Do domesticated animals have control over their karma? Are domesticated animals able to generate their own karma, or is it down to their masters to ensure that they are set on the right path? I am talking particularly in regards to Pets, here.

My dog, Bronson, has epilepsy and fits on a regular basis, perhaps as a result of bad karma? To what extent can he help himself, and to what extent can I?

Are domesticated animals able to generate their own karma

Yes, they commit Kamma just like humans. But their range is limited compared to us. They are unable to commit highly potent good/bad Kamma except on rare occasions. Their minds are clouded by ignorance most of the time. So it's highly unlikely for them to commit a Triple Rooted Kamma required for a perfect human birth.

Examples of animals committing good Kamma(first 2 are highly potent due to the purity of the recipient):

Pārileyyaka the elephant and the monkey who took care of the Buddha in the forest.
Muchalinda the king cobra who sheltered the Buddha from rain in the 6th week after attaining enlightenment
Animals taking care of their offspring.

  their masters to ensure that they are set on the right path? To what extent can he help himself, and to what extent can I?

Yes, the owners can teach them good manners. Train them not to kill other animals, not to steal food from others. The more domesticated the animal is, the less bad Kamma it would commit. Also, you can have it listen to the Dhamma. It's a long shot, but it has worked on some occations. ex: The story of Manduka Devaputta

  My dog, Bronson, has epilepsy and fits on a regular basis, perhaps as
  a result of bad karma?

Yes, it is. This is called the Upattambaka(Supportive) Kamma. In case of lower births, this type of Kamma worsens the living conditions.


What happens after anger disappears? I practiced meditation few years ago,had reached a state where experience consepte of "I"was an illusion.when was Illusion  of the I disappeared anger disappeared altogether. But  I can't  meditate now.It is totally  different. Now wondering thoughts are less.what shall I do ?

If you can give more details on the type of meditation and your current situation -- like anger, and whether 'I' is still there or not -- helpers here might reach you.

Assuming that you are doing sensation-Vipassana, anger and 'I' have a comeback. As you mentioned, "less wondering thoughts" means that now you are able to see thoughts too.

It's a progress in meditation -- things coming and passing by, and you are aware of them. Your main focus must be to alter the defiled behaviour pattern by accepting the sensations and  thoughts as they are, and maintaining noble silence in front of them (this part of maintaining noble••• comes under practice of Citta-Vipassana).

What comes after anger?

Anger generates heat in body. Heat is due to sankharas. After anger seems to pass-by, leftover sankharas induce (or to be precise, divert mind to) other defiled characteristics like lust, memory-loss, frustration etc. These defilements, if  remain unseen wisely, enables anger to have a comeback.


Two-arrows paradigm (Sallatha Sutta) -- in the Mahayana? The Sallatha Sutta (SN 36.6) in the Pali Canon is well-known in the Theravada and MBI (mindfulness-based-intervention -- MBSR, MBCT, etc) worlds for the two-arrows paradigm.

The first arrow is a physical pain (or in modern readings, also primary emotional pain such as loss of a loved one). The second arrow, which ones shoots at oneself, is the emotional reaction to the first-arrow pain. The first arrow is inevitable -- it's part of being in samsara; the second arrow is not inevitable and is preventable dukkha.

It's sometimes expressed in the aphorism -- pain is inevitable; suffering is optional.

My question -- is this paradigm, aphorism or sutta discussed anywhere in the Mahayana? I cannot find it in the Gelug Lam Rim (via Pabonka), but maybe it's elsewhere, or subsumed under something else? But perhaps this sutta is not included in the Tibetan canon (the Kangyur) at all.

Below is the two-arrow (dart) excerpt, Bikkhu Bodhi's translation. (But you might want to read the whole sutta; even though it is fairly short, there is a lot more to it than what's covered by most contemporary teachers and commentators.)

  Bhikkhus, when the uninstructed worldling is being contacted by a
  painful feeling, he sorrows, grieves, and laments; he weeps beating
  his breast and becomes distraught. He feels two feelings a bodily one
  and a mental one. Suppose they were to strike a man with a dart, and
  then they would strike him immediately afterwards with a second
  dart,so that the man would feel a feeling caused by two darts. So
  too, when the uninstructed worldling is being contacted by a painful
  feeling ... he feels two feelings—a bodily one and a mental one.

  ...

  Bhikkhus, when the instructed noble disciple is contacted by a painful feeling, he does not sorrow, grieve, or lament; he does not
  weep beating his breast and become distraught. He feels one feeling
  a bodily one, not a mental one. Suppose they were to strike a man with
  a dart, but they would not strike him immediately afterwards with a
  second dart, so that the man would feel a feeling caused by one dart
  only. So too, when the instructed noble disciple is contacted by a
  painful feeling ... he feels one feeling—a bodily one, not a mental
  one.

Thanks! --David

Most Mahayana sutras are in Chinese Text, as a result someone who is good both in English and Chinese will help you.

I tried google, and found 2 results based on the titles: (however not sure how smart google is in buddhism, so i do not know if they are Chinese versions of your selected sutra)

http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/T01n0026_060
（二二一）中阿含例品箭喻經第十
http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T01/0094_001.htm
佛說箭喻經

However similar story might appear in some other sutras, the story below is one of them which I read before:

======================

http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T19/0945_005.htm
(From line: T19n0945_p0126b20(00))

畢陵伽婆蹉即從座起，頂禮佛足而白佛言：「我初發心從佛入道，數聞如來說諸世間不可樂事，乞食城中心思法門，不覺路中毒刺傷足，舉身疼痛我念有知，知此深痛雖覺覺痛，覺清淨心無痛痛覺，我又思惟如是一身寧有雙覺？攝念未久身心忽空，三七日中諸漏虛盡成阿羅漢，得親印記發明無學。佛問圓通，如我所證，純覺遺身斯為第一！」

======================

And the English version of above text:

======================

Pilindavatsa arose from his seat, bowed at the Buddha's feet, and said to the Buddha:

"When I first left home to follow the Buddha and enter the way, I often heard the Thus Come One explain that there is nothing in this world that brings happiness. Once, when I was begging in the city, I was reflection on this Dharma-door and did not notice a poisonous thorn on the road until it had pricked my foot. My entire body experienced physical pain, but my mind also and recognized the feeling of pain, I knew that in my pure heart, there was neither pain nor awareness of pain.

"I also thought, 'Is it possible for one body to have two awareness?' Having reflected on this for a while, my body and mind were suddenly empty. After twenty-one days, my outflows disappeared. I accomplished Arhatship and received certification in person and a confirmation that I had realized the level beyond study.
"The Buddha asks about perfect penetration. As I have been certified to it, purifying the awareness and forgetting the body is the superior method."

======================

May you be happy and at ease


Who is Bhikkhu Sīlācāra? ... The architect Rutch from Breslau had already designed a monastery with huts for monks, and the plan was that Bhikkhu Sīlācāra and other disciples were to join Nyanatiloka there. ...

(Wikipedia entry on Nyanatiloka)

Who is the monk mentioned above? What is the contribution that he has made? Any books by him?

The link lists a summary of Bhikkhu Silacara's life and other books about him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C4%ABl%C4%81c%C4%81ra

It is a starting place to begin your study.


When did the Buddha get angry? I wish to know the circumstances where/when Buddha ever got angry and acted upon that anger. Thanks for your time. Love.

Anger is eradicated at the 3rd stage(Anagami) of enlightenment. Lord Buddha is fully enlightened. It is impossible to make him or any other being who has reached or passed the stage of Anagami, angry.


The "awakened" outside of a monastic/retreat setting? Most people cannot live in the secluded setting of a monastery or retreat. Some Buddhist traditions nonetheless affirm that laypeople can become enlightened. Are there (inspiring) examples of such laypeople?

How (well) do so-called awakened spiritual/meditation masters function outside the seclusion of the monastic/retreat environments? Please give examples. (Only one comes to mind: Patrul Rinpoche).

Milarepa

...His mother, bitter, sent Milarepa to train in black magic, to wreak revenge on those who had blighted her life...

Then later in life he came to meet his teacher Marpa the translator

...he came to regret his actions, and looked for help in shedding the bad karma he had acquired during his vengeful adolescence...

Tilopa

He practiced this teaching at Somapuri, but when the monastery saw him take a female consort for the practice of union yoga, he was forced to quit the community.

Tilopa profited from his expulsion by travelling throughout India, searching out many teachers and learning their methods.

Naropa

Several years later, at twenty-eight, his interests drew him to Nalanda University, near Pullahari, famous for its Buddhist philosophers...But then a dakini appeared to him, telling him that meditation practice was more important than philosophizing, and that he should search out a certain Tilopa for instructions.Leaving the monastery...

This is an entire lineage Tilopa->Naropa->Marpa->Milarepa

As they say :The truly enlightened are not necessarily very religious. Religon is a convienent description to take care of our fears, to passify us.


Consciousness and Name-Form In the twelve nidanas in the dependent origination it is said that through ignorance arises constructive activities (Sankskara). I do understand that. But the fact that I am still having trouble understanding is how Sankara causes the consciousness to arise and how consciousness cause the name and form to arise.

I do understand that cause of name-form the consciousness arises as these two are very interdependent. But my question is as the above.

How does Sankskara cause consciousness to arise?
How does consciousness cause the name-form to arise?

In my interpretation (which is a product of my own vipassana), the translation and interpretation of nidanas is a little different. I tend to think of nidanas in terms of developmental psychology:

Avidya is innate ignorance, so far so good.
Sankskara is "imprint that creates subsequent tendency to react in a certain way". Kind of like memory but at a lower organizational level. So when there is ignorance, the interaction of primordial nature with itself leaves traces, which, given enough repetitions, eventually accumulate into tendencies and expectations.
These tendencies and expectations get progressively more robust and integrated until they connect into full-fledged continuous experience ('vijnana'). This experience is not reality itself though, but an interpretation/projection assembled from the tendencies and expectations.
Through the same process of accumulation of sankskaras (which remain the underlying fabric comprising the experience) the whole process keeps on maturing until some of the tendencies and expectations crystallize to the status of objects ('namarupa'). These objects are second-order constructs - the signs (nimitta) that make up the original experience are further interpreted up the chain of abstraction.

