How do I integrate Vipassana practice into daily life?

Follow the following basic steps in integrate meditation to daily life:

Pay attention to fabrication and how they are created, i.e., when you react to sensations. Train to be equanimous to sensations. Understand the cause and effect with relation to what causes misery. Understand that to the reaction to sensations cause new fabrications. Actively clam the creation of fabrications.
Try to understand the 3 marks of existance / characteristics with regard to the 5 aggregates and the mind matter phenomena. Starting the process by seeing the impermanence of sensations. (Even when looking at impermanence of a body part, how you sense the body part of the sensation when you bring your attention to the particular body part. Also seeing impermanence is easier and lead to seeing the other two characteristics of existance - corelessness and unsatisfactoriness.)

In more detail:

Physical

Bodily fabrications

Actively look at sensations in the body - especially areas tied to sense faculties i.e. skin, eyes, ear, head, mouth - when they come in contact something
Understand that the normal tendency is to react. Try to ensure you do not react and maintain equanimity to what ever sensation.
Try to look at the breathing process and the sensation it create. Sensation of touch around your nostrils. Feeling of oxygen spreading in the in breath and sensation in your body in the out breath. Expansion and contraction it causes in the body. The speed and length of the in and out breath.
Contemplate on the sensation on you body part by part. (How you sense a body part is by looking at the sensation aground it when you move you attention to the body part. This not any verbalisation or visualisation.)
Contemplate on you bodily posture. The sensation associated in staying in a particular posture and sensation when changing your bodily posture (like when walking)
Also the vibrations is the body cased by your heart beat when breath is not predominant
You should investigate phenomena with a view to understand phenomena at the experiential and empirical level. Through this investigation you should eventually see the at 3 characteristics of all physical form at the experiential level. This is not a concept or verbalisation but at the experiential level.
Further investigate the make up of the corporal structure: solidity, liquidity, gaseous nature, and heat. Investigate how sensation related to these states. Investigate the changes of the states. E.g. numb leg, rumbling stomach, etc. Investigate the relationship of fabrication and these states. E.g. how numbness comes and goes, headache comes and goes, etc.

Mental

Verbal fabrications

Look at applied thoughts or mental verbalisations or visualisation and sensations it creates
When you your sense doors cones in contact this cause a sensation in recognising and giving evaluation to the contact and a perception created. E.g. This is my friend. Associated with this again feeling comes into play.
Look at the change of mental state and associated sensations when you get distracted. E.g. if you think about dinner you will get a sensation throughout your body but predominant around your belly. If you are not equanimous this will lead to to more through proliferation with verbalisation or visualisation of food mental state change
Proliferation of thought from any contact. E.g. a smell cause to remember some previous incident. You should investigate the sense doors in involved.
You should actively calm the chartering mind which would lead to concentration.
Look at 3 characteristics of all mental form

Mental fabrications

Look for moods and mental states, perception forming
When you your sense doors cones in contact this cause a sensation in recognising and giving evaluation to the contact and a perception created. E.g. This is my friend. Associated with this again feeling comes into play.
Look at changes in mood and mental state when it comes in contact with any sense objects. First this arises around the organ e.g. around the ear followed by the head when you give evaluation and perceive
Look at 3 characteristics of all mental state

In any of the above if any uneasy or tense sensation / feeling arise bring your attention to it for a short while. At higher stages when something comes to your attention it dissolves. Use this to release your tension. Initially the sensation will be physical but as you go on physical sensation become pleasant and neutral much of the sensation would be linked to thoughts and mental states which generally dominant around the head area. At some state all sensations will be pleasant. Keep dissolving even pleasant sensations until it is neutral by moving your attention to the sensation. At this point where there is neutral feeling all over and you are not creating any new fabrication is an important point. You have the leave the results to time.
You should actively investigate cause and effect and through this understand the cause and effect misery and how to eliminate it. Contact > Recognise / Register > Evaluation Through Perception > Sensation > Craving > Clinging > Fabrications. Through this understand the root cause of misery is the clinging to sensations and this sensation is caused by your perception and giving evaluation as wanted or unwanted and reacting to it with craving or aversion. When you stop giving evaluation and be equanimous than reactive then the fabrication stops as well as the pain due to your attachment or expectation of the outcome.
Acrobats, dancers, etc, have to be really mindful of what they do otherwise there would be disaster. With an exception of Uggasena, acrobats are far away from enlighten. The main thing is to practice the right type of mindfulness. The right type is to be mindful of the the sensations without reaction understanding it true nature. With each contact we have a choice. To react to the sensation the contact brings and be miserable or not to react and be at peace.
Investigate the sources from which sensations arise. External form coming in contact with a faculty resulting in contentiousness followed by sensation. You crave to prolong, get rid of be in situation where certain sense input is available (at a show) or situation where certain sense input is unavailable (get out of prison and go to the Caribbean). You have no absolute control over the form. Even you eat the same dish it might not be the same. You do not have absolute control over the faculty as your eyesight may deteriorate. You have no absolutely no control over the sensation as it just arise and passes away. Investigation of physical / material form of the organ would show they are also arising and passing away. At least at the logical level if not seeing arising and passing away externally see that external form is impermanent as well.
Then investigate what we are made of:

We have physical form with physical sense faculties. Investigation of physical form my brining your attention and sensing the sensations arising and passing on those parts.

We have faculties. These faculties come in contact with external form and you register this contact. I say this. I heard that. I read that.

We have a way to recognise and register external form and stimulus. This recognition is what makes our faculties useful. Investigate you your mind recognise something on contact and what following and sensations that arise when recognising.
We have a mental form

We views and outlook of the world and we analyse things against this perceptions. From this you analyse and build you take or view on the matter. This taste good. What a great story.
We have habits and reactions. When we get a sensation resulting from a contact we have build a habitual response and reaction to it.
We have mental images of what we have come in contact.

We have feels and sensations. May it be happiness, sadness, heat, cold, touch, etc. When we get and input from out faculties we analyse against our perception or view we conclude that this is wanted or unwanted. Being in contact and registering the input on its own gives rise to sensation but burning is the sensations through your take on the matter and longing for more or less and to be in situation which might bring more or less of the input.
Investigation on all physical and mental form will reveal all this is changing, cannot be fully controlled and or worthy of being identified as me and any expectation or exertion of control any of these things which are part of us result in misery.

In our minds we created a universe of our own with yourself as the centre. This universe is mainly of different perceptions which differ from reality. It can be perception about one self, view and beliefs, habits, etc. Many off these perceptions results in misery when reality is different. For different inputs you give evaluation and identify a gap which is positive (linked to pleasant sensation - craving as the base), negative (linked to unpleasant sensation - as aversion as the base) or neutral (linked to neutral sensation - as lack of wisdom as the base). Through you meditation you should note the arising of these sensation and straiten your views such that you are not attached to perceptions which cause misery and cultivate perceptions which help get over misery. (Girimananda Sutta mentions 10 of them.)
Also when analysing your mental and physical processors you will see that any mental action will have physical manifestation and vice versa. With regard to both you will that some sensation are linked with the characteristics of matter (since we are sensing this through a sense faculty what we see is the associated sensations). Namely, solidity / hardness, liquidity / flowing nature, gaseous nature, temperature / vibrations, space between the quantum of elements and conciousness. Without conciousness you cannot feel anything. Feeling has some characteristics of matter (solid, gas, ...). When you are angry you will also feel a bit hot. Also when you have a numbness there will be a solid feeling around the area. The make up of you body also will have these characteristics. Also food and environmental influences have similar manifestations.
The 3 poisons and all defilements and linked to sensation and perception. Identify as defilements come and go. What sensation they create. When you transgress morality also the same thing happens (unpleasant sensations). When you do do good the opposite happens (pleasant sensations). Also your thoughts and mental actions are similarly. Be mindful of all actions and thoughts which cause sensations (what ever the nature - generally pleasant [craving as the root] or unpleasant [aversion as the root]) and contribute to building perceptions (generally neutral [delusion as the root])
In all cases we should be

Mindful of the arising and passing away of sensation while maintain equanimity
Investigative of the causes of sensations
Develop concentration to be able to and do finer analysis of any mental / physical form and input
Exert effort to be mindful and maintain equanimity, develop concentration and calm the fabrications and crating of fabrications
Be investigative of phenomena.
Actively calm the fabrication process
Be mindful and attentive to sensation until painful sensation subside and you are left with pleasant sensations. When any pain comes to your mind it will just pass away at some stage. Exercise appropriate effort of be mindful. Be investigative of what cause the pain and what makes it dispensary. Investigate keeping you attention on the whole body that there is not place without pleasantness
Similarly be mindful and attentive to pleasantness until it is no more.

In summary there are 4 thing you should look out for:

Cause and effect and the impact on rising and passing away of misery
Actively calm the fabrications. (Bodily, verbal and mental)
Get right of unwholesome perceptions and out look of the world and replace it with a more conducive out look towards your mental well being
Understand the 3 characteristics of all phenomena

See:

What are examples of identity-view?
Culavedalla Sutta which involved Vishaka who was a householder (lay disciple).
Contemplation of Feeling
Importance of Vedana
The Importance of Vedana and Sampajanna
The Great Discourse on the Establishing of Awareness (See introduction: Vedanā in the Practice of Satipaṭṭhāna)
Discourses on Satipatthana Sutta
Formations
Bhaddekaratta Sutta (Chinese version)
Madhu Pindika Sutta
Chettana Sutta
Bhaddekaratta Sutta
Anathapintikovade Sutta
Dhatu Vibhanga Sutta
Channovade Sutta
Bojjhanga sila sutta
Mula Pariyaka Sutta
Titth Ayatana Sutta


A.K. Warder, a Pali scholar and a linguist ... does imply that the Digha Nikaya is the oldest and therefore most authentic part of the
  Pali Canon

beneath is some gleaned info on the relative chronology of the canonical Buddhist texts

From T.W. Rhys Davids, Appendix to Chapter 10 of 'Buddhist India' Putnam, 1903.
http://fsnow.com/text/buddhist-india/chapter10.htm

[The list] represents the probable order in which the extant Buddhist documents of this period were composed. They were not yet written, and a great deal has no doubt been lost.

