(1) Does self-compassion arise from wisdom?

Yes! And out of compassion for all others. An all included wisdom & compassion.

➱ 1th stage of wisdom, serious honesty:

   Rājan Sutta: The King

  I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. And on that occasion King Pasenadi Kosala had gone with Queen Mallikā to the upper palace. Then he said to her, "Mallikā, is there anyone dearer to you than yourself?"

  "No, great king. There is no one dearer to me than myself. And what about you, great king? Is there anyone dearer to you than yourself?"

  "No, Mallikā. There is no one dearer to me than myself."

  Then the king, descending from the palace, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, "Just now, when I had gone with Queen Mallikā to the upper palace, I said to her, 'Mallikā, is there anyone dearer to you than yourself?'

  "When this was said, she said to me, 'No, great king. There is no one dearer to me than myself. And what about you, great king? Is there anyone dearer to you than yourself?'

  "When this was said, I said to her, 'No, Mallikā. There is no one dearer to me than myself.'"

  Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:

  Searching all directions
  with your awareness,
  you find no one dearer
      than yourself.
  In the same way, others
  are thickly dear to themselves.
  So you shouldn't hurt others
      if you love yourself.

➯ 2nd Stage:

   Piya Sutta: Dear

  At Savatthi. As he was sitting to one side, King Pasenadi Kosala said to the Blessed One: "Just now, lord, while I was alone in seclusion, this train of thought arose in my awareness: 'Who are dear to themselves, and who are not dear to themselves?' Then it occurred to me: 'Those who engage in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct are not dear to themselves. Even though they may say, "We are dear to ourselves," still they aren't dear to themselves. Why is that? Of their own accord, they act toward themselves as an enemy would act toward an enemy; thus they aren't dear to themselves. But those who engage in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct are dear to themselves. Even though they may say, "We aren't dear to ourselves," still they are dear to themselves. Why is that? Of their own accord, they act toward themselves as a dear one would act toward a dear one; thus they are dear to themselves.'"

  That's the way it is, great king! That's the way it is! Those who engage in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct are not dear to themselves. Even though they may say, 'We are dear to ourselves,' still they aren't dear to themselves. Why is that? Of their own accord, they act toward themselves as an enemy would act toward an enemy; thus they aren't dear to themselves. But those who engage in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct are dear to themselves. Even though they may say, 'We aren't dear to ourselves,' still they are dear to themselves. Why is that? Of their own accord, they act toward themselves as a dear one would act toward a dear one; thus they are dear to themselves."

  That is what the Blessed One said. Having said that, the One Well-Gone, the Teacher, said further:

  If you hold yourself dear
  then don't fetter yourself
          with evil,
  for happiness isn't easily gained
      by one who commits
      a wrong-doing.

  When seized by the End-maker
      as you abandon the human state,
  what's truly your own?
  What do you take along when you go?
  What follows behind you
      like a shadow
      that never leaves?

  Both the merit & evil
      that you as a mortal
      perform here:
  that's      what's truly your own,
          what you take along when you go;
  that's      what follows behind you
      like a shadow
      that never leaves.

  So do what is admirable,
  as an accumulation
      for the future life.
  Deeds of merit are the support for beings
      when they arise
      in the other world.

.

 (2) Does self-compassion imply accumulating joys and happiness in a context of detachment and non-craving? I.e. what is the nature of the wise person's self-compassion?

➯ 3rd stage, supramundane wisdom: real compassion with all

It's already given under one, but maybe a ballade give wisdom for success of being really dear to oneself and so naturally to every being by leaving the states of demerits as well as merits behind:

   The Ballad of Liberation from the Khandhas

  Once there was a man who loved himself
  and feared distress. He wanted happiness
  beyond the reach of danger, so he wandered
  endlessly. Wherever people said
  that happiness was found, he longed to go,
  but wandering took a long, long time.
  He was the sort of man who loved himself
  and really dreaded death. He truly wanted
  release from aging & mortality.
  Then one day he came to know the truth,
  abandoning the cause of suffering &
  compounded things. He found a cave of wonders,
  of endless happiness, i.e., the body... ❋

➯ 4th stage: the practice out of compassion:

   Sedaka Sutta: At Sedaka

  The Blessed One said, "Once upon a time, monks, a bamboo acrobat, having erected a bamboo pole, addressed his assistant, Frying Pan: 'Come, my dear Frying Pan. Climb up the bamboo pole and stand on my shoulders.'

  "'As you say, Master,' Frying Pan answered the bamboo acrobat and, climbing the bamboo pole, stood on his shoulders.

  "So then the bamboo acrobat said to his assistant, 'Now you watch after me, my dear Frying Pan, and I'll watch after you. Thus, protecting one another, watching after one another, we'll show off our skill, receive our reward, and come down safely from the bamboo pole.'

  "When he had said this, Frying Pan said to him, 'But that won't do at all, Master. You watch after yourself, and I'll watch after myself, and thus with each of us protecting ourselves, watching after ourselves, we'll show off our skill, receive our reward, and come down safely from the bamboo pole.'

  "What Frying Pan, the assistant, said to her Master was the right way in that case.

  "Monks, a frame of reference is to be practiced with the thought, 'I'll watch after myself.' A frame of reference is to be practiced with the thought, 'I'll watch after others.' When watching after oneself, one watches after others. When watching after others, one watches after oneself.

  "And how does one, when watching after oneself, watch after others? Through pursuing [the practice], through developing it, through devoting oneself to it. This is how one, when watching after oneself, watches after others.

  "And how does one, when watching after others, watch after oneself? Through endurance, through harmlessness, and through a mind of kindness & sympathy. This is how one, when watching after others, watches after oneself.

  "A frame of reference is to be practiced with the thought, 'I'll watch after myself.' A frame of reference is to be practiced with the thought, 'I'll watch after others.' When watching after oneself, one watches after others. When watching after others, one watches after oneself."

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial purpose and other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange]


Meditation - hot and expectant in the morning

Be expectant in life as a house holder but not when meditating. When meditating focus on the task at hand.

With regards to ideal time for meditation, it depends, from person to person and time to time. For some people morning sessions may work well while evenings may not, but for the same people evenings may work well in some periods. Hence it is best to practice at least 2 times a day.

The heating up and cooling experience you mentioned is normal. People experience certain persisting parters of experience like burning sensation, acute pains, vibrations, etc., but these also will change after some time. Do not dwell of give too much importance to the experience but use it to eradicate your past store of Sankara as in the Pahana Suttas (Pahāna Sutta, Avijja Pahana Sutta 2). Be equanimous to the experience knowing it is impermanent (arising and passing).


How can I tell the difference between the Deva realm and the Buddha and bodhisattva realms?

Denizens of the heavenly planets enjoy more and live longer. They have made lots of good karma in their human form of life and became qualified to enjoy heavenly life. The joy of of Buddhas is eternal and unlimited. Buddhas enjoy their natural life that's found in enlightenment.

The best way to know this is by gaining experience from meditating.


Does Theravada believe in feeding food to hungry ghosts?

Theravada tradition believe in the transferring of merit to the deceased in case they are in need of merit. If born in a relm where you can sence and rejoice in the meritorious deeds performed you can gain merit. This does not imply that these beings are fed.

There is a Ancient India and Sri Lankan practice in doing leaving food for the Petas but this doesn't relate much to Buddhism. Ratana Sutta does mention harantia balin. So the Buddha did not reject it but I don't think this should be taken as an endorsement also by the Buddha. Hence this practice is outside Buddhism where Buddhism don't accept or reject the social practice at that time.


"Gatha" (Verse) on mindfulness/contemplation of Death : Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw

Because you mention the Mahasi Sayadaw in your question, most relevant is the Mahasi Sayadaw's discussion of the Purabheda Sutta:

http://static.sirimangalo.org/mahasi/Purabheda%20Sutta.htm

(Sorry, the formatting is off in this version)

There are some Pali phrases in that book that might be of interest, e.g.:

  Vītataṇho purābhedā, pubbamanta manissito.
  Vemajjhe nupasaṅkheyo, tassa natthi purekkhataṃ.

  The one who has removed craving before death, independent of past and future;
  who is not stuck in the present; for such a one there is no further becoming.

Also in the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition, it is customary to reflect on death before starting the practice:

  The fourth protection for your psychological benefit is to reflect on the phenomenon of
  ever-approaching death. Buddhist teachings stress that life is uncertain, but death is
  certain; life is precarious but death is sure. Life has death as its goal. There is birth,
  disease, suffering, old age, and eventually, death. These are all aspects of the process of
  existence.

  -- Mahasi Sayadaw, Practical Insight Meditation

The Pali for this is from the Dhammapada Commentary:

  addhuvaṃ me jīvitaṃ, dhuvaṃ me maraṇaṃ

  My life is unsure; my death is sure.

  avassaṃ mayā maritabbameva,

  Indeed, in the future I must die.

  maraṇapariyosānaṃ me jīvitaṃ,

  My life has death as its final end.

  jīvitameva aniyataṃ, maraṇaṃ niyatanti

  Life indeed is uncertain, death is certain.

  -- Dhp-A 174 (pesakāradhītāvatthu)

These are often chanted before starting a meditation course in the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition.

Besides this, there are many verses about death in the tipitaka; the most common is that spoken by Sakka when the Buddha passed away:

  “aniccā vata saṅkhārā, uppādavayadhammino.
  uppajjitvā nirujjhanti, tesaṃ vūpasamo sukho”ti.

  Impermanent indeed are all formations; of a nature to arise and pass.
  Having arisen, they cease; their fading away is happiness.

  -- DN 16

Another similar one we use often is Dhp 41:

  aciraṃ vatayaṃ kāyo, pathaviṃ adhisessati.
  chuddho apetaviññāṇo, niratthaṃva kaliṅgaraṃ.

