What is it like to experience enlightenment?

The answer does somewhat depend on which tradition you follow, and what you mean by "enlightenment". For example, in Theravada Buddhism it could refer to either someone who has let go of everything (āsavakkhaya), or someone who has come to understand everything (sabbaññū). And in Mahayana, from what I've heard, a bodhisatta who is reborn again and again is considered to be enlightened (according to the Theravada, this would require attachment, a sign of lack of enlightenment).

That being said, here are some quotes and thoughts about what enlightenment is like (from a Theravada perspective):

The Buddha

First, we have the Buddha's enlightenment. Given the profundity of his wisdom, compassion, and purity, it has a bit of a different flavour from that of an "ordinary" arahant:

  At that time the blessed Buddha dwelt at Uruvelâ, on the bank of the river Nerañgarâ at the foot of the Bodhi tree (tree of wisdom), just after he had become Sambuddha. And the blessed Buddha sat cross-legged at the foot of the Bodhi tree uninterruptedly during seven days, enjoying the bliss of emancipation.

  ...

  Knowing this the Blessed One then on that occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'When the real nature of things becomes clear to the ardent, meditating Brâhmana, then all his doubts fade away, since he realises what is that nature and what its cause.'

  ...

  Knowing this the Blessed One then on that occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'When the real nature of things becomes clear to the ardent, meditating Brâhmana, then all his doubts fade away, since he has understood the cessation of causation.'

  ...

  Knowing this the Blessed One then on that occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'When the real nature of things becomes clear to the ardent, meditating Brâhmana, he stands, dispelling the hosts of Mâra, like the sun that illuminates the sky.'

  -- Mv 1 (Rhys-Davids, trans)

(These utterances are also found in the Udana.)

The Buddha's enlightenment changed him in several ways:

He gained unobstructed knowledge, meaning he could call forth the correct answer to any question he posed.

  “Bhikkhus, in this world with its devas, Māra, and Brahmā, among this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its devas and humans, whatever is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, reached, sought after, examined by the mind—that I know.

  -- AN 4.24 (Bodhi, trans)

His enlightenment removed not only all mental defilements (as would be the case with any arahant), but it also removed any vāsanā - idiosyncracies - from his character. While ordinary arahants retain many of their idiocsyncracies gained from their parents, past lives, etc., a Buddha acts and speaks like a Buddha. (I don't have a reference off-hand; it's generally known in Theravada Buddhism, but I can find a source, if required)
His knowledge led him to disinclination to teach:

  And then the following . . . . stanzas, unheard before, occurred to the Blessed One: 'With great pains have I acquired it. Enough! why should I now proclaim it? This doctrine will not be easy to understand to beings that are lost in lust and hatred.

  'Given to lust, surrounded with thick darkness, they will not see what is repugnant (to their minds), abstruse, profound, difficult to perceive, and subtle.'

  -- Mv 1 (Rhys-Davids, trans)

That being said, his deeply ingrained compassion led him to accept the invitation to teach and work tirelessly for 45 years without concern for his own well-being; some arahants might refuse the invitation to teach, disinclined to bother themselves.

  Then the Blessed One, when he had heard Brahmâ's solicitation, looked, full of compassion towards sentient beings, over the world, with his (all-perceiving) eye of a Buddha. And the Blessed One, looking over the world with his eye of a Buddha, saw beings whose mental eyes were darkened by scarcely any dust, and beings whose eyes were covered by much dust, beings sharp of sense and blunt of sense, of good disposition and of bad disposition, easy to instruct and difficult to instruct, some of them seeing the dangers of future life and of sin.

  -- Ibid

The Pacceka-Buddha

Next, we have the enlightenment of a private (pacceka) Buddha. Private Buddhas are interesting and a bit of a mystery, I think. On the one hand, they have the ability to attain freedom from suffering themselves, but on the other hand, they lack the ability to teach what they have themselves learned. They could be likened to a street fighter who learned how to fight without instruction and so is unable to teach others how to fight beyond telling them to go figure it out on their own.

Private Buddhas are perfectly at peace with themselves, but solitary and unattached. They tend to retreat at the first sign of conflict and shy away from teaching or becoming religious leaders. Having neither the wisdom to see the potential in others nor the Buddha's compassion leading them to accept invitations to teach, they tend to offer simple lessons and live content in their own freedom. One of the great lessons we have from the private Buddhas is found in the Sutta Nipata, the Khaggavisana Sutta:

  If one acquires a clever companion, an associate righteous and wise, let him, overcoming all dangers, wander about with him glad and, thoughtful.

  If one does not acquire a clever companion, an associate righteous and wise, then as a king abandoning (his) conquered kingdom, let him wander alone like a rhinoceros.

  -- Sn 44-45 (Fausboll, trans)

There's an interesting story of a Pacceka-Buddha in the DhpA, where he befriends a dog and actually appears to play a game with the dog, testing its intelligence and loyalty:

  The dog ran before him, barking constantly. From time to time the Private Buddha tested the dog by taking the wrong path; but every time he did so the dog, by standing across the path and barking, intimated to him to take the other path.

  One day the Private Buddha took the wrong path, and when the dog tried to stop him, without turning back, he pushed away the dog with his foot and went on. The dog, perceiving that he did not intend to turn back, took the hem of his undergarment in his teeth and dragged him along until he brought him to the right path. Such was the strength of the affection of the dog for the Private Buddha.

  -- DhpA 16 (Burlingame, trans)

Private Buddha's do teach from time to time, and possess great wisdom in their own right. They also are represented as possessing compassion in their support for the spiritual development of others. One memorable story is in relation to the being who later became Anuruddha:

  Now one day a Private Buddha named Upariṭṭha arose from a Trance of Cessation in Gandhamādana, and considered within himself, “To whom shall I show favor to-day?” Straightway the thought came to him, “To-day I ought to show my favor to Annabhāra.” And perceiving within himself, “At this moment Annabhara is on the point of returning home from the forest with his grass,” he took bowl and robe, and proceeding by supernatural power, appeared before Annabhara. Annabhara, seeing that the bowl in his hand was empty, asked him, “Reverend Sir, have you received no food?” The Private Buddha replied, “It is my expectation to receive food, man of great merit.” “Well then, Reverend Sir, wait a moment,” said Annabhara.

  -- DhpA 266 (Burlingame, trans)

Annabhara gives him his meal, then is asked to "sell" the merit of his good deed to a rich man. Not sure what that would mean, he asks the Pacceka Buddha:

  So he went quickly to the Private Buddha and asked him, “Reverend Sir, the Treasurer Sumana has offered me a thousand pieces of money, asking me to make over to him the merit I acquired by giving you a portion of alms. What shall I do?”

  The Private Buddha answered by a simile: “Wise man, it is as if in a village consisting of a hundred families, a man were to light a lamp in a single house and the rest of the villagers were to moisten their wicks with their own oil, light their lamps, and take them away with them. [123] Is that light the light of the first lamp or not?” “Reverend Sir, in that case the light of the first lamp has multiplied itself.” “Wise man, precisely so is it with the alms you gave. Whether it be a ladleful of broth, or a spoonful of boiled rice, when a man makes over to others the merit of a portion of alms which he has given, the merit thereof increases according to the number of persons to whom he gives. To be sure, you have given but a single portion of alms. But in making over the merit thereof to the treasurer, that one portion of alms has become two, of which one belongs to you and the other to him.”

  -- Ibid

Note that these are just stories, but they do offer some insight into the nature of a Pacceka Buddha according to tradition. I always think of Lao Tzu as fitting the role of a self-enlightened being who couldn't fully teach his enlightenment to others.

The Arahant

The arahant is the quintessential enlightened being in Theravada Buddhism; even the Buddha is described as being an arahant. Mahasi Sayadaw gives a good description of what an arahant is like in his discourse on Dependent Origination:

  Arahants have no illusions about the nature of sense-objects. They are aware of their unsatisfactoriness, which means they fully realise the truth of suffering because they are free from delusion. So they have no craving for anything. Inevitably, they have to fulfill the biological needs of the body such as eating, sleeping, etc., but they regard this as conditioned suffering and find nothing agreeable. The question arises whether they should long for a speedy death to end such suffering. Nevertheless, the desire for early death or dissolution of the physical body is aversion, which the arahant has also removed. In the Theragatha, the Elder’s Verses, an arahant says that he neither wishes to die nor to live. The arahant does not wish to live a long life, for life means a burden of suffering inherent in the aggregates. Although the aggregates need constant care and attention, they are not reliable in the least. To many middle-aged or old people, life offers little more than frustration, disappointment, and bitterness. Living conditions deteriorate, physical health declines and only disability and death await them. Yet, because of ignorance and attachment, many people take delight in existence. However, the arahants are disillusioned, so they find life unattractive.

  Yet the arahants don’t desire death either, since they have conquered ill-will. They equanimously anticipate their parinibbana, an expectation that is analogous to a worker’s expectation of wages. A worker does not like to face hardships and privations to make a living, but does not want to be unemployed either. A worker wants only money and expects payment. Likewise, the arahants await death, so when they think of their lifespan, they wonder how long they must bear the burden of the body. Because of their total disillusionment, their life-stream ceases completely after parinibbana, so it is called cessation without any remainder (anupadisesanibbana).

I don't think there is much to add to this description. The Visuddhimagga goes into great detail about what it means to be enlightened in the final chapter, like what fetters are destroyed at what stage, etc. The Thera and Theri gathas have verses from enlightened beings that offer a sense of their state of mind.

The Sekkha

Besides an arahant, it is proper to describe the other three types of ariya puggala as "enlightened", or at least "partially enlightened". They have all experienced nibbana for themselves, and it has changed them all profoundly. They are considered to have *become family" (gotrabhu) and will never return to the state of an ordinary being. They still have remenants of unwholesome behaviour - a sotapanna might still cry (e.g. Visakha when her granddaughter died), an anagami might still become distracted, etc. They all have unshakeable faith in the triple gem and no doubt or wrong views about the Buddhadhamma. More about the specific defilements discarded at each level can  be found in the last chapter of the Visuddhimagga.