  The simple statements of Buddhist doctrine now found, in identical words, in paragraphs or verses recurring in all the books.
  Episodes found, in identical words, in two or more of the existing books.
  The Sīlas, the Pārāyana, the Octades, the pātimokkha.
  The Dīgha, Majjhima, Aṅguttara, and Saṁyutta Nikāyas.
  The Sutta Nipāta, the Thera- and Therī-Gāthās, the Udānas, and the Khuddaka Pāṭha.
  The Sutta Vibhaṅga and the Khandhakas.
  The Jātakas and the Dhammapadas.
  The Niddesa, the Itivuttakas, and the Paṭisambhidā.
  The Peta- and Vimāna-Vatthus, the Apadānas, the Cariyā Piṭaka, and the Buddha Vaṁsa.
  The Abhidhamma books; the last of which is the Kathā Vatthu, and the earliest probably the Puggala Paññatti.

Alternative chronological order
from Bimala Law: A History of Pali Literature, Ch 1, pp. 29-66

Chronological placement of the Octades (Atthakavagga) and Patimokkha,
whole Nikayas, regarding their strata, is questionable, same for Sutta Nipata

  The simple statements of Buddhist doctrine now found in identical works in paragraphs or verses recurring in all the books.
  Episodes found in identical works in two or more of the existing books.
  The Silas, the Parayana group of sixteen poems without the prologue, the Atthaka group of four or sixteen poems, the Sikkhapadas.
  Dlgha, Vol. I, the Majjhima, the Samyutta, the Anguttara, and earlier Patimokkha code of 152 rules.
  The Digha, Vols. II and III, the Thera-Theri-gatha, the collection of 500 Jatakas, Suttavibhanga, Patisambhidamagga, Puggalapaññatti and
  Vibhanga.
  The Mahavagga and the Cullavagga, the Patimokkha code completing 227 rules, the Vimanavatthu and Petavatthu, the Dhammapada and the
  Kathavatthu.
  The Cullaniddesa, the Mahaniddesa, the Udana, the Itivuttaka, the Sutta Nipata, the Dhatukatha, the Yamaka, and the Patthana.
  The Buddhavamsa, the Cariyapitaka, and the Apadana.
  The Parivarapatha.
  The Khuddakapāṭha.


Puthujjanas love 2 things

sensuality
being told that they are good people, precisely for craving sensuality. If nobody tells them they are virtuous for craving sensuality, they build a little story in their head where they are good people for craving sensuality.

puthujjanas who crave sensuality will tell other puthujjanas who have good items and fame that they are good people.  Everybody wins, according to those people.

It gets even worse. The western humanists even say that envy of wealth will make people compete, for jobs for instance, and by making people compete, they will produce and buy good quality goods and services but for cheap, as long as the people who run their republic will break monopolies. Those people call this progress.

When those people want to feel compassionate, they will mix their cravings for sensuality with some social fight they found. For instance, they love to organize concerts where they will listen to songs for several hours, exactly like when they want to be purely entertained, but in order to feel righteous (and not selfish like when they feel when they get entertained), they say that they organize this entertainment not be  entertained but to ''make society aware of'', or ''in the name of'', or ''denounce'' some situation that they call ''unfair'' like some misery of some people living far away from them (like in third world countries).
This is the best life for puthujjanas: they get all the entertainment they crave and they feel like good people making a change in society, when all they do is listening to music then going back home...

Puthujjanas who break the 5 precepts do exactly the same thing.


Is there an equivalent of "Dokkaebi" in Buddhism?

What you describe fits yakkha (Pali) or yaksha (Sanskrit). You can find more info on this on the Wikipedia page on Yaksha where it says:

  Yaksha (Sanskrit: यक्ष yakṣa, Kannada: ಯಕ್ಷ yakṣa, Tamil: யகன் yakan,
  இயக்கன் iyakan, Odia: ଯକ୍ଷ jôkhyô, Pali: yakkha) are a broad class
  of nature-spirits, usually benevolent, but sometimes mischievous or
  capricious, connected with water, fertility, trees, the forest,
  treasure and wilderness. They appear in Hindu, Jain and Buddhist
  texts, as well as ancient and medieval era temples of South Asia and
  Southeast Asia as guardian deities. The feminine form of the word is
  yakṣī or Yakshini (yakṣiṇī).

  In Hindu, Jain, and Buddhist texts, the yakṣa has a dual personality.
  On the one hand, a yakṣa may be an inoffensive nature-fairy,
  associated with woods and mountains; but there is also a darker
  version of the yakṣa, which is a kind of ghost (bhuta) that haunts the
  wilderness and waylays and devours travelers, similar to the rakṣasas.

The story in Udana 4.4 describes an act of mischief committed by a yakkha:

  A third time, the first yakkha said to the second, "I'm inspired to
  give this contemplative a blow on the head."

  A third time, the second yakkha said to the first, "Enough of that, my
  good friend. Don't lay a hand on the contemplative. He's an
  outstanding contemplative, of great power & great might."

  Then the first yakkha, ignoring the second yakkha, gave Ven. Sāriputta
  a blow on the head. And with that blow he might have knocked over an
  elephant seven or eight cubits tall, or split a great rocky crag. But
  right there the yakkha — yelling, "I'm burning!" — fell into the Great
  Hell.

  Now, Ven. Moggallāna — with his divine eye, pure and surpassing the
  human — saw the yakkha give Ven. Sāriputta a blow on the head. Seeing
  this, he went to Ven. Sāriputta and, on arrival, said to him, "I hope
  you are well, friend Sāriputta. I hope you are comfortable. I hope you
  are feeling no pain."

  "I am well, friend Moggallāna. I am comfortable. But I do have a
  slight headache."

However, in SN 10.8, a yakkha tried to be helpful to the Buddha's lay disciple Anathapindika:

  I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near
  Rajagaha in the Cool Grove. Now at that time Anathapindika the
  householder had arrived in Rajagaha on some business. He heard, "An
  Awakened One, they say, has appeared in the world," and he wanted to
  go right then to see the Blessed One. Then the thought occurred to
  him, "Today is not the proper time to go to see the Blessed One.
  Tomorrow I will go to see the Blessed One at the proper time." With
  his mindfulness immersed in the Awakened One he lay down to sleep.
  Three times he got up during the night, thinking it was light. Then he
  went to the gate to the charnel ground. Non-human beings opened the
  gate.

  When Anathapindika the householder had left the city, the light
  vanished and darkness appeared. Fear, terror, & horripilation arose,
  and because of that he wanted to turn back. Then Sivaka the
  yakkha-spirit, invisible, proclaimed:

    A hundred elephants,
    a hundred horses,
    a hundred mule-drawn carts,
    a hundred-thousand maidens
    adorned with jewels & earrings
    aren't worth one-sixteenth
    of one step forward.

    Go forward, householder!
    Go forward, householder!
    Going forward is better for you,
    not back!

  The darkness then vanished for Anathapindika and the light appeared.
  The fear, terror, & horripilation he had felt subsided.


The Anapanasati Sutta in Pali is here: https://suttacentral.net/pi/mn118

It appears there is no Pali script, per the comment made to the question:

  Emperor Ashoka erected a number of pillars with his edicts in at least
  three regional Prakrit languages in Brahmi script, all of which
  are quite similar to Pali. Historically, the first written record of
  the Pali canon is believed to have been composed in Sri Lanka, based
  on a prior oral tradition. As per the Mahavamsa (the chronicle of Sri
  Lanka), due to a major famine in the country Buddhist monks wrote down
  the Pali canon during the time of King Vattagamini in 100 BC. The
  transmission of written Pali has retained a universal system of
  alphabetic values, but has expressed those values in a stunning
  variety of actual scripts. In Sri Lanka, Pali texts were recorded in
  Sinhala script. Other local scripts, most prominently Khmer, Burmese,
  and in modern times Thai (since 1893), Devanāgarī and Mon script (Mon
  State, Burma) have been used to record Pali. Since the 19th century,
  Pali has also been written in the Roman script. An alternate scheme
  devised by Frans Velthuis, called the Velthuis scheme (see § Text in
  ASCII) allows for typing without diacritics using plain ASCII methods,
  but is arguably less readable than the standard IAST system, which
  uses diacritical marks.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pali#Writing

  ‘Pāli’ is not a language, it is the name of the mūla (source)
  Tripiṭaka text, as distinguished from its commentary, which is called
  Aṭṭhakathā - this distinction between Pāli and Aṭṭhakathā only makes
  sense in the commentarial tradition - it was not (and should not be)
  used as the name of the language.

  The language of the Theravāda tripiṭaka is actually an artificially
  standardized (sanskritized) form of the original buddhist canon, which
  was written in the early Kharoṣṭhī script (only fragments of which
  survive today). Kharoṣṭhī was greatly unsuitable for writing sanskrit,
  and that is why sanskrit words written in Kharoṣṭhī appears like
  another language altogether (which is broadly called Middle-Indic, but
  is known by specific modern names like Pāli & Gāndhārī based on the
  script they are written in).

