Does freedom from birth and death mean there is no freedom to experience birth and death without desire? As I understand the cycle of birth and death produces suffering but ,once the truth is realized, there is no suffering ,so living in this world shouldn't be any longer a problem .So is freedom from birth and death here mean only that there is no binding to the cycle or that there is no longer a possibility of experiencing the cycle forever ?.
This may induce another question if one can be reborn fully aware of the truth ,if that is no-longer a possibility then how can this be considered true freedom ?.

Existence is suffering. Cessation of existence is a realization of the truth of the cessation of suffering.

“Just as, mendicants, even a tiny bit of fecal matter still stinks, so too I don’t approve of even a tiny bit of continued existence, not even as long as a finger snap.” AN1.329

“One perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ Just as, when a fire of twigs is burning, one flame arises and another flame ceases, so one perception arose and another perception ceased in me: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna; the cessation of existence is nibbāna.’ On that occasion, friend, I was percipient: ‘The cessation of existence is nibbāna.’” AN10.7

When you say;

the cycle of birth and death produces suffering but ,once the truth is realized suffering has no power ,so living in this world shouldn't be any longer a problem.

You are slipping by the definition of suffering as all conditioned phenomena;

Monks, there are these three kinds of suffering.[1] What three? Suffering caused by pain,[2] suffering caused by the formations (or conditioned existence),[3] suffering due to change.[4] It is for the full comprehension, clear understanding, ending and abandonment of these three forms of suffering that the Noble Eightfold Path is to be cultivated..." SN45.165

Even the existence of what can be grasped with wrong view to be an Arahant or personal and belonging to an Arahant, that is classed as suffering.
The Arahants are disenchanted with suffering and thus with the breakup of the body do not take up another body and their consciousness does not become established in any sphere of existence, they abandon all being;

These two Nibbāna-elements were made known
By the Seeing One, stable and unattached:
One is the element seen here and now
With residue, but with the cord of being destroyed;
The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease.

Having understood the unconditioned state,
Released in mind with the cord of being destroyed,
They have attained to the Dhamma-essence.
Delighting in the destruction (of craving),
Those stable ones have abandoned all being. Iti44

Existence is a truth and it's cessation is also a true principle to be realized and when known as it actually is, it is known to be the highest bliss also called Asoka [Sorrowless] state.

It's hard to see the unaffected,
for the truth is not easily seen.
Craving is pierced
in one who knows;
For one who sees,
there is nothing. Ud8.2

Cessation of the conditioned depends on the unconditioned element, if there was no unconditioned then the cessation principle wouldn't be possible.

There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished,[1] unevolving, without support .[2] This, just this, is the end of stress. Ud8.1

There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned. [Ud8.3] (https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.03.than.html)

When cessation principle is realized it is known as pleasant and any existence in the light of it is categorically known as suffering.
It is as if a tired person was offered a seat just to have that seat pulled out from underneath him, not knowing better, might think; 'This good person is offering me a seat out of kindness, why don't i accept?'. So he accepts, time and again, not understanding as it actually is, that it is out of cruelty and for the purpose of suffering that he is offered a seat.
If later the tired person the was offered a stable relief then he would discern the cruelty in what was previously offered and if offered to take a seat would pass on the offer, discerning the deal as suffering.
Therefore the mind of one who has realized the cessation principle realizes the truth of suffering, the truth of arising of suffering, the truth of it's cessation & the path to the cessation; and thus inclines to Nibbana which is the utter extinguishment of the conditioned & of the causes which beget the conditioned existence.

There he said to the monks, "This Unbinding is pleasant, friends. This Unbinding is pleasant."
When this was said, Ven. Udayin said to Ven. Sariputta, "But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?"
"Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt. AN9.34

Now it's possible, Ananda, that some wanderers of other persuasions might say, 'Gotama the contemplative speaks of the cessation of perception & feeling and yet describes it as pleasure. What is this? How can this be?' When they say that, they are to be told, 'It's not the case, friends, that the Blessed One describes only pleasant feeling as included under pleasure. Wherever pleasure is found, in whatever terms, the Blessed One describes it as pleasure.'" MN59


Tips for negotiation from Buddhism What are the teachings from Pali canon on negotiation in a business or social context? I have read tips such as not to make a false negative attitude on someone's property and acquire it. It is a form of stealing. Or sometimes the buyer will make techniques not to pay the real value. It is also a form of stealing according to Buddhist texts. So my concern is on how to negotiate on things/price such that all the parties involved get happy. I will be really grateful for an answer with some references from Pali Canon or from the teachings of a Buddhist scholar. Thanks in advance.

In the Sigalovada Sutta the Buddha gives the following advice regarding wealth creation

He who acquires his wealth in harmless ways
like to a bee that honey gathers,
riches mount up for him
like ant hill's rapid growth

So the bee gains from the flower and the flower remains as radiant as ever after the bee has visited. The bee doesn't just buzz off leaving the flower an absolute wreck. From that I would suggest that the important point is that during the negotiation neither party is harmed at the end. Negotiation is a part of business and a part of life that many lay followers must engage in but nevertheless it is an activity that should not cause harm.
As an aside, Bhikkhu Basnagoda Rahula's book The Buddha's teaching on Prosperity gives much more of the Buddhas advice on wealth and wealth creation which you may find interesting.


Science, the largest current religion, is it truth or does one follow actually on blind faith? From a Dhammic perpective of truthfulness: wouldn't, isn't following science preaching totally based on blind faith with no personal prove?
And isn't the non changing of the truth of suffering, the fact of being still dependend, not free, actually a proof that, althought putting it's advices into action, they hardly bring ever the actually desired effect?
[ Note that this isn't given for stacks, exchange, cyber-sex, unskilful entertainment of notions of identifications, or what ever world-binding trade but to get pregnant with the seed of release]

Science is not a religion, it is a method. Science does not "preach", has no hierarchy, ultimate authorities, dogmas, axioms, faith, nor any principle or concept that cannot be questioned and criticized. Any student is free to prove his teacher wrong. In fact, science values being proven wrong as much as being proven right, as both indicate the direction of further inquiry. Science goes where the evidence takes us, not where we would prefer the path to go.
In this regard, science is similar to these words from the Kalama Sutra:

Do not believe anything on mere hearsay.
Do not believe in traditions merely because they are old and have been handed down for many generations and in many places.
Do not believe anything on account of rumors or because people talk a a great deal about it.
Do not believe anything because you are shown the written testimony of some ancient sage.
Do not believe in what you have fancied, thinking that, because it is extraordinary, it must have been inspired by a god or other
wonderful being.
Do not believe anything merely because presumption is in its favor, or because the custom of many years inclines you to take it as true.
Do not believe anything merely on the authority of your teachers and priests.
But, whatever, after thorough investigation and reflection, you find to agree with reason and experience, as conducive to the good and
benefit of one and all and of the world at large, accept only that as
true, and shape your life in accordance with it.

To assert that science is blind faith, based on nothing more than scripture - written down before we understood atoms & particles, microbes, evolution, neurology, etc. - would be a textbook example of attachment and clinging to concepts. It would be willful ignorance, not in line with the Kalama Sutra.

“Suppose that something is definitely proven through scientific
investigation, that a certain hypothesis is verified or a certain fact
emerges as a result of scientific investigation. And
suppose, furthermore, that that fact is incompatible with Buddhist
theory. There is no doubt that we must accept the result of the
scientific research.” - The 14th Dalai Lama


Has anyone seen any meditation master demonstrating abhinna or supernatural powers? Has anyone seen any meditation master demonstrating abhinna or supernatural powers stated in various suttas and in Visuddhi Magga? I know, most will suggest me to keep practicing meditation to see or experience it by myself. But I would like to hear from modern day people about their practical experiences, not from the suttas and texts.
PS: It's not about starting a debate. Basically it's just yes/no answer based on practical experiences. I would love to hear it.

It is not desirable to answer such questions because inevitably some smart cookie will debate every example by offering counter examples of parlor magicians who can do the same.

As the Kevatta Sutta states, the real magic is in the bringing of peace, happiness and goodness to the hearts and minds of people.

It is a magic that cannot be argued against.


Tathagatagarbha and dhammakaya Can we consider 'tathagatagarbha' and 'dhammakaya' as synonyms? If not, what is the difference between those words.

No, they are not synonyms. They are mutually exclusive: If it is 'tathagatagarbha', then it is not 'dhammakaya'. If it is 'dhammakaya', it is not 'tathagatagarbha'.

Tathagatagarbha is 'suchness with defilement', which is the emptiness of the minds of sentient beings.

Dharmakaya is 'suchness without defilement', which is the emptiness of the omniscient mind of a buddha. (more specifically any of the 'nature truth body', according to Prasangika). Although they are undifferenciated in nature (pure by nature), Dharmakaya and Tathagatagarbha are not the same.

As Gyaltsab-Je states in his commentary to Maitreya's Sublime Continuum
differentiating the Lineage of the Three Jewels:

  Suchness with defilement is the basic element not liberated from the
  obscurations of mental afflictions, and is known as tathagata
  essence." By nature it is pure and is the ultimate truth. The term
  "tathagata essence" is not used anywhere by either the Tathagata
  Essence Sutra or this treatise and its commentary, which explain the
  thinking of that sutra, to teach the  twofold purity [i.e. the
  dharmakaya endowed with the twofold purity]. Therefore, to apply the
  ultimate dharmakaya to "tathagata essence" is a mere fabrication


Did Buddha know the properties and behaviour of the matter fully? How did Buddha fully understood the world and proclaimed it without the knowledge of all experiments of science? Was his knowledge about the properties and the behavior of matter limited?
Thanks.

