What would one encounter at a Buddhist temple service?

You'd be shocked at how much different each ceremony is — even inside the same temple/centre — because there are a multitude of completely different ones, most of which would be completely incomprehensible for someone who came to them for the first time.

One thing is for certain: no matter how outrageously strange the 'ceremony' looks like, it's almost always one of two kinds: either a teaching or a meditation session (one could also see a teaching as a meditation session, of course). The important thing to have in mind is that 'meditation' just means 'training the mind' — mostly to be more mindful, more aware — but there are a lot of completely different types of training! Traditionally, it is said that just Siddhārtha Gautama taught 84,000 different types of training! (But there are many more)

If you'd drop out of the blue into a Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhist temple in the middle of a purification ceremony held twice per month, for example, you'd be seeing a very formal-looking temple, but exotic and garish-looking, with very strange images. Caught in the middle of it, you might be seeing a group of practitioners, old and new, some in loose clothing, some in formal red robes, some in more complicated attire, all laughing, singing (not necessarily 'sacred' chants, just popular contemporary songs), dancing, telling rude jokes, while drinking and eating meat. Dogs would be howling, cats would be sitting on people's laps, and children might be running around making a lot of noise. You'd run quickly away thinking that these people were all crazy or simply not 'serious', but just pranksters...

But in fact each and very one of those people there (except perhaps for the cats, dogs, and children) would be practicing a very complex and advanced form of meditation, using all senses — smell, taste, sound — during one of the most important purification ceremonies.

Obviously this would require a lot of explaining! And even for a very experienced practitioner of a different tradition, such a ceremony would be utterly incomprehensible (at least without a thorough understanding of what that training is supposed to be accomplishing).

Come in on the next day, and you might see the exact same people just sitting on the ground in perfect and complete silence for endless minutes, looking quite serious about it — and then come out of the temple, laughing, joking, making trivial conversation, having fun together, even with the presiding teacher. Again, that completely opposite behaviour might startle many people.

I'm obviously pointing out the extremes. Like @Tommy suggested, the best is to start with some introductory class for beginners. These will often be relatively short, perhaps half an hour to an hour, and there will be a mix of easy-to-understand explanations about easy meditation techniques (easy in the sense that they are very simple to follow — but have profound effects!), followed by short sessions of silent meditation of a few minutes, then back to a few more explanations, and so forth. As the vision of that particular school or tradition is better explained, you might feel more encouraged to attend to the more esoteric practices, and not feel they're completely insane and alien — because you've learned to understand what they are all about.

A few tips should be common to every session you attend. Shoes are off and remain outside in all cases (socks are fine). The same applies to any head gear — hats, baseball caps, scarves. It's customary to stand up when the teacher enters the room (like during Grammar School!), wait for him or her to sit down, and only then take a seat. In less formal environments the teacher will greet the students, and greeting the teacher back is naturally good etiquette. Although Buddhism seriously encourages questions about anything we don't understand (the only stupid question is the one we don't ask), it's customary to leave questions for the Q&A session, and let the teacher speak without interruption unless he or she asks for something specifically to you (like your name!). The reason for that is not merely to 'show respect'. It's actually a training! You're supposed to be learning to pay attention to what is being taught, and, when having questions, remember them until the end of the teaching session — that way, you're both training in paying attention and training your memory (that's why a 'teaching session' is also simultaneously a form of meditation — in this case, training your mind to pay attention and remembering things). Good teachers will always ask students, before they engage into so-called formal meditation practice (what is usually known in the West as 'silent meditation'), if everybody has understood the instructions correctly. At this point it's very desirable to ask questions if there are any doubts about the instructions.

Although teachers are supposed to answer anything (and most will do so gladly), it's good manners to only ask questions about what is being taught. You might read from many transcripts of teachings given by the Dalai Lama that people, during Q&A, ask His Holiness about pretty much everything, even if completely unrelated to what he has been saying. This is impolite. If you have very pressing questions about any other subject, it's better to approach the teacher for a private session. Most will gladly concede those, depending on their availability and time. It's also far less disruptive for the group. On the other hand, allowing the teacher to explain everything without interruption most often will allow them to actually answering your question further on — you'll see that happens quite a lot.

More traditional (even if informal!) meditation sessions will start with a short recitation, and end with another one. This is part of the session itself; it's not a 'waste of time' by 'going religious' or 'superstitious'. Again, you might ask the teacher — at the end, when the session is over — why they recite things at the beginning and at the end. They will gladly explain it thoroughly.

Traditionally, at least in Vajrayana Buddhism, more experienced practitioners will also offer prostrations to the teacher. It is very important that you do not imitate them — unless you know exactly why they're doing that! In Buddhism, nothing is pointless; everything is practice; everything has a very specific meaning and a purpose, and it can rationally be argued and discussed. So, if you are a beginner, you should just sit down after the teacher does, let the other practitioners do their things, and just remain silent. Sitting down in silence is not a form of disrespect; a teacher will know you're new and eager to learn; and he or she will most definitely be glad to explain you what's the whole point in those rituals.

Offerings are not necessary, but obviously they're also welcome. Again, they have a very specific meaning, and — yes, you've guessed it! — they are also a form of meditation, a form of training your mind. In this case, it's a training in generosity — letting go of your attachment to money and other goods. Anything really can be offered, but the important thing is that you're not really offering anything to gain some benefit, get something in return, or just by blindly showing some respect. The practice of generosity is mostly for your own benefit: to learn the importance of letting go of attachments. I remember that I offered my first teacher — before he formally was my teacher — a jar of pickles, because I had heard he liked spicy foods :) So what exactly is offered is irrelevant.

Usually such offerings are made in a way that nobody else is seeing. The purpose here is not to 'show off'. If you can't give anything to the teacher while everybody's watching, you can just leave your gifts anywhere in the centre or temple. Don't worry if they get stolen or not, or if the teacher doesn't get your things for some reason; the whole purpose is for you to practice generosity. Once given away freely, your deed is done. What happens afterwards with your gifts is not your concern. This is often misunderstood, because one thinks that one should have some form of 'control' to what is being done with one's gifts! I have seen teachers who take money, for instance, thank you, and almost immediately afterwards give it to someone else. That even happens with way more precious gifts — golden watches or statues or jewelry. Remember, teachers are practitioners as well, and they also practice generosity towards others!

If you are planning to ask for a private meeting with the teacher, where you will be able to ask any question, it is customary to bring a special offering just to him or her personally. This is a sign that you understand perfectly that these teachings will have a profound meaning in your life: you will learn to be more alert, pay more attention, become a better person. And because that's so precious to you, you wish to show how thankful you are for this kind teacher to be able to spend some time with you. Traditionally, in Tibet, it's customary to offer some sticks of incense, which the teacher can always use for his or her own practice (be careful not to pick Indian incense, though, because it often contains animal fats which are not appropriate as an offering — animals had to be killed to produce that incense. If you're unsure, just ask in the temple or centre for appropriate incense to be given as offerings to a teacher) and something that you know that the teacher likes to eat — biscuits are typical, perhaps some chocolate, or something like that. In the case of a private meeting, offerings are usually given at the very beginning, before you start with your questioning.

When the session ends, students stand up immediately before the teacher does the same. There are a few conventions which vary slightly. Some teachers assume that if the students don't get up, they wish to learn more, and so the teacher will continue. Others, when seeing all students suddenly stand up, might interpret that as dismissing the teacher, which might be slightly offensive. Teachers well acquainted with Westerners will often say good-bye first, so everybody knows that it's time to stand up, and they will rise slowly, to allow everybody to stand up just in time. Prostrations are never made at the end, but it's customary to remain standing, slightly bowed, hands palms touching, always turning towards the teacher, until the teacher leaves the room.

Because Buddhism has its roots in Indian culture, some things might sound silly to us Westerners, but the traditions are kept. You should never turn your back to a representation of the Buddha — or to a teacher. That shows disrespect. That doesn't mean that you need to walk backwards all the way (and risk stumbling!) if you leave a temple with some statues, but you can definitely do that for a few backward steps (safety first! tradition next!). If your teacher comes from the Far East and is not acquainted with Western traditions, it is rude to stare them directly in the eyes (by contrast, a Western teacher, or an Eastern teacher well-acquainted with our traditions, will understand that staring directly in their eyes is a sign of paying close attention to what they're saying, which would be a sign of respect in our culture).

Pointing your feet to the teacher and/or any Buddha statues is also considered very rude. For the Indian tradition, the feet, because they are touching the mud and filth on the ground, are considered 'dirty'. So pointing them at objects worthy of respect is very impolite. If you really need to stretch your legs, do it sideways, so that your feet are not pointing to anyone. In the winter it's sometimes easier, temples might distribute some blankets, and so you can cover your feet that way.

If you're a beginner, and you cannot stay cross-legged for a long period, it's fine to ask for a chair if one is available. Sitting cross-legged is not even an 'Eastern' thing. Chinese, for instance, use chairs. The Japanese 'sit' by kneeling down. So there is no fixed rule for what 'has' to be done when attending ceremonies or teachings. However, Vajrayana Buddhism has some very advanced meditation techniques which require sitting down cross-legged, which will be explained to you why — in due time. In the mean time, in the West, many temples might have some chairs, and it's neither rude, nor impolite, to ask to be allowed to sit there. In fact, if you can sit down and remain still in your chair, it's far better than be constantly stretching legs, arms, back, etc. because you cannot (yet) remain still cross-legged. It's also far less disturbing for others. When sitting down, you should not cross your legs, nor play with them, sit sideways, etc. The appropriate way is to sit down with both legs parallel to each other, feet well planted in the ground, your back straight.

