Did the Buddha try to effect social change?

Let me narrow down "engaged Buddhism" to "applying the Dharma to social and political injustices".

In the Kathavatthu Sutta, the Buddha did not prefer monks to engage in discussions concerning mundane things:

  Then the Blessed One ... addressed the monks: "For what topic of
  conversation are you gathered together here? ..."

  "Just now, lord, after the meal, ... we ... engaged in ... conversation about kings, robbers, &
  ministers of state; armies, alarms, & battles; food & drink; clothing,
  furniture, garlands, & scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns,
  cities, the countryside; women & heroes; the gossip of the street &
  the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity, the creation of the
  world & of the sea; talk of whether things exist or not."

  "It isn't right, monks, that sons of good families, on having gone
  forth out of faith from home to the homeless life, should get engaged
  in such topics of conversation ....

  "There are these ten topics of [proper] conversation. Which ten? Talk
  on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on
  arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on
  release, and on the knowledge & vision of release.

At the same time, the Buddha advised the lay followers in the Sigalovada Sutta on how good friends should be. From here, I extrapolate that lay Buddhists can become good friends of their fellow members of society, and exhort them to be likewise. This can be one way to Engaged Buddhism.

  "Young man, be aware of these four good-hearted friends: the helper, the friend who endures in good times and bad, the mentor, and
  the compassionate friend.
  "The helper can be identified by four things: by protecting you when you are vulnerable, and likewise your wealth, being a refuge when
  you are afraid, and in various tasks providing double what is
  requested.
  "The enduring friend can be identified by four things: by telling you secrets, guarding your own secrets closely, not abandoning you in
  misfortune, and even dying for you.
  "The mentor can be identified by four things: by restraining you from wrongdoing, guiding you towards good actions, telling you what
  you ought to know, and showing you the path to heaven.
  "The compassionate friend can be identified by four things: by not rejoicing in your misfortune, delighting in your good fortune,
  preventing others from speaking ill of you, and encouraging others who
  praise your good qualities."


the closest related thing i can think of is the teaching of overcoming mind tendency to objectification or conceptual proliferation (papañca), that is steering clear of preconceived concepts and notions about the world, reality and phenomena, which are dependent on our perception of those through the 6 sense organs, and disallowing ourselves to be obsessed with them

however this teaching in my view is much deeper because it aims immediately at the final goal, cessation of objectification is synonymous to attainment of nibbana

until then we need to learn to not fall victim to papañca and keep the mind in check


What is the significance of Reclining Buddha Statue in Laos compared to other countries in Asia?

This is a depiction of the Buddha in his last moments of life, just before he achieved parinibbana (nirvana-after-death). There are 32 signs of a great man and 80 secondary signs (all of which the Buddha possessed) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_characteristics_of_the_Buddha#The_32_Signs_of_a_Great_Man and long slender fingers, long earlobes as depicted are two of the lesser signs.. I guess if you examine it up close, you will probably get some more  (foot arches etc?)! As for the differences, I am not well versed in art or its history, sorry!


They are essentially counting aid for concentration, you basically count them as you chant say "Amitabha", the Heart Sutra or any mantra, for example 108 times. For the technologically minded, it can be even substitute with an electronic counter.


What happens if no beings choose to act on one's bad karma?

You can find the answer for your question from a Jataka called "Matakabhatta-Jātaka". Herewith I've quoted the section of the Jātaka which may answer your question.

"In times past, brahman," the goat began, "I was a brahman who taught the Vedas like you. I, too, sacrificed a goat as an offering for a Feast for the Dead. Because of killing that single goat, I have had my head cut off 499 times. I laughed aloud when I realized that this is my last birth as an animal to be sacrificed. Today I will be freed from my misery. On the other hand, I cried when I realized that, because of killing me, you, too, may be doomed to lose your head five hundred times. It was out of pity for you that I cried."
"Well, goat," said the brahman, "in that case, I am not going to kill you."
"Brahman!" exclaimed the goat. "Whether or not you kill me, I cannot escape death today."
"Don't worry," the brahman assured the goat. "I will guard you."
"You don't understand," the goat told him. "Your protection is weak. The force of my evil deed is very strong."
The brahman untied the goat and said to his students, "Don't allow anyone to harm this goat." They obediently followed the animal to protect it.
After the goat was freed, it began to graze. It stretched out its neck to reach the leaves on a bush growing near the top of a large rock. At that very instant a lightning bolt hit the rock, breaking off a sharp piece of stone which flew through the air and neatly cut off the goat's head. A crowd of people gathered around the dead goat and began to talk excitedly about the amazing accident.

Quoted from: Matakabhatta-Jātaka (Jātaka, Khuddaka Nikaya, Sutta Pitaka, Tipitaka)
The subject of Kamma is very deep and hard to understand. Only a Tatagatha Samma Samubuddha can understand.
Note: This is how I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.


The following five conditions must be satisfied to break the first precept.

The being must be alive.
There must be knowledge that it is a living being
There must be intention to cause its death
Action must be taken to cause its death
Death must result from such action

So punching someone in the nose does not break the 1st precept. But it weakens it. Since the question is if it's against(not if it breaks) the precept, the answer is yes.

Weakening here means the merits you acquire by keeping to first precept are reduced or weakened. Also, when it comes to the consequences of Kamma, Killing results in one having a short life span if born as a human again. Just injuring or torturing results in having bad health if born as a human again. killing usually involves inflicting pain or torturing as well. So it can result in bad health too.


How to use a Tibetan singing bowl when meditating solo?

Traditionally, both Tibetan as well as Far East meditation masters, use singing bowl as a gong to mark beginning and end of meditation session. In a Korean Zen school I attended, the bowl is struck three times, in the beginning and at the end, with an oddly very slightly longer pause between the second and third strike. Tibetan Dzogchen master I once meditated with, striked the bowl once in the beginning and once at the end. The exact way the bowl is hit is an expression of the enlightened mind. Listening to how exactly the master strikes the bowl can show one the way to enlightenment. Trying to do it oneself, makes very obvious the lack of one's zen realization. During the meditation itself the bowl is not used, as meditation pretty much requires getting bored, so playing with the bowl would be too much entertainment.


Sure - the Blue Rock Collection, the Mumonkan, the Book of Serenity, etc.  We mostly stick to those because, frankly, they're freaking fantastic and have been leading people to enlightenment for over 1200 years.  Why reinvent the wheel?  Of course, just about every teacher will often make up a koan on the spot to help a student with a specific obstacle.  Some of these remain in circulation among some lineages, but they rarely (if ever) rise to the prominence of something collected in the afore mentioned texts.


Need reference for the two conditions need to realize path to Nibbana

I didn't find that phrase on sutta central. https://suttacentral.net/search?query=paratoghosa

Still it's very common in the suttas to read of someone's entering the stream at the end of a sutta. Perhaps the first time that happens is in the first sutta, SN 56.11,

  That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the group of five monks delighted at his words. And while this explanation was being given, there arose to Ven. Kondañña the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye: Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation.

Perhaps that's the most common way or almost the only way these days. The article you quoted said that "sammasati" is the method which the Buddha himself used (perhaps because he couldn't hear the Buddha-dhamma from someone else).

Note that "sammasati" doesn't just mean "meditation", it's also "right mindfulness" i.e. part of the noble eightfold path. So I suppose people won't complete the path without that, but they might enter the path (and I think that must be what was meant by "realise" the path).


Questions on Attachment, Entertainment and Pleasure

What do we do depends on what we know and feel as meaningful.

If we have meaningful things to do, and some things know and feel as rather meaningless, then the correct choice comes naturally.

Due to habits we might lack awareness and we might dwell in habits. Then by regulating our priorities we can change our activities.

We can think of it as finding our wholeness, or "true self".

An illusory self is entangled in activities, conditions, attachments, submissions etc. "True self" is never there.

Think of it as not a real object, not a theoretical notion. Finding "true self" means the experiential discovery of the freedom.

There is nobody who could be attached. All things and their meanings are here, now.


Are Bodhisattvas real human beings we can encounter?

From (Chinese) Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra:

  “Subhūti, this is like the body of a person that is tall and great.”

  Subhūti said, “Bhagavān, the body of a person that the Tathāgata speaks of, tall and great, is not a great body, and is thus called the Great Body.”

  “Subhūti, for bodhisattvas it is also such as this. If someone says ‘I will liberate and cross over innumerable sentient beings,’ then this is not one to be called a bodhisattva. Why? Subhūti, truly there is no such dharma as "bodhisattva", and for this reason the Buddha says, ‘All dharmas are not a self, a person, a being, or a life.’ Subhūti, if a bodhisattva says, ‘I am adorning buddha-lands,’ then this is not one to be called a bodhisattva. Why? The adornments of buddha-lands spoken of by the Tathāgata are not adornments, and are thus called adornments. Subhūti, if a bodhisattva has penetrating realization that dharmas are without self, then the Tathāgata says, ‘This is a true bodhisattva.’

A parallel from (Sanskrit) Diamond Sutra:

  "Subhuti, a comparison can be made with the idea of a large human body. What would you understand me to mean if I spoke of a 'large human body'?"

  "I would understand that the lord Buddha was speaking of a 'large human body' not as an arbitrary conception of its being, but as a series of words only. I would understand that the words carried merely an imaginary meaning. When the Buddha speaks of a large human body, he uses the words only as words."

  "Subhuti, it is just the same when a disciple speaks of liberating numberless sentient beings. If they have in mind any arbitrary conception of sentient beings or of definite numbers, then they are unworthy of being called a disciple. Subhuti, my teachings reveal that even such a thing as is called a 'disciple' is non-existent. Furthermore, there is really nothing for a disciple to liberate."

  "A true disciple knows that there is no such thing as a self, a person, a living being, or a universal self. A true disciple knows that all things are devoid of selfhood, devoid of any separate individuality."

