What does mass donation of the Dhamma mean?

Here are a couple of lines of Pali (the first two lines of the verse at the end of the sutta):

“Yo dhammayāgaṃ ayajī amaccharī,
Tathāgato sabbabhūtānukampī ;

Here are the same lines from the translation quoted in the question:

He who, unstinting,
made the mass-donation of Dhamma,

Here are the same lines from another translation:

The Tathāgata has made the Dhamma-offering,
Unselfish, compassionate towards all beings;

Looking at the Pali, I think it's saying:

dhammayāgaṃ -- gift of dhamma
ayajī -- something to do with offering or sacrifice?
amaccharī -- without being a miser
Tathāgato -- the Tathagata

That just leaves sabbabhūtānukampī to translate.

I think that sabba means "all" or something like that ... that must be where the "mass" translation is coming from

And bhūtā means something like "a being".

And kampī, I'm not sure, maybe perhaps being "still" or "not trembling" ... or maybe the second translation above suggests that this bit somehow means "compassionate"

Anyway, the Pali suggests to me that the "all" there is associated with the "beings" (i.e. "to all beings") -- and that agrees with the second English translation that I quoted.
So I thik that what's translated as "mass-donation" in the first translation means "donation to all" ... i.e. that the Tathagata gave the dhamma to all beings.
But maybe the sutta (both the Pali and the second translation) is really saying, more literally ...

making the dhamma-offering unselfishly
the Tathagata (and something: compassionate, maybe) to all beings

... i.e. maybe the offering-of-dhamma wasn't "to all" ... and instead only the kampī (i.e. the stillness or compassion or whatever that means) was "to all beings" ... maybe the text could be read either way. This latter way might be more compatible with other suttas: e.g. he was teaching "those with little dust in their eyes" and so on, rather than everyone.

I don't understand though why the word "mass" also appears in previous lines of the translation you're using (because "sabb..." doesn't appear there, in the Pali: it's only in the verse).
Maybe this is the clearer or more straightforward, more literal translation:

The Dhamma-offering

This was said by the Lord…
“Bhikkhus, I am a brahmin, ever accessible to entreaties, open-handed, one bearing his last body, an unsurpassed physician and surgeon. You are my own legitimate sons, born from my mouth, born of Dhamma, fashioned by Dhamma, heirs of Dhamma, not heirs of material things.
“Bhikkhus, there are these two kinds of giving: the giving of material things and the giving of the Dhamma. Of these two kinds of giving, this is the foremost, namely, the giving of the Dhamma. There are these two kinds of sharing … these two kinds of help … these two kinds of offerings: the offering of material things and the offering of the Dhamma. Of these two kinds of offering, this is the foremost, namely, the offering of the Dhamma.”
The Tathāgata has made the Dhamma-offering,
Unselfish, compassionate towards all beings;
Living beings revere such a one,
Gone beyond being, as chief of devas and humans.


Automatic body scanning? What is happening here?

This automatic body scanning that you mentioned is your ego playing games with you. During meditation, your Self or ego is becoming weaker and weaker. When the ego sees he is dying, ego will do everything to not die. You could hear sounds, vibrations, gain supernatural powers, travel to distant galaxies, predict the future, read minds, gain magical powers, fly through walls, visit astral planes, talk with devas, have out of body experiences, etc.

Ego wants you to cling onto something. Ego wants you to crave. That's why he gives you weird experiences. If you show fear to such experiences, ego will give you experiences that you'll be afraid off. If you show attachment to such experiences, ego will give you experiences that you'll be attached to.

The important thing is not to get attached to these experiences and get beyond them. Don't worry, if the experience arises, just go with it, enjoy, relax, have fun and don't intellectualize. The most important thing: never, ever be afraid. If a bad experience arises, smile, don't worry, just go with it, enjoy, relax, have fun and don't intellectualize.

The closer you will be to liberation, the less such experiences will arise.


Suzuki stresses in Zen Mind Beginner's Mind the importance of not having any gaining idea when practising zazen. Remember: the goal of Buddhism is not to attain enlightenment but to end suffering. Of course you cannot end suffering in any absolute sense but you must try. I think you might be worrying too hard about achieving something. Where is this enlightenment I seek?

This is attachment.

The ending of suffering (of you, me, the world etc.) doesn't depend on you attaining enlightenment but on the ending of suffering. We meditate to see and to understand. Right understanding leads to right speech and action. But really you don't need to understand. This is why traditional lay practise is based on the five precepts relating to speech and action. This is why you have apparently unintelligent people who are good at their jobs and apparently intelligent people who don't even have jobs.

But really you don't need to attain/obtain anything. Everything is temporal and comes into existence and goes out of existence in time. A thing has a beginning and an end. Depending then on any thing can only make you unhappy because by its nature it won't last.

A dog is made up of atoms. The word dog is made up of the three letters d-o-g, one sound from the larynx (vowel) and two sounds from restricting the sound via the mouth (consonants) at the beginning and the end. The word dog has entered the French language as "dogue" (mastiff). A physical dog will die. The idea of a dog will last longer but will still eventually die. Bears and dogs share a common ancestor. Once there were no dogs.

Everything changes. You cannot depend on the temporal.

And yet you have to.

You have to eat food and breathe air to provide that collection of attached particles you call "you" with energy so it can continue to hold together.

You need some attachments. To live is to suffer.

What can you do then?

Well, fewer constraints is better than more constraints. Freer is better than not free at all.

How do you find freedom?

Through choices.

How do you get choices?

Through being a source of something that others want/need. If you reduce their suffering they will be drawn to you. The more you are in demand, the more you will have choices. In such a scenario you are free to engage (bind/tie) or not to engage. They are happier because you have decreased their suffering. You are happier because you are freer.

Anyway, it all ends in tears so I wouldn't worry too much. Give the world what it is happier for having and take care of yourself. Don't worry about attaining enlightenment. Don't worry about correct meditation, just keep going and focus on ending suffering.


There are two types of nirvana: saupādisesa-nibbāna (nirvana with remainder) and anupādisesa-nibbāna (nirvana without remainder) (Iti. 44).

It is true that for one who has attained anupādisesa-nibbāna there will be no more consciousness. This is because someone who has attained anupādisesa-nibbāna is dead*. It is the equivalent to the more familiar parinibbāna - "complete" nirvāna. For one who has attained saupādisesa-nibbāna, there is still the physical and mental formations that have been created as a result of being born as a human that need to work themselves out, including consciousness.

* Conventionally speaking; technically, they have become free from death, since they have become free from birth (arising).


"Rāhulajāto, bandhanam jātam"   the word rāhula meaning bond

(Source: http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/r/raahula.htm)

edit: see comments below


In the Dhammapada 153-154, we find the Buddha exclaiming:

  Through the round of many births I roamed
  without reward,
  without rest,
  seeking the house-builder.
  Painful is birth
  again & again.

  House-builder, you're seen!
  You will not build a house again.
  All your rafters broken,
  the ridge pole dismantled,
  immersed in dismantling, the mind
  has attained to the end of craving.

The commentary on these verses by Ven. Thanissaro states:

  DhpA: These verses were the Buddha's first utterance after his full
  Awakening. For some reason, they are not reported in any of the other
  canonical accounts of the events following on the Awakening.

  DhpA: "House" = selfhood; house-builder = craving. "House" may also
  refer to the nine abodes of beings — the seven stations of
  consciousness and two spheres (see Khp 4 and DN 15).

  The word anibbisam in 153 can be read either as the negative gerund of
  nibbisati ("earning, gaining a reward") or as the negative gerund of
  nivisati, altered to fit the meter, meaning "coming to a rest,
  settled, situated." Both readings make sense in the context of the
  verse, so the word is probably intended to have a double meaning:
  without reward, without rest.

The commentary by Acharya Buddharakkhita states:

  According to the commentary, these verses are the Buddha's "Song of
  Victory," his first utterance after his Enlightenment. The house is
  individualized existence in samsara, the house-builder craving, the
  rafters the passions and the ridge-pole ignorance.

I interpret this as saying that the self ("house") is deconstructed at death, but reconstructed again in the following birth, due to craving ("house-builder"), according to dependent origination.

So, the answer to your question would be "yes, it ends, but then it arises again".

Apparently, this question was asked with the skeptical view on whether rebirth truly exists or not.

I think this reference from the DN2 should lay our doubts to rest:

  "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
  free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
  imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the
  recollection of past lives (lit: previous homes). He recollects his
  manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four,
  five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand,
  one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of
  cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion,
  [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had
  such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure
  and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I
  re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan,
  had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of
  pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that
  state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in
  their modes and details. Just as if a man were to go from his home
  village to another village, and then from that village to yet another
  village, and then from that village back to his home village. The
  thought would occur to him, 'I went from my home village to that
  village over there. There I stood in such a way, sat in such a way,
  talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that
  village I went to that village over there, and there I stood in such a
  way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in
  such a way. From that village I came back home.' In the same way —
  with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
  free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
  imperturbability — the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of
  the recollection of past lives. He recollects his manifold past
  lives... in their modes and details.


Right livelihood with modern (potentially dangerous) products

Buddhism is not about following set rules. Monks have 227 rules &, if you have ever lived with monks, you will notice certain monks trying to find loop holes to circumvent the rules (rather than live according to the spirit, purpose & essence of the rules).

The matter of right liveihood is something you must decide for yourself according to your spiritual conscience. While the scriptures list 5 kinds of wrong livelihood (trading in weapons, human beings, meat, intoxicants & poisons), there are many other jobs you may chose not to do due to their lack of ethicalness. If you personally find fault in GM foods, best you not work in that industry.


How to avoid subtle biases and inclinations to influence phenomena when doing vipassana?

Find out the difference between what are concepts and what is.

Follow the sensation of the breath not the idea of the breath.

