I would like to return to the practice of Buddhism. Where should I begin? I have a serious mental illness. It has been well treated by medication. When I was young, before I developed this illness I would practice meditation as best I could. But I had no mentor and so I don't know if my practice was correct. I do not come from a Buddhist culture so I know little about the subject other than what I have been able to read. Will my medication interfere with meditation as it is obviously mind altering? Should I start for example with meditation on impermanence, on mindfulness, or by attempting to reduce my desire?

I am looking for some kind of Buddhist society/group/organization in Mumbai, India, where we can meet similar like-minded people, attend cultural events, discuss/talk/teachings (dharma talk) on Buddhist ideas/concepts, etc. I am looking for Theravada Buddhism & not neo-Buddhism. Any kind of help is highly appreciated. I know there's COVID situation going on but I just need to know if there's any, will attend when the situation becomes normal.

This question refers to The Four Great References in Mahāpadesa Sutta (AN 4.180) . In each case, it ends with: > If they’re not included in the discourses and not found in the texts on > monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is > not the word of the Blessed One, the perfected one, the fully awakened > Buddha. It has been incorrectly memorized by ... > > If they are included in the discourses and found in the texts on > monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is > the word of the Blessed One, the perfected one, the fully awakened > Buddha. It has been correctly memorized by ... So, why are there four great references and not one, if the criteria is the same for each of them? What is the difference between the four great references? Do they represent primacy or order of reliability? For e.g. is the first great reference more reliable than the second great reference?, is the second more reliable than the third? etc. If the answer to the previous question is Yes, then does this imply that the traditional commentaries to the suttas by the Sangha is more reliable than the interpretation of a single monk, as suggested by this comment ?

1. Ways to be conscious in all situations 2. How to do one thing at a time ?

If I'm not mistaken, the Abhidhamma mainly explains the mind as mental factors. Modern psychology tends to see the mind as neuronal substrates. Buddhism's time didn't have the neuroscientific modern view, but in many respects seems more advanced. **What are the benefits specific to seeing the mind as mental states, rather than as a physical substrate?** For example, I think maybe mental states allows one to simulate and extend what they mean. A person may be angry, very angry, and we can imagine the causes of anger. However, just saying 'dopamine increases in such region' could mean a million things. **Are any other advantages linked to seeing the mind as mental factors?**

I have a question regarding the early texts the question is : am I right to say that the Pali Canon is exclusively considered the Thervada text, while the Agama is the Mahayana Sutras or am I wrong maybe the Agama is also considered Thervadin. Do Thervadin scholars accept Agama as part of Thervada??. Thank you I appreciate your answers.

I've found this to be an interesting question with highly respected monastics falling on both sides of the answer.

Wikipedia uses "the Buddha" to refer to the founder while a book uses "Buddha" without the definite article. from "Meetings with Remarkable People By Osho" Is it correct to refer to "Buddha" without "the"? If yes, when should I use which?

Vedantist calls it Sunya or Sunyata. Buddhists calls it Void . If you once perceive that voidness , is “something”. They both get inside there and return back, saying that was Samadhi. How can be Samadhi without Consciousness , isn’t it like susupti or just artificial?

Specifically with my mother. I talk with her on the phone and when we have already talked for a while, say half an hour, she keeps talking and bringing new pointless futile topics and expanding on them, which annoys me and sometimes I end up getting angry, and sometimes I manifest that anger getting "cutting" or being a little rude. She can talk for an hour or more until she has something to do. I don't tell her to stop because I'm this way and I expect her to realize we have already talked about the main topics and important stuff and a little bit more but she doesn't and keeps going for what I perceive to be too long. I always feel really bad afterwards because of my unreasonable anger and irritation and the inability to deal with this, and when I get too rude most of the times I call her again and apologize. It frustrates me even more because most of the time I'm not really doing anything better than talking with her, but I can't help but get annoyed when she starts to talk for too long about basically nothing, something that we will both probably forget in a short time. And it's not like we talk once a month, we usually talk multiple times a week. We never talk so much even in person. I love my mother, she is not perfect, but I really don't want to get angry with her but I can't avoid it sometimes and I don't know what to do about it. I don't want to ask her to not to talk too much to me because I think that would sound like an entitled kid, and if I cut her random talk I would feel like I'm not being patient enough with her, but I end up getting angry doing that. And now that I think about it I think I have a tendency of getting angry with her like a stupid brat, I'm not sure why. I would really appreciate any advice on how I can talk to my mother without getting angry?

The common stanza describing qualities of dhamma goes as "Swakkatho bhagawatho dhammo sandittiko..." which describes six of them. I am looking for an accurate and concise translation of this from someone good in both Pali and English; and of course Buddhism

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

What are some "skillful means" of getting through holidays, birthdays, graduations and etc. when your in-laws are constantly making passive aggressive statements about you or the way you raise your kids. Are there Buddhist techniques one can use to aleviate the anxiety and the irritability associated with these situations?