No, the Buddha lived in an age where things such as germs, atoms, nuclei, molecules, thermodynamics, neurology, etc. were unknown. This is largely irrelevant to Buddhism, though there are similarities in their values and approach.
Science attempts to create theories and experiments that are independent of the human range of senses and way of thinking. The best example is quantum mechanics, which is beyond both our sensory range and our intuition. Science is therefore objective and experimental in nature.
Buddhism is a path to seeing the true nature of things through the human perspective, in particular the mind. It is therefore anthropocentric and experiential. Trying to describe or analyze the path is counterproductive, it is to be esperienced.

Joshu asked Nansen: ‘What is the path?’

Nansen said: ‘Everyday life is the path’.

Joshu asked: ‘Can it be studied?’

Nansen said: ‘If you try to study, you will be far away from it’.

The question then remains, does attaining Nirvana/Kensho/Satori render a complete understanding of the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, neurology, etc? The answer is no. While this attainment does give the practitioner a new (and very important) understanding about the one-ness, interconnectivity, and emptiness of all phenomena, it does not endow with knowledge equal to or beyond the body of science.
Again, this is not central or essential to Buddhism, just like it is not essential to know about thermonuclear reaction to feel the warmth of the sun on your face, or to know neurology to lift your arm. It is possible to experience Mind without understanding Mind. The (mythical) discourse between Bodhidharma and the Chinese emperor illustrates this very well:

The emperor asked: “What is the ultimate meaning of the holy truths of
Buddhism?”

“Vast emptiness, no holiness,” replied Bodhidharma.

“Who stands here before me?” asked Emperor Wu.

“I do not know” said Bodhidharma.

The question “Who stands here before me?” is taken as "who are you in essence, as an enlightened person?", i.e. "what is the nature of Mind"?


Where can one find guidance from a teacher next year in 2018? Where on Earth or online are future retreats or classes for an insight practitioner to get Dhamma guidance and/or guidance through some version of the stages of insight meditation?

Are there teachers who might guide an insight practitioner on a one on one basis, given the right situation?

Best and proper way is to approach and ask personal, after having spend a good time next him and have observed his virtues, Nyom Lowbrown.

It's in dependency of assossiation with admirable friends, that one gaines right view. Of course the condition to meet such is a matter of upanissayapaccayena (strong condition causes) and not possible to buy and demand.

So keep always in mind: Better to Give than to Consume. Having not the right attitude and behaviour, one, like many and most, would just meet poor business in Dhamma and Juwel-thieves of many kinds.

People who are really into Dhamma have neither dates nor calenders, but always open doors for those seeing them and having the condition to enter. For those always right in front and near. Someone demand, consume... no way to meet, enter and learn, or being haunted by spirits when enter without a clean and honest mind.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]


Does the Buddha speak of the nature of time, vis-à-vis "past," "future," and "present?" Physics shows that what we percieve to be the unidirectional arrow of time is an illusion; that time doesn't necessary "flow" in any direction, and that the concepts of past and present are ultimately meaningless. Is there any discussion of the nature of time as a concept in  Buddhist teachings?

Lord Buddha definitely does talk about Past, Present and Future; but I guess your questions is mainly about, "Do we have something called time?" or "What is time?"

With regards to Abidhamma, there is no "Paramartha" dhamma which we can relate to time: i.e. there is Citta, Cetasika and Rupa and Nirvana, but no reference to time. One of the best explanations I've heard is that the impermanence (Anicca) that we see is what we comprehend as time: i.e. the change that we see, is what we associate with time.

Sorry if it's not very helpful.


Is the path an individual journey? When seeking or on the path, is the journey intended to be for the one on the path or can it be travelled by more than an individual i.e. is the path different for each being?

The Path is the same for all beings, although since all beings have different kamma due to past actions, all beings are on different stages of the Path.

So one being might need to practice certain path factors, e.g. Sila more than another being and vice versa.

Regarding The Ten Perfections (Paramis) they are often compared to jars and when one practices a parami one fills the jar with a drop. So again, how full a jar is, is different from being to being. One being might have worked extensively on the Dana-parami, while lacking in the Aditthana-parami.

  Is the path an individual journey?

The Path proclaimed by a fully englightened Buddha is always the same. A fully enlightened Buddha does not invent the Path. He discovers the Path by himself with no help from anyone else, then he proclaims it and teaches it to other beings. Its often described as discovering an ancient path (purānam añjasam), covered by a dense forest which leads to a bygone kingdom.

The Path is an individual journey. No one can walk the Path for us. We ourselves has to work. Only oneself can free oneself. Only oneself can issue liberation from the rounds of suffering by practicing the Dhamma.

One has to become ones own refuge. The Buddhas only show the way and guide us but we ourselves must walk the Path. Throughout the Buddha's 45 years of teaching-career he constantly emphazized the importance of practicing diligently, consistently and with great effort in order to win Nibbana.

If you are interested in further readings about the self-reliance-factor of the Path, then I recommend the following chapter in the book "What Buddhists Believe", by Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda.


Do ascetic practices create samvega? If so, how? Do ascetic practices create saṃvega? If so, how?

(I am trying to find ways to create samvega - and I understand ascetic practices can help in that).

Anyone can arise into samvega, spontaneously. In the West, it is discouraged as a non normative realization which leads to cognitive dissonance. But at any moment, ascetic practice or not, one can stumble into samvega, given fortunate causes and conditions.

In its most simple form, samvega is the thing which causes us to start practicing. To try to find a way out.

This talk may be of help: Samvega and the Flailing Fish

  Ajahn Thanissaro defines samvega as “the oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that come with realizing the futility and meaninglessness of life as it's normally lived...and an anxious sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of the meaningless cycle.”


Third precept and parents approval If one is having sexual relationship with minor (protected by parents) and parents disapprove the relationship, that is breaching of the third precept. What if an adult child having a (sexual) relationship with someone without the consent of their parents, of course everyone has their rights, but the question is is this breaking the third precept?

It depends on what the society consider as an adult. Back then in India, women always had a guardian regardless of their age.  But things are quite different nowadays. In most countries when one reaches 18+ the society consider that person as an adult that no longer requires guardianship. Any care given after that is optional and any care accepted after that does not make one a minor, unless there is such an understanding between the 2 parties.  In other words, when you become an adult by law, if your parents continue to give you food and lodging with the mutual understanding that you will not be sexually active with someone without their permission, it breaks the 3rd precept.


Because of which element the world has come together? The world seems to have come together. We have United Nations which is a symbol of the unity of the nations.However things come together because of an element.  That element can be greed or aversion or delusion or education or faith or love or anger... etc...
Therefore I would like to ask : Because of which element the world has come together?


Is Buddhism "opposed" to striving, or working towards a goal that you really want I've found that it is pleasant and exciting to work towards a goal, for example: wanting to run a 21km race, imagining the crowds, imagining the personal accomplishment. This requires a certain amount of dissatisfaction with your current situation (I can only run 5km, I need to train more).

However, what I understand from Buddhism is that this attachment to an end result in the future causes suffering. Does one live with some attachment and accept it, or is it something to be avoided entirely?

In one perspective, buddhism shows something you likely already know: if your goal is not accomplished, and if you created expectations (to win, to see a crowd, to have personal accomplishment, etc), you have invited suffering. And because you don't have full control of the outcome, it's always possible the goal may not be reached.

It also shows that, depending on nuances of the "dissatisfaction with current situation", that dissatisfaction might denote a suffering in and on itself.

But it's quite possible for one to formulate goals without clinging to their outcome -- so that reaching or not the goal is not a source of suffering. And it's possible that the dissatisfaction is not an impediment in one's life, but something useful (e.g. a source of motivation for reaching a goal).

  However, what I understand from Buddhism is that this attachment to an end result in the future causes suffering.

Generally (and ultimately) speaking, any attachment is a source of suffering because it presupposes the object of attachment can be obtained, and if it is obtained, that it is stable and persists through time. Because we can't guarantee we can have what we want, nor we can guarantee what we "have" won't change or be separated from us, craving and attachment are ultimately bogus from the point of view of happiness.

  Does one live with some attachment and accept it, or is it something to be avoided entirely?

Attachment of any kind, from the buddhist point of view, is something to be done away with. But not everyone (buddhist or not) feels the urgency or will to go through the process of doing that. So it's up to you. Generally, the choice to remove an attachment comes from seeing the "bug" in it and develop enough dissatisfaction to do something about it.

So, just like the amount of race training you do is up to you -- ranging from training a few hours per week to full dedication under an olympic training --, the amount of buddhist training is also up to you -- ranging from a a few hours per week to full dedication as a monk.


How is Recollection of peace (upasamānussati) practiced? Out of the 10 recollections in the 40 Kammaṭṭhāna how is upasamānussati practiced to the level of Jhana?

One should begin by reflecting on the qualities of nibbana, according to the Buddha's words:

  “Bhikkhus, in so far as there are dhammas, whether formed or unformed,fading away is pronounced the best of them, that is to say, the disillusionment of
  vanity, the elimination of thirst, the abolition of reliance, the termination of the
  round, the destruction of craving, fading away, cessation, Nibbāna”

  A II 34 (Nyanamoli, trans)

Practice most likely involves a mantra for each quality, for example, "madanimmadano" (disillusionment of vanity).

According to the Visuddhimagga, upasamaanussati doesn't lead to aapana samadhi, only upacara samadhi:

  As he recollects peace in its special qualities of disillusionment of vanity,etc., in this way, then: “On that occasion his mind is not obsessed by greed or obsessed by hate or obsessed by delusion; his mind has rectitude on that occasion, being inspired by peace” (see VII.65, etc.). So when he has suppressed the hindrances in the way already described under the recollection of the
  Enlightened One, etc., the jhāna factors arise in a single moment. But owing to
  the profundity of the special qualities of peace, or owing to his being occupied
  in recollecting special qualities of various kinds, the jhāna is only access and
  does not reach absorption. And that jhāna itself is known as “recollection of
  peace” too because it arises by means of the special qualities of peace.

