Relying on the Laity, monastics I had questions regarding the laity, monastic relationship.

  1) How exactly (the step by step or explained) does the process work
  in which the monastics rely solely on the laity?

  2) How do monks publish works (such as books) and not deal with the
  money involved in their lives?

Metta!

At it's core it works out as if a person went to mountains to meditate, his friend then brings him food & clothing. Eventually the amount of people interested in supporting this project grows. Then for some reason the supporters build something and invite the meditator to stay there. At some point there might be willingness and resources for others to become full time meditators. The supporters may equip the monastery with starlink and invite monks to publish books or monks might do so on their own initiative.

Good householder,
in regard of 2):
To lead the holly life (use it) and make ones living by publishing books for lay-people, although common, is for the most wrong livelihood (sg 13). The primary task of a monk is to gain the highest fruit, liberation.
To lead the holly live just to become well-known, famous, for honor... is likewise wrong as learning and publish Dhamma to win over others is. Many are just disputer, contribute, like all of them for sensuall pleasures, becoming, to maintain support.
Not seldom, byways of stealing, they even touch Pārājika-faults.
Those many popular provider of food in books (even as sold stuff or for direct trade) usually simply make a living from it, holding money, or take controll over it, and do a lot not proper to Vinaya, starting from fondraising, trade, till encouraging to steal Dhamma. Depending on there "students", customers, the Dhamma grows corrupt. This being the case, monks are actually not allowed to receive something after/in exchange with Dhamma.
To be clear, a Monks task, who has still not arrived at Arahat-ship, is in no way obligated to teach, not to speak of producing entertainments for householder.
How ever, likewise the Buddha dedicated his rest of life for the Dhamma, as it is not pleasing to dwell without dedication, his Arahat disciples had been encouraged to teach. Yet it's somethink total voluntary.
Of what a monk should do is giving an encouragement after having received generosity out of faith.
As there had been cases that other sects got famous by teaching people on Uposatha, while the Buddhas monks remained in seclution, on request of a King, the Buddha allowed his disciples to give talks on Dhamma on this day.
There are, how ever, cases  that books might come into being, but such is exclusively a product of generosity by wise lay people, contributing them as gift. Something very selfdom actually.
It's also usually in traditional lands that lay people would support the share of Dhmma books for the monks, the Sangha, hepling, assisting to maintain their heritage.
It's a modern confusion, with the start of the last Dhamma-Period, that monks started to contribute Dhamma, incl. the Tripitaka, to householder.
Dhamma of which is shared or gained in improper way has no conductive effects at all and for those not understanding the whole issue and the way and economy of the Noble Ones, the demanding or trading common people with grave wrong view and no faith in regard that giving first is the reason for gain more sublime, there is no way to prevent them falling deeper and deeper.
in regard of 1):
Early in the morning a monk would take his bowl and walk for alms in nearby settlement. Wise people, on seei.g him, would give alms, take the seldom change to make merits.
Generally it's a matter of Upanissaya to ever met such. For sure good monks to not run "fire houses" next villages or in towns, and where such as natural generosity has already died of, on places where is actually no condition for Dhamma, good monks would not dwell. Neither having given, give inwardly and outwardly food, relation doesn't grow, dies off.
16.3: Candūpama Sutta — Comparable to the Moon give best answer to 1) and 2), to understand, that there is actually no relation in both ways anymore, no duities for the world.
Here you are, or, and what do you think would be smart to do? You wouldn't either, right? That's the way it goes.
[Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, other world-binding trades, but for an escape from corruption, to gain independency]


Buddhism and terminal illness Even in my limited knowledge on Buddhism, it makes sense to see a connection between a terminal illness (like cancer) and previous negative karma. Is there a Sutta where Buddha talks about this connection?
Is it true that a terminal illness can be seen in a "positive" way, like purifying past karma?
From a Buddhist prospective, are there specific ways (like rituals, prayers) for curing (or helping with) a terminal illness?

Thank you all for your answers! Be well!

First, from Tsongkhapa's viewpoint, there are three types of karmic results. One of them is the result similar to the cause. It is often thought that cancer or other deadly ones result from having taken life/lives in past life. A reason for thinking this way is that it may help the meditator to lessen anger (that would come from feeling that it's unfair or underserved). Thinking "cancer comes from such a negative action" is meant to generate regret (not incredible guilt or remorse that will have you paralyzed), and apply antidotes so as to stop engaging in negativities. One has to be careful with this way of thinking. For instance, telling a third person "it's just karma" or "it's because you killed in the past" might not be the best thing to do. It is first and foremost something to take for oneself, to improve one's own practice. To be taken and given carefully. These considerations are not so much to be taken as descriptive than instructive, so as to meditate, dwell on them, and generate within one's own continuum, antidotes to anger and so forth. Dwelling on the notion that "one created the causes of whatever awful turn of event occur" would otherwise be sterile or even possibly dangerous.

Also, a ripening of a karmic imprint is always "karma getting exhausted" but is not necessarily a sign of purification.

As to prayers, in Tibetan monasteries, we perform pujas ("ceremonies, rituals, prayers") on a regular basis, dedicating to specific people who requested (some giving donation, some not). The most common in this setting are Medicine Buddha Puja and Cittamani Tara Puja. This said, the practice we consider the best in these cases is animal liberation (i.e. saving life, as directly opposed to the cause that was taking lives).

Mittakali

Going forth through conviction
from home into homelessness,
I wandered this place & that,
greedy for gain & offerings.
Missing out on the foremost goal,
I pursued a lowly one.
Under the sway of defilements
I surrendered the goal
of the contemplative life.

Then, sitting in my dwelling,
I suddenly came to my senses:
I'm following a miserable path.
I'm under the sway of
        craving.
    Next to nothing, my life —
            crushed
    by aging & illness.
    Before the body breaks apart,
    I have no time
        for heedlessness.

After watching, as it actually was,
the rising & falling of aggregates,
I stood up with mind released,
the Awakened One's bidding
        done.


Can someone provide explanation on dependent origination According to this law, every phenomenon owes its origin to another
phenomenon prior to it. It may simply be expressed as “depending
on this, this originates”. An example of Dependent Origination in
nature is given below:
There being clouds in the sky it rains.
It having rained, the road becomes slippery.
The road becoming slippery, a man falls down.
The man having fallen down becomes injured.
Here a shower of rain depends on the clouds in the sky.
The road becoming slippery depends on the rain.
The fall of the man depends on the road becoming slippery.
The injury of the man depends upon his fall:
Conversely:
If there were no clouds in the sky, it would not have rained.
Then the road would not have become slippery.
Then the man would not have fallen.
Then he would not have become injured.

So this is understandable and clear to anyone. So can anyone explain (in simplified way)dependent origination step by step with practical examples?

okay, since you asked for a simple explanation... this is about as simple as I can make it:

Avidya: A newborn baby has no memories nor concepts, just a potential to learn.
Samskaras: Everything that happens leaves a trace, or imprint, on the baby mind.
Vijnana: As similar patterns happen again and again, baby begins to recognize them and classify in buckets by similarity and thus becomes minimally aware.
Namarupas: The baby begins to assemble recognizable features into individual objects.
Six doors: The baby begins to develop a notion of "here" and "there", and the doors connecting "here" with "there" (seeing, hearing etc.)
Contact: As objects disappear and reappear, the baby comes up with idea of "contact" or having the object.
Vedana: Baby notices that when some objects are present it feels good inside. So baby decides that this good feeling comes from the object.
Craving: From this, baby learns to miss a good object and to crave it again.
Upadana: As this craving becomes obsessive, the baby learns to make the contact its goal and to work towards the goal, in order to experience the good feeling again.
Bhava: As baby learns to crave, work towards a goal, and enjoy the gratification, it develops a notion of self or "I". Because it has the same obsessive thought of the goal from the initial desire, through working on it, and until receiving gratification. This obsessive craving becomes "I".
Jāti: From the notion of "I" comes self-identification with a living organism -- a human individuum.
Jarā-marana: From the self-identification with an individuum comes idea of death and million other problems.

The only real problem with this explanation... there is no baby! Baby is an object we learned to assemble. Which is why Buddha's original language is more precise, even if cryptic. "Ignorance" -> "Samskaras" -> "Vijnana" and so on. But if we put aside nitpicking about reification inevitable to any casual explanation, and just focus on the main idea, at least this explanation gives us a hint what Dependent Origination could be about.

