What does Buddhism teach about healing others through the mind

What happens when we aren't attentively listening, and then we see someone who attentively tries to listen to something?

It's natural if we would begin to listen attentively too.

So our behavior and states of mind influence others, and are influenced by others. Therefore, having clear and calm mind can benefit others around us.

It happened that entering a room or a Dharma center where a Buddhist teacher experienced in meditation was present, I felt thick atmosphere of awareness. Like a field of energy.

Likewise, sometimes I felt similar "field of energy" entering a church, or entering my room when I practiced there a lot.

There are many stories how a state of mind influenced others or even influenced weather, e.g. stopped a drought. Famous Heart Sutra (except in the brief version) says:

  Once the Blessed One was dwelling in Rajagriha at Vulture Peak mountain, together with a great gathering of the sangha of monks and a great gathering of the sangha of bodhisattvas.  At that time the Blessed One entered the samadhi that expresses the dharma called “profound illumination,” and at the same time noble Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva mahasattva, while practicing the profound prajñaparamita, saw in this way: he saw the five skandhas to be empty of nature.

It means the Buddha was in deep meditative absorption, and that helped Avalokiteshvara to immerse in deep clarity and gain insight.

I noticed such things in my own life. For example, when I sat down with a silent mind near people whose mind was scattered and troubled, often they realized something, e.g. solutions to their problems, or they recalled something they wanted to do.

Therefore we can say that harmony, clarity, calmness and concentration of our mind might help others too be in harmony, clarity, calmness and concentration.

When turbulence of mind ceases, our bodies naturally tend to optimize their self-regulation.

So there are Buddhist practices, especially in Mahayana, such as Bhaishajya Guru (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhaisajyaguru) sadhanas, which are used for healing.

Among the mental factors conductive to awakening, there are Four bases of spiritual power, or riddhipada. See Iddhipada (Wikipedia) and Four Steps to Magical Powers by Master Sheng Yen.

Improving our states of mind as means of practice is the basis of the concept of Six paramitas. It might be considered the central concept of Mahayana Buddhism, with the role similar to the role of the Eightfold path for Buddhism in general.

Six paramitas (six perfections) can be explained as developing puṇya (Pali puñña, English merit) - the energy of good karma. As we practice the first paramita, selfless giving, and so on, we move the burden of egoism away from our shoulders. It can be felt as natural "unconditional happiness". Like feeling warm sun on the skin, warm smile inside, clarity and calmness pervading everything, as unlimited as space.

That process of abandoning egoism therefore is explained as developing the energy of good karma. Our actions become more powerful and clean, our mind more stable and perceptive, and so on.

When we try to study Dharma intellectually, we can find it's hard to understand complex ideas like emptiness etc., but when we practice Six perfections, we develop punya, and understanding becomes easier. Therefore Mahayana teachers say: "The path of giving is the supreme path". (See e.g. "Ratna avali").

Some students misunderstand that, theoretically thinking that such words were addressed to laymen and so weren't ultimately true. They think that it's clear that the supreme path is studying emptiness. But in real practice we develop punya, and that enables us to realize emptiness, so it's the same path.

Therefore we shouldn't think that developing good karmic energy is somehow a lower path; it is indeed the supreme path, inseparable from the realization of emptiness.

That's why Mahayana practitioners, especially after a session of formal practice, pronounce "dedication of merit". In order to keep our giving selfless, and to keep our energy from dissipation, we give it away, to benefit everybody. We dedicate the developed punya to the awakening of all beings, or to other goals in that direction. For example, after a session of meditation etc., we can transfer merit dedicating it to healing a sick person.

Also note that causes created mentally become more powerful when they are expressed in actions of body and speech.


MN58 Abhaya Sutta:

  (1) In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual/untrue, unbeneficial, and unendearing/disagreeable [i.e. painful - AV]  to others -- he does not say them.

  (2) In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual/true but
  unbeneficial and unendearing/disagreeable to others -- he does not say
  them.

  (3) In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual/true and
  beneficial, but unendearing/disagreeable to others -- he has a sense
  of the proper time for saying them.

  (4) In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual/untrue, unbeneficial, and yet endearing/agreeable to others -- he does not
  say them.

  (5) In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual/true,
  unbeneficial, and endearing/agreeable to others -- he does not say
  them.

  (6) In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual/true, and
  beneficial, and endearing/agreeable to others -- he has a sense of the
  proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has
  sympathy for living beings."

Also:

  It's as if a man were shot with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. As a result of being shot with the arrow, he would feel fierce, sharp, racking pains. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon. The surgeon would cut around the opening of the wound with a knife. As a result of the surgeon's cutting around the opening of the wound with a knife, the man would feel fierce, sharp, racking pains. The surgeon would probe for the arrow with a probe. As a result of the surgeon's probing for the arrow with a probe, the man would feel fierce, sharp, racking pains. The surgeon would then pull out the arrow. As a result of the surgeon's pulling out the arrow, the man would feel fierce, sharp, racking pains. The surgeon would then apply a burning medicine to the mouth of the wound. As a result of the surgeon's applying a burning medicine to the mouth of the wound, the man would feel fierce, sharp, racking pains. But then at a later time, when the wound had healed and was covered with skin, he would be well & happy, free, master of himself, able to go wherever he liked. The thought would occur to him, "Before, I was shot with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. As a result of being shot with the arrow, I felt fierce, sharp, racking pains. My friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives provided me with a surgeon... The surgeon cut around the opening of the wound with a knife... probed for the arrow with a probe... pulled out the arrow... applied a burning medicine to the mouth of the wound. As a result of his applying a burning medicine to the mouth of the wound, I felt fierce, sharp, racking pains. But now that the wound is healed and covered with skin, I am well & happy, free, master of myself, able to go wherever I like."

Can an objective criticism of somebodies work, which might hurt feelings, violate 'Right Speech' precept? -- Yes, it can: 1) if it is not beneficial; 2) if it is not said at the proper time.


You don't have to join a physical Buddhist community or temple. Instead you can use online resources for learning and be part of virtual Buddhist communities on the Internet. You can also practice the Noble Eightfold Path on your own.

A classic book for a beginner to read is "What the Buddha Taught" by Walpola Rahula, which can be downloaded here.

The Basics of Buddhism podcast series by the Buddhist Society of Western Australia (BSWA) seems to be good. Ajahn Brahm, who features in some of these podcasts, is also a famous speaker on Youtube.

Two good beginner articles to read are The Buddha and His Dhamma by Bhikkhu Bodhi and An Introduction to the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Tricycle's Buddhism for Beginners has some nice articles.

If you want to feel close to a Buddhist community, watch the live and recorded videos of the BSWA on their Youtube Channel. During the live sessions, you can submit questions. Sometimes they have live events like the five precepts initiation ceremony on Wesak Day and the occasional monk ordination ceremony.

You can learn the basics of Buddhist meditation as taught by Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu either using the booklet or the Youtube videos. You can join the online meditation courses also, where you could have interaction with other course participants.

Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu has also written many great answers on this website, which would be helpful to a beginner. His YouTube channel also has many good videos for beginners.

When you want to deep-dive into the teachings of the Buddha, use the accesstoinsight.org website's Self-guided Tour of the Buddha's Teachings. The book "In the Buddha's Words" by Bhikkhu Bodhi is also highly recommended.

And of course, Buddhism SE, SuttaCentral and DhammaWheel are a few other online Buddhist communities you can participate in.


How should Buddhists receive generosity?

The lay community consider it a privilege to offer Dana to monks. A monk is a special person who has given up the comforts of lay life in search of spiritual liberation. Offering Dana to such a being is very meritorious(refer to Dakkhina Vibhanga Sutta). So the monks are actually doing a favor to the laypeople by accepting it. When going on alms round, a monk may give a short blessing, but it is not compulsory. If monks are invited to a house to receive the dana, they will usually give a sermon on invitation.

From a monk's perspective, being worthy of it is the spirit of receiving generosity. In the Aggikkhandopama Sutta, lord Buddha explains what happens to the monks who are not worthy of the gifts received.

From a giver's perspective, the receiver needn't have any standards. You can even give food to an animal and expect a 100 fold gift in return, according to Dakkhina Vibhanga Sutta. The more virtuous the receiver, the greater the merit.

Generally, from a receiver's perspective, rather than just thanking as a common courtesy, it's more important to remember the favor and return the kindness as one is able when one gets the chance. SACCAṀKIRA-JĀTAKA gives a good example. Also, one can try to make the best use of the gift received to make the giver happier.


Are there anything to care about in this universe?

I think Buddhism recommends you focus on what's virtuous and moral instead of on what's feels pleasurable.

For example, lying, killing, stealing -- are all to be avoided -- and that's important.

Conversely, generosity, kindness, keeping your promises -- that's important too.

There is a word -- sukha -- which might be translated "happiness". It's used in contexts like the Sukhavagga.

I suspect it's a happiness conditioned or caused by an absence not by a presence -- for example not happiness because you have something ("a chocolate bar") but happiness because of not having something ("anger", "greed", "remorse").


The Buddha already attained the 1st jhana when he was a child as per MN 36:

  I considered: ‘I recall that when my father the Sakyan was occupied, while I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, I entered upon and abided in the first jhāna, which is accompanied by applied and sustained thought, with rapture and pleasure born of seclusion."

In MN 26, the Buddha already mastered both Rupa and ARupa jhanas when studying under the two masters Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta. The topic of Jhana in general was discussed extensively in many suttas, here're some examples.


If I don't react, am I not placing myself and others in harm's way by taking part in an enabling apathy?
Given that anger is ineffective in that situation, I don't see how non-anger is enabling apathy.
You seem to be keenly aware of the potential dangers of unsafe driving. I presume you act on that, when you're the driver yourself, or when you're a passenger and able to communicate with the driver.
I don't see what good it does to get angry about the behaviour of others over whom you have no control, with whom you have no communication, whose driving you're unable to affect.
How do Buddhists see disagreements where the opposing party might harm others if they continue in their ways?
Doctrine like MN 8 might be relevant:

Others will be harmful; we shall not be harmful here
etc.