Meaning, "bodhisattva" is an approximation, a label. In reality there is nothing fixed / specific / well-defined that we can call "bodhisattva". When one practices like this, one can be called "bodhisattva" - and yes, at this point it is a live person someone can encounter.


Likely there is a subtle energy blockage around your elbows & shoulders so the lifting of the arms is to allow the energy to flow out of your arms and through your shoulders.

In Buddhism, we practise meditation on the natural ordinary breathing. This also leads to purification or healing of the body; where certain energies must flow so they can be released. Limbs can move to accommodate this.


Should I address myself as I/my or you/your to remind myself of non-self?

Try rather to catch urself in the process of thinking about yourself, that is thinking.

If one grouped all thoughts and ideas into one cathegory and called it all "thinking" one could see that the idea of self etc it is merely an idea, a concept that exists in the thinking faculty, just like forms and colors exist when there is seeing, so does ideas of self when there is thinking.

The Buddha was perfect in conduct, that implies verbal conduct too. He talk very well and used personal pronounce perfectly too, he would not have talked in english but for translations they put enlighs I, Me and etc. So avoiding words is probably not something useful to adapt and was never recommended by the Buddha afaik. if anything i heard a good disciple is skilled in words and their use, so probably studying linguistics and general semantics is a better practice.


Maximum productive time for a meditation sit?

I find daily sits of an unbroken hour and a half to be optimum.  The first half hour is normally just enough to settle my mind and loosen the hold that the day has on me.  The next half hour is spent really honing in on my concentration object (i.e. cultivating sustained thought).  It's here that my mind begins to unify into something resembling one-pointedness.  The next half hour is where the magic happens, so to speak.  During that part of the sit - and really depending on the day - is when my body starts to drop away and rapture begins to arise.

Some days I may push toward two to three hours, but unless you are in a retreat situation, those longer sits don't necessarily get much deeper.  Your karmic obstacles simply have too much of a hold on your mind.  Only extended periods of silence and multiple 8+ hour days of meditation will allow you to progress into jhana.

Side note: my teacher's teacher knew a monk who would just randomly sit for two days.  48 hours.  No sleep, no food, no bathroom.  In full lotus.   I can't even imagine doing that!


Meditation and the Noble Eightfold Path is necessary for Buddhist enlightenment but it is not a compulsory practise for Buddhist lay people (non-monks). The Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta) says:

  There are these two extremes that are not to be indulged in by one who has gone forth [from the household life]. Which two? That which is
  devoted to sensual pleasure with reference to sensual objects: base,
  vulgar, common, ignoble, unprofitable; and that which is devoted to
  self-affliction: painful, ignoble, unprofitable. Avoiding both of
  these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata — producing
  vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to
  self-awakening, to Nibbana. And what is the middle way realized by the
  Tathagata... Precisely this Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right
  resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort,
  right mindfulness, right concentration.

For Buddhist lay people, they should ideally at least practise the five moral precepts of training in non-killing, non-stealing, non-sexual-misconduct, non-lying & non-drug-alcohol taking. Also, avoiding worse bad things, such as gambling, addictions to entertainment, indebtedness & laziness. Refer to the Sigalovada Sutta for the The Layperson's Code of Discipline.

Also, fully completing the last factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, namely, Right Samadhi, is not required for the 1st stage of enlightenment, called "stream-entry".

There is a preliminary level of right samadhi called "neighbourhood concentration". It does not reach "absorption" yet it is "right" because it has a foundation of Right Understanding or non-clinging. It is clear enough for the development of insight.


Original reference for 'The essence of all religions is love, compassion and tolerance' by the HH the Dalai Lama

The phrase appears verbatim in Handbook for the Spirit, in the first essay (the opening chapter) which is titled "Love, Compassion, and Tolerance".

The author of that essay is given as (and copyright is attributed to) His Holiness the Dalai Lama, without any translator.

A copy of that essay can be found here: http://www.ofspirit.com/dalailama1.htm


Fathersday - how would a western disciple of the Buddha make use of this fest?

My father is dead but I try to go the extra mile and help--really help my eldest uncle and those closest to my father in ways that I can whether it is:

psychologically and emotionally supportive by giving happy thoughts and emotions and not supporting negativity
virtually supportive (I work in IT so I know most things that are useful) by setting up phone, accounts, etc.
reminisce about my father's good qualities and actions frequently with family, ignoring the bad


so•lip•sism sŏl′ĭp-sĭz″əm, sō′lĭp-►
n.    The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and
verified.
n. The view that the self is the only reality.
n. The belief
or proposition that the person entertaining it alone exists and that
other people exist only as ideas in his mind

That being the definition of Solipsism non of the schools of Buddhism will have anything to do with it.
The Buddha refuted most of the solipsistic schools in his time and taught non-self.


How I can live longer as well as peaceful by doing practices taught by Buddhism?

Here is a list of a few things you can do to live a longer and healthier life.

Meditate: Stress will make you age quicker and die younger.
Eat vegetarian meals: Most meats will cause inflammation which lowers your life-span.
Intermittent fasting or only eating for the first half of the day. This will help you keep thin, slow down your metabolism (the idea is animals who have slower metabolisms live longer than those with faster), and your body has the chance to clean out it's system.
Put aside yourself and help others. Helping other people makes you active, social, younger, and happier.
Simplify your lifestyle. Buddha always encouraged his followers to live a simpler life, why? Because it helps you live longer by lowering your stress and finding happiness.
Finish all your work in the morning so you can rest in the afternoon. This is a pretty common practice in the monasteries.
Don't Procrastinate! Buddha encourages us to keep up with our work so we don't add unnecessary stress to our lives.
Buddha gave us a purpose in life which helps you live longer. We're not just piles of flesh waiting to die.
Many Buddhist sects believe in early to bed, and early rising. Life becomes much easier when following this pattern of living. Stress decreases significantly! Less stress means a healthy body.

This is but a few practical tips given by Buddha, with external sources (supporting) the reasons for why you should follow them. I hope this helps and have a wonderful day!


The way I understand, any action which benefits you and the other person or both are wholesome.


In Buddhism, the heart is judged by its own virtues (goodness) rather than by what others think.

Therefore, your mother should develop faith & trust in the virtues of the Buddha (rather than be concerned about what others may think or not think about her). If your mother has the virtues of Dhamma (such as non-killing, non-stealing, non-sexual-abuse, non-lying, non-greed, non-hatred & gratitude) then her heart will have well-being & inner-respect.


From early in my practice I noticed they had there own type of sensual craving not particularly connected with dense forms.

Jhana is not considered "sensual", including when craved for.

Rūparāgo and arūparāgo

The above appears to be lust for the blissful and equanimous feelings of rupa jhana and formless spheres, such as rapture, happiness, equanimity, spaciousness, etc, such as described in AN 9.36:

Take a mendicant who, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded
from unskillful qualities, enters and remains in the first
absorption.... If they don’t attain the ending of defilements, with
the ending of the five lower fetters they’re reborn spontaneously,
because of their passion (dhammarāgena) and love
(dhammanandiyā) for that meditation. They are extinguished there,
and are not liable to return from that world.

Apart from the above, I do not know of any other sutta explanations.
For a personal opinion, Ajahn Buddhadasa said:

The next defilement, the sixth of the fetters, is desire for the bliss
associated with the various stages of concentration on forms (rupa -
raga). The first three grades of Aryian are still not capable of
giving up attachment to the bliss and tranquillity obtainable by
concentrating deeply on forms, but they will succeed in doing so when
they move up to the last stage, that of the Arahant. The fully
concentrated state has a captivating flavor, which can be described as
a foretaste of Nirvana. Though it differs from real Nirvana, it has
more or less the same flavor. While one is fully concentrated, the
defilements are dormant; but they have not evaporated away entirely,
and will reappear as soon as concentration is lost. As long as they
are dormant, however, the mind is empty, clear, free, and knows the
flavor of real Nirvana. Consequently this state can also become a
cause of attachment.
The seventh subtle defilement is desire for the bliss associated with
full concentration on objects other than forms (arupa - raga). It
resembles the sixth fetter, but is one degree more subtle and
attenuated. Concentration on an object such as space or emptiness
yields a tranquillity and quiescence more profound than concentration
on a form, with the result that one becomes attached to that state. No
Arahant could ever become fascinated by any state of pleasant feeling
whatsoever, regardless of where it originated, because an Arahant is
automatically aware of the impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and
nonselfhood of every state of feeling. Other hermits and mystics
practicing concentration in the forest do not perceive the hidden
danger in these blissful states and so become fascinated by and
attached to the flavor of them just as immature people become attached
to the flavor of sensual objects. For this reason the Buddha used the
same word "desire" for both cases. If you think this subject over and
really come to understand it, you will be full of admiration and
respect for these individuals called Aryians.


About the compatibility between meditation methods, guides, trainings and teachers, and other questions regarding Samadhi

SO the summary is that you must not confuse the  noble 8 fold path with the humanism pushed by puthujjanas, you must not let the mind be afflicted by the body, you must not be blind to the danger of sensuality, you must judge your thoughts and sanna and vedana all day long, you must become sensitive to the sankharas in order to destroy them.
The hardest part is to be sensitive to the ''joy of renunciation'' and the samma smadhi will come by the usual formula:

  ''living thus heedfully, joy arises''

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn55/sn55.040.than.html

It is mano which has piti and the kaya has passambhati then sukhaṃ vediyati, and the citta has sukhha then samadhi.

