This post is a revision of https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39546/buddhism-or-christ which already closed. I posted that _Buddhism or Christ?_ question on a Christian forum too, and after quite a response from them, I felt I have some clues. I used to be a loyal person and have been studying Buddhism for 6 years. Indeed it helps me a lot to be a better person and almost 100% of my doubt and direction can be found from the legacy of Buddha. Now I have been in Church as an observer for 1 year. I have an influential and high-level family of Christ that is eager to invite me into Christianity. They even speak at country council level for all the Christian activities. But, I really miss so much of Buddha's teaching and I really want to do something for Buddhism before I turn to Christianity. But it will create a lot of complications; but I found the below is necessary to clear the misconception and Buddha's name. I believe all Buddhist has responsibility on the below. 1. There are too many misconception especially to Buddhism and Taoism -- [Top 10 MISCONCEPTIONS about BUDDHISM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYlQ0UZ1C2I) . Many Buddhism or Taoism disbelief the belief because they don't even know who is Siddhartha Gautama but claimed is a Buddhist. Most of them go to temple, pray something in return, which I believe is inappropriate. What Buddha wants us to do is practice way of life and not actually praying Buddha as an idol.  2. How they view Buddhism and other religion -- [4 Ways Christians can respond to a Satanic statue](https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/4-ways-christians-can-respond-to-a-satanic-statue) . "Buddha is a Satan" wording is really "hurts". They will see Buddha is opponent and some really harsh wording from many Christian seniors is really hurting us as Buddhism Student. My sister went to Church for few months, back to house and screaming like a mad woman to request us to throw away all the Buddhism and Taoism statues.  3. Respect and be tactful to those Buddhist visitor to Church - I wish to have a lot of social media sharing, discussion and Church sharing on how to handle the 2 above. [This URL](https://answersingenesis.org/world-religions/buddhism/) for example speaks well on how to handle this.   > You must learn to distinguish original Buddhism from modern variants, in addition to determining which school of Buddhism your friend embraces. When in a discussion, do not be afraid to ask respectful probing questions. My #2 issue above was shared online today during their Church service and it really touched my heart. I didn't request them to do it during Church services too, but I did share many of the above to them. I am not sure Bodhisattva or Jesus (God) sent this high level Christ family as messenger to me. Question: Let me know your thought for my action for item #3. What i really wish is the those huge religion community to publish an apology online letter on the web site for against the Blasphemy Law and immediately remove the content (i.e. Buddha is Satan, Buddhist will go to hell , etc). That's the basic manner of human being. Cheers,

What is the Buddhist approach to dealing with the suffering caused by the uncertainty of whether your actions and efforts will cause more or less physical pain to a dying family member? My dad is dying from stage 4 pancreatic cancer. Life expectancy will be less than 1 years (more likely a couple of months). He is in a lot of physical pain because the pain medications are losing their effects. It is not clear to us what options are left to manage his physical pains (if any even exist at this point?). No one in our family caring for dad are trained in the profession of health care. My mom, brother, sister-in-law and I are working around the clock to coordinate and consolidate the disjointed/broken communication between several medical teams responsible for my dad's care (family physician, palliative care, occupational therapist, emergency team etc...). My dad has a strong desire to live, but not at the expense of prolonged agonizing physical pain. Our whole family echoes this sentiment. During these times, the family members caring for dad is suffering from uncertainty of whether we are: 1) doing enough to ease dad's pain - how far do we go to address dad's situation? How do we know if we're doing enough? How do we know if we're wasting time? If we knew with certainty there's nothing more we can do, then we will relax and execute the final steps of closure. If we knew with certainty there are still possibilities to explore, then we will do as much as we can and use the feeling of "hope" to mitigate our feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, fatigue and other forms of suffering. As of today, we assume there are still possibilities to explore, but we really don't know for sure, which causes suffering. We have found solutions to alleviate dad's suffering when doctors have said there are none, which tells us that even the professionals may not know what they are doing (or they've lost interest in our health case), which also means sometimes we need to try things ourselves. But we are uncertain on whether we are able to keep up with the new problems that arise each day. How much runway do we have left to alleviate the agonizing physical pain my dad is in? **How do Buddhist's manage the suffering caused by uncertainty on whether you are doing enough to alleviate the pain of people you care about?** 2) doing the right thing to ease dad's suffering - eg. if palliative care team does not respond in time to an urgent request, we will exercise our own actions without sufficient medical guidance which sometimes makes things better, and other times makes things worse (we have not documented all actions and their results, and hence we are uncertain if we have produced a net positive or net negative outcome during this saga). **How do we manage the suffering caused by not knowing in advance if you are improving or hurting your family member?** **At the end of the day, if we were certain of our actions, we wouldn't be suffering. But our uncertainty causes not only our own suffering (eg. are we over-exerting ourselves researching futile efforts?), but tremendous physical pain to someone we care about. What is the Buddhist philosophy to addressing this scenario?** ---- ADDITIONAL NOTES Approaches I've considered: A1. Detach from my family and not care about them at all. Now I feel no emotional connection to their pain. My family will probably never speak to me again and call me an ingrate, but at least I don't have to take part in their suffering. A2. Do a half-ass job in caring for my dad. I just need convince /brainwash myself to think that I'm doing enough, and keep myself oblivious to the reality of whether I really am or not. I've now relieved myself of suffering from the uncertainty of actions caring for my dad. I will also coincidentally not feel any guilt of whether my other family members have taken on responsibilities that were formerly mine, because I'm blissfully ignorant.. Is A1 / A2 the Buddhist way?