The Bodhisatta

As mentioned, in Mayahana Buddhism, I understand that there are certain beings called Bodhisattvas who are considered enlightened but stay in samsara to help others. Some believe Buddhas do the same, I think. I don't have anything to say about such teachings, except that such beings would not be considered enlightened in Theravada Buddhism.

Either way, it is worth talking about the Bodhisatta, a being who has made the determination to become a Buddha but hasn't yet attained Buddhahood, since this is a part of the process of change called enlightenment.

A Bodhisatta is a being who could become an enlightened arahant but does not:

  While thus I lay upon the ground,
  Arose within me many thoughts:
  "To-day, if such were my desire,
  I my corruptions might consume.

  "But why thus in an unknown guise
  Should I the Doctrine's fruit secure?
  Omniscience first will I achieve,
  And be a Buddha in the world.

  "Or why should I, a valorous man,
  The ocean seek to cross alone?
  Omniscience first will I achieve,
  And men and gods convey across.

  "Since now I make this earnest wish,
  In presence of this Best of Men,
  Omniscience sometime I'll achieve,
  And multitudes convey across.

  "I'll rebirth's circling stream arrest,
  Destroy existence's three modes;
  I'll climb the sides of Doctrine's ship,
  And men and gods convey across.

  -- Jat-A 46-69 (from Buddhism In Translation, Warren, trans.)

The reason it is worth mentioning is that a change overcomes one who makes this vow in front of a Buddha; they become a niyata bodhisatta - one who is certainly destined for Buddhahood. As the Jataka stories show, they have many qualities that at times seem to surpass those of even arahants. They still, however, have not overcome all greed, anger or delusion, nor have they experienced nibbana or come to understand the four noble truths for themselves.

Nibbāna

Finally a few words on the actual experience of nibbāna, since that is what is considered to be the experience of enlightenment. The Milinda-Panha has some things to say on the experience, comparing nibbana to a lotus, water, medicine, an ocean, etc. Some of these similes contain descriptions of the experience, e.g.:

  “Like water, it cools the
  fever of defilements and
  quenches the thirst of craving.

  “Like medicine, it protects beings who are poisoned
  by the defilements, cures the disease of suffering, and nour-
  ishes like nectar.

  “Like food, which sustains life,
  nibbàna
   drives away
  old age and death; it increases the spiritual strength of
  beings; it gives the beauty of
  virtue, it removes the distress
  of the defilements, it relieves
  the exhaustion of all suffering.

  “Like a wish-fulfilling gem, it
  fulfils all desires, causes
  delight and is lustrous.

  -- The Debate of King Milinda (Pesala, trans)

Nagasena also says:

  “How is nibbàna to be shown? By freedom from distress and danger, by purity and by coolness. As a man, afraid and terrified at having fallen among enemies, would be relieved and blissful when he had escaped to a safe place; or as one fallen into a pit of filth would be at ease and glad when he had got out of the pit and cleaned up; or as one trapped in a forest fire would be calm and cool when he had reached a safe spot.

  -- Ibid

Conclusion

If you were looking for a short answer, apologies :) Unfortunately, the experience of enlightenment is paccata (private), and not to be understood by ordinary beings. So in a sense, your question is only answerable by your own experience. Enlightenment is like the breaking of a dam; it can not be undone, and it signifies a profound and categorical change of one's entire being. It is called "becoming family" (gotrabhu) in the sense of one being categorically different from an ordinary individual. In that sense, it is not gradual or graded, it is distinct and complete.

The realization of enlightenment is best described as the attainment of the four noble truths. In brief, this means practicing until the moment where one realizes that the five aggregates are impermanent (unstable), suffering (unsatisfying or stressful), and non-self (empty and uncontrollable). The next moment one enters into nibbana, a complete cessation of arisen phenomena that is perfect and unadulterated peace. Subsequent to this, one dwells with clear knowledge of the nature of true peace and a freedom from attachment to suffering. It is the most profound change that could possibly occur for a sentient being, and it is considered to be the final goal of existence.


I guess the reason why you were feeling hopeless is that you were anxious about the past, a memory ... but the past isn't something you can conveniently change.

You were also anxious about the future ... "I don't think a girl who know about my past will accept my love" ... but the future too is something you can't easily change ... it's beyond your control at the moment (for example because it isn't happening yet) and because you can't control it it's easy to feel hopeless (or helpless) about it.

Instead of being "distracted from life" by anxiety about the past and future, maybe the one thing you can affect more easily, one thing you can reach, is the present. You're aware of what you're doing now, how you're thinking now ... maybe you can use Buddhist practices to relieve your suffering now, your present suffering ... maybe in fact that's something you can hope for, i.e. you can hope that Buddhism can help you.

Another reason why you might be feeling helpless is because "I tried to have loving life" -- a lot of people in society want that, but it maybe "hopeless" to depend on someone else loving you (again, because you can't control that).

FYI this answer has some advice on how to choose a marriage partner.

Also, is it true to say that "hope" isn't a big factor in Buddhism? There are things that are like hope, e.g. faith and confidence.

Hope is maybe similar to ignorance, e.g. you 'hope' that something is true when you don't 'know' that something is true. Maybe it's better to concentrate on what's knowable, on what makes sense, rather than trying to hope for what's unknown (and the future is maybe not just unknown but unknowable).

I found (only) a couple of essays by Thanissaro Bhikkhu about "hope". One is All About Change ... which says that it may be stressful to have "hope" in things that are impermanent. It then goes on to describe a search for "the Deathless" via concentration. You said "I born as layman" so, I don't know, maybe you're saying you're not interested in that ... but maybe the essay is worth reading anyway, because it's lucid and includes a question from the Buddha that's worth considering:

  "What, when I do it, will lead to my long-term well-being and happiness?"

Another short essay was a Dhamma talk about The Sublime Attitudes. It includes this quote:

  Notice that the teaching on equanimity is a reflection on the principle of karma. Of the four chants we have for the sublime attitudes, it's the only one that's simply a statement of fact. The others say:

    "May all beings be happy.
    May they be free from stress and pain.
    May they not be deprived of the good fortune they're experiencing."

  The first three are wishes, attitudes, things you would like to see happen. "May... May... May..." The fourth one is simply a reflection on the way things are.

    "All living beings are the owners of their actions, heir to their actions...
    Whatever they do, for good or for evil, to that will they fall heir."

  This reflection actually turns up in lots of different contexts. In the five reflections, the reflection on karma is the one that gives hope. You realize that you're in charge of your actions. You're not simply a victim of fate or of the stars or of some other being acting through you. You're the one who's making the choices. That's what gives you hope.

I guess the difference is that you can be hopeful about what you do (instead of trying to depend on someone else).


is there a right or respectful way of praying in Buddhism?

Praying is conventionally understood as a petition or wish addressed to a deity.

In Buddhism, one might:

  meditate spreading a heart full of love to one direction, and to the second, and to the third, and to the fourth. In the same way above, below, across, everywhere, all around, spread a heart full of love to the whole world—abundant, expansive, limitless, free of enmity and ill will. --SN46.54

These two are similar except in one important way. Praying often involves intention and volition. In other words one quite often prays for a fixed result (e.g., rain, health, etc.). Notice that in the described mettā meditation, there is simply an extension of good will without boundaries, intention or direction. From a Buddhist perspective, intention and volition tend to perpetuate the cycle of suffering from craving particular outcomes.

This wisdom about intention and volition is also evident in religions with formal prayer. For example, there is the well-known phrase: "be careful what you pray for."

In Buddhism, one cultivates Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech and Right Action in the context of your question. Interestingly, asking about Right View is itself Right View!


"The knowledge and vision to see things clearly" (yathābhūtañāṇadassanaṃ)

1) Yes. When the Buddha spoke about vipassana, he meant it as being the direct insight into reality.

What is being taught as vipassana (depending on how it is taught) is supposed to be the training which will lead us to vipassana.

As far as the Buddha-Dhamma is concerned. Meditation training means: Abandoning, letting go, of craving and clinging. Which will lead us to vipassana "clear seeing".

The whole path of the Buddha-Dhamma can be summarized with this short sentence;

"Nothing whatsoever should be clung to".

Or as Ajahn Buddhadasa would express it: "Nothing whatsoever should be clung to as being I or mine".

The amount of training (sitting meditation) that must be done, will depend on the mental faculties, moral purity, weakening of mental defilements, equanimity, understanding, wisdom etc.

Abandoning or letting go of craving and clinging should be practiced day and night, until complete cessation of craving and clinging.


Looking for a complete list of how the 37 factors are balanced

This PDF could be a useful resource, specifically the following passages:

  faith and wisdom are to be balanced
  so as to avoid blind belief and mere intellectual cleverness;
  effort and concentration are to be balanced
  to avoid mental restlessness and sluggishness.

  Mindfulness is the key factor that keeps all the other
  factors in balance and harmony

and

  The three factors of investigation (dhamma,vicaya), effort (viriya) and zest (piti) counteract torpor.

  The three factors of tranquillity (passaddhi), concentration (samādhi) and equanimity (upekkhā)
  counteract mental agitation.

  Mindfulness (sati) keeps the two sets of factors in a harmonious balance.

Other than these areas I could find no references to balancing the 37 factors. Hopefully this is what you are looking for...


Can Right View be interpreted as scientific fervor?

Sounds like Wikipedia is suffering from some Buddhist fervour of its own... ;)
Can I interpret the first of the eightfold path as scientific fervor ?
Right view has nothing to do with fervour; it refers to one's outlook or point of "view". The word "diṭṭhi" literally means "way of seeing". As the commentary explains it:

sammādassanalakkhaṇā sammādiṭṭhi
The characteristic of seeing properly is right view.
(DN-a 6.5)

In Theravada Buddhism, right view is of five kinds:

1. Right View Regarding Karma (kammassakatāsammādiṭṭhi)

“And what is accomplishment in view? Here, someone holds right view and has a correct perspective thus: ‘There is what is given, sacrificed, and offered; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings spontaneously reborn; there are in the world ascetics and brahmins of right conduct and right practice who, having realized this world and the other world for themselves by direct knowledge, make them known to others.’ This is called accomplishment in view."
AN 3.117 (Bodhi, trans)

The Buddha calls this type of right view "affected by the taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions" (MN 117)

2. Right View Regarding Insight (vipassanāsammādiṭṭhi)

And how does right view come first? One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view: this is one’s right view.
MN 117 (Bodhi, trans)

The commentary explains that this is the understanding one gains along the path of the three characteristics (impermanence, suffering, non-self).