Depending co-arising verbaliced, read with proper attention:
not-seeing/not-regarding dependend, fabricating/composing,
fabricating dependend, recognizing/knowing,
recognizing dependend, mind-mattering,
mind-mattering dependend, by-standing,
by-standing dependend, touching,
touching dependend, sensing/feeling,
sensing dependend, longing,
longing dependend, supporting/entertaining,
supporting dependend, becoming,
becoming depending, standing,
standing dependend, then decaying, dying, ...
Again: Paccaya Sutta: Requisite Conditions

"Now what is dependent co-arising? From birth [Stand/standing] as a requisite condition comes aging & death. Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this regularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma, this this/that conditionality. The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, makes it plain, & says, 'Look.' From birth [Stand, standing] as a requisite condition comes aging & death.
From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth [standing]...
"From clinging/sustenance [supporting/entertaining] as a requisite condition comes becoming...
"From craving [longing] as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance [supporting/entertainging]...
"From feeling [sensing] as a requisite condition comes craving [longing]...
"From contact [touching] as a requisite condition comes feeling [sensing]...
"From the six sense media [by-standing] as a requisite condition comes contact [touching]...
"From name-&-form [mind- mattering] as a requisite condition come the six sense media [by-standing]...
"From consciousness [recognizing/knowing] as a requisite condition comes name-&-form [mind- mattering]...
"From fabrications [fabricating/composing] as a requisite condition comes consciousness [recognizing/knowing]...
"From ignorance [not-seeing (as it really is)] as a requisite condition come fabrications [fabricating/composing]. Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands — this regularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma, this this/that conditionality. The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, makes it plain, & says, 'Look.' From ignorance [not-seeing] as a requisite condition come fabrications [fabricating]. What's there in this way is a reality, not an unreality, not other than what it seems, conditioned by this/that. This is called dependent co-arising.
"And what are dependently co-arisen phenomena? Aging & death are dependently co-arisen phenomena: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation.
"And what are dependently co-arisen phenomena? Aging & death [decay] are dependently co-arisen phenomena: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation.
"Birth [Stand/Is-tence] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Becoming is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Clinging/sustenance [Entertainment/Hold-on] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Craving [Longing] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Feeling [Sense] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Contact [Touch] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"The six sense media [By-Standing/Receiver] are dependently co-arisen phenomena...
"Name-&-form [Mind-matter/Name-object] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Consciousness [Recognition/Awarness] is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon...
"Fabrications [Composing] are dependently co-arisen phenomena...
"Ignorance [Not-seeing (as it really is) is a dependently co-arisen phenomenon: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation. These are called dependently co-arisen phenomena.
"When a disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be, it is not possible that he would run after the past, thinking, 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past?' or that he would run after the future, thinking, 'Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' or that he would be inwardly perplexed about the immediate present, thinking, 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?' Such a thing is not possible. Why is that? Because the disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be."

With not seeing comes fabrication
With fabrication comes aware
With aware comes name&matter
With name&matter comes Stand-by
With stand-by comes touching
With touching comes sensing
With sensing comes longing
With longing comes under-holding/entertaining
With under-holding comes becoming
With becoming comes Standing
With Standing comes Stress, Suffering and Fall
From birth as a condition, Suffering and Stress comes along.
And how is the cessation of Stress, Suffering and Fall?
(Good that Andrei Volkov modified his answer a little and pointed out an importance withit, since it is a major fault if doing or willing to bring an object, person, into play in this cain of cause and effect. So it's good to let go of that unuseful tries, out of faith for now, eternally. One does good to mark it as foolish way to try to be compassionate or over-smart while pulling Dhamma into the "dirt" of the world: e.g. identification)
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial use or other lower wordily gains by ways of exchange or trade]


What is the meditation and what is its purpose? Is meditation thinking about thoughts?
Is it rational thinking about our perceptions?
What is meditation? What is the purpose of it?
Can I gain supernatural powers via meditation?

Meditation is when the mind comes back home. When the mind comes back home it can sit by the fire and enjoy its own warmth. It can stop being busy with all kinds of "doing". Meditation is the ultimate "not-doing". Just sit in presence and let the nature of things take care of itself.

Meditation is not thinking. It's more like watching the cows graze. The cows represent thoughts, if they start misbehaving you show them their place -- other than that, you just let them graze. When the mind watches itself, there is some processing going on, some laundering, some mending and healing, some connecting, some letting go.

The practical purpose of meditation, beside processing, mending and healing, is to reunite with the original state of "this is enough", "this is peaceful". The supramundane purpose of meditation is to lose form and go deep into formless, the real nature of things.

When you completely lose attachment to any form, you get supernatural powers - yes.

meditation is a way to develop our mind , so as to keep it without wandering here and there and you have to keep it in wholesome thought then only you can develop wisdom


How to work with praise and blame? What are the scriptural references to working with praise and blame from the Pali Canon?

I am specifically looking for answers with

Explanations on the significance of praise and blame, and how they relate to each other.
Stories on how to work with praise and blame.

Examples from outside the Pali Canon are also welcome (other traditions, or non-scriptural), but preference will be given to answers that match the above.

What are the scriptural references to working with praise and blame from the Pali Canon?

Due to space, I'll answer with some excerpts but bear in mind that the full texts should be read for a better understanding:

  (1) Bhikkhus, when an uninstructed worldling meets with gain, he does
  not reflect thus: ‘This gain that I have met is impermanent,
  suffering, and subject to change.’ He does not understand it as it
  really is. (2) When he meets with loss … (3) … fame … (4) … disrepute
  … (5) … blame … (6) … praise … (7) … pleasure … (8) … pain, he does
  not reflect thus: ‘This pain that I have met is impermanent,
  suffering, and subject to change.’ He does not understand it as it
  really is.

  “Gain obsesses his mind, and loss obsesses his mind. Fame obsesses his
  mind, and disrepute obsesses his mind. Blame obsesses his mind, and
  praise obsesses his mind. Pleasure obsesses his mind, and pain
  obsesses his mind. He is attracted to gain and repelled by loss. He is
  attracted to fame and repelled by disrepute. He is attracted to praise
  and repelled by blame. He is attracted to pleasure and repelled by
  pain. Thus involved with attraction and repulsion, he is not freed
  from birth, from old age and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain,
  dejection, and anguish; he is not freed from suffering, I say.

  “But, bhikkhus, (1) when an instructed noble disciple meets with gain,
  he reflects thus: ‘This gain that I have met is impermanent,
  suffering, and subject to change.’ He thus understands it as it really
  is. (2) When he meets with loss … (3) … fame … (4) … disrepute … (5) …
  blame … (6) … praise … (7) … pleasure … (8) … pain, he reflects thus:
  ‘This pain that I have met is impermanent, suffering, and subject to
  change.’ He thus understands it as it really is.

  “Gain does not obsess his mind, and loss does not obsess his mind.
  Fame does not obsess his mind, and disrepute does not obsess his mind.
  Blame does not obsess his mind, and praise does not obsess his mind.
  Pleasure does not obsess his mind, and pain does not obsess his mind.
  He is not attracted to gain or repelled by loss. He is not attracted
  to fame or repelled by disrepute. He is not attracted to praise or
  repelled by blame. He is not attracted to pleasure or repelled by
  pain. Having thus discarded attraction and repulsion, he is freed from
  birth, from old age and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain,
  dejection, and anguish; he is freed from suffering, I say.

  “This, bhikkhus, is the distinction, the disparity, the difference
  between an instructed noble disciple and an uninstructed worldling.”

  -AN 8.6, Worldly Principles (2)

  "'It's through adversity that a person's endurance may be known, and
  then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is
  attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning,
  not by one who is not discerning': Thus was it said. And in reference
  to what was it said?

  "There is the case where a person, suffering loss of relatives, loss
  of wealth, or loss through disease, does not reflect: 'That's how it
  is when living together in the world. That's how it is when gaining a
  personal identity. When there is living in the world, when there is
  the gaining of a personal identity, these eight worldly conditions
  spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight worldly
  conditions: gain, loss, status, disgrace, blame, praise, pleasure, &
  pain.' Suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through
  disease, he sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes
  distraught. And then there is the case where a person, suffering loss
  of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease, reflects:
  'That's how it is when living together in the world. That's how it is
  when gaining a personal identity. When there is living in the world,
  when there is the gaining of a personal identity, these eight worldly
  conditions spin after the world, and the world spins after these eight
  worldly conditions: gain, loss, status, disgrace, blame, praise,
  pleasure, & pain.' Suffering loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or
  loss through disease, he does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not
  beat his breast or become distraught.

  "'It's through adversity that a person's endurance may be known, and
  then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is
  attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning,
  not by one who is not discerning': Thus was it said. And in reference
  to this was it said.

  -AN 4.192, Traits

  Gain and loss, disrepute and fame,
  blame and praise, pleasure and pain:
  these conditions that people meet
  are impermanent, transient, and subject to change.

  A wise and mindful person knows them
  and sees that they are subject to change.
  Desirable conditions don’t excite his mind
  nor is he repelled by undesirable conditions.

  He has dispelled attraction and repulsion;
  they are gone and no longer present.
  Having known the dustless, sorrowless state,
  he understands rightly and has transcended existence.

  -AN 8.5, Worldly Principles (1)

Not to gain or loss
not to status or honor,
not to praise or blame,
not to pleasure or pain:
      everywhere
they do not adhere —
     like a water bead
     on a lotus.
     Everywhere
they are happy, the enlightened,
everywhere
un-defeated.

-Thag 14.2, Godatta

He whose doctrine is [judged as] demolished,
     defeated, by those judging the issue:
He laments, he grieves — the inferior exponent.
     "He beat me," he mourns.