  In no long time indeed will this body lie on the earth;
  Discarded, consciousness having departed, as useless as a charred log.


What does Buddhism teach on cultivating energy for those who are drowsy?

Present situation is the result of past causes, so it would be interesting to see what led you to that constant state of fatigue in the first place.


Mahayana is not a sect at all; it is a vehicle.

Major traditions in Buddhism are usually country or region related. We can distinguish three major branches of Buddhism in the World by what they keep as canon.

Tibetan, Mongolian, and Russian Buddhism share Tibetan canon.
Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Buddhism share Chinese canon.
Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, etc share Pali canon.

Some countries mix several aforementioned branches.


In MN 71, the Buddha clarifies the meaning of his omniscience to the wandering ascetic Vacchagotta:

Vaccha: ‘Venerable sir, I have heard this said: The recluse Gotama is all knowing and all seeing and acknowledges remainderless knowledge and vision in this manner, ‘while walking, standing, lying or awake, constantly and continually knowledge and vision is established, to me’.Venerable sir, those who say, these words, ‘The recluse Gotama is all knowing and all seeing and acknowledges remainderless knowledge and vision:while walking, standing, lying or awake, constantly and continually.’ Are they saying the words of good Gotama and are they not blaming the Blessed One falsely?
The Buddha: Vaccha, those who say, the recluse Gotama is all knowing and all seeing and acknowledges remainderless knowledge and vision, while walking, standing, lying or awake, constantly and continually. They, do not say my words, they blame me falsely.
Vaccha: Venerable sir, saying how would it be said, correctly not blaming the Blessed One falsely?
The Buddha: ‘The recluse Gotama knows the three knowledges. Saying it thus they would be saying the right thing, and not blaming me falsely. Vaccha, whenever I desire, I recollect the manifold previous births, such as one birth, two births, with all modes and all details, thus I recall the manifold previous births. Vaccha, when I desire, with the purified heavenly eye beyond human, see beings disappearing and appearing, in unexalted and exalted states, beautiful and ugly, in good and bad states,-- I see beings, according their actions. Vaccha, destroying desires, my mind released and released through wisdom, here and now by myself realising I abide. Vaccha, if it is said, the recluse Gotama knows the three knowledges, saying it thus, you would be saying the right thing and not blaming me falsely’.

Ven. Bodhi further elaborates by citing the Commentary in his note in "The Middle Length Discourses":

MA explains that even though part of the statement is valid, the Buddha rejects the entire statement because of the portion that is invalid. The part of the statement that is valid is the assertion that the Buddha is omniscient and all-seeing; the part that is excessive is the assertion that knowledge and vision are continuously present to him. According to the Theravāda exegetical tradition the Buddha is omniscient in the sense that all knowable things are potentially accessible to him. He cannot, however, know everything simultaneously and must advert to whatever he wishes to know. At MN 90.8 the Buddha says that it is possible to know and see all, though not simultaneously, and at AN 4:24/ii.24 he claims to know all that can be seen, heard, sensed, and cognized. This is understood by the Theravāda commentators as an assertion of omniscience in the qualified sense. See too in this connection Miln 102–7.


Is it acceptable for Buddhists to celebrate Santa Claus at Chistmas?

To quote the eminent Rev. Lovejoy - "Santa doesn't leave presents under the Bodhi Tree!"  ;-)
https://www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/1dfa24e6-d8cf-48c2-9f6d-2f5eaef9209e
Of course it's acceptable!  If Buddha isn't merriment, then what good is it?


When was the word enlightenment introduced into Theravada Buddhism?

One place where I know "enlightenment" is used is in this version (which was published in 1894):

A middle path, O bhikkhus avoiding the two extremes, has been discovered by the Tathagata-a path which opens the eyes, and bestows understanding, which leads to peace of mind, to the higher wisdom, to full enlightenment, to Nirvana!

Wikipedia's Buddhism in the West suggests that's one of the early references (that there's nothing earlier than the 19th century).
It's word with a history of meaning in the West (see e.g. Age of Enlightenment).
Bhikkhu Bodhi uses the word "enlightenment" a lot, e.g. in his book In the Buddha's Words. He uses it to translate words like sambodhi:

sambodhi: [sam+bodhi] complete awakening, perfect knowledge, complete enlightenment. Designates the awakening of the Buddha and the arahants.

Some other translators choose variations on the word "awake" (e.g. "self-awakened") instead of enlightened; which (awakened) is apparently a more literal translation.
According to Wikipedia ("Enlightenment in Buddhism"),

The English term enlightenment is the western translation of the term bodhi, "awakening", which was popularised in the Western world through the 19th century translations of Max Müller. It has the western connotation of a sudden insight into a transcendental truth.
The term is also being used to translate several other Buddhist terms and concepts used to denote insight (prajna, kensho and satori);[1] knowledge (vidhya); the "blowing out" (Nirvana) of disturbing emotions and desires and the subsequent freedom or release (vimutti); and the attainment of Buddhahood, as exemplified by Gautama Buddha.

Very occasionally in Pali the Buddha is praised as ukkādhāraṃ translated "torch-bearer".


The distinction goes back all the way to Buddha's students' original Maha-Sangha and its two sub-schools Bahushrutiya and Prajnaptivada. From Wikipedia:

  According to Paramārtha, the Bahuśrutīya school was formed in order to fully embrace both "conventional truth" and "ultimate truth."

and

  The Prajñaptivādins were early articulators of the two truths doctrine.

The relationship of the two truths is the main concern of Buddhist ontological tradition called "Madhyamaka". According to them, the "ultimate" that is defined in opposition to "conventional" is not the true ultimate. As you say, these two are mere views or descriptions of reality. The true "ultimate", they argue, is beyond all descriptions, and therefore complete and does not stand in opposition to anything (is all inclusive). One of the very many texts that elaborate on this point and its implications is Karmapa's commentary on an ancient little stanza known as The Cuckoo of Awareness.
As my Zen Master said, it is one thing if I explain this, and another thing if you get it yourself. Therefore I will leave this one unanswered.


Anger
Anger is a manifestation of one of the five hindrances, the hindrance of aversion/ill-will (byāpāda). According to the Buddha, the path to happiness and Nirvana is the path of understanding and abandoning these hindrances.

“Bhikkhus, if one were to say of anything ‘a heap of the unwholesome,’ it is about the five hindrances that one could rightly say this. For this is a complete heap of the unwholesome, that is, the five hindrances." (SN 47.5)
"This Noble Eightfold Path is to be developed for direct knowledge of these five hindrances, for the full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for their abandoning.”  (SN 45.177)
"I say, bhikkhus, that ignorance has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for ignorance? It should be said: the five hindrances." (AN 10.61)
“Bhikkhus, these five hindrances are makers of blindness, causing lack of vision, causing lack of knowledge, detrimental to wisdom, tending to vexation, leading away from Nibbāna."  (SN 46.40)

Anger, like any hindrance, obstructs the development of the other limbs of the Eightfold Path. One example is the concentration (samadhi) limb, where it's not possible to enter the first jhana, a deeper state of meditation, without being secluded from the five hindrances:

"Quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, he enters upon and abides in the first jhāna, which is accompanied by applied and sustained thought, with rapture and pleasure born of seclusion."

When meditation is obstructed, wisdom is obstructed and so on... like a house of cards falling apart.
Nutriment for Anger
Anger manifests itself when we give careless attention to that which bugs us.

“And what, bhikkhus, is the nutriment for the arising of unarisen ill will and for the increase and expansion of arisen ill will? There is, bhikkhus, the sign of the repulsive (paṭigha): frequently giving careless attention to it is the nutriment for the arising of unarisen ill will and for the increase and expansion of arisen ill will."
-- SN 46.2

Mitigating One's Own Anger
Part of the training to dispel anger is the practice of the virtue group of the Noble Eightfold Path, in particular, Right Speech and Right Action. These are restraints on bodily and verbal action. Thus, one abandons the act of killing living beings. Also, one abandon harsh words, words that are "rough, hard, hurtful to others, offensive to others, bordering on anger, unconducive to concentration" (AN 10.211).
Furthermore, one also must restrain mental actions, which are the forerunners of verbal and bodily actions.

"There is the case where a monk does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence. He does not tolerate an arisen thought of cruelty. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence. He does not tolerate arisen evil, unskillful mental qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence."
-- AN 5.140

This threefold teaching related to anger is nicely put together in the following dhammapada verses:

Let a man guard himself against irritability in bodily action; let him be controlled in deed. Abandoning bodily misconduct, let him practice good conduct in deed.
Let a man guard himself against irritability in speech; let him be controlled in speech. Abandoning verbal misconduct, let him practice good conduct in speech.
Let a man guard himself against irritability in thought; let him be controlled in mind. Abandoning mental misconduct, let him practice good conduct in thought.

Restraining anger in the mind can be very challenging. A progressive teaching on how to restrain unwholesome thoughts was given by the Buddha in the Vitakkasanthana sutta (MN 20):

"When a bhikkhu is giving attention to some sign, and owing to that sign there arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts [...] connected with hate then he should give attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome. When he gives attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome, then any evil unwholesome thoughts connected with hate are abandoned in him and subside. With the abandoning of them his mind becomes steadied internally, quieted, brought to singleness, and concentrated [...]"
"If, while he is giving attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome, there still arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts [...] connected with hate then he should examine the danger in those thoughts thus: ‘These thoughts are unwholesome, they are reprehensible, they result in suffering.’ [...]
"If, while he is examining the danger in those thoughts, there still arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts [...] connected with hate then he should try to forget those thoughts and should not give attention to them [...]"
“If, while he is trying to forget those thoughts and is not giving attention to them, there still arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts [...] connected with hate then he should give attention to stilling the thought-formation of those thoughts. When he gives attention to stilling the thought-formation of those thoughts, then any evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with hate, and with delusion are abandoned in him and subside [...]"
“If, while he is giving attention to stilling the thought-formation of those thoughts, there still arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts [...] connected with hate then, with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth, he should beat down, constrain, and crush mind with mind."

