Sitting on a chair, working. Sometime later finding yourself sitting in a position same as one beside you. Is this an automatic influence on mind, you are not aware of the position in which the other being is sitting ? Sometimes while working make same mistakes as the one sitting beside or in front. The status of the mind same as the people around. Doing those things as thought by other. How to avoid this? Is there any reference in Buddhism to stop this? What is such behaviour of mind called? There is another thing , would like to mention, the status of mind sometimes becomes same as the one who remembers you. For e.g when someone trying to contact you for very long time via mobile, the mind becomes the person who is trying to contact you. Is it something to do with chakra? How to guard the mind?

actually I love any kind of animal, I had some birds like Nightingale, White-eared bulbul and so many others, even snake mouse and so..., That time I was child, some one said, you not love them, they love to be free, not in cage and you slave them, after that I did not keep any kind of animal anymore (as you said pet), I don't have pet for a long times But know I see many people that have homing pigeon, they are free and they come back to their cage freely, or in other way the special kind of pigeon which known as dove or white dove or ring-neck dove with it's extremely calm character somehow seems that it can not stay alive in wild world. so what about keeping pigeon that they became homing pigeon actually I should say we training them to became homing pigeon, or others that need to human take care of them like dove? are this act known as slavery? Is it wrong? even though this is not good excuse to cage them either for homing pigeon and for other need to take care, but I searching for straight and clear answer and wise explanation are these slave? does it acceptable in Buddhism? This is virtuous act? how we can explain it that is either good or bad?

Since a couple of weeks I'm stuck in meditation with something that's unclear. I hope that answers will help me get some inspiration and ideas. So, how do the thoughts appear to you? As words, as pictures, as a far away voice? Is it always the same way, or do they sometimes appear as pictures and sometimes as words? I have asked a couple of people already, and nobody seems to be able to tell me. Everyone responded with 'I don't know'. Which is kind of weird, since we all think. Anyway, in my case: thoughts appear to me as a distant voice. Just to share my bit of experience. :)

Buddha said that a man who sees the folly of his ways and changes them is like the moon bursting out of a dark sky to shine light. I feel very inspired by stories of men and women like Angulimalla who were doing "bad " things due to the force of their afflictions and then changed due to coming in contact with Dhamma. I know there are many stories in the Tibetan tradition, but I am looking for any stories from any tradition that you might know for inspiration along with the reference text.

So while reading a lot of teachings, especially "higher" teachings, a great deal is mentioned about dispassion in worldy things, unattractiveness in the body and various contemplations on death. It's quite easy to get lost in these kind of contemplations without developing the Brahmaviharas to feel something positive (especially social positive emotions are important for humans). I'm wondering if positivity is highly stressed in Buddhism? On the one hand the brahmaviharas are not withot reason called "the divine **abidings**". So I think one needs to dwell in them as much as possible. Also the last two points of Right Effort stress the importance of cultivating and maintaing positive emotions. On the other hand though, being non-delighted in things makes this look rather grim. Maybe I haven't read much Suttas on Compassion, loving kindness, generosity etc..

Sexual lust and pornography in Buddhism is considered as being unskillful, but for me it is not clear why. If all parties involved consented to taking part in sexual acts, I don't see why they are morally wrong. As a living animal we can give and be kind to others, but we also have our own needs which can be called healthy self-interest that we had better fulfill. **Why is it wrong to be primarily interested in a person on a sexual level?** If we openly discuss our needs and theirs and are honest with them, I see no reason why it is bad. **Why is pornography wrong?** In many cultures sex and/or pornography is looked down upon (or at least only acceptable once certain conditions are met, i.e. marriage) but the people there were in all probability consenting and they always have the chance to quit their job, too. Drug abuse or depression in pornography cannot necessarily be a direct correlation, but primarily a result of I) lack of coping skills and II) underlying irrational beliefs ABOUT STRESSORS and III) an unhelpful environment.

