Sometimes we get an instant Karma. In other cases it takes time for Karmic fruits to ripen. I want to know in later case where does the Karma get stored or how is it remembered.

Do Buddhists use the Shambhawi mudra ? What kind of tradition use it and for which purpose? (if possible with some references)

Should monks be envolved with Politics or Governments? I think the answer is a clear NO, but I have seen things like that so I would like to doublecheck and ask where is this "rule"? Vinaya?

Dependant Origination declares that from Consciousness (Viññana) arises Nāma-Rūpa, not just Nāma. Therefore it is implied that even in formless realms the entities that exist there also have a form of some kind. Uddakka Ramaputta and Alara Kalama were most probably born in formless Brahma realms after their death. But Buddha didn't visit Alara-Kalama and Uddakka-Ramaputta which means that they couldn't understand the Dhamma which must have been a problem with the senses or something similar (My first question) because they already had superior mental ability to understand the Dhamma (MN 21 ), > Alara Kalama is wise, competent, intelligent. He has long had little > dust in his eyes. What if I were to teach him the Dhamma first? He > will quickly understand this Dhamma. Dust here implies the 5 hindrances . > This Uddaka Ramaputta is wise, competent, intelligent. He has long had > little dust in his eyes. What if I were to teach him the Dhamma first? > He will quickly understand this Dhamma. I would like to get an answer to either or both (if possible) of the below questions, **Question 1**: Why couldn't Buddha teach the Dhamma to Uddakka Ramaputta and Alara Kalama. **Question 2**: What is the difference in form between the Rūpa Lōka and Arūpa Loka.

I am following meditations as taught by **Ajahn Brahm** in his book **Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond.** I have almost reached to state of **Silent Present Moment Awareness.** The next stage is **Silent Present Moment Awareness of Breath**. Its been days I am watching the breath and its getting no where. I get bored watching the breath. The next stage is supposed to be **Awareness of Beautiful Breath.** Thats not happening and its getting boring, even the meditation. **What to do when breath watching gets boring?**

We get pleasure and satisfaction by doing Mathematics. Thinking over math problems and solving them does give us some pleasure. According to Buddhism, what is this pleasure categorized as? A sensual pleasure ? Or is it like pleasure we get from Jhana?

Did Gautama Buddha endorse the caste system? > [Buddhism: An Atheistic and Anti-Caste Religion? Modern Ideology and Historical Reality of the Ancient Indian Bauddha Dharma by Edmun Weber](http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/irenik/relkultur50.pdf) > Hans Wolfgang Schumann has statistically proven that almost all of Buddha's disciples were high caste people and that the Brahmans comprised the majority of the Sangha. > Buddha tells about the earlier Buddhas in the so-called Mahapadana Suttanta- Great Sermon on the Legends.21 He refers to their membership of (high) caste as the first characteristic of their full enlightenment. According to this report the Buddhas belonged all to the high castes, to the Kshatriyas and Brahmans. Buddha says proudly about himself "And now I, the venerable and fully enlightened one, was born a warrior and have come from the caste of the warriors, O monks. > 21 Buddha - Die Lehre des Erhabenen. Aus dem Pali Kanon ausgewählt und übertragen von Paul Dahlke, München 1960. Also: > The Bodhisattvas appear only in two kinds of lineage, the one of the Brahmanas and of the warriors (Kshatriya). So my question is, did the Buddha endorse or uphold the Vedic caste system?