Inside the centre or temple, it is very rude to speak of anything futile or trivial (except on those very exceptional occasions mentioned at the beginning!), but Buddhists are supposed to be happy, easy-going people, so they just have their fun outside. It's not 'hypocrisy' to 'behave well' inside and be a jokester outside — it's only important to understand that, one one hand, Buddhists take their practice very seriously, but the result of that practice is a way of happiness — so being too serious, too worried, too stressed, too stiff is definitely not a good sign! Buddhists are easy-going and certainly behave that way outside the centres or temples! Just look at the Dalai Lama, he's always smiling, laughing, telling jokes, amusing himself with silly things, and pretty much spreading that easy-going nature of his to everybody around him. But inside a temple he's serious.

Good teachers, however, will also teach in an informal way. This is specially the case in the Nyingma and Kagyü schools of Tibetan Buddhism. It's not unusual for a teacher to tell jokes, illustrate a complex point of doctrine with a hilarious anecdote, and, in general, make the students relaxed and in a good mood. Of course, visiting teachers who come for the first time to a specific temple will be much more formal, because they might not know what the reaction of the audience will be. You can certainly see that a teacher who has come to a centre often — or who is a resident at that centre — will most certainly have a much more informal way of teaching.

In a Vajrayana temple, all objects and images you see there are 'special', in the sense that you have to be given special teachings to understand their purpose. You're still welcome to ask about anything, but please refrain from touching anything. In particular, you should not touch anything belonging to the teacher — or to other practitioners. Vajrayana temples have musical instruments around, but, again, they're not toys, and their purpose is not really just making musical sounds — there are far more profounder meanings in the music — and they are not to be handled unless you have been given special instructions and explanations about them. This sounds a bit crazy and secretive, but you can imagine how you would feel if a visitor to your place would start opening the drawers and look at your underclothing and ask strange questions. Of course, if that visitor happens to be your sweetheart or someone very close to you, you would share a certain degree of intimacy, and then you'll let them do that to your home easily. Vajrayana Buddhism is a bit like that: once you have some 'intimacy' with the whole philosophy and the whole point of the practice, then, yes, slowly, you'll be able to touch everything, do everything... and, in fact, it will even be a requirement. In many Vajrayana temples, new visitors might be shocked that suddenly one of the other practitioners start to do the practice without a supervising teacher, or even teach some meditation techniques, etc. There is no real 'dividing line' between 'student' and 'teacher'. A teacher becomes a teacher when their own teacher tells them to do so! So, every time you see someone who is dressed just like you, very casually, all of the sudden leading a meditation session or more complex ceremony on their own, you can rest assured that they have been given explicit permission from their own teachers to do so. In fact, they're practicing to become teachers one day. And the first thing that they all learn is how to do everything — because teachers will die some time, and who will continue their work?

Books with recitations or anything related to the teachings of the Buddha should never be touched or handled without permission, and never ever placed in the ground. You should also never place anything on top of them — not even your glasses (if you use glasses to read). The reason for that is that these books contain the precious instructions that will teach you how to train your mind, to become more functional, a gentler being, a better person. Even if they're just photocopies of something scribbled down in a hurry, they're the most precious things you can find. As such, they are to be handled respectfully. If, before a meditation session, they handle out some plain printouts of the recitations, or some instructions, don't place them on the ground. They might look very simple and plain, but they're nevertheless very precious. And, for practical purposes, it also means that you are not spoiling them, making them dirty and unreadable, thus contributing that the next person who gets them to read can benefit from them as well. Not all Buddhist groups are wealthy enough to be constantly printing out things!

Most groups will also not give you their books or photocopies of the recitations, etc. This is not due to a lack of generosity of their part! One difference from Buddhism to other religions and philosophies is that you cannot learn anything from a book — just from a teacher. Books are just memory aids — things to remind you what you're supposed to do. But without a teacher to explain you what is meant, they're worthless — to anyone who doesn't understand them. As such, they're not easily given away. Instead, you should always ask the teacher for permission to get a copy. A teacher will know if you really intend to practice those instructions seriously, and, if that's the case, he will be most glad to give a copy or allow you to buy them. But if he's not sure yet that you intend to follow the practice as he instructed, then he will politely decline to allow you a copy.

Many teachers practice generosity towards their students. Some teachers are really not wealthy and give away everything; so the slightest gift is very important, and also a form of test. For example, it's rude not to accept something to eat or drink from a teacher. When he offers you food or drink, he or she is symbolically offering you the teachings of the Buddha — this is the most generous offer he or she can make to you. So even if you're full from your last meal, or even ill with some stomach disease, accept at least a tiny morsel of what the teacher is giving to you. This will give the teacher confidence in you: if you're willing to accept food from him or her, you will very likely be willing to accept teachings from them as well.

Last, but most definitely not least, but rather the contrary: Buddhism is a very thorough philosophy/way of life/religion/science of the mind with a vast amount of literature. Over 2,600 years of discussion and debate have been recorded by millions of teachers. As a result, it's profoundly logical and rational at every level. While externally there might be some rituals and some rules to observe, all of them have some logic behind you. So, the beginner's mind should be a questioning mind. Question everything. Be skeptical, but open-minded enough to ask everything. Think the answers over: do they make sense to you? Are the arguments rational and well-presented? If so, accept the answers, and turn them as if they were your own. If they don't make any sense to you, reject them. Siddhārtha Gautama himself said, quite clearly, that nobody should take his words for granted, just because he is called the Buddha. Instead, you should think them over very carefully and see if they make sense. If not, and you're still curious about Buddhism, ask away — ask as much as you can to see if you can clear away each and any doubt you have. Be wary of 'teachers' who refuse to answer your questions, or come up with some technical mumbo-jumbo which might sound impressive but really doesn't make any sense. Buddhist teachers do not try to 'impress' students, or 'convert' them. Instead, they describe methods and techniques, and expect students to ask them 'why does this work?' — but also that they are willing to experiment those techniques and see if they work for themselves. It's a very experimental philosophy: it makes little sense to read about Buddhism — except if you wish to put it into practice, which is the whole point.

Oh, I forgot to say: make sure you get a qualified teacher to ask your questions. A qualified teacher is someone who has been asked by their own teachers to teach. And you're certainly allowed to ask any teacher, 'who told you that you're allowed to teach?' Any serious, qualified teacher will have absolutely no problem in answering that question truthfully — and you're quite welcome to check if it's true!

I, for sure, am not a qualified teacher :) But I try to help when asked to the limit of my abilities; all I know was what my poor memory retained from the words of my excellent teachers. So all mistakes I make are only mine — not a flaw of the teachings of the Buddha, and most certainly no flaws from my own teachers.


Clenching teeth and pressing tongue against roof of mouth

In Mahayana, we take such things as expression devices - not literal instructions. In this case clenched teeth are a pointer to great effort, great application of willpower.

The objectives of samatha are to disidentify from the mind, to learn to control attention, to acquire concentration/willpower, to integrate the disjointed layers of psyche, and generally to attain a "tamed", "pliable" mind.

It is towards these that we apply the great effort. Especially when the inappropriate thoughts arise, and if other techniques did not work (such as switching attention to antidotes and other techniques described in that sutra), as a last resort, we apply the sheer willpower.


From SN 7.16 - Paccanīka Sutta:

At S›vatthı. Now on that occasion a brahmin named Paccanıkas›ta, Relisher of Contradiction, was residing at S›vatthı. Then it occurred to the brahmin Paccanıkas›ta: “Let me approach the ascetic Gotama and contradict whatever he says.” Now on that occasion the Blessed One was walking back and forth in the open. Then the brahmin Paccanıkas›ta approached the Blessed One and said to him while he was walking back and forth: “Speak Dhamma, ascetic!”

[The Blessed One:]
693 “Well-spoken counsel is hard to understand By one who relishes contradiction, By one with a corrupt mind <386> Who is engrossed in aggression.
694 “But if one has removed aggression And the distrust of one’s heart, If one has cast away aversion, One can understand well-spoken counsel.”

When this was said, the brahmin Paccanıkas›ta said to the Blessed One: “Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent, Master Gotama!… Let Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who from today has gone for refuge for life.”


(Radical) pacifism and governmental force (army, police, etc.)

I think this would take a political scientist to answer but I'll try to give a few thoughts on this.

I listened to a podcast a while ago where Owen Flanagan was arguing that Buddhism was ill suited to form part of any political philosophy. Whereas a country may be Buddhist from a democratic perspective when it comes to the political sphere that country will operate with a different political philosophy such as monarchy, oligarchy etc... So whether a Buddhist does or doesn't subscribe to radical pacifism would be irrelevant in Buddhist countries as the political philosophy isn't actual based on Buddhism. I'm not agreeing or diagreeing with this - my knowledge of global political structures isn't strong enough to support that stance. However it was an interesting assertion and relevant here I think.

Also for many people the Dalai Lama is the Buddhist political leader that they are most familiar with and his attitude to political force is complex. For instance he has given messages of support to the armed forces - while that not directly advocating violence it isn't radical pacifism either.

In short although I do think that radical pacifism is a valid Buddhist position I don't believe it is a position that political figures hold whether in Buddhist countries or being Buddhist themselves. Very happy to be proved wrong on this of course.


In the trisvabhava theory, is the consummate nature inflected by past present and future conditions?

Yes consummate nature is inflected by past present and future conditions but it is not inflected by time. Do any other mahayana object?
If something is composed of multiple parts and one of those parts is timeless and not inflected by time. Then the whole cannot be inflected by time even if it is composed of another part that is inflected by karma (including past present and future conditions).
My advice: become enlightened and try to prove whether or not you are existing in reality as we know it, or not.