Follow the sensation of the feet as they move exactly in the present moment and don't follow the idea of the feet.

Notice thoughts as they happen or as they are remembered but don't make an effort to notice or not notice the content of the thoughts.

Notice what mental content is being reacted to, notice intentions.

When you merely witness what is in attention and realize that it is what it is then there cannot be any bias in that moment. Bias comes with consepts.


What happens to one in a locked in syndrome?

Death, in the realm of humans and Devas (for them), where Dhamma can be understood, is defined with "break up of the body", so a "unconscious" human being should not be regarded as no more living as long the body "works", ages.

"And what is aging and death, what is the origin of aging and death, what is the cessation of aging and death, what is the way leading to the cessation of aging and death? The aging of beings in the various orders of beings, their old age, brokenness of teeth, grayness of hair, wrinkling of skin, decline of life, weakness of faculties — this is called aging. The passing of beings out of the various orders of beings, their passing away, dissolution, disappearance, dying, completion of time, dissolution of the aggregates, laying down of the body — this is called death. So this aging and this death are what is called aging and death. With the arising of birth there is the arising of aging and death. With the cessation of birth there is the cessation of aging and death. The way leading to the cessation of aging and death is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration.

"When a noble disciple has thus understood aging and death, the origin of aging and death, the cessation of aging and death, and the way leading to the cessation of aging and death... he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma."

There is the state of (trans.asaññasatta) "Unconscious" - being, a realm of existence not desired and maybe therfore not much talk about.
How ever, even if "really" in an asañña state (lit. "No rememberance, no perception"), there are still the mental factors, consiting with form/object a living being (satta), of cause very subtle [Sadhu for giving the right spelling of this word, N. Chris].
So this asañña state might fit to you question.
There is also, what is called, "caught in concentration" in meditation, one might know such "unconscious" states, often called "daydreaming", when the mind is firm on a mind object concentrated (possible the arupa-realms of existence.
One in such a state is not easy to get to mind again, like "paralyzed", similar maybe with shock.
It's reported that Samadhi sessions can last for extreme long time, of course it has it's limits in regard of physical nurishment, but obiviously, the mind can nurish it self, for a long time, without much external imput. (see the four kinds of nurishment).
It's not so easy to say if this states might be in the sphere of asañña or actually arupa states, which might also explain the attentive discussion under the question, assuming two different phenomenas.
Of cause, in a very materialistic world of thoughts, the "mindless" states of beings will increase, either as general "ignorance" or such as the "medical" recognised phenomenas.
A modern wrong view, present in that what is called "secular Buddhism", is the case, the Buddha told, "when a asaññasatta falls out of its existence and gains a human life, this and that "materialistic" views are hold.

"There are, bhikkhus, certain gods called 'non-percipient beings.' When perception arises in them, those gods pass away from that plane. Now, bhikkhus, this comes to pass, that a certain being, after passing away from that plane, takes rebirth in this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from home to homelessness. When he has gone forth, by means of ardor, endeavor, application, diligence, and right reflection, he attains to such a degree of mental concentration that with his mind thus concentrated he recollects the arising of perception, but nothing previous to that. He speaks thus: 'The self and the world originate fortuitously. What is the reason? Because previously I did not exist, but now I am. Not having been, I sprang into being.'
Brahmajāla Sutta: The All-embracing Net of Views

So generally this phenomena, in all it's small and larger appearances, not at least by such so guided practice and teachings, will increase. And (provoking), where should all the trees have gone to in this days :-)
Such as classical taught Zen-ways in modern times, put away of all thinking, is a good chance to reach the asanna states by zazen. Not being aware of anything, one might believe "coming and going, from and to emptiness"

Brahma Realm of Perceptionless Beings (Asañña-Satta Brahma-Loka), kindly given by Bhante Paññobhāsa.
--This  Realm presumably is the destination of contemplatives who gain 4th jhāna without any corresponding insight; it is a kind of heavenly dead end. The beings here are virtually unconscious, and remain motionless like statues for many billions of years. After approximately 500 world cycles (the same lifespan as in Realm 21) a thought finally arises in their mind, and they immediately vanish from this strange Heaven and reappear somewhere else. Aside from the fact that they gain no benefit from this, there is the philosophical question of whether Perceptionless  Brahmas are really there at all, as of course they are completely oblivious to their environment, and would experience absolutely no passage of time while in this non-state. They would seem to be inanimate  objects, or at best comatose bodies. At any rate, this is an example of  a high Heaven Realm that is not all that great of a place to go to—skillful meditators may as well avoid it.

Might it help in the desire to get an releasing answer: leading to disenchantment in regard of conditioned things and issues not leading to the unconditioned, by seeing the dangers in this world.
Practical, to prevent from such existences, approaching the wise, and ask
'What is skillful, venerable sir? What is unskillful? What is blameworthy? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What, having been done by me, will be for my long-term harm & suffering? Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?'
...makes one being not so much in danger of unbenefical states to gain and then just taken on this, act-ually walk for beyound.
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial use or other lower wordily gains by ways of exchange or trade]


Did Buddha ever say that educated people would be a problem?

It's important to read the full context of what that teacher said. Also, if someone simply says: "The Buddha said this or that", then that's not good enough. He'll need to provide backup sutras/suttas references. For example, in the suttas education is very important:

"Friend, the Blessed One has described you as being endowed with seven amazing, astounding qualities. Which seven? 'Hatthaka of Alavi is endowed with conviction. He is virtuous. He has a sense of conscience. He has a sense of concern. He is learned. He is generous. He is discerning.' Friend, the Blessed One has described you as being endowed with these seven amazing, astounding qualities." ~ AN 8.23 ~
"Even so, he who is experienced and has a well-trained mind, who is learned and dependable, 2 clearly knowing, he can help others to understand who are willing to listen and ready to receive" ~ Sn 2.8 ~


Is it possible to destroy the rupa heavens?

There should be an observer experience any plane of existence. Once the observer is no more, in a relative sense they cease to exist.

All these are experienced through consciousness. When consciousness cease to exist so does all the places of existence.


What number Jataka tale does this story come from?

The closest I have found is about a quail who put out a fire though determination. This is VAṬṬAKA-JĀTAKA (35). Perhaps there might be another Jataka about the parrot but I am not sure if it fits the description. You can perhaps read more about other Jataka tales from The Jataka tr. by Robert Chalmers.

What the author of this had to say:

  This is part of Rafe Martin, Sensei's teisho on "The Brave Little Parrot" jataka. It is from his forthcoming book on Zen Buddhist practice and the jatakas, to be published by Wisdom Publications 2016.

  The text for the Brave Little Parrot Jataka remains elusive. It exists as a few stirring lines of verse in the brief Jatakastava “Verses in Praise of the Buddha’s Former Lives,” a short Sythian-Khotanese work composed just prior to 1,000 AD, discovered in the cache of texts found in the Buddhist cave grottoes of Dun-Huang, China, in 1907. It does not appear in either the Pali Jataka or the Sanskrit Jatakamala, though Jataka No. 35 in the Pali collection of 547, about a quail who stops a forest fire with an act of truth, is seen as a variant. An original may exist as a carving at the great Buddhist monument of Borobodur, as well as a painting at the Ajanta caves. Whether as text or visual art, the ending of the story is different than that of our version. In the original the god, moved by the parrot’s heroism, squeezes a cloud causing rain to fall. I created the god’s tears more than forty years ago when I began telling the tale. The colors of the parrot’s feathers aren’t mentioned either. Are they gray? Multi-colored? Never mind. The point is that deeds make us who we are. Beautiful, which means selfless deeds, make us beautiful. There is truth greater than fact. Myth reveals what never was, but always is. While fact recounts what happens in one time, in one place, myth (ideally) reveals the archetype, i.e., what happens in all times, all places. Literalists adhering to the facts can still create a truncated story.

  It was my decision to make the Parrot female. Is she so in the original? No, he is not. Does that make our version untrue? Stories must find their relevance to every generation or they wither and fade. The feminine is reawakening. The jatakas are often though not exclusively, patriarchal. There are wise women, enlightened nuns, and true wives and queens throughout the tales. But rarely (if ever), does the Buddha appear in as female. Maybe this is true. Maybe this is how karma works. A man is a man is a man. Or maybe monastic forms led to suppression of a greater truth. In the jatakas, the Buddha could be a crow in a graveyard, a mongrel dog, or a monkey but never a woman? Really? I felt it was time to give our grand old tradition a nudge. Hence, the emergence peck peck peck, from its overly literal shell of the brave lady parrot. Dogen writes, in “Receiving the Marrow by Bowing,” in Shobogenzo, section no. 9:

  Why are men special? Emptiness is emptiness. Four great elements are four great elements. Five skhandas are five skhandas. Women are just like that. Both men and women attain the way. You should honor attainment of the way. Do not discriminate between men and women. (Treasury of the Eye of the True Dharma: Zen Master Dogen’s Shobo Genzo, ed. by Kazuaki Tanahashi)


There are five opportunties for spiritual freedom:

