I see "Om ah hung vajra guru pema siddhi hung" but also "Om ah hum vajra guru padma siddhi hum". I know the first is Sanskrit mixed with Tibetan and the latter is pure Sanskrit. I also am aware that it is about how the Tibetans pronounce Sanskrit. Is one preferred or more authentic? Is it up to the individual? Any elucidation on this matter is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

In vipassana meditation either samadhi or insight comes as the vehicle .When samadhi comes as a vehicle it's called Samanthayanika vipassana .In Samanthayanika meditation how yogi see the impermanence suffering and no self?

Is it necessary to study quantum field theory to understand the Abhidhamma Pitaka

Basically, I have tried for some time mindfulness meditation. I have also tried compassion meditation. In mindfulness meditation, my mind becomes very still, with few thoughts, but outside of meditation the mind remains so. My thoughts outside of meditation are quite abstract, but I am perhaps stunted emotionally and in terms of visual images. I don't feel my mind wanders too much though. In compassion meditation, I visualize loving-kindness and compassionate images, and I usually end up crying or feeling positive affect in my body. It is nevertheless quite difficult for me to visualize vividly. **How does one decide which type of meditation to engage in? Would both mindfulness (focused attention) and compassion generate some type of meditative concentration?**

What is Vibhava Tanha? What is the destination (rebirth) of a person with Vibhaba Tanha? Is the view non-existence considered Vibhava Tanha? What is the Sutta reference relating to this teaching? Why the desire for Nibbana is not considered Vibhava Tanha?

There is the case where a person gives toward a monk, having a joyful perception of the good Sangha, while he gives. There is the case where a person assumes a certain monk assuming being a Noble One and gives with such a joy. There is a person who is not able to trace either a monk nor the Sangha and gives an householder, willing to think "more worthy is he". What would give the most benefits? What are the problems for an ordinary person, and a most secure way? What are the dangers of overestimating ones capacities of judgment? What it a person thinks that his ideals are those of a Noble One "I know", yet total wrong? *(Note: this is not given for trade, exchange, stacks or binding entertainment here, but as a tiny door to escape the wheel corrent and since a long caught in)*

As far as I know, most Theravada followers practice according to the Pali Canon even though they accept the Bodhisattva vehicle as well. So, the main focus is to attain Arahantship for most people. My question is: How common is it for Theravada practitioners to aspire to be Buddhas?

I read that the world is only our 6 sense object that we percieve with our 6 sense doors, does this mean that Buddhism says that everything is mindmade and there is nothing really out there or I may be wrong so I would be glad to hear from you.

While doing self enquiry kind of meditation(also doing vipassana) there is feel of understanding/experience/logic that make myself convinced(but not strongly) that "me" is not the thoughts or the body or sensual experience. I don't continuously feel this, but I find concentration, calmness etc getting better. What is this am I experiencing? How to go beyond this? And some teachings says that if you can disassociate ourself from mind and body then we can experience oneness(or conciousness), but I don't experience oneness or anything that I haven't experience before except the feeling of dissociation, why?

During the last 5 months I made observation regarding my inner mind process. The inner chatter which most people know during their day disappeared completely in my mind. I practiced mindfullnes during my day and meditated as well. Is their a specific term in Buddhism which refers to achieving a quite or calm mind?

If co-dependant arising is shown to be false or contradictorary, would all of Buddhism fall ? anatta, shunyata, nirvana as extinction-cessation, momentariness and and so forth seem to be based on this law-paticasamutpada/pratityasamutpada ? is this Buddhism's crutch?

Dogen, Shobogenzo #26 > Guishan is the thirty-seventh ancestor, a direct descendant of > Shakyamuni Buddha. He was a dharma heir of Bhaizhang, Zen Master > Dazhi, Today buddha ancestors in the ten directions, even those who do > not call themselves descendants of Guishan, are all in fact his remote > descendant. > > One day, while Guishan was lying down, Yangshan Huiji came to see him. > Guishan turned to face the wall. > > Yangshan said, “I am your student. Please don’t be formal.” > > Guishan started to get up. > > Yangshan rose to leave. > > Guishan said, “Huiji.” > > Yangshan returned. > > Guishan said, “Let me tell you about my dream.” > > Yangshan leaned forward to listen. > > Guishan said simply, “Would you interpret my dream for me? I want to > see how you do it.” > > In response Yangshan brought a basin of water and a towel. Guishan > washed his face and sat up. > > Then Xiangyan came in. > > Guishan said, “Huiji and I have been sharing miracles. This is no > small matter.” > > Xiangyan said, “I was next door I heard you.” > > Guishan said to him, “Why don’t you try now?” > > Xiangyan made a bowl of tea and brought it to him. > > Guishan praised them, saying, “You two students surpass even > Shariputra and Maudgalyayana with your marvelous activity!” I don't think Dogen believed in miracles. Am I right?

What is the difference between the two or are they the same?

In this answer by ven. Yuttadhammo, it is said that depending on the level of concentration and mindfulness of a person, attending to certain states can result in either wakefulness or tiredness. Hence, I wonder: Is it the case that strong mindfulness tends to counter unwholesome states merely by observation, and that without mindfulness these states persevere and may worsen? E.g. a person meditating on a bus mindfully will decrease hindrances, whereas a person mindwandering might increase them? If so, then I ask: Does this entail that strong meditative states 'burn' unwholesome states because of a mindfulness absent from daily life?

I’ve been reading about this term and have found it written in both ways. I don’t know if the difference is related to some kind of verb form.

Once the 5 precepts is observed from a monk, is there any rupa of sila being formed as a kind of mental factor in the observer? And this rupa of sila (like a vase?) if thus polluted,it can be cleansed, but once broken, it can not be amended. Is this saying correct?

I think I recall reading about the Buddha saying that compassion meditation was far superior to compassionate action, hundreds (or some great number) times more. **Is this accurate? What is the source for this?** I am also interesting in knowing if this is true in people's experience on here.

If I am a Buddhist parent and a child is always messy, should I always clean up the mess they make? Are there any sutta teachings to guide parents of messy children?

Today I regret for a sparrow was wandering around running ceiling fan. Even I had noticed and think to turn it off but I forget. I don't care if it was my bad karma which is not important than saving a sparrow but does really a matter for saving it then it wasn't a bad karma. I'm not afraid if I've break precept or my bad krama, what else I need to pay for it. I can't revert a time neither get a sparrow alive. I don't have anything left than **regret**. Does it worth? Anything defined in sutta about regret or what Lord Buddha said about ***regret***?

I read in an answer that AN 9.5 states: > The best sort of kindly speech is to teach the Dhamma again and again > to someone who is engaged and who lends an ear. However, is there an opposite quote to this in the Pali Canon? Does the Buddha say anywhere in the Pali Canon that we should not bother to teach the Dhamma to one who cannot appreciate it, or is not interested in listening to it? What I'm asking for, is perhaps equivalent to the following quote from the Christian Bible in Matthew 7:6 : > Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If > you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you > to pieces.