How to chant the mantra Nam Myoho Renge Kyo?

What is the best way to chant it?

I think that:

Chanting that mantra is a characteristic of a form of Buddhism (a school, a tradition of Buddhism) called "Nichiren" (see Nichiren).
There aren't many users on this site who know about Nichiren, so it might be difficult to answer your question.
The most widespread Nichiren-oriented society outside Japan is called SGI
(Soka Gakkai International) -- I expect you can find more from their web site and/or by finding a group of SGI people near you.

For example:

  Daily Practice

  The core Buddhist practice of SGI members is chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo and reciting portions of the Lotus Sutra (referred to as gongyo), and sharing the teachings of Buddhism with others in order to help them overcome their problems.

  The practice of chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo was established by Nichiren (1222–82), a reformist Buddhist monk who identified the Lotus Sutra as the core teaching of Shakyamuni Buddha.

  Applying the Teachings

  Practice is supported by faith and study. SGI members study the teachings of Nichiren in order to deepen their understanding of the principles of Buddhism and the processes of inner transformation. Study strengthens faith and conviction, which finds expression in practice.

  Faith, in Nichiren Buddhism, is grounded in  the experience of applying Buddhism and seeing improvements in the quality of one’s life. Faith could be described as the ongoing effort to orient one’s heart toward the ideal of Buddhahood—the continual unfolding of one’s inherent potential for good, the ability to transform any negative circumstance into a source of growth and benefit, and a life dedicated toward helping others do the same.

  (etc.)

Their web site in India seems to be https://www.bharatsokagakkai.org/

My experience (in Canada) was that they are happy to have you join them their group, to meet to chant with them, and to explain their doctrines to you.

How can I have my desires fulfilled by that mantra?

I'd like to (but I'm not sure I can) explain that, in a way that's simple and accurate -- perhaps someone else will, who knows more about that form/school of Buddhism than I do.

I suppose it's easier to practice than it is to teach.

Or you may find an answer by reading the web pages I referenced -- see also for example Buddhist Concepts.
I'm referencing SGI's web site, because I think they're the biggest organisation of practitioners outside Japan whose practice depends on the mantra that you asked about.
There are other forms or schools of Buddhism too, which don't use that mantra. It's said there's a unity, that all schools of Buddhism have a lot in common with each other, perhaps it is all relevant to the "Buddhist method of worship".

I also recommend these topics, on this site:

What "technically" happens when we chant Nam Myoho Renge Kyo?
Question about Nichiren Buddhism
What is meant by Namu Amida Butsu and also Nam-myoho-renge-kyo?
How does chanting work in Nichiren Buddhism?

I suppose that it's important to hear, understand, and practice Buddhist doctrine (i.e. "dhamma" or "dharma"), possibly with other Buddhists -- and that mantra is connected with that, part of that.


I would skip it, allow me to explain why.

Just a little bit of context:
Your question touches on a very important point about meditation currently many people see meditation as a simple tool for relaxation, some mix meditation with music, some use it for healthy benefits only, stress reduction etc... there is nothing wrong with that, however in Buddhism meditation is seen as something very different from that, much more powerful.

Meditation is something sacred, special, divine, that is why we prostate, that is why we are thankful for the opportunity to meditate, it is something that we should pay respect to, Buddha attained enlightenment meditating.

In a Nutshell, as a way of showing respect for the meditation process you should never do it after drinking, keep it as something pure, something special in your mind and in your routine.

PS: This is my approach, I understand people from other traditions may think differently


I disagree with Sumida and ChrisW, an hour is too long for beginners and experts alike. In Zen monasteries we do zazen for between 30 - 45 minutes followed by about 10 minutes of kinhin (fast or slow walking meditation), then another period of zazen. For a beginner 20 minutes (or even less) is fine. In time you should aim to raise it to around 30 mins. If you want to do more you should break it up with kinhin (or possibly some yoga).

I agree with Chris that you should use a timer (a countdown timer on a digital watch is ideal). When the timer goes off, then get up (some people sway gently from side to side before getting up). You shouldn't be pondering during meditation whether to get up or not, a) you shouldn't be pondering things during meditation and b) if you practise like this you will turn meditation into an aesthetic experience (I'm enjoying this so I'll sit longer/I'm not enjoying this so I'll get up) which is not right meditation.


Correct, emotions are complex psychosomatic events, of which vedana is but a small component.

For the purposes of liberation, Buddhism differentiates between emotions in their affecting or intoxicating function, and emotions experienced as a result.

The first type are called klesha, they are traditionally defined by example, as want, hate, delusion, and all kinds of combinations of the three. (For the sake of accuracy I should say that not all kleshas are exactly emotional in nature... they can be strong mental concepts skewing or clouding one's interpretative and goal-making functions.)

The second type are various shades of "agreable" and "disagreable" experiences, including of course the cornerstone of Buddhism, duhkha and its false opposite, sukha. Again, I'm mixing all kinds of stuff in the same bucket here - some of these experiences are primarily somatic in nature and so would classify as vedana, and some are mostly mental - I suppose the most accurate way of saying would be that they are different mixes of mental and somatic states.

In Buddhism it is generally understood that emotions are conditioned by mental dispositions such as attachments, aversions, prejudices, assumptions, generalizations etc - which in their order come from past experience. Plus, the everpresent component is one's current attitude, conditioned by one's level of insight or ignorance about the nature of phenomena and mind.

The methods for working with emotions vary from one school to another. Traditional summary from later schools, is that earlier schools like Theravada primarily worked with (undesirable) emotions through either suppressing them or switching attention away to a different topic, -- from this we go to Mahayana schools which are said to work with emotions through underlying mental dispositions - by deconstructing the ego complex, and removing attachments, generalizations, assumptions etc. culminating in realization of Emptiness -- and then on to Vajrayana schools which are said to work with emotions directly in their psychosomatic form as energies, by using visualizations and yoga-inspired psychosomatic exercises. This stereotypical classification is obviously wrong, as in reality all schools use combination of all three approaches, presented in various ways. Indeed, if you think about it from psychological perspective, the three approaches are merely different embodiments of the same underlying principle. Especially as it comes to producing desirable emotional states, the schools show surprising unity of approaches, each presenting in their unique style.

To get to your specific questions,

  I wonder which method is most conducive to either processing an existing emotion, or release and allow unfelt (repressed/suppressed) emotions to arise.

There is no single method that works for all people in all circumstances, otherwise Buddhism would be a very simple thing. There are cases when suppressing/avoidance /distraction works best, practiced either momentarily or over a long term - there are cases when experiencing emotion in full, without analyzing/feeding its mental stimulus, works best - and then there are cases where analysis of assumptions&attachments is the most effective.

As for unfelt emotions, I think I can safely say that most schools agree that meditation is a very effective practice to help suppressed emotions come up. Also, in Mahayana and Vajrayana schools teachers use all kinds of scenario-based improvisations to have the apprentice meet their suppressed emotion or assumption face-to-face.

  I am particularly curious about the relationship of these meditative techniques towards emotions: (1) breathing meditation (2) visualization (3) body awareness (4) reappraising/re-framing cognitively.

To me, (1) breathing meditation is a great way to connect with the body and get in touch with the types of emotions stored in the body that are so deeply habituated as to be effectively unconscious.

(2) As I said, visualization is an active generation technique that may be used to directly stimulate certain emotions. These are primarily practiced in Tibetan Vajrayana schools. These techniques range from, should I say, abstract psychosomatic visualizations (colors, shapes, letters - imagined over various parts of one's body) - to vivid impersonations that involve imagining oneself as a certain persona or deity. complete with not only costume and appearance but most importantly the thoughts, emotions, and attitude that such character would have experienced.

(3) Body awareness is practiced in all schools, usually on beginner's stages - although the significance of this technique cannot be overemphasized. My various teachers were fond of reminding importance of posture, gait, comfort, speed of movement, grace, and generally good connection with the body.

(4) Reappraising/re-framing is taught in all schools, both in form of traditional frameworks, and custom-tailored teacher/student 1:1 work. Theravada, Mahayana/Zen, and Vajrayana has their own favorite themes and contexts that are too numerous and too deep to review in any details here.

  Lastly, I wonder whether it would be more beneficial to focus on feelings (vedana) or emotions themselves as an emphasis.

My personal advice is to treat emotions as two separate phenomena: bodily feelings, and mental dispositions that cause them - and to work with each separately, one at a time. Treating emotion as single unit ("here is what happened and now I feel this") can lead to projecting the emotion onto the world ("I can't live without my GF who made me heartbroken; or I hate her etc.") - so in effect you are creating a realm and inhabit it with your imaginary self, at the same time declaring oneself a helpless victim of situation. Instead, treating emotion as bodily feeling + mental disposition allows one to take on master's role and be in charge of one's mind and emotions.


How might Buddha have seen how far the gratification, danger and escape extend?

Because He was the one who experienced it all. As a prince, He had all the necessary means to experience the maximum level of pleasure/gratification. Later on, as the most extreme self-mortified ascetic, He was able to experience the most terrible kinds of suffering. Abandoning both extremes, He meditated and penetrated the Four Noble Truths. Then after this major breakthrough, He was able to claim that He directly knew as they really are the gratification, the danger, the escape, etc. In short, due to various factors like his time as a prince, an extreme ascetic, and the final breakthrough to the Four Noble Truths, the Buddha was able to see the true nature of all phenomena. In SN 14.31, Ven. Bodhi provided the Commentary's note:

  Spk: In this sutta the Four Noble Truths are discussed. The "gratification" (assada) in the four elements is the truth of the origin; the "danger" (adinava) is the truth of suffering; the "escape" (nissarana) is the truth of cessation; the "path" that understands the escape is the truth of the path.


Scattered mind while doing Body Scanning in Vipassana

I have read some suggestions for this like having the perception of light, walking meditation etc. but none of these are helping me out. I would be very grateful if someone could point out my mistakes and give some advise to overcome this.

Interesting, because I was just about to suggest the same when I read your post saying it doesn't work for you.

