Though "dharma without rebirth" have appeared here more than once ...

What if there is no rebirth?
What's the value or harm of a literal belief in rebirth?
Is a belief in rebirth a necessity for Buddhist practice?
Is rebirth a delusional belief?
Is rebirth/reincarnation central to Buddhism?

... I'll tackle some of the points as they come to me with a interesting clothing.

"Considering the concepts of kamma and rebirth, ONE of the approaches the author offers, is that the Lord Buddha just simply took kamma and rebirth as beliefs deriving from his culture"

I'm not a buddhologist, so personally, for me to take the proposed idea seriously, the author would have to show, at least:

why the Buddha took the view of those that believe in rebirth and karma?

there's evidence that his context was diverse in regard to beliefs, and that belief in rebirth and karma may not have been as popular as we would think. So why picking this one in particular, when other views are available and believed?
If rebirth/karma was indeed such a deep part of the culture he was in, why he would "sacrifice truth for pedagogy sake" in that particular case?

...when he clearly refused in other circumstances, let alone, that he stated "whatever a Tathagata says from the moment of his enlightenment to his parinirvana, that is so, and not otherwise" -- DN29.
In the case of textual corruption inserting rebirth/karma doctrine, how these corruptions took place, and why?

it would certainly have to happen very early on. Maybe with the cumplicity of all monks and disciples (an extremely ambitious project, I'd say).

"[...] beliefs so deep and taken for granted that he would not spend a second on doubting it"

There's plenty of evidence of the Buddha being careful about his statements (see also number 2 above). Not having knowledge about something (specially something about dharma, his specialty) and declaring it would be quite careless on his part.

"Dharma without karma?"

As for the above, the tradition rejects this view. It's not just a matter of "because it's on the suttas" -- though it's overwhelmingly on the suttas. But I think that (a) the doctrine itself is intimately intertwined with these concepts; (b) it provides a complete picture of the grand scheme of things; and (c) it justifies in a very strong way the importance of the buddhist soteriology, nirvana.

But rebirth/karma seems to be something put aside by secular buddhists. I think their method for rejecting is through empirical evidence and their focus is on practicality. That is, they reject because of the lack of empirical evidence for both concepts, or inability to conciliate them with related empirical evidences:

  It is for reasons such as these that any contemporary, scientifically informed Buddhist practice should reject belief in rebirth and its associated kammic causation. The Path is rich enough without them. And while we can make good use of kamma and rebirth as metaphor for our moment-to-moment lived experience of change, or of skillful and unskillful action, we simply cannot make any more of it and expect to end up with a system which is compatible with our best understanding of the way the world works.

  -- http://secularbuddhism.org/2013/05/29/a-secular-evaluation-of-rebirth/


What did Buddha say about dysfunctional families for novice practitioners?

I can only agree with Dhammadhatu's last paragraph. Get yourself going first, for  if you are suffering inside you cannot help others and your inner rescources will become less and less. This is not about being selfish but I call it enlightened self interest.
Now, the Dhammapada is largely addressed to monks, but I think some of the quotes are still good reminders and something to strive for.
To quote from the Dhammapada:

  Verse 160: One indeed is one's own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one? With oneself thoroughly tamed, one can attain a refuge (i.e., Arahatta Phala), which is so difficult to attain.

_

  Verse 61: If a person seeking a companion cannot find one who is better than or equal to him, let him resolutely go on alone; there can be no companionship with a fool.

and lastly verse 43, which targets your issue and echoes Dhatus last point:

  Verse 43: Not a mother, nor a father, nor any other relative can do more for the well-being of one than a rightly-directed mind can.

Apart from Buddhism, I can also recommend REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) by Albert Ellis who was the "father" of cognitive behavioral therapy. Especially Windy Dryden published countless books in how to overcome obstacles (search on Google Books, I learned most of it through Book reviews there). One of the most important hallmarks in REBT is self acceptance, and if possible other and world acceptance, where you differentiate between personhood (or supposed "self/other worth") and the doer. Basically "condeming the sin but not the sinner". It would definitely help with your self esteem issue you raised. On YouTube, Albert Ellis is also to be found. There are old lectures, but still on point and have a no non-sense approach which I like and is usually quite rare to be found in comparison to Buddhism, where lectures and talks go up to 2-3 hours with a lot of non-sense and rambling.


Your bad Karma does not cause bad Karma for others. If another person gets a mindset to kill, it's not a result of your bad Karma. It's a result of his own aversion and volition. But your bad karma can place you at the wrong place at the wrong time.

ex: A crocodile might attack anyone who gets into the water. Your bad karma can place you at the river when the crocodile is waiting to grab a meal.
Coconuts fall down from coconut trees whether you killed someone or not. But your bad Karma can place you under a coconut tree when a coconut is falling down.


Importance of Tipitaka in Mahayana Schools

Tripitaka is taught to and learned by monks in the monasteries and laypeople are encouraged to learn. From a Tibetan viewpoint, the texts H.H. quoted are included within one of the three baskets. Shantideva's Bodhisattvacharyavatara is included in the Sutra Pitaka (although it is not a sutra), Asanga's Mahāyāna Sūtrālamkāra kārikā is included in the Abhidharma Pitaka, Kamalashila's Stages of Meditation belongs to the Abhidharma Pitaka, Nagarjuna's Karika belongs to the Abhidharma Pitaka as well, and so forth.

In the ninth chapter of the Bodhisattva Deeds, Shantideva explains that anything that is included within one of the three baskets was the speech – or at least the intention – of Lord Buddha. His Holiness the Dalaï-Lama highlighted this principle. In Illuminating the Path to Enlightenment, he writes:

  As Dromtönpa lay dying, his head rested on the lap of one of his chief
  disciples, Potowa, and he noticed that Potowa was crying. Then Potowa
  said, “After you pass away, in whom can we entrust our spiritual
  well-being? Who can we take as our teacher?” Dromtönpa replied, “Don’t
  worry. You’ll still have a teacher after I’m gone—the tripitaka, the
  threefold collection of the teachings of the Buddha. Entrust yourself
  to the tripitaka; take the tripitaka as your teacher.”

Furthermore, in 'Transcendent Wisdom', His Holiness writes:

  The three baskets are (1) Vinaya, dealing with moral discipline; (2)
  Sutra, dealing with the training in meditative concentration and other
  facets of the path of awakening; and (3) Abhidharma (sometimes
  translated as "higher knowledge"), concerning a diversity of topics
  ranging from psychology to cosmology. For a further explanation see
  Opening the Eye of New Awareness, pp. 47-52.

We hold that the Tibetan translators showed to which basket the text they were translating belonged, by way of paying particular homage. As His Holiness writes in his commentary to Stages of Meditation:

  The intention [of the Tibetan translator paying homage when
  translating Nagarjuna and so forth] was to cearly indicate to which of
  the three divisions [the pitakas, or baskets] of the Buddha's
  teachings any sutra or commentary belongs. [It goes as follows:]
  1. Supplication is made to all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas if a text belongs to the Collection of Discourses [i.e. Sutra Pitaka].
  2. And if a text belongs to the Collection of Knowledge [i.e. Abhidharma Pitaka], supplication is made to Manjushri.
  3. In order to indicate that a certain text belongs to the Collection of Discipline [I..e Vinaya Pitaka], supplication is made to the
  Omniscient.


What does Buddhism teach about fear of success?

Restlessness is it called, this hindrance. Restlessness and Remorse, in the "Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest"

It can be of course used for worldly purposes, but actually it not meant for such, its not meant to be a winner of others in the world, but to win something beyond that, Mr. Dmitri Pisarenko.


The Account of Other Minds in Chinese Yogācāra Buddhism

Didn't you already ask this?

"Or does he pretend to communicate with other minds, but in fact he
knows that only his mind exists, and all other minds are just
imaginations created by his mind"

Who's conceptual framework would that be done with?
What do you think minds are, things with an unchanging essence?
As I see it, key to understanding the 'mind-only' perspective is recognising all experiences have to be filtered through subjectivities, there is no truly objective, because no one experiences that, only consilience of experiences: like between different senses, & by comparing with others.
We each carry our own reality, but it's one where we constantly interact with the reality of others. A modern framing is 'peer to peer reality'.


Unintentionally killing insects when playing sports and running

Formally the Vinaya, or Buddhist monastic law, states this about killing:

  pli-tv-bu-vb-pc61There is no offence if it is unintentional; if (he is) not thinking; if he does not know; if he is not meaning death; if he is mad, if he is the first wrong-doer.

In particular, notice that ignoring the knowledge that there are living creatures on sports grounds is also intentional and therefore harmful if one proceeds to practice sports and thereby kill insects. How to resolve this?

One observes that small creatures flee the sun. Because of this, one can skillfully choose a time for sports when small creatures will be safe from harm. Children will understand this logic, therefore adults can as well.

Intention therefore affects skillful means. If we play sports intending entertainment, then stadiums emerge along with massive environmental impact, death and destruction. Yet if we exercise for harmony and coordination, then the "need to kill" evaporates and our relationship with the world decreases suffering skillfully. Even a monk walking meditation can intend to walk peacefully without stomping and therefore with less killing.

But cowering inside afraid to step out and kill an insect is also wrong because it is self-mortification. Bodies need exercise for health. Children need physical practice that promotes teamwork. So a balance for all enters consideration.

Unskillful choices generate suffering. Skillful choices end suffering.  The path revolves around the skillful.

  AN3.69:9.1: There are these three skillful roots. What three? Contentment, love, and understanding.


Are there any Buddhist charities or organisations funding education in Buddhist studies?

Maitripa College in Portland, Oregon has scholarship opportunities available: https://maitripa.org/event/scholarship-applications-are-available/


Can Mahayana and Theravada learn from eachother?

