Have to know before to read atthakathā

Tipiṭaka and atthakathā are keep by oral study system. So:

1. There are uncountable descriptions that atthakathā described in previous atthakathā and in visuddhimagga, so this atthakathā is not complete. This is the problem of reading study system, but is not a problem of reciting study system which is ancient method.
2. Original text in pāli-language is the best, easiest, and maximum performance way to learn tipiṭaka and atthakathā. The translation is just an alternative way.
3. Tipitaka-memorizer is very important qualification to be a teacher in atthakathā culture.
4. Each sutta and it's explanation must complete in itself, by the relation of words/sentence/paragraph. And they must be compatible with the other sutta by meaning.
• So, mostly atthakathā are not comment or opinion, but it is description. Because atthakathā describing the reference to prove the relation of each word in tipitaka. Mostly words of atthakathā has it's own reference from it's sutta context or the other sutta which is relating. Then sariputta and the other tipitaka memorizers use these relations to author their own canons, such as khuddakapātha, paṭisambhidāmagga, niddesa, abhidhamma, parivāra, netti, commentary, etc. In contrast, mostly comment or opinion words base on concepts, which mostly without reference.  So, mostly explanations in atthakathā are not just the comment, but it is the description.
5. Atthkathā-teachers are very serious to keep tipiṭaka as original. Changing anything in tipitaka is seriously denied by tipitaka and atthakathā.
6. There are 4 ages of atthakathā: 
1. 1st-saṅgāyanā-atthakathā (0BE), 
2. 2nd-3rd-saṅgāyanā-atthakathā (~100BE, ~218BE), 
3. siṅhala-atthakathā (450BE-900BE), modern-atthakathā (~950BE). 
4. The modern-atthakathā. This is the combined version of the other atthakathās, so nowadays just modern-atthakathā still available. But we can say the other atthakathās still going on in modern-atthakathā, because the modern-atthakathā composer, buddhaghosa,  swore to the mahāvihāra-saṅgha that he must did just translating and merging all atthakathā together. This swearing still appear in the introduction of every modern-atthakathā.
7. Modern-atthakathā were categorized very clear. The 1st-saṅgāyanā-atthakathā is the primary structure. When something in the other atthakathā is difference from the primary structure, it is added next to it with note mark, if is necessary, as an extension, such as "in pañcarī (siṅhala-atthakathā) wrote...", then the structure return to the primary structure again. Buddhaghosa's opinions are the same. So no any complication between each age of atthakathās that were combined in the modern-atthakathās.
8. Reading study system doesn't has good enough performance to understand tipiṭaka and atthakathā. Many misunderstanding in tipiṭaka and atthakathā come from reading. Because reading through often cross many syllable/word/sentence/paragraph/sutta/vagga/etc, but reciting is harder to cross.

Substitute of āṇisutta (6th sutta of purisavagga; AN 2.47)

48. Bhikkhus, there are two factions. What two? The obstinate faction, who never ask to understand clearly,  and the asking to understand clearly faction, who are not obstinate.

Bhikkhus, what is the obstinate faction, who never ask to understand clearly? Bhikkhus, when the suttantas, which is buddha's teaching, contained by profound word, profound meaning,  lokuttara, and emptiness-collection, are teaching,  herein fraction's bhikkhus  do not listen, not pay attention,  and thinking out of what listening. Also, they do not prioritize it to memorize and to learn. But when the suttantas, which is composed or authored by the poem-composer, in melodic syllables and words, out of buddha's teaching, teaching by that composer's disciple, herein fraction's bhikkhus listen, pay attention, thinking of what listening. Also, they prioritize it to memorize and to learn. After they learned it, they do not ask and answer with each other,  not go to ask, not seek the hidden detail of that suttanta "How to recite it? What is it's relation?", not clarify the unclear point of that suttanta, and not solve the doubt about the various question about that teaching.  Bhikkhus, this is the obstinate faction, who never ask to understand clearly.

Bhikkhus, what is the asking to understand clearly faction, who are not obstinate? Bhikkhus, when the suttantas, which is composed or authored by the poem-composer, in melodic syllables and letter, out of buddha's teaching, teaching by that composer's disciple, herein fraction's bhikkhus do not listen, not pay attention,  not thinking of what listening. Also, they do not prioritize it to memorize and to learn. But when the suttantas, which is buddha's teaching, contained by profound word, profound meaning,  lokuttara, and emptiness-collection, are teaching,  herein fraction's bhikkhus listen, pay attention,  and thinking of what listening. Also, they prioritize it to memorize and to learn. After they learned it, they ask and answer with each other,  go to ask, seek the hidden detail of that suttanta "How to recite it? What is it's relation?", clarify the unclear point of that suttanta,  and solve the doubt about the various question about that teaching.  Bhikkhus, this is the asking to understand clearly faction, who are not obstinate.

Bhikkhus, those are  two factions. Bhikkhus, the best faction, of those two factions, is the asking to understand clearly faction, who are not obstinate.