  Vism VIII.249 (Nyanamoli, trans)


questions about my practice I have been practicing insight meditation daily now for over 6 years. I have learnt the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition. I focus on my abdomen rising and falling and notice when my attention goes to something else which seems to be mostly thoughts and then I gently bring it back. When my attention goes to a sensation I watch the sensation for a while until it is no longer holding attention then I bring it back to the breath. After 6 years of doing this I can't say that I have had profound insight into the true nature of reality etc. Most of the time I just feel really bored and doubtful that sitting all this time is actually changing anything. My concentration is only marginally better.  I understand Dukha, Anicca and Anatta but its more from reading about it than sitting.  I sit for an hour in the morning and 45 mins at night.  Im not sure whats going on but just feels something is missing.  I read about and hear people talking about the profound changes they experience and how their lives are filled with peace and joy from practicing so I wonder where Im going wrong?   As far as Metta practice goes I am told that at first it may feel contrived but if you keep going it begins to work but I have to say that after all these years not much has changed on that front either.  It seems that the effort and energy I apply massively out weighs the benefits. So I'm confused about this.

Boddhidharma sat for 9 years.
The last time I was in Japan, I had an oppertunity to sit Zazen in a very old temple. I remember one of the monks talking me through the process of what I should do/expect, etc... Before the sitting commenced.

He gad no idea tgat I'd been sitting fir over a decade, but that's fine. I remember him attempting to discribe what it might be like if I have an "experience" (huge mistake, experience in Zazen can not be reduced to words).

Anyway, when he was done, I just smiled, nodded my head, and told him, I'm not anticipating having any experience. I just intend to sit... Just sit. And that's what I did.

But the fact is, I have had experiance from zazen before, not every time, but it has happened. You have to engage the practice wuth absolutly zero preconceptions, empty your mind, and stay fixed in the moment. Constantly, reducing that moment more and more until it is merely this instant.

When you are in this instant, that means that nothing else exists to you. That moment, that just passed, dies not exist. That moment, which is approaching, does not exist. Nothing exists except this instant. And then... This instant becomes eternity for you. And you are no longer locked in time.

There are no words that can exoress that experience. It dies not resemble any other experience that you can relate to. There is no point in trying to imagine what it might be. If you search for it, you can nit find it, because you have no idea wgat you are searching for.


Does all Tibetan Buddhism classify the sutras in the same way? Does all Tibetan Buddhism classify the sutras and sastras in the same way, or do specific schools elevate different Indian etc. texts?

I read about Chinese discussion about panjiao (doctrinal classification), and found it really interesting, especially the systems developed by Tsungmi and Zhyiyi, even if may seem quite dogmatic compared to someone like Wonhyo, who practiced hwajaeng, doctrincal harmony, so that "in his works we do not see the application of the practice of doctrinal classification".

Is there an equivalent in Tibetan Buddhism?

There are variations in the classification per school/monastery. All schools divide the canon in Kangyur and Tengyur (resp. original canon and treatises).

The number of Kangyur texts varies. Variations include the Derge, Lhasa, Narthang, Cone, Peking, Urga, Phudrak and Stog Palace versions, each named after the physical location of its compilation.


Contemplating during meditation What can be object of contemplation during meditation? Can I take a puzzle or mathematical problem for contemplation? What is the right way of contemplation?

All this involve conceptualisation which can lead to delusional thoughts as with any mind constructed concept it is easy to lose sight of its true nature. This is called Vipallasa as discussed in Vipallasa Sutta.

Sometimes you cannot avoid doing intellectual work like a puzzle or mathematical work. This is not ideal, but any kind of mental activity or when you cognize you experience some sensation. (Titth’ayatana Sutta, Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta, etc.)

So if you are sensitive enough then perhaps you can try to look at the arising  and passing of these sensations with equanimity.

Some analysis from the Suttas.

  Cognizing a mental object with the mind, one examines the mental object as the basis for
  pleasure, or for pain, or for neither-pain-nor-pleasure

Source: Titth’ayatana Sutta. Hence the puzzle and math problem inevitably create some sensation which falls into the the 3 categories of either pleasant, painful or neither pleasant or painful. Similar passage appears in Dhātu Vibhaṅga Sutta also.

  If he wishes thus, ‘May I dwell rejecting both the unrepulsive and the repulsive, and dwell in
  equanimity, mindful and fully aware,’ he dwells therein equanimously, mindful and fully aware

Source: Indriya Bhāvanā Sutta. Clearly the math problem or puzzle is unrepulsive but you have to be equanimous when doing this.

  he dwells contemplating states that arise in the ... he dwells contemplating states that fall away in the ... he dwells contemplating states that arise and fall away in the ... he maintains this mindfulness: ‘There is ...’ just sufficient for knowing and awareness And he dwells independent, not clinging to anything in this world ...

Source: Mahā Satipatthāna Sutta. Here ... And he dwells independent, not clinging to anything in this world ... is equanimously, in your case not getting excited about the problem. ... just sufficient for knowing and awareness ... means there is no conceptualisation and though proliferation, which you your case is present but this has some sensation as previously discussed. If you are sensitive enough you can look at these sensations.


Does thinking during an action improve the quality of the action or reduce it? Does thinking during an action improve the quality of the action or reduce it?

For example, I am writing, and I am aware that I am writing: when I repeat, "I am writing", "I am writing", in my mind, when performing the action of writing, isn't there a split between action and thought?

I remember in a Bruce Lee film in which he says, "Don't Think". If there is a split between action and thought, wouldn't the processing of action slow down?

Lets begin with our good old actor Bruce lee and ascend to Buddhism afterwards....
What you are referring to is something called "Reflexes". In martial arts the reason they practice long hours is to train their bodies to fight automatically. This is the extreme level of fighting and he who is in this level is considered an elite. Here your muscles do the thinking for you and there is no need for logical reasoning (like your hand is feeling heat from a candle and immediately taking the hand away).
The Scientific explanation is very simple on this. There is a thing called "Muscle memory". Muscle memory is your muscles learning the things that you do constantly. This allows you to do things very fast and better than a novice.
for example :- Playing a guitar without looking at the strings, Typing something without looking at the keyboard and etc.

There is a common misinterpretation of what "Mindfulness" truly is, my school teach us differently and the form you are mentioning is "Not so effective" as to my teacher. So here is what we have learned as Mindfulness.....

Lets discuss your own example,
When i'm writing,like any other time my mind starts to wander and start many discussions within. I may even get angry or bored. I might even start to focus on the debate my mind has generated within a couple of minutes and jump into it. I am no longer focused on my writing and i may even write a wrong letter or a word.

Clearly here i have lost my focus and i'm jumping back and forth on my writing and debating with my mind. this is clearly not being mindful.
So if i focus on my writing and focus my thinking on what i have written and what i am about to write that focus my mind on the task at hand. Now i'm mindful about what i am actually doing this instance.

When asked about the version of mindfulness that is mentioned on the question my teacher had a reply like this....

(The person who asked the question asked......)
Is it correct to think i'm walking now,  now i'm taking the right foot, now i'm taking the left foot. as a form of mindfulness?
(My teachers answer....)
What is the reason that we as Buddhists go on to practice mindfulness?
Because we are trying to reach Nirvana. And when we are not mindful the mind start to wonder.
Where does the mind wander?

Mind wander in the adoring nice memories of the past, Bright hopes of
the future and in the moment we enjoy currently and it gets
attached.
Mind wander in the cruel worrying past, dread for what future may bring and finds a reason to start hating right now
Mind wander in a chaos. it jumps here and there, a moment ago you were laughing and now you are feeling bad and almost about to cry. Seconds later you are angry and a half an hour later you are burning in lust.

These three phases or sides of your mind feeds the craving you have for life,to be born again,to live forever,to chase the mirage of happiness.
This is bad because it's these three phases that drives a being further into "Samsara".
These 3 has brought you here and they will drag you through the dangerous lower realms to feed on innocent little animals,to be be hunted by lions and tigers,to be eaten alive and even to be tortured and burned in "hellish" realm. This is the true danger that a being face in Samsara. Because once there in a bad realm there is virtually no hope for a poor being.
And what about the good realms.....
Yes, those 3 sides of your mind also took you to "Deva" realm,to "Brahma" realm and here to "Human" realm. Not so bad you might say,won't you?
Well lets see. you have been born so many times in this samsara. Our Lord Buddha said
"Any being has been killed so many times.If someone collect all the blood that fell when he or she was decapitated,the amount of blood will be roughly equal to the amount of water in the sea."
Look at that old person next to you, after listening to the words of lord Buddha can you certify that he or she next to you has not being someone you loved?
Well lets see this in another way. We know what animals are,they are the poor beings who lost their way and ended up in a bad realm.
When you go home and eat a delicious meal like a fish curry or sausages,look at it closely. Imagine a one you had. Do you see your father or mother? How about that girl you promised to live eternity with in another life, don't you see her?
The sad fact is you do. Now you are eating them so greedily,just like they ate you. Look at this bizarre circle that we roam around from good realms to bad, from bad to good.
One day Lord Buddha smiled and there was Ven. Anandha thero nearby. As a smile from a Buddha is rare the venerable one asked why. Lord Buddha gave a strange reply, if you focus on this statement alone you can understand the true reason to practice "Mindfulness" and the true danger of Samsara. The answer was "Look Anandha, look at these ants here. There isn't a single ant in this long row of ants that hasn't been the king of earth".

Remember these words from Lord Buddha,
"Vinnana" is like a seed, attachment or craving is like water and Karma is the land.
Because your mind wander and get attached it creates Karma. Whatever you get attached to,you soon start to crave for it. There it is The land,the water and the seed, because of this you are born and will be born.
Practice to focus on the temporary nature of things and use your knowledge to see and feel the world not your body. practice to keep away from the 3 phases mentioned above.
Mindfulness Lord Buddha taught was keeping mind from those 3 phases mentioned above and maintaining your life and the very second you live in on 8 noble ways.