I am very new to Buddhism and am learning the teachings, so I am reaching out. I avoid hurting any living thing at all cost, but this morning while walking my dogs I was texting and I crushed a snail. My heart broke the moment it happened and I felt ill. I know it was not intentional, and I mourned the loss of life, but it happened while I was distracted and not mindful. I still feel it so deep. So I guess I have a couple of questions. What are the implications of this action? And how do I correct this wrong?

Perhaps this should be closed as [a 'shopping' question](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/158810/139866) , but maybe translations take a long time to make and therefore there are not too many of them, and they don't go out of date quickly. The English texts I use seem unreliable. For example: - One book I have (using a 1925 CE translation) has a translation which (because it uses an abstract noun "the lovely") [I had thoroughly failed](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/4053/compassion-to-friends-stepping-in-vs-letting-them-learn-on-their-own#comment5397_4055) to understand. In that case, [the 'Access to Insight' translation](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.002.than.html) was clearer (using concrete nouns like 'with people' and 'with friends' instead of abstractions like "with what is lovely"). So I have been using **Access to Insight**. - However when I wanted the Samuddo Sutta, the [Access to Insight version](http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.187.wlsh.html) is (in my opinion) relatively very inadequate compared to [this **Buddha Vacana** version](http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/salayatana/sn35-229.html) . I only found these using Google, i.e. I have no expertise about what translations exist. - Can you recommend **any (single) specific translations**? - Can you give **any survey of what (many) is available**? - Or should I ask about **translators** instead of translations (I'd prefer 'the best' translation rather than the 'historically-first' translation)? Even if there are too many, are there **great/classic resources** that any Anglophone should know? - **Printed** books would be on-topic, though I'm warned that such things might be [ten times the size of a bible](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/4019/254) . - **Online** or (at least) **digital** references might be convenient. For example the side-by-side (hyper-linkable) translation feature found on the *Buddha Vacana* site helped me understand (by linking to the Pali word) what it meant when it said "mental phenomena". - A resource for any **European** language (English, French, German, etc) would be interesting - Google Translate doesn't do Pali or Sanskrit, but if there's a (free or affordable) semi-competent **machine-based** translator (accurate although not poetic or idiomatic), that might be good (though it may be hoping too much, to hope for the existence of such a thing yet).

Most people cannot live in the secluded setting of a monastery or retreat. Some Buddhist traditions nonetheless affirm that laypeople can become enlightened . Are there (inspiring) examples of such laypeople? How (well) do so-called awakened spiritual/meditation masters function outside the seclusion of the monastic/retreat environments? Please give examples. (Only one comes to mind: Patrul Rinpoche).

Please find reference for the texts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhāran_Buddhist_texts

I'm 22 years old and have been interested in Buddhism for a long time and consider myself Buddhist. I meditate 2 or 3 times a week and have read a few books on Buddhism. I am more interested in Theravada Buddhism and am not sure where to move forward from here. Should I read and study the Digha Nikaya? I should probably find a sangha near me and go to it, too. For starters, though, should I purchase and read the Digha Nikaya?

I'm wondering do you say "sadu, sadu, sadu" in theravada buddhism, after you have made donation and want to share your good deeds with others.

Example: A child (+/- 8yrs old) is forced to kill an animal. It doesn't want to, but has to because it is threatened by abusive adults. Wanting to kill or not doesn't, I think, matter when it comes to the bad kamma performed here. And yes, since it is the child that performs the killing, the bad kamma is done by the child and the child will bear the negative results of that kamma. But, what about the weight of that kamma? Since the child had no option but to obey. How heavy is that kamma? How heavy can the results be? Does anyone have an idea (preferably with source to text in the Pali canon)? (Related: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/9716/what-is-the-buddhist-perspective-on-child-abuse/25950#25950 . Except that that question was about the cause, mine is about the weight of kamma.)

I am asking this question due to this answer . Is the removal of identity view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) required before stream entry can be attained? Or would identity view be removed only with the achievement of stream entry?