According to the Theravada tradition, the Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha. From "The Abhidhamma in Practice " by N.K.G. Mendis: > Theravaada tradition holds that the Buddha conceived the Abhidhamma in > the fourth week after his enlightenment, while still sitting in the > vicinity of the Bodhi tree. Tradition also has it that he first > preached the Abhidhamma to the assembly of deities in the Taavatimsa > heaven; his mother, reborn as a deity, was present in the assembly. > This can be taken to mean that the Buddha, by intense concentration, > transcended the earth-bound mentality and rose mentally to the world > of the deities, a feat made possible by his attainment of higher > powers (*abhiññaa*) through utmost perfection in mental concentration. > Having preached the Abhidhamma to the deities, he returned to earth, > that is, to normal human consciousness, and preached it to the > venerable Saariputta, the arahant disciple most advanced in wisdom. However, in this YouTube video , Ajahn Brahm stated that the Theravada Abhidhamma was not taught by the Buddha and that the complexity of the Abhidhamma is not needed. He said that the Buddha's original teachings in the Pali suttas is simpler and completely sufficient. One of the evidences he cited is as follows - only the Suttas (Dhamma) and the Vinaya were recited at the First Buddhist Council and there was no mention of the Abhidhamma. I quote from Harvey, P (2013), "An Introduction to Buddhism: Teachings, History and Practices" (2nd Edition), Cambridge University Press, p. 88 : > Just after the Buddha’s passing away (c. 404 BCE), a 'communal > recitation' (council) of 500 Arahats was held at Rājagaha (Skt > Rājagraha, Vin.ii.284–7) to agree the contents of the *Dhamma* and > *Vinaya* which the Buddha had left as ‘teacher’ (D.ii.154). Ānanda, the > Buddha’s faithful attendant monk, recited the Suttas, such that each > begins: ‘Thus have I heard’. The monk Upāli recited the Vinaya. This wikipedia page on Theravada Abhidhamma states that according to scholars, the Theravada Abhidhamma was **probably** composed in 3rd century BCE, which is after the Buddha's lifetime. I also call it the Theravada Abhidhamma specifically, because there seems to be another Sarvastivada Abhidharma. So, my question is: Was the Theravada Abhidhamma really taught by the Buddha? Or is that an exaggeration?

Answering questions here in buddhism.stackexchange.com is often Dhamma teaching, or at least an effort of it. How can that be rightly done?

I am interested in what Buddhism has to say about the flow of energy in our lives. (For clarification, by "energy" i am referring to the concrete aspects of stamina/fatigue, feeling tired or having the strength to go about your day. I realize the topic of energy is broad, and dealt with in different yogic, para-psychological or pseudo-scientific contexts, but those aspects are out of the scope of my question). To the best of my knowledge, the extent of Buddhist commentaries regarding energy use concepts like indriyas/balanis and not least viriya. For instance, in AN 6.55 we can read that: >...when energy is too forceful it leads to restlessness. When energy is too slack it leads to laziness. So, Soṇa, you should apply yourself to energy and serenity, find a balance of the faculties, and learn the pattern of this situation. https://suttacentral.net/an6.55/en/sujato In SN 48.43 Buddha elaborates on the faculty of energy: > The faculty of energy is the power of energy, and the power of energy is the faculty of energy. https://suttacentral.net/sn48.43/en/sujato Possibly related, we can also read about piti, a feeling of energizing rapture (if you will) as a dhyana factor: >Here, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhāna, which consists of rapture and pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by thought and examination. https://suttacentral.net/an5.28/en/bodhi Seeing as tranquility in Buddhism is - arguably - given precedence over energizing i am assuming that the latter is somewhat subordinate, and dealt with to lesser degree than other Buddhist topics. Or am i wrong? What else can Buddhism teach us about energies? (This is a reference request.)

I started with a new goal: meditate for a month daily and it reminds me of my experiences during group meditations in the past. After relaxing the body, it gets very hard to breathe, my chest feels very heavy or like something is on top with a lot of pressure. I feel like I should breath deeply all the time, yet still feel like I don't have enough air. A bit scary too. Has anybody experienced the same?

A person told here, that wholesome (kusala) means absence of passion (desire, will..., raga, lobha, chanda...). Is that right? If, why. Is it wrong? If, why? No need to have passion to answer the question, of cause. *(note: this is not for entertaining, trade, exchange or stacks that binds, but to get attached to liberation and for a leave.)*

Do any Buddhists say that everyone's Buddha nature repeats an infinite number of times? To be specific, I mean that everyone's -- including Sakyamuni's -- life, or perhaps just karma, is repeated over and over again, timelessly and forever. I'm asking, because I think that's what I believe [that's all]. The Fan Wang Ching says that Sakyamuni manifests *billions* of times, but does anything claim he appears an infinite number of times, or eternally [I don't mean permanent].

How would one deal with a verbally or otherwise abusive partner who gets upset over nothing and let's anger loose? Assuming the abuser realizes they have a problem but are unable to solve the behavioral issue. How could one best advise everyone involved in such a relationship based on the Buddhist texts & practices? Would be great if answers are referenced but it's not a requirement. Thanks