Approaching causal and effectual reliance through "times"

Past, Present, and Future are the three times.

Future, Past, and Present equally depend on each other.

If you try and draw a triangle with only one line or two lines, it is impossible.  All three need to be in place for the totality of "time."

In this way, it might be possible to reason more clearly about how causes depend on effects.

Approaching co-emergent phenomena via phor

Your question seems to be "okay causes lead to effects, but why do causes depend on effects?"

Two people high-fiving requires a silent clap from both sides.

The beach (of sand) and the shore-line (of water) depend upon one another.  To say there can be a beach without water is to have a desert.  To have water without a shore-line is not a shore, but an ocean.

Thus, investigating

The nature of where they meet

Noble Nagarjuna, in Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way states

  Forms do not meet and they do not part.

Dogen-ji made a statement of similar magnitude by saying "Space has no gaps."

I will stop there, at risk of becoming too philosophical.  The teachings are meant for experiential understanding.  Words will help, but like reading a menu or eating a meal, the actual experience is what counts.

For now, know that the present is dominant and that both future and past must borrow from Now in order to even come into question.


I practice with Triratna Buddhists so for us solitary retreats are seen as an important part of practice. So much so that if one wanted to become ordained (as many do) then the expectation is of at least one solitary retreat. So if I can have a go at your questions

Right Time

When you have been practicing for at least 6 months and have attended at least one group retreat

How much time

Depends. The people that I know usual do a week but many start off with a few days. Ultimately people can and do spend months on solitary

Wrong Time

I don't believe I've ever heard of anyone saying a wrong time except with the above caveats. I guess as ever you should kind to yourself on these things. Even though it is solitary it is  up to you how you spend the time. It doesn't have to be 8 hours meditation a day if that isn't appropriate for you at that point. Many people for instance have spent some of their time writing (about the dharma) and have found that beneficial for them at that point.

Confession

I have never been on solitary retreat so this is all second hand. I do believe it is a valuable practice though so would like to at some point.


Giving not outside in relation to merits, how should this proper perceived?

I think this is merely a reference to a typical aspect of religious life. Whenever we have a body of people who dedicate their lives to religious pursuits — be they clergymen or monastics — those people have no means of support other than the generosity of lay people. This binds the lay followers and the devotees together: the lay followers put their hopes for salvation on the full-time adherents; the full-time-adherents get their subsistence from the labor of lay followers. Someone who gives donations to a different group is breaking that bond; that has an impact both on the community as a whole and on his own progress on the path.

Imagine someone who attends a Christian congregation, but gives a good part of his donations to a Hindu temple down the road. There are reasons one might do that, but it inevitably calls into question his commitment to the Christian congregation and Christian teachings as a whole. Is he trying to hedge his bets, in case the Hindus are 'right'? Is his boss Hindu, and he is trying to curry favor? Hmph.

It's often a good idea when faced with lists like this to focus less on the individual items and more on the common theme. The goal here is to convince lay followers to show a commitment equivalent to that of monastics, within their means. They shouldn't split their attention between this and that; sometimes being committed to the sangha and sometimes being committed to other groups or principles. If you think about it, it is difficult to violate any one of these precepts without simultaneously violating the others, and that is the essential concern.


How does Buddhism explains rebirth and law of Karma?

The Kamma can be understood as a seed in put in your mind, what goes to the next life according to Buddhism is the mind, not a soul, the mindstream does not stop when the body dies.

There is a great video on Kamma by Ven. Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu on youtube, I recommend you watch it, it is full of details and at the same time easy to understand, I will paste the link:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ih0moT0bvgM


Does the breath literally stop in the fourth Jhāna?

The breathing is imperceptible, that is all, because there must be movement of the breathing for it to be perceived. However, obviously the body continues to have breath flowing through it.


How to suppress the 5 hindrance to achieve the first jhana?

'Suppressing' the five hindrances is not the method of the Pali suttas.

In the Pali suttas, the five hindrances are 'abandoned', 'purified' or 'cleansed' using wisdom, as explained in MN 19, MN 20, DN 13, SN 46.55, etc.

  Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells with an awareness devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of
  covetousness. Abandoning ill will & anger, he dwells with an awareness
  devoid of ill will, sympathetic with the welfare of all living beings.
  He cleanses his mind of ill will & anger. Abandoning sloth &
  drowsiness, he dwells with an awareness devoid of sloth & drowsiness,
  mindful, alert, percipient of light. He cleanses his mind of sloth &
  drowsiness. Abandoning restlessness & anxiety, he dwells undisturbed,
  his mind inwardly stilled. He cleanses his mind of restlessness &
  anxiety. Abandoning uncertainty, he dwells having crossed over
  uncertainty, with no perplexity with regard to skillful mental
  qualities. He cleanses his mind of uncertainty.

  Having abandoned these five hindrances — imperfections of awareness that weaken wisdom — then, quite secluded from sensuality,
  secluded from unskillful qualities, he enters and remains in the first
  jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed
  thought & evaluation.

  MN 38


No, satori is not complete enlightenment, it is an a-ha moment when the practitioner finally realizes "how things are":

  Seeing his own original nature, he discovers that the ground of this
  nature is innately free of defilement, and that he himself is
  originally endowed with the non‐outflow wisdom‐nature which is not a
  hair's breadth different from that of all the Buddhas.

From this moment on, one's practice stops being guesswork or imitation and becomes informed by real understanding. In Zen this is known as "sudden awakening, gradual cultivation":

  Although he has awakened to the fact that his original nature is no
  different from that of the Buddhas, the beginningless habit‐energies
  are extremely difficult to remove suddenly and so he must continue to
  cultivate while relying on this awakening. Through this gradual
  permeation, his endeavors reach completion. He constantly nurtures the
  sacred embryo, and after a long time he becomes a saint. Hence it is
  called gradual cultivation.  This process can be compared to the
  maturation of a child. From the day of its birth, a baby is endowed
  with all the sense organs just like everyone else, but its strength is
  not yet fully developed. It is only after many months and years that
  it will finally become an adult. (from Secrets on Cultivating the Mind  by Bojo Jinul)

Chogyam Trungpa also speaks about it:

  Having received transmission and having had some kind of realization,
  you have to follow it up; you have to become liberated. Some people
  think realization is liberation, but in our case, it is not. When you
  realize something, you have to practice that realization, and then you
  are liberated. So realization does not mean you are liberated; it
  means that you have just touched on the possibility of liberation. Realization is like seeing the first rays of sunshine on the horizon -- you know that the sun is in the sky.


Virtual things that emerge from interaction and exist as interaction

You only really know of the apples existence by touching it, smelling it and tasting it.  That is, interacting with it. Even looking at it is an interaction.


Vipassana meditation comes naturally; Samatha meditation incredibly hard.

I have also found this to be the case when practicing samatha meditation. Here is my understanding of why that is, and how to deal with it:

In vipassana meditation, you do not need to "tune" sensations out. In fact, noticing them is part and parcel of the practice itself. Restlessness and agitation are thus sensations to be noticed and analyzed, and their presence won't really pose a problem.

By contrast, samatha meditation is about concentration on one thing -- in the case of anapanasatti, the breath. One thus becomes far more sensitive to the hindrances that obscure the goal of single-pointed focus, and they actually become an obstacle. The agitation you describe is literally the fourth hindrance, which is described as an inability to calm the mind. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_hindrances#Restlessness-worry_.28uddhacca-kukkucca.29.

On a deeper level, agitation / restlessness are manifestations of a mistaken belief that changing to some new state will end an unpleasant feeling. You thus experience the unpleasantness  of the sensation and react by attempting to change the situation.

How to deal with it:
Whenever I practice samatha meditation, I invariably experience what you've described above. To overcome it, I walk through a counting exercise I learned in Bhante Gunaranta's book "Beyond Mindfulness in Plain English". He recommends counting each in-out breath up to ten, then back down to one, then up to nine, then back down to one, then up to eight, etc. etc. until you reach one. Oh, and if you mess up, you need to re-establish your mindfulness, and start over :D

From personal experience, I've found that this method works very, very well. I am an inexperienced, impatient meditator, but this method -- when applied with mindfulness and self-honesty -- completely subdues the grosser manifestation of the hindrances for me.

Additional suggestions: Here is where your vipassana practice can and should bolster your samatha practice. Recognize the sensation objectively; recognize its impermanent nature, recognize that moving / shifting / getting up / etc won't truly eliminate the suffering within the experience, and recognize that there is not really a self behind the unpleasant experience -- it is merely an aggregation of perception resulting in you experiencing a hindrance to meditation. Through this process, you will calm the unpleasantness of the experience, and the hindrance will become subdued. Then you gently re-focus and proceed with the breath.


The Buddha was a realist who preached about reality as it is. Optimising is a mindset where one thinks that conditions are better than what they actually are. Pessimism is the opposite, where one thinks things are worse off than what they actually are. Realism is the middle ground where one accepts things for what they actually are, without undue focus on only the negative or positive aspects of reality. The Buddha Dhamma teachers to reality as it is a teachers a path to see reality as it is.


What are the commonalities between Jewish and Buddhist thought?

I'm glad to see my previous answer proved inspiring / thought-provoking.

Following up on that:
I'm speaking from the Jewish perspective, specifically the Hasidic perspective. My knowledge of Buddhism is pretty limited, so I will not really be able to give too many points, and I'm sure if you dig into my answers you find specifics that don't line up in the two faiths. I know that there are probably more points where Buddhism and Judaism differ strongly, noticeably when it comes to religious cosmology, attitudes towards deities/G-d, and views on an individual's purpose in life. The same is probably true for almost any two religions -- the specifics are often VERY different.