While the recital continues there will be found a pot of water placed
on a table before the monks. On this table there is also a sacred
thread (pirit nula). For an all night pirit ceremony the casket
containing a relic of the Buddha, and the Pirit Potha or The Book of
Protection written on ola leaves, are also brought into the pavilion.
The relic represents the Buddha, the "Pirit Potha" represents the
Dhamma or the teachings of the Buddha, and the reciting Bhikkhu-Sangha
represent the Ariya-Sangha, the arahant disciples of the Buddha.
The thread is drawn round the interior of the pavilion, and its end
twisted round the casket, the neck of the pot of water, and tied to
the cord of the ola-leaf book. While the special discourses are being
recited the monks hold the thread. The purpose is to maintain an
unbroken communication from the water to the relic, to the Pirit Potha
and to the officiating monks, (Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, the Ti-ratana,
the three jewels.) A ball of thread connected to "The Three Jewels"
and the water, is unloosened and passed on to the listeners (seated on
the ground on mats), who hold the thread while the recital goes on.
When the recital in Pali of the entire book is over at dawn, the
thread sanctified by the recital is divided into pieces and
distributed among the devotees to be tied round their wrists or necks.
At the same time the sanctified water is sprinkled on all, who even
drink a little of it and sprinkle it on their heads. These are to be
regarded as symbols of the protective power of the paritta that was
recited. It is a service of inducing blessings. It has its
psychological effects.
Dr. Bernard Grad of McGill University in Montreal painstakingly proved
that if a psychic healer held water in a flask and this water was
later poured on barley seeds, the plants significantly outgrew
untreated seeds. But — and this is the intriguing part — if depressed
psychiatric patients held the flasks of water, the growth of seeds was
retarded. Read more...

The practice of giving Paritta threads was even done by Pacceka Buddhas in the past.
It's basically used as a symbol of protection. There's no real time limit to how long you have to wear it. If it's clean, you can keep it as long as you want. It can be helpful in many ways. If you feel afraid, you can look at the thread and remember the Paritta chanting event. Remember taking refuge. And feel confident that you are able to handle any situation since you have the protection of the Triple-gem. Wearing the thread can make you disinclined to break precept. ex: "Am I really going to kill while wearing this which represents the Triple-gem?", "Am I really going to misbehave while wearing this sacred thread?" etc.
Wearing a thread or a band for such reasons is much more wholesome than wearing bands/bracelets to make a fashion statement.


What are the main differences between Buddhism and Ellen Langer's 'scientific mindfulness'?

Do you have the passage? If you posted an excerpt it would be easier to answer the question.

But "scientific Buddhism", or Buddhist philosophy and practices adapted to fit a Western, secular audience, is not new. The Dhamma talks I've heard from teachers on retreat at places like the Insight Meditation Center in Massachusetts, focus much less on formal scripture and avoid metaphysics or the supernatural. Since the Buddha himself spent a lot of time de-emphasizing metaphysical questions, this is an easy step to take. Sam Harris has an entire book (Waking Up) that tries to convince skeptical, secular Westerners to practice Buddhist meditation.

On the plus side, this kind of approach cuts away the cultural baggage that grows up around any religious institution. Buddhism works perfectly well without spirits, devas, or reincarnation, and in this form it is easier for modern people to work with. Using the scientific method as a check on the woo-woo and wishful thinking that can corrupt spirituality is also a big benefit. (Does practice increase happiness? is a testable question, and it's reassuring that science seems to say "yes".)

On the minus side, emphasizing medical research showing that meditation and mindfulness are correlated with lower blood pressure, reduced stress, blah blah blah, risks taking a very thorough and rich spiritual tradition and turning it into a relaxation technique. Even people like Sam Harris, who take things like no-self seriously, throw out a lot of serious introspection in their attempt to strip things down.


How many times has someone taken birth into samsara?

According to the Assu Sutta:

  There the Blessed One said: "From an inconstruable beginning comes
  transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings
  hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating &
  wandering on. What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears
  you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time —
  crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being
  separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great
  oceans?"

  "As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is
  the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating & wandering
  this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is
  displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in
  the four great oceans."

  "Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand
  the Dhamma taught by me.

According to this article, the total amount of tears a person sheds on average in a lifetime is estimated to be 64 litres.

According to this USGS estimation and this article, there is an estimated 1.332 billion cubic kilometers of water in the Earth's oceans. That's 1.332 x 1021 litres.

If I divide that by 64, I get 2.08125 x 1019 lifetimes.

According to the short scale, that's 20 quintillion (20 x 1018).

Hence, according to the Buddha, every person has been reborn at least 20 quintillion times.

However, since the Buddha says that "a beginning point is not evident", I guess that it should be far greater than 20 quintillion times. Maybe a googleplex amount of times.


Can cold showers benefit or harm our practice (our concentration)?

Let me tell you a story from Lord Buddha's time....
One day a maid who was a follower of Lord Buddha went early in the morning to the nearby river to bring water.
She saw a sage in the  river taking an early bath, knowing the temperature of the water in the morning she asked him a question.

Dear sage what are you doing in this cold water, it is very cold in this part of the day?
the sage replied, I am washing away my sins. When i take cold baths it brings me closer to salvation.

The maid was surprised by the answer and said,

Dear sage if cold water brings you closer to the path what about the fish in the water?

Then she went on to describe how mind matters to the path not the body.

This is what you should take from this story...
Lord Buddha clearly said "Mind is the thing that comes first,that it is on top of the order".
Lord Buddha also said "thoughts are Karma" ("Chethanahan Bhikkave kamman wadami")
It is the mind that matters not the body...

Let me convince you with some stories from the history of the Great Arahats,

One day a determent monk started to do the walking meditation around the "Bodhi tree" of a monastery. The monk was determined to keep going no matter what. After some time he felt that his legs hold no more power to carry him and he fell down, but he did not stop. He started to keep going on his knees. Then his knees gave up on him after some time. He was bleeding and fell down on the sand. Later on he was directly instructed by Lord Buddha to take things slow, Not too hard and not too soft.

So this is how taking things too hard ended up. Now lets see how taking things too soft ended up...

In the early age of Buddhism monks used a wooden pillow to rest their heads when sleeping. But this was later on replaced by the kind of pillows we use today.
And it can be found in many dialogs among Monks and Arahats (In text) that this replacement which is seemingly good actually reduced the potential of the monks. It was considered a bad choice because the replacement actually represented the love for the well being of the body.

So have people or monks meditated without any regard to their bodies?
Here's the answer...

Once there was a monk called "Ven. Chakku pala". while he was at the peak of his practice he started having troubles with his eyes. The doctor gave a medicine which needed to be dropped in to the eyes while the patient is lying on a bed. But he could not agree to that because the practice style he was doing needed him in only to poses (sitting or standing). So all along he was either standing or sitting,skipping the sleeping. He chose his Nirvana above his eyes and kept going. In the very day he turned blind he reached Nirvana.

Do not have many concerns. Try to relax and not to worry about the minor details. If you have pains while meditating do some vipassana meditation and focus on the impermanence of that pain and keep going on. It is essential that you give up the love for your own body and to do that you need to learn and realize just like all other things your body is temporary too.

Be strong and keep it up,
May triple gems bless you!


Is there anything I can read about the Buddhist tradition today?

The Broken Buddha isn't exactly a history -- more of a snapshot, a description, an account of the author's personal experiences -- his description of people he met and their attitudes and behaviours which he saw ... not about "personalities", in that the people he describes are unnamed or not famous.

Seven Years in Tibet is history (ending in 1950) -- but by a non-Buddhist, and more about the culture, society, geography and politics of Tibet at the time, than about Buddhism.


It is in Thupavamsa. I doubt if there's any online version of the translation.

The Pali version of Thupavams in the following link says, at the time the people were building the road, Sumedha was supposed to be flying in the sky. When he asked if he could also help, as people already knew that he had iddhi powers they gave him to construct a difficult part of the road.

  Te puna divase asadisa mahādānaṃ sajjetvā dasabalassa āgamana maggaṃ
  sodhenti. Tasmiṃ kāle sumedhatāpaso attano assama padato uggantvā
  rammanagaravāsīnaṃ tesaṃ manussānaṃ uparibhāgena ākāsena gacchantā te
  haṭṭhapahaṭṭhe maggaṃ sodhente disvā kinnu kho kāraṇanti cintento
  sabbesaṃ passantānaṃyeva ākāsato oru ekamante ṭhatthāyaha te manusse
  pucchi.’Hambho kassa pana imaṃ maggaṃ sodhethā’ti te āhaṃsu bhante
  sumedha tumhe kiṃ naṃ jānātha, dīpaṅkaro nāma satthā
  paramābhisambodhiṃ patvā pavattavara dhammacakko janapada cārikaṃ
  caramāno anukkamena amhākaṃ nagaraṃ patvā sudassana mahāvihāre
  paṭivasati. Mayaṃ taṃ bhagavantaṃ nimantayimha tassa bhagavato
  āgamanamaggaṃ sodhemāti. Taṃ sutvā sumedhapaṇḍito cintesi. Buddhoti
  kho panesa ghosopi dullabho, pageva buddhuppādo tena hi mayāpi imehi
  manussehi saddhiṃ dasabalassa āgamanamaggaṃ sodhetuṃ vaṭṭatīti so te
  manusse āha, sace bho tumhe imaṃ magga buddhassa sodhetha - sayahampi
  ekaṃ okāsaṃ sampaṭicchatvā ayaṃ sumedhapaṇḍito mahiddhiko
  mahānubhāvoti jānantā dubbisodhanaṃ udakasambhinnaṃ ativisamaṃ ekaṃ
  okāsaṃ sallakkhetvā imaṃ hakāsaṃ tumhe sodhetha. Alaṅkarothāti adaṃsu.

http://tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/e1202n.nrf0.xml


What is known/taught about yawning during meditation?

There are a whole host of phenomenon that happen at the early stages of meditation.  Some others you might experience are a feeling that your face is swelling, that your sinuses are filled with cotton, your muscles might twitch involuntary, it may feel like your hands or other parts of your body are disappearing, that your body is being twisted, that someone is messing with your hair, and so on and so forth.  None of these mean anything, but they are a good indication that you are just touching the edges of samadhi.  As your concentration deepens, all of these phenomenon will ultimately disappear.