AN5.26:1.1: “Mendicants, there are these five opportunities for freedom. If a mendicant stays diligent, keen, and resolute at these times, their mind is freed, their defilements are ended, and they arrive at the supreme sanctuary.
AN5.26:2.1: What five? Firstly, the Teacher or a respected spiritual companion teaches Dhamma to a mendicant. That mendicant feels inspired by the meaning and the teaching in that Dhamma, no matter how the Teacher or a respected spiritual companion teaches it. Feeling inspired, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, one feels bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed in samādhi. This is the first opportunity for freedom. If a mendicant stays diligent, keen, and resolute at this time, their mind is freed, their defilements are ended, and they arrive at the supreme sanctuary.
AN5.26:3.1: Furthermore, it may be that neither the Teacher nor a respected spiritual companion teaches Dhamma to a mendicant. But the mendicant teaches Dhamma in detail to others as they learned and memorized it. That mendicant feels inspired by the meaning and the teaching in that Dhamma, no matter how they teach it in detail to others as they learned and memorized it. Feeling inspired, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, one feels bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed in samādhi. This is the second opportunity for freedom. …
AN5.26:4.1: Furthermore, it may be that neither the Teacher nor … the mendicant teaches Dhamma. But the mendicant recites the teaching in detail as they learned and memorized it. That mendicant feels inspired by the meaning and the teaching in that Dhamma, no matter how they recite it in detail as they learned and memorized it. Feeling inspired, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, one feels bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed in samādhi. This is the third opportunity for freedom. …
AN5.26:5.1: Furthermore, it may be that neither the Teacher nor … the mendicant teaches Dhamma … nor does the mendicant recite the teaching. But the mendicant thinks about and considers the teaching in their heart, examining it with the mind as they learned and memorized it. That mendicant feels inspired by the meaning and the teaching in that Dhamma, no matter how they think about and consider it in their heart, examining it with the mind as they learned and memorized it. Feeling inspired, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, one feels bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed in samādhi. This is the fourth opportunity for freedom. …
AN5.26:6.1: Furthermore, it may be that neither the Teacher nor … the mendicant teaches Dhamma … nor does the mendicant recite the teaching … or think about it. But a meditation subject as a foundation of immersion is properly grasped, attended, borne in mind, and comprehended with wisdom. That mendicant feels inspired by the meaning and the teaching in that Dhamma, no matter how a meditation subject as a foundation of immersion is properly grasped, attended, borne in mind, and comprehended with wisdom. Feeling inspired, joy springs up. Being joyful, rapture springs up. When the mind is full of rapture, the body becomes tranquil. When the body is tranquil, one feels bliss. And when blissful, the mind becomes immersed in samādhi. This is the fifth opportunity for freedom. …

Although meditation alone is mentioned in the fifth opportunity, be sure to investigate the other four. Importantly, the teachings are mentioned again and again.
Study the suttas. Find a teacher and good spiritual companions. You will need all three to help develop meditation, wisdom and ethics together.

AN2.126:1.1: “There are two conditions for the arising of right view.
AN2.126:1.2: What two?
AN2.126:1.3: The words of another and proper attention.


Will someone explain rebirth and the differences between reincarnation?

The problem with Buddhism, there is no single accepted interpretation of just about anything. On the other hand, that's what makes it fun. Buddhism today is like mirror shattered in a thousand pieces. I have spent more than two decades trying to get to truth and I think I'm 99% clear about it now.

Most people thinking about past and future lives assume that something (some very important part of them, may be consciousness) stays alive after death and goes on to "other worlds" and maybe spends some time in an intermediate state to eventually obtain a new body. This is what's usually called "reincarnation".

The Buddhist view (of course I will say the only right Buddhist view - but you don't have to believe) is to view life as a continuous and not discrete phenomenon, both space- and time-wise. In this view everything is interconnected and made from millions of causal/conditional influences contributing to a particular configuration in a particular timespace locality. There are no individual "objects" let alone "people" or "souls" - that would seem to exist in a static world. Instead, the world is a dynamic system of constantly flowing influences, deterministically unfolding from their interactions.

The most important aspect of all these causes/conditions/influences that interact to compose everything, is information. Natural world with its variety of species is first and foremost an informational process, shaped by the principle of natural selection. As Richard Dawkins correctly explained the main subject of evolution is gene - essentially a sequence of information - with body being a physical manifestation of gene's tendency to replicate itself and pass itself on.

Likewise, the human culture can be seen as evolution of informational forms - memes (which was a term coined by Dawkins to expand the idea of gene as informational subject of natural selection beyond its one type known as the DNA). In this view, primates are media for memetic evolution, with our culture being a manifestation of memes' tendencies to replicate and pass themselves on, just like a body of biological organism is a manifestation of gene. Makes sense so far?

Our mind (what we call "our" "minds" - but which in fact should probably be called "The Mind" - because it's not "many") is an informational phenomenon made possible by a flow and interaction of information, an evolved kind of the same information that manifested the natural world, passing between different kinds of media. These media include primates' brains as well as various artifacts of human culture - primarily books and these days the digital medium of computers-and-the-internet. In this view the subjective experience or consciousness is no longer a mystery but rather a very natural property of information to re-present (to reflect, to model, to remember) other stuff. Any possible object or configuration or system of relationships found in the natural world can be re-presented with information. When this re-presentation gets robust enough it is called "experience" or "consciousness" or "sentience".

So now to get back to Buddhism. Because our lives and our minds are understood to be manifestations of, and 100% shaped by, informational processes (both at the material as well as the subjective levels), these processes operating contiguously & non-descrete-ly across the utterly complex combinations of various media capable of re-presentation; because in Buddhism we (supposedly) have a very clear understanding of all of the above -- we no longer see humans as separate blobs of matter (with or without "soul") getting born and dying. In this view, there is no birth and death, there is continuous trans-form-ation. The mind of a person does not start with death, but comes together gradually over time from various sources. All of those sources trace back to something that existed (events that happened) long before this particular human was born. In this sense there is no new person having been born. The person is an assembly or a manifestation of multiple threads of information transformation. The birds-eye perspective on this that looks at the entire human civilization (as well as the pre-human evolution) will see a graph of interconnected causation/information/transformation rolling forward like a stream. The entire thing is contiguous and highly interconnected, with no discrete entities to be found.

Then as the human child grows up, he or she develops ability to delineate and differentiate "objects". I don't have room to go over this here in much detail, but this ability is something Mahayana Buddhists call "objectification" or "reification". In this ability to designate discrete entities lies the biggest power and the biggest vulnerability of sentient mind. Since mind is nothing but dynamically interacting system of re-presentations, there is no way for it to know that its models (the discrete objects it delineates) are not the reality but only a rough (simplified) re-presentation of reality. This results in mind absolutizing and clinging to its models as all-correct and all-important, and developing attachment to some configurations and aversion to others, based on its simplistic re-presentation of the world. This attachment, aversion and confusion lead to conflict and suffering when our models mismatch other similar but incompatible models (harbored by other people) and also when our simplistic models inevitably mismatch reality.

When Buddhism talks about Enlightenment it talks about clearly understanding all of the above (this is my claim anyway). When Buddhism talks about liberation from suffering, it talks about the above. When Buddhism talks about no-self and no-rebirth, it talks about the above.

  Is the goal of buddhism to cease to exist? If people aren't reincarnated, then how does the cycle of suffering continue.

Now we have all the tools we need to answer your question, aren't we? The goal of Buddhism is to transcend the naive model we have that "to exists" means "to exist as a separate object". Transcending this model leads to the notion of death (as well as re-incarnation of an individual soul) becoming utterly naive and irrelevant.

The cycle of suffering continues with each generation passing the objectification/reification on to the next generation. Each new child is born and learns to see the world as a collection of separate objects, him- or herself one such object among others. (The exact process of how this separation unfolds is explained in Buddhist teaching of Twelve Nidanas aka Paticcasamuppada aka Pratitya-samutpada). This naive reification/objectification in turn leads to suffering, because of the conflict between the model and reality or one model and another model. Growing in the civilization shaped by the incorrect understanding, we humans internalize the reified world as the only possible cognitive framework and pass it on to the next generation, continuing the cycle of suffering.

This answer getting too long I have to stop here - but this should give you the big picture. All of the Buddhism's teaching and practice with its various schools can be explained nicely in terms of the above.


The role of doubt in Zen Buddhist practice?

This doubt is a byproduct of really paying attention to details. As you pick up bits and pieces here and there, some of them don't fit together. So you put them aside and keep going. Then, later, some of them fit together, but others still don't. You have great faith in three jewels, and great resolve to walk the path. At the same time you have no choice but to suspend your judgement on some things that don't make sense. The further you go, the more this happens. But only if you really pay attention, and only if you don't get discouraged by logical inconsistencies, and only if you are determined to follow through. Somewhere along the way you get unwavering certainty on some points, even if they contradict other, equally authoritative points. Because you are certain about these things, you can give up some other things you would never have dreamt of giving up, even though your heart sinks as you do it. You keep doing it in the name of "no hope, no fear" until you lose all ground and fall through space. This is the great doubt, the flip side of your faith and determination. It's not the goal, it's a thing you have to go through. It's not something that can or should be induced artificially though. As Master Bankei said:

  What’s worse, they [the false teachers] tell practitioners that unless they can raise a “great ball of doubt” and then break through it, there can’t be any progress in Zen.  Instead of teaching them to live by the unborn Buddha-mind, they start by forcing them to raise this ball of doubt any way they can.  People who don’t have a doubt are now saddled with one.  They’ve turned their Buddha-minds into “balls of doubt.”  It’s absolutely wrong.

So doubt must be natural to be real. That's why even though Master Hakuin is right in listing it as one of three essential things, I now say it is secondary to paying attention properly, taking note of facts and how they fit together or not.


Sacca-pabba Is the reason that commentary commented "Viññāṇa is Jāti and Paṭisandhi," right?

So jāti-paṭiccasamuppāda is viññāna-paṭiccasamuppāda.

No, this is not a proper statement. jāti refers to conceptual birth of a satta, both in paṭiccasamuppāda and the sacca-pabba:

Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jāti? Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ tamhi tamhi satta-nikāye jāti
The difference is: Jāti-paṭiccasamuppāda is 5 khandha.

jāti is the event of being born, it cannot be equated to the five khandha directly.

So jāti is a conclusion of viññāna, nāma+rūpa, āyatana, phassa, vedanā, taṇhā, upādāna and bhavā-paṭiccasamuppāda.

This is correct, of course.

But viññāṇa-paṭiccasamuppāda is an explanation of jāti.

viññāṇa is a part of the process of jāti, but paṭiccasamuppāda is not always taught in a way relating viññāṇa to jāti.