The first part of the sutta may imply that what's especially good isn't the, "enjoying a nice calm walk in my neighbourhood and be otherwise feeling quite serene", but is more especially the decision to refrain from unskilful action -- including anger -- even when others don't.
I feel like I should change my attitude, but I'm not quite sure what I should strive for.
The doctrine of the "Three Poisons" suggests that people feel attracted to what's attractive, repulsed by or angry about what's unattractive, and confused or ignorant about what's neither. Perhaps we're used to thinking about things being Good or Bad, and are nonplussed about what's Not or Neither.
I think that Buddhist doctrine has a lot of "not" or "non-" in it -- for example the opposite of "harmful" isn't only  "beneficial" or "benevolent", it's also simply "non-harmful" or "harmless".
Similarly if you feel that anger isn't appropriate, then "what you should change it to" might be, simply, "non-anger". I like Akkosa Sutta: Insult (SN 7.2) -- it suggests you should refrain from "participating in" or "sharing" or "accepting" the misbehaviour (e.g. somebody's revving their car engine) -- not to violently stamp out that behaviour, but to see it as an attention-getting invitation which you decide to decline.
I think you described already many disadvantages of anger and why it's inappropriate (in the first two paragraphs).
I don't know how much doctrine you know already (since this is the first time you posted here), but I'd like to add two more things.

One is that I'm conscious of "conceit" as being a cause of inter-personal disputes, and try to avoid both (conceit and inter-personal disputes). If I'm tempted to dispute I remind myself that conceit is hard to eradicate (but should be eradicated) -- see here for some explanation of what conceit is:

Māna (Wikipedia)
This answer associates it with comparisons, e.g. "I am better than you" (including "... because I'm selfless and considerate, whereas your actions are potentially harmful")

I'm not trying to say that there's no difference between skilful and unskilful driving -- but perhaps I'm trying to suggest that getting angry is akin to unskilful driving -- see Chapter 17 of the Dhammapada, which includes

He who checks rising anger as a charioteer checks a rolling chariot, him I call a true charioteer. Others only hold the reins.

This answer suggests that getting angry or getting into disputes -- about what's ethical -- is still getting angry or getting into disputes.


Apologizing is good Karma that has a mitigating(not delete) effect on the bad Karma you had committed:
ex:

The story of Soreyya.
Devadatta taking refuge of the Buddha just before being swallowed by earth.
The story of Bhaddā Kapilānī Therī

Bad Karma committed against parents are highly potent compared to ordinary beings. Ex: Killing parents makes birth(next life) in hell inescapable and you will have to face the consequences in the subsequent lives until you end Samsara.


Just think of the flip side of it @Akila… If the patient is a devout Buddhist.. still almost all  will say "may god bless you" at the time of leaving. Will they ever say "Namo Buddhaya" when arriving, or at the time of leaving? I doubt it. It is because very few know that we Buddhists say 'Namo Buddhaya' whenever we meet or depart. At the time when the Supreme Buddha was alive, it was the practice observed by His disciples to place both hands together in a gesture of worship and greet each other by saying ‘Namo Buddhaya’, whenever they met. Today, whenever Hindus meet one-another, they too bring their hands together and say ‘Namo Narayana’ or ‘Oh Namah Shivaya’. Some say ‘Namo Sairam’ when they enter the ashram of Sai Baba.

But in a way it is OK to say “may god bless you" as the point of the Buddhist teachings isn't to reinforce the identity of "I am a Buddhist and this is what I believe." It's to cultivate compassion and loving kindness and purify anger and aversion from your life. Then your focus would be on "How can I compassionately reply to these people in a way that feels authentic to me?"  You need to be able to connect with the human being in front of you, and look past beliefs and value systems and connect with their humanity.

So focus less on yourself and focus more on the other. What words can you say to bring this being happiness and reduce his/her suffering? Intention is the most important factor and can often supersede other factors. If you feel that by replying "God bless you," (which is personally my own response), this person might experience a sense of comfort, ease, and happiness that would not be experienced otherwise, then there is nothing wrong in saying it.


How to rebuild a relationship after a breach of trust?

I can't think of any instances where the Buddha specifically addresses your question. However, you may find the Patience chapter in Santideva's Bodhicaravatara (Way of the Bodhisattva) quite helpful.
Of course, the whole chapter is profoundly useful (as is the entire text), but you may want to have a look, starting at verse 38 of chapter six. Here's a link: https://www.tibethouse.jp/about/buddhism/text/pdfs/Bodhisattvas_way_English.pdf


Sutta advice on obstacles and insults, similar to Epictetus' (Stoic) advice?

OP: "If anyone tells you that a certain person speaks ill of you, do not make excuses about what is said of you but answer, "He was ignorant of
  my other faults, else he would not have mentioned these alone."

Please see the Akkosa Sutta. It's similar. If you don't react to insults, it goes back to the originator.

Also from the Kalama Sutta:

  "Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — thus devoid
  of greed, devoid of ill will, undeluded, alert, & resolute — keeps
  pervading the first direction [the east] — as well as the second
  direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with
  good will. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around,
  everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing cosmos with an
  awareness imbued with good will: abundant, expansive, immeasurable,
  free from hostility, free from ill will."

Be free from hostility and ill will, and be imbued with good will.

  OP: "Bear and forbear"

Please see the Nakulapita Sutta:

  "When this was said, the Blessed One said to me, 'So it is,
  householder. So it is. The body is afflicted, weak, & encumbered. For
  who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true
  health, except through sheer foolishness? So you should train
  yourself: "Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be
  unafflicted." That is how you should train yourself.'

Let your mind be unafflicted.

  OP: "What ought one to say then as each hardship comes? I was practising for this, I was training for this".

Please see the Maha-Saccaka Sutta:

  "And how is one developed in body and developed in mind? There is the
  case where a pleasant feeling arises in a well-educated disciple of
  the noble ones. On being touched by the pleasant feeling, he doesn't
  become impassioned with pleasure, and is not reduced to being
  impassioned with pleasure. His pleasant feeling ceases. With the
  cessation of the pleasant feeling there arises a painful feeling. On
  being touched with the painful feeling, he doesn't sorrow, grieve, or
  lament, beat his breast or becomes distraught. When that pleasant
  feeling had arisen in him, it didn't invade his mind and remain
  because of his development of the body. When that painful feeling had
  arisen in him, it didn't invade his mind and remain because of his
  development of the mind. This is how one is developed in body and
  developed in mind."

When you face hardship, if you are developed in body and mind, you would not suffer from it.


When I think of Western ordination, I only think of the Ajahn Chah tradition because it is highly disciplined.
If you are European, it may be convenient to be a novice & take ordination in Europe, so you can undertake the transition in a familiar language & possibly a less challenging environment.
However, once you settle into the life of a bhikkhu (say after two or three years), I think living the Holy Life in Asia is more advantageous because you will live in what is historically a Buddhist society & culture; which is based in the relationship between monks & laypeople and the cultural norms of both benefaction & social morality.
The strongest impressions I had when I lived in Thailand was the traditional culture.
To the contrary, in my opinion, what has become "Western Buddhism", particularly in the USA, has little relationship to orthodox Buddhism.


Do the texts of Mahayana Buddhism or those of any other school posit that everything is to be regarded as ideation? (Idealism)

the idea that the physical world does not exist apart from an observer's frame of reference

This is agreeable for expression. As i understand it, the Theravadin texts posit this iow.

as in everything exists only in the mind as imagination

This is dodgy. Which is closer to what you are asking?

That which imagines is imagined.
That which imagines isn't imagined.

There is a fundamental difference and #1 is closer to Theravada. #2 would be disagreeable.


But when I try to concentrate more during meditation, my mind becomes charged...

If what you are describing here is concentrate with more effort (rather than meditating for a longer duration) then what you have described is a common symptom of concentrating with too much power & effort.

While beginner meditators often meditate with mental force to counter (suppress) discursive (habitual) thinking, ultimately, Buddhist meditation is based on letting go & emptying the mind (rather than pushing the mind with power & effort).


The 6th fetter's meaning pretty straightforward: the craving for the fine-material (or form) existence/Rupa-Raga. The lower 5 fetters are lower because they're all related to our world, which is the sensuous world (Kama-Loka), while the 5 higher fetters are those that are tie to the 2 higher worlds above Kama-Loka: Rupa-Loka (form or fine-material world), and Arupa-Loka (or immaterial world) (see Planes of Existence and RupaRaga for further details).


Arahants don't have karmic intentions and they don't seek any results. They have higher wisdom, higher goodness, higher intelligence that is not possible to measure or described by the ordinary way of thinking. The cause of their actions are not connected to any ordinary human intention, desire or mind state but it happens out of complete purity and wisdom of Nibbana. Even If an Arahant say that "It's my intention" or "It is not my intention" that's only words(which are just tools to communicate with humans) and words have limitations to explain things correctly. So obviously Buddha didn't have intentions but it is not possible to describe the root of an Arahant's actions because they attained Nibbana permanently and Nibbana is the formless state.

A part of this video(5:08-5:35) is about this subject:

https://youtu.be/GRquhvbfVp4?t=308


How does one keep oneself motivated to follow the path of dhamma?

When I go to the doctor and he does a blood pressure reading, sometimes I am anxious about how the reading will turn out. This anxiety in turn makes the reading go higher, which is not what I wanted in the first place. To get a good blood pressure reading within a good range, I need to let go of my anxiety and expectation.
It's pretty much the same with regards to doubt and your practice.
More on doubt below ...