These disputes have arisen among contemplatives.
     In them are elation, dejection.
Seeing this, one should abstain from disputes,
     for they have no other goal
     than the gaining of praise.

He who is praised there
     for expounding his doctrine
     in the midst of the assembly,
laughs on that account & grows haughty,
     attaining his heart's desire.

-Sn 4.8, To Pasura

As a single slab of rock
won't budge in the wind,
so the wise are not moved
     by praise,
     by blame.

-Dhp 81

Simple, Krishna in Bhagavat Gita says "Do your work,Do not expect the results".When you are very much mindfully doing a work you would not worry about the results.When you do not worry about the results there won't be any expectations.Normally if you have done a very good job,you would expect an apppreciation(or recogonition).Praise come to picture here.When you have screwed up,then you would try to escape from the blame or try to make things up.The answer is simple.To be in peace with the work you are doing at the present.So that you would not care whether you are praised or blamed.You would be peacefully that you have mindfully enjoy


If Buddhism is about moderation, then why is it that you can attain nirvana only after renouncing worldly possessions? This is really confusing to me. Buddha himself was an ascetic, and his teachings seem to imply that the path to nirvana is attained through renouncing one's worldly possessions.

Isn't this in direct contradiction to the Middle Way?

These are common misunderstandings of the middle way. The middle way is best explained through the Buddha's life story.

The Buddha began as a nobleman who had the money for all the indulgence in sensual pleasures which he wanted. However, indulgence in pleasure did not lead to lasting happiness. This is the first extreme. The Buddha then became an ascetic who starved himself and took part in self mortification. This was an attempt at gaining happiness through pain, or indulgence in pain. This is the second extreme and it did not lead to lasting happiness.

The middle way is neither indulgence in pleasure nor indulgence in pain. The middle way is not about moderation, it is about the attitude to indulgence.

Taking a simple example like eating chocolate: There are extremes of never eating chocolate or eating 10 bars of chocolate each day, but eating in moderation such as 1 bar per day is not going to bring about happiness. If you eat 1 bar of chocolate and you treat it as the best thing you've ever tasted then you're already indulging in pleasure. The amount of chocolate is irrelevant. The point is to eat chocolate without doing it to seek pleasure and without doing it to seek pain.

One final common misconception which you didn't mention is "The middle way is for laypeople, monks don't follow the middle way". This misconception comes from the idea that the middle way is moderation. Although monks deny themselves things like sex or perfume this is not a type of indulgence in pain, the purpose of the rules is entirely different. The monks don't try to use perfume in moderation but as I've explained moderation is not the middle way.

'you can attain nirvana only after renouncing worldly possessions?'

no - I meditated to satori 40 years ago - I forget exactly how long it took but maybe about two and a half months - which I only recently read was apparently about the same time as Gautama took.

I live in a house full of junk - have retired with enough money and regularly enjoy overseas travel - but with an empty no-mind free to see with crystal clarity the beauty of the world, I tend to live simply - my partner just told me our carpet has changed colour after 25 years - our 35yo kitchen has not been renovated - it works fine - I drive a 26yo small car - it works perfectly.

So I don't live in the forest under a tree - I live in the centre of city and today enjoyed some wonderful Japanese ice cream treats - but without desire or attachment to things, I could lose the stuff - or my life tomorrow without any worry.

Without Fear - http://users.rider.edu/~suler/zenstory/nofear.html


Are the Jhanas related to some of the 31 realms of existence When I say 'related' in this sense means more about the hue that accompanies a jhana, this might be a very pleasant feeling, mind state or perception.

I don't know what school this question refers to. I'm just responding from some kind of intuition so any Buddhist sect is fine.

The jhanas are related to to Brahma realms

  "There is the case where an individual, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the devas of Brahma's retinue. The devas of Brahma's retinue, monks, have a life-span of an eon. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  "Again, there is the case where an individual, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Abhassara devas. The Abhassara devas, monks, have a life-span of two eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  "Again, there is the case where an individual, with the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Subhakinha devas. The Subhakinha devas, monks, have a life-span of four eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  "Again, there is the case where an individual, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. He savors that, longs for that, finds satisfaction through that. Staying there — fixed on that, dwelling there often, not falling away from that — then when he dies he reappears in conjunction with the Vehapphala[4] devas. The Vehapphala devas, monks, have a life-span of 500 eons. A run-of-the-mill person having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, goes to hell, to the animal womb, to the state of the hungry shades. But a disciple of the Blessed One, having stayed there, having used up all the life-span of those devas, is unbound right in that state of being. This, monks, is the difference, this the distinction, this the distinguishing factor, between an educated disciple of the noble ones and an uneducated run-of-the-mill person, when there is a destination, a reappearing.

  AN 4.123

So as you can see, if a person dwell in the first jhana often until he dies then he will reappear in the brahma’s retinue. So I think you have to master the first jhana and dwell there very often and not lose the ability to enter it until you die. Only then you might be reborn in the Brahma retinue. If you enter the first jhana once and start killing your parents or an arahant then you probably won’t appear in the Brahma realm and will go straight to hell because you will probably lose the ability to enter jhana.

If you want to know more about the 31 planes of existence then go to this link. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html

In the original teachings, the jhanas were not related to the 31 realms. In the original teachings, the jhanas were merely the Samma Samadhi of the Noble Eightfold Path.

But in what appears to be the later Brahmanisation of Buddhism (to convert the common Indian people to Buddhism, probably by the clergy of King Asoka) the jhanas become related to the 31 realms (similar to how Vajrayana introduced Hindu gods, such as Tara, Yellow Jumbala, Avalokiteshvara, etc, into Mahayana Buddhism).

Refer to (questionable) suttas such as AN 4.123 and MN 1, which equate the jhanas to Brahmanistic gods.

As the Buddha predicted, relating the jhanas to Brahmanistic cosmology lead to the extinction of Buddhism in India. Because people are unable to abandon the self-survival instinct, this corruption of Buddhism continues in the 'modern' world.

The former Supreme Patriarch of Thailand described these godly realms as "ancient geography".

  View on Heaven and Hell of Somdet Phra Nyanasamvara, Supreme Patriarch of Thai Buddhism. "As we are so familiar, in religious
  sphere, the concept of heaven and hell is a very prominent belief. In
  many cases, it becomes the goal of religious practice itself. On this
  very subject, His Holiness critically analyses that the very concept
  and belief of heaven and hell in Buddhism is a cultural influence of
  indigenous culture and belief. He states: (I quote) ‘the subject of
  cosmology appeared in Buddhism is clearly can be seen that it is not
  ‘Buddhist teaching’ at all but an ancient geography. The concept and
  belief about it was included in Buddhist Canon merely because of
  strong influence of popular belief of the time. Later Commentaries
  further explain about heaven and hell in a greater detail distant
  itself from the original teaching of the Buddha. If Buddhism teaches
  such belief on heaven and hell it would not be Buddhism at all but an
  ancient geography. Buddha wouldn’t be the Buddha who delivered the
  Noble Truth and ‘timeless’ message for mankind.’ (p. 1) (end of the
  quote) He then shows in his teaching that the concept of heaven and
  hell in Buddhism are in fact symbolic, representing the quality of
  mind and spirituality instead. One can be in heaven and hell in this
  very earth and life. No need to wait until one dies..."

  Supreme Patriarch of Thailand H.H.Somdet Phra Nyanasamvara. (Head of
  the Buddhist monks in Thailand).

  In the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their
  meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited.
  They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't
  regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will
  listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets,
  elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of
  disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on
  knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping &
  mastering.

  In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with
  emptiness — will come about.

  The Buddha: Ani Sutta


What is the duality of body and external name-and-form? What is the duality of body and external name-and-form?

What is the difference between the two? What is the relationship between the two?

From the Balapandita Sutta (SN 12.19) (translated by Bhikkhu Sujato):

  “Mendicants, for a fool hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving,
  this body has been produced.

  “Avijjānīvaraṇassa, bhikkhave, bālassa taṇhāya sampayuttassa evamayaṃ
  kāyo samudāgato.

  So there is the duality of this body and external name and form.
  Contact depends on this duality. When contacted through one or other
  of the six sense fields, the fool experiences pleasure and pain.

  Iti ayañceva kāyo bahiddhā ca nāmarūpaṃ, itthetaṃ dvayaṃ, dvayaṃ
  paṭicca phasso saḷevāyatanāni, yehi phuṭṭho bālo sukhadukkhaṃ
  paṭisaṃvedayati etesaṃ vā aññatarena.

The same excerpt translated here by Bhikkhu Bodhi:

  “Bhikkhus, for the fool, hindered by ignorance and fettered by
  craving, this body has thereby originated. So there is this body and
  external name-and-form: thus this dyad. Dependent on the dyad there is
  contact. There are just six sense bases, contacted through which—or
  through a certain one among them—the fool experiences pleasure and
  pain.