Learning -- If by this word within infinite spiritual domain, you mean as ," a type of simple but pure(dedicated towards goal) practice to understand, feel & get established into dhamma(Right teaching)".

Then yes, One can follow any path(householder or homeless or mix like this and this) and will be able to arrive at the same goal through learning.

Goal-- means to achieve state of enlightenment.
It's the behaviour through which it can be said that the stated person/s above or below were either stream-enterer or enlightened ones.

Assuming that you are not a blind fan of buddha to the extent that you call only Gautama the buddha to be an enlightened one, whereas there are still other respectables like this 1, this 2, this 3 etc., there might be others of whom you would have heard in your locality as well. Along with this as per buddhism, once stream-entry occurs- journey will definitely end at same goal.

Even if you are, dhamma teaches us to respect other philosophies as well.

So here is my experience till now,

What can those following the Theravada learn when studying the Mahayana as the Mahayana see it?

My Ego remains satisfied with only a small portion of  theravada but when I see in my locality, it's the mahayani and other similar religions who wins my emotions by showing so much generosity by helping poors, providing free food, free medicines etc. whereas theravadins remain buisy in free abroad travelling  and this becomes a greatest learning for me without the need to even look at mahayani texts or of others.

Is it possible for individuals to use different concepts and arrive at the same goal even though those concepts are misinterpreted by many people in both schools?

As far as practicality of life is there in this modern world, mahayani wins over this race also because of it's vast support in every direction and for almost every type of person(even for the bad-asses, there is tantra way to deal with them as per mahayani texts). Even if this tantra way might not be approved by theravadins, still end purpose of this way is only to change bad behaviour of bad••• ones ,i.e. enable others to have an 'insight like in theravada'.

What can those following the Mahayana learn when studying the Theravada as the Theravada see it?

Still, when it comes to the fastest way of rectifying defiled behaviour pattern within, it's the Theravadin way as in this, we directly deal with the behaviour within our body by temporarily ignoring outside world like various types of Vipassana, whereas in Mahayani way, one may take vows to rectify outside world temporarily,  like here -- even these vows might differ & hence thereby increasing samsara cycle. Still, end goal is same ,i.e. to get enlighten and help others too.

::::::::::::: That's All for now ::::::::::::

Can Mahayana and Theravada learn from each other?

In short, Learning never stops till enlightenment.


If there is no "I", who or what is controlling my animalistic urges?

The "I" is a survival function of the (unenlightened) human mind & is actually created by the very impulses & urges it seeks to control. (Or otherwise this type of "I" is also created by social or religious conditioning).

For example, sexual urges arise due to hormones & other physical & psychological mechanisms and then, a short time later, the mind thinks: "I feel sexual". Thus, the urge occurs before the "I". The "I" is a product (result) of the urge rather than the producer (cause) of the urge.

A child (not conditioned by its parents or religion about right & wrong) does not attempt to control its impulses & urges. A child simply follows its impulses & urges. It is only later, when the child or adult learns through experience that some of its impulses & urges lead to harming itself or are dangerous that it tries to control its impulses & urges.

However, in reality, it is not the "I" that is trying to control the impulses & urges that have lead to hurt, pain & suffering. In fact, it was not really the "I" that experienced pain & hurt. Instead, it is simply the 'citta' (mind-heart) that experienced hurt & it is simply the wisdom of the citta through feeling hurt that seeks to control impulses & urges. That is why enlightened minds (cittas) do not need an "I". Such enlightened minds are guided by wisdom (i.e. neurological sensitivity) only.

It is like breaking a leg. First the pain of the broken leg arises and, a short time later, the mind thinks "I am hurt". The "I am" is not required for the mind to feel the hurt. The mind itself knows the hurt & the "I am" is extra or the commentary.

That said, this business of "I" is very deep. It is natural for the minds of people to develop the "I". Since months after child birth, most feelings, sensations, urges & impulses have been deemed by the mind to be "I am". This is all part of natural human development. Generally, a mind without a development of "I" (to give it personal & social boundaries) will have some kind of mental illness.

The best Buddhist explanation about the "I" is probably 'Anatta and Rebirth' by Buddhadasa.

The citta (mind) certainly accumulates 'kamma'. An example is a drug addict, which accumulates addiction or craving symptoms for a drug. The drug addict decides to break the addiction and successfully enters into 'cold-turkey'. This shows the person is not the accumulated kamma of drug-addiction since the drug addiction (accumulated kamma) can be broken & cleansed.

Similarly, the teachings (AN 6.63) state the Noble Eightfold Path is the path for the ending of accumulated kamma. Accumulated kamma is also something conditioned & subject to impermanence & change when the conditions that created it are removed.

This is why the teachings (AN 3.61) also state what we experience is not due to past lives but to how the mind responds to (internal & external) sense experience/stimuli in the here-&-now.

For example, a certain kamma in the past may have once hurt us (the mind-heart). But if there is a change in attitude or response towards that kamma, such as regarding that kamma as a "lesson" rather than "hurt", that kamma will stop hurting us.

That is why the teachings state "old kamma" ought to be viewed as the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body & mind (since "old kamma" is only sense stimuli arising in the present).

Therefore, accumulated kamma is not something fixed & static but something that people can learn from, i.e., a teacher.


What exactly is Buddhism? Where does it help me? How can I start?

The exact nature of Buddhism is it exists to diagnose the suffering & problems that exist in human life for the sole purpose of overcoming & being free from suffering & problems in human life.

The Buddha said: "I teach about two things: suffering & freedom from suffering".

Whatever problems people have, be they related to work, finance, relationships, life skills, grief, suffering, discontent, existentialism, etc, Buddhism generally has an answer.

In short, Buddhism exists to bring human happiness, peace & freedom.


Can buddhists watch horror films/tv shows?

In short, yes, Buddhists are “allowed” to watch horror films.
The more detailed explanation requires an explanation of Buddhist ethics. In Buddhism there are no “rules,” in the same sense as in other religions. In particular, there is no concept of sin, meaning that one does not commit infractions against a code enforced/created by a divinity or institution. Actions carry a moral weight in and of themselves, but only insofar as they result in certain fruits that either hinder or help liberation. There is no punishment for “breaking” the “moral code.” There are only consequences, so one is encouraged to develop wisdom, to be able to tell apart bad decisions and good decisions. Ultimately, one is responsible for one’s own actions, so one does not ask for permission, nor does one offend an institution or supreme being by breaking the precepts, but one does harm other beings and oneself by performing evil deeds.
So, in general, when approaching any situation in life, Buddhists are encouraged, as the Buddha encouraged his own son, Rāhula, to ask themselves, “Will this action result in harm to myself or others?” So in that line, will watching a horror movie result in harm to myself or others? The answer, depending on one’s tastes and whether one considers being afraid as harmful, is that probably not.


Do Buddhist children from outside of Buddhist countries ever become monks temporarily?

In my country (Belgium) and I presume in most Western countries, children are of course allowed to follow programs like these. However, a child joining a monastic order is considered controversial as it collides with laws regarding the protection of minors. Also, consider that many other Western religious orders impose minimum age requirements themselves.

There was a case a few years ago of a 15-year old boy who wanted to join a Tibetan monastery. He was stopped by police on his way to a flight to India. After a court appeal was he permitted to depart a month later.

Though not exactly the same thing, court cases will take into consideration the legal age required to choose/change one's religion without parental consent. The minimum age varies somewhat in European countries.

In Austria and Germany, children can change their religion without parental consent from the age of 14 years;
in Estonia and Slovenia, from the age of 15 years;
in Cyprus, Portugal and Romania, from the age of 16 years.
In Bulgaria, Denmark and Finland, the minimum age for changing religion without parental consent is 18 years.


How can killing of Muslims by Buddhists in Myanmar be justified?

Here's a good story of a Buddhist reaction to a genocide in Lord Buddha's time.

"Lord Buddha's family/cast (Shrathriya/Shakya) was at the top of the casts at the time and they were very proud of it.Once a kind requested a princess for a marriage from Shrathriya/Shakya cast.But because of their ego they tricked the king by sending a pretty slave girl as a princess.Time went by and she had a son,he visited the Shrathriya/Shakya relatives one day and went back.But one of his men forgot his weapon and came to get it back.That's when he heard what a slave was saying while she was eagerly washing the room that prince stayed in, She was saying look how high a slave's boy has come. The guard went back and said the whole story and the truth was revealed.He took his army and came to kill all the Shrathriyas/Shakyas.Lord Buddha saw this and stopped him not once but twice.In the third time Lord Buddha looked back in time and understood that these people are about to be slaughtered as an effect of a old Karma.This time lord Buddha did nothing.The prince went and killed all of the Shrathriya/Shakya cast brutally.That is why there is no more left today from Lord Buddha's family."

Lord Buddha said that we must come above the lust to be alive,to be born,to not to exist.Lord Buddha said that we must understand the impermanence.But we as normal people still love to live.

If you look into Buddhism you will see how many villages,casts,races have faced death/genocide. Whether we like it or not the only option is to stand like men an take it because if we raise an arm we commit bad Karma.

What happened in Myanmar can't be justified. That is not the advice of Lord Buddha.We are not permitted to kill.

You can't be a Buddhist and a warrior at the same time,it is simple as that.
This might be a hard pill to digest but here is a good example why this concept is right...

Khantivādī Jātaka: J 313 (A Bodhisattva story of our Buddha)

In the Jātaka Tale, Patience Teacher Birth Story (Khantivādī Jātaka: J 313), a jealous king repeatedly asked an ascetic what the ascetic taught, to which the ascetic replied, "Patience," which the ascetic further defined as "not to get angry when injured, criticized or struck." To test the ascetic's patience, the king had the ascetic struck two thousand times with a whip of thorns, had the ascetic's hands and feet axed off, cut off the ascetic's nose and ears, and then kicked the ascetic in the heart. After the king left, the ascetic wished the king a long life and said, "Those like myself do not feel wrath." The ascetic died later that day.