Cr. http://84000.org/tipitaka/read/roman_read.php?B=20&A=1820
Atthakathā: http://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/2018/02/substitute-of-anisutta-atthakatha-6th.html

Substitute of āṇisutta-atthakathā (6th sutta of purisavagga's atthakathā; AN 2.47)

Translation of this sutta: https://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/2018/02/substitute-of-anisutta-6th-sutta-of.html

Read first: Have to know before to read atthakathā. 

(Dark side:)
okkācitavinītā (obstinate) means who are stubborn.
no paṭipucchāvinītā (never ask to understand clearly) means who don't ask enough to understand clearly.
gambhīrā (profound word) means which is hard to understand of the pāli , such as MN cūḷavedallasutta, etc.
gambhīratthā (profound meaning) means which is hard to understand of the pāli's meaning, such as MN mahāvedallasutta, etc.
(tīkā: attha means meaning-to-meaning=causes-to-effects relation (sabhāva), the paragraph-to-paragraph relation (anusandhi), words' relation, and the pre-word-to-next-word relation. Tīkā described attha word follow to paṭisambhidāmagga. [learn pali-grammar, pali-naya, and netti-pakaraṇa for more information].)
lokuttarā means which refer to lokuttara (4 ariyamaggas 4 ariyaphalas 1 nibbāna).
suññatapaṭisaṃyuttā (emptiness-collection) means which is complex of no satta only dhamma, such as SN Asṅkhatasaṃyutta,( or in Abhi. Saṅ. Suññatavāra,) etc.
na aññācittaṃ upaṭṭhapenti (thinking out of what listening) means bhikkhus not pay attention of mind to listen, so he sleepy or thinking out of what listening.
uggahetabbaṃ pariyāpuṇitabbaṃ (to memorize and to learn) means uggahetabbe pariyāpuṇitabbe (=grammatical description).
kavikatā (composed by the poem-composer) means which composed by a composer. The other (authored by the poem-composer) word are just the synonyms of it.
cittakkharā (melodic syllables) come from cittara+akkharā (=vocabulary description, [citta=cittara]!=viññāṇa). The other word (melodic word) are just the synonyms of it.
bāhirakā (out of buddha's teaching) means which is out of buddha's teaching.
sāvakabhāsitā (teaching by that composer's disciple) means which is taught by that composer's disciple.
(Atthakathā explained sāvakabhāsitā like that because it is "kavikatā ... bāhirakā sāvakabhāsitā" in sutta's pāli. Also, bāhirakā means out of buddha's teaching, pariyatti/patipatti/pativeda, so every teaching, which still teaching perfectly about those 3 teaching of buddha, is not out of buddha's teaching, such as parivāra of upāli, paṭisambhidāmagga/abhidhamma of sāriputta, etc.)
sussūsanti (listen) means bhikkhus listen that teaching because they like the melodic syllables and melodic words.
na ceva aññamaññaṃ paṭipucchanti (do not ask and answer with each other) means bhikkhus don't ask (the tipitaka-memorizer) about the meaning-to-meaning relation, the paragraph-to-paragraph relation, and the pre-word-to-next-word relation.
na paṭivicaranti (not go to ask) means bhikkhus don't go to ask.
idaṃ kathaṃ (How to recite it?) means how should I recite this syllable? and what does pronounce this syllable?
imassa kvattho (What is it's relation?) means what is the meaning (relativity between causes and effects) of this teaching? What is the paragraph-to-paragraph relation of it? What is the word-to-word relation of it? (see: "attha" description by tika above for more information.)
avivaṭaṃ (the hidden) means which is hidden.
na vivaranti (not seek) means not showing.
anuttānīkataṃ (the unclear) means which is unclear.
na uttānīkaronti (not clarify) means do not clarify.
kaṅkhāṭṭhānīyesu (question) means about the objects of doubts.
The practitioner can understand the light side by the opposite meaning of all explanation above.

So, the translation of this sutta follow to the culture in tipitaka and atthakathā must be like this one:

Sudden enlightenment described in the suttas

Your question looks like the question "why the scientist can understand the relativity theory of Einstein, it is unbelievable!".

This is the reason why the theras told their story inside KN thera/therī-gāthā and KN thera-therī-apādāna at 1st saṅgāyanā of thera-vāda, because they want to let us know that they practiced themselves so long time ago more than you see their enlightened moment in sutta.

So, you and me, who have not enough practice-experience like those theras, still not enlighten after read many suttas.

For the present life answer see: https://unmixedtheravada.blogspot.com/2017/09/yugganaddha-patipada-abhinna-obhasa.html

Question:

A lot of suttas mention the case of sudden enlightenment, during the time of the Buddha. Do these cases speak only of stream-enterers, or can they even be full arahants?

For me it's unbelievable, that either others or I must simply (!!) understand impermanence, in order to become an arahant.

Thanks

The history of mātikā (nidāna)

Mātikā already described in the same canon after cittuppādakaṇḍa. This answer is for if you means abhidhamma is pāli-canons, too.