The Buddha also narrated how he trained to dispel his own unwholesome thoughts in the Dvedhavitakka sutta (MN 19):

"As I abided thus, diligent, ardent, and resolute, a thought of ill will arose in me ... a thought of cruelty arose in me. I understood thus: ‘This thought of cruelty has arisen in me. This leads to my own affliction, to others’ affliction, and to the affliction of both; it obstructs wisdom, causes difficulties, and leads away from Nibbāna.‘ When I considered thus it subsided in me. Whenever a thought of cruelty arose in me, I abandoned it, removed it, did away with it."

Finally, two mental factors, when fully developed, make it impossible for anger and cruelty to take over one's mind:  loving kindness (mettā) and compassion (karunā):

"It’s impossible and inconceivable, friend, that one might develop and cultivate the liberation of mind by loving-kindness, make it one's vehicle and basis, carry it out, consolidate it, and properly undertake it, yet ill will could still obsess one's mind."
[...]
"It’s impossible and inconceivable, friend, that one might develop and cultivate the liberation of mind by compassion, make it one's vehicle and basis, carry it out, consolidate it, and properly undertake it, yet the thought of harming could still obsess one's mind."
-- AN 6.13

The deeper practices of loving kindness and compassion are described in suttas such as the Atthakanagara Sutta.
Dealing with People's Anger
In one episode, the Buddha instructed Phagguna to train as follows when he is facing dispraise and violence (MN 21):

‘Neither will my mind become perverted, nor will I utter an evil speech, but kindly and compassionate will I dwell with a mind of friendliness and void of hatred.’

The Buddha taught his disciples to endure the anger from others:

“And how is a monk an endurer? There is the case where a monk is resilient to cold, heat, hunger, & thirst; the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles; ill-spoken, unwelcome words & bodily feelings that, when they arise, are painful, racking, sharp, piercing, disagreeable, displeasing, & menacing to life."
--AN 5.14

He taught his disciples to be tolerant towards angry people:

“And which is intolerant practice? There is the case where a certain individual, when insulted, returns the insult; when abused, returns the abuse; when bickered with, bickers in return. This is called intolerant practice.
“And which is tolerant practice? There is the case where a certain individual, when insulted, doesn’t return the insult; when abused, doesn’t return the abuse; when bickered with, doesn’t bicker in return. This is called tolerant practice.
-- AN 4.164

He also emphasized the development of equanimity when dealing with angry people, and instructed the monks to remain in healthy distance so as to not obstruct their own practice:

“And what kind of person is to be looked upon with equanimity, not to be associated with, followed, and served? Here, some person is prone to anger  and easily exasperated. Even if he is criticized slightly he loses his temper and becomes irritated, hostile, and stubborn; he displays irritation, hatred, and bitterness. [...] Such a person is to be looked upon with equanimity, not to be associated with, followed, and served. For what reason? With the thought: ‘He might insult me, revile me, and do me harm.’ Therefore such a person is to be looked upon with equanimity, not to be associated with, followed, and served.
-- AN 3.27

The Buddha pointed out that harmlessness is a protection we give not only to others, but to ourselves:

“And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, lovingkindness, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
-- SN 47.19

He taught the disciples consistently in this path even if the Dhamma, Sangha and the Buddha are insulted:

"If, bhikkhus, others speak in dispraise of me, or in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Sangha, you should not give way to resentment, displeasure, or animosity against them in your heart. For if you were to become angry or upset in such a situation, you would only be creating an obstacle for yourselves.
-- DN 1

Finally, he also vividly illustrated how anger has no part in his teachings:

Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching."  (MN 21)


A view is when you affirm a certain thinking to be true. Simply having a thought of doubt doesn't qualify as having a view, even though it's still unwholesome.

A human taking the view that there are no spontaneous beings solely based on his inability to see them points to a flaw in his thinking. I.e. thinking that anything that cannot be seen does not exit. If a born blind person has the same thinking, he might even deny the existence of the sun and the moon. This is similar to taking the view that the earth is the only place with sentient beings in the whole universe because we haven't seen any aliens yet. The same line of thinking can make a person take the view that Nibbana does not exist, because he hasn't seen it.

Not believing in father and mother is more about thinking that there's no use in caring for them, which is wrong and detrimental. It's about biological parents.


Lighting a lamp, you need another lamp. Because during self generation you are the Buddha, and in order to have 100% conviction that you are the Buddha, you must be told(initiated) by the Buddha himself. That is why it is said that seeing/recognising the guru as the Buddha himself is important in Tantra. Further the guru himself must have an unbroken lineage starting from the Buddha himself.


I think i get what you mean and being too analytical can seem strange because one will definitely be no fun at a party nor is one likely to participate to begin with. However being constantly serious and ardently training is going to make one more happy and one will be able to benefit other people in a far more useful way.


What is the difference between the path to nibanna and the path to higher planes?

Practicing Samatha meditations you reach higher realms.
Practicing Vipassana meditation you reach Nibbana.
Samath practice attenuates attachment aversion and ignorance.
Vipassana practice fully eradicates the attachment aversion and ignorance.


How to practice ignoring identification with the body?

The question you asked is directly combined with the concept of saññā(identification).
From the day we born in this world, we sense things around us and recognize them according to the external world. For example, when you first see an object like chair, you don't have any idea that it is a chair. But the knowledge you get from the outside, lead you to believe that it is a chair. So, next time you see a similar shape, you understand that is also a chair.
That's how conventional world is built. But actually, what we see is not what exists. Everything in this universe is made of 4 fundamental things patavi,aapo ,thejo and wayo. Nothing is beyond that.Anything you see from your eyes is just a combination of these 4 elements.Only the outer appearance differs according to the element percentages.
As an example if you consider water => aapo is the dominant factor...
for a rock => patavi is the dominant factor. The names you use for them are just set of words nothing more.

When you consider about the body, first thing you need to know is, the name "body" is just a word. What you feel when you touch yourself and what you see from the mirror is just a combination of 4 factors mentioned above.
In the Buddhism human body is beautifully described. Human body is made of 32 parts.

Head hair, Body hair, Nails, Teeth, Skin
(Kesa, Loma, Nakkha, Danta, Taco)
Flesh, Sinews, Bones, Bone Marrow, Kidneys
(Masam, Naharu, Atthi, Atthiminjam, Vakkam)
Heart, Liver, Diaphragm, Spleen, Lungs
(Hadayam, Yakanam, Kilomakam, Pihakam, Papphasam)
Large Intestine, Small Intestine, Stomach, Feces, Brain
(Antam, Antagunam, Udariam, Kerisam, Mattagunam)
Bile, Phlegm, Pus, Blood, Sweat, Fat
(Pittam, Semhan, Pubbo, Lohitam, Sedo, Medo)
Tears, Grease, Saliva, Mucus, Oil of the Joints, Urine
(Assu, Vasa, Kelo, Singhanika, Lasika, Muttam)

Imagine you separate each of these from your body and see them individually. If you see these things separately, you don't consider them as a body or a human.You might recognize them as blood, piece of bone or piece of flesh etc.
But when they are together you recognize it as the body. That is the wrong saññā(identification).
Body never exist anywhere in the future,past or present. Only these 32 parts where there. If you go deeper you might realize each of these part is just combination of patavi,aapo,thejo and wayo. So ultimately, what really exists is 4 fundamentals, not anything else.
when you realize what you see from the mirror is not your body and just combination of four fundamentals.You will not recognize it as body and you will see it as a combination.
patavi is toughness it belongs to land.. everything in your body made of patavi will decay and added up to soil one day.
aapo is the liquidity and it belongs to ocean.. everything in your body made of aapo will wash away and collect to the ocean.
thejo is the temparature inside the body.. it will mix with the atmosphere once you dead and add to the fire.
wayo is the air inside the body and it will mix to the atmosphere and blow away with the wind..

So if you cannot control these four factors,obviously you cannot control a combination of them as well. So there is no point of telling "body" is mine.
correct your saññā(identification) about the "body" according to Buddhism then you will see the truth.


What are the characteristics of karmaless action?

It leads to dispassion.

Meaning, it's an action that reduces both karmic as well as mental / emotional entanglement.

Normal pathological action leads to entanglement in issues and trouble. Typical example is a child of a dysfunctional family, who is forced to inherit the bad circumstances and negative inertia, and by reacting destructively keeps creating causes for future trouble. Normal success-oriented action leads to positive entanglement in worldly affairs. Such as, when you are realizing yourself as a successful professional in any field.

Supramundane action leads to dispassion, to disentanglement, to letting go, to unbinding. How? Through counteracting/taming the forces of desire, aversion, and confusion.

So every time you act (whether directly or indirectly) towards reduction of desire, reduction of aversion, increase of wisdom - that's the supramundane action.

You can act towards reduction of desire and aversion by directly suppressing them and letting go - and realize wisdom as you practice this ("samatha followed by vipassana" in the broad sense). Or you can pursue wisdom and realize reduction of desire and aversion, and eventual dispassion - as a product of wisdom ("vipassana followed by samatha" metaphorically speaking). This is a theoretical construct meant to made the point. In practice everyone has to do both, in a spiral fashion - emotional intelligence and wisdom developing in lockstep.