Addiction and Suffering I have experienced minor addictions lately, such as overeating or social media; these topics have been addressed on this site previously.

I now have a more general question. I am wondering: which is more important between tolerating negative emotions and aspiring to healthier positive emotions and activities?

Currently, both are quite difficult for me. Any suggestions as how to tolerate negative emotions, to let them arise, are welcome. Similarly, any suggestions about ideal ways to generate joyfulness and positive emotions would be useful as well.

Thank you.

I now have a more general question. I am wondering: which is more important between tolerating negative emotions and aspiring to healthier positive emotions and activities?
Any suggestions as how to tolerate negative emotions, to let them arise, are welcome. Similarly, any suggestions about ideal ways to generate joyfulness and positive emotions would be useful as well.

It really depends on the tradition/method that works for you.
When negative feelings or thoughts of ill-will arise, they can be substituted with wholesome thoughts/feelings, e.g. by practicing Loving-kindness meditation.
In Vipassana traditions, one tries to observe unwholesome phenomena passively and objectively, in order to prevent the mind from falling into liking or disliking, thereby slowly changing the habits of the clinging mind.
The general approach is explained in the noble path factor of Right Effort (Samma Vayama). In SN 45.8 - Magga-vibhanga Sutta: An Analysis of the Path, the Buddha teaches:

“... And what, bhikkhus, is right effort? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu generates desire for the nonarising of unarisen evil unwholesome states; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. He generates desire for the abandoning of arisen evil unwholesome states…. He generates desire for the arising of unarisen wholesome states…. He generates desire for the maintenance of arisen wholesome states, for their nondecay, increase, expansion, and fulfilment by development; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. This is called right effort ...".

To sum it up, one needs to:

abandon or dispel already arisen unwholesome states of mind.

to guard against or prevent unarisen unwholesome states of mind from arising.

to cultivate unarisen wholesome states of mind.

to main already arisen wholesome states of mind.

Wholesome states of mind are e.g.; Serenity and insight, the four foundations of mindfulness, the eight path factors and especially the seven factors of enlightenment.


How to deal with being ignored? At work, my mother experiences that she is being ignored by most of her co-workers. She feels isolated and sad.  What can she do?

In Buddhism, the heart is judged by its own virtues (goodness) rather than by what others think.

Therefore, your mother should develop faith & trust in the virtues of the Buddha (rather than be concerned about what others may think or not think about her). If your mother has the virtues of Dhamma (such as non-killing, non-stealing, non-sexual-abuse, non-lying, non-greed, non-hatred & gratitude) then her heart will have well-being & inner-respect.


What are the 10 sammādiṭṭhis, ten right views? Maybe a challenging questions for the scholars and literary Abhidhamma-fans, with much possibilities for great merits:

What are the 10 sammādiṭṭhis, ten right views?

Deatal explaining of each would be a great gift of the deathlessness.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]

Extracted from Ten Bases of Meritorious Actions (Ten Punnakiriya-vatthus):

  There is a good result in an act of alms-giving, charity giving.
  There is benefit in veneration.
  There is benefit in offering gifts.
  There is the Law of Karma and Its Results which teaches that moral and immoral deeds have respective consequences, in this life and the next.
  There is benefit in tending and supporting one’s own mother, while neglecting her means an evil deed.
  There is benefit in tending and supporting one’s own father, while neglecting him means an evil deed.
  There are unseen worlds of hell, hungry ghosts, demons, devas, Sakkas and brahmas. Existence of such beings should be accepted as a fact.
  There is this present world.
  There is the next world or lives to come.
  There are holy persons who have subdued their thought, word and deed. There are persons with jhanic insight or concentration who see this world and the next clearly. They teach such sights, views and visions in a correct way. We should have confidence in such samanas and brahmanas.


Did the Buddha approved the idea of a council or was it a decision made after he passed away? I would like to know if the idea of having a council was something suggested by the Buddha, also I would like to know if he had any influence in the way the teachings are currently grouped.

The Buddha's final exhortation was for his monks to rely primarily upon themselves and their own memory as the means to guide them:

  Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, that his body is more comfortable.

  Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge.

  —Maha-parinibbana Sutta, DN 16

If you tell your followers to be "islands unto yourselves," can that be construed as "after my death, gather together a council of arahants"?

It seems that the Buddha wanted no central authority at all after he was gone.


What books address various difficulties that may arise during various stages of meditation practice? I am looking for books that go beyond the usual introduction on how to do various form of Buddhist meditation practice but rather, in addition to describing the practices themselves, discuss various difficulties that may arise during various stages of meditation practice and what can be actively done to address these difficulties.

The Five Hindrances disturb one's path in meditation and practice. The canonical description can be found in the Nivarana Sutta.

Here are some useful resources:

Book entitled Unhindered: A Mindful Path Through the Five Hindrances by Gil Fronsdal.

A selection of texts and their commentaries on The Five Mental Hindrances and Their Conquest by Nyanaponika Thera.

Essay on The Five Hindrances by Ajahn Brahmavamso. Another version of this.

Audio recordings on The Five Hindrances by Gil Fronsdal and Ines Freedman.

Online handouts: The Five Hindrances: Handouts for 2008-2009 Dharma Study Program. These seem to come from Gil Fronsdal. Should match the audio recordings.

Practicing with the Five Hindrances, a Q&A with Geri Larkin, Lama Palden, Ajahn Amaro, Michael Liebenson Grady and Sharon Salzberg.

Working with The Five Hindrances by Barbara O'Brien.

Yet another article: Methods of Working on the Five Hindrances
 by Kamalashila.


How can I direct attention on an breath without consciously breathing? In every guided meditation or in the books I've read on meditation, I've been told to observe and hold sustained awareness towards the the 'meditation object', that is my breathing. When I do that, though, I stop breathing automatically and instead have to control my breaths. Can someone explain to me what's going on? Is this okay? Or is there a way I can observe my breath whilst automatically breathing?

These books are wrong, which is why relatively few Buddhists are stream-enterers or reach jhana.

To observe the computer screen in front of you, you do not have to do anything with your eyes. The seeing of the computer screen happens automatically, as long as your head is pointed in the direction of the computer screen & your mind is not asleep.

Similarly, in meditation, feeling & knowing the breathing happens automatically, as long as the mind is quiet, still & gentle. All that is really needed is to sit upright with a still, quiet, gentle, awake mind.

The difficult part is the quiet clear mind. If this can be done, the breathing part is easy because the body breathes automatically & the mind knows breathing automatically when the mind is quiet.

The path of the Buddha is the giving up of craving, which includes not craving when meditating.

The Zen masters say: 'The silent mind can listen to grass'.


Which is the most read journal on Buddhism? I got confused while googling about which is the most popular (widely distributed, published continuously in a large number) journal on Buddhism (or Buddhist journal). It is very obvious for the publishers to advertise their products  but I want to have an actual information so that I can get authentic knowledge as well as send my articles to them. I know that there are a number of Buddhist journals published from throughout the world but my primary concern is with academic publication. I will be grateful for every information. I have not been talking about any particular branch of Buddhism e.g. Theravada, Mahayana etc. but I want to know which is the most recognised journal as a whole; I mean an academic journal that includes all of them. I want to know in detail.

The Journal of Buddhist Ethics might be one, but Atma would not call it "Buddha Dhamma" journal; yet it is another Buddhism nourishing place with interest to put the Dhamma into the ways of thinking of people in the world, rather that otherwise.

They are for sure in line with your thoughts and intentions.

For a more or lesser traditional place it might be useful to get in contact with http://www.bps.lk/ which is for sure the most known one and inventor of certain "Trade on Dhamma", made it presentable even for monastics.

As for Dhamma in line of Dhamma, Atma is not aware of any journal. http://www.inquiringmind.com/ might have tried such ways, but finished its task.

For sure not a final answer but maybe it give some thoughts.

Well known university journals are maybe:

Numata Center for Buddhist Studies at the University of Hamburg
Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies.

German and British Scholars are historical in a strong battle in regard of Buddhist topics on Papañca and translations.


Why the emptiness brings fear in to our mind? Time to time , feeling emptiness, do not see any value in goodness and badness. Some time, getting the question what is happiness, everything seems to be happiness, everything seems to be annoying. Feeling like to cry some times. But at the end, feeling some kind of fear in my mind whenever i get feel the mentioned above.

What is the practice, or what is that  have to be done to understand or overcome this fear?

It's hard to answer this kind of questions without seeing the questioner upclose. But from what I can see, here is what I can say:

The reason Emptiness brings fear, is because it removes simple direction: go this way, do this. Indeed, if the world had simple moral imperative, or simple value imperative ("so and so is the best") - it would be simply a matter of pursuing that. Instead, to accept Emptiness means to accept that responsibility for making decisions lies upon ourselves. There is nothing in the world that has absolute value. So we can't just figure out what it is and thereby win the game!

Sounds like you need to learn to trust yourself. Trust your own judgement of goodness and badness, of happiness and suffering.

If you are very confused, you can use Buddhist precepts and principles as the first approximation. But eventually you have to discover your own source of wisdom, your own Buddha nature.

Trungpa Rinpoche said, "the bad news is we are falling -- the good news is, there is no ground". This is what it means to take the leap into Emptiness, to take responsibility. There is no guarantee that what you do will get you to a good destination -- so you have to keep your eyes open and rely on your own fundamental sanity.

Or, as Buddha said:

  Monks, be islands unto yourselves, be your own refuge, having no other.