Every now and then we (close friends) start some discussion on some topic, then we put our sides, but unfortunately, this conversation takes a path towards argument, where both the sides want to prove that they are correct. This is forcing me to not to start any type of conversation among us in future because I don't want to hamper my peace of mind. What should be the right suggestion over here? Shall we dig deeper into the conversations more and more, and until the conclusion does not comes up, just don't stop. Or, just tell your friend that you are right, and try to wrap the conversation over there itself. Or is there any other good way to reaching out to a pleasant end?

A question for the initial phase of starting meditation. To start meditation, it's important to know food first as per satipatthana. Materialistic food preserves cell-offspring reproduction inside body. In a way food helps in adultery. Whether we eat once a day or many times a day, no difference. Why to forcibly carry-on adultery within body at cellular level? Why not let the cells die naturally instead of allowing them to produce daughter cells by providing them required things. For this question, there is another subquery that can be considered, "what is natural?" "Is there anything as natural?" Various precepts might say adultery is natural, attraction of opp. identities(of any material) is natural but buddha gave a proper reason that can break this naturality. Is this merely a misguided term because natural is what it should be buddha's teachings but this teaching ends whole cycle and hence in the end, ends itself. Where is natural (infinite process of causes & effects) in here? So subquery can be ,Why word natural has contradictory meanings as per above 2 paragraphs? EDIT 1:: Understood subquery part, only 1st remains now. Impermanence is natural and nature. Natural is not infinite rather it is universally acceptable.

I vaguely recall reading this story before, possible from the Suttas. Can anyone tell me the scriptural source? (Not looking for modern re-telling such as those by Ven Thich Nhat Hanh.) > THE LOST SON > > "A young widower, who loved his five year old son very much, was away > on business when bandits came who burned down the whole village and > took his son away. When the man returned, he saw the ruins and > panicked. The took the burnt corpse of an infant to be his son and > cried uncontrollably. He organised a cremation ceremony, collected the > ashes and put them in a beautiful little bag which he always kept with > him. Soon afterwards, his real son escaped from the bandits and found > his way home. He arrived at his father's new cottage at midnight and > knocked at the door. The father, still grieving asked: "Who is it?" > The child answered, it is me papa, open the door!" But in his agitated > state of mind, convinced his son was dead, the father thought that > some young boy was making fun of him. He shouted: "Go away" and > continued to cry. After some time, the child left. Father and son > never saw each other again." After this story, the Buddha said: > "Sometime, somewhere, you take something to be the truth. If you cling > to it so much, even when the truth comes in person and knocks on your > door, you will not open it." > (http://viewonbuddhism.org/resources/buddhist_stories.html)

What are the sets of one, two, three, five and twelve things mentioned in the sutta below? What does it mean? From SN 1.44 (translated by Bhikkhu Sujato): > “One is the root, two are the whirlpools, three are the stains, five > the spreads, twelve the ocean’s whirlpools: such is the abyss crossed > over by the hermit.” From SN 1.44 (translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi): > “The seer has crossed over > the abyss > With its one root, two whirlpools, >Three stains, five extensions, > An ocean with twelve eddies.”