Kshanti (Sanskrit kṣānti) or khanti (Pāli) is patience, forbearance and forgiveness.1 It is one of the pāramitās in both Theravāda and Mahāyāna Buddhism.

It is comforting to have the licence to kill but as Bodhisattva's had done for eons there is only patience and Kshanti for a Buddhist. Go to India and ask what happened to the Buddhists, all of them were impaled on Trishulas by Hindu people. This is not the only time a Genocide happened. No matter who is the victim it is only wrong. Imagine why a teaching like Buddhism vanishes every time it appears in this world, every time it has been a genocide. Your mind will not support the idea first but if you read enough sources the massage is clear. Lord Buddha said one must not harm or kill another even if it cost him his own life .You can either be a Buddhist and make your mind to die the glorious death in Kshanti or you could pick a weapon and go to war. This is where we differ from Christians,Hindus and Islamic, With all due respect to them we do not have a holy war. A good Buddhist is ready to happily accept the other end of the gun.

The offensive of a Buddhist King

But if you are a rebel i recommend you learn the story of** King Dutugamunu . This King protected the lives and the Theravada teaching of srilanka against the Hindu invader's Genocide. As to the prophecy this king will be one of the Great followers of Maithri Buddha in the future.


When I lived in Thailand:

Monks were admitted to hospital.
Monks took painkillers.
Monks used medicine for internal parasites.


Do Different Meditations Support One Another?

Yes they do support eachother imho. Whenever one directs the mind to a wholesome theme, to rouse gladness or energy, when keeping the mind on the theme one is not oblivious to the theme and this concentration is a good skill to develop. Furthermore the foremost quality for the attainment and awakening to the truth is effort and it requires contemplation and coming to agreement.

Therefore it is evident that when mind is somehow impaired one should direct the mind to a skillful theme for a purpose of gladdening or composing otherwise. When mind is unconstricted and pliant one can then retreat from that wholesome theme and stop thinking about it and just be mindful and at ease.

Traditionally speaking the guardian meditations are largely accepted to be necessary among insight and samatha meditators alike afaik. I advocate contemplation in general; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kZxstsAvjhj9Svc47RUKRIyKQMuHMD4adIvr_7pp2uI/edit?usp=drivesdk

  “There is the case of a monk who remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on the body in & of itself, a fever based on the body arises within his body, or there is sluggishness in his awareness, or his mind becomes scattered externally. He should then direct his mind to any inspiring theme. As his mind is directed to any inspiring theme, delight arises within him. In one who feels delight, rapture arises.

  In one whose mind is enraptured, the body grows calm. His body calm, he feels pleasure. As he feels pleasure, his mind grows concentrated.

  He reflects, ‘I have attained the aim to which my mind was directed. Let me withdraw [my mind from the inspiring theme].’ He withdraws & engages neither in directed thought nor in evaluation. He
  discerns, ‘I am not thinking or evaluating. I am inwardly mindful & at ease.’

  “This, Ananda, is development based on directing.

  And what is development based on not directing? A monk, when not directing his mind to external things, discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external
  things. It is unconstricted [asankhitta] front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on the body in & of itself. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’

  “When not directing his mind to external things, he discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external things. It is unconstricted front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on feelings… mind… mental qualities in & of themselves. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’

  “This, Ananda, is development based on not directing.


There are several options for you.

Keep the marriage life and visit a monastery for meditation for couple of weeks every six months.
Give up the marriage and get ordained. But before you do that, make sure your family has a steady income to survive.
Keep the marriage and meditate whenever your wife does not need you.
Keep the marriage and just be mindful of everything you do in lay life.


From Buddhas point of view, is what is common called preaching unskillful not benefical?

"Preaching" in the sense of "proselytizing" is kind of unpopular among Buddhists (see also How are Buddhists supposed to spread Buddhism?).
In the suttas I think that the Buddha tended to teach people who asked him a question or people who challenged him (and didn't try to impose his views on strangers), and he often taught by asking questions.

But "preaching" in the sense of "giving dhamma talks" is normal; and (Dhamma) is I think defined as one of the proper topics of speech for a monk.


Is the only way to deal with the effects of your bad karma endurance?

Try to make good Karma - it will help you for sure. The Buddha once gave a simile.

He said that bad karma was like salt and good karma like water. If you put some salt in a glass of water it will taste bad, but if you put the same amount of salt in a river, the taste of the water will not change, so doing good karma is a very good way to handle this situation.

Of course, one can get rid of all past karma by becoming enlighten or a Buddha, ordaining would be great, but I assumed you wanted a "quick" and "wordy" answer.


What did Siddhartha really meant by ending suffering

"Ending suffering" is a red haring caused by older translations of the Pali word Dukkha.

It is a word which has not survived in Western Indo-European languages, but its antonym "Sukkha" is the root for our word "Sugar" in English, "Sucre" in French and "Zucker" in German, all meaning "sweet".

Later translators preferred to either leave the term untranslated or to clarify that translation with terms such as anxiety, distress, frustration, unease, unsatisfactoriness, etc. Many contemporary teachers, scholars, and translators have used the term "unsatisfactoriness" to emphasize the subtlest aspects of dukkha.

Buddhism focuses on developing insight into the nature of dukkha, the conditions that cause it, and how it connects & affects us all. This insight, bodhi is (also dubiously) translated as enlightenment. So what Siddharta actually meant would be closer to "ending the arising & conditions of unsatisfactoriness in one's mind", which also creates positive effects in reality (by actions based on understanding) and therefore to others.


Are Therevada's cosmology and the Mahanaya's sutras physically impossible?

Buddhism is a definite, and it is the same Dhamma preached by all Buddhas. Popular science is always changing with new theory replacing old ones. But having said this some similar theories have emerged:

Parallel universe - Multiverse
Multiple worlds - Planetary habitability
Cyclical universe - Cyclic model, One Big Bang, or were there many?, Multiple Big Bang theory could bring 'Copernican revolution' says Astronomer Royal

Also might be of interest:

Loka: The Buddha’s Formulation of the Universe by Richard R. Crutcher
Parallel universes by Piya Tan


Where is the description of the vow and the Bodhi tree?

This seems to appear in the Jhataka (in the Khuddaka-Nikâya) literature: THE ATTAINMENT OF BUDDHASHIP in J.i.7110 marked as p. 76.

Then the Future Buddha turned his back to the trunk of the Bo-tree and faced the east. And making the mighty resolution, "Let my skin, and sinews, and bones become dry, and welcome! and let all the flesh and blood in my body dry up! but never from this seat will I stir, until I have attained the supreme and absolute wisdom!" he sat himself down cross-legged in an unconquerable position, from which not even the descent of a hundred thunder-bolts at once could have dislodged him.
At this point the god Mâra, exclaiming, "Prince Siddhattha is desirous of passing beyond my control, but I will never allow it!" went and announced the news to his army, ...

The above page is linked/referenced on this index page as "i.685-772 (§ 8.), Intro".


Does craving include basic survival drives like hunger, thirst, reproduction?

Hunger is not "craving" (tanha, technical Buddhist term). Craving is basically when you are in whatever state you are (let's call that X) and you imagine (visualize) some other state Y. And then you label Y as "desirable" and strongly wish that you were there, and then by inference state X becomes "unacceptable", hence you experience [mental/emotional] suffering. Makes sense?

Hunger is just a signal you get from your body: "need food". Craving is conceptual, hunger is not. Craving involves judging, taking sides. Hunger is just raw sensation.


The impact of the subconscious mind on the conscious mind

There is an interesting section on Visions and Signs in the teachings of Ajaan Fuang. I quote my other answer here.

  § "Don't be amazed by people with visions. Visions are nothing else
  but dreams. There are true ones and false ones. You can't really trust
  them."

  § A Bangkok housewife who was practicing meditation with Ajaan Fuang
  heard some of his other students say that meditation without visions
  was the straight path. It so happened that she had frequent visions in
  her meditation, and so hearing this made her wonder why her path was
  so winding and convoluted. When she asked Ajaan Fuang about this, he
  told her: "Having visions in your meditation is like having lots of
  lush wild greens growing along the side of your path. You can gather
  them as you go along, so that you'll have something to eat along the
  way, and you'll reach the end of the path just like everyone else. As
  for other people, they might see the greens without gathering them, or
  may not even see them at all — because their path goes through arid
  land."

  § "Visions — or whatever things appear in the course of your
  meditation: It's not the case that you shouldn't pay any attention to
  them, for some kinds of visions have important messages. So when
  things like this appear, you have to look into how they're appearing,
  why they're appearing, and for what purpose."

  § "There are true visions and false visions. So whenever you see one,
  just sit still and watch it. Don't get pulled into following it."

  § "You should watch visions the same way you watch TV: Just watch it,
  without getting pulled inside the tube."

  § "If you can't let go of your visions, you'll never gain release."

  § One of Ajaan Fuang's students asked him, "When you see something in
  a vision, how can you know whether it's true or false?"

  His answer: "Even when it's true, it's true only in terms of
  convention. You have to get your mind beyond both true and false."

  § "The purpose of the practice is to make the heart pure. All these
  other things are just games and entertainment."


What are the Major Meditation Traditions / Masters in Laos / Cambodia / Vietnam?

