How did the Buddha handle such situations in his time?

There are two famous schisms in the time of the Buddha; the Devadatta schism and the Kosambi schism.

In the former case, new, inexperienced monks were led astray by bogus teachings and the Buddha sent his two chief disciples to explain the truth to them.

In the latter case, the Buddha tried to invoke the seventh means of settling disputes (adhikaranasamatha), called "covering over with grass" - i.e. agreeing to leave the past transgressions behind and start fresh. The monks refused and the Buddha abandoned them.

To some extent, it's not very instructive to ask "how did the Buddha handle X", since he was fully enlightened and knew how to best deal with every specific situation. Better to ask is how the Buddha taught one should deal with sangha politics. In this instance, he left fairly specific procedural teachings on how to avoid and deal with such affairs.

Briefly, the seven adhkaranasamatha for dealing with disputes and legal cases are:

Settling in front of the transgressor
Settling based on a confirmation of enlightenment
Settling based on a confirmation of insanity
Settling based on an admission of guilt
Settling by a vote of the majority
Settling on punishment for evil-doers
Settling by covering over with grass

Beyond this, there is specific and lengthy instruction in the vinaya regarding schisms, and there are various teachings on dealing with power struggles, envy, disobedience, etc.

How are such situations handled within the Sangha today?

Rather poorly, for the most part. But "the sangha" is a huge and diverse conceptual body that for all intents and purposes doesn't exist as a single entity. Various sects, traditions, and even countries have their own sanghas now, and each sangha has its own means of dealing (or not) with such problems. For the most part, it is far more difficult to actually deal with monastic transgressions in modern times; without the stability of a large body of enlightened beings, it's much more "every monk for himself", unfortunately.


From a scriptural point of view, Buddha did not forbid the consumption of meat, let alone animal products etc., but what we do know is that 'Right Livelihood' tells us to not work as a butcher.

You cannot kill or case others to kill. If another person kills independently without your mediation and you buy and consume this then it is fine.

Countries like Burma have been very much meat centric diets. Buddhism may not have survived it preached veganism.

If you sufficiently distance your self to the extent that your conscience is clear then this is sufficient.

  Once we know about the abattoir's conditions around the world, we are informed & we thereby have to take kammic responsibility, otherwise we will partake in the deaths of trillion animals, due to our demand for animal products.

Karma is volition which is acted upon. So what ever happens in the world, to which on does not contribute in volition and action, does not result in any karmic retribution.

If you can take some action to reduce deaths of animals this will definitely be positive Karma. If you are not successful at it still there is no negative Karma. At least trying would be positive Karma.


You're absolutely right that they are only superficially appearing similar, but when you dive deep, they are completely different.
This has been discussed in numerous answers, which I will not repeat here - this answer, this answer, this answer, this answer, this answer.
The original teachings of the Buddha are systematic (the four noble truths), empirical (the three marks of existence), soteriological (the Noble Eightfold Path) and avoids intellectual gymnastics and obscure mysticism (Parable of the Poisoned Arrow, Acintita Sutta, Sabba Sutta), while Advaita is metaphysical and based on logic, philosophy and intellectual gymnastics.
For e.g. the Eternal Self as the Universal Consciousness or Cosmic Consciousness that is standalone, indivisible, eternal and witnesses through all living beings is a very elegant idea in Advaita Vedanta.
But the Buddha's empirical observation and realization is that consciousness is dependently originated on the six sensory media, and it is conditioned and impermanent (see MN 38). Even the mental idea of the self is also dependently originated, conditioned and impermanent. This can be realized generally through the Noble Eightfold Path, and specifically through vipassana.
So, which is true? If you dive deeper, you can see for yourself which is true. One is a very elegant intellectual model, while the other is empirically verifiable.


I am familiar with the story of Ñāṇavīra Thera, and while I deeply appreciate his work, esp. on 12 Nidanas, which for me is a good evidence that he indeed could have been a stream-enterer, I feel that his suicide was a very unfortunate outcome of the bad karma he created in the past. This karma, in its turn, came from a chain of negative mind states that evidently spanned multiple lives.

While, generally speaking, anyone can decide to commit suicide, a decision to do so is more likely to be made by someone who 1) is not afraid to die, 2) sees the pain associated with continuing to live, 3) has aversion to pain, and 4) does not see much value in continuing to live.

Because stream-enterer is beyond the illusion of self, s\he is not afraid of death. Because s\he clearly sees conditions that lead to arising of pain, s\he sees the pain associated with life. Because s\he is not yet beyond sukha-and-dukkha, s\he can still have aversion to pain. What remains is #4.

The value in continuing to live falls into two categories: the value for oneself and the value for others. Because stream-enterer is beyond the illusion of self, the only reason to carry on this particular life would be the value he or she thinks s\he could bring for others.

In Mahayana tradition, the first idea you learn, right after the basic concepts of Samsara, Nirvana, Enlightenment, and Karma -- is the high ideal of compassion. By this ideal, if I don't have a reason to live for myself, if I can alleviate suffering of even one dog, it is worth to continue living, let alone if I can help one human, let alone if I can help multiple people, let alone if I can teach Sat-Dharma.

So, while stream-entry refers to the same basic milestone that is known as First Bhumi in Mahayana, a Bodhisattva of First Bhumi would only choose to die if doing so would greatly benefit more people than he could benefit by e.g. teaching Dharma. For example, participating in the repair of Fukushima nuclear station could be a great way to die for someone who has no reason to live but does not have an aptitude to teach Dharma. There are many other ways to help humanity and die a hero whose name will be on a monument, instead of becoming a topic of regret that no one wants to mention.


Arguing depends upon person to person. Buddha always forbid arguing. Even at time of buddha , few of his disciples used to argue & he ,by many Upmas(lessons), used to forbid everyone to argue.

By wearing a tag of buddhism or any other tradition , doesn't mean person has become an enlightened one. If somebody is not ready to accept , it's good -let this go otherwise ,if accepts ,it's good ,still ,whatever the case is ,one must be ready to learn(if same is unenlightened) ,mustn't stick to blind-faith.

Moreover , dhamma-discussion can be done peacefully , buddha never restricted dhamma_related_discussion. You are your own master , you cannot force anyone to accept your views ,if you are forcing or arguing that means you are clinging & this is unwholesome.

Above is for full_time meditators.

For house holders::

Sometimes ,it becomes necessary to argue ,not to fulfill your desire but saving someone's life ,taking important decisions for benefit of large amount of people,etc. In such cases , arguing becomes necessary ,still this must be done while maintaining basic 5 Percepts at body & mental level.


That is Nibbana, and not god or Brahman or any kind of Ultimate Reality. It is that which is experienced by the mind, when it is completely free of all fetters and defilements.

I quote from this answer below. Please see that answer for details.

  So, Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind,
  not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a
  feeling. However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana, which is not
  conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not
  arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. The mind
  can therefore experience Nibbana, but it cannot feel it or think about
  it.

  Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when
  encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses) or when
  encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses).
  But for an arahat, sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced
  when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana.


Is Meditation And Concentration Mutually Exclusive?

It's should be the other way around. One needs concentration for meditation and one can't attain concentration without diligently meditate. It's also a common misconception that insight/vipassana and serenity/samatha are 2 mutually exclusive practices. Furthermore, insight and serenity by themselves are still not sufficient. Various other factors are also needed to make progress in meditation: observing the precepts, diets, surrounding environment, etc. For further details, please see Ven. Buddhadasa's  http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/anapanasati.pdf and Ven. Nanamoli's http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf1/MindfulnessBreathing.pdf . Some introduction to meditation in general from Ven. Gunaratana's http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html


Can we be sensously aware without consciousness?

Short Answer: No.

Long Answer:

First, you'll need to define what you mean by consciousness.  If we take consciousness as "conscious awareness" then by definition, if you don't have consciousness of something, then you are not sensuously aware of it.

However, it's possible that you may unconsciously register things that impact your consciousness later. For instance, if you get a "bad feeling" about someone, this may be due to you unconsciously registering several factors like quick facial sensations, tones being off-kilter, etc...


About the Buddha Preaching that we Humans are Aliens

The Sutta you are looking for is Agganna sutta.
In the second part of the Sutta, the Buddha tells the story of how human beings came to dwell on Earth.

  The Buddha said that sooner or later, after a very long time, there
  would come a time when the world(universe) shrinks. At a time of contraction,
  beings are mostly born in the Abhassara Brahma world. And there they
  dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through
  the air, glorious — and they stay like that for a very long time. But
  sooner or later, after a very long period, this world begins to expand
  again. At a time of expansion, the beings from the Abhassara Brahma
  world, having died from there, are mostly reborn in this world. Here
  they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving
  through the air, glorious — and they stay like that for a very long
  time...


Why do the Noble Truths talk about 'craving', instead of about 'attachment'?

Craving (lit. "thirst", tanha) is a technical term that means that very phenomenological moment when you (here!) daydream about something (over there!). Buddha says "unsatisfied craving IS dukkha" (suffering) - note how he does not say "craving is the cause of suffering", he says "unsatisfied craving IS". That's because dukkha isn't exactly "suffering", it should be more precisely translated as "unsatisfactoriness", or, as I sometimes translate it, "the feeling of wrongness". So as you see, to say that "unsatisfied craving IS the feeling of wrongness" is almost a truism, a statement that is obviously and self-evidently true. This way Buddha not as much identifies the cause of suffering, as illustrates the nature of suffering, brings it into light and shows it upclose so we can see it for what it is. Indeed, suffering is nothing else but the painful experience of the unsatisfied craving for another experience.

As for "attachment", I feel like this is a long-standing misunderstanding that crept in since the earliest days of Buddhism, when the term upatthana/upattana (to attend) got mixed up with upadana (fuel). In my opinion, the sequence here is that what one craves for, one attends to, thereby fueling the craving. In other words, as you keep obsessing over the object of your craving, you only make it worse.