When I walk meditation, I have the same problem as you and I deal with it by simply noting the length of the distraction. I don't fight it. I simply say, "oh I was distracted for a block." Or I say, "I was distracted for a mile."

This sounds so simple and so silly, right?

But it works because what happens is that you will find that the distractions decrease in length over days and weeks. This is exactly the same approach taken for noting the length of breathing: "this is a long breath" and "this is a short breath".  The breath becomes longer on its own without any struggle or grasping.

Similarly, notice that you are "scanning the body" or that you are "distracted from scanning the body". Just be aware. I counted my breath for decades. That is only the first step!  Just be mindful and aware of what is happening. It is not a race. Be gentle and mindful.


What is initial thought and discursive thought

Ordinarily, when unrelated to jhana, the words 'vitakka' & 'vicara' simply mean 'thought', 'thinking' & 'thinking about'. For example, MN 19 is about 'two kinds of thinking'; MN 20 is about distracting thoughts &, in MN 44, 'vitakka' & 'vicara' are called the 'verbal conditioner' because they cause speech to occur, as follows:

  Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are
  verbal fabricators. MN 44

In the context of jhana, the words 'vitakka' & 'vicara' have a different & special meaning. Here, they do not refer to ordinary verbal thinking but to non-verbal movements of mind that finalise the attainment of & maintain the 1st jhana.

In respect to the attainment of the 1st jhana, 'vitakka & vicara' refer to 'applied & sustained thought', where the mind itself (rather than volitional intention) applies itself to bring to fruition the 1st first jhana. As said, these movements of mind are beyond the scope of ordinary volition.

Once the 1st jhana comes to be, 'vitakka & vicara' refer to 'directed thought & pondering / exploring / moving about ', where part of the mind itself remains active in examining & responding to its own response to the jhana factors (such as rapture), to ensure the jhana is maintained.

As stated in SN 48.10, jhana is born from 'letting go' ('vossagga'). Thus, 'vitakka & vicara' ('directed thought & pondering') operate in the 1st jhana to ensure the letting go & thus the jhana factors are maintained. Refer to Ajahn Brahm's explanation, here, about the "wobble".

There are many subtle different explanations of vitakka & vicara in respect to the 1st jhana. For example, the monk Thanissaro has translated with the words 'directed thought & evaluation'; and Buddhadasa had translated (from Thai) with the words 'noting' & 'experiencing' (here) and 'looking at' & 'knowing thoroughly' (here).

I personally prefer Ajahn Brahm's explanation because the existence of vitakka & vicara in the 1st jhana simply indicate the mind is not completely still, despite its attainment of 'one-pointedness'.

I also like Jeffrey Brooks summation as "sustained application of a meditation technique" (namely, the now automatic technique of 'letting go' ) but I do not agree with Jeffrey's translation of 'sustained attention' because the mind has 'attention' in every jhana:

  The correct translation of the Pali terms 'vitakka' and 'vicára,' with respect to the absorptions (jhanas), must be "applied and
  sustained attention" or "sustained application" of a meditation
  technique."

  Jeffrey Brooks

'One-pointedness' refers to the mind becoming unmovingly glued to a mental image ('nimitta'), which has arisen to replace the totally tranquilised breath as the object of meditation. This 'one-pointedness' can be compared to an axle upon which a wheel becomes fixed to. Although the wheel is fixed to the axle and cannot move off the axle, the wheel can still spin around the axle.

Similarly, although the mind is fixed or unmoving due to one-pointedness (which also results in ordinary volition ending), the mind itself can still actively move towards & away from the other factors of jhana. These movements of mind that sustain the meditation are 'vitakka & vicara'.

In conclusion, understanding what 'vitakka & vicara' are as factors of jhana will not assist in the attainment of jhana because these factors of jhana occur beyond the sphere of ordinary volition, as Ajahn Brahm has explained.

For example, in the preliminary development leading to jhana, a more primitive 'vitakka & vicara' refers to the volitional activity that keeps 'letting go'; that keeps wilfully non-attaching. But once jhana is reached, ordinary volition falls away and a new 'automatic volition' arises.


I prepare for death by watching clouds.

Appearances of entities arise when certain elements come together, and then morph beyond recognition as elements drift apart.

Death is all around us at all times. Everything is changing, always. I prepare for death by letting go of fixed ideas about who I am. Every moment is a different configuration and there's no me in that.

There is no birth and death, only continuous transformation. I learned this by watching the clouds.


Isn't the act of Prince Vessantara giving his children away extreme?

Giving away children does not come under self-mortification. Self-mortification is torturing the physical body.

  “Venerable Nàgasena, do all the Bodhisattas give away their wives and
  children, or was it only Vessantara?” “All of them do.” “But do those
  wives and children consent to it?” “The wives do but the children do
  not due to their tender age.” “But was it then a meritorious deed if
  the children were terrified and cried at being given away?” “Yes it
  was. As a man desiring merit might take a cripple wherever he wanted
  to go in an ox-cart and thereby the oxen would be made to suffer; or
  as a king might levy a tax in order to perform a great meritorious
  deed; so too, giving, though it may cause anguish to some, is
  conducive to rebirth in heaven. Is there, king, any gift that should
  not be given?” “Yes, Nàgasena, there are ten kinds of gifts that
  should not be given, the giving of which leads to rebirth in states of
  woe: a gift of intoxicants, of a festival, of a woman, of a man,of
  suggestive designs, weapons, poisons, chains or instruments of
  torture, fowls and swine, or false weights and measures.” “I am not
  asking about gifts that are not approved of in the world. I am asking
  if there is any gift that should not be given when there is someone
  worthy of it.” “Then, Nàgasena, there is no gift that should not be
  given. When satisfaction in Dhamma has arisen, some people give a
  hundred thousand, or a kingdom or even their life.” “Then why do you
  criticize the gift of Vessantara so harshly? Is it not sometimes the
  case that a man in debt may sell his son or leave him as a pledge?
  Just so, Vessantara gave his son as a pledge against his future
  attainment of omniscience.” “Nevertheless, why did he not give himself
  instead?” “Because that was not what was asked for. To offer something
  else would have been ignoble. Furthermore, O king, Vessantara knew
  that the Brahmin would be unable to keep the children as slaves for
  long since he was advanced in years. Anyway, he knew their grandfather
  would pay a ransom for their return.” “Skilfully, Nàgasena, has this
  puzzle been unravelled. The net of heresy has been torn to pieces.
  Well has the letter of the scriptures been maintained while you have
  thus explained the spirit. This is so and I accept it as you say.”  - Milinda Panha


After the absorption, the practitioner can say he is the obtainer of the first Jhana if the five hindrances still not arise instead of Jhana practice.
If that obtainer can't absorpt the first Jhana, but he has not an arising of the five hindrances, we still can call him as the obtainer of the first Jhana because he is in access concentration state, Upacāra-Jhāna, of the absorption concentration state, Appanā-Jhāna, which certainly going to arise if he still can keep the access concentration go on continuously.
The five hindrances are a major one important keyword of this question. Focus on it.

At the first time absorption, Jhana arises only one moment, but it is going to take the longer duration when the practitioner practice that Jhana to be the mastery skillful expert, Vasī.
It's like when the practitioner practices the weight training, no one can hold up the weight in long duration, but the practitioner can hold the weight up longer and longer after training the weight more and more.
The path of purification, pathavikasinaniddesa:

Sā ca pana ekacittakkhaṇikāyeva.
Ñ(IV,78): But that (first time of the first Jhana) absorption is only of a single conscious moment.
Sattasu hi ṭhānesu addhānaparicchedo nāma natthi paṭhamappanāyaṃ, lokiyābhiññāsu, catūsu maggesu, maggānantaraphale, rūpārūpabhavesu bhavaṅgajjhāne, nirodhassa paccaye nevasaññānāsaññāyatane, nirodhā vuṭṭhahantassa phalasamāpattiyanti.
Ñ: For there are seven instances in which the normal extent [of the cognitive series] does not apply. They are in the cases of the first absorption, the mundane kinds of direct-knowledge, the four paths, fruition next after the path, life-continuum jhāna in the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming, the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception as condition for cessation [of perception and feeling], and the fruition attainment in one emerging from cessation.

The path of purification, Vasī:

Tatrimā pañca vasiyo āvajjanavasī, samāpajjanavasī, adhiṭṭhānavasī, vuṭṭhānavasī, paccavekkhaṇavasīti.

Ñ: Herein, these are the five kinds of mastery: mastery in adverting, mastery in attaining, mastery in resolving (steadying the duration), mastery in emerging, and mastery in reviewing.
... (See the explanation inside the link and book)...


Appamāda - What is it? How to practise it? Benefits?

Pamada is a condition of a happily misbehaving child or a drunken person enjoying oneself too much. A type of silly joyful carelessness that assumes no concern or responsibility for results of one's actions. There are many translations of this word - laxity, sloppiness, but the one I find particularly insightful is "indulging".

Appamada then is a sober, grownup, calculated attitude to things. A grownup may relax a little, but never loses sight of what results will the actions bring. Hence the usual translation, heedfulness, or my preferrence -  "sobriety".

One metaphor Buddhism uses a lot is that of intoxication. The three basic intoxicants of desire/obsession, negativity, and confusion/delusion cause the state of pamada, when one acts without proper regard for the consequences.

The practice of Appamada is certainly related to mindfulness, remaining aware and remembering the teaching at all times, but here the emphasis is on karma, or action and its expected result. Not only the physical action of course, but mental activity as well, including upadana, or fueling certain thoughts by giving them attention. We can either indulge in harmful thoughts uncontrollably, further fueling our intoxication, or be deliberate about our thinking, which leads to cessation of suffering. This last application of appamada can't be emphasized enough.

Appamada means always staying in planned, deliberate, results-oriented frame of reference, as opposed to merely acting out one's emotions and impulses. Every time before we think or say or do something, we ask ourselves, what will this achieve?