Also, as reference, from SN 12.2 (trans. Bodhi):

  “And what, bhikkhus, is name-and-form? Feeling, perception, volition,
  contact, attention: this is called name. The four great elements and
  the form derived from the four great elements: this is called form.
  Thus this name and this form are together called name-and-form.

Also, please note that the term "kāya" has been used in the sense of physical body for example in SN 22.56 (although I know that it can be used to mean group or collection, when combined with other things):

  eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind consciousness.
  cakkhuviññāṇaṃ, sotaviññāṇaṃ,ghānaviññāṇaṃ, jivhāviññāṇaṃ,
  kāyaviññāṇaṃ, manoviññāṇaṃ.

This is just an elaboration of D.O. Everything is clear and makes sense.

Delineation of feeling depends on the notion of contact.

Delineation of contact depends on separating totality into "internal" and "external".

Six sense doors are the subjective boundary across which the contact is made.

On this side of the boundary are upadana-skandhas - stuff we appropriate as I/mine.

On the other side of the boundary are the namarupas, the mind-made delineated entities that we designate as "external".

In each pair of DO, it's always a notion and its counterpart serving as foundation.

When there is a stand, a body (in sense of compound, not physical, see DD's answer in this regard), not-knowing, there is a surface, hence "duality".

By absence, having uprooted not-knowing, not dwelling on another stand, there is what goes beyond able to trace and discriminate. Others then the Nihilists idea, there "is" something beyond the six senses.

dvaya is just another word for avijja, not-knowing. Althought many try to trace something special, the Buddha used different words to serve different inclinatiins of different people.

[This answer is not given as means of trade, exchange, for Buddh-ism or other low wordily bonds but for liberations purpose]


Is Dhamma-thinking considered wise attention? According to AN 5.73 (translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu):

  "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard
  & studied it and thinks about it, evaluates it, and examines it with
  his intellect. He spends the day in Dhamma-thinking. He neglects
  seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of
  awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on thinking, not one who
  dwells in the Dhamma.

Another translation of AN 5.73 by Bhikkhu Sujato:

  Furthermore, a mendicant thinks about and considers the teaching in
  their heart, examining it with the mind as they learned and memorized
  it. They spend their days thinking about that teaching. But they
  neglect retreat, and are not committed to internal serenity of heart.
  That mendicant is called one who thinks a lot, not one who lives by
  the teaching.

Is Dhamma-thinking considered yoniso manasikara or wise attention or appropriate attention? Please explain your answer.

If yes, then why is it not useful, without internal tranquility of awareness (cetosamatham)?

If no, then what is needed to upgrade Dhamma-thinking to wise attention? What is it missing?

Yes, if that Dhamma-Thinking is arising continuously without five strings, without five hindrances, and with understanding the real reality, more than trillion times in a second, with it's real relation.
However, most people are thinking of Dhamma with five hindrances in between because they have not enough concentration meditation power, so their mind can't meditate to the end, Nibbāna.

Only Ariya Puggala (Sotapanna and avove) has the Yonisomanasikara.


How is Qi Energy used in Buddhist practice? Ive seen television programmes and videos of buddhist shaolin monks who perfom incredible techniques such as breaking iron bars with their heads, impaling themselves with spears, throwing needles through glasses windows etc.

It was said that these monks create, harness and use Qi Energy which makes it possible for them to perform these techniques. I have two questions:

What is this Qi Energy?
Is it a strong and profound level of concentration like the Jhanas in Theravada Buddhism?

Thank you for your time.

Click on photos for full size

"How is chi used in Buddhist practice?"

Buddha ignored the fascination people had with all this and classified it as "the five elements" knowing that even the slightest attraction to these low physical phenomena would waste people's time and detract from the many more worthwhile goals. You don't have to know anything about chi in Buddhism because in Buddhism the method of true awareness is enough to dissolve all blockages and problems that might come up.

This is why so many uneducated Buddhist monks who didn't know anything about any of the other traditions still won the prize of Enlightenment! One of them was the patriarch of the Zen school, whom other jealous disciples tried to hunt down..

In those times, monks would be all too interested in those things, at the expense of understanding one's True Mind, which is beyond body and mind... If Buddha even mentioned the word chi, there would be a million and one distracting questions popping into people's head at those times--that would probably derail people's focus entirely... which is why Gautama supposedly returned as Padmasambhava and created the Tibetan school--much much later after the heart of Buddhism was established. (Tibetan school by the way is still aligned with Buddhism but has an integrated focus on the wisdom-energies.)

Nonetheless, chi is related to different karmic habits that we have and once these energies are dissolved the personality characteristic is also transformed--and vice versa.

Buddhism aims at a much higher target than physical perfection, beyond even physical immortality, and this is why it is possible in Buddhism to go beyond the body to transform the mind at its root, attaining things that are definitely Buddhist ("non-common supermundane achievements") and other things that are beyond form but common to all spiritual schools ("common supermundane achievements").

Buddhism aims at the highest possible level: transforming the 8th consciousness, the storehouse of karmas from our endless lives... becoming a radiant actualized Buddha helping all beings win Awakening, becoming free from cycles like birth-and-death and suffering. To Buddhism, these super-powers are nothing but wasting time developing tricks, totally distracted from our human and spiritual problem. That is, unless it is for skillful means (see the parable of the burning house).

With that Buddhist warning aside, to answer your first question, there are many different types of chi, based on various organs. This falls within the realm of TCM and there are many uses to knowing such things, especially in diagnosing one's body. I would love to have an intuitive TCM doctor analyze my sitting posture--lots of constructive advice can be gained from that!

So what is chi in related to Buddhist practice and meditation? How can we make use of such learnings to motivate our Buddhist practice?

The Taoists have mapped out a timeline for what the excellent cultivators and Buddhists go through:

jing > chi > shen > emptiness >> Tao

When one practices Buddhism 100% correctly (celibacy + samatha-powered vipassana), this process happens automatically all the way to "seeing the Tao"/bodhisattvahood.

Due to one's celibacy, one has stored up jing (semen) which after 3 months of jhana eventually starts to transform into chi. One will feel less hungry and can fast for a long time. One is qualified to do the things posted in the picture. Eventually after at least a year like this, one's chi will transform to shen. For several years this process will continue, one's sleep needs will drastically reduce. After even more refined letting go, one will be at the stage of "emptiness" free from dualities and one step away from turning around and "seeing the Tao"

Also, the Taoists have fancier, more interesting names than this - I'm just summarizing.

I recommend the dense book "How to Measure and Deepen Your Spiritual Realization" for a complete understanding of this subject of energetics and where your concern on energetics absolutely must stop in order to progress and not subconsciously focus on lower things and hold yourself back from awakening the formless, nondual prajna wisdom.

Whether one is a monastic or a layman, in this day and age there is a lot of confusing bioenergetics fascination so it is important to clear up this matter for yourself because even if I say "just study Buddhism, and keep noting, all that fancy stuff is nothing they will lose it after they die"... you are still curious and vulnerable to false information--especially since you want to be able to do cool things like be free of sexual desire (when your jing is full), no longer need to ingest food (when chi is full), and no longer need to sleep (when shen is full)... at the best false information + fixation might lead to nonbeneficial/retarding practices and at the worst, a painful fiery death (I refer you to the Buddhist story of Hakuin).

2nd question: yes, it is a result of staying in that state. After achieving the 1st jhana on a mental level, one must reside in this state until the body completes transforming. After one's body and mind are in sync (this may take a few months if one achieved jhana/insight quickly), one's state will stabilize (and one can go to even higher states more easily)... and one can feel and train one's chi to do various tricks--beneficial and harmful. One can also ignore those lateral pathways and continue on the Buddhist journey.

Go here for more nondenominational info and definitions.
Also read "Master Huai-Chin Nan - Internal Martial Arts Nei-Gong" to have all your chi-related questions answered, especially related to Buddhist practice.
The dense book I mentioned earlier has excellent case studies as well on how chi manifested in different practitioners' lives.

Qi Energy can be compared to mechanical pneumatic equipment that uses air to lift, move or destroy heavy & hard objects.

Where as the Jhanas refine the breathing until the breathing completely disappears.

Therefore, the Jhanas in Theravada Buddhism are not related to Qi Energy & are in fact the opposite of cultivating Qi Energy.

  In-&-out breaths are the body fabricator

  MN 44

  He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming body fabricator.' He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming body fabricator.'

  MN 118

  When one has attained the fourth jhāna, in-and-out breathing has been stilled.

  SN 36.11


What is the difference between Vijñāna, Manas and Citta? Together they refer to one's mental processes as a whole. Separately, what are they and how are they different?

'Citta' (the C is pronounced as ch in cheetah) is a generic word for mind, including thoughts as well as emotional state. When the Chinese translated Buddhist texts they often used 'shin', the heart-mind, to indicate citta.

'Manas' (both As are pronounced as in Adam) is the "inner eye" that can see thoughts, memories, and one's state of mind (citta).

'Vijnana' (jna is pronounced as jnya - i.e. with soft n) is experience of reality that arises from mind's ability to recognize and interpret new stimuli by relating and comparing them with memories of past experiences.