3. Right View of the Path (maggasammādiṭṭhi)

“And what, bhikkhus, is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path? The wisdom, the faculty of wisdom, the power of wisdom, the investigation-of-states enlightenment factor, the path factor of right view in one whose mind is noble, whose mind is taintless, who possesses the noble path and is developing the noble path: this is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path.
MN 117 (Bodhi, trans)

4. Right View of Fruition (phalasammādiṭṭhi)
The right view of fruition is the same as the right view of the path.

5. Right View of Reflection (paccavekkhaṇāsammādiṭṭhi)

“When I knew and saw thus, my mind was liberated from the taint of sensual desire, from the taint of being, and from the taint of ignorance. When it was liberated, there came the knowledge: ‘It is liberated.’ I directly knew: ‘Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being.’
MN 4 (Bodhi, trans)

This refers to the knowledge that comes after attainment of enlightenment upon reflection of the path and fruition.

Further, Ven. Sariputta equates right view with knowledge of the four noble truths:

“And what, friends, is right view? Knowledge of suffering, knowledge of the origin of suffering, knowledge of the cessation of suffering, and knowledge of the way leading to the cessation of suffering—this is called right view."
MN 141 (Bodhi, trans)

Since there is no scientific evidence to rebirth, would believing in it make my belief dogmatic or narrow minded maybe?
However you come to the understanding that rebirth is a fact of life, that understanding is considered right view, insofar as it is in line with the truth. If you believe that at death the mind ceases, or that at death the same mind that existed before death continues on, both of these are wrong view.
As according to the quotes above, right view can be "affected by taints" if it is simply belief that happens to accord with reality, or it can be "noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path" if it is acquired through observation and understanding.
Rebirth really isn't a big mystery; it is simply the fact of existence that is perfectly open to reasonable scientific investigation that everything in the universe arises and ceases, and that certain arisen phenomena spawn further arisen phenomena in an unbroken causal chain. That this ceases at death is wrong view (ucchedaditthi); that this constitutes a lasting, continuous entity is also wrong view (sassataditthi).


State of mind corrected by anti anxiety or anti depressants

Here are some thoughts on the topic, and i want to be clear that i'm not looking to argue for either of the alternatives of medication/no medication. Also, any question regarding the effects of medicine and the proper ordination has to be consulted with the doctor prescribing the medicine first hand.

If by karma you mean sila/moral consequences of medication, i don't believe a buddhist perspective differs from a layperson perspective on moral. Generally speaking, drugs that affect our actions in a way that risk being harmful to ourselves or others are illegal, and are not prescribed by doctors (I realize this is debatable).

On the other hand, if you're wondering about any form of consequence from a buddhist perspective one could argue that the use of medication is a form of tanha - desire for pleasant feelings, alternatively a desire for eliminating negative feelings - and as such can be a hindrance to develop a buddhist understanding of dependent origination, anatta or anicca, for instance.

However, one may argue that medication really doesn't do any difference to the fact that vedanas/skandhas are continually transforming independent of the choice of medication or no medication. One may very well be able to develop mindfulness and concentration in the buddhist sense either way, provided that the medication (and eventual side effects) doesn't affect your concentration or perception.

The aspects mentioned above regards medication, and could also be weighted against the option to live with unmedicated anxiety or depression, and deal with these things according to the buddhist noble eightfold path. I would argue that this is a matter of severity of symptoms, or the intensity of emotions, and that a buddhist approach to life is easier done in cases of lighter forms of negative emotions or mental illness. Also, the karmic effects of actions based on more severe emotional states of anxiety, depression or illness may very well be more concerning compared to how one goes about ones life with a prescribed and carefully planned medication.


The word Sati (Smrti in Sanskrit) literally means remembrance or recollection, but as with many Buddhist technical terms has a more specialized meaning in a meditative context. In the context of meditation the word Sati has a more general meaning to set the mind on the object of meditation. For example, the meditation in which one contemplates the attributes of the Buddha is called Buddhanusati.

However quite often when people say Sati, they mean a specific kind of Sati. That is to say, Samma-Sati, or right mindfulness, which is the seventh factor of the Noble Eightfold Path. The Suttas define Samma-Sati as follows:

  And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains
  focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful —
  putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains
  focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself...
  mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful —
  putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is
  called right mindfulness.

(http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.141.than.html)

So with right mindfulness one is specifically directing the mind to the body, feeling, mind, and mental qualities. The word which the translator translates as Alert is the term Sampajanna, which others often translate as "fully aware" and quite often when people say mindfulness, they are actually thinking of Sampajanna although they aren't totally distinct, as you need Sampajanna to have Samma-Sati.


Erik,

If the are Sanghas (of the Buddha's monks - a mixed or lay community shouldn't be called a "Sangha") or possible one or another monk alone, it's good to visit them, observe them, and to ask them -- if it's the case that you can trace a good amount of independence between the monk[s] and the "students" (e.g. the monks don't live from students, and instead go for alms independently). If such a person is traced, one might ask questions on any matter of doubt, having found trust, to possibly gain right view. If having gained right view after listening the true Dhamma, there is no more much to worry and the path will develop step by step.

If not finding such, take, if given by a Monk personally (!), the Tipitaka. Usual ways, although common, seldom or never bear any fruits, and it's far better to simply avoid the many teachers who teach for a trade (i.e. for reward). Even if they knew what water was, you would only get an empty bottle: to be sure you would have to return to them!

Maybe this is your personal guide heading toward independence: Into the Stream

And for the case that Erik has already found firm faith, it is because of doing it to an end that the Buddha has found this religion, Sangha, open to make use of it and such might then be not so much a matter of "west Sweden".

[Note: This is not given for any trade, exchange, stacks or what ever ordinary gains within the world.]


What is the Sutra where The Buddha says that he has taught only a fraction of what he knew

That sutta (or, at least, one of those suttas) is sometimes summarized as "a handful of leaves".

Simsapa Sutta: The Simsapa Leaves

  "In the same way, monks, those things that I have known with direct knowledge but have not taught are far more numerous [than what I have taught]. And why haven't I taught them? Because they are not connected with the goal, etc.


According to buddhism, do demons exists?

According to Buddhism Demons exist. The Four Great Kings in the Cāturmahārājika Heaven keep watch over us of harm from these demons. There are a handful of (few) good demons too who have seen the Dhamma.)  These four Devas are Virūpākṣa (he who sees all), Dhṛtarāṣṭra (he who upholds the realm), Virūḍhaka (he who causes to grow), and Vaiśravaṇa (Kubera) (he who hears everything).  All four Devas serve Śakra, the lord of the devas. All demons have spontaneous birth (opapatika) like the Davas and the Petas (Hungry Ghosts). You may know by now that there are four kinds of birth - namely, egg-born (andaja), womb-born (julabuja), moisture-born (samsedaja), and spontaneous birth (opapatika).

There are four lower planes of existance = Niraya = devoid of happiness. There are four kinds of niraya - namely, woeful state (apaya / hell), the animal kingdom, the plane of Petas (hungry ghosts) and the plane of Asura-demons (Titans). None of these states is eternal. According to their unwholesome / unskillful kamma beings may be born in such woeful states. Departing from those states, they may be born in blissful states according to their past good kamma. In the sense-sphere (kamaloka) the human plane and the six celestial planes are regarded as blissful states. They too are not eternal.

Devil is referred to as MARA, in the scriptures. Mara means killer. He is the personification of the force that kills virtue and also kills existence. His armies are poised to attack all persons; they even tried to overcome the Buddha on the night of his enlightenment. But Mara is a post that is been held by a person.  If you are attached to the six senses, you are in the Mara (Devil)s grasp (a firm hold or grip). He is a tempter, distracting humans from practicing the spiritual life by making mundane things alluring, or the negative seem positive.

At the time of Kakusandha Buddha – our Gautama Supreme Buddha’s chief disciple, Ven. Maha Moggallana was the Mara, chief of demons, lord of the lower worlds.  Kakusandha is the fourth of the Seven Buddhas of the last 91 Kalpa (Aeons), and the first of the five Buddhas of the present kalpa. The present day Mara is his sister’s son (nephew). When someone talks about “God’s grace” and “God’s mercy”,  it can more likely be that the blessings are of Mara and his hosts. This is possible. As the great jealous one, Mara has the power to bestow blessings on his hosts and subjects.

Getting back to the subject of Demons, here is a question & answer session that once took place between a King (Milinda) and an Arahant ( Ven. Nâgasena):

  'Venerable Nâgasena, are there such things as demons (Yakkhâ) in the world?'
  'Yes, O king.'
  'Do they ever leave that condition' (fall out of that phase of existence)?
  'Yes, they do.'
  'But, if so, why is it that the remains of those dead demons are never found, nor any odour of their corpses smelt? '
  Their remains are found, O king, and an odour does arise from their dead bodies. The remains of bad demons can be seen in the form of worms and beetles and ants and moths and snakes and scorpions and centipedes, and birds and wild beasts.'


How much does the Bodhisattva way influence Theravadan practices?

Compassion and the Bodhisatta path are two different things; compassion is a quality of mind, the Bodhisatta path is a determination.  The latter is based, one could say, on a high level of compassion, but it is not equivalent to compassion. It is the determination to not enter into freedom from suffering until one is able to (in Theravada Buddhism) become a fully-enlightened Buddha, one who can teach others without having been taught oneself. From the Jataka Commentary:

  62.   Then loosened I my matted hair,
  And, spreading out upon the mud
  My dress of bark and cloak of skin,
  I laid me down upon my face.

