing from slightly different angle, and you see how they try to explain something that is hard to explain in words, and emphasize what they think are the most important points of that.

And I'm telling you right here and now, what this principle is. It is about dukkha, origination of dukkha, cessation of dukkha, and path leading gradually to cessation of dukkha. I know this sounds so standard and abstract as to almost make no sense, but I swear this is what it is about.

In our life with our every choice and every action we either generate more dukkha (either right now, or increase its odd in our future) or we ... well ... we simply don't create it, or at least reduce the odds of it happening.

This is what all types of Buddhist meditation about, all of them, without exception. They all are various ways to just... Well... They are all exercises at not creating dukkha. Some are more direct and some roundabout. Some more straightforward and some more implicit. But they are all about same thing, essentially. Not creating dukkha.

And how is dukkha created? Whenever in your mind there's craving for things to be other than they are, or in other words there's conflict between "is" and "should", or in other words there's discord - then there is dukkha. And correspondingly when there is no craving, no conflict, no discord - there's no dukkha. And then there's coarse craving, coarse conflict, coarse discord, coarse dukkha -- and various degrees of more subtle craving, subtle conflict, subtle discord.

So meditation is about somehow solving this problem. Removing craving, conflict, discord. Naturally, there are different ways to approach this. Some do it gradually. Some try to do all at once. Some use more force, some are more gentle.

Usually, there is understanding that craving for things to be other than they are, conflict between "is" and "should", and discord - are implicit in our frame of reference, in our evaluation, in our perspective. So most meditations involve some sort of technique that conditions (or unconditions) one's perspective, in order to change the basis for evaluation. Other techniques try to remove all evaluation altogether. In any way, it's all about dukkha and cessation of dukkha.

If you think about it, not all methods are appropriate for all situations. If dukkha is generated by more coarse conflict, then cruder methods work better. If dukkha is generated by subtle inner discord, then very tricky techniques are required. Since most practitioners make progress starting from coarser and then to more subtle, it makes sense that different techniques are appropriate depending on where you are on your individual ladder.

However, many meditation methods are not aware of where they fall. They are often taught in isolation of the broader context, so people don't know what they are doing and why. This is a problem.

If you understand the big picture, you can just sit down and practice. You don't need lenghthy explanations. You don't need to study all these different methods. You can just sit and watch your mind, and try to figure out the problem of dukkha all by yourself. It actually works better that way.

Just sit down and watch:  here is dukkha, this is how it feels, this is how it looks, this thing, this thought, this mindstate has an element of dukkha, and I can see it very clearly.

Then sit and try to see, this is how this dukkha originates, this is the craving for things to be different than they are that it comes from. This is the conflict between "is" and "should" that it comes from. This is discord that it comes from.

Then sit and try to do it. Here's when I let go of this craving for things to be different than they are, this dukkha no longer originates. Here's, when I reconcile the conflict between "is" and "should", here's when I remove inner discord, the dukkha ceases to arise.

Then this particular dukkha is gone, but something is still bothering us, and so we go on to the next iteration. This bothering is a piece of dukkha. I can see it very clearly.

And so on, all the way to Nirvana. It's kind of simple when you get what it is all about.

All meditations in your list, essentially do the same thing, except they don't explain it step by step like I did, instead they just say, "here is exactly how to stop dukkha: watch your breath, and if anything, including dukkha, comes up, come back to breath" (Anapana) or they would say "just label everything that comes up, without judging" (Vipassana) or they will say "just sit. there's no need to change anything, just sit" (Zazen), or they would say "sit and believe that you are a Buddhist deity, and learn to really feel it" (tantric), or they will say "sit and try to love everyone and everything (metta)", or they will say "sit and do nothing until you get lost in thought, then read mantra and come back to doing nothing" (transcendental), or they will say "walk and pay attention to every tiny detail of your walking muscles" and so on and so forth. But now you get it - all of these are just their tricks to stop making dukkha. When you know what it is about, you don't have to blindly follow any of that. You can sit down and practice your own real Buddhist meditation, in accordance with Noble Truths.


Of course you can! If you want to be free of something, get rid of the cause of it. The cause of becoming is attachment. The cause of attachment is craving. Work on getting rid of the craving to end all suffering.


Lucid Dreaming and The Dream Journal.

A Dream Journal is actually quite simple to use.

First of all you need some material, i.e. Dreams.

After weeks or months, depending on your dream activity and the ability to remember your dreams, you should have sufficient material to begin analyzing your dream-material.

