Are Buddhists supposed to feel superior compared to other people, and to brag about it?

What you are noticing is a familiar behavioural pattern unearthed by various Buddhists practices. In Tibetan and Theravada Buddhism it is called Māna or to use the more user-friendly term: conceit. Theravada sees this as one of the very last fetters to fall away. Conceit can be quite a horrible one. I have experienced this myself and still do on the odd occasion. If we are not aware of it, then big lessons loom on the horizon, and those lessons usually come from life in the form of a proverbial brick - sometimes the harsh lessons can be the greatest.

Sanyojana Sutta: Fetters
"There are these ten fetters. Which ten? Five lower fetters & five higher fetters. And which are the five lower fetters? Self-identity views, uncertainty, grasping at precepts & practices, sensual desire, & ill will. These are the five lower fetters. And which are the five higher fetters? Passion for form, passion for what is formless, conceit, restlessness, & ignorance. These are the five higher fetters. And these are the ten fetters."

Essentially, conceit is a response evoked by fear because, through practice, we come to learn more about the nature of reality, we gain knowledge of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self. This is enough to stir up our psychological issues around inferiority and the compensating effect of this is to bolster our identity but through the guise of spiritual-type things. We hit our fellow humans on the head with spiritualized trinkets and baubles, and poke them with incense sticks. We philosophize them into a stupefied mess of their former selves such that they take away only empty judgments.
My understanding of conceit: A sense of arrogance and superiority; a know-it-all attitude. The one-upmanship complex. In my view, conceit has an opposite which presents as an overly deflated sense of self.
I guess you'll be seeing this in your friends for some time. It is likely that they have some awareness about it, but unfortunately, it can chew people up entirely such that they cannot see themselves falling under the influence of further egoic pursuits. I don't think it would be unreasonable of you to share your observations with one of them. Maybe first bring up the fetters model as this can be a good talking point for the pursuing Buddhist, and then ask if they see any of these fetters in themselves.
Chogyam Trungpa covers this subject with great skill in his book, Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism.


Although i am not an expert, but i like to mention some facts.
Chathasikas collectively determine as Chitta(Naama).
"Banga " is current situation of "Chitta -(Naama-roopa)".
The persion who can feel(see/live) now have experiance "Banga Gana" and-"UdayaWaya". rising and decaying of "NaamaRoopa".
If "life" is a flow then the Attributes of current moment as follows;
perception - "sangna". feeling - "Veedana".  Action - "Sankara". are some chethasikas belongs to Naama. There are also "roopa" and consiouness - "Vingnana" - in background.
There can be other Sankaras or chathsikas according the situation. (Depend on the roopa and Kamma-Vingnana). feeling and perception are also chathsikas belong to 52 chathasika (Model).

The strategy to understand above is:
Follow "Mahasathipattana Suttha"- (Ekayano Maggo).

For the help of clear understanding we take smiler example.
As a example, lets suppose that the meditator had a "kaya(physical BODY)". How to determine what are the elements were at each of 32 parts, out of 4 "Mahabootha"? We know there must be patavi apoo thego and vayo boothas in  roopa at previously mentioned kaya, but how to determine the amount or the power of these boothas?
Here BODY(kaya) is one.  (physio-physical level)
32 parts are small bodies.  (Bio-chemical level)
4 MahaBoothas are Lover level energy. (physical)
As Like this
Mana is collective chttha.
Chitta is collective chathasika.
How does the process work? The mind – consciousness – gives rise to our experience of reality. We experience the physical and mental reality around us according to our state of mind. So this conscious mind is said to give rise to the mental-physical reality we experience from one moment to the next. For instance, when we practice meditation, we experience the stomach, rising and falling. When we breathe, when the stomach rises, when the stomach falls, there is the physical and the mental aspects of the experience. The rising is physical and the knowing of the rising is mental. When we walk, there’s the foot moving, which is physical, and the mind knowing it, which is mental. When we feel pain, there’s the physical experience and there’s the mind that knows it and doesn’t like it and decides that it is unpleasant. And so on.
http://www.sirimangalo.org/text/lessons-in-practical-buddhism/practical-dependent-origination/


In a Buddhist perspective how do we recall memories of this life and beyond?

From my understanding of Buddhism, there are no memories from beyond. Everything including memories are impermanent. There is no permanent memory-self that remains from moment to moment.


As a matter of fact, yes! Here it is: http://www.thedhamma.com/buddhaslists.pdf
I highly recommend it.


Are there communities of practicing secular Buddhists?

Secular Buddhism is expressing itself in ways beyond the imagination. There are people in the virtual world Second Life that are practicing Buddhism virtually.
Secular Buddhist Association -- Supportive Virtual Buddhist Communities

There is talk of secular Buddhism all over the world.
(search for communities of secular Buddhists)

What seems significant is that secular Buddhism is taking off. I would say that people hunger for the Buddhist experience and practice without the masks of religion that various sects require its monks to wear. This is not the end to Buddhism but a glorious new beginning that is sustainable in modern culture.


Theravada Buddhist Answer.

  How will I know that this state of no suffering will last forever?

A good and important question. The thing is that you can't know whether or not this state of suffering will last forever.

There are especially two (and probably more) important reasons for this.

The first one being that fact that the Buddha didn't want us to accept his teaching based on blind belief, hear-say or something similar. The Buddha's teaching is a practical teaching meant for us to realize through especially meditation practice.

The second reason dives into the nature of reality and how to understand it. There exists different types of realities; Conventional and Ultimate realities.

Conventional realities consist of concepts. What characterizes a concept is that it can be understood by hearsay, logical reasoning, inference or intellectual thinking. In other words, such concepts are not regarded as ultimate reality.

An ultimate reality such as Nibbana cannot be understood by the above mentioned methods. A person born blind can never know colors no matter how others may explain those colors. Likewise, one can never know toothache if one has never had them.

In the same way, insight-knowledge and Jhana can never be known, unless one has attained them. Nibbana, the end of suffering, can only be understood by personal experience, ie. through correct meditation practice.

Ultimate reality is only accessible for insight-meditators, those who attained Jhana and the noble ones.

Lastly, be aware that Doubt (Vicikicchā) is one of the Five Hindrances to Enlightenment. The antidote for doubt is; studying the teachings, finding a good teacher and vipassana meditation practice.

The second Bojjhanga, ie. the Investigation of Phenomena (dhamma vicaya) is also a direct remedy for Doubt, since it leads to personal experience of the Three Marks of Existence (tilakkhaṇa) and how the mind-body complex operates.


Although the higher jhanas are not required, they're strongly encouraged by the Buddha evident in the high frequency with which they are mentioned throughout the suttas. Ven. Gunaratana in his "The Jhanas" wrote:

  The Buddha is constantly seen in the suttas encouraging his disciples to develop jhana. The four jhanas are invariably included in the complete course of training laid down for disciples. They figure in the training as the discipline of higher consciousness (adhicittasikkha), right concentration (sammasamadhi) of the Noble Eightfold Path, and the faculty and power of concentration (samadhindriya, samadhibala). Though a vehicle of dry insight can be found, indications are that this path is not an easy one, lacking the aid of the powerful serenity available to the practitioner of jhana. The way of the jhana attainer seems by comparison smoother and more pleasurable (A.ii,150-52). The Buddha even refers to the four jhanas figuratively as a kind of Nibbana: he calls them immediately visible Nibbana, factorial Nibbana, Nibbana here and now (A.iv,453-54).


How to use Sloth and Torpor as an object for meditation

It is an experience, like any other, so you have to face it and recognize it clearly as it is. In our tradition we describe the experience of catching up the fatigue in one's awareness and reminding oneself "tired, tired"; if one's mindfulness is sharp, it will either disappear completely or, if the body needs sleep, one will fall asleep.

As the Mahasi Sayadaw describes this process:

  Make a mental note of drowsy, when drowsy, and sleepy, when sleepy.
  After you have gained sufficient concentration in contemplating you
  will be able to overcome drowsiness and sleepiness and feel refreshed
  as a result. Take up again the usual contemplation of the basic
  object. Suppose you are unable to overcome a drowsy feeling, you must
  then continue to contemplate until you fall asleep.

  http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed041.htm

Also, the commentary to the Satipatthana sutta has a number of ancillary techniques for overcoming sloth and torpor:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html#sloth


Are there any Buddhist suttas in the scriptures about retaining memory?

In the sutta quote from AN 6.51 below, Ven. Ananda explains how one learns, understands and remembers the teachings.

Ānanda said this:
“Reverend Sāriputta, take a mendicant who memorizes the
teaching—statements, songs, discussions, verses, inspired
exclamations, legends, stories of past lives, amazing stories, and
classifications.
Then, just as they learned and memorized it, they teach others in
detail, make them recite in detail, practice reciting in detail, and
think about and consider the teaching in their heart, examining it
with the mind.
They enter the rains retreat in a monastery with senior mendicants who
are very learned, knowledgeable in the scriptures, who have memorized
the teachings, the texts on monastic training, and the outlines. From
time to time they go up to those mendicants and ask them questions:
‘Why, sir, does it say this? What does that mean?’ Those venerables
clarify what is unclear, reveal what is obscure, and dispel doubt
regarding the many doubtful matters.
This is how a mendicant gets to hear a teaching they haven’t heard
before. It’s how they remember those teachings they have heard. It’s
how they keep rehearsing the teachings they’ve already got to know.
And it’s how they come to understand what they haven’t understood
before.”
“It’s incredible, reverend, it’s amazing! How well said this was by
Venerable Ānanda! And we will remember Venerable Ānanda as someone who
has these six qualities.
For Ānanda memorizes the teaching … statements, songs, discussions,
verses, inspired exclamations, legends, stories of past lives, amazing
stories, and classifications. Those venerables clarify to Ānanda what
is unclear, reveal what is obscure, and dispel doubt regarding the
many doubtful matters.”
AN 6.51


Anapanasati, when practised properly, arises from compassion towards onself.