There are the five hindrances which can prevent you from progress in your practice. They are: sensory desires, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt.
What you're experiencing here is doubt - "can I do this?", "is it possible?", "where am I going with this?", "is this the right way?".
The general advice for overcoming the hindrance of doubt is letting go and trusting the inner silence (see quote below).
Here's Ven. Ajahn Brahm's advice on overcoming the hindrance of doubt, from this essay:

Doubt refers to the disturbing inner questions at a time when one
should be silently moving deeper. Doubt can question one's own ability
"Can I do This?", or question the method "Is this the right way?", or
even question the meaning "What is this?". It should be remembered
that such questions are obstacles to meditation because they are asked
at the wrong time and thus become an intrusion, obscuring one's
clarity.
The Lord Buddha likened doubt to being lost in a desert, not
recognising any landmarks.
Such doubt is overcome by gathering clear instructions, having a good
map, so that one can recognise the subtle landmarks in the unfamiliar
territory of deep meditation and so know which way to go. Doubt in
one's ability is overcome by nurturing self confidence with a good
teacher. A meditation teacher is like a coach who convinces the sports
team that they can succeed. The Lord Buddha stated that one can, one
will, reach Jhana and Enlightenment if one carefully and patiently
follows the instructions. The only uncertainty is 'when'! Experience
also overcomes doubt about one's ability and also doubt whether this
is the right path. As one realised for oneself the beautiful stages of
the path, one discovers that one is indeed capable of the very
highest, and that this is the path that leads one there.
The doubt that takes the form of constant assessing "Is this Jhana?"
"How am I going?", is overcome by realising that such questions are
best left to the end, to the final couple of minutes of the
meditation. A jury only makes its judgement at the end of the trial,
when all the evidence has been presented. Similarly, a skilful
meditator pursues a silent gathering of evidence, reviewing it only at
the end to uncover its meaning.
The end of doubt, in meditation, is described by a mind which has full
trust in the silence, and so doesn't interfere with any inner speech.
Like having a good chauffeur, one sits silently on the journey out of
trust in the driver.

Also see his conclusion:

Any problem which arises in meditation will be one of these Five
Hindrances, or a combination. So, if one experiences any difficulty,
use the scheme of the Five Hindrances as a 'check list' to identify
the main problem. Then you will know the appropriate remedy, apply it
carefully, and go beyond the obstacle into deeper meditation.
When the Five Hindrances are fully overcome, there is no barrier
between the meditator and the bliss of Jhana. Therefore, the certain
test that these Five Hindrances are really overcome is the ability to
access Jhana.

Ven. Ajaan Fuang Jotiko gave a shorter version of the solution to overcoming the hindrance of doubt in  "Awareness Itself":

A student came to complain to Ajaan Fuang that she had been meditating
for years, and still hadn't gotten anything out of it. His immediate
response: "You don't meditate to 'get' anything. You meditate to let
go."

The answer to your inner doubts is ... just let it go!
Does it matter whether you gain Nirvana is 10 months or 10 years or 10 lifetimes? Is there a deadline?
Just keep practising with heedfulness, as the Buddha stated in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta:

Then the Gracious One addressed the monks, saying: “Come now, monks,
for I tell you all conditioned things are subject to decay, strive on
with heedfulness!” These were the last words of the Realised One.


What is the relation between Pratītyasamutpāda and Four Noble truths?

If we divide Pratītyasamutpāda to three existences it's much easier to explain. (this can be explained for each moment as well)

  First existence
   1. Ignorance
   2. Formations
  Second existence
   3. Consciousness  4. Nāma-rūpa   5. The six senses   6. Touch    7. Sensation
   8. Craving
   9. Clinging
  10. Becoming
  Third existence
   11. Birth
   12. Old age and death

If we take second existence as the current life, points 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 (consciousness,  nāma-rūpa,  the six senses,  touch and sensation) are another form or representation of the five aggregates which is same as suffering or the first noble truth.
If you crave for the sensations (nourished by ignorance) in this existence, then this will form your next life. Although craving, clinging, becoming, ignorance and formations in this life are all causes for the next life, craving is the main culprit, hence craving becomes the second noble truth.
If craving is ceased in this very life, there won't be another existence,that means you've overcome the suffering, this can be achieved and has been achieved, hence this becomes the third noble truth.
To realise this, you have to follow the eightfold path, which is the fourth noble truth. However, Pratītyasamutpāda doesn't straight away relate to the fourth noble truth as the other three here.


Why not just google him? I see dozens of articles. Including:

What Kind of Buddhist was Steve Jobs, Really? PLosOneBlog
Here's How Zen Meditation Changed Steve Jobs' Life And Sparked A Design Revolution. Business Insider
Steve Jobs' private spirituality now an open book. USAToday.

Take your pick. I don't see how StackExchange/Buddhism is going to help you here. Unless of course there is someone who writes answers that knew him personally, we're all reliant on what is in the media.


What are we supposed to do while meditating?

There are many kinds of meditation, and as many ways of explaining them as there are people. After years of study and practice, here is a meditation I recommend. I call this "the coming to one's senses meditation" :)

Sit any way you want, as long as it's not too uncomfortable nor too comfortable as to put you to sleep. You can change your posture any way you want. Don't worry about it at all.

Bring your attention in front of you. Not literally "in front", but rather "to the room". It is the same kind of attention you need when you were busy for too long and neglected your room, and now you are finally coming back to the present and taking a good look at your room - and noticing the overall disorder. It's a similar feeling to awakening. "Hiii, present moment! Long time no see! I was waaaay too busy lately." Finally the Sinbad is back from yet another travel. This is why it's called "coming to one's senses".

Look at your body. Look at your hands. Feel them. If you are like most people, it's been long time since you gave attention to your basic being. Feel your entire body, as presence, as energy. It feels so good to finally stop running like a hamster in the wheel and come back to one's body and one's room. At the same time, you may have a feeling of anxiety. It feels like you are wasting time doing nothing. You've been running on for too long, and it became a habit. Feel that anxiety in your body. Drop it. It's okay to waste time. In fact, this is a precious way to use time, you are reconnecting with your basic being.

Don't worry about the clock. If you do do worry, put a timer for 15-20 minutes, and test it first - it will help you relax knowing you won't "waste" too much time ;) So in this case the purpose of the timer is the opposite of normal. You use the timer for its silence, not for its alarm. If you do trust yourself and don't worry about time - then you don't need a timer.

Come back to your senses. You've been driven for too long by all those goals and problems, now is time to gather your thoughts. It's a same feeling like you are on vacation, or actually it's like you added several days after vacation, to stay home and gather your thoughts. That's it! So you sit and you're like "pheew!" Finally. It's that state of mind when you can finally think "Alright, what should I do next?". You are reconnecting with your inner core and sending a silent SQL query to your guts: "give me the top 5 things I wanted to get to but never had time".

Now, this moment is when there is departure between meditation and regular thinking-and-gathering-your-thoughts type of sitting. Normally, you get absorbed into the first of those 5 things, or maybe the second one - and go on creating new plans, and that's it, vacation is over. Instead, with meditation, you stay in that query mode, and let your guts keep on finding more and more things that you have been previously deferring. Remember those old stories about a student tasked with reciting prayers in a church all night long, while all kinds of horror creatures come up but the student should keep his cool? They are the echo of this meditation.

The trick is to stay fully present in the room, just like you were in the beginning. Maybe 65% of your CPU is staying in the room and feeling the presence of the body & the freshness of the current moment, 20% is running the deep query, and 15% is the control circuit ("you") aka mindfulness. The role of the control circuit is to gently restore the balance when it skews too much towards thinking. Meaning, when the query comes up with a result, your role is to take it, bring it fully into your present moment, and take one good look at it while keeping at arms length. Then gently dismiss it, while leaning fully on the visual awareness of your presence in the room and the feeling of aliveness of your body. Don't rush to do anything at this moment. Wait until your mind fully comes back to the room and the initial "gathering your thoughts / what should I do next" state is restored. This is the critical moment! Don't rush into the next cycle. Let yourself waste time! When you get present and stable enough, your body will automatically send the next query to your subconscious. Don't think about it at all, just come back to the initial state. That's it! -- Repeat like this until you feel super-awake. I call this process "thought laundry" or "mind washing machine". This is the vipassana element.

You don't have to obsess with the laundry cycle either. Sometimes you may feel like not waiting for query results at all, and focusing on your overall inner comfort instead. This is also a valid mode of "coming to one's senses meditation". Perhaps you feel like your body was crumbled and now you want to open it up. Perhaps you feel like your aura was burning with anxiety and now you would like to apply the metaphorical aloe of contentment. Sometimes you may feel like you want to uphold a kingly posture or stretch the face muscles or open the chest etc. As long as you don't go too far into the sport exercises, and your main activity remains sitting in the room, gathering your thoughts, and coming back to your senses -- all kinds of psychosomatic comfort motions are very valid. May be you'll realize you've been drowsy all this time and you want to make an effort to awaken your mind. All these are good. I call this "conditioning the mind". This is the samatha element.

The most important point is: it's not about doing anything. It is about coming back to your senses. Both conditioning the mind as well as coming up of the deferred thoughts are just aspects of coming back to your senses.

So as you see, in this version, it's not really thinking, nor is it no-thinking. It's not mindfulness of any one thing, but it's not no-mindfulness either. It's coming back to one's senses. If you do it right it should be quite enjoyable! Although every time you still need to overcome the tendency to continue worrying about the things that worried you that day or the previous day. Also, on some days you may have trouble doing this at all, if thoughts or emotions are too strong. In that case, don't need to force yourself. When you force it, your heart will start hating it - and then you won't do it at all. But if you're doing it right, it feels like finally finding time for your most precious friend. Over time you should be able to extend the sitting from 15-20 mins to maybe 40 mins. Maybe in the future you will want to sit for 2 hours, like the monks do. Maybe one time you will be encouraged to sit for entire weekend, with only snack and bathroom breaks - who knows.

But even if you only do it 15 minutes a day, you should feel much more stable and awaken throughout the day. It works like sleeping, just 10 times more efficient.


What's the difference between monks and priests?

So far as I know (I may be wrong), "priest" is only used of Japan.

I've read three different theories for that.

One is that the term is for Japanese monks who marry (or who may marry). Usually part of the definition of a Buddhist "monk" (in any country) is that they keep some version of the Vinaya (which includes celibacy). I think that Japan is exceptional, for historical reasons. Wikipedia's Buddhist monasticism -- EastAsia currently says (see the original for hyperlinks and references),

  In East Asia, monastics live in greater isolation from the lay population than is observed in most Theravada countries. Because of local conditions of geography and climate, as well as local attitudes towards begging, monks generally do not make begging rounds in China, Korea, Vietnam, and many parts of Japan. Instead, monasteries receive donations of bulk food (such as rice) and funds for the purchase of food that is then stored and prepared at the monastery. Many monks and nuns are vegetarians and, after Baizhang Huaihai, many monks farm food to eat; some work or sell. Most eat after noon. The management of the kitchen and monastery properties may be the purview of a specially designated layman or a monk who has been given a special role by the abbot of the monastery. Monks chant many mantras in regular living.