Citta: The mirror of mind that lacks any qualities of it's own, but provides the canvas for the phenomena of samsara and nirvana (synonymous with the all-ground consciousness in Yogachara, though here being referred to in it's mundane aspect, as it appears to ordinary beings).  It is also considered to be the domain where karmic tendencies rest dormant, but with the possibility of manifesting when exposed to an external stimuli that generates grasping and conceptualization (which is the function of manas).

Caitta: The qualities of the mind.  The waves on the ocean, the coloring of a gem with a colored cloth beneath it, etc.  The basic dispositional sense that the mind is imbued with.  For more info see the 51 mental factors.

Vijnana: the basic sense of self-orientation and "I-making" that infuses the experience of reality for unenlightened beings.  It is differentiated into six forms given the six classes of phenomena (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell, and ideation).  It is the projection of an illusory "I" in reference to these phenomena.  The basis of this reference is the citta, which itself has no self-qualities (though it can become anything).  This is what the Buddha propounds anatman.

Manas: Conceptual thinking.  Can be afflictive or non-afflictive.  Vijnana (a basic self-orientation toward reality), is a necessary precondition for the functioning of conventional manas. This is the part of the mind that believes in the solid, unchanging, self-nature of phenomena and conceptualizes about their various inter-relations.  Whether there is still conceptualization within enlightenment (with the transcendence of vijnana) is argued about, but the most sensible description is that conceptualization occurs, but those concepts are not experienced as solid and unchanging, but are seen as the play of interdependent phenomena, none of which possess their own self-nature.

With metta.


Why aren't there 5 Noble Truths? Consider the fact that our Nirvana depends on one crucial truth and that is law of Karma. Good karma bear good fruit and bad karma generates bad results.

Why didn't Buddha say that Fifth Noble Truth is law of Karma ?

Other answers say that kamma is already covered by, or implicit in, the first and/or second noble truths.

I think it's related to the fourth noble truth -- i.e. you say that kamma is important to attaining nirvana (and I think that "the path towards attaining nirvana" is what the fourth noble truth is about).

Or, perhaps, you can see "bad karma" and "good karma" in the second and third noble truths respectively.

I find the logical structure of the four noble truths satisfying or persuasive.

The first three have the structure of a syllogism:

premise: dukkha exists, and is this and that
premise: dukkha is associated with craving
theorem: dukkha ceases when craving ceases

So that's the doctrine "in a nutshell".

The fourth is, then, an introduction to the rest of Buddhism:

to begin to implement that in practice, see the noble eightfold way

I think that (as well as karma) there are other important aspects of dharma -- e.g. anatta, dependent origination, the sangha, the qualities conducive to Enlightenment, and so on.

So I don't see why you see the need to "privilege" karma (as more important than other doctrines) -- but it's helpful that there is a doctrine with only 4 (memorable) truths, rather than (less memorable) 20. The "4 truths" served as (and still serve as) an introduction to the dharma.

Or perhaps you're saying that the doctrine of karma should be privileged because it's the single most important doctrine to remember. If so, maybe you're not wrong; but there are also some other dharmas that people have been inclined to say are the most important -- for example, "right view"; or maybe "harmlessness", "generosity", "skilful virtue", "admirable friendship", "attention"; and so on.

Yeah puthujjanas are stuck between what they call good and bad karma and since ''bad karma'' is ''bad'', they love to believe they become good people for striving to do the ''good'' karma. The love this good karma because the good karma does not lead to painful contact and they love to think that having good contacts is a good thing for them and other people.

It turns out that  What there is about ''common'' karma is bright karma,  dark karma, dark & bright. ANd even worse, none of those karmas makes you reach nirvana.

  "Monks, these four types of kamma have been directly realized, verified, & made known by me. Which four? There is kamma that is dark with dark result. There is kamma that is bright with bright result. There is kamma that is dark & bright with dark & bright result. There is kamma that is neither dark nor bright with neither dark nor bright result, leading to the ending of kamma.

  "And what is kamma that is neither dark nor bright with neither dark nor bright result, leading to the ending of kamma? Right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is called kamma that is neither dark nor bright with neither dark nor bright result, leading to the ending of kamma.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.235.than.html

Toxic Puhtthujanas love to confuse the bright karma with the non-bright & non-dark karma because they love to believe they generate the bright karma and they love to believe that they are good people for this generation.

Toxic puthujjanas love to think that karma is a good thing, but it really is not. It just a big mechanic scam since you do not even know if the karma will be good or bad. You do not know how the evolution of the karma that is ''attached to you'' end even less the karma ''of'' others.
Even worse, speculating about karma, trying to know about it with the usual ways of the puthujjanas is a big waste of time on the path to reach nirvana.
In therms of karma, THe whole point of nirvana is that the karma ends.

iN order To know about karma, the various destinations, for you and others, you need lots of work and even with this work, you are not an expert on karma like a buddha. At best a puthujjanas can know about karma by listening to a buddha. And even then, plenty of pathetic puthujjanas manage to cling to their fantasy of being a good guy for generating bright karma and neglect non-bright non-dark karma.

And even better about this non-bright non-dark karma, is that once the person is good at generating those non-bright non-dark karmas, the person automatically ''  fabricates a non-injurious bodily fabrication ... a non-injurious verbal fabrication ... a non-injurious mental fabrication '' like with the ''bright karma'', that puthujjanas crave  so much believing they do, which are part of the noble path.

Since you really worry about karma, be a good puthujjana and start by following the ''5 precepts'', each hour of each day of each week, which are typically tied to bright karma, but do not spend most on your life on this, and remember about this 4th karma and go beyond this bright karma by following the ''8 fold path''.
THe 8 fold path which is one of the ''truths'' is exactly what you imagine would be the ''5th noble truth''.
Once you follow the 8 fold path, you do not need to worry about all those karmas, you already know that the ''fabrications'' are the relevant ones and since you stop worrying about all that, you get better at generating piti, sukkha, samadhi and all that.

here is a little text about those karmas for more references.
http://read.goodweb.net.cn/PDF/p34/Karma%20In%20The%20Pali%20Suttas.pdf

  Ajahn Buddhadāsa's Note: This matter of 4 kinds of karma appears in numerous suttas, with
  the same details in some places and different details in others: in the Kammavagga of the AN
  Fours, the Saṃkhitta Sutta (A.ii.230) and Vitthāra Sutta (A.ii.230, Cf NDB 123) have the same
  details as above for all four kinds; Paṭhamasikkhāpada Sutta (A.ii.234) has dark karma explained
  in terms of violating the five precepts and bright karma in terms of upholding the five precepts,
  while the other two karmas are the same as above; Dutiyasikkhāpada Sutta (A.ii.234, 21/319/236)
  has dark karma explained in terms of the five heinous actions and bright karma in terms of the ten
  bases of wholesome action; Ariyamagga Sutta (A.ii.235, 21/320/237) has the first three kinds of
  karma are explained the same as above while the fourth is in terms of the noble eightfold path;
  Bojjhaṅga Sutta (A.ii.236, 21/321/238) has the first three kinds of karma explained the same as
  above while the fourth is in terms of the seven factors of awakening. In some cases the Buddha
  spoke to bhikkhus and in other suttas he spoke to other kinds of people.


What is the modern understanding about Four Great Elements and Reality? The 4 elements are:

pruṭhavī-dhātu - solidity or attraction. This holds something together. You feel this as tightness, pressure in the body.

āpa-dhātu - liquidity or relative motion.

teja-dhātu - heat or energy. Body temperature, vibrations in the body you feel in meditation. Difference of temperature in and out meditation.

vāyu-dhātu - expansion or repulsive forces. You feel this as pulsation or expansion and contraction in the body or flow of respiration, rumbling gasses in the belly and passing of wind.

So can we expand our knowledge about "Four great elements" in Buddhism using the knowledge that we have already understood by other means?

Modern Understating

There are infinite number of Buddhas in the past (though only few are recorded), and they preached the same Dhamma. With respect to Science this is always in constant evolution in terms of the understanding and body of knowledge. Though Science generally may not refute Buddhism drawing parallels may not be useful.

Understanding the 4 Elements

Understanding of the 4 elements should be at the experiential level or at the level that is felt. Conceptual understanding falls into the sphere of Perception, through this is also essential, but as stepping stone to the next item which is putting into practice with a view to experience it for one self.

Prologue

As we all are aware Lord Buddha used a certain method when teaching Dhamma to the common man,and that was breaking things down in a way that particular person will understand.

So the teachings were very dynamic bit stayed true to the core.Lord Buddha used this style of teaching because people had different levels of intelligence and potential when it comes to understanding complex teachings.

When Lord Buddha found people with very low intelligence much simpler methods were used to teach dhamma.But with people who had great potential much complex teachings were used according to their character and potential.

This is an effort to deliver more in depth understanding to our audience with far more sophisticated understanding about the world compared to the innocent people in Lord Buddha's time....

I would also like to add that these are results of years of experiments by many groups and a commonly shared perspective among huge groups who try to draw better understanding of complex teachings of Buddhism through science.

