Is this the same nun in these sutta references?

They seem to be two different persons.
Info on Vajira Theri:

Vajirā Therī. The Samyutta Nikāya (S.i.134f) relates that one day, when she was taking her siesta in Adhavana at Sāvatthi, Mārā
questioned her as to the origin of “being" (satta), its creator, its
origin, its destiny. Vajirā answers that there is no such thing as
“being," apart from certain conditioned factors, like a chariot, which
exists only because of its parts. Māra retires discomfited.
Vajirā's verses are often quoted (E.g Kvu. 240, 626; Mil. p.28;
Vsm.ii.593) both in the Canon and in later works, but they are not
included in the Therīgāthā, nor do we know anything else about her.

Info on Sela Theri:

Selā Therī. She was born in Alavi as daughter of the king: therefore
she was also called Alavikā. When she was still unmarried the Buddha
visited Alavī with Alavaka, whom he had converted, carrying his
begging bowl and robe. On that occasion Sela went with her father to
hear the Buddha preach. She became a lay disciple, but later, agitated
in mind, she joined the Order and became an arahant. After that she
lived in Sāvatthi. One day, as she was enjoying her siesta in the
Andhavana under a tree, Māra, in the guise of a stranger, approached
her and tried to tempt her. But she refuted his statements regarding
the attractions of lay life, and Māra had to retire discomfited
(S.i.134; Thig.vss.57-9).
In the time of Padumuttara Buddha Selā was born in the family of a
clansman of Hamsavatī and was given in marriage. After her husband's
death she devoted herself to the quest of good, and went from ārāma to
ārāma and vihāra to vihāra, teaching the Dhamma to followers of the
religion. One day she came to the Bodhi tree of the Buddha and sat
down there thinking, "If a Buddha be peerless among men, may this tree
show the miracle of Enlightenment." Immediately the tree blazed forth,
the branches appeared golden, and the sky was all shining. Inspired by
the sight, she fell down and worshipped the tree, and sat there for
seven days. On the seventh day she performed a great feast of offering
and worship to the Buddha (ThigA.61f). Her Apadāna verses, quoted in
the Therīgāthā Commentary, are, in the Apadāna itself, attributed to a
Therī called Pañcadīpikā, and are twice repeated in these verses
(Ap.ii.519, repeated at 527f), however, she is mentioned as having
attained arahantship at the age of seven, and there is no reference to
her life as daughter of the king of Alavī.


Is daydreaming bad (outside of meditation)?

It is hard to be mindful yet it is beneficial.

  SN1.18:2.1: “Few are those constrained by conscience, who live always mindful.

It is easy to daydream yet it is fatal while driving.

Which would you choose moment by moment?


Has Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance got anything to do with Zen?

The main idea is pretty Zen yes. The premise of the book is that Western philosophy made a wrong turn at Aristotle, who placed (conceptual) Truth at the top of the hierarchy of all knowable, thereby subsuming the Good (aka Quality aka Beauty) as a byproduct of Truth. Through this sleight of hands the conceptual has falsely acquired status of universal, while the experiential from being the mother of conceptual became its slave and hostage. Instead, argues the author, the (preconceptual) Good exists in the sphere of direct experience, and can be known directly. According to author, true understanding of Quality, Beauty and Ethics is possible only through such direct nonconceptual contact with the principle of Good. At which point Good is reinstated to the throne of knowable and Truth becomes merely one of alternative ways of attaining Good.

This very much parallels Zen Buddhism's interpretation of Buddha-Dharma, according to which Self-Existing Enlightenment is not to be understood through analytical reasoning, but is awakened to through direct experience. Meditation, koan work, interviews with Zen Master, calligraphy, tea ceremony etc. are all means of getting in touch with this direct experience, which in Zen Buddhism is emphasized over analytical study of texts.

In my opinion it would not be too much of a stretch to equate book author's direct insight into Good/Quality with Enlightenment as it is understood in Zen Buddhism. Although technically, Zen Buddhism goes further in that it gets one into direct contact not just with Good, but also with the very Emptiness itself. So strictly speaking the author falls short of full-scale Enlightenment, but still does a good job illuminating the trap of strict rationality and the primacy of direct experience.


References on Rupa and Arupa Jhana through Brahma Vihara

Upasaka Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena,

May Atma be able to proper trust that Upasaka is well, healthy any heedfull?

Especially Notes here give further crosslinks, aside of the Sutta it self:

SN 46.054 and a linked in another question AN 04.125

Also Sankhitta Sutta: In Brief
(Good Will, Mindfulness, & Concentration) might be of interest.

And here maybe useful Bhant Nyanadassanas teaching: From mettā Jhāna to nibbāna and a Sutta and commentat that supports that: DN.09 and at least The Limits of the Unlimited Attitudes -
The Brahmaviharas on the Path to Awakening by Bhante Thanissaro with many links and crossreferences.

All collected in "Metta-Boom just fills Heaven and Hell"

Here some of Ven.Mahāsi Sayadaw comments.

In regard of Bhanthe Vimalasiri, best to ask Upasaka Micro, he is surely be found on any forum of other tapapals, charts or equal Buddhist communities and as disciple (till not so long mentioned as such) of Bhante, he always loved to share in this regard.

(Note: This is a gift of Dhamma not meant for commercial purpose or use for other wordily gains.)


irrational fear of hell and damnation and spiralling, please help me?

Nothing in what the Buddha taught says that one is not to enjoy righteously earned pleasures. One gives up the world at one's own pace. But the whole world recognizes (if it doesn't practice) the corrupting nature of lies, harm, theft and unrestrained self indulgence. The key idea there is 'righteously earned'. You need to develop a sense of where the line is drawn between activities that create bad kamma and those that create good kamma. One does not go to Hell practicing only good deeds. That is basic training:

Create good kamma: Practice generosity. Find a vihara and make gifts to the bhikkhus.

Avoid bad kamma:

Train yourself to refrain from saying things that are not true.
Train yourself to refrain from activities that cause harm to breathing things.
Trin yourself to refrain from taking things that are not givin to you.

That is 'train yourself'. You are not expected to reach perfect behavior over night, the important thing is the direction you are headed. Your fear is rational; right now you are headed in the wrong direction. You do a 180 by taking the first step.

If you have a good bank account of good kamma and are cultivating a life that avoids making bad kamma what pleasures come to you can be enjoyed without fear and the bad stuff you have already created or newly create will be experienced in an over-all environment of progress towards the good.

If you want to understand this system more deeply I suggest this over-view, which is based on Ananda's Gradual Course:

http://buddhadust.net/dhammatalk/the_pali_line/course/table_of_contents.htm


Isn't it insane Bodhidharma cut his own eyelids?

Usually, such extreme Zen stories are used to illustrate commitment and urgency to achieve enlightenment.

It's said that he cut his eyelids because at some point he fell asleep during meditation, a major distraction for him.

Huiko, a disciple, is said to have cut his arm to be accepted as a student by Bodhidharma.

There are many other stories, some involving cut a disciple's fingers (master Gutei Isshi), others cutting a cat in half (master Nansen Osho) and so on.

As far as factuality, I don't think these stories are believed by zen monks to have happened (at least, the ones harming another being), but their symbolism remain a strong vehicle to convey strong meanings, specially in the form of Koans.


Root Institute belongs to the FPMT (Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition, founded by Lama Yeshe and Lama Zopa Rinpoche). It is a Gelug-pa organization.

At Root Institute, they teach the (normally 5 years) Basic Program, but I am not sure they do it as long as 5 years. There are FPMT centers where it lasts 2 or 3 years only. The curriculum is always the same, though.

I studied the 5 years BP at Nalanda Monastery, in France (the program was in Tibetan, English, French, and Spanish). It is a lot of study, discussion groups, exams and learning by heart, "karma yoga" (i.e. community service). There are usually more lay people than monks. It is designed specifically for those who do not speak Tibetan and cannot attend the study program at Sera monastic "university". In addition, contrary to Sera, it is not exclusively monastic. The Program includes a bit of meditation (45 minutes day is not much indeed), and sometimes formal debates. Normally, the 45 minutes session has to be Lam Rim meditation.

On the importance of studying, there is a Zen nun (ven Myokyo) who said:

  Real acquaintance with the Dharma is necessary because, being what we
  are, we are prone to stray. If we do not have the framework of the
  teachings, and continuously test ourselves against it, we will very
  soon be off and away down a blind alley. Training and the teachings
  need to match, need to go hand in hand.

On a more personal level, I feel studying helped me read (in a general sense) on my own. I believe I got rid of the grossest misconceptions I had. Studying also helped me dig channels for my mind to flow, like a river (of course, it stills wanders off... finds its way to unwholesome places and dwells on what has to be abandoned). It supports meditation. The more I studied, the more I understood it can lead somewhere but it is a question of how we relate to study and how we use it.

Attending the 5 years BP is one of the best things I have done in my life.

One thing to bear in mind, though, is that the FPMT Basic Program covers just a few texts belonging to one tradition in particular. I would suggest that, once grounded in one tradition, entertaining diversity is an antidote to sectarian stances and over-simplifications.


How many citta vithis are there in Abhidhamma?

Bhavaṅga
The bhavaṅga citta, mentioned earlier, is the primary form of mind. It flows from conception to
death except when interrupted by a stimulus through one of the sense doors. When a stimulus
enters, consciousness becomes active, launching into a thought process (citta vīthi). Thought
processes have been analysed in great detail in the Abhidhamma.
A complete thought process, occurring through the physical sense doors, is made up of
seventeen thought moments (citta khaṇa). These are:
1) A bhavaṅga that flows by in a passive state when one of the five physical sense organs
comes in contact with its object (atīta bhavaṅga).
2) A bhavaṅga that vibrates for one thought moment (bhavaṅga calana).
3) A bhavaṅga that cuts off the flow (bhavaṅga upaccheda).
10
4) A citta that turns towards the object through the sense door that has been stimulated
(pañcadvāra-vajjana).
5) The appropriate sense consciousness; in the case of the eye, for example, eye
consciousness (cakkhu viññāṇa).
6) Next a thought moment—the sampaṭicchana citta—which has the function of
receiving the object.
7) When the object has been received another thought moment, called the santīraṇa citta,
arises, performing the function of investigating the object.
8) The act (kamma) itself, especially if it was a weighty one.
9–15) The object having been determined, the most important stage from an ethical
standpoint follows. This stage, called javana, consists of seven consecutive thought
moments all having an identical nature. It is at this stage that good or evil is done,
depending on whether the cittas have wholesome or unwholesome roots. Therefore,
these javana thought moments have roots and also produce new kamma.
17) Following the seventh javana the registering stage occurs, composed of two thought
moments called tadālambana. When the second registering citta has perished, the
bhavaṅga follows, flowing on until interrupted by another thought process.

http://103.242.110.22/theravadins/English-articles/abhidhamma-in-practice.pdf


What is the difference between access and absorption in Vipassana meditation?