So that's one aspect, always being deliberate, and the other aspect is not letting oneself get intoxicated. We get intoxicated every time we get aroused by the scent of an external source of joy, or by a particularly inspiring form of negativity. We get excited off balance by the thought of either reward or righteous anger. If we let ourselves get emotionally intoxicated all the time, we practically never spend time being emotionally sober, which makes us mentally weak. Instead, staying sober and collected requires a certain kind of strength and will power. In a way, you always keep your spine straight, your feet on the ground, your eyes open, your mouth shut. That's appamada, sobriety.


Can we use computer coding activity as a kasina object?

What you are describing is colloquially known as being in the zone. It's a type of refined concentration where spectacular human feats can be achieved. There's a lack of ownership regarding the current task and often the concept of a body disappears. This should make you curious.
It's completely possible for jhana to occur under these circumstances, off the cushion and in the throes of daily life. In my personal understanding, experiencing jhana off the cushion has much more of an impact. In fact, this kind of exploration should be actively encouraged.
For dhamma practice, the object of concentration must not be generating continuity of thought, as with your task of programming code. There is something behind that primary task. This is the whole point: to bring meditative enquiry into the sensuous domain such that we become receptive to evermore subtle forms of awareness: hence, from coarse to fine, until we reach the bare subtleties of our awareness which flickers like a mirage in the desert. Like approaching a mirage in the desert, it vanishes; conditionality ceases. See the Lesser Discourse on Emptiness.
Look furthermore into these events you describe and see if you can replicate them in other settings. It's also important that, through study or teacher interaction, one is able to find a stable environment from where these experiences can be contextualized. See the Discourse on the Arousing of Mindfulness.


What does 'all the phenomena related to the senses are "not real"' mean?

I think that "not real" is not a good translation, and is not a translation that I'm used to seeing on Access To Insight or other careful translations.
It's a phrase I used to see written sometimes in some author's modern paraphrase of Buddhism, and before I discovered the translations of the suttas -- but it's a phrase I didn't understand at that time, and which might be (in my experience) a little harmful because it makes Buddhism sound like nonsense (e.g. because I don't understand it).
For that kind of reason I wish that people wouldn't use the phrase ("not real"). As well as being unclear, and maybe untrue, the phrase "not real" also seems to be a bit unkind -- if someone is grieving a loved one's death, for example, would you say "the grief you feel isn't real"? That kind of message ("grief isn't real") is not the kind of message I get from the suttas (though the suttas do describe a way towards the end of suffering).
I think the conventional (non-Buddhist, English-language) understanding of "not real" is something like "illusory" or "not existent" -- also "not tangible" or "not thing-like" -- but that sort of meaning might be refuted by this Zen story:

Nothing Exists
Yamaoka Tesshu, as a young student of Zen, visited one master after another. He called upon Dokuon of Shokoku.
Desiring to show his attainment, he said: “The mind, Buddha, and sentient beings, after all, do not exist. The true nature of phenomena is emptiness. There is no realization, no delusion, no sage, no mediocrity. There is no giving and nothing to be received.”
Dokuon, who was smoking quietly, said nothing. Suddenly he whacked Yamaoka with his bamboo pipe. This made the youth quite angry.
“If nothing exists,” inquired Dokuon, “where did this anger come from?”

The word anicca is usually translated "impermanent".
The "phenomena related to the senses" are usually described as "dependently originated", "not fit to be regarded as 'self'", "changeable", maybe "not satisfying", and by implication "not reliable" etc. (though they're also described as "The All" in one sutta).


"Can we still reach loved ones with guidence after they have passed through the bardo into a rebirth?"

If "guidance" you refer to what the book "Tibetan Book of The Death" instructed, then it would be "no". That person is in a new life form, all the possibilities during the bardo stage is conclusive now. In general saying, the bardo lasts max. 49 days. However, you may send blessings to the loved ones any time.


Satipatthana bhavana versus Vipassana bhavana

Vipassanā is the same as satipatthana bhavana. Essentially the practice is from Satipatthana Sutta and/or Anapanasati Sutta or similar Suttas are called Vipassanā as they help to see clearly the true nature of phenomena.


The Dhamma is described as timeless (akāliko).

From the Pali glossary:

  akāliko:
      Timeless; unconditioned by time or season.

From SN 55.22:

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

From AN 6.47:

  "... the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting
  verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves."

From AN 3.40:

  Now, the Dhamma is well-taught by the Blessed One, to be seen here &
  now, timeless, inviting all to come & see, pertinent, to be seen
  by the wise for themselves. There are fellow practitioners of the
  chaste life who dwell knowing & seeing it.

You can also find this in AN 11.11, AN 11.12, AN 5.179, AN 10.92 and AN 3.70.

From this essay by Ajahn Sumedo:

  The second refuge is in the Dhamma, in ultimate truth or ultimate
  reality. Dhamma is impersonal; we don’t in any way try to personify it
  to make it any kind of personal deity. When we chant in Pali the verse
  on Dhamma, we say it is ‘sanditthiko akaliko ehipassiko opanayiko
  paccattam veditabbo vinnuhi’. As Dhamma has no personal attributes, we
  can’t even say it is good or bad or anything that has any superlative
  or comparative quality; it is beyond the dualistic conceptions of
  mind.

  So when we describe Dhamma or give an impression of it, we do it
  through words such as ‘sanditthiko’, which means immanent,
  here-and-now. That brings us back into the present; we feel a sense of
  immediacy, of now. You may think that Dhamma is some kind of thing
  that is ‘out there’, something you have to find elsewhere, but
  sanditthikodhamma means that it is immanent, here-and-now.

  Akalikadhamma means that Dhamma is not bound by any time condition.
  The word akala means timeless. Our conceptual mind can’t conceive of
  anything that is timeless, because our conceptions and perceptions are
  time-based conditions, but what we can say is that Dhamma is akala,
  not bound by time.

  Ehipassikadhamma means to come and see, to turn towards or go to the
  Dhamma. It means to look, to be aware. It is not that we pray to the
  Dhamma to come, or wait for it to tap us on the shoulder; we have to
  put forth effort. It is like Christ’s saying, ‘Knock on the door and
  it shall be opened.’ Ehipassiko means that we have to put forward that
  effort, to turn towards that truth.

  Opanayiko means leading inwards, towards the peace within the mind.
  Dhamma doesn’t take us into fascination, into excitement, romance and
  adventure, but leads to Nibbana, to calm, to silence.

  Paccattam veditabbo vinnuhi means that we can only know Dhamma through
  direct experience. It is like the taste of honey — if someone else
  tastes it, we still don’t know its flavour. We may know the chemical
  formula or be able to recite all the great poetry ever written about
  honey, but only when we taste it for ourselves do we really know what
  it is like. It is the same with Dhamma: we have to taste it, we have
  to know it directly.

  Taking refuge in Dhamma is taking another safe refuge. It is not
  taking refuge in philosophy or intellectual concepts, in theories, in
  ideas, in doctrines or beliefs of any sort. It is not taking refuge in
  a belief in Dhamma, or a belief in God or in some kind of force in
  outer space or something beyond or something separate, something that
  we have to find sometime later. The descriptions of the Dhamma keep us
  in the present, in the here-and-now, unbound by time. Taking refuge is
  an immediate immanent reflection in the mind, it is not just repeating
  ‘Dhammam Saranam gacchami’ like a parrot, thinking, ‘Buddhists say
  this so I have to say it.’ We turn towards the Dhamma, we are aware
  now, take refuge in Dhamma, now as an immediate action, an immediate
  reflection of being the Dhamma, being that very truth.


Can someone mention few good web sites to learn theravada Buddhism?

A Handful of Leaves has books and papers. Also http://www.dhammatalks.net/, http://www.wisdomlib.org/, http://www.buddhanet.net/ (multiple authors) and http://www.dhammatalks.org/ (by Thanissaro Bhikkhu), http://www.aimwell.org/. In addition https://archive.org/ does have many old Buddhist books. http://static.sirimangalo.org/pdf/ has also got scans of some old books.

http://www.abhidhamma.com/ has many Abhidhamma books.

Also there is Piya Tan's website - http://dharmafarer.org/ which has essays and traslations.

Also VRI (Ledi / U Ba Khin tradition) has couple of online resource:

http://www.vridhamma.org/Research-Index
http://www.vridhamma.org/Research
http://www.vridhamma.org/Online-Books-and-Pamphlets

Also you can look into magazine like: https://tricycle.org/, http://www.mindful.org/, http://www.lionsroar.com/ to get material.

Also have a look at: https://what-buddha-said.net/. This is a blog which posts something new on Buddhism nearly every day.

Also following are other sites like http://www.accesstoinsight.org/: https://suttacentral.net/, http://www.tipitaka.org/, http://newguide.org/


I suggest you take a look at the Dhammapada which is part of the Pali Canon if you are interested in Buddhism.

The Buddha taught that such questions weren't important. He rather encouraged people to focus on the life here and now. There are a few dialogs in the Pali Canon in which Buddha answers his apprentice's similar question with a metaphor.


Are there buddhists who criticize Eckhart Tolle as it is not really a buddhist teach? If so, what is their critique?

If you call something Buddhism it will be attributed to the Buddha and should be inline with the doctrinal system the Buddha taught. If something is not what the Buddha said then it is wrong to miss attributed something to the Buddha as this is what the Buddha taught. A summary of the majority of Buddha's teaching is encompassed in the Wings of Awakening, 3 Marks of Existence, 4 Noble Truths, Dependent Origination. So if what Eckhart Tolle writes does not have these aspects and if what is found in line with the doctrinal system then you cannot call it Buddhism.

Also some of the core teachings of Christianity and Buddhism are not compatible with each other, so any philosophy influenced by both is neither Christianity nor Buddhism.

See: -ism


Do monks HAVE to accept anything offered to them?

I can't speak to the Pratimoksha followed by Theraadans, however, according the the Pratimoksha of Mulasarvastivada (which I foillwed when I was a monk), there are certain items no monk can possess (e.g. a meditation mat made of black sheep's wool) - so if offered, one might accept it - but then turn it over to the abbot. Otherwise, the only other relevant vows concerned accepting what was offered in terms of food. I imagine these restrictions would be similar for Theravadans. As for technology, in my monastery, we had lots of teachings that had been digitized, for walkmen, MP3 players and computers were ubiquitous.
Hope this helps.