As I discuss in [this question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/7426/19) , by far the most popular school of Hindu philosophy today is the Vedanta school, which is based on the philosophical portions of the Vedas. But in the time when Buddhism was at its peak popularity in India, the most popular school of Hindu philosophy was the Purva Mimamsa school, which was based on the ritualistic portions of the Vedas. Now one of the most famous Purva Mimasa philosophers was named Kumarila Bhatta, and in [this excerpt](http://gdurl.com/Is8P) from his work the Tantra Vartika, he argues that Hindus should not accept Buddhist texts as valid scripture, because Buddha was a violator of the Vedas: > Then again, we find that the Bauddha teachings were given by one who was a born Kshatriya; and as such, he transgressed the duties of his own class, in taking upon himself the work of taking and receiving presents (which are the monopoly of the Brahmanas); and hence how can we believe that true Dharma or Duty would be taught by one who has transgressed his own Dharma? It has been well said: "One who is found to be doing deeds opposed to a prosperous hereafter, should be shunned from a distance; because how can one who deceives himself offer any salutary advice to others?" > > Such transgression of Dharma by Buddha is clearly mentioned in **the Alankarabuddhi (a Bauddha work), where Buddha is represented as saying - "May all the pain proceeding from the sins due to the Iron Age, rest in me, and leave humanity at large absolutely free!"** And in connection with this his followers eulogise his virtues in the following strains: "For the sake of the well-being of humanity, He transgressed his own duties as a Kshatriya, and having taken up the duties of the Brahmana, he taught, even to the people outside the pale of Vedic religion, such truths relating to Dharma, as were not taught by Brahmanas who were unable to transgress the prohibition (of such teachings being imparted by outsiders); and thus prompted by his mercy to others, he even went to the length of transgressing his own Dharma!" And we actually find His followers behaving in a manner entirely at variance with the teachings of the Veda. I found the quote in bold interesting, because it seems reminiscent of the Christian notion that "Jesus died for our sins". So my question is, does the Buddhist text that Kumarila Bhatta is quoting from, the Alankarabuddhi, still exist? By the way, when the Alankarabiddhi quote says "Iron Age", that's an English translation of the Sanskrit term "Kali Yuga", which refers to the Hindu notion that we are currently living in an age of evil. Now I think only some sects of Buddhism share this Hindu belief, so that may help in finding this text.

As I understand the cycle of birth and death produces suffering but ,once the truth is realized, there is no suffering ,so living in this world shouldn't be any longer a problem .So is freedom from birth and death here mean only that there is no binding to the cycle or that there is no longer a possibility of experiencing the cycle forever ?. This may induce another question if one can be reborn fully aware of the truth ,if that is no-longer a possibility then how can this be considered true freedom ?.

Does anyone have a comprehensive side by side reference to Suttas numbering from different edition (PTS, VRI, etc.) of the Tripitaka? I have trouble with reconciliation of certain references to the Sutta names.

What happens if no beings choose to act on one's bad karma? Does one then hallucinate one's bad karma? *( By this I mean i.e. is there experiencing of hallucinations (or illusions) alongside things such as real pain? ).* E.g. What would have happened to Moggallāna if no being chose to attack him?

Has there been a recent monastic ruling amongst Dharmaguptaka monks in China & Hong Kong with regards to a policy of denying ordination to laymen who have lived homosexual lifestyles prior to cultivating the aspiration to go forth?

When meditating on the breath, after a while the sensation of my eyes not being closed properly appeared. This then turns into vibrating, and my eyes feel like they are literally moving. I tried refocusing on the breath but this is a very difficult sensation to ignore. Does anyone have advice? Other sensations I feel are the opening of my eyes, if I do not pay attention to them. This sometimes happens, but mostly doesn't. This is also extremely distracting, as I feel like I should focus on keeping my eyes closed. Many thanks.

I read the discussion between Bhavaviveka and Buddhapalita, and there's a reference to "no cognition" (anupalabdhi) of emptiness, as liberative, though I forget which one of the two were supporting it. e.g. Garfield and Westerhoff in *Madhyamaka and Yogacara*: > The cognition of the ultimate nature of things—their all being empty > of intrinsic nature—is nonconceptual because, there being nothing to > cognize, no cognition arises. Or Eckel in *To See the Buddha*: And obviously the heart sutra includes (emphasis mine): > No suffering, no origination, > > no stopping, no path, *no cognition*, > > also no attainment with nothing to attain. ---------- Does anyone say that there is "no cognition" of *the present*, either at all times, or that only this "no cognition" has conventional validity? Or, can we have conventional knowledge of the present?

According to AN 5.73 (translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu): > "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard > & studied it and thinks about it, evaluates it, and examines it with > his intellect. He spends the day in Dhamma-thinking. He neglects > seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of > awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on thinking, not one who > dwells in the Dhamma. Another translation of AN 5.73 by Bhikkhu Sujato: > Furthermore, a mendicant thinks about and considers the teaching in > their heart, examining it with the mind as they learned and memorized > it. They spend their days thinking about that teaching. But they > neglect retreat, and are not committed to internal serenity of heart. > That mendicant is called one who thinks a lot, not one who lives by > the teaching. Is Dhamma-thinking considered *yoniso manasikara* or wise attention or appropriate attention? Please explain your answer. If yes, then why is it not useful, without internal tranquility of awareness (*cetosamatham*)? If no, then what is needed to upgrade Dhamma-thinking to wise attention? What is it missing?