Like any humanist, The puthujjana Upasaka Culadasa confuses being a humanist, having compassion, with the ''kamma that is neither dark nor bright with neither dark nor bright result, leading to the ending of kamma''. That's a typical mistake created by puthujjanas who refuse the nekhamma part of samma sankappa, whereas not having nekhamma is just as detrimental as having ill-will.
http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/05/an05-090.html

Those people  cling to sensuality and their typical behavior is that they feel sad when they see puthujjanas not having stuff, so they say that they are good people, because ''they have compassion'' and because they give'' stuff to destitute puthujjanas, because when the destitute puthujjanas has stuff, this puthujjana is no longer sad.
Of course, this behavior relies on craving, on kamma,  on sankharas and jayati so it never ever ends the dukkha of the puthujjana who gives stuff nor the dukkha of the destitute puthujjana.
This is explained here https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/an7.52

The good thing about the doctrine created by the puthujjana Upasaka Culadasa is that even though you get wrong concentration by following his directions,  you avoid one of the most moronic & toxic idea ever created by a puthujjana :  to wit, mixing the dhamma with ''the dark night'' created the christian puthujjanas who develop the ''dry insight'' doctrine in the west, [christian puthujjanas who talk about the dhamma cling to their christian vocabulary]. Those people completely fail to understand that any insight into dukkha does not generate more dukkha. THis is because those puthujjanas are eager to declare themselves as ''having insights'', as ''reaching first path'', as ''cycling through insights'' and plenty of other toxic words expressing their toxic ideas.

Instead of talking about the various wrong samadhi invented by various puthujjanas, it is way better to focus on right sammadhi, or even better on rigth liberation.
The difficulty with the right liberation is that The right liberation can be expressed by the vocabulary used for the wrong liberations.
http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/sn/04_salv/sn04.41.007.wood.pts.htm#p1
but like the buddha says,  the best[=non-ambiguous] and unique way to speak of the right liberation is

  Truly that unshaken heart's release is void of lust, void of hate,
  void of illusion.

For instance, there are plenty of wrong liberations and then puthujjanas wonder what is the difference between those wrong liberations and the right liberation:

  "Housefather, this heart's release and this utterly unworldly[2]
  heart's release, and this heart's release that is by the void and that
  which is signless, - are these states diverse in spirit, diverse in
  letter, or are they the same both in spirit and in letter?"

  "There is one view of the question,[3] sir, according to which these
  states are diverse both in spirit and in letter.

  But there is another view, sir, according to which they are one and
  the same both in spirit and in letter.

Let's recall that the only goal of the dhamma is to end dukkha, and it turns out that ending dukkha is about viraga, nirodha, Paṭinissaggā and ''the letting go'' that puthujjanas misuse and plenty of other words like extinction.

  "Householder, through the destruction, fading away, cessation, giving
  up, and relinquishment of desire, lust, delight, craving, engagement
  and clinging, mental standpoints, adherences, and underlying
  tendencies towards the form element, the mind is said to be well
  liberated.

The buddha had plenty of wrong concentration before getting the right concentration, which are the jhanas, and then later on ''turning the citta'' to the famous 3 knowledges which are the insights into kamma, jayati and dukkha.

So like he said after remarking his failure to end dukkha, he started from scratch. For a puthujjana, starting from scratch means judging thoughts and sanna-vedana, because puthujjanas crave basing their life and actions on their thoughts and sanna-vedana. The biggest problem for puthujjanas is that they do not know what are meritorious thoughts and meritorious vedana-sanna, and the demeritorious thoughts and sanna-vedana.
SO starting from scratch means judging thoughts and sanna-vedana each hour of each day of each week of each month. That's really hard for most puthujjanas. THe citta who watches and judges  thoughts and sanna-vedana has the samadhi called the sati sampajaanna http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/04/an04-041.html

Even though he claimed that nekhamma and metta are good, he still failed to get the citta into samadhi, precisely because he still lusted towards the opposite of those  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html
Failing to see the dangers of the aggregates is the way to never have the joy of the nekhamma, to have the mind afflicted by the aggregates, like the buddha explains to Nakulapita, in the Nakulapita Sutta

  "And how is one afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind? There is
  the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has
  regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma;
  who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in
  their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as
  possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is
  not seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is
  not seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, but he does
  not fall into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its
  change & alteration.

  "He does not assume feeling to be the self...

  "He does not assume perception to be the self...

  "He does not assume fabrications to be the self...

  "He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as
  possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self
  as in consciousness. He is not seized with the idea that 'I am
  consciousness' or 'Consciousness is mine.' As he is not seized with
  these ideas, his consciousness changes & alters, but he does not fall
  into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair over its change &
  alteration.

  "This, householder, is how one is afflicted in body but unafflicted in
  mind."

It turns out that the good thoughts and sanna-devana are the thoughts of nekhamma and metta and the good sanna-vedana are whatever sanna-vedana there is in samma samadhi. When the citta is in samma samadhi, ''you make merit'', like puthujjanas say, and the ''contact'' generating the sanna-vedana are meritorious. [and then when there is a jayati, , it is in the higher realms and the contact is good].
 The other way to make merit outside samadhi is explained here https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.057.than.html

Having right samadhi is good and since a puthujjana who trains to end dukkha has sati, this puthujjana has memorized that right samadhi is the way to slide towards nibanna,  viraga, nirodha , Patinissagga, the ending of the sankharas, of the asavas, of whatever stems from ignorance.
https://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/sn/05_mv/sn05.53.001-012.wood.pts.htm

This is what sotapannas  have to do to finish the path, because right samadhi means to see properly the dhammas [puthujjanas speculate on this by wondering whether dhammas here means ''phenomena or the teaching, but it is not important]
accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.005.than.html

  The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated
  monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he
  discern in line with what has come into being? The origination &
  disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling...
  perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of
  consciousness.

THe way for a sotapanna to reach anagamin is the first jhana

  even so in the Ariyan disciple arises the flawless, taintless eye of
  wisdom,[12] and along with this arising three fetters are abandoned,
  to wit:

  The view of the person-pack,[13] doubt-and-wavering and wrong handling
  of rite and ritual.

  Nay more, he departs from two things, coveting and malevolence.

  This disciple, aloof from sensual desires, aloof from unprofitable
  states, entering on the first musing, which is accompanied by thought
  directed and sustained, born of seclusion, zestful and easeful, dwells
  therein.

  [222] At such time, monks, if the Ariyan disciple should make an end,
  there is no fetter bound by which he would come back again to this
  world.'[14]

Once you are good at getting the citta in samadhi, you can try anapanasati, because The result of anapanasati is always nibanna.
In terms of sankharas, anapanasati means the destruction of sankharas, and reaching viraga and all that. Before destroying the sankharas, you need to tranquilize them and before tranquilizing the sankharas, you need to be sensitive to the sankharas. So it always goes like this
**

  be sensitive to sankharas --->calm the  sankharas--> destroy the
  sankharas

**


What are the "realms" or "planes of existence"?

My understanding of "levels of existence" is that they are mind states.For example when i'm happy i am residing in the deva realms and when i'm sad or angry in the lower realms.These mind states keep changing and fluctuating all the time it never lasts.As for real physical places I think the only way to find out for certain is through meditation.


miccha-samadhi (wrong/defiled concentration). And to think the mind is in the body is also miccha-samadhi if so perceived.


Here is a slightly modified B.Thanissaro translation of that passage (etam santam...), with pali + english lined up side by side, nearly word for word order.
http://lucid24.org/an/an09/an09-0036/toc-addon/index.html

suttacentral.net is an excellent resource, if you configure the settings on there to show pali with english for B.Sujato translations (aside from KN, he has complete set of translations for nikayas). You can view them side by side or line by line.

lucid24.org has a snapshot of B.Sujato's translations as of 2019-jan., arranged in side by side pali+english, with an important correction to B. Sujato's mistranslation of the 4 jhana formula.

DPR (digital pali reader) is an offline excellent resource addon for firefox.

Those resources will save you an enormous amount of time from the tedious and frustrating old tech research methods. But with that said, don't expect to get an understanding of the Dhamma even if you read the entire Pali and English collection with a decent intellectual understanding. It's only through repeated reflection over years, and seeing how the various important terms are used in various contexts throughout the canon, and a deepening of samadhi in your meditation practice that the passages will really make sense, and you're able to sort out for yourself the various controversies and sharply divergent interpretations existing out there.


The Sankha Sutta is one of the best sutta's I know of that provides instructions on how to transcend and overcome the effects of past unskillful kamma.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn42/sn42.008.than.html

  This is how there comes to be the abandoning of that evil deed. This
  is how there comes to be the transcending of that evil deed.

  ...when the awareness-release through equanimity is thus developed, thus
  pursued, any deed done to a limited extent no longer remains there, no
  longer stays there."


The PTS dictionary says,

  Cala (adj.) [see calati] moving, quivering; unsteady, fickle, transient S iv.68 (dhammā calā c' eva vyayā ca aniccā, etc.); J ii.299; iii.381; v.345; Miln 93, 418; Sdhp 430, 494.
  -- acala steadfast, immovable S i.232; J i.71 (ṭṭhāna); Vv 514 (˚ṭṭhāna=Ep. of Nibbāna); acalaŋ sukhaŋ (=Nibbāna) Th 2, 350; cp. niccala motionless DhA iii.38

So cala means "unsteady", acala means "not unsteady", and acala sukha means "unwavering happiness" i.e. nibbana.

The phrase is in some of the suttas, e.g. the last line of Ud 8.10; and the end of the first verse of Thag 3.16.


Lies as self defence vs. Physical self defence

The key is intent to deceive and the person understanding the deceptive communication. If the intention to deceive is not there then there is no unwholesome. If you mistakenly believe something and say this it is not breaking the precept of lying because there is no intention to deceive.

Generally, people do not like being deceived, even for their own good. So if you are motivated to deceive for their own good, then this is still lying.

If you make a promise you do not intent to keep this also is lying. If you make a promise which you know will never happen then this is not lying (e.g. I will give you an angle to marry if the sun rises in the North.) The latter type of tact was used on Nanda, in which case the promise was if you meditate.

Also I do not think a monk can resort to violence.

Also need not always tell what you know. You can simply refuse to answer, but if you answer it should be the truth.


What does "aeons of cosmic expansion and cosmic contraction" mean in Buddhist cosmology?