So in my interpretation the twelve nidanas describe the natural process by which the primordially impersonal becomes (first aware and then) personal.


Why can't we reason or logic our way to NIrvana? I have read at various places that Nirvana can't be described or reached by logic or reason. ONLY meditation is the way. Why is that so? thanks in advance.

I have read at various places that Nirvana can't be described or reached by logic or reason.

I think that's two questions: 1) described, 2) reached.

I think Nirvana is defined as being the end of craving -- not just a temporary pause or lull, but uprooting the "tendencies" and "effluents" which result in the arising of craving -- so changing or undoing habits (if craving is a kind of habit, and results from habits, etc.).

And you can't do something, or accomplish something ("reach" something), just by thinking about it -- you have to do it!

I suppose that's true of everything -- mundane things too not only Nirvana -- e.g. you can't learn to play piano or guitar just by thinking about: you'd have to do it, practice it.

Maybe that's true even of describing something -- I can't describe playing guitar or piano, nor even describe hearing piano or guitar  -- i.e. you'd have to actually do it yourself, play it or hear it, to know it for yourself.


Miracles from Lord Buddha vs messages from Gods? I live in Sri Lanka and many good Buddhist ceremonies take place all year long. And more often than not in almost all of these major functions something extraordinary happens that leave the whole country speechless. These events take place not once or twice but annually as these big functions happen every year.

None of these events happen in broad daylight and no one has been able to explain how they occur and that includes all the well renowned Professors and other science related organizations and universities.

These events have broken the once accepted idea that they are some kind of weather or other anomaly as they have happened annually in perfectly equal circumstances that includes a major Buddhist event,a whopping number of pilgrims,a very pleasant environment & etc.The Somawathi Stupa is a fine example....

The best part is none of these events took place when this place is vacant, all of this happened when it was full of Buddhists and everyone there (at least few thousand people every time) witness the events.

Here is one event on video in broad daylight...

Rays of lights on Somawathi Stupa

Images of the event taken in few different days and angles...

A 3D Hologram like image of Lord Buddha appeared in front of this stupa recently...

According to this description on the banner this is supposedly a image of a group of Devas visiting the Stupa...

As there has been no proper explanation to these events what so ever people have came to the conclusion that this is the power of Lord Buddha, There is another idea. Some think it's the Devas trying to encourage the people to do good more.

Is there any explanation that you can find?

Has such events happened in recent history in any other Buddhist countries,monasteries or events?

There is a lot of business with it, especially in Asian countries and people love to share each other such stuff on facebook. Yes 1000 of such events :-) They would just not see if an Arahat would cross their ways, or not even look deeply in the Miracle of Dhamma by practicing it.

Attached to form, sound, smell, taste, bodily sensations not to speak of intellect, its had to see.

Once you meet Devas, that you do not need to seek for such on Facebook. Some inspirations:

  Knowledge

  This is called manomayiddhi. When the mind is firmly established, you
  can go see these things. Or you can go to the land of the nagas, the
  different lands on the human level — sometimes, when you get tired of
  human beings, you can go visit the heavens: the heaven of the Four
  Great Kings, the heaven of the Guardians of the Hours, the
  Thirty-three gods, all the way up there to the Brahma worlds. The mind
  can go without any problem. This is called manomayiddhi. It's a lot of
  fun. Your defilements are gone, your work is done, you've got enough
  rice to eat and money to spend, so you can go traveling to see the
  sights and soak up the breezes. That's manomayiddhi.

(Note: this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of/for trade and/or keep people trapped and bound. How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)


Lost and in need of guidance I live in Dickinson, North Dakota USA and I am wanting to follow Buddha but have no one to teach me or to ask questions to. I has wondering if there is anyway to get in to contact with a Theravada Buddhist Monk to help guide me down my path? I have checked my local library and online for books but nothing comes up helpful.

If you are looking for a place to ask questions about Buddhism (or to read through the many questions that have already been answered); this is a good place to do that. Our format is that anyone who believes they have the answer to a question may submit that answer for your consideration. So questions will be answered by both monastic and lay people of various traditions. If you are looking for an answer from a specific tradition, simple tag your question as you've done above.

Among the many questions that have already been answered on this site are community wikis such as this list of introductory books. Another online resource is this video wiki created by a Buddhism.SE moderator and frequent contributor, Venerable Yuttadhammo. Hundreds of questions and answers in video form are included here.
For local resources here is a short list of Theravada centers in your area.
Once you've had a chance to check these resources, if you have additional questions, please feel free to submit them! Our New User Welcome gives some tips on how to best use this site. Best wishes!


Does pasteurization count as cooking in prep of juices for after noon? If I were to have, lets say, a V8 after noon, and it was not cooked... but was pasteurized (heated at a high temp which is considered by the food industry to not be a temperature sufficient to cause it to actually cook... like just under the boiling point)... would this be in keeping with the 6th precept as a daily practice. Like during 7pm tea for example.

I am obviously running under the notion that raw pulp-free vegetable or fruit juice is 100% allowable which was told to me by a monk.

Heating juice is allowed; cooking it is not:

“I allow reheating.”
Mv.VI.17.6


Which discourses list the factors needed for becoming successful? I want help tracking down two discourses.
First discourse is where The Buddha is asked how long it takes to complete his training and he answers posing a counter question, then lists an amount of flawed qualities in a learner. It ends with him saying that if a disciple is of good quality the teaching can be reslized in 7 years... or in a day or so (this part similar to satipatthana sutta). I think this one is in the Anguttara Nikaya.
The second discourse i've heard claimed to list factors which lead to success in one's pursuit and the two;

Thinking about the thing one is developing
surrounding oneself with people who are into it

are included in that list iirc.
Thanks

"And what is meant by admirable friendship?
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/kalyanamittata.html


What are the traditional Buddhist arguments for rebirth? According to Buddhist philosophy, there are two Pramanas or means of valid knowledge: Pratyaksha or sensory perception and Anumana or inference.  (This is in contrast to most Hindus who believe in three or more Pramanas.) My question is, what are the traditional Buddhist arguments for the existence of rebirth?

Now at least ordinary humans don't observe rebirth directly, so I assume that these arguments will rely on Anumana.  I've seen Hindu arguments that use Anumana to prove the existence of rebirth, but those arguments are about establishing the existence of the Atma or soul, which Buddhists reject.  So I assume that traditional Buddhist works have a different Anumana-based argument than the one Hindus use.

I have been unable to find the word anumāna in the Pali suttas but found it in the later-day Milindapañha, as follows:

  He who, himself set free in that bless’d state In which the Upadhis have ceased to be, —Lusts, sin, and Karma—has brought safe ashore,
  Saved from the sea of woe, great multitudes— Only by inference can it
  be known That he, the best of men, existed once. Mil 6.4 1

In AN 2.25 there is the word nītattha (inferred meaning), which I have been unable to find elsewhere in the Pali suttas (although the prefix 'nita' is often used unfavourably, such as 'led' by ignorance or 'led' to hell).

The Dhamma of the Buddha is explicitly defined in the Pali suttas as follows:

  The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the
  wise for themselves.' AN 4.92

  Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork... MN 22

  I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard
  to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed
  fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. DN 16

The metaphysical ideas about reincarnation or rebirth, such as Jataka Stories, relinking consciousness (paṭisandhi-viññāṇa), 3-lifetime dependent origination, etc, were obviously brought into Buddhism at a time after the Buddha's passing, probably during to era of King Ashoka, who was zealous in growing the religion socially, Since the core essence of Buddhism does not appeal to common people, a religion would have to be created to make Buddhism appealing, which ultimately resulted in the demise of Buddhism in India (per common scholarly opinion) because Buddhism became virtually indistinguishable from Hinduism.

  Buddhism's distinctiveness diminished with the rise of Hindu sects. Though Mahayana writers were quite critical of Hinduism, the devotional cults of Mahayana Buddhism and Hinduism likely seemed quite similar to laity, and the developing Tantrism of both religions were also similar. Buddhist ideas, and even the Buddha himself, were absorbed and adapted into orthodox Hindu thought,while the differences between the two systems of thought were emphasized. Wikipedia

If you are Indian, you must know the word 'jati', which is the central term used in Pali Buddhism, does not mean physical birth or childbirth. It means self or social identity or caste:

  Jāti (in Devanagari: जाति, Bengali: জাতি, Telugu:జాతి, Kannada:ಜಾತಿ, Malayalam: ജാതി, Tamil:ஜாதி, literally "birth") is a group of clans,
  tribes, communities and sub-communities, and religions in India. Each
  jāti typically has an association with a traditional job function or
  tribe. Religious beliefs (e.g. Sri Vaishnavism or Veera Shaivism) or
  linguistic groupings may define some jatis. A person's surname
  typically reflects a community (jati) association: thus Gandhi =
  perfume seller, Dhobi = washerman, Srivastava = military scribe, etc.
  Wikipedia

In summary, the numerous words in the Pali scriptures, commonly universally translated as "rebirth", simply refer to the re-arising of 'self-view' (see discussion here); just as the words 'pubbe nivasa', which is wrongly translated as 'past lives', really mean 'past adherences', namely, when in the past the mind ignorantly clung to the  five aggregates as 'self'.

Thus, when the Buddha recollected his "past lives" or "past adherences" (properly translated as "past abodes" or "past dwellings", literally "former homes"), he recollected each time the mind in the past ignorantly gave "birth" ('jati') to the idea of 'self', as explicitly explained in the Khajjaniya Sutta, Haliddakani Sutta and elsewhere.