This is more an unfortunate example of problematic translation than anything. appento, for example, means rushing forward, plunging or entering into, or fixing upon. The commentary surrounding this word,

  sampayuttadhamme ārammaṇe appento viya pavattatīti vitakko appanā

would better be translated as

  "Applied thought that proceeds as though plunging into the object with its associated states is called appanā"

vyappanā could mean several things, since it is just appanā with a vi prefix. You'd have to be fluent in Pali colloquialism to understand the meaning, but PED says

  Vyappanā (f.) [vi+appanā] application (of mind), focussing (of attention) Dhs 7.

At any rate, "absorption" should be understood in the sense of "becoming absorbed in (i.e. fixed upon) the object", I think.

"Access" is another ambiguous term; it is used in the sense of moving (cara) close to (upa), as it is a translation of the term upacāra. Other translations are "neighbourhoood", "approach", etc. It is more often used in a mundane sense to refer to the area surrounding (e.g.) a dwelling. e.g.:

  vihārassa upacāre - in the surrounding area of a dwelling (Vin. Pāc. 2.5)

In regards the section of the Visuddhimagga you are reading, we should first be clear that this section pertains to samatha meditation, not vipassana. The two terms are not commonly used in the practice of insight meditation, since it is understood that appanā samadhi doesn't allow for insight to occur. Insight meditation requires momentary concentration similar to that described as upacāra in this section, in that it comes close to but doesn't reach samatha jhāna.

The main difference between the two is that appanā is fixed on the object from moment to moment, unwavering and unchanging - it is sometimes described as "trance" concentration; whereas upacāra is still not fixed on a single object. The main similarity is that they both have the power to suppress the five hindrances from the mind.


How can there be Happiness without suffering?

Light vs darkness is a better analogy to wisdom vs ignorance than happiness vs suffering. What you describe as happiness and suffering are just experiences. They belong to the Sankhara group in the five aggregates of clinging. Nibbana exists independently of the five aggregates. All experiences, whether they are pleasurable, painful or neutral, fall under the first Noble truth. So they all have the inherent nature of Dukkha. Nibbana is non-experiential and devoid of Dukkha.


I bicycle regularly so maybe I'm good at breathing (get a good amount of oxygen from each breath).

If I sit at rest I seem to need about 4 breaths per minutes. Apparently that's abnormal (maybe even pathological), the internet says that 12/minute is normal for adults, 8/minute for athletes. Also I've been diagnosed with sleep apnea so I have a CPAP machine for sleeping. I say this to warn you that "your mileage may vary".

Anyway, sitting at rest it takes me about:

5 seconds to inhale
5 seconds to exhale
Pause for about 5 seconds, until my body feels it wants to begin to take another breath to avoid a shortage

So 15 seconds per cycle, 4 per minute, including a 5 second pause in each cycle.

I breathe continuously on a bicycle (i.e. during aerobic exercise), and don't try to breathe continuously when I'm at rest, i.e. at rest I do expect to pause between each breath -- and not take the next breath until I feel I begin to need it.

It doesn't have to be exact: if you start a breath a couple of seconds too late or too early, it doesn't matter.

By breathing deeply and continuously I can slow that to 3 breaths/minute:

10 seconds to inhale
10 seconds to exhale
No pause between breaths

That feels abnormal though, an effort to breathe extra deeply and extra slowly.

Anyway, maybe what you're missing is the pause between breaths. IMO if I didn't pause (when I'm at rest) I'd hyperventilate. You can vary the duration of the pause. The trick is not to begin to inhale, until you begin to feel that you begin to need the next breath. If you wait until you just begin to need to breath, don't worry: because you're at rest you'll easily be able to satisfy your need with just one breath, maybe two at most.

Sometimes there's a sudden urge to take an extra quick inhale. If that happens then just let that happen.

Also you wrote, "an awkward cycle of holding breath", as if you're pausing with your lungs full. I pause after each exhale:

Inhale engages some muscular effort
Exhale releases that muscular effort
Pause/idle while the muscles are at rest (not breathing and the body held upright just by being balanced on an upright skeleton, minimum use of muscles to hold yourself in place).

See also How to breathe into your stomach and not get light headed during meditation?

I kind of recommend the book, Anapanasati -- Unveiling the Secrets of Life by Bikkhu Buddhadasa ... plenty of detail, adapt as necessary.


Sudden enlightenment described in the suttas

The first five arahants are said to have attained that after hearing the Buddha's second sutta, which was the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta: The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic.

MN 26 however says,

  And so I was able to convince them. I would teach two monks while three went for alms, and we six lived off what the three brought back from their alms round. Then I would teach three monks while two went for alms, and we six lived off what the two brought back from their alms round. Then the group of five monks — thus exhorted, thus instructed by me — being subject themselves to birth, seeing the drawbacks of birth [etc...]

I don't know how to reconcile the timeline of that, with the Anatta-lakkhana sutta's being the second sutta.

This question is discussed on pages 43 through 44 (i.e pages 2 and 3 of the PDF file) of this document: Assaji Sutta (also known as "SD 42.8" of Piya Tan's Sutta Discovery series). The bit of that that's relevevant to your question is:

  In other words, listening to the Dharma alone does not bring arhathood. Some stories of the great
  saints, such as Sāriputta and Bahiya Dāru,ciriya, give us the impression that they awaken merely by listening
  to the Buddha giving them a special teaching. However, it is imperative to remember the implicit
  fact that they are all good dhyana-attainers in the first place. It is their dhyana-purified minds that make
  them the perfect candidates for the attaining of arhathood. As such, it is not merely through listening that
  they become arhats (although, on the other hand, this “listening effect” may occur in the case of streamwinning).


In theory the Pāṭimokkha Rules: Intro | Bhikkhus' | Bhikkhunis' is the basic code of monastic discipline, consisting of 227 rules for monks (bhikkhus) and 311 for nuns. It lays down offences and punishments leading to a maximum of expulsion from the order. The punishment is typically decided by the Sangha, but the presiding abbot may decide on occasion when it is not feasible to assemble the sangha.

http://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/buddhist-monastic-discipline/d/doc4046.html

  The code of the Pātimokkha itself, in its details of disciplinary
  procedure, recommends certain forms of penalties for the categories of
  major offences. The Pārājika, being the gravest of the monastic
  offences, admits of no remedies or atonements. The penalty for
  Pārājika offences being complete ex-communication and loss of monastic
  status, it is spontaneously brought about by the commission of the
  crime.

  All offences other than the Prājika are remediable in that every
  offender, barring one who is guilty of a Pārājika offence, who submits
  himself to the specified penalties and punishments and behaves himself
  in accordance with the law is considered as being purged of his guilt.
  The Saṇghādisesas include a host of offences for which specified
  penalties are to be imposed by the Saṇgha, taking into consideration
  the circumstances attendant on the commission of the crime.

In practice, it appears to vary depending on the monastery/monastic order, the country and the culture - barring the grave offences, there appears to be a lot of leeway in how the offences are viewed.

Some countries like Thailand have in the past got involved in the disciplining of monks because the monastic order itself wasn't doing enough, or because the state was outraged by certain infamous incidents.

While it appears that punishments are generally very rare in most Buddhist countries, Japanese Zen monasteries are famous for offering very tough disciplinary punishments for the smallest of offences, often decided solely by the abbot. So obviously culture has a large role to play in all this.

A strict reading of the Pāṭimokkha would make cooking an offence worthy of confession. However, monks have to adapt to new cultures and times - for example the monks and nuns of the Plum Village order in France under the tradition of Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh do their own cooking and even cook for lay people  because it is nearly impossible to go on alms rounds in the countryside where they live.

The Buddha was rather pragmatic about the rules it would appear,

  AN 3.83: Vajjiputta Sutta — The Vajjian Monk {A i 230; Thai 3.85} [Thanissaro]. A monk who is having difficulty following all the Pāṭimokkha training rules can boil them all down to these three: the training in heightened virtue, the training in heightened mind, the training in heightened discernment.


Is suffering caused by oneself, others, by both, or spontaneous?

The teaching of 'good & bad kamma' is not Buddhist but is merely a conventional & universal understanding about 'personal' behavior found in most cultures & religions that is also part of Buddhism. The doctrine of kamma in Buddhism is called 'lokiya dhamma', which means a 'mundane' or 'worldly' understanding based on the view of 'self' or 'persons'.

To the contrary, the suttas state (eg. MN 56) that the unique or special teaching of the Buddhas is the Four Noble Truths, which includes the Noble Eightfold Path that ends kamma (refer to AN 6.63). The Noble Eightfold Path ends kamma because its fruition renders all kamma as 'not-self' ('anatta'). Such understanding in Buddhism is called 'lokuttara dhamma', meaning 'transcendent', 'supramundane' or 'beyond the world'.

Thus, according to 'lokuttara dhamma', suffering is impersonally caused by the element of ignorance according to the process of Dependent Origination.

In short, the Acela Sutta answers the question exactly.

Note: the Acela Sutta states the view that suffering is 'self-caused' is a form of 'Eternalism' and the view that suffering is 'other-caused' is a form of 'Annihilationism'.


Ancient Indian sites, where Jataka stories are illustrated through sculpture and painting?