Therefore, when Anapanasati is fulfilled, the defilements end, peace occurs & the original compassion towards oneself remains; which then manifests outwardly in one's natural state of being.

To practise the Dhamma and Anapanasati successfully requires a great act love towards oneself.

This love will remain when the task is completed.

However, Anapanasati cannot be practised & fulfilled if we continue to engage in behaviours (kamma) that defile, enslave & weaken our self and others.


Thanks to ChrisW for additional clarifications.
In my understanding, this is a reference to a folk poem-turned-proverb popular at Buddha's times about impermanence and the futility of human condition:

Yena yenahi maññanti,
Tatotassa hi aññathā;

In whatever way you think of it
It invariably gets otherwise.

Here Buddha creatively uses it to emphasize the point he's making about confusing any particular meditative state with Nirvana. However refined, any meditative state is fleeting, "it invariably gets otherwise". In whatever way one tries to grasp it and make it into something one can own and be proud of -- true Nirvana remains unreachable to the grasping mind. It cannot be held onto, cannot be conceptualized, it can only be realized through actually letting go, or, in Mahayana terms, through embracing Shunyata as one's actual modus operandi.
You can see on my example right here in the previous paragraph that, indeed, as soon as you use a positive statement to describe Nirvana, your very words become a conceptual box limiting the vast open space and misrepresenting the living realization.
Or to paraphrase OP's apt question title, Nirvana is never what you think it is.
To answer your question directly: the poem speaks about impermanence of everything in life in the general sense, but when the Buddha quotes it he refers specifically to the impermanence of meditative states vs the letting go of grasping at conceptual boxes (atammayata) as the only true Nirvana.


I would speak to the preceptor you wish to ordain with.

  There is no need to get a parent’s permission if he/she is no longer
  alive or has abandoned the son. From this it can be argued that if the
  parents are divorced and one of them has totally abandoned
  responsibility for the son, there is no need to get permission from
  that parent. If, however, both parents continued to assume
  responsibility for the son, he needs to get the permission of both.

  https://www.dhammatalks.org/vinaya/bmc/Section0054.html


What is the difference between right thinking and right view?

Samma Sankappa (right thinking) is the result of right view (Samma Ditthi).
If you have the wrong view your thinking will be wrong thinking. (Mittcha Sankappa)
Generally, right view is the forerunner for the rest of the Noble Eightfold Path.
For example seeing things as impermanent is the right view and seeing things as permanent is the wrong view. With the first, you have the thoughts of renunciation and with the second you have the thought of accumulation.

Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? In one of right view, right thinking comes into being. In one of right thinking, right speech comes into being. In one of right speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right knowledge, right liberation comes into being.
MN 117


Renunciation and Negative Mysticism (Escaping from ones Dharma)

Your idea about "One's Dharma" is Hindu & not Buddhist. Equally, your concerns about helping the world are too far ahead in respect to priorities. A monastic life (which does not necessarily mean official ordination) is the formal opportunity to final personal inner peace & contentment. In Buddhism, developing inner peace is the primary responsibility. Monasticism is the ideal mysticism. If personal liberation is a person's path, this person will find themselves in a monastery. When I was 23 years old, I found & lived my 1st year (as a non-monk) in a monastery, where I meditated around 8 hours per day. This was the most beneficial year of my life. As for the world, it is certainly increasingly corrupted & little can be done to help the world at the current time.


One should associate with true friends and disassociate with false friends.

One should associate with those are:

  (1) He is pleasant [loving]. piyo ca hoti

  (2) He is agreeable. manāpo ca

  (3) He is respectful. garu ca

  (4) He is worthy of respect. bhāvanīyo ca

  (5) He admonishes, patient when admonished. vattā ca vacana-k,khamo ca

  (6) He is profound in conversation. gambhīrañ ca kathaṁ kattā hoti,

  (7) He does not engage us in the impossible. no ca aṭṭhāne niyojeti.

(Piya) Mitta Sutta 2

  (1) He gives what is difficult to give. duddadaṁ dadāti

  (2) He does what is difficult to do. dukkaraṁ karoti

  (3) He tolerates what is difficult to tolerate. dukkhamaṁ khamati

  (4) His secrets he reveals. guyham assa āvi karoti

  (5) Your secrets he keeps. guyham assa pariguhati

  (6) In misfortune he forsakes you not. āpadāsu na jahati

  (7) He does not look down (on you) when you
  have failed [are destitute]. khīṇena nâtimaññati

(Piya) Mitta Sutta 1

  “Young houselord, there are these 4 who should be known as true-hearted friends:

  (1) The helper (upakara)

  should be known as a true-hearted friend.

  (2) The one constant in joy and in sorrow (samana,sukha,dukkha)

  should be known as a
  true-hearted friend.

  (3) The good counsellor (atth’akkhayi)

  should be known as a true-hearted friend.

  (4) The caring (anukampaka)

  should be known as a true-hearted friend.

  (1) The helper, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons:

  (a) He guards you when you are heedless.
  pamattaṁ rakkhati

  (b) He guards your property when you are heedless. pamattassa sāpateyyaṁ rakkhati

  (c) He is a refuge to you when you are in fear [in danger]. bhītassa saraṇaṁ hoti

  (d) When you are faced with tasks, he provides you with double the supplies you need. uppannesu kicca,karaṇīyesu tad
  di,guṇaṁ bhogaṁ anuppadeti

  The helper, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons.

  (2) The one constant in joy and in sorrow [a friend through thick and thin] should be known as
  a true-hearted friend for these 4 reasons:

  (a) He tells you his secrets. guyham assa ācikkhati

  (b) He keeps your secrets. guyham assa parigūhati

  (c) He does not abandon you in your troubles. āpadāsu na vijahati

  (d) He would even give up his life for you. jīvitaṁ pi’ssa atthāya pariccattaṁ hoti

  The one who is constant in joy and sorrow, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted
  friend for these four reasons.

  (3) The good counsellor [the one who shows benefits or the goal] should be known as a truehearted friend for these four reasons:92

  (a) He restrains you from bad. pāpā nivāreti

  (b) He exhorts you to do good. kalyāṇe niveseti

  (c) He lets you hear what you have not heard before. assutaṁ sāveti

  (d) He shows you the way to heaven. saggassa maggaṁ ācikkhati

  The good counsellor, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four
  reasons.

  (4) The caring should be known as a true-hearted friend for these four reasons:

  (a) He does not delight in your misfortunes. abhaven’assa na nandati

  (b) He delights in your good fortunes. bhavena’ssa nandati

  (c) He prevents others from speaking ill of you. avaṇṇaṁ bhaṇamānaṁ nivāreti

  (d) He commends others who speak well of you. vaṇṇaṁ bhaṇamānaṁ pasaṁsati

  The one who is caring, young houselord, should be known as a true-hearted friend for these 4
  reasons.”

  The Blessed One said this.

  Having said that, the Sugata [the well-farer], the Teacher, further said this:

  The friend who is a helper, and the friend in weal and woe,

  and the friend who gives good counsel, and the caring friend—

  these four are (true) friends, thus the wise should know

  and devotes himself with respect as a child would his parents

Sigal’ovada Sutta

At a spiritual level they should have these qualities:

  (1) The accomplishment of faith (saddhā,sampadā),

  (2) The accomplishment of moral virtue (sīla,sampadā),

  (3) The accomplishment of charity (cāga,sampadā),

  (4) The accomplishment of wisdom (paññā,sampadā)

Dīgha,janu Sutta

One should disassociate or distance oneself from those with the following qualities:

  “Young householder, there are these four who should be known as enemies in the guise of
  friends:

  (1) The downright taker,

  young householder, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend.

  (2) The mere talker,

  young householder, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a
  friend.

  (3) The sweet-talker,
  young householder, should be known as enemy in the guise of a
  friend.

  (4) The destructive companion,

  young householder, should be known as an enemy in the
  guise of a friend.

  Young householder, these are the four who should be known as enemies in the guise of
  friends.

  (1) The downright taker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend for these four reasons:

  (a) He only takes (without ever giving). añña-d-atthu,haro hoti

  (b) With little, he desires much. appena bahum icchati

  (c) He does what needs doing only out of fear. bhayassa kiccaṁ karoti

  (d) He serves with an ulterior motive. sevati attha,kāraṇā

  The downright taker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for these
  four reasons.

  (2) The mere talker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for
  these four reasons:

  (a) He claims to having been hospitable in the past. atītena paṭisantharati

  (b) He promises hospitality in the future. anāgatena paṭisantharati

  (c) He worms his way with empty favours. niratthakena saṅgaṇhāti

  (d) In present tasks, he feigns misfortune. paccuppannesu kiccesu vyasanaṁ dasseti

  For these four reasons, young houselord, the mere talker should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend.

  (3) The sweet talker, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of a friend for
  these four reasons:

  (a) He approves of your doing wrong. pāpakaṁ pi’ssa anujānāti

  (b) He approves of your doing right [or disapproves of it,
  depending on what profits him]. kalyāṇaṁ pi’ssa anujānāti

  (c) He sings your praises to your face. sammukhāssa vaṇṇaṁ bhāsati

  (d) He runs you down behind your back. param,mukhāssa avaṇṇaṁ bhāsati

  For these four reasons, young houselord, the sweet talker should be known as an enemy in the guise
  of a friend.

  (4) The destructive companion, young houselord, should be known as an enemy in the guise of
  a friend for these four reasons:

  (a) He is your companion in taking strong drinks, distilled drinks, fermented drinks that which causes
  heedlessness.