So sacca-pabba is the reason that commentary commented "Viññāṇa Is Jāti And Paṭisandhi", right?

What commentary is this? paṭisandhi is one important viññāṇa but not the only one being spoke of in paṭiccasamuppāda. I think you are over simplifying things.


Do meditation or chanting make one less agitated?

No, chanting does not make you less agitated. on the contrary, chanting makes puthujjanas more agitated and the buddha says it is a mistake for the bikkhus to chant, but the buddha allows ''intonation''.

The problem with chanting is that puthujjanas love to get carried away by the chant and as usual being carried away by the senses is the biggest mistake a puthujjana who wants to stop being unhappy can make.
So the bikkhus must avoid that in order for the bikkhus to stop creating suffering for the bikkhu and for and for the audience, so that the puthujjanas are not carried away by their words, which means preventing suffering in lay people. This is how somebody cares for oneself and for others, typically from having metta and doing karuna.

http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/vp/03.cv/vp.03.cv.05.03.horn.pts.htm

  Having given reasoned talk, he addressed the monks, saying:

  "Monks, there are these five disadvantages to one singing dhamma with
  a long-drawn plain-song sound:

  he is pleased with himself in regard to that sound, and others are
  pleased in regard to that sound,

  and housepeople look down upon,

  and while he is himself striving after accuracy in the sound[2] there
  is an interruption in his concentration,

  and people coming after fall into the way of (wrong) views.[3]

  These, monks, are the five disadvantages to one singing dhamma with a
  long-drawn plain-song sound.

  Monks, dhamma should not be sung with a long-drawn plain-song sound.

  Whoever should (so) sing it, there is an offence of wrong-doing."

  Now at that time monks were doubtful about intoning.[4]

  They told this matter to the Lord.

  He said:

  "Monks, I allow intoning."


The karma is a product of

The mind of the person doing the action
The mind of the person subjected to the action

If the person who is subjected to the result of the action has a pure mind then the results are applied may it be good or bad.

If I give to a Buddha (very pure mind) with great piety the results would be great. If I do the same for a animal the results will not be that great since the results are not "amplified" due to a lower state of mind the animal has.

The Buddha has made great sacrifice to create the Sasana. So if we do something in line with the Buddha's will and intentions then the results would very much greater than any other action. Similarly if we go against it.


What does breaking the fetter 'Clinging to rites and rituals' actually mean?

The coarser or more general context:
It's about not being attached to symbolic rites and rituals or taking them to be literally true.
For e.g. from SN 7.21:

The Buddha said to Sangarava:
“Is it really true, brahmin, that you practice purification by water,
believing in purification by water; that you live committed to the
practice of immersing yourself in water at dawn and dusk?”
“Yes, Master Gotama.”
“But brahmin, for what reason do you practice purification by water?”
“It’s because, Master Gotama, whatever bad deeds I’ve done during the
day I wash off by bathing at dusk; and whatever bad deeds I’ve done
during the night, I wash off by bathing at dawn. That’s the reason why
I practice purification by water.”

“The teaching is a lake with shores of ethics, brahmin,
unclouded, praised by the fine to the good.
There the knowledge-masters go to bathe,
and cross to the far shore without getting wet.”

When he had spoken, Saṅgārava said to the Buddha:
“Excellent, Master Gotama! Excellent! … From this day forth, may
Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge
for life.”

The more refined context:
From AN 3.78:

“Take the case of someone who cultivates precepts and observances, a
lifestyle, and a spiritual path, taking this as the essence. If
unskillful qualities grow while skillful qualities decline, that’s not
fruitful. However, if unskillful qualities decline while skillful
qualities grow, that is fruitful.”

From MN 24:

“Is the spiritual life lived under the Buddha for the sake of
purification of ethics?”
“Certainly not.”  ....
“In the same way, reverend, purification of ethics is only for the
sake of purification of mind. Purification of mind is only for the
sake of purification of view. Purification of view is only for the
sake of purification through overcoming doubt. Purification through
overcoming doubt is only for the sake of purification of knowledge and
vision of the variety of paths. Purification of knowledge and vision
of the variety of paths is only for the sake of purification of
knowledge and vision of the practice. Purification of knowledge and
vision of the practice is only for the sake of purification of
knowledge and vision. Purification of knowledge and vision is only for
the sake of extinguishment by not grasping. The spiritual life is
lived under the Buddha for the sake of extinguishment by not
grasping.”

From DN 16:

If it wishes, after my passing the Saṅgha may abolish the lesser and
minor training rules.

The purpose of precepts and observances, purification of ethics, and a spiritual path is only for the purification of the mind and cultivation of skillful qualities.
But being too attached to minor rules and rituals to the point that breaking them causes remorse and mental anguish, is unskillful and pollutes the mind.
It is enough to practise purification of ethics with the understanding that it is for the purification of the mind, and not be too attached to following minor rules and rituals to the letter.


What does ཕལ་པོ་ཆེ། (translated to the Flower Ornament Sutra) really mean?

ཕལ་པོ་ཆེ་ is mdo phal po che (Dopel Poché in Standard Tibetan) according to the Rigpa

mdo means "sutra"
phal by itself means "ordinary (person)"
po is a masculine agentive
che means "great", "greatest"

One of the English translations on this site is "great host".


If you eat vegetables or grains, it can indirectly cause the death of animals like snails and earthworms, due to clearing of land, ploughing, pesticides, weeding etc.

If you wear clothes made of cotton, it can indirectly cause the death of animals like snails and earthworms, due to clearing of land, ploughing, pesticides, weeding etc.

If you use banknotes made of paper, or buy or use anything made of paper, it can indirectly cause the death of animals, when trees got chopped down for the manufacturing of paper.

If you use any plastics or fuel for your car or banknotes made of polymer, it can indirectly cause the death of animals due to drilling for petroleum and gas.

If you throw rubbish away, it can indirectly cause the death of animals, because some of that trash ends up in the sea or landfills.

If you buy anything metal (including all electronics), it can indirectly cause the death of animals due to mining.

If you drink treated water from the tap, it can indirectly cause the death of small animals from the process of filtration and chlorination.

If you use electricity, it can indirectly cause the death of animals from the process of clearing land for building hydroelectric dams, or the billowing of smoke from a plant that burns hydrocarbons.

When you pay any kind of taxes, even indirectly e.g. through purchasing goods, the money from it may be used by the government to buy weapons and train soldiers for killing humans.

Basically, the Buddha taught that to break the first precept, you must have the intention to kill and then actually kill. This applies to directly causing the deprivation of life. For e.g. hitting a mosquito would be directly killing it.

By buying frozen meat or vegetables from the supermarket, or using paper or banknotes or wearing clothes or drinking treated water or using electricity or using electronics (including the computer or smartphone you are reading this on), you did not have any intention to kill anyone and you did not in fact kill anyone. Therefore, you do not break the first precept this way.


Is Nirvana the goal, for Zen and Theravada?

There is no goal in Zen. To have a goal is spin the wheel of samsara. Zen is all about getting to the basics, which are beyond words and concepts. I should know I have been practicing Zen for seventeen years and I am still a beginner.


One starts by seeing with insight how the old habits are disadvantageous, unsatisfactory (incapable of bring lasting hapiness), dangerous, harmful &/or promote suffering.

One starts by seeing with insight the advantage & benefit of giving up those old habits.

The Dvedhāvitakka Sutta is one of many suttas describing how the Buddha, before his enlightenment, reflected upon the advantages & disadvantages of differing types of thinking.

The Upanisa Sutta states a cause of faith in Buddhist practises is the experience of suffering.


Does samatha practice always come before vipassana practice?

While different traditions might emphasize one over the other, they all need a certain level of development for both:

  "These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana).
  "When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned.
  "When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned.
  "Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release." AN 2.30

About the order of development, it could be in any order:

  "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity...Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight...Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight" AN 4.170


Are either of the two truths Truths (Satya)?

Prasangika-Madhyamika define a truth as whatever is not deceptive in that it appears the way it exists. The opposite of a truth is a falsity.

Ngawang Palden says:

  Ultimate truths necessarily are established in accordance with how
  they appear to the awarenesses to which they clearly appear.

  Conventional truths are necessarily falsities. The meaning of falsity
  is “deceptive,” and the meaning of deceptive is “discordance between
  the mode of appearance and the mode of abiding.”

Ultimate truths are truths because, in the perspective of the wisdom directly realizing them, they appear the way they exist (i.e. empty). On the other hand, conventional truths are falsities and not truths because they appear as inherently existent while they do not exist in this way. Thus, conventional truths are truths only in relation to ignorance. This is because ignorance conceive of them to exist the way they appear.

In Tsong-kha-pa’s Final Exposition of Wisdom by Jeffrey Hopkins, it says:

  In saṃvṛtisatya, saṃvṛti means that which obscures, or conceals,
  reality, and thus saṃvṛtisatya means "that which is a truth for
  ignorance".


Is it OK for a Buddhist teacher to charge their students an hourly rate for their time?

It's not OK.

  “It’s not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ānanda. The Dhamma
  should be taught to others only when five qualities are established
  within the person teaching. Which five?

  “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak
  step-by-step.’

  “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak
  explaining the sequence (of cause & effect).’

  “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak out of
  compassion.’

  “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak not for
  the purpose of material reward.’

  “The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, ‘I will speak without
  hurting myself or others.’
  (AN 5:159)

.

  One

  should not make an effort everywhere,

  should not be another’s hireling,

  should not live dependent on another,

  should not go about

  as a trader in the Dhamma.
  (Ud 6:2)


You should not believe meditation is for everyone or should not believe you are a "failure" if meditation does not work out for you. In reality, serious meditation is only for a small minority of people. Some of the meditation in the Western world is just 'fondling' with a service that is advertised so some smooth talkers can make money. Few Westerners are doing actual real meditation.

