Buddhism and the Diet Practices view from other religion

Whether plants have consciouness or to what extent doesn't obviate the fact that persons need sustenance to grow etc. There can be moderation in consumption however, & nonwaste of foodstuffs, lumber etc, which too is efficient from resource utilisation standpoints. Plants do react to light & water & wind etc, yet typically plants are described as nonconscious by current western science, & don't have neural systems, so, sort of depends on how consciousness & volition are being defined.
Consuming animal flesh is perceived as ok by them, so if sharing dinner etc with them such menu items would be reasonably expected. They are being friendly & generous in their way, & it's nice of them to share their time & their resources. If persons select to notconsume animal flesh for whatever reason, good friends might make allowance for that and have some nice things to eat other than animal flesh: bread, potatoes, beans, tomatoes, lettuce, etc. So maybe good to appreciatively consume those items & forego discussions re what the hosts are consuming. They will observe the example of someone notconsuming the animal flesh. And consuming some lobster from a can & which would otherwise be discarded is different from participation of obtaining/ demise of live lobsters. And they may offer thanks for having food & ok health etc, which seems reasonable to observe, and less so thanking for factory farms etc. And to some extent nutritional considerations may be valid. Moderation & nonwaste, & noncontribution(even indirectly) to demise of living things is generally good. To gently show is different from causing sadness or distress to them by comments that they don't understand, and activies which on their part were kindly intentioned. Maybe sidestep such situations is generally good, and each situation may vary.
Nonparticpation in the demise of things, and of such venues, shows by example: and if specifically asked, perhaps could offer a brief explanation, & if presented nicely, might have more good result than more emphatic responses. Good friends would generally be respectful of views differing from their own, so maybe try and use gentle words if commenting on such things, or if replying to a sincere request for information. And perhaps even gentler & briefer if such topic might arise during lunch or at dinner etc.


How many countries did Lord Buddha travel?

Solosmasthana are 16 sacred places in Sri Lanka, that Gautama Buddha is said to have visited. Buddha is said to have visited the country three times and on one occasion, the  footprint of the Buddha was placed symbolizing the Buddha's presence. The sacred left footprint is said to be imprinted by Buddha on his third visit to Sri Lanka at the apex of the Sri Pada Mountain. There are two other places that the Buddha is said to have visited and placed the sacred footprint. One is in Thailand, and the other is at Sunaparanta – the present day Saudi Arabia, & at the Kaabah.


Watching the breath during meditation is getting boring?

I don't train according to that book but in the anapanasati sutta there are these instructions;

'I will breathe in sensitive to mental fabrication.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to mental fabrication.'

Mental fabrications are defined;

Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications." Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications [sn41.006]."

Unpleasant feelings & perceptions associated with boredom would fall into this category.
Furthermore instruction;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the mind.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the mind.'

How is one sensitive to the mind? That is defined here;

"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."When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released. "In this way he remains focused internally on the mind in & of itself, or externally on the mind in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the mind in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the mind, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the mind, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the mind. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a mind' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself [DN22]

Therefore when perceptions & feelings associated with boredom arise one should take note of the mind as it is with aversion, longing, delusion etc.
Furthermore instruction;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming mental fabrication.' He trains himself; 'I will breathe out calming mental fabrication'

How is this calming achieved? That is by this development;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on inconstancy.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on inconstancy.'
13) He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on dispassion [literally, fading].' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on dispassion.'
14) He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on cessation.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on cessation.'
15) He trains himself, 'I will breathe in focusing on relinquishment.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out focusing on relinquishment.'[mn.118]

To understand what this refers to consider this;

'Whatever is felt comes under stress.' That I have stated simply in connection with the inconstancy of fabrications. That I have stated simply in connection with the nature of fabrications to end... in connection with the nature of fabrications to fall away... to fade away... to cease... in connection with the nature of fabrications to change [sn36.011].