However, I do feel that Buddhism and Judaism have these broader themes in common:

The concept of an enlightened individual who serves as an exemplary model: In Judaism we have the Tzadik, akin perhaps to the Bodhisattva. Both are individuals who have attained a special degree of awareness about the reality of existence, which somehow "pulls them out" from the normal frame of reference perceived by normal humans. Both are truly selfless individuals (i.e. individuals devoid of personal ego), who possess the potential to abandon the confines of human existence, and yet who nonetheless persist in engaging in the human world for the sake of others. Both are individuals who attain a clarity of vision which gives them far deeper insight into the cosmic order.
An emphasis on self-refinement through specific practices: The laws (mitzvot) associated with Jewish observance are akin the Noble Eightfold Path, both of which provide the individual with a means to increase their spiritual refinement and sensitivity. Diverging from these practices is seen in both religions as only deepening our enslavement to the very things we wish to escape.
A strong emphasis on mental/intellectual cultivation as a means to promote righteous action: Particularly in the Hasidic movement Chabad-Lubavitch, with which I am affiliated, we place huge emphasis on training one's mental faculties to control the emotional faculties. The specifics of this abstract idea are of course complicated, but I find it VERY similar to the concept of Mindfulness, which promotes a rational, objective viewpoint that gives one the clarity to pursue true, meaningful things, while avoiding vain pursuits of personal passions. Mindfulness is a concept which I find so relevant to Jewish observance, that I've gained tremendous personal spiritual inspiration by incorporating it into my own worldview.

I suspect a large part of the reason why many Jews are involved in Buddhism, and one of the reasons I know I find Buddhism more "approachable" than other religions, is that Buddhism presents an extremely existential, personal, non-judgmental system, and human-oriented approach to spiritually, which does not immediately seem to conflict with Judaism's very concrete, objective presentation of a Deity-oriented reality.

Quoting Bhante Gunaratana from Mindfulness in Plain English (from which I have admittedly gotten almost all of my knowledge of Buddhism): "[Buddhism's] flavor is intensely clinical, much more akin to what we might call psychology than to what we would usually call religion." I suppose that "flavor" is less of a turn-off than that of another, say Abrahamic religion, all of which have very specific, belief-oriented models of the universe.

Hope this helps!


How can I be happy at other's happiness?

If you have a child then when your child is happy you are automatically happy, and that happiness you experience is 100% without holding back, that is because your love and compassion for your child is unconditional.  The same type of happy feeling you must get if your thoughts are pure towards others happiness.  Jealousy is the reason why you cannot feel 100% happiness for others when they are happy. You need to develop loving kindness and compassion towards others what we call Metta meditation.

Every day 30 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes in the evening you can practice Metta meditation. Find a suitable place - calm environment in your house. Sit and close your eyes and stay focus by saying a prayer, if you are a Christian say a prayer few times and bring your attention without allowing your mind to wonder, then when your mind is calm you say, "May I be well, May I be happy, may I be joy, may I be safe, may I be peaceful", repeat this three times, then you say the same but to your immediate love ones, "May my closest family and friends be well, may my closest family and friends be happy...", etc., three times, ( you must concentrate and have feelings when you are saying these words),  after that you say three times, "May my normal family and friends be well, may my normal family and friends be happy...", etc., last you say three times, "May my enemies be well, may my enemies be happy...", etc., finally you say, "May all beings in this cosmos be well, may all beings in this cosmos be happy, ...", etc, three times, then you start all over again from the beginning. When you start doing this for few months, you will gradually develop your loving kindness and compassion, you may see changes especially if you have a pet at home it helps, because every living being you must have compassion and loving kindness, you will soon start to have compassion towards even a cockroach and will not want to harm, you let it live and have compassion for it's misfortune of being born as a cockroach.

You must also learn to let go of things that you normally attach to, and it is easy to start with material things, eg, you might like to wear only expensive brands of clothes, you will need to change the mindset of not making yourself important by wearing ordinary not so expensive clothes, this is a way to change your mindset which helps you to let go of things.

You can gradually let go of other things little by little, until you feel there is no competition between you and others, until this happens your jealousy will not disappear, that means your happiness level to go up you need to gradually get rid of your jealousy ( which arises due to ego). You can gradually increase the times of your Metta meditation.

Wisdom what is discussed in Buddha Dharma is not the same kind of wisdom what the west talks about.

May you be happy and well


How a sotapanna person experiences the mind?

Maybe the simplest answer to this question is that a sotāpanna does experience the mind, whereas most people identify with the mind so strongly that they cannot experience it at all. They are immersed in their thoughts, emotions, and urges, and cannot effectively separate themselves from these mental conditions.

Someone is sotāpanna when they have eliminated the following three obstructions:

Self-view
Clinging to rites and rituals
Skeptical doubt

The first — the elimination of self-view — means that they have abandoned the idea that the self is intrinsically bound to the 'five aggregates': physical forms, feelings or sensations, perceptions, mind structures, and discriminative thinking. All of these still arise in a sotāpanna, but the sotāpanna realizes that these are not identical to him/herself. For instance, imagine a man who feels a sudden wave of hatred towards something. If he is unskilled he merely hates, with no qualifiers; if he has the skills of a sotāpanna he recognizes the hatred as something separate arising within his mind. He may still be controlled by it because his attachments are still strong, but he has created a certain spaciousness — a mental distance from the arising — that he can cultivate with further practice. As he progresses, this spaciousness grows and those arisings weaken.

Sotāpanna is just the first step, and there's no sense expecting the unconscious habits of a lifetime to fall away like dead leaves. So yes, dukkha and tanhā will still be there; the mind will still be filled with thoughts and feelings and urges. We have to get into the water first, and only after that can we start to learn how to swim. But getting into the water is an accomplishment.


There are a few others that I know of too ...

http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/
http://www.buddha-vacana.org/
https://obo.genaud.net/
https://84000.co/

... see also English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon (plus various books).
IMO the (translated) English words change (from one translation to the next), because a word of Pali might have a (narrow or broad) range of meanings, which might be translated (more or less well) by any of several English words.

I tend to use Ven. Sujato's translations, for example:

Go to https://suttacentral.net/sn56.11/en/sujato
Click on Setting (the gear-wheel icon) near the top of the page
Enable "View original text with translation" (e.g. "Line by line"), and "Activate Pali word lookup"

Then you see the (original) line of Pali next to each (translated) line of English.

You can hover (with the mouse, unless you're using a touch-screen) over a word of Pali, to see a popup translation/definition:

And click on the title word in that popup to go to the dictionary definition:

https://suttacentral.net/define/viharati

Eventually you get to recognise various words of Pali, which then have a meaning of their own to you. You'll notice on this site that people slip words of Pali into their text -- dukkha, dhamma, and so on -- because that's less confusing than using several different English translations for the same thing.

You can see the same happening in http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/maha/sn56-011.html -- i.e. the text on the right includes some Pali words untranslated, but you can hover or click on them for dictionary/glossary support.
The "Resources" on this site (see the navigation menu on the left side the home page) are a gentle introduction to some Pali words and phrases.

Piya Tan's (i.e. Dhammafarer) is interesting too what you want to study and not just read a sutta: because for some suttas he has written commentary; and read commentary (traditional and from modern authors) which he might summarise; and cross-references with other suttas, footnotes, etc.

I like the Search function on Access to Insight -- Access to Insight doesn't include all the suttas but it does include:

Essays by various authors (which a Search may find)
Some reference material (collections of sutta extracts) which I like, for example, A Path to Freedom -- A Self-guided Tour of the Buddha's Teachings.
Beginnings -- Suggested Entry Points to this Website.


Is it unethical to teach mindfulness for money?

I guess that what's taught as "mindfulness" probably isn't Buddhist Dharma -- for example:

  Sharf further notes that this [i.e. Buddhist mindfulness] has little to do with "bare attention," the popular contemporary interpretation of sati [i.e. the mindfulness which is taught by and to corporations], "since it entails, among other things, the proper discrimination of the moral valence of phenomena as they arise."

I think there are reasons why it's traditionally wrong to teach dharma for money -- for example:

Monks shouldn't
Lay people might be typically less able to teach Buddhism than monks or nuns are, and should respect (not try to replace) one of the functions of the Sangha which is teaching

Buddhism isn't very specific about what "right livelihood" is for lay people; but IMO it includes giving good value for money, not making fraudulent claims about the product or service.

IMO because they're not teaching Dharma (#1 above) so the normal reasoning (#2) isn't applicable.

It might be (but isn't necessarily) unethical for #3, e.g. if they make fraudulent (untrue) claims about the benefits of what they're teaching, or if they don't deliver (competently teach) what they promised.

On the other hand, many mindfulness centres in the west offer retreats in exchange for "suggested" donations.

The little experience I have of that is of a group of people renting a room in which to meet -- where a small amount of money per person was volunteered,  a collection to pay to rent the meeting room.


Can you meditate too much as part of a daily routine?

I'm sure you've heard the phrase "Practice like your hair is one fire"

However, one researcher was looking for people who had so-called "Dark Nights of the soul" experience, i.e. unpleasant experience with meditation. She found that

  "She identified two susceptible demographics: a) men, 18 to 30 years
  old, who go to Asia and do 10 to 20 hrs of meditation/day, and b)
  middle-aged women w/an hr/day practice who go to “say, Spirit Rock
  Meditation Center ... for the last 10 to 20 years”.

ref: http://beyondmeds.com/2014/02/16/dark-night-of-the-soul/

In the case of a lay follower, I don't think we need to go outside of Buddhism to answer the question-- your job will determine the upper bound to how much you can meditate, which I suppose is the whole motivation behind renunciation, to allow more time to meditate. For a lay follower with a day job, fitting in 3 hours a day and maybe more on a weekend (16 maybe?) seems to be the most you can get away with without re-arranging your lifestyle and job to crank up the number of hours.

Anyhow, in my opinion quality trumps quantity, I wish I had a good objective metric for monitoring quality.

Also, in my own practice I've been working on doing more different sorts of meditation, since I already sit on my butt at the office all day staring at a screen (sometimes with concentration, sometimes scatter brained). So I've been trying to mix in prostrations, chants, walking meditation, etc.