Quoting from Dharma: Its Early History in Law, Religion, and Narrative
By Alf Hiltebeitel:

An "aeons of cosmic expansion and cosmic contraction" is a translation of saṃvaṭṭa-vivaṭṭakappa:

  vivaṭṭakappa
  masculine
  an ascending aeon

and/or:

  Vivaṭṭa, (m. & nt.) (vi+vaṭṭa1) 1. “rolling back, ” with ref. to the development of the world (or the aeons, kappa) used to denote a devolving cycle (“devolution”), whereas vaṭṭa alone or saṃvaṭṭa denote the involving cycle (both either with or without kappa). Thus as “periods” of the world they practically mean the same thing & may both be interpreted in the sense of a new beginning. As redupl. -inter. cpds. they express only the idea of constant change. We sometimes find vivaṭṭa in the sense of “renewal” & saṃvaṭṭa in the sense of “destruction, ” where we should expect the opposite meaning for each. See also vaṭṭa & saṃvaṭta. Dogmatically vivaṭṭa is used as “absence of vaṭṭa, ” i.e. nibbāna or salvation from saṃsāra (see vaṭṭa & cp. citta-vivaṭṭa, ceto°, ñāṇa°, vimokkha° at Ps. I, 108 & II. 70).—Fig. in kamma° “the rolling back of k. ” i.e. devolution or course of kamma at S. I, 85.—Abs. & combd with saṃvaṭṭa (i.e. devolution combd with evolution) e.g. at D. I, 14, 16 sq.; III, 109; A. II, 142 (where read vivaṭṭe for vivaṭṭo); Pug. 60; Vism. 419 (here as m. vivaṭṭo, compared with saṃvaṭṭo), 420 (°ṭṭhāyin). In cpd. °kappa (i.e. descending aeon) at D.

... in other words, according to the book quoted above, "a period in which the world is created and destroyed".

The word kappa is usually translated as an aeon. The PTS dictionary says,

  -- 2．（temporal） a “fixed” time，time with ref．to individual and cosmic life．As āyu at DA．I，103 （cp．kappaṁ）； as a cycle of time=saṁsāra at Sn．521，535，860 （na eti kappaṁ）； as a measure of time：an age of the world Vin．III，109； Miln．108； Sdhp．256，257； PvA．21； It．17=Bdhd 87=S．II，185．There are 3 principal cycles or aeons：mahā°，asaṅkheyya°，antara°； each mahā° consists of 4 asaṅkheyya-kappas，viz．saṁvaṭṭa° saṁvaṭṭaṭṭhāyi° vivaṭṭa° vivaṭṭaṭṭhāyi° A．II，142； often abbreviated to saṁvaṭṭa-vivaṭṭa° D．I，14； It．15； freq．in formula ekampijātiṁ，etc．Vin．III，4=D．III，51，111= It．99．On pubbanta° & aparanta°，past & future kappas see D．I，12 sq．paṭhama-kappe at the beginning of the world，once upon a time （cp．atīte） J．I，207．When kappa stands by itself，a Mahā-kappa is understood：DA．I，162．A whole，complete kappa is designated by kevala° Sn．pp．18=46~125； Sn．517； also dīgha° S．II，181； Sdhp．257．For similes as to the enormous length of a kappa see S．II，181 & DA．I，164=PvA．254．-- Acc．kappaṁ adv．：for a long time D．II，103=115= Ud．62，quot．at DA．I，103； Vin．II，198； It．17； Miln．108； mayi āyukappaṁ J．I，119，cp．Miln．141．Cp．saṅkappa．

When used, the word kappa may have a prefix which qualifies it (as in saṃvaṭṭa-vivaṭṭakappa above), which describes what kind of kappa it is. If it doesn't have a prefix it's assumed to be a Maha-kappa (a great kappa, a world kappa, an aeon). Maybe for that reason it's translated "aeon". I'm unsure whether kappa always definitely means long time periods (i.e. longer than a human life).

Even if it does imply a long, long time (which it seems to, both, in general, and in context in this sutta), I don't want to accuse the Buddha of exaggerating or false speech, but people do sometimes describe subjective time loosely or figuratively (e.g. "the bus took ages to arrive").

Anyway, it appears to mean some kind of time period, especially related to life, maybe the life-time of something.

Is this similar to Big Bounce in physics?

I doubt it; and generally I presume that nothing in Buddhist phenomenology is similar to physics.


Where can I find suttas about the immaterial realm?

The immaterial jhana are optional & not required for enlightenment (refer to SN 12.70), which is why immaterial jhana are not included in the noble eightfold path (refer to SN 45.8). The Buddha attained enlightenment by developing the 4th material jhana (refer to MN 19). However, the immaterial jhana are described in many suttas (such as in detail in MN 111) because they are a natural development of concentration or quieting (refer to SN 36.10). I recommend reading MN 111.


The guidance I got from one teacher, of Tibetan Nyingma school, is to let the eyes relax. In detail, this includes:

keep them open but not stare-open - don't strain to keep them half-closed either,
relax the muscles around the eyes, so called soft-eyes,
do not focus the eyes on anything in particular, allow them go a little out of focus but don't force it,
if your eyes wander from object to object a bit, that's totally fine - as long as the objects are not too engaging. You don't have to literally sit in front of the wall but you want your scene to be rather generic.


How did the suffering of Gautama Buddha arise or co-arise?

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

According to Itivuttaka 44 (above), an Arahant (including the Buddha) can still feel pleasure and pain.

  And soon after the Blessed One had eaten the meal provided by Cunda
  the metalworker, a dire sickness fell upon him, even dysentery, and he
  suffered sharp and deadly pains. But the Blessed One endured them
  mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed.

The suffering had indeed ended for the Buddha. That was why he was unperturbed by physical ailments. He feels pain but does not suffer from it.

In the Sivaka Sutta, the Buddha explains that not everything one feels is due to past karma becoming ripe:

  "There are cases where some feelings arise based on
  bile. You yourself should know how some feelings arise based on bile.
  Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise based on bile. So
  any brahmans & contemplatives who are of the doctrine & view that
  whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain,
  neither-pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before
  — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by
  the world. Therefore I say that those brahmans & contemplatives are
  wrong."

  "There are cases where some feelings arise based on phlegm... based on
  internal winds... based on a combination of bodily humors... from the
  change of the seasons... from uneven care of the body... from harsh
  treatment... from the result of kamma. You yourself should know how
  some feelings arise from the result of kamma. Even the world is agreed
  on how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. So any brahmans
  & contemplatives who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an
  individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither pleasure-nor-pain — is
  entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they
  themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I
  say that those brahmans & contemplatives are wrong."

In the story of Ven. Chakkhupala in Dhammapada 1, we find that it is possible for an Arahant to be blind due to past karma becoming ripe prior to Nibbana.

But since he was already blind, he does not suddenly become cured and starts to have vision because of Nibbana.

  On one occasion, Thera Cakkhupala came to pay homage to the Buddha at
  the Jetavana monastery. One night, while pacing up and down in
  meditation, the thera accidentally stepped on some insects. In the
  morning, some bhikkhus visiting the thera found the dead insects. They
  thought ill of the thera and reported the matter to the Buddha. The
  Buddha asked them whether they had seen the thera killing the insects.
  When they answered in the negative, the Buddha said, "Just as you had
  not seen him killing, so also he had not seen those living insects.
  Besides, as the thera had already attained arahatship he could have no
  intention of killing and so was quite innocent." On being asked why
  Cakkhupala was blind although he was an arahat, the Buddha told the
  following story:

  Cakkhupala was a physician in one of his past existences. Once, he had
  deliberately made a woman patient blind. That woman had promised him
  to become his slave, together with her children, if her eyes were
  completely cured. Fearing that she and her children would have to
  become slaves, she lied to the physician. She told him that her eyes
  were getting worse when, in fact, they were perfectly cured. The
  physician knew she was deceiving him, so in revenge, he gave her
  another ointment, which made her totally blind. As a result of this
  evil deed the physician lost his eyesight many times in his later
  existences.

So, we find that no new karma becomes ripe after Nibbana. But it is possible that the Arahant could feel pain due to other reasons.

At the same time, any chronic conditions caused by previous karma becoming ripe prior to Nibbana, do not suddenly disappear due to Nibbana.

But in all cases, the Arahant is unperturbed. He feels pain but does not suffer from it. That shows that the Arahant has risen above suffering.

In this resource about dependent origination, Mahasi Sayadaw says:

  One who watches these present resultant processes effectively does not
  have craving that is rooted in feeling and so will put an end to the
  cycle of existence completely. In other words, the meditator watches
  every mental and physical phenomenon that occurs at the six
  sense-doors clearly in terms of its three characteristics. Through
  this effective practice of mindfulness, the meditator gains insight
  into the nature of the sense-objects and overcomes attachment to them
  there and then (tadaṅga), that is he or she overcomes it by opposing
  it with the knowledge that undercuts it. The cessation of attachment
  rules out the arising of the other phenomena, e.g. clinging, the
  process of becoming, birth, etc. After the this cessation through
  insight the meditator overcomes the latent attachment completely
  through cutting-off (samuccheda) when he or she attains the knowledge
  of the Noble Path. At this moment the other phenomena, e.g. clinging
  etc., also become totally extinct.

  There is no teaching that says: “With the extinction of feeling, craving ceases to exist.” This is not surprising for even Arahants do
  not have any control over the feelings that arise from contact with
  the six senses.


Must Lay Arahants become Buddhist Monks?

If and when a lay-follower attains arahant-ship, he or she has to either enter the Order that very day or else must attain parinibbàna. This is a Dhammata. This is conformity to the Dhammaniyāma – a general rule in Dhamma.
This is discussed in the Milindapanha, which is a set of three Buddhist books that records the dialogues between the Indian monk Nagasena and the Indo-Greek king Milinda.