While "karmaless" action can be ensured in the most straightforward way by literally leaving the world and engaging in practice of meditation (an approach typical of Theravada), a more effective approach, IMHO, is the Mahayana practice of not letting your ego indulge in self-sustaining activities. In other words, you should only do what leads to objectively optimal result (within the limits of your practical ability to achieve the optimum in the midst of a real life situation) and never let your social image, your ego, your group/tribe ego, your fears, your pride, (including your spiritual pride!), your bias etc. to get a bite of nutrition. This way all of your action will go towards dispassion and wisdom, as it will not be motivated by an egoistic motive (aka "passion").

Now, for the wisdom leg, this wisdom is not the worldly wisdom either. It is the special wisdom of understanding the nature of phenomena and mind, the nature of reality so to speak. So any action toward pursuit of this wisdom counts as "karmaless" action (action that leads to the ending of karma).

One notable characteristic of special wisdom is abandonment of overgeneralization and stereotyping. This leads to action that itself is not based on overgeneralization, stereotyping, and passionate side-taking - and encourages others to avoid overgeneralization, stereotyping, and passionate side-taking. Enlightened/enlightening action is inherently peaceful and brings peace.


Why isn't Buddhānussati more popular in the West?

I doubt faith, virtue & devotion to the Buddha (alone) can bring stream-entry because these suttas include penetration of lokuttara dhamma as one of the four factors of stream-entry, namely:

  He is endowed with verified (avecca) confidence in the Dhamma: 'The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here & now, timeless,
  inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for
  themselves.'

  avecca absol. understanding, having penetrated (see aveti)

This surely must mean enlightenment to the noble truths & liberating anatta, which ends the fetters of self-belief (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) & doubt (vicikicchā). It also appears to negate beliefs in reincarnation as factors of stream-entry because the dhamma to be verified is to be seen here & now, etc.


Is there a commentary for the Dhammapada?

Yes, there is indeed. The commentarial text includes both these stories and word-by-word commentary on the verses themselves.
The story parts were translated into English long ago by Burlingame as "Buddhist Legends". The PDF version is available here:
http://static.sirimangalo.org/pdf/
in three volumes. (Search the page for "Buddhist Legends", there's eight pdf files)
The commentary on the verses has never been fully translated, AFAIK. Here, as an example, is the commentary on the first verse (not found in Burlingame's translation):

Realities have mind as forerunner, have mind as chief, are formed of mind.  If, with a mind corrupted, one speaks or acts, because of that, suffering follows him, just as a wheel the foot of the one pulling the burden.
Therein, each and every mind of the four realms, categorized as sensual-sphere wholesome, etc. is called “mind”. But, in this passage, being fixed, determined and defined by the power of the doctor's arisen mind, just a mind associated with aversion and accompanied by displeasure was obtained. In reference to “having as forerunner”: having become because of it going first, they are associated with it.  in reference to “realities”, there are actually four types of reality, under the headings of virtue, dissemination, study, and non-being/non-soul.  In regards to these, in “dhamma and non-dhamma do not indeed both have the same result.  Non-dhamma leads to hell, dhamma causes to reach a happy destination.”,  this is called “dhamma as virtue”. In “I will disseminate the dhamma to you monks, beautiful in the beginning...”, this is called “dhamma as dissemination”.  In “So here, monks, some young men of a good families bring the dhamma to complete fulfilment: the sutta the geyya...” this is called “dhamma as study”.  In “But indeed, at that time dhammas exist, aggregates exist.” this is called “non-being dhamma”.  This indeed is also called “non-soul dhamma”. Of those, in this instance non-being/non-soul dhamma is intended. The meaning of that is the three formless aggregates - the aggregate of sensation the aggregate of perception and the aggregate of mental formation.  Because, these are spoken of as “mind is the forerunner of them”, they are called that which has mind as forerunner.
But why is mind, arising in a single instant together with these, of a single base, with a single object, not before nor after, called “forerunner”? By the meaning of being condition for arising. Just as where many villains are doing evil deeds together like pillaging, etc., when it is asked, “Who is the forerunner of these villains?” whoever is the condition for them, having depended on whom they do that deed, he, whether Datta or Mitta, is called “the forerunner” of them. Thus should the completion of this matter be understood. Since, by the meaning of being condition for arising, mind is the forerunner of them, so they have mind as forerunner; whereas they are not able to arise with mind not arising, mind, however, does indeed arise with some mental concomitants not arising. Further, by virtue of being ruler over, mind is foremost in regards to them, so they have mind as chief. For, just as senior villains, etc., are chiefs of villains, etc., by ruling over them, so, as the mind is ruler of those mental concomitants, they indeed have mind as chief. Further, just as whatever is fashioned with wood, etc., all of those wares are called made of wood, etc., so, as those mental concomitants are themselves fashioned from the mind, they are called mind-made.
In reference to “with a mind corrupted”, the meaning is with a mind corrupted by incoming faults beginning with covetousness.  For the bhavaṅgacitta is an normal mind that is uncorrupted.  But  just as clear water tainted by incoming blue colour, etc. is thus categorized as blue water, etc., and not new water, nor either the former same clear water, even so is that mind corrupted by incoming faults beginning with covetousness, and not a new mind, nor indeed the former same bhavaṅgacitta.  Thus the Blessed One said, “Radiant, monks, is this mind; yet indeed, it is defiled by incoming defilements (AN 1.49).” So, if with a mind corrupted a man speaks or acts, speaking, he speaks only the fourfold verbal misconduct; acting, performs only the threefold bodily misconduct; not speaking, not acting, while there exists that mind corrupted with covetousness, etc., he fulfils the threefold mental misconduct.  Thus he fulfils the ten means of unwholesome action.
In regards to, “because of that, suffering follows him,” the meaning is, because of that threefold misconduct, suffering goes after that individual; by the power of misconduct, in the four states of loss or in the realm of humans, going both as a body-entity and otherwise, thus by this explanation bodily and mental suffering as a result follows that state of being.
Just like what? In regards to “just as a wheel the foot of the one pulling the burden”, the meaning is, like a wheel the foot of the ox harnessed in the yoke, pulling the yoke. For, just as that ox pulling even for one day, even for two, even for five, even for ten, even for half-a-month, even for a month, is not able to leave behind, to abandon the wheel; then indeed, when he is advancing to the front, the yoke presses on his neck; when retreating to the back, the wheel strikes against the flesh of his legs.  Oppressing by these two means, the wheel is in-step with the feet of that ox.  Just so, with a mind defiled, having fulfilled the three types of misconduct, an individual  is set in hell, etc..  Gone into such and such places, both bodily and mental suffering rooted in misconduct follows after him.  This is the meaning.


This is a triple win in term of accumulating and strengthening the effectiveness of the karmic action:

Being nice
Knowing being nice has consequences
Acting knowing there are consequences

When doing good, believing in Karma and knowing there are consequences, reinforce the good results.


What is the, "Counterfeit Law" as referenced in Lotus Sutra

Here is the definition for  Correct Law (from the Soka Gakkai Nichiren Buddhism Library Glossary):

  Correct Law (Ch zhengfa, J shōhō or shōbō) An abbreviation for the period when the Correct Law prevails. According to Buddhist belief, after the death of a buddha, his teachings pass through three periods or phases of development. In the first, known as the period of the Correct Law, Buddhism is a living religion and those who practice it attain enlightenment through its teachings. The period of the Correct Law following the death of Shakyamuni Buddha is usually said to have been a thousand years in length, though some sources describe it as five hundred years long.

And here is the definition for Counterfeit Law:

  Counterfeit Law (Ch xiangfa, J zōhō or zōbō) Second period following the death of a buddha. During this period, Buddhism becomes increasingly formalized, people’s connection with it weakens, and progressively fewer of them are able to gain enlightenment through its teachings. Some sources describe the period of the Counterfeit Law following Shakyamuni’s death as a thousand years in length, others as five hundred years.


How can I know that I am clear of thoughts while I am meditating?

There are multiple kinds of mental phenomena, not all of which can be classified as thoughts.

First and the crudest kind, are visualizations, cravings, and replays. This is when we mentally leave here and now, and are experiencing what basically is a (short or long) daydream about the subject our mind is concerned or agitated about.

The second kind are mental chatter. This is when we think in words, silently saying them in our head. If you look carefully you will notice how the muscles of the tongue and lips are slightly engaged as you "pronounce" your inner speeches.

The third kind is conceptual thinking. This is when we mentally follow a chain of logical relationships between objects or concepts. These are still thoughts.

The fourth kind is labeling. This is when we mentally recognize phenomena we experience and identify them with a category or attribute that makes them distinct, given the context.

The fifth kind is registering. This is when we make a mental note of experience without labeling it to any category. For the purposes of this answer, these are the borderline between thoughts and non-conceptual experiences.

The sixth kind is non-conceptual perception. This is when we experience (see, hear, smell) or feel (a bodily sensation or emotion), without labeling, acknowledging or noting it in any way. Famous technique used by Zen masters to awaken one to this level is to make a sudden noise in the middle of long meditation session.

The seventh kind is perception of energy. This is when we feel chakras and meridians.

The eighth kind is samadhi. This can't be described in words and must be experienced to be understood.

When we say "my thinking has stopped", we usually mean levels 1-4, while levels 6-8 can still function. This said, it is not like in meditation our goal is to stop thinking. Rather, it is to open ourselves to levels 6-8. As we get better at this, thinking can go on "in the background" without affecting our meditation.


Pressing palms together in respect for the lotus sutra - a boddhisattva?

The greeting with joined palms is mentioned throughout the suttas. In general, the entire Sangha is worthy of such greeting:

  DN33:1.11.105: ‘The Saṅgha of the Buddha’s disciples is practicing the way that’s good, straightforward, methodical, and proper. It consists of the four pairs, the eight individuals. This is the Saṅgha of the Buddha’s disciples that is worthy of offerings dedicated to the gods, worthy of hospitality, worthy of a religious donation, worthy of greeting with joined palms, and is the supreme field of merit for the world.’