Valued Upasaka Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena

Atma can only tell you about Cambodia. Meditation is a very death matter. There are 3 main streams, currently:

One and most popular and growing: Goenka. A second center is currently in building in Central Cambodia.
The secound most dominate lineage is that of But Sovung, originated from Acharn Sujin, a Thai Upasika (also teacher of Upasika Nina Van Gorkum), which avoids in somehow everything that could cause Jhana and is merely a dry Adhidhamma tradition (Dhamma in Cambodia), but most successful in manners of gaining.
The "formal" branch of "Vipassana Dhura Buddhist Meditation Center" with the most public and governmental support, focusing more on Jhana.

Under 1.000 monks, you would find 10 who have learned meditation a little and 1 who regular practice it. The same with laypeople. Such as daily practice is merely unknown and people are much to busy so that they would scarify time. So if, there are mainly such as retreats or courses here and there, events. In every region one finds on this or that hill such as a meditation guru, mostly focusing on samadhi. The forest Tradition is extincted. Atma came across some disciples of older lineages, but those Monks (mostly 50+) mostly have stopped to teach or are busy to build Meditation Building first.

There is one monastery in Siam Reap, which is sad to focus on meditation. Atma had met some monks from there but did not personally came there till today.

All in all it holds true, if there is no Sila, there is no foundation for samadhi. Maybe Atma is able to share more contacts and hints.


Which sutta is it in which Sariputta asks his disciples .. friend if someone asks, is the world eternal

I found two that are similar, but not identical.

The Kalara Sutta is similar, in that it's Sariputta talking about Dependent Origination. However, in that sutta, it's the Buddha who is asking the questions; Sariputta has no disciples; and instead of asking whether the world is eternal, the question is whether birth is ended. This could perhaps be the one you're thinking of, because the Buddha asks questions like, "But, Sāriputta, if they were to ask you ..."

Or there's the The Greater Discourse on the
Elephant-Footprint Simile, which starts with Sariputta addressing the bhikkus as "Friends", and ends by repeating that "He who sees dependent origination sees the
Teaching; he who sees the Teaching sees dependent origination."


Here is the simple answer to what you feel...

We are in constant pain and suffering.

As to lord Buddha

Eyes,Ears,Tongue,Nose,Body & Mind are Burning from three things (Lust,Anger,Confusion -[Raga,Dwesha,Moha]). But the one who practice and realize escape the burning forever,he is free.

So here's what is happening to you...

Now that you have started to see the world in the correct way you might feel these things like anyone who traveled the path before you,

Happiness or joy without a reason
Feeling happy even from the little things
Not feeling like you used to,as if you are someone else
Appreciating little things in life
Feeling more love or kindness towards ones who are close to you & for almost anyone
More willing to forgive & forget
Looking back at past and making plans to correct the wrongs and to
apologize

These are really few among the usual characteristics of an individual who is practicing the path. Feeling happy and relaxed, starting to enjoy the life without hassle is really normal and there is nothing to be afraid. What you feel is the slow process of realization, The realization of what truly things are.


Is it possible to reconcile the evolution theory with Buddhism?

I'm really not sure what one has to do with the other.  The Buddha taught the path leading to the cessation of suffering.  Evolutionary theory explains what happens through the interplay of a given species and its surroundings.  I think the example set by the Dalai Lama is very instructive in demonstrating how a Buddhist should approach science.  He strongly embraces what science has to teach us about reality - which is what Buddhism seeks to do in it's own way.  He even goes so far as to say that if science (and by science, I understand him to mean rigorous testing and reproducible evidence) could prove an aspect of Buddhism teaching false, a Buddhist would have to side with science.  I'm really don't see anything in evolution that would impinge on the dharma.


What is the meaning of the word Uncreate?

In this case, uncreated means, non-contrived, natural, something that does not require an effort to maintain.

I once heard a myth, not sure how real, that New York City has a massive underground flooding problem - but because the city infrastructure situation is so insanely complicated, no-one can even dream of fixing the leaks - instead they just have a system of pumps running 24/7 pumping the water. The city can only exist thanks to the pumps, if the pumps were to stop even for an hour, the city would get flooded and the rest of the infrastructure would collapse. This is how the story goes anyway.

Samsara is like that. It requires continuous maintenance. We are not normally aware of this, but we do put tremendous effort 24/7 to maintain Samsara. We do it ourselves.

Our Ego (image of self) is contrived, and requires constant effort to maintain.
Our idea of the world is contrived as well.
Our idea of how the world should be is also contrived.
The pumps that maintain these systems are our narratives that we keep telling ourselves again and again.
The whole mass of suffering is based on these pumps.

Similarly, mere intellectual understanding of Dharma, of Anatta, of Emptiness etc. is equally contrived. Because it is contrived, it does not hold under pressure of real-life circumstances.

The uncreated, the natural, is always there, like the clear sky above the clouds, we just have to stop the pumps in order to see it. Direct experience belongs to this category, and so will hold under any pressure.

This is the meaning of "uncreated" here, not in the active sense as in "deconstruct". Although come to think of it, certain amount of deconstruction (of ego, of habitual illusions) is sometimes necessary too.


Hinduism teaches about a permanent soul that goes from life to life until it reunites with the universal soul called the Mahabrahma.
Buddhism says there's no soul going even from this moment to the next, let alone from life to life. Both mind and body are processes of causes and effects. There's nothing permanent within you that can qualify as a soul. Read about Paticca Samuppada. Buddhism also rejects the belief of a universal soul.


I only know that I will know nothing: can that ever have any currency for Buddhists?

"A fool who knows his foolishness is wise at least to that extent, but
  a fool who thinks himself wise is a fool indeed." - Dhammapada 63

If a foolish person were to become aware that he is foolish, there is potential for spiritual growth. But the fool who thinks that he is wise, blocks himself from any spiritual development due to his delusion.


The right time is whenever you can, wherever you are, starting if possibile with a calm mind. Try to maintain a constant practice, whichever technique do you follow. As a reminder read Webu Sayadaw's To Light a Fire.


Looking for a canonical reference: everyone who attains jhana will be a god of that realm in the next life

The question is about common interpretations of AN 4.123.


Yes. It's true that not everything is caused by karma. Some things are caused by other reasons, like the weather. The Sivaka Sutta talks about this. There's a summary at the bottom:

  Bile, phlegm, and also wind,
  Imbalance and climate too,
  Carelessness and assault,
  With kamma result as the eighth.

The Acintita Sutta states that you can't work out karma and its results precisely:

  "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is an
  unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring
  madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.

What's more skillful is to develop one's virtue (sila), concentration (samadhi) and wisdom (pañña) as stated in the Lonaphala Sutta. That will mitigate the ill effects of past karma.


Why does the Buddha call himself the Tathāgata?

Tatha means "truth", "reality" or literally "so", "such".

gata is often translated as gone, however from my research it looks like it is a suffix that means "firmly grounded in" or "rooted in" -- as in kayagata smrti "mindfulness rooted in the body".

Together this would make Tathagata mean "Firmly established in reality".

I personally associate this word with two other terms: sugata and duggata.

Sugata is a person who fared well, a lucky one, and therefore an optimist.
Duggata is an unfortunate person, a loser, and therefore a pessimist.
Tathagata would then mean neither a pessimist nor an optimist, but realist.


I cannot of course say what is happening with you. But here is a thought, since you have used the tag of impermanence for this question (and quite correctly, I think).

Our minds are addicted to sensations- craving of pleasurable sensations and aversion to painful sensations. The addiction is to react, depending on which type of sensation one is experienceing, which changes from time to time (hence the impermanence in the subtlest form). An addicted mind, like an addict, grows accustomed to a high- once staisfied with one drug (here 'fun'), it wants another. Addict wants a high and once that is satisfied, it will want another high. This wanting of high (craving) is a conditioned pattern of mind, at the deepest level- conditioned because of our ignorance to the impermanent nature of phenomenon.

What you thought of as fun, is now boring. But the mind is addicted to 'fun'. So now it is in a bad mood since it can't find something new, a new fun thing to do. Don't get me wrong, having fun is important. The obsession is harmful- we loose the balance of mind.


Questions to deniers of traditional view on Rebirth

1.
  If there's no rebirth, what happens after death of a non-arahant? Does a new life ensue dependent on the one which has just ended?

Life continues all the time. New lives inherit some characteristics from previous lives. Information is rarely lost completely. Influences carry on. They are not necessarily linear 1:1, but due to grasping some people may identify with a previous life.

  2.
  Rebirth is tightly connected with kamma.
  a) Do you observe ripening of all results of wholesome and unwholesome actions in the current life?

Nope. Some are latent until a following life or lives. The question is, whose life?

  b) If you don't, what's in your opinion the fate of those kammas which haven't produced result in the current life?

N/A

  3.
  Current existence is traditionally thought of as being a manifestation of kamma amassed in previous existences.

Not correct. This is an eternalistic view. There are influences from the past sure, but the experience of current existence is primarily an interpretation we make in the here and now.

  If there's no rebirth, current life hasn't been preceded by any other existence which would contribute its kamma to it.

Previous lives did contribute. Not necessarily your lives.

  How do you then explain differences between people and their experiences, which in MN 135 in particular are explained through kamma?

N/A

  4.
  If a person doesn't attain Nibbana in the current life, isn't there any hope for them?

For them? Sure there's hope for them. But not for the dead John Smith, right?

To summarize, there are past and future lives, OUR lives. There's karmic influence that carries on. There's identification with a living organism in this life, or with a story from a past life. There's hope for and fear of a future life, due to craving.

There's no entity or identity that carries on from life to life, only disjointed influences. In fact, even in this life it is the same, the assemblage of disjointed influences into a bundle is a magic trick performed by the grasping mind.


In Buddhism Can Devas do Something For Us?