-------------------------

The modern professors never know the method to read tipiṭaka and atthakathā, so they can't found the mentions in tipitaka. They often distorts tipiṭaka and atthakathā. I am sorry. I just want to let you see the primary cause of your question, I don't want to slander them.

What is the method to read mātikā?

The history of mātikā (nidāna)

In atthakathā told mātika was described by sāriputta as 6 abhidhamma canons. Sāriputta memorized mātikā from buddha then he taught mātika and his mātikā's descriptions to his students, then his students recited them mātikā and it's descriptions as abhidhamma-piṭaka at 1st saṇgāyanā.

Who is sāriputta? Sāriputta is the best teacher like the buddha who exalted by the buddha in A.N. Ekakanipāta, Ekapuggalavagga. And many sutta showed that everyone in buddha's time respected in sāriputta's description, such as in MN Mahāgosiṅgasālasutta which every etadagga go to listen sāriputta's describing dhamma (and all of them were the most important theras in the 1st saṅgāyanā of thera-vāda, therefore it is impossible that the abhidhamma and the other sāriputta-literal canons not come in 1st saṅgāyanā).

So, if mātikā is really taught by sāriputta we must can find abhidhamma style dhamma in sāriputta's sutta, too.

And yes, I often found it. But the ancient western professors studied tipitaka and atthakathā by bias of the western religious problems. Therefore, they never found these important connection. So, the westerner still uneducated by the obstruction, bias.

You need the revolution to understand tipitka and atthakathā deeper. And that revolution is the using kālāmasutta in the ancient western professors' comments, be aware their books.

Why should one not address a venerable as friend?

Controlling the process lead to every goals

When the course of study are very hard to graduate, or when the work very hard to take the goals, the teacher/manager need the very strict & many enough rules to control the process work follow in the plan to goals.
The 7 goals of buddhism are the hardest job in the world: 1. keeping own advantage, 2. keeping social advantage, 3. keeping public advantage, 4. keeping present advantage, 5. keeping future advantage, 6 going to anupādisesa-nibbāna, 7. keeping the buddha's teaching for the public advantage in the future until 5,000 years old. This 7 goals appeared in many sutta, such as in 10 purposes of monastic legislation.
That is the reason why the buddha, the dhamma's manager, gave 91,805,036,000 rules, just in vinaya-pitaka, for the monks. Also, 63,000 dhamma-khandha in suttanta and abhidhamma, included āvuso/bhante in this question. I still not included their ancient commentary, which is larger than the present commentary.

Guru, teacher, means respect, doing hard

There are upajjhācāra-vatta for the student in VN mahāvagga, mahākhandhaka, which do service the teacher more than āvuso/bhante calling.

Student need intimacy and trust to learn the hardest teaching

I often see in the movie that when some student very respect to some professor, they will use "professor" word to call the professor.
Why? They realize that the professor will love them and give them all of his knowledge.
This is still going nowadays.

Teacher maybe not arahanta

Tipitaka allowed the un-enlightener, who graduated bhikkhuparisūpaṭṭhāpaka-course, to teach the new monk. So, he can hate/angry his student, because he is not anāgāmi-ariya. When the teacher bias like that, just a little impolite word can let him stop the teaching. When the teaching is not taught like that, the buddhism will go to the end.

All reason above connect together in kammṭṭhānagahaṇaniddesa

The path of purification, kammṭṭhānagahaṇaniddesa.

The right culture give the previous right master, the previous right master give the next right master

The explanation from the previous generation to the next generation, will specify the future.
If Einstein didn't describe his complicated formula, who can understand his complicated formula?
Tipitaka and commentary are very hard than Einstein's formula. Because even we understand Einstein's formula, we may not understand the whole concept of tipitaka and commentary, even tipitaka and commentary often said "the buddha taught very clear, very beautiful syntax". But why we still confuse in tipitaka and commentary meaning. Why?
Because we still not trust enough in the previous teacher, such as commentary--the tipitaka-memorizer, to learn from them step by step.
For the example of problem, nowadays, people believe in reading study system, then they try to read tipitaka and commentary by themselves. But tipitaka and commentary began in oral reciting study system. So when the readers try to read by themselves, they will miss many meaning and relativity of words/phrases/sentences/paragraphs/suttas/canons. Because reading study system and reciting study system are very difference in many dimension, such as structure, referencing, definition-doing, etc.
So, when the reader just read, they will miss many core of tipitaka and commentary.
How about the thailand in a book compare to thailand in travelling? Is the travelling give the traveler deeper dimensions, right? That is the difference between just the reading and the reality experience. Reading can give you a summary of tipitaka and commentary, but reciting can give the deeper information, quicker understanding, easier study, and more.
This is the reason why the monks still keep the oral study system follow ordering of buddha in vinaya-pitaka, through 2600 years. It doesn't mean we
just only recite follow the order, but actually we found the truth that reciting study system is the better way to study tipitaka and commentary. For the example, thailand discarded reciting study system about 100 years ago in colony war, today I have to ask the very deep question about pāli canon from burmese master, which the reciting study system still going on, because no one in present thailand can understand my question with my description, even my teacher who already read the whole translated tipitaka and commentary. But the burmese pali tipitaka memorizer who study from his previous teacher, can understand my question without any description.
why? The right culture give the previous right master, the previous right master give the next right master, which thai loose them 100 years ago.