Note the clarification about four pairs and eight individuals. The fourth pair comprises those perfected or practicing for perfection. But it takes more than simply paying homage. All of these eight individuals have undertaken the Noble Eightfold Path: Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Immersion.

Even Gautama Buddha had to be encouraged to pay homage to a living Buddha. He had to be grabbed by the hair:

  MN81:8.16: Then Ghaṭīkāra grabbed Jotipāla by the hair of his freshly-washed head and said, ‘Dear Jotipāla, the Buddha Kassapa’s monastery is not far away. Let’s go to see the Blessed One Kassapa, the perfected one, the fully awakened Buddha. For I regard it as holy to see that Blessed One.’

It is good that you are paying homage to the Buddhas already. But perhaps more attention to the entire Noble Eighfold Path would be more effective than such simple observances?


Where can I read the oldest and purest texts of Buddhism?

The original teachings are found in the Pali suttas, where the Refuge in the Dhamma (Teachings) is described as follows:

  The teaching is well explained by the Buddha—visible in the here &
  now, immediately effective, inviting inspection, relevant, so that
  sensible people can know it for themselves.

  SN 16.3

You start with the 1st three sermons of the Buddha, which are:

Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path
Three Characteristics
Three Defilements

Then:

Dependent Origination
Emptiness

Also, where the Buddha declares what exactly he uniquely teaches:

Handful of Leaves
"Suffering and the cessation of suffering"
Emptiness
Six elements; six bases for contact; eighteen mental examinations; and four noble truths

To understand the original teachings, the following words are best understood:

(i) "jati" ("birth") or "jatiya", which means "self/social identity".

(ii) "marana" ("death"), which means "death of identity".

(iii) "kaya" (often translated as "body"), which means "group" or "collection" of aggregates.

(iv) "nirodha", which can mean "cessation" but often means the cessation of ignorance & craving.

(v) "beings" ("satta'), which on a spiritual level refers to thought created "idea" or "view".

(vi) "dukkha". in relation to the four noble truths, "dukkha" means "suffering" or "stress"; in relation to the Three Characteristics of the 2nd sermon, "dukkha" means "unsatisfactoriness", "ungratifying" or "unable to bring true happiness"; in relation to feeling, "dukkha" means "painful" or "unpleasant".

Once the above is understood, you will be able to negotiate your way through the teachings.

You can read these book to help you:

Two Kinds of Language
Buddha-Dhamma for Students
The Shape of Suffering up to & including page 6
Nibbana For Everyone
Kamma in Buddhism


How sacrosanct is the "source material" of Buddhism?

I think there are some very good and apposite questions here. I find I meet two kinds of Buddhists online. Those committed to the idea that the Pāḷi Canon is something like the Bible, the words of the Buddha and thus an ultimate authority. These kind are mostly, but not only, Theravādin Buddhists. To a lesser extent one also sees this kind of ideological commitment from Mādhyamikas about Nāgārjuna as well. The second kind take the opposite view. That the texts are worthless and that apart from the some of the practices that there is nothing worth saving.

There is a kind of middle way. No modern historian treats the Pāḷi Canon as historically accurate any more. Apologetics which argue for the authenticity of the suttas tend to come from establishment figures within one or other Theravādin movement. Thanissaro and Sujato have both written apologetics in recent times for example. But this is what we expect of men who have made a strong commitment to a Buddhist sect (especially one which involves life-long chastity).

However many of the stories in the texts are still of considerable interest for their insights into the historical development of Buddhism and the changes that Buddhist doctrines undergo over time. I am particularly interested in these kinds of changes. And of course some stories are timeless. This is why we preserve and retell stories from the distant past: the Mahābharat in India and the Greek myths in Europe are good examples. Good story telling is timeless and fictional characters no less moving and educative for being unreal.

It's widely acknowledged, by scholars at least, that Buddhism is syncretic from the first evidence we have of it. The earliest records of Buddhism show influence from a number of other cultures not limited to Brahmanism, Jainism, local animistic cults, and Zoroastrianism (the latter discovery is relatively old, my own contribution to the field has been to put the case more systematically). Such syncretism continues throughout the life of Buddhism in India and outside it, right down to the present. With more or less success. Usually the process involves subordinating the assimilated material to Buddhism in some explicit fashion, though sometimes the process is implicit, and often it is transparent to Buddhists (e.g. the Vedic myth in the Agañña Sutta quoted time and again as a "Buddhist" creation story).

That said I think the identity of "Buddhist" is meaningful for many people in many ways. The history of Buddhism is not one in which everyone is a full-time practitioner devoted to awakening. Such people were and will continue to be relatively rare. Most of us aspire to more than we can achieve. This does not invalidate the aspiration or the achievement. Most of us require positive conditions to flourish, and a positive experience of Buddhist community can contribute to that. As such membership of a Buddhist group is a necessary facet of life as a Buddhist for many of us. And part of group membership is conformity to group norms, including taking on the jargon and mythology of the group. Being able to recite popular stories is a mark of membership.

That said I think there is a problem in Buddhism with people not correctly assessing their own limitations. The wide availability of Buddhist texts to lay people with no training in linguistics or critical thinking has led to a glut of uncritical opinions. The internet has only exacerbated the trend. Some of us have very limited experience of living a Buddhist life, but full access to multiple translations of Buddhists texts. With no basis for assessing the value of translations or other sources of information, they tend to be cited indiscriminately (to support views). I notice it is routine in this website to cite Thanissaro's translations, which happen to be the easiest to get hold of because they are online for free. But Thanissaro is an eccentric translator, to say the least. All his translations need to be carefully assessed before being cited - but they never are. I would put Access to Insight on a par with Wikipedia as a source. Use with caution.

It is good to see some hard questions being asked of Buddhists.


If Kombucha Tea (trace amounts of alcohol) is used as medicine, is it considered a breach of conduct?

The purpose of that precept is to prevent loss of heedfulness through intoxication.

If your reason to drink tea of some kind with very little alcohol in it, is for medicinal purposes, and if it does not cause the loss of heedfulness through intoxication, then there is no violation of the precept in my opinion.


I am not sure if this fits your tradition, but perhaps it might be a value addition to you or perhaps another reader.

The best source to find out on how to be mindful is to get the information from the Maha Satipatthana Sutta. Here it mentioned that the awareness should be on the 4 foundations of mindfulness (these relate to the aggregates). In doing this you should pay particular attention to arising and passing of phenomena. You have to divide and dissect the foundation that you are looking at - e.g. if you look at body you should divide and dissect until you come to the level of Kalapa (sub atomic particles). You have to look piecing and penetratingly looking inside and out - e.g. if you take the body look at phenomena on the surface and also inside like in the organs. What ever part of the body or if you look at the whole body you should be sensitive to seeing phenomena arising and passing. You should try to actively or passively calm the fabrications.

Now coming back to studying there will be a lot of mental activities. Some of this can be mental or verbal fabrications. You cannot avoid this. But any mental activity creates a sensation. You can keep looking at these sensations with out reaction. Pleasant sensation can be used to eradicate craving, stressful sensation to eradicate aversion and neutral sensations to eradicate delusion (see A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma for the technicalities). Also try keeping your mind focused on the studying. If it goes to something else bring back your mind to the breath for a short while and continue studying keeping your thinking limited to studying. When taking a break whatever object your mind is on keep dividing and dissecting and look at it piercing and penetratingly. Also look at your breathing if you feel agitated or restless when studying for long hours. If you feel sleepy scan your body part by part staying on one place until you can feel something; if your body is already sensitive scan in rapid space. What ever the case keep your mind equanimous (devoid of craving and clinging) towards any sensation you experience.

Hope this is helpful. If you need anymore clarification please comment or post another question.


How comes that praising oneself and blame others is unskillful but the teacher of it does?

The difference is that the teacher is a fully enlightened Buddha - the only one of his kind in this Aeon.

A fully enlightened Buddha has uprooted all defilements. There are absolutely no traces left of any defilements. Its impossible for a Buddha to create Kamma.

What might seem like praise or blame from the perspective of a non-Buddha is vastly and completely different from the perspective of a Buddha.


Difference between Theravada's self and Mahayana's intrinsic essence

1. Do other Mahayana Buddhists apart from the commentator above, also call the intrinsic essence (svabhava) of a chair, as the "self of chairs"?

Yes, this is a common expression in Mahayana texts on the topic.

2. If Theravada states "sabbe dhamma anatta" and Mahayana states "sabbe dhamma asvabhava", does it mean that anatta = asvabhava, and therefore, atta (self) = svabhava (intrinsic essence)?

I think Mahayana states "sabbe dhamma shunyata" - which can be explained as "sabbe dhamma asvabhavata" and "sabbe dhamma pratityasamutpida". From this it also follows that all dharmas are anicca (ephemeral) and dukkha (here, faulty/unreliable).

If we don't nitpick too much about the meaning of the equal sign, I think I can agree with your statements that "anatta = asvabhava" and "atta = svabhava". More on this in a second.

3. Depending on your view: if the Theravada atta (self) is different from the Mahayana svabhava (intrinsic essence), then what really is the difference? OR if the Theravada atta (self) is same as the Mahayana svabhava (intrinsic essence), then does that make the Mahayana emptiness a redundant concept?

I think svabhava is a broader concept than atman (atta). To me, atman is only one case of reification, or one case of attributing svabhava to abstractions and observations.

Therefore, Mahayana's emptiness is not redundant. True -- it is not something entirely new that was absent in Theravada, but in my opinion it gives proper emphasis to something that is kind of implicit and not explained enough in the Pali Canon (even if ever-present "between the lines").