Fear of loneliness ("dark night of the soul") is certainly a common and inevitable result of extensive and intensive meditation. This existential fear must be passed through to achieve any advanced level of meditation.

Therefore, if meditation has not worked out for you, please do not judge yourself negatively. Many monks meditate for many years but make little progress and disrobe.

You should see a doctor or healer for your gastritis and find some solutions for poor sleep, such as Chinese herbal medicine, exercise, swimming, metta meditation, spiritual friendship, etc.

If you believe in future lives, the Buddha taught lay people to practise generosity & keep the five precepts is enough for 'rebirth' in heaven.  The Buddha generally did not teach meditation to lay people.

The sense of "self" is a natural survival instinct. Meditation can diminish the sense of "self" and this is actually not healthy for most people. Its only a small minority of people who are able to abide without a sense of "self".


According to Milindapanha 3.5.5, one is reborn without the need for a transmigrating soul:

  The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, is it so that one does not
  transmigrate (saṅkamati) and one is reborn (paṭisandahati)?"

  "Yes, your majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is reborn."

  "How, venerable Nagasena, is it that one does not transmigrate and one
  is reborn? Give me an analogy."

  "Just as, your majesty, if someone kindled one lamp from another, is
  it indeed so, your majesty, that the lamp would transmigrate from the
  other lamp?"

  "Certainly not, venerable sir."

  "Indeed just so, your majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is
  reborn."

  "Give me another analogy."

  "Do you remember, your majesty, when you were a boy learning some
  verse from a teacher?"

  "Yes, venerable sir."

  "Your majesty, did this verse transmigrate from the teacher?"

  "Certainly not, venerable sir."

  "Indeed just so, your majesty, one does not transmigrate and one is
  reborn."

  "You are clever, venerable Nagasena."

Ven. Narada Mahathera wrote here about hungry ghosts:

  Peta-yoni (pa + ita) lit., departed beings, or those absolutely devoid
  of happiness. They are not disembodied spirits of ghosts. They
  possess deformed physical forms of varying magnitude, generally
  invisible to the naked eye. They have no planes of their own, but live
  in forests, dirty surroundings, etc.

Milindapanha 3.5.6 states:

  The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, is a soul to be found?"

  The elder replied: "According to ultimate reality, your majesty, a
  soul is not to be found."

  "You are clever, venerable Nagasena."


Where can I find a reference for someone becoming a sotapanna through meditation?

I've come across many stories in the Tipitaka where people attained arahanthood or became non-returners through meditation.

The different doors through with you can get liberation are given in Vimutt’āyatana Sutta, which are:

listens to the Dharma
teaches the Dharma in detail
recites the Dharma
applies his mind to the Dharma
properly grasps some concentration-sign

Which in turn leads to:

gladness arises in him;
because of gladness, zest arises;
because of zest, the body becomes tranquil;
when the body is tranquil, he feels happy;
a happy mind becomes concentrated
unfreed mind of a monk, dwelling heedful and exertive, finds freedom; or where the mental influxes, not wholly destroyed become wholly destroyed, where the unattained unsurpassed safety from the yoke is attained.

Meditation is only one of them.

    Mahanama, Sarakani the Sakya kept the training (in moral virtue, concentration, and
    wisdom) at the time of his death.

Sarakani Sutta 1

Sarakani became a stream winner because keeping up the training though he was a drunken also. This might happen all at once where one becomes liberated or may achieve it in stages, entering through any of the doors above, where sotapanna is 1st of the stages:

    Bhikshus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge
    is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress.

Kīta,giri Sutta


What are the guides for lay followers, as to how far they should go to be compassionate?

The most important things is to get Panna yourself as much as you can. You can achieve it by either reading Tripitaka or consulting monks about wholesome and unwholesome acts or both.
Passionate or compassionate about others is generally speaking wholesome act. But it has it own merit as well as harm to helper and helped if improper intention or volition.
To be specific to your question,

Donation is good to donor as long as donor have no attachment to things donated and have Metta to donee that he/she will free from sufferings. That is the very minimum requirements to have mind in donor. (There are many more details about making donation to the best, you can consult in Tripitaka and/or a well taught monks). In this case donor won't worry about how donee will use donated material/money.

For mental or verbal assistance,
Try to make your friend cheerful by encouraging, assisting to understand sufferings are not persisting. Try to do some activities and distracting him/her from thinking negative ideas if you are persuasive enough (you can either read some from Buddha's teachings or other religious teachings and non-religious self-help. The more you read, the more persuasive you are. Words have power).

For helping other people from clinging, you are absolutely right. No one, except Sammasam Buddha is the best because people with different hobby, desire, volition, perception and attitude need different delicate guidance to right path. We can only recommend some right ways to soothe sufferings. You can recommend him/her to do some meditation/Vipasana. Let him/her find what is bothering by himself/herself. How he/she can understand sufferings and how Buddha's Dhamma can guide him/her right way to end sufferings. There is nothing wrong if you are pushing someone to get to know Buddha's Dhamma as long as you put Metta on the people you are pushing. I read in Buddha's past life, he was pulled from hair to bring in front of Buddha and to get to know prior Buddha and Buddha teachings. But in this age of personal freedom, communities and societies don't go details to true intention of pushing someone hard and is not appreciated.


Vesak is the day marking the birth, enlightenment, and passing away of the Buddha, which according to traditional accounts all occurred on the full-moon day of May. Vesak (by that I mean the three events) has nothing to do with the Vaishakh Month in India.It is just that the three event happen to fall on this month.

The three great events that took place on Vesak day in the life of the Buddha are - the birth of Prince Sidhartha, the Bodhisatva at the Royal Park of Lumbini, His attainment of the Perfect Enlightement in his 35th year under the shade of Sri Maha Bodhi at Buddha Gaya, and His Parinirvana. His Pari-nibbhana, at Kusinara in the Sala Grove, Upavartana that belonged to Royalty of Malla-occured on the Vesak Full Moon Poya Day. It is renowned as the most sacred Poya Day in the Buddhist world over.

Although the recognised Vesak Full Moon ‘Poya’ (holiday) Day falls in the month of May, there is an additional Vesak Full Moon called "Adhi Vesak Full Moon Poya Day". This Adhi ‘Poya’ occurs once in 3 years, due to the change of planentary movements. There are 365 days in an year. According to astrology (SriLankan ‘Nekath’), they calculate a year usually as 360 days. The planets rotate round the Sun. Sometimes the course of the planetary movements change. According to astrological calculations, this leads to an additional month.

Here I should mention the name of Sir Ponnambalam Ramanthan, who was a Member of the Legislative Council of Ceylon from 1879 to 1892, Solicitor General from 1892 to 1906, a member of the Legislative Council from 1911 to 1921, and from 1924 to 1930. A Barrister by profession, he was elected by a broad coalition of Buddhists and Hindus. He supported the efforts of the Theosophical Society to establish Buddhist denominational schools. He worked tirelessly for Hindu Buddhist unity. He was responsible for making Vesak, the birth anniversary of the Buddha, a public holiday in colonial Ceylon.


How is it possible to change habits cultivated over lifetimes

Easy. Well, easy in theory :) -- you need to get fed up! You need to get really sick and tired of your conditions, so sick that you cannot live like that anymore. You are so fed up that you are either ready to die - or to change your habits. So that desire to get out leads to iron intent to change.


What additional ethics you find in Buddhism which are not found in other religions?

Divisive Speech.

This is definitely something unique to Buddhism (I think). Other religions talk about lying, but I don't remember any mentions of divisive speech.

  Abandoning divisive speech he abstains from divisive speech. What he has heard here he does not tell there to break those people apart from these people here. What he has heard there he does not tell here to break these people apart from those people there. Thus reconciling those who have broken apart or cementing those who are united, he loves concord, delights in concord, enjoys concord, speaks things that create concord.

This comes from Buddha's special insight into the nature of dukkha. Dukkha comes from a conflict of mind, an unresolvable uninergated contradiction. Craving is one example of such contradiction, aversion is another, and conflict between people because of their incompatible views (about the world or about each other) is a third!

So when you engage in divisive speech, you create and spread conflict between the sides, which will sooner or later bear the fruit of dukkha.

While the non-violence is taught by many religions, it is only (to my limited knowledge) in Buddhism is where the source of dukkha is understood so deeply that the role of divisive speech in creating dukkha is clearly recognized.

Harsh speech

  They give up harsh speech. They speak in a way that’s mellow, pleasing to the ear, lovely, going to the heart, polite, likable and agreeable to the people.


Pagoda's symbolism of yogi's progress to Nirvana

There are so many stupas (pagodas as you call them which are chinese versions of stupas) which architectural meanings are never recorded, they are symbols for the viewer to interpret, especially the modern ones.

Symbolism from Wikipedia

"The shape of the stupa represents the Buddha, crowned and sitting in meditation posture on a lion throne. His crown is the top of the spire; his head is the square at the spire's base; his body is the vase shape; his legs are the four steps of the lower terrace; and the base is his throne."[7]

Five purified elements

Although not described in any Tibetan text on stupa symbolism, the stupa may represent the five purified elements:[8]

The square base represents earth
The hemispherical dome/vase represents water
The conical spire represents fire
The upper lotus parasol and the crescent moon represents air
The sun and the dissolving point represents the element of space


Did the Buddha ever mention or encounter Jews?