  Monastics in Japan are particularly exceptional in the Buddhist tradition because the monks and nuns can marry after receiving their higher ordination. This idea is said to be introduced by Saichō, the founder of the Tendai school, who preferred ordaining monks under the Bodhisattva vows rather than the traditional Vinaya. There had long been many instances of Jōdo Shinshū priests and priestesses marrying, influenced by the sect's founder Shinran, but it was not predominant until a government Nikujiku Saitai Law (肉食妻帯) was passed during the Meiji Restoration that monks or priests of any Buddhist sect are free to seek wives. This practice influenced Korea and Taiwan. A nun in Taiwan gave birth. Some Korean monks live with wives in their monasteries.

The second is that "priest" is used for senior monks, who have graduated and are no longer students. Note the quote above, which says that "monks and nuns can marry after receiving their higher ordination".
Thirdly, some perform the role of priests in other religions (i.e. Shinto). Wikipedia's Tendai and Shinto says,

  Tendai doctrine allowed Japanese Buddhists to reconcile Buddhist teachings with the native religion of Japan, Shinto, and with traditional Japanese aesthetics. In the case of Shinto, the difficulty is the reconciliation of the pantheon of Japanese gods, as well as with the myriad spirits associated with places, shrines or objects, with the Buddhist doctrine that one should not concern oneself with any religious practice save the pursuit of enlightenment. However, priests of the Tendai sect argued that Kami are simply representations of the truth of universal buddhahood that descend into the world to help mankind.

In English (Christianity) the difference between priest and monk is that a monk lives in a monastery or priory (with other monks); while a priest will, more likely, live alone (in parish) to serve the lay community.


From parinibbana suttha

    16: The Gracious One’s Sickness

  Then the Gracious One, after living near Ambapālī’s Wood for as long
  as he liked, addressed venerable Ānanda, saying: “Come Ānanda let us
  approach the little village of Beluva.”

  “Very well, reverend Sir,” venerable Ānanda replied to the Gracious
  One. Then the Gracious One together with a great Community of monks
  arrived at the little village of Beluva. There the Gracious One lived
  near the little village of Beluva.

  There the Gracious One addressed the monks, saying: “Go, monks, and
  undertake the Rains Retreat in the vicinity of Vesālī living like
  friends, like companions, like comrades, and I will spend the Rains
  Retreat right here at the little village of Beluva.”

  “Very well, reverend Sir,” and those monks, after replying to the
  Gracious One, undertook the Rains Retreat in the vicinity of Vesālī
  living like friends, like companions, like comrades. But the Gracious
  One spent the Rains Retreat right there at the little village of
  Beluva.

  Then while dwelling for the Rains Retreat, a heavy affliction arose
  for the Gracious One, and continued with strong and death-like
  feelings. There the Gracious One dwelt mindfully, with full awareness,
  and without being troubled. Then this occurred to the Gracious One:
  “It is not suitable that I, without having addressed my attendants,
  without having given notice to the Community of monks, should attain
  Final Emancipation. Having energetically dismissed this affliction, I
  could live on after determining the lifespan.”

  Then the Gracious One having energetically dismissed that affliction
  lived on after determining the lifespan. Then the Gracious One’s
  affliction abated. Then, the Gracious One, having risen from that
  sickness, not long after rising, departed from the Sick Room and sat
  down on the prepared seat in front of that Room.

  Then venerable Ānanda approached the Gracious One, and after
  approaching and worshipping the Gracious One, he sat down on one side.
  While sitting on one side venerable Ānanda said this to the Gracious
  One:

  “I have seen, reverend Sir, the Gracious One comfortable, I have seen,
  reverend Sir, the Gracious One bearing up while sick, and my body,
  reverend Sir, became faint as it were, and although I could not see
  straight, and things were not clear, it appeared to me, reverend Sir,
  that the Gracious One was sick, but it was some small comfort that the
  Gracious One would not attain Final Emancipation until the Gracious
  One had spoken regarding the Community of monks.”

  “But what, Ānanda, does the Community of monks expect of me? The
  Teaching has been taught by me, Ānanda, without having made a
  distinction between esoteric and exoteric, for the Realised One there
  is nothing, Ānanda, of a closed teacher’s fist in regard to the
  Teaching.

  To whoever, Ānanda, this thought occurs: ‘I will lead the Community of
  monks’ or ‘I am the instructer of the Community of monks’ let him
  speak, Ānanda, regarding the Community of monks. But to the Realised
  One, Ānanda, this thought does not occur: ‘I will lead the Community
  of monks’ or ‘I am the instructor of the Community of monks’. Then
  why, Ānanda, should the Realised One speak regarding the Community of
  monks?

  I, Ānanda, at present, am old, elderly, of great age, far gone,
  advanced in years, I am eighty years old. It is like, Ānanda, an old
  cart, which only keeps going when shored up with bamboo, just so,
  Ānanda, I think the Realised One’s body only keeps going when shored
  up with bamboo.

  When the Realised One doesn’t pay attention, Ānanda, to any of the
  signs, when all feelings have ceased, he lives having established the
  signless mind-concentration, and at that time, Ānanda, the Realised
  One’s body is most comfortable.

  Therefore, Ānanda, live with yourself as an island, yourself as a
  refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the
  Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge. And how, Ānanda, does a
  monk live with himself as an island, himself as a refuge, with no
  other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the Teaching as a
  refuge, with no other refuge?

  Here, Ānanda, a monk dwells contemplating the nature of the body in
  the body, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and
  sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the nature of
  feelings in feelings, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing
  avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the
  nature of the mind in the mind, ardent, fully aware, and mindful,
  after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells
  contemplating the nature of things in various things, ardent, fully
  aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the
  world.

  Thus, Ānanda, a monk lives with himself as an island, himself as a
  refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the
  Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge. For whoever, Ānanda,
  whether at present or after my passing, lives with himself as an
  island, himself as a refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching
  as an island, the Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge, those
  monks of mine, Ānanda, will go from darkness to the highest—whoever
  likes the training.”

  The Second Chapter for Recital is Finished.


Ultimate existence and the self in Mahayana

According to Tibetan system of tenets, the Vaibhāṣikas so-called 'Hinayana school of tenets' defines an ultimte truth as:

  A phenomenon such that an awareness apprehending it is not cancelled
  if it is broken up or mentally separated into its individual parts.

Illustrations of ultimate truths are:

  directionally partless particles, temporally partless [moments of]
  consciousness, uncompounded phenomena, any of the five aggregates.

Mahayana tenets assert that Vaïbashikas do not posit selflessness of phenomena, but merely [a grosser] selflessness of persons. Jetsün Chökyi Gyaltsen writes:

  A selflessness of phenomena is not accepted because it is accepted
  that if it is an established base it is necessarily a self of
  phenomena.


What does merit (puṇya/puñña) actually mean?

There is here a 119 pages transcript of a teaching given by Khenrinpoche Geshe Chonyi, in which he answers that exact same question. Search for 'what is merit' and you will find the answer, page 26. Although Khenrinpoche's answer is not extremely precise (it that it might not stand debate) there are greatly illuminating points:

In one way, merit and virtue are the same.  In general,  virtue is 'virtuous karma', for it is a cause of the fruitional effect of happiness [in the aspect of pleasant feelings, and so forth].

Additionally, a collection of merits is:

The virtuous imprint that is left in the  mind
A non-associated composition factor (like karmic imprints, so it stands to say they are the same in general)
A cause of the Form Body [whereas the collection of wisdom results in the Truth Body]

He also adds:

  I  would  think that, the  meaning  of the word accumulate  in the
  phrase  accumulate the collection of merit would  mean that, doing
  something  repeatedly such that, a real impression, mark, imprint is
  left on the  mind .  This is  the meaning  of  to accumulate .

Being virtuous karmic imprints, it is produced by every virtuous intention (like for instance the virtuous intention to give, which is generosity) as well as any virtuous bodily or verbal action. Being virtuous karmic imprints, it must also have the same 4 types of result, one of them being the resultant tendency concordant to the cause. It means you will have a seemingly natural tendency, and liking for, say, practicing generosity and so forth.


Did the Buddha ever talk about his family?

The Buddha praised princess Yashodara's virtue by dispensing the Channakinnara Jataka when he visited her at Kapilavatthu. Yashodara has never been a wife to another man since the life when Bodhisatva received the confirmation from Deepankara Buddha to become a Buddha in the future. The Bodhisatva was always her husband.

So the Bodhisatva and his family have spent plenty of time together as family in many a previous life. If that didn't take away their suffering, what's the point of doing more of the same?

Lets take an analogy. If your family is suffering from a mortal illness and if you alone have the capability to go find the cure, wouldn't you leave them behind to get the cure instead of lingering there to give them false comfort?


In my understanding, Buddha did not progress through the four stages of enlightenment he later prescribed for his students.

This is because, for Buddha students - you start with theoretical understanding (stream entry), and then you practice according to instructions until you achieve it (arahant-hood).

In Buddha's case, because he is Self-Awakened, he starts with intuitive practice and then achieves understanding (Bodhi).

So in Buddha's case he does not proceed gradually, phase by phase, like assembling the puzzle by looking at the complete picture. Instead, it's like solving a puzzle randomly - by the time he sat under the Bodhi Tree, he had assembled most of the pieces but still did not know what was shown on the picture.

This is why in Buddha's case he left all interpretative possibilities open until the last moment, which means he still had doubts until the very last moment. Those doubts are represented in the anthropomorphic personification known as "the Mara".

In case of Buddha's students, the interpretative framework is locked in place from the time of stream-entry, so doubts are eliminated at that phase.


How does one practice Buddhism when experience is limited by the 6 senses?