There's The Illustrated Jataka & Other Stories of the Buddha

Some are also covered in this documentary

A simple comprehensive list can be found here


Death according to various schools of buddism

In the ancient Pali scriptures, the word 'death' has two meanings: (i) conventional; & (ii) ultimate. In the language of ultimate truth, 'death' refers to the psychological idea that "I" or a "person" or a "being" ("satta") dies (SN 12.2).

The Buddha taught a 'self', 'person' or 'being' ('satta') is only a mental state of craving & attachment (SN 23.2); that in reality, there is no 'being' ('satta') to be found (SN 5.10).

'Death' only happens when there is unenlightened 'self-view'. This is why the Buddha called enlightened selfless nirvana: 'The Deathless'.

  He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow.
  And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a
  sage at peace.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said?
  'I am' is a construing. 'I am this' is a construing. 'I shall be' is a
  construing. 'I shall not be'is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing
  is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing,
  he is said to be a sage at peace.

  A sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die,
  is unagitated, and is free from longing. He has nothing whereby he
  would be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die?
  Not dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he
  long? It was in reference to this that it was said, 'He has been
  stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the
  currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.'

  Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta

In enlightenment, all that occurs at what is conventionally regarded as 'death' is the five aggregates come to an end, that is all.

  Form is impermanent... Feeling... Perception... Fabrications...
  Consciousness is impermanent. That which is impermanent is
  unsatisfactory. That which is unsatisfactory has ceased and gone to
  its end.

  Very good, my friend Yamaka, very good.

  Yamaka Sutta


If Buddhas don't feel bliss, what is the purpose of attaining nirvana?

From AN 9.34:

Ven: Sariputta: “Reverends, extinguishment (Nibbana) is bliss!
Ven. Udayi: “But Reverend Sāriputta, what’s blissful about it, since
nothing is felt?”
Ven. Sariputta: “The fact that nothing is felt is precisely what’s
blissful about it.

Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses, including thoughts and the intellect) or when encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses).
But for a Buddha or arahat, sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana.
Please see this answer for commentaries by Nyanaponika Thera. The supporting suttas are MN 44, SN 36.5 and AN 9.34.
In addition, the Buddha and arahats can experience emotions or states of mind which are not tainted with the three poisons of greed (lobha), aversion (dosa) and delusion (moha). This includes the four brahmaviharas of loving kindness (metta), compassion (karuna), empathetic joy (mudita) and equanimity (upekkha).
The brahmaviharas are considered skillful states of mind.
An enlightened person is not an emotionless person. It's simply a person who does not have cravings, does not have plans to fulfill sensual cravings, does not have plans to become something and does not become afflicted with negative states of mind that arise as a side effect of having craving. Also please see this question.
The purpose of Nirvana is permanently ending suffering - it's not about experiencing bliss.

Adding on based on a comment by Ruslan, the Buddha did have his five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness) intact and functioning without being tainted by the three poisons, after attaining Nibbana, and could still experience pain and pleasure, but did not suffer from it. Please see this answer for details.


One of my teachers explicitly warned me: do not put too much trust in books written by Buddhist scholars unless they were authorized to teach by a lineage.

In hindsight, having attained "independence of others in regards to Buddha's message", I now see why: Buddhist texts are ambiguous enough that correct interpretation of the points made (as opposed to the literal meaning) requires understanding of Buddhist path as a whole, in context of personal practice -- what's known as "ground, path, fruition".

Back when I was a baby-Buddhist, I used to study all kinds of materials, written by both practicing teachers and scholars alike. Now I see that most of the monographs that focused primarily on translation have been pretty useful, while those that ventured into analysis and elaboration were mostly a waste of time.

Not that translation is quite possible without some measure of interpretation. But there seems to be a difference between following a preexisting text and following your own train of thoughts. If you think about it, the purpose of writing is very different between the two cases. A realized teacher does not write to express his or her understanding. That's not the goal. A teacher writes in order to "deliver" the students (professional slang for "to get them to Realize"). Whereas a scholar writes to explore and explain a particular thread of reasoning they discovered that seems to explain Buddhist artifacts in a cohesive and logically consistent manner.

It is not unheard of for a scholar to slip into metaphysics (how things supposedly are) as opposed to soteriological methodology (how to achieve the Goal in practice). The tradition refers to this difference as "Buddha-eye" vs. "Dharma-eye". Buddha-eye is the enlightened perspective. The elements of it may or may not be helpful to a given student at a given point in time. Whereas Dharma-eye is the perspective presented to student by the teacher, whose concerns as I said above, are primarily didactic.

Now, don't get me wrong, many lineages have professional scholars within the tradition. "Traditional" does not always equate with "sloppy" you know. I've known of teachers in both Theravada and Mahayana schools who did care about careful choice of words, precise phrasing, and clear reasoning. It is just that in the world of realized teachers conveying information is always secondary to the real objective. To entertain you with a metaphor, not every student can handle pure spirit, so teacher ought to mix in the additives according to student's capacity. Such additive, known as upaya or skilfull mean -- basically a useful simplification -- is something non-existent in the work of a pure scholar.

Let's not assume scholarly works are 100% truth either. I've seen so many cases of misrepresenting evolution of Mahayana as progressive loss of the original meaning -- that every time I see a new one I don't even cringe anymore :)

I'm telling responsibly, unless one clearly sees that elusive Truth the Buddha has found under the Bodhi tree, one should be very careful making assumptions about a particular Buddhist school or individual teacher being authentic or a "mere religion".

To conclude this post which is already getting too long, the answer to your question I'm afraid is "it depends". The further the scholar is from putting the teaching to his or her personal practice, the likelier they are to misunderstand what Buddhism is really about, the more they're prone to skewing the message, the less we can trust them. The more the scholar is also a practitioner, the more credibility they can have in our eyes. After all, the proof is in the pudding - and how can you trust a cook who's never tried his own recipe?


Can all human beings potentially be enlightened in this lifetime?

In the Ugghaṭitaññū Sutta (AN. ii. 135) the Buddha says that there are
  four kinds of person found in this world: those who are quick in
  acquiring, those who learn by means of a detailed exposition, those
  who may be guided, and those for whom the letter [of the Teaching]
  alone is the highest thing. In the Abhidhamma Piṭaka these are defined
  as follows:

  What sort of person is quick in acquiring (ugghaṭitaññū)? The person
  for whom there is penetration of the Dhamma at the very time when it
  is being taught is called “quick in acquiring.”

  What sort of person is one who learns by means of a detailed
  exposition (vipañcitaññū)? The person for whom there is penetration of
  the Dhamma when the meaning of what has been taught in brief is later
  analysed in detail is called “one who learns by means of a detailed
  exposition.”

  What sort of person is one who may be guided (neyya)? The person for
  whom penetration of the Dhamma comes gradually by means of recitation,
  questioning, proper attention, and by serving, cultivating and waiting
  upon kalyānamittas is called “one who may be guided.”

  What sort of person is one for whom the letter alone is the highest
  thing (padaparama)? The person for whom penetration of the Dhamma will
  not come in this life, however much [of the Teaching] he may hear and
  speak and bear in mind or recite, is called to be “one for whom the
  letter alone is the highest thing.” (Puggalapaññatti 41-2; Designation
  of Human Types 58)

  Regarding the fourth type, the padaparama, his lack of potential for
  awakening in the present life may be due to a number of factors. Most
  padaparamas were already such before they were even born, when still
  in their mothers' wombs. Only humans conceived with a triple-rooted
  relinking consciousness (i.e., one accompanied by all three kusala
  roots: non-greed, non-hate and non-delusion) have the possibility of
  attaining jhāna or the noble path in their present life. Those with
  fewer kusala roots than this are all padaparamas.

  Even those who have been reborn with such a consciousness may still be
  padaparamas. In the Puggalapaññati Atthakathā (PuggA. 184-5)
  Buddhaghosa lists six causes for incapacity to attain the paths and
  fruits in the present life; in each case the state is reckoned as one
  that lacks the requisite decisive support condition
  (upanissaya-paccaya). A similar list is also given in the
  Paṭisambhidāmagga (Paṭi. i. 123), but here I will use Buddhaghosa's as
  the Paṭisambhidāmagga's version does not supply any explanation.

  Obstruction by kamma (kammāvaraṇa); meaning those who have committed one of the five anantariyaka kammas.
  Obstruction by defilement (kilesāvaraṇa); meaning those who hold to any of the ten niyata wrong views ("there is no giving, no
  sacrifice... etc.").
  Obstruction by kammic ripening (vipākāvaraṇa); meaning those who were reborn with only a double-rooted or a rootless relinking
  consciousness.
  Lack of faith (assaddha); "one lacking faith in the Buddha, Dhamma and Saṅgha."
  Lack of zeal/desire-to-act (acchandika); defined as being one who either lacks chanda in the sense of desiring to undertake what is
  kusala.
  Being weak in wisdom (duppañña); defined as those in whom the bhavaṅga-citta of that lifetime lacks the mental factor of paññā (this
  in fact overlaps with #3, for it is the relinking consciousness that
  determines the character of the bhavaṅga-citta in any lifetime).
  Blockquote

Above is copied from the answer given here by ven. Dhammanado

  Does any tradition make the claim that particular human beings will
  never be enlightened no matter what even in subsequent rebirths?

It is said that those who are with Niyata Micchāditthi will be stuck in Samsara indefinitely. They are also called as beings who are tied to a pole in Samsara. They are said to be born in the Lokantarika hell when the world system gets destroyed. It is considered even worse than committing one of the 5 heinous crimes.


Will I break the eight precepts if I listen to nature sounds considered as music?

What is prohibited is the sounds (music) disturb your meditation and increase your attachment aversion and ignorance. You are allowed to substitute unwholesome sounds with wholesome sounds.
For instance, you can listen to Pirith chanting or watch Dhamma video.


Is there a value for a single moment of mindfulness (without others) ?

Value, let's face it, is an idea - not to diminish the question. Value can be attributable to all and everything that occurs, whether once and forgotten, or consistently applied.

All that can be found is mindfulness, whether realized or ignored. No moment, or what appears in it, can possibly have a beneficial or detrimental effect on some other moment, though a clean sink is bliss itself.