Vinaya Rule which prohibits on engaging in political activities

Bikkhu can advise laymen about  politics, for the example, see "Conditions of a Nation's Welfare" in mahāparinibbānasutta.

And saṅgha means "group of bikkhu".

Another, all virtual (sīla), keeping-sīla (ethic) and avoiding-sīla (precept), are politic because of "10 purposes of monastic legislation:for the lastingness of the true doctrine", so all advising about physical action & speech are politic, too.

However, bikkhu maybe offense vinaya, if the advising or action is wrong, conflicted with vinaya, such as ordering to kill or ordering to stole, etc.


Is it ok to eat after midnight after observing the 8 precepts?

No. It's also not a cheat, when one resolves to keep the Uposatha-precepts for one day, good householder. Sadhu. Nevertheless maybe taking the Buddhas further encouragements into consideration: Sakka Sutta: To the Sakyans (on the Uposatha)
(btw. day starts with sun rise, and eating at right time means from sun rise till sun at zenith, lesser a matter of time by clock as this could be differently.)


Could the Buddha have touched goal and gems in the 7 weeks after enlightenment

Essentially what you are asking is can / will a Buddha do something in contradiction to the Vinaya.
In the olden days the King is not under the law he imposes. Likewise, after forbidding miracles, the Buddha announced the he will perform the Twin Miracle. A King asked you just put a rule not to display miracles and you are just going to perform one. Then the Buddha pointed out like the King being exempt from his own rules the Buddha is exempt from the Vinaya rules, i.e., Vinaya rules are only for the disciples.
Assuming you are from Sri Lanka, this is there in the old syllabus Buddhism curriculum (which was in effect in the school leaving year of 1997). I forget what year, and the exact details, but likely year 10 text book.
In this context, though a monk cannot be in a chamber of gems the Buddha can. Having said this, the chamber of gems is also not real, as it is mind made through psychic powers. In such a case I do not think there is an issue for a monk prior to the forbidding of psychic power display. As in this case there were not witnesses hence, if a does this, in private it will still not break the rule of touching gold (it is not real - it is just a mind projected image). This is just my opinion, there might be other vinaya rules in play.

In addition this is not the traditional account:

The stone chamber and the stone seat (length 6.5 feet width 3 feet) made and offered to Buddha by King Muchalinda using the highest technology prevailed to that date are still exist there. Earlier it was called Ruwan Geya

More orthodox account of it is:

The Golden Bridge
In the third week, the Buddha saw through his mind’s eye that the devas in the heavens were not sure whether he had attained enlightenment or not. To prove his enlightenment the Buddha created a golden bridge in the air and walked up and down it for a whole week.
The Jewelled Chamber
In the fourth week, he created a beautiful jewelled chamber and sitting inside it meditated on what was later known as the "Detailed Teaching" (Abhidhamma). His mind and body were so purified that six coloured rays came out of his body — blue, yellow, red, white, orange and a mixture of these five. Today these six colours make up the Buddhist flag. Each colour represented one noble quality of the Buddha: yellow for holiness, white for purity, blue for confidence, red for wisdom and orange for desirelessness. The mixed colour represented all these noble qualities.
...
The Mucalinda Tree
The Buddha then went and meditated at the foot of a mucalinda tree. It began to rain heavily and a huge king cobra came out and coiled his body seven times around the Buddha to keep him warm and placed his hood over the Buddha’s head to protect him from the rain. After seven days the rain stopped and the snake changed into a young man who paid his respects to the Buddha. The Buddha then said:
"Happy are they who are contented. Happiness is for those who hear and know the truth. Happy are they who have good will in this world towards all sentient beings. Happy are they who have no attachments and have passed beyond sense-desires. The disappearance of the word "I AM " is indeed the highest happiness."

Life of the Buddha - Chapter 18: Seven Weeks After Enlightenment
The Jewelle Chamber is separate from the time under the Mucalinda Tree.


Managing sloth and torpor in meditation?

Mumonkan Case 16: When the Bell Sounds

  Unmon said, "The world is vast and wide.  Why do you put on your
  seven-piece robe at the sound of the bell?"

  Mumon's Comment

  In studying Zen, you should not be swayed by sounds and forms.  Even
  though you attain insight when hearing a voice or seeing a form, this
  is simply the ordinary way of things. Don't you know that the real Zen
  student commands sounds, controls forms, is clear-sighted at every
  event and free on every occasion?

  Granted you are free, just tell me: Does the sound come to the ear or
  does the ear go to the sound? If both sound and silence die away, at
  such a juncture how could you talk of Zen?  While listening with you
  ear, you cannot tell. When hearing with your eye, you are truly
  intimate.

  Mumon's Verse

  With realization, things make one family;  Without realization,
  things are separated in a thousand ways. Without realization,
  things make one family; With realization, things are separated in
  a thousand ways.

Medhini gives a good gloss of the traditional techniques for overcoming sloth/torpor.  Honestly, I'd try those first before moving into what I'm about to say.

One thing I've noticed in my own practice is that my own sloth and torpor is inversely proportional to my clarity of intention.  What I mean by that is sometimes we take up an object of meditation but don't fully commit to it.  We might focus on the tip of our nose, for instance, but never quite arouse a sense of clear intention.  Our vitaka - our applied thought - is more like someone lazily flopping on a bed.  We just sort of hang out there in a haze of comfortable, quasi-concentration.  And then we promptly fall asleep.

Instead, imagine the intention of a monk putting on his seven piece robe before sitting down for meditation.  Or take a look at this bloke doing some iado:

https://youtu.be/byAgl-b2xFs

That is how you want to approach your concentration object.  Command sound,
 control form!  Your breath is like a razor sharp sword.  Don't let it escape your attention for even a moment.  Handle it as if your life depended on it!


Were robes a factor in the spread of Buddhism?

In Theravada, robes may be made of six types of material, including linen, cotton, silk, wool, jute, or hemp (Mv.VIII.3.1). I've got a wool robe myself and it works fine in Canadian winters, so that shouldn't be a factor.

There may have been other geographic-based reasons, though; other aspects of monastic discipline might have made it difficult to practice the strict vinaya of the Theravada in colder climates, e.g. alms round, not-storing or cooking food for oneself, etc. Or, it may have been just by chance - kind of a "you go left, I'll go right" kind of thing.

One reason for Mahayana Buddhism spreading quicker might be the fact that it is generally-speaking easier to adapt to, since the focus is less on monastic discipline and more on engaged practice; in Zen Buddhism, for example, monks can drink alcohol and have wives, so much less adaptation is required for new practitioners. Tibetan Buddhism has spread mostly due to the humanitarian issues surrounding Tibet and the charisma of the Dalai Lama.

Another reason would probably be the Theravadin focus on attaining liberation in this life, a goal not easily accessible to the masses; the Bodhisatta path, while orders of magnitude more difficult in theory, can be relatively easy in practice.


How to acknowledge emotions and their consequences in day to day life?

I see you have accepted an answer but i feel like to add something because I can personally feel related.

  learnt to remove my lust for the human flesh, but not for the sexual act

Do yo mean like you learnt to let go of the ice but still desire its cooling property?

If so, that means you can let go of rupa (form) but stuck at kama sanna (perception of sensual pleasure).  Perception of grossness of body may not help with kama sanna because you are already above Rupa and dealing with something of a higher level.

So many ways to deal with kama sanna such as meditation.  I promise you it will help.

FYI: I recognize a pattern for terms Buddha used for satisfactory in sensual pleasures; kama chanda, kama raga, kama sanna, kama yogi.  Each has specific use and definitely not interchangeable.  For example, when Buddha taught about sensual pleasure in 5 hindrance, or jhanna, he would use kama chanda, or kama sanna.  Howerver, when he talked about higher fetters or an anagami, he would use kama raga or kama yogi.

For those who are interested in the difference between Kama Chanda (English-sensual desire), and kama raga (sensual lust): The Greater Discourse to Mālunkyāputta


How not to alter breathing in Anapana meditation?

A simple and natural way to relinquish breath obsessions is to count your breaths. This is a traditional Zen meditation practice that I still use 4 decades after I learned it. It works because it gives your grasping mind something to do. It's actually quite difficult to maintain a count. One has to relinquish distractions in order to not lose count. And that is actually why breath counting of any sort is initially effective.

With extended practice, the counting itself becomes a distraction since it engages the verbal processes. In the meditation practice guide of MN44, we have:

  MN44:17.2: “Verbal processes cease first, then physical, then mental.”

So to deepen the practice, we have to relinquish the numbers. One way to do so is to switch to something like prayer beads where the counting is relinquished while retaining the mindfulness of the passage of time. Or one can simply follow the breath in and out as recommended by the suttas.

Consult with a meditation teacher for individual advice on breathing.


Is there evidence of a Buddhist influence on Greek Stoicism?

It's hard to answer these kind of things with a negative but I'm going to be bold and do that with caveats. I haven't heard of Stoicism itself being directly influenced by Buddhism but.....

There is evidence that Indian Philosophy was influencing Greek philosophy

The founder of skepticism Pyrrho travelled with Alexander the Great into India and was said to have studied philosophy there. One of his subsequent central concerns was  ataraxia (freedom from worry) which to my mind seems to have parallels with the doctrine of liberation as espoused by Buddhism and other Eastern traditions

A specific example of an advocate of east/west cross pollination of ideas is Thomas McEvilley in his book the Shape of Ancient Thought. He contends that modern thought is actually influence by Eastern and Western traditions and there was a rich cross pollination of ideas. He goes right back to the Pre-Socratic and says that with the exception of Thales, these philosophers could (would???) have been influenced by Eastern though as mediated through the Persian Empire.

Looking at it the other way, the transfer of ideas certainly happened the other way around. The Questions of King Milander detail a dialog between a Buddhist Monk and a Indo-Greek king thought to have been Menander. So it's very evident that a dialog was happening between east and west.