Milinda: "You say that if a layman attains arahantship he must either enter the Order that very day or die and attain parinibbàna. Yet if he is unable to find a robe and bowl and preceptor then that exalted condition of arahantship is a waste, for destruction of life is involved in it."
Nagasena: "The fault does not lie with arahantship but with the state of a layman, because it is too weak to support arahantship. Just as, O king, although food protects the life of beings it will take away the life of one whose digestion is weak; so too, if a layman attains arahantship he must, because of the weakness of that condition, enter the Order that very day or die."


Did the Buddha ever delve on the dangers of one's own spirtual achievements feeding the ego?

There is one good example of the Buddha delving on the dangers of one's own spirtual achievements feeding the ego.  It is that of the erudite monk called Potila. Buddha dismissed him with just one word “THUCCA POTILA”  (meaning empty Potila), because he only taught others, but did not practice. It was his EGO that prevented him from achieving even the level of a stream entrant. The story is best described in THIS BLOG.

  During the time of the Buddha there was a bhikkhu named Pötila, who was well-versed with deep Dhamma concepts and was a well known teacher; he had developed abhinna powers as well, but had not attained even the Sotapanna stage. His desanas (discourses) were deep and only those at the Anagami stage (at least Sotapanna stage) could follow them and get to Arahanthood. One day he went to see the Buddha, paid respects, and told the Buddha that he had been a Dhamma teacher during the times of several earlier Buddhas too, and helped many to attain Nibbana (Arahantship).

  The Buddha asked him whether he has attained any magga phala and Bhikkhu Potila admitted that he had not. The Buddha just commented: ”Thucca Potila” and turned his attention to other matters; thucca (pronounced “thuchcha”) in Pali means despicable or “lowly”.

  So, bhikkhu Potila, who had expected praise from the Buddha for helping others, realized that he needs to work on his own salvation before helping others. He strived by himself and could not make any progress; he was trying very hard to “give up all attachments”, following the same instructions he was giving others. But no matter how hard he tried, he could not succeed.

  When he sought help from other bhikkhus, they were reluctant to become his teacher because everyone knew he was very knowledgeable in Dhamma. Eventually, he went to this very young Arahant, who was well-known for his teaching abilities, and sought help. The young Arahant agreed to help, only if bhikkhu Potila agreed to carry out everything as instructed, and Potila agreed.

  The young Arahant decided to use an unusual kammatthana (instructions). He took Potila to a large area covered by mud, and asked him to wade into the mud and keep going until told to stop. Potila started wading in mud and kept going until he was told to stop when the mud was all the way up to his chin; he was barely able to move at this point because mud was heavy.

  The Arahant told him that, “if someone is stuck in mud like that any knowledge about cleaning oneself by taking a bath is not going to help. One needs to get out of the mud first”.

  Then he asked Potila to come back. Potila had great difficulty in moving forward initially, since he was all the way up to the chin in thick and heavy mud. While dragging himself out of the mud with great difficulty, Potila realized what the young Arahant was talking about. It is not possible to get out of mud until one realizes that one is stuck there, and getting out of mud required sheer will power. Similarly, he had not realized that he was stuck at a much lower moral level; he needed to cleanse his mind first.

  The “giving up” part comes with a mind that has removed the wrong visions (micca ditthi); and that comes via comprehending anicca, dukkha, anatta. If someone at a level below at least the Sotapanna stage, “giving up worldly things” is not possible; that could easily lead to patigha or “friction” or “anger with oneself for giving up things”. One’s mind has not advanced to that stage yet.

  The simile can be made even better by looking at what happens to ants who get stuck in honey. Here unlike mud, the sense pleasures are appealing and there is no incentive to get out either. Those ants who get stuck in honey, would not even try to get out because they are too busy enjoying the honey. Even when they are barely stuck, and can move out of honey, they would not because they like the taste of honey. Just like that, any living being, whether a human or even the lowly worm, likes to indulge in the sense pleasures, and thus gets stuck.

  And even when one realizes that one needs to get out of “the honey pot” it is hard, at least initially.
  For that one needs to see the perils of staying in this rebirth process, where birth in lower four realms will lead to unimaginable suffering. Even if one can strive to be born in higher realms, that will not last long. This is “anicca“: no matter how hard we try to find refuge in the 31 realms it is not possible to do so in the long run.

  With much effort, Potila slowly made his way up to the waist level, and started feeling the lightness of being free of mud. He could now move faster too. He felt the relief when he was out the mud, and was asked to go and take a shower. Now, cleaning up with soap could be done; but while stuck in mud, there was no use of soap and water. Just like that the deep Dhamma that he had memorized was of no use to him while he was still stuck in mud.

  Eventually, when one comes out the mud that is like the Sotapanna level. One is still covered with mud, i.e., one still likes to enjoy sense pleasure. But now one KNOWS that one needs to take a shower, use soap and shampoo, and remove all that mud.


what is anatta during vipassana practice?

No. Anatta arises from seeing the arising and passing nature of conditioned phenomena wherever you look. You see that the whole body is like mass of bubbling particles. One set gets destroyed another arises. You also see that this process is not controllable and this process generates sensations which are essentially unsatisfactory. Unpleasant sensations are unsatisfactory, pleasant sensation are unsatisfactory when they end and neutral sensations are unsatisfactory as they are conditioned and pass away giving rise to unsatisfactory experiences.

In addition, craving towards any of the sensation gives rise to the notion or perception of a being. Such perceptions all end in unsatisfactoriness.

Whatever unsatisfactory is not worth identifying as self. This is Anatta.


Thoughts are created by the mind's natural activity. It's what the mind does. It's like a muscle or hair follicle. What matters is our attachment to that thought. Karma is simply energy and attachment and by attaching ourselves to the thoughts of a temporary vehicle (our body and mind), we are destined for suffering.

If you're a fellow geek, you may get a lot out of the research from Dr. Fred Travis. He studies the brain and has done a lot of research on meditation and brain activity. He basically shows that meditation helps us rise past lower states of consciousnesses by disconnecting that "word = object" mentality. See Youtube, Brain Plasticity and Transcendental Meditation with Dr Fred Travis.

Letting go of karma is thus attaining a higher form of humanity.


Question on a Mahayana Sutra (Three Svabhavas)

What are objects?
Worldly things, for ex. 'Table'. or 'Car'.
If we divide them to parts, is that 'thing' exist further?
can we say that 'thing' exist before divide to parts?
So that 'things' are considered as 'forms'(nimitta).
The 'things'(forms) has signs('name') and shapes('rupa'/form/object).
We believe(adhere to) these 'things' are real objects.
This is called false discrimination (attachment to names and attachment to objects).
This adherence takes place in two ways.('ajjhattaṃ'- Internal and 'bahiddhā'- External).  As shown in 'Sathipattana sutta'

.....In this way they meditate by observing an aspect of the body inside;
they meditate by observing an aspect of the body outside; they
meditate by observing an aspect of the body inside and outside.
(In Pali: Iti ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, bahiddhā vā kāye
kāyānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā kāye kāyānupassī
viharati;)

So what is "get attached to inner and external things [as realities]..."
Inner things - person, I, Myself, Me, Body etc.
External  things - others, they, He/s ,It etc.


Perhaps it is possible that you aren't confident in being right, perhaps you are wrong and people who are challenging your views are right. In that case you should figure it out and do as they say if they are right and do as you see fit if you are right. Whether you are or aren't is the most important factor in determining your course of action.
If you aren't certain then don't get into a discussion. In general avoid getting into a debate if you aren't certain in your righteousness and don't understand the opposing position better than the opposition does.
You can always say 'this is my conviction but i am not certain, if you have all the answers then teach me but if you are likewise of speculative persuation then let's set this discussion aside until one of us gains verified confidence'. It will solve your problem because this statement protects the truth and avoids arguments.

But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth."
"If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.
"If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.095x.than.html

As to how one develops fortitude there is no simple answer but this very training does develop it, namely the four bases of mindfulness, five faculties, five bases of power, seven factors of awakening, this noble eightfold path. One should avoid associating with bullies and seclude oneself from abusive people until becoming such that one's forbearance is one's mighty army and one can endure both the abuse and one's own anger without letting it loose.
When it comes to parents we can't just go along with whatever they say because we owe them

I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. Which two? Your mother & father. Even if you were to carry your mother on one shoulder & your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, & rubbing their limbs, and they were to defecate & urinate right there [on your shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. If you were to establish your mother & father in absolute sovereignty over this great earth, abounding in the seven treasures, you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. Why is that? Mother & father do much for their children. They care for them, they nourish them, they introduce them to this world. But anyone who rouses his unbelieving mother & father, settles & establishes them in conviction; rouses his unvirtuous mother & father, settles & establishes them in virtue; rouses his stingy mother & father, settles & establishes them in generosity; rouses his foolish mother & father, settles & establishes them in discernment: To this extent one pays & repays one's mother & father."

It is normal that we want to bring people we like along with us and be aligned in view but we should associate with our equals or better and a person is neither of those by the virtue of kinship alone. Therefore it is entirely reasonable to seclude oneself and to that extent violate even kinship.
It is just sad to associate with people of different persuation because it is unpleasant to watch people we care about aim down and furthermore listening to their rationalization for doing so. If we don't agree with their rationalization a person will usually get upset and defensive about it. Therefore best leave them to their own until you have an ace in your sleeve so to speak.
Don't waste words of wisdom on people who are fixated in wrong views, don't throw pearls before swine.

There is no companionship with fools. Living with fools is painful as living with foes.

As to how to train in more detail, look up development of perceptions & contemplation, learn the defining of elements and practise jhana. .
If you are going to contemplate whilst people are abusing you then there are better themes:
I have compiled ~ 20 to be developed lines of reasoning and visualizations here (theravadin texts, mostly sutta):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kZxstsAvjhj9Svc47RUKRIyKQMuHMD4adIvr_7pp2uI/edit?usp=drivesdk
Something you should reflect on often is that people are like that. They critcized even the Buddha. Another thing is that bad people don't like good people.