If one's present course of practice is intermittent, it is beautiful. If one's present course of practice is consistent, it is beautiful. If we tie our quality of practice to some preferential outcome, there is binding.

If we fail to see or appreciate the fulfillment of things as they are, our very commitment to practice can reinforce the myth that we are somehow less than enlightenment. Presence is awake, this is irrefutable.

Warmly, NightSkySanghaGuy


Meditation influences the surrounding by vibration created. (You can really feel the vibration when you experience Piti) So when you pratice as a group these vibrations influence others, especially when you are having a bad patch in meditation then the influence of others will help in to develop calmness and concentration and perhaps dispel agitation and other hindrances that might have surfaced during your worldly interactions.

This is true for all types of meditation but most effective when doing Metta as vibrations tend to be stronger.


What can I do to help avoid laxity while meditating lying down?

The Meditation on Falling to Sleep:

We can be on mindful guard for the arising of the moment we  start to fall asleep. This mindfulness should stop the falling asleep and can give an  initial boost in the meditation faculties like effort and concentration so we  won't fall asleep as much and we can then better practice whatever we want with those improved faculties and wakefulness.

We can know when we are starting to fall asleep by finding and tuning into were  the bodily or mental experiences are that we know always happen right before we start to fall asleep. We then  can easily catch when we will  start to fall asleep.


It depends on what you mean by wisdom. By wisdom, if you mean intelligence as well, it can be dangerous and cruel. ex: coming up with more effective ways to invade countries, deceive people to make more profit etc.

But wisdom from a Buddhist perspective can be seen as two fold.

Worldly wisdom: Wisdom that helps you live a successful family life, be an ideal husband, wife, householder or worker; wisdom that helps you improve a good business; wisdom that leads you to a happy destination, next life. etc. Singalovada Sutta has many such examples.
Wisdom that leads to Nibbana.
Basically this means the understanding of the four noble truths.

  can true wisdom ever be devoid of compassion?

Sure! Wisdom need not be associated with compassion.
Ex: take each of the 16 Vipassana Nanas. Those mind states have nothing to do with compassion. Some of them are associated with fear towards Samsara. Wisdom can also come as disappointment towards sensual pleasures. Read the story of Upatissa & Kolitha who later became the chief disciples of the Buddha.
Even the four stages of enlightenment don't have compassion as a quality.

To reach enlightenment, one needs to cultivate the Five Spiritual Faculties:

Faith
Vigor
Mindfulness
Concentration
Wisdom

Balancing of these five faculties is more important to the progression in the path:

  For one who is strong in faith and weak in wisdom places his
  confidence foolishly in an unworthy object. One strong in wisdom and
  weak in faith errs on the side of cunning and is as hard to cure as a
  sickness caused by medicine. But with the balancing of the two, faith
  and wisdom, a man has confidence only in a deserving object.

But this doesn't imply compassion(Karuna) and kindness(Metta) are unimportant. They have many useful benefits and they help us to stay away from hells by subduing our cruelty and hatred. That is very conducive to attaining Nibbana. Realising that is wisdom.

When a being attains or passes the state of Anagami, he removes aversion completely. Then there's no obstacle in his mind for compassion and kindness to arise, when he interacts with people. That's why they are naturally inclined to help other beings attain enlightenment. That is the reason why we even have Buddhism today. If the Buddha did not have any compassion towards the worldlings, he wouldn't have preached the Dhamma just because the Maha Brahma invited. Compassion and wisdom can work in tandem. Ex: Maha Karuna Samapatti Nana of the Buddha. But compassion is not a requirement for wisdom to be present.


Which Pali suttas describe the Buddha & monks demonstrating psychic powers to laypeople?

In MN 86 (quoted below), we find the lay bandit Angulimala cognizant of the psychic power displayed by the Buddha.

Then Aṅgulimāla donned his sword and shield, fastened his bow and
arrows, and followed behind the Buddha. But the Buddha used his
psychic power to will that Aṅgulimāla could not catch up with him no
matter how hard he tried, even though the Buddha kept walking at a
normal speed.
Then Aṅgulimāla thought, “It’s incredible, it’s amazing! Previously,
even when I’ve chased a speeding elephant, horse, chariot or deer,
I’ve always caught up with them. But I can’t catch up with this
ascetic no matter how hard I try, even though he’s walking at a normal
speed.”

In the Vinaya chapter Cammakkhandhaka (Pli Tv Kd 5) quoted below, we find the example of the Buddha asking a monk to perform wonders of psychic power for eighty thousand villagers to see.

Then those eighty thousand village overseers approached the Lord;
having approached, having greeted the Lord, they sat down at a
respectful distance. Then those eighty thousand village overseers paid
respect only to the venerable Sāgata, not likewise to the Lord. Then
the Lord, knowing by reasoning of mind the minds of those eighty
thousand village overseers, addressed the venerable Sāgata, saying:
“Well then, do you, Sāgata, abundantly show a state of further-men, a
wonder of psychic power.”
“Very well, Lord,” and the venerable Sagata, having answered the Lord
in assent, having risen above the ground, paced up and down in the
air, in the atmosphere, and he stood, and he sat down, and he lay
down, and he smoked and he blazed, and then he vanished.
Then the venerable Sagata, having shown in the air, in the atmosphere,
various states of further-men and wonders of psychic power, having
inclined his head towards the Lord’s feet, spoke thus to the Lord:
“Lord, the Lord is my teacher, I am a disciple; Lord, the Lord is my
teacher, I am a disciple”. Then those eighty thousand village
overseers, saying: “Indeed it is marvellous, indeed, it is wonderful,
that even a disciple can be of such great psychic power, of such great
might. What must the teacher be?” paid respect only to the Lord, not
likewise to the venerable Sagata.

The story in the commentary to Dhp 124 (quoted below) has a demonstration of psychic power by the Buddha to Kukkutamitta and his family, but it's not clear if they were cognizant of it.

When the hunter came, he saw no animal in the trap; he saw the
footprint and surmised that someone must have come before him and let
cut the animal. So, when he saw the Buddha under the shade of the
bush, he took him for the man who had freed the animal from his trap
and flew into a rage. He took out his bow and arrow to shoot at the
Buddha, but as he drew his bow, he became immobilized and remained
fixed in that position like a statue. His sons followed and found
their father; they also saw the Buddha at some distance and thought he
must be the enemy of their father. All of them took out their bows and
arrows to shoot at the Buddha, but they also became immobilized and
remained fixed in their respective postures. When the hunter and his
sons failed to return, the hunter's wife followed them into the
forest, with her seven daughters-in-law. Seeing her husband and all
her sons with their arrows aimed at the Buddha, she raised both her
hands and shout: "Do not kill my father."
When her husband heard her words, he thought, "This must be my
father-in-law", and her sons thought, "This must be our grandfather";
and thoughts of loving-kindness came into them. Then the lady said to
them, ''Put away your bows and arrows and pay obeisance to my father".
The Buddha realized that, by this time, the minds of the hunter and
his son; had softened and so he willed that they should be able to
move and to put away their bows and arrows. After putting away their
bows and arrows, they paid obeisance to the Buddha and the Buddha
expounded the Dhamma to them. In the end, the hunter, his seven sons
and seven daughters-in-law, all fifteen of them, attained Sotapatti
Fruition.

In the Vinaya chapter Mahākhandhaka (Pli Tv Kd 1) quoted below, the Buddha used his psychic power to temporarily hide Yasa from his father, both of whom were laypersons at the time. However, it appears that they were not cognizant of the fact.

The Lord saw the (great) merchant, the householder, coming in the
distance; seeing him, it occurred to the Lord: “Suppose I were to
perform such a psychic wonder that the (great) merchant, the
householder, sitting here, should not see Yasa the young man of
family, sitting here?” Then the Lord performed such a psychic wonder.
Then the (great) merchant, the householder, approached the Lord;
having approached he spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord has the Lord not
seen Yasa, the young man of family?”
“Well, householder, sit down. Perhaps, sitting here, you may see Yasa,
the young man of family, sitting here.”


How do I practise Vipassana and Samatha through Anapanasati?

If you are focusing on the breath sensation then it is vipassana and if you are focusing on in and out breath as a concept then it is samatha. There are many methods like mahasi, sunlun, goenka so I suggest you try it. I don't think you can reach jhana if you are just focusing on the in and out breath because it's not easy to stop thoughts from arising. That's why samatha and vipassana should be developed together. You should be aware of what you are doing all the time. Always be aware of sensation of touch.


Does the saṅkhatalakkhaṇa of dukkha apply to the noble path?

Theravada recognizes only nibbāna as unconditioned -- thus, not dukkha.

Other schools have disagreed on what is unconditioned:

  In the Sarvāstivādin tradition since the compilation of the Dharmaskhanda, three unconditioned dharmas have been recognized: analytical cessation (pratisankhayā-nirodha), nonanalytical cessation (apratisankhayā-nirodha) and space (ākāśa). In the Theravada tradition, only one unconditioned dharma, nirvana, is recognized (Dhammasanghani p.244), a position also maintained in the Agamas and by the Vātsīputrīya school. According to the Samaya, the Mahāsanghika, Ekavyavahārika, Lokottaravādin, and Kaukutica schools all recognized the following nine unconditioned dharmas: (1) analytical cessation (2) nonanalytical cessation (3) space (4) the realm of infinity of space (5) the realm of infinity of consciousness (6) the realm of nothingness (7) the realm of neither consciousness nor unconsciousness (8) the law of dependent origination (9) the law of the noble path [...]. The Mahīsāsaka school also recognized nine unconditioned dharmas; but its list differed somewhat from that of the Mahāsanghika school and included such items as immovability, the eternal law of good dharma, the eternal law of bad dharma, the eternal law of indeterminate dharma, the eternal law of the path, and the eternal law of Dependent Origination. The law of Dependent Origination was included in the list of unconditioned dharmas because it was regarded as an unchanging principle. The Sarvāstivādins disagreed with this position and did not recognize the existence of a principle of Dependend Origination separate from conditioned dharmas. For the Sarvāstivādins, the law of Dependend Origination itself was conditioned.

