This article explains Anicca, Dukkha, and Anatta -- and in this question I'd like to ask about Anicca. The article says that Anicca doesn't mean, or shouldn't be translated as, "impermanence": > - Impermanence is a fact; see, “Grand Unified Theory of Dhamma“. But impermanence is NOT the MEANING of anicca. It says, > A Buddha is not needed to show that "impermanence" is an inherent > characteristic of our universe. Scientists are well aware of that, but > they have not attained Nibbāna. Anicca is a deep concept that can be > described in many different ways, and they are all related. Here are > three ways to look at it: > > - “Anicca – Inability to Keep What We Like” > > - “Anicca – Repeated Arising/Destruction“. > > - “Anicca – Worthlessness of Worldly Things“. Is that so -- is the article right about that? --- It seems to me that this is more logical -- and it explains lots of points where we have doubt about. As an example, when it says it's dukkha when something is Anicca -- how come loosing a tooth of a kid (to grow new one) makes no sorrow to his mum, but when some boy looses his tooth when he is 19 (adult tooth not kid) it makes the mother cry? it's not because of the impermanence but because the things didn't work out the way as expected. So impermanence is not always cause to Dukkha -- but when the expected result is not met, that is always Dukkha. And understanding this deeper make you wise, Not to expect things but to accept the situations as it is. Because things happens not because whether we like it or not but it's the way things are supposed to be. If I explain with another example: a boy starts liking a girl, just because she has nice hair, nice eyes and nice voice (Attachment start with Avijja). And boy starts to date the girl and everything is going well . And they decided to marry, after the marriage, boy finds out that the girl can't be a mother, but boy wants to be a dad. Now there's a conflict and it normally result in sorrows (dukkha). If we think about this, no matter whether they grow older and look bad here nothing is related to impermanence but it's not getting what the boy wanted. So initially boy get attached to the girl base on outer appearance (what ever noticeable) thinking he can achieve what he wanted with girl. When getting attached boy didn't ask her whether she is capable of having a baby or not, but the picture / model / image which is created in boy's mind (by himself) is capable of any of those. In other words, in boy's mind the picture of the girl is perfect, he expects what ever he needs from her as his model in the mind is capable of anything he wants. And when the boy understand that she is not capable of making his expectations a reality, the image / model / picture in his mind get clashed with reality and that drives to sorrow, dukkha. Building these images/models/pictures is because of avijja -- we don't know how the world behaves, but we expect things from the attached world. What ever we are attached to, we build our own castles, on top of that in our mind because we don't understand the Anicca nature of the world. That's what the Buddhist (who has the Samma Ditti = Sothapanna) understand the true nature of the world, which means everything is Aniccha -- so don't expect to be happy by attaching to outside world things. Because what ever the joy you create are in your mind they are not because of the external world material. So attachment is dangerous as it creates Karma which will cause you later. --- Above is how I've realized this. I expect the comments answers on this. Whether someone rejecting this view if so why? I'm not sticking to any of view, I'm whether this view on Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta is wrong?