What does Buddhism literature and tradition say about transgender folks?

The Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara can be seen as having an indeterminate gender. Quoting from this website

  One interpretation of this development contends that the bodhisattva
  is neither male or female but has transcended sexual distinctions
  [...] the flowing drapery and soft contours of the body seen in
  statues and paintings have been intentionally combined with a visible
  moustache to emphasize the absence of sexual identity.

So the issue of gender can take on a more flexible interpretation with some more Mahayana aspects of Buddhism


The 4 elements are:

pruṭhavī-dhātu - solidity or attraction. This holds something together. You feel this as tightness, pressure in the body.
āpa-dhātu - liquidity or relative motion. See below.
teja-dhātu - heat or energy. Body temperature, vibrations in the body you feel in meditation. Difference of temperature in and out meditation.
vāyu-dhātu - expansion or repulsive forces. You feel this as pulsation or expansion and contraction in the body or flow of respiration, rumbling gasses in the belly and passing of wind.

Mobility element is liquidity like liquidly nature in the nose, saliva, urine, sweat. You can look at the flowing nature of these elements in mediation. Though solidity, heat, air element can be experienced through the body liquidity can be experienced or constructed through the mind only.

More particularly, the experience of the 3 elements (earth, heat, air) are happen through Body - Conciousness accompanied by either Pain, Pleasure, or Neutral Sensation and liquidity (motion) through the mind.

Some translators translate Air Element (vāyu-dhātu) as motion element.

Also see: Matter and Moments, Matter & moments and feeling 1, Rupa (Form), Lectures on Rupa 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d by Piya Tan for more academic analysis of the Elements. Wikipedia entry on Mahābhūta.


Is it possible and good to know and/or talk about other/more details about the way out of suffering than the Buddha did?

In the parable of the Simsapa leaves in SN 56.31, the Buddha took some Simsapa (Indian rosewood) leaves in his hand and said that the leaves in his hand were far less in number than the leaves in the forest. Similarly, he had realized far more than he taught. However, that which he taught is all that is needed for the path to end suffering. That which he did not teach is not relevant to the path to end suffering.

Meanwhile, in DN 16, he declared that he did not hide (in a "closed fist") any teachings from his disciples. He said he did not separate some teachings as being exotic or esoteric.

Based on these statements, we can say that more details regarding the path is unnecessary. Also, since the Shakyamuni Buddha was the last Sammasambuddha (or Buddha with full perfection), it is unlikely that anyone else coming after him would know more of the path than he does, unless they too achieve the same level of perfection.

Hence, it is plausible that primarily relying on the Buddha's original words (Buddhavacana or the Buddha's Words) in most of the Sutta Pitaka (and the corresponding Mahayana Agamas) is sufficient for understanding his teachings and the path. I say "most", because there are parts of the Sutta Pitaka which contain teachings or writings from other people e.g. Sariputta, Ananda, Mogallana, elder monks, elder nuns, a few advanced householders etc. Some parts of the Sutta Pitaka like some books in the Khuddaka Nikaya even come from later periods, like the Milindapanha. You can find more scholarly information on the authenticity of the Buddha's original words in the book "The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts" by Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali.

But this does not mean that it's wrong to elaborate or expand on the Buddha's teachings, while not contradicting the original teachings. In fact, I think teachers over the ages would definitely try to explain the teachings using new methods and analogies. However, such elaborations or expansions should be considered secondary sources, which are less important compared to the Buddha's original teachings.

Many traditional Theravadins say that the Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha, but academic scholars say that this is a later work by disciples. To me, I would consider the Abhidhamma as a secondary source, that explains the Buddha's original teachings in the Sutta Pitaka. The many carefully collated lists in the Abhidhamma are useful.

The Visuddhimagga (or Path of Purification) written by Buddhaghosa in the 5th century in Sri Lanka is another useful secondary source that expands on Buddhist meditation practice and doctrine. It can be downloaded here.

Also many traditional Mahayanists say that the Mahayana sutras were taught by the Buddha in the second and third turning of the wheel, but academic scholars say that these are later works by Mahayana authors. To me, I would consider these as secondary sources too. Nagarjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā contains an expansion on the Buddha's original definition of emptiness. I tried to analyze the link between Madhyamaka emptiness and Theravada emptiness in this question.

Of course, I understand that there will be traditional Theravadins and traditional Mahayanists who will disagree with some of my opinions above.


At least yes, the Dhamma as a stand, or "my" understanding of Dhamma, all stands/views (diṭṭhī) have to be abounded at least, whereas the Dhamma (teching), the raft, will be abounded when having reached the other shore, see the "raft - simile". Note that it is the very last, and in no way good to abound fist or in the middle of the ozean.

Having layed down all views, seeing knowing as unreal as well, one then might reach what is called paññā-vimutti knowing-release, where all kinds of stands or views are abounded, would no more related to.

The word under-stand-ing it self shows well that it is a matter of "holding on it" (upādāna), yet there are Dhammas, there is a Dhamma, that is useable to get free of unreal, insecure (anicca) things.

The first step here is to distinguishing right understanding from wrong understanding: Micchatta Sutta: Wrongness, and after having developed the path completely, one, by abounding it also, gets free of troubles:

  Among those who live above confrontation
      not pitting view against view,
      whom would you gain as opponent, Pasura,
  among those here
  who are grasping no more?

  To Pasura

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


What are the benefits of practicing under a teacher vs. practicing alone?

If one has found a good teacher who is willing to teach, nothing like it. Unfortunately, good teachers are rare, and most wander alone.

It's like climbing a mountain without a guide. Sometimes we get lost, wander around a lot, maybe learn a lot of things in the process, but also get hurt by falling down. Most times the learning is not really essential to climbing the mountain, it can sometimes feel like it is impossible to continue, and other times one can think, "I have come so far, I can't turn back now".

In the modern age with so many dharma books and teachers online, one may not always need a direct teacher. However, one can get confused with a multitude of approaches and schools.

It's a risk, but it also protects from getting locked into a dogma or school. This can happen to anyone who finds a teacher or school at an early age and never encounters other ideas. The Dalai Lama (in his book "Toward a True Kinship of Faiths: How the World's Religions Can Come Together") has said that until he visited the Theosophical society in Chennai and met people of other faiths, he was pretty certain only Buddhism had all the answers, and every other approach was wrong.

Ultimately we make do with what we have. We don't abandon our practice merely because we can't find a good teacher, we do it the best way we can.

If we accumulate merit by helping others it will lead to better guides, books and teachers - dharma will find us.


What is the process for cleansing a very negative action?

Nyom Eugene,

it's most needed to speak with an "admirable" friend", a teacher (one who actually knows), at least not only to know if it was a fault and which kind of. As your words here give much doubt in regard of whether it even wars or if "you world-view" has something to do with what is right or wrong, and since it is not a proper enviroment here, it's good when Nyom seeks for refuge at proper place.

All my person can offer are proper places here. Amends & confession or Uposatha/Sila ceremonies.

The pattern to come out of a fault is simple: recognize it clear as fault, be ashamed and express it, firm resolving not to ever engage into such again. That's it. Clean. Yet of course does not make deeds undone, but when effects ripe later, easy to bear and one can after cleaning move on, having been lifted out of the hole.


What's the role of mother-day in regard of a blessed life?

I would like to paraphrase Luang Por Viradhammo, who cared for about 10 years for his elderly mother, in saying that it is good to have formal ways of bringing up and maintaining gratitude for ones mother lest we become complacent and let the importance they have in our being here fade from our minds.

With that in mind, I would say that exactly how you would internally use the formal occasion of mother's day is something only yourself can piece together. I hope the two links I am sharing can help give you a good starting point for reflection.

Dhamma talk by Luang Por Sumedho about gratitude to parents

Article by Ajahn Amaro


Should one who follows the Dhamma give drugs to the dying to ease thier suffering?

This is not exactly "Buddhist scripture or commentary" but it's related -- What nurses need to know about Buddhist perspectives of end-of-life care -- here's an extract but you might read it all:

Taking into consideration overall well-being
(including the mental state of the patient), nurses
must balance the level of pain relief needed against
the need for alertness in the dying Buddhist. Proper
pain management can be achieved with minimal disruption of alertness by the use of the WHO analgesic
ladder. The choice of non-opioid analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) and weak opioids
should be preferred over strong opioids and neurolytic
block therapy whenever possible, with the aim of reducing adverse side effects (i.e. sedation and cognitive
impairment), thus maintaining alertness of the individual so that effective spiritual practices may continue. However, if severe uncontrolled pain develops,
cognitive impairment (e.g. delirium) may result that
may require the use of strong opiods for effective
relief to achieve the best cognitive function possible
that would support meditative spiritual practices. In
concordance with good practice and recognizing that
the individual needs of each patient will differ,
nurses should continue to monitor the need for pain
relief, and should clearly document the preferences
of such patients with regard to pain relief, particularly
during initial patient assessment regardless of the
setting (patient’s own home, hospice, hospital).

I believe the "analgesic ladder" means, not prescribing more than needed, and, increasing the prescription over time (when the need/illness increases, and as the tolerance to the drug increases, tolerance making it less effective) -- additional details here: WHO Analgesic Ladder

For some patients I think that unmanaged pain and suffering itself, may cause a "mind to be in a bad state" -- for example delirious or suicidal.

This article -- Ministering to the Sick and the Terminally Ill -- includes a lot of sutta references.
One of these is AN 5.124 which identifies qualities of a competent carer -- they include being able to prepare medicine and knowing what's suitable and unsuitable.