  153. Through many a birth in samsara have I wandered in vain, seeking the builder of this house. Repeated birth is indeed suffering!

  154. O house-builder, you are seen! You will not build this house again. For your rafters are broken and your ridgepole shattered. My
  mind has reached the Unconditioned; I have attained the destruction of
  craving.

  First Words of the Buddha: Dhammapada 153

In his discussions with Brahmans (MN 95; DN 13), monks (MN 38) and even lay people (AN 3.65), the Buddha often condemned the idea of blind faith or unsubstantiated beliefs.


What is the purpose of not eating after noon? We all know this precept taken by the monks, but I would like to understand the reasons behind it. Currently the specialists claim that we should eat small portions every 3 hours or so, eating once a day is not a big issue, but is not recommended.

From my understanding, the Buddha laid down the rule to not eat afternoon in order to reduce the burden on the laity and to help the sangha avoid a negative reputation.

In the Latukikopama Sutta (MN 66) the Buddha said that there were many disadvantages to going for alms at night.

  that monks wandering for alms in the pitch dark of the night have
  walked into a waste-water pool, fallen into a cesspool, stumbled over
  a thorn patch, or stumbled over a sleeping cow. They have encountered
  young hooligans on the way to or from a crime.


Unforgiveable/Unforgetable Past Abortion and Miscarriage I knew a few very senior Buddhism Scholars, one of them also start teaching Dharma having an issue as per title above.
The guiltiness is persist more than a decade and the actions below i personally felt inappropriate especially being too superstitious and claim that all those bad luck due to the title above. Kindly Correct me from wrong if any statement here found inappropriate.

Body overweight and start having obesity sickness like knee pain. They will claim that the aborted child coming back and bite the knee. I thought it is as simple as due to diet issue (too much sugar and fats) and lack of exercise?

Getting a Spirit tablet for the aborted/miscarriages child and often doing offering like praying, food, toy, etc  - Personally thought the child will remain in the human dimension and refuse to get incarnation yet it will keep playing mind tricks to the person.

They will start teaching Dharma and hope the child can listen as well?

Q1) Please someone review the action above is appropriate especially #2 and #3 ?
Q2) Apart the similar question and answer and this post, should we focus more in 8 fold path as core resolution and performing often chanting/praying without spirit tablet? Any Sutta/Mantra suitable for this type issue?
I hope can have different angle and views from Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, etc. Well, those scholars i mentioned above are from Mahayana by the way.

From the sutta quote below, you can see that a person's actions while they were alive determines their outcome, and not rituals performed after death.
Also, please watch this video talk and this video talk on superstition by Ven. Ajahn Brahm. In SN 7, you can find many cases where the Buddha criticized superstitions.
In DN 2, we find that astrology, palmistry, divination, tea leaf reading, magic, geomancy, dream interpretation, making predictions etc. are considered "animal arts" and wrong livelihood for monks.
From SN 42.6:

Then Asibandhaka’s son the chief went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat
down to one side, and said to him:
“Sir, there are western brahmins draped with moss who carry pitchers,
immerse themselves in water, and serve the sacred flame. When someone
has passed away, they truly lift them up, raise them up, and guide
them along to heaven. But what about the Blessed One, the perfected
one, the fully awakened Buddha: is he able to ensure that the whole
world will be reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm when their body
breaks up, after death?”
"Well then, chief, I’ll ask you about this in return,
and you can answer as you like.
What do you think, chief? Take a person who doesn’t kill living
creatures, steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech
that’s false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re contented,
kind-hearted, and have right view. And a large crowd comes together to
offer up prayers and praise, circumambulating them with joined palms
and saying: ‘When this person’s body breaks up, after death, may they
be reborn in a place of loss, a bad place, the underworld, hell!’ What
do you think, chief? Would that person be reborn in hell because of
their prayers?”
“No, sir.”
“Chief, suppose a person were to sink a pot of ghee or oil into a deep
lake and break it open. Its shards and chips would sink down, while
the ghee or oil in it would rise up. And a large crowd was to come
together to offer up prayers and praise, circumambulating it with
joined palms and saying: ‘Sink, good ghee or oil! Descend, good ghee
or oil! Go down, good ghee or oil!” What do you think, chief? Would
that ghee or oil sink and descend because of their prayers?”
“No, sir.”
“In the same way, take a person who doesn’t kill living creatures,
steal, or commit sexual misconduct. They don’t use speech that’s
false, divisive, harsh, or nonsensical. And they’re contented,
kind-hearted, and have right view. Even though a large crowd comes
together to offer up prayers and praise … when their body breaks up,
after death, they’re reborn in a good place, a heavenly realm.”
When he said this, Asibandhaka’s son the chief said to the Buddha,
“Excellent, sir! … From this day forth, may the Buddha remember me as
a lay follower who has gone for refuge for life.”


what is the difference between Anapanasati and the Satipatthana studying the two, and reading the list of the 4 tetrads, in the Anapanasati - first breathe and body, second studying the two, and reading the list of the 4 tetrads, in the Anapanasati - first breathe and body, second feelings. third mind, fourth dhammas.

in the Satipatthana it is the same. I have read Analayo's book on Sati a number of times as well as many other books - sat contemplating both practices,

is it the fact that in the Ana they suggest which dhammas to sit with? where in Sati it is much greater? 4nt 8fp, awakening factors....

Anapanasati and Satipatthana are essentially
the same thing. The Anapanasati Sutta says: "mindfulness with breathing, developed and cultivated, fulfils the four establishments/foundations of mindfulness".

However, in the scriptures, there are two scriptures with some different respective explanations, namely, the Satipatthana Suttas (MN 10 & DN 22) and the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118).

The instruction in the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) is repeated in many other suttas, such as the excellent MN 62 and in most of the 20 suttas in the Ānāpāna Saṃyutta. The Ānāpāna Saṃyutta says in a number places (such as SN 54.8 & SN 54.11) the Buddha practised Anapanasati.

The Satipatthana Sutta is merely a list of various dhammas often illogically compiled together. It appears not possible the Buddha spoke the Satipatthana Sutta for various reasons, such as:

Including the Five Hindrances in the 4th satipatthana (because the hindrances are abandoned prior to the start of practice)
Including painful feelings in the 2nd satipatthana (because pleasant feelings rather than painful feelings arise from the prior calming of the breathing) and;
Referring to the impermanence of experiencing the 4 noble truths in the 4th satipatthana (because an enlightened person has a permanent discernment of the 4 noble truths).

In short, it appears the Satipatthana Sutta does not follow the right sequence of cause & effect as explained in AN 5.159 as the right way to teach the Dhamma.

Bhikkhu Sujato appears to say the Satipatthana Sutta was a fraud (Piltdown), as follows:

  Some of the recent Burmese recensions have re-incorporated this entire section from the Dīgha Nikāya back into the Majjhima Nikāya, and even acknowledge this provenance by re-titling it the ‘Mahā Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta’. Perhaps a better title would be the ‘Piltdown Sutta’. This canonical innovation is extraordinary. While it is common for a word or phrase to slip between the cracks, I don’t know
  any other place where a large body of text has been moved, obviously in
  fairly recent times. No doubt this editorial innovation was designed to
  further exaggerate the already excessive status of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta.
  But the result is rather the reverse—such clumsy mishandling leaves alltoo-obvious fingerprints at the scene of the crime.

  Page 298

Bhikkhu Buddhadasa said:

  Another common problem is that some people cling to and are stuck on the word satipatthana (foundations of mindfulness) far too much. Some go so far as to think that Anapanasati has nothing to do with the four foundations of mindfulness. Some even reject Anapanasati out of hand. In some places they really hang onto the word "satipatthana." They cling to the satipatthana of the Digha-nikaya (Long Discourses) which is not anything more than a long list of names, a lengthy catalogue of sets of dhammas. Although there are whole bunches of dhammas, no way of practice is given or explained there. This is what is generally taken to be satipatthana. Then it is adjusted and rearranged into these and those practices, which become new systems that are called satipatthana practices or meditation.

  Then, the followers of such techniques deny, or even despise, the Anapanasati approach, asserting that it is not satipatthana. In truth, Anapanasati is the heart of satipatthana, the heart of all four foundations of mindfulness. The 16 Steps is a straight-forward and clear practice, not just a list of names or dhammas like in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta (Digha-nikaya#22**). Therefore, let us not fall into the misunderstanding that Anapanasati is not satipatthana, otherwise we might lose interest in it thinking that it is wrong. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding is common. Let us reiterate that Anapanasati is the heart of all four satipatthana in a form that can be readily practiced.

  We have taken time to consider the words "satipatthana" and "Anapanasati" for the sake of ending any misunderstandings that might lead to a narrow-minded lack of consideration for what others are practicing. So please understand correctly that whether we call it satipatthana or Anapanasati there are only four matters of importance: kaya, vedana, citta, and Dhamma. However, in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta there's no explanation of how to practice these four things. It gives only the names of dhammas and expands upon them. For example, the matter of kaya (body) is spread out over corpse meditations, sati-sampajanna in daily activities, the postures, and others more than can be remembered. It merely catalogues groups of dhammas under the four areas of study.

  The Anapanasati Sutta, on the other hand, shows how to practice the four foundations in a systematic progression that ends with emancipation from all dukkha. The sixteen steps work through the four foundations, each one developing upon the previous, and supporting the next. Practice all sixteen steps fully and the heart of the satipatthana arises perfectly. In short, the Satipatthana Suttas are only lists of names. The Anapanasati Sutta clearly shows how to practice the four foundations without anything extra or surplus. It does not mention unrelated matters.

  Appendix B

The Anapanasati Sutta properly describes the true fruition or sequence of practise of a stream-enterer, namely:

The nature & causal relevance of the breathing is known & calmed.
From the calming of breathing, pleasant feelings arise, their causal nature is known & calmed.
From the calming of feelings, the mind and its purity or impurity is clearly known, any impurity is cleansed so the mind becomes pure & free.
Due to having a clear lucid mind, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self are fully (100%) experienced, which results is dispassion, the cessation of suffering & delusion and the giving up of regarding things as self.