  (b) He is your companion in roaming (and loitering in) the streets at unseemly hours.

  (c) He is your companion in frequenting fairs [shows].

  (d) He is your companion in indulging in gambling, a basis for heedlessness.

  For these four reasons, young houselord, the destructive companion should be known as an enemy in
  the guise of a friend.”

  The Blessed One said this.

  Having said that, the Sugata [the well-farer], the Teacher, further said this:

  The friend who merely takes, and the friend who only talks,

  and the one who sweet-talks, and the companion who brings destruction—

  these four are not friends. Thus the wise should know:

  they should be avoided from afar like a dangerous path.

Sigal’ovada Sutta

Associating with false friends will influence you to be more unskillful than what you are in a spiritual sense and fail in a worldly sense. Sometimes true friends may seem like a pain when they watch out for you but they are the ones who make you a better person by helping you prosper in a world sence and be more skilful in a spiritual sense.

Also, see:

Spiritual friendship by Piya Tan
Spiritual Friendship: Stories of Kindness by Piya Tan
Bad friendship by Piya Tan


Would a wise person avoide situations where other could perform lot of demerits?

The general Buddhist advise is to associate wise people. There are many Buddhist stories that Buddha encountering unwise people. It appears that Buddha did not have much time for those people. You find stories such as Angulimala. But they appeared to be intelligent people.


You can find some advice from Ajaan Fuang on this page:

  § When Ajaan Fuang taught meditation, he didn't like to map things out
  in advance. As soon as he had explained the beginning steps, he'd have
  the student start sitting right in his presence, and then take the
  steps back home to work on there. If anything came up in the course of
  the practice, he'd explain how to deal with it and then go on to the
  next step.

  Once a layman who had known more than his share of meditation teachers
  came to discuss the Dhamma with Ajaan Fuang, asking him many questions
  of an advanced nature as a way of testing his level of attainment.
  Ajaan Fuang asked him in return, "Have you had these experiences in
  your own meditation yet?"

  "No, not yet."

  "Then in that case I'd rather not discuss them, because if we discuss
  them when they're not yet a reality for you, they'll just be theories,
  and not the real Dhamma."

  § One meditator noticed that his practice under Ajaan Fuang was making
  quick progress, and so he asked what the next step would be. "I'm not
  going to tell you," Ajaan Fuang said. "Otherwise you'll become the
  sort of amazing marvel who knows everything before he meets with it,
  and masters everything before he's tried his hand. Just keep
  practicing and you'll find out on your own."

  § "You can't plan the way your practice is going to go. The mind has
  its own steps and stages, and you have to let the practice follow in
  line with them. That's the only way you'll get genuine results.
  Otherwise you'll turn into a half-baked arahant."

  § "Don't make a journal of your meditation experiences. If you do,
  you'll start meditating in order to have this or that thing happen, so
  that you can write it down in your journal. And as a result, you'll
  end up with nothing but the things you've fabricated."


The  Jāṇussoṇi Sutta is about merit or benefit accruing to the receiver of the gift.
The Ratana Sutta is probably about merit or benefit accruing to the giver of the gift.
Is so, there appears to be no conflict.

In the Janussonin Sutta, the Buddha states that food offerings to the dead cannot reach them if they are reborn in hell, as animal, as human or as devas (heavanly beings). However, food offerings to the dead would reach them or other ancestors who are born as hungry ghosts or petas.
This is because a human or god does not need the gift, which is why the gift does not accrue to them. For example, a virtuous (human) parent gains merit from giving to its children. When a child gives a gift to its parents, this gift is only a trivial or amusing thing to the parent (rather than something that changes the parent's merit). Or when a rich person (a god) is given a gift, it does not change the rich person. For example, my rich friend returned home from overseas recently and when I visited him after many years I sensed I was not really appreciated by him because he has become very important & rich. But 15 years ago when he was having relationship problems & I helped him, he appreciated me because he was a hungry ghost then, wanting a successful relationship.
Similarly, for beings trapped in hell or animal mind, a gift does not accrue to them because of their chronic state. For example, when people are chronically depressed due to a deep loss (which is 'hell'), giving a gift does not help them. Similarly, an animal, such as a sexual predator, does not respond to gifts because they do not have the disposition for loving others. For example, I know a man who is a sexual predator, who is bitter & twisted. I helped him once for many hours set up & learn to use his new computer but he is never friendly when he sees me. He hates everyone. He is incapable of gratitude because his mind is animal mind, every morning & every afternoon on the same beat looking for tourist women to have sex with.
But for a hungry ghost, a person who is lonely or searching for love, a gift accrues to them because the hungry ghost is searching for love or gifts. The hungry ghost wants to be reborn in a human relationship & they respond very positively to receiving gifts.

In the same way, a family member who has not done enough merit to be human (enlightened) or a god & is also not an animal or hell being but is separated from their family & misses their family will accrue from a gift from their family. This is what the hungry ghost is here, namely, the needy & unenlightened family member who misses their family.
Its like my mother, who I see for one or two weeks per year. My giving gifts to her does not change the enormous merit she has made as a mother. Therefore, my gifts to her are essentially worthless, apart from a token gesture to show I think about her. However, my small token gesture is important to the 'hungry ghost' element in my mother; namely, her need to know her children think about her on her birthday, mothers day, Xmas, etc. Just a small gift or phone call is enough to keep this hungry ghost element in my mother satisfied. I am not required to give an enormous gift to my mother.

The above analysis is supported by the traditional depiction of the Wheel of Life (below), where the antidote, solution or practice for each realm given by the Buddha is depicted as follows:

humane - renunciation

godly - beauty

animal - morality

hungry ghost - generosity

hell - 'the book' - the Four Noble Truths


Is there any way one can be a Monk without a teacher in India/Nepal?

Remember buddha's last words :: Atto Na Attanno Natho ~ You are your own teacher, infact this is what our Mind does.

It's important to see the Buddha's full paragraph because one cannot solely and entirely be one's own teacher without His Teaching:

Therefore, Ānanda, live with yourself as an island, yourself as a refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge. And how, Ānanda, does a monk live with himself as an island, himself as a refuge, with no other refuge, with the Teaching as an island, the Teaching as a refuge, with no other refuge?
Here, Ānanda, a monk dwells contemplating the nature of the body in the body, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the nature of feelings in feelings, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the nature of the mind in the mind, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world; he dwells contemplating the nature of things in various things, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world... ~~ DN 16 ~~

So while it'd be helpful to have a knowledgeable and virtuous teacher who can coach/advise/correct you along your path, but if you're not able to find one who's truly knowledgeable and truly virtuous, it's totally legit. to go solo provided that you remember to cultivate the Path in both theory and in practice. Use great online resources like accesstoinsight.org, suttacentral.net, themindingcentre.org for the theoretical aspect and observe precepts/practice meditation for the practice side. Remember, one is a monk not because he shaves his head, wears an orange robe, and stays inside a monastery, but because he observes the Vinaya with its 227 rules and seriously cultivate Samadhi and Panna, just like you can't call someone a martial artist because he wears a gi and a black belt, but because you see him walking out of the ring alive and on his own two feet.


What happens if a Person spent money on good things which are earned from bad ways

There is no problem at all. It will have mixed result (if casue is really mixed) or each action will have it's own result (selling liquor - bad, generosity - good). Amount of the result is not just lineraly depend on the amount of action, it's also depend on the level of development of mind of the performer. There is more factors to play in the ripening of karma.


*"... not the physical lama, ... but your own nature of mind ... That's the real lama ..."* Is that actually a concept in vajrayana?

In Tibetan Buddhism there are many different lineages, broadly grouped into several categories known as schools or traditions. The exact details of the Dharma passed down from teacher to student in large degree depends on a particular lineage. In a more abstract sense, an overall teaching style is determined by the school. And then finally there are elements common to all of Tibetan Buddhism.

Then, within each school & lineage, there are different levels of presentation, targeted at students of different maturity levels.

There is a commonly held understanding among Tibetan Buddhism teachers and senior students, that the basic levels of Dharma are more focused on the outer forms of practice and simplistic concepts of teaching, to help complete beginners and outsiders get a "Micky-Mouse"-level introduction, before they can start delving into the real thing.

In my understanding the cult of the guru (formally known as the "guru-yoga") and the endless emphasis on compassion both belong at this basic level, along with some rather highly religious elements, and then, as the students mature, they are gradually introduced (or, rather, are allowed to discover for themselves) the progressively more direct teachings, with gradually less emphasis on the outer forms and gradually more focus on the inner personal practices of groundlessness, wakefulness, sobriety and composure.

Specifically, this idea that "your own mind is guru" is very well-known at the higher levels of teaching in Kagyu and Nyingma lineages (Mahamudra and Dzogchen respectively).

For example, here is a verse passed down Shangpa Kagyu lineage since ~12th century:

  ...
  Yes, gurus do point out how things are,
  But the guru who is natural being is within.
  Mind that is my guru, here is how you are:

  ...
  I can’t see, hear, taste, smell or touch you:
  You are not a thing, yet you are the source of all experience.
  Try as I may, there’s nothing I can point to and say, “That’s you!”
  But when I sit and don’t look for you, you are present in everything.

  ...
  Because you aren’t anywhere, you arise as anything anywhere.
  Yet you don’t belong to any one place.
  So, while you are not anything I can point to,
  You are my guru!

  ...
  Oh, mind that is my teacher,
  I meet you by recognizing what I am.
  I pray to you by letting go of doubt and hesitation.
  I revere you by letting go and settling naturally.