Prevention is better than cure. It is easiest to tackle the mental pollution of unwholesome acts before it has happened - i.e. at the stage that desire is born.

For the same reason, help groups like Alchoholics Anonymous say "Say no to the first drink" - call a sponsor or friend and get over the urge. Suicide hotlines work the same way - they would like us to call at the very first thought of self harm, and not when we are standing on the ledge.

Likewise, it is more effective to walk away or keep silent when we feel angry, than calm down after a long rant.

Preventing unwholesome desires from arising, or tackling them as soon as they have arisen with right contemplation is better than recovering from the addiction.

Samsara is a greater addiction than any drug or alcohol.

  If I just happen to walk by an area in which music is playing, and I
  find myself tapping my feet, or feeling really good; is this seen as a
  state we must abandon?

This is a fundamental question about all entertainment - why must entertainment be eschewed?

First, the nature of boredom is that it arises out of a mind that isn't at ease with itself. The nature of thought at the moment a bored mind arises is to gravitate towards the outside world - towards sense pleasures.

Distracted thought gets reinforced with every application of distraction, so much so, we live in a world where hardly anyone reads books, and more and more people even find Twitter too much text - they want videos or GIF images instead. If we make a habit of mindfulness, then the opposite is true, at every opportunity the mind will seek mindfulness.

Second, the nature of boredom is that it gets excited by violence rather than peace - it is an existential threat mechanism that is woken up and makes us come alive. Thus entertainment is the enemy of equanimity.

Thirdly, entertainment reinforces duality, of the entertainer and the entertained. It makes us lapse into being controlled by external forces, rather than taking control of our mind.

It is thus a quality of mind to be safe guarded against.

  Also, metta-meditation frequently uses people as objects of good-will
  and loving-kindness -- however, this is attaching sense pleasures to
  mental objects, which I thought are to be abandoned?

All mind states come with a stinger of unwholesomeness, except four mind states. Which four?

The four Bramhaviharas or Bramha abodes - namely, karuna (compassion), maithri (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy at the well being of others, or the opposite of schadenfreude) and upeksha (equanimity).

The mind needs to be parked somewhere, and rather than park it in a state where it can be tempted by a more exciting desire, if we park it in these four areas the mind will remain at peace, occupied and not easily distracted.


When to delight and when not to delight?

I am only aware of one sutta, namely, MN 1, where the bhikkhus did not delight in the Buddha's words, as follows:

  Na te bhikkhū bhagavato bhāsitaṃ abhinandunti

  na
  (negative particle) not; no; nor; neither

  abhinandati
  rejoices at, welcomes; approves of; is pleased at.

Bhikkhu Bodhi comments:

  The bhikkhus did not delight in the Buddha's words; apparently because the discourse probed too deeply into the tender regions of
  their own conceit, and perhaps their residual brahmanic views.

Bhikkhu Thanissaro comments:

  The Buddha taught that clinging to views is one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus
  recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to
  views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in
  their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind
  reads into experience. This is a point he makes in the following
  discourse, which is apparently his response to a particular school of
  Brahmanical thought that was developing in his time — the Samkhya, or
  classification school.

  This school had its beginnings in the thought of Uddalaka, a ninth-century B.C. philosopher who posited a "root": an abstract
  principle out of which all things emanated and which was immanent in
  all things. Philosophers who carried on this line of thinking offered
  a variety of theories, based on logic and meditative experience, about
  the nature of the ultimate root and about the hierarchy of the
  emanation. Many of their theories were recorded in the Upanishads and
  eventually developed into the classical Samkhya system around the time
  of the Buddha.

  Although the present discourse says nothing about the background of the monks listening to it, the Commentary states that before their
  ordination they were brahmans, and that even after their ordination
  they continued to interpret the Buddha's teachings in light of their
  previous training, which may well have been proto-Samkhya. If this is
  so, then the Buddha's opening lines — "I will teach you the sequence
  of the root of all phenomena" — would have them prepared to hear his
  contribution to their line of thinking. And, in fact, the list of
  topics he covers reads like a Buddhist Samkhya. Paralleling the
  classical Samkhya, it contains 24 items, begins with the physical
  world (here, the four physical properties), and leads back through
  ever more refined & inclusive levels of being & experience,
  culminating with the ultimate Buddhist concept: Unbinding (nibbana).
  In the pattern of Samkhya thought, Unbinding would thus be the
  ultimate "root" or ground of being immanent in all things and out of
  which they all emanate.

  However, instead of following this pattern of thinking, the Buddha attacks it at its very root: the notion of a principle in the
  abstract, the "in" (immanence) & "out of" (emanation) superimposed on
  experience. Only an uninstructed, run of the mill person, he says,
  would read experience in this way. In contrast, a person in training
  should look for a different kind of "root" — the root of suffering
  experienced in the present — and find it in the act of delight.
  Developing dispassion for that delight, the trainee can then
  comprehend the process of coming-into-being for what it is, drop all
  participation in it, and thus achieve true Awakening.

  If the listeners present at this discourse were indeed interested in fitting Buddhist teachings into a Samkhyan mold, then it's small wonder that they were displeased — one of the few places where we read of a negative reaction to the Buddha's words. They had hoped to hear his contribution to their project, but instead they hear their whole pattern of thinking & theorizing attacked as ignorant & ill-informed. The Commentary tells us, though, they were later able to overcome their displeasure and eventually attain Awakening on listening to the discourse reported in AN 3.123.

  Although at present we rarely think in the same terms as the Samkhya philosophers, there has long been — and still is — a common tendency to create a "Buddhist" metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the "All" — the entirety of our sensory & mental experience — is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have most often originated among meditators, who label (or in the words of the discourse, "perceive") a particular meditative experience as the ultimate goal, identify with it in a subtle way (as when we are told that "we are the knowing"), and then view that level of experience as the ground of being out of which all other experience comes.

  Any teaching that follows these lines would be subject to the same criticism that the Buddha directed against the monks who first heard
  this discourse.

  Translator's Introduction


What is the sutra where the Buddha emits fire and water from his body?

It's called the "twin miracle": The DPPN entry under Yamaka pātihāriya says,

  The Twin Miracle is described at DA.i.57, and in very great detail at DhA.iii.204; see also J.iv.263ff. etc.


www.spokensanskrit.de says,

क्षण    kṣaṇa   m. n.   moment


I believe that it is a depiction of Mahakala, rather than Yama.
In the Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia page Mahakala is a Protector of all Tibetan Buddhism, we find this info:

The Form varies according to the different teaching lineages. For
example, there is the two-armed, big-mouthed Mahakala Bernakchen of
the Karma Kagyu, the four-armed Mahakala who is protector of the
Drikung Kagyu, and six-armed Mahakala of the Gelugpas described below.
They are not all wrathful forms of Chenresi [Skt.: Avalokiteshvara)
although:

"There is an emanation of Avalokiteshvara which arose in the Form
of Mahakala and this is the Shangpa Kagyu Mahakala with one face and
six arms, in a standing posture. This Form was later adopted by
Tsongkhapa and followers as the main protector of the Gelugpa School.
Mahakalas can arise from various sources namely Vajradhara and
the Anuttarayoga Tantras but are not generically Avalokiteshvara."
~ Jeff Watt, Himalayan Art

There is a white one associated with prosperity, and also a eunuch and
some feminine forms, but it is incorrectly held that there are 75
variants.

Regarding the symbolism around Mahakala:

Symbolism of Mahakala in the 6-armed Manifestation:
The Protector's Body is midnight blue, symbolic of the changeless
Dharmakaya.
His three eyes symbolize his Knowledge of the past, present and
future, and also the manifestation of the three bodies of Buddha.
The crown adorned with five skulls symbolizes the transformation of
the five poisons of Anger, desire, Ignorance, jealousy and pride into
The Five Wisdoms.
His six arms symbolize the attainment of the six Perfections:
Generosity, Patience, Morality, Diligence, Meditation and Wisdom. The
kartika or triku [or trigu, pron. tigu] the Ritual curved knife, cuts
Attachment to ego.
The kapila or skull bowl filled with blood symbolizes the subjugation
of the maras or Evil ones. (An alternate interpretation can be found
in other contexts.)
The rosary symbolizes his continuous activity for the benefit of
beings.
The Damaru or hand-drum symbolizes his Power over the Dakinis. (Also,
different interpretations in other contexts.)
His trident symbolizes his Power over The Three Kayas -- the spheres
of desire, Form and formlessness. (An alternate interpretation can
also be found.)
The lasso binds those who break their vows.
His two feet are the means and the Wisdom to accomplish his task. That
his left leg is straight and his right leg bent symbolize his
accomplishment of the benefit to oneself and to others. He tramples on
a vinayaka, to symbolize his destruction and dispersal of great
obstacles.
The sun on which he stands symbolizes his illumination of the darkness
of Ignorance.
His Lotus seat symbolizes purity undefiled by Samsara.
The surrounding blazing Fire symbolizes his activity that consumes
neurotic states.
The tiger skin stands for Purification of desire; the elephant skin
for Purification of pride, and the snake, for the Purification of
Anger.
His other ornaments together symbolize that he has all the qualities
of a Buddha.
The material about the symbolism of 6-armed Mahakala derives from a
Gelugpa sadhana (Ritual) of Tara that includes an Offering to
Mahakala.


Faith in Buddhism has many function. Also faith in upon which wisdon is built.

Firstly you listen to the Dhamma and see that this sounds right
Secondly you see this is logical when you think and analyse it
Lastly you should practice and see for your self then you know that in fact it is right by direct experience hence faith becomes unshakable

You might have past 1 and 2. Now is the time to put some serious effort into meditation to realise 3.

  And practising accordingly strengthens my faith.

At a more mundane level you can increase your faith by recollection of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha.

  Noble Truths the "correct object of faith" in Buddhism?

