> In 2012, Harry Falk and Seishi Karashima published a damaged and partial Kharoṣṭhī manuscript of the Mahāyāna Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. It is carbon dated to ca. 75 CE, making it one of the oldest Buddhist texts in existence. > > [Wikipedia: Gandhāran Buddhist texts - The "Split" Collection](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandh%C4%81ran_Buddhist_texts#The_%22Split%22_Collection) Here's a copy of that paper by Harry Falk and Seishi Karashima: [A first-century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra](https://docdro.id/PyJF9z5) Question (1): What are the commonly acceptable hypotheses/theories among Buddhist-studies scholars in order to explain how come Prajñāpāramitā sutra (which belongs to the so-called 'Mahayana') have existed since so early (no later than 75 CE)? Question (2): Is it sensible to hypothesize/theorize (or even accept) that, Prajñāpāramitā thoughts, in fact, have developed early parallel with thoughts in Āgama and Nikāya (which belongs to the so-called 'Hinayana')?

I am not questioning the path of Zen. It just exist as it is. But I read this legend about Bodhidharma. To stay awake he cut off his eyelids and tea was flourished. Upto now I have felt tranquility in meditation. But isn't it an insane act. How people tell this story about a great Zen master? Or is it mystical way of delivering something which I am not understanding?

"It seems not customary to share demerit in certain Buddhist traditions. However, I've recently heard demerit can't really be shared. What did the Buddha say about this?" What's the matter with bringing others to approve, or rejoice, or appreciate ones demerits made by body, speech, thoughts? What's the result for one if joining anothers demerits? And refined: What's the different between demerits and sharing them, for an 'unfettered' heart?

Today, we are living in very complex world. Various lifestyles inspire us greatly. So as being a modern layperson, it is difficult to know good karma and bad one. How would I will be on good path and eventually attain Nirvana with 21 century lifestyle? I wouldn't know which activities and deeds have to stop from doing. Which Buddha teachings do I have to follow, differentiating current lifestyles and livings?

I seem to have read that the "original" or "oldest" Tripitaka was written in Pali, but at the same time the Sanskrit language is much older than Pali. How do Sanskrit and Pali relate in terms of Buddhism? I would like to collect as many Buddhist terms and their meanings in one of these two languages but not sure which would provide the deepest, most concise, clear, and complete terminology for the Buddhist cosmology and theories of mind and such. Sanskrit seems like it has a richer more established etymological system so it might be easier to understand concepts that way, but perhaps Pali is closer to the original meaning or something? Which language would be better for a beginner or advanced student of Buddhism?

I'm currently reading In the Buddha's Words by Ven. Bikkhu Bodhi. In the introduction to **The Way to a Fortunate Rebirth** he states that the roots of what make an action unwholesome (akusala) are: > "greed, hated and delusion" Well that confirms a hypothesis I got from reading Dawkin's The Selfish Gene that *'there are no truly altruistic actions'*. People often give to the needy to feel better, to get good karma, to get into heaven. Whatever the case may be they are giving for "greedy" reasons. They're own gratification in some form or another. There is no such thing as kusala. Unless you have a complete lack of self awareness and/or do it purely on instinct. Therefore I ask: **Is this not a paradox?** Is it even possible under the Dhamma to commit a wholesome act (kusala) like giving, without it being rooted in "greed"? Therefore making all positive actions such as donating to charity, giving to homeless, giving gifts, anything positive is actually unwholesome (akusala)?! In summary: **It's impossible to gain good karma without it being routed in your greed for good karma** I'd appreciate your ideas, discussion and/or answers?

Why are Buddhist monks not as extreme as Jain monks when it comes to non-violence? For example Jain monks sweep the floor in front of them to avoid stepping on insects/microbes. As far as I'm aware, Buddhist monks don't do this. I'm guessing it is just that the traditions of the two religions through time have been different. But wouldn't it make sense for the Buddhist monks to be as extreme as Jain monks as they also try to avoid harming any living thing? Or maybe Buddhist monks could justify not doing these things as it would eat up more time in their day thus leaving less time for meditation practice? Thoughts anyone? Thanks

Is Upekṣā (equanimity) a certain kind of feeling which if attained, everyone will feel in a similar way, or its a kind of numbness to sensory input? From the wiki the definition of equanimity says > is a state of psychological stability and composure which is > undisturbed by experience of or exposure to emotions, pain, or other > phenomena It is not clear to me, as a Brahmavihara, is it a special kind of feeling, or it simply is maintaining calm composure in all circumstances,kind of indifference attitude, but this sounds like if practiced, is certain kind of numbness to sensory input, meaning, no matter what is the sensory input is, you stop or repress any kind of feeling that may arise.

Did the Buddha (Shakamuni) say another Buddha will appear in the future? Which text does that appear in? didn't he say he would not be born again? I recall that's what he said.