  ...
  I serve you by resting continuously in how things are.
  I provide you with food by resting without strain in empty clarity.
  I provide you with drink by knowing attention and distraction make no difference.
  I clothe you by knowing appearance and sound as enchantments.

  ...
  I have studied with many capable gurus:
  Each guru has given me his or her own advice.
  All advice comes down to one point – mind!
  So, mind that is my guru,
  I look at you, listen to you, and seek your instruction again and again.

  ...
  By doing so, I know directly that mind is the guru.
  Because this knowing arises internally,
  When I see writings that contradict or conflict with my experience:
  I consider the meaning, not the words.


Why is there no self in the container of the 5 aggregates?

This is the problem with mixing up ultimate reality with conventional reality. In ultimate reality, the cat does not exist. What is real is the tactile experience of the touch. That experience is an instance of the 5 aggregates arising due to causes. The experience is impermanent, unsatisfactory and non-self.

'Container' is only a concept in the mind. It doesn't exist. Sights can be sensed, sounds can be sensed, aromas can be sensed, tastes can be sensed, tactile sensations can be sensed, mental objects can be sensed. 'Container' is not something that can be sensed. So it's nothing more than a concept. It has no basis in ultimate reality. Vipassana meditation is about stop looking at the world in terms of entities and start looking at the world in terms of experiences. You cannot see the 3 characteristics in concepts.


There is no simple answer, since it will always depend on the context. However, in most cases, it would go agains the first precept: to abstain from killing.

However, there could be situations where the act is interpreted in different contexts. Thich Nhat Hanh once wrote (a few years after the incident in the picture):

  The Vietnamese monk, by burning himself, says with all his strength
  and determination that he can endure the greatest of suffering to
  protect his people. What he really aims at is the expression of his
  will and determination, not death. To express will by burning oneself,
  therefore, is not to commit an act of destruction but to perform an
  act of construction, that is to suffer and to die for the sake of
  one’s people.

In a more recent interview (with Oprah Winfrey), Thich Nhat Hanh mentioned that there were a lot of killings (by the government of its citizens) in the country at the time, and that the monk that chose this action saw it as a peaceful action to put an end to the violence (protesting with a non-violent action to create attention, instead of violence that would cause more violence). In other words, the action to save many lives was an act of compassion.

From Wikipedia regarding sacrificing the body:

  The act of sacrificing one's own body, though not by fire, is a
  component of two well-known stories found in the ancient Buddhist text
  known as the Jataka tales, which, according to Buddhist tradition,
  gives accounts of past incarnations of the Buddha. In the "Hungry
  Tigress" Jataka, Prince Sattva looked down from a cliff and saw a
  starving tigress that was going to eat her newborn cubs, and
  compassionately sacrificed his body in order to feed the tigers and
  spare their lives. In the "Sibi Jataka", King Śibi or Shibi was
  renowned for unselfishness, and the gods Śakra and Vishvakarman tested
  him by transforming into a hawk and a dove. The dove fell on the
  king's lap while trying to escape the hawk, and sought refuge. Rather
  than surrender the dove, Śibi offered his own flesh equivalent in
  weight to the dove, and the hawk agreed. They had rigged the balance
  scale, and King Śibi continued cutting off his flesh until half his
  body was gone, when the gods revealed themselves, restored his body,
  and blessed him.

A much discussed topic, and the answer is that it depends on the context.


Doesn't mahāyāna have a classification for jhānas?

You're right - jhanas are deemphasized (and for good reason as far as I'm concerned), but don't forget that most Mahayana schools use the Chinese Agamas as a part of their canonical literature.  The Agamas do contain, more or less, the original Sutta-pitaka along with the vinaya, abhidhamma, etc.  You're not finding anything in the newer Mahayana literature because the Mahayanists are just using a Chinese translation of the same texts a Theravadan might refer to.


Vajrasattva is a specific bodhisattva, not another word for "bodhisattva." In esoteric traditions Vajrasattva is invoked as a counter measure to unwholesome actions. Esoteric traditions, and Tibetan traditions in particular, have elaborate explanations for the mechanics of karma+vipaka, and Vajrasattva is used as one of the opponent powers of confessing misdeeds. The general idea is that strong enough opposition to harmful deeds performed can circumvent the ripening of "bad karma" and prevent the formation of harmful habits and lower rebirths.


What are the things that the enlightened people know but others don't?

the usual sutta about the higher knowledge is mn112
https://suttacentral.net/mn112/en/sujato

you can read bikkhu analayo analysis with the comparisons with paralel suttas here
https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/sixfold-purity.pdf


Where can I find an English translation of the Buddhavatamasaka Sutra?

To the best of my knowledge there is no other translation of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra.

As far as text called Buddhāvataṃsaka - there is nothing in the Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon; nor in GRETIL - Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages.

This suggests that no Sanskrit manuscript survives. Searching for a Sanskrit name in the Chinese Canon is not quite impossible, but very very difficult.

Responding to the comment:

Taisho Edition of the Chinese Tripiṭaka (with links to the online CBETA version):

T280 佛說兜沙經; Scripture on the Original Deeds of the Bodhisattva as Explained by the Buddha (Ch 7 & 8 of Avataṃsaka)
T282 佛說菩薩求佛本業經; Original Deeds of Bodhisattvas Seeking Buddhahood. (Ch 11)
T282 菩薩十住行道品; Book on Bodhisattvas’ Ten Abodes in the Practice of the Way (Ch 15)

But these are not all attributed to Lokakṣema. The last looks most promising, but is attributed to Dharmarakṣa in some sources. However see Nattier: A Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations: Texts from the Eastern Han and Three Kingdoms Periods. This article questions the traditional attributions and assigns T280, T282 and T283 to Lokakṣema. The last looks most promising as a source for the Daśabhūmi or 10 Levels, but I cannot see any English translations online. Unfortunately very little of the Chinese Tripiṭaka is yet available in English. Though there is a Numata Foundation project under way to translate it all, it will take decades.


Other than physical form which characteristics define a woman?

The Pali scriptures refer to the 'faculty of femininity' ('itthindriya'), as follows:

  Mendicants, there are these three faculties.What three? The faculties
  of femininity (itthindriya),
  masculinity (purisindriya) and life (jīvitindriya).

  SN 48.22

Thus, it appears the biological aggregate/faculty of form may possibly be one way to define a "woman" (itthi). However, it appears such a biological definition is not necessarily "identity" ("jati").

SN 12.2 defines "identity" ("jati") as follows:

  Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ tamhi tamhi sattanikāye jāti sañjāti okkanti
  abhinibbatti khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho

Here, SN 12.2 (& also MN 98) explains "identity" ("jati") is produced (abhinibbatti) from how both physical & mental aggregates are manifested & used (khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo) and from what sense objects are sought & taken possession of (āyatanānaṃ paṭilābho).

Therefore, the following suttas AN 6.52 & AN 7.51 below describe other characteristics which define a woman. In other words, AN 6.52 & AN 7.51, below, provide descriptions the manifestation & use of aggregates ('faculties', 'gestures', 'manners', 'poise', 'desires', 'voice', 'charms', 'delight', 'excitement', 'attending outwardly', etc) and the seeking/taking possession of sense objects (such as 'a man', 'children', 'adornments', etc) which may possibly define the category of beings (sattanikāye) called "women".

  Itthī kho, brāhmaṇa, purisādhippāyā alaṅkārūpavicārā puttādhiṭṭhānā
  asapattībhinivesā issariyapariyosānā ti

  A man, O brahmin, is a woman’s aim, her quest is for adornments, her
  mainstay is sons, her desire is to be without a co-wife and her ideal
  is domination. (Nyanaponika)

  A man, brahmin, is the aim of women; their quest is for adornments;
  sons are their support; they on intent on being without a rival; and
  their final goal is authority. (Bodhi)

  Women have a man as their ambition. They’re preoccupied with
  adornments. They’re dedicated to their children. They insist on being
  without a co-wife. Their ultimate goal is authority. (Sujato)

  AN 6.52

  The Blessed One said: “A woman attends (manasi karoti) inwardly to her feminine
  faculties (itthindriya), her feminine gestures, her feminine manners, feminine
  poise, feminine desires, feminine voice, feminine charms. She is
  excited by that, delighted by that. Being excited & delighted by that,
  she attends outwardly to masculine faculties, masculine gestures,
  masculine manners, masculine poise, masculine desires, masculine
  voices, masculine charms. She is excited by that, delighted by that.
  Being excited & delighted by that, she wants to be bonded to what is
  outside her, wants whatever pleasure & happiness that arise based on
  that bond. Delighting, caught up in her femininity, a woman goes into
  bondage with reference to men. This is how a woman does not transcend (nātivattati) her femininity.

  AN 7.51

The above said, an enlightened bhikkhuni (Buddhist nun) that does not manifest/use/possess aggregates & sense objects in the above described ways appears to not have the identity (jati) of "a woman", as follows:

  What does womanhood matter at all. When the mind is concentrated well.
  When knowledge flows on steadily. As one sees correctly into Dhamma.

  One to whom it might occur, 'I'm a woman' or 'I'm a man' Or 'I'm
  anything at all' — Is fit for Mara to address.

  SN
  5.2

However, AN 7.51 does contain the phrase: "This is how a woman transcends her femininity. Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, itthī itthattaṃ ativattati".

Therefore, it appears the 'faculty of femininity' ('itthindriya') or form aggregate may possibly generically define a "woman" however such "femininity" can be "transcended" ("ativattati") by not attending to it (na manasi karoti), by not manifesting it (na khandhānaṃ pātubhāvo) & by not identifying with it (anabhiratā).

  And how does one become unbound?

  Kathañca, bhikkhave, visaṃyogo hoti?

