Types of Meditation in Theravada Buddhism

At least forty:

Earth device

Water device

Fire device

Air or wind device

Blue device

Yellow device

Red device

White device

Space device

Consciousness device

A corpse that is bloated

A corpse that is livid (has patchy discoloration)

A corpse that is festering (trickling with pus in broken places)

A corpse that is cut up

A corpse that is gnawed

A corpse that is scattered

A corpse that is hacked and scattered

A corpse that is bleeding

A corpse that is worm-infested

A corpse that is a skeleton

Contemplation of the Buddha

Contemplation of the Dhamma

Contemplation of the Sangha

Contemplation of Virtue

Contemplation of Charity

Contemplation of the Devas

Mindfulness of Death

Mindfulness of the Physical Body

Mindfulness with Breathing

Contemplation of Calmness

Loving-kindness

Compassion

Sympathy

Equanimity

Sphere of Infinity of Space

Sphere of Infinite Consciousness

Sphere of No-thingness

Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception

Contemplation of the loathsomeness of food

Analysis of the four physical elements

http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=40_meditation_subjects


Is there a source for the story about the sun being covered by the cloud?

it is not exactly what you want, but first there is this

  "Just as, monks, from time to time a strong wind scatters and causes
  to vanish a great mass of clouds that has arisen, even so a monk who
  cultivates and makes much of the seven limbs of wisdom from time to
  time scatters and causes to vanish the ill, unprofitable states that
  rise and rise again.

http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/sn/05_mv/sn05.46.099-110.wood.pts.htm#p107

http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/sn/05_mv/sn05.46.099-110.wood.pts.htm#p106

what you seek is found in Theragatha

  Who once was heedless,[1] but later is not,    brightens the world
  like the moon set free from a cloud.

  His evil-done deed[2] is replaced with skillfulness:    he brightens
  the world    like the moon set free from a cloud.

http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/ati/kd/thag/thag.255.than.ati.htm

and in MN http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/bd/mn/mn.112.olds.bd.htm

  Then, by letting go these five bindups, afflictions of the heart,
  crippling to wisdom, separating myself from sense pleasures,
  separating myself from unskillful things, with rethinking, with
  reminiscing,[13] there came the pleasurable Enthusiasm born of
  solitude inhabiting the first burning.

  Then, rethinking and reminiscing calmed, inwardly impassive, become
  unified in heart, without rethinking, without reminiscing, there came
  the pleasurable Enthusiasm born of serinity inhabiting the second
  burning.

  Then, Enthusiasm fading, living detached, recollected and self-aware,
  there came the experiencing of the bodily pleasure inhabiting the
  third burning of which the Aristocrats delcare:

  'Detached, recollected, he lives happily.'

  Then, letting go of pleasure, letting go of pain, their precursers in
  mental ease and discomfort having found their own way home, without
  pain or pleasure, there came the utter purity of the detached mind
  inhabiting the fourth burning.

  Then, thus with calm heart, pure, clean, debtless, without
  afflictions, become soft, capable, steadfast, unshakable, the heart
  bent down to knowledge of the eradication of the corruptions.

  Then the knowledge: 'This is pain' emerged as though a splendid light
  from a dark cloud, the knowledge: 'This is the source of pain' emerged
  as though a splendid light from a dark cloud, the knowledge: 'This is
  the end to pain' emerged as though a splendid light from a dark cloud,
  the knowledge: 'This is the way to walk to the end of pain' emerged as
  though a splended light from a dark cloud.

  Then the knowledge: 'This is corruption' emerged as though a splended
  light from a dark cloud, the knowledge: 'This is the source of
  corruption' emerged as though a splended light from a dark cloud, the
  knowledge: 'This is the end to corruption' emerged as though a
  splended light from a dark cloud, the knowledge: 'This is the way to
  walk to the end of corruption' emerged as though a splended light from
  a dark cloud.

  When I knew thus, saw thus, I was freed in heart from the corruption
  of sense pleasures, freed in heart from the corruption of living,
  freed in heart from the corruption of blindness.

  In freedom I thought: "I am free' and had the knowledge:

  'Birth: left behind, carrying on as Brahma: finished, duty's doing:
  done, no further it'n-n-at'n is to be known for me'.

  Even so, my friends, thus knowing, seeing, with regard to this body
  with consciousness and all external signs, I say that 'Bias towards
  me- my-making is uprooted.'

http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/pts/an/10_tens/an10.015.wood.pts.htm

You also have the variant with the rain cloud
http://obo.genaud.net/a/dhamma-vinaya/wp/sn/05_mv/sn05.45.149-160.bodh.wp.htm


What might be the long therm effects of ignoring ones duties?

In AN6.54 there was an ungrateful monk Dhammika, who craved solitude and was not hospitable to visiting monks. Eventually his kamma caught up with him and:

  Then the local lay followers went up to Venerable Dhammika and said to him:
  “Sir, please leave all seven monasteries in our native land.”
  Then Venerable Dhammika thought:
  “I’ve been banished by the local lay followers from all seven monasteries in my native land.

Because of his lack of gratitude and sense of duty, Dhammika was forsaken by all.

Distressed and woeful, Dhammika went to the Buddha, who scolded him:

  “When someone abuses, annoys, or argues with an ascetic, the ascetic doesn’t abuse, annoy, or argue back at them. That’s how an ascetic stands by an ascetic’s duty.”

And Dhammika acknowledged his fault:

  “I was not standing by an ascetic’s duty when the local lay followers banished me from all seven of the monasteries in my native land.”

The Buddha then directed:

  But someone who abuses and insults a single person accomplished in view with malicious intent makes even more bad karma. Why is that? Brahmin Dhammika, I say that any injury done by those outside of the Buddhist community does not compare with what is done to one’s own spiritual companions. So you should train like this: ‘We will have no malicious intent for those who we want to have as our spiritual companions.’ That is how you should train.

These are some of the long term effects of ignoring ones duties.


華嚴 (Hua-yan) literally means "flower garland". The name is the Chinese translation of "Avatamsaka". The name Flower Garland is meant to suggest the crowning glory of a Buddha's profound understanding of ultimate reality. The Avatamsaka sutra contains the following verse:

In each dust-mote of these worlds
Are countless worlds and Buddhas...
From the tip of each hair of Buddha's body
Are revealed the indescribable Pure Lands...
The indescribable infinite Lands
All ensemble in a hair's tip [of Buddha]


Do Buddhists see reality as consensual or individual?

From Buddhist perspective, phenomenal (experiential) reality is dependently co-arisen phenomena. In other words, experience depends on convergence of a number of factors. Some of those factors are common across multiple cases of perception, and some are specific to an individual case of perception. To the extent that some factors are shared, realities are similar. To the extent that some factors are unique, realities are dissimilar.

This topic is discussed in depth in a very advanced work of 19th century Buddhist philosopher Mipham, called Beacon of Certainty (topic #6). For a more casual read, check out The Prayer of Kuntuzangpo. Also see Lamp of Mahamudra section one, "Ground Mahamudra".

P.S.

The objects (and subjects!) appearing in each of the realities are not truly existing. But there is only one ground underlying them all. To realize the true meaning of this ground is to be Buddha.

There is an infinite number of valid, internally not inconsistent, but not necessarily compatible with each other, ways to cognize this ground. Although all cognitions (including cognition of the true meaning of the ground!) are construed on the basis of temporarily combined elements (so in this sense no one cognition is fundamentally better than any other), however, since there's a case of being aware (vs. being unaware) of dependently-coarisen nature of objects (and subjects!) of perception, there's a sense in which we can speak of an awakened cognition. Or as Master Dogen said in Genjo-Koan:

  When all dharmas are [seen as] the Buddha-Dharma, then there is delusion and realization, there is practice, there is life and there is death, there are buddhas and there are ordinary beings. When the myriad dharmas are each not of the self, there is no delusion and no realization, no buddhas and no ordinary beings, no life and no death.


In Buddhas Time Did Kings give Freedom to His Sex Wives(Anttappura Wives)?

One such instance was King Bimbisara giving freedom to Khema to enter the order. Many more may be found in the cemeteries and many may not even be documented!


There really isn't anything quite like ashrama in Buddhism, at least as it applies to an individual person's life. Buddhism takes a simple view that one is born, lives, and then dies, within a cycle of saṃsāra (a belief shared with Hinduism). Within the context of that life, one is either awakened or one isn't.

I think it's interesting, since Buddhism defines many other "stages" involving aspects of life (just not about life itself):

Four stages of enlightenment
Stages along the path to liberation (in Tibetan Buddhism)
Jhāna stages of meditation
Seven stages of purification
Seven stages of mind training (in Tibetan Buddhism)

Also: Happy birthday!


Help locating a widespread quote attributed to Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche

In Smiling at Fear, in the chapter titled "Facing Yourself", Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche says:

The only way to relax with yourself is to open your heart. Then you
have a chance to see who you are. This experience is like opening a
parachute. When you jump out of an airplane and open the chute, you
are there in the sky by yourself. Sometimes it is very frightening,
but on the other hand, when you take this step, the whole situation,
the whole journey, makes sense. You have to actually do it, and then
you will understand.


Why don't teachers just tell us the answers?

Because the question is supposed to "point directly at your mind" like the finger pointing at the moon. The answer could not do better. In fact, you learn more from trying to solve an apparent contradiction. If anything, you learn at least that you are frustrated over not getting it. What matters most is not the object (a koan, a hua tou) but how you hold it in mind, what it does to your mind, how you try to make sense of it, etc.

The funny thing is that we are so habituated to run after external objects and dive into them that it is difficult to look inward. A proof is that we are more concerned with the object (the koan) than we are with our mind. We forget to pay attention to what our experience tells us, not of the object we experience, but our mind that experiences. Because of this, we know little of the mind, including our own. It is easy to recognize a tree when we see one; it is way more difficult to recognize attachment, anger, belligerence, spite, etc. when they arise in our continuum because we seldom look inward, we are not familiarized with it.