Body scanning - right way of attention moving

When I do a body scan, I do a visualization of a "golden nectar" slowly filling my body from the toes all the way to the top of my head. This is a way of helping you keep a focus of attention to the body. For me, sometimes as I am doing this technique, there is a sensation of warmth that I feel or think I feel as my attention to the body scan grows.

I hope this also helps a bit during your meditation practice.


A more useful way of looking at it is to see both the Nikayas and Agamas as Early Buddhist text rendered in different languages (Pali for Nikayas, Sanskrit for Agamas). If you've read Ven. Analayo's work on comparative studies between the two systems, you'll see they are very very similar. Now, Theravada pretty much focuses on the Nikayas as their go-to sutta sources, while Mahayana, due to its vast number of sub-schools or sub-systems, has various focuses depending on the particular school. Some pay more attention to the Agamas, while others more on the later additions (Amitabha collections, Avatamsaka, Lankavatara, Prajnaparamita, etc...).


How was Chögyam Trungpa's behaviour justified by his lineage?

The most famous Tibetan "Mad monk of the Dragon Lineage" Drukpa Kunley would be an example and precedence.

  He was known for his crazy methods of enlightening other beings, mostly women, which earned him the title "The Saint of 5,000 Women". Among other things, women would seek his blessing in the form of sex. His intention was to show that it is possible to be enlightened, impart enlightenment, and still lead a very healthy sex life. He demonstrated that celibacy was not necessary for being enlightened. In addition, he wanted to expand the range of means by which enlightenment could be imparted, while adding new evolutionary prospects to the overarching tradition. He is credited with introducing the practice of phallus paintings in Bhutan and placing statues of them on rooftops to drive away evil spirits.[2] Because of this power to awaken unenlightened beings, Kunley's penis is referred to as the "Thunderbolt of Flaming Wisdom" and he himself is known as the "fertility saint". For this reason women from all around the world visited his monastery to seek his blessing.[3][4]

The drunken saint Drukpa Kunley

Poems and songs of Drukpa Kunley

Poem about happiness

  I am happy that I am a free Yogi.

  So I grow more and more into my inner happiness.

  I can have sex with many women,

  because I help them to go the path of enlightenment.

  Outwardly I'm a fool

  and inwardly I live with a clear spiritual system.

  Outwardly, I enjoy wine, women and song.

  And inwardly I work for the benefit of all beings.

  Outwardly, I live for my pleasure

  and inwardly I do everything in the right moment.

  Outwardly I am a ragged beggar

  and inwardly a blissful Buddha.

Song about the pleasure

  A young woman finds pleasure in love.
  A young man finds pleasure in sex.
  An old man finds pleasure in his memoirs.
  This is the doctrine of the three pleasures.

  Who does not know the truth, is confused.
  Those who have no goals, can not sacrifice.
  Those who have no courage, can not be a Yogi.
  This is the doctrine of the three missing things.

  Even if a person knows the way of wisdom;
  without practicing there is no realization.
  Even if a master shows you the way,
  you have to go it by yourself.

The five spiritual ways

  I practice the path of self-discipline.
  I meditate every day.

  I go the way of embracing love.
  I work as a mother and father of all beings.

  I do the deity yoga.
  I visualize myself as a Buddha in the cosmic unity.

  I read the books of all religions
  and practice all at the right moment.

  The life is my teacher
  and my inner wisdom is my guide.

More on The Sublime Life and Songs of Drukpa Kunley


Unenlightened monks indebtedness to the laity

This is covered in the Cūlaccharāsanghāta Sutta, this was preached to counter the  Aggikkhandhopama Sutta, which was said to frighten many monks back to lay life , or to "disrobe". This is supposedly (link) said in the Manorathapūranī, the commentary by Buddhaghosa on the Aṅguttara-nikāya.


If kamma is not everything, then what is that?

The idea that everything that happens is a result of kamma is a common enough wrong view to have a name in Pāḷi: Pubbekata-hetu-diṭṭhi (literally "the with-past-actions-as-cause view"). For a canonical discussion of this you could try the Devadaha Sutta (Majjhima Nikāya 101). It's a long and complex argument that is difficult to summarise, the Buddha works through a range of combinations and shows that most of them, including the view that everything that one experiences is a result of past actions, are illogical.

The main result of accumulated karma is usually rebirth, although some karma may ripen as vedanā "sensations". Karma was not, at least originally, intended to describe every little thing that happens, it was intended to explain how mental states drive the cycles of rebirth. At least one sutta, Karajakāyasuttaṃ (AN 10.219; v.299-301), argues that rebirth wipes the slate clean, but most karma theories allow for karma to ripen many lifetimes hence.

At least one text describes many different kinds of causes for misfortunes. In the Sīvaka Sutta (SN 36.21) eight different causes are summarised in a verse:

  Pittaṃ semhañca vāto ca, sannipātā utūni ca;
   Visamaṃ opakkamikaṃ, kammavipākena aṭṭhamī ti.

  Bile, phlegm, wind, combinations of them, and regular processes;
  Something disagreeable, sudden pains, and kamma as eighth.

Regular processes (utu) might be seasons, but it can also refer, for example, to the menstrual cycle. In this view a fatal car accident is not necessarily to do with karma, though where you are reborn afterwards is. Note that Bhikkhu Thanissaro has argued against this interpretation of the Sīvaka Sutta.

  The point here is that old and new kamma do not override other causal factors operating in the universe — such as those recognized by the physical sciences — but instead find their expression within those factors."

However this "everything happens for a reason" (teleological) argument is weak by modern philosophical standards. It's a kin to the Christian claim that "God moves in mysterious ways" - there is a reason, but mere mortals cannot understand it. It only works in Buddhism because on the whole the conditions for an event are said to be in a past life and therefore unknown to us (until we begin to develop the three mystical skills or tevijjā, one of which is knowledge of former lives).

Karma is a very changeable doctrine. So that many modern traditions teach something different. Many Tibetan schools, for example, say that karma is responsible for everything that happens. The car accident would be the result of some action or actions in the past. I personally do not find this teaching compelling, and it has many philosophical problems.

The standard view of karma is that it determines which of the five "realms" (Hell, gods & asuras, humans, animals, hungry ghosts) you are born into, and perhaps the original circumstances of your birth. After that things unfold in their own way according to the nature of the realm and the choices one makes.


Teaching or giving advice without mentioning the Buddha

There is nothing wrong with it at all. It is an extremely wonderful thing to speak the Dhamma in any form. In the Abhaya sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html) the Buddha said he used three factors to decide what and when to say something. They are truth, benefit, and agreeableness. The Buddha would only say something if it was true and beneficial to the listener, and if it was disagreeable, he would say it only at the right time and in the most gentle way possible. Because the Buddha is the perfect example of morality and right speech, we can use these principles to guide our speech as well.

When you say this you are saying something true, beneficial, and agreeable. Not only is there nothing wrong with it, but speaking the Dhamma is actually a kind of giving. In fact according to the Buddha:

  "The gift of Dhamma excels all other gifts." Dhammapada 354

Far from being a cause for bad Kamma, your action is actually a basis of great ammounts of good Kamma.


Neither-pleasant-nor-unpleasant feeling vs not feeling

This is a classic dilemma for almost every new practitioner of Buddhism. The question goes into so much depth and even lead to Nibbana if studied in proper detail. Apologies for the long answer, but there is no shorter way of explaining this.

First things first, everyone feels through their senses. Even the Arahath feels. Otherwise, we would be able to attain Nibbana, by severing the nervous connections. What matters to the Buddhist is not what you feel through the senses; rather, what value you assign for that sensation. Unless you are aware of the process of your mind assigning values to sensations Moha (inability to see things as they are) tricks you to either hold onto that sensation (Lobha) and form attachments or to desist that sensation (Dwesha) and form hatred/dislike towards it. Simply put, we translate the actual sensations into a totally different set of values in out mind.

Wait a minute, those values help me survive. So how can they be bad?
Of cause, some of them will help your survival. As an example moving away from dangerous situation. So, obtaining sensory data is important. But forming attachments and pursuing them or forming hatred and dislike and trying to rid them is the path to generating both 'Sansara' habits (habits that could perpetuate from this life and next) as well as Karma. In Buddhism, all forms of likes and dislikes are attachments. You form attachment to some sensation by liking it, or disliking it.

Not all attachments are bad! If these attachments help you stop the cycle of birth and death, it will bring you positive results. In fact you need such attachments to obtain Nibbana. Be warned, there is a fine line here. At some point in the path to Nibbana you have to sever these attachments. Huh? Yes even the ones which help you attain Nibbana. This is why Budhdha taught us to take Dhamma as a vessel to cross the treacherous river of Sansara, and leave the vessel at the banks rather than carrying it along.

So, how can I distinguish between good attachments and bad?
Simple, if that attachment help you to attain Nibbana, help you to understand Dhamma that is a good attachment. A productive attachment. If the attachment blocks your path to Nibbana, that is a bad attachment. Be warned, we can easily fool ourselves in to classifying even the most notorious actions under this category. Again, a fine line to walk.

So everything is centered around Nibbana?
Yes it is, for a Buddhist. As Buddhists the ultimate freedom from all forms of suffering is Nibbana. Buddhism teaches us that Sansara is a treacherous cycle of endless birth and death, in different forms and planes. As long as there is YOU (one capable of suffering) there will be suffering. Suffering is the way of the world. No one can escape and no one can finish suffering, through the act of suffering. The only way to stop suffering is to remove the sufferer. That is Nibbana, which makes it the most important thing to achieve. It is the solution to ALL your problems!