Next step is to look for patterns. All people have different patterns that occur in the majority of their dreams. One pattern could be "action". Some people have dreams that are action-packed and very vivid. Others have dreams that are very realistic, while others have dreams that are no near realistic. Each have their own dream-pattern.

You want to find these patterns through studying your dreams. Get to know these patterns as your own back pocket. In time and with practice, these patterns will become lucid-dream-triggers. When you know them very well and they occur in a dream of yours, you will realize them and become aware/lucid in the dream.

That step might take a while so don't become discouraged at first. Every morning when you wake up, write down as much as you remember from your dreams. Have a pen and a journal at your bed table or close by. When you wake up, dont move. Stay frozen for some minutes and lie with closed eyes. That will make it easier for you to remember more details from your dreams.

The great thing about this is that the more you write down, the more details you can remember from your dreams. Soon you will remember 2 dreams, then 3, then 4-5 or 7 dreams when you wake up in the morning. When you have enough material, then begin analyzing.

Do yourself a favor and have at least some weeks of material. That will make it easier to find patterns the dreams. When you find patterns, write them down separately and get to know them. They will be unique, just like a fingerprint.

Lucid Dreaming and the relation to Buddhist Practice.

How can this then be used in Buddhist practice?

In Theravada Buddhism, one can use the dream-state to deepen ones practice.

If one is practicing the WILD technique (see also Tibetan Methods), i.e. entering the dream-state from waking-state, one can continously observe conditioned phenomena as they arise and pass away. Why is that important?

Because the stages before falling asleep, exactly mirrors the stages of dying. There is the possibility to gain some deep insights here. Also to sneak-preview and prepare for the moment of Death. Meditating while going from waking-state into the dream-state gives the opportunity to continue to practice even while the body sleeps.

Let me end with a quote from Tibetan Buddhism, by Shugchang.

  "In order to make the time we spend dreaming more meaningful, we must first recognize that we are dreaming. That is the initial exercise. The next step is called transforming the dream; the third is known as multiplying. The fourth practice is to unify the dream with the clear light. Recognizing, transforming, multiplying and unifying the dream with the luminosity of the true nature; these four outline the essential applications of dream yoga."


What is meant by Namu Amida Butsu and also Nam-myoho-renge-kyo?

My answer is from the Shin perspective, I'll let someone else answer for Nichiren. Indeed you're right in saying that there are "two" meanings of Namu-Amida-Butsu - and that for the person of faith, it has a special meaning. However, in Shin, Namu-Amida-Butsu is not a mantra. It is understood within an entirely different framework from that of Esoteric mantras. For a person without the mind of faith (jp.: shinjin), "Namu-Amida-Butsu" is an effort of calling to Amida for salvation. As you probably already know, the Original Vow of Amida is that people who will sincerely and joyfully entrust themselves to Amida and call upon his Name, they will be saved and will be reborn into the Pure Land. So for a person without shinjin (which means having no doubt whatsoever about Amida's Vow), "Namu-Amida-Butsu" might still be a practice like others in Buddhism, an effort of self-power. For such a person, calling Namu-Amida-Butsu is a willingness to rely on the Other-Power of Amida (on his practice of saving sentient beings). But from the perspective of a person of shinjin, a true person of faith, chanting or reciting "Namu-Amida-Butsu" thinking that this is what will get you to the Pure Land is still caught within the logic of calculating mind, calculating merit ("the more you say it, the more chance you will have to be reborn in the Pure Land"). This mind that "does religious deeds" is the very mind of self-attachment! For a person of shinjin - for Shinran - this logic has to be absolutely abandoned. "Namu-Amida-Butsu" is then understood entirely differently: not as something we do, not as our own practice, but as an embodiment of Amida's practice. Another way to put it, once one totally abandons the idea that it's possible to "save yourself" through enough effort, one totally relies on Other-Power and so there is nothing to practice anymore on our part. There's just an absolute passivity of "deep listening to the Dharma". One realizes that Amida already accomplished all practices so there's nothing to do on our part except to listen to this truth and to rely on it fully. This reliance is true faith, the diamondlike mind, and "Namu-Amida-Butsu" is just the verbal expression thereof. It's the "linguistic embodiment" of our already-having-been-saved by Amida. One is then only a witness of this salvation event, not someone who is practicing to achieve one's own salvation. To practice anything after the salvation-event is to not understand that event. Practising anything after having been saved by Amida would be like looking for a job after you've already won $10 million in the lottery, to give a mundane example.