As far I understand, the point with Hua tou and Koan is rather to stay with it and learn from how you relate to it. For instance, why is it that contradictions make you unsettled? How do you relate to frustration? Does frustration even arise when you try to solve a case? What makes you think it has to be solved? How do you try to make sense of things?

In Vipassana, some do what they call "meditation with an anchor" (the anchor often being the breath). Here, it is quiet similar. You learn a great deal by trying to stay with an object such as a Hua Tou. You learn why it is difficult to stay with it, why you lose it over and over again, etc. So it is not the answer that matter much.

Kazuaki Tanahashi 's introduction to Dogen's Shobogenzo is quiet informative and very enjoyable. But then, I am not that qualified when it comes to anything different from Tibetan Buddhism.


What canon do you follow to modify the Buddha's views as knowledge advances?

It would depend on the information, but when in doubt, I go back to the basics of the Four Noble Truths, and the Buddha's last words of "Be a light unto yourself." and would see where the new information fit in with those. Without an idea of how a Teaching might be disproved, it is difficult to speculate.

If ultimately, it was somehow proven, and I feel this is unlikely, the Teaching is incorrect, then another path would need to be considered.


Person A has unwholesome kamma, so unwholesome kamma make him get immorality resultant. Person A's kamma never force person B  to do unwholesome kamma to person A.

person A can get immorality resultant from anyway such as back pain himself, no one pain him. So although if person B pain person A: there is just person A's kamma give immorality resultant to person A, not to person B. And there is just person B's kamma give immorality resultant to person B, not to person A.

Kamma give immorality/morality resultant to it's person. Kamma will not give immorality/morality resultant to the others.

There are the other causes by person A (except kamm-cause) that let's person B do kamma to person A. But person B get those other causes because of person B's kamma. There is still not person A' kamma give resultant to person B to let him meet person A and get those other causes work.

See kamma-paccaya and vipākapaccaya in paṭṭhāna. Learn abhidhamma to get the easiest way to understand tipitaka.


Is it (in a strict view) possible to go to inside a temple/pagoda sanctum with a wheelchair or should it be placed outside?

Where do you live or where is the temple you want to go to?

A good idea is to either visit, write or call (if possible) the Temple and ask about their options. Some remote temples might not be accessible via wheelchair due to infrastructure or lack there of.

A list with a couple of places to visit temples:

There is a temple in Canada that is wheelchair-accessible from the backside.
There is also a temple in Thailand.
Wheelchair-accessible Tanah Lot Temple in Bali.
Wheelchair-accessible Sensoji Buddhist Temple in Asakusa, Tokyo.
Recommended Temples to visit in Tokyo with wheelchair-access.
Here is a link to New Kadampa Festival for wheelchair-users.
A great post about a wheelchair-user who visited temples in both Cambodia and Thailand. She mentions that she was able to visit even temples in the remote countryside.

  and/or orthotics?

Regarding the use of orthotics inside Temples is difficult to answer. Many temples require one to remove shoes when entering as a sign of respect. Other temples might give out cloth to wrap over e.g. a shoe or orthotic. There are many ways to show respect. It would be a good idea to also ask about this topic when contacting a temple. Some temples are very strict while others are more relaxed.


I just read this, and it is pretty solid. It's from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, so it should meet the requirement that it be an academic text.

I recommend also reading the suttas (source texts), many of which are available here and simply reading them critically. A third option is to buy a text such as this which has suttas as well as commentary from a prominent Buddhist scholar, Bhikku Bodhi (Although he is Buddhist).

One reason why I would personally urge caution when reading anything without having the source texts is that they can be easily misrepresented. For example, one modern position that is not uncommon is that the teaching of rebirth was a metaphor or was simply a cultural belief. If one reads the source texts (the suttas) thoroughly however, it is very difficult to defend this view as the Buddha claims to have direct, personal knowledge of rebirth (e.g., in the Bhaya-bherava Sutta).

I hope this helps. Best.


How does one develop right view in the space of multiple views?

Ballanced skepticism.

You cannot force yourself to believe in rebirth. You can only educate your mind not to grasp firmly to the view that there isn't. If you adopt a ballanced attitude, that considers the several options without being partial to any option, then I think it's close to the best possible attitude. The true right view, of believing in rebirth, non material worlds, the existence of arahats, and so on, can only arise when you verify it yourself, beyond doubt. Until then, it's all provisional. So don't grasp views, especially those that might become an obstacle to liberation. Because I believe this is actualy the main point.


Is their any reference in buddhism about time travell and parallel universe travell?

One Sutta which such reference occur is Rohitassa Sutta.

  Rohitassa’s astral journey

  Once in the past, venerable sir, I was a seer named Rohitassa Bhoja,putta [son of Bhoja], possessed
  of spiritual power, able to travel through the sky [space].  My speed was such, venerable sir, that I
  could move just as fast as an archer with a strong bow,
  trained, skillful, well-practised, experienced,
  could easily shoot past the shadow of a palmyra tree with a light arrow.

  My stride was such, venerable sir, that it spanned the eastern ocean and the western ocean.
  Then, venerable sir, the wish arose in me, ‘I will reach the end of the world by going.’

  Possessing such speed and such a stride, and having a lifespan of a hundred years, without pausing
  except to eat, drink, take meals and snacks, to void and pee, to sleep and dispel tiredness. Yet I died
  along the way without reaching the end of the world.

  It is wonderful, venerable sir! It is amazing, venerable sir! How well this was stated by the
  Blessed One: ‘As to that end of the world, friend, where one is not born, does not age, does not die, does
  not pass away, does not arise—it cannot be known, seen or reached by going, I say.’”

Moral story of this is that space travel is not a way to find a way out of unsatisfactoriness and you would be dead before you real such goal through space exploration.

Also such references are found in the Abhidhamma. More on this see this answer and others.


I would say that this word has been conflated and in my experience unnecessary for entering jhana. please refer to the instructions on how to enter jhana found in the Sutta Pitaka.


Buddhism in context, differences through SE Asia?

Burma is the only one in the world that still have buddhist ancient learning system (mukkhapāṭha). The strongest buddhism country is Burma. The tipitaka-strictest nikāya is Shwegyin Nikaya of Burma.

About a hundred year ago, in colonization war, thailand began to lost our tipitaka memorizing system. We need to get western's learning culture to protect our land from colonial possession. The central region of Siam reform memorizing learning system to academic learning system. Mun's students (Phun acaro, etc) were the last tipitaka memorizers of thailand.

Mun was the north-eastern region of thailand, that got reform order from the central region. And Lao was the north-eastern colony of thailand at that time. So Lao tipitaka memorizing learning system had began to lost since that time, too. Kambodia, also.

Nowadays, Lao and Kambodia monks equal to thai mahanikaya tradition. They are not forest tradition.

Thailand and srilanka have lost tipitaka learning system in colonization war.

Thailand began to lost our tipitaka learning system about 1855 and after that years (Bowring Treaty).

The king trying to protect thailand by changing every rules of us. They also changed learning system of monk, too. They cancle memorized learning system, then took a writing learning system instead. We also started to lose abhidhamma learning system  at this time, too.

Writing learning system is for kamaguna 5. They save memorizing times to consume kamaguna 5.

Arahanta haven't writen. They keep tipitaka in their mind.

Before that time we still having tipitakathara, such as mun bhuritutto (he not memorized enough to be bhikkhu-parisūpaṭṭhāpaka). But after the changing, we never have tipitakathara anymore. The elder tipitakathara died. Never have any newer to be instead of them.

So, thailand loose our tipitaka learning system so long time ago in colonization war.

Buddhadasa was a monk after we lost tipitaka learning system. He is tipitaka cutter.


A list of center can be found in:

https://www.dhamma.org/
http://www.buddhanet.net/

Also it is best not to discuss meditative experiences and many traditions forbid this as individual experiences differ from one person to another since the sum total of your Sankara (conditioning /fabrication) differs. When you discuss experience what happens if people crave for different experiences and your meditation becomes unsuccessful.


What is Buddhism's view about debating teachings?

Another way to put your question (re-phrase) is... "Is criticizing other religions allowed in Buddhism?"

If that criticism is fair and aims to correct others, then it’s allowed and is a good thing to do. As it is mentioned above in Cula-dukkhakkhandha Sutta, Jainism is criticized by Supreme Buddha.

Supreme Buddha was one of the first crusaders against caste system, an apartheid evil ideology started by Aryans who used it to suppress indigenous Indian people. Lord Buddha was a social reformer and thoroughly criticized the animal sacrifices and discrimination of women which was common in the Hindu society.

A heartfelt touching discourse of Lord Buddha on animal sacrifice comes in the Sutta Nipata, Brahmana-dhammika Sutta. In this discourse, it is discussed about the ethical conduct fit for a Brahmin. Lord Buddha speaks respectfully of ancient Brahmins who rejected disdainfully the taking of life and never allowed their religious rites to be contaminated by the blood of poor animals. But corruption came upon, and they started the wicked practice of animal sacrifices to please gods. When the knife was laid on the neck of cow, the gods themselves cried out in horror, seeing that crime of ingratitude and insensitivity committed on an animal that was such a faithful worker, such a sustain-er of life, to humans.

In the Agganya Sutta, Supreme Buddha focuses on the Brahman idea from Wrig Veda that Brahmans came through the mouth of Maha Brahma/God; thus they are supreme. Lord Buddha questions the Brahmins as to how they can claim so when they see day to day that women in the Brahmin caste get pregnant, give birth, and take care of their children? Don’t they understand that they all came from the mother’s womb, not from the Brahma’s mouth?

‘One is not low because of birth nor does birth make one holy. Deeds alone make one low, deeds alone make one holy.’
– Supreme Buddha (Dhammapadha)


As already mentioned, any sort of identity matter is dealt with as anatta in buddhism as far as i can tell. That likely goes for any form of gender identity, however it may present itself.
However, i'm not sure that the idea of anatta pertains to transcendence, because the word seems to connotate tanha in my understanding: It may lead us into desiring the notion of an elevated state, whereas anatta is arguably a question of no state at all.
The second half of your question seems like a question deemed unanswerable in buddhism (avyākata). For instance, this is mentioned in the Sabbasava Sutta:

"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'
"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it is for eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html


How do Buddhists justify or explain that monks and/or temples amass and use wealth?