How did Buddhism and Hinduism differ in their approaches to sex work

In Buddhism, any activity based in only "lust" is unwholesome, as follows:

  And what is the root of the unwholesome? Greed (lust) is a root of the unwholesome; hate is a root of the unwholesome; delusion is a root of the unwholesome. This is called the root of the unwholesome. MN 9

  Dhammapada
   202. There is no fire like lust

In Buddhism, no prostitute ever gained enlightenment. Instead, only "ex-prostitutes" (e.g. Vimala) gained enlightenment. Buddhism states a fully enlightened being is incapable of performing the sexual act (AN 9.7).

Any action that harms oneself or another is unwholesome in Buddhism (MN 61). References to prostitution in Buddhism generally include harming, for example:

  Unsatisfied with his own wife, with others’ wives he’s seen in tow,
  corrupted too with prostitutes— that’s the way to disaster’s woe

  Snp 1.6

  As they grow, the defilements possess many people; They play with
  fools, I believe, like demons with the mad.

  In medicine they are like doctors, in business like householders, in
  decoration like prostitutes, in sovereignty like lords.

  Cheats, frauds, false witnesses, sly: using multiple plans, they enjoy
  material things.

  Thag 16.10

(I may add more to this answer at a later time).


What is the proper mindfulness anchor for a stream-winner?

Recollection of the memory is not attending to the present but attending to sanna (past perception that has been stored). The best the recollection of the memory can do is inform one of the path that one has travelled and probably one can help other people along the same path.

The continued perception of arising and passing away of dhammas will deepen the insight into the three characteristics. Each stage of the breakthrough occurs because one has clearer and clearer insights of the 3 characteristics and able to let go of further attachments until nothing sticks, and everything slips like "a drop of water on a lotus leaf".

Even at the stage of an Anagami, Khemaka still watch further the arising and passing away of dhammas.


Mindfulness is a translation of a Buddhist term that generally means "recollection" or "remembrance". It can be used in any number of ways, for example "recollection of the Buddha", "recollection of past lives", etc. In insight meditation, it refers to one's ability to recollect or remember the present moment, as taught in the discourse on the four foundations of mindfulness.
The four foundations are

body - recognizing and reminding oneself of bodily sensations as being simply bodily sensations
feelings - recognizing and reminding oneself of feelings (pain, pleasure, neutral) as being simply feelings
mind recognizing and reminding oneself of one's state of mind (scattered, focussed, etc.) as being simply a state of mind
dhammas - recognizing and reminding oneself of various aspects of ones experience on the path to enlightenment as being simply what they are.

So, to answer your question, mindfulness is simply a tool used to focus one's attention on a specific object; what you are suggesting sounds like a conceptual object, e.g. something unrelated to the task at hand to take your mind off of the present moment. This could be called "mindfulness", in the sense that you are actively working to recollect a specific object. It would be considered a form of samatha (tranquility) meditation, since it is no longer based on ultimate (i.e. present moment) reality.
The problem with what you suggest is that it seems to likely involve aversion to the present moment, and so it is not likely to lead to true freedom from the suffering associated with aversion. For this, you will need to practice mindfulness as described above regarding the four foundations. There, it should be used to focus on the present moment and remind you that the stress you feel is merely stress - not me, not mine, not good, not bad, etc.
A Buddhist perscription for your condition would be to focus your attention on the state of being flustered, as such states are conditioned by habit and can be countered with new conditioning (i.e. objectivity) through simply recognizing them as they are. As the Buddha said, for example:

idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu sarāgaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘sarāgaṃ cittan’ti pajānāti
Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu clearly knows a mind with passion thus: "a mind with passion".
-- MN 10

In my tradition, this is accomplished by noting the flustered mind, for example, as "flustered, flustered..." somewhat akin to a mantra.


How should a lay person respond if they see a monk teaching something contrary to Dhamma?

The word sangha is used nowadays to refer to the bhikkhus. This may or may not be true. One does not have to be a bhikkhu to belong to the sangha. An Upāsaka (male) or Upāsikā (female) - lay followers – could also be part of Arya Sangha. Upāsaka and Upāsikā are part of Ariya Sangha, once in the Path. The Ariya Sangha is described as all those who have attained at least the stage of Stream Entrant.

A bhikkhu is someone who has renounced the life of a layman to dedicate himself exclusively to practice, realization, study and teaching of the dhamma. But in the present day and age, there are a great number of bhikkus who have not come to the stage of Stream Entrant. Thus they are not part of Arya Sangha.

There were times when Hattha Āḷavaka Ugga gahapati (householder) preached dhamma to the Bhikkus at the time of Buddha, when no one else came forward to speak on Dhamma..

The Buddha does not advocate superficial unity for its own sake between bhikkhus or amongst bhikkhus and lay followers at the expense of the Dhamma. Buddha instead encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma and that the distinction between the two be kept clear.

Buddha has described in no less than six suttas about what one should do at such an instant. In the Sangha Bedha Sutta (AN 10.1.4.7), Buddha’s instruction is to not advocate superficial unity for its own sake at the expense of the Dhamma, but instead encourages that the Dhamma be clearly defended against non-Dhamma and that the distinction between the two be kept clear. According to the Vinaya, a speaker of non-Dhamma is to be recognized as such if he “explains not-Dhamma as ‘Dhamma’ … Dhamma as ‘not-Dhamma’ … not-Vinaya as ‘Vinaya’ … Vinaya as ‘not-Vinaya’ …

Thus the ability to take a stand requires that one be well-informed about the Buddha’s teachings. A difference of opinion can be rightfully ended only if both sides are able to investigate the grounds and get to the root, and then resolve which side was right, based on the Dhamma and Vinaya.

For more about the Sangha Bedha Sutta, see the Suttas on pages 1389 through 1391 which are titled Schism(1), Schism(2), and Ananda(1) in The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha: A Complete Translation of the Anguttara Nikaya – by Bhikkhu Bodhi; and Schism in the Sangha by Thanissaro Bhikkhu & Geshe Rabten
.


What is the destination of unenlightened monk reviling Noble Layperson?

Sure. But they wouldn't risk much here in regard of touch Noble Ones, or? Even a fault couldn't be expected here, as not possible to trace it an area of Upasaka, Upasika, for the most.
How ever, even if a Noble One would act wrongly toward another, such would block his progress as long as not pardoned, brought to be solved again.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape frim this wheel]


Enlightenment & the path to enlightenment (such as meditative jhana) is a higher & better pleasure than any pleasure that can be experienced in ordinary life.

This is the simple, accurate & correct way to view enlightenment.

Please refer to this link.

  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Household pleasantness and the pleasantness of one gone forth. Of these two, the
  pleasantness of one gone forth is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Sensual pleasantness and the pleasantness of giving up sensuality. Of these
  two, the pleasantness of giving up sensuality is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? The pleasantness with substratum and the pleasantness without substratum.
  Of these two, the pleasantness without substratum is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? The pleasantness with desires and the pleasantness without desires. Of
  these two, the pleasantness without desires is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Material pleasantness and immaterial pleasantness. Of these two, immaterial
  pleasantness is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? The noble pleasantness and the ignoble pleasantness. Of these two, the noble
  pleasantness is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Bodily pleasantness and mental pleasantness. Of these two, mental
  pleasantness is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Pleasantness with joy and pleasantness without joy. Of these two,
  pleasantness without joy is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Pleasantness on account of agreeability and pleasantness on account of
  equanimity. Of these two, pleasantness on account of equanimity is
  better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Pleasantness on account of concentration and pleasantness on account
  of distraction. Of these two, pleasantness on account of concentration
  is better.
  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Pleasantness with joy for an object and pleasantness without joy for
  an object. Of these two, pleasantness without joy for an object is
  better.

  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Pleasantness on account of an agreeāble object and pleasantness on
  accout of equanimity for an object . Of these two, pleasantness on
  account of equanimity for an object, is better.

  Bhikkhus, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Pleasantness born on account of a material object and pleasantness
  born, on account of an immaterial object. Of these two, pleasantness
  born, on account of an immaterial object is better.

As for your other concerns, they are unrelated to Buddhism. Buddhism is not for people who believe ordinary life can be pleasurable most of the time. Buddhism never ever states all people must follow the Buddhist way of life.


self esteem and the need to feel proud of ourselves

The motivation behind the need to feel proud of yourself has it's roots in a lack of self-worth and confidence.

  Lack of self-confidence can be made up of several different aspects like: guilt, anger turned inward, unrealistic expectations of perfection, false sense of humility, fear of change or making mistakes, depression etc. Depression can actually also be a result of a lack of self-confidence. '

The damage can actually be found in your ego. The ego is an identity fabricated in the mind by past events. For example your birth name, skin color, nationality, sex, or anything that deals with past experiences which reaffirms the identity of who you are. In Buddhism, there are terms such as "antidotes" which are used to cure delusions associated with general or specific sufferings. For example, anger can be cured with patience and love. Anxiety can be cured with acceptance and wisdom. Self-worth can be cured by loving-kindness and wisdom.

Loving-kindness, also known as Metta, is a practice to accept and love others and ourselves unconditionally. Typically Metta is practiced through a meditation which usually uses a mantra such as,

  May you be happy. May you be well. May you be safe. May you be peaceful and at ease.

Other methods may include visualizations such as a radiating red or white auras from the heart symbolizing love. Meditation is important but more importantly is service. It takes the attention off yourself and puts it onto others. This is the quickest way for developing Metta in yourself while putting it into practice.

Next, you need to develop wisdom. Studying sutras, listening to Dharma talks, and reading books on the subject is a fantastic way to gain knowledge. Knowledge will help you systematically but it won't necessarily develop wisdom. By doing meditations such as "Zazen", you will gradually see through the ego the same way you would see through a desert mirage. Eventually by seeing through the ego it will wither away completely leaving you at peace.