So generally the conclusions could be that there was no direct influnce but if the Pre-Socratics and/or the Skeptics were being infuenced by Eastern thought then Stocism itself would have been influenced by those philosophies. The influences doesn't need to be direct to by present and relevant.

We might not/never know

We probably lack direct evidence for this kind of transfer from the Stoics in particular. Philosophers such as Aristole do name check their influences in their texts (and then go on to say why their own ideas were so much better). I'm not aware of any direct referencing to Buddhist or other Eastern traditions in Greek texts.

That said the transmission of ancient texts is clearly very incomplete. I find it fascinating that we have lost much (all??) of the work of Chrysippus one of the main Greek Stoic thinkers. I heard it said that if his works had have come down to us then Chrysippus would have been a philosopher know to us in the same way as Plotinus or even Plato and Aristole.

So that said the eveidence of direct influence could well be there. Given that writings of major thinkers in the Stoic tradition are lost it can't be said what else is in there.

It might not just be the Stoics

I'm personally not convinced that the Stoics would be the best candidates for a heavy Buddhist influence. There is a lot in Stoicism such as their logic and physics that I would struggle to fit into this framework. To my (naive) mind the Skeptics have more similarities or even the Neoplatonic thinkers or even the Pythagoreans. I could even make a (bad) argument for Epicuricans if we consider the central place of spiritual community - though that's really pushing it to an almost crazy extent.


Which Buddha do Buddhists take refuge in?

I think both interpretations should be somewhat intertwined and doesn't need to be clearly distinguished. See, you'll not say 'I only take refuge in Gautama Buddha, but not Buddhahood', or 'I will take refuge only in Buddhahood, but not Gautama Buddha', both of these sounds weird. Buddha Gautama represents Buddhahood, so we can not separate Him from Buddhahood.

Abhidharmakosa-bhasya of Vasubandhu explains taking refuge in Buddha like this:

  They who take refuge in the Buddha, take refuge in the factors
  (dharma) of the perfected being (arhat) that constitute a Buddha
  (buddhakāraka), the factors that are the causes of the designation
  “Buddha” [buddhaprajñaptihetūn], i.e., the factors due to which, as a
  principal cause, a certain person is called Buddha; or else the
  factors through the acquisition of which a certain person,
  understanding all entities, is called Buddha. These factors are (1)
  the cognition of exhaustion (kṣayajñāna), (2) the cognition of
  non-arising (anutpādajñāna), and (4) right view (samyagdṛṣṭi) (vi. 50,
  67), (4) with the factors that accompany (parivāra) these cognitions
  (jñāna), i.e., with the five pure aggregates (skandha).

  As for the material body (rūpakāya) of the Buddha, it is not
  subject to modification through the acquisition of the status of
  Buddha. Thus, one does not take refuge in the material body of the
  Buddha, which is, in fact, the material body of the Bodhisattva.

  [Question:] – Does one take refuge in all the Buddhas or in one
  Buddha? [Answer:] – According to the nature of entities [lakṣaṇatas],
  and in the absence of an explicit declaration (kaṇṭhokti), [one takes
  refuge] in all the Buddhas, for the Buddhas have always followed the
  same path, (1) a mundane (laukika) path and (2) a supramundane
  (lokottara) path (vii. 34).  [Lodrö Sangpo translation.]


Does accepting duality lead only to nondual skillfull qualities?

This question is a wonderful one. What should be defined and addressed in order to clear up your confusion is this:

What defines a “skillful” quality?

In classical Buddhism, something is skillful if it leads you closer to enlightenment. But why are experiences such as jealousy, pride, hate, and anger unskillful? All of these emotions enhance and reinforce a belief in duality. When you are jealous, you (someone separate) desire something they (someone separate) wants. Every unskillful experience arises because of a belief in separateness. It is only through observing first hand that the belief in duality is an illusion that we can be truly free.

It seems from your question, you believe that actions can be positive or negative. It is important to remember positive and negative are born from desire. No action or object is inherently “good” or “bad”. What makes something positive or negative is our own desires and orientation towards those experiences. Here are two examples to illustrate this.

The sky is blue. Most would say the sky being blue is neutral. If I wished more than anything in the world the sky was always orange, I would suffer most of the time, but find some peace during sunsets. If I desired the sky to be blue, it would bring me much joy most of the time, but I would suffer during sunsets.

All things are inherently neutral. Killing an animal for food is only a negative action if you don’t want to kill animals. If you are a vegan, you suffer while doing it. If you are a hunter, it brings you joy while doing it.

  Can we cry consciously can we kill consciously ?

This is exactly what enlightenment is. Right now, because you believe yourself to be a separate entity observing the world, you see many things that are not. Killing and crying are illusions. To someone who has not yet observed Nirvana, killing and crying are interpreted as painful actions that cause suffering. But when you see beyond the illusion, you will find that very same suffering doesn’t arise from killing and crying, but from the belief that there is someone present that is being harmed. Once you experience Nirvana first hand, it becomes clear that the only thing here is Nirvana. There is no you. There is no I. There is no killing. There is no crying. There is only peace.

I hope these words have been helpful to you on your path. I pray for nothing more than your liberation this lifetime.


Would an advanced practitioner ever stop meditating?

If we take the Buddha & his disciples as an example, I would say, no. I would also not see a reason why. In the texts, the jhānas are referenced as pleasant abidings here-&-now and that is what the arahats do.

  "Bhikkhus, if wanderers of other sects ask you: 'In what dwelling,
  friends, did the Blessed One generally dwell during the rains
  residence?'-being asked thus, you should answer those wanderers thus:
  'During the rains residence, friends, the Blessed One generally dwelt
  in the concentration by mindfulness of breathing.'"
  ...
  "Those bhikkhus who are arahants, whose taints are destroyed, who have
  lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden,
  reached their own goal, utterly destroyed the fetters of existence, those completely
  liberated through final knowledge: for them concentration by
  mindfulness of breathing, when developed and cultivated, leads
  to a pleasant dwelling in this very life and to mindfulness and
  clear comprehension."
  -SN 54.11, At Icchanangala

  But having heard that Dhamma, those bhikkhus who are arahants, whose
  taints are destroyed, who have lived the spiritual life, done what had
  to be done, laid down the burden, reached their own goal, utterly
  destroyed the fetters of existence, and are completely liberated
  through final knowledge, are devoted simply to a pleasant dwelling in
  this very life.
  -AN 9.4, Nandaka

  And how does the disciple of the noble ones obtain at will — without
  trouble or difficulty — the four jhanas that constitute heightened
  awareness and a pleasant abiding in the here-&-now? There is the case
  where, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful
  mental qualities, the disciple of the noble ones enters & remains in
  the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied
  by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed
  thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana:
  rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free
  from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the
  fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses
  pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of
  which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant
  abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier
  disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the
  fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor
  pain. This is how the disciple of the noble ones obtains at will —
  without trouble or difficulty — the four jhanas that constitute
  heightened awareness and a pleasant abiding in the here-&-now.
  -MN 53, The Practice for One in Training


Is the experience of suffering or enjoyment completely reducible to physics e.g. such as in materialist views i.e. materialism?

Your question is quite interesting because it starts out with an openness regarding identity view. Awesome! You ask about what is and are puzzled at the rise of feelings pleasant, painful or neutral. You ask whether we have experimental evidence for such feelings and equations for them. Indeed, you might well be asking for the wave equation for "self" or "consciousness".

An interesting read that delves into the five grasping aggregates is SN22.80 With Khemaka. Khemaka is gravely ill, perhaps dying, and the monks are very worried for him. So they keep pestering him with Dhamma questions in an effort to rouse him and cheer him up.

  Reverend Khemaka, the seniors say that these five grasping aggregates have been taught by the Buddha, that is:
  the grasping aggregates of form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness. Do you regard anything among these five grasping aggregates as self or as belonging to self?’

This Dhamma dialogue is relayed by poor Reverend Dāsaka, who runs back and forth between Khemaka and the senior monks, relaying questions and answers again and again.

Finally, the exasperated Khemaka rouses himself from his almost deathbed and limps over to the senior monks. And what he says is quite remarkable:

  For when it comes to the five grasping aggregates I’m not rid of the conceit ‘I am’. But I don’t regard anything as ‘I am this’.

Regarding the nature of physical forces, I think that might be a simple confusion here resulting from the inadequacy of terminology. The attraction of two masses to each other is a nature of space-time, not the ephemeral "I love you, love you not" that the Buddha addresses. The Buddha addresses suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering and the path to that cessation. Without physics.

To understand suffering (dukkha), we are given the rather perplexing:

  Everything this individual experiences—pleasurable, painful, or neutral—is because of past deeds.

However, for those seeking deeper causes, we have in MN1, that

  Delight is the root of suffering

This small phrase (Nandī dukkhassa mūlan’ti) is the E=mc2 of MN1, The Root of All Things. This is the canonical statement of the "I love you, I love you not" dilemma. Yet it goes much deeper, since we are led to explore further into how nandī generates dukkhassa. And THAT is dependent origination (search SE Buddhism).

On a side note, physics is the science of modeling the physical for predictability. Per DN33, there are three ways to see and study the world with:

  the eye of the flesh, the eye of clairvoyance, and the eye of wisdom. --DN33

If we say that physics is the second, let us consider that Buddhism is the third. Remember that physics gave us Hiroshima. Buddhism has a different goal. The ending of suffering.


How to develop energy, rapture, tranquility and immersion?

There's a whole samyutta dedicated to the description and analysis of the Bojjhanga in the Connected Discourses (see Bojjhanga Samyutta). Also check out Ven. Piyadassi's great "Seven Factors of Enlightenment"


There are at least two suttas (AN 4.94 & AN 10.54) that refer to vipassana without samatha. However, personally, I don't believe them. Suttas such as the 2nd sermon (SN 22.59) & the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) say the seeing of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self results in dispassion (viraga). Therefore, if the mind has dispassion (viraga), obviously it must also have tranquility (samatha); because "viraga" means "without lust". Further, those suttas also say  dispassion (viraga) results in nirodha (cessation).