In Buddhist scriptures, devas are described as powerful beings who often interact with humans. So assuming devas are real, they can surely hinder or help humans in a material way. What no being can ever do is force or hinder another's spiritual path. There we are truly alone. Even Mara can only tempt beings to stray from the skillful path but can never succeed as long as we can see through its illusions.


I suppose "to die without getting enough" is a colloquial expression for being insatiable, indefatigable.

This is an emphatic way of saying that women have a strong instinctual desire to bear children. If you polled a big enough sample of women I suspect majority would say they like to have children, enjoy having children, and many would say they'd want to have more then one child if allowed by the living circumstances.

The point of this in context of Buddha's teaching is that samsara has built-in mechanisms for self-continuation. Natural phenomena have innate tendency to proliferate, to continue, to support their kin, to procreate.

Left unchecked, the stream of samsara rolls forward endlessly regenerating ignorance, confusion, desire, suffering, and desire to escape suffering. It is the ignorant pursuit of this desire is what supports the stream's momentum to roll on and on.


Why do Buddhists believe in reincarnation?

There is rebirth in Buddhism, for sure, but rebirth of what?

When we say "rebirth", we mean that something that we can peg onto as YOU, is born again after physical death. But what is YOU? The soul or self or the SAME consciousness that wanders on throughout this lifetime?

The Buddha taught that all phenomena is not self. The Buddha also taught that all conditioned and/or compounded things (including consciousness) is impermanent. It is not the SAME consciousness that wanders from childhood to old age. It changes. (See MN 38)

So, in Buddhism, there is no rebirth of the self or consciousness.

In fact, if a person injures his brain or experiences dementia or amnesia or coma, then his personality, his memories and even his consciousness could be impaired or non-existent for the remainder of his physical life. In this case, even in his lifetime, we cannot guarantee that he is totally present at every moment. Then, what more for the next lifetime?

So, if a soul or self or consciousness is not reborn, then what is reborn?

There is definitely rebirth in Buddhism, but what is reborn?

Suffering. The continuity of suffering, regardless of physical death, is rebirth.
The continuity of conditioned processes when the condition for them to exist continues, is also rebirth. For e.g. karmic cause and effect, and its relationship to an individual's perceived continued existence in this lifetime. Also, the physical and mental processes of the five aggregates, for e.g. the "stream" of consciousness (MN 38) and the thought "I am the thinker" (Snp 4.14). The continuity of conditioned processes doesn't necessarily end at the death of the physical body.

The Theravada perspective is that at every moment there is death and rebirth. In between, we have the continuity of conditioned processes, that bridges every moment. With the continuity of conditioned processes, we have the continuity of suffering, so long as ignorance is present.

When ignorance is permanently ended, craving is permanently ended and suffering is permanently ended. This permanent ending of ignorance is referred to as enlightenment in Buddhism.

In this answer, Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu wrote:

  ... the conclusion I make is that it's not that Buddhists believe in
  rebirth, it's that we don't believe in death - the latter being merely
  a concept referring to the change from one set of experiences to
  another. True death only occurs either at every moment or at the
  experience of nibbana.

Usually when people talk about rebirth, they imply that the SAME consciousness wanders on in this lifetime and onto the next lifetime. In the following quote from this answer, we read a nice explanation by Damith, of why this is not true.

  Stream of consciousness OR Continuity of consciousness means
  individual consciousness which arises (uppada), exists (titi), ceases
  (bhanga) rapidly as an effect of many causes. It's just a stream, not
  a long lasting single one.

  Think of a stream of water. When you look at a single point in the
  stream, you see many water droplets appear, exist, and disappear. Take
  a single droplet out of it which passed by(*) that point. If you
  consider the past, present, and future of that droplet, you'll see a
  stream. In reality, it's not the same droplet nor another droplet you
  see in the past, present, and future. Stream of consciousness is
  analogous to this example. Please try to understand it in that way.

  (*) Note: "passed by" - This phrasal verb can be only used when we
  talk in conventional truth. The reader may think that rūpa
  (form/matter) can move in space which is not a true in ultimate
  reality. Neither any nāma (name) nor rūpa can move. What happens is
  the arose rūpa existed and ceased then and there. After that new rūpa
  arise nearby. This is called "Deshāntarotpatti".

I'm not saying that there is no YOU (self) at all. There is a YOU, but it's not a permanent YOU. It's changing from moment to moment, depending on conditions, and compounded by different mental and physical processes.


I'm wondering whether 'physical pliancy' and 'mental pliancy' -- found in many meditation texts on samatha -- refers to physical energy. Is this linked or equivalent to virya?

It probably refers to the balancing of the Five Spiritual Faculties, especially
Concentration (samadhi) and Energy (viriya).
If the Energy faculty is unbalanced, leading to the 3rd Hindrance of Sloth and torpor (thina-middha), one needs to arouse energy. This can be done in a number of ways such as;

One can splash cold water in the face before a meditation session
One can do walking meditation in a brisk pace before sitting meditation
One can go to a high place, e.g. a mountain or building and practice
One can make a firm determination to practice effortly and sincerely
One can practice Death-contemplation (Maraṇasati ) to arouse a feeling of urgency
One can reflect on the 5 daily recollections, i.e. That one will grow old, become sick and ill, die, loose everything that one holds dear and that one is the sole heir of one's actions.

In the book "The Way Of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera, it's described how to overcome to the hindrance of Sloth and Torpor. Here he writes about the perception of light. I have made highlights in the quote:

3. Sloth and Torpor
Through wrong reflection on a state of boredom and the like, sloth and torpor come to be. Boredom is just dissatisfaction. Lassitude is bodily laziness. Languidity of body is the bending of the body torpidly in getting up and in similar actions. Lethargy after a meal is a dizziness or slight faint which is due to eating a principal meal. It is also called the discomfort which follows such a meal. The mind's sluggishness is the dullness of the mind. An abundance of wrong reflection on boredom and similar states of mind produces sloth and torpor. Therefore the Blessed One said that much wrong reflection on boredom, lassitude, languidity of body, lethargy after a meal, and the mind's sluggishness, is a condition for the production of fresh sloth and torpor and the increase and expansion of sloth and torpor already come into being.
Through right reflection in inceptive energy and similar states of mind is brought about the overthrow of sloth and torpor. Inceptive energy is the effort first set afoot. Exertion is more powerful than the inceptive energy because it leaves indolence behind. And because of its assailing further and further of the destructive condition, progressive endeavor is more powerful than exertion. By the exercise of right reflection intensely on this threefold strenuousness sloth and torpor are cast out. Therefore the Blessed One said that the condition for keeping out new sloth and torpor, and for casting out sloth and torpor that is old, is abundant right reflection on the element of inceptive energy, of exertion and of progressive endeavor.
There are six things which lead to the casting out of sloth and torpor: The seeing of the reason of sloth and torpor in the fact of eating too much or gluttony; the changing of the postures completely; reflection on the perception of light; staying in the open; sympathetic and helpful companionship of the good; and stimulating talk that assists in dispelling sloth an torpor.
There is the following explanation of these six things: The bhikkhu who has eaten gluttonously is assailed by sloth and torpor while doing his recluse duty of meditation in his day or night quarters as by a mighty elephant pressing down on him, but that one who practices moderation in food is not troubled thus with these hindrances. In one who thus sees the characteristic of sloth and torpor in gluttony there is the casting out of sloth and torpor.
Sloth and torpor disappear in him who changes over from the posture which induces sloth and torpor to another; in him who reflects on the brightness or the light of the moon, a lamp or a torch by night, and on the light or brightness of the sun by day; in him who lives in the open; in him who associates with sympathetic and helpful companions, like the Elder Maha Kassapa, who have dispelled sloth and torpor; and by stimulating talk connected with a strict recluse-regimen.
Therefore it is said: Six things lead to the casting out of sloth and torpor. The yogi understands thus: sloth and torpor cast out by these six things are stopped from arising forever in the future by the attainment of the path of arahantship.
The bhikkhu who has eaten gluttonously after the manner of the well-known types of Brahmanical gormandizers mentioned in ancient Indian books. There are five kinds of these greedy eaters: (1) He who eats until he has to be raised up by the hand from his seat. (2) He who lies rolling just where he has eaten and eats as long as he likes. (3) He who eats until he slips off his waist cloth. (4) He who fills himself with food in such a way that it seems as if a crow could peck at the food in him. (5) He who having filled his belly full and vomitted eats more food again, or he who eats until he vomits.
On the light or brightness of the sun by day: The meaning should be understood thus: Sloth and torpor vanish in him, too, who at night is reflecting on the image of the perception of the brightness of the sun he got by day.
Here it may be helpful to state the eight ways of dealing with torpor taught by the Master to the Elder Maha Moggallana: (1) One should neglect to mind the thought which says that drowsiness is descending on one, or (2) one should reflect on the Dhamma, or (3) repeat or recite the Dhamma, or (4) pull both earlobes and rub or massage the limbs with the hands, or (5) getting up from the sitting position, apply water on and rub the eyes, and look into the distance, at the constellations in the starry sky, or (6) reflect on the thought of light, or (7) fix the thought on the ambulatory, aware of the ends of it with the controlling faculties of sense turned inwards and the mind kept in, or (8) sleep conscious of the time of waking and on awaking get up quickly thinking that one will not give oneself to the comforts of lying down, reclining and languor, when all other seven ways fail.

May this be of use to you.


What is the difference between mindfulness and detachment?

'Mindfulness' means 'to remember' to apply/practise the Buddhist teachings. It does not mean 'bringing one's attention to experiences occurring in the present moment' (as written by a person in Wikipedia).

For example, if I wish to stalk and assassinate (murder) another person using a rifle, I must meticulously bringing my attention to experiences occurring in the present moment. Yet murdering a person in the present moment is not practising the Buddhist teachings.