One should feel pity for those ignorant monks for they're sowing some very bad seeds for their future's well-being:

  Bhikkhus, there are these five themes that should often be reflected upon by a woman or a man, by a householder or one gone forth. What five? (1) A woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth, should often reflect thus: ‘I am subject to old age; I am not exempt from old age.’ (2) A woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth, should often reflect thus: ‘I am subject to illness; I am not exempt from illness.’ (3) A woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth, should often reflect thus: ‘I am subject to death; I am not exempt from death.’ (4) A woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth, should often reflect thus: ‘I must be parted and separated from everyone and everything dear and agreeable to me.’ (5) A woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth, should often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do.’ ~~ AN 5.57 ~~


Are monks allowed to travel during the rain retreat?

It's seven days and only if there is a reason, in a specific (but long) list of potential reasons, mostly pertaining to Buddhist practice. The only true exception I can think of to the rule is the case of obstacles to keeping the rains. As Thanissaro explains:

  Mv.III.9.1–Mv.III.11.13 gives a long list of valid obstacles, which Pv.VI.4 divides into
  four sorts: dangers to life, dangers to the holy life, a threatened split in the Community,
  and an actual split in the Community.

  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc2.pdf


Is Enlightment ultimatelly up to you (Karma and Freewill)?

Enlightenment comes as a natural result of the meditation practise. When you practise meditation with proper effort you'll realize very quickly that this is path of freedom from suffering. So with experience a person realizes the benefits of meditation and that realization can lead the person to get involved with meditation more deeply.

It is "not" possible for a person to not become enlightened If s/he is able to get rid of his physical and mental addictions, learns to practise mindfulness correctly and practises mindfulness and meditation for long periods of time. But modern life's requirements, the person's attachment to wrong ideas/beliefs and the possible mental or physical problems limits a person's conditions to do what is necessary in the path of freedom from suffering. So the chances to have success in the path is not just about freewill or karma. It's about both of them.

You don't need to be a Buddhist or subscribe to any religion or tradition to have benefits from spirituality. Also Buddhism really leads people to become Non-Buddhists If one follows Buddhism correctly. Just like Thich Nhat Hanh said "Buddha is made of non-Buddha elements".

If you want to start to walk in the path, this map can be helpful to you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErN4a5qvxok


Is it only possible to pay attention to one thing at a time?

The teacher is correct.

It is only possible for the mind to hold a single object at a time. Thinking that the mind is able to hold multiple objects at the same time is merely an illusion of continuity. It is just the mind shifting very rapidly between objects and mindfulness is not yet strong enough to register/discern that.

As mindfulness, concentration and insight matures that fact will gradually become more apparent.

By practicing Vipassana meditation one can come to clearly experience this fact.


Is working in government insurance company right livelihood?

I don't see any reason why wouldn't it be - it is not meat business or dealing with arms, or criminal activity, therefore isn't causing harm as a result of such business dealings.

After all, insurance is a positive thing as it helps the person in the case of unforeseen event.

Also here, What is exactly Right Livelihood as a reference from sutras. Furthermore, I advise watching What is right livelihood by Ajahn Brahm where it’s thoroughly explained.

From my perspective, make sure the company is not scammers and make it clear that your religion does not allow you to lie and twist the truth if sales is your department. Your intentions on why you work are important here.


This answer is only from the Theravada viewpoint. It's likely that you can find more diverse meditation techniques in Vajrayana.
Shambhavi Mudra is apparently an eyebrow center gazing gesture.
This source states:

Shambhavi Mudra is an eye-crossing technique which is used as a hack
to activate the parasympathetic nervous system—which is cognate with
the medulla oblongata and the ajna chakra (or the so-called third
eye). A sign that the mudra is being practiced properly is the result
of having pressure build in the sinus cavities.

While there is no Shambhavi Mudra in Theravada Buddhism, the closest thing to it is parimukham. Please read this answer for a detailed analysis on the term parimukham, with respect to the mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati) meditation, in the Pali suttas.
This is often translated as concentrating on the sensation of the breath at the tip  of the nose in the mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati) meditation. That does not refer to the tip of the nose at the eyebrow center, but rather, it refers to the nostrils and area around the nose and mouth where the sensation of the breath can be felt.
But the sensation of the breath can also be felt at the diaphragm and abdomen. Please also see this answer.
The concept of chakras, and stimulating the nervous and endocrinal system is also not found in Theravada Buddhism.
On another note, there is however, something similar to Kechari Mudra in Buddhism, in this question. But again, the purpose is different. It's not to stimulate the nervous and endocrinal system.
The purpose of Buddhist meditation is to still the mind and use it to observe the processes of the mind and the mind-body connection, to understand the nature of the mind-body, and how it relates to the four noble truths, dependent origination and the three marks of existence. It's not meant for obtaining psychic abilities or supernatural powers - though that may be possible.


It depends on who perceives it, depends on what's being talked about, and it can be the both at the same time.

Eastern philosophy and spirituality is very different from our western logic. For us, it must be A or not A, for them it can be A and not A at the same time. In Shunryu Suzuki's "Zen Mind, Beginners Mind" there is a handful of paradoxes.

Coming back to the question, to the western mindset it seems that being active is good and being passive is bad. But it wouldn't be correct to assert that Buddhism is active just to say that it is good. So I prefer to say that enlightenment isn't one nor another. Or, in mystical terms, it is a balance between active and passive energies.

Meditation can look like a very passive practice, since you stay still, you stop moving, you stop talking, you calm down thinking and other mind processes. Then you stay there passive to noise, to itches, to mosquitoes, to pain, to chatter in the mind, to boredom, and so on.

Now, if you look from another perspective, meditation is very active. Nowadays people fill their days with activities, there is always something to do avoid tedium. Usually when someone starts meditating, it requires a great amount of effort to not move and to calm down the thoughts. People usually need to actively practice meditation to achieve subtler states of mind.

You will never listen someone saying something like "There was nothing to do and I was bored and then I suddenly realized that I was meditating."

Now, in enlightenment the underlying constant existential suffering isn't produced. It isn't fed, as if the ground of mind wasn't fertile for growing suffering. So if it doesn't exist, there can't be a relation of passivity or activity to it.

If you take mundane suffering such as physical pain or emotional pain, it keeps happening, but there won't be a "me" that feels pain. But there is just pain. You could say that enlightenment is passive because there is just a stream of phenomena that flows and between these phenomena there is pain. You could also say that enlightenment is active because there is complete presence and clear awareness of all phenomena that emerges, and nothing we judge as bad could produce the slightest suffering.

And finally, "active" and "passive" are just concepts. If you are taking the path to enlightenment, instead of trying to define it take the path to get there. And if you are just trying to define it, be warned that words and thoughts are too limited for this task.


i express anger or sadness, i should look to detach or disassociate
  myself from such emotions.

Not! Stop hypothesizing and simply observe the events/experience at their unsullied form.
When you say "I express anger", it's already sullied. You have assumed the existence of an 'I'. Anger is anger. So simply notice it as anger. Not 'I'! Same with sadness and other emotions. Don't look to do anything with them. Just observe and see if they qualify as an 'I' or 'self'.

  Are meditation and mindfulness the only methods of actualization?

There's no actualization required. Anatta is already actual. It's similar to saying "how do I make the world round?". It's already round, you just need to realize it.
Satipattana meditation is the only way to purify the mind. Buddha called it the "Ekayano Maggo".The one and only way.


Where did the belief about monks' mothers going to heaven come from?

This belief comes from a popular Chinese Buddhist tale in Mulian saves his mother from Hell.

Mulian Saves His Mother From Hell is a popular Chinese Buddhist tale originating in the 3rd century CE, inspired by tales from India of Maudgalyayana, who becomes Mulian in the Chinese stories. Mulian, a virtuous monk, seeks the help of the Buddha to rescue his mother, who has been condemned to the lowest and most painful purgatory in karmic retribution for her transgressions. Mulian cannot rescue her by his individual effort, however, but is instructed by the Buddha to offer food and gifts to monks and monasteries on the 15th day of the 7th lunar month, which established the Ghost Festival (Chinese: 鬼 節; pinyin: guijie). The monk's devotion to his mother reassured Chinese that Buddhism did not undermine Confucian filial piety and helped to make Buddhism into a Chinese religion.
The story developed many variations and appeared in many forms..

There are many variations and from that comes the simple belief that if a filial son could descend to Avici Hell and save his mother, a filial son will will always saves his mother especially if he is a monk. In Confucianism filial duty is inculcated and taken for granted


Nature of dependent origination, and is Buddhism non-duality?

Is dependent arising meant for us to understand the arising of suffering

According to the Pali scriptures, yes. Refer to SN 12.2 or AN 3.61.

  or is it also meant to describe how phenomena in the outside World
  arises dependent on other conditions for instance how water and sun
  causes a flower to grow.

No. The Buddha taught about suffering & its cessation (MN 22; SN 56.31; AN 3.61; etc).

  I Think Nagarjuna says that dependent origination is not only
  showing how suffering arises but also how phenomena in the World
  arises.

Nagarjuna has his own philosophy. You are free to follow Nagarjuna rather than the Buddha.

  He uses a sutra in the Pali Canon where the Buddha said that this
  World is dominated by a duality of existence and non existence then he
  continued when one sees the origination and cessation of the World
  existence and non existence do not occur to one anymore.

The above is a misunderstanding of SN 12.15. Its funny how you think one single sutta that uses words (namely, "atthitañceva" & "natthitañca") that are difficult to translate defines what the Buddha taught. Possibly, the discussion of the word 'atthi' at this link can help you.