Well, the "ancient Israelites" lived quite a long time compared with the lifespan of a single individual like Siddharta Gotama, the Buddha. Their own history, taken from the religious tradition, was from Abraham up to 0 BCE (or today, don't know when "ancient" ended...), and this means at least something from 2000 BCE; Moses is estimated to 1200 BCE if I recall right. But we (and also the Jews themselves) have this all only in the form of myths. Back to 1000 BCE and earlier I don't know whether there are any other reliable sources (besides the Torah) with such specific stories like that Torah ones about the kings Saul, David, Salomo, Rehabeam, ... and which were the first kings which were also mentioned by other tribes or nations (for instance Babylonian, Persian, Egypt) in governmental letters and statements.
From the Buddha we have only discourses (from one lifespan of about 40 years of teaching)  with Brahmins as foreign religions and some remarks about contemporary ascets, like Mahavira (I think the patriarch of the Jains - which have also survived as a religious movement up to today), the "naked ascetics" and the "white robed ascetics", the followers of Kassapa from Uruvela and so on. As far as I have read in the Pali-canon (the corpus of german translations) there was no explicite remark about other, more remote tribe/gentile/religion (also not about hellenistic ideas of the same historic times - but which in my view does not say that he might have or didn't have heard about it. In the contrary: why should you involve your disciples in a discussion about greek philosophy -even if you'd heard about it- when every important ingredient of it you can discuss with local examples...)


Was buddha aware of future or future way of living?

Change in circumstances

This is a fact of life. You have your ups and downs. Worrying or resentment towards the situation will not change it. You have to accept it with grace and then do what is wihtin your control to improve your situation.

Use of psychedelics

This interferes with your mindfulness. So best is to sop using them. If it is difficult perhaps you can use professional help. This might also help in solving your changed circumstances.

Right way to earn a living

The right way to earn a living is a way which does not harm yourself or others and have a moral basis. Avoid ways to earn a living without lies, deceit, killing, debauchery, etc.


Critique of interview with secular Buddhist author of "Why Buddhism is True"

Any sutra references or teachings for the "cognitive bias that fascinates me" part where he talks about the "fundamental attribution error?"

I find two definitions of "fundamental attribution error":

One is the view that behaviour characteristics are innate (or inherent in the person) rather than situational -- Wikipedia:

  In social psychology, fundamental attribution error (FAE), also known as correspondence bias or attribution effect, is the concept that, in contrast to interpretations of their own behavior, people tend to (unduly) emphasize the agent's internal characteristics (character or intention), rather than external factors, in explaining other people's behavior. This effect has been described as "the tendency to believe that what people do reflects who they are".

The author uses it in what may be a slightly different way -- e.g. here is the same author writing for Wired -- saying it's affected by our view of which tribe (friend or enemy) a person belongs to:

  After all, we tend to interpret the errors of our enemies and rivals in an unfavorable light, while explaining away the errors of our allies in more innocent terms.

  Indeed, this tendency itself involves a cognitive bias, one that is less famous than confirmation bias. It’s called “attribution error,” and it, too, is dividing America.

  In a context of intense tribalism, attribution error works like this: If people we identify as members of our tribe do something bad—if they’re mean to someone, say, or they break the law—we tend to attribute the behavior to “situational” factors. They had been under stress at work, or they were pressured by bad actors into misbehaving, or whatever. If members of the enemy tribe do something bad, we’re more likely to explain the behavior in “dispositional” terms—the bad behavior emanates from their basic disposition, their character. It’s just the kind of thing that people like them do.

You ask for sutta references. I think an obvious example is the Buddha's attitude to what a "holy man" is.
That's conveniently summarised in the Dhammapada (but I think the same doctrine exists in many suttas too):

  Because he has discarded evil, he is called a holy man. Because he is serene in conduct, he is called a recluse. And because he has renounced his impurities, he is called a renunciate.

and:

  Not by matted hair, nor by lineage, nor by birth does one become a holy man. But he in whom truth and righteousness exist — he is pure, he is a holy man.

and:

  He who without resentment endures abuse, beating and punishment; whose power, real might, is patience — him do I call a holy man.

My analysis:

People used to be called "holy" because of their birth i.e. if they were born Brahmin -- i.e. their holiness was considered innate -- and Buddhism contradicts the view, that they are holy because they're born holy.

This also says that people are not holy merely because they're called (named) or viewed as holy, or merely bear the outward signs of being members of a holy caste.
I'm not sure about the converse:

Maybe Buddhism suggests (instead of their birth or caste or maybe even their view) there is a good test for when a man can or should be considered holy -- i.e. when a person's behaviour can be attributed to the person's internal characteristics -- i.e. for example,

  He who without resentment endures abuse

Perhaps this is the right time to consider someone inherently holy, because it seems to be an example of when their behaviour isn't dependent on external situation.

(Not just "enduring abuse" -- other admirable qualities are described in this chapter.)
Maybe Buddhism suggests that a person is holy when they're serene because they're unaffected, when they are independent, i.e. because they are a recluse and renunciate.
Or, maybe a social psychologist, who holds that the "fundamental attribution error" doctrine is always true, might argue that even this is somehow an example of situational or something "dependent" (a reaction) rather than "inherent" (an action) -- I don't know (because I'm not a social psychologist and don't know exactly how they define and use their FAE doctrine).

As well as or instead of this (definition of "a holy man"), you might (I don't know) also view the FAE as having parallels with Buddhist the doctrine on emptiness (i.e. that things are dependent not inherent), and maybe the "non-self", "two truths", and "dependent origination" doctrines too.

The author's doctrine may come via doctrine on emptiness (not to mention, his own practice) -- e.g. as evidenced by the previous paragraph in the Wired article:

  I think the more you go down the path, the clearer the connection between practice and your everyday moral behavior. As I said, all the way down the path is this idea of emptiness where you’re not projecting essences onto lamps or weeds or people, but if you just get a little ways down the path and are reacting a little less emotionally to people, you can make real progress. Can I talk about a cognitive bias that fascinates me because it's so subtle?

The article you referenced mentions morality too, by the way:

  We talked about the illusion of self, the psychology of tribalism, how meditation can make us more moral, and why he thinks spreading meditation practice could be socially transformative

Buddhism has some "moral" doctrine too, as you know -- perhaps metta bhavana (meditation) for example, towards everyone (not just for "my own tribe" -- not to mention, whether it's proper to have a "my" tribe) -- not holding ill-will -- or in the context of contemporary American politics, Buddhism might frown on "fake news" (wrong speech) and, who knows, perhaps even any political, tribal, divisive (unendearing, unbeneficial) news and speech even if 'true'.

I don't want to start a discussion of "injustice (in America and elsewhere)" here, though.

In context, the main or final example he gave of what he called "fascinating" appeared to be "demonizing the leader of the country they want to invade" -- a reference to the year-long lead-up to (i.e. the media campaign to justify) the invasion of Iraq (which included what some people now call 'fabricated' evidence or false pretexts e.g. related to WMD).


How should I stop thinking that I am even slightly enlightened?

The appropriate response to such a thought of personal enlightenment is: "fart".

  Su Dongpo was an avid student of Buddhist teachings. He was
  quick-witted and humorous; as a Zen Buddhism follower he was very
  serious and self-disciplined. He often discussed buddhism with his
  good friend, Zen Master Foyin. The two lived across the river from one
  another.

  Following is an interesting and famous story about him and Zen Master
  Foyin.

  One day, Su Dongpo felt inspired and wrote the following poem:

  稽首天中天， 毫光照大千； 八风吹不动， 端坐紫金莲。

  I bow my head to the heaven within heaven, Hairline rays illuminating
  the universe, The eight winds cannot move me, Sitting still upon the
  purple golden lotus.

  The “eight winds (八风)” in the poem referred to praise (称), ridicule
  (讥), honor (誉), disgrace (毁), gain (得), loss (失), pleasure (乐) and
  misery (苦) – interpersonal forces of the material world that drive and
  influence the hearts of men. Su Dongpo was saying that he has attained
  a higher level of spirituality, where these forces no longer affect
  him.

  Impressed by himself, Su Dongpo sent a servant to hand-carry this poem
  to Fo Yin. He was sure that his friend would be equally impressed.
  When Fo Yin read the poem, he immediately saw that it was both a
  tribute to the Buddha and a declaration of spiritual refinement.
  Smiling, the Zen Master wrote “fart” on the manuscript and had it
  returned to Su Dongpo.

  Su Dongpo was expecting compliments and a seal of approval. When he
  saw “fart” written on the manuscript, he was shocked . He burst into
  anger: “How dare he insult me like this? Why that lousy old monk! He’s
  got a lot of explaining to do!”

  Full of indignation, he rushed out of his house and ordered a boat to
  ferry him to the other shore as quickly as possible. He wanted to find
  Fo Yin and demand an apology. However, Fo Yin’s door closed. On the
  door was a piece of paper, for Su Dongpo. The paper had following two
  lines:

  八风吹不动， 一屁弹过江。 The eight winds cannot move me, One fart blows me across
  the river.

  This stopped Su Dongpo cold. Fo Yin had anticipated this hot-headed
  visit. Su Dongpo’s anger suddenly drained away as he understood his
  friend’s meaning. If he really was a man of spiritual refinement,
  completely unaffected by the eight winds, then how could he be so
  easily provoked?

  With a few strokes of the pen and minimal effort, Fo Yin showed that
  Su Dongpo was in fact not as spiritually advanced as he claimed to be.
  Ashamed but wiser, Su Dongpo departed quietly.

  This event proved to be a turning point in Su Dongpo’s spiritual
  development. From that point on, he became a man of humility, and not
  merely someone who boasted of possessing the virtue.


Is there a line of thought in Buddhism that is less centered on suffering?

The scripture MN 117 explains there are two sorts of Right View or two sorts of Buddha's teaching, namely: (i) supramundane/transcendent; and (ii) mundane/worldly.
The mundane/worldly teachings that focus on avoiding bad kamma, doing good kamma and 'rebirth' are less focused on suffering & the cessation of suffering.
These 'kamma & rebirth' teachings are for the ordinary people called 'puthujjana' who are spiritually blind and naturally unable to discern the unsatisfactoriness and meaninglessness of the world.
These mundane/worldly teachings are to prevent ordinary people inflicting self-harm upon themselves and others.
These mundane/worldly teachings not only include moral teachings but also teachings about generating loving-kindness towards all beings.