In addition, the 7 factors of enlightenment are also explained in proper sequence at the end of the Anapanasati Sutta, including, most importantly, how to properly practise them, relying on "letting go/relinquishment" as the foundation.

As for the four noble truths & noble eightfold path, these must be understood intellectually prior to practise and they are realised gradually throughout each stage of practise. This is why each of 14 steps in the Anapanasati Sutta includes the phrase: "He trains himself" prior to them. "He trains himself" means training in the three trainings of higher morality, higher mind & higher wisdom, which includes the 4 noble truths.

In conclusion, the Satipatthana Suttas were probably composed after the Buddha for Buddhists who practise meditation less frequently; providing various different practises they can use.

Where as the Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) has a very auspicious opening narrative, referring to famous disciples and the four levels of enlightenment in the Sangha. The Anapanasati Sutta is for serious practitioners who are practicing meditation for many hours per day.

In SN 54.11, it is said:

  For whatever one rightly speaking would call, ‘a noble dwelling,’ ‘a divine dwelling,’ ‘a Tathāgata's dwelling,’ it would be the concentration of mindfulness with breathing that he, speaking rightly, would call, ‘a noble dwelling,’ ‘a divine dwelling,’ ‘a Tathāgata's dwelling.’”


Was Buddhism the dominant religion of India for one thousand years? I read in a book by Amartya Sen 'The Argumentative Indian', (link) that Buddhism was the dominant religion of India for about a 1000 years, and that foreigners referred to India as a Buddhist kingdom. Is it true?

This map from wikipedia shows that Buddhism was influential only in a small part of North-East India, and not at all in the southern or western part. Kindly provide online references, if possible.

Wikipedia's History of Buddhism in India says that:

Maurya Empire (322 BCE–185 BCE) was Buddhist
Kushan Empire (30 CE–375 CE) was Buddhist

Decline of Buddhism in India says that decline began in late Gupta Empire (320 CE–550 CE)

So for more than 500 years, there were Buddhist empires ruling the whole of what's now India except its southern tip.


What are the languages associated with each Buddhist school? Suppose I am really serious about following the path of Vajrayana Buddhism o the point of studying texts in their original and I speak only English. I assume that the best language to learn would be Tibetan. Is this correct? What other languages would be relevant for this?

For example, if you would like to study the various forms and schools of Christian thought, I would recommend learning mostly Greek, Latin and Hebrew, but also some Aramaic, Russian and German, in their ancient versions.

If, instead of Vajrayana, I wanted to follow the path of Mahayana, I would assume some kind of ancient Mandarin was the way to go. I assume that this is analogous for Theravada and Pali.

For each school of Buddhism, what would be the best languages to learn in order to be able to study the bulk of the canon associated to that school in its original and why?

Question: For each school of buddhism, what would be the best languages to learn in order to be able to study the bulk of the canon associated to that school in its original and why?

Learning Buddhism is like learning Judo. While it might help to know the meaning of some Japanese terms like Ne-waza, Tachi-waza, Nage-waza, etc. In no way it's a mandatory prerequisite for one to become a Judo master. One'll do just fine to know how to practice Ground techniques, Standing techniques, and Throws techniques. If language was the prerequisite then only Japanese fighters could win Judo tournaments (actually, a lot of them do, but not because they're Japanese, but because they really train their butts off). Similarly for Buddhism, it might help with some Sanskrit or Pali, but ultimately what really separates the noble disciple from the run-of-the-mill simply comes down to the level of dedication of one's time and effort into the cultivation of the Path. No shortcut, no secret obscure language, just pure sweat and tears (maybe no tears... :-) )


Are there any detail exposition of Consciousness without surface (viññanam anidassanam)? I asked this question recently to understand why consciousness is different from the intellect itself and considering the answer given I now think that Consciousness is not something higher than intellect but just the working of intellect i.e. "consciousness of". But now I encountered another type of consciousness Consciousness without surface (viññanam anidassanam) which seems to be beyond the intellect itself, as Bhikkhu Thanissaro explain it here it is beyond the six sense media. I read somewhere else that it is consciousness of arising of Dhammacakka, The Eye of Wisdom.

Could you please direct me to a detailed exposition of this type of consciousness, if any.

Thanks a mil.

Bhikkhu Thanissaro was definitely wrong is explaining viññanam anidassanam is beyond the six sense media because SN 35.23 says there can be nothing experienceable beyond the six sense media.

Since Nibbana, in Ud 8.1, is described as a sense object (ayatana), how can Nibbana be an object of sense media but viññanam anidassanam is not an object of media?

Also, DN 11 says in viññanam anidassanam the four physical elements "have no footing" (rather than "cease without remainder") therefore viññanam anidassanam is not something completely disconnected from the four physical elements.

Also, viññanam anidassanam is certainly not a consciousness of arising of Dhammacakka, The Eye of Wisdom, because the Dhammacakka is described in many suttas (such as SN 56.11 & SN 35.74) relating to the Four Noble Truths and Three Characteristics.

In the two suttas where viññanam anidassanam is mentioned, namely, DN 11 and MN 49, no listener of the Buddha gains enlightenment. This shows viññanam anidassanam is not the arising of the Dhamma Eye nor related to Buddhism at all.

DN 11 and MN 49 are both suttas of Buddhist propaganda spoken against or mocking Brahmanism (and probably not spoken by the Buddha himself). The verse about 'viññanam anidassanam' is spoken to Brahmins & Brahma gods, who don't believe in the Buddha. The Buddha's reply is related to the Brahmnanistic doctrines, using Brahmanistic terminology. For example, MN 49 says:

  Consciousness that is invisible, infinite, radiant all round—that’s what is not within the scope of experience based on earth, water,
  fire, air, creatures, gods, the Creator, Brahmā [1st jhana], the gods
  of streaming radiance [2nd jhana], the gods replete with glory [3rd
  jhana], the gods of abundant fruit [4th jhana], the Overlord and the
  All.

Now, MN 49 says viññanam anidassanam is not within the scope of experience of 'The All' yet SN 35.23 says anything not included within 'The All' is beyond range of experience. This apparent contradiction is explained simply by distinguishing that 'The All' in MN 49 is the Brahmanistic meaning of 'The All' where as SN 35.23 is the Buddha's debunking or redefining of 'The All' for Buddhist purposes.

It is important to know that certain pre-Buddhist Brahmanistic terms, such as 'The All' and 'nama-rupa' can have dual & different meanings in the suttas, namely, the original Brahmanistic meaning & the revised Buddhist meaning. For example, the Brahmanistic meaning of nama-rupa is 'name-form' where as the Buddhist meaning of 'nama-rupa' is 'mentality-materiality'. Thus in suttas directed to Brahmnins (example SN 7.6; DN 11; MN 49 and DN 15), nama-rupa retains its Brahmanistic meaning. Similarly, in MN 49, the term 'The All' retains its Brahmanistic meaning (rather than is the Buddhist meaning found in SN 35.23).

That the famous Western scholars such as Thanissaro, Bodhi, Sujato, etc, do not distinguish two meanings of nama-rupa and cling to the literal Brahmanistic meaning of 'name-form'.

This said, the monk Sujato provides his opinion at: 'Nibbana is not viññāṇa. Really, it just isn’t.', which is contrary to Thanissaro's ideas. In short, Sujato's view appears to be viññanam anidassanam is an immaterial jhana (although I personally may not agree).

While I have not examined the matter in depth (given it is an unimportant teaching), my initial impression is viññanam anidassanam is merely a teaching to Brahmins challenging them to abandon their existing ideas & doctrines. In short, it is later-day Buddhist propaganda typical of the dodgy suttas found in the Digha Nikaya. Most scholars accept the Digha Nikaya was compiled for the purpose of converting Brahmans to Buddhism.


Music and Right Livelihood A lay follower should not engage in five types of business i.e. business in weapon, human being, meat, intoxicant and poison. But there are many jobs can be considered harmful but not included in the five types of business mentioned in the Sutta.
I have a qualification in music and I want to put this into practice. Is teaching music can be considered right livelihood? Talaputa Sutta says

Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound
by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things
inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a
festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who
are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on
things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage in the midst
of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin
with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more
delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on stage
in the midst of a festival. Thus the actor — himself intoxicated &
heedless, having made others intoxicated & heedless — with the breakup
of the body, after death, is reborn in what is called the hell of
laughter.

Teaching piano may not be explicitly mentioned in this Sutta but it is possible for a person who teaches music and for those who are taught to be focused with even more passion, aversion and delusion. Does this livelihood lead us to hell? I believe the majority of healthy, normal people in the most strictest sense will not object to teaching piano. But the Sutta is probably saying otherwise and it can potentially limit your career or business you want to pursue or at worst you can end up unemployed for the sake of keeping yourself on the right path. The antidote to this type of situation is to ignore it and keep going but I don't think ignorance is the right path.
I may misunderstand the Sutta or may not misunderstand it.
Hope someone can shed some light, that will be a very helpful and appreciated. Many thanks.

Music is allowed for those observing the five precepts. This is the most basic practice. The five precepts:

I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking that which is not given.
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

Music is not allowed for those observing the eight precepts (those observing uposatha) and ten precepts (for novice monks and full monks).
A livelihood in music is allowed by the following:

"Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business.
Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in
meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.
"These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not
engage in." - AN 5.177

Music in some sense provides pleasure and maybe even intoxication, but the type of intoxication that is more controllable than alcohol or recreational drugs.
Many things can provide pleasure like food, sex, good thoughts, pleasant sights and sounds. The Middle Way of Buddhism prescribes limits on these for lay persons by way of the five precepts and lay person Right Livelihood.
The point is, do all forms of music make the lay person heedless? I don't think so. I know of people who consume alcohol and get intoxicated while dancing to trance music. That definitely makes a lay person heedless.
But a lay person listening to other types of music, like pop or classical or country, may not become uncontrollably heedless.
However, it is still a type of pleasant sensation. And for a lay person, all pleasant sensations should be experienced in moderation, in accordance with the five precepts and Right Livelihood.
Personally, I think if you use music to uplift a negative or depressed mind - it's even a skillful use of music for laypersons.
For serious practitioners, uplifting the mind using mindfulness of breathing (anapanasati) is better (as prescribed in the Vesali Sutta).