  This seems to confirm what Nagarjuna said that dependent
  origination is not only describing how suffering originate but how
  phenomena in the World also originate?.

No. When the Pali suttas use the word "world" ("loka"), this does not necessarily refer to the physical world. Refer to SN 12.44 and AN 4.45, which use the word "the world" synonymously with the word "suffering".

  I have Another question also how would you describe
  Thervada,Mahayana,Vajryana and Tibetan Buddhism are they non dual or
  not and please describe to me the logic why you answered the way you
  did also.

The Buddha did not teach "non-duality". Refer to my answer here.


When I say, "find a teacher" I just mean, don't rely on your understanding of books alone. Go to an actual resident Buddhist master of any denomination, like a teaching Theravada bhikkhu or a Zen Master or a Tibetan Buddhism Master (Rinpoche). They usually reside at a temple (or a private residence turned into a temple) and have little sanghas formed around them. Talk to them, hang around them, and validate your insights against theirs. More often than not they got enough realization to at least check where you are obviously mistaken and point out the blind spots.

Sometimes they do lecture, like actual teachers, or do Q&A - and at other times they build personal connections with students and become mentors. Expectedly, the depth varies.

As for diploma, a good rule of thumb is to prefer someone within a tradition, who can point out their lineage, to someone who is merely self-proclaimed (with rare exceptions). They usually have some paraphernalia and entourage, e.g. my Zen master had a scroll on the wall listing his entire lineage of teachers all the way back to the Buddha, not to mention that he had converted a barn into an actual traditional meditation hall in Korean Seon tradition.

Of course being a part of tradition does not always mean the teacher is good and has complete realization. You can never know for sure, until you are a teacher yourself - but a good rule of thumb is to see if they can cut through masks and bullshit and gently touch the student's heart.

If you search www.buddhanet.info you should be able to find someone in your locality; I see a Vajrayana temple in Ardennes.

Finally, if you don't have anyone nearby, or anyone you like and can connect with, at least find a more senior fellow practitioner that can provide some guidance and support.


In Vipassana, what's the difference between 1st and 2nd "knowledge of dissolution" (paṭhama- & dutiya- bhanga-ñāṇa)

Bhanga-ñāṇa or "knowledge of dissolution" is the first major direct (nonconceptual) experience of Emptiness. Although every practitioner's experience is unique, there are some common themes that can help one recognize the milestones as they are passed. Here is one description of bhanga-ñāṇa by Patrick Kearney of buddhanet.net, a dharma teacher in the lineage of Mahasi Sayadaw:

  What happens next? The meditator’s awareness and concentration continues to develop. As a result, he now sees only the passing away of phenomena. It is as if his awareness is so fast, it is faster than the experiences he is examining, As soon as he places his attention on some aspect of his experience, it disappears. This is the knowledge of dissolution (bhanga-nana). In a weak aspect, this can take the form of the meditator apparently losing his concentration. It seems like he can no longer focus on anything; his attention keeps sliding off whatever he tries to look at. It can be lie trying to grasp something that slips out of your hand the moment you touch it. In a stronger aspect, it can be like falling into the black hole of Calcutta. Wherever you look, there is nothing - only blackness. The meditator is shocked, because he used to be able to focus on anything. Now, it seems, he can focus on nothing at all. All his good work has dissolved into nothing.

In reality, this and the following several stages are a very painful experience. It feels like losing your mind, so frustrating it is. You can't even focus on your frustration -- the moment you look at frustration, it slips right through your fingers. This is truly the very bottom of "the dark night of the soul". All preconceptions collapse. You really see the BS-ness, the emptiness of all mental formations. Up until this moment you were holding onto the hope that something must be real, but now your ego is exhausted and can no longer maintain yourself.

As for the distinction between the first and the second "knowledge of dissolution", when the thought-form you are "looking" at collapses, falls apart, and dissolves right in front of your "eyes" -- that's the first bhanga-ñāṇa, and when, in utter frustration and disbelief, you look at this "looking", and it itself collapses, falls apart, and dissolves -- that's the second bhanga-ñāṇa.

In case you don't believe my first-hand experience ;) here is an explanation by Ven. Sayadaw U Jotika in his "A Map of The Journey" (a transcript of a series of preparatory talks given prior to a meditation retreat held in Australia):

  At this stage, every time the meditator is meditating -- no matter what the object is, even the movement, (without paying attention to the shape anymore but to the sensation) - the meditator is aware of the sensation and the very fast passing away one after another very clearly. All the shapes and solidity disappears, which means that you don't pay attention to shape or solidity anymore. You pay attention only to sensations and their passing away very quickly.

  Seeing the object passing away very quickly is the first bhanga-ñāṇa, paṭhama-bhanga-ñāṇa. Seeing the wisdom passing away is the second bhanga-ñāṇa, dutiya-bhanga-ñāṇa. The two together make the bhanga-ñāṇa complete.

  In any insight there is the beginning and the maturity of insight. In the beginning you see the object passing away very quickly. When this becomes more mature, stronger, you see the passing away of consciousness, vipassana consciousness, and the wisdom also passing away together.

    You notice one thing, that passes away and
    that consciousness which is aware of
    that passing away also passes away.

  ...

  Because of seeing this passing away, passing away, continuously you feel
  that this process is dangerous; it is passing away so quickly you cannot rely on it. You cannot identify with it. You see that nobody can identify with
  this and hold on to it and rely on it. There is no reliance. There
  is nothing reliable in these mental and physical phenomena.

As interesting as it is to read about these things, my advice to all practitioners is to forget about these stages/levels and instead focus on your practice. In Buddhism, knowing stages does not help you get there. Buddhist experience cannot be contrived! Once every 5 years you might want to check yet another stages-of-the-path text, congratulate yourself on another achievement, confirm that your intuition was right again -- and then forget about stages for the next 5 years.


Does anyone read the part 2 of Nagarjuna's karika as an argument about infinite divisibility?

Here is the translation that by Jay L. Garfield of that same verse:

  2.25 One that both is and is not a goer does not go in any of the three ways. Therefore, going, goer and that which is to be gone over are non-existent.

This is from the second chapter of Nagarjuna's Fundamental Treatise where Nagarjuna refutes the inherent existence of motion: going and that which goes. This verse is the last of the chapter and Je Tsongkhapa in his Ocean of Reasoning explains (by adopting Buddhapalita's earlier explanation) the three ways refer to:

That which is gone
That over which one is going
That which over which one has yet to go

ie., the three times. Je Tsongkhapa says there is another way to understand the three aspects here (by adopting Chandrakirti's explanation) as referring to:

That which is a goer
That which is not a goer
That which is and is not a goer

In sum, the verse can be read as refuting the inherent existence of the goer, the place one is to go, or the going. All of these exist as mere conventions. There is no essence of motion.

Anyway, maybe you can update your question to indicate how you arrive at the conclusion that time cannot be both infinitely divisible and extended? That's basically saying that time cannot be regarded as modeled by the real numbers... but rather must be the infinite integers?? I don't think this is what Nagarjuna is saying because even if time is infinitely divisible and extended it would still be proper to model time by the past, present and future.

Let's say that the past, present, and future are modeled by real numbers. All we have to do is identify the present with a specific real number and say all those numbers less than, but not equal to the present model the past and all those numbers greater than, but not equal to the present model the future. Even with this, Nagarjuna's argument in the chapter would still accomplish the goal: refuting the inherent existence of the goer, the act of going, and the place where one goes...

You also refer to verse 23 in your update, but this verse according to Je Tsongkhapa is just a refutation to the idea that there is more than one action or "going" that makes a goer go. Nagarjuna's position is that only one action is tenable because a two-fold action makes no sense. Although it is obvious that it takes time to perform an action, these verses and this chapter do not explicitly deal with time. The chapter is about motion and how motion does not inherently exist.

However, there is a chapter in Nagarjuna's Treatise that explicitly deals with time. That is chapter 19 and there is one verse in particular that deals with whether or not time "endures":

  19.5 A nonenduring time is not grasped.
  Nothing one could grasp as time
  Could exist as enduring.
  If time is not grasped, how it is known?

You can read more about this verse and Je Tsongkhapa's explanation in Ocean of Reasoning, but I would just add that it is clear from the first phrase that we experience moments of time as enduring. That is directly contradictory to the way I used the real numbers above to model time. We perceive the present moment as enduring for some length of time. If we look at the present moment and analyze it we'll find it is made of parts. For anything that has an extent must be made of at least three parts: the beginning, the middle, and the end. Thus, if the present moment is enduring then it must be made of parts. If it is made of parts, we can analyze further and ask if an inherent entity that is this present moment can be found in the beginning of this present moment? In the middle ? In the end? By looking and analyzing like that it can be known for sure that the present moment cannot be made of any inherent entity. The present moment does not exist inherently.

So, I'd conclude and say that it is precisely through analyzing an enduring moment of time and breaking it up and dividing it infinitely we can know that no enduring moment whatsoever truly exists. Time does not truly exist. It only exists as mere label. It only exists conventionally.

That is emphatically not to say that time does not exist at all! That way lies nihilism and we can be sure that if we look at the above explanation as somehow indicating nihilism, then we have grasped the snake of emptiness incorrectly and ought to put it down right away!


According to Dependent Origination ..dependent on feeling, craving arises, are there exceptions?

Paticca Samuppada doesn't even include aversion. But that doesn't mean Vedana(feeling) doesn't lead to aversion. Just that in Paticca Samuppada we are focusing on what keeps us bound to Samsara.

But if you talk about it in general, Vedana can lead to ignorance, craving and aversion. If the feeling is pleasant, craving is prominent. If the feeling is unpleasant, aversion is prominent. If the feeling is neutral, ignorance is prominent. Ignorance is present in all 3 instances.


Who are the Buddhas of the three worlds in Ryōkan's poems?

This phrase here means everywhere.

Specifically, probably the Trailokya, the realm of desire, form and formlessness.  The realm of desire is hell and earth. The realm of form and formlessness are different types of heavens.

ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trailokya

The 10 realms, 10 directions, a three times are all common stock literary phrases that meant everywhere and everything and all times.

And I've lost track of how many ways I've seen the realms sliced up, into the 4, 6, 10 realms, and now with this question, 3!


The word 'mindfulness' means 'to remember' or 'keep in mind'. In the context of Buddhism, it means 'to remember' to practise the factors of the eightfold path.

For example, if you are speaking/talking, you remember to speak in a manner that is honest, pleasant/gentle, cordial & beneficial. This is practising mindfulness meditation when meditating upon speech.

If practising formal sitting meditation, mindfulness is to remember to keep the mind in state that does not have desire for or get distressed about anything in the world.

Therefore, in formal sitting meditation, how to practise mindfulness meditation is to sit without desire or worry & just sit with natural quiet. When this is done properly, awareness of breathing will arise naturally as a sign of right mindfulness & later pleasant feelings will arise as a sign of right mindfulness.


What is citta in the four frames of reference?

Citta is mind. In Four Frames of Reference, it means your overall state of mind:

  "And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

If you feel a strong emotion in your body immediately after the noise - that is vedana (what you called "sensation"). The state of anger generated towards the person is a kind of aversion.

But this is not complete awareness of citta yet. In order to see the entire citta you need to expand your awareness further.

In this case, the reason you feel irritated when the noises happen, is because in your mind (in your citta) you have established a certain intent, a certain desire, or a certain expectation, -- an expectation of a quiet environment conducive to concentration. This expectation serves as a background or counterpart to noise, it is what the noise is compared with - and since the noise and this expectation are obviously in conflict - you get irritated and angry, because of the mismatch. Now, this expectation of quiet environment probably comes from an even deeper intent, for example, you may be trying to achieve a certain state that you have read about in a book. Etc.

At every moment of time we have a certain frame of reference inside of which we are operating. This frame of reference is made from some concepts. Most of the time, we are not actively thinking about these concepts but they stay "on the periphery" of our minds. These peripheral framing concepts are maintained or renewed through a mechanism known as "upadana" in Buddhism. The way it works is, every time we hear, see, or think about something connected with these concepts, we "feed" them, so they keep staying on our (background) mind.

Now this is a more complete picture: you have read about some state in a book, now you keep thinking about that state, you wanted to attain a similar state, you think that in order to attain this state you need to concentrate on something, and therefore you see all noises as enemies, getting in the way of you attaining your state. Therefore you get irritated and angry. (Your situation may be different, I'm making this stuff up, but you get the idea. You need to learn to clearly see your "background intent" - in every case, not just in this case.) On top of this, you may have some preconceptions about noisy people, that identify them with being sloppy, uncultured, uncaring etc.

So your complete state of mind at that point includes all of that - from very high-level mental frameworks - to very specific thoughts and sensations.

This entire configuration, when you take all of it at once and look at it "panoramically" has a certain flavor or a certain taste. It can't always be described in words, but it is something you can experience if you look at all of the above all at once.

That panoramic assessment of the all-inclusive quality of your mindstate is what we're after in this meditation. This panoramic awareness of the entirety of one's mind, including its implicit frames-of-reference, is called cittanupassana or simply vipassana.


We must learn to thank the physically uncomfortable things in life, because it is a great teacher.

The retreat center in my city is right beneath the primary flight path to a busy airport. New meditators on their first retreat often get very irritated by this - because not only is it hot and sweaty, especially if they aren't from India, but they didn't sign up to deal with this infernal din from above.

We may not realize it, but we often live in our thoughts and memories and not in the present moment. Our memory of comfort is what comes in conflict with the present discomfort, not the physical pain itself, since it is the mind that gives meaning to pain.

When irritation swells up in us we must immediately thank it, and investigate it - who is getting irritated? Where is the clinging coming from? What exactly is uncomfortable? What is getting hurt? Is it our senses or our expectation? When exactly did the irritation begin? What happens to our attention at the moment of irritation? When does it end? How soon does it begin, and how soon does it end? What is its nature? Is it constant or does it arise and pass in waves? Can one see the three characteristics of anicca, anatta and dukkha in the irritation? and so on.

When the first aircraft flew above me, I was mildly irritated by it, but seeing that this was a great teacher who had come to guide me, I began to practice loving kindness towards the passengers in every aircraft that flew above me after that. Soon it became a habit, and so while there were some who would audibly sigh and hiss at the aircraft, I would be enveloped in a warm glow of love several times every hour.

It isn't the physical reality but our reaction to it that matters.


What do we do when we've broken a precept?

Don't regret or repent! That is bad Karma. What you need to practice is Samma Vayama(The right effort) of the noble eightfold path.

The effort

(1) to prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states;

(2) to abandon unwholesome states that have already arisen;

(3) to arouse wholesome states that have not yet arisen;

(4) to maintain and perfect wholesome states already arisen.

Take the triple refuge and the five precepts every morning to remind yourself. Then at night, before going to sleep, reflect on the day's activities and see if you broke any precepts or if you can improve with Samma Vayama and try to do better next day.


The institution of the Dalai Lama, as an emanation of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, is officially recognized only by Tibetan Buddhism.

The concept of tulku where teachers like the Dalai Lama, Panchen Lama and Karmapa, may intentionally reincarnate again and again as custodians of certain religious lineages, is only found in Tibetan Buddhism. It's not clear if other Vajrayana traditions also have tulkus.

The Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara is found prominently in many Mahayana sutras, and has the ability to incarnate as any kind of being, including human, to help and teach others. But the Mahayana sutras do not identify the Dalai Lama as an emanation of Avalokiteśvara.

The Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, though present in temples in Theravada countries (probably due to Mahayana influence), is not found in the Pali Canon.


fear of liberation from 5 skandhas is normal for those who haven't studied Dhamma.  Buddha mentioned it in (Udana Sutta,

  "There is the case where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person ... falls into fear over what is not grounds for fear. There is fear for an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person [who thinks], 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me.' But an instructed disciple of the noble ones does not fall into fear over what is not grounds for fear. There is no fear for an instructed disciple of the noble ones [who thinks], 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me.'

Quite long sutta but it answers your question.


Sure, the way to have clarity of perception is with sati sampajana and the way to have pleasure is to go beyond sati sampajana, ie, with samadhi. nobody can have ''withdrawal'' without being ''happy''. happiness stems form withdrawal and clarity of perception.

So it is  minduflness and turning minduflness into samadhi, as usual, like so

  Whomsoever it may be, Ananda, bhikkhu or bhikkhunī, living, having got
  by heart the four settings-up of memory — of such a progressively more
  excellently refined self-awareness is to be expected."

  Of what do these four consist?

  Here Ananda, a beggar living in body oversees body ardent, self-aware,
  recollected, disciplining worldly covetousness and depression.

  In such a one, living in body overseeing body, promted by body or
  arising from body, passions[3] of the heart or sluggish externals
  destract the heart.

  Then, Ananda, that beggar should set his heart on the track of some
  happy state.

  In the heart set on the track of some happy state joy is born.

  With enjoyment entheusiasm is born.

  Entheusiastic in mind the body becomes impassive.

  Impassive in body happiness is experienced.

  Happy at heart one is serene.

  He then determines:

  'Such as was the attainment of heart to which I aspired, such
  attaiment has been produced in me.

  In that case, it is now time to withdraw!'

  And thus he withdraws and does not think and does not ponder.

  Understanding:

  'Without thinking, without pondering, internally recollected, I am
  happy.'

http://obo.genaud.net/dhamma-vinaya/bd/sn/05_mv/sn05.47.010.olds.bd.htm#p1


How to Practice After Stream Entry as Opposed to Before?

Not different. If one wishes, one has to do an effort to turn the Wheel of Dhamma, develop the eightfold Path, as before.

One who has reached such stage knows this, having lost all doubts in regard of the path.


If someone who has been practicing for over 10 years thinks they are aware and are everything but, what am I going to do?

I think this issue you are raising is not really related to Buddhist meditation practices but to the individual. Some individuals, be they Buddhist or non-Buddhist, religious or non-religious, have a keen sense of not harming others & being responsible towards others. Others do not.

That said, about Buddhism, my impression is cultural Buddhism, both Western & Asian, is quite weak in its explanations of sexual misconduct to its lay followers since I get the impression monks don't want to put pressure on people by over-moralising. Therefore, it can be expected that people may practise Buddhist meditation for 10 years but have no real sense of the purpose of the precepts. In fact, there are enough Buddhist teachers that practise sexual misconduct.

Sexuality is a very strong emotion/drive thus many people struggle to manage it.

  The obvious answer is to truly feel and accept painful feelings without reacting by fleeing into passion. But these impulses are
  strong and the mind is clever. What can I do to prevent this behavior?
  Can there be a mistake in the meditation practice itself that causes
  such obscurations to persist?

There are probably many suggestions to this question. One suggestion is to reflect on (think about) what benefit & what harm will come from impulsive fleeing into passion? Will impulsive passion really help yourself? Will it really help the other person involved in the impulsive passion? Or will it create more hurt, more confusion, more regret? Is it really something you really want to do?

Buddhist practises about wise reflection are described in MN 61 and MN 19.

  Additionally, I do hope to find a partner who observes truthfulness towards himself and others. How do I go about avoiding the blinding
  capacities of passion and idealistic desires in judging any such
  “romantic" situation accurately?

As has been mentioned by Chris, the teachings in Buddhism about finding the right partner are not based in "romance". Instead, they are based on determining what your life goals & values are and then finding a partner that can fulfil/meet your life goals & values, i.e., a partner that shares your same goals & values.

This includes things many take for granted, such as having children. There are occasions when two people are together, romantically, for many years and suddenly one person raises their want for children and the other person objects to this. Ideally, the matter of having children should be sorted out before beginning the relationship.

Thus, Buddhism does not really recommend get "romantically" or sexually involved with a prospective life partner before determining whether that prospective partner is suitable. It may sound very unromantic & clinical but I assume it is like interviewing another person for a job. An employer does not employ a prospective employee until determining & assessing the suitability & qualifications of that person.

