Is kasina meditation and other such meditation techniques not found in the suttas (i.e. not taught by the Buddha) and only invented in the Visuddhimagga? Or does it have basis in the Pali suttas?

Wikipedia's Kalpa(aeon) in Buddhism article says, > In another simple explanation, there are four different lengths of kalpas. A regular kalpa is approximately 16 million years long (16,798,000 years<a href="/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FKalpa_%2528aeon%2529%23Buddhism" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">[1] <i class="fas fa-external-link-alt fa-xs"></i></a>), and a small kalpa is 1000 regular kalpas, or about 16 billion years. Further, a medium kalpa is roughly 320 billion years, the equivalent of 20 small kalpas. A great kalpa is 4 medium kalpas, or around 1.28 trillion years. I just went through the Visuddhimagga, and could not find where or how that time in years is calculated. I was wondering how to calculate it. Please explain how it's calculated, with reference to scripture where Lord Buddha mentioned it, and/or where the calculation or the result of the calculation is described, perhaps in the Thripitaka or Visuddhimagga? --- <a href="/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FKalpa_%2528aeon%2529%23Buddhism" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">[1] <i class="fas fa-external-link-alt fa-xs"></i></a> Wikipedia's reference is to a book: > Epstein, Ronald B.(2002). Buddhist Text Translation Society's Buddhism A to Z p. 204. Buddhist Text Translation Society. ISBN 0-88139-353-3, ISBN 978-0-88139-353-8. Perhaps that book may have a reference to where they found it, but I still haven't find that book.

Does anyone know of a good summary of the Visuddhimagga? Is "Loosening the Tangle" A meditator’s guide to the Visuddhimagga by Ian Rose a good summary?

I have heard it stated that vipassana can be practiced without samatha. Since samatha leads us to the early jhana factors of vitarka and vicara, how is it possible to do vipassana with wandering undirected and unsteady mind? "The Buddhist commentarial tradition, as represented by the contemporary Theravada, interprets vitarka and vicara as the initial and sustainted application of attention to a meditational object, which culminates in the stilling of the mind." - wikipedia ----> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitarka-vicara

Recently I happened to read the following review and comments about the book "The Broken Buddha." The Broken Buddha and its Implications The Broken Buddha: The revenge of the unfaithful monk > By Carl Stimson: > > The book is the work of Shravasti Dhammika, an > Australia-born man who ordained as a Theravada monk in 1976. It was > published in 2008, though as he states in the preface, most of it was > written several years earlier and he only decided to publish after an > “unauthorized draft” appeared online. I am unsure how much the > official version differs from this draft, but the text retains a rough > feel. At less than 80 pages, it is somewhere between long essay and > short book, and is at turns angry, funny, cutting, astounding, and, > unfortunately, sometimes poorly researched. For some, Bhante > Dhammika’s casual relationship with facts and tendency toward > generalization may limit their ability to take the thrust of his > arguments seriously. Both of them says most of the S. Dhammika's views are angry and and misleading. Is S. Dhammikas work poorly researched and baseless?

In Theravada, the Concepts are considered unreal ("person", "chariot" etc.). Then what about the "Concepts about Real" ("red", "perception")? Are they Concepts? or Real?

Who are the most knowledgeable Abhidhamma masters today? Where are the active Abhidhamma communities? - country - lineage - monastery - institute - teacher - group - website - forum

Why did Sakka steal the Visuddhimagga three times according to the legend -- was it because Visuddhimagga erroneously stated that it couldn't be done by a sotapanna?? Quoting from the Introduction to the English translation: > The reply was: 'I have come to translate the Buddha's Dispensation into Magadhan'. The senior elder told him, 'If so, then construe the Three Pitakas upon the text beginning "When a wise man, established well in virtue ..."'. He began the work that day, the stars being favourable, and wrote very quickly. When finished, he put it aside and went to sleep. Meanwhile Sakka Ruler of Gods abstracted the book. The elder awoke, and missing it, he wrote another copy very fast by lamplight; then he put it aside and slept. Sakka abstracted that too. The elder awoke, and not seeing his book, he wrote a third copy very fast by lamplight and wrapped it in his robe. Then he slept again. While he was asleep Sakka put the other two books beside him, and when he awoke he found all three copies. He took them to the senior elder and told him what had happened. When they were read over there was no difference even in a single letter. Thereupon the senior elder gave permission for the translating of the Buddha's Dispensation. From then on the elder was known to the people of Ceylon by the name of Buddhaghosa.

