If ritual is repetition outside of what can be justified through direct experience, can ideas and opinions, as well as words and actions, be ritualistic? Would a belief in God - given the axiomatic impossibility to verify the entity directly - classify as ritual?

On various web pages relating to the Dhamma I have read the claim that arahants never dream. A few examples: * Buddhist scholar Lily de Silva [writes](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/desilva/wheel407.html) : > We may also note the tradition maintaining that arahants never dream, maybe because they have attained such perfect mental health that there is no necessity to release tension through dreams. * The ven. Dhammananda Maha Thera [writes](https://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/321.htm) : > Buddhas and Arahants never dream. The first three kinds of dream cannot occur in their minds, because their minds have been permanently 'stilled' and cannot be activated to dream. The last kind of dream cannot happen to them because they have eradicated all their craving energy completely, and there is no 'residual' energy of anxiety or unsatisfied desire to activate the mind to produce dreams. * And the Czech monk U Sarana [writes](http://burmadhamma.blogspot.com/2016/05/cremation-and-relics-of-sayadaw-u.html) : > At that time Mahasi Sayadaw told to U Pandita that to his (Mahasi Sayadaw's) surprise, Mahasi Sayadaw had a dream. It is impossible for an Arahant to have a dream - and thus Sayadaw U Pandita knew, that Mahasi Sayadaw was not an Arahant at the time when this was said. Surprisingly, I have not been able to find any Suttas or other textual sources for the claim that arahants never dream. Do any of you guys know of such sources? Is it in the Suttas, the Abhidhamma, the commentaries, or in a later text such as the Visuddhimagga? Thanks in advance for your answers!

I noticed that I almost unconsciously revert to trying to fight cravings via willpower, i.e. resisting them. Let's take the example of food cravings. I usually make an internal commitment to avoid junk food, but the cravings nevertheless arise, and when my mood is low I fail to resist. **Are there alternatives to willpower in fighting cravings?** I had been wondering whether other solutions -- like mindfulness or even seeking healthier sources of pleasure -- might be more effective. More so, I believe I crave more because recently I experience less pleasure from activities or emotional sources. **Does Buddhism have any technique specifically linked to pleasure?**

Is there a fate worse than *oblivion* ? To forget, to be forgotten is there … Chant for anti-*nothingless* ?

I read on the internet: > Arahants have eliminated all Sankhara. So there is no need for > accumulation of memory. Have Arahants really eliminated all Sankhara? Please answer with Pali sutta references.

As an example of what I mean, suppose I want to find Zen Buddhist teachings on diet. How should I go about finding this? Googling anything as it pertains to Buddhism (especially Buddhism) gets a tonne of results from Americanized Yoga types, which is less than authentic teaching.

There is a part of Yuttadhammo's answer at [How to practice Metta without a Benefactor?](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/7865/how-to-practice-metta-without-a-benefactor?rq=1) that has very confused me: > cultivate metta towards yourself **(useless, but a good example)** Why is metta useless? Are there any specific sources for this statement, or is this based on a determine school?

What is Bodhicitta? I recall reading that the "power" of it is what ends up making someone a Bodhisattva or Buddha. So my specific question is whether it is nirvana, and if it is qualitative, felt etc..

Supposed one has to work, yet comes across the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, stops suddenly to follow his duties, and scarifies all (possible his job) to give into the Jewels, what does one think, bad Kamma and violation to be blamed by wise or legitimate "[break of promise](http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,8136.html) ", with high rewards? Whats the different to Sunday questions? *{Other then a [sunday-question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/31262/sunday-question-learning-dhamma-at-working-time-on-other-recource) , this might be the proper for Mondays, rlease and yet not for trade and exchanges thought. So what now?}*

I have been practicing mindful breathing for about one or two sittings a day, and done a few retreats. I have a big problem with metta, even directed at myself. after trying to practice metta I often find myself in a very angered state of mind, even rage, especially at friends for various reasons regarding my life. The background to the anger seems to be that they do not really care for me and just want me to be synchronized with their hobbies or lifestyles which are usually high achievement based . the background is that my personal life is much more crisis oriented than theirs , and i am also about 10 years older than them . I have a lot of regret for not leaving these relations and my thoughts are around those regrets , that in fact it is/was my interest to do so, and the 'tug of war' that they would have/will do with me would be based on their own interests ('tug of war' i mean things like 'you should stay in touch' or 'what going on with you?' etc...). Do other people experience such extreme counter reaction to metta? should i continue with it ? a bit at a loss ... thanks.