This makes it clear that upattana/upadana (to-attend/to-fuel, usually translated as clinging or attachment) is not really the direct cause of suffering, but only a sustaining factor. The direct cause of suffering is craving.

Four Noble Truths (at leat the first three) are focused on the immediate experience of suffering, as it occurs and can be ceased in the present moment. That's why they talk about craving being the cause.

The Twelve Nidanas cover the big picture: how entire experience of "I" and "The World" arises. In that context it's more appropriate to talk about Upadana being a fuel for Bhava, and Avidya being the root cause of it all.  Avidya (invalid/confused understanding ~of the experience) causes reification of experience as external objects which then become the object of craving. This craving causes dukkha, sure, but more importantly for the big picture it leads to ego-centric imagination (Upadana) which leads to individuation (Bhava).

I hope this analysis of the terms and how they relate to the phenomenology of suffering clarifies the topic.


Right View is actually not "seeing things as they are". "Seeing things as they are" (yathābhūtaṃ passāmī) is a high level of insight that leads to liberation; as follows:

For a person who knows & sees things as they actually are, there is no
need for an act of will, 'May I feel disenchantment.' It is in the
nature of things that a person who knows & sees things as they
actually are feels disenchantment.
AN 11.2

Right View is much more basic. Right View is having an understanding of the basics and can be intellectual at first. Right View includes the following:

And what are the roots of what is unskillful? Greed is a root of what is unskillful, aversion is a root of what is unskillful, delusion is a root of what is unskillful. These are termed the roots of what is unskillful.
And what are the roots of what is skillful? Lack of greed is a root of what is skillful, lack of aversion is a root of what is skillful, lack of delusion is a root of what is skillful. These are termed the roots of what is skillful.
The Discourse on Right View.

So, yes, if you have dark angry thoughts is it too late. You have already entered into the territory of wrong view.
However, it is certainly good (actually ideal) that you are noticing then not reacting! You don't want to react because that leads to big trouble & danger.
When it happens in a split second, its OK. When its Anger - Boom; its OK. Just don't act upon it.
The suttas say:

One makes an effort for the abandoning of wrong view & for entering
into right view: This is one's right effort. 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.
MN 117

Even the Buddha-To-Be had angry thoughts, as follows; but used reasoning to think about his angry thoughts:

And as I remained thus heedful, ardent & resolute, thinking imbued
with ill will arose in me. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with ill
will has arisen in me; and that leads to my own affliction or to the
affliction of others or to the affliction of both. It obstructs
discernment, promotes vexation & does not lead to Unbinding.'
"As I noticed that it leads to my own affliction, it subsided. As I
noticed that it leads to the affliction of others... to the affliction
of both... it obstructs discernment, promotes vexation, & does not
lead to Unbinding, it subsided. Whenever thinking imbued with ill will
had arisen, I simply abandoned it, dispelled it, wiped it out of
existence.
MN 19


Technically speaking... (the devil is in the details!)

You can only 'reincarnate' into a sentient being. Mosquitoes, fleas, and worms are, in general, considered sentient beings in Buddhism. Bacteria (not an animal) and bamboo trees (a plant) are not. One might discuss if it's possible to 'reincarnate' as an amoeba (technically an animal — from the perspective of Western biology, at least), but I'd guess that one would require at least a minimal nervous system with a few cells in order to classify as 'sentient'. Then again, I might be wrong, of course!
'Reincarnation' is a Western term coming from a Christian tradition, with a very specific meaning, so it may lead Buddhist practitioners into the mistake of thinking that somehow their minds will be put into the body of a flea or a mosquito; in practice, it's both more complicated and much more simpler than that, and I'll give you the analogy that my own teachers gave me:

Think of a series of candles, all about the same size, the first of one is lit. The light of that candle represents a sentient's being life. Now, eventually, the candle burns out — and you might have to transfer the flame to the next candle using a stick of wood or something. The next candle might outwardly look like the first one, and from the perspective of someone on the room, there is still light around — even if it might come slightly from the left or the right, or be slightly stronger or weaker because even outwards-looking 'identical' candles will have some difference at the molecular level and thus there will be a difference.

You can repeat the process from one candle to the next, and there will always be 'light' while you keep one flame going, but eventually, there will be no more candles to light.

This symbolises how a stream of consciousness works across 'lives'. All the candles give light — but the light is not exactly the same, because each successive candle is slightly different than the previous one. Each candle is its own distinct object — symbolising different bodies if you wish — and there is no shared material/physical components between each candle. Because there is a succession of flames — the previous one becoming the cause for the next one, and so forth we can say that what you do in one life will influence — 'cause' — the next life. But each is started 'from scratch' in the sense that each life is separate and distinct from the previous one, even if it's in very small details (i. e. even two consecutive human lives will be quite different!). There is technically 'nothing' passing from the flame of one candle to another (this is where the analogy fails because it requires the stick/match/a bit of paper etc.), except this very abstract notion of 'light': i.e. all candle flames produce light, and the flame from one candle is the only cause for kindling the flame of another candle, so there is a cause-and-effect tying all candles together (this is the stream-of-consciousness which 'ties' together different lives through a causation effect). And finally, when one reaches awakening/enlightenment, there will be no more candles — no need to 'reincarnate' again, if you wish. So there will always be an end to the cycle of reincarnation; the role of Buddhist teachers is to get as many people to get out of that cycle as fast as possible (through teaching their students the means to do so, of course)!

Is this a confusing analogy? I think so; it is one supposed to make us think a bit. For instance, it's true that you have been a mosquito or a worm on previous lives, but you have no recollection of that — this is simply because not only each candle is physically different, but because its flame is different, so you cannot 'look back' to how you were in the past. Nevertheless, there is a connection: what you did as a mosquito back then has influenced what you are today (in exactly the same way that what you do today will affect you tomorrow — even if you don't notice it in most cases). Of course, a poor mosquito will have little knowledge of how to behave in order to get a 'better' life in the future (what makes you a 'good' or 'bad' mosquito...?); however, you, as a human being, have the ability not only to influence what your next life will be (it only depends on what you do in this life), but, even better than that, you have the abilities and capacity to break free from the reincarnation cycle altogether! When that happens, you can spend the rest of eternity in any form whatsoever and have the ability to watch from afar how flames go from one candle to another... while Buddhas cannot directly influence how that happens (even Buddhas cannot change the causation effects on other beings!), they can certainly help us out with tools and methods to figure out, on our own, how to break free from the cycle of reincarnation.

Patience, young grasshopper, you're on the right path!

Extra bonus: just by following the Buddha's path will give you another chance as a human being. And you were so fortunate to find the Buddha's path and a teacher on this life because, well, you did great on a previous life! Perhaps, as a mosquito, you might have bitten a Buddha by accident — thus creating a bond with a Buddha, which has ultimately led you to be 'reborn' as a human being able to study the Buddhadharma, think about it, and meditate. So rejoice!


Many people will disagree with my answer because they wish to believe they are practising cittanupassana.
The word "anupassana" means to "watch closely" therefore cittanupassana is not "noting" because noting is thinking rather than watching.
Also, because "anupassana" means to "watch closely", there is no thinking whatsoever in the mind when cittanupassana occurs.
For example, in the practise of Anapanasati, cittanupassana is practised with full concentration, i.e., with knowing each in-breath & each out-breath.
About cittanupassana in Anapanasati, the Buddha commented:

I do not say that there is the development of mindfulness of breathing for one who is forgetful, who is not fully aware.
MN 118

Cittanupassana occurs after the breathing has calmed & after the rapture that arises from calming breathing is also calmed.
Cittanupassana is directly knowing the quality & purity of the mind. Although during cittanupassana the mind can have stains of greed, hatred & delusions, these stains are not thoughts or thinking. They are the energy or mood of the stains/defilements themselves. Therefore, MN 10 says:

And how, monks, does a monk fare along contemplating mind in the mind?
Herein, monks, a monk knows intuitively the mind with attachment as a
mind with attachment;
he knows intuitively the mind without attachment, as a mind without
attachment;
he knows intuitively the mind with hatred, as a mind with hatred;
he knows intuitively the mind without hatred, as a mind without
hatred;
he knows intuitively the mind with confusion, as a mind with
confusion;
he knows intuitively the mind without confusion, as a mind without
confusion;
he knows intuitively the mind that is contracted, as a mind that is
contracted;
he knows intuitively the mind that is distracted, as a mind that is
distracted;
he knows intuitively the mind that has become great, as a mind that
has become great;
he knows intuitively the mind that has not become great, as a mind
that has not become great;
he knows intuitively the mind with (some other mental state) superior
to it, as a mind with (some other mental state) superior to it;
he knows intuitively the mind with no (other mental state) superior to
it, as a mind with no (other mental state) superior to it;
he knows intuitively the mind that is composed, as a mind that is
composed;
he knows intuitively the mind that is not composed, as a mind that is
not composed;
he knows intuitively the mind that is freed, as a mind that is freed;
he knows intuitively the mind that is not freed, as a mind that is not
freed.
MN 10


What are the differences between joy (piti), bliss (sukha) and peace (santi) and how do the qualities relate to Nibbana?

OP: What's the connection or difference between joy (piti), and the so-called "bliss" (sukha) and peace (santi) of Nibbana?

Piti and Suka are encountered along the path arising due to the practice of concentration.

(Ekādasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta Introduction by Piya Tan

(Dasaka) Cetanā’karaṇīya Sutta Introduction by Piya Tan

OP: Is one required to seek joy to attain Nibbana? Why? Should one seek sukha, peace, or nibbana? If nibbana and joy are different then why is (or what's meant by saying that) joy is one of the path factors?