  The oldest script in use was Kharoṣṭhī. The second-oldest script was
  Brāhmī. Sanskrit was written initially in Kharoṣṭhī (which did not
  distinguish between long and short vowels, conjunt consonants and
  simple consonants etc). So it became very difficult to read texts
  written in this script, even today western scholars are breaking their
  heads over whether Kharoṣṭhī texts are really in sanskrit or some new
  language (which in 1946 some have named as Gāndhāri, although such an
  independent language was never recognized at any point of time in BCE
  India). Anyways an improved script arose which was called Brāhmī
  (which did distinguish between short and long vowels) but still did
  not enable writing conjunct consonants properly (and scholars have
  named this language an early version of Pāli, which again was never
  known by that name in ancient India). With the passage of a few
  centuries, Brahmi was perfected for sanskrit, but the old ways of
  writing (which we call Gāndhāri & Pāli today) did not die out, they
  kept evolving into what became independent languages called the
  prākṛta languages (or prākrits)

  https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-script-of-pali-language

  The Kharosthi script, also spelled Kharoshthi or Kharoṣṭhī, is an
  ancient script used in ancient Gandhara and ancient India
  (primarily modern-day Afghanistan and Pakistan) to write the Gandhari
  Prakrit and Sanskrit. It was popular in Central Asia as well. An
  abugida, it was in use from the middle of the 3rd century BCE until it
  died out in its homeland around the 3rd century CE. It was also in
  use in Bactria, the Kushan Empire, Sogdia and along the Silk Road,
  where there is some evidence it may have survived until the 7th
  century in the remote way stations of Khotan and Niya.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharosthi


The habit of mind to Speculate and Stereotype is developed over thousand of years of psychological evolution. It was at some point in history, very important for humans to classify the objects, they saw and and hence speculation and stereotyping gave advantage, when the world around humans was not very complex.

The point I am making is, these are habit patterns of mind created over thousands of past lives.

As against 'jumping to conclusions', as we mean it in a judgemental sense, is some kind of recent phenomena of fast paced life.

May be, even the stone age humans must have been jumping to conclusions at sight of some thing akin to snake.

So, I am trying to say, these are habit patterns of everybodies mind.

Now answering your question, how one trains to accept the uncertainity

The point of Buddhism is not to train the mind (there are therepies in modern psychology to do just that), instead we try our best to see things as they are. So the way to dismantle the bias is, to be aware to the present moment and be watchful of your mind as much as possible.

This gives rise to intelligence, and through that intelligence you dismantle the habit pattern.

When you fail, don't be judgemental towards yourself and feel bad. Instead make a note and understand that as all your intelligence was available what you did was the best you can do.

Through such repeated feedback your biases will be dismantled without specifically trying to train the mind which is a superficial and phony solution.

To put it simply, Stay Aware to the Present Moment.


Developing Positive Qualities and Diminishing Negative Qualities

In my opinion, this boils down to the differences I previously outlined between "formless" and "form-full" paths.

The formless path is about relinquishing negative qualities without explicitly striving to generate the positive ones - an activity which would require creation of (contrived) forms.

On the formless path, the positive qualities are expected to manifest implicitly, as a by product of removing the negative. We say the positive qualities "co-emerge". While the form-full path involves strong emphasis on defining objectives and reaching them, which is an explicit way to generate the positive qualities.

In terms of drawbacks, the formful path is prone to issues associated with Form, such as attachment, reification, and pride. While the formless path is prone to the opposite set of issues such as loss of motivation, uncertainty, and low self esteem.

It seems that most people naturally incline towards one or the other, and so in practice it becomes a matter of recognizing the pitfalls associated with either path and knowingly compensating for them.


Transferring merit to someone living who isnt open minded to receiving it

It was once said that...

  If you were to go along the north bank of the Ganges giving and sacrificing and encouraging others to do the same, no merit comes of that, and no outcome of merit. --SN42.13

A more effective approach to merit is given in AN5.45:

  When a mendicant enters and remains in a limitless immersion of heart while using a robe …
  alms-food … lodging … bed and chair …
  medicines and supplies for the sick, the overflowing of merit for the donor is limitless …
  These are the five kinds of overflowing merit, overflowing goodness. They nurture happiness, and are conducive to heaven, ripening in happiness, and leading to heaven. They lead to what is likable, desirable, agreeable, to welfare and happiness.

Merit flows as gifts are used towards progress along the Noble Eightfold Path.


Teacher said yes, but forgot it. I asked if he could send me a mil with some info I needed. He said yes but forgot.

The teacher saying "yes" could be a manifestation of compassion. But the teacher forgetting what he said he would do sounds like a manifestation of heedlessness (the opposite of mindfulness) -- these are two different things.

Also both saying "yes" and forgetting could be heedlessness. It's hard to guess one's mind state even when one is answering a simple thing with "yes".

In any case, "compassion" can be a tricky term to understand. It's generally understood as "the desire to see other beings free from suffering". Sometimes is useful to emphasize it does not mean to actively do what other people ask one to do -- compassion may manifest even as harsh actions.

  You know, compassion for all – aren’t your students included in “all”?

I see two things here. First, doing or teaching compassion meditation does not make one flawlessly compassionate onwards. Second, that meditation can have a short term goal (as a path to samatha) and long term goal (as a means of transforming one's mind and strengthening the habits of compassion). Out of the cushion is hard to be always compassionate (or always benevolent, or always mindful, or always equanimous, etc), hence the practice.

Having said that, yes, students are included in "all" -- stuff like that happens.


I think these practices crept into buddhism from local customs ,I doubt if buddhism is practised entirely in its true form in any country. As far as i know even while bathing in a river a junior monk should keep a certain distance  from senior monks and should bath further downstream.


There is no problem for a Buddhist and a non-Buddhist to enjoy a married life together.

However, the Buddha recommended couples to be in tune in conviction, for best results, in the Samajivina Sutta:

  [The Blessed One said:] "If both husband & wife want to see one
  another not only in the present life but also in the life to come,
  they should be in tune [with each other] in conviction, in tune in
  virtue, in tune in generosity, and in tune in discernment. Then they
  will see one another not only in the present life but also in the life
  to come."

    Husband & wife, both of them
    having conviction,
    being responsive,
    being restrained,
    living by the Dhamma (the Buddha's teachings),
    addressing each other
    with loving words:
    they benefit in manifold ways.
    To them comes bliss.
    Their enemies are dejected
    when both are in tune in virtue.
    Having followed the Dhamma here in this world,
    both in tune in precepts & practices,
    they delight in the world of the devas,
    enjoying the pleasures they desire.

There is no prohibition on Buddhists marrying religious non-Buddhists. Of course, if a Buddhist who does not believe in a Supreme Creator God, is married to someone who thinks that belief in a Supreme Creator God is mandatory for a pleasant afterlife, this produces some lack of compatibility between the couple, but this does not make marriage impossible. It is simply not optimum.


In the original Pali scriptures, the term "dependently arisen" is used to refer to conditions related to the arising of "suffering" or "sorrow & grief". It is not used for any "causality" related to the laws of physics.

Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, I will describe & analyze dependent
co-arising for you.
And what is dependent co-arising? From ignorance as a requisite
condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite
condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite
condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition
come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite
condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes
feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From
craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/.. From clinging as a
requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite
condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging
& death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into
play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress &
suffering.
SN
12.2

As for the idea of "time", this can obviously relate to "craving" or "mental wanting" (such as thinking about the past & having expectations of the future, as described in MN 131). However this "mentally constructed time" (in MN 131) is obviously unrelated to the "time & space" of physics; as found in the following verse:

‘As the days and nights flit by, what sort of person am I becoming?’
AN 10.48

As for "space", it is one of the six elements (dhatu):

There are these six elements: the elements of earth, water, fire, air,
space and consciousness.
When a mendicant knows and sees these six elements, they’re qualified
to be called ‘skilled in the elements’.
MN 115

The reason a teaching about "space" is provided is so "space" is not clung to, as follows:

And what is the space element?
The space element may be interior or exterior.
And what is the interior space element?
Anything that’s space, spacious and organic that’s internal,
pertaining to an individual. This includes: the ear canals, nostrils,
and mouth; and the space for swallowing what is eaten and drunk, the
space where it stays, and the space for excreting it from the nether
regions. This is called the interior space element.
The interior space element and the exterior space element are just the
space element. This should be truly seen with right understanding like
this: ‘This is not mine, I am not this, this is not my self.’
When you truly see with right understanding, you reject the space
element, detaching the mind from the space element.
MN 62

....................


Venerable K. Sri Dhammananda Maha Thera:

  According to Buddhist psychology dreams are ideational processes which occur as activities of the mind.

And:

  Dreams are mind-created phenomena and they are activities of the mind. All human beings dream, although some people cannot remember. Buddhism teaches that some dreams have psychological significance.

Finally:

  The significance and the cause of dreams were the subject of discussion in the famous book 'Milinda Panha' or 'The Questions of King Milinda', in which Ven. Nagasena has stated that there are six causes of dreams, three of them being organic, wind, bile and phlegm. The fourth is due to the intervention of supernatural forces, fifth, revival of past experience and sixth, the influence of future events. It is categorically stated that dreams occur only in light slumber which is said to be like the sleep of the monkey. Of the six causes given Ven. Nagasena has stated positively that the last, namely prophetic dreams are the only important ones and the others are relatively insignificant.

The full text on Ven. Thera's explanation of dreams and their significance is available at http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/321.htm.


Common denominator between forms of happiness included in dukkha

The common denominator is the feeling of pleasure. Apart from that, the conditions giving rise to the two types of pleasure are different. The conditions giving rise to the pleasure of the household life is craving & affection where as the conditions giving rise to the pleasure of the recluse life is the abandoning of craving & affection.

Monks, there are two kinds of pleasantness. What two? Household pleasantness and the pleasantness of one gone forth. Of these two, the pleasantness of one gone forth is better.
AN 2.7


Which Chinese Buddhist schools were gradualist?

I'm not a scholar of Chinese Buddhism, all I known is that the gradual enlightenment tradition was referred to as "The Northern School of Chan" and the sudden enlightenment got known as "The Southern School of Chan". Googling for these two terms turns up some useful references. Let's see what we can learn from these...