This is what you should realise at the experiential level to cement your faith.

You should have:

you have to have faith the teacher knows what he is teaching
some faith to lean the teaching and training properly and put it to practice according to instruction
you have to have faith in your ability practice accordingly and gain results
you have to have faith that the time is always right to practice (it worked in the past, it works not and it will work in the future) if practice properly


What was the reason behind Colonel Henry Steel Olcott and Anagarika Dharmapala split

The reason stated in Anagarika Dharmapala's wikipedia page for his split with the Theosophical society is that he was against the idea of a universal religion that the Theosophists were aiming at.

Dharmapala eventually broke with Olcott and the Theosophists because of Olcott's stance on universal religion. One of the important factors in his rejection of theosophy centered on this issue of universalism; the price of Buddhism being assimilated
into a non-Buddhist model of truth was ultimately too high for
him."Dharmapala stated that Theosophy was "only consolidating
Krishna worship." "To say that all religions have a common
foundation only shows the ignorance of the speaker; Dharma alone is
supreme to the Buddhist".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anagarika_Dharmapala

Later, in 1904 he had split with Henry Steel Olcott as well. The reason given in the book Relics, Ritual, and Representation in Buddhism is,

Dharmapala broke with Olcott in 1904 when the latter showed disrespect toward the relic of the Buddha's tooth, one of the most sacred relics of the Buddha worshipped in Sri Lanka.

The author cites Return to Righteousness: A Collection of Speeches, Essays, and Letters of the Anagarika Dharmapala as the original source for this and quotes the following phrase from this book in a footnote,

Col. Olcott insulted the feelings of the Buddhists by showing disrespect to the Tooth Relic, a copy of which he had placed under the shelf.

After the split I don't think there was  enough time for something significant to happen, because Henry Steel Olcott died on 1907.


Can we reach Nirvana without removing ignorance?

Maybe you've heard of the old South Indian Monkey Trap (from this article):

  In Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance, Robert Pirsig’s
  bonkers-but-brilliant philosophical novel that turns 40 this year, he
  describes “the old South Indian Monkey Trap”. ... The trap
  “consists of a hollowed-out coconut, chained to a stake. The coconut
  has some rice inside which can be grabbed through a small hole”. The
  monkey’s hand fits through the hole, but his clenched fist can’t fit
  back out. “The monkey is suddenly trapped.” But not by anything
  physical. He’s trapped by an idea, unable to see that a principle that
  served him well – “when you see rice, hold on tight!” – has become
  lethal.

The monkey needs to let go of the rice in order to free himself from his suffering. The way to end his suffering, is to end his craving for rice.

But in order to end his craving for rice, he must first understand how his hand is stuck inside the coconut. When the monkey overcomes his ignorance about how the trap works, he would let go of his craving for rice, and release his clenched fist. With this, he would be free from his suffering.

Also you can say that the monkey's suffering originated with his ignorance of the trap.

(Illustration above: Paul Thurlby for the Guardian)


Feeling weltschmerz, which I guess is feeling that the world and its material pleasures are ultimately not going to satisfy you, is a good thing. It hints towards the first noble truth that there is suffering.

However, focusing too much on it will make you sad and depressed, which is a negative emotion and not wholesome.

In Buddhism, there are various techniques to counter different types of unwholesome states of mind. When a car veers too much to the left, you nudge the steering wheel to the right. When a car is moving too slowly, you step on the accelerator pedal. But also the reverse is true with turning left or stepping on the brakes. Similarly, there are techniques in Buddhism to ensure that the mind stays wholesome and does not go into unwholesome states of mind.

Dhammadhatu's anapanasati (mindfulness of breathing) is one method.

However, being a young person, who should appreciate that both young and old people would not ultimately become and remain satisfied forever, from what the physical and material world offers, I suggest you to practise the Brahmavihara of metta, the meditation on loving kindness, whenever you feel the sadness of weltschmerz. It has many benefits.

Why do I suggest this? You should wish that all beings in this world, including yourself, should be happy at heart and and at ease. Yes, they may not be ultimately satisfied with what the world has to offer, but let them all be happy for this very moment and for as long as they can be. And this applies to you too.

From the Karaniya Metta Sutta:

  Think: Happy, at rest,
  may all beings be happy at heart.
  Whatever beings there may be,
  weak or strong, without exception,
  long, large, middling, short,
  subtle, blatant, seen & unseen,
  near & far, born & seeking birth:
  May all beings be happy at heart.

  Let no one deceive another
  or despise anyone anywhere,
  or through anger or irritation
  wish for another to suffer.

  As a mother would risk her life
  to protect her child, her only child,
  even so should one cultivate a limitless heart
  with regard to all beings.

  With good will for the entire cosmos,
  cultivate a limitless heart:
  Above, below, & all around, unobstructed,
  without enmity or hate.
  Whether standing, walking,
  sitting, or lying down,
  as long as one is alert,
  one should be resolved on this mindfulness.
  This is called a sublime abiding
  here & now.


From SN 42.3:

When a warrior strives and struggles in battle, their mind is already
low, degraded, and misdirected as they think:
Yo so, gāmaṇi,
yodhājīvo saṅgāme ussahati vāyamati, tassa taṁ cittaṁ pubbe gahitaṁ
dukkaṭaṁ duppaṇihitaṁ:
‘May these sentient beings be killed, slaughtered, slain, destroyed,
or annihilated!’
His foes kill him and finish him off, and  when his
body breaks up, after death, he’s reborn in the hell called ‘The
Fallen’.

From the sutta quote above, we see that the warrior who strives (ussahati) and struggles or exerts himself (vāyamati) in battle, is already deep in the low, degraded and misdirected mindset of killing.
Similarly, just having the fleeting thought of hurting the Buddha, killing an arahant, killing one's mother, killing one's father or causing a schism in the Buddha's sangha, is not sufficient to be considered an incurable action.
It's an incurable action only when one strives (ussahati) and struggles or exerts himself (vāyamati) to commit those heinous acts, regardless of whether he has actually been successful or not, just as in the case of the warrior in battle.
So, yes, even an unsuccessful intentional and deliberate attempt to perform these wicked acts would be incurable.

The OP asked in the comments to the effect of: What about Angulimala who killed many humans and attempted to kill the Buddha, but eventually became an arahant?
When Angulimala attempted to kill the Buddha, he did not know that it was the Buddha or an arahant. He only saw a monk walking alone along the road.
So he did not have the intention to kill the Buddha. He only had the intention to kill a monk.
Please read the story of Chakkhupala in the commentary of Dhammapada 1 and also the quote:

"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of
body, speech, & intellect." - AN 6.63

Karma is based on intention in Buddhism. Karma is not a universal system of justice.


I am familiar with the term “pārisuddhi-sīla”, but this only relates to monastic practice (restraint according to Vinaya, restraint of senses, purification of livelihood and restraint in use of the four requisites). I have not heard of the "ultimate version of the five precepts"... where are these mentioned?

Your first five bullet points are mentioned in the Atthasālinī under courses of immoral action (also mentioned in the Vinaya), but I have not encountered “If you can stop a killing you must stop it”. Is this from a Mahāyāna text?

Your questions seem to be around this final bullet point.

Please help me to better understand and I may be able to offer an answer.


What is the difference between love and infatuation?

I reckon if you marry someone because you want to keep them, that's like infatuation.

And if they're dying, and you neither want them to remain in suffering, nor want to push them away, that's more like love.

More generally any form of unwise or selfish misbehaviour might be diagnosed as caused by an "infatuation", whereas ethical and generous might be described in more positive terms like "love". Buddhism might distinguish different types/kinds (manifestations) of the better kind of love -- see the "brahmaviharas" which are translated e.g. "compassion" and "loving-kindness" and so on.

There's another consideration, I think "ethical" might imply that nobody regrets it, it's not action (or intention) from which any suffering or dissatisfaction arises -- so it "benefits both, self, and others", and see e.g. "and is a small taste of Nibbana".

If you want specific advice about binding yourself to (or simply choosing) a lay partner, see e.g. Any authentic sutta from any tradition that gives guidance on what kind of partner to choose? -- see also e.g. DN 31 for very generic advice about friendships in lay life.


Difference between Pacceka Buddha and Arahant?

Sravakabuddha is a Mahayana terminology so it's not found in the Pali canon.

Sometimes the Buddha refers to himself as an Arahant because they have all attained releases which are the same, abandoning of greed, hate and delusion (it is like saying we are humans instead of men and women).
Only the wisdom of the Buddha is different to the rest, as the wisdom of Maha Arahant Sariputta is different from the other Arahants.

In Theravada Buddhism a Buddha is one who discovers Dhammma and starts a Buddha sasana. A Buddha usually mean Samasambuddha, self-enlightened one, not dependent on another's teaching. This definition is different from Mahayana, Vajrayana.

A Pacceka Buddha is also one who has abandoned greed, hate and delusion but he does it by himself, when in an aeon, or time when there is no Buddha's teaching but his wisdom is limited in that he cannot start a Buddha sasana, He is called the silent Buddha.


Has the Buddha taught anything about how one should approach fixing society?

Yes.
The best is the sutta on World Turning Monarch (DN 26).
In addition other two important sutta are Sigalovada Sutta (DN 31) and Parabhava Sutta (Snp 1.6).
There are many other suttas on the values of a great country.


Does anybody know the composition of the 6th council and how the delegates were chosen?

I have been asking around and done some research, but got nothing specific to answer your questions. Some years ago I spoke with an elder Norwegian Buddhist, who said that no less than 12 countries(to his knowledge) was present, plus a number of schools from each country. He said that extra invitations were sent out by the original invited and that this was allowed. A bit like how the Buddhist UN conferences work - just without all the fancy food... :)


Can a lay person become an Arahant according to the Suttas?

The answer is Yes. Please look through this website.

  "If a layman attains arahant-ship, only two destinations await him; either he must enter the Order that very day or else he must attain parinibbàna" -- Milindapanha III.19


How in buddhistic terms one can explain life evolution?