These are milestones along the path. One does not seek them but you naturally pass them when practising, similar to when going on a road trip to a city you pass many mileposts.

OP: It seems to me the meaning of the English words "bliss" or "happiness" is synonymous with "joy" so why does it seem like Nibbana has been described as "bliss" or "happiness"?

When translating authors choose English words to map Pali terms into. Many of the English words are no perfect matches. So one must try to understand the actual meaning in the disclosure's context.

OP: In my opinion if there is no element of "joy", "pleasure", "delight" etc. to the attainment of Nibbana then it is wrong to refer to it as "happiness" or "bliss".

Feelings of pleasantness, unpleasantness and neutral feeling are not entirely satisfactory.

Also, also bliss or joy born from meditation also changes when one loses concentration hence they are not satisfactory.

Nibbana is happiness or bliss, not dependent sensations or any other form of support. Nibbana is beyond space and time (cosmology) and psychological phenomena.

  For the sake of discussion, we can imagine—since we have not attained nirvana—that the first paragraph [§4] addresses nirvana’s freedom from space and the second paragraph [§5] its freedom from
  time.

Nibbāna Paṭisaṁyutta Sutta 1 Introduction by Piya Tan


Infinity, eternity, countlessness in Buddhism

Questions regarding eternity are considered to lack an answer:
https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/avyakrita
According to the sutta quoted below, Buddha refrained from answering that type of questions. The reason for this comes from the buddhist notion of anatta, also mentioned below. The concepts are a bit hard to untangle, but this is the gist of it:

How is it, Master Gotama, is the world eternal?”… as above …
“What, Master Gotama, is the cause and reason why, when wanderers of other sects are asked such questions, they give such answers as: ‘The world is eternal’ … or ‘The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’ And what is the cause and reason why, when Master Gotama is asked such questions, he does not give such answers?”
“Vaccha, wanderers of other sects regard form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. They regard feeling as self … perception as self … volitional formations as self … consciousness as self, or self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in self, or self as in consciousness. Therefore, when the wanderers of other sects are asked such questions, they give such answers as: ‘The world is eternal’ … or ‘The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.’ But, Vaccha, the Tathagata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Enlightened One, does not regard form as self … or self as in consciousness. Therefore, when the Tathagata is asked such questions, he does not give such answers.

https://suttacentral.net/sn44.8/en/bodhi


Are there examples of the Buddha showing humour in the Pali Canon?

You could say the Buddha and arahants had a peculiar form of humour, as Konrad suggested in his comment above. The hasituppādacitta (smiling-producing mind) is a citta unique to enlightened beings. While they can also smile due to beautiful-functional cittas, the hasituppādacitta is rootless, containing none of the wholesome or unwholesome roots.

This means they would smile at things ordinary folk wouldn't, like brahmas being born as pigs (Dhp-A 338), or ghosts being tortured for past misdeeds (Dhp-A 71).


When you become dispassionate in continuing the lay life or when you get enough confidence that you can successfully fend off the temptations of lay life, it is worth considering ordination. I would suggest staying in a monastery or a meditation center first, continuously for about 6 months while keeping to the 8 precepts to see if you can handle it well.


How many levels of enlightenment are there?

I think it depends on the school, which defines and describes enlightenment.

You mentioned that Theravada defines four stages.
Wikipedia says that Mahayana defines Five Paths and Ten Bhumis.
"Kundalini awakening " is (I think) generally seen as Hinduism rather than Buddhism.


My understanding of a refuge tree is a visual representation of a lineage of a particular school of Buddhism. From Wikipedia

  the lineage of gurus and transmission of teachings is depicted in
  visual form as a visual mind map

For instance I practice with the Triratna Buddhist community and we have our own refuge tree (shown below). At the bottom is Sangharakshita winding its way to his teachers (e.g. Dhardo Rimpoche) and up to more historical figures (Hakuin, Milarepa) and into the mythic (Amitabha, Ratnasambhava) up to the Buddhas past present and future (Shaykamuni, Dipankara, Maitreya).

We study it to find inspiration and guidance in other teachers and other times. Because the movement is electic it means something to us to study a Zen figure (Hakuin) and then a Tibetean (Milarepa) and draw out the underlying themes. More pragmatically and politically the Triratna Community has been criticised for lacking a proper lineage so we (over)compensate by having a refuge tree that we study and refer back to.


Does the degree of the victim's sentience correlate with the kamma associated with killing it?

Yes, killing a human generates far more karma then crushing an ant.
However the size of the seed does not determine the outcome of the seed.

One teacher once noted that the karma of swatting a fly grows exponentially.
That after a few days, especially if it is a repeated action, it can be grown to the size of the initial seed of killing a human.

However the initial human killing seed grows similarly as fast.

The thing is we have all these seeds or "karmic imprints" if you will, that are all maturing and ripening. Both good an bad, and they are coming in at a rate of around 60 imprints a second.

I once let a mosquito eat its fill from my arm back when I was more seriously into Buddhism, the thought process was along the lines of sure, I have plenty of blood... eat up. The bite was magnificently itchy, and I will never do such again.

Now I crush mosquitoes, I don't enjoy killing them, I don't seek it out, but if one is buzzing around in my apartment it is off to the bardo with it.

However, squirrels raiding your garden, that is a slightly different scenario. Have you researched other options? Is there another way to protect your garden? It would be worth it to explore these questions from a karmic standpoint.

Better to plant as few of those kinds of seeds as possible, or plant the opposite kind of seed... maybe out of compassion put out some food that squirrels eat and enjoy nearby, if the squirrel is hungry you will get the karma of feeding a being of lesser sentience. A full squirrel is less likely to raid your garden.

Another thing to consider is the attachment to the garden, and the outcome of the harvest. If you lose one or two tomatoes, but harvest 12, really I'd say let the squirrel do its thing. I don't know the full extent of the raiding though, perhaps this squirrel ate all of your tomatoes. It still is not after your blood though, so there is that.


Would the Buddha have considered engaging in anal sex as breaking the 1st and/or 5th precept?

Obviously, anal sex performed by a husband on a wife would not break the literal teaching found in the 3rd precept. However, its often voyeuristic nature tends to place it within the sphere of mere lust, which is unwholesome, unless the wife genuinely rather than begrudgingly consents to the act.

In certain societies, anal sex was a common way for men to have sex with their wives and avoid pregnancy. However, many wives resented it. If a wife resented this, it would be an unwholesome act, not based in real love. But if the wife enjoyed it & was happy to do it, I suppose it would be OK (ignoring the fact the anus being something not really designed for sexual penetration).

Similarly, if committed homosexual partners sincerely wish to practise anal sex, it seems OK, I suppose (i.e., ignoring whatever risks are involved). But if anal sex is part of some domination or aggression motivation, it would not be OK.

Sex exists in nature for reproduction. However, it is acknowledged in religion that sexual desire is also something "oppressive"; that often needs to be "managed". When questions about sexual morality arise from the perspective of "sexual desire management", it becomes more complex & less straightforward. But when sex is for reproduction, sexual morals is easier to define.

Naturally, ordinary male & female relationships have children as a very strong factor that naturally binds the relationship. When people, be they homosexual or heterosexual, engage in childless relationships, this lacks the natural children factor that helps define ethics and also greatly helps maintain the relationship.

For example, when a wise man sees marriage & children are the optimal life for a woman, a wise man can easily generate compassion towards women and even lose sexual desire towards women (and thus easily become a monk or enter samadhi). In the Buddhist suttas, wise men left the household family villlage life because they could see the business of reproduction & family life was a burden & bondage. For homosexuals, however, such a perspective is lacking.


In the case of Gauthama the Buddha, there is no description about a leaf. The Buddha did review dependent origination, direct, reverses and direct & reverse order, as in the other answers.

But there are cases of Pacceka Buddha's who have been enlightened by seeing a withered leaf.

  Two other Jātaka tales report the attainment of Paccekabodhi on seeing a
  withered leaf fall. In these cases, too, it is clearly an external condition
  that is responsible for the break-through to awakening.

Paccekabuddhas in the Isigili-sutta and its Ekottarika-āgama Parallel Bhikkhu Anālayo

  At that instant Darīmukha seeing the garden now empty came and sat on the royal seat in the garden. A withered leaf fell before him. In it he came to see the principles of decay and death, grasped the three marks of things, and making the earth re-echo with joy he entered on paccekabodhi.

No. 378. DARĪMUKHA-JĀTAKA. The Jataka Volume III tr. by H.T. Francis and R.A. Neil ed. E. B. Cowell [1897]

  But when the king was gone, Sonaka returned and sat on the stone seat, and so it was that a withered leaf of a sāl tree fell from its stalk in front of him, and on seeing it he cried, "Even as this leaf, so will my body fall into decay," and acquiring supernatural insight by reflecting on the impermanence of all things he attained to the state of a paccekabuddha, and at this very instant his characteristic as a layman vanished, and the marks of an ascetic became visible, and saying, "There is no more re-birth for me," in the utterance of this aspiration he set out for the cave of Nandamūla.

No. 529. SONAKA-JĀTAKA. The Jataka Volume V tr. by H.T. Francis and R.A. Neil ed. E. B. Cowell [1905]


Are there any references in the Pali canon to the experience of death?

Death perspective from the Abhidhamma point of view:

Notes:

"Death is the temporary end of a temporary phenomenon." By death is meant the extinction of psychic life (jīvitindriya), heat (usma = tejodhātu), and consciousness (viññāna), of one individual in a particular existence. Death is not the complete annihilation of a being. Death in one place means birth in another place, just as, in conventional terms, the rising of the sun in one place means the setting of the sun in another place.
What are commonly understood to be natural deaths due to old age may be classed under this category.