  For the Mahaśiśākas, the path to nirvana was recognized as an unconditioned dharma because the practices established by the Buddha were considered to be eternal truths. The Sarvāstivādins opposed this position by maintaining that although nirvana was unconditioned, the wisdom the Buddha had realized was conditioned and not eternal.

  -- A history of Indian Buddhism: From Sakyamuni to Early Mahayana


If karma is objective, how come it's cause for "good" rebirth?

Okay, I will take a shot. As I understand it...

Karma (Pali: kamma) cannot judge actions because 'kamma' refers to the intentional actions of persons. The result or fruit (Pali: phala) of some intentional act (kamma) is related to that act in a lawful (although complex) way.

We say that healthy habits tend to lead to having a healthy body because of a causal relationship between the action and result. If one exercises, eats healthy food, and keeps her body clean, this tends to promote bodily health. The laws of physics and biology are not judging someone's bodily habits; it is simply the case that, the laws being what they are, 'healthy choices' such as exercise  tend to lead to healthy results (cardiovascular health), and 'unhealthy choices' such as smoking cigarettes, tend to lead to unhealthy results or disease (cancer).

In the same way, according to Buddhism, the nature of the universe is such that certain kinds of bodily, verbal, and mental actions are causally related to certain kinds of results. If, e.g., one initiates good actions, i.e., one intentionally gives, is kind to others, and seeks to learn from the wise, this will tend to produce good results including fortunate future birth. As in the above analogy, the laws governing kamma are not judging you; it is simply the case that, the laws being what they are, 'good/skillful actions' such as kindness tend to lead to good/desirable results (being born beautiful), and 'bad/unskillful choices' such as intentionally killing beings, tend to lead to bad/undesirable results (short life as a human or birth in animal or hell realm).

The relationships between intentional action and its results were well-known, we hear, by the Buddha, who taught them to others. See, e.g., the Maha Kammavibhanga Sutta


Karma responsibility regarding beheadings

One would need to attain one of those supernatural powers that enables one to see other people's previous lives to know for sure. Anyway, the fact is that for every man whose head is chopped off, there has to be another man who carries out the gruesome act. So, ever wonder what'll be waiting for the executioner in the future life times? According to the law of kamma, he'll never be able to get away with what he did. He'll have to pay with his own head or something similar sooner or later..


Does rational thinking avoid dogma and enhance our wisdom?

There are 3 kinds of knowledge.

knowledge based on thinking (cintā-mayā-paññā). Rational thinking comes under this.
knowledge gained by learning from others (suta-mayā-paññā)
knowledge based on mental development or meditation (bhāvanā-mayā-paññā)

Only the third kind of knowledge leads one to freedom from suffering. One can never attain enlightenment by thinking up theories.


Can I attain to Satori in Walking Meditation?

Yes. But the walking must be done with 'empty mind' so consciousness illuminates.


At the behest of ChrisW - not to sound flippant, but you really do need a teacher if you are going to study koans.  At their very core, koans are asking you to look at something outside your current way of seeing the world.  Unfortunately, you simply can't use your current system of thinking to correctly discern something outside of it.  (Godel, Escher, and Bach, right?)  You absolutely need a second opinion - someone with confirmed understanding - and that's where a teacher comes in.

By going at this yourself you run the risk of falling into two traps.  On the one hand, you might come to mistakenly think you've understood something.  We are great at deluding ourselves, after all.  This is especially true when it comes to our habits, preconceived notions, and obstacles (you know, the very things koans seek to rout out!).  Without a teacher to point out that your understanding is less than ideal (or entirely wrong!) there is no limit to how screwed up you can get.

On the other hand, and this happens with quite a bit of frequency, sometimes we actually see the very thing a koan is pointing at, but ignore it or don't take it to be significant.  Seeing into a koan isn't exactly accompanied by the singing of angels.  Well, sometimes it is.  More often than not, however, you aren't even going to understand what it is you've seen.  At the very least, you aren't going to understand why it's important.  I once sat with a koan for years thinking I hadn't answered it when I had actually seen into the very first week.  Me, in my boundless stupidity, just assumed that I was supposed to be looking for something more significant than what I was experiencing!  If I didn't have a teacher (who finally demanded a black and white, literal report on what was happening with my practice) I might still be sitting with that same koan today!


Sati means to 'remember' (SN 48.10) or 'bring to & keep in mind' (MN 117).

Sampajana is situational wisdom; the right or thorough understanding of or for a situation.

Sampajana is from the words saṃ & pajāna (cp. pajānāti). It appears suttas such as MN 118, AN 3.121 & SN 12.28 indicate mere pajānāti might be a level of knowing or recognition that is not as complete as sampajana.

For example, in MN 118, pajānāti is only used with the most basic practise, namely, knowing long & short breathing. In AN 3.121, pajānāti is used for the recognition of the arising of defilements (which means the mind does not have thorough understanding; if defilements are arising). In SN 12.28, pajānāti of Dependent Origination is called 'one endowed with a trainee’s knowledge’; ‘one who has entered the stream of the teaching’. Thus, mere pajānāti appears different to saṃ + pajāna, namely, "thorough" or "complete" understanding.

While the suttas do not explain much about sampajana, when SN 47.35 briefly defines 'sampajana', it uses the word "vidita" (pp. of vindati), which means "to understand" or "understood", as Bhikkhu Bodhi appeared to properly translate as "understood" (and Sujato & Thanissaro improperly translated as "known").

  And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu exercise clear comprehension? Here, bhikkhus, for a bhikkhu feelings are understood as they arise,
  understood as they remain present, understood as they pass away.
  Thoughts are understood as they arise, understood as they remain
  present, understood as they pass away. Perceptions are understood as
  they arise, understood as they remain present, understood as they pass
  away. It is in this way, bhikkhus, that a bhikkhu exercises clear
  comprehension.

  Bhikkhu Bodhi

Thus, it appears obvious "sampajjana" means to thoroughly or completely understand something or a situation with right understanding rather than to have mere "bare awareness". "Bare awareness" without understanding (similar to a small child ignorantly looking non-judgmentally at the ocean, not understanding its danger) is not "sampajana".

For example, in MN 66 and SN 12.17, the word "vidita" means "to understand" rather than merely "experience with bare awareness", as follows:

  Because I understand the diversity of faculties as it applies to this person.

  Indriyavemattatā hi me, udāyi, imasmiṃ puggale viditā.

  MN 66

  However, I have recognized individual differences.

  Api ca mayā puggalavemattatā viditā”ti.

  SN 12.17

MN 66 & SN 12.17 seem to show Bhikkhu Sujato and particularly Bhikkhus Thanissaro (with his "bare awareness") provide inaccurate translations & explanations of SN 47.35.

In summary, sati delivers & maintains sampajjana. They work together.

Please refer to Ajahn Jayasaro You Tube or Ajahn Buddhadasa Part II. The Use of Dhamma.


Tibetan Buddhism:Recieving inititation in India/Tibet

I think you should search for vajrayana buddhist temple

  Vajrayana Buddhism is one of the most important and most followed Buddhist tradition in the present states of Buddhism in the whole world. Also known as the Tantric Buddhism, Vajrayana Buddhism is also represented as the Diamond Way or Thunderbolt Way and Indestructible Way. source

Not sure about India but I think in Nepal you would find a master of Vajrayana. Maybe you can start by taking up a course in Kopan Monastery in Kathmandu. They are not vajrayana of course, they are Gelug branch of Mahayana but when you go there and meet the Monks you  can ask about what you want and they'll guide you.


What did the Buddha mean by 'development of the body'?

I only quickly browsed the sutta (not reading it all) but the question seems to not really be relevant to the Buddha because it was not the Buddha that introduces the phrase: "development of the body". Instead, it was Saccaka the Jain that introduced the phrase, probably from Jainism.

  Then Saccaka the Nigantha...said to the Blessed One, "There are, Master Gotama, some brahmans & contemplatives who live committed to
  the development of the body..."

The Buddha answered as follows, which is just the standard teaching about development of mindfulness & wisdom in relation to the six spheres of sense contact:

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

When suttas are read, such the often cited SN 44.10 which is about 'self' & 'no-self' (rather than about the Buddha's doctrine of 'not-self'), I suggest we should be very careful about putting words into the Buddha's mouth based on terms used in questions made by non-Buddhists.

Another example is the Tevijja Sutta, in which the Buddha answers questions to Brahmans, yet some scholars believe it is about Nibbana.

  Asked about the path to union with Brahma, the Buddha explains it in terms of the Buddhist path, but ending with the four brahmaviharas;
  the abbreviated way the text is written out makes it unclear how much
  of the path comes before this; Robert Gombrich has argued that the
  Buddha was meaning union with Brahma as synonymous with nirvana.
  Wikipedia

Similarly, the Buddha often uses the term 'nama-rupa' in answers to questions made by Brahmans. Since the Brahmans did not know the Buddha's teachings, the term 'nama-rupa' in these contexts probably retains the Brahmanistic meaning.


Meditation, compassion: How to handle people who dominate you in the office?

Every worker has a duty to become proficient in & do their work. A proper leader must nurture this. Also, rude speech is improper in the workplace; just as rude speech is improper in Buddhism.

In reality, the values in original Pali Buddhism perfectly fit a secular world. For example, if the Pali scriptures are read, it will not be found the Buddha speaking very politely to everyone and, particularly, always agreeing with other's views. Often the Buddha was firm (but always fair) to others in his speech & the Buddha always conformed with what is ethically & dhammically correct thus often correcting or even admonishing the wrong views of others.

Just like the Dhamma-Vinaya (Doctrine-&-Disciple) has clear rules, a workplace has set rules & delegation of duties. These should be adhered to, without prejudice, which results in a lack of confusion.

If you are a leader, you have the opportunity to nurture a clear, ethical & unconfused workplace. It is when workplace leaders become corrupt, prejudiced or too wavering when confusion arises & difficulties begin, particularly for ethical workers. Most people take any chance to dominate. A fair & ethical leader is rare.

In short, less focus on personalities (including your own) and more focus on rules & responsibilities.