Often, this is how traditional cultures operated. Parents would get together & assess whether a partner was suitable for their son & daughter in marriage. The Buddhist approach is similar, i.e., more rational or cerebral rather than "romantic".

Once "romance" (sex) occurs, that itself starts to make the situation less flexible since two people become attached to each other sexually (with the various demands & expectations) even though they may not be suitable in terms of individual aspirations or temperament.

Thus, Buddhism encourages the development of 'metta' (friendliness; loving-kindness). We should learn to relate to all people as 'friends' first; putting their welfare first. In meeting a prospective partner, ideally, we put friendship first. We become friends for a significant amount of time before committing to romance.

  I imagine working on one’s own mental and emotional hangups will diminish obscurations — how is one advised to go about this other than
  meditating?

This can be done by learning about & reflecting upon the Buddhist teachings about relationship. By doing this, we can learn about the mistakes we make in our past relationships & the way forward for the future.

For example, if we can see the necessity of the Buddhist qualities prescribed for a suitable partner, we can realise our previous partner never did have the qualities or abilities to fulfill our expectations. But doing this, we may stop blaming them & instead focus on our own choices.

The main teaching of the Buddha can be read in AN 4.55 however the link already provided explains the main relevant teachings of the Buddha.


What community activities do monks in southest asia take part in?

They try to fulfill   "Muni vrutha" - Muni's=Saga's, vrutha=Duty.
refer - Nalaka sutta.
[Nalaka:]  I ask you, Gotama, you who have gone to the beyond of all things. I'm intent on the homeless life; I long for the almsround. Tell me sage, when I ask you, the utmost state of sagacity.
[The Buddha:]
I'll explain to you a sagacity hard to do, hard to endure.
Come now, I'll tell you.
Be steadfast. Be firm.
Practice even-mindedness, for in a village there's praise & abuse.
Ward off any flaw in the heart. Go about calmed & not haughty.
High & low things will come up like fire-flames in a forest.
Women seduce a sage. May they not seduce you.
Abstaining from sexual intercourse,……..


Learning materials for Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda) in Theravada Buddhism

Here's a few of resources from our tradition:

http://www.aimwell.org/dependentorigination.html - a book by the Mahasi Sayadaw, one of Burma's greatest meditation teachers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_llBSCXt6c - a video by me, some monk from the Internet

http://www.sirimangalo.org/teachings/lessons-in-practical-buddhism/practical-dependent-origination/ - a written piece based on the above video.

You'll find a lot of stuff centring on the debate over three-life/one-life, which is terribly unhelpful, IMO. Here's a piece I appreciated from one of Thailand's top scholar monks:

http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Payutto_Bhikkhu_Dependent_Origination.htm

Edit: here's something I wrote about practical application of PS:

http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/2009/07/three-teachers-or-buddhist-addiction.html


Following are the 9 qualities of the Buddha one should get inspiration and try to develop:

Buddho – Awakened
Sammasambuddho – Perfectly self-awakened
Vijja-carana-sampano – Endowed with higher knowledge and ideal conduct.
Sugato – Well-gone or Well-spoken.
Lokavidu – Wise in the knowledge of the many worlds.
Anuttaro Purisa-damma-sarathi – Unexcelled trainer of untrained people.
Satthadeva-Manussanam – Teacher of gods and humans.
Bhagavathi – The Blessed one
Araham – Worthy of homage. An Arahant is "one with taints destroyed, who has lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached the true goal, destroyed the fetters of being, and is completely liberated through final knowledge."

(Sourced from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha#Nine_virtues)


From the book What Buddhists Believe by Venerable K. Sri Dhammananda Maha Thera:

Buddhism also teaches that the acquired merit can be transferred to others' it can be shared vicariously with others. In other words, the merit is 'reversible' and so can be shared with other persons. The persons who receive the merit can be either living or departed ones.
The method for transferring merits is quite simple. First some good deeds are performed. The doer of the good deeds has merely to wish that the merit he has gained accrues to someone in particular, or to 'all beings'. This wish can be purely mental or it can accompanied by an expression of words.
This wish could be made with the beneficiary being aware of it. When the beneficiary is aware of the act or wish, then a mutual 'rejoicing in' merit takes place. Here the beneficiary becomes a participant of the original deed by associating himself with the deed done. If the beneficiary identifies himself with both the deed and the doer, he can sometimes acquire even greater merit than the original doer, either because his elation is greater or because his appreciation of the value of the deed is based on his understanding of Dhamma and, hence, more meritorious, Buddhist texts contain several stories of such instances.
The 'joy of transference of merits' can also take place with or without the knowledge of the doer of the meritorious act. All that is necessary is for the beneficiary to feel gladness in his heart when he becomes aware of the good deed. If he wishes, he can express his joy by saying 'sadhu' which means 'well done'. What he is doing is creating a kind of mental or verbal applause. In order to share the good deed done by another, what is important is that there must be actual approval of the deed and joy arising in the beneficiary's heart.

I encourage you to read the whole page devoted to this (linked above). There is a lot of interesting supplemental information including the reasons for transferring merit to the deceased and the right and wrong way to go about doing this.
The Author refers to the Tirokudda Kanda sutta which you may find interesting.


1. Is the Pali Canon the only canon in modern Buddhism?

No. Additionally, as far as I know, there are also many versions of the Chinese Canon which contain the Āgamas (parallels of the Nikāyas from the Suttapiṭaka of the Pāli Canon), Mahāyāna sūtras & Vajrayāna sūtras.
There is also the Tibetan Canon which contains the Kangyur (material which is similar to the Chinese Canon) and the Tengyur (Commentarial works, Abhidharma and additional treatises).

2. So would the term canon be completely synonymous with Pali Canon in the context of Buddhism?

Bearing in mind what was said above, no.

3. What is the status of texts such as Bodhicaryāvatāra which aren't in the Pali canon?

That text is present in the Chinese Canon1 & Tibetan Canon2.


What are the texts of Vajrāyana Buddhism? And where can I get?

This person – Andrea Pema will be able to help you on this. If asked just say that Saptha Visuddhi referred you to him.
Andrea Pema has translated many of  Vajrāyana Buddhism text to English. The follow are few of his notes:

The Progressive Stages of Meditation. From Shamata to the Beginning of the Mahasandhi

An Excerpt from my Book “Buddha Dharma”: Introduction to the Vajrayana (for Advanced Yogis and Yoginis as well as for Beginners)

On the three Buddha Bodies - the Buddhist Sutra and Tantra on the Qualities of Enlightenment

The Guru Yoga Practice of Padmasambhava, for Beginners and Advanced Practitioners

A short advice on how to do Deity Yoga in Buddhist Tantra

What is “Bodhicitta” in the Tantra ?

A Gem of Compassion from the Mahayana; The Practice of Tonglen, a “must” for those that follow the Bodhisattva Path

The Dharani of Lapis Light that generates the Power of the Tathagatas Meditative Absorption

On Shunyata ( Emptiness)

On meditation and sacred outlook

The Path of Bliss in Buddhist Tantra


What is the difference between Citta contemplation and Dhamma contemplation in Satipathana?

These are the two last stages in the 4 foundations of mindfulness:

Citta means "mind". Dhamma refers to the Buddhist teachings.

Cittanupasana is the meditation on the mind: the observation of the arising and setting of thoughts and desires. It is required to understand the impermanent nature of mind, which is wrongfully perceived as a permanent self.

Dhammanupasana is meditation on the Dharma, the Buddhist teachings. Typically a student will be asked to meditate/research one of these topics:

The Five Hindrances
The Four Noble Truths
The Seven Factors of Enlightenment
The Five Aggregates
Canon Literature


The Indian Vasthu Shastra and the Chinese Feng Shui are known as geomancy in English.

In DN 2, this is known as "vatthuvijjā" in Pali, which in Sanskrit is presumably, "vasthuvidya" or, knowledge or science of vasthu (the science of building sites).

The Buddha forbade monks from practising geomancy in DN 2 (translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu), calling it an "animal art" or "debased art":

  "Whereas some contemplatives & brahmans, living off food given in
  faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such "animal"
  arts as: reading marks on the limbs [e.g., palmistry]; reading omens
  and signs; interpreting celestial events [falling stars, comets];
  interpreting dreams; reading features of the body [e.g., phrenology];
  reading marks on cloth gnawed by mice; offering fire oblations,
  oblations from a ladle, oblations of husks, rice powder, rice grains,
  ghee, and oil; offering oblations from the mouth; offering
  blood-sacrifices; making predictions based on the fingertips;
  geomancy; making predictions for state officials; laying demons in a cemetery; placing spells on spirits; earth-skills [divining water
  and gems?]; snake-skills, poison-skills, scorpion-skills, rat-skills,
  bird-skills, crow-skills; predicting life spans; giving protective
  charms; casting horoscopes — he abstains from wrong livelihood, from
  "animal" arts such as these.

Another translation of DN 2 by Bhikkhu Bodhi:

  “Whereas some recluses and brahmins, while living on the food offered
  by the faithful, earn their living by a wrong means of livelihood, by
  such debased arts as:

  prophesying long life, prosperity etc., or the reverse, from the marks on a person’s limbs, hands, feet, etc.;
  divining by means of omens and signs;
  making auguries on the basis of thunderbolts and celestial portents;
  interpreting ominous dreams;
  telling fortunes from marks on the body;
  making auguries from the marks on cloth gnawed by mice;
  offering fire oblations;
  offering oblations from a ladle;
  offering oblations of husks, rice powder, rice grains, ghee and oil to the gods;
  offering oblations from the mouth;
  offering blood-sacrifices to the gods;
  making predictions based on the fingertips;
  determining whether the site for a proposed house or garden is propitious or not;
  making predictions for officers of state;
  laying demons in a cemetery;
  laying ghosts;
  knowledge of charms to be pronounced by one living in an earthen house;
  snake charming;
  the poison craft, scorpion craft, rat craft, bird craft, crow craft;
  foretelling the number of years that a man has to live;
  reciting charms to give protection from arrows;
  reciting charms to understand the language of animals

  he abstains from such wrong means of livelihood, from such debased
  arts. This too pertains to his moral discipline.