To each of the various planes of existence is naturally assigned a definite age-limit, irrespective of the potential energy of the Reproductive Kamma that has yet to run. One must, however, succumb to death when the maximum age-limit is reached. It may also be said that if the Reproductive Kamma is extremely powerful, the Karmic energy rematerializes itself on the same plane, or on some higher plane as in the case of the devas.

As a rule the thought, volition, or desire, which was extremely strong during lifetime becomes predominant at the moment of death, and conditions the subsequent birth. In this last thought-moment is present a special potentiality. When the potential energy of this Reproductive Kamma is exhausted, the organic activities of the material form, in which is corporealized the life-force, cease even before the approach of old age.
If a person is born at a time when the age-limit is 80 years, and he dies at 80 owing to the exhaustion of the potential force of his Reproductive Kamma, his death is due to the simultaneous expiration of both age and Kamma.
There are powerful actions which suddenly cut off the force of the Reproductive Kamma, even before the expiration of the life-term. A more powerful opposing force, for instance, can check the path of a flying arrow and bring it down to the ground. Similarly, a very powerful Kammic force of the past is capable of nullifying the potential energy of the dying reproductive (janaka) thought-moment, and thus destroy the life of a being. The death of Devadatta was due to an upacchedaka kamma which he committed during his lifetime.

The first three types of death are collectively called kālamarana (timely death), and the last one is known as akālamarana (untimely death).

An oil lamp, for instance, may be extinguished owing to any of the following four causes, namely, the exhaustion of the wick, the exhaustion of oil, simultaneous exhaustion of both wick and oil, and some extraneous cause like the gust of a wind. Death of a person may similarly be caused by any of the aforesaid four ways.

As a person is about to die, a good or bad action may present itself before his mind's eye. It may be either a meritorious or a demeritorious Weighty action (garuka kamma), such as jhānas (ecstasies), or parricide etc. They are so powerful that they totally eclipse all other actions, and appear very vividly before the mental eye. If there is no Weighty action, he may take for his object of the dying thought a Kamma done or remembered immediately before death (āsanna kamma).

If it is a past action, strictly speaking, it is the good or bad thought experienced at the moment of performing the action, that recurs at the death-moment.

Kamma nimitta is any sight, sound, smell, taste, touch or idea which was obtained at the time of the commission of the Kamma, such as knives in the case of a butcher, patients in the case of a physician, flowers in the case of a devotee, etc.
By gati nimitta is meant some sign of the place where he is to take birth, an event which invariably happens to dying persons. When these indications of the future birth occur, and if they are bad, they can be turned into good. This is done by influencing the thoughts of the dying person, so that his good thoughts may now act as the Proximate Kamma and counteract the influence of the Reproductive Kamma which would otherwise affect his subsequent birth.

These symbols of one's destiny may be hellish fires, forests, mountainous regions, mother's womb, celestial mansions, etc.

The Kamma is presented to the mind-door. Kamma nimitta may be presented to any of the six doors according to circumstances. Gati nimitta, being always a physical sight, is presented to the mind-door as a dream.

Taking one of the aforesaid objects, a thought-process runs its course even if the death be an instantaneous one. It is said that even the fly which is crushed by a hammer on the anvil also experiences such a thought-process before it actually dies.

So if we practice jhanas (ecstasies), which is a weighty action (garuka kamma), we are destined to have that as the death nimitta, and reborn in the Brahma realm, unless other garuka kamma nimmitta intervenes.


A definition of ignorance is as the first of the 'twelve nidānas'.
In the Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta it's described as follows:

And what is ignorance? Not knowing stress, not knowing the origination of stress, not knowing the cessation of stress, not knowing the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called ignorance.
Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. etc.

So there it's defined as ignorance of the four noble truths.

This article titled Ignorance (by Thanissaro Bhikkhu) is a commentary about Ignorance from the perspective of the four noble truths (which is what you were asking about). It says that vijja (the opposite of avijjā i.e. ignorance) means not only 'knowledge' of facts but also 'skill'; so non-ignorance means:

Knowing the four noble truths
Understanding them
Skill, resulting in cessation and liberation

Avijja, the Pali word for ignorance, is the opposite of vijja, which means not only "knowledge" but also "skill" — as in the skills of a doctor or animal-trainer. So when the Buddha focuses on the ignorance that causes stress and suffering, saying that people suffer from not knowing the four noble truths, he's not simply saying that they lack information or direct knowledge of those truths. He's also saying that they lack skill in handling them. They suffer because they don't know what they're doing.

The Sammaditthi Sutta concurs in equating ignorance with the four noble truths ... it says that not knowing about the four noble truths is the origin of ignorance:

And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the cessation of ignorance, what is the way leading to the cessation of ignorance? Not knowing about suffering, not knowing about the origin of suffering, not knowing about the cessation of suffering, not knowing about the way leading to the cessation of suffering — this is called ignorance. With the arising of the taints there is the arising of ignorance. With the cessation of the taints there is the cessation of ignorance. The way leading to the cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration.
When a noble disciple has thus understood ignorance, the origin of ignorance, the cessation of ignorance, and the way leading to the cessation of ignorance... he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma.

If cessation of ignorance is right view, then presumably "ignorance" can be defined as or understood as the cause of 'wrong view'.
The Maha-satipatthana Sutta too defines 'right view' as knowledge of the four noble truths.

And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view.

There's a (closely) related term moha which is one of the three poisons and one of the defilements (I think that identifying three poisons is more Mahayana than Theravada, which sees aversion as a secondary cause, as in Sankha's answer).
When it's ignorance or illusion or delusion about the three characteristics, I think that means for example:

Seeing the non-self as self
Seeing the impermanent as permanent
Seeing the inherently-unsatisfactory as desirable.

Ignorance (like conceit) is one of the last of the fetters to be eradicated, according to the stages of the path (though identity-view is a wrong view and therefore one form of ignorance).


Buddhism explains there are at least three kinds of love:

raga: lust
pema: affection
metta-karuna: unconditional love and compassion.

The first and second kinds of love lead to sorrow, but not the third kind of love.

Some readings are:

Piyajatika Sutta: From One Who Is Dear (MN 87), which starts with:

  I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time a certain householder's dear & beloved little son, his only child, had died. Because of his death, the father had no desire to work or to eat. He kept going to the cemetery and crying out, "Where have you gone, my only little child? Where have you gone, my only little child?"

Piyavagga: Affection (from the Dhammapada), which starts with,

  Giving himself to things to be shunned and not exerting where exertion is needed, a seeker after pleasures, having given up his true welfare, envies those intent upon theirs.
  Seek no intimacy with the beloved and also not with the unloved, for not to see the beloved and to see the unloved, both are painful.

Karaniya Metta Sutta: The Buddha's Words on Loving-Kindness (SN 1.8)
Brahmavihara Sutta: The Sublime Attitudes (AN 10.208)


What is a skillful way to meditate in the midst of a migraine headache?

Theravada Buddhist Answer based in the Burmese method as taught by the Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw.

The following method is based in Vipassana meditation. This type of meditation is characterized by taking reality as an object of meditation, meaning that one directs attention towards the most apparent object in the present moment.

In terms of a migraine attack one might focus on the pain, nausea if present, a feeling of lightheadedness or ones reaction towards those objects.

One would note whatever object is most predominant and change object when another object becomes predominant. One notes the pain by mentally and slowly saying to oneself "pain, pain, pain". This is done while keeping attention on the object. One notes in order to create clear comprehension about the object, so to not fall into either liking or disliking of the object.

When this is done repeatedly over a period of time the mind will come to see the pain as merely an object. One will come to understand that the pain is not a problem. Instead its our own reaction to the pain that creates suffering for us.

For more in-depth information on the method in relation to dealing with pain, I recommend the following video teachings given by Ven. Yuttadhammo:

Ask A Monk: Dealing With Pain and Using Suffering as a Vehicle for Enlightenment
Ask A Monk: Pain
Monk Radio: When Pain Becomes Unbearable

He also made a booklet, which is available here.

May you have a fruitful practice.


Why are desires in The Five Hindrances only about "sensual" desires?

It seems that the five hindrances are obstacles to the five factors to be developed in the first jhana. There are other hindrances but these five are important in the context of progress in meditation.

According to Access To Insight:

  Buddhaghosa states that the abandonment of the five hindrances alone
  is mentioned in connection with jhana because the hindrances are the
  direct enemies of the five jhana factors, which the latter must
  eliminate and abolish. To support his point the commentator cites a
  passage demonstrating a one-to-one correspondence between the jhana
  factors and the hindrances: one-pointedness is opposed to sensual
  desire, rapture to ill will, applied thought to sloth and torpor,
  happiness to restlessness and worry, and sustained thought to doubt
  (Vism. 141; PP.147). Thus each jhana factor is seen as having the
  specific task of eliminating a particular obstruction to the jhana and
  to correlate these obstructions with the five jhana factors they are
  collected into a scheme of five hindrances.

The Jhanas in Theravada Buddhist Meditation
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html#ch1


To progress along the path, to realise what the Buddha did, we need a vehicle. If the vehicle uses imagination as a method, then imagination becomes the path. Imagination is not mindfulness, but is used to train mindfulness.


Is Will Power required to renounce sense pleasures?

In Pali Canon, Buddha gives the following image of Will Power:

  Gladly would I let the flesh & blood in my body dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if I have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing my persistence.

According to my teacher, if you look at Will Power closely, you will see that it's actually made out of multiple distinct factors:

Inspiration - first, we're inspired by an example of the teacher or the beauty of a tradition.

Objective - because we're inspired by an image of happiness, freedom, perfection etc., we want to attain it, we want to be like the Buddha or like our teacher.

Commitment - then we make a firm decision. In case of renouncing worldly pleasures it's a firm decision to not enage in worldly pleasures. In case of abandoning negative thinking, it's a firm decision to not cultivate the negative thinking. In case of cultivation of suchness, it's a firm decision to not think that you lack any further achievements etc.