I know that lord Buddha refrain from finding the all the laws of nature from science, everything in universe.(Understanding the whole truth of the universe). I like to know the reason for this. Is it because our knowledge about the universe is so weak that we don't see anything, nor that the universe is so big that it is endless, (please correct me if i am wrong about this)? I know that lord Buddha mentioned the endless expansion and collapse of the universe. This phrase follows with Gibbs free energy theory, where everything goes to disorder. To make things into order it causes energy. Like keeping the mind in one place is very hard. If I find nibbana in the coming up life, maybe I will realize that it is not meaningful. Currently I like learning new things in science, like I love reading books of prof. Hawkings teachings... Will all this knowledge be worthless if I find nibbana someday? Also I am confused of the fact that Lord Mugalan did try to find the whole truth of the universe by meditation. Is it true that he got caught in a infinite loop and Lord Buddha saved him?

Not sure what the _earliest_ copy is we have of the [Lankavatara Sutra](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Buddhism#Lankavatara_Sutra) , but wondering if it can be found online for free in **copy/pastable text format** (i.e. not PDF or image). I am looking through [The Kangyur on Thlib](http://www.thlib.org/encyclopedias/literary/canons/kt/catalog.php#cat=d/k-1-4-1) but not finding it anywhere. Does it exist in the Kangyur even, is it [this](http://www.thlib.org/encyclopedias/literary/canons/kt/catalog.php#cat=d/0108) ?

I wish to be brief in the matter, a friend recommended this website after a certain meditation struggle. I just did a vipassana retreat, focusing on one's breath, which was done perfectly the first two days. Whenever the mind was distracted I got it back on track. However, I had an odd and pleasant experience during that period, as if a bundle of negativity exploded, and since then not only my meditation became shallow but it were as if my focus wasn't directly on the breath, but on the eyes, as when you see different colors when seeing through the lids. And getting simply back on the breath seems impossible because the mind is entirely focused on my vision, allowing me to perceive the breath but faintly and as if it were in the background of the focus. If anyone had such a hindrance or a way out of it, I'd be most grateful, spending 8days of vipassana not managing to focus properly is a bit of a nightmare. Thank you so much.

**QN:** I'm looking for Buddha's teachings on self compassion. (Especially for lay practitioners.) There are few verses which can be found in Dhammapada: > He, who by good deeds covers the evil he has done, illuminates this world like the moon freed from clouds. (Dhp, verse 173) Angulimala Sutta also represents forgiveness and self compassion if some mistakes has happened due to lack of mindfulness or by ignorance. I personally think that self compassion is required otherwise we may fall in too much guilt instead of improving ourselves. And by understanding our own suffering, we can understand the suffering of others and help them better. It will make this world a better place. ---------- **Update:** At the beginning, I was asking for very specific suttas but I understood that there are less suttas directly connected to Self compassion. _**(So you can use any sutta which are relevant and makes sense.)**_ And I think there is a reason for it. I feel that Buddha wanted to say, develop compassion in all directions (including inward & outward). Because if we develop it only towards self or only others in either case, it will lead to Identification which will stop us from direct knowing and release. He always mentioned it as whole. I also found [[SN 56.11]](https://suttacentral.net/sn56.11/en/sujato) very relevant. >"Mendicants, these two extremes should not be cultivated by one who has gone forth. What two? Indulgence in sensual pleasures, which is low, crude, ordinary, ignoble, and pointless. And indulgence in self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and pointless. Avoiding these two extremes, the Realized One woke up by understanding the middle way..." _I hope everyone will participate. And you're free to edit and improve your answer if needed.^^_

What is the origination of the mind-stream continuum? What are the basic elements that make up the mind-stream continuum?