  63.   "Let now on me The Buddha tread,
  With the disciples of his train;
  Can I but keep him from the mire,
  To me great merit shall accrue."

  64.   While thus I lay upon the ground,
  Arose within me many thoughts:
  "To-day, if such were my desire,
  I my corruptions might consume.

  65.   "But why thus in an unknown guise
  Should I the Doctrine's fruit secure?
  Omniscience first will I achieve,
  And be a Buddha in the world.

  66.   "Or why should I, a valorous man,
  The ocean seek to cross alone?
  Omniscience first will I achieve,
  And men and gods convey across.

  67.   "Since now I make this earnest wish,
  In presence of this Best of Men,
  Omniscience sometime I'll achieve,
  And multitudes convey across.

  68.   "I'll rebirth's circling stream arrest,
  Destroy existence's three modes;
  I'll climb the sides of Doctrine's ship,
  And men and gods convey across.

  http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/bits/bits001.htm

Compassion, on the other hand, is just a mind state that can be cultivated by anyone; we say a Buddha has great compassion because of his sacrifice, but anyone can cultivate it as a meditation practice. See Wikipedia on Karuṇā.

The reason why karuṇā is considered a side practice is because it cannot itself lead to enlightenment, taking as it does concepts (living beings) as its object.

  Now, zeal consisting in desire to act is the beginning of all these things. Suppression of the hindrances, etc., is the middle. Absorption is the end. Their object is a single living being or many living beings, as a mental object consisting in a concept.

  Path of Purification, IX.102

So the best it can lead to directly is worldly absorption (lokiya samatha jhana).

Since the goal of Theravada Buddhism is enlightenment here and now, meditation based on concepts takes a back seat role to meditation on the five aggregates, four foundations of mindfulness, etc., which take ul

karuṇā can play an important role in quelling cruelty in the mind, which is a hindrance on the path, just as metta can play an important role in quelling anger. They are useful practices, just not enough to lead to understanding of reality.

As for the Bodhisatta path itself, Theravada Buddhists in general tend to favour not reinventing the wheel; the path has been opened, why not walk it and encourage others to walk it as well? The only way the path will stay open is if people continue to practice and follow it to its goal; once everyone decides its better to wait until one can become a fully enlightened Buddha, the path will be effectively closed; the question then arises, what was the point of becoming a fully enlightened Buddha in the first place?

The Mahayana, if I'm not mistaken, gets around this quandary of everyone wanting to lead and no one to follow by suggesting that the arahant is not actually enlightened and still has further to go. Or something like that.

So, while there are many notable examples of Bodhisattas in Theravada Buddhism (the king of Thailand, I think, may have hinted at it), for the most part the idea is to keep the path that is already open open long enough to get as many people across to safety as possible. This seems preferable to waiting countless more eons and letting those people undergo untold suffering before the path can be opened again (assuming one is successful in attaining Buddhahood at all).


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

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

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

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

Access to insight
http://accesstoinsight.org
has the pali text linked to the suttas they have posted. This is the BJT text and I believe has the entire Pali, not just the ATI-linked suttas.

I have a different version, linked to the suttas I have posted. It is based on the BJT version, proofed against the PTS version. Incomplete, but formatted in a way that is very readable. Working towards completion. Not likly for a good time yet.
http://obo.genaud.net
see the What's New Page for new listings, the Sutta Index for what is now available.


Where to get the genuine e-book on "Jataka Tales" in English?

See: The Jataka by Robert Chalmers ed. E.B. Cowell in www.sacred-texts.com. The index is found here.


What is the symbol sometimes depicted on images of the Buddha which looks like a swastika?

Swastica is an ancient symbol of sun, rotation, wheel, cyclic activity esp. in nature, and by extension -- eternity. When German Nazis adopted a then-emerging theory of racial superiority of Germans, finding it well suiting their political goals, they took swastika as a symbol of their supposed identity with the Aryan race, and, more generally, inherent superiority.

Buddha, too, used the symbolism of Aryan superiority as a way to point to the holistic multi-dimensional excellence of Sat-Dharma and how it manifests outwardly in behavior of its practitioners. Such true excellence is beyond the concept of superiority, beyond any trace of conceit. In Mahayana we call this "unity of wisdom and compassion".

To weave in the solar symbolism, Buddha (and incidentally, Chogyam Trungpa) called himself a kinsman of sun. In my understanding, this is a reference to the message of positive constructive attitude inherent in Buddhist philosophy: taking on the universe with all its inherent problems, and winning (remember Buddha is often referred to as "Victor" in texts). In Chogyam Trungpa's explanation, the philosophy of Raising Sun is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of Setting Sun, because the latter relies on solving the problems through external means (feeling hot -- turn on the AC; feeling pain -- drop a pill of painkiller; feeling depressed -- watch a movie or smoke a joint), which too easily ends up encouraging weakness of character, while in the philosophy of Raising Sun, the problems are solved at a deeper, more holistic level.

So if I were to summarize the meaning of swastika as used in Buddhism I would say it is a symbol of true excellence transcending even the highest ideals, including the ideal of transcendental excellence itself; taking on the universe with all its inherent problems, and winning in the most fundamental sense.

It is the attitude of facing your darkest shadows; becoming a heir to Sat-Dharma and then coming back to the marketplace to share with people; embodying the eternal cycle of teachers and students, the Unconditional Buddha Nature.

In one word, it is a symbol of perfection.


I am aware of the drawbacks mentioned in MN.19 , but could this way of thinking, that is, the shortness of pleasure not lead to isolation/life rejection?

Yes. MN 19, similar to AN 3.38, MN 26, etc, describes the experiences of the Buddha-To-Be (Bodhisatta) before enlightenment. For the unenlightened Gotama, his experience of life was happiness was not to be found in ordinary worldly life; thus he went searching. While Gotama did not know what Nibbana was; he already held the conviction that ordinary worldly life would not bring him true happiness.

If we ourselves personally have not had such an experience of disenchantment towards worldly life then teachings such as MN 19 may not be suitable for us or, otherwise, may need to be adapted into a reflection that focuses more on morality rather than on Nibbana.

  The Buddha frequently used the word dispassion towards the world, but I HIGHLY DOUBT HE HAD AVERSION to worldly things. This is a common
  phenomenom that many monks also display ,that is, that they feel
  aversion to the world. How does one deal with such a (mind) problem to
  not to drift into negativity to worldly affairs?

There are subtle differences between aversion/hatred (dosa), disenchantment (revulsion; nibbida) and dispassion (viraga). Therefore, impressions can arise, which can be actually true, that monks can have aversion & hatred towards worldly things.

Aversion is an ordinary, natural yet unenlightened reaction towards evil worldly phenomena. For example, most people believe Hitler was evil, therefore they have a hatred towards Hitler. Thus, generally aversion occurs within some kind of moral outlook related to ideas of 'good' & 'evil'.

Where as dispassion, which arises from disenchantment, is related to impermanence (anicca) and the inability of impermanent things to bring lasting & true happiness (dukkha), as described in the Buddha's 2nd Sermon (SN 22.59). Dispassion is essentially a loss of craving that occurs with the view that worldly things cannot bring true happiness. Thus worldly things become unattractive & not worth craving.


Are the Pali words "cause" ("hetu'), "condition" ("paccaya"), "nutriment" ("ahara") and "root" ("mula") synonyms?

The Pali words "cause" ("hetu') is NOT a synonym of "condition" ("paccaya"). To explain this, let me take the example in paticca samuppada (PS). The PS cycle that describes the “cause and effect” in Buddha Dhamma starts as: “avijja paccaya sankhara, sankhara paccaya vinnana, vinnana paccaya nama rupa, nama rupa paccaya salayatana,….”.

One may tend to think that “avijja paccaya sankhara” means “avijja causes sankhara” or “ignorance causes one to acts that generate bad kamma”, but it is not so. All of us ordinay people have avijja, but that does not mean that we always act accordingly. Most of the time we act appropriately or morally. However, if avijja is there, it is likely that at times one will act with avijja and do inappropriate or immoral things.

Thus PS does not refer to a “direct link”. Any effect must have a cause. But there can be possible causes without leading to any effects. Otherwise, Nibbana would not be possible. For causes to bring about corresponding effects, suitable conditions must be present. That is what ‘paccaya’ means.

Similarly the Pali words "nutriment" ("ahara") is NOT a synonym of "root" ("mula"). In Pali language, “mula” is a root, so that “mūlika héthu” means “root causes”. To explain this, let me take the example of a tree. The roots (mūlika hetu) are critical for the tree’s survival, but the “patta” also plays an important role for the tree’s growth. The “patta” are essential for the tree’s survival, just as the roots of the tree are. One could kill a tree simply by a process called “girdling” where those phloem cells are removed. Girdling, also called ring-barking is the complete removal of a strip of bark. from around the entire circumference of either a branch or trunk of a woody plant. Girdling results in the death of the area above the girdle over time. A branch completely girdled will fail and when the main trunk of a tree is girdled, the entire tree will die.

So, the tree’s survival depends on not only its roots, but also its “patta” containing those critical phloem cells. Thus, CONDITIONS are as important as ROOT CAUSES, and both these taken together is "nutriment" ("ahara") for the tree.


Has Sādhna ( Meditation practice) with closed eyes more benefits than with open?

To your question, ”Should I allot dedicated time for meditation with closed eyes? Are there some benefits?” I would advice you to do otherwise. Each person is different. In your case it is when you keep your eyes wide open that you are most effective. So put more emphasis on the things that work for you, and that you consider favorable. Now I will give you some pointers to help develop this type of ‘meditation’ to another level.

In interacting with the world, we see visuals (rupa) with eyes, hear sounds with ears, smell odors with nose, taste with the tongue, touch (pottabba) with body, and think about concepts (dhamma) with the mind. Be mindful when you experience these while you are in any of the four main postures of sitting, standing, walking, or lying down. Then you will observe that kamachanda and vyapada are the main culprits for making a mind stressful, and for causing “inside fires”. Try to forcibly remove any thoughts of extreme greed and hate as they come to the mind. Make a habit of it. Then with time you will begin of “cooling down” or experiencing niramisa sukha.