Here is a quote from the book "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi. The quote is from the chapter: "The Process of Death and Rebirth", p. 220-223:

  §36 The Mind at the Time of Death

  Thereafter, attending to that object thus presented, the stream of consciousness in accordance with the kamma that is to be matured, whether pure or corrupted, and in conformity with the state into which one is to be reborn continually flows, inclining mostly towards that state. Or that rebirth productive kamma presents itself to a sense door in the way of renewing.

  Guide to §36

  In the way of renewing (abhinavakaraoavasena): that is, the kamma presenting itself does not appear as a memory image of something that was previously done, but it appears to the mind door as if it were being done at that very moment.

  §37 Death and Rebirth-Linking

  To one who is on the verge of death, either at the end of a cogni- tive process or at the dissolution of the life-continuum, the death con- sciousness, the consummation of the present life, arises and ceases in the way of death.
  Immediately after that (death consciousness) has ceased, a rebirth-linking consciousness arises and is established in the subsequent existence, apprehending the object thus obtained, either supported by the heart-base or baseless, as is appropriate; it is generated by a volitional formation that is enveloped by latent ignorance and rooted in latent craving. That rebirth-linking consciousness, so called because it links together the two consecutive existences, is conjoined with its mental adjuncts, and acts as the forerunner to the conascent states as their locus (or foundation).

  Guide to §37

  To one who is on the verge of death: The last cognitive process begins when the bhavanga is interrupted, vibrates for one moment, and is then arrested. Thereafter follows either a sense-door process taking as object some sense object presenting itself at one of the five sense doors or a bare mind-door process taking as object either some sense object or a mental object presenting itself at the mind door. Within this termi- nal process the javana phase, by reason of its weakness, runs for only five mind-moments rather than the usual seven.

  This process lacks original productive kammic potency, but acts rather as the channel for the past kamma that has assumed the rebirth-generative function. Following the javana stage two registration cittas (tad±rammaoa) may or may not fol- low. In some cases the bhavanga may follow the last process cittas. Then, as the very last citta, the death consciousness arises performing the func- tion of passing away from the present life. With the ceasing of the death consciousness, the life faculty is cut off. Then the body remains a mass of inanimate material phenomena born of temperature, and continues as such until the corpse is reduced to dust.

  Immediately after that has ceased: Following the dissolution mo- ment of the death consciousness, there arises in a new existence the re- birth-linking consciousness apprehending the object thus obtained in the final javana process of the previous life. This citta is supported by the heart-base in realms which include matter, but is baseless in the imma- terial realms. It is generated by a volitional formation, i.e. the kamma of the previous javana process, which in turn is grounded in the twin roots of the round of existence, latent ignorance and latent craving. The rebirth consciousness is conjoined with its mental adjuncts, i.e. the cetasikas, which it serves as a forerunner not in the sense that it pre- cedes them, but in that it acts as their locus (or foundation).


Why wouldn't one say "I am the watcher"?

Identity view (i.e., "I am...") is the first lower fetter.

  the mendicants who, with the ending of three fetters are stream-enterers

To say "I am the watcher" simply perpetuates identity view. Identity view is a conceptual tool. Like all tools, it can be put aside. When identity view is put aside, "there is watching." With identity view, there is a prioritization towards the self. Without identity view, broader consideration becomes the norm. With identity view, the self controls--there is struggle to use and impose will. Without identity view, experience unfolds effortlessly.

To see this, meditate "there is breathing" vs. "I am breathing". When "I am breathing" there comes a cascade of questions ("Am I breathing well?", "Should I exhale now?"). When "there is breathing", simple awareness follows the breath in and out. Effortlessly.

Relinquishing "I", we relinquish the first fetter. There is watching.


Why can't we reason or logic our way to NIrvana?

I have read at various places that Nirvana can't be described or reached by logic or reason.

I think that's two questions: 1) described, 2) reached.

I think Nirvana is defined as being the end of craving -- not just a temporary pause or lull, but uprooting the "tendencies" and "effluents" which result in the arising of craving -- so changing or undoing habits (if craving is a kind of habit, and results from habits, etc.).

And you can't do something, or accomplish something ("reach" something), just by thinking about it -- you have to do it!

I suppose that's true of everything -- mundane things too not only Nirvana -- e.g. you can't learn to play piano or guitar just by thinking about: you'd have to do it, practice it.

Maybe that's true even of describing something -- I can't describe playing guitar or piano, nor even describe hearing piano or guitar  -- i.e. you'd have to actually do it yourself, play it or hear it, to know it for yourself.


Does/did Buddhism assert that everything that is/was important to know about the world is/was already known?

The buddha said that some people found the truth before him, but of coure most people didn't

  “In the same way, I had now arrived at the ancient way of the noble
  ones, the ancient path of the noble ones, the ancient way trodden by
  the noble ones, along which passed the noble ones of ancient times,
  and which I should now follow, namely this Noble Eightfold Path: right
  view, right aim, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right
  skilful means (effort), right mindfulness, right concentration.

https://suttacentral.net/sa287/en/choong


Laws of the land, and Buddhist virtues and precepts

we tend to frown upon people who disobey traffic rules
I've been taught we might "frown on" bad behaviours but needn't frown on people.
So for example I'm inclined to think, "that's bad driving", and not, "you're a bad person for driving that way".
I'd tend to frown on and stay clear of dangerous driving.
There's a saying, "Don't attribute to malice what you might attribute to incompetence"!
Double standards though: I do tend to attribute good (safe) driving to good will -- I've  admired the way in which most drivers cooperate, coordinate with each other, by all obeying the same traffic laws.
Are breaking traffic rules deliberately
I believe intention matters, and than there is some variation due to local circumstance.
For example in France the speed limit is 130 km/hour on the highway, you may in practice be fined for driving at 134, most people don't exceed the speed limit, and neither do I.
Conversely in Ontario the official limit is (or was until recently) 100 km/hr, and everyone drives as if the real speed limit were 110 -- and in that situation, I figure that insisting on sticking to the letter of the law and driving at 95 would be less safe than driving at 110, like everyone else does, except in winter.
Is it a violation of Right Action?
Following the letter of the law, SN 45.8

And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, abstaining from unchastity. This is called right action.

These are three of the four Pārājika offences. So I think "Right Action" in that context is, "action which won't get you expelled from the community of monks".
And, strictly, "taking life" is a pārājika only if you're intending to kill. So, speeding, or failing to signal, resulting in an accident, presumably "doesn't count" unless you're doing it in order to kill (and not e.g. just out of carelessness).
But!! Some road accident can cause a lot grief.
is it a sign of a unwholesome or unskillful mindset from a Buddhist perspective
Again, I don't like to condemn others. I don't want to say, "if you do that then your mindset is unwholesome or unskillful". But I can tell you that when I drive or even ride a bike I'm conscious that it's potentially dangerous to other people on the road and that I can and must avoid those dangers by driving conscientiously -- and I think that's a virtue from a Buddhist perspective, mettā, ahimsa -- and may fit the definition of "skillful", in that its purpose includes "freedom from remorse".


Does Pure Land Buddhism ever have a Buddha other than Amitābha as the object of devotion?

Amitābha Buddha has two attendant bodhisattvas: Avalokiteśvara and  Mahāsthāmaprāpta and they all are present in meditations based on visualisation used in the Pure Land Buddhism (as well as in Vajrayana).


How to propery pay back goodness and develop gratitude?

I think that a typically Buddhist recommendation is that you try to be "easy to support". For example if someone tries to do you a kindness (for example, by offering you food), then you're "easy to support" if you accept what's offered without making further, difficult demands.
Another example of being "easy to support" might mean being inoffensive and harmless (although arguably everyone should try to be so anyway, not only when repaying a kindness).
That said, I'm not sure that I agree with the premise of the question (that you should "pay back" goodness). I thought that kindness isn't necessarily supposed to be transactional: for example, monks don't sell Dharma. So when lay people support monks, and monks support lay people, I'm not sure this ought to be viewed as "paying back".
A fairly widespread (not necessarily only Buddhist) alternative to "paying back" is called paying forward. That means, if someone is kind to you, then you "return" that favour by being kind to someone else!
"Paying forward" is a famous concept, at least on the internet: it's mentioned in one of this site's help topics, for example:

Pay it forward
Saying “thanks” is appreciated, but it doesn’t answer the question. Instead, vote up the answers that helped you the most! If these answers were helpful to you, please consider saying thank you in a more constructive way – by contributing your own answers to questions your peers have asked here.

As an idea it's perhaps not incompatible with Buddhist ideals.


What is real meanning of Prathipathi poojawa?

It means to honor the Buddha by working on purifying the mind and attaining freedom from suffering as he instructed.


What is opinion of Nichiren Buddhism on the concept of a Creator or Supreme Being?

Nichiren did not address the concept of a Creator or Supreme Being. Buddhists in general do not address this, basically because Shakyamuni, the founder of buddhism in India, did not address this even when asked what he thought about it.

Also, in Japan in the thirteenth century, the general population was not interested in this so no one is recorded as having asked Nichiren about it. The lack of interest may be attributed to the influence of Shintoism and Confucianism in Japan since neither pay much attention to this question either.

In order to verify that Nichiren did not address this, the Nichiren Buddhism Library offers a searchable database for writings by Nichiren and for a record of his oral teachings as well.

A lack of concern about a creator deity may be difficult for a theist to understand. I do know some buddhists, including some Nichiren buddhists, raised theistic and polytheistic, who do believe in a creator god. In buddhism this is okay, just like it is okay to be an atheist or an agnostic. Since these questions are not considered to be decidable, the choice of belief about a creator is up to the individual. Practicing and living one's life as a human being in this life are primary.


Meditation object: Use color seeing when eyes are closed

The wildmind website does list seeing colours as one of the signs of progress. So you should obviously find that encouraging. However it does caution

  But it’s best not to pay much attention to those lights or they will
  turn into a distraction and slow your progress.