If you're eating a grape and you are thinking about the soil and farmers and so on, then you are not eating the grape, you are thinking.  This isn't mindfulness.

You don't try to be interconnected.  You let go of all the conceptualizing that infiltrates experience.  The idea here is that your concepts are the thing that blocks interconnection; let them go, and there's interconnection.  You needn't develop it, you just need to remove the barriers to it.

Ironically, one of those barriers is precisely the exercise you mentioned.  Your thoughts about how you are interconnected to that grape is exactly what's keeping you from really being connected to that grape.

You don't connect in an ecological or social sense, but in an experiential sense.


For mental lethargy you can try the techniques to abandon sloth and torpor.

To overcome physical lethargy you can do walking meditation with a quicker pace.


SN 35.116 - Is "the world" ("loka") an objective reality perceived via the senses?

It depends on the context.
This sutta has a play on both meanings of loka - the objectively real world and the inner world of mental formations in this statement:

Mendicants, I say it’s not possible to know or see or reach the end of
the world by traveling. But I also say there’s no making an end of
suffering without reaching the end of the world.

This second meaning is explained in this statement (which also has both meanings of the word):

Whatever in the world through which you perceive the world and
conceive the world is called the world in the training of the noble
one.

The "world" in the training of the Noble Ones, refers to the world of mental formations through which we perceive (based on what is sensed of) the objectively real world and conceive the mental model of the world, which is the result of concept proliferation/ reification/ objectification-classification or papanca.
This is also found in the Rohitassa Sutta:

The end of the world can never
be reached by traveling.
But without reaching the end of the world,
there’s no release from suffering.
So a clever person, understanding the world,
has completed the spiritual journey, and gone to the end of the world.
A peaceful one, knowing the end of the world,
does not hope for this world or the next.”

So, the end of the world is the end of papanca (reification, objectification-classification, concept proliferation).
Piya Tan's commentary on the Lokantagamana Sutta:

2.1 In the Lok’anta Gamana Sutta,the Buddha, in simple words with profound senses, explains what it really means to “save the world.” We
need to first understand what “world” really means. In the Sabba Sutta
(S 35.23), the Buddha declares that all that there is are our 6
sense-faculties and their 6 respective sense-objects: these are the
“all” (sabba). This is the world, the universe, we have created for
ourselves. Nothing is meaningful for us beyond this.
2.2  The Buddha has never exhorted us to “save the world,” as this ultimately refers to all our senses, from which we liberate ourself.
Even when taunted by the wanderer Uttiya, who asks, with all the
Buddha’s attainments and teachings, “Is the whole world liberated by
this, or only half of it, or a third of it?” The Buddha remains
silent, because the question is wrongly put.
2.3 In an important sense, we can say that the Buddha’s teaching is about
“saving ourself” from the world. The world is what we make of
it: we create our own world. Hence, it is within our power to change
our “world,” that is our own self. This is the spirit of “renouncing
the world,” of letting go of the world so that we are free of the
falseness and unwholesomeness we have created for ourself. The save
the world, then, we need to renounce it.
2.4  In the Lok’anta Gamana Sutta 1 (S 35.116), the Buddha
declares what kind of “world” that we can really save or liberate. First, the
Buddha shows us what kind of world needs“saving”: Bhikshus, the end of
the world cannot be known, seen or reached by going, I say. Yet,
bhikshus, I also say that without reaching the end of the world there
is no making an end to suffering.8(S 35.116,2), SD 7.4 The first
mention of “the world” refers to the physical universe, which is with
neither beginning nor ending in terms of time and space
(okāsa,loka). It also refers to the world of beings (satta,loka),
simply put, the cycle of births and deaths (saṁsāra) itself, which
is external to us, so to speak. However, within us are the world of
formations (saṅkhārā,loka), the self-created and self-centred
“world”—this is our real prison of craving and ignorance, what we need
to awaken from and so be liberated.
2.5 The Lok’anta Gamana Sutta further records the Buddha as declaring,
“That in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a
conceiver of the world—this is called ‘the world’ in the noble one’s
discipline.”11(S 35.116,22). This refers to the workings of the 6
sense-bases. Then, the Buddha famously declares in the Rohitassa Sutta
(S 2.26):

In this very fathom-long body, endowed with perception and mind, I
declare the world, the arising of the world, the ending of the world,
and the way leading to the ending of the world.”12(S 2.26,9), SD 7.1


At least based on the Pali Canon and its commentary, devaputta are precisely what you state:  sons of devas with comparable divine powers.

For instance, the Pali Canon's Samyutta Nikaya's second chapter is entitled, "Devaputta Samyutta," and collects discourses involving the Buddha (or one of his disciples) engaging with a devaputta.  (You can find free, on-line translations of a few of these discourses at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/index.html#sn2 .)  In his introduction to the Wisdom Publication edition of the Samyutta Nikaya, Bhikkhu Bodhi writes:

  The devaputtas, or 'sons of the devas,' are young devas newly arisen in their respective heavenly planes; devaduhitās, 'daughters of the devas,' are also mentioned in the commentary but none appear in this saṃyutta. The commentary says these beings are reborn spontaneously in the laps of the devas.... [I]t is surprising to find that several of [the devaputta] — or at least their verses — have already appeared in the Devatāsaṃyutta [which is the preceding chapter in which the Buddha engages with adult devas].... This suggests that the dividing line between the two classes of deities is not a hard and fast one, just as the dividing line between an adult and an adolescent is not hard and fast...  (Source: Bodhi, Bhikkhu, 2005-06-10. The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, Kindle Locations 1285-1293. Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.)

Just to note, the referenced commentaries were likely written centuries after the Samyutta Nikaya itself, and thus have significantly less authority.  In addition, I know you expressed particular interest in Mahayana tradition and the Pali Canon is most closely aligned with the Theravadan tradition; nonetheless, this canon provides a basis for understanding much of the Mahayana cosmology.

I hope this helps,
Larry


About svasaṃvedana (reflexive awareness) and having bodhicitta

I hold the Prasangika Madhyamaka as the highest and definitive of the Buddhist tenet systems. The prasangika refute the notion of inherently existing reflexive self-awareness. Here you can see Chandrakirti refuting the notion of Svasaṃvedana or rangrig of the Cittamatran school:

The above is taken from a commentary on Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche. Rinpoche is a highly accomplished master of the Rime movement and has studied under all major schools of Tibetan Buddhism. It should also be noted that he is quite sympathetic to the Cittamatran school:

I won't highlight the actual rebuttal arguments that Chandrakirti invokes as you can click on the link above and read them and draw your own conclusions whether they are strong arguments or not. However, this is the conclusion that Chandrakirti draws:

As for your second question... Yes, it is possible to be aware of your own genuine realization of Bodhicitta. However, most ordinary people fool themselves into believing overinflated self-conceptions of their own achievements. Regardless, this self-awareness - whether mistaken or unmistaken - is only conventionally true and does not have one iota of true existence. That's because nothing whatsoever has one iota of true existence.

PS: If you would like to verify with another commentary on the Madhyamakavatara you can look at Ju Mipham's commentary here. If you do you'll find that it is in complete accord with the above.


What would Buddhists say about 'pantheism'

I think that Buddhists don't assume that there's a "one God". So there's no need to explain the relationship between God and World.

Wikipedia's Pantheism in religion mentions many religions, but not Buddhism. Maybe the concept (of "pantheism") is meaningless when there's no concept of (no meaning attributed to the word) "God".

I suppose the nearest Buddhist analog might be the concept of Buddha-nature.


Is Theravada Buddhism the only modern representative of Hinayana Buddhism?

Hinayana is complicated philosophical term, sometimes it refer to lower motivation, sometimes to some misunderstanding of Teaching, sometimes to smaller knowledge, or restricted acceptance of Buddha's Teaching, and sometimes it's misnomer for early schools. I want to stress, that term is philosophical from just a few of Mahayana sutras. It is not a simple thing as school, (and Mahayana is not a school too).

Hinayana as type of motivation (lower than reaching Buddhahood) is acceptable lower motivation in Mahayana schools for some types of personalities. So, in that sense Hinayana is survived inside of any Mahayana school, which accepts such notion.

In the sense of non-Mahayana: many Mahayana schools accept and their canons contain non-Mahayana teachings. All traditional Mahayana schools actually have survived vinaya lineages of early schools, not related to Mahayana doctrines.

On the other hand, Theravada developed bodhisatta practices and philosophical concepts which thought by some to be distinctively mahayanistic. It just don't generally accepts Mahayana canon, but don't officially denies either. So it's personal choice to accept it or not. Some Theravada scholars studied Mahayana, for example famous Walpola Rahula, he even wrote dissertation on Abhidharmasmuccaya with parallels to Pali canon.


How does our inactions contribute to Karma?... For eg:How can you justify act of your cook killing an animal for your non buddhist guest?

Is it dharma to ask your cook to kill an animal to serve your guest

If Dalai Lama asks the cook to kill an animal, he violates the 1st precept and commits bad karma.
If he asks the cook to just prepare meat without intending him to kill, he does not violate the 1st precept. He will get good Karma for arranging a meal for the guest.


Doing versus not doing what others tell you to do

In all examples both acted suboptimally.

It looks like person B should learn to understand and appreciate other people's perspectives. Perhaps he should say: "I understand why you worry about the lawn. It does look very high by normal standards. The normal standards are X inches and the lawn is Y. But I am not declining to mow it out of laziness, believe me. I think at this moment it is advantageous to everybody, including you to not mow it. Here is why: A) B) C).

In other words, don't drive people mad with your "superior understanding". If your understanding is better than others' -- invest your energy in teaching.

Also, always remember that people (including yourself!) are rarely truly objective. Instead they often act in line with their interests, or with the group interests, or with the "party line" or with their philosophy. It helps to rephrase your understanding in that context as to help them relate.

One of the very prominent characteristics of Buddha's method was to always work within the person's perspective, not against it.

Speak in terms of what they know, what they value, what they have experienced before - then they will hear and understand.