Meditation and Pleasure I have three simple questions relating to pleasure. I have tried meditation many times without generating pleasure. Thus:

1) What level of skill permits meditation to release pleasure? How advanced must one be for this effect?

2) Is focused meditation -- i.e. shamatha -- the only meditation conducive to pleasure? Are there meditations more conducive to pleasure?

3) Is there still attachment when we want the benefits of pleasure not for themselves, but for an altruistic or wider goal?

These are my questions,
Thank you.

1) What level of skill permits meditation to release pleasure? How advanced must one be for this effect?
Ability to enter and abide in 1st Jhana is needed for deriving pleasure from meditation. This involves gaining access concentration (upacara samadhi) and then shifting focus to a pleasant sensation in the body or smile etc.
This is one of the simplest guides I've found for entering jhanas:

Instruction for Entering Jhana (by
Leigh Brasington).

You can also refer to:

9 Jhanas -- The First Jhana: Pleasant Sensations
The Jhanas in Theravada Buddhist Meditation --
Part 2: How to Enter the Jhanas

From the first link:

You watch the breath until you arrive at access concentration, and then you let go of the breath and shift your attention to a pleasant sensation. There is not much point in watching the breath that has gotten extremely subtle or has disappeared completely. There's nothing left to watch. Shift your attention to a pleasant sensation, preferably a pleasant physical sensation. You will need a good bit of concentration to watch a pleasant physical sensation, because a mildly pleasant feeling somewhere in your body is not nearly as exciting as the breath coming in and the breath going out. You've got this mildly pleasant sensation that's just sitting there; you need to be well-concentrated to stay with it.
The first question that may arise when I say "Shift your attention to a pleasant sensation" is "What pleasant sensation?" Well, it turns out that when you get to access concentration, the odds are quite strong that some place in your physical being, there will be a pleasant sensation. Look at this statue of the Buddha: he has a smile on his face. That is not just for artistic purposes; it is there as a teaching mechanism. Smile when you meditate, because when you reach access concentration, you only have to shift your attention one inch to find the pleasant sensation.

2) Is focused meditation -- i.e. shamatha -- the only meditation conducive to pleasure? Are there meditations more conducive to pleasure?
I don't know about all the meditation techniques available, but out of vipassana and shamatha, shamatha is conducive to gain pleasure and tranquility. Some times you get pleasure out of vipassana as well, but it is not conducive for that, the objectives are different.
3) Is there still attachment when we want the benefits of pleasure not for themselves, but for an altruistic or wider goal?
Like for practicing for eightfold path and liberation? Then no. If it is for mundane or daily activities, it is easy to get attached to the pleasure.


Potential of Five Minutes of Meditation Once, when I went to a Buddhist meditation center, an experienced meditator said: "Sometimes, for meditation, all it takes is five minutes [in a session]." I'm wondering what is the meaning of such a statement.

Does this refer to relaxation? Insight? Or something else? What is the most plausible meaning?

According to Abhidhamma Jhana is one thought moment. One thought moment is so small there could be billions of thought moments in a splash of the light. So the five minutes of Jhana is quite an achievement for a beginner.


What are the common buddhist practices to eliminate sleepiness? I sleep the hours which are said to be needed, but I still feel sleepy. I've been drinking coffee recently to eliminate grogginess, and it does work for me. However, I was wondering if there are other methods of eliminating grogginess?

Buddha gave his disciple Moggallana a sequence of advice on how to overcome drowsiness during meditation. Moggallana was however continuously meditating for 7 days without sleep when he received this advice.

  Well then, Moggallana, whatever perception you have in mind when drowsiness descends on you, don't attend to that perception, don't pursue it. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness
  But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then recall to your awareness the Dhamma as you have heard & memorized it, re-examine it & ponder it over in your mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness.
  [..] then repeat aloud in detail the Dhamma as you have heard & memorized it. [..]
  [..] then pull both your earlobes and rub your limbs with your hands. [..]
  [..] then get up from your seat and, after washing your eyes out with water, look around in all directions and upward to the major stars & constellations. [..]
  [..] then attend to the perception of light, resolve on the perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night. By means of an awareness thus open & unhampered, develop a brightened mind. [..]
  [..]  then — percipient of what lies in front & behind — set a distance to meditate walking back & forth, your senses inwardly immersed, your mind not straying outwards. [..]

  But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then — reclining on your right side — take up the lion's posture, one foot placed on top of the other, mindful, alert, with your mind set on getting up. As soon as you wake up, get up quickly, with the thought, 'I won't stay indulging in the pleasure of lying down, the pleasure of reclining, the pleasure of drowsiness.' That is how you should train yourself.

  AN 7.58


Are the formless jhanas without any consciouness of form at all? I don't understand the formless jhanas.

Does this meditator completely lose consciousness of form, or are they meditating on something formless and, apart from that, as before?

I've read the abhidharmakosa bhashyam, of Vasubhadhu, and he says that a mediator of this sort will be later reborn into a realm without form, so that suggests that there are sentient beings without any of the sense consciousnesses. But I just find the idea impossible, to be honest.

Interesting, one of those books says that some Buddhists claim that there is a residue of visual consciousnesses there.

Can anyone describe to me what the formless jhana is like? I'm especially intrigued as to whether there is any sense of shade to it: if it seems darker or lighter than any given colour I've experienced.

Formless meditations exist. The eight attainments (atthasamapatti) in meditation (attaining Adhicitta) broadly has two parts - namely, the first four rupa jhanas and the four arupa jhanas. These last four are higher stages of mental concentration – the formless states - enable one to gain super-normal powers.

Even though we see the mind as normally inter-dependent with body, there are levels of existence where only mental phenomena exist, with nothing whatever of rupa.  The four 'formless' (arupa) meditative states are attainable from the fourth jhana onwards:

The sphere of infinite space (Akasanañcayatana);
This is attained by transcending any cognition of rupa, by abandoning the metal image that was previously the object of concentration, and seeing that space is infinite.

The sphere of infinite consciousness (Viññaaañcayatana);
In this second state, the focus is on the consciousness that had been aware of infinite space.

The sphere of nothingness (Akiñcaññayatana);
In the third, this object (Viññaaañcayatana) is dropped, and the focus is on the apparent nothingness remaining.

The sphere of neither-cognition-nor-non-cognition (Nevasaññanâsaññayatana).
In the fourth, this object (Akiñcaññayatana) is dropped and the mind is in an attenuated state where it is hardly functioning.

SD 24.11 _ Pathama Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Savitakka) Pathama Jhana Sutta. Progressing in the 1st dhyana.
SD24.12a _ Dutiya Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Avitakka) Dutiya Jhana Sutta. Progressing in 2nd dhyana.
SD 24.13 _ Tatiya Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Sukhena) Tatiya Jhana Sutta. Progressing in the 3rd dhyana.
SD 24.14 _ Catuttha Jhana Pañha Sutta or (Upekkhaka) Catuttha Jhana Sutta. How to progress in the 4th dhyana.
SD 24.15 _ Akasanañcayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of infinite space.

SD 24.16 _ Viññaaañcayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of infinite consciousness.
SD 24.17 _ Akiñcaññayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of nothingness.
SD 24.18 _ Nevasaññanâsaññayatana Pañha Sutta. Progressing in the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.


What's is the Buddhist view on persistence or grit? We are always taught to have grit, show resilience and never to give up in difficult situations. In the lights of my knowledge in Buddhism, I think of these as a manifestation of strong attachment to objects and emotions. Am I right? Should these qualities be valued? What is the Buddhist viewpoint? Thanks!

It's one of the 4 Iddhipadas, namely the second one.:

Four Bases of Power or Success (Iddhipada)

Desire (chanda)
Persistence/Energy/Effort (viriya)
Intention, Mind, Thoughtfulness (citta)
Investigation/Discrimination (vimamsa or panna)

They are all needed in order to progress on the Path. Without them (especially the second one) the mind will not be fit for meditation practice.
One needs energy to apply the mind to the arising and ceasing of phenomena. Constant application of mind leads to concentration and mindfulness which leads to clarity of mind. Seeing clearly leads to freedom from suffering which eventually leads to Nibbana.
So yeah, these qualities should be valued and cultivated.


Is it right to use the term rebirth in the Buddhist context? As I delve into the Buddhist literature deeper and deeper, particularly the Theravāda sutta literature, I am getting convinced more and more that when we use the term ‘rebirth’, and more so, the grosser English equivalents like ‘metempsychosis’ and ‘re-incarnation’, to signify what the Buddha talked about when he referred to the apparent continuity of the ‘life process’ after death, we are getting it all wrong. I have till now also been unable to find the equivalent of the Vedic term ‘Punarjanma’, which is used so very profusely in the Brāhmanic literature like the Upaniṣads and the Purāṇas. The Sanskrit/Pāli word that comes up again and again in the Buddhist context is ‘bhava’ which has been translated as ‘becoming’, perhaps rightly so. But, would it be right to translate this very word also as rebirth, re-incarnation, punarjanma, and the like, when it seems so very clear that bhava does not stand at all for any of these, because the very notion of rebirth/re-incarnation/punarjanma carries within it the concept of a permanent entity moving from birth to birth?
I remember a beautiful metaphor from somewhere that compares the notion of this recurrence of saṁsāra in Hinduism with that in Buddhism. If this recurrence is like a necklace of pearls in Hinduism where the pearls stand for various janmas and the string for the eternal ātman, in Buddhism it is like a pile of coins where each coin, each birth, thought dependent for its support on the coin below, on the birth that came before, does not have any eternal binding entity holding them together, only the unseen ‘gravity’ of karma. Isn’t it right, therefore, that the actual term in the Buddhist sense, used for this recurrence of lives, ought to be bhava, or, to be technically more exact, punarbhava/punabbhava/’re-becoming’/recurrent becoming, rather that punarjanma/rebirth/re-incarnation/metempsychosis?