Why is it bad to assign values to a feeling?
The process of assigning value to feelings is the primary reason for all beings to be slaves of Moha. Moha means the inability to see things as they are.
Lets take an example: Say your partner brings you a piece of cake. And tell you 'I made this specially for you'. You eat the piece of cake and it tastes wonderful. Halfway through, you find lots of dead insects in the cake and get to know that it is from a bakery with some questionable hygiene. If you take the next bite from the cake would it taste as good as before? Would you eat it at all? what changed between learning about the piece of cake, before and after? did the cake change? or your mind?
This is how Moha plays tricks on you. The piece of cake has a taste, a smell and a form. But what you perceive is not the reality because Moha had tricked you. That's why the initial bites before learning more information about it tasted better. You were tricked by Moha into forming Lobha or likeness. Because of that, you feel the form, smell, taste much more than the reality.
Once you learn more information about the cake, Moha tricks you again, by forming Dwesha/dislike towards the cake. You feel betrayed and angry and the cake tastes terrible and you simply don't want to eat it anymore. If we plot the events on a crude graph:

Everything above and below the dotted line which depict the actual taste, smell, feel of the cake are the effect of Moha. When Moha is not operating (at Arahath state) you would be able to feel the true taste of the cake. Nothing more, nothing less. Just the actual. This is why Arhath state is known as 'the awakened state'.

Does this mean most of the time we are perceiving more than we actually feel?
Yes of cause. Until one is Arhath, they will be a slave to Moha, which means they don't see the world as it is. They see their own perception of the world as interpreted through assigned values. This is the main reason for the endless wandering in Sansara.

So how can I guard myself against it?
Stop trying not to feel. That won't work. Try to see the reality of things through understanding of Dhamma. Being mindful and perceiving your thoughts is key. When you see the reality, as an effect of your effort to see things without any bias (without the effects of Moha), you will form less and less attachments, ultimately none - Arhath.

EDIT:
As a person who did not study Buddhism in English, my terminology could be different. So, I have put down some explanations on how certain terms should be taken.

Feeling - What is felt by your senses
Value assignment - Based on our habits and biases, and based on what we uphold as 'good for us', we constantly assign values to what we feel. Our actions are governed by the values we assign. If we take for an example; you have tickets to a musical show and on the same day at the same time you can attend a Dhamma discussion. You have to choose one from the other. Your choice of selection depends on how much you value each experience. (A simile to this is popular among native Americans: "There are two wolves in each person in constant battle. One is good; one is bad. Which one would win the battle?" - The answer is 'the one you feed the most'). Similarly the feelings you pursue define your actions.


What are the arguments behind the relatively late dating of Khuddaka Nikaya and Abhidhamma Pitaka?

For the layer of pāli-canons timeframe, please see:
What are timeframe were pali canons, included commentaries, done, especially Mahavihara-Theravada?
The arguments began from misunderstanding of students/scholars in reading study system, especially from the western world, see  The Case of Dhammakaya (Thai: กรณีธรรมกาย) by P.A. Payutto.
Reading study system make students/scholars understand teaching discontinuous, incomplete, through the buddhist study course.
You can see through below cases that the arguments of buddhist hypothesis by the students/scholars in reading study system, began from misunderstanding.
So, there are many misunderstand appearing from the past and still going on now, below.
I have the evidences in pāli-canons for each below example, if someone request to me, I will add them to this answer as soon as I can.
for the example:
(a) The introduction of dhammasaṅgaṇī's commentary, by the tipitaka-memorizers, said:

sāriputta studied just the brief abhidhamma teaching from buddha. Then
sāriputta taught his advance literary abhidhamma to his large number
of  students.
(Sāriputta's student was included upāli because some paṭṭhāna-words appear in
Vinayapitaka Parivāra, and some abhidhammas' description appear
in vinaya, too. So, in gosiṅgasāla-sutta said many famous
bhikkhu go to listened sāriputta's teaching, and in A.N. Ekaka. buddha
announced sāripuuta is the best of teacher who can teach the listener
for enlightenment as alike as himself. But sāriputta's literary abhidhamma didn't appear directly in 4 first nikāya of suttanta because even though ānanda often went to listen sāriputta, but he was not sāriputta's close student. When the 1st saṅgāyanā began, the most of sāriputta's teaching, still kept by sāriputta's students, not by ānanda. So, the fact appeared in commentary which said that many canon in K.N. were taught by sāriputta. Another, K.N. and Abhidhamma are easier to memorize than suttanta, by technical, too. So, the very big amount of abhidhamma and K.N. in oral study sysytem are not an argument to said "abhidhamma began very late after buddha time".)

But the beginner students just read through commentary then misunderstood and distort it as "commentary said buddha taught abhidhamma".

(b) The introduction of kathāvatthu's commentary, by the tipitaka-memorizers, said:

The forth member, of sevent abhidhamma canons, were authored in 3rd saṅgāyanā.

But the beginner students just read through commentary then misunderstood and distort it as "abhidhamma authored in 3rd saṅgāyanā".

(c) In VN Pañcasatikakhandhaka, 1st saṅgāyanā saṅgha, the original commentary teachers, made the unanimous decision to keep, to modify not/to add not, all the buddha's speech rules in the Vinaya, even the lesser and the minor rules. If there are something to describe about vinaya, it must appear in the other's context, such as the upāli's sikkhāpadavibhaṅga/upāli's parivāra/commentary/etc., without any modify buddha's speech.
But the beginner students just read through some sutta, then misunderstood and distort it as "there were just 150 vinaya rules in vinaya pitaka".

(d) Commentary said in introduction of D.N.'s  commentary:

Ānanda showed to kassapa, at 1st saṅgāyanā, that he did not modify anything of every sutta which he was presenting  to 1st saṅgāyanā saṅgha.

But the beginner students just read through the english translation version of 4 nikāya, which translated only some part, then misunderstood and distort it as "some sutta in 4 nikāya maybe authored after 1st saṅgāyanā".

(e) Vinaya pitaka and DN's commentary, the tipitaka-memorizers, said:

1st saṅgāyanā saṅgha gave each nikāya and commentary to 5
arahanta-groups at 1st saṅgāyanā meeting cave, upāli school got
vinaya-pitaka, ānanda school got dīghanikāya, etc, to recite for
the received nikāya, and there were somebodies in each school memorized more than 1 nikāya, too. Then about each 100 years later their relayed
students met each other school members again to recite them together,
2nd and 3rd saṅgāyanā, again. Each saṅgāyanā, they did it on the same
rule in (c) and (d).

But the beginner students just read through the western scholars' thesis, who never recite and memorize tipitaka, then misunderstood and distort it as "saṅgāyanā was the meeting to edit tipitaka." And "tipitaka become blurred through the time, because of oral study system".

You can see through above cases that the arguments of buddhist hypothesis by the students/scholars in reading study system, began from misunderstanding.


i saw vibrations in my body, but after that day its been many days i have not seen them

When you experience something like vibration you should understand this is also not permanent. You should not crave to experience it again.

This craving can also lead to arising of hindrances.

  But its my mind, it says “Why are you doing this, lets sleep, when i tell it no, it says its more comfortable to meditate in sleep”. and then i sleep, How do i control it, am i missing something ?

This can be either you being merely lazy and trying to find and excuse to doze off or sloth and torpor taking its hold. Whenever, you experience something like vibration this stirs up deep rooted Saṅkhāra which might manifest itself like aches and pains or hindrances.

Sloth and torpor is nourished  by unwise attention, you should denourish it by wise attention and exertion. Also see The Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest: Selected Texts from the Pali Canon and the Commentaries compiled and translated by Nyanaponika Thera and also Pacalā Sutta which deals with dozing off. Also there are many answers, which I have given, which deal with Pacalā Sutta which which are listed here and relevant to this context and also this answer. Also more content may be tagged meditation-hindrances and five-hindrances which are also relevant. Content I have created under the above tags are found here and here which might be less noisy and more relevant. Also Nīvaraṇa, Thīna,middha by Piya Tan might be useful.

The Vipassana method, as in the Pacalā Sutta, is as follow:

    “Nothing is worth clinging to”

    When this was said, the venerable Mahā Moggallāna said this to the Blessed One:
    “In what way, bhante, in brief, is a monk freed through the destruction of craving, that is, one who has reached total perfection, the total security from bondage, the total holy life, the total consummation, the highest amongst gods and humans?”

    “Here, Moggallāna, the monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to.
    And, Moggallāna, a monk has learned that nothing is worth clinging to, thus: he directly knows all things [he directly knows the nature of the all].
    Having directly known the nature of all things, he fully understands all
    things.

    Having fully understood all things, he knows whatever feelings there are, whether pleasant, painful or neither painful nor pleasant.

    As regards to those feelings, [Section on Disillusionment and Revulsion (Nibbida) follows]

    he dwells contemplating impermanence in them;

    he dwells contemplating dispassion [fading away of lust] in them;

    he dwells contemplating ending (of suffering) in them;

    he dwells contemplating letting go (of defilements).

    When he dwells contemplating impermanence in them, contemplating dispassion in them, contemplating ending in them, contemplating letting go, he does not cling to anything in the world.
    Not clinging, he is not agitated; being not agitated, he himself surely attains nirvana.


What is the minimum amount of time needed for a productive meditation sit?

My answer is based on oral transmission from Vajrayana teachers and thus I am unable to provide references.

I've been told that every meditation, however short, will bring about positive results and the only worthless meditation is the one you never did. Imagine that over a period of a month one could sit only for one minute a day but never did thinking that it is worthless. If they actually sat down, they would have done 30 minutes of meditation in total, which, admittedly, is nothing particular, but they would also form a great habit by doing one thing 30 days in a row. It means that 30 times they stopped doing their worldly activities and sat down to change something in their life.

Keeping a meditation session short is actually a common advice for beginners. Meditation should not be perceived as a difficult duty but rather as the best gift one can give to oneself. If one starts off too ambitiously, after a week they would connect 'meditation' with 'sore back', 'confusion', 'uncontrollable thoughts', 'drowsiness' etc. To prevent this, it's better to sit for a few minutes and finish the session while still feeling fresh. Then one will form positive connotations about meditation and will willingly sit down next time and possibly won't be bothered too much with prolonging the sessions step by step.