Wikipedia articles on Chan Buddhism - Southern School, East Mountain Dharma Gate, Subitism - Chan, and Shenhui provide some historical information about the two approaches.

From all the evidence it looks like the distinction was made up and promulgated by Shenhui, the student of Huineng whose adversary Shenxiu was later portrayed as that infamous monk in the Platform Sutra who lost the famous verse contest for their common teacher Hongren of East Mountain Dharma Gate (the original Chan school tracing back to Bodhidharma himself).

Shenhui sharply criticized Shenxiu's Northern School's emphasis on ceremony and sutra study - and contrasted it with seated meditation of Huineng and the original East Mountain Dharma Gate:

  Shenhui traveled north to live amongst his ideological enemies in the capital city of Luoyang. While in the city he spoke publicly against the teachings of the Northern School:

...

  "[Northern School teachings] are the methods of the ignorant. ... In the six generations that have come before [!!! - AV], not a single person performed the practices of Shenxiu."

...

  This was a polemical exaggeration, since both schools were derived from the same tradition [of Bodhidharma, Daoxin, and Hongren - AV], and the so-called Southern School [the Shenhui's sect - AV] incorporated many teachings of the more influential Northern School [which was a direct descendant of the original Chan! - AV]. Eventually both schools died out, but the influence of Shenhui was so immense that all later Chan schools traced their origin to [Shenhui's teacher - AV] Huineng, and "sudden enlightenment" became a standard doctrine of Chan.

So it looks like it was a rhetorical device coined by Shenhui and popularized by the later Chan tradition to make a case for their "Meditation leading to A-ha Realization" method as an antipode to mere "ceremony and sutra study" which they felt was a degradation of Dharma.

From this standpoint I suppose we could say that any school that does not have a notion of Aha Realization could be considered a gradualist school.

Apparently the gradual approach traces its origins to Yogachara and even further back to Shurangama Sutra and Lankavatara Sutra (According to Traleg Kyabgon Rinpoche, "The Surangama Sutra and the Lankavatara Sutra were the inspiration for Asanga and Vasubandhu to build their system of philosophy.") - while the sudden approach goes back to the prajna-paramita family of sutras.

From this I guess we could infer that those schools that taught Lankavatara and/or Shurangama sutras exclusively were probably the gradualist schools you are looking for.

Late Chan schools should be excluded by definition. It does look like the early East Mountain Dharma Gate was not gradualist either:

  [Daoxin, the founder of East Mountain Dharma Gate, advocated for] the unification of the teachings of the Lankavatara Sutra with those of the prajnaparamita sutras [family], which includes the well-known Heart and Diamond sutras.

One Chan school that stands apart is Caodong, the Chinese predecessor of Soto. Apparently it's a school that emphasizes silent illumination (through sitting meditation) without any end result whatsoever. There is simply "no goal to be attained beyond the practice itself." This makes this school neither gradualist nor subitist.

Before Bodhidharma and Chan, the Hua-yen school taught Avatamsaka Sutra, which apparently "integrates the teachings on śūnyatā and Yogacara thinking" - shunyata being an element of sudden realization. Before that, Tiantai school included Avatamsaka Sutra in its "classification of teachings" scheme, and mentioned "Gradual Teaching, for those with medium or inferior abilities vs Sudden Teaching for those with superior abilities". So Hua-yen and Tiantai are not gradualist in the strict sense of the word - although we can't call them subitist either.

The only remaining Chinese schools that I know of are Tangmi (tantric), Faxiang (yogacara), and Pure Land.

Looks like Tangmi did teach Surangama Sutra - and its Wikipedia article says:

  In Chinese Buddhism there was no major distinction between exoteric and esoteric practices and the Northern School of Chan even became known for its esoteric practices of dhāraṇīs and mantras.

Faxiang reportedly studied the Heart Sutra among other texts, which would put it into the "integrationist" camp in my book, along with Tientai and Hua-yen. As for the Pure Land, they say unlike in Japan in China it was never a distinct school but rather a tradition permeating other schools - including Chan.

To summarize, it looks like the only school that we can definitely call gradualist was Tangmi, the Chinese precursor of Shingon. If we were to grade schools from completely gradualist to integrative to subitist, Pure Land and Tangmi would be on the far left, then the integrationist schools like Faxiang, Tiantai and Hua-yen in the middle, followed by the early Chan (the first 5 generations from Bodhidharma to Hongren), followed by the late Chan, and finally Linji (Rinzai in Japan) on the far right with its kicking, yelling and koans. I'm not sure where to place Caodong and Soto Zen though - they could either go to the far left if we consider them "infinitely gradual" or somewhere near the middle if we assume their "the path is the goal" to be a clever upaya designed to help the student attain the non-attainment.

Alas for simple theories but this was fun. I learned a lot while working on this answer, so thank you for an interesting question.


What do ethical conduct (sila) and compassion have to do with the cessation of dukkha?

Dukkha comes not just from craving, but from unsatisfied craving, in other words from inner conflict between "is" and "should".

Sila, Prajna, and Samadhi are three methods to remove and prevent that conflict: coarse, middling, and subtle conflict.

Sila helps remove and prevent coarse behavioral conflict, like obvious conflicted states of Obsession, Negativity, Egoism, - and their real life results, which manifest as various kinds of conflict.

Prajna helps remove and prevent middling intellectual conflict, through analysis of dharmas, understanding how things work, understanding Three Marks of Existence, and Emptiness, understanding the limits of mind's models and perspectives.

Samadhi helps remove and prevent subtle emotional conflict, like states of negativity, unsatisfaction, craving for a different life etc.

So to answer your question, it helps by reducing, removing and preventing conflict between "is" and "should" which manifests as Dukkha.


There are four conditions for wrong conduct in sexual pleasures.

There must be a man or woman with whom it is improper to
have sexual intercourse.
There must be intention to have sexual intercourse with such a
person.
Action must be taken to have such an intercourse.
There must be enjoyment from contact of the sexual organs.

With reference to the first condition, there are twenty kinds of
women with whom men should have no sexual relations. They can
be divided into three groups, namely:

women under the
guardianship of parents, family members, relatives and authorities
charged with their care;
married or betrothed women;
bhikkhunis and religious women observing the Holy Life.

For all women,

a man forbidden by tradition or
under religious rules

is prohibited as a partner.

If someone is an unwilling partner, who is drugged or forced to
have sexual intercourse under threat of violence or coercion,
conditions (2) and (4) exclude them from having violated the precept.

Source: FIVE PRECEPTS (PACASILA) - urbandharma.org

It is also sexual misconduct when one engages a partner at an inappropriate time, such as when a woman is pregnant, or when she is nursing. It is unethical to take the mother away from the baby for sex. It is also misconduct to have sex at inappropriate places, such as at places of worship.

Source: The Third Precept: Abstain from Sexual Misconduct

Also it is sometimes considered Poya / Uposatha is in appropriate time to have sex.

In addition, outside the bedroom is considered an inappropriate place in some interpretations.

As for the question about fornication: if the partner belongs to a category you should not have sex with, then you break the precept.


A person who has these tendencies is suffering greatly. He is causing great harm to himself and other beings by acting on the unwholesome roots of greed, anger and delusion.

It does not really matter if you trust him or not. There is still the possibility that he could use or betray you. One cannot control reality. One is just given a hand of cards. It's up to oneself to find out how to play that hand in the most beneficial and wholesome way.

Let's look at both scenarios.

You place your trust in him and he betrays you or uses you.

All he can do is to impinge on your sense-faculties. Anger can arise, sadness or other negative mind states can arise in you. That is really it. Noone can force you to react to these states of mind.

If you instead just observe them with mindfulness in the present moment then you can use these phenomena to cultivate insight. You can use them as a stepping stone to progress in your path.

You place you trust in him and he does not use or betray you.

This scenario is better for him since he does not create unwholesome kamma for himself since he is not doing those unwholesome actions.

For you it's pretty much the same. If happiness arises in you because of that you can enjoy that happiness without being attached to it. As long as you know it is impermanent and unsatisfactory you can enjoy it without dwelling in it. In the same way you can contemplate the conditioned happiness and see the danger in it if one gets attached to it. Conditioned happiness is dukkha in disguise because when it's exhausted it will leave behind a void leaving one wanting for more. That is if one is attached to the happiness. If not you can again use it for the cultivation of insights.

If you contemplate the situation you might find compassion for him. Why? Because he is dealing with the same "illness" that we are all dealing with, i.e. ignorance of the true nature of reality. We are all in the same boat here. Some beings minds are just clouded in a heavier darkness than others. When thinking about these beings naturally a deep compassion can arise.

We are all in this together. As long as we not enlightened we are all dealing with some level of ignorance meaning that we have a mind that is not fully trained to see reality clearly. Only the Buddhas and Arahants are fully awake.

By knowing that we are all in the same boat we can begin to view the situation in a different way.

I do not know if you are training in meditation at the moment but if you do and if you are practicing insight meditation (vipassana meditation) you will come to experience these things for yourself. By seeing this directly through observation of reality compassion can arise in you.

Buddhist ethics is centered on intentions / volitions. When acting according to the Noble Eightfold Path one should cultivate Right Intention (Samma Sankappa), i.e. intentions of renunciation, good will and harmlessness.

It is not your job to fix him or other people. By working on ourselves and purifying ourselves from defilements we can be good examples for other beings. Naturally people want to be around a person that is honest, wise, calm and peaceful.


As a Buddhist, is it right to say that anything about Buddhism is right?