This accords with my own experience. While various strange things during meditation is fascinating, too much fascination will mean that you are not focusing on whatever your object of meditation actually is (breath, visualisation etc...). Absolutely dig around in them and have a little investigate but ultimately return to the practice you are doing. Just my experience of course.


Why did Buddhism declined and then almost extinguished in India?

The religion which has committed greater sacrifice for the humanity will always come on the top. Good Karma never dies. Moreover we believe in the cycles of period. This period belongs to Christianity. May be next will belong to Hinduism and then may be Buddhism will come. In this era the things are happening exactly the way it should. Only a fool will believe that Greatest religion now will remain the greatest religion forever because Sabbe Dhamma Anatta.
Buddhism declined the way it should have declined for the conditioning of this era. Give up these mental fabrications. These are not good for Anatta.


Has a teacher referred to sleep as a form of 'lazy nirvana'?

Sleep is not really Nibbana because Nibbana is defined as the "uprooting" & "destruction" of the mental defilments, as follows:

  To whatever extent there are phenomena conditioned or unconditioned, dispassion is declared the foremost among them, that is, the crushing
  of pride, the removal of thirst, the uprooting of attachment, the
  termination of the round, the destruction of craving, dispassion,
  cessation, nibbāna.

  AN 4.34

In sleep, the mental defilements of an non-fully-enlightened mind remain dormant as "underlying tendencies". Therefore, sleep cannot be Nibbana.

However, the teacher Bhikkhu Buddhadasa make some comments about how the 'Nibbana element' operates in everyday life, here: Nibbana for Everyone. which includes 'sleep'.

  Nibbāna is one of the dhātus (natural elements). It is the coolness that remains when the defilements – greed, anger, fear, delusion –
  have ended.

  Any reactive emotion that arises ceases when its causes and conditions cease. Although it may be a temporary quenching,
  merely a temporary coolness, it is still Nibbāna, even if only
  temporarily. Thus, there’s a temporary Nibbāna for those who can’t yet
  avoid some defilements. It is this temporary Nibbāna that sustains the
  lives of beings who continue hanging onto defilement. Anyone can see
  that if the egoistic emotions existed night and day without any pause
  or rest, no life could endure it. If such life didn’t die, it would go
  crazy and then die in the end. You ought to consider carefully the
  fact that life can survive only because there are periods when the
  defilements don’t roast it. These periods outnumber the times when the
  defilements blaze.

  These periodic Nibbānas sustain life for all of us, without excepting even animals, which have their levels of Nibbāna, too. We are able to
  survive because this kind of Nibbāna nurtures us, until it becomes the
  most ordinary habit of life and of mind. Whenever there is freedom
  from defilement, then there is the value and meaning of Nibbāna. This
  must occur fairly often for living things to survive. That we have
  some time to relax both bodily and mentally provides us with the
  freshness and vitality needed to live.


What are the sub divisions of the Tripitaka and what do these areas cover?

Since I don't know how deep in the Tipiṭaka's structure you want the answer, I'll try to give the most in-depth answer. I'll present the structure in a tree chart and, beneath it, I'll refer to an article with an in-depth analysis of the canon which provides the summaries.

Structure

(Click to enlarge)

Summaries

Summaries are provided in "Chapter I: Textual Analysis of the article "An Analysis of the Pāḷi Canon" by Russell Webb. It also contains an excellent index of the canon, and an extensive bibliography.


Vipassana is training to handle such life situation.

Associated with each life interaction and though is a sensation. You can look at the arising and passing away of the sensations with full equanimity.

In generally what happens is when you come in contact with vicissitudes of life you react with clinging and craving on how you Perceive the sensation hence creating fabrication.

You can think and ponder on the matter in hand. This is in fact verbal fabrications. Thinking and pondering will create other sensation. Most prominent even in no mediators are like happiness, depression, anxiety, anger, hate, etc. which also has feelings associated. In general thinking things these can also be neutral or very subtle. In the process of Thinking and Pondering again look at the associated sensations arising and passing away.


How does 'Om Mani Padme Hum' protect us from danger?

I'm going to try to answer your question by equating "danger" with Mara (devils).
Buddha used Mara both literally and figuratively, such as gods in heavens who hold wrong views, 5 skanda, attachment to sensual pleasures etc.  He said meditation from 1 first Jhanna is a safe place to hide from those dangers.

However, if danger in a sense of things happen to you like car accident, danger from natural disaster, sickness, aging, and causes of death, nothing can help for those are the way it is and from Karma.


Is there a universal definition of a crime?

tort /tɔːt/ Learn to pronounce nounLAW

  a wrongful act or an
  infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to legal
  liability.

  "public nuisance is a crime as well as a tort"

  What is negligence?

  Negligence is a failure to take reasonable care to avoid causing
  injury or loss to another person. There are four steps in proving
  negligence. The plaintiff must prove:

  that there is a duty in the circumstances to take care duty of care
  that the behaviour or inaction of the defendant in the circumstances did not meet the standard of care which a reasonable
  person would meet in the circumstances (breach of duty)
  that the plaintiff has suffered injury or loss which a reasonable person in the circumstances could have been expected to foresee
  (damage)
  that the damage was caused by the breach of duty (causation).

  Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it:
  'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction,
  to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful
  bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on
  reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the
  affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily
  action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily
  action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do

  MN 61

  The kings are informed of someone’s bad deed: ‘While under the
  influence of alcoholic drinks that cause negligence, this person
  murdered a woman or a man. Or they stole something from a village or
  wilderness. Or they had sexual relations with women or maidens under
  someone else’s protection. Or they ruined a householder or
  householder’s child by lying.’ Then the kings have them arrested for
  being under the influence of alcoholic drinks that cause negligence,
  and execute, imprison, or banish them, or do what the case requires.
  Have you ever seen or heard of such a case?

  Sir, we have seen it and heard of it, and we will hear of it again.

  AN 5.178


How do I focus from the distraction of people who look attractive?

Since you are philosophical, ponder: "What is beauty? Why does it exist? What is its purpose?"

In Buddhism, five questions are always asked about a thing:

(1) How does the thing arise (samudaya)?

(2) How does the thing pass (atthaṅgama)?

(3) What is the attraction (assāda) of the thing?

(4) What is the drawback or danger (ādīnava) of the thing?

(5) What is the method to escape (nissaraṇa) the danger? (which may include, with some things, escaping the danger while utilizing the attractive quality.)

  Bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling does not understand as it really is the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger and
  the escape in the case of form, feeling, perception, volitional
  formations and consciousness.

  But, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple understands as it really is the origin and the passing away, the gratification, the danger and
  the escape in the case of form, feeling, perception, volitional
  formations and consciousness.

  SN 22.74


Techniques for sluggish mind and restless mind

In short when you notice drowsiness don't just sit there developing that theme of anapanasati, metta, the noting of drowsiness and whatnot. See Capala Sutta for examples.
As soon as you notice that the hindrance of drowsiness is present in you then you should rouse yourself as to wake yourself up and give attention to the theme of arousal of energy or joy.
This you can do by contemplating stirring objects, something that makes ypu glad and even doing tiresome work and whatnot. Basically somehow you hype yourself up if you can.
On the other hand if restless then harness the excess energy to stick to a meditation object like it's glued. A calming theme is used here, something like the breath is good if the mind is racing because anapanasati is particularly good at preventing distracting thoughts.
Otherwise one could develop the themes or appreciation or recollection of nice things like one's virtue, the gems or devas. These can be both calming andor gladdening.
The theme you pick depends on your temperament and circumstances, you can use other themes like the asuba or metta as well if you want, anything that keeps you focused all the way into jhanas.
What then happens is that mind quickly gets secluded due to that non-distractedness on account of directing of aroused energy and keeping it focused.
I have studied this extensively and this is only a very brief practical abbreviation of how to train, not analyzing each theme nor each factor.
Here some texts i've read;

Dhamma Vicaya
He, dwelling mindful in the above manner, searches, investigates and reasons out thoroughly that same thing with wisdom. This is called truth investigation-awakening-factor. (2) Therein what is truth investigation-awakening-factor? That which is wisdom, understanding. absence of delusion, truth investigation, right view, truth investigation-awakening-factor, path constituent, included in the path. This is called truth investigation-awakening-factor.
“And how, bhikkhus, is a bhikkhu a triple investigator? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu investigates by way of the elements, by way of the sense bases, and by way of dependent origination. It is in such a way that a bhikkhu is a triple investigator…

Viriya

The energy of his searching, investigating and reasoning out thoroughly that same thing with wisdom, is strenuous, unshrinking. This is called energy-awakening-factor. (3)Therein what is energy-awakening-factor? That which is the arousing of mental energy. right effort, energy-awakening-factor, path constituent, included in the path. This is called energy-awakening-factor.
The mental inception of energy which there is on that occasion, the striving and the onward effort, the exertion and endeavour, the zeal and ardour, the vigour and fortitude, the state of unfaltering effort, the state of sustained desire, the state of unflinching endurance, the solid grip of the burden, energy, energy as faculty and as power, right endeavour—this is the energy that there then is.

Piti

Therein what is rapture-awakening-factor? That which is rapture, gladness, rejoicing, rapture, mirth, merriment, felicity, elation, delight of consciousness, rapture-awakening-factor. This is called rapture-awakening-factor. (4)For him of strenuous energy there arises rapture that is not worldly. This is called rapture-awakening-factor. (4)
The joy which on that occasion is gladness, rejoicing at, rejoicing over, mirth and merriment, felicity, exultation, transport of mind—this is the joy that there then is.