Question:

Here is a quote from MN 26:

One, standing up to greet me, received my robe & bowl. Another spread out a seat. Another set out water for washing my feet. However, they addressed me by name and as 'friend.'
So I said to them,

'Don't address the Tathagata by name and as "friend." The Tathagata, friends, is a worthy one, rightly self-awakened. Lend ear, friends: the Deathless has been attained. I will instruct you. I will teach you the Dhamma.

I can understand why the Tathagata might not be addressed by name; but why not as "friend"?
Perhaps similarly, from the Maha-parinibbana Sutta:

And, Ananda, whereas now the bhikkhus address one another as 'friend (āvuso)', let it not be so when I am gone. The senior bhikkhus, Ananda, may address the junior ones by their name, their family name, or as 'friend'; but the junior bhikkhus should address the senior ones as 'venerable sir (āyasmā)' or 'your reverence (bhante)'.

What's the need for, what's the benefit of, the "reverent" form of address? Or what's the harm, if any, in the "friendly" mode of address?
If you can, I'd appreciate answers:

• From canonical sources (e.g. suttas or commentary)
• From post-canonical sources (e.g. later, or modern, articles or dhamma talks)
• From personal experience
• and/or which apply to lay people (when addressing monks, or teachers or other venerables)

---

Edit:
I think that ruben202's answer is ample evidence that it is so, in the culture and in the suttas and other scriptures.
I'm not sure I understand why, though. For example:

• A venerable is a friend -- or are they not?
• Is the behaviour (or mode of address) mere ritual?
• Is there said to be a benefit, some purpose, some effect: for society, for the individual's state of mind or karma, or even for the venerable?

I imagine one benefit may be orderliness in the classroom: giving the venerable an opportunity to speak; another benefit is that it might be somehow associated with "faith" (i.e. being willing to listen without yet knowing); is another obedience for some good reason?
The whole question seems to me a bit associated with some identity-view and so thicket-of-views.
The only answer I can think of is a reference to the sutta (reference required) where the Buddha said that people need some teacher or leader, and he (having none) would take the Dhamma as his -- but that's speculation, whereas I'm asking for answers based on references or experience.

cr. https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/25218/why-should-one-not-address-a-venerable-as-friend/25220#25220

Is luminous (pabhassa­ra­-citta) mind unconditioned and not impermanent?

Actually, no. Because pabhassa­ra­-citta must arise. Because if pabhassa­ra­-citta will never arise, it can't be defiled by incoming defilements which will arise to defile it, too.
Citta, viññāṇa, mano are the synonym of each other in SN Nidānavagga, assutavasutta:

“But, bhikkhus, as to that which is called ‘mind(citta)’ and ‘mentality(mano)’ and ‘consciousness(viññāṇa)’ —the uninstructed worldling is unable to experience revulsion towards it, unable to become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it.

So, pabhassa­ra­-citta is conditioned (sankhara) and impermanent (anicca) by SN Khandhavagga, Aniccasutta:

consciousness is impermanent.

Therefore, paphassara-citta is included in one synonym of citta In abhidhamma, dhammasaṅgiṇī, kusalacittuppādakaṇṭa:

The citta which is arising while the occation (that 1st wholsome citta is arising) means citta, mano, mānasa, hadaya, paṇḍara (paphassara), mano, manāyatana, manindriya, viññāṇa, viññāṇa-khandha, and tajjā manoviññāṇadhātu — this is the citta which is arising while the occation.
(Translated version is not correct, so I did not quote from that. I have to translate myself.)

A concentrated monk discerns things as they actually are?

It depend on your theravāda-tipitaka culture skill. Your question begin from reading study system. Although you trust in abhidhamma and commentary, but the question still going on. Because the reading let you lose many tipitaka culture which is require to access the tipitaka's content.

Samādhiṃ bhikkhave bhāvetha . samāhito bhikkhave bhikkhu Yathābhūtaṃ pajānāti .
Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk (not meditating concentration monk) discerns things as they actually are present.

Also, in abhidhamma, 3 characterizes are concepts, paññatti, too. 6th's and 8th jhāna's objects are reality, too. Another, both jhāna-mind and vipassana-mind must be arising with paññā.
So, it doesn't means paññā can understand only reality, but it means paññā understanding both the concept-object, such as 3 characterizes or jhāna-object, and the reality-object, such as 5 aggregates and nibbāna, as each object is.
But the main object of each meditation is difference. The vipassanā-meditation require the reality-object as the main object, because 3 characterizes are the concepts of reality-object, 5 aggregates in paṭiccasamuppāda cycle.
Therefore, the vipassanā practitioner require reality-object to understand the 3 characterizes concept.
Note: most of sources from the path of purification, concentration meditation chapter, and abhidhammatthasaṅgaha 8th/9 chapters. You can require me the pāli, if the translation version is not understandable enough.