I assume that "right" might have any of several different meanings:

A correct or truthful, beneficial, description of the world and its processes
Noble, or ariya
Better than other people or beliefs

The first ("truthful, beneficial") is a broad subject:

See the Kalama Sutta for example -- if Buddhism consists of doctrine which you know yourself to be true (sandiṭṭhiko, akāliko, ehipassiko, opanayiko), praised by the wise, it's hard to see how that could be wrong
It's a broad doctrine -- being prosperous, prudent, and kind if you're a layperson, perhaps other ambitions (including nibbida) if you're ordained -- it's so broad and detailed that it's difficult to understand, or it may even sometimes seem self-contradictory in places, or consisting of truisms (e.g. "do what is skillful and don't do what leads to suffering")
Whether you believe it's right, emotionally feel it's right, may depend on finding and seizing a specific aspect of it -- for example, "yes, Buddhism really speaks to me about dukkha, it's got that right"; or, "yes, Buddhism is really kind and harmless, isn't it, that's something I can really admire"; or, "yes, the Buddha is definitely the best person I've ever heard of" -- but some people don't see everything as dukkha, some people might see pacifism as some un-energetic failure, etc., so (for whatever reason, maybe many reasons) it doesn't seem right to them
It's arguably unreal unless it's actually practised -- it exists in the mind of the beholder, and (perhaps like Mathematics) it's kind of meaningless (even if other people find it predictive) when you're not mindful of it.

The second ("noble or ariya") I've not much to say about -- bits of Buddhism or doctrine are ariya by its own definition.

The third ("better than others") is difficult to generalise about. I expect stream-winners have a clear view of what Buddhism is (before that it's difficult to be sure of what you're talking about). According to this answer, making comparisons is a form of "conceit", and only a stream-winner will only give rise to true conceit i.e. true comparisons.

If it is not right to say so, how right or wrong is it to assume that?

I think you're asking, "If it's wrong to say so is it alright to assume it?"

Firstly I think that whether it's right or wrong doesn't depend on whether you say so.

Still there may be circumstances (perhaps when you're working with someone, and therefore busy with something else, or not wanting to proselytise  when that's not welcome) when it's inappropriate to say so.

If it is wrong to say so, it may be wrong to assume it.

And according to some doctrine -- e.g. Paramatthaka Sutta (SN 4.5) -- I think that views themselves, attachment to views, seeing a view as supreme, is itself a kind of fetter.

Myself as a "traditional Buddhist" from Myanmar, I find it pretty disturbing to see Buddhists here having blindfolded faith in Buddhism and every act of monks and religious leaders.

I guess that's so, yes. Living in the West, here, I haven't seen many monks in person, nor acting as leaders -- and I haven't seen any who seem to be misbehaving -- but I do see news, sometimes, interviews, where a monk seems to be quite hostile for example, which I find strange -- like a lot of news though that might be exceptional, news tends to report on what's scandalous rather than on what's normal, which can lead to a false (or extremist) impression.

I did read a booklet called The Broken Buddha once, so I hope I don't have a false (over-idealised and blindfold) view of modern society.

  This book, Broken Buddha, although critical of much of what goes on in some Sanghas, could help provide some valuable information for some aspiring monks so that there are no unreasonable expectations.

I suppose some people might say that Buddhism is in decline, or perhaps was even lost after the first few hundred years -- I don't think so, I suppose that even at the time (which the suttas talk about) there was a variety of people.

Still, I like reading, too, to understand what the ideals are.

as a self-aware Buddhist, how can you analyse if your thoughts or actions are right, without having much knowledge about Dhamma (Dharma)?

I think that maybe, without a knowledge of the Dhamma, you can't (determine whether your thoughts are right and wrong) -- that's a reason why you might (or should) want to know more about Dhamma.

People have recommended several books (e.g. here and here and here).
There are suttas (each is shorter than a book)
There's the Dhammapada (each verse is shorter than a sutta).

There are some rules of thumb, for example ...

  All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the hoofprint of the ox that draws the cart.

... so you might try to avoid doing anything with "a mind of hate", for example, e.g. motivated by revenge.

Apart from literature, people recommend you practice (actions, e.g. generosity and ethical behaviour; and meditation); and that you should have "good friends".

There's two little bits I find helpful, to "know what's right without having much knowledge about Dhamma".

One is that some of the suttas conclude with the Buddha's saying, "Both formerly and now, what I teach is dukkha and its cessation."

There's a children's game where you have to guess where some object is, that someone else is thinking of -- so you walk around, and as you do they say "you're getting colder" if you're moving away from the object, and "you're getting warmer (or hotter)" when you move towards it ... until eventually you put your hand on it.

Similarly if what you're doing is increasing dukkha then maybe that's not right, conversely if it tends toward cessation (of dukkha, of craving, and attachments) that may be closer to what the Buddhism of the Pali canon has in mind.
The second bit of doctrine that I think it's helpful to know about or keep in mind are the Brahmaviharas:

  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.

  The Brahma-viharas are incompatible with a hating state of mind...


The Buddha taught there are two kinds of desire:

(1) Ignorant desire (tanha): which seeks unwholesome & harmful things;

(2) Wise desire (samma sankappa; chanda iddhipada): which seeks wholesome & beneficial things.

The Buddha praised worldly achievements such as having a good reputation, good friends and vocational skill & learning. Refer to Maha-mangala Sutta & Sigalovada Sutta.

The Buddha taught you will succeed at what you want to achieve if you have four qualities, which are: (1) love & devotion (chanda); (2) energy & persistence (viriya); (3) mental focus (citta); & (4) analytical investigation (vimansa).

  One who desires progress and success in life, be it in the field of
  education, occupation or livelihood, is advised to abide by the
  following principles:

  A. The principles of growth: to practice according to the teachings
  that guide life to prosperity and eminence known as the four cakka
  (the conditions likened to the four wheels that carry a vehicle to its
  destination):

  Patirupadesavasa: choosing a suitable environment; to choose a
  suitable location in which to live, study or work, where there are
  people and an environment conducive to learning and betterment in
  life, to the pursuit of the truth, virtue and knowledge, and the
  generation of goodness and prosperity.

  Sappurisupassaya: associating with good people; to seek association or
  alliance with people who are learned and virtuous and who will support
  one's pursuit of the truth, virtue and knowledge, and one's
  advancement and growth in a rightful way.

  Attasammapanidhi: establishing oneself rightly; to establish oneself
  firmly in virtue and a right way of life; to establish a clear and
  virtuous goal for one's life and work, and set oneself resolutely and
  firmly on the right path to that goal, not wavering or being
  negligent.

  Pubbekatapunnata: having a good "capital foundation"; one portion of
  this capital foundation comprises innate qualities such as
  intelligence, aptitude and a healthy body; the other is, on the basis
  of that foundation, knowing how to rectify or improve oneself, to seek
  further knowledge, to strengthen good qualities and to train oneself
  in preparation for when these qualities are needed, to be ready to
  welcome success, to bring about welfare and happiness and to advance
  to even greater heights.

  (A.II.32)

  B. The principles of success: practicing according to the four
  conditions that lead to the success of any undertaking, known as the
  iddhipada (pathways to success):

  Chanda: having a heart of zeal; to be keen to do something, and to do
  it for the love of it; to wish to bring an activity or task to its
  optimum fruition, not simply doing it to get it out of the way or
  merely for reward or material gain.

  Viriya: doing with effort; to be diligent and apply oneself to a task
  with effort, fortitude, patience and perseverance, not abandoning it
  or becoming discouraged, but striving ever onward until success is
  attained.

  Citta: committing oneself to the task; to establish one's attention on
  the task in hand and do it thoughtfully, not allowing the mind to
  wander; to apply one's thought to the matter regularly and
  consistently and do the task or action devotedly.

  Vimamsa: using wise investigation; to diligently apply wise reflection
  to examine cause and effect within what one is doing and to reflect
  on, for example, its pros and cons, gains and shortcomings or
  obstructions. This can be achieved by experimenting, planning and
  evaluating results, and devising solutions and improvements in order
  to manage and carry out the activity in hand so as to achieve better
  results.

  When applied to the work situation, for example, these four conditions
  may, in short, be remembered as love of work, tenacity, dedication and
  circumspection.

  http://www.mahidol.ac.th/budsir/Part2_2.htm#9


What is the state,the during vipassana meditation?

Perhaps this is the state called "Passambayan Kayasankharam" or "Sabbakaya Patisamvedhi" state.
[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.'[2] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' [4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'[3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.'
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html


Okay, I did my own research and here is what I've come up with so far. Interestingly, the artist is making a reference to this Pali suttra:

  "Monks, suppose that this great earth were totally covered with water,
  and a man were to toss a yoke with a single hole there. A wind from
  the east would push it west, a wind from the west would push it east.
  A wind from the north would push it south, a wind from the south would
  push it north. And suppose a blind sea-turtle were there. It would
  come to the surface once every one hundred years. Now what do you
  think: would that blind sea-turtle, coming to the surface once every
  one hundred years, stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole?"
  "It would be a sheer coincidence, lord, that the blind sea-turtle,
  coming to the surface once every one hundred years, would stick his
  neck into the yoke with a single hole."

  "It's likewise a sheer coincidence that one obtains the human state.
  It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a Tathagata, worthy & rightly
  self-awakened, arises in the world. It's likewise a sheer coincidence
  that a doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the
  world. Now, this human state has been obtained. A Tathagata, worthy &
  rightly self-awakened, has arisen in the world. A doctrine &
  discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world.

  "Therefore your duty is the contemplation: 'This is stress...This is
  the origination of stress...This is the cessation of stress...This is
  the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.'"

http://uwf.edu/wmikulas/webpage/leaves/website/canon/samyutta/sn56-48.html

Other Bodhisattvas and Buddhas are often described as riding a particular animal.

Samantabhadra is explicitly described as riding an elephant in his sutra. Samantabhadra's elephant appears to be another awe inspiring flourish. (At least from my reading of the excerpt of Samantabhadra Meditation Sūtra in Wikipedia.

