I am currently in my late twenties and I began meditation in my early twenties. I often think that the path that I am on being correct as it is and it has provided it's justification through practice- I am unsure what I will think of me in my thirties or forties I am pretty certain I am making some mistakes that I am not aware now and will be with the passage of time. This question stems from the fact that I personally know how my meditation journey began as a yuppie and how I thought more an did less. Also following books and authors without knowing that it's not really my own wisdom but someone else's. Trying to be someone else unconsciously without thinking what I want from my life. Intellectual discussions and tryin to prove a point without having metta for the other person. Learning to accept family as they are without doubting or questioning their motives (still beats me). The list goes on. Well I am sure there are many more experienced and mature meditators who can probably provide a glimpse on their twenties. All this only for a healthy comparison as I don't have any friends my age who take meditation seriously. Metta

Here is the famous quote by Mahathma Ghani the great leader from India; > "It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. Violence is any day preferable to impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." > > Mahatma Gandhi My simple question is; Is this acceptable? How can it be compatible with non-violence teaching of Buddhism?

The following video got me thinking: [Machiavelli’s Advice For Nice Guys](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQlnmWCPgA) Machiavelli believes that being kind and compassionate is good, but one often needs to learn to be harsh and ruthless in order to survive so that good may triumph. The best example would be the Axis Powers during World War 2 - if the Allies had been nice, they'd have been no match for the Axis Powers for their sheer ruthlessness. On a smaller scale in everyday life, it's the nicer, more helpful people who are constantly taken advantage of. So this raises a dilemma. Continue being gentle and compassionate with loving kindness, and get eaten. Or react harshly when necessary and risk darkening ourselves. Or, is there a proper middle path? Yet, Buddhism has survived 2500 years and even flourished at a time where war and cruelty were rampant. So there must be something there, and it bugs the heck out of me.

I am very close to someone in my family. I have supported her through rough times and offered my advice. However, she does not support me for the one thing I want in life. I am working hard to achieve my goal (career related), but she is completely against it. I have to live with her, and interact with her everyday and I feel her negative vibes around me. It really hurts my feelings. How can I deal with this issue and maintain peace in my mind? Thank you, I appreciate it.

I had previously asked a question about contempt. Since then, I noticed a few things, such as that it's not easy for me to 'cancel' out analytically my judgment of others. If I try to question my judgment and invalidate it, it often doesn't work, especially if I get angry. I *know* that my judgments are false, but they still arise. **Are there alternatives to analyzing/questioning the judgment?** The most effective solution so far has been compassion meditation. But that is not always possible in the moment. **What can be done *in the moment* where judgmental thoughts arise to remain open?** EDIT: I feel perhaps my question is similar to my previous one, but I'm asking for really *in the moment* remedies, and the diverse options Buddhism recommends.

I practiced meditation for 6 months continuously. I used to meditate 45 mins in the morning as well as evening. In weekends, I used to meditate many rounds with breaks in between. I developed fear of loneliness due to which I have suffered from insomnia which has lasted till now though it has gotten a bit better now. I don't know if its dark night of the soul or depression. I have also been suffering from gastritis since 1 year. The stomach pain causes me anxiety and I have not been able to continue my meditation. I am waiting for both my sleep and stomach to get better so that I can continue. I sometimes feel that the problem will last till my death. I don't know how to progress from this phase. My meditation practice had definitely brought many positive changes. I have set milestones for myself regarding the practice that I think I may not reach during this lifetime. Any suggestions for me ?

There are several scientific methods to treat the psychiatric condition depression. Is there a method to overcome depression by Lord Buddha's teachings?

What prevents us from attaining Nibbana? Is it the **ignorance** or the **craving**? So, what should we focus on, in order to attain Nibbana? Is it **uprooting the craving** or **uprooting the ignorance**? Because of what reason the **uprooting of craving** happen? and Because of what reason the **uprooting of ignorance** happen?

I am new to Buddhism and have a question I am hoping someone can answer. My understanding is that realizing enlightenment is universally desirable. In other words, it is considered “better” to realize enlightenment than to not (i.e. if a genie ever offered to magically grant someone the realization of enlightenment, no one should say “no”). When it comes to what happens to arahant after death, my understanding is that Buddha did not give a very concrete answer. I've read a couple of answers such as, "it falls under the category of things that are not known" or "the answer will not end suffering so it is irrelevant” or “arahant are extinguished like a flame”, etc. He did seem to concretely say, however, that arahant are definitely “freed” from the cycle of death and rebirth. And when it comes to what happens to non-arahant after death, he seemed to have a very concrete answer with no hesitation: they/we die and are reborn in an endless cycle of dukkha (suffering). My understanding is that both happiness and sadness are dukkha (suffering/impermanence). But isn’t happiness generally considered a pleasant feeling? And aren’t some non-arahant more happy than they are sad in life? I’m not saying I’m one of those people, but don’t those people exist? So for them, perhaps an endless cycle of death and rebirth isn’t that bad? Life can be net-positive in happiness for some, can’t it? For those people, does it make sense to exit out of this endless cycle of mostly-pleasant life and instead enter....nothingness? The unknown? Become an extinguished flame? I have read that arahant experience “happiness” in an unfathomable way, far beyond the happiness of the laymen. Even if that is true, that “happiness” is only guaranteed for the rest of their current life is it not? After that, even the Buddha is not sure what will happen except that they will for sure not be reborn to experience that happiness again in the next life because they will have been freed from the cycle. If it was just laid out as, “following the eight-fold path will end your suffering in this life” then that would be simple. But then there’s also that added bonus of “if you realize enlightenment, the illusion of ‘you’ will forever be nothing.” But what if I’m not suffering all that much? What if I have a pretty peaceful, happy life? Does it make sense for me to say “yes” to that genie? Thank you in advance.