---

The concept, paññatti, is almost the hardest part of tipitaka. I try to explain it to everyone. But just the jhāna&vipassanā-teachers in tipitaka-memorizer-school, such as pa-auk forest monastery, can understand it. After you understand the concept, paññatti, you will receive the actually open-mind, which is very important tool to destroy 3 below saṅyojana.
Another, no translation good enough for me, included my translation, because no just one translation can keep the whole tipitaka's meaning.

---

The question:

Samadhi Sutta (Concentration) [Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.] “Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns things as they actually are present...
Is this an accurate translation of this part of the sutta? Isn't seeing things as they are mindfulness territory or mindfulness and concentration territory?
My understanding is that a strongly concentrated monk usually focuses on concepts not actual reality. When one concentrates on reality as it is(reality without concepts) then it's difficult to get strong concentration but when one concentrates on a concept that doesn't move around and is more stable than actual impermanent reality then the concentrated monk can reach those great blissful jhana states.
Only meditation of reality will lead one to the understanding of reality or panna.
I don't know but it kinda sounds like this translation is implying that concentration always shows one reality as it actually is but usually, concentration meditation involves one pointed attention on one concept not reality as it is.
The kind of concentration that is usually used for "seeing things as they are" is khanika samadhi or momentary concentration. This kind of concentration is used in Satipathana Vipassana meditation. It's like one pointed concentration only when a distraction comes, the distraction becomes the new focus until the distraction falls then it's back to the original focus that is often the sensation breath as it happens, moment by moment.

Householder and renunciation equanimity in saḷāyatanavibhaṅgasuttaṃ and mahāsatipaṭṭthānasutta

Question:

The thirty-six states (6 x 6 classes of contact) to which beings are attached are described in Salayatana-vibhanga Sutta; I have made a caricature while reading each state as below, states 1, 2, 4 & 5 are easy to understand, however, I'm straggling to clearly identify the two type of equanimity and how they differ.
Quoted below is the definition given for each equanimity states in the Sutta, but it’s not clear to me how the foolish deluded householder equanimity is any different from the other. How do these two people react to a given situation?
I will give an example for the householder equanimity and If possible please try to use the same situation to represent the state of the renunciation equanimity and if possible beyond renunciation equanimity (atammayata) in which there is no act of intention, not even the intention underlying equanimity is said to be present.
For example, a householder loses his beloved son or a wife he could reason and say ‘I know I was only in love with a mortal and what has happened is natural’ and he remains calm without suffering. This equanimity, I take it, doesn’t go beyond form. With a wide open eye as I caricatured his state, he looks into pain and pleasure even death with equanimity without reasoning beyond form. Let them change he is just looking.
Many thanks.

"And what are the six kinds of household equanimity? The equanimity that arises when a foolish, deluded person — a run-of-the-mill, untaught person who has not conquered his limitations or the results of action 2 & who is blind to danger [3] — sees a form with the eye. Such equanimity does not go beyond the form, which is why it is called household equanimity. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.)
"And what are the six kinds of renunciation equanimity? The equanimity that arises when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — one sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change: This equanimity goes beyond form, which is why it is called renunciation equanimity. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.)
"And what is equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity? There is equanimity with regard to forms, equanimity with regard to sounds...smells...tastes...tactile sensations [& ideas: this word appears in one of the recensions]. This is equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity.
"And what is equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness? There is equanimity dependent on the dimension of the infinitude of space, equanimity dependent on the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... dependent on the dimension of nothingness... dependent on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. This is equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness.

Answer:

There is nothing difference between equanimity, but the difference appear in householder and renunciation.
Don't judge a book by its cover.
For your example: the 3rd and 6th case react the same action. But one by unwholesome mind, another by wholesome mind. That's the difference.
However, because of the very difference between the mind factors of them. If the householder equanimity person doesn't try to fake, lie. He react by most of these mind factors: lobha, dosa, moha, diṭṭhi, māna, issa, macchariya, uddhacca, kukucca, vicikicchā,ahiri, anottappa, thīna, middha.
However, the wholesome action can react like that, too, such as the householder equanimity fall to sleep by thīna and middha. But the renunciation equanimity fall to sleep by sati-sampajañña. The householder equanimity may show or not their sleepy action. But the renunciation equanimity must not. However, the renunciation equanimity may have the tired-action which is physical, but it may looks like the physical action by thīna and middha as well.
So, don't judge a book by its cover.