It is not correct.

As Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena says in this post (Does contemplation activity, before hand, give rise to the mental image?) in this context, nimitta (that we usually translate as sign) refers to a mental image. In case of concentrating on the breath, it says it resembles white light.

But the measure of achieving an access level is not just that, for the mental image of the breath is found way before, according to Abhidharma. Before the access level, there is samatha, and the measure of achieving samatha are physical and mental pliancy, and physical and mental bliss. As long as these pliancy and bliss are not present, you can be sure you have not obtained samatha, much less the access level. That pliancy is the direct antidote to laziness, which means that one can at last meditate for as long as he wishes without experiencing discomfort (no more backache, no more unwilling mind that you feel you can not bend, etc).

You should not actively seek for these (pliancy, bliss, and even the finding of the mental image of  the breath) because it will make your mind tight and narrow. We do not meditate just to cultivate more attachment. Rather, you should count on ethical discipline, contentment, few desire, the lack of many discursive thoughts, regular and repetitive practice, and an understanding of the Dharma to lead you there eventually.


Which Buddhist traditions have no gender divisions at all

Our branch of Rinzai Zen has no gender division other than that we segregate by sex when bunking up for sesshin.  I can’t think of too many Buddhist communities in the US that would even consider that, quite frankly.  I think the group you’re with would be the exception in the West, at least.


Insight meditation is what you ultimately strive at. You can start with Samadhi and progress to insight.

When getting instructions for Samadhi meditation it is best you get this from a competent teacher who can guide you. Have a look at the World Buddhist Directory to see if you can locate some on in your area: http://www.buddhanet.info/wbd/. If you want to try out using Anapana to develop Samadhi and them progress to Vippassana perhaps you can also try out a course at: https://www.dhamma.org/en/index. (There are over 200 centres world wide.)

In case you are in the receptive area some relevant centres maybe (check if the do the type of Samatha mediation you want to practice):

http://bhavanasociety.org/
http://www.dhammasukha.org/
http://www.dhammatalks.org/
http://www.imsb.org/ (Though the name suggests insight the teacher is from Pa Auk tradition hence competent to teach Samatha)
http://cms.bswa.org.au/
http://www.amaravati.org/
http://www.samatha.org/


Where is the story that Buddha was worried about a monk who meditated with a straight back?

I've heard Ajahn Brahm tell this story during a lecture which was recorded on YouTube, so I can confirm it's definitely told by him; however I don't remember which one it was.
The story is not (strictly) in the suttas. It is probably (very loosely) based on AN 6.42, and deals more with the disturbances of nearby lay life as opposed to the wilderness.

Nagita, there is the case where I see a monk sitting in concentration in a village dwelling. The thought occurs to me, 'Soon a monastery attendant will disturb this venerable one in some way, or a novice will, and rouse him from his concentration.' And so I am not pleased with that monk's village-dwelling.
But then there is the case where I see a monk sitting, nodding, in the wilderness. The thought occurs to me, 'Soon this venerable one will dispel his drowsiness & fatigue and attend to the wilderness-perception, [his mind] unified.' And so I am pleased with that monk's wilderness-dwelling.

So in this sutta it looks more like he's worried about the auspiciousness of the environment rather than the current condition in which a monk  dwells, and his being pleased is based on his assumption that the monk will soon generate right effort, and not that he'll be heedless.
However, I think it's important to stress that Ajahn Brahm's purpose for telling this story, regardless of where he had heard it, were probably that he has many lay followers which come to the practice with high expectations for quick results. He has to teach people how to give themselves some breathing space first - and that, I believe, he does very well.


What practices are included in (daily lay) life for a Buddhist?

Yes, it is the five precepts on normal days and 8 precepts on Poya days. Apart from that, do meditation and good deeds whenever there's an opportunity. Or simply come up with plans to avail opportunities to do good deeds. Just like how we normally plan or devise ways to gain sensual pleasures.


Why are the psychological forces that stop us from attaining Nibbana greater/stronger than those propel us towards Nibbana?

Instinct (refer to  AN 7.11). The Earth today has 7.7 billion people plus zillions of animals, insects, fish & other life forms. This whole Earth is created by lust & craving (refer to SN 12.44). Basically, each creature is born from reproduction for the purpose to further engage in reproduction. It goes on & on like this, endlessly for the unenlightened (refer to SN 15.1), until the Earth burns up.


Does our conventional body belong to the external sense bases?

OP: If we look at our own hand, leg, or any other conventional body part or if we touch and feel our own conventional body, do all
these belong to the external sense bases?

Yes, if we see, hear, smell, taste or feel parts of the body, then those are experienced, hence they are a part of the external sense bases. They are part of "form".

OP: If the answer is "yes" to the first part of the question, which elements (rūpa) are included in internal?

No form elements are part of the internal sense bases, because the internal sense bases are part of "name", not "form" - they are related to feeling and contact.
The internal sense bases are the mental interfaces to the physical senses, from my understanding.
From MN 137:

‘The six interior sense fields should be understood.’ That’s what I
said, but why did I say it? There are the sense fields of the eye,
ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. ‘The six interior sense fields
should be understood.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I said it.
‘The six exterior sense fields should be understood.’ That’s what I
said, but why did I say it? There are the sense fields of sights,
sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and thoughts. ‘The six exterior sense
fields should be understood.’ That’s what I said, and this is why I
said it.

From SN 12.2:

And what is feeling? There are these six classes of feeling. Feeling
born of contact through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind.
This is called feeling.
And what is contact? There are these six classes of contact. Contact
through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. This is called
contact.
And what are the six sense fields? The sense fields of the eye, ear,
nose, tongue, body, and mind. These are called the six sense fields.
And what are name and form? Feeling, perception, intention, contact,
and attention. This is called name. The four primary elements, and
form derived from the four primary elements. This is called form. Such
is name and such is form. These are called name and form.


Does everyone need to sit, even zen masters, especially according to Soto zen?

When you don't have "scattered thoughts" whenever you are doing something, you're doing it fully immersed. Everybody has had periods of absolute involvement.

Obviously everybody has thoughts, it's just a matter of Distance from them.

As a matter of tradition and to set an example to everyone, everybody sits. I think even the founder Dōgen Zenji, sat till the very end. I'd even go so far as to say, if some people sit and some don't need to, then there's something wrong with the tradition and has some biases.

Also some accomplished masters just sit peacefully/blissfully. Let's say you have mastered a good amount of distance between yourself and thoughts, you will be able to sit peacefully. And that would be a pleasure (not the material pleasure, just bliss). Hence you would just sit naturally. I hope I made myself clear.


What's the buddhist stance on cognitive behavioral therapy?

Is it a good idea to expose yourself to situations that trigger fear and anxiety and use meditation to get through it [?]

Maybe -- and it depends on what you mean by "meditation". But since the context is about CBT, I'm not sure this would be advised, specially without professional assistance.

  or is the desire to overcome fear and anxiety "bad" because it's technically a desire?

Desires for well being, for good, and further aspirations are not considered "bad", on the contrary. In Buddhism, two technical terms for things we strive to overcome are craving (pali taṇhā) and clinging (pali upādāna). These are specific kinds of desire that present problems.

  (And fear and anxiety are only temporary states anyway and should be recognized for being just that.)

Indeed, they should. But again, in context of CBT, I don't think recognizing the temporariness of such things are usually enough for remission.

  Would it even be possible to meditate through a triggering situation since one wouldn't be calm enough to see clearly in such a situation?

Again, it depends on what you mean by "meditation". If you mean bringing up attention and mindfulness, calming the breath and "observing", yes, naturally.

Of course, the success will mostly depend on one's skill, and how strong these fears and anxieties are. Thus, if the former is weak and the later are strong, intentionally putting oneself in such situations where more harm can be done is probably a bad idea.

  To put it more simply: could meditation be used as a substitute for CBT?

As someone who is not a doctor, but only familiar with DBT (a form of CBT) and who was close to people with disorders who relied on such therapy: hardly. While "mindfulness meditation" is considered an important and integral practice in the process, I personally think is nowhere near an adequate substitute of the entire therapy program. I also don't know of any research suggesting the remission efficacy of disorders with meditation only vs. CBT (or DBT).

  If not, does Buddhism encourage or discourage CBT?

I don't see anything in these therapies that would present a dilemma  with the Buddha's teachings.


Signlessness seems to be contradictory to Buddhism

As I understand it, in Mahayana, signlessness (animitta) has nothing to do with omens. To quote Wikipedia,

  Signlessness refers to the fact that phenomena seem to possess their
  apparent qualities by way of their own nature, but when one examines
  this appearance one realizes that all qualities are merely mentally
  imputed and not a part of the nature of the objects they appear to
  characterize.

Basically, signlessness means not getting caught into traps of abstractions. This is based on clear understanding that real world is infinitely more nuanced and multifaceted than any concept, however precise, can ever dream to capture. There is an infinite number of alternative ways of describing the world -- each valid in its own context.

The notion of signlessness is related to aniketa-cārī (usually translated as "wandering without a home" but having a broader meaning in Mahayana) -- the practice of "non-abiding", or not settling on any single conceptual, metaphysical, or philosophical base.


Is it easiest to pursue/attain Nirvana as a human?

According to the Buddhist cosmology, a human being has the best advantages to become enlighten.

  It is not intrinsically marked by extremes of happiness or suffering, but all the states of consciousness in the universe, from hellish suffering to divine joy to serene tranquility can be experienced within the human world.

For being in the lower realms:

  Among the lower realms, Pretas (aka hungry ghosts), and dwellers in the Narakas (Buddhist hell(s)) are gripped by pain and fear, and can only endure their lot but cannot better themselves. Animals are intellectually unable to understand the Dharma in full.