Overwhelming thoughts - Mindfulness and awareness So I have read and know something about awareness and doing regular tasks with attention and focus. But recently there has been chaos with my job and cause for consternation. Thoughts keep arising from my mind and there has been anxiety and that is overwhelming. I don't really resist them as they are thoughts and as such I know that is the nature of the mind. I try to accept it. But I then feel weak and give way to appease those thoughts and then start acting or reacting to them.

Could somebody's experience with Buddhism and meditation here help out with the nature of those overwhelming thoughts? It is possible there is no other way apart from meditation and accepting them calmly. But it gets too strong and then "resisting" becomes a natural tendency and I lose composure.

Also the problems tend to keep repeating themselves from my mind because they are long standing problems albeit impermanent. Makes me feel that that is the nature of problems of this worldly life anyway and then I even feel caged.

If you have thoughts that are repeating in a loop, most likely you are focusing on them or obsessing over them, intentionally or unintentionally, rather than "not resisting" them.

My understanding of not resisting thoughts is this. If you are practising mindfulness on the breath, then when any thoughts appear, just take note of the fact that the thought appeared, then go back to the breath. This way, you are neither focusing on nor suppressing those thoughts. You are instead, focusing on the breath. As soon as you realize that you left the breath to think of something else, your focus returns to the breath.

If someone tells you "don't think about monkeys", what would appear in your mind when you focus on that? Monkeys. The best way to not think of monkeys is to focus on something else. In this case, we are focusing on the breath and eventually, the mind will stick to the breath and the repetitive thoughts would rarely or never arise.

If you face problems, then you may want to solve them or mitigate their effects, if that's possible. Repetitively thinking about the problem does not actually solve the problem. Instead, it results in depression. Solving a problem and obsessing over a problem are two very separate things.

In the solution process, you may list out actions to take, execute those actions at the appropriate times, then review the outcome of those actions at the appropriate times. In between, while waiting for the "appropriate times" to come, if the repetitive thoughts return, then mindfulness meditation would be helpful to bring peace of mind.

Thanissaro Bhikku instructs in his essay:

  If your mind wanders off, gently bring it right back. If it wanders
  off ten times, a hundred times, bring it back ten times, a hundred
  times. Don't give in. This quality is called ardency. In other words,
  as soon as you realize that the mind has slipped away, you bring it
  right back. You don't spend time aimlessly sniffing at the flowers,
  looking at the sky, or listening to the birds. You've got work to do:
  work in learning how to breathe comfortably, how to let the mind
  settle down in a good space here in the present moment.

This Scientific American article tells us the benefits of mindfulness for depression and anxiety:

  As a remedy for depression and anxiety, mindfulness meditation may
  help patients let go of negative thoughts instead of obsessing over
  them. Training people to experience the present, rather than reviewing
  the past or contemplating the future, may help keep the mind out of a
  depressive or anxious loop.

Basic Breath Meditation Instructions and A Guided Meditation are two essays by Thanissaro Bhikku that instructs one into breath-based mindfulness. If the Five Hindrances disturb you, then there are antidotes mentioned in this essay by Ajahn Brahmavamso. To make mindfulness easier, Thanissaro Bhikku suggests using the "Buddho" word in the second essay. You might find that very helpful.


Was the Buddha against violence in all situations? Is a strictly pacifist Buddhism exactly correct or are there certain situations were violence or war might be appropriate according to the Buddha's teaching?

  What did the Buddha say about the Military?

  Given that Buddhist countries have soldiers, what doctrine[s] do they use to justify having a military to defend the people and the Dharma?

  Is there anything in the Tipitaka to support the idea that a soldier  who selflessly tries to defend others and/or the Dharma by violent means, makes good karma?

actually everything is in the suttas and for the purpose of the answer Buddhism i equate with Buddhadhamma, not sure what meaning the inquirer imparts it

  And how, householders, are there three kinds of bodily conduct not in
  accordance with the Dhamma, unrighteous conduct? Here someone kills
  living beings; he is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and
  violence, merciless to living beings.

  So, householders, it is by reason of such conduct not in accordance
  with the Dhamma, by reason of such unrighteous conduct that some
  beings here on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in
  states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even
  in hell.

Saleyyaka sutta (MN 41)

one could be a Buddhist who got caught up in unfortunate circumstances where they are forced to use violence or a deadly force which they wouldn't use otherwise, but they'll still have to experience kammic consequences, which is normally birth in hell

such a kamma i think to a certain degree can be alleviated if the mind isn't clouded and blinded with defilements, first of all with desire of killing, at the time of its (the kamma) creation

  Again, with sensual pleasures as the cause, sensual pleasures as the
  source, sensual pleasures as the basis, the cause being simply sensual
  pleasures, men take swords and shields and buckle on bows and quivers,
  and they charge into battle massed in double array with arrows and
  spears flying and swords flashing; and there they are wounded by
  arrows and spears, and their heads are cut off by swords, whereby they
  incur death or deadly suffering.

  Now this is a danger in the case of sensual pleasures, a mass of
  suffering visible here and now, having sensual pleasures as its cause,
  sensual pleasures as its source, sensual pleasures as its basis, the
  cause being simply sensual pleasures.

  Again, with sensual pleasures as the cause, sensual pleasures as the
  source, sensual pleasures as the basis, the cause being simply sensual
  pleasures, men take swords and shields and buckle on bows and quivers,
  and they charge slippery bastions, with arrows and spears flying and
  swords flashing; and there they are wounded by arrows and spears and
  splashed with boiling liquids and crushed under heavy weights, and
  their heads are cut off by swords, whereby they incur death or deadly
  suffering.

  Now this is a danger in the case of sensual pleasures, a mass of
  suffering visible here and now, having sensual pleasures as its cause,
  sensual pleasures as its source, sensual pleasures as its basis, the
  cause being simply sensual pleasures.

Mahadukkhakkhandha sutta (MN 13)

  When a warrior strives & exerts himself in battle, his mind is already
  seized, debased, & misdirected by the thought: 'May these beings be
  struck down or slaughtered or annihilated or destroyed. May they not
  exist.' If others then strike him down & slay him while he is thus
  striving & exerting himself in battle, then with the breakup of the
  body, after death, he is reborn in the hell called the realm of those
  slain in battle. But if he holds such a view as this: 'When a warrior
  strives & exerts himself in battle, if others then strike him down &
  slay him while he is striving & exerting himself in battle, then with
  the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of
  devas slain in battle,' that is his wrong view. Now, there are two
  destinations for a person with wrong view, I tell you: either hell or
  the animal womb."

Yodhajiva sutta (SN 42.3)

one who is a Buddhist serving in a military during peace time with intent to slack on his duty at the high noon in favor of his obligations as a Buddhist, i think would be committing verbal misconduct of lying

Here's how Ajahn Sucitto of Cittaviveka Vihara describes his encounter with road bandits while on a pilgrimage in India

  Then everything blew up. Nick turned round with a menacing expression
  on his face; someone was tugging my robe on one side while the ﬁrst
  man was hauling frantically at the mug on its strap on the other.
  Three men charged at Nick who was crouched boxer-style; he wheeled and
  hit them with his backpack, then ran off with the three of them in hot
  pursuit. I was being lugged in two directions simultaneously by the
  strap on my water bottle and on my bag, I could only try to get the
  stuff off and let them have it, but their pulling on it made that
  impossible. We were going round in circles, with their excitement
  spinning into frenzy . I had to stop this. “Wait! Wait! Let me get
  this stuff off !” Momentarily they stood still. They all had axes and
  staves. The leader glared at me through twisted features and raised
  his axe.
  Funny how your mind goes clear when the options disappear. Why
  struggle against the inevitable? The only freedom was to go without
  fear. I bowed my head and pointed the top of my skull toward him, drew
  the blade of my hand along it from the crown of my head to the brow.
  “Hit it right there.” Something shifted; he backed off, waving his axe
  and muttering angrily. I stepped forward and repeated the action. Give
  it away; let it all go.
  Things settled. He lowered his axe. I slipped off the bag and the water
  bottle and stepped back. The three of them began excitedly picking over
  the  treasure. I imagined that they’d rummage around, ﬁnd there was
  nothing there of any value, and run off. Two of them picked up the
  gear and scurried down the track away. I felt shaky and sat down.
  Better keep cool — I started chanting softly. Then Nick ambled along with a
  smile but without his pack or assailants. “I’ve hidden the money;
  Bhante, are you all right?”
  His return signalled further frenzy. As his assailants returned, the men
  charged at him with their sticks and began swinging blows; Nick caught
  most of them on his arms: “ All right, all right! I’ll show you
  where.” And the mob had streamed off into the forest by the time that
  I got to my feet, leaving me with one lad, who sullenly resisted my
  attempts to strike up a conversation. But he was mellow compared to
  the older men when they returned — without Nick or the bags. They
  jumped on me and pulled off the bag that I had around my neck
  containing the relics and Buddha image; they ripped off the waistband
  that was threaded through my pouch; they clawed under my sabong and
  dragged the passport out of another pouch that was hanging around my
  waist.
  Then they were off with the loot tied up in bundles on their
  heads. The leader turned round and said “Your bags are over there,”
  pointing into the forest. “Fine, OK.” I said, in a vaguely warm way .
  The forest went back to silence as usual ... a sunny day, with the
  forested slopes on either side.