---

Gehasita feeling (householder feeling; gehasita=with lobha) means the feeling going together with attaching the 12 āyatana, and 6 contacts (18 manopavicāra). The feeling and attaching are called taṇhā (samudayasacca;caving) and 18 manopavicāra are called 18/60 piyarūpa/sātarūpa in MN Mūlapaṇṇāsaka, mahāsatipaṭṭthānasutta.
Nekkhammasita feeling (renunciation equanimity; nekkhamma=without lobha) means the feeling going without attaching the 12 āyatana, and 6 contacts (18 manopavicāra). The feeling and non-attaching are called nekkhamma-sammāsaṅkappa (right thought in maggasacca) which appear in nirodha-sacca of MN Mūlapaṇṇāsaka, mahāsatipaṭṭthānasutta. as attachment cessation from 18/60 piyarūpa/sātarūpa.

(the kehasita = taṇhā-paṭiccasamuppāda)
And what, bhikkhus, is the dukkha-samudaya ariyasacca? It is this taṇhā leading to rebirth, connected with desire and enjoyment, finding delight here or there, that is to say: kāma-taṇhā, bhava-taṇhā and vibhava-taṇhā.
...
(6 inner-āyatana-paṭiccasamuppāda)
The eye ... ear ... nose ... tongue ... Kāya ... Mana in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(rūpa-paṭiccasamuppāda; 6 inner-āyatana-paṭiccasamuppāda's objects; outer-āyatana)
Visible forms ... Sounds... Smells ... Tastes ... Bodily phenomena ... Dhammas in the world are pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(6 viññāṇa-paṭiccasamuppāda)
The eye-viññāṇa ... ear-viññāṇa .. tongue-viññāṇa ... Kāya-viññāṇa ... Mana-viññāṇa in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(phassa-paṭiccasamuppāda)
The eye-samphassa ... ear-samphassa ... nose-samphassa ... tongue-samphassa ... Kāya-samphassa ... Mana-samphassa in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(vedanā-paṭiccasamuppāda)
The vedanā born of eye-samphassa... vedanā born of ear-samphassa ... vedanā born of nose-samphassa ... vedanā born of tongue-samphassa ... vedanā born of kāya-samphassa ... vedanā born of mana-samphassa in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(nāma-paṭiccasamuppāda)
The saññā of visible forms ... saññā of sounds ...saññā of odors ... saññā of tastes ...saññā of bodily phenomena ... saññā of Dhammas in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(kamma-bhava-paṭiccasamuppāda; saṅkhāra-paṭiccasamuppāda)
The intention [related to] visible forms ... intention [related to] sounds ... intention [related to] odors ... intention [related to] tastes ... intention [related to] bodily phenomena ... intention [related to] dhammas in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(kehasita taṇhā)
The taṇhā for visible forms in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The taṇhā for sounds .. odors ... tastes ... bodily phenomena ... dhammas in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
[Mana = vitakka in saḷāyatana-vibhaṇgasutta because of upavicāra (vicāra often appear with vitakka), sammā-saṅkappa(right vitakka), and miccha-saṅkappa (wrong vitakka). So, the context force us to translate mana(of mana-upavicāra) as vitakka in saḷāyatana-vibhaṇgasutta]
(kehasita vitakka; kehasita mano)
The vitakka of visible forms in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The vitakka of sounds in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The vitakka of odors in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The vitakka of tastes in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The vitakka of bodily phenomena in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The vitakka of dhammas in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles.
(kehasita upavicāra)
The vicāra of visible forms in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. The vicāra of sounds ... odors ... tastes ... bodily phenomena ... dhammas in the world is pleasant and agreeable, there taṇhā, when arising, arises, there when settling, it settles. This is called, bhikkhus, the dukkha·samudaya ariyasacca.
(See nirodhasacca-niddesa in the same way for nekkhammasita)
(Below word "saṅkappa" ofthen use "vitakka" instead in variant sutta, so this is nekkhammasita-vitakka)
And what, bhikkhus, are sammāsaṅkappas? Those, bhikkhus, which are saṅkappas of nekkhamma, saṅkappas of abyāpāda, saṅkappas of avihiṃsā, those are called, bhikkhus, sammāsaṅkappas.

This is not good enough explanation for abhidhammist, abhidhamma has more detail than I told above, but I think it is enough for you.

Sutta that says to do mindfulness in a slow manner

Question:

I remember that I once read a sutta by the buddha where he mentioned to do things slowly while being mindful in order to recognize each step. Any ideas which sutta it could be?

Answer:

There is no sutta or commentary which taught to meditate slowly. The action speed depends on the practitioner skill level, some uneducated practitioner (may be) need to action slow.

But there are many sutta taught to meditate in order. And There are some commentary which have the example of the practitioner who always repeatedly his action when he forget to meditate mindfulness.

However, when we begin to do some very hard new thing carefully, mindfully. we will be automatic slow down ourselves. Because if we do it over fast we will cross the step, mistake the practice's sequences.

There is nothing permanent, if the electron still go around the nucleus and the proton&neutron still require that electron.

Well now one could argue that you can enjoy something which is impermanent and not get attached to it, but that is never really mentioned in the suttas.. it's not about enjoying but always to renounce.