  A woman doesn’t focus on her own femininity:

  Itthī, bhikkhave, ajjhattaṃ itthindriyaṃ na manasi karoti—

  her feminine moves, feminine appearance, feminine ways, feminine
  desires, feminine voice, and feminine adornment.

  itthikuttaṃ itthākappaṃ itthividhaṃ itthicchandaṃ itthissaraṃ
  itthālaṅkāraṃ.

  She isn’t stimulated by this and takes no pleasure in it.

  Sā tattha na rajjati, sā tatra nābhiramati.

  So she doesn’t focus on the masculinity of others:

  Sā tattha arattā tatra anabhiratā bahiddhā purisindriyaṃ na manasi
  karoti—

  masculine moves, masculine appearance, masculine ways, masculine
  desires, masculine voice, and masculine adornment.

  purisakuttaṃ purisākappaṃ purisavidhaṃ purisacchandaṃ purisassaraṃ
  purisālaṅkāraṃ.

  She isn’t stimulated by this and takes no pleasure in it.

  Sā tattha na rajjati, tatra nābhiramati.

  So she doesn’t desire to bond with another.

  Sā tattha arattā tatra anabhiratā bahiddhā saṃyogaṃ nākaṅkhati.

  Nor does she desire the pleasure and happiness that comes from such a
  bond.

  Yañcassā saṃyogapaccayā uppajjati sukhaṃ somanassaṃ tañca nākaṅkhati.

  Sentient beings who are not attached to their femininity are not bound
  to men.

  Itthatte, bhikkhave, anabhiratā sattā purisesu visaṃyogaṃ gatā.

  This is how a woman transcends her femininity.

  Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, itthī itthattaṃ ativattati.

  AN 7.51


If you are/become very sensitive for sounds what could be the reason/cause?

Sensitivity could just mean your senses are being noticed. Something that you once ignored is now being noticed because your living in the present moment. You're aware of things which you didn't notice before. It may seem louder than usual because your mind is no longer being occupied by something else. Another explanation could be sensory adaptation to a new environment. It's not uncommon for practitioners who return from retreats to be more sensitive to their environment. Their ears have adapted to the silent lifestyle but eventually adapt to usual city noise over time.


Are there any similar characteristics between Nama and Rupa?

The best thing to remember the fire simile.
The campfire become a grass fire. the grass fire becomes a bush fire. The bushfire becomes the housefire.
Here the fire is similar to the consciousness (Nama). What fire depends on (grass etc) are the Rupa.
When we take the fire with say grass it is called Namarupa.


Visakha Uposatha Sutta AN 8.43  and  Muluposatha Sutta: The Roots of the Uposatha AN 3.70  are good reads in this regard. Also in the Uposatha Sutta— Practicing uposatha —AN 3.71 the Buddha defines how lay people should practice Uposatha and describes the different types of devas.

Uposatha practice is the practice by which lay people rest from their daily work, devoting a day on the full moon, new moon, and quarter moon days,  to listening to the Dhamma and training the mind in meditation. The question is whether one does it the proper way or not. The practice of taking the eight precepts in the morning, then taking the five precepts again in the evening, is not proper. In the Uposatha Sutta, Buddha describe it as ‘the Cowherd’s Uposatha.’  It is not the Uposatha of the Noble Ones. The eight precepts should be observed for at least twenty-four hours.

Another thing to be mindful about is that those persons who, on uposatha days plan to go to quiet places to meditate they inadvertently fall into other trappings. They at times end up in the company of friends and get into other unrelated conversations, because they have no control over their minds. Even in meditation even when they attempt to direct their minds to the samatha (calm) or metta (loving-kindness), their thoughts get scattered aimlessly and they end up only with the visible manifestation of the recitation. The 24 hour uposatha is for the mind, and not for the body. Lastly, it is important for one be mindful to take the five precepts to formally end the uposatha, whenever one wants to terminate it.


How do you identify the 5 factors associated with Jhana?

Applied thought and sustained thought are not the factors that you recognize, they are the factors that you generate. You know when you have them, because you are doing them!

Once you use applied and sustained thought properly, the factors of joy and ease (what you called rapture and happiness -- the translations I don't find precise) will emerge. These are very easy to recognize, because you will feel joyful and at ease! ;)


Not all worthy (enlightened) monks have psychic powers. In fact, Satan or Mara also has psychic powers. The Buddha's enemy Devadatta, who tried to murder Buddha, also had psychic powers. Psychic powers, such as telepathy, can only be developed by individuals that have a latent disposition for them. The Buddha had many fully enlightened disciples but they all did not have psychic powers. The most lucid (Sariputta) did not have psychic powers. The disciple famed for his psychic powers (Maha Moggallana)  was said to be Mara in a past life (MN 50). In original Buddhism, psychic powers were not considered a sign of sanctity.


What is the Antidote for a Hateful Temperament?

The solution is to use Metta (loving kindness). For canonical description of Metta, please see the Karaniya Metta Sutta, Metta Sutta and the Mettanisamsa Sutta.

Information on how to practise Metta can be found here and here. These are quite specific and written by Ven. Dhammarakkhita and Ven. Buddharakkhita. These are too long to quote here.

Hateful temperament is part of "ill will", one of the five hindrances (also here) to meditation and practice. Ajahn Brahmavamso explains in this essay:

  Ill will refers to the desire to punish, hurt or destroy. It includes
  sheer hatred of a person, or even a situation, and it can generate so
  much energy that it is both seductive and addictive. At the time, it
  always appears justified for such is its power that it easily corrupts
  our ability to judge fairly. It also includes ill will towards
  oneself, otherwise known as guilt, which denies oneself any
  possibility of happiness. In meditation, ill will can appear as
  dislike towards the meditation object itself, rejecting it so that
  one's attention is forced to wander elsewhere.

  The Lord Buddha likened ill will to being sick. Just as sickness
  denies one the freedom and happiness of health, so ill will denies one
  the freedom and happiness of peace.

  Ill will is overcome by applying Metta, loving kindness. When it is
  ill will towards a person, Metta teaches one to see more in that
  person than all that which hurts you, to understand why that person
  hurt you (often because they were hurting intensely themselves), and
  encourages one to put aside one's own pain to look with compassion on
  the other. But if this is more than one can do, Metta to oneself leads
  one to refuse to dwell in ill will to that person, so as to stop them
  from hurting you further with the memory of those deeds. Similarly, if
  it is ill will towards oneself, Metta sees more than one's own faults,
  can understand one's own faults, and finds the courage to forgive
  them, learn from their lesson and let them go.


Buddhist origin of tobacco and its relation to Native American use

Householder Vimutti, interested,

Only that far, as possible related (not so much in folk-culture relation):

The Buddha allowed his monks to make use of allowed medicine to be inhaled via smoke trough nose or moth, as well as using pipes for such treatment, incl. even to hold one fr each of the seven week days and a bag to keep them good.

What is not allowed is using medicine for simple sense pleasure and to take means which cause heedlessness (indoxicants causing lose of moral shame and fear of wrong doing)

There are many sorts of "tobacco", plant-leaves, other plant medicine used in ways of inhalation of their smoke till today and this being so the usual name for this "tobaccos", plants for inhalation, is "medicine" (smoking medicine). Many monks and Yogies, till this days, smoke, of course not always just for medication.

As not really violating the Vinaya, outwardly aspects, smoking tobacco is not regarded as break of precepts principle and very common under monks in SEAsia, at least also because sense pleasure that does only harm possible one self and no other beings.

As for normal smoke tobacco, used this days in most cigarettes, it easy leads to addiction regarded to strong sense-pleasure-addition, so one is not at all encouraged to make use of such.

Medicine, one of the four requirements to practice and maintain the body for that, bas to be taken in this manner:

  Wisely reflecting I will make use of medicine only as an aid to eliminate bodily pains that have arisen, and also to maintain that important condition, freedom from disease. (The Fourfold Reflection of a Monk )

Medizine, in and of itself, is no direct means of practice, while it's use and how to gain it, is.

Smoking of things not causing carelessness (lack of moral shame, fear of wrong doing), for lay people (5 Silas, is no breaking of any precept. When observing Uposatha, use at wrong time, not as just medicine, might be, in regard of mental factor, intention, if for just sense pleasure.

At least: if humans only sense addiction whould be tobacco, there would be no harm of others, no war, no conflicts and nature destruction in this world. People who enjoy other sense-pleasures, stating from using vehicles of nice clothers, even in regard of air-pollution, are no match in harming others at all.

(my person has not investigated the links and teaching given in the comments to the question)

(Note that this gift of Dhamma is not dedicated for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to make merits toward release from this wheel)


Once ignorance is removed ,is the cessation of suffering automatic?

Ignorance does not cause consciousness. In your studies of Buddhism, please avoid this materialistic error many Buddhists have. As a beginning student, it is important to learn the right way, from the beginning. The suttas (SN 22.82) say consciousness is caused (hetu) by the mind-body (nama-rupa).

In reality, dependent origination is describing how ignorance pollutes consciousness, similar to how dirt pollutes pure water or how dust covers a mirror. SN 46.55 provides some good analogies.

This is why there are many suttas that describe how a Buddha has no ignorance but remains conscious, such as SN 22.53, Iti 44 and the end of MN 38.

When ignorance ceases, what occurs to consciousness is it become pure. In other words, what ceases is 'ignorant-consciousness' or ignorant-sense-contact (called avijjāsamphassajena).

  If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there
  is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed,
  not increasing, not concocting, is released. Owing to its release, it
  is steady. Owing to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing to its
  contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is
  totally unbound right within. SN 22.53


Where can I find sources for historical data on Buddhist populations in various regions around the world?

There's the Maps of Ancient Buddhist Asia and History of Buddhism mentions some population figures for certain eras, but I don't know of any detailed census data particular to Buddhism prior to the last couple of centuries.

