Is continuity just causation? When a fire is caused by a spark, is that the same kind of continuity as there is in the dependent origination of the skandhas, just with different causes and effects?

Although one can cultivate sati (recollection/mindfulness) through meditation & good conduct (silā), & one can learn wisdom via book knowledge as well as via direct seeing (for example rising & passing away of phenomena), **how does one know (exactly) what to do/think about in every day life situations?**

I've read in other posts (such as [this one](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/18799/right-way-to-teaching-dhamma)) about the right way to teach the Dhamma. But is there a way to know about the "when", i.e. when to reach out someone else to teach the Dhamma? In specific, I'd like to know if one should teach only when asked for it, or if one should make assumptions about the other's needs or degree of knowledge when trying to help him/her (regardless if that person asked for that helped or not). If you could provide information about suttas where this is talked about, I'd really appreaciate it. I'd even be grateful if personal experiences are given. Thanks for your time and patience!

Are there parallel texts between Pali Canon Jhana Suttas, and Mahayana equivalent? Dhyana Sutras? I now that the theme is picked up again in Tiantai texts, but I'm thinking of between the Pali canon and the Tiantai? Does Asanga touch on this topic or skip over it? Kumarajiva?

MN 38 has the following two different or opposite verses on the arising of suffering & the ceasing of suffering: > *On seeing a form with the eye, he lusts after it if it is pleasing; he dislikes it if it is unpleasing. He abides with mindfulness of the > body unestablished, with a limited mind, and he does not understand as > it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom > wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. Engaged > as he is in favouring and opposing, whatever feeling he feels—whether > pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant—he delights in > that feeling, welcomes it, and remains holding to it. As he does so, > delight arises in him. Now delight in feelings is clinging. With his > clinging as condition, being comes to be; with being as condition, > birth; with birth as condition, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, > pain, grief, and despair come to be. Such is **the origin** of this whole > mass of suffering.* > > *On seeing a form with the eye, he does not lust after it if it is pleasing; he does not dislike it if it is unpleasing. He abides with > mindfulness of the body established, with an immeasurable mind, and he > understands as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance > by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without > remainder. Having thus abandoned favouring and opposing, whatever > feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or > neither-painful-nor-pleasant, he does not delight in that feeling, > welcome it, or remain holding to it. As he does not do so, delight in > feelings ceases in him. With the cessation of his delight comes > cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of > being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the > cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, > grief, and despair cease. Such is **the cessation** of this whole mass of > suffering.* Although these two verses are different, what is common to both verses is the event of: "*on seeing a form with the eye*". How do aging-&-death cease when the eye sees a form?

Are life's issues and other practical problems appropriate as a meditation subject? Any buddhist school, that focus on this type of meditation?

Wikipedia lists schools in this section ... > [Schools of Buddhism (Theravāda subschools)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Buddhism#Therav%C4%81da_subschools) ... but, those pages which describe each school focus on **doctrine or philosophical aspects** (and don't always emphasise the differences with other subschools). I am interested in aspects that have more to do with **practice and disciplines**, e.g.: - What are the main differences in how monastic life is led in each of these subschools? - What does meditation practice focus on and how does that change from one school to the other? For instance: I know that in the teaching of Mahasi Sayadaw there is an emphasis on verbalising whatever is taking place in the present moment; whereas Ajahn Chah focuses on "opening the heart". I expect other subschools to neglect walking meditation of discourage verbalisation, others not to allow nuns, etc. --- Edit -- an answer mentioned that Wikipedia also has another page ... > Theravada (Monastic orders within Theravāda) ... which discusses *nikayas* rather than *subschools* and so which is more pertinent to my question. Unfortunately, those pages too don't discuss, detail, nor compare, the discipline and meditation practice.