In Buddhism, one is not interested in immediate results as following Buddha's teachings is a long journey and many lifetimes might pass before one reaches enlightenment. One should do whatever is possible in the current situation and everything that is done with the motivation to follow Buddha's path should be considered productive.

Practising meditation is a very individual issue and coming up with a universal minimum value wouldn't help anyone. Everyone meditates as much as they can and want. If one can only do one minute a day due to a busy schedule, all they can do is to possibly make wishes that soon their conditions will change and they will be able to find more time. There are cases, however, that the reason why people meditate only a little lies elsewhere. They are again busy, but this time with things like browsing Internet, meaningless chatting, gossiping, napping etc. My point is that there is no use making a hard rule about meditation time, rather one might reflect on why they meditate that amount of time and not any more. Checking one's motivation and contemplating on impermanence might help in deciding whether one wants to meditate more.


what is the difference between Anapanasati and the Satipatthana

Anapanasati and Satipatthana are essentially
the same thing. The Anapanasati Sutta says: "mindfulness with breathing, developed and cultivated, fulfils the four establishments/foundations of mindfulness".

However, in the scriptures, there are two scriptures with some different respective explanations, namely, the Satipatthana Suttas (MN 10 & DN 22) and the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118).

The instruction in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) is repeated in many other suttas, such as the excellent MN 62 and in most of the 20 suttas in the Ānāpāna Saṃyutta. The Ānāpāna Saṃyutta says in a number places (such as SN 54.8 & SN 54.11) the Buddha practised Anapanasati.

The Satipatthana Sutta is merely a list of various dhammas often illogically compiled together. It appears not possible the Buddha spoke the Satipatthana Sutta for various reasons, such as:

Including the Five Hindrances in the 4th satipatthana (because the hindrances are abandoned prior to the start of practice)
Including painful feelings in the 2nd satipatthana (because pleasant feelings rather than painful feelings arise from the prior calming of the breathing) and;
Referring to the impermanence of experiencing the 4 noble truths in the 4th satipatthana (because an enlightened person has a permanent discernment of the 4 noble truths).

In short, it appears the Satipatthana Sutta does not follow the right sequence of cause & effect as explained in AN 5.159 as the right way to teach the Dhamma.

Bhikkhu Sujato appears to say the Satipatthana Sutta was a fraud (Piltdown), as follows:

  Some of the recent Burmese recensions have re-incorporated this entire section from the Dīgha Nikāya back into the Majjhima Nikāya, and even acknowledge this provenance by re-titling it the ‘Mahā Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta’. Perhaps a better title would be the ‘Piltdown Sutta’. This canonical innovation is extraordinary. While it is common for a word or phrase to slip between the cracks, I don’t know
  any other place where a large body of text has been moved, obviously in
  fairly recent times. No doubt this editorial innovation was designed to
  further exaggerate the already excessive status of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta.
  But the result is rather the reverse—such clumsy mishandling leaves alltoo-obvious fingerprints at the scene of the crime.

  Page 298

Bhikkhu Buddhadasa said:

  Another common problem is that some people cling to and are stuck on the word satipatthana (foundations of mindfulness) far too much. Some go so far as to think that Anapanasati has nothing to do with the four foundations of mindfulness. Some even reject Anapanasati out of hand. In some places they really hang onto the word "satipatthana." They cling to the satipatthana of the Digha-nikaya (Long Discourses) which is not anything more than a long list of names, a lengthy catalogue of sets of dhammas. Although there are whole bunches of dhammas, no way of practice is given or explained there. This is what is generally taken to be satipatthana. Then it is adjusted and rearranged into these and those practices, which become new systems that are called satipatthana practices or meditation.

  Then, the followers of such techniques deny, or even despise, the Anapanasati approach, asserting that it is not satipatthana. In truth, Anapanasati is the heart of satipatthana, the heart of all four foundations of mindfulness. The 16 Steps is a straight-forward and clear practice, not just a list of names or dhammas like in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta (Digha-nikaya#22**). Therefore, let us not fall into the misunderstanding that Anapanasati is not satipatthana, otherwise we might lose interest in it thinking that it is wrong. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding is common. Let us reiterate that Anapanasati is the heart of all four satipatthana in a form that can be readily practiced.

  We have taken time to consider the words "satipatthana" and "Anapanasati" for the sake of ending any misunderstandings that might lead to a narrow-minded lack of consideration for what others are practicing. So please understand correctly that whether we call it satipatthana or Anapanasati there are only four matters of importance: kaya, vedana, citta, and Dhamma. However, in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta there's no explanation of how to practice these four things. It gives only the names of dhammas and expands upon them. For example, the matter of kaya (body) is spread out over corpse meditations, sati-sampajanna in daily activities, the postures, and others more than can be remembered. It merely catalogues groups of dhammas under the four areas of study.

  The Anapanasati Sutta, on the other hand, shows how to practice the four foundations in a systematic progression that ends with emancipation from all dukkha. The sixteen steps work through the four foundations, each one developing upon the previous, and supporting the next. Practice all sixteen steps fully and the heart of the satipatthana arises perfectly. In short, the Satipatthana Suttas are only lists of names. The Anapanasati Sutta clearly shows how to practice the four foundations without anything extra or surplus. It does not mention unrelated matters.

  Appendix B

The Anapanasati Sutta properly describes the true fruition or sequence of practise of a stream-enterer, namely:

The nature & causal relevance of the breathing is known & calmed.
From the calming of breathing, pleasant feelings arise, their causal nature is known & calmed.
From the calming of feelings, the mind and its purity or impurity is clearly known, any impurity is cleansed so the mind becomes pure & free.
Due to having a clear lucid mind, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self are fully (100%) experienced, which results is dispassion, the cessation of suffering & delusion and the giving up of regarding things as self.

In addition, the 7 factors of enlightenment are also explained in proper sequence at the end of the Anapanasati Sutta, including, most importantly, how to properly practise them, relying on "letting go/relinquishment" as the foundation.

As for the four noble truths & noble eightfold path, these must be understood intellectually prior to practise and they are realised gradually throughout each stage of practise. This is why each of 14 steps in the Anapanasati Sutta includes the phrase: "He trains himself" prior to them. "He trains himself" means training in the three trainings of higher morality, higher mind & higher wisdom, which includes the 4 noble truths.

In conclusion, the Satipatthana Suttas were probably composed after the Buddha for Buddhists who practise meditation less frequently; providing various different practises they can use.

Where as the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) has a very auspicious opening narrative, referring to famous disciples and the four levels of enlightenment in the Sangha. The Anapanasati Sutta is for serious practitioners who are practicing meditation for many hours per day.

In SN 54.11, it is said:

  For whatever one rightly speaking would call, ‘a noble dwelling,’ ‘a divine dwelling,’ ‘a Tathāgata's dwelling,’ it would be the concentration of mindfulness with breathing that he, speaking rightly, would call, ‘a noble dwelling,’ ‘a divine dwelling,’ ‘a Tathāgata's dwelling.’”


You can criticize if it is beneficial to you and/or others, but you should not get angry.
You can advice the person not to do so, if you think he will listen. In any case, be mindful of the concern about your ego. You cannot really stop people from talking whatever they like behind your back. Be mindful of the anger arising in you. Do either Metta or Satipattana meditation to deal with anger.
Intention takes precedence always. It's never the act. Stealing is wrong because it is caused by greed and delusion. Regarding sliced bread, taking something is ok if the owner does not mind you taking it. It does not break the precept. You can prevent someone from hurting another by blocking his path or holding him tight. But hurting intentionally usually involves aversion. It's up to you to check if hate/aversion creeps in.


I guess the most Buddhist answer is going to be, to the extent you are blinded by "kleshas" (mental/emotional hangups) you can't clearly see what is good for others -- nor even what is good for yourself. The fewer hangups you have, the better you can estimate the outcomes - all the way until Buddha's omniscience, which involves 0% obscurations and therefore 100% clarity. So working on your own mental and emotional hangups is the best way to ensure your actions will do more help than harm.

As was said in Sedaka Sutta:

  And how does one help others by helping oneself?
  -- By practicing Dharma, by developing it, by pursuing it.

Meanwhile, is there a rule of thumb we can apply to decide when to help and when not to help? Here is what I follow:

the kind of help that inspires other person to let go of obsessions, negativity, confusion, attachments, fixed ideas, overgeneralizations, preconceptions, one-sided views etc. - is useful even if it involves lots of effort and pain on my side;
but the kind of help that supports person's samsaric lifestyle - and helps them run on like a squirrel in the wheel - this kind of help has very little long-term effect IMHO, outside of reducing their immediate suffering. I still do it sometimes, out of compassion -- and in the hope that perhaps it will inspire recipient's faith in basic goodness -- but I don't allow it to use all of my energy / tip me out of balance - otherwise that would be what Chogyam Trungpa called "idiot compassion".


With objectless mindfulness, if I am in a bad mood the mood
  perseveres. I just observe the bad mood but it doesn't easily stop.

This may be because the attention you're giving to the bad mood is the wrong kind of attention. There may be a clue in you wanting for the bad mood to easily stop. Observe with no anticipation for anything.

  However, if I applied concentration on an object such as the breath,
  the mood immediately dissipates and even sometimes vanishes.

The dissipation of the mood by shifting focus may be a further clue to the mental proliferation that you could be adding to the 'watching' of this bad mood.

  Does strong concentration repress emotions, or does it process them in
  a healthy way? In other words, does focusing on the breath still
  permit the emotions to be experienced naturally despite an absence of
  thought or feeling?

It doesn't need to be strong concentration. One just needs to simply switch focus to something else. The something else can become a further problem like an escape though. Notice breath, movement, objects, light gradients... There are many wonderful harmless things to remove us from mental anguish. This is, indeed, healthy and not a repression technique.