“On whatever occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence’;trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence’;
trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating fading away’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating fading away’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating cessation’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating cessation’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe in contemplating relinquishment’; trains thus, ‘I shall breathe out contemplating relinquishment’—on that occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating mental objects in
mental objects, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief regarding the world. [mn.118]

Calming is to be understood thus;

There are these six calmings. When one has attained the first jhāna, speech has been calmed. When one has attained the second jhāna, directed thought & evaluation have been calmed. When one has attained the third jhāna, rapture has been calmed. When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has been calmed. When one has attained the cessation of perception & feeling, perception & feeling have been calmed. Sn36

Speech here is a tricky term but here is an alternate progression description;

"When one has attained the first jhāna, the perception of sensuality has been stopped. When one has attained the second jhāna, directed thoughts & evaluations [verbal fabrications] have been stopped. When one has attained the third jhāna, rapture has been stopped. When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breaths [bodily fabrications] have been stopped.

As i understand it, as one focuses on the inconstancy and cessation of phenomena one comes to become disintetested & disenchanted with feelings. As one becomes disenchanted the feelings & perceptions are calmed, they are stilled, they cease & fade from the mind.
Furthermore it is said in the mn118;

He trains himself, 'I will breathe in satisfying the mind.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out satisfying the mind.'mn.118

As the feelings & perceptions are calmed one experiences the pleasure & equanimity of renunciation;

And what are the six kinds of renunciation joy? The joy that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: That is called renunciation joy. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.)
"And what are the six kinds of renunciation equanimity? The equanimity that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: This equanimity goes beyond form, which is why it is called renunciation equanimity. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.)mn.137

The general development is summed up like this;

"And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. [an4.41]

That in itself does not guarantee progress;

"Suppose that there is a foolish, inexperienced, unskillful cook who has presented a king or a king's minister with various kinds of curry: mainly sour, mainly bitter, mainly peppery, mainly sweet, alkaline or non-alkaline, salty or non-salty. He does not take note of[1] his master, thinking, 'Today my master likes this curry, or he reaches out for that curry, or he takes a lot of this curry, or he praises that curry. Today my master likes mainly sour curry... Today my master likes mainly bitter curry... mainly peppery curry... mainly sweet curry... alkaline curry... non-alkaline curry... salty curry... Today my master likes non-salty curry, or he reaches out for non-salty curry, or he takes a lot of non-salty curry, or he praises non-salty curry.' As a result, he is not rewarded with clothing or wages or gifts. Why is that? Because the foolish, inexperienced, unskillful cook does not pick up on the theme of his own master.

"In the same way, there are cases where a foolish, inexperienced, unskillful monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on the body in & of itself, his mind does not become concentrated, his defilements[2] are not abandoned. He does not take note of that fact.[3] He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on mental qualities in & of themselves, his mind does not become concentrated, his defilements are not abandoned. He does not take note of that fact. As a result, he is not rewarded with a pleasant abiding here & now, nor with mindfulness & alertness. Why is that? Because the foolish, inexperienced, unskillful monk does not take note of his own mind.[4] [SN47.08]]

Therefore it is really important to take note of the mind, as i described above and especially with reference to mental qualities in regards to the hindrances;

[1] "There is the case where a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances? There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that 'There is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' He discerns how there is the arising of unarisen sensual desire. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of sensual desire once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of sensual desire that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining hindrances: ill will, sloth & drowsiness, restlessness & anxiety, and uncertainty.)

If one notices the hindrances one should direct the mind to a different perception which is connected with skillful qualities. In practical terms try focusing more on the inconstancy, cessation or an inspiring theme, what i do depends on the hindrance.

As a result, he is rewarded with a pleasant abiding here & now, together with mindfulness & alertness. Why is that? Because the wise, experienced, skillful monk picks up on the theme of his own mind." [SN47.08]

“Ananda, if a monk or nun remains with mind well-established in the four establishings of mindfulness, he/she may be expected to perceive grand, successive distinctions.
“There is the case of a monk who remains focused on the body in & of itself—ardent, alert, & mindful—subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. As he remains thus focused on the body in & of itself, a fever based on the body arises within his body, or there is sluggishness in his awareness, or his mind becomes scattered externally. He should then direct his mind to any inspiring theme. As his mind is directed to any inspiring theme, delight arises within him. In one who feels delight, rapture arises.
In one whose mind is enraptured, the body grows calm. His body calm, he feels pleasure. As he feels pleasure, his mind grows concentrated.
He reflects, ‘I have attained the aim to which my mind was directed. Let me withdraw [my mind from the inspiring theme].’ He withdraws & engages neither in directed thought nor in evaluation. He discerns, ‘I am not thinking or evaluating. I am inwardly mindful & at ease.’
“This, Ananda, is development based on directing.
And what is development based on not directing? A monk, when not directing his mind to external things, discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external
things. It is unconstricted [asankhitta] front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on the body in & of itself. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’
“When not directing his mind to external things, he discerns, ‘My mind is not directed to external things. It is unconstricted front & back—released & undirected. And then, I remain focused on feelings… mind… mental qualities in & of themselves. I am ardent, alert, mindful, & at ease.’
“This, Ananda, is development based on not directing.
“Now, Ananda, I have taught you development based on directing and development based on not directing. What a teacher should do out of compassion for his disciples, seeking their welfare, that I have done for you. Over there are [places to sit at] the roots of trees. Over there are empty dwellings. Practice jhana, Ananda. Do not be heedless. Do not be remorseful in the future. That is our instruction to you all.” — SN 47:10