In a recent Buddhist Geeks podcast the presenter Bodhipaksa stated that by the time the Buddhagosa wrote the commentary Visuddhimagga in the 5th Century CE, meditation had been largely abandoned. He goes on to state that there is good evidence that 500 years previously Buddhist monks had given up meditation and felt the best they could do was to pass down the Buddhist texts to further generations. To what extent is this analysis of Buddhism true? Was meditation really not practiced for a large proportion of Buddhist history? If this is the case then when was meditation 'rediscovered' or at least reinvigorated?

According to Visuddhimagga, focusing on breath does't require repeating "inhalation, exhalation..." in mind (at least it seems that the book doesn't explicitly tell that) . However, the 10 Kasinas and the 10 foulness may need repetitive words in mind. For example: > "Anyone else should use that same kind of circle of luminosity just described, developing it as “luminosity, luminosity” or “light, light.”(Vm. The Remaining Kasinas.The Light Kasina) I think that the principle of the 10 Kasinas is focusing on concepts of meaning. So maybe repeating the concepts of word isn't necessary. Many modern experts also imply repeating words when meditating but give no further explanation.

What are the 7 Purifications in laymans terms and how is this practiced in daily life?

Some websites show that it is ideal to get 1.5 m distance between the person and the *kasina* object. Is there any science behind the recommendation to get that specific distance?

I came across the concept of Nirodha in the book The Meditative Mind by Daniel Goleman. I think it's originally from the Visuddhimagga . In the book it seems to be placed above Nirvana in the path of insight. I have never heard of this term anywhere else or ever heard of anything being above Nirvana. Does anyone have any details about what this is and why it would be placed above Nirvana.

The primary source for the 16 stages of insight (aka 7 stages of insight) is the Theravadan text, the Visuddhimagga . But do other, unrelated, sects of Buddhism have similar stages? (ie. Do other sects mention things that could be compared to the *dukkha nanas*?) You would think that separate sects of Buddhism, performing the same practices of meditation, would have encountered the same things, and so would have formed their own "maps". Did they? Or is it unique to the Theravadan tradition. And if that's the case, why?

From everywhere I've read and heard in the suttas they talk about the jhanas being needed for insight, but as I understand it the Visuddhimagga gives the option of dry insight not requiring the jhanas. Does anyone know what canonical source Buddhagosa was basing this on?

I found this statement in the Visuddhimagga; > They cannot come to be by their own strength, Or yet maintain themselves by their own strength; Relying for support on other states, Weak in themselves, and formed, they come to be; They come to be with others as condition. They are aroused by others as their objects, They are produced by object and condition, And each by something other than itself. And just as men depend upon A boat for traversing the sea. So does the mental body need The matter-body for occurrence. And as the boat depends upon The men for traversing the sea. So does the matter-body need The mental body for occurrence. Depending each upon the other The boat and men go on the sea. And so do mind and matter both Depend the one upon the other. The above statement seems to confirm that mind doesn't have occurrence without material body, and vise versa. Both factors are interdependent and seemingly co-exists. But, once, I heard that one's mind does't end at death of material body: how can that match with the above statement in the Visuddhimagga?

From what I understand in the suttas, unless you renounce the household life and desire almost entirely, chances are you won't eliminate the necessary fetters to achieve nibbana in this life. For someone who has to take care of a family, work a job, and be social, stream-entry seems like a more realistic goal, which is achieved through faith and virtue (AN 10.92, SN 55.7). Despite the importance of these topics, I can hardly find any instruction on cultivating faith and virtue outside of the suttas and Visuddhagga. Is interest in the devotional practices really so scarce?

Usually, the word enlightenment is not directly understandable; a newcomer might understand incorrectly. In the Visuddhimagga (Path to Purification, p. 6), Nibbana is illustrated as follows: > "Herein, purification should be understood as Nibbana, which being > devoid of all stains, is utterly pure." On page seven it is further explained as follows: > "Formations are all impermanent: When he sees thus with understanding > And turns away from what is ill, That is the path to purity" Are enlightenment and Nibbana the same? If so, does enlightenment mean achieving purity?

The knowledges(nanas) start at realizing mind and body. After the last knowledge, the practitioner goes back to realizing mind and body again? Is that correct? What is the difference between the first time realizing mind and body and the second time realizing mind and body?

In the Visuddhimagga, on the topic of *virtue*, there is a reference to the ten courses of action (kamma): > Furthermore, virtue as volition is the seven volitions [that accompany > the first seven] of **the [ten] courses of action (kamma)** in one who > abandons the killing of living things, and so on. Virtue as > consciousness-concomitant is the [three remaining] states consisting > of non-covetousness, non-ill will, and right view, stated in the way > beginning, “Abandoning covetousness, he dwells with a mind free from > covetousness” *(D I 71)*. I know the quote is taken out of context from the chapter, but I was just wondering about the ten courses of action (kamma), and their reference and significance?