Also in time you will abstain from committing an immoral act at any time. In any posture – be it sitting, standing, walking, and laying flat, you will be vigilant on what you are about to do or speak. This is being “morally mindful” at all times. get into the habit of contemplating their consequences. When thoughts come to mind to say something or to do something while sitting, standing, walking, or lying down, you will to get into the habit of contemplating their consequences. Then with time you will see a change in yourself, a sense of tranquility, a “peace of mind”. When you are at this stage, it will be easier to get into samadhi, even if you are just doing the “breath meditation”.


Some of these have been actively researched in Parapsychology. The Wikipedia link directs you to research efforts around this subject.

If you are skeptical of what others have to say you can verify your self by developing the Jhanas. Also keep in mind more you long for these powers more further it becomes so your practice should be very diligent with strong sense of equanimity through out the practice. Once you see for yourself (Ehipassiko) your doubts and skepticism will disappear.


How are Buddhists supposed to spread Buddhism?

It varies by sect. These questions generally attract a bunch of people who think you are advocating in-your-face Christian style evangelism.

The patterns I'm going to describe appear to be true for the US, Europe and Russia.

SGI. Works the hardest to gain new members and at least back in the 70s (80s?) was willing to send people out to interact with strangers on the street. It's what makes SGI special, their outreach has reached a broader demographic than just about anyone and what also makes people think SGI is a cult. I'm not SGI, but I think they're far from a cult. They try the hardest to gain members and seem to have had some success.

"Ethnic Buddhist." Some people don't like the word, but it describes communities of recent immigrants who set up Buddhist temples, target recent immigrants, practice in their home language and generally make no effort to involve the "host" community.

State Buddhism. This has been how Buddhism spread in the past. For example in Japan, it used to be that the government assigned you to the local temple. There is some vestigial form of this in modern Japan, most people often don't know what sort of Buddhist temple their family temple is. This means of spread is a nonstarter in the US and Christians are already up in arms about attempts to teach secularized mindfulness in schools.

"(Upper) Middle Class" Buddhism. Generally educated people who are well read and familiar with a variety of world religions and who have chosen Buddhism. This spreads via books and meditation classes.

As for what normatively should be done to spread Buddhism, it's hard to say. On the internet, generally people get bogged down in "respect for autonomy", they have a hypersensitive trigger for seeing someone being forced to do this, or required to do that against their will, or in the case of religion, how teaching religion is some sort of child abuse.

The historical Buddha sent his sangha in every direction to enthusiastically spread the word. Mahayana Buddhism makes teaching (i.e. spreading Buddhist ideas), essentially a requirement, it is mentioned many times in the BNS precepts. Historically Buddhist governments saw no problem with making it a state religion and funding it. I think it would be hard to say Buddhism as a organization, sangha or movement doesn't care about spread, it clearly does. But how to do it, isn't so clear.

Personally, I think Buddhism should be marketed like any other idea and using means that work for a given community in a given time. Some people will buy your book & read it. Some people will go to a book club. Some people read posts on the web. Some people will go to a meditation class if it's advertised in the local community events page.


Is there a Buddhist equivalent to Lutheran doctrine of Justification?

Yes and no.
No: The term “sin” does not have any special connotation in Buddhism, as it has in major theistic religions like Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. In all these religions, the general belief is that sins are individual actions which are contrary to the will of God or to the will of the Supreme Being. The karmic principle is based on action and consequence.
In Buddhist thinking the whole universe, men as well as gods, are subject to a reign of law. Every action, good or bad, has an inevitable and automatic effect in a long chain of causes, an effect which is independent of the will of any deity. Even though this may leave no room for the concept of 'sin' in the sense of an act of defiance against the authority of a personal god, Buddhists speak of 'sin' when referring to transgressions against the universal moral code. In addition, Buddhism has no concept of "original sin" like Christianity.
Yes: If you consider all of the above:

deities are subject to the same karmic principles as all other living beings
there is no comparable concept of sin, just action and consequence

then the principle of Pratītyasamutpāda comes very close. Commonly translated as dependent origination, or dependent arising, it is a key doctrine of Buddhist philosophy, which states that all dharmas arise in dependence upon other dharmas, i.e. that everything is interconnected and nothing can truly be separate.


'Re-birth' is merely the re-arising of the 'self-belief' or 'self-concept' (in this life). To quote:

  There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — assumes form, feeling, perception, thought fabrication &/or consciousness to be a 'self'. That assumption is a thought fabrication. Now
  what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is
  the coming-into-existence of that thought fabrication? To an uninstructed,
  run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact
  with ignorance, craving arises. That thought fabrication (of 'self') is born of that.
  SN 22.81

  The craving that makes for re-becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual
  pleasure, craving-to-be, craving not-to-be: This, friend
  Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the
  Blessed One. MN 44

This 'self-belief' or 'concept' is a thought that is known or observed by 'consciousness'. Just as consciousness is not the thought of a 'dog' or 'tree', consciousness (which observes) is not the thought of 'self', 'I' or 'me'. The thought is a separate thing to the consciousness.

There is no evidence of anything living on beyond the ending of the activity of 'the' brain (not 'my' brain). The totally lame analogy about a candle flame going from one candle to the next which explains nothing was not an analogy spoken by the Buddha. Buddhism teaches the five aggregates are impermanent. When the activity of life (the aggregates) ends, that's it. If the mind can fully realise & accept all life ends, it will be at peace. That is all that needs to be done. Please read the Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta and the Maggavagga and be free from doubt.


Are there Bodhisatta practices within Theravada?

Bodhisatta practices in Theravada are mentioned in Buddhavamsa, Jataka and Apadana atthakatha, especially in Visuddhajanavilāsiniyā, Apadana Atthakatha, the commentary of Apadana, which is believed to be a late addition to the Pali Canon, added after the Second and Third Buddhist Councils. This is probably why we hear that the notion of bodhisatta is a late addition. However, in Theravada countries like Sri Lanka where I come from, the bodhisattas are widely accepted. (See also the wikipedia section on Theravada bodhisattas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva)

According to Buddhavagga section in Apadana Atthakathaa, Theravada Buddhism has ten perfections dasapāramitā (Giving, morality, renunciation, wisdom, energy, patience, truthfulness, determination, loving kindness and equanimity)
and there are three types of bodhisattas, the ones aspiring to be Sammāsambuddha, Pacceka Buddha (a private Buddha) and Savaka Buddha (arahant).

According to the section Buddhavagga in Apadana Atthakathaa, to become a Sammāsambuddha, one requires either 4x10^140 (cattāri asaṅkhyeyyāni), 8x10^140 (aṭṭha asaṅkhyeyyāni) or 16x10^140 (soḷasa asaṅkhyeyyāni) eons of pāramitā perfection

  ‘‘buddhānaṃ, bhante, patthanā kīva ciraṃ vaṭṭatī’’ti. Buddhānaṃ,
  ānanda, heṭṭhimaparicchedena cattāri asaṅkhyeyyāni
  kappasatasahassañca, majjhimaparicchedena aṭṭha asaṅkhyeyyāni
  kappasatasahassañca, uparimaparicchedena soḷasa asaṅkhyeyyāni
  kappasatasahassañca
  Apadana Atthakathaa

depending on whether he has high wisdom (Paññādhika), faith (Saddhādhika) or effort (Vīriyādhika).

  Ete ca bhedā paññādhikasaddhādhikavīriyādhikānaṃ vasena ñātabbā.
  Paññādhikānañhi saddhā mandā hoti, paññā tikkhā. Saddhādhikānaṃ paññā
  majjhimā hoti, saddhā tikkhā. Vīriyādhikānaṃ saddhā paññā mandā hoti,
  vīriyaṃ tikkhanti.
  Apadana Atthakathaa

A bodhisatta aspiring to be a pacceka buddha requires 2x10^140 (dve asaṅkhyeyyāni) eons of practice.

  paccekabuddho paccekabodhisattabhūmiṃ ogāhanto dve asaṅkhyeyyāni
  kappasatasahassañca pāramiyo pūretvā
  Apadana Atthakathaa

For an arahant a time limit is not given for the bodhisatta period.


What is the role of kōans in contemporary Buddhism?

The way my Zen Master used them (as much as I can pretend to have understood my Zen Master at all!) is to essentially give the person a hint about a particular pathological pattern the person was stuck on. So the koan would always match the elephant in the room that the student was working hard to ignore. The student could then resort to analysis, or simply mull over the koan while going along with the daily activities. In any case, solving the koan required getting an insight into oneself and one's fundamental relationship to the world, as opposed to figuring out some new external fact or gaining an analytical understanding.


Psychic Powers and the Kevatta Sutta (DN 11)

There are 2 things here.

developing supernormal powers
displaying supernormal powers

Developing supernormal powers as side benefit of meditation is welcome and long as they are used to teach and further the understanding of the Dhamma. E.g. Meditation master using though reading to see if the partitioner has understood the instructions. Also when meditating you goal should not be to be after these powers but just to realise the Dhamma but have them developed as a side benefit.

Displaying the powers for vanity is what is not encouraged.


What does one need to give, for liberation?

All you have to give up are your preconceptions.  All you need to give is your trust in the process.


The eightfold path is said to be conditioned, as follows:

To whatever extent there are phenomena that are conditioned, the noble eightfold path is declared the foremost among them. AN 4.34

Where as Nirvana is said to be unconditioned:

There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. Ud 8.3

What is plainly obvious is the liberation of an arahant (from suffering) is permanent (until the ending of the life of the arahant).