For being in the upper realms:

  Most of the Brahmas and Devas simply enjoy reaping the fruits of their past actions and think that they are immortal and forever to be happy and so they don't try to practice the Dharma.

However in addition, when the Dhamma teaching is no longer available in the human world, some of the upper realms may still abundant with being knows Dhamma and still possibly attend nirvana.

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_beings_in_Buddhism


This is through maintaining Sati, Samadhi and Sampajanna it self.

1st one should keep your mindfulness in the 4 Frames of Reference. You should have Sampajanna in the following way:

  purpose (sātthaka): refraining from activities irrelevant to the path.
  suitability (sappāya): pursuing activities in a dignified and careful manner.
  domain (gocara): maintaining sensory restraint consistent with mindfulness.
  non-delusion (asammoha): seeing the true nature of reality (see three characteristics).

Source: Sampajañña also see The Four Sampajanna by VRI, Sampajanna by VRI, Sampajanna-the Constant Thorough Understanding of Impermanence by VRI,
 Sampajañña: The Fullness of Understanding - by S. N. Goenka, The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna by VRI

Though arise due to sensory input. Perhaps you can try to restrict distraction by non reaction to the sensory input, which is to maintain the domain, and also be non deluded by at least seeing arising and passing nature of the experience. Also if the thought that district you are not related to the path you can abandon them. More on this see Vitakka Saṇṭhāna Sutta. Also be careful there is no lapse of mindfulness which might lead to unwholesome
 or unsuitable thought to arise.

To quiet your active mind perhaps you can try out developing the Jhana factors. Saṅkhitta Dhamma Sutta. If initial and sustained application is developed within the 4 Frames of Reference this also you are keeping to the domain, purpose, doing what is suitable and non deluded, while also getting and handle on the distracting thoughts through concentration.

To apply this to daily activities always see it your mind is with the 4 Frames of Reference periodically, with initial and sustained application, contemplating the at least impermanence of the of the three characteristics, as you go through your daily activities.


First thing, you shouldn't be relying on B. Sujato's translation for meditation specific terms. He has gross misunderstandings of key words like kāya (physical body), rūpa (in meditation context, usually means 4 elements of physical body of meditator). So in his translation, he inconsistently translates rupa sometimes as 'physical form', sometimes as 'vision', according to his wrong understanding of jhana and arupa samadhi.
Going by a straightforward, and correct EBT interpretation, 'rupa' translates consistently as 'physical form of  the anatomical body made up of 4 elements and 6 sense bases active - you can see, hear, touch, etc.'
So the first base of liberation (vimutti), having form (rupa) and seeing form is referring to the point of view of being in the 4 jhanas, where the 6 sense bases of the physical body are active.
The second base of liberation, one is in an a-rupa (form-less) samadhi attainment, you are in a meditative state where you can't perceive your own physical form of body anymore, can't hear sounds, 6 sense bases are divorced from the mind. But you can perceive external forms, for example seeing visions of the rupa (form, 4 elements) of external world, other beings, etc.


The Gelug tradition expounds on the following five types of meditation.

You find here teachings (for free) related to Tsongkhapa's Middle-Length Lam Rim. They must cover the first, second and third types of the five types of meditation I list below. They were given by my teacher.

You also have the possibility to subscribe to the FPMT Online Basic Program. It provides with study material on twelve subjects. You can chose which subject(s) you wish to study. Again, the Stages of the Path (Lam Rim) module relates to the first, second and third of the 5 types of meditation listed below, while the Ornament for Clear Realization, Ch 4 relates to the practice of the four placements (as well as to actual vipassana, meditation on emptiness).

The five types of meditation you find in the Gelug tradition are:

Of the type of Vipassana (i.e. analytical), but not actual vipassana
Most Lam Rim topics are objects of such analytical meditations.
Ani Karin Valham (a quiet inspiring nun and teacher from Kopan, ordained for almost 40 years now) wrote outlines called beginner's meditation guide. It's best is you already know Tsongkhapa's Middle-Length or Greater Lam Rim text. There are other Lam Rim such as Atisha's Lamp for the path to enlightenment and so forth.
Calm Abiding (non-analytical)
In Tibetan tradition, we cultivate calm abiding mostly by focusing on a [mental image of] the body of the Buddha. Not so much on one's breath. Tsongkhapa's Lam Rim Chen Mo, volume 3, explains the practice. Commentaries on this are:
- Samatha Meditation, by Gen Lamrimpa.
- Balancing the Mind, by Alan Wallace.
- Study and Practice of Meditation, Leah Zahler.
- Gyaltsab Je's Explanation: Ornament of the Essence Chapter 1
Actual Vipassana (i.e. analytical meditation on emptiness)
As commentaries to the 2nd part of the 3rd volume of Tsongkhapa's Lam Rim Chen Mo, the FPMT advises these:
- Tsongkhapa's Final Exposition of Wisdom.
- Insight into Emptiness, by Khensur Tegchok
- Meditation on Emptiness, by Jeffrey Hopkins.
- Emptiness Yoga, by Jeffrey Hopkins.
Four Placements (close to Sathipattana, but not as elaborated as the typically Theravadin practice)
- Maitreya's Ornament of clear Realization (and commentaries by Haribhadra, Gyaltsab Je, etc)
For further study, the four placements are the first of the 37 aids to Enlightenment (Skt.: bodhipakṣa dharma)
Mahamudra
It is meditation of the conventional nature of the mind (clear light - or 'clear and knowing') and its ultimate nature. Exercises such as 'the mind like a mirror', or 'the mind like the sky', or 'four placements without an anchor' are preliminaries to it. One can study The Gelug/Kagyu Tradition of Mahamudra from H.H. the Dalaï-Lama & Alexander Berzin. Mahamudra is divided into two: (1) sutra and (2) tantra.


I think that what is taught to children about a "universal monarch" -- together with The Legendary Account of the Four Sights, in the Introduction to the Jâtaka -- is that the prince Siddhattha might have been one (and that his father wanted him to become a ruler), and that he chose not to be:

Seven of these raised two fingers each, and gave a double interpretation, saying, "If a man possessing such marks and characteristics continue in the household life, he becomes a Universal Monarch; if he retire from the world, he becomes a Buddha." And then they set forth all the glory of a Universal Monarch.
But the youngest of them all, a youth whose clan-name was Kondañña, after examining the splendid set of marks and characteristics on the person of the Future Buddha, raised only one finger, and gave but a single interpretation, saying, "There is here naught to make him stay in the household life. He will most undoubtedly become a Buddha, and remove the veil of ignorance and folly from the world." For this Kondañña was one who had made an earnest wish under former Buddhas, and was now in his last existence. Therefore it was that he outstripped the other seven in knowledge, and saw but one future; inasmuch as a person possessed of such marks and characteristics would never stay in the household life, but would undoubtedly become a Buddha. So he raised only one finger, and gave that interpretation.

So at least one of the requirements for that "achievement" is to "stay in the household life".

Wikipedia says,

The first references to a Chakravala Chakravartin appear in monuments from the time of the Maurya Empire (322–185 BCE), dedicated to Chandragupta Maurya and his grandson Ashoka. In Buddhism, the Chakravarti came to be considered the secular counterpart of a Buddha.

I guess that the conceit (of comparing "universal monarch" and "Buddha") might have been consolation and/or flattery for the emperor, or perhaps just good advice for the emperor.
The biographies (including birth, achievements, etc.) of Chandragupta Maurya and of Ashoka are also linked on Wikipedia -- see especially Conquest of Kalinga & Buddhist conversion but also Buddhist kingship.


Difference between Yoniso Manasikāra and Sammā sati with Sampajaññā

Yoniso manasikara is investigating or examining something for the purpose of either newly or thoroughly understanding it. For example:

SN 45.62 says yonisomanasikara is the forerunner and precursor for the arising of the Noble Eightfold Path; therefore yonisomanasikara is also the forerunner and precursor for the arising of the 7th factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, namely, sammāsati.

Similarly, AN 10.61 says: "Hearing the good Dhamma... fills up careful attention; careful attention... fills up mindfulness and clear comprehension". Again, yonisomanasikara operates prior to sati-sampajanna.

Similarly, DN 18 says: "After some time they hear the teaching of the noble ones, properly attend to how it applies to them & practice accordingly. So aparena  samayena ariyadhammaṃ suṇāti, yoniso manasi karoti, dhammānudhammaṃ paṭipajjati". Then, later on, DN 18 refers to the four satipaṭṭhānā.

Iti 16 says: "in regard to internal factors, I do not perceive another single factor so helpful as wise attention (yonisomanasikaro) for a bhikkhu who is a learner".

SN 12.10 provides an example where yoniso manasikara was used to discover dependent origination. Since dependent origination remained unknown or undiscovered, sati-sampajana could not be used because sati-sampajanna only brings to mind preexisting knowledge

While MN 95 does not use the term 'yonisomanasikara', it provides a similar explanation when it says: "Next, they place faith in them. When faith has arisen they approach the teacher. They pay homage, lend an ear, hear the teachings, remember the teachings, reflect on their meaning (upaparikkhato) and accept them after consideration."

Sati-sampajanna is the bringing to mind and keeping in mind past learned or realised knowledge/wisdom to a specific present situation. This is indicated in SN 45.62 & SN 45.62 quote above or otherwise unambiguously explained in SN 46.3 & MN 117 quoted below:

When one has heard the Dhamma from such bhikkhus one dwells withdrawn
by way of two kinds of withdrawal—withdrawal of body and withdrawal of
mind. Dwelling thus withdrawn, one recollects that Dhamma and thinks
it over. Whenever, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwelling thus withdrawn
recollects that Dhamma and thinks it over, on that occasion the
enlightenment factor of mindfulness is aroused by the bhikkhu; on that
occasion the bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness;
on that occasion the enlightenment factor of mindfulness comes to
fulfilment by development in the bhikkhu.