Cultivation - now that we have made the decision, we must stick to it despite all sorts of obstacles and distractions, including the ones that disrupt our Commitment by distracting us into other frames of reference in which the original Objective does not make sense. So we repeatedly engage our attention with stimuli that help sustain and generate the right kind of Inspiration and we avoid the stimuli that mess with our Commitment.

Forbearance - as we do the above, we keep running into situations that result in psychological pain because of the conflict between our commitment and the distracting stimuli pulling us in other directions. This type of pain is inevitable side-effect of practice and we must learn to endure it.

Taken together, these factors constitute Will Power. It is important to understand the exact mechanics of how the will power works, rather than naively assuming we can achieve success by applying brute force.

The first two factors happen automatically, without our control. We get inspired by an idea and we want to be like that, too. The other three factors depend on us. We must make a firm determination or commitment to stick to a specific frame of reference. We must guard our minds from distractions and demotivators. We must seek inspiration again and again, by turning our attention to and going over the inspiring ideas, in order to keep our motivation high. We must be prepared to face the conflict-generating aspect of commitment and the pain it creates. Without putting effort in these three factors, our original inspiration will die out very fast.

So while Will Power matters, what's important in Buddhism is developing skilful means for working with (mental) causes and their effects.


Undertaking the practice of Samatha meditation, should be done for the sake of the practice itself - not for seeking out pleasant experiences. The minute one is thinking about achieving and gaining pleasant experiences, one has fallen into the hindrances. As a result of that, one has moved away from the primary object of meditation and thus are not cultivating concentration any longer.

It comes down to ones intentions for doing the practice.

Its a good idea to regularly clarify and affirm ones intentions for practicing - especially with Samatha meditation, that is very important. Its easy to become attached to the pleasant sensations this type of meditation practice can result in.

One should ask oneself why one takes on this practice. A wholesome intention is essential. Wholesome intentions for engaging in Samatha meditation could be:

Collecting the scattered mind (e.g. to be used later for Vipassana meditation)
Deepening serenity
Purification of the mind stream
Cultivating a high level of concentration (e.g. to be used later for Vipassana meditation)


One of the most important topics in Buddhism is the lack of basis for "identity view". This comes out, for example, in MN62:

  “Rāhula, you should truly see any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: all form—with right understanding: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’”

Having faith that identity view is baseless, one is led to conclude that those who cling to identity view are often:

Greedy, which can be recognized in the unfairness and suffering of those excluded from shared resources such as drinking water during a drought.
Hating, which can be recognized in a lack of compassion for others such as saying "steerage passengers will have no lifeboats."
Deluded, which can be recognized in a never-ending grasping at the vanities of health, youth, and life.

Yet those who have identity view can also be:

Faithful, which can be recognized in a willingness to experience the fruit of teachings of the Buddha personally
Intelligent, which can be recognized in a discernment between skillful qualities and unskillful qualities
Speculative, which can be recognized in a struggle to understand the meaning and worth of the teachings of the Buddha such as "This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self,’"


Is Being a Bartender Considered Right Livelihood

Vaṇijjā sutta discusses Right Livelihood in for levity which include: business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.

If you sell meat or drinks for a living this is not right livelihood. I think is suffices if you are part of the establishment and need not be the proprietor / owner / shareholder. So if you work in a meat shop or bar or liquor store then this is not right livelihood.

If you are working is a big supermarket which sells among anything meat and drinks and you work in a generic counter not dedicated for the sale of meats or drinks then this might be OK. I.e., if you are part of a large store out of which a small part of business is meats, drinks and poisons unless you are involved is specifically to procure and sell these items it might be OK. As management or owner or shareholder of such business might be OK if this is a minor line of business and you are not involved in the planning and management of such activities.

Kandaraka Sutta, Apannaka Sutta mentions that those who torment themselves, those who torment others, those who torment both, and those who torment neither themselves nor others, out of which the last is the most conducive. Similarly one's job or business should be ideally organised around the same principles.

Also Ama,gandha Sutta discusses that it is not meat you should abstain from but from evil action.

So in conclusion bartending, being in the wine counter, being part of a butcher or meat shop, or being in the meat counter, is not right livelihood, but eating meat is not an issue.


A lot of people find metta practice hard. I find metta practice hard. Where I practice they have even run day retreats called 'I hate the metta bhvana' to try to address this.

If I can maybe address some of you points with what I've been told and maybe my own experience

  I can't feel any metta being generated

It does feel like the task is to pump out as much metta as you can but I was told by a very experienced practiconer that this is an unhelpful way to think about it. Rather than trying frantically to be a metta generating machine he said the task is to be with whatever comes up when you bring people to mind. That might be metta, it might be irritation, it might be a big aching feeling of numbness. If it is then that is what it is and the task is to be open to that. Perhaps being sensitive to metta if it is there but being sensitive to it's absence if it isn't.

  I feel like I'm just repeating empty words

The traditional formulations can feel very fake. If they do then maybe don't do them and just try to have an awareness to that person. Someone said of the formulations that they are like a submarine pinging a sonar out and seeing what if anything comes back. Personally I don't often do them but sometimes I will say them to myself after another (breath) meditation and that can give other mediation a more metta-ful quality.

  metta means friendliness and i think this is the problem as I may not
  be born with this quality

Not knowing you but knowing human beings I'm going to say you do have this quality but it can be just numbed out of you by day to day living,. I think this is where faith (śraddhā) comes in. Have faith that you do have this quality and it is a universal human quality that everyone can connect with.

  metta practice is unbearable

Be kind to yourself. The beginning of the practice is have metta to yourself. Give yourself a break during practice by coming back to the breath or take a break from the practice for a time. If at all possible, don't give up completely.

  it so difficult.

It is difficult. You are doing a difficult thing. You and everyone that does this are heroes for even trying it. Own the difficult. It's difficult because it's difficult and celebrate yourself for engaging with it. You are amazing for doing it.

Good luck.


Should sensual pleasure be actively avoided, rather than simply not sought? I am particularly interested in regards to taste

Reading your post, i remembered the Middle Way or the Noble Eightfold Path as a path of moderation, between the extremes, any sensorial pleasure provokes addiction if not moderated.
In the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, it reads:

these two extremes ought not to be practiced by one who has gone forth from the household life. (What are the two?) There is addiction to indulgence of sense-pleasures, which is low, coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to self-mortification, which is painful, unworthy, and unprofitable.
Avoiding both these extremes, the Tathagata (the Perfect One) has realized the Middle Path

Depending on the spiritual tradition, some are more strict on interpreting moderation, and some like my own have a stronger focus on the self conscience: If you are mindful your unconscious urges will be apparent to you, and you will know what causes suffering to you and what does not.
Having said so, Monastics were advised in the 8 precepts not to indulge in any sensual pleasures, because I believe Budha regarded that as a problem if one was to attain enlightenment since it is so prone to cravings which will result in suffering.
In the Kamma Sutta:

If one, longing for sexual pleasure, achieves it, yes, he's enraptured at heart. The mortal gets what he wants. But if for that person — longing, desiring — the pleasures diminish, he's shattered, as if shot with an arrow.

For lay people it is recommended in the 5 precepts to abstain from sexual misconduct, which along with some guidelines more or less sprinkled in the Buddhist literature, I believe it should be interpreted in light of cultural and traditional practices, or even the self own conscience.
Citations from here:
Noble Eightfold Path
Buddhism and sexuality
Five Precepts


What is the difference between non-self and emptiness?

As I understand, Mahayana's shunyata (noun, because shunya is adjective) includes all Three Characteristics of Existence, as well as Nirvana (sometimes counted as the fourth!)

In this sense, Shunyata is the all-encompassing view, and as close as it gets to Ultimate Truth, while Anatta is but one aspect of this truth.


It is an effect by wrong way commentary reading of the western professors and thai professors, because they have not enough skill to read pāli tipitaka and commentary.

Commentary just want to said:

  Buddha called "bhikkhave" because the listeners in front of buddha are bhikkhu. But it doesn't means the other buddhist people can not practice follow that sutta.

But in the appearing commentary doesn't said  "because the listeners in front of buddha are bhikkhu", like above, because it is simple in mukkhapātha tradition to call just the specify target, most cases are the nearest. And the most buddha's nearest people were bhikkhu.

Today, you can see in the classroom, when the teacher ask someone to teach
, such as "Peter! don't break the school's rule", it doesn't means "just that one can't break", but it means "everyone in school can't break". It is simple, so it doesn't need to explain as "the others can't break, too."

There are some excepted cases that should use the difference meaning of "bhikkhave", such as in 1st vinaya rule. For those, there had the explanation in commentary, case by case. It does't means "commentary commented by there own opinion", but it means "that sutta's context or the other related sutta make the commentary commented like that". Because the commentary teacher must be tipitaka memorizer in ancient theravāda tradition, such as ancient mahāvihāra monastery.

I don't want to blame the others, but I must specify an actual main problem cause of new age buddhist students, that make them feel so hard to study buddha's teaching.


Is there a time difference between death and re-birth?

In abhidhamma, when death consciousness vanished, then rebirth consciousness arise, immediately.


To help understand the differences between the two words, let’s try to understand the meaning of the words independently.  Vyäpäda is ill will. It is a stronger word than patigha. Because of kamachanda, “dosa” or long-lasting hateful situations arise. In the present day Sinhala language, we say ‘dvesa’ for the term ‘dosa’. This long-lasting hateful situation, at its extreme brings out the second of the five hindrances, ‘Vyäpäda’. We can break this word into “vaya”+”pada”. “Vaya” means decline even in native Sinhala. and “Pada” means walk towards.  Thus ‘Vyäpäda’ means one is on a path of (moral) decline. kamachanda and Vyäpäda are the main reasons that we suffer. By disciplining ourselves through speech and bodily actions we can remove any thoughts of extreme greed and hate as they come to the mind.