Should one see a wise man,
Who, like a revealer of treasures,
Points out faults and reproves,
Let one associate with such a one,
Well is it, not ill, to associate with such a one.
Let him admonish, exhort,
And shield from wrong.
Truly, pleasing is he to the good,
Displeasing is he to the bad.
Associate not with evil friends;
Associate not with mean men;
Associate with good friend;
Associate with noble men.


What is the significance of Commentaries (Atthakatha) to the Suttas?

In Theravada Buddhism, much of the commentarial literature is merely providing definitions and etymologies of words, so it only makes sense in the original pali. Besides this, it is so voluminous that any attempt at translating it would be a daunting task.

That being said, some of the more accessible and interesting commentaries have indeed been translated into English:

The Dhammapada commentaries (stories only, not verse explanations)
The Jataka commentaries (and the introduction)
The Commentary to Satipatthana Sutta
The Commentary to Sammaditthi Sutta
The Patisambhidamagga and Visuddhimagga
The Therigatha Commentary

I'm sure there are others, but this is a sample.

As to their significance, in Theravada Buddhism, they are what defines the orthodoxy; any interpretation of the canonical texts that deviates significantly from the commentaries is considered to be outside of the fold of Theravada Buddhism. In a word, they are the agreed upon correct interpretation or explanation of the texts.

And they have some funny stories.


Responding skillfully to an insincere apology

There is a difference between the ideas of apology and revelation or confession. When we in the west read in the suttas about some person recognizing his mistake, we should not be thinking he is apologizing. The idea is that by confessing ones understanding that one has made a mistake and that one understands the nature of that mistake one has made the details conscious. Conscious of the error and the corrective measures needed to prevent its repetition, one is then in a position to take those corrective measures. It is the making conscious that is the important thing.

Apology is asking for forgiveness, not necessarily stating that there will be any effort to reform.

In both cases there is the idea that once an error is sincerely confessed, or a wish for forgiveness expressed in an apology and the other person does not acknowledge the confession or forgive the transgressor, the bad kamma of the deed passes over from the one who is confessing or apologizing to the one confessed to or apologized to. It is beyond my scope to comment on the reality of this belief.

In the case of the apology, going by the Christian practice, there is no requirement that the transgressor understand his error, and one is supposed to forgive, '“seventy times seven times” (490) (Matthew 18:22), a number that symbolizes boundlessness. ... '

In the case of the confession the transgressor must express an understanding of the error and corrective measure before it is necessary to acknowledge it. In this case (and we do not have an example in the suttas so this is just me making up what seems to be a logical response), the polite thing to do would be to explain exactly what was needed before the error could be acknowledged. A diplomatic construction of the statement: "You have not understood your error and consequently I am unable to acknowledge it for you." With perhaps an explanation such as made above to point to what is needed to be done by the transgressor in order to turn this exercise into something helpful to the goal, i.e., change of behavior.

Since the distinction between confession and apology is not likely to be known by most persons in the west, a further act of kindness when faced with an apology that looks to be a sincere effort at change for the better would be to explain this distinction and by that give the person an opportunity to change the apology into a confession.


Notions of self in religions that blend Buddhism and Hinduism

Please do not vote on this answer since it doesn't directly address the question about the religion in Bali, but does go to a nearby place. I misread the question and wrote out this answer, and don't want to throw it away, in case it maybe of use to someone. Happy to delete it if anyone objects to it staying here.

--

I've personally found the idea of samvritti bodhicitta to be indistinguishable from the Atman. However I am no expert. FWIW, the exact position of the five skandhas / heaps as defining the self is hotly debated within Buddhism, there is no single position on this matter that satisfies all schools, past and present, as far as I know.

I find there's a lot of Hindu opinion that Buddhism is really not a different religion, so much as a clearly refactored expression of Hindu ideas.

  Famous Indian Hindu scholars like the ex-President of India the late Radhakrishnan state ‘The Buddha did not feel that he was announcing a new religion. He was born, grew up, and died a Hindu. He was restating with a new emphasis the ancient ideals of the Indo-Aryan civilization.’ (2500 Years of Buddhism, 1971, Government of India, foreword, p.ix). Swami Vivekananda said that the Buddha was a great Vedantist for Buddhism was really only an offshoot of Vedanta (The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, volume 7, p. 59 and Inspired Talks, volume 3, p. 527). Likewise, Nepalese scholars like Mr. Chudanath Bhattarai, Swami Prapannacharya and scores other Nepalese and Indian scholars, too numerous to be mentioned here, have written that Buddhism is a reaction, a reformation of Hinduism. The Buddha tried to reform some of the malpractice within Hinduism and he never wanted to create a new religion. In short, according to these scholars, Buddhism is correct Hinduism without any malpractice and evils and what is called Hinduism is the malpractice and distorted form of the Vedas.

Source: http://www.byomakusuma.org/teachings/MadhyamikaBuddhismVisAVisHinduVedanta.aspx

p.s. above source goes on to refute this position - but it occurs to me this is treading in muddy water territory since it's the kind of debate no one is truly equipped to answer. Anyone unenlightened would be arguing from a position of bias, and be worried about the implications of consequent gain or loss of power. An enlightened one would probably find the whole debate silly. I find it hard to side with either the Buddhists or the Hindus on this.

It is also said by Hindus that Shankaracharya, a leading Hindu saint of the 8th century defeated the leading Buddhist scholars of his day {source 1}, {source 2} in debate and converted them to Hinduism by showing them that their position on self wasn't so unique.

Also see, Wikipedia article on Shankara -  this debate incident is often not mentioned on Wikipedia because of its obvious capacity to incite emotions.

Thirdly, Hindu belief is that the various Buddhas are an avatar of Bhagavan Mahavishnu.

My off the cuff comment on all this:

There is no heresy or apostasy in Hinduism, it is the most accommodating of any religion I've known.

Unlike several religions including Islam and Christianity, there was never any effort at the harmonization of Hinduism into one standard religious idea; because the very idea of Hinduism as a distinct religion is a recent Westerner's view of things.

According to the modern Indian constitution (since 1950) all believers in Indian religions such as Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs are clubbed together as Hindus. So that's what it says on the Indian passport unless one is a believer in an imported religion such as Christianity, Judaism or Islam.

Hinduism in the way that appeals to me at least has a breathtakingly grand view of religion as its core definition, according to which all beings share the same spiritual essence since they share the same physical essence. There isn't a special Christian blood group or a Christian planet earth and a Hindu planet earth, so how can there be different truths of the world?

If someone has an idea of God, and godliness is found in all, then aren't all ideas of God manifestations of God?

Note however, the Buddha doesn't go anywhere near such philosophy. He simply wasn't interested, because it wasn't going to lead to the end of suffering. He wasn't interested in absolute ultimate truths that didn't liberate people from everyday suffering. (see Simsappa sutta)

However in this grand view, the essence of religion is that there is no religion. There is no beginning, no founder, no end. The cosmic truth is too vast to be divided along the lines of human thought. The only things that matter are ethical living and peace in the here and now.

"Hinduism is about correct action, not correct belief. Orthopraxy not Orthodoxy."

I like this definition, and it isn't very far at all from Buddhism. However as Buddhism traveled across other cultures, a bit of orthodoxy of the lands did slip in, unused as they were to the idea of orthopraxy.

As long as one believes like the original idea of Hinduism as the all religion, anyone can be a Hindu.

This is easier said than done - religious conflicts have festered in India for a very long time, with Siva temples being destroyed to make way for Vishnu temples, or the other way around; or Buddhist monasteries being razed to make way for Siva temples or the other way round; or temples being razed to make way for mosques and churches and so on, ad infinitum.

It is as if no one wants this memo that all religious identity is unreal, because it all arises from thought.


Does consume eggs and fish oil violate the first precept?

It does not unless the egg is alive. Eggs sold in supermarkets are usually unfertilized. Fish oil is not an animal.


What are the Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma according to Tibetan Buddhism?

Where did they take place according to Tibetan Buddhists?

The Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma according to Tibetan Buddhists are broadly speaking three different categories of teachings the historical Buddha gave as recorded in various Sutras.

The First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma is said to have been given at Deer Park in northern India. Here is an article cited by the FPMT which describes what Tibetan Buddhists believe constitute this first turning:

  The first turning includes those teachings given by the Buddha in the
  earliest historical period of Buddhism in general, and Buddha
  Shakyamuni’s teaching career in particular.  Many of these teachings
  are fundamental to all schools of Buddhism such as the four noble
  truths, the eightfold path, selflessness (anatman), dependent-arising,
  impermanence, the five aggregates, etc. Perhaps the most famous of the
  many discourses (Pali: sutta, Sanskrit: sutra) of the Buddha from the
  first turning is the one that records the Buddha’s very first teaching
  at Deer Park to the first five disciples entitled The Turning of the
  Wheel of the Dhamma Sutta. In actuality, virtually all of the contents
  of the Pali version of the Buddhist canon, that version utilized by
  Theravada Buddhists of Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia today, are
  considered by Tibetans to be teachings from the first turning of the
  wheel.

The Second Turning of the Wheel of Dharma is said to have been given at Vulture Peak Mountain in Rajagriha, India. The Sutras which record this turning are broadly given the title of Perfection of Wisdom Sutras or prajnaparamita the most famous of which are likely the Heart Sutra and the Diamond Cutter Sutra.

The Third Turning of the Wheel of Dharma is said to have been given in numerous locations and generally comprise those Sutras making up what is called the Tathāgatagarbha doctrine.

How do Tibetan Buddhists interpret these Three Turnings?

Is there disagreement within Tibetan Buddhists schools about which teachings are definitive and which are provisional?

Among the various subschools of Tibetan Buddhism there is broad agreement about these Three Turnings. In other words, the subschools generally agree that these are valid and authentic teachings of the Buddha. However, there are some disagreements.

I'm not aware of any disagreements about the First Turning which are widely considered provisional in meaning, but there is some contention about the status of the Second and Third and which Sutras are said to be definitive in meaning and which are provisional.