One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right
view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right view.
One is mindful to abandon wrong resolve & to enter & remain in right
resolve: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right resolve.
One is mindful to abandon wrong speech & to enter & remain in right
speech: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right speech.
One is mindful to abandon wrong action & to enter & remain in right
action: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities —
right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run & circle around
right action.
One is mindful to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter & remain in
right livelihood: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three
qualities — right view, right effort & right mindfulness — run &
circle around right livelihood.
Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the
forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In
one of right resolve, 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 release comes into being.  Thus the learner is
endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten.

In summary, SN 45.62 says yonisomanasikara is the forerunner for the arising of the Noble Eightfold Path. Where as MN 117 says sammasati is the 7th factor of the Noble Eightfold Path.
I will end with an example:

When the mind is ignorant, it does not understand not referencing quotes is not only theft (plagiarism), but it also causes trouble for others. Therefore, such an ignorant mind must examine & reflect repeatedly until it understands the harm, evil, sinfulness & wickedness of not referencing quotes. This is the use of yonisomanasikara.

Where as a mind with wisdom that knows referencing quotes is beautiful behaviour, may occasionally forget to reference a quote. Such a mind will quickly rectify this mistake using mindfulness & clear-comprehension. There is no need for this mind to use yonisomanasikaro because it has already understood the dhammic significance of the matter thoroughly.


Wearing a bracelet to remind me to be mindful ... is it a good idea ?
from previous attempt it seemed useful for a day maybe two but than i get used to wearing the bracelet and i dont notice im wearing it

I guess your past experience shows this is not very useful

What are your thoughts about doing this practice - is it useful ? are there other ways to remind yourself to be mindful ?

Relying on external tools may not be the most optimal but if it helps why not.

anything someone wants to add about this subject is appreciated

When your mind wonders away be extra mindful when you bring your attention back. Look at a few breaths with sustained attention. Do a few body scans with sustained attention.
When your mind goes you bring your mind back to an object. Similarly even when your mind is on the chosen object you can repeal the re direction of the mind to the object continuously as if when initially brining the mind to the object.
This practice will help make your mindfulness stick to the chosen object.
Also as a mode of preliminary practice you can:

scan you body zig zag quickly alternating the side.
quickly alternating at the base of each nostril

This helps you redirect your attention to an chosen object like the breath continuously after initially brining to attention to it. Once you have some reasonable practice just target a chosen object repeatedly, even though you mind is not wondering away. One your mind get "sticky" with the object you an stop the continuous redirection.


Is moderate drinking acceptable in Buddhism?

The application of the fifth precept is a matter of controversy even within specific traditions, so there is no simple yes/no answer to this question.

The Tibetan tradition famously incorporates alcohol in the bi-monthly ceremony known as tsog (see Lama Thubten Yeshe's "What is Tsog?"). Lama Palden Drolma's opinion on the matter seems to summarize well the thinking in the Tibetan tradition:

  To refrain from taking intoxicants is one of the primary vows that
  laypeople may take and that monastics have to uphold. One of the main
  reasons for not becoming intoxicated is that this can—and often does—
  lead to breaking other vows or straying from one’s integrity. Another
  reason for not becoming intoxicated is that for many, intoxication
  obscures the clarity of mind— the clarity to understand and rest in
  one’s true nature moment to moment. If one’s mind has stabilized in
  true nature to the extent that its clarity is never obscured, then it
  makes no difference whether one takes in substances or not.

  From the point of view of the dharma training I was given, it is
  permissible, even having taken this vow, as a layperson, to enjoy a
  glass of wine occasionally. A distinction is made between
  intoxication, where one’s clarity is compromised, and simply enjoying
  partaking of a substance. I also do not feel that occasionally
  utilizing a substance for transformational work is an obstacle to
  awakening. It may be helpful—but honest discernment and consultation
  is needed if one engages in this way, so that one does not fool
  oneself and go astray. [Source]


Very much not the case, so long as you don't engage in a No true Scotsman fallacy and say that they aren't really Buddhists unless they are also vegetarian.

In some traditions it is common for a begging monk to eat whatever is put in their offering bowl, mixing it together first (see the interview with Achaan Chaa in Living Dharma).

For laypeople the provision is against engaging in the business of meat as it says in Vanijja Sutta, AN 5:177:

  "Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business.
  Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in
  meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.

  "These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not
  engage in."

There's little that I am aware of, at least from the Pali Canon, that addresses meat eating for laypeople. Even monks get a pass in some circumstances on this as well, as it says in The Bhikkhus' Rules: A Guide for Laypeople:

  The Buddha did allow bhikkhus to eat meat and fish[88] except under
  the following circumstances:

    If a bhikkhu sees, hears or suspects that it has been killed for him,
    he may not eat it.[89] (M.I,369)

This is clarified with footnote 90 with the following cited quote:

  The flesh of animals which have been slaughtered to sell as meat for
  the people, however, is called 'flesh which exists already.' [It] has
  been slaughtered for their meat to be used for food by one person or
  by a group of people, apart from fellow Dhamma friends, or specially
  for the butcher himself… If people cook such meat and offer it to a
  bhikkhu, [it] will not be an offence to accept and eat it.

Citing The Entrance to the Vinaya, (Vinayamukha), volume 2, pages 131—133.

It should be emphasized that these are predominantly guidelines for monks, not for lay practitioners.

This gets further modified depending on the specific tradition. His Holiness 17th Gyalwang Karmapa, simply try to lessen the amount of impact or the amount of meat eaten, and I have seen quite a few Vajrayana practitioners eat meat.

Many other sects have de-emphasized the need for vegetarianism depending on the local conditions and the history of that specific sect.

Basically: Even among monks the following of vegetarianism is not absolute and it isn't even clear that restrictions on that order exist for lay followers in a lot of different Buddhist traditions.


Anapanasati: Mindful Breathing Concentration Point

You can feel anyone of them, but you have to use one of them for whole your meditation.  I prefer breath. First you have to notice that you are inhaling when inhale and you have to notice that you are exhaling when you exhale.  When you do that you may feel lot of things: pain in legs, scratches, mosquito bite like feelings.  Just ignore them at once and make sure before you start meditation you are in a position that will be less trouble some for you.

Make sure you keep your righthand on the lefthand and keep them on the lap after sitting down the proper way.  Don't get too comfortable with a cushion or too uncomfortable with hard floors.

Now concentrate on your breathing, focusing your thoughts only on the breaths.  Then you will feel the larger breaths will slowly give way to short lighter breaths. But continue to concentrate on your breathing. Don't loose your attention. Then you will feel so comfortable with your mind because your mind is entering a state of concentration. But don't pay attention to the comfort because it will also break your concentration.


What is the meaning of Pali word "Apannaka"

It obviously cannot be "guaranteed" because the moral realm is never guaranteed; per MN 136, MN 117, etc. Regardless of what "apaṇṇaka" means; I think a "safe bet" is the most accurate meaning, based on Dhamma principles. The idea of "incontrovertible" appears to slander the Dhamma.

For example, moral people who hold the follow view can still suffering when their mother & father die because they still believe in mother & father:

  ‘There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed;
  there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world
  and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who
  are reborn spontaneously; there are good and virtuous recluses and
  brahmins in the world who have themselves realised by direct knowledge
  and declare this world and the other world.’

MN 117, a later addition, written by an arahant, properly says the above is non-noble defiled right view siding with merit & not siding with liberation. MN 117 was required to be written to straighten out other later additions, such as MN 60, which falsely say worldly right view has guaranteed results.


What is the source of this popular quote about giving?

At least parts of the quote appears to originate from the article "Family Dharma: The Joy of Generosity", written by Beth Roth and published in January 2007. This article appears in "Tricycle: The Buddhist Review", a Buddhist magazine.
I guess from there, it became wrongly attributed to the Buddha and the text has also changed along the way.
If you read the article, Beth Roth derived her inspiration from the Buddha, as shown below.

The Buddha said, “If you knew, as I do, the power of giving, you would
not let a single meal pass without sharing some of it.”

This comes from Iti 26:

This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have
heard: "If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing,
they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of
selfishness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite,
their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared, if
there were someone to receive their gift. But because beings do not
know, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they eat without
having given. The stain of selfishness overcomes their minds."

Also, related quote from AN 3.57:

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


Why can't I be happy in the pursuit of Nirvana?

I answer, since you tagged Tibetan Buddhism. However, personal practice is a serious matter and I believe you should ask a qualified teacher.

  After all we want Nirvana because we are looking for a being in a state of something eternal, Which is equanimity.

No, in Mahayana, we want to achieve enlightenment in order to be able to  benefit all sentient beings uninterruptedly, without  limitations of ours (death being one of them).

Instead of focusing on equanimity, rather train in being patient, content, and have few desires. First, there is less risks of being confused about what patience, contentment and few desires are. Second, it is more at reach for a beginner. Third, aversion to pain causes much unhappiness while patience opposes this. We suffer a great deal just because we have the notion that we would be better off without this or that, or having this or that. Discontent and desires also create much unhappiness.

Tibetan do not usually emphasize Anapana. The concentration factor is in general just a means for the mind to become stable and flexible, and then abide in virtue. Right now, it's difficult to study for a long period of time, or to meditate for a long period of time. Body and mind get sore and exhausted, there is pain and boredom. We cultivate the three factors of concentration, mindfulness and introspection by doing Anapana (or usually focusing on the mental image of the body of the buddha) simply to become able to abide in virtue for as long as we want. It is like opening your eyes to then get to see this and that. Unfortunately, there are people who engage in Anapana meditation and the like just to feel better, temporarily sheltered from their issues, away from their usual obsessive and discursive thoughts, etc. These are not wholesome motivations. Great teachers usually say: if you want to relax, take a nap. It's way easier than meditating.