But none of below statements include any conclusions from Suttas,Teachings from monks or any other source.These are purely facts based on scientific experiments and logical reasoning.

Any comments are welcome as this is truly a new chapter of our understanding, And i advice readers to use their reasoning to conclude their own views of this.....

The shocker....

As we all know Lord Buddha's ingredients of everything is quite different from what we learn in science.Science talk about how chemical elements make everything and Lord Buddha talk about four elements creating everything.This is quite puzzling.

So i did my research on this topic to find why this difference exist.And i was quite interested to know about the paradox that these "Four elements" make.

I mean,
i am solid,i have fluidity in me,i have air in me and i have emptiness in me.
But this is what my body has,as i have learned it is made of cells and if i devide cells i end up with chemical elements that make my body.

So my intention was to learn why lord Buddha said that everything including my body is made of "Four great elements".

And i found some amazing proof to back up Buddhism in a totally different field. In Quantum physics

I recommend watching these two videos for better and easier understanding.(Each video is 10 minutes so you will have to spend 20 minutes.I guarantee you it is worth it and you will have never before understanding about everything.)

Where Science and Buddhism Meet - part 1 (video)

Where Science and Buddhism Meet - part 2 (video)

Turns out reality is not truly what it feels like.As too quantum physics there is no such thing called a solid object,But there is the "State of solidness"

Let me explain....

Sometime before science thought everything is real but one day everything changed by a single experiment giving birth to a new kind of Physics! It was called the Double Slit Experiment.

Double Slit Experiment
Double-slit experiment - Wikipedia

What science found was that reality does not actually exist but it comes to existence only when we observe it.

Experiment suggests that reality doesn't exist until it is observed

Reality doesn't exist until we measure it

So as to Quantum physics reality is not just an illusion of mind it is also acting in a way that is impossible to measure.As it turns out when we are not observing reality is acting in its own way but when we try to measure it or observe it reality start to function the way we know it.
(read the links above for better understanding [Reality doesn't exist until we measure it])

As Quantum physics has discovered not only reality is only the way we observe it,reality is also a deeper illusion.For example when you touch something (Sparsha- as mentioned in Buddhism) what happens is two field repelling each other like two magnets would and your mind (Kaaya vinyana) picking it up as a touch. In fact as to Quantum physics no one has ever really touched anything,even the chair you are sitting on is not touching you you are actually hovering above it in a atomic level.(watch the videos above to learn better)

So the dark horse of science "Quantum physics" has finally proved Lord Buddha's sayings

There is only Emptiness
There is no soul or a person
Everything is made of "Four Great Elements"

I request you all to take your time and read this answer fully with all the links given,and i guarantee you when you stand up from that chair after reading this you will be a different man forever.

May triple gems bless you all!

Namo Buddhaya!


If there is no Self , what Self is there to be affected by the karma which non-Self now performs? If there is no Self , then what Self is there to be affected by the karma which the non-Self now performs?

EDIT: A similar question I guess was asked in Samyutta Nikaya and Buddha replied as follows :
" With thy thoughts, which are under the dominion of desire, dost thou dream thou canst overhaul the teaching of the Master "
However I not sure what that means. I would be really happy if someone can explain the meaning of that answer from Buddha.

This comes from the Acela Sutta (although this quote comes from here). Basically, it's pointless to ask questions like this, according to the Buddha. Instead, we should approach it from the perspective of dependent origination.

  Again, when the Buddha was asked by the naked ascetic Kassapa whether
  suffering was of one's own making or of another's or both or neither,
  the Buddha replied "Do not put it like that." When asked whether there
  was no suffering or whether the Buddha neither knew nor saw it, the
  Buddha replied that there was, and that he both knew and saw it. He
  then said "Kassapa, if one asserts that 'He who makes (it) feels (it):
  being one existent from the beginning, his suffering is of his own
  making,' then one arrives at eternalism. But if one asserts that one
  makes (it), another feels (it); being one existent crushed out by
  feeling, his suffering is of another's making,' then one arrives at
  annihilationism. Instead of resorting to either extreme a Tathaagata
  teaches the Dhamma by the middle way (by dependent origination)"
  (S. XII, 17/vol. ii, 20).

You are karma. Your body, your accumulations, your memory, your mind, your compulsive thoughts and activities are all an aggregate that is you, right now. If I wipe out your memory, you won't know what is what, you have to relearn everything, you'd have to start from scratch. In the same way, if I wipe out your karma, you will cease to exist in this state.

All this translation confuses people. Self, no self bla bla bla. Yes it's a load of rubbish. Just know that you are an aggregate/accumulation of a lot of memory and karma and the food you've eaten.


Would a true Buddhist engage in the No True Scotsman fallacy? The No true Scotsman fallacy is a rhetorical trick to avert criticism of a generalization by appealing to the impurity of counterexamples i.e., "no true Scotsman would do such a thing!"

My question is whether or not a true Buddhist would ever appeal to such a juvenile rhetorical trick?

I'm thinking that no true Buddhist would ever do this as I'm sure the Buddha would not have approved of such illogical argumentation. What's the community think?

I see The True Scotsman Fallacy as a joking illustration of reification. There is obviously no such thing as THE TRUE Scotsman. It's an ill-defined abstraction that has no real-world referent. Every Scotsman is different and not all of them even live in Scotland! How can we possibly say that some of them are "true" and some are "fake"?

Similarly, "TRUE Buddhist" is an ill-defined abstraction that has no real-world referent. Believing that True Buddhists actually exist or that someone is a true Buddhist while someone else is not, are two examples of reification.

So to ask "would a true Buddhist engage in The True Scotsman Fallacy" is akin to asking whether a reification would engage in reification. And of course it happens all the time! Someone considering himself a "true Buddhist" (I don't want to name any users here but I can think of a few) is by definition rather prone to engaging into a "no true Buddhist would do or say X, Y, Z" line of argument. Not to say that, even more generally, someone considering himself a sentient being is probably rather likely to have an unconscious predilection for engaging into all types of reifying views that lead to quarrels and arguments.

In fact the entire Buddhist path (according to Mahayana interpretation) can be seen as growing up from naive reification and into the "wisdom" (wisdom or prajna being a short word for "a skillful modus operandi based on special insight into the nature of phenomena with awareness of the rewards of, the dangers of, and the escape from - reification"). In this sense of course, a "true Buddhist" (from streamenterer and above, or from 1st Bhumi and above in Mahayana) would NOT engage into naive reifying definitions like "the true Buddhist" or "the true Scotsman" etc.

Which is why "a true Buddhist" would never ever consider him or her self "a true Buddhist". If this sounds like a paradox, welcome to true Buddhism ;)

First, be careful with the word logic. It is easy to see oneself as ''logical'', but for anybody who does not want to pass for a boob, there is no relevance in  using the word logical,  before any learning about formal logic and natural logic, typically by talking to logicians.

Second, only rationalists claim that logics matter and they fantasize that some of the products of their imagination connect them to ''true reality'' which is some fantasy of going beyond ''appearances'' and ''emotional biases'' and that the various logics is a way to ''communicate clearly'' and a way of ''justifiable knowledge'' which would be a realization one of their deepest fantasy of labeling as knowledge something that is something else that the consciousness of whatever ''objects'' (to speak like the realists) is felt through the 5 senses.
This is for the ''secular'' rationalists. For the ''religious'' rationalists, the ''justifiable knowledge'' also include the scriptures that they claim ''are true'' or, let's say, ''are authentic, meaning authoritative'' or ''not altered'' by bad people.
In natural languages, their fantasy of ''arguments'', inside a ''debate'' are there to ''support a thesis'' and they claim that, somehow, the adversaries are supposed to changed side once they ''understand the arguments''. When they do not like a statement qualified as an argument, they are quick to label the statement as ''fallacious''.
All those quoted words are theirs and mean absolutely nothing.

Third, since you care about what rationalists do and that those people write books, you ''learn'' (to speak like a them) that the various indian buddhisms that you have today have been created by indian puthujjanas, then later on taken by the chinese and the tibetans who created the Mahayana and the vajrayana whose followers -- being puthujjanas -- are bound to love to use bad words to express their bad ideas.
The buddha did not create any buddhism. IT is the puthujjanas who created buddhism as their natural tendencies to fantasize a system out of any doctrine they hear or read. Some of those people go even further and try to create, or rather mix, their system with the organization of people, which is typically called a society.
Those people love to fantasize that the buddha would worry, or even worse, would agree with their views about some current social issues.
Yet, Typically, the only system created by the buddha is the called the vinaya.

Now puthujjanas love to fantasize about what a ''true something'' would be, like you who want to follow your natural tendency of puthujjanas to fantasize about ''what is a true buddhist'', you could say it is the one who at least follows the 5 precepts, but most people are not able to follow those for more than a few days or weeks.
You can even be more severe on your ''criteria'' (as if you -- as a puthujjana -- are able to discriminate among people) declare that such a person would be someone who has sati and restrain the senses all day long like a good fortress, day after day avoiding ''the 3 poisons'' of ignorance of the right view, of the path, of the 8 fold path, and, of course, of the lack of engaging in the ''middle way'' which is the presence of aversion and avidity towards the pleasures and pains, (by enjoying the senses or being such an ascetic that even the joy of the jhanas would be seen as inappropriate), like mentioned here
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.063.than.html
. In one word, a true buddhist is a student of the buddha.