  Kesi, I train a tamable person [sometimes] with gentleness, [sometimes] with sternness, [sometimes] with both gentleness &
  sternness.

  Kesi Sutta

Some references:

Right Speech From His Own Lips

A Constitution for Living: Buddhist Principles for a Fruitful and Harmonious Life

Sigalovada Sutta: The Layperson's Code of Discipline

  Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world.  What four kinds?  The four kinds are:

  Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised,
  according to the truth, at the proper time.

  Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be
  blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.

  Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and do not praise those who should be
  praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.

  Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praise those who should be praised, according
  to the truth, at the proper time.

  Potaliya, these four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world.  Of these four kinds of people, that kind should be the most
  fair and right, the most refined, to you?

  "Venerable Lord Gotama, of all those four kinds of people, the kind of person who does not blame those who should be blamed, according to
  the truth, at the proper time, and does not praise those who should be
  praised, according to the truth, at the proper time; is the kind of
  person who is the most beautiful and refined to me.  What is the
  reason for this?  Because this is fair and right with upekkha
  (equanimity)."

  Potaliya, of all those four kinds of people, whichever kind of person blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the
  proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the
  truth, at the proper time; this kind of person is the most beautiful
  and refined of these four kinds of people.  What is the reason for
  this?  It is fair and right because such a one knows the right time in
  those circumstances.

~~~

  Avoiding the biases: when an administrator is carrying out his functions, he should not allow the four biases, or deviations from
  righteousness, to interfere:

  Chandagati: biased conduct on account of like

  Dosagati: biased conduct on account of dislike

  Mohagati: biased conduct on account of delusion or foolishness

  Bhayagati: biased conduct on account of
  timidity and fear


Do animals feel emotions just like us or do they feel emotions on an
  instinctual level only?

AN 3.61 says "for those who feel, I teach the Four Noble Truths". Animals do not "feel". If animals could "feel", they would not be controlled by their cravings & emotions. They would employ mindfulness & wisdom at sense contact & feeling. But instead of "feeling", animals are driven by their emotions rather than "feel" their "emotions". If animals could "feel" their emotions, they could practise vedanupassana & cittanupassana and stop the arising of craving.

  What makes animals different from humans according to their planes of existence?

In Buddhism, the word translated as "animal" is "tiracchāna", which means to "move horizontally" or not evolve on a spiritual level; to merely be guided by instincts of reproduction, sex, territorialism, etc. For example, "worldly talk" by monks in Buddhism is called "animal talk".

The word translated as "human" is "manussa", which means "high minded". Suttas such as SN 56.47 define the "human state" as moral righteousness, non-harmful & realised the Four Noble Truths.

For example, animals believe pornography, sexual promiscuity & other forms of liberal sex are OK. Where as "humans" see the danger, degradation & dysfunction of sexual liberalism. The Lokapala Sutta says:

  Bhikkhus, these two bright principles protect the world. What are the
  two? Shame and fear of wrongdoing. If, bhikkhus, these two bright
  principles did not protect the world, there would not be discerned
  respect for mother or maternal aunt or maternal uncle's wife or a
  teacher's wife or the wives of other honored persons, and the world
  would have fallen into promiscuity, as with goats, sheep, chickens,
  pigs, dogs and jackals. But as these two bright principles protect
  the world, there is discerned respect for mother... and the wives of
  other honored persons.

  Lokapala Sutta

  How can an animal get out of their plane? Is it by working off Kamma by suffering?

Animals leave the animal plane by realising the Four Noble Truths, as taught in SN 56.120, SN 56.47, etc, and abandoning instinctual lusts. This video (in English here) shows the animal named Angulimala realising the Four Noble Truths and having rebirth in the human realm due to abandoning violence.

  How does evolution work in terms of animals/humans cause I hear it works with Buddhism?

Buddhism is about 'spiritual evolution' rather than 'physical evolution'. Sutta, such as MN 8, says wholesome states 'lead upwards'.

  The Way Leading Upwards

  Cunda, just as all unwholesome states lead downwards and all wholesome states lead upwards, so too:

  (1) A person given to cruelty has non-cruelty to lead him upwards.

  (2) One given to killing living beings has abstention from killing living beings to lead him upwards.

  (3–43) One given to…to lead him upwards.

  (44) One given to adhere to his own views, who holds on to them tenaciously and relinquishes them with difficulty, has non-adherence
  to his own views, not holding on to them tenaciously and relinquishing
  them easily, to lead him upwards.


There is nothing I know of about the qualities arising from sotapanna attainment that preclude the arising of fear of death. A sotapanna has eradicated wrong view of self, attachment to non-essential practices and vows, and doubt about the triple gem. Fear of death as a view would not arise I don't think, e.g. "death is fearsome", but as an emotional reaction to thoughts of death, there is no reason to think it couldn't possibly arise.  Fear, according to the Vism Maha-tika, is based on anger, which a sotapanna can still give rise to. Only an anagami is free from anger entirely.


Is it not conceit when you compare yourself to other people?

From the Buddhist viewpoint, conceit is a delusion that convinces us that we are the sum of our experiences. When we compare ourselves to others, we create a sense of self in our minds. then that sense of self is involved in comparison to others that generates "self" inflicted suffering, which is where the concept of no-self comes into Buddhist thought as an antidote to that particular suffering.

According to the Buddha, there are three conceits. The first conceit, I am better that others, leads to pride and arrogance. The second, I am worse than others, leads to envy or resentment. The third, I am the same as others, generates complacency.

"And what are the three kinds of conceit that are to be abandoned? (1) Conceit, (2) the inferiority complex, and (3) arrogance: these are the three kinds of conceit that are to be abandoned."
from AN 6.106, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi

Conceit is among that which defiles the mind, and can generate several of the others on that list.

"Imperfections that defile the mind:
(1) covetousness and unrighteous greed
(2) ill will
(3) anger
(4) revenge
(5) contempt
(6) a domineering attitude
(7) envy
(8) avarice
(9) deceit
(10) fraud
(11) obstinacy
(12) presumption
(13) conceit (mana)
(14) arrogance
(15) vanity
(16) negligence"
from MN7, translated by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi

Lastly, the short answer to your question is...Yes.


It's taken from (or quoted in) MN 7 (but it's one of the Pali Formulae -- buddha-vacana.org says, of this one, "45 occurrences", so I suppose this occurs in 45 suttas; also, that it's a component of the Sekha Paṭipadā).

It's one of the Anussati -- specifically Saṅghānussati. Sati is "mindfulness" -- and anu is "after (behind)", "for (towards an aim)", "according to (in conformity with)", also "each/every/one-by-one" -- so, combined, "remember" or "recollect" or "call to mind".

AN 3.70 says (of all the Anussati) that, "as they recollect ... their mind becomes clear, joy arises, and mental corruptions are given up".

Commentary says that this is referring to the "ariya sangha" (the noble sangha), i.e. all enlightened ones. The "8 [types of] individuals" refer to the "four stages of enlightenment" (sotāpanna etc.) or as it says "the four pairs of persons" -- both ordained and/or lay.


Does thinking during an action improve the quality of the action or reduce it?

Lets begin with our good old actor Bruce lee and ascend to Buddhism afterwards....
What you are referring to is something called "Reflexes". In martial arts the reason they practice long hours is to train their bodies to fight automatically. This is the extreme level of fighting and he who is in this level is considered an elite. Here your muscles do the thinking for you and there is no need for logical reasoning (like your hand is feeling heat from a candle and immediately taking the hand away).
The Scientific explanation is very simple on this. There is a thing called "Muscle memory". Muscle memory is your muscles learning the things that you do constantly. This allows you to do things very fast and better than a novice.
for example :- Playing a guitar without looking at the strings, Typing something without looking at the keyboard and etc.

There is a common misinterpretation of what "Mindfulness" truly is, my school teach us differently and the form you are mentioning is "Not so effective" as to my teacher. So here is what we have learned as Mindfulness.....

Lets discuss your own example,
When i'm writing,like any other time my mind starts to wander and start many discussions within. I may even get angry or bored. I might even start to focus on the debate my mind has generated within a couple of minutes and jump into it. I am no longer focused on my writing and i may even write a wrong letter or a word.

Clearly here i have lost my focus and i'm jumping back and forth on my writing and debating with my mind. this is clearly not being mindful.
So if i focus on my writing and focus my thinking on what i have written and what i am about to write that focus my mind on the task at hand. Now i'm mindful about what i am actually doing this instance.

When asked about the version of mindfulness that is mentioned on the question my teacher had a reply like this....

(The person who asked the question asked......)
Is it correct to think i'm walking now,  now i'm taking the right foot, now i'm taking the left foot. as a form of mindfulness?
(My teachers answer....)
What is the reason that we as Buddhists go on to practice mindfulness?
Because we are trying to reach Nirvana. And when we are not mindful the mind start to wonder.
Where does the mind wander?

Mind wander in the adoring nice memories of the past, Bright hopes of
the future and in the moment we enjoy currently and it gets
attached.
Mind wander in the cruel worrying past, dread for what future may bring and finds a reason to start hating right now
Mind wander in a chaos. it jumps here and there, a moment ago you were laughing and now you are feeling bad and almost about to cry. Seconds later you are angry and a half an hour later you are burning in lust.

These three phases or sides of your mind feeds the craving you have for life,to be born again,to live forever,to chase the mirage of happiness.
This is bad because it's these three phases that drives a being further into "Samsara".
These 3 has brought you here and they will drag you through the dangerous lower realms to feed on innocent little animals,to be be hunted by lions and tigers,to be eaten alive and even to be tortured and burned in "hellish" realm. This is the true danger that a being face in Samsara. Because once there in a bad realm there is virtually no hope for a poor being.
And what about the good realms.....
Yes, those 3 sides of your mind also took you to "Deva" realm,to "Brahma" realm and here to "Human" realm. Not so bad you might say,won't you?
Well lets see. you have been born so many times in this samsara. Our Lord Buddha said