In my understanding, it comes back to a central Buddhist concept of "attachment".

We feel frustrated or angry, we get emotional about things, when we have a strong attachment or prejudice about how things are supposed to be.

These prejudices or preconceptions come from some strong experiences we have in childhood, or from some books we trust, people we highly respect etc. They also come from pain, when we did something and got in trouble. In most of these cases we have some basic formula in our head "this is bad" or "this is good" (why - because blah blah blah). And we are so convinced that this is correct, that we feel like we will never change our opinion in the entire life.

So when we see something or someone doing something that goes against this preconception or attachment, then we feel like they go against Truth (or the way we see it anyway). This makes us frustrated or angry or upset etc.

There are multiple ways to develop patience in Buddhism. On the basic level, we just try to calm down. We tell ourselves how bad it would be if we lose control and start yelling etc. But in my experience this does not work as soon as situation gets serious. We just forget everything and jump right back into emotion.

The next method is to be mindful of one's emotions on the body level. This way we can notice ourselves getting nervous far before it gets out of control. So if we develop feeling of presence of body, and always feel all tensions etc., we get this convenient weather indicator that can show a storm coming 5 days in advance (really maybe 5 minutes, but still good). It is much easier to fix e.g. a conversation that goes towards a scandal 5 minutes before it gets out of control, when things are still calm, but you feel it coming.

And then the most powerful method is to see the attachments or preconceptions that give rise to emotion - and learn to let them go. This is the most difficult, because it means you have to learn to see situation from another perspective, and to not assume that you are 100% right. This can be very difficult in the beginning. But at the end this ability makes you practically immune to all disturbances, 100% patient at all times. It is a very helpful feature to have in life.

My teacher said, enlightened person is like a lawyer. He or she sees every situation from all sides at the same time. This helps him to never lose patience and to make better decisions than anyone. The point is, Buddhist patience is not self-restraint and self-torture, it is freedom from single point of view, freedom from attachments.

P.S.

Same exact logic applies to impatience towards desirable objects. Attachment, preconception etc. - except in this case it's a preconception that the object is "good", usually based on some overgeneralization or idealisation. So the method Buddha prescribed for that is to analyze the object and see that it has negative sides and not only positive. This helps to let go of attachment and come back to patience and balance. All the same advice about being mindful of your body to sense the attachment getting out of control, applies here as well. In Buddhism desire and aversion are considered things of the same nature, one is positive and the other is negative but the principle is the same.


Which suttas in the Pali canon are relatively early or late?

I can't translate the whole of question, however I tried to answer as I can do.

Layers of pali literature already being in buddha-living-period.

There are many pali literature in buddha's time, such as buddha's literature, sāriputta's literature, mahākaccāna's literature, upāli's literature, etc. Because every mahāsāvaka have there own students.

But the most influential literature are buddha's literature and sāriputta's literature.

4 nikaya are buddha's literature, most of the others cannon are sāriputta's literature, because he is the one who buddha said "sāriputta is the best teacher who can teach like me". So everyone always go to meet sāriputta to listen his teaching, in his literature. But if someone need buddha's literature, they will go to meet buddha or ānanda, who is the best in sutta memorizing.

So, abhidhamma is difference from sutta, because commentary said "abhidhamma is memorized by sāriputta". And the other buddha's sāvaka book also have literature look like sāriputta's literature because everyone in buddha-living-period often go to learn dhamma with sāriputta (see:mahāgosiṅgasālasuttaṃ).

7 Vinaya-pitaka, is  memorized by  Upāli and his students. He also author some path of parivāra because buddha said in tipitaka (a.n.) "Upāli is the best vinaya-memorizer" (vinayadharānaṃ yadidaṃ upāliฯ).

Suttanta-pitaka is memorized by Ānanda. But in 1st saṅgayanā, 500 arahanta decide to separate whole sutta to 4 nikya.Then they gave each nikya to a group of 4 etadagga and his student to especially memorize it.

Who are the members, of group of 4 etadagga?  Ānanda and his students (tn), Sāriputta's students (mn), Kassapa and his students (sn), Anuruddha and his students (an). (The others have learned and memorized dhamma, too, but buddha said "ānanda is the best", so everyone need him in 1st saṅgayanā).

Abhidhamma-pitaka, paṭisambhidāmagga, niddesa, buddhavaṃsa, cariyā-pitaka, except kathāvatthu of moggalliputta, is learned by Sāriputta, But then they are memorized by every arahanta, because everyone in buddha-living-period often go to listen Sāriputta (see:mahāgosiṅgasālasuttaṃ).

Origin: http://www.tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/s0101a.att0.xml


When feels empty during vipassana meditation?

When command the mind to does something it was done what had commanded.

"So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or
presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or
external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with
right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine,
this is not I, this is not myself.'
"Any kind of feeling whatever...
"Any kind of perception whatever...
"Any kind of determination whatever...
"Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future or presently
arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external,
whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right
understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is
not I, this is not my self.'
SN 22.59

As the Buddha taught, identification with the mind (along with the other aggregates) is a wrong view. The mind is impermanent (along with all else in Samsara), in flux. It is not a stable, controllable thing. The more you try to control it, the more identification you will cultivate with it. Try meditating and observing thoughts arising and falling in the mind. You will come to see that they are out of the control of any self and you will come to objectively accept them as just arising and ceasing thoughts.
If thought about more happy today next moment less happy.

"Monks, these eight worldly conditions spin after the world, and the
world spins after these eight worldly conditions. Which eight? Gain,
loss, status, disgrace, censure, praise, pleasure, & pain. These are
the eight worldly conditions that spin after the world, and the world
spins after these eight worldly conditions.
AN 8.6

Experiences are impermanent as the Buddha teaches. This is something the Buddha teaches to accept. And how does one accept it? This is through meditation (specifically vipassana), observing one's experiential reality to see it objectively as it is and ultimately let go to be wavered by it.
After sitting meditation feel empty.

"And how does a monk remain focused on feelings in & of themselves?
There is the case where a monk, when feeling a painful feeling,
discerns, 'I am feeling a painful feeling.' When feeling a pleasant
feeling, he discerns, 'I am feeling a pleasant feeling.' When feeling
a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he discerns, 'I am feeling a
neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.'
"When feeling a painful feeling of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am
feeling a painful feeling of the flesh.' When feeling a painful
feeling not of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am feeling a painful feeling
not of the flesh.' When feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh, he
discerns, 'I am feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh.' When feeling
a pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am feeling a
pleasant feeling not of the flesh.' When feeling a
neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns, 'I am
feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh.' When
feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he
discerns, 'I am feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of
the flesh.'
"In this way he remains focused internally on feelings in & of
themselves, or externally on feelings in & of themselves, or both
internally & externally on feelings in & of themselves. Or he remains
focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to feelings, on
the phenomenon of passing away with regard to feelings, or on the
phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to feelings. Or
his mindfulness that 'There are feelings' is maintained to the extent
of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by
(not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains
focused on feelings in & of themselves.
MN 10

When you feel empty, meditate on that feeling, observing it as just a feeling. That's all it is anyways.
Is it mindfulness?where is the meditation,according to visuddhimagga?
Unfortunately, I am ill suited to quote a passage from the Visuddhimagga that can clarify this (as it is a vast technical text). What I can tell you from what I have learned is that mindfulness is when one is in the here and now, presently focusing on their current experience (which, again, is done in vipassana meditation).

I would recommend checking Yuttadhammo's booklet on how to meditate. Your questions should be answered once you start meditating after a while. I hope this all helps!


Do you have to have certain pastlife karma to use a computer?

Karma is a complex dhamma that only Buddha saw it thru and thru..   However, Buddha taught us 6 things to know about the fundamentals of karma

For sure, Karma is not a fate.  In Angulimala Sutta, a Sutta about a misguided serial killer who would have committed matricide if Buddha didn't interfere with his killing mission.

You can give $20 to someone but then you will never know if it was his good karma that let him run into you?  or his good karma that you have money to share.   Karma is a complex thing that is imponderable or incomprehensible, Acinteyya (Pali).


In Buddhism there is not concept of Atman. But has the concept of Anatta, means you have not control over the aggregates or anything else to be considered as self, me or mine. Also there is no core which is unchanging or everlasting which you can consider Atman. It does not relate to the concepts given in your question.


Can a human being reside both in this world and Nirvana at the same time?

My question is fairly simple, i.e., do all beings in this world "get reborn" through karma, or are there ascended beings in this world, living as human beings, free of all suffering?

It is correct, that beings get reborned due to their kamma. Kamma means action, but not just any action. The type we are talking about here is volitional action, i.e. actions where intentionality is present. This type of action is kamically potent. Kamma is created by body, speech and mind. It originates from the Mind and is based in either wholesome or unwholesome roots. Volitional actions have consequences, we call that vipakka which means "ripening" or phala (fruits).

The ripening need not to come right away, i.e. in this life. It can also come in the next life or operate across the succession of lifetimes. If you are interested in reading more about kamma and rebirth, references by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, can be found here.

There are beings in this world that are free some suffering, i.e. Arahants and possibly Pacceka Buddhas (silent Buddhas). These Buddhas are self-enlightened and arise between the time of two fully enlightened Buddhas, e.g. our Buddha, Gautama and the next Buddha to be, Maitreya.

If you would like to read more about Arahants, Pacceka Buddhas and Buddhas, Ven. Yuttadhammo has written about all of them in this answer.


Animal sacrifices mentioned in the suttas or vinaya?