I think the questions are very broad (too broad), so this answer will be correspondingly (too) shallow.
It's 'community wiki' in case you want to edit (add to) it.
Do you believe that Buddhism has shaped society today. If so how?
Yes.
It does so by providing an alternative. If your question is like, "Do you believe 'that door over there' (Buddhism) has shaped 'prison' (society) today?", then Buddhism might be about freedom.
There's an article titled The Taste of Freedom which includes,

"Just as in the great ocean there is but one taste — the taste of salt — so in this Doctrine and Discipline (dhammavinaya) there is but one taste — the taste of freedom": with these words the Buddha vouches for the emancipating quality of His doctrine.

How has Buddhism influenced your life?
I don't think that's on-topic on this site, because that isn't common/shared experience.
Where in Buddhism does it say that you have to live your life in peace?
There's a general concept called non-violence or Ahimsa.
More specifically there are rules of ethics which are called e.g. five precepts: which include "peaceful" rules like "don't kill" and "don't steal" and "don't lie".
Do you believe that a pursuit of peace is necessary in today's society?
I think that people (in society) find stress unpleasant, and that too much stress (or greed) can lead to war and destruction of society. Even if there weren't inter-personal or international problems, there are still personal problems: for example your friends and family (and you) getting sick and old and dying.
So, yes, some alternative to or relief from stress, some peace, is necessary to society.
Various members of society (i.e. people) learn about Buddhism when they feel motivated to.
As a Buddhist, how does a pursuit of peace begin? (How do you pursue it, what does a "pursuit" of peace entail and when does your pursuit end?)
I think it begins with stress. When you experience stress then you pursue peace.
A way to pursue it by following the Buddhist "noble eightfold way" a.k.a. "three-fold training".
The pursuit ends when it's successful.
This is summarized in the Four Noble Truths:

Stress exists
Stress has a cause
There is a  way to end stress
The way to end stress is the "noble eightfold way"

There is more than one school of Buddhism though. In this answer, with the "four noble truths", I'm trying to summarize the earliest school, but see also e.g. the last paragraph of this answer which suggests that the pursuit ends when one is, also, liberated from the stress of (or perhaps peaceful even within the constraints of) Buddhism. This answer suggests there some real difference in the end-stage of different Buddhist schools (but that's probably Too Much Information i.e. more detail than you were looking for).
Do you believe that all people should follow a life of peace?
Yes and no. I don't expect lions to stop hunting. I think people people might be happier and hurt each other less if they were more Buddhist.
As a Buddhist, do you think that Buddhism has the idea of changing the world?
Yes and no. Buddhism is mostly or originally about changing yourself.
Buddhists also have an effect on each other:

Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."[1]
"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path.

Buddhists may also have an effect on society at large (see for example Did the Buddha try to effect social change?) and includes advice for laypeople who continue to live within society.
Furthermore, Mahayana Buddhism includes the concept of not only liberating yourself but also "changing the word" (e.g. liberating "all other sentient beings").
If Buddhism values finding peace within yourself, how is each person finding peace among themselves going to help change the world?
For the better, presumably.
One way is that the purpose of "virtue" is "lack of remorse". In order to find peace, people may find they need to become more effective (e.g. so they can fulfill their social duties).
The Dalai Lama says that happiness comes from making other people happy.


What are the Three Trainings and how are they practical?

The threefold training (Pali: sikkha) consists of: morality (sila); concentration (samadhi); and wisdom (panna).

Sikkha is meant to conquer and eradicate the defilements (kilesas).

Visuddhimagga XXII,49

  'The defilements are the ten states, namely: greed; hate; delusion;
  conceit; false view; uncertainty; stiffness of mind; agitation;
  conciencelessness, shamelessness. They are so called because they are
  themselves defiled and because they defile their associated states.'

Each of those defilements has 3 stages (bhumi) which are identical to the 3 stages of consciousness (latent - manifested - action).

the latent stage = anusaya-bhumi
the manifest stage = pariyutthana-bhumi
the action stage = vitikkama-bhumi

Through the threefold training, it is possible to conquer and eradicate these defilements in the 3 subsequent stages: sila-sikkha; samadhi-sikkha; and panna-sikkha.

The training itself is a strict personal affair: Purity and impurity depend on oneself. No one can purify another (Dhammapada).


Does the Buddha suggest a change in practice after the unfolding of Sotapanna?

No, the practitioner no need changing the practice.

The practitioner has to comprehends 3 characteristics of 5 aggregates, which cycling as the dependent origination, from being ordinary until arahatta-magga. But the teaching literature may be difference. See the description after the below quote.

So, in Sutta. Saṃ. Kha. Sīlavantasutta taught the same meditation for all people, ordinary and all noble one:

  On one occasion Ven. Sariputta & Ven. Maha Kotthita were staying near
  Varanasi in the Deer Park at Isipatana. Then Ven. Maha Kotthita,
  emerging from seclusion in the late afternoon, went to Ven. Sariputta
  and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an
  exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he
  was sitting there, he said to Ven. Sariputta, "Sariputta my friend,
  which things should a virtuous monk attend to in an appropriate way?"

  "A virtuous monk, Kotthita my friend, should attend in an appropriate
  way to the five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a
  disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a
  dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. Which five? Form as a
  clinging-aggregate, feeling... perception... fabrications...
  consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. A virtuous monk should attend
  in an appropriate way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant,
  stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction,
  alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that
  a virtuous monk, attending in an appropriate way to these five
  clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would realize the fruit
  of stream-entry."

  "Then which things should a monk who has attained stream-entry attend
  to in an appropriate way?"

  "A monk who has attained stream-entry should attend in an appropriate
  way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a
  disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a
  dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that a monk
  who has attained stream-entry, attending in an appropriate way to
  these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would
  realize the fruit of once-returning."

  "Then which things should a monk who has attained once-returning
  attend to in an appropriate way?"

  "A monk who has attained once-returning should attend in an
  appropriate way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant,
  stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction,
  alien, a dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that
  a monk who has attained once-returning, attending in an appropriate
  way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would
  realize the fruit of non-returning."

  "Then which things should a monk who has attained non-returning attend
  to in an appropriate way?"

  "A monk who has attained non-returning should attend in an appropriate
  way to these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a
  disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a
  dissolution, an emptiness, not-self. For it is possible that a monk
  who has attained non-returning, attending in an appropriate way to
  these five clinging-aggregates as inconstant... not-self, would
  realize the fruit of arahantship."

  "Then which things should an arahant attend to in an appropriate way?"

  "An arahant should attend in an appropriate way to these five
  clinging-aggregates as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an
  arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a dissolution, an emptiness,
  not-self. Although, for an arahant, there is nothing further to do,
  and nothing to add to what has been done, still these things — when
  developed & pursued — lead both to a pleasant abiding in the
  here-&-now and to mindfulness & alertness."

But the teaching literature may be difference. Each enlightenment depend on each personal understanding-ability because each person has difference own understandable dhamma, i.e. Pañcavaggī were professional of aggregates before he meet buddha, but Dīghanakha were  professional of six sense fields  before he meet buddha, etc.

Dīghanakha enlightened nibbāna as sotāpanna by comprehending 3
characteristics  of the dependent origination (nāma-rūpa) in Sutta.
Ma. Ma. Dīghanakhasutta.
A thousand jaṭila  enlightened nibbāna as arahanta  by comprehending
3 characteristics of the dependent origination (six sense fields, six
contacts, six feeling) in Sutta. Saṃ. Saḷa. Ādittapariyāyasutta.
Koñḍañña-pañcavaggī enlightened nibbāna as sotapanna  by comprehending
3 characteristics of the fourth noble truth in Sutta. Saṃ. Ma.
Dhammacakkappavattanasutta.

All pañcavaggī enlightened nibbāna as arahanta  by comprehending 3
characteristics of five aggregates, which is continuous from the five
clinging-aggregates suffering noble truth of
Dhammacakkappavattanasutta above, in Sutta. Saṃ. Kha.
Anattalakkhaṇasutta.


Looking for negative reference to women in the Avatamsaka Sutra

I downloaded the Chinese translation of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra and did a few searches for patterns with different combinations of words that are likely to appear there (e.g. 女 "woman", 地獄 "hell", 種 "seed", 夜叉 "Yaksha"). I found quite a few phrases, but none of them looked like the cited passage. My knowledge of classical Chinese is very rudimentary, so I may be mistaken. However, the search inside the Cleary translation on the Amazon website doesn't show any such passage either. So if it is there at all, I think it's more likely that the quote is a summary/paraphrase of a larger chunk of the sutra, and not a direct translation.

EDIT: I found a classical Chinese/classical Japanese phrase that is the source of your quote:

  女人地獄使。能断仏種子。外面似菩薩。内心如夜叉。

It can be found in this text at 7-094. Unfortunately, there is no information about the author nor the date when it was written. In any case, it is definitely not modern Japanese, so I don't think it was written recently. It seems to be a Nichiren commentary to the Lotus Sutra.

EDIT 2: The above quote is preceded by "華厳経云", which means "Avataṃsaka Sūtra says". That explains why the passage is commonly (and incorrectly, as we may conclude) attributed to this sutra.

EDIT 3: I found information about the origin of the quote, which, in light of the facts presented above, we can regard as conclusive:

  This statement is not found in the extant Chinese versions of the Flower Garland Sutra. However, A Collection of Treasures written by Taira no Yasuyori during the Jisho era (1177–1181) cites it as a quotation from the Flower Garland Sutra.


While I don't have any comments on the individual concepts of Differentiation and Integration, reading that wikipedia article about Integrative Complexity as a style of thinking - strikes me as being very similar to the "Buddha can see from all perspectives" idea I presented in my answer here.
Quoting the wikipedia:

Integrative Complexity is ...recognition and integration of multiple perspectives and possibilities and their interrelated contingencies.
For example, it could take the form of explaining why someone may view an event in a different way or in what ways a compromise could be made between conflicting values.