The Gelug school as founded by Je Tsongkhapa and which forms the root lineage of His Holiness the Dalai Lama believe the Second Turning to be definitive in meaning while the Third is said to be provisional or at least that it needs to be interpreted with the wisdom realizing emptiness. According to the Gelug viewpoint the Third Turning was motivated to dispel the fear that some generated upon hearing the teachings of the Second Turning. That is, some listeners had an incorrect understanding of the Second Turning and developed a nihilistic view and so out of compassion the Buddha gave the Third Turning with a sheen of essentialism to dispel this nihilism which leads to the avici hell.

Tsongkhapa gave his viewpoint in his Essence of True Eloquence.

Here is what His Holiness the Dalai Lama has to say about this:

  "At a time when Tsongkhapa's work ‘Essence of Good Explanation’ on the
  provisional and definitive meaning of the Sutras was translated into
  Hindi at Varanasi, the pandits Tripathi and Upadhyaya were involved. I
  asked Tripathi to consider Je Rinpoche's work in the context of the
  great Indian classics and wondered whether he might be classed among
  the scholars of Nalanda. Tripathi responded that he would not only
  hold his own among them, but would be classed among the most
  excellent."

It is important to understand that the Second and Third Turning teachings predate Tibetan Buddhism. These teachings were recorded and came from India before Buddhism was ever introduced to the land of snow. However, the Second and Third Turnings were not recorded in the Pali Canon and thus properly belong to the Mahayana.

Do Tibetan Buddhists think these Three Turnings are contradictory?

No.

There is very wide agreement that these teachings - when interpreted correctly and with a proper view of which are provisional and which are definitive - do not contradict each other.


I have done the same thing for slower speakers. In my opinion, it's just fine to speed up your listening as long as you grasp the content.


I am confused with my life. In most of the time I fill that, My husband don't love me don't care of myself

The Buddha taught to maintain a good marriage, the husband & wife must speak to each other with loving gentle words and also have the same goals for life. Please read this in the Samajivina Sutta.

The Buddha also taught in the Sigalovada Sutta the duties of a husband & wife, namely:

  A husband:

  (i) being courteous to her, (ii) not despising her, (iii) being faithful to her, (iv) handing over authority to her, (v) providing her
  with adornments.

  The wife:

  (i) she performs her duties well, (ii) she is hospitable to relations and attendants  (iii) she is faithful, (iv) she protects what he
  brings, (v) she is skilled and industrious in discharging her duties.

Using the above teachings of the Buddha as a guide, you should: (i) discuss these with your husband &/or his family; (ii) visit a monk or priest for counselling; or (iii) visiting a professional marriage counselor.

Also, try to find a 'support group'; either Buddhist, religious or secular.


Unfortunately, this is one of the first questions people ask, especially if they are coming from a theistic background. As a result, many who require the belief of a 'God' as a precondition, turn away from Buddhism without even practicing and finding out for oneself. Likewise, many atheists also get turned off when they hear about hells/heavens/rebirth in Buddhism.

To answer your question, if by 'God', you mean a creator/omnipotent/all governing entity, the answer is No.

'God' is a Christian term. At the time of the Buddha, words like 'Mahābrahmā' or 'Brahma' were used to describe such concepts. Brahmajala sutta talks in detail about how this belief was originated.

The concept goes directly against one of the core teachings of Buddhism: "Sabbe Dhamma Anatta" - all phenomena are non-self or devoid of a soul.

Even a Jataka story questions the belief in such a being:

"If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why does he order such misfortune
And not create concord?"

"If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why prevail deceit, lies and ignorance
And he such inequity and injustice create?"

"If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Then an evil master is he, (O Aritta)
Knowing what's right did let wrong prevail!"

Here's a related article: Buddhist attitude towards 'God'

Buddhism teaches that all misbeliefs(beliefs that block the path to Nibbana) are variations of 2 fundamental misbeliefs.

Sassata Vada - Eternalism
Uchcheda Vada - Nihilism

The belief of 'God' falls under the first category.

Even though holding onto such a belief does not prevent one from being born in heavens(given that they do many good deeds), it does block the path to Nibbana(Enlightenment). That's why it is called Maggavarana. Buddhism has very little to offer to such people until they are ready to give up that belief.


Given the psychological nature of sankhara (schemata), you have very understandable and intelligent reasons for having a “pattern of strong aversion” in terms of past experience. In other words, past experience in this lifetime and probably in previous lifetimes has given you substantial reasons to experience strong aversion today. Circumstances and experiences of the past have caused you to adapt to the world with aversion as a strategy for dealing with hardship. There is no blame here, but it is difficult to revise or unlearn strong patterns of adaptation. In Theravadin Buddhism, the classical remedy for modifying aversion is the development of bliss experienced during full samadhi. There are several Buddhist meditations that lead to full samadhi. Indeed, your own Bodhicitta will direct you towards full samadhi. It is important that you do not push yourself to the point where aversion kicks in. You might consider a full retreat in some beautiful countryside meditation center. I wish you well.


If there is no soul, how can there be rebirth?

When most people think of "self" they think of some abstract core that is the subject of all experience and the agent of all actions. Buddha taught (and modern cognitive science tends to agree) that upon careful examination there is no such single core. Instead experiences result from interactions of multiple perceptory functions. Similarly, our actions are performed by a conglomerate of functions, without a single agent responsible for all choices.

When the notion of individual rebirth exists as an unexamined belief, it depends on this unexamined notion of "self" as its necessary foundation. Once practitioner is free from illusion of self (in practice, not just conceptually), the notion of individual birth/death/rebirth no longer applies. From this perspective, rebirth is a byproduct of attachment to a (substantial) self.

But because karma at large still continues to function, the infinitely forking/joining threads of causation that once were the subject of attachment continue to participate in activity and serve as causes for subsequent effects. In this sense, rebirth as principle goes on continuously whether we posit an individual or not.

To give this a more practical spin, instead of worrying about rebirth, we practitioners should focus on working towards deconstruction of self by reducing the strength of the illusion through practice of altruism and non-attachment, first and foremost at the microscopic level of thought-to-thought intention and reaction.


Do Buddhists have sacred scripture to read?

Basically the answer is YES, OF COURSE.

The oldest completely available set of scriptures is the Pali canon, the so called tipiṭaka or "three-basket". It contains the vinaya-piṭaka on the rules of monkish life, the sutta-piṭaka which contains by and large the words of the Buddha as collected by disciples and fixed on a number of councils, and last but not least the abhidhamma-piṭaka, which is hardest to translate or explain in just a word. Maybe "basket of systematics" for a start.

In different schools, vehicles, sects of Buddhism there are also different canons current, some of these schools have perished and so parts or most parts of their canons are lost. As pointed out here, there are basically three different canons: What are the major sects of Buddhism?

But when I read your question, I was not hundred percent sure, whether it also somewhat refers to these scriptures being considered as "holy words". If yes, I guess this would be a matter of discussion and elaboration, but the words of the Buddha (sutta-piṭaka) are if I dare say, at the very least auspicious to be heard and read.


Tryin to project one's self-image into the minds of others is a source of suffering1. So one should look inwardly and constraint oneself with the precepts and also develop the Brahavihara and be benevolent. This protects others also oneself. Beyond this worrying about what others think will create misery as this is not in one's control and one's ego is expanding from the spere of "me" to "dear ones" and "others" (also see link below). The misery will be more closer you are to the person in question.

1 This is highlighted in this example: Vipassana | S.N. Goenka | The Ego - "The teacher and his 5 students"


One of those pictures is shown on this page: Lhabab Duchen – the Day Buddha Descended from Tushita Heavens:

  This article from Bhutan Journals describes the iconography of the Buddha Shakyamuni Descending from Tushita Heavens to the Earth.

A version of this story is told/included in the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā (verse 181):

  On return from the Tavatimsa deva world, the Buddha uttered Verse (181) of this book at Sankassanagara, in reply to Thera Sariputta's words of welcome.

There's a more detailed version of this story somewhere else (I don't know where), for example Wikipedia's Lhabab Duchen article includes details about a "triple ladder" (shown in all the pictures):

  He was exhorted by his follower and representative Maudgalyayana to return, and after a long debate and under a Full Moon agreed to return. He returned to earth a week later by a special triple ladder prepared by Viswakarma, the god of machines. This event is considered to be one of the eight great deeds of the Buddha.


Buddhism about the Big Bang and Science in general

One thing which is important to remember is that the Big Bang theory is a mathematical model that fits in with physical observations and helps with predictions. The model is beneficial in that it's both useful and intuitive. However, there might be many more models, possibly more complex, or simpler, which would do the same job. Saying we know that a Big Bang occurred is thus a shorthand for saying "for our intents and purposes, it's good enough to assume that a Big Bang occurred." However, although it's good enough for cosmological study, it's obviously not good enough for individual predictions, i.e. which code of conduct will lead to the highest form of welfare. For this purpose, empirical science has found its way into the field of psychology, which is, unfortunately, notoriously lacking.

The Buddha's Dhamma includes such a code of conduct, and certain cosmological references, but always in terms of the individual, e.g. what gives birth to our experience of the world, what sorts of possibilities are there to experience, what sort of conduct leads to each, etc.

Though the Buddha recalled past lives from, to quote, "many eons of cosmic expansion and contraction," he didn't present (in the suttas) any clear-cut genesis story. There is one sutta where he talks of how worlds of experience are generated, but never in terms of the origination of "what's out there." Nor did he take a stance on whether things have an inherent existence or not.

You'll find many interpretations of the Buddha's statements about the world. For instance, when he describes an "intergalactic void with a darkness beyond any other," it correlates with black holes. When he speaks of other realms of existence, it correlates with other galaxies, or (considering recent cosmological theories) universes. When he talks of beings who are invisible to the ordinary human eye, it correlates with the theory of dark matter. But it's crucial to note that these are all worthless speculations, which might or might not have anything to do with his intentions. They have nothing to do with the tasks he left us with.