I meditated for many years and read quite a few Buddhist books by famous authors from here in America and abroad. Unfortunately, I have fallen away from meditating on a regular basis and reading Buddhist books. I would like anyone who can help me in trying to get back into the practice of meditation. If anyone has a suggestion on a book to read or a video to watch, that would inspire me to get back to daily meditation, I would really appreciate it. Thank you for your time.

I recall it being said by the Buddha that the formless - jhana perhaps - is better than the formed. in which sutta does this say this? I remember reading that, but I can no longer find the text

I've recently begun reading up on the Avataṃsaka Sutra and was curious if anyone here is aware of any available Sanskrit text. Thank you.

Anyone knows where I can find an english translation of Moggaliputta’s work “Kathavatthu” (The Points of Controversy) where he somehow “saved” the Buddha’s message of the middle way contained in the Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta, which then later has been rejected by Theravada and Mahayana schools but flourished under Nagarjuna?

Buddhist and non Buddhist people have a lot of ups and downs in their lifes, doubts, fears, anxiety, regrets etc... we understand that as impermanence. Do monks experience similar things of aftet joining the Sangha their lifes are pretty much "peaceful and flat"?

Looking up the [Pali bodhi](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bodhi#Pali) leads to [Sanskrit bodhi](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%AC%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BF#Sanskrit) , which says "perfect knowledge or wisdom", from Proto-Indo European "to be awake". Perfect wisdom and being awake are not the same thing from a layman's perspective, so they are hinting at some underlying unity. Is that present in the components of the word? What about parts of speech of the word, what is its part of speech and how is it composed? Also, it seems to be related to the word Buddha (b*dh*), but I am not sure. [Bod](https://www.shabdkosh.com/dictionary/english-sanskrit/bod/bod-meaning-in-sanskrit) seems to mean "body", and [hi](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%B9%E0%A4%BF) , I dunno. I may be doing this wrong :)

I always hear of Buddhists encouraging people to chant mantras, dedicate merits, pray etc. for animals & pets so that they may be exposed to the dharma and take a better rebirth. Also, chanting for dead animals; the insect you unintentionally killed, the carcass on the dinner table, pets who have passed on etc. How do we know that? Do animals have the capacity to comprehend dharma?

I have read in various sources that karma is impression (when we grasp to something, it creates karma/impression), is this true? So what if, for example, a girl is sitting in a place then then they see someone next to them carrying an expensive bag that she has long wanted. Suddenly, in her mind appear ideas to steal the bag, but then she immediately acknowledge that thought and quickly tries to think of something else (tries to stop the thoughts of stealing). In that case, does the fleeting thought of stealing counts as bad karma? Will she suffer the bad consequences of that thought, even though she immediately acknowledged it and tried to stop that thought?

I am from a Buddhist family, in which my parents believe in Buddhism a lot (100%). But after learning tech, science, and IT in the last five years, what I feel is the idea of rebirth is nothing more than an ancient Far Eastern religious belief, which is utterly impossible. For rebirth to be real, there would need to be: - The ability for consciousness or awareness to survive the death of the brain of the person concerned. This is an impossibility, since consciousness is an exceedingly complex function of the electrical and biochemical activity inside a living brain, and as far as we’re currently aware, only in the brain of certain higher mammals. The definition of death is when all electrical and biochemical activity in the brain ceases, and consequently everything which was ever held in that brain, vanishes. It doesn’t ‘go’ anywhere, it simply ceases to exist. - The ability for a person’s consciousness or awareness to exist both extra-corporeally and immaterially. There is no mechanism which allows for such a thing even when related to a living brain, let alone a dead one. For this to happen, several of the fundamental laws of science would need to be violated. - The ability for this extra-corporeal consciousness or awareness not only to survive the death of the brain in which it originated, and then continue in existence in an immaterial form for an undefined period, but then to somehow find its way into the brain of another person who might not even be born yet—we’re well into the realm of pure fantasy or science fiction here! So what I want to know is: has rebirth been scientifically proven or is it true?

**State Administration for Religious Affairs** (SARA) and the **Buddhist Association of China** are in charge of regulating religion in China. So far, what effect have they had on doctrine for Chinese (non-vajrayana) Buddhism? It's already well known that the Chinese government is hostile to the Dalai Lama. (Also, as a side note, for those skeptical of any government's ability to regulate belief and practice- some percent of American Zen's doctrine and practice can be traced to Meiji era government initiated reforms)

According to Wikipedia's [Buddhist monasticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_monasticism) article, the Buddha formed the first monastery. There is no source, 'though. To quote: > Buddhist Monasticism is one of the earliest surviving forms of organized monasticism in the history of religion. > > The order of Buddhist monks and nuns was founded by Gautama Buddha during his lifetime over 2500 years ago. Ok, so it doesn't specifically say 'monastery' here but still, an order of monks and nuns, some sort of precursor to a monastery at least. According to History World's History of Monasticism : > Leading his followers into holiness a generation after Mahavira, Buddha also organizes them into communities. Is this just "according to tradition" or is there historical evidence of him forming a monastery/order/community: such as archaeological findings or non-religious texts? If yes, is there's anything left of the original or has it all branched out?