As preached by Buddha there are four types of people in the world, they are ugghaṭitaññū, vipañcitaññū, neyya and padaparama. The last person is definition is here . Can anyone please guide me how how to identified the pada-parama type people. **Update** Based on the comments, I was looking for the definitions of above four types of people and finally found that in Sutta Pitaka -> Kuddaka Nikaya -> Nettiprakaranaya -> Desanāhāravibhaṅga. And the english translation is not yet done, but you can find the pali here . I've highlighted the important words in below quoted section from above sutta. > Tattha bhagavā ugghaṭitaññussa puggalassa nissaraṇaṃ desayati, > vipañcitaññussa puggalassa ādīnavañca nissaraṇañca desayati, > neyyassa puggalassa assādañca ādīnavañca nissaraṇañca > desayati. - nissaraṇaṃ = deliverance - ādīnavañca = danger - assādañca = attractiveness - puggalassa = person - desayati = lecturing / teaching So here are three main things in Buddhism which are assādañca, ādīnavañca and nissaraṇañca. And the details of how it relates to the path can be found in <a href="/redirect?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.accesstoinsight.org%2Ftipitaka%2Fsn%2Fsn22%2Fsn22.109.wlsh.html" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">Sotapanna Sutta <i class="fas fa-external-link-alt fa-xs"></i></a> as below. > And when, monks, the Ariyan disciple understands as they really are > the arising and the passing away, the attractiveness and the danger, > and the deliverance from the five groups of clinging, he is called an > Ariyan disciple who is a Stream-winner, not liable to states of > woe,[1] assured of final enlightenment. So in summary, out of the the four persons three has defined the based on what to be taught. 1. ugghaṭitaññussa -> Teaching deliverance is sufficient. 2. vipañcitaññussa -> Teaching danger and deliverance is sufficient. 3. neyyassa -> Has to teach all three which are attractiveness danger and deliverance. 4. Pada parama -> Can not attain Nivana as he is the one for whom the words are the utmost attainment'.;Whoever, though having learned much, speaking much, knowing many things by heart, and discoursing much, has not penetrated the truth. (this is extracted from here )

I recently came across a video of a guru (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPINIZmQDwI&t=1s) claiming that Buddha's method to enlightenment was just one of 112 methods discovered by Shiva many years before the time of Buddha. ( https://yogitonics.com/shivas-112-ways-to-attain-enlightenment/) . I was wondering if anyone knows if this is a valid claim. Are there other ways out there to attain enlightenment or is the eight-fold path the only way?

I am looking for symbols which specifically represent Zazen, or, more generally the act of meditating.

I'm looking for early Sutras that talk about gratitude. I'm especially interested in if there are lists of things that we can be grateful for, and there are sources that deal with gratitude for lay people. (So far I've seen the [Maha-mangala Sutta](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.04.piya.html) , which in the translation linked to talks about "blessings", but in another place ("Old Path, White Clouds" by Thich Nhat Hanh) is translated as "observances", so I'm not sure if it's relevant) Thankful for help and with kind regards, Tord

During a meditation I have practiced Metta, as I have learned it, I sent Metta to; - myself - a good friend - a "neutral" person - a difficult person - all four of the above equally - and then gradually the entire universe with the thoughts; - May I be free from enmity/danger - May I be free from mental suffering - May I be free from physical suffering - May I take care of myself happily Sometime during the meditation I have also sent my Metta to my deceased father. I had a good feeling about it, but wonder whether a Suta this refers? I want to know whether this form is OK, and how to deal with it.

I heard from a Monk that dependent origination is akaliko or timeless what did he exactly mean with that. Is Nibbana outside of time and space and could you explain how and why if it is. Is the prinicple of dependent origination of suffering the same as what happens outside in nature like when a seed is planted then with enough sunshine and rain etc the flower grows if not what is the difference between them. Thank you.

Upasaka Angus asked on [another place](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/33943/11235) : >What do you mean that all the phenomena related to the senses are "not real"? So what does a statement '"all the phenomena related to the senses are "not real (anicca)"' dhammical mean? What are phenomena related to the senses? *(Note that question in Dhamma is not dedicated for trade, exchange, stacks or entertainment but as a means to make merits toward release from this wheel)*

I don't have access to a Sangha just now, and I do frequent this very well conceived and helpful site. Recently I was writing a comment about no longer being a programmer because it was too isolating for my nature ("square girlfriend" = computer screen, ha ha) and I thought: gee, I am staring at a screen now... and for many hours today... But it is vastly different to be reading and writing with other people (ahem) than to just do an *induhvidual* activity like programming. Right? I am actually interacting, but somewhat ansynchronously. So I still use and develop some of my *Hetaira Archetype* skills (more effortful and challenging with only text to interpret and reply by). **Does asking and answering Questions here count as taking refuge in (and providing) The Sangha?**

Is a monk allowed to exercise the body in order to keep it fit and healthy? I reckon both 'healthy' and 'fit' as attachments, but is there an overall rule/teaching that explains this?