Vihimsa can be said as cruelty and harmfulness. Its opposite is harmlessness (avihimsa). The following Pali phrase in short means MOLEST NONE…. It’s full meaning is… “He who seeks his own happiness by harming others who also desire to have happiness will not find happiness hereafter.

  ”Sukha kamani bhutani yo dandena VIHIMSATI
  Attano sukham esano pecca so na labhate sukham.

If we take ‘Sankappo’ to mean thoughts, then…     Nekkhamma-sankappo  is  ‘thoughts of renunciation’, i.e., thoughts to cultivate when being at ease in quiet, solitary places.

Avyäpäda -sankappo  is ‘thoughts of non-anger, non-hatred’: We don’t have to keep
thinking about our own bad points or the bad points of others and let these thoughts of ill-will fester.

Avihinsa-saakappo is ‘thoughts of not doing harm’, not creating trouble or doing harm to ourselves and others. i.e., This also entails not thinking about our own shortcomings, which would depress us; if we think about our own shortcomings, it’ll spread to that of others shortcomings too. For this reason, the wise would lift their thoughts to the level of goodness so that they project love and good will for themselves, and in turn feel love and good will for others too.


What is/was the role of agamas in Chinese and Japanese history?

They are the practice of the sravakas (voice hearers, desciple), hinayana (though not Theravada) and not the practice of the Bodhisattva, so it is ignored, as not worthy of practice.
Mahayana views in Sravaka link

In the 4th century abhidharma work Abhidharmasamuccaya, Asaṅga describes those who follow the Śrāvaka Vehicle (Skt. śrāvakayanika). These people are described as having weak faculties, following the Śrāvaka Dharma, utilizing the Śrāvaka Piṭaka, being set on their own liberation, and cultivating detachment in order to attain liberation.[29] While those in the Pratyekabuddha Vehicle (Skt. pratyekabuddhayānika) are portrayed as also utilizing the Śrāvaka Piṭaka, they are said to have medium faculties, to follow the Pratyekabuddha Dharma, and to be set on their own personal enlightenment.[30] Finally, those in the Mahāyāna (Skt. mahāyānika) are portrayed as utilizing the Bodhisattva Piṭaka, as having sharp faculties, following the Bodhisattva Dharma, and set on the perfection and liberation of all beings, and the attainment of complete enlightenment.[31]
According to Vasubandhu's Vijnanavada teachings, there are four types of Shravakas:[32]

The fixed
The arrogant
The transformed
The converted (to "Bodhi" or Buddhism)

The transformed and the converted (Buddhist) are assured in the Lotus Sutra of eventual Nirvana.

SO SAYS MAHAYANIST....hmmmmm???


Why do you have sadness in the first Jhana?

This is an interesting question, because the first jhana explicitly involves seclusion from the five hindrances, one of which relates to domanassa (translated in your quotation as "sadness"). According to the abhidhamma, domanassa can only arise in anger-based minds, which one might think would be totally absent in the first jhana. The commentary to SN 48.40 blames vitakka and vicaara explicitly for the potential arising of domanassa:

  nānāvajjaneyeva ca dutiyajjhānupacāre pahīnassa domanassindriyassa yasmā etaṃ vitakkavicārapaccayepi kāyakilamathe cittupaghāte ca sati uppajjati, vitakkavicārābhāve neva uppajjati.

My Pali is rusty, but this passage basically means that the bodily distress and mental harm which would arise based on vitakka and vicaara do not arise with the non-existence of vitakka and vicaara.

This gives some insight into the nature of vitakka and vicaara as per the texts; they allow for some instability by which the mind still engages in perceptions leading to domanassa, even though the mind is otherwise fixed and focused on a single object (ekaggata).


How to discipline self to practice meditation everyday?

This is a common problem. I'd suggest you get some inspiration and enthusiasm from reading online about meditation and start doing it for even say, 30 seconds.

But most importantly, don't force yourself to do it or feel bad about not meditating. The moment you start forcing your mind to do something, it mostly doesn't work. Let your mind be.

Also there could be external distractions apart from internal distractions. Try an early morning meditation sometime if that is the case.

Again, don't force yourself. Just sit down when you have the time/desire and let go of your mind. Let it wander aimlessly. But be with your mind. It's not what the mind is aware of, but how you are aware of the mind. Once this is done, start bringing the mind to your breath. This is a trick to deal with the mind. ;)

Also try mindfulness in your everyday activity. Say, your lunch or dinner time. It helps to get you started again.

Good luck.


If every bad event is because of karma, how can anyone ever murder an arhat or buddha?

Question premise might reveal an internal inconsistency - every bad event is not only caused by Kamma.

The Buddha taught that there are 5 natural laws (Niyamas), that causes physical and mental events to take place;

  1.    The seasonal laws (Utu-Niyama) related to temperature, seasons and other physical events

  2. The biological laws (Bija-Niyama) related to seeds and physical organic order

  3. The physical law (Citta-Niyama) related to the processes of consciousness, or to the nature of consciousness which recognises objects etc.

  4. The Kammic law (Kamma-Niyama) related to the law of Kamma, (good deeds and bad deeds and their results)

  5. The Natural laws (Dhamma-Niyama) related to certain events: the general law of cause and effect, causality conditionally and unconditionally
  Trying to further interpretate it will just carry over into  imagination. Only a fully enlightened Buddha can know the intricate workings of kamma.


Accurate translation of "Satipatthana Sutta"

In my opinion, one of the best translations is the one in Analayo Bhikhu's "Satipatthana: The Direct Path to Realization".

see https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/direct-path.pdf or

https://ahandfulofleaves.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/satipatthana_direct-path_analayo_free-distribution-copy2.pdf


Exact meaning of Ditthivisuddhi (3rd purification)

Understand that mental and physical process and the world at large is not in our control and is changing. So any notion of regarding one self will not be in line with expectations and also would lead to comparison hence misery. (3 Marks of Existence) Further the understanding of the 4 Noble Truth and Dependent Origination.

See: Rathavinita where this is initially covered.


Koans break the intellectual mind and require deeper investment.

  SN41.6:1.4: “Householder, there are three processes. Physical, verbal, and mental processes.”

Practice a koan physically, verbally and mentally. For example, walk with it, speak it and feel it.

This sounds mysterious, but is actually practical. To walk with a koan, one might attend to "left foot original face", followed by "right foot original face". When meditating, one could silently speak the koan. To feel it one could look at anything that appears as "this tree original original face feels tall", "this car original face feels fast". And so forth. In other words, tie the koan into everything seamlessly.

In this way one discovers "original face" and can answer the Roshi by presenting the original face. It takes much practice because most of us are distracted by other stuff day-to-day and moment-by-moment.

My koan was Joshu's Mu. Everything was Mu. Same practice, however.


Are eating raw oysters a violation of the first Precept?

The  word 'panatipata'  is  derived  from  two  words: 'pana'  which means  'living  being'  and 'atipata'  which  means  'striking  down', hence  killing  or  destroying.  According  to  the Atthasalini or Expositor, for killing to take place five conditions must be met.

    The being must be alive.
    There must be knowledge that it is a living being.
    There must be intention to cause its death.
    Action must be taken to cause its death.
    Death must result from such action.

      If  all  these  conditions  are  fulfilled,  then  the  precept  has  been broken.

~ Cited from: Five Precepts (Pncasila)

If all the above conditions are not met, the action doesn't become a kammapata (action which gives birth in another existence) but become only a kamma (action which gives its result during the lifetime of a living being in an existence).

Suppose you eat something. But you don't know it's a living being. First precept is not broken for such action.

Suppose you see something on your desk and think of it as a bug. You hit that with your hand with the intention of killing that bug. But later you get to know it's not a bug but something which was not alive. First precept is not broken for such action. But you accumulate bad kamma for such action.

Suppose you see a flying mosquito and you hit that mosquito with a mosquito racket with the intention of killing it. But mosquito is not killed (let's assume the battery in the racket was drained). First precept is not broken for such action. But you accumulate bad kamma for such action.

Suppose you gave medicine to a ill dog with the intention of saving that dog. But then that dog die of that medicine. For such action you don't accumulate bad kamma. Actually you accumulate good kamma for such action.

Note: This is what I understood. I may be wrong but not Dhamma.


What are the steps in Mindfulness of Breathing meditation?

Steps differ by every teaching lineage. But a basic outline would look like this:

Focus on the breath and recognize it as breath, without the thought, this is me, this is mine, this is what I am, this is good, this is bad, etc.
If the mind wanders from the breath, acknowledge the thought in some system of categorizing objects that arise in the experience. The Satipatthana Sutta outlines a neat and tidy system for categorizing such objects.
Return to focusing on the breath.
Repeat 1-3 for duration of practice.

As for duration of practice, do what your body and mind can handle, and work upwards from there. Start with 5 minutes, and if that's easy, try 10 or 15. Try 30 or 60 minutes. But there's no substitute for having a teacher.

On a meditation course, my teacher had me practice 50 minutes of walking meditation, then 50 minutes of sitting meditation, repeating indefinitely. Back in the ordinary world I tend to keep it at 30 minutes (15 walking, 15 sitting).

If you study under a teacher, you will find that every teaching lineage has their own specific steps. For example in the Mahasi Sayadaw school we don't just focus on the breath. We start with rising and falling of the abdomen, and then as skill develops we include recognition of sitting, and then recognition of various points on the body. Out of respect for the teachers I don't want to go into too much detail as I am not a meditation teacher, just a practitioner.

theravadasatipatthanamahasibreathing


How to manage insects in the house while adhering to the First Precept?