Is Buddhism antinatalist? I was listening to a discussion with David Benatar, and the point that Buddhism seems to be antinatalist was raised. It seems that people argue this both ways. Can Buddhism be said to be antinatalist? Or some strands but not others? If it is, what consequences does this have?

I have always kind of dismissed Benatar's ideas as being a kind of Larkin-esque pose, and making a mistake in hierarchy that puts pleasure above meaning, like utilitarians. But if the charge of antinatalism sticks, it seems I am going to have look more carefully at which of his points also apply to Buddhism.

Antinatalists argue that people should refrain from procreation
  because it is morally bad

According to the third precept, it's not procreation that is morally bad, it's sexual misconduct. So it's perfectly fine for a Buddhist layman to have a family and make kids. Buddhism doesn't really care if you have kids or not. Although the Buddha once said "Putta wattu manussanam"- son is an asset to man. But that's about it.

For monks, it's out of the question as they are not allowed to have any kind of sexual activity with anyone. But it's not because of women getting pregnant. It's because the lust that is involved is detrimental to their spiritual progress.

Birth is indeed part of suffering, but Buddhism never says that the solution to it is to stop people from making children. Even if you ban women from getting pregnant by law, beings will still be born elsewhere. The only way to end it is to cut off craving. So to call Buddhism antinatalist shows a weak understanding of the teachings of the Buddha.

On the contrary, I think Bodhisattvas might view providing sentient beings with the opportunity for perfect human rebirths as a profound way of helping them. Indeed, this could be one way in which a Bodhisattva might give his/her body away for the benefit of others!


What are the other Theravada Councils held between the 4th and 6th The Wikipedia entry on the 5th council says:

  However, there were a number of other councils held in Ceylon and Thailand between the fourth and sixth ...

What are these other councils? Where where they held? What was their significance?

What are these other councils? Where were they held? What was their significance?

I am going to try to answer this to the best of my abilities.

I do not know the specifics of where they were held, but I do know what they are & their significance.

All the Buddhist councils are meant to preserve the Dhamma the Buddha formulated & to discuss the Tipitaka & its interpretations.

Buddhist councils have not consisted of all schools unified, although in some cases they have been.

I hope my answer suits you well! :)

May you be well.

Here is a descriptions of some of the councils and their significance
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Buddhist_councils


My explanation of six realms of existence The six realms states of mind

This is my graphical interpretation of existence of six realms by Buddha.

I have attempted to decode the great concept of Buddhist teaching consider the state of mind as all beings possess the mind:

X axis represent the level of mind or level of happiness and suffering which can’t be measured by scientific apparatus.
Y axis represents time which only feels by mind and time can’t be measured. (Absolute time)

White paper represents space.

God’s realm

Here is it. Gods are always in happy mind and maintain it effortlessly long time and happiness is stable.

Time is very fast as they are in happiness and pleasure. Their physical body has been evolved to feel and maintain the happiness and pleasure. Human can’t measure anything on this realm except feel the state of mind just a few seconds or minutes.

No 1 represent this in graphical way e.g. poor, financially oppressed human has collected the bundle of 1 million dollar notes. So his happiness suddenly reached his climax and enjoy the pleasure and overflow his happiness for few seconds or few minute etc……. and once he feel the fear of robbers, hesitations of the future and thinking about what to do in future and he is collapsed on human level of human mind again. If he is with cardiac problem then he is dropped down to hell being as suffer cardiac pain or death as can’t control his thought and overflow of happiness. Time is extremely fast on this realm.
Demi gods or Asura

Normally Demi-gods are below the gods. They are confident on their power of fighting nature. Intelligent and born to fight. Physical body has been designed for it. Muscular, strong body, intelligent and master on weapon usage and create new weapons. They are born to survival and they normally not possess for survival. But someone on craving and try to possess in front of Asuras, they will fight for grab it even though the object is useless for them. Once they possess the object they are in climax of happiness and fade it gradually with time. E.g. this can be experienced with kids some time neglected toy get the attention child the second child also come with desire for same toy and they will fight for it.

Time is fast and varies in this realm.
Humans realm

They can think the middle way. That’s the reason Buddha specially states about Human realm. Any psychiatric can explain the human mind. Time is average in this realm
Animal realm

Driven by instincts and ever one know range of physical appearance. No spiritual vision, no religion, no art, no science and only they have well adapted to physical environment by evolution of physical body.just big fish eat little fish is the only law.

Animals never use apparatus to measure time and they synchronise the time with environment. Animals fight for survival not for possess anything. Animals fight, flight, eat, drink, sleep etc…….are the purpose of their existence. Time is passing slowly in this realm
Hungry ghosts.

They always overflow with craving and desire. Mind is driven to fulfil craving and desire and they are not fulfilled by achievements. Time is very slow as they are always in overflow by non-satisfaction.
Hell being

Always suffer from intensive, extreme and unavoidable pain both physically and mentally. But mental pain is the most. (As modern psychiatry says mental suffering is difficult than physical pain) and it is extremely difficult to escape from this realm and time is very very slow in this realm. E.g just imagine a person who is wounded badly and has to suffer intensive pain in hospital ICU units.

Is my explanation of the six realms of existence consistent with common Buddhist explanation?

Yes this is correct this is the way a mahayana views reality. And this is the reason a theravedan disagrees! LOL.

To the theravedan the six realms are not visible in the human world. Or rather with human eyes the six realms are not visible on earth.

All the lokkas you call "states" are just as real as the robe and the bowl...
Keep calling Buddha a liar; with continual grasping at "mind" and you will feel the realness of the lokkas with body attachment; If you have not already heard them for yourself by hearing the lokkas speech attachment; In "self and other" soon enough.
Do: Practice, practice, practice. Do not: Think, think, think.
Grasping of the eye, ear, nose, mouth, and tactile sensations are each a consciousness and aflame with skandha in each sense consciousness making six jealousy's to break the link... breaking the link of the eye skandhas is just one, consciousness conquered.
At least; Three rounds of birth and death are required to attain the fourth noble step into truth on the path.
The essence of: "Practice as if; One's head is on fire." Is a direct pointing to this.
When you are sitting in your grave; and Mara is tearing your hair out by the roots? Don't forget to smile.
"Whatever an enemy might do to an enemy, or a foe to a foe, the ill-directed mind can do to you even worse."
~Dhammapada
That quote is past tense from someone thus gone sharing their wisdom, worthy of gifts and offerings.
When you yourself find yourself alone in the grave and yet still living? And Mara after Mara of either "Body" "Speech" or "mind" is tearing your hair out by the roots; speaking or growling disembodied; Trying to possess your "precious human form"? As any ol' preta is apt to do? Do not forget; They only see humans as a vessel, an easy to conquer vehicle due to the three poisons the attachment is so strong in craving and desire for the three poisons; not having form? They only want yours as soon as you become untangled.


Who is ignorant and when does one realize that one is ignorant? Who is considered to be ignorant according to Buddhism? What does the term ignorance cover ? When does one realize, one is ignorant ?

Can one know nothing of ignorance and still become enlightened?

everyone who is subject to samsara or the round of rebirths is ignorant, because

  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.
  Fromc ontact 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.

Paticcasamuppadavibhanga sutta ( SN 12.2)

i think ignorance covers nescience of the phenomenon of suffering and the way of escape from it

  When does one realize, one is ignorant ?

perhaps once one realizes that they suffer while having no clue how to avoid that

  Can one know nothing of ignorance and still become enlightened?

i find this an interesting  question, my guess is 'NO', but i'm not sure i can explain why i think so and can't remember suttas which explain this point.
that's as far as awakening is concerned

as for nibbana i'm a bit more certain, just as suffering is effected by a  chain of causes, quoted above, so is nibbana, for example

  What is impermanent is suffering. What is suffering is nonself. What
  is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus:
  ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’
  When one sees this thus as it really is with correct wisdom, the mind becomes dispassionate and is liberated from the taints by nonclinging.
  By being liberated, it is steady;
  by being steady, it is content;
  by being content, he is not agitated.
  Being unagitated, he personally attains Nibbāna.

Anicca sutta (SN 22.45)

an aspirant needs to go through a series of stages of mind development to arrive at that destination and those cannot be bypassed

the first step in curing an illness is its acknowledgement

Can one know nothing of ignorance and still become enlightened?

This is a very big epistemological question.

Ignorance is the state of being unaware, or uninformed.

Enlightenment is the state of being informed.

Knowing ignorance or knowing nothing of ignorance are posited opposites of non-existent states. Probably the answer is no.

However; take the Rumsfeldian view of knowledge - there are known knowns, and known unknowns. We know that we know things, and we know there are things we don't know - these are the states of knowledge everyone understands. There could also be unknown knowns and unknown unknowns.  I have yet to imagine a scenario for  unknown unknowns  - that's like proving the existence of a negative / non-existent thing. Perhaps unknown unknown knowns.... ugh.