Wikipedia says of Manjusri and his lion: "Mañjuśrī is often depicted as riding on a blue lion, or sitting on the skin of a lion. This represents the use of wisdom to tame the mind, which is compared to riding or subduing a ferocious lion." Wikipedia doesn't explain why the lions, but elsewhere it's suggested that lions were sort a family symbol of the Sakyas, or it's just a reference to the pali sutra about "The lions Roar", ref: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel390.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakyasimha


Is stream entry an unmistakeable experience?

Tibetan Buddhism recognizes two kinds of milestones: "experiences" and "realizations".

Experiences are all kinds of extraordinary moments one has along the way. Like the experience of non-duality: "I am what they call God, the true goal of all religions and the real meaning of love". Experiences come and go. They leave memories, but they don't stay with you in all their might. And that's probably a good thing. I don't know how I would live walking around thinking I'm God ;))

Realizations are (sudden or gradual) breakthroughs that change one's perspective in fundamental ways. Needless to say, they stay with you, although not necessarily in an explicit form, because you tend to get used to them and stop noticing. An interesting feature of realizations, they sometimes can be retrograde (like retrograde amnesia). It slowly creeps on you or dawns on you, that you have known something or have been behaving differently for a while now. It is almost like realization spreads backward in time.

By this classification, stream entry is a realization, not an experience. Because of its nature, in most cases I suspect it is a retrograde realization.

The true stream entry is unmistakable, yes -- but I don't see why someone could not just take some arbitrary experience, or even some intermediate realization, like the realization of emptiness of so-called "objects", and imagine that to be stream-entry.

What makes it unmistakable is the fact that in order to attain it, you have to run out of other options. You have to exhaust all theories, all hypotheses, all alternative routes to enlightenment. That's why you don't hesitate, because you clearly see that there is no way it could be something else.

What's funny is this nagging feeling I have, that you reading my description of it, reduces your chances of attaining it. Enlightenment is freedom from clinging (among other things), so clinging to this notion of stream-entry must be very counterproductive. This is why I'm a little leery of Theravada's sometimes excessive emphasis on bullet-point lists and precise definitions of the stages, as well as of Zen's obsession with the notion of satori. The more your mind grasps these, the further you are from the goal.


Rupa

  Does this refer to physical form?

Yes, anything physical is included in this category. Ex: light, sound, aromas,earth element, water element, heat element, air element  etc.
However, with regards to the five skandhas, a thought is also called a rupa when it becomes the object received by the mind sense faculty. Ex: a memory

  Can we only know form through the sense organs?

Yes, there'll be no knowing without the 6 senses.

Vedana

  Are these just sensations from the sense organs?

Sense organs cannot produce sensation by themselves. The contact should occur. That is the union of Rupa, sense organ and the relevant consciousness.
ex: light, eye and the eye consciousness

There are basically 3 kinds of sensations: pleasant, painful and neutral.

  If this is the case, does emotion fall under sensation?

No, that is Sankhara(Mental Formation).

Sanna(Perception)

  My understanding is that the faculty to recognize is consciousness

No. Consciousness is just base awareness.

  how is perception and consciousness different?

Sanna(perception) is what recognizes the object specifically. Awareness cannot tell what it is. But awareness is present at this stage as they all rise together.

Sankhara(Mental Formation)

  I'm assuming this is where emotions exist? Is happiness an emotion? Is
  loving-kindness an emotion?

Yes, that's right. Happiness, loving kindness, hatred, jealousy, craving etc. belong to this group

Vinnana(Consciousness)

  If this is the case, then is consciousness that which observes
  sensations, mental formations, perception and form, or that which
  experiences sensation, perception, mental formations and form?

A single experience contains all 5 of the Skhandas. They make up the whole experience. Think of it as drinking a chocolate milk shake. When you drink it, do you feel the taste of milk, chocolate, sugar separately? No. You feel them all together. Consciousness is like the water they are all mixed in. Consciousness cannot separately observe anything. Observing itself is an experience where all 5 skandhas are present.  In an experience, consciousness simply plays the role of being aware. When you are asleep, the ear consciousness may not be present at the ears. That's why you won't be able to hear, even if the sound hits the ears.

  Can the experience of sensation exist if we are not conscious of it?

No. Every experience has all the 5 skhandas.

  Are animals conscious?

Yes, they are beings. It's Panchaskhandha for them as well

  what is the difference between consciousness and self-awareness?

Consciousness is what plays the role of being aware in an experience. Self-awareness is an experience(5 skandhas) in which the perception identifies the object of the experience as a self.

To give a common example to illustrate the functions of the Skandhas, say you are smelling something delicious. The smell and the nose here are Rupa. When they get together with the nose consciousness, contact happens. At that moment the Vinnana is aware that an object is present at the nose sense door. Vedana tells that it is pleasant. Sanna tells what it is: whether it's a pudding, cake, ice cream etc. Sankhara tells it's good and desires for it. Keep in mind that the event of smelling here involves many instances of five aggregates rising and passing away.


What is the text in which the Buddha gets a migraine?

This is explained in Why the Buddha Suffered (The Connection with Previous Deeds / Apadāna 39.10).


As per my dictionaries:

Phassa (sanskr. sparça): contact, touch, tangibility, tactile sensation, a momentary union of the sense-object, sense-door, and sense-consciousness.

It's a standard term coming all the way back from the Pali Canon and used widely by Theravada and Abhidhamma.


What you are saying, about seeing things as they are, is not very accurate. You're not supposed to passively accept your negative mind states, neuroses, pathological emotions, traditionally known as "evil, unskillful qualities of the mind". Otherwise, why would it be called the path of liberation, if it did not lead to abandonment of the above bad qualities and cessation of suffering that they bring?

From Tri-Yana perspective, the method varies depending on the practitioner's style:

If you are a Hinayana-style student, you're supposed to confront and overcome your negative emotions - through either direct willful effort, or as you say, through deliberate self-distraction.

If you are a Mahayana-style student, you're supposed to look inside until you see which egoistic attachment has given rise to the emotion, and by letting go of attachment, dismiss the emotion.

If you are a Vajrayana-style student, you're supposed to get in direct contact with the psychosomatic energy of the emotion and by going through the emotion transmute it into pure energy.

What you're referring to as "seeing things as they are" reminds me of one of the methods that Buddha taught back in the Pali Canon, that kinda spans all the three styles above:

In this method you look at your emotion analytically, objectively - so instead of replaying the thoughts/events that feed the emotion (which is bad), you philosophically/phenomenologically/scientifically analyze the emotion: see it's source in the attachment, see it's psychosomatic projection in the body - and this analysis itself (this will sound like a joke but it's not!) actually serves as a distraction that switches your mind away from the emotion to the skillful mind quality known as "analysis of dharmas". Makes sense?

So you don't just passively accept your negative mind states, you work with them, but this work does not always have to be as crude as suppression or distraction - there are more subtle methods, and this is one of them.


The Theravada school teaches the thirty one planes of existence.

These 31 planes are separated into three major categories:

Immaterial or formless world (arupa loka)
Fine material world (rupa loka)
Sensuous world (kama loka)

The sensuous world is divided into:

Happy destinations (including the human realm)
Unhappy destinations (including hell and the animal realm)

The immaterial world has beings with mind but no body. This world is above or beyond the gods (brahmas and devas). The realms here include:

Neither-perception-nor-non-perception
Nothingness
Infinite Consciousness
Infinite Space

It appears that devas (a type of god) and humans live in the happy sensuous destinations, while there are brahmas and devas (types of gods) living in the fine material world. Brahmas are superior to devas.

Those who have reached the level of non-returners (anagamin) would be reborn in the upper five realms of the fine material world. After this, they gain enlightenment there and would no longer be reborn, after passing.

All beings, whether formless beings or gods or humans or animals or ghosts etc. are not immortal. The gods like the Maha Brahmas may live for a very long period of time, that they may assume that they are immortal, according to DN11. All unenlightened beings would face death and rebirth, while enlightened beings would no longer be reborn after physical death.

The Buddha is said to be the highest type of being of them all, who is enlightened and has psychic powers allowing him to teach gods and humans in the fine material world and sensuous world. But even he is not immortal or permanent.

The only thing that is not impermanent is Nibbana. Udana 8.1 describes it as:

  There is, bhikkhus, that base where there is no earth, no water, no
  fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base
  consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base consisting of
  nothingness, no base consisting of
  neither-perception-nor-non-perception; neither this world nor another
  world nor both; neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is
  no coming, no going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed,
  not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of suffering.


Decoupling happiness from state of the world: Useful? Against human nature?

This is a very well known sentiment in Buddhist circles. The canonical metaphor for this is "leather shoes" -- you can't cover all earth in leather but you can cover your feet.

There are certainly two paths, and you're right that the path of least resistance in following our greed for ease and comfort has brought us to all these great inventions. The question is, are we psychologically more satisfied than we were in old times? The quality of life has improved without doubt, but do we feel better? (and do we feel better specifically due to that, or could there be something else going on hand in hand)

It would be a truism to say that lovers are happy in hovel and that the rich also cry. These days people in affected ethnic neighborhoods probably enjoy higher basic living standards than the elite in medieval times. Do they feel happier?

In Buddhism, happiness/suffering depends on a match between "is" and "should", or your perception of the situation on one hand and your expectations on the other. If the two mismatch, one will feel unhappy no matter how good the situation is, objectively. In other words, Buddhism defines happiness as a mental/emotional state conditional on one's values ("attachments").

So the Buddhist way of making "the leather shoes" for the mind, is to learn to transcend any fixed idea of the world, as well as any fixed set of expectations, and learn to dive into the spontaneity of life as is, with infinite openness and no sense of conflict. This is subjectively experienced as acceptance (aka love) of oneself and the world, or the perfect ease and spontaneity. This stateless state of having no ego, no fixed position, and therefore no suffering, is what we call Nirvana, and the Christians call unity with God.