"Rude Awakenings" (pp. 238-239)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9YE1oP-qr0#t=1h1m15s


Conscience in Buddhism Conscience is described as being the moral sense in which an individual makes decisions. Do Buddhists believe there is a conscience? If so how is it defined

In Mahayana abhidharma, we speak of the two mental factors that I would think are quiet similar to the "moral conscience" that you allude to. These two might be the same as 'shame' and 'conscience' in MA45. The two are:

Shame (Tib. ngo tsha shes pa)
Embarassement (Tib. khrel yod pa)

Regarding shame, the Compendium of Knowledge says:

  Question: What is shame?

  Answer: It is an avoidance of misdeeds on
  account of oneself. It has the function of acting as a support for
  effective restraint from misconduct.

An example of shame is to restrain from stealing even when nobody would have known. It is akin to self-respect.

Regarding embarrassment, the Compendium of Knowledge says:

  Question: What is embarrassment?

  Answer: It is an avoidance of
  misdeeds on account of others. It has the function of just that [i.e.,
  acting as a support for effective restraint from misconduct].

An example of embarrassment is to restrain from stealing by thinking "there is a camera", paying heed to what others would think of our negativity, or thinking "what would my teacher think if he knew?".


Sutta Reference of Buddhism Not being a Philosophy I am looking for the proper Suttra/Dhammapada in which the Buddha states the following.

  My teaching is not a philosophy. It is the result of direct
  experience...  My teaching is a means of practice, not something to
  hold onto or worship.  My teaching is like a raft used to cross the
  river.  Only a fool would carry the raft around after he had already
  reached the other shore of liberation.

The raft is in MN 22.

  I shall show you, monks, the Teaching's similitude to a raft: as having the purpose of crossing over, not the purpose of being clung
  to.


Is ignorance eradicated after breakup of the physical body? Suppose an ignorant person dies in a car accident. Has ignorance come to an end for that person?

We don't know. The Buddha would in each case know if a person possible got rid of ignorance by death, would know the destiny of certain being.


Where is ignorance, and why does it not end with death? Where is ignorance, and why does it not end with death? Can we experience it? Does it have to be actively conditioning formations for us to experience it, or can we know this nidana even when freed from it?

I'm interested in an answer from any tradition.

Ignorance includes self-view. Similarly, "death", being the idea "a being" or "a person" dies, is also a self-view. Since "death" is a self-view, the idea/mental construct of "death" cannot end ignorance.

When there is no self-view, there is no ignorance and there is also no idea of "death", as follows:

  Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall
  be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be
  possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a
  conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be
  non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be
  neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is
  a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming
  all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage
  at peace is not born, does not age, does not die....

  https://suttacentral.net/mn140/en/bodhi

Therefore, the 'Deathless' can end ignorance but 'death' cannot end ignorance.


Finding The Right Buddhist "Vehicle" / Sect For An Individual I know there are three vehicles in Buddhism: Therevada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana. It seems there are so many sects of buddhism. Each of these three vehicles has sub-sects, (Zen, Pureland). Do the majority of Buddhist study each in depth in order to choose which fits them best in order to study the sutras accordingly? I find comfort in reading small pieces of sutras from each sect, though I've always loved Vajrayana and Zen. Is there a large difference?

On a side note: is the eightfold path is acknowledged by all three sects?

Demographically the majority of Buddhists today (nearly 99%) are born in Asia into Buddhists families and would likely follow their family or local tradition.

But assuming your question is regarding those of us who have converted to Buddhism in primarily non Buddhist countries, there may still be no consensus on what the majority of these Buddhist converts do to select a tradition or sect.

One important consideration is whether one wishes to practice with a local group. If so, it might be more practical to gather information on local Buddhist centers/monasteries/temples and visit each to see where one might comfortably fit in and have an opportunity to study and practice along with other like minded local people rather than spending time learning in depth about traditions which may not be represented locally.

If one is more interested in studying and practicing alone or in online communities, the possibilities are far less limited and studying at least the basics of each of 3 major branches and the major sub sects within the major branches could give one enough information to see which branch really peaked ones interest to begin a more in depth study into a particular branch. This answer links information on the various canons used in different traditions.

Finding a teacher whom one really feels they can learn from, whether a present day teacher teaching locally, online, or through books/videos or a historical teacher teaching through their writings, can certainly influence an individual's choice of sect too. When teachings resonate, the energy to learn more grows.

Your question is interesting to me because it's the same thing I wondered when I first began learning about Buddhism. The information on the various schools seemed overwhelming. I started with a local group to make things easier for myself. Then spotted some interesting online resources which made me think beyond the local group. Then found the energy to begin to study the different branches in a basic way and eventually found the tradition that really resonates for me. But I think if I had just sat down and tried to read up on everything all at once, it wouldn't have made much sense. :)


Truth Table of Buddism/Four fold logic? One thing that I find Buddhism fascinating is the "true contradictions", which says that there are statements that can be both true and false.
I was googling and found Dialetheism and Catuṣkoṭi on Wikipedia, but I have not found a truth table that represents this idea.
Do anyone know if there are web pages talk about this idea more clearly, and if we can also do a truth table about this idea, compared with the standard mathematical Truth table?
Namaste

Catuṣkoṭi or tretralemma is mostly made up by  intellectuals who commented on what they thought was the dhamma, and they tried to push their sloppy reasoning as the dhamma too, like Nagarjuna, so it is mostly in Mahayana. None of that stuff is strongly buddhist. The intellectual works like the Upanishads use it too, with their neti neti, and the jains also, to support exactly the same claim like Nagarjuna, ie ''you can't talk about reality'', ie the absolute truth cannot be said with conventional language. Buddhist intellectuals are not really rigorous logicians, even more so when compared to today logicians.
Plenty of people have tried to formalize the tretralemma like here https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.7744.pdf

Hence the interpretation of this modified catus.kot.i is: If somebody
denies all these alternatives, then he/she intends to mean by
abbreviation using the representatives that he/she declares that the
ultimate truth or the reality can- not be described by any formula of
any propositional calculus in which A is a generic formula.
Particularly any propositional calculus for which A is a sentence
letter doesn’t work to describe the reality.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/contradiction/#LNCBudTet
In the sutras, the tetralemma is just rejecting a claim and also rejecting the negation of the claim. This is from the claim being ill-defined, completely out of topic. But intellectuals prefer to view it has a deep thing about reality.


Bad conduct leads to richness? Some people, althought saying that following the Buddhas teaching, but maybe do not have much trust or understandig into cause and effect, kamma, saying that richness and success comes from no fear to do evil.

If that is the case, why are not all people who have no virtues, no Sila, rich, following their arguments pattern?

Isn't it not merely because still having some merits that the downfall does not arises accurate, if one conducts wrong, thinking it will not fall to me?

What's the effect of Sila, virtue, on wealth and success?

(Note: this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks, entertainment but for release from this wheel)

It is a contradiction to say generosity is a virtue when there also exists delight in material wealth.

The teachings in Buddhism about generosity leading to wealth are fake dhamma.

The suttas properly say (somewhere) the supreme generosity is merely for the purpose of beautifying the mind.

Generosity is practised for the sake of giving up selfishness & self. Generosity is not practising for the sake of material reward.

The poor peasants in Cambodia who give to monks will never have material wealth.

Material wealth is acquired by those who have the disposition for making money.

No amount of generosity will give an incapable person the ability of making money on the stock market or start a large corporation, for example.

The greatest wealth in the world is acquired by evil means.

Yes - bad conduct leads to material wealth.

The suttas themselves say wealth can be acquired via evil means.

  These ten pleasure seekers are found in the world.

  What ten?

  First, a pleasure seeker seeks wealth using illegitimate, coercive
  means. They don’t make themselves happy and pleased, nor share it and
  make merit.

  Next, a pleasure seeker seeks wealth using illegitimate, coercive
  means. They make themselves happy and pleased, but don’t share it and make merit.

  AN 10.91


What is the recommended time of day for meditation? Does Buddhism have any recommendation for particular time of day for meditation?
Can I meditate before going to sleep at night if I don't feel drowsy before I go to bed?

Is there any Sutra which talks about this?

No such recommended time. Especially if you are doing Vipassana meditation, you are advised to practice Samma Sati all the time. But early morning(just before dawn) is said to be a good time for meditation since the world is still sleeping and the mind is very clear and less distracted. So you can easily attain Samadhi. You'll find that it's a very good time to study as well. You can easily memorise things. All the Buddhas have attained enlightenment just before dawn as I've heard. Yes, you can do meditation before going to bed. If it's Vipassana meditation, drowsiness won't be a problem as you can meditate on the drowsiness. Some people with insomnia try meditation at nights to help them fall asleep.


Reconciling metta & avoiding fools/immoral people The Buddha repeatedly said to avoid ignorant, immoral people as much as possible, but isn't this - at least a little - opposed to kindness? I associate kindness with being benevolent, caring & somewhat open. Am I missing here something?

Thanks

I think it's a matter of degree, not entirely black-and-white -- how stable you are, how much contact there is between you and of what type, etc.

A monk's giving a formal dhamma talk to a polite audience might be not-very-adversely affected, for example.

Whereas, conversely, your joining a criminal gang would be maybe not so harmless.

It might possibly be a conceit, too, to imagine that you're better than someone else; that you're able to benefit them even when they don't already benefit themselves; that your goodness is stable and is independent of the situation you're in (the company you're with); and so on.

It's good to want to be kind, but you might beware of pathological codependency for example -- which might seem well-intentioned but maybe isn't beneficial (and therefore not actually kind, or not skillful).


When was the Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism marked as separate religions? Historically Buddhism, Jainism were just the one of the sects of many sects or philosophical schools in ancient times. When was this separation of religions happened and all other vedic and non-vedic sects are clubbed under Hinduism?

Well, Buddhism separated itself out as a separate system of thought with the Buddha himself. Jainism must have been a distinct tradition by that time too because the Buddha interacted with the Jains and they are mentioned in the Suttas where they are called the Niganthas. Their leader at that time was Mahavira, who in the Suttas is called Nigantha Nataputta, but they may have existed for quite some time before that.