Tassata sā vimutti sacce ṭhitā akuppā hoti.Tañhi, bhikkhu, musā yaṃ mosadhammaṃmosa taṃ saccaṃ yaṃ amosadhammaṃ nibbānaṃ
His release (liberation), being founded on truth, does not fluctuate, for whatever is deceptive is false; Nirvana — the undeceptive — is true. MN 140

Therefore, liberation (from suffering) must be unconditioned, just as Nirvana is unconditioned.
In summary, the eightfold path does not create or condition Nirvana. Instead, the eightfold only removes the obscurations to Nirvana (which was always there but unknown due to obscurations).

It is just as if a man, traveling along a wilderness track, were to see an ancient path, an ancient road, traveled by people of former times. He would follow it. Following it, he would see an ancient city, an ancient capital inhabited by people of former times, complete with parks, groves & ponds, walled, delightful.
In the same way I saw an ancient path, an ancient road, traveled by the Rightly Self-awakened Ones of former times. And what is that ancient path, that ancient road, traveled by the Rightly Self-awakened Ones of former times? Just this noble eightfold path: right view, right aspiration, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
I followed that path. Following it, I came to direct knowledge of... cessation...
Nagara Sutta: The City


Why do monastics in certain Buddhist traditions take new names?

In India, during the time of the Buddha, the vast majority of monks and nuns didn't change their names. Notable exceptions are Sariputta and Moggallana, whose original names were "Upatissa" and "Kolita" respectively.

It is not clear why the Buddha chose to call Upatissa by the fact that he was the son (putta) of Sari, or Kolita by the name of his village. The Mahavagga calls them by these names before they met the Buddha, so it may have been that they took these names earlier.

Other examples that may also have been acquired earlier are Kundala-Kesi, Bakkula, etc.

Cases of adding a descriptive to the name are common, e.g. Kumara Kassapa, Lakuṇṭaka-bhaddiya, etc.

One case stands out, that of Angulimala, who actually had his name changed by the king:

  Then the king's fear, his terror, his hair-standing-on-end subsided. He went over to Ven. Angulimala and said, "Are you really Angulimala, lord?"

  "Yes, great king."

  "What is your father's clan? What is your mother's clan?"

  "My father is a Gagga, great king, and my mother a Mantani."

  "Then may Master Gagga Mantaniputta delight [in staying here]. I will be responsible for your robes, almsfood, lodgings, & medicinal requisites for curing illness."

  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.086.than.html

Apart from all this, the biggest reason for later name changes is simply because names in other languages don't work for the Pali recitation required for ordination, e.g.:

  ayaṃ Noaho āyasmato Tongassa upasampadāpekkho

doesn't really work, so giving monks Pali names is considered appropriate:

  ayaṃ yuttadhammo āyasmato sirimaṅgalassa upasampadāpekkho

It seems that early on there was a tradition of naming monks after arahant disciples of the Buddha, so we get various Moggallanas and Sariputtas throughout the ages. In modern times, there seems to be some greater variation in the practice, and choosing a name for a monk has taken on significance that pretty clearly wasn't there in the time of the Buddha.

My name, for example, is chosen because I was born on a Wednesday - in fact, I was given the wrong name, because one monk thought that me being born in the morning in Canada meant that he should give me a Wednesday night name (it having been night in Thailand when I was born).

In the end,

  What's in a name? That which we call a rose
  By any other name would smell as sweet;
  So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
  Retain that dear perfection which he owes
  Without that title.

  -- William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet


Is karma of arms giving depends on the reciever?

Yes the people involved in the donation matters. The only thing which does not matter for karma is the thing given,  but the receiver may not use the gift if it is useless.
This is because matter, physical objects are meaningless in buddhism. This has far reaching consequences, such as why you cannot get into rigth samadhi by focusing on objects, contrary to what other religious people claim. For instance hindus say that mantras can get them into samadhi but that's not possible, because sounds are meaningless. Same thing with the bath that some people take to wash ''the bad deeds'' they did. Physical objectscannot modify your Concentration and karma, only improving your behavior can work on karma and concentration.

So for giving the usual sutta is this

  "I tell you, Vaccha, even if a person throws the rinsings of a bowl or
  a cup into a village pool or pond, thinking, 'May whatever animals
  live here feed on this,' that would be a source of merit, to say
  nothing of what is given to human beings. But I do say that what is
  given to a virtuous person is of great fruit, and not so much what is
  given to an unvirtuous person. And the virtuous person has abandoned
  five factors and is endowed with five.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.057.than.html

  "And how is a donation endowed with six factors? There is the case
  where there are the three factors of the donor, the three factors of
  the recipients.

  "And which are the three factors of the donor? There is the case where
  the donor, before giving, is glad; while giving, his/her mind is
  bright & clear; and after giving is gratified. These are the three
  factors of the donor.

  "And which are the three factors of the recipients? There is the case
  where the recipients are free of passion or are practicing for the
  subduing of passion; free of aversion or practicing for the subduing
  of aversion; and free of delusion or practicing for the subduing of
  delusion. These are the three factors of the recipients.

  "Such are the three factors of the donor, the three factors of the
  recipients. And this is how a donation is endowed with six factors.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.037.than.html


PIN POTHA (puñña potha) or Merit Book, costom still alive? How to keep it up?

As a Sri Lankan, I've heard these in our grand parent times (within last 20-30 years back). With the current lifestyle, everyone has started looking for happiness in outer world, most of the people have forgotten these kind of customs / traditions. This doesn't imply that Pin Potha is no longer active in Sri Lanka, but I should say its very hard to find now a days.

As I've heard the main purpose of this book is, when the owner of the book is about to die and while laying on the bed (Here it's talking about natural death with aging, because that's how the most of the people died in back old days, no sudden heart attacks) someone else starts reading the book to the owner. The concept behind this is, to make his next life a better one ( next birth in human world or heaven not the hell)

How that happens is the bhava in Pratītyasamutpāda is caused by the previous Nidanas. So if he can have good Saṅkhāra (mental fabrication) based on what he hears (from Pin Potha) at the last fractions of seconds, it will results to create a good Bhava. This is the concept behind this action as I've understood.


As others have mentioned it's not recommended to attempt to account for all the variables in karmic effects. Here is the basis for this. It's the third on a short list of what is called the Four Imponderables or Unconjecturables:

"There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four?
"The Buddha-range of the Buddhas1 is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
"The jhana-range of a person in jhana...2
"The [precise working out of the] results of kamma...
"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
"These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them."

From Acintita Sutta: Unconjecturable
But while pondering the precise effects of karma is not something a person working toward Nirvana should do, as it's a distraction; a fully enlightened Buddha would know such effects.

"When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.

From Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking


Why did Mahayana leave out the Pali Canon?

It did not. The Canon is an integral part of Mahayana, has always been.

In Chinese Mahayana, the Canon is included in the form of Agamas (translated to Chinese). In Tibetan Mahayana, the Canon is a part of Kangyur (translated from Chinese or Sanskrit to Tibetan). Most of those are the same sutras as in Pali, just with slightly different wording. Some are rather different, and shed new light on the teaching. Some are even more "explicit" (clear, straightforward):

  "It was a dark night, raining lightly, with flashes of lightning. The Buddha said to Ananda: "You can come out with the umbrella over the lamp." Ananda listened, and walked behind the Buddha, with an umbrella over the lamp. When they reached a place, the Buddha smiled. Ananda said: "The Buddha doesn’t smile without a reason. What brings the smile today?" The Buddha said: "That’s right! That’s right! The Buddha doesn’t smile without a reason. Now you are following me with an umbrella over a lamp. I look around, and see everyone doing the same thing."

...

  "At that time, Mahakasyapa stayed for a long time in a deserted meditation place, he came to visit Buddha, with long hair and beard, wearing old torn clothes. At that time, the Buddha was explaining dharma, surrounded by many people. The monks saw Mahakasyapa coming from afar, and were contemptuous of his appearance: "What kind of monk is this? Dressed in such ragged clothes, looking so uncouth." The Buddha knew what was on their minds, and he said to Mahakasyapa: "Welcome! Come share my seat. Now I am going to find out who became a monk first, you or me?" Those monks were shocked, their body hair stood up, wondering among themselves. "How strange! This respectable monk
  was offered to share Buddha’s seat."

  Then, Mahakasyapa put his palms together: "Most respectable one, the Buddha is my master. I am the disciple."

  The Buddha said: "True, true. I am the master. You are the disciple. Why don’t you sit down and make yourself comfortable?"

  Mahakasyapa touched his head to the Buddha’s feet and sat aside…"

...

  "Listen carefully and think. I will explain it to you. When the eye meets the matter, and you become aware that the matter is desirable, then practice detachment. If, on the other hand, the matter is undesirable, then practice non-avoidance… In this way, you will know that your desire arises from your eye meeting the matter, and this realization will make it cease…like a drop of water on an extremely hot iron ball, it will evaporate in an instant…"

These were extracts from Samyukta Agama. According to the sutra commentaries in the Yogacara-bhumi Shastra, the Samyukta Agama was the earliest agama collection. See my answer here for links to the full sutras.

Now, you have to understand that Mahayana sees itself as a living tradition, concerned first and foremost with the spirit of Dharma, not its letter. So from Mahayana's perspective to understand the point, the taste, and the style of teaching is much more important than to memorize the matrika-s. So in Mahayana making up new texts to convey the point in a new way suitable to the new generation of students in the new country is totally acceptable and even desirable. The Chinese and Tibetan people are very different in character from Indian - and so the outer wrapping on the medicine of Dharma had to be adapted to make it more attractive to them. The medicine itself is the same, just a different wrapping.

I suspect that modern Western people (Americans and Europeans) are more like ancient Indians than like ancient Tibetans or Chinese. So naturally the agama-sutra-style teaching is more appealing to us than the long-mahayana-sutra-style or the tantra-style. But whatever style teaching we take, it is critically important to understand that the point of Dharma applies to our immediate living experience, not to some far-fetched fantasy.

As one translation of Heart Sutra says:

  Far beyond mistaken fantasy, at last there is Nirvana.


According to Theravada Buddhism, fear is based on anger. As per the Visuddhimagga-Tika:

  na bhāyati ñāṇassa bhāyanākārena appavattanato. paṭighacittuppādavasena hi bhāyanaṃ, ñāṇaṃ pana bhāyitabbavatthuṃ bhāyitabbanti yāthāvato jānāti.