The karmic result for killing a dog is:

Possible retaliation by your neighbor.
Possible legal action by neighbor and government.
Possible regret & guilty conscience in your heart.
Getting scored negative on Buddhism Stack Exchange.
Not woken up at 5 am; getting an improved night's sleep; more focus & energy at work.
Woken up at 4 am by a new different dog.


Are those who haven't attained enlightenment 'psycho'?

The commentary of Majjhima Nikaya ‘Papancasudani’ says that – “All worldly beings are deranged”, “Sabbe puthujjana ummataka”

So even if you get a green light by the contemporary mental health standards, you can still be called a psycho according to Buddhism as long as you are not enlightened. The level of insanity varies from person to person.


I noticed that in my meditation on compassion, the beginning is consistently potent (i.e. tears, strong feeling) and the ending is usually less apt (i.e. body agitation, distraction).

Most likely what is happening is when you think about different people

your perception of them
past incidents
their situations

Stir up emotions.

Would the emotional intensity of such a meditation depend highly on concentration? Or, perhaps, would some other aspect explain this, e.g. becoming saturated emotionally early in the meditation?

Emotional intensity most likely goes down with meditations as your concentration increases your mind becomes stable.


Can anyone briefly explain what is Dhamma?

The term dhamma has multiple meanings in Buddhism. Dhamma is defined in the accesstoinsight.org glossary page as:

  dhamma [Skt. dharma]:(1) Event; a phenomenon in and of itself; (2)
  mental quality; (3) doctrine, teaching; (4) nibbāna. Also, principles
  of behavior that human beings ought to follow so as to fit in with the
  right natural order of things; qualities of mind they should develop
  so as to realize the inherent quality of the mind in and of itself. By
  extension, "Dhamma" (usu. capitalized) is used also to denote any
  doctrine that teaches such things. Thus the Dhamma of the Buddha
  denotes both his teachings and the direct experience of nibbāna, the
  quality at which those teachings are aimed.

If you want to know more about Dhamma, the doctrine and teachings of the Buddha, see this page.

If you want to know more about dhamma (mental quality or mental object), the fourth foundation of mindfulness, see this page, this page and the Satipatthana Sutta.


As my teacher explained, living with the feeling of wrongness is the very essence of samsara.

This constant feeling that you don't like your work, don't want to do it, and are forced to endure it only for survival - is NOT a normal condition. You should not force yourself to live like this year after year after year.

When you have inner conflict, you don't live your life authentically - and because of that non-authentic living you keep creating and maintaining situations that force you to maintain that inner conflict. This works like a vicious circle!

To quit this job in the hope of finding a better job is not an answer. My teacher called that "The Hunting-Dog Mind" (chasing after birds). Simply changing jobs will not help -- as long as you still have inner conflict, your mind will keep recreating pathological situations anywhere you go. Instead, the answer is to remove the inner conflict and learn to live authentic life, to be truly yourself. When you are truly yourself, the actions you choose, your reactions with people, etc. they all create your own path step by step - that may take you to a different job or connect you with entirely different people etc. And because every step of this path is made authentically and without inner conflict, it does not lead to new inner conflict - it leads to maintenance and development of inner peace and strength.

The main exercise to remove inner conflict is meditation. When we meditate we connect with our true nature, beyond attachments, thoughts, and judgements that we picked up during the course of our life. Of course, there is also the foundation of basic sila - five precepts, ten parami and so on - because we can't be authentic and spontaneous until we have eliminated major sources of conflict like the lust for material pleasures, for fame, for success, all kinds of overgeneralizations, identifications, side-taking, and hatred based on that, the defensiveness of the ego and so on. So the function of sila is to remove the gross source of conflict. And then the function of meditation is to remove subtle conflict.

Once we reduced inner conflict enough, we must start practicing authentic living in our daily life. This is a somewhat scary moment - because we should build up enough courage to be true to ourselves even if our new behavior can completely change our life situation. For example, we may end up quitting our family or our job. Or we will stay in our family and/or job, but we will stop tolerating certain things that we always hated, and will openly talk about them with other people (with wisdom and tact, assuming we worked on our sila and meditation). Or we may accept everything as is, because we may realize that our rebellion was only due to attachment to some mental image. Or we accept some things, confront others, and abandon third. In any case, authentic living means being true to ourselves and living without inner conflict.

This authentic living without inner conflict is understood by (some) Zen and Vajrayana schools to be the real essence of Buddhist liberation.


How do monks transcend the desire for relationships & sex?

Is it with metta towards the opposite sex or just seeing the unattractiveness of it that craving reduces?

I think it's both of those -- with "unattractive" meaning:

Something like graveyard meditation
Seeing it as dissatisfactory (dukkha) or "not permanently satisfying"
Seeing consequences

I get the impression from watching some of Ven. Yuttadhammo's videos that it's also a matter of developing some dispassion towards "feeling".

And I think perhaps it's a matter of discipline (e.g. the vinaya) as an alternative to pursuing sensuality.

Another example of that, for a monk, is feeling hungry and yet not eating (except properly).

I suppose it's also a matter of habit, changing or attenuating existing habits (if any), and avoiding causes or occasions (e.g. being alone with a woman).


I'm starting in Wikipedia, where "clinging to rites and rituals" is defined as one of the "fetters". This answer assumes that "clinging to rites and rituals" is (the same as) the "superstition" you were asking about, and so this answer will give references to describe what "clinging to rites and rituals" means.

From Wikipedia, Fetter (Buddhism), the third fetter is,

  attachment to rites and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāsa)

  Attachment to rites and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāso)

  Śīla refers to "moral conduct", vata (or bata) to "religious duty, observance, rite, practice, custom," and parāmāsa to "being attached to" or "a contagion" and has the connotation of "mishandling" the Dhamma. Altogether, sīlabbata-parāmāso has been translated as "the contagion of mere rule and ritual, the infatuation of good works, the delusion that they suffice" or, more simply, "fall[ing] back on attachment to precepts and rules."

Wikipedia then gives the following paragraph which may or may not be helpful -- on the one hand it's relevant to the conventional meaning on superstition, but on the other hand Thanissaro Bhikkhu's description of it below says it has a broader meaning (e.g. that merely clinging to even Buddhist precepts isn't right):

  While the fetter of doubt can be seen as pertaining to the teachings of competing samana during the times of the Buddha, this fetter regarding rites and rituals likely refers to some practices of contemporary brahmanic authorities.

A footnote mentions "the similar concept of sīlabbatupādāna (= sīlabbata-upādāna), 'grasping after works and rites.'"

From Wikipedia's Sotāpanna article,

  Clinging to rites and rituals - Eradication of the view that one becomes pure simply through performing rituals (animal sacrifices, ablutions, chanting, etc.) or adhering to rigid moralism or relying on a god for non-causal delivery (issara nimmāna). Rites and rituals now function more to obscure, than to support the right view of the sotāpanna's now opened dharma eye. The sotāpanna realizes that deliverance can be won only through the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path. It is the elimination of the notion that there are miracles, or shortcuts.

Following Wikipedia's footnoted references to the suttas, one is Lohicco Sutta which says that Brahmans have their rituals (garbs of skin, chanting, ritual washing), but that these actions aren't right.

  First in virtue were the men of old,
  Brahmans who preserved the ancient ways,
  In whom well guarded were the doors of the sense.
  They were never overcome by wrath.
  Meditating on the Law[1] their joy,
  Brahmans who preserved the ancient ways.
  These backsliders who but chant by rote,
  Drunk with pride of birth they stagger on.
  Full of violent rage, aggression prone,
  They lose respect from weak and strong alike:
  Their unguarded senses bring them loss,
  Like a treasure hoard found in a dream.
  Fasting, sleeping on the ground, and such,
  Dawn ablutions, chanting Vedic texts,
  Garb of skins, matted hair and filth,
  Magic spells and rites and penances,
  Trickery, deception, blows as well,
  Ritual washing, rinsing of the mouth,
  These are caste-marks of the Brahman-folk,
  Done and practiced for some trifling gain.
  But a heart that's firm and concentrated,
  Purified, of all defilements freed,
  Kind and gentle to all living things-
  That's the path that gains the highest goal.

Another description of this fetter is in Thanissaro Bhikkhu's Into the Stream
A Study Guide on the First Stage of Awakening,

  The fetter of grasping at habits and practices is often described in the Pali Canon with reference to the view that one becomes pure simply through performing rituals or patterns of behavior. This view in turn is related to the notion that one's being is defined by one's actions: If one acts in accordance with clearly defined habits and practices, one is ipso facto pure. Although the Canon recognizes the importance of habits and practices in the attaining the stream, the experience of the Deathless shows the person who has attained the stream that one cannot define oneself in terms of those habits and practices. Thus one continues to follow virtuous practices, but without defining oneself in terms of them.

    "Now where do skillful habits cease without trace? Their cessation, too, has been stated: There is the case where a monk is virtuous, but not fashioned of (or: defined by his) virtue. He discerns, as it actually is, the awareness-release & discernment-release where his skillful habits cease without trace."

    — MN 78

And,

    [The enlightened person] doesn't speak of purity
    in terms of     view,
            learning,
            knowledge,
            habit or practice.

    Nor is it found by a person
    through lack of view,
            of learning,
            of knowledge,
            of habit or practice.

    Letting these go, without grasping,
        one is  independent,
            at peace.

    — Sn 4.9

The first of these two referenced suttas, Samana-Mundika Sutta (MN 78) says that doing no wrong isn't enough -- that merely doing no wrong is "on the same level as a stupid baby boy lying on its back" -- that person needs skillful resolves and habits, and (as quoted above) discernment of cessation.

The last reference Magandiya Sutta (Sn 4.9) is more on the subject of not clinging, of not being fashioned by views, not being led by actions, not being tied by perception (of better and worse).


Lending a friend money,and not getting it back

Next time better simply give, never expect something return, for bondage is seldom a help for both, all involved. If not able to give, that's "fine" as well, but never lend. Even if now saying "no need to pay back", for example, your friend might be even more lost.

My person did, after doing such one or two times, never gave loans and it makes/made much more on releasing joy to simply give when asked and able to, and never even a little regret in don't giving loans but make clear liberal gifts.