Meditation should not replace the bottle. It should not be a means to bury your head in the sand or an anesthetic that makes your life more bearable.

There is no better way to damage the karma you have accumulated than:

Purifying by way of the four opponent powers
Restraining from non-virtue by upholding discipline (turning away from the 10 non-vritues, taking refuge and lay vows, etc.)
Abiding by wholesome habits such as not oversleeping, taking refuge six times a day, setting motivation before engaging in activities, dedicating after, offering food before you eat, offering drink (even water) before you drink
completing activities
Studying the teachings of the Buddha, because this will help you see things the way they are
Cultivating altruistic intention, opposing self-cherishing. This makes the mind vaster, open, and inclined in virtue.


What are timeframe were pali canons, included commentaries, done, especially Mahavihara-Theravada?

This may not exactly be the answer that you're looking for, but it's related. It doesn't say at which council, but it speculates on the chronology of different parts of the Pali Canon, from an academic viewpoint.

On this page and this page, you can find the "Chronology Of The Pali Canon" by Dr. Bimala Churn Law.

Here, it is written in the beginning:

  Rhys Davids in his Buddhist India (p. 188) has given a chronological
  table of Buddhist literature from the time of the Buddha to the time
  of Asoka which is as follows:--

  The simple statements of Buddhist doctrine now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all the books.
  Episodes found, in identical words, in two or more of the existing books.
  The Silas, the Parayana, the Octades, the Patimokkha.
  The Digha, Majjhima, Anguttara, and Samyutta Nikayas.
  The Sutta-Nipata, the Thera-and Theri-Gathas, the Udanas, and the Khuddaka Patha.
  The Sutta Vibhanga, and Khandhkas.
  The Jatakas and the Dhammapadas.
  The Niddesa, the Itivuttakas and the Patisambbhida.
  The Peta and Vimana-Vatthus, the Apadana, the Cariya-Pitaka, and the Buddha-Vamsa.
  The Abhidhamma books; the last of which is the Katha-Vatthu, and the earliest probably the Puggala-Pannatti.

But later, after in-depth analysis, the author comes to the conclusion:

  The results arrived at concerning the chronology of the Pali canonical
  literature are presented in the subjoined table:

  (1) The simple statements of Buddhist doctrines now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all the books.

  (2) Episodes found, in identical works, in two or more of the existing books.

  (3) The Silas, the Parayana group of sixteen poems without the prologue, the atthaka group of four or sixteen poems, the sikkhapadas.

  (4) The Digha, Vol. l, the Majjhima, the Samyutta, the Anguttara, and earlier Patimokkha code of 152 rules.

  (5) The Digha, Vols. II & III, the Thera-Theri-Gatha, the collection of 500 Jatakas, the Suttavibhanga, the Partisambhidamagga,
  the Puggala-pannatti and the Vibhanga.

  (6) The Mahavagga and the Cullavagga, the Patimokkha code completing 227 rules, the Vimanavatthu and Petavatthu, the Dhammapada
  and the Kathavatthu.

  (7) The Cullaniddesa, the Mahaniddesa, the Udana, the Itivuttaka, the Suttanipata, the Dhatukatha, the Yamaka and the Patthana.

  (8) The Buddhavamsa, the Cariyapitaka and the Apadana.

  (9) The Parivarapatha.

  (10) The Khuddakapatha.

But there is no table available listing each sutta with its date of writing.


What are the advantages/disadvantages of meditating with eyes closed?

Meditating with the eyes open allows more connection to the sensory experience, while meditating with the eyes closed provides more insulation from distraction. There are advantages and disadvantages either way. With less distraction, it's easier to stabilize the mind; this might be very helpful for some people.  On the other hand, with less sensory input, it's easier to get lost in your own little world, lost in wandering thoughts, lost in experiences of bliss that might arise from strong states of concentration. In addition with long-term practice it's somewhat easier to develop a sense of separation from the world, which is different from "non attachment" and can lead to people acting like they're better than everyone else, etc.

On the other hand, with eyes open and more sensory input, it may be overwhelming and difficult to stabilize the mind at all. Only a few people are probably capable of doing any kind of meditation while, say, staring at a busy street scene in Manhattan (but some are!) But on the other hand, the meditation practice that does develop will be more ensured to maintain a connection with the senses and the outside world. It is more likely to develop an equanimity and mental stability that is tolerant of the vicissitudes of the outside world, rather than an equanimity that compels one to "run away" to the forest, the mountains, the monasteries.

There is somewhat of a tendency that traditions emphasizing individual liberation from suffering teach meditation with the eyes closed; while traditions emphasizing first the development of compassion for others teach meditation with the eyes open. (Because of the differences mentioned above.) Nevertheless, in either case, there is some wiggle room for whatever works best for the individual at her/his current stage of development.

If you practice with a qualified teacher, someone who is good at deeply perceiving you rather than merely spouting lists of instructions, then they will be able to give you good advice. Otherwise, feel free to experiment, keeping the opposing considerations in mind, and find a good balance for yourself.


Can insight be gained at any point in insight meditation, or do you have to go through all 7 purifications of insight?

The seven purifications are not all related to insight; only the sixth specifically deals with the realization of three characteristics. The first purification is related to morality, and the second to concentration. The seventh is super-mundane, so is not related to realization of the three characteristics. The fourth and fifth do somehow relate to the three characteristics, but the fourth has more to do with understanding cause and effect, and the fifth to do with finding the path rather than walking it.


Is it "bad" to want a "materialistic" happiness?

The question is not one of being "allowed" or "not allowed" things, you're taking this too much like a dogmatic religion. Buddhism is more like a form of psychotherapy that comes with its own philosophy that it needs you to understand for the method to work.

The therapeutic method comes in an if-then formulation: IF you do this, THEN that will follow; IF you don't want that to follow, THEN don't do this. Its focus is suffering and the thing it teaches you how to do is eliminate a necessary cause of suffering that is present in your own psyche and without which the suffering cannot happen. If you don't feel any suffering or don't want to eliminate it, then there's nothing to do, you can ignore the Buddhist method. If you do feel suffering, you have in Buddhism a most efficacious method of eliminating it, namely by stripping away one of its necessary causes.

The necessary cause of suffering that's contributed by your psyche is having expectations. An expectation is a certain insistence or dogmatic belief that things having to do with your life must be or remain in a specific way (this is what they call "attachment" - this insistent belief or strong expectation). Unavoidably whenever you entertain such an insistent belief you are setting yourself up for disappointment and suffering - "things must be or remain in this exact way or else... <insert negativity>" - and life, being a process of continuous change, will be all too happy to provide these violations to your expectations and produce said suffering. So to the extent to which you want to avoid suffering, to that extent you must abandon your insistent belief that the world "must" be or remain in a certain way, e.g. that you "must" keep your current level of wealth and never go lower, that everyone in your family "must" remain alive and healthy forever, that you "must" keep all your limbs forever, that you "must" benefit from your current good relationships forever etc. etc. Any of these expectations can be violated by the process of life at any time, and this will immediately cause you great suffering because of your insistent belief that these things must stay constant, especially for you, forever. But the process of the universe is not tuned to such static(!) wishes, and the sooner you understand this the more immune to suffering you will be.

So the short answer would be: sure, enjoy every kind of sense-pleasure and emotion and feeling and whatever you want to enjoy in life, BUT... if to the pleasure you also add an insistent belief (expectation, attachment) that the pleasure "must" last or stay with you for X amount of time, know that you are setting yourself up for disappointment and suffering. If you want to avoid the suffering part, just feel the pleasure that is there to be felt in the present moment and don't create any beliefs about how it should behave in the future. If it continues into the next moment, that's fine, and if it ends and is replaced by some pain in the next moment, that's fine too, because pain is also something that arises and then ceases, and doesn't last forever. Learn not to cling to things, be they pleasant or unpleasant: this is the essence of the Buddhist teaching.


Do Asimov's three laws make a robot a Buddhist?

Animate being are created through Dependent Origination, Nutriment, etc. The Buddha's teaching is for such beings. The part is morality, concentration and wisdom. Even this laws may engrain morality I am not sure if concentration and wisdom can be developed by a robot. A robot may have memory of the teachings but cannot practice. So robot cannot become Buddhist by practice.


Did the Buddha ever weep in his days of Enlightenment?

A Buddha would never ever weep while in his days of Enlightenment. It is because of the quality Akampita. It means unshaken; calm; resolute; that which does not tremble; not to be shaken.

The opposite of it is Kampita meaning shaken; agitated; quivering; caused to tremble. All these the Buddha was not. A Buddha is always impartial, treating all rivals or disputants equally; fair and just. Other words that describe this quality are unbiased, unprejudiced, neutral, nonpartisan, nondiscriminatory, disinterested, detached, dispassionate, objective, open-minded, equitable. For example the Buddha radiates metta equally towards his adversary Devadatta, Yasodhara his wife, and Patacara the demented woman, his royal father King Suddhodana and Sopaka the humble low-caste youth.

All feelings that arise are due to tanha, or some form of attachment. All such are due to mano sankhara. The feelings, (or the perceptions that give rise to feelings,reside inside oneself. It does not come from outside. We use external things to cause happiness or suffering by our own volition. There is no inherent suffering or happiness in anything external. A Buddha, or for that matter any Arahant, who has removed all asavas, will be free of such emotional responses.


What could be some teachings that Buddha has not revealed to us?

Yes,  of-course buddha hid lot of teachings.  They were mostly related to superpowers like how to use capability of  brain to control others,  flying,  instant-transmission,  preaching to deva-lokas,  teaching in future(time travel) and what not?

Alas!  It was all for nothing as later on various tantriks at nalanda university were probably having advanced knowledge on all this and for goodness,  it was burnt down otherwise today would have been worse in terms of black magic,  sex-tantrism,  immoral monks and much more.

These type of teachings were never required and have nothing to do with attaining nibbana.