For recent data, there's the PEW Religious Affiliation Report

Hope this helps in some small way.


How can the theory of emptiness be true and yet the self still transmigrates and takes rebirth?

Not all forms of Buddhism define emptiness in the way you describe; in Theravada Buddhism, for example, emptiness mainly means "empty of self":

  “katamā cāvuso, suññatā cetovimutti”?

  “idhāvuso, bhikkhu araññagato vā rukkhamūlagato vā suññāgāragato vā iti paṭisañcikkhati — ‘suññamidaṃ attena vā attaniyena vā’ti. ayaṃ vuccatāvuso, suññatā cetovimutti”.

  "And what, friend, is liberation of mind through emptiness?"

  "Here, friend, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or gone to the root of a tree or gone to an empty dwelling reflects thus: 'empty is this of self or what belongs to self.' This one calls, friend, liberation of mind through emptiness."

  -- MN 43

Being empty of self is different from not existing; it simply means that, from the point of view of experience, that which comes into existence does so from non-existence, and subsequently returns to non-existence; it has no existence outside of the single moment:

  “aniccā vata saṅkhārā, uppādavayadhammino.
  uppajjitvā nirujjhanti, tesaṃ vūpasamo sukho”ti.

  "Impermanent indeed are formations, of a nature to arise and fall.
  Having arisen, they cease, their tranquillizing is happiness."

  -- DN 16

  “yaṃ kiñci samudayadhammaṃ sabbaṃ taṃ nirodhadhamman”ti.

  "Whatever is of a nature to arise, all of that is of a nature to cease."

  -- DN 3

  yasmā ca kho, ānanda, suññaṃ attena vā attaniyena vā tasmā suñño lokoti vuccati.

  Because it is, Ananda, empty by way of self or what belongs to self, therefore 'the world is empty' is said.

  --SN 35.68

There is only one example in Theravada Buddhism that I know of that is cited as support for the idea of emptiness being related to non-existence - in the Patisambhidamagga:

  katamaṃ vipariṇāmasuññaṃ? jātaṃ rūpaṃ sabhāvena suññaṃ.

  What is emptiness due to change? Born form is empty by way of intrinsic existence.

  -- Paṭis. XX.5

The commentary to this passage refutes the idea that this refers to non-existence, however:

  'Void of individual essense': here sabhāva is sayaṃ bhāvo; arising of itself is the meaning. Or sabhāva is sako bhāvo; own arising. Because of existence in dependence on conditions there is in it no essence by itself or essence of its own, thus it is "void of individual essence".

  ...

  But if someone should say: "Own essence is individual essence; it is void of that individual essence. ... Because of the non-existence of any idea whatever it is the non-existence of materiality that is expressed by the words 'born materiality is void of individual essence.'" It should be argued thus: that being so, the words 'born materiality' would be contradicted; for what is devoid of arising is not called 'born'. ... And the word 'void' for what is non-existent contradicts the Blessed One's use of it above for the 'world' and also the words of the books of logic and linguistics; and it contradicts many logical arguments.

  -- Path of Discrimination, p. 362 (Ñāṇamoli, trans)

So, while to say that "the Buddha never taught a theory of emptiness. This idea is nowhere in the entire Pali Canon." is clearly false (and should really be removed from your question), there are ways of understanding emptiness that don't contradict existence.

Further, the Buddha taught non-self; he didn't precisely teach "rebirth" - he never actually used a word, that I know of, that implies such an idea. He taught dependent origination; that mental formations lead to further becoming. It is pretty clear from reading the earlier texts (e.g. those cited above) that experiences arise and cease, being replaced by new experiences. This occurs even at the moment of physical death, hence "rebirth", or more accurately "birth".

In summary, emptiness can be understood to refer to absence of self (i.e. something eternal or immutable) and rebirth isn't really a Buddhist concept. Birth comes about because of mind states in one existence leading to future mind states in another existence - the separation between existences is merely conventional.


The monastic rules of the Vinaya has rules pertaining to food, lodging, medicine, conduct etc. There are rules pertaining to medical care. The Buddha ate, slept, wore robes, took medicine when he was ill etc.
The Middle Way of the Buddha avoids both extreme indulgence and extreme asceticism. It includes moderation in food, healthcare and living. To neglect healthcare is to go against the Middle Way of moderation.
From Kucchivikara-vatthu of the Theravada Vinaya, the Buddha taught:

"A sick person endowed with five qualities is hard to tend to: he does
what is not amenable to his cure; he does not know the proper amount
in things amenable to his cure; he does not take his medicine; he does
not tell his symptoms, as they actually are present, to the nurse
desiring his welfare, saying that they are worse when they are worse,
improving when they are improving, or remaining the same when they are
remaining the same; and he is not the type who can endure bodily
feelings that are painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent,
disagreeable, life-threatening. A sick person endowed with these five
qualities is hard to tend to.
"A sick person endowed with five qualities is easy to tend to: he does
what is amenable to his cure; he knows the proper amount in things
amenable to his cure; he takes his medicine; he tells his symptoms, as
they actually are present, to the nurse desiring his welfare, saying
that they are worse when they are worse, improving when they are
improving, or remaining the same when they are remaining the same; and
he is the type who can endure bodily feelings that are painful,
fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable, life-threatening. A
sick person endowed with these five qualities is easy to tend to.

Based on this Vinaya quote, I would say that the Buddha himself would have wanted his followers to practice moderation, and accept the advice of healthcare professionals and the government when dealing with the Covid-19 pandemic.
Of course, they should not accept advice blindly but they should ask questions and clarify their doubts before they accept the advice if they see fit, as taught in the Kalama Sutta (below):

"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by
traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by
analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by
the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for
yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are
blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these
qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" —
then you should abandon them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to
this was it said.
"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by
scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by
agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought,
'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves
that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless;
these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted
& carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter
& remain in them.

Also, spreading misinformation about Covid-19, masks and vaccines is against the fourth precept of not speaking falsehood.
Wearing a surgical mask is more for the wearer to avoid spreading pathogens to others, than for the wearer's own protection from contracting an infectious disease. As such, wearing a mask with the explicit intention of reducing others' suffering, is also an expression of compassion (karuna).
Getting vaccinated with the intention of preventing others, especially the high risk group, from becoming infected, is also an expression of compassion (karuna).
The quote from DN 26 below, also shows that the Buddha did not promote anarchy or civil disobedience. He stated that the wheel-turning monarch should provide just protection and security to his subjects and also care for their welfare.

‘But sire, what are the noble duties of a wheel-turning monarch?’
‘Well then, my dear, relying only on principle—honoring, respecting,
and venerating principle, having principle as your flag, banner, and
authority — provide just protection and security for your court,
troops, aristocrats, vassals, brahmins and householders, people of
town and country, ascetics and brahmins, beasts and birds. Do not let
injustice prevail in the realm. Pay money to the penniless in the
realm.

I would even say that a responsible Buddhist should support his or her government and follow its advice (after clarifying it), if the government is discernibly doing the right thing, and if its advice is in accordance with the five precepts, Right Action, Right Speech and Right Livelihood. For e.g. conscription into military service is against Right Livelihood, and should be declined.


Are non-Theravada monks allowed to eat after noon, and to use money?

They differ for any number of reasons.  For one, there are at least five different 'official' versions of the vinaya - each of which is prominent in different countries.  The rules in each vary slightly - some have more rules, some have less, some place greater emphasis on different things, etc.  A lot of it also has to do with tradition and the culture where Buddhism is practiced.  If there is one thing you say about Buddhism it's that it very much malleable to local custom.

A very good example of this is Japan.  Some monks there will accept money such as for funeral services.  Many will eat after noon, despite the injunction not to - it's just called "medicine" instead of a meal!  My own teacher's teacher really loved his sake despite that being a fairly clear violation of the fifth precept.  Some Japanese monks, believe or not, even get married.

I think it's helpful not to view Buddhism as a monolithic entity.  It really is as complex as the people practicing it.


Is there a list of (all the) Suttas that mention supranormal powers?


It is in the region around Mt. Kailash that Pacceka Buddhas will reside at a time just before a Supreme Buddha is born to this world.  That is when the eminent coming of a Supreme Buddha is talked about amongst the general population of that time.

So Mt. Kailash is a very storied mountain, the equally storied lake and the storied flower in it. Mt. Kailash is the mythical Mt. Meru. Read about it in the "Saptha Suryodgamana Sutta" The Sermon of the Seven Suns (Anguttara Nikaya VII. 62). In it the Buddha explains in detail about the events that would unfold, and in it, this monarch of mountains will get consumed and burnt, that neither ashes not soot will remain.

The Lake Anavatapta is said to be so sheltered and covered that the direct rays from the sun would not fall and the lake would not dry up until the day this world would come to an end, as per the Saptha Suryodgamana Sutta. In this "Sermon of the Seven Suns" the Supreme Buddha, tells us about the end of the earth due to the expansion of the dying sun.

To tell you a bit about the storied flower that is found in its forest…. It is the Kadupul flower - said to be the world’s most expensive flower. It survives around the Lake Anavatapta, because it is sheltered from the sun’s rays. The flower is said to be a midnight miracle, surviving during the night, and fading to nothing at dawn.


Are the movie Fight Club, and Project Mayhem in it, buddhist?

I don't think so.

it predicates detachment from material possessions

That's not enough to call it Buddhist.

Buddhism might be known for what it is, rather than for what it isn't. Maybe Buddhism isn't material possessions, but, what is it?

That ("what is Buddhism?") is addressed e.g. in many other topics on this site, for example:

What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share?
New to Buddhism
How to explain what Buddhism is?