I follow the notion that when the false view of an independent, permanent "self" is annihilated for the first time this is Stream Entry. The Dharma no long is merely a question mark, and it's not dependent on rituals, or merely following rules. These first three fetters can't continue in the face of such an experience. But how is the practice after Stream Entry different that before? --- > "In Buddhism, a sotāpanna (Pali), śrotāpanna (Sanskrit; Chinese: 入流; pinyin: rùliú, Tibetan: རྒྱུན་ཞུགས་, Wylie: rgyun zhugs), "stream-winner", or "stream-entrant" is a person who has seen the Dharma and consequently, has dropped the first three fetters (saŋyojana) that bind a being to rebirth, namely self-view (sakkāya-ditthi), clinging to rites and rituals (sīlabbata-parāmāsa), and skeptical indecision (Vicikitsa). > > The word sotāpanna literally means "one who entered (āpanna) the stream (sota)", after a metaphor which calls the noble eightfold path a stream which leads to nibbāna. Entering the stream (sotāpatti) is the first of the four stages of enlightenment." > > -- [Sotāpanna (wikipedia)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sot%C4%81panna) Also see [Agataphala Mahānāma Sutta (A 6.10) -- The Discourse on Mahānāma (on the fruition-attainer) ](http://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/15.3-Agataphala-Mahanama-S-a6.10-piya.pdf)

When I first started *metta bhavana*, everything went very well and I generated a strong feeling. Ironically, I am now anxious in doing this meditation (i.e. I skip some) because I feel I might not recreate the same quality as before. I feel this is definitely the wrong way of seeing, but I can almost not help it. **Are there any suggestions towards this type of anxiety/perfectionism?**

I have a friend from Sri Lanka who is a Theravada Buddhist monk. He is 36 (soon 37) years old and have been a monk for 19 years. He resides in SL and has just finished an english language course and have asked me if I could help find a Buddhist monastery, where he could stay for 2-3 years. His goal is to practice and improve his language skills to eventually be able to give a full Dhamma talk in english. It must a non-Sri Lankan monastery. Bhante would like to work with all Buddhist traditions. If you want to know more about him he has a *FB profile.* He has also written a short description of himself (this description is part of an email that Bhante himself has sent to monasteries - I have taken the self-description-part and put here): >"Dear Venerable sir/madam > >My name is Venerable Buttala Samithawansha and I am 36 years old. I currently reside in a monastery in Colombo Sri Lanka. I am a fully ordained Buddhist monk. > >I grew up as a poor farmer's son and was not able to get my formal education particularly English, however I managed to join the British Council where I completed pre intermediate levels 1, 2 and 3, intermediate levels 1, 2 and 3 and upper intermediate levels 1 and 2. > >I stopped school at 17 years old and was ordained at 18 years old. > >I would be very grateful if you know of any scholarships or funding to facilitate people who are in my situation.I am keen to improve my English skills under guidance on the native English speakers. I would like to share Buddhist teachings in English language in the future. > >My most humble gratitude . > >Yours faithfully, >Reverend Samithawansha" Does anyone know of a Buddhist monastery, where that would be possible? Thank you.

In the context of the sutta below, what does the following phrase mean? - "**whatever bad deed I did here in the past with this deed-born body is all to be experienced here. It will not follow along**" (*yaṃ kho me idaṃ kiñci pubbe iminā karajakāyena pāpakammaṃ kataṃ, sabbaṃ taṃ idha vedanīyaṃ; na taṃ anugaṃ bhavissatī’ti*) This phrase seems to apply to one who practises the Brahmaviharas . How is it different for one who does not practise the Brahmaviharas (or the Dhamma in general, for that matter)? What does deed-born body (*karajakāya*) really mean? Also related is the phrase "**A woman or a man cannot take this body with them when they go. Mortals have mind as their core.**" (*Itthiyā vā, bhikkhave, purisassa vā nāyaṃ kāyo ādāya gamanīyo. Cittantaro ayaṃ, bhikkhave, macco.*). What does this mean? From AN 10.219 : > “What do you think, bhikkhus, if a youth were to develop the > liberation of mind by loving-kindness (and also, compassion, > altruistic joy and equanimity) from his childhood on, would he do a > bad deed?” > > “No, Bhante.” > > “Could suffering affect him if he does no bad deed?” “No, Bhante. For > on what account could suffering affect one who does no bad deed?” > > **“A woman or a man should develop this liberation of mind by > loving-kindness (and also, compassion, altruistic joy and equanimity). > A woman or a man cannot take this body with them when they go. Mortals > have mind as their core.** > > “The noble disciple understands: **‘Whatever bad deed I did here in the > past with this deed-born body is all to be experienced here. It will > not follow along.’** When the liberation of mind by loving-kindness (and > also, compassion, altruistic joy and equanimity) has been developed in > this way, it leads to non-returning for a wise bhikkhu here who does > not penetrate to a further liberation.