So by this definition Buddha is the champion of Integrative Complexity.
That said, these parts:

Integratively complex thinkers are also more prone to defer to others or put off making a decision when faced with difficult cost–benefit decisions.

and

Additionally, while integratively complex thinkers are more likely to reach a mutually advantageous compromise when dealing with reasonable opponents, unreasonable opponents are much more likely to be able to exploit them.

-- do not sound relevant at all. Perhaps whoever wrote this did not realize that one's ability to integrate diff. perspectives does not preclude one from having clear agenda. Buddha knows what is ultimately good (cessation of suffering!) and has no problem utilizing his Integrative Complexity skills to use people's own motives to their ultimate good.
So perhaps we could say that Buddha is the champion of Integrative Complexity AND ethics.


What is the difference between panna vimutti and ceto vimutti?

I wonder if the difference has something to do with the permanent destruction (through vipassana bhavana) vs. the temporary destruction (through samatha bhavana) of the kilesas?

Per the Pali dictionary, CetoVimutti and PannaVimutti carry different meanings depending on context (restricted sense versus highest sense). In the highest sense, both are on the same level for they both signify the fruition of Arahantship. They're just different in regards to the specific pathway as a result of the practitioner's dominant faculty on either concentration or insight.


Light is movement of photons which vibrate within a certain frequency range and travel at the speed of light. If there there is no one present with eyes to sense light, is there still light? I would say yes.
Nibbana is a permanent phenomena (dhamma) which is like light. Even if there are no enlightened ones to experience it, it is still there.
From MN 49 with corrected translation from this answer:

That which could be known (Nibbana), is invisible, infinite, radiant
all round—that’s what is not within the scope of experience based on
earth, water, fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā, the
gods of streaming radiance, the gods replete with glory, the gods of
abundant fruit, the Overlord, and the all.

Also Ud 8.1-4.
But wisdom (panna) is different. It depends on the mind. If the mind ceases, then wisdom ceases. When the Buddha passed away, his wisdom ceased, but his teachings (Dhamma) which arose out of his wisdom, continue to exist through the suttas and the noble sangha.
So are the teachings (Dhamma) permanent or unconditioned? I would say no. If the suttas and the noble sangha disappear after many centuries or millennia (i.e. the end of the current Buddha sasana), then the teachings also disappear.
Some have asked if physical space is permanent or unconditioned. From Einstein's theory of general relativity, we know that physical space-time is conditioned.
So, in every case, we can see that only one phenomena is permanent and unconditioned and that is Nibbana. It is that which is experienced by the mind when it is free of defilements and fetters. It is not a mental idea or state of mind or state of consciousness.


How is suffering the supporting condition for faith?

The sutta lists links of dependent origination, backwards.

So I'd read it as "With existence as condition, birth. With birth as condition, suffering. With suffering as condition, faith."

I expect it means faith in the four noble truths, for example: i.e. because of (conditioned by) suffering you agree with the noble truths (including the first noble truth), and develop confidence in the Buddha's teaching.

Note that suffering is the end or final result of samsara ... and faith is the beginning or first step towards liberation. So this sutta lists two sequences of links (the conditions of suffering and the conditions of liberation), and links the two together there.

There is a longer article on the sutta here, which talks about how faith arises, and a shorter one here.

You might possibly be confused by the term "supporting condition": other translations may include "proximate condition", "requisite condition", "prerequisite".


What is the meaning of "in and of itself" in DN 22?

Theravadin Abhidhamma;

And how does a monk dwell contemplating (the nature of) the body in the body in regard to himself?
Here a monk in regard to himself—from the sole of the feet upwards, from the hair of the head down, bounded by the skin, and filled with manifold impurities—reflects (thus):
There are in this body:
hairs of the head, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, bone-marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, intestines, mesentery, undigested food, excrement, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, grease, spit, mucus, synovial fluid, urine.
https://suttacentral.net/vb7/en/anandajoti


Things can go wrong in meditation. Some of the are as follows:

If you are not equanimous, i.e., you are reacting to different situation thus creating negativity. This can accumulate to an extent this might be very dangerous.
The basis of your meditation is greed, hatred or delusion. There are some techniques where the basis is this hence can easily go wrong. You have to be very careful and have a teacher to guide you if you do this type of meditation. E.g. in Kasina meditation you develop some attachment to the device. This should be very subtle but incorrectly practicing this can lead to an imbalance. In foulness meditation if you practice too much you might become polar to the other end where you even dislike your self and attempt suicide. This has happened in Buddha's time also.
Meditation you are area of different fears and other phobias and you closely be aware of them. This can result in imbalance of the mind if you are not strong and steadfastly equanimous. This can start tipping you over to the wrong direction.
If you strive way too hard always mindful of your progress and what you achieve you are continuously creating negativity hence you can fall into depression and anxiety. You should always do meditation for without attachment to the outcome or progress. You have to be balanced and equanimous.
You are trying to concentrate too much. This leads to disappointment when you fail. You are then accumulating negativity.
Meditation brings new experiences and sensations. If you react to them will cause problems as you are creating negativity.
You should be mindful of any polarity you have (temperament) you have and be sure you stop a particular type of samatha meditation when you are neutral if you do samatha
You have be be extremely mindful of the 5 hindrances and defilements and further be mindful that no Tanha or Upadana is in play. Sometimes you might be inadvertently developing some of these. If this continues you will go out of control so make sure you are on track. E.g. if something you are doing meditation is making you irritated, if you do not notice it soon enough and make amends to properly practice this will become stronger and can lead to depression. If you have doubts you this will have proliferation of thinking and logic followed by restlessness.
You have to be equanimous when Sankara comes up. Meditation shakes up Sankara. This means if you have something like mild depression, the intensity of this will also increase, as more and more Sankara comes up. The plus side is sooner it passes away better you become as this will eventually pass away.
Also we have built in to our self some form of ego defence mechanisms. Letting go of ego or perception of I or self can also cause lot of trauma. Best is to stay put, being equanimous and without reacting as reacting will cause more conditioning.

What is needed to be done is (so things don't go wrong):

you have to always be equanimous
you have the right concentration and awareness, i.e., not based in a slightest trace of attachment, hate, delusion and always be mindful of the arising and passing of sensation with 1) not reaction (equanimous) 2) looking at the 3 marks of existence
stick to Sathipattana and Anapana if you do not have a well experienced teacher
alway be mightful where any negativity arises even in meditation, i.e., you reaction to sensation / feelings
sensation / feeling is as part of us (5 aggregates), it also appears in the 4 noble truths (dukkha is also a feeling), dependent origination, Satipatthana. If you do not give adequate emphasis to this then you might not be practicing the right type of awareness or concentration. (see: Vedanā in the Practice of Satipaṭṭhāna)

One VRI reference I found where other techniques were discouraged: My experiences with Goenkaji. Here what is discouraged is the practice of Mantra and Tantra in the same time as practicing Vipassana. Though statistical / clinical trials may have not been done to the extent of drug approvals, this perception may have been formed based on experience. So to avoid danger it is best to accept it at face value.

Also see:

The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna
The Discourse Summaries
Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta
The Great Discourse on the Establishing of Awareness
Answer https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/3774/295 to question Are the results of positive Kamma good from a Buddhist's perspective or good from a "Samsaric's" perspective? (unrelated but might be of some insight)
What can go wrong in Mindfulness Therapy as used in Clinics? (Related question)


Apologies for a nearly identical post to another question, but:

You can get a hard copy text of the Pali Text Society edition from:

The Pali Text Society: http://palitext.com
(they also have sets of the translations) Become a member and receive a nice discount.

You can find an on-line version of the BJT text at:
Metta Net Lanka:
http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/index.html

You can get a searchable CD from the Vipassana Research Institute:
http://www.vridhamma.org/Chattha-Sangayana-CD-ROM-Update

These have the Abhidhamma texts.

EDIT: In response to your revised question. I have the Abhidhamma texts. The books are:
Abhidhamma Pitaka

Dhammasangani: Buddhist Psychological Ethics
Vibhanga: The Book of Analysis
Dhatukath¤: Discourse on Elements
Puggalapannatti: A Designation of Human Types
Kathavatthu: Points of Controversy
Yamaka: —
Tikapatthana: Conditional Relations
Dukapatthana: —

I believe the book you have linked to is a new work constructed along the lines of the Abhidhamma. There may be others that can inform you better about that.


How do you know if you have attained Nibbana?

If the mind has reached final Nirvana, nothing in the whole world can bother it and make it suffer.

The mind will completely cleansed of greed, lust, anger, hatred, irritation, delusion, attachment, fear, worry, hurt, sorrow, self-view, etc.


What is the Buddhist view, if any, on witchcraft?

This is an interesting question.

But "witchcraft" is a vague term. In Western culture, it often associates with negative meaning.

If witchcraft is just a board terminology to cover any practice that's outside common sense and general knowledge, you may say Buddhist texts mentioned about it. Often the text retells the story to forbid such practice.

I've read the full Mahisasakas Vinaya, in it mentioned several stories related to witchcraft. Often it's due to some Bhiksus were originally Brahmins they brought it to the Samgha. For example, it mentioned the spell to cure snake bites, spell to call upon spirit to animate corpse, or fortune telling, etc. In it it even mentioned the Precept of Not to Kill included the killing by witchcraft (I will need to check the text to cite properly, it's very interesting).

As said, Buddhist texts notice and understand the practice of witchcraft existed, but banned it, or discouraged it. From the Vinaya, if the Bhiksu continued his practice after its made as breaking the precept, he would be expelled. But the texts never mentioned any prosecution of any practitioner.

From the central teaching of Buddhism, Prajna-paramita is the greatest witchcraft. If anyone wants supernatural power, the best investment is to invest in cultivating wisdom and virtue.