I think that these topics describe elements of Buddhism, and that you'd find it difficult to identify any of these specifically Buddhist element in the movie ... not only difficult to show that the movie identifies these elements but even that it doesn't contradict these elements.
There are other (non-Buddhist) common belief-systems which de-emphasize or criticize material possessions -- e.g. communism, christianity, anarchy, and nihilism -- but these are not Buddhism ... which, is proof (a "proof by counterexample") that critiquing material possessions isn't even nearly sufficient to identify an ideology as Buddhist.
Buddhism isn't entirely or necessarily against material possessions, at least in lay society (and lay society is relevant to the topic, in that I assume you won't try to argue that the movie represents Buddhist clergy). I don't know a Zen example off-hand, but for example I'm thinking of the Sigalovada Sutta which talks about not squandering wealth, and about protecting and making peaceful and secure, etc.

There are books and essays you could read about the behaviors and attitudes recommended to Buddhist lay-folk, in summary I don't think I see these (generosity, non-violence) in the movie. I think that Buddhism was in many ways meant to co-exist with lay society, and not meant to destroy it (which, destruction, is I think more inline with what the movie is suggesting).

My impression is that the movie isn't written by a Buddhist nor written for a Buddhist audience, not intended to teach a Buddhist message. Furthermore I think it arouses passion in its audience, rather than arousing a dispassion (or compassion) which might be more characteristic of Buddhism.

To address some of the points you made in your other question ...

Narrator does bunches of haikus

Here is the haiku from the movie:

  worker bees can leave
  even drones can fly away
  the queen is their slave

Apart from anything else I think that this isn't a good, Buddhist haiku e.g. as described in What Makes Haiku a Zen Art (I mean, "yes it's a haiku but is it Zen?"):

  Haiku is an expression of direct experience, not an expression of an idea about experience. Possibly the most common mistake western haiku writers make is to use the form to express an idea about experience, not experience itself. A haiku does not present metaphors or try to explain meaning. It provides no concepts or opinions. It does not reflect on the past or anticipate the future. It is just this moment, right now. Plop! It is this directness that makes it a Zen art.

  So, for example, this is a really bad haiku:

    A rose represents
    A mother's kiss, a spring day
    A lover's longing.

  It's bad because it's all conceptual. It doesn't give us experience. Contrast with:

    Wilted rose bouquet
    Left in new grass
    By the gravestone.

  The second haiku is not great, perhaps, but it brings you into a moment.

The haiku in the movie is conceptual: the queen bee represents a slave, which represents the alleged slavery of the fictional character's colleagues, which represent human office workers, which supposedly represent the movie's audience?

This isn't just a criticism of the poetry, it's a criticism of the way in which the words are or are not used to connect the audience with reality (or unreality).

Narrator's home intends to be zen-like looking

Well now you seem to be making a religion of Ikea's minimalism, which is actually one of the things the movie complained about.

Car crash scene Tyler says Stop trying to control everything and just let go!

If it's true that there's a time and a place for everything, IMO that's inappropriate (even potentially suicidal or murderous) behavior for a car driver.

The phrase ("Stop trying to control everything and just let go") sounds interesting but I'm not sure that it corresponds to what Buddhist might know as Right Intention, for example:

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

I don't think the movie does teach renunciation; for example it advocates acquiring a harder body:

  A guy who came to Fight Club for the first time, his ass was a wad of cookie dough. After a few weeks, he was carved out of wood.

Nor is it, IMO, especially good at teaching freedom from ill-will.

Detachment is a major theme since first conversation between Narrator-Tyler

Yes the whole movie is about "detachment", which is arguably a psychological pathology ... see for example Wikipedia articles like:

Emotional detachment
Dissociation (psychology)
Dissociative identity disorder
Dissociative disorder
etc., etc.

I don't think this is necessarily "Buddhist".

Buddhism teaches non-attachment, which isn't quite the same thing (as "detachment"). The opposite of non-attachment is clinging.


To what extent do Zen students study Dhamma?

I found my way into Buddhism via Zen since the teacher 'who appeared when needed' was a Zen and Taoist practitioner. This was fantastically lucky since Zen cuts straight to the chase and I'm impatient with details. As a lazy person 'just sitting' was right up my street.

I started by reading 'Cultivating the Empty Field', a collection of poetry by Master Hongzhi. The preface and introduction are brilliant and from a philosophical perspective explained all I wanted to know. At the time these were by far the two best and most useful philosophical pieces of writing I had ever read.

The dharma in all its details is not especially important since Zen goes straight the heart of practice. But the situation is deceptive. The teachings and practices of Zen are grounded in the metaphysics of Nagarjuna. Thus Zen is iconoclastic as is Mahayana. Nothing really exists or ever really happens and all our mundane idea have to be knocked-down.

There is very little need for organised teaching. I was advised to sit down and give up everything. That's it really, the core of the method, supported by pondering on koans, the occasional touch of austerities and so on.

I would recommend the aforementioned book as a way into this topic. I have no patience with the 8 levels of this, the 43 levels of that, the 9 stages of the other and so on for to me they are merely didactic devices, albeit valuable where they are helpful. It won't suit everyone, but some prefer to burn their books and leap-frog all that.

I feel Zen is the best approach for anyone coming from scholastic philosophy since it is free of clutter and has an explicit, complete and well-formed metaphysical scheme. Whether it is best for you only you can know. It combines well with other simple-minded approaches like philosophical Taoism (not the later religious Taoism) and Sri Ramana's method of self-enquiry.

You ask what is Zen doctrine. It is the Mahayana doctrine stripped-down to its most-minimal practical essentials. One sits and waits for the dust to settle, and as it does ones realisation grows and life improves. No need to fight tendencies and attachments like a battling saint for they gradually fall away in the silence and peace. Also, koans are an effective method of unsettling ones usual way of thinking and getting to grips intellectually and 'intuitively' with non-duality.

Hope this helps. For more of an answer the question would have to be more specific.


Why a Buddhist prays at Hindu temple which is situated in another country and prays for the betterment of his own country?

Maybe it's a politic and skilful thing to do -- analogous to the Prime Minister of New Zealand wearing a headscarf after the Christchurch mosque attack.

New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern, wearing hijab, meets Christchurch terror attack victims' families

Perhaps it helps to represent that (the population of) Sri Lanka is Buddhist and Hindu too, and that populations (within countries and between) can co-exist peacefully.

That's just a guess though, I haven't read any publicity about his motive.


Did any Indian Mahayana Buddhists have non-cognition as a goal?

Apparently that was Candrakīrti's position.

From Mario D'Amato's "Why Buddha Never Uttered A Word", quoting J.D. Dunne's study of Candrakīrti and Vose's study of Candrakīrti's commentator Jayānanda:

  ...As Dunne points out, for example, “Candrakīrti [c. 600–650 c.e.] holds strong views on the impossibility of a buddha having conceptual knowledge” (1996: 540). While, according to certain Buddhist thinkers, such as Dignāga (c. 480–540 c.e.) and Dharmakīrti (c. 600–660), perception is without conceptual construction, according to Candrakīrti’s view, “even raw sense data are in some sense conceptual,” so “at the highest state of understanding where one’s knowledge is completely nonconceptual, nothing appears at all” (ibid.: 544). Dunne goes on to specify that, according to Candrakīrti’s account of buddhahood, for buddhas “the fluctuations of mind and mental functions” have “completely ceased” (ibid.). Jayānanda (c. 1100), the only known Indian commentator on any of Candrakīrti’s works, affirms Candrakīrti’s account and “explains that enlightenment is a process of ‘not knowing’ and is characterized by the elimination of the knowing instrument, the mind” (Vose 2005: 191–192). (Footnote: Jayānanda writes, “Since enlightenment is by way of not knowing  (anadhigama) at all, we assert that the activities of mind and mental factors— feeling and so forth—[all] having the character of experiencing, have ceased their engagement”.) But how can a mindless buddha teach the dharma? Dunne states that, according to Candrakīrti, “the dharma-kāya causes a didactic sound to emit from a buddha . . . [but] the production of this sound does not at all mean that a buddha is cognitively active” (1996: 549).
  Being mindless, a buddha is unable to use language in any ordinary sense; on this view, a buddha only appears to use language—what is actually occurring is that certain sounds emanating from a buddha are interpreted by unenlightened beings as words and language.

You can read the entire paper on academia.edu and it's included as a chapter in Mario D'Amato, Jay L. Garfield & Tom J. F. Tillemans (eds.), Pointing at the Moon: Buddhism, Logic, Analytic Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 41--55 (2009) - from where you can get the references to bibliography for Dunne and Vose works.

D'Amato has quite enough to say on "non conceptual cognition". If you are interested in that topic I suggest you check his this and other works. He provides interesting references too.


Can bad kamma be overcome in one lifetime

According to AN 6.87, there is actually a list of characteristics, and such a person will never be able to have the right mental state or moral capacity to learn the Dhamma:

"Endowed with these six qualities, a person is incapable of alighting
on the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even
when listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?
"He has killed his mother; he has killed his father; he has killed an
arahant; he has, with corrupt intent, caused the blood of a Tathagata
to flow; he has caused a split in the Sangha; or he is a person of
dull discernment, slow & dull-witted.
"Endowed with these six qualities, a person is capable of alighting on
the lawfulness, the rightness of skillful mental qualities even while
listening to the true Dhamma. Which six?
"He has not killed his mother; he has not killed his father; he has
not killed an arahant; he has not, with corrupt intent, caused the
blood of a Tathagata to flow; he has not caused a split in the Sangha;
and he is a discerning person, not slow or dull-witted.