Buddha is a God or different God's level misconception in Buddhism System

You can portray Gautama Buddha as an ordinary man who lived 2500 years ago, who found the way to end suffering and attain true happiness.
He discovered that suffering is mostly a mental condition. Thus, Gautama Buddha became history's most illustrious psychologist.
To support this claim, you can quote the first 6 verses of the Dhammapada. Part of these verses sound similar to Jesus' turning the other cheek, thus making Gautama Buddha appear compatible with Jesus in just this way.
Also, statues of Gautama Buddha are just for inspirational purposes, similar to statues of Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi.


I practice with the Triratna Buddhists which is an explicit attempt to bring Buddhism into the Western context. It is ecumenical so brings in all traditions so for me this question is very interesting. For us the sutras that are particularly studied are

Pali Canon
Middle Length Discourses generally but more specifically from the pali canon

Satipatthana sutta
Anapanasati sutta
Karaniya Metta Sutta
Dhammapada
Udana

Mahayana

Heart Sutra
Diamond Sutra
White Lotus Sutra
Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra
Golden Light Sutra

Also

Bodhicaryāvatāra
Life of Milarepa

This list isn't exhaustive by any means but I think represents the ones that are referenced most frequently. However a lot of others come up particularly from the Pali Canon such as the Gotami Sutta and even outside of Buddhism altogether such as the poetry of Rumi.


Don't play with yourself during meditation.  You're wasting your time and I hear that you can go blind if you do it too often.

Seriously, though, what you are experiencing is just your own internal energy.  Call it qi, call in prajna, call it whatever.  It's important, but if you get obsessive about it, it's going to undermine your meditation practice.  Buddhist meditation is about liberation.  It has nothing to do with working with subtle bodies, astral projection, or healing your Aunt Milly's lumbago from across three continents.

It's important that you don't try to raise this energy.  Any forced, willful manipulation of it is completely artificial and potentially nothing more than self delusion.  Removed from the hindrances, secluded, putting aside grief and covetousness for the world (including feeling that energy), it will rise all of it's own accord.  When it does, just let it do what it's going to do.  It will probably start to feel different.  It may disappear entirely.  You might also start to feel uncomfortable tension in your body; most likely you'll start to get antsy...whatever happens just sit in it.  Don't move.  Eventually, you will pass through a barrier.   On the other side of it, all of that will dissolve and you will be left in a place that feels spacious and open.  That's where you ought to be aiming for.

Don't expect this to happen all at once.  It will most likely take several years of practice.  You might get glimpses of it here and there, but let me assure you that when you finally arrive there, the experience will be unmistakable.  Then your practice actually begins!

For now, put everything else aside.


How can we know the original meaning of a word with certainty?
Yes.
I'm sure there's a scholarly answer -- not this from me though.
Your mentioning "chakras" reminds of something similar, i.e. the "chi" that we're taught in Tai Chi -- which I learned from, was taught by, a Chinese master.
His English wasn't good, even with a translator I didn't ask complicated question, my own Chinese was non-existent though, I'm not complaining. Anyway part of what he'd do is describe the movement of chi -- especially the dan tien for example -- in reply, some students would say they could feel the chi, others not.
Based on a couple of answers (one on Skeptics.SE, another on MartialArts, which I won't reference) I've decided that "chi" doesn't exist as such -- not objectively measurable, and/or not separate from other things.
But ...
A lot of the preliminary work is to affect how you stand -- posture -- knees, hips, back, neck, and so on. We're told to "stand straight" ... and to, "imagine there's a thread, from the sky to the top of your head, and that you're hanging from that thread -- so instead of being pressed and heavy and bent by gravity, you're being pulled and light-weight and hanging straight, with vertebrae aligned each above the other".
The exercise is effective, at least when you see it and follow along.
In reality, there is no such "thread"! :-) -- but I think it's a useful visualisation exercise. It helps you to stand straight ...

I guess I'm getting around to saying that "meaning" of a word is maybe difficult to ascertain.
One way, perhaps an important way, to know a word is by its effect -- what does it mean to you? What does it mean to other people? What is the effect of using the word?
In Tai Chi you can kind of judge how people practice --- how well (they practice), and how beneficial (their practice is).
Perhaps it's something similar in Buddhism -- i.e. you practice for a purpose, towards a purpose ... perhaps a purpose of your own ... or perhaps toward a goal and following a curriculum set by a teacher -- and the meaning of the words might be assessed by their effect, whether they help you to practice.
In a word like "rebirth" I think there are two important questions:

What does it originally mean?
What does it mean to me?

I see those as separate questions. I don't, can't, assume that I know the original meaning. I don't assume that what I understand is the real meaning.
It's partly a matter of ... is "humility" the right word? Knowing what you don't know? For example there's a bunch of stuff I know, that children don't -- how to drive a car, even how to bicycle. I imagine explaining that to a child, if they ask ... or "How does a radio work?" I could use words to explain, but would the words have the same meaning? If I say "electromagnetic radiation", what's that to someone who hasn't studied it? What is it even to someone who has studied it?
Similarly I, being only very ... you know ... a student, I don't think I should assume that I'm able to understand the "meaning" even when it's explained.
But "what does it originally mean?" is an important question. I've posted questions, "what does X mean?", so that people can explain that. And I don't think I should post to say "It doesn't mean that". I don't want to misrepresent, I don't want to falsify the transmission.
It used to be that my knowledge of, access to Buddhism was very second-hand, third-hand, fourth-hand -- e.g. I'd read a book, explaining Buddhism, written by someone who had studied with people who had studied with other people -- and what's written in the book is, sort of, their opinion, their summary ... which is OK but, maybe not reliable, and maybe not much depth, the words are an easy explanation and superficial and there isn't much there, much substance, to study.
So I'm grateful to meet something like an original scripture and be able to study that, like, to be able to read what people are talking about.
But "What does it mean to me?" is an important question too, though. It's good to ask and good to be told, not enough though to be only able to repeat what you've been told. It's like, maybe I go to a Maths lecture -- and being able to repeat what was said, to memorise the lesson, that's one thing -- to use what's learned, to understand new (Maths) problems and to know how to solve them properly, that's another.
So I take an interest in both:

What is the, what is an, orthodox doctrine ... about the meaning? Can I understand it? Can I reference it? Can I, even, repeat it without distorting it?
Are there several orthodox doctrines? Not overly surprising if there were. Does a word have more than one meaning? Does the meaning depend on the context? Did it have several meanings in the original? If several people understood it, did it have several meanings then? Was it intended for several people, perhaps with different understandings?

What does it mean to me? How can I use that doctrine? Can I use it? If I only understand it partially, is there a part of it I can use?

I guess a final question might be, how do I manage a part doctrine that I don't understand? I guess I "neither approve nor disapprove" but "put it aside". There's a lot of knowledge in the world -- practical and theoretical knowledge, science, arts, know-how -- the fact that I don't know something or don't understand it doesn't mean it's untrue, doesn't mean it's impractical, or badly taught.
nobody seems to have the last word
No.
This is meant to be a Q+A site, is one thing, so in theory everybody "has the last word". You ask a question, people answer, and you select from among the answers to build your own understanding. There may be some good answers, maybe some less good, you don't always have to have the last word, or do you.
One of the stack exchange guidelines I read was that answers should be "backed up" or "based on" something, either:

A reference
Something you have experience personally

I think that's quite a good guideline for this site and this topic (i.e. Buddhism) too.
If I answer I like to ...

provide a reference
and/or, explain from my personal experience

... and by doing that I hope to be not misleading.
(Not that all answers require references on this site ... e.g. with many people/users/readers are familiar with the same doctrines and it's often enough and more convenient to explain a doctrine without references).

Perhaps I should, I don't know whether I should, mention one more thing -- i.e. that you might want to know, be certain of, your own understanding -- perhaps to ask, "what do I understand?", to avoid confusion.
For me personally I think it's right to, I think we're taught to, disentangle from a "thicket of views", perhaps recognise and avoid "a thicket" from a distance, maybe "know your own mind" for what that's worth as they in English, and maybe no "It means this! No, it means that!" like the sectarians.


To what extent can Ānāpānasati be related to Vipassanā?

Anapanasati is divided into 4 tetrads which correspond to the 4 Satipatthana hence the pratice of Anapanasati is actually a forms of Satipatthana / Vipassana. A thorough introduction to Anapanasati and how to develop this into Vipassana is difficult in this format hence it might be worthwhile to read a more elaborate book on it: Anapanasati: Mindfulness of Breathing by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. You can complement this book with: Right Mindfulness: Memory & Ardency on the Buddhist Path by Thanissaro Bhikkhu


Who follows which yana (Vajrayana, Hinayana or Mahayana)?

In today's world Buddhist people dwell in South Asia and East Asia . Who among themselves follows particular sect.

Wikipedia's Schools of Buddhism article has a map.

Does anybody follows more than one of them?

I'm not sure that it makes sense to talk of "following a sect". If you think of them as "schools" then, yes, I'm pretty sure that there are some (or many?) people who learn from more than one school.

For example the Pali canon could be associated with the Theravada school, but it is studied by people who also learn from other (e.g. Tibetan or Zen) teachers.

I can't tell you how wide-spread that practice is geographically, but there are certainly some users like that on this site.

And people sometimes emphasize what the "sects" of Buddhism have on common (What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share?, and One Vehicle for Peace which is referenced from that topic).

Incidentally, please refer to this topic: How should we police the use of the word Hinayana?

Also, One Vehicle for Peace (referenced above) says,

  It is universally accepted by scholars that the terms Hinayana and Mahayana are later inventions by Mahayanists. Theravada cannot be included in either of these divisions. Historically speaking Theravada already existed long before these two terms came into being. etc.

The Wikipedia map I referenced shows Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana (not Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana) as you wrote in the question.

Dhammadhatu's answer is about Hinayana ("individual enlightenment vehicle") since that's what you asked about -- it's one of the yanas which are described in Mahayana doctrine. But maybe (since you asked about different schools in different geographical places) you intended to ask instead about Theravada (which I think of as "old school" or "original school" or literally "school of the elder monks").


Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights and International Buddhist Ethics Committee

Don't waste a penny on them

H.E. Master Maitreya Samyaksambuddha (https://buddhistnations-gov.net/2018/08/01/president/)

Let me break down the name for you

H.E. - His Excellency - This shows Mana or pride. No matter what Buddhist text you follow Abhidharma or Theravada, it will teach that arrogance and pride are illnesses of the mind

Maitreya - Is the reincarnation of Buddha in the current times.

Samyaksambuddha - Is someone who has attained nirvana (there is a lot more to this)

So yes the claim of being the promised Buddha goes a long way in explaining the trait of a teacher which lacks humility

Now, there is nothing wrong on calling oneself H.E. Buddha himself and presiding over a university with rate card without classrooms or any qualifications or lineage whatsoever or anything remotely close to zen or Buddhist values. Some people may choose to do business in the name of Buddha and that’s a moral wrongdoing.

But let's put attention to other things that you asked for.

International Buddhist Ethics Committee & Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights

These 2 organizations are affiliated to the same university via United Buddhist Nations Organization (buddhistnations-gov.net) registered in 2017

Starting with the domain you can say this site has been created to falsely promote the university as a GOVERNMENT unit.

They conduct trials on individuals for reasons ranging from war crimes to un Buddha-like behavior.

The Tribunal

buddhistcourt-gov.net - A domain registered in 2017

This tribunal - uses a proton mail id and claims to be a legal body that has rights internationally to prosecute anyone it deems fit from United Nations to World Leaders to a common man

They send out notices in legal language accusing vaguely of things like waging war, fraud, and 100s of such things with a threat to malign and defame people. Which Buddhist in his right mind would do this

Just look at some of the cases online and you would see so many cases posted on educational portals and academia.