It is very clear that the english word 'rebirth' in Buddhist writing and practice causes a whole host of confusions and misunderstandings. This is evident in this forum with the myriad questions and debates that have erupted as a consequence. As an added complexity, not all of the confusions and misunderstandings are related or easily dispelled in the same way.
Now, with that said I don't quite know how to answer the question, "Is it right to use the term rebirth in the Buddhist context?"
Let's grant the supposition that the answer is yes and see what the consequences are:

The word 'rebirth' could be replaced with another english word or words
The word could be omitted entirely with a blank in its place

The problem with #1 is that this has already been tried. In fact, numerous other words have been suggested instead. You've mentioned two - metempsychosis and re-incarnation - but many more have been used in the past with transmigration being another heavily used synonym.
Some on this forum are heavily biased against the word 'rebirth' thinking it causes more confusion than not and have insisted that 'rebirth' was never uttered by the Buddha. Which is true insofar as the Buddha did not speak english.
For me, I see all of this arguing over the 'right' word to use as rather beside the point. I don't think it is true that there exists one or more 'right' words that would magically dispel all the confusion and misunderstanding that come along with the word 'rebirth' or the ideas that the word is used to convey.
My go to strategy to try and dispel the confusions and misunderstandings that the word 'rebirth' and the ideas behind it often inspire is to focus not on 'rebirth' from life-to-life, but rather 'rebirth' from moment-to-moment. Why? Because I've found that most Buddhists or people learning about Buddhism have an easier time thinking about and granting that 'rebirth' from moment-to-moment happens and can relate it back to their own daily moment-to-moment lives in an experiential way. And a lot of the same questions that pop-up in 'rebirth' from life-to-life also pop-up in a natural way in 'rebirth' from moment-to-moment.
Let's take your contention that, "the very notion of rebirth/re-incarnation/punarjanma carries within it the concept of a permanent entity moving from birth to birth?"... that is true of 'rebirth' from moment-to-moment as well isn't it? Don't we all have the sense and experience that there is some permanent entity moving from moment-to-moment? So if we can resolve how it can be that 'rebirth' from moment-to-moment happens all the while not having some permanent entity moving from moment-to-moment, - and it most undoubtedly does happen as we can all attest experientially, right? - then perhaps we can take that and extrapolate what it means for 'rebirth' to happen from life-to-life.


Has Ram Bahadur Bomjon already proclamed that he is a Buddha? On wikepedia is written that buddha-boy had in 2005 said that he was at the level of a rinpoche. He said that he will need six more years of meditation before he can become a Buddha. So in 2011 he could had become a buddha. But is he still /already living in the bush as a buddha?

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

The international and Nepali media, as well as direct witnesses and victims had described Bomjon as too far from even from a normal ethically firm human beings, far from a law-abiding person and too far from compassion. He had attacked seriously dozens of people, luring his victims to himself through promises of secret initiations. They come to his jungle, for a few days or weeks are loved and cared by his resident "Sangha", and at one point, out of the blue, attacked at Bomjon's order by maroon-robed monks, chained or locked up in his secret houses, beaten with sticks and hands to black and blue, and many of them kept for weeks and even as long as 3 months in his captivity, telling to the outside world that they are in "secluded meditation"! During that, further tortures are inflicted on these victims, if they are women, often even raped and tortured so extremely that two of his victims did not survive. Yet, unfortunately, he has a political backing in his country, and huge money resources, especially from foreign devotees, who are securely kept away from learning the truth.

Have a look at these sights, among many others you can easily Google out:

https://buddhaboymedia.wordpress.com/

http://irregulartimes.com/?s=bomjon


What is the mean of 'samma ditti' in Ariya-Ashtanga Marga? Everybody, who is learning Buddhism know that 'Samma Dhitti' is the 1st of 'Ariya-Ashtanga Marga'. It's surface meaning is 'Right vision'. But what is the exact meaning of it?

It is a one procedure of 'Ariya-Ashtanga Marga' to achieve 'Nirvana'. I want to know the deep meaning of it. How to achieve right vision or Samma Dhitti? Is it a procedure of our thoughts?

If we go to the 'Samma aajeewa','Samma kammantha','Samma wacha''Samma wayama', we can describe them as procedures or habits. But I get a feeling that 'Samma Dhitti' is more than that.

If a virtuous person were to constantly reflect and expand upon even one strand mentioned in the Samma Ditti sutta referred by Suminda above, it will be for his long term benefit.

For example one can take the section on the four types of Food and constantly reflect on that reality and confirm that view.

Mr. Piya Tan has written an in depth commentary of the Samma Ditti sutta here.

http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/11.14-Sammaditthi-S-m9-piya.pdf


Is there a comprehensive list of types of Samadhi? Is there a comprehensive list of different types of Samadhi (in Pali, Sanskrit, English and/or otherwise) related to Buddhism?

I did an in depth research going through a digital search of the pali suttas and compiling a comprehensive list of every type of usage of
☂ Samādhi: broad umbrella term in every type of usage in EBT.
https://lucid24.org/sted/8aam/8samadhi/nuance/index.html


Proper meditation at hard times ( to be kind, open mind and enjoy hard times ) I understand that i act harmfully by my words also when i struggle at hard situation. (male 37 years old)

 For example today forced my mother ( elderly) to do some work which i thought it could be good for her but dont consider her disability and health problem because of her Brain stroke like some partly depression and maybe her scares about her life.

I think if have some view point of the reasons of happening  this situation could be useful to suggest proper meditation for this situation.

So i think is because of becoming sensitive and like to be kind, so try to give her an advice which in during the conversation my reactions change to showing that i am leader or supportive but not in controled of others!.  so at this situation finally i sence her hurted by my words and reactions. ( my brother some times before said to me your speaking tone is some not interesting and maybe could be changed by some meditation?!!)

Also sence to have cached by my psychological system and some other limitations , and can not find other situation and have more freedom for choosing some others actions and sensing more kindly.

So what kind of meditation do you suggest for this situation to try?

Thanks for your attention.

In Buddhism, a type of meditation to be used is called EQUANIMITY MEDITATION.

Equanimity meditation is: "OTHERS ARE PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS".

Often we want to help another person but that other person cannot be helped.

If your mother has had a stroke, you must be very patient & gentle with her.

You probably should ask your mother a question, such as: "Would you like to try to do some work? I will be here with you to help you".

Instead of controlling your mother, try to assure your mother you will support her.

For example, Buddhism teaches to never teach another person Buddhism if that other person does not want to listen to Buddhism.

It is the same with your mother. You should try to encourage your mother to make her own decision about her doing some work & exercise.

Also, I recommend you ask your mother's doctor, physiotherapist &/or occupational therapist for some advice about methods of helping your mother.

Also, you could ask an occupational therapist to visit your home to help you help your mother. If a professional occupational therapist visits your mother to help you help your mother, your mother may reduce fear & trust you more because you have been taught to help her by a professional occupational therapist.


Is there any proof of Karma theory & rebirth? Non Abrahmic religions like Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism & Sikhism believe in Karma theory & rebirth.

I'm interested in knowing the proofs of Karma theory & rebirth presented by Buddhism.

Buddhism differs from others in that rebirth is not a transmigration of a Soul, nor of any specific entity. It is more of a statement that perceived experience being subject to conditions - finding itself empty of any and all self referential properties - cannot logically be seen to either have a concrete beginning nor a concrete ending, whilst the conditions for the arising of said experience are present.

When the notion of an Essential, Independent and Unchanging Atman/Soul is taken at its word, then at birth and death, that Soul must either appear from somewhere, or disappear somewhere, respectively, as Essentialist religions infer.

The Buddha's aim was to show that what is directly perceived - impermanence and non-self - does not allow for termination of the conditioned (as that would be a process with a permanent conclusion), nor does it allow for some unconditioned and unexperiancable entity flirting off to invade somewhere else, as that is not directly perceivable by entities that depend on conditions for their perception..

The point is that there is no duality of 'cessation of the conditional'+'non-cessation of the non-conditional'. There is simply the continuation of conditionality. Ending the process of rebirth is the act of removing whatever conditions make up the necessary support for some conditionally-defined object: there is no 'rebirth' for my desire to drink, because I have removed the necessary conditions for this conditioned entity called 'me' to lunge for booze - the condition removed is craving for beer. This craving is removed volitionaly - volition being the arbiter of Kamma and its fruit: empty of volition? Empty of Kamma and hence empty of rebirth.

(I will be the first to say that this logic works a lot easier for 'beer' than for the entity labeled 'me'. But there is no concrete dividing line between the two concepts - as for any two concepts - given that true Independence is not possible within conditionality, so the beer example should be a decent starting point!)


Meditation and being aware in your sleep while dreaming I noticed a reply Andrei made on a post on the results of meditating, that you become aware in your sleep while dreaming, so that your mind knows it's a dream:

Mindfulness during sleep
Do Arhats sleep?

This is a major confirmation sign of correct practice in Ancient Daoism (which i've been reading for years now, not knowing which is correct practice) -- and i would like Andrei's advice (and whoever else would like to share their insight) on practice technique and how you have managed to get to this advanced level.

This is Lucid Dreaming and (AFAIK) it isn't typical practice in most schools of Buddhism, nor should it be used as a gauge for how your meditation practice is going.

With that said, there are some connections.

Dream Yoga.  A set of practices in Tibetan Buddhism for using dreaming (including Lucid Dreaming) to further the path.
Using your improved concentration (thanks to meditation) to enter the hypnagonic state intentionally and from there initiate a Lucid Dream.


Compassion and Wisdom Does wise practice of compassion ever lead to suffering or bliss for the practitioner?

Is there a difference between compassion cultivated through the Brammaviharas and compassion cultivated through Vipassana insight?

If one is enlightened does that mean one is   compassionate or fully compassionate?