I realize I didn't do a good job at explaining this here ... it's hard to do it in this format, but I hope that at least it became clear that the Pure Land Way of Master Shinran has nothing to do with Esoteric Buddhism or Mantrayana / the Way of Mantras. It's a wholly different paradigm.


What are the benefits of caring parents?

The Buddha says that there are two people that you can never repay, no matter what you do. They are your mother and your father. Again the Buddha said that there is one way that you can repay for all what they have done.  That is to establish them in this Dhamma Path. It is not an easy task, as we are all full of defilements that muddy the waters and prevent us from seeing this path. So if they’re stingy for example, then you can try to find some way to influence them to be more generous.  If they are not the type to observe the five precepts, then you could try to get them to be more virtuous, to have more principles in their lives. You can gain merits that will help pave the way to your own Dhamma path, if you could help introduce your parents to the practice of Dhamma. Try to do it in as diplomatic a way as possible. Most parents resent their children who try to tell them what is right or wrong.  That is why you will have to find some means of doing this in an indirect way. If they are not into Dhamma, try not to say that this is a Buddhist thing. That is how SN Goenka thought Vipassana Meditation to the Westerners. Only later that they get to know that this is the Noble Eightfold Path that their Master is leading them to.


As a lay follower how to deal with uncontrollable sexual urges?

Stuck on the horny of a dilemma? Want to get rid of it?

The Root of All Things (Mūlapariyāya Sutta MN 1)
But he doesn’t conceive extinguishment, he doesn’t conceive regarding extinguishment, he doesn’t conceive as extinguishment, he doesn’t conceive that ‘extinguishment is mine’, he doesn’t take pleasure in extinguishment. Why is that? Because he has understood that relishing is the root of suffering,

There are indeed simple things that can be done. From "I am horny", simply acknowledge "there is horniness". Unhook the self. There is horniness breathing in. There is horniness breathing out. There is a fly in the room breathing in. There is a fly in the room breathing out. There is breathing in long. There is breathing in short. There is cutting vegetables breathing in long. There is cutting vegetables breathing out long. Etc.
In the modern world with dayglow sexuality in all visible forms around you on the internet or even walking down the street seeing exciting attire or cut bodies, there is a constant stream of distraction. Seeking and abiding in solitude can provide relief. You will need time to deal with each explosion of craving. Exposing yourself to constant stimulus is counterproductive. Look down. Look aside. "No, thank you."
As you relinquish the craving, note that there is also danger in relishing the fight against horniness (hence quote above). As Ajahn Chah might have said. "Can you endure?"
Note: While sleeping, if the sperm is released during a dream, no fault is being committed. Just observe and let go.


Doing good deeds is very beneficial because our moral character is changeable. When we do good deeds, our moral character improves. When we do bad deeds, our character worsens.

However, according to the Buddha's teaching of dependent origination, the ultimate cause of all our negative qualities is much deeper than that. This underlying root cause is ignorance, so the only way to permanently change is to overcome ignorance. To do good deeds without overcoming ignorance is very good, but it isn't enough to become enlightened.

To overcome ignorance, one must develop wisdom by developing insight into the nature of reality. Once this wisdom is attained and brought to perfection, the ignorance that is the underlying cause of all suffering is brought to an end.


Suggestions for when practice has plateaued

What do you mean your practice has plateaued?! Are you perfect? Don't you have day-to-day challenges?

Practice is not just meditation. Your "personal issues" are practice too. See if you can trace your personal issues to improvement opportunities. Take responsibility. Stalk your ego patterns. Reconcile with "enemies". Break through your fears, stereotypes, projections. Life is an endless source of practice opportunities, day after day after day. If you are serious about this, you'll never get bored!

Yes, sometimes we plateau when we solve one set of problems, and wallow around for a while until we can grasp the pattern in our behavior / situations that then can be traced the next set of problems. As Buddho said, this is perfectly normal - as long as you are aware that you are in between jobs.

Take a rest, open your eyes and look around. The pathways to next levels are hiding among the obvious, long used to, unquestioned pains.


How can I explain soullessness to other one?

Both soul exists and soul does not exist are extreme view:

  Ananda, if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of eternalism [the view that there is an eternal, unchanging soul]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, that would be conforming with those brahmans & contemplatives who are exponents of annihilationism [the view that death is the annihilation of consciousness]. If I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is a self — were to answer that there is a self, would that be in keeping with the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?

Ananda Sutta

Simply there is nothing worthy of identifying as self, because you are not in control, whatever you identify as self are not entirely pleasant.