Becoming sensitive/ kind to all forms of life is the sign you are walking the path :). Deeds speak louder than rhetoric, those clever minds learnt the letters only; true Dharma followers learnt the teachings of Buddha, including the teachings of Karma and Rebirth in Buddha's original meaning.

When you treat them with kindness, they return you with kindness. My place was savoured by ants when I just moved in, I didn't kill them but drove them away or let them be if not too troublesome, they started to decrease. Once I was peeling a pear near the sink the peels and some juices fell onto the worktop, immediately ants coming like people going for party and feast. Suddenly I realized our small castaway could be a treasure vault for another lifeforms... So I started to bestow my presents to ants - literally :]. I'll leave the used sugar bag on the worktop the ants will clean the leftover spotlessly, it's a great amusement and feels some accomplishment for having treating the ants. Since all these measures they seem just appearing occasionally in untroublesome way. I learnt that ants are very tidy and sanitary conscious little creatures, so I'm not disliking them.

For roaches I learnt from Chinese Buddhist sites that you can use empty mineral water bottle for example. Roll newspaper in cone shape, insert the smaller end into the bottle, inside the bottle put bit of bacon or smelly food, lay the bottle flat on floor or where they like to cross, tip the newspaper touching ground so they can crawl in. The roaches will be drawn by the smell they will enter the bottle via the wider end of newspaper; since roaches are blind they can only detect light they won't be able to find the exit, which is high in the mid-air inside the bottle. Once you collect enough of them, take them to release in appropriate environment, such as rubbish collecting point away from neighborhood. I tried once or twice it works, I caught one or two, maybe I didn't put in smelly enough food since I was trying to go against meat 1st by not buying raw meat, I didn't use bacon but certain Thai style fish favoured chips instead; also there was one or two of them only that I saw.

Other passive method is to scent your home, sandalwood or cedar etc.,  those fragrant smells are toxic and repellent to most insects. Still less known way is to use Mantra, this required certain merit and ability that the practitioner accomplished, Puan Mantra is very well known for Chinese Buddhists.


Is there some scripture reference to dream yoga?

This depends somewhat on how you define "scripture." It's important to emphasize that "scripture" to a Buddhist doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as "scripture" to a Protestant Christian, despite the similar language.

As Rabbit references there is a document titled the Six Yogas of Nāropa (ན་རོ་ཆོས་དྲུག་, Narö chö druk).  Naropa himself was no small figure, at least for certain traditions, and a lot of the teachings in the Six Yogas are widely practiced among certain sects.

That, by itself, might count as a "scriptural reference" if that's what you are going for. This has been taught as stemming from the Gautama Buddha's statements about the illusory or dream-like nature of reality. It is an established document that is well known.

On the other hand, as far as I can tell it isn't listed–at least commonly–as part of the Tibetan Buddhist canon or any of the other major canons. That having been said, there are a great many Buddhist texts that cover a wide variety of different practices that are not found in in those specific texts that doesn't lessen their value.

So the question comes down to what, exactly, you consider "scripture" and why you are looking to know.


Is there a legendary biography of Avalokitesvara/Kwan-Yin/Chenrezig?

Also known as Chenrezig in the Tibetan tradition, Avalokiteśvara is widely known through most Buddhist traditions.

According to legend, Chenrezig made a a vow that he would not rest
until he had liberated all the beings in all the realms of suffering.
After working diligently at this task for a very long time, he looked
out and  realized the immense number of miserable beings yet to be
saved. Seeing this, he became despondent and his head split into
thousands of pieces. Amitabha Buddha put the pieces back together as a
body with very many arms and many heads, so that Chenrezig could work
with myriad beings all at the same time. Sometimes Chenrezig is
visualized with eleven heads, and a thousand arms fanned out around
him.

He has a total of 33 forms, including the wrathful form of Mahakala
He is also considered to be the "parent" of Tara

In Tibetan Buddhism, Tara came into existence from a single tear shed
by Avalokiteśvara. When the tear fell to the ground it created a lake,
and a lotus opening in the lake revealed Tara. In another version of
this story, Tara emerges from the heart of Avalokiteśvara. In either
version, it is Avalokiteśvara's outpouring of compassion which
manifests Tara as a being

He is mentioned in the following sutras :

Lotus Sutra
Kāraṇḍavyūhasūtra
Heart Sutra
Nīlakaṇṭha Dhāraṇī Sutra
Eleven-Faced Avalokitesvara Heart Dharani Sutra
Cundī Dhāraṇī Sūtra

Pictured below Avalokitesvara in his 1000 armed form and as Mahakala, and Tara


What can be done when one is having difficulties establishing a regular practice?

This happens when you have a mistaken idea that practice is something separate from your normal life. But meditation is only 1/3rd of the practice, the top of the wedding cake (shila-prajna-samadhi). Most of the practice happens during the day, in what some of us Buddhists semi-jokingly call "post-meditation".

I think meditation looks important to Westerners because it seems to follow familiar functional pattern: do something and get the result. "Leave the rest of your Buddhist B.S. superstitions to the uneducated ancients. I will focus on THE practice." But Buddhism does not work this way. Without right context meditation is useless.

What is the context in Buddhism? The context is removing obstacles to enlightenment, from coarse obstacles, to middling obstacles, to subtle obstacles. You can't remove subtle obstacles until you remove middling obstacles. You can't remove middling obstacles until you remove coarse obstacles. Meditation is a tool that is used for working with subtle obstacles.

What are coarse obstacles? They are coarse biases, coarse illusions, coarse preconceptions, coarse hangups. How can you identify them? By their effects -- production of strong emotions during the day.

Every time you feel strong emotion (e.g. longing, irritation, frustration, resentment, contempt, insult, disgust, anxiety, aversion, strong timidity) - or about to feel strong emotion - therein is attachment (=bias, illusion, preconception, hangup). That's the moment when you should switch your context from whatever it is that you are grasping at, and pause and look at your attachment. At such moments it is right there, like an elephant in the room. What's interesting about attachment, subjectively it always looks legit, it always seems right, appropriate, justified. But that's the way it tricks the rational mind. It may even be attachment to humbleness, attachment to open-mindedness, attachment to kindness, attachment to fairness - any of the good things. But when it becomes all-important it turns into a demon and starts generating judgement, aversion, conflicts, blinding emotions, and bad karma. So as soon as you see the emotion arising - you should step back and identify the attachment / preconception. Then you should let it go while focusing on your recommended anchor:

if you are very mental, focus on your body - esp. lower abdomen and feet. Do you feel any tightness or burning or blockage? Do you feel other parts of your body or are they numb?,
if you are very emotional, focus on your breathing - is it fluid or jerky or blocked?,
if you take real-life situations very seriously, imagine the time of your death,
if you are an earthly person, remember that you exist in the infinite Universe with its worlds, which existed for billions of years and will exist for billions of years into the future,
if you often feel helpless or frustrated getting your point across, remember behavior of Buddha or your teacher.
in any case, let go of your attachment and change your point of view to either very low level (physiology of your psychosomatic expressions and the mechanics of the imprint-based associative cycle) or very high level (the perspective of "God").

When you practice like this you can't forget to practice, there is no problem "establishing" practice - every time there is an obstacle in your life it comes as a reminder to practice!

In the same vein, when you notice yourself getting too happy, too self-righteous, enjoying yourself too much, being too puffed up, doing too well - you should pause and check if there is an attachment at play. When you're doing this right, there should be a feeling of balance, some feeling of ambiguity or open-endedness. But with this I am getting into advanced territory... Anyway.

This is what the practice should be on initial stages, this was my main practice for many years - this and the overcoming of spiritual materialism - before I was even introduced to Buddhist philosophy of anatta and shunyata - and only after I mastered those two conceptually, was I introduced to (shikantaza) meditation.

So yeah like I said, to any Westerner jumping straight into meditation I recommend at least five years of preliminary "shila" practice working with attachments (coarse obstacles), then five years of "prajna" practice studying -- and applying! -- anatta and shunyata to remove middling obstacles, and only then the practice of "samadhi" aka meditation.


My local Buddhist temple's resident teacher Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo has this beautiful metaphor of the "poop soup", highly relevant to yours (and the rest of ours) situation.
In this metaphor we accumulate all kinds of neuroses ("poop")     in the bowl of our psyche, until after many years it becomes veritable poop soup. Then, as we get older and more restrained, the poop gets harder and the surface of the soup becomes nice and flat. Couple more years and it gets covered by a layer of beautiful silver fungi, giving the whole thing a surreal appearance of something ethereal and fluffy. We become an adult, sometimes even an admirable person, and almost forget what hides in our bowl under its surface level.
The bowl is full of shit! (excuse my language.)
So when we start meditating, we puncture a hole in the lid of fungi and hard poop and start stirring the content. Guess what happens then? It does not smell nice. To be very honest it stinks and looks nauseating.
But wouldn't it be insincere if we kept pretending to be a nice admirable person while holding on to all that baggage?
We must work through it until our cup gets empty and squeaky clean. There's no "unpleasant side effects of meditation", these are The Results of meditation, its fruit and its blessing.
Keep working until you get through it and come out on the other side.


What is the Buddhist Perspective on Lucid Dreaming?

Lucid dream is a place where you can do more work, more Buddhist practice. For example, if you are afraid of fights you can pick a fight with anyone, man or monster. It's a safe place to try things you can't try in regular life.

Reference: Tibetan Buddhist teacher Tarab Tulku. For more information read Chapter 19 of The Psychology of Awakening anthology by Gay Watson and Stephen Batchelor.


According to my experience in meditation, first time it was happened to me. Do not fear to do the mediation.

These are the steps for Anapana-sathi meditation.

1.Concentrate your mind into breathing process.

2.In that time,try to think about only breathing patterns.

After you do it more times you feel relax in your mind.
It gives you to easily concentrate for your work.