Stay with me- for the case of unknown knowns - there may be things we would know if we were made aware of the possibility they could be known. A case that comes to mind is say you have knowledge in one science that people in another field of science don't realize exists. Phlogiston perhaps or the ether. All I need to do is tell you the knowledge you are seeking exists in another field of science.  I don't say where and I don't say what.

Now you are in a state of knowing you are ignorant about that knowledge, and you may become enlightened.


what to do, when you can't meditate? I am meditating on a daily basis since a couple of months. I noticed having ups and downs in my meditation, probably mostly caused by the amount of sati or (on the other side) stress I had during the day.

But I am also experiencing sittings, where I am just overwhelmed by the hindrances and not even able to recognize them properly.

What is the best way to deal with these extreme states of mind (in meditation)?

You are certainly not alone. Sounds like what you describe is a situation I have been in many times.

In order to find more balance, I would stay sitting still and try to remember that I could just be with the tension, fuzzy lack of clarity, confusion, anger, desire for the practice to go my way and whatever else arises. Usually this would lead to a better practice session.

This problem is mainly about unbalanced   faculties. A good teacher can help yogis balance the faculties. A good teacher can be a wonderful help when yogis are tangled up like this.

I recommend you to download some musics like flow of water or chanting of om  or music with slow beats.And you try to meditate only by listening to the music and soon you will get the good concentration.


What does "break-up of the body after death" mean in the suttas? The Pali suttas, particularly in teachings about kamma, has the phrase: "at the break-up of the body after death".

Are there contexts other than kamma where this phrase is used?

What does "break-up of the body after death" actually mean in the suttas?

Are these words in the language of materialism?

Do they have a non-materialistic meaning?

"break-up of the body" refers to conventional death. It doesn't refer to instant death of experiences.

My answer:

The word 'kaya' means 'group' or 'collection'.

The word 'death' or 'marana' means the death of 'a being' ('satta'), which is a 'self-view', as stated in SN 23.2, SN 5.10 and SN 12.2.

For example, if a person gets drunk on alcohol, the body (rupa) & mind (nama) are made up of a certain & specific collection of aggregates & elements, such as alcohol in the blood & happy feelings & uninhibited thoughts. The drunk person or aggregates identifies with being drunk & dances & sings: "I am so happy. I love alcohol".

But when the alcohol wears off; this is the ending of the 'kaya' ('body'). This is 'death' of that state of 'being' or 'identity'.

The next day, the person or aggregates have a very bad headache from drinking alcohol and regret they drank alcohol. Here, a new 'being' ('satta' - illusion of self) takes birth in hell (suffering) because of the kamma of drinking alcohol.

Therefore, "break-up of the body after death" means the break-up of one collection of aggregates & the arising of another collection of aggregates, which also results in the death of a self-identity and birth of a new self-identity.

The is why the suttas say: "In laying down one body & taking up another body is blameworthy".

This is a knowable visible here & now and non-materialistic discernment.


Can one take rebirth as an insect? I have always wondered if insects belongs to the animal realm in Buddhism, and I have yet to read stories about rebirth as an insect, such as a butterfly, a mosquito, or a praying mantis.

According to Buddhism, rebirth can take one of four types:

Opapatika - spontaneous rebirth
Samsedaja - born or arisen from moisture
Andhaja - born in an egg, oviparous
Jalabuja born from a womb, viviparous

Most insects belong to the andhaja group, I think. But yes, as others have mentioned, insects are considered a potential realm of rebirth.

Examples from the texts:

Queen Upari (Ubbari)

  Persons favored by fortune enjoying privileges of wealth, family, education, rank, physical beauty etc., are prone to exhibit haughtiness in their dealings with others. Shrouded in their own vanity and self-esteem, they become neglectful in their performance of meritorious deeds. Humility plays no part in their make-up. The Blessed One had taught in the Cūḷakammavibhaṅga sutta that such vain-glorious, haughty persons are liable to land up in lowly inferior re-births. On the other hand, unpretentious persons who show humility and pay reverential respects to those deserving of homage will be reborn in noble families.

  Queen Upari of our story was extremely beautiful and being the chief queen of the ruling monarch was of very high status in life. She had her head turned by these pre-eminent qualities and looked down with contempt on those she should have shown her respects. For such unwholesome attitudes and actions, it may be presumed she was reborn a lowly female cowdung-beetle. On hearing this account of rebirth of his beloved queen as a female beetle, King Assaka promptly rejected it, saying "I don't believe it."

  The hermit replied, "I can show you the female beetle and make her talk too." The king said, "All right. Please do and make her talk too." The hermit using his supernatural powers of abhiññā made a vow for both the male and female beetles to make their appearance before the king.

  When the male and female beetles emerged from the heap of cowdung into the presence of the king, the hermit said, "Oh King, the female beetle which is following from behind was your chief queen Upari devi. Having abandoned you, she is now trailing the male cowdung-beetle wherever it goes. Oh King, have a good look at the female beetle who was lately your chief queen Upari."

  The king refused to believe the hermit. "I can't believe that such an intelligent being as my queen Upari was reborn as this female beetle", said the king.

  True, for those who do not quite believe in the laws of kamma and its resultant effect, who do not understand the principles of conditionality or causal relationship, as explained in Paṭiccasa-muppāda, it would be difficult to accept that a being of the human world should have gone down so low as to become a mere beetle. Even in these days of sāsanā when Buddha's teachings are widely prevalent, there are some people holding the view that "when man dies, he cannot descend into an existence inferior to that of a human being". So it is not surprising that during the dark ages when Buddha's dispensations were yet unheard of, such stories of incarnation were received with scepticism.

  http://static.sirimangalo.org/mahasi/Dhammacakkappavattana%20Sutta.htm

Ven. Tissa

  Tissa.-An Elder of Sāvatthi. He once received a length of coarse cloth as a gift and handed it to his sister to be made into a robe. She had the cloth pounded and spun into fine yarn and made of it a soft robe-cloth. At first Tissa would not accept it but was prevailed upon to do so and had it made into a soft robe by skilled robe-makers. He died on the night it was finished and, as a result of his fancy for it, was reborn as a louse in the robe. After his death, the monks wished to divide the robe but the louse started shouting. The Buddha, hearing this by his power of divine audience, asked the monks to lay the robe aside for seven days. At the end of that period, the louse was reborn in the Tusita world. DhA.iii.341ff.

  http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/t/tissa.htm

You are the whole you are the nature. You are the truth everything is connected with you.You cant die you can just change your body.


Dependent origin operating mind During  walking meditation it happens automatically,without any initiation.understanding of dependent  origin lead to fear of sansara. Is it the doer of the  mind cause upadana?

During walking meditation it happens automatically,without any initiation

There is an intention (Cetana) behind every movement in the walking meditation. If you look carefully it can be seen. There's e.g. an intention to lift the foot, move it, lower it, place it, etc. With practice one will begin to see intentions everywhere such as the intention to swallow, to blink, even behind a thought, there's an intention to think.
With consistent practice this part of reality will reveal itself.

Buddha did not talk about a doer. What he said was "Thanha pccaya Upadana" (craving is the cause for clinging)


Does Viññāṇa generate Nāmarūpa in the sense that would make "uploading concsciousness" impossible? Does Viññāṇa generate Nāmarūpa in the sense that would make "uploading concsciousness" to a computer impossible?

I was reading this question on philosophy.stack

I'd suspect that it's impossible to make sense of momentary rebirth / causal continuity in terms of computer data. Wouldn't every Buddhist say that pots and trees are mental constructions, so that, even if granted concrete reality, as in the Sarvastavadin school, they don't exist from moment to moment? A chariot's axle, for them, does not generate visual consciousness, only colour and shape do that. And so the same for computers.

But should the Buddhist claim it's not merely opaque but impossible, especially due to mind-body dualism? Does rebirth consciousness actually form the new body (and mind), in the 12 links of dependent origination? Because if it does, unless I've misunderstood 'consciousness', perhaps due to its coupling with 'rebirth', I don't see how anyone can claim that there is genuine continuity.

As surely my consciousness does not form the physical body of a computer: it's already been designed etc..

I don't understand the question. I just try to help. I write this answer by my guess the question's meaning.

The past (vanished) moment does not "upload" anything to the moment which it affects. It just causes its effect to arise. However, the effects are able to arise as the same habit, e.g. same object and same feeling, because of Upanissaya Paccaya.

The vanished moment is hypochondria. It cannot pass or upload anything to the future, although it still is able to cause new moment effects.

For example, I can smile when I thinking of my dead sister however she vanished and doesn't upload anything to me, she just causes me to smile.

If using the word "knowing", "recognize", classical words for vi (seeing) - ñāṇa (knowing), "knowing by sense", its possible all easier. Close the eye and open it. New "body", kaya, rūpa?

Maybe Why beings take birth, even in most worse existences and circumstances? is of help to understand inclination to food of what viññāṇaṃ is one sort.