It's useful to note how, even though infinitesimally few people have been on the moon, us lay men and women always want to hear more about the size of the universe. When we think of the solar system, we're awed; the milky way, woah; the observable universe, and now the multiverse theory, we just can't get enough. If and when multiverse becomes a standard belief, we're going to watch out for bigger revelations. All of this to feed out insatiable intellect. Regardless of whether the size and origination of the universe is of any importance to us, we can clearly see why the Buddha, even if he knew about it, would not even spare a taste if it didn't directly support his path of practice, which is said to be the path to end the craving for existence and thus the end of all of our stress and suffering.

Hence, Science and Buddhism are not in competition. We study science for certain purposes. We practice Buddhism for others, such as to set clear boundaries for ourselves so our minds don't get carried away with ideas and sensations. In doing so, he implied we'll be able to find out the truth about many things. But that in itself wasn't the basis for his message - one which he said we urgently needed to hear.


Magga is Pali for "path" or "road", and phala is Pali for "fruit" or "result". Thus it is a compound word that can be understood as the result obtained by proceeding on the path to enlightenment. This is the general use of the term, whenever one refers to the benefits of enlightenment.

It can also be used as a precise technical term by some, but before I get to that I will take a moment to explain something about the path, and its destination.

Many Buddhists believe in a graduated path towards enlightenment. The Theravadan belief describes a very precise (some would even say too precise, but really there are always those who cast doubt on anything in any religion) mapping of these states, where, upon attaining each of these states one is expected to have graduated, and having locked in their attainments, cannot fall back to lower states of being.

The Sutta Pitaka classifies the four levels according to the levels' attainments.  The four Ariya (noble) states are, Sotapanna (stream-enterer), Sakadagami (once-returner), Anagami (non-returner) and Arhat (completely unbound).

  A Stream-enterer is free from:

  Identity view
  Attachment to rites and rituals
  Doubt about the teachings

  A Once-returner has greatly attenuated:

  Sensual desire
  Ill will

  A Non-returner is free from:

  Sensual desire
  Ill will

  An Arahant is free from all of the five lower fetters and the five
  higher fetters, which are:

  Craving for fine material existence
  Craving for existence on the level of formlessness
  Conceit
  Restlessness
  Ignorance

The Visuddhimagga is a commentarial book written by Buddhagosa in Sri Lanka almost a millenium after the Buddha, and is the reference text for many when dealing with intricacies in the stages of the path leading to each of these 4 graduations or path attainments.

Like a package tour covers the key tourist attractions in a foreign land, the Visuddhimagga lists the path in panoramic terms as the 7 stages of purification, and further subdivides them into specific terms as including 16 stages.

One hasn't simply not visited Paris, merely because one hasn't hit a key tourist attraction like the Eiffel tower; and one can visit Paris without using a specific tour operator. Similarly, one can proceed on the path without noticing clearly that one has crossed some of these stages, and one can notice other things not covered in these 16 stages, and one can even remain ignorant of the Visuddhimagga and attain these attainments. So I would say this list is a good way to examine the path, but not the only way.

Following attainment of each of the stages of enlightenment, several final stages of mind arise, of which two significant ones are, Magga and Phala.

  Path Knowledge (magga-ñana)
  It is followed immediately by knowledge that abides in that same Nibbana, which is void of formations since it is
  the cessation of them. This is called "path knowledge."[43] It is also
  called "purification by knowledge and vision."
  Fruition Knowledge (phala-ñana)
  That again is immediately followed by knowledge that belongs to the final stage and continues in the course
  of its predecessor. It abides in that same Nibbana, which is void of
  formations since it is the cessation of them. This is called "fruition
  knowledge."

Source: (Visuddhiñana-katha) by The Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw

For an approachable examination of enlightenment in more detail, please see Mind like Fire, Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

@EyeArrow mentions Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw's "Nature of Nibbana", I've not read it, but it looks interesting, so I'll probably read it soon.


Does speed of body movements affect the calmness of mind?

The ordinary speed of ordinary body movements does not adversely affect the mind. In my experience, the ultra-slow methods of walking meditation do not enhance mindfulness and, in my opinion, hinder mindfulness, because it takes far more unnatural activity of mind to maintain a very slow unnatural walking pace.
The original Buddhist scriptures are silent on the speed of walking meditation, which means walking meditation was most probably done at a natural pace; which is why it is described as "walking back & forth (caṅkama)".
I know from intensive personal practice that natural ordinary body movements are the optimal for mindfulness.
In fact, the what most do not understand is how to practice mindfulness. In higher practise, mindfulness is maintaining the mind is a state of letting go. Therefore, in the state of letting go, body movements are natural rather than contrived and controlling.


Some quick answers, which I may add to later:

Buddhism is certainly not a religion because it states all of its teachings are to be known & verified by its wise followers. It is certainly a way of life, which leads away from suffering to peace. Buddha defined it as the 'holy way of life'.
Buddha is the most special individual human being because history shows he was the first to fully & truly diagnose what suffering really is and, more importantly, the methods to overcome suffering. Although today there are many religions & disciplines incorporating direct or indirect principles of the Buddha to overcome suffering, the Buddha was the 1st to fully diagnose suffering & its solution.
The Buddha actually does have all of the answers to all important questions. The teachings of the Buddha cover all facets of life, including money, work, relationships, human behaviour, meditation & spiritual wisdom that overcomes suffering. However, as the saying goes: "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear". To test the Buddha, we can ask questions about different things and a well-educated Buddhist can offer answers from the Buddha. By asking questions, we can learn how wise the Buddha was.
Buddhism is not the same as Christianity because Buddhism holds everything is just natural elements (dhatu) where as Christianity believes in God. However, Christianity does share some principles with Buddhism about charity, morality, love, non-violence & some aspects of mental development. But Christianity does not explicitly teach the higher wisdom of Buddhism, such as the four noble truths, three-characteristics, not-self (anatta), emptiness (sunnata), the elements (dhatu), etc.
Buddhism is very straightforward, extremely thorough in its analysis and the language used is literal. Where as Christianity can often be very vague and the language used is often metaphorical. Jesus himself said he taught in parables to hide his teachings from certain people.
Ying & yang is not really related to Buddhism because ying & yang is a principle that explains the creation of natural things where as Buddhism is about ending suffering (rather than natural creation). However, some ying & yang principles are found in Buddhism, such as in its description of male & female faculties & it is description of the vicissitudes of life. While the psychology of Buddhism certainly explains ying & yang principles pertaining to the cyclical relationship between pleasure, craving & suffering, the goal of Buddhism is to transcend or be beyond ying & yang (rather than to embrace or celebrate ying & yang).
Similar to ying & yang, the 12 laws of the universe are mostly about creationism & therefore not related to the liberative purpose of Buddhism (although Buddhism would agree with some of them but not all). For example, since Buddhism transcends 'self', the idea of 'we reap what we sow' is not central to Buddhism, although it does exist in Buddhism. This idea is only morality for worldly people that believe they are a 'self' & believe 'they personally' reap & sow.
As for being an "artist of our times", most of the world still must advance towards the spiritual evolution of the Buddha. Buddhism states the way/path of the Buddha is "timeless" (akaliko). As long as beings or minds exist that can experience suffering, the way/path of the Buddha will properly address such suffering.
Finally, about 'schools of Buddhism', this depends on your disposition. i.e., the Law of Attraction. The Buddha taught individuals of different dispositions are attracted to different teachers with different emphasis. The general distinctions between Buddhism schools are:

(1) Helping oneself versus helping others.

(2) Individual self-reliant practice versus teacher lead

(3) One present life focus versus reincarnation/rebirth focus.


It’s called a “kundalini awakening” in yoga, and “tummo” in Tibetan Buddhism. Seek out a qualified teacher who can guide you through this, as it is both a beautiful and a possibly dangerous event. You can get lost in it and suffer various emotional or motivational problems, but properly harnessed it can launch you into major spiritual advancements. The key is to understand what is happening to you and how you work with it. But be careful, as many yoga teachers are ill-prepared to help with something so profound, as ‘modern’ yoga practices are often focused more on external body forms, rather than on energy movements in the subtle energy body.
Congratulations, and good luck.


I want to pray and meditate like a Buddhist, but I do not know how because I am Arab and I have not found sources in Arabic so can you guide me

I found this PDF copy of the Dhammapada in Arabic online. I don't read Arabic, so I cannot guarantee the authenticity of this copy.
The Metta Sutta (خطبة البودا عن المحبه) in Arabic translated by Ven. Dhammarakkhita and hosted on SuttaCentral.
You can read AccessToInsight.org in Arabic through Google Translate. This contains a large collection of the Pali Canon. For e.g. the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta in Arabic translated using Google Translate. This is the discourse where the Buddha declared his teachings just after his enlightenment, and set the wheel of the Dhamma in motion.
I have found and used Google Translate to translate some important prayers/ chants/ statements here.
This is the undertaking of the five precepts (قواعد التدريب الخمسة):

أتعهد بمبدأ الامتناع عن تدمير الكائنات الحية.
أتعهد بالامتناع عن أخذ ما لم يؤخذ.
أتعهد بمبدأ الامتناع عن سوء السلوك الجنسي.
أتعهد بالامتناع عن الكلام غير الصحيح.
أتعهد بالامتناع عن المسكرات والمخدرات التي تؤدي إلى الإهمال.

For meditation, I'm again putting through Google Translate, the pages from Ven. Yuttadhammo's e-book How to Meditate:

Chapter One: What Is Meditation (الفصل الأول: ما هو التأمل)
Chapter Two: Sitting Meditation (الفصل الثاني: جلوس التأمل)
Chapter Three: Walking Meditation (الفصل الثالث: المشي التأمل)
Chapter Four: Fundamentals (الفصل الرابع: الأساسيات)
Chapter Five: Mindful Prostration (الفصل الخامس: السجود اليقظ)
Chapter Six: Daily Life (الفصل السادس: الحياة اليومية)
Appendix: Illustrations (الملحق: الرسوم التوضيحية)