Why does wisdom lead to compassion or compassion lead to wisdom?

Yes, there is. There is a difference between compassion cultivated through the Brammaviharas and compassion cultivated through Vipassana.

With the Brammaviharas, one can be as compassionate to the maximum, but that does not mean one has gotten rid of ignorance. Those beings in the Brahma worlds do not generate any hateful thoughts. They have perfected the four Brahmavihara of metta, karuna, mudita, & upekkha. Yet they have ignorance (moha), even though they don’t have a trace of hateful thoughts, and thus can be reborn in the four lower realms.

Even if one gets rid of greed and hate, will still have ignorance, and will end up getting back greed and hate due to ignorance. But when compassion is cultivated through Vipassana, wisdom, or panna arises. The Buddhist mental factor ‘Adosa’ is not mere absence of ‘dosa’, but embodies compassion. The more panna one has, it is more likely that one would be generating ‘adosha’ and ‘amoha’ thoughts of compassion more often.


How to deal with exhaustion? So, I meditate every for more than half an hour during the evenings and also five minutes session every one or two hours during my work so I keep myself calm all the time(not every day but I am trying to do in these lockdown days) but what I feel is I easily get exhausted from my work which involves only heavy mental activities.

But otherwise if I let myself refresh doing things which excites us like joking with my friends, watching fast beat songs, etc. I can continue my work feeling energetic. But the downside of this is I easily get carried away with the stuffs I do for refreshing or even get stressed with my work.

How to balance this?(physically i am weak person due to medical problem)

I would advice improving the effectiveness of meditation by learning more, this so that you might more often attain a pleasant abiding when you meditate and otherwise.

One can start by adressing the exhaustion & lack of energy by giving a lot of attention to the theme of wakefulness, the benefits of wakefulness, to the fearfulness of laziness & lazy stretching and to the drawbacks of getting into a habit of sleeping too much.

This can be contemplated for some time and will be effective if established as dominant perspective and will thus remain for as long as maintained by sufficient giving of attention to the theme of wakefulness.

When one gets over exhaustion one might be restless and a restless mind can be calmed by ie breath meditation.

If you learn how to get over states like exhaustion, restlessness, regret, doubt, anger and sensual pleasure seeking, then you will be in charge of directing and the states you compose in meditation will more often be rewarding and pleasant.

The resolves and inclinations will change by themselves according to development.


Does the Dalai Lama have bodyguards? Does the Dalai Lama have bodyguards? And if so what does Buddhist philosophy have to say about that? Are they necessary, or are they just to keep with appearances?

ps. The Dalai Lama is one of my heroes so this should in no way be taken as a joke.

Does the Dalai Lama have bodyguards?

According to Ganden Thurman, executive director of the Tibet House;

  "...Whenever the Dalai Lama travels, "he has his own bodyguards and staff, of course, and translator and two attendants," Thurman said. "And then the State Department people provide the protection envelope around his person..."

I couldn't find anything about any current bodyguards for the Dalai Lama, presumably due to security reasons.

There are, though, information about former bodyguards;

From Dalai Lama's bodyguard to Dharamshala Municipal Councillor: Journey of a common man

  "...DHARAMSHALA, FEB 3: A Tibetan civil servant has been inducted in the Dharamsala Municipal Corporation as a councilor, a feat no one has achieved ever in the history of Tibetan exile. Dawa Rinchen, Dharamshala Tibetan Settlement Officer and a former bodyguard to His Holiness the Dalai Lama..."

Nun now teaches Buddhist psychology, once was body guard for Dalai Lama

  "...The Venerable Robina Courtin has led many lives. At 70 years old, she’s been a Buddhist, a Catholic, a musician, a political activist, a radical feminist, a martial arts expert, an advocate for prisoners and even one of the Dalai Lama’s personal bodyguards..."

The Dalai Lama’s Bodyguard

  "...Dawa Singya Bhutia (center) was a soldier, trained in Kung Fu and bodyguard to the Dalai Lama..."

The multitasking bodyguard

  "...It's no mean feat to be a private bodyguard for the Dalai Lama..."

May this be of use to you.


Did the Buddha discourage antropomorphic representations of himself? The first anthropomorphic representations of the Buddha appeared centuries after his death (see this related question). Buddhist art then was "aniconic", insofar as the Buddha was only represented through symbols such as the Buddha's footprint or the Dharma wheel. In the Wikipedia article on Greco-Buddhism, there is a hint as to why this might be so:

  [The] reluctance towards anthropomorphic representations of the Buddha, and the sophisticated development of aniconic symbols to avoid it (even in narrative scenes where other human figures would appear), seem to be connected to one of the Buddha’s sayings, reported in the Digha Nikaya, that discouraged representations of himself after the extinction of his body.

This assertion isn't, however, accompanied by a reference to the relevant portion of the Digha Nikaya, and it is contradicted in Donald Lopez's latest book, From Stone to Flesh: A Short History of the Buddha (University of Chicago Press, 2013):

  [N]o proscriptions against making images of the Buddha have been located in what scholars would regard as an early Buddhist text, nor have any prescriptions for his representation been found.

Is there actual textual basis for the claim that the Buddha discouraged antropomorphic representations of himself (in the Digha Nikaya or other early Buddhist texts)?

A direct quote from the Digha Nikaya that explicitly expresses a prohibition or even a discouragement concerning his antropomorphic representations has not been found yet, as far as I know.

In Religions of the Silk Road (Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1996), Yuvraj Krishan maintains that the aniconic period is due to a Vedic heritage: Vedism was aniconic because it considered the highest gods as ultimately transcendent and formless. His contention is that when Buddhism was in its infancy, those who were faithful to the growing tradition were careful to act within to the Vedic tradition to avoid any normative displacement. So it should not surprise us that the earliest representational art appears at the geographical fringes of the Indian subcontinent (Sri Lanka and Gandhara). The earliest source for this thesis that I know is John C. Huntington's 1977 paper titled "The origin of the Buddha image".

Although there seems to be no known explicit doctrinal injunctions against the representation of the Buddha in anthropomorphic form, there is an  oblique statement in the Vinaya of the Sarvastivadins (first called attention to by Arthur Waley) which may be interpreted as a prohibition and consists the only textual source I have found to this effect. In this passage, which deals with the decoration of monasteries, Anathapindika asks:

  World-honoured one, if  images  of yours  are  not allowed  to be made, pray  may we not at least  make images  of Bodhisattvas in attendance  upon you? (apud Waley, 1931/2)

Although this statement addresses the theme of iconic representation of Buddha, it is an isolated case and cannot really be construed as a prohibition. Therefore, Huntington's theory that the aniconic representation of the Buddha in early Buddhism was a result of Vedic traditions and not specific doctrinal prohibitions seems to be the best explanation.

Further reading:

Rob Linrothe, 'Inquiries into the origin of the Buddha image: a review', East and West 43, 1/4 (December 1993), pp. 241-256.


How do Buddhists express condolences? Since converting to Buddhism, I've been unsure how to express condolences when people pass away. Everything familiar that I might say comes from a Christian perspective such as "being in a better place" or "with the Lord now".

Simply letting the family know that I'm thinking of them works. But I'm wondering what is typical or traditional in Buddhist countries (or among experienced Buddhists in the west) where teachings of impermanence and rebirth may change the mindset regarding death. What is the typical way to express condolences among Buddhists?

Here in Sri Lanka, we typically say "Anicca Vata Sankhara" or "Vaya-dhamma Sankhara" in the bereavement notices. When you meet the family members, you put your hands together and greet without smiling. You are not expected to say anything unless you are giving an eulogy. When you talk to people, you are expected to talk quietly and not to gossip. You can either inquire about funeral arrangements or engage in a Dhamma discussion.

I suppose in the West, it's customary to say something. So you can probably say "May he/she attain Nibbana soon!"


I'm interested in precise piece-by-piece translations of the 5 precepts I recently saw a post on this website by Andrei Volkov that discussed the term Kāmesumicchācāra, breaking it down into it's constituent parts and discussing the full meaning of the word.

It led to me creating an account here, as I'm interested in having a similar discussion about the 4 other precepts - specifically the words Pāṇātipātā, Adinnādānā, Musāvādā, and Surāmerayamajjapamādaṭṭhānā.

I'd be grateful for any insight.  Thanks.

The Five Precepts (pañca-sila)

These basic training rules are observed by all practicing Buddhist lay men and women. The precepts are often recited after reciting the formula for taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha.

Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.

  Pānātipātā: ‘the killing of living beings' can be further broken down into destruction (atipata) of life (pana)
  veramani: ‘to refrain from’
  sikkhāpadam: ‘the Precept’
  samadiyami: ‘I undertake

Adinnadana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.

  Adinnadana: ‘taking that which is not given’;  adinna+adana includes bribery, burglary, forceful acquisition of property, invasion of somebody else's territory, fraud, theft etc.
  veramani: ‘to refrain from’
  sikkhāpadam: ‘the Precept’
  samadiyami: ‘I undertake

Kamesu micchacara veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.

  Kamesu: ‘sexual’;  micchacara: ‘misconduct’
  veramani: ‘to refrain from’
  sikkhāpadam: ‘the Precept’
  samadiyami: ‘I undertake

Musavada veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.