A while ago I wrote a question [here](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/31913/are-all-forms-of-dukkha-related-to-a-sense-of-self) about the relation between dukkha and the sense of self (whether from identity view, from conceit or both). There, most answers said that, indeed, that sense of self was at the root of all forms of dukkha. Now I want to ask some things related to that: I know that that sense of self is part of what we call ignorance (avijja) in buddhism. And at the same time I know that the first link of the Dependent Co-Arising (or Dependent Origination, DO) is Ignorance. Is ignorance only referred to the illusion of the sense of self? Is ignorance in the DO just referring to that sense of self? Are the rest of the distortions ([vipallasa](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.049.olen.html)) of the mind (seeing the impermanent as permanent, the unsatisfactory as satisfactory, and the unlovely as lovely) included in the definition of ignorance? If the answer to the last question is "yes", then can we say that not all forms of dukkha arise because of a sense of self, but rather from ignorance in general, i.e. from the distortions of the mind? Thanks in advance for your time and patience.

According to Salguero (2017): > The Five Pungent Roots generally refer to garlic, leeks, scallions, onions, and asafoetida, as well as their subvarieties. In some sources, the list includes ginger and chives. I am looking for a more definitive reference for this. In particular, I am looking for any early Buddhist texts that proscribe the "Five Pungents" and, better still, explicitly names the five.

I noticed that when I'm mindful of what I'm doing, it seems different and even more helpful than merely paying attention to the senses, i.e. vision or sound. **Are there any noted difference between these two practices?**

According to wikipedia article on the eightfold path, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Eightfold_Path >The Eightfold Path consists of eight practices: right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and **right samadhi ('meditative absorption or union')**. In early Buddhism, these practices started with understanding that the body-mind works in a corrupted way (right view), followed by entering the Buddhist path of self-observance, self-restraint, and cultivating kindness and compassion; and **culminating in dhyana or samadhi**, which re-inforces these practices for the development of the body-mind. My question: Is meditation necessary in Buddhism? Is the practice of Buddhism incomplete without meditation?

What is Sanna Samapatti and Nirodha Samapatti? How this differs from Sanna Vedaniya Nirodha? What is the sutta reference? This question based on the following Dhamma talk in the Sinhalese language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1422&v=IdvO1AvwOrQ > Yā cāyaṃ bhikkhu ābhādhātu yā ca subhādhātu yā ca ākāsānañcāyatanadhātu yā ca viññāṇañcāyatanadhātu yā ca ākiñcaññāyatanadhātu imā dhātuyo **saññāsamāpatti** pattabbā . yāyaṃ bhikkhu nevasaññānāsaññāyatanadhātu ayaṃ dhātu **saṅkhārāvasesasamāpatti** pattabbā . yāyaṃ bhikkhu **saññāvedayitanirodhadhātu** ayaṃ dhātu nirodhasamāpatti pattabbāti . Paṭhamaṃ. Source: http://84000.org/tipitaka/pitaka_item/pali_read.php?B=16&A=3621&w=%CA%AD%DA%AD%D2%CA%C1%D2%BB%B5%DA

I want to know whether the action of ancestors will be pass down to their children in the form of karma?.. A father's decision can affect his children like father quitting his job and staying at home can affect his children...but What i want to know is, if someone has a very crual father does atleast some of his bad karma gets pass down to his later generations not just to his childrens but maybe to great grand children...like for example a person's great grand father may have killed someone...and due to that this person is having a major disease... Does karma works in this way?

I'm wondering if mental illness is carried over into the space between lives and then subsequently to the next birth?

I read on the internet Mahasi Sayadaw once said: > "For example, if a generous person obtains something precious and > valuable, his first thought is to offer it to someone else rather than > to use it for his own pleasure." So a person, in being devoid of craving, or in cultivating detachment, shows "generosity" in giving someone else the object of the craving and allowing them to bear the craving in themselves. This seems both perverse and ubiquitous in the literature. Where is the "generosity" in spreading the disease of attachment?

Is there some website or book somewhere that lists suttas on different criteria like what suttas are more core or more likely to be authentic do to scholarly analysis like comparing Chinese translations or other ways of analysis...that brings me to another question. What are the different ways scholars can find clues or evidence of a sutta's authenticity?