What are the different ways of protecting one's practice?

Mindfulness will "protect" your practice.

Mindfulness is a wholesome mental factor (cetasika) and when it is present, one is not reacting to phenomena, i.e. by running away from unpleasant phenomena and running after pleasant phenomena. Instead one is standing still. One is in the present moment, clearly recognizing that it is our own reactions to phenomena that create suffering. An unwholesome thought or anger is still just a thought and a feeling. Its our own aversion towards these objects, that create our suffering.

So by keeping mindfulness at all times, one is protecting ones practice.

I would recommend the video "How Mindfulness Creates Understanding (The Buddhist TV)" by Ven. Yuttadhammo.


IMHO, you should stop this nonsense. Sitting and waiting for insight is not going to work.

Insight meditation is not meant to be waiting. Instead, it is meant to be examination of the elements of your immediate experience:

Look at your thoughts. Where do they come, how do they switch. Who is watching? How do you get distracted and how do you recover focus? Examine these for a long time, until you really see it.

Look at your emotions. Where are they located? What triggers them? How do they subside?

Now, think about this insight you are looking for. Assume at some point you'll get it. Now what? Why do you need it? What's wrong now? What do you want?

Now, think about dukkha, suffering. They say, "suffering comes from craving". What does this really mean? Try remember something that you really really want (or really really don't want). What happens? Now, force yourself to think about something else. What happens now?

Now, think about causes and results. Take objects and events and trace all causal forces that bring them together and then take them apart. Think how this works on the global scale.

Now, think about yourself in terms of causal chains. How many different things come together to make up you and your immediate experience? Were you made once or are you being made daily? What causal elements contribute to that?

This is insight meditation, in my opinion. Sitting and watching how your experience comes together - for hours and hours, until you clearly see how it works. Not sitting and waiting like a log.


Why should we worship statues of Lord Buddha?

I am not sure we should worship statues itself as that would be some sort of idolatry. Buddhists worship Buddha, and statue or other image is just symbol, something that bring into our memory good qualities of Buddha. It's mindfulness of Buddha. Statue is a symbol, and symbol is communication which states about its subject, Buddha in our case. Thus, showing respect before statue should be directed to Buddha as Jewel, and not to statue. Mindfulness and respect to the Saint and Teacher is good action.

Btw, Buddha is not disappeared, he stated that he will remain in his Teaching (Dharma).


Can you be a Buddhist if you don't believe in reincarnation?

I think to call yourself a Buddhist or practice the buddhist teaching you should at least believe in cause and effect.Maybe not in past lives but in the here and now.When you can see cause and effect clearly in the present then you'll infer that the same principle applies after death.

Things you do  in this life will have some effect after.(Future rebirth)

There must be something you did before that caused you to be here now in this life.(Past Birth)

Note: Rebirth is not the same as reincarnation.Please search this site for more info.


Is there a way to hasten the results of bad deeds

The law of cause and effect is unchangeable and we must face the consequences of the Karmas done through body, speech and mind.

Only the five heinous crimes are guaranteed to manifest their results. According to what I have been told, others need a suitable environment/conditions to manifest at percent/future. But this is not entirely in your control.

Ex:- If you have in the past get involved in fights and beat up people, you would build up karma to eventually get beaten up in a fight. Because it is only natural and fully inline with dependent arising that you will over time keep increasing your abrasive nature and eventually meet your match. However if you stop getting involved in fights, that probability will be greatly reduced. But it is possible that someone from the past who held a grudge against you, plot revenge against you and succeed at a moment that you are weak.


Software Engineer not challenged enough at work, feels like wasting my time

All Buddhism is going to tell you on this issue is that you do not have to suffer your way through it. You have a number of attachments:

An attachment to your job, which may be due to loyalty, fear, a sense of personal responsibility, etc
An attachment to having challenging (meaningful, fulfilling) work
A set of self-identification attachments, in which you envision yourself as more successful and productive than you actually are

There is nothing wrong with you staying in this job and continuing to do this work. There is nothing wrong with you deciding to advance yourself (either by finding a different job or by working for advancement within this company). The only problematic thing would sitting in this state of dissatisfaction because you cannot resolve these competing attachments. So, contemplate these attachments a bit to try to get at their root; meditate a bit to clear your head. Then make a choice, and trust it's the right one.


A well-known monk with a bodily disorder was the deceased Bhikkhu Buddhadasa, who was given all kinds of diets when he was alive. Buddhadasa was fat most of his life.

However, for example, some current Western monks (based in Western Australia) have put on lots of weight, which looks like eating too much rich food & doing too little exercise; devoting their lives to teaching, scholarship & administrative duties.

You reach an age when you start to put on lots of weight. You must reduce your food intake because your body obviously does not need so much food anymore.

Two years ago, I cut my life-long food in-take by 50% & stopped eating certain foods (cheese, ice-cream, bread; I never ate much sugar). I lost 12kg but notice if I eat certain prohibited foods (such as when visiting my mother), I add weight quickly.

These monks are often given lots of Asian sweets & cakes and drink lots of sugar drinks.

Years ago, I spent lots of time in a certain monastery in Asia. The last time I visited, after five years of absence, I noticed how the core monks had all lost lots of weight. Obviously, the abbot thought the monks were too fat and instructed to reduce food, for the sake of public image. Having known these monks for 17 years, I could not believe how thin they were.

  Dhp 395. The person who wears a robe made of rags, who is lean, with veins showing all over the body, and who meditates alone in the forest
  — him do I call a holy man.


The qualities of the Buddha Dhamma and Sangha is found in the Dhajagga Sutta, Velu,dvāreyya Sutta this might be a good starting point to study the qualities. Also Buddhânussati by Piya Tan has more discussion including that of the the Mahayana parallels. The 10 Characteristics discussed in the Wikipedia article Buddhahood seas to be the Mahayana point of view. A more comprehensive book written in the subject is Suwisi Maha Gunaya by Rerukane Chandawimala Thero would be a the best starting point for a for some one who knows Sinhala. A similar book perhap not this extensive in English would be Manual of Excellent Man: Uttamapurisa Dipani by Ledi Sayadaw


In one Sutta the Buddha said that one should constantly be mindful of the fact of anicca.

Sure. But you need to understand what the terms really mean.

Mindfulness (sati) means to remember.

Anicca is a wisdom (panna).

Sampajanna means 'situational wisdom', which is applying wisdom to a situation.

Mindfulness must remember to apply wisdom.

Therefore, mindfulness & wisdom always operate together.

There cannot be mindfulness without wisdom.

This is why the term 'sati-sampajanna' is often used, as a compound.

This video might help: Buddhist Meditation (4) Sati Sampajanna

This book might help: The Natural Cure for Spiritual Disease by Bhikkhu Buddhadasa

  In the Satipatthana Sutta he said that when one is dressing, eating, speaking etc. one should be aware that he is doing exactly that.

Not really.

In the 1st part, about "I am walking, "I am standing", etc, the word is "pajānāti", which means to know. Here, knowing with wisdom is not emphasised. This is more about knowing with concentration.

In the 2nd part, about "going forward, looking ahead", etc, the word is "sampajānakārī". This not only means awareness but having wisdom with awareness.

As the video states, 'sampajanna' is of the wisdom faculty & not of the concentration faculty. Awareness without ready wisdom is not sampajanna.

  Now my two questions (and yes I know that Sati is more than just present moment awareness in that it can also mean remembering
  something or calling somethibg helpful to mind)

Sati is never present moment awareness. Sati is only remembering or calling something to mind.
Present moment awareness may be a result or outcome of using mindfulness but mindfulness itself is not present moment awareness -- see this answer for a more detailed explanation.

Present moment awareness is simply a clear consciousness (vinnana), called 'anupassi' ('seeing') in the Satipatthana Sutta.

  The aspect of knowing what one is doing is connected with mental noting, right?

Not really but sort of. Noting is a very subtle thing. Noting does not have to be strong thinking, as the Burmese Mahasi teach. The mind can note very silently, such as knowing it is typing on this website.

  Because the Buddha never (correct me if Im wrong) mentioned to note
  something as seeing, seeing, touching, touching.. etc.

Of course he did, in the Satipatthana Sutta, that you mentioned, where it states: "I am walking", etc. However, this is only beginner's practise.

  If I am not mistaken the Buddha said one should constantly dwell/remind oneself of the fact of anicca but at the same time one
  should know what one is doing.

There are many wisdoms apart from anicca. All sati-sampajanna includes some type of wisdom.

The Buddha did not actually teach to constantly remind oneself of anicca because this would mean the mind is always thinking. Instead, one only reminds oneself of anicca when necessary.

To goal of meditation is to stop thinking so the mind has concentration so it can develop calm and then see anicca directly (rather than reminding oneself about anicca).

  This is confusing.

What is confusing is your views about it. Yes, you are making it confusing for yourself.

  When does one know when to use "what one is doing-mindfulness" and when to dwell on "impermanence-mindfulness"?

When required.

  Is continous present moment awareness actually endorsed by the Buddha? Kind of confusing because first of one cannot be mindful all
  the time and secondly, how is one able to be present aware if one uses
  sati in the "remembering" sense when for example a hindrance is
  present?

Your questions are like: "How & when & why do I do this turn when surfing and surf inside the wave when surfing?" before you have even learned to paddle a surfboard & catch a wave.

  I think that the word "constant" or "continous" is just a word that puts strong emphasize on a specific activity, but I might be wrong.

I think you are thinking too much. When the mind has developed some calmness, it will begin to understand the teachings and what to do. Developing some calmness does not require too many questions & answers.


Can a bad karma happen just only with a thought without any physical or verbal action?