I've long felt that some people engage in unskillful behaviour as a consequence of not valuing themselves. For example, they engage in drugs to numb or detrimental sexuality, seemingly because they feel unworthy or undeserving. **Would Buddhism link such a behaviour to self-compassion or self-esteem? Is there such a thing in Buddhism as instincts of self-harm?** Or, even, can such self-impeding behaviour be linked to some other cause, such as not seeing the consequence of actions or something of the like? Thank you

My career involves lot of self-learning, and self-motivation. I like my work, which is a reason why my work doesn't feel like work. However, I am finding it hard to incorporate Vipassana into my work. For example, if I'm working and I'm in the *zone* there's a general pleasurable feeling associated with motivation/focus. It's what keeps me going. I feel like it's a mental state that's actually valuable specially in today's society full of procrastination. However, if I mentally note that sense of motivation/focus, it does fade away, but it makes it harder for me to concentrate and enjoy work. In fact, I even get slightly depressed and begin to hate the work. Then I would mentally note those negative feelings, but they will come back and I begin to feel miserable, and like a robot. Will this go away? Should I constantly "mental note" my feeling of motivation/focus, similar to how one "mental notes" a feeling of anger? How am I suppose to apply Vipassana in this situation?

I'm going through a period of meditating every day which is not how I usually practice. Before I would meditate 5-6 times a week then deliberately not do more as I would seem to 'run dry' and lose my feeling for it and felt like a needed a gap. So I'm trying just to keep going and see how that works. But how important is constancy in meditation? - is it better just to ease off for a day if you feel depleted with it or would the thing be to keep with it even if the practice feels dry and barren. Many thanks as always

How would/should a perfect monk appear, act and possible serve you? Or from Buddhas view if wishing to try to answer this? Good if remarking whether a claim one would have or possible good for a monk (the used perspective of individual "issues") *[One may render it how ever wished for better lucie to nurish stackes and much exchange and no fear if not wishing to use it for liberation]*

If it's possible to do it, how should such practice look like? Will it be inferior to the practice of those who meditate?

I have been practicing insight meditation daily now for over 6 years. I have learnt the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition. I focus on my abdomen rising and falling and notice when my attention goes to something else which seems to be mostly thoughts and then I gently bring it back. When my attention goes to a sensation I watch the sensation for a while until it is no longer holding attention then I bring it back to the breath. After 6 years of doing this I can't say that I have had profound insight into the true nature of reality etc. Most of the time I just feel really bored and doubtful that sitting all this time is actually changing anything. My concentration is only marginally better. I understand Dukha, Anicca and Anatta but its more from reading about it than sitting. I sit for an hour in the morning and 45 mins at night. Im not sure whats going on but just feels something is missing. I read about and hear people talking about the profound changes they experience and how their lives are filled with peace and joy from practicing so I wonder where Im going wrong? As far as Metta practice goes I am told that at first it may feel contrived but if you keep going it begins to work but I have to say that after all these years not much has changed on that front either. It seems that the effort and energy I apply massively out weighs the benefits. So I'm confused about this.

I was reading this answer, in which an essay is cited. In this essay, *Freedom From Fear*, an example is given of a hunted deer which experiences anger, and thus aversion. In contrast, the desire to escape isn't aversion, but considered potentially skillful. I have always thought aversion involves aversive states such as avoidance from painful experiences. **Is aversion strictly about anger, and irritation? Does it have nothing to do with avoidance (though the English term somewhat suggests this)?** In sum, I wonder what the nature of aversion actually entails and encompasses.

According to the historical story before the day of enlightenment, Mara apparently lured the Buddha with various worldy pleasures. Now, I am not arguing whether Mara really existed or is just Buddha's mind (which would be rather my interpretation). But The Buddha should at that time be a non-returner and he must have abandoned the fetter of sensuous desires. He should've chilled in the 4th Jhana not giving a damn! So my question is: Why was it a struggle for the Buddha if the conditioned fetter of sensuous desire was already uprooted as an anagami?

I have four parts of this question, 1. Is Nibbana a state of mind or a dhamma? 2. If Nibbana is a state of mind, is it merely the uprooting of craving? 3. If the answer for the second question is **"Yes"**, then why it's said "Nibbana is the object of eight super-mundane consciousness? Or simply, how would a stream winner experience/see Nibbana with the existence of craving? 4. "One attain Nibbana by uprooting craving" or "One uproots craving by attaining Nibbana" Which one of the aforesaid is correct?

I've heard even though two people do the same good Karma their returns can be different on what they were thinking. And when coming to effect these different Karmas can give different births ("Trihethuka pratisandhi") to the beings who did those Karma Unlocking or Locking the ability to realize Nirvana in that life itself. Can someone explain how Birth Karma effect a being?

Does Theravada Buddhism encourages animal release? Would it be conflicting if one is under the branch Theravada Buddhism but perform animal release?