In summary, for the 'trainee' of the higher path, the mind must continuously remember to not attach to any experience. Therefore, to practise non-attachment requires mindfulness, as written in the suttas:

  His mindfulness... is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, not clinging to anything in
  the world.

  MN 10


Benefits of "Mental Noting" during positive events?

I spoke before about the power of narratives. Narratives is how our mental world is shaped, narratives is one of the main ways to control the sukha/dukha mechanism described in the Four Noble Truths.

In this case, mental noting is a special case of narrative. By looking at thoughts and emotions in a certain way ("in and off themselves" as Buddha said in Satipatthana) we create a special philosophical narrative in which the thoughts are things of a different order than they are in our regular everyday context. We look at them neutrally, philosophically. Hence the dissociation effect.

However, mental noting is just one way to do narrative. The idea is to be the master of your thoughts (via control of the context / frame of reference) instead of being driven by your thoughts (being locked in a certain context). So don't fall in the same trap with your positive experiences, you don't have to shape it in a way that does not induce positive states of mind. You are totally free to create any sort of narrative (assuming it is true, not harmful, and does not go contrary to Dharma) - as long as it drives you up. In fact the whole point of the First Jhana is to learn to control your mood via narratives (and then directly, in the Second Jhana).


Regarding Nicca and Anicca natures of Avidya and Prajna

If Tanha(craving) is caused by Avijja(ignorance) and if Avijja is sustained by Tanha, the cycle cannot be broken using Avijja and Tanha. But that doesn't mean it cannot be broken using something that is not a link of the Paticca-samuppada(Dependant Origination). Panna(wisdom) or within this context Vijja(non-ignorance) is the opposite of Avijja. It takes out the root cause of Tanha. This breaks the perpetual cycle.

  how can a state with no end (Nirvana) have a beginning (Nirodha)?

Nirodha is not a beginning. Nirodha refers to end of all suffering. That is achieved by cutting off the cause of suffering: Tanha(craving). Tanha is cut off by non-ignorance(Vijja). The word Nibbana(Nirvana) refers to the unconditioned Dhamma(reality). It is uncaused and unborn. Hence it has no beginning or end.

  Are Avidya and Nirvana therefore Nicca or Anicca?

Avijja here refers to not knowing the four noble truths, not seeing impermanence, suffering and non-self. Avijja is not a thing to be permanent or impermanent. It only points to the lack of Paññā(Wisdom). Nevertheless, Moha(delusion) as a Cetasika(mental concomitant) is caused and it dies when the accompanying thought dies. Therefore it's Anicca(impermanent).

Nibbana is Nicca(permanent).

  if Prajna is Nicca, how could it give way to the origination and
  sustenance of Avidya in the first place?

Paññā is not Nicca(permanent). Paññā has to be cultivated. It belongs to the Sankhara(mental formations/activity) aggregate of the Pancakhanda(Five Aggregates).

  If Prajna is Anicca and has a beginning, then how can we say that
  Nirvana (which requires Prajna) is Nicca?

Nibbana is not dependant on anything. As mentioned above, it is unborn and uncaused. Paññā(wisdom) is required to cut off the defilements that prevent one from seeing Nibbana.


The question "why?" with regards to existence comes from theistic thinking. Even some scientists cannot free themselves from this kind of thinking. It is a result of believing that there's some ultimate entity/force in the universe that decides a purpose for us.

Buddhism doesn't subscribe to ideas like that. Buddhism teaches about causes and effect. It never talks about an inherent purpose or something written in the stars with regards to existence. Because there is none. But that doesn't mean that there are no goals worth aiming for. In an ultimate sense, end of suffering is the goal that is worth striving for.

If your head is on fire, trying to put off the fire is the smarter thing to do. Not to ask "why me?".


What are the six types of equanimity based on the household life?

(E) Therein, what are the 6 kinds of equanimity of the household life (cha gehasitā upekkhā)?

  (25) On seeing a form with the eye, equanimity arises in a foolish, confused, worlding,
  in an untutored worldling who has not conquered his limitations
  nor conquered his karmic fruits, who sees not danger.
  Such an equanimity as this does not transcend form.
  Therefore, it is called the equanimity of the household life.

  (26) On hearing a sound with the ear, equanimity arises in a foolish, confused, worlding,
  in an untutored worldling who has not conquered his limitations
  nor conquered his karmic fruits, who sees not danger.
  Such an equanimity as this does not transcend sound.
  Therefore, it is called the equanimity of the household life.

  (27) On smelling a smell with the nose, equanimity arises in a foolish, confused, worlding,
  in an untutored worldling who has not conquered his limitations
  nor conquered his karmic fruits, who sees not danger.
  Such an equanimity as this does not transcend smell.
  Therefore, it is called the equanimity of the household life.

  (28) On tasting a taste with the tongue, equanimity arises in a foolish, confused, worlding,
  in an untutored worldling who has not conquered his limitations
  nor conquered his karmic fruits, who sees not danger.
  Such an equanimity as this does not transcend taste.
  Therefore, it is called the equanimity of the household life.

  (29) On feeling a touch with the body, equanimity arises in a foolish, confused, worlding,
  in an untutored worldling who has not conquered his limitations
  nor conquered his karmic fruits, who sees not danger.
  Such an equanimity as this does not transcend touch.
  Therefore, it is called the equanimity of the household life.

  (30) On cognizing a mind-object with the mind, equanimity arises in a foolish, confused, worlding,
  in an untutored worldling who has not conquered his limitations
  nor conquered his karmic fruits, who sees not danger.
  Such an equanimity as this does not transcend mind-object.
  Therefore, it is called the equanimity of the household life.

  These are the 6 kinds of equanimity of the household life.

Sal,āyatana Vibhanga Sutta

  (1) the latent tendency to lust reinforced by being attached to pleasant feelings;

  (2) the latent tendency to aversion reinforced by rejecting painful feelings;

  (3) the latent tendency to ignorance reinforced by ignoring neutral feelings

Pahāna Sutta

So the neutral feeling or equanimous feeling experienced, in the case of a householder leads to ignorance. The equanimity, in this case, is not been non-judgemental.


You don't necessarily have to abandon your opinions. The important thing is to recognize that opinions come from conditions, and those conditions always change. Your work is one of the conditions, and it's appropriate to form an opinion for those conditions... and then be ready to change the opinions if the conditions change, or if the opinion doesn't apply in a new situation.

Like the previous commenter said, this is a 'sila' practice, rather than meditation - examining your everyday behaviour to see if it's skillful. It's probably impossible to do vipassana at work!


What is the difference between transcendental state of mind and Nirvana?

Nirvana is not a state of mind but is an element the transcendental mind has sense contact with.
As for "transcendental" mind, the Pali is "lokuttara"; which literally means "above/beyond the world".

Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent (lokuttara), connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves.
Ani Sutta


Is there a defined counting system in Pali?

Are there any equivalent numbers which can be written in Hindu-Arabic numerals for numbers used in Pali

I found one here by Googling for "pali numerals": Pali Numbers - Ancient Buddhist Texts

  This is a list of commonly found Pāḷi numbers which occur in the literature.

What is the time period mentioned in ‘‘Sataṃ sahassānaṃ nirabbudānaṃ, Chattiṃsatīṃ pañca ca abbudāni"

The reference I cited above says,

  1 + 63 zeros: nirabbutaṁ

Ven. Sugato's translation of that sutta says,

  For more than two quinquadecillion years,
  Sataṃ sahassānaṃ nirabbudānaṃ,

  and another five quattuordecillion years,
  Chattiṃsatī pañca ca abbudāni;

I don't know if those are the same numbers; I can't count that high in English!


Seeking sources on -- practicing for this life alone is not even Dharma

The closest I can think of is the Dana sutta in which the Buddha explains how the purity of one's motives have an effect on the results.

"Sariputta, there is the case where a person gives a gift seeking his own profit, with a mind attached [to the reward], seeking to store up for himself [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death.' He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?"
"Yes, lord."
"Having given this gift seeking his own profit — with a mind attached [to the reward], seeking to store up for himself, [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death' — on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Four Great Kings. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.
[...]
"Or, instead of thinking, 'When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise,' he gives a gift with the thought, 'This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind.' He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?"
"Yes, lord."
"Having given this, not seeking his own profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to store up for himself, nor [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death,'
[...]
" — but with the thought, 'This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind' — on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of Brahma's Retinue. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a non-returner. He does not come back to this world.
"This, Sariputta, is the cause, this is the reason, why a person gives a gift of a certain sort and it does not bear great fruit or great benefit, whereas another person gives a gift of the same sort and it bears great fruit and great benefit."

-- AN 7.49
Now, if you're asking about the possibility of practicing the Dhamma without, at the very least, assuming rebirth to be true, then in the Apannaka sutta the Buddha indeed said this was wrong view, and thus against the path.

Because there actually is the next world, the view of one who thinks, 'There is no next world' is his wrong view... when he says that 'There is no next world,' he makes himself an opponent to those arahants who know the next world. Because there actually is the next world, when he persuades another that 'There is no next world,' that is persuasion in what is not true Dhamma. And in that persuasion in what is not true Dhamma, he exalts himself and disparages others. Whatever good habituation he previously had is abandoned, while bad habituation is manifested.

-- MN 60


11 year old daughter suffocated, was dead and was resuscitated now in a state of reduced concsciousness

After my wife died I found that she existed in my mind quite a lot (as well as formerly existing physically).

That existence (in my mind) could make me happy ("what a privilege to know her") or sad ("miss her dearly").

Whether I'm sad or happy is partly my choice, it's not inherent in or obliged by the physics of the situation -- instead a matter of how I train myself (habitual thought), a.k.a. it depends on how I "view" it.