Yes, from multiple suttas we see that karma can be done by way of the mind and intentional thoughts only. In fact, according to the first verses of the Dhammapada, the mind precedes all mental states. It's more important than words and actions.
From Nibbedhika Sutta:

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

From Mahakammavibhanga Sutta:

After doing an intentional deed to be experienced as pleasant by way
of body, speech, or mind, one feels pleasure. After doing an
intentional deed to be experienced as painful by way of body, speech,
or mind, one feels pain. After doing an intentional deed to be
experienced as neutral by way of body, speech, or mind, one feels
neutral.”

From Bhumija Sutta:

"When there is a body, pleasure & pain arise internally with bodily
intention as the cause; or when there is speech, pleasure & pain arise
internally with verbal intention as the cause; or when there is
intellect, pleasure & pain arise internally with intellectual
intention as the cause.

From Kamma Sutta:

And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with
speech, or with the intellect. This is called new kamma."


Is it possible to abandon desire by means of desire

It's kinda simple. First we abandon desires. Only then we abandon the desire to give up desires. As per the traditional metaphor, you should not leave "the raft" until you are safely "on the other shore".

Sure, the desire to abandon desires also causes suffering. But that's the price we pay. It is like with the surgeon inflicting more pain short-term to end the pain long-term.

My point is, it is only a paradox in theory, once we get to real kitchen-level practice, to action -- there is no paradox.


What did the Buddha say about motivation?

Right effort(sammā-vāyāma) in terms of mindfulness is not a forceful , grit your teeth kind of effort. It's a moment by moment, continuous, good cyclical habit kind of effort.
Cetanā is Pali for
1- intention
2- volition
3- directionality of mind
4- attraction
5- urge
Intention(cetanā) can be defined as a mental factor that moves or urges the mind in a particular direction, toward a specific object or goal. Intention(cetanā) is the most significant mental factor involved in the creation of karma.
Sammā-vāyāma and cetanā are two different concepts. In practice, one concept(or the actual experience the concept points towards) might happen right after the other though. Then there is right intention (samma sankappa) that isn't really like sammā-vāyāma. Imho at least.
Samvega, the sense of shock and empty alienation that comes with realizing the futility and meaninglessness of living in the sleeping world, is what motivated the Buddha and others onto the wholesome eightfold path. Some are motivated by other things like faith(saddhā) in the  Buddha's teaching.
Right effort and right view are the two most important factors for an insight meditator to understand, it seems to me.
Right effort can be something like, effort to continue striving to remember to focus awareness on whatever experience arises in awareness and to strive in a broader sense to transcend all assumptions even the ones we don't yet see.
The Four Supreme Efforts
(cattārimāni sammappadhānāni)
1-Restraint Not to let an unwholesome thought arise which has not yet arisen(anuppādāya)
2-Abandonment Not to let an unwholesome thought continue which has already arisen.(pahānāya)
3-Cultivation To make a wholesome thought arise which has not yet arisen.(uppādāya)
4-Preservation To make a wholesome thought continue which has already arisen.(ṭhitiyā)
Effort can come easier with interest but then the path is to eventually develop a certain disinterest.


Random thoughts don't collect much bad karma. Intentional and deliberate thoughts generate karma. Habitual intentional thoughts accumulate karma.
Now, you are feeling remorse because you had those thoughts.
What you should do is acknowledge that those are random thoughts. Acknowledge that you don't have the intention to harm her.
And now you should disassociate from those thoughts using mindfulness. Just watch those thoughts as they appear but understand that they are not related to you or anything. Just watch and acknowledge it, then let it go.
Watch this video talk on YouTube on the scientific research done in this area.
From a canonical perspective, the Lonaphala Sutta explains that a trifling evil act has significant consequences for an undeveloped person but hardly any effect for a developed person.
Your remorse is part of that unintended significant consequence. But if you learn to let go, then you would have developed your mind to detach from such trifling negative thoughts.


How can I live life knowing other people work so hard for so little and people and animals suffer

What you are experiencing is too much empathy. Many people believe that empathy is a universal virtuous trait that should always be increased, but this is not so.

To be very clear, empathy is distinct from compassion. The two are not the same thing although they are often conflated and misunderstood. The definition of compassion is very simple: the wish for others to be free from suffering. That's it.

Empathy is different from compassion. Empathy is the capacity to put yourself in someone else's shoes and feel what it is they are feeling. To imagine what someone else is feeling and experience some amount of it yourself.

So what is the relationship between compassion and empathy? Well, to some extent you need to be able to recognize someone else's suffering in order to develop the wish for them to be free of it. However, once this recognition is accomplished it does not require you to keep feeling what they are feeling. To suffer with them. When people in the west talk about "compassion fatigue" they are really talking about empathy fatigue.

So in summary, empathy can be both good (allowing us to recognize the suffering of others) and bad (rendering us powerless/overwhelmed or biased towards those we empathize with) depending upon the context. It sounds like you are definitely experiencing the latter and should stop empathizing so much. In order to do so, you first have to become clear on the differences between compassion and empathy. Compassion is a universal good that should always be increased. There is no such thing as compassion fatigue, but there is such a thing as empathy fatigue.

Have a look here for a modern account of how a western psychology recently discovered something that Buddhists have known for centuries ;)

Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion

You can also find an interesting interview with the author here.


The experience of discomfort and unpleasantness themselves can be great meditation objects, and it is mindful that you are distinguishing them from pain. Some traditions and buddhist communities expand their conception of formal sitting to include sitting in chairs with back support and lying down, so if it is of interest, know that there are paths that provide such options.

As to how the resistance can be explained, it may be fruitful to consider how your mind and body have been conditioned to relate to sitting and the time you are devoting to sitting (i.e. saṅkhāra meditations can help). For many people, such explorations illuminate habits and valuations that can themselves be fruitful meditation objects.

In terms of counter acting the experience, you'll probably find most teachers encouraging you to grow more curious about the experience. For example, if discomfort is arising from the experience of the stillness, you can examine the nature of the stillness. For instance, you might begin to noice that the posture is not really a static pose, even when you remain quite still. Blood is coursing through your veins. Air is moving in and out of your lungs. Electrical impulses are happening throughout your body. I would encourage you to examine the nature of your discomfort and allow that to guide some portion of your meditation practice.


It might be difficult for readers to understand exactly what you're experiencing in your meditation. You learn techniques of meditation to get you started on a path, but eventually that path must be understood by you, personally. You become like a scientist experimenting with what works and what doesn't work. For that you have to know what "working" even means... as you develop your path, this is an essential aspect to understand. What am I trying to achieve here when I sit down to meditate?
The path the Buddha described made Tranquility and Insight the markers of progress. If what you are experimenting with, within your own mind and body framework, moment to moment, is (over time) leading you to more and more calmness of mind, calmness of body, then you might be able to consider whatever methods you were employing successful.
Similarly, if whatever you are experimenting with, within your own mind and body framework, moment to moment, is (over time) leading you to deeper and deeper understanding of the nature of reality (three marks of existence), causing you to see more finely these qualities, subtler and subtler in your experience, then you might be able to consider whatever methods you were employing successful.
Both these two developments, Tranquility and Insight, should lead to letting go, fading away, cessation of your experience, in a gradual way.
AN 4:170
Mindfulness of the breath is a common practice that can develop both of these to their fruition.
SN 54:13
As you practice in this way, the Four Establishments of Mindfulness should simultaneously be developed.
MN 10


What does Buddhadasa say about rebirth after the break-up of the body?

Buddhadasa taught "literal rebirth" is something mental, in the here-&-now. Since the Pali word "jati" ("birth") literally refers to something mental, why would the superstitious speculative idea occur that an imaginary "physical rebirth" is "literal"?

The word 'birth' ('jati') refers to the production of 'beings' (per SN 12.2). Suttas such as SN 23.2, SN 5.10 & MN 98 say 'beings' ('satta') are merely 'views' & 'verbal designations' born of 'strong clinging'. Therefore, 'jati' or 'birth' is something 'mental', in both original Buddhism and in modern Hindu India.

As for he answers to your questions, they can be found in the book by Buddhadasa called Two Kinds of Language.

  Now, going a little higher, we come to the word "birth" (jati). In
  everyday language, the word "birth" refers to physically coming into
  the world from the mother's womb. A person is the born physically only
  once. Having been born, one lives in the world until one dies and
  enters the coffin. Physical birth  happens to each of us only
  once. This birth from the mother's womb is what is meant by "birth"
  in everyday language.

  Now let's consider the word "death". Death in everyday language means
  that event which necessitates putting something in a coffin and
  cremating or burying it. But in Dhamma language, the word "death"
  refers to the [traumatic; sorrowful; suffering] cessation of the idea mentioned just a moment ago, the
  idea of "I" or "me". The [traumatic; sorrowful; suffering] ceasing of this idea is what is meant by
  "death'' in Dhamma language.

About the later-day corruption of 'jati' into something 'physical', Buddhadasa said:

  People language is used by the ordinary people who don't
  understand Dhamma very well and by those worldly people who are so
  dense that they are blind to everything but material things.

Such worldly people are so dense & blind they label as 'materialists' those who don't subscribe to superstitions of 'physical rebirth', which is illogical & contradictory, given it is they, who believe in 'material physical rebirth', who are obviously 'materialists'.

In summary:

'Literal rebirth' is something 'mental'.
Believers in 'physical rebirth' are logically 'materialists'.
Buddhadasa appeared to say there is only one life.

As for the term 'kaya', found in the translated sutta phrase: 'break-up of the body', it does not necessarily mean 'physical body'. 'Kaya' literally means 'group' or 'collection'. MN 44, for example, says the 'sak-kaya' is the five aggregates. Since the quality of the five aggregates are changing from moment to moment, particularly in the common worldly 'person', obviously the phrase 'break-up of the kaya' may not refer to the termination of life.

For example, as soon as I log off Buddhism Stack Exchange, obviously the aggregates answering this question (such as the sankhara aggregate thinking with the thought content of this question; and the visual consciousness of the sense object Buddhism Stack Exchange) will end.