Is it desirable to have entire population of Earth to get into this state of spontaneous freedom and what would happen to society and the very civilization? Until I experienced it first-hand I used to think that civilization would die out from the lack of activity. Now I have all reasons to believe that once the mind lets go of its conceptual boundaries, it gets to see that the nature of reality is not as fixed as we used to believe. So, in my opinion, when we are all free, instead of dying out the civilization will enter a phase of increased playfulness and creativity. Instead of being victims in our collective nightmares, we will be dreaming our own dreams, collectively and individually. I want to be around when that happens.


Have the copies of original Tipitaka written in Aluvihara Sri Lanka now been lost?

I am not an active participant of this forum anymore, but in seeing this OP, I just could not be without expanding on the question that I just asked. The writing of the Tripitaka, Theravāda Pāli Canon, was performed at the cave temple “Alu Lena”  and not at the cave temple called Aluvihare in Matale area in Sri Lanka. Tripitaka was committed to writing by 500 monks in the first century BC. The Cave temple in Aluvihare cannot even hold 50 monks, leave aside 500. It is just not spacious enough. But whereas in “Alulena”, this cave is spacious enough to accommodate 500 monks and it is well illuminated by the sunlight.

Before the introduction of paper, palm leaf was the main raw material used for writing and painting for several centuries, and palm trees are abundant in and around “Alulena”. Anyway to your question proper…  The sacred Buddha Dhamma preached by Gautama Buddha 2600 years ago is secured and well preserved only in the Tripitaka Canons which were written in the present-day Sri Lanka. Today this original Tripitaka written in Sri Lanka is found in the British Museum. The present Neville Collection in the UK has 2000 manuscripts. The first of these were taken by George Turner and the second lot by Hugh Nevill of the British Civil Service.

![Now we have a copy of the original scriptures with us.
]1


Showing anatta from modern psychology or neuroscience?

Yes. Please see Quartz article dated February 9, 2018 by Ephrat Livni, entitled "Scientists studying psychoactive drugs accidentally proved the self is an illusion". Research papers are linked in it.

Also, please see the TED Talk by neuroscientist Anil Seth entitled "Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality" which was published on YouTube on July 18, 2017.


How can I be sure if the Buddha actually woke up?

I feel the reason why people struggle to see that becoming " Awakened" is impossible or very difficult is because of ignorance. How can anyone possibly see something that they can't comprehend, it's a paradox!

But......this is why we know the Buddha was "enlightened" and "awakened" to the truth of suffering because He created the Dhamma, the Noble Eightfold  path, the way out of suffering.( It would be impossible for someone to show others the way out if they themselves were not free!)

The matrix you speak of is the delusion, it is the ignorance which blinds us of the truth, but once you come to realize the truth, you will see that in fact it takes more energy and creation to live in a world of fantasy, a world of fantasy that will bring pain and suffering to all!!

I hope i have helped you in someway!

Metta


The Pali Canon position (e.g. Sedaka Sutta) is that :

  [Correctly] Looking after oneself, one [implicitly] looks after others.
  [Correctly] Looking after others, one [implicitly] looks after oneself.

The Mahayana position is unquestionably that of service without boundaries.

That said, both the Buddha of Pali Canon and the contemporary Mahayana teachers insist that taking care of oneself is a prerequisite to being able to take care of others. To use a modern analogy, first put the oxygen mask on oneself, and then help the children.


What is Inner and Outer Peace and how can I achieve them?

Using Buddhist vocabulary, what you call "inner peace" might be "tranquility" (i.e. Passaddhi); and what you call "Outer Peace" might be a consequence of ethical/virtuous/moral behaviour (i.e. Sīla).


Comments from the following link:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html

Bhagava: also rendered "the Auspicious One" or "the Exalted One"; the most frequent appellation of the Buddha, though not restricted to Buddhist usage.

The word "Bhagava," can be translated as "the Blessed One"


Can you attain stream entry without meditation?

If you find it difficult to meditate you may not have enough merits.
Your bad karma is obstructing you from meditating, either ones performed in this life or previous ones. Remember that it is because of our merits that we can even encounter the dharma.

First develop sufficient merits. Do dana and develop sila. Some people spend years developing their sila and generosity before sitting on the meditation mat. Other ways to develop merits helping others, listening to Dharma talks, being happy for other people's success, volunteering for charity and being humble. Basically just by being a good person and keeping the precepts. Just think of everything that's good and positive, wholesome and happy and let that shine your path. Don't worry about egolessness, equanimity or meditation. Don't run before you can stand. No-one who ever developed deep states of meditation and achieve Arahanthood did so without creating the necessary karma for it.

After you have developed positive qualities or merits then you will naturally be able to grasp meditation. Remember you don't meditate your problems away, you see your problems more clearly. So my advice is sort out your life first then your karma will allow you to meditate.


What is the meaning in the Buddha walking seven steps?

According to Mahāpadānasutta, when he was born he stood firm on both feet, then with his face to the north took seven strides while a white canopy was held over him. There is no mention of a shower at every step though.

According to Mahāpadānasutta commentary, standing firm on both feet is a portend for achieving the four iddhipada (Intention, Effort, Consciousness, Investigation). Facing north is a sign that he'll rise above others, the seven steps he walked is a portend that he'll achieve the seven factors of enlightenment (satta bojjhaṅgā) and finally the white canopy held over his head is a symbol that he'll achieve nirvana.


There is no known beginning nor end of times.


I really do mean to ask, how do you deal with the two concrete situations given above?

I am inclined to "yield first", although it doesn't often (or hardly ever) happen in practice that I'm walking on a path that narrow.

When I'm on a bicycle on a shared footpath, pedestrians are usually inclined to yield to me, and then I allow them to yield (they walk on one side of the path and I cycle past them); or you could say I yield i.e. I cycle around them. I slow, slow to a stop, or dismount when necessary (e.g. on a single-lane footpath under a bridge, when passing small children or off-leash dogs, or on a pedestrian side-walk).

Sometimes I drive a car on a single-track road. There is a (unwritten?) convention for which car is supposed to yield in that case, i.e. it's supposed to be whichever car is able to yield the most easily:

The car which has a lay-by in front of it, which it can pull into
The car which is closest to the lay-by behind it (i.e. the car which has most recently passed a lay-by) into which it can reverse
The car which can most easily reverse (e.g. the car which will be reversing down-hill rather than up-hill, or the smaller car)

Sometimes I stop for 4 ½ seconds to see whether the other car (which is probably driven by someone who's more familiar with the road than I am) goes into reverse, and if not then I start to reverse.

The more abstract problem here might be described as, the correct action to take when you and another have conflicting interests. An answer to that is appreciated as well ...

I don't see this as a conflicting interest. I want to get around in a friendly and more-or-less cooperative way, I want to be non-aggressive and I don't want to frighten people. I assume (and my experience has confirmed) that these ambitions are socially acceptable and not a "conflicting interest".

When one car yields to another is conventional for both drivers to do a small hand-wave to the other as they pass each other (each to acknowledge the other's politeness and savoir faire perhaps).

On foot if I make eye-contact with someone (outside a city) then I'm likely to say "Good day!" to them (and vice versa, they do too). Someone said once that according to the older and more formal rules of politeness in this country it's conventional that it should be the more junior person who should be the first to say "Good day!"; but I'm happy ignore that and wish a good day to anyone, older or younger.


Why choose to attain Nirvana when we can become Brahmas (or Bodhisattvas)?

"[...] This also means that this person loses his personhood (although this personhood is impermanent and is part of dukkha)."

I wouldn't say "loses". It may be worth reminding that Nirvana should not be considered annihilation. Complementing:

  Bhikkhus, it is impossible that a bhikkhu who considers nibbāna to be suffering will possess a conviction in conformity [with the teaching]. [...] [But] it is possible that a bhikkhu who considers nibbāna to be hapiness will possess a conviction in conformity [with the teaching].

  -- Nibbāna [Bodhi Trans.], AN 6:101

"On the other hand, by achieving the first four Jhanas, a person could be reborn in the Brahma realms, which I understand to be the best beings in the universe, besides the Bodhisattvas."

Personal preferences aside, if we are talking about happiness, Nibbāna is declared to be supreme. A happiness and security from suffering unknown to a Brahma or Bodhisattva.

Also, perhaps is not so surprising the idea of devas of superior realms desiring to be born as humans:

  "It's a gain for you, monks, a great gain, that you've gained the opportunity to live the holy life. I have seen a heaven named 'Six Spheres of Contact.' Whatever form one sees there with the eye is desirable, never undesirable; pleasing, never displeasing; agreeable, never disagreeable. Whatever sound one hears there with the ear... Whatever aroma one smells there with the nose... Whatever flavor one tastes there with the tongue... Whatever tactile sensation one touches there with the body... Whatever idea one cognizes there with the intellect is desirable, never undesirable; pleasing, never displeasing; agreeable, never disagreeable.

  -- Khana Sutta, SN 35.135

"[...] but one could keep trying over and over to be reborn again and again in the Brahma realms."

...and, while trying, out of inattention or forgetfulness or simply ignorance, one may do something foolish -- because that's what we do as ignorants. Foolish enough to open one's mind to darker unwholesome states, perhaps in a chain reaction, and end up in a worse destination (though reappearing as a human during a time with no dhamma, and no condition to develop oneself to become a Buddha might be bad enough). Perhaps you were Brahma before, and now here you are, among humans (again?). I guess, as long as one thinks this endeavor is worth...

"The question is, why should sentient beings choose to end their personhood permanently, rather than trying to be reborn again and again as the best person possible?"

One way of answering is to ask "What's to end?".

Here is an appeal from the Buddha himself as to why one should reach Nirvana:

  "Bhikkhus, this samsāra is without discoverable beginning. A first point is not discerned of beings roaming and wandering on hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving. What do you think, bhikkhus, which is more: the stream of tears that you have shed as you roamed and wandered on through this long course, weeping and wailing because of being united with the disagreeable and separated from the agreeable -- this or the water in the four great oceans?"