English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon

I personally use the following translations:

Paper copies of Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations of Nikayas (for example Majjhima) for nice smooth English rendition.
Access To Insight for quick and convenient search.
Dharmafarer for in-depth analysis.

When in doubt, I do my own translation with a dictionary (Sanskrit, Pali, I also use a number of Pali-Russian dictionaries). For this, Sutta Central is a good source of well-formatted Pali texts (it also has translations but I don't like their renditions).


The God you speak of, is known as the Great Brahma or Mahabrahma, the first being to appear in the Mahabrahma plane, when the world expands again. Also, take a look at the 31 planes of existence.

The story you're looking for is in DN1:

  "There comes a time, bhikkhus, when after the lapse of a long period this world contracts (disintegrates). While the world is
  contracting, beings for the most part are reborn in the Ābhassara
  Brahma-world. There they dwell, mind-made, feeding on rapture,
  self-luminous, moving through the air, abiding in glory. And they
  continue thus for a long, long period of time.

  "But sooner or later, bhikkhus, after the lapse of a long period, there comes a time when this world begins to expand once again. While
  the world is expanding, an empty palace of Brahmā appears. Then a
  certain being, due to the exhaustion of his life-span or the
  exhaustion of his merit, passes away from the Ābhassara plane and
  re-arises in the empty palace of Brahmā. There he dwells, mind made,
  feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving through the air, abiding in
  glory. And he continues thus for a long, long period of time.

  "Then, as a result of dwelling there all alone for so long a time, there arises in him dissatisfaction and agitation, (and he yearns):
  'Oh, that other beings might come to this place!' Just at that moment,
  due to the exhaustion of their life-span or the exhaustion of their
  merit, certain other beings pass away from the Ābhassara plane and
  re-arise in the palace of Brahmā, in companionship with him. There
  they dwell, mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, moving
  through the air, abiding in glory. And they continue thus for a long,
  long period of time.

  "Thereupon the being who re-arose there first thinks to himself: 'I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the
  Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the Maker and Creator,
  the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the Father of all that
  are and are to be. And these beings have been created by me. What is
  the reason? Because first I made the wish: "Oh, that other beings
  might come to this place!" And after I made this resolution, now these
  beings have come.'

  "And the beings who re-arose there after him also think: 'This must be
  Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the
  Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the Maker and Creator,
  the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the Father of all that
  are and are to be. And we have been created by him. What is the
  reason? Because we see that he was here first, and we appeared here
  after him.'

  "Herein, bhikkhus, the being who re-arose there first possesses longer life, greater beauty, and greater authority than the beings who
  re-arose there after him.

  "Now, bhikkhus, this comes to pass, that a certain being, after passing away from that plane, takes rebirth in this world. Having come
  to this world, he goes forth from home to homelessness. When he has
  gone forth, by means of ardor, endeavor, application, diligence, and
  right reflection, he attains to such a degree of mental concentration
  that with his mind thus concentrated he recollects his immediately
  preceding life, but none previous to that. He speaks thus: 'We were
  created by him, by Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Vanquisher, the
  Unvanquished, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the
  Maker and Creator, the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the
  Father of all that are and are to be. He is permanent, stable,
  eternal, not subject to change, and he will remain the same just like
  eternity itself. But we, who have been created by him and have come to
  this world, are impermanent, unstable, short-lived, doomed to perish.'

Footnote on Ābhassara Brahma-world (by Bhikkhu Bodhi):

  The "world of streaming radiance," the sixth of the fifteen planes in
  the fine-material world (rūpaloka), the lowest order to be exempt from
  the onset of world destruction. The Brahma-world mentioned later is
  destroyed by the conflagration but reappears at an early stage.

The same being is also referenced in DN11:

  "When this was said, the gods of the retinue of Brahma said to the
  monk, 'We also don't know where the four great elements... cease
  without remainder. But there is Brahma, the Great Brahma, the
  Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the
  Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father
  of All That Have Been and Shall Be. He is higher and more sublime than
  we. He should know where the four great elements... cease without
  remainder.'

  "'But where, friends, is the Great Brahma now?'

  "'Monk, we also don't know where Brahma is or in what way Brahma is.
  But when signs appear, light shines forth, and a radiance appears,
  Brahma will appear. For these are the portents of Brahma's appearance:
  light shines forth and a radiance appears.'

  "Then it was not long before Brahma appeared.

  "So the monk approached the Great Brahma and, on arrival, said,
  'Friend, where do these four great elements — the earth property, the
  liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease
  without remainder?'

  "When this was said, the Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am
  Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the
  All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator,
  Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall
  Be.'

  A second time, the monk said to the Great Brahma, 'Friend, I didn't
  ask you if you were Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the
  Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the
  Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have
  Been and Shall Be. I asked you where these four great elements — the
  earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind
  property — cease without remainder.'

  "A second time, the Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am
  Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the
  All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator,
  Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall
  Be.'

  "A third time, the monk said to the Great Brahma, 'Friend, I didn't
  ask you if you were Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the
  Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the
  Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have
  Been and Shall Be. I asked you where these four great elements — the
  earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind
  property — cease without remainder.'

  "Then the Great Brahma, taking the monk by the arm and leading him off
  to one side, said to him, 'These gods of the retinue of Brahma
  believe, "There is nothing that the Great Brahma does not know. There
  is nothing that the Great Brahma does not see. There is nothing of
  which the Great Brahma is unaware. There is nothing that the Great
  Brahma has not realized." That is why I did not say in their presence
  that I, too, don't know where the four great elements... cease without
  remainder. So you have acted wrongly, acted incorrectly, in bypassing
  the Blessed One (the Buddha) in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Go
  right back to the Blessed One and, on arrival, ask him this question.
  However he answers it, you should take it to heart.'


Boddhidharma sat for 9 years.
The last time I was in Japan, I had an oppertunity to sit Zazen in a very old temple. I remember one of the monks talking me through the process of what I should do/expect, etc... Before the sitting commenced.

He gad no idea tgat I'd been sitting fir over a decade, but that's fine. I remember him attempting to discribe what it might be like if I have an "experience" (huge mistake, experience in Zazen can not be reduced to words).

Anyway, when he was done, I just smiled, nodded my head, and told him, I'm not anticipating having any experience. I just intend to sit... Just sit. And that's what I did.

But the fact is, I have had experiance from zazen before, not every time, but it has happened. You have to engage the practice wuth absolutly zero preconceptions, empty your mind, and stay fixed in the moment. Constantly, reducing that moment more and more until it is merely this instant.

When you are in this instant, that means that nothing else exists to you. That moment, that just passed, dies not exist. That moment, which is approaching, does not exist. Nothing exists except this instant. And then... This instant becomes eternity for you. And you are no longer locked in time.

There are no words that can exoress that experience. It dies not resemble any other experience that you can relate to. There is no point in trying to imagine what it might be. If you search for it, you can nit find it, because you have no idea wgat you are searching for.


The Puttamansa Sutta lists four nutriments for the sustenance of beings (sattānaṃ) who have come to be (bhūtānaṃ) and for the support of beings seeking to be (sambhavesīnaṃ), namely:

Edible food, coarse and fine;
Sense-impression;
Volitional thought; and
Consciousness.

For unenlightened beings, craving is included within the nutriment of volitional thought, as stated:

  If the nutriment volitional thought is comprehended, the three kinds of craving are thereby comprehended.

  Puttamansa Sutta

Thus, at a primal level, for every unenlightened living being, craving serves the main objective (of nature) to survive and to reproduce.

As for the enlightened, they survive more skilfully relying on wisdom rather than craving.

The word 'dharma' means 'that which supports' thus craving also supports life but it is an 'akusala dhamma', namely, an unskilful means of support. For example, the suttas state:

  Thus, Ānanda, in dependence upon feeling there is craving; in dependence upon craving there is pursuit; in dependence upon pursuit
  there is gain; in dependence upon gain there is decision-making; in
  dependence upon decision-making there is desire and lust; in
  dependence upon desire and lust there is attachment; in dependence
  upon attachment there is possessiveness; in dependence upon
  possessiveness there is stinginess; in dependence upon stinginess
  there is safeguarding; and because of safeguarding, various evil
  unwholesome phenomena originate—the taking up of clubs and weapons,
  conflicts, quarrels, and disputes, insulting speech, slander and
  falsehoods. Therefore, Ānanda, this craving is the cause, source, origin, and condition for those various evil unwholesome phenomena.

To add, "we" do not crave. To the contrary, it is craving that creates the idea of "we". To quote:

  "Who, O Lord, craves?"

  "The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he craves.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who craves?' would
  be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask
  the question will be 'What is the condition of craving?' And to that
  the correct reply is: 'Feeling is the condition of craving and craving
  is the condition of clinging.'"

  SN 12.12

  An uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person assumes form, feeling, perception, fabrication &/or conscious to be a self. That assumption
  is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what
  is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication?
  To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is
  felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication [of self]
  is born of that.

  SN 22.81


Anybody know what is Nirvana and where we can find it?

It's  hard to know what Nibbana is without experiencing  it. The same as it  can't be known what an orange tastes like until it's taste is experienced, it can only be described with words. It's easier to say what it's not.

Nibbana is not nothingness or annihilation. Nibbana is the highest goal, better than the bliss of Heaven.

Nibbana is a state of great renunciation. There is Heaven within Samsara but it's imperminent and Nibbana is the   final permanent liberation beyond Heaven and outside of Samsara.

Nibbana is an end of the cravings which cause all the suffering of birth, old age, disease, death, lamentation and fear.

Nirvana is the cure for our suffering here in the material world of Samsara caused by craving sensual pleasure and seeing reality as we want to see it rather than how it really is.

It's the correct understandung, virtue, peace and clarity of reality as it really is that leads to Nibbana.