Now what to expect? Just let it be his good and proper or demerits? If possible to bear it. Would be one possibility: patient. Things are at least not for sure and giving, even if time and place to get back on good track, is always good.

Much joy in wise and liberal growing. Joy in giving without intended on a deal or back of low and material things.

(Note that this is not given for trade exchange or stacks, but to turn toward freedom from bound in loan giving because of debt)


How does the first noble truth associate dukkha with each of the five skandhas?

They are related to all aggregates.

Birth is the arising of aggregates. Death is the disappearing of that which arose. Ageing is the changing in between.
Sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are all Dukkhas caused by clinging to the five aggregates.
Association with unbeloved is the association with painful experiences(five aggregates).
Separation from the loved is the separation from pleasurable/neutral experiences(five aggregates).
Not getting what is wanted means not being able to control the five aggregates at will: Not being able to retain pleasurable/neutral experiences. Not being able to keep away painful experiences.


Google defines psychosis as

  A mental disorder characterized by a disconnection from reality.

Causes:

  Psychosis may occur as a result of a psychiatric illness like schizophrenia. In other instances, it may be caused by a health condition, medications, or drug use.

Since what you suffer from sounds more like the temporary kind, I would say there's a good chance that vipassana meditation could help you. Vipassana means to see clearly the nature of reality, and it is effected by cultivating sati, the main characteristic of which is confronting (abhimukha) reality. If you can manage that, I'd say you would be effectively counteracting the dissociation involved in psychosis.

That being said, I've been reading a lot lately about Goenka-based retreats that seems to suggest they are quite intense. I don't practice his technique myself, so I would just like to say that there are many ways to practice vipassana, some maybe more suitable for dealing with your condition than others. Good luck :)


Replacing the hindrances with it's opposite?

So lets say i am having ill will thoughts do i just replace those thoughts with loving kindness instead? Or if im experiencing sloth and torpor, do i just replace and abandon those thoughts with exertion and striving?

Yes, that would be one way of dealing with the hindrances. This is the first method. If that does not work, one moves on to the second method and so forth. Methods are described below.

One can deal with each of the 5 hindrances in 5 ways, i.e. the following 5 methods works for all of the hindrances.

Methods are found in The Noble Eightfold Path, p. 63-66, by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi.

Replacing the hindrance with its opposite, e.g. replacing hatred/ill-will with thoughts of loving-kindness.
Contemplating the arisen hindrance as vile and ignoble, since it has entered the mind without permission or any control.
Shifting attention away from the hindrance.
Shifting attention onto the hindrance and thoroughly contemplating it by investigating its causes and conditions for arising together with its characteristics.
Removing the hindrance with force, just as a strong man would pin a weaker man to the ground.

No. 5 should only be used if method 1-4 does not work.

If you have any questions to what I wrote feel free to ask.


What are the different meditation types & how to do them?

You will want to memorize and think about the Dhamma a lot to develop insight, motivation and conviction. Then one would split thinking into two and constantly try to entertain themes which are good, being sensitive to the mind, adjusting to accommodate the various hindrances and contemplating a lot.

Id advice you to do your own learning and get mastery of the 4 nikayas first but you should also use commentary where it makes sense and have a general idea of origin & points of controversy.

here are various perception developments; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kZxstsAvjhj9Svc47RUKRIyKQMuHMD4adIvr_7pp2uI/edit

here on factors of enlightenment;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18b57EkdwyqsmER1dS5MPqpeWSjj82A7qvqYlXrhkCPQ/edit

here on anapanasati meditation;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hRy-g6o8yKsDQnR6_sbBbY5ZVpDbQ5-_LURXqwxS7YU/edit?usp=sharing

here on dhamma terminology;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NHDYCBjXLKwCxEUqbqvk7ui9fPfUx6oKxibjXcEH2CM/edit?usp=sharing

here on hindrances;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVz1XtntivxPRsxycsrH0_sgILcMbcghdpxoKuxlLYo/edit?usp=sharing

It is best to find some teachers and experiment a lot.


From AN4.163 we have:

  It’s when a mendicant meditates observing the ugliness of the body, perceives the repulsiveness of food, perceives dissatisfaction with the whole world, observes the impermanence of all conditions

Paradoxically, observing ugliness is a great antidote for the seduction of attractive. The perception of ugliness develops equanimity. To see this yourself, simply look at any pair of people. Invariable, one will attract your eye and one will not. Now rapidly look at each one in turn, switching to the other when any feeling (good or bad) arises. As you do this, also acknowledge that, "This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self."

What happens as you do this is that your mind gets exhausted trying to make coherent sense of it all and collapses eventually into equanimity. Be careful when doing this with real people because nobody likes being stared at. However, you can practice this with any movie or video that you can stop mid-play. Simply scan back and forth repeatedly until equanimity returns. When you do this, the scene will always be equanimous to you in the future. Eventually you will be able to do this in real time without bothering others.

The nice thing about dealing with others in equanimity is that you will earn trust and friendship. Out of those friendships, deeper connections will naturally evolve. And those connections will always enrich your life.


Buddha's time in India there were many views about the world. This is similar to saying nowadays "The all mighty God" etc. These views are discussed in the Brahmajala Sutta. These wrong views lead you to a wrong destination. However, according to Buddhism the right view lead to Nibbana.
What Buddha saying is nobody can comprehend anything beyond six senses.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html


Origin of the concept of «Oneness» in (Zen-) Buddhism

Oneness of the Universe was the original thesis of the (Kuru-Pancala) Vedic Religion (Brahmanism, as opposed to the later religion, the multi-deity Hinduism) - centuries before Buddhism appeared on scene. But it was never fully understood and the actual practitioners were rather corrupted, showing all kinds of real-life behaviors that went contrary to their own ideal.
Buddha had effectively cleaned it up and re-interpreted from the perspective of his own experience-centric framework.
Basically, Buddha said, the All of our lives can be summarized to our sensory and mental experience. Since experience is All,  having painful and conflicted experience is the essence of suffering while having peaceful and harmonious experience is the essence of happiness.
The highest happiness or bliss, is Nirvana, the complete cessation of all limits, divisions, and conflicts that would have induced suffering. This cessation of limits includes (among other things) complete and utter cessation of any and all I-making or self-identification. So once the individual mind stops identifying anything as "self", not even the universe, the true realization of that which the concept of oneness meant to represent is achieved.
Note how this is different from the Vedic experience of All Universe as Self. In Buddha's own words, that could be liked to a dog claiming freedom from the pole it was tied to, while still running around that pole a leash-length away.
In Buddhism the authenticity of the attainment is verified in practice as absence of any longing, grasping, attachment, identification, juxtaposing, and reification. Any kind of conflicted unsatisfied mind betrays still having some limits. The liberated mind has no limits, no position, no identity, no fixed form. It is beyond even the concept of oneness and off to the Unbounded - which is what the notion of oneness meant to mean anyway. This emphasis on direct experience and personal behavior that must be in line with the transcendental realization is the trademark of the Buddha's method.
The essence of this teaching was carried along the trade routes from the original birthplace of Buddhism to Kashmir and from there to China, where it grew into Ch'an Buddhism, and then to Japan where it got known as Zen. The essential practice of Zen is direct non-verbal transmission of the first-hand experience of this formlessness and limitlessness, beyond scripture and conceptual interpretation.
Part of Chan's inspiration for making the emphasis on harmony with the natural environment comes from the ancient Chinese tradition of Taoism which teaches a similar end-state but without tying it to the social, ethical, and psychological implications the way Buddha did.
Coming back to the original Buddha's teaching, the suttas often describe Buddhist path as progression of steps taking the student from confusion to the experience of oneness and beyond. For example in MN137:

"There is equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity; and there is equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness.
"And what is equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity? There is equanimity with regard to forms, equanimity with regard to sounds...smells...tastes...tactile sensations [& ideas: this word appears in one of the recensions]. This is equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity.
"And what is equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness? There is equanimity dependent on the dimension of the infinitude of space, equanimity dependent on the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... dependent on the dimension of nothingness... dependent on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. This is equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness.
"By depending & relying on equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, abandon & transcend equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity.
"By depending & relying on non-fashioning, abandon & transcend the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness. Such is its abandoning, such its transcending."

In other words, the Buddha repurposed naive oneness of Brahmins as a stepping stone to "emptiness" - the true state of shapelessness and limitlessness which is the end of suffering.
Just like the Buddhist social ethics of non-violence, truthfulness, non-intoxication etc. lead away from the objective causes of suffering, Buddhist practice of oneness (Brahmaviharas, Formless Jhanas) leads away from the subjective causes of suffering, and all this is culminated by the teaching and practice of transcending the limits of conceptual mind - Emptiness - which removes the very ground the suffering stood on.


On this page and this page, you can find the "Chronology Of The Pali Canon" by Dr. Bimala Churn Law.

Here, it is written in the beginning:

  Rhys Davids in his Buddhist India (p. 188) has given a chronological
  table of Buddhist literature from the time of the Buddha to the time
  of Asoka which is as follows:--

  The simple statements of Buddhist doctrine now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all the books.
  Episodes found, in identical words, in two or more of the existing books.
  The Silas, the Parayana, the Octades, the Patimokkha.
  The Digha, Majjhima, Anguttara, and Samyutta Nikayas.
  The Sutta-Nipata, the Thera-and Theri-Gathas, the Udanas, and the Khuddaka Patha.
  The Sutta Vibhanga, and Khandhkas.
  The Jatakas and the Dhammapadas.
  The Niddesa, the Itivuttakas and the Patisambbhida.
  The Peta and Vimana-Vatthus, the Apadana, the Cariya-Pitaka, and the Buddha-Vamsa.
  The Abhidhamma books; the last of which is the Katha-Vatthu, and the earliest probably the Puggala-Pannatti.

But later, after in-depth analysis, the author comes to the conclusion:

  The results arrived at concerning the chronology of the Pali canonical
  listerature are preseented in the subjoined table:

  (1) The simple statements of Buddhist doctrines now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all the books.

  (2) Episodes found, in identical works, in two or more of the existing books.