"Any being has been killed so many times.If someone collect all the blood that fell when he or she was decapitated,the amount of blood will be roughly equal to the amount of water in the sea."
Look at that old person next to you, after listening to the words of lord Buddha can you certify that he or she next to you has not being someone you loved?
Well lets see this in another way. We know what animals are,they are the poor beings who lost their way and ended up in a bad realm.
When you go home and eat a delicious meal like a fish curry or sausages,look at it closely. Imagine a one you had. Do you see your father or mother? How about that girl you promised to live eternity with in another life, don't you see her?
The sad fact is you do. Now you are eating them so greedily,just like they ate you. Look at this bizarre circle that we roam around from good realms to bad, from bad to good.
One day Lord Buddha smiled and there was Ven. Anandha thero nearby. As a smile from a Buddha is rare the venerable one asked why. Lord Buddha gave a strange reply, if you focus on this statement alone you can understand the true reason to practice "Mindfulness" and the true danger of Samsara. The answer was "Look Anandha, look at these ants here. There isn't a single ant in this long row of ants that hasn't been the king of earth".

Remember these words from Lord Buddha,
"Vinnana" is like a seed, attachment or craving is like water and Karma is the land.
Because your mind wander and get attached it creates Karma. Whatever you get attached to,you soon start to crave for it. There it is The land,the water and the seed, because of this you are born and will be born.
Practice to focus on the temporary nature of things and use your knowledge to see and feel the world not your body. practice to keep away from the 3 phases mentioned above.
Mindfulness Lord Buddha taught was keeping mind from those 3 phases mentioned above and maintaining your life and the very second you live in on 8 noble ways.


Why did the Buddha teach the mahayana? No, He did not teach Mahayana. Nor did He teach Theravada, Sarvastivada, Pudgalavada, etc. and the 18 or so schools that splitted from His original Teaching/Dhamma after His passing away. Fortunately for us, all the different schools still share the same "core" regarding the Discourses and Discipline: 3 characteristics, 4NT, 5 Precepts, 8NP, 12DO, etc. Of course there're certain doctrinal disagreements among the schools which is expected and unavoidable but if one sticks to those pillars of teaching, one'd find out that they have a lot more in common than difference.


What is the relation between Astrology and Buddhism?

In terms of horoscopes, it is definitely not a Buddhist practice to explain one's future or decisions based on some external forces (planets).

However, phases of the Moon have some importance in Buddhism. Many significant events in Buddha's life coincided with the Full Moon - birth, giving first teachings or death, to name a few. Full Moon is also considered to be the Amitabha Buddha Day (Buddha of Limitless Light and the principal Buddha in Pure Land Buddhism). One can find full lunar calendars where different Moon phases are associated with various Buddhas, practices etc. One example of observance days based on the lunar calendar is Uposatha when practitioners intensify their practice and make conscious effort to keep the 5 precepts.

One may wonder why bother with the Moon. In the simplest terms, the reasoning behind it is that our body is mostly composed of water and just like the oceans, the body (with its energy channels) does react to the Moon phases.

The main point is that the Moon phases are not used to predict one's future but rather to mark favourable or auspicious days for specific practises. One could coordinate one's practise with the Moon so that in different days one could focus on specific Buddha forms or teachings. So the Moon should be considered as a support and not an oracle of some sort. It might be helpful but it is not necessary to follow it.


According to Buddha's characteristics and teaching in Pali Canon, could he have taught Vajrayana (and Karmamudra)?

According to the early texts the Buddha didn't have any secret teachings. Somewhere in the Digha Nikaya (I think it's in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, but it's a very long Sutta and I can't quite locate it) the Buddha said: "I do not have the closed fist of the teacher who holds anything back" and in AN 1.283 the Buddha said: "Three things shine openly, not in secret. What three? The orb of the moon, the orb of the sun and the Dhamma and discipline taught by the Tathàgata"

One thing to note though is that the Tantras mostly don't claim to have been spoken by the historical Buddha Sidhartha Gautama, or Shakyamuni Buddha, but by Vajradhara, a different Buddha that is often understood to be Shakyamuni appearing in Tantric form. They say that Vajradhara appeared to the various Mahasiddhas in visions and revealed to them the various Tantras that became the basis of the tantric teachings.

Also, just to clarify for readers who may not be aware, Karmamudra is a high level tantric practice in which one engages in sexual intercourse with a special consort in order to destroy the knots around the Heart Chakra and thus allow the attainment of enlightenment. It is a very high level practice and isn't done lightly. Monks are not allowed to do it (at least in the Gelugpa school) because of their vows of celibacy. It's a very rare practice.


In contrast to the other answers, it is my perception that mindfulness and deep intellectual thinking complement each other.

Sports are not about defeating the other team but rather raising your own performance to a higher level.  The higher level of physical or mental (chess) performance is a result of this alignment between the mind, body and spirit.

As a skilled chess player, my best games come not from furious concentration but rather from an openness to the possibilities and patterns of the board. Indeed many chess players compare their state of mind to Zen or Taoist mindfulness.  As with a koan answer, the right move often comes as lightning.

The mind can be trained to be present and creative at the same time. Both take a lot of practice however.  A novice chess player will be looking for the next move and confused by all the possibilities.  Just so, the novice meditation practitioner will be confused by all the stray thoughts.

I'd encourage you to quiet your mind and emotions during a competitive chess game (not easy) perhaps the deeper possibilities on the board will be revealed.


A class of semi divine beings who inhabit the Catummaharajika realm and are the lowest among the devas. They are generally classed together with the Asuras and the Nagas. Beings are born among them as a result of having practised the lowest form of sila. They are said to be able to receive merits from humans.


Why are Buddhas always Indian, male and human?

The question has two parts. Why only one Buddha? This is only in the Theravāda. In other Buddhist schools two, five, or up to millions of Buddhas can be seen. Two in the White Lotus, Five in the five Buddha Maṇḍala (featuring Vairocana Tathāgata, Akṣobhya Tathāgata, Ratnasambhava Tathāgata, Amitābha Tathāgata, and Amoghasiddhi Tathāgata), and an infinite number in the Avatamsaka Sūtra. Most non-Theravādin schools accept the existence of multiple Buddhists.

The second part is why ethnically North Indian? Artists in different countries tend to depict the Buddha as having features similar to their own ethnic group, and besides have nationally distinctive styles, so one can usually tell say a Khmer Buddha from a Chinese, or a Tibetan. Many of the Buddhist artists (the image is by my colleague Dharmacārī Āloka) I know paint the Buddha as similar to themselves - since most of the artists I know are English or Kiwis, their paintings tend to look Anglo-Saxon. But there's nothing to stop, say someone of African descent portraying the Buddha as African.

And of course there is some cross over. So Khmer artists tend to portray solitary Buddhas but with Khmer features, whereas Tibetans portray many Buddhas with Tibetan features. For some artists it makes sense to portray Gautama Buddha as an Indian because it seems more historically authentic, though of course we do not know the ethnic identity of Buddha - it's possible the Śākyas originally came from Iran for example.


Is the path considered or viewed as being selfish?

Chavalata Sutta: The Firebrand, see also AN 5.20; AN 4.96; AN 4.99 and most efficient of what Ms. Frying Pan had to say about this issues: The Bamboo Acrobat


When the Buddha changes his mind to teach

It is the Asibandhakaputta Sutta- SN 4.8.6
It was Asibandhakaputta , the disciple of Nighanta-Natha-Putta, who raised the question for which Buddha gave the
parable of the three fields, the good , the middling, and the poor.   In this parable Buddhist laity rank as the moderate field, between the Bhikkus (excellent) and the men of other creeds (poor).

Within this Sutta look for the Khettûpama Sutta - SN 4.8.7. where Buddha took this parable of the three fields: the greatly fertile field, the fertile field, and, the unfertile field.   This Sutta explains as to why the Buddha does not teach all people with the same level of effort. The greatly fertile field is prioritized over the fertile field and the fertile field is prioritized over the unfertile field.  The greatly fertile field as monks and nuns; the fertile field as laymen and laywomen; and, the unfertile field being adherents of other doctrine and methods. It also includes the parable of the three pots; the parable of righting the upside down thing; the parable of the uncovering; the parable of the right road; the parable of the lighted lamp.

  “Venerable Sir, doesn’t the Blessed One dwell compassionate towards all living beings?”

  “Yes, headman, the Tathagata dwells compassionate towads all living beings.”

  “Then why is it, venerable Sir, that the Blessed One teaches the Dhamma thoroughly to some, yet not so thoroughly to others?

  “Well then headman, I will question you about this. Answer as you see fit. What do you think headman? Suppose a farmer here had three fields: one excellent, one of middling quality, and one inferior – rough, salty, with bad ground. What do you think, headman? If that farmer wishes to sow seed, where would he sow it first… in the excellent field, in the field of middling quality, or in the field that was inferior – rough, salty, with bad ground?

You could read further on this in the Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1338, 1339, 1340.


Did anyone equate the tathagatagarbha with the past?

None identify buddha nature with the past. Generally speaking and regardless of the school of thought, buddha nature points to you having (at present) the potential to achieve buddhahood.

Cittamatrin identify buddha-nature to the mind-basis-of-all (alaya vijnana) while Madhyamika identify it to suchness with defilements, that is the emptiness of the mind of a sentient being. The Lankavatara Sutra equates tathagatagarba with mind-basis-of-all.

In his commentary to Maitreya's Sublime Continuum, Gyaltsab Je (Madhyamika-Prasangika) writes:

  Suchness with defilement is the basic element not liberated from the
  obscurations of mental afflictions, and is known as tathagata essence (Skt. tathagatagarbha).

Madhyamika-Svatantrika speak of emptiness of true existence while Madhyamika-Prasangika speak of emptiness of inherent existence. The Madhyamika idea is basically that if your mind was not empty, it would not be dependent, no change could occur in it, it could not be subject to transformation, it could not be separated from the obscuring factors, it could not come to be endowed with the two purities, would not be suitable to transform into the bodies of a buddha, and so forth.


The first book I read about Buddhism described the Sermon at Benares, i.e. the Dhammacakkappavattana, as explaining that the cause of suffering (the second noble truth) is,

... the craving to have what you don't have; the craving to keep what you can't keep; the craving to live; even the craving to die.