  It doesn't fear - because of the non-occurrence of the condition of fearing in this knowledge [knowledge of fearsomeness]. For, fearing is through the influence of a mind of aversion, but this knowledge knows, of a thing to be feared, merely: "it is to be feared".

  Vism-Tika 21.3

The Visuddhimagga itself (quoted above in bold) provides a good explanation of the difference between knowledge and fear:

  But does the knowledge of appearance as terror [itself] fear or does it not
  fear? It does not fear. For it is simply the mere judgment that past formations have
  ceased, present ones are ceasing, and future ones will cease. Just as a man with
  eyes looking at three charcoal pits at a city gate is not himself afraid, since he
  only forms the mere judgment that all who fall into them will suffer no little
  pain;—or just as when a man with eyes looks at three spikes set in a row, an
  acacia spike, an iron spike, and a gold spike, he is not himself afraid, since he
  only forms the mere judgment that all who fall on these spikes will suffer no
  little pain;—so too the knowledge of appearance as terror does not itself fear; it
  only forms the mere judgment that in the three kinds of becoming, which resemble
  the three charcoal pits and the three spikes, past formations have ceased, present
  ones are ceasing, and future ones will cease.

  Path of Purification, XXI.32

The important distinction here is that fear itself is unwholesome, so Buddhist practice is for becoming free from fear. Unfortunately, apart from never being subject to that which is fearsome, the only way to become completely free from fear is to practice so that one is no longer afraid of that which is fearsome (i.e. by freeing oneself from attachment to the objects about which one is afraid).

So, rather than practicing religious practices to avoid situations of which one is afraid, the point of Buddhism is to practice in a way that allows one to remove one's fear of such situations. The premise is the same; namely that one is afraid of certain situations. The difference is in how one relates to this fact. In regards to bhayañāṇa (knowledge of fearsomeness), the expectation is that the knowledge will help one to let go of one's fears, once one realizes that there is no real, lasting escape for one with fear.

The claim that non-religious people can somehow be free from fear without such practice depends in a large part on whether there is indeed life after death; still, it is most certain that those who scoff at the fears of hell and the afterlife would still experience great fear in this life if they were to meet with what is truly fearsome (disaster, danger, etc.) and so they have not really accomplished the goal by simply discarding fear of that which they don't believe to exist.

Update:

As for the criticism that Buddhism uses fear as a means of encouraging proper practice, I suppose this might be true conventionally; a person who does something not knowing the consequences of that act ought to be reminded of the danger. In a conventional sense, that may bring fear to the individual. But the individual need not be afraid, they should simply avoid the activity.

As to your additional questions, fear of hell is only irrational if there is no hell. Fear is always detrimental, though, and in fact a prime reason for being reborn in hell; only those with minds inclining towards anger will suffer from fear. Buddhism helps one become free from anger and thus fear; whether there is an afterlife or not, this is surely a beneficial thing to modern society.


I know there is absolutely no concrete evidence of reincarnation. I'm not denying its possible.

First, you need to understand what is an Empirical evidance, with that, you have to understand that in the matter of the object of your question, an empirical evidence based on pure observation cannot be provided, no matter what.

The accounts of rebirths are purely subjective if you google about such matters, you will find that some authentic psychologists have indeed written books based on tons of interviews they have conducted. Now as a direct evidence cannot be obtained and all the data collected is subjective, all this research goes down the drain as 'pseudoscience' or worst 'woo-woo'.

So when you say the concrete evidence is not present, the problem is concrete evidence cannot be given in the first place. On similar lines even, 'human consciousness' has no concrete evidence, the only way I know you are conscious is because I am conscious and based on your activity and my experience I can only infer that you are conscious. This has led few scientists to say that consciousness itself is an illusion.  So lack of empirical evidence doesn't imply the non-existence of something.

the self-aware part of the us-the part that's aware we are thinking goes beyond death and was here before birth?

This is again the Hindu theory of eternal Aatman, but in the Buddhist context, the Buddha said in Assu Sutta,

  This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.

So, he clearly indicated that part of you goes on living even after death, but where the Buddha contradicts with the Hindus is that He insisted that the self itself is an illusion, so what lives of you after the bodily death is an interplay of five aggregates, the exact dynamics has not been mentioned.

Is there any hard evidence for this ?

I will tell you a small exercise, do it for yourself, you will get a hard subjective experience.

Lie down and relax on your back, be completely relaxed, now try to
remember the memories early on your life as possible, do this for
2-3 days.
Next, try to remember and focus the memories of your life between 3-4 years of age, this is the time you would have just started feeling the sense of 'I', sense of separateness.
Now focus on all the memories where you are in action, where you are doing something, there will be memories where you will be motivated to do something unusual, there will be memories of you doing things instinctively which have not come from your parents or siblings or from TV or from any source possibly there. These are instincts you have followed from past lives. Mant things in our current life, we go on doing in oblivion.

Now, this is not a hard empirical evidence, it's solely your own worldview out of your own experience. There is an obvious ability of human mind to know things. Skeptics are mere Physicalists.


If society is collectively wrong about me then ,myself is an error , illusion or dream, not just for me but for the entire society...

Yes. Correct. The Buddha said:

174. Blind is the world; here only a few possess insight. Only a few, like birds escaping from the net, go to realms of bliss.
Lokavagga

From Buddha's point of view if Self is Mara then Society is the follower of Mara as it encourages the growth of self.

Yes. Correct. This is the Buddhist view.

44. Who shall overcome this earth, this realm of Yama and this sphere of men and gods? Who shall bring to perfection the well-taught path of
wisdom as an expert garland-maker would his floral design?
45. A striver-on-the path shall overcome this earth, this realm of Yama and this sphere of men and gods. The striver-on-the-path shall
bring to perfection the well-taught path of wisdom, as an expert
garland-maker would his floral design.
46. Realizing that this body is like froth, penetrating its mirage-like nature, and plucking out Mara's flower-tipped arrows of
sensuality, go beyond sight of the King of Death!
47. As a mighty flood sweeps away the sleeping village, so death carries away the person of distracted mind who only plucks the flowers
(of pleasure).
48. The Destroyer brings under his sway the person of distracted mind who, insatiate in sense desires, only plucks the flowers (of
pleasure).
Pupphavagga

The Buddha taught individual people have different dispositions & inclinations (MN 12). This means people should find a religion that suits their disposition and to not harass other religions. For example, the Buddha did not harass other religions.

So my question is : Is society the follower of Mara , the evil one?

Of course society is the follower of Mara. In India, for 100s of years, there has been the evil caste system, with millions of people living in condemned institutionalized poverty. For thousands of years, there is war after war. Only 70 years ago, 50 million people were slaughtered in a world war, including fire & nuclear bombings of civilian cities. The current world has technology to be able to feed & house every person, but there remains war, poverty, greed, abuse. Nations & peoples lives are destroyed in unprovoked wars, such as in Iraq, Libya & Syria. The public internet has evil pornography on it, which governments allow & the people do not object to. The word is full of broken families. Slavery and slave labour has returned. A mafia of billionaires has just become the USA govt; which replaced a murderous war mongering government. Yet most of the American people agree with one of those governments. Of course society is the follower of Mara.

Note: Christianity appears to have the same view:

Question: "How is Satan god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4)?"
Answer: The phrase “god of this world” (or “god of this age”) indicates that Satan is the major influence on the ideals, opinions,
goals, hopes and views of the majority of people. His influence also
encompasses the world’s philosophies, education, and commerce. The
thoughts, ideas, speculations and false religions of the world are
under his control and have sprung from his lies and deceptions.
Satan is also called the "prince of the power of the air" in Ephesians 2:2. He is the "ruler of this world" in John 12:31. These
titles and many more signify Satan’s capabilities. To say, for
example, that Satan is the "prince of the power of the air" is to
signify that in some way he rules over the world and the people in
it.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Satan-god-world.html


Can the practices of 'Art of War' align with Buddhism?

It's a cup is half empty, half full kind of thing.

One says, life is full of suffering so one succeeds by coming out a winner ahead of others.

The other says the life is full of suffering, so one must help everyone out of suffering to personally come out of suffering.

One view point creates conflict, the other eliminates conflict.

I see Art of War as short term thinking, and Buddhism as long term thinking. The former has instant appeal, but the latter has appeal to those who are contemplative and not hasty.

Note: I'd like to mention the short book (50 odd pages), "The Buddha Taught Nonviolence, Not Pacifism" by Paul R. Fleischman, MD on the subject of violence. It's a difficult subject, I can't say I agree with the entire book, but it has interesting ideas.


Why emphasise the EBT when anyone who has achieved Arhathood can teach from direct experience?

Without psychic powers, it's actually quite difficult to determine who is an arahant. Fortunately, the Buddha gave some guidelines in MN47 about how to assess a potential teacher:

MN47:4.1: “Mendicants, a mendicant who is an inquirer, unable to comprehend another’s mind, should scrutinize the Realized One for two things—things that can be seen and heard:
MN47:4.2: ‘Can anything corrupt be seen or heard in the Realized One or not?’ etc...

However, it's much easier to verify the validity of the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs). Many scholars have compared these ancient scriptures as they were translated and written down in many different countries. The EBTs are remarkably consistent in doctrine. Having faith in the EBTs doesn't require psychic powers.
This principle of faith based on inquiry and evidence is fundamental in Buddhism:

MN47:16.1: When someone’s faith is settled, rooted, and planted in the Realized One in this manner, with these words and phrases, it’s said to be grounded faith that’s based on evidence.

Arahants do teach. Sariputta taught, as did Moggallāna. They had different styles. Sariputta was more into textual analysis and Moggallāna more into psychic powers. And both of their teachings were rooted in the Buddha's own teachings. However, without a Buddha to verify their arahantship, we need to rely on the methods of MN47 to establish a trust in contemporary teachers.
Lastly, the EBTs are continuously translated into contemporary languages and are therefore just as relevant today as 2500 years ago.  Samsara goes on as it does while the wisdom in the EBTs remains directly relevant to this day and beyond.