On the subject of memory, one of the things to remember (according to Buddhism) is "virtue" -- for example skilful, altruistic, compassionate behaviour -- "recollection of virtue" is an mind-object whose result or purpose could be an "absence of remorse". So when people behave virtuously, remembering that doesn't cause regret -- instead, looking back, "I'm glad she did that" and "I'm glad I did that" and so on.

Because it's a matter of doing the best you can in the circumstances.

So my question is this: what would Buddhism say that happened to my daughter? What is she today? Where is she? Is she still my daughter or has reincarnation taken place? What is the purpose of her being damned to this state?

If Buddhism were speaking carefully I think it would adapt what it says according to what you understand and know -- perhaps a gradual training.

I tend to think of Buddhist doctrine as starting with "the four noble truths", but according to this topic it might begin with talking about ethics, and generosity, and heaven.

Then there are the four noble truths, which are approximately (as I remember them):

Birth, sickness, death, are dukkha (the word dukkha is translated variously as "suffering" or "stress" or "unsatisfactory"); and not getting what you want, being exposed to what you don't want, not being able to keep what you want to keep, are dukkha; in short, the five "aggregates of clinging" are unsatisfactory.
Dukkha is associated with tanha (literally "thirst", usually translated "craving") craving for sense-objects, craving for becoming/existence, even the craving for ending
Dukkha ceases when craving ceases
There's a way (Buddhist practice) which leads towards the complete ending of  craving and suffering

So apparently suffering arises with (and results from) various forms of craving -- wanting things to be other than as they are.

Another important part of the Buddhist doctrine is that everything that's put-together (including "beings") is impermanent -- so I guess you'd better not expect "compound things" to last forever ... including "human bodies" (but even also day-dreams may be fabricated and based on a false assumption that the body is under your control, e.g. that it remains healthy and unchanging).

Buddhism also praises "seeing things as they really are" -- which includes seeing, "they're impermanent" -- but I think that also includes seeing a distinction between moral and immoral (seeing kindness, altruism, and so on).

There's another doctrine, the anatta or "non-self" doctrine. If the four noble truths are the first doctrine then anatta is the second. It might be difficult to understand or explain -- those who do understand might be called semi-enlightened, there are dozens of questions about it on this site -- it might be summarised as "any view of self will result in dukkha" -- where examples of "self-view" include "I exist" but also "I don't exist" and "this is me" and "this is mine" and "this is my permanent self".

For that kind of reason the question "What is she?" is difficult to answer in a way that wouldn't cause you pain -- I think that Buddhism might say that there is no satisfactory answer to that question.

Going further the question might be described as the product of unwise attention. Conversely "wise attention" focuses on questions like "what is stressful?" and "what is not?" -- for example, "recollection of virtue" and questions like "what was virtuous?" and "what is virtuous now?" might be a more kind of "enlightening" way to try to think about things.


Monks cannot marry, but in your case best course of action is to practice as a lay person until you are fully ready to leave the householders responsibility and and become a monk. Being a monk would mean you will have to leave your girlfriend.


What is it like to perceive without 5 Skandas?

Nibbana is the 5 skandas have overcome the idea of a "person" & "who".

The Pali scriptures define Nibbana as the end of greed, hatred & delusion and occurring to a living conscious mind. The following is merely one teaching from many:

  Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the
  burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely
  released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties
  remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and
  disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of
  attachment, hate and delusion in him that is called the
  Nibbana-element...

  Iti 44


Can we ignore sense doors through meditation?

One cannot avoid contact (described below) hence one cannot ignore the sense doors totally:

Cha Chakka Sutta

(Samuday’atthaṅgama) Loka Sutta

What one can do it to ensure any contact (described above) does not result in craving and break the above progression of events at feeling. This can be achieved through meditation.

See

Food and other cravings, and guarding the senses
Rejecting clinging to both pleasure and displeasure
How should I watch sensations in Vipassana meditation?
Sankhara meditation
Meditation technique to reduce/control pain/sorrow/loss

answers for more details.


Is there a scientific consensus on meditation?

If you are still interested, you can check this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Meditation/comments/9dx45g/can_we_please_have_a_pinned_thread_with_all_the/e5qcic6/

It's a comment with about 15 benefits of meditation with links to scientific articles that state them as far as I understand.


Does mankind evolve or devolve spiritually?

According to Mahayana Buddhism there are Three Ages of Buddhism:

The Former Day of the Law, also known as the Age of the Right Dharma, which lasts between 500-1000 years during which the Buddha's disciples are able to uphold the Buddha's teachings.
The Middle Day of the Law, also known as the Age of Semblance Dharma, (second 1,000 years) during which the teaching only resembles the right Dharma.
The Latter Day of the Law, during which the Dharma declines.

So, according to this, there is devolution in the sense that the Dharma declines over time until it disappears and then the true Dharma will only be re-established by the next Buddha.


Vitakkasanthana Sutta (MN 20)

Please keep in mind that one's effort should be of ardency and urgency. You have to act like a hero and free yourself from these. You need to have wisdom about defilements, otherwise you will find excuses and dwell in them even further.

1) "Divert your attention to something more skillful". Now, this doesn't necessarily mean to change one's ill-will to compassion via metta meditation, since the ill-will has too much energy and your thoughts are therefore distorted and won't let good thoughts in so easily. Therefore attend to something skillful but nothing unrealistically positive, for your current state of mind ( ill-will in that case) is too strong. You can try to give self compassion to yourself, i.e.that you are quite angry and that you are not feeling well (treat yourself like a little child). After that, once you feel better you see that other person might also get angry so that you have a sense of not being alone with that problem and you then send metta to these people.

2) Repeatedly scrutinize the benefits of letting go of negative mind states and the benefits of positive ones (both for you and how it contributes to other people as well)

3) Step 3 in the sutta mentions: "Paying no mind to thoughts". Since not thinking of a thought or even aversion to it doesn't really eliminate it, my adive is to always accept the presence of the thought and then distract myself and do something else (or just curiously observe it and see its impermanence). At best, I would always employ a cognitive technique like Step 2 and a behavioral one (like standing up and doing something else while keeping the drawbacks and benefits in mind)

"Relaxation of thoughts". Basically "cooling off", for example via breathing and internally saying: "I'm breathing in sensitively.. breathing out sensitively". "Anger only makes matters worse.. both for me and for others" (connected to step 2)
Clenching one teeths. Now I don't  know how this one is to be understood, but surpressing thoughts in the sense of "don't think of xyz" doesn't work. I recommend contemplating the Buddha's strengths like energy and determination etc. and follow the steps above.

  "There is the case where evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — arise in a monk while he is referring to and attending to a particular theme. He should attend to another theme, apart from that one, connected with what is skillful. When he is attending to this other theme, apart from that one, connected with what is skillful, then those evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. Just as a skilled carpenter or his apprentice would use a small peg to knock out, drive out, and pull out a large one; in the same way, if evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — arise in a monk while he is referring to and attending to a particular theme, he should attend to another theme, apart from that one, connected with what is skillful. When he is attending to this other theme, apart from that one, connected with what is skillful, then those evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it.

  If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to this other theme, connected with what is skillful, he should scrutinize the drawbacks of those thoughts: 'Truly, these thoughts of mine are unskillful, these thoughts of mine are blameworthy, these thoughts of mine result in stress.' As he is scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts, those evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. Just as a young woman — or man — fond of adornment, would be horrified, humiliated, and disgusted if the carcass of a snake or a dog or a human being were hung from her neck; in the same way, if evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to this other theme, connected with what is skillful, he should scrutinize the drawbacks of those thoughts: 'Truly, these thoughts of mine are unskillful, these thoughts of mine are blameworthy, these thoughts of mine result in stress.' As he is scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts, those evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion, or delusion — are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it.

  "If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts, he should pay no mind and pay no attention to those thoughts. As he is paying no mind and paying no attention to them, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. Just as a man with good eyes, not wanting to see forms that had come into range, would close his eyes or look away; in the same way, if evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is scrutinizing the drawbacks of those thoughts, he should pay no mind and pay no attention to those thoughts. As he is paying no mind and paying no attention to them, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it.

  "If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is paying no mind and paying no attention to those thoughts, he should attend to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts. As he is attending to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. Just as the thought would occur to a man walking quickly, 'Why am I walking quickly? Why don't I walk slowly?' So he walks slowly. The thought occurs to him, 'Why am I walking slowly? Why don't I stand?' So he stands. The thought occurs to him, 'Why am I standing? Why don't I sit down?' So he sits down. The thought occurs to him, 'Why am I sitting? Why don't I lie down?' So he lies down. In this way, giving up the grosser posture, he takes up the more refined one. In the same way, if evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is paying no mind and paying no attention to those thoughts, he should attend to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts. As he is attending to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it.

  "If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts, then — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he should beat down, constrain, and crush his mind with his awareness. As — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he is beating down, constraining, and crushing his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. Just as a strong man, seizing a weaker man by the head or the throat or the shoulders, would beat him down, constrain, and crush him; in the same way, if evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to the relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts, then — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he should beat down, constrain, and crush his mind with his awareness. As — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he is beating down, constraining, and crushing his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it.

Regarding the fifth point in the Sutta: Sometimes there is also the word "surpressing" mentioned (or at least Ajahn Sona in one of his videos said "surpression"). However above, the Buddha says "constraining and beating down with one's awareness."
 Is someone familiar with this sutta? Does it really mean awareness? I wouldn't personally interpret that as "don't think of xyz" (since it doesn't work), but rather about forcing one's mind to concentrate on an object and thereby "crushing" one's thoughts. Now I don't know how the fifth method would differ then from the fourth. Any ideas? I think the difference would be the emphasize, that is: the urgency and ardency to rid oneself from these defilements.