It seems that there may have been a lot of different ascetic groups that had a lot of the ideas of the Niganthas without actually being a part of the movement proper, as it seemed that Jain ideas of karma had diffused into the general religious climate of the ascetics. For example, it seems that when the Buddha was practicing self mortification for six years, he was acting under this sort of general theory of karma as the basis of his practice.

There were other movements and systems of thought as well that would eventually become part of Hinduism, but it is important to remember that at that time they were very much separate traditions that didn't see themselves as part of the same religion or spiritual heritage. They were very diverse and didn't join together as Hinduism until at the very earliest 200 A.D. These traditions are essentially became the six Astika schools of Hindu philosophy, but it is very unclear as to whether or not these groups accepted the Vedas at that particular time.

Some of them very likely didn't see themselves as Vedic systems of belief at that time and only subscribed to the Vedas when the schools of philosophy began to see themselves as part of a common heritage. Only the Mimamsa school was explicitly based on the Vedas for example, and some of them, like the Samkhya, Yoga, and Vedanta schools had received a great deal of influence from the various ascetic movements and possibly considered themselves to be part of the ascetic tradition rather than the Vedic tradition.

In addition to these distinctive traditions, you had the general folk religion of the people that was largely unorganized. People would venerate Nagas in caves and the various tree spirits by leaving offerings before them. These devotional customs had nothing to do with the Vedic rituals of the day, but would eventually be incorporated into the devotional practices of Hinduism.

I hope that gives a good overview.


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

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

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

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

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


How do I make non-buddhists help understand I operate with a different view? I have started on my path not very long ago and because I'm very unsure where it will take me, I am hesitant to label myself as a Buddhist or even a meditator or such. Also where I live, eastern schools of thought are not well known anyway.

In certain social situations (most recently at the office Christmas party) I am usually nagged to relax more or to enjoy myself more. I understand that these are good intentioned tries to make me have a similar experience to what these people deem as joyous. However I don't feel anxiety or loss of comfort just because for example I don't get drunk and dance in a very animated way. In fact I'm usually quite content to just lean on the bar and observe people and be mindful of what's happening. I have yet to meet a party goer who will believe this.

Do you have any advice on how to try and help these people understand that I don't partake in their experiences because I don't find them wholesome and ultimately fulfilling without having them brand me as a weirdo or a liar? Specifically without mentioning Buddhism, meditation, mindfulness and similar terms? I'd like to convey believably that there are other ways to enjoy yourself, not just drinking and hitting up attractive people.

Thanks!

As long as what you are doing is not immoral in my case I would go along with what the others are doing.

Main point is by doing this you should not accumulate more fabrication. One way is to reduce contact through it is not very effective, which you are trying now.

The more effective way is to go along with the crowed but what every you do be mind full of the sensation and its impermanence. It is reaction of clinging or aversion to the sensation created when you come in contact with something which causes fabrications. This is what you should actively avoid. Though you might not chase sense pleases you have to go with the flow in social contexts if you want to be a householder.


Different meditation approaches within Theravada I talked to a monk at a Thai Theravada based monastery recently and he told me that they primarily use breath meditation and jhana to gain awakening.  And then there are other traditions, like yours, that emphasis vipassana to gain awakening.  To me, they seem like completely different paths.  Do you know why it is that different monasteries within the same regional tradition of Theravada have completely different approaches?  Are they equally useful in gaining awakening?

Actually there are 4 ways and they are all valid Theravada techniques. Problem occurs when misinformed people start saying only one of these techniques is correct.

Insight preceded by tranquility
Tranquility preceded by insight
Tranquility in tandem with insight
by settling the mind with regard to the Dhamma.

Read the Yuganandha Sutta for more details


How to disconnect family life & become monk? I have a very strong pull towards becoming a full-time monk but being a family person (a son/husband/father) it seems really tough to take-up robe. How do I go about convincing or communicating this thought to my family?

What are the drawbacks if I just leave everything and walk away?

MN82 discusses the drawbacks faced by Raṭṭhapāla when expressing a desire to  go forth:

  Please give me permission to go forth.”
  When he said this, Raṭṭhapāla’s parents said to him,
  “But, dear Raṭṭhapāla, you’re our only child. You’re dear to us and we love you. You’re dainty and raised in comfort.
  You know nothing of suffering.
  When you die we will lose you against our wishes.

Similarly, consider the needs of your spouse and children. Later in MN82 we see the impact on the wives:

  Then Raṭṭhapāla’s former wives each clasped his feet and said,
  “What are they like, lord, the nymphs for whom you lead the spiritual life?”
  “Sisters, I don’t lead the spiritual life for the sake of nymphs.”
  Saying, “Our lord Raṭṭhapāla refers to us as sisters!” they fainted right away.

Going forth affects many. Discuss this with them. Also think about your own motivations. Raṭṭhapāla felt he had no choice in life but to go forth:

  ‘I’ll either die right here or go forth.’


What object should one focus on when meditating to reduce anxiousness? Just the header really! A friend is very self reflective, builds herself up into a tempest thinking about her situation (not terrible, but below where she is comfortable being, I guess).

Just feel the body in general as one breath in and out. Then allow the body to relax. As the body relaxes, so does the cognitive mind.


What exactly is rebirth? According to Buddhism, one's self is made of 5 agregates. But these agregagtes should dissolve at death, because according to neurosciences,feeling, perception, thinking and conscience are just functions of the brain, which is destroyed at one's death. So what links the new human B that is considered a reincarnation of human A ?

"According to Buddhism, one's self is made of 5 agregates.", maybe according to whom's ever Buddhism and Buddhists, but the Buddha did not told such. More: he repeatedly stressed out that ones own can not be found in the five aggregates.

As for what is birth:

  "And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] spheres of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth. MN 141

And as part of the first Noble truth it's somehow pointless to call it "merely convention" since such would hinder one to take actions for a beyond. So for a serious practitioner it's very needed to avoid people who deny coming into being and the Noble Truths, people of grave wrong view.

What makes you the same person who wrote the question and now reading an answer? Desire? Not-knowing?

And without first things first, your practice becomes nothing but that of the many Jains around: a really poor living of real poor hypocriticals.

May you have an auspicious birth here, since it is the prerequisite of liberation.

(Note: not given for stacks, trade and exchange but as a tiny door out of the wheel of rebirth)


Anicca (when and how?) The Buddha put high emphasize on Anicca and thus it shouldn't be dismissed. Now my question: When should one remind oneself of the transience of all phenomena? I doubt in every occassion.

If I for example walk or do my daily chores, according to the Buddha I apply Sati on the sense that I remember to not to forget walking. So this then is a rather concentration excercise without pañña (wisdom), right?

The Buddha put high emphasize on Anicca and thus it shouldn't be dismissed.

The Buddha put an emphasis on many dhammas.

The Buddha did not actually teach to constantly remind oneself of anicca because this would mean the mind is always thinking. Instead, one only reminds oneself of anicca when necessary.

The goal of meditation is to stop thinking so the mind has concentration so it can develop calm and then see anicca directly (rather than reminding oneself about anicca).

Reminding oneself about 'anicca' is called 'anicca sanna'. Where as seeing anicca directly is called 'vipassana'. Reminding oneself about 'anicca' is not 'vipassana'

  Now my question: When should one remind oneself of the transience of all phenomena? I doubt in every occasion.

'Reminding oneself' is called 'mindfulness'.

The wisdom (panna) used with reminding oneself is called 'sampajanna' ('situational wisdom').

'Reminding onself about impermanence' is called 'anicca sanna'.

'Anicca sanna' is a preliminary practice (mentioned in MN 62 & MN 118) & particularly useful when there is a very strong hindrance that one cannot control and thus must endured; patiently waiting for the energy of the hindrance to dissipate & dissolve.

It is also done whenever necessary when something must be endured or when something is lost. Such as when you dislike a poster on the internet or lose a debate on the internet. You can think: "This internet is impermanent; this debate is impermanence".

For example, you have a good meditation, which then ceases, due to hindrances. If the mind clings to the good meditation wishing to have it all the time, one can reflect on impermanence to get rid of the craving.

Or if your mother nags you to do your chores, you reflect: "This nagging is impermanent; the sound is impermanent; doing the chores is impermanent".

  If I for example walk or do my daily chores, according to the Buddha I apply Sati on the sense that I remember to not to forget walking.

No. The purpose of sati is not to remember you are walking. The purpose of sati is to remember to walk with wisdom or to do chores with wisdom.

For example, in a monastery, everyone must do chores. The chores are done with the wisdom that defilements lead to suffering therefore to do chores without defilements.

  So this then is a rather concentration excercise without pañña (wisdom), right?

Sati is never without wisdom. Sati always has sampajanna. Sati is only remembering or calling something to mind. Mindfulness must remember to apply wisdom. Therefore, mindfulness & wisdom always operate together. There cannot be mindfulness without wisdom. This is why the term 'sati-sampajanna' is often used, as a compound.

Why would we walk or do chores without wisdom? If we do not have any wisdom about the purpose of walking meditation or doing chores & how to do it, why would we do it? For what purpose? With what method? For what benefit?

This video might help: Buddhist Meditation Sati Sampajanna

This book might help: Part II. The Use of Dhamma


How can we make compatible the 'ehipassiko' aspect of the Dhamma with the faith aspects of it? In this sutta (https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.077.than.html), it is explained that the power of Gotama Buddha as a sammasambuddha cannot or should not be conjecture about; the underlying mechanisms of kamma are not available to be investigated either.
However, also in the suttas it is emphazised that the teachings can be tested by ourselves through practice and investigation, being that the 'ehipassiko' ("come and see") aspect of the Dhamma.

How can we conciliate those aspects of the Dhamma?