Do lay Buddhists ever wear distinguishing clothing or jewellery?

At least in the Theravada tradition people do not were distinguishing clothes or jewelry.

Though not used as a distinctive form, but as more of protection and a good luck charm, some wear a Pirith thread.


What are Buddhist views about free will? Does the concept of free will vs determinism even apply? Is it a question with a wrong assumption?

Free Will. Someone might say: "If all phenomena are conditionally arisen, then Buddhism is a form of fatalism, for we have no free will to control our destiny." Such a statement would not be correct. Will is volition (cetanaa), a mental state, determined ethically by its root condition (hetu paccaya). If the root is unwholesome, we can either restrain or indulge the volition; if the root is wholesome, we can encourage it or neglect it. In this exercise of will lies our freedom to guide our destiny.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel322.htmlThis is how there's free will in the midst of causality. At the same time, the pattern in the way intentions lead to results allows us to learn from past mistakes. This freedom within a pattern opens the way to a path of mental training that can lead to the end of suffering. We practice generosity, virtue, and meditation to learn the power of our intentions and in particular to see what happens as our intentions grow more skillful, so skillful that present intentions actually stop. Only when they stop can you prove for yourself how powerful they've been. And the spot where they stop is where the unconditioned — the end of suffering — is found. From there you can return to intentions, but you're no longer their captive or slave.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/faithinawakening.html


Was meditation not practiced for most of the history of Buddhism?

It is quite safe to say that the Buddhist interest in meditation is much higher than a few hundred years ago. David Chapman argues that vipassana was basically reinvented around 1900. His post is certainly controversial, but he provides sources, so it is a good starting point for researching the subject.

It is rather certain that some of the vipassana techniques originated in the 19th century, e.g. the "New Burmese" method was created by The-lon Sayadaw:

  According to Strong Roots, cited below, “The-Lon Sayadaw… put this textual guidance [the Visuddhimagga] into practice without a personal teacher to guide [him] in mindfulness practice” (p. 110).

Origins of some techniques are less certain. For instance, Chapman argues that Ledi Sayadaw invented his own technique. However, an answer to a related question provides sources that say that he only learnt a technique that had been practiced in the caves of Sagaing Hills:

  Ledi Sayadaw learned the technique of Vipassana which had remained being taught in the caves of the Sagaing Hills, which was honeycombed with meditation caves and dotted with forest monasteries

In any case, even if is the case, the meditation wasn't widespread at that time. In The Birth of Insight: Meditation, Modern Buddhism, and the Burmese Monk Ledi Sayadaw, Erik Braun writes:

  This is not to say that no one meditated prior to the colonial period, but [...] such practice was limited, especially among the laity.


Implementing the Satipatthana Sutta IRL [HELP]

Since you seem interested in what Bhikkhu Analayo has to offer in regards to the Satipatthana sutta I would suggest you maybe consider looking into his
practice guide.


Is it true that arahants don't have sati?

He said that sati is like a raft in the sense that it should be given up as soon as the goal, arahantship, has been reached.

Sati is "non-forgetting" of the Dhamma Truth.

  To give more strength to his claim he also pointed out that sati is not one of the 10 parami (perfections).

This does not make sense because effort, determination, patience, etc are parami. Why would a mind that has destroyed/uprooted the defilements need effort, determination, patience, etc? Regardless, the Buddha never taught the 10 parami; particularly for Arahants.

  I myself think that his claim is absurd, I think that arahants have nothing but sati.

When the defilements are destroyed/uprooted; naturally the sati of a non-arahant (which includes the abandoning of wrong view) is not required. The sati of a non-arahant or learner is described as follows:

  One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness.

  MN 117

This being said, the mind of an arahant obviously cannot forget the Dhamma Truth. Thus MN 117 also says:

  Thus the learner is endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten.

  MN 117

In short, the sati of an arahant is automatic because an arahant can never forget the Dhamma Truth.


String of beads can be used in Anussati meditation in sitting or when you are out of meditation to occupy the mind with wholesome thoughts.


'Dukkha' as one of the three characteristics is not a psychological phenomenon (unlike 'dukkha' in the four noble truths). As one of the three characteristics, 'dukkha' means 'unsatisfactoriness', namely, the inherent inability of impermanent conditioned things to bring lasting happiness.

For example, apples, motor cars & cocaine are 'unsatisfactory' because there is no characteristic within those things that can bring lasting happiness.

The following correct translation makes the different usages of 'dukkkha' clear:

  Sabbe baṅkhārā dukkhā'ti yadā paññāya passati Atha nibbindati dukkhe esa maggo visuddhiyā.

  "All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to
  purification.

  Dhammapada 278 translated by Acharya Buddharakkhita

As for 'nama', for Buddhist purposes, it is defined in the suttas (SN 12.2; MN 9; etc) as the 'mentality' or 'mental faculties' of feeling, perception, intention, contact & attention and also mindfulness, zeal, energy, decision, etc (MN 111).

'Nama' for the purpose of converting & teaching Brahmans (eg. DN 15, DN 11, SN 7.6), namely, 'name', is not for Buddhist purposes & should be ignored by those wanting to comprehend Buddhism.

In other words, in the context of Buddhist suttas such as SN 12.2, MN 9, etc, 'name-form' is an incorrect translation. The correct translation here should be 'mentality-materiality'.

'Name-form' is only a correct translation for Brahman suttas, such as DN 15, DN 11, SN 7.6, etc.

Thus, in terms of the three characteristics, nama-rupa is dukkha (unsatisfactory); just as SN 22.85 states the five aggregates of a Buddha are unsatisfactory (dukkha).

However, in terms of the four noble truths, nama-rupa is not dukkha because the 1st noble truth summarises all psychological dukkha as attachment (upadana) to the five aggregates.


What are good resources to study the historic evolution and comparative studies of Abhidhamma

Hope this helps.

Abhidhamma Studies III: Origins of the Canonical Abhidha(r)mma Literature

Abhidhamma Studies: Buddhist Explorations of Consciousness and Time;
and Abhidhamma Studdies--Introduction, both by Ven. Nyanaponika Thera

Studies in Abhidhamma Literature and the Origins of Buddhist Philoposhical Systems by Erich Frauwaller. At Sunypress.edu

Similar books and/or articles:

Karl H. Potter (1970). Abhidharma Buddhism to 150 A.D.

In The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies. Motilal Banarsidass
Chandra B. Varma (1992).

A Concise Encyclopedia of Early Buddhist Philosophy: Based on the Study of the Abhidhammatthasaṅgahasarūpa. Eastern Book Linkers.
Jay Garfield, Translation as Transmission and Transformation.
C. L. A. De Silva (1937/1988).

A Treatise on Buddhist Philosophy, or, Abhidhamma. Sri Satguru Publications.
Gustav Roth (ed.) (2009).

Stupa: Cult and Symbolism. Aditya Prakashan.
H. W. Bailey (ed.) (2010).

Buddhist Poetry, Thought, and Diffusion. International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan.
Richard King (1998).

Vij Aptim Trat and the Abhidharma Context of Rarly Yog C Ra. Asian Philosophy 8 (1):5 – 17.
Noa Ronkin (2005).

Early Buddhist Metaphysics: The Making of a Philosophical Tradition. London ; New Yorkroutledgecurzon.
Herbert V. Guenther (1976).

Philosophy and Psychology in the Abhidharma. Distributed by Random House.
Eli Franco (2004).

The Spitzer Manuscript: The Oldest Philosophical Manuscript in Sanskrit. Verlag Der Österreichischen Akademie Der Wissenschaften.


What is Buddhist debate and how do I get started?

In the suttas a debate usually takes the form:

I hold such and such to be the case.

the response:

I hold such and such a different case to be the case.

There is no confrontation. No dealing with the other persons argument. You accept or do not accept. You are held to be capable of understanding both arguments and hold the wrong one only because you have not heard the correct one before. Argument concerning cases is held to be 'thinking out loud' and is not done. Again, you are held to be capable of reasoning through all the arguments yourself. The original statement can be made up to three times with the same response being made up to three times. Then a deadlock is declared and the issue is submitted to an authority both can trust.

Here is one example:
http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/an/05_fives/an05.166.hare.pts.htm

A later form of debate, not found in the suttas, but found in the controversies that arose around the second Council, involved directly dealing with the substance of the opponant's argument.

You say such and such, but here it is understood that this is the case. Do you agree that here it is understood that this is the case?
If so you must agree that your argument is defeated.

I agree that such and such is understood to be the case, but it does not apply in the case I bring up for such and such reasons.

More or less the way a reasonable dialogue would be conducted today, but at an essentially lower level than the earlier form.

There is never any reference to the individual involved, only the issues are discussed.


I think its helpful to bear in mind the different between Karma and it's fruit (or vipāka). An action may have a karmic effect if it has ethical or volitional weight but it's fruit doesn't occur immediately. It might occur years later, in another life or it might fizzle out before it ever occurs.

The relevance of this is that a person might generate a whole lot of 'bad' Karma but this karma might only bear fruit well after the person has undergone a tremendous amount of spiritual progress. So 'bad' Karma storing up to bear fruit won't stop them on the spiritual path. They might however have to deal with the effects of that bad action when they are an entirely different sort of person.

A good example of this (from the Pali Canon so this has a Therevadan focus now) is the story of Angulimala. He was a notorious bandit and murderer who encountered the Buddha and then became the Buddhas disciple. His 'bad' Karma didn't stop him ultimately becoming a ahrant. However he still had to deal with the fruits of his bad conduct well after his conversion. At one point his was seriously attacked by resentful villagers while on his alms round. Even though he was no longer a murderer he still had to deal with the consequences of his 'bad' Karma.

So just to summarise, your previous bad Karma won't necessarily stop your progress on the spiritual path. But it's likely that you will at some point have to deal with the fruits no matter how spiritually adept you may become.