Is it helpful to avoid first person pronouns when speaking and writing?

There is no rule about such use, and the Buddha begins many suttas with 'Aham, bhikkhave...' 'I, bhikkhus,...'

ChrisW has the general idea: the point is not the use or omission of the personal pronoun but the point of view in back of and reflected by that use.

Where the point of view is simply to identify an individuality (as one's place on the computer screen is marked by the cursor) such use is called 'speaking conventionally', for example,

"Please pass me the salt. I will be going to the store at 10. I, friends, when I was a young lad ..."
Where the use is to enhance the idea of an on-going or eternal self, the use signifies that a point of view concerning the self is present in the speaker, for example,

"I am everything and everything is me. You make me feel bad. That is my toy. Some day I will be president."

As for the middle way being part of the answer to this question, there are a number of suttas where an Arahant is praised for teaching Dhamma 'without bringing in the self'.

The two extremes that are not the Middle way can be said to be the point of view that an eternal self exists and that an eternal self does not exist. (See: The First Sutta) (The way it is stated in the First Sutta: 'the path down self-indulgence, and the path down self-torture' represent the forms of behavior that result from these two extreme views of existence. They are elsewhere directly spoken of as being the two extreme worldly points of view.)

The Middle way, the essence of the Dhamma teaches the fact of becoming, the satisfactions of becoming, the disadvantages of becoming, and the way to escape from becoming without bringing in a point of view concerning 'self.'

The whole of the Dhamma is essentially The Middle Way, but The Ariyan Eightfold Way is specifically called that, and an equivalent of the Eightfold Way, also often called 'The Way Down the Middle' is the Paticca Samuppada which you can see speaks about the process but does not bring in the self:

  "From blindness proceeds own-making.
  From own-making proceeds consciousness.
  From consciousness proceeds named-forms.
  From named-forms proceeds the six realms of the senses.
  From the six realms of the senses proceeds sense-experience.
  From sense-experience proceeds desire.
  From desire proceeds fueling desire.
  From fueling desire proceeds existing.
  From existing proceeds birth.
  From birth proceeds old age, sickness, and death,
  grief and lamentation,
  pain and misery,
  and despair.

  But from the utter eradication of blindness comes the utter destruction of own-making.
  From the utter eradication of own-making comes the utter destruction of consciousness.
  From the utter eradication of consciousness comes the utter destruction of named-forms.
  From the utter eradication of named-forms comes the utter destruction of the six realms of the senses.
  From the utter eradication of the six realms of the senses comes the utter destruction of sense-experience.
  From the utter eradication of sense-experience comes the utter destruction of desire.
  From the utter eradication of desire comes the utter destruction of fueling desire.
  From the utter eradication of fueling desire comes the utter destruction of existing.
  From the utter eradication of existing comes the utter destruction of birth.
  From the utter eradication of birth comes the utter destruction of old age, sickness and death,
  grief and lamentation,
  pain and misery,
  and despair.

No mention of self. If the thinking in back of the personal pronoun is of such a nature there is no reflection there of a point of view of self. Where the thinking in back of such speech is: "I am. That is mine. That is the self of me. I am a part of that. That is a part of me." Whether of the past, the future or of the present, then the self has been brought in.

Still this is not a matter for criticizng others or holding one's self superior or taking pride in one's handling of personal pronouns! It is simply a reflection of one's inner state of mind.


Realigning your priorities after realizing death and impermanence

The ancient extinct Kadampa school of Tibetan Buddhism (not the NKT, New Kadampa Tradition, which is an unsanctioned "breakaway" school) practiced mindfulness of death. Their motto was:

  Base your mind on the Dharma
  Base your Dharma on a humble life
  Base your humble life on the thought of death
  Base your death on an empty, barren hollow.

"The Words of my Perfect Teacher" by Patrul Rinpoche explain this practice in the following way:

  While standing up, sitting or lying down, tell yourself: “This is my last act in this world”, and meditate on it with utter conviction. On your way to wherever you might be going, say to yourself: “Maybe I will die there. There is no certainty that I will ever come back.” When you set out on a journey or pause to rest, ask yourself: “Will I die here?” Wherever you are, you should wonder if this might be where you die. At night, when you lie down, ask yourself whether you might die in bed during the night or whether you can be sure that you are going to get up in the morning. When you rise, ask yourself whether you might die sometime during the day, and reflect that there is no certainty at all that you will be going to bed in the evening.

One Kadampa would always turn his bowl upside down when going to bed, and would not cover the hot ashes to last until morning. When asked why, he answered: "I really cannot say if I will wake up tomorrow".

Besides the ongoing mindfulness of death, there is also a formal meditation on death, which involves contemplating three points:

that we are sure to die,
that we can not predict time and circumstances of our death,
that when we die, there is nothing that can help us.


Noble Friendship (Kalyana Mitta) in modern times

Kalyāṇa is a word translated as "beautiful, charming; auspicious, helpful, morally good", by the way -- not the same word as ariya (which is the word that's usually translated as "noble").

Kalyāṇa is used in lots of other contexts, mostly not to do with "friends" (i.e. where the adjective qualifies a noun other than "friend" or "friendship") -- e.g. in the first search result from that list (AN 10.47), it's an adjective used to describe "good deeds":

  What is the cause, sir, what is the reason for doing good deeds, for performing good deeds?”
  “Ko pana, bhante, hetu ko paccayo kalyāṇassa kammassa kiriyāya kalyāṇassa kammassa pavattiyā”ti?

So what does the adjective mean when it's ascribed to, when it describes, friend and friendship? That's explained in three ways:

What are the qualities of a good friend (what do they 'have')?
What is the function of a good friend (what do they 'do' for you)?
What is the effect of a good friend?

Piya Tan wrote a translation of the Upaḍḍha Sutta with some analysis in its introduction.
Several paragraphs of that introduction include the phrase, "According to the Sutta Commentary" (so I think that his introduction is based on or inline with that commentary).

"What they have?" appears to be these qualities:

  The accomplishment of faith (saddhā,sampadā),
  The accomplishment of moral virtue (sīla,sampadā),
  The accomplishment of charity (cāga,sampadā),
  The accomplishment of wisdom (paññā,sampadā)

"What they do?" appears to be this (I think it's this bit of Piya Tan's introduction that's most worth quoting, because it's the most definitive):

  Spiritual friendship, in other words, is the effecting of the three trainings (ti,sikkhā), that is, in moral
  virtue, mental concentration, and wisdom. On the moral level, the mentor as spiritual friend serves as a
  virtuous exemplar. On the mental level, he is a teacher who gives a meditation subject to the pupil, and
  further inspires and nurtures his meditation and mental cultivation. And on the spiritual level, the mentor motivates his mentee to aspire towards spiritual liberation in this life itself. Spiritual friendship is the mutual
  rejoicing of both the teacher and this pupil in the Dharma as well as in the goals that such a friendship
  entails, namely, awakening.

  Spiritual friendship is the whole of the holy life in the
  sense that the “holy life” (brahma,cariya) is basically our training in moral virtue, that is, the taming and
  refining of our bodily actions and our speech, or what we do and how we communicate with others. This
  is the “external” or social aspect of our spiritual training, so called because our moral training, in an important
  way, is how wholesomely we relate with others in keeping with at least the five precepts.

  Spiritual friendship as moral training is the basis of our mental training, where our spiritual friend is
  our mentor in mental cultivation. In either case, there is a vital level of instruction from the spiritual friend
  and wholesome communication between mentor and mentee. This instruction is sometimes known as “the
  voice of others” (parato ghosa), that is, the beneficial instructions and inspiration from the spiritual
  friend. The Anguttara Commentary explains parato ghosa in the context of giving rise to right view as
  that of “hearing the true Dharma” (saddhamma,savana) (AA 2:157).

  “The voice of another” is one of two ways in which right view arises; the other way is the personal
  effort of wise attention (yoniso manasi,kāra). “Wise attention” here is the mindfulness that is the basis of
  proper mental cultivation leading to mental focus and wisdom. Our wise attention is fortified through
  spiritual friendship by way of an inspiring and experienced guide.

  Moral virtue is our wholesome relationship or interbeing with others, which in turn is also the wholesome
  conditions that nurture our mental cultivation and wisdom (the other two trainings). Moral virtue is
  always present in the arhat. When we are still worldlings, moral virtue is a catalyst to our spiritual development,
  and when we become noble disciples, as awakened beings, moral virtue comes naturally to us.
  We are then spiritual friends to those who are less developed than we are. Hence, spiritual friendship is
  the whole of the holy life.

"What's their effect?" is (explained simply as being) your development of the noble eightfold path.

In summary (my own summary):

It's not just "wise" people, it's "good" people.
IDK to what extent you can learn morality via the internet ...
I think that people do correspond with their mentors -- e.g., in pre-internet times, by writing letters.
I think Buddhism is a.kk.a. Dhamma-vinaya ...

  Dhamma-vinaya [dhamma-vinaya]: "doctrine (Dhamma) and discipline (Vinaya)." The Buddha's own name for the religion he founded.

... the "vinaya" being a.k.a. the monastic code (rules of conduct etc.). That's what I think of and IMO it's to miss something important (including presence, personal example, discipline) if you take the phrase (kalayanamitta) out of (that) context.


Once the Exalted One spoke to the Venerable Maha-Moggallana thus: "Are you drowsy, Moggallana? Are you drowsy, Moggallana?" — "Yes, venerable sir."

(1) "Well then, Moggallana, at whatever thought torpor has befallen you, to that thought you should not give attention, you should not dwell on it frequently. Then it is possible that, by so doing, torpor will disappear......................

AN7.58

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel026.html