  (3) The Silas, the Parayana group of sixteen poems without the prologue, the atthaka group of four or sixteen poems, the sikkhapadas.

  (4) The Digha, Vol. l, the Majjhima, the Samyutta, the Anguttara, and earlier Patimokkha code of 152 rules.

  (5) The Digha, Vols. II & III, the Thera-Theri-Gatha, the collection of 500 Jatakas, the Suttavibhanga, the Partisambhidamagga,
  the Puggala-pannatti and the Vibhanga.

  (6) The Mahavagga and the Cullavagga, the Patimokkha code completing 227 rules, the Vimanavatthu and Petavatthu, the Dhammapada
  and the Kathavatthu.

  (7) The Cullaniddesa, the Mahaniddesa, the Udana, the Itivuttaka, the Suttanipata, the Dhatukatha, the Yamaka and the Patthana.

  (8) The Buddhavamsa, the Cariyapitaka and the Apadana.

  (9) The Parivarapatha.

  (10) The Khuddakapatha.

But there is no table available listing each sutta with its date of writing.


mindfulness thinking about future and past?

As you suggest by writing that your work involves ‘going’ into the future and past, the reality of our experience is that past and future exist only in thought (which includes memories, imagination and so on). This is the key to approaching your experience with mindfulness. In any given moment it is possible to recognise, from a place of awareness, that thought is occurring. In my experience the best place to start with mindfulness is the body and breath. They help root us in our present, moment by moment experience. When aware of being in the present moment it is possible to notice that thinking is happening. It is not you,  it is not necessary to identify with the thoughts nor get lost in them. One way to work with this is to start work with a kind of ‘checking in’ with yourself, with a minute or two of mindfulness, being present, however you find it is best done for you. And then to frequently ‘check in’ with your body and breath as your work continues, continuing like this throughout the day. In this way you can gradually develop the ability to think but not be lost in thought. I hope that helps…


Is Schopenhauer's "the Will" equivalent to "the Mystic Law"?

I know next to nothing about Schopenhauer but the Nichiren sect of Japanese Buddhism focus on the sutra popularly known as Lotus Sutra - the 妙法蓮華経 Myōhō Renge Kyō which is in turn from Chinese 妙法蓮華經; pinyin: Miàofǎ Liánhuá jīng, which is ultimately from Sanskrit Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra literally Sutra on the White Lotus of the Sublime Dharma. So "Mystic Law" is just a re-translation of "Sublime Dharma". Now I am no expert on the text but I believe the 'Sublime Dharma' refers to All of Existence and Phenomena. So this concept is only tangentially related to the Will or Collective Consciousness described by Schopenhauer.


His name is Budai and many people in the West mistake his image as being Gautama Buddha. Budai is usually identified with or seen as an incarnation of Maitreya, the future Buddha.


Is it right, according to the Vinaya, to charge for Dhamma classes? (I'm not talking about donations, but a fixed amount per class one has to pay)

Vinaya only applied to Monks. If it is lay teachers charges may be a possibility but as per my opinion highly not recommended. As for monks I don't think they should do this at all. The trustees (Dayaka Sabawa) may do it but again highly unadvisable as per my opinion.

But having said this, I do not like the idea of any charge. Buddhism was taught free of charge and has maintained this tradition through out most of history.

Also Buddha put much effort to become a Buddha and tough if for free. It is morally wrong to charge for teaching something the Buddha put so much efforts into when we are just teaching what he prescribed.

If you look at https://www.dhamma.org/ you will see a lot of centers all run solely by donation through out the world. So the donation model does work.


To debate or not to debate? and When to debate? and How to debate?

from Kathāvatthu Sutta:

  Monks, it’s through his way of participating in a discussion that a person can be known as fit to talk with or unfit to talk with. If a person, when asked a question, wanders from one thing to another, pulls the discussion off the topic, shows anger & aversion and sulks, then—that being the case—he is a person unfit to talk with. But if a person, when asked a question, doesn’t wander from one thing to another, doesn’t pull the discussion off the topic, doesn’t show anger or aversion or sulk, then—that being the case—he is a person fit to talk with.

  Monks, it’s through his way of participating in a discussion that a person can be known as fit to talk with or unfit to talk with. If a person, when asked a question, puts down (the questioner), crushes him, ridicules him, grasps at his little mistakes, then—that being the case—he is a person unfit to talk with. But if a person, when asked a question, doesn’t put down (the questioner), doesn’t crush him, doesn’t ridicule him, doesn’t grasp at his little mistakes, then—that being the case—he is a person fit to talk with.

  ...

  For that’s the purpose of discussion, that’s the purpose of counsel, that’s the purpose of drawing near, that’s the purpose of lending ear: i.e., the liberation of the mind through lack of clinging/sustenance.

  Those who discuss
  when angered, dogmatic, arrogant,
  following what’s not the noble ones’ way,
  seeking to expose each other’s faults,
  delight in each other’s
          misspoken word,
  slip, stumble, defeat.
  Noble ones
  don’t speak in that way.

  If wise people, knowing the right time,
  want to speak,
  then, words connected with justice,
  following the ways of the noble ones:
  That’s what the enlightened ones speak,
  without anger or arrogance,
  with a mind not boiling over,
  without vehemence, without spite.
  Without envy
  they speak from right knowledge.
  They would delight in what’s well-said
  and not disparage what’s not.
  They don’t study to find fault,
  don’t grasp at little mistakes.
  don’t put down, don’t crush,
  don’t speak random words.

From AN 5.165:

  All those who ask questions of another do so from any one of five motivations.
  Which five?

  One asks a question of another through stupidity & bewilderment. One asks a question of another through evil desires & overwhelmed with greed. One asks a question of another through contempt. One asks a question of another when desiring knowledge. Or one asks a question with this thought,1 'If, when asked, he answers correctly, well & good. If not, then I will answer correctly

Sn 4.8 Pasura Sutta:

  "Only here is there purity"
    — that's what they say —
  "No other doctrines are pure"
    — so they say.
  Insisting that what they depend on is good,
  they are deeply entrenched in their personal truths.

  Seeking controversy, they plunge into an assembly,
  regarding one another as fools.
  Relying on others' authority,
  they speak in debate.
  Desiring praise, they claim to be skilled.

  Engaged in disputes in the midst of the assembly,
    — anxious, desiring praise —
  the one defeated is
    chagrined.
  Shaken with criticism, he seeks for an opening.

  He whose doctrine is [judged as] demolished,
    defeated, by those judging the issue:
  He laments, he grieves — the inferior exponent.
    "He beat me," he mourns.

  These disputes have arisen among contemplatives.
    In them are         elation,
                dejection.
  Seeing this, one should abstain from disputes,
    for they have no other goal
    than the gaining of praise.

  He who is praised there
    for expounding his doctrine
    in the midst of the assembly,
  laughs on that account & grows haughty,
    attaining his heart's desire.

  That haughtiness will be his grounds for vexation,
    for he'll speak in pride & conceit.
  Seeing this, one should abstain from debates.
  No purity is attained by them, say the skilled.

  Like a strong man nourished on royal food,
  you go about, roaring, searching out an opponent.
  Wherever the battle is,
    go there, strong man.
  As before, there's none here.

  Those who dispute, taking hold of a view,
  saying, "This, and this only, is true,"
    those you can talk to.
  Here there is nothing —
    no confrontation
    at the birth of disputes.

  Among those who live above confrontation
    not pitting view against view,
    whom would you gain as opponent, Pasura,
  among those here
  who are grasping no more?

  So here you come,
    conjecturing,
  your mind conjuring
    viewpoints.
  You're paired off with a pure one
    and so cannot proceed.

Most people approach debate as if it was a sword fight. They debate to win, as if losing meant death. They do not make any effort to understand the other person's perspective!

They keep on fighting until they see an opening in the opponent's defense. As soon as they see a little inaccuracy or a logical error, they happily grasp on that -- even if it does not change the main idea the other person is trying to convey.

When the other person gets confused for a moment and says something obviously wrong, they happily make fun of him and keep pushing until the opponent is completely lost.

This kind of people firmly hold their ground, their confidence coming from their limited perspective and narrow view. Having won another debate with aggression and cunning, they are proud of themselves.

But if they see they cannot win, they get very envious of the winner, they get nervous, start changing topics, lie, resort to personal attacks, get angry, and finally go down to rudeness and yelling.

Instead, the noble students do not debate, they have conversations. They discuss things. When they thus sincerely talk they try to see each other's perspective. They understand that each (truthful) perspective is valid from its own side. So they try to see the value of the other perspective, and appreciate the factors and conclusions of the other side. Then, by combining the two perspectives, they come out with a more complete, more thorough understanding of the original problem. Each side lets go of its attachments and delusions as it accepts the other side's point of view, and integrates them together.

Also, see MN18 for an in-depth analysis of the psychology of reification underlying debates and arguments.


You might be asking several questions, but let me try to just answer the first one, where you ask,

  Does the Buddha say that we can enjoy something for two different mutually exclusive reasons?

On the contrary, at least initially, the first of the "four noble truths" is that everything is dukkha (i.e. stressful, unsatisfactory, cause of anxiety, etc.).

It's important to understand dukkha: What are the twelve aspects of the Four Noble Truths?

  Does the Buddha say that we can enjoy something for two different mutually exclusive reasons?

If you're asking, "What does the 'middle way' mean in Buddhism?", there's a Wikipedia article about that: Middle Way

In summary, I think that the 'Middle Way' doesn't mean "both of the two different mutually exclusive reasons" ... instead it usually means "neither of the two different mutually exclusive extremes".

For example:

Should we pursue sensory pleasure (hedonism), or, should we mortify the body with asceticism? The Buddha's "middle way" answer to that question was, "neither of those two extremes" (e.g. eat to live, but not live to eat).
Should we believe in eternal life of the self/soul after death, or, should we believe that death is annihilation? The answer is "neither".
Should we believe that everything exists, or, that nothing exists? No...

And so on.

The problem is that asking, "Is it this extreme, or is it that extreme?" implies that it's one extreme or the other: which reminds me of what's called a false dilemma, also known as a "fallacy of the excluded middle".