  Musavada: ‘lying’ (One word); this is similar to....  slandering (pisunavaca), harsh speech (pharusavaca), and frivolous talk (Sampappalaapa)
  veramani: ‘to refrain from’
  sikkhāpadam: ‘the Precept’
  samadiyami: ‘I undertake

Suramerayamajja pamadatthana veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness. This is a compound made up from sura + meraya + majja + pamada + thana

  Suramerayamajja: ‘sura = fermented liquors made with powdery substances, merya = distilled liquors made with nectar / sweet liquid secreted from flowers or plants, majja = intoxicating liquors made by fermenting the above two types (ie. Sure & Meraya)
  Pamadatthana: ‘causes heedlessness'; Pamada = delay;  thana = state / condition
  veramani: ‘to refrain from’
  sikkhāpadam: ‘the Precept’
  samadiyami: ‘I undertake

The most important bit of information regarding the five precepts that very few of the Buddhists are aware of is the meaning of these three words … aarati virati pativirati…  veramani. The five precepts as we know and practice is the worldly right view and worldly right conception. The distinction made in the discourse between worldly right view and the right view that is above the world (supre-mundane) is that, in the case of the latter, this means Complete Abstinence, expressed by the use of these three more terms - aarati virati and pativirati. Such abstinence applies to right action and right livelihood as well. An explanation of it is found in the MN 117 Mahācattārīsaka Sutta - The Great Forty.

One who takes the five precepts with an aim of walking the Noble Eightfold Path, towards attaining Path-Fruition aim for the aarati virati pativirati level of abstinence.


Question on a Mahayana Sutra (Three Svabhavas) First time trying this. Much Metta to all beings here. I've been studying and meditating on a Mahayana based sutra for months, which is quite detailed in philosophy. I don't seem to understand the meaning of a particular passage.

"Now, Mahāmati, false discrimination rises from form (nimitta). How, Mahāmati, does it rise from form? In [the consideration of] the relativity aspect of Svabhāva, realities appear in various ways, as having forms, signs, and shapes; when, Mahāmati, these objects, forms, and signs are adhered to [as real], this adherence takes place in two ways. The Tathagatas, Arhats, and Fully-Enlightened Ones thus declare false discrimination to consist in attachment to names and attachment to objects. By the attachment to objects is meant, Mahāmati, to get attached to inner and external things [as realities]..."

-Lankavatara Sutra, Chapter II, Suzuki Translation.

I'm confused on what it means by attaching to objects as realities.
Thoughts? Thank you!

What are objects?
Worldly things, for ex. 'Table'. or 'Car'.
If we divide them to parts, is that 'thing' exist further?
can we say that 'thing' exist before divide to parts?
So that 'things' are considered as 'forms'(nimitta).
The 'things'(forms) has signs('name') and shapes('rupa'/form/object).
We believe(adhere to) these 'things' are real objects.
This is called false discrimination (attachment to names and attachment to objects).
This adherence takes place in two ways.('ajjhattaṃ'- Internal and 'bahiddhā'- External).  As shown in 'Sathipattana sutta'

.....In this way they meditate by observing an aspect of the body inside;
they meditate by observing an aspect of the body outside; they
meditate by observing an aspect of the body inside and outside.
(In Pali: Iti ajjhattaṃ vā kāye kāyānupassī viharati, bahiddhā vā kāye
kāyānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā kāye kāyānupassī
viharati;)

So what is "get attached to inner and external things [as realities]..."
Inner things - person, I, Myself, Me, Body etc.
External  things - others, they, He/s ,It etc.


Can you point me some Sutras on Buddhist Cosmology? Can someone point me some good sutras for Buddhist Cosmology. I'm interested in the Theravada school's teaching on this.

Kosala Sutta 1
Aggañña Sutta
Cakka,vatti Siha,nāda Sutta
Satta Suriya Sutta
Pāṭika Sutta
Saṅkhārupapatti Sutta
Brahma,jala Sutta Also see for introduction: An Introduction to the Brahma,jāla Sutta

Also Abhidhamma books contain a lot on this subject.


Is Buddha Nature the original state, i.e. Awareness/ Consciousness without Existence? Existence, Consciousness, Bliss is described as Brahman by Vedanta but surely that only applies when viewed through the veil of Maya and experienced as the universe. As awareness/ consciousness is always "on", no matter of what state it's in then surely awareness/ consciousness would still experience non-existence, akin to our lack of any experience in deep sleep.
Is Buddha Nature Vedanta's opposite of Brahman i.e. Non-Existence, Consciousness, Bliss?
Knowing that existence arises from Buddha Nature, non-existence, is this why we start to grasp and cling to the dream of there being any existence at all? Not that there is nothing but that there are no-things, no names or forms, no self, just awareness/ consciousness?

OP: Is Buddha Nature Vedanta's opposite of Brahman i.e. Non-Existence, Consciousness, Bliss?

Firstly, what is Tathagatagarbha aka Buddha Nature? Is it the same as or opposite to Vedanta's Brahman?
According to this article:

Tathagatagarbha, or Tathagata-garbha, means "womb" (garbha) of Buddha
(Tathagata). This refers to a Mahayana Buddhist doctrine that Buddha
Nature is within all beings. Because this is so, all beings may
realize enlightenment. Tathagatagarbha often is described as a seed,
embryo or potentiality within each individual to be developed.

And it discusses further:

In the religions of the Buddha's day that were the forerunners of
today's Hinduism, one of the central beliefs as (and is) the doctrine
of atman. Atman means "breath" or "spirit," and it refers to a soul or
individual essence of self. Another is the teaching of Brahman, which
is understood as something like the absolute reality or the ground of
being. In the several traditions of Hinduism, the precise relationship
of atman to Brahman varies, but they could be understood as the small,
individual self and the big, universal self.
However, the Buddha specifically rejected this teaching. The doctrine
of anatman, which he articulated many times, is a direct refutation of
atman.
Through the centuries many have accused the Tathagatagarbha doctrine
of being an attempt to sneak an atman back into Buddhism by another
name.
In this case, the potentiality or Buddha-seed within each being is
compared to atman, and Buddha Nature -- which is sometimes identified
with the dharmakaya -- is compared to Brahman.
You can find many Buddhist teachers speaking of small mind and big
mind, or small self and big self. What they mean may not be exactly
like the atman and Brahman of Vedanta, but it's common for people to
understand them that way. Understanding Tathagatagarbha this way,
however, would violate basic Buddhist teaching.

Another article here tries to point the origins of tathagatha-garbha or Buddha-nature to the Luminous Mind in the Pali Canon (which according to Theravada Buddhism, is not permanent or eternal, but is dependently arising - see this answer).
It comments in its conclusion:

In conclusion, when we try to interpret the thought of the
'tathagatagarbha', we should keep several points in mind:

The 'tathagatagarbha' symbolizes the potential for enlightenment (a
principle) rather than a material "essence" of ultimate truth,

... Thus it is
better to take the 'tathagatagarbha / Buddha nature' as representing
"profound existence" derived from "true emptiness" rather than as a
monistic self.

Buddha Nature is said to originate from the concept of the "luminous mind" in Pabhassara Sutta, which is anyway not eternal, not unconditioned and not impermanent (see this answer).
Nirguna Brahman is described in Advaita Vedanta as the substratum of all phenomena in Vivekachudamani 289 and as the material cause of the phenomenal universe in Aparokshanubhuti 45.
So, while Buddha Nature is simply the potential for enlightenment (a principle), it is not the material "essence" of ultimate truth, which Nirguna Brahman is.
So Buddha Nature and Nirguna Brahman are not the same. But they are also not opposite. They simply refer to different concepts. Like oranges and apples - not same, not opposite, just different.

OP:  As awareness/ consciousness is always "on", no matter of what state it's in then surely awareness/ consciousness would still
experience non-existence, akin to our lack of any experience in deep
sleep.

Awareness/ consciousness in Advaita Vedanta is always "on". This is described by Bhagavad Gita 13.14 and Shvetashvatara Upanishad 6.11.
However, this is not the case in Buddhism.
The Buddha taught the following, from MN 38:

"Just as fire is classified simply by whatever requisite condition in
dependence on which it burns — a fire that burns in dependence on wood
is classified simply as a wood-fire, a fire that burns in dependence
on wood-chips is classified simply as a wood-chip-fire; a fire that
burns in dependence on grass is classified simply as a grass-fire; a
fire that burns in dependence on cow-dung is classified simply as a
cow-dung-fire; a fire that burns in dependence on chaff is classified
simply as a chaff-fire; a fire that burns in dependence on rubbish is
classified simply as a rubbish-fire — in the same way, consciousness
is classified simply by the requisite condition in dependence on which
it arises. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the eye & forms
is classified simply as eye-consciousness. Consciousness that arises
in dependence on the ear & sounds is classified simply as
ear-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the nose
& aromas is classified simply as nose-consciousness. Consciousness
that arises in dependence on the tongue & flavors is classified simply
as tongue-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on
the body & tactile sensations is classified simply as
body-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the
intellect & ideas is classified simply as intellect-consciousness.

Think about it. How can the silent witness witness anything except through one of these media: eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind? There was never a time, when there was consciousness being aware of something except through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind. There is therefore no independent consciousness.
Consciousness is dependent on and conditioned upon these six media. It does not exist independently connecting all beings. The consciousness in every being may be of a similar type, but it's not the same consciousness.
For example, I can say that every candle has a similar flame, but it's not the exact same flame that appears on every candle. Each flame is different.
Awareness/ consciousness is not always "on" in Buddhism. It depends on the six sensory media.
Also useful, also from MN 38, in which the Buddha makes clear that it is not the SAME consciousness that wanders through one's life:

Then he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to
him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to
him, "Is it true, Sāti, that this pernicious view has arisen in you —
'As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this
consciousness that runs and wanders on, not another'?"
"Exactly so, lord. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed
One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on, not
another."
"Which consciousness, Sāti, is that?"
"This speaker, this knower, lord, that is sensitive here & there to
the ripening of good & evil actions."
"And to whom, worthless man, do you understand me to have taught the
Dhamma like that? Haven't I, in many ways, said of dependently
co-arisen consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is
no coming-into-play of consciousness'? But you, through your own poor
grasp, not only slander us but also dig yourself up [by the root] and
produce much demerit for yourself. That will lead to your long-term
harm & suffering."