What is the difference between sex cults, and the tantric tradition? I understand that the latter has a lot of tradition and ritual behind it And while there is a strict monastic code, I imagine, in the tantric tradition, monks are encouraged to have sex with their disciples. Furthermore, any claims that there is a direct lineage all the way back to our Buddha, Shakyamuni, is as doubtful as it is in zen; these practices may be Indian, but aren't specifically his. I'm not saying that a power imbalance in a religious context of sexual activity needs to be abusive, but it can be. So why not here?

The fifth of the precepts is "I undertake the training to refrain from intoxicants." does smoking marijuana count as an intoxicant ?

According to this Buddhist glossary (quoted below), there are six types of people i.e. people with six types of nature or temperaments. Apparently, it comes from the Visuddhimagga. There is some information on the Buddhist personality types wikipedia page, but it doesn't have sufficient source citations. According to it, there are different recommended techniques for the different temperaments. Also, it claims this info is available in Visuddhimagga, Abhidhamma and Niddesa of KN. My questions: 1. Where can I find the references mentioned? (in Niddesa, Abhidhamma, Visuddhimagga) 2. What are the recommended techniques for the different temperaments? 3. Is this (#2) found in the scriptural sources? Please provide references. From this Buddhist glossary : > *carita* [*carita*] nature, temperament. *Carita* denotes the intrinsic > nature of a human being. The six types of temperament are: > > 1. greedy temperament [*rāga-carita*], > 2. hateful temperament [*doṣa-carita*], > 3. dull temperament [*moha-carita*], > 4. devout temperament [*śraddhā-carita*], > 5. intellectual temperament [*buddhi-carita*], > 6. discursive temperament [*vitarka-carita*]. > > The six temperaments are combined with one another. The speculative temperament (*dṛṣṭi carita*) is added to them. > > AS. I. 309. CMA. IX. 330-331. VM. III. 82-88.

relying on Guru Rinpoche is nothing but a skillful means for realizing and empowering ourselves with the phenomena of our own pure, joyful, and powerful perceptions and experiences, which arise from our own peaceful and open Buddha nature that we all have inherited. If we believe, then Guru Rinpoche will always be with us. He is not an individual person of a particular time or place. He is (or represents) the Buddha, the Buddha nature and its expression. In other words, he is the true nature of the universe and the pure character or expression of that universe. Whenever we allow our mind to connect with our inner truth, that truth will always be there to be reached, and then the manifestations or expressions arisen from that truth will always arise as pure and divine manifestations or appearances. If we let ourselves be inspired and see that very ultimate peace and truth, which we all have, through the support of and/or as Guru Rinpoche, we will realize and become Guru Rinpoche and his qualities and expressions. Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche wrote: In the case of deity meditation, it is the mind consciousness that creates the body of the deity. It is thus a mentally created body, and thus, so to speak, unreal. When, however, the karmic imprints of this visualization get stored in the all-base and become more clear and more stable, it is actually possible to meet the deity one day, or Guru Rinpoche, for example, face to face! This is the result of deity meditation with in-front visualization. [From Everyday Consciousness and Primordial Awareness, p. 39] Kunga Rinpoche, wrote in "Drinking the Mountain Stream": The deities of the tantric vehicle's extensive pantheon, the male and female personifications of psychic processes as "herukas" and "dakinis", are **"produced" by the yogin through the practice of controlled visualization until their reality overshadows that of the superficial apparent world.**When the yogin is able to visualize his own personal deity to the point where the visualization seems to have a life of its own, and when he's able to see the his environment as divine, he then practices the "divine pride" of direct identification of his own body and mind with those of his personal deity. all these quotations from masters indicate that dakinis,herukas and even guru rinpoche are not existant in the sence of having a mindstream and cognition and actually existing in some heaven.Rather they are appearances or creations of the individual's(Yogi or yidam practicioner) mind. but obviousely there are purelands as many people have visions of amitabha etc picking them up to go there etc Dawa Drolma had visitation to the pureland of avalokiteshvara guided by Tara.are these then just appearances of her own mind?like Nimittas?

I have been having questions from time to time about my practise. I do the cushion practise once a day in the morning for half an hour and try to follow the five precepts through the day. A lot of times through the day I have questions that make me feel like I need to discuss this with someone who is more experienced than I am. How does one "find a teacher" that can help me customise path & methods for a better practise? *I live in a city called Bombay, in India.* Any help and/or insight appreciated. *PS: I have had the privilege of learning through a 10-day SN Goenka Vipassana Retreat once.* :) -With Love & Chai.