The Aggikasutta (SN 7.8) below states that the Buddhas do not eat food enchanted by spells i.e. food that was chanted over for the Vedic fire sacrifice. **Does the Buddha reject ritually chanted over food? Why is this the case? Does this apply to Buddhists as well?** What is the meaning of "The Buddhas reject things enchanted with spells. Since nature is real, brahmin, that’s how they live"? I asked another similar question before here . That sutta seems to be about offering food after receiving a teaching as not being allowed, because that's remuneration. However, this question is different because the Buddha did not give any teaching before being offered the milk rice. Instead, the milk rice seems to have been chanted over, in the fire sacrifice ritual. Furthermore, the Buddha asks the brahmin to serve some other food, not the one chanted over with verses. > At one time the Buddha was staying near Rājagaha, in the Bamboo Grove, > the squirrels’ feeding ground. Now at that time ghee and milk-rice had > been set out for the brahmin Bhāradvāja the Fire-Worshipper, who > thought: “I will serve the sacred flame! I will perform the fire > sacrifice!” > > Then the Buddha robed up in the morning and, taking his bowl and robe, > entered Rājagaha for alms. Wandering for alms to be consumed on site > in Rājagaha, he approached Bhāradvāja the Fire-Worshiper’s house and > stood to one side. Bhāradvāja the Fire-Worshipper saw him standing for > alms and addressed him in verse: > > > “One who’s accomplished in the three knowledges, of good lineage and > > ample learning, accomplished in knowledge and conduct may enjoy this > > milk-rice.” > > > “Even one who mutters many invocations is no brahmin by birth if > > they’re filthy and corrupt within, with a following gained by fraud. > > > But one who knows their past lives, and sees heaven and places of > > loss, and has attained the ending of rebirth, that sage has perfect > > insight. > > > Because of these three knowledges a brahmin is a master of the three > > knowledges. Accomplished in knowledge and conduct, they may enjoy this > > milk-rice.” > > “Eat, Master Gotama! you are truly a brahmin.” > > > **“Food enchanted by a spell isn’t fit for me to eat. That’s not the way > > of those who see, brahmin. The Buddhas reject things enchanted with > > spells. Since nature is real, brahmin, that’s how they live.** > > > Serve with other food and drink the consummate one, the great seer, > > with defilements ended and remorse stilled. For he is the field for > > the seeker of merit.” > > When he had spoken, the brahmin Bhāradvāja the Fire-Worshipper said to > the Buddha: “Excellent, Master Gotama! …” … And Venerable Bhāradvāja > the Fire-Worshipper became one of the perfected. With the Pali version: > “Food enchanted by a spell isn’t fit for me to eat. > *“Gāthābhigītaṃ me abhojaneyyaṃ* > > That’s not the way of those who see, brahmin. > *Sampassataṃ brāhmaṇa nesa dhammo* > > The Buddhas reject things enchanted with spells. > *Gāthābhigītaṃ panudanti buddhā* > > Since nature is real, brahmin, that’s how they live. > *Dhamme sati brāhmaṇa vuttiresā* > > Serve with other food and drink > *Aññena ca kevalinaṃ mahesiṃ*

During walking meditation and day to day activity if sees the mind intention of doing something is earlier than that of bodily action. Is that mindfulness enough to generate right view in a person and disappearance of sakkaya ditti?

As a westerner that self-identifies as Buddhist, I have struggled to understand the role of belief in Buddhist practice. In my culture, we are more familiar with the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) for which what one believes is central to the religion. So, what if I choose to believe that nobody can be enlightened, therefore the Buddha was not enlightened? This question goes for other Buddhist concepts like karma too.

Personality view disappears at once at the stage of stream entry or is it gradual ?

I can grasp the truth of the false self. That what I think of "me" in my mind doesn't exist . But I'm scared of giving it up after 45 years of it. Im like the guy in the matrix. Nero?

Also are there behaviors that all humans do when they suffer? For instance, do all humans try to alleviate suffering when they experience it?