  "[...] venerable sir, [...] this alone is more than the water in the four great oceans."

  "Good, good, bhikkhus! It is good that you understand the Dhamma taught by me in such a way. [...] For a long time, bhikkhus, you have experienced the death of a father ... the death of a brother ... the death of a sister ... the death of a daughter ... the loss of relatives ... the loss of wealth ... the loss through illness [...]. For what reason? Because, bhikkhus, this samsāra is without discoverable beginning ... It is enough to experience revulsion towards all formations, enough to become dispassionate towards them, enough to be liberated from them."

  -- Tears [Bodhi Trans.], SN 15.3


Is there a specific range of meditation styles that could help with extreme clumsiness and disconnected mind-body?

Of the four foundations of mindfulness (satipatthana)...
Mindfulness of the body is the main one in western practice already. Transitioning a constant state of awareness of the body into daily life could definately combat clumsiness.
           During meditation just feel all of your entire body at once... be aware of it, the feeling of it sitting there or better yet do walking meditation more... if something comes up, note it how its experienced by the body, then refocus on feeling the body just being a body.

do that regularly and you'll find yourself more aware of it naturally... then its more difficult to be clumsy.


Could someone help me transcribe a Pali chant?

Pali : Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa.

  English : Homage to the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened
  One.

If you are interested in this chanting, you should read The Divine Mantra.


How does one calm one's bodily fabrications?

The Visuddhimagga ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf ) starting on page 268 gives a detailed explanation of Anapanasati Sutta MN 118 ( http://suttacentral.net/en/mn118 ). The specific method is the 8 steps starting on Vism. page 272..


bhava (kammabhava, upapattibhava) and jati

It is actually pretty simple. Once you have identified "yourself" and equated it with an organism, you must have been born. Makes sense? If you don't think you are this organism, moreover, you don't think there is any "you" at all, the notion of birth no longer applies.


What fuels social media use? What effects does its use have?

I suppose it's fairly benign or minor to start with.

Curiosity: "What is this 'Facebook' which other people talk about?"
Utility: "I have a question about my work, I can ask people online."

I've read people say it's fueled by small rewards. You get a little chemical 'hit' from smoking a cigarette or taking a drug; or from winning on a slot machine; similarly you get a little (mental) reward when you get a 'Like' or a reply on social media.

And Stack Exchange for example encourages people to "pay it forward" (e.g. if you're helped by someone's answer, you're invited to try to help someone else by contributing another answer elsewhere), which (the feeling of altruism) is some kind of reward in itself.

See also "operant conditioning".

As for effect, it is time-consuming; and (like other addictions) can or will fragment attention. It also results in social bubbles (less connected with "real" people around you).

People have a similar problem with smart phones and email/messages (the thought occurs, "let's check my phone to see if there's another message"); or with Twitter and news sites ("has anyone posted anything new?").

It's easy (relatively effortless) to do (it's easy to read a web page, for example) so I'm inclined to do it instead of doing something more difficult (e.g. work): "It's time to start work now ... I'll just read a bit of social media first, which is easier, to get started ... maybe I'll feel like working after I do that."

IMO a task's being effortless is interpreted by the brain as a type of reward, something to seek (perhaps it's associated with mastery).

It's unsatisfying though (or only temporarily satisfying), hence the eventual desire to repeat the "rewarding" behaviour.

What are the best ways to deal with this addictive medium?

Sometimes if I get too disgusted by how much time I spend on a site, I block it from my computer so that I cannot access it anymore.1

It may be good (or better) to find alternative media for communication: 'phoning people, writing letters, reading books, meeting people in person.

And perhaps alternative "reward" systems (other activities that are rewarding in some way).

On the subject of "best ways", it might a topic to apply the noble eightfold way to (starting with right view, and so on).

1 This technological solution, i.e. barring one's personal access/exposure, is also used by other software developers: see 'Our minds can be hijacked': the tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia, which also explains in more detail the theory of why it's addictive and takes your attention.


Sila means ethics, or morality. There are many Suttas that describe how Sila is practiced. The most basic way for a layperson to practice Sila is to keep the five precepts.

  Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
  I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.
  Adinnadana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
  I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.
  Kamesu micchacara veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
  I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.
  Musavada veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
  I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.
  Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
  I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

(http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/pancasila.html)

After that there are the eight precepts, the ten precepts, and the monastic precepts.

One thing to bear in mind however is that these precepts shouldn't be looked on as just being rules given to us to follow. We should look on them not as restrictions put on us by our religion, but as greatly beneficial spiritual practices we take on because they benefit both ourselves and others.

Also it is important to remember that the five precepts are only a basic summary of morality. Just because something isn't technically covered by the precepts doesn't mean that it is totally ok to do. One should always consider the effects of ones actions on one's self and on others.

One of the most practical Suttas giving a description of how to discern right from wrong is the very famous Instructions to Rahula at Mango Stone. It explains how one should contemplate and reflect on one's actions and character in order to develop Sila.
(http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.061.than.html)


There's not much of the kind of critical criticism of the kind that Price is giving in his talk. Scholars of Buddhism are largely in love with their subject. It is something I have complained about on my blog. Academia is still in the stage of trying to accurately describe what Buddhism is and generally likes what it sees. Few scholars are engaged with what it is not or with the conflicts and contradictions within the tradition.

Perhaps the only prominent scholar who is actively critical is Greg Schopen though much of his criticism is based on the conflict between archaeological evidence and textual evidence. His collection of essays "Bones, Stones, and Buddhist Monks" is worth reading. This video The Buddha as Businessman shows him giving a talk that gives a good idea of his approach.

Apart from my blog there are a few online references which are openly critical of Buddhist ideas and practices.

The Secular Buddhist Association;
Ted Meissner's  Secular Buddhist podcast (now seems to have merged with the SBA),
Meaningness (by a Buddhist and sometimes about Buddhism, but with a much broader scope).
Glenn Wallis's Speculative Non-Buddhism is a rather acquired taste, but nothing if not critical. Strong influence from Post-modernism and Marxism.
Richard K Payne is an academic who is frequently critical of modernist developments in Buddhism.
There's also Smiling Buddha Cabaret focus on feminist themes.
I have not reviewed Matthew O'Connell's Post-Traditional Buddhism seems to be in a similar vein (he's influenced by Wallis).

There may be more. But this lot will keep you busy for a while. There are a number of websites which are aimed at critical approaches to practice. This is not really my area of expertise, but one can look into the phrase "dharma overground" for example.


Which aggregate (khandha) is or generates 'suffering'?

I don't have the complete meditative experience or knowledge of the Dhamma to be able to fully comprehend the intents behind the teachings of the Five Aggregates and Twelve Nidanas, but I think I have some insights. I suspect that they are observable abstracted analysis of the complex working of the mind rather than actual entities within the mind itself - just as the body is only labeled 'form', but can be further analyzed in it's components such as the organs, or states of solidity, liquidity, gas and heat (earth, water, wind, and fire in ancient terminology). In this sense I believe the mental aggregates overlap in functions.

For example, the mind and mental activities in normal daily linguistic usage can be divided into feelings/sensation, thoughts, emotions, memories. Psychologists can probably further divide them according to various theories.

So Vedanā - commonly translated as sensations, is the observable feeling of pleasant, unpleasant, neutral when our internal sense organs come into contact with external sense objects and the associated consciousness.

Sañña - typically translated as "perception" or "cognition." Interestingly in Chinese this is translated as 想 - "thoughts". So this is our thinking mind

Saṅkhāra - 'volitional formations' mental formation etc. I think this generally the emotional response. The Chinese translation 行 has a meaning of 'action'/'execution'.

And finally the Viññāṇa 'consciousness' seems to be the catch all bucket for the general 'state' of the mind. You can have a pure consciousness, defiled consciousness and so forth.

As we can see, some functions of this overlaps, but the division help us focus our attention of where to comprehend things from.

In the Satipatthana.
The four domains are:
mindfulness of the body
mindfulness of feelings or sensations
mindfulness of mind or consciousness
mindfulness of dhammās.

  Satipaṭṭhāna  Ānāpānasati

  Contemplation of the body

  Breathing long (Knowing Breath)
  Breathing short (Knowing Breath)
  Experiencing the whole body
  Tranquillising the bodily activities

  Contemplation of feelings

  Experiencing rapture
  Experiencing bliss
  Experiencing mental activities
  Tranquillising mental activities

  Contemplation of the mind

  Experiencing the mind
  Gladdening the mind
  Centering the mind in samadhi
  Releasing the mind

  Contemplation of Dhammas

  Contemplating impermanence
  Contemplating fading of lust
  Contemplating cessation
  Contemplating relinquishment

The last one contemplation of the Dhamma is essentially a contemplation of all phenomena and of Truth.

The division of the mind into the four aggregates allow you to focus and observe the phenomena of impermanence, suffering and selflessness within them.

This is useful because we commonly suffer due to attachment to our feelings, thoughts, emotions, memories, consciousness.

The Buddha reminds us that all the aggregates are impermanent and hence subject to cessation, and hence attachment to all of them is suffering. They are not self because we don't have full control of them. But a positive way to look at it would also be that each of them is caused and conditioned, and we can try to create good causes to have good results. For example having good thoughts and enjoying the pleasant emotions and sensations resulting from that, without being attached to the loss of those sensations when the conditions ends.


What exactly is happiness, moods and states of the mind?

I was always under the impression that happiness was our default setting, our buddha nature. If we remove "blow away or extinguish" all the labels, bindings, and habit energies that collect what is left is happiness. True Happiness is the default state we experience when we extinguish the fires that cause suffering. This cessation of suffering can also be described as complete peace.

It is a great wealth because it is the only thing that can bring us true liberation.