There are a lot of people practicing their religion at home (to some extent). But how practical is that for a Buddhist? My question came boiling up when a family-member said that I ultimately have to choose between 'my western life' or becoming a Monk because they think they aren't compatible and to be honest, I don't really know. I feel myself to become quite less social when I practice Buddhism which is by my knowledge a common reaction when you get to see things as they are. The Vinaya Pitika describes 227 rules to ordained Monks for the sake of becoming enlightened. There are many distractions which keeps you from the right path and you will break 220 on average each day.

*Note: Originally I wrote "unintentionally" and not just "accidentally" but I have realized that even the "accidental" action described in the example below involves the person's intentions of their movements and thus even if the person's intention wasn't to break the vase they still broke the vase through their intentional action and I believe they would necessarily suffer for breaking the vase.* Example: 1. A person is walking through a friend's house and accidentally knocks a vase and causes it to fall and break. The friend asks for the person to buy them a new vase, but the person refuses. Does the person necessarily suffer for refusing to buy their friend a new vase?

I want to devote my life to Buddhist way of meditation, I want to know more of Buddha teaching but my main interest is for go day and night actual meditation practices. I accidentally come across Sri S. N. Goyenka Vipassana retreats and attended one 10 day retreat at Dhamma Sota-New Delhi, after that from one year i'm practicing Vipassana meditation 2-4 hours daily at home. Now i'm very clear i want to devote my life for this.Its be very helpful if anyone can guide me into this.

I was planning to visit a centre, so first I checked their webpage, I thought they are a lit too pushy when it comes to donations, asking for money in a very explicit way to pay their bills. OK, let me be fair, they have bills to pay and utilities can be expensive sometimes. I have more experience with Mahayana (eventhough I follow Theravada now) and in the two centres I have been to, I have never seen similar thing, so it makes me wonder, why? Maybe their funding structures are different, more robust, I dont know... Is there anything in the Vinaya that can help? What are the limits when it comes to asking for money?

According to a precept it is forbidden to integrate a person under 20 years of age into the Sangha. Is that correct? So are the young monks, not monks, but something different?

Is the experience of jhana considered dukkha because of its impermanence? If yes, is it still considered dukkha after attaining Nibbana? Is the experience of jhana conditioned? Is it still considered conditioned after attaining Nibbana? Thanks in advance for your time and patience. Kind regards!

Are only stream-entrants destined to attain Nibbana? I don't know whether it is possible to be destined to attain Nibbana more than 7 lives beforehand. Is it not possible to be destined to attain Nibbana more than 7 lives beforehand ?

What do you think? I believe the experience of suffering or enjoyment is not equivalent and is not reducible to physics e.g. things like "repulsion", "attraction" etc. I cannot see "suffering" or "enjoyment" arising out of or being equivalent to forces, force,energy, waves, atoms etc. no matter how one configures it. It seems suffering cannot be reduced to "energy", waves etc. in the same way that hearing cannot be reduced to seeing.

I have recently managed to restrict my eating period to about 8h per day, which is supposed to help circadian rhythm. Yet, to further promote sleep and circadian rhythm, I should also cut out blue light from a computer a few hours before bed (and go to bed at the same time each day). Since I get *bored* when I cut the computer at this hour, I always revert to using the computer, delaying bedtime in the process. **What would Buddhism suggest as solution towards such a computer use?** In the evening, I'm unable to find activities interesting enough, I always revert to using the computer. Would avoiding the computer at *other* times decrease my attachment to it overall? What might help?

Why is Nibbana referred to as "The destination and the path leading to the destination" ? What does this mean? Is it referring to the cessation of defilements? Is it referring to anything other than the cessation of defilements? In what way is Nibbana "...the path leading to the destination" ? reference: https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Nibbana#33_synonyms_for_Nibbana