Passadhi

Therein what is calmness-awakening-factor? That which of the aggregate of feeling, of the aggregate of perception, of the aggregate of volitional activities, of the aggregate of consciousness is calmness, serenity, being calm, being serene, state of being serene, calmness-awakening-factor. This is called calmness-awakening-factor. (5)For him of raptureful mind the body (of mental aggregates) becomes calm, also consciousness becomes calm. This is called calmness-awakening-factor.
The serenity, the composure which there is on that occasion, the calming, the tranquillizing, the tranquillity of the aggregates

Samadhi

Therein what is samādhi-awakening-factor? That which is stability of consciousness. right samādhi, samādhi-awakening-factor, path constituent, included in the path. This is called samādhi-awakening-factor. (6)For him of calm body (of mental aggregates) and mental pleasure, consciousness is in samādhi. This is called samādhi-awakening-factor.
The stability, solidity, absorbed steadfastness of thought which on that occasion is the absence of distraction, balance, imperturbed mental procedure, quiet, the faculty and the power of concentration, right concentration—this is same as composure [collectedness/self-collectedness/onepointedness]

Upekkha

Therein what is equanimity-awakening-factor? That which is equanimity, having equanimity, supreme equanimity, state of balance of consciousness, equanimity-awakening-factor. This is called equanimity-awakening-factor. He, having consciousness in samādhi in the above manner, is well balanced. This is called equanimity-awakening-factor.
The mental [condition] neither pleasant nor unpleasant, which, on that occasion, is born of contact with the appropriate element of representative intellection; the sensation, born of contact with thought, which is neither easeful nor painful; the feeling, born of contact with thought, which is neither easeful nor painful—this is the feeling that there then is.
*Here end the Theravadin Abhidhamma & Sutta excerpts.

Also when the mind is sluggish or aroused, the theme you pick depends on why it is aroused, it might be due to remorse, worry, anger, sensual desire or due to giving of attention to the factor of Viriya as you can easily hype yourself up immensely once you get a grip on this.
Therefore one should be mindful of the hindrances at all times.
I won't post on these and picking themes but i have compiled commentary and sutta excerpts here;
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qVz1XtntivxPRsxycsrH0_sgILcMbcghdpxoKuxlLYo/edit?usp=drivesdk
I think the least obvious development is that of upekkha factor and there are several ways of going about it.
Ie defining elements brings about a kind of equanimity, as do certain lines of contemplation and entering the 4th rupa jhana brings about a kind of equanimity.
In general equanimity that is good is brought about however you can get it imo.


All unenlightened beings suffer including scientists. I suppose the real question is whether scientists will ever realize the four noble truths. Unless there's a radical change in how they approach reality, I do not see that happening any time soon.

The real issue is that mainstream science still does not acknowledge that there is a mental aspect to the universe. They think of the mind as a byproduct of the brain. Any scientific research done based on that hypothesis will never lead to the understanding of the four noble truths.


Of course merit can be transferred, such as when the love or goodness of one person makes another person feel love or goodness, such as when parents love their children & thus transfer their merit to their children.
However, transferring merit to dead or unconnected people, yes, that would bring the results to the giver similar to a metta or gratitude meditation.
Whether there is actual merit being transferred to the dead would be not knowable.

In five ways, young householder, a child should minister to his
parents as the East:
(i) Having supported me I shall support them,
(ii) I shall do their
duties, (iii) I shall keep the family tradition, (iv) I shall make
myself worthy of my inheritance, (v) I shall offer alms
in honor of my departed relatives.
Sigalovada Sutta


Is it only a matter of time before expected feelings of "remorse or shame or guilt" surface during meditation?

I'd suggest that no-one can predict what comes next for someone in meditation. Perhaps there is 'stuff' that has yet to arise into consciousness, but if there is, there's no point trying to 'predict' what it is. That would just be unhelpful speculation.

I'd say, if you stick with sensing what is in your physical experience in a kindly way, if there's something there, it'll make itself known. In the meantime, just enjoy the practice :-)


Your calling it "suicide" (i.e. intentionally killing yourself) and "committing" (a crime) suggest that the action/intention/view you have in mind are not appropriate.

The following paragraphs from pages 82 and 83 of this Vinaya commentary,
The Buddhist Monastic Code I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu suggest that the doctors would not be "killing" is they withhold treatment:

  Inaction. Given the Vibhanga’s definition of taking life, we can infer that
  inaction does not fulfill the factor of effort here, for it does not cut off the life
  faculty. Thus if a bhikkhu sits idly when seeing a flood sweep a person
  downstream, he commits no offense—regardless of his feelings about the
  person’s death—even if the person then drowns. Recommending that another
  person sit idly as well would also not fulfill the factor of effort here, because the
  category of command covers only the act of inciting the listener to do any of the
  four actions that would fulfill the factor of effort under this rule.

  Medical care and life-support. The same holds true if a bhikkhu decides not to
  give a patient a treatment—or to discontinue treatment—that might conceivably
  extend the patient’s life: It does not fulfill the factor of effort, for such acts do not
  cut off the life faculty. At most they simply allow it to end on its own. The Canon
  supports this inference by treating such actions not under this rule but under
  Mv.VIII.26.3-4, where it imposes only a dukka˛a on the act of refusing to give 83
  any treatment at all to an ill bhikkhu, or of discontinuing all care for an ill
  bhikkhu prior to his recovery or death. This shows that the compilers of the
  Canon did not regard these acts as cutting off the life faculty. (Mv.VIII.26.8 lists
  the ideal characteristics of a bhikkhu who tends to the sick, but does not impose
  a penalty on a bhikkhu who cares for the sick but lacks the ideal qualities; at no
  point does the Canon impose a required level of care for the sick. The compilers’
  refusal to mandate a level of care is wise. If there were a case in which the
  bhikkhus did not feel that that level of care was appropriate for their patient,
  they would have only one option: to abandon the patient, so as to incur only a
  dukka˛a and not the potentially higher penalty for not measuring up to the
  mandated care. Thus, instead of protecting the patient, a higher level of
  mandated care would expose the patient to abandonment.) For this reason,
  deciding to withhold or discontinue a particular treatment—while still continuing
  otherwise to care for the patient—would not be grounds for an offense

Beware of the way in which you talk about this subject with others. It is wrong to encourage/counsel suicide.

  c) Describing the advantages of dying. This, the third type of act covered by this
  rule, can include berating a sick person (“Why do you keep hanging on to life
  like this? Don’t you realize what a burden you are to others?”) or simply 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. The Vinita-vatthu also includes under this type of act any statements that
  a nurse might make out of compassion to shorten the miseries of an illness by
  encouraging a patient to let go of life so as not to dawdle in the face of 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.

  The Vibhanga notes that a statement describing the advantages of dying
  would fulfill the factor of effort regardless of whether delivered by gesture, by
  voice, by writing, or by means of a messenger. The same holds true for any
  statements under the next type of act.

  d) Inciting a person to die, the fourth type of act, covers:
  —Recommending suicide. This includes not only telling a person to commit
  suicide but also giving advice—whether requested or not—on the best ways to
  commit the act.

There's a paragraph on page 85 which may answer your question directly:

  The Commentary extrapolates from this case to apply the dukkata to all
  attempts at suicide, including even the decision not to take food when motivated
  by a desire to die. However, it then runs into the question of how far this penalty
  applies to a bhikkhu who is ill. Its verdict: As long as medicine and attendants are
  available to him, the penalty would still apply. But then it lists two cases where
  the penalty would not apply: (a) A bhikkhu is suffering from a long and serious
  illness, and the attendant bhikkhus are fed up with caring for him, thinking,
  “When will we be free of this sick one?” If the bhikkhu reflects that, even with
  medical care, his body won’t last and that the bhikkhus are being put to
  difficulties, he incurs no penalty in refusing food and medicine. (b) A bhikkhu—
  reflecting that his illness is harsh, the forces of life are running out, and yet the
  noble attainments appear to be within his reach—may refuse food and medicine
  without penalty.

  The Commentary’s deliberations here show how difficult it is to legislate in
  this area, and there are reasons to question the way it applies the Great
  Standards here.

And page 86,

  As for ways of attempting suicide that do not endanger others, it seems
  better to follow the Buddha’s wisdom in not legislating about this issue at all, and
  to treat it as a matter of Dhamma rather than Vinaya. In other words, one
  should keep in mind his comment in SN 35.87 that the only blameless death is an
  arahant’s. If, lacking that attainment, one chooses to refuse food when ill to
  speed up one’s death, one should be heedful of the risks that death and rebirth
  can involve.

You might like to read those several pages from the Vinaya commentary in their entirety (instead of only the quotes above).

Someone also wrote a commantary on the commentary, here: Vinaya Parajika 3 do not kill – accesstoinsight detailed commentary


Is the Karma theory an essential component of Buddha's teaching?

There is no Buddhism without Karma. Paticcasamuppada (the Law of Dependent Origination) is all about Karma and it's consequences.

Akiriya-ditthi is the false view or opinion of the inefficacy of action: That neither moral good nor moral evil action have any delayed consequences for anyone.

This wrong view was taught by Pūrana-Kassapa during the time of the Buddha.

Today also there are people like Pūrana Kassapa who spread such views. What is more dangerous is that instead of presenting such views as their own beliefs, they try to present them as the teachings of the Buddha and mislead many who are new to Buddhism.


Is anxiety connected to the three unwholesome roots?

Anxiety/worry taken together are one of the five "nīvarana" in the Buddha Dhamma. "Nīvarana" are states of mind that conceals, hinders, covers, prevents the understanding of the true nature things.

Restlessness (uddhacca) and worry (kukkucca)

  Restlessness (uddhacca) has the characteristic of disquietude,
  like water whipped by the wind. Its function is to make the mind
  unsteady, as the wind makes a banner ripple. It is manifested as
  turmoil. Its proximate cause is unwise attention to mental disquiet.

  Kukkucca is worry or remorse after having done wrong. Its
  characteristic is subsequent regret. Its function is to sorrow over
  what has and what has not been done. It is manifested as remorse. Its
  proximate cause is what has and what has not been done (i.e. wrongs of
  commission and omission).

Bhikkhu Bodhi

  Is this because it is a form of aversion, one of the three unwholesome
  roots, or something else?

Yes, and could also be caused by the other 2 unwholesome roots as well. Anxiety can be due to a state of conflict. The mind in a fight or flight situation. Or caused by a state of desire, an expectation, or a state of ignorance.

Restlessness and worry are painful states of existence.

You can find more about the 5 Hindrances here and recommendations on how to overcome them.

May you be happy.