Does Buddhism say anything about suffering as the result of having a sense of "betrayal" -- perhaps a sense of someone else having committed an "injustice"? I think that for some individuals it's an important and a very long-lasting type of suffering -- for example: - if they feel betrayed or mistreated by their parents - ... or their spouse, their children - ... or even become outraged as a result of criminal offence by a stranger - ... or even just impersonal bad luck ("oh, that is so unfair!") But although it can be important, I see [nothing about it](https://accesstoinsight.org/search_results.html?q=betrayal) on Access to Insight. The one possible mention of it that I can think of is Dhp 3: > "He abused me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me." Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred. Another mention in passing might be the parable of the saw -- i.e. the importance of keeping a mind of good will even if you are abused -- but that's all: very few examples/mentions. I understand it as being a specific case of a more general problem, i.e. of "craving" (for things to be other than as they are), and "I-making" -- but **do you know any doctrine on this more specific subject, i.e. of betrayal and/or a sense of injustice?** Also is it right to say that Buddhist doctrine on the subject tends to "well actually, you deserved this misfortune" -- for example something like [the origin story for Dhp 5](https://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=005) implies that if someone persecutes you, then perhaps that's a result of something you did in a previous life. If so, **is there a way to paraphrase or explain that principle to a modern non-Buddhist audience?** Because "actually it's your fault" might be quite unwelcome (therefore ineffective), the modern view tends to denounce that as "blaming the victim", and the victim themselves might want to know that you're on their side and not siding with their abuser. If this is a 'reference request' question, it might be asking for doctrine from outside the suttas.

I go through my daily chores and it has become habituated to the extent that i do not need to concentrate on the action and my mind has some time to do thinking or just wander. Now monks life is also similar in that they repeat the activities over life time. So my question, what does monk think on daily basis? Does one control his thoughts or let it wander without attaching oneself to the thought? How does a monk achieve oneness or prepare to be in present? Regards, Contemplating One

What would be the proper terminology to define the different geospatial perspectives of myself? If I envision myself inside my body viewing an experience in front of me, such as when I watch a movie, is there better terminology to use other than "first person perspective"? What about if I envision myself still from a first person perspective, however with the added perspective of 3 dimensional awareness. Is there different terminology for this? What about if I envision myself outside of my body looking at myself from a third person perspective? Is there more descriptive terminology I can use to define these experience perspectives?

This is a reference request, not a doctrine question. I recall seeing a quote from a Buddhist text or teacher roughly to this effect... - To see your *past* karma, look at your present *body* (and environment). - To see your *future* lives, look at your present *mind*. The closest I can find now from a teacher or text is a quote from Philip Kapleau's *Three Pillars of Zen*... > Thus our present life and circumstances are the products of our past > thoughts and actions, and in the same way our deeds in this life will > fashion our future mode of existence.” (p. 408) ... which is close -- "life and circumstances" vs "body and environment" and "deeds" vs "mind"-- but not quite. If anybody can supply a pointer to the body/environment/mind version, I'd be grateful.

Life is inherently full of suffering. I wonder if the concept of dukkha applies to non-human animals.

The above is a quote from 'Humphreys, Christmas. Buddhism: An Introduction and Guide'p145. Is it true that the main aim of Buddhism (Mahayana) is for reason to destroy itself? That really sound too colorful and worst than nihilism itself

And in particular, is it eternal, unchanging and like any other formulation for a soul that we might have seen, in say Christianity or Hinduism? This particular idea, that ālaya-vijñāna is like a permanent self, is mentioned in "Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist", by Stephen Bachelor.

I want to know how to prolong the knowing factor in my life .I face hindrances when thinking about solving a problem for example which is different than contemplating the receptions in mindfulness.How can it remain and become **unfabricated**.

Suppose a bhikkhu living in the forest was to come across an abandoned shelter not frequented for several years. Dwelling is clearly in decay and not maintained, with spider webs & hornet's nest etc. Suppose it's natutally assumed to be an illegal structure by law of the land. Can he make use of the dwelling and appropriate the requisites if those are otherwise allowable, to do with as he sees fit? Can he dismantle the dwelling? How long does it take for requisites to be considered forsaken and fit to make use of in general? Im looking primarily for relevant guidelines & anecdotes from the vinayas & commentary of early schools, not interested in mahayana/vajrayana answers.