And here is the same quote from Access to Insight,

"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.

So I think that suicide must be missing the most important, fundamental truth of Buddhism.
Suicidal ideation is a risk factor: Suminda said, "You shouldn't even think about things like suicide".

Similarly, the "middle way" doctrine says not to afflict or self-mortify the body.
And, the doctrine of rebirth suggests that, although there are problems in life, these problems can't be escaped simply by dying. It was by 'unbinding' (not suicide) that in the Ariyapariyesana Sutta the Buddha said,

I reached the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'

According to the Vinaya even 'describing the advantages of dying' is wrong.

This, the third type of act covered by this
rule, can include [...] telling a
person of the miseries of life or the bliss of dying and going to heaven in such a
way that he/she might feel inspired to commit suicide or simply pine away to
death. [...] Thus, the Commentary notes, a bhikkhu talking to a dying patient should be
very circumspect in how he chooses his words, focusing not on how to speed up
the dying process but on how to inspire the patient with the following thoughts:
“The attainment of the paths and fruitions is not out of the ordinary for a
virtuous person. So, having formed no attachment for such things as your
dwelling, and establishing mindfulness in the Buddha, Dhamma, Saºgha, or the
body, you should be heedful in your attention.” The Vinita-vatthu to Pr 4
contains a number of stories in which bhikkhus comfort a dying bhikkhu by
asking him to reflect on what he has attained through the practice, which was
apparently a common way of encouraging a dying bhikkhu to focus his
thoughts on the best object possible. The suttas also contain advice on how to
encourage patients facing death. See, for example, MN 143, SN 36.7, and AN 6.16.
In all of these cases, the advice is aimed not at precipitating death but at inspiring
calm and insight.

As for "what makes life worth living": Buddhism can even seem quite 'negative' ("life is suffering") ... and so I asked this question, How to explain what Buddhism is? ... and people's answers to that explain it in more 'positive' or constructive terms: morality; concentration; and wisdom.
My dad told me, when I was young, that suicide is painful for the friends and family who are left behind (i.e. it causes suffering for others): I thought, even that is enough reason to avoid suicide.
And, for example, I lived with a friend: who became relatively enlightened, especially during the last year of her life. So it was more perfect, for her and for others, that she lived as long as she did, instead of dying earlier.
Perhaps what makes life worth living is that it's an opportunity to "live the holy life".
Many Buddhist descriptions try to describe the experiences of one person (e.g. in meditation), or even of 'no self'.
But part of the "holy life" is in the relationships between people, for example,

As he was sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "This is half of the holy life, lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie."[1]
"Don't say that, Ananda. Don't say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life.

Perhaps you don't feel you have that (or are that) at the moment but there is every chance you might in future.

Unfortunately there are things which can make life seem unimportant: bad companions, "heedlessness", "restlessness", etc.
Instead, try to remember what Right intention is:

And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve.

Also, problems are fixable: problems, too, are 'conditioned' and therefore changeable.


Why do Bodhisattvas postpone enlightenment?

This question (more or less) was asked a year ago. I recently gave a fairly fully answer to it.


Everything that happens to us is caused by an action we have committed in the sansara. This was common to Buddha as well (Devdatta's actions etc.).
Therefore the answer to the question What is the best action? is,
Understand that this is a result of an action you have committed in the past (maybe in previous births). Further, try to spread metta (kindness, love) towards him though he is lying to you. In future, he will admit what he did today. Until that there's no much meaningful thing to do.


What is meant by ‘threefold bliss’ in the “verses of sharing and aspiration”

This page ...

  2007-11-16 The Threefold Bliss 55:28

  The talk explores worldly or human happiness, celestial or heavenly happiness and transcendent happiness or Nibbana

... says that it means:

  worldly or human happiness
  celestial or heavenly happiness
  transcendent happiness or Nibbana

I haven't found a more canonical source for the quote i.e. I don't know where that chant comes from.

The page Reflections on sharing blessings includes the Pali if that's helpful:

  Puññāni pakatāni me
  May they soon attain

  Sukhañca tividhaṃ dentu
  The threefold bliss

  Khippaṃ pāpetha vomataṃ
  And realize the Deathless.

The word translated as "bliss" is sukha, defined here (Wikipedia) and here (PTS dictionary).

The PTS dictionary definition includes:

  Two kinds, viz kāyika & cetasika; at Pts.i.188; several other pairs at AN.i.80; three (praise, wealth, heaven) Iti.67; another three (manussa˚, dibba˚, nibbāna˚) Dhp-a.iii.51; four (possessing, making good use of possessions, having no debts, living a blameless life) AN.ii.69

Those three ("manussa˚, dibba˚, nibbāna˚") correspond to the three identified above (i.e. "of man, of gods, and nibbana") -- though I don't understand the reference, i.e. what "Dhp-a.iii.51" means.


How to Focus consciously?

The Right Mindfulness is being equanimous towards the pleasant and unpleasant, which prevents craving and aversion from arising, while free from corruption of insight (free from Vipallasa, i.e., seeing the Three marks of existence), which prevents ignorance arising, within the 4 Frames of Reference. If unwholesome roots arise, deluded (with Vipallasa), hence creating fabrications  or based on external objects or conceptual objects hence not within the 4 frames of reference it is not right mindfulness.

If you are not equanimous and there is a pleasant sensation this leads to attachment and if there is an unpleasant sensation this leads to aversion and if neutral sensation, without insight into the 3 Universal Characteristics, this leads to ignorance. Hence, unwise attention is attention corrupted by Vipallasa and the experienced sensation is leading to the unwholesome roots. See commentary of Yoniso Manasikāra Sampadā Sutta & Vipallasa Sutta by Piya Tan and Kīta,giri Sutta

    For, one who perceives impermanence, Meghiya, establishes the perception of non-self. One who perceives
    non-self eliminates the ‘I am’ conceit. He attains nirvana here and now.”

Meghiya Sutta

Similarly of the other opposites of Vipallasa (3 universal characteristics) can be understood through, impermanence, or seeing arising and passing.

So simply put it what needs to be done is:

stay with the sensation in the body
be equanimous - displaces craving and aversion
know what ever experience is impermanent, i.e., arising and passing - displaces ignorance

Also see this answer.

If you mind wanders away and you lose attention get in touch with the sensation than are prevalent in the body and mind and establish your attention on the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness.

Once you experience a gross (easy to penetrate) sensation try to experience its subtleness (had to penetrate) by strongly focussing on it and trying to divide and dissecting it.

  (coding takes your entire attention), Which seems impossible to do consciously?

Generally when doing something like this your attention will be lost. Thinking creates sensation in the head and chest regions. If you cannot figure something you the frustration means you hear rate increases and breathing becomes heavy. Similarly when exited. Sometimes thinking too much gives a headache. If your figure something out, or your code works, you will feel happy, which gives a pleasant sensation. It is these sensation you should be looking at. This will require extra practice, but what is essential is you are mindful when you do you daily work. The training on the cushion or chair is just a booster or pre training for this.

Also additional information can be found in:

The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna
The Four Sampajanna
Why Vedana and What is Vedana?


Subtleties... The concept of emptiness is a mental object that is predicated on other things. We only get to the concept of emptiness by seeing through and negating the fullness (meaningfulness) of other concepts.
The experience of emptiness in not predicated on the concept of it. To experience emptiness is to see that 'emptiness' is no more real than 'fullness'.
If one holds the concept of a thing-in-its-own-right (an 'own thing'), one must hold the concept of its negation (that which is 'not-such'). If one holds the concept of a negation, one must hold a concept of that which has been negated (a thing-in-its-own-right). So what lies beneath those concepts?


Buddhist (Theravada) cure for "Insecurity"?

1.One of the ways to deal with anxiety,insecurity or lack of self confidence is by developing Sila (Morality,Integrity,Virtue,Ethics).

"Five blessings, householders, accrue to the righteous person through his practice of virtue: great increase of wealth through his diligence; a favorable reputation; a confident deportment, without timidity, in every society, be it that of nobles, brahmans, householders, or ascetics; a serene death; and, at the breaking up of the body after death, rebirth in a happy state, in a heavenly world."
— DN 16*

2.Anxiety comes from fear and fear comes from aversion,a way to counter act aversion is by practicing metta bhavana (to yourself First,make sure you spend a lot of time on yourself,lack of self confidence masks self hatred).

3.Counteract Fear by developing one of the five spiritual faculties,Faith.Take refuge in the Triple Gem,Take refuge in the Present Moment.Embrace the present moment.Anxious or not.Don't fight it or get upset that you got anxious.This just makes it worse.Just note it.Anxiety.Be present for it.Hold it in Awareness and compassion.Yes you might feel worse or uncomfortable but that's okay.You can note.Uncomfortable.No matter what arises due to insecurity to anxiety you can always Note.Which means there is something bigger than anxiety and that is Mindfulness.And soo you will see it changes.So have faith in the Buddha's teaching,put it to practice and see for yourself.


Meditation through clearing the mind of all thoughts

From the viewpoint of Theravada Buddhism, we definitely do not teach this way. It's impossible to empty the mind. Thoughts pop up all the time. We can, however, train ourselves not to follow these thoughts. In other words, we want the mind to become stable and free of dependencies.

Here is a basic outline of the method of Mahasi Sayadaw, a prominent 20th-century meditation teacher:

Focus on the rising and falling of the abdomen during the process of
breathing. Focus on only one thing at a time, and make an honest effort to
focus well.
If a thought arises—besides the thought, "rising... falling..."—focus on the act of thinking itself. In other words, shift from "I wonder how much that car will cost me" to "thinking... thinking..."
If pleasure or pain is experienced, focus on the pleasure or pain itself.
Similar for liking, disliking, drowsiness, distraction, doubt.
When these objects disappear or become uninteresting, return to rising
and falling.

The ultimate goal of this practice is to bring about the insight into the nature of reality. This means understanding—not by thought, but by having seen the truth for oneself—that all experiences are:

Anicca—Impermanent
Dukkha—Unsatisfying
Anatta—Uncontrollable, not part of oneself

That being said, a beginner should have the guidance of a skilled teacher. Here is a meditation manual in the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition, by the Venerable Sir Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu.