Hard to understand becoming in paticca samupadda

In Theravada Buddhism, there are two kinds of bhava:

kamma-bhava - the becoming that is kamma
upapatti-bhava - the becoming that is coming-to-be

The former is what is directly understood to be referred to in the teaching on dependent origination. It refers to the wholesome or unwholesome mental formation that constitutes volitional activity. It is the result of clinging, since clinging leads directly to acting on one's intense desire.
The second type of becoming is a by-product of kamma-bhava and is actually more or less synonymous with rebirth.

As it is said, "Bhava paccaya jāti," rebirth occurs in the human and deva worlds or in the lower worlds because of good or evil kamma-process. So rebirth stems from kammas which result from clinging (upādāna) and craving that is rooted in the contact between the six sense-objects and the corresponding sense-organs (āyatana).
In other words, there arise viññāna, nāmarūpa, salhāyatana, phassa and vedanā in the present life as the avijjā saṅkhāra, etc in a previous existence and now on top of that, taṇhā and upādāna give rise to new rebirth. The situation is like that of a man who has committed a crime while he is in prison for a previous conviction, or that of a man who has incurred new debt before he has fully settled his old debt.
Such new kammas accumulate by the thousands in a single lifetime. Under certain conditions one of these kammas becomes a death-bed vision and leads to rebirth while other kammas will create rebirth at other times in the life-cycle. If there are residual kammas from the previous lives that possess great force, they take precedence over present kamma, appear as death-bed visions and create rebirth in the lower or higher worlds. The post-mortem destiny of the person in such cases is determined by the nature of kamma.
-- Mahasi Sayadaw, Paticcasamuppada

As a simile, upadana is like the heat of rubbing two sticks together, bhava is like the igniting of the spark, and jati is like the flame and smoke that arise based on the ignition.


How to deal with post meditation frustration?

Sometimes expectation may lead to conterproductive meditation.


Difference between "mythology" and historical "facts"?

All we can know to be "facts" is the following:

  Svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko
  paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī

  The teaching (of Suffering Ending Truth) well explained by the Buddha — visible in the here-&-now, immediately effective, inviting inspection, leading onwards (to Nibbana), that
  sensible people can know for themselves.

This is the Dhamma Refuge taught by the Honest Awakened One (The Buddha); adhered to by Honest Noble People. This is all we can know as "fact" and this is all the Buddha expects or asks of us to know.


If you look at original Pali, what they translated as "consciousness" is actually "vijnana" - (discriminative) experience.

The point of the sutta is, as you meditatively investigate what seems to be your "I", you progressively exclude all physical elements as obviously not "I", until you are left with just experience itself. Then you investigate that experience and realize that it depends on the sensory input, which depends on attention.

When you don't pay attention to any sensory input, experience stops. What's left is called "equanimity" ("upekkha"), characterized as "luminous" or "radiant" ("pabhassara"). See Pabhassara Sutta for the canonical reference to "luminous mind".

Then Buddha explains that although this equanimity can be shaped into any other meditative state, including the formless jhanas, the meditator understands that any such state would be contrived and conditioned and therefore finite and prone to suffering.

This realization leads to letting go of desire to attain any state different from what is presently unfolding. The resulting state is pure suchness providing no basis for suffering to arise. The meditator realizes that this indeed is the culmination of the path, "the knowledge of the ending of suffering".

So, the "experience" is not analyzed as internal and external because we are talking about meditator's own experience as he tries to find who he is by separating from everything that is conditioned and unreliable. Experience (vijnana) itself is conditioned on sensory input and is therefore unreliable, not suitable to be called "I" or to be our basis for eternal happiness. Which leaves us with nothing to rely on, nothing to stand on - and this final realization being the only unshakable truth, acceptance of which gives unconditional freedom from any mismatch of expectations, - is the very Nirvana the Buddha is leading us to.


According to Buddhism , who achieves Nirvana?

Your question is invalid. If all phenomena are non-self you cannot ask "what self achieves the phenomenon called Nibbana".

Prince Siddharta attained  Nibbana and became the Buddha. But that is a statement in conventional reality. When you say "all phenomena are non-self", it is a statement in ultimate reality. Do not  try to mix up the 2 paradigms. Either you speak in ultimate reality or conventional reality. Pick one at a time.


What does a traditional Buddhist wedding look like?

These are more inherent with the local culture and customs than to do with Buddhism. So they might change from region to region and country to country.

The is no Buddhist wedding as such though some elements of Buddhism are incorporated like hymns (Jayamangala Gatha).


I believe (based soley on what you've written) that Mingyur Rinpoche is talking about our first reaction to new stimuli: in the first moment of perception there's an unlanguaged, felt sense (vedana) that whatever we are perceiving favors or threatens us which gives rise to attachment or aversion. Simultaneously, there's an awareness of what we perceive (samjna) followed by a host of associations that go with it (prapanca) which leads to further kleshas and conceptualizations (anusaya) which incline (cetana) us (anusaya) toward action (karma). This process is what keeps us trapped in samsara.
On the other hand, determining whether someone understands the lesson they've been given on the five skandhas, or the Utarratantra Shastra - while entailing the same processes - inclines the mind toward liberation. That is, what drives the process is the wish that whomever is receiving the teaching may understand it and benefit from it.
Having been a monk, and having been in both the role of student and teacher in a monastic college (and Mingyur Rinpoche visited my monastery twice while I was there), I can tell you that the point of a Buddhist education is to sharpen one's prajna in order to recognize the constituents of experience and to recognize reality for what it is. Seeing things as they are - as opposed to how we think they are makes us much less reactionary, and much more content.
So, in the end, there is absolutely no contradiction between assessing whether or not a student grocks the meaning of a text, and striving to meet whatever one encounters with equanimity.


In satipatthana, how does mindfulness lead to nirodha?

The between cessation and nirodha is "cessation" is an English word and "nirodha" is a Pali word that often does not literally mean "cessation" although often it does.

In meditation, the important "cessations" to be experienced are:

Cessation of craving.
Cessation of attachment.
Cessation of I-making & my-making.
Cessation of suffering.
Cessation of ignorance.
Cessation of ego-birthing, ego-aging & ego-dying.

In summary, all of the above "cessations" amount to the cessation of suffering (dukkha-nirodha).

Therefore, often, when the Pali teachings refer to "consciousness-nirodha"; "nama-rupa-nirodha"; "sense-contact-nirodha" and "feeling-nirodha"; what this means is consciousness, nama-rupa (mind-body), sense contact & feeling are no longer imprisoned by ignorance, craving, egoism & suffering.


There are different types of shynesses.

shyness towards doing evil: This is a result of understanding that evil deeds are undignified and demeaning. It's an aspect of wisdom.
stage shyness or shyness to talk to people: This is a result of inferiority complex. It's caused by ignorance and aversion.


Here's the standard answer of what the mind is according to Buddhism. 4 aggregates.

Feelings. (Pleasant, unpleasant, neither pleasant nor unpleasant.)
Perception. (Spontaneous recognition)
Volitional formations.
Consciousness. (6 consciousnesses, 5 physical sense base consciousness and 1 mind consciousness.)

We all have the same structure of the mind. The difference from person to person is merely that different feelings at different time for different people, (only 3 possibilities)

We can possibly speak different languages, so our perception of sounds is different, I perceive Russian language sound as noise, those who knows the language perceives their meaning spontaneously.

We choose to react differently to different things, but we all have the same basic template to choose from. Metta, or anger, or generosity, or greed. Emotions fall under the category of volitional formations.

We can be conscious of different things at different times. Like he's sleeping, I am awake etc.

The mind object can be anything, including the 4 aggregates of the mind itself, it's perceived via the mind base, and when mind consciousness arise to come together, we have contact of mind object. When contact happens, feelings arises and is dependent on what contact it is, what perception we have of the contact etc.


How did the Buddha subdue fear and terror while standing, sitting, etc.?

Buddha has given a detailed answer to handling fear and trepidation in the Sutta SN 11.3. Below I quote the relevant part:

  “But, bhikkhus, I say this: If you have gone to a forest or to the
  foot of a tree or to an empty hut, and fear or trepidation or terror
  should arise in you, on that occasion you should recollect me thus:
  ‘The Blessed One is an arahant, perfectly enlightened, accomplished in
  true knowledge and conduct, fortunate, knower of the world,
  unsurpassed leader of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and
  humans, the Enlightened One, the Blessed One.’ For when you recollect
  me, bhikkhus, whatever fear or trepidation or terror you may have will
  be abandoned.

  “If you cannot recollect me, then you should recollect the Dhamma
  thus: ‘The Dhamma is well expounded by the Blessed One, directly
  visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be
  personally experienced by the wise.’ For when you recollect the
  Dhamma, bhikkhus, whatever fear or trepidation or terror you may have
  will be abandoned.

  “If you cannot recollect the Dhamma, then you should recollect the
  Saṅgha thus: ‘The Saṅgha of the Blessed One’s disciples is practising
  the good way, practising the straight way, practising the true way,
  practising the proper way; that is, the four pairs of persons, the
  eight types of individuals—this Saṅgha of the Blessed One’s disciples
  is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy
  of reverential salutation, the unsurpassed field of merit for the
  world.’ For when you recollect the Saṅgha, bhikkhus, whatever fear or
  trepidation or terror you may have will be abandoned.

To answer the question How did the Buddha manage fear? I would say that he recalled Dhamma. If anyone recalls Dhamma, all the fear will vanish or fade away.


At this point I venture to say that the school one picks is largely irrelevant. It's much more about the teacher's ability to connect the map of the teaching with the jungle of your immediate living experience. Once you see how the two relate, you can start making progress. As was said in Kalama Sutta:

  Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... nor upon ... Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," -- enter on and abide in them.

The right teacher will capture your attention and inspire motivation by appealing to things that you yourself value high. Using samsaric inertia as the fuel and stepping stone, he or she will help you cut through habit and get a fresh look at obvious issues that you have been ignoring far too long. The right teacher makes you feel extremely uneasy AND inspired at the same time. Uneasy, because the teacher holds a mirror for you to see that you have been a fool all along. Inspired, because in front of your very eyes you see a perfect role model, a living example of what Dharma actually stands for, far beyond theoretical constructs.

In my experience, traveling/lecturing "rockstar" teachers rarely provide the level of up-and-close personal guidance required to break through. Retreats and books help to a degree but nothing replaces the immediate influence of watching a master go about everyday things.

I'm inclined to say, the best bet is to find a resident teacher/master/lama and join the sangha of students on a permanent basis. Many Zen masters run meditation circles, with some degree of study and personal guidance mixed in. Tibetan lamas regularly take students for the preliminary Ngondro course, from which one can graduate to Vajrayana proper to receive in-depth guidance. In any case, I would suggest, search locally for little sanghas organized around a resident master - whether at a temple, or a secular meditation circle.


What are the requirements or preconditions for someone to ordain?

Disclaimer: This is the current knowledge I have on the Theravadin tradition.
Here is a summary that answers your question:

  Becoming a Novice

  The first part of the ordination procedure for bhikkhus is known as
  the Going Forth into Homelessness (pabbajjaa). If it finishes with
  just that — without going on to the Questioning of the candidate and
  the Acceptance of him by all the gathered bhikkhus into the Bhikkhu
  Sa"ngha — the candidate is known as a saama.nera or novice. This is
  usually the case when the candidate is less than the twenty years of
  age necessary to become a bhikkhu. A very young boy is not allowed to
  become a novice either, but the minimum age will vary according to
  place.

  A saama.nera wears the 'yellow robe' like a full bhikkhu — except he
  does not have the sa"nghaa.ti (double-thickness robe) — and leads a
  very similar life. In some places a period as a novice forms part of
  the preliminary training to become a bhikkhu, while some men decide to
  remain saama.nera for various reasons. The saama.nera keeps the Ten
  Precepts and the 75 Training Rules (sekhiya) and some other rules of
  the bhikkhu. Later, when he is ready and if he is old enough, he can
  ask the bhikkhu community for full ordination (upasampadaa).

  Becoming a Bhikkhu

  In the Pali texts, when a man decided to become a bhikkhu, he is often
  quoted as saying: "Confined is the household life, a path of dust; the
  going forth is open and spacious. Not easy is it living in a house to
  lead the religious life absolutely fulfilled and purified, as polished
  as mother-of-pearl. Suppose I were to shave off my hair and beard,
  clothe myself in ochre robes and go forth from homelife into
  homelessness?" (HS ch.19)

  However, anyone wishing to become a bhikkhu must fulfill certain
  conditions about which he will be questioned during the actual
  ordination procedure. The candidate must be male and at least twenty
  years old. He must never have committed any grievous crimes and, if
  previously ordained, he must not have been guilty of any Defeater
  (Paaraajika) offences or have entered some other religion without
  disrobing first. He should also be of good
  reputation; fit and healthy enough to carry out the duties of a
  bhikkhu; not in debt; not subject to government service; and have
  permission from parents or guardian.

  The Ordination ceremony requires a prescribed boundary (siima), a
  preceptor (upajjhaaya) and a quorum of bhikkhus to validate the formal
  Sangha Act. In the formal procedure the candidate is examined as to
  the necessary qualities and, if all the bhikkhus are satisfied,
  they receive him into the Sangha, the Community of Bhikkhus.

  It is in this way that yet another link is added to the
  bhikkhu-lineage. Henceforth, the new bhikkhu can participate (and make
  up the necessary quorum) in future assemblies and help receive other
  new bhikkhus — as bhikkhus have continued to do for two and a half
  thousand years. (See EV,I,p.4; OP)

  When a candidate requests full admission to the Community (after
  the saama.nera ordination) he does not make any 'lifetime vows' but
  offers himself for training and instruction under his Preceptor's
  guidance. At the end of the ordination ceremony, the Preceptor will
  immediately instruct the new bhikkhu (or arrange that he is properly
  taught) about the Paa.timokkha Rule and the other principles that all
  bhikkhus should follow and observe.

  For the first five years a bhikkhu is called navaka ('new one') and he
  must live 'dependent' (nissaya) on a senior bhikkhu — either his
  preceptor or teacher (aacariya) — training in the ways of a bhikkhu.
  The preceptor and the new monk should be kind and helpful to each
  other, in almost a father-and-son relationship. A new bhikkhu who no
  longer lives under his preceptor must take another senior bhikkhu as
  his teacher and depend on him instead.

  For the next five years after his navaka period, the bhikkhu is called
  majjhima, ('one in the middle') and he is allowed to live by himself
  if he is accomplished in certain qualities.

  When a bhikkhu has completed ten Rains he is called Thera, which can
  be translated as 'an elder who is worthy of respect.' If he is also
  accomplished in certain extra qualities, he is allowed to give
  ordination as preceptor, to be a teacher, and have young monks live in
  dependence on him.

  -The Bhikkhus' Rules: A Guide for Laypeople

Note: Requirement of being male is not always necessary and is dependent on the specific monastery in which the ordination takes place.

For a more in-depth answer, see the chapter on Ordination in the Buddhist Monastic Code by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Here's a chart of the procedure in some western monasteries (in Asian monasteries the ordination can be immediate):

Some references:

Ordination at Santi Forest Monastery
General Information for Potential Anagarikas in UK Monasteries


Here are some excellent advice given by Ajaan Fuang in "Awareness Itself":

  § "When the meditation goes well, don't get excited. When it doesn't
  go well, don't get depressed. Simply be observant to see why it's
  good, why it's bad. If you can be observant like this, it won't be
  long before your meditation becomes a skill."

  § A young nurse practiced meditation with Ajaan Fuang several days
  running, and finally asked him one day, "Why wasn't today's session as
  good as yesterday's?"

  He answered: "Meditating is like wearing clothes. Today you wear
  white, tomorrow red, yellow, blue, whatever. You have to keep
  changing. You can't wear the same set of clothes all the time. So
  whatever color you're wearing, just be aware of it. Don't get
  depressed or excited about it."

  § A few months later the same nurse was sitting in meditation when a
  sense of peace and clarity in her mind became so intense that she felt
  she would never have a bad mood infiltrate her mind again. But sure
  enough, bad moods eventually came back as before. When she mentioned
  this to Ajaan Fuang, he said, "Looking after the mind is like raising
  a child. There will have to be bad days along with the good. If you
  want only the good, you're in for trouble. So you have to play
  neutral: Don't fall in with the good or the bad."

  § A student came to complain to Ajaan Fuang that she had been
  meditating for years, and still hadn't gotten anything out of it. His
  immediate response: "You don't meditate to 'get' anything. You
  meditate to let go."

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

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

  § "When the mind's not quiet — that's when its poor and burdened with
  difficulties. It takes molehills and turns them into mountains. But
  when the mind is quiet, there's no suffering, because there's nothing
  at all. No mountains at all. When there's a lot to the mind, it's
  simply a lot of defilement, making it suffer."

Maybe you can give yourself the flexibility of meditating between 15 to 30 minutes. At the end of it, don't cling to any result/ state, and be observant about why today's session was the way it was. If today's session was not good, it's not because you had failed. It was probably due to some defilement entering the mind. Then that would lead you to identify how the defilement came into the mind. That's more skillful than blaming yourself.


Does Theravadin analysis distinguish between implicative and absolute negations?

From a practicing (non-academic) Theravada perspective philosophical analysis/speculation of this form would be simply considered playing with vaci-sankhara (verbal formations). Realization of anattā for a Theravadin comes from meditative practice alone. No amount of fiddling around with words or expertise in the written Pali scriptures or associated philosophical intricacies brings one any closer to the goal. Any and all thoughts one has about anattā are merely formations based on craving (tanha) which must be let go before one can actually realize anattā. There is a feeling associated with every sense object that comes in contact with the senses. Based on this feeling one perceives the object as good, bad, or neither and then one's intellect explores this object as a source of happiness, unhappiness, or neither respectively. In this case one's mind comes into contact with an idea about anattā and it evokes some feeling. If this feeling is positive then one will be attracted to the idea (as a source of happiness) and will attempt to further justify this idea with the intellect. Similarly, if the idea evokes a negative feeling then the intellect will attempt to refute this idea as it perceived the idea as a source of unhappiness. The irony is that both of these explorations about anattā (really intellectual exploration about any subject) are psychologically based on self-view (sakkaya-ditti). The intellect is always biased by the fundamental perceptions one has about the object that are based on nothing more than feelings. In order to realize the truth about anything these thoughts (explorations of the intellect) must be abandoned.


How is "becoming" (bhava) defined in the context of Dependent Co-arising?

it is explained as formation of various existence in the three ranges of existence;

  AN 3.76  Bhava Sutta: Becoming (1)

  Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down
  to him and sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
  Blessed One, "Lord, this word, 'becoming, becoming' — to what extent
  is there becoming?"[1]

  "Ananda, if there were no kamma ripening in the sensuality-property,
  would sensuality-becoming be discerned?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
  moisture.[2] The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance
  & fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a lower property.
  Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.

  "If there were no kamma ripening in the form-property, would
  form-becoming be discerned?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
  moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance &
  fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a middling property.
  Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future.

  "If there were no kamma ripening in the formless-property, would
  formless-becoming be discerned?"

  "No, lord."

  "Thus kamma is the field, consciousness the seed, and craving the
  moisture. The consciousness of living beings hindered by ignorance &
  fettered by craving is established in/tuned to a refined property.
  Thus there is the production of renewed becoming in the future. This
  is how there is becoming."
  https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.076.than.html

If there is craving, will that craving always result in "becoming"?

Yes craving is always for a state with certain conditions or a state without certain conditions, either way craving for something dependent on conditions becoming like this or otherwise, becoming better or worse, good or bad etc.

If one talks about craving for the cessation of craving, such craving can be explained as being dispersive of becoming to the extent that it is for abandoning of craving and therefore becoming but still it is craving for a conditioned state, a state without certain conditions, without craving. There is nothing further after that and craving is at that point uprooted due to complete disenchantment.

  Then Ven. Ananda approached the nun and, on arrival, sat down on a
  prepared seat. As he was sitting there, he said to the nun: "This
  body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying
  on food that food is to be abandoned.

  "This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying
  on craving that craving is to be abandoned.https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html

Is there something like craving without "becoming"?

i am not sure what you mean.


To focus, you remember to keep the mind on the meditation object (breathing) &, when the mind strays, just bring it back to the object.

When the mind strays, it is not "you" that is intentionally straying but the mind itself therefore it is not logical to judge "yourself" since the mind is the problem rather than "yourself".

If the mind is straying a lot and you are judging yourself a lot, you may have to train the mind new ways of acknowledging the straying, such as mentally noting: "The mind is straying"; "the mind has craving"; "the mind has anger"; "the mind is restless"; etc or simply: "straying"; "craving"; "anger"; "restlessness", etc.

In this way, instead of judging "yourself" & attributing blame upon "yourself" unnecessarily & unwarrantedly, the mind is judged or the states of mind are judged.

There are preliminary meditation techniques for beginners such as the popular Mahasi Sayadaw method that use this  kind of mental noting. You may check out these methods or, otherwise, read about how the Buddha dealt with his straying mind in the sutta on Two Kinds of Thinking.


At which stage of enlightenment are the aggregates seen as not-self fully?

The conceit ‘I am’ is the 8th fetter; only fully eradicated by an Arahant.

Bhikkhus, there are these five higher fetters. What five? Lust for form, lust for the formless, conceit, restlessness, ignorance. SN 45.180

The stream-enterer has overcome 'identity view' ('sakkaya-ditthi'); which means seeing the group (body; kaya) of aggregates are not a self. However, the stream-enterer's seeing of the aggregates as not-self is obviously not complete enough to remove all ten fetters and uproot all outflows of defilements & conceit.
Therefore, arahant is the stage of enlightenment where the aggregates are seen as not-self fully.


Metta towards a non-sentient entity or substance (e.g. rice)?

Is there a Buddhist tradition or practice, which involves developing or showing metta towards a non-sentient entity ... for example, towards a jar of rice?

Not that I know of.

If not, why not?

This essay says,

  These four attitudes are said to be excellent or sublime because they are the right or ideal way of conduct towards living beings (sattesu samma patipatti). They provide, in fact, the answer to all situations arising from social contact.

Rice isn't a "living being", and one does not have "social contact" with rice.

Also I don't think that rice is capable of "suffering" (because it isn't sentient; it's inanimate), and so it's not a suitable object for "metta".

Is it theoretically possible (according to Buddhist theory) that such a practice might have an effect, an effect not only on the mind of the practitioner but also on the object

I don't think so. I think you're asking that the rice last longer before spoiling, that it be less impermanent; and I don't remember seeing doctrine which I could construe as saying that "wishing that something were less impermanent is enough make it so".

Conversely there's doctrine about doing rather than wishing: saying e.g. if you want a long life then you should do things which are conducive to long life (not just wish for it).

Perhaps being careful about preparing the rice you care for, and doing something such as cleaning the jar more carefully or sealing the jar more tightly, might show an experimental effect.


Good question! Not everyone finds this episode interesting - and yet it illustrates a very important point.
Buddha subdues his fear by bringing all of his attention to the present moment.

As I was staying there a deer came by, or a peacock snapped a twig, or the wind rustled the leaves. Then I thought, ‘Is this that fear and dread coming?’ Then I thought, ‘Why do I always meditate expecting that fear and terror to come? Why don’t I get rid of that fear and dread just as it comes, while remaining just as I am?’

Normally when we are afraid, our mind gets split. Half of it is in the present moment and another half runs to a hypothetical future, imagining the dreadful scenario. Buddha said, why do I always do that, why do I imagine things? Rather than worry about them why don't I focus on what I was doing?
This happens a lot to us. We imagine what our neighbors think about us, we imagine our audience judging us when giving a lecture, we imagine things lurking in the night when putting the trash can out for pickup. The more we worry about them the more we lose our ground and our connection with the real situation.
Instead if we can focus on doing what we started - which is what actually matters anyway - then we will not only stop experiencing fear, we will do better in terms of meeting an actual danger if it should ever come.


I see that the translation in your link interprets the Pali word dukkha as "suffering". Other translations have it as "painful" or "stressful" or "unsatisfactory". Whatever word we use, the point being made about external phenomena is that they are not going to make us happy. The gorgeous potential romantic or sexual partner, the object my eye rests upon, may inspire in me a pleasurable feeling, but that happiness is not going to last. That happiness is not a support for the freedom from suffering that the Buddha is teaching us about.
Because they are notself, because they are impermanent, they cannot provide lasting happiness, though we tend to think they will. Instead, we'll end up discovering the things we see (hear, touch, smell, taste, think of) will disappoint us. They'll change, or disappear, causing us to suffer.


Before Buddhism, was there a way to escape from samsara?

Some Buddhist texts say that there were previous Buddhas (and that there will be others in the distant future): that they too taught Buddhism; and that the current Buddha rediscovered Buddhism.

For example, in the commentary to Dhammapada verse 183:

  On one occasion, Thera Ananda asked the Buddha whether the Fundamental Instructions to bhikkhus given by the preceding Buddhas were the same as those of the Buddha himself. To him the Buddha replied that the instructions given by all the Buddhas are as given in the following verses:

  Then the Buddha spoke in verse as follows:

    Not to do evil, to cultivate merit, to purify one's mind - this is the Teaching of the Buddhas.
    The best moral practice is patience and forbearance; "Nibbana is Supreme", said the Buddhas. A bhikkhu does not harm others; one who harms others is not a bhikkhu.
    Not to revile, not to do any harm, to practise restraint according to the Fundamental Instructions for the bhikkhus, to be moderate in taking food, to dwell in a secluded place, to devote oneself to higher concentration - this is the Teaching of the Buddhas.

There are even some suttas, such as SN 12.65 which implies that Nirvana and the path the Nirvana was "inhabited in ancient times" and rediscovered by the Buddha.

  In the Nagara Sutta, the delightful ancient fortress city [§20.2] clearly refers to nirvana, and the city is
  populated by saints (called “seers,” rsi, in the Sanskrit Nagara Sutra, §5.28). Both the Pali and Sanskrit
  versions of the Sutta speak of ancient people using the path.

Texts also say that a few people (called "private Buddhas") discover Nirvana for themselves, but (unlike a true Buddha) aren't able or aren't willing to teach other people.


Listening to music, among other liminally conscious activities, like scribbling or tapping a pencil while listening to a lecture in class, are ways of distracting one’s attention from other more disturbing phenomena such as street noise, but the goal of meditation is to focus the mind, not distract it. I suggest that buying some industrial grade earplugs (not the foam kind) would be more beneficial to your practice than listening to music.


In what realm did archaic humans live? Is it manussa (human) realm or tiracchāna (animal) realm?

There are times when humans hold long lifespan, good conducts, beautiful and large bodies, and there are times when their lifespans are short, bad, animal-like conducts, ugly small bodies. Currently it goes foward the decaying line again. Lifespan, bodies, without much taken support, is already very short and degenerated. So the age of going into relationship.

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


Should I meditate on one thing or just any sensation that arise?

The main objective of meditation is to maintain a mind of equanimity (calmness).

When the mind is calm, it can also develop insight.

Meditating upon one thing helps establish equanimity (calmness).

The main practise in the teachings of the Buddha is to establish the mind on knowing when the body breathes in & when the body breathes out.

In does not matter where this knowing of breathing in & breathing out is established.

The knowing can be in a small area, such as the nostrils, nose-tip & upper lip.

Or the knowing can be in a larger area, such as the abdomen; or even a larger area, from the nostrils, throat, chest to abdomen (stomach).


Can anyone follow Buddhism if the person has had drinks & ate non-veg in the past?

As long as a person gives up violence and drugs & alcohol, they can be a Buddhist.

The ideal step is to clearly see why violence & drugs/alcohol are harmful and do not bring happiness.

As for vegetarianism, it is not strictly Buddhist, even though it helps nurture compassion.


Do doctors waster their chance as you put it? They are human beings and so we could surmise most do and some don't. Do they have a privileged position to exercise their humanity?

  Doctors see birth, aging, sickness and death on a daily basis but have somehow become deaf,dumb and blind to all that they see and hear inside a ward.

I totally agree with you! I recently watched Alive Inside, a brilliant documentary about the plight of the elderly in America who are struggling with dementia and other related diseases. The documentary clearly illustrates that the root cause of the problem is not that the care givers and doctors are inhuman but that the system in which they find themselves, conditions them to think of the elderly under their care as 'patients' not human beings. Until they are 'cured' we must hide them away in institutions.

Science is great at solving problems but, in the medical profession, it has been taken too far and patients are seen as puzzles to solve, dials to turn and control rather than as HUMAN BEINGS. So what's missing is COMPASSION.

The modern Hypocratic Oath states:

  I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug. Wikipedia

How much of this warmth, sympathy and understanding is taught in medical school? Very little. It's all science - diagnosis and treatment of symptoms. Symptoms that present themselves in a biological machine not in a human being. Without the balance of a basic compassionate view, failure to cure every patient, will eventually take its emotional toll on the doctor. From a basic view of compassion there is no failure only a desire to help, to support and care for.

In ayurvedic medicine, doctors ask the following four questions upon seeing their patients: 1) Is there a disease? If so, what is it? 2) What is the cause of the disease? 3) Is there a cure for the disease? 4) If there is a cure, what is the treatment?

Sounds like the Four Noble Truths right? Buddha must have been exposed to Ayurveda in India and re-framed these questions to diagnose the human condition. Buddha could have kept quiet about his great liberation under the Bodhi tree and just live out the rest of his life in bliss and happiness ... but he chose to teach and share with others out of COMPASSION.

So I think my answer is clear ;)

  How can a medical student or a doctor get across this barrier, and not be deconditioned to being blind to the truth, and how can he/she be strong and balanced enough mentally to cope up with the evergrowing needs/obligations that a doctor is cursed with?

COMPASSION :)


More like shunyata instead of anatta. The former has a philosophical as well as an experiential component. It speaks to the inherent emptiness of all things as well as the spacious feelings that often accompany the direct realization of that emptiness.  The etymology of the word shunyata also conveys a notion of "hollowness" and has actually been translated as "emptiness", "voidness", and "spaciousness".

Side note - I'd be careful not to confuse the perception of shunyata with the experiences of the formless attainments (namely the base of infinite space and the base of nothingness).  Those are very different things; even the Pali/Sanskrit roots of the word are vastly different.


How does rebirth fit with the fact that everything is impermanent?

"Rebirth" is a moral teaching in Buddhism; about destiny due to action (karma).

"Impermanence" is a transcendent teaching in Buddhism.

"Rebirth" and "impermanence" are not intended to "fit" together.


I had a no-self experience, why is it a good state?

When I told my Zen Roshi that "I didn't exist," he simply tapped my leg and said, "What's that?" I was completely baffled and tongue-tied.

Welcome to the stream.

  “Mendicants, all those who have experiential confidence in me have entered the stream. --AN10.64

If the "world seems to be completely neutral and analytic", this can be due to indifference (i.e., lay equanimity) or renunuciate equanimity. The difference is subtle and warrants further practice and study.

  Therein, by relying on the six kinds of renunciate equanimity, give up the six kinds of lay equanimity. --MN137

Regarding your question about joy or bliss, you might be interested to read about the eight liberations. In particular, the third liberation involves beauty. Indifference cannot see beauty.

  They’re focused only on beauty. This is the third liberation. --AN8.66

The challenge provided by being just neutral and analytic is that one is still beset by choices, and those choices become more and more difficult with greater insight. Here, precepts become increasingly important along with further practice.

Also study the brahmaviharas.


What is the perfect truth in Tientai Buddhism?

I'm going to answer based on a hunch. Swanson notes, in his translation of the Mo-Ho-Chih-Kuan, that

  These three [truths as] expressions [of the perfect teaching] seem to
  be the same as the formulation in the Distinct Teaching, but as
  Chan-jan points out (BT–I, p. 284), the Distinct Teaching takes each
  of these formulations to be a separate level of understanding.

My hunch is that:

for the separate teaching, the mundane truth does not contain anything of the
absolute, and is only its negation.

As the perfect teaching merely integrates the three truths of the separate teaching (see above quote) it only teaches:

neither existence nor emptiness, and not neither existence nor emptiness.

And, because the perfect teaching includes both truths of the separate teaching, the perfect teaching must include:

existence and nonexistence

All three truths in perfect teaching, beyond words.

  The three types [of truth such as "emptiness"] are all empty because they are beyond verbalization

My second hunch is that:

we can only express what is beyond verbalisation to say it is merely provisionally true.

Then the perfect teaching must only state that

any proposition that mentions existence, or non-existence, or
emptiness, or non-emptiness, is merely provisionally true.

Whatever, that is, "existence" is translated as.


How to make a decision based on Buddhist principles?

A book by Bhikkhu Basnagoda Rahula, Ph.D entitled The Buddha's Teachings on Prosperity At Home, At Work, and in the World devotes a chapter to "The Buddha's View on Decision Making".

  I have seen no other cause than the presence of false views to block the origination of right thoughts in the mind and to corrupt the right thoughts already present in the mind. I have seen no other cause than the presence of correct view to inspire the right thoughts already present in the mind. ~ The Buddha, The Numerical Discourses

Venerable Dr. Rahula, outlines 10 kinds of fallacies in reasoning (from several suttas including the Kalama, Bhaddiya, Canki and others) that if one were to believe to be true could create such false view.

Fallacy 1. Reported information is true
Fallacy 2. Traditional values, beliefs, and practices are actual truths
Fallacy 3. Social truths are actual truths
Fallacy 4. The texts are true
Fallacy 5. Logical reasoning is always correct
Fallacy 6. Reasoning based on imagination and speculation is correct
Fallacy 7. Hypothesized reasoning is correct
Fallacy 8. One should accept a view because it is compatible with one's own way of thinking.
Fallacy 9. One's persuasive skill validates the message
Fallacy 10. Individual authority is a dependable criterion for making decisions

Each of the fallacies is explained in detail and the following chapter details "Correct Reasoning, Right Decisions".

  If you understand that this action is right, harmless, blissful, beneficial, and admirable, take that action and follow it. ~ The Buddha, The Numerical Discourses

The four forms of correct evaluation (from the Kalama Sutta) are:

Right Evaluation 1. Wrong motivations lead to wrong decisions
Right Evaluation 2. Absence of wrong motivation leads to right decisions
Right Evaluation 3. Consequences of a decision make it right or wrong
Right Evaluation 4. Attention to the views of qualified people lead to right decisions.

In summary, the Buddha spoke of the correct way to make decisions on many occasions. Due to the way discourses are categorized, it's not easy for the average person to pick out the teachings of the Buddha on such practical matters in any sort of an easy way. This book has done that and combines an easy to read style with the expected references to the suttas from which the information is taken. It's available from Wisdom Publications if you are interested in reading it in full.


Is the determining thought moment (vottopana) based entirely off of past karma?

Vottapana is a Citta(thought moment) that has the function of determining or decision making. It is not a result of past Kamma. But it is not a self either. There's no 'I' in it. Why? Because it is also born of causes and impermanent like any other Citta.

  there is no
  control and yet I can control my reactions to situations. Is there
  only a sense of control as long as an individual is not fully
  enlightened?

Whether one is enlightened or not, there's no sense of control if by 'control' you mean there's a 'self' or 'I' who does the decision making. But there's a sense of control in the sense of a citta performing the function of decision making.


You can find a Sinhala translation of the Mahaniddesa and a Sinhala translation of the Culaniddesa on SuttaCentral. Both were translated by A. P. de Zoysa.
From there, you can copy and paste the Sinhala texts into Google Translate, and get it translated into English or another western language of your choice.
For example, I managed to translate the first paragraph of Mahaniddesa 6 in Sinhala to:

This life is definitely short. ”Life is the existence of life,
dependence, existence, control, life, sense of life. Again, in two
respects life is short, a little, life is short because it exists,
life is short because it is small in nature. How can life be short in
existence? Lived in the past emotional moment. Not alive. Will not
live. Does not live in the future psyche. Did not live, did not live.
Did not live and did not live in the present time mentality. Will not
live.


Question about going forth (while having children & wife)

When Rahula was born the Buddhisattava was contemplating to renouncing a householder's life hence he said "rāhulajāto bandhanaṃ jātaṃ", meaning "A rāhu is born, a fetter has arisen".

So a kid and a wife bind you to with the burden of responsibility. There were many monks who left householders life with families to become monks at the time of the Buddha. Even now in Buddhist countries, this happens.

Going forth is leaving aside ones household responsibilities to wife, children, parents, relatives and friends, so that one is free from these responsibilities, hence having more time to practice the dhamma.


Who am 'I'? Verification as to the demarcations of 'Sankhara'

who is the 'being' within our minds, who travels through this eternity
  of existence?

'being' is simply a label given to nama-rupa. There's no being within the mind. It's like asking "what is the car within the car? Is it the engine? Wheels? Frame? Seats?". No such thing! 'Car' is simply a label given to a certain arrangement of all that.

  Who travels through this eternity of existence?

Nobody! A being traveling through a Samsara is simply used in the metaphoric sense to give teachings at conceptual level. In reality, it's just Paticcasamuppada.

Sankhara paccaya Vinnana - Dependent on Karma consciousness arises

  Sure it changes from one existence to another, but it is endlessly
  existing

What do you mean by 'it' here? Is it Nama, or is it Rupa? A single Rupa unit only lasts for 17 thought moments. The next Rupa arising is not the same as the previous. Nama vanishes even quicker. So what exactly is endlessly existing?

"It existing" here is simply a false view of reality about a Sanna(perception) caused by contact at the sense doors. Ignorance covers up impermanence, so instead of taking Sanna as just Sanna that rises and dies, we take Sanna as something existing.

Remaining questions are based on the above mentioned.


How do you see this article fitting in with Buddhist principles?

Buddhism does not state 'perception' ('sanna') is a chain. In fact, without perception, enlightenment (perceiving the true nature of things, including perception itself) cannot occur.
Instead, Buddhism lists the following chains (fetters):

belief in a self (Pali: sakkāya-diṭṭhi)

doubt or uncertainty,
especially about the teachings (vicikicchā)

wrong use of morals and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāsa)

sensual desire (kāmacchando)

ill will (vyāpādo or byāpādo)

lust for material jhana, lust for material things (rūparāgo)

lust for immaterial jhana, lust for immaterial things, such as status,
fame, etc (arūparāgo)

conceit (māna)

restlessness (uddhacca)

ignorance (avijjā)

Fetter (Buddhism) adapted from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the perception of the 'illusion of perceptions', if this was actually seen clearly, desires & attachments would end because, in reality, the mind only desires & attaches with concrete (solid) self-belief to concrete (solid) objects .
It is one thing for a cognitive scientist to create concrete ideas & theories about the illusion of perception, which may not end the desires & attachments of the scientist. It is another thing to actually see the illusion of perception meditatively, which will certainly end desires & attachments.

Now suppose that in the last month of the hot season a mirage were shimmering and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it &
appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it &
appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without
substance: for what substance would there be in a mirage?
In the same
way, a monk sees, observes & appropriately examines any perception
that is past, future or present; internal or external; blatant or
subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing it, observing
it & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void,
without substance: for what substance would there be in perception?
Phena Sutta


Should my happiness be dependent on the suffering of others?

For the question, "Why should I be happy?", if the answer is, "Because there are people more miserable than you. Thank God that at least you are better than them," I think this is not an answer appropriate for Buddhism.

The reason is that today there are other people worse off than you, but in the future, it is also possible that you are worse off than them. That's anicca - nothing is permanent. This answer also shows a lack of compassion and loving-kindness.

Instead, you can generate happiness through the Brahmavihara of loving-kindness (metta), to wish that both you and them would be happy, safe and at ease.

The other Brahmavihara is compassion (karuna). If you can't alleviate the sufferings of others, at the very least, you can contribute towards not increasing their suffering.

From the Karaniya Metta Sutta:

  Think: Happy, at rest,
  may all beings be happy at heart.
  Whatever beings there may be,
  weak or strong, without exception,
  long, large, middling, short,
  subtle, blatant, seen & unseen,
  near & far, born & seeking birth:
  May all beings be happy at heart.

  Let no one deceive another
  or despise anyone anywhere,
  or through anger or irritation
  wish for another to suffer.

  As a mother would risk her life
  to protect her child, her only child,
  even so should one cultivate a limitless heart
  with regard to all beings.

  With good will for the entire cosmos,
  cultivate a limitless heart:
  Above, below, & all around, unobstructed,
  without enmity or hate.
  Whether standing, walking,
  sitting, or lying down,
  as long as one is alert,
  one should be resolved on this mindfulness.
  This is called a sublime abiding
  here & now.


I do not understand if it's Tibetan Buddhism saying lower, middle, or greater yanas, or only Tibetan Buddhism only.

Reference to the Chinese Sutras I studied, it would be Śrāvaka, Bodhisattva and Buddha yanas. Or sometimes five yanas: Śrāvaka, Arhat, Pratyekabuddha, Bodhisattva and Buddha. These yanas are depending on the nature/inclination of the students that they naturally choosing their vehicles. In general, Sravaka, Arhat and Pratyekabuddha responding to life as an abode to be escaped from, their main concern is a jailbreak, or liberation. But the Bodhisattva and Buddha are liberation and enjoyment, or total mastery. All yanas have happy ending, just that they have different taste buds, like some people like beer, some wine, some whisky... :)

So this is not the Buddha be partial or judgemental, just providing all different drinks for all different drinkers that pleased the most their taste buds. It wouldn't be a good bar if only offering one type of drink, huh?


What is the Buddhist perspective on body language?

There are many examples in Buddha's life how others were inspired by his appearance.
King Bimbisara was tempted to offer him a palace seeing his stature on the first encounter (this was before his enlightenment),

  Look at this one, sirs. How handsome, stately, pure! How consummate
  his demeanor! Mindful, his eyes downcast, looking only a plow-length
  before him, as one who's not from a lowly lineage: Send the royal
  messengers at once to see where this monk will go.

  [..]

  "You are young, youthful, in the first stage of youth, endowed with
  the stature & coloring    of a noble-warrior. You would look glorious
    in the vanguard of an army,     arrayed with an elephant squadron. I
  offer you wealth : enjoy it. I ask your birth : inform me."

  Sn 3.1

Maha Kassapa accepted him as his teacher without hearing a word from him,

  On the road between Rajagaha and Nalanda, the Master sat down under a
  fig tree, waiting for his future disciple. When Kassapa arrived at the
  spot and saw the radiance of the Buddha's countenance, sensing the
  enlightenment that shone through it, he thought, "This must be my
  Master for whose sake I have gone forth!" He approached the Buddha,
  and paying homage, fell at his feet and exclaimed: "The Exalted One,
  Lord, is my teacher, and I am his disciple!"

  http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/hecker/wheel345.html#ch4

The occasion where Milinda was introduced to Nâgasena in Milinda panha gives some insight on how Buddhist literature sees the influence of body language.
Nâgasena was a junior monk, yet Milinda was able to recognize him among others by his demeanor,

  And as he looked over the whole of the assembly, in front, and down the centre,
  and behind, king Milinda detected Nâgasena seated in the middle, and,
  like a shaggy lion who knows no fear or frenzy, entirely devoid of
  nervous agitation, and free from shyness and trepidation. And as soon
  as he saw him, he knew by his mien that that was Nâgasena, and he
  pointed him out to Devamantiya.

Now, this is a king that gets nervous and frightened by the sight of a monk.

  Whereupon the king rejoiced that he had recognised Nâgasena without having had him pointed out to him. But nevertheless, at the sight of him, the king was seized with nervous excitement and trepidation and fear.

This encounter conditions the king's mind, the king has accepted defeat by the very sight of this monk.

  'At the sight of Nâgasena, wise and pure, Subdued in all that is the
  best subjection, Milinda uttered this foreboding word-- "Many the
  talkers I have visited, Many the conversations I have had, But never
  yet, till now, to-day, has fear, So strange, so terrible, o'erpowered
  my heart. Verily now defeat must be my lot, And victory his, so
  troubled is my mind".


Once nirvana is reached is there any connection to earth available?

The short answer is no.

When the Buddha attained Nirvana, he exclaimed (Dhammapada 153 - 154):

  Through many a birth in samsara have I wandered in vain, seeking the builder of this house (of life). Repeated birth is indeed
  suffering!

  O house-builder, you are seen! You will not build this house again. For your rafters are broken and your ridgepole shattered. My
  mind has reached the Unconditioned; I have attained the destruction of
  craving.

Explanation:

  According to the commentary, these verses are the Buddha's "Song of
  Victory," his first utterance after his Enlightenment. The house is
  individualized existence in samsara, the house-builder craving, the
  rafters the passions and the ridge-pole ignorance.

So, thereafter, he would no longer be born again in any world or in any form again. Hence, there is no way that he can communicate with Earth directly. So, how does the Buddha reach people now?

From the Vakkali Sutta:

  "For a long time, Lord, I have wanted to come and set eyes on the
  Blessed One, but I had not the strength in this body to come and see
  the Blessed One."

  "Enough, Vakkali! What is there to see in this vile body? He who sees
  Dhamma, Vakkali, sees me; he who sees me sees Dhamma. Truly seeing
  Dhamma, one sees me; seeing me one sees Dhamma."

This means that when one sees his teachings, one sees him.

And from the Mahaparinibbana Sutta:

  Then the Blessed One said to Ven. Ananda, "Now, if it occurs to any of
  you — 'The teaching has lost its authority; we are without a Teacher'
  — do not view it in that way. Whatever Dhamma & Vinaya I have pointed
  out & formulated for you, that will be your Teacher when I am gone.


What is the meaning of paramattha dhamma?

Paramattha dhamma is an Abhidhamma term, meaning the 'highest' dhamma.

The equivalent in the Pali suttas is called 'lokattura (supramundane) dhamma' or 'heartwood'. Such dhamma is related to not-self ('anatta'), emptiness ('sunnata') & here-&-now liberation-&-Nibbana.

The Ani Sutta states:

  Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning,
  transcendent (lokuttara), connected with emptiness — are being
  recited'.

Paramattha dhamma is the opposite of 'lokiya (mundane) dhamma', which is about kamma, rebirth, metta & any other mundane moral dhamma which can be practised with 'self-view' by ordinary unenlightened people. The primary goal of lokiya dhamma is morality & non-harming. Where as the goal of paramattha dhamma is to extinguish all suffering. To quote:

  Paramattha-dhamma (absolute truth of nature) is the Dhamma or the knowledge, which when we know it, will enable us to extinguish dukkha.
  Ultimate truth then is the way the thing that helps us, enables us to
  extinguish all dukkha.

  Buddhadāsa Bhikkhu

The important distinction between 'lokuttara' ('paramattha') & 'lokiya' dhamma is found in the Maha-Cattarisaka Sutta, which explains two sorts of Right View:

  And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: (i) There is right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in
  acquisitions [of becoming]; (ii) there is right view that is noble, without
  effluents, transcendent (lokuttara), a factor of the path.

For example, my posts on this forum are exclusively about 'paramattha dhamma'.


Is impermance provable?

Of course. Through the practice of Insight meditation the  mark of impermanence becomes visible. It can be seen in all conditioned phenomena, e.g. the breath. Try to observe the in/out-breath and you will see impermanence on a gross level..


Is there any meaning, which I am supposed to untangle, to things I saw during meditation?

In order to possibly determine the meaning of your thoughts, you would need to consult a psychoanalyst. What is important within the reference of a forum answering questions on Buddhism, is that these conceptual thoughts during meditation are to be pushed aside so that you return to your focal point, usually the breathe. The goal of meditation is not to allow your thoughts to jump from one to another while you sit on a cushion. The goal is the absence of thought, thereby generating a clear calm mind. This takes practice. As you are someone new to to Buddhism, I recommend that you not rely on your friend alone, but read and study, and attend as many teachings offered by genuine lamas in order to extend your knowledge. You have made a good start. The Buddha said to listen to what he had to say but explore the truth of it on one's own.


What is Buddhism’s beliefs on humans living with the environment ?

Answering one of the questions from a Deva, Buddha gave a discourse on the merit gained by planting groves.

“Those who set up a park or a grove, the people who construct a
bridge, a place to drink and a well, Those who give a residence:
“For them merit always increases, Both by day and by night; Those are
the people going to heaven, Established in Dhamma, endowed with virtue.
Planters of Groves (SN 1.47)

Although there are no rules for lay people, there are several vinaya rules for monks for harming the environment such as cutting down trees, burning forests.
In one occasion, monks who were making some repairs, were cutting down trees and when Buddha heard about this he criticized them,

“How can you, foolish men, cut down trees and have them cut down? It
is not, foolish men, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …
And thus, monks, this rule of training should be set forth:

and imposed a vinaya rule,

“For destruction of vegetable growth there is an offence of
expiation.”
Monks’ Expiation (Pācittiya) 11

In Aṅkurapetavatthu, it is mentioned that if one gets some benefit from a tree such as lying in the shade, he should not harm even a leaf of that tree.


Does any modern Buddhist sangha still support slavery?

Following are some of the requirements for ordination which are relevant to this question.

Must never have committed any grievous crimes.
Should be of good reputation.
Should not be in debt.
Not subject to government service.
Having permission from parents or guardian.

So prostitutes may not be accepted as they are not of good reputation.
Immigrant workers who are unable to find other work may not be accepted, if they are just looking for a means of getting free food and easy life. People who are in debt won't be accepted as per conditions mentioned above. A deserter may not be accepted as he can be seen as still subjected to government service or someone who is evading the law of the country. But he might be accepted in a different country. A child will not be accepted without the consent of parents. A wife may not be accepted if she is still legally married to someone and does not have his permission.

Buddhist society recognises only four groups. Monks, nuns, laymen and laywomen. Lay people can never be slaves to the Sangha as whatever support they provide is alway voluntary. Also, the Sangha would not recommend slavery, even if it's an accepted practice in the society. Ex: Prostitution is an accepted practice in some countries. But not ordaining a prostitute doesn't mean that the Sangha recommends prostitution.


What does Buddhism say about Antinatalism?

Wikipedia defines antinatalism as follows:

Antinatalism, or anti-natalism, is a philosophical position and social
movement that assigns a negative value to birth. Antinatalists argue
that humans should abstain from procreation because it is morally bad
(some also recognize the procreation of other sentient beings as
morally bad).

In respect to Noble People, Buddhism may possibly appear antinatalist, when it says:

Monks, there are these two searches: ignoble search & noble search.
And what is ignoble search? There is the case where a person, being
subject himself to birth, seeks [happiness in] what is likewise
subject to birth. Being subject himself to aging... illness...
death... sorrow... defilement, he seeks [happiness in] what is
likewise subject to illness... death... sorrow... defilement.
And what may be said to be subject to birth? Spouses & children are
subject to birth. Men & women slaves... goats & sheep... fowl &
pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, & mares... gold & silver are
subject to birth. Subject to birth are these acquisitions, and one who
is tied to them, infatuated with them, who has totally fallen for
them, being subject to birth, seeks what is likewise subject to birth
MN 26

However, for laypeople, Buddhism appears not antinatalist. It says:

To support one's father and mother; to cherish one's wife and
children, and to be engaged in peaceful occupations — this is the
highest blessing.
Maha-mangala Sutta

Buddhism says the pleasant feelings from renunciation, meditation & enlightenment are superior to the pleasant feelings from the household family life. Refer to the Sukhavagga in AN 2.

There are, mendicants, these two kinds of happiness. What two? The
happiness of laypeople and the happiness of renunciates. These are the
two kinds of happiness. The better of these two kinds of happiness is
the happiness of renunciates.
There are, mendicants, these two kinds of happiness. What two? Sensual
happiness and the happiness of renunciation. These are the two kinds
of happiness. The better of these two kinds of happiness is the
happiness of renunciation.
There are, mendicants, these two kinds of happiness. What two? The
happiness of attachments, and the happiness of no attachments. These
are the two kinds of happiness. The better of these two kinds of
happiness is the happiness of no attachments.

It follows it appears Buddhism is not 'antinatalist' because it appears to never say having children is "morally bad". Buddhism appears to merely say (for those capable of entering the Noble Path) not having children brings more happiness when compared to having children.
In conclusion, my personal view is Buddhism is not antinatalist. My impression is Antinatalism is merely another regressive ideology held by psychopaths, similar to Marxism and Feminism.


Vajrayana Buddhism relies on a teacher-pupil relationship. What in tradition or the literature explains how to find the appropriate teacher?

"The Words of My Perfect Teacher" by Patrul Rinpoche has a chapter (Ch. 6) on how to choose, test and follow a "spiritual friend" (teacher):

pure, never having contravened any of the commitments or prohibitions (Pratimoksha, Bodhisattva's Vow, Secret Vows of Secret Mantrayana)
unstained by negative emotions
learned, not lacking in knowledge of sutras, tantras and shastras
heart suffused with compassion, loves each being like his only child
well-versed in vast array of rituals and ceremonies
not merely verbal but by putting the meaning of teaching into practice has actualized in himself the achievements of riddance and realization
generous, completely free of attachments
language should be pleasant
teaches each according to person's needs
acts in accordance with what he teaches

Teachers to avoid:

Like a millstone made of wool (high lamas by birth but have not studied and practiced seriously enough for the above qualities to arise)
Like the frog that lived in a well (with very limited exposure to true depth and breadth of Practice, having never seen a genuine spiritual master)
Mad guides (loose in discipline, strong in emotions, overemphasizing the esoteric and transcendental)
Blind guides (don't know what they are talking about)

"Treasury of Precious Qualities" by Jigme Lingpa has several pages (in Ch.5) on fully qualified masters vs. false teachers:

(repeats most of the above and adds the following)

Good teacher must have few activities, exclusively preoccupied with Dharma
His presence has transforming effect, inspiring all who meet him to seek for liberation
Must have an unconfined view, having realized the equality of nirvana and samsara
Having direct experience of the above, he is the source of his own freedom
Has been ripened by empowerments that came down to him in an uninterrupted lineage.


Most effective meditation techniques to develop empathy, love and compassion for others?

There are different ways of going about this goal.

A problem with merely reciting the standard formula could be that it may feel like internally, you are actually experiencing the opposite intention.

Not being satisfied with oneself, even feeling aversion towards oneself, is quite common, especially in many Western cultures, and to extend metta from that position can be very difficult. The same thing is true when there are people you do not actually like, or even feel strong aversion or hate towards.

Personally, I suspect just reciting, going against one's actual experienced intention in the present moment could be counter-productive.

There are other methods to try.

You may first want to consider if there is anything or anyone that actually does bring up a sense of compassion and a wish for well-being inside of you.

Ajahn Brahm provides various suggestions: perhaps babies? Perhaps kittens or puppies? Some other animal? Perhaps somebody who showed you love and care when you were a child - one of your parents, one of your grandparents, etc.

Whatever or whoeever it is, is not so important, with the caveat that somebody you have been sexually attracted to is probably not the best choice.

The point is to find the feeling and amplify it as much as you can, before you start to extend the metta.

You can also use logic to strengthen your resolve. You can imagine what your situation would be like, and by extension, what the world could be like if people genuinely wished everyone else well.

Finally, there is a "backwards metta hack" that a kind monk taught me.

He explained that for him, metta had been the biggest challenge in his practice. He had a miserable upbringing and major problems with depression, even suicidal ideas, before he was introduced to Buddhism. So when he started out, he simply could not do it. He just couldn't find the feeling within himself.

However, as he started to learn how to calm the body and mind through meditation, he would experience increased peace and well-being within himself, and had a breakthrough at one time, as he was coming out of a very peaceful meditation and felt very calm, very soft and yet very clear and bright. At that moment, something inside of him clicked: 'What if I can radiate this state?' - and then he started the metta meditation. Immediately, it felt genuine.


Why is Budai often associated with the future Buddha Maitreya?

Here is a reference to the Japanese Miroku Bodhisatva.

Another reference says that Hotei was Kaishi Zen priest and a Boddhisattva, the future Maitreya:

  Hotei stands out from the other six Lucky Gods because he is the only one known to have been a real person, rather than a mythical being. According to Chiba, his Chinese name was Kaishi. His birth date is unknown, but his date of death was in March of the year 916. He was a Zen priest who could quote Buddhist text verses almost nonstop. Some sources affirm that he was an  incarnation of the Bodhisattva Miroku (Maitreya in Sanskrit), the Buddhist Savior of the Future (Giraud 404). However, some of his actions would not be  considered particularly saintly. For example, he would beg for meat and fish  even though they were foods forbidden to priests.

Bits of details about claims to Maitreya and where references of it could be found in the pali canon.


Is vipassana outside a ten day retreat possible?

This is possible but anything less than 10 days for you 1st sitting may not give you visible results for an average novice. Also anything shorter may not have the critical push to give results. This is the reason the courses are organised in such away.

Also some continuity or length of practice takes you deeper and give better results. Just when you practice playing a game, more frequently you do it better you become.


Here is a version from the Triratna site

All existence is dukkha
The cause of dukkha is craving
The cessation of dukkha comes with the cessation of craving
There is a path that leads from dukkha - (The path most commonly associated with this is the eightfold path).

Dukkha is commonly translated as suffering but the translation that I find more useful is unsatisfactoriness. The original meaning comes from an ill fitting chariot wheel. A bumpy ride if you will.

The formulation is related to a medical diagnosis e.g.

The illness
The etiology (cause)
The prognosis
The cure

As far as I am aware the 4 Noble Truths are a central teaching in Buddhism perhaps comparable to the divinity of Christ for Christian's (controversial comparison maybe). I have not heard of any significant variations. I would be very interested to hear if they were any.


Where does the Buddha compare the Dharma to leaves on a tree?

From the Pali canon perhaps it's the Simsapa Sutta (see here and here).

The main message I get from that story is a bit the opposite of what you suggested: i.e. not that "The Dharma is actually all the leaves in all the trees", rather that the central doctrine is only the four noble truths (stress; origin of stress; cessation of stress; path of practice leading to the cessation of stress).

I think there are other suttas in which he said, "I have taught one thing and one thing only, i.e. dukkha and the cessation of dukkha.


Thought-sending in Tibetan Buddhism and other traditions

The closest I can think is the "Satya Kriya" in Theravada Buddhism.
You contemplate on your virtues and extend that power for good cause such as a person to relieve from her suffering.

Anguli Mala Sutta:
"In that case, Angulimala, go to that woman and on arrival say to her, 'Sister, since I was born I do not recall intentionally killing a living being. Through this truth may there be wellbeing for you, wellbeing for your fetus.'"

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.086.than.html


The Three characteristics of existence are part of the core teaching of the Buddha and found throughout his teachings. In essence every single compound (i.e. made of the 5 aggregates and/or the four elements) thing has these characteristics inherent in their very existence.

When one realizes with their own experiential knowledge that all things we have attachments and aversions to have at their core these three characteristics, then there is nothing to cling to, nothing to run from, there is just peace.

We understand that everything, from the universe itself down to ourselves and our loved ones are subject to change and decay(impermanence). We understand that every compound thing is subject to and can be part of the cause of Dukkha(unsatisfactoriness/suffering). Because of our attachments and aversions, nothing created can bring lasting happiness. And Thirdly we understand that there can be found nothing that we can truly identify as "self". What we take to be self is not-self. There is no inherent permanent self/identity in anything created, the "self" we take to be us is merely a coming together of the 5 aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness), processes that come into being, and eventually decay.

As far as I know( and I'd love to be proven wrong on this if anyone can link it) there is no one grand sutta solely on this specific topic, but it is inherently at the core of all of the teachings and therefore pervades the whole cannon. I agree with what Catpnosis said about there being no fundamental differences, but differences in interpretation and usage as part of the various paths.

Here are a few Suttas regarding the three characteristics:

  Dhamma-niyama Sutta: The Discourse on the Orderliness of the Dhamma

  "Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant.

  "Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are stressful.

  "Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All phenomena are not-self.

And from the Dhammapada:

  Maggavagga: The Path

  "All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.
  "All conditioned things are unsatisfactory" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.
  "All things are not-self" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

I think this passage from the Maha-parinibbana Sutta speaks volumes about understanding impermanence:

  Then, when the Blessed One had passed away, some bhikkhus, not yet freed from passion, lifted up their arms and wept; and some, flinging themselves on the ground, rolled from side to side and wept, lamenting: "Too soon has the Blessed One come to his Parinibbana! Too soon has the Happy One come to his Parinibbana! Too soon has the Eye of the World vanished from sight!"

  But the bhikkhus who were freed from passion, mindful and clearly comprehending, reflected in this way: "Impermanent are all compounded things. How could this be otherwise?"

Of course Dukkha is all over the teachings.. heck it's the first noble truth:

  "Now this, monks, is the Noble Truth of dukkha: Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are dukkha."

And about not-self:

  Anatta-lakkhana Sutta: The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic

  "Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.'

  "Bhikkhus, feeling is not-self...

  "Bhikkhus, perception is not-self...

  "Bhikkhus, determinations are not-self...

  "Bhikkhus, consciousness is not self. Were consciousness self, then this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.' And since consciousness is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus, let my consciousness be not thus.'


Pleasant feelings/Unpleasant feelings & craving/aversion

Short Answer:

When you think "it would be nice to have more(/less) future contact with object X" - then you have craving; when you think "this feeling is (un)pleasant and it came from object X" - then you are creating/sustaining potential for future craving; and when you think "this feeling came from the mind, it is empty, dependently originated, transient, ephemeral, unreliable, like a phantom - therefore craving to have more(less) of it would lead to suffering, and instead I keep training the mind of suchness." - then you don't have craving nor do you create/sustain potential for future craving.

Long Answer:

It is a popular misunderstanding of Dependent Origination -- to assume that it describes a process as it unfolds moment-by-moment. No, it does not. Instead, according to Mahayana (esp. Karma-Kagyu lineage), it describes a logical sequence of stages of development of individual mind.

The "contact" described in D.O. is not the momentary contact of sense organ with an external stimulus. It is a stage of development of individual mind when "contact with an object" is delineated, designated, and recognized.

Then, Vedana described in D.O. is a stage when "feeling that comes from contact with an object" is delineated, designated, and recognized.

Once this stage is reached, "Craving for feeling that comes from contact with an object" has a basis to develop on.

A more detailed description of this phase (vedana => tanha) is given e.g. in MN 18 as vedana => sañña => vitakka => papanca.

In other words, as one learns to separate the feeling that comes from contact with an object from the experience of contact itself, one learns to formulate ideas like: "it would be nice to have another contact like that, to bring that feeling again" or "it would be nice to avoid a contact like that, to not bring that feeling again". Eventually, such an idea gets simplified to something like: "It's nice and I want it" or "It's bad and I don't want it".

Then, holding such idea, mulling over it, and pursuing it in practice - making it one's goal and one's mode of operation - is what's known as upadana or grasping.

Suppose I am eating something or taking a massage to get rid of pains, is this pleasant vedana immediately connected with craving?

As I said, D.O. describes the development of mind in general, not one particular instance. So, most of the time, experience and craving do not follow one another immediately. Instead, most of the time craving occurs on the basis of remembering some past experience.

But generally speaking, when you're eating something or taking massage, and at that moment you experience a pleasant feeling, if you attribute that feeling to the external object, thinking "this food gives me the feeling" or "this massage gives me the feeling" - then, on the basis of this attribution, your thinking about that experience in those terms will fuel and sustain the potential of the future craving towards that object (food or massage).

If on the other hand, you think "this pleasant feeling is born in the mind, is a product of the mind" and you think "this comfort is mind-made, empty, dependently-originated" or "this discomfort is mind-made, empty, dependently-originated" - then on the basis of thinking in these terms you will not fuel and not sustain potential future craving towards the object and will instead develop the mind of sufficiency in suchness.

It seems to be quite difficult to discern whether one feels pleasant feelings (vedana) without craving, pleasant feelings with craving & the same with unpleasant feelings & aversion.

In my Mahayana understanding, it boils down to your frame of reference, your attribution of experience to an entity. if you attribute pleasant/unpleasant experiences to what you think are "external" objects, then you will develop and sustain future craving to them - and if instead you recognize that all pleasant/unpleasant experiences are mind-made, empty, like phantoms - and learn to control your mind's frame-of-reference, your perspective, your interpretation - then you are not developing craving and are developing the mind of bodhi instead.

As for detecting the presence of craving in the here-and-now, if your mind is leaking to imaginary past or future and grasping onto an imaginary experience (whether positive or negative) - then that's craving/aversion right there. And if your mind is not leaking anywhere but is seeing things as they are, then that's a moment of suchness.

Here, I explained craving (leaking), the root of craving (attribution of experience to external objects), and path to cutting the root of craving (learning to reframe the experience in such a way as to no longer reify it as something real coming from the external objects and to instead think of it in terms of D.O. and 4NT). I explained it according to my understanding and in my own words. Hope it helps.


Vedananupassana (contemplation of feelings) is part of the Satipatthana. There are 3 types of feelings:

Pleasant feeling or sensation,
Unpleasant feeling or sensation,
Neutral feeling or sensation.

In Vedananupassana you focus your mind on the sensation to see how and when it arises and how and when it passes away, keeping your mind steadfastly equanimous without getting attached to the pleasant sensations or averse to the painful sensation or ignorant of the transient nature of the neutral sensations.

This is a very concise description of the technique. It is best you take a course to learn it properly. Following are some pointers:

https://www.dhamma.org/en/index
http://www.internationalmeditationcentre.org/global/index.html


Where did Buddha state "Mother is the Buddha of the home?"

I am only aware of the suttas stating:

  Mother and father are called
  "Brahma," "early teachers"
  And "worthy of veneration,"
  Being compassionate towards
  Their family of children.

  Iti 109

  A wife as the West be ministered to by a husband by...handing over authority to her...

  DN 31

DN 31 also states:

  (iv) she protects what he brings, (v) she is skilled and industrious in discharging her duties.

The wife has authority in the home when she is financially prudent, like my mother. But many women of the current 'feminist sexual liberal era' lack financial prudence. Instead of saving money, they spend money. Only individuals with morality can be the authority of the home.


What is shown is A STUPA, usually housing the cremated remains or possessions that are considered sacred. In Sri Lanka we call it “The dagaba” (from Sanskrit dhatu- element, component, or relic + garbha - storehouse or repository). Dagaba is of pre-buddhistic era in origin, and is a  deeply respected or admiration for symbol of the Buddhist creed.  In the Sri Lankan version (the first pic. In the OP) it is covered with pure white lime plaster (It is not the ‘white’ achieved by mixing Rickette’ blue). As Buddhism was introduced in different regions, the basic architectural features of stupas were transformed into a variety of shapes reflecting the artistic expressions of those cultures. In Sri Lanka there are five shapes that are most prominent.

Of all the Stupa / Dagaba of this world, the most revered Dagaba is the Ruwanweli-Saya, found in the Historic City of Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. It is also known as Mahathupa, Swarnamali Chaitya, Suvarnamali Mahaceti (in Pali) and Rathnamali Dagaba. After The Buddha's Parinibbāna, His relics were enshrined and worshipped in stupas.  This pinnacle for Buddhists all round the world, the Ruwanweli-Saya, contains the largest portion of relics from the pyre of the sacred body of the Buddha. According to the ancient chronicle Dhatuwamsa, one eighth of the whole-body-relics of the Buddha has been deposited in the Stupa making it one of the treasured places of worship for Buddhists.

There is a great power generated from this Stupa and it is visible to this date. The energy radiating from within it is linked up with those meditating around the Maha-thupa. There is a legend that says that at the time when the Dhamma that He preached cease to be heard,  all relics of the world will come to the Maha-thupa and perform a coming together of the body-form. – a kind of ‘Yama Maha Pelahara’. BTW…  ‘Yama Maha Pelahara’ – is a twin miracle, a power said to have been possessed by the Buddha to cause a stream of fire to issue from one part of His body and a stream of water from another at the same time, which is a power to issue such streams together from eyes, ears and nostrils.

The Ruwanweli Mahathupa is unique among all others because: a ‘dona’ (One of eights parts) of the Buddha’s relics is enshrined within; the site was dedicated especially and consecrated many generations before by Arahant Mahinda; the only stupa recorded to have a Bodhi tree embodied within; the particular use of many materials not found in other stupas, such as crystal, metals; the particular and deliberate design of the base layers, and of the relic chamber; and the function of the crystal on the pinnacle as a beacon.

All dagaba / Stupa found in the world is meant to imitate a passage from the confusion of the world, through stage after stage of awakening, to a breakthrough into the ‘pure region’ of the transcendent. The dageba (Stupa) consists of six main parts.

Pinnacle  (Kotha)
This symbolizes Enlightenment. This is usually a pinnacle made of metal on top of which is a precious crystal or gemstone (chudamanikya).

Parasol / Conical Spire (Kothkerella)
This symbolizes the Nine levels of the Dhamma – the 8 stages of the Path plus the Nibbhana (Navalokottara Sri Dhammaskanda). This is built on the Devatha Kotuwa. A crystal (chudamanikya) on a pinnacle made of metal is placed at the top of the spire to adorn it.

The Gods Enclosure (Devatha Kotuva)
This is a Cylindrical neck built on the ‘Hatharas Kotuwa’. Figures of deities are usually carved on the surface. The word  means a place for the Gods to stay.

Square Enclosure (Hatares kotuwa)
This symbolizes the four noble truths. Relics are enshrined in this part too.

Hemispherical dome  (Gharbaya)
This symbolizes the whole of the  Dhamma.   The hemispherical dome is constructed on the three berms. In the middle of the dagaba was built a relic chamber (Dhathu garbhaya). The Buddha's relics are enshrined there. In the centre of the Relic Chamber was placed a bo-tree made of precious metals, and an image of the Buddha round which were groups of figures representing various events in the life of the Buddha.

Octagonal foundation  (Atapattama)
This symbolizes the 8 noble path. This form is found in some Stupas only.

The Three Berms or Terraces (Pesa valalu)
This symbolizes the Seela, Samadhi, Pannna. A stupa consists of three such berms at its base. The three berms rising from the base gradually reduce in size.
Upper Terrace (Uda maluva) represents the bhikku, the Arahant
Middle Terrace  (Deveni maluva)  represents  Lay Disciples (upasaka / Upasika)
Lower Terrace (Veli maluva) represents the Devotees who have not yet come to the Path.

The Buddhist temple is not complete without the following:
Stupa /dageba;
the actual vihara / image house;
a bodhi maluva or platform, with or without alters;
a ‘pansala’ or priests’ residence.
The ‘bana maduva’ or preaching hall is usually separate from the vihara itself.


Refuge in the modern vipassanā movement (the concept/practice, not the ceremony/commitment)

By taking refuge you are aspiring to build the qualities of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha in your self than any ceremonial right or ritual.

There are virtues can also be further used as a form of recollection meditation to gain inspiration from the qualities and develop them within oneself:

Buddhanusssathi
Dhammanussathi
Sanghanussathi


Preventing to enhance one's sense of self

Vippassanna's really good because it breaks down the sense of self.
Samatha might require a sense of self at first but it gets released in jhana.
Metta is also good because it breaks down the boundaries between you and others.


Non-duality in essence means that samsara and nirvana are one, and this further corresponds to emptiness and interconnectedness of all beings. For instance, we have mostly positive and comfortable, wealthy lives in the West, but that corresponds to the terrible situation in the third world countries that are exploited to provide West with all the comfort (example given, China or some African, exploited countries). Another common example is that there cannot be Lotus without Mud, one allows the other to exist. Or Left political wing cannot exist without the Right.

Non-duality is mainly Mahayana and Vajrayana concept. If you'd like to know more, read Heart Sutra along with some decent commentary. I recommend "The heart of understanding" by Thich Nhat Hanh, if you are getting lost in the practical way.

Another example from perspective of realised being (Bodhisattva), Diamond Sutra explains it quite well as a universal teaching:

  However many species of living beings there are—whether born from
  eggs, from the womb, from moisture, or spontaneously; whether they
  have form or do not have form; whether they have perceptions or do not
  have perceptions; or whether it cannot be said of them that they have
  perceptions or that they do not have perceptions, we must lead all
  these beings to nirvana so that they can be liberated. Yet when this
  innumerable, immeasurable, infinite number of beings has become
  liberated, we do not, in truth, think that a single being has been
  liberated

For one there is pledge for non-discrimination, which requires non-dual way of thinking (i.e. Me versus Them, Ugly versus Beautiful), but also aspect of spontaneous helping; helping without distinguishing between the person that's being helped, and the helper.

Concluding, I think what you really mean is not non-duality per se, but applying wisdom of the teaching through Mindfulness. This way is fully described by Buddha in step four of the Noble Truths; Eightfold Path that is.

You don't have to really do much more, everything is there! Do good, avoid evil, purify your mind and also, remember three characteristics; impermanence, no-Self and that there is suffering. If you keep recollection of these at all times, you will transform your drives and habits.


Kamma is action which produces results, which could be called "merit." It's like seeds planted in a field, no one knows for sure when they will ripen, but if they were planted, they will ripen:

  Just as when seeds are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind & heat, capable of sprouting, well-buried, planted in well-prepared soil, and the rain-god would offer good streams of rain.
  Those seeds would thus come to growth, increase, & abundance.

  In the same way, any action performed with greed ... performed with aversion ... performed with delusion — born of delusion, caused by delusion, originating from delusion: wherever one's selfhood turns up, there that action will ripen.
  Where that action ripens, there one will experience its fruit, either in this very life that has arisen or further along in the sequence.

  AN 3.33

Insincere actions are those performed with greed or delusion. There's no "tricking" kamma; if you do a greedy action, the consequences are automatic, like how a person can't indulge in sensual pleasures without also becoming accustomed and attached to them in the process.

If evil has been done in the past, performing good actions now doesn't cause it to become unplanted, but developing good qualities of mind here and now means that when things ripen, you can lessen their effect.

For example, someone who meditates and keeps in mind the impermanence of all things will be less likely to be driven into rage and depression if a flood comes in and destroys their home, because this is a perfect example of that impermanence they keep reminding themselves of. They might even see the positive side that it re-affirms to them the principle of impermanence. If you don't develop good kamma right now by developing the mind, you're more likely to lose it when bad things happen.


As long as you do not make claim of function being non fiction then you are OK.
For something to be a lie the following conditions must be fulfilled.

i) The statement must be untrue.
ii) There must be an intention to deceive.
iii) An effort must be made to deceive.
iv) The other person must know the meaning of what is expressed.

Souce: FIVE PRECEPTS (PACASILA) at https://www.urbandharma.org
In writing non fiction, you would not be having the second condition as you would know and also making know this is fiction.


What puts together composites according to Buddhism?

The word 'sankhara' has many different meanings. It can mean:

"conditioned thing' (something made from causes & conditions; AN 3.134; Dhp 277; SN 22.90)
"conditioner' (a condition that conditions/creates another conditioned thing; SN 41.6; MN 44).
"conditioning" (the process of conditioning; SN 22.79)
aggregate of mental formations (sankhara khandha; SN 22.79; SN 22.48)
mental conditioning (i.e., mental proliferation, psychobabble or papanca; Dhp 203; SN 38.14).

Therefore what puts together a conditioned thing (sankhara; sankhata) is the conditioning (saṅkharonti) of other conditioned things (sankhara).

In the context of mental formations (sankhara khandha), SN 22.79 says:

  Kiñca, bhikkhave, saṅkhāre [plural] vadetha?

  And why do you call them 'fabrications'?

  Saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharontīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘saṅkhārā’ti vuccati.

  Because they fabricate [saṅkharontī; verb] fabricated things
  [saṅkhatam], thus they are called 'fabrications'[saṅkhārā]

  Kiñca saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharonti?

  What do they fabricate [saṅkharonti] as fabricated thing [saṅkhatam]?

  Rūpaṃ rūpattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharonti, vedanaṃ vedanattāya
  saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharonti, saññaṃ saññattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharonti,
  saṅkhāre saṅkhārattāya saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharonti, viññāṇaṃ viññāṇattāya
  saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharonti.

  For the sake of form-ness, they fabricate form as a fabricated thing.
  For the sake of feeling-ness, they fabricate feeling as a fabricated
  thing. For the sake of perception-hood... For the sake of
  fabrication-hood... For the sake of consciousness-hood, they fabricate
  consciousness as a fabricated thing.

  Saṅkhatamabhisaṅkharontīti kho, bhikkhave, tasmā ‘saṅkhārā’ti vuccati.

  Because they fabricate fabricated things, they are called
  fabrications.

In the context of intentional kamma (action), AN 3.23 says:

  A certain person makes/generates/puts together
  (abhisaṅkharoti) hurtful (sabyābajjhaṃ) body
  choices/intentions/activities (kaya-sankhara), speech
  choices/intentions/activities (vaci-sankhara) and mental
  choices/intentions/activities (mano-sankhara).

  Saṅkhāra Sutta


Where do I find a Buddhist retreat in Asia?

Speaking from personal experience with stays at Zen monasteries in Japan:

It depends on what you mean by retreat. Many Zen monasteries in Japan offer "retreats" in their web pages, but this is not necessarily what is meant in Japanese Zen by a sesshin (接心). If you want to experience the daily life of Buddhist monks in Asia, I'd advise not joining a sesshin for your first time in Japan, as this is an extremely intense period for the monks, and if you do not fully master the local language and the temple customs you will struggle. First time around, I would advise you stay at one or more temples during a regular period.

If you want to sleep, meditate, eat, and work with the monks you can contact the head temple or administrative office of a Buddhist lineage in Japan and ask for possible periods and places to stay (also, indicate if you need some help with the language and customs, as this will be taken into account proposing possible stays to you).

Here are some links you may find useful:

Shoganji Monastery - Rinzai lineage

Soto Zen monasteries for foreigners in Japan - Soto Lineage

ShinShoJi Temple - Rinzai Lineage

Shunkoin Temple - Mindfullness

Japan Vipassana Association

There's also shukubo in Japan, a kind of pilgrim lodging associated with nearby temples.