It is impossible. Because every enjoying in impermanent stuff is attachment.

---

There is nothing permanent, if the electron still go around the nucleus and the proton&neutron still require that electron. Because electron are impermanent and what depending on the impermanent stuff, it is impermanent as well.
So, if you try to risk yourself by your wrong logic, it's fine. But the imprudent attitude can't change the buddhist prudent attitude. We don't want to risk with you. We want the peace, the permanent, the stable, and real happiness without any risk/posibile suffering/possible problem anyway.

---

You inclined to be capitalism, materialism, eternalism, and annihilationism, which all were called micchā-diṭṭhi.
So, when someone has micchā-diṭṭhi, misunderstanding the causes and effects, it means that one has sakkāyadiṭṭhi, sīlabataparāmāsa, and vicikicchā.
Therefore, one can doubt, vicikicchā, in the result of wholesome action, then act the illegal or immoralness, sīlabataparāmāsa.
That sīlabataparāmāsa is a very risk to cause the very painful feeling, such as the rob who killed by the law or the stuff owner. It is not just the rob's painful, it is his family painful as well.

---

question:

Why must someone strive for something which is everlasting, e.g. Nirvana? It is unfortunate if everything is impermanent but I think this is a mistake, a false conclusion, that you shouldn't be attached to anything which is impermanent. It is not 100% awful if everything is fleeting. One doesnt need to cling to a belief that there is something which lasts forever. Did anyone come to the idea that everyone cling to the buddha and the idea of liberation?
Well now one could argue that you can enjoy something which is impermanent and not get attached to it, but that is never really mentioned in the suttas.. it's not about enjoying but always to renounce. Now, I thing that it's not good to base one's goal PRIMARLY to self oriented ones, i.e. only achieving enlightenment. I know that this is not a good motivation and that one rather focus on others or on much measureable goals like.. meditating twice per day or showing forgiveness or to apologize for one's wrongdoings.. Agreed on that? I think you all do but still the main goal in Buddhism is to escape Samsara and the cycle(s) of rebirth. Which leads to my second question:
Does one practise metta just for the sake to cleanse one's karma, for the wish that the other escapes samsara (which is ok if one literally - and not metaphorically - believes in it) and to not being reborn in this - im sorry - "mess" yet again?
I think, it is better to stick to an agnostic "i don't know" attitude concerning rebirth, samsara, nirvana or rather reinterprates them than to greedily chase for liberation which is just another craving and could foster laziness, selfishness and everything which is contrary to the teachings.

How to explain metta meditation phrase by yourself

Question:

Metta phrases about safety in ancient and modern times

Background

I've been practicing with metta phrases adapted from the Visuddhimagga, and i've seen the same thing in other places: Part of the meditations focuses on safety, which is perhaps not as relevant in our modern world where we are better protected from physical injury than in the ancient times
(Example: "May i be safe and free from injury")

Question

I'd like to find an alternative to metta mediation phrases related to physical safety so that the phrases that i practice with are more relevant to me and others

What i've found so far

So far i've been thinking about maybe exchanging phrases about physical safety to mental/emotional safety, or a feeling/perception of safety. In our modern society many people are suffering from anxiety

Answer: 

Your understanding in that phrase is lacking. So if you practice your understanding up more level, nothing is necessary to change or to request, because you can notice the explanation by yourself, after you recite nd recite the briefed phrase.

1st reason

Many phrases in tipitaka, abhidhamma, and commentary were taught in brief for easily memorizing of the practitioner, because in ancient theravāda tradition we orally memorize our kammaṭṭhāna-phrase before we meditate follow it.
So, what you want to do, the explanation of the brief phrase, is what the practitioners generally do in every meditation types. We do it until the meditation will be level up.
Also, this is the reason that why we already have the abhidhamma and ancient commentary in buddha time, too. Because in buddha period, there has not just the educated people who can enlighten at the fist time ever they listened dhamma. But there also has too many uneducated people who cannot understand and cannot enlighten, too. So they need the very deep explanation, which sāriputta had to answer to them because the buddha promoted him as the teacher of enlightenment in AN ekakanipāta ekapuggalapāli, such as appeared in M.N. mūlapaṇṇāsaka mahāgosiṇgasālasutta which every etadagga go to sāriputta's home to listen the very deep dhamma (the explanation) from him.

2rd reason

So, what you need will appear after you recite and recite the memorized ancient phrase again and again (parikamma).
For the example: when you secondly recite "May I be safe", the "your trying-to-safe-your-self effort" will little by little appear to you, such as when you try the vegan food to avoid ass injure by a hard shit, the secondly recited word will appear to you "this is what I recited 'May I be safe', this is giving happiness to my self, then I should do this giving to the other to meditate mettā", etc.

3nd reason

"Mettā to practitioner self" is just a preparation, it is not meditation.
In the path of purification, loving kindness meditation section, wrote:

when the practitioner doesn't know how to mettā, he should mettā to himself, before meditate mettā follow the tipitaka. "May I be happy, free from suffering hatred, difficulties, and troubles, and may I live in happiness!"