Are probabilistic physics and pratitya samutpada compatible?

Dependent origination is about how sorrow & grief arise. It is not related to physics.


How do you handle a begar who want to stay in your temple?

I used to manage certain affairs of a monastery. I once gave a homeless penniless man food & lodging and he has been a monk now for over 20 years & is a well-known dhamma teacher.

The beggar must be able to live by the basic monastery rules for laypeople, which is not consuming drugs & alcohol; not disturbing other people; and doing his share of work.


Choosing advantages of one tradition over another

The Buddha taught all, but such an attainment is rare. Even in the Buddha's time, Ānanda asked about the difference in practice.

MN64:16.1: “Sir, if this is the path and the practice for giving up the five lower fetters, how come some mendicants here are released in heart while others are released by wisdom?”
MN64:16.2: “In that case, I say it is the diversity of their faculties.”

Buddhist practice actually consists of three practices. Different teachers may be adept at one or more of these and appeal to different students:

AN3.89:1.1: “Mendicants, these are the three trainings.  What three? The training in the higher ethics, the higher mind, and the higher wisdom.

The three practices support each other. If one cannot find a teacher for all three, one can certainly choose a teacher who teaches what one lacks.
Different traditions emphasize different practices. I first trained in Zen for mind/immersion, but later studied the suttas themselves for ethics and wisdom.


It's good to remember birth, aging, sickness and death, the suffering again and again. So actually perfect when the proper attention to see the first Noble truth and more perfect then, if having heard the others as well.


Five Precepts - did Buddha really preach them?

The five precepts are mentioned in Dhammika sutta. The main reason for teaching the fifth precept is said to be that intoxication easily instigates people to break other precepts by concealing the seriousness.

  "Now I will tell you the layman's duty. Following it a lay-disciple
  would be virtuous; for it is not possible for one occupied with the
  household life to realize the complete bhikkhu practice (dhamma).

  "He should not kill a living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor
  should he incite another to kill. Do not injure any being, either
  strong or weak, in the world.

  "A disciple should avoid taking anything from anywhere knowing it (to
  belong to another). He should not steal nor incite another to steal.
  He should completely avoid theft.

  "A wise man should avoid unchastity as (he would avoid falling into) a
  pit of glowing charcoal. If unable to lead a celibate life, he should
  not go to another's wife.

  "Having entered a royal court or a company of people he should not
  speak lies. He should not speak lies (himself) nor incite others to do
  so. He should completely avoid falsehood.

  "A layman who has chosen to practice this Dhamma should not indulge in
  the drinking of intoxicants. He should not drink them nor encourage
  others to do so; realizing that it leads to madness. Through
  intoxication foolish people perform evil deeds and cause other
  heedless people to do likewise. He should avoid intoxication, this
  occasion for demerit, which stupefies the mind, and is the pleasure of
  foolish people.
  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.14.irel.html

As for creating a schism in the sangha, my understanding is that this is not applicable for laypeople. Only monks are capable of causing a split. But a layperson can be a cause indirectly which isn't a severe offense.


Sensory Pleasure as a Hindrance on the Path

The mind is an organ of habits and reactions. Those habits and reactions appear after sense contact, and it is based on the before learnt patterns of the mind. In turn, those patterns become ingrained due to repeated intentional behavior.

What I just mentioned is a -shallow- summary of kamma (intentional deeds) and the effect on the mind, in short and long term.

It's hard to know when will the mind establish a pattern, and when that pattern will become an habitual tendency, which is the source of habitual reactions and responses.

The mind is like a glass of water, but we don't know how filled it is. That's why we should be wise, prudent and cautious, because we don't know how much water does it take to overflow that glass; maybe it takes a lot of it, or maybe a few drops.

We don't know when our past actions will gave fruition to their consequences. We don't know exactly how the past kamma has influenced our minds and our habits/responses. We don't know for sure how will a new act affect our past kammic story.

In the Dvedhavitakka Sutta, it is said:

  "Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that
  becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing
  thinking imbued with sensuality, abandoning thinking imbued with
  renunciation, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with
  sensuality. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with ill will,
  abandoning thinking imbued with non-ill will, his mind is bent by that
  thinking imbued with ill will. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking
  imbued with harmfulness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmlessness,
  his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with harmfulness."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.019.than.html

Have a wonderful day!


How should I offer a compassionate ear to my mother while setting healthy boundaries?

There is affective empathy - feeling what the another is going through, and cognitive empathy - understanding what another is going through.

The former weighs you down and offers solace but no solutions, the latter is (a sometimes seemingly cold) 'What happened? Where are you now and do you want to be there? How do you move from here (if you want to)'.

If your mother can answer those questions with respect to her problems, herself, then she has everything she needs to, to get out of those problems. (she may want more than that from you, but that is in short, craving, and won't help her towards her goals)

If she doesn't, she needs to find those answers, by herself or with the help of others.

I think the Buddhist way to say it is have compassion - feel for, but not with the other. Offer your notion of solutions, but don't carry her burden.


Is there a point for a not continues practice?

You should consider the following

Change your approach

In Mahayana Buddhism the emphasis is on skillful means, sitting meditation is not the only practice available, there are plenty of other Dharma practices you can do, build up your base of merits first. You could focus on chanting a particular passage or mantras, this allow your mind something to focus on, and you will naturally see mindful concentration arise through this practice, even without trying to sit.

You could attend services, try to participate in any group chanting if available - Theravada is far as I know is not available for lay people in this case. But there are plenty of Mahayana Buddhist temples that offer group chanting with lay people.

You could offer to help clean up the temple, cleaning is also a powerful practice for mindful concentration if you can focus on what you are doing. Zen monks can do chores like cleaning and still experience Zen also known as Jhana. They blissfully and mindfully perform the tasks needing to be done. Go forth and volunteer! In fact, just participate and enjoy the community, you will learn something!

You can practice offering alms to your community of monks, giving is a great practice of Dāna and give rise to skillful mental qualities. In fact before you try to focus your mind on sitting meditation, try to cultivate positive qualities like love, kindness and avoid negative ones like anger in your daily life.

As you build up your merits, you will find it easier to sit because your mind will naturally begin to calm.

Know that your effort makes a difference

Yes a consistent practice is of course better, but even one single change of thought will make a difference no matter how small. Take comfort in this. Have some confidence in the fact that even when you don't seem to be 'getting somewhere' at least you are not doing something harmful, and that is already making a difference, and if you are not advancing, at least you are not sliding towards more suffering.

And your actions will eventually create the causes and conditions favorable to further your path, whether it will take years or life times. Have some faith.


Which sutta? The Buddha says monks missing out on pleasures of lay life and pleasures of holy life

You're probably thinking about Dhammapada 155-156 (translated by Ven. Thanissaro):

Neither living the chaste life
nor gaining wealth in their youth,
they waste away like old herons
in a dried-up lake
depleted of fish.
Neither living the chaste life
nor gaining wealth in their youth,
they lie around,
misfired from the bow,
sighing over old times.

Alternative translation here by Ven. Buddharakkhita:

Those who in youth have not led the holy life, or have failed to acquire wealth, languish like old cranes in the pond without fish.

Those who in youth have not lead the holy life, or have failed to acquire wealth, lie sighing over the past, like worn out arrows (shot
from) a bow.

Additional references include:

Iti 91: so by such a simile do I speak about this person: he has missed out on the enjoyments of a householder, yet he does not fulfil the purpose of recluseship.
SN22.80:7.4: I say that person is just like this. They’ve missed out on the pleasures of the lay life, and haven’t fulfilled the goal of the ascetic life.


Does doing an ordinary day-to-day job account for good karma?

Observing the five precepts, Right Action, Right Speech and Right Livelihood, i.e. virtues (sila), with heedfulness (appamāda), with the right intentions, certainly generates good karma.
In addition, accumulation of wealth as a layperson and use of this wealth in a generous, charitable way, is also good karma, generating merit.
Observance of the five precepts is also one of the prerequisites for stream entry. Please see this answer for details.
Of course, these are not sufficient for the permanent cessation of suffering. That requires renunciation. However, the path of the observing lay Buddhist may be able to lead one to stream entry.
From Ittha Sutta:

Long life, beauty, status, honor,
heaven, high birth:
To those who delight
in aspiring for these things
in great measure, continuously,
the wise praise heedfulness
in making merit.
The wise person, heedful,
acquires a two-fold welfare:
welfare in this life &
welfare in the next.
By breaking through to his welfare
he's called prudent, wise.

The Adiya Sutta speaks about five benefits that can be obtained from wealth, and ends with:

'My wealth has been enjoyed,
my dependents supported,
protected from calamities by me.
I have given supreme offerings
& performed the five oblations.
I have provided for the virtuous,
the restrained,
followers of the holy life.
For whatever aim a wise householder
would desire wealth,
that aim I have attained.
I have done what will not lead to future distress.'
When this is recollected by a mortal,
a person established in the Dhamma of the Noble Ones,
he is praised in this life
and, after death, rejoices in heaven.

From SN 3.19:

Like water
in a haunted place
that, without being imbibed,
dries up:
such is the wealth
acquired by a worthless person
who neither enjoys it himself
nor gives.
But one enlightened & knowing,
on acquiring wealth,
enjoys it & performs his duties.
He, a bull among men,
having supported his kin,
without blame
goes to the land of heaven.

And don't forget virtues once again, reminded by SN 3.20:

Grain, wealth, silver, gold,
or whatever other belongings you have;
slaves, servants, errand-runners,
& any dependents:
you must go without taking
any of them;
you must leave
all of them
behind.
What you do
with body, speech, or mind:
that is yours;
taking
that you go;
that's
your follower,
like a shadow
that never leaves.
Thus you should do what is fine
as a stash for the next life.
Acts of merit
are the support for beings
in their after-death world.