### Background Hi all, i have been practicing Metta and self-compassion meditation for a while but have just switched (back) to following the first couple of exercises in the Anapanasati Sutta (translations: [Thich Nhat Hanh](https://plumvillage.org/sutra/discourse-on-the-full-awareness-of-breathing/) , [Thanissaro Bhikkhu](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html)) I can successfully practice exercises 1-4, but when i come to 5 and 6 i have a hard time to feel joy and happiness (i have a low-grade depression and also anxiety and maybe this is interfering with my practice) ### Question **Can we (is it recommended to) integrate Metta practices in the 5th and 6th exercises of the Anapanasati Sutta?** (And how can this be integrated? We may not want to switch the phrases since these are already provided in the Sutta, but thoughts can still be filled with Metta and help us that way) I'd like to find a way to successfully practice these two exercises so i can continue in my spiritual development and practice of the Sutta Please provide references if you have! *** Grateful for help! Kind Regards, Tord

1. Does metta mean that we should not ignore people? 2. Is it possible to forcefully and assertively tell people their wrong doings? What about scolding? 3. My reservation: If one always remains kind it's likely that people will do whatever they want with you which will result in more problems or not stating one's concerns sufficiently

If I recall correctly, karma is constituted of two parts - action and intention. Which means if one wishes to "gain" positive karma, one would have to conduct a positive action AND do so with a positive mind. With that being said, if I were to help an old lady to cross the street for the sole purpose of obtaining good karma, am I going to get good karma?

Venerables, Upasaka, Upasika Valued readers and engaged Buddhabodhisattas here, - In how far might it count as a break of the precept, abstaining from telling what is not true, if one changes the circumstances? For example here: - There might be a question, receiving answers. Afterwards are changes of the questions, sometime seemingly slight, does a change counts as a break? - If not having the intention to missinterpret the answerer, does such anyhow possible give ground that they accure missinterpreted? To include Abhidhamma aspects: - What are ones reasons willing to change answers, questions, delete parts, modify... afterwards if it is unskillful? Why and how could one modify, delete, change in a skilfulway that would harm in this or that way? - How to go beyound such problems, what whould be a secure solution? - What are the consequences of missinterpreting and changing the true or circumstances to display a differnt picture for ones benefit, harm of others or out of not-knowing and fear (e.g. the four roots of akusala, greed, aversion, delution, fear)? - How do you practice that, or exerianced the matter in you practice in forums and blogs? Note that it is a general question, but also a very urged matter of all editors and edits here, yet so importand and on topic of practicing Dhamma, that it should not be taken as meta. *(This question is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purposes or other wordily gains.)* >*Side note in regard of Bu-meta*: it might be good if the moderators engage on this maater in regard of: 1. Make use of "on hold" and possible protection of question and or notification of answerers in cases of question changes. My person can not engage there, just with hints in comments, not sure if the old question there still exists.

According to this comment : > "Form is like a lump of foam ... And consciousness like an illusion" (SN 22.95 ) > means something more subtle and interesting, much more deep than just > "empty of self". It means that these things are "virtual" (in the > original sense of the word) - they emerge from interaction and only > exist as interaction, they only seem solid "from inside" but in > actuality they are like sleight of hand. I guess this comes from one of the Mahayana schools' interpretation of Madhyamaka shunyata (emptiness). What does this really mean? Let's say I have a piece of apple in my hand. I see that it's an apple. I feel that it's an apple when I touch it. I can smell it as an apple. It also tastes like an apple when I bite into it. How does the apple emerge only from interaction? How does the apple exist only as interaction? How is the apple like a sleight of hand that only appears solid, although it's virtual? I originally thought this is related to physics, where things that we can experience are made of atoms which are mostly empty space. However, Buddhism is almost always related to the mind. So, how does this apply to the mind? Does this interpretation come from Yogachara?

I think the interesting part is to first classify archaic humans, as a manussa or a tiracchāna? Is there any explanation about this? Since as far as I know, Buddhism supports the theory of evolution.

And what is the main differences between them? Is it like Christianity where there seems to be a couple of main ones and then dozens of smaller ones doing their own thing?

Coming accoss such: Would such, on even normal sociaty level, be contuctive for western people who desire odination? Is such in line with good conducts, monks would have to keep?

During uposatha days, I'm getting a little confused with the interpretation of the seventh precept of eight precepts. Is it possible for me to listen to nature sounds without any musical instruments' sounds? Even if they’re considered as 'music'? Also, is there any text (from aṭṭhakathā or ṭīkā) explaining this precept? It would be great and very helpful. Thank you in advance.

I have seen this a few times in various places, although I haven't read it in any suttas, but I am guessing there might be some that talk about this.