If they get offended by you, they will put a case on you :) I am doing this at the cost of being at the receiving end of one such notice

Above all, the cases are judged by Mr. H.E. himself - Now if that's not a fair trial, then what is?

So to answer your questions - As someone who has devoted her life to meditation, I can tell you don’t waste your time on this. There is no university, there are no classes and there is a massive scam of scaring people with -gov in the urls

Put that money to buy a big tub of ice cream and stare at it instead :D


Can meditation strengthen the sense of self?

Just do what you're doing. When you notice your self, don't fight it. Your sense of self is there for a purpose. The purpose is to find out the cause. Once the cause of self is found, the cause is removed. When the cause is removed, self ceases.

When meditation is done gently, spontaneously, peacefully, one becomes absorbed in meditation. When one is absorbed in meditation, thinking ceases. When thinking ceases, self ceases.


What is the difference between a Bodhisatta and a Bodhisattva?

Bodhisatta is Pali, Bodhisattva is Sanskrit, they have the same basic meaning.

Wikipedia:

  In Buddhism, a bodhisattva (Sanskrit: बोधिसत्त्व bodhisattva; Pali:
  बोधिसत्त bodhisatta) is an enlightenment (bodhi) being (sattva).
  Traditionally, a bodhisattva is anyone who, motivated by great
  compassion, has generated bodhicitta, which is a spontaneous wish to
  attain Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings. According
  to Tibetan Buddhism, a Bodhisattva is one of the four sublime states a
  human can achieve in life (the others being an Arhat, Buddha, or
  Pratyekabuddha).

In Theravāda Buddhism, the term "bodhisatta" (Pāli language) was used by the Buddha in the Pāli canon to refer to himself both in his previous lives and as a young man in his current life, prior to his enlightenment, in the period during which he was working towards his own liberation. In later Theravāda literature, the term "bodhisatta" is used fairly frequently in the sense of someone on the path to liberation.

Mahāyāna Buddhism is based principally upon the path of a bodhisattva. Mahāyāna Buddhism encourages everyone to become bodhisattvas and to take the bodhisattva vows. With these vows, one makes the promise to work for the complete enlightenment of all sentient beings.

The vows are an expression of bodhichitta, the desire to realize enlightenment for the sake of others. The exact wording of the Bodhisattva vows varies from school to school. The most basic form is:

May I attain Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings.

Mahāyāna schools like Zen, Nichiren, Tendai, and others use vows translated as:

Beings are numberless, I vow to save them
Desires are inexhaustible, I vow to end them
Dharma gates are boundless, I vow to enter them
Buddha's way is unsurpassable, I vow to become it.


What, if anything, do the texts say about habits versus mindulfness?

Some modern references:

Conscious, preconscious, unconscious, subconscious by Piya Tan
Viññāṇa (Consciousness) by Piya Tan
Unconscious Views by Piya Tan
The Unconscious by Piya Tan
Anusaya by Piya Tan

Suttas:

Cetanā Sutta 1-3

There many more Tipitaka references bibliography of the essays.


Causes of downfall of a Man, pointed by Buddha in Mangala Sutta

Among those following is the one among them; 1) Those who have ample wealth does not support his old aged father and mother has a downfall!

Philosophy aside, just by going with plain simple logic and there's no contradiction here. The statement and the premise is clear: those who have ample wealth who do not support their aging parents will face downfall. The Buddha and His noble disciples did not have ample wealth and hence did not satisfy the condition for the downfall. Now including the philosophy, one can safely say that what the Buddha did at the end for His parents, siblings, son, their many relatives, and countless many people was an extraordinary kind of support no other worldly support was able to match:

  "I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. Which two? Your mother & father. Even if you were to carry your mother on one shoulder & your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, & rubbing their limbs, and they were to defecate & urinate right there [on your shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. If you were to establish your mother & father in absolute sovereignty over this great earth, abounding in the seven treasures, you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. Why is that? Mother & father do much for their children. They care for them, they nourish them, they introduce them to this world. But anyone who rouses his unbelieving mother & father, settles & establishes them in conviction; rouses his unvirtuous mother & father, settles & establishes them in virtue; rouses his stingy mother & father, settles & establishes them in generosity; rouses his foolish mother & father, settles & establishes them in discernment: To this extent one pays & repays one’s mother & father.” ~~ AN 2.32 ~~