We have teachers and bhikkhus teachings about rebirth, kamma, abhijjas, the nature of Buddhas and arahants, the nature of reality, and so on, but never reaching consensus about those themes. Even within the same schools, the teachings of those topics varies from teacher to teacher.
It seems to me that Buddhism, at least in those topics, becomes a religion as the many others existent.
Are we supposed to follow blindly this part of the Dhamma?

Thanks for your time!

In this sutta (https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.077.than.html), it is explained that the power of Gotama Buddha as a sammasambuddha cannot or should not be conjecture about; the underlying mechanisms of kamma are not available to be investigated either. However, also in the suttas it is emphazised that the teachings can be tested by ourselves through practice and investigation, being that the 'ehipassiko' ("come and see") aspect of the Dhamma.

I don't see any contradiction in the suttas. Sorta like a college math professor telling 5th graders not to conjecture about the working of calculus, differential equations, etc. But once the students have made it thru high school and into college, taking more advanced math and they'll be able to "come and see" and find out for themselves. Similarly, there're many things in the Dhamma that can be verified, some can be verified in the here and now, some would require thorough training with much dedication and effort down the line.


What role does zen or zazen play in Tendai? I would like to know how Tendai or indeed Tiantai, views its use of zazen or zen.

I would provisionally assume it serves a different role than it does or is in Soto and Rinzai and contemporary Chan.

The Tendai school has its own system of meditation based on the writings of the founder of the school, the great Chinese monk Zhiyi, who wrote a classic meditation book called the Mohe Zhiguan which means The Great Shamatha Vipashyana. This meditation style in Japanese is simply called Shikan, which is the Japanese pronunciation of the last half of the name of the book meaning Shamatha Vipashyana.

I don't know too much about it but it is a different system of meditation than Soto Shikantaza or Rinzai Koan practice. I think that it is a more structured and explicit system of meditation but I don't have much direct knowledge on this point.


How should I offer a compassionate ear to my mother while setting healthy boundaries? I hope you are all well.

I have been studying Buddhism for a few months and I am very grateful for the teachings. I've visited this website frequently for similar questions and this is the first time I am reaching out to this community.

Since bringing Buddhist practices into my life, my relationships have improved, especially with my mother. However, I am finding it difficult to navigate what would be the most helpful or skilful actions for myself and my mother during the suffering she is experiencing at the moment. A bit of background on my mother: she has narcissistic tendencies and since my childhood, has leaned on my siblings and I for her emotional needs especially in times of suffering.

I am now 20 years old and the relationship we share I feel is much healthier than even a year ago, as I struggled to understand my own suffering and suffering of others before I began studying Buddhism. My mother is in the midst of a break up with her ex-fiancé and I am the only one she has shared this with in our family unit (I live with her and my younger sibling who is 17 years old). While sharing with me her feelings about this and having my shoulder to lean on, she began sharing things she dislikes about my father and his family (ex-fiancé and my father are different people).

I understand the importance of boundaries and I am not sure how to lend a compassionate ear for her during this time while communicating that I cannot be a therapist for her. I recognise that everyone is in care of their own suffering and that it is not your responsibility to alleviate the suffering of someone else, only they can do that.  I would like to share compassion with her in a healthy way for both of us as our past had no boundaries, and I had felt that her emotions were my responsibility.

In other words, I want to do what I can to support her during her suffering in the most healthy and skilful way for both of us. How would one go about this? I appreciate all comments and advice and I'm happy to go into more detail if you would like. Thanks for reading.

There is affective empathy - feeling what the another is going through, and cognitive empathy - understanding what another is going through.

The former weighs you down and offers solace but no solutions, the latter is (a sometimes seemingly cold) 'What happened? Where are you now and do you want to be there? How do you move from here (if you want to)'.

If your mother can answer those questions with respect to her problems, herself, then she has everything she needs to, to get out of those problems. (she may want more than that from you, but that is in short, craving, and won't help her towards her goals)

If she doesn't, she needs to find those answers, by herself or with the help of others.

I think the Buddhist way to say it is have compassion - feel for, but not with the other. Offer your notion of solutions, but don't carry her burden.


Differences of Ultimate Realities in different traditions In Theravada Abhidhamma Pitaka there are four Ultimate Realities (paramattha dhammaa) mentioned,

Citta
Cetasika
Rupa
Nibbana

Is there any variations in these realities in other traditions of Buddhism?

There are those traditions that disregard pursuing an "ultimate reality." In Tools of Perception (and mp3), Thanissaro says:

There's a point where the perceptions have done their work and you put them aside. That's the correct use of all the different ideas and concepts that we pick up from the study of the dhamma. The incorrect use is to say there is an ultimate view of reality and there are conventional views of reality and what we're trying to do is get the ultimate view which describes things as they really are.
And so you latch on to those ideas: okay, this is ultimate reality and you hold on to it as if you could hold reality in words. But if you hold on to it with words, what are you doing with it?

His point being that even if you found an "ultimate" reality, what use is it compared to what your actions are? What use is having a mental description of something when the mind has not gone beyond suffering:

So we're not trying to get to an ultimate description of reality, we're trying to get to an end of suffering--two very different things.


How can you translate nibbida? How can you translate or define nibbida in English?

This is turning away from the worldliness with a view to attain Nibbana.

When you get input fro your sense door you are equanimous towards the sensation that arise knowing their impermanence. Reacting creates the conditioned existance.


Samatha vs Vipassana. What are the mechanics? So correct me if im wrong samatha and vipassna are the goals of all forms of meditation. Anapanasati can be either for the goal of samatha or vipassana (or both). Vipassana is very cognitive, contemplative, and samatha is often the exact opposite, one pointed focus?

Im curious how it works. How does it connect to doctrines of tanha and clinging? Is the samatha concentration lead to deep state of non-reactivity? Like this is how it leads to tremendous results (samatha anapanasati is the meditation used in psychotherapy as just pure stress reduction) . But despite it's results it's not sufficient for the Buddhist path because serious stages of enlightenment require real understanding and insight.

And vipassana on the other hand from what i understand is for insight. it doesnt mean tranqulity and mental strenght cant come from it, in fact the true peace and strength does come from understanding eventually, but thats not the point. vipassana on death is generally not that happy go lucky an experience...

So while insufficent samatha is a good powerful tool for overcoming barriers? If someone is consumed by hatred or anger or anxiety or impatience and they are too frenzied to really practice so it would be good to tranquilize them first? If I'm dealing with a lot of stress samatha would be the place to go?

Tell me if everything I've described is correct. :) thanks

Vipassana (insight) is direct clear seeing thus does not requiring any thinking; therefore it is not antagonistic to samatha (tranquility). Both samatha & vipassana are natural results of the silent collected stable mind called "samadhi". Suttas such MN 149 say samatha & vipassana are products of the noble eightfold and are developed in tandem.

Thus for him, having thus developed the noble eightfold path, the four frames of reference go to the culmination of their development. The four right exertions... the four bases of power... the five faculties... the five strengths... the seven factors for Awakening go to the culmination of their development. [And] for him these two qualities occur in tandem: tranquillity & insight.
MN 149

"Samatha" ("tranquility") is not "one-pointed focus" ("samadhi") nor is genuine "one-pointedness" ("ekaggata") an obstacle to vipassana. Its appears you are reading the typical non-sense of modern teachers.
I will read the question more thoroughly & completely at a later time and probably add to this answer.


How to wake up properly after a nights sleep? My mind tends to be more unbalanced after waking up than before going to bed. I try to observe breath and sensations but the mind is pretty muddled. This raises the question if the mind is making sankharas in deep sleep too? How is that possible when I don't have a choice in the matter?

What are the best practices after waking up?

One simple way to setup your mind in the morning is to re-take the refuge vow and/or the five precepts. Or, if you are a Mahayana practitioner, recite the Bodhisattva vow.

Here is another consideration though: as one of my teachers said, "the morning begins in the evening". Your morning mind is continuation of the tendencies you have setup in the evening. So if you go to bed with a clear mind and pure heart of simplicity, chances are, you will wake up clean and bright. The state of mind during the day matters too. If we argue, or get obsessed, or blame ourselves during the day, these thoughts and moods tend to come back during the night.

In the evening, there is a number of ways to prepare your mind for a good night. In my opinion, meditation should be done earlier in the evening, before the sunset. After sunset, having a silent walk helps. What I personally do after that, is read a Buddhist book in bed. This only works if your practice is going well though, otherwise you may get a sense of guilt when comparing the high ideals with your actual state.


What Does It Feel Like to Be in Nirvana? Nirvana is the goal of the Buddhist path. The literal meaning of the term is "blowing out" or "quenching". Nirvana is the ultimate spiritual goal in Buddhism.
What Does It Feel Like to Be in Nirvana?

The fully liberated ones (called arahants) do not experience any kind of mental suffering. They may experience physical pain which they endure and not suffer mentally from.
They do not have latent tendencies (anusaya), defilements (kilesa), effluents (asava), fetters (samyojana), the five hindrances (pañca nīvaraṇāni), craving (tanha), clinging (upadana) and the fourteen unwholesome mental factors from the Abhidhamma. They do not have the 3 poisons (greed/ lust, aversion and delusion).
They may plan to do something (see this answer), but they never plan to become something or somebody. They don't brood about the past or, dream or worry about the future.
Where the unenlightened feel boredom due to inactivity or feel loneliness due to lack of company, the arahants feel completely at ease and peaceful, and even prefer this. Their mental state is peaceful, free of "noise" and mental agitation of any kind.
They eat or take care of their health only out of necessity for maintenance and not with desires for sensual pleasures or to become something or somebody.
Each of the technical terms mentioned like fetters, hindrances, effluents, defilements, craving, clinging, unwholesome mental factors, 3 poisons etc. are all very detailed and often expand into further lists and definitions - you can search for them on Buddhism.SE.
But if you want a super short summary - it's bliss and peace all the time.
Also please see Dhammapada chapter 7.