AN 4.39, AN 4.40, DN 5 and also see MN 55

Then Ujjaya the brahmin went up to the Buddha, and exchanged greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to the Buddha:
“Does Master Gotama praise sacrifice?”
“Brahmin, I don’t praise all sacrifices. Nor do I criticize all sacrifices. Take the kind of sacrifice where cattle, goats and sheep, chickens and pigs, and various kinds of creatures are slaughtered. I criticize that kind of violent sacrifice. Why is that? Because neither perfected ones nor those who have entered the path to perfection will attend such a violent sacrifice.
But take the kind of sacrifice where cattle, goats and sheep, chickens and pigs, and various kinds of creatures are not slaughtered. I praise that kind of non-violent sacrifice; for example, a regular gift as an ongoing family sacrifice. Why is that? Because perfected ones and those who have entered the path to perfection will attend such a non-violent sacrifice. [AN4.39]

Also see: [DN 5]


Is Buddhism a syncretic religion, and then what would they say on the Abrahamaic religions?

It might appear that Buddhism is a syncretic religion because it apparently has some similar features to Hinduism and/or Jainism:

Rebirth
Concept of Karma
Samsara
Monks with orange robes and shaven heads
Beings like Brahma, Sakka / Indra, Yama, devas, gandhabba
Tendency to non-violence similar to Jainism
Some Mahayana deities resemble Hindu deities
The use of beads or rosaries in Mahayana Buddhism similar to Hindu
Tendency to non-violence similar to Jainism
Similar ritual elements like cremation and use of incense

In terms of philosophy, the oldest teachings of the Buddha are found in the Pali Canon, especially the Sutta and the Vinaya.

From there, we can see that some of the core and non-core Buddhist teachings, from the Pali Canon, are a stark departure from Hinduism and Jainism, and some are quite original:

The middle way between eternalism and annihilationism (both Hinduism and Jainism subscribe to eternalism of the self) - see this answer
The middle way between asceticism and indulgence (Jainism tends towards asceticism) - see this answer
The self is not eternal, not standalone and not independent - see this answer and contrast with Hindu BG2.24
The self or soul does not pervade the body (unlike the Hindu BG2.17) - see SN35.85
In terms of karma, not everything we experience is a result of past karma (compared to Jainism) - see this answer, SN36.21 and MN101
There is no Supreme Creator God (unlike Hinduism and the Abrahamic religions) - see this answer
The self or soul does not transmigrate (unlike Hindu BG2.22) - see this answer
Lay people eating meat that was bought dead and frozen from the supermarket is not sinful - see this answer

However, as also discussed in this answer, later on, Buddhist and Hindu philosophy influenced each other to produce Advaita Vedanta and Indian Mahayana Buddhist philosophy. Also, Tibetan Buddhism have adopted some Hindu deities. On the other hand, there has also been debates in later times between Hindu and Buddhist scholars (see this question).

However, Anatta and the lack of a Supreme Creator God, still keeps Buddhism very far apart from the other religions, and due to this, it is very unlikely that Buddhism will form a doctrinally syncretic relationship with Hinduism, Jainism or the Abrahamic religions. The syncretism is likely to remain at the cultural level, if it exists at all.


It is a contradiction to say generosity is a virtue when there also exists delight in material wealth.

The teachings in Buddhism about generosity leading to wealth are fake dhamma.

The suttas properly say (somewhere) the supreme generosity is merely for the purpose of beautifying the mind.

Generosity is practised for the sake of giving up selfishness & self. Generosity is not practising for the sake of material reward.

The poor peasants in Cambodia who give to monks will never have material wealth.

Material wealth is acquired by those who have the disposition for making money.

No amount of generosity will give an incapable person the ability of making money on the stock market or start a large corporation, for example.

The greatest wealth in the world is acquired by evil means.

Yes - bad conduct leads to material wealth.

The suttas themselves say wealth can be acquired via evil means.

  These ten pleasure seekers are found in the world.

  What ten?

  First, a pleasure seeker seeks wealth using illegitimate, coercive
  means. They don’t make themselves happy and pleased, nor share it and
  make merit.

  Next, a pleasure seeker seeks wealth using illegitimate, coercive
  means. They make themselves happy and pleased, but don’t share it and make merit.

  AN 10.91


How can we know that we experience sensations as a series of discrete sensations?

There is obviously not a continuous stream of sensations otherwise the mind could remember every sensation, similar to how every frame in reel of movie film can be viewed. In other words, the sensation experienced one second ago has disappeared, forever. To believe there is a continuous stream of sensation is to only observe arising & to not observe passing/disappearance. Its like a person given a box of delicious chocolates that hungrily can only see the next chocolate to be eaten, never realising each chocolate is disappearing & soon there will be no chocolates left, which eventually brings despair when the chocolates (similar to life) run out

Regardless, what Daniel is writing about, such as observing 40 sensations per second, is not found in the reported teachings of the Buddha, although it may possibly be found in later philosophy called Abhidhamma. To me, what Daniel is writing about is unimportant for clear insight, because objects must be very discrete to experience abrupt disappearance (rather than a blur of oscillating sensations the mind becomes infatuated with; like becoming infatuated with the oscillations or vibrations of a girl dancing on a cliff; rather than watching the girl fall off the cliff, to her death).

The Buddhist scriptures refer to observing the coming-to-be & then disappearance of a single in-breath, then an out-breath (MN 118) then, on a more advanced level, the arising, persisting & disappearing of a feeling, perception or thought (AN 4.41). This is more than enough for the purpose of vipassana. For example, merely observing a single breath, until it disappears; then observing the next breath, until it disappears, is enough to get started on seeing the true nature of life phenomena.

  We are typically quite sloppy about what are physical sensations and what are mental sensations (memories, mental images, and mental
  impressions of other sensations). These two kinds of sensations
  actually oscillate back and forth, a back and forth interplay, one
  arising and passing and then the other arising and passing, in a
  somewhat quick but quite penetrable fashion. Being clear about exactly
  when the physical sensations are there will begin to clarify their
  slippery counterpart that helps create the illusion of continuity or
  solidity: flickering mental impressions.

  If you can perceive one sensation per second, try for two. If you can perceive two unique sensations per second, try to perceive four. Keep
  increasing your perceptual threshold in this way until the illusion of
  continuity that binds you on the wheel of suffering shatters. In
  short, when doing insight practices, constantly work to perceive
  sensations arise and pass as quickly and accurately as you possibly
  can

  How fast are things vibrating? How many sensations arise and
  vanish each second? This is exactly what you are trying to experience,
  but some very general guidelines can provide faith that it can be done
  and perhaps point the way as well. Begin by assuming that we are talking
  about one to ten times per second in the beginning. This is not actually
  that fast. Try tapping five to ten times per second on a table or
  something. It might take two hands, but it's manageable, isn't it? You
  could obviously experience that, couldn't you? That's the spirit!
  There are faster and slower vibrations that may show up, some very
  fast (maybe up to forty times per second) and some very slow (that are
  actually made up of faster vibrations), but let's just say that one to ten
  times per second can sometimes be a useful guideline in the beginning.

  Page 20

  Since I just used this dangerous phrase “the mind,” I should quickly mention that it cannot be found. I’m certainly not talking about the
  brain, which we have never experienced, as the standard for insight
  practices is what we can directly experience. As an old Zen monk once
  said to us in his extremely thick Japanese accent, “Some people say
  there is mind. I say there is no mind, but never mind. Heh, heh,
  heh!”


What is the ultimate goal of Buddhism? Is it nirvana?

But what is the ultimate goal of Buddhism?
To begin with maybe it's not entirely about, perhaps even not at all about, an "ultimate goal".

Just as the great ocean, monks, gradually inclines, gradually slopes, gradually slants, certainly does not fall away abruptly, so, monks, in this Dhamma and Discipline there is a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual practice, it certainly does not have an abrupt penetration of knowledge. That, monks, in this Dhamma and Discipline there is a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual practice, and it certainly does not have an abrupt penetration of knowledge, is the first wonderful and marvellous thing, monks, about this Dhamma and Discipline, which, having seen and considered, the monks delight in this Dhamma and Discipline.
from Ud 5.5

Perhaps it begins with doctrines of morality, harmlessness, kindness, prudence, duty -- for well-earned (albeit perhaps temporary) bliss, for the sake of others ... and an "absence of remorse" (which should result from "skilful virtue", and which doctrinally is one of the first steps towards towards proper joy and so on).
The goal to achieve nirvana is basically dying and never coming back, because Buddhism believes in rebirth and the cycle of samsara, which it believes is filled with sorrow and suffering.
That's kind of debatable, I guess. One venerable, on this site, wrote earlier,

I've talked about the subject before myself, and the conclusion I make is that it's not that Buddhists believe in rebirth, it's that we don't believe in death

Instead of saying "dying and never coming back", perhaps you might just as well say "living and never going away", eh?
One of the Buddha's titles the Tathagata and I'm not sure whether that means "thus-come" or "thus-gone" (someone said its etymology is ambiguous -- i.e. gata or agata).
And then there's e.g. this story from another Buddhist tradition (i.e. Zen), i.e.

If you think you really come and go, that is your delusion. Let me show you the path on which there is no coming and no going.

the cycle of samsara, which it believes is filled with sorrow and suffering
I'm not sure. Some schools teach that "suffering" is impermanent too -- that some "beings" suffer.
See also Did the Buddha really say that "life is suffering"?
one should try to achieve nirvana. Am I correct??
I'm not sure even of that: one "should"? Perhaps one "will"? Or that one "has", even, the Buddha himself for example?
I like the "four noble truths" i.e. which say that perpetually "craving" for what you can't have, craving to keep what you can't keep, etc., is a cause of "suffering" -- and that suffering and craving are both subject to cessation.
Some people don't much like that message though (or the way in which someone might try to explain it), see e.g. How to explain what Buddhism is? -- see also Did the Buddha teach the four noble truths to laypeople?