It is because the uneducated practitiner can easily notice giving-happiness-to-himself mind by this way. When he know what is mettā, then he can let the giving-happiness-to-the-others mind arise.
Read pāli cannon in pāli language is better, I recommend.

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu metta description conflict with traditional mettā meditation

Question:

I'm a beginner and I'm studying (and trying to practice) both meditation on breathing and mettā meditation, and in the book Anapanasati by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, which i'm following with some initial success, when dealing with preliminaries and false views, it is said:
"[...] Some forms of "radiating loving kindness" are phrased in an amusing way, for instance: "May I be happy, free from suffering hatred, difficulties, and troubles, and may I live in happiness!" This really reflects fear and self love on the part of the speaker. How could a person with such a weak mind ever put forth the effort necessary to realize impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and non-selfhood? With this kind of ritual he will only disturb his mind all the more. [...]"
Now, i think almost every book and guide on mettā I've read suggests phrases like the one took as example in the above cited text. For example in Brahmavihara Dhama by Ven. Sayadaw it is suggested the phrase "May i be happy and free from misery" and similars. So the above mentioned paragraph confused me a bit. Do the Buddhadasa teachings conflict with traditional mettā practice? What view of things should a beginner follow, between these? Thanks in advance!

Answer:

Do the Buddhadasa teachings conflict with traditional mettā practice?

Yes, he did, because he is a unusually argumentative regard to commentary and abhidhamma. His quote is in visuddhimagga. So, he againt it.

What view of things should a beginner follow, between these?

The uneducated beginner should follow the traditional mettā practice, because it is easier to understand "what is mettā".
So in the path of purification, loving kindness meditation section, wrote:

when the practitioner doesn't know how to mettā, he should mettā to himself, before meditate mettā follow the tipitaka. "May I be happy, free from suffering hatred, difficulties, and troubles, and may I live in happiness!"

It is because the uneducated practitiner can easily notice giving-happiness-to-himself mind by this way. When he know what is mettā, then he can let the giving-happiness-to-the-others mind arise.

Bhal­li­kādi­sutta

TIPITAKA Volume 22 : PALI ROMAN
Sutta Pitaka Vol 14 : Sutta. Aṅ. (3): pañcaka-chakkanipātā
120–​139. Bhal­li­kādi­sutta
“Chahi, bhikkhave, dhammehi samannāgato bhalliko gahapati … pe … sudatto gahapati anāthapiṇḍiko … citto gahapati macchi­kāsaṇḍiko … hatthako āḷavako … mahānāmo sakko … uggo gahapati vesāliko … uggato gahapati … sūrambaṭṭho … jīvako komārabhacco … nakulapitā gahapati … tavakaṇṇiko gahapati … pūraṇo gahapati … isidatto gahapati … sandhāno gahapati … vicayo gahapati … vijayamāhiko gahapati … meṇḍako gahapati … vāseṭṭho upāsako … ariṭṭho upāsako … sāraggo upāsako tathāgate niṭṭhaṅgato amataddaso amataṃ sacchikatvā iriyati.

There are 6 elements being inside bhalliko gahapati...pe... sudatto gahapati anāthapiṇḍiko … citto gahapati macchi­kāsaṇḍiko … hatthako āḷavako … mahānāmo sakko … uggo gahapati vesāliko … uggato gahapati … sūrambaṭṭho … jīvako komārabhacco … nakulapitā gahapati … tavakaṇṇiko gahapati … pūraṇo gahapati … isidatto gahapati … sandhāno gahapati … vicayo gahapati … vijayamāhiko gahapati … meṇḍako gahapati … vāseṭṭho upāsako … ariṭṭho upāsako … sāraggo upāsako

, who completely decided (to faith) in tathāgata, saw amata (no death=nibbāna), and enlightened amata then living.

Katamehi chahi? Buddhe aveccap­pasā­dena, dhamme aveccap­pasā­dena, saṃghe aveccap­pasā­dena, ariyena sīlena, ariyena ñāṇena, ariyāya vimuttiyā. Imehi kho, bhikkhave, chahi dhammehi samannāgato sāraggo upāsako tathāgate niṭṭhaṅgato amataddaso amataṃ sacchikatvā iriyatī”ti.

How about 6 elements?

1. (Perfect) trusting without doubt in buddhā.
2. (Perfect) trusting without doubt in dhamma.
3. (Perfect) trusting without doubt in saṅghā.
4. Ariya's sīla (noble one's morality).
5. Ariya's ñāṇa (noble one's understanding).
5. Ariya's vimutti (noble one's liberation).

Those are 6 elements being inside sāraggo upāsako, who completely decided (to faith) in tathāgata, saw amata (no death=nibbāna), and enlightened amata then living.

pāli: http://84000.org/tipitaka/pitaka_item/r ... 8&items=14