According to MN 86, Angulimala killed many human beings, but he could still change and become an arahant. So, probably, he did not commit the transgressions above (killing father, killing mother, killing arahant, injuring Buddha).
So in short, if one did not commit the acts mentioned above or have those characteristics, one could theoretically completely turn around and become an arahant in this very lifetime.
From Dhammapada:

Few among men are those who cross to the farther shore. The rest, the bulk of men, only run up and down the hither bank.

But those who act according to the perfectly taught Dhamma will cross the realm of Death, so difficult to cross.

87-88. Abandoning the dark way, let the wise man cultivate the bright
path. Having gone from home to homelessness, let him yearn for that
delight in detachment, so difficult to enjoy. Giving up sensual
pleasures, with no attachment, let the wise man cleanse himself of
defilements of the mind.

Those whose minds have reached full excellence in the factors of enlightenment, who, having renounced acquisitiveness, rejoice in not
clinging to things — rid of cankers, glowing with wisdom, they have
attained Nibbana in this very life.


According to the Abhidhamma, we don't "see a car". It is a bit more complicated :-)

According to the Abhidhamma, sensing involves seeing a small patch of colour. The small patch of colour is rūpa, an ultimate reality.

How small is this patch of colour? Extend your arm and hold out your thumb. Scientists say that the size of your thumbnail as compared to your entire field of vision is what that retina can process at one instant. The rods and cones of the retina respond to specific colours.

Once this small patch of colour (the ultimate reality) has been seen, it becomes a concept (the tadanuvattikā manodvāravīthi process). Sensing is finished and now thinking takes over. The first thing that thinking does is the “grasp the object as a whole” (samudāyagāhikā); in other words, thinking builds up the entire field of vision from these “thumbnail-sized” patches of colour.

How is this done? It is not in the linear mechanical way that a TV screen image is built up. Scientists say that the eye focuses first on areas of high contrast, on faces and on movement before filling in the rest of the scene.

Once the entire scene has been built up, the thinking mind recognizes colours (vaṇṇasallakkhaṇā). Next, a shape or “entity” is extracted from the pattern of colours (vatthugāhikā). Next is the thinking process of recognizing the share or “entity” (vatthusallakkhaṇā). Next is a thinking process of gasping the name (car in the example you gave) (nāmagāhikā) and the thinking process of recognizing the name (nāmasallakkhaṇā).

Scientists explain that the activity in the brain extends from the visual cortex to involve memory.

Of course, next comes the idea of the car, judgements and associations regarding the car, obsessions and fantasies about the car.

What we see is the ultimate reality of a small patch of colour. Once seeing of this small patch of colour is complete, then thinking of concepts takes over.

This is explained in Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" (page 164).


What are Gandhari Charm and Manika Charm told by Buddha?

The sutta exemplifies how a wordling would interpret miraculous powers of a monk, by saying that it was not the monk who did it by his concentrated mind but he used charm X.

Now the wordling wants some quick fix charm and not work on his silā and samādhi.


What is correct punishment for children?

I like Milton Erickson's practice of physically restricting the movement of his son when he engages in the prohibited behaviour until the child undergoes a change of heart. He describes this somewhere.


Kamma and right livelihood in a modern business environment

It depends on what services you are providing to the company. If you are just helping them to balance accounts, it'll be similar to the hunter's wife cooking the meat. But if you are actually involved in poison making or marketing of the product, it won't be a right livelihood. Even as an HR officer, if you are hiring people to make poison or butcher animals, it's not a right livelihood. As a lawyer, if you are helping the company to get away with environmental damage, tax fraud, public health concerns, it's not a right livelihood. Yes, it creates bad Karma.


This is probably just a case of a word having many (conflicting) uses.

Intuition is an elusive word. It seems we often associate it to a kind of feeling about something. Because that "kind of feeling" is also elusive and could be pretty much anything, it may be regarded as unreliable. Perhaps this explain why you were told it is not something to be valued.

However, intuition can be used to describe not-so-elusive kinds of knowledges, like tacit/implicit/non-verbal knowledge we all use daily (e.g. intuitively knowing where the north is, or how to solve a puzzling problem).

Finally intuition can also mean some kind of immediate knowledge of reality. I found the following dictionary descriptions interesting:

direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
a fact, truth, etc., perceived in this way.
a keen and quick insight.
the quality or ability of having such direct perception or quick insight.
pure, untaught, noninferential knowledge.

This description is close to wisdom (but in Buddhism, it's a little more specific than that: see paññā/vipassanā, yoniso manasikāra and yathā bhūta ñāna dassana). And wisdom is something that has been systematized in Buddhism: there is both a large body of practice and evaluation. One can speak of attainments, higher and lower wisdom. One can identify when one's wisdom is lacking, and when it improved. Finally, one can practice to develop it.

"Mere intuition", on the other hand, as just "some feeling", has a high risk of being just this: a mere feeling. And mere feelings are often wrong. And once wrong or right, we are lost as to why. To explain it, one ends up creating some sort of (creative) theory or borrowing from some religious tradition or superstition ("the channeling with spirits was not clear", "I ate meat at an inappropriate time", etc.), which further tax one's beliefs, and might bring one closer to the blindness referred to.


How is Qi Energy used in Buddhist practice?

"How is chi used in Buddhist practice?"

Buddha ignored the fascination people had with all this and classified it as "the five elements" knowing that even the slightest attraction to these low physical phenomena would waste people's time and detract from the many more worthwhile goals. You don't have to know anything about chi in Buddhism because in Buddhism the method of true awareness is enough to dissolve all blockages and problems that might come up.

This is why so many uneducated Buddhist monks who didn't know anything about any of the other traditions still won the prize of Enlightenment! One of them was the patriarch of the Zen school, whom other jealous disciples tried to hunt down..

In those times, monks would be all too interested in those things, at the expense of understanding one's True Mind, which is beyond body and mind... If Buddha even mentioned the word chi, there would be a million and one distracting questions popping into people's head at those times--that would probably derail people's focus entirely... which is why Gautama supposedly returned as Padmasambhava and created the Tibetan school--much much later after the heart of Buddhism was established. (Tibetan school by the way is still aligned with Buddhism but has an integrated focus on the wisdom-energies.)

Nonetheless, chi is related to different karmic habits that we have and once these energies are dissolved the personality characteristic is also transformed--and vice versa.

Buddhism aims at a much higher target than physical perfection, beyond even physical immortality, and this is why it is possible in Buddhism to go beyond the body to transform the mind at its root, attaining things that are definitely Buddhist ("non-common supermundane achievements") and other things that are beyond form but common to all spiritual schools ("common supermundane achievements").

Buddhism aims at the highest possible level: transforming the 8th consciousness, the storehouse of karmas from our endless lives... becoming a radiant actualized Buddha helping all beings win Awakening, becoming free from cycles like birth-and-death and suffering. To Buddhism, these super-powers are nothing but wasting time developing tricks, totally distracted from our human and spiritual problem. That is, unless it is for skillful means (see the parable of the burning house).

With that Buddhist warning aside, to answer your first question, there are many different types of chi, based on various organs. This falls within the realm of TCM and there are many uses to knowing such things, especially in diagnosing one's body. I would love to have an intuitive TCM doctor analyze my sitting posture--lots of constructive advice can be gained from that!

So what is chi in related to Buddhist practice and meditation? How can we make use of such learnings to motivate our Buddhist practice?

The Taoists have mapped out a timeline for what the excellent cultivators and Buddhists go through:

jing > chi > shen > emptiness >> Tao

When one practices Buddhism 100% correctly (celibacy + samatha-powered vipassana), this process happens automatically all the way to "seeing the Tao"/bodhisattvahood.

Due to one's celibacy, one has stored up jing (semen) which after 3 months of jhana eventually starts to transform into chi. One will feel less hungry and can fast for a long time. One is qualified to do the things posted in the picture. Eventually after at least a year like this, one's chi will transform to shen. For several years this process will continue, one's sleep needs will drastically reduce. After even more refined letting go, one will be at the stage of "emptiness" free from dualities and one step away from turning around and "seeing the Tao"

Also, the Taoists have fancier, more interesting names than this - I'm just summarizing.

I recommend the dense book "How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization" for a complete understanding of this subject of energetics and where your concern on energetics absolutely must stop in order to progress and not subconsciously focus on lower things and hold yourself back from awakening the formless, nondual prajna wisdom.

Whether one is a monastic or a layman, in this day and age there is a lot of confusing bioenergetics fascination so it is important to clear up this matter for yourself because even if I say "just study Buddhism, and keep noting, all that fancy stuff is nothing they will lose it after they die"... you are still curious and vulnerable to false information--especially since you want to be able to do cool things like be free of sexual desire (when your jing is full), no longer need to ingest food (when chi is full), and no longer need to sleep (when shen is full)... at the best false information + fixation might lead to nonbeneficial/retarding practices and at the worst, a painful fiery death (I refer you to the Buddhist story of Hakuin).

2nd question: yes, it is a result of staying in that state. After achieving the 1st jhana on a mental level, one must reside in this state until the body completes transforming. After one's body and mind are in sync (this may take a few months if one achieved jhana/insight quickly), one's state will stabilize (and one can go to even higher states more easily)... and one can feel and train one's chi to do various tricks--beneficial and harmful. One can also ignore those lateral pathways and continue on the Buddhist journey.

Go here for more nondenominational info and definitions.
Also read "Master Huai-Chin Nan - Internal Martial Arts Nei-Gong" to have all your chi-related questions answered, especially related to Buddhist practice.
The dense book I mentioned earlier has excellent case studies as well on how chi manifested in different practitioners' lives.


5 Hindrances can be suppressed in Jhana. As one is not yet fully liberated when in Jhana though the 